AN ASSERTION FOR True and Christian church-policy. Wherein Certain Politic Objections made against the planting of PASTORS and Elders in every Congregation, are sufficiently ANSWERED. And Wherein also sundry projects are set down, how the Discipline by Pastors and Elders may be planted, without any derogation to the King's Royal Prerogative, any indignity to the three Estates in Parliament, or any greater alteration of the laudable Laws, Statutes, or Customs of the Realm, than may well be made without damage to the people. IN DOMINO CONFIDO printer's or publisher's device London, Printed 1642. To the Right Honourable the LORDS and COMMONS Assembled in High COURT of Parliament. Right HONOURABLE, etc. THe Ensuing Treatise which I am bold to present to Your wisdom's view, contains principal political reasons grounded upon the Laws of this Kingdom, for the removing of the present Hierarchy, and planting of a Government by Pastors and Elders. The appellation of Lay Elders hath been very displeasing to many; whereas the Elder intended to be planted, is not lay, but in regard of the service (wherein he is to be employed) Ecclesiastical. The Author was an elaborate Student in the civil Law, and a professor of it. He was esteemed learned by the best of that profession, as also by Divines and common Lawyers, learned Sir Edward Cook, late Chief Justice of the King's Bench, Sir Christopher Yeluerton, late Judge of the Common Pleas, Sir Henry Finch, late the King's Sergeant at Law, and others have given testimony of him. The Treatise is an answer to divers passages in a Book written by D. Whitgift, late Archb. of Canterbury, entitled An admonition to the Parliament. The Author (as I doubt not but will appear to your Wisdoms) hath written with the spirit of meekness and humility, submitting all to the judgement of an High Court of Parliament, he disputes with the Great Bishop in a Scholastical way, without one syllable of reviling, or bitter language, which he ever detested. He discovers the foundation of the Hierarchy to be totally illegal, and to be abolished by the abolition of the Papal Canon Law, which appears to be abolished by the statute of 25. of Henry 8. cap. 9 The truth whereof (being discovered by the Author's means to the said learned Judge Sir Edward Cook,) he did most ingenuously acknowledge, and did avow he never understood the statute so well before, yet affirmed he thought he had read the said statute an hundred times. May it please you in your wisdoms to commend the Treatise to be viewed by the learned Gent. of the long Robe, whose awful judgements I shall ever honour. Most true it is (I dare aver) there is little written in this Kingdom tending to the removal of the Episcopacy, from Legal and Political arguments, but the Author hath the arrows in his quiver, I say not that others have borrowed light from his Candle. Right Honourable and Right worthy, I shall humbly take further boldness (humbly presuming upon your Honourable favours) if this poor model find acceptance in your sight, to present you with a new impression of an abstract written in time of famous Queen Elizabeth, (a Book well known to learned King james) by the same Author, whose memory, I am bound by nature to Honour. Give me leave only now to make known unto you the Title and several Treatises contained in it. It is entitled, An abstract of certain Laws, Canons and Constitutions Synodall and Provincial in force within the Queen's dominions, and for the most part unknown to the subject. It containeth these principal Treatises. 1. That a learned Ministry is commanded by Law. 2. That Pluralities are forbidden by Law. 3. That it is unlawful to make a Minister without a title. 4. That it is unlawful for a Clerk to have civil authority. This abstract was seemingly answered by the railing stile of a than Doctor Cousins, but by a further encounter, and the counterpoison (yet extant) written by the same Author, he departed the Field with Honour, such was the opinion of many learned, among others of the foresaid, Reverend Judge, Sir Henry Yeluerton. This treatise was never questioned nor quarreled, for aught I ever heard: Yet was the Author well known to many of the Bishops. You may happily in your Wisdoms conceive some things might have been omitted, as not wholly incident to the time, and some abbreviated in regard of the shortness of your time, and of the high affairs now in hand. But may it please you, being about so to do, I found the light must have been much Eclipsed, and the truth obscured. I am over bold, most humbly to commend the defence of what he writes, grounded upon the laws of the Kingdom, to your most Honourable protection. It shall be enough for me to attend among the meanest of your servants, having heretofore had the happiness to have been a member (though unworthy) of the Honourable House of Commons. Presenting your honours and your grave wisdoms with my heartiest prayers and humblest service, In most humble manner, I entreat your pardon of and for The Contents. THe defenders of the Hierarchy confess their government is not apostolical. pag. 2. The bringing in of the discipline desired, causeth no alteration of temporal laws, nor the officers of a kingdom. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 No fear that profane men will overthrow the Gospel if the form of Church government be altered, 10. The description of lukewarm professors, that will be of that religion the King will be of, 11. The Puritan protestants can never overthrow the Gospel, 13. Neither can the Papist because he is overthrown by the Gospel, 13 The planting of an Apostolical government will draw no alteration of the Laws of the Realm, 14. The whole Papal Law is totally abolished by the statute of the 25 of Henry 8. c. 19 of the submission of the Clergy, as appears by the body of the statute and the proviso, from the 15. to the 20. Canon and civil Laws no part of the Laws of the Realm but by sufferance, 15 An imbasement for civilians to have preferment by the offices of the Canon Law, that ought not to be used, 17, 18, 19 Whence it followeth that the papal Canon Law being abolished, the papal offices and functions of Archbishops and Bishops are also abolished, being grounded upon the same Law, 20 Power properly and improperly called spiritual, 20, 21 Bishops remain ordinary by custom, provincial Canons and statute Law, though papal laws be abolished, 21 The King though Supreme governor of the Church cannot give Archbishops and Bishops spiritual power properly called spiritual: that power must be derived from the Scripture, 20. The Bishops did use a plenary power, devised and promulged new Canons without the Queen's assent, 23 All the Bishops together can make no new Law, and yet every Bishop doth make many laws, 24 All temporal officers do draw their power from the King one way or other, 25 The Charter of England confirmeth not the power of Archbishops or Bishops, because their power appears not by the Scripture to be given them by God, and therefore the King and Parliament, may be pleased to abolish both them and their power, as King Hen. 8. did abolish Monks and Friars. 26. 40. and 28 The challenge for Lordly primacy out of the great charter answered, 28 The study of the civil Law and the professors of it may flourish more than now they do, 28 Fees for probate of testaments let to farm, 29 Fees dew for execution of functions of the Canon Law disproportionable for a D●ctor of the Civil Law, 30 An Act of Parliament for the advancement of the Civil Law is set down, and a form laid for all proceed in the Courts in which the Civil Lawyers should be judges, 32, 33 It will advance the honour of the King, and the good of his subjects to have matters of tithes and testaments, and matrimony reduced by act of Parliament to be tried by the judges of the Common Law, 37 Matters of tithes and other causes of light nature pertain to civil justice, 37 The temporal law may easily be applied to causes now reputed Ecclesiastical, 39 How legacies may be recovered at the Common Law, 42 Matters of marriages more fit to be decided by the King's officers than by the Bishops, 43 Much ad●e in the Bishop's Courts about Accipio and Accipiam, 44 The common Law preferred by the Bishops above the Law of God and the civil Law, 45 Causes of Adulteries, Slander, Heresy which by sufferance only have been exempted from the Cognizance of the King may be arbitrated by the judges of the common Law, 47 Hierarchy may be judged felony if it please the King, 49 The cognizance of all crimes as well as of some by the Law of God belong to the King, 50 No impeachment and impropriations in lay men's hands, the stat. of 15. Rich. 2. and the 4. Hen. 4. being observed for a Vicar endowes, yet if it please the King & Parliament, a law may be made for reducing of impropriations, which may be done. First, by restitution. Secondly, by commutation. Thirdly, by redemption. Fourthly, by contribution, 52 Parochial Churches to what use they were founded, 56 First, restitution of many may and aught to be, which are now accounted the temporal revenues of Archbishops and Bishops which were given to several Churches, are now spoilt of them by Archbishops and Bishops, 55, 56, 57, 58. Secondly, commutations may be made of many of the Bishop's lands given to superstitious uses, for many impropriations in the King's hand and the hands of many of the Nobility, 56, 58, 59 Thirdly, there may be a redemption made of the same land, or buying in of many impropriations by a common purse or treasury which will increase. 1. When the people shall be discharged of the burden of Ecclesiastical Courts. 2. The treasure will increase by the dissolution of Chapels of ease, and uniting two Parishes into one, and especially in great Cities and Towns where often are but small Live. 61 Dissolution of Chapels no new thing, Ibid. Chapels the Seminaries of hirelings, 62 3. By sequestration of the Live of non residents. 4. By the forfeiture of penal Laws due to the King, 60, 61, 62, 63 Sequestration of the Churches of pluralists may further the treasure for redemption of impropriations, 63 By what contributions Impropriations may be brought to the use of the ministry, 63 Fourthly, the fourth means, viz, by contribution whereby Impropriations may be reduced to the ministry, 63, 64, 65 How and by what means impropriations may be reduced into the ministry, 65, 66 None of the three estates in Parliament is lost by removal of the Hierarchy, as appears by several statutes, viz. 25. E. 3. c. 24. 31. Ed. 3. Stat. of Herrings 3. R. 2. c. 3. 7. R. 2. c. 12. 1. E. c. 2. 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73 The state of Prelacy founded by the Grandfather of K. E. 3. 69 The K. having the assent of the Nobles and Commons may repeal statutes without the assent of the Prelates, 70 The argument answered, in which it is said that it hath been always dangerous to pick quarrels against laws settled, 74, 75 Less danger to reform the Church by new laws, than to continue corruption by old laws, 74 That argument answered, in which it is said that there must of necessity be in every Parish one Pastor, a company of Seniors, and Deacon or two at the least, and all those to be found of the Parish, 75, 76, 77, 78 What kind of men ought to be chosen Seniors, and Deacons, 76 The judgement of the Commissioners of Ed. 6. touching Elders and Deacons, 77 The election of Pastors by the people stands upon the ground of reason and nature, rules of Christian equity and the law of God, therefore by no Law or custom can justly be taken away though actually it was by the Pope, 79, to 87 Dangerous to innovate unless there be evident utility in innovation, 80 The common manner of election in the old Churches was by the people, 81 The King without the people hath power to nominate the Kingly Bishop, 82 M. Bilson confirms the people's election of their Pastor, 83 A great difference betwixt the choice of Bishops in England and Pastors, 86 No Schism happened by choice of Pastors by the people: ancient schimes were ever from the election of Bishops, 87, 88 therefore a Stat. is desired for the giving of election of their Pastors, 86 Election of public officers in Cities and Boroughs is by the principal men of these places, 90, 91. therefore Ministers may be elected: the officers of Cities and Towns Corporate chosen without contention, therefore Pastors may be also chosen, 90 The people would be more careful of their Election than Bishops have been, the people could make no choice of insufficient Ministers unless the Bishops did make insufficient Ministers, 93, 94 The common people accused of backwardness in Religion, the reason of that must needs be from their ill guides, 95 Men of excellent gifts and men of no gifts are unequally matched in the ministry of the Gospel, 96 The people may know a man to be a fit Minister though he be not brought up among them, 98 What knowledge of a Minister is required in the people before they choose him. No partial suits can follow the election of Ministers by the people, 100 The means to take away all simony for places in the Ministry, 100 The inconveniences of Bishop's ordination set down, 102 As many suits between the Bish, and the Clerk, 2. suits between the Clerk and the Archdeacon, 3. suits between the B. and the Archdeacon, 4. Riots and breaches of the King's peace, 5. unlawful Fees for Letters of institution, 6. unlawful Fees for letters of sequestration, 105. 7. Perjury by the Clerk and robbery by the Patron, 8. Chopping of benefices and dispensations, 106. A supplication to the Parliament to consider these inconveniences, and likewise a brief way is set down of the redress of them, 107, Divers things set down concerning ordination of Ministers, 108 How a Minister ought to be called to a place, of his examination, and approbation by Ministers and the Parish, and of his ordination and actual calling to a place, 108 This way laid down before is no such innovation as is pretended, it being agreeable to the ancient Laws of the Land, 100 The spirit of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets how to be, 112 What is to be done if suit fall out betwixt two Patrons, 113 Patrons not so strictly kerbed is pretended, 114 Prophets to be taken from the Schools of the Prophets upon difference in judgement of the abilities of men what then to be done, 114 Concerning refusal upon non ability, 116 The benefits ensuing the platform of ordination and required, 117, 118 What perfection is required in a Minister, 120 Prelacy and a learned Ministry cannot stand together, 120 That objection answered, that the reward of learning being taken away learning itself must needs fall to the ground, 121 Prelacy the bane of learned Ministers, 122 That argument answered concerning the drawing of Scholars out of the Universities before they are fit, 123, 124 The argument concerning excommunication answered: by whom excommunication ought to be performed, 125, 126, 127, what it is, 128 The inconvenience of the Bishop's excommunication, 129 It hath many deformities, 130 By the Bishop's excommunication one may be a communite, 130 Excommunication toucheth them only who profess themselves members of the Church, 133 The different manner of discipline exercised by Ecclesiastical Commissioners: several instances in divers persons set down, 134, 135, 136 The Articles objected by her Majesty's High Commissioners for causes Ecclesiastical against G. B. of B. and F. B. of B. in the County of L. with observations on the Bishop's proceed, 1637. 138, 139, 140, 141. with a Copy of the Archbishops Letter and answer from the Bishop to that Letter. The Argument concerning the bringing in of Aristocracy into the Church answered, 143 Prelacy either oligarchy or tyrannine, 144 It is to be feared, lest by the examples of the Prelate's oligarchy be brought into the Commonwealth, and therefore a caution is put in against it, 145 The government of the Church by Prelates is not Monarchical, 145 If it be so, than the government by Pastors may be so too, 145 No cause for the Monarch to fear Aristocracy in Church government, 147 Pastors disclaim to meddle in civil matters, 147 The people of England are rather possessed with the sense of Democracy and Aristocracy, 148 The manner of Policy by Pastors and Elders in the Church is agreeable to the government in the Commonwealth, but the government by Prelacy is disagreeable, 149 The answer of an Italian Bishop being asked, vis ne Episcopari? And the answer of an English Bishop having obtained his Congedelier, 149, 150 The manner of administration of justice spiritual in the Church by Prelacy, 150 The administration of justice spiritual by Pastors and Elders agreeable to the execution of civil justice in the Commonweal 151 No matters of justice civil administered by one alone in the Commonwealth, 150, 152. Several ordinances set down in several Courts how they proceed, 152, 153, 154. The Government of the Church ought not to be by one alone, 155, 156. Several ordinances thereof, in the same pages. No exception to be taken against Lay Elders to be authorized by the King in every Parish, since the King authorizeth Lay Elders in Ecclesiastical commission, 157 Discipline of excommunication exercised by one Lay Elder, and one Ecclesiastical Elder, an instance of this discipline set down, 157, 158 The King hath as good right to command excommunication to be exercised by a Pastor and Elders, as the Bishops have to commit the same to a Curate, and one Lay Elder, 159 Lay men appointed by the Queen's injunctions to execute some part of discipline, 160 Every Minister ought to minister the discipline of Christ in his own cure by consent of Parliament, 161 The Minister by promise bindeth himself to minister the discipline of Christ, 162 The not disposing in particularity, all rites and ceremonies of discipline doth not hinder the exercise of discipline by the Minister 163 To what persons the discipline of Christ by Scripture is committed, and whether the persons be arbitrable or no, 164, 165 A Bishop, Pastor, and Elder, and our L. Bishop differ, 165. and what a L. Bishop is. No Lord Bishop called L. Pastor, Pastoral authority of a L. Bishop and of other Pastors is equal, 166 Whether a L. Bishop minister the doctrine, Sacraments, and Discipline of Christ by virtue of his Lordly Episcopal or Pastoral office, 166 Lordly Episcopality authorised only by the Realm, 167 If the L. Bishop have power to minister Discipline by divine right, than no more can he commit that his power to an other, than he can commit the power which he hath of preaching to another, 168 Whether L. Bishops, by Pastoral Authority may excommunicate a Pastor, 169. Pastors over small Flocks are as truly Pastors as Pastors over great Flocks, 169. As great parity between Pastors and Pastors, as between Apostles and Apostles, 169 Not only Kings of great kingdoms, but also Kings of small kingdoms be true Kings, 170. Rural Deans in Cheshire, etc. use some part of Episcopal power, 171 Episcopal power to excommunicate granted by papal privileges, or prescribed Use, 171. Power to excommunicate, if it be of divine right, may not be prescribed, 171. No more pre-eminence given to a Bishop than to a Minister, or to a Layman, in some places, for the use of Excommunication, 172 AN ASSERTION FOR True and Christian church-policy: Wherein certain politic Objections made against the planting of Pastors and Elders in every Congregation, are sufficiently answered. And wherein also sundry projects are set down, how the Discipline by Pastors and Elders may be planted, without any derogation to the KING'S Royal Prerogative, etc. ADMONITION. THE reason that moveth us, not to like of this Pag. 79. platform of Government, is, that when we, on the one part, consider the things that are required to be redressed; and on the other, the state of our Country, People, and Common weal, we see evidently that to plant those things in this Church, will draw with it so many and so great alterations, of the state of Government, and of the Laws, as the attempting thereof, might bring rather the overthrow of the Gospel among us, than the end that is desired, ASSERTION. THe benefit of all exceptions, and advantages, to the invalidity, uncertainty, imperfections, and insufficiency, of this admonitory bill, and matters therein contained, always saved; for answer to so much as concerneth this clause, and every other clause, and article, of the bill hereafter following, and without that, that there is any matter, or thing, in the same bill of admonition material, to be answered unto, and not herein, or hereby sufficiently answered, confessed, and avoided, traversed and deemed is true, in such manner and form, as in the same is set forth, and declared; the defendant is ready to aver, maintain, and prove his answer, as shall please the King, to award, and to command. And therefore he most humbly beseecheth the King, if it please the King, and that he have found favour in his sight, that his exceptions may be admitted, and read, and that his counsel, learned in the law, may be heard, and suffered to speak. This platform of government, intended by the admonitor, not to be liked of in this place, is that platform of Church government, Book of Com. Pray. tit. Commination. Homil. 2. part. of the right use of the Church. Admo. pag. Whitgift p. 654. M. Nowell in his Cate. M. Calvin. M. junius. Look Peti. to her excellent Majesty, p. 11. by Pastors and Elders which the Book of Common Prayer, the Doctrine of the Church of England do highly command, and which he himself Master D. Whitgift, now Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, and very many other (c) reverend Divines of our age, do publicly confess in their writings, to have been practised by the Apostles, and Primitive Church. From whence it followeth that the government of the Church, by Archbishops, Bishops, Suffragans, Archdeacon's, Deacons, Chancellors, Commissaries and officials, now already planted and liked of, was not practised by the Apostles and Primitive Church. And therefore for my part, I cannot, but marvel, that a disciple of the Apostles Doctrine, and a successor in the Apostles Chair, should be drawn to humane reasons, not to like of the Apostles government, nor to tread in the steps of the Primitive Church. For seeing the same is acknowledged by himself to be the first ways to be the old and ancient way, as being the Apostles way, why jer. 6. 16. should we not walk therein, as in the only good and perfect way? The reverend Bishops will not deny, that the Apostles, and Primitive Church for their manner of government, had the mind of Christ, and that we should follow the Apostles, as having them for examples, because they were the followers of Christ. Again they cannot but grant, that the manner of government, practised by the Apostles and Primitive Church, is written within the book of the covenants of grace. All which notwithstanding we see in this place, that from the new Testament, from the Articles of grace, from the law, from the testimony, from the example of the Apostles, and from the mind of Christ, we are addressed and turned over to our state of government, to our country, to our people, to our Common weal, and to our Laws. But this turning of devises shall it not be esteemed, as the Potter's clay? Isa. 29. 16. But (saith he) to plant those things in this Church, which are required to be redressed, might bring rather the overthrow of the Gospel, than the end, that is desired. Indeed (say I) if this might be as soon proved, as it was soon said, the case might have gone well with him. But this parable is so dark, that (unless it be opened) there is no light at all to be seen in it. For he well knew, that in stead of the government practised by the Apostles and Primitive Church, the jurisdiction of Archbishops, Bishops, Suffragans, Deacons, Archdeacon's, Chancellors, Commissaries, and Officials, is already planted in this Church; And he was not ignorant also that the same jurisdiction only, and none other, is required to be redressed. Now than if request be made, that this manner of government be redressed, how can it evidently be seen that to plant that manner of government, might bring rather the overthrow of the Gospel than the end that is desired? But it may be that he meant more lightsomely than he spoke. Yea let it be, that he intended thus: viz. to unplant that, which is now planted, and to plant those things, which are yet unplanted (by reason of many and great alterations) might bring rather an overthrow of the Gospel, than the end that is desired; well (I say) be it so, that he thus meant. How is this thing evidently seen, or how can it evidently be proved? The best sight, that the servant of Christ can have, is faith. For Faith is an evidence of things which are not seen. This overthrow Heb. 11. then of the Gospel, not being seen with his bodily eyes, must needs be intended to have been seen with the eyes of his faith, But where is the word of Christ, whereupon the eyes of his faith were fixed? If then he hold no word of faith, then of necessity was his evident sight, but an evident fancy. And in deed what else could it be? For what other thing is there desired, to be planted in this Church, but only the Apostolical government of Christ? And what other Gospel could he evidently see, that might be overthrown by holding forth this sceptre, but only the Apostolical doctrine of Christ? A marvellous strange and unkind sight, (I trow) to be seen, that the Apostolical Government could no sooner be planted, but that the Apostolical doctrine must needs be rooted up. That Christ by his own sceptre, were not able to maintain his own grace, by his own order, should weaken his own oath, or by his own sword, should cut from the people of God, his own Word. But seeing it was his purpose to persuade the people unto a dislike of the Apostolical government, by arguments and reasons drawn from humane policy, rather than to confirm them in a good opinion of the Prelatical Government, by proofs taken from the authority of holy Scripture, we will follow him in this his vein. Yea, and by the help of God, we will try of what efficacy, such his politic and humane reasons may be, as wherewith he did assay, to dissuade the people from consenting unto any other manner of Church Government, than is already settled among us. The general effect of all which, both here and else where spoken of, by him briefly gathered, is this: Such things may not be plan●ed in the Church of England, as by attempting, the planting whereof, there is an evident sight, that the Gospel among us, may be overthrown. But there is an evident sight, that the Gospel among us, may be overthrown, by attempting, to plant that Government in the Church of England, which was practised by the Apostles and the Primitive Church, Therefore that manner of Government may not be planted. The assumption of which syllogism, he endeavoureth to confirm thus, whatsoever will draw with it, many, and great alterations of the state of Government, and of the laws, the same may bring rather the overthrow of the Gospel, than the end that is desired: but the planting of the Government practised by the Apostles and Primitive Church, will draw with it, many and great alterations, of the state of Government, and of the laws. Therefore the planting of this manner of government may rather bring an overthrow of the Gospel, etc. If any shall object that by thus gathering his argument, I had in this place falsified his argument, by adding more, than is here expressly uttered by him: let such one understand, that this charge is but a mere and needless cavil. For since both here, and throughout his book, his intent was to dispute for the government already received, against the government, which is required, to be planted, in the Church: And for so much also, as none other government, is required to be planted, but that only Government, which was practised, by the Apostles and Primitive Church, it must necessarily follow, that the arrows which he shot against the government required to be planted, were shot only against the government which was practised by the Apostles, and the Primitive Church. And therefore there can be no just charge of any falsification; used in the gathering of his arguments. Against which I argue as followeth: Whatsoever will draw with i● no alterations of the state of Government, and but few, or small alterations of the laws, the same may rather bring the end, that is desired, viz. a godly peace, and Christian unity both in Church and Common weal, than the overthrow of the Gospel among us. But the planting of the government practised by the Apostles and Primitive Church, will draw with it no alteration, of the state of government, and but few or small alterations of the laws. Therefore the planting of the Government practised by the Apostles, and Primitive Church, may rather bring the end that is desired, viz, a godly peace and Christian unity, both in Church and Common weal, than the overthrow of the Gospel among us, The truth of which argument will then appear, when the Admonitors argument shall be convinced of error: for the disproof of the one, is the proof of the other, and if his fall, then cannot this but follow. And touching the invalidity of the first proposition, of his second syllogism, we affirm, that the alterations, of the state of government, and of the Laws (be they never so many and never so great) can never bring any overthrow of the Gospel, if the same alterations, be made, for the planting of the Gospel. For the laws once altered, can overthrow nought, because they are then no more laws. And to say, that the Gospel once planted by authority of new laws, can be overthrown by the same laws, is more absurd. For the new laws give life to the entertaining of the Gospel, by means whereof, the Gospel, can not discontinue, so long as those laws continue. And hereupon also it followeth, that no alteration of laws, for sweeping, and cleansing of the Church, for casting, and whipping buyers and sellers, and choppers of Churches, out of the Church, can overthrow the Gospel. For if all dross, filth, and corruption, be cast out; if all lets, and impediments, be done away, it cannot be but that the Gospel, must needs have a freer, and larger passage, as whereunto a wider door can not be, but opened, for the bringing in of a more plentiful harvest. And if the Church be beautiful as Tyrsa, and Sol. song. 6. 3, 4 comely as jerusalem, if she look as the morning, If she be fair as the Moon, pure as the Sun, and terrible as an army, then is she set as a seal on the Lord's heart, and as a signet upon his arm, and then shall the coals of his jealousy be as fiery coals, and as a vehement flame, that much water shall never quench it, nor any floods ever drown it. But if he should rather mean, that the alterations of the state of government, should be so many and so great, as that thereupon he did strongly imagine, evidently to see the overthrow of the Gospel, than we say that no state of government, can ever undergo, either many, or few, either small, or great alterations, unless by alteration of laws made by the same state of Government, the same state of government be altered. Now than if our politic state of government, (whereof he must needs speak, for otherwise his speech were to no purpose) to amend and reform abuses in itself, may justly put itself under the yoke of a new law, (as it hath done, and daily doth unto many new laws) and so in this respect, after a sort, in some part alter itself (for every reformation is a kind of alteration) without any damage, hazard, or prejudice to itself, if (I say) this may well be so, what a silly skare-crow, is there here, brought into the field, to fray our politic state of government, for attempting a reformation in the Church? Belike he knew some to feign, that our state of government, must necessarily fancy whatsoever they fancy. And namely, that a reformation of the Church, cannot but infer a desolation of the State: or that the State cannot be well ordered except it suffer the Church to be disordered: or that the Church could not be fair, well favoured, and in good plight, but the state of our Country, people and common weal, must be foul, ill favoured and out of heart; or lastly that the State cannot lance, bind, draw, and heal up the sores, wounds, and contagions of the Church, but it must withal fester, infect and poison itself. All which, how unsavoury and void of all sense it is, I leave to the judgement, both of the state, and of the Church. For who seethe not, but that the state of politic government, may wholly alter the state of Church government, and not so much as alter one lest jot of the politic state of government itself? Besides, since our state of politic government, hath in our days and before our eyes, repealed very many old laws, and disavowed sundry ancient customs, to entertain, and harbour the Gospel, must our state of politic government, no sooner now attempt to repair certain breaches, made into the vineyard, but it must straight ways, root up, that which it hath planted, and pull down that, which it hath builded? He that diggeth about, and dungeth, he that spreadeth and pruneth the roots and branches of a Tree, doth he not rather quicken, than kill the root? And doth he not rather cause the boughs to sprought, than the body to whither? Can seven times trying, and fining of Gold, breed a canker in Gold: or may a River be dreined dry, by one who shutteth not, but openeth the Springs? The body of a corpulent, and diseased man, the more it is purged, the more full of health it is, and of better constitution. And how then can it be concluded, that the Gospel, the life and soul of the Church, can languish, and give up the ghost, when the Church for the better preservation of her health, shall receive by some new and wholesome law, some new and wholesome purgative receit? Moreover, forsomuch as here is mention made, how the publishers of this Book, did consider on the one part, of things that were required to be redressed, and on the other side, of things required to be planted, together with the state of our Country, People, and Common weal, it is plain, that their resolution was rather still to continue things amiss, in the Church unredressed, than to plant the things required, to be planted. And alas, what a resolution was that among pillars and Fathers (for so they will be counted) of the Church? Especially, when as the things required to be redressed, were required to be redressed at the hands of the whole state of government, that is, at the hands of the Queen, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons in open Parliament assembled. And could any damage (I pray you) have ensued to the state of Government, to the state of the Queen, to the state of our Country, People, Common weal, and Laws, or to the state of the Gospel, if things amiss in the Church, had been redressed, and things wanting in the Church, had been planted by so high, and supreme a power? I trow not. Nay seeing our Country, People, and common weal, not only once, and twice, and thrice, but many times, have humbly and earnestly prayed, and solicited in open Parliament, a redress of things amiss in the Church, is it not most evident, that things were not considered aright but amiss by these Fathers of the Church? And that the considerers by keeping things unplanted, rather aimed at their own profit, honour, and dignity, than that our Country, People, and Common weal, should far the better, by having things amiss, to be redressed▪ The considerers then being themselves parties, yea and such parties as by whom things were carried amiss, in the Church, and whose defects only were required to be redressed: no marvel (I say) if they used all kind of artificial advisement and consideration, to keep things still unplanted, by the planting whereof their own unfatherly miscarriages, must have been reform. On the other side, if things required to be planted, might indeed be once planted, howsoever happily our former Church officers, might be somewhat male-contented, and discouraged, to have their superfluities pared, and the edge of their swords abated, yet is there no least cause at all, for our Country, people, and Common weal to fear any trouble, or hurly burly among us. For if the hand of God be in Judah, so that he give the people one heart, to do the commandment 2 Chron. 30 12. of the King, and of the Rulers, according to the word of the Lord, and if the King, the Nobles and Commons shall condescend and agree in one, and if their voices shall be all, but as the voice of one man, to allow and approve that, which doth touch and concern them all, then shall neither the Nobles have any occasion to disdain the Commons, nor the Commons any reason to envy the Nobles. Much less can the Nobles be at variance with the Nobles, nor the Commons be at defiance with the Commons. For they be all of them so prudent, and so provident, as that they will not by't one another, lest they should be devoured one of the other. And in deed, why should any of our Clergie-Masters be so void of judgement, as to deny the Nobles and Commons, after four and forty year's experience, of a most prosperous peace, waiting upon the Gospel, to be now grown so uncircumspect and simple witted, as that a reformation of disorders to be made by their consents in others, should bring forth a confusion in themselves? What? will they bicker one with the other, will they beat, and buffet one another, when there is no cause of disagreement, or variance between them? For they shall be sure to lose neither liberty, nor dignity; they shall endanger neither honour, nor profit. Our Nobles shall be tres-noble still, they shall be Princes and Captains over our people: They shall be Deputies and Precedents in our public Weal: They shall be Peers, and Ancients of the Kingdom: their Privileges, Prerogatives, Preeminences, styles, ensigns, and titles of prowesle, and honour, shall not be razed, defaced, or diminished. But they shall (as they may and aught) remain and continue whole, and inviolable, both to them, and their posterities, throughout their generations. Our Judges, Justices, and Lawyers, shall have and enjoy their authorities, credits, and reputations, as in ancient times. They shall be recorders of our Cities, Towns, and Boroughs: They shall be Stewards of King's Leets and lawdays. Our Knights, Esquires and Gentlemen, shall still be Burgesses in Parliaments, and Conservators of the King's peace: they shall be Assistants to examine and repress thefts, rapines, murders, robberies, riots, routs, and such like insolences. yea they shall be our Spokesmen, and our Dayes-men, to arbitrate and compose, striffes' and debates between neighbour and neighbour. Our common people, they without disturbance, shall quietly and peacably, retain and enjoy (as in former ages) their immunities, franchises and liberties, as well abroad as at home, as well in their houses, as in their fields. They shall possess their tenancies without ejection, they shall be inheritors without expulsion, as well to the laws, liberties, and customs, as to the lands and possessions of their Ancestors. They shall not be compelled to go to warfare upon their own costs, they shall not be tried, arraigned, or condemned, by foreign power, or by foreign Laws. There shall no husbandry, no clothing, no handicraft, no mariner, no merchandise, no laws of the Land, no manner of good learning whatsoever in School, College, or University, be decreased or laid aside. Wherefore the Admonitor toying neversomuch; howsoever he hath made his flourish, and cast about with his May bees, his, I fear, his prey God, his yfes, and his andes, howsoever (I say) it pleased him to trifle with these gew gawes; yet shall none ever be able, to prove by any proofs drawn from the holy Scripture, or humane reason, that any hindrance, indignity, or encumbrance can ever betid our Nobles, our Commons, the state of our Country, People, Laws, or Commonweal, if the state of Church-governement, were translated from Archbishops, Bishops, Archdeacon's, Chancellors, Commissaries, and Officials, (which are officers in the house of God, only according to the commandments and traditions of men) unto the government practised by the Apostles and primitive Church, which they cannot deny, but must confess to have been according to the holy pleasure of God. Nay our Nobles, and our Commons, are most assured to be so far from being endamaged, or dosing aught hereby, as hereby they shall purchase that unto themselves, which never yet any oppugner of so good and holy a cause, could attain unto. Namely, they shall seal up unto their own souls, infallible testimonies of good and sincere consciences: testimonies (I say) of their fidelities unto God, testimonies of their allegiance unto him, by whom they have been redeemed, and testimonies of love, and compassion unto the whole Church of God. Nay further, our Commons shall be so fare from bringing a-dammage upon themselves, as they shall marvellously benefit the mselves. First by purchasing unto themselves, a large immunity from many foul and great grievances, and exactions of money imposed and levied upon them, by Officers and Deputies of Arehbishops, Bishops, Archdeacon's, etc. Secondly, by having the Lord Christ, whose cause they undertake, and whose glory they advance, to be a friend unto their friends, and an enemy unto their enemies. And if our Nobles, and our Commons, be all hushed, if they be all at sleep, at peace and at rest, we may cast away all fear, and be past all doubt, that the King can not, but holily recreate and solace himselve, and that his grey hairs, whensoever they shall come, shall never be brought to the grave, in sorrow, but in a good and perfect age, and peace But happily it may be replied, that some of our Nobles, and most of our `` Commons, be so backwardly affected of the truth of Religion, Pag. 79. as that rather they would turn head upon the Gospel, than Pag. 79. brook an alteration of archiepiscopal, Episcopal, and archidiaconal Church government. In deed if a reformation of the state of the Clergy were attempted by any other means, than by public tractation and consent of Parliament, I could not but lean unto this opinion, that the attempting thereof might bring an overthrow to the attempters. Because the same attempt, should be dishonourable to the name of God, as being contrary to the form of doctrine received. But since things amiss are required to be redressed by the King and Parliament alone, this objection is altogether vain and frivelous, and is already sufficiently convinced, by that peaceable agreement between Nobles and Commons, before remembered. But let us wade a little deeper, and search a little more narrowly into every vein, creek, and corner of this supposition. And let us see, by what manner of persons this pretenced overthrow of the Gospel might be wrought. All carnal, sensual, and earthly men, either whose belly is their No fear that profane men will overthrow the Gospel. god, or whose God is this world, all such men (I say) as in every age, be of Domingoes religion, namely, just and jump, of that religion, which the King and State profess, they are so fare from attempting aught, to overthrow the Gospel, as under the shadow of the name thereof, they will evermore crowd, and cover their carnality and profaneness. For they being evermore of every religion, and so indeed of no religion, and passing not whether our Saviour Christ, or belial be their God, sing as the Poet singeth; Ais? Aio: Negas? Nego: beck and bow, cap and knee, to whatsoever the State and Law commands. If the King be a gospeler, the Gospel, the Gospel, and naught else, but the Gospel shall be found to roll in their mouths. But let the Crown once turn, by and by, they have turned their Coats, and as weaher-cocks, with every puff of wind, are huffed about. Whatsoever order or manner of government be planted or displanted in the Church, the same shall be no corosive to them. It shall never stick in these men's stomaches, neither will they lay it to their hearts. The King and the Counsel is wise enough, and know what they have to do well enough. They will not be more forward, nor wiser than the Prince, they will not check and control the whole Realm. They cannot brook these busy bodies, and meddlers in matters above their reach. They will be none of these new fangled and precise fools; they will not be backward, and come behind the law, as the Papists do; neither will they be too forward, and run before the law, as the Puritans do. But they will behave themselves in all things, and at all seasons, as discreet and politic Protestants ought to do, conforming and submitting themselves always to all order and authority of the Queen's book, and laws settled. Yea and though they be not book learned, nor any pen Clerks, yet they believe well. And therefore they will go to the Church, and say a few prayers, yea, and they will receive the Sacrament at Easter, as devoutly as the best precisian of them all. All these Atheists and godless men, being neither hot nor cold, neither fish nor flesh, nor good red herring, plant what plants you will, and sow what seeds you list, yea make what ditch, hedge, pale, wall, or sense you please, they set cock upon hoop, and pass not a button for it; every season, be it wet, or be it dry; every kind of land, be it clay, or be it sand; every furrow, be it broad, or be it narrow, be it deep or be it shallow, pleaseth these medley coats alike. They are like unto jacobs' Ewes, which having streaked and party coloured rods laid before them in the gutters, at a ramming time, brought forth none other but party coloured Lambs. And therefore they will never stir hand nor foot, nor once step over a straw to work any Admonitory protestants by their own doctrine, ought not to bind the Church, to a perpetual government of prelacy. least annoyance to the Gospel. It is good sleeping always, for these men in a whole skin: And not much unlike to these party coloured sleepers, are the admonitory protestants. For they, as the duty of faithful subjects do bind them, living in a state of the Church reform, and having liberty in external government, and other outward orders to choose such as they think, in wisdom and godliness, to be most convenient for the state of their country, and disposition of the people, and having the consent of their godly Magistrates, to that outward form of jurisdiction, and deciding of Ecclesiastical causes, these kind of protestants, (I say) always blowing out the trumpet of obedience, and crying an alarm of loyalty to every ordinance of man, and gravely, wisely, and stoutly demeaning themselves against all the giddy heads, and fanatical schismatics, and wrangling spirits of our age, dare not (I trow) slip the collar nor cast off the yoke, dare not push with the horn, nor wince with the heel against the Gospel; If so be by the authority of our Christian King, with the consent of his Parliament; the platform of govern- (as he saith) devised by some of our neighbour Churches, but (as we and they themselves confess) practised by the Apostles and Primitive Church, might be received and established, to be the best and fittest order of government, for the Church of England, as well as it hath been a long time, and yet is of Scotland, and of most of all other Christian Churches. For if it be too great a bridle of Christian liberty (as they say) in things external, to cast upon the Church of Christ, a perpetual commandment, and if the Church have free liberty to make choice of what government soever, she thinketh convenient, then is she neither restrained at her pleasure, to forsake that which by long experience she hath found to be inconvenient, neither is she tied still to retain archiepiscopal, Episcopal, and archidiaconal government, though for a long season the same have been used. For that indeed might well and justly be said, be too to great a bridle of Christian liberty, when by necessity there is cast upon the Church, such a perpetual regiment of prelacy, as may not be removed. Wherefore if our continued Prelatical discipline, whereby the liberty of the Church is taken away, by public authority of the King and States might be discontinued, and liberty granted to the Church, to use the Apostolical discipline, either our admonitory Protestants must yield, stoop, and obey, or else be found to be a way ward, a contentious and a ●romple generation. And if these two former kinds of our people (which the land being divided into five parts make three at the least) shall every way be supporters of unity, and conformity, to the Gospel, and no way disturbers of the peace, liberty and tranquillity of the Church, what overthrow, or what damage may the Gospel sustain by the other parts? Yea though they should unite, link and confederate themselves in one. For are they not weaker in power, poorer in purse, and of fare less reputation than the former? And yet nevertheless, these parts are at such deadly feud one against the other, and at such an irreconcilable enmity between themselves, that the case standeth now between them, as sometimes it stood with Caesar and Pompey, not whether of them, should reign, but whether of them should live. And how then can these parts thus divided, possibly agree together, against the other parts, so surely combined? Besides, the first sort of these two sorts, whom it pleaseth our Protestants, Puritan protestants, can never overthrow the Gospel. the Admonishers, for difference sake to dubb with the Knight's Hood of Precisians, or precise and puritan Protestants. Why? They are the only and principal spokesmen and petitioners for the Apostolical Discipline, required to be planted. Nay these men, out of the holy Scriptures, so resolutely are persuaded, of the truth of God, contained therein, as without which, they know perfectly that the doctrine of the Gospel can never powerfully flourish, or be entertained with so high a Majesty in the hearts of men, as it ought to be. The Gospel hath overthrown the papist, therefore he can never overthrow the Gospel. And as for the other sort, (the Papists I mean) alas that poor rat, what overthrow can he work to the Gospel, whose bane the Gospel hath wrought so long since? Alas this faint ghost is so fare spent; his disease grown so desperate, and his sickness, now at such an hay-now-hay, as all the physic of all the Physicians in the world, can not recover his health, or once take away his headache. This silly snake, then having hissed out all his sting, spit out all his venom, and ungorged himself of all his poison, how can his skin, or how should his tail annoy the Gospel? If therefore it might please the Admonishers, upon a revew of our State, our country, and our people, to cast such men, as be open enemies to the Gospel, into squadrons, causing them to march rank by rank, and troop by troop and delivering unto the King, a muster roll, of all the names, qualities and conditions of the principal popish recusants within the Realm (for none but such only can be suspected openly to band themselves against the Gospel) it is not to be doubted, but the least part of all the other four parts would be as great in number, as these. And what then should the King and State fear the multitudes of Recusants, when one standing on the King's side, should be able to withstand ten; and ten an hundred; and hundred a thousand; and a thousand ten thousand papists. King Asa 2 Chron. 14. crying unto the Lord his God, that it was nothing with him, to help with many or with no power, and resting upon the Lord, overcame ten hundred thousand, and three hundred chariots, of the Ethiopians, and Labimes. For the eyes of the Lord behold all the earth, to show himself strong with them, that are of a perfect heart toward him: And when King Joash remembered not the kindness which 2 Chron. ●4 jehoiada the Priest had done unto him, but slew Zechariah his son, the Lord delivered the King, and a very great Army into the hands of a small company of the host of the King of Aram, who gave sentence against the King, slew all the Princes of judah from among the people, and carried the spoil of them unto Damascus. And thus much concerning the Admonitors proposition, viz. Whatsoever will draw with it many and great alterations of the state of Government, and of the laws, the same may bring rather the overthrow of the Gospel, than the end that is desired; All which speech of his I affirm to be but a vain and trifling riddle, as the whole strength whereof resteth only upon a may be. Whereunto if I should only have spoken thus, and no more, viz. that many and great alterations, etc. might rather not bring an overthrow of the Gospel, etc. I suppose, and that upon good ground, that such (may, might not be) might every way be as forcible, to disprove the one, as his (may be) can any way be pregnant to prove the other. And touching his assumption, viz. but the planting of the government, practised by the Apostles and Primitive Church, will draw with it many and great alterations, of the state of government and of the Laws: If in this place he understood, the state of Church government, and of the Laws Ecclesiastical now in use, then is the proposition true. And yet notwithstanding we avow, the Gospel to be so fare from incurring any overthrow by such an alteration, as thereby it is certain, that the same shall more and more flourish, and be perpetually established: by reason that this alteration should be made from that which by long experience, is known to be corrupt, unto that which is known by the holy Scriptures, to be pure and sincere. From a government (I say) and Laws authorized, by tradition, and commandments of man alone, to a policy and laws founded and descended, by and from God himself. But if the Admonitor, by the assumption meant to inform us, that the planting of the Apostolical government will draw with it many and great alterations, of the temporal state of government, and of the temporal laws, statutes, or customs of the Kingdom: then as before The planting of the Apostolical government will draw no alteration of the Laws of the realm with it. to his first, so now also to his second, I answer negatively: and affirm, that the planting of the said Apostolical government, will not draw with it any the least alteration, of any part, of that temporal state of government, nor almost of any one common statute, or customary law of the Land, which may not rather be altered, than retained. For this platform of government, we are able by the help of God, to defend the same generally, and for the most part, to be most agreeable, and correspondent, to the nature, quality, disposition, and estate of our Country, People, Common weal, and Laws, as in our particular answers, to his particular reasons shall more at large appear. In all new, and extraordinary alterations, it is not only requisite to abolish all bad opinions out of the minds of those that know not the drift of the enterprisers, but it is also necessary, that the defence of such alterations, be made forcible against the opposition of all gainsayers: we will descend to the particulars, and join issue with the Admonitor. And upon all allegations, exceptions, witnesses, and records to be made, sworn, examined, and produced out of the holy Scriptures, and Laws of the Land already settled, on the behalf of our cause, before our Sovereign Lord the King, his Nobles, and Commons in Parliament, we shall submit ourselves and our cause to the King's Royal, and most Christian judgement. In the mean time, we aver that not only the former clause of this admonitory bill, but that all other clauses following in the same bill, for the invalidity, insufficiency, indignity, and nullity of them, are to be thrown out and dismissed from the King's Court, especially for that the particulars opened by the Admonitor, can not serve for any reasonable warning, to induce the common people, to rely themselves upon his, I am of opinion, to the which we plead at bar as followeth. ADMONITION. First (saith he) the whole State of the Laws of the Realm will be Page 77 altered. For the Canon Law must b● utterly taken away, with all Offices to the same belonging; which to supply with other Laws and functions, without many inconveniences, would be very hard: the use and study of the civil Law, will be utterly overthrown. ASSERTION. When by a common acceptance and use of speech, these words (whole State of the Laws of the Realm) are understood of the Common and statute laws of the Realm, that is to say of the King's temporal Canon and civil Laws no part of the Laws of the Realm, but only by sufferance. laws, and not of Canon or Civil laws, it cannot follow, that the whole state of the Laws of the Realm should be altered, though the Canon and Civil Laws, with all offices to the same belonging, should be utterly taken away and be wholly overthrown. For no more could the Admonitor prove, the Canon or Civil Law, at any time heretofore, to have been any part of the Laws of this Realm, otherwise than only by ` a 25. H. 8. C. 21. in the preamble. sufferance of our Kings, acceptance, long use and custom of our people) than can any man prove a parsley-bed, a rosemary-twigge, or an ivie-branch, to be any part of the scite of the Castle of Farnham: And therefore he might aswell have concluded thus, the whole scite of the Castle of Farnham will be transposed: for the Boxetrees, the Heythorne Arbours, and the Quickset hedges planted within the Castle-garden must be removed and cast away: which were but a proof provelesse, and a reason reasonless. If then by the abrogation of the Canon or Civil Law, scarce any one part of the laws of this Realm should be changed, what reason have we to think that the whole state of the laws of the Realm must be altered? Besides, to conclude the whole, by an argument drawne ab enumeratione partium, and yet not to number the tenth part, (of such parts as were to be numbered) is, I am sure, neither good logic nor good law. Moreover if all the Canon-law, (I mean all the Papal and foreign Canon Law, devised and ordained at Rome, or elsewhere without the Realm, and consequently all the Offices and functions to the same belonging) be already utterly taken away, what hope of reward can Civilians expect from the use of such things, as are within the compass of that law? or of what efficacy is this argument, to prove an alteration, of any part of the laws of this Realm, or that the study of the Civil Law should be utterly overthrown? For the whole state of the Laws, properly called the Laws of the Realm▪ hath stood and continued many years since the same Papal and Canon Law was abolished. An imbasement for civilians to have preferment by offices of the Canon law. The Canon law be abolished out of the realm and ought not to be used. And as touching the Civilians, for them to seek after preferments, by Offices and functions of the Canon Law, is an embasement of their honourable profession, especially since fare greater rewards might very easily be provided for them if once they would put to their helping hands, for the only establishment and practice of the Civil Law, in the principal causes now handled by them in the Courts called Ecclesiastical. But how may it be proved, that the Papal and foreign Canon law, is already taken away, and ought not to be used in England? For my part, I hearty wish, that some learned men in the Common Law, would vouchsafe to show unto the King and Parliament, their clear knowledge in this point. In the mean season, I shall not be negligent, to gather and set down, what (in mine understanding) the Statute-Law hath determined thereof. By the statute of submission, 25. Hen. 8. revived 1 Eliz. (as the very words and letter of the petition and submission of the Clergy, of the body of the law, and of the provisoes do import) the very true meaning and intent of the King and Parliament, is evident and apparent to be thus as followeth, and none other, viz. That such Canons, Constitutions, and Ordinances Synodall, or Provincial, which before that time were devised and ordained, or which from thenceforth should be devised or ordained by the Clergy of the Realm, being not contrariant or repugnant, etc. should only, and alonely be authorised, and to be put in ure, and execution. And consequently, that all Canons, Constitutions, and Ordinances Papal, and made by foreign power without the Realm, should wholly and utterly be abrogated, anulled, abolished and made of no value. The words touching the petition, and submission, mentioned in that Statute, in substance, are these: Where the King's humble and obedient subjects the Clergy, etc. have submitted themselves, and promised in verbo Sacerdotii, that they will never from henceforth presume No Canons provincial or other to be put in ure, therefore no papal canons in force. to attempt, allege, claim, or put in ure, any Canons, Constitutions, Ordinances, provincial or other, or enact, promulge, or execute any new Canons etc. And where also divers Constitutions, Ordinances, and Canons Provincial, or Synodall, which heretofore have been enacted, and be thought not only to be much prejudicial to the King's prerogative Royal, etc. the Clergy hath most humbly besought Canon's provincial, heretofore enacted, being prejudicial, are to be abrogated. the King's Highness, that the said Constitutions, and Canons, may be committed to the examination and judgement of his Highness, and of two and thirty persons of his subjects, etc. and that such of the said Canons, and Constitutions, as shall be thought and determined by the said 32. persons, or the more part of