THE KING's Right of Indulgence IN SPIRITUAL MATTERS, WITH The EQUITY thereof, Asserted.  
BY A Person of Honour, and Eminent Minister of State lately Deceased.  
LONDON: Printed, and Sold by Randall Taylor, near Stationers-Hall, MDCLXXXVIII.   

TO THE READER.  
IT was the Opinion of the Great Lord Verulam, That Books (such as in earnest deserve that Title) need no other Patrons than Truth and Reason. Let the Abortives of the Press Court your favour; This Treatise securely Appeals to your severest (provided it be but unprejudiced) Judgement.  
It was Composed divers years ago, by the Dictates of a NOBLE PERSON, of whom, when I have said, That he was an Eminent Minister of State, a known Protestant, and one of the most Studious Gentlemen of our Age, equally diligent and happy in Reading both Books and Men, I shall have expressed but part of His Character: The rest of which, when you have perused this Elaborate Discourse, you will better be enabled to supply by those Idaea's of Veneration, which it cannot but raise in minds that have any respect to Truth, Piety, or Learning.  
As the Dead can neither Cajole, nor be Flattered, so ought they not to be Envied; you have here the free and well-poized Thoughts of a late Peer of England on this Important matter, long before His present Majesty came to the Crown.  
All that I can pretend to, is the Honour of being a little Instrumental to hand That forth to public Light, which I thought was too valuable to be doomed to the Obscurity of a private Closet; as being unwilling the Inquisitive World should be deprived of one of the most accurate Pieces that have been, or perhaps can be, Written on this Subject.  
If any thing therein occur less suitable to present times, you are desired to remember how long ago it was Compiled; And withal to Pardon any Errors of the Press that may have escaped Correction. Which is all I thought necessary you should be Advertised of, by  
blackfriars, Octob. 26, 1687. Your Humble Servant, HEN. CARE.   

THE CONTENTS.  

CHAP. I. The meaning of the Title. SECT.  
1 OF Right.  
2 Of the Kings Right.  
3 Of the King's Grant.  
4 Of Indulgence.  
5 Of Spiritual Matters.  
6 What is not meant by such Indulgence.  
7 What is meant by Spiritual Matters.   

CHAP. II. That from Grounds of Policy, Indulgence in Spiritual matters is fit to be granted. 
 The several grounds thereof in Policy, are  
1 THE preservation of the Public Peace.  
2 From the Examples of our Neighbours.  
3 From Examples of Elder Times.  
4 From the Present State of our Affairs.  
5 From the Advancement of Trade.  
6 From the Increase of People.  
7 From the Dependence upon the Prince.  
8 From the satisfaction of men's Minds.   

CHAP. III. That from grounds of Piety, it is fit to grant Indulgence in Spiritual Matters.  
1 FRom the Rule of doing as we would be done by.  
2 From the Note of being tender and kindhearted.  
3 From the ground of Leaving to God his own Works.  
4 From the Subject Matter, being Spiritual.  
5 From the Practice of the Church in best times.  
6 From the ground of sparing Christian Blood.  
7 From the difficulty to search out Truth.  
8 From the aptness of good men to err.  
9 From the Introduction of Christianity.   

CHAP. IU. Of Supreme, Spiritual Jurisdiction; and consequently a Right of Indulgence in Kings.  
1 OF Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction.  
2 Of the Matter of Fact, and consequence thereof.  
3 That this Jurisdiction was in Fathers of Families.  
4 That it was in the Hebrew Princes.  
5 That it was in the Heathen Princes.  
6 That it was in the Emperors.  
7 That it was in the Kings of France.  
8 That it was in the Kings of Spain.  
9 That it was in the Kings of Sweden.  
10 That it was in several other Christian Princes.   

CHAP. V The Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction in England, is in Kings.  
1 THat it was in our British Kings.  
2 That it was in our Saxon and Danish Kings.  
3 That it was in William 1. William Rufus, and Henry 1.  
4 That it was in King Stephen, Henry 2. and Richard 1.  
5 That it was in King John, and Henry 3.  
6 That it was in Edward 1. and Edward 2.  
7 That it was in Edward 3. and Richard 2.  
8 That it was in Henry 4. Hen. 5. H. 6. E. 4. R. 3. and H. 7.  
9 That it was in King Henry 8.  
10 That it was in the succeeding Princes.   

CHAP. VI That the Right of Granting Indulgence in Spiritual Matters, is in our King.  
1 AS he is a Mixed Person.  
2 As he is a Spiritual person.  
3 As he is Head of the Church of England.  
4 From the Grounds of Reason.  
5 From the Common-Law.  
6 From the Precedents before W. 1.  
7 From Precedents of W. 1. till our time.  
8 From Precedents in our time.  
9 From several Acts of Parliament.  
10 From the Statute of 25 Henry 8.   

CHAP. VII. The Answers to Objections against this Right of the King.  
1 That it would encourage Schisms.  
2 That it would hinder Uniformity.  
3 That it would cause Discontent.  
4 That it would countenance Disobedience.  
5 That the King might then Repeal Statutes.  
6 That the late Act of Uniformity bars this Right.   

CHAP. VIII. Observations upon Examples of Persecution.  
1 OF Cain 's persecution.  
2 Of Pharaoh 's persecution.  
3 Of Haman 's persecution.  
4 Of Nabuchadnezzar 's persecution.  
5 Of Darius his persecution.  
6 Of the Persecutors of our Saviour.  
7 Of Christ's Disciples persecuted.  
8 Further Observations upon the Examples.  
9 The Comfort of Persecution.   

CHAP. IX. Observations upon Examples of Indulgence in Spiritual Matters.  
1 OF Indulgence to Noah.  
2 Of Indulgence to the Patriarches.  
3 Of Indulgence by the Egyptians.  
4 Of Indulgence by Moses.  
5 Of Indulgence by Joshua.  
6 Of Indulgence by the Judges and Kings.  
7 Of Indulgence by our Saviour.  
8 Of Indulgence by the Disciples of Christ.  
9 The Sum and Conclusion of the Treatise.    

THE King's Right OF INDULGENCE In Spiritual Matters, ASSERTED.  

CHAP. I. The Meaning of the Title.  
1. TO explain the meaning of the Title of this Work: 
Lib. feud. 2. tit. 2. ss. 2. & tit. 3. ss. 1. Idem quod justum id est quod recto jure Constitutum. Instit. de fidei commis-haered. Secundum juris civilis praescripta & regulos. Bracton, l. 5. de exceptionibus, c. 28. ss. 2. fol. 434. Jus possessionis. Jus proprietatis. Cook on Littleton, f. 345.  It may be inquired first, what is meant by the word Right?  
The Civilians say that Right is the same with Just; that which is constituted by right Law, and by just and lawful means, that is Right.  
Justinian called the Law Right, Rectum; so the French say Droict. That which the Civil Lawyer's term, what is according to the Praescripts and Rules of the Civil Law.  
The same signification it bears in our Law, and our ancient Authors call it Jus, as Right of Possession and Right of Property.  
And if a Tenant in Fee make a Lease for Years, and afterwards release all his Right, his whole Estate is thereby past away, and what he had by Law, he hath given away by this Release of his Right.  
That which we call a Man's Right, is that which is due, which by Law and Justice he ought to have.  
2. Next, We may consider the King's Right, which is, what the Law and Justice gives to the King, that which is due to him.  
The Right of the King of England is no new upstart Right, but of great Antiquity, enjoyed by his Predecessors from the beginning of Government amongst us. It is no Usurped Right, but descended to him from his Royal Ancestors, by Succession and Inheritance.  
It is no disputable Right, but certain and clear, defined by the known Laws of this Kingdom, and general Consent of his People, who have submitted thereunto.  
It is no Subordinate Right, our King acknowledgeth no Superior, his Empire is Independent, under God, and as Sovereign by Law, as any Prince's in Christendom.  
3. Of the King's Grant, may be our next Argument, wherein I intent not to argue the several sorts of the King's Grants under the Great Seal, the Privy Seal, or his Sign Manuel, and the force of such Grants.  
This is not our present business, but the meaning of the King's Grant, as we intent it, is, where he gives or bestows his Favour and Indulgence to any of his Subjects, by such ways and legal Conveyance or Grant thereof, as is Valid and Effectual, to those to whom it is made, be it under the Great Seal or otherwise; this is meant by the King's Grant.  
And it is the Honourable Intention of the King, that all his Grants should be effectual and valid, as the Grants of a King ought to be, else his Officers do not their duty.  
4. We may now inquire the meaning of Indulgence.  
The word Indulgentia, 
Spieg. Is cui alimenta relicta fuerant in metallis, damnatus. Dd. in exped. ard. de Por. c. ult. l. 6. Spieg. Lib. in quasd. 13. ss. 4. cap. de Sen. pass. & restit. 9 in Extra. de Paen. & remis. L. 2.3.11. c. de sent. pas. Bris.  was properly used for the leaving of Victuals for one, who is condemned to the Mines.  
It comprehends generally a Permission, a Condescension, a certain Lenity or mildness; So it used in the Civil Laws, and the Canonists take it for a Pardon.  
It comprehends a Recovery or Restitution of Dignity, Lands, and of all things lost.  
Most pertinent to our purpose is the Sense, wherein the Gloss takes it, that it means a relaxation of Punishment, which one is to undergo for his Offences, a grant of the Prince's Clemency, by which a Subject is freed from Punishment, and in this sense doth the Law of England also mean an Indulgence, and is the same with a Licence, an Exemption, a Pardon, or a Dispensation.  
5. We may likewise inquire the meaning of Spiritual Matters; by them are meant, such matters as concern the Soul or Spirit, such as concern the Worship of God, in Doctrine and Discipline.  
It is no lose Consideration, 
Seneca Epist. 27.  by what Care and Cost Kingdoms and States should be preserved, being they derive and uphold all happiness to Men. The only infallible ground of their preservation is true Religion, the worship of God in Spirit and in Truth.  
And though ill manners are by accident, the cause, 
Ex malis moribus bonae leges.  or rather occasion of good Laws, which are better in execution and best in obedience, yet good manners cause obedience, and Religion begets good manners.  
Spiritual matters are matters of Religion, but Religion cannot consist without Public Exercise and action, and the requisits thereof.  
If the Expression Spiritual, 
P. Nye of the King's Supremacy.  be interpreted by the contradistinct member Temporal, it seems to direct us to understand such matters as concern Eternity, for that is the true opposite to what is Temporal. The things that are seen are Temporal; 
2 Cor. 4.18.  and the things that are not seen, are Eternal. This we mean by Matters Spiritual.  
6. But it may be now not improper to express in the negative, what I do not mean by this Indulgence, and then what I do mean by it.  
By Indulgence I do not mean that a toleration should be granted by the King of any known Blasphemy or Sin. Neither do I mean such Indulgences whereof Luther complains, that for Money Indulgence was granted for Sin, and redemption out of Purgatory; surely none can pardon Sin but God alone, and Money got by such means perisheth with the getter.  
7. But in the affirmative, by Indulgence in Spiritual matters, is meant a permission of Liberty of men's Consciences, in matters not sinful of themselves, and whereby there is no disturbance of the Public Peace.  
That where Men out of tenderness of Conscience cannot submit to some particulars enjoined by Authority, in matters touching God's Worship, fearing or doubting, least if they should do it, they should offend God, and hazard the salvation of their precious Souls; and upon these grounds do not conform, yet live peaceably.  
For an Indulgence and Permission to these Persons to serve God as they think most for the good of their own Souls, especially when they agree in Fundamentals with the rest of their Brethren. That these may not be punished in their Estates or Liberties, much less in their Lives, for Nonconformity. This is that Indulgence which is meant in matters Spiritual.   

CHAP. II. That from Grounds of Policy, Indulgence in Spiritual Matters is fit to be granted.  
1. IT will be needless to discourse of the King's Right to grant Indulgence in Spiritual matters, unless it be fit and expedient that such Indulgence be granted.  
If it be not fit to be granted, the King will not grant it, his wisdom and affection to his People, will dissuade him from it; therefore before we proceed any further in this Argument, it will not be impertinent to inquire, whether such Indulgence be fit to be granted or not.  
And it seems to me very clear, that it is fit to be granted; and that first from grounds of Polity.  
The chief grounds of Polity is the preservation of the Public Peace, to which nothing more conduceth, than the granting such Indulgence. Other grounds of Polity therein, are the encouragement of Trade, the increase of People, their dependence upon the Prince, and the quieting of men's troubled minds.  
Upon all which grounds is inferrd, and that in Polity, the granting of such Indulgence; and we shall take the liberty to treat somewhat of them in order.  
1. It seems fit, for the better preservation of the Public Peace, that such Indulgence be granted. Tacitus notes, That it is safer to let pass things grown up and strong in discrepancy, than to provoke them to future discords.  
When things are old and rooted, they labour in vain, who would remove them by violence, the shaking of them makes them but the firmer. To unite Men in Religion by force, is to cause the Sword to be drawn, 
French History, H. 4.  which is not so easily sheathed again.  
Prince's well advised, have never put some of their Subjects to death, to make others believe, that they have not wasted their Provinces by War, but to instruct the Consciences of their Subjects by the Sword; knowing that Religion is an act of Union, Concord, and Instruction; War nothing else but Misery and Destruction. And they who have moved Heaven and Earth, that is, have made use of every Engine to force the Consciences of their Subjects, into the same Religion, have been constrained at last to desist, rejecting the Counsels of bad Physicians, who have nothing but Stibium and letting of blood, for all sorts of Diseases. Where Liberty of Conscience cannot be enjoyed, the Canker of Civil Discord frets and eats till it can break forth into open Sedition. But by granting an Indulgence, both their Minds and Persons become peaceable.  
2. That this is so, appears from the Examples of some of our Neighbours, who had many troubles and much disturbances of their Peace, before Indulgence was granted to Dissenters among them, and much Peace and Security after it.  
This was the case of the Netherlanders, whom their Governors could not retain in Peaceful Obedience, till they had granted this Indulgence, which with them is very large, yet is esteemed a chief cause of their Peace and Civil Unity; nor do any flourish more in Trade and all Security.  
That wise and gallant Prince, H. IU. of France, saw so great Mischiefs in his State, and such a flood of Civil Dissension, for want of this Indulgence, that he thought fit to grant it, and told his Parliament, That Necessity and Utility moved him to do it by the Advice of all his Council, who found it good and necessary for the State of his Affairs, and the good of his Service, to confirm the Indulgence, and to dissipate those unhappinesses that Discord had produced, and it would be found equally prudent, peaceful and happy, for every Prince to follow this Example.  
3. That by such Indulgence the Peace will be the better preserved, appears further by Examples of elder times, Christians have been so strangely hated and persecuted in the Birth of the Church, that some gave them no other Names but of Impostors; others accused them of the injury of the Air, of the sterility of the Seasons, of the overflowing of Rivers, and of Earthquakes.  
But the Emperor Adrian would not that they should be curiously searched into, as to the matter of Religion; and Antoninus his Successor, commanded that he that accused them should be burnt alive.  
After the whole Empire had found the public Prosecutions of Dioclesian and Maximinius to be vain and fruitless, and that for one Christian they caused to be Burnt, an hundred sprang up out of their Ashes; their Successors found it true, 
Curtius' L. 7. nemo Rex perinde animis imperare Potest.  That Kings have not the same command over Hearts as over Bodies. That Religion could not be forced, that Truth could not be joined with Violence, nor Justice with Cruelty; and that there is nothing so free as Religion, nothing so voluntary; that the Permission and Indulgence of that freedom tends most to the preservation of Public Peace, a main ground of all Polity.  
Pagan Princes have found it so, 
Pagans have Indulged Christians.  by Indulging the Christians. And it was Objected against Decius, that his want of Moderation towards the Christians, rob him of the Title of a Great and Righteous Prince.  
Christian Princes also have Indulged Pagans, 
Christians have Indulged Pagans.  and would not have Paganism among them to be Punished.  
The Emperors Honorius and Theodosius though burning with the Zeal of advancing their Religion, yet would not that the Heathens should be forced to be Christians; and required of all Judges and Precedents of Provinces, not to trouble them, so long as they did live without Disturbance or Sedition. It were hard for Christians to deny the like favour and Indulgence to one another.  
The Jews, 
Jews have been Indulged by Pagans.  although irreconcilable Enemies to the Ethnics, and to the multitude of their Gods, yet have they dwelled with the greatest security among the Grecians, Parthians, Medes, Elamites and Mesopotamians; none ever chased them out of the Roman Empire, they have had there in all times their Synagogues, especially under Nerva and Antoninus Pius.  
They have lived peaceably and been Indulged in England, 
And by Christians.  France, Spain, and other Countries, and wheresoever they were driven out of any Kingdom, it was not for their Religion, but for their Usuries and great Cruelties; and it would be hard to see these in quiet who deny Christ, and Protestants hurried to Prison for disliking Surplices or some little things.  
Doubtless, A violent way of force will never be found a way to preserve Peace, where a mild way of Indulgence is open, and having been taken, it appears by Examples both of elder and latter times, that it hath been found by Princes, the best way to preserve their Tranquillity.  
4. Upon the grounds of Polity, from the consideration of the the present state of our Affairs in England, it seems sit that this Indulgence be granted, and that thereby our Peace will the better be preserved.  
The Baltique and other deep Seas being once moved by Tempests, do swell and roll high for many hours after, and a small new Storm raises them yet much higher.  
After hideous Storms of Civil Discord in England, the Affairs thereof through the miraculous goodness of God in his Majesty's Restoration, are come into a calm state, yet the more apt to rage, because so lately moved, and therefore surely all Tempestuous courses are to be avoided, and Provocations laid aside.  
There are three ways of stopping Commotion from raging again, by Force, by Extirpation, or by Indulgence.  
If Force be used to keep Dissenters quiet, and to compel Conformity, this Force cannot be maintained without a vast Charge; this Charge will increase Discontent in them and others; that must cause increase of Force; that again, increase of Charge; and that, of Discontent; and so it will run round in a course of unhappiness and unsetledness.  
It were Impiety in a Prince to be angry with his own Country, he ought rather to imitate good Physicians, who having used sharp Remedies without profit, do apply sweet ones.  
Those who are for an Extirpation of the Nonconformists, would un-people their Native Country, disarm their Prince of so may thousands of Strong and Valiant Subjects, abate their own Revenue, and the public Wealth and Trade, to enrich Foreign Countries. Some merciless Fancies would force a Conformity on Pain of Death, a sure way of Extirpation.  
Such Tyrannous men are like their Predecessor, infamous in History, who would have all conform to his Stature; those who were not so tall as he, to be racked out to his length; those who were taller than he, to be cut stort to the length of his Bed.  
Certainly there is as much difference in Judgements as in Statures, and as little reason to except against the one as the other, or to impose Conformity in Opinion, as in Complexion.  
But these (who are no kin to Moses) fancy Impossibilities when they fancy an Extirpation; by these means did the Massacre in France Extirpate those of the Religion? It did indeed those who were Murdered, but it made the Dissent to grow.  
They are like Camomile, the more they are bruised and trod upon, the more they flourish, as the stories of the Church do manifest.  
In the last and best place it will be found that the granting of Indulgence is the surest and most probable way of preserving the Public Peace.  
But hereof there will be occasion to Treat more at large in a following Section.  
5. Another ground of Polity for the allowing of this Indulgence, is for the Advancement of the TRADE of the Kingdom.  
The Dissenters are generally Sober Industrious Trading men, not Debauched Drones, Born only to consume Corn and Wine; but such as can do more Service for their Prince than merely to Drink his Health. Every Trader, Merchant, or Artificer, bringeth Wealth to the Public, and adds to the King's Revenue; they are considerable Members of a State, and add much to common Riches and Safety. Merchants are honourable, and Artificers had the title of Fathers, and both deserve encouragement.  
But without this Indulgence, there will need no Law to banish multitudes of these men, they will banish themselves, if they cannot enjoy their dearest interest, the Liberty of their Conscience.  
If this be denied them in their native Country, they will seek it in the remotest Regions, rather than not enjoy it. And they will be welcome wheresoever they go. Even Pagans will allow them this liberty, if their fellow Protestants will not.  
But I suppose and hope that no sober English man will think of any such way as extirpation, by banishment or death of those who differ in Opinion from them. If these Dissenters be encouraged by Indulgence, it will highly tend to the advancement of the Trade of the Kingdom. If they be forced out of it, the Nobility and Gentry will find it in the decay of their Rents; the King will find it in the emptiness of his Coffers; and the People, as well as their Prince, will be sensible of the mischief upon any contest with Foreigners.  
6. Another ground of Polity for the granting of this Indulgence is, That thereby the People of the Kingdom will be increased, they will be kept from going out of it, and live comfortably, and increase within it. But by denial of this Indulgence, the great numbers of People and their Children, and children's Children, which will leave the Kingdom, and be born, and inhabit other Countries, will dispeople and weaken England. The strength and wealth of a Prince and People consists in their multitude; happy is that Prince who hath his Quiver full of People. He shall not be ashamed when he speaks with his Enemy; but the loss of every single Industrious Man, is a loss both to King and Kingdom. It was the blessing to Abraham, 
Gen. 17.5.  that his Seed should be as the Stars of Heaven for multitude, and therefore God would have his Name called Abraham, for a Father of many Nations have I made thee. And the Word Abraham, signifies a high Father of a multitude. Every Prince is a Father of his Country, 
Pater exce'sus multitudinis.  and the more Subjects he hath, the more Children he hath, and the more happy and strong he is, and the loss of any one, is the loss of a Child to him. It was the answer of Queen Elizabeth to her Parliaments advice for her to marry, that she might have Children to succeed her, That every English man was her Child. Now the granting of this Indulgence will keep the Children at home with their politic Father, whose Riches, and Honour, and Strength, will be increased by their increase. But by driving them away, the Prince will lose his Children, impair his Revenue, and weaken his Kingdom, encourage a Foreign Invasion, and Domestic troubles.  
7. Another ground of Polity for this Indulgence, is because thereby the Persons to whom it is granted, will be brought to an entire dependence on their Prince who grants it. No interest in the world is so dear to these Dissenters as the liberty of their Conscience; and where they have this, the interest of it obligeth them to be faithful to that Power which gives it, else they are not faithful to their own interest. Nothing binds more firmly than Interest, and no interest is more strong to bind, more beloved, or more desired than this Freedom, and therefore bindeth those to faithfulness where they have it. Subjection is due in regard of Protection, and where these Men have the liberty of their Consciences from a Prince, the interest of preserving that Liberty obligeth them to be faithful to, and to preserve his Power, by which this great interest of theirs is preserved. If the Prince fall who grants this Liberty, the Liberty falls with him, they that will maintain the Gift, know that they must support the Giver also. It is safe for a Prince by such ways, to oblige his Subjects, especially such as these, who are for the most part of constant, stout, and industrious Spirits, to a dependence on him, whose service will be the more available to him. And it is their Tenet that this Indulgence cannot be enjoyed with so much certainty and stability under any other, as under their native Legal Government. Religion hath its name from binding, and there can be no firmer bond of Subjects to their Sovereign, than when they enjoy the freedom of their Religion from their Prince's favour; and the continuance of this highest comfort and interest, depends upon the safety and good of him that grants it.  
8. The last ground of Polity which I shall now mention for the granting of this Indulgence, is, because thereby men's minds will be satisfied. Whilst Dissenters are in doubts and fears lest they may be punished and persecuted for their Dissent, whilst they see and feel Laws rigorously executed upon them, or others in the same condition, this perplexeth their thoughts, disturbs them in their business, causeth them to transport their Stocks or part of them into other Countries, and sometimes their Persons and Trades with them, which hath been no small detriment to England heretofore, and may it be so no more. But by such Indulgence men's minds will be quieted, they will cheerfully and undisturbed follow their Vocations, whereby Trade will be promoted, and the Wealth, Strength, and Peace of the King and his Kingdom will be advanced.   

