An Assertion For true and Christian church-policy.  
Wherein certain politic objections made against the planting of Pastors and Elders in every Con Congregation, are sufficiently answered. And wherein also sundry projects are set down, how the Discipline by Pastors & Elders may be planted, without any derogation to the King's Royal prerogative, any indignity to the three Estates in parliament, or any greater alteration of the laudable Laws, Statutes, or Customs of the Realm, then may well be made without damage to the people.  
1604.   

An assertion for true & Christian church-policy: Wherein certain politic objections made against the planting of Pastors and Elders in every Congregation, are sufficiently answered. And wherein also sundry projects are set down, how the Discipline by Pastors and Elders may be planted, without any derogation to the King's Royal prerogative, etc.  


Admonition.  
THe reason that moveth us, not to like, of this platform of 
Pag. 77.  government, is, that when we, on the one part, consider the things that are required to be redressed; & on the other, the state of our country people, and common weal, we see evidently that to plant those things in this Church, will draw with it so many and so great alterations, of the state of government, and of the laws, as the attempting thereof, might bring rather the overthrow of the Gospel among us, than the end that is desired.   

Assertion.  
The benefit of all exceptions, and advantages, to the invalidity, uncertainty, imperfections, & insufficiency, of this admonitory bill, & matters therein contained, always saved; for answer to so much as concerneth this clause, & every other clause, and article, of the bill hereafter following, and without that, that there is any matter, or thing, in the same bill, or admonition material, to be answered unto, and not herein, or hereby sufficiently answered, confessed, & avoided, traversed & deemed is true, in such manner and form, as in the same is set forth, and declared; the defendant is ready to aver, maintain, and prove his answer, as shall please the King, to award, and to command. And therefore he most humbly beseecheth the King, if it please the King, & that he have found favour in his sight, that his exceptions may be admitted, and read, and that his counsel, learned in the law, may be heard, and suffered to speak.  
This platform of government, intended 
Book of come. pray. tit. commination. Homil. 2. part. of the right use of the Church. Admo. pag. whitgift pag. 654. M. Nowell in his cathe. M. Calvin. M. junius. look Petic. to her excellent May. pag. 11.  by the admonitor, not to be liked of in this place, is that platform of Church government, by Pastors and Elders which the book of common Prayer, the doctrine of the Church of England do highly command, and which he himself Mr. D. Whitgift, now Lord Archbishop of Canturbury, & very many other ᶜ reverend Divines of our age, do publicly confess in their writings, to have been practised by the Apostles, and primitive Church. From whence it followeth that the government of the church, by Archbishops, Bishops, Suffragans, Archdeacon's, Deacons, chancellors, Commissaries and officials, now already planted and liked of, was not practised by the Apostles, and primitive Church. And therefore for my part, I can not, but marvel, that a disciple of the Apostles doctrine, and a successor in the Apostles Chair, should be drawn by human reasons, not to like of the Apostles government, nor to tread in the steps of the primitive church. For seeing the same is acknowledged by himself to be the first way, to be the old and ancient way, as being the Apostles way, why should we not 
jere. 6. 16.  walk therein, as in the only good and perfect way? The reverend Bishops will not deny, that the Apostles, and primitive Church for their manner of government, had the mind of Christ, and that we should follow the Apostles, as having them for examples, because they were the followers of Christ. Again they can not but grant, that the manner of government, practised by the Apostles & primitive church, is written within the book of the covenants of grace. All which notwithstanding we see in this place that from the new Testament, from the articles of grace, from the law, from the testimony, from the example of the Apostles, and from the mind of Christ, we are addressed and turned over to our state of government, to our country, to our people, to our common weal, and to our laws. But this turning of devices shall it not be esteemed, as the potter's 
Isaiah. 29 16.  clay?  
But (saith he) to plant those things in this church, which are required to be redressed, might bring rather the overthrow of the Gospel, than the end, that is desired. Indeed (say I) if this might be as soon proved, as it was soon said, the case might have gone well with him. But this parable is so dark, that (unless it be opened) there is no light at all to be seen in it. For he well knew, that in steed of the government practised by the Apostles and primitive church, the jurisdiction of Archbishops, Bishops, Suffragans, Deacons, Archdeacon's, chancellors, Commissaries and Officials, is already planted in this church: And he was not ignorant also that the same jurisdiction only, and none other, is required to be redressed. Now than if request be made, that this manner of government be redressed, how can it evidently be seen that to plant that manner of government, might bring rather the overthrow of the Gospel, than the end that is desired? But it may be that he meant more lightsomely than he spoke. Yea let it be, that he intended thus: viz. to unplant that, which is now planted, and to plant those things, which are yet unplanted (by reason of many and great alterations) might bring rather an overthrow of the Gospel, than the end that is desired; well (I say) be it so, that he thus meant. How is this thing evidently seen, or how can it evidently be proved? The best sight, that the servant of Christ can have, is faith. For Faith is an evidence of things which are not seen. 
Heb. 11.  This overthrow then of the Gospel, not being seen with his bodily eyes, must needs be intended to have been seen with the eyes of his faith. But where is that word of Christ, whereupon the eyes of his faith were fixed? If then he hold no word of faith, then of necessity was his evident sight, but an evident fancy. And in deed what else could it be? For what other thing is there desired, to be planted in this church, but only the Apostolical government of Christ? And what other Gospel could he evidently see, that might be overthrown by holding forth this sceptre, but only the Apostolical doctrine of Christ? A merveylous strange and unkind sight, (I trow) to be seen, that the Apostolical government could no sooner be planted, but that the Apostolical doctrine must needs be rooted up. That Christ by his own sceptre, were not able to maintain his own grace, by his own order, should weaken his own oath, or by his own sword, should cut from the people of God, his own word. But seeing it was his purpose to persuade the people unto a dislike of the Apostolical government, by arguments and reasons drawn from human policy, rather than to confirm them in a good opinion of the prelatical government, by proofs taken from the authority of holy Scripture, we will follow him in this his vein. Yea, and by the help of God, we will try of what efficacy, such his politic and human reasons may be, as wherewith he did assay, to dissuade the people from consenting unto any other manner of Church government, then is already settled among us. The general effect of all which, both here and else where spoken of, by him briefly gathered, is this: 
Such things may not be planted in the Church of England, as by attempting, the planting whereof, there is an evident sight, that the Gospel among us, may be overthrown.  
But there is an evident sight, that the Gospel among us, may be overthrown, by attempting, to plant that government in the church of England, which was practised by the Apostles & primitive Church, therefore that manner of government may not be planted.  
The assumption of which syllogism, he endeavoureth to confirm thus, whatsoever will draw with it, many, and great alterations of the state of government, and of the laws, the same may bring rather the overthrow of the Gospel, than the end that is desired: but the planting of the government practised by the Apostles and primitive church, will draw with it, many and great alterations, of the state of government and of the laws.  
Therefore the planting of this manner of government may rather bring an overthrow of the Gospel, etc.   
If any shall object that by thus gathering his argument, I had in this place falsified his argument, by adding more, then is here expressly uttered by him: let such one understand, that this charge is but a mere and needless cavil. For sithence both here, and throughout his book, his intent was to dispute for the government already received, against the government, which is required, to be planted, in the Church: And for so much also, as none other government, is required to be planted, but that only government, which was practised, by the Apostles and primitive Church, it must necessarily follow, that the arrows, which he shot against the government, required to be planted, were shot only against the government which was practised by the Apostles, and primitive Church. And therefore there can be no just charge of any falsification, used in the gathering of his arguments. Against which I argue as followeth: 
Whatsoever will draw with it no alterations of the state of government, & but few, or small alterations of the laws, the same may rather bring the end, that is desired, viz: a godly peace, and Christian unity both in Church and common weal, than the overthrow of the Gospel among us.  
But the planting of the government practised by the Apostles and primitive Church, will draw with it no alteration, of the state of government, and but few or small alterations of the laws.  
Therefore the planting of the government practised by the Apostles, & primitive Church, may rather bring the end that is desired, viz: a godly peace and christian unity, both in church and common weal, than the overthrow of the Gospel among us.   
The truth of which argument will then appear, when the Admonitors argument shallbe convinced of error: for the disproof of the one, is the proof of the other, and if his fall, then can not this but follow. And touching the invalidity of the first proposition, of his second syllogism, we affirm, that the alterations, of the state of government, & of the laws (be they never so many and never so great) can never bring any overthrow of the Gospel, if the same alterations, be made, for the planting of the Gospel. For the laws once altered, can overthrow nought, because they are then no more laws. And to say, that the Gospel once planted by authority of new laws, can be overthrown by the same laws, is more absurd. For the new laws give life to the entertaining of the Gospel, by means whereof, the Gospel, can not discontinue, so long as those laws continue. And hereupon also it followeth, that no alteration of laws, for sweeping, & cleansing of the Church, for casting, and whipping buyers and sellers, and choppers of churches, out of the Church, can overthrow the Gospel. For if all dross, filth, and corruption, be cast out; if all lets, and impediments, be done a way, it can not be but that the Gospel, must needs have a freer, & larger passage, as whereunto, a wider door can not be, but opened, for the bringing in of a more plentiful harvest. And if the Church be beautiful as Tyrsa, and comely as jerusalem, if she 
Solo. Song 6. 3. 4.  look as the morning, If she be fair as the Moon, pure as the Sun, and terrible as an army, then is she set as a seal on the Lord's heart, and as a signet upon his arm, and then shall the coals of his jealousy be as fiery coals, and as a vehement flame, that much water shall never quench it, nor any floods ever drown ●t. But if he should rather mean, that ●he alterations of the state of government, would be so many and so great, as that thereupon he did strongly imagine, evidently to see the overthrow of the Gospel, than we say that no state of government, can ever undergo, either many, or few, either small, or great alterations, unless by alteration of laws made by the same state of government, the same 〈◊〉 of government be altered. Now 〈◊〉 if our politic state of government, (whereof he must needs speak, for otherwise his speech were to no purpose) to amend and reform abuses in itself, may justly put itself under the yoke of a new law, (as it hath done and daily doth unto many new laws) and so in this respect, after a sort, in some part alter itself (for every reformation is a kind of alteration) without any damage, hazard, or prejudice to itself, if (I say) this may well be so, what a silly skarr crow, is there here, brought into the field, to fray our politic state of gowerment, from attempting a reformation in the Church? Belike he knew some to feign, that our state of government, must necessarily fancy, whatsoever they fancy. And namely that a reformation of the Church, can not but infer a desolation of the State: or that the State can not be well ordered, except it suffer the Church to be disordered, or that the Church could not be fair, well favoured, and in good plight, but the state of our country, people, and common weal, must be foul, ill favoured and out of heart; or lastly that the State can not lance, bind, draw, & heal up the sores, wounds, & contagions of the church, but it must with all fester, infect, and poison itself. All which how unsavoury and void of all sense it is, I leave to the judgement, both of the state, and of the Church. For who seethe not, but that the state of politic government, may wholly alter the state of church government, and not so much as alter one lest jot, of the politic state of government itself? Besides, since our state of politic government, hath in our days, and before our eyes, repealed very many old laws, & disavowed sundry ancient customs, to entertain, and harbour the Gospel, must our state of politic government, no sooner now attempt, to repair certain breaches, made into the vinyeard, but it must straight ways, root up, that which it hath planted, & pull down that, which it hath builded? He that diggeth about, and dungeth, he that spreadeth and pru●eth the root● and branches of a tree, doth he not rather quicken, then kill the root? and doth he not rather cause the boughs, to sprought, than the body to whither? Can seven times trying, and fining of gold, breed a canker in gold: or may a river be drained dry, by one, who shutteth not, but openeth the springs? The body of a corpulent, and diseased man, the more it is purged, the more full of health it is, & of better constitution. And how then can it be concluded, that the Gospel, the life & soul of the Church, can languish, and give up the ghost, when the Church; for the better preservation of her health, shall receive by some new and wholesome law, some new and wholesome purgative receipt? Moreover, for so much as here is mention made, how the publishers of this book, did consider on the one part, of things that were required to be redressed, and on the other side, of things required to be planted, together with the state of our country, people, and common weal; it is plain, that their resolution was rather still to continued things amiss, in the Church unredressed, then to plant the things required, to be planted. And alas what a resolution was that among pillars and Fathers (for so they willbe counted) of the church? Especially, when as the things required to be redressed, were required to be redressed at the hands of the whole state of government, that is at the hands of the Queen, the Lords spiritual and temporal, and commons in open Parliament assembled. And could any damage (I pray you) have ensued to the state of government, to the state of the Queen, to the state of our country, people, common weal, & laws, or to the state of the Gospel, if things amiss in the Church, had been redressed, and things wanting in the Church, had been planted, by so high, and supreme a power? I trow not. Nay seeing our country, people, and common weal, not only once, and twice, & thrice, but many times, have humbly and earnestly prayed, & solicited in open parliament, a redress of things amiss in the church, is it not most evident, that things were not considered a right but amiss by these fathers of the church? and that the considerers by keeping things unplanted, rather aimed at their own profit, honour, and dignity, than that our country, people, and common weal, should far the better, by having things amiss, to be redressed? The considerers then being themselves parties, yea & such parties as by whom things were carried amiss, in the Church, and whose defects only were required to be redressed: no marveyle (I say) if they used all kind of artificial advisement and consideration, to keep things still unplanted, by the planting whereof their own unfatherlie miscariadges, must have been reform.  
On the other side, if things required to be planted, might in deed be once planted, how soever happily our former Church-officers, might be somewhat malcontented, and discouraged, to have their superfluities pared, and the edge of their swords abated, yet is there no least cause at all, for our country, people, & common weal, to fear any trouble, or hurly burly among us. For if the hand of God be in judah, so that he give the 
2 Chron. 30. 12.  people one heart, to do the commandment of the King, and of the Rulers, according to the word of the Lord, and if the King, the Nobles & commons shall condescend & agree in one, and if their voices shall be all, but as the voice of one man, to allow and approve that, which doth touch and concern them all, then shall neither the Nobles have any occasion to disdain the commons, nor the commons any reason to envy the Nobles. Much less can the Nobles be at variance with the Nobles, nor the commons be at defiance with the Commons. For they be all of them so prudent, and so provident, as that they will not bite one another, lest they should be devoured one of the other. And in deed, why should any of our Cleargy-Maisters be so void of judgement, as to deny the Nobles and Commons, after four and forty years experience, of a most prosperous peace, weighting upon the Gospel, to be now grown so uncircumspect and simple witted, as that a reformation of disorders to be made by their consents in others, should bring forth a confusion in themselves? What? will they bicker one with the other, will they beat, and buffet one another, when there is no cause of disagreement, or variance between them? For they shallbe sure to lose neither liberty, nor dignity; they shall endanger neither honour, nor profit. Our Nobleses shallbe tres-noble still, they shallbe Princess and Captains over our people: They shallbe Deputies and Presidents in our public Weal: They shallbe Peers, and Ancients of the Kingdom: their Privileges, Prerogatives, pre-eminences, styles, ensigns, and titles of prowess, and honour, shall not be razed, defaced, or diminished. But they shall (as they may and aught) remain and continue whole, and unviolable, both to them, and their posterities, throughout their generations. Our judges, justices, and Lawyers, shall have and enjoy their authorities, credits, and reputations, as in ancient times. They shallbe Recorders of our Cities, Towns, and boroughs: They shallbe Stewards of the Kings Leates and lawdays. Our Knights, esquires and Gentlemen, shall still be burgesses in Parleaments, & Conservators of the King's peace: they shallbe assistants to examine & repress, thefts, rapines, murders, robberies, riots, routs, & such like insolencies. Yea they shall be our Spokesmen, and our days men, to arbitrate and compose, strifes and debates between neighbour and neighbour. Our common people, they without disturbance, shall quietly and peaceably, retain and enjoy (as in former ages) their immunities, franchises and liberties, as well abroad as at home, as well in their houses, as in their fields. They shall possess their tenancies without ciection, they shallbe inheritors without expulsion, as well to the laws, liberties and customs, as to the lands & possessions of their Ancestors. They shall not be compelled to go to warfare upon their own costs: they shall not be tried, arraigned, or condemned, by foreign power, or by foreign laws. There shall no husbandry, no clothing, no handicraft, no mariner, no merchandise, no laws of the land, no manner of good learning whatsoever, in School, College, or University, be decreased, or laid aside. Wherefore the Admonitor toying never so much; how so ever he hath made his flourish, & cast about with his May bees, his, I fear, his I pray God, his, yfes, & his andes, howsoever (I say) it pleased him to trifle with these; yet shall none ever be able, to prove by any proofs drawn from the holy Scripture, or human reason, that any hindrance in dignity, or encumbrance can ever betide our Nobles, our Commons, the state of our Country, people, laws, or common Weal, if the state of church-goverment, were translated from Archbishops, Bishops, Archdeacon's, chancellors, Commissaries, and officials (which are officers in the house of God, only according to the commandments and traditions of men) unto the government practised by the Apostles and primitive Church, which they can not deny, but must confess to have been according to the holy pleasure of God. Nay our Nobles, and our commons, are most assured to be so far from being endamaged, or losing aught hereby, as hereby they shall purchase that unto them selves, which never yet any oppugner of so good and holy a cause, could attain unto. Namely, they shall seal up unto their own souls, infallible testimonies of good and sincere consciences: testimonies (I say) of their fidelities unto God, testimonies of their allegiance unto him, by whom they have been redeemed, and testimonies of love, and compassion unto the whole church of God. Nay further our commons, shallbe so far from bringing any damage upon themselves, as they shall marvelously benefit themselves. First by purchasing unto themselves, a large immunity from many foul and great grievances, and exactions of money imposed & levied upon them, by officers and deputies of Archbishops, Bishops, Archdeacon's, etc. secondly by having the Lord Christ, whose cause they undertake, and whose glory they advance, to be a friend unto their friends, and an enemy unto their enemies. And if our Nobles, and our Commons, be all hushed, if they be all at sleep, at peace and at rest, we may cast away all fear, and be past all doubt, that the King can not, but holily recreate and solace himself, and that his grey hairs, when soever they shall come, shall never be brought to the grave, in sorrow, but in a good & perfect age, and peace.  
But happily it may be replied, that 
Pag. ●9.  some of our Nobles, and most of our commons, be so backwardly affected 
Pag. 79.  to the truth of Religion, as that rather they would turn head upon the Gospel, then brook an alteration of archiepiscopal, Episcopal, and archidiaconal Church government. In deed if a reformation of the state of the Clergy were attempted by any other means, then by public tractation and consent of parliament, I could not but lean unto this opinion, that the attempting thereof, might bring an overthrow to the attempters. Because the same attempt, should be dishonourable to the name of God, as being contrary to the form of doctrine received. But since things amiss are required to be redressed by the King and parliament alone, this objection is altogether vain and frivolous, and is already sufficiently convinced, by that peaceable agreement between Nobles and Commons, before remembered. But let us wade a little deeper, and search a little more narrowly into every vain, creak, and corner of this supposition. And let us see, by what manner of persons this pretenced overthrow of the Gospel, might be wrought.  
All carnal, sensual, and earthly men, 
No fe●re that profane men will overthrow the Gospel.  either whose belly is their god, or whose god is this world, all such men (I say) as in every age, be of Domingoes religion, namely, just & jump, of that religion, which the King and State profess, they are so far from attempting aught, to overthrow the Gospel, as under the shadow of the name thereof, they will evermore crowd, and cover their carnality and profanes. For they being evermore of every religion, and so in deed of no religion, and passing not whether our Saviour Christ, or Beliall be their God, sing as the Poet singeth; Ais? Aio. Negas? Nego: beck and bow, cap and knee, to whatsoever the state and law commands. If the King be a gospeler, the Gospel, the Gospel, and nought else, but the Gospel shallbe found to roll in their mouths. But let the Crown once turn, by and by, they have turned their coats, and as wether cocks, with every puff of wind, are huffed about. Whatsoever order, or manner of government be planted, or displanted in the Church, the same shallbe no corrosive to them. It shall never stick in these men's stomachs, neither will they lay it to their hearts. The King and Counsel is wise enough, and know what they have to do well enough. They will not be more forward, nor wiser than the Prince, they will not check and control the whole Realm. They can not brook these busy bodies, and meddlers in matters above their reach. They willbe none of these new fangled and precise fools; they will not be backward, and come behind the law, as the Papists do; neither will they be to forward, and run before the law, as the Puritans do. But they will behave themselves in all things, and at all seasons, as discrete & politic Protestants ought to do, conforming & submitting themselves always to all order & authority of the Queen's book, & laws settled. Yea and though they be not book learned, nor any pen clerks, yet they believe well. And therefore they will go to the Church, and say a few prayers, yea & they will receive the Sacrament at Easter, as devoutly as the best precisian of them all. All these Atheists and godless men, being neither hot nor cold, neither fish nor flesh, nor good red herring, plant what plants you will, and sow what seeds you list, yea make what ditch, hedge, pale, wall, or fence you please, they set cock upon hoop, & pass not a button for it; every season, be it wet, or be it dry; every kind of land, be it clay, or be it sand; every furrow, be it broad, or be it narrow, be it deep, or be it shallow, pleaseth & contenteth these medley coats alike. They are like unto jacobs' ●wes, which having streaked and party coloured rods, laid before them in the gutters, at a ramming time, brought forth none other but party coloured lambs. And therefore they will never stir hand nor foot, nor once step over a straw to work any least annoyance to the Gospel. It is good sleeping always, for these men, in a whole skin: And not much unlike to these party coloured sleepers, are the admoni●orie protestants. For they, as the duty of faithful subjects do bind them, li●ing in a state of a Church reform, and having liberty in external government, & other outward orders, to choose such as they think, in wisdom & godliness, to be most convenient for the state of their country, and disposition 
admonitory Protestants by their own doctrine, ought not to bind the Church, to a perpetual government of prelacy.  of the people; and having the consent of their godly Magistrates, to that out ward form of jurisdiction, and deciding of Ecclesiastical causes, these kind of protestants, (I say) always blowing out the trumpet of obedience, and crying an alarm of loyalty to every ordinance of man, and gravely, wisely, and stoutly demeaning themselves against all the giddy heads, and fanatical schismatics, and wrangling spirits of our age, dare not (I trow) slip the collar, nor cast of the yoke, dare not push with the horn, nor wince with the heel against the Gospel; If so be by the authority of our Christian King, with the consent of his parliament; the platform of government (as he saith) devised by some of our neighbour Churches, but (as we & they themselves confess) practised by the Apostles and primitive Church, might be received and established, to be the best and fittest order of government, for the Church of England, as well as it hath been a long time, and yet is of Scotland, & of most of all other Christian Churches. For if it be to great a bridle of christian liberty (as they say) in things external, to cast upon the Church of Christ, a perpetual commandment, & if the church have free liberty to make choice of what government soever, she thinketh convenient, then is she neither restrained at her pleasure, to forsake that, which by long experience she hath found to be inconvenient, neither is she tied still to retain archiepiscopal, Episcopal, and archidiaconal government, though for a long season the same have been used. For that in deed might well and justly be said, to be too great a bridle of christian liberty, when by necessity there is cast upon the Church, such a perpetual regiment of prelacy, as may not be removed. Wherefore if our continued prelatical discipline, whereby the liberty of the church is taken away, by public authority of the King and States might be discontinued, and liberty granted to the Church, to use the Apostolical discipline, either our admonitory Protestants must yield, stoup, and obey, or else be found to be a wayward, a contentious and a from●ple generation.  
And if these two former kinds of our people (which the land being divided into five parts make three at the least) shall every way be supporters of unity, and conformity, to the Gospel, and no way disturbers of the peace, liberty and tranquillity of the Church, what overthrow, or what damage may the Gospel sustain by the other parts? Yea though they should unite, link and confederate themselves in one. For are they not weaker in power, poorer in purse, & of far less reputation than the former? And yet nevertheless, these parts are at such deadly feud one against the other, and at such an irreconcilable enmity between themselves, that the case standeth now between them, as sometimes it stood between Caesar and Pompey; not whether of them, should reign, but whether of them should live. And how then can these parts thus divided, possibly agree together, against the other parts, so surely combined?  
Besides, the first sort of these two sorts, 
Puritan Protestants, can never othrowe the Gospel.  whom it pleaseth our Protestants, the Admonishers, for difference sake, to dubb with the Knight's Hood of Precisians, or precise and puritan Protestants. Why? They are the only and principal spokesmen and petitioners for the Apostolical Discipline, required to be planted. Nay these men, out of the holy Scriptures, so resolutely are persuaded, of the truth of God, contained therein, as without which, they know perfectly that the doctrine of the Gospel can never powerfully flourish, or be entertained with so high a majesty in the hearts of men, as it ought to be. And as 
The Gospel hath overthrown the papist, therefore he can never overthrow the Gospel.  for the other sort, (the Papists I mean) alas that poor rat, what overthrow can he work to the Gospel, whose bane the Gospel hath wrought so long since? Alas this faint ghost is so far spent; his disease grown so desperate, & his sickness, now at such an hay-now-hay, as all the physic of all the Physicians in the world, can not recover his health, or once take away his hedach. This silly snake, then, having hissed out all his sting, spit out all his venom, & ungorged himself of all his poison, how can his skin, or how should his tail annoy the Gospel? If therefore it might please the Admonishers, upon a revew of our State, our country, and our people, to cast such men, as be open enemies to the Gospel, into squadrons, causing them to march rank, by rank, & troop, by troop, and delivering unto the King, a muster roll, of all the names, qualities & conditions of the principal popish recusants within the Realm (for none but such only can be suspected openly to band themselves against the Gospel) it is not to be doubted, but the least part of all the other four parts would be as great in number, as these. And what then should the King and state fear the multitudes of recusantes, when one standing on the King's side, should be able to withstand ten; and ten an hundredth; and an hundredth a thousand; and a thousand ten thousand papists. King Asa crying unto the Lord his God, that it was nothing with him, to help with many, or with no power, and resting upon the 
2 Cron. 14.  Lord, overcame ten hundredth thousand, and three hundredth chariots, of the Ethiopians, and Labimes. For the eyes of the Lord behold all the earth, to show himself strong with them, that are of a perfect heart toward him: And when King joash remembered not the kindness which jehoiada the Priest had done unto 
2 Chro: 24.  him, but slew Zechariah his son, the Lord delivered the King, & a very great army, into the hands of a small company of the host of the King of Aram, who gave sentence against the King, slew all the Princes of judah from among the people, and carried the spoil of them unto Damascus. And thus much concerning the Admonitors proposition, viz: Whatsoever will draw with it many and great alterations of the state of government, and of the laws, the same may bring rather the overthrow of the Gospel, than the end that is desired; All which speech of his, I affirm to be but a vain and trifling riddle, as the whole strength whereof resteth only upon a may be. Whereunto if I should only have spoken thus, and no more, viz: that many and great alterations, etc. might rather not bring an overthrow of the Gospel, etc. I suppose, and that upon good ground, that such (may might not be) might every way be as forcible, to disprove the one, as his (may be) can any way be pregnant to prove the other.  
And touching his assumption viz: but the planting of the government, practised by the Apostles and primitive Church, will draw with it many & great alterations, of the state of government & of the laws: If in this place he understood, the state of Church government, and of the laws Ecclesiastical now in use, then is the proposition true. And yet notwithstanding we avow, the Gospel to be so far from incurring any overthrow by such an alteration, as thereby it is certain, that the same shall more & more flourish, and be perpetually established: by reason that this alteration should be made from that which by long experience, is known to be corrupt, unto that, which is known by the holy Scriptures, to be pure and sincere. From a government (I say) and laws authorized, by tradition, and commandments of man alone, to a policy & laws founded and descended, by and from God himself.  
But if the Admonitor, by the assumption meant to inform us, that the planting of the Apostolical government will draw with it many and great alterations, of the temporal state of government, and of the temporal laws, statutes, or customs of the kingdom: then as before to his first, so now also to his second, I answer negatively: and affirm, that the 
The planting of the Apostolical government will draw no alteration of the laws of the realm with it.  planting of the said Apostolical government, will not draw with it any least alteration, of any part, of that temporal state of government, nor almost of any one common statute, or customary law of the Land, which may not rather be altered, than retained. For this platform of government, we are able by the help of God, to defend the same generally, & for the most part, to be most agreeable, and correspondent, to the nature, quality, disposition, & estate of our country, people, common weal, and laws, as in our particular answers, to his particular reasons shall more at large appear. In all new, and extraordinary alterations, it is not only requisite to abolish all bad opinions, out of the minds of those that know not the drift of the enterprisers, but it is also necessary, that the defence of such alterations be made forcible against the opposition of all gaynesayers: We will descend to the particulars, & join issue with the Admonitor. And upon allegations, exceptions, witnesses, and records to be made, sworn, examined, and produced out of the holy Scriptures, and laws of the Land already settled, on the behalf of our cause, before our Sovereign Lord the King, his Nobles, and commons in parliament, we shall submit ourselves and our cause to the King's Royal, and most Christian judgement. In the mean time, we 〈◊〉 that not only the former clause of this admonitory Bill, but that all other clauses following in the same bill, for the invalidity, insufficiency, indignity, and nullity of them, are to be thrown out and dismissed from the King's Court, especially for that the particulars opened by the Admonitor, can not serve for any reasonable warning, to induce the common people, to rely themselves upon his, I am of opinion to the which we plead at bar as followeth.   

Admonition.  
First (saith he) the whole State of 
Pag. 77.  the Laws of this Realm willbe altered. For the Canon Law must be utterly taken away, with all Offices to the same belonging; which to supply with other laws and functions, without many inconveniences, would be very hard: the use and study of the civil law, willbe utterly overthrown.   

Assertion.  
When by a common acceptance and use of speech, these words (whole state of the laws of the Realm) are understood of the common and statute laws of the Realm, that is to say of the King's temporal laws, and not of Canon or civil laws, it cannot follow, that the whole state of the laws of the Realm should 
Canon and civil laws no part of the laws of the Realm, but only by sufferance.  be altered, though the Canon and civil laws, with all Offices to the same belonging, should be utterly taken away & be wholly overthrown. For no more could the Admonitor prove, the canon or civil law, at any time heretofore, to have been any part of the laws of this Realm, (otherwise then only by 
c 2. 25. H 8. C 21. in the preamble.  sufferance of our Kings; acceptance, long use and custom of our people) then can any man prove a parsley-bed, a rosemary-twigge, or an ivie-branch, to be any part of the scite of the Castle of Farnham: And therefore he might aswell have concluded thus, the whole scite of the Castle of Farnham willbe transposed: for the Boxetrees, the heythorn arboures, and the quick set hedges planted within the Castle-garden must be removed & cast away: which were but a proof proovelesse, and a reason reasonless. If then by the abrogation of the canon or civil law, scarce any one part of the laws of this Realm should be changed, what reason have we to think that the whole state of the laws of the Realm must be altered? Besides, to conclude the whole, by an argument drawn ab enumeratione partium, and yet not to number the tenth part, (of such parts as were to be numbered) is, I am sure, neither good logic nor good law. Moreover, if all the canon-law, (I mean all the papal and foreign canon law, devised and ordained at Rome, or else where without the Realm, and consequently all the Offices & functions to the same belonging) be already utterly taken away, what hope of reward can Civilians expect from the use of such things, as are within the compass of that law? or of what efficacy is this argument, to prove an alteration, of any part of the laws of this Realm, or that the study of the Civil Law should be utterly overthrown? For the whole state of the laws, properly called the laws of the Realm, hath stood, and continued many years since the same Papal and canon law was abolished. And as touching the Civilians, for them to seek after preferments, by 
An imbasement for Civilians to have preferment by offices of the canon law.  offices, and functions of the canon law, is an embasement of their honourable profession, especially since far greater rewards, might very easily be provided for them, if once they would put to their helping hands, for the only establishment and practice of the civil law, in the principal causes now handled by them in the Courts called Ecclesiastical. 
The canon law be abolished out of the Realm & ought not to be used.   
But how may it be proved, that the Papal and foreign canon law, is already taken away, and ought not to be used in England? For my part, I heartily wish, that some learned men in the common law, would vouchsafe to show unto the King and parliament, their clear knowledge in this point. In the mean season, I shall not be negligent, to gather & set down, what (in mine understanding) the Statut-law hath determined thereof. By the statute of submission 25. H. 8. revived 1. Eliz. (as the very words and letter of the petition and submission of the Clergy, of the body of the law, & of the provisoes do import) the very true meaning and intent of the King & parliament, is evident and apparent to be thus as followeth, & none other, Viz. That such Canons, Constitutions, and Ordinances synodal, or Provincial, which before that time were devised & ordained, or which from thenceforth should be devised or ordained by the Clergy of the Realm, being not contrariant or repugnant, etc. should only, and alonely be authorized, and to be put in ure, and execution. And consequently, that all canons, constitutions, and ordinances papal, and made by foreign power without the Realm, should wholly and utterly be abrogated, anulled, abolited, and made of no value. The words touching the petition, & submission, mentioned in that statute, in substance, are these: Where the King's humble and obedient subjects the Clergy, etc. have submitted themselves, & promised in verbo Sacerdotij, that they will never from hence forth presume to attempt, allege, claim, or put in ure, 
No Canons provincial or other to be put in ure, therefore no papal canons in force.  any canons, constitutions, ordinances provincial or other; or enact, promulge or execute any new canons, etc. And where also diverse constitutions, ordinances, and canons Provincial or Synodal, which heretofore have been enacted, and beethought, not only to be much prejudicial 
Canon's provincial, heretofore enacted, being prejudicial, are to be abrogated.  to the King's prerogative Royal, &c: the Clergy hath most humbly besought the King's Highness, that the said constitutions, and canons, may be committed, to the examination and judgement of his Highness, and of two and thirty persons of his subjects, &c: and that such of the said canons and constitutions, as shall be thought and determined by the said 32 persons, or the more part of them, worthy to be abrogated, and anulled, shallbe abolite, and of no value: and such other of the same constitutions, and canons, as by the said 32 persons: &c. shallbe approved to stand with the laws of God, and consonant to the laws of this Realm, shall stand in their full strength and power, etc. These are the words of the Petition and Submission, etc. the letter of the body of the statute in effect is this: Be it therefore enacted, etc. That they, nor any of them, from hence forth shall presume to attempt, allege, claim, or put in ure, any constitutions, or ordinances provincial, 
No constitutions or ordinances Provincial or other canons to be alleged, therefore once they were all abolited.  or synodal, or any other canons. And for as much as such canons, constitutions, etc. as heretofore have been made by the Clergy of this Realm, can not, etc. by reason of the shortness, &c: be it therefore enacted, &c: that the King's Highness, &c: shall have power, &c: & that the said 32 persons, &c: shall 
The King and 32. persons have no power to examine papal canons; therefore papal canons intended to be wholly abolished.  have power & authority to view, search and examine the said canons, constitutions, &c: Provincial and Sinodall heretofore made, and such of them as the King's Highness, etc. shall deem and adjudge worthy to be continued and kept, shallbe from hence forth kept, etc. and the residue of the said canons, constitutions and ordinances provincial, which the King's Highness, &c: shall never be put in execution within this Realm. These are the words of the body of the law: the words of the Proviso are these: Provided that such canons, constitutions, 
Canon's provincial already made only onauthorised by the proviso, therefore no papal can●● in force.  ordinances, and Sinodals Provincial, being already made, which be not contrariant, &c: shall now still be used and executed, as they were before the making of this Act, till such time as they be viewed, searched, &c: by which words of the petition, body of the statute, and proviso, three things seem principally to be meant and intended. First an utter & absolute abolition of all canons, constitutions, ordinances, and synodals before that time made by the Clergy within the Realm, or by any foreign power without the Realm whatsoever: secondly, a view, search and examination of all canons, constitutions and ordinances provincial or synodal before that time made by the Clergy within the Realm: And lastly, because the Church should not utterly be destitute of all canons, &c: (Provincial or Sinodall) a re-establishment, or reauthorisement of all such of the said canons Provincial or synodal, as were not onerous to the people, contrariant or repugnant to the laws, statutes, or customs of the Realm, nor prejudicial to the King's prerogative Royal, was agreed upon, till the said Provincial Canons, &c: were viewed, searched, and examined.  
All papal & foreign canon law then, before that time made without the Realm, being once inhibited, to be attempted, alleged, claimed, or put in ure, and by consequence annihilated, abolited & made void: unless the same be again revived and re-established, remain frustrate and anulled still, and therefore ought not to be attempted, alleged, claimed, or put in ure. Besides, it is plain, that foreign & papal canon law was never intended to be reauthorized, because the same law was never committed to the view, search and examination of the King and 32. persons. The King therefore and 32 persons, by virtue of this act, not having any authority to view, search, and examine any foreign canon law, though he and they, had deemed and adjudged any part of the same law, worthy to have been continued, kept and obeyed, yet nevertheless had not the same been of any force or validity. For only such canons, constitutions and ordinances Provincial or Synodal (being not contrariant, onerous or prejudicial to the King, to the laws, or to the people) were re-established, as were committed. Besides, whereas about twenty years passed, diverse canons, constitutions and ordinances, aswell papal as provincial, were alleged by him that collected an Abstract, against an unlearned ministery, against dispensations for many benefices, against excommunication, and against civil jurisdiction in ecclesiastical persons: the aunswerer, in the behalf and maintenance of those 
Tit. pag. 〈◊〉. & 2. The answerer unto the Abstract, proveth by his reasons the Papal canon law now used to be abolished  abuses, challenged the Author for not having proved his intent by law in force: affirming that the canons and laws by him alleged, were but pretended necessary and disused laws; that they were not inspired with the life of laws; that such were fathered for laws, as be not laws; and that it remained by him to be discussed how many of them were to be called in truth, her majesties laws. The reason of all which his exceptions, he yieldeth to be this: namely, that the Author ought to have proved them, not to have been repugnant to the customs of the Realm, but to have been in use and practise before the making of that act of submission. For he must prove (saith the Answerer) that they are not repugnant to the customs of this Realm, and show us how they have been used and executed here, before the making of the statute: yea he can say, that they are by law established among us. Which points (saith he) because we learn by law, quod facta non presumantur, matters in fact, are not intended to be done, until they be proved so: we must still put him to his proofs, & in the mean time say, that he hath gaped wide to say nothing to the purpose, and that in his whole book, he hath talked, but not reasoned. All which asseveration of this Answerer, if the same be true, and, if this plea be a good averment to bar the Author from having proved a learned ministery to be commanded by the law; dispensations for many benefices to be unlawful; excommunication by one alone to be forbidden; and civil gouverment to be unlawful in ecclesiastical persons, then much more forcibly may this argument be retorted, upon all such as claim, allege & put in ure any portion of the foreign canon law. For sithence it hath never yet been proved, that the foreign canon law, used and executed at this day, was accustomed & used 25. H. 8. then because we learn by law (as he saith) quod facta non presumantur, we must still put him, & his clients to their proof, and in the mean while tell them, that their Advocate hath twisted for them but a bad thread, when by his reason he hath untwined all their laws, and broken a sunder the bands of their gouverment. Moreover because it is not yet proved, that the foreign and papal canon law is not contrariant nor repugnant to the laws, statutes or customs of the Realm, nor derogatory to the prerogatives of the regal Crown; nay because the contradictory hereof is affirmed, and this denied: and because we learn by law (as he saith) that matters in fact, are not intented to be done ●ill they be proved so, we must still put the upholders and executioners of this law, to their proof, and in the mean while tell them that the foreign & papal law, is but a pretended necessary & disused law; that it is not inspired with the life of law, and that it is fathered by them to be such a law, as is an heedless, a fetherlesse and a nocklesse arrow which is not fit to be drawn, or shot against any subject of the King. And from this voidance, abolition & nullity of foreign and papal canon law (because sublato principali, tolluntur accessoria) it followeth that all offices and functions of papal Archbishops, papal Bishops, papal Suffragans, papal Archdeacon's, papal Deans and Chapters, papal Priests, papal Deacons, papal Subdeacons', papal Chancellors, papal Vicar's general, papal Commissaries, and papal Officials, merely depending upon the authority, and drawn from the rules and grounds of that law, are likewise annihilated, and of no value. Howbeit forso 
By the opinion of the Civilians, the papal canon law seemeth to be in force.  much as by the opinion of some learned Civilians, there seemeth unto them a necessary continuance of the same foreign and papal law, by reason that Archbb. and Bishops do now lawfully 
Apology of certain proceed in courts Ecclesiastical.  (as they say) use ordinary archiepiscopal and Episcopal jurisdiction, which they could not (as they think) do, if the same common law were urterly abolished: and for so much also, as some learned in the canon laws, do maintain, that since the statut of 1. Eliz. c. 1. the Archbb. and Bb. cannot lawfully claim any ordinary spiritual jurisdiction at all, but that the spiritual jurisdiction, to be exercised by them, aught to be delegated unto them from the King, by a commission under the great Seal: Forasmuch (I say) as there are these differences of opinions, it seemeth expedient to be considered, by what law, & by what authority, Archbb. and Bb. exercise Archiepiscopal, & Episcopal power in the church: And to the end this question may fully be known, and no scruple nor ambiguity be left, what power spiritual may be intended to be exercised by them: We distinguish spiritual power, into a power properly called spiritual; and into a power improperly 
Power properly, and improperly called spiritual.  or abusively called spiritual. The power properly called spiritual, is that spiritual power, which consisteth, and is conversant in preaching the Word; administering the Sacraments; ordaining and deposing Ministers; excommunicating or absolving; and if there be any other spiritual power of the like property and nature. Now that this power properly called spiritual, could have been drawn from the person of our late Sovereign Lady the Queen unto 
Power properly called spiritual, was never in the Queens person.  Archbb. and Bishops, we deny. For the Queen's Royal person, being never capable of any part of this spiritual power, how could the same be derived from her person unto them? Nemo potest plus juris in alium transforre, quam ipse habet. archiepiscopal and Episcopal power therefore, exercised in, and about these mysteries of our holy Religion, ordinarily & necessarily must belong unto the Archbb. and Bb. by the canon of the holy Scriptures; otherwise they have no power (properly called spiritual, touching these things at all. The power which improperly is called spiritual, 
Power improperly called spiritual, is indeed but a temporal power.  is such a power, as respecteth no● the exercise of any pastoral or ministerial church, to the internal begetting of faith, or reforming of manners in the soul of man; but is such a power, as whereby public peace, equity and justice is preserved, and mainteigned in external things, peculiarly appropried, and appertaining unto the persons, or affairs of the church; which power indeed is properly a temporal or civil power, and is to be exercised only by the authority of temporal and civil Magistrates. Now then to return to the state of the point in question touching this later power, improperly called spiritual, by what law, or by what authority the Archbishops and Bishops do exercise this kind of power in the church: I answer that they cannot have the same, from any foreign canon law, because the same law, with all the powers & dependences thereof is anulled: And therefore that this their power, must & aught to be derived unto them from Bb. where, From whence then is their power derived? Hereunto we answer, that (before the making of that act) spiritual jurisdiction did appertain unto Bishops, and that Bishops were ordinaries, aswell by custom of the Realm, canons, constitutions and ordinances provincial & synodal, as by foreign canon law. And 
Bishops remain ordinaries by custom, provincial canons, and statute law, though papal canon law be abolished.  that therefore these canons, constitutions & ordinances provincial or synodal, according to the true intent of that act, could not still have been used and executed as they were before, if the Bishops had not still remained ordinaries. Moreover, it is clear by two statutes, that the Archbishops & Bishops ought 
25. H. 8. c. 20. 25. H. 8. c, 16.  to be obeyed in all manner of things, according to the name, title, degree and dignity, that they shall be chosen, or presented unto, and that they may do and execute, minister, use, and exercise all and every thing and things, touching or pertaining to the office or order of an Archbishop or Bishop, with all ensigns, tokens and ceremonies thereunto lawfully belonging, as any Archbishop or Bishop might at any time heretofore do, without offending of the prerogative Royal of the Crown, and the laws and customs of this Realm. Let it be then that by custom, canons provintiall and statute law, Bishops be and do remain ordinaries; yet aswell upon those words of the statute 25. H. 8. without offending of the prerogative Royal, as upon the statute of 1. Eliz. c. 1. there remaineth a scruple and ambiguity, whether it be not hurtful, or derogatory unto the kings prerogative Royal, that Ordinaries should use and exercise their ordinary power (improperly called spiritual) without a commission under the great Seal, or that such their power should be as immoderate, and excessive now, as in times past it was by the papal canon law? Concerning the first, by the statut of 1. Eliz. c. 1. and by the statute of 8. Eliz. c. 1. the Queen was recognised to be in effect the Ordinary 
The Queen was supreme ordinary of ordinaries.  of Ordinaries, that is, the chief, supreme and Sovereign ordinary over all persons, in all causes, aswell ecclesiastical as temporal. Where it seemeth to follow, that all the branches, & streams, aswell of that power which improperly is called spiritual, as of that power which properly is called temporal, should have been derived originally unto the Bishop from her highness person, as from the only head & fountain of all the same spiritual power within her Kingdoms, in such manner and from, and by such commission under the great Seal, as her H. temporal Officers, justicers & judges, had their authorities committed unto them. And to this opinion Master D. Bilson seemeth to accord. For all power 
Pag. 348  (saith he) is not only committed to the sword, which God hath authorized, but is wholly closed in the sword. Against the head, that it shall not be head, to rule and guide the feet, can be no prescription; by reason God's ordinance, for the head to govern the body, is a perpetual and eternal law: and the usurpation of the members against it, is no prescription but a confusion, and the subversion of that order, which the God of heaven hath immutably decreed and settled. Besides, there resteth (saith the Remonstrance) 
Pag. 114. & 130.  unto the Bishops of this Realm, none other but subordinate, & delegate authority: and that the matter & heads wherein their jurisdiction is occupied, are by, and from the Christian Magistrates authority: In whom, as supreme Governor, all jurisdiction, within her dominions, aswell ecclesiastical as civil, by Gods and man's law is invested, and their authority ecclesiastical is but subordinat under God & the Prince, derived for the most part from the Prince. From which two statutes & judgements of the 
1. Eliza. c. 1 & 8. Eliz. c. 1  Governors of the Church contained in these two books (for these two books were seen & allowed by the Governors of the church) I leave it to be considered, if the Bishop did exercise the same improper and abusive spiritual power and jurisdiction ecclesiastical only and alonely, in their own names, styles and dignities, and under their own seals of office, & that also by authority of foreign and papal laws; if (I say the Bishop did these things, after this & this manner, I leave it then to be considered, whether their exercise of such power were derogatory and prejudicial in a very high degree, to the prerogatives of the Royal Crown or not. For my part because I find by the foreign canon law, that papal Bishops be the Pope's sons, and are privileged to carry the the print & image of the Pope their father, namely that they have plenitudinen potestatis within their dioceses, as the 
Ex de Maior: & o●●.  Pope pretendeth to have power over the whole world: For quilibet ordinarius saith the same law in sua diocaesi est maior quolibet principe, and because also (not withstanding whatsoever the Bb. have written, that they were the Queen's Bb. and had their authority derived unto 
M. Bilson pag. 330.  them from the Queen) they did in her life time, put the same papal law in execution, & by the same law did take upon them, plenitudinem potestatis, within their Dioceses: I for my part (I say) can not as yet otherwise conceive, but that exceedingly they did intrude them selves into the Royal pre-eminences, privileges, & prerogatives of the Queen. For by what other authority, then by a certain plenary power, did they in their own names, for the government of the 
The Bb. by a plenary power devised & promulged new canons, with out the Queen's assent.  several Churches within their several Dioceses, from time to time, make, promulge, and by virtue of men's corporal oaths put in execution, what new Canons, Injunctions, and articles soever seemed good unto them, without any licence, or confirmation from the Queen, first had and obtained thereunto? By which pretenced plenary power, it seemeth that the statute made to bring the Clergy in submission to the King, was covertly deluded, and our late Sovereign Lady the Queen, cunningly bereft of that regal authority, over every partieular Diocesan, or Ordinary, which notwithstanding, by the parliament was given unto her Highness, over the whole body and state of the Clergy. For if once there be no necessity of the King's licence, assent, or confirmation to such articles, canons, or injunctions, as every ordinary shall make within his jurisdiction, then must it be intended, that the statute of submission hath covertly permitred, several members, severally to do, & to execute those things which apparently, & in express terms, the whole convocation was commanded, and with the same, in verbo sacerdotij, had promised, not to do: then the which what can seem more unreasonable and absurd? For than might all the Ordinaries join hand in hand, and agree all together in one, never in any of their convocations assembled, by the Kings writ, to devise, make, or promulge, any canons Ecclesiastical at all. And what assent, licence, or confirmation from the King, could then be needful? Or how then was the Clergy, brought in submission to the King? For then, should it not be with them, as it is in the proverb; A threefold chord is not easily broken: but then should it be with them, contrary to the proverb; for they being all fast knit and bound together unto the King's authority, by a chord of 24 threads, might easily be broken; but being severed and plucked a sunder, into 
24. Bishops, can make no law without leave. And yet every Bb: doth make many laws  24 parts, one from the other, the King with all his regal power, might not be● able so much as to break one of the least threads, wherewithal one of their cords was twisted. If the Lord Maior, the Sheriffs, Aldermen, and whole commonalty of the City of London, should promise unto the King upon their fidelities, not to set any price upon Wines or other victuals, by their common Council, within the said City, unless the King, under his privy signett, should first authorize them so to do, were it not a mere collusion of the King's meaning, if every particular Alderman, should set prices of such things in every particular Ward? But against the collection made from the Statutes. 1. & 8. Eliza: & the judgement of the divinies aforesaid, the 
A collection made against the former reason by an Apology for sundry proceed by iurisdi. Eccl. pag. 5.  author of an Apology, to his understanding, reckoneth the same collection to be a very simple collection, & against the same, he answereth and reasoneth in effect thus. 
If (as is collected) all power spiritual, by a commission under the great Seal, must be derived from the Queen, to warrant the execution of it unto him, that is, to exercise it; then must the like warrant be procured, for every temporal office, to execute his temporal office.  
But every temporal officer, must not procure like warrant to execute his temporal office.  
Therefore a commission under the great Seal must not be procured to warrant the execution, of the said spiritual power.   
The consequence of his mayor proposition being false, he laboureth notwithstanding to make the same good, and in effect for the same argueth thus: 
All temporal authority, as absolutely and as really, is revested in the person of the Queen, as is the said spiritual authority.  
Therefore as all spiritual officers, for the execution of the said spiritual power; must have their authority, derived unto them from the person of the Queen under the great Seal, so likewise must all temporal officers, for the execution of their temporal offices, have the like commission.   
The consequence of which enthimeme followeth not, though the antecedent be true. For although as well all temporal, as all the said spiritual authority improperly so called, was really & absolutely in the person of the Queen; yet hereupon it followeth not, that by one and the self same means alone, and namely, by a commission under the great Seal, all temporal, and the said spiritual power, in every part and branch thereof, should be drawn alike, from the Queen's person. For there be diverse and sundry means, to derive temporal authority, whereas there seemeth to be but one only means to derive the said spiritual authority, and then mark the substance of the Author's argument. 
Some temporal Officers, as Stewards of leets, Constables, & sundry other Officers, must not draw their temporal authority from the Queen by a commission under the great Seal.  
Therefore no spiritual officers, as Archbishops, Bb: Archdeacon's, and s●de vacant, Deans and chapters must draw any of their spiritual authority from the Queen by a commission, etc.   
Which argument drawn from a particular affirmative, unto a general negative, what weakness it hath, every young Logician can discern. And as for Stewards of leets, though they have no 
Though all temporal officers draw not their power from the King, by the great Seal, yet by one means or other withdraw it from the King.  commission under the great Seal, yet for the execution foe their Stewarships they have a commission under the Seal of the Exchequer, Constables, Decennary, or tithingmen, and Thirdboroughes, have their authorities derived unto the from the King's person, by the very original institution of their offices, Sheriffs of Countries, Coroners, Escheators, and Verderors, have their offices and their authorities warranted unto them, by the King's writs out of the Chancery. But 〈◊〉 was not the mind of the Lawmakers saith the Author) that the Ordinaries, by a commission under the great Seal, should draw their said spiritual power from the Queen. What the minds of the Lawmakers were, touching this point, it mattereth little or nothing at all. Neither is it to purpose, whether a commission under the great Seal, be necessarily required, or not required by virtue of that statut 1. Eliz. c. 1. to warrant the said spiritual power unto Ordinaries. Only it sufficeth, that the Queen having all power, improperly called spiritual, invested in her Royal person, & being really & actually seized of all the said supreme spiritual authority, could not have any part of the same spiritual power drawn from her, but by some one lawful and ordinary means or other. For if this rule be true in every common person, quod meum est, sine mea voluntate à me auferri non potest; how much more doth the same rule hold, in the Royal prerogatives, rights, privileges, dignities, and supremities of a King! Wherefore to say that all supreme and ordinary power (improperly called) spiritual, was really and actually inherers in the Royal person of the Queen, and to say also, that some of the same inferior, and ordinary power, not derived from the Queen, was nevertheless in the persons of inferior ordinaries, is as much to say, that some branches of a tree, may receive nourishment from ells-where then from the root; that some members of the body, are not guided by the head; and that some streams, flow nor from their fountains. And now to conclude this part, against the canon law, & their Offices and functions thereof, I dispute thus: 
The foreign and papal canon law, with all the accessories, dependences, Offices, and functions thereof, is utterly abolited out of the Realm:  
Therefore the same law is no part of the laws of the Realm; and therefore also it is evident, that there will not follow any alteration of the laws of the Realm, by the taking of it away.   
Which canon law also, with other laws & functions, how easily the same without any inconveniences, may be supplied, shall (God willing) be presently made apparent, if first we shall answer to that challenge, which the state of Prelacy may seem to make for the continuance of their Lordly primacy, 
Challenge for Lordly primacy, out of the great Charter, an●vered.  out of the words of the great Charter. Concerning which challenge, namely, that by the great Charter, Lordly Archiepiscopal, and Episcopal primacy or jurisdiction belonging to the state of Prelacy, is belonging unto them: I demand unto what Church this great Charter was granted? And whether it were not granted unto the Church of God in England? The words of the Charter are these: Concessimus Deo, & hac presenti Charta nostra confirmavimus, pro nobis 
Mag. Charta. c. 1.  & haeredibus nostris, in perpetuum, quod Ecclesia Anglicana libera sit, & habeat omnia iura sua integra, & libertates suas illaesas. We have granted unto God, and by this our present writing have confirmed for us, and for our heirs for ever, that the church of England be free, and that she have all her rights, and liberties whole and unhurt. Now by this Charter, if the same be construed aright, there is provision made; first, that such honour and worship be yielded by the King and his subictes, his and their successors and posterity unto God, as truly, and in deed belongeth unto him: secondly, that not only such rights and liberties, as the King & his progenitors, but also that such as God had endowed the Church of England with, should inviolably be preserved. And in very deed, to speak truly & properly, such rights and liberties only, are to be called, the rights & liberties of the church of England, which God himself hath given by his law unto his universal Church, & not which the Kings of England, by their Charter, have bequeathed to the particular church of England. When therefore question is made, that by the great Charter, the Kings of England are bound to maintain the rights and liberties of the Church of England, we are to inquire and search what rights and liberties, God in his holy word, hath granted unto his universal Church; and so by consequence unto the Church of England, one part of the Catholic church. And this questionless was the cause, that moved the victorious Prince Henry the eight, so effectually and powerfully to bend himself against the Pope's supremacy, usurped at that time over the Church of England. For (saith the King) we will with hazard of our life, and loss of our Crown, uphold and defend in our Realms whatsoever we shall know to be the will of God. The church of God then in England, not being free, nay having her rights and liberties according to the great Charter, whole and unhurt, but being in bondage and servitude to the Sea of Rome, contrary to the law of God; the King judged it to stand highly with his honour, & with his oath (according to the measure of knowledge, which then was given unto him) to reform, redress, & amend the abuses of the same Sea. If then it might please our gracious Sovereign Lord King JAMES, that now is (treading in the godly steps of his renowned great Uncle) to vouchsafe an abolishment of all lordly primacy, executed by Archiepiscopal, & Episcopal authority, over the Ministers of Christ; His Highness in so doing, could no more rightly be charged with the violation of the great Charter, then might King HENRY the eight with the banishment of the Pope's supremacy; or then our late Sovereign Lady the Queen could be justly burdened with the breach of her oath, by the establishment of the Gospel. Nay if the Kings of England, by reason of their oath, had been so straightly tied to the words of the great Charter, that they might not in any sort, have disannulled any supposed rights, & liberties of the church then used, and confirmed by the great Charter, unto the church that then was supposed, to be the Church of God in England; then (belike) King Henry the eight, might be attainted to have gone against the great Charter, and against his oath, when by the overthrow of abbeys & Monasteries, he took away the rights, and liberties of the abbots and Priors. For by express words of the great Charter, abbots and Priors, had as ample and as large a Patent, for their rights and liberties, as our Archb. & Bb. can at this day challenge for their primacies. If then the rights and liberties of the one, as being against the law of God, be duly & lawfully taken away, notwithstanding any matter, clause, or sentence, contained in the great Charter; the other have but little reason, by colour of the great Charter, to stand upon their pantofles, and to contend for their painted sheaths. For this is a rule & maxim in all good laws, that in omni juramento, semper excipitur authoritas maioris: unless then they be able to justify by the holy scriptures, that such rights and liberties, as they pretend for their spiritual primacy over the Ministers of Christ, to be granted unto them by the great Charter, be in deed & truth likewise confirmed unto them by the holy law of God: I suppose the kings Highness, as a successor to King Henry the third, and as a most just inheritor to the Crown of England, by the words of the great Charter, and by his oath (if once the same were taken) to be bound utterly to abolish all Lordly primacy, as hitherto upheld and defended, partly by ignorance, and partly by an unreasonable and evil custom.   