them, worthy to be abrogated, and No Constitutions, or Ordinances provincial or other canons to be alleged, therefore once they were all abolished. anulled, shall be abolite, and of no value: and such other of the same Constitutions, and Canons, as by the said 32. persons, etc. shall be approved to stand with the Laws of God, and consonant to the Laws of this Realm, shall stand in their full strength and power, etc. These are the words of the petition and submission, etc. the letter of the body of the Statute in effect is this: Be it therefore enacted, etc. That they, nor any of them, from henceforth shall presume to attempt, allege, claim, or put in ure, any Constitutions, or Ordinances The King and thirty two persons have no power to examine papal canons; therefore papal canons intended to be wholly abolished. Provincial, or Synodall, or any other Canons. And forasmuch as such Canons, Constitutions, etc. as heretofore have been made by the Clergy or this Realm, can not, &c, by reason of the shortness, etc. be it therefore enacted, etc. that the King's Highness, etc. shall have power, etc. and that the said 32. persons, etc. shall have power and authority to view, search, and examine the said canons, constitutions, etc. Provincial and Synodal heretofore made, and such of them as the King's Highness, etc. shall deem and adjudge worthy to be continued and kept shall be from henceforth kept, etc. and the residue of the said Canons, constitutions, and ordinances provincial, which the K. Highness, etc. shall never be put in execution within this Realm. These are the words of the body of the Law: the words of the Proviso are these: Provided Canon's provincial already made only on authorised by the proviso, therefore no papal Canons in force. that such Canons, Constitutions, Ordinances, and Synodals Provincial, being already made, which be not contrariant, etc. shall now still be used and executed, as they were before the making of this Act, till such time as they be viewed, searched, etc. by which words of the petition, body of the statute, and proviso, three things seem principally to be meant and intended. First an utter and absolute abolition of all Canons, Constitutions, Ordinances, and Synodals, before that time made by the Clergy within the Realm, or by any foreign power within the Realm whatsoever: Secondly a view, search, and examination of all Canons, Constitutions and Ordinances Provincial or Synodall before that time made by the Clergy within the Realm: And lastly, because the Church should not utterly be destitute of all Canons, etc. (Provincial or Synodall) a reestablishment, or reauthorisement of all such of the said Canon's Provincial or Synodall, as were not onerous to the people, contrariant or repugnant to the Laws, Statutes, or customs of the Realm, nor prejudicial to the King's prerogative Royal, was agreed upon, till the said Provincial Canons, etc. were viewed, searched, and examined. All Papal and foreign Canon Law then, before that time made without the Realm, being once inhibited, to be attempted, alleged, claimed, or put in ure, and by consequence annihilated, abolished and made void: unless the same be again revived and reestablished, remain frustrate and anulled still, and therefore ought not to be attempted, alleged, claimed, or put in ure. Besides, it is plain, that foreign and Papal Canon Law was never intended to be reauthorised, because the same Law was never committed to the view, search and examination of the King and 32. persons. The King therefore and 32 persons, by virtue of this act, not having any authority to view, search and examine any foreign Canon Law, though he and they, had deemed and adjudged any part of the same Law, worthy to have been continued, kept and obeyed, yet nevertheless had not the same been of any force or validity. For only such Canons, Constitutions, and Ordinances Provincial or Synodall (being not contrariant, onerous or prejudicial to the King, to the Laws, or to the people) were reestablished, as were committed. Besides, whereas about twenty years passed, divers Canons, Constitutions and Ordinances, as well Papal as Provincial, were alleged by him that collected an Abstract, against an unlearned ministry, against Dispensations for many benefices, against excommunication, and against Civil jurisdiction in Ecclesiastical persons: the answerer, in the behalf and maintenance of those abuses, challenged the author for not having proved his intent by law in force: affirming that Tit. pag. 1. & 2. The answerer unto the Abstract. proveth by his reasons the Papal Canon law now used to be abolished. the Canons and Laws by him alleged, were but pretended necessary and disused laws; that they were not inspired with the life of laws; that such were fathered for laws, as be not Laws; and that it remained by him to be discussed how many of them were to be called in truth, her Majesty's laws. The reason of all which his exceptions, he yields to be this: namely, that the Author ought to have proved them, not to have been repugnant to the customs of the Realm, but to have been in use and practice before the making of the act of submission. For he must prove (saith the Answerer) that they are not repugnant to the customs of this Realm, and show us how they have been used and executed here, before the making of the statute: yea he can say, that they are by law established among us. Which points saith he, because we learn by law, quod facta non praesumantur, matters in fact, are not intended to be done, until they be proved so: we must still put him to his proofs, and in the mean time say, that he hath gaped wide to say nothing to the purpose, and that in his whole book, he hath talked but not reasoned. All which asseveration of this Answerer, if the same be true, and, if this plea be a good averment to bar the Author from having proved a learned ministry to be commanded by the law; dispensations for many benefices to be unlawful, excommunication by one alone to be forbidden; and civil government to be unlawful in Ecclesiastical persons, then much more forcibly may this argument be retorted, upon all such as claim, allege and put in ure any portion of the foreign Canon Law. For since it hath never yet been proved, that the foreign Canon Law, used and executed at this day, was accustomed and used 25. H. 8. then because we learn by law (as he saith) quod facta non prae sumantur, we must still put him, and his clients to their proof, and in the mean while tell them, that their Advocate hath twisted for them but a bad thread, when by his reason he hath untwined all their laws, and broken a sunder the bands of their government. Moreover because it is not yet proved, that the foreign and Papal Canon Law is not contrariant nor repugnant to the Laws, statutes or customs of the Realm, nor derogatory to the prerogatives of the regal Crown; nay because the contradictory hereof is affirmed, and this denied: and because we learn by law (as he saith) that matters in fact, are not intended to be done till they be proved so, we must still put the upholders and executioners of this law, to their proof, and in the mean while tell them that the foreign and Papal Law, is but a pretended necessary and disused law, that it is not inspired with the life of Law, and that it is fathered by them to be such a Law, as is an headless, a fetherlesse and a nocklesse arrow which is not fit to be drawn, or shot against any subject of the King. And from this avoidance, abolition and nullity of foreign and papal Canon Law (because sublato principali, tolluntur accessoria) it followeth that all offices and functions of papal Archbishops, papal Bishops, papal Suffragans, papal Archdeacon's, papal Deans and Chapters, papal Priests, papal Deacons, papal Subdeacons', papal Chancellors, papal Vicar's general, papal Commissaries, and papal Officials, merely depending upon the authority, and drawn from the rules and grounds of that Law, are likewise annihilated, and of no value. Howbeit for so much as by the opinion of some learned Civilians, By the opinion of the Civilians, the papal Canon law seemeth to be in force. there seemeth unto them, a necessary continuance of the same foreign and papal Law, by reason that Archbishops, and Bishops do now lawfully (as they say) use ordinary archiepiscopal and Episcopal jurisdiction, which they could not (as they think) do, if the same common law were utterly abolished: and for so much also, as some learned in the Canon laws, do maintain, that since the statute Apology of certain proceed in Courts Ecclesiastical. of 1 Eliz. c. 1. the Archbishop and Bishop cannot lawfully claim any ordinary spiritual jurisdiction at all, but that the spiritual jurisdiction, to be exercised by them, aught to be delegated unto them from the King, by a Commission under the great Seal: Forasmuch (I say) as there are these differences of opinions, it seemeth expedient to be considered, by what law, and by what authority, Archbishops and Bishops exercise archiepiscopal and Episcopal power in the Church: And to the end this question may fully be known, and no scruple nor ambiguity be left, what power spiritual may be intended Power properly, and improperly called spiritual. Queen's Injunct. and execut. of justice. to be exercised by them: We distinguish spiritual power, into a power properly called spiritual; and into a power improperly or abusively called spiritual, There power properly called spiritual, is that spiritual power, which consisteth, and is conversant in preaching the Word; administering the Sacraments; ordaining and deposing Ministers, excommunicating or absolving; and if there be any other spiritual power of the like property and nature. Now that this power properly called Power properly called spiritual, was never in the Queen's person. spiritual, could have been drawn from the person of our late Sovereign Lady the Queen unto Archbishops and Bishops, we deny. For the Queen's Royal person, being never capable of any part of this spiritual power, how could the same be derived from her person unto them? Nemo potest plus juris in alium transfer, quam ipse habet. archiepiscopal and Episcopal power therefore, exercised in, and about these mysteries of our holy Religion, ordinarily and necessarily must belong unto the Archbishop and Bishop by the canon of the holy Scriptures; otherwise they have no power (properly called Power improperly called spiritual, is indeed but a temporal power. spiritual) touching these things at all. The power which improperly is called spiritual, is such a power, as respecteth not the exercise of any pastoral or ministerial Church, to the internal begetting of faith, or reforming of manners in the soul of man; but is such a power, as whereby public peace, equity, and justice is preserved, and maintained in external things, peculiarly appropried, and appertaining unto the persons, or affairs of the Church; which power indeed is properly a temporal or civil power, and is to be exercised only by the authority of Temporal and Civil Magistrates. Now then to return to the state of the point in Question touching this later power, improperly called spiritual, by what law, or by what authority the Archbishops and Bishops do exercise this kind of power in the Church: I answer that they cannot have the same, from any foreign Canon Law, because the same Law, with all the powers and dependences thereof is anulled: And therefore that this their power, must and aught to be derived unto them from Bb. where, From whence then is their power derived? Hereunto we answer, that (before the making of that act) spiritual jurisdiction did appertain unto Bishops, and that Bishops were ordinaries, aswell by custom of the Realm, canons, constitutions, and ordinances provincial and synodal, as by foreign canon law. And that therefore these canons, constitutions and ordinances provincial or synodal, according to Bishops remain ordinaries by custom, provincial Canons, & statute law, though papal Canon law be abolished. 25. h. 8. c, 20. 25. h 8. c ●6. the true intent of that act, could not still have been used and executed as they were before, if the Bishops had not still remained ordinaries. Moreover it is clear by two statutes, that the Archbishops and Bishops ought to be obeyed in all manner of things, according to the name, title, degree, and dignity, that they shall be chosen, or presented unto, and that they may do and execute, minister, use, and exercise all and every thing and things, touching or pertaining to the office or order of an Archbishop or Bishop, with all ensigns, tokens and ceremonies thereunto lawfully belonging, as any Archbishop or Bishop might at any time heretofore do, without offending of the prerogative royal of the Crown, and the laws and customs of this Realm. Let it be then that by custom, canons provincial and statute law, Bishops be and do remain ordinaries; yet aswell upon those words of the statute 25. H 8. without offending of the prerogative Royal, as upon the statute of 1. Eliz. cap. 1 there remaineth a scruple and ambiguity, whether it be not hurtful, or derogatory unto the King's Prerogative Royal; that Ordinaries should use and exercise their ordinary power (improperly called spiritual) without a commission under the great Seal, or that such their power should be as immoderate, and excessive now, as in times past it was by the Papal Canon law? Concerning the first, by the Statute of 1 Eliz. c. 1. and by the Statute of 8 Eliz. c. 1. the Queen was recognized to be in effect the Ordinary of Ordinaries, The Queen was supreme ordinary of ordination. that is the chief supreme and sovereign Ordinary over all persons, in all causes, aswell Ecclesiastical as Temporal. Where it seemeth to follow, that all the branches, and streams, aswell of that power which improperly is called spiritual, as of that power which properly is called temporal, should have been derived originally unto the Bishop from her Highness' person, as from the only head and fountain of all the same spiritual power within her Kingdoms, in such manner and form, and by such commission under the great Seal, as her H. temporal Officers, Justicers and Judges, had their authorities committed unto them. And to this opinion Master D. Bilson seemeth to accord. For all power Pag. 348. (saith he) is not only committed to the sword, which God hath authorised, but is wholly closed in the sword. Against the head, that it shall not be head, to rule and guide the feet, can be no prescription; by reason God's Ordinance, for the head to govern the body, is a perpetual and eternal law: and the usurpation of the members against it, is no prescription but a confusion, and the subversion of that order, which the Pag. 114. & 130. God of heaven hath immutably decreed and settled. Besides there resteth (saith the Remonstrance) unto the Bishops of this Realm, none other but subordinate, and delegate authority: and that the matter and heads wherein this jurisdiction is occupied, are by, and from the Christian Magistrates authority: In whom, as supreme Governor, all jurisdiction, within her Dominions, aswell Ecclesiastical as Civil, by Gods and man's law is invested, and their authority Ecclesiastical is but subordinate under God and the Prince, derived for the most part from the Prince. From which two Statutes and judgements of the gorernours of the Church contained in these two books (for these two 1 Eliz. c. 1 & 8 Eliz. c. 1. books were seen and allowed by the Governors of the Church) I leave it to be considered, if the Bishop did exercise the same improper and abusive spiritual power and jurisdiction Ecclesiastical only and alonely, in their own names, styles and dignities, and under their own seals of office, and that also by authority of foreign and Papal laws; if (I say) the Bishop did these things, after this and this manner, I leave it then to be considered, whether their exercise of such power were derogatory and prejudicial in a very high degree, to the prerogatives of the Royal Crown or not. For my part because I find by the foreign Canon Law, that Papal Bishops be the Pope's sons, and are privileged to carry the print and image of the Pope their father, namely, that they have plenitudinem potestatis within their Dioceses, as the Pope pretendeth Ex. de Major. & obe. to have power over the whole world: For quilibet ordinarius saith the same law in sua Dioecesi est major quolibet principe, and because also (notwithstanding whatsoever the B b. have written, that M. Bilson pag. 330. they were the Queens B b and had their authority derived unto them from the Queen) they did in her life time, put the same Papal Law in execution, and by the same law did take upon them, plenitudinem potestatis, within their Dioceses: I for my part (I say) can not as yet otherwise conceive, but that exceedingly ●hey did intrude themselves into the Royal preeminences, privileges, and prerogatives of the Queen. For by what other authority, than by a certain The Bb. by a plenary▪ power devised and promulged new Canons, without the Queen's assent. plenary power, did they in their own names, for the government of their several Churches within their several Dioceses, from time to time, make, promulge, and by virtue of men's corporal oaths put in execution, what new Canons, Injunctions, and Articles soever seemed good unto them, without any licence or confirmation from the Queen, first had and obtained thereunto? By which pretenced plenary power, it seemeth that the statute made to bring the Clergy in submission to the King, was covertly deluded, and our late Sovereign Lady the Queen, cunningly bereft of that regal authority, over every particular Diocesan, or Ordinary, which notwithstanding, by the Parliament was given unto her Highness, over the whole body and state of the Clergy. For if once there be no necessity of the King's licence, assent, or confirmation to such Articles, Canons, or Injunctions, as every Ordinary shall make within his jurisdiction, then must it be intended, that the Statute of submission hath covertly permitted, several members, severally to do, and to execute those things which apparently, and in express terms, the whole convocation was commanded, and with the same, in verbo sacerdotii, had promised, not to do: then the which what can seem more unreasonable and absurd? For than might all the Ordinaries join hand in hand, and agree all together in one, never in any of their convocations, assembled, by the King's Writ, to devise, make, or promulge any Canons Ecclesiastical at all. And what assent, licence, or confirmation from the King, could then be needful? Or how then was the Clergy, brought in submission to the King? For then, should it not be with them, as it is in the proverb; A threefold cord is not easily broken: but then should it be with them, contrary to the proverb; for they being all fast knit and bound together unto the King's authority, by a cord of twenty four threads, might easily be broken; but being severed and plucked asunder, into twenty four parts, one from the other, the 24 Bishops, can make no law with out leave, And ye● every B. doth make many laws King with all his regal power, might not be able so much as to break one of the least threads, wherewithal one of their cords was twisted. If the Lord Major, the Sheriffs, Aldermen, and whole commonalty of the City of London, should promise unto the King upon their fidelities, not to set any price upon Wines or other victuals, by their common Council, within the said City, unless the King under his privy signet, should first authorise them so to do, were it not a mere collusion of the King's meaning, if every particular Alderman, should set prices of such things in every particular ward? But against the collection made from the Statutes, 1 & 8 Eliz. and the judgement of the divines aforesaid, A collection made against the former reason by an Apology for sundry proceed. by jurisdi. ●●. pag. 5. the author of an Apology, to his understanding, reckoneth the same collection to be a very simple collection, and against the same, he answereth and reasoneth in effect thus. If (as is collected) all power spiritual, by a commission under the great Seal must be derived from the Queen, to warrant the execution of it unto him, that is, to exercise it; then must the like warrant be procured, for every temporal office, to execute his temporal office. But every temporal officer, must not procure like warrant to execute his temporal office. Therefore a Commission under the great Seal, must not be procured to warrant the execution, of the said spiritual power. The consequence of his major proposition being false, he laboureth notwithstanding to make the same good, and in effect for the same argueth thus: All temporal authority, as absolutely and as really, is revested in the person of the Queen, as is the said spiritual authority. Therefore as all spiritual Officers, for the execution of the said spiritual power; must have their authority, derived unto them from the person of the Queen under the great Seal, so likewise must all temporal officers, for the execution of their temporal offices, have the like commission. The consequence of which enthimeme followeth not, though the antecedent be true. For although as well all temporal, as all the said spiritual authority improperly so called, was really and absolutely in the person of the Queen; yet hereupon it followeth not, that by one and the self same means alone, and namely, by a commission under the great Seal, all temporal and the said spiritual power, in every part and branch thereof, should be drawn alike, from the Queen's person. For there be divers and sundry means, to derive temporal authority, whereas there seemeth to be but one only means to derive the said spiritual authority, and then mark the substance of the author's argument. Some temporal Officers, as Stewards of Leets, Constables, and sundry other Officers, must not draw their temporal authority from the Queen by a Commission under the great Seal. Therefore no spiritual Officers, as Archbishops, Bishops, Archdeacon's, and seed vacant, Deans and Chapters must draw any of their spiritual authority from the Queen by a Commission, etc. Which argument drawn from a particular affirmative, unto a general negative, what weakness it hath, every young Logician can discern. And as for Stewards of Leets, though they have no Commission Though all temporal officers draw not their power from the King by the great seal yet by one means or other withdraw it from the King. under the great Seal, yet for the execution of their Stewardships they have a Commission under the Seal of the Exchequer, Constables, Decennary or Tythingmen, and Thirdboroughs, have their authorities derived unto them from the King's person, by the very original and institution of their offices, Sheriffs of Countries, Coroners, Escheators, and Uerderors, have their offices and their authorities warranted unto them, by the King's writs out of the Chancery. But it was not the mind of the Lawmakers (saith the Author) that the Ordinaries, by a commission under the great Seal, should draw their said spiritual power from the Queen. What the minds of the Lawmakers were, touching this point, it mattereth little or nothing at all. Neither is it to purpose, whether a commission under the great seal, be necessarily required, or not required by virtue of that statute, 1 Eliz. c. 1. to warrant the said spiritual power unto Ordinaries. Only it sufficeth, that the Queen having all power, improperly called spiritual, invested in her Royal person, and being really and actually seized of all the said supreme spiritual authority, could not have any part of the same spiritual power drawn from her, but by some one lawful and ordinary means or other. For if this rule be true in every common person, quod meum est, sine mea voluntate à me auferri non potest; how much more doth the same rule hold, in the Royal prerogatives, rights, privileges, dignities, and supremities of a King? wherefore to say that all supreme and ordinary power (improperly called) spiritual, was really and actually inherent in the Royal person of the Queen, and to say also, that some of the same inferior, and ordinary power, not derived from the Queen, was nevertheless in the persons of inferior ordinaries, is as much to say, that some branches of a tree, may receive nourishment from elsewhere than from the root; that some members of the body, are not guided by the head; and that some streams, flow not from their fountains. And now to conclude this part, against the Canon Law, and their Offices and functions thereof, I dispute thus: The foreign and papal canon law, with all the accessories, dependences offices, and functions thereof, is utterly abolished out of the Realm: Therefore the same law is no part of the laws of the Realm; and therefore also it is evident, that there will not follow any alteration of the Laws of the Realm, by the taking of it away. Which Canon Law also, with other laws and functions, how easily the same without any inconveniences, may be supplied, shall (God willing) be presently made apparent, if first we shall answer to that challenge, which the state of Prelacy may seem to make for the continuance of their Lordly primacy, out of the words of the great Challenge for Lordly primacy, out of the great Charter, answered. Charter. Concerning which challenge, namely, that by the great Charter, Lordly archiepiscopal, and Episcopal primacy or jurisdiction belonging to the state of Prelacy, is belonging unto them: I demand unto what Church this great Charter was granted? And whether it were not granted unto the Church of God in England? The words of the Charter are these: Concessimus Deo, & h●c praesenti Mag. Charta. c. 1. Charta nostra confirmavimus, pro nobis & haeredibus nostris, in perpetuum, quod Ecclesia Anglicana libera sit, & habeat omnia jura sua integra, & libertates suas illaesas. We have granted unto God, and by this our present writing have confirmed for us, and for our heirs for ever, that the Church of England be free, and that she have all her rights, and liberties whole and unhurt. Now by this Charter, if the same be construed aright, there is provision made; first, that such honour and worship be yielded by the King and his subjects, his and their successors and posterity unto God, as truly, and indeed belongeth unto him: Secondly, that not only such rights and liberties, as the King and his progenitors, but also that such as God had endowed the Church of England with should inviolably be preserved. And in very deed, to speak truly and properly such rights and liberties only, are to be called, the rights and liberties of the Church of England, which God himself hath given by his Law unto his universal Church, and not which the Kings of England, by their Charter, have bequeathed to the particular Church of England. When therefore question is made that by the great Charter, the Kings of England are bound to maintain the rights and liberties of the Church of England, we are to inquire and search what rights and liberties, God in his holy word, hath granted unto his universal Church; and so by consequence unto the Church of England, one part of the Catholic Church. And this questionless was the cause, that moved the victorious Prince Henry the eight, so effectually and powerfully to bend himself against the Pope's supremacy, usurped that time over the Church of England. For (saith the King) we will with hazard of our life, and loss of our Crown, uphold and defend in our Realms whatsoever we shall know to be the will of God. The Church of God then in England, not being free, nay having her rights and liberties according to the great Charter, whole and unhurt, but being in bondage and servitude to the Sea of Rome, contrary to the Law of God; the King judged it to stand highly with his honour, and with his oath (according to the measure of knowledge, which then was given unto him) to reform, redress, and amend the abuses of the same Sea. If then it might please our gracious Sovereign Lord King james, that now is (treading in the Godly steps of his renowned great Uncle) to vouchsafe an abolishment of all lordly primacy, executed by archiepiscopal, and Episcopal authority, over the Ministers of Christ; His Highness in so doing, could no more rightly be charged with the violation of the great Charter, than might King Henry the eight with the banishment of the Pope's supremacy; or than our late Sovereign Lady the Queen could be justly burdened with the breach of her oath, by the establishment of the Gospel. Nay if the Kings of England, by reason of their oath, had been so straightly tied to the words of the great Charter, that they might not in any sort, have disannulled any supposed rights, and liberties of the Church then used and confirmed by the great Charter, unto the Church that then was supposed, to be the Church of God in England; then belike King Henry the eighth, might be attainted to have gone against the great Charter, and against his oath, when by the overthrow of Abbeys and Monasteries, he took away the rights and liberties of the Abbots and Priors. For by express words of the great Charter, Abbots and Priors, had as ample and as large a Patent, for their rights and liberties, as our Archbb. and Bishops can at this day challenge for their primacies. If then the rights and liberties of the one, as being against the law of God, be duly and lawfully taken away, notwithstanding any matter, clause or sentence, contained in the great Charter; the other have but little reason by colour of the great Charter, to stand upon their pantofles, and to contend for their painted sheaths. For this is a rule and maxim in all good laws, that in omni juramento, semper excipitur authoritas majoris: unless then they be able to justify by the holy Scriptures that such rights and liberties, as they pretend for their spiritual primacy over the Ministers of Christ, to be granted unto them by the great Cha●ter, be in deed and truth likewise confirmed unto them by the holy Law of God: I suppose the King's Highness, as a successor to K. Henry the third, and as a most just inheritor to th● Crown of England, by the words of the great Charter, and by his oath (if once the same were taken) to be bound utterly to abolish all Lordly primacy, as hitherto upheld and defended, partly by ignorance, and partly by an unreasonable and evil custom. ADMONITION. The use and study of the Civil Law will be utterly overthrown; for the Civilians in this Realm, live not by the use of the Civil law, but by the Offices of the Canon Law, and such things as are within the compass thereof. And if you take those offices, and functions away, and those matters, wherein they deal in the Canon Law, you must needs take away the hope of reward, and by that means their whole study, ASSERTION. This collection dependeth upon his former Reason, and is borrowed to prove a necessary continuance of Canon Law, and concludeth in effect thus: The taking away of the reward and maintenance of Civilians, will be the overthrow of the use and study of the civil law: But the taking away of the Canon Law, the offices and functions thereof, and such things as are within the compass of the same, will be the taking away of the reward and maintenance of Civilians. Therefore the taking away of the Canon Law, will be the overthrow of the use and study of the Civil Law. But we deny the assumption, and affirm that Civilians might have The maintenance of Civilians, dependeth not upon the functions of the Canon law. fare better reward and maintenance than now they have, if the offices and functions of the Canon Law, and such things as are contained within the same, were simply and absolutely taken away. And further we say, if there were none other use, nor end of the study of the Civil Law, than hope of reward, and maintenance by some office and function of the Canon Law, that then Civilians should in vain seek for knowledge in the Civil Law, because without the knowledge thereof, and by the only knowledge of such things, as are within the Compass of the Canon Law, they might reap that reward and maintenance. Nay since by experience we have known that some, who never unclasped the institutions of justinian, out of the same to learn the definition of Civil Justice, have been and yet are authorized, to exercise the offices and functions of the Canon Law; how should the study of the civil law, be furthered by these offices and functions, when as without any knowledge of the civil law, these offices and functions have been and yet are daily undertaken, and executed to the full? And what man then (if there were none other reward for Civilians) would ten or twelve years together, beat his brain, and trouble his wits, in the study of the Civil Law, when every silly Canonist might be able and learned enough, to sit in the Bishop's throne, and to be judge in his Consistory? Besides, if the Admonitor speak sooth, viz. that Civilians in this Realm, live not by the use of the civil Law, to what end then should he fear an overthrow of the study thereof? For if there be no use of it in this Realm, for the maintenance of this life, to what use then should men study the same in this Realm? As for the use of it among strangers, and foreign nations without the Realm; the same (as I suppose) is no greater than such as 3. or 4. Civilians may be able well enough, fully to deliver the law, touching all matters of controversy, that may grow to question during the whole space of a King's reign. If no man lived in this Realm, by the trade of brewing Beer, but that all Brewers did live by the trade of Brewing Ale, what should we need to fear the decay of ●eere-brewers, or what use were there of them? in like sort, if men live only by the use, offices and functions of the Canon Law, and that men live not (as he saith) by the use of the Civil law within the Realm, what folly were it to study the one, whereas without the knowledge thereof, he might live by the other? And therefore it seemeth that the Admonitor by his own weapon, as much as in him lay, hath given the whole study of the Civil Law, a most desperate and deadly wound. And to the end we may understand what reward and maintenance, Civilians by the Offices and functions of the Canon, do receive yearly for their service and attendance, in the Bishops and Archdeacon's their Courts; We will examine what fees Doctors of the civil law, being Chancellors, Commissaries or Officials, have usually, and ordinarily allowed unto them, by their Lords and Masters. Fees for probat of Testaments, granting Fees for probat of testaments let to farm. of administrations, with their appendances, of late years in some places (whether in all or how many I know not) have been demised unto farm for an annual rent; out of which, either a small or no portion at all, have been allowed unto the Chancellor or Official, for his service in this behalf. Whereupon (as I conjecture) it hath fallen out, rather than that those Officers would work, keep Courts, and travail for little or nought, there have been exacted greater fees, for the dispatch of these things, than by law ought to have been paid. Perquisits of courts arising upon suits, commenced between party and party, it must be a plentiful harvest, and there must be multi amici curiae, in a Bishop's consistory, if ordinarily (communibus annis) they amount in the whole to twenty pounds by the year: and yet these perquisits, belong not wholly to the Chancellor, but are to be divided between him and the Register. And touching fees for excommunication, and absolution, fees for institution and induction, licences to preach, licences for Curates and Readers. For testimonial of subscription, or licences to marry without banes; fees for commutation of penance, and fees for relaxation of sequestrations: touching these manner of Fees, if the same be fees no Fees due for the execution of the functions of the canon law, dishonourable for a Doctor of the civil Law. way warrantable, how are not then such fees every way dishonourable for a Doctor of the Civil law, to take, either of Ministers or people? There must be therefore some other hope of better reward and maintenance, to incite and encourage scholars, to the study of the civil law, than are these beggarly and unlawful fees, depending upon the functions, and exacted by the Officers of the Canon law: or else the use of the civil law (as the Admonitor saith) must necessarily in short time be overthrown. For if Fees for probat of Testaments, and granting of administrations with their appendices, shall still be let to farm; and if also, many unlawful fees were quite inhibited, there would remain (I trow) but a very poor pittance for Civilians out of the functions of the Canon law, to maintain their Doctoralities withal. But what better reward can there be for Civilians, than hath already been mentioned? If the Admonitor had not willingly put a hood Civilians in England live not only by the functions of Canon law. wink before his eyes, he might have seen that the Civilians live not wholly and altogether by the practice of the Canon Law; but partly also, and that most honourably by the use of the Civil law. If a Doctor of the Civil Law, be judge or Advocate, in the Court of Admiralty; if he be Judge or Advocate in the Prerogative Court, so fare as the same Court handleth only matters of Legacies, Testaments and codicils, to what use can the Canon Law serve him, or what advantage can the same Law bring him in? Beside to what use serveth the Canon Law unto a Doctor of the Civil Law, if he shall find favour in the King's sight, and if it please the King to make him one of the Masters of his Requests, or one of the twelve Masters of his high Court of Chancery, or to be the Master of his Rolls; or to be his Highness' Ambassador unto foreign Nations, or to be one of his Highness' most honourable privy Council, or to be one of his principal Secretaries. It followeth not therefore (as the Admonitor pretendeth) that either the Civilians in this Realm, live not by the use of the civil law but by the offices, and functions of the Canon law, and such things as, are within the compass thereof; or that the hope of reward, and by that means, the whole study of the Civil Law must be taken away, if once the Canon Law should be abolished. Neither would it be any hard matter for the King (if the Civilians might find grace in his sight) to appoint Courts, Offices, and all manner of process and proceed in judgement for Doctors of the Civil Law, to hear and determine in the King's name, all causes being now within the compass of any Civil or Ecclesiastical Law within this Realm. And although a little candle can give but a little light, and a small Spring can send forth but a small stream, yet because great fires are kindled sometimes by little sparkles, and small streams meeting together, may in time grow into great rive●s; I shall desire the great Civilians with their floods and lamps of learning, to help forward such a law, as whereby the study of the Civil Law, may be upholden, the reward and maintenance of Civilians, without any function from the Canon Law, may be enlarged, many controversies, and disorders in the Church, may be pacified, and the King's Prerogative Royal be duly advanced. Which things if it might please them rightly to consider, then let them humbly and seriously beseech our Sovereign Lord the King, and States in Parliament, to give their consents to such a Law, as the project ensuing, may warrant them, the same not to be dangerous to the overthrow of their civil studies. The Project of an Act for the explanation and amplifying of one branch of a Statute, made in the first year of the reign of Queen ELIZABETH, entitled, An Act restoring to the Crown, the ancient jurisdiction over the state Ecclesiastical, and also for the declaring, and reviving of a Statute made in the first year of King EDWARD the sixth, entiled, An Act, what seals and styles Bishops and other spiritual persons exercising jurisdiction Ecclesiastical, shall use. FOrasmuch as by one branch of an Act made in the first year of our late Sovereign Lady of blessed memory, Queen Elizabeth (entitled an Act, restoring to the Crown the ancient jurisdiction over the state Ecclesiastical and Spiritual, and abolishing all foreign power repugnant to the same) it was established and enacted, That such jurisdictions, privileges, superiorities, and preeminences Spiritual and Ecclesiastical, as by any spiritual, or Ecclesiastical power, or authority, hath heretofore been, or may lawfully be exercised, or used, for the visitation of the Ecclesiastical state and persons, and for reformation, order and correction of the same, and of all manner errors, heresies, schisms, abuses, offences, contempts and enormities, should for ever, by authority of that present Parliament, be united and annexed, to the imperial Crown of this Realm, by means whereof, it may now be made a question, whether any Archbishops or other Ecclesiastical persons, having since that time used or exercised any such spiritual or Ecclesiastical jurisdiction in their own right, or names, might lawfully have done, or hereafter may lawfully do the same, without special warrant, and authority derived immediately from your highness, by and under your Highness' letters patents: And whereas also by a statute made in the first year of King Edward the sixth, entitled, an Act what seals and stile, Bishops, or other spiritual persons shall use, it was ordained, that all and singular Archbishops and Bishops, and others exercising Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, should in their process use the King's name and stile, and not their own: and also that their Seals should be graved with the King's arms: And forasmuch also, as it must be highly derogatory to the imperial Crown of this your Highness' Realm, that any cause whatsoever Ecclesiastical or temporal, within these your Highness' Dominions, should be heard or adjudged, without warrant or commission from your Highness, your heirs and successors, or not in the name, stile, and dignity of your Highness, your heirs and successors; or that any seals should be annexed to any promise, but only your Kingly seal and arms: May it therefore please the King at the humble supplication of his Commons, to have it enacted, That the foresaid branch of the foresaid Act made in the first year of Queen Elizabeth her reign, and every part thereof may still remain, and for ever be in force. And to theend, the true intent and meaning of the said statute, made in the first year of K. Edw. the sixth, may be declared and revived, that likewise by the authority aforesaid, it may be ordained, and enacted, that all and singular Ecclesiastical Courts, and Consistories, belonging to any Archbishops, Bishops, Suffragans, College, Deane and Chapter, prebendary, or to any Ecclesiastical person or persons whatsoever, and which have heretofore been commonly called, reputed, taken or known to be Courts or Consistories, for causes of instance, or wherein any suit, complaint or action, between party and party, for any matter or cause wherein judgement of law civil or Canon, hath been or is required, shall and may for ever hereafter be reputed, taken, and adjudged to be Courts, and judgement seats merely Civil, secular and temporal, and not henceforth Ecclesiastical or Spiritual; and as of right belonging and appertaining to the Royal Crown and dignity of our Sovereign Lord King James that now is, his heirs and successors for ever. And that all causes of instance and controversies, between party and party, at this day determinable in any of the said Courts, heretofore taken and reputed Ecclesiastical, shall for ever hereafter be taken, reputed, and adjudged to be causes merely Civil, secular, and temporal, as in truth they ought to be, and of right are belonging and appertaining to the jurisdiction of the Imperial crown of this Realm. And further, that your Highness' Liege people, may be the better kept in awe, by some authorised to be your Highness' Officers and Ministers to execute justice in your Highness' name, and under your Highness' stile and title of King of England, Scotland, France and Ireland, defender of the Faith, etc. in the said Courts and Consistories, and in the said causes and controversies: Be it therefore enacted by the authorities aforesaid, That all the right, title, and interest, of, in, and to the said Courts and Consistories, and in and to the causes and controversies aforesaid, by any power, jurisdiction, or authority heretofore reputed Ecclesiastical (but by this Act adjudged civil, secular and temporal) shall for ever hereafter, actually and really, be invested and appropried in and to the Royal person of our Sovereign Lord the King that now is, his heirs and successors, Kings and Queens of this Realm. And that it shall and may be lawful to, and for our said Sovereign Lord and King, his heirs and successors, in all and every Shire and Shires, Diocese and Dioceses, within his Highness' Dominions and Countries, by his and their letters patents under the great Seal of England, from time to time, and at all times to nominate and appoint, one, or moe able and sufficient, Doctor or Doctors learned in the Civil Law, to be his and their civil, secular, and temporal Officer, and Officers, Minister, and Ministers, of justice in the same civil, secular, and temporal Courts and Consistories, which in and over his, and their royal name, stile, and dignity, shall, as Judge, and Judges, do perform, and execute all and every such act, and acts, thing and things whatsoever, in and about the execution of justice and equity in those Courts, according to the course and order of the civil Law, or the Ecclesiastical canons, and constitutions of the Realm, as heretofore hath been used and accustomed to be done, by, for, or in the name of any Archbishops, Bishops, College, Cathedral Church, Deane, Archdeacon, Prebendary, or any other Ecclesiastical person or persons whatsoever: And that all, and every such civil, secular and temporal Officer, and Officers, Minister, and Ministers, Judge, and Judges, in his and their process shall use one manner of Seal only and none other, having graved decently therein your Kingly arms, with certain characters for the knowledge of the Diocese or Shire; And further be it enacted, etc. That it shall and may be lawful, by the authority aforesaid, for our said Sovereign Lord the King, his heirs and successors, from time to time, and at all times, to nominate and appoint, by his and their Highness' Letters Patents, under the great Seal of England, for every Shire and Shires, Diocese and Dioceses within his or their highness' Dominions, one or more able and sufficient persons, learned in the Civil Law, to be his and their Notary and Notaries, Register and Registers, by him and themselves, or by his or their lawful Deputy or Deputies, to do, perform, and execute all and every such act and acts, thing and things, as heretofore ●● the Courts and Consistories Ecclesiastical aforesaid, hath been, and ●ow are incident and appertaining, to the office of any Register or Notary. And further at the humble suit of the Commons, etc. it may please the King, to have it enacted, that all and singular matters of Wills and Testaments, with all and every their appendices, that all and singular matters of Spousals and Marriages, with their accessories, that all and singular matters of defamation heretofore determinable in the Ecclesiastical Courts (and if there be any other causes of the like mere civil nature) shall be heard, examined, and determined by the said civil and secular Officers and judges in the said civil and secular Courts, according to the due course of the civil Law, or statutes of the Realm in that behalf provided. And that all matters of Tithes, Dilapidations, repair of Churches, and if there be any other of like nature, with their accessories, and appendices, shall be heard, examined, and determined, by the said civil and secular Officers and Judges, in the said Civil and Secular Courts, according to the King's Ecclesiastical Laws, Statutes, and customs of the Realm, in that behalf heretofore used, or hereafter by the King and Parliament, to be established. And at the humble suit of the Commons, may it please the King to have it further enacted, That all manner of fees heretofore lawful, or hereafter by the King and Parliament to be made lawful, for or, concerning the probat of Wills; administration of the goods of the intestat; letters of tuition; receiving or making of accounts, inductions to Archbishoprickes, Bishoprickes, Deaneries, Parochiall-Churches, or other spiritual promotions, and all other fees whatsoever heretofore lawful, or hereafter to be made lawful, for any travail or pain to be taken in or about the expedition or execution of any of these causes, shall for ever hereafter be fees, and allowances appropriated to the Judges, and principal Registers of the said Courts, equally to be divided between them, as heretofore hath been accustomed; and that the said Judges and Ministers, within their several charges, shall be Collectors of the King's tenths and subsidies, granted and due by the Clergy, taking for their travail and pain, in and about the same collection, such fees as heretofore have been accustomed. Provided always, that none of the said civil and temporal Officers and Ministers, nor any of them, for any offence, contempt or abuse, to be committed by any person, or persons, in any wise incident to any of the said Courts and Consistories, suspend, excommunicate, or interdict any person or persons, but shall and lawfully may by authority of this present Act, proceed against every offender, and offenders by such ordinary process, out of the said Register or Notary's office, as is used upon a subpoena out of the high Court of Chancery, and there upon default, or contempt, to proceed to attachment, proclamation of rebellion, and imprisonment of the party offending, as in the said high Court of Chancery is used. Provided also, that all appeals, hereafter to be made, from all and every Court, and Courts in the Shires and Dioceses of the Country, shall be made to the higher Courts, as heretofore hath been accustomed, only with an alteration, and addition of the names, styles and dignities of Archbishops, Bishops and other Ordinaries, unto the name, stile and dignity of our Sovereign Lord the King, his heirs and successors. And that upon the appeals, so to be made, it shall and may be lawful, for the Judges and Ministers of Justice, of and in the said higher Courts, to make out all manner of process, and processes, and to do and execute all and every act and acts, thing and things, for the furtherance of Justice, in the causes aforesaid, as to them shalby the law seem equal, right, meet, and convenient; any law statute, privilege, dispensation, prescription, use or custom, heretofore to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding. Provided also that all and every such Judge and Minister, that shall execute any thing by virtue of this act, shall from time to time obey the King's writ, and writs of prohibition, of attachment upon prohibition and indicavit, and not to proceed contrary to the tenor of such writ or writs, in such and the same manner and form, and condition, as they have or aught to have done be o'er the making of this act, any thing in this act to the contrary notwithstanding. Provided also that this act or any thing therein contained, shall not extend or be interpreted to give any authority to the said Judges and Officers, or any of them, to put in execution any civil or Ecclesiastical law, repugnant or contrariant to the laws, statutes, or customs of the Realm, or hurtful to the King's Prerogative Royal. And thus it may seem to be but a small labour, a little cost, and an easy matter, for the King, his Nobles and Wisemen of the Realm, to devise forms of judgement, and manner of process, and proceed, without any offices or functions of the Canon law, whereby the use and study of the Civil Law, and the reward and maintenance for Civilians, might be furthered and increased, and not utterly overthrown and taken away; as the Admonitor uncivilly beareth us in hand. As for the alteration of the censure of excommunication for contumacy mentioned in this project, we have the consent of the reverend Bishops in this admonition, that the same may be altered. For the Admonitor their Prolocutor speaketh on this wise, viz. As for the excommunication Pag. 138. Excommunication for contumacy by the Admonitors judgement, may be taken away without offence, and with the good liking of the Bishops. practised in our Ecclesiastical Courts for contumacy, in not appearing, or not satisfying the judgement of the Court, if it had pleased the Prince, etc. to have altered the same at the beginning, and set some other order of process in place thereof; I am persuaded (saith he) that the Bishops and Clergy of the Realm would have been very well contented therewith. And speaking of a certain manner of civil discomoning used in the Church of Tigure, he further addeth, viz. Which, or the like good order devised by some godly persons, if it might be by authority placed in this Church, etc. I think it would be gladly received, to shun the offence, that is taken at the other. ADMONITION. And matters of Tithes, Testaments, and Matrimony; matters also of adultery, slander, etc. are in these men's judgements, mere temporal, etc. therefore to be dealt in by the temporal Magistrate only, which as yet have either none at all, or very few laws touching those things, therefore the common law of the Realm, must by that occasion, receive also a very great alteration. For it will be no small matter, to apply these things, to the temporal law, and to appoint Courts, Officers and manner of process and proceed in judgement for the same. ASSERTION. Indeed we hold, that all these matters whereof mention is here made, Matters of tithes and other causes of like nature pertain to civil justice. and all others of the like nature, are merely civil and temporal, and by the temporal Magistrate alone, to be dealt in, and to be discussed, if we consider the administration of external and civil justice. And this we think will be granted of all, and not to be denied of any unless they be too too popishly addicted. In regard whereof we have drawn (as before is mentioned) a project, how Courts and manner of process and proceed in judgement, by Doctors of the Civil Law may be appointed by the King, and his high Court of Parliament, without that, that the common Law of the Realm, by the occasion of any such courts, offices, or manner of process and proceed, must receive any alteration at all, much less a very great alteration. Howbeit if it should not please the King, and that the Civilians could not find favour in his sight, by courts, offices, and manner of process and proceed in judgement before specified, or by the like to have the study of the civil Law advanced; yet we think it convenient once again How matters of tyths etc. may be dealt in by ●he Kings judges. to be examined how these matters may be dealt in, according to the rules and grounds of the Common Law, before the King's Judges, and Justices of the King's bench, and Common pleas. By a Statute of 32. H. 8. c, 7. it is clear, that all tyths, oblations, etc. and other Ecclesiastical or Spiritual profits, by the laws and statutes of the Realm, may be made temporal, as being admitted to be, abide and go to, and in temporal hands, lay-uses and profits. From the reason of which statute it is clear, that those laws likewise, may be reckoned amongst us for temporal laws, which by the laws and statutes of the Realm, may be executed by temporal and lay persons, and which are conversant about temporal and lay causes. If then the execution of the Laws, touching these matters may lawfully remain, and abide in the hands of Doctors of the Civil Law, being temporal and lay persons (as already under the Bishops they do;) it cannot be denied but that the King's Judges, and Justices, of both benches, may be as compatible Judges, to put in execution the laws concerning these matters, as Doctors of the Civil Law, or other lay men be. But the causes are not reputed and called temporal, and lay causes amongst us. What for that? if in their own nature simply considered, these causes be merely lay and temporal causes, such causes (I mean) as whereof the King a lay, civil and temporal Magistrate, by his lay civil and temporal Magistracy derived unto him immediately from the holy law of God, may and aught to take cognizance, and thereupon, either in his own Royal person, or by the person of any of his inferior Officers, may give absolute and peremptory judgement: If (I say) these things be so, what booteth it, or what wisdom is it to contend, that these causes and matters, have been, and are still adjudged to be therefore Ecclesiastical, and no temporal causes, because through an abusive speech, or through a vain and evil custom, they have been so led and accounted in times past? And what if it hath pleased the King's Progenitors, by sufferance to tolerate the executions of such Laws, as concern these things, to be in the hands and power of Ecclesiastical persons; yet hereupon it followeth not that in very deed and truth, the Magistracy of the said Ecclesiastical persons, was an Ecclesiastical Magistracy, or that they were Ecclesiastical Magistrates; but their Magistracy was, and remained still a temporal magistracy, and they were and abode temporal Magistrates. For not more can the quality of the person, altar the nature of the cause, than can the quality of the cause, altar the nature of the person. And if it be true, that matters determinable (in times past) by a Magistracy abusively called Ecclesiastical, be notwithstanding properly temporal matters, and that the same Magistracy also, be a temporal and no spiritual Magistracy, what a childish and poor conceit is it, to challenge and threp upon the temporal Magistrate, that he hath none, or very few temporal laws, touching those matters, and that therefore the people should not solicit an alteration of abuses in Church government, left for want of temporal laws, the people should be without Ecclesiastical discipline? It will be no small matter (saith he) to apply these things to the temporal law; yea, and so say I to. But what of that? The question is not how hardly these things may be applied to the temporal law, but how small a matter it were to apply the temporal law unto these things. For it is not said in any law, that, casus ex juribus, but it is said in all laws, that ex casibus jura nascuntur. The temporal law may easily be applied to causes now reputed Ecclesiastical. And indeed the Physician applieth not the disease to his Physic, but he prepareth his phificke for the disease. The husbandman he measureth not his ground by the seed, but his seed by the ground. The Draper, he meateth not his yard by the cloth, but his cloth by the yard. If in like manner the temporal laws, and the grounds and rules thereof, were applied to these matters of tithes, marriages, etc. whereof he speaketh, what more alteration could there be of the temporal law by such an application, than there is an alteration of the plummet, by laying it to the stone, or than there is an alteration of the rule or yard, by laying them to the timber and cloth? Besides, he that rightly and after an exact, and equal proportion, can apply one rule or maxim of the temporal law, to many more cases, than whereupon it hath been usually in former times applied, he may rather be reputed an additioner, than an alterer of the Law. But how may the temporal Law be applied to those matters? how? even so, and so, as followeth. By the statute of 32. H. 8. c. 7. it is declared, that tithes, oblations, how tithes may be recovered in the King's temporal Courts. etc. and other Ecclesiastical or spiritual profits, etc. being lay men's hands to lay uses, be no more Ecclesiastical, but temporal goods, and profits; and that if any person were diseased, deforced, wronged, or otherwise kept, or put from his lawful inheritance, estate, seisin, etc. of, in, or to the same, by any person, claiming, or pretending to have interest, or title, in, or to the same, that then, in all and every such case, the person so disseised, deforced, or wrongfully kept from his right or possession, shall and may have his remedy in the King's temporal Courts, as the case shall require, for the recovery of such inheritance by writ original, etc. to be devised and granted out of the King's Court of Chancery, in like manner, etc. It is there likewise provided, that that Act shall not extend, nor be expounded, to give any remedy, cause of action or suit, in the Courts temporal, against any person, which shall refuse to set out his tithes, or which shall detain, etc. his tithes and offerings. But that in all such cases, the party, etc. having cause to demand, or have the same tithes, shall have his action for the same, in the Ecclesiastical Courts, according to the ordinance, in the first part of that act mentioned, and none otherwise. Now then since every person, whether he be lay or Ecclesiastical, having right to demand tithes and offerings, hath the party from whom those tithes be due, bound and obliged unto him: and since also the party not dividing, yielding or paying his tithes, doth actually and really detain the same, and thereby doth unjustly wrong the party to whom they be due: contrary to justice and the King's laws; since (I say) these things be so, what alteration or disadvantage could