CHAP. III. That from Grounds of PIETY it is fit to grant Indulgence in Spiritual Matters.  
1. 
Matt. 2.12.  I Shall consider the ground of Piety, To do as we would be done unto, which is part of our Saviour's Sermon, Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them; and he is pleased to give a Reason of it, For this is the Law and the Prophets. If a Dissenter might expostulate with one in Authority, and say to him, What if men's Opinions should alter? or if I were in Authority, and you in Obedience, would you think I did well to impose things upon you against your Conscience, and to compel you to do them, or else to ruin you, and your Wife and Children? The man in Power doubtless would answer, When it was his own case to suffer, It is against the Rules of Piety so to impose upon me, and to force me to do against my Conscience: and may not a present Sufferer say the same to an Imposing Power? He might say, or enact that another shall be ruined because he differs from the Imposer in Countenance, with as much Reason and Piety, as because he differs in Opinion. He will one day find the truth of that Scripture, With the same measure that ye meet withal, 
Luke 6.38.  it shall measured to you again.  
2. Another ground of Piety, for this Indulgence, is from that Rule of the Apostle, 
Eph. 4.32.  Be ye kind one to another, tender hearted. And surely these are too far from it, who have no kindness or regard to tender Consciences. The same Apostle demandeth, Why is my liberty judged of another's Conscience? implying, that it ought not to be so, none can judge of another's Conscience but God. To be tender hearted to a Brother, is the way to gain tender mercies from our Heavenly Father; and to be kind to others, will gain kindness to ourselves in the conclusion. But for another's Conscience to judge of my Liberty; to impose upon others Consciences who differ from us, and vigorously to require them to obey Man rather than God, (as they esteem it) To order their Conformity to such things as they scruple in their Consciences (and it is Sin to do what We doubt is unlawful) To exact these things from their Brethren, on pain to be ruined, to lose their Estates, Liberties, and Lives too, if they do not Conform; this will hardly be judged at the Great Day, to have been kind to one another, or to have been tenderhearted. But to bear with the Infirmities of others, to indulge them in such things as are not sinful in themselves, not to force their Consciences; this is agreeable to the Rules of Christianity, and is a ground of Piety for granting this Indulgence.  
3. Another ground of Piety for the same, is, That we are to leave it to God to perform his own Works. We ought to leave the triumph and conquest of Souls to the eternal Wisdom, who re-makes and fashions Hearts as he pleaseth, 
History of France, H. 4.  and gives the Signal to so many straying Souls to cause them to enter into Salvation, it being impossible for Men to impose any necessity upon things which God hath left free, as men's Consciences are, which ought to be as free in a State as their Thoughts. And those who impose upon them, and would help God by that way to save Souls, presume too much upon their own judgements, and have too little veneration of God's omnipotence. What he hath commanded, his Vicegerents are to see done, but no command of such imposing is to be found; rather to be believed that God hath reserved the directing of those things to himself as his own Work. It was wise Counsel of the Doctor of the Law, Gamaliel, to the Public Assembly, Refrain from these men, and let them alone; 
Acts 5.35, 39  for if this Counsel, or this Work be of Men, it will come to naught; but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it, lest happily ye be found even to fight against God. It were well if some in our Age had taken this Counsel, and left the Works of God to be done by God, who is more wise and able to perform them, than his poor, sinful, weak Creatures are. If that which is called by some a Schism, be form in a State, or that which others call Evil, be grown old, it will be difficult to shake that which is deeply rooted, especially by the weak hand of feeble Men, but God will surely root it up, if it be Evil.  
4: Another ground of Piety for this Indulgence is, because the subject matter is altogether Spiritual. 
Bishop tailor's Liberty of Prophesying:  It is excellently said by Bishop Taylor on this subject: That to believe so, or not so, when there is no more but mere believing, is not in the Magistrate's power to enjoin, therefore not to punish. And it is not only lawful to Tolerate disagreeing Persuasions, but the authority of God only is competent to take notice of it, and fit to judge, because Infallible to determine it. And therefore (saith the Bishop) No Humane Authority is sufficient to do those things which can justify the inflicting Temporal Punishments upon such as do not conform in their Persuasions, to a Rule or Authority which is not only fallible, but supposed by the disagreeing Persons to be actually deceived. And none can judge between them in this Spiritual matter, but God alone. If men shall do despite to the Spirit of Grace, God will Punish them with much more Severity than this World can execute, 
Heb. 10.30.31.  as the Apostle Notes, For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will Recompense, saith the Lord: And again, The Lord shall judge his People. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. By this and sundry other Texts, it seems to me not obscure, that God reserves to himself the Punishment of matters merely Spiritual, and which are not Sin in themselves, or but doubtful; in those cases he would not have the Civil Magistrate to determine and punish. But if he do impose upon God's Servants, and Persecute them as Evil doers, when perhaps they are not so (which in these Spiritual matters no man can judge) This will be to tread under foot the Son of God; and if the Nonconformists shall do so, or the Imposers shall do so, Vengeance is Gods; a temporal Magistrate cannot inflict a Punishment according to the demerit.  
5. A fifth ground of Piety for this Indulgence is from the practice of the Church in the best times. The Church hath always detested Heresies, and yet the Punishments which she hath used, have been more Shameful than Cruel, more Medicinal than Mortal, loving rather to see their Faces Blush with Shame, 
Math. Westm. p. 152.  than their Veins emptied of Blood. When Germanus and Lupus came into Britain to confute the Pelagian Heresy, they used no violent means to do it, but allowed freedom of dispute to the Heretics, 
Copiam dispu●●ndi praeponendique adversarijs probuerunt, loquacit●ti●que garritum evomere permiserunt.  and permitted their Gagling Loquacity. The Weapons which they used against them were Torreuts of Eloquence, with Showers of Apostolic and Evangelical Truths, Modest Assertions, and especially Divine Testimonies, which sooner and better Convinced the Opposites, than Tortures could have done. The Emperor Theodosius ordained great Punishments, but he Executed none. He would restore his Subjects to the Concord of Religion and of Divine things, more by sweetness then by force, more by favour and by love, than by cruelty and punishment, which were true grounds of Piety for his Indulgence, and a Pattern worthy Imitation. The four first Councils did not use other Arms against Dissenters than the Word of God. That of Nice of 300 Bishops against Arrius. That of Constantinople of 150 against Macedonius. That of Ephesus of 200 against Nestorius, and 630 against Eutiches. These Reverend Fathers held, that Heresy is an Obstinacy of Soul, which is not subjected to the Torments of Bodily Death. That Punishments do rather discover and give breath to the Sect, than smother and strangle it. And that Punishments are of no use, except it be to break the Bonds of Affection; for meeting with Souls so resolved and constant, it draws away more in an hour, than their Lives could have done in ten years. If the Church in those times of her Purity were thus tender and indulgent to those they esteemed Obstinate Heretics, why may not the present Dissenters, most of them being in Ceremonies and matters not Fundamental, be in hopes of such an Indulgence as may free them from the Rigour of some Laws, and preserve the Liberty of their Consciences, which upon grounds of Piety is fit to be granted, especially to those that live peaceably.  
6. From the ground of Piety, to avoid the effusion of Christian-blood, this Indulgence is fit to be granted. War (saith the History of H. IU.) is not dead in an Estate, where Consciences are divided, but only Sleepeth; there is nothing that doth more slide and speedily penetrate into the Persuasions of men to stand one against another, than this Religion; every one thinks his own way best, and judgeth so, more by Zeal and Persuasion, than by Knowledge and Reason. From hence it hath too often fallen out, that there hath been much Effusion of Christian-blood, when there hath been attempts to force men contrary to their Persuasions; and nothing doth more allay and stop this Sanguinary Issue, than an Indulgence to these men; 
Fulges. l. 3. c 11. Suetonius.  uno ictu omnes interficere simul posset.  and it is a great ground of Piety to avoid such Effusion of the Blood of our Fellow Christians. A Prince must not be of the mind of Caligula, who wished that all the People of Rome had but one Neck, that with one stroke he might cut them all off. Nor of Vitelius, who when divers, by reason of the stench of dead Bodies, went out of the way, 
Suetonius.  the Emperor went straight forward through the heaps of the dead Carcases, saying, That the dead Body of an Enemy did smell excellently well, 
Optime olere Hostem, praesertim Cive●.  but especially that of a Citizen. Nor that of Hannibal, who when he saw a Ditch full of men's Blood, is reported to say, That it was a most Beautiful sight. Such pleasure did these Beasts take in Wickedness and the Effusion of Humane Blood; but a good Prince and Christian, detests such Cruelty, and labours to avoid such Rigours, especially upon his Subjects, whose Blood is better kept in their Bodies, for the Defence and Service of their Prince and Country. Bloodiness is an opposite to Right as the wise man Notes, 
Prov. 29.10. Psal. 5.6. Rev. 19.2.  That the Bloodthirsty hates the Upright, and we are assured that the Lord will abhor the Bloody man, and avenge the Blood of his Servants. Nothing more Defiles a Nation, nor brings heavier Punishments on them, than the shedding of Innocent Blood. 
Bishop Hall's contemplation on Abel and Cain.  Nothing (saith the Ingenuous Bishop Hall) hath a louder Voice than Blood; the Cry of it is heard from Earth to Heaven, every drop of Innocent Blood has a Tongue, and is not only Vocal, but Importunate. How careful then ought Princes and Magistrates to be, to avoid the Effusion of Blood, which will so much pollute the Land, if it be Innocent, and Cry so loud against them. If they would prevent this Effusion of Christian Blood, either by the Sword of War or of Peace, it must be by Indulgence, the most likely way to do it, and a ground of much Piety for it.  
7. 
Dr. Jerem. Taylor, his liberty of Prophesying. 521.  Another ground of Piety for this Indulgence, is from the difficulty to search out the truth. The Reverend Bishop Taylor gives this Reason for it, It is impossible (saith he) for any Industry to consider so many particulars in the infinite numbers of Questions as are necessary to be considered before we can with certainty determine any. And after all the considerations we can have in a whole Age, we are not sure not to be deceived. The obscurity of some Questions, the nicety of some Articles, the intricacy of some Revelations, the variety of Humane Understanding, the wind of Logic, the tricks of Adversaries, the subtlety of Sophisters, the engagement of Education, Personal Affections, the portentous number of Writers, the infinity of Authorities, the vastness of some Arguments, as consisting in enumeration of many particulars, the incertainty of others, the several degrees of Probability, the difficulty of some Texts, the invalidity of probation of Tradition, the opposition of Exterior Arguments to each other, and their open contestation, the public violence done to Authors and Records, the private Arts and Supplanting, the falsifyings, the indefatigable industry of some men to abuse all Understandings and all Persuasions, into their own Opinions. These and thousands more, even all the difficulty of things, and weaknesses of man, and all the arts of the Devil, have made it I conceive, next to impossible for any man, in so great variety of matter, not to be deceived. If then it be so easy a matter for men of the greatest Learning and Parts to be mistaken in these matters; If it be so difficult a thing, for the ablest and most judicious men to find out the Truth in these matters of dispute and difference in Religious things; It would be uncharitable and against the grounds of Piety to force these men, who are not all learned, nor of the deepest knowledge, to conform to the judgements of others in matters of this nature, under grievous punishments if they do not. But surely it is more consonant to the grounds of Piety, being it is so very difficult (as the Bishop shows) not to be deceived, and to search out Truth, that an Indulgence be allowed to these Dissenters, and that those in Power do remember, that even themselves may be deceived.  
8. Another ground of Piety for this Indulgence, is from the aptness of good men to Err. The Bishop hath showed the difficulties which must be passed through in the search of Truth, wherein learned, able, good, and pious men may easily be deceived. And where there is so much occasion to lead them into an Error, it were uncharitable, and against the grounds of Piety, not to grant Indulgence to them; especially if we consider, that we are not only uncertain in finding out Truths in disputable matters, but we are certain that the best and ablest Doctors in Christendom have been actually deceived in matters of great Concernment, which thing is evident in all those Instances of Persons from whose Doctrines all sorts of Christians respectively take liberty to descent. The Errors of Papias, Iraenaeus, Lactantius, and Justin Martin, in the Millenary opinion; of St. Cyprian, the Asian and African Fathers in the question of Rebaptisation; St. Augustine in his uncharitable Sentence against the Vnbaptized Children of Christian Parents. The Roman or the Greek Doctors in the question of the Procession of the Holy Ghost, and in the matter of Images, are Examples beyond exception. Now if these great Personages had been persecuted or destroyed for their Opinion, who should have answered the invaluable loss the Church of God should have sustained in missing so excellent, so exemplary, so great Lights? But then if these Persons Erred, and by consequence might have been destroyed, what would have become of others, whose Understanding was lower, and their Security less, their Errors more, and their Dangers greater. At this rate all men should have passed through the Fire, for who can escape when St. Cyprian and St. Augustin cannot? But since good Men are so apt to Err, the Piety of Christians did then, and aught now to indulge the Men, though not the Errors.  
9 The last ground of Piety for this Indulgence, which I shall now mention, is from the consideration of the Introduction of Christianity. It is (saith Bishop Tailor) one of the Glories of Christian Religion, that it was so Pious, Excellent, Miraculous, and Persuasive, that it came in upon its own Piety and Wisdom, with no other force but a terrent of Arguments and demonstration of the Spirit, a mighty rushing Wind to break down all strong Holds, and every high Thought and Imagination. But towards the Persons of Men it was always full of Meekness and Charity, Compliance and Toleration, Condescension, and bearing with one another, restoring Persons overtaken with an Error in the Spirit of meekness; considering lest we also be tempted. The consideration is as prudent, and the Proportion as just, as the Precept is charitable, and the Precedent was pious and holy. Now every thing is best conserved with that which gave it the first Being, and is agreeable to its temper and constitution. The Precept which the Christian Religion chief preaches, in order to all the Blessedness in this and the other World, is Meekness, Mercy, and Charity: And this should also help and preserve itself, and promote its own interest; for indeed nothing will do it so well, nothing doth so excellently insinuate itself into the understandings and affections of Men, as when the actngs and persuasions of a Sect, and every part and principle are tending to a universal Good. And it would be a mighty disparagement to so glorious an Institution, That in its Principles it should be merciful and humane, and yet in the promotion and propagation of it, so inhuman. And it would be improbable and unreasonable, that the Sword should be used in persuasion of one Proposition, and yet in the persuasion of the whole Religion, nothing like it. To do so, may sometimes seem, and but seem to serve the Interests of a Temporal Prince, but never promote the honour of Christ's Kingdom; it may secure a Design of Inquisitors, but it will much disserve Christendom to offer to support it by that which good Men believe to be a distinctive Cognizance of the Mahometan Religion, from the Excellency and Piety of Christianity, whose Essence and Spirit is described in these excellent words of St. 
2 Tim. 2.14.  Paul, The Servant of the Lord must not strive, but be gentle unto all men in meekness of instructing those that oppose themselves, if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging the Truth. And as it is unnatural, so it is unreasonable that Sempronius should force Caius to be of his Opinion, because Sempronius is Consul this Year, and commands the Lictors; as if he that can kill a man cannot but be infallible; and if he be not, why should I do violence to my Conscience, because he can do violence to my Person? There is nothing under the Almighty that hath power over the Soul of Man, so as to command a Persuasion, or to judge a disagreement; and because no Man's command is a satisfaction to the Understanding, or a verification of the Proposition, therefore the Understanding is not subject to Humane Authority. We see that the greatest Persecutions that ever have been, were against Truth, even against Christianity itself; and it was a Prediction of our Blessed Saviour, That Persecution should be the Lot of true Believers. And if we compute the experience of Suffering- Christendom, and the Prediction, That Truth should suffer, with those few Instances of Suffering-Hereticks, it is odds but Persecutions are on the wrong side; and that is Error and Heresy, that is cruel and tyrannical; especially since the Truths of Jesus Christ and of his Religion, are so meek, so charitable, and so merciful. And we may in this Case exactly use the words of St. Paul; But as then he that was born after the Flesh, persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now; and so it ever will be, till Christ's second coming. This may give us a good ground of Piety from the meekness of the Introduction of Christianity, that the most proper way, and most agreeable to the example of our Saviour, and of his holy Disciples, for the propagation thereof, is by the same Meekness, Charity, and Mercy in which it was Instituted, and consequently, to give Indulgence to tender Consciences.   