Admonition.  
The use and study of the civil law willbe utterly overthrown; for the Civilians in this Realm, live not by the use of the civil law, but by the offices of the canon law, and such things as are within the compass thereof. And if you take those offices, and functions away, and those matters, wherein they deal in the canon law, you must needs take away the hope of reward, and by that means their whole study.   

Assertion.  
This collection dependeth upon his former Reason, & is borrowed to prove a necessary continuance of canon law, and concludeth in effect thus: 
The taking away of the reward and maintenance of Civilians, willbe the overthrow of the use and study of the civil law:  
But the taking away of the canon law, the offices, and functions thereof, and such things as are within the compass of the same, willbe the taking away of the reward and maintenance of Civilians;  
Therefore the taking away of the canon law, willbe the overthrow of the use and study of the civil law.   
But we deny the assumption, and affirm 
The maintenance of Civilians, dependeth not upon the functions of the canon law.  that Civilians might have far better reward & maintenance then now they have, if the offices and functions of the canon law, and such things as are contained within the same, were simply and absolutely taken away. And further we say, if there were none other use, nor end of the study of the civil law, then hope of reward, and maintenance by some office & function of the canon law, that then Civilians should in vain seek for knowledge in the civil law, because without the knowledge thereof, and by the only knowledge of such things, as are within the compass of the canon law, they might reap that reward and maintenance. Nay, sithence by experience we have known that some, who never unclapsed the institutions of justinian, out of the same to learn the definition of civil justice, have been & yet are authorized, to exercise the offices and functions of the canon law; how should the study of the civil law, be furthered by these offices and functions, when as without any knowledge of the civil law, these offices and functions have been and yet are daily undertaken, and executed to the full? And what man then (if there were none other reward for Civilians) would ten or twelve years together, beat his brain, and trouble his wits, in the study of the civil law, when every silly canonist might be able and learned enough, to sit in the Bishop's throne, and to be judge in his consistory? Besides, if the Admonitor speak sooth, viz: that Civilians in this Realm, live not by the use of the civil law, to what end then should he fear an overthrow of the study thereof? For if there be no use of it in this Realm, for the maintenance of this life, to what use then should men study the same in this Realm? As for the use of it among strangers, and foreign nations without the Realm; the same (as I suppose) is no greater than such as 3. or 4. Civilians may be able well enough, fully to deliver the law, touching all matters of controversy, that may grow to question during the whole space of a kings reign. If no man lived in this Realm by the trade of brewing Beer, but that all Brewers did live by the trade of brewing Ale, what should we need to fear the decay of Beere-brewers, or what use were there of them? In like sort, if men live only by the use, offices and functions of the canon law, & that men live not (as he saith) by the use of the civil law within the Realm, what folly were it to study the one, whereas without the knowledge thereof, he might live by the other? And therefore it seemeth that the Admonitor by his own weapon, as much as in him lay, hath given the whole study of the civil law, a most desperate and deadly wound. And to the end we may understand what reward & maintenance, Civilians by the offices & functions of the canon law, do receive yearly for their service and attendance, in the Bishops and Archdeacon's their Courts; We will examine what fees Doctors of the civil law, being Chancellors, Commissaries or Officials, have usually, and ordinarily allowed unto them, by their Lords and Masters. Fees for probat of Testaments, granting of administrations, 
Fees for probat of testaments let to farm.  with their appendances, of late years in some places (whether in all or how many I know not) have been demised unto farm for an annual rent; out of which, either a small or no portion at all, hath been allowed unto the Chancellor or Official, for his service in this behalf. Whereupon (as I conjecture) it hath fallen out, rather than that those Officers would work, keep courts, & travail for little, or nought, there have been exacted greater fees, for the dispatch of these things, then by law ought to have been paid. Perquisits of courts, arising upon suits, commenced between party and party, it must be a plentiful harvest, and there must be multi amici curiae in a Bb. consistory, if ordinarily (communibus annis) they amounr in the whole to twenty pounds by the year: and yet these perquisits, belong not wholly to the Chancellor, but are to be divided between him & the Register. And touching Fees for excommunication, and absolution, fees for institution & induction, licences to preach, licences for Curates and Readers. For testimonial of subscription, or licences to marry without banes; fees for commutation of penance, & fees for relaxation of sequestrations: touching these manner of Fees, if the same be fees no way warantable, how are not then such Fees every way dishonourable for a Doctor of the civil law, 
Fees due for the execution of the functions of the canon law, dishonourable for a Doctor of the civil la  to take, either of Ministers or people? There must be therefore some other hope of better reward & maintenance, to incite and encourage scholars, to the study of the civil law, them are these beggarly and unlawful fees, depending upon the functions, and exacted by the officers of the canon law: or else the use of the civil law (as the Admonitor saith) must necessarily in short time be overthrown. For if Fees for probat of Testaments, and granting of administrations with their appendices, shall still be let to farm; and if also, many unlawful Fees were quite inhibited, there would remain (I trow) but a very poor pittance for Civilians out of the functions of the canon law, to maintain their Doctoralities withal. But what better reward can there be for Civilians, then hath already been mentioned? If the Admonitor had not willingly put a hoodwincke 
Civilians 〈◊〉 England live not only, by the functions of canon la  before his eyes, he might have seen that the civilians live not wholly & altogether by the practice of the canon law; but partly also, and that most honourably by the use of the civil law. If a Doctor of the civil law, be judge or Advocate, in the Court of Admiralty; if he be judge or Advocate in the prerogative Court, so far as the same Court handleth only matters of Legacies, Testaments and codicils, to what use can the canon law serve him, or what advantage can the same law bring him in? Besides, to what use serveth the canon law unto a Doctor of the civil law, if he shall find favour in the King's sight, & if it please the King to make him one of the Masters of his Requests, or one of the twelve Masters of his high Court of Chancery, or to be the Master of his Rolls; or to be his highness Ambassador unto foreign Nations, of to be one of his H. most honourable privy Council, or to be one of his principal Secretaries. It followeth not therefore (as the Admo, pretendeth) that either the Civilians in this Realm, live not by the use of the civil law, but by the offices, & functions of the canon law, and such things as are within the compass thereof; or that the hope of reward, and by that means, the whole study of the civil law must be taken away, if once the canon law should be abolished. Neither would it be any hard matter for the King (if the Civilians might find grac● in his sight) to appoint Courts, offices, and all manner of process and proceed in judgement for Doctors of the civil law, to hear & determine in the King's name, all causes being now within the compass of any civil, or ecclesiastical law within this Realm. And although a little candle can give but a little light, and a small Spring can send●● forth but a small stream, yet because great fires are kindled sometimes by 〈◊〉 tle sparkles, and small streams 〈◊〉 together, may in time grow into great rivers; I shall desire the great Civilians with their floods & lamps of learning to help forward such a law, as where●● the study of the civil law, may be upholden, the reward and maintenance of Civilians, without any function from the Canon law, may be enlarged, many controversies, and disorders in the church, may be pacified, and the King's prerogative Royal be duly advanced. Which things if it might please them rightly to consider, then let them humbly and seriously beseech our Sovereine Lord the King, and States in parliament, to give their consents to such a law, as the project ensuing, may warrant them, the same not to be dangerous to the overthrow of their civil studies.    

The Project of an Act for the explanation, and amplifying of one branch of a statute, made in the first year of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, entitled, An Act restoring to the Crown, the ancient jurisdiction, over the state Ecclesiastical, and also for the declaring, and reviving of a statute made in the first year of King Edward the sixth, entitled An Act, what seals and styles Bishops and other spiritual persons exercising jurisdiction ecclesiastical, shall use.  
FOr as much as by one branch of an Act made in the first year of our late Sovereign Lady, of blessed memory, Queen Elizabeth (entitled an Act, restoring to the Crown the ancient jurisdiction over the state Ecclesiastical & Spiritual, and abolishing all foreign power repugnant to the same) it was established and enacted, That such jurisdictions, privileges, superiorities, and pre-eminences spiritual and ecclesiastical, as by any spiritual, or ecclesiastical power, or authority, hath heretofore been, or may lawfully be exercised, or used, for the visitation of the Ecclesiastical state and persons, and for reformation, order & correction of the same, and of all manner errors, heresies, schisms, abuses, offences, contempts and enormities, should for ever, by authority of that present parliament, be united and annexed, to the Imperial Crown of this Realm, by means whereof, it may now be made a question, whether any Archbishops or other Ecclesiastical persons, having since that time used or exercised any such spiritual or ecclesiastical jurisdiction in their own right, or names, might lawfully have done, or hereafter may lawfully do the same, without special warrant, and authority derived immediately from your Highness, by and under your H. letters patents: And whereas also by a statute made in the first year of King Edward the sixth, entitled an act what seals and style, Bishops, or other spiritual persons shall use, it was ordained, that all and singular Archbishops and Bishops, & others exercising ecclesiastical jurisdiction, should in their process use the King's name and style, and not their own: and also that their Seals should be graved with the King's arms: And forasmuch also, as it must be highly derogatory to the Imperial Crown of this your highness Realm, that any cause whatsoever ecclesiastical or temporal, within these your H. Dominions, should be heard or adjudged, without warrant or commission from your Highness, your heirs & successors, or not in the name, style, and dignity of your Highness, your heirs and successors; or that any seals should be annexed to any promise, but only your Kingly seal and arms: May it therefore please the King, at the humble supplication of his Commons, to have it enacted, That the aforesaid branch of the aforesaid Act made in the first year of Queen Elizabeth her reign, & every part thereof may still remain, & for ever be in force. And to the end, the true intent and meaning of the said statute, made in the first year of King Edward the sixth, may be declared and revived, that likewise by the authority aforesaid, it may be ordained, and enacted, that all and singular Ecclesiastical Courts and Consistories, belonging to any Archb. Bb. Suffragans, college, Deane and Chapter, prebendary, or to any Ecclesiastical person or persons whatsoever, and which have heretofore been commonly called, reputed, taken or known to be Courts or Consistories, for causes of instance, or wherein any suit, complaint or action, between party and party, for any matter or cause wherein judgement of law civil or canon, hath been, or is required, shall and may for ever hereafter be reputed, taken, and adjudged to be Courts, and iudgmentseats merely civil, secular and temporal, and not hence forth Ecclesiastical or spiritual; and as of right belonging and appertaining to the Royal Crown and dignity of our Sovereign Lord King james that now is, his heirs and successors for ever. And that all causes of instance, and controversies, between party & party, at this day determinable in any of the said Courts, heretofore taken and reputed ecclesiastical, shall for ever hereafter be taken, reputed, and adjudged to be causes merely civil, secular and temporal, as in truth they ought to be, and of right are belonging and appertaining to the jurisdiction of the Imperial Crown of this Realm. And further, that your H. liege people, may be the better kept in awe, by some authorized to be your H. Officers & Ministers to execute justice in your highness name, and under your H. style and title of King of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland, defender of the faith, etc. in the said Courts and Constories, and in the said causes and controversies: Be it therefore enacted by the authority aforesaid, That all the right, title, and interest, of, in, and to the said Courts and Consistories, and in and to the causes & controversies aforesaid, by any power, jurisdiction, or authority heretofore reputed Ecclesiastical (but by this Act adjudged civil, secular, and temporal) shall for ever hereafter, actually and really, be invested and appropried in and to the Royal person of our Sovereign Lord the King that now is, his heirs & successors, Kings and Queens of this Realm. And that it shall and may be lawful to and for our said Sovereign Lord and King, his heirs and successors, in all and every Shire and Shires, Diocese and Dioceses, within his H. Dominions and Countries, by his and their letters patents under the great Seal of England, from time to time, and at all times to nominat and appoint, one, or more able and sufficient, Doctor or Doctors learned in the civil law, to be his and their civil, secular and temporal Officer, and Officers, Minister, and Ministers, of justice in the same civil, secular, and temporal Courts & Consistories, which in and over his, and their royal name, style, and dignity, shall, as judge, and judges, do perform, & execute, all and every such act, and acts, thing and things whatsoever, in and about the execution of justice and equity in those Courts, according to the course and order of the civil law, or the Ecclesiastical canons, and constitutions of the Realm, as heretofore hath been used and accustomed to be done, by, for, or in the name of any Archbb. Bb: College, Cathedral Church, Deane, Archdeacon, Prebendary, or any other Ecclesiastical person or persons whatsoever: And that all, and every such civil, secular and temporal Officer, and Officers, Minister, and Ministers, judge, & judges, in his and their process shall use one manner of Seal only and none other, having graved decently therein your Kingly arms with certain characters for the knowledge of the Diocese or Shire; And further be it enacted, &c: That it shall and may be lawful, by the authority aforesaid, for our said Sovereign L. the King, his heirs and succerssors, from time to time and at all times, to nominat and appoint, by his and their highness letters patents, undee the great Seal of England, for every Shire and Shires, Diocese and Dioceses within his or their H. Dominions, one or more, able & sufficient persons, learned in the civil law, to be his and their Notary and Notaries, Register and Registers, by him & themselves, or by his or their lawful Deputy or Deputies, to do, perform, and execute all and every such act & acts, thing and things, as heretofore in the Courts and Consistories Ecclesiastical aforesaid, hath been, and now are incident and appertaining, to the office of any Register or Notary. And further, at the humble suit of the Commons, etc. it may please the King, to have it enacted, That all & singular matters of Wills & Testaments, with all and every their appendices, that all and singular matters of Spousalls & Marriages, with their accessories, that all and singular matters of diffamation hereto fore determinable in the ecclesiastical Courts (and if there be any other causes of the like mere civil nature) shall be heard, examined, and determined by the said civil and secular Officers and judges in the said civil and secular Courts, according to the due course of the civil law, or statutes of the Realm in that behalf provided. And that all matters of Tithes, Dilapidations, repair of churches, and if there be any other of like nature, with their accessories, and appendices, shallbe heard, examined, and determined, by the saido civil and secular Officers and judges, in the said civil and secular Courts, according to the King's ecclesiastical laws, statutes, and customs of the Realm, in that behalf heretofore used, or hereafter by the King and parliament, to be established. And at the humble suit of the Commons, may it please the King to have it further enacted, That all manner of fees heretofore lawful, or hereafter by the King and parliament to be made lawful, for, or concerning the probat of wills; administration of the goods of the intestat; letters of tuition; receiving or making of accounts inductions to archbishoprics, bishoprics, Dearries, Parochiall-churches, or other spiritual promotions, and all other feees what soever heretofore lawful, or hereafter to be made lawful, for any travail or pain to be taken in or about the expedition and execution of any of these causes, shall for ever hereafter be fees, & allowances appropriated to the judges, and principal Registers of the said Courts, equally to be divided between them, as heretofore hath been accustomed; and that the said judges and Ministers, within their several charges, shallbe Collectors of the King's tenths and subsidies, granted and due by the Clergy, taking for their travail and pain, in and about the same collection, such fees as heretofore have been accustomed. Provided always, that none of the said civil and temporal Officers and Ministers, nor any of them, for any offence, contempt or abuse, to be committed by any person, or persons, in any wise incident to any of the said Courts and Consistories, suspend, excommunicate, or interdict any person or persons, but shall and lawfully may by authority of this present Act, proceed against every offendor, and offenders, by such ordinary process, out of the said Register or Notary's office, as is used upon a subpaena out of the high Court of Chancery, and there upon default, or contempt, to proceed to attachment, proclamation of rebellion, and in prisonment of the party offending, as in the said high Court of Chancery is used. Provided also, that all appeals, hereafter to be made, from all and every Court, and Courts in the Shires and Dioceses of the Country, shallbe made to the higher Courts, as heretofore hath been accustomed, only with an alteration, and addition of the names, styles and dignities of Archb. Bb. and other Ordinaries, unto the name. style and dignity of our Sovereign Lord the King, his heirs and successors. And that upon the appeals, so to be made, it shall and may be lawful, for the judges & Ministers of justice, of and in the said higher Courts, to make out all manner of process, and processes, and to do, & execute all and every act and acts, thing & things, for the furtherance of justice, in the causes afore said, as to them shall by the law seem equal, right, meet, & convenient; any law, statute, privilege, dispensation, prescription, use or customs, heretofore to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding. Provided also that all and every such judge and Minister, that shall execute any thing by virtue of this act, shall from time to time obey the Kings writ, & writs of prohibition, of attachment, upon prohibition and indicavit, and not to proceed contrary to the tenor of such write or writes, in such and the same manner and form, and condition, as they have or aught to have done before the making of this act, any thing in this act to the contrary notwithstanding. Provided also that this act or any thing therein contained, shall not extend or be interpreted to give any authority to the said judges & Ossicers, or any of them, to put in execution any civil or Ecclesiastical law, repugnant or contrariant to the laws, statutes, or customs of the Realm, or hurtful to the King's prerogative Royal.  
And thus it may seem to be but a small labour, a little cost, and an easy matter, for the King, his Nobles and Wise men of the Realm, to devise forms of judgement, and manner of process, & proceed, without any offices or functions of the canon law, whereby the use and study of the civil law, and the reward and maintenance for Civilians, might be furthered and increased, and not utterly overthrown & taken away; as the Admonitor uncivilly beareth us in hand. As for the alteration of the censure of excommunication for contumacy mentioned in this project, we have the consent of the reverend Bishops in 
Pag. 138.  this admonition, that the same may be altered. For the Admonitor their Prolocutor speaketh on this wise, Viz. As for 
Excommunication for contumacy by the Admonitors judgement, may be taken away without offence, and with the good liking of the Bishops.  the excommunication practised in our ecclesiastical Courts for contumacy, in not appearing, or not satisfying the judgement of the Court, if it had pleased the Prince, etc. to have altered the same at the beginning, and set some other order of process in place thereof; I am persuaded (saith he) that the Bishops & Clergy of the Realm would have been very well contented therewith. And speaking of a certain manner of civil discomoning used in the Church of Tigure, he further addeth, viz. Which, or the like good order devised by some godly persons, if it might be by authority placed in this Church &c: I think it would be gladly received, to shun the offence, that is taken at the other.  

Admonition.  
And matters of Tithes, Testaments, and Matrimony; matters also of adultery, slander, etc. are in these men's judgements, mere temporal, etc. therefore to be dealt in by the temporal Magistrate only, which as yet have either none at all, or very few laws touching those things, therefore the common law of the Realm, must by that occasion, receive also a very great alteration. For it will be no small matter, to apply these things, to the temporal law, & to appoint Courts, Officers and manner of process and proceed in judgement for the same.   

Assertion.  
In deed we hold, that all these matters whereof mention is here made, and all 
Matters of tithes and other causes of like nature pertain to civil justice.  others of the like nature, are merely civil and temporal, and by the temporal Magistrate alone, to be dealt in, and to be discussed, if we consider the administration of external and civil justice. And this we think willbe granted of all, and not be denied of any unless they be too to popishly addicted. In regard whereof we have drawn (as before is mentioned) a project, how Courts and manner of process and proceedings in judgement, by Doctors of the civil law may be appointed by the King, and his high Court of parliament, without that, that the common law of the Realm, by the occasion of any such courts, officer, or manner of process and proceed, must receive any alteration at all, much less a very great alteration. Howbeit if it should not please the King, and that the Civilians could not find favour in his sight, by courts, offices, and manner of process and proceed in judgement before specified, or by the like to have the study of the civil law advanced, yet we think it convenient once again to 
●owe matters of Tithes, etc. may be dealt in by the King's judges.  be examined how these matters may be dealt in, according to the rules & ground● of the common law, before the King's judges, and justices of the King's bench, and common pleas.  
By a statute of 32. H. 8. c. 7. it is clear, that all tithes, oblations etc. and other ecclesiastical or spiritual profits, by the law or statutes of the Realm, may be made temporal, as being admitted to be, abide, & go to, and in, temporal hands, lay uses, and profits. From the reason 〈◊〉 which statute it is clear, that those law●● likewise, may be reckoned amongst 〈◊〉 for temporal laws, which by the law●● and statutes of the Realm, may be executed by temporal and lay persons, and which are conversant about temporal and lay causes. If then the execution of the laws, touching these matters may lawfully remain, & abide in the hands of Doctors of the civil law, being temporal and lay persons (as already under the Bishops they do); it can not be denied but that the King's judges, and justicers of both Benches, may be as compatible judges, to put in execution the laws concerning these matters, as Doctors of the civil law, or other laymen be. But the causes are not reputed and called temporal, & lay causes amongst us. What for that? if in their own nature simply considered, these causes be merely lay and temporal causes, such causes (I mean) as whereof the King, a ●ay, civil and temporal Magistrate, by his lay, civil and temporal Magistracy, derived unto him immediately from the holy law of God, may, and aught to take cognizance, & thereupon, either in his own Royal person, or by the person of any of his inferior Officers, may give abso●te & peremptory judgement: If (I say) ●hese things be so, what booteth it, or that wisdom is it contend, that these causes and matters, have been, and are still adjudged to be therefore ecclesiastical, & no temporal causes, because through an abusive speech, or through a vain and evil custom, they have been so called and accounted in times past? And what if it hath pleased the kings Progenitors, by sufferance to tolerate the execution of such laws, as concern these things, to be in the hands & power of Ecclesiastical persons; yet here upon it followeth not that in very deed and truth, the Magistracy of the said ecclesiastical persons, was an ecclesiastical Magistracy, or that they were ecclesiastical Magistrates; but their Magistracy was, and remained still a temporal magistracy, & they were and abode temporal Magistrates. For not more can the quality of the person, altar the nature of the cause, then can the quality of the cause, altar the nature of the person. And, if it be true, that matters determinable (in times past) by a Magistracy abusively called ecclesiastical, be notwithstanding properly tempora●● matters, and that the same Magistracy also, be a temporal & no spiritual Magistracy, what a childish & poor conceit is it, to challenge & threp upon the temporal Magistrate, that he hath none, or very few temporal laws, touching those matters? And that therefore the people should not solicit an alteration of abuses in Church-goverment, lest for want of temporal laws, the people should be without ecclesiastical discipline? It will be no small matter (saith he) to apply these things to the temporal law; yea and so say I to. But what of that? The question is not how hardly these things may be applied to the temporal law, but how small a matter it were to apply the temporal law unto these things. For it is not said in any law, that, casus ex iuribus, but it is said in all laws, that 
The temporal law may easily be applied to causes now reputed ecclesiastical.  ex casibus ●ura nascuntur. And in deed the Physician apply not the disease to his physic, but he prepareth his physic for the disease. The husbandman he measureth not his ground by the seed, but his seed by the ground. The Draper, he meateth not his yard by the cloth, but his cloth by the yard. If in like manner the temporal laws, and the grounds and rules thereof, were applied to these matters of tithes, marriages, etc. whereof he speaketh, what more alteration could there be of the temporal law by such an application, than there is an alteration of the plummet, by laying it to the stone, or then there is an alteration of the rule or yard, by laying them to the timber & cloth? Besides, he that rightly and after an exact, & equal proportion, can apply one rule or maxim of the temporal law, to many more cases, then whereun to it hath been usually in former times applied, he may rather be reputed an additioner, than an alterer of the law. But how may the temporal law be applied to those matters? How? even so, and so, as followeth. By the statute 32. 
How Tithes may be recovered in the King's temporal Courts.  H. 8. c. 7. it is declared, that tithes, oblations, etc. and other ecclesiastical or spiritual profitts, etc. beinng in lay men's hands, to lay uses, be no more ecclesiastical, but temporal goods, and profits; and that if any person were disseised, deforced, wronged, or otherwise kept, or put from his lawful inheritance, estate, seisin, etc. of, in, or to the same, by any person, claiming, or pretending to have interest, or title, in, or to the same, that then, in all and every such case, the person so disseised, deforced, or wrongfully kept from his right or possession, shall and may have his remedy in the King's temporal Courts, as the case shall require, for the recouvery of such inheritance by writ original, etc. to be devised and granted out of the kings Court of Chancery, in like manner, etc. It is there likewise provided, that that Act shall not extend, nor be expounded, to give any remedy, cause of action or suit, in the Courts temporal, against any person, which shall refuse to set out his Tithes, or which shall deteigne, etc. his Tithes and offerings. But that in all such cases, the party, etc. having cause to demand, or have the same tithes, shall have his action for the same, in the Ecclesiastical Courts, according to the ordinance, in the first part of that act mentioned, and none otherwise.  
Now then sit hence every person, whether he be lay or Ecclesiastical, having ●●ght to demand tithes and offerings, hath the party from whom those tithes 〈◊〉 due, bound & obliged unto him: and thence also, the party not dividing, yielding or paying his tithes, doth actually and really deteigne the same, and thereby doth unjustly wrong the party to whom they be due: contrary to justice, & the King's laws; sithence (I say) these things be so, what alteration, or disadvantage could befall or ensue to the common law, or the Professors thereof; if so be it might please the King, with his parliament, to have the last part of this Act so to be explained, extended, and enlarged, as that the same might give remedy in the King's temporal Courts, by writ original, to be devised & granted out of the Chancery, against any person deteigning his tithes and offerings● the Hospital of St leonard's in York, of the King's foundation and Patronage, 
Hospital of S. Leonard 1. 2. H. 6. c 2  endowed of a thrave of corn, to be taken yearly, of every ploungh ear-ring, with in the Counties of York, Comberlande, Westmoreland and Lancaster, having no sufficient, or covenable remedy, at the common law, against such as withheld the same thraves, it was ordained by the King in parliament, that the Master of the said Hospital, and his successors, might have actions by writ, or plaints of debt, or detinue at their pleasure, against all and every of them that detained the same thraves, for to recover the same thraves with their damages. And by a statute 32. H. 8. c. 44. it is enacted, That the Parsons and Curates of five parish churches, whereinto the Town of Roysen did extend itself, and every of them, & the successors of every of them, shall have their remedy, by authority of that Act, to sue, demand, ask, & recover in the King's Court of Chancery, the Tithes of corn, hay, wool, lamb and calf, subtracted or denied to be paid by any person or persons. Again, Vicars, Parsons, or Improprietaries, do implead any man, in the ecclesiastical Court, for tithes of wood, being of the age of 20. years, or above, for tyth-hay out of a meadow, for the which time out of mind & memory of man, there hath only some Meade-silver been paid: or if a debate hang in a spiritual Court for the right of tithes, having his original, from the right of Patronage, & the ●uantite of the same tithes, do pass the ●urth part of the value of the benefice, prohibition in all these, and sundry other cases doth lie, and the matters are to be tried, and examined in the kings Courts, according to the course of the common law, unless upon just cause there be granted a consultation. And if in these cases, in maintenance of the common law, the defendants have relief in the kings Courts; I think it more meet to leave it to the consideration rather of common, then to the judgement of canon Lawyers, to determine, what alteration the common law could sustain, in case all Plaintiffs, aswell as some defendants, might pray the King's aid, for the recovery of tithes; especially seeing at this day, the manner of paying tithes in England, for the most part, is now limited by the common and statute laws of the Realm, and not by any foreign canon law. Object. But there is some fact happily so difficile, so secret, and so mystical, in these causes of tithes, as the same cannot, without a very great alteration of the common law, be so much as opened before a lay judge; or, of the hidden knowledge whereof, the King's temporal judges are not capable. Answer. Why then let us see of what nature that inextricable fact may be. I have perused many libels; made and exhibited, before the ecclesiastical 
What facts touching the withholding of tithes are examinable in the ecclesiastical Courts.  judges, yea and I have read them over and over, and yet for ground of complaint, did I never perceive any other material and principal kind of fact, ' examinable in those Courts, but only such as follow. 
First, that the party agent, is either Rector, Vicar, Proprieiarie, or Possessor, of such a Parish-Church, and of the rectory, Vicarage, farm, possession, or dominion of the same, and by virtue thereof hath right unto all Tithes, oblations, etc. appertaining to the same Church, and growing with on the same Parish, bounds, limits, or places tythable of the same.  
Secondly, that his predecessors, Rectors, Vicars, etc. time out of mind and memory of man, have quietly and peaceably, received and had, all and singular Tithes, oblations, &c: increasing, growing, and renewing within the Parish, etc. and that they and he have been, and are in peaceable possession, of having, and receiving Tithes, oblations, etc.  
Thirdly, that the party defendant, hath had and received in such a year, etc. of so many sheep, feeding and couching within the said Parish, etc. so many fleeces of will; and of so many ewes, so many lambs, etc.  
Fourthly, that the defendant hath not set out, yielded or paid, the Tithe of the wool, and lamb; and that every Tithe fleece of the said wool, by common estimation, is worth so much; and that every Tithe lamb, by common estimation, is likewise worth so much, etc.  
Fiftly that the defendant, is subject to the jurisdiction of that Court, whereunto he is summoned.  
Lastly, that the defendant doth hitherto deny, or delay to pay his Tithes, notwithstanding he hath been requested there unto.   
These and such like are the chief matters 
The kings justices are as able to judge of exceptions against tithes, as the ecclesiastical judges.  of fact, whereupon in the ecclesiastical Courts, proofs by witnesses, or records rest to be made for the recovery of tithes. And who knoweth not, but that these facts, upon proofs made, before the kings justices, may aswell be decided by them, as by any of the reverend Bishops or venerable Archdeacon's, their Chancellors, or Officials. If there be am exception alleged by the defendant, as of composition, prescription, or privilege, the kings justices are as able to judge of the validity, of these, as they are now able to determine customs de modo decimandi, or of the use of high ways, of making and repairing of bridges, of commons of pasture, pawnage, estovers, or such like. Truth it is, that of legacies and bequests of 
Legacies how they may be recovered at the common law.  goods, the reverend Bishops by sufferance of our Kings and consent of our people, have accustomably used, to take cognizance, and to hold plea, in their spiritual Courts. Notwithstanding if the legacy be of lands, where lands be divisible by Testament, the judgement thereof, hath been always used, and holden by the King's writ, and never in any ecclesiastical Court. Wherefore if it shall please the King, to enlarge the authority of his Courts temporal, by commanding matters of legacies and bequests of goods, aswell as of lands, to be heard, and determined in the same, it were not much to be feared, but that the King's justices, the King's learned Counsel, and others learned in the law of the Realm, without any alteration of the same law, would speedily find means, to apply the grounds thereof, aswell to all cases of legacies, and bequests of goods, as of lands. For if there be no goods divisible by will, but the same are grauntable, and confirmable, by deed of gift, could not the King's justices, aswell judge of the gift, & of the thing given by will, as of the grant, & of the thing granted by deed of gift? or can they not determine of a legacy of goods, aswell as of a bequest of lands? If it should come in debate before them, whether the Testator, at the time of making his will, were of good & perfect memory, upon profess, and other circumstances to be opened, and made of the Testators memory by lively testimonies, either the Admonitor must condemn the kings learned and discreet justices to be 〈◊〉 mentis & insanae memoriae, or else it must be confessed, that they be as well able to judge of the distraction of wits and unsoundness of memory, in a person deceased, as they be to determine the question of Lunacy, madness, or idiocie, in a man living.  
If any question should arise upon the revocation of a former will of the ademption of a legacy, or of a legacy given upon condition, or in diem, it would be 〈◊〉 matter, for the learned judges; upon sight of the Will, and proofs to be made, to define, which is the first, and which is the last will; whether the legacy remain, or whether it be revoked, whether it be legatum per rerum or 〈◊〉, whether condicional or without condition: And if it be condicional whether the same be possible or impossible; honest, or dishonest; and if it be 〈◊〉, whether the day be past, or to come. But there lieth no action at the common law, for a legatory, against the executor to recover his legacy. I grant. But a creditor to recover his d●●t, due by the testator upon specialty, may bring an action, at the common law, against the executor. And than what is the cause, that a creditor, may recover his debt, & that a legatory can not recover his legacy, in the kings Court, but only, for that remedy could not be given unto legatories complaynantes by any writ out of the Chancery. And therefore that such plaintiffs, might not be deferred of their right, & 
21. Ed. 1. statute upon the writ of consultation  remedy in such cases, to their great damage, it hath pleased the Kings, by sufferance, to tolerate the Church officers, to determine these cases. Wherefore if it might please the King, to cause Writes to be made out of his Court of Chancery, for the recovery of Legacies, it were clear by the common law of the Realm (as from the statute may be gathered) that the cognizance of these cases, did not appertain any more, to the spiritual Court. For then might the legatory, by that Writ, bring an action against the executor, to obtain his Legacy. But how should that action be tried? How? even as other actions of debt, detinue, or trover be tried, namely (as the case should require) either by the country, or by the judges upon a moratur in lege.  
As Testaments with their adherences, so likewise matters of Spousalles, 
Matters of marriages, more meet to be decided by the Kings, then by the Bb. officers.  Marriages, divorces, etc. together their accessories, by common right, of the Imperial Crown, did in ancient times properly appertain to the examinations, and sentences of the Emperors themselves, & to their Provostes, Deputies, and Presidents, of Cities and Provinces, as by the several titles, de Testamentis, Legatis, Fidei commissis, Nuptijs, repudijs, divortio, dote, etc. in the books of the civil law appeareth. By the Law of England also, the King hath the marriage of an heir being within age, & in his ward. widows also that hold of the King in chief, must not marry themselves without the King's licence. And by an Act made 4. and 5. Phil. and Mary, there is a straight punishment provided against all such, as shall take away Maidens, that be inheritors, being within the age of sixteen years; or marry them without consent of their Parents. And what reason letteth them, that the King, might not as well have the care, and cognoyzance of all the contracts of marriage, especially of the marriage of all children and Widows, in his temporal Courts, as he hath of some parties, to be contracted, of the Dower, of the jointure, of the does aragment, of the age, of the 〈…〉 way, of the deflowering, and of manage without parent's consent in some cases? or what a very great alteration of the common Law, could ensue, in case the King's temporal justices, did examine, and determine whether the contract were a perfect and simple, or condicional contract yea or no? For if upon the statute made by Phi. and Mary, that Maidens and Women, children of Noble men, & Gentlemen, etc. being heirs apparent, etc. and being left within age of xuj. years, should not marry against the will or unknowing, of, or to the Father, or against, etc. If I say upon the publishing of this Act, there hath no alteration of the common law hitherto followed, it is but a mere superstitious error, to feign, that a change of the common law must follow, if so be this statute were extended, to all children, both Sons and Daughters, of what parentage, sex, estate, or age so ever. For if the King in his temporal Courts, had the definition of all, aswell as of some contracts, made by children, without consent of parents, than should a multitude of lewd and ungodly contracts, made by flattery, trifling gifts, fair and goodly promises, of many unthrifty, and light personages thereunto won, by entreaty of persons of lewd demeanour, be pronounced void, and of no efficacy, yea & on the other side, a number of honest, lawful, and godly contracts, should be confirmed, and remain in their full strength, and force; which now upon certain frivolous, and trifling quiddities, and niceties of 
Much a do in the ecclesiastical Courts, about accipio, & accipiam.  words and sillabes are pronounced in the ecclesiastical Courts, to be no contracts. And in good earnest, is there now a days, any soundness of reason at all, to be heard amongst the Doctors and proctor's of those courts, where they inform out of the canon law in these cases? For doth not their whole dispute and information rest principally, whether the contract be made by words of the present, or of the future tense? whether it be made with an oath, or without an oath? yea and do they not exceedingly besweate, and besmyre themselves, by turning, and returning, by folding, and unfolding, their great and hideous volumes, for proof, and reproof, of accipio, & accipiam? yea and sometimes of letters, and accents? If the youngman and maid, having both of them their parent's consent, shall answer only in the future tense: I will have thee, or, I will take thee; or I am content to take thee, or I will have none other but thee, or if ever I marry, I will marry thee; and do not answer directly, I do take thee to mine husband, or I do take thee to my wife: oh! it is a world to see, and a wonderment to behold, what canvasing, heaving, and shoving, what a stir, quoil, and garboil, the canonists make, about the lifting, and removing of these feathers. And whatsoever the holy Scriptures have determined of the necessity of parent's consent, or of what necessity likewise so ever the 
a Institu. de ●up. §. 1.  civil law, hold the consent of parents to be, yet in the ecclesiastical Courts, the papal canon law must needs take place, because by the same law, consent of parents, is not de necessitate, but de honestate tantum, and because also matrimonia debent esse libera, & non pendere ex alieno arbitrio. Wherein the reverend Bishops, (under their favourable patience) 
The canon law preferred by the reverend Bb. before the law of God and the civil law.  can not clearly excuse themselves, of much oversight, in so slender managing, of a matter, of so great, and high a consequence. The holy law of God, by public authority, hath been commanded within this Realm, to be sincerely, and purely taught, received and embraced. The civil law, hath not had her free course, in this case hindered, by any law of the Realm. And how then cometh it to pass, that the canon law, being in this point repugnant to both these laws, should notwithstanding, be preferred, bear sway & take place, in this Realm, before & above both these laws, especially the same in this point, as being against the law of God, being utterly taken away. The abuses past, & marriages past, under colour and pretext of this law, may and aught to be bewailed, and repent of: yea and that no such marriages, in time to come, may be made, I leave it to be considered, whether it 
Certain special points to be provided about marriages.  might not tend to the advancement of the law of God, be honourable for the King, & commodious for the common weal, providently to provide, these things following: viz. First, that no matrimony secretly contracted, against the will, or unknowing of, or to the Father, or him, or her, that hath the keeping, education, or government, of the party to be married, before he, or thee come to a certain age, should in any sorts, be good or available to make the pos●●tie of those, who shall be so married, legitimate, or inheritable.  
secondly, that every contract of marriage concluded, with consent of Parents, Tutor, Governor, or Guardian, should be forcible, and effectual, to bind both parties irrevocably: whether the same contract (with an intent to conclude a marriage) be made by words of the present, or future tense, it skilleth not. thirdly, that every man stealing away, contracting, and marrying a maid, under the age of certain years, without consent of Father, Tutor, Governor, or Guardian, should be a fellow, and for such his felonious act, suffer the pains of death. And lastly, that all licences to marry without banes ask, according to the intendment of the book of common prayer, be forbidden and unlawful for ever. Which things if they might be observed, it is very likely, that men's inheritances (as now many times they do) should not hang in suspense, upon question of legitimation, or illegitimation of their children, to be allowed, or disallowed, by the canon law. There should not any such long, and tedious s●●tes & variances hereafter fall out, between the posterities and children of one man, for the right, & interest of their Ancestors 
Complaint heretofore made upon stealing away & marrying men's daughters, how they may cease.  Lands. Neither should Sir Thomas Lucy, nor Sir Edmund Ludlow, nor the Lady Norton, nor Master Cook the King's Attorney general, nor many more Knights, esquires, & Gentlemen, complain and bewail, the stealing away, and marriages of any their daughters, Nieces, near Kinswomen, or Wards. Neither could it be possible, that one Woman might procure four, or five several licences for the marriage of four or five several husbands, all of them being alive together, & not one of them dead. Neither should there any Licence of marriage be granted out of an Ecclesiastical Court, to any man or woman with a blank, whereby the party licenced was enabled to have married an other man's wife, or his own, or his wife's sister. Neither should any couples married, and living together, four, six, or more years, as man and wife, upon a new, and sudden dislike, or discontentment, & upon a surmised precontract, to be pretensedlie proved, by two suborned witnesses, be adjudged (by virtue of the canon law) to be no husband, and to be no wife. Neither should any man (being solemnly married to a wife, & afterward by reason of a precontract, solemnly divorced from the same his wife, and by censures of the Church compelled to marry her for whom sentence of precontract was adjudged) be reauthorized by the same Consistory, about ten, or twelve years after the divorce, to resommon, recall, & rechalenge his first wife: especially she having a testimonial out of the same Consistory, of her lawful divorce, and being again solemnly married to an other husband. Wherefore to conclude these matters of Tithes, Testaments, and Marriages (if the King should not be pleased, to have the study of the civil law advanced, by some such law, as whereof the former project maketh mention) I dispute for the enlargement of the common law, thus: 
If it stand with reason, with the grounds and rules of the common law, & with the kings Royal prerogative, that in cases of Tithes, Testaments, & Marriages, the King (if it may please him so to provide by parliament) may give remedy unto complainants, by writs out of the Chancery, and that complaints in such cases, may effectually be redressed upon such writs, in the King's Courts: And if also sundry matters of Tithes, Testaments, and Marriages, be already handled, in the kings Courts: if these things (I say) be so, and so may be; then with little reason, did the Admonitor warn us, that a very great alteration, of the common law must follow, and that it will be no small matter, to apply these things, to the temporal law.  
But the antecedent is true, as hath been already showed.  
Therefore the consequent is true.    