befall or ensue to the Common Law, or the Professors thereof; if so be it might please the King, with his Parliament, to have the last part of this Act so to be explained, extended, and enlarged, as that the same might give remedy in the King's temporal Courts, by writ original, to be devised and granted out of the Chancery, against any person detaining his tithes and offerings? the Hospital of S. leonard's in York, of the King's foundation and Patronage, endowed of a thrave hospital of S. Leonard 1, 2. h. 6. c, 2 of Corn, to be taken yearly, of every plough ear-ring, within the Counties of York, Comberland, Westmoreland and Lancaster, having no sufficient or convenable remedy at the Common Law, against such as withheld the same thraves, it was ordained by the King in Parliament, that the Master of the said Hospital, and his successors, might have action by writ, or plaints of debt, or detain at their pleasure, against all and every of them that detained the same thraves, for to recover the same thraves with their damages. And by the Statute of 32. H. 8. c. 4. it is enacted, That the Parsons and Curates of five Parish Churches, whereinto the Town of Royson did extend itself, and every of them, and the successors of every of them, shall have their remedy, by authority of that act, to sue, demand ask, and recover in the king's Court of Chancery, the tithes of corn, hay, wool, lamb, and calf, subtracted or denied to be paid by any person or persons. Again, Vicars, Parsons, or improprietaries, do implead any man, in the Ecclesiastical Court, for tithes of wood, being of the age of twenty years or above, for tyth-hay out of a meadow, for the which time out of mind and memory of man, there hath only some Meade-silver been paid: or if a debate hang in a spiritual Court for the right of tithes, having his original, from the right of Patronage, and the quantity of the same tithes, do pass the fourth part of the value of the benefice, a prohibition in all these, and sundry other cases doth lie, and the matters are to be tried, and examined in the King's Courts, according to the course of the Common Law, unless upon just cause there be granted a consultation. And if in these cases, in maintenance of the Common Law, the defendants have relief in the King's Courts; I think it more meet to leave it to the consideration rather of common, than to the judgement of Canon Lawyers, to determine what alteration the Common Law could sustain, in case if plaintiffs, as well as some defendants might pray the King's aid, for the recovery of tithes, especially seeing at this day, the manner of paying tithes in England, for the most part, is now limited by the common and statute laws of the Realm, and not by any foreign canon law. But there is some fact Object. happily so difficile, so secret, and so mystical, in these causes of tithes, as the same cannot, without a very great alteration of the Common law, Answer. be so much as opened before a lay judge, or, of the hidden knowledge whereof, the King's temporal Judges are not capable. Why then let us What facts touching the upholding of tyths are examinable in the Ecclesiastical courts. see of what nature that inextricable fact may be. I have perused many libels; made and exhibited, before the Ecclesiastical Judges, yea and I have read them over and over, and yet for ground of complaint, did I never perceive any other material and principal kind of fact, examinable in those Courts, but only such as follow. First, that the party agent, is either Rector, Vicar, Proprietary, or Possessor, of such a Parish-Church, and of the rectory, Vicarage, farm, possession, or dominion of the same, and by virtue thereof hath right unto all tithes, oblations, etc. apertaining to the same Church, and growing within the same parish, bounds, limits, or places tythable of the same. Secondly, that his predecessors, Rectors, Vicars, etc. time out of mind and memory of man, have quietly and peaceably, received, and had, all and singular tithes, oblations, etc. increasing, growing, and renewing within the Parish, &c, and that they and he have been, and are in peaceable possession, of having, and receiving tithes, oblations, etc. Thirdly, that the party defendant, hath had and received in such a year, etc. of so many sheep, feeding and couching within the said Parish, etc. so many fleeces of wool; and of so many Ewes, so many Lambs, etc. Fourthly, that the defendant hath not set out, yielded or paid, the tithe of the wool, and lamb; and that every Tithe fleece of the said wool, by comm●n estimation, is worth so much, and that every tithe Lamb, by common estimation, is likewise worth so much, etc. Fifthly, that the defendant, is subject to the jurisdiction of that Court, whereunto he is summoned. Lastly, that the defendant doth hitherto deny, or delay to pay his tyths, notwithstanding he hath been requested thereunto. These and such like are the chief matters of fact, whereupon in the The King's justices are as able to judge of exceptions against tyths as the Ecclesiastical judges. Ecclesiastical Courts, proofs by witnesses, or records rest to be made for the recovery of tithes. And who knoweth not, but that these facts, upon proofs made, before the King's Justices, may aswell be decided by them, as by any of the Reverend Bishops or venerable Archdeacon's, their Chancellors or Officials. If there be any exception alleged by the defendant, as of composition, prescription, or privilege, the King's Justices are as able to judge of the validity, of these, as they are now able eo determine customs de modo decimandi, or of the use of high ways, of making and repairing of Bridges, of Commons of pasture, pawnage, ●estovers, or such like. Truth it is that of Legacies and bequests of goods, the reverend Bishops by sufferance Legacies how they may be recovered at the common law. of our Kings and consent of our people, have accustomably used, to take cognizance, and to hold plea, in their spiritual Courts. Notwithstanding if the Legacy be of lands, where lands be divisible by Testament, the judgement thereof hath been always used, and holden by the King's writ, and never in any Ecclesiastical Court. Wherefore if it shall please the King, to enlarge the authority of his Courts temporal, by commanding matters of legacies and bequests of goods, aswell as of lands, to be heard, and determined in the same, it were not much to be feared, but that the king's Justices, the kings learned Counsel, and others learned in the Law of the Realm, without any alteration of the same law, would speedily find means, to apply the grounds thereof, aswell to all cases of Legacies, and bequests of goods, as of lands. For if there be no goods divisible by will, but the same are grantable, and confirmable, by deed of gift, could not the king's Justices, aswell judge of the gift, and of the thing given by will, as of the grant, and of the thing granted by deed of gift? or can they not determine of a Legacy of goods, aswell as of a bequest of lands? If it should come in debate before them, whether the Testator, at that time of making his will, were of good and perfect memory, upon proofs and other circumstances to be opened, and made of the Testators memory by lively testimonies, either the Admonitor must condemn the kings learned and discreet Justices to be malae mentis & insanae memoriae, or else it must be confessed, that they be as well able to judge of the distraction of wits and unsoundness of memory, in a person deceased, as they be to determine the question of Lunacy, madness, or idiocie, in a man living. If any question should arise upon the revocation of a former will, of the ademption of a legacy, or of a legacy given upon condition, or in diem, it would be no hard matter, for the learned Judges, upon sight of the will, and proofs to be made, to define which is the first, and which is the last will; whether the legacy remain, or whether it be revoked, whether it be legatum per rerum or in diem, whether conditional or without condition: And if it be conditional, whether the same be possible or impossible; honest, or dishonest; and if it be in diem, whether the day be past, or to come. But there lieth no action at the common law, for a legatory against the executor to recover his legacy. I grant. But a creditor to recover his debt, due by the testator upon speciality, may bring an action at the common law, against the executor. And than what is the cause, that a creditor way recover his debt, and that a legator cannot recover his legacy, in the king's Court, but only, for that remedy could not be given unto legatories complainants, by any writ out of the Chancery. And therefore that 21 Ed. 1. statute upon the writ of consultation. such plaintiffs, might not be deferred of their right, and remedy in such cases, to their great damage, it hath pleased the kings, by sufferance, to tolerate the Church Officers to determine these cases. Wherefore if it might please the king, to cause writs to be made out of his Court of Chancery, for the recovery of Legacies, it were clear by the Common Law of the Realm (as from the statute may be gathered) that the cognizance of these Cases, did not appertain any more to the Spiritual Court. For then might the legatory, by that writ, bring an action against the Executor, to obtain his Legacy. But how should that action be tried? How? even as other actions of debt, detinue, or trover be tried, namely (as the case should require) either by the country, or by the Judges upon a moratur in lege. As Testaments with their adherences, so likewise matters of Spousals, Marriages, divorces, etc. together with their accessories, by common Matters of marriages, more meet to be decided by the Kings, than by the Bishop's officers. right, of the Imperial Crown, did in ancient times properly appertain to the examinations, and sentences of the Emperors themselves, and to their Provostes, Deputies, and Precedents, of Cities and Provinces, as by their several titles, de Testamentis, Legatis, Fidei commissis, Nuptiis, repudiis, divortio, dote, etc. in the books of the civil law appeareth. By the Law of England also, the king hath the marriage of an heir being within age, and in his ward. Widow's also that hold of the King in chief, must not marry themselves without the King's licence. And by an Act made 4. and 5. Phil. and Mary. there is a straight punishment provided against all such, as shall take away Maidens, that be inheritors, being within the age of sixteen years, or marry them without consent of their parents, and what reason letteth them, that the King might not as well have the care and cognizance of all the contracts of marriage, especially of the marriage of all children and widows, in his temporal Courts, as he hath of some parties, to be contracted of the Dower, of the jointure, of the disparagement, of the age, of the taking away, of the deflowering, and of marriage without parents consent in some cases? or what a very great alteration of the common law, could ensue, in case the King's temporal Justices, did examine and determine whether the contract were a perfect and simple, or conditional contract yea, or no? For if upon the statute made by Philip and Mary, that maidens and women, children of Noble men, and Gentlemen, etc. being heirs apparent etc. and being left within age of sixteen years, should not marry against the will or unknowing, of, or to the father, or against, etc. If I say upon the publishing of this act, there hath no alteration of the common law hitherto followed, it is but a mere superstitious error, to feign, that a change of the Common law must follow, if so be this statute were extended, to all children, both Sons and Daughters, of what parentage, sex, estate, or age soever. For if the King in his temporal Courts, had the definition of all, as well as of some contracts, made by children, without consent of parents, than should a multitude of lewd and ungodly contracts, made by flattery, trifling gifts, fair and goodly promises, of many unthrifty, and light personages thereunto won, by entreaty of persons of lewd demeanour, be pronounced void, and of no efficacy, yea, and on the other side, a number of honest, lawful, and godly contracts, should be confirmed, and Much a do in the Ecclesiastical Courts, about accipio, & accipi●m. remain in their full strength, and force; which now upon certain frivolous and trifling quiddities, and niceties of words and syllables are pronounced in the Ecclesiastical Courts, to be no contracts. And in good earnest, is there now a days, any soundness of reason at all, to be heard amongst the Doctors and Proctors of those Courts, where they inform out of the Canon law in these cases? For doth not their whole dispute and information rest principally, whether the contract be made by words of the present, or of the future tense? whether it be made with an oath, or without an oath? yea, and do they not exceedingly besweat, and besmyre themselves, by turning and returning, by folding, and unfolding, their great and hideous volumes, for proof, and reproof, of accipio, & accipiam? yea and sometimes of letters and accents? If the young man and maid, having both of them their parent's consent, shall answer only in the future tense; I will have thee, or I will take thee; or I am content to take thee, or I will have none other but thee, or if ever I marry I will marry thee; and do not answer directly, I do take thee to mine husband, or I do take thee to my wife: oh! it is a world to see, and a wonderment to behold, what canvasing, heaving and shoving, what a stir, quoil, and garboil, the Canonists make, about the lifting and removing of these feathers. And whatsoever the holy Scriptures have determined of the necessity of parent's consent, or of what necessity likewise soever the “ Institu. de nup. S. 1. civil law, hold the consent of parents to be, yet in the Ecclesiastical courts, the papal canon law must needs take place, because by the same law, consent of Parents, is not the necessitate, but The canon law preferred by the reverend Bishops before the law of God and the civil law. de honestate tantum, and because also matrimonia debent esse libera, & non pendere ex alieno arbitrio, Wherein the reverend Bishops, under their favourable patience) can not clearly excuse themselves, of much oversight, in so slender managing of a matter, of so great and high a consequence. The holy law of God, by public authority, hath been commanded within this Realm, to be sincerely and purely taught, received and embraced. The civil law, hath not had her free course, in this case hindered, by any law of the Realm. And how then cometh it to pass, that the canon law, being in this point repugnant to both these Laws, should notwithstanding be preferred, bear sway, and take place, in this Realm, before and above both these Laws, especially Certain special points to be provided about marriages. the same in this point, as being against the law of God, being utterly taken away. The abuses past, and marriages past, under colour and pretext of this law, may and aught to be bewailed, and repent of: yea and that no such marriages in time to come, may be made, I leave it to be considered, whether it might not tend to the advancement of the Law of God, be honourable for the King, and commodious for the Common Weal, providently to provide, these things following: viz. First, that no matrimony secretly contracted, against the will, or unknowning of, or to the father, or him, or her, that hath the keeping, education, or government of the party to be married, before he or she come to a certain age, should in any sort, be good or available to make the posterity of those, who shall be so married, legitimate, or inheritable. Secondly, that every contract of marriage concluded, with consent of parents, Tutor, Governor, or Guardian, should be forcible and effectual, to bind both parties irrevocably: whether the same contract with an intent to conclude a marriage) be made by words of the present, or future tense, it skilleth not. Thirdly, that every man stealing away, contracting, and marrying a maid, under the age of certain years, without consent of father, tutor, governor, or guardian, should be a fellow, and for such his felonious act, suffer the pains of death. And lastly, that all licences to marry without banes ask, according to the intendment of the book of Common prayer, be forbidden, and unlawful for ever. Which things if they might be observed, it is very likely, that men's inheritances (as now many times they do) should not hang in suspense, upon question of legitimation or illegitimation of their children to be allowed or disallowed by the commonlaw. There should not any such long and tedious suits and variances hereafter fall out, between the posterities and children of one man, for the right and interest of their Ancestors lands. Neither should Sir Thomas Lucy, nor Sir Edmond Complaint heretofore made upon stealing away and marrying men's daughters, how they may cease. Ludlow, nor the Lady Norton, nor Master Cook the King's Attorney general, nor many more Knights, Esquires and Gentlemen, complain and bewail, the stealing away, and marriages of any their daughters, Nieces, near Kinswomen, or Wards. Neither could it be possible, that one woman might procure four or five several licences for the marriage of four or five several husbands, all of them being alive together, and not one of them dead. Neither should there any licence of marriage be granted out of any Ecclesiastical Court, to any man or woman with a blank, whereby the party licenced was enabled to have married another man's wife, or his own or his wife's sister. Neither should any couples married, and living together four, six, or more years, as man and wife, upon a new and sudden dislike or discontentment, and upon a surmised precontract, to be pretensedly proved by two suborned witnesses, be adjudged (by virtue of the canon law) to be no husband, and to be no wife. Neither should any man (being solemnly married to a wife, and afterward by reason of a precontract, solemnly divorced from the same his wife, and by censures of the Church compelled to marry her for whom sentence of precontract was adjudged) be reauthorised by the same Consistory, about ten or twelve years after the divorce, to resummon, recall, and rechallenge his first wife: especially she having a testimonial out of the same Consistory, of her lawful divorce, and being again solemnly married to an other husband. Wherefore to conclude these matters of tithes, testaments, and Marriages (if the King should not be pleased, to have the study of the civil law advanced by some such law, as whereof the former project maketh mention) I dispute for the enlarging of the common law, thus: If it stand with reason, with the grounds and rules of the common law, and with the King's Royal prerogative, that in cases of Tithes, Testaments, and Marriages, the King, (if it may please him so to provide by Parliament) may give remedy unto complainants, by writs out of the Charcorie, and that complaints in such cases, may effectually be redressed upon such writs, in the King's Courts: And if also sundry matters of Tithes, Testaments, and Marriages, be already handled, in the King's Courts: if these things (I say) be so and so may be; then with little reason, did the Admonitor warn us, that a very great alteration of the common law must follow, and that it will be no small matter, to apply these things to the temporal law. But the antecedent is true, as hath been already showed. Therefore the consequent is true. ADMONITION. Judgements also of adultery, slander, etc. are in these men's judgements mere temporal, and therefore to be dealt in by the temporal Pag. ●●. Magistrate only. ASSERTION. We are indeed of this judgement, that in regard of the King's Royal Office, these judgements of adultery and other criminal Causes comprised within this clause, etc. ought no more to be exempted, from the King's temporal Courts, than matters of theft, murder, treason, and such like aught to be. And for the maintenance of our judgements, we affirm, that there is no crime, or offence of what nature or quality soever, respecting any commandment contained within either of the two tables, of the holy law of God, if the same be now corrigible by spiritual power, but that some fault and contempt, one, or other, of the like nature and quality, as comprised under the same commandment, hath been evermore, and is now punishable by the King's Regal, and temporal jurisdiction. For, adultery, as the same is to be censured by penance in the Ecclesiastical Courts, so is ravishment also, buggery and sodomy, to be punished in the King's Court, by pain of death. And, as hath been accustomed, that Ordinaries by censures of the Church, may correct fornicators, so fornication also, (as in some books written of the common law, is reported) hath been in times passed, presented, and punished in leets, and law-days, in divers parts of the Realm, by the name of Letherwhyte, which is, as the book saith, an ancient Saxon term. And the Lord of the Leet (where it hath been presented) hath ever had a fine, for the same offence. By the statute of those, that be borne beyond the seas, it appeareth, that the King hath cognizance, 25. Ed 3. of some bastardy. And now in most cases of bastardy, if not in all, by the statute of Eliz. the reputed father, of a bastard borne, is liable to be punished at the discretion of the justices of peace. Touching perjury, if a man lose his action, by a false verdict, in plea Perjury if punishable, temporally in some cases, why not in all. of land, he shall have an attaint, in the King's Court, to punish the perjury, and to reform the falsity. And by divers statutes it appeareth, that the King's temporal Officers, may punish perjury committed in the King's temporal Courts. And though it be true, that such perjury as hath risen upon causes, reputed spiritual, have been in times past, punished only by Ecclesiastical power and censures of the Church, yet hereupon it followeth not, that the perjury itself, is a mere spiritual, and not a temporal crime or matter, or that the same might not to be civility punished. By a statute of Westminster, 25. Edw. 3. it was accorded, that the Usury. King, and his heirs shall have the cognizance of the usurers dead; and that the Ordinaries have cognizance of usurers on life, to make compulsion, by censures of the Church for sin, and to make restitution of the usuries taken, against the laws of holy Church. And by another statute, it is provided▪ that usuries shall not turn against any being ●0. h. 3. ●. 5. within age, after the time of the death of his Ancestor, until his full age. But the usury with the principal debt, which was before the death of his ancestor, did remain, and turn against the heir. And because all usury being forbidden by the law of God, is sin, and detestable, it was enacted, that all usury, lone, and forbearing of money, etc. giving days, etc. shall be punished, according to the form of that Act. And that every such offender shall also be punished, and corrected, according to the Ecclesiastical laws, before that time made against usury. By all which statutes, it seemeth that the cognizance, and reformation of usury, by the laws of the Realm, pertaineth only to the King, unless the King by his Law, permit the Church, to correct the same, by the censures of the Church, as a sin committed against the holy law of God. Touching heresies and schisms, albeit the Bishops, by their Episcopal, and ordinary spiritual power, grounded upon Canon law, or an evil custom, have used by definitive sentence pronounced in their Consistories, to condemn men for heretics and schismatics, and heresies & schisms are punishable by the king's laws. afterward being condemned, to deliver them to the secular power, to suffer the pains of death, as though the king being custos utriusque tabulae, had not power by his kingly office, to inquire of heresy, to condemn an heretic, and to put him to death, unless he were first condemned, and delivered into his hands, by their spiritual power: although this hath been (I say) the use in England: yet by the statutes of Richard the second, and Henry the fifth, it was lawful for the King's Judges and Justices, to inquire of heresies and Lollards, in Leets, Sheriffs 25. h. 5. c. 14. turns, and in Law days, and also in Sessions of the peace. Yea the King, by the common law of the Realm, revived by an act of Parliament, which before the Statute of Henry the fourth, was altered, may pardon a man condemned for heresy, yea and if it should come to pass, that any heresies, or schisms should arise in the Church of England, the king by the Laws of the Realm, and by his Supreme and 1 Eliz c. 1. Sovereign power, with his parliament, may correct, redress and reform, all such defaults and enormities. Yea further, the king and his 1 Eliz. c. 1. parliament, with consent of the Clergy, in their Convocation, hath power to determine what is heresy, and what is not heresy. If then it might please the king, to have it enacted by parliament, that they which opiniatively, and obstinately, hold, defend, and publish, any opinions, which according to an Act of Parliament already made, have been, or may be ordered, or adjudged to be heresies, should be heretics If it please the King, heretics may be adjudged felons, and heresies felonies. and felons, and their heresies to be felonies, and that the same heretics and felons, for the same their heresies and felonies, being arraigned, convicted, and adjudged by the course of the common law, as other felons are, should for the same their heresies and felonies, suffer the pains of death: there is no doubt, but the King, by virtue of his Sovereign, and Regal Laws, might powerfully enough, reform heresies, without any such ceremonial form, papal observance, or superstitious solemnity, as by the order of the Canon Law, pretended to be still in force, have been accustomed. And as these offences before mentioned, be punishable partly by temporal and partly by Ecclesiastical authority, so drunkenness, absence from divine service and prayer, fight, quarrelling, and brawling in Church and Churchyard; defamatory words and libels; violent laying on o● hands upon a Clerk, etc. may not only be handled and punished in a court ecclesiastical, but they may also be handled and punished by the King, in his temporal courts. By all which it is evident that the Clergy hath had the correction of these crimes, rather by a The cognizance of all crimes as well as of some crimes ●● the law of God, belong to the King. custom, and by sufferance of Princes, than for that they be mere spiritual, or that they had authority, by the immediate law of God. And if all these, as well as some of these crimes, by sufferance of Princes, and by a custom may be handled and punished spiritually, then also if it please the King, may all these, as well as some of these crimes, without a custom be handled, and punished temporally. For by custom, and sufferance only, some of these crimes be exempted from the cognizance of the King, and therefore by the immediate law of God, the cognizance as well of all, as of some o● these crimes, properly appertaineth unto the King. And then the judgement, of those men, who defend judgements of adultery, slander, etc. to be more temporal, and by the temporal Magistrate, only to be dealt in, seemeth every way to be a sincere, and sound judgement. Howbeit, they do not hereby intent, that the party offending, in any of these things, and by the King's law punishable, should therefore wholly be exempted and freed from all censures of the Church. Nay we judge it most requisite, and necessary for the bringing the No offender freed from the censures of the Church party which offendeth, to repentance and amendment of life (if presently upon sentence of death, he be not executed) that besides his temporal punishment, the censures of the Church according to the quality of the offence, may be used, and executed against him: yea and we think, that the King, by the holy law of God, is bound by his regal power, to command the Church, duly and rightly to use the same censures, not only against every adulterer, defamer, usurer, etc. but also against every thief, every manslayer, every traitor, and every other offender: For not only sins, reputed with us Ecclesiastical, but all sins, of what kind soever, aught to be repent of, and consequently against all sins, the Ecclesiastical censures ought to be used. And by whom should the same be exercised, but by the Church? Why then belike, where an offender is punished in the King's Court, he shall again be punished in the Ecclesiastical Court, and so for one offence, be twice punished, which were unreasonable. To this we answer, that it is not against reason, that one man, for one fault should be punished both temporally and spiritually. First he consisteth For a man to be punished ●wi●e for one ●ault ●n two re●●ect, is 〈…〉. of two parts: viz. of a body, and of a soul, in both which parts he hath offended. Secondly, he hath offended, against two laws, the law of God, and the law of the King. For the execution of which two laws, there be two kinds of officers, of two several natures, the king for the one law, and the officers of the Church for the other law; and both these kinds of officers, have power given them, immediately from God, to execute; the one, Kingly and temporal; the other pastoral and spiritual power. And therefore we say, it standeth with great reason, that the soul causing the body to sin, should no more escape that punishment which is appointed for the soul, by the law of God, than the body should escape that punishment which is appointed for the body, by the law of the King: why then the officers of the Church, may meddle with matters appertaining to the King's law, and what an indignity to the King were that? To this we answer, that the officers of the Church in a several respect, and to a several end, dealing in one and the self same matter, wherein the king dealeth, may no more be charged with dealing in matters appertaining to the Crown, by the exercise of their spiritual sword, than can the King be charged, with meddling in the same matters, to meddle with matters pertaining to the soul, by the exercise of his temporal sword. So that the spiritual power of the officers of our Saviour Christ, (which consisteth only in binding and losing of the souls of men) can not possibly, by any reason or good intendment, be construed, now to be any more prejudicial, to the King's prerogative, or contrariant to the laws of the Realm, than it hath been heretofore: Because usury, incontinency, and divers other crimes Ecclesiastical have not been punished only by Ecclesiastical correction, but also by corporal pain. And therefore to take away this frivolous objection, we instantly pray, that the laws of the Realm may still keep their due and ordinary course, and that the King's Sceptre may retain, that ancient and Royal estimation, which belongeth unto it: and that it may be ordered, by an irrecoverable law as followeth. Potestas & jurisdictio actionum quarumcunque civilium; punitio, & castigatio externa, omnium maleficiorum qu●rumcunque famam, facultates, seu personas tangentium, non penes pastors, & Seniores Ecclesiae; sed penes unum solumque Principem, & civilem Magistratum sunto, & quicunque iis non acquieverunt, cap●tali poena puniunto. Whereupon falleth to the ground, that cavillous and odious slander following in the Admonition: viz. that the laws maintaining the Queen's Supremacy, in governing of the Church, and her prerogative in matters Ecclesiastical, as well Elections as others, must be also abrogated. The contrary whereof being avouched throughout this whole assertion, it shall be needless to spend any time in the refutation of so gross an untruth. ADMONITION. Thos laws likewise, must be taken away, whereby impropriations and patronages stand, as men's lawful possession and heritage. ASSERTION. By a statute 15. R. 2. c. 6. because divers damages and diseases oftentimes had happened, and daily did happen to the parochians of divers places, by the appropriation of benefices, of the same places, it was agreed and assented, that in every licence, from thenceforth to be made in the Chancery of appropriation of any parish Church, it should be expressly contained and comprised, that the Diocesan of the place, upon the appropriation of such Churches, should ordain according to the value of such Churches, a convenient sum of money, to be paid and distributed yearly of the fruits, and profits of the same Churches, by those that shall have the same Churches in proper use and by their successors, to the poor parochians of the same Churches, in aid of their living and sustentation for ever; and also that the Vicar be well and sufficiently endowed. By which statute it appeareth, that every impropriation ought to be made by licence out of the Chancery, that it ought to be made to the use of Ecclesiastical persons only, and not to the use of temporal persons or patrons. Now than all such parish Churches, as without licence of the king in his Chancery, have been appropried to any Ecclesiastical person; and again all such parish Churches, as by licence of the King in his Chancery, have been appropried, to the use of lay persons, they are not to be accounted men's lawful possessions and heritage's. Besides this, as many impropriations, as whereupon the Diocesan of the place, hath not ordained, according to the value of such Churches, a convenient sum of money to be paid, and distributed yearly of the fruits of the same Churches, etc. to the poor Parochians of the same Churches, in aid of their living and sustentation for ever; yea and every Church also appropried, as whereunto a perpetual Vicar is not ordained, canonically to be instituted and inducted in the same, and which is not convenably endowed, to do divine service, and to inform the people, and to keep hospitality there, all and every such Church and Churches (I say) otherwise than thus appropried, by the law of the Realm (as it seemeth) are not men's lawful possessions and inheritances: For by a Statute of king Henry the fourth, every Church after the fifteen year of king Richard the second, appropried by licence of the king against the form of the said Statute of Rich. 2. if the same were not duly reform, after the effect of the same statute, within a certain time appointed, than the same appropriation and licence thereof made, presently (the parish Church of Hadenham, only excepted) was adjudged to be void, and utterly repealed and anulled for ever. And therefore I leave it to the inquisition of our Sovereign Lord the King, whether the impropriation of the parish Church of Belgrave in the County of Leic●ster, whereunto two Chapels are annexed, and other Churches appropried to the Bishop of Liecester, since the statutes of Richard the second, and Henry the fourth, be the lawful or unlawful possession and heritage of the same Bishop, yea or no And if it be lawfully appropried and so a lawful possession and heritage, than I leave it again to the inquisition of the King, what sum of money out of the fruits of the same Church ought yearly to be distributed to the poor parochians, what the endowment of a vicar canonically to be instituted, and inducted, in the same Church should be, what house is appointed for the same Vicar to keep his hospitality in, and whether any Vicar for the space of these many years passed, hath been canonically instituted and inducted in the same Church, to possess that endowment, to inhabit that same house, and to inform that people. For if by the appropriation itself, or by the abuse thereof, the poor parochians have been defrauded of their yearly distribution, or if no Vicars have been Canonically instituted and inducted in the same, or if being inducted they have their endowments so small, or so covetously kept back from them, as that they cannot sufficiently maintain themselves, much less keep hospitality: then (as the Admonitor confesseth) there must needs be a lamentable abuse of impropriations; and that therefore it is greatly to be wished, that by some good statute, it might be remedied. And as those Churches which are unlawfully appropried, are not the lawful possession and heritage, of the proprietaries, so on the other side we affirm, that those impropriations, which were made and reform, according to the statutes of Ric. 2. and Hen. 4. may well stand as men's lawful possessions and heritage's, even with those things which are required to be planted and brought into the Church, whatsoever the Admonitor hath written to the contrary. For we do not hold that maintenance, must only and necessarily be provided for every Minister, by the payment of tyths, oblations and other ecclesiastical profits, belonging to Churches appropried or disappropried. For there being no direct proof to be made out of the law of God, that Ministers of the Gospel, must only live upon tithes; the King and parliament, may well and competently enough, appoint convenable endowments for every Minister, without disapproprying of any Church appropried. And therefore little cause had the Admonitor, to insinuate the ruin of impropriations, upon the bringing in the discipline of our Saviour Christ, because the same may be well planted, and yet to other not unplanted. But what need we to argue against his insinuation, considering he himself, before he came to the end of this page, by his own idisclaime, contradicted his insinuation, For if the form of finding Ministers by tithes, must with the canon law (as he saith) be abolished, and if there must be some other order for this devised, because this may seem papistical and antichristian: what should any man fear the taking away of those laws, whereby impropriations do stand? For if such as heretofore have spoken or written against them, because (as he insinuateth) the form of finding Ministers by tithes, seemed to be unlawfully taken away, and as he would also insinuate by their judgement, ought again to be restored, and not to stand any longer as men's lawful possessions, and heritage's. How (I say) doth it follow that they which desire impropriations, to be restored to their pristinate state, should withal inquire, to have the finding of Ministers by Tithes, to be abolished? It seemeth therefore, that the Admonitor, so he might be talking, passed but a little what he talked. For what a double talk is here? or to what purpose was this talk? Was it because some men do think, that the Ministers, ought not to receive tithes, for their relief and pains in the Ministry? Why then, let all men know, that we disclaim such some men's opinions. For we account all things, pertaining to this life, directly, or by consequence, not commanded, nor prohibited, by the holy and sacred Scriptures, to be things indifferent, and that therefore we may use them or not use them, as the commodity or incommodity of the Church shall require. And therefore as we do not affirm, that the maintenance of the Ministers, must only and necessarily be levied out of tithes, oblations, and such like, so also we do not deny, but that the tenth part of the increase of all our goods, by the authority of the King, and his laws, may be allotted for their possession and heritage: especially in our country, the same manner of payment being so ancient, and so agreeable to the manners, usages and disposition of our state and people. Nay since the payment of tithes, for service accomplished in the spiritual Sanctuary, is correspendent in the nature thereof, to the equity of the Law of Moses, for the Levites attendance about the earthly Tabernacle; and since also we be bound by the commandment of the Apostle, to make him that teacheth us in the word, to be partaker of all our goods, I see not (so Jewish and popish ceremony, and superstition be avoided) but that this duty, may as Christianly be performed, by the payment of the tenth part of the increase of our corn, hay, wool, lamb, etc. as by the eight, twelfth, twentieth, or any other part of our money and coin. By payment also of which tithes, the Ministers at every season, with every kind of necessary provision towards hospitality, might throughly be furnished, which many times they shall want, by reason of men's backwardness, when collections of money are to be made. But to speak no more of this matter of tithes, we will return to the objection made against the Apostolical government, drawn from taking away impropriations, And herein we will not handle, whether the laws whereby impropriations do stand, as men's lawful possession and heritage must (as he saith) be taken away: but whether impropriations, now divided from the Ministry, and dispersed into many several men's hands, and employed to many uses in the Common weal, may not in tract of time by some wholesome law, be reduced, either wholly, or in part, to be the only lawful possessions and inheritances for the Ministers of the Gospel, yea and that without any prejudice or damage unto Prince, or people. It is evident in the eyes of all, that the Churches now appropried, do stand and remain as the lawful possessions and inheritances, either of the King, or of the Nobles, or of the Knights, Equires, Gentlemen, and other temporal persons: or of Archbishops, Bishops, Archdeacon's, Deans, Prebendaries, and other Ecclesiastical persons, or of the Universities, of the Colleges in the Universities, of Collegiate and Cathedral Churches, of Schools, Hospitals, Fraternities, and other bodies Politic, and Corporate. Wherefore to the end our meaning may the better be understood, and that we may proceed orderly, we think it good, to examine first, by how many several ways, some o● these impropriations may be wholly and thoroughly reduced: secondly, by how many several means, other some in part, may be brought to the use of the Ministry. To reduce some of them wholly may be done by restitution. commutation, redemption, and contribution. And first Impropriations may be reduced to the ministry by 4 means. that I prejudice not the Lords spiritual, and Churchmen of their ancient privileges, from being placed in the first rank, reason is, that, (they teaching the people not to possess other men's goods wrongfully) we speak first o● restitution to be made by them. In declaration whereof, we think it not fit, in this place to show, to what end the state of the Clergy was first founded into a state of prelacy, by the King, Earles, Barons and other great men (because the same cometh afterward to be handled more at large) but it shall suffice at this parochial Churches to what use they were founded. present, for the purpose whereof we now entreat, to let the reverend Bishops understand, that the small Parochial Churches, were founded, and endowed with glebe lands, tithes, and other fruits by the Lords of Manors, to the end that the Lords Tenants within the same Manors, should be informed of the Law of God, and that hospitalities might be kept, and the poor of the same parishes be relieved. And besides, the reverend Bishops, we hope, will grant, that the great Cathedral, This may be proved by 15. R. 2. and 4. h. 4. c. 2. and is confessed by M, Bilson in his perpet government, pag. 365. 366. and Collegiate Churches, were not founded by the King's progenitors, Nobles, and great men of the Realm, to the end, that those great Churches, (as great Hawks prey upon little fowls) with their great steeples, should eat and devour the little steeples, or that with their great Quires, they should overthrow and justle down the small pulpits. And therefore we most humbly pray aid from the king, for the casting of new claps to be erected in the little pulpits, that he would be pleased, to grant restitutiones in integrum, to all the little Churches, and that all impropriations, of all Parochial Churches and benefices, now by spoliation, parcel of the revenues, of Archbishops, Bishops, Deans, Archdeacon's, Prebendaries, and other Ecclesiastical persons, restants within those great Churches, may be wholly restored to their ancient and original use, according to the minds and intents of the first Donors, and Patrons of the same parochial and little Churches. For if (as Master Bilson saith) it be true, that the Lords of Villages, having erected Churches, and allotted out portions for divine service, either by Gods or man's law, by their later grants could not have the former rights, unto their patronages overthrown; and if the allowance given at the first, to the Minister of each Parish, by the Lord of the soil, were matter enough in the judgement of Christ's Church, to establish the rights of patrons, that they alone should present Clerks, because they alone provided for them, if (I say) this be true, then have the Ministers of those Villages, and of that soil, just cause to require, at the Diocesans hands, a restitution of such allowances, as were first given and provided for them by the patrons: Especially the Diocesans by their own act now enjoying, and converting the same allowances, to their own use. If it be answered, that this can not well and conveniently be brought to pass, because the same impropriations, by the Archbishops, Bishops, and other Ecclesiastical persons, for divers sums of money, are now lawfully demised to farm, for many years yet to come: hereunto we answer, that these leases should hinder nothing at all, the restitution of the right and interest in reversion, or remainder of those impropriations. Only if the impropriations have been made according to the laws of the Realm, and the leases duly granted) these leases for a time, may hinder the incumbent Ministers, from the present possession of the Tithes, Fruits, and glebe Land, belonging to the said impropriations. And yet may not the incumbent Ministers, be hindered in the mean while, from receiving the rents reserved upon such Leases, and which by the same Leases, are now payable to the Archbishops, Bishops, and other Ecclesiastical persons. Neither after the determination of the same leases, should the incumbent Ministers, be any more letted, to enjoy and receive, the whole profits in right of their Churches, than other Ministers be now letted to enjoy theirs. If any shall say, that many of these impropriations, are annexed and appropried, as prebend's for the provision of some of the Prebendaries of the same great Churches, and that the same Prebendaries, in the right of their prebend's, be the lawful Rectors of the Churches appropried, and have curam animarum in the same Parishes; then we must instantly again pray the King, that those Prebendaries, by some wholesome law may be constrained to reside, and to incumb upon their said prebend's, and Parochial Churches, and that by continual preaching of wholesome doctrine, they may endeavour to cure the souls of the people, over whom, by the order of those great Churches, they be set, and over whom they have taken charge. And withal that they may no more be suffered, to lie and to live idly in their Cloisters, in their caves, and in their dens, sometimes at Worcester, sometimes at Hereford, sometimes a Gloucester, sometimes at Salisbury, sometimes at Westminster, sometimes at Southwell, sometimes at Windsor, sometimes at Paul's, sometimes at Oxford, and sometimes at Cambridge. When in the mean while both seldom, and very slenderly, they feed other sheep, whose fleeces they take in, and about London, Winchester, Tukesbury, Reading, and other places of the Country. Besides we pray that these prebends, after the determination of Leases now in being, may never any more be let to farm, so that the fruits thereof may serve for those Prebendaries, or other succeeding Ministers, to make Hospitalities, Alms, and other works of Charity. If it be alleged that the king now having first fruits, Tenths, and Subsidies, out of the impropriations of those great Churches, as being all comprised, under a gross sum of the Tenths payable for the whole revenues of the same Churches, should lose the first fruits, Tenths, and Subsidies, of the same impropriations, if hereafter they become either donative, or presentative; to this the answer is readily made, viz, that Tenths, first fruits, and subsidies, might as well be paid then as now. And that the King might then aswell have right to the donation of the benefice disappropried, as the Bishop now hath the gift of the prebend appropried. In the next rank cometh commutation to be spoken of. Wherein, because the impropriations of Parochial Churches appertaining now to the King, Nobles, Commons, Colleges, Schools, Bodies politic, etc. were at the first appropried only by the discretion of the Diocesans, Predecessors to the reverend Bishops that now are, unto Abbots, Priors, Nuns, Friars, etc. and because the successors of those Diocesans be bound in the same band of iniquity with their predecessors, unless by all good means they labour that things may be brought to their first, and pristinate state, it seemeth equal and just, that this commutation should likewise proceed and be drawn from the Diocesans, and great Churches before specified. The reasons whereof may be such as follow. The Lands and possessions given by the King's progenitors, the Earls, Barons and other great men of the Realm, to Bishoprickes, were not given (as Master Bilson affirmeth) to unburden the people Perpetual power, pag. 367. 25 Ed. 3. statutes for provisours. Bishoprics founded to some sumptuous uses. of the support and charges of their Bishops, but they were given (as the Law of our Land teacheth us) first, to inform the people in the Law of God in those Churches; Secondly, to keep Hospitalities, alms, and other works of charity; And thirdly, for the souls of the founders, their heirs, and of all Christians. Now then, if some of these conditions be such as for the impiety thereof ought not to be performed, and if other some also, being good and godly, be not performed, and so the things are to return to their first nature, as in the same statute is alleged; then is it reason, that the King and Nobles, who are the just inheritors and successors, to those who were first Donours, and founders of those Churches, should have as free a disposition, and donation of those lands and possessions now, as his, and their progenitors and ancestors ever had. And seeing it is manifest, that the lands and possessions of Archbishops, Bishops, Deans, and Chapters, do not for the most part, now a days serve for those good uses, for the which they were first granted, namely, to inform the people in the Law of God, to keep hospitalities, alms, and other works of charity, but partly for the use of chanting, and singing in the quires; and partly to vain, idle, superfluous, and pompous uses, the king can not do a better and more charitable deed, than to convert a parcel of the same lands and possessions (thus by defect of the conditions not performed, returning to their first nature) to and for the necessary and perpetual provision of learned, able, and preaching Ministers, to be planted in parochial Churches, now destitute of sufficient pastors, for want of sufficient maintenance, nay since Archbishoprickes, bishoprics, and other prelacies, by the very express letter of the statute; are said to be founded to superstitious uses: viz. for the souls of the founders, their heirs, and of all ●hristian, the same reason led King Henry the eight, his Nobles and Parliaments, to dissolve Abbeys and Monasteries, and the same reason also, which moved King Edward the sixth, with his Nobles, and Parliament, to dissolve Colleges, free Chapels, and Chauntries, the same reason, may be a sufficient reason, to persuade our Sovereign Lord King JAMES that now is, with his Nobles and Parliament, to dissolve Archbishoprickes, Bishoprickes, Deaneries, etc. First, to the end these Prelacies and Dignities, may never in any succeeding ages, serve to any such superstitious uses, as whereunto they were first erected. Secondly, that the King having them all in his own hands, and free disposition, may be the only founder and donor of so many new Bishoprickes as might please him to erect, and endow with such liberal, and convenable endowments, as might serve for learned Evangelicall Bishops to inform the people in the holy Evangell of Christ, to keep hospitalities, alms, and to do other works of charity, rather than to be expended, as now for a great part they are, upon the keeping of great horses, caroches, and troops of serving idlers. The commutation then whereof we speak, and which we most humbly commend, to the consideration of the King, is, viz. That parcel of the temporal Lands and possessions of Archbishops and Bishops, together with all the lands and possessions, serving to the maintenance of idle Ministers, and idle Songsters, in Cathedral and Collegiate Churches (the Collegiate Churches of Eton and Winchester, and the Cathedral and Collegiate Churches in Oxford and Cambridge excepted) by an equal and reasonable proportion, may be made, with such impropriations, as belong to the King, the Nobles, Commons, Colleges, Hospitals, Schools, etc. Provided as before hath been said, that there may be a liberal and convenable endowment, for the learned Bishops or Pastors, to be continued and placed in all the chief and principal towns and cities of the Realm. And that the impropriations of Parochial Churches may for ever, be livings for the Ministers of the same Churches. And therefore in the just defence of the innocence of all such as require a godly and religious reformation, we say, that they ought not, to have been traduced before the king, as robbers and ransackers of the Church. And that some of the plotters for the Prelacy, more honestly might have employed both their Latin and their labour, than lately they did. When by drawing Letters (as they pretended) congratulatory to the King, only in the name of Preaching Ministers, they procured notwithstanding ignorant, and unpreaching Ministers to join in the action, and to affix their hands and names. That such letters have been made and signed, is sufficiently to be proved, but whether they have been presented to the King's hands, is not yet known. Only if they shall hereafter come, then may they be known by these words: Nos Concionatores, &c, ab omni domestica capacitate eorum, qui praetextu religionis, ecclesiae insidiantur. My Lord the King is wise, 2 Sam. 14. 24. according to the wisdom of an Angel of God, to understand all things whereof he is informed. The third means to reduce impropriations, unto the possession of Public redemption of impropriations. the Ministry is by way of public redemption or purchase. For the accomplishment whereof it is necessary, that not only a common treasure be provided, but also that the price of improptiations, by a public consent be valued, at a reasonable rate to make, which rate will be a matter of small weight, whether they be valued to be bought and sold, at their old and ancient, or at their new and improved rents. To provide a common treasure, though to some it may seem a matter intricate, and troublesome, yet seeing the same possibly and conveniently may be done, there is no cause, that men should faint, before thy fight, or be at an end, before they begin. It is written that the cause when king Solomon raised the tribute, to wit, was to build the house of the Lord, his own house and Millo, and the wall of jerusalem. After 1 Kin. 9 15 that wicked Athaliah and her children, had broken up the house of God, and had bestowed all the things, that were dedicated for the house 2 Chr. 24. of the Lord, upon Balaam, King joash commanded the Priests and Levites, to go unto the Cities of Judah, to gather of all Jsrael money to repair the house of God, from year to year, and they made a chest, and made Proclamation to bring the tax of Moses, and the Princes rejoiced, and brought in, and cast into the chest. And when there was much silver, they emptied the chest, and carried it, to his place again, and thus day by day they gather silver in abundance. If then towards the building of an earthly house, the Princes and people of Judah and Israel, willingly with joy of their hearts, from year to year, and from day to day, threw silver in abundance into the chest, how much more were it praise worthy, if Christian people, did encourage themselves, to pay a small tribute towards the provision of a competent maintenance, for their spiritual pastors, by whose labours, as lively stones, they might be builded up into a spiritual temple in the Lord? That many and great taxes and tributes of late years have been made for many uses, and to many purposes, there is no man ignorant thereof. And therefore though there be little reason, that the people standing already burdened, with great charge, should be again recharged, especially when without any extraordinary burden, there is an ordinary means, (if the same were accordingly bestowed) by the people yielded, to relieve the Ministers in all places, with a decent and comely portion; yet notwithstanding to be eased, from those public payments, and annual grievances, imposed by the Ecclesiastical Courts, upon the people is not to be doubted, but the parishioners in all places would willingly pay any reasonable tax or tribute, to be demanded of them for this purpose. An other means to raise this public treasure, may be a dissolution The dissolution of Chapels may be a good mean to raise a tribute. of all free Chapels, and Chapels of ease in the Country, together with an union of two or more Churches into one, especially in Cities and great towns. For as in these Cities and Towns, the poorest, and meanest live be provided, so generally for the most part, are they fitted, with the poorest, and meanest Curates, as by most lamentable experience is to be seen, in all the Episcopal Cities of the Realm, excepting London. Nay the chief and Metropolitan City of Canterbury is not to be excepted. For in that City there being about 12, or 13, Parish Churches, there hath not been ordinarily of late years above 3. or 4. able Preachers, placed in the same Churches. The Chapels to be dissolved, and the Churches to be consolidated by two, and two into one, and one can be no fewer in number than one thousand at the least. All which if they might be sold, the money to be raised upon their sale, could be no less than twenty thousand pounds, if they were sold only for twenty pounds a piece. But if they be well worth double or triple so much, then would the treasure also be double or triple. This dissolution of Chapels, and union of Churches, is no new device, nor strange innovation: but hath been heretofore thought upon, and in some part confirmed already by our Kings in their Parliaments. Touching the dissolution of Dissolution of Chapels no new device. Chapels, the most reverend Father Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, with the residue of the King's Commissioners, appointed for the reformation of Ecclesiastical laws alloweth of the same. And Titu. de eccles. guard. fol. 54. for the union of Churches, there was an act made 27. H. 8. so they exceeded not the value o six pounds. And by a statute 1 Ed. 6. it was lawful for the Mayor and Recorder of the City of York, and the Ordinary or his Deputy, and six Justices of the peace in the same City, to unite and knit together, so many of the poor parishes of the same Cities and suburbs of the same, as to them should be thought convenient, to be a living for one honest incumbent. And it was lawful for the Lawful for the Major of York, etc. to unite Churches in the City of York. said Major, Recorder, and Aldermen, to pull down the Churches, which they should think superfluous in the said city, and suburbs of the same, and to bestow the same, towards the reparation and enlargement of other Churches, of the Bridges in the City, and to the relief of the poor people. The considerations which moved the King and Parliament to ordain this act, were these, viz. The former incompetency of honest live, the former necessity of taking very unlearned and ignorant Curates not able to do any part of their duties; the former replenishing of the City, with blind guides and Pastors; the former What reasons moved K Ed. 6. to unite Churches in York may move king james to unite Churches in Canterbury etc. keeping of the people, aswell in ignorance of their duties to God, as also towards the King and Common weal; and lastly the former danger of the souls of the Citizens. If then in these days it might please the King to apply like plasters, to the like sores, to provide remedies for the like mischiefs, and for the like diseases, to minister like medicines, it would come to pass no doubt, in few years, that the lame and the blind and the broken, with a number o● unhallowed and unclean beasts, should be swept, and cast forth of all the Parochial Churches, within Canterbury, Winchester, Chichester, Lichfield, Oxford, and other great Cities of the Realm. For these Chapels, and smaller Churches, being the very Seminaries, of all hirelings, and idle Shepherds, a Benefice can no sooner become void, but the poor and hungry Chaplains, weary Chapels, the seminaries of hirelings. of their thin diet, and long leaping after a bean, presently trudge to the Patron, offering, or accepting any conditions to be presented by him. And not only should the Church by this means, be rid of these vermin, but also the learned and Preaching Minister, without further aid or contribution, in those places, might have more liberal maintenance, than erst they have had. For than should they be no more constrained, to deduct out of their live, by reason o Chapels yet standing, and as it were annexed to their parish Churches, some 10 pound, some 20. pound, some 30. pound by the year, for the wages o these hirelings, besides this a singular and apparent benefit, could not but redound to the Common weal, by the dissolution By the dissolution of Chapels many suits in law should be avoided. of these Chapels, when as many, long, tedious, and changeable and uncharitable suits, heretofore had and commenced, should hereafter be extinguished, between the parochians of the mother Churches and the inhabitants of Hamblets, for and concerning the repair, and re-edifying of the said Churches, and Chapels, and for other rights, and duties challenged to belong from one unto the other. A third means to leavy a treasure, for the redemption of impropriations, may be a sequestration of the fruits of the Churches of non Sequest ration of the fruits of the Churches of pluralists may further the treasure for the redemption of impropriations. Residents, and commendames, with the fruits of the Churches of the pluralists, and perinde valeres, from the which same the plurisied persons are to departed, the said sequestration no longer to endure, than some able Ministers may be provided and placed in the same Churches. A fourth mean to raise this treasure, if it please the king, and that the Church have found favour in his sight, may be the money due unto the King upon such penal Laws, as for the benefit of the Common weal, are necessarily to be put in execution, and especially upon the law of provision and praemunire, not pardoned by the Queen. And albeit happily the King, upon a most worthy and Christian zeal, be well pleased hereafter not to urge upon the popish recusants, the payment of their forfeitures, for absence from divine service, yet because they be able and do daily contribute to seminaries abroad, and be favourers and abetters of popish Priests and Jesuits, lurking at home, the most treasonable and dangerous enemies, that can be to the King's Person and State, in consideration hereof (I say) if it may please the King, it seemeth not unreasonable (the law standing still in force, and unrepealed) that the popish recusants be urged to the payment of such sums of money, as are already forfeited; the same by the commandment, and free gift of the King to be employed upon the redemption of such impropriations, as are within the parishes of their abodes. To the end that learned, and preaching Ministers, being placed in the same, they; their wives, children, servants, tenants, and dependants, by the powerful preaching of the word, might be converted unto the Gospel. It followeth now in order, that we speak of contribution, the By what contribution impropriations may be brought to the use of the ministry. fourth means whereby some impropriations may be reduced wholly to the use of the Ministry. Wherein there can not any certain rule, or direction be prescribed: because it must proceed only from those, whose hearts God shall touch, stir up, and encourage, willingly to bring a free offering, unto the Lord, for the building up of his spiritual house. For of every one (saith the Lord) whose heart offereth it freely, ye shall take an offering for me. And every one whose heart encouraged Exod, 25. 