CHAP. IU. Of Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction, and consequently a Right of Indulgence in KINGS.  
1. OF Spiritual Matters, somewhat hath been before discoursed; We may now, for the clearer understanding of the Intent of this Chapter, inquire the meaning of Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction.  
Supreme, is that which is the Highest on Earth next under God, according to Law. So the meaning thereof is expressed in the Statute of H. 8. 
24 H. 8. C. 12.  That this Realm is an Empire governed by one supreme Head and King, whom both the Spiritualty and Temporalty ought to obey. 
28 H. 8. C. 1. 1 E. 6. C. 12.  So another Act declareth him supreme Head of the Church upon Earth. So the King is declared by an Act of E. 6. Supreme Head of the Church in England, immediately under God.  
The Oath of Supremacy is enacted. 
5 Eliz. C. 5. Pro supreme Jupiter.  The Latins from whence we borrow the Word, have it in the same sense, for the highest and chiefest. So Terence faith, O supreme Jupiter; and Virgil calls the highest Mountains, 
Supremi Montes.  the Supreme Mountains. Supreme Jurisdiction then, is the highest and chiefest Authority according to Law, the speaking or declaring of Law, the sovereign, or the highest lawful Authority. Spiritual Jurisdiction is about matters relating to the Spirit or Souls of Men to Eternity, wherein a King in the strict acceptation of the Word, can have no Jurisdiction, for no Power can command the Spirit or Soul of Man, but God only. 
French Academy, c. 33. p 540, 541.  Accordingly, an Ingenious French Author holds, That one part of Man's building, the Soul, is created free for ever, and to be exempted from the yoke of Humane Power, acknowledging only the Divine Jurisdiction, as the Apostle intimates, Standfast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, 
Gal. 5.18.  ye have been called unto Liberty. The Spiritual Jurisdiction whereof we speak, is, and can only be exercised upon the Body, concerning some actions which may have a relation to the Spirit and eternal condition of Man, wherein the Magistrates power is exercised to suppress Idolatry and Sin. 
Field of the Church, p. 680.  Dr. Field saith, that Spiritual Causes are of two sorts, some are originally and naturally such, and some only in that they are referred to the cognizance of Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Persons, as the Ecclesiastical Testaments, Matrimony, 
Sir John Davis rep. Case of the Praemunire.  etc. And Sir John Davis saith, that for 300 Years this distinction of Spiritual (or Ecclesiastical) and Civil, was not known or heard of in the Christian World. The causes of Testaments, Matrimony, etc. termed Ecclesiastical or Spiritual, were indeed merely Civil, and determined by the Laws of the Secular Magistrate: for making of Wills, and Marrying, were regarded by Heathens as well as Christians. But for Causes and Persons Spiritual and Ecclesiastical, that are properly and indeed such, as First-table-duties, which concern matters of Faith and Holiness, and what conduceth to the eternal welfare of men's Souls. Some hold there is a Right in the Civil Magistrate more suo, to give Commands, and exercise lawful Jurisdiction about things of that nature. And it is meant, and will in part be made appear, that as to Spiritual Matters, a Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction, which is always to be intended according to Law, over Persons and Matters which are usually termed Spiritual or Ecclesiastical, is in Kings.  
2. In the next place we may consider the matter of fact, and the consequence of the Argument thereupon. The matter of Fact will be showed to be the constant and general practice and exercise of Supreme Jurisdiction in Spiritual Matters by most Kings and Princes, both Christians and Pagans, and from the eldest Times to our present Age, which will be distinguished, and some particulars of this Practice, briefly noted in the following Sections. The consequence and conclusion thereupon will be this.  
If Kings and Princes have Supreme Jurisdiction in Spiritual Matters, as the practice thereof, and the Authorities proving the same, do demonstrate that they have. It will then necessarily follow, that the Right of Indulgence, which is a part of that Supreme Jurisdiction, is likewise in those Princes. He that hath Right in the whole; hath Right in every part thereof; and the grant of Indulgence is an Act of Jurisdiction in Spiritual matters, comprehended within the general Jurisdiction which belongs to Princes, and consequently doth belong to those to whom the Supreme Jurisdiction doth belong in Spiritual matters, and that is, to Kings and Princes.  
We may begin with the eldest exercise of this Jurisdiction.  
3. The first Exercise whereof, was in Fathers of Families, and by the same reason is proper to be in Kings, who are Fathers of their Countries.  
The first guide of the Requisites, 
Calibute Downing 's Discourse of the Estate Ecclesiastical, p. 57  as to Public Exercise and actions of Religion, was the original Domestic Discipline in Private Families, where the Father was a King and Priest. Adam directed his Sons to Sacrifice. Seth, Noah, Abraham, and the Princes of those times, Fathers of Families, were Priests also. That the Priesthood was in the Firstborn, as in Melchisedeck, who is taken for Shem the firstborn of Noah; and in the rest of the firstborn, the Fathers of Families in those times before Aaron, is admitted both by Christians and Hebrews. Abraham, and every Patriarch or Prince within his Territory, and every Father of a Family within his Family, did exercise the office of Priest also. So it is, or aught to be at this day, That every Father of a Family is either in his own Person (if he be able) or by providing some fit Person (if his Estate will bear it) to perform Religious Duties in his Family, to pray and expound the Holy Scriptures there. It will not be denied, but that every such Father of a Family may dispense with, and indulge any of his Children or Servants to be absent from those Family-Duties, when he shall see just cause for it. And it would be hard to deny a Prince the same power of Indulgence to his Subjects, which is allowed to every Father of a Family, to his Children and Servants.  
4. We may in the next place look into this Jurisdiction, 
Exod. 29.9. Numb. 3.10.  as it was exercised by the Hebrew Princes. Moses Consecrated, and commanded Aaron; and Moses is styled the Priest of Priests, and the Supreme King, 
Rex summus item & Sacerdos. Jos. 1.5. Jos. 7.  and also Priest, which is testimony sufficient of his Supremacy in Spiritual things. Joshua had the presence of God with him, as Moses had, and commanded all as he did, both Persons and Causes, he built an Altar in Mount Ebal, and offered Sacrifices there, and read the Law to the Levites and Priests. Deborah was Prophetess, and Judge, or Prince of Israel. Samuel was a Prophet, and he and most of the Judges of Israel, did exercise Supreme and Spiritual, as well as Temporal Jurisdiction in Israel. So did David, Solomon, Jehosaphat, Hezekiah, and other Kings of Israel, 
Bertramus, Menechius, Seldenus, Sigonius, etc.  and of Judah, whereof there is plentiful mention in the holy Story, and in those Authors named in the Margin, who have written on this Subject, and it is the best Pattern to be followed by other Princes. The Hebrew Word for a Priest, signifies likewise the Prince of a Territory; not that Priesthood made one a Prince, or did carry Command with it; but that Princes were chief Priests also in their Territories. Before the Law given in Sinai, Moses had cognizance as well of Sacred, as of Profane Matters together (as they were termed) without the distinction of Spiritual and Civil: And this appears in the Tribunals set up by Jethroes advice, and in his Judgements in those Sacred Causes; and to him the Appeals were made, whether the Matters were Sacred or Profane; and doubtless in the exercise of this Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction, the power of Indulgence, where he saw cause, was not denied him.  
5. The like Jurisdiction was in the Heathen Princes, who from the Precedents of the Hebrews (although miserably depraved) drew their Customs to have public Priesthoods, which were Patrimonial and Hereditary; and among them the Prince was also the High Priest. 
Synes. Ep. 12.  The Caldean Kings were Priests also. A Priest and a Prince was all one amongst the Egyptians, so the Magis among the Persians, and the Priests of Apollo at Delphos, among the Grecians. 
Arist. Polit. c. 10.  Aristotle speaking of Kings in the time of the Heroes, saith, That they were Rulers of matters of War and of Sacrifices or sacred Things, which pertained to the Sacerdotal Function. In another place he saith, That the King was Leader or General of the War, and Judge or Moderator of divine Things; and to be Moderator, implies a Power and Right of Indulgence. In like manner the Roman Emperors, before the Birth of Christ, were their High Priests also. 
Pontisiciam potestatem cum Caesarea potentia conjunxit.  It is noted of Julius Caesar, that to the end he might fully recover into his Power the Temporalty, he joined the Pontifical Authority with the Caesarian Power; and so have all wise Princes, his Successors: And it is not improbable, where those two Powers are joined together, 
Sr. Walt. Raleigh in his Treatise of War.  that the right of Indulgence was part of them. The Mufty among the Turks holds all he hath at the discretion of the Great Sultan. Most Nations of the World, after the Precedent of the Hebrews, placed the Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction in their Kings and Supreme Rulers, and it were improbable to conclude that the right of Indulgence was excepted out of that Jurisdiction.  
6. It is likewise evident, That this Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction was in the Emperors, both as to Persons and matters which were termed Spiritual. Writers of Church matters do show that the Clergy for 850 years together, claimed no Superiority or Jurisdiction, but left the same, and submitted themselves therein to their own Princes, who took upon them the Sovereignty in the matters, and over the Persons which were afterwards called Spiritual and Ecclesiastical.  
By Constantius were the Bishops Julius and Liberius Banished. 
Martin Dort. in Jub. et Lib.  Boniface I. by Honorius. Silenus and Virgilius by Justinian. Martin I. by Constantine III. 
Platin. in Bonifac.   
Leo iv submitted himself in all things, great and small, 
Claus. 2. q. 7.  to the command of Lodowick, and offered to amend all that was amiss by the Prince's judgement.  
In the strife between Donatus and Cécilianus, 
Euseb. l. 10. c. 5. Optat. l. 1. cont. Parm. August. Ep. 162.166.  the matters and Persons both Ecclesiastical, Meltiades then Bishop of Rome, was appointed with others by Constantine, to determine the matter, from whose judgement, the party's Appealing, the Emperor appointed new Judges, from whom they appealing likewise, at last Constantine determined it, sitting himself in Person.  
Under Theodosius the elder, Damascus, Sericius and Anastacius, 
Theodos. l. 5. c. 23. Gozon. l. 8. cap. 28. Niceph. l. 15. c. 30. Lib. Pontific in viz. Bonif. Ep. Bonif. ad Honor. Aug. rescrip. Honour ad Bonif. Leo Epist. 9.12, 13, 17. Epist. 43.50. Conoil Chalced, Art 1.  complained against Flavianus, but the Prince heard and justified him. Innocentius desiring the Emperor to appoint a Council for the trial of Chrisostomes' cause, it was denied.  
Honorius commanded Bonifacius and Eulavius chosen Bishops of Rome in a tumult, to departed the City; and Boniface being restored, put up a supplication to the Prince for a Decree for future Elections, which was made by him.  
Leo Bishop of Rome made suit to Theodosius the younger, to command a Council in Italy, for suppressing Eutiches his Error, but the Emperor appointed it at Ephesus, and would not be persuaded to reverse the Judgement. But his Son Martian did it upon the supplication of the Pope, and commanded the Council of Chalcedon, where himself sitting in Person, forbade the Bishops to defend or avouch any thing of the Flesh and Birth of our Saviour, otherwise than the Nicene Creed did contain. 
Novel. Constit. 1. l. 23. Gregory Epist. l. 4. c. 76. 78.  Justinian saith, We command the Blessed Archbishop of Rome, etc. to obey the Law he then made. Gregory I. writing to Mauritius, useth this stile, My Lord, my most gracious Lord, I your Servant, and Subject to your command, and makes many submissions to the Emperor, 
Sixth Synod. Art 4.  who overruled him in his Episcopal Jurisdiction. Agatho Bishop of Rome 685 years after Christ, when Constantine I. sent for some Learned men out of the West parts, to come to the general Council, returns this Answer, 
Agathan. Epist 2.  Your Princely Favour mildly commanding, our Baseness hath obediently fulfilled that which was by you commanded. And in another Epistle, 
Distinct. 10. l. de Captulis.  he saith, All Bishops of the North and West parts Servants of your Christian Empire. Leo iv submitted himself to Lodowick the Father, and afterwards confirmed his obedience to Lotharius the Son, promising submission to their Decrees. In the 20 Constitutions, 
Novel. Constit. 3.5, 6, 16. etc.  wherein Justinian disposeth of crimes and causes Ecclesiastical, almost every Sentence is a command. The like in 123. 
Socrates. l. 1.  Entitled of divers Ecclesiastical Chapters. The like is in the Laws of Constantine, Charles, Lodowick, Lotharius, and others. By all which, and many of the like nature which are omitted, it appears, That all the submission and obedience that Subjects do owe their Prince, was acknowledged and given by the Clergy, as well as others, to the Emperors. And that they did exercise Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction both over the Persons, and in the matters termed Spiritual. It would be hard then not to admit them, 
Gers. 4. part. pro Jo. Manius de Schism & Concil. c. 22. Lazan. Epist. c. 267.  as a consequent thereof, the Right of Indulgence also.  
7. This Jurisdiction was likewise in the Kings of France, and exercised by them. The Divines of Paris, by the King's encouragement, did condemn Pope Julius his Doctrine with the sound of Trumpets, taking as much supremacy to himself as Charles did, who by advice of his Bishops, Princes, and Universities, Decreed that the whole Church of France should departed from the obedience of Benedict, 
Naucter General. 48. Leland 448.  and be under their own King in matters Spiritual. And Charles the VII. made a Law called the Pragmatical Sanction, for the perpetual Observation of those things which the Council of Bazil had Decreed, 
Lateraneus Council sub Leo 10. Sespred. 10.  which kerbed and cashired the Pope's Jurisdiction, and advanced the Kings. And though the Pope reversed it, and laboured the King to do it, yet the Clergy of France adhered to the King, 
Oron Matraej in Anno. 1510.  owning his Authority. A little before that, in a Council at Tours, the Praelates of France gave their full resolution to Lewis the XII. That it was Lawful for him to forsake the Pope's Obedience, 
Taricuske Hist. Vnivers. Ep. l. 9 Philade Cominos, l. 9  and to despise his Curses, being himself Supreme in his Kingdom. But Philip the Fair, before that, clapped the Pope's Legate by the heels, and Sequestered himself and his whole Realm from his Obedience, and at length caught the Pope's own Person, and kept him in Prison till he died. Here was exercise of Supreme Power to he highest. And when Francis I. 
Concordat. Gall. Budovus de Astr.  in his Interview with Leo X. did remit the Force of the Pragmatical Sanction, his Secretary said, That the Garland of France was betrayed. So much they valued the King's Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction; whereof many more Instances are in the Story of that Nation.  
8. The like Supreme Jurisdiction was exercised by the Kings of Spain. In Castille, they have some limited Ecclesiastical Power by a late Privilege of Adrian VI granted to Charles V. But when they see their time, they are pleased to take so much as shall serve their turn. As Philip II. seized upon the Temporalties of the Archbishop of Toledo; then when the Bishop of Gorusa was apprehended at Rome for New Heresy; And when Sixtus V sent to him, That if he would undertake the War against England, 
Thuanus Hist. l. 71. Prudentissimus princeps respondit se nil de suo Pontifici largiri. Thesaur. Polit. Apol. Epist. 49. Nullis personis Ecclesiastici vel Sacres Locis ullam rem immobilem absque Principis licentia acceptare vel habere. Hug. tui Jul. de Repub. Portugal. Botar. Net. orais quaest. l. 3. Guicchard. Hist. l. 4. Boron. Annal. 1209.  he would remit to him the Revenues of that Bishopric. This wise Prince answered, That he would receive nothing from the bounty of his own Bishop. And though at home his Power is but what he pleaseth to take, yet in other his Territories it is lawfully, and in Spiritual matters, as large a Jurisdiction as that of any other Prince. As in Burgundy and Flanders, he had the same Right that the King of France once had: As Charles V made a Statute of Mortmain. That it should not be lawful for any Ecclesiastical Persons, or Sacred Places, to take or have any Immovable Things without the Licence of the Prince, and his Indulgence in that behalf. Philip II. his Son, in publishing the Council of Trent in the Netherlands, did not let it pass in all points, with the strength of an Ecclesiastical Law, but restrained it with an express Clause, That it should not prejudice any privilege of the King, touching Possessory Judgements, or Ecclesiastical Live, or Nominations thereunto. In Portugal they had the Right of Presentation to all Bishoprics and Abbeys, which is no small Testimony of Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction. Sicily hath been held of the See of Rome as a Spiritual See, yet there the Kings of Spain do not only claim Supremacy of Over-seeing, but likewise Superindency in doing of Ecclesiastical or Spiritual Affairs; and there in all his Dominions the King of Spain doth exercise Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction, to which the Right of Indulgence is incident.  
9 The like Supreme Jurisdiction was also exercised, and still is, by the Kings of Sweden in Spiritual matters. They bestow the Bishoprics and Superintendencies upon such Persons as they judge fittest for them; which Donation is no slender Proof of this Supreme Jurisdiction; and the Bishops and Superintendents there, who are the same in Office and Authority, though not in Name, with the Bishops; These chief Rulers, I say, of the Clergy, and the Clergy themselves, are in perfect Obedience and Submission to the King, as their Supreme in matters Spiritual. All Appeals from the Proceed of their Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Courts, as they likewise term them, are made to the King in his Chancery; who thereupon Ordains, under the Great Seal of Sweden, certain Commissioners or Delegates, who hear and determine those matters by the King's authority. And in some Cases of extraordinary weight or difficulty, the King himself, with the advice of his Senate or Council of State, as in the last Resort, resolves them. The Bishops, Superintendents, and the rest of the Clergy, are excluded from any Office or intermeddling with Secular Public Affairs, which some of them relate to be occasioned by the height and busy interposing in such matters by some of their Archbishops and Bishops. But of that I can say nothing, only I know the present Archbishop and some of their Bishops to be learned, grave, and pious Men, and very observant to their King, whose Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction is acknowledged by them, and all other his Subjects, and surely comprehends therein his clear Right of Indulgence, which he exercises in many places.  
10. 
Thesaur. Pol. Apol. 50. Herbert. Hist. Pol. l. 2. c. 7. Thesaur. Hist. l. 56. Dicunt suoque arbitrio eligunt. Garnier. Comment. Pragmat. Sancta de Sanat. Patriam a Daniaes' simul & Pontificis servitute asseruit. Sir Jer. Davis rep. f. 88 10 H. 7. C. 5. 33 H 6. C. 9 22 H. 6. C. 3. 40 E. 3. C. 13. 7 E. 4. C. 10. 16 E. 4. C. 4.  This Jurisdiction was likewise in several other, if not in all the rest of the Princes of Christendom. Poland and Hungary were by Benedict VII. Converted from Paganism, and thereupon wholly at the dispose of the Pope in matters Spiritual; yet they appoint and choose, at their pleasure, Archbishops, Bishops, and Abbots. The Kings of Hungary use the same Power as the Kings of England do; whereof a Canonist saith, Tho of Right they cannot, yet the Kings of England and Hungary bestow Benefices by allowance from the Pope. Thus he is pleased to declare his opinion, though grossly mistaken as to the Allowance; whereas they claim and exercise this Right only by Virtue of their own Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction according to Law. In which point, besides the Precedents as to England, an English Lawyer may hope for as much Credit as a Canonist. The Princes of Germany, Sweden, Denmark, and of the Netherlands, have exercised the like Spiritual Jurisdiction, especially when they Introduced the Reformation of Religion, and abolished the Power of the See of Rome; Whereupon it is said, that Gustave I. of Sweden, asserted his Country from the Danish and Popish Servitude. Scotland hath likewise vindicated the Jurisdiction of her Prince in these Spiritual matters. And of Ireland it is affirmed, That they have there made as many Laws against Provisions, Citations, Bulls, and Briefs of Rome, as are to be found in all the Parliament Rolls of England. Besides, Poynings Law, Enacts there the Statutes of Provision, and all other Laws against the See of Rome. Also in the Parliament of Kilkenny, and in another Parliament in that Kingdom, it is declared, That the publishing of Bulls of Provision from Rome, is High Treason. But I may incur the Censure of tediousness to bestow more time on this Argument, which can receive little opposition; but it must be acknowledged, that generally the Princes of Christendom, and other Princes before and out of Christanity, and the first Princes and Fathers of Families, have exercised Supreme Jurisdiction in Spiritual matters within their Territories, as a Right belonging to them; and consequently the Right of Indulgence, as part of that Jurisdiction, can hardly be denied to them.   