Admonition.  
judgements also of adultery, slander, etc. are in these men's judgements 
Pag. 78.  mere temporal, and therefore to be dealt in by the temporal Magistrate only.   

Assertion.  
We are in deed of this judgement, that in regard of the kings Royal Office, these judgements of adultery, and other criminal causes comprised within this clause, etc. ought no more to be exempted, from the King's temporal Courts, than matters of theft, murder, treason, and such like aught to be. And for the maintenance of our judgements, we affirm, that there is no crime, or offence of what nature or quality soever, respecting any commandment, contained within either of the two tables, of the holy law of God, if the same be now corrigible by spiritual power, but that some fault and contempt, one, or other, of the like nature, and quality, as comprised under the same commandment, hath been evermore, and is now punishable, by the King's Regal, and temporal jurisdiction.  
For, adultery, as the same is to be censured, by penance in the Ecclesiastical Courts, so is ravishment also, buggery & sodomy, to be punished in the King's Court, by pain of death. And, as hath been accustomed, that Ordinaries, by censures of the Church, may correct fornicators, so fornication also, (as in some books written of the common law, is reported) hath been in times passed, presented, and punished in leets, and law-days, in diverse places of the Realm, by the name of Letherwhyte, which is, as the book saith, an ancient Saxon term. And the Lord of the Leete (where it hath been presented) hath ever had a fine, for the same offence. By the statute of those, that be borne beyond the Seas, 
25. Ed 3.  it appeareth, that the King hath cognizance, of foam bastardy. And now in most cases of bastardy, if not in all, by the statute of Eliza. the reputed father, of a bastard borne, is liable to be punished at the discretion of the justices of peace.  
Touching perjury, if a man lose his action, by a false verdict, in plea of land, 
Perjury if punishable, temporally in some cases, why not in all.  he shall have an attaint, in the kings Court, to punish the perjury, and to reform the falsity. And by diverse statutes it appeareth, that the King's temporal Officers, may punish perjury committed in the King's temporal Courts. And though it be true, that such perjury as hath risen, upon causes reputed spiritual, have been in times past, punished only by ecclesiastical power and censures of the Church; yet hereupon it followeth not, that the perjury itself, is a mere spiritual, and not a temporal crime or matter, or that the same might not to be civilly punished.  
By a statute of Westminster 25. Ed. 3. it was accorded, that the King, & his 
Usury.  heirs shall have the cognizance of the usurers dead; and that the Ordinaries have cognizance of usurers on life, to make compulsion, by censures of the Church for sin, and to make restitution of the usuries taken, against the laws of holy church. And by another statute, it is provided, that usuries shall 
20. H. 3. c. 5.  not turn against any being within age, after the time of the death of his ancestor, until his full age. But the usury, with the principal debt, which was before the death of his Ancestor, did remain, and turn against the heir. And because all usury being forbidden by the law of God, is sin, & detestable, 
13. Eliz. c. 8.  it was enacted, that all usury, lone, and forbearing of money, etc. giving days, etc. shall be punished, according to the form of that Act. And that every such offendor shall also be punished, & corrected, according to the Eccle. laws, before that time made against usury. By all which statutes, it seemeth that the cognizance, & reformation of usury, by the laws of the Realm, pertaineth only to the King, unless the King by his law, permit the Church, to correct the same, by the censures of the church, as a sin committed against the holy law of God.  
Touching heresies, and schisms, albeit the Bishops, by their Episcopal, 
Heresies & schisms are punishable by the King's laws.  and ordinary spiritual power, grounded upon canon law, or an evil custom, have used by definitive sentence pronounced in their Consistories, to condemn men for heretics and schismatics; and afterward being condemned, to deliver them to the secular power, to suffer the pains of death, as though the King being custos utriusque tabulae, had not power by his Kingly office, to inquire of heresy, to condemn an heretic, & to put him to death, unless he were first condemned, & delivered into his hands by their spiritual power, although this hath been (I say) the use in England, yet by the statutes of Richard the second, & Henry the fift, it was lawful for the King's judges, and justices, to inquire of heresies and lollard, in leets, Sheriffs turns, and in law-days, and also in Sessions of the peace. Yea the King, by the common law of the Realm, revived 
25. H. 5. c. 14.  by an Act of parliament, which before by the Statute of Henry the fourth, was altered, may pardon a man condemned for heresy: yea and if it should come to pass, that any heresies, or schisms should arise in the Church of England, the King by the laws of the Realm, and by his Supreme & Sovereign power, with his parliament, may correct, redress, and reform, all such defaults and enormities. Yea further, the King and his parliament, with consent of the Clergy, in their Convocation, 
1. Eliz. ca 〈◊〉  hath power to determine what is heresy, and what is not heresy. If then it might please the King, to have it enacted by parliament, that they which opiniativelie, and obstinately, hold, defend, 
1 Eliz 〈◊〉. 1.  and publish, any opinions which according to an Act of parliament, already made, have been, or may be ordered, or adjudged to be heresies, should be heretics, and felons, and their heresies, 
If it please the King, heretics may be adjudged felons, and heresies felonies.  to be felonies, and that the same heretics and felons, for the same their heresies, and felonies, being arraigned, convicted, and adjudged by the course of the common law, as other felons are, should for the same their heresies, & felonies, suffer the pains of death: there is no doubt, but the King, by virtue of his Sovereign, and Regal Laws, might powerfully enough, reform heresies, without any such ceremonial form, papal observance, or superstitious solemnity, as by the order of the canon law, pretendeth to be still in force, hath been accustomed.  
And as these offences before mentioned, be punishable partly by temporal, and partly by ecclesiastical authority, so drunkenness; absence from divine service, and prayer; fighting, quarreling, and brawling in church and church yard; diffamatory words and libels; violent laying on of hands upon a Clerk, etc. may not only be handled, and punished in a Court ecclesiastical, but they may also be handled & punished by the King, in his temporal Courts. By all which it is evident, that the Clergy hath had the correction of these crimes, rather by a custom, & by sufferance of Princes, them for that they be mere spiritual, or that they had authority, by the immediate law of God. And if all these, as well as some of these crimes, by sufferance of Princes, 
The cognizance of all crimes as well as of some crimes by the law of God, belong to the King.  and by a custom may be handled & punished spiritually, then also if it please the King, may all these, as well as some of these crimes, without a custom, be handled, and punished temporally. For by custom, and sufferance only, some of these crimes be exempted from the cognizance of the King, and therefore by the immediate law of God, the cognizance as well of all, as of some of these crimes, properly appertaineth unto the King. And then the judgement, of those men, who defend judgements of adultery, slander, etc. to be more temporal, and by the temporal Magistrate, only to be dealt in, seemeth every way, to be a sincere, and sound judgement. Howbeit, they do not hereby intent, that the party offending, in any of these things, & by the King's law punishable, should therefore wholly be exempted & freed from all censures of the Church. Nay we judge it most requisite, and necessary, 
No offendor freed from the censures of the Church.  for the bringing the party which offendeth, to repentance, and amendment of life (if presently upon sentence of death, he be not executed) that besides his temporal punishment, the censures of the Church, according to the quality of the offence, may be used, and executed against against him: yea and we think, that the King, by the holy law of God, is bound by his regal power, to command the church, duly & rightly, to use the same censures, not only against every adulterer, defamer, usurer, etc. but also against every thief, every manslayer, every traitor, and every other offendor: For not only sins, reputed with us ecclesiastical, but all sins, of what kind soever, aught to be repent of, & consequently against all sins, the ecclesiastical censures ought to be used. And by whom should the same be exercised, but by the church? Why then belike, where an offender is punished in the King's Court, he shall again be punished in the Ecclesiastical Court, and so for one offence, be twice punished, which were unreasonable.  
To this we answer, that it is not against reason, that one man, for one 
For a man to be punished twice for one fault in two respects is not unreasonable.  fault, should be punished both temporally and spiritually. First he consisteth of two parts: viz. of a body, and of a soul, in both which parts he hath offended. secondly he hath offended, against two laws, the law of God, and the law of the King. For the execution of which two laws, there be two kinds of officers, of two several natures, the King for the one law, and the Officers of the Church for the other law; & both these kinds of officers, have power given them, immediately from God, to execute the one, Kingly and temporal; the other Pastoral & spiritual power. And therefore we say, it standeth with great reason, that the soul causing the body to sin, should no more escape that punishment which is appointed for the soul, by the law of God, than the body should escape that punishment which is appointed for the body, by the law of the King: why then the Officers of the Church, may meddle with matters appertaining to the kings law, & what an indignity to the King were that? To this we answer, that the Officers of the church, in a several respect, and to a several end, dealing in one, and the self same matter, wherein the King dealeth, may no more be charged with dealing in matters appertaining to the Crown, by the exercise of their spiritual sword, then can the King be charged, with meddling in the same matters, to meddle with matters pertaining to the soul, by the exercise of his temporal sword. So that the spiritual power of the officers of our Saviour Christ, (which consisteth only in binding and losing of the souls of men) can not possibly, by any reason or good intendment, be construed, now to be any more prejudicial, to the King's prerogative, or contrariant to the laws of the Realm, than it hath been heretofore: Because usury, incontinency, & diverse other crimes ecclesiastical have not been punished only by ecclesiastical correction, but also by temporal pain. And therefore to take away this frivolous objection, we instantly pray, that the laws of the Realm may still keep their due and ordinary course, and that the kings Sceptre, may retain, that ancient and Royal estimation, which belongeth unto it: and that it may be ordered, by an irrevocable law as followeth. 
Potestas & iurisdictio actionum quarumcunque civilium; punitio, & castigatio externa, omnium maleficiorum quorumcunque famam, facultates, seu personas tangentium, non penes pastors, & Seniores Ecclesiae; sed penes unum solumque Principem, & civilem Magistratum sunto, & quicunque ijs non acquieverunt, capitali poena punivnto.   
Whereupon also falleth to the ground, that cavillous and odious slander following in the Admonition: viz. that the laws maintaining the Queen's Supremacy, in governing of the church, and her prerogative in matters ecclesiastical, as well elections, as others, must be also abrogated. The contrary whereof, being avouched throughout this whole Assertion, it shall be needless, to spend any time, in the refutation of so gross an untruth.   

Admonition.  
Those laws likewise, must be taken 
Pag. 79.  away, whereby impropriations and patronages stand, as men's lawful possession, and heritage.   

Assertion.  
By a statute 15 R. 2. c. 6. because diverse damages, and diseases oftentimes had happened, and daily did happen, to the parochians of diverse places, by the appropriation of benefices, of the same places, it was agreed and assented, that in every licence, from thence forth to be made in the Chancery of appropriation of any parish church, it should be expressly contained & comprised, that the diocesan of the place, upon the appropriation of such churches, should ordain according to the value of such Churches, a convenient sum of money, to be paid and distributed yearly of the fruits, and profits of the same churches, by those that shall have the same churches in proper use, & by their successors, to the poor parochians of the same churches, in aid of their living, & sustentation for ever; and also that the Vicar be well and sufficiently endowed. By which statute, it appeareth, that every impropriation, aught to be made by licence out of the Chancery, that it ought to be made, to the use of ecclesiastical persons only, & not to the use of temporal persons, or patrons. Now then, all such parish churches, as without licence of the King, in his Chancery, have been appropried, to any ecclesiastical person; and again all such parish churches, as by licence of the King in his Chancery, have been appropried, to the use of lay persons, they are not to be accounted, men's lawful possessions, & heritage's. Besides this, as many impropriations, as whereupon the Diocesan of the place, hath not ordained, according to the value of such churches, a convenient sum of money, to be paid, & distributed yearly of the fruits of the same churches, etc. to the poor Parochians of the same churches, in aid of their living and sustentation for ever; yea & every church also appropried, as whereunto a perpetual Vicar is not ordained, canonically to be instituted, & inducted in the same, and which is not convenably endowed, to do divine service, and to inform the people, and to keep hospitality there, all and every such church, & churches (I say) otherwise then thus appropried, by the law of the Realm (as it seemeth) are not men's lawful possessions and inheritances: For by a statute of King Henry the fourth, every church, after the 15. year of King Richard the second, 
4 H. 4. c. 12  appropried by licence of the King, against the form of the said statute, of R. 2. if the same were not duly reform, after the effect of the same statute, within a certain time appointed, than the same appropriation and licence thereof made, presently (the parish Church of Hadenham, only excepted) was adjudged to be void, and utterly repealed, and anulled for ever. And therefore I leave it to the inquisition of our Sovereign Lord the King, whether the impropriation of the parish church of Belgrave in the County of Leycester, whereunto two chapels are annexed, and other Churches appropried to the Bishop of Leycester, since the statutes of Richard the second, and Henry the fourth, be the lawful or unlawful possession and heritage of the same Bishop, yea or no. And if it be lawfully appropried and so a lawful possession, and heritage, than I leave it again to the inquisition of the King, what sum of money, out of the fontes of the same church ought yearly to be distributed, to the poor Parochians; what the endowment, of a Vicar canonically to be instituted, and inducted, in the same church, should be: what house is appointed for the same Vicar to keep his hospitality in, and whether any Vicar, for the space of these many years passed, hath been canonically instituted, and inducted in the same church, to possess that endowment, to inhabit that same house, and inform that people. For if by the appropriation itself, or by the abuse thereof, the poor Parochians, have been defrauded of their yearly distribution, or if no Vicars have been canonically instituted and inducted in the same, or if being inducted, they have their endowments so small, or so covetouslie kept back from them, as that they can not sufficiently maintain themselves, much less keep hospitality: than (as the Admonitor confesseth,) there must needs be a lamentable abuse of impropriations; and that therefore it is greatly to be wished, that by some good statute, it might be remedied.  
And as those churches which are unlawfully appropried, are not the lawful possession and heritage, of the proprietaries, so on the other side we affirm, that those impropriations, which were made & reform, according to the statutes of Ri. 2. & Herald 4. may well stand, as men's lawful possessions and heritage's, even with those things, which are required to be planted & brought into the Church, whatsoever the Admonitor hath written to the contrary. For we do not hold that maintenance, must only and necessarily be provided for every Minister, by the payment of tithes, oblations and other ecclesiastical profits, belonging to churches appropried, or disappropried. For there being no direct proof, to be made out of the law of God, that Ministers of the Gospel, must only live upon tithes; the King and parliament, may well and competently enough, appoint covenable endowments for every Minister, without disapproprying of any church appropried. And therefore little cause had the Admonitor, to insinuate the ruin of impropriations, upon the bringing in, the discipline of our Saviour Christ, because the same may be well planted, and yet to other not unplanted. But what need we to argue against his insinuation, considering he himself, before he came to the end of this page, by his own disclaim, contradicted his insinuation. For if the form of finding Ministers by tithes, must with the canon law (as he saith) be abolished, and if there must be some other order for this devised, because this may seem papistical and Antichristian, what should any man fear the taking away of those laws, whereby impropriations do stand? For if such as heretofore have spoken or written against them, because (as he insinuateth) the form of finding Ministers by tithes, seemed to be unlawfully taken away, and as he would also insinuate by their judgement, ought again to be restored, and not to stand any longer as men's lawful possessions and heritage's. How (I say) doth it follow that they which desire impropriations, to be restored to their pristinate state, should withal require, to have the finding of Ministers by tithes, to be abolished? It seemeth therefore, that the Admonitor, so he might be talking, passed but a ●itle what he talked. For what a double talk is here? or to what purpose was this talk? Was it because some men do think, that the Ministers, ought not to receive tithes, for their relief, & pains in the ministery? Why then, let all men know, that we disclaim such some men's opinions. For we account all things, pertaining to this life, directly, or by consequence, not commanded, nor prohibited, by the holy and sacred Scriptures, to be things indifferent, and that therefore we may use them, or not use them, as the commodity, or incommodity of the Church shall require. And therefore as we do not affirm, that the maintenance of the Ministers, must only, and necessarily be levied out of tithes, oblations, and such like, so also we do not deny, but that the tenth part of the increase of all our goods, by the authority of the King, & his laws, may be allotted for their possession and heritage: especially in our country, the same manner of payment being so ancient, and so agreeable to the manners, usages, and disposition of our State and people, Nay since the payment of tithes, for service accomplished in the spiritual Sanctuary, is correspondent in the nature thereof, to the equity of the Law of Moses, for the Levites attendance about the earthly Tabernacle; and since also we be bound by the commandment of the Apostle, to make him that teacheth us in the word, to be partaker of all our goods, I see not (so jewish and popish ceremony, and superstition be avoided) but that this duty, may as christianly be performed, by the payment of the trenth part of the increase of our corn, hay, wool, lamb, etc. as by the eight, twelfeth, twentieth, or any other part of our money, and coin. By payment also of which tithes, the Ministers at every season, with every kind of necessary provision towards hospitality, might thoroughly be furnished, which many times they shall want, by reason of men's backwardness, when collections of money are to be made. But to speak no more of this matter of tithes, we will return to the objection made against the Apostolical government, drawn from taking away impropriations. And herein we will not handle, whether the laws whereby impropriations do stand, as men's lawful possession, and heritage must (as he saith) be taken away: but whether impropriations, now divided from the ministery, and dispersed into many several men's hands, and employed to many uses in the common weal, may not in tract of time by some whole some law, be reduced, either wholly, or in part, to be the only lawful possessions and inheritances for the Ministers of the Gospel, yea and that without any prejudice or damage unto Prince, or people.  
It is evident in the eyes of all, thatthe Churches now appropried, do stand & remain, as the lawful possessions & inheritances, either of the King, or of the Nobles, or of the Knights, Esquyres, Gentlemen, and other temporal persons: or of Archbb. Bb. Archdeacon's, Deans, Prebendaries, and other ecclesiastical persons, or of the Universities, of the Colleges in the Universities, of collegiate and Cathedral Churches, of Schools, Hospitals, Fraternities, and other bodies Politic, and Corporate. Wherefore to the end our meaning may the better be understood, and that we may proceed orderly, we think it good, to examine first, by how many several ways, some of these impropriations may be wholly and thoroughly reduced: secondly, by how many several means, other some in part, may be brought to the use of the ministery. To reduce some of them wholly may be done by restitution, 
Impropriations may be reduced to the ministry by four means.  commutation, redemption, and contribution. And first that I prejudice not the Lords spiritual, and Churchmen of their ancient privileges, from being placed in the first rank, reason is, that (they teaching the people, not to possess other men's goods wrongfully) we speak first of restitution to be made by them. In declaration whereof, we think it not fit, in this place to show, to 
Porochiall Churches to what use they were founded.  what end the state of the Clergy was first founded into a state of prelacy, by the King, Earles, Barons, & other great men (because the same cometh afterward to be handled more at large) but it shall suffice at this present, for the purpose whereof we now entreat, to let the Reverend Bb. understand, that the small Parochial churches, were founded, and endowed, with glebe Landes tithes; and other fruits by the Lords of Manors, 
This may be proved by 15. R. 2. and 4. H. 4. c. 2. and is confessed by M. Bilson in his perpet. government Pag. 365. 366.  to the end that the Lords tenants within the same manors, should be informed of the law of God, and that Hospitalities might be kept, and the poor of the same Parishes be relieved. And besides the reverend Bishops, we hope, will grant, that the great Cathedral, and Collegiate Churches, were not founded by the King's progenitors, Nobles, and great men of the Realm, to the end, that those great Churches (as great hawks pray upon little fowls) with their great steeples, should care and devour the little steeples; or that with their great Quires, they should overthrow, & justle down the small pulpits. And therefore we most humbly pray aid from the King, for the casting of new claps to be erected in the little pulpits, that be would be pleased, to grant restit●●ones in integrum, to all the little churches, and that all impropriations, of all Parochial churches and benefices, now by spoliation, parcel of the revenues, of Archbb. Bishops, Deans, Archdeacon's, Prebendaries, and other ecclesiastical persons, restantes within those great churches, may be wholly restored to their ancient, and original use, according to the minds and intentes of the first donors, and patrons of the same Parochial and little Churches. For if (as Master Bilson saith) it be true, that the Lords of Villadges, having erected churches, and allotted out portions for divine service, either by Gods or man's law, by their later grants could not have their former rights, unto their patronages overthrown; and if the allowance given at the first, to the Ministers of each Parish, by the Lord of the soil, were matter enough, in the judgement of Christ's Church, to establish the right of patrons, that they alone should present clerks, because they alone provided for them, if (I say) this be true, then have the Ministers of those Villadges, and of that soil, just cause to require, at the Dioc●sans hands, a restitution of such allowances, as were first given and provided for them, by the patrons: Especially the Diocesans by their own act now enjoining, and converting the same allowances, to their own use. If it be answered, that this can not well and conveniently be brought to pass, because the same impropriations, by the Archbishops, Bishops and other Ecclesiastical persons, for diverse sums of money, are now lawfully demised to farm, for many years yet to come: hereunto we answer, that these leases should hinder nothing at all, the restitution of the right and interest in reversion, or remainder of those impropriations. Only (if the impropriations have been made according to the laws of the Realm, & the leases duly granted) these leases for a time, may hinder the incumbent Ministers, from the present possession of the Tithes, Fruits and glebe Land belonging to the same impropriations. And yet may not the incumbent Ministers, be hindered in the mean while, from receiving the re●tes reserved upon such Leases, and which by the same Leases are now payable to the Archbishops, Bishops and other ecclesiastical persons. Neither after the determination of the same Leases, should the incumbent Ministers, be any more letted, to enjoy & receive, the whole profits in right of their churches, than other Ministers be now letted to enjoy theirs. If any shall say, that many of these impropriations, are annexed, & appropried, as Prebends for the provision, of some of the Prebendaries, of the same great churches, and that the same Prebendaries, in the right of their prebends, be the lawful Rectors of the churches appropried, and have cura● animaru● in the same parishes; then we must instantly again pray the King, that those Prebendaries, by some wholesome law may be constrained, to reside, and to incumbe upon their said prebends, and parochial churches, and that by continual preaching of wholesome doctrine, they may endevoure to cure the souls of the people, over whom, by the order of those great churches, they be set, & over whom they have taken charge. And withal that they may no more be suffered, to lie and to live idly in their Cloisters, in their caves, and in their dens, sometimes at Worcester, sometimes at Hereforde, sometimes at Gloucester, sometimes at Salisbury, sometimes at Westminster, sometimes at Soutwell, sometimes at Windsor, sometimes at Paul's, sometimes at Oxford, and sometimes at Cambridge. When in the mean while both seldom, and very slenderly, they feed other sheep, whose fleeces they take in, and about London, Winchester, Tewkesburie, Reading, and other places of the Country. Besides we pray that these prebends, after the determination of leases now in being, may never any more be let to farm, so that the fruits thereof may serve for those Prebendaries, or other succeeding Ministers, to make Hospitalities, Alms, and other works of charity. If it be alleged that the King now having first fruits, tenths and Subsidies, out of the impropriations of those great churches, as being all comprised, under a gross sum of the tenths payable for the whole revenues of the same churches, should lose the first fruits, Tents and subsidies, of the same impropriations, if hereafter they become, either donative, or presentative; to this the answer is readily made, viz. that tenths, first fruits, and Subsidies, might as well be paid then, as now. And that the King might then aswell have right to the donation of the benefice disappropried, as the Bishop now hath the gift of the prebend appropried.  
In the next rank cometh commutation to be spoken of. Wherein, because the impropriations of Parochial churches appertaining now to the King, Nobles, Commons, Colleges, Schools, Bodies politic, etc. were at the first appropried one lie by the discretion of the Diocesans, Predecessors, to the reverend Bishops that now are, unto abbots, Prioures, Nuns, Friars, etc. and because the Successors of those Diocesans be bound in the same band of iniquity with their predecessors, unless by all good means they labour that things may be brought to their first, and pristinate state, it seemeth equal, & just, that this commutation, should likewise proceed and be drawn from the Diocesans, and great Churches before specified. The reasons whereof may be such as follow.  
The Lands and possessions given by the King's progenitors, the Earls, Barons, & other great men of the Realm, to bishoprics, were not given (as Master Bilson affirmeth) to unburden the people of the support, and charges of 
Perpetu. power. Pag. 367.  their Bb. but they were given, (as the law of our land teacheth us) first to inform the people in the law of God, in those churches; secondly, to keep Hospitalities, alms, & other works of charity; And thirdly, for the souls of the founders, their heirs, and of all christian. Now then, if some of these conditions be such as for the impiety thereof ought not to be performed, and if other some also, being good and godly, be not performed, and so the things are to return to their first nature, as in the same statute is alleged; then is it reason, that the King and Nobles, who are the just inheritors and successors, to those who were firsT Donoures, and Founders of those Churches, should have as free a disposition, and donation of those lands and possessions now, as his, and their progenitors and ancestors ever had. And seeing it is manifest, that the lands & possessions of Archbishops, Bishops, Deans and Chapters, do not, for the most part, now a days serve for those good uses, for the which they were first granted, namely to inform the people in the law of God, to keep Hospitalities, Alms, and other works of charity, but partly for the use of chanting, and singing in the Quyers; & partly to vain, idle, superfluous, and pompous uses, the King, can not do a better, and more charitable deed, then to convert parcel of the same lands and possessions (thus by defect of the conditions not performed, returning to their first nature) to and for the necessary & perpetual provision of learned, able, & preaching Ministers, to be planted in Parochial churches, now destitute of sufficient pastors, for want of sufficient maintenance, nay sit hence archbishoprics, bishoprics, & other Prelacies, by the very express letter of the statute, are said to be founded to superstitious uses: viz. for the souls of the founders, their heirs, and of all christian, the same reason which led King Henry the eight, his Nobles, and Parleamentes, to dissolve abbeys and Monasteries, & the same reason also, which moved King Edward the sixth, with his Nobles, & parliament, to dissolve Colleges, free Chapels and chantries, the same reason, may be a sufficient reason, to persuade our Sovereign Lord King JAMES that now is, with his Nobles and parliament, to dissolve archbishoprics, bishoprics, Deaneries, etc. First to the end these Prelacies and Dignities may never in any succeeding ages, serve to any such superstitious uses, as whereunto they were at the first erected. secondly, that the King having them all in his own hands, and free disposition, may be the only Foundor and donor of so many new bishoprics as might please him to erect, & endow with such liberal, and covenable endowmentes, as might serve for learned evangelical Bishops to inform the people in the holy Evangill of Christ, to keep hospitalities, alms, and to do other works of charity, rather than to be expended, as now for a great part they are, upon the keeping of great horses, coroches, and troops of serving idlers. The commutation then whereof we speak, and which we most humbly commend, to the consideration of the King, is, viz: That parcel of the temporal Lands & possessions of Archbb and Bishops, together with all the lands and possessions, serving to the mainrenance of idle Ministers, and idle Songsters, in Cathedral and Collegiate churches (the Collegiate churches of Eton and Winchester, and the Cathedral and Collegiate churches in Oxford & Cambridge excepted) by an equal and reasonable proportion. may be made, with such impropriations, as belong to the King, the Nobles, Commons, Colleges, Hospitals, Scholes, etc. Provided as before hath been said, that there may be a liberal and couvenable endowment, for the learned Bishops or Pastors, to be continued and placed in all the chief and principal towns & cities of the Realm. And that the impropriations of Parochial churches may for ever, be livings for the Ministers of the same churches. And therefore in the just defence of the innocency of all such as require a godly and religious reformation, we say, that they ought not, to have been traduced before the King, as robbers and ransackers of the church. And that some of the plotters for the Prelacy, more honestly might have employed both their Latin and their labour, then lately they did. When by drawing letters (as they pretended) congratulatory to the King, only in the name of preaching Ministers, they procured notwithstanding ignorant, & unpreaching Ministers, to join in the action, and to affix their hands and names. That such letters have been made and signed, is sufficiently to be proved, but whether they have been presented to the kings hands, is not yet known. Only if they shall hereafter come, then may they be known by these words: Nos Concionatores, etc. ab omni domestica capacitate eorum, qui pretextu religionis, ecclesiae insidiantur. My Lord the King is wise, according to the wisdom 
2 San. 14. 24  of an Angel of God, to understand all things whereof he is informed.  
The third means to reduce impropriations, unto the possession of the ministery 
Public redemption of impropriations.  is by way of public redemption or purchase. For the accomplishment whereof it is necessary, that not only a common treasure be provided, but also that the price of impropriations, by a public consent be valued, at a reasonable rate to make, which rate will be a matter of small weight, whether they be valued, to be bought and sold, at their old and ancient, or at their new & improved rents. To provide a common treasure, though to some it may seem a matter intricate, and troublesome, yet seeing the same possibly, and convenienlie may be done, there is no cause, that men should faint, before they fight, or be at an end, before they begin. It is written that the cause when King Solomon 
1 K. 9 15.  raised the tribute, to wit, was to build the house of the Lord, his own house and Millo, and the wall of jerusalem. After that wicked Athaliah and 
2. Cron. 24  her children, had broken up the hous● of God, & had bestowed all the things, that were dedicated for the house of the Lord, upon Baalim, King joash commanded the Priests and Levites, to go unto the Cities of judah, and to gather of all Israel money to repair the house of God, from year to year, and they made a chest, and made Proclamation to bring the tax of Moses, & the Princes rejoiced, and brought in, and cast into the chest. And when there was much silver, they emptied the chest, and carried it, to his place again, and thus day by day, they gathered silver in abundance. If then towards the building of an earthly house, the Princes & people of judah and Israel, willingly with joy of their hearts, from year to year, and from day to day, threw silver in abundance into the chest, how much more were it praise worthy, if Christian people, did encourage themselves, to pay a small tribute towards the provision of a competent maintenance, for their spiritual Pastors, by whose labours, as lively stones, they might be builded up into a spiritual temple in the Lord? That many and great taxes and tributes of late years have been made for many uses, and to many purposes, there is no man ignorant thereof. And therefore though there be little reason, that the people standing, already burdened, with great charge, should be again recharged, especially when without any extraordinary burden, there is an ordinary means (if the same were accordingly bestowed) by the people yielded, to relieve the Ministers in all places, with a decent and comely portion; yet notwithstanding, to be eased, from those public payments, and annual grievances, imposed by the ecclesiastical Courts, upon the people, it is not to be doubted, but the Parishioners in all places would willingly pay, any reasonable tax or tribute, to be demanded of them for this purpose.  
another means to raise this public treasure, may be a dissolution of all free 
The dissolution of Chapels may be a good mean to raise a tribute.  chapels, and chapels of ease in the Country, together with an union of two or more churches into one, especially in Cities and great Towns. For as in these Cities and Towns, the poorest, & meanest live be provided, so generally for the most part, are they fitted, with the poorest and meanest Curates, as by most lamentable experience is to be seen, in all the Episcopal cities of the Realm, excepting London. Nay the chief and Metropolitan city of Canterbury is not to be excepted. For in that City there being about 12. or 13. Parish churches, there hath not been ordinarily of late years above 3. or 4. able Preachers, placed in the same Churches.  
The chapels to be dissolved, and the Churches to be consolidated by two, and two into one, & one, can be no fewer in number then one thousand at the least. All which if they might be sold, the money to be raised upon their sale, could be no less than twenty thousand pounds, if they were sold only for twenty pounds a piece. But if they be well worth, double or triple so much, then would the treasure also be doubled or trebled. This dissolution of Chapples, and union of Churches, is no new devise, nor strange innovation: But hath been heretofore thought upon, and in some part confirmed already by our Kings in their Parleaments. Touching the dissolution of Chapples, the most 
Dissolution of Chapels no new devise.  reverend Father Thomas Crammer, Archbishop of Camterburie, with the residue of the King's Commissioners, appointed for the reformation of Ecclesiastical laws alloweth of the same. And for the union of Churches, there was an act made 27. H. 8. so they exceeded not the value of six pounds. And by a statute 
Titu. de eccles. guard. fol. 54.  r. Ed. 6. it was lawful for the Mayor & Recorder of the City of York, and the Ordinary or his Deputy, & six justices 
Lawful for the Mayor of York, etc. to unite Churches in the City of York.  of the peace in the same City, to unite and knit together, so many of the poor Parishes of the same City and suburbs of the same, as to them should be thought convenient, to be a living for one honest incumbent. And it was lawful for the said Mayor, Recorder, and Aldermen, to pull down the Churches, which they should think superfluous in the said city, and suburbs of the same, and to bestow the same, towards the reparation and enlargement of other Churches, of the Bridges in the City, and to the relief of the poor people. The considerations which moved the King and parliament, 
What reasons moved K. Ed 6. to unite churches in York may move King james to unite Churches in Canterbury, etc.  to ordain this act, were these, viz. The former incompetencie of honest live, the former necessity of taking very unlearned and ignorant Curates not able to do any part of their duties; the former replenishing of the City, with blind guides and Pastors; the former keeping of the people, aswell in ignorance of their duties to God, as also towards the King, and common weal; and lastly the former danger of the souls of the Citizens. If then in these days it might please the King to apply, like plasters, to the like sorcs, to provide remedies, for the like mischiefs, and for the like diseases, to minister like medicines, it would come to pass no doubt, in few years, that the lame & the blind, & the broken, with a number of unhallowed and unclean beasts, should be swept, and cast forth of all the Parochial churches, within Canterbury, Winchest, Chichester, Lichfield, Oxford, and other great Cities of the Realm. For these chapels, and smalller churches, being the very 
chapels, the seminaries of hirelings.  Seminaries, of all hirelings, and idol Shepherds, a benefice can no sooner become void, but the poor, and hungry chaplains, weary of their thin diet, and long leaping after a bean, presently trudge to the patron, offering, or accepting any conditions to be presented by him. And not only should the Church by this means, be rid of these vermin, but also the learned & preaching Minister, without further aid or contribution, in those places, might have more liberal maintenance, than erst they have had. For than should they be no more constrained, to deduct out of their live, by reason of Chapples yet standing, and as it were annexed to their Parish churches, some 10. lb. some 20. lb. some 30. lb. by the year, for the wages of these hirelings. Besides this, a singular and apparent benefit, 
By the dissolution of Chapels many suits in law should be avoided.  could not but redound to the common weal, by the dissolution of these chapels, when as many, long, tedious, and changeable, & uncharitable suits, heretofore had & commenced, should hereafter be extinguished, between the Parochians of the mother Churches and the inhabitants of Hamblets, for & concerning the repair, and re-edifying of the said Churches, and chapels, & for other rights, and duties challenged to belong from one unto the other.  
A third means to leavy a treasure, 
Sequestration of the fruits of the Churches of pluralists may further the treasure for the redemption of impropriations.  for the redemption of impropriations, may be a sequestration of the fruits of the Churches of non Residentes, and commendames, with the fruits of the Churches of the pluralistes, and perinde valeres, from the which the same plurisied persons are to departed; the said sequestration no longer to endure, than some able Ministers may be provided & placed in the same Churches.  
A fourth mean to raise this treasure, if it please the King, and that the church have found favour in his sight, may be the money due unto the King upon such penal laws, as for the benefit of the common weal, are necessarily to be put in execution, & especially upon the law of provision and praemunire, not pardoved by the Queen. And albeit happily the King, upon a most worthy and christian zeal, be well pleased hereafter not to urge upon the popish recusantes, the payment of their forfeitures, for absence from divine service, yet because they be able, and do daily contribute to seminaries abroad, and be favourers, and abettors of popish Priests and jesuits, lurking at home, the most treasonable & dangerous enemies, that can be to the King's Person and State, in consideration hereof (I say) if it may please the King, it seemeth not unreasonable, (the law standing still in force, and vnrepealed) that the popish recusants be urged to the payment of such sums of money, as are already forfeited; the same by the commandment, and free gift of the King to be employed upon the redemption of such impropriations, as are within the parishes of their abodes. To the end that learned, and preaching Ministers, being placed in the same, they, their wives, children, servaunts, tenants, and dependants, by the powerful preaching of the word, might be converted unto the Gospel.  
It followeth now in order, that we speak of contribution, the fourth means 
By what contribution impropriations may be brought to the use of the ministery.  whereby some impropriations may be reduced wholly to the use of the ministery. Wherein there can not any certain rule, or direction be prescribed: because it must proceed only from those, whose hearts God shall touch, stir up, & encourage, willingly to bring a free offering, unto the Lord, for the building up of his spiritual house. For of every one (saith the Lord) whose heart offereth 
Exod. 25. 2  it freely, ye shall take an offering for me. And every one whose heart encouraged him, and whose Spirit made him willing, and men, and women, as many as were freehearted, came and 
Exod. 35.  brought, taches, and earrings, and rings, and bracelets, all were jewels of gold, and blue silk, and purple, & skarlett, and fine linen, and goats hair, and Rams skins, and Badgees skins, and silver, and brass, & Shittim wood, and Onyx stones, and Spice, and Oil: Every man, and woman, (I say) whose hearts moved them willingly to bring for all the work, which the Lord had 
Exod. 36. 5.  commanded, brought a free offering. yea and the people brought too much, and more than enough, for the use of the work of the Lord. King Solomon, having 
2. King. 8.  all the Elders, the heads, the chief Fathers, and all the men of Israel, & the Priests, and Levites, to bring up the ark, and Tabernacle of the Lord, offered Beefs, and sheep which could not be numbered for multitude. Yea and after these offerings were made, and after the King had prayed, that their heart might be perfect with the Lord their God, to walk in his statutes, & to keep his commandments, as at that day; the King again offered a sacrifice of two and twenty thousand beefs, one hundred and twenty thousand sheep, and so was the house dedicated. After the return of the people out of captivity, certain of the chief Fathers, when they came to the house of the Lord, which was in jerusalem, they gave after their ability, unto the treasure of the work, even one and three score thousand drams of gold, and five thousand pieces of silver, and an hundred priests garments: they gave money also, 
E●● 2. 2, 68 etc.  to the Masons, and to the workmen, and meat, and drink, and oil. Yea at the exhortation of Nehemiah, the Priests, the great men, the people, and the women, 
Nehe. 2. 〈◊〉  that they might be no more a reproach, set their minds to the building of the Walls, and at their own charges, builded some, one gate, some another; some one door, some another; some one tower, some another: some one portion of the Wall, some an other. Wherefore, seeing we have not an Ester, to succeed our Deborah, but a Solomon rather, to succeed a David; yea such a Solomon, as whose heart the Lord hath filled with an excellent spirit of wisdom, of understanding, and of knowledge, to find out, and to dissolve hard & curious parables, & hath put in his heart, to teach and to guide others; we rest persuaded in our hearts, that the King for his part, treading in the steps of the godly Kings, Princes, & Governors of judah, will go in, and out, before his people, as they did before theirs. And that he will rather not eat of the bread, nor drink of the wine, of the governors 
Nehe. 5.  that were before him, then that he will not remit the provisions the seasements the fines, the impositions, & the amerciaments, that have been exacted. Yea also that he will feed from his own table, an hundred and fifty Prophets, & prepare for them oxen, and sheep, and birds, and wine in all abundance, because they are come unto him, from among the prelatistes that were about them, because their bondage hath been grievous unto them. Yea further also, we are 
2 Chro. 11.  persuaded, that he will shake out of his lap every servant of his, that shall bear rule over his people. And thus much of the means whereby some impropriations, may wholly be reduced to the use of the ministery. It followeth to show by what means other some impropriations, may be converted in part, to the maintenance of Ministers to be planted in Parochial Churches, now destitute of able pastors, in case the said impropriations by none of the former means, can be reduced wholly to their first and ancient institution. Wherein these two things come principally to be considered.  
First, whether it were not convenient, 
How impropriation, may be in part, reduced to the Ministry.  by some wholesome law, to have it ordained, that the Heads, Governors, Rulers, and Masters of the Universities, Colleges, Cities, Towns, Hospitals, free Schools, and other bodies politic and Corporate, should not from henceforth demise or set to farm their, or any of their impropriations, or any of the glebe Land, tithes, or other fruits belonging to the same, until such time as all leases heretofore made, be fully ended, or otherwise determined.  
secondly, whether it were not convenient, to have it enacted, by the same law, that all and every impropered Church & Churches, with their glebes, tithes, and other fruits, after the determination of the Leases now in being, should be demised and set to farm, only to the incombent Ministers of the same Churches, for term of their natural lives, if so long they did continue reseant, and faithfully preach in the same Churches, the doctrine of the Gospel, according to the articles of Religion, concerning Faith and Sacraments, by public authority, now established in the Church of England. And because by likelihood the Vicars will not be able to pay fines or incomes unto the Colleges, Hospitals, and other places; and because also it seemeth reasonable, that the Colleges, Hospitals, & other places, by some other means, should be recompensed, we leave it again to be considered, whether it were not convenient that the Vicars, in consideration of non payment of fines, should yield in money, corn, or other provision, to the double, or triple value, of the anicient and unimproved rents. For m●n experienced in these affairs of this life, know, that the profits arising out of churches appropried, unto the farmers thereof, are commonly six, eight, or ten times more worth by just estimation, than are the old rents, payable unto Colleges, Hospitals, & other like places. And thus we see how together with the bringing in of these things, which are required to be planted in the Church, imp●opriations may stand, as men's lawful possessions, and heritage's, or otherwise how without damage or hurt to the King, or Realm, they may be converted to the use and provision of the Ministers, what soever hath been insinuated by the Admonitor to the contrary. And yet do I not in any of these things, or of any other thing, first or last spoken, or to be spoken, desire mine own advise and judgement so to be respected, as though I should arrogate unto myself more knowledge than all others, which labour in the cause of reformation: but only I submit these my private meditations with their reasons, to the censures of all wise, godly, and learned men. Humbly praying them so to bestir their own wits, and so to bestow their own cunning, and learning, that a better & more easier way, by their ingenuousnes, may be found out, & procured to take place. And in the mean season, that these motions tendered to their views, may not altogether be neglected but duly weighed, and considered. Especially for that I have not tendered any other thing to be performed, by any of these means, unto any other, than such as whereunto I myself, to my power, yea and beyond my power, as far as in me lieth, shall be ready to yield.  
And howsoever the Bishops & other great Clergy Masters, with their stately favourites, may pretend some part of this device, to be an hindrance of learning, and other some part, not to be for the King's profit; yet to the first we answer briefly, that learning is not so much furthered, by a few great rewards, provided for a few great learned men, as it is by many good rewards, appointed for many good learned men, as hereafter more at large, in a more convenient place is declared. Touching the kings profit, we affirm, that it is not only most profitable, but also most honourable for the King, to have a multitude of loyal, virtuous, and godly subjects. And that such manner of subjects, can by no means better be procured, then by a continual preaching ministery of the word, to be planted in every parish, of the King's Realms. And because no man better, knoweth the reciprocal duties, between a Christian King, and christian Counsellors, we leave the discerning of the spirits of these profit preachers, to the trial and judgement of our most Christian King; whom if he shall find, either by flattery, to fawn upon the King's profit, or by labouring to keep the King in a good opinion of things amiss, we most humbly beseech the King, to accept them, and reward them for such, as could wish in their hearts, the King should rather be impoverished by having many bad, & unprofitable subjects, then that them selves would not be enriched, by enjoying many good and profitable impropriaons. As for the Laws whereby Patronages do stand, as men's lawful possessions, and inheritances, which (as the Admonitor saith) must also be taken away, how the same laws may still endure, or by consent of patrons, be altered, without their damage (if God permit) when we come to speak, of the election of Ministers, wherein, the reformers are charged with the hurling, and thrusting out of patrons, shall be declared.   

Admonition.  
The laws of England to this day have stood by the authority of the 
Pag. 78.  three estates, which to alter now by leaving out the one, may happily seem a matter of more weight, than all men do judge it.   