2. him, and whose Spirit made him willing, and men, and women, as many as were freehearted, came and brought, taches, and Exod. 35. earings, and rings, and bracelets, all were jewels of gold, and blue silk, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen, and Goat's hair, and Rams skins, and Badgers skins, and silver, and brass, and Shittim wood, and Onyx stones, and Spice, and Oil: Every man, and woman, (I say) whose hearts moved them willingly to bring for all the work, Exod. 36. 5. which the Lord had commanded, brought a free offering, yea and the people brought too much, and more than enough, for the use of 2 King. 8. the work of the Lord. King Sa●omon having all the Elders, the heads, the chief Fathers, and all the men of Israel, and the Priests and Levites, to bring up the Ark and Tabernacle of the Lord, offering Beefs, and Sheep which could not be numbered for multitude. Yea and after these offerings were made, and after the King had prayed, that their heart might be perfect with the Lord their God, to walk in his statutes, and to keep his commandments, as at that day; the king again offered a sacrifice of two and twenty thousand beefs, one hundred and twenty thousand sheep, and so was the house dedicated. After the return of the people out of captivity, certain of the chief Fathers, when they came to the house of the Lord, which was in ●erus●lem, they gave after their ability, unto the treasure of the work, evenone, and three score thousand dams of gold, and five thousand pieces of silver, and an hundred priests garments: they gave 〈◊〉. 2. 68 etc. money also to the Masons, and to the workmen, and meat, and drink, and oil. Yea at the exhortation of Nehemiah, the Priests, the great men, the people, and the women, that they might be no ●●he 2 etc. more a reproach, set their minds to the building of the walls, and at their own charges, builded some one gate, some another; some one door, some another; some one tower, some another: some one portion o● the Wall, some another. Wherefore, seeing we have not an Ester to succeed our Deborah, but a Solomon rather to succeed a David; yea such a Solomon, as whose heart the Lord hath filled with an excellent spirit of wisdom, of understanding and of knowledge, to find out, and to dissolve hard and curious parables, and hath put in his heart to teach and to guide others; we rest persuaded in our hearts, that the King for his part, treading in the steps of the godly Kings, Princes, and Governors of Judah, will go in, and out, before his people, as they did before theirs. And that he will rather not eat of the Nehe 5. bread, nor drink of the wine, of the governor's that were before him, than that he will not remit the provisions, the seasements, the fynes, the impositions, and the amerciaments, that have been exacted. Yea also that he will feed from his own table, an hundred and fifty Prophets, and prepare for them oxen, and sheep, and birds, and wine in 2 Chro. 11. all abundance, because they are come unto him, from among the prelatists that were about them, because their bondage hath been grievous unto them Yea further also, we are persuaded, that he will make out of his Lap every servant of his, that shall bear rule over his people. And thus much of the means whereby some impropriations, may wholly be reduced to the use of the Ministry. It followeth to show by what means other impropriations, may be converted in part, to the maintenance of Ministers to be planted in parochial Churches, now destitute of able Pastors, in case the same impropriations by none of the former means, can be reduced wholly to their first and ancient institution. Wherein these two things come principally to be considered. First, whether it were not convenient, by some wholesome law; to how impropriation● may be in part, reduced to the Ministry▪ have it ordained, that the Heads, Governors, Rulers, and Masters of the Universities, Colleges, Cities, Towns, Hospitals, free Schools, and other bodies politic and corporate, should not from henceforth demise or set to farm their, or any of their impropriations, or any of their glebe Land, Tithes, or other fruits belonging to the same, until such time as all leases heretofore made, be fully ended, or otherwise determined. Secondly, whether it were not convenient to have it enacted, by the same law, that all and every impropried Church and Churches, with their glebes, tithes and other fruits, after the determination of the leases now in being, should be demised and set to farm, only to the incumbent Ministers of the same Churches, for term of their natural lives, if so long they did continue resiant, and faithfully preach in the same Churches, the doctrine of the Gospel, according to the articles of Religion, concerning Faith and Sacraments; by public authority, now established in the Church of England. And because by likelihood the Vicars will not be able to pay fynes or incomes unto the Colleges, Hospitals, and other places, and because also it seemeth reasonable, that the Colleges, Hospitals, and other places, by some other means, should be recompensed, we leave it again to be considered, whether it were not convenient that the Vicars, in consideration of non payment of fynes, should yield in money, corn, or other provision, to the double or triple value, of the ancient and unimproved rents. For men experienced in these affairs of this life, know that the profits arising out of Churches appropried unto the farmours thereof, are commonly six, eight, or ten times more worth by just estimation, than are the old rents, payable unto Colleges, Hospitals, and other like places. And thus we see how together with the bringing in of these things, which are required to be planted in the Church, impropriations may stand, as men's lawful possessions, and heritage's, or otherwise how without damage or hurt to the King or Realm, they may be converted to the use and provision of the Ministers, whatsoever hath been insinuated by the Admonitor to the contrary. And yet do I not in any of these things, or of any other thing, first or last, spoken, or to be spoken, desire mine own advice and judgement so to be respected, as though I should arrogate unto myself more knowledge than all others, which labour in the cause of reformation: but only I submit these my private meditations with their reasons, to the censures of all wise, godly, and learned men. Humbly praying them so to bestir their own wits, and so to bestow their own cunning, and learning, that a better and more easier way, by their ingenuousness, may be found out, and procured to take place. And in the mean season, that these motions tendered to their views, may not altogether be neglected, but duly weighed, and considered. Especially for that I have not tendered any other thing to be performed, by any of these means, unto any other, than such as whereunto I myself to my power, yea and beyond my power as far as in me lieth, shall be ready to yield. And howsoever the Bishops and other great Clergy Masters, with their stately favourites, may pretend some part of this device, to be an hindrance of learning, and other some part not to be for the King's profit; yet to the first we answer briefly, that learning is not so much furthered by a few great rewards, provided for a few great learned men, as it is by many good rewards, appointed for many good learned men, as hereafter more at large, in a more convenient place is declared. Touching the King's profit, we affirm, that it is not only most profitable, but also most honourable for the King, to have a multitude of loyal, virtuous, and godly subjects. And that such manner of subjects, can by no means better be procured, than by a continual preaching Ministry of the Word, to be planted in every parish, of the King's Realms. And because no man better knoweth the recyprocall duties, between a Christian King, and Christian Councillors, we leave the discerning of the spirits of these profit preachers to the trial and judgement of the most Christian King; whom if he shall find, either by flattery, to fawn upon the King's profit, or by labouring to keep the King in a good opinion of things amiss, we most humbly beseech the King to accept them, and reward them for such, as could wish in their hearts, the king should rather be impoverished by having many bad, and unprofitable subjects, than that themselves would not be enriched, by enjoying many good and profitable impropriations. As for the Laws whereby patronages do stand, as men's lawful possessions, and inheritances, which (as the Admonitor saith) must also be taken away, how the same laws may still endure, or by consent of patrons, be altered without their damage (if God permit) when we come to speak, of the clections of Ministers, wherein the reformers are charged with the burling, and thrusting out of Patrons, shall be declared. ADMONITION. The Laws of England to this day have stood by the authority of the three estates, which to alter now by leaving out the one, may happily seem a matter of more weight, than all men do judge it. ASSERTION. Not to stand upon terms with the Admonitor, that the laws usually called the common laws of the land, being mere customary laws, did never yet stand by the authority of the three estates. I will The bringing in of the discipline by pastors and elders is not the leaving out of parliament any one of the three estates take his meaning to be, that the statute laws of England, to this day have stood by authority of the three estates, which to alter now by leaving out the one, etc. and then hereunto, I answer, that not any one of the three estates should be left out, or barred, from having authority in making and promulging statute laws, though the government of the Church, by Pastors and Elders were brought in. For we which so much cry (as he saith) for this manner of government, to be planted, are so fare from exempting, or excluding any one of the three estates, from their ancient power, privilege, and preeminence, in the making of statute laws, as that we pronounce him to be guilty of high treason, to the King and to the Realm, that avoweth the contrary. And we affirm directly, and confess plainly, that it belongeth only, wholly and altogether, to the three estates, as well to root out, and to pull up, whatsoever government, is not justifiable, by the holy law of God: as also to plant and to settle, whatsoever discipline is warrantable by the same law. And to speak as the thing is, how were it possible to have the discipline by Pastors and Elders planted by authority of the three estates, if one of the three estates should be left out? or can it be imagined, that any one of the three estates, would ever consent, to the bringing in of such a government of the Church, as whereby (the same government being once brought in) the same estate, should ever after wards cease, to be any more an estate? Besides we acknowledge that all powers are of God, and therefore every one of the three estetes, being a power; we grant that the same hath his stateship, by the authority of God. And if all the three estates be lawful by the holy law of God; how can it be verified against us, that we, which urge the same holy law, for the bringing in of the discipline by pastors and elders, should notwithstanding contrary to the same law, intent the leaving out, or altering any one of the three estates? But which of the three estates was it that he meant, should be left out? I trow there is none of the state of prelacy, so ill advised, as to take upon him the proof of this position: viz. That the Lords spiritual The state of the prelacy is not one of the three estates in parliament. by themselves alone, do make one of the three estates, or that the statutes of England, to this day have stood by their authorities, as by the authority of those, who alone by themselves are to be accounted, one of the three estates. For if that were so, how much more then, might the great Peers, Nobles, and temporal Lords, challenge to make by themselves an other estate? And without contradiction, to this day the commons summoned by the kings writ, have ever been reckoned a third estate. Now than if statutes have hitherto stood, by authority of the Lords spiritual, as of the first estate, by the authority of the Lords temporal, as of the second estate, and by authority of the commons, as of the third estate, I would gladly be resolved, what account the Admonitor made of the King's estate. It had not been liegnes, nor loyalty (I am sure) howsoever he spoke much of the Lords spirituals duty and fidelity in the execution of our late Queen's laws, to have set her Royal person, authority and state, behind the lobby, at the Parliament door, Either the kings Royal person then, as not comprised within the compass, and circumcription of the three estates, by his meaning (which had been but a very bad meaning) must be thought to have been hitherto secluded, from authorising the statute laws, made in Parliament. Or else it is a most clear case, that the Lords spiritual themselves alone, do not make any one of the three estates. And what matter then of more weight, may it happily seem to be, to alter the authority of the Lords spiritual, and to leave them out of the Parliament, when as notwithstanding, they being left out, the statutes of England, may remain and continue, by authority of the three estates? And it were not amiss for the Lords spiritual, to consider, that the body and state of the weal public, both now is and ever hath been, a perfect, entire and complete body, and State, without the body and state of Prelacy: and that the King, and Nobles, and Commons of the Realm, without Prelates, Bishops or Clerks, do make up all the members and parts of the body, and of the state; and may therefore ordain, promulg and execute, all manner of laws, without any consent, Anno 36. h. 8. fo. 51. h & Anno m. j fo. 93. ●. approbation or authority yielded unto the same, by the Bishop's spiritual, or any of the Clergy. And thus much our Divines, Histories, and Laws do justify. Sir james Dier, Lord chief Justice of the Common pleas in his reports, telleth us that the state and body of a Parliament in England, consisteth first of the King, as of the head and chief part of the body; secondly of the Lords, as principal members; and lastly of the Commons as inferior members of that body. By a statute of provisoes, it appeareth, That the holy Church of 25. Ed. 3. holy church founded in the state of prelacy by the King. England, was founded into the state of prelacy within the Realm of England, by the grand father of King Edward the third, and his progenitors, and the Earls, Barons, and other Nobles of the Realm, and their Ancestors, for them to inform the people of the law of God, and to make hospitalities, and alms, and other works of charity, in These uses are changed to the keeping of great horses, great troops of idlers wi●h long hair, and great chains of gold. 6 Eliz. c. 1. The King bound to do laws made without assent of prelate's to be kept as laws of the realms. the places where the Churches were founded. From whence it followeth: First that the Archbishops and Bishops only and alone, do not make of themselves any state of prelacy, but that the whole holy Church of England, was founded into a state of Prelacy: Secondly it is plain, that the Kings of England, before they and the Earls, Barons, and other Nobles, and great men had founded the holy Church of England, into a state of Prelacy, aught and were bounden, by the accord of their people, in their Parliaments, to reform and correct whatsoever was offensive, to the laws, and rights of the crown, and to make remedy, and law in avoiding the mischiefs, damages, oppressions and grievances of their people, yea and that the Kings were bound by their oaths, to do the same laws so made, to be kept as laws of the Realm, though that through sufferance, and negligence, any thing should at any time be attempted to the contrary. For whereas before the statute of Caerlile, the Bishop of Rome, had usurped the Seignories, of such possessions and benefices, as whereof the Kings of the Realm, Earls, Barons, and other Nobles, as Lords and Avows aught to have the custody, presentments and collations. King Edward the first, by assent of the Earls, Barons, and other Nobles, and of all the commonalty, at their instances and requests, und without mention of any assent of the state of prelacy, in the said Parliament holden at Caerlile, ordained that the oppressions, grievances, and damage sustained by the Bishop of Rome's usurpation, should not from thenceforth, be suffered in any manner. And forasmuch as the grievances and mischiefs mentioned in the said Act of Caerlile, did afterward in the time of King Edward the third, daily abound to greater damage and destruction of the Realm, more than ever before, and that by procurement of Clerks, and purchasers of grace from Rome 31 Ed. 5 sta. of ●●ering. the said King Edward the third, by assent, and accord, of all the great men, and commons of this Realm, and without mention of any assent of Prelates, or Lords spiritual, having regard of the said Act of Caerlile, and to the causes contained in the same to the honour of God and profit of the Church of England, and of all this Realm, ordained and established, that the free elections of Archbishops, Bishops, and all other dignities, and benefices, elective in England, should hold from thenceforth, in the manner as they were granted by the King's progenitors, and founded by the ancestors of other Lords. And in divers other statutes made by King Edward the third, it is said, that our sovereign Lord the King by the assent of the great men, and all the Commons hath ordained remedy etc. That it was accorded by our Sovereign Lord the King, the great men, and all the commons, 36 Ed. 3. c. 6 8 Ed. 3. 3. statute of provisours. that the King chief desiring to sustain the people in tranquillity and peace, and to govern according to the laws, usages, and franchises of his land, by the assent and express will and accord of the Dukes, Earls, Barons, and the Commons of his Realm, and of all other whom these things touched, ordained that all they, etc. By which desire of the King, and words of the Act, we learn, that our sovereign Lord King james, may sustain his people, The king with the assent of the nobles and commous, may repeal statutes without consent of prelate's. 25 Ed 3. in tranquillity and peace, and govern according to the laws, usages, and franchises of his kingdom, though the assent, and accord of Prelates be never required to the enacting of any statute in Parliament. Nay such hath been and yet is the power of the King, that with the assent and accord of the Nobles, and Commons, he hath authority to adnull, and make void, even those Acts which in favour of Prelacy, and assent of Prelates, have been enacted in Parliament. As by an Act made in the time of King Edward the third, is plainly to be seen. For whereas the King by assent of the Prelates, Earls, &c had willed and granted for him, and for his heirs, certain articles firmly to be kept, and holden for ever, namely that the Ministers of holy Church for money taken for redemption of corporal penance, nor for proof, and account of Testaments, nor for solemnity of Marriage, etc. should not be impeached, etc. before the King's Justices; nevertheless the same king, in the same year, with assent of the Earls, Barons, and other wise men of the Realm, and without assent of Prelates, revoked and adnulied the same articles again. Again king Richard the second hearing the complaints of his faithful liege people, and by their clamour in divers parliaments of divers abuses crept in against the solemn, and devout ordinations of Churches, &c at the request, and complaint of the commons, by the advice 3 R. 2 c. 3. 7 R. 2 c. 12. and commonassent of the Lords temporal (without mention of any Lords spiritual) is said to have ordained, That none of the king's liege people, etc. should take or receive within the Realm of England, any procuracy, etc. And in the eleventh year of the same king's reign, it is especially provided, that the appeals, pursuits, etc. made and given in the same parliament, be approved, affirmed, and established, as a thing Act. & Mo. R. 2. duly made, for the weal and profit of the king, and of all the realm, notwithstanding that the Lords spiritual, and their procurators, did by protestation, absent them out of the Parliament, at the time of the said judgement given. And the like protestation being made by the Prelates and Clergy, at a Parliament, holden the third year of the same king, it was replied for the king, that neither for their said protesttation, The king bound by his oath, to do his laws to be made though prelate's protest against him. or other words in that behalf, the king would not stay to grant to his Justices in that case, and all other cases, as was used to be done in times past, and as he was bound, by virtue of his oath at his coronation. By all which premises it is as clear, as the Sun shining at noon day, that the Lords spiritual be so fare from making any one of the three Estates, as that (if it please the king) they may not be so much as any member, or part of any of the three Estates at all. If in the time of king Henry the eight the Lords spiritual (being then more in number than the Lords temporal) had been but such principal members of the high estate of Parliament, as without whom, neither law could The Lords spiritual no principal members of the parliament otherwise than as the King pleaseth. have been made, Monastery nor Priory might have been dissolved; what could the king have done as head, and the Commons have done as feet, and the Nobles have done as the heart, the Liver and the Longs, to the dislording and discloystering of the Abbots, and Priors, the Monks and the Friars of those days. In case the Prelates with their arms, and with their shoulders, with their hands, and with their horns, had heaved, and shoved, and pushed, and thrusted to the contrary. But to come nearer unto our own times, and remembrances, if it cannot be proved, that above one Lord spiritual was present in parliament, and gave any assent to the enacting of statutes, made in the first year of the Queen's Majesties reign deceased, but that it be a No Lords spiritual present in parliament 1 E●. clear case, that the ancient jurisdiction, preeminences, rights, and privileges of the king's Crown, were restored, that popery and superstition was banished, and the doctrine of the holy Gospel harboured only by the Queen, the Lords temporal and commons, what more plain evidence or better proole can there be, that the Lords spiritual by any necessity be neither principals nor accessaries, neither branches nor buds, nor any essential member of the house of Parliament. And of this opinion are the soundest Historians, and sincerest Divines of our age. In the fifteenth year of King Edward the third (saith Master Fox) divers petitions being put up in Parliament against provisions coming Act. & M●. fol. 320. from Rome, the King's answer and agreement was made in form following: viz. It is agreed by the Kings, Earls, Barons, Justices, and other wise men of the Realm, That the petitions aforesaid, be made in sufficient form of law. Where it is to be noted (saith he) that at the grant hereof, the consent of the Bishops is neither named nor expressed, with the Lords of Parliament, and yet the Parliament standeth in his full force notwithstanding. At an other Parliament Act. & Mo. 525. (saith he) William Wicham, Bishop of Winchester, for a slanderous report savouring of a contumelious lie, and proceeding of a subtle zeal, meaning falsehood, was so by the Duke of Lancaster pursued, that by act of Parliament he was condemned, and deprived of all his temporal goods. And this seemeth to have been done (saith Master Fox) without assent, and against the wills of the Lords spiritual; for afterward at an other Parliament, great suit was made by the Clergy, for deliverance of the said Bishop: and being asked a subsidy in the King's behalf, with great lamentation they complained, for lack of their fellow and brother of Winchester, and denied to join themselves in any tractation of any such matter. And in another Parliament holden at York, in the sixth year of King Edward the third, all such Act. & Mo. 519. laws, as then passed, and were concluded by the King, Barons, and Commons, were good, notwithstanding the absence, or malice of the Lords Spiritual. For it is recorded (saith he) that only the Archbishop of York, the Bishop of Lincoln, and the Abbots of York and Silby were there present. In a book entitled the burning of Paul's Church in London, 1561. and in the fift question moved by a papist, it is said, that this manner of ministration of Sacraments, set forth in the book of Common prayers, was never allowed, nor agreed upon, etc. no not by the Clergy of England, at the last Parliament, but only it was agreed upon, by the Laity which had nothing a do with spiritual matters, or causes of religion. Whereunto the reverend Father Master Pilkington Bishop of M. Pilkington Bishop of Durisme. Duresme answering: was there not (saith he) a disputation for Religion, appointed by the Queen's Majesty, wherein your Clergy was afraid to utter their foolishness, in defending their superstition, lest they had taken more shame in answering, than they did in holding their peace? I think the Universities with so many places of this Realm, receiving religion, and these other disputing for it, may be counted to be some part of the clergy of the Realm. And so it was not received without consent of the Clergy: But these were not of the Parliament, What then? But as joash, Josaphat, Ezechias, and josias, did not make a new Religion, but restored that which was defaced and had long lain buried, so our Parliament, did not set forth a new religion, but restore that, which was godly begun before the good K. Edward, confirmed by the Parliament, and Clergy then, etc. But nothing can be concluded, as a law by Parliament, (say they) without consent of the Clergy there present. But this having not their consent, cannot be counted a law, as they think. I had rather (saith M. Pilkington) leave this to be answered by the Lawyers, than otherwise. Yet that the world may see, that something may be said in it, we grant him not this to be true, that no law at all can be made without consent of Bishops. Look your old statutes of Parliament, when Bishops were highest, afore Edward the third, and ye shall read, that they passed by consent of the Lords temporal, and commons, without any mention of the Lords spiritual, which statutes, many of them stand in strength at this day. Then it may well be gathered, that the consent of the Clergy, was not always so necessary as they think it. The Lawyers, Judges, and Justicers put in practice and execute these laws, therefore their do, may be a sufficient reason, to lead the unlearned, what opinion they have of this statutes. For Religion (except Justice Rastall) first executing that, and afterward running away, may condemn the rest, which I trust he may not; I think they would not execute them, except they had the strength and nature of laws. If they do contrary to their knowledge and opinion, they cannot be able to answer their do, but I think no wise men are of this opinion. Only these corner creepers, that dare not show their face, and would deceive the people, go about to deface all good and godly order, that displeases them. In the days of K. Edward, they had the like fond opinion, that the king could not make laws in his minority, until he came unto full age, and to make the people to disobey their Prince. Hitherto M. Pilkington L. Bishop of Durisme; with whom the most worthy and learned M. Jewel, late Bishop of M. jewel B. of Salisbury. Salisbury agreeth in every point. The wise and learned (faith he) could have told you, that in the Parliaments of England, matters have evermore used to pass, not of necessity by the special consent of the Archbishops and Bishops, as if without them no statute might lawfully be enacted, but only by the more part of voices, yea although the Archbishops and Bishops were never so earnestly bend against it. And statutes so passing in Parliaments, only by the voices of the Lords temporal, without the consent and agreement of the Lords spiritual, have nevertheless been always confirmed, and ratified by the Royal assent of the Prince, and have been enacted and published, under the names of the Lords spiritual and temporal. Read (saith he) the statutes of King Edward the first, there shall ye find, that in a Parliament holden at S. Edmundsbury, the Archb. and Bishops were quite shut forth, and yet the Parliament held on and good, and profitable laws were there enacted, the departing, or absence, or malice of the Bishop's spiritual notwithstanding. In the Records thereof it is written thus: Habito Rex cum suis Baronibus Parliamento, & Clero excluso statutum est: The King keeping a Parliament, with his Barons, the Clergy, that is to say, the Archbishops and Bishops being shut forth, it was enacted, etc. In provisione de matrona in the time of K. Edward the third, whereas matter was moved of bastardy, touching the legitimation of bastards, borne before marriage, the statute passed wholly, with the Lords temporal, whether the Lords spiritual would or no. and that contrary to the express decrees and canons of the Church of Rome. And thus much the most reverend and godly Father M. jewel Bishop of Salisbury. Wherefore to conclude this point against the Admonitors position, I dispute thus: All those persons, who by any necessity, are none of the three estates, a●d by whose authorities, the statutes of England, to this day, have not stood, to leave out the same persons, may happily seem a matter of less weight, than all men do judge it: But the Archbishops and Bishops, are such persons, as by necessity are none of the three estates, and by whose consents, the statutes of England to this day, have not stood, Therefore to leave out the Archbishops and Bishops may happily seem a matter of less weight than all men do judge it. If our Evangelicall Bishops be of that opinion, of which the Popish Bishops were, viz. that the house of Parliament is an unfit, and an unmeet place, to have the holy cause of the religion of God debated and concluded upon, and that the Laity without the clergy ought not to conclude any thing in Religion, and that in respect hereof, their presences, their voices, and their assents are necessary in the parliament: If our Evangelicall Prelates (I say) make this objection: then besides that hereby they unseemly, unmannerly, and unchristianly, accuse the whole land of ignorance and blindness in religion, supposing neither King, nor Nobles, nor Commons, to be able to discern between night and day, besides this (I say) so shameful an abuse, of a whole Christian nation, I would pray them to remember what the most reverend Fathers, Master Pilkington and Master jewel have answered, to such cavillous slanders. For what else intended they by many examples, and proofs brought for the Parliaments of England, consisting of the King, the Nobles, and the Commons, to be lawful Parliaments, and to have right to establish religion, but to justify against Popish scoffers, that religion might be conceived, and established in Parliament, notwithstanding the absence or exclusion of the Clergy? Besides, since our laws do uphold the state and authority of the Convocation house, for the examination of all causes Matters of religion not concluded in parliament, before the same be consulted of in convocation. of Religion, surely it cannot be truly averred, that it is necessary for Evangelicall Bishops, to be members of the Parliamenthouse, lest controversy of Religion should be handled, and discussed without them. For how should any matter of religion be concluded without them in Parliament, when first of all, the same is to be argued among themselves in convocation? Or let them hardly (if they can) show any one instance of any change, or alteration, either from religion to superstition, or from superstition to religion, to have been made in Parliament, unless the same freely and at large, have been first agreed upon in their Synods and Convocations? And what booteth it, then, to have a double or triple consultation, and consent of Archbishops and Bishops in parliament? Is the holy cause of God, any whit bettered, by their Bishops riding from Paul's to Westminster? Or can it receive any more strength, by their walking from Westminster Church, to Westminster palace? Nay it hath been often times so fare from being promoted by their bishops, as not only in their convocations, but also in the Queen's parliaments, the same thing hath been shamefully entreated, and taken the foil, as may witnesle the bill for the better observation of the Sabbath, 27. Eliz. which being passed by both houses of parliament, was notwithstanding gainsaid and withstood, by none so much as by certain Evangelicall bishops, and which (as there all men generally conceived) was only stayed from being made a law, by the Queen, upon their counsel, and persuasion. ADMONITION. Pag. ●8. It hath been always dangerous to pick quarrels against laws settled. ASSERTION. And is it not morbus haereditarius in Prelates to pick quarrels against reformation of errors? For even this did Stephen Gardener Stephen Gardeners argument, and the ad●onitors argument in effect one. reason against the Lord Protector, That in no case (saith Stephen Gardener) is to be attempted, of the Lord Protector, which may bring both danger to him, and trouble to the whole Realm: But innovation of Religion, from that state wherein K. Henry left it, may be and is like to be dangerous, to the Lord Protector, and to baeed troubles to the whole Realm: Therefore innovation of Religion from the state that K. Henry left it, is in no wise to be attempted. And even of this stamp, and of this strain is the argument of pickking quarrels against laws settled, for thus in effect he argueth: That Discipline in no case is to be brought into the Church by the King and Parliament, which may be dangerous to laws settled: But to bring into the Church the Apostolical discipline, may be dangerous to laws settled. Therefore the Apostolical Discipline, in no case is to be brought into the Church by the King and Parliament. But forasmuch as that noble and religious Lord Protector (notwithstanding Stephen Gardeners sophistry) continued constant, and courageous in the abolishment of popery and superstition which king Henry left, and did without dangerous alteration of laws then settled, innovate religion: How much more now may the King's Majesty, the Lords and Commons in Parliament, attempt with effect, an innovation of that state of Ecclesiastical government, wherein the Queen left the Church? And if it cannot be denied, but it had been far more dangerous for the Realm, and for the Lord Protector, not to have settled the holy doctrine, of the everlasting Gospel, by Less danger to reform the Church ●y n●w laws, than to c●ntinue corruption by old laws new laws, than to have maintained, and continued antichristianity by old laws: how should it be less danger, for the king in these days to continue corruptions in the Church, by toleration of old laws, than to have the same corruptions reform by establishment of new laws? But unto whom, or unto what, hath it been dangerous, to pick quarrels against laws settled? Wha, hath it been dangerous to laws settled? No. For how should laws settled be endangered by quarrelers! since quarrellers are evermore in danger of laws settled. Or hath it been always dangerous for a king, for a State, for a people, or for a Country, to pick quarrels against laws settled? No. For what man is he, or what face carrieth he, that dare upbraid a country, a people, a State or a King, minding to unsettle evil laws, and evil customs, to be quarrellers against laws settled? Let it then only be dangerous for private persons, upon private male-contentment, to pick quarrels against good laws, well, and rightly settled; and let it not be hurtful or dangerous for supreme Kings, powers, and principalities, by public edicts, to alter evil laws, evilly settled. For to what other end should evil laws evilly settled, be continued, but to continue evil? And what a thing were that? This argument then for laws settled, being the sophism of that Fox Stephen Gardener, is but a quarrelsome, and wrangling argument. ADMONITION. If this government whereof they speak, be (as they say) necessary Pag. 78. in all places, then must they have of necessity, in every particular parish, one Pastor, a company of Seniors, and a Deacon, or two, at the least, and all those to be found of the parish, because they must leave their occupations to attend upon the matters of the Church. But there are a number of Parishes in England, not able to find one tolerable Minister, much less to find such a company. ASSERTION. This argument seemeth to be drawn from kitchen profit, and is but a bugbegger to scare covetous men from submitting their necks unto the yoke of that holy discipline, which our Saviour Christ hath prescribed, and which the Admonitor himself confesseth, to have been practised by the Apostles, and primitive Church. And yet because this argument seemeth to lay a very heavy burden on men's shoulders, such as is impossible to be borne, it is an argument worthy That seniors and Deacons should be found at the charge of the Parish is absurd. to be examined, though in itself, the same be very untrue and absurd. For who did ever fancy that a Pastor, a company of Seniors, and a Deacon or two at the least, should be men of occupations, or that they should be all found of the parish, because they must leave their occupations, to attend upon the matters of the Church? Why? there be many hundreds of parishes in England, wherein there dwelleth not one man of an occupation. And what reason then, or what likelihood of reason was there, to father such an absurd necessity upon the Church? As for the necessity of having one Pastor in every partilar parish, and of his finding by the parish, because it is his duty, to attend upon reading, exhortation, and doctrine, although he be no man of occupation, this (I say) is agreeable and consonant, to the government of the Church practised by the bishops. And therefore in the finding, and having of one pastor in every parish, they, and we differ not. But that men of occupations only should be chosen Seniors and Deacons in every parish; or if Seniors and Deacons, were men of occupations in any parish, that they should be all found of the parish, we utterly disclaim as an absurdity of absurdities. And yet we deny not, but in Cities and great towns wherein for the most part, men of trade, do inhabit, that Seniors and Deacons must of necessity be men of occupations. Unless then an occupation must of necessity hinder men, from being faithful, religious, and godly men, there is no reason to enforce, that men of occupations in cities and What kind of men ought to be chosen seniors and Deacons. great towns, should not be chosen Seniors and Deacons. And as for Country parishes, wherein very few, or no men of occupations do reside, this objection is altogether idle. In which parishes also we affirm, that men of greatest gravity, integrity, wisdom, faith and godliness, aught to be chosen Seniors, and Deacons. And we doubt not, but all such men as whom we intent, aught to be chosen Seniors and Deacons, whether dwelling in Cities and Towns, or in the Country, would be as ready, as willing, and as watchful, prudently to employ themselves hereafter, in matters of the Church, as now either themselves, or their equals, are busied in matters of their corporations, or common weal, without any manner of contribution, to be yielded towards their finding. When the people of Israel were commanded to pay their tithes, first fruits, and other oblations unto the Priests, and Levites, for their attendance and service in the Sanctuary, we do not read in the whole book of God, that they were enjoined to be helpers and contributers to the relief and sustentation of the Captains over thousands, of the Captains over hundreds, nor of the Elders and governor's, placed city by city, for the affairs of the King. And therefore since we have neither precept nor precedent, that all the officers of the Church should be found at the costs of the Church; and since also as well in Country parishes, as in Cities, and towns, (to the praise and glory of God be it spoken) we have many able, wealthy, and substantial persons, who have given their names unto Christ, what necessity is there that any such Seniors and Deacons should be elected, as have need to be relieved, and supported by a common purse? And Churchwardens and sidemen are not found at the charges of the parishes had the Admonitor well and advisedly pondered, that our Churchwardens, and Sidemen (who carry a semblance of governing Seniors) that our Collectors also for the poor (who justle out the Deacons) being all of them men of occupations, poor husbandmen, or day labourers, and being not ●ound of the parish, are notwithstanding oftentimes in the year, troubled and turmoiled, from one end of the Diocese unto the other, and that which is more, from attendance upon their day labour, husbandry and occupations, to wait, and to attend, not upon matters of the Church, but upon money matters, pertaining to the officers of the Bishop's consistory, Had he (I say) wisely and sincerely considered these things, he would certainly not once have mentioned this so silly and simple a suggestion. But quite and clean to cut off at one blow all the skirts of the coat of this silly bulbegger, that the very buttocks of it may be bare, and that the Church may see, there is no such burdensome Charge, to be laid upon her, as is feigned; the grave and godly judgement, and policy of King Edward The judgement of K. Ed. 6. commissioners touching Elders and Deacons. the sixth his Commissioners, authorized to compile a book, for the reformation of laws Ecclesiastical, according to an act of Parliament, in that behalf provided, shall rise up for us and plead the truth and equity of this our say, The commissioners names were these: viz. The most reverend Father Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury. Thomas, Bishop of Ely. Richard Cox, the King's Almoner: Peter Martyr, professor of Divinity. William May, Rowland Taylor, Doctor of the Law, Sir john Cheek, john Lucas, Richard Godericke, M. Hadon, and others. All which reverend, learned, Titul de divinis officiis c. 10. f. 45. and religious men, as with one voice and accord speak one thing: so thus and thus they speak: Evening prayer being finished, whereunto all shall be attendant, after sermon in their own Church's, the chief Minister whom they call parochies, and the Deacon, if happily they shall be present, or they being absent, let the Ministers, Vicars and Elders, (so the Archbishop of Canterbury, afterwards a godly Martyr, and Bishops can skill of the name of Deacon and Elders) with the people confer about the money put apart to godly uses, how the same may be best employed; And let the Discipline (lo these sage Counsellors were all Disciplinarians) be reserved until that time. For they whose forwardness hath been public, and tending to the common offence of the Church, let such be recalled to the acknowledgement of their faults, and let them publicly for the same be censured, that the Church by their wholesome coercion, may be brought in good frame. Afterward let the Minister going a part, with some of the Elders, take counsel, how the others (whose manners are said to be lewd, and whose life is said to be full of mischief) may first according to the commandment of Christ in the Gospel, come together, and be communed with, by sober and discreet men, and with a certain kind of brotherly love. By whose admonition if they shall reform themselves, thanks are diligently to be given unto God. But if they shall proceed forth in their wickedness, they are to be bound with that sharp pain, which by the Gospel we know to be prepared for contumacy. And when the force and vehemency of excommunication shall be shaken, first let the Bishop be sought unto, who if he shall consent, and oppose his authority, let the form of excommunication be dispatched, before the whole Church, that we may bring in as much as may be the ancient Discipline. Thus much have these most Christian Disciplinarians, and renewers of the ancient Discipline, by Pastors, Elders, and Deacons both written and spoken. And yet have they founded never a word, to the finding of Elders and Deacons by the Parish, nor by having men of occupations to leave their business, to attend upon matters of the Church. For men thus meeting together once only in the week, and that upon the Lord's day, and that only within their own parishes, and without payment of any fees, may very well notwithstanding these attendances, give themselves wholly all the week following, to their ordinary vocations. And therefore against his not able to find one tolerable Minister, much less to find a Company, etc. I conclude thus: No Parish in England shall be burdened to find so much as one Seniour or Deacon: Therefore much less shall every Parish be burdened to find a company of Seniors, &c, Where the Admonitor complaineth, that many parishes are not Tolerable and intolerable Ministers. able to find one tolerable Minister, we would gladly learn, by what brand tolerable Ministers, are known from intolerable Ministers, according as the Lords spiritual judge, or judge not, of tolerable, and untolerable Ministers. For if all reading Ministers (as needs with them they must be) or else why do they tolerate them, be tolerable Ministers, what a vain and idle distinction, hath he coined touching the scarcity of maintenance, for tolerable Ministers? Considering all Ministers by intendment of law, be able to read: and considering also a very small maintenance, is esteemed to be a tolerable maintenance, for reading Ministers. For else why do the great Bishops, in their great Churches of Commendams, and the rich Doctors in their rich Churches of non residencies, make so small allowances to their reading and stipendary Curates? And where then is that parish in England, that is not able to maintain a tolerable Minister? ADMONITION. The next Argument, that the people might not choose their Pastors, Pag. 78. Elders and Deacons, as is required, is drawn partly from a fear, that the same will be a matter of schism, discord, and dissension in many places: partly from affection and want of right judgement of the people, partly from the unruliness of the Parishes, and partly from the broil and trouble which may follow. ASSERTION. Unto this objection if I should answer nothing at all, but only should The objection of fear etc. answered. deny, that any fear, or any other inconvenience at all, pretended in this place, is to be feared to ensue, my simple negation were more to be tolerated than his simple affirmation, for by the canon Law, non inficienti, sed ponenti, incumbit onus probandi. And yet because Doct. in ●si cui de preb●●●. the Lord hath spoken unto josua, and in him unto us all, that we should not fear, nor be discouraged to observe, and to do all, that is written in the law, for then (s●ith the Lord) shalt thou make thy way prosperous, and then shalt thou have good success, therefore in the word of the Lord (I say) that none of all this fear, broil, trouble, or turmoil, is to be feared at all. Nay that it is most assuredly, and without all doubt, to be hoped and looked for, that he would so bless the attempt of putting this order in execution, as that the people's approbation, and allowance of their Ministers, should be a matter of all peace, quietness, unity, concord, good success and prosperity to the whole Church of God in England. For what an heathenish incredulity, were it for us to reply upon the erroneous conceit of a timorous, and suspicious fancy, that fear, and I wots not what unruliness, and unquietness shall follow, when we (receiving the laws of peace from the Prince of peace) have his most stable truth, that his peace shall rest upon us, and that all fear and evil success shall cease and vanish away. No busy headed body therefore, shall be able to lead any man away, to disquiet either Church or common wealth, (otherwise than as the Church in all ages by the malice of Satan and his instruments, hath evermore been disquieted) if once the holy law of the Gospel touching this point were observed and put in ure. And if it be feared, that the choice to be made by the people of God, and which is allowed unto them by the holy laws of God would prove to be a matter of schism, discord, and dissension, how much more reason have we to fear, that the fi●e of schism, discord, and dissension, being blown already, should not break out and fame among us, if still one man alone, be suffered to thrust upon the people of God, not tolerable Ministers, according to God's heart, but intolerable Ministers, according to man's tradition. The Admonitor hath insinuated unto us often in his Admonition, that it is dangerous to innovate. And so I say too, unless there be evident ●●de constitu. prim. L. 2. utility of innovation. For (saith the Emperor) in rebus novis constituendis evidens esse utilitas debet, ut ab eo jure recedatur, quod diu aequum visum est. But is it not as perilous, yea sometimes much more perilous not to innovate? for proof whereof, it shall suffice, to take witness of our own times, and of our own experiences. It seemed equal a long time, and for many years, that the Sacrifice of the Mass, with all the pelf and trumpery thereof, should not once be Dangerous to innovate unless there be evident utility of innovation. spoken against. But we all know, that the abandoning thereof, hath not yet brought any perilous subversion, upon any nation, that purely and sound in place thereof, hath embraced the holy sacrament of the Lords Supper. It seemeth also to be equal for many ages past that the Bishop of Rome might have supreme and absolute power over all persons, states, and causes, not only in Rome, Italy, Spain, Germany, and other foreign kingdoms, but also in England and Scotland. But as yet to the view of all the world, it hath not proved perilous for the King and Queen of England and Scotland, to establish new laws, for the alteration of that ancient abuse. And why hath it not been dangerous so to do? Why? forsooth because there was evident utility in doing of it. But how could an evident utility appear before it was done? How? Forsooth because the holy law of God had warranted an alteration. For faith having eyes to see the wisdom, the power, and the truth of God in his word, discerned a far off that the institution of the Lords Supper, was long before the sacrifice of the mass. And therefore our Kings by abandoning popery out of the Realm, did not institute any new religion, but only they restored the old. Now than if a same holy law of God, do condemn the choice, and thrusting of the pastor upon the people by one man alone; and again it the same Law, do impugn the primacy of one pastor over all Pastors, as well in a Diocese, or Province, as in the whole West part of Christendom, what danger can it be, not to disfranchise the one, since without any manner of danger, we have abolished the other? or what peril can it be, not to countenance the sons, since without peril we have discountenanced the father? Especially seeing in this place of the admonition we have a plain confession, that the common manner of election of Pastors, Elders, and Deacons in the old Churches was made by the people. For if the examples of schism, discord and contention, did commonly appear in the old Churches, while that manner of election did continue, then by his own mouth Common manner of elections in the old churches was by the people. that manner of election was common, and did continue in the old Churches. Besides, this inconvenience (saith he) caused Princes and Bishops so much to intermeddle in this matter. Frow whence it necessarily again followeth, that by the holy Scriptures, and law of God, Princes and Bishops, did not intermeddle with that matter at all. For had it been simply lawful for them, to have dealt in those causes by the word of God, then aswell before schism, discord, and dissension, as afterward, yea rather much more before than afterward. For then by their own right, might Princes and Bishops have prevented Bishops n●eddle not with election of Pastors by the holy Scriptures. all occasion of schism and contention, and have so preserved the Church, that no tumult, or disorder, should once have been raised or begun therein. Again if by the law of God, Princes and Bishops, had meddled in these matters, and had not intermeddled by humane device, then lawfully by their authority alone, might they have chosen Pastors, Elders and Deacons in the old Churches: which thing in this place by necessary inference he denieth. For schism (saith he) caused them to intermeddle. So as by his confession, they were but intermedlers, and entercommoners, by reason of schism, and not commoners, and meddlers by virtue of God's word. And yet now a days our reverend Bishops in this case, are no more intercommoners, with Princes and with the people, they eaten no more entermedlers as in old times they were; but they have now so far encroached upon the prerogatives of the prince, and privileges of the people, that neither prince nor people have any commons in the election of Pastors, Elders and Deacons with them at all. Besides if schism, and contention among the people Bishop's ●n croach upon the ●igh● o● p●●●ce and people. were the reason, why Bishops first intermeddled in the choice of Pastors; we now having no schism nor contention about the choice of Pastors, by the people, and so the cause of ceasing, why should not the effect likewise cease? But this effect, is therefore still to be continued, because otherwise the cause would a new sprout out, and spring up again. Nay rather inasmuch, as for these many years, we have had schism, discord and dissension, because the bishops wholly and altogether have meddled in the choice of pastors, and have thrust upon the people, whatsoever pastors please not the people, but pleased themselves, and have not suffered the people to meddle, no not so much as once to intermeddle in these matters; in as much (I say) as these things be so: it seemeth most expedient, requisite, and necessary, for the appeasing, and pacifying of this discord, and the taking away of this schism, to have the manner of election, which was in the old Churches, restored to the people; and this wherein the bishops have intermeddled, without authority from the word, to be abolished: that so again the cause of scbism and strife, which is now among us ceasing, the effect might likewise cease. After I had ended this tract, in this manner, touching this point, there came into mine hands a book entitled, The perpetual government of Christ's Church, written by Thomas Bilson, Warden of Winchester College: in the fifteenth chapter of which book is handled this question, viz. to whom the election of Bishops and Presbyters doth rightly belong, and whetherby God's law the people must elect their pastors or no. In which chapter also the matter of schism, strife and contention is handled. The final scope and conclusion whereof, is as the proposition importeth, twofold: First, concerning Bishops, then concerning Pastors. The quarrel taken against Bishops doth not so much touch (saith he) the office and functions of Bishops, as it doth the Prince's prerogative. When you rather think the Prince may not name her Bishops, without the consent and election of the people, you impugn not us, but directly call the Prince's fact, and her laws in question. As touching this point of the proposition, because the people by any law, or custom, never challenged any right, or interest, in the choice of the King's bishops, we have nothing The King only hath power without the people to nominate his Kingly Bb. to meddle or to make about the choice; of any of the King's Bishops. Nay we confess, as his highness' progenitors Kings of England have been the Sovereign Donours, Founders, Lords and Avows of all the Bishoprics in England without aid of the people; that so likewise it is a right, and interest invested into his Imperial crown, that he only, his heirs and successors, without consent of the people, aught to have the free nomination, appointment, collation, investiture, confirmation of all the Bishops from time to time, to be planted in any of those Bishoprickes; yea, and we say further, that the King alone, hath not power only to nominate, collate and confirm, but also to translate, yea and if it please him to depose all his Kingly Bishops without any consent of his people at all. For (say we) ejus est destruere, cujus est construere, ejus est tollere, cujus est condere: Neither will we dislike, but rather content ourselves, that our late Queen's Bishops (if they shall find favour in the King's eyes) should be also the King's Bishops, conditionally they submit themselves to the laws, and prerogatives of the King's Crown, content themselves with the only name of Kingly and Princely Bishops, and not challenge any more unto themselves the sole titles of Godly and Christian Bishops, as though without injury to the law of ●od, and Gospel of our Saviour Christ, they could not be dispossessed of their Lordly Bishoprics. And therefore our most humble prayer to the King is, that his Majesty would be pleased, that such his Kingly Bishops may not henceforth over crow, and justle out God's Bishops: nor have any primacy over God's Bishops. And withal, that the King himself would vouchsafe, to hearken to the doctrine of such as are indeed God's Bishops, rather than to the Counsel of those who lately were the Queen's bishops. As touching the second part, viz. whether the people by God's M. Bilson confirmeth the people's election of their pastor p. 339. law, must elect their Pastors, or no; Master Bilson by reasons, and proofs brought for the first use of it, rather confirmeth than impugneth the same. For (saith he) Well may the people's interest stand upon the grounds of reason and nature, and be derived from the