CHAP. V That supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction in England, is in our Kings.  
1. IT may be shown in a few Instances of many, that this Jurisdiction was in our Kings, in all ages, according to Law.  
If for the Stories-sake we should take our first step as high as our British Kings, we may find in them some testimonies of it, before Christianity was introduced; our British Kings were supreme over the Druids, the Priests, the Arch-flamens and Flamines, and ordered their Sacrifices.  
They ordered likewise all matters of that Nature, as to the supreme Jurisdiction of them.  
The first Christian British King Lucius, if you credit that Story, made that blessed change from Paganism to the Light of the Gospel, which he and all his People embraced.  
He changed the Arch-flamens and Flamines into Arch-Bishops and Bishops, and for the Druids, entertained the Ministry of the Gospel; and the actions of this King and of his Successors, in the Progress of Christianity among them, do give testimony that supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction was then taken to be in our Kings.  
Eleutherius Bishop of Rome, in his Answer to the Letters of Lucius and his Nobles, styles the King, God's Vicar within his Kingdom; and the Vicar is in the stead of his Master, and invested with his Power; which not earthly Prince is capable of, as to command over the heart, and to eternity, but the eternal King of Kings: Yet as to power in this World, Kings are deputed by God as his Vicars on Earth, with as much Supremacy in Spiritual Matters, whereof men are capable, as of Temporal.  
It hath been showed, that the Commands of Christ were full of Meekness: We read that indeed he did Scourge some out of the Temple, but never that he Scourged any into the Temple. He exhorts his Vicars, and all others, Learn of me, for I am meek and lowly; which is commendable in all who are his Vicars, to be thus like their Master.  
2. In the next place a view may be taken of the exercise of this Jurisdiction by our Saxon and Danish Kings.  
Ina saith, in the Preface to his Laws, 
Leg. Inae Reg. c. 1.  That he Studied the health of the Souls of his People; which argues, that he took himself to have spiritual Jurisdiction.  
He makes Laws for the Form of Life of God's Ministers, and such spiritual Matters.  
King Alured gins his Laws with the Decalogue and Judicial Laws, 
Leg. Aluredis, Reg. c. 1.  and enacts the immunity of the Church, as Head of it.  
In the League between Edward and Guthrune the Dane, it enacts, that before all things they worship one God alone, laying aside all barbarous Worship.  
Athelstane enacts also Spiritual Laws: 
Leg. Athelstani Regis. Leg. Edm. Reg. c. 1. Not. in Eadmer. p. 161. de quorum omnium moribus ad nos spectat examen. Leg. Eadgeri Reg.  So doth King Edmond, and declares that he had consulted how the Christian Faith might be promoted.  
King Edgar in his Oration to his Clergy, saith, That the examination of all their Manners did belong to him.  
He made many Canons of matters merely spiritual; as touching the Demeanour and Duty of Priests, Parents instructing their Children in the Christian Faith, and to abstain from filthy and blasphemous Words and Songs; that Priests do Preach every Lord's day, and against Swearing and Sabbath-breaking: Matters sufficiently spiritual, and not unworthy or improper for a Prince's care.  
King Canute commandeth all his Subjects to Worship God, 
Leg. Canuti Reg.  and to keep the Rules of Christian Religion; makes many Ecclesiastical Canons, forbids barbarous Worship and Superstition, yet without severe Penalties, and professeth to do all things for confirmation of Christian Piety.  
Aelfric in his Canons, 
Canon's Aelfrici ad Wulfinum Episcopum.  saith unto the Priests, I tell you, I will not bear your negligence in your Ministry, and all his Laws are concerning spiritual Matters.  
Edward the Confessor, 
Leg Edvardi Confessor.  in his Laws, calls himself the Vicar of the most high God; and saith, that he was constituted to that end, that he should govern the Kingdom and People of God, and above all, the holy Church; which is agreeable to the Writ of Summons to Parliament to this day.  
These ancient Kings did use to give the Bishoprics by the Ring and Staff, as the Investiture: And these, with many other Instances which are omitted, do testify the supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction to be exercised by these Kings.  
3. The like Jurisdiction appears also to have been in William the first, called by the flattering Monks, the Conqueror; though he came into England to recover his Claim to the Crown, 
Eadmer. Fidelitatem facere nolui, nec volo, quia nec ego promisi, nec Antecessores meos, Antecessoribus tuis id ye●isse comperio.  and had the Pope's Benediction, who sent him an hallowed Banner, with one of St. Peter's Hairs in it.  
Yet when the Legate required him to do fealty to the Pope, he would acknowledge no Superior to himself, but answers, Fealty I would not do, nor will I do it, because neither I have Promised it, nor do I find that my Ancestors have done it to your Ancestors.  
He appropriated Churches with Cure to Ecclesiastical Persons, 
7 E. 3. Quar. Imp. 19 Eadmer. f. 6. Cuncta divina simul, & humana ejus nutum expectabant. Mat. Paris in W. 2. Ann. 1094. Anselm. Epist. 36. ad Paschal.  and did many the like Acts; whereupon Eadmerus reports, that all things, both Divine and Humane, were at his beck; which sufficiently testifies his supreme Jurisdiction in Spiriritual Matters.  
His Son William Rufus denied leave to Anselme to go to Rome, and told him, that no Archbishop or Bishop of his Realm, should be subject to the Pope, or Court of Rome; and that if he asked this leave any more, or appealed to Rome, he should speedily departed out of his Realm.  
And because he went thither without a Licence from the King, all his Goods and Chattels were seized to the King's use, and he constrained to live in Banishment during the King's Life.  
In King Henry 1. time he was permitted to return into England, 
Mat. Paris in H. 1. Anno 1104.  but not without Promise first made, that he would perform the Customs of W. 1. and of William Rufus: And when H. 1. perceived that Anselme combined with the Pope, 
Coke Rep. 5. Gale 's Case, fol. 106.  to hinder the King's donation of Bishoprics, the King wrote to the Pope, challenging that right; and his Proctor in Rome told the Pope, that his Master would rather lose his Kingdom, than the Donation of Bishoprics.  
In his Charter to the Abbey of Reading, he saith, We Ordain as well in regard of Ecclesiastical as Regal Power.  
4. We come next in order to the time of King Stephen, 
Sir John Davis Rep. f. 40. Apellationes in usu non erant, donee H. Winton. Episcop. malo suo, dum Legatus esset crudeliter intrusit.  whereof a Monk writes, that Appeals to Rome were not in use until Henry Bishop of Winchester, by his mischief while he was Legate did cruelly intrude them: before this, they were made to the King, as having supreme spiritual Jurisdiction.  
H. 2. was a strong opposer of the Sea of Rome, as appears by the Story of Thomas of Becket, and by the Laws made at Clarendon, abridging the Pope's authority, forbidding Appeals, and payment of Peter pence, 
Guliel. Nubrigens. Cro. Anglor. 1.2. c. 16. Mat. Paris Anno 1164. Roger Hovenden, f. 496.  and commanding that none should bring Decrees from Rome to be executed here, on pain of Imprisonment and confiscation; nor Bulls of interdicting the Realm, on pain of high Treason.  
Generally this King asserted and maintained his supreme spiritual Jurisdiction, but he began a little to relent when the Pope armed his sons and Neighbours against him; he constantly made all the resistance he was able against the encroachment of the Clergy, and for the vindication of his own Right (as his Laws also testify) in matters spiritual. King Richard 1. 
Coke Epist. 6: Rep.  gave the Bishoprics by the investiture of the Ring and Staff, which was a great testimony of this Jurisdiction acknowledged to be in him.  
He went further in a Droll which brought him in Money, to make a Bishop an Earl, 
Mat. Paris, p. 144. 50. Juvenem feci Comitem de Episcopo veterano.  saying, That of an old Bishop he had made a young Earl.  
He granted great privileges and exemptions to some of his Clergy and Subjects of Normandy, as well as those in England.  
5. The next are the Reigns of King John, and Henry the 3. who exercised the like Jurisdiction; 
Mat. Paris, anno. 1203. & 1216.  yet it must be acknowledged, that in King John's time the power of the Bishop of Rome did swell to a great height in this Kingdom, the Pope neglecting no means for the increase thereof.  
For which end he scrupled not to absolve the people of England from their Oaths, and Allegiance to their Sovereign.  
And then turning the Tables, interdicting the Kingdom for opposing his will and pleasure: By which means he brought the King to surrender the Crown to the Pope's Legate, and to take it again as his Farmer.  
But the Barons were so sensible of the Right and Supremacy of the Crown of England, that they told the Legate; That the Kingdom of England never was, nor should be St. Peter's Patrimony, and spoke homely of the Clergy, 
Polydore Virgil. in Joh. l. 15.  who assisted the Pope's proceed, crying out upon these shriuled Ribbaulds.  
Neither this King, nor any that succeeded him, observed any part of this Submission.  
And notwithstanding all this, 
Not. in Eadmar. p. 143. donationem baculi pastoralis Abbathiae de Nutlega.  the same King held it not only his Right himself to give the Pastoral Staff, but granted this Right to others: As to William Marshal and his Heirs, he granted the Donation of the Pastoral Staff of the Abbey of Nutlege, which was a mere spiritual Right, and exercise of Supreme Jurisdiction in those matters.  
In the time of his son H. 
4 H. 3: 7 H. 3. prohibition. 15. H. 3. prohibit. 15. & 22. to 5. respects Cas. 11. f.  3. prohibitions were very frequent, which is a strong vindication of this Jurisdiction in the King.  
So was the writing in the King's name to the Bishop, to absolve a Person Excommunicate, and to certify Loyalty of Marriage, Bastardy and the like, which were often done in this King's Reign.  
Also in this King's time, 
45 H. 3. rot. stans in 14. dorso.  there are some Records yet extant, by which it is forbidden that any man be drawn in Plea out of the Realm, there being sufficient Jurisdiction in the King, to do his Subject's Justice, in all matters whatsoever.  
6. We may now look into the Reigns of Edw. 1. and Edw. 2. and find the same Jurisdiction exercised by them.  
E. 
1 E. 1. rot. stans. in 5. dors.  1. A stout and wise Prince, did much recover this right to his Crown: He would not suffer those of the Clergy to go to Rome without his Licence.  
In his time the Statute of Mortmain was made, 
7 E. 1. stat. of Mortmain.  which much ●mpaired the growth of the Clergy, and increased the King's Jurisdiction.  
He forbade the Pope's Provisions without his knowledge and leave, 
11 E. 1. rot. fin. M. 5. 11 E. 1. c. 32.  ●nd shortly after this was the Statute of Carlisle made; which re●ites the Usurpations of the Pope in giving Ecclesiastical Benefices to Aliens, and Enacts that those oppressions should be no more suffered.  
This King denied William of Nottingham to prosecute his Appeal to Rome, because it would infringe the King's Jurisdiction, 
18 E. 1. Petitiones coram Rege. f. 1. 3.  but bade him to enter it here, if he would.  
He set a penalty upon the Provisions of Appropriation, 
18 E. 1. Pleas in Parliament. 28 E. 1. in Scaccario.  and being cited by the Pope to appear before him: The great Council were highly offended at it; and wrote to the Pope, that it was notorious, That the King of England was not to appear before ●he Pope or any other, and although he would, yet he could not do it, being himself Supreme in those as well as other matters.  
This King denied the Pope's Bulls and Peter pence, 
33 E. 1. lib. ●pud Turrim. f. 1. 114. 35 E. 1. 16 f. 150. 35 E. 1. rot. Pat. M. 25. Sir Jo. Davis, Rep. f. 95.  and other Exactions of Rome, and would not Licence his Bishops to repair to the General Council, till they had taken an Oath not to receive the Pope's Blessing.  
He regarded not the Pope's prohibition of his Wars against Scotland. He forbade the payment of First fruits to the Pope, and seized the Temporalties of the Clergy for refusing to pay him a tenth, though the Pope forbade them.  
In his time, 
50 E. 3. lib. Assis pl. 19 Brook praemunire. 10. Coke 5 Rep. Eccles. Case. f. 12. 9 E. 1. quare admisit. 7. 39 E. 3.  it was adjudged Treason for one Subject to bring in a Bull of Excommunication against another; and a high contempt against the Crown to bring in Bulls of Provision, or Briefs of Citation.  
And the Archbishop of York had all his Lands seized into the King's hands, and lost, during his life, for a contempt in refusing to admit the King's Clerk to a Benefice, against the Pope's Provision, and all this was held to be according to the Common Law of England, and an high Testimony of the King's Supremacy.  
In E. 2. time, 
Stat. 9 E. 2.  the Clergy put up again for a share of this Supremacy, and got the Statute of Articuli Cleri to be made, but in them the Right of the Crown is reserved and manifested.  
This King by his Letters civilly and filially entreated the Pope and Cardinals, 
14 E. 2. lib. apud Turrim. f. 85.  not to hold plea at Rome of things done in England.  
And though in his time the Spiritual Courts held plea, 
Sr. John Davis Rep. f. 95.  by the Statute of circumspectè agatis, and by general allowance and usage, yet they thought themselves not safe till the King had granted them Jurisdiction in these Cases, 
Coke 5 Rep. Eccles. Case. f. 13. Stat. Articuli Cleri. 9 E. 2.  wherein the Parliament consented by their Act before mentioned. And it was objected nevertheless against this King, that he had given allowance to the Pope's Bulls and Authority here.  
7. We meet with the same practice in the time of E. 3. and of his Grandson, R. 2.  
Edward the third was a wise and Powerful Prince, and his time affords us a large view of this matter, in the Records and Printed Statutes.  
In his minority and in the heat of his wars in France, the Pope sent many Briefs into England, at which the King and his Subjects were much offended, and did smartly oppose them.  
By the Resolutions of the Judges, 
Coke 5 Rep. Eccles. Case. f. 15.16, 17.  and of the Parliaments in his time, they admitted no Jurisdiction of the Court of Rome here, but punished those who did bring any Bulls from thence, or obtained any Provisions of Benefices, and the like.  
He entirely resumed the right of his Crown in supreme spiritual Jurisdiction.  
The Statute of Provisors recites the Statute of Carlisle, 
25 E. 3. Stat. de provisor.  and Asserts: That the Church of England was founded in the Estate of the Prelacy by the Kings and their Predecessors.  
And this, 
27 E. 3. Stat. provis. c. 1.  and a subsequent Statute forbidding Provisions of Benefices by the Pope, do testify the authority of the King to be Supreme in Spiritual matters.  
So doth another Act forbidding those to be cursed, 
32 E. 3. c. 1, 2, 3.  who shall execute the former Laws.  
In the Annals of our Law, 
17 E. 3.23.  we also find Resolutions to the same effect, for the King's right of granting Exemptions from the Jurisdiction of the Ordinary, which manifests his own Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction.  
In his time it was resolved, 
28 Assis. pl. 20. 38 E. 3. c. 7. Coke 5 Rep. Eccles. Case. f. 16.  That a Prior being the King's debtor, might sue a Spiritual Person for Tithes in the Exchequer; for until a Statute of this King the right of Tithes was determinable at the King's Temporal Courts, and in many Manors of the King and of other Lords, they had probate of Wills.  
This King translated Canons Secular into Regular and Religious, 
38 Assis. pl. 22.49 E. 3. lib. Assis. pl. 8.  and made of the Prior and Covent of Westminster, who were Regular Persons, capable in Law to sue and to be sued: All which and divers others omitted, are proofs of this Jurisdiction in him.  
In the Nonage of R. 2. the Power of Rome again budded, and they attempted to encroach, by sending hither Bulls, Briefs and Legates: Whereof the People were so impatient, that they offered to live and die with the King in withstanding this Usurpation.  
In his time an Act makes it Death, to bring any Summons, 
13 R. 2. c. 3.  Excommunication, etc. against those who executed the Statute of Provisors.  
Another Statute makes it a Praemunire to purchase or pursue in the Court of Rome, or elsewhere, any Translations, Provisions, 
16 R. 2. c. 5.  and Sentences of Excommunication, Bulls, Instruments, or any other things which touched the King, his Crown and Regality, or his Realm. And declares that the Crown of England hath been in no Earthly Subjection; but free at all times, and immediately Subject to God in all things, which is full Supremacy, and in all things, includes Spirituals.  
The King had also the ill fortune to have it objected against him in Parliament, that he had allowed of some Bulls from Rome.  
8. We come now to the times of several Kings, who found this point so well settled, that there was not much need of their stirring in it, yet the same Jurisdiction was exercised by them.  
In H. 4. time, were several Resolutions of the Judges, 
Coke 5 Rep. Eccles. Case. f. 22, 23, 24.  expressly disallowing the Supremacy of the Pope in this Realm, and confirming the Kings.  
A Statute makes it a Praemunire to purchase Bulls from Rome. 
2 H. 4. c. 3. 6 H. 4. c. 1.   
Another forbids the horrible Mischiefs and damnable Customs of the Court of Rome, about compounding with the Pope's Chamber for First-fruits.  
Another makes it a Praemunire for any to put in execution here any Bulls for the discharge of Dimes. 
2 H. 4. c. 6.   
In his son's time an Act makes it a Praemunire for one by colour of Provisions from Rome, and Licences thereupon, 
2 H. 5. c. 9  to molest any Incumbent.  
In his time the Lands of Religious houses were in some danger to be taken away, 
Martin Chron. p. 142.  the King being Petitioned to suppress them, as Nurseries of Idleness, Gluttony, Lechery and Pride, and that their Revenues would bring yearly to the King's Coffers 200000 l. and also maintain 15 Earls, 1500 Knights, and above 6000 men at Arms.  
But by the Policy and liberal offer of the Clergy, to supply the King's occasions in furtherance of his Title to France, this business was diverted.  
In the minority of H. 6. 
Sir Jo. Davis, Rep. f. 96.  when the Commons had denied the King a Subsidy, the Prelates offered a large supply for his Wars, if the Act of Provision were repealed: But Humphrey Duke of Gloucester, who not long before had cast the Pope's Bull into the fire, caused this motion to be denied, as derogatory to the Kings Right and Supremacy.  
In this King's Reign it was adjudged, 
1 H. 6. f. 10. 8 H. 6. f. 1.  that the Pope's Excommunication is of no force in England, by the Common Law.  
The succeeding Kings were not so active in these matters, nor was there so much occasion for it in their time, as in the Reigns of their Predecessors.  
E. 
1 H. 7.20. 9 E. 4. f. 3. Fitz. N. B. f. 44. 12 E. 4.46.  4. was full of trouble, yet we find mention of a resolution in his time, that the Pope could not grant any Sanctuary in England. And that if one Spiritual Person did sue another at Rome, where he might have Remedy here, he should incur a Praemunire.  
Another Judgement was, that the Pope's Excommunication was of no force in England.  
And when two Legates, 
1 H. 7. f. 10.  one after another came into England, they could not be admitted, till they had taken an Oath, to attempt nothing against the King and his Crown.  
R. 
2 R. 3. f. 22.  3. had a short and unhappy Reign, after his wicked Usurpation, and was careful to please the Clergy; yet in his time it was resolved, That a Judgement or Excommunication at Rome, did not prejudice any man here.  
H. 7. was a prudent and wary man, not forward to disoblige any party, 
1 H. 7. f. 10.  especially so great a one as the Clergy; yet in his time divers Resolutions passed to the same effect as before, for the vindication of the King's Supremacy.  
The Judges affirmed, 
10 H. 7. f. 18. Persona mixta.  that the King is a mixed person, having both spiritual and temporal jurisdiction in him.  
And that the King may dispense with the Ecclesiastical Law for Pluralities, 
11 H. 7. f. 12.  and for a Bastard to be made Priest.  
9 We are now come to the great Wheel, which turned upside down the whole course of Ecclesiastical Affairs; King H. 8. who not only resumed absolutely the whole spiritual Jurisdiction into his own hands, but totally abolished the Supremacy of the Pope in England.  
The cause hereof some would attribute to his Covetousness, but he was rather prodigal; and though none are more covetous than some prodigal men to get fuel for their flames, yet the humour of covetousness was spent in his Father, and his own Education and Practice was otherwise.  
His displeasure against the Pope about the business of Queen Katherine, and the precedent of Woolsey, added to his private grudge; and Haughtiness might put him upon this work, which he went through with, and that by Parliament, which he sufficiently commanded.  
It chief began in the 24 year of his Reign, 
24 H. 8. c. 2.  when an Act was made, which fully recites the King's supreme Jurisdiction both in Spiritual and Temporal matters, without Appeal to any foreign Princes or Potentates.  
It enacts that all Causes determinable by any spiritual Jurisdiction, shall be adjudged within the King's Authority; and if any procure Appeals, Process, etc. from Rome, he shall iucurre a Praemunire.  
The next year an Act was made, 
25 H. 8. c. 19  wherein the Clergy acknowledged the King's Supremacy, and that they are convened by his Writ: And no Canons to be of force without his assent; which is enacted accordingly: And that the King may assign 32 persons to examine the Canons, and to continue such of them as they think fit, and to restrain the rest. Appeals to Rome are forbidden, and that Appeals from places exempt, and which were formerly to the Sea of Rome, shall for the future be to the King in Chancery; which is a great asserting of the King's Supremacy.  
Another Act the same year declares, 
25 H. 8. c. 20.  that the King may grant his Congee deslier for Bishops, and in default of Election of them, the King may nominate the Bishop by his Letters Patents, and they to be consecrated here.  
Another Act reciting the Pope's Exactions for Dispensations, 
25 H. 8. c. 21.  Licences, etc. in derogation of the Imperial Crown and Authority Royal, enacts that none be had from Rome, and gives power to the King therein, which will be mentioned in another place.  
The next Parliament unites to the Crown the title of Supreme Head of the Church, 
28 H. 8. c. 1.  and all Jurisdictions and Authorities thereto belonging.  
Another Act gives to the King First-fruits, as the Pope had them. 
26 H. 8. c. 3.   
Another Act forbids Appeals to Rome. 
28 H. 8. c. 7.   
Another (since repealed) makes it a Praemunire to extol or defend the Authority of the See of Rome: 
28 H. 8. c. 10.  And Officers to be sworn to renounce and resist it.  
Another Act makes void Licenses and Indulgences from Rome, 
28 H. 8. c. 16.  and those allowable to be confirmed under the Great Seal.  
In the 31 year of his Reign, 
31 H. 8. c. 9  an Act gives him power to nominate such number of Bishops, Bishops Seas and Churches, and to endow them with such Possessions as he will.  
Another Act gives to the King all the rest of the Monasteries not dissolved, and their Possessions. An Act of as much neglect of the Romish Power, and of as much Supremacy in the King in matters spiritual, as may be imagined.  
Which Supremacy was further exercised by this King, in the Laws made for confirmation of the Romish Doctrine, and the Six Articles, upon which was great severity, some being put to death for affirming the Pope's Supremacy, others for denying his Doctrine, all at the same time.  
10. We come now to the succeeding Princes.  
Edw. 6. proceeded in spiritual matters, as to the Doctrinal part, concerning which sundry Acts of Parliament were made: 
1 E. 6. c. 12.  One makes it Treason to affirm, that the King is not, or that the Pope is, supreme Head of the Church in England.  
An Act ordains the Book of Common Prayer. 
2 & 3 E. 6. c. 1 & 12.19. 2 & 3 E. 6. c. 20, 21. 3 & 4 E. 6. c. 10. 3 & 4 E. 6. c. 10.   
Another is about payment of Tithes, prohibiting flesh on Fasting days; For payment of Tenths to the King, and Repeal of Laws against Marriage of Priests. Another takes away Popish Books and Images, repealed by Queen Mary: Another gives Power to the King to name 32 persons, to examine the Ecclesiastical Laws, and to set forth such as they think fit.  
People are required to come to Church, 
5 & 6 E. 6. c. 1.3. 5 & 6 E. 6. c. 12. 1 M. c. 2.9.  the Common Prayer with some Alterations enacted, Fasting days to be observed, Priests Marriages lawful.  
But all the good Laws made by this King, were repealed by his Sister Queen Mary, and such Service as was in the last year of Hen. 8. to be used: That she may make Orders for governance of Cathedral and Collegiate Churches.  
Acts against Heresy are revived, 
1 M. c. 6.  (but this was repealed 1 El. c. 1.) Cardinal Pool dispensed with the laymen's possession, to retain Abbey-Lands. 
2, 3 P. & M. c. 4.  And the Queen remitted First-fruits, and renounced Ecclesiastical Live.  
Queen Elizabeth turned all about again, 
1 El. c. 1.  and by Act of Parliament all foreign Jurisdictions spiritual are abolished, the Statutes of H. 8. her Father, for this purpose, are revived. So are the Statutes of her Brother, 1 E. 6. c. 1. and she repeals the Statute 1 & 2 P. & M. c. 6.  
And it is enacted, that such Jurisdictions spiritual as lawfully were exercised before, shall be united to the Imperial Crown of this Realm. And the Queen hath power to assign Commissioners in matters Ecclesiastical, and enacts the Oath of Supremacy. The Act of 1 M. is repealed, and the Book of Common Prayer of 5 & 6 E. 6. C. 1. is established.  
'Tis made Penal to maintain the Authority of the Sea of Rome, 
1 El. c. 4.  the Oath of Supremacy to be taken, 
5 El. c. 1.  Fasting days to be observed. The Bible and Common Prayer to be translated and confirmed; Bulls from Rome are prohibited, 
5 El. c. 5.5. 13 El. c. 1.  and reconciling to that Church, and bringing in of Agnus Dei, Pictures, Crosses, etc. Made Treason to withdraw any from our Religion to the Romish: 
23 El. c. 1. 27 El. c. 1.  Jesuits and Priests are to departed the Realm, and not return on pain of Treason.  
Next was a severe Law made against Seditious Sectaries, 
35 El. c. 1.  frequenting Conventicles on pretence of any exercise of Religion, contrary to the Queen's Laws; and so it must be, and whether this Act be continued or not, was questioned. King James proceeded in the ways of Queen Eliz. as to spiritual matters. 
1 Jac. c. 4.  That her Acts against Romish Priests be put in Execution, but with favour upon Conformity.  
Sundry Acts were made in his time, touching fasting days, 
1 Jac. c. 2●. & 29. 3 Jac. c. 1. 3 Jac. c. 4.  Prayer for delivery from the Gunpowder Treason, for repressing and discovering of Popish Recusants, and against absolving to the Church of Rome; and penalties for not coming to Church. In none of which the King's power of Indulgence is impeached, or named.  
There is also an Act of King Charles 1. for reforming abuses on the Lord's day, and to restrain sending any beyond Sea to be popishly brought up, and others of like nature.  
In all these Princes Reigns, the writing to the Bishops to absolve Persons Excommunicate, to certify Loyalty of Marriage, Bastardy, etc. and Prohibitions to the Ecclesiastical Courts, were very frequent, and testimonies of, together with a quiet enjoyment of their Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction; which consequently carries the Right of granting Induigence in Spiritual matters along with it.   