Assertion.  
Not to stand upon terms with the Admonitor, that the laws usually called the common laws of the land, being mere customary laws, did never yet stand by the authority of the three Estates, I will take his meaning to be, that the statute laws of England, to this day have stood by authority of the three Estates; which to alter now by leaving out the one, etc. and then thereunto, I answer, that not any one of the three 
The bringing in of the discipline by pastors and elders is not the leaving out of parliament any one of of the three Estates.  Estates should be left out, or barred, from having authority in making and promulging statute laws, though the government of the Church, by Pastors and Elders were brought in. For we which so much cry (as he saith) for this manner of government, to be planted, are so far from exempting, or excluding any one of the three Estates, from their ancient power, privilege, and pre-eminence, in the making of statute laws, as that we pronounce him to be guilty of high treason, to the King, and to the Realm, that avoweth the contrary. And we affirm directly, and confess plainly, that it belongeth only, wholly, and altogether to the three Estates, as well to root out, and to pull up, whatsoever government, is not justifiable, by the holy law of God: as also to plant & to settle, whatsoever discipline is warrantable by the same law. And to speak as the thing is, how were it possible to have the discipline by Pastors & Elders planted by authority of the three Estates, if one of the three Estates should be left out? Or can it be imagined, that any one of the three Estates, would ever consent, to the bringing in of such a government of the Church, as whereby (the same government being once brought in) the same estate, should ever afterwards cease, to be any more an estate? Besides we acknowledge that all powers are of God, & therefore every one of the three Estates, being a power, we grant that the same hath his stateship, by the authority of God. And if all the three Estates, be lawful by the holy law of God; how can it be verified against us, that we, which urge the same holy law, for the bringing in of the discipline by Pastors and Elders, should notwithstanding contrary to the same law, intent the leaving out, or altering of any one of the three Estates? But which of the three Estates was it that he meant, should be left out? I trow, there 
The state of the Prelacy is not one of the three estates in parliament.  is none of the state of Prelacy, so ill advised, as to take upon him the proof of this position: viz. That the Lords spiritual by themselves alone, do make one of the three Estates, or that the statutes of England, to this day have stood by their authorities, as by the authority of those, who alone by themselves, are to be accounted, one of the three Estates. For if that were so, how much more them, might the great Peres, Nobles, and temporal Lords, challenge to make by themselves an other estate? And without contradiction, to this day, the Commons summoned by the King's writ, have ever been reckoned a third Estate. Now than if statutes have hitherto stood, by authority of the Lords spiritual, as of the first Estate, by authority of the Lords temporal, as of the second Estate, & by authority of the Commons, as of the third Estate, I would gladly be resolved, what account the Admonitor made of the King's Estate. It had not been liegnes, nor loyalty (I am sure) howsoever he spoke much of the Lords spirituals duty and fidelity in the execution of our late Queen's laws, to have set her Royal person, authority and State, behind the lobby, at the Parliament door. Either the Kings Royal person then, as not comprised within the compass, and circumscription of the three Estates, by his meaning (which had been but a very bad meaning) must be thought to have been hitherto secluded, from authorizing the statute laws, made in Parliament. Or it is a most clear case, that the Lords spiritual themselves alone, do not make any one of the three Estates. And what matter then of more weight, may it happily seem to be, to alter the authority of the Lords spiritual, and to leave them out of the Parliament, when as notwithstanding, they being left out, the statutes of England, may remain, & continue by authority of the three Estates? And it were not amiss for the Lords spiritual, to consider, that the body and state of the weal public, both now is, and ever hath been, a perfect, entire and complete body, and State, without the body and state of Prelacy: And that the King, the Nobles, & Commons of the Realm, without Prelates, Bishops, or clerks, do make up all the members, and parts of this body, and of this state; and may therefore ordain, promulge, and execute, all manner of laws, without any consent, approbation, or authority yielded unto the same, 
Anno 36 H 8. fo. 58. b. & Anno 〈◊〉. j fo. 93. 2  by the Bishop's spiritual, or any of the Clergy. And thus much our Divines, Histories, & Laws do justify. Sir james Dier, Lord chief justice of the common pleas, in his reports, telleth us, that the state and body of a Parliament in England, consisteth first of the King, as of the head and chief part of the body; secondly of the Lords, as principal members; and lastly of the Commons as inferior members of that body.  
By a Statute of provisoes, it appeareth, 
25. Ed. 3. holy church founded in the state of Prelacy by the King.  That the holy Church of England, was founded into the state of Prelacy within the realm of England, by the grandfather of King Edward the third, and his progenitors, and the Earls, Barons, and other Nobles, of the Realm, and their Ancestors, for them to inform the people, of the law of God, & 
These uses are changed to the keeping of great horses, great troops of idlers with long hair, and great chains of gold.  to make Hospitalities, and alms, and other works of Charity, in the places where the churches were founded. From whence it followeth: First that the archbishops & Bishops only & alone, do not make of themselves any state of Prelacy: but that the whole holy church of England, was founded, into a state of Prelacy. secondly, it is plain, that the 
6. Eliz. c. ●.  Kings of England, before they, and the Earls, Barons, and other Nobles, and great men had founded the holy church of England, into a State of Prelacy, aught and were bounden, by the accord 
The King bound to do laws made without assent of Prelates to be kept as laws of the realm.  of their people, in their Parleaments, to reform and correct whatsoever was offensive, to the laws, and rights of the Crown, and to make remedy, and law in avoiding the mischiefs, damages, oppression, and grievances of their people, yea and that the Kings were bound by their oaths, to do the same laws so made, to be kept, as laws of the Realm, though that through sufferance, and negligence, any thing should at any time be attempted to the contrary. For whereas before the statute of Caerlile the Bishop of Rome, had usurped the Seignories, of such possessions and benefices, as whereof the Kings of the Realm, Earls, Barons, and other Nobles, as Lords and Avows aught to have the custody, presentements, and collations. King Edward the first, by the assent of the Earls, Barons, and other Nobles, & of all the commonalty, at their instancies and requests, and without mention of any assent of the state of prelacy, in the said parliament holden at Caerlile, ordained that the oppressions, grievances, and damage sustained by the Bb. of Rome's usurpation, should not from thenceforth, be suffered in any manner. And for as much as the grievances and mischiefs mentioned in the said Act of Caerlill, did afterward in the time of K. Edward the third, daily abound to greater damage and destruction of the 
31. Ed. 5 sta. of hearing. 36. Ed. 3. c. 8.  Realm, more than ever before, and that by procurement of Clerks, & purchasers of graces from Rome, the said King Edward the third, by assent & accord, of all the great men, and commons of his Realm, and without mention of any assent of Prelates, or Lords spiritual, having regard to the said Act of Caerlile, and to the causes contained in the same to the honour of God, and profit of the Church of England, and of all this Realm, ordained and established, that the free elections of Archbishopps, Bishops, and all other dignities, and benefices elective in England, should hold from thenceforth, in the manner as they were granted by the King's progenitors, and founded by the Ancestors of other Lords. And in divers other statutes, made by King. Ed. the third, it is said, that our Sovereign Lord the King by the assent of the great men, and all the commons hath ordained remedy, etc. That it was accorded by our Sovereign Lord the King, the great men, and all the commons, that the King chiefly 
8. Edw. 3. 〈◊〉 statute of. Provisours  desiring to sustain his people in tranquillity and peace, and to govern according to the laws, usages, and franchises of his land, by the assent and express will and accord of the Dukes, Earls, Barons, and the commons of his Realm, and of all other whom these things touched, ordained that all they, etc. By which desire of the King, and words of the Act, we learn, that our Sovereign Lord King JAMES, may sustain his people, in tranquillity and peace, and govern according to the laws, usages, and franchises of his kingdom, though the assent, and accord of Prelates be never required to the enacting of any statute in parliament. Nay such hath been and yet is the power of 
The king with the assent of the Nobles and commons, may repeal Statutes without consent of Prelates. 15. Ed. 3.  the King, that with the assent and accord of the Nobles, and commons, he hath authority to adnull, and make void, even those Acts which in favour of Prelacy, and assent of Prelates, have been enacted in parliament. As by an Act made in the time of King Edward the third, is plainly to be seen. For whereas the King by assent of the Prelates, Earls, etc. had willed and granted for him, and for his heirs, certain articles firmly to be kept, and holden for ever, namely, that the Ministers of holy Church for money taken for redemption of corporal penance, nor for proof, & account of Testaments, nor for solemnity of Marriage, etc. should not be impeached, etc. before the kings justices; nevertheless the same King, in the same year, with assent of the Earls, Barons, & other wise men of the Realm, and without assent of Prelates, revoked and anulled the same articles again.  
Again King Richard the second hearing the complaints of his faithful liege 
3 Ric. 2. cap. 3.  people, and by their clamour in divers Parleamentes of diverse abuses crept in against the solemn, and devour ordinations of Churches, etc. at the request, & 
7 Ric. 2. cap. 12.  complaint of the Commons, by the advice and common assent of the Lords temporal (without mention of any Lords spiritual) is said to have ordained, That none of the kings liege people, etc. should take or receive within the Realm of England, any procuracy, etc. And in the eleventh year of of the same same King's reign, it is specially provided, that the appeals, pursuits, etc. made & given in the same parliament, be approved, affirmed & established, as a thing duly made, for the weal and profit of the King, and of all the Realm, notwithstanding that 
Act & Mo. Rich. 2.  the Lords spiritual, and their Procurators, did by protestation, absent them out of the parliament, at the time of the said judgement given. And the like protestation being made by the Prelates, & Clergy, at a parliament, holden the third year of the same King, it was replied for the King, that neither for their said protestation, or other words in that behalf, 
The King bound by his oath, to do his laws to be made though prelate's protest against him.  the King would not stay to grant to his justices in that case, and all other cases, as was used to be done in times past, and as he was bound, by virtue of his oath at his Coronation. By all which premises it is as clear, as the sun shining at noon day, that the Lords spiritual be so far from making any one of the three Estates, as that (if it please the King) they may not be so much, as any member, or part of any of the three Estates at all. If in the time of King Henry the eight, the Lords spiritual (being then more in 
The Lords spiritual no principal members of the parliament otherwise then as the King pleaseth.  number then the Lords temporal) had been but such principal members of the high Estate of parliament, as without whom, neither law could have been made, Monastery nor Priory might have been dissolved; what could the King have done as Head, and the Commons have done as feet, and the Nobles have done as the Heart, the Liver and the longs, to the dislording and discloystering of the Abbots, and priors, the Monks, and the Friars of those days. In case the Prelates with their arms, and with their shoulders, with their hands, and with their horns, had heaved and shouved, had pushed, and thrusted to the contrary. But to come nearer unto our own times, and remembrances, if it can not be proved, that any one Lord spiritual 
No Lords spiritual present in parliament, 1 Eliza.  was present in parliament, or gave any assent to the enacting of statutes, made in the first year of the Queen's Majesties reign deceased, but that it be a clear case, that the ancient jurisdiction, pre-eminences, rights, and privileges of the kings Crown, were restored, that popery and superstition was banished, & the doctrine of the holy Gospel harboured only by the Queen, the Lords temporal, and commons, what more plain evidence or better proof can there be, that the Lords spiritual, by any necessity be neither principals, nor accessaries, neither branches, nor buds, neither hang nor sealings, nor any furniture for the house of parliament. And of this opinion are the soundest Historians, and sincerest Divines of our age.  
In the fifteenth year of King Edward 
Act. & Mo. fol. 320.  the third (saith Master Fox) diverse petitions being put up in parliament against provisions coming from Rome, the kings answer and agreement was made in form following: viz: It is agreed by the King, Earls, Barons, justices, & other wise men of the Realm, That the petitions aforesaid, be made in sufficient form of law. Where it is to be noted (saith he) that at the grant hereof, the consent of the Bishops is neither named nor expressed, with the Lords of parliament, and yet the parliament standeth in his full force notwithstanding. At an other parliament (saith he) William Wicham, Bishop of Winchester, 
Act. & Mo. 525.  for a slanderous report, savouring of a contumelious lie, and proceeding of a subtle zeal, meaning falsehood, was so by the Duke of Lancaster pursued, that by act of parliament, he was condemned, and deprived of all his temporal goods. And this seemeth to have been done (saith Master Fox) without assent, and against the wills of the Lords spiritual; for afterward at an other parliament, great suit was made by the Clergy, for deliverance of the said Bishop: and being asked a subsidy in the King's behalf, with great lamentation they complained, for lack of their fellow and brother of Winchester, and denied to join themselves in any tractation of any such matter. And in another parliament holden at York, in the sixth year of King Edward the third, all 
Act. & Mo. 519.  such laws, as then passed, and were concluded by the King, Barons, and Commons, were good, notwithstanding the absence, or malice of the Lords spiritual. For it is recorded (saith he) that only the Archb. of York, the Bishop of Lincoln, and the abbots of York & Silby were there present.  
In a book entitled the burning of Paul's church in London 1561. and in the fift question moved by a papist, it is said, that this manner of ministration of Sacraments, set forth in the book of common prayers, was never allowed, nor agreed upon, etc. no not by the Clergy of England at the last parliament, but only it was agreed upon, by the Laity, which had nothing a do with spiritual matters, or causes of religion. Whereunto the Reverend Father Master Pilkington 
M. Pilkington Bishop of Duresme.  Bishop of Duresme answering: was there not (saith he) a disputation for Religion, appointed by the Queen's Majesty, wherein your Clergy was afraid, to utter their foolishness, in defending their superstition, lest they had taken more shame in answering, than they did in holding their peace.? I think the Universities with so many places of the Realm, receiving religion, & these other disputing for it, may be counted to be some part of the Clergy of the Realm. And so it was not received without consent of the Clergy: But these were not of the parliament, What then? But as joash, josaphat, Ezekias, and josias, did not make a new religion, but restored that which was defaced & had long lain buried, so our parliament, did not set forth a new religion, but restore that, which was godly began under the good King Edward, confirmed by the parliament, and Clergy then, etc. But nothing can be concluded, as a law by parliament, (say they) without consent of the Clergy there present. But this having not their consent, can not be counted a law, as they think. I had rather (saith Master Pilkington) leave this to be answered by the Lawyers, than otherwise. Yet that the world may see, that some thing may be said in it, we grant him, not this to be true, that no law at all can be made without consent of Bishops. Look your old statutes of parliament, when Bb. were highest, afore Edward the third, and ye shall read, that they passed by the consent of the Lords temporal and commons without any mention of the Lords spiritual, which statutes many of them stand in strength at this day. Then it may well be gathered, that the consent of the Clergy was not always so necessary as they think it. The Lawyers, judges, and Iustice●s put in practice & execute these laws, therefore their doings, may be a sufficient reason, to lead the unlearned, what opinion they have of these statutes. For Religion (except justice Raftall) first executing that, and afterward running away, may condemn the rest, which I trust he may not; I think they would not execute them, except they had the strength and nature of laws. If they do contrary to their knowledge and opinion, they can not be able to answer their doings, but I think no wise men are of this opinion. Only these corner creepers, that dare not show their face, and would deceive the people, go about to deface all good & godly order, that displeases them. In the days of King Edward, they had the like fond opinion, that the King could not make laws in his minority, until he came unto full age, and to make the people to disobey their Prince. Hitherto Master Pilkington Lord Bishop of Duresme; with whom the most worthy & learned Master jewel, late Bishop of Salisbury, 
M. jewel B. of Salisbury  agreeth in every point.  
The wise and learned (saith he) could have told you that in the Parleaments of England, matters have evermore used to pass, not of necessity by the special consent of the Archbishops & Bishops, as if without them no statute might lawfully be enacted, but only by the more part of voices, yea although the Archb. & Bishops were never so earnestly bend against it. And statutes so passing in Parleaments, only by the voices of the Lords temporal, without the consent, and agreement of the Lords spiritual, have nevertheless been always confirmed, and ratified by the Royal assent of the Prince, and have been enacted, and published, under the names of the Lords spiritual and temporal Read (saith he) the statutes of K Edward the first, there shall ye find, that in a Parliament holden at St Edmondsbury, the Archbishops & Bishops were quite shut forth, and yet the parliament held on and good, and profitable laws, were there enacted, the departing, or absence, or malice of the Bishop's spiritual notwithstanding. In the records thereof it is written thus: Habito Rex cum suis Baronibus Parliamento, & Clero excluso statutum est: The King keeping a parliament, with his Barons, the Clergy, that is to say the Archbishops and Bishops being shut forth, it was enacted, etc. In provisione de matrona in the time of King Edward the third, whereas matter was moved of bastardy touching the legitimation of bastards, borne before marriage, the statute passed wholly, with the Lords temporal, whether the Lords spiritual would or no. And that contrary to the express decrees & canons of the church of Rome. And thus much the most reverend and godly Father Master jewel Bishop of Salisbury, wherefore to conclude this point against the Admonitors position, I dispute thus: 
All those persons, who by any necessity, are none of the three estates, and by whose authorities, the statutes of England, to this day, have not stood, to leave out the same persons, may happily seem a matter of less weight, than all men do judge it:  
But the Archb: and Bb. are such persons, as by necessity are none of the three estates, and by whose consents, the statutes of England to this day, have not stood,  
Therefore to leave out the Archb: and Bb. may happily seem a matter of less weight than all men do judge it.   
If our evangelical Bishops be of that opinion, of which the Popish Bishops were, viz, that the house of parliament is an unfit, & an unmeet place, to have the holy cause of the religion of God, debated and concluded upon, and that the laity without the Clergy ought not to conclude any thing in religion, & that in respect hereof, their presences, their voices, and their assents are necessary in the parliament: If our evangelical Prelates (I say) make this objection: then besides that hereby they unseemly, unmannerly, & unchristianly, accuse the whole land of ignorance and blindness in religion, supposing neither King, nor Nobles, nor Commons, to be able to discern between night and day, besides this (I say) so shameful an abuse, of a whole Christian nation, I would pray them to remember what the most reverend Fathers, Master Pilkington & Master jewel have answered, to such cavillous slanders. For what else intended they by many examples, & proofs brought for the Parleamentes of England, consisting of the King, the Nobles, and the Commons to be lawful Parleaments, and to have right to establish religion, but to justify against Popish scoffers, that religion might be received, & established in parliament, notwithstanding the absence or exclusion of the Clergy? Besides, since our laws do uphold the state & authority of the Convocation 
Matters of religion not concluded in parliament, before the same be consulted of in convocation.  house, for the examination of all causes of Religion, surely it can not be truly averred, that it is necessary for evangelical Bishops, to be members of the parliament house, lest controversy of religion, should be handled, and discussed without them. For how should any matter of religion be concluded without them in parliament, when first of all, the same is to be argued among themselves in convocation? or let them hardly (if they can) show any one instance, of any change, or alteration, either from religion to superstition, or from superstition to religion, to have been made in parliament, unless the same freely, & at large have been first agreed upon in their Synods and Convocations? And what booteth it, then to have a double or triple consultation, and consent of Archbishops & Bishops in parliament? Is the holy cause of God, any whit bettered, by their Bishops riding from Paul's to Westminster? Or can it receive any more strength, by their walking from Westminster Church, to Westminster Palace? Nay it hath been oftentimes so far from being promoted by their Bishops, as not only in their convocations, but also in the Queen's Parleaments, the same hath been shamefully entreated, and taken the foil: as may witness the bill for the better observation of the Sabbath 27. Eliz. which being passed by both houses of parliament, was notwithstanding gainsaid & withstood, by none so much as by certain evangelical Bishops, & which (as there all men generally conceived) was only stayed from being made a law, by the Queen, upon their counsel, and persuasion.   

Admonition.  
It hath been always dangerous to pick quarrels against laws settled. 
Pag. 78.    

Assertion.  
And is it not morbus hereditarius in 
Steven Gardeners argument, and the Admonitors argument in effect one.  Prelates to pick quarrels against reformation of errors? For even this did Steven Gardener reason against the Lord Protector. 
That in no case (saith Steven Gardener) is to be attempted, of the Lord Protector which may bring both danger to him, and trouble to the whole Realm.  
But innovation of Religion, from that state wherein King Henry left it, may be and is like to be dangerous, to the Lord protector, & to breed troubles to the whole Realm:  
Therefore innovation of Religion from the state that King Henry left it, is in no wise to be attempted.   
And even of this stamp, & of this strain is the argument of picking quarrels against laws settled: for thus in effect he argueth: 
That Discipline in no case is to be brought into the Church by the King & parliament, which may be dangerous to laws settled:  
But to bring into the Church, the Apostolical discipline may be dangerous to laws settled.  
Therefore the Apostolical Discipline, in no case is to be brought into the Church by the King & parliament.   
But forasmuch as that noble and religious Lord Protector (notwithstanding Steven Gardiner's sophistry) continued constant, and courageous in the abolishment of Popery, and superstition which King Henry left, & did without dangerous alterations of laws then settled, innovate religion: How much more now may the King's Majesty, the 
Less danger to reform the Church by new laws, then to continue corruption by old laws.  Lords and Commons in parliament, attempt with effect, an innovation of that state of Ecclesiastical government, wherein the Queen left the Church? And if it can not be denied, but it had been far more dangerous, for the Realm, and for the Lord protector, not to have settled the holy doctrine, of the everlasting Gospel, by new laws, then to have maintained, and continued antichristianity by old laws: how should it be less danger, for the King, in these days to continue corruptions in the Church, by toleration of old laws, then to have the same corruptions reform by establishment of new laws? But unto whom, or unto what, hath it been dangerous, to pick quarrels against laws settled? What? Hath it been dangerous to laws settled? No. For how should laws settled be endangered by quarelers? sithence quarrelers are evermore in danger of laws settled. Or hath it been always dangerous for a King, for a State, for a people, or for a Country, to pick quarrels against laws settled? No. For what man is he, or what face carrieth he, that dare upbraid a Country, a people, a State, or a King, minding to unsettle, evil laws, & evil customs, to be quarelers against laws settled? Let it then only be dangerous for private persons, upon private malecontentment, to pick quarrels against good laws, well, & rightly settled; and let it not be hurtful or dangerous for supreme Kings, powers, and Principalities, by public edicts, to alter evil laws, evilly settled. For to what other end should evil laws evilly settled, be continued, but to continue evil? And what a thing were that? This argument then for laws settled, being the sophism of that Fox Steven Gardener, is but a quarrelsome, and wrangling argument.   

Admonition.  
If this government whereof they 
Pag. 7●.  speak, be (as they say) necessary in all places, then must they have of necessity, in every particular parish, one Pastor, a company of Seniors, and a Deacon, or two, at the least, & all those to be found of the parish, because they must leave their occupations to attend upon the matters of the Church. But there are a number of Parishes in England, not able to find one tolerable Minister, much less to find such a company.   

Assertion.  
This argument seemeth to be drawn from kitchen profit, and is but a bugbegger to scar covetous men from submitting their necks unto the yoke of that holy Discipline, which our Saviour Christ hath prescribed, and which the Admonitor himself confesseth, to have been practised by the Apostles, and primitive Church. And yet because this argument seemeth to lay a very heavy burden on men's shoulders, such as is impossible to be borne, it is an argument 
That Seniors & Deacons should be found at the charge of the Parish is absurd.  worthy to be examined, though in itself, the same be very untrue & absurd. For who did ever fancy that a Pastor, a company of Seniors, and a Deacon, or two at the least, should be men of occupations, or that they should be all found of the parish, because they must leave their occupations, to attend upon the matters of the Church? Why? there be many hundreds of parishes in England, wherein there dwelleth not one man, of an occupation. And what reason then or likelihood of reason was there, to father such an absurd necessity upon the Church? As for the necessity of having one Pastor in every particular parish, and of his finding by the parish, because it is his duty, to attend upon reading, exhortation, & doctrine, although he be no man of occupation, this (I say) is agreeable & consonant, to the government of the church practised by the Bishops. And therefore in the finding, & having of one Pastor in every parish, they, and we differ not. But that men of occupations only should be chosen Seniors and Deacons in every parish; or if Seniors and Deacons, were men of occupations in any parish, that they should be all found of the parish, we utterly disclaim as an absurdity of absurdities. And yet we deny not, but in Cities and great Towns wherein for the most part, men of trade, do inhabit, that Seniors & Deacons must of necessity be men of occupations. Unless then an occupation must of necessity hinder men, from being faithful, religious, & godly men, there is no reason to enforce, that men of occupations in Cities, and great towns, should not be chosen Seniors, and Deacons. And as for Country parishes, 
What kind of men ought to be chosen Seniors & Deacons.  wherein either very few, or no men of occupations do reside, this objection is altogether idle. In which parishes also we affirm, that men of greatest gravity, integrity, wisdom, faith and godliness, aught to be chosen Seniors, and Deacons. And we doubt not, but all such men as whom we intent, aught to be chosen Seniors, and Deacons, whether dwelling in Cities & Towns, or in the Country, would be as ready, as willing, and as watchful, prudently to employ themselves hereafter, in matters of the Church, as now either themselves, or their equals, are busied in matters of their corporations, or common weal, without any manner of contribution, to be yielded towards their finding.  
When the people of Israel were commanded to pay their tithes, first fruits, and other oblations unto the Priests & Levites, for their attendance and service in the Sanctuary, we do not read in the whole book of God, that they were enjoined to be helpers and contributors to the relief and sustentation of the Captains over thousands, of the Captains over hundreds, nor of the Elders & Governors, placed City by City, for the affairs of the King. And therefore sithence we have neither precept nor precedent, that all the officers of the church should be found at the costs of the Church; and sithence also as well in Country parishes, as in Cities, & towns (to the praise and glory of God be it spoken) we have many able, wealthy, & substantial persons, who have given their names unto Christ, what necessity is there that any such Seniors, and Deacons should be elected, as have need to be relieved, and supported by a common purse? And had the Admonitor well and advisely pondered that our Church 
Church wardens & side men are not found at the charges of the parishes.  Wardens, & side men (who carry a semblance of governing Seniors) that our collectors also for the poor (who justle out the Deacons) being all of them men of occupations, poor husbandmen, or day labourers, and being not found of the parish, are notwithstanding oftentimes in the year, troubled and turmoiled, from one end of the Diocese unto the other, and that which is more, from attendance upon their day labour husbandry and occupations, to weight, and to attend not upon matters of the church, but upon money matters, pertaining to the officers of the Bb. Consistory: Had he (I say) wisely and sincerely considered these things, he would certainly not once have mentioned this so silly and simple a suggestion. But quite & clean to cut of at one blow all the skirts of the coat of this silly bulbegger, that the very buttocks of it may be bare, and that the church may see, there is no such burdensome charge, to be laid upon her, as is feigned; the grave and godly judgement, and policy of King Edward 
The judgement of King Ed. the sixth commissioners touching Elders and Deacons.  the sixth his Commissioners, authorized to compile a book, for the reformation of laws ecclesiastical, according to an Act of parliament, in that behalf provided, shall rise up for us, and plead the truth and equity of this our sayings. The Commissioners names were these: viz. The most reverend Father Thomas Crammer, Archbishop of Canterbury. Thomas Bishop of Ely, Richard Cox, the King's Almoner: Peter Martyr, professor of Divinity, William May, Rowland Taylor, Doctors of the Law, Sir john Cheek, john Lucas, Richard Goddericke, Master Hadon, and others. All 
Titul. de diuiois officijs cap. 10. fol. 45.  which reverend, learned, and religious men, as with one voice & accord speak one thing: so thus and thus they speak: Evening prayer being finished, whereunto all shallbe attendant, after sermon in their own Churches, the chief minister whom they call Parochies, and the Deacon, if happily they shallbe present, or they being absent, let the Ministers, Vicars and Elders, (lo the Archb. of of Canterbury, afterwards a godly Martyr, and Bishops can skill of the name of Deacon and Elders) with the people confer about the money put apart to godly uses how the same may be best employed; And let the Discipline (lo these sage counsellors were all Disciplinarians) be reserved until that time. For they whose frowardness hath been public, and tending to the common offence of the Church, let such be recalled to the acknowledgement of their faults, and let them publicly for the same be censured, that the Church by their wholesome coercion, may be brought in good frame. Afterward, let the Minister going apart, with some of the Elders, take counsel, how the others (whose manners are said to be lewd, and whose life is said to be full of mischief) may first according to the commandment of Christ in the Gospel, come together, & be communed with, by sober and discreet men, and with a certain kind of brotherly love. By whose admonition if they shall reform themselves, thanks are diligently to be given unto God. But if they shall proceed forth in their wickedness, they are to be bound with that sharp pain, which by the Gospel we know to be prepared for contumacy. And when the force and vehemency of excommunication shallbe shaken, first let the Bishop be sought unto, who if he shall consent, and oppose his authority, let the form of excommunication be dispatched, before the whole church that we may bring in as much as may be the ancient Discipline.  
Thus much have these most Christian Disciplinarians, and renewers of the ancient Discipline, by Pastors, Elders, and Deacons both written and spoken. And yet have they sounded never a word, to the finding of Elders and Deacons by the Parish, nor by having men of occupations to leave their business, to attend upon matters of the Church. For men thus meeting together once only in the week, and that upon the Lord's day, and that only within their own parishes, and without payment of any fees, may very well notwithstanding these attendances, give themselves wholly all the week following, to their ordinary vocations. And therefore against his not able to find one tolerable Minister, much less to find a company, etc. I conclude thus: 
No Parish in England shallbe burdened to find so much as one senior or Deacon:  
Therefore much less shall every Parish be burdened to find a company of Seniors, etc.   
Where the Admonitor complaineth, 
Tolerable and intolerable Ministers.  that many parishes are not able to find one tolerable Minister, we would gladly learn, by what brand tolerable Ministers, are known from intolerable Ministers, according as the Lords spiritual judge, or judge not, of tolerable, & untolerable Ministers. For if all reading Ministers (as needs with them they must be) or else why do they tolerate them, be tolerable Ministers, what a vain, and idle distinction, hath he coined touching the scarcity of maintenance, for tolerable Ministers? Considering all Ministers by intendment of law, be able to read: and considering also a very small maintenance, is esteemed to be a tolerable maintenance, for reading ministers. For else why do the great Bishops, in their great Churches of Commendames, and the rich Doctors in their rich Churches of non residencies, make so small allowances to their reading and stipendary Curates? And where then is that parish in England, that is not able to maintain a tolerable Minister?  
The next argument, that the people might not choose their Pastors, Elders 
Pag. 78.  and Deacons, as is required, is drawn partly from a fear, that the same willbe a matter of schism, discord, and dissension in many places: partly from affection and want of right judgement of the people, partly from the unruliness of the parishes, and partly from the broil and trouble which may follow.   

Assertion.  
Unto this objection if I should answer nothing at all, but only should 
The objection of fear etc. answered.  deny, that any fear, or any other inconvenience at all, pretended in this place, is to be feared to ensue, my simple negation were more to be tolerated, than his simple affirmation: for by the canon law, non inficienti, sed ponenti, incumbit onus probandi. And yet because the Lord hath spoken unto josua, & in him unto 
Doct. in c. 6 cui. depreb. Lib. 2.  us all, that we should not fear, nor be discouraged to observe, and to do all, that is written in the law, for then (saith the Lord) shalt thou make thy way prosperous, and then shalt thou have good success, therefore in the word of the Lord (I say) that none of all this fear, broil, trouble, or turmoil, is to be feared at al. Nay that it is most assuredly, and without all doubt, to be hoped, & looked for, that he would so bless, the attempt of putting his order in execution, as that the people's approbation, and allowance of their Ministers, should be a matter of all peace, quietness, unity, concord, good success and prosperity to the whole Church of God in England.  
For what an heathenish incredulity, were it for us to reply upon the erroneous conceit of a timorous, and suspicious fancy, that fear, and I wots not what unruliness, & unquietness shall follow, when we (receiving the laws of peace from the Prince of peace) have his most stable truth, that his peace shall rest upon us, and that all fear and evil success shall cease and vanish away. No busy headed body therefore, shall be able to lead any man away, to disquiet either Church or common Wealth, (otherwise then as the Church in all ages by the malice of Satan and his instruments hath evermore been disquieted) if once the holy law of the Gospel touching this point were observed & put in ure. And if it be feared, that the choice to be made by the people of God, and which is allowed unto them, by the holy laws of God would prove to be a matter of schism, discord, and dissension; how much more reason have we to fear, that the fire of schism, discord, and dissension, being blown already, should not break out, and flame among us, if still one man alone, be suffered to thrust upon the people of God, not tolerable Ministers, according to God's heart, but intolerable ministers, according to man's tradition. The Admonitor hath insinuated unto us often in this admonition, that it is dangerous to innovate. And so I say too, unless there be evident 
M. de constitu. prim. L. 2  utility of innovation. For (saith the Emperor) in rebus novis constituendis evidens esse utilitas debet, ut ab eo iure recedatur, quod diu aequum visum est. But is it not as perilous, yea sometimes much 
Dangerous to innovate unless there be evident utility of innovation.  more perilous not to innovate? for proof whereof, it shall suffice, to take witness of our own times & of our own experiences. It seemed equal a long time, and for many years, that the sacrifice of the Mass with all the pelf and trumpery thereof, should not once be spoken against. But we all know, that the abandoning thereof, hath not yet brought any perilous subversion, upon any nation, that purely and sound in place thereof, hath embraced the holy Sacrament of the Lords Supper. It seemeth also to be equal for many ages past that the Bishop of Rome might have supreme and absolute power over all persons, states, and causes, not only in Rome, Italy, Spaigne, Germany, & other foreign Kingdoms, but also in England and Scotland. But as yet to the view of all the world, it hath not proved perilous for the King, & Queen of England and Scotland, to establish new laws, for the alteration of that ancient abuse. And why hath it not been dangerous so to do? Why? forsooth because there was evident utility in doing of it. But how could an evident utility appear before it was done? How? Forsooth because the holy law of God had warranted an alteration. For faith having eyes to see the wisdom, the power, and the truth of God in his word, discerned a far of that the institution of the Lords Supper, was long before the sacrifice of the mass. And therefore our Kings by abandoning popery out of the Realm, did not institute any new religion, but only they restored the old. Now than if the same holy law of God, do condemn the choice, and thrusting of a Pastor upon the people by one man alone; and again if the same law, do impugn the primacy of one Pastor over all Pastors, as well in a Diocese, or Province, as in the whole West part of Christendom, what danger can it be, not to disfranchise the one, sithence without any manner of danger, we have abolished the other? or what peril can it be, not to countenance the sons, sithence without peril we have discountenanced the father? Especially seeing in this place of the admonition we have a plain confession, that the common manner of election of Pastors, Elders and Deacons in the old Churches was made by the people. For if the examples of schism, discord 
Common manner of elections in the old churches was by the people.  & contention, did commonly appear in the old churches, while that manner of election did continue, then by his own mouth that manner of election was common, and did continue in the old churches. Besides, this inconvenience (saith he) caused Princes & Bishops so much to intermeddle in this matter. From whence it necessarily again followeth, that by the holy Scriptures, and law of God, Princes and Bishops, did not intermeddle with that matter at all. For had it been simply lawful for them, to have 
Bb. meddle not with election of Pastors by the holy Scriptures.  dealt in those causes by the word of God, them as well before schism, discord, and dissension, as afterward, yea rather much more before then afterward. For then by their own right, might Princes and Bishops have prevented all occasion of schism, and contention, and have so preserved the Church, that no tumult, or disorder, should once have been raised or begun therein. Again if by the law of God, Princes & Bishops, had meddled in these matters, and had not intermeddled by human devise, then lawfully by their authority alone, might they have chosen Pastors, Elders and Deacons in the old Churches: which thing in this place by necessary inference he denieth. For schism (saith he) caused them to intermeddle. So as by his confession, they were but entermedlers, and entercommoners, by reason of schism, & not commoners, and meddlers by virtue of God's word. And yet now a days our reverend Bishops in this case, are no more entercommoners, with Princes and with the people, they are no more entermedlers as in old times they were; but they have now so far encroached upon the prerogatives of the Prince, and privileges of the people, that neither Prince 
Bishops encroach upon the right of prince and people.  nor people, have any commons in the election of Pastors, Elders & Deacons with them at all. Besides if schism, and contention among the people were the reason, why Bishops first intermeddled in the choice of Pastors, we now having no schism nor contention about the choice of Pastors, by the people, and so the cause ceasing, why should not the effect likewise cease? But this effect, is therefore still to be continued, because otherwise the cause would a new sprout out, and spring up again. Nay rather inasmuch, as for these many years, we have had schism, discord & dissension, because the Bishops wholly and altogether have meddled in the choice of Pastors, and have thrust upon the people, whatsoever Pastors please not the people, but pleased themselves, & have not suffered the people to meddle, no not so much as once to intermeddle in these matters; in as much (I say) as these things be so: it seemeth most expedient, requisite, & necessary, for the appeasing, & pacifying of this discord, & the taking away of this schism, to have that manner of election, which was in the old Churches, restored to the people; and this wherein the Bishops have intermeddled, without authority from the word, to be abolished: that so again the cause of schism and strife, which is now among us ceasing, the effect might likewise cease.  
After I had ended this tract, in this manner, touching this point, there came into mine hands a book entitled The perpetual government of Christ's church written by Thomas Bilson, Warden of Winchester College: in the fifteenth chapter of which book is handled this question, viz: to whom the election of Bishops and Presbyters doth rightly belong, and whether by God's law the people must elect their Pastors or no. In which Chapter also the matter of schism, strife, and contention is handled. The final scope and conclusion whereof, is as the proposition importeth, two fold: First, concerning Bishops, then concerning Pastors. The quarrel taken against Bishops doth not so much touch (saith he) the office, and functions of Bishops, as it doth the Prince's prerogative. When you rather think the Prince may not name her Bishops without the consent and election of the people, you impugn nor us, but directly call the Prince's fact, and her laws in question. As touching this point of the proposition, because the people by any law, or custom; never challenged any right, or interest in the choice of the King's Bishops, we have nothing to meddle or to make about the choice, of any of his Kingly Bishops. 
The King only hath power without the people to nominate his Kingly Bb.  Nay we confess, as his highness progenitors Kings of England, have been the Sovereign donors, Founders, Lords and Avows of all the bishoprics in England without aid of the people; that so likewise it is a right, and interest invested into his Imperial Crown, that he only, his heirs & successors, without consent of the people, aught to have the free nomination, appointment, collation, investiture, and confirmation of all Bishops from time to time to be placed in any of those bishoprics; yea & we say further, that the King alone, hath not power only to nominate, collate & confirm, but also to translate, yea and if it please him to depose all his Kingly Bishops without any consent of his people at all. For (say we) eius est destruere, cuius est construere; eius est tollere, cuius est condere: Neither will we dislike, but rather content ourselves, that our late Queen's Bishops (if they shall find favour in the King's eyes) should be also the King's Bishops, conditionally they submit themselves to the laws, & prerogatives of the King's Crown, content themselves with the only name of Kingly and Princely Bishops, & not challenge any more the titles of Godly and Christian Bishops, as though without injury to the law of God, and Gospel of our Saviour Christ, they could not be dispossessed of their Lordly bishoprics. And therefore our most humble prayer to the King is, that his Majesty would be pleased, that such his Kingly Bishops may not henceforth overcrow, and justle our God's Bishops: nor have any primacy over God's Bishops. And withal that the King himself would vouchsafe, to hearken to the doctrine of such as are in deed God's Bishops, rather than to the Counsel of those who lately were the Queen's Bishops.  
As touching the second part, viz. whether 
Mai. Bilson confirmeth the people's election of their Pastor. Pag. 339.  the people by God's law, must elect their Pastors, or no; Master Bilson by reasons, and profess brought for the first use of it, rather confirmeth than impugneth the same. For (saith he) Well may the people's interest stand upon the grounds of reason and nature, and be derived from the rules of Christian equity and society: That each Church and people stand free by God's law, to admit, maintain, or obey no man, as their Pastor without their liking, unless by law, custom, or consent, they have restrained themselves: That the people 
360.  had as much right to choose their Pastor, as the Clergy that had more skill to judge: That the Apostles left elections indifferenthe to the people & Clergy at jerusalem: That the Apostles in the Acts, when they willed the Church at jerusalem to choose the seven, did not make any remembrance or distinction of the seventy Disciples from the rest: And lastly, against the cursing, & fighsting of the late Bishops of Rome, till 
359.  excluding both Prince and people, from yielding his consent, or making their request, they had reduced the election wholly to the Clergy, he telleth them by their leave, it was not so from the beginning. From all which sayings of Master 
339.  Bilson, I conclude thus: 
Whatsoever is right, lawful, and free by the law of God: whatsoever standeth upon the grounds of reason and nature: whatsoever is derived from Christian equity and society: whatsoever is from the beginning, and was left by the Apostles to the Church at jerusalem, the same aught still to remain, and must be kept inviolable in the Church.  
But the people's interest to choose their Pastore, is right; is lawful; is free by the law of God; standeth upon the grounds of reason, and nature; is aerived from Christian equity & society; is from the beginning, and was left by the Apostles to the church at jerusalem:  
Therefore the people's interest to choose their pastor ought still to remain, and must be kept inviolable in the Church.   
The whole proposition and every part thereof, together with the assumpt, and every part thereof, is drawn from Mr bilson's own confession. Only to the proposition he hath annexed certain conditions or exceptions, viz. Unless by law, custom, or consent, the people have restrained themselves, or transferred, or altered their right, or else by their default, or abuse, the canons, counsels, superior powers, princely, or public laws, have abridged, altered, or abrogated the same. Now than it remaineth to know, whether any consent, default, abuse, custom, canons, counsels, superior powers, public or Princely Edicts, may be a good and sure warrant, to abridge, transfer, or abrogate, the people's interest, from having to do, in the choice of their Pastors.  
Our Saviour Christ, when he came in the flesh, he came to reform the abuse crept in of the Law, and to improve the corruptions of doctrine taught by the Scribes, pharisees, and Doctors of the law, but he took not away any least title of the law, ne abolished any jot of true, & sound doctrine in the Church. The Gospel teacheth us to order our judgements aright, to bridle the unruliness of our affections, & to moderate our inordinate appetites. But yet, doth not the same command us, to empty our souls of all judgement, to bury our affections in our bellies, and to become as dead as stones, without all sense, or appetite. In like sort we grant, that custom, consent, Canons, Councils, Superior powers, public, & princely Laws, 
Canons and counsels, etc. may bridle disordered elections, but not disannul elections of the people altogether.  may reform, reprove restrain, direct, moderate, and bridle the disordered unruliness, and contentious brawlings of the people, in, and about their elections; yea and we grant further, that they may alter, abridge, or enlarge the form and manner of elections. All this we grant: but that Christian Kings or any Superior powers, may take this right into their own hands (as he sayeth) from the people; or that the people by any law, custom, consent, canon, or council, may transfer or abolite their right, freedom, and interest given and deduced unto them, by these rules and by these grounds, I do not yet perceive any good ground or reason for the same. For in so doing, how should the holy wisdom and providence of God, who hath imprinted in our nature, these rules and these grounds, this equity and this freedom, be so holily regarded, and so highly reverenced, as it ought to be. For hath he made us free men, and can we without contempt of this grace become bondmen? Hath he given us leave and liberty to choose, & shall we with profane Esau, set little by this our birthright, and post our liberty unto others, for less than a mess of wort pottage? And albeit in some cases, that may be well said, quod volenti non fit iniuria, and that quilibet potest recedere 〈◊〉 suo iure; yet the cases must be such, as a man's willingness, and readiness to forego his right, be not tied to him with so strong a band, as is the band of the grounds of reason and nature, of the rules of Christian equity, & of the freedom of the law of God. It is free, I grant, for a man to eat or not to eat, to drink, or not to drink, but for a man not to eat at all, or not to drink at all, and so with hunger and thirst to starve himself, is not free: and in this case volenti sit iniuria. Every man that hath a wife, that hath sons and daughters, that hath men-servantes, and maydservantes; as by the very instinct of nature, and by the equity of the law of Christ, he hath freedom to provide for them, so must he carefully use this his freedom. And therefore he may not wholly and altogether put from himself, and expose at haphazard, the provision, education, instruction, dieting, appareling, and lodging of his wife, his sons, his daughters and his servaunts unto strangers: neither may Husbands, Fathers, nor Masters give their consent, to the making of any law, or the bringing in of any custom, whereby their freedoms, should be restrained, adnihiled, or made void in this behalf. For by thus violating the rules, and grounds, & by thus treading, as it were, under foot, the equity of Christ, and the freedom they have by the law of God: should they not most profanely, and impiously despite God, and, as it were, over turn the whole order he hath set in nature? And if the people may not cast off these rules, and these grounds, this equity, and this freedom in things appertaining to this frail, bodily, transitory, and earthly life: how much less may they, cast them off, or set little by them, in things appertaining to the salvation of their souls, and to a durable, spiritual, everlasting and heavenly life?  
But the people's right to choose their 
Objection, that the people's right did never depend upon the express commandment of God  Bishops, did never depend upon the express commandment of God: neither can the people challenge by God's law, the right to choose their Bishops: I mean (saith he) no such thing is expressed, and contained in the Scriptures. What then? if it do depend, or be contained under the general grounds, and rules of reason, nature, christian equity, christian society, principles of human fellowships, the law of God, the practice of the Apostles, and that which was from the beginning: Is it not sufficient? Though it be not expressed in these terms, viz: That the people must choose, or that the people have right to choose their Bishops? It is not expressed and contained in the scriptures, that every man must choose his own wife; or that every woman must choose her own husband. And yet by the doctrine expressed, or contained in the scriptures, is it true that no man hath right either to choose an other man's wife, or to choose an other woman's husband. And that every man hath right to choose his own wife, and every woman right to choose her own husband. Again, it is not expressed and contained in the scriptures, that infants must be baptised: Neither is it expressed and contained in the scriptures that the Bishop of Lichfield must have but one wife. Yet because it is contained in the scriptures, that God in the beginning, brought but one woman unto one man, and gave to one woman but one husband. I assure myself it will not be denied, but that the Bishops must and doth content himself with one wife, and that every Christian ought to bring their children to be baptized. Besides if Master Bilson distinguish Bishops in England from Pastors in England, and archbishops in England, and Pastors in England, two several orders and degrees of Ministers in the Church of England, than I grant that it is neither expressed nor contained in the Scriptures that the people must choose their Bishops in England. And why? but because the Scriptures (having put no difference between Bishops and Pastors) know no such Bishops as we have in 
bishops in England are only Bishops by the Kings grace, & not by divine institution.  England. And therefore Bishops in England, being Bishops only by the kings grace, and not by divine institution and ordination, as Pastors in England be, hence is it, that the Kings of England, by their prerogative Royal, and not the people, by the rule of Scriptures, have chosen their Bishops in England. And for this cause also was it, that King Henry the eight, with advice of the parliament, did reassume, the nomination, appointment, investiture, & confirmation, of his Kingly Bishops from the Pope. As for the nomination of pastors, having cure of souls in parishes (otherwise 
Pastors in parochial Churches were never placed by the King; as Bb. are in their bishoprics.  then all patrons by right of patronage, do give presentments) their choice, institution, translation, or deprivation, the Kings of Enland by their regal power, never yet hitherto took the same upon them. And if the Kings of England by any fact, or by any law, did never take away the right, interest, and freedom from the people, in choosing their Pastors; what right, other, then by usurpation, can the Bishops have, to impose, or thrust upon the people Pastors without their liking? But by custom and consent the people have restrained themselves. Hereunto (if it were not already sufficiently answered, that the people could not lawfully restrain themselves) yet Master Bilson himself answereth: That the late Bb. of 
The people lost their consent by cursing & fight of the Popes.  Rome never left cursing & fight, till they had excluded both Prince, and people, and reduced the election wholly to the Clergy. By cursing, and fight then have the people been overruled, and excluded, and not by custom or consent, have they restrained themselves. Yea & by virtue of this cursed fight only, do the Bishops of England at this day, exclude both Prince and people, from meddling in the choice of pastors. For by authority of the canon law, made by those late cursing and fight bishops of Rome, the Bishops of England have the sole ordination, and placing of Pastors over the people. And from hence also is it plain, that the people's right, was not by their default, or abuse, relinquished, and forfeited. For then then late Bishops of Rome, needed not to have cursed, and fought for it. And now whether it be not meet, that the Lord Bb. professing themselves to be Christian Bishops, should still retain in their hands, and not restore unto Christian people, the possession of their Christian equity, and freedom, extorted from them, by the cursings and fightings of antichristian Bb. I leave it to the consideration of the reverend Bishops themselves.  
Touching the mischiefs and inconveniences of schism, troubles, strifes, & contentions so often inculcated, and so much urged, and excepted against the election of the people, there is no man able (as I think) to produce any one pregnant proof, out of any ancient, or late History, that any King or Sovereign power, hath interposed any supreme authority, to appease any discord or dissension, ensuing or raised, upon the bare choice, made of any mere Parochial Pastor, by any faithful and Christian people. The schisms, strifes, and factions, that were raised in the old 
Schisms & contentions spring from schismatical and proud clergy masters.  Churches, sprang out, and flowed only from the heads, and fountains of those schisms, strifes & factions: and namely from proud, ambitious, and heretical Bishops, and great Clergy masters. For they being infected, and poisoned with the contagion of schism, and heresy, & having soured the minds of their Disciples, with the leaven of their heretical doctrines, no merveile if the people became followers of the evil manners of their teachers, and no merveile if they verified the proverb, Like Master, like Man; like Priest, like People. Eustatius Bishop of Antioch being a Sabellian heretic, 
Socr. lib. cap ●8.  was deposed by the Counsel of Antioch: after whose deposition, a fiery flame of sedition was kindled in Antioch: because one sort of the common people sought to translate Eusebius Pamphilus from Caesarea to Antioch; some other would bring again Eustatius. Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia, and Theognis Bishop of Nice, being both Arians, with their confederates, raised skirmishes 
Socr. lib. 2. cap. 2.  and tumults against Athanasius. After the death of Alexander, Bishop op Constantinople about the election of a Bishop, there was greater stir than ever before time, and the Church was more grievously turmoiled: The people were divided into two parts: the one eagerly set with the heresy of Arius, clave to Macedonius; the other cleaved very constantly 
Socr. lib. 2 cap. 4.  to the decrees of the Nicene Counsel, and choose Paulus to be their Bishop. The cause of division among the Citizens of Emisa, about the election of Eusebius Emisenus, was, for that he was 
Socr. lib. 2. cap. 6  charged with the study of the Mathematics, and accused of the heresy of Sabellius. After the death of Eusebius, when the people of Constantinople, had brought again Paulus, to be their Bishop, the Arians chose Macedonius. The authors and chief doers, in that stir were certain Arian Bishops, who before aided Eusebius, that turned up 
Socr. lib. cap. 9  side down the whole state of the church. These and sundry such like stirs, discords, factions, & dissensions, are found to have been raised, & pursued by schismatical, and heretical Bishops, their favourites & followers, in the old Churches; but that these or the like mischiefs, and inconveniences can be proved, to have fallen out, by the election of parochial Pastors in the old churches, we deny. And why then should not the interest, and freedom of faithful, & Christian people, wrested from them by cursings and fightings, of faithless, and antichristian Popes, be restored to them again? And the cause ceasing, why should not the effect likewise cease? And therefore we humbly entreat the Lords Bishops, that against the grounds of reason and nature; against Christian equity 
A request to the reverend Bishops.  and society; against the right & freedom of the law of God; against the principles of humane fellowships; against that which was in the beginning; and against that which the Apostles left in the Churches, by colour of laws brought into the Church, by the cursings and fightings of the late Roman Bishops, they would not henceforth, bar & seclude the King's Christian and faithful people, from giving their consents unto their Pastors. Yea and we further beseech their Lordships, that as scholars unto the Apostles, and as servants unto the old way, of reason, of nature, of the law of God, of the equity of Christ, and of human society, they would hereafter embrace that way, which was from the beginning; which is the old way, and the best way, and not any longer persist, in a cursed and quarreling way, which is the new way, and the worst way. But if the Lords spiritual 
A supplication to be King by the Lords and commons for the restitution of their right in the choice of their Pastors  of their own accord, shall not readily vouchsafe to yield unto us this our right, at our entreaty: then for my part, I will briefly show mine opinion, what were expedient, for the Lords and commons, in open parliament dutifully to pray, and to supplicate at the King's Majesty's hand. Namely:  
At the humble petitions and supplications, of all his Lords temporal, and Commons in parliament assembled, his Majesty would be well pleased, to give his Royal assent to an Act: to be entitled: An Act, for the restitution of the ancient right, and freedom which the people of God in the old Churches had, and which the people in England ought to have, in, to, or about the election of their Pastors, and abolishing all papal power repugnant to the same. For if (as it is plainly confessed) the people of all Churches, have right, and freedom by the law of God, by the equity of Christ, by the grounds of reason, and nature, by the principles of human fellowshipps, and by that which was from the beginning, to elect their Pastors: and if also the same right, and freedom being left to the old churches, and especially to the Church at jerusalem by the Apostles, have been taken away by the cursings, and fightings of the late Bishops of Rome: then can not the people without violation of those laws, rules, & grounds, by any Episcopal power, be any more excluded from their said right, and freedom; then could, or might the ancient jurisdiction of the Crown of England, have been still usurped by the Pope from the Kings of England.   

Admonition.  
But alas the common people of England, through affection and want of right judgement, are more easily wrought by ambitious persons, to give their consent to unworthy men, as may appear in all those offices of gain or dignity, that at this day remain in the choice of the multitude.   