rules of Christian equity and society: That each Church and people stand free by God's law, to admit, maintain, or obey no ma●, as their Pastor without their liking, unless by law, custom, or consent, they have restrained themselves: Then the people had as much right to choose their 360, Pastor, as the Clergy that had more skill to judge: that the Apostles left elections indifferent to the people and Clergy at Jerusalem, That the Apostles in the Acts, when they willed the Church at Jerusalem to choose the seven, did not make any remembrance or distinction of the seventy Disciples from the rest: And lastly, against the cursing, and fight of the late Bishops of Rome, till excluding both 359. Prince and people, from yielding his consent, or making their request they had reduced the election wholly to the clergy, he telleth them by 339. their leave, it was not so from the beginning. From all which say of Master Bilson I conclude thus: Whatsoever is right, lawful, and free by the law of God: whatsoever standeth upon the grounds of reason and nature: whatsoever is derived from christian equity and society: whatsoever is from the beginning, and was left by the Apostles to the church at jerusalem, ●he same aught still to remain, and must be kept inviolable in the church. But the people's interest to choose their Pastor, is right; is lawful; is free by the law of God; standeth upon the grounds of reason and nature; is derived from Christian equity and society, is from the beginning, and was left by the Apostles to the Church at jerusalem: Therefore the peoples interest to choose their Pastor ought still to remain, and must be kept inviolable in the Church. The whole proposition and every part thereof, together with the assumpt, and every part thereof, is drawn from M. bilson's own confession. Only to the proposition he hath annexed certain conditions or exceptions, viz. Unless by law, custom, or consent, the people have restrained themselves, or transferred or altered their right, or else by their default or abuse, the canons, counsels, superior powers, princely, or public laws, have abridged, altered, or abrogated the same. Now than it remaineth to know, whether any consent, default, abuse, custom, canons, counsels, superior powers, public or princely edicts, may be a good and sure warrant, to abridge, transfer or abrogate, the people's interest, from having to do, in the choice of their Pastors. Our Saviour Christ, when he came in the flesh, he came to reform the abuse crept in of the Law, and to improve the corruptions of doctrine taught by the Scribes, Pharisees, and Doctors of the Law, but he took not away any least tittle of the Law, ne abolish any jot of true and sound doctrine in the Church. The Gospel teacheth us to order our judgements aright, to bridle the unruliness of our affections and to moderate our inordinate appetities. But yet, doth not the same command us, to empty our souls of all judgement, to bury our affections in our bellies, and to become as dead as stones, without all Canons and Counsels, &c may bridle disordered elections, but not disannul elections of the people altogether- sense, or appetite. In like sort we grant, that custom, consent, Canons, Counsels, Superior powers, public, and princely laws, may reform, reprove, restrain, direct, moderate, and bridle the disordered unruliness, and contentious brawlings of the people, in, and about their elections; yea and we grant further, that they may alter, abridge, or enlarge the form and manner of elections. All this we grant: but that Christian Kings or any superior powers, may take this right into their own hands (as he saith) from the people; or that the people by any law, custom, consent, canon, or council, may transfer or abolite their right, freedom, and interest given and deduced unto them, ●y these rules and by these grounds, I do not yet perceive any good ground o● reason for the same. For in so doing, how should the holy wisdom and providence of God, who hath imprinted in our nature, these rules and these grounds, this equity and this freedom, be so holily regarded, and so highly reverenced, as it ought to be. For hath he made us freemen, and can we without contempt of this grace become bondmen? And albeit in some cases, that may be well said, quod volenti non fit injuria, and that quilibet potest recedere a suo jure; yet the cases must be such, as a man's willingness, and readiness to forgo his right, be not tied to him with so strong a band, as is the band of the grounds of reason and nature, of the rules of Christian equity, and of the freedom of the law of God. It is free, I grant, for a man to eat or not to eat, to drink or not to drink, but for a man not to eat at all, or not to drink at all, and so with hunger and thirst to starve himself is not free: and in this case volenti fi● injuria. Every man that hath a wife, that hath sons and daughters, that hath man-servants, and maid servants; as by the very instinct of nature, and by the equity of the Law of Christ he hath freedom to provide for them, so must he carefully use this his freedom. And therefore he may not wholly and altogether put ●rom himself, and expose at hap hazard, the provision, education, instruction, dieting, apparelling, and lodging of his wife, his sons, his daughters and his servants unto strangers: neither may husbands, fathers, nor masters give their consent, to the making of any law, or the bringing in of any custom, whereby their freedoms should be restrained, adnihiled, or made void in this behalf. For by thus violating the rules, and grounds, and by thus treading, as it were, under foot, the equity of Christ, and the freedom they have by the law of God: should they not most profanely, and impiously despite God, and, as it were, overturn the whole order he hath set in nature? And if the people may not cast off these rules, and these grounds, this equity, and this freedom in things appertaining to the frail, bodily, transitory, and earthly life: how much less may they cast them off, or set little by them, in things appertaining to the salvation of their souls, and to a durable, spiritual, everlasting and heavenly life? But the people's right to choose their Bishops, did never depend Objection, that the people's right did never depend upon th● express commandment of God. upon the express commandment of God: neither can the people challenge by God's law, the right to choose their Bishops: I mean (saith he) not such thing is expressed, and contained in the Scriptures. What then? if it do depend, or be contained under the general grounds and rules of reason, nature, christian equity, christian society principles of humane fellowships, the law of God, the practice of the Apostles, and that which was from the beginning: Is it not sufficient? Though it be not expressed in these terms, viz. That the people must choose, or that the people have right to choose their bishops? it is not expressed and contained in the Scriptures, that every man must choose his own wife; or that every woman must choose her own husband. And yet by the doctrine expressed, or contained in the Scriptures, is it true that no man hath right either to choose an other man's wife, or to choose an other woman's husband. And that every man hath right to choose his own wife, and every woman right to choose her own husband. Again, it is not expressed and contained in the Scriptures, that infants must be baptised: neither is it expressed and contained in the Scriptures, that the bishop of Lichfield must have but one wife. Yet because it is contained in the Scriptures, that God in the beginning, brought but one woman unto one man, and gave to one woman but one husband, I assure myself it will not be denied, but that the bishop must and doth content himself with one wife, and that every Christian ought to bring their children to be baptised. Besides if Master Bilson distinguisheth bishops in England from pastors in England, and Archbishops in England, and Pastors in England, two several orders and degrees of Ministers in the Church of England, than I grant that it is neither expressed nor contained in the Scriptures that the people must choose their bishops in England. And why? but because the Scriptures (having put no difference between bishops and pastors) know no such bishops as we have in England. And therefore bishops Bishops in England are only Bb. by the King's grace and not by divine institution. in England, being bishops only by the King's grace, and not by divine institution and ordination, as pastors in England be, hence is it, that the Kings of England, by their prerogative Royal, and not the people, by the rule of Scriptures, have chosen their bishops in England. And for this cause also was it, that K. Hen. 8. with advice of the Parliament, did resume the nomination, appointment, investiture, and confirmation, of his Kingly bishops from the pope. As for the nomination of pastors, having cure of souls in parishes (otherwise than all patrons by right of patronage, do give presentments) their choice, institution, translation, o● deprivation, the Kings of England by their Pastors in parochial Churches were never placed by the King, as Bb. are in their Bishoprics. regal power never yet hitherto took the same upon them▪ And if the Kings of England by any fact, or by any law, did never take away the right, interest, and freedom from the people, in choosing their pastors; what right, other, than by usurpation, can the bishops have, to impose, or thrust upon the people pastors without their liking? But by custom and consent the people have restrained themselves. Hereunto (if it were not already sufficiently answered, that the people could not lawfully restrain themselves) yet Master Bilson himself answereth, That the late bishops of Rome never left cursing The people lost their consent by cursing and fight of the Popes. and fight, till they had excluded both prince and people, and reduced the election wholly to the Clergy. By cursing, and fight then have the people been overruled, and excluded, and not by custom or consent, have they restrained themselves. Yea and by virtue of this cursed fight only, do the Bishops of England at this day, exclude both Prince and people, from meddling in the choice of pastors. For by authority of the canon law, made by those late cursing and fight Bishops of Rome, the bishops of England have the sole ordination, and placing of pastors over the people. And from hence also it is plain, that the people's right, was not by their default or abuse, relinquished and forfeited. For then the late Bishops of Rome needed not to have cursed, and fought for it. And now whether it be not meet, that the Lord Bishops professing themselves to be Christian bishops, should still retain in their hands, and not restore unto Christian people, the possession of their Christian equity, and freedom▪ extorted from them, by the curse and fightings of antichristian Bishops, I leave it to the consideration of the reverend bishops themselves. Touching the mischiefs and inconveniences of schisms, troubles, strifes, and contentions so often inculcated, and so much urged, and excepted against the election of the people, there is no man able (as I think) to produce any one pregnant proof, out of any ancient, or late history, that any king or Sovereign power, hath interposed any supreme authority, to appease any discord or dissension, ensuing or raised upon the bare choice, made of any mere parochial pastor, by any faithful and christian people. The schisms, strifes, and factions, that were raised in the old churches, sprang out, and slowed only Schisms and contentions spring from schismatical and proud clergy masters. from the heads, and fountains of those schisms, strifes and factions: and namely from proud, ambitious, and heretical bishops, and great clergy masters. For they being infected, and poisoned with the contagion of schism, and heresy, and having soured the minds of their Disciples,, with the leaven of their heretical doctrines, no marvel if the people became followers of the evil manners of their teachers, and no marvel if they verified the proverb, Like master like man, like Priest like people. Eustatius Bishop of Antioch, being a Sabellian heretic, was deposed by the Council of Antioch, after whose deposition, a fiery flame of sedition was kindled in Antioch: Socr. 1. c. ●● because one sort of the common people sought to translate Eusebius Pamphilus from Caesarea to Antioch; some other would bring again Eustatius. Eusebius bishop of Nicomedia and Theognis bishop of Nice, being both Arians, with their confederates, raised skirmishes and tumults against Athanasius, after the death of Alexander bishop Socr. l. 2. c. 2 of Constantinople about the election of a bishop, there was greater stir than ever before time, and the Church was more grievously turmoiled: The people were divided into two parts, the one eagerly set with the heresy of Arius, clavae to Macedonius; the other cleaved very constantly to the decrees of the Nieene Council, and choose Socr. l. 2. c. 4 Paulus to be their Bishop. The cause of division among the Citizens of Emisa,, about the election of Eusebius Emisenus, was, for that he was charged with the study of the Mathematics, and accused of Socr. l. 2. c. 6 the heresy of Sabellius. After the death of Eusebius, when the people of Constantinople, had brought again Paulus, to be their bishop, the Arians chose Macedonius. The authors and chief doers in that stir, were certain Arian bishops, who before aided Eusebius, that turned up side down the whole state of the Church. These Socr. l. c. 9 and sundry such like stirs, discords, factions, and dissensions, are found to have been raised, and pursued by schismatical, and heretical bishops, their favourites and followers in the old Churches; but that these or the like mischiefs, and inconveniences, can be proved to have fallen out, by the election of Parochial pastors in the old Churches, we deny. And why then should not the interest, and freedom of faithful, and Christian people, wrested from them by curse and fightings, of faithless, and antichristian Popes, be restored to them again? And the cause ceasing, why should not the effect likewise cease? And therefore we humbly entreat the Lords bishops, that against the grounds of reason and nature; against Christian equity A ●equest to the reverend bishops. and society; against the right and freedom of the law of God; against the principles of humane fellowships; against that which was in the beginning; and against that which the Apostles left in the Churches, by colour of laws brought into the Church, by the curse and fightings of the late Roman Bishops, they would not henceforth bar and seclude the King's Christian and faithful people, from giving their consents unto their pastors. Yea and we further beseech their Lordships, that are scholars unto the Apostles, and as servants unto the old way of reason, of nature, of the law of God, of the equity of Christ, and of humane society, they would hereafter embrace that way, which was from the beginning, which is the old way, and the best way, and not any longer persist, in a cursed and quarrelling way, which is the new way, and the worst way. But if the Lords spiritual of their own accord, shall not readily vouclsafe to yield unto us this our right at our entreaty: then for my part, I will briefly show mine opinion, what were expedient, for the A supplieation to the king by the Lords and commons for the restitution of their right in the choice of their pastors. Lords and commons in open parliament dutifully to pray, and to supplicate at the King's Majesty's hand. Namely, At the humble petitions, and supplications, of all his Lords temporal, and commons in Parliament assembled, his majesty would be well pleased, to give his Royal assent to an act, to be entitled, An act, for the restitution of the ancient right, and freedom which the people of God in the old Churches had, and which the people of England ought to have, in, to, or about the election of their Pastors, and abolishing all papal power repugnant to the same. For if as it is plainly confessed) the people of all Churches, have right, and freedom by the law of God, by the equity of Christ, by the grounds of reason and nature, by the principles of humane fellowships, and by that which was from the beginning, to elect their pastors: and if also the same right, and freedom being left to the old Churches, and especially to the Church at jerusalem by the Apostles; have been taken away by the curse, and fightings of the late Bishops of Rome, then cannot the people without violation of those laws, rules, and grounds, by any Episcopal power, be any more excluded from their said right, and freedom: than could, or might the ancient jurisdiction of the Crown of England, have been still usurped by the pope from the Kings of England. ADMONITION. But alas the common people of England, through affection and want of right judgement, are more easily wrought by ambitious persons, to give their consent to unworthy men, as may appear in all those offices of gain or dignity, that at this day remain in the choice of the multitude. ASSERTION. The Admonitor in one place of his admonition, telleth us, that he must not put all that he thinketh in writing, and yet he writeth in this place that thing, which might far better have been utterly unthought than once written: for could he think, to win the common people of England, to a continual good liking, of high and stately prelacy, by upbraiding and charging them to their faces, in a book dedicated unto them, with affection, and wanting of right judgement? Was this the way to procure grace, favour, and benevolence at their hands? And albeit this slander deserved rather to have been censured by the Commons in Parliament, than by confutation to have been answered, yet for the better clearing of the right judgement, of the common people, giving their consents, to most worthy men, in all offices of gain, or dignity, remaining in their hands, I think it necessary to show the indignity of this contumely. There be (I confess) in London, York, Lincoln, Bristol, Exeter, Norwich, Coventry, and other principal Cities, and towns corporate, Majors, Sheriffs, Stewards, Recorders, Bailiffs, Chamberlains, Bridgemasters, Clerks, Swordbearers, Knights, Burgesses, and such like offices, some of dignity, some of gain, but that the officers of these, or any other places, whether of dignity, or gain, be chosen by the multitude of those places, is utterly untrue: for only according to their ancient customs, privileges, and Charters, by the chief Citizens, Townsmen, and Boroughmasters, are those officers chosen. The number also of which Electors in all places is not alike. In London the Aldermen, choose the Lord Major. In other Cities and Towns, sometimes eight and forty, sometimes fourteen, sometimes twelve, sometimes only such as have borne office, as Majors, Sheriffs, and Bailiffs in the same places, nominate and elect their new Major, Sheriffs, and Bailiffs. But that the Aldermen, principal Townsmen, Boroughmasters, and men having born chief offices in those cities, towns, and boroughs, have easily been wrought by ambitious persons, to give their consents unto unworthy men, though it have pleased the Ll. Bb. (with seen and allowed) to have spread and published this saying, yet that the same saying, is wholly unworthy, of any credit to be given unto it, or to be regarded of any wise and indifferent man, let the sober and peaceable elections made of the worthies of the land hereafter mentioned, be witnesses. The officers in Cities and towns corporate chosen with out contention and ambitious working of unworthy men. And to leave to speak of the election of the Lord Major of the City of London, Sheriffs, Aldermen, Wardens of companies, Chamberlains, bridgemasters, and other annual officers, of honour and dignity, let us consider whether the Citizens of London have been wrought by ambitious persons to choose M. Wilbraham, M. Onslie, M. Bromley, to be their Recorders, ●ll three afterward the Queen's solicitors, and M. Bromly Lord Chancellor of England: and let us consider whether the same Citizens, as men of affection, and want of right judgement, did elect to be Recorders of the same City, M. Sergeant Fleetwood, Master Serjeant Fleming, Master Serjeant Drue, and how Master Crook, a man wise, learned and religious, and a Counsellor and justicer within the principality of Wales. The Recorder of the town of Bedford, is the right honourable, the Lord S. john's of Bletsoe. The Recorder of Bristol, was a long time Master Poppam, now Lord chief Justice of England. The Recorder of Northampton, before he came to be Judge in the King's bench, was Master Serjeant Yeluerton, a favouter of the truth, and an upright Justicer: The Recorder of Warnick was Master Serjeant Puckering, afterward Lord keeper of the great seal: And of the same town the Recorder now is, a worthy Knight, descended from a noble house, Sir Foulke Grevile: The Recorder of Coventrie, is Sir john Harrington Knight, a man zealous for the true fear of God: The Recorder of Chichester, was M. Sergeant Lewkner now chief Justice in the principality of Wales. The Recorder of Norwich was Master Cook, the King's Attorney general. And who soever shall inquire, after the names, and after the manner of election of all the Recorders, in all other Cities and Boroughs of the land, I doubt not but he shall find them all, to have been fare from any least show, of ambitious working, the Citizens, and townsmen to nominate, and elect them. Moreover, as these noble Persons, these sage, grave, learned, and christian Gentlemen, quietly, and in all peaceable manner, with upright, and good affection and judgement, and without ambition, have been chosen by the Citizens, Townsmen, and Boroughmasters, to the office 〈◊〉 ●ecorderships. So likewise many and sundry honourable Counselors, have been, and as occasion is Honourable Counsellors chosen high stewards, without ambitious working. ministered, are daily elected by Citizens, and Townsmen to be their high Stewards, Sir Francis Knolles, an honourable counsellor, and one, whose faith was famous among the Churches as well abroad, as at home, by the election of the citizens of Oxford, remained until he died, high Steward of the City of Oxford. The right honourable Sir Francis Walsingham, by the common counsel of Ipswich, was made high Steward of the same town: after whose decease, the same common counsel, by their election, surrogated into the same place, the right honourable the L. Hunsdon, late L. Chamberlain. The right honourable S. Christopher Hatton, L. Chancellor of England, by the townsmen of Cambridge, was chosen to be high steward for the town of Camb. The right Ho. the old F. of Arundel; and after him the right Ho. E. of Lincoln, and after his death, the right honourable, the L. high Admiral of England, now E. of Nottingham, by the bo●oughmasters of the town of Gildford, was elected to be high steward of the town of Gildford. Of all which honourable persons, and of all other their Peers, chosen in other places of the Kingdom, by the same means, to the like offices, there is great reason, and just cause for the reverend Bishops to carry a more reverend estimation towards them, than to burden them as ambitious persons, to have sought their places, at the hands of men affected, and wanting right judgement. As for any other offices of credit, dignity, charge, and government in the common weal, now remaining in the choice of the commons: it may easily be proved, that the common people in sundry places, have bend, and opposed themselves, against ambitious persons, who by sinister, and indirect means, have hunted for preferment at their hands. And what if it cannot be gainsaid, but that some public officers chosen by public applause of the people, have corruptly behaved themselves, in their charges, and have not so equally, and indifferently distributed justice to all degrees, as it became them: yet this their misdemeanour can no more justly be laid as a fault, nor any more disgrace, or discountenance the ancient and commendable form, and manner of election, than the hypocrisy, or counterfeit zeal, of an evil man ordained by the bishop to be a Minister, can be imputed unto his letters of orders or manner of ordination. Besides if none be able Knights of the shires ●● other officers chosen by the people without trouble to the state. to prove, that the choice of the Knights of our Shires, Coroners of the Counties, Verderers of the king's forests, resting in the free voices, and consents of the freeholders; that the nomination of the high Constables being in the disposition of the Justices of peace, at their quarter sessions; that the choice of our peti-Constables, third Boroughs, Tythingmen, Churchwardens, wardens for the highways, overseers for the poor, side men and such like, remaining altogether in the free elections of the suitors to courts, Leets, and lawday, and of the inhabitants, and Parishioners of every Village, Hamlet, or Tything, have been troublesome to the Lieutenants of the Shires, to the Stewards of our Courts, to the Lords of our liberties, nor to the ordinaries of the Dioceses: If (I say) there be not any one man able to bring forth some few persons, for many years passed, by whom the Officers and Magistrates of the Queen's peace, have been sued unto, and importuned, for the pacification of any strife contention, or debate of any busy head, or ambitious person, raised among the people, about the choice of any one of these Oficers; then (I say), it is meet and it importeth the Lords Bishops very deeply, that for ever hereafter they be silent, and never any more utter so Pag. 8. vile a slander, against so noble a people, as are the people of England: viz. that upon affection and want of right judgement, they will easily be led by ambitious persons to prefer unworthy persons un●o all Offices of gain or dignity. Or that this Nation of England, upon light causes, is more inclined to broil, and trouble than any other. And to speak the truth (as daily experience teacheth us) what No fear of trouble about the choice of an ecclesiastical Officer. sear of trouble is there likely any way to ensue by reason of dissension, and ambition among the people in the choice of an ecclesiastical Officer, when most of the people shall rather shun and eschew, than long or desire to bear any ecclesiastical office? The common people among whom I dwell use oftentimes many delays, yea they procure what favour and friendship they can, not to be appointed, to any the inferior Offices before specified: And why do they so, but because those offices be full of bodily care and trouble? And is there then any Christian, knowing, how the whole soul, mind, and spirit of a man is altogether to be employed in the discharge of a spiritual function, that will dissentiously and ambitiously seek to be chosen an Elder? The admonitor telleth us, that men by experience know that many parishes upon some private respect, do send their letters of earnest pag. 79 commendation for very unfit, and unable persons, insinuating thereby what an inconvenience might follow, if Parishes had the whole direction, and order to sound out, who were fit and able persons. But as this fancy was never yet by any of sound judgement on our behalf so much as once thought, much less insisted upon: so may it please the reverend Bishops to be advertised, that the meanest and simpliest parishioner, among a thousand, can quickly retort this reason against their Lo. viz. that no parishes by letters of commendation, can commend unso any bishop, any person, as an able and fit man, unto any particular parish or special charge, unless the same, or some other bishop have formerly ordained him, and approved him to be a fit and able person for every place. And how then were it possible if the choice of having one, to be their pastor were wholly in the hands of a parish, that the same parish could choose any worse men, any more ignorant, and unlearned men, than their Lords have commended unto us. For have they not chosen, sent, and commended such unto us as know not a be from a battle door, as uneth know to Ministers sent unto the people, which know not a be from a battle doors. read English, and as know not the Lords prayer from the articles of faith: Of which sort of Ministers, the Parson of Haskam now living a Chaplain in Winton-diocesse may be produced for a witness omni exceptione major. For thus much is to be proved from the report of a good and religious Knight, dwelling within that diocese, that upon a time in the presence, and at the instant request of the said Knight, when a Protestant bishop of the same diocese deceased, had demanded of the new Parson of Haskam, which was the first Petition of the Lords prayer, the said Parson, after he had a pretty space paused The parson of Haskams' answer to the Bishop of Winchester. and gased towards heaven at length made this answer, viz. I believe in God the Father Almighty: at which answer the Knight merrily smiling, I told you my Lord, quoth the Knight, what a profound Clerk your Lordship should find this fellow. Well how unclerkely, and how unprofoundly soever, this Clerk then answered, and albeit at that present, he could not obtain the institution, which he came for, to that benefice (for the good Bishop hated such gross ignorance) yet this Clerk afterwards, by the corruption of the s●me Bishop's Chancellor, was instituted into the same benefice, and to this day possesseth it quietly, though he can hardly read English to the understanding of his people. I could have informed him also of many other such Clerks resiant and beneficed in that Diocese: and namely of the Vicar of W. who upon an holy day, instead of preaching the word which he could not, or in reading of Homilies Fables read in the Church. which he would not, (to terrify his Parishioners with the judgements of God, and to move them unto repentance) solemnly read and published a counterfeit fable out of a little Pamphlet, entitled, Strange news out of Calabria, pretended to be prognosticated by M. john Doleta. Of these and of a number of such able and skilful Clerks and Chaplains; my Lords of the Clergy may be informed. ●f the people had choice of their pastors they would provide better than the bishops send them. And therefore on the behoof, and in the defence of the common people of England, I am to testify and to protest unto their Lordships, that by the mercifulness and goodness of our God, we are not yet become so ignorant, rude, and barbarous, as that we would admit such manner of Clerks and Chaplains, to have the cure of our souls, in case, it laid in our power to choose, and refuse our own Pastors. No, no, our souls, and the souls of our wives, children and families should be more dear, and more precious in our eyes, than that carelessly we would hazard, all our birthrights, upon the skill and ability of such a mess of hirelings, and idol shepherds. And surely me thinks it standeth greatly with the charity of our Lord Bishops to conceive Though the common people be not able to discern of pastors, yet the Nobles are able. the Commons, to have so much natural understanding, as not to choose a cobbler, when they want a carpenter; nor to retain a loiterer in lieu of a labourer, nor to hire a sleeper, in stead of a watchman. But (alas) be it, that the poor Commons of England, were thus wretched and thus bewitched; yea be it, that they were thus desperate and besides themselves: should therefore the Nobles and Peers of the Realm; be as profane, as impious, and as heathenish as they? Are the great men also unworthy, unable, and unfit to discern between night and day, between light and darkness? Can they also put no difference between good and evil, between a blind guide, and him that hath his eyesight? or have they no better stomach, than to cast up Mithridate, and to digest hemlock? will they also choose them Captains from among Corvisers? and will they call shepherds from among swineheards? or will they take them pastors from among pedlars? or will my Lords of the clergy charge them to be those ambitious persons, to work the Commons, (for their private respect) to the choice of unworthy men? or will they, being themselves under his Majesty, the worthies of the land) and chief guides and leaders of men in peace and in war upon earth, choose the scumm, the refuse, and the baggage of the land, to guide their own souls to hell? For to heaven by the labour and industry of such idol ministers (as whose lips preserve no knowledge) they can never be brought. A great part of the common people (saith he) are backwardly affected towards the truth of Religion: from which backwardness The common people accused to be backwardly affected to religion. he draweth an argument against the allowance of the pastors by the people. But (alas) is there any marvel, that the common people (for the most part) be backwardly affected? For how is it possible, that they should step one foot forward, when either their guides stand still, or go not at all, or at least run fromward? or can The backwardness of the people proceedeth from the backwardness of their guides. the common people become good scholars in the school of Christ, and learn to know the truth of his religion, when their Masters and Tutors (whom my Lords of the Clergy have begotten, provided, and thrust upon them) be unlearned and irreligious dullards What? Can truth spring from error? or can light arise out of darkness? Do men pluck, or pull corn from a dead stalk, or a full ear from a dead root? Can a Vintner draw wine out of an empty Casque? or doth a Baker pour meal out of a bottomless bag? If then the common people be foolish and ignorant, if they do err, and be irreligious, they may justly challenge the Lords spiritual of unkindness, and want of love, not because they have sent Ambassadors unto them, as the Gibeonites sent unto josua, with old sacks, and old bottles, with old shoes, and old raiment; with provision of bread dried, and mouled: but because they have sent them such ambassadors, as have had no sacks, no bottles, no shoes, no raiment, yea and no manner of bread at all. All which notwithstanding, the Admonitor (by the backwardness of the people) laboureth mightily to acquit the Lord Bishops, laying to the people's charge, that this fault hath not happened for want of teaching by the Ministers, but for want or profiting by the people The Scripture (saith he) in no place teacheth us, that the offences and faults of the Ministers, are always the only cau●e, why the word of God doth not take place in men's hearts. It is commonly, and almost always imputed to the way wardness, unthankfulness, and obstinacy of the people that hear it. But (alas) who ever fancied that the faults of the Ministers of God, were the only cause, why the word of God preached by them, did not enter into the hearts of men? Where the Minister sincerely preacheth the word of God, if there the people do not worthily embrace the same, the people are only in blame and not the Minister, no, though he may have many faults: for when they teach the truth, the people are bound to do as they Mat. 2●. 2, 3 say, and not to do as they do, because they say and do not. But the complaint that hath been, and is still made is this: namely, that the people generally in most places of the land, and for the most part have no seed at all sown, for want of husbandmen; that the people cannot be harvested, for lack of labourers, that the people could bring forth no fruit, because they were not ered and ploughed; and that the people could not hear. What? for want of their own ears? no, but for want of the Priests lips, which should have preserved and taught knowledge, and therefore this general backwardness and unfruitfulness of the people in religion, must still light upon such as have been the occasion that there have been so few drivers to haite them on, and to whistle them forward. No? why this Realm of England (as saith the Admonitor) never had so many learned men, nor of so excellent gifts, in delivering the word of God; it Pag. 140. is the greatest ornament that ever this Church had; for my part (saith he) surely I do reverence, and marvel at the singular gifts of God, that I see in many. And do my Lords of the clergy marvel in deed of so great a number of excellent men, and of so singular gifts in them? And should not then also the people marvel beyond marraile, Men of excellent gifts and men of no gifts, are unequally matched in the ministry of the Gospel. that some of the Lords spiritual, for small matters, and of so little importance, should put to silence, many of the chiefest of many excellent and learned men? Nay may not the people be astonished at the little love of some of the Bishops, when as upon displeasure conceived against many excellent and learned men, their Lordships suffer, the people to starve, and famish for want of food, rather than those learned and excellent men should break unto them, the bread of life? But be it granted that many excellent men's mouths be not yet stopped, or if they have been stopped, they are now opened again, what is this to that, that they have no moe learned men, or that, they have any hirelings at all? For to what use serveth an hireling, but first to rob, to spoil, and to kill, and afterwards to trust to his heels to trudge, and to run away? As for that, that many learned The use of an hireling The number of excellent Ministers in the ministry, is small, in comparison of unlearned Ministers. and excellent men, in many places of the land do still feed the people, they may be said (in respect of the people unfed) to be an handful, to an house-full, or as an inch to an ell. Besides how are the people fed in many places by some of these many learned men? is not one of them allotted (by a licence in a box) to break bread unto twenty or forty thousand people? What? by themselves in one place sitting round and close together? Nay but in a thousand and more Parishes distant fare and wide asunder, and that at sundry times, one time long after another: and what a strange and new kind of feeding call you that? Is it not as if a victualler, should provide one meals meat for a company at London, and an other meals meat for a company at Lincoln, and an other meals meat for a company at Exeter, and an other meals meat for a company at Bristol, to feed his The manner of diet set before the people, by such Ministers as wander from place to place. guests, until he had ridden from coast to coast to provide new viand? And yet this is the common manner of Diet, and the common manner of food prepared and set before the souls of the people. For many of these learned Preachers, gallop from place to place, and troth from parish to parish, and give unto the people at one time, bread, half baked, at another time, beer half brewed; sometimes either meat twice sodden, or half raw, and many times drink, both dead, sour, and wallowish. And how then is it possible, that the souls of the people should prosper, wax strong and be pliable in going forward in the truth of religion, they being so thinly dicted, and entertained with so small cost. But let these gallopers pass, we will conclude this point: and thus we say, that the backwardness of the people in the truth of religion (how backward soever they be, and howsoever the same backwardness may happen) can be no good plea in bar to take from the people of God, their right, interest and freedom, from the allowance and approbation of their pastor. As for that vain and ridiculous gibe, whether all (hand over head) men and boys, women and girls, young and old, etc. should give their consents, to this fond gibe, I answer, that there is no such vanity of vanities intended. Answer to the abstract For when we say, that the people of every parish, aught to choose and elect their pastor, we mean, not that the election should solely be committed to the multitude, but we intent only that the chief Fathers, Ancients, and Governors of the parish in the name of the whole should approve the choice made by the holy Ministry: wherein we follow the example of the ancient people of God, whose affairs were committed to the chief Fathers sitting in the gate. Where the Admonitor hath pretended that it is impossible to be Pag. 80. brought to pass, which (as he saith) is most of all pretended for the The people may know a man to be a fit Minister though he be not brought up among them. common manner of election, that the people may know their Minister, and thereby have the better liking of him, unless every parish shall have within itself, a School or College, where those should be brought up that shall be preferred to the Ministry amongst them: this (I say) is another vanity of vanities, and a vexation of spirit without all mean or measure, yea it is an asseveration void of all sense and soberness. For is it not possible for a Lord Bishop, to know the equity's, condition, and behaviour of a man fit to be retained for his Secretary or Gentleman-usher, unless the same party be brought up, in some School or College within his own house? Or is it impossible for his Lordship to know the education, life, learning, gifts of utterance and aptness to teach, of a man, and so to have the better liking of him, to make him a Minister, unless within his Parish, there be a School or College, wherein such as are to be preferred, to the Ministry be brought up? If then without having any school or college, within his own house, or within his own parish, for the bringing up of such as are received by a L. Bishop either to his private service, or to the public ministry; his Lordship may know, and so have the better liking of them, whom he would prefer. How then followeth it to be impossible, that the people should know their Minister, and so have the better liking of him, unless every parish had in itself a School or College, where those should be brought up that should be preferred to the Ministry amongst them? What? is one tongue, of one man alone able to inquire and learn the manners of many men to be ordained & placed Ministers in many places, and are many tongues of many men not able to inquire and learn the conversation of one man to be placed in one place? or have the eyes and ears of one man, sight quick enough, and hearing good enough, to hear and to see into the education and life of all the Ministers, within all the parishes of one whole diocese? and are all the ears and eyes of many men, deaf and dim to hear and to see into the life and education of one Minister, in one parish? If the parish of Maries in Cambridge, or the parish of All-hallowes in Oxford, were destitute of an able, and preaching Minister, might not the people of the first know M. Doctor Overall, and have the better liking of him; and might not the people of the second, know M. Doctor Reynolds, and have the better liking of him to be their pastor, unless Corpus Christi College in Oxford, stood in All-hallows Parish, or Kat. Herle in Cambridge stand in Mary's parish? or did the Dean and Chapter, the Clerks and people of Lincoln, and Winchester, therefore know H. C. and thereby had they the better liking of him to choose him first Bishop of Lincoln, and secondly Bishop of Winchester, because he was brought up in some School or College in any of the parishes of Lincoln and Winchester? I trow himself, if he were now living, would not so affirm: and what then should eale the Gentlemen o● the Temple, or the people of the Parish of Bow in London, that they may not know, and thereby have the better liking of M. Travers, and M. Barber to be their Ministers, albeit neither of the twain, were brought up in any School or College, in, or about the Temple, or the Parish of Bow? For who knoweth not, that there be means enough, and enough to know a man within and without, and to have a good opinion and liking of him, though the same man be not brought up in any School or College, amongst them? Wherefore his argument of (cannot possibly be brought to pass) may pass, and repass, as the only stream of an The people would not do as the ordinaries use to do, first choose Ministers and then set them to school: humorous passion. Neither may the people in this case do as the Ordinaries use to do. For the Ordinaries first ordain Ministers; secondly, they set them to school and give them their tasks, that by their Archdeacon's they may know, how they profit; and lastly they have the better liking of them because they be branded with their own stamp. But the people (I say) may not, ne yet would they, thus ungainely set the cart before the horse. But they would use all good and circumspect care and diligence, first to know them, secondly upon just and equal cause, to like them, and lastly, upon their liking, to allow and approve them. For how should a m●n allow any thing, before he like it, or how should he like it before he know it? or how should he know it, before he had seen, heard, or enquired after it? And hereupon also his two asseverations next ensuing, fall to the ground. For albeit he affirm, that if this manner of election were admitted, the Pag. 80. If the people were admitted, to the election of their Minister they should be better acquainted with him, than now they be. people (nevertheless.) should have as little acquaintance with their ministers as now they have: albeit (I say) he thus thought, yet nevertheless his (ipse opinatus sum) I am of opinion, is not (ipse dixit) unto me. No, I aver and hold the contrary to be true, and therefore his opinion in this case) to be erroneous. For this cannot be denied, that there is not any one man, or woman amongst forty, in any one parish amongst forty, that can tell, that ever he, or she, did see, or hear, of the Minister appointed, and sent by the Ordinary, to be Parson or Vicar of the ●arish Church vacant, before such time, as he did hear, or see, the Parish Clerk to trudge with the Church door keys, to let in the Sextin, to ring the bell, for the said Parson, or Vicar's induction, and real possession. And if the people of every parish had their consents in the choice and approbation of their minister, were it possible to have less acquaintance with him than this? For we avow that the people ought not to give their consents unto any pastor, before they have seen him, before they have heard him divide the word, before they have procured a good testimony of his gifts, from those who by the word have interest to approve him; and lastly before they have gotten sufficient notice of his condition, estate, conversation, birth, education, and life. Wherefore these things being carefully and diligently searched into, not by one, but by many, not for a fee, but of duty, not for reward, but for conscience; not for one day, but for many days, I trust it will not still be holden for an oracle, that the people should have as little acquaintance with their Ministers, as now they have. As for the second poinr, that fare greater occasions of partial suits should follow this manner of common election, whereof we speak, No partial ●uits can follow the election of Ministers by the people. than now there is: this is also (I say) not true; nay that fare less occasion of partial suits, should follow than now there is, this (I say) is true. For by this means all partial suits now happening, may either be extinguished, or with less charges pursued, than now they be. For there can be no suits, much less can there be any partial suits, when neither plaintiff, nor defendant may be found, and where also there can lie no writ, nor any action be commenced. For who be the parties between whom these partial suits should arise? Be there many ministers, who for one place, and at one time, are found meet for the same? And do they sue and contend one against anoother, which of them should possess the place? or should these so many partial suits, consist between the inhabitants of one parish; one part leaning to one side, and an other part cleaving to the other side? Touching the Ministers, we affirm that none may or aught to sue or solicit any man's voice, directly or indirectly, much less to labour for a place of Ministry. And therefore, we desire by an irrevocable law (according to the manner of the Medes and Persians) to have it enacted, That as well every procurer, and labourer for a voice, as also No occasion of partial suits about election, between parishioners every suitor and solicitor for a place of Ministry, be adjudged ipso facto, incapable for ever of the same place. For the second, touching partial suits to arise between the Parishioners, about the election of their Pastor, these suits for aught I yet conceive (wherein I grant I may err and conceive too little) may easilier be dispatched, than be once begun. Parishioners ordinarily in the Country, sue not, ne molest one the other for pleasure, but for profit; they are not so lavish of their purses, nor so careless of their thrifts, as to jangle in vain, when before hand, they know there is no hope of gain. And indeed what advantage, or what pleasure should Ancients divided against Ancients, and chief men distracted against chief men in a parish, about the election of a Minister, reap by such ● division, and distraction? Besides by our daily experience, we have learned, that very rarely, or not at all about elections, made by the people of any Officers, either in the Country or in Cities and Towns, any variance or partial suits have been stirred, between the electors. For though some times perhaps they in their judgements one from another, yet rest they more wise and provident, than to impair their own estate, to advance an other man's reputation. And if in former times there have no occasion of partial suits (touching public officers in the common weal) fallen out between the people, when out of a multitude they have chosen one: much less can there be any occasion of No partial suits can be among parishioners, when one only is propounded to be chosen by them. partial suits, if only there remain but one, to be chosen to be a Church officer. For if all the ancients agree to choose that one, then is all the suit (about him) ended: and if the greater part disagree, yet this their disagreement can be no occasion to breed and nourish suit and contention. And why? first because no other cause by the greater part ought to be alleged, to withdraw their consent, but only such a cause as the law should precisely allow, in the same case, to be a just cause: Secondly, because this just cause before the day of election, aught to be made known unto the Magistrate, and by him to be approved; so that if the greater part upon the day of election shall descent, not having before hand alleged, and provided a just cause of their dislike, the voices of the lesser part (as being supposed the better part) shall prevail, confirm, and make good the election. Oh! here is much (said my Lords) spoken of a choice, and election to be made by the Ministers and people, by proofs to be made before the Magistrate, but here is not any one word spoken, or any mention made of the Patron, of the Bishop, or of the Archdeacon, of presentation, institution, or induction. And what an alteration, and innovation would that be, and what a dangerous attempt were it, to alter laws settled; and that Patrons should be kerbed, and that Bishops and Archdeacon's should not meddle in these businesses any more? Well then to wipe away as much as in me lieth, this cavillous reproach, and obloquy from the servants of God, who are challenged to be new fangled, giddy headed, and fanatical spirits, strange innovators, and desirers of perilous alterations, to wipe away (I say) this slander, If it may please the King with his Princely wisdom to confirm the form of policy now in use and practice, touching ordinations, presentations, The form of Church policy now in practice by the Bishops, and the platform of Church policy, desired to be planted by pastors, compared together. institutions, and inductions, by Bishops, Patrons, and Archdeacon's, with the manner of that platform of Discipline (concerning the substance of these things) which is propounded. And if the propounders prefer but the commandment of God, before the traditions of men; but the King's Crown, before the Bishop's Mitres, but a feast of fat things, yea of fat things full of marrow, before lean spits and empty platters; but a feast of wines, yea of wines fined and purified, before sour and untoothsome whey: I hope his Majesty will graciously vouchsafe so to protect the propounders (being his faithful, loving and obedient subjects) as that hereafter they shall not be charged with any more so unjust and scandalous imputations. The practice and policy then now in use, is after this and this manner. The Bishop oftentimes at his pleasure, (beside the law, nay rather Inconveniences of bishoply ordination are these, pestering of the churches with unlearned ministers. Unlawful gain for ●etters or orders the breach of many good laws. against the express letter of the Law, and public Canons of the Church) not only ordaineth Ministers alone, without assistants of such number of Ministers, as is required; but he also ordaineth them, (for the most part.) when there is no place of Ministration void. Now the buds which, (to the grief of many godly men, and to the obloquy of the Professors of the Gospel) have sprung from this manner of ordination, have been these, viz. The public breach of many good laws; the pestering of the Church with multitude of unable Ministers, together with much unlawful gain (by immeasurable exaction of money) for letters of orders. For it cannot be denied, but the Bishop's Secretary, Gentleman-usher, groom of his chamber, Butler, Pantler, Porter, and other the Bishop's menials, (besides his own and his Registers fees, and his Clerk for expedition) do usually (all, or most of them) challenge and receive fees, (some more, some less) before the poor Minister with his box of orders can be suffered to pass by the porters lodge: these are the fruits of the Bishop's Suits between the patron and the bishop. sole ordination. The suits which have grown and daily do grow, by the Patron's presentation to the Bishops have been and are these, Sometime contention and suit in law, between the Patron and Bishop, for disallowing the Patron's Clerk, for non-abilitie, or as being criminous. Sometimes, if two Patrons pretend right of patronage, Suits between Clerk and Clerk. if one of their Clerks be instituted, and the other rejected (as necessarily it must come to pass, for one wife can have but one husband) then followeth suit at law, between the Clerk refused, and the Clerk admitted, wherein also the Bishop is made a party by a writ of quare impedit, sometime suit falleth out between the Clerk presented, and the Bishops, when the Clerk calleth the Bishops Suits between the Bishop and the Clerk, (by a double quarrel) before the Archbishop, for not granting institution: and sometime also likewise debate is moved, and law attempted, between the Clerk instituted, and the Archdeacon, who Suits between the Clerk and archdeacon: (knowing the Church not to be vacant) refuseth to execute the Bishop's inductorie mandat. For many times, upon pretence that the Church standeth void (being indeed full) the Patron, upon suggestion granteth a presentation, and the Bishops also institution; which if the Archdeacon refuse to execute, than (besides the discord between the Bishops and the Archdeacon, for contempt of the Suits between the Bishop and the Archdeacon. Bishops mandat) he, who pretendeth title by vacancy, thinking to have right, though a real incumbent be in possession, bringeth their two titles to be tried in the Ecclesiastical Court; but before the matter can be finally sentenced by that Court; many foul riots, ●●ots and breaches of the King's Peace. breaches of the King's peace, and unlawful assemblies, upon entries and keeping possessions, do ensue: as was well enough lately known in the case between Rogers, and Baker, for the title to the Parsonage of Barby, in the County of Northampton. Howbeit, let it be supposed that none of these variances in law f●ll out between the Bishops and the Patron, between the Bishops and the Clerk, between the Bishop and the Archdeacon, between the Clerk and the Archdeacon, and between Clerk and Clerk: the exaction (notwithstanding) of unlawful gain, for fees of letters of institution, and fees usually payable to the Bishop his Officers, as aforesaid; for fees of the Archdeacon's induction; his Rester; his Clerk, and his Apparrators fees: the unconscionable exaction Unlawful fe●s for letters of institution, etc. (I say) of these unreasonable fees, may seem to be a conscionable motive, to cause better things than these, without danger to be attempted, and innovated. And yet these are not all the bad events that happen, and fall out upon the presentation, institution, and induction now used. But by the interest whereby the Bishop challengeth to be custos Ecclesiarum, there happen as bad, if not worse than these. For there is no sooner a Church void, but a post is sent in all haste, with letters of sequestration, to sequester the Unlawful fees fo● letters of sequestation. fruits, to the use of the next incumbent. Which next incumbent, for the great care taken to preserve the fruits to his use (before he can obtain to be put in real possession) must pay Ten Shillings, or a mark, or more, for those letters of sequestration, which as much more also for letters (so called) of relaxation; besides Two pence, Three pence, or Four pence a mile, for portage to the Summoner. And from hence is the Patron (as I take it) very much injuried. For he being (as it appeareth) by the Statute of 25. of King Ed. 3. Lord and Avower of the benefice, aught to have the custody and possession thereof during the vacancy. Besides many times wilful Perjury by the Clerk, and robbery by the patron. perjuries are committed by the Clerk, and many times sacrilegious robberies are perpetrated by the Patron. The Clerk (when he sweareth that neither directly, nor indirectly, any compact, promise, band or agreement hath been made or passed by him, for him, or in his name to the Patron;) many times forsweareth himself. And if the Clerk be presented to a Vicarage, than the Bishop Every Vicar sweareth or aught to swear to be resident. (if he be faithful to the law) sweareth him to be resident upon the same Church: Which oath (notwithstanding) is afterwards broken; when as the same Vicar, accepting another benefice (and retaining withal the former, by purchase of a dispensation) betaketh himself to be resident upon his second Benefice, and so by nonresidence from his first Vicarage, committeth perjury. Touching the Patron's robbery, thus it is, and thus many times hath it fallen Patroness robbery. out. The Patron, when (at the hands of two, three, or moe such perjured Clerks) he hath (time out of mind) possessed, the mansion house, or gleebe-land of the Parsonage; finally (in time) spoilt the Church both of the house, and gleebe-land: the gleebe-land being often intermingled with his own enclosed grounds, he possesseth them as his own inheritance; and in steed of the Parsonage house, either he buildeth another new, or else hireth some cottage or farm house for the Parson and his successors to inhabit in. These abuses (we see) are many, and yet, besides these continuing at this day in the government established, there remaineth others, as foul, and as gross as any of the rest: which is the too too inordinate, and licentious chopping and changing of Churches from Minister to Chopping of benefices despensations, etc. Minister; for dispensations, commendames, perinde valeas, res, pluralities, and Non-residencies: wherein not the people to be taught, but their own backs and bellies to be clothed and fed, is wholly respected. Now than that this manner of government, wherein the afore specified, & the like discommodities daily fall out, under colour of not diminishing the King's Prerogative, of not altering laws settled, of not attempting dangerous innovations, and of the preserving of the right of Patroness, Bishops, and Archdeacon's, should still be continued without any mention or Remembrance to be once had, of their discontinuance, especially in the time of Peace, and under a Christian Magistrate, and in a state (as he saith) reform; we humbly leave to the wise, and mature deliberation of our most Christian King, and State in Parliament. And we most humbly beseech the King and State, that indifferently, freely, and largely, it may be argued, heard and examined; whether it be possible, Supplication to the King and State in parliam. that the tenth part of these, or any other the like disorders, corruptions, and grievances, can possibly fall out in the Church, by that platform of Discipline, which is required to be planted. And to the end that the King's Majesty, and the State, might rightly and perfectly be informed and resolved of those points, whereof we now speak, viz. of the petition, ordination, election, prefentation and admittance of every Parochial Pastor, to any Church, with cure of souls; how the same may stand, and not be disagreeable to Petition, ordination, etc. of Mistress or Pastors, how the same may be made without Bishops or Archdeacon's, not disagreeable to divers laws already settled. divers laws already settled, and in force; it is requisite that the substance of these things, in this place be entreated of; wherein against the base office, and mean person of the Archdeacon, we oppose the Royal office, and most excellent person of the King: against the immoderate office, and stately person of one Lordly Bishop; we oppose the meek and temperate carriage of a Senate, or Presbytery, of many wise, learned, and grave Ministers, together with a Reverend assembly of the Ancients, and chief Fathers of every Church destitute of a Pastor. As for the Patrons right, we are so fare from diminishing any jott of the true right which by laws settled he ought to have, as that he shall quietly possess his interest, and that with less trouble and expense, yea and with greater privilege than he did before. Thus therefore touching the office and person of the King, the duty of the Presbytery and people, the right of the Patron, and the person of the Minister to be ordained, thus and thus we say, and thus and thus (as we think) may our say well stand with laws settled. By an act primo Eliz. c. 1. the King hath full power and authority, by Letters Patents under the Great Seal of England, when, and as often as need shall require, as he shall think meet and convenient, and for such, and so long time as shall please his Highness to assign, name, and authorise, such person, or persons, being natural borne subjects, as his Majesty shall think meet, to exercise, use, occupy, and execute, under his Highness, all manner of jurisdictions, privileges, and preeminences, in any wise touching or concerning any Spiritual, or Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, within this Realm of England. Again, by the book of ordaining Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, it is prescribed, that the Bishops, with their The Bb. and Priests must lay on their hands. Priests, shall lay their hands severally upon the heads of every one that receiveth Orders; that every one to be made a Minister, must be of virtuous conversation, and without crime, sufficiently instructed in the holy Scriptures; a man meet to exercise his ministry duly; that he must be called, tried and examined; that he must be presented by the Archdeacon, and be made openly, in the face of the Church, with prayer to God, and exhortation to the people. And in a statute made 21. of King Hen. 8. it is affirmed, That a Bishop The Bishops must use six Chapleins at giving of orders. must have six Chaplains, at giving of orders. Besides, by an ancient and lowable custom, the Parishes, and Parish Churches within every Archdeaconry, remain unto this day, distributed into certain Deaneries, the Parson or Vicar of the ancientest Church, commonly called the Mother Church of the deanery (unless by Every Archdeacon divided into Deaneries. consent, some other be chosen by the Ministers themselves) hath the first place, and is the chief director, and moderator of whatsoever things are propounded in their Synodall meeting; which Minister also is called Archipresbyter or Decanus curalis, according to the appellation of the chief Minister, of the mother, or chief Church of that Diocese, who is called Archipresbiter or Decanus cathedralis: so that unto this day these Ministers meeting at the Archdeacon's visitations once in a year at the least, there remaineth in the in the Church of England, a certain image or shadow of the true, ancient, and Apostolical conference, and meetings. Wherefore from these laws, and from this ancient manner of the meetings of Ministers, and of having one principal and chief Moderator amongst them; according to the Apostolical practice, and usage of the primitive Church, thus already settled in the Church of England, we humbly leave it to be considered by the King's Majesty. First, whether it were not meet and convenient for his Highness by his letters patents under the great Seal of England, to assign, A Minister to be ordained by the Bishops, and a company of Minister's at the King's commandment. name and authorise, the Bishops and six or more Ministers within every deanery continually resiant upon their benefices, and diligently teaching in their charge, to use and execute all manner of jurisdiction, privilege, and pre-eminence, concerning any spiritual ordination, election, or institution of Ministers to be placed in the Parochial Churches, or other places, with cure of souls, within. Secondly, when any Parish Church, or other place, with cure of souls, shall be void, whether it were not meet and convenient, that the ancients and chief Fathers of that place, within a time to be limited for that purpose, should intimate the same vacancy unto Vacancy of a benefice to be intimated t● the King's office. the office of the King's civil Officer, appointed for that Shire or Diocese: to the end the same Officer, by authority from the King, might command in the King's name, the Bishop and other Ministers, to elect, and ordain, and the people of the same place to approve and allow of some able and godly person, to succeed in the Church. Thirdly, the Patron (if the same be a common and lay person, A Lay patron, instead of varying his Clerk may present two Clerks at one time. having now liberty to vary his Clerk, if he be ●ound unable) whether it were not meet and convenient (to avoid all manner of varying) that, within the time permixed, he should nominate at one time two Clerks, to be taken out of the Universities, or other Schools, and Nurseries, of the Prophets, and that the same nomination be made unto the Bishop, and the said six Ministers, to the end that both the Clerks, being tried and examined by them, the abler of the two might be preferred to that charge. And of this manner of presenting two Clerks by the Patron, we have a precedent not much unlike, in the statute for nomination of Suffragans. By which act, every Archbishop and Bishop, desiring to have a Suffragan, hath liberty to name, and present unto the King two honest and discreet Spiritual Persons, etc. that the King may give to one such of the said two Spiritual Persons, as shall please his Majesty, the title, name, stile and dignity of a Suffragan. Fourthly, the Bishops and Presbyters having thus, upon trial and A Minister found able for gifts, is to be sent to the parish, that his life may be examined, and to have the consent of the people. examination found one of the Patroness Clerks, to be a fit and able man, to take upon him the execution of the Ministry in that Church; whether it were not then meet and convenient, that by them he should forthwith be sent to the same Church, as well to acquaint the people with their judgement and approbation, of his gifts and ability to teach, as also that, for a time, he should converse, and abide amongst them, to the end his life, manners, and behaviour, might be seen into, and enquired after, by their careful endeavours? Fiftly (the people within a time to be perfixed, not making and proving before the Magistrate, any just exception against his life, A man allowed for gifts and Conversation, is to be ordained with prayer, fasting, and laying on of hands. A Minister to be inducted into th● Church, b● the Kin●● Writ. manners and conversations) whether it were not then meet, and convenient, that the Bishop with six ●ther Ministers or moe of the same deanery, authorized by the King, as aforesaid, under some pain, and within a certain time, should be bound (in the presence of the Elders and people, and in the same Church, with fasting, prayer, and laying on of hands) to ordain and dedicate him to the Ministry, and Pastoral charge of that Church. Lastly, these things being thus finished, whether it were not then meet and convenient that the Bishops with the other Ministers, and some of the chief of the people, should give the party ordained, a testimonial under their hands, or under some authentical seal, to certify the King's Officer of the execution of his writ; and that the Patron also should present the same person to the King's officer, humbly praying the same officer, by authority to be derived from the King, to cause him by some other writ, to be confirmed, and really inducted, into the possession of the same Church, and into the Mansion-house, glebeland, and other profits Ecclesiastical to the same appertaining. Oh! but this were a strange kind of innovation, and a dangerous To execute the premises no dangerous attempt. attempt to alter laws settled, especially in a settled estate of the Church. Well, well let my Lords of the Clergy sing this song, and pipe this melody at their pleasure. How be it, forasmuch as this platform, in some part thereof, hath already been agreed upon by divers Committees in Parliament; in other some part thereof, by laws already settled, aught to have been practised; and that in other some part thereof is an advancement of the King's authority, which last part also is lively pourtracted out unto us, by precedents from the Archb. & B. themselves, we shall through the grace of God, and favour of the King, be able well enough, quite and clean to wipe away all the spots of this calumniation. And first, touching the intimation, and supplication to be made unto the King, that his Highness would Petition and intimatiō●o the King, agreeable to laws settled. be pleased to command every Minister to be presented by the Patron, ordained by the Bishop and Ministers, and elected by the people; and that the King, being certified by them of the execution of his writ, should upon their Testimonial, by another public writ, cause the Clerk ordained, to be confirmed, admitted, and inducted to the real possession of the temporalities of the benefice; This manner (I say) of intimation, petition, testimonial and admittance, in substance and effect, differeth but little from the form of the petition, ●●. H. 8. c. nomination, election, investiture, confirmation, and consecration of the Archbishops, and Bishops of this Realm. For whensoever the Church of Canterbury, Winton, or other Bishop's Sea becometh destitute of a Pastor, doth not the Dean and Chapter of the same Sea, intimate unto the King their want of a Bishop? and doth not the same Dean and Chapter, humbly supplicate his Majesty's favour and licence to elect another? and doth not the King, upon their supplication, by Letters Patents under his great Seal, favourably grant their petition; willing them, ut talem eligant in Episcopum & Pastorem, qui Deo devotus, & Ecclesia suae necessarius, nobisque & regno nostro utilis & fidelis existat? And with the same Letters Patents, doth not the King send a letter missive, containing the name and commendation of the person to be elected? After the election finished, doth not the Dean and Chapter intimate the same also unto the King, and humbly again pray the King, to yield his Royal assent to the Lord elected? Whereupon doth not the King again direct his Letters Patents of warrant to the Archbishop, or some other, whom the King shall appoint, to perform all things which accustomably are to be done, appertaining to his confirmation, and consecration, according to the laws and statutes of his Realm of England? Lastly, the consecration and confirmation being finished, and the Bishop having done his homage, and sworn fealty, is not the Kings writ out of the Chancery directed to the Escheator, to restore unto him, the temporalities of the same Bishopric? Yea and may not the Bishop also, if it please him, procure another writ out of the Chancery, directed to his Tenants, commanding them to atturne, and to take him for their Lord? Now then, in this platform, whereof mention hath been made touching the placing of a Parochial Pastor (any Parochial Church with cure of souls being void) when it is craved that the people of the same parish, might intimate their want unto the King's officer, and that the same officer might command the Patron to present, the Ministers to ordain, and the people, according to the King's laws, to assent unto, and approve the Clerk; what other intent or meaning have we then, that the King hath as ample, and as lawful a power The King hath as large a power to command a Minister to be elected and ordained, as a Bishop, to be chosen and consecrated. to command a Minister to be presented, ordained, and elected to be a Pastor in a parochial Church, as he hath to command a Bishop to be elected, confirmed, and consecrated to an Episcopal sea? And are we not then merveilously giddyheaded, new fangled, and strange innovators? Again, when we desire, that the King at the humble suit of the Ministers, the Patron and the people would be pleased, to confirm and admit the Patroness Clerk, in, and to the temporalities of a Benefice, what other thing is required, but that the possession of no Church should be delivered unto any Minister, without the King's public writ. And would not this breed a perilous stir, garboil, discord, and contention, when the Archdeacon's pretty signet, as Dagon falling down before the Ark, should give place, bow down, and do reverence unto the Kings of England seal at arms? The Prophets ought to be tried by the prophets. Oh! but in this platform, there be other dangerous innovations and alterations, not to be attempted: Yea? And what then be they? The Admonitor himself, in his admonition holdeth: Yea Master Bilson, and all other supporters of the Hierarchy defended, That the Clergy ought to judge of the Clergy, and that the Prophets ought to be tried, examined, & ordained, only by the Prophets, and that the ●pi●its of the Prophets are subject to the spirits of the Prophets. Wherein the consists the disagreement & variance between us & them, touching the ordination of a Prophet, by Prophets, or a Minister, by Ministers? certes to my understanding, there is no other matter of dissonancy in this case, but even alone this: viz. That he by these words (the Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets) intendeth Corinth. that the Spirits of many Prophets, touching their trial, examination, and ordination, are subject to the spirit of one Prophet, and that therefore one Prophet by his own spirit may try, examine, and ordain many Prophets: Whereas on the other side, we affirm, that one Prophet, according to this rule of our holy faith, Whether the spirits of many Prophet's subject to one, or of one ●o many. is to speak, and the other Prophets are to judge, and that no one Prophet may t●ie, examine, or ordain many Prophets: Because from this place, we gather, that the spirits of many Prophets in the ordinary course of the ministry of the Word, were never subjected in this case to the spirit of one Prophet. But in this platform there is no mention made of the King, if he be patron, neither is there any institution spoken of; and then how can any action of quare impedit, be brought, to try the right, if two Patrons pretend title to the Patronage: besides the Patron by this platform must fetch his Clerks only from the Universities, Schools of learning, and Nurseries of the Ministry, whereas now he hath liberty, to present any Clerk wheresoever or howsoever ordained: Again, strife and contention may arise in the Presbyter, between the Bishops and the Ministers themselves, appointed to be examiners, and ordainers, which of the two Clerks nominated by the Patron is most worthy to be preferred. If both the Patron's Clerks for non-abilities, or criminousnes, be refused, who shall then nominate, and to whom shall the election devolve? And lastly, what if the B. & Presbyter shall disallow one for unabilite, which indeed is notwithstanding, of ability to teach? to all these difficulties, thus we answer. If the King's Majesty be Patron, to any benefice with cure of souls, because we judge and confess him, to be a King, endowed Touching the King's patronage. with a rare and singular spirit of zeal, for the glory of our God, with an excellent spirit of love, for the salvation o● the souls of his subjects, & to be the Nehemiah of our age, sent unto us from above, for the building of the walls, & re-edifying of the ports of the House of God, which were broken down & devoured: we for our parts doubt nothing at all, nay rather we most certainly persuade ourselves, his Highness having once been please●, to prescribe all wholesome and commendable Laws, unto his people, will also vouchsafe, much more to prescribe laws, yea and to be a Law u●to himself. And that his Majesty will set this business of the Lords house, so near unto his Kingly and Christian heart, by the planting of able Ministers in H. de ley & fidei. 3 l. ex imperfecto. all the Churches, of his Highness' Patronage, a that all other Patrons, by his godly example, will be excited rea●●ily to walk in the King's path, to wear the King's colours, and to become the Ki●gs chief favourers in this so holy a work. And therefore touching the King's Patronages, cum Magistas imperatoria, l●gibu esses●luta videatur, we commend them wholly to the Kings most Christian care, providence, and fidelity. The Bishop's institution, and writ of Quare impedit, we grant The Bb. institution may cease. must cease: but in place of institution, the election and ordination by the Presbytery succeedeth: and the Clerk nominated by the Patron, elected and ordained by the Presbytery; shall have idem jus, ad Ecclesiam, & in Ecclesia, which in former times, the Clerk presented by the Patron, and instituted by the bishop, was wont to have. If any suit in law, happen for the right of Patronage, between two or more Patrons, pretending title to the gift of one benefice: It seemeth If suit fall out between two patrons what then may be done. that this gift might have far easier, and more speedy way of trial, by some other writ, than ●y the writ of quare impedit; for upon this writ many times by negligence, or unskilfulness of the Attorneys it falleth out, that one of the parties is driven sometimes to sit down by great loss, and not to have his title tried at all, only for wan● of some ceremonial form, no● observed in the plead of the cause: And therefore both Patrons, within the time to be limited by the kings writ, having nominated their Clerks, to the Presbytere, as heretofore they presented to the B. we leave it to be considered, whether it were not meet, and convenient, that the Presbytery should wholly defend ●he election, and ordination, of either their Clerks, until the right of patronage were finally adju●ge● before the K. Justices at the common Law: upon which judgement passed, they might then without scruple, or impediment, proceed to the full election, & ordination, of that patron's Clerk, for whom the judgement was given. By which manner of trial, if the action might be brought in the name of patron against patron, the Clerks should not only be freed from much obloquy, whereunto they are now subject, by prosecution of suits at law, one Clerk against another, but also they should be exempted, from all expense, labour and turmoil, with which heretofore they have encumbered themselves, to the hindrance of their studies, and decay of their estates, by pursuing the Patron's title, at their own charge. Neither might the occasion of suit about the right of patronage, be any let or hindrance that the Church in the mean time should be left as a Widow destitute of an husband. For any one of the Clerks nominated by either of the patrons, might be appointed by the presbytery, to preach the Word, and publicly to pray, until the controversy were ended. And out of the fruits also of the same Church, remaining in the custody of one of the patrons, or sequestered by the king to the use of the next incumbent, he might have such allowance, as were requisite for the time of his continuance in that place. And for the Sacraments, if any were of necessity to be administered, some other Minister near adjoining, might be provided to administer the same, as in many places, it hath been, and is now daily used, in like cases of vacancy. That the Patron should be kerbed with too hard a bridle, as being barred to fetch his Clerks from any other place, than from the The curbing of a patron with too hard a bridle answered. Universities or other Schools and nurseries of learning, is a matter, if it be well weighed, of less importance, than the Admonitor would insinuate the same to be. First it is not of necessity required, that all patrons should at all times fetch all their Clerks, from those places and not from elsewhere. For many times it may happen upon just cause, (for the benefit of the Church) that a Clerk already ordained, and placed in one Church, may be removed from the same, to another. But only the meaning is according to the Laws and canons already settled, that the greatest part, of the patrons Clerks, must of necessity be called thence, because they can not elsewhere be had. Now than whereas the law intendeth every Church to be a wife and to have an husband; to be a body, and to have an head; the law as a parent unto the Church hath provided, until she be widow indeed, that no husband be provided for her. And therefore by sundry ●●. de prebend. c. tuis l. 6. de prebend. fi Episcopus. as well ancient Decrees, as by Canons of Discipline, made and published by the Bishops 1571. it is decreed and confirmed, That the Bishop shall lay his hands on none, or at any other time, but when it shall chance some place of ministration is void in the same Diocese. As for stipendary Curates it is expressly against the policy of our Church, that any should be ordained a Minister, to serve only as an hireling. From which Decrees and Canons, already settled (as I said before) it followeth for the most part, that the patrons Clerks to be ordained, of necessity must be called from the Universities; or other places of learning. For if every place of ministration, be full, and none must be made a Minister until some place be void, then albeit some patrons, upon good causes to be allowed by public discipline, might be permitted to nominate some Clerks already placed in administrations: Yet in the end, as well the patrons of those Churches, from whence these are to beremoved, as other patrons also (many benefices at one time being void) must of necessity, seek out men, to be ordained, which never were ordained to the ministry before. And where are these to be sought, if not only at the Universities, or other Schools and nurseries of learning? For that prophets in the ordinary time of prophesying, should be taken from the feet of the Apothecaries, Tailors, Drapers, milner's, Mercers, or Prophets in the ordinary time of prophesying to be taken out of the schools of prophets. from the butry, pantry, kitchen, cellar, or stable, of any Bishop, Peer, Knight or Gentleman, and not from the feet of the prophets, is a thing abominable, and odious unto God, and man. Wherein then, doth this platform, in this point of fetching Ministers, only from the Universities, or other places of learning, differ from the intendment of laws settled? Or wherein can the patrons receive any detriment by such a practice? Nay they are so far from receiving any prejudice hereby, as indeed both they and their Clerks shall reap great commodity by it. Wherein I grant some discrepance, to consist between the Bb. practice, and this platform. For the Bb. at The difference between the platform and the bishop's practice. one time, allow a Clerk for ability, and at another time, disallow the same Clerk for nonability. And him whom they have ordained, and adjudged, to day, worthy of an office, they many times disordaine him tomorrow, and refuse him as a person unworthy, to possess a benefice: Whereas on the contrary part, we think it very absurd, and unreasonable to bar any man from a benefice, whom the Governors of the Church shall judge worthy to bear an office. So that the patron by this platform, sha●l be sure, if at any time he nominate a Clerk already ordained, that the same Clerk (unless it were for Crime, or some defect after happening) should never be refused. And if such be the laws and liberties of the Ordinaries, what alteration of the law, or prejudice to the patron, could it be, if by a new law, the King provided new means, to put his old law, in due execution? It upon difference of judgement, any variance should arise, between Upon difference of judgement about the ability of a Clerk what may be done. the Ministers appointed to elect, and ordain, which of the patrons Clerks were most worthy, the same diversity we assure ourselves, can breed no greater inconvenience, nor further danger, than doth now daily fall out in the election of Scholars, fellows, and heads of houses in the Universities, or of other Officers in Colleges, Cathedral Churches, and bodies politic or corporate. As those controversies therefore have been, and are appeased by the good orders and laws of those places, even so might these also. And therefore some good law might be made to this effect, viz. If any four of the seven did agree together, upon any one clerk nominated by the patron, that the same four should strike the stroke, and make the election good, against the other three. Neither do we think it to stand with reason, that the Archipresbyter, or any other Minister among the seven, should necessarily be of the quorum. For if any one of the seven, should necessarily be of the quorum, than (having, as it were, a negative voice against all the rest) if he should be wayward, and apt A Clerk refused for nonability to whom the nomination may devolve. to contention, he might then always frustrate the election, either by opposing himself to all the rest, or by inclining to the lesser, and worse part, as lately came to pass about the election of a Scholar, among great Doctors. If both the Patron's Clerks, should be disabled by those, unto whom the judgement of their nonability did appertain, we leave it to be considered, whether the right to nominate, elect, and ordain, for that time only, might not hereafter devolve unto the presbytery, as in like case it hath done heretofore unto the Bishops. And from that Presbytery, if the same should make default, that the benefice, should be then in lapse unto the king. Lastly, touching the nonability of a Clerk: i● the Clerk whom A Clerk wronged by a refusal for nonability how he may be relieved. the presbytery should refuse, come from one of the Universities, then as a Clerk before time refused for nonability, by the Bishops was to be tried by the Archbishop, and by him to be allowed, or disallowed, so in this case we leave it to be considered, whether it were not meet that this Clerk so refused, and complaining himself unto the Magistrate, to be wronged, should have his ability to be again tried, by that next Synod of Ministers to be congregated within that Deanery. And if upon trial made, and bringing a testimonial under some authentic seal, from the Synod, of his ability: whether the Presbytery, upon a good pain within a time to be prefixed, should A Clerk refused for crime to whom the nomination may devolv● not be constrained, to ordain and dedicate the same Clerk, to the Ministry of the same Church. And as for the refusal of a Clerk by the Presbytery, upon objection of crime, if the crime be so heinous as for which by the Canons of the Church, he might not be promoted, to the Ministry, then is it to be considered, whether the presbytery in this case also, as in the former of nonability, might not nominate, elect, and ordain, the Clerk to that place, for that time only? and upon the presbyters default, the lease also to be unto the king. And thus have we compared, the manner of Church government, The benefits ensuing the platform of ordination etc. required. now in use, touching these points, with th●●●orme of Discipline, which is desired to be planted. By which comparison the King's Highness, may very easily discern, the differences between them, to be such, as whereby the King's dignity and prerogative, shall highly be advanced, the King's poor subjects, both Ministers and people, divers ways eased, and unburdened, and the Laws better observed, to the unspeakable peace, and tranquillity, both of Church and Commonweal. The Prophet's trial of the Prophets; the people's approbation of their Pastors; the Minister's entrance into their Ministry, according to the Apostolical practice of the Primitive Church, would be a means utterly to extinguish, that schism, that remaineth yet among us; that we have no Christian Ministers; no Christian Sacraments; no Christian Church in England. Besides, the Ministers, for Letters of Orders; Letters of Institution; Letters of Inductions; for Licences to serve within the Diocese; for Licences to serve in such a cure; for Licences to serve two cures in one day; for Licences to preach; for Licences of resignation; for testimonials of subscription; for Letters of sequestration; for Letters of relaxation; for the Chancellors, Registers, and Summoner's dinners; for archidiaconal annual, and for Episcopal triennial procurations, the Ministers (I say) to be nominated, elected, ordained, approved, confirmed, and admitted, by the Patron, by the Presbytery, by the People, and by the King, should be disburdened, from all fees, for these things, and from all these, and such, and such like grievances. Only for the King's writts, and for the traveile and pains of His Highness' Officers, taken in, and about the execution of the same wr●tts, some reasonable fees, (as it shall please the King,) may be taxed, and set down. The people also in souls, in bodies, and in their goods could not be much comforted, relieved, and benefited. They should not henceforth to the peril of their souls, have unlearned, unable, and undiscreete Ministers thrust upon them, and set over them: Neither should they be compelled, upon light occasions, to take many frivolous oaths in vain. They should not be summoned, from one end of the Diocese, unto the other: nor be posted from Court, to Court, and from visitation, to visitation. The Churchwardens, and Sidemen of every Parish, should not upon pain of excommunication, be constrained, once, or twice in the year, to pay six or eight pence, for a sheet of threehalfepeny articles. They shall not any longer, out of the common treasury, reserved for the poor, bear the charge of their Parishes for making bills, visitation and divers other expenses. There should be no more suits at Law, between Clerk and Clerk, about the Patron's Title; no more suits of double quarrel, between the Clerk and the Bishop; no more debate between the Bishop and the ; and lastly there should be no occasion of any riots, and unlawful assemblies to be made upon entries and possessions, by virtue and colour of two presentations, two institutions, and two inductions, into one benefice, at one time. The Patrons as being Lords and avowers of the Churches, might have the custody of the Churches, during their vacancies, and their ancient right, in this behalf, restored. All swearing of Canonical obedience, unto the Bishops by the Ministers: all 31. Eliz. c. 6. swearing, and forswearing of Clerks, for any simoniacal bands, promises, or agreements, between them and their Patrons, and all robberies and spoiling of the Churches, by the Patrons, should determine and cease. Especially if it might please the King and Parliament, to have one clause of a Statute, against abuses, in election of Scholars, and presentation, to benefices enlarged. For although every corrupt cause, and consideration, by reward, gift, profit, or benefit to present, be inhibited by that act; yet notwithstanding by experience in many places we find, that the Patrons for small rents, and for many years, are in possession, some of the mansion houses, some of the glebe lands, and some of the tithes, of such benefices as since the publishing of that act, have been bestowed upon Clerks: which breedeth great suspicion and jealousy in the minds of men, that the Clerk and Patron at the beginning directly or indirectly, did conspire to frustrate and delude, the intendment of the statute: And therefore we leave it to be considered by the King's Majesty and Parliament. If any Clerk after confirmation A means to restrain patrons from corruption. and possession to any benefice, hereafter to be made and given unto him, shall willingly and wittingly, suffer the Patron of the same benefice, or any other person, in his name or to his use, directly or indirectly, mediately or immediately, to use, occupy, or enjoy, the mansion house, glebe land, or other ecclesiastical commodities, or any part thereof, belonging to the same Benefice: In this case (I say) we leave it to be considered, whether it were not meet and convenient, that every such willing and witting sufferance by the Clerk, and every such willing, and witting possession, use, or occupation, by the Patron, should not be adjudged, to be a just cause, to determine the presentation, to have been first made upon corrupt respect, and consideration. And that therefore the Clerk, ipso facto, to ●ose the benefice, and the Patron, ipso facto, to forfeit his right of Patronage to the King, for the two next turns following. And these being the principal reasons, and grounds of our desires, we are humbly to pray the Lords spiritual, either to convince them of indignity, insufficiency, and incongruity, or else to join with us unto the King's Majesty, for the restitution of that manner of Government, which they themselves confess to have been practised, at the beginning by the Apostles and Primitive Church: but the Admonitor hath yet more reasons unanswered against this platform. ADMONITION. That every Parish in ENGLAND may have a Learned and discreet Minister, howsoever they dream of perfection, no man is able in these days, to devise how to bring it to pass, and especially when by this change of the Clergy, the great rewards of Learning, shall be taken away, and men thereby discouraged, to bring up their Children in the study of good Letters. ASSERTION. In some part to justify this opinion, I grant, that no man is able in these days, to devise, to bring it to pass, that every Parish should have a Learned and discreet Minister. And why? because in these days not any one Bishop hath afforded, to ordain one Learned and discreet Minister, for five Parishes: secondly, because where some of the Reverend Fathers, have ordained and placed in many Parishes, many Learned and discreet Ministers, some others of the same Fathers, have again disregarded, and displaced those learned and discreet Ministers, and in their rooms have placed many unlearned and undiscreet Ministers. Now than if these days wherein so few learned and discreet Ministers, and so many unlearned and undiscreet Ministers be ordained, and wherein also, so many learned, and discreet Ministers are disgraced, and so many undiscreet and unlearned Ministers graced: If these days (I say) were ended, then albeit no perfection, whereof never any one of us dreamt, could be attained unto, and albeit no one man were able to devise, how to bring it to pass, that every Parish should have a learned Minister: Yet nevertheless, all good and holy means being used, to aim and to shoot after perfection, and all good and holy men laying to their heads, and applying their hearts to further this enterprise, and service unto God, we know that the Lord might call, and make, and fill with the Spirit of God in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in spiritual workmanship, many Bezaliels, and many Aholiabs, spiritually to carve, grave, and imbroyder the Lords spiritual Temple. The perfection therefore after which we long, and the change of the Clergy, whereof we entreat, is but such a perfection, and such a change, as (good means for the restitution of impropriations being used) may easily be attained, and well made. For the perfection required by us, to be in a Minister, What perfection of a Minister is required by this platform. is none other than such as the holy Law of God, and the Laws, Canons and Injunctions already settled, do require, viz. that every Minister, to whom cure of souls is committed, with some competent knowledge, according to the measure of the grace, of the gift of Christ, be able to teach, to exhort, and reprove the people, yea and to convince the gainsayers, if any should arise among them. From whence also springeth the change intended by us: viz. that in the Churches of all Ministers, unable to teach, etc. There might be a change of Ministers able to teach, etc. Wherefore if the Admonitor meant otherwise then we intent, and if upon placing a learned and discreet Minister in every Parish, he should not intent, the change of the High ●nd Papal state of Prelacy: then either is not his answer pertinent to the question, or else it must necessarily follow, from his intendment, that the high and Papal state of Prelacy, and Prelacy & a learned Ministry cannot stand together. the placing of a learned and discreet Minister in every Parish, are like unto Coleworts planted among Vines, or unto Parsley sowed among Bishop's Weed, which will never spring, grow, and prosper together. Because the rising of such a Learned Ministry must be the fall, ruin, and breake-necke of Prelacy. And this followeth inevitable upon his own reason, drawn from the taking away of the great rewards of learning, by the change of the Clergy. For the great rewards of learning, whereof he speaketh, must of necessity be the Prelacies, viz. Arbishoprickes, Bishoprickes, Deaneries, Archdeaconries, Prebendaries, Canonries, Chanterships, Commendames, non Residencies, and Pluralities. And then let us observe, whether in effect he hath not reasoned thus: If prelacies (being the great reward of learning) should nor stand, and not be changed, there is no man able to devise, how a learned and discreet Minister may be placed in every parish: but if prelacies (the great rewards of learning) may once be changed and not stand, than were it possible to have it devised, that a learned and discreet Minister, might be placed in every parish. And then hath he not profoundly, and learnedly disputed, when he hath preferred the Damsel before her Dame, and the maid before her Mistress? When he hath advanced a great deal o● learning in one before a great deal of learning in many, and learning in some places, before learning in all places; lastly, when by continuance and furtherance of the great rewards of learning, he ●ath greatly hindered and discontinued learnedness, and greatly furthered and continued u● learne●nesse? For if Prelacies were no hindrances, but only furtherances of discreet and learned Ministers; and again if prelacies were no furtherances, but only hindrances ●f unlearned and undiscreet Ministers, to be had in every parish, th●n might the rewards of learning still remain, that men should not be discouraged, to send their sons to the study of good learning. For generally men be not so much encouraged, to set their sons to learning, where a few great rewards Men are more encouraged to learning, where many good rewards than where few great rewards are provided. of learning are provided for a few men greatly learned, as where many good rewards of learning, are provided for many good learned m●n. A●d to speak as experience teacheth us, and as the truth is, what one father among twenty, will dedicate his son, to learning, if men (as the case now standeth under prelacy) not brought up at the feet of Gamaliel, but at the feet of some swashbuckler; not taught from any Doctor's chair, but schooled upon some craft's man stoo●e, when men who can but read, and cannot preach, may be Ministers and capable of the fattest benefice; within a whole County? In the Commonweal, if there be many places of honour, profit, and dignity, for such o●ly as have valiantly served the King in his wars, or carefully attended upon him in the Court, then will many fathers incite and encourage their sons to prepare and furnish themselves to the wars, and to the Court. But if all men's sons in the Camp, and in the Court be capable of entertainments alike; if as well a labourer's son following the Cart, as a noble man's son a waiter in Court, may be the King's Lord Chamberlain, in time of peace; and if as well a Carpet Knight, as a valiant warrior, may be Lord general in time of war, would any father for many years together, costly, and gorgeously brave his son at Court; or would any father adventurously, and dangerously hazard his son in the field? Again, fathers do not therefore send their sons to be students, at the Inns of Court, or to be apprentices in the City of London, only in regard, that they may be all great Citizens, and all great rich men, and all great Lawyers, and all Judges of the Land. It sufficeth all parents, and the purpose and intent of all parents is, that their sons being such Lawyers, and such Citizens as by their law, and by their trades, they may thrive, and live Barrester-like, and Lawyerlike; Marchantlike, and Citizen-like, though they be not able to live Serjeant-like, or Judge-like, Alderman-like, or Lordlike. In like sort questionless, would it be an excellent encouragement, to many fathers, to send many sons unto many Schools and Universities of learning, if so be there were many and good rewards, rather than few and great rewards provided for many, rather than for few learned men in the Church. For if there be but few rewards, albeit the same be great, then but a few fathers among many, will adventure the spending of their substance, upon a vain hope, that their sons shall obtain great rewards of learning. For what father knoweth the capacity, and diligence of his so? Or who can divine that his son, shall be one among the number of a few men greatly learned, worthy of a great reward, and to live Deane-like, Archdeacon-like, Bishop-like, or Archbishop-like? Wherefore if such a change of the Clergy, as whereof we speak, were made, that is to say, if ●n unlearned, and undiscreet Ministry, were changed into a discreet and learned ministry: it is not to be doubted, but a fare greater number of sons, would be sent by their fathers, to the study of good learning, than now there be. From whence also it followeth, that either Papal Prelacy is the Prelacy the bane of a learned ministry. only bane of a learned Ministry, or else that an unlearned Ministry, is the untimely fruit of the womb of Papal Prelacy. Both which twain, rather than one of which twain, being true, we leave it to be considered, whether the mother conceiving too soon, or the daughter borne out of time, or both as an afterbirth, and superfluous members should be cast away, and cut off from the body of the Church? The admonitors next argument, is drawn from the small continuance in the Universities. ADMONITION. Furthermore who seethe not, how small continuance there shall be in the Universities to make men of any profound knowledge, when the very necessity of places, shall draw men away, before they come to any ripeness or profound knowledge, etc. ASSERTION. This argument is as an headless arrow shot against a corslet of steel, out of a bow unbent, for what can this argument pierce, when in effect the conclusion is thus: If every parish should have a learned and discreet Minister, than men should have but small continuance in the University, to make them men of ripeness, or of any profound knowledge, But that men should be of small continuance in the University, and should be drawn away, before they come to ripeness or profound knowledge, is not meet. Therefore it is not meet that every parish should have a learned and discreet Minister. The reason of which consequence is thus: viz. The very necessity of places (saith he) shall draw men away before they come to Page 80. any ripeness: The learnedness then, and discretion, of a Minister, by his reason, dependeth upon his long continuance in the University. And what shall we then say of the learnedness and discretion, of such Ministers of the Bishops making, as did never continue in the Universities, one day in all their whole life; but hereunto they answer, that the very necessity of the one, is so great, as that the people must have prayer said, and the Sacraments administered, lest the people in the country should grow to an heathenish barbarity: unto which answer, again I reply and reason thus: if a man of unlearnedness and without knowledge and ripeness, may be a Minister, than a man of small learnedness, of small knowledge, and of small ripeness, may be a Minister much more; and again: If necessity of places may draw men of no continuance in the University, of no knowledge, and of no ripeness, into the Ministry: then may the necessity of places draw men of small continuance, knowledge, and ripeness, But the necessity of places may draw men of no continuance, knowledge or ripeness into the Ministry: Therefore the necessity of places may draw men of small continuance, knowledge, and ripeness, into the Ministry. The second proposition of which syllogism, is confirmed by practice, and precept, by word, and by deed, of most of our reverend Bishops. And then from their own practice, I argue thus: if the necessity of saying prayers, of reading service, and of delivery of the elements, be of necessity, and of necessity require unlearned Ministers: rather than no Ministers: then much more the necessity of having faith, the necessity of the salvation of our souls; and the necessity of God his glory, is of necessity; and being of necessity requireth Ministers of small learning, of small continuance, of small knowledge, and of small ripeness: rather than Ministers of no learning, no continuance, no knowledge, and of no ripeness. And if faith, salvation of men, and the glory of God, as sound, and Faith mo●e necessary to be preached than the sacraments be administered as sincerely may be preached and promoted, by young and rude Timothy, as by aged, learned, and eloquent Apollo, what necessity is there of continuance in the University, to obtain more profound knowledge, or any other riper understanding, than is that knowledge, a●d that understanding, whereby faith to the salvation of men, and to the glory of God, is of necessity to be preached? Again, if by continuance in the University, profound knowledge, and ripeness, be so necessary, that (as is pretended) in respect thereof, a change of the Clergy may not be made, and that unlearned, and undiscreet Ministers, as it were by necessity, should still be placed; then seemeth it reasonable, to move the L. Bb. that it would please them to effect an abolishment of some of the statutes, of all the Colleges in Oxford and Cambridge: whereby all Masters of Art, of what youth, ignorance, or rudeness soever they be (excepting some small number, which by order of their foundation, he put apart to the study of Law or Physic) some after two, some after three, and some after four years of their commencement, are compelled either to enter into the Ministry, or to leave their fellowships: Nay in some Colleges, if Bachelors of arts be chosen fellows, and be not Ministers after one year, by statute they lose their places. The principle reason of the founders of all which statutes (to my best remembrance) is this: namely that the harvest being great, and the labourers but few, many labourers, shall be sent from those Colleges, into the harvest. Neither can it be intended, that many labourers of long continuance, many labourers of profound knowledge, or many labourers of ripeness should be sent. But it is simply provided, that many labourers, and not loiterers should be sent, and yet now the Admonitor rather than that some loiterers should not be sent, contendeth to seclude some labourers from the work. Besides, how can they be of any long continuance, of any ripeness, or of any profound knowledge, in the mysteries of faith and godliness, when not having accomplished the age of 24. years, 26. or 28. years at the most, and not having given themselves above 2. 3. or 4. years at the most, to the study of divinity, nay which after the study of 3. or 4. years of Philosophy or arts, and no study of Divinity, must notwithstanding enter into the ministry? wherefore from the statutes of the Colleges in the Universities I thus dispute: If the necessity of the College statutes, do compel: All Masters of Arts before mentioned, and some Bachelors of arts not having any profound knowledge, or being but of small continuance, or not of any ripeness, either to leave their Colleges, or to enter into the Ministry, then much more the necessity of preaching faith, the necessity of being saved, and the necessity of God his glory may compel men of small learning, of small knowledge, of small ripeness, and of small continuance, to execute their ministry, rather than that any parish should be necessarily clogged with a Minister of no learning, of no discretion, of no knowledge, of no ripeness, and of no continuance. But the necessity of the College statutes do compel the one, Therefore the necessity of Faith, etc. may compel the other. ADMONITION. Against the inconvenience of discipline, by excommunication only (which he saith we so much cry for) he telleth us Page 81. that some learned men of this age have at large declared in their works set forth to the world, that the same will be of most men contemned, and that it will be of small force to bring to effect any good amendment of life. ASSERTION. But who taught him to father, or to fasten this untruth upon us? only than this might suffice for answer, that he did never yet hear, any one of our part, so much as call, much less to cry for discipline No discipline by excommunication only called for. Discipline by excommunication only, no more to be suffered. by excommunication only. For we say clean otherwise, viz, that the Discipline of the Church ought not to be executed (as now for the most part it is) by excommunication only. This manner of discipline therefore, by excommunication only, is one of the disorders in the Church, used by the reverend Bishops, and which we so much desire, to be reform. And for this cause we entreat their Lordships, to forbear the practice of that, which (as it seemeth) they would so feign have others to mislike. But happily this was not the mark whereat the Admonitor shot; for Bishoply and Archdeaconly excommunication, being daily used, it is like that he bent his bow, and aimed at that excommunication only, which is pastoral and Elderly. Against which form and manner of excommunication, let be so, that some learned men of this age, have at large declared in their works, set forth to the world, that the same will be of most men contemned, and that it will be of small force to bring to effect, any good amendment of The writings of some learned men not sufficient to condem●e● excommunication by pastors and Elders. life, let this (I say) be granted, what of all this? must the Church of England therefore, dislike and reject the same? God forbidden. The whole doctrine of Faith and Sacraments, we know to be of most men contemned, and to be of small force to bring most men from superstitious and popish idolatry. And how then is it possible, but that the sword of this doctrine, should have as little entertainment amongst most men as the doctrine? He that casteth away the kernel, will much more despise the shalt: And he that setteth light by the sword, will set less by the scabbard. It sufficeth then that the children of the Church in England, striving to enter in at the narrow gate, and embracing the doctrine of the Gospel, it is sufficient (I say) that they submit and subject their necks unto the yoke of the Gospel, for what have we to do with them that are without? Doth the law of England endight, condemn and judge a Spaniard resiant in Spain? The Admonitor himself affirmeth (at the time when our Saviour Christ said, dic Ecclesiae) that there were many precedents as it page 134 were, and governor's of the Church together with the chief Ministers page 135▪ The Bb. confesseth that the Minister and Elders, did govern in the primitive Church. of every congregation; nay further he saith tha● he will not deny that the Apostles afterward, and the primitive Church, did practise the same. These some learned men then, e●ther must show, and prove (unto us the children of God in England,) that this form of governing the Church, and excommunicating by many precedents and go vernours, together with the chief Minister of every congregation, was given to the Churches in the time of Christ and his Apostles, but only for that time, and that therefore that form is now at an end, and ceased, or else it must be confirmed unto us, that God hath in these days altered and changed his mind touching England, and that he hath by some new vision, or revelation, commanded the Reverend Bishops in these days, to teach the Church of England, that he will not have the same manner of Government used in the Church of England, because it would be of most of his Children in England The opinion of some Learned men not sufficient for the Church of England to departed from the word. contemned, and of small force to bring to effect any good amendment of life in them: for albeit all the Learned men in the world, had declared as much in their works set forth to the world, as is here spoken of, what were that to the children of God in England, unless the same Learned men, had taught unto us true learning from the mouth of God? How much less are we bound to regard, what only some Learned men of this age have declared unto us, the same some Learned men having no warrant out of the holy Book of God for such their Learning? For if the declaration of some Learned men of this age, in their works set forth to the world, may be a sufficient warrant to draw men from the way of truth: then hardly let the declaration of Doctor Harding against the true use of the Lords Supper, and then let the declaration of Osorius against justification by faith, and the declarations of Bellarmine, against divers Articles of our Religion, and the declaration of Doctor Allen, against the execution of Justice in England, and the declaration of Doctor Saunders, a rebellious fugitive, in the defence of the Pope's Bull, and the declaration of G. T. for the pretended Catholics; and lastly, let the declaration of the Pope, and his whole Clergy, excommunicating our late Sovereign Lady the Queen deceased, be received, and listened unto. For who can deny but that these men were some men, and that these some men were also some learned men, and who then seethe not the looseness, the vanity, the trifling, and the toying of this argument. The Argument following which the Admonitor would seem Page 81. to let pass, drawn from experience, is of like quality. For though experience (as he saith) teach that men of stubbornness, will not By excommunication of Pastors▪ and Elders, more can not be out of communion than in communion shun the company of such as be excommunicated, and though such men of stubbornness, must be also (as he saith) excommunicated, for keeping of company with them, yet to affirm, that by means of Pastourly, and Elderly excommunication, more will be excommunicated, as being men of stubborness, than in communion, is a very gross, and palpable error. For we hold (as the truth is) that the greater part of the Church cannot be excommunicated by the lesser; nor that many should be excommunicated, by a few; nor that a few should be excommunicated by one of the Church. And if the common union must necessarily consist of all, or of the most part of the faithful, then is the lesser part always out of this common union. For what else is excommunication, but extra communionem ejectio, a casting forth of one, or of more persons from the common fellowship, society, and company of the faithful? The greatest part whereof, and not the least, are accounted to be the Church, and to be in communion; unless then the whole Church, or the greater part of the Church, having once cast out from among them, one or more adulterers, blasphemers, extortioners, or such like, and having also excommunicated men of stubbornness, for keeping company with such, shall themselves all, or the greatest part, become children of disobedience, and men of stubbornness: it can not be, but there must be still more of the Church, in communion, than out of communion. But if the whole Church shall have cast away the yoke of Discipline, and become such themselves, as were those whom before they had excommunicated, then is it a clear case, that there is not any more, any communion among them. For how should any common union be there, where is no union at all? And if all be departed from obedience, where then can the Church be? Nay further, if the greatest part of the Church should revolt, and forsake the faith, yet hereupon it would not follow, that more of the faithful, be out of communion, than in communion. For then such only as remain in the unity of faith, and have not separated themselves from Christ, remain now only to be in communion with Christ: out of which number also, if any should be excommunicated, by the residue of their brethren, yet even among this small number, there would be still more in communion, than out of communion. For to be out of communion can not be understood, to be of any but only of such as remaining in the profession of faith, and godliness, are yet notwithstanding found guilty of some transgression, and for the same by the Church, for a time cut off from the Church by sentence of excommunication. These deformities, and inconveniences therefore, can in no wise follow, that Discipline of excommunication, by Pastors, and Elders, which so much is called for. But certes, it fared (I fear me) with the Admonitor, and sundry of his colleagues in this case none otherwise, than it fareth with incontinent women, once (say they) incontinent and ever incontinent, we know it by ourselves. Our Ecclesiastical Judges and Officers, in like manner, seeing by experience, those whom they account to be men of stubbornness, not to shun the company of such as they daily excommunicate; yea and By the bishop's excommunication moe are out of communion, than in communion, it is therefore by his own reason, a deformed discipline. they perceiving also, that it may fall out, that more, under their Jurisdiction, may be out of their communion than in communion with them, because one man alone (as he plainly insinuateth) may excommunicate the greatest part of the Church under his censure (for otherwise he could never have supposed, that more would be out of communion than in communion) because (I say) these deformities, and these inconveniencies, by their own experience, have been found to have followed upon that discipline of excommunication, which hitherto hath been practised; it falleth out, that they cannot otherwise judge, but that all other manner of discipline, by excommunication, must be of the same nature and condition, that is, as deformed and inconvenient, as their own is. And yet in this place it is worthy to be marked, what a rod the Admonitor hath By S. Augustine's reason bishoply excommunication hath many deformities. gotten out of S. Augustine, to whip his own discipline, by excommunication only out of the Church, and thus it may be framed. That discipline whereby more will be, or more may be excommunicated than in communion, hath in it many deformities, and inconveniences: But by the Discipline of excommunication which the reverend Bishops, their Archdeacon's, Chancellors, Commissaries, and Officials practise, more will be, or more may be excommunicated, than in communion. Therefore that Discipline by excommunication, which the reverend Bishops, their Archdeacon's, &c. practice, hath in it many deformities, and inconveniences. The Major proposition (if he speak truly) is S. Augustine's, but whether it be or be not, it is no great matter, because it needeth not the authority of any man to confirm it, the same being sound and true in it own nature. The Minor is drawn from his own reason thus: Where there be more men of stubbornness in the Church, than of obedience, and where there be more men that eat not, than that eat the company of those that be excommunicated, there moe will be, or may be excommunicated, than in communion. But there be more men of stubbornness, than of obedience, and moe that eat not, than that do shun the company of those that be excommunicated, by the Reverend Bishops, their Archdeacon's, Chancellors, and Officials. Therefore there may be, or will be more excommunicated, by their Lordships, their Archdeacon's, Chancellors, etc. than in communion. The assumption, though I cannot warrant the same to be simply true, yet I may safely warrant it, to be drawn from the Admonitors own experience. For I let pass (saith he) that experience teacheth that men of stubbornness, will not shun the company of them that be excommunicated, etc. and that they must be excommunicated Bishoply excommunication hath many deformities for keeping of company with them. And so it will fall out, that more will be excommunicated, than in communion; but this last consequence (say I) cannot follow, unless he first presuppose both his Antecedents to be true: And therefore because he must needs be intended to have spoken of that kind of excommunication, whereof he hath had experience, it followeth that these deformities, and inconveniences whereof he speaketh, must needs be found in that excommunication, which he and his use. For of the other kind of excommunication, he never yet had any experience: And then by experience he could not speak. If he spoke not of his own experience, but of the experience of some other men, then have we but little cause to believe him, because we know not what manner of persons those were, from whom he drew his argument of experience, and whether they reported deceitfully, or truly of their own experience, or no. And if this argument drawn from the experience of his own manner of Discipline, be of sufficient validity to impugn (as he weaneth) that Discipline by excommunication; which so much (as he saith) is cried for, and whereof as yet he never had experience, By discipline of Bishoply excommunication one may be a community how much more effectual than is this argument to overthrow that his own manner of Discipline, which he so long time to so small profit, and with so great inconveniences, and deformities, hath so unprofitably practised? For can there be any greater deformity, than that one member should be supposed to be the whole body, or that one man should make a community? And yet this deformity, by his experience, may fall out to be seen even under that discipline, which every Ordinary exerciseth. For if by process, Ex mero officio, an Ordinary should excommunicate any one of his jurisdiction, for not communicating with an idol Minister, or for holding that Christ in his soul did not descend into hell, or for denying reading to be preaching, and withal should pronounce all them to be men of stubbornness, which would shun the company of him so excommunicated. And for that cause also should excommunicate them, as is here supposed lawful to be done, were it not a clear case that the body of that Church must now be taken to consist only in the person of the Ordinary, and one member to become the whole body? For if all under his jurisdiction were once excommunicated, how could then any be in communion with him: And if they all were once excommunicated, must not the Ordinary then alone be the common union, and so make a community? And what a deformed kind of excommunication, then is that kind of excommunication, whereby it may fall out, that to be one, is to be many, and that to be a Church, a company, a society, and a fellowship, is to be one? of which nature, and of which kind that manner of excommunication, which by Pastors and Elders is to be executed, cannot be as hath already been proved. If then excommunication now used be a deformed kind of discipline, and therefore, as we say, to be no more tolerated, and if excommunication by Pastors and Elders, be a kind of discipline for the inconvenience thereof, (as he saith) not to be planted: what manner of discipline by excommunication The Admonitor would have no excommunication at all would he have in these days, trow we? would he have none at all? verily I suppose none at all. For so do his words plainly insinuate, by two reasons following: First (saith he) the looseness of these days, require discipline of sharper laws by punishment of body, and danger of goods, which they do, and will more fear, than they will excommunication: Secondly, we have (saith he) a good manner of discipline, by the Ecclesiastical commission which doth much good, and would do more, if it were more common. But why did he not speak plainly, and why did he not affirm devoutly, that discipline by excommunication, was good where the Church was in persecution, and that it is not necessary, nor so convenient under a Christian Magistrate as it may be otherwise? For if Pastors and Elders were appointed joint officers, only for times of persecution, and not to be under Christian Princes, it followeth (these joint officers ceasing) that all accessories, appendices, and consequences, of their joint offices must also cease, unless it can be proved out of the holy Scriptures, that the offices of Pastors ought still to continue, and that the Offices of Elders ought not to continue; because the offices of Elders, with all their appendices, have been translated by our Saviour Christ unto Archbishops, Bishops, Archdeacon's, their Chancellors, Commissaries, and Officials. For unless these Officers be Christ's Officers, the discipline which they use cannot bind the consciences of the people of God. And for this cause is it very probable, that he so commendeth discipline of sharper laws, and discipline by the Ecclesiastical commission. For if these officers, by their discipline have not to do with the consciences of men, then is it no marvel that men fear not their discipline. And therefore if they will be still officers, it is requisite, that they call for such a discipline, as might cause men to stand in awe of their authority. But were they indeed the officers of God, and had they indeed the authority from God, to execute discipline by excommunication, as Pastors and Elders did in the Primitive Church; then were the looseness of this age never so great, yet that the children of God in England would more fear the loss of goods, lands, bodies, or lives, than the censure of God's officers is one of the Admonitors paradoxes. And here I appeal the consciences of all the reverend Bishops and Prelates in the land, and let them answer me hardly, if they judge themselves to be the children of God, and had seven times seven thousand lives, whether they had not rather seven thousand times be committed to the Gaoler of Winchester, than once be delivered over, to the Gaoler of Hell. And are not all the children of God in England their brethren? And are they not all led by one and the self same spirit? And how then can they less fear excommunication (which is a delivery of the soul to Satan) than the punishment of body and danger of goods? And yet touching this point of Excommunication, he seemeth to be against himself, for in the 137. page, he telleth us that happily it may be a fault, yea and a great fault that is found with the bishops in these days, that they do not excommunicate the Prince and Rulers, and so constrain them to do that, which by persuasion they will not do. If then excommunication be so terrible to Princes and Rulers, how should it be of so light account with subjects? And if it be so powerful as it can constrain Princes and Rulers to do their duties, how much more fearful would it be, to compel inferiors, and men of low estate, to live soberly in their vocations? I will not here debate the matter touching the excommunication of Princes and Rulers; much less touching the excommunication of the Prince and Rulers of our land. But I would gladly be informed, what they were, or who they be, that found great fault with the Bishops in these days, for not endeavouring to excommunicate the Prince and Governors? The Papists, they think it sufficient, that the Prince and Governors, be excommunicated by the Pope, and his Clergy. The Ministers, and people professing the Gospel, and seeking for reformation of excommunication, deny the Bishops to have any divine power granted by the Word of God, to excommunicate a private man, much less do they think it lawful for them to excommunicate the Prince and Rulers: Who then (I say) find fault with the Bishop●, that they do not excommunicate the Prince and Governors, and so constrain them to do that which by persuasion they will not do? For my part I cannot guess, whom he should mean, unless he meant to give us to understand, that some Prelatists have consulted about the excommunicating, both Prince and Governors, for not making sharper Laws, against such, as whom the Prelates, and their favourites, have falsely slandered, to be pestilent fellows, movers of sedition, enemies to Caesar, troublers and subverters of the state; Act. 24. 