CHAP. VI 
10 H. 7. Rex est persona mixta & unita cum Sacerdotibus. Ab & Gloss in c. de decimis. Rex non praeesse debet in spiritualibus ut in temporalibus. A. B. C. de sacro sanct. unctionibus. Quod Rex mere Laicus & non Ecclesiasticus aut mixtus, quanquam unctus, nec spiritualibus, aut temporalibus quoad ecclesiam se immiscere posse. In ordine ad spiritualia.  That the right of granting Indulgences in Spiritual matters, is in our King.  
1. THis right is in the King of England, as he is a mixed Person, capable of Spiritual Jurisdiction.  
This was affirmed by Judge Bryan in H. 7. time, and that the King is a mixed person, and united to the Priests of holy Church.  
But the Canonists say, that the King is not Supreme in Spirituals, as he is in Temporals, and they labour much for their own, and their Master's interest, to make it good.  
Some Doctors affirm, that a King is a mere lay person, and not an Ecclesiastical, or mixed Person, although he be anointed; and that he cannot intermeddle with matters Spiritual, or with matters Temporal, which do concern the Church.  
It is much for them to abridge a King's Power in matters Temporal, but it is not the first time they have made use of the Words in order to Spirituals, to the prejudice of the Power of Princes. Nor doth their opinion determine the Laws of England, by which our King hath this Jurisdiction.  
The stories of other Kingdoms as well as of this, do manifest the exercise of Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction by Princes, and the Non Obstante of the Doctor (though the King be anointed) is no small objection in their way, carrying Testimony that Kings are mixed persons.  
Especially as it relates to our King, 
Ca●ibut downing's discourse of the States Ecclesiastical, p. 57  whose Anointing is only ancient among the Princes of Christendom.  
The old Rhyme of Robert of Gloucester is mistaken, which saith of Alured, 
" And he was King of England, of all that there come,  
" That versed thus yeled was of the Pope of Rome. 
Oiled or anointed.    
For Gildas mentions the anointing of the ancient British Kings (although in a bad sense, 
Galfred Muneth, l. 9 c. 3. ) and the Monk of Malmesbury, the anointing of Egbert before Alured.  
Jothams' speech to the Israelites, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Isa. 45.1.  That the Trees went to anoint them a King, and that which is rendered, they went to make Abimelech King; is in some Greek Copies they went and anointed Abimelech to be their King.  
This was about 200 years before the beginning of their Kingdom in Saul, who with his Successors were anointed: So also was the King of Syria, Hazael, and Cyrus' King of Persia in the holy Prophecy is called the Lords anointed, a frequent expression of Kings in Scripture.  
I meddle not with the Miracle, 
Cedar Roda senim tract Kerisos, Lyr ad Ri. 3.  that the Holy Oil, which was consecrated in Moses time, and used in this Unction, continued without diminution until the Captivity.  
But from those Examples in the Holy Story, the Kings of Christendom took their custom of being anointed.  
Our Sovereign is anointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Emperors when they were Kings of France, were anointed by the Archbishop of Rheims, and as Emperors by the Archbishop of Mentz, Colen and Triers.  
But the Kings of France of the first line were not anointed, 
Du. Haillan, l. 1. de la premiere lignee oinct nigh Sacrèe.  as their Historian testifies; and in a second place saith plainly and peremptorily, There is no mention in our Antiquities of the anointing of the Kings of the first line.  
Though the Kings of Spain are anointed by the Archbishop of Toledo: 
N●est fact aucune mention de sacrèe ny de onctionee Reys de la premiere lignèe.  The Kings of Denmark, (he means of Sweden) by the Archbishop of Vpsal: The King of Poland by the Archbishop of Guesne: The Kings of Hungary by the Archbishop of Strigon: The Kings of Navarre by the Bishop of Dampetune: yet none of them were anciently anointed, but now are; and this real Relation doth more peculiar and appropiate the State Spiritual to our King.  
And by it, 
Downing, f. 96.  he is more than a lay man, he is a mixed person, having Supreme Ecclesiastical as well as civil Government.  
2. Nay, the King of England is not only a mixed Person, but in some sense he may be termed a Spiritual Person, whereof the former Note of his being Anointed, and by Spiritual Persons, is some Argument.  
The use of Oil, or Unction amongst the Gentiles and Jews, 
Causabon ad Baron. Annal. exercit. 14. An. 32. Numb. 26.  whereby they would have even inanimate things Sacred, by pouring Oil on them, may be omitted. All hold the Anointing of Kings, to difference them from Lay persons, and that it put a kind of Sacredness upon them, as making them Spiritual persons.  
Hence the French word for it is (sacree) as it were a consecration or dedication of the King above all others, to the Service of God in Spiritual matters.  
That Kings anointed with holy Oil, 
Reges sancto Oleo uncti, sunt Spiritualis Jurisdictionis capaces. 33 E. 3. tit. Aid du Roy. Guimer, tit. 12. §. 9 Quod Reges inuncti, non sunt mere Laici. Psal. 105.15. 2 Cor. 1.  are capable of spiritual Jurisdiction, was a sentence applied to our King in the time of E. 3. and to his Predecessors 〈◊〉 Successors.  
And Guimer in his Comment upon the Pragmatical Sanction of France, is peremptory, that anointed Kings are not merely lay Persons.  
And he adds, that from thence it is, that the Kings of England do bestow Benefices.  
The anointed King David puts Prophets and anointed Persons together; Touch not mine anointed, and do my Prophets no harm; and Christ's Ministers are frequently styled Gods anointed.  
If our King (as undoubtedly he is) be a spiritual Person, it is not improper for him to grant Indulgence in matters Spiritual.  
The Kings of Israel took themselves to be spiritual Persons, and and to have spiritual Jurisdiction, as the Judgement and Actions of Moses, Joshua, the Judges, and their Kings do show.  
The excellent and Pious Sermons and Exhortations made by Moses, Joshua, Samuel, David, Solomon, Hezekiah, Jehoshaphat and others, do testify their being Spiritual Persons.  
So doth that passage of our first Christian King Lucius, 
Antiquit. Britan. p. 6.  that he laboured the Propagation of the Gospel of Christ; and that having transported an Army into France, 
Dum Duces sui bellica tractarent officia, ipse evangelio praedicando assiduus suit.  whilst his Captains were employed about the business of the War, he himself was diligent in Preaching of the Gospel.  
Our last Saxon King Edward gained the title of Confessor.  
And who so reads the Book of our late King Charles the first, will find that he had admirable Endowments in Spiritual as well as Temporal things.  
Though it be not a personal Duty in a Prince to Preach, yet he is trusted to promote the Gospel as a principal part of his Duty; and for a Prince to Preach is no strange thing, nor any disparagement, the great Solomon is called the Preacher; and they may Preach if they please, which is an argument of their being Spiritual Persons, and that of their fitness to give Indulgence in Spiritual matters.  
3. If our King were not to be taken as a Spiritual Person, he could not so properly be Head of the Church in England; which by our Law he is, and therefore the more capable and fit to grant Indulgence in Spiritual Matters.  
The Passages before in part remembered, of the actings of our elder and later Kings, 
16 R. 2. c. 5.  do sufficiently evince them to have been Heads of the English Church. An Act as ancient as R. 2. time, declares that the Crown of England hath been so free at all times, that it hath been in no earthly subjection, but immediately subject to God in all things. H. 8. settling this Supremacy in himself and his Successors, by the Act in the 24th year of his Reign, 
24 H. 8. c. 12.  recites, that by authentic Histories and Chronicles it appears, that this Realm is an Empire, and so hath been accepted in the World; governed by 〈◊〉 supreme Head and King, unto whom the Spiritualty and Tempor 〈…〉 een bounden and owen to bear (next under God) a natural and humble Obedience.  
In the next year an Act prays thus, 
25 H. 8. c. 21.  In regard your Majesty is supreme Head of the Church, which the Convocation hath recognised, that it may be enacted, etc.  
Another Act settles it more expressly, which recites, That although the King rightfully is, and aught to be supreme Head of the Church of England, and so is recognized by the Clergy in their Convocation; yet for confirmation thereof, and increase of Virtue, and to extirpate Errors and Heresies, it enacts, That the King shall be taken and reputed the only Supreme Head in Earth of the Church of England: And shall have and enjoy, annexed and united unto the Imperial Crown of this Realm, as well the Title and Style thereof, as all Honours, Dignities, Preeminencies, Jurisdictions, Privileges and Immunities to the said Dignity of Supreme Head belonging.  
In his Son's time it was enacted to be High Treason, 
1 E. 6. c. 12.  to affirm that the King is not, or ought not to be Supreme Head in Earth of the Church in England, immediately under God; or that the Bishop of Rome, or any other than the King of England, is, or aught to be by the Laws of God, Supreme Head of the same Church.  
This Title was challenged by the Pope over all the Churches of Christendom, but the several Acts of Parliament declare it to have been, and to be the right of our Kings.  
And if it ever did belong to any Spiritual Jurisdiction, to grant Indulgence in Spiritual Matters, it is by these Acts given to the King.  
The Pope, when he claimed the Title, did give Indulgence in greater matters; therefore it may be allowed to our Kings, under this Title, to grant Indulgence to some of their Subjects, Dissenters, as to some minuter matters of Religion, as Forms or Ceremonies in Church Discipline, etc.  
4. We may examine from the ground of Reason, whether it be not fit that this Right should be in the King.  
When a sudden Tumult and Insurrection hath broke forth into a dangerous Rebellion, the King hath in that exigency granted some temporal Indulgences, Manumissions, and other Immunities and Pardons, which at another time he would not grant; yet this in reason and consequence hath been approved a violent Storm, being thereby avoided and appeased, and danger to the King and Kingdom prevented: May it not fall out upon the like grounds of reason, that the King (who is the public Sentinel) overseeing any Tempest or Danger, or the decay of the Trade, Wealth or Strength of the Kingdom, may thereupon, and to prevent it, grant Indulgence to his Subjects in Spiritual Matters.  
If this Power should be denied him, it cannot in reason be expected that he should be so well furnished without it as he should be, to prevent a common Mischief or Danger.  
Bishop Taylor hath a Rational as well as Theological Discourse on this Subject: It is, saith he, a great fault, 
Bishop Taylor 's Book of the Liberty of Prophesying, pag. 536, 537.  that men will call the several Sects of Christians by the name of several Religions.  
All the Sects, and all the Pretences of Christians, are but several Species of Christianity, if they do but serve the great End; as every man for his own Sect and Interest believeth for his share he does.  
In reason, the Prince is to Order and Indulge such of them as he thinks fit, the better to serve his great end.  
To Tolerate, is not to Persecute; and the Question, Whether the Prince may Tolerate divers Persuasions, is no more than whether he may lawfully Persecute any man, for not being of his Opinion?  
If he ought not in Justice and Reason to do this, it follows in reason, that he have a Power to Indulge them.  
The Prince is just to Tolerate diversity of Persuasions, as he is ●o Tolerate public Actions; for no Opinion is Judicable, nor ●o Person Punishable but for a sin.  
If the Nonconformity be no Sin, it is reason that it be Indulged; and in reason, none is so fit as the Prince to give this Indulgence.  
And it is not only lawful to Tolerate disagreeing Persuasions, but the Authority of God only is competent to take notice of it, and infallible to determine it, and fit to judge.  
And therefore no humane Authority is sufficient to do all these things, which can justify the inflicting of temporal Punishments upon such as do not Conform in their Persuasions, to a Rule or Authority which is not only fallible, but supposed by the disagreeing Persons to be actually deceived.  
But I consider, (saith the Bishop) that in the Toleration of a different Opinion, Religion is not properly and immediately concerned, so as in any degree to be endangered.  
It is also a part of Christian Religion, 
Tertullian ad Scapul. Humani juris & naturalis potestatis unicuique quod putaverit colere, sed nec Religionis est cogere religionem quae sucipi sponte debet non vi. Heretici qui pace data scinduntur persecutione uniuntur. Contra Remp. Dextra praecipue capit Indulgentia mentes Asperitas odium saevaque Bella parit.  that the Liberty of men's Consciences should be preserved, in all things where God hath not set a limit and made a restraint; that the Soul of man should be free, and acknowledge no Master but Christ Jesus; that matters Spiritual should not be restrained by Punishments Corporal.  
Thuanus wisely observes, That if you Persecute Heretics or Discrepants, they Unite themselves as to a common defence; if you Permit and Indulge them, they divide themselves upon private Interest; and the rather if this Interest was an ingredient of the Opinion: the reason therefore is much the stronger for this Indulgence.  
In Cases where there is no sin, nor disturbance of the public Peace, it is not only lawful to permit, but necessary, that Princes and all in Authority should not Persecute discrepant Opinions.  
5. That this right of granting Indulgence is in the King, seems also to be warranted from the Common Law of England.  
The Statute before cited, recites, that by authentic Histories and Chronicles, it appears, that this Realm is an Empire, and both Spiritualty and Temporalty subject to it, and that the King is Supreme Head thereof. 
24 H. 8.   
This being so by the Common Law, He as supreme Head may grant any Indulgence or Dispensation where the Law doth not forbid the same. And I know no Law which forbids the King's granting of Indulgence in this Case.  
In the time of K. 
4 H. 3. 7 H. 3. prohibit. 13, 15 H. 3. prohibit. 15.22. Coke 5. Rep. Eccles Case, fol. 1.  Hen. 3. and since, Prohibitions were frequent, and granted as the King's right by the Common Law. So was the Writing in the King's Name to the Bishop, to absolve a person Excommunicate, and to certify Loyalty of Marriage, Bastardy, and the like.  
If in these Spiritual matters, the King by the Common Law might indulge, as to absolve a person Excommunicate, and the like, he may upon as strong Reason of the Law give Indulgence in the matters now desired.  
We find also in the Annals of our Law, Resolutions that the King may exempt any Ecclesiastical person from the Jurisdiction of the Ordinary, 
17 E. 3.24.  and may grant to him Episcopal Jurisdiction and Exemption; this was nothing else but an Indulgence granted by the King, and that from the grounds of the Common Law.  
By the Common Law the King may dispense with Ecclesiastical Law, 
11 H. 7. f. 12.  for Pluralities, and for a Bastard to be made a Priest; by the same ground of Law he may grant the Dispensation and Indulgence which is now desired.  
A Dispensation, or a Non Obstante, is nothing else but an Indulgence in that particular case, according to the Canon Law.  
And it was the Resolution of all the Judges of England, 
Coke 7 Rep. Case. de penal Laws, f. 16.37.  in the 2d year of King James, That the King, upon any Cause moving him, in respect of time, place, person, etc. may grant a Non Obstante to dispense with any particular person, that he shall not incur the penalty of a Statute; and this agreeth with Books of Law.  
Another Resolution was by divers of the Judges; 
10 Apr. 9 Car. 1. at the Sessions at Newgate.  That the King may pardon an Indictment upon the Statute of 5 Eliz. and that he may by the Common Law give a Licence to one to exercise a Trade, for all his Life-time, although he had not been an Apprentice to it, because it is not malum in se, but malum prohibitum.  
Upon the same Reason and ground of Law, 
Coke 11 Rep. f. 88 Dispensatio mali prohibiti st de jure domino Regi concessa, propter impossibilitatem praevidendi de om●i us particularibus. Dispensatio est provida relaxatio mali prohibiti, utilitate seu necessitate pensata. Briton. f. 280. 282, 283. Fleta, l. 6. c. 8. Coke Comment on Littleton, f. 131.  the King may grant a Licence of Indulgence in spiritual matters, as well as in those Cases of temporal matters, especially when the Indulgence is not desired for any thing that is malum in se, but only, perhaps, Bonum prohibitum.  
It is agreed for Law in another Case, in our Books, That the Law hath given power to the King, that of right he may dispense with a prohibited evil, because of the impossibility of foreseeing all particulars which may fall out. And that a Dispensation is a provident relaxation, or Indulgence of a prohibited evil upon consideration of profit or necessity.  
The right to do this, being by our Law in the King, comprehends within the same right of the King, his granting of Indulgence in matters spiritual.  
By the old Law, no Lord, or Knight could go beyond Sea, because thereby the Realm might be disfurnished of valiant men.  
Yet in that Case the King might by the Common Law, grant Licence, or Indulgence to any Lord, or Knight, or other, to go beyond Sea, and dispense with that Law.  
But I am not arguing at the Bar, a point of Law, to cite all Authorities I can meet with for it; I only mention a few, to the end that by them, the reason of the Law, and the Application to our present purpose, may be the better apprehended: I shall therefore forbear to cite more, and conclude with this one general ground of our Common Law, the wisdom whereof hath thought fit, that Acts of Grace and Favour should be in the Right of the King, to be dispensed by him, for the more obliging of his Subjects, and the gaining their affections to him.  
Hence it is, that the granting of Exemptions, Licences, Faculties, Dispensations, Non-obstante's, and the like Acts of Grace, are left unto the King, and are in his right to grant or deny them, as he shall judge fit. So it is, if a man be convicted of Felony, or Treason, and hath judgement of Death passed upon him by the Law, he is to suffer Death; yet the Law gives the Power and Right to the King, that he may indulge this condemned person, and give him a pardon for his life, which is every day's experience. And many in our time, have tasted the fruits of his Majesty's Grace and Clemency herein: And if the Common Law gives this Right of Indulgence for Life to the King, it were hard to deny it him in Spiritual matters, for not coming to Church, or the like.  
6. That this right was in the King by the Common Law, and practice of it, may appear from many both ancient and later Precedents; some whereof, and first before the time of W. 1. will be remembered in their order.  
It is observed, 
●●n ●Rep. ●prae● f.  that as under the Temoral Monarchy of Rome, Britain was one of the last Provinces that was won, and one of the first that was lost again; so under the spiritual Monarchy of the Pope, England was one of the last Countries of Christendom that received this Yoke, and one of the first that did reject, and cast it off again.  
That the Sea of Rome, before W. 1. ˢ time, had no Jurisdiction in England, neither in the time of the Britain's, nor of the Saxons (as appears by the passages of Pelagins, and Colman an Irish Saint, and divers others in our story,) but that the Kings then exercised Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction, appears in part by what hath been before noted out of our stories.  
It will not be supposed an easy thing, 
●ev. ●esbur. ●de eccles.  at so great a distance of time, and after so many Revolutions and injuries of accidents, to find particular apt precedents for that which is our present argument; yet there seemeth to have been some even in those times not impertinent to our purpose. In the Reign of the British King Arviragus, 
●Park● ●34.  in the 63 year after the birth of our Saviour, it is related, that Joseph of Arimathea, and eleven more of Philip's Disciples, arrived in Briton, and preached the name of Christ unto the Britain's, who were then Pagans.  
This new Doctrine and Religion wholly contrary to Paganism, and tending to the subversion of that whereof the Britain's were so blindly zealous, yet though they could hardly be persuaded to change the Traditions of their Fathers, nevertheless they were so far from persecuting of these Non-conformists to the old Religion, that they freely permitted them to preach, and to instruct the people in this new Doctrine and Worship, though wholly different from their own Profession.  
And the King did so far grant Indulgence to them, and to all that would hear them; that every one had the liberty of his own Conscience indulged to them.  
And because these Preachers came from far, and that their lives were full of Modesty and Meekness, and that they instructed the people in pious things; the King for their maintinance, granted to them the Isle of Glassenbury; each one of these Non-conformists having an hide of Land given to him, and they twelve in number, they are called the twelve Hides of Glassenbury to this day.  
You see the Pagans were so far from persecuting them, or taking any thing from them, as they gave them a livelihood.  
This Indulgence and grant was confirmed by many of the Saxon Kings their Successors.  
When Paganus and Damianus preached the Gospel of Christ to the Britain's, King Lucius not only gave them Indulgence, though their Doctrine and Religion was so contrary to Heathenism then professed here, but both the King and his People became Non-conformists to their old Pagan Worship, and embraced the true Faith of Christ.  
How much longer might that blessed Truth have been hid from our eyes, and that glorious Light of the Sun of Righteousness have been obscured from our eyes, had it not been for granting Indulgence to the preaching of it? sure we ought to have the better opinion of Indulgence, since Christianity was introduced by it.  
So it was when Augustin the Monk preached to the Saxons, had he not been indulged to preach, and the people to hear, our Saxon Ancestors had not been converted to the knowledge of Christ Jesus.  
The Christian Saxon, King Kenulphe, 
Stamford, 3. c. 38. f. 111. 1 H. 7. f● 23. tit. 2 Coke 5 Rep. Eccle Case. f. 9 Ab omni Episcopali ju● re in sempeternum esse quietus, nu● lives Episco● aut suorum officialium jugo inde depremantur. Leg. Alure● Reg. c. 2. Bilson. differ, p. 40 Bede l. 1. c. 25.  by the Counfel of his Bishops and Senators, did grant to the Abbey of Abingdon, certain Lands with an express clause of Indulgence contained in the grant: That the Abbot and his Successors should be free for ever from all Episcopal Jurisdiction, and that the Tenants and Inhabitants should not be depressed by the yoke of any Bishop or his Officials, but in all things should submit to the Decrees of the Abbot. And although this were done by the Council of his Bishops and Senators, that doth not impeach, but rather fortify the Kings Right to do it, by their Judgements that it should be done by him.  
In the Laws of King Alured, he grants Indulgences and Immunities for the Clergy themselves.  
And when Gregory sent Augustin the Monk and his Companions, to convert the Saxons, they stayed in the Isle of Thanet, till the King's pleasure were known, and whether he would grant them Indulgence to exercise their Religion here, and instruct others therein; which the King (although it were sufficiently different from the Religion then professed by the Heathen Saxons) did grant unto these Dissenters, and encouraged them so far, that at length they became of their persuasion.  
The Application may be thus far proper, That if Pagans gave so much Indulgence to Christians, it would ill beseem Christians not to give the like to one another.  
7. Some Precedents in the time of W. 1. and after, 
Eadmerus, f. 165. 167 7 E 3. Quare Imp● 19 5 Rep. f. 10● Mat. Paris Anno 1119 Coke 5 Rep. Eccle● Case. f. 106● Roger Hovenden, f. 496.  down unto our own memories, may be next in order remembered.  
W. 1. granted a full Indulgence by his Charter of Exemption unto Battel-Abbey, that they should be under no Jurisdiction of the Bishop: And it was an Indulgence to the Freeholders', when he divided the Bishop's Court from the Hundred Court, which before that sat both together.  
So was his appropriating of Churches without Cure to Ecclesiastical Persons; The like exemption and Indulgence is granted by his Charter to the Abbey of Reading.  
H. 1. granted an Indulgence by his Charter to the Abbey of Reading, and saith, he doth it as well in regard of Ecclesiastical as Regal Power.  
H. 2. granted an Indulgence to his people, That none of the Pope's Decrees should be executed here, nor any of his Bulls of Excommunication. 
Not. in Ead● mer p. 14●   
He did the like to his Clergy of Normandy, in the Exemptions he granted to them. 
45 H. 3. Rot. Stan● in 14. dorson 1 E. 1. Rot. Stans in. 5. dorson H. 11. E. 1 Rot. fin. M● 5.   
It was a great Indulgence, which King John granted to William Marshal, to have the Donation of the Pastoral Staff of the Abbey of Nutlege.  
H. 3. exercised this Right of Indulgence, when he forbade that men should not be drawn in Plea out of the Realm.  
E. 1. indulged whom he pleased to go to Rome, and indulged his People against the Provisions of the Pope.  
In E. 2. time, as frequently before and since, were Prohibitions to the spiritual Courts, and Indulgences and Licenses granted by the King in cases of Pluralities, and Dispensations of several Natures, upon the same reason and ground of Law as the present Indulgence is desired.  
In our Law Annals of E. 
〈…〉 3.  3. is a Resolution, that the King may exempt any Ecclesiastical Person from the Jurisdiction of the Ordinary, and may grant him Episcopal Jurisdiction, and that this King did so to the religious Houses founded by him.  
An Act of as high exercise of the right of Indulgence in Spiritual matters as may be.  
And indeed, all Monasteries and religious Houses in England and elsewhere, are testimonies of this right of Indulgence in the King; for they all enjoyed such Exemption, the fruits of that Right, and yet the Spiritual Judges did not think themselves injured thereby.  
The Precedents in R. 2. H. 4. and H. 5. time, as to the like Exemptions, and granting of Licences, dispensing with the then received Law in matters Spiritual, are obvious in our Records.  
The like are in H. 
● f. 1.  6. time, when it was adjudged that the Pope's Excommunication was of no force, and his Subjects were much Indulged against them.  
This right of the King was also asserted by that Judgement in his time, 
● f. 16.  That the King only may grant a Licence to found a Spiritual Incorporation.  
King E. 4. granted the like Exemptions, Dispensations and Licenses in spiritual Matters, as his Predecessors had done.  
So did H. 
〈…〉 7.  7. and in his time the Judges resolved, That the King might dispense with the Ecclesiastical Law for Pluralities, and for a Bastard to be made a Priest, as hath been remembered.  
King H. 8. not only exercised this right himself, but abolished all pretence and practice thereof by the Bishop of Rome, as hath been mentioned; and procured this to be done, and his own right to be acknowledged, by the Parliament.  
E. 6. and his Sister Queen Mary exercised the same right, only Queen Mary advanced that which her Father and Brother had abolished.  
Queen Elizabeth followed the Precedent of her Brother, and in the beginning of her Reign, when there was a scarcity of Ministers that would conform to the Reformation, and it was difficult to get Preachers after that way, the Queen took upon her to give Licence and Indulgence to Laymen to Preach publicly, although they were not in Orders.  
And I have been particularly and credibly informed of a Gentleman in Oxford-shire, who being High Sheriff of that County about 1 Eliz. whose Grandchild at the writing hereof was the worthy High Sheriff there, That the Grandfather by special Licence from the Queen, being a Gentleman of Parts and Learning, did himself Preach publicly to the Judges at the Assizes, when he was High Sheriff: Nor would the like be more a crime now than it was in those days, if there were the same necessity; but Blessed be God we are more plenteously furnished.  
We may now look upon some Precedents of our own time, such as many yet alive may remember; in the times of the late K. James, K. Charles 1. etc.  
In King James his time, it was Resolved by the Judges, That all Proceed in the Ecclesiastical Courts Ex Officio, are for the King; for which reason, 
2 Ja. c. B. Tr. Hall's Case. Coke 5 Rep. f. 51.  whatsoever the Suit there be, the King may Pardon it, for those Suits are only to Convict or Punish the Party, for the Offence or Fault which the King may Pardon, and not for the particular Interest of the party.  
This Precedent and Resolution seems much to testify the Kings Right of Indulgence to any of his Subjects, whose Opinions in some Ceremonies, or other matters of Discipline, are different from the Opinions of their Magistrates, to which in tenderness of Conscience they cannot conform; and for their Nonconformity are Punishable by the Spiritual Judges, (as they are termed) and by other Officers, for the Correction of that fault; and this the Judges Resolved, that the King might Pardon. And for the King to grant an Indulgence in these matters, is no other but a Pardon of the Offence in them, and the particular Interest of no Man is concerned to hinder this Pardon or Indulgence: And therefore by this, and divers Precedents pursuant to this Resolution, the King's right of giving this Indulgence is affirmed.  
Another Precedent in King James and King Charles 1. time, seems to me to have a great resemblance, if not to be the same with the Indulgence now discoursed of, and therefore I shall be the more particular in the recital of it.  
It pleased those Kings in their Clemency and Wisdom, by their Letters Patents under the great Seal of England, to grant to divers persons of the French and Dutch Nations, Protestants then residing England, this Liberty and Indulgence; That they in distinct Congregations by themselves, and in public Churches or other Places, might meet and exercise the Reformed Religion and Worship of God, in such Order, and according to such Forms, and with such Ceremonies as were, or should be agreed upon among themselves; and after the Rites and Usages of their particular Churches and Congregations, without Conforming to the Order and Ceremonies of the Church of England.  
This Indulgence and Liberty was enjoyed by them all the time of King James, after the grant of it.  
And under his Son King Charles 1. it was continued and enjoyed also by them, and they were not compelled to come to any Parish Church, or other place than their own particular Congregations and Assemblies: Nor were they at all questioned for the breach of any Law of Conformity; but this Indulgence of the King did wholly free them from Penalties of those Laws, or molestation in the different Exercise of their Religion.  
The Parliament so far declared their Judgement, that this right of Indulgence was in the King, that it was one of their Objections against the late Archbishop Laud, That he endeavoured to disturb these Dissenting Protestants in their enjoyment of this Indulgence, and to have it taken away from them.  
The Archbishop answered, That the reason of his so doing, was because the first Indulgence being granted to Foreigners and Strangers, who fled hither from Persecution, and as to a Sanctuary to preserve the Liberty of their Consciences in the Reformed Religion, and therefore it was fit and charitable to afford them such Protection and Indulgence.  
But that those who enjoyed it at present, were not such persecuted People, who fled hither for their Religion, but were the Children and Posterity of those, and were now become Natives and Denizens of England; and therefore aught to yield the same conformity to the Laws as others of the King's Subjects did, and for that reason, in regard of their Nonconformity, he said he moved his Majesty to take away that Indulgence from them.  
But this Answer was not approved, the King thought fit to continue his Grace and Favour to these Sons of Strangers, and to preserve his own right in granting and confirming this Indulgence.  
The Archbishop acknowledged this Right to be in the King, by moving him to take it away; and the Parliament acknowledged it to be in the King, by their not being satisfied with the Arch-Bishops answer to their Charge about it, and by their Proceed in it.  
And the confirmation and continuance of this Indulgence in Spiritual matters to the Children of those Strangers, now become Natives of this Kingdom, which they justly and deservedly enjoy to this day, under the Goodness and Favour of our present Gracious Sovereign, is no slender Argument of his Majesties Right to grant the same, and to grant the like Indulgence to any other of his Loyal Subjects.  
Another Precedent in our time, is upon several Acts of Parliament in the time of Queen Elizabeth and King James, 
●● El c 2. ● Ja. c. 4. ● Ja. c. 5.  by which all Jesuits and Romish Priests are prohibited from coming into this Realm, upon Pain of High Treason; and Rewards are given to those who shall discover them here, and Forfeitures for saying or hearing of Mass. And in these Statutes nothing is mentioned or reserved as to the King's right of Dispensing with them, or granting Indulgence upon them.  
Nevertheless we all know, that in our time all along, upon Reasons of State, for public Service and Occasions, and upon Contracts of Marriage by our Kings with Foreign Princes, upon great Advice and public Treaties, it was thought fit and lawful, that our Kings should grant Indulgence to such Romish Priests, and such a Number of them as was agreed and held expedient for attendance in the Courts of their Royal Consorts.  
And although nothing thereof is mentioned in those Statutes, yet no question hath been made upon the King's right of Indulgence on this occasion, but the same remains undisputed and acknowledged.  
And surely, upon the same grounds of Reason and Law, by which our Kings have and exercise this right of granting Indulgence to the Chaplains and Servants of our Queens, though Romish Priests and Englishmen, and no reservation thereof in those Acts of Parliament, (but this right taken as Inherent in the Crown,) our King may likewise owe Indulgence to any other of his Subjects, differing in smaller matters of Religion.  
There will be no need to mention the Precedents in our time, of the late King's Order, That no Children of any of the Nobility should be Married, without a particular Licence from the King; which he granted, and sometimes permitted the Archbishop to grant.  
Nor of the Kings granting of Licenses or Indulgences under the Great Seal, to Persons and their Heirs to Eat Flesh on Fasting-days, and in Lent; although in the Statute 5 El. no reservation or mention is of the King's Power to grant any such Indulgence, but he doth it by Virtue of his Supreme Right in matters Spiritual.  
That one precedent of the Indulgence granted and continued to those of t●● French and Dutch Protestant Congregations, is a very full testimony and acknowledgement of this right to be in the King, and that when he pleaseth he may extend and grant the like to any other of his Native and faithful Subjects of this Kingdom.  
9 Not only precedents of elder and later, and of our own time, do affirm this right to be in the King, but it seems also warranted to be in him by several Acts of Parliament: We may look as high as the time of E. 1. 
11 E. 1. c. 32.  in the Statute of Carlisle, forbidding the Provisions of the Pope without the King's Licence: If then he might grant that Indulgence, more strongly he may do it now.  
The Statutes of praemunire do highly assert the King's right, as do those of Provisions, and are before in part mentioned.  
To come to those which seem nearer our matter: By the Statute of 25 H. 8. it is enacted, That Appeals from places exempt, which were to the See of Rome, 
25 H. 8. c. 19  shall be to the King in Chancery; which asserts his right in those matters a fortiori, in granting the Indulgence now desired.  
By the Statute in the 26 year of this King, it is enacted, That the King may order, etc. as by any spiritual Authority or Jurisdiction, aught or may lawfully be Ordered, etc.  
If then it did or doth belong to any spiritual Jurisdiction to grant Indulgence in spiritual matters, it is by these Statutes given unto the King.  
But the Pope practised to grant Indulgences in greater matters than any upon earth, even to the Pardon of sins, and freeing Souls out of Purgatory, (which will not be taken as a precedent.)  
And as the Law of the Church was before this Statute taken, he might lawfully grant Indulgence in any spiritual matters whatsoever, and indulge any Nonconformity.  
It therefore follows, that by this Act, the King hath the same right, and may lawfully order and grant Indulgence in the matters for which the same is now desired.  
By the Statute 28 H. 8. is recited, That the Bishop of Rome, 
28 H. 8. c. 16.  for profit used to grant to the King's Subjects divers Authorities, Faculties, Licenses, Indulgences, etc. And it enacts, that all Dispensations from the Sea of Rome, shall be void, and that the effects and contents of Bulls, Faculties, etc. purchased of the Sea of Rome, which shall be allowable, shall be confirmed under the Great Seal.  
By the Judgement of this Parliament, this right of Indulgence was declared and enacted to be in the King: And that such Indulgences, etc. as were necessary and allowable for the people to have, (whereof the King was Judge) should in the effect of them be passed under the Great Seal, that is, by the King, whose Warrant to the Chancellor doth authorise him to pass a Grant under the Great Seal accordingly.  
The Statute of 1 El. reeites that in H. 8. time, divers good Laws, 
1 El. c. ●.  were made for the extinguishment of all usurped and foreign Powers, and Authorities, and for the restoring and uniting to the Imperial Crown of this Realm, the ancient Jurisdiction thereto belonging; by reason whereof the Subjects ever since enjoyed good order, and were disburdened of the intolerable Charges and Vexations so usurped on them.  
That Act abolisheth all foreign Jurisdiction Spiritual or Ecclesiastical within this Realm, and Enacts, That such Jurisdiction, Spiritual and Ecclesiastical, as by any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Power or Authority had heretofore been, or lawfully might be exercised or used for the Visitation of the Ecclesiastical State and Persons, and for Reformation under, and correction of the same, and of all manner of Errors, Heresies, Schisms, Abuses, Offences, contempts and enormities, should for ever by authority of that Parliament be united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm. I shall still forbear to mention that arrogancy of granting Indulgences to reach to Eternisy, to pardon Sin, at which every sober Christian may grieve, and will readily agree it not to be within this Act.  
Nor will it be denied, but that the Pope practised here, the granting of Indulgence to whomsoever he pleased, and in any spiritual matter whatsoever, and as the Law was then taken and submitted unto, he was held lawfully to exercise that Jurisdiction.  
If it were so, than the same Jurisdiction, and right of Indulgence, so exercised by the Pope, is now by this Act annexed and united to the Crown, and the King possessed and re-invested in his ancient Right, and the same may be accordingly exercised by him.  
And the Power by this Act to order Errors, Schisms, etc. will comprehend the granting of Indulgence, which some hold to be the best and safest way to order Errors and Schisms; and doubtless, if there ever were a right of Indulgence exercised in this Realm by any lawful power, the same is by this Act vested in the King.  
But I shall thus briefly pass by others, and come to that Act of Parliament, which in express terms seems to allow this Right to be in the King, or gives it to him: And this is the Statute of 25 H. 
●5 H. 8. c. ●1.  8. in which there is this clause:  
That the Archbishop and his Commissary, shall not grant any other Licence, Dispensation, Faculty, etc. in causes unwont, and not accustomed to be had at Rome, nor by Authority thereof, nor by any Prelate of this Realm, until your Grace, your Heirs or Successors, or your, or their Council shall first be advertized thereof, and determine whether such Licences, Dispensations, etc. in such Cases unwont, and not accustomed to be dispensed withal or allowed, shall pass or no. And if it be determined by your Grace, your Heirs or Successors, or your, or their Council, that Dispensations, Licences, or other writings in any such case unwont shall pass, than the Archbishop or his Commissary, having Licence of your Highness, your Heirs or Successors, for the same, by your, or their Bill assigned, shall dispense with them accordingly.  
Provided that Dispensations, Licenses, etc. where the Tax for expedition at Rome extended to 4 l. or above, shall not be put in execution till confirmed by the King under the Great Seal.  
And it enacts, that where the Archbishop or Guardian of the Spiritualties deny to grant a Dispensation, or Licence, which ought to be granted; the Chancellor shall send an Injunction under the Great Seal, commanding it to be granted under a pain, which not being obeyed, and no just cause certified why it is not done, the Bishop or Guardian of the Spiritualties shall forfeit such Penalties. And the King after due Examination, that such Licences, Faculties or Dispensations may be granted without offending the Holy Scriytures, and laws of God, may by Commission under the Great Seal, to two spiritual Prelates or other Persons to be named by him, authorise them to grant such Licences.  
And it gives power to the King for the ordering, redress and reformation of Indulgences formerly obtained at Rome, and such of them as shall seem good and reasonable, for the honour of God and the weal of his People, and such order shall be observed.  
This Statute in plain terms gives the right of granting Indulgence,  
1. Where the cause is unwont and unaccustomed.  
2. Where it is a cause of Importance, as all will agree the Indulgence now desired to be.  
3. Upon a Denial of the Bishops, who will hardly take upon them to grant an Indulgence in the matter.  
In all these Cases, by the plain words of this Act, the Power and Right of granting such Indulgence is clearly in the King, to whom this Statute gives it in express words, if it were not in him by the former Acts, or (as indeed it also is) by the Common Law of England.   