Assertion.  
The Admonitor in one place of his admonition, telleth us, that he must not put all that he thinketh in writing, and yet he writeth in this place, that thing, which might far better have been utterly unthought, then once written: For could he think, to win the common people of England, to a continual good liking, of high and stately Prelacy, by upbraiding and charging them to their faces, in a book dedicated unto them, with affection, and wanting of right judgement? Was this the way to procure grace, favour, and benevolence at their hands? And albeit this slander deserved rather to have been censured by the Commons in parliament, then by confutation to have been answered, yet for the better clearing of the right judgement, of the common people, giving their consents, to most worthy men, in all offices of gain, or dignity, remaining in their hands, I think it necessary to show the indignity of this contumely.  
There be (I confess) in London, York, Lincoln, Bristol, Exeter, Norwich, Coventry, and other principal Cities, and Towns, corporate, Mayors, Sheriffs, Stewards, Recorders, Bailiffs, Chamberlains, Bridgemaisters, Clerks, Swordbearers, Knights, burgesses, and such like offices, some of dignity, and some of gain, but that the officers, of these, or any other places, whether of dignity, or gain, be chosen by the multitude of those places, is utterly untrue: for only according to their ancient customs, privileges, and Charters, by the chief Citizens, Townsmen, and Boroughmaisters, are those officers chosen. The number also of which Electors in all places is not alike. In London the Aldermen, choose the Lord Mayor.  
In other Cities and Towns, sometimes eight and forty, sometimes fourteen, sometimes twelve, sometimes only such as have born office, as Mayors, Sheriffs, or Bailiffs in the same places, nominate and elect their new Mayor, Sheriffs, and Bailiffs. But that the Aldermen, principal Townsmen, boroughmasters, and men having borne chief offices in those Cities, Towns, & boroughs, have easily been wrought by ambitious persons, to give their consents unto unworthy men, though it have pleased the Ll. Bb. (with seen and allowed) to have spread and published this saying, yet that the same saying is wholly unworthy, of any credit to be given unto it, or to be regarded of any wise and indifferent man, let the sober & peaceable elections made of the worthies of the land hereafter mentioned, be witnesses; And to leave to speak of the election of the Lord 
The officers in Cities & Towns corporate chosen without contention & ambitious working of unworthy men.  Mayor of the City of London, Sheriffs, Aldermen, Wardens of companies, Chamberlains, Bridgemaisters, and other annual officers, of honour and dignity, let us consider whether the Citizens of London have been wrought by ambitious persons to choose Master Wilbraham, Master Onslie, Mr Bromly, to be their Recorders all three afterward the Queen's solicitors, and Master Bromly Lord Chancellor of England: and let us consider whether the same Citizens, as men of affection, and want of ●ight judgement, did elect to be Recorders of the same City Mai. Sergeant Fleetwood, Master Sergeant Fleming, Master Sergeant Drue, and now Master Crook, a man wise, learned, and religious, & a Counseler and justicer within the Principality of Wales. The Recorder of the Town of Bedford, is the right honourable, the lord St johns of Bletsoe. The Recorder of Bristol was a long time Master Poppam, now Lord chief justice of England. The Recorder of Northampton, before he came to be judge in the King's bench, was Master Sergeant Yeluerton, a favourer of the truth, & an upright justicer: The Recorder of Warwick, was Master Sergeant Puckering, afterward Lord Keeper of the great seal: And of the same Town the Recorder now is, a worthy Knight, descended from a noble house, Sir Foulke Grevile: The Recorder of Coventrie, is Sir john Harrington Knight, a man zealous for the true fear of God: The Recorder of Chichester, was Mai. Sergeant Lewkner, now chief justice in the principality of Wales. The Recorder of Norwich was Master Cook, the King's Attorney general. And who soever shall inquire, after the names, & after the manner of election of all the Recorders, in all other Cities & boroughs of the land, I doubt not but he shall find them all, to have been far from any least show, of ambitious working, the citizens, and Townsmen to nominate, and elect them. Moreover, as these Noble persons, these sage, grave, learned, and christian Gentlemen, quietly, and in all peaceable manner, with upright, and good affection and judgement, & without ambition, have been chosen by the Citizens, Townsmen, & Boroughmasters, to the offices of Recordershippes. So likewise many, & sundry honourable Counsellors, 
Honourable Counsellors chosen high stewards, without ambitious working.  have been, and as occasion is ministered, are daily elected by Citizens, & Townsmen to be their high Stewards. Sir Francis Knolles, an honourable counsellor, & one, whose faith was famous among the churches, as well abroad, as at home, by the election of the Citizens of Oxford, remained until he died, high Steward of the City of Oxford. The right honourable Sir Francis Walsingam, by the common Counsel of Ipswich, was made high Steward of the same Town: after whose decease, the same common counsel, by their election, surrogated into the same place, the right honourable the L. Hunsdon, late L. Chamberlain: the right honourable Sir Christopher Hatton, L. Chancellor of England, by the Townsmen of Cambridg: was chosen to be high steward for the town of Cambridge. The right honourable the old Earl of Arundel; & after him the right honourable Earl of Lincoln; and after his death, the right honourable, the Lord High Admiral of England, now Earl of Nottingham, by the Boroughmaisters of the Town of Gildforde, was elected to be high steward of the Town of Gildeford; Of all which honourable persons, and of all other their Peers, chosen in other places of the Kingdom, by the same means, to the like offices, there is great reason, & just cause for the reverend Bb. to carry a more reverend estimation towards than, then to burden them as ambitious persons, to have sought their places, at the hands of men affected, & wanting right judgement. As for any other offices of credit, dignity, charge, and government in the common weal, now remaining in the choice of the commons: it may easily be proved, that the common people in sundry places, have bend, and opposed themselves, against ambitious persons, who by sinister, & indirect means, have hunted for preferrment at their hands.  
And what if it can not be gaynesaid, but that some public officers chosen by public applause of the people, have corruptly behaved themselves, in their charges, and have not so equally, and indifferently distributed justice, to all degrees, as it became them: yet this their misdemeanour can no more justly be laid as a fault, nor any more disgrace, or discountenance the ancient and commendable form, and manner of election, than the hypocrisy, or counterfeit zeal, of an evil man ordained by the Bishop to be a Minister, can be imputed unto his letters of orders or manner of ordination. Besides if none be able to prove, that the choice of the Knights 
Knights of the Shires & other officers chosen by the people without trouble to the state.  of our Shires, Coroners of the Counties, Verderers of the King's forests, resting in the free voices, and consents of the freeholders; that the nomination of the high Constables being in the disposition of the justices of peace, at their quarter sessions; that the choice of our peti-Conestables, third boroughs, tithing men, Church wardens, Wardens for the high ways, overseers for the poor, side men & such like, remaining altogether in the free election of the suitors to courts, leets and law days, and of the inhabitants, & Parishioners of every Village, Hamlet, or tithing, have been troublesome to the lieutenants of the Shires, to the Stewards of our Courts, to the Lords of our liberties, nor to the Ordinaries of the Dioceses: If (I say) there be not any one man able to bring forth some few persons, for many years passed, by whom the Officers and Magistrates of the Queen's peace, have been sued unto, and importuned, for the pacification of any strife, contention, or debate, of any busy head, or ambitious person, raised among the people, about the choice of any one of these Officers; then (I say) it is meet, and it importeth the Lords Bishops very deeply, that for ever hereafter they be silent, and never any more utter so vile a slander, against so Noble a people, as are the people of England: viz. that upon affection, and want of right judgement, they will easily be led by ambitious persons to prefer unworthy persons unto all Offices of gain or dignity. Or that this nation 
Pag. 8.  of England, upon light causes, is more inclined to broil, and trouble then any other.  
And to speak the truth (as daily experience teacheth us) what fear of trouble 
No fear of trouble about the choice of an ecclesiastical Officer.  is there likely any way to ensue by reason of dissension, & ambition among the people in the choice of an ecclesiastical Officer, when most of the people, shall rather shun and eschew, then long or desire to bear any ecclesiastical office? The common people among whom I dwell use oftentimes many delays, yea they procure what favour & friendship they can, not to be appointed, to any the inferior offices before specified: And why do they so, but because those offices be full of bodily care, and trouble? And is there then any Christian, knowing, how the whole soul, mind, and spirit of a man is altogether to be employed in the discharged of a spiritual function, that will dissentiously and ambitiously seek to be chosen an Elder?  
The Admonitor telleth us, that men 
Pag. 79.  by experience know that many parishes upon some private respect, do send their letters of earnest commendation for very unfit, and unable persons, insinuating thereby what an inconvenience might follow, if Parishes had the whole direction, and order to sound out, who were fit and able persons. But as this fancy was never yet by any of sound judgement on our behalf, so much as once thought, much less insisted upon: so may it please the reverend Bishops to be advertised, that the meanest and simplest Parishioner, among a thousand, can quickly retort this reason against their Lo. viz. that no parishes by letters of commendation, can commend unto any Bishop, any person, as an able and fit man, unto any particular parish or special charge: unless the same, or some other Bishop have formerly ordained him, and approved him to be a fit and able person for every place. And how then were it possible if the choice of having one, to be their Pastor, were wholly in the hands of a parish, that the same parish could choose any worse men, any more ignorant, and unlearned men, than their Ll. have commended unto us. For have they not chosen, sent, & commended such unto us as know not a be from a battle door, as uneath know to read English, and as know not the lords prayer from the Articles of faith: Of which sort of Ministers, 
Ministers sent unto the people, which know not a b. from a battle door.  the Parson of Haskam now living a chaplain in Winton-diocesse may be produced for a witness omni exceptione maior. For thus much is to be proved from the report of a good and religious Knight dwelling within that Diocese, that upon a time in the presence, & at the instant request of the said Knight, when a protestant Bishop of the same 
The person of Haskams' answer to the Bishop of Wincester  Diocese deceased, had demanded of the new Parson of Haskam, which was the first Petition of the lords prayer, the said Parson, after he had a pretty space paused and gazed towards heaven, at length made this answer, viz: I believe in God the Father Almighty, at which answer the Knight merely smoyling, I told you my Lord, quoth the Knight, what a profound Clerk your Lordship should find this fellow. Well how unclerkly, and how unprofoundly soever this clerk then answered, and albeit at that present, he could not obtain the institution, which he came for, to that benefice (for the good Bishop hated such gross ignorance), yet this Clerk afterwards, by the corruption of the same Bishop's Chancellor, was instituted into the same benefice, and to this day possesseth it quietly, though he can hardly read English to the understanding of his people. I could have informed him also of many other such Clerks resiant and beneficed in that Diocese: and namely of the Vicar of W: who upon an holy day, in steed of preaching the Word 
Fables read in the church  which he could not, or in reading of Homilies which he would not, (to terrify his Parishioners with the judgements of God, & to move them unto repentance) solemnly read and published a contrefaict fable out of a little Pamphlet, entitled, Strange news out of Calabria; pretended to be prognosticated by M. john D●leta. Of these & of a number of such able & skilful Clerks & chaplains; my Lords of the Clergy may be informed. And therefore on the behoof, and in the defence 
If the people had choice of their Pastors, they would provide better than the bishops send them.  of the common people of England, I am to testify and to protest unto their Lordships, that by the mercifulness and goodness of our God, we are not yet become so ignorant, rude, & barbarous, as that we would admit such manner of Clerks & chaplains, to have the cure of our souls, in case, it laid in our power to choose, and refuse out own Pastors. No, no, our souls, and the souls of our wives, children and families should be more dear, and more precious in our eyes, then that carelessly we would hazard, all our birthrights, upon the skill & ability of such a mess of hirelings, and idoll-sheapheards. And surely me thinks it standeth greatly with the charity of our Lord Bishops to conceive the commons, to have so much natural understanding, as not to choose a cobbler, when they want a carpenter; nor to retain a loiterer in am of a labourer; nor to hire a sleeper, in steed of a watchman. But (alas) be it, that the poor commons of England, were thus wretched 
Though the common people be not able to discern of Pastors, yet the Nobles are able.  and thus bewitched; yea be it, that they were thus desperate and besides themselves: should therefore the Nobles and Peres of the Realm, be as profane, as impious, and as heathenish as they? Are the great men also unworthy, unable, & unfit to discern between night and day, between light and darkness? Can they also put no difference between good and evil, between a blind guide, and him that hath his eyesight? or have they no better stomach, then to cast up Mithridate, and to digest hemlock? will they also choose them Captains from among Corvysers? and will they call shepherds from among swineheards? or will they take them Pastors from among peddlers? or will my Lords of the Clergy charge them to be those ambitious persons, to work the Commons, (for their private respect) to the choice of unworthy men? or will they (being themselves under his Majesty, the worthies of the land) and chief guides and leaders of men in peace & in war upon earth, choose the scum, the refuse, & the baggage of the land, to guide their own souls to hell? For to heaven by the labour and industry of such idol ministers (as whose lips preserve no knowledge) they can never be brought. A great part of the common people (saith he) are backwardly affected towards 
The common people accused to be backwardly affected to religion.  the truth of Religion: from which backwardness he draweth an argument against the allowance of the Pastors by the people. But (alas) is there any merveyle, that the common people (for the most part) be backwardly affected? For how is it possible, that they should step 
The backwardness of the people proceedeth from the backwardness of their guides.  one foot forward, when either their guides stand still, or go not at all, or at least run fromward? or can the common people become good scholars in the school of Christ, & learn to know the truth of his religion, when their Masters and Tutors (whom my Ll. of the Clergy have begotten, provided, & thrust upon them) be unlearned and irreligious dullards? What? Can truth spring from error? or can light arise out of darkness? Do men pluck, or pull corn, from a dead stalk, or a full ear from a dead root? Can a Vintner draw wine out of an empty casque? Or doth a Baker power meal out of a bottomless bag? If then the common people be foolish and ignorant, if they do err, & be irreligious, they may justly challenge the Lords spiritual of unkindness, and want of love: not because they have sent Ambassadors unto them as the Gibeonites sent unto josua, with old sacks, & old bottles, with old shoes and old raiment; with provision of bread dried, and mouled: but because they have sent them such Ambassadors, as have had no sacks, no bottles, no shoes, no raiment, yea and no manner of bread at all. All which notwithstanding, the Admonitor (by the backwardness of the people) laboureth 
Pag. 116.  mightily to acquit the Lord Bb. laying to the people's charge, that this fault hath not happened for want of teaching by the Ministers, but for want of profiting by the people. The scripture (saith he) in no place teacheth us, that the offences and faults of the Ministers, are always the only cause, why the word of God doth not take place in men's hearts. It is commonly, and almost always imputed to the waywardness, unthankfulness, and obstinacy of the people that hear it. But (alas) who ever fancied that the faults of the Ministers of God, were the only cause, why the word of God, preached by them, did not enter into the hearts of men? Where the Minister sincerely preacheth the Word of God, if there the people do not worthily embrace the same, the people are only in blame and not the Minister, no, though he may have many faults: for when they teach the truth, the people are bound to do as they say, 
Mat. 23. 2. 3  and not to do as they do, because they say and do not. But the complaint that hath been, & is still made, is this: namely, that the people generally in most places of the Land, and for the most part, have no seed at all sown, for want of husbandmen; that the people can not be hearvested, for lack of labourers; that the people could bring forth no fruit, because they were not eared & ploughed; & that the people could not hear. What? for want of their own ears? no, but for want of the Priests lips, which should have preserved and taught knowledge. and therefore this general backwardness and unfruitfulness of the people in religion, must still light upon such as have been the occasion that there have been so few drivers to hayte them on, and to whistle them forward. No? why this Realm of England (as saith the Admo.) never had so many learned men, nor of 
Pag. 140.  so excellent gifts, in delivering the word of God; it is the greatest ornament, that ever this Church had; for my part (saith he) surely I do reverence, and merveile at the singular gifts of God, that I see in many. And do my Lords of the Clergy merveyle in deed of so great a number 
Men of excellent gifts and men of no gifts, are unequally marched in the ministery of the Gospel.  of excellent men, and of so singular gifts in them? And should not then also the people merveyle beyond merveyle, that some of the Lords spiritual, for small matters, & of so little importance, should put to silence, many of the chiefest of many excellent and learned men? Nay may not the people be astonished at the little love of some of the Bishops, when as upon displeasure conceived against many excellent & learned men, their Lordships suffer, the people to starve, and famish for want of food, rather than those learned and excellent men should break unto them, the bread of life? But be it granted that many excellent men's mouths be not yet stopped, or if they have been stopped, they are now opened again; what is this to that, that they have no more learned men, 
The use of an hireling.  or that, they have any hirelings at all? For to what use serveth an hireling, but first to rob, to spoil, and to kill, & afterwards to trust to his heels, to trudge, and to run away? As for that, that many learned and excellent men, in many places of the land do still feed the 
The number of excellent Ministers in the ministery, is small, in comparison of unlearned Ministers.  people, they may be said (in respect of the people vn●ed) to be an hand-full, to an house-full or as an inch to an elle. Besides how are the people fed in many places by some of these many learned men? is not one of them allotted (by a licence in a box) to break bread unto twenty or forty thousand people? What? by themselves in one place sitting round and close together? Nay but in a 1000 and more Parishes distant far and wide a sunder, and that at sundry times, one time long after an other: and what a strange and new kind of feeding call ye that? Is it not as if a victualler, should provide one meals meat for a company at London, and another meals meat for a company at Lincoln, and another meals meat for a company at Exeter, and another meals meat for a company at Bristol, to feed his guests until he had ridden from coast to coast 
The manner of diet set before the people, by such Ministers as wander from place to place.  to provide new viand? And yet this is the common manner of Diet, and the common manner of food prepared and set before the souls of the people. For many of these learned Preachers, gallop from place to place, and trot from Parish to Parish, and give unto the people at one time bread, half baked, at another time, beer half brewed; sometimes either meat twice sodden, or half raw; and many times drink, both dead, sour, & wallowish. And how then is it possible, that the souls of the people should prosper, wax strong, and be pliable in going forward in the truth of Religion, they being so thinly dieted, and entertained with so small cost. But to let these gallopers pass, we will conclude this point: and thus we say, that the backwardness of the people in the truth of religion (how backward so ever they be, & how soever the same backwardness may happen) can be no good plea in bar to take from the people of God, their right, interest, and freedom, from the allowance and approbation of their Pastor. As for that vain and ridiculous gibe, whether 
Answer to the abstract.  all (hand over head) men & boys, women and girls, young and old, etc. should give their consents, to this fond gibe, I answer, that there is no such vanity of vanities intended. For when we say, that the people of every Parish, aught to choose and elect their Pastor, we mean not that the election should solely be committed to the multitude, but we intend only that the chief Fathers, Ancients, and Governors of the Parish in the name of the whole should approve the choice made by the holy ministery: wherein we follow the example of the ancient people of God, whose affairs were committed to the chief Fathers sitting in the gate.  
Where the Admonitour hath pretended 
Pag. 80.  that it is impossible to be brought to pass, which (as he saith) is most of all pretended for the common manner of election, that the people may know their 
The people may know a man to be a fit minister though he be not brought up among them.  Minister, and thereby have the better liking of him, unless every Parish shall have within itself, a School or College, where those should be brought up that shallbe preferred to the ministery amongst them: This (I say) is an other vanity of vanities, & a vexation of spirit without all mean or measure, yea it is an asseveration void of all sense and soberness. For is it not possible for a Lord Bishop, to know the equities, condition, and behaviour of a man fit to be retained for his Secretary or Gentleman-usher, unless the same party be brought up, in some School or College within his own house? Or is it impossible for his Lordship to know the education, life, learning, gifts of utterance, and aptness to teach, of a man, & so to have the better liking of him, to make him a Minister, unless within his Parish, there be a School or College, wherein such as are to be preferred, to the ministery be brought up? If then without having any School or College, within his own house, or within his own Parish, for the bringing up, of such as are received, by a Lord Bishop either to his private service, or to the public ministery; his Lordship may know, & so have the better liking of them, whom he would prefer. How then followeth it, to be impossible, that the people should know their Minister, and so have the better liking of him, unless every Parish had in itself a School or College, where those should be brought up that should be preferred to the Ministry amongst them? What? is one tongue, of one man alone able to inquire and learn the manners of many men to be ordained and placed Ministers in many places, and are many tongues, of many men not able to inquire and learn the conversation of one man to be placed in one place? or have the eyes & ears of one man, sight quick enough, and hearing good enough, to hear & to see into the education & life of all the Ministers, within all the parishes of one whole diocese? & are all the ears and eyes of many men, deaf and dim to hear and to 〈◊〉, into the life and education, of one Minister, in one Parish? If the Parish of Maries in Cambrige, or the Parish of All-hollowes in Oxford, were destitute of an able, and preaching Minister, might not the people of the first know Master Doctor Overall, & have the better liking of him; and might not the people of the second, know Master Doctor Reynolds, and have the better liking of him to be their Pastor, unless Corpus Christi College in Oxford stood in All-hollowes Parish, or Katherine Herle in Cambrige stand in Mary's Parish? or did the Dean and Chapter, the Clerks and people of Lincoln and Wincester, therefore know H. C. and thereby had they the better liking of him to choose him first Bishop of Lincoln, and secondly Bishop of Wincester, because he was brought up in some School or College in any of the Parishes of Lincoln and Wincester? I trow, himself, if he were now living, would not so affirm: and what then should eale the Gentlemen of the Temple, or the people of the Parish of Bow in London, that they may not know, & thereby have the better liking of M. Travers, & M. Barber to be their Ministers, albeit neither of the twain, were brought up in any School or College, in, or about the Temple, or Parish of Bow? For who knoweth not, that there be means enough, & enough to know a man within and without, and to have a good opinion & liking of him, though the same man be not brought up in any School or College amongst them? Wherefore his argument of (cannot possibly be brought to pass) may pass, and repass as the only stream of an humorous passion. Neither may the people in this 
The people would not do, as the Ordinaries use to do, first choose Ministers & then set them to school.  case do as the Ordinaries use to do. For the Ordinaries first ordain Ministers; secondly, they set them to school, and give them their tasques, that by their Archdeacon's they may know, how they profit; and lastly they have the better liking of them because they be branded with their own stamp. But the people (I say) may not, ne yet would they, thus ungainly set the cart, before the horse. But they would use all good and circumspect care and diligence, first to know them, secondly upon just and equal cause, to like them, and lastly, upon their liking, to allow and approve them. For how should a man allow any thing, before he like it, or how should he like it before he know it, or how should he know it, before he had seen, heard, or inquired after it? And hereupon also his two asseverations next ensuing, fall to 
Pag. ●0. If the people were admitted, to the election of their Minister they should be better acquainted with him, than now they be  the ground. For albeit he affirm, that if this manner of election were admitted, the people (nevertheless) should have as little acquaintance with their Ministers as now they have: albeit (I say) he thus thought, yet nevertheless his (ipse opinatus sum) I am of opinion, is no (ipse dixit) unto me. No, I aver and hold the contrary to be true, and therefore his opinion (in this case) to be erroneous. For this can not be denied, that there is not any one man, or woman amongst forty, in any one Parish amongst forty, that can tell, that ever he, or she, did see, or hear, of the Minister appointed, and sent by the ordinary, to be Pa●son or Vicar of the Parish Church vacant, before such time, as he did hear, or see, the Parish Clerk to trudge with the Church-door keys, to let in the Sextin, to ring the bell, for the said Parson, or Vicar's induction, and real possession.  
And if the people of every Parish had their consents in the choice and approbation of their Minister, were it possible to have less acquaintance with him then this? For we avow that the people ought not to give their consents unto any Pastor, before they have seen him, before they have heard him divide the word, before they have procured a good testimony of his gifts, from those who by the word have interest to approve him; and lastly before they have gotten sufficient notice of his condition, estate, conversation, birth, education and life. Wherefore these things being carefully and diligently searched into, not by one, but by many; not for a fee, but of duty; not for reward, but for conscience; not for one day, but for many days; I trust it will not still be holden for an oracle, that the people should have as little acquaintance with their Ministers as now they have.  
As for the second point, that far 
No partial suits can follow the election of Ministers by the people.  greater occasions of partial suits should follow this manner of common election, whereof we speak, than now there is: this is also (I say) not true; nay that far l●sse occasion of partial suits, should follow, then now there is, this (I say) is true. For by this means all partial suits now happening, may either be extinguished, or with less charges, pursued, then now they be. For there can be no suits, much less can there be any partial suits, when neither plaintiff, nor defendant may be found, & where also there can lie no writ, nor any action be commenced. For who be the parties between whom these partial suits should arise? Be there many Ministers, who for one place, and at one time, are found meet for the same? And do they sue and contend one against another, which of them should possess the place? or should these so many partial suits, consist between the inhabitants of one Parish; one part leaning to one side, and another part cleaving to the other side? Touching the Ministers, we affirm that none may or aught to sue or solicit any man's voice, directly or indirectly, much less to labour for a place of ministery. And therefore, we desire by an irrevocable law (according to the manner of the Medes and Persians) to have it enacted, That as well every procurer, and labourer for a voice, as also every suitor, and solicitor for a place of ministery, be adjudged ipso facto, incapable for ever of the same place. For the second, touching partial suits to arise between the 
No occasion of partial suits about election, between parishioners.  Parishioners, about the election of their Pastor, these suits, for aught I yet conceive, (wherein I grant I may err and conceive too little) may easilier be dispatched, then be once begun. Parishioners ordinarily in the Country, sue not, ne molest one the other for pleasure, but for profit; they are not so lavish of their purses, nor so careless of their thrifts, as to jangle in vain, when before hand, they know there is no hope of gain. And in deed what advantage, or what pleasure should Ancients divided against Ancients, and chief men distracted against chief men in a Parish, about the election of a Minister, reap by such a division, and distraction? Besides, by our daily experience, we have learned, that very rarely, or not at all about elections, made by the people of any officers, either in the Country or in Cities and Towns, any variance or partial suits have been stirred, between the Electors. For though some times perhaps they vary in their judgements one from another, yet rest they more wise & provident, then to impair their own estate, to advance an other man's reputation. And if in former times there hath no occasion of partial suits (touching public Officers in the common weal) 
No partial suits can be among parishioners, when one only is propounded to be chosen by them.  fallen out between the people, when out of a multitude they have chosen one: much less can there be any occasion of partial suits, if only there remain but one, to be chosen to be a Church-Officer. For if all the ancients agree to choose that one, then is all the suit (about him) ended: and if the greater part disagree, yet this their disagreement can be no occasion to breed and nourish suit and contention. And why? first because no other cause by the greater part ought to be alleged, to withdraw their consent, but only such a cause as the law should precisely allow, in the same case, to be a just cause: Secondly because this just cause before the day of election, aught to be made known unto the Magistrate, and by him to be approved; so that if the greater part upon the day of election shall dissent, not having before hand, alleged, and provided a just cause of their dislike, the voices of the lesser part (as being supposed the better part) shall prevail, confirm and make good the election. Oh! here is much (said my Lords) spoken of a choice, & election to be made by the Ministers & people, by proofs to be made before the Magistrate, but here is not any one word spoken, or any mention made of the Patron, of the Bishop, or of the Archdeacon; of presentation, institution, or induction. And what an alteration, and innovation would that be, and what a dangerous attempt were it, to alter laws settled; and that patrons should be kerbed, and that Bishops and Archdeacon's should not meddle in these businesses any more? Well then to wipe away as much as in me lieth, this cavillous reproach, & obloquy from the servants of God, who are challenged to be new-fangled, giddy-headed, & fanatical spirits, strange innovators, and desirers of perilous alterations: to wipe away (I say) this slander, If it may please the King, with his 
The form of Church policy now in practice by the Bishops, & the platform of Church policy. desired to be planted by Pastors, compared together.  Princely wisdom to confer, the form of policy now in use, and practise, touching ordinations, presentations, institutions, and inductions, by Bb. patrons & Archdeacon's, with the manner of that platform of Discipline (concerning the substance of these things) which is propounded. And if the Propounders prefer but the commandment of God, before the traditions of men; but the King's Crown, before the Bishop's miters; but a feast of fat things, yea of fat things full of marrow, before lean spits and empty platters; but a feast of wines, yea of wines fined and purified, before sour & untoothsome whey: I hope his Majesty will graciously vouchsafe so to protect the propounders (being his faithful, loving and obedient subjects) as that hereafter they shall not be charged with any more so unjust and scandalous imputations.  
The practice and policy then now in use, is after this and this manner: The Bishop oftentimes at his pleasure, (beside the law, nay rather against the express letter of the law, and public Canons of the Church) not only ordaineth Ministers alone, without assistants of such number of Ministers, as is required; but he also ordaineth them (for the most part) when there is no place of ministration 
Inconveniences of bishoply ordination are these, pestering of the church's with unlearned Ministers. Unlawful gain for letters of orders the breach of many good laws.  void. Now the buds, which (to the grief of many godly men, and to the obloquy of the Professors of the gospel) have sprung from this manner of ordination, have been these, viz: The public breach of many good laws; the pestering of the Church with multitudes of unable Ministers, together with much unlawful gain (by immeasurable exaction of money) for letters of orders. For it can not be denied, but the bishops Secretary, Gentl. usher, groom of his chamber, Butler, Pantler, Porter, and other the Bb. menials, (besides his own & his Registers fees, & his Clerk for expedition) do usually (all, or most of them) challenge & receive fees, (some more, some less) before the poor Minister with his box of orders can be suffered to pass by the Porter's lodge: these are the fruits of the Bb. sole ordination. The suits which have grown & daily do grow, by the patrons presentation 
Suits between the Patron & the Bishop.  to the Bb. have been and are these, Sometime contention & suit in law, between the Patron and Bishop, for disallowing the patrons Clerk, for non ability, or as being criminous. Sometime, if two patrons pretend right of patronage, if one of their Clerks be instituted, & the other rejected (as necessarily it must 
Suits between Clerk and Clerk.  come to pass, for one wife can have but one husband) then followeth suit at law, between the Clerk refused, and the Clerk admitted, wherein also the B. is made a party by a writ of quare impedit: 
Suits between the Bishop and the Clerk.  sometime suit falleth out between the Clerk presented, and the Bb. when the Clerk calleth the Bb. (by a double quarrel) before the Archb. for not granting institution: and sometime also likewise debate is moved, & law attempted, between the Clerk instituted, and the 
Suits between the Clerk and Archdeacon  Archdeacon, who (knowing the church not to be vacant) refuseth to execute the Bb. inductorie mandat. For many times upon pretence that the Church standeth void (being in deed full) the Patron, upon suggestion granteth a presentation, and the Bb. also institution; which if the Archdeacon refuse to execute, than (besides the discord between the Bb. & the Archdeacon, for contempt of the Bishops mandat) he, who pretendeth title by vacancy, 
Suits between the Bishop and the Archdeacon.  thinking to have right, though a real incombent be in possession, bringeth their two titles to be tried in the ecclesiastical Court: but before the matter can be finally sentemced by that Court; many foul riots, breaches of the King's peace, & unlawful assemblies, upon entries 
Riots and breaches of the kings Peace.  and keeping possessions do ensue: as was well enough lately known in the case between Rogers, and Baker, for the title to the Parsonage of Barby in the County of Northampton.  
Howbeit, let it be supposed that none of these variances in law fall out between the Bb. and the Patron, between the Bb. and the Clerk, between the B. and the Archd. between the Clerk & the Archd. and between Clerk & Clerk: the exaction (notwithstanding) of unlawful gain, for fees of letters of institution, & fees usually payable to the Bb. his Officers, as aforesaid; for fees of the Archd. induction; his Register; his Clerk, & his Apparators fees: the unconscionable exaction 
Unlawful fees for letters of institution, etc.  (I say) of these unreasonable fees, may seem to be a conscionable motive, to cause better things than these, without danger, to be attempted, & innovated. And yet these are vot all the bad eventes that happen, and fall out upon the presentation, institution, and induction now used. But by the interest whereby the Bb. challengeth to be custos Ecclesiarum, there happen as bad, if not worse than these. For there is no sooner a Church void, but a post is sent in all haste, with 
Unlawful fees for letters of sequestration.  letters of sequestration, to sequester the fruits, to the use of the next incumbent. Which next incumbent, for the great care taken to preserve the fruits to his use, (before he can obtain to be put in real possession) must pay x. shill. or a mark, or more, for those letters of sequestration, with as much more also for letters (so called) of relaxation; besides ij. pennies, iij. pen. or iiij. pennies a mile for portage to the Summoner. And from hence is the Patron (as I take it) very much injuried. For he being (as it appeareth) by the statut of 25. of King. E. 3. Lord & Avower of the benefice, aught to have the custody and possession thereof during the vacancy. Besides many times wilful perjuries are committed by the Clerk, and 
Perjury by the Clerk, and robbery by the Patron.  many times sacrilegious robberies are perpetrated by the Patron. The Clerk (when he sweareth that neither directly, nor indirectly, any compact, promise, band, or agreement hath been made or passed by him, for him, or in his name to the Patron); many times for sweareth himself. And if the Clerk be presented to a Vicarage, than the Bishop (if he 
Every Vicar sweareth or aught to swear to be resident.  be faithful to the law) sweareth him to be resident upon the same Church: Which oath (notwithstanding) is afterwards broken; when as the same Vicar, accepting an other benefice (and retaining withal the former by purchase of a dispensation) betaketh himself to be resident upon his second benefice, and so by nonresidence from his first Vicarage, committeth perjury. Touching the Patron's robbery, thus it is, and thus 
patrons robbery.  many times hath it fallen out. The Patron, when (at the hands of two, three, or more such perjured Clerks) he hath (time out of mind) possessed, the mansion house, or gleebe-lande of the Parsonage; finally (in time) spoilt the Church both of the house, and glebelande: the glebe-land being often intermingled with his own enclosed grounds, he possesseth them as his own inheritance; and in steed of the Parsonage house, either he buildeth an other new, or else hireth some cottage or farmhouse for the Parson and his successors to inhabit in. These abuses (we see) are many, and yet besides these continuing at this day in the government established, there remaineth 
Chopping of benefices despensations, etc.  others, as foul, & as gross as any of the rest: which is the too too inordinate, and licentious chopping and changing of churches from Minister to Minister; for dispensations, cōmend●mes, perinde vares, pluralities, & non residencies: wherein not the people to be taught, but their own backs and bellies to be clothed and fed, is wholly respected. Now then that this manner of government, wherein the afore specified, and the like discommodities daily fall out, under colour of not diminishing the King's prerogative, of not altering laws settled, of not attempting dangerous innovations, & of the preserving of the right of patrons, Bb. and Archd. should still be continued without any mention or remembrance to be once had, of their discontinuance, especially in the time of peace, & under a Christian Magistrate, and in a state (as he sayeth) reform; we humbly leave to the wise, and mature deliberation of our most Christian King, and State in parliament. And we most humbly beseech the King & State, that indifferently, freely, and largely, it may be argued, 
Supplication to the King and State in parliament.  heard, and examined; whether it be possible, that the tenth part of these, or any other the like disorders, corruptions, & grievances, can possibly fall out in the church, by that platform of Discipline, which is required to be planted. And to the end that the King's Majesty, and the State, might rightly and perfectly, be 
Petition, ordination, etc. of Ministers or Pastors, how the same may be made without Bb. or Archdeacon's, not disagree able to diverse laws already settled.  informed and resolved of those points, whereof we now speak, viz: of the petition, ordination, election, presentation and admittance of every Parochial Pastor, to any church with cure of souls; how the same may stand, and not be disagreeable to divers laws already settled, and in force; it is requisite that the substance of these things, in this place be entreated of. wherein against the base office, & mean person of the Archdeacon, we oppose the Royal office, & most excellent person of the King: against the immoderate office, and stately person of one lordly Bishop; we oppose the meek and temperate carriage of a Senate, or Presbytery, of many wise, learned, and grave Ministers, together with a Reverend assembly of the Ancients, and chief Fathers of every Church destitute of a Pastor. As for the patrons right, we are so far from diminishing any jot of the true right which by laws settled he ought to have, as that he shall quietly possess his interest, and that with less trouble and expense, yea and with greater privilege than he did before. Thus therefore touching the office and person of the King, the duty of the Presbytery & people, the right of the Patron, and the person of the Minister to be ordained, thus and thus we say, and thus and thus (as we think) may our sayings well stand with laws settled.  
By an Act primo Eliz. c. 1. the King hath full power and authority, by letters patents under the great seal of England, when, and as often as need shall require, as he shall think meet and convenient, and for such and so long time as shall please his H. to assign, name, & authorize, such person, or persons, being natural born subjects, as his Majesty shall think meet, to exercise, use, occupy, & execut, under his H. all manner of jurisdictions, privileges, and pre-eminences, in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual, or ecclesiastical jurisdiction, within this Realm of England. Again, by the book of ordaining Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, it is prescribed, that the Bishop with their 
The Bb. & Priests must lay on their hands.  Priests, shall lay their hands severally upon the heads of every one that receiveth Orders; that every one to be made a Minister, must be of virtuous conversation, and without crime, sufficiently instructed in the holy Scriptures; a man meet to exercise his ministery duly; that he must be called, tried, and examined; that he must be presented by the Archd. and be made openly in the face of the Church, with prayer to God, and exhortation to the people. And in a statute made 21. of King H. 8 it is affirmed, That a Bishop must have six 
The Bishops must use six chaplains at giving of orders.  chaplains, at giving of orders. Besides, by an ancient and lowable custom, the Parishes and Parish Churches, within every Archdeaconry, remain unto this day, distributed into certain Deaneries; 
Every Archdeacon divided into Deaneries.  among the Ministers of which Deaneries, the Parson or Vicar of the ancientest Church, commonly called the Mother Church of the deanery, (unless by consent some other be chosen by the Ministers themselves) hath the first place, and is the chief director, and moderator of whatsoever things are propounded in their synodal meeting; which Minister also is called Archipresbiter or Decanus curalis, according to the appellation of the chief Minister, of the mother, or chief church of that Diocese, who is called Archipresbiter or Decanus cathedarlis: so that unto this day these Ministers meeting at the Archdeacon's visitations once in a year at the least, there remaineth in the Church of England, a certain image or shadow of the true, ancient, & Apostolical conferences, and meetings. Wherefore from these laws, & from this ancient manner of the meetings of Ministers, and of having one principal and chief moderator amongst them; according to the Apostolical practice, and usage of the primitive church, thus already settled in the church of England, we humbly leave it to be considered by the King's Majesty.  
First, whether it were not meet and convenient for his Highness by his letters patents under the great Seal of 
A Minister to be ordained by the Bishops, and a company of Ministers at the King's commandment.  England, to assign, name, & authorize, the Bishops & six or more Ministers within every deanery continually resiant upon their benefices, and diligently teaching in their charge, to use and execute all manner of jurisdiction, privilege, and pre-eminence, concerning any spiritual ordination, election, or institution of Ministers to be placed in the Parochial Churches, or other places with cure of souls, within.  
secondly, when any Parish Church or other place with cure of souls shallbe void, whether it were not meet & convenient, that the ancients and chief Fathers of that place, within a time to be limited for that purpose, should intimate the same vacancy unto the office 
Vacancy of a benefice to be intimated to the king's office.  of the King's civil Officer appointed for that Shire or Diocese: to the end the same Officer by authority from the King, might command in the King's name, the Bishop and other Ministers, to elect, and ordain, and the people of the same place to approve & allow of some able and godly person, to succ●ede in the Church.  
Thirdly, the Patron, (if the same be 
A lay patron, instead of varying his Clerck may present, two Clerks at one time.  a common and lay person having now liberty to vary his Clerk, if he be found unable) whether it were not meet and convenient, (to avoid all manner of varying) that, within the time prefixed, he should nominate at one time two Clerks to be taken out of the Universities or other Schools, and Nurseries or of the Prophets, & that the same nomination be made unto the Bishop and the said six Ministers, to the end that both the Clerks being tried and examined by them, the abler of the two might be preferred to that charge. And of this manner of presenting two Clerks by the Patron, we have a precedent not much unlike, in the statute for nomination of Suffragans. By which act every Archbishop and Bishop, desiring to have a Suffragan, hath liberty to name, and present unto the King two honest and discrete spiritual persons, etc. that the King may give to one such of the said two spiritual persons, as shall please his Majesty, the title, name, style and dignity of a Suffragan.  
Fourthly, the Bb. and Presbyters having thus, upon trial and examination, 
A minister found able for gifts, is to be sent to the parish, that his life may be examined and to have the consent of the people.  found one of the patrons Clerks, to be a fit and able man, to take upon him the execution of the ministry in that Church; whether it were not then meet & convenient, that by them he should forthwith be sent to the same Church, aswell to acquaint the people with their judgement and approbation, of his gifts and ability to teach, as also that, for a time, he should converse & abide amongst them, to the end his life, manners, and behaviour, might be seen into, & inquired after, by their careful endeavours?  
fiftly, (the people within a time to be perfixed, not making and proving before the Magistrate, any just exception against his life, manners and conversations), whether it were not then meet, and convenient, that the Bishop with six other Ministers or more of the same deanery, authorized by the King, as aforesaid, 
A man allowed for gifts and conversation, is to be ordained, with prayer fasting & laying on of hands.  under some pain, and within a certain time, should be bound (in the presence of the Elders and people, and in the same Church, with fasting, prayer, and laying on of hands) to ordain and dedicate him to the ministery, and Pastoral charge of that Church.  
Lastly, these things being thus finished, whether it were not then meet & 
A Minister, to be inducted, into the Church, by the Kings writ.  convenient that the Bishops with the other Ministers, and some of the chief of the people, should give the party ordained, a testimonial under their hands, or under some authentical seal, to certify the King's officer of the execution of his writ; and that the Patron also should present the same person to the King's officer, humbly praying the same officer, by authority to be derived from the King, to cause him by some other writ, to be confirmed, and really inducted, into the possession of the same Church, and into the mansion-house, glebe-land, and other profits Ecclesiastical to the same appertaining.  
Oh! but this were a strange kind of innovation, and a dangerous attempt to 
To execute the premises no dangerous attempt.  alter laws settled, especially in a settled estate of the Church. Well, well, let my Lords of the Clergy sing this song, and pipe this melody at their pleasure. How be it for as much as this platform, in some part thereof hath already been agreed upon by diverse Committees in parliament; in other some part thereof, by laws already settled, aught to have been practised; and that in other some part thereof is an advancement of the King's authority, which last part also is lively pourtraicted out unto us, by precedents from the Archbishop, and Bishop themselves, we shall through the grace of God, and favour of the King, be able well enough, quite and clean to wipe away all the spots of this calumniation. And first, touching the intimation, and supplication to be made unto the King, 
Petition and intimation to the King, agreeable to laws settled.  that his H. would be pleased to command every Minister to be presented by the patron, ordained by the Bb. & Ministers, and elected by the people; and that the King, being certified by them of the execution of his writ, should upon their testimonial, by another public writ, cause the Clerk ordained, to be confirmed, admitted, and inducted to the real possession of the temporalities of the benefice; This manner (I say) of intimation, petition, testimonial, & admittance, in substance and effect, differeth but little from the form of the petition, nomination, 
25. H. 8. c.  election, investiture, confirmation, and consecration of the Archbb. and Bb. of this Realm. For when soever the Church of Canterbury, Winton, or other bishops sea becometh destitute of a Pastor, doth not the Dean and Chapter of the same sea, intimate unto the King their want of a B. & doth not the same Dean and Chapter, humbly supplicate his majesties favour and licence, to elect an other? And doth not the King upon their supplication, by letters patents under his great Seal, favourably grant their petition; willing them, ut talem eligant in Episcopum & Pastorem, qui Deo devotus, & Ecclesiae suae necessarius, nobisque & regno nostro utilis & fidelis existat? And with the same letters patents, doth not the King send a letter missive, containing the name and commendation of the person to be elected? After the election finished, doth not the Dean and Chapter intimat the same also unto the King, and humbly again pray the King, to yield his Royal assent to the lord elected? Whereupon doth not the King again direct his letters patents of warrant to the Archb. or some other whom the King shall appoint, to perform all things, which accustomably are to be done, appertaining to his confirmation, and consecration, according to the laws and statutes of his Realm of England? Lastly, the consecration and confirmation being finished, and the Bb. having done his homage, & sworn fealty, is not the Kings writ out of the Chancery directed to the Escheator, to restore unto him, the temporalities of the same Bishopric? Yea and may not the Bishop also, if it please him, procure another writ out of the Chancery directed to his tenants, commanding them to attorn, and to take him for their Lord?  
Now then in this platform whereof mention hath been made touching the placing of a parochial Pastor (any parochial church with cure of souls being void) when it is craved that the people of the same parish, might intimate their want unto the King's officer, and that the same officer might command the Patron to present, the Ministers to ordain, and the people, according to the King's laws, to assent unto, and approve the Clerk; what other intent or meaning have we, then that the King hath as ample, and as lawful 
The King hath as large a power to command a Minister to be elected & ordained, as a Bishop, to be chosen & consecrated.  a power to command a Minister to be presented, ordained, & elected, to be a Pastor in a parochial Church, as he hath to command a Bishop to be elected, confirmed, and consecrated to an Episcopal sea? And are we not then merveylouslie giddi-headded, newfangled, and strange innovators? Again, when we desire, that the King at the humble suit of the Ministers, the Patron and the people, would be pleased, to confirm and admit the patrons Clerk, in, & to the temporalities of a benefice, what other thing is required, but that the possession of no church should be delivered unto any Minister without the King's public writ. And would not this breed a perilous stir, garboil, discord, and contention, when the Archdeacon's pretty signet, as Dagon falling down before the ark, should give place, bow down, and do reverence unto the Kings of England seal at arms.  
Oh! but in this platform, there be other dangerous innovations and alterations, not to be attempted: Yea? And what then be they? The Admonitor himself, 
The Prophets ought to be tried by the Prophets.  in his admonition holdeth: Yea Mai. Bilson, and all other supporters of the hierarchy defended, That the Clergy ought to judge of the Clergy, and that the Prophets ought to be tried, examined, and ordained, only by the Prophets, and that the spirits of the Prophets, are subject to the spirits of the Prophets. Wherein then consisteth the disagreement and variance between us and them, touching the ordination of a Prophet, by Prophets, or of a Minister by Ministers? Certes to mine understanding, there is none other matter of dissonancy in this case, but even alone this: viz. That he by these words (the spirits 
Corinth.  of the prophets are subject to the prophets) intendeth that the Spirits of many prophets, touching their trial, examination, and ordination, are subject to the spirit of one prophet, and that 
Whether the spirits of many Prophets be subject to one, or of one to many.  therefore one prophet by his own spirit, may try, examine, and ordain many Prophets: Whereas on the other side, we affirm, that one prophet according to this rule of our holy faith, is to speak, and the other prophets are to judge, and that no one prophet may try, examine, or ordain many prophets: Because from this place we gather, that the spirits of many prophets in the ordinary course of the ministery of the word, were never subjecteth in this case to the spirit of one Prophet. But in this platform there is no mention made of the King, if he be patron, neither is there any institution spoken of; and then how can any action of quare impedit, be brought, to try the right if two patrons pretend title to the Patronage: besides the Patron by this platform must fetch his clerks only from the Universities, Schools of learning, and Nurseries of the ministery, whereas now he hath liberty, to present any Clerk wheresoever or howsoever ordained: Again, strife and contention may arise in the presbytery between the Bishops and the Ministers themselves, appointed to be examiners, and ordeyners, which of the two Clerks nominated, by the Patron is most worthy to be preferred. If both the patrons Clerks, for non ability, or criminousnes, be refused, who shall then nominate, and to whom shall the election devolve? And lastly, what if the Bishop and presbytery shall disallow one for unability, which in deed is notwithstanding, of ability to teach? to all these difficulties, thus we answer.  
If the kings Majesty be Patron, to any benefice with cure of souls, because 
Touching the kings patronage.  we judge and confess him, to be a King, endowed with a rare and singular spirit of zeal, for the glory of our God, with an excellent spirit of love, for the salvation of the souls of his subjects, and to be the Nehemiah of our age, sent unto us from above, for the building of the walls, and re-edifying of the ports of the house of God, which were broken down and devoured: We for our parts doubt nothing at all, nay rather we most certainly persuade ourselves, his Highness, having once been pleased, to prescribe all wholesome & commendable laws, unto his people, will also vouchsafe, much more to prescribe laws, yea and to be a law unto himself: And that his Majesty will set this business of the Lords house, so near unto his Kingly & Christian heart, by the planting of able Ministers, in all the Churches, of his highness Patronage; as that all other Patrons, by his godly example, willbe excited readily to walk in the King's path, to wear the kings colours, and to become the kings chief favourytes in this so holy a work. And therefore touching the King's Patronages, cum Maiestas imperatoria, 
H. de ley. & fidei. 3. l. ex imperfecto.  legibus esse soluta videatur, we commend them wholly to the Kings most Christian care, providence, and fidelity.  
The Bishop's institution, and writ of quare impedit, we grant must cease: 
The Bishop's institution may cease.  but in place of institution, the election & ordination by the Presbytery succeed: and the Clerk nominated by the Patron, elected and ordained by the Presbytery; shall have idemius, ad Ecclesiam, & in Ecclesia, which in forme● times, the clerk presented by the Patron, and instituted by the Bishop, was wont to have.  
If any suit in law, hap for the right of Patronage, between two or more Patrons, 
If suit fall out between two patrons what then may be done.  pretending title to the gift of one benefice: It seemeth that this suit, might have far easier, and more speedy way of trial, by some other writ, then by the writ of quare impedit; for upon this writ many times by negligence, or unskilfulness of the Aturneyes, it falleth out, that one of the parties is driven some times to sit down by great loss, and not to have his title tried at all, only for want, of some ceremonial form, not observed in the plead of the cause: And therefore, both patrons, within the time to be limited by the King's writ, having nominated their Clerks, to the Presbytery, as heretofore they presented to the Bishop, we leave it to be considered, whether it were not meet, and convenient, that the Presbytery should wholly defer the election, & ordination, of either their Clerks, until the right of patronage were finally adjudged before the King's justices at the common law: upon which judgement passed, they might then without scruple, or impediment, proceed to the full election, & ordination, of that patrons Clerk, for whom the judgement was given. By which manner of trial, if the action might be brought in the nam● of Patron, against Patron, the Clerks should not only be freed from much obloqui, whereunto they are now subject, by prosecution of suits at law, one clerk against another, but also they should be exempted, from all expense, labour and turmoil, with which heretofore they have encumbered themselves, to the hindrance of their studies, and decay of their estates, by pursuing the patrons title, at their own charge. Neither might the occasion of suit about the right of Patronage, be any let or hindrance that the Church, in the mean time should be left as a Widow destitut of an husband. For any one of the Clerks nominated by either of the patrons, might be appointed by the Presbytery, to preach the word, and publicly to pray, until the controversy were ended. And out of the fruits also, of the same Church remaining in the custody, of one of the patrons, or sequestered by the King, to the use of the next incumbent, he might have such allowance, as were requisite for the time of his continuance in that place. And for the Sacraments, if any were of necessity to be administered, some other Minister, near adjoining, might be provided, to administer the same, as in many places, it hath been, and is now daily used, in like cases of vacancy.  
That the Patron should be kerbed with two hard a bridle, as being barred 
The curbing of a patron with to hard a bridle, answered.  to fetch his clerks, from any other place, then from the Universities or other Schools and Nurseries of learning, is a matter, if it be well weighed, of less importance, than the Admonitor would insinuate the same to be. First it is not of necessity required, that all patrons should at all times fetch all their Clerks, from those places & not from else where. For many times it may happen upon just cause, (for the benefit of the Church) that a Clerk already ordained, and placed in one Church, may be removed from the same; to another. But only the meaning is according to the laws and canons already settled that the greatest part, of the patrons Clerckes, must of necessity, be called thence, because they can not else where be had.  
Now than whereas the law intendeth, every Church to be a wife, and to have an husband, to be a body, and to have an head; the law as a parent unto the Church hath provided, until she be a widow in deed, that no husband, be provided for her. And therefore by sundry as well ancient Decrees, as by Canons of 
Ex: de prebend. c. tui● lib. 6. de prebend. si Episcopus.  Discipline, made and published by the bishops 1571 it is decreed and confirmed, That the Bishop shall lay his hands on none, or at any other time, but when it shall chance some place of ministration is void in the same Diocese As for stipendary Curates, it is expressly against the policy of our Church, that any should be ordained a Minister, to serve only as an hireling. From which Decrees, and Canons, already settled (as I said before) it followeth, for the most part, that the patrons Clerks to be ordained, of necessity must be called from the Universities; or other places of learning. For if every place of ministration, be full, and none must be made a Minister, until some place be void, then albeit some patrons, upon good causes, to be allowed by public discipline, might be permitted, to nominate some Clerks already placed in administrations: Yet in the end, as well the patrons of those Churches, from whence these are to be removed, as other patrons also (many benefices at one time being void) must of necessity, seek out men, to be ordained, which never were ordained to the ministery before. And where are these to be sought, if not only at the Universities, or other Schools & Nurseries of learning? For that prophets in the ordinary time of prophesying, should be taken from the feet of the Apothecaries, Tailors, Drapers, Milners, Mercers, 
Prophets in the ordinary time of prophesying to be taken out of the Scholes of Prophets.  or from the butry, pantry, kitchen, cellar, or stable, of any Bb. Peer, Knight or Gentleman, and not from the feet of the prophets, is a thing abominable, and odious unto God, and man. Wherein then, doth this platform, in this point of fetching Ministers, only from the Universities, or other places of learning, differ from the intendment of laws settled? Or wherein can the patrons receive any detriment by such a practice? Nay they are so far from receiving any 
The difference between the platform and the bishops practise.  prejudice hereby, as indeed both they & their Clerks shall reap great commodity by it. Wherein I grant some discrepance, to consist between the Bb practise, and this platform. For the Bb. at one time, allow a Clerk for ability, and at another time, disallow the same Clerk for non ability. And him, whom they have ordained, and adjudged, to day, worthy of an office, they many times disordayne him to morrow, and refuse him as a person unworthy, to possess a benefice: Whereas on the contrary part, we think it very absurd, & unreasonable, to bar any man from a benefice, whom the Governors of the Church shall judge worthy to bear an office. So that the Patron by this platform, should be sure, if at any time, he nominate a Clerk already ordained, that the same Clerk (unless it were for crime, or some defect after happening) should never be refused. And if such be the laws, & liberties of the Ordinaries, what alteration of the law, or prejudice to the Patron, could it be, if by a new law, the King provided new means, to put his old laws in due execution?  
If upon difference of judgement, any variance should arise, between the Ministers 
Upon difference of judgement about the ability of a Clerk what may be done.  appointed to elect, and ordain, which of the patrons Clerks, were most worthy, the same diversity, we assure ourselves, can breed no greater inconvenience, nor further danger, then doth now daily fall out in the election of scholars, fellows, & heads of Houses, in the Universities, or of other Officers in Colleges, Cathedral churches, and bodies politic or corporate. As those controversies therefore have been, and are appeased by the good orders & laws of those places, even so might these also. And therefore some good law might be made to this effect, viz. If any four of the seven did agree together, upon any one Clerk nominated by the patron, that the same four, should strike the stroke, and make the election good, against the other three. Neither do we think it to stand with reason, that the archpresbyter, or any other Minister among the seven, should necessarily be of the quorum. For if any one of the seven, should necessarily be of the quorum, them (having, as it were, a negative voice against all the rest) if he should be wayward, and apt to contention, he might then always frustrate the election, either by opposing himself to all the rest, or by inclining to the lesser, & worse part, as lately came to pass about the election of a Scholar, among great Doctors. If 
A Clerk refused for nonabiliti● to whom the nomination may devolute.  both the patrons Clerks, should be disabled, by those unto whom the judgement of their nonhabilitie did appertain, we leave it to be considered, whether the right, to nominate, elect, & ordain, for that time only, might not hereafter devolve unto the presbytery, as in like case it hath done heretofore unto the Bb. And from that Presbytery, if the same should make default, that the benefice, should be then in lapse unto the King.  
Lastly, touching the nonhabilitie of 
A Clerk wronged by a refusal for nonability how he may be relieved.  a Clerk: if the Clerk whom the presbytery should refuse, come from one of the Universities, then as a Clerk before time refused for non ability, by the Bb. was to be tried by the Archbishop, and by him to be allowed, or disallowed, so in this case we leave it to be considered, whether it were not meet that this Clerk, so refused, and complaining himself unto the Magistrate, to be wronged, should have his ability to be again tried, by that next Synod of Ministers to be congregated within that Deanery. And if upon trial made, and bringing a testimonial under some authentic seal, from the Synod, of his ability: whether the Presbytery, upon a good pain within a time to be prefixed, should not be constrained, to ordain, and dedicate 
A Clerk refused for crime to whom the nomination may devolve  the same Clerk, to the ministery of the same Church. And as for the refusal of a Clerk by the Presbytery, upon objection of crime, if the crime be so heinous as for which by the canons of the church, he might not be promoted, to the Ministry, then is it to be considered, whether the presbytery in this case also, as in the former of nonhability, might not nominate, elect, and ordain, the Clerk to that place, for that time only? and upon the presbyteries default, the lease also to be unto the King.  
And thus have we compared, the manner of church government, now in use, touching these points, with that form of Discipline, which is desired to be planted. By which comparison the King's 
The benefits ensuing, the platform of ordination, etc. required.  Highness, may very easily discern, the differences between them, to be such, as whereby the King's dignity and prerogative, shall highly be advanced, the King's poor subjects, both Ministers & people, divers ways eased, & unburdened, & the laws better observed, to the unspeakable peace, & tranquillity, both of church, & common weal. The Prophet's trial of the Prophets; the people's approbation of their Pastors; the Minister's entrance into their ministery, according to the Apostolical practice of the primitive church, would be a means utterly to extinguish, that schism, that remaineth yet among us; that we have no Christian Ministers; no Christian Sacraments; no Christian Church in England. Besides, the Ministers, for letters of orders; letters of institution; letters of inductions; for licences to serve within the Diocese; for licences to serve in such a cure; for licences to serve two cures in one day; for licences to preach; for licences of resignation; for testimonials of subscription; for letters of sequestration; for letters of relaxation; for the chancellors, Registers, & Summoner's diverse; for Archidiaconal annual, and for Episcopal trieniall procurations, the Ministers (I say) to be nominated, elected, ordained, approved, confirmed, and admitted, by the Patron; by the Presbytery; by the People, and by the King, should be disburdened, from all fees, for these things, and from all these, and such, and such like grievances. Only for the King's writs, and for the traveyle and pains of his highness Officers, taken in, and about the execution of the same writs, some reasonable fees, (as it shall please the King,) may be taxed, and set down. The people also in souls, in bodies, and in their goods could not but be much comforted, relieved, and benefited. They should not henceforth to the peril of their souls, have unlearned, unable, and undiscreet Ministers thrust upon them, and set over them: Neither should they be compelled, upon light occasions, to take many frivoulous oaths in vain. They should not be summoned, from one end of the Diocese, unto the other: nor be posted from court, to court, & from visitation, to visitation, The Churchwardens, and sidemen, of every Parish, should not upon pain of excommunication, be constrained, once, or twice in the year, to pay six or eight pence, for a sheet of three halfpenny articles. They shall not any longer, out of the common treasury, reserved for the poor, bear the charge of their Parishes for making bills, visitation & diverse other expenses. There should be no more suits at law, between Clerk and Clerk, about the Patron's title; no more suits of double quarrel, between the Clerk and the Bishop no more debate between the Bishop and the Archdeacon; and lastly there should be no occasion of any riots, and unlawful assemblies to be made upon entries and possessions, by virtue and colour of two presentations, two institutions, and two inductions, into one benefice, at one time. The patrons as being Lords and avowers of the Churches, might have the custody of the Churches, during their vacancies, and their ancient right, in this behalf, restored. All swearing of canonical obedience, unto the Bishops by the Ministers: all swearing, and forswearing of Clerks, for any simoniacal bands, promises, or agreements, between them and their patrons, and all robberies 
31. Eliz. c. 6  and spoiling of the Churches, by the patrons, should determine & cease. Especially if it might please the King & parliament, to have one clause of a statute, against abuses, in election of Scholars, and presentation, to benefices enlarged. For although every corrupt cause, & consideration, by reward, gift, profit, or benefit to present, be inhibited by that act; yet notwithstanding by experience in many places we find, that the patrons for small rents, and for many years, are in possession, some of the mansion houses, some of the glebe lands, and some of the tithes, of such benefices as since the publishing of that act, have been bestowed upon Clerks: which breedeth great suspicion and jealousy in the minds of men, that the Clerk and Patron at the beginning directly or indirectly, did conspire to frustrate and delude, the intendment of the statute: And therefore we leave it to be considered by the kings Majesty and parliament. If any Clerk after confirmation & possession 
A means to restrain patrons from corruption.  to any benefice, hereafter to be made and given unto him, shall willingly and wittingly, suffer the Patron of the same benefice, or any other person, in his name or to his use, directly or indirectly, mediately or immediately, to use, occupy, or enjoy, the mansion house, gleebe land, or other ecclesiastical commodities, or any part thereof, belonging to the same benefice: In this case (I say) we leave it to be considered, whether it were not meet & convenient, that every such willing and witting sufferance by the Clerk, and every such willing, and witting possession, use, or occupation, by the Patron, should not be adjudged, to be a just cause, to determine the presentation, to have been first made upon corrupt respect, and consideration. And that therefore the Clerk, ipso facto, to lose the benefice, and the Patron, ipso facto, to forfeit his right of patronage to the King, for the two next turns following. And these being the principal reasons, and grounds of our desires, we are humbly to pray the Lords spiritual, either to convince them of indignity, insufficiency, and incongruity, or else to join with us unto the kings Majesty, for the restitution of that manner of government, which they themselves confess to have been practised, at the beginning by the Apostles & primitive Church: but the Admonitor hath yet more reasons unanswered against this platform.   