5. Act. 1. 16. 20. 17. 6. Puritan, and I wots not what chief maintainers of the sect of the disciplinarians; unless (I say) he should mind some such Prelatists, I can not guess any subjects within the land, to be so undutiful, as to find fault with the Bishops, for not attempting to bring our Late Sovereign Lady the Queen deceased, to their excommunication. And therefore to inform the people of an Author, and not to bring him forth, it argueth and breadeth great suspicion that Excommunication toucheth them only which make profession to be of the Church. the enformer was the Author himself. Touching the looseness of some or of all in these days, that are without the Church, if he intent that they require Discipline of sharper Laws, by punishment of body, and loss of goods, than excommunication, and that they will more fear that manner of punishment, I hold, and affirm therein as he holdeth, and affirmeth, and yet (I say) that to the matter in question, he hath fitted no other answer, than as if he had answered, a poke full of plums, or a Buchet full of Pears, (for the controversy is not concerning those that are without, but concerning those that are within: not touching those, that are not of the household, but touching them that are of the household of faith and of God.) As for the first sort of which people, the Reverend Bishops with good leave, may procure what sharp punishment, they can devise, for by the Church excommunicated they should never be. For how should any be thrust from the communion of the Church, who never were in the communion with the Church? But it is to be feared, that this sharpness of punishment, is not urged so much to be inflicted upon them, that are without, as upon them, that are within the bosom of the Church. For though such, as be without, did a long time scorn, and set naught by the sword of excommunication, which was not only drawn out, by the Chancelours, Commissaries, and Officials: for every crust of bread, and for every piece of Bacon, but also, which was again put up, for every cracked groat, and for every IRISH harper; the Reverend Bishops whose freehold by such contempt, was not touched, were pacified, and contented themselves well enough by inflcting, and releasing that manner of punishment, but now for so much as they perceive the Children within the Church, to begin seriously, and religiously to stand against the use of Lordly and humane censures for the Crown and Sceptre of our Saviour Christ, and that the stateliness of Prelacy, must be taken one hole lower, if the simplicity of the holy ministry be exalted a degree higher, they pretend Discipline by excommunication, which is the sword of the Son, and heir of God, to be too bluntly pointed, and too badly edged, to foin, or to strike withal. Touching that very good manner of Discipline by the Ecclesiastical commission, which he saith hath done and doth daily much good, and would do more, if it were more common, the people whom he admonisheth, have just cause of being desirous to understand what manner of Discipline it is, which is so highly commended. Not one manner of Discipline used by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. For all men know, that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners use not in all places, and at all times one and the self same manner of Discipline. For the same Commissioners, for the same kind of offences, sometimes suspend, sometimes deprive, sometimes degrade, sometimes excommunicate, sometimes fine, sometimes imprison, sometimes command this penance, and sometimes that. Nay sometimes having convented before them, grave, Learned, and godly Ministers, for crimes supposed to be Ecclesiastical, and for the same pretenced Ecclesiastical offences, having detained them some years in durance, This Discipline was practised against Master Cart-Wright, Fenner, Whight, L. Snape, and others. for refusal of the oath ex officio: in the end not having any other supposed just cause of inflicting any punishment upon them, by Ecclesiastical authority, have been forced, for a show, to maintain their own credits, to cause accusations to be framed against them, by the Queen's Attorney in the High Court of Star Chamber, as against violators of the dignities of the Royal Crown, whose innocencies by the very witnesses produced by their means on the behalf of the Queen, have notwithstanding been fully cleared from the faults objected, and the Ministers discharged, without any ordinary Ecclesiastical Discipline used by the high Commissioners against M. Udall. punishment usually inflicted by that Court upon malefactors. Nay further, when the Ecclesiastical Commissioners had committed Master Udall to prison, where he remained half a year, for refusal of the oath ex officio, touching his knowledge of the Author of a Book, entitled The Demonstration; in the end he was delivered over as a fell on for making of the same book, and for the which he was arraigned, and convicted, and so died in prison: notwithstanding our Sovereign Lord, King james, than King of Scotland, had Graciously written for his deliverance. And how then would the Admonitor have the people contented with such a moderation of Ecclesiastical discipline, as the Ecclesiastical Commissioners ma●y times use? For did he think that every manner of discipline used by the High Commissioners can not be, but a very good An oath tendered by the Ecclesiastical Commission unto M. V dal in case of Felony. moderation? Why then let some of the Commissioners, tell the people whether the Ecclesiastical Commissioners used a very good moderation, and manner of Discipline Ecclesiastical against the same Master Udall, when they tendered unto him a corporal oath, to have appeached himself upon a matter which was adjudged to be Felony? or let them declare, what a very good manner of discipline Ecclesiastical, certain Ecclesiastical Commissioners used, when having a Gentleman before them, wearing long hair, they constrained the same Gentleman, by force, and strong hand, to have his head knotted in their presence? The wearing of long hair, by our Laws being not reputed an Ecclesiastical crime, no although the same be worn by attendants upon the Reverend Bishops, waiting on their Trenchers. Or let them signify unto us, what a good manner of discipline, and moderation it was for a Bishop and his associates, to make an act, in the High Commission Court, repugnant to the Institution of our Saviour Christ, and contrary to the order The Minister authorized, to put sacramental bread into the mouth of a Communicant. appointed by the Book of Common Prayer, that the Minister should put the Sacramental bread inro the mouth of a superstitious communicant, and not deliver it into his ha●ds? After our hearty commendations (saith the Bishop and his associates) whereas 1 V one of your charge, hath been often convented before us Her Majesty's Commissioners, in causes Ecclesiastical, for not receiving the holy Communion, it seemeth unto us, that he hath not of any contemptuous mind, refrained f●om the same, but is willing to receive it, and so hath bound himself, saving that he hath a scruple in his mind by reason of a fond vow, or promise he made long ago (whereof he is sorry) never to receive the Sacrament into his hand, but to put it into his mouth by the Minister? And therefore we pray you to bear a time, with his weakness, and permit him to receive it in that sort, until by your good counsel, and persuasion, he may be reduced from that fond scruple. And so we bid you hearty farewell. Your loving friends, etc. And seeing the Admonitor hath opposed a very good manner of Discipline, by the Ecclesiastical commission against excommunication, it seemeth that excommunication in his judgement, is no Master Excommunicated by the High Commissioners, most whereof were lay men. good or moderate discipline, to be used by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. And then were it fit, that the people were resolved, what a very good manner of Discipline Master D. W. and other Ecclesiastical Commissioners used against Master E. whom by virtue of the Ecclesiastical commission they excommunicated? The tenor of which excommunication, taken out of the Register at L. followeth. In Dei nomine, Amen. Nos I. W. Sacrae Theologiae Doctor, etc. Cancellarius ecclesiae, etc. M. A. M. Armigeri, & M. H. civis civitatis, etc. Commissarij rite, & legitime procedentes, I. E. de B. L. Dioceses ad hos diem & locum legitime, & peremptory citatum, & praecognizatum, diuque expectatum, & nullo modo comparentem, pronunciavimus contumacem, & in poenam contumaciae suae hujusmodi cum excommunicavimus in hijs scriptis. Concordat cum Regio. T Moreover it seemeth not an unmeet thing, that some Ecclesiastical Authority committed to Pursuivants by the Ecclesiastical commissioners. If the Queen had specially commanded this search, it is credible, that her privy Counssellors should have set to their hands rather than the High Commissioners. Commissioners, did make known unto the people, whether banishment be an Ecclesiastical Discipline; and what moderate discipline Ecclesiastical the Commissioners used when they banished religious Master Fullerton the Scot, from dwelling at Warwick, or within certain Miles thereof, Or l●t them inform the Realm, what a very good moderation was used, when by the Ecclesiastical Commission, for suppressing of Martin's Books, and other books of argument, against the Hierarchy, they authorised drunken and swearing Pursuivants, to search men's houses, and to break up their chests, etc. the Copy of which their Letters is this, viz. Whereas the bearer is (say they) by the Queen's Majesty especially appointed, to make search, and to apprehend, certain suspected persons, according to such particular directions, as he hath in that behalf received, these shall be to will, and require, and in her Majesty's Name strairly to charge and command you, and every of you, to whom these shall appertain, to be by all good and possible means, aiding, and assisting to the bearer in the execution of this service, by entering into all such houses, as he shall think meet, and hold suspected, as well within liberty as without, and that in them, and every of them, to make due, and diligent search. And to search all manner of writings, letters, papers, books, and all other things carrying note of suspicion, sparing no studies, chests, cubbares, locks, or walls, as also to apprehend, examine, and bring before us, such persons, as by Her Majesty's said direction, therein appointed, and wherein if he shall any way require your further assistance, you may not fail, to yield him the same, with all diligence, and dexterity, according to the trust reposed in you, as you will answer for your default, for the contrary at your uttermost peril. Directed unto all Mayors, Sheriffs, Justices of Peace, and quorum, Bailiffs, Constables, Hedboroughes, Tything-men, and to all other Her Majesty's Officers, and Subjects, etc. But be it that all these manners of Disciplines, were moderate, and good Ecclesiastical Disciplines, and more to be used, yet there may a scruple remain, which were fit to be discussed, what a very good moderation, and manner of Discipline, within our remembrances, was used, between an Archbishop, and a Bishop, both high Commissioners, against certain Gentlemen, and one of their Wives, about these Articles following. Articles objected by her Majesty's High Commissioners, for causes Ecclesiastical against G. B. of B. and F. B. of B in the County of L. IN primis, We object unto you G. B. and L. your wife, that you have within these seven years, and so at this present, do keep company, and use conference with divers persons, disobedient to her Majesty's laws, and such as be suspected to resort and frequent, unlawful Conventicles. Item, we object unto you, to the end you might the better insinuate yourselves into their companies, you Quere, whether this convention were lawful, for this cause. Quere, against what law this entertainment was, and whether the Bishop of L. conversing with Popish Priests and traitors, did not more offend. have tabled and boarded with the same parties, and that you or one of you, have been heretofore convented for the causes aforesaid, before the now Lord Archbishop his grace, for entertaining into your house a person which stood then, and yet standed suspended, and deprived, for disliking the Book of Common Prayer, and other godly orders established by Her Majesty's authority in this Realm. Item, We object unto you the said G. B. and L. your Wife, that you have not frequented divine service, celebrated within your Parish Church of Bothese vi. 5. 4. 3. 2. or one year's last, nor do not at this present; at least every Sunday, nor have received the holy Communion within your said Parish Church during the said years. Item, that you the said G. B. and L. your Wife within the time aforesaid, have not Christened, nor baptised Quere, whether the Bishop did not more offend the law of God by preferring these artioles, than the Gentleman did by procuring his children to be Baptised by a preaching Minister having none at home. your Children within your Parish Church, but contrary to the form, and order of Her Majesty's Laws in that case provided, have either christened them at home privately in your own house, or have carried, or caused them to be carried to other Churches. And let them declare what Church, and what Minister did baptise them, and where, and whether the same Minister, did at the same baptism, sign the child with the sign of the Cross, and let them declare the cause, why they did baptise their children out of the Parish. Item, that the Ministers pew or seat in the Church of B. aforesaid, by the direction of the L. Reverend Father Note that the bishop of L. was not bishop of the Diocese. in God the Bishop of London that now is, being at the same Church, as also by the consent of the Minister, and Churchwardens there, was placed in a very convenient place of the Church, to the end the Parishioners there might the better hear, and understand the Minister, at the time of reading the divine service. Item, We object unto you, that you the said F. B. within these vi. or 3. month's last passed, have without any sufficient warrant, or commandment from the Father in God, the Lord Bishop of London or his Clancelour, or other having authority therein, very disorderly, and contemptuously, removed the same seat, to the great offence of the Parishioners, and bad example of others. Item, We object unto you, that you know, believe, or have heard say that Za. G. is a Preacher of the Word of God, and a man of good life, and conversation, and lawful Parson of B. aforesaid. Item, We object unto you, that the premises notwithstanding, you the said F. B upon a Sunday, within a quarter of a year, last passed, when the Parishioners of B. were assembled together, at the said Church to hear Divine Service, caused divers serving men, and others to sit in the Pew or place, which properly belonged to the Parson of the said Church: so that when the said M. G. came to take his place, they thrust him, and very disorderly in the time of Prayer, kept him out of the said place. Item, We object unto you F. B. that about six years past you the said F. brought into the town of B. a bastard child, as it is credibly thought of your own, and there placed it at nurse, and have lately received it into your own house, to the great offence of the inhabitants there, and the bad example of others. Et obijcimus cum duobus & de quolibet. Subscribed, etc. Whereunto in the foot of these Articles was added. Master B. I pray you let this matter be followed ex officio, and the parties presently to be sent for, by warrant. Subscribed, etc. Now these Gentlemen, according to the Bishop's direction, being presently sent for by a Pursuivant, to answer the Articles objected, they forthwith make their repair to the Archbishop, with a Copy of the Articles, with whom they find such grace, as in their behalf immediately he writeth to the Bishop as followeth. SAlutem in Christo, My very good Lord, I have by means received these Articles enclosed, signed by your Lordship's hand, and can not but greatly marvel, that contrary to the orders of the Commission Court, subscribed by yourself, and the rest of the Commissioners, Note that the sign of Cross in Baptism by an Archbishop's opinion is but of small moment, and that suspicion of bastardy may easily be dismissed. Note that the 17. of October was the Sabath day, at what time Arch▪ D. C, and D. B. sitting as Commissioners, the Archippus took pen & ink, and crossed the Articles all overthwart, and so sent them bacl with his Letter. you would cause a Gentleman of such a quality, as Master B. is to be sent for by a Pursuivant, before the ordinary process of a Letter missive were served upon him, especially for matters of so small moment. Neither will it be thought to proceed of any just cause, but rather of some other misconceite, when it shall be understood that there is a controversy in Law elsewhere depending, between him and a kinsman of yours. And therefore for the avoiding of his further complaint and other offence, that may grow thereby, I hearty pray your Lordship to suppress the same, and proceed no further therein. Desiring you withal to have due consideration of the cause, lest I be enforced to deal likewise, in the defence of my kinsman, as you do for yours. And so praying your Lordship to return unto me answer hereunto, and what you mean to do, with my very hearty commendations I commit you to the tuition of Almighty God. From, etc. the 17. of October, etc. Subscribed etc. Unto which Letter also was added as followeth. Master B. I pray you according to the tener of this Letter, to see that this cause of M. G. and F. B. be dismissed from thence, and if any be bound to prosecute the cause against them, let them understand that I mean to hear it at, etc. otherwise let it wholly be dismissed, and the bands delivered. The Bishops Answer to the Archbishop's former Letters. MAy it please your Grace to understand that I was the more willingly drawn, to send for M. B. in that sort, because he was oft, and of long time accused, not only to be a disordered man himself, but also a great and open maintainer, and carrier from place to place of that wrangling Puritan, W. And as it is to be proved, a refrainer from his Church, and from the Communion, as I am informed. And therefore if we have omitted any circumstance or ceremony, it is in zeal of the redress of such a disorderly person. Which if it should be found in your own brother, I think your grace would not spare him. Nevertheless if you yourself take it in hand, to his redress, I for my part shall be entreated, so that the man be amended, who hath carried himself cutragiously, both in that, and other things. And so referring the whole matter to your grace's discretion, I take my leave, praying God to bless us, in the peace of the Church. From, etc. the 17. of October, etc. Your Grace's most assured in Christ, etc. Whatsoever special cause might move these two great Prelates, to stand either of them, for the defence of his kinsman, is not a thing material to this Treatise. But this honestly enough may be averred, that it is no very good nor moderate kind of ecclesiastical discipline, either for the Archbishop and his associates, in regard of his kinsman presented to a benefice by the Gentleman, to cancel the articles of his colleague, and fellow commissioners: or for the Bishops upon a spleen taken against the Gentleman, for standing upon the right of his patronage, against his kinsman, to violate the public orders, of the high commissioners, whereunto he himself had subscribed. Many other forms of ecclesiastical discipline of late years have been used by the high commissioners: But whether they were all very good, and moderate disciplines or no is greatly doubted, by many wise, learned, and godly men. And namely it is doubted, whether such ecclesiastical commissioners, as by letters patents, under the great Seal of England were authorised from the Queen, to exercise, use, occupy and execute, all manner of jurisdiction, privileges, and preeminences concerning any spiritual or Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, be able to prove unto the Realm, that they had lawful power and authority, by the statute of 1 Eliz. c. 1 or by the Queen's letters patents made according to the true intent of that statute, or by any other law or statute of the Realm to depute and substitute any other person under them, to use, exercise and execute any part of that jurisdiction ecclesiastical, which by virtue of that statute and letters patents, was committed only to their fidelities and discretions. And whether it were a very good manner of ecclesiastical discipline which was used, exercised, and executed either by the person so deputed, or by the Commissioners themselves, upon any process or proceed made by the said person substituted. Again, it is doubted whether it were a good manner of Ecclesiastical discipline, for the high Commissioners to command the Magistrates Ecclesiastical discipline against the●● Magistrates of Banbury of the town of Banburie, at the suit of certain popish companions to reset up a Cross, which by virtue of the Queen's injunctions, they had peaceably, and lawfully pulled down. It is also doubted, whether it were a very good manner of Ecclesiastical discipline for the high Commissioners, to detain Master More one year or two in prison, depriving him also from his living, for his confident asseveration that William Summer with divers others in Lancashire were possessed, and that Master Dorrell was not an impostor. The occasion of the Admonitors great commendation, of a very good manner of ecclesiastical discipline, used by the high Commissioners, hath necessarily drawn me, to show the differences of the disciplines used by the same. To the intent the King's Highness might be pleased with the advice of his Parliament, to consult, whether it were not more agreeable to the good laws, statutes, and customs of the Realm, and more convenient, for the good government of the Church, to have one certain form and rule of Ecclesiastical discipline, to be established, and to be used, by the high Commissioners; rather than thus at random, to suffer their only discretion, to be the Mistress of all Ecclesiastical discipline; especially since without any manner of appeal, or supplication to be made from them unto the King, they use what manner of discipline soever seemeth good in their own eyes, whether moderate, or immoderate, Civil or Ecclesiastical, without check or controlment. Than the which there cannot seem any thing more prejudicial and burdensome unto the people. ADMONITION. Page 8●. Further more the●r whole drift, as it may seem, is to bring the government of the Church to a Democracie or Aristocracy: the principles and reasons whereof, if they be made once by experience familiar in the minds of the common people, and that they have the sense and feeling of them, it is greatly to be feared, that they will very easily transfer the same to the government of the common weal For by the same reasons they shall be induced to think that they have injury, if they have not as much to do in civil matters, as they have in matters of the Church, seeing they also touch their commodity and benefit temporally as the other doth spiritually, and what hereof may follow, I leave to the judgement of other. ASSERTION. Let it be granted, that their whole drift is to bring the government Book of common prayer, title communation and confirmed by 5 and 6 Ed. 6. c 1. prim. Eliz. c. 2, 8 Eliz, c, 1, Aristocracy in the Church not hurtful to the common wealth, of the Church to that manner of government which the learned call Aristocracy, what incommodity should the Church or common weal receive by such a government? when as the same government is not only authorised by the holy law of God, but also commended unto us by the desires and wishes of sundry acts of Parliaments. For saith the book of Common prayer, the Discipline of the Primitive Church, is greatly to be wished. Aristocracy therefore, and the discipline of the Primitive Church, differing but in name, and not in nature, it cannot be hurtful to the common weal, that the principles and reasons thereof should by experience be made familiar in the minds of the common people; nay it cannot but be beneficial unto the common weal, when the same shall understand, that the best observers of the law of God, and the best friends unto God and his people, are to be the Officers in the house of God. Neither is their whole drift, to be disliked, but to be commended, that labour to bring the government of the Church from a Papal Prelacy, to a Christian Aristocracy: the one viz. Aristocracy, according to the interpritation of the name Aristocracy in the Church optimatum, Praelacia pessimatum potestas. thereof, being optimatum potestas, a power of the best observers of the law; the other, viz. Prelacy, according to their practice, being pessimatum potestas, a power of the worst observers of the law: the first derived from the law of God, and practice of God's people; the other reduced from the laws and customs of the Gentiles and idolatrous Priests. And this of necessity, in defence of the truth, the Admonitors argument, forceth me to speak; for by an implication of the dislike of bringing the government of the Churches by Pastors and Elders, to a Democracie or Aristocracy, he hath by consequence, disclaimed and disavowed the government of the Church by Prelacy, to be any of those two. And what other government than should we think Prelacy to be, but either oligarchy, or Tyranny? For neither Monarchy may it be, neither Prelacy either oligarchy or tyranny. Policy, or political estate can it be: and other kind of government besides these there is not any. For my part, I more charitably judge of the government of the Church by prelacy, than to match it with Tyranny. And although the Admonitor, and the perusers and allowers of his book, were men in their generation wise, yet had they well weighed the nature of the government of oligarchy, they would rather in this argument, have been silent, than upon disclaim of Democracie, and Aristocracy, (governments both of them commendable in their kind) have cast the commendation of their own government of the Church by Prelacy, to so desperate an estate, as is the estate of oligarchy. Wherein if any do glory, because not many of the best, but some few of the wealthiest, and richest sort do govern, then let him hearken and consider, what (long since) was preached before Pope Vrban the fifth, by one Nicholas Orem, a man singularly commended for learning in his time. Amongst all the regiments of the Gentiles, Act. & Mo. Nich. Orem his opinion of oligarchy. none (saith he) is more to be found, wherein is to be seen so great and exceeding odds, than in the policy of Priests: Amongst whom one is drunken, another is sterved, amongst whom some be so high, that they exceed all Nobles and Princes of the earth; some again be so abased, that they are under all rascals; and such a common wealth (saith he) may well be called oligarchy. But Thomas Aquinas, he seemeth to set the discommodities of oligarchy a pin higher: for (saith he) as a Kingdom hath in it the commodities Tho. Aquin. what he thinketh of oligarchy. Aristocracy a good regiment. of all other good regiments; of Aristocracy, that the Noblest and chiefest persons among the people, be taken to Council: of policy or political estate, where an assembly of all estates is had, and when the very best of all sorts, are chosen, to consult, and deliberate, of the public weal●: so doth Tyranny contain, and hath in it all incommodities, and vices of all naughtiness and corrupt regiments: of oligarchy it borroweth, that the most wicked and corruptest men be Counselors, and that as it were a rout of Tyrants do govern. The reasons and pillars of which oligarchy, are immoderateness, oligarchy a corrupt regiment excessiveness, disparity, and inequality, passing and beyond all mean and measure. Now if our reverend Bishops shall show themselvea to be male contented with me, as though out of the opinions of these learned men, I would gather that the government of the Church by Prelacy, is one of he corruptest governments; I am to desire them to have patience until hey shall plainly demonstrate unto us, that the same is not Oligarchy. For if hereafter they shall revoke their former disgraceful judgements, against the discipline by Pastors and Elders, containing in it the very nature of true Aristocracy; and wi●hall, instruct ●s better of the true nature of their own government of the Church by Prelacy; they shall find us filyable to their opinion, so that it be grounded upon the principles and reasons of truth. In the mean season (after the fashion of the Admonitors manner of admonishing the people, we most humbly beseech the King and Parliament to be informed, that it is greatly to be feared (if Prelacy be oligarchy) that the Prelates It is to be feared lest (by the example of Prelates) oligarchy be brought in the commonweal will endeavour, to transfer that manner of government, from the Church unto the Commonweal. And that the Commonweal shall as miserably be rend, and torn, with factions and uproars, as now the Church is disquieted by schisms and divisions. For if only a few of the richest and wealthiest sort, shall get an head, and bear all the sway in the Commonweal, they shall think by the Principles and reasons of oligarchy, that they have injury, if they have not as much to do in civil mats, as the Prelates have to do in the matters of the Church: And what hereof may follow, as the Admonitor leaveth, so do I also leave it to the judgement of other. Only if the way hereof already hath been trodden A caveat against oligarchy. out unto them, by some who have not written, nor spoken, but yet practised the principles and reasons of oligarchy in the Commonweal, only than this I say, and add as a Caveat, that the danger to come, is more heedfully to be prevented. For like as in good harmony (to make the Music perfect) is required a moderate, and proportionate inequality of voices; which, if it too much exceed, taketh away all the sweet melody, so by too much immoderate inequality, or disparity of Citizens, the Commonweal falleth to ruin. But why may not the Government of the Church by Prelacy, The government of the Church by Prelacy, is not Monarchical. be a Princely and a Royal Government? Indeed this question, if it should be resolved, by the Rules and Principles of the Canon Law, I could hardly disprove that government to be Princelike: for, (as hath been said before) quilibet Ordinarius in Diocoesi, est major quolibet Principe. Yea and every Bishop, by the same Law, hath as absolute a spiritual power, within his Diocese, as a King hath a temporal power within his Kingdom. But because that Law with the rules and principles thereof, is, or aught to be discarded out of this Kingdom, we will not wade in it. Only we say that the government of the Church by Prelacy, cannot be any kind of Royal and monarchial government, because Prelates have not like power spiritual, as Kings and Monarches have power temporal. For there was never yet lex regia, de Praelatorum spi●ituali imperio, lata, qua Praelatis & in eos omne imperium suum, & potestatem, aut Deus, aut Institut. de jure nature. gent & ci. § Sed & quod. populus Dei contulerit. And therefore where the people have made the fore said regal Law, as there it is justly said, quodcunque Imperator per Epistolam constituit, vel cognoscens decrevit, vel edicto praecepit, legem esse constat: and quod Principi placuit, legis habet vigorem; So likewise, where there is no such regal Law, made in the Church, there it is justly affirmed: quod Praelato placuit, legis non habet vigorem; quodcunque Praelatus per Epistolam constituit, cognoscens decrevit, vel canone praecepit, legem non esse constat. And then how can every Prelate, or why doth every Prelate, by his sole authority, enjoin Canons, Articles, Injunctions, and orders, to be observed as Laws, in all the Churches of his jurisdiction? If the Admonitor supposed the government of the Church by Prelacy to be monarchial, because the Queen was a Monarch, and that If the government of the Church by Prelacy be Monarchical, then may the government by pastors be● so to. the Reverend Bishop governed under a Monarch; then what did he else, but put a weapon into the hands of Pastors and Elders, to prove their government also, to be Princely and monarchial? Because Pastors and Elders desire not to have that manner of government, to be brought into the Church, otherwise than by the Royal assent, Sovereign authority, and express commandment of Our most Gracious King and Monarch. Besides, if any government may be therefore said to be a Monarchy, because the same is derived from an earthly Monarch, how much more than may the government of the Churches, by Pastors and Elders be adjudged Monarchical, by reason the same is deduced from our heavenly and everlasting Monarch. For the Reverend Bishops by their public M. Horn, bishop of Winch. M. ●ewell, bishop of Sali M. Bilson, bishop of Winch. preach, and apologetical writings testify, that power and authority to ordain and depose Ministers; to excommunicate and to absolve; to devise and to establish rites and Ceremonies in the Church; to define what is truth; to pronounce what is falsehood; to determine what is schism; and to condemn what is heresy: our Reverend Bishops (I say) confess this power, to be originally decided, unto the true Bishops, and Pastors of the Church from the Kingly and Sovereign power of our Saviour Christ. By what name therefore soever the government of Pastors and Elders in the Churches be called, there is no manner of cause to dislike of the planting of that government in a Monarchy, because the same is instituted by No cause for a Monarch to fear, that his Christian subjects should have the sense of Aristocracy in Church government the Monarch of Monarches, who is able, and ready, to uphold the state of all Monarchies in Commonweals, together with the state of Aristocracy in his Church. Neither is there any cause for any Monarch in the world, to fear the making of Christian common people, by familiar experience, to have the sense and feeling of the principles and reasons of Aristocracy. For if a people have once submitted their necks to the yoke of Christ, they can live a peaceable ●nd godly life, under all kinds of powers, because they know all kind of powers, to be the ordinance of God. But especially, there is not, neither ever was, neither ever can there be, any cause for any King, or Monarch of England, greatly (as the Admonitor insinuateth) to fear, that the common people, will very easily transfer the principles, and reasons Aristocracy, to the government of the Commonweal; and thereupon be induced to think that they have injury, if they have not as much to do in civil matters, as they have in matters of the Church, seeing they also touch their commodity and benefit temporally, as the other doth spiritually. And certes it seemeth that the Admonitor was drawn very dry of reason, when he was feign to pluck this stake from the hedge, to make a fire, and to kindle the wrath of the Magistrate, against the form of Discipline, by Pastors and Elders. For whether he intendeth that the Pastors and Elders will think themselves to have injury, if they deal not in all causes of the Commonweal, as well as in all causes of their Churches; or whether he meant, that the common people, w●ll easily transfer, the government of the Commonweal, from a Kingly Monarchy, to a noble Aristocracy, there is neither soothness nor soundness in his meaning. For since the Learned Ministers against the reverend Pastors disclaim to deal in civil matters Bishops by the holy rules of our faith, maintain that it is not lawful for a Minister of the Gospel, to exercise civil Magistracy, and that it is not lawful for the man of God, to be entangled with the affairs of this life; how is it probable, that those Ministers, will easily oppugn their own knowledge, by their own contrary practice? Or how is it probabl●, that they would overleade themselves with that burden, to ease the Church whereof they have contentedly exposed themselves into a number of reproaches, contempts, bitings, and persecutions? As for that other intendment of ●he Admonitors, that it is greatly to be feared, that the common people will easily transfer Monarchy, unto Democracie, or Aristocracy, if the principles and reason thereof, by experience, were made familiar in their m●nds: this reason (I say) might seem to carry some show of affrighting a Monarch, if the same were insinuated unto a King, whose people were never acquainted with the Principles and reasons of Democracy, or Aristocracy: but this fear being insinuated unto our late Sovereign Lady the Queen, whose people ever since the time they first began to be a people, have had their wits long exercised, The people of England have their wits exercised with the sense of Democracy & Aristocracy with the sense and feeling, of the reasons and principles, as well of Democracy, as also of Aristocracy, what sense had the Admonitor to urge this fear? That in the Kingdom of England, the common people have already the sense and feeling of the reasons and principles of Democracy cannot be denied. For in every cause almost, as well of criminal, as civil justice (some few only excepted) to be executed in the Commonweal, by the common laws of the Realm, have they not some hand, and dealing in the same, by one mean or other? Nay which is more, have they not the sense and feeling, of the making, and unmaking their own laws in Parliament? And is not their consultations in Parliament, a mere Democritall consultation? As much also there is to be avowed, for the sense, and feeling of the reasons, and principles of Aristocracy, to be already in the minds of the Peers, the Nobles, the judges, and other great men of the Realm. For are not the Wisest, the Noblest, and the chiefest taken out of these, by the King, to be of his Counsel, and to be judges and justicers in his Courts? Yea, and is not their Assembly also in Parliaments, a mere Aristocratical assembly? And what translation then is there greatly to be feared, out of the Church to be made into the Commonweal, when the minds of all sorts of our common wealth's men, be already seasoned, with the things which he fears? And when the Commonweal is already seized of the Principles and reasons, which he would not have familiarly known unto it? Wherefore that the King, the Nobles, and Commons, may no more be feared, with the strangeness of these uncouth, and unknown Greek names, of Democracy, and Aristocracy, written in his book with great and Capital Letters; I have thought it my duty, by these presents to inform them, that the government of the Church by Pastors and elders now wanting amongst us, and desired to be brought into the Church, by the Sovereign authority of our King, Nobles, and Commons in Parliament (for the outward form and manner thereof) is none other manner of Government, nor form of policy, than such as they, and their Progenitors and Ancestors, for many hundred years together, without interruption have used and enjoyed in the Commonweal. And that therefore it will be a very easy matter, to transfer the same, to the government of the The manner of Policy, by Pastors and Elders in the Church, is agreeable to the government in the common weal. The government of the Church by prelacy, disagreeable to the government used in the common weal. Church. For by the reasons and principles of their own government, in the Commonweal, and by the sense, and feeling thereof, they may well be induced, to think, that they have injury, if they have not as much to do in matters of the Church, as they have to do in matters of the Commonweal, seeing they touch their commodity and benefit spiritually, as the other doth temporally. And withal on the other side, I shall do my best endeavour, to advertise them that the government of the Church by Prelacy, is such a manner of Government, as was never yet in the administration of justice by any subject (no not touching the outward form thereof) once admitted into any part of Commonweal: and that therefore the same (if it may please the King) will very easily be sent, and transmarined unto Rome, whence it first came, and where it had it original and birthright. And to the end, that we may clearly discern, whether the nature of the Government of the Church by Prelacy, or the nature of the Government, desired to be planted by Pastors and Elders, be more agreeable to the nature of the policy, received and used both by the Nobles, and common people, in the Commonweal; it is necessary that the manners and forms, both of Prelatical, and Pastoral Government, be made familiar unto the mind of the Reader. And because we have already declared, the manner of the election, and confirmation both of a Bishop, into his Episcopal See, and of a Minister, into his Pastoral charge; what the one is by the Law already established, and what the other, by a Law desired to be established, aught to be, we will not any more speak of their entrance, into either of their places, unless only (a little to recreate the Reader) we merely note what answer some Bishops have made, when as long chase after Bishoprickes, they have chafed in their minds, for fear of losing The answer of an Italian Bishop, loath to lose his Bishopric. their prey: as was the answer of that Italian Bishop, who being thrice demanded of the Archbishop, (as the manner is) vis Episcopari? vis Episcopari? vis Episcopari? and being willed by one standing by, thrice again to answer (as the manner is) nolo, nolo, nolo. He making n● bones at the matter, answered aloud with an The answer of an English Bishop, having obtained his congedelie● oath, Proh Deum, dedine ego tot millia Florenorum, pro volo Episcopari, & jam debeo dicere nolo? or as was the answer of that English Bishop, who having promised a Courtier one annuity of twenty pound, during his life, out of his Bishopric, if he could procure the speedy fe●ling of his congedelier: within a while after, when it was sealed, he rapt out an oath, and swore by Jesus God, that the same Gentleman had done more for him, than an other great Courtier, who before hand, for that purpose, had received from him one thousand marks: But whether all Bishops buy their congedeliers dearer, or better cheap, is not a matter incident to this treatise; only if they buy dear, they may happily think with themselves, that they may sell dear, vendere jure potest, emerat ille prius, setteth not any price upon any wares in the Royal Exchange. But to return The manner of the administration of spiritual justice in the Church, by Prelacy. to our purpose, whence by occasion of those Bishoply oaths and answers, we have a little digressed: let us see what is the manner and form, of the administration of spiritual justice, in the government of the Church, by Prelacy, as the same is ordinarily administered, in all places throughout the Church of England. Wherein that we be not mistaken, it is to be understood, that the manner of administration of justice, whereof we speak, is that administration of justice only, which respecteth the punishment of crimes Ecclesiastical to be inflicted by spiritual censures. In all which cases, penances, suspension, and excommunications, in the Bishop's consistory, proceed from the judgement, and authority of the Bishop alone, if he be present, or from the sentence and power of his Vicar general, or Commissary alone, and if he be absent: Nay doth not every such censure likewise in the Archdeacon's consistory, proceed from the sole authority of the Archdeacon? or if he be absent, from the sole authority of his official? But if the like course of the execution of Justice as this is, cannot be found, to be an ordinary course of Justice, in the Commonweal, where Justice is administered in criminal causes, by the Ministry of a subject: I would feign learn, what prejudice may be feared to redound unto the Common Weal, if the administration of spiritual justice (after a sort) were established, to be after the same manner in the Church, after which civil justice is already practised in the Commonweal. I said after a sort, to this end, lest I should be mistaken. For the meaning is not, that spiritual justice should be ministered exactly, in No one subject in the Common Weal, can alone exercise civil justice, in causes criminal. every respect, after the manner of civil justice, but the comparison standeth only in this; that, as not any one temporal subject alone hath authority to hear, to examine, and to judge any one criminal cause, in any Court of civil justice, in the Commonweal; so likewise that any one spiritual person alone should have authority, to be examiner and judge of any one criminal cause in any Court of spiritual justice in the Church. For if certain principal and godly persons, associated unto a learned and zealous Pastor, in the presence, and with the consent and authority of the people of every Parish, did enjoin penance, suspend, or excommunicate a spiritual The administration of spiritual justice, by pastors and Elders, agreeable to the execution of civil justice in the Commonweal Master D. Bancroft what his assistants Letter, able to repress puritans in one parish. D. Stanhope, alone to repress all in a Diocese. offendor, were not this form of administration of spiritual justice, more consonant, agreeable, and conformable, to the daily execution of civil justice in the Courts of the Commonweal, than is the administration of spiritual justice, by the Bishop alone, or by his Vicar general alone, in his Consistory? and to make this matter more familiar in the mind of the Reader, for an instance or two let us suppose, that Master Doctor Bancroft Parson of S. Andros in Holborn, had chosen Master Harsnet to be his Curate, and withal that Master Dodge, Master Mercury, Master Flower, and Master Brisket, (all chief attendants on his late great Lord and Master) were inhabitants within the same Parish, and th●t the chief men, of the same Parish, had chosen those to be assistants to him, and to his Curate, for the inquisition of the demeanours of all the Puritans and Precisians within his Parish; let this (I say) be supposed, would not he and they (trow we) think it a high scorn, and an indignity to be offered unto their Mastership's, in case it should be insinuated, that Master Doctor Stanhope, were better able, with one little blast of breath upon a piece of paper, to blow away all Puritanisme, out of the City and Diocese of London, than these great Chapleins, and discreet Gentlemen, with their thunderings, and with their lightnings, were able to fright the same out of one poor Parish in HOLBORN? And again, to make this matter yet a little more familiar to the mind of the Reader, let us suppose again that thundering Master Merbury now Lecturer in the Church of Saint Mary Overis, were Pastor of the same Church, and had, to be his assistants in the Ministry, but simple M. Butterton, and that they two, for the Elders of the same Church, to be chosen by the Parish, had such, and such, and such men, lovers of all honesty and godliness, and enemies unto all dishonesty, and ungodliness; could not these learned and grave Ministers, with the assistants of such wise and godly Boroughmasters, be as well able, to reform Papists, Atheists, Swearers, prophaners of the Sabbath, drunkards, adulterers, and such like, within the Borough of Southwark; as is Master Doctor Ridley, to bring to any good amendment of life, all such kind of persons, within the whole Diocese of Winchester? If the examination and judgement of all theeveries, pickeries, burglaries, robberies, murders and such like, were committed to Master D●ctor Ridley alone for the Diocese of Winchester, and to Master D. Stanhope alone for the Diocese of London, were it not like, that for one such malefactor, as there is now, we should shortly have an hundred? And therefore to hold us still to the point in question, it is very plain and evident, that this manner of spiritual justice, mentioned to be executed, by the Pastors and Elders, is more correspondent to the administration of civil justice, in the Commonweal, than is that manner of the execution of spiritual justice, by Doctor Stanhope, or Doctor Ridley; by the Bishop of London, or by the Bishop of Winchester. For to begin with our meanest, and basest Courts, let them show unto us, any Court, Leete, law-days, Matters in Leets and Law days not overruled by one alone. or Sheriff's turns, within any County, City, Town, Borough, Village, or Hamlet within the Realm, wherein matters of civil justice are heard, examined, and adjudged by one man alone. If for the common benefit of the Tenants against incrochments, overlaying of commons, waist, nuisances, or such like, any pain is to be offered, or presentment made, the same is not set or made, by the Steward, Sheriff, or other Officer alone, but by the common voice and consent of all the homagers, and suitors to the Court. The Steward indeed is the director, and moderator of the Court, the giver of the charge, and the mouth of the whole Assembly, to pronounce and enact the whole work of their meeting, but he is not the only inquisitor, the presenter, the informer, or the Judge, to dispose all things according to his own discretion. Besides, matters of the King's peace, are not committed in any County, or other place within the Realm, only to one Justice of the peace alone. For neither at the general Sessions of the peace, nor at any other less public meetings, any person, for any offence, Breaches of the King's peace, not punishable by one alone. (whereof he standeth indicted, or for which he is punishable) can be fined, amerced, or bodily punished, at the discretion of one Justice alone, but by the greatest part of the justices assembled, his penalty is to be imposed upon him. Furthermore, this manner of the examination of the fact, and declaration of the Law, for the trial of the fact, and judgement of the Law, doth not reside in the breast of one juror or judge alone. In the Court of the King's Bench, if a Prisoner he brought to the Bar, justice in any of the B. Courts, is not executed by one judge alone and confess not the Crime, by the justice of that Court he can receive no judgement, unless he be first indicted, by inquisition of twelve grand jurors at the least, and afterward again be tried by other twelve brought judically into the Court face to face. Yea and in this Court, neither the interpretation of the common Law, nor the exposition of any statute dependeth upon the opinion, credit, or authority of one judge, or not of the King's chief justice himself alone; for his other three brethren and Co-juges; varying from him in point of law, may lawfully overrule the Court. The same manner of Judgement, for the Law is in use, and is practised by the Judges, in the Court of common Pleas, and by the Barons of the Exchequer in the Latin Court of the Exchequer. And not In the Courts of Equity are many assistants, Court of requests, only in these Courts of law and Justice, but also in all the King's Courts of equity and conscience; it is not to be seen that any one person alone, hath any absolute power, without assistants, finally to order, judge, and decree, any cause appertaining to the jurisdiction of those Courts. In the Court of Requests, there are not fewer than two, yea some times three, or four, with Master of Requests in commission, to hear and determine matters of equity in Court of Wards, that Court. In the Court of Wards and liveries, there sitteth not only the Master of the Wards, but also the King's Attorney, the Receiver, and other Officers of the same Court. In the Court of Court of the Chequer Chamber. the Exchequer-chamber, with the Lord Treasurer (who is chief and precedent of that Council) yet with him as assistants, do sit the chancellor of the Exchequer, the Lord Chief Baron, High courts of Chancery, and the other Barons. Whatsoever decree final is made in the King's high Court of Chancery, the same is decreed, not by the Lord Chancellor alone, But by the Lord Chancellor, and the high Court of Chancery: wherein the Master of the Rolls, and the twelve Masters of the Chancery as coadjutors, do sit and give assistance. In the most honourable Court of Star-chamber, the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Treasurer, and the precedent of the Court of Star-chamber, 3 H, 7 c. 1, & 2, H, 8 c, 20, Kings most honourable Council, and Keeper of the King's privy Seal, or two of them, calling unto them one Bishop, and one temporal Lord, of the Kings most honourable Council, the two chief Justices of the King's bench, and Common pleas for the time being; or other two of the King's Justices in their absence, have full power and authority, to punish, after their demerits, all misdoers being found culpable before them. If we search our statutes (besides the Courts, and matters determinable in these spoken of before) we shall find, that the complaints of error, whether it t●uch the King, or any other person, made in the Exchequer, should be 31 E, 3 c, 21, done to come before the Chancellor, and Treasurer, who taking to them two Justices, and other sage persons, are duly to examine the business; and, i● any error be found to correct and amend the 14, E, 3, c 5, Rolls, etc. By reason of delays of judgements, used in the Chancery, in the King's bench, common bench, and in the Exchequer, it was assented, established and accorded, that a Prelate, two Earls, and two Barons chosen by the Parliament, by good advice of the Chancellor, etc. shall proceed to take a good accord and to make 10 K. 2 c. 1 a good judgement. When it was complained unto the King, that the profits etc. of his Realm by some great Officers, &c, were much withdrawn and eloyned, etc. it pleased the King, etc. to commit the surveying, aswell of the estate, of his house, etc. unto the honourable Fathers in God, William Archbishop of Canterbury, 26 H. 6, b 11 H. 7 c. 25. c 19 H. 7 c. 7. and Alexander Archbishop of York, etc. by a statute of commission for Sowers: by a statute for punishment of perjury: by a statute against making or executing of acts, or ordinances, by any c Masters, being not examined; etc. by the Lord Chancellor, d 27 H, 3, c. 27 c 32 H. c. 45. f 27 E c. 8 Treasurer, or chief Justices, etc. By a statute for the erection