CHAP. VII. The Answer to Objections against this Right of the King.  
1. IT is objected, That if this Right should be in the King, object. and he should exercise the same, it would be a countenance and encouragement of Schisms and Divisions in the Church.  
To which is answered, That the Persecuting of different Opinions, answ. is that which causeth the Schism, not the dissenting in Opinion; for if one be a Nonconformist, he troubles nor disquiets no others by his Nonconformity; if they let him alone, he is satisfied. But when he is troubled or punished, because he differs in opinion from some in Power, this causeth the Rent or Schism in the Church, which otherwise would be whole; the Persecutors cut off the Dissenters from them, and are most properly to be termed the Schismatics.  
But admitting these whom the Persecutors call so, to be Schismatics; yet to indulge them so, as that they shall not be punished, is no more to encourage their Opinions, than it is to encourage the wearing of Scarlet, when men are not punished for wearing of that, or of any other colour.  
The way to countenance and encourage any thing, except by rewards and perferments, will hardly be found effectual; the not punishing, is no reward; and the not punishing of Nonconformity, will not be found such a reward or bait as to countenance and encourage Schism.  
But admit the Prince upon Emergencies of State, should evidently see it necessary, to countenance or encourage Non-conformists, and that the same would much tend to the preservation of the Public peace to grant indulgence to them, without which it might be endangered.  
If this Right of Indulgence should be denied him, the duty of common preservation could not be expected from him, the requisites and powers necessary thereunto not being allowed to him.  
2. Another Objection is, object. That if the King should exercise this Right of Indulgence, it would be a hindrance to that most desirable thing in the Church of Christ, Uniformity.  
To which is answered, answ. That no good Christian but will hearty pray and endeavour for this uniformity; 
Lord St. Alban Essay of Unity in Religion.  yet as the Chancellor Bacon notes, Unity and Uniformity are Two things.  
One of the Father's observes, That Christ's Coat indeed had no Seam, but the Church's Vesture was of divers Colours; there may be an Unity, though not a strict Uniformity.  
It is a good and pleasant thing to dwell together in Unity; 
Psal. 133.1. Eph. 4.3.13.  and we must endeavour to keep the Unity of the Spirit in the Bond of Peace, which surely is most broken by Persecution.  
There is no way but in the unity of the Faith and knowledge of the Son of God to come unto a perfect man, to the measure of the Stature of the fullness of Christ.  
But, 
Matt. 18.7.  Christ tells us, That offences must come, but Woe to that man by whom the offence cometh.  
Surely, the offence cometh more by him that persecuteth than by him that pardoneth; and to differ from another in opinion, is no more justly an offence than to differ in countenance; notwithstanding which difference in countenance, yet all are of one unity and uniformity as men.  
All Vines, 
Philip Nye Beams of former Light.  Cedars, every Plant, and every Herb, every Beast and Bird, are uniform in their Kind, though there bosom difference in each of them. So it is with gracious and holy men, being a holy Seed, and having this Seed remaining in them, their conversation for the substance is the same, and so is their profession of Religion, notwithstanding some Minute differences (as Bishop Taylor calls them,) and it is so visibly uniform and the same, as the blind World can distinguish them from other men.  
So also in this part of their conversation, their Service of God in his Ordinances, if the Institutions of Christ, and whatsoever he in his Word hath prescribed as necessary means and circumstances from more general rules be observed, you will have a natural, free and comely uniformity, and more to the Glory of God, than to have all by External injunctions cast as it were in an artificial Mould; such a forced Conformity in all Ages hath been the occasion of greatest differences and disturbances.  
The neglect of Scripture Rules which guide and direct an uniformity in matters of substance and great consequence; and by Canons, and Injunctions, and other ways to erect an uniformity in matters of doubtful dispute, and not of much concernment if they were cleared: The pretence of Uniformity, and upon that account taking liberty to impose doubtful Traditions, hath been in all Ages an Utensil in the hand of Church Governors, by which they have exercised greatest Tyranny.  
One Council decrees, That all Ministers must live single lives for Uniformity. Bellarmin disputes to have the Service in the same Language in all the Pope's Dominions for Uniformities sake: And what thing, be it never so absurd, but may be brought into this List?  
There is an Uniformity arising from the Virtue of internal Principles, as also from an external mould or frame; the one is free and natural, the other compelled and forced.  
Uniformity from internal Principles, is an excellency in Nature, and in Grace also.  
No necessary Uniformity for the beauty and good of the Church is hindered, but advanced by the King's Right to grant Indulgence in Spiritual matters. And surely, no Person can be so proper and so fit a judge to discern and determine when this Uniformity is most beautiful and most to be desired, and how far, and when it is to be pressed or indulged for the Churches good, as the Prince himself is.  
3. Some will also object, object. That it would cause discontent for the King to exercise this Right of Indulgence, That those who are for Uniformity and Conformity would be disturbed at it.  
In answer to which may be said, Answ. That surely much more discontent will arise, and more cause be given for it by punishing, than by pardoning. The one will give too much cause, the other gives no just cause of any discontent.  
The Wisdom of the King will more consider the cause of discontent, than the discontent itself, and would himself have most cause of discontent, to be denied so great and necessary a Right, and so much conducing to the peace and welfare both of himself, and also of all sorts of his Subjects, and without which he can hardly preserve either.  
Doubtless the best way will be to discontent as few as may be, especially in a time when discontents are too rife, and too apt to rise; and that will be found the way to content them, which allows them their most desired Interest in this World, their liberty by this Indulgence.  
Those who are punished for what they hold their Right, will be too apt and too much provoked to discontent, and to esteem it an issue of Pride more than of Piety, and of Domineering more than of Meekness, to impose upon our Christian Brethren. And may one not be as justly discontented, because a fair haired man is not punished when himself is brown, as because one is not punished for disliking a Ceremony, with which the imposer is pleased?  
It will be found undeniable, that Meekness, and Indulgence to such Dissenters will remove discontents, unite affections, and be security both to Prince and People.  
4. Object. Another Objection is, That if this Right be in the King, and he be pleased to exercise it by granting Indulgence to those who disobey the Laws, that this will be to countenance disobedience in this, and other matters of the like nature.  
The Law is, that every one shall conform to the Ceremonies of the Church; these Dissenters will not conform, but disobey the Law, and if they be indulged herein, they are countenanced in their disobedience, and by this Example, others will be encouraged and expect indulgence in their disobedience in other cases, which may prove dangerous to Government.  
To this is answered, Answ. That whether the granting or denying of this indulgence will most endanger the Government, is to be left to the judgement of the King who is the Supreme Governor.  
The Swedes call a Governor Styrer Skib, the stearer of a Ship; the Latin word Gubernator, 
(*) Cicero 1 4. de sin. Et si in ipsa gubernatione negligentia navis est eversa. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  and the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, have the same signification; and if the Steersman be not permitted to judge what course the Ship shall steer, it will prove dangerous.  
The Hebrew word Tachan, to order, prepare, to weigh, number and preponderate, refers this to the King.  
But I cannot admit Nonconformists to be disobeyers of the Law. As to instance in a particular, The Law saith, That every one shall come to Church to hear Common-prayer, or else shall pay such a penalty: He that pays the Penalty, doth as much obey the Law, as he that hears the Common-prayer; the one is agreeable to the Law as well as the other; either men must hear, or must pay; those that hear, and those that pay, do equally obey the Law.  
If then the King indulge those who do not hear, that they shall not pay, it is no countenancing of disobedience, because there is no disobedience in the case.  
It is only a dispensing with that punishment which is imposed for an offence to the King, which he may pardon; or a remitting of that penalty or payment which is given to him.  
Every common person may do the same; if Ten pound be given to a man, he may if he please remit it; and if one recover Money in an Action, and have judgement for it; he may if he please forbear to take the Defendant in execution, or to levy the damages which the Law gives him.  
By the same reason the King may pardon the punishment, or remit the penalty which the Law imposeth upon Nonconformists, and yet this is no countenancing of disobedience.  
5. It is further objected, That if this right be allowed in the King, Object. it would be in his power by the exercise of it to repeal Statutes without the assent of his Parliament.  
Several Acts of Parliament ordain conformity; but if the King may indulge those who do not conform, he doth in effect repeal those Acts of Parliament, and make them to be of no force as to the Nonconformists.  
To this somewhat mentioned in the last Section may in part be for an Answer. Answ.  
The Law enjoins conformity, or else a penalty; he that submits to the penalty, doth conform to the Law. And when the King indulgeth particular persons as to part of these Laws, he doth not thereby repeal the Laws, but remit some of the Penalties.  
To repeal an Act of Parliament is wholly to take it away, and to make it of no force; which our Law saith must be done by the same power that made it, the concurrent assent of the King, Lords and Commons in Parliament.  
But when the King grants Indulgence to some Nonconformists, he doth not thereby repeal the Acts of Conformity, which still continue; but only to some particular persons he remits some of the penalty.  
The Law is, that a Traitor shall suffer death; yet many have experience by his Majesty's clemency, that it is his right (if he please) to indulge and pardon the life of the Traitor. Nevertheless none will say that hereby the King repeals the Law of Treason.  
Upon a sentence of one to be an Heretic, the Law heretofore was that a Writ de Haeretico comburendo be taken out, and the Heretic to be burned.  
Yet none of our Kings have been denied the Right, and have frequently practised it, to pardon the lives of such sentenced Heretics as they thought fit to be indulged, and yet thereby the Laws against Heretics were not repealed.  
By the same reason the King may pardon and indulge some Nonconformists, and remit the Penalties which the Law imposeth on them, and yet the Acts for Conformity are not thereby repealed.  
6. But to come nearer to the great point in question, Object. the main objection is, That this Right of the King, if it were before in him, 
Stat. 14 Car. 2. cap. 14.  yet now by his own consent it is barred and taken away by the late Act of this present Parliament for Uniformity.  
If this be so, our question is determined; the wisdom and judgement of Parliament ought to bind and conclude all persons in the Kingdom, who are parties, and involved in their judgements, and aught to acquiesce therein.  
And with my particular due submission thereunto, it seems to me that nothing in this Act doth take away or impeach, but rather confirm this Right of Indulgence in the King.  
One Clause in this Act provides, that the Penalties thereof shall not extend to the Foreigners, or Aliens of the foreign Reformed Churches, allowed, or to be allowed by the King, his Heirs or Successors in England.  
By this Proviso, the Parliament declares their judgement, That this Right was and is fit to be in the King.  
And there occurs to me no reason, but that the same Right is in the King to grant the like Indulgence to any other of his Subjects, as by this Proviso is approved to these Foreigners, whose posterity, now become Natives, do enjoy it.  
This Right was in the King, either before the Statute of Queen Elizabeth, or annexed to the Crown by that Act. And either it was in him before the Statute of 25 H. 8. or is granted to him by that Act, as hath been before showed.  
If any way this Right was once in the King (as unquestionably it was) than it cannot be barred, nor taken away from him, without express words in some subsequent Act of Parliament. But there are no words in the late Act of Uniformity to bar or to take away this Right from the King; therefore it remains in him as it was before, and there is nothing in this Act to the contrary.  
It is true, that the King doth not dispense with a Law, or any part of it, whereby particular Interests are concerned, as to those particular Interests.  
Therefore that part of this Act which giveth a Right of Presentation to particular Patrons, upon the Nonconformity, is not to be dispensed with. But as to the Penalties of this Act, and of those other Acts to which it relates, and which are reformation of manners, and wherein no particular Interest is concerned, the King may dispense with such Laws and Penalties; as the resolution is in Halles Case, 
Coke 5. Rep. Eccles. Case f. 6.51.  That the King may pardon Suits in the Ecclesiastical Courts, because they are only to correct or punish the party for the offence, or default, which (saith the Book) the King may pardon, and not for the particular interest of the party.  
By the same reason, the King hath a right to pardon or indulge the Penalties and execution of these Acts in which no particular Interest is touched, and which are to correct and punish the party for his offence and default against these Laws, especially when there are no words in the Act to impeach, but rather to allow this right to be in the King, and which clearly was in him before the making of this Statute.   