Admonition.  
That every Parish in England may have a learned & discrete Minister, howsoever they dream of perfection, no man is able in these days, to devise how to bring it to pass, and especially when by this change of the Clergy, the great rewards of learning, shallbe taken away, and men thereby discouraged, to bring up their children in the study of good letters.   

Assertion.  
In some part to justify this opinion, I grant, that no man is able in these days, to devise, to bring it to pass, that every Parish should have a learned and discrete Minister. And why? because in these days not any one Bishop hath afforded, to ordain one learned and discrete Minister, for five Parishes: secondly, because where some of the reverend Fathers, have ordained and placed in many Parishes, many learned and discrete Ministers, some others of the same Fathers, have again disgraded, and displaced those learned and discrete Ministers, & in their rooms have placed many unlearned and undiscreet Ministers. Now than if these days wherein so few learned & discrete Ministers, & so many unlearned & undiscreet Ministers be ordained, & wherein also, so many learned, & discreet Ministers are disgraced, & so many undiscreet & unlearned Ministers graced: If these days (I say) were ended; then albeit no perfection, whereof never any one of us dreamt, could be attained unto, and albeit no one man were able to devise, how to bring it to pass, that every Parish should have a learned Minister: Yet nevertheless, all good and holy means being used, to aim and to shoot after perfection, & all good and holy men laying to their heads, and applying their hearts to further this enterprise, and service unto God, we know that the Lord might call, and make, and fill with the Spirit of God in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in spiritual workmanship, many Bezaliels', and many aholiab's, spiritually to carve, grave, and imbroyder the Lords spiritual Temple. The perfection therefore after which we long, and the change of the Clergy, whereof we entreat, is but such a perfection, and such a change, as (good means for the restitution of impropriations being used) may easily be attained, and well made. 
What perfection of a Minister is required by this platform.  For the perfection required by us, to be in a Minister, is none other than such as the holy law of God, and the laws, canons and injunctions already settled, do require. viz. that every Minister, to whom cure of souls is committed, with some competent knowledge, according to the measure of the grace, of the gift of Christ, be able to teach, to exhort, and to reprove the people, yea and to convince the gainsayer, if any should arise among them. From whence also springeth the change intended by us. viz. that in the Churches of all Ministers, unable to teach, etc. There might be a change of Ministers able to teach, etc. Wherefore if the Admonitour meant otherwise then we intent, and if upon placing a learned and discrete Minister in every Parish, he should not intend, the change of an unlearned, and undiscreet Clergy, but a change of the high and Papal state of Prelacy: then either is not his answer pertinent to the question, or else it must necessarily follow, from his intendment, that the high and Papal state of Prelacy, and the placing of a learned and 
Prelacy & a learned Ministry can not stand together.  discrete Minister in every Parish, are like unto Coleworts planted among Vines, or unto Parsley sowed among bishops Weed, which will never spring, grow, and prosper together. Because the rising of such a learned ministery must be the fall, ruin, and break neck of Prelacy. And this followeth inevitable upon his own reason, drawn from the taking away of the great rewards of learning, by the change of the Clergy.  
For the great rewards of learning, whereof he speaketh, must of necessity be the Prelacies, viz. archbishoprics, Bishoprics, Deaneries, Archdeaconries, Prebendaries, Canonries, Chanterships, Commendames, non Residencies, and Pluralities. And then let us observe, whether in effect he hath not reasoned thus: If Prelacies (being the great rewards of learning) should not stand, & not be changed, there is no man able to devise, how a learned and discreet Minister may be placed in every parish: but if Prelacies (the great rewards of learning) may once be changed & not stand, than were it possible to have it devised, that a learned and discreet Minister, might be placed in every parish. And then hath he not profoundly, and learnedly disputed, when he hath preferred the Damsel, before her Dame, and the maid, before her Mistress? When he hath advanced a great deal of learning in one before a great deal of learning in many, and learning in some places, before learning in all places; lastly, when by continuance, and furtherance of the great rewards of learning, he hath greatly hindered, & discontinued learnedness, and greatly furthered and continued unlearnedness? For if Prelacies were no hindrances, but only furtherances of discreet and learned Ministers; and again, if Prelacies were no furtherances, but only hindrances, of unlearned, & undiscreet ministers, to be had in every parish, then might the great rewards of learning, still remain, and men should not be discouraged, to send their sons to the study of good learning, For generally men be not so much encouraged, to set their sons to learning, where a few great rewards of learning are provided for a few men greatly learned, as where many good rewards of learning, are provided for many good learned 
men are more encouraged to learning, where many good rewards then where few great rewards are provided.  men. And to speak as experience teacheth us, and as the truth is, what one father among twenty, will dedicate his son, to learning, if men (as the case now standeth under Prelacy) not brought up at the feet of Gamaliel, but at the feet of some swashbuckler; not taught from any Doctor's chair, but schooled upon some crafts man stool, when men who can but read, and can not preach, may be Ministers, & capable of the fattest benefice, within a whole County? In the common weal, if there be many places, of honour, profit, & dignity, for such only as have valiantly served the King in his wars, or painfully attended upon him in the Court, then will many fathers incite, and encourage their sons to prepare and furnish them selves to the wars, and to the Court. But if all men's sons, in the camp, and in the court, be capable of entertainments alike; if as well a labourer's son following the cart, as a noble man's son a waiter in court, may be the King's lord chamberlain, in time of peace; and if as well a carpet knight, as a valiant warrior, may be lord general in time of war, would any father for many years together, costly, and gorgeously brave his son at Court; or would any father adventerouslie, and dangerously hazard his son in the field? Again, fathers do not therefore send their sons to be students, at the Inns of Court, or to be apprentices in the City of London, only in regard, that they may be all great Citizens, and all great rich men, all great lawyers, and all great judges of the land. It sufficeth all parents, and the purpose and intent of all parents is, that their sons, become such lawyers, and such Citizens, as by their law, and by their trades, they may thrive, and live ba●resterlike, & lawyerlike; merchantlike, & citizen-like, though they be not able to live Serieantlike, or judgelike, Alldermanlike, or Lordlike. In like sort questionless would it be an excellent encouragement, to many fathers, to send many sons, unto many Schools and Universities of learning, if so be there were many and good rewards, rathet then few & great rewards, provided for many, rather than for few learned men in the Church. For if there be but few rewards, albeit the same be great, then but a few fathers among many, will adventure the spending of their substance, upon a vain hope, that their sons shall obtain great rewards of learning. For what father knoweth the capacity, and diligence of his son? Or who can divine, that his son, shallbe one, among the number of a few men greatly learned, worthy of a great reward, & to live Deanlike, Archdeaconlike, Bishoplike, or Archbishoplike? Wherefore if such a change of the Clergy, as whereof we speak, were made, that is to say, if an unlearned, and undiscreet ministery, were changed into a discreet and learned ministery: it is not to be doubted, but a far greater number of sons, would be sent by their fathers, to the study of good learning, then now there be.  
From whence also it followeth, that either Papal Prelacy is the only bane 
Prelacy the bane of a learned ministery.  of a learned ministery, or else that an unlearned ministery, is the untimely fruit of the womb of Papal Prelacy. Both which twain, rather than one of which twain, being true, we leave it to be considered, whether the mother conceiving to soon, or the daughter borne out of time, or both as an after birth, & superfluous members should not be cast away, and cut of from the body of the Church? The Admonitors next argument, is drawn from the small continuance in the Universities.   

Admonition.  
Furthermore who seethe not, how small continuance there shallbe in the Universities to make men of any profound knowledge, when the very necessity of places, shall draw men away, before they come to any ripeness or profound knowledge, etc.   

Assertion.  
This argument is as an headless arrow shot against a corselet of steel, out of a bow unbent, for what can this argument pierce, when in effect the conclusion is thus: 
If every parish should have a learned and discrete Minister, them men should have but small continuance in the University, to make them men of ripeness, or of any profound knowledge.  
But that men should be of small continuance in the University, and should be drawn away, before they come to ripeness or perfound knowledge, is not meet.  
Therefore it is not meet, that every Parish should have a learned & discreet Minister.   
The reason of which consequence is this: viz. The very necessity of places 
Pag. 80.  (saith he) shall draw men away before they come to any ripeness: The learnedness then, and discretion, of a Minister, by his reason, dependeth upon his long continuance in the University. And what shall we then say of the learnedness and discretion, of such Ministers of the Bishops making, as did never continue in the University, one day in all their whole life? but hereunto they answer, that the very necessity of the one, is so great, as that the people must have prayer said, and the Sacraments administered, lest the people in the country should grow to an heathenish barbarity: unto which answer, again I reply and reason thus: If a man of unlearnedness, and without knowledge & ripeness, may be a Minister, than a man of small unlearnedness, of small knowledge, and of small ripeness, may be a Minister much more; and again: 
If necessity of places, may draw men of no continuance in the University, of no knowledge, and of no ripeness, into the ministery: then may the necessity of places draw men, of small continuance, knowledge, and ripeness.  
But the necessity of places may draw men of no continuance, knowledge or ripeness into the Ministry:  
Therefore the necessity of places may draw men of small continuance, knowledge, and ripeness, into the Ministry.   
The second proposition of which syllogism, is confirmed by practice, & precept, by word, and by deed, of most of our reverend Bb. And then from their own practice, I argue thus: If the necessity of saying prayers, of reading service, and of delivery of the elements, b● of necessity, & of necessity require unlearned 
Faith more necessary to be preached then the Sacraments be administered  ministers, rather than no ministers: then much more the necessity of having faith; the necessity of the salvation of our souls, and the necessity of God his glory, is of necessity; and being of necessity requireth ministers of small learning, of small continuance, of small knowledge, and of small ripeness: rather than ministers of no learning, no continuance, no knowledge, and of no ripeness. And if Faith, salvation of men, and the glory of God, as sound, and as sincerely may be preached and promoted, by young and rude Timothy, as by aged learned, and eloquent Apollo, what necessity is there of continuance in the University, to obtain more profound knowledge, or any other riper understanding, then is that knowledge, & that understanding, whereby faith to the salvation of men, & to the glory of God, is of necessity to be preached? Again, if by continuance in the University, profound knowledge, & ripeness, be so necessary, that (as is pretended) in respect thereof, a change of the Clergy may not be made, and that unlearned, & undiscreet ministers, as it were by necessity, should still be placed; then seemeth it reasonable, to move the Lord Bishops, that it would please them, to effect an abolishment of some of the statutes, of all the Colleges in Oxford and Cambridge: whereby all Masters of Art, of what youth, ignorance, or rudeness soever they be (excepting some small number, which by order of their foundation, be put apart to the study of Law or Physic) some after two, some after three, & some after four years, of their commencement, are compelled either to enter into the ministery, or to leave their fellowships: Nay in some Colleges, if Bachelors of arts be chosen fellows, & be not ministers after one year, by statut they lose their places. The principle reason of the founders of all which statutes (to my best remembrance) is this: namely that the harvest being great, and the labourers but few, many labourers, shallbe sent from those Colleges, into the harvest. Neither can it be intended, that many labourers of long continuance, many labourers of profound knowledge, or many labourers of ripeness should be sent. But it is simply provided, that many labourers, and not loyterors should be sent, & yet now the Admonitor, rather than that some loiterers should not be sent, contendeth to seclude some labourers from the work. Besides, how can they be of any long continuance, of any ripeness, or of any profound knowledge, in the mysteries of faith, and Godliness, when not having accomplished the age of 24 years, 26 years, or 28 years at the most, & not having given themselves above 2. 3. or 4. years at the most, to the study of divinity, nay which after the study of 3. or 4. years of Philosophy or arts, and no study of Divinity, must notwithstanding enter into the ministery? wherefore from the statutes of the Colleges in the Universities I thus dispute: If the necessity of the College statutes, do compel: 
All Masters of arts before mentioned, and some Bachelors of arts not having any profound knowledge, or being but of small continuance, or not of any ripeness, either to leave their colleges or to enter into the Ministry, then much more the necessity of preaching Faith, the necessity of being saved, and the necessity of God his glory may compel men of small learning, of small knowledge, of small ripeness, and of small continuance, to execute their Ministry, rather than that any parish should be necessarily clogged with a Minister of no learning, of no discretion, of no knowledge, of no ripeness, and of no continuance.  
But the necessity of the college statutes do compel the one,  
Therefore the necessity of Faith, etc. may compel the other.    

Admonition.  
Against the inconvenience of discipline, by excommunication 
Pag. 81.  only (which he saith we so much cry for) he telleth us that some learned men of this age have at large declared in their works set forth to the world, that the same willbe of most men contemned, and that it will be of small force to bring to effect any good amendment of life.   

Assertion.  

But who taught him to father, or to fasten this untruth upon us? only than 
No discipline by excommunication only called for.  this might suffice for answer, that he did never yet hear, any one of our part, so much as call, much less to cry for discipline by excommunication only. For we say clean otherwise. viz. that the Discipline of the Church ought not to be executed (as now for the most part it is) by excommunication only. This manner 
Discipline by excommunication only, no more to be suffered  of discipline therefore, by excommunication only, is one of the disorders in the Church, used by the reverend Bb. & which we so much desire, to be reform. And for this cause we entreat their Lordships, to forbear the practice of that, which (as it seemeth) they would so fain have others to mislike.  
But happily this was not the mark whereat the Admonitor short; for Bishopply and Archdeaconly excommunication, being daily used, it is like that he bent his bow, and aimed at that excommunication only, which is Pastoral and Elderly. Against which form 
The writings of so●● learned men not sufficient to condemn excommunication by Pastors and Elders.  and manner of excommunication, let be so, that some learned men of this age, have at large declared in their works, set forth to the world, that the same willbe of most men contemned, and that it willbe of small force to bring to effect, any good amendment of life, let this (I say) be granted, what of all this? must the Church of England therefore, dislike and reject the same? God forbidden. The whole doctrine of Faith and Sacraments, we know to be of most men contemned, & to be of small force to bring most men from superstitions & Popish idolatry. And how then is it possible, but that the sword of this doctrine, should have as little entertainment amongst most men as the doctrine? He that casteth away the kernel, will much more despise the shalt: And he that setteth light by a sword, will set less by the scabbard. It sufficeth then that the children of the Church in England, striving to enter in at the narrow gate, & embracing the doctrine of the Gospel, it is sufficient (I say) that they submit & subject their necks unto the yoke of the Gospel, for what have we to do with them that are without? Doth the law of England indite, condemn, and judge a Spaniard resiant in Spain?  
The Admonitor himself affirmeth 
Pag. 134.  (at the time when our Saviour Christ said, dic Ecclesiae) that there were many precedents, as it were, and governors of the Church together with the chief Ministers of every congregation; nay further he saith that he will not deny that the Apostles afterward, & the primitive 
Pag. 235. The Bb. confesseth that the Minister and Elders, did govern in the primitive church.  Church, did practise the same.  
These some learned men then, either must show, and prove (unto us the children of God in England) that this form of governing the church, & excommunicating by many precedents and governors, together with the chief Ministers of every Congregation, was given to the Churches in the time of Christ, and his Apostles, but only for that time, & that therefore that form is now at an end, and ceased, or else it must be confirmed unto us, tha● God hath in these days altered and changed his mind touching England; and that he hath by some new vision, or revelation, commanded the reverend Bb: in these days, to teach the church of England, that he will not have the same manner of government used in the Church of England, because 
The opinion of some learned men not sufficient for the Church of England to depart from the word.  it would be of most of his children in England contemned, and of small force to bring to effect any good amendment of life in them: for albeit all the learned men in the world, had declared as much in their works set forth to the world, as is here spoken of, what were that to the children of God in England, unless the same learned men, had taught unto us true learning from the mouth of God? How much less are we bound to regard, what only some learned men of this age have declared unto us, the same some learned men having no warrant out of the holy book of God, for such their learning? For if the declaration of some learned men of this age, in their works set forth to the world, may be a sufficient warrant to draw men from the way of truth: then hardly let the declaration of Doctor Harding, against the true use of the Lords supper, and then let the declaration of Osorius against justification by faith, and the declarations of Bellarmine, against diverse articles of our religion, and the declaration of Doctor Allen, against the execution of justice in England, & the declaration of Doctor Saunders, a rebellious fugitive, in the defence of the Pope's Bull, and the declaration of G. T. for the pretended catholics; and lastly, let the declaration of the Pope, and his whole clergy, excommunicating our late Sovereign lady the Queen deceased, be received, and listened unto. For who can deny but that these men were some men, and that these some men were also some learned men, and who then seethe not the looseness, the vanity, the trifling, and the toying of this argument.  
The argument following which the Admonitor would seem to let pass, 
Pag. 81.  drawn from experience, is of like quality. For though experience (as he saith) reach that men of stubbornness, will not shun the company of such as be excommunicated, & though such men of stubbornness, must be also (as he saith) excommunicated, for keeping of company with them, yet to affirm, that by means of Pastourly, & Elderly excommunication, more will be excommunicated, 
By excommunication of Pastors and Elders, more can not be out of communion them in communion.  as being men of stubbornness, then in communion, is a very gross, and palpable error. For we hold (as the truth is) that the greater part of the Church can not be excommunicated by the lesser; nor that many should be excommunicated, by a few; nor that a few should be excommunicated by one of the Church. And if the common union must necessarily consist of all, or of the most part of the faithful, then is the lesser part always out of this common union. For what else is excommunication, but extra communionem eiectio, a casting forth of one, or of more persons from the common fellowship, society, and company of the faithful? The greatest part whereof, and not the least, are accounted to be the church, and to be in communion; unless then the whole church, or the greater part of the Church, having once cast out from among them, one or more adulterers, blasphemers, extortioners, or such like, and having also excommunicated men of stubbornness, for keeping company with such, shall themselves all, or the greatest part, become children of disobedience, & men of stubbornness: it can not be, but there must be still more of the church, in communion, than out of communion. But if the whole Church shall have cast away the yoke of Discipline, and become such themselves, as were those whom before they had excommunicated, then is it a clear case, that there is not any more, any communion among them. For how should any common union be there, where is no union at all? And if all be departed from obedience, where then can the Church be? Nay further, if the greatest part of the Church should revolt, & forsake the faith, yet hereupon it would not follow, that more of the faithful, be out of communion, then in communion. For then such only as remain in the unity of faith, and have not separated themselves from Christ, remain now only to be in communion with Christ: out of which number also, if any should be excommunicated, by the residue of their brethren, yet even among this small number, there would be still more in communion, than out of communion. For to be out of communion can not be understood, to be of any but only of such as remaining in the profession of faith, and godliness, are yet notwithstanding found guilty of some transgression, and for the same by the Church, for a time cut of from the Church by sentence of excommunication.  
These deformities, and inconveniences therefore, can in no wise follow, that Discipline of excommunication, by pastors and Elders, which so much is called for. But certes, it fared (I fear me) with the Admonitor, and sundry of his colleagues in this case none otherwise, than it fareth with incontinent women, once (say they) incontinent, and ever incontinent, we know it by ourselves. Our ecclesiastical judges and Officers, in like manner, seeing by experience, those whom they account to be men of stubbornness, not to shun the company of such as they daily excommunicate; yea and they perceiving also, that it may fall out, that more, under their jurisdiction, 
By the Bb. excommunication more may be 〈◊〉 of communion, then in communion, it is therefore by his own reason, a deformed discipline.  may be out of their communion then in communion with them, because one man alone (as he plainly insinuateth) may excommunicate the greatest part of the Church under his censure (for otherwise he could never have supposed, that more would be out of communion then in communion) because (I say) these deformities, & these inconveniences, by their own experience, have been found to have followed upon that discipline of excommunication, which hitherto hath been practised; It falleth out that they can not otherwise judge, but that all other manner of discipline, by excommunication, must be of the same nature & condition, that is, as deformed and inconvenient, as their own is. And yet in this place it is worthy to be marked what a rod the Admonitor hath gotten out of S. Augustine, to 
By S. Augustine's reason Bishopply excommunication hath many deformities.  whip his own discipline, by excommunication only out of the church, and thus it may be framed. 
That discipline whereby more will be, or more may be excommunicated then in communion, hath in it many deformities, and inconveniences:  
But by the Discipline of excommunication which the reverend bishops, their Archdeacon's, chancellors, Commissaries, and Officials practise, more will be, or more may be excommunicated, then in communion.  
Therefore that Discipline by excommunication, which the reverend bishops their Archdeacon's, &c. practice, hath in it many deformities, and inconveniences.   
The Mayor proposition (if he speak truly) is St. Augustine's, but whether it be or be not, it is no great matter, because it needeth not the authority of any man to confirm it, the same being sound and true in it own nature. The minor is drawn from his own reason thus: 
Where there be more men of stubbornness in the church, then of obedience, & where there be more men that shun not, then that shun the company of those that be excommunicated, there more will be, or may be excommunicated, then in communion.  
But there be more men of stubbornness, then of obedience, and more that shun not, then that do shun the company of those that be excommunicated, by the Reverend bishops, their Archdeacon's, chancellors, and Officials.  
Therefore there may be, or willbe more excommunicated, by their Lordships, their Archdeacon's, chancellors, etc. then in Communion.   
The assumption, though I cannot warrant the same to be simply true, yet I may safely warrant it, to be drawn from the Admonitors own experience. For I let pass (saith he) that experience teacheth that men of stubbornness, will not shun the company of them that be excommunicated, etc. and that they must be excommunicated 
Bishoply excommunication hath many deformities.  for keeping of company with them. And so it will fall out, that more will be excommunicated, then in communion; but this last consequence (say I) can not follow, unless he first presuppose both his antecedents to be true And therefore because he must needs be intended to have spoken of that kind of excommunication, whereof he hath had experience, it followeth that these deformities, and inconveniences whereof he speaketh, must needs be found, in that excommunication, which he & his use. For of the other kind of excommunication, he never yet had any experience: And then by experience he could not speak. If he spoke not of his own experience, but of the experience of some other men, then have we but little cause to believe him, because we know not what manner persons those were, from whom he drew his argument of experience, and whether they reported deceitfully, or truly of their own experience, or no.  
And if this argument drawn from the experience of his own manner of Discipline, be of sufficient validity to impugn (as he weaneth) that Discipline by excommunication, which so much (as he saith) is cried for, and whereof as yet he never had experience, how much more effectual than is this argument to overthrow that his own manner of discipline, which he so long time, to so small profit, and with so great inconveniences, & deformities, hath so unprofitably practised? For can there be any greater deformity, 
By discipline of Bishopply excommunication one may be a community.  than that one member should be supposed to be the whole body, or that one man should make a community? And yet this deformity, by his experience, may fall out, to be seen even under that discipline, which every ordinary exerciseth. For if by process, ex mero officio, an ordinary should excommunicate any one of his jurisdiction for not communicating with an idol minister, or for holding that Christ in his soul, did not descend into hell, or for denying reading to be preaching, and withal should pronounce all them to be men of stubbornness, which would not shun the company of him so excommunicated. And for that cause also should excommunicate them as is here supposed lawful to be done, were it not a clear case that the body of that church, must now be taken to consist only in the person of the ordinary, & one member to become the whole body? For if all under his jurisdiction were once exco●●municated, how could then any be in communion with him: And if they all were once excommunicated, must not the ordinary then alone be the common union, and so make a community? And what a deformed kind of excommunication, then is that kind of excommunication, whereby it may fall out, that to be one, is to be many, and that to be a church, a company, a society, and a fellowship, is to be one? of which nature, and of which kind that manner of excommunication, which by Pastors, and Elders is to be executed, can not be as hath already been proved. If then excommunication now used, be a deformed kind of discipline, and therefore, as we say, to be no more tolerated, and if excommunication by Pastors and Elders, be a kind of discipline for the inconvenience thereof (as he saith) not to be planted: what manner of discipline by excommunication would he have in th●se days, 
The Admonitor would have no excommunication at all  trow we? would he have none at all? verily I suppose none at all. For so do ●his words plainly insinuate, by two rea●●s following: First (saith he) the lose 〈…〉 of these days, require discipline of sharper laws by punishment of body, and danger of goods, which they do, & will more fear, than they will excommunication: Secondly we have (saith he) a very good manner of discipline, by the Ecclesiastical commission which doth much good, and would do more, if it were more common. But why did he not speak plainly, and why did he not affirm devoutly, that discipline by excommunication, was good where the church was in persecution, and that it is not necessary, nor so convenient under a Christian Magistrate, as it may be otherwise? For if Pastors and Elders were appointed joint officers, only for tim●s of persecution, and not to be under Christian Princes, it followeth (these joint officers ceasing) that all accessaries, appendices, and consequences, of their joint offices must also cease, unless it can be proved out of the holy scriptures, that the offices of Pastors ought still to continue, & that the offices of Elders ought not to continue; because the offices of Elders, with all their appendices, have been translated by our Saviour Christ, unto archbishops, Bishops, Archdeacon's, their chancellors, Commissaries, and Officials. For unless these Officers be Christ's Officers, the discipline which they use cannot bind the consciences of the people of God. And for this cause is it very probable, that he so commendeth discipline of sharper laws, & discipline by the Ecclesiastical commission. For if these officers, by their discipline have not to do with the consciences of men, then is it no merveyle that men fear not their discipline. And therefore if they willbe still officers, it is requisite, that they call for such a discipline, as might cause men to stand in awe of their authority. But were they indeed the officers of God, and had they indeed authority from God, to execute discipline by excommunication, as Pastors and Elders did in the primitive Church; then were the looseness of this age never so great, yet that the children of God in England would more fear the loss of goods, lands, bodies, or lives, than the censure of God's officers is one of the Admonitors paradoxes. And here I appeal the consciences of all the reverend Bishops and Prelates in the land, and let them answer me hardly, if they judge themselves to be the children of God, & had seven times seven thousand lives, whether they had not rather seven thousand times be committed to the jailor of Winchester, then once be delivered over, to the jailor of Hell. And are not all the children of God in England their brethren? And are they not all led by one and the self same spirit? And how then can they less fear excommunication (which is a delivery of the soul to Satan) than the punishment of body and danger of goods? And yet touching this point of excommunication, he seemeth 
Admonitor supposeth it to be a fault not to excommunicate that Prince, and Rulers: and than what force is my Lo. of Ca judgement, who supposeth it unlawful for the Church to excommunicate a Prince.  to be against himself, for in the 137. page, he telleth us that happily it may be a fault, yea & a great fault that is found with the Bishops in these days, that they do not excommunicate the Prince and Rulers, and so constrain them to do that, which by persuasion they will not do. If then excommunication be so terrible to Princes and Rulers, how should it be of so light account with subjects? And if it be so powerful as it can constrain Princes and Rulers to do their duties, how much more fearful would it be, to compel inferiors, and men of low estate, to live soberly in their vocations? I will not here debate the matter touching the excommunication of Princes & Rulers, much less touching the excommunication of the Prince and Rulers of our land. But I would gladly be informed, what they were, or who they be, that found great fault with the Bishops in these days, for not endeavouring to excommunicate the Prince and Governors?  
The Papists, they think it sufficient, that the Prince and Governors, be excommunicated by the Pope, & his Clergy. The Ministers, and people professing the Gospel, and seeking for reformation of excommunication, deny the Bishops to have any divine power granted by the word of God, to excommunicate a private man, much less do they think it lawful for them to excommunicate the Prince and Rulers: Who then (I say) find fault with the Bishops, that they do not excommunicate the Prince and Governors, and so constrain them to do that which by persuasion they will not do? For my part I can not guess, whom he should mean, unless he meant to give us to understand, that some Prelatists have consulted about the excommunicating, both Prince & Governors, for not making sharper laws, against such as whom the Prelates, and their favourites, have falsely slandered, to be pestilent fellows, movers of sedition, enemies to Caesar, troublers and subverters 
Act. 24 5. Act 1. 16. 20. 17. 6.  of the state; puritanes, and I hot n●t what chief maintainers of the sect of the disciplinarians; unless (I say) he should mind some such Prelatists, I can not guess any subjects within the land, to be so undutiful, as to find fault with the Bishops, for not attempting to bring our late Sovereign Lady the Queen deceased, to their excommunication. And therefore to inform the people of an Author, and not to bring him forth, it argueth & breadeth great suspicion that the enformer was the author himself. Touching the looseness of some or of all in these days, that are without the 
Excommunication toucheth them only which make profession to be of the church.  Church, if he intent that they require discipline of sharper laws, by punishment of body, and loss of goods, than excommunication, and that they will more fear that manner of punishment, I hold, and affirm therein as he holdeth, and affirmeth, and yet (I say) that to the matter in question, he hath fitted no other answer, then as if he had answered, a poke full of plums, or a buchet full of pears, (for the controversy is not concerning those that are without, but concerning those that are within: not touching those, that are not of the household, but touching them that are of the household of faith and of God). As for the first sort of which people, the reverend Bishops with good leave, may procure what sharp punishment, they can devise, for by the Church excommunicated they should never be. For how should any be thrust from the communion of the Church, who never were in communion with the Church? But it is to be feared, that this sharpness of punishment, is not urged so much to be inflicted upon them, that are without as upon them, that are within the bosom of the Church. For though such, as be without, did a long time scorn, & set nought by the sword of excommunication, which was not only drawn out, by the chancellors, Commissaries, and officials: for every crust of bread, and for every piece of bacon, but also, which was again put up, for every cracked groat, and for every Irish harper; the reverend Bb. whose freehold by such contempt, was not touched, were pacified, and contented themselves well enough by inflicting, and releasing that manner of punishment, but now for so much as they perceive the children within the church, to begin seriously, and religiously to stand against the use of Lordly and human censures for the Crown & Sceptre of our Saviour Christ, and that the stateliness of Prelacy, must be taken one hole lower, if the simplicity of the holy ministery be exalted a degree higher, they pretend Discipline by excommunication, which is the sword of the son, and heir of God, to be too bluntly pointed, and too badly edged, to foin, or to strike withal.  
Touching that very good manner of Discipline by the Ecclesiastical commission, which he saith hath done and doth daily much good, and would do more, if it were more common, the people whom he admonisheth, have just cause of being desirous to understand what manner of Discipline it is, which 
Not one manner of Discipline used by the ecclesiastical commissioners.  is so highly commended? For all men know, that the ecclesiastical commissioners use not in all places, and at all times one and the self same manner of Discipline. For the same Commissioners, for the same kind of offences, sometimes suspend, sometimes deprive, sometimes degrade, sometimes excommunicate, sometimes fine, sometimes imprison, sometimes command this penance, & sometimes that. Nay sometimes having convented before them, grave, learned, and godly Ministers, for crimes supposed 
This Discipline was practised against master Cartwhright, Fenner, Whight, L. 〈◊〉 and others.  to be Ecclesiastical, & for the same pretenced Ecclesiastical offences, having detained them some years in durance, for refusal of the oath ex officio: in the end not having any other supposed just cause of inflicting any punishment upon them, by ecclesiastical authority, have been forced, for a show, to maintain their own credits, to cause accusations to be framed against them, by the queens Attorney in the high Court of star-chamber, as against violators of the dignities of the Royal Crown, whose innocencies by the very witnesses produced by their means on the behalf of the Queen, have notwithstanding been fully cleared from the faults objected, and the Ministers discharged, without any ordinary punishment usually infflicted by that Court upon malefactors. Nay further, when the Ecclesiastical 
Ecclesiastic. discipline used by the high Commissioners against Ma. Udall.  Commissioners had committed Master Udall to prison, where he remained half a year, for refusal of the oath ex officio, touching his knowledge of the Author of a book, entitled The Demonstration; in the end he was delivered over as a felon for making of the same book, and for the which he was arraigned, and convicted, and so died in prison: notwithstanding our Soverayno Lord, King JAMES, the King of Scotland, had graciously written for his deliverance. And how then would the Admonitor have the people contented with such a moderation of Ecclesiastical discipline, as the Ecclesiastical Commissioners many times use? For did he think that every manner of discipline used by the high Commissioners can not be, but a very good moderation? Why then let some of the Commissioners, tell the people whether the Ecclesiastical commissioners 
An oath tendered by the Ecclesiastic. Commissio. unto M. Udall in case of felony.  used a very good moderation, & manner of Discipline Ecclesiastical against the same Master Udall, when they tendered unto him a corporal oath, to have appeached himself upon a matter which was adjudged to be felony? or let them declare, what a very good manner of discipline Ecclesiastical, certain Ecclesiastical Commissioners used, when having a Gentleman before them, wearing long hair, they constrained the same Gentleman, by force, and strong hand, to have his head knotted in their presence? The wearing of long hair, by our laws being not reputed an Ecclesiastical crime, no although the same be worn by attendants upon the reverend Bb. waiting on their trenchers. Or let them signify unto us, what a good manner of discipline, and moderation it was for a Bb. and his associates, to make an act, in the high commission Court, repugnant 
The Minister authorized, to put sacramental bread into the mouth a of communicant.  to the institution of our Saviour Christ, and contrary to the order appointed by the book of common prayer, that the Minister should put the sacramental bread, into the mouth of a superstitious communicant, and not deliver it into his hands? After our hearty commendations (saith the Bb. & his associates) whereas 1 V one of your charge, hath been often convented before us her majesties Commissioners, in causes ecclesiastical, for not receiving the holy Communion, it seemeth unto us, that he hath not of any contemptuous mind, refrained from the same, but is willing to receive it, & so hath bound himself, saving that he hath a scruple in his mind by reason of a fond vow, or promise he made long ago (whereof he is sorry) never to receive the Sacrament into his hand, but to put it into his mouth by the Minister? And therefore we pray you to bear a time, with his weakness, & permit him to receive it in that sort, until by your good counsel, and persuasion, he may be reduced from that fond scruple. And so we bid you heartily farewell.  
Your loving friends, etc.   

And seeing the Admonitor hath opposed a very good manner of Discipline, 
Master E. excommunicated by the high Commissioners, most whereof were lay men.  by the Ecclesiastical commission against excommunication, it seemeth that excommunication in his judgement, is no good or moderate discipline, to be used by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. And then were it fit, that the people were resolved, what a ve●● good manner of Discipline Master D. W. and other Ecclesiastical Commissioners used against Master E. whom by virtue of the ecclesiastical commission they excommunicated? The tenor of which excommunication, taken out of the Register at L. followeth. In Dei nomine, Amen. Nos I. W. sacrae theologiae Doctor, etc. Cancellarius ecclesiae, etc. M. A. M. Armigeri, & M. H. civis civitatis, etc. Commissarij rite, & legitime procedentes, I. E. de B. L. Dioceses ad hos diem & locum legitime, & peremptory citatum, & praecognizatum, diuque expectatum, & nullo modo comparentem, pronunciavimus contumacem, & in poenam contumaciae suae huiusmodi eum excommunicavimus in hijs scriptis.  

T.  
Concordat cum  
Regio.   
Moreover it seemeth not an unmeet thing, that some ecclesiastical Commissioners, did make known unto the people, whether banishment be an ecclesiastical discipline; and what moderate discipline Ecclesiastical the Commissioners used when they banished religious Master Fullerton the Scott, from dwelling at Warwick, or within certain miles thereof, Or let them inform the Realm, what a very good moderation was used, when by the Ecclesiastical commission, 
Authority committed to pursuivants by the ecclesiastical commissioners.  for suppressing of Martin's books, and other books of argument, against the Hierarchy, they authorised drunken & swearing pursevantes, to search men's houses, & to break up their chests, etc. the copy of which their letters is this, viz. Whereas the bearer is (say they) by the Queen's Majesty especially appointed, 
If the Queen had specially commanded this search, it is credible, that her privy Cosisaylors should have set to their hands, rather than the high Commissioners.  to make search, and to apprehend, certain suspected persons, according to such particular directions, as he hath in that behalf received, these shallbe to will, and require, and in her majesties name straightly to charge, and command you, and every of you, to whom these shall appertain, to be by all good and possible means, aiding, and assisting to the bearer in the execution of this service, by entering into all such houses, as he shall think meet, and hold suspected, as well within liberty as without, and that in them, & every of them, to make due, and diligent search. And to search all manner of writings, letters, papers, books, & all other things carrying note of suspicion, sparing no studies, chests, cubbards, locks, or walls, as also to apprehend, examine, and bring before us, such persons, as by her majesties said direction, therein appointed, and wherein if he shall any way require your further assistance, you may not fail, to yield him the same, with all diligence, & dexterity, according to the trust reposed in you, as you will answer for your default, for the contrary at your uttermost peril. Directed unto all Mayors, Sheriffs, justices of peace, and quorum, Bailiffs, Constables, Hedboroughes, tithingmen, and to all other her majesties officers, and subjects, etc. But beit that all these mane●● of disciplines were moderate, and good ecclesiastical Disciplines, & more to be used, yet there may a scruple remain, which were fit to be discussed, what a very good moderation, & manner of discipline, within our remembrances, was used, between an Archbishop, and a Bishop, both high Commissioners, against certain Gentlemen, & one of their wives, about these Articles following.     