of the Court of d Augmentation: by a statute for erection of the Court of first e fruits and tenths: and lastly by an f act for redress of erroneous judgements in the Court commonly called the King's bench: By all these Statutes (I say) it is very apparent, that the Administration of public affairs, in the common weal, hath never been usually committed, to the advisement, discretion, or definitive sentence, of any one man alone. Which point is yet more fully, and more perfectly Lord precedent, and council in Wales. Lord precedent and council in the North parts. Lord deputy & council in Ireland. The King & his honourable privy Council. The King and his grand council in Parliament. to be understood, by the establishment, and continuance, of the King's Lord President and Council of Wales; of the King's Lord President and Council established for the North; of the Kings L. deputy and Council within the Realm of Ireland; of the K. highness most honourable privy Council, chosen by him for the assistance of his Royal person, in matters appertaining to his Kingly estate; and lastly of the supreme and grand Council of the three estates in Parliament, for matters concerning the Church, the King and the common weal. For whether respect be had unto the secret affairs of the King's estate, consulted upon in his Highness' Council Chamber, by his privy Councillors, or whether we regard the public tractation of matters in Parliament, there can be no man so simple, as not to know, both these privy and open negotiations, to be carried by most voices of those persons who by the K. are called to those honourable assemblies. And what a vain jangling then doth the Admonitor keep, and how idly and wranglingly doth he dispute; when against the government of the Church by Pastors and Elders, he objecteth, that the same will interrupt the laws of the Realm: that it will be great occasion of partial and affectionate dealing, that some will incline to one part, and that the residue will be wrought to favour the other; and that thereby it will be a matter of strife, discord, schism and heresies? Howbeit if never any of these extremities and dangers, have fallen out in the common weal, by any partial ot affectionate dealing of the King's Deputies, Precedents, Judges, Justicers, and other Officers and Ministers, associated unto them for the administration of Justice, or equity in any of the King's civil Courts; how much less cause have we to fear any partiality, affection, working inclination, favour, strife, debate, schismatical or heretical opinions, if once Pastors and Elders in every Congregation, and not throughout a Diocese one Bishop alone, had the spiritual administration of the Church cause? Can many temporal Officers, Justicers and Judges, rightly and indifferently administer the Law, and execute justice and judgement, without that, that some do incline to one part, and without that the residue be wrought to favour the other part? And cannot spiritual Officers dispatch spiritual affairs, without that, that they be partially and affectionally disposed? What? is it so easy a matter that the Ancients of God, and the Ministers of Christ, can the one part incline to righteousness, and the residue be wrought to favour wickedness? can some incline to God and unto Christ; and can other some be wrought to follow Satan and Antichrist? For what other controversy, is required to be decided by Pastors and Elders, than the controversy of sin, between the soul of man, and his God? And is there any Christian Pastor or Elder, that will be wrought, rather to favour the sin of a mortal man, than the glory of his immortal God? But to leave the state of the kingdom and common weal, and the good usages and customs of the same; let us come to the state of the Church itself, and to the lawful government thereof, established even amongst us at this The government of the Church, ought not to be by one alone, day. For whatsoever our Reverend Bishops practise to the contrary, yet-touching ordination and deposition of Ministers; touching excommunication and absolution; touching the order and rule of Colleges, Cathedral Churches and the Universities, the Ecclesiastical law doth not commit the administration of these things, and regiment of these places to any one person alone. The Universities admit not the government of the Chancellor being present, nor of his Vicechancellor The government in the Universities not by one alone. The government in Colleges not by one alone. (himself being absent) as of one alone, the Doctors, Procurators, Regent's, and non-Regents, have all voices, and, by most o● their voices, the University causes take success. The businesses of Colleges, by the statutes of their founders, are commended to the industry and fidelity of the Precedent, Viceprovost, and Fellows; unto the Provost and Viceprovost, and Fellows; unto the Warden, Sub-warden, and fellows; unto the Master and fellows; and unto such like Officers and fellows. The Cathedral The government of Cathedral Churches not by one alone, Churches, their live, and their lands, their revenues and their dividents, their Chapiters', and their co●ferences, depend upon the will and disposition of the Dean and Chapter, and not of the Bishop alone. Neither can the Bishop alone, by any ancient canon law (pretended to be in force) place, or displace, excommunicate, or absolve, any Ecclesiastical person, without the judgement of the Chapter. Ex de excess. Prela. c. 2. Exc. de hiis quaes. cons. cap, c, novit And aswell by a statute, 21. H. 8. c. 13. as also by the book of consecrating Archbishops, etc. the presence of divers Ministers, and the people is required, at the ordination of every Minister. As for the deposition, or degradation of Ministers (under the correction of the reverend Whether the degradation of a Minister be warrantable Monsieur de ● jesis 164. in the 2 book of the Mass, Bb. be it spoken) I think, they have not so much as any colour of any law for it. The form of the degradation of a popish and sacrificing Priest, by the Canon law can be no pretext to degrade a Minister of the Gospel, because a Minister of the Gospel is not set into his charge, per calicem, & patinam, with a cup full of wine, and dish full of hosts: neither receiveth he any character at all of a shaveling priest. And because a Minister of the Gospel, is ordained only after that manner, which the statute law hath appointed, how should the ordination made by so high an authority, be undone by any other power? unto the former manners, of the administration of the causes of the Universities, Colleges, and Cathedral Churches, may be added the execution of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, committed The ecclesiastical Commission exercised by many commissioners, and not by one. heretofore by the Queen unto the Ecclesiastical Commissioners. For althought by the words of the statute, her Highness had full power, and authority, by her letters patents, to assign, name, and authorise, any one person, a natural borne subject, to execute spiritual jurisdiction; yet nevertheless, according to the laudable usages, and customs of her Kingdom, and courts temporal, she evermore authorised, not one alone, but divers and sundry, aswell temporal as Ecclesiastical persons, for the execution thereof. Which manner of The ecclesiastical commission commanded by the Bishops if it please the King may be enlarged unto all parishes wherein are godly preaching Ministers. commission, because the reverend Bb. commend the same, and avow that it would do more good, if it were more common, it cannot but seem to be a most grateful thing, unto all good men, especially unto those reverend Fathers, if humbly we beseech the king, that his highness would be pleased, to make it more common. And therefore in the behalf aswell of the reverend Bb. as of all the learned and grave Doctors, and Pastors of every Church, we most instantly entreat our most gracious Sovereign Lord the K●ng, that where in any parish there shall be found a learned preaching Minister, resident upon his benefice, that there be would be pleased by his authority royal, under the broad Seal, to enable him, and some other godly and faithful Knights, Esquires, Gentlemen, Citizens, Boroughmasters, or other chief men of the same parish, to execute spiritual justice against drunkards, adulterers, swearers, railers and such like ecclesiastical offenders, inhabitants only within the same parish. For in this case we say, as the reverend Bishops say, bonum quò communius, eo melius. If any exception should be taken, or challenge made scoffingly, and with scornful terms, against these lay parochians, as hereto fore hath been used, against lay-Elders, or lay-Aldermen No exception to be taken against lay Elders, to be authorized by the king in every parish; since the King authorizeth lay-Elders, in ecclesiastical commission. (as they call them) let him that taketh such exception, advise himself well, and remember before he speak, that in speaking he control not the policy, the practice, the wisdom, and the authority of our late Queen deceased, and of our Sovereign Lord the King now reigning; who authorized, and doth authorize lay men to be Ecclesiastical commissioners. Which kind of lay men, or lay Elders (as they call them) that they have joined in the exercise of the chiefest censure of the Church, viz. excommunication, with Ecclesiastical persons, hath been already proved, by the sentence of excommunication pronounced against E. by Master W. and his associates, whereof divers were lay men. Again if one lay Elder dwelling at Winchester, may call and associate unto himself, one Ecclesiastical Elder, dwelling at S. George's in Southwark, to excommunicate any parochian or Minister subject unto the Archdeacon of Surrey, in what parish soever of the same jurisdiction the party shall dwell: if it be lawful (I say) for every Ordinary to join one lay Elder, and one Ecclesiastical Elder Discipline of excommunication exercised by one lay Elder and one Ecclesiastical Elder. together in commission, the one to pronounce sentence of contumacy, the other to denounce sentence of excommunication, for every spiritual contumacy, committed within his jurisdiction; what reason can any man pretend, why it should not be much more lawful, for the King by his Royal authority, to appoint a learned, and preaching Pastor, with the assistance of some company of faithful inhabitants of the same parish, to exercise all manner of spiritual justice within their own parish? If the King shall stand in doubt, whether any Discipline by excommunication be exercised, after this and this manner, in the Church of England, then to put his highness out of all doubt hereof, may it please the King to consider the precept of the reverend Bishops made in their convocation; together with the practice of the venerable Archdeacon of Surr. following; The precept is this; Vnusquisque Vicarius generalis, Officialis, seu Commissarius, qui ordines ecclesiasticos non susceperit, eruditum aliquem presbyterum, sibi Arriculo pro Clero c. de buibusdam circa excom: excessib: coercend. 1584. accerset, & associabit, qui sufficienti authoritate, vel ab ipso Episcopo, in jurisdictione sua, vel ad Archidiacono (presbytero existente) in jurisdictione sua munitus, idque ex praescripto jud●cis tunc praesentis, excommunicationis s●ntentiam pro contumacia denunciabit. Every vicar general, Official, or Commissary, which hath not taken upon him ecclesiastical orders, shall call and associate unto him some learned Presbyter, who being armed with sufficient authority from the Bishop in his jurisdiction, or from the Archdeacon, being a Presbyter in his jurisdiction, shall denounce, and that by the prescript of the judge present, the sentence of excommunication for contumacy. Now the manner of the practice of this precept, ensueth in D. Hones practice of the Bishop's a●●icle. these words: johannes Hone, legum Doctor, Officialis venerabilis viri domini Archidiaconi Surr. omnibus & singulis rectoribus, etc. salutem. Cùm nos rite & legitime procedentes, omnes & singulos quorum nomina, etc. in non comparendo coram nobis, etc. seu saltem in non satisfaciendo mandatis nostris, etc. pronuncia verimus contumaces, ipsoque, etc. excommunicandos fore decreverimus. Cumque discretus vir magister Roul. Allen presbyter, eosdem omnes & singulos subscriptos, ex officio nostro excommunicaverit in scriptis, justitia id exigente, vobis igitur committimus, etc. quatenus eos omnes, etc. sicut profertur ex officio nostro mero excommunicatos fuisse & esse, etc. palam denuncietis, &c Datum sub sigillo officialitatis nostrae, 19 Die Decembris, Anno Domini, 1587. John Hone Doctor of the Laws, Official of the venerable man, and Archdeacon of Surr. to all and singular persons etc. greeting: Whereas we, otherwise rightly, and lawfully proceeding, all and singular whose names are under-written, in not appearing before us, or at leastwise, in not satisfying our mandates, have pronounced contumacious, and decreed them to be excommunicated: And whereas also the discreet man M. Rowland Allen presbyter, one of our office, hath excommunicated, all and singular under written, justice so requiring, wherefore we charge you that openly you denounce, and declare them, and every of them, so as aforesaid out of our office to be excommunicated. Given under the seal of our officialitie. The 19 day of December. 1587. By this practice, it doth appear, that Doctor Hone and Rowland Allen canvaced many poor men very piteously, and that this poor curate Rowland Allen, had a warm service, to attend upon D. Hone, and to jerk those, whose points soever he shall untie. But because this precept, was an article concluded upon by the reverend Bishops in their convocation, and confirmed (as I suppose) by the Royal authority of our late Queen, we will forbear, to speak what we think, might justly be spoken, against the incongruity thereof. Only this without offence, to the reverend Bishops, we may safely demand: since every ordinary, whether he be a Bishop, or a Presbyter, by this article of their own device, hath such an absolute power, resiant in his person, as that thereby, throughout his whole jurisdiction, he may thus commit, the execution of Discipline, by excommunication, partly to one lay person, and partly to one ecclesiastical person, partly to a supposed spiritual elder, and partly to a Lay elder: since (I say) this is so; we may safely demand, what reason they can produce, to hinder the King, from having authority to command three, or four, The K. hath as good right to command, excommunication, to be exercised by a Pastor & Elders, as the Bb. have to commit the same to a Curate, & one lay Elder. or (if occasion serve) five or six lay elders (as they call them) and one spiritual pastor, being a true spiritual elder in deed, all lawfully chosen ecclesiastical Officers in the house of God, that they jointly should not execute the discipline of Christ, viz. excommunication and other censures of the Church, in every parish within his kingdom? If it be answered, that in this case, the Presbyter alone doth excommunicate, is it not, as if one should say, that the executioner doth give judgement when at the commandment of the Judge, he smiteth off the head, or casteth down the ladder? or may not as much be said, for the execution whereof we speak, that the Pastor only should excommunicate, when by virtue of his office, with the consent, and not by the prescript of the elders associated unto him, he should declare and pronounce the party to be excommunicated? but let it be granted that Rowland Allen, denounceth the lesson which is written in the paper, for him to read; yet it is clear by the precept, that the same must be done, by the prescript of Doctor Hone, Besides Doctor Hone, he citeth, he precognizateth the parties, and they being absent, he pronounceth them contumaciter absentes, and in poenam contumaciarum suarum hujusmodi, decreeth them to be excommunicate: and are not all these necessary parts incident to the execution of discipline by excommunication? And how then can the Minister, be said to excommunicate alone, when Doctor Hone of necessity must play three parts of the four; without all, or without any one of which parts, the excommunication by reason of a nullity, is merely void? Again, the Act being done, as it were uno puncto, ac uno halitu, and Rowland Allen, and Doctor Hone, having their commission from the Archdeacon, in solidum, how can their judgement be divided? Furthermore, to say that Rowland Allen doth excommunicate, by the authority of Doctor Hone, were to overthrow the intendment of the article: Because by the scope of the article, it is plain, that the presbyter, to be associated to the official, must only derive his authority from one who hath taken Ecclesiastical orders. But those order's Doctor Hone, never took, otherwise Rowland Allens presence, had been unnecessary and superfluous. And therefore if the excommunication be of any validity, then is discipline, by excommunication in the Church of England exercised, partly by our lay-Elder (as they call him) and partly by one Ecclesiastical Elder; wherein again, it is worthy the observation, for the matter we have in hand; that D. Hone, a mere lay and temporal man, hath authority from the Archdeacon, to call, and associate unto him, and to prescribe R. Allen a Presbyter, and an other man's hireling Curate in Southwark, to excommunicate, not only the Parochians, of an other Pastor's charge, but any other Pastor whatsoever, subject to the Archdeacon's jurisdiction. And hath not the King's highness then, as good right, as great a privilege, and as high a Prerogative, to command Master Doctor Andros, or Master Doctor King, and lay Elders, by a lawful election to be associated unto either of them to excommunicate either of their own parishioners, for public drunkenness, or other notorious sins, committed in their own parish? For if it be lawful, at the voice of a lay stranger, that an hireling and stipendary Curate, should chase an other man's sheep out of his own fold, how much more is it it lawful, that a true shepherd, should disciplinate his own sheep, feeding and couchant within his own pasture and within his own fold? Furthermore touching the admittance of governing Elders, or lay Elders (as they call them) unto the Minister of every congregation, according to the former pattern of one lay Elder, that the same is not, a matter so strange, for lay men to be joined in this charge Lay men appointed by the Queen's injunctions, to execute some part of discipline. of ecclesiastical government, as the opposites bear us in hand to be: it shall not be amiss, to call unto their remembrances, one of our late Sovereign the Queen's injunctions, whereby certain lay persons, called overseers, were commanded, to be chosen by the ordinaries, in every parish, for the better retaining of the people in obedience, unto divine service. In every parish (saith the Injunction) three or four discreet men, which tender God's glory, and his true religion, shall be appointed, by the Ordinaries, diligently to see, that all the parishioners duly resort, unto their Church, upon all Sundays and holidays, and there to continue, the whole time, of the Godly Service. And all such as shall be negligent, in resorting to the Church, having no great, or urgent cause of absence, they shall straightly call upon them, and after due admonition, if they amend not, they shall denounce them to the Ordinary. Thus fare the injunction. Which, that it is not meant of the Church wardens, appeareth by the very next article; for unto them, as is assigned an other name, so also another office. That sidemen also, are not these kind of overseers, is plain, in that they be neither so many in number, as are here required, neither chosen by the Ordinaries, neither yet do they admonish and denounce, according to this article. Wherefore because it is meet, that the effect of this injunction being religious, should be put in due execution, it seemeth a thing very reasonable, and much tending to the honour of the King, that his Highness under his letters patents would be pleased to appoint three, four, or more discreet and faithful persons in every Parish, not only to perform the effect of this article, but also generally to oversee the life and manners of the people, that without great and urgent causes they resort not unto Typling-houses, or houses of evil note, and suspected fame; and that upon the Sabbaths, they use no heathenish dancing, about their disguised Maypoles: And after due admonition if they amend not, to denounce them to the Pastor of the place. For than might the Pastor Book of the form of ordaining Priests. be encouraged, to give his faithful diligence, as at the time of his ordination, he solemnly promiseth unto the Bishop, always to Minister the Doctrine and Sacraments, and Discipline of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded; by which words inserted it the book, there is a plain and open confession made by all estates in Parliament, that Christ hath not only established discipline, but a certain form of discipline in his Church, and that the pastor to whom Every Minister ought to minister the discipline of Christ in his own cure, by consent of Parliament. the care, and charge is committed to teach the people, aught to minister the same discipline. For it had been a very absurd part for the Parliament, to appoint the Bishop, to receive a promise from the Ministers, to minister the discipline of Christ, if Christ had not instituted a discipline; or that the same discipline, which he instituted, had not in their judgements belonged unto the Minister. And therefore this very letter of the book convinceth the whole answer made unto the abstract, touching this point to be very erroneous, frivolous and impertinent, to the point in question: For whereas in the abstract it is alleged, that the Bishop by virtue of the order and form appointed, by act of Parliament; bindeth the Minister, as well to Minister the discipline of Christ, within his cure, The Minister by promise bindeth himself to minister the discipline of Christ, page 55 page 60 as the doctrine and Sacraments of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded, etc. hereunto first he answereth, that these clauses do not dispositively, ordain any thing for discipline, as though the law meant, by authority hereof, to establish, that the order in these things, by the Realm received, should be holden as agreeable to the Word of God, but must be taken enunciatively, to declare and affirm, that following the order by law established, they should do agreeable to Gods will. But alas what repugnancy is there heard? for how can the law declare and affirm that the Ministers following the order by law established, shall do agreeable to Gods will, if the order in these things, by the Realm received, should not (by the meaning of the law) be Repugnance ●● the answer to the abstract. holden as agreeable to the Word of God? What? doth the law mean, that a man can do agreeable to Gods will, in any thing, which is not agreeable to his word? or if the law have established, an order in the discipline, which is not agreeable to God's word, shall the Ministers do agreeably to Gods will, if they follow the Law? For the meaning of the Law is plain, viz. that the Minister by virtue of his promise made to the Bishop, shall be no further bound to Minister any Doctrine, Sacraments, or Discipline received by the Realm, unless the Realm have received the same, according to the commandment of God. For the Parliament having a religious consideration, that the Minister of Christ, must not have so much respect, what the law of the Realm, as what the Law of God commandeth, carefully provided for his indemnity in this behalf. Besides, what a frivolous comment, hath he made upon the words of the book, when he saith, that these words of the Bishop, do not A frivolous comment upon the words of the book of ordaining of priests. etc. dispositively ordain any thing for discipline? When as the question is not whether the Bb. words, but whether the law and book dispose any thing for discipline? For the Bishop being but a servant to the book, and to the law, and one unto whose fidelity the execution of the law and book is committed, though he do not by his words, dispose any thing of discipline; yet by his demand, he showeth unto the Minister, that the office of the Ministration of Discipline, within his cure and charge, is committed unto him, and that by his ordination, his person is fully enabled, as well to minister the Discipline, as to preach the doctrine of Christ. And hereupon also falleth to the ground, his other answer, as wholly impertinent to the point in question. For where he saith, that the Law meant not, by authority hereof, to establish that the order of these things, by the Realm received, should be holden as agreeable to the word of God; The answer to the abstract wholly impertinent to the point in question. this (I say) seemeth wholly impertinent to the purpose of the abstract. For there is no such thing insinuated, to be intended by the statute: only the scope of the Author's drift, in that place seemeth to be this: viz. That every Minister, by virtue of his promise, enjoined by act of Parliament, to be made by him, and by the office of ministry taken upon him, at the time of his ordination, hath bound himself, to minister the doctrine, sacraments and discipline of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded. And what then if the law, have not authorized, disposed, or established in particularity, the order The not disposing in particularity, all rites and ceremonies of discipline, doth not hinder the exercise of discipline by the Minister. of these things, or if the Scripture have not delivered every ceremony, form, or circumstance, about these three things, shall not the Minister therefore, minister these, or any of these three things at all? And suppose, I pray you, that neither this, nor any other law, had in particularity, appointed the ceremony of the Cross, the ceremony of Godfathers, or any other ceremony in Baptism; or that the Law had not appointed the ceremony of kneeling, or any other ceremony, at the celebration of the Lords Supper, should not the Minister therefore, minister neither Baptism, nor the Lord's Supper, in the charge committed unto him? yes he should. And why: forsooth because he hath promised so to do, and because the Lord hath commanded him so to do. Besides, since every Minister, by virtue of his promise, and force of this law, is bound to teach the doctrine of Christ, to the people of his charge, notwithstanding he be not tied by the law of the Realm, nor by the holy Scripture, to any rite, ceremony, or circumstance, or to any exact form, or particular manner in teaching, what reason can any man pretend, that the not particularising, of all rites, ceremonies, or circumstances, in the Scripture, or the not establishing of any order, by the law of the Realm, touching discipline, should altogether hinder Answer to the abstract▪ pag. 59 page 55. every Minister, from the administration of all discipline in the Church: For as touching the Answer, that the Ministers may, and do exercise not the least parts of Discipline, of declaring by Doctrine, according to the word of God, men's sins to be Dis. of declaring by doctrine, is called disc. erroneously. bound and loosed, and the censure of rebuking and reproving openly, and that the discipline which the Minister is to execute, reacheth no further, than to teach his parish, with all diligence to keep, and observe so much of the Doctrine, Sacraments and Discipline of Christ, as appertaineth unto them, as touching this answer (I say) it is as erroneous, as the former we●e frivolous and impertinent. For as consolation and comfort, by way of exhortation, so reproof and sharp rebuking, by way of dehortation, belong properly to that part of the Ministers function, which concerneth the binding and losing of sinners by doctrine, and not by discipline, and is but an application of the doctrine to a wounded, or seared conscience. He therefore that leaveth no other discipline, to be executed by the Pastor of the Church, than of declaring by doctrine, men's sins to be bound, or loosed, and by teaching his Parish, to observe doctrine, sacraments, and discipline, confoundeth the matters both of discipline and doctrine. Again if not any other discipline, Discipline and doctrine confounded by the Answerer. was meant to be attributed, to every Minister, than such as is declared by doctrine, than these words, viz. (and the discipline of Christ) were superfluously, and idly added by the Parliament. For than had it been sufficient for the Parliament, to have enjoined the Bishop, to demand of the Minister only this and no more: viz. whether will you give all faithful diligence, to minister the Doctrine and Sacraments of Christ? There is therefore some other kind of Discipline of Christ, intended by the Parliament, to The Parliament intendeth some other disciplin●●●han of declaring by doctrine. be attributed unto every Minister, and wherewith also the law of the Realm doth enable every Minister, than is this manner of discipline o● declaring by doctrine and teaching the people. And this discipline also must needs be understood, to be of the spiritual censures of the Church, because Christ never instituted any other discipline. And therefore because our opposites agree with us in a generality, that the doctrine, Sacraments, and discipline of Christ, are to be ministered as the Lord hath commanded only, and none otherwise, and yet nevertheless do dissent from us touching the persons, Answer to the abstract, 55, 60, by whom this discipline is to be ministered, because (say they) every particular ceremony, rite, or circumstance of external policy, are not set down in Scripture, because of this their answer (I say) it is to be considered; First, unto what persons, the function of the ministration of the discipline of Christ, by the holy Scriptures is committed. Secondly, whether the same persons with their functions, be arbitrable, ceremonious, ●●●rituall, or circumstantial To what persons the discipline of Christ by the Scriptures is committed, and whether the persons be arbitrable or no, Phil. 1. 1. Tit. 9, 5, & 7, to be altered, and changed by authority of the Church, as things indifferent, yea, or no. To the first, seeing to one and the self same person, the holy Scriptures attribute these two names, Bishop and Pastor, thereby signifying what are the two duties, which belong to the same one person; and seeing also no one person by God's word is called a Bishop or Pastor, in regard of his fellow brethren, the other Bishops or Pastors, but in regard of his own flock, which he overseeth; and seeing also in well ordered Churches, by the Ordinance of God, certain men of approved godliness 1 Tim, 3, 1, (called according to the common name of the Hebrews, by the common name of Elders, whom partly calleth Governors) 1 Cor. 12, 28. were joined as Ecclesiastical Magistrates, to the Bishop, Pastor, or teaching Elder, by whose common direction, and authority, Ecclesiastical discipline was practised; seeing (I say) these things are so, we affirm that the persons, to whom the ministration of the discipline of Christ, rightly belongeth, are the persons only above specified and none other. And further we say if any spiritual Discipline, or The Discipline of Christ profaned, if the same be ministered by other persons, than the holy Scriptures do appoint. power, which directly be longeth unto the Conscience, be ministered in the Church, by any other persons, than by those persons only, that the same Discipline is not to be called the Discipline, but a mere profanation of the Discipline of Christ. For as it is unlawful, for any person, to usurp any part, of the Bishops or Pastor's office, which consisteth in spiritual teaching the word and administering the Sacraments; so is it also unlawful for any person to usurp any part of a Bishops, Pastors, or Elders office, which consisteth in spiritual rule and government. Whereupon it secondly followeth, that the same persons, with their functions, are not arbitrable, ceremonial, ritual, and circumstantial, as things indifferent to be altered, by the authority of the Church, but perpetual, substantial, essential, and as it were the very main and fundamental pillars, to uphold, and stay the House of God, from all spiritual sliding, and falling down. And therefore from the execution of the Discipline of Christ, we seclude the persons of all humane Archbishops, humane Bishops, Suffrafanes, Arch-deacons, Chancellors, Commissaries, Officials, and all Rowland Allens, because their persons together with their functions, are arbitrable, ceremonious, ritual traditional, or circumstantial, yea and removable at the pleasure of the King and State. Neither doth this disagree, from that which was erst said of a A Bishop. Pastor and Elder, and our Lord ●, diffr. Bishop or Pastor, that they be all one, in respect of their function. For it is not said that an humane Bishop, and Pastor, but that a Bishop and Pastor are all one. For a Bishop simply so called, is not a Bishop, and Pastor, in respect of his fellow brethren, but only in regard of his flock, which he over-seeth, feedeth, and ruleth. But a What a Lord ●, is. humane Bishop is he, that is promoted, unto this dignity by man, and who by man's authority taketh upon him superiority, and pre-eminence over them which are equal unto him, touching their function, that entangleth himself with civil government, and worldly affairs, and whose Bishoply office consisteth not so much, in the dispensation of God's Word and Sacraments, as in Lordly and Bishoply apparel, Crossing with the sign of the Cross, confirmation of Children, sole imposition of hands, sole excommunication, sole enjoining of Articles upon the people and Clergy of his Diocese, consecration of Oratories, delegation of his Episcopal authority to his Suffragan Vigar general, and principal official, and other such humane and Bishoply functions. All which are after the customs, precepts, and traditions of men. And albeit D. O. by virtue of the Queen's congedelier, were chosen, by the Dean and Chapter of Lichfield, in Episcopum, & Pastorem Ecclesiae Lichfieldensis, The Lord Bishop of Lichfield is never honoured with the title of being Lord Pastor. Pastoral authority of a Lord Bishop and of other Pastors, is equal. yet is he never entitled with the dignity of being the Lord Pastor, but only with the honour of being the Lord Bishop of Lichfield, so that one and the self same person being a Bishop, and a Pastor, may be a Lord Bishop over Pastors, but not a Pastor, over Pastors. Whereupon it followeth, that the Pastoral authority, which he hath in common, with his brethren, the other Pastors of his Diocese, is of superiority or proheminence, above theirs, and that touching the function, both of his, and their Pastoral cure and charge, there is a parity between him and them, by reason whereof, he can have no power over them; because par in parem non habet imperium. But why is it, that he can not be called Pastor Pastorum Ecclesiae Lichfieldensis, Lord Pastor of the Pastors of the Church of Lichfield, and yet may be called Dominus Episcopus Pastorum Ecclesiae Lichfieldensis, Lord Bishop of the Pastors of the Church of Lichfield? Why? but only for that there is custom, tradition, and the Law of man, for his Episcopal jurisdiction, and for that his pastoral function (if he have any) belongeth unto h●m in common, with his brethren the other Pastors, jure divino. The Whether a lord Bishop minister the doctrine, Sacrament & discipline of Christ, by virtue of his lorldly episcopal or pastoral office. Bishop then having these two several and distinct offices imposed upon his person, the one by divine, the other by humane Law, the one humane and Episcopal, the other without pomp, and pastoral; there ariseth from thence this question: by which of those two functions he may lawfully (I mean according to God's Law) minister the Doctrine, Sacraments, and censures of Christ? If it be answered, that it is lawful for him, by virtue of his Pastoral office, to minister the doctrine and Sacraments; and by force of his humane Episcopal office, to minister the censures of Christ, then is not the answer fitted to the question, the same being made, à bene conjunctis, ad male divisa. For the censures of Christ, as well as the doctrine of Christ, being simply of divine ordinance, it must follow (if his Episcopal power be only of humane right, and pastoral power be only of divine institution) that the censures may be ministered by authority derived only from man, but the doctrine and Sacraments, by power derived only from God. Which commixion of divine and humane right, in the execution of the ordinances of God, can no manner of ways be sound, pure, and sincere, and therefore also can not be pleasing unto God. For no more can the censures of Christ, to the pleasure of God, be lawfully administered, by the authority of any one whose function is of man, and not of God; than could the sacrifice of God, be offered by one, who was a priest of man, and not of God. Now that humane Episcopality, or B●shoppisme, in the Church of England, is authorized, and deduced from Lordly Episcopality authorised only by the Law of the Realm. the power and Law of man, viz. of the King and Realm alone, is evident, as well by the donation and endowment of the Bishoprickes founded by the Kingly Prerogatives of the Kings of this Realm, as by the erection and establishment of the new Bishoprics of Chester, Gloucester, Bristol, Peter borough, and Oxford, with their Cathedral Churches, Seas, Cities, meres and bounds of those humane Bishops, for the exercise of their Episcopal administration, according to act of Parliament, authorising the King's Highness, to make Bishops by His Letters Patents. Nay further that humane Episcopal Note that King Henry the eight by letters Patents made Bish. therefore, etc. 31. H. 8. c. 9 jurisdiction within the meres and bounds of every Diocese within England is merely of humane, and not of divine institution appeareth by that power and authority which the King hath in translating, and dissolving of Bishoprics, in conserving Episcopal jurisdiction, sometimes to such persons, as be no Bishops (as did William the Conqueror, when he gave Episcopal power to the Abbot of Battle,) and last, by the very manner and form of the nomination, licence of Election, and authority of investiture, confirmation, and consecration of Archbishops and Bishops, established by the more positive Law of the Realm. But if it be answered, 25. H. 8. c. 20, that the Bishop, by his humane Episcopal power, doth minister the Doctrine, Sacraments, and discipline of Christ, then is the case worse with him than it was before: because than not only the Discipline of Christ, but also the doctrine and Sacraments of Christ, should be ministered by that authority which is of humane institution. Besides, the answer should be untrue, because the Bishop at the time of his consecration, doth not receive any authority to preach the Word, and minister the Sacraments; (for that authority was then committed unto him, when first he was ordained to be a Presbyter:) But the authority which he receiveth at the time of his consecration, is to correct, and punish such, as be unquiet, disobedient, and criminous within his Diocese. Whereby once again is that confirmed which was erst said, viz. That Episcopal power in England is not of divine, but of humane institution. Especially for that, by the Scriptures, it can not be proved, that there be two several and distinct forms of ordinations; the one called consecration, proper to a Lord Bishop, for the exercise of Discipline; the other called ordination, peculiar to a Pastor, or teaching Elder, for the ministration of the Word and Sacraments. Whereunto last may be added another main reason, that Episcopal power in If the Lord Bish. have power to minister discipline by divine right then no more can he commit that his power, to an other, than he can commit the power which he hath of preaching to another. England, to minister the Discipline, can not therefore be of divine institution, because, if it were of divine institution, the Bishop could no more surrogate the same his Episcopal power to his Suffragan, to his Vicar general, or Roland Allen, to minister the censures of Christ in his own name, than he can depute them or any of them, to minister the doctrine and Sacraments in his own name. But how doth it appear, that the Vicar general, Rowland Allen, or any other Presbyter, did ever excommunicate by the power, or in the name of the Bishop? For the proof hereof we shall not need to search any other authentical record, than the precept, and the practice before entreated of. For it is not said in the precept, that the Presbyter, being armed with authority from Christ, but it is said, that the Presbyter, being armed with authority, from the Bishop, or Archdeacon, shall denounce the sentence of excommunication; the practice also of Doctor Hone, every way, confirmeth as much. For therein Doctor Hone doth not challenge to be an Officer unto Christ, but he saith, that he is the official of the venerable Archdeacon of Surrey; and that Master Rowland Allen Presbyter, by virtue of his office, doth excommunicate, the parties who obeyed not his mandates, who made not their appearances before him, etc. If it be answered that Rowland Allen, though he be not an immediate officer from Christ, that yet nevertheless, he is a mediate officer, depu●ed to his office, by an immediate officer unto Christ, viz. the Lord Bishop, or Archdeacon: then we reply, and say: First, that the Lord Bishop and Archdeacon, be neither immediate, or mediate Officers, appointed by Christ, to be ministers of his discipline. Secondly, if they were immediate officers from Christ, that yet they have no authority by the Law of Christ, to transfer their right, or any part thereof, to an other person, in their name, or by their authority, to excommunicate. As for these words, viz. In Dei nomine, Amen: nos johannes Hone, or nos Roulandus Allen, etc. sometimes used in their schedule of excommunication; it is but a profaning of the holy name of God, whereby they make themselves guilty, of the taking of the glorious name of God in vain. And thus much touching both the question and answer, whether the discipline of Christ, may be ministered, by the Bishop's humane Episcopal power, yea or no. But now on the other side (because no divine censure, can lawfully be executed in the Church, by that authority which is of humane institution) if it be answered, that the Bishop, by reason Whether L. Bishop● by pastoral authority. may excommunicate a Pastor. of his pastoral power (which he is said, to have over all the Pastors and people of his Diocese) may lawfully not only minister the Word and Sacraments, but also the Discipline of Christ, unto them all; than it followeth, that by a Pastoral power, one Pastor, may be a Pastor of Pastors, which is against the Scriptures, and contrary to the brotherly and fellowlike authority, which is common to all Pastors under the Sun, and between whom, touching their Pastoral functions, there is to this day, by the Scriptures, as little superiority, and as great a parity, as ever there was between Apostles, and Apostles; between Prophets, and Prophets; or between Evangelists, and Evangelists; and as at this day, there is between Bishops, and Bishops; between Archbishops, and Archbishops; or between Patriarches, and Patriarches: yea, and as is between Earls and Earls, Dukes and Dukes, Kings and Kings, Emperors and Emperors. For no greater superiority, or pre-eminence, hath any one Pastor, over the person or function o● an other Pastor, touching the administration of any thing properly belonging to either of their pastoral functions, than hath one Pastors over small flocks, are as truly pastors as pastors over great flocks As great parity! between pastors & pastor, as between Apostles and Apostles. Emperor, over the person or function of an other Emperor, or one King, over the person or function of an other King; or one Lord Bishop over the person or function of an other Lord Bishop, or one Archbishop, over the person or function of an other Archbishop, or than had one Apostle, over the person or function of an other Apostle. Nay then hath one eye over an other eye; one hand over an other hand, one arm over an other arm, or one foot over another foot. And therefore if touching the functions which Pastors, either among themselves, have in common one with the other, or which they have over their flocks, there be no disparity, but that the Pastors, to whom small flocks are committed, do as really, and as truly participate of the nature of true Pastors, as those great Pastors do, upon whose great shoulders, great burdens are imposed; it behoveth great Pastors, to prove unto us, by the holy Scriptures, that by the institution of their great pastoral function, they have their power so enlarged, as that thereby they may preach the Word, minister the Sacraments, and excommunicate: and that on the other side, the little Pastors, have their power by the institution of their petty pastoral offices, so straightened, as whereby they may only preach the Word, and administer the Sacraments, but not excommunicate: it behoveth (I say) great Pastors, to be able sufficiently to show unto us these things out of the holy Scriptures: or else it seemeth to stand, with reason and equity, deduced from the same Scriptures, that a Pastor over a few, should have like power to teach, and to govern a few, as a great Pastor over many hath to instruct and to rule many. Marry, if they think, that only great Pastors be true Pastors, and that great powers spiritual, be only true powers spiritual; then let them also conclude, that only great Knights be true Knights, that only great Dukes be true Dukes, that only great Kings be true Kings, and that only great principalities temporal, be true principalities temporal. Which conclusion if they shall judge, to be conclusionlesse; because King Rehoboam had Not only Kings of great kingdoms, but also Kings of small kingdoms, be true Kings. as large a Patent, to feed, and to command two Tribes, as King Solomon his Father had to command, and to feed twelve; or as the Archbishop of York may suppose himself to have, over nine or ten Counties, as the Archbishop of Canterbury, can have over nine and thirty or forty: then me thinketh it a matter, very reasonably of them to be confessed, that all true Pastors, whether they be great Pastors, or little Pastors, may lawfully exercise, all manner of such true power spiritual, as unto true spiritual Pastors by the holy Scriptures doth appertain. For if Bishops, being great Pastors, may therefore preach, and minister the Sacraments, because they be as they say, true Pastors; then also may little Pastors, therefore excommunicate, because they be, (as the Scripture saith) true Bishops. Wherefore, if the Lord Bishop of London, by virtue of his Pastoral office, (as he thinketh) which with his brethren the other Pastors of his Diocese, he hath in common deriveth unto him, immediately from the Word of God, may lawfully excommunicate: then the Pastoral office, which Master Doctor Andrews hath over the people of his Parish of Saint Giles without Creeplegate, and the Pastoral function which Master Doctor White hath over the people of Saint Dunston's within Temple-bar, being as absolutely, and as immediately, deduced unto them, out of the same word; what proof can be made out of the word, that the Bishop being not Lord Pastor of the Pastors of his Diocese, may lawfully by the word excommunicate, all manner of offenders both Pastors and people, within his Diocese; and yet nevertheless that neither Master Doctor Andrew's, and Master Doctor White, by the same word may excommunicate, any one of their Parishioners at all? Nay further, what reason can there be afforded from the Law of God, that Master Doctor Abbot, Deane of Winchester, that Master Browne, Master Barlow, and divers other Prebendaries, in the Church of Winchester, having certain parochial, and Pastoral Churches, annexed to his, and their Deanery, and Prebends, and Master D. Grey in his Parish by their pastoral functions, should have absolute authority (unless it be during the time of the L. Bishops triennial visitation) to exercise the discipline of Christ, within their several, and peculiar Churches; and yet notwithstanding, that neither Master Richman nor Master Burden, being both of them, grave, godly, and learned Pastors should have at any time, any pastoral authority, to exercise any censure at all? And as it is in the Churth of Winchester, so is it in the Church of Paul's, in the Church of Salisbury, and in well nigh all the Cathedral, and Collegiall Churches, throughout the Realm. The Dean, Prebendaries and Canons, having certain parochial Churches exempted from the Bishop within their exempt and peculiar jurisdictions, by mere Pastoral authority (for Episcopal authority, by the Laws of the Church have they none) may exercise all manner of spiritual censures, and that as well by their substitutes as by themselves. Nay, Rural Deans in Cheshire, etc. use some part of Episcopal power. Episcopal power to excommunicate granted by papal privileges, or prescribed use. Power to excommunicate, if it be of divine right, may not be prescribed. which is more, in Cheshire, Lancashire, Yorkshire, Richmondshire, and other Northern parts, there be many whole Deaneries, exempted from the Bishop's jurisdiction, wherein the Deans and their substitutes, have nor only the probate of Wills, and granting of administrations, but also the cognisance of Ecclesiastical crimes, with power to use the Ecclesiastical censures. Yea and this authority of the execution of Ecclesiastical censures, have those Deans, either long since by some papal privileges obtained, or else by long use prescribed against the Bishops. Whereby again, it is clearly convinced, that Episcopal excommunication used in the Church of England, is not of divine Institution, but only by by humane tradition. For were it of divine right, then could the same no more be prescribed, or by papal immunity be possessed, than could these Deans prescribe power, or be enfranchised to preach the word or to administer the Sacraments. These things have we thus at large and more fully entreated of, to the end that the King's Highness, and His Parliament, and all sorts of people, might well understand, how it is not altogether, an unusual and unaccustomed thing, in the Church of England, that private and inferior ministers (as they call them) in their own right, and in their own parochial Parishes, without any authority from the Bishop, should exercise even the highest censure of the Church. And that in sundry places of the Realm there is no preeminence in the matter of the execution of the censures, attributed to a Bishop above a Minister. Nay which is more, than is attributed to a Bishop No more prcheminence given to a B than to a Minister, or to a lay man in some places for the use of excommunication. above a Lay man: yea than to such a lay man, who is authorized only, by a lay man to his office. Which is evident by Ecclesiastical jurisdiction and censures, exercised a long time by Lay men, in the peculiar jurisdictions of Newton, Gronbie, Anstie, Soak of Rothely, Evington, and other parishes and Hamlectes in the County Leycester. The Officers of all which places, for their spiritual authority, having not had any other warrant, than such only as hath been signed, sometimes under the hand and seal of the right Honourable the Earl of Huntingdon deceased; sometimes of the Honourable Sir Henry Grey Knight; sometimes of Henry Skipwith Esquire, and sometimes of others. For the avoiding therefore of sundry intolerable inconveniences which hitherto hath ensued for want of that authority, which the Law settled, doth enable every Minister with, It is most expedient, that all humane authority in the execution of spiritual censures, be utterly taken away, and that the divine and Evangelicall censures of Christ, be ministered in every Congregation, where learned and godly Pastors, with discreet Elders may be had, as from the mind of the Lord they were executed, in the Apostolical and Primitive Church. I had almost forgotten to speak of one common and usual kind of jurisdiction spiritual in the use of the censures of the Church, by the Archbishops, which in cases of their Prerogative, they have prescribed against the Bishops over the Presbyters and people of every Bishop's Diocese, and Archdeacon's jurisdiction, within their provinces: of one other common and usual kind of pretenced spiritual jurisdiction, and use of the censures, which the Archbishop and sometimes the Dean and Chapter, (sede Archiepiscopali, or sede Episcopali vacant) exercise: and lastly, of that spiritual kind of jurisdiction and censures, so called of the Church, which Suffragans, and Archdeacon's, have and do use. As touching which supposed spiritual power, both of the Archbishops and Archdeacon's, because the same their power, doth not only belong unto them jure consuetudinario & non scripto, by unwritten, and not by written Law; I must conclude against the jurisdiction of the Archbishop's Prerogative, and against the Archdeacon's jurisdiction in all cases, as out of St. Cprian, King Henry the eigh● concluded against the Pope. viz: That their authorities can not be from Christ. Because Christ said, ego sum via, veritas, & vita. He never said, ego sum consuetudo. Touching the jurisdiction of the Dean and Chapter, the papal Law being abrogated, how the same may lawfully now be used, otherwise than by sufferance and consent of the King, and Realm, I know not. But of all spiritual authority exercised at this day in the Church of England, the same seemeth to draw most near to the semblance of the government practised by the Apostles and Primitive Church. And might be approved in many points, if so be the Deane ●nd Chapter, being as it were a Senate of preaching Elders, did no more commit the execution of their Ecclesiastical juridiction, to the wisdom of one Vicar general, or principal official, than they do put over the leassing of their Lands, or dividents of their rents to the only discretion of one of their Bailiffs, or Stewards. As for Bishop's Suffragans, in England and in Wales, how many there may be, and what Cities and Towns, are to be taken and accepted, for their Seas, it is at large expressed in a statute, made for the nomination of Suffragans. By which statute also we are given to understand, that it remaineth only in the disposition, and liberty of every Archbishop and Bishop within this Realm, etc. to name and elect two honest and discreet spiritual persons, being learned, and of good conversation, and them to present unto the King by their writing under their Seals, making humble request to give to one such of the said two persons, as shall please His Majesty, such title, name, stile and dignity of Bishop of such Seas specified in the said act, as the King's Highness shall think most convenient for the same, so it be within the same Province, whereof the Bishop that doth name him is: Besides after such title, stile, and name given by the King, it is said that the King shall present, every such person by his Letters Patents, under his great Seal, to the Archbishop of the same Province, wherein the Town, whereof he hath his title, name, stile and dignity of Bishop; and that the Archbishop shall give him all such consecrations, benedictions and ceremonies as to the degree and office of a Bishop's Suffragan shall be requinte. It is further enacted, and provided that every person nominated, elected, presented, and consecrated according to that act, shall be taken, accepted, and reputed in all degrees and places, according to the stile, title, name and dignity, that he shall be presented unto, and have such capacity, power and authority, honour preeminence and reputation, in as large and ample manner, in and concerning the execution of such Commission, as by any of the said Archbishops or Bishops, within their Diocese shall be given unto the said Suffragan, as to Suffragans of this Realm heretofore, hath been used and accustomed. And that no Suffragan made and consecrated by virtue of this act, shall take or receive any manner of profits, of the places, and Seas whereof they shall be named, nor use, have or execute, any jurisdiction or Episcopal power, or authority within their said Se●s, etc. but only such profits, jurisdiction and authority, as shall be licenced, and limited unto them, to take, do, and execute, by any Archbishop or Bishop within their Diocese, to whom they shall be Suffragans under their seals. And that no such Suffragan shall use any jurisdiction ordinary or Episcopal power, otherwise nor longer time, than shall be limited, by such Commission to him given upon pain, etc. From which Act touching the use, and exercise of Episcopal power, and censures by the Suffragan, we may again safely conclude, that the EPISCOPAL power, granted by the Bishops, to be used by the Suffragan, is not of divine right, and institution, but only from humane device and ordinance. For the Suffragan could not exercise any power called spiritual or Episcopal, unless by the Bishop he were nominated, by the King elected and presented, by the Archbishop consecrated, and by commission under the Bishops seal authorized, in what manner, and for what time he should exercise the same. Custom then being not from heaven, but from the earth; and again the Bishop's Commission limiting the Suffragans delegated power being of man, and not of God, it followeth necessarily, that, that Episcopal power, which the Bishop's use and exercise in England, can not be divine but humane. Because Episcopal authority which is divine, being conveyed from the Royal and Sovereign authority of our Saviour Christ, the giver of all power unto every officer within his Ceurch, cannot be transferred, to any other person, by the same Bishop, by the King, by the body of the state, or by custom. For the King's Person, and body of the state, nor being made capable by the holy Scriptures, to use and exercise that Episcopal power which is of divine Institution, can never transfer the same to others, whereof they be themselves uncapable. And to defend that custom, or any municipal Law, should transfer divine Episcopal power from a divine B. to any human officer, is more erroneous. And from hence if the now L. Bish. of London judge his Episcopal power to belong unto him by divine, and that by the same right, he have power, as well to ordain, depose, suspend and excommunicate Presbyters, as to confirm boys, girls, young men and maidens,) there seemeth to be good reason that the same B. should make it apparently known unto the King and Realm, by what power or commission descended from heaven, he may delegate under his Seal, the same his divine authority, of ordination, deposition, suspension, excommunication, and confirmation, unto Doctor Stern his now Suffragan of Colchester. For if from the holy Scriptures, he can produce no warrant, for the making of a delegation of any part, of that Episcopal power which he holdeth to be committed unto him from our Saviour Christ: then well may we conclude against the ordination, deposition, suspension, excommunication, and confirmation made by the same his Suffragame, that the same his Suffragans ordination, deposition, etc. is not divine. For how can an ordination, a deposition, etc. made by a Suffragan, be divine, when as the Commission granted by the Bishop, is merely humane? Wherefore seeing the Bishop himself, hath plucked certain of his principal feathers from his own spiritual wings (if so be his own wings may be spiritual) and imped them with an untwysted thread of humane policy, to the humane train of his Suffragan; and seeing also his Archbishop's grace of Canterbury, in cases of his metropolitical prerogative, the Archdeacon's, London, Midlesex, Essex, Hertford, the Dean of Paul's, and certain Prebendaries in Paul's, the Dean of Westminster, the Master of the Savoy, and divers other Persons, have by Papal privileges, or by ancient custom prescribed almost all other parts of his Episcopal power; there seemeth good reason, that the Bishop should again declare, whether the Churches within the said Diocese after the decease, or translation of his Lordship shall stand in need of any Lordly Successor, to sit in the same Sea, for any other profitable use or purpose, than only for wearing of a white rochet, walking with a pastoral staff, keeping seven year's Sabbath, from preaching in his Parish Church at Fulham, consecrating of Chapels, hallowing of Fontes, Christening (as they call it) of Bells, whiting of Walls, painting of Tombs, garnishing of Sepulchers, preserving of superstitious Monuments in glass Windows, repairing and gild rotten and outworn Crosses, confirming Leases of Benefices, with cure of souls, upon small rents, improprying Churches, or such like. For if the great things of the Episcopal power, may be transferred, either by express, or by secret consent, either by commission or custom, and that as well to an inferior, as to a superior, as well to a Suffragrane, a Dean, an Archdeacon, and a Prebendary, as to an Archb. than it seemeth reasonable, that the smaller things, before spoken of, may well be performed, without any Lordly authority. When I had thus