CHAP. VIII. Observations upon Examples of Persecution.  
1. PErsecution is a word taken from the Latin, Persequor; which signifies to follow to the extremity; and denotes the execution of Revenge and slaughter.  
That the good of Indulgence, and the evil of Perfecution may the better appear, some observations upon a few, of very many Examples thereof in the Holy Story are here inserted; and to begin with these of Persecution.  
It is observed, that for the most part ungodly men excited by pride and envy, have persecuted the godly. So it was in the first Persecution in the World, when the elder Son of Adam persecuted his Brother Abel.  
Cain was an ungodly man, 
Gen. 4.5.  for unto him and to his offering the Lord had not respect; but Abel was a godly man, for he brought of the firstlings of his flock, and of the fat thereof, 
Gen. 4.4.  and the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering; because Abel and his offering had respect from God, therefore was his Brother very wroth, 
Bishop Hall's Contemplatition upon Cain and Abel.  and persecuted Abel for his Religion; such was the pride and envy of his heart, upon which the Ingenious Bishop of Exon thus contemplates:  
What then was the occasion of this capital malice? Abel's Sacrifice is accepted, what was this to Cain? cain's is rejected: What could Abel remedy this? Oh envy! the corrosive of all ill minds, and the root of all desperate actions! The same cause that moved Satan to tempt the first man to destroy himself and his posterity, the same moved the second man to destroy the third.  
It should have been Cain's joy to see his Brother accepted: It should have been his sorrow to see that himself had deserved a rejection. His Brother's example should have excited and directed him. Can Abel have stayed God's fire from descending? Or should he if he could, reject God's acceptation, and displease his Maker, to content a Brother? Was Cain ever the further from a blessing, because his Brother obtained mercy? How proud and foolish is malice? which grows thus mad for no other cause, but because God or Abel is not less Good? It hath been an old and happy danger to be holy.  
This hath commonly been the ground of Persecution, men's piety begets envy, and envy raiseth persecution from proud and ungodly men, who having the world at will, because others are more acceptable to God than themselves, therefore they in pride and envy, persecute them as Cain here did his Brother Abel.  
If there be an evil heart, there will be an evil eye; and if both these, there will be an evil hand.  
Cain persecuted and murdered his Brother Abel for his Religion: How early (saith our Bishop) did Martyrdom come into the World? The first man that died, died for Religion. Who dare measure God's love by outward events, when he sees wicked Cain standing over bleeding Abel, whose Sacrifice was first accepted, and now himself is Sacrificed?  
Death was denounced to man as a curse, yet behold it first lights upon a Saint. How soon was it altered by the mercy of that just hand which inflicted it?  
If death had been evil, and life good, Cain had been slain, and Abel had survived: Now that it gins with him that God loves, Oh death where is thy sting?  
This may comfort godly men being under Persecution; and though it should reach to death, yet it would be their happiness.  
And for the condition of their Persecutors, it will be like that of Cain, who because he persecuted his Brother, was cast out from the protection of God. He that feared not to kill his Brother, fears now that whosoever meets him, will kill him; the troubled conscience projecteth fearful things, and sin makes even cruel men cowardly.  
God saw it was too much favour for Cain to die, he shall live, but for a curse, banished from God, carrying his Hell in his bosom, and the brand of God's vengeance in his forehead.  
God rejected him, the Earth repines at him, men abhor him, himself now wisheth that death which he feared, and no man dares pleasure him with a murder.  
How bitter is the end of him, yea without end, still Cain finds that he killed himself more than his Brother; and in time all Persecutors will find that they have persecuted themselves more than their dissenting Brethren.  
2. The next Persecution which I shall mention, is that of Pharaoh persecuting the Israelites, and this was upon a Ground of Spiritual matters. 
Exod. 3.18  The message which God sent by Moses unto Pharaoh was for an Indulgence in Spiritual matters. Let us go we beseech thee three days journey into the Wilderness, that we may sacrifice unto the Lord our God; 
Exod. 4.3  and let my son go that he may serve me.  
When Moses and Aaron had delivered their Message to Pharaoh, and prayed his Indulgence to the Israelites to go and sacrifice to the Lord; the Tyrant persecuteth them the more, and says, Ye are idle, 
Exod. 5.3.  ye are idle, therefore ye say let us go and do sacrifice to the Lord. 
Exod. 5.13. Exod. 7.20. Exod. 8.1, 4. Ver. 8.  Go and work, no straw shall be given you, yet shall ye deliver the tale of Bricks.  
Then is the River turned into Blood, and Moses again demands the King's Indulgence, Let my people go that they may serve me. But Pharaoh's heart is hardened, and Frogs are sent, this made him a little relent, Entreat the Lord that he may take away the Frogs, and I will let the people go that they may sacrifice. The Frogs being taken away, the Tyrant's heart is again hardened, He will not let the people serve the Lord. Then Lice are sent; and before every new Plague, leave is desired for the people to go and serve their God, but Pharaoh would not grant this Indulgence, as soon as the Plague was removed his heart was hardened, and he would not let the Israelites serve the Lord their God.  
But upon the death of their firstborn the King and his Servants are willing, Go and serve the Lord as ye have said. 
Exod. 12.31.   
No sooner are they gone, and the Plagues ceased, but Pharaoh resolves to recall them, and to continue his Persecution of them; but therein the Judgement of God appeared against Persecutors, and his zeal for his people to have this Indulgence by destroying the deniers of it, Pharaoh and all his host perished in the Red Sea.  
3. The next Persecution which was intended only, 
Esth. 3.5, 6.  was that of Haman against the Jews. Such was his pride, because Mordecai the Jew did not bow to him, and do him reverence, that he thought scorn to lay hands on Mordecai alone, but thought to destroy all the Jews. And his pretence for this Persecution was by suggesting to the King Ahasuerus, That there is a certain people in all the Provinces, and their Laws (that is the Laws of their Religion) are divers from all people; they were Dissenters, neither keep they the King's Laws, 
Esth. 3.8.  they were absolutely Nonconformists, and therefore he concludes and counsels the King, It is not for the King's profit to suffer them. The King himself was contented to indulge them, but this great Favourite out of pride, and his malice to Mordecai, and for his sake to all the Jews, persuades the King thus. If it please the King let it be written, that they may be destroyed. The King hearkens to Haman's advice, and a Decree is sent out to persecute all the Jews to their utter destruction; but afterwards through Divine mercy, by the means of Queen Esther and Mordecai miraculously prevented. And although here was only a design and intention of persecuting God's people, and not put in action, yet such was the jealousy and wrath of God against the Enemies of his people, 
Esth 9 25.  that the chief contrivers of this Persecution, Haman and his Sons, were hanged on the Gallows, and near eighty thousand of the Persecutors slain by those whose ruin they designed. And the King commanded by his Letters, That Haman's wicked devise which he devised against the Jews should return upon his own head, which may terrify all malicious or impious men from persecuting of their Brethren.  
4. The Persecution which Nabuchadnezzar made may likewise afford us an observation:  
The King made an Image of Gold, 
Dan. 3.1, 4, 5, 6.  and had a solemn Dedication of it, and a Decree was made and proclaimed, That all people when they heard the Music should fall down and worship the Golden Image which Nabuchadnezzar the King had set up. Then this Decree and Law of Conformity highly imposeth on the Consciences of all his Subjects, and that upon a most severe and capital punishment: Whoso falleth not down and worshippeth, 
Dan. 3.6.  shall the same hour be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace. All conformed to this Law, except a few godly Jews, and against them some envious pickthank Chaldeans complained to the King, and accused Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, that they would not conform, and designed to persecute them to their destruction.  
They informed the King, 
Dan. 3.12, 13, 14.  These men, O King, have not regarded thee, they serve not thy gods, nor worship the Golden Image which thou hast set up.  
Then Nabuchadnezzar in his rage and fury commanded them to be brought before him, and examined them, who stoutly professed their Religion, and confidence in God.  
Then the King commanded that they should heat the furnace one seven times more than it was wont to be heat, and these men were cast into the midst of the burning fiery furnace.  
But to the astonishment of the King and all the Persecutors, they were delivered; and the King blessed the God of Heaven, Blessed be the God of Shadrach, 
Dan. 3.28.  Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent his Angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him, and have changed the King's word, and yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any God, except their own God.  
The King and the Persecutors were convinced, and a Decree was made, that none should speak amiss of the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego.  
Of this King it is said, When his heart was lifted up, and his mind hardened in pride, he was deposed from his Kingly Throne, 
Dan. 5.20, 21.  and they took his glory from him, and he was driven from the sons of men, and his heart was made like the beasts, and his dwelling was with the wild asses, they fed him with grass like an ox, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, till he knew that the most high God ruled in the Kingdoms of men, and that he appointeth over it whomsoever he will.  
5. 
Dan 6.4, 5, etc.  In the time of King Darius there were envious Persecutors of godly Daniel, who sought occasion against him concerning the Kingdom, but they could find none occasion or fault.  
They would fain have removed him from his Preferments to have made way for themselves, and when they could find no default in him as to his Civil employments, forasmuch as he was faithful (as most Nonconformists are) neither was there any error or fault found in him; Then the Persecutors said, We shall not find any occasion against this Daniel, except we find it against him concerning the Law of his God.  
Hereupon they sought to entrap him, and acquaint the King, That all the Precedents, Princes, Governors, Councillors, and Captains, a great public Council had consulted together to establish a Royal Statute, and to make a firm Decree, That whosoever shall ask a Petition of any God or man for thirty days, save of thee, O King, he shall be cast into the den of Lions; and they prevailed with the King to sign the Decree.  
Then Daniel when he knew that the Writing was signed, he went into his house, and his windows being open in his Chamber towards Jerusalem, he would avow his profession and worship, not withstanding the Law to the contrary; he kneeled upon his knees three times a day, and prayed, and gave thanks before his God, as he did aforetime.  
This provoked the Persecutors, they inform the King of it, who was willing to save Daniel, but they insisted on the Law of the Medes and Persians which altereth not. Hereupon Daniel was cast into the Lion's Den, but his God preserved him, and he was taken forth again the next day, but the Persecutors, and their Wives and Children were cast into the Lion's Den; and the Lions had the mastery of them, and broke all their bones in pieces, or ever they came at the bottom of the Den.  
6. We may come to the highest of Persecutions to that of our blessed Lord and Saviour Christ Jesus.  
His persecution began betimes, shortly after he was born, and continued till his Death, and will continue against his Members, till his coming again in Glory. 
Matt. 2.13.16.   
Herodes Ascalonita sought the young Child to destroy him, and when he saw that he was mocked of the Wisemen, he was exceeding wrath, and sent forth and slew all the Children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from Two years old and under, according the the time be had diligently inquired of the Wisemen.  
This bloody persecutor (as Josephus relates) was severely punished by God for his barbarous persecution of our Saviour, 
Josephus Antiquit. l. 17. c. 7. & l. 17.7. De Bello Judaic. c. 21. Mat. 4.1.2. Mat. 12.14. Matt. 22.15. Matt. 26.3.4.59 47.  and of these innocent and young Martyrs.  
The grand Persecutor Satan tempted the Lord of Life in the Wilderness, when he fasted Forty days, and Forty nights.  
After the Miracles which he had wrought, it is said, that then the Pharisees went out and held a Council against him, how they might destroy him.  
Then they consulted how they might entangle him.  
A public Council of the chief Priests, Scribes and Elders consulted, that they might take Jesus by subtlety and kill him; and to this end, all the Council sought false Witness against him, to put him to death.  
His own Servant betrays him, the Multitude with Swords and Staves from the chief Priests and Elders of the People, apprehend him and lead him to the Council, 
Matt. 26.66.67.  who pronounce their Sentence against him; He is guilty of death, than they spit in his Face, buffet him and smite him.  
After all this they still take council against him to put him to death, they bond him and led him away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the Governor, who when the Rabble cried out, Crucify him, 
Matt. 27.28, 29.30, 34.  released Barrabas, and scourged Jesus, and delivered him to be crucified; but of all others, the Soldiers used him most spitefully; they mocked him, put a Crown of Thorns upon his Head, spit upon him, 
Jo. 19.34.  smote him, and led him away to crucify him. They gave him Vinegar to drink mingled with Gall, and pierced his side with a Spear after he was dead.  
Thus was our blessed Redeemer rewarded by men, for all the good he did for them, they persecuted him to death, who brought them Eternal life and glory.  
But it were presumption to speak of that glorious Passion, and all the Persecution of the Lord of Life in this small Treatise, and by so weak a hand, which the Pen of the Holy Ghost hath described. 
Joseph. Antiq l. 18. Eutropius L. 7.   
We may only Observe of his Persecutors, that Judas hanged himself, Pilate and most of the Council that condemned him, were (as Eutropeus and others affirm) afflicted with many and sharp miseries in th●ls life and with violent deaths, besides their punishment in the life to come.  
For the People of the Jews, our persecuted Prince, foretold what should become of them for their persecutions.  
I send unto you Prophets, and Wisemen, and Scribes; 
Matt. 23.34, 35, 38.  and some of them ye shall kill and crucify, and some of them ye shall scourge in your Synagogues and persecute them from City to City.  
Then follows the most fearful of all Judgements.  
That upon you may come all the Righteous blood shed upon the Earth, from the blood of Righteous Able, to the blood of Zacharias.  
Behold your House is left unto you desolate: 
Josephus, Eusebius, Socrates Scholast, etc.  The Ecclesiastical story sets forth the full accomplishment of this Prophecy, the sad calamities which befell the Jews in the Siege of Jerusalem, and the taking and demolishing of it, and of the stately Temple, whereof nothing was left but heaps upon heaps, and all buried in Ruin.  
The People carried away Captives, lost their Native Country, dispersed over the face of the Earth, and besides the unexpressible miseries inflicted by Divine Justice on that Generation; it reacheth also to all their Posterity, who ever since have been wanderers up and down the Earth, and sojourners in strange Lands, and have had no City or fixed Habitation to dwell in.  
7. The example and course of the Master was followed by his Disciples that knew him in those times, and will be cheerfully submitted unto, (if God shall require it) by all such who in our time shall be acquainted with the Lord Jesus, to suffer with patience and joy, the Persecutions which the Enemies of Christ shall inflict upon them, whereof our Saviour's predictions was;  
They shall deliver you up to be afflicted and shall kill you, 
Matt. 24.9, 10, 13.  and ye shall be hated of all Nations for my name's sake, and then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another: But he that shall endure to the end, shall be saved.  
That this was fulfilled in the Persecution of the Disciples of Christ, appears too evidently in the Ecclesiastical story, and the particulars thereof are too many to be inserted in this short Treatise; they may at large and with sorrow be perused in their Authors.  
John the Baptist for displeasing Herodes Antipas in his Doctrine and Opinion about his Brother Philip's Wife was imprisoned, and afterwards in a kind of frolic beheaded by him. 
Euseb. l. 2. c. 4. Jos. Antiq. l. 8. c. 9 Acts 8.1.3.   
This Herod (as Eusebius and others testify) was afterwards condemned to perpetual banishment.  
Saul was himself a great persecutor of the People of God, he was consenting to the death of Stephen, and there was a great persecution against the Church: As for Saul he made havoc of the Church, entering into every House, and haling men and Women committed them to Prison.  
And breathing out threaten and slaughter against the Disciples of the Lord, 
Acts 9.1, 2.  went unto high Priest and desired of him Letters to Damascus to the Synagogues, that if he found any of this way (Nonconformist) whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem.  
This fierce persecutor was miraculously convinced of his sin (as all persecutors one day will be) and he became himself a persecuted Disciple of Christ Jesus.  
Nero, 
2 Tim. 4.17. Eutrop. l. 8.  whom he calls the Lion, and who was a fierce persecutor of him (as Eutropius relates) was sentenced by the Senate to whipped to death, which although he escaped, yet afterwards he slew himself.  
Herodes Agrippa stretched for his hands to vex certain of the Church, 
Acts. 12.1, 2.  and he killed James the Brother of John with the Sword; this persecutor also perished by an horrible death.  
Domitian the presecutor of John the Evangelist, 
Jos. Antiq. l. 10. c. 7. Suetonius, Eutropius  was slain in his Bed by his own servants, his Wife consenting to it, and his Carcase thrown into the Street by order of the Senate.  
Throughout almost the whole Book of the Acts of the Apostles are stories of the persecution of Christ's Disciples.  
I confine myself to those Examples which occur in the Holy story, nor can I mention but some of them, and must refer those who desire to look more particularly into this matter to the Ecclesiastical story, where they will find stories of that horror and bitterness of persecution against the People of God, and those who professed the Name of Christ Jesus, that would melt a Pious heart, and those horrible judgements of God against the persecutors of his Servants, that may forewarn all persecutors whatsoever from the wicked ways of persecution, and deter them from imposing upon men any thing contrary to that freedom of Conscience, which is due to all that profess the Faith of Christ; and whosoever by persecution shall seek to take it from them, will ensnare themselves in misery probably here, certainly hereafter.  
8. This Chapter may be concluded with some few further Observations upon the Examples before remembered from the holy Scripture.  
By all which it appears evidently, that in all times, and in all places, the People and Servants of God have been under severe persecutions; but what hath been the end and issue thereof? Eternal joy and comfort.  
I know the Objection is obvious, that the Examples before remembered, and divers others which may occur, are not applicable to the subject matter of our present Discourse; they are of persecutions of the People of God, and of Christians by Heathens, and by the Jews, who believed not that the Messiah was come: but the matter now in Discourse is of enjoining conformity in Sectaries and Schismatics, by the lawful Power and Authority of the Rulers of the Church of Christ, and therefore these Examples come not to this matter.  
But if a dissenting Brother do judge or doubt, that what is imposed on his Conscience, is contrary to the will of God; He holds himself equally obliged not to conform thereunto, as the Ancient Primitive Christians, or the Jews held themselves bound not to conform to the Impositions of Heathen Emperors, Governors, in matters Spiritual.  
And they do observe, that if God shown so great displeasure for those Impositions of the Heathen upon his People; That, surely he will be as much displeased at the Impositions of Christians upon Christians, and of Protestants upon Protestants, in Spiritual Matters, and which are not Fundamental, and where the public Peace is not disturbed.  
It may be further observed, that in all Examples of Persecution, the Power and Authority of the King or Monarch, was made use of; and by the same Reason and Authority, his Power and Right of Indulgence may be exercised.  
The Observation of pouring out of the Wrath and Vengeance of God upon the Persecutors of his People, hath been before in part noted, and may be found throughout the Stories of those Passages.  
And it is a greater breach of Charity and Christian Duty, for a Professor of Christ, than for an Unbeliever to persecute a Servant of Christ Jesus.  
9 This Section and Chapter may be concluded with a Contemplation of the Comfort of Persecution. It was the condition of the holy Apostle Paul, and will be the Condition of all faithful Servants of Christ, 
2 Cor. 6.4, 5, 8, 9, 10.  to be in much Patience in Afflictions, in Necessities, in Stripes, in Imprisonments, in Tumults, in Labours, in Watch, in Fast, by Honour and Dishonour, by evil Report and good Reports, as Deceivers, and yet True; as Unknown, and yet Well-known; as Dying, and behold we Live; as Chastened, and not Killed; as Sorrowful, and yet always rejoicing; as Poor, yet making many Rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all Things.  
Our Master Christ Jesus, being Lord of all, yet was pleased to endure the greatest Persecution for our Sakes; shall not we then be willing to endure short Persecutions for his Sake, and the Gospels? These Persecutions will be Comforts and Blessings to all that faint not, but persevere in Righteousness to the end.  
The Discourse of Bishop Hall, 
Bp. Hall, Decad. 5. Epist. 5.  is heavenly on this Subject.  
The Bone that was disjointed, cannot be set right without Pain; no Potion can cure us, if it work not; it works not, unless it make us Sick; we are contented with the Sickness, which is the way to Health; we are afflicted, not overpressed; needy, not desperate; persecuted, not forsaken; cast down, but perish not.  
Fear not, these Stripes are the Tokens of his Love; he is no Son that is not beaten, yea, till he Smart and Cry, if not till he Bleed. No Parent corrects another's Child, and he is no good Parent that corrects not his own.  
What we lost in our height, we recover in our Misery, a conformity to the Image of the Son of God. He that is not like his elder Brother, shall never be Co-heir with him. Lo, his Side, Temples, Hands, Feet, all bleeding; his Face blubbered, ghashly, and spit on; his Skin all pearled with a bloody Sweat, his Head drooping, his Soul heavy to the Death.  
No man can follow Christ without his Cross, much less reach him; and if none shall reign with Christ, but those that suffer with him; what shall become of those jolly Ones of this World?  
Go now, thou dainty Worldling, and please thyself in thy happiness; Laugh always, and be ever applauded; it is a woeful Felicity that thou shalt find in Opposition to thy Redeemer.  
He hath said, Blessed are ye that weep; who can believe this, and not rejoice in his own heart? Why blessed? For ye shall laugh.  
Behold we shall weep on Earth, shall laugh in Heaven; we that now weep with Men, shall laugh with Angels; we that weep for a Time, shall laugh for Ever.  
Who would not be content to defer his Joy a little, that it may be Perpetual and Infinite?  
In Heaven you shall see no more Palms than Crosses; you shall see none crowned, but those that have wrestled with Crosses and Sorrows, to Sweat, yea, to Blood, and have overcome; and overcoming, ye shall be crowned.  
A reward truly great, a Crown for a few Groans; an Eternal Crown of Life and Glory, for a short and momentary Suffering.  
How just is St. Paul's account, That the Afflictions of this present Life, are not worthy of the Glory which shall be showed unto us.  
What say you, Would you not be afflicted? Would you not be persecuted? Whether had you rather mourn for a while, or for ever? One must be chosen. Whether had you rather rejoice for one fit, or always? you would do both. Pardon me, it is a fond Covetousness, and idle Singularity; what, that you alone may far better than all Gods Saints! That God should make that way smooth to you, which all the Patriarches, Prophets, Evangelists, Confessors, Christ himself, have found rugged and bloody!  
A way with this Self-love, and come down you ambitious Sons of Zebedee, and ere you think of sitting near the Throne, be content to be called to the Cup. Now is your trial, let your Saviour see how much of his bitter Potion you can pledge, then shall ye see how much of his Glory he can afford; be content to drink of his Vinegar and Gall, and ye shall drink new Wine with him in his Kingdom.  
The shortest Persecution thou canst undergo for the Satisfaction of thine own Conscience, for the Truth of Christ, will prove the greatest Blessing and Comfort to thy Soul.   