Articles objected by her majesties high Commissioners, for causes Ecclesiastical against G. B. of B. and F. B. of B. in the County of L.  

INprimis, We object unto you G. B. and L. your wife, that you have within these seven years, and so at this present, do keep company, and use conference with diverse persons, disobedient to her majesties laws, and such as be suspected to resort and frequent, unlawful conventicles.  
Item, we object unto you, to th' end you 
Quere whether this convention were lawful, for this cause. Quere, against what law this entertainment was, and whether the Bishop of L. conversing with Popish Priests and traitors, did not more offend.  might the better insinuate yourselves into their companies, you have tabled and boarded with the same parties, and that you or one of you, have been heretofore convented for the causes aforesaid, before the now lord Archb. his grace, for entertaining into your house a person which stood then, and yet standed suspended, & deprived, for disliking the book of common prayer, and other godly orders established by her majesties authority in this Realm.  
Item we object unto you the said G. B. and L. yourwife, that you have not frequented divine service, celebrated within your parish Church of Bothese vi. 5. 4. 3. 2. or one years last, nor do not at this present, at least every Sunday, nor have received the holy Communion within your said parish Church during the said years. 
Quere, whether the Bishop did not more offend the law of God by preferring these articles, than the Gentleman did by procuring his children to be baptized by a preaching Minister having none at home.   
Item, that you the said G. B. and L. your wife, within the time aforesaid, have not Christened, nor baptised your children within your parish Church, but contrary to the form, and order of her majesties laws in that case provided, have either christened them at home privately in your own house, or have carried, or caused them to be carried to other Churches. And let them declare what Church, and what Minister did baptize them, and where, and whether the same Minister, did at the same baptism, sign the child with the sign of the cross, and let them declare the cause, why they did baptise their children out of their parish.  
Item, that the Ministers pew or seat in the church of B. aforesaid by the direction 
Note that the Bishop of L. was not Bishop of the Diocese.  of the L. reverend Father in God the Bb. of L. that now is, being at the same Church, as also by the consent of the Minister, and Churchwardens, there was placed in a very convenient place of the Church, to the end the parishioners there might the better hear, and understand the Minister, at the time of reading the divine service.  
Item, we object unto you, that you the said F. B. within these vi. or 3. months last passed, have without any sufficient warrant, or commandment from the father in God, the Lord Bishop of L. or his Chancellor, or other having authority therein, very disorderly, and contemptuously, removed the same seat, to the great offence of the parishioners, and bad example of others.  
Item, we object unto you, that you know, believe, or have heard say that Za. G. is a Preacher of the word of God, and a man of good life, and conversation, & lawful Parson of B. aforesaid.  
Item, we object unto you, that the premises notwithstanding you the said F. B. upon a Sunday, within a quarter of a year, last passed, when the Parishioners of B. were assembled together, at the said Church to hear divine service, caused diverse serving men, and others to sit in the pew or place, which properly belonged to the Parson of the said Church: so that when the said M. G. came to take his place they thrust him, and very disorderly in the time of prayer, kept him out of the said place.  
Item, we object unto you F. B. that about six years past you the said F. brought into the Town of B. a bastard child, as it is credibly thought of your own, and there placed it at nurse, and have lately received it into your own house, to the great offence of the inhabitants there, and the bad example of others. Et obijcimus cu ᵐ duus & de quolibet. Subscribed, etc.  
Whereunto in the foot of these articles was added.  
Master B. I pray you let this matter be followed ex officio, and the parties presently to be sent for, by warrant. Subscribed, etc.   


Now these Gentlemen, according to the bishops direction, being presently sent for by a Pursuivant, to answer the articles objected, they forthwith make their repair to the Archbishop, with a copy of the articles, with whom they find such grace, as in their behalf immediately he writeth to the Bishop as followeth.   

SAlutem in Christo, My very good Lord, I have by means received these articles enclosed, signed by your Lordsh. hand, and can not but greatly merveyle, that contrary to the orders of the commission Court, subscribed by yourself, & the rest of the Commissioners, you would cause a Gentleman of such a quality, as Master B. is to be sent for by a Pursuivant, before the ordinary process of a letter missive 
Note that the sign of the cross in Baptism by an Archb. opinion is but of small moment, & that suspicion of bastardy may easily be dismissed.  were served upon him, especially for matters of so small moment. Neither will it be thought to proceed of any just cause, but rather of some other misconceyte, when it shallbe understood that there is a controversy in law elsewhere depending, between him and a kinsman of yours. And therefore for the avoiding of his further complaint and other offence, that may grow thereby, I heartily pray your Lordship to suppress the same, and proceed no further therein. Desiring you withal to have due consideration of the cause, lest I be enforced to deal likewise, in the defence of my kinsman, as you do for yours. And so praying your Lo. 
Note that the 17. of Octo. was the Saboth day, at what time the Archb. D. C. and D. B. sitting as Commissioners, th● Archb. took pen & ink, and crossed the articles all overthwart, and so sent them back with this letter.  to return unto me answer hereunto, & what you mean to do, with my very hearty commendations I commit you to the tuition of Almighty God. Fron, etc. the 17. of Octo. etc. Subscri. etc., Unto which letter also was added as followeth. Master B. I pray, you according to the tenor of this letter, to see that this cause of M. G. and F. B. be dismissed from thence, and if any be bound to prosecute the cause against them, let them understand that I mean to hear it at, etc. otherwise let it wholly be dismissed, and the bands delivered.    

The bishops answer to the Archbishop's former letters.  
MAy it please your grace to understand that I was the more willingly drawn, to send for Ma. B. in that sort, because he was oft, and of long time accused, not only to be a disordered man himself, but also a great and open maintainer, and carrier from place to place of that wrangling puritan, W. And as it is to be proved, a refrainer from his church, and from the Communion, as I am informed. And therefore if we have omitted any circumstance or ceremony, it is in zeal of the redress of such a disordered person. Which if it should be found in your own brother, I think your grace would not spare him. Nevertheless if you yourself take it in hand, to his redress, I for my part shall be entreated, so that the man be amended, who hath carried himself outrageously, both in that, and other things. And so referring the whole matter to your grace's discretion, I take my leave, praying God to bless us, in the peace of the Church. From, etc. the 17. of October, etc.  
Your gra. most assured in Christ, etc.   

Whatsoever special cause might move these two great Prelates, to stand either of them, for the defence of his kinsman, is not a thing material to this treatise. But this honestly enough may be averred, that it was no very good or moderate kind of ecclesiastical discipline, either for the Archb. and his associates, in regard of his kinsman presented to a benefice by the gentleman, to cancel the articles of his colleague, & fellow commissioners: or for the Bb. upon a spleen taken against the gentleman, for standing upon the right of his patronage, against his kinsman, to violate the public orders, of the high commissioners, whereunto he himself had subscribed.  
Many other forms of ecclesiastical discipline of late years have been used by the high commissioners: But whether they were all very good, and moderate disciplines or no is greatly doubted, by many wise, learned, and godly men. And namely it is doubted, whether such ecclesiastical commissioners as by letters patents, under the great Seal of England were authorized from the Queen, to exercise, use, occupy and execute, all manner of jurisdictions, privileges, & pre-eminences concerning any spiritual or ecclesiastical jurisdiction, be able to prove unto the Realm, that they had lawful power and authority, by the statute of 1. Eliz. c. 1. or by the Queen's letters patents made according to the true intent of that statute, or by any other law or statute of the Realm to depute and substitute, any other person under them, to use, exercise and execute any part of that jurisdiction ecclesiastical which by virtue of that statute, & letters patents, was committed only to their fidelities & discretions. And whether it were a very good manner of ecclesiast. discipline, which was used, exercised, & executed either by the person so deputed, or by the Commissioners themselves, upon any process or proceed made by the said person substituted. Again, it is doubted, whether it were a good manner of ecclesiastical discipline, for 
Ecclesiastical discipline against the Magistrates of Banbury.  the high Commissioners, to command the Magistrates of the Town of Banbury at the suit of certain Popish companions to reset up a Cross which by virtue of the Queen's injunctions, they had peaceably, and lawfully pulled down. It is also doubted whether it were a very good manner of Ecclesiastical discipline for the high Commissioners, to detain Master Moore one year or two in prison, depriving him also from his living, for his confident asseveration that William summers with diverse others in Lanchashire were possessed, and that Master Dorrell was not an impostor.  
The occasion of the Admonitors great commendation, of a very good manner of ecclesiastical discipline, used by the high Commissioners, hath necessarily drawn me, to show the differences of the disciplines used by the same. To the intent the kings Highness might be pleased, with the advice of his parliament, to consult, whether it were not more agreeable, to the good laws, statutes and customs of the Realm, and more convenient, for the good government of the Church, to have one certain form & rule of ecclesiastical discipline, to be established, and to be used, by the high Commissioners; rather than thus at random, to suffer their only discretion, to be the Mistress of all manner of ecclesiastical discipline; especially sithence without any manner of appeal, or supplication to be made from them unto the King, they use what manner of discipline soever, seemeth good in their own eyes, whether moderate or immoderate, civil or ecclesiastical, without check or controlment. Then the which there can not seem any thing more prejudicial and burdensome unto the people.   

Admonition.  
Furthermore their whole drift, as it may seem, is to bring the government 
Pag. 82.  of the church to a Democracie or Aristocracy: the principles & reasons whereof, if they be made once by experience familiar in the minds of the common people, and that they have the sense and feeling of them, it is greatly to be feared, that they will very easily transfer the same to the government of the common weal. For by the same reasons they shall be induced to think that they have injury, if they have not as much to do in civil matters, as they have in matters of the Church, seeing they also touch their commodity and benefit temporally, as the other doth spiritually, and what hereof may follow, I leave to the judgement of other.   