CHAP. IX. Observations upon Examples of Indulgence in Spiritual Matters.  
1. IN this Argument, We may take a rise from before the Flood, and find, that in all Ages to this day, generally Indulgence hath been given in Spiritual Matters, and the right of giving it, exercised by Monarches; and we may begin with the Indulgence which Noah had.  
Noah was a just man, 
Gen. 6.9, 11.  and perfect in his Generations, and Noah walked with God, but the earth was corrupt before God, and filled with violence.  
Noah differed as much from the People of the Earth in his Persuasion, as could be; yet, even that corrupt Generation indulged Noah and his Family to enjoy the freedom of their Conscience; and Noah himself was a Preacher of Justice, 
2 Pet. 2.5. Rabbi Eliezer, c. 22.  and as a Rabbi saith, he preached to the old World, and said, Turn ye from your ways, and from your evil Works, that the Waters come not upon you, and cut off the whole Se●d of the Sons of Adam.  
But some may object, That Noah was a King, and might give Indulgence to himself, and he received none from others.  
It is acknowledged, that Noah was a King both before and after the Flood; and of the ten Kings of the Chaldaeans, who reigned before the Flood, the last is reckoned by Cedrens and others, to be Xisuther, who was Noah; and in him some of the Greek Stories continue that Eastern Kingdom of the Chaldaeans, through the Flood; and affirm that Noah was King about 180 years before the Flood, and that his Kingdom continued to his Death, and that then he bequeathed it to his Son Seth.  
But I shall not make much inquiry into this matter; if he were a King, he gave good Example, by seeking to convert his People by preaching, rather than by punishing of them.  
If he were not a King, then was the Indulgence that he enjoyed the more considerable, and may be also exemplary.  
2. The next Indulgence which we meet with in order of time in the holy Sto●y, is that which was enjoyed by the holy Patriarches.  
Every Father of a Family, was Prince and Priest in his Family, and ordered matters of Divine Worship as he thought best; and we read of no Persecutions among them.  
Abraham by the Direction of God, 
Gen. 12.3, 5, 6, 7, 8.  with his Wife, and his Nephew Lot, and all their Family, went from Haran into Canaan, and there built an Altar, and called upon the name of the Lord.  
And though the Canaanite was then in the Land; yet Godly Abraham would not neglect the true Worship of God, even amongst those Unbelievers; neither did any of them disturb him, though his Persuasion differed much from theirs in Spiritual Matters; but he was indulged therein, both while he was there, and when he was in Egypt, and in his return to Canaan.  
After 
* Gen. 19 1 〈◊〉 de 〈…〉 15 Be●eshith. R●●●●a Parash. f. 56. col. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Lot parted from him, he was not only indulged in wicked Sodom, but preferred by them to be Chief Justice in the City, as their Rabbins, and other Authors, and the Original itself in this Signification of the Words used in this Chapter, do testify.  
Abraham was also indulged by the King of Gerar, 
Gen. 20.11.  though he thought surely the fear of God is not in this place.  
Isaac enjoyed his Freedom with a succeeding Abimelech, King of Gerar, who saith, We have not touched thee, 
Gen. 26.29, 23.  we have done unto thee nothing but good, and have sent thee away in peace. Even Philistines indulged this Servant of God, and amongst them he built an Altar, and worshipped his God without disturbance.  
Jacob paid his Devotions at Bethel, and had his Liberty and Indulgence in Laban's House, from whose persuasion in Spiritual Matters, he much differed.  
In his return from thence, in the Land of Canaan, 
Gen. 33.18, 19, 20.  he purchased a Field, and built an Altar, and was indulged by Hamor the Hivite, Prince of the Country. He enjoyed the like Freedom at Bethel, 
Gen. 35.5.  and in Egypt, after he went down thither; both he and all his Family enjoyed their Liberty in Spiritual Matters, and were not disturbed for many years.  
Hereupon it may be observed, That this Indulgence was given by Kings, and allowed to the Servants of God, even by Philistines; much more may the like be expected from Protestants, to their Brethren.  
The next Indulgence that we meet with in time the holy Story, was that given by Pharaoh King of Egypt, to the Israelites,  
The Lord was with Joseph, and he was a prosperous man; 
Gen. 39.2, 4.  and the Egyptian his Master, not only gave him the Liberty of his Conscience, but preferred him to be Overseer of his House, and his godly Disposition appeared in his Carriage to his Mistress.  
After he had interpretd Pharaohs Dream, though he much differed in his persuasion in Spiritual Matters from the Egyptians; yet the King seeing his Wisdom and Spirit, made him ruler of the Land, 
Gen. 41.41, 42, 43. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chaldees of Onkeles and Knathan Hierosol. Targum.  and to ride in the second Chariot, and they cried before him, Bow the Knee. The Hebrew word, for which Abrech signifies, Father of the tender King, or the tender Father of the King, which was the highest Title and Honour whereof a Subject was capable among them, and the highest trust that could be under the King, was conferred on Joseph, though he was a Nonconformist.  
And the difference of Persuasion in Spiritual Matters, between the Hebrews and the Egyptians, was such, That they would not eat together, as appears in the Entertainment which Joseph made for his Brethren. When they set on bread for him by himself, 
Gen. 43.32.  and for them by themselves, and for the Egyptians by themselves, because the Egyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews, for that is an abomination to the Egyptians.  
The reason whereof (as Pererius notes) was because the Hebrews killed the Cattle for their food and sacrifice, 
Coment. Pererii in Gen. 43.33.  and eat of them, which the Egyptians worshipped as their Gods; therefore the persuasion of Joseph, and of his Father Jacob, and of his Brethren, was sufficiently different from that of the Egyptians in Spiritual matters, yet were they therein indulged by Pharaoh, and his Successors. And we read of no disturbance of them in those matters until Moses required of Pharaoh an Indulgence for them to go into the Wilderness to sacrifice to their God, which the King denied, because God had hardened his heart, and purposed to manifest his own power, and his mercy to his people, in delivering them from bondage; and what was the issue of the denial of that Indulgence, is set forth by Moses in his Story of it.  
4. This may lead us to a consideration of what Indulgence was granted by Moses to the Israelites themselves, being next in order of time.  
It is agreed by all Authors, that Moses had Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction in him, as his judgements in Spiritual Cases given by him do testify.  
But in his judgements in Spiritual Cases, we find none against any one's freedom of Conscience and Opinion, except in case of Idolatry, Breach of some positive Law of God, or for Blasphemy.  
And in that of Blasphemy in the case of the Israelitish Woman's Son whose Father was an Egyptian, Moses would adjudge no punishment of him till first the mind of the Lord might be showed, who commanded that he should be put to death.  
Many Egyptians and Strangers came out of Egypt with the Israelites, but we read of no Persecution of any of them for different Opinions, nor any punished for any Spiritual matter, but in the cases before mentioned.  
But it may be objected, That Moses was not a Sovereign King, and could not Exercise that Jurisdiction as other King's might in such cases, which perhaps was the reason that such Dissenters were not punished.  
To which is answered, That Moses was a Sovereign King, as Absolute as any other Prince, and knew as much of the mind of God as ever any King did, which was revealed to him; and accordingly he Exercised his Kingly Authority both in this matter of Indulgence, and in all other matters.  
That he was King, 
Deut. 33.5.  appears in the express terms of the Text, And he was King in Jeshurun.  
So the Hebrew reads it, and the Chaldee, Syriac, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Yfue en Ysrael Roy. Deut. 32.15. Impinguata est gens Judaica. Isa. 44.2.  and Persic Versions, for Jeshurun, do read Israel.  
So do the Spaniards, And he was King in Israel.  
The Germans agree herewith; and a little before in the Song of Moses, But Jeshurun waxed fat and kicked. The Mauritanians read it, The Nation of the Jews waxed fat, and upon that in, I said, the Greek Version hath a Note for Jeshurun, understand Israel.  
The Old English Translation under Hen. 8. for Jeshurun, hath Israel. Both Christians and Jews agree that where it is said, He was King in Jeshurun, it is the same thing as if it had been said, He was King in Israel.  
The Hebrew Authors often call him King, 
Levis Gerson in Perushtera, f. 245. col. 3. Aben Ezra Maimon. Tract. Beth Habentura, c. 6. Sect. 1.  as Moses our Master was King. And Moses was King. And the like Expressions often occur in them.  
Another calls him, Prince of Princes, and a King over Israel. 
Philo de vita Mosis l. 2. c. 3. Jure regio populum Gubernavit. Nazianzen Orat. 6.   
Oxtius saith, That in Kingly right he governed the people.  
Nazianzen affirms that he Exercised the Office of Legislator, of Judge, and of King.  
Selden holds that he was in truth, 
Selden de Synedr. l. 2. p. 62. Regem fuisse Mosen revera, etc.  King or Prince of the israelites according to Divine Institution.  
But this may be censured of too much curiosity. I have the rather insisted thereon, to show that he who was the meekest man upon earth, and highly indulged Gods people, was a King; and it will become all Kings to imitate his Pattern.  
5. Upon the same Ground, I proceed to the Indulgence of Joshua, Moses Successor, who was also Prince or King in Israel. He had the same authority as Moses had, delegated to him from God, and consented to by the people, who promise him, 
Josh. 1.16.  All that thou commandest us, we will do; and whithersoever thou sendest us, we will go; according as we harkened unto Moses in all things, so will we hearken unto thee.  
We do not find that he was severe against any Dissenters from his Opinion, but in his admirable Expostulation with the people, he leaves it to them: If it seem evil unto you this day to serve the Lord, 
Josh. 24.15.  choose you this day whom you will serve, whether the Gods which your Fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the Gods of the Amorites in whose land ye dwell. Then he makes and declares his own profession of Religion, But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.  
He sought not to convince the people by severe Laws and punishments, but by meek Exhortations and Admonishments, reasoning the matter with them:  
If ye forsake the Lord, 
Josh. 24.20.  and serve strange Gods, than he will turn and do you hurt, 
Josh. 24.21, 22, 23, 24, 25.  and consume you after that he hath done you good.  
And the people said, Nay, but we will serve the Lord. And Joshua said, Ye are witnesses against yourselves that ye have chosen the Lord to serve him; and they said, We are witnesses. Now therefore, said he, put away the strange Gods which are among you, and incline your heart unto the Lord God of Israel.  
So Joshua made a Covenant with the people, and set them a Statute and an Ordinance in Shechem.  
This way of meekness and Indulgence Joshua held the best way to persuade the people to Conformity, to put away the strange Gods which were among them, and to incline their heart unto the Lord God; and it is an excellent precedent to be followed.  
6. The next in order is to consider of the Indulgence which the Judges and Kings gave to the people of Israel, whereof there is not much to be gathered, more than what is before remembered in general, in the times of Moses and Joshua.  
The times wherein there was no King in Israel, (that is, no Governor nor Government) when every one did that which seemed right in his own eyes, relate to Civil as well as Spiritual matters, and were rather times of Anarchy, than of Indulgence.  
But both the Judges, who were Monarches, and a kind of Kings, and the Kings by name, did generally indulge all Persons in matters Spiritual, except in cases of Blasphemy, Idolatry, or breach of the known Law of God.  
To write the Particulars of these times, would take up too much of ours; they are obvious in the Holy Story, which every servant of God will take delight to read.  
And throughout all the passages of them, it will appear that they were indulgent to different persuasions in matters of their Law, wherein (as to Expositions, and some weighty points) there were many different opinions, whereof there will be occasion to make some mention by and by, and that these Dissenters were not punished.  
It will likewise be manifest, that all Indulgence in matters of this nature proceeded from the Judges and Kings, who by their Exercise thereof showed that the Right of Indulgence was in them, though the Cases before mentioned were not to be dispensed with, but by sinning against God, and transgressing the Law which he had given unto his People, and which will not be done by granting an Indulgence now desired.  
7. Time will be wanting to insist on these, and I must omit many other examples in the Word of Truth of Indulgence in Spiritual matters, and come to that which may serve instead of all others: the unerring great Examplar, our Lord Jesus, whose infinite wonderful indulgence and mercy to his unworthy Creatures, gives a sharp rebuke to all persecuting earthly powers, and fully instructs them to give indulgence to those over whom he hath set them.  
Our blessed Redeemer God Omnipotent, knew the inclinations and opinions of all men's hearts and ways, who were just and righteous, who were wicked and ungodly, who were sincere, and who were hypocrites; who were faithful, and who unbelievers.  
Yet was he graciously pleased to make no distinction, 
1 Tim. 2.6. Acts. 10.43. John 3.15.  but indulged all, both Jew and Gentile, just and unjust, righteous and sinful; he gave himself a Ransom for all, that whosoever believes in him shall have remission of Sins, shall not perish but have everlasting Life.  
Our Jesus who inhabiteth Eternity, liveth for ever, and can do whatsoever pleaseth him, was pleased in his great humility and mercy to Mankind, to come down from Heaven upon the Earth, and to take our vile Nature upon him.  
How unfit is it for sinful Dust and Ashes, whose Breath is in their Nostrils, who are but as of yesterday, to ascend the Throne of God, to take his Authority on them, to sit in Judgement upon the Hearts and Consciences of Men?  
The Lord of Life and Glory humbled himself, and became obedient to death, even the death of the Cross, that he might thereby purchase his Enemies eternal Life.  
How unanswerable to this, is it for Powers made of Dirt, and without Foundations, to condemn their Friends to death, that will not be of the same judgement with these Rulers?  
The searcher of Hearts allows a freedom to all men's Hearts and Consciences to serve him in such ways as they think most agreeable to his Divine Will.  
How unfit it is for any earthly Govornours to attempt an alteration of the frame of the hearts of men, to compel them to serve God in such ways as are most agreeable to the will of the Governors, and contrary to the Hearts and Consciences of those whose good only is concerned.  
Christ exhorteth all to Kindness and Indulgence, 
Luke 4.18.  and affirms, That he was sent to heal the broken hearted. How unfit it is for his Vicegerents to wound yet more the broken hearted! He was sent to preach deliverance to the Captives; How contrary is it, to proclaim imprisonment or banishment to those whom Christ hath made free?  
He was sent to recover sight to the Blind; those who are sent by him, have no Commission to put out the Eyes of those that see, to torment and punish their Brethren, because they see not with their Rulers Eyes.  
Christ was sent to set at liberty them that are bruised; and surely he hath not sent any of his Officers to bruise his Members, and to take away their liberty or lives from them.  
The Son of God saith, If the Son make you free, ye shall be free indeed. How contrary is it for those in Power to impose upon the Consciences of them under Authority, whereby they take away that freedom which the Son, hath given to all his Servants?  
He saith, Ye shall be free. But these imposers say, Ye shall not be free.  
Proud Flesh contradicts the Spirit; Man, God; the Creature, his Creator and Redeemer.  
8. The Holy Disciples of our Lord Christ, inspired and instructed by him, followed the Example of their Master, in giving Indulgence to others, though differing in some Opinions.  
When the dissension arose among the Brethren, touching Circumcision, and the Apostles and Elders came together to consider of it, 
Acts 15.  Peter relates to them, God made choice amongst us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the Gospel, and believe. And God which knoweth the heart, bore them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us, and put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by Faith. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the Disciples, which neither our Fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe, that through the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, we shall be saved even, as they.  
Then James declares his Sentence, That we trouble not them, who from among the Gentiles are turned to God: Then he adviseth, and accordingly it was agreed by the whole Church, to send them Messengers, and to write Letters by them.  
Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us, have troubled you with words, subverting your Souls, saying, You must be circumcised, and keep the Law, to whom we gave no such Commandment: It seemed good to us, to send chosen men to you, with our beloved Barnabas and Paul  
For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things, That ye abstain from meats offered to Idols, and from Blood, and from things Strangled, and from Fornication; from which if you keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Far ye well.  
Here is a very high Example of Indulgence, warranted by the authority and judgement of the Apostles and Elders, and of the whole Church, and of the Holy Ghost likewise, to whom it seemed good not to lay burdens upon the Servants of Christ, but in necessary things; and it would be found more agreeable to the mind of the Holy Ghost to give this Indulgence, than to impose unnecessary or Ceremonious burdens upon our Brethren.  
The Holy Apostle Paul declares this Doctrine from the Holy Spirit: One believes that he may eat all things; another who is weak, eateth Herbs: Then he exhorteth to this Indulgence.  
Let not him that eateth, despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not, judge him that eateth. One man esteemeth one day above another, another esteemeth every day alike: let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.  
But, why dost thou judge thy Brother? Or why dost thou set at naught thy Brother? We shall all stand before the Judgment-Seat of Christ. Let us not judge one another any more, but judge this rather, That no man put a stumbling Block, or an occasion to fall, in his Brother's way. And he that doubteth, is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of Faith; for whatsoever is not of Faith, is Sin.  
We then that are strong, aught to bear the Infirmities of the weak, 
Rom. 15.  and not to please ourselves. Let every one of us please our Neighbour for his good to Edification, which is not done by persecuting men's Neighbours for their Nonconformity.  
The same Apostle tells us, 
1 Cor. 8.12.  When ye sin so against the Brethren, and wound their weak Consciences, ye sin against Christ.  
And surely they do wound men's weak Consciences, who would force them to a Conformity.  
He saith in another place, 
1 Cor. 10.29.  Why is my Liberty judged of another's Conscience? that is, it ought not to be so judged, every one ought to have his Liberty, 
Jer. 34.15.  as the Prophet commendeth it, Ye had done right in proclaiming Liberty, every man to his Neighbour.  
St. 
2 Cor. 3.17  Paul asserteth, That where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is Liberty; it followeth, that where a just Liberty is denied, that is by another Spirit.  
He exhorts, 
Eph. 4.32.  Be ye kind one to another, tender hearted; which will scarce be thought of those, who deny a just Indulgence. And let each esteem others better than themselves; 
Phil. 2.3.  which they do not, who persecute others, because they are not.  
Jerusalem which is above, 
Gal. 4.26. and 5.13.  is free; and we are exhorted to stand fast in the Liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free; we have been called unto Liberty.  
Very many Admonitions and Expressions of the like Nature of the Disciples of Christ, are obvious in the Holy Scripture; by which the Example of those holy and inspired Servants of Christ is left unto us; not only warranting, but in effect, injoining a just Freedom and Indulgence to be given to our Fellow-Christians.  
Upon the whole matter it seems to me (with Submission to better Judgement) very evident,  
That an Indulgence in matters Spiritual, is fit to be granted from the grounds of Polity and Piety.  
To demonstrate which, I have only in the general collected such Grounds as I met with, and time allowed; whereby it seems to me fit that such Indulgence be granted.  
That the Supreme Spiritual Jurisdiction is in Kings and Princes; and in England, in our Kings.  
That as a consequence thereof, the right of granting Indulgence in Spiritual Matters, is in his present Majesty.  
Then, I have offered some Answers to Objections against this Right.  
Lastly, I have made some few Observations upon Examples, in the holy Story, of Persecution, and of Indulgence in Spiritual Matters. From all which, I may presume to say, That to me (under Correction) it seems manifest, that our King hath this right of Indulgence; and that as it is of Right in our King, so 'tis one of the highest and clearest, and most beautiful Flowers of his Crown.  
And that, if this right were not in the King, he would thereby be much disabled from performing his Office as King, in preventing Mischiefs and great Inconveniences to the Public, in preserving the Trade, Wealth, Strength, and Peace of his Kingdoms, in providing for his Own, and his Subjects Security; and in doing that, which will much tend to the Honour of God, to the Happiness and Welfare of Himself and all his People, and to the general good of Christendom.   
The End.