Assertion.  
Let it be granted, that their whole drift is to bring the government of the Church to that manner of government which the learned call Aristocracy, what incommodity should the Church or common weal receyur by such a government? when as the same government is not only authorized by the holy law of God, but also commended unto us by the desires 
Book of common prayer title, communation and confirmed by 5. and 6. Ed. 6. c. 1. prim. Eliz. c. 2. 8. Eliz. c. 1. Aristocracy in the church not hurtful to the common wealth  and wishes of sundry Acts of Parleaments. For saith the book of common prayer, the Discipline of the primitive church, is greatly to be wished. Aristocracy therefore, and the discipline of the primitive Church, differing but in name, and not in nature; it can not be hurtful to the common weal, that the principles and reasons thereof should by experience, be made familiar in the minds of the common people; nay it can not but be beneficial unto the common weal, when the same shall understand, that the best observers of the law of God, & the best friends unto God and his people, are to be the Officers in the house of God. Neither is their whole drift, to be disliked, but to be commended, that labour to bring the government of the church from a Papal Prelacy, to a christian Aristocracy: the one viz. Aristocracy, 
Aristocracy in the Church optimarum, Prelacia pessimarum, potestas.  according to the interpretation of the name thereof, being optimatum potestas, a power of the best observers of the law; the other, viz. prelacy, according to their practice, being pessimatum potestas, a power of the worst observers of the law: the first derived from the law of God, & practise of God's people; the other deduced from the laws and customs of the Gentiles and idolatrous Priests. And this of necessity, in defence of the truth, the Admonitors argument, forceth me to speak; for by an implication of the dislike of bringing the government of the Churches by Pastors and Elders, to a Democracie or Aristocracy, he hath by consequence, disclaimed and disavowed the government of the Church by Prelacy to be any of those two. And what other government than should we think Prelacy to be, but either oligarchy, or Tyranny? For neither Monarchy may it be, neither Policy, 
prelacy either oligarchy or tyranny.  or political estate can it be: and other kind of government besides these there is not any. For my part, I more charitably judge of the government of the Church by Prelacy, then to match it with Tyranny. And although the Admonitor, and the Perusers and allowers of his book, were men in their generation wise, yet had they well weighed the nature of the government of oligarchy, they would rather in this argument, have been silent, then upon disclaim of Democracie, and Aristocracy, (governments both of them commendable in their kind) have cast the commendation of their own government of the Church by Prelacy, to so desperate an estate, as is the estate of oligarchy. Wherein if any do glory, because not many of the best, but some few of the wealthiest, and richest sort do govern, then let him hearken and consider, what (long since) was preached before Pope Vrban the fift, by 
Act. & Mo.  one Nicolas Orem, a man singularly commended for learning in his time. 
Nicholas Orem his opinion of oligarchy.  Amongst all the regiments of the Gentiles, none (saith he) is more to be found, wherein is to be seen so great and exceeding odds, them in the policy of Priests: Amongst whom one is drunken, another is sterved, amongst whom some be so high, that they exceed all Nobles & Princes of the Earth; some again be so abased, that they are under all rascals; and such a commonwealth (saith he) may well be called oligarchy. But Thomas Aquinas, he seemeth to set the discommodities of oligarchy, a pin 
Thomas Aquinas what he thinketh of oligarchy.  higher: for (saith he) as a Kingdom hath in it the commodities of all other good regiments; of Aristocracy, that the Noblest and chiefest persons among 
Aristocracy a good regiment.  the people, be taken to Council: of Policy, or political estate, where an assembly of all estates is had, & when the very best of all sorts, are chosen, to consult, and deliberate, of the public weal: so doth Tyranny contain, and hath in it all incommodities, and vices of all naughty & corrupt regiments: of oligarchy it borroweth, that the most wicked 
oligarchy a corrupt regiment  & corruptest men be Counsellors, & that (as it were) a rout of Tyrants do gowerne. The reasons and pillars of which oligarchy, are immoderatnes, excessivenes, disparity, and inequality, passing and beyond all mean and measure. Now if our reverend Bb. shall show themselves to be malcontented with me, as though out of the opinions of these learned men, I would gather that the government of the Church by Prelacy, is one of the corruptest governements; I am to desire them to have patience until they shall plainly demonstrate unto us, that the same is not oligarchy. For if hereafter they shall revoke their former disgraceful judgements, against the discipline by Pastors and Elders, containing in it the very nature of true Aristocracy; and withal, instruct us better of the true nature of their own government, of the Church by Prelacy; they shall find us pliable to their opinion, so that it be grounded upon the principles and reasons of truth. In the mean season (after the fashion of the Admonitors manner of admonishing the people, we most humbly beseech the King and parliament to be informed, that it is greatly to be feared (if Prelacy be oligarchy) that the Prelates will endeavour, 
It is to be feared lest (by the example of Prelates) oligarchy be brought in the common weal.  to transfer that manner of government, from the Church unto the common weal. And that the common weal shall as miserably be rend, & torn, with factions & uproars, as now the church is disquieted by schisms and divisions. For if only a few of the richest and wealthiest sort, shall get an head, and bear all the sway in the common weal, they shall think by the principles and reasons of oligarchy, that they have injury, if they have not as much to do in civil matters, as the Prelates have to do in the matters of the Church: And what hereof may follow, as the Admonitor leaveth, so do I also leave it to the judgement of other. Only if the way hereof already hath been trodden out unto them, by some who 
A caveat against oligarchy.  have not written, nor spoken, but yet practised the principles and reasons of oligarchy in the common weal, only than this I say, and add as a caveat, that the danger to come, is more heedfully to be prevented. For like as in good harmony (to make the Music perfaict) is required a moderate, & proportionate inequality of voices; which, if it too much exceed, taketh away all the sweet melody, so by too much immoderate inequality, or disparity of Citizens, the common weal falleth to ruin. But why may not the government of the 
The government of the Church by Prelacy, is not Monarchical.  Church by Prelacy, be a Princely and a Royal government? In deed this question, if it should be resolved, by the rules and principles of the canon law, I could hardly disprove that government to be Princelike: for, (as hath been said before) quilibet Ordinarius in sua Diocoesi; est maior quolibet Principe. Yea and every Bishop, by the same law, hath as absolute a spiritual power, within his Diocese, as a King hath a temporal power within his Kingdom. But because that law with the rules & principles thereof, is, or aught to be discarded out of this Kingdom, we will not wade in it. Only we say that the government of the Church by Prelacy, cannot be any kind of Royal and Monarchical government, because Prelates have not like power spiritual, as Kings and monarchs have power remporall. For there was never yet lex regia, de Prelatorum spirituali imperio, lata, qua Prelatis, & 
Institut. de iure nature. gent & ci. § Sed & quod.  in eos, omne imperium suum, & potestatem, aut Deus, aut populus Dei contulerit. And therefore where the people have made the foresaid regal law, as there it is justly said, quodcunque Imperator per epistolam constituit, vel cognoscens decrevit, vel edicto praecepit, legem esse constat: and quod Principi placuit, legis habet vigorem; So likewise, where there is no such regal law, made in the church, there it is as justly affirmed: quod Prelato placuit, legis non habei vigorem; quodcunque Prelatus per epistolam constituit, cognoscens decrevit, vel canone praecepit, legem non esse constat. And then how can every Prelate, or why doth every Prelate, by his sole authority, enjoin canons, articles, injunctions, and orders, to be observed as laws, in all the Churches of his jurisdiction? If the Admonitor supposed the government 
If the gouvernment of the Church by prelacy be Monarchical, them may the government by Pastors be so to  of the Church by Prelacy to be Monarchical, because the Queen was a Monarch, and that the reverend Bishop governed under a Monarch; then what did he else, but put a weapon into the hands of Pastors and Elders, to prove their government also, to be Princely and Monarchical? Because Pastors & Elders desire not to have that manner of government, to be brought into the Church, otherwise then by the Royal assent, Sovereign authority, and express commandment of our most gracious King and Monarch. Besides, if any government may be therefore said to be a Monarchy, because the same is derived from an earthly Monarch, how much more than may the government of the Churches, by Pastors and Elders be adjudged Monarchical, by reason the same is deduced from our heavenly and everlasting Monarch. For the reverend Bb. by their public preachings, & apologetical 
Ma. Horn, Bishop of Winch. Ma. jewel, Bishop of Sali. Mai. Bilson, Bishop of Winch.  writings testify, that power & authority to ordain and depose Ministers; to excommunicate and to absolve; to devise and to establish rites and ceremonies in the church; to define what is truth; to pronounce what is falsehood; to determine what is schism; and to condemn what is heresy: our reverend Bb. (I say) confess this power, to be originally decided, unto the true Bishops, and Pastors of the Church from the Kingly and Sovereign power of our Saviour Christ. By what name therefore soever the gouvernment of Pastors and Elders in the Churches be called, there is no manner of cause to dislike of the planting of that government in a Monarchy, because the same is instituted by the Monarch of monarchs, who is able, and ready, to uphold the state of all Monarchies in common weals, together with the state of Aristocracy in his 
No cause for a Monarch to fear, that his Christian subjects should have the sense of Aristocracy in Church government.  Church. Neither is there any cause for any Monarch in the world, to fear the making of christian common people, by familiar experience, to have the sense & feeling of the principles and reasons of Aristocracy.  
For if a people have once submitted their necks to the yoke of Christ, they can live a peaceable & godly life, under all kinds of powers, because they know all kind of powers, to be the ordinance of God. But especially, there is not, neither ever was, neither ever can there be, any cause for any King, or Monarch of England, greatly (as the Admonitor insinuateth) to fear, that the common people, will very easily transfer the principles, and reasons of Aristocracy, to the government of the common weal; and thereupon be induced to think that they have injury, if they have not as much to do in civil matters, as they have in matters of the Church, seeing they also touch their commodity and benefit temporally, as the other doth spiritually. And certes it seemeth that the Admonitor was drawn very dry of reason, when he was fain to pluck this stake from the hedge, to make a fire, and to kindle the wrath of the Magistrate, against the form of discipline, by Pastors and Elders. For whether he intendeth that the Pastors and Elders will think themselves to have injury, if they deal not in all causes of the common weal, as well as in all causes of their churches; or whether he meant, that the common people, will easily transfer, the government of the common weal, from a Kingly Monarchy, to a noble Aristocracy, there is neither soothness nor soundness in his meaning. For sithence 
Pastors disclaim to deal in civil matters.  the learned Ministers against the reverend bishops by the holy rules of our faith, maintain that it is not lawful for a Minister of the Gospel, to exercise civil magistracy, and that it is not lawful for the man of God, to be entangled with the affairs of this life; how is it probable, that those Ministers will easily oppugn their own knowledge, by their own contrary practice? Or how is it probable, that they would overloade themselves with that burden, to ease the Church whereof they have contentedly exposed themselves into a number of reproaches, contempts, bitings, & persecutions? As for that other intendment of the Admonitors, that it is greatly to be feared, that the common people will easily transfer Monarchy, unto Democracie, or Aristocracy, if the principles and reason thereof, by experience, were made familiar in their minds. this reason (I say) might seem to carry some show of affrighting a Monarch, if the same were insinuated unto a king, whose people were never acquainted with the principles & reasons of Democracie, or Aristocracy: but this fear being insinuated unto our late Sovereign Lady the Queen, whose people ever since the time they first begun to be a people, have had their wits long exercised, with the 
The people of England have their wits exercised with the sense of Democracie & Aristocrarie  sense and feeling, of the reasons & principles, aswell of Democracie, as also of Aristocracy, what sense had the Admonitor to urge this fear? That in the Kingdom of England, the common people have already the sense and feeling of the reasons & principles of Democracie, cannot be denied. For in every cause almost, aswell of criminal, as civil justice (some few only excepted) to be executed in the common weal, by the common laws of the Realm, have they not some hand, and dealing in the same, by one means or other? Nay which is more, have they not the sense and feeling, of the making, and unmaking their own laws in parliament? And is not their consultation in parliament, a mere democratical consultation? As much also there is to be avowed, for the sense, and feeling of the reasons, and principles of Aristocracy, to be already in the minds of the Peres, the Nobles, the judges, and other great men of the Realm. For are not the Wisest, the Noblest, & the Chiefest taken out of these, by the King, to be of his Counsel, and to be judges and justicers in his Courts? Yea, and is not their assembly also in parliament, a mere Aristocratical assembly? And what translation then is there greatly to be feared, out of the Church to be made into the common weal, when the minds of all sorts of our common wealthes-men, be already seasoned, with the things which he feareth? And when the common weal is already seized of the principles and reasons, which he would not have familiarly known unto it. Wherefore that the King, the Nobles, and commons, may no more be scared, with the strangeness of these uncouth, and unknown greek names, of Democracie, and Aristocracy, written in his book with great and capital letters; I have thought it my duty, by these presents to inform them, that the government of the church by Pastors and Elders now wanting amongst us, and desired to be brought into the Church, by the Souveraine authority of our King, Nobles, and commons in parliament (for the outward form & manner thereof) is none other manner of government, nor form of 
The manner of policy, by Pastors and Elders in the Church, is agreeable to the government in the common weal  policy, them such as they, and their progenitors and Ancestors, for many hundred years together, without interruption, have used and enjoyed in the common weal. And that therefore it will be a very easy matter, to transfer the same, to the government of the Church. For by the reasons and principles of their own government, in the common weal, and by the sense, & feeling thereof, they may well be induced, to think, that they have injury, if they have not as much to do in matters of the Church, as they have to do in matters of the common weal, seeing they touch their commodity and benefit spiritually, as the other doth temporally. And withal on the other side, I shall do my best endeavour, to advertise them that the government of the Church by Prelacy, is such a manner of government, as was never yet 
The government of the Church by Prelacy, disagreeable to the government used in the common weal.  in the administration of justice by any subject (no not touching the outward form thereof) once admitted into any part of common weal: and that therefore the same (if it may please the King) will very easily be sent, and transmarined unto Rome, from whence it first came, & where it had it original and birthright. And to the end, that we may clearly discern, whether the nature of the government of the Church by Prelacy, or the nature of the government, desired to be planted by Pastors and Elders, be more agreeable to the nature of the policy, received and used both by the Nobles, and common people, in the common weal; it is necessary that the manners and forms, both of Prelatical, & Pastoral government, be made familiar unto the mind of the Reader. And because we have already declared, the manner of the election, and confirmation both of a Bishop, into his Episcopal Sea, & of a Minister, into his Pastoral charge; what the one is by the law already established, and what the other, by a law desired to be established, aught to be, we will not any more speak of their entrance, into either of their places, unless only (a little to recreate the Reader) we merely note what answer some Bb. have made, when as long chase after Bishoprics, they have chafed in their minds, for fear of losing their prey: as was the answer of that Italian Bishop, 
The answer of an Italian Bishop, loath to lose his Bishopric.  who being thrice demanded of the Archb. (as the manner is) vis Episcopari? vis Episcopari? vis Episcopari? and being willed by one standing by, thrice again to answer (as the manner is) nolo, nolo, nolo. He making no bones at the matter, answered aloud with an oath, Proh Deum, dedine ego tot milia Florenorum, pro volo Episcopari, & iam debeo dicere nolo? or as was the answer of that English Bishop, who having promised a Courtier one annuity of xx. pound, during 
The answer of an English Bishop, having obtained his congedelier.  his life, out of his Bishopric, if he could procure the speedy sealing of his congedelier: within a while after, when it was sealed, he rapt out an oath, & swore by jesus God, that the same Gentleman had done more for him, than an other great Courtier, who before hand, for that purpose, had received from him one thousand marks: But whether all Bishops buy their congedeliers dearer, or better cheap, is not a matter incident to this treatise; only if they buy dear, they may happily think with them selves, that they may sell dear, vendere iure potest, emerat ille prius, setteth not any price upon any wares in the Royal exchange. But to return to our purpose, whence by occasion of those bishoply oaths and answers, we have a little digressed: let us see what is the manner 
The manner of the administration of spiritual justice in the Church, by Prelacy.  and form, of the administration of spiritual justice, in the government of the Church, by Prelacy, as the same is ordinarily administered, in all places throughout the Church of England. Wherein that we be not mistaken, it is to be understood, that the manner of administration of justice, whereof we speak, is that administration of justice only, which respecteth the punishment of crimes ecclesiastical to be inflicted by spiritual censures. In all which cases, penances, suspension, and excommunications, in the Bishop's consistory, proceed from the judgement, and authority of the Bishop alone, if he be present, or from the sentence and power of his Vicar general, or Commissarie alone, if he be absent: Nay doth not everi such censure likewise in the Archdeacon's consistory, proceed from the sole authority of the Archdeacon? or if he be absent, from the sole authority of his official? But if the like course of the execution of justice as this is, can not be found, to be an ordinary course of justice, in the common weal, where justice is administered in criminal causes, by the ministery of a subject: I would feign learn, what prejudice may be feared to redound unto the common weal, if the administration of spiritual justice (after a sort) were established, to be after the same manner in the Church, after which civil justice is already practised in the common weal. I said after a sort, to this end, lest I should be mistaken. For the meaning is not, that spiritual justice should be ministered exactly, in 
No one subject in the common weal, can alone exercise civil justice, in causes criminal.  every respect, after the manner of civil justice, but the comparison standeth only in this; that, as not any one temporal subject alone hath authority to hear, to examine, and to judge any one criminal cause, in any Court of civil justice, in the common weal; so likewise that not any one spiritual person alone should have authority, to be examiner and judge of any one criminal cause in any Court of spiritual justice in the Church. For if certain principal 
The administration of spiritual justice, by Pastors & Elders, agreeable to the execution of civil justice in the common weal.  & godly persons, associated unto a learned and zealous Pastor, in the presence, and with the consent and authority of the people of every Parish, did enjoin penance, suspend, or excommunicate a spiritual offendor, were not this form of administration of spiritual justice, more consonant, agreeable, and conformable, to the daily execution of civil justice in the Courts of the common weal, then is the administration of spiritual justice, by the Bishop alone, or by his Vicar general alone, in his Consistory? and to make this matter more familiar in the mind of the Reader, for an instance or two let us suppose, that Mai. Doctor Bancroft were still Parson of S. Andros 
Master D. Bancroft with his assistants letter, able to repress Puritans in one Parish, than Master D. Stanhope alone, to repress all in a Diocese.  in Holborn, and that he had chosen Master Harsnet to be his Curate, and withal that Mai. Dodge, Ma. Merbury, Master Flower, and Master Brisket, (all chief attendants on his late great Lord and Master) were inhabitants within the same Parish, & that the chief men, of the same Parish, had chosen those to be assistants to him, and to his Curate, for the inquisition of the demeanours of all the Puritans and Precisians within his Parish; let this (I say) be supposed, would not he and they (trow we) think it a high scorn, and an indignity to be offered unto their masterships, in case it should be insinuated, that Master Doctor Stanhope, were better able, with one little blast of breath, upon a piece of paper, to blow away all Puritanisme, out of the City and Diocese of London, than these great chaplains, and discrete gentlemen, with their thunderings, and with their lightnings, were able to fright the same out of one poor Parish in Holborn? And again, to make this matter yet a little more familiar to the mind of the Reader, let us suppose again that thundering Mai. Merburie now Lecturer in in the church of Saint Mary O●eris, were Pastor of the same church, & had, to be his assistants in the Ministry but simple M. Butterton, & that they two, for the Elders of the same Church, to be chosen by the Parish, had such, and such, and such, and such men lovers, of all honesty and godliness, and enemies unto all dishonesty, and ungodliness; could not these learned and grave Ministers, with the assistants of such wise & godly Boroughmaisters, be as well able, to reform Papists, Atheists, swearers, profaners of the Sabaoth, Drunkards, adulterers, and such like, within the Borough of Southwark; as is Master Doctor Ridley, to bring to any good amendment of life, all such kind of persons, within the whole Diocese of Winchester? If the examination and judgement of all thieveries, pickeries, burglaries, robberies, murders and such like, were committed to Master Doctor Ridley alone, for the Diocese of Winchester, and to Master D. Stanhope alone for the Diocese of London, were it not like, that for one such malefactor, as there is now, we should shorthly have an hundred? And therefore to hold us still to the point in question, it is very plain and evident, that this manner of spiritual justice, mentioned to be executed, by the Pastors and Elders, is more correspondent, to the administration of civil justice, in the common weal, then is that manner of the execution of spiritual justice, by Doctor Stanhope or Doctor Ridley; by the Bishop of London, or by the Bishop of Winchester. For to begin with our meanest, and basest Courts, let them show unto us, any Court, Leete, Law-days, or Sheriffs turns, within 
Matters in Leets and law-days not overruled by one alone.  any County, City, Town, Borough, Village, or Hamlet within the Realm, wherein matters of civil justice are heard, examined, and adjudged by one man alone. If for the common benefit of the Tenants against incrochments, overlaying of commons, waist, nuisances, or such like, any pain is to be offered, or presentment made, the same is not set or made, by the Steward, Sheriff, or other Officer alone, but by the common voice and consent of all the homagers, and suitors to the Court. The Steward indeed is the director, and moderator of the Court, the giver of the charge, and the mouth of the whole assembly, to pronounce and enact the whole work of their meeting, but he is not the only inquisitor, the presenter, the informer, or the judge, to dispose all things according to his own discretion. Besides, matters of the King's peace, are not committed in any County, or other place within the Realm, only to one justice of the peace alone. For neither at the general 
Breaches of the kings peace, not punishable by one alone  Sessions of the peace, nor at any other less public meetings, any person, for any offence, (whereof he standeth indited, or for which he is punishable) can be fined, amerced, or bodily punished, at the discretion of one justice alone, but by the greatest part of the justices assembled, his penalty is to be imposed upon him. Furthermore, this manner of the examination of the fact, and declaration of the law, for the trial of the fact, and judgement of the law, doth not reside in the breast of one juror or judge alone. In the Court of the King's Bench, if a prisoner be brought to the Bar, and confess not the crime, 
justice in any of the B. Courts, is not executed by one judge alone  by the justice of that Court he can receive no judgement, unless he be first indicted, by inquisition of 12. grand jurors at the least, and afterward again be tried by other 12. brought judicially into the Court face to face. Yea & in this Court, neither the interpretation of the common law, nor the exposition of any statute dependeth upon the opinion, credit, or authority of one judge, no not of the kings chief justice himself alone; for his other three brethren and Co-juges; varying from him in point of law, may lawfully overrule the Court. The same manner of judgement, for the law is in use, and is practised by the judges, in the Court of common Pleas, and by the Barons of the Exchequer in the Latin Court of the Exchequer. And not only in these Courts of law and 
In the Courts of Equity are many assistances.  justice, but also in all the King's Courts of equity & conscience; it is not to be seen that any one person alone, hath any absolute power, without assistants, finally to order, judge, and decree, any cause appertaining to the jurisdiction of those Courts. In the Court of Requests, there are not fewer than two, 
Court of Requests.  yea some times three, or four, with Master of Requests in commission, to hear and determine matters of equity in that Court. In the Court of Wards and liveries, there sitteth not only the 
Court of Wards.  Master of the Wards, but also the kings Attorney, the Receiver and other Officers of the same Court. In 
Court of the chequer Chamber.  the Court of the Checquer-chamber, with the Lord Thresorer, (who is chief and Precedent of that Council) yet with him as assistants, do sit the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Lord chief Baron, and the other Barons. Whatsoever decree final is made in the kings 
High court of Chancery.  high Court of Chancery, the same is decreed, not by the Lord Chancellor alone, but by the Lord Chancellor, and the high Court of Chancery: wherein the Master of the Rolls, and the twelve Masters of the Chancery as coadjutors, do sit and give assistance. In the most honourable Court of star-chamber, the 
Court of star-chamber. 3. H. 7. c. 1. &. 21. H. 8. c. 20.  Lord Chancellor, the Lord Thresaurer, and the Precedent of the Kings most honourable Council, & keeper of the King's privy Seal, or two of them, calling unto them one Bishop, & one temporal Lord, of the Kings most honourable Council, the two chief justices of the kings bench, and common Pleas for the time being, or other two of the King's justices in their absence, have full power and authority, to punish, after their demerits, all misdoers being found colpable before them. If we search our statutes (besides the Courts, and matters determinable in these spoken of before) we shall find, that the complaints of error, whether it touch the King, or any other person, 
31. E 3. c. 21  made in the Exchequer, should be done to come before the Chancellor, & Treasurer, who taking to them two justices, & other sage persons, are duly to examine the business; and, if any error be found to correct, & amend the Rolls, etc. By reason of delays of judgements, used in the Chancery, in the 
14. E. 3. c 5  kings bench, common bench, and in the Exchequer, it was assented, established, and accorded, that a Prelate, two Earls, and two Barons chosen by the parliament, by good advice of the Chancellor, etc. shall proceed to take a good accord and to make a good judgement. When it was complained unto the King. that the profits, etc. of his Realm by 
●0. K. 2. c. 1  some great Officers, etc. were much withdrawn and cloyned, etc. it pleased the King, etc. to commit the surveighing, aswell of the estate, etc. of his house, etc. unto the honourable Fathers in God, William Archbishop of Canterbury, and Alexander Archbishop of York, etc. by a statute of commission for 
a 6. H. 6.  Sewers: by a statute for punishment of 
b 11. H. 5. c. 25.  perjury: by a statut against making or executing of acts, or ordinances, by any 
c 19 H. 7. c. 7.  Masters, etc. being not examined, etc. by the Lord Chancellor, Treasurer, or chief justices, etc. By a statute for the erection of the Court of 
d 27. H. 8. c 27.  Augmentation: by a statute for erection of the Court of first 
e 32. H. c. 45.  fruits & tenths: and lastly by an 
f 27. Eli. c. 8  act for redress of erroneous judgements in the Court commonly called the kings Bench: By all these statutes (I say) it is very apparent; that the Administration of public affairs, in the common weal, hath never been usually committed, to the advisemnet, discretion, or definitive sentence, of any one man alone. Which point is yet more fully, and more perfectly 
Lord precedent, and counsel in Wales. Lord precedent & counsel in the North parts Lord deputy, & counsel in Ireland. The King, and his honourable privy Counsel  to be understood, by the establishment, & continuance, of the King's Lord President and Council in Wales; of the King's Lord President and Counsel established for the North; of the kings Lord deputy and Council within the Realm of Ireland; of the King's Highness most honourable privy Council, chosen by him for the assistance of his Royal person, in matters appertaining to his Kingly estate; and lastly of the supreme and grand Council of the three estates in parliament, for matters concerning 
The King & his grand Counsel in parliament.  the Church, the King, and the common Weal. For whether respect be had unto the secret affairs of the King's estate, consulted upon in his highness Council Chamber, by his privy Counsellors, or whether we regard the public tractation of matters in parliament, there can be no man so simple, as not to know, both these privy and open negotiations, to be carried by most voices of those persons, who by the King are called to those honourable assemblies. And what a vain jangling then doth the Admonitor keep, & how idly and wranglingly doth he dispute; when against the government of the church by Pastors and Elders, he objecteth, that the same will interrupt the laws of the Realm: that it willbe great occasion of partial & affectionate dealing, that some will incline to one part, and that the residue willbe wrought to favour the other; and that thereby it willbe a matter of strife, discord, schism and heresies? Howbeit if never any of these extremities and dangers, have fallen out in the common weal, by any partial or affectionate dealing of the King's Deputies, Precedents, judges, justicers, and other Officers & Ministers, associated unto than for the administration of justice, or equity in any of the King's civil Courts; how much less cause have we to fear any partiality, affection, working inclination, favour, strife, debate, schismatical or heretical opinions, if once Pastors and Elders in every Congregation, and not throughout a Diocese one Bishop alone, had the spiritual administration of the Church-causes? Can many temporal Officers, justicers and judges, rightly and indifferently administer the law, and execute justice and judgement, without that, that some do incline to one part, & without that the residue be wrought to favour the other part? And cannot spiritual Officers dispatch spiritual affairs, without that, that they be partially & affectionally disposed? What? is it so easy a matter that the Ancients of God, and the Ministers of Christ, can the one part incline to righteousness, and the residue be wrought to favour wickedness? can some incline to God and unto Christ; and can other some be wrought to follow Satan and Antichrist? For what other controversy, is required to be decided by Pastors and Elders, than the controversy of sin, between the soul of man, and his God? And is there any Christian Pastor or Elder, that willbe wrought, rather to favour the sin of a mortal man, than the glory of his immortal God? But to leave the state of the Kingdom and common weal, and the good usages and customs of the same; let us come to the state of the Church itself, and to the lawful government thereof, established even amongst us at this day. 
The government of the Church, ought not to be, by one alone.  For whatsoever our reverend bishops practice to the contrary, yet touching ordination and deposition of Ministers; touching excommunication and absolution; touching the order and rule of Colleges, Cathedral churches, and the Universities, the ecclesiastical law doth not commit the administration of these things, and regiment of these places, to any one person alone. The Universities admit not the government of the Chancellor being present, nor of his Vicechancelour 
The government in the Universities not by one alone.  (him self being absent) as of one alone: the Doctors, Procurators, Regent's, & non-Regents, have all voices, and, by most of their voices, the University causes take success. The businesses 
The government in Colleges not by one alone.  of Colleges, by the statutes of their founders, are commended to the industry and fidelity of the Precedent, Vicepresident, and fellows; unto the Provost, Viceprovost, and fellows; unto the Warden, Sub-warden, and fellows; unto the Master and follows: and unto such like Officers & fellows. The Cathedral 
The government in Cathedral churches, not by one alone.  churches their live, and their lands, their revenues & their dividents, their chapters, and their conferencies, depend upon the will and disposition of the Dean and Chapter, and not of the Bishop alone. Neither can the Bishop 
Ex. de excess. Prela. c. 〈◊〉. Exc. de 〈◊〉 quaes. cons. cap c. novit.  alone, by any ancient canon law (pretended to be in force) place, or displace, excommunicate, or absolve, any ecclesiastical person, without the judgement of the Chapter. And aswell by a statute 21. H. 8. c. 13. as also by the book of consecrating Archbishops, etc. the presence of diverse Ministers, and the people is required, at the ordination of every Minister. As for the deposition, or degradation of Ministers (under the correction 
whether the degradation of a Minist. be warantable.  of the reverend Bb. be it spoken) I think, they have not so much as any colour of any law for it. The form of the degradation of a Popish and sacrificing Priest, by the canon law can be no pretext to degrade a Minister of the 
Monsieur de Plesis 164. in the second book of the Mass.  Gospel, because a Minister of the Gospel is not set into his charge, per calicem, & patinam, with a cup full of wine, & dish full of hosts: Neither receiveth he any character at all of a shaveling Priest. And because a Minister of the Gospel, is ordained only after that manner, which the statute law hath appointed, how should the ordination made by so high an authority, be undone by any other power? unto the former manners, of the administration of the causes of the Universities, Colleges, and Cathedral churches, may be added the execution of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, committed heretofore by the Queen unto the ecclesiastical Commissioners. For although by the words of the statute, her Highness had full power, and authority, 
The ecclesiastical commission exercised by many commissioners, and not by one.  by her letter patents, to assign, name, and authorize, any one person, a natural borne subject, to execute spiritual jurisdiction; yet nevertheless, according to the laudable usages, and customs of her kingdom, and Courts temporal, she evermore authorized, not one alone, but divers & sundry, aswell temporal, as ecclesiastical persons, for the execution thereof. Which manner of commission, because the reverend Bb. commend the same, and avow that it would do more good, if it were more common, it cannot but seem, to be a most grateful thing, unto all good men, especially unto those reverend Fathers, if humbly we beseech the King, that his Highness would be pleased, to make it more common. And therefore, in the 
The ecclesiastical commission commanded by the Bb. if it please the king may be enlarged unto all Parishes wherein are godly preaching Ministers.  behalf, aswell of the reverend Bb. as of all the learned and grave Doctors, and Pastors of every church, we most instantly entreat our most gracious Souverayne Lord the King, that where in any Parish, there shallbe found a learned preaching Minister, resident upon his benefice, that there he would be pleased by his authority Royal, under the broad Seal, to enable him, and some other godly and faithful Knights, Esquires, Gentlemen, Citizens, Boroughmaisters, or other chief men of the same Parish, to execute spiritual justice against drunkards, adulterers, swearers, railers, and such like ecclesiastical offenders, inhabitants only within the same Parish. For in this case we say, as the reverend Bb. say, bonum quò communius, eò melius. If any 
No exception to be taken against lay Elders to be authorized by the king in every Parish; sithence the king authorizeth lay Elders, in every ecclesiastical commission.  exception should be taken, or challenge made scoffingly, and with scornful terms, against these lay parochians, as heretofore hath been used, against lay elders, or lay Aldermen (as they call them) let him that taketh such exception, advise himself well, and remember before he speak, that in speaking he control not the policy, the practice, the wisdom, & the authority, both of our late Queen deceased, and of our Souverayne Lord the King now reigning; who authorized, and doth authorize laymen to be ecclesiastical commissioners. Which kind of lay men, or lay Elders (as they call them) that they have joined in the exercise of the chiefest censure of the Church, viz. excommunication, with ecclesiastical persons, hath been already proved, by the sentence of excommunication pronounced against E. by Master W. and his associates, whereof divers were lay-men. Again if one lay Elder dwelling at Winchester, may call and ssociate unto himself, one ecclesiastical Elder, dwelling at S. George's in Southwark, to excommunicate any Parochian or Minister subject unto the jurisdiction of the Archdeacon of Surrey, in what Parish soever of the same jurisdiction the party shall dwell: if it be lawful (I say) 
Discipline of excommunication exercised by one lay Elder and one ecclesiastial Elder.  for every ordinary, to join one lay Elder, & one ecclesiastical Elder, together in commission, the one to pronounce sentence of contumacy, the other to denounce sentence of excommunication, for every spiritual contumacy, committed within his jurisdiction; what reason can any man pretend, why it should not, be much more lawful, for the King by his Royal authority, to appoint a learned, & preaching Pastor with the assistance of some company of faithful inhabitants of the same Parish, to exercise all manner of spiritual justice within their own parish?  
If the King shall stand in doubt, whether any Discipline by excommunication be exercised, after this, and this manner, in the church of England, then to put his Highness out of all doubt hereof, may it please the King to consider the precept of the reverend Bishops made in their convocation; together with the practice of the venerable Archdeacon of Surr. following. The precept is this; unusquisque 
Articlo pro clero. c. de quibusdam circa excom: excessib. coercend: 1584.  Vicarius generalis, officialis, seu Commissarius, qui ordines ecclesiastico; non susceperit, eruditum aliquem presbyterum, sibi accerset, & associabit, qui sufficienti authoritate, vel ab ipso Episcopo, in iurisdictione sua, vel ab Archidiacono (presbytero existent) in iurisdictione sua munitus, idque ex praescripto judicis tunc praesentis, excommunicationis sententiam pro contumacia denunciabit. Every Vicar general, Official, or Commissary, which hath not taken upon him, ecclesiastical orders, shall call and associate unto him some learned Presbyter, who being armed with sufficient authority from the Bishop in his jurisdiction, or from the Archdeacon, being a Presbyter in his jurisdiction, shall denounce, & that by the prescript of the judge present, the sentence of excommunication for contumacy. Now the manner of the 
D. Hones practise of the bishops article.  practice of this precept, ensueth in these words: johannes Hone, legum Doctor, Officialis venerabilis viri domini Archidiaconi Surr. omnibus & singulis rectoribus, etc. salutem. Cùm nos rite & legitime procedentes, omnes & singulos quorum nomina, etc. in non comparendo coram nobis, etc. seu saltem in non satisfaciendo mandatis nostris, etc. pronunciaverimus contumaces, ipsosque, etc. excommunicandos fore decreverimus. Cumque discretus vir magister Roul. Allen presbyter, eosdem omnes & singulos subscriptos, ex officio nostro excommunicaverit in scriptis justicia id exigente, vobis igitur committimus, etc. quatenus eos omnes, etc. sicut prefertur ex officio nostro mero excommunicatos fuisse & esse, etc. palam denuncietis, etc. Datum sub sigillo officialitatis nostrae, 19 die Decembris Anno Domini 1587. John Hone Doctor of the Laws, Official of the venerable man, the Archdeacon of Surr. to all and singular persons, etc. greeting: Whereas we, otherwise rightly, and lawfully proceeding, all and singular whose na●●s are underwritten, in not appearing before us, or at leastwise, in not satisfying our mandates, have pronounced contumacious, and decreed them to be excommunicated: And whereas also the discrete man M. Roland Allen presbyter, out of our office, hath excommunicated, all and singular under written, justice so requiring, wherefore we charge you that openly you denounce, and declare them, & every of them, so as aforesaid out of our office to be excommunicated. Given under the seal of our officialitie. The 19 day of December. 1587.  
By this practice, it doth appear, that Doctor Hone, and Roland Allen canvased many poor men very piteously. And that this poor curate Roland Allen, had a warm service, to attend upon Doctor Hone, and to jerk those, whose points soever he should untie. But because this precept, was an article concluded upon, by the reverend bishops, in their convocation, and confirmed (as I suppose) by the Royal authority of our late Queen, we will forbear, to speak what we think, might justly be spoken, against the incongruity thereof. Only this without offence, to the reverend Bishops, we may safely demand: sithence every ordinary, whether he be a Bishop, or a presbyter, by this article of their own devise, hath such an absolute power, resiant in his person, as that thereby, throughout his whole jurisdiction, he may thus commit, the execution of discipline, by excommunication, partly to one lay person, and partly to one ecclesiastical person, partly to a supposed spiritual Elder, and partly to a lay Elder: sithence (I say) this is so; we may safely demand, what reason they can produce, to hinder the King, from having authority, to command three, or four, or (if occasion 
The King, hathas good right to command, excommunication, to be exercised, by a Pastor and Elders, as the Bb. have to commit the same to a Curate, and one lay Elder.  serve) five or six lay Elders (as they call them) and one spiritual Pastor, being a true spiritual Elder in deed, all lawfully chosen ecclesiastical Officers in the house of God, that they jointly should not execute the discipline of Christ, viz. excommunication and other censures of the church, in every Parish within his Kingdom? If it be answered, that in this case, the Presbyter alone doth excommunicate, is it not, as if one should say, that the executioner doth give judgement when at the commandment of the judge, he smiteth of the head, or casteth down the ladder? or may not as much be said, for the excommunication whereof we speak, that the Pastor only should excommunicate, when by virtue of his office, with the consent, and not by the prescript of the Elders associated unto him, he should declare and pronounce the party to be excommunicated? But let it be granted, that Roland Allen, denounceth the lesson which is written in the paper, for him to read; yet is it clear by the precept, that the same must be done, by the prescript of Doctor Hone. Besides Doctor Hone, he citeth; he precognizateth, the parties, and they being absent, he pronounceth them contumaciter absentes, and in paenam contumaciarum suarum huiusmodi, decreeth them to be excommunicate: and are not all these necessary parts incident to the execution of discipline by excommunication? And how then can the Minister, be said to excommunicate alone, when Doctor Hone of necessity must play three parts of the four; without all, or without any one of which parts, the excommunication by reason of a nullity, is merely void? Again, the act being done as it were uno puncto, at uno halitu, and Roland Allen, and Doctor Hone, having their commission from the Archdeacon, in solidum, how can their judgement be divided? Furthermore to say that Roland Allen doth excommunicate, by the authority of Doct. Hone, were to overthrow the intendment of the article: Because by the scope of the article, it is plain, that the Presbyter, to be associated to the official, must only derive his authority from one, who hath taken ecclesiastical orders. But those order's Doctor Hone never took, otherwise Roland Allens presence, had been unnecessary and superfluous. And therefore if the excommunication be of any validity, them is discipline, by excommunication in the Church of England exercised, partly by one lay Elder (as they call him) and partly by one Ecclesiastical Elder; wherein again, it is worthy the observation, for the matter we have in hand; that Doctor Hone, a mere lay & temporal man, hath authority from the Archdeacon, to call, and associate unto him, & to prescribe Roul. Allen a Presbyter, & an other man's hireling Curate in Southwark, to excommunicate, not only the Parochians, of an other Pastor's charge, but also any other Pastor whatsoever subject to the Archdeacon's jurisdiction. And hath not the King's Highness then, as good right, as great a privilege, and as high a prerogative, to command Master Doctor Andros, or Master Doctor King, and lay Elders, by a lawful election to be associated unto either of them to excommunicate either of their own Parishioners, for public drunkenness, or other notorious sins, committed in their own Parish? For if it be lawful, at the voice of a lay stranger, that an hireling and stipendiary Curate, should chase an other man's sheep out of his own fold, how much more is it lawful, that a true shepherd, should disciplinate his own sheep, feeding and couchant within his own pasture and within his own fold?  
Furthermore touching the admittance of governing Elders, or lay Elders (as they call them) unto the Minister of every congregation, according to the former pattern of one lay Elder, that the same is not, a matter so strange, for lay men to be joined in this charge of ecclesiastical government, as the opposites 
Lay men appointed by the Queen's iniwctions, to execute some part of discipline.  bear us in hand to be: it shall not be amiss, to call unto their remembrances, one of our late Sovereign the Queen's iniuctions, whereby certain lay persons called overseers, were commanded, to be chosen by the ordinaries, in every Parish for the better retaining of the people in obedience, unto divine service. In every Parish (saith the Injunction) three or four discrete men, which tender God's glory, and his true religion, shall be appointed, by the ordinaries, diligently to see, that all the parishioners duly resort, unto their Church, upon all Sundays, and holy days and there to continue, the whole time, of the godly service. And all such as shall be negligent, in resorting to the Church, having no great, or urgent cause of absence, they shall straightly, call upon them, and after due admonition, if they amend not, they shall denounce them to the ordinary. Thus far the iniuction. Which, that it is not meant of the Church Wardens, appeareth by the very next article; for unto them, as is assigned an other name, so also another Office. That sidemen also, are not these kind of overseers, is plain, in that they be neither so many in number, as are here required, neither chosen by the ordinaries; neither yet do they admonish & denounce, according to this article. Wherefore because it is meet, that the effect of this Injunction, being religious, should be put in due execution, it seemeth a thing very reasonable, and much tending to the honour of the King, that his Highness, under his letters patents would be pleased, to appoint three, four, or more discrete and faithful persons in every Parish, not only to perform the effect of this article, but also generally to oversee the life and manners of the people, that without great & urgent causes they resort not unto Typling-houses, or houses of evil note, and suspected fame; and that upon the sabboth's, they use no Heathenish dancing, about their disguised Maypoles: And after due admonition if they amend not, to denounce them to the Pastor of the place. For than might the Pastor be encouraged, to give 
Book of the form of ordaining Priests.  his faithful diligence, as at the time of his ordination, he solemnly promiseth unto the Bishop, always to Minister the Doctrine and Sacraments, and Discipline of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded; by which words inserted in the book, there is a plain and open confession made by all estates in parliament, that Christ hath not only established 
Every Minister ought to minister the discipline of Christ in his own cure, by consent of parliament.  discipline, but a certain form of discipline, in his Church, and that the Pastor to whom the care, and charge is committed to teach the people, aught to minister the same discipline. For it had been a very absurd part for the parliament, to appoint the Bishop, to receive a promise from the Minister, to minister the discipline of Christ, if Christ had not instituted a Discipline; or that the same discipline, which he instituted, had not in their judgements belonged unto the Minister. And therefore this very letter of the book convinceth the whole answer made unto the abstract, touching this point to be very erroneous, frivolous and impertinent, to the point in question; For whereas in the abstract, it is alleged, that the Bishop by virtue of 
The Minister by promise bindeth himself to Minister the discipline of Christ.  the order and form appointed, by act of parliament, bindeth the Minister, aswell to minister the discipline of Christ, within his cure, as the doctrine and Sacraments of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded, etc. hereunto first he answereth that these clauses do not dispositively, 
Pag. 55. Pag. 60.  ordain any thing for discipline, as though the law ment, by authority hereof, to establish, that the order in these things, by the Realm received, should be holden as agreeably to the word of God, but must be taken enunciatively, to declare and affirm, that following the order by law established, they should do agreeable to Gods will. But alas what repugnancy is there heard? for how 
Regugnance in the answer to the abstract.  can the law declare and affirm, that the Ministers following the order by law established, shall do agreeably to Gods will, if the order in these things, by the Realm received, should not (by the meaning of the law) be holden as agreeable to the word of God? What? doth the law mean, that a man can do agreeably to Gods will, in any thing, which is not agreeable to his word? or if the law have established, an order in the discipline, which is not agreeable to Gods word, shall the Ministers do agreeably to Gods will, if they follow the Law? For the meaning of the law is plain, viz. that the Minister by virtue of his promise made to the Bishop, shall be no further bound to minister any Doctrine, Sacraments or Discipline received by the Realm, unless the Realm have received the same, according to the commandment of God. For the parliament having a religious consideration, that the Minister of Christ, must not have so much respect, what the law of the Realm, as what the law of God commandeth, carefully provided for his indemnity in this behalf.  
Besides, what a frivolous comment, hath he made upon the words of the 
A frivolous comment upon the words of the boo●e of ordaining Priests, etc.  book, when he saith, that these words of the Bishop, do not dispositively ordain any thing for discipline? When as the question is not whether the Bb. words, but whether the law and book dispose any thing for discipline? For the Bishop being but a servant to the book, and to the law, and one unto whose fidelity the execution of the law & book is committed, though he do not by his words, dispose any thing of Discipline; yet by his demand, he showeth unto the Minister, that the office of the Ministration of discipline, within his cure & charge, is committed unto him, & that by his ordination, his person is fully enabled, aswell to minister the Discipline, as to preach the doctrine of Christ. And hereupon also falleth to the ground, his other answer, as wholly impertinent to the point in question. For where he saith, that the Law meant not, by authority hereof, to establish that the order of these things, by the Realm received, should be holden as agreeable to the word of God; this (I say) seemeth wholly to be impertinent to the purpose of the abstract. For there is no such thing insinuated, 
The answer to the abstract wholly impertinent to the point in question.  to be intended by the statute: only the scope of the Authors drift, in that place seemeth to be this: viz. That every Minister, by virtue of his promise, enjoined by act of parliament, to be made by him, and by the office of ministery taken upon him, at the time of his ordination, hath bound himself, to minister the doctrine, sacraments and discipline of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded. And what then if the Law, 
The not disposing in particularity, all rites & ceremonies of discipline, doth not hinder the exercise of discipline by the Minister.  have not authorized, disposed, or established in particularity; the order of these things, or if the Scripture have not delivered every ceremony, form, or circumstance, about these three things, shall not the Minister therefore, minister these, or any of these three things at all? And suppose, I pray you, that neither this, nor any other law, had in particularity, appointed the ceremony of the Cross, the ceremony of Godfathers, or any other ceremony in Baptism; or that the Law had not appointed the ceremony of kneeling, or any other ceremony, at the celebration of the Lords Supper, should not the Minister therefore, minister neither Baptism, nor the Lord's Supper, in the charge committed unto him? yes, he should. And why? forsooth because he hath promised so to do, and because the Lord hath commanded him so to do. Besides, sithence every Minister, by virtue of his promise, and force of this law, is bound to teach the doctrine of Christ, to the people of his charge, notwithstanding he be not tied, by the law of the Realm, nor by the holy Scripture, to any rite, ceremony, or circumstance, or to any exact form, or particular manner in teaching, what reason can any man pretend, that the not particularizing, of all rites, ceremonies, or circumstances, in the Scripture, or the not establishing, of any order, by the law of the Realm, touching discipline, should altogether hinder every Minister, from the administration of all discipline in the church? For as touching the answer, that the Ministers may, and do exercise not the 
Answer to the abstract. Pag. 59  least parts of Discipline, of declaring by doctrine, according to the word of God, men's sins to be bound, and loosed, and the censure of rebuking and reproving 
Pag. 55.  openly, and that the discipline 
Discipline of declaring by doctrine, is called discipline, erroneously.  which the Minister is to execute, reacheth no further, then to reach his Parish, with all diligence to keep, and observe so much of the Doctrine, Sacraments and Discipline of Christ, as appertaineth unto them; as touching this answer (I say) it is as erroneous, as the former were frivoulous and impertinent. For as consolation and comfort, by way of exhortation, so reproof, and sharp rebuking, by way of dehortation, belong properly, to that part of the Ministers function, which concerneth the binding and losing of sinners by doctrine, and not by discipline, and is but an application of the doctrine to a wounded, or seared conscience. He therefore that leaveth no other Discipline, to be executed by the Pastor of the church, then of declaring by doctrine, men's sins to be bound, or loosed, and by teaching his Parish, to observe, doctrine, sacraments, and discipline, 
Discipline & doctrine confounded by the Answerer.  confoundeth the matters both of discipline and doctrine. Again if not any other discipline, was meant to be attributed, to every Minister then such as is declared by doctrine, them these words, viz. (and the discipline of Christ) were superfluously, and idly added by the parliament. For than had it been sufficient, for the parliament, to have enjoined the Bishop, to demand of the Minister only this and no more: viz. Whether will you give all faithful diligence, to Minister the Doctrine and Sacraments of Christ? There is therefore some other kind of discipline of Christ, intendeth by the parliament, to be attributed 
The parliament intendeth some other discipline, then of declaring by doctrine.  unto every Minister, and wherewith also the law of the Realm doth enable every Minister, then is this manner of discipline of declaring by doctrine, & teaching the people. And this discipline also must needs be understood, to be of the spiritual censures of the Church, because Christ never instituted any other discipline. And therefore because our opposites agree with us in a generality that the doctrine, Sacraments, and 
Answer to the abstract. 55. 60.  discipline of Christ, are to be Ministered as the Lord hath commanded only, & none otherwise, and yet nevertheless do dissent from us touching the persons, by whom this discipline is to be ministered, because (say they) every particular ceremony, rite, or circumstance of external policy, are not set down in scripture, because of this their answer (I say) it is to be considered; First, unto what persons, the function of the ministration of the discipline of Christ, by the holy Scriptures is committed. secondly, whether the same persons with their functions, be arbitrable, ceremonious, ritual, or circumstantial to be altered, & changed by authority of the Church, as things 
To what persons the discipline of Christ by the scriptures is committed, & whether the persons be arbitrable or no.  indifferent, yea or no. To the first, seeing to one and the self same person, the holy Scriptures attribute these two names, Bishop, and Pastor, thereby signifying what are the two duties, which belong to the same one person; and seeing also no one person by God's word is called a Bishop or Pastor in regard of 
Phillip 1. 1.  his fellow brethren, the other bishops 
Tit. 9 1. 5. & 7.  or Pastors, but in regard of his own flock, which he overseeth; and seeing 
1 Tim. 3. 1●  also in well ordered Churches, by the ordinance of God, certain men of approved godliness (called according to the common name of the Hebrews, by the common name of Elders, whom partly calleth governors) were joined as ecclesiastical Magistrates, to the Bishop, 
1 Cor. 12. 28.  Pastor, or teaching Elder, by whose common direction, & authority, ecclesiastical discipline was practised; seeing (I say) these things are so, we affirm that the persons, to whom the ministration of the discipline of Christ, rightly belongeth, are the persons only above specified and none other. And further we say if any spiritual Discipline, or power, which directly belongeth unto the conscience, 
The Discipline of Christ profaned, if the same be ministered by other persons, then the holy scriptures do appoint.  be ministered in the church, by any other persons, than by those persons only, that the same discipline is not to be called the discipline, but a mere profanation of the Discipline of Christ. For as it is unlawful, for any person, to usurp any part, of the bishops or Pastor's office, which consisteth in spiritual teaching the word and administering the sacraments; so is it also unlawful for any person to usurp any part of a bishops, Pastors, or Elders office which consisteth in spiritual rule and government. Whereupon it secondly followeth, that the same persons, with their functions, are not arbitrable, ceremonial, ritual, and circumstantial, as things indifferent, to be altered, by the authority of the church, but perpetual, substantial, essential, and as it were the very main and fundamental pillars, to uphold, & stay the house of God, from all spiritual sliding, and falling down. And therefore from the execution of the discipline of Christ, we seclude the persons of all human Archbishopps, human Bishops, Suffragans, Archdeacon's, chancellors, Commissaries, Officials, and all Rowland Allens, because their persons together with their functions, are arbitrable, ceremonious, ritual, traditional, or circumstantial, yea and removable at the pleasure of the King and State.  
Neither doth this disagree, from that 
A Bishop, Pastor and Elder, and our Lord B. diffu.  which was erst said of a Bb. or Pastor, that they be all one, in respect of their function. For it is not said that an human Bishop, and Pastor, but that a Bb. and Pastor are all one. For a Bb. simply so called, is not a Bishop, and Pastor, in respect of his fellow brethren, but only in regard of his flock, which he overseeth, feedeth, and ruleth. But a human 
what a lord Bishop is.  Bishop is he, that is promoted, unto this dignity by man, and who by man's authority taketh upon him superiority, & pre-eminence over them which are equal unto him, touching their function, that entangleth himself with civil government, and wordly affairs, and whose Bishopplie office consisteth not so much, in the dispensation of God's word and Sacraments, as in Lordly & Bishoplie apparel, Crossing with the sign of the cross, confirmation of children, sole imposition of hands, sole excommunication, sole enjoining of articles upon the people and Clergy of his Diocese, consecration of oratory's, delegation of his episcopal authority to his Suffragan Vicar general, and principal official, and other such human and Bishopplie functions. All which are after the customs, precepts, and traditions of men. And albeit D. O. by virtue of the Queen's congedelier, were chosen, by the Dean and Chapter of Lichfield, in episcopum, & Pastorem ecclesiae Lichfieldensis, yet is he never entitled 
The Lord Bishop of Lichfield is never honoured with the title of being Lord Pastor  with the dignity of being the Lord Pastor, but only with the honour, of being the Lord Bishop of Lichfield, so that one and the self same person being a Bishop, and a Pastor, may be a Lord Bishop over Pastors, but not a Pastor, over Pastors. Whereupon it followeth, that the Pastoral 
Pastoral authority of a Lord Bb & of other Pastors, is equal.  authority, which he hath in common, with his brethren, the other Pastors of his Diocese, is of no superiority or proheminence, above theirs; and that touching the function, both of his, and their Pastoral cure & charge, there is a parity between him and them, by reason whereof, he can have no power over them; because par in parem non habet imperium. But why is it, that he can not be called, Pastor Pastorum ecclesiae Lichfieldensis, Lord Pastor of the Pastors of the Church of Lichfield, and yet may be called Dominus Episcopus Pastorum ecclesiae Lichfieldensis, Lord Bishop of the Pastors of the Church of Lichfield. Why? but only for that there is custom, tradition, and the law of man, for his episcopal jurisdiction, and for that his pastoral function (if he have any) belongeth unto him in common, with his brethren the other Pastors, iure divino. The Bishop then having these two several 
Whether a lord Bishop minister the doctrine, sacrament and discipline of Christ, by virtue of his lordly episcopal or pastoral office  and distinct offices imposed upon his person, the one by divine, the other by human law, the one human and episcopal, the other without pomp, & pastoral; there ariseth from thence this question: by which of those two functions he may lawfully (I mean according to God's law) minister the Doctrine, Sacraments, & censures of Christ? If it be answered, that it is lawful for him, by virtue of his Pastoral office, to minister the doctrine and Sacraments; and by force of his human Episcopal office, to minister the censures of Christ, then is not the answer fitted to the question, the same being made, â bene coniunctis, ad male divisa. For the censures of Christ, as well as the doctrine of Christ, being simply of divine ordinance, it must follow (if his episcopal power be only of human right, & pastoral power, only of divine institution) that the censures may be ministered by authority derived only from man, but the doctrine and sacraments, by power derived only from God. Which commixion of divine and human right, in the execution of the ordinances of God, can no manner of ways be sound, pure, and sincere, and therefore also can not be pleasing unto God. For no more can the censures of Christ, to the pleasure of God, be lawfully administered, by the authority of any one whose function is of man, and not of God; then could the sacrifice of God, be offered by one, who was a priest of man, and not of God. Now that human episcopalitie, or Bishoppisme, in the Church of England, is authorized, and deduced from the power and law of 
Lordly episcopalitie authorised only by the law of the Realm.  man, viz. of the King, & Realm alone, is evident, as well by the donation & endowment of the ancient bishoprics founded by the Kingly prerogatives of the Kings of this Realm, as by the erection and establishment of the new bishoprics of Chester, Gloucester, Bristol, Peterborough, and Oxford, with their cathedral Churches, Seas, Cities, meres and bounds of those human Bishops, for the exercise of their episcopal administration, according to an act of parliament, authorizing the King's Highness, to make Bishops by his letters patents. Nay further that human episcopal jurisdiction within the meres 
Note that King Henry the eight by letters patents made Bb. therefore, etc.  and bounds of every Diocese within England is merely of human, and not of divine iustitution appeareth, by that power and authority which the King hath in translating, & dissolving of bishoprics, in conserving episcopal jurisdiction, 
31. H. 〈◊〉. c. 9  sometimes to such persons, as be no bishops (as did William the Conqueror, when he gave Episcopal power to the Abbot of Battle,) and lastly, by the very manner and form of the nomination, licence of election, authority of investiture, confirmation, and consecration of archbishops and Bishops, established by the more positive law of the Realm. But if it be answered, that 
25. H. 8. c. 20.  the Bishop, by his human episcopal power, doth minister the doctrine, Sacraments, and discipline of Christ, then is the case worse with him than it was before: because then, not only the Discipline of Christ, but also the doctrine & Sacraments of Christ, should be ministered by that authority which is of human institution. Besides, the answer should be untrue, because the Bishop at the time of his consecration, doth not receive any authority to preach the word, and minister the Sacraments; (for that authority was then committed unto him, when first he was ordained to be a presbyter): But the authority which he receiveth at the time of his consecration, is to correct, and punish such, as be unquiet, disobedient, and criminous within his Diocese. Whereby once again is that confirmed which was erst said, viz. That episcopal power in England is not of divine, but of human institution. Especially for that, by the scriptures, it can not be proved, that there be two several & distinct forms of ordinations; the one called consecration, proper to a Lord Bishop, for the exercise of Discipline; the other called ordination, peculiar to a Pastor, or teaching Elder, for the ministration of the word and Sacraments. Whereunto lastly 
If the Lord Bishop, have power to minister discipline by divine right, them no more can he commit that his power, to another, than he can commit the power which he hath of preaching to another.  may be added another main reason, that Episcopal power in England, to minister the discipline, can not therefore be of divine institution, because, if it were of divine institution, the Bishop could no more surrogate the same his episcopal power to his Suffragan, to his Vicar general, or Roland Allen, to minister the censures of Christ in his own name, than he can depute them or any of them, to minister the doctrine & Sacraments in his own name. But how doth it appear, that the Vicar general, Rowland Allen, or any other Presbyter, did ever excommunicate by the power, or in the name of the Bishop? For the proof hereof we shall not need to search any other authentical record, than the precept, and the practice before entreated of. For it is not said in the precept, That the Presbyter, being armed with authority from Christ, but it is said, that the Presbyter, being armed with authority, from the Bishop, or Archdeacon, shall denounce the sentence of excommunication; the practice also of Doctor Hone, every way, confirmeth as much. For therein Doctor Hone doth not challenge to be an officer unto Christ, but he sayeth, that he is the official of the venerable Archdeacon of Surrey; and that Master Rowland Allen Presbyter, by virtue of his office, doth excommunicate, the parties who obeyed not his mandates, who made not their appearances before him, etc. If it be answered that Rowland Allen, though he be not an immediate officer from Christ, that yet nevertheless, he is a mediate officer, deputed to his office, by an immediate officer unto Christ, vix. the Lord Bishop, or Archdeacon: then we reply, and say: First, that the Lord Bishop, & Archdeacon, be neither immediate, or mediate officers, appointed by Christ, to be Ministers of his discipline. secondly, if they were immediate officers from Christ, that yet they have no authority by the law of Christ, to transfer their right, or any part thereof, to an other person, or to depute an other person, in their name, or by their authority, to excommunicate. As for these words, viz: In Dei nomine, amen: nos johannes Hone, or nos Roulandus Allen, etc. sometimes used in their schedule of excommunication; it is but a profaning of the holy name of God, whereby they make themselves guilty, of the taking of the glorious name of God in vain. And thus much touching both the question and answer, whether the discipline of Christ, may be ministered, by the bishops human episcopal power, yea or no. But now on the other side (because no divine censure, can lawfully be executed in the church, by that authority which is of human institution) if it be answered, that the Bishop, by reason of his pastoral 
Whether the L. Bishop by pastoral authority, may excommunicate a Pastor.  power (which he is said, to have over all the Pastors and people of his Diocese) may lawfully not only minister the word and Sacraments, but also the Discipline of Christ, unto them all; than it followeth, that by a Pastourall power, one Pastor, may be a Pastor of Pastors, which is against the Scriptures, and contrary to the brotherly & fellowlike authority, which is common to all Pastors under the sun, and between whom, touching their Pastourall functions, there is to this day, by the Scriptures, as little superiority, and as great a parity, as ever there was between Apostles, and Apostles; between Prophets, and Prophets; or between Evangelistes, and Evangelistes; and as at this day, there is between Bishops, & Bishops; between Archbishops, and Archbishops; or between patriarchs, and patriarchs: yea and as is between Earls and Earls, Dukes and Dukes, Kings and Kings, Emperors & Emperors. For no greater superiority, or pre-eminence, hath any one Pastor, over the person or function of an other Pastor, touching the administration of any thing properly belonging 
pastors over small flocks, are as truly pastors as Pastors over great flocks.  to either of their pastoral functions, them hath one Emperor, over the person or function of an other Emperor, or one King, over the person or function of an other King; or one Lord Bishop over the person or function of an other Lord Bishop, or one Archbishop, over the person or function of an other Archbishop, or then had one Apostle, over the person 
As great parity between Pastors & Pastors, as between Apostles & Apostles.  or function of an other Apostle. Nay then hath one eye over an other eye; one hand over an other hand, one arm over another arm, or one foot over another foot. And therefore if touching the functions which Pastors, either among themselves, have in common one with the other, or which they have over their flocks, there be no disparity, but that the Pastors, to whom small flocks are committed, do as really, and as truly participate of the nature of true Pastors, as those great Pastors do, upon whose great shoulders, great burdens are imposed; it behoveth great Pastors, to prove unto us, by the holy Scriptures, that by the institution of their great pastoral functions, they have their power so enlarged, as that thereby they may preach the Word, minister the Sacraments, and excommunicate: and that on the other side, the little Pastors, have their power by the institution of their petty pastoral offices, so straightened, as whereby they may only preach the Word, and administer the Sacraments, but not excommunicate: it behoveth (I say) great Pastors, to be able sufficiently to show unto us these things out of the holy Scriptures: or else it seemeth to stand, with reason and equity, deduced from the same Scriptures, that a Pastor over a few, should have like power to teach, and to govern a few, as a great Pastor over many hath to instruct and to rule many. Marry, if they think, that only great Pastors be true Pastors, & that great powers spiritual, be only true powers spiritual; then let them also conclude, that only great Knights be true Knights, that only great Dukes be true Dukes, that only great Kings be true Kings, and that only great principalities temporal, be true principalities temporal. Which conclusion 
Not only Kings of great kingdoms, but also Kings of small kingdoms, be true kings.  if they shall judge, to be conclusionles; because King Rehoboam had as large a patent, to feed, and to command two Tribes, as King Solomon his Father had to command, and to feed twelve; or as the Archbishop of York may suppose himself to have, over nine or ten Counties, as the Archbishop of Canterbury, can have over nine & thirty or forty: then me thinketh it a matter, very reasonably of them to be confessed, that all true Pastors, whether they be great Pastors, or little Pastors, may lawfully exercise, all manner of such true power spiritual, as unto true spiritual Pastors by the holy scriptures doth appertain. For if Bishops, being great Pastors, may therefore preach, & minister the Sacraments, because they be, as they say, true Pastors; then also may little Pastors, therefore excommunicate, because they be, (as the scripture saith) true Bishops. Wherefore, if the L. Bishop of London, by virtue of his Pastoral office, (as he thinketh) which with his brethren the other Pastors of his Diocese, he hath in common deriveth unto him, immediately from the word of God, may lawfully excommunicate: then the pastoral office, which Master Doctor Androes hath over the people of his Parish of St. Gyles without Creeplegate, and the pastoral function which Master Doctor white hath over the people of St. Dunston's within Temple-bar, being as absolutely, & as immediately, deduced unto them, out of the same word; what proof can be made out of the word, that the Bishop being not Lord Pastor of the Pastors of his Diocese, may lawfully by the word excommunicate, all manner of offenders both Pastors and people, within his Diocese; and yet nevertheless that neither Master Doctor Androes, nor Master Doctor white, by the same word may excommunicate, any one of their Parishioners at all? Nay further, what reason can there be afforded from the law of God, that Master D. Abbot, Deane of Winchester, that Ma. Browne, Master Barlowe, and divers other prebendaries, in the church of Winchester, having certain parochial, and pastoral churches, annexed to his, and their deanery, and Prebends, and Master D. Grey in his parish by their pastoral functions, should have absolute authority (unless it be during the time of the L. bishops triennial visitation) to exercise the discipline of Christ, within their several, and peculiar churches; and yet notwithstanding, that neither Master Richman nor Mai. Burden, being both of them, grave, godly, & learned Pastors should have at any time, any pastoral authority, to exercise any censure at all? And as it is in the church of Winchester, so is it in the church of Paul's, in the church of Salisbury, & in well nigh all, if not in all the Cathedral, & Collegiall Churches, throughout the Realm. The Dean, Prebendaries and Canons, having certain parochial Churches, exempted from the Bishop within their exempt and peculiar jurisdictions, by mere Pastoral authority (for episcopal authority, by the laws of the Church have they none) may exercise all manner of spiritual censures, and that aswell by their substitutes as by themselves. Nay which is more, in Cheshire, Lancashire, 
Rural Deans in Cheshire, etc. use some part of episcopal power.  Yorkshire, Richmondshire, and other Northern parts, there be many whole Deaneries, exempted from the bishops jurisdiction, wherein the Deans and their substitutes, have not only the probate of Wills, and granting of administrations, but also the cognisance of ecclesiastical crimes, with power to use the ecclesiastical censures. Yea and this authority of the execution of ecclesiastical censures, have those Deans, either long since by some papal privileges 
Episcopal power to excommunicate granted by papal privileges, or prescribed use.  obtained, or else by long use prescribed against the bishops. Whereby again, it is clearly convinced, that Episcopal excommunication used in the Church of England, is not of divine institution, but only by human tradition. For were it of divine right, then could the same 
Power to excommunicate, if it be of divine right, may not be prescribed.  no more be prescribed, or by papal immunity be possessed, them could these Deans prescribe power, or be enfranchised to preach the word or to administer the Sacraments.  
These things have we thus at large & more fully entreated of, to the end that the King's Highness, and his parliament, and all sorts of people, might well understand, how it is not altogether, an unusual and unaccustomed thing, in the Church of England, that private & inferior ministers (as they call them) in their own right, and in their own parochial parishes, without any authority from the Bishop, should exercise even the highest censure of the Church. And that in sundry places of the Realm there is no pre-eminence in the matter of the execution of the censures, attributed to a Bb. above a Minister. Nay, which is more, then is attributed to a Bb. above a 
No more pre-eminence given to a Bb then to a Minister, or to a lay man in some places for the use of excommunication.  lay man: yea then to such a lay man, who is authorized only, by a lay man to his office. Which is evident by the ecclesiastical jurisdiction and censures, exercised a long time by lay men, in the peculiar jurisdictions of Newton, Gronbie, Anstic, Soak of Rothelie, Evington, and other parishes & hamlets in the County of Leycester. The officers of all which places, for their spiritual authority, having not had any other warrant, than such only as hath been signed, sometimes under the hand and seal of the right Honourable the Earl of Huntingdon deceased; sometimes of the Honourable Sir Henry Grey knight; sometimes of Henry Skipwith Esquire, and sometimes of others.  
For the avoiding therefore of sundry intolerable inconveniences which hitherto hath ensued for want of that authority, which the Law settled, doth enable every Minister with, It is most expedient, that all human authority in the execution of spiritual censures, be utterly taken away, and that the divine and evangelical censures of Christ, be ministered in every Congregation, where learned and godly pastors, with discrete Elders may be had, as from the mind of the Lord they were executed, in the Apostolical and primitive church.  
I had almost forgotten to speak of one common and usual kind of jurisdiction spiritual in the use of the censures of the church, by the Archb. which in cases of their prerogative, they have prescribed against the Bb. over the presbyters and people of every bishops Diocese, and Archdeacon's jurisdiction within their provinces: of one other common and usual kind of pretenced spiritual jurisdiction, and use of the censures, which the Archb. and sometimes the Dean and Chapter, (sede Archiepiscopali, or sede Episcopali vacant) exercise: and lastly, of that spiritual kind of jurisdiction & censures, so called of the Church, which Suffragans, and Archdeacon's, have and do use.  
As touching which supposed spiritual power, both of the Archbishopps & Archdeacon's, because the same their power, doth only belong unto them iure consuetudinario & non scripto, by unwritten, and not by written law; I must conclude against the jurisdiction of the Archbishopps prerogative, and against the Archdeacon's jurisdiction in all cases, as out of St. Cyprian, King Henry the eight concluded against the Pope. viz: That their authorities can not be from Christ. Because Christ said, ego sum via, veritas, & vita. He never said, ego sum consuetudo.  
Touching the jurisdiction of the Dean and Chapter, the papal law being abrogated, how the same may lawfully now be used, otherwise then by sufferance and consent of the King, and Realm, I know not. But of all spiritual authority exercised at this day in the Church of England, the same seemeth to draw most near to the semblance of the government practised by the Apostles and primitive Church. And might be approved in many points, if so be the Dean and Chapter, being as it were a Senate of preaching Elders, did no more commit the execution of their ecclesiastical jurisdiction, to the wisdom of one Vicar general, or principal official, than they do put over the leassing of their Lands, or dividentes of their rents to the only discretion of one of their Bailiffs, or Stewards.  
As for bishops Suffragans, in England and in Wales, how many there may be, and what Cities and Towns, are to be taken and accepted, for their Seas, it is at large expressed in a statute, made for the nomination of Suffragans. By which statute also we are given to understand, that it remaineth only in the disposition, and liberty of every Archbishop & Bishop within this Realm, etc. to name and elect two honest and discrete spiritual persons, being learned, & of good conversation, and them to present unto the King by their writing under their Seals, making humble request to give to one such of the said two persons, as shall please his Majesty, such title, name, style & dignity of Bishop of such Seas specified in the said act, as the King's Highness shall think most convenient for the same, so it be within the same Province, whereof the Bb. that doth name him is. Besides after such title, style, and name given by the King, it is said that the King shall present, every such person by his letters patents, under his great Seal, to the Archbishop of the same Province, wherein the Town, whereof he hath his title, name, style and dignity of Bishop; and that the Archbishop shall give him all such consecrations, benedictions and ceremonies as to the degree and office of a bishops Suffragan shall be requisite. It is further enacted, & provided that every person nominated, elected, presented, and consecrated according to that act, shall be taken, accepted, and reputed in all degrees & places, according to the style, title, name & dignity, that he shall be presented unto, & have such capacity, power and authority, honour pre-eminence & reputation, in as large & ample manner, in & concerning the execution of such commission as by any of the said Archb. or Bb. within their Diocese shall be given to the said Suffragan, as to Suffragans of this Realm heretofore, hath been used & accustomed. And that no Suffr. made & consecrated by virtue of this act, shall take or receive any manner of profits, of the places, & Seas whereof they shall be named, nor use, have or execute, any jurisdiction or Episcopal power, or authority within their said Seas, etc. but only such profits, jurisdiction & authority, as shall be licenced, and limited unto them, to take, do, and execute, by any Archbishopp or Bb. within their Diocese, to whom they shall be Suffragans under their seals. And that no such Suffragan shall use any jurisdiction ordinary or Episcopal power, otherwise nor longer time, then shall be limited, by such commission to him given upon pain, etc.  
From which Act, touching the use, & exercise of Episcopal power, and censures by the Suffragan, we may again safely conclude, that the Episcopal power, granted by the Bishops, to be used by the Suffragan, is not of divine right, and institution, but only from human devise and ordinance. For the Suffragan could not exercise any power called spiritual or Episcopal, unless by the Bb. he were nominated, by the King elected and presented, by the Archb. consecrated, and by commission under the Bb. seal authorized, in what manner, and for what time he should exercise the same. Custom then being not from heaven, but from the earth; and again the Bb. commission limiting the Suffragans delegated power being of man, and not of God, it followeth necessarily, that, that Episcopal power, which the bishops use and exercise in England, can not be divine but human. Because Episcopal authority which is divine, being conveyed from the Royal and sovereign authority of our Saviour Christ, the giver of all power unto every officer within his Church, can not be transferred, to any other person, by the same Bb. by the King, by the body of the state, or by custom. For the King's person, and body of the state, not being made capable by the holy scriptures, to use and exercise that Episcopal power which is of divine institution, can never transfer the same to others, whereof they be themselves uncapable. And to defend that custom, or any municipal law, should transfer divine Episcopal power from a divine Bishop to any human officer, is more erroneous.  
And from hence if the now L. Bb. of London judge his Episcopal power to belong unto him by divine, and that by the same right, he have power, aswell to ordain, depose, suspend and excommunicate presbyters, as to confirm boys, girls, young men & maidens,) there seemeth to be good reason that the same Bb. should make it apparently known unto the King & Realm, by what power or commission descended from heaven, he may delegate under his Seal, the same his divine authority, of ordination, deposition, suspension, excommunication, and confirmation, unto Doctor Stern his now Suffragan of Colchester.  
For if from the holy Scriptures, he can produce no warrant, for the making of a delegation of any part, of that Episcopal power which he holdeth to be committed unto him from our Saviour Christ: then well may we conclude against the ordination, deposition, suspension, excommunication, & confirmation made by the same his Suffragan, that the same his Suffragans ordination, deposition, etc. is not divine. For how can an ordination, a deposition, etc. made by a Suffragan, be divine, when as the commission granted by the Bishop, is merely human?  
Wherefore seeing the Bishop himself, hath plucked certain of his principal feathers from his own spiritual wings (if so be his own wings may be spiritual) and imped them with an untwisted thread of human policy, to the human train of his Suffragan; and seeing also his archbishops grace of Canterbury, in cases of his metropolitical prerogative, the Archdeacon's, London, Midlesex, Essex, Hertforde, the Dean of Paul's, and certain prebendaries in Paul's, the Dean of Westminster, the Master of the Savoy, and diverse other Persons, have by Papal privileges, or by ancient custom prescribed almost all other parts of his Episcopal power; there seemeth good reason, that the Bishop should again declare, whether the Churches within the said Diocese after the decease, or translation of his Lordship shall stand in need of any Lordly Successor, to sit in the same Sea, for any other profitable use or purpose, then only for wearing of a white rochet, walking with a pastoral staff, keeping seven years Sabbath, from preaching in his parish Church of Fulham, consecrating of Chapels, hallowing of Fontes, Christening (as they call it) of Bells, whyting of Walls, painting of Tombs, garnishing of Sepulchres, preserving of superstitious Monuments in glass Windows, repairing and gilding rotten and outworn Crosses, confirming Leases of Benefices, with cure of souls, upon small rents, improprying Churches, or such like. For if the great things of his Episcopal power, may be transferred, either by express, or by secret consent, either by commission or custom, and that as well to an inferior, as to a superior, as well to a Suffragan, a Dean, an Archdeacon, and a prebendary, as to an Archb. than it seemeth reasonable, that the smalller things, before spoken of, may well be performed, without any Lordly authority.  
When I had thus finished, according to our line, that which I first undertook, against the Admonitors pretenced dangerous alterations, innovations, and inconveniences, & was also purposed, to have added that which (in mine opinion) seemeth to prove that, which the Admonitor by his opinion, denieth; viz: that the external government of the Church should always, and in all places be one, when (I say) I had thus purposed, by reason of some other present, and for the time more necessary occasion, I was driven to alter my mind, and to show the same, in a place somewhat more convenient.  
And yet in the mean while, it shall not be amiss, but a thing very necessary, in this place, so to clear the state of the question, between the Admonitor and me, as the same being rightly before hand understood, there might no prejudicate opinion be conceived against the truth.  
The Admonitor against the not having of one form of external policy in all ages and states of the Church of Christ, allegeth that in Denmark, they have Bishops, both in name and in office: that in Saxony they have archbishops, and Bishops in office, but not in name: that in Tigure, they have no Senate of Elders; nor the discipline by excommunication, which they more mislike; that in Geneva, in Scotland, & in other places, they have a government not much unlike that platform which is desired to be among us: that in Saxony, & Basill they kneel at the lords Supper: all Tigure they sit, & it is brought unto them, & that in other places they go and receive it, for the more expedition, as they pass. And that he doubteth not but that the learned men, whom God sent, to instruct those churches in which the Gospel in those days was first received, have been directed by the spirit of God, to retain this liberty, that in external government, and other outward orders, they might choose such, as they thought in wisdom, and godliness, to be most convenient, for the state of their country and disposition of the people.  
Unto all which we answer briefly; viz. that Bishops both in name and in office being of divine institution, ought aswell to be in the Church of England as of Denmark. that it is an error (by their leave) in the Church of Saxony, not to have Archb. and Bb. in name, if so be they hold it lawful to have Archb. and Bishops in office. For what should a necessary officer do, without a convenient name? And touching the Church of Tigure, it is not material, what the same church doth think not tolerable, or doth more mislike, but what she ought not to mislike, or what it ought not to think tolerable. And then what a poor proof is there here made (trow we) for the confirmation of the corruptions in the Church of England, by producing for two witnesses, two errors in the Church of Tigure. For not to like a Senate of Elders, and more to mislike excommunication, is more and more to slide out of the right way.  
And sithence we have the whole christian Kingdom of Scotland, the most famous, and renowned Church of Geneva, and sundry Churches, by his confession in other places, to be lights unto us, and to agree with us, in a government not much unlike to that, which we desire: we have not only great cause, to rejoice in this our desires, but also to be much comforted and encouraged, by these examples, by all holy means, to labour the full accomplishment thereof. For by this testimony, & by these instances given & produced by himself, the Admonitor hath quite and clean weakened, and disabled, his own general position, opinion, and thoughts of the unnecessaries, and inconvenientnes, of having the Apostolical and primitive government, in the time of peace, under a Christian Magistrate.  
For hath not the free Kingdom of Scotland, the free City of Geneva, and other Sovereign and free Princes, Potentates and Powers, (not being under Tyrants, and persecution) received the same, as being the best, the fittest, the convenientest, & most necessary government (yea even in the time of peace and under their christian Magistracy) for the state of their country, and disposition of their people?  
And as touching rites & ceremonies, we affirm not, that every rite, ceremony or circumstance to be used in the external execution of church government, is precisely set down in the holy Scriptures, but touching the substance of government, thus we say, and thus we hold: viz. that the Officers and Governors appointed by our Saviour Christ, to be over the Churches in every Country (observing the general rules of decency, comeliness, and edification) have liberty, with the consent of their Christian King, or other supreme Magistrate, to choose what rites & ceremonies, they in wisdom and godliness shall think most convenient. And therefore we grant that the officers of Christ, in the use and dispensation of their functions, are no more exactly tied, by any direct commandment in the holy Scriptures, to use at all times, and in all places, one only manner of rites & ceremonies, than were the Priests of the law, to use all one manner of knives, to kill their sacrifices, or the singers to sing all songs after one manner of tune, or upon one kind of instrument: or then are Kings & Princes in all countries commanded, to use all kind of circumstances, in the outward execution of civil justice in their common weals.  
As then, as it was lawful for the Priests to have knives and trumpets of diverse fashions; and for the Levites to have their Musical instruments of diverse forms: Nay as sundry justices of peace, in sundry Shires of the Kingdom, are not bound to keep their quarter sessions, all in one day to begin, & to break their sessions at one instant; to stand, to sit, & to walk, when soever they speak, to wear all one fashion, hates, caps, cloaks, or gowns, and such like: so likewise, is it with the Bishops, pastors and Elders of the church.  
In the ministration of Baptism, there is no direct commandment, that the vessel to hold the water, for the child's Baptism, should be of stone, of pewter, of brass, or of silver; whether the Minister should descend to the lower end, or the child ascend to the upper end of the church: Whether the child should have a great handful, or a little spoonful of water powered upon his head. In the celebration of the lords Supper, it is directly commanded, that the people shall stand, sit, or pass: whether it should be celebrated every first or second Sabbath of the month; whether in the morning; at noon, or at night. In the ordination of Ministers, there is no just proof to be made, that any certain number of Ministers, are to lay on their hands, that the day of ordination should be always one: that the Minister should be of such an age, or that the prayers should be of this or of that length and form of words. And therefore touching these and such like things of indifferency, we agree with the Admonitor and reverend Bb. that one form of external orders, rites & ceremonies is not of necessity, to be in every Church, because there is no such order witnessed by the holy Scriptures to be of necessity. But touching the joint, & several functions of Bishops, Pastors, and Elders, that they, or any of them, should in any age or state of the church of Christ be wanting, or that such offices as by warrant of the Scripture are coupled together, should be severed, or that any other persons should be appointed, to execute any functions in the Church, than such persons only, as for their functions, have warrant from the holy Scriptures, we can not in any sort thereunto agree. And why? forsooth because all, both offices, and officers in the Church, must only, and alonely, be derived from our Saviour Christ, as from the only fountain and bestower of all officers, & offices in the house of God. And therefore, albeit we should grant, (as the Admonitor hath said) that the outward order used in the primitive Church, touching rites & ceremonies, by Bishops, Pastors and Elders, is neither necessary, nor so convenient as it may be otherwise, in the time of peace, & under a Christian Magistrate, yet we may not hereupon imply, as his negative implieth: viz. that Bishops, Pastors & Elders, or any of them, are neither necessary, nor so convenient officers, or governors, as other officers of man's invention might be. For which our opinion (by the help of God) we shall assay (as before hath been mentioned) in an other place, to lay down, out of the word of God, some just proofs, (according to the Admonitors request) that there ought to be in all ages and states of the Church, this outward order & form of government: viz. that Bishops, Pastors and Elders, ought evermore to be spiritual governors, and that evermore they, and none other, aught to use that essential kind of spiritual government, and none other which was practised by the Bishops, Pastors and Elders, in the Apostolical and primitive Church. Always leaving the outward rites and ceremonies of their spiritual kind of government, to be indifferent, as erst hath been said.    
FINIS.   

Speeches used in the parliament by Sir Francis Knolles: and after written to my L. Treasurer, Sir William Cecil.  
TO the end I may inform your Lord ship of my dealing in this Parleament-time, against the undue claimed superiority of the Bishops over their inferior brethren, Thus it was:  
Because I was in the parliament time, in the 25. year of King HENRY the eight. In which time, First, all the Clergy, aswell Bishops as others, made an humbly submission to King HENRY the 8. acknowledging his Supremacy, and detesting the usurpation of the Bb. of Rome's authority: Upon which submission of the Clergy, the King gave unto the said Bb. the same ample rule, that before they had under the Pope, over their inferior brethren; saving that the same rule was abridged by statute by this parenthesis following, that is to say (without offending the prerogative Royal of the Crown of England, & the laws & customs of the Realm) In the latter end of the Statute, it was added, that whosoever offendeth in any one part of that statute, & their Aydors, Counsellors, and abetters, they did all fall into the penalty of the praemunire. And after I had recited this statute in the Parleament-house, I declared that in King HENRY'S the eight days after this: There was no Bishop that did practise superiority over their inferior brethren. And in King EDWARD'S days, the said Bb. obtained a statute, whereby they were authorized to keep their Courts in the King's name: the which statute was repealed in Queen Mary's days, and was not revived in her Majesty's time that now is, whereupon it was doubtful to me, by what authority the Bishops do keep their Courts now in their own names, because it is against the prerogative Royal of the Crown of England, that any should keep a Court, without sufficient warrant from the Crown. Whereupon I was answered, that the bishops do keep their Courts now by prescriptions, & it is true that the Bb. may prescribe, that King HENRY the 8. gave them authority, by the statute of 25. of his reign, to have authority and rule over their inferior brethren, as ample as they had in the Pope's time. But this was no special warrant for them to keep their Courts by, and that in their own names. And yet they have none other warrant to keep their Courts (as they do now in their own names) to my knowledge. And this was the cause that made them obtain a statute in King EDWARD'S days, to keep their Courts by, in the King's name. Now, it is a strange allegation, that the bishops should claim authority at this present to keep their Courts in their own names, (as they do) by prescription, because the statute of 25. doth restrain them generally from offending of the prerogative Royal of the Crown of England, and the laws and customs of the Realm. And no man may justly keep a Court without a special warrant from the Crown of England, as is aforesaid. And the general liberty given by King H. the 8. to the Bishops to rule and govern, as they did in the Pope's time, is no sufficient warrant to the Bishops to keep their own Courts in their own names by prescription, as I take it. And therefore the Bishops had done wisely, if they had sought a warrant by statute to keep their Courts in the Queen's name, as the Bb. did in King EDWARD'S days: In which time Archbishop Crammer did cause Peter Martyr and Bucer to come over into this Realm to be placed in the two Universities, for the better instruction of the Universities in the word of God. And Bb. Crammer did humbly prefer these learned men without any challenge to himself of any superior rule in this behalf over his inferior brethren. And the time hath been, that no man could carry away any grant from the Crown of England by general words, but that he must have special words to carry the same by: Therefore how the Bb. are warranted to carry away the keeping of their Courts in their own names, by prescription: it passeth my understanding.  
Moreover, where as your Lordship said unto me, that the bishops have forsaken their claim of superiority over their inferior brethren, (lately) to be by God's ordinance, and that now they do only claim superiority from her Majesty's supreme government: If this be true, then is it requisite & necessary, that my L. of Canterbury, that now is, do recant and retract his saying in his book of the great volume against Cartwright, where he saith in plain words (by the name of Doctor Whitgift) that the superiority of Bb. is Gods own institution: Which saying doth impugn her Majesty's supreme government directly, & therefore it is to be retracted plainly and truly. For Christ plainly & truly confesseth, joh. 18. 36. That his Kingdom was not of this world. And therefore he gave no worldly rule or proheminence to his Apostles, but the heavenly rule which was to preach the Gospel, saying: Ite, predicate in omnem mundum, quicumque crediderit & baptizatus fuerit, salvus erit: qui non crediderit, condemnabitur. Go & preach in all the world, who soever shall believe & be baptized, shallbe saved: but he that will not believe, shallbe condemned, Mark 16. 15. But the Bishops do cry out, saying, that Cartwright & his fellows, would have no government, etc. So, belike, the Bb. care for no government, but for worldly & forcible government over their brethren, the which Christ never gave to his Disciples nor Apostles, but made them subject to the rule of Princes, who ought not to be resisted, saving that they might answer unto Princes, that they must rather obey God then men (Acts. 5. 29.) and yet in no wise to resist the Prince, but to take up the cross, and follow Christ.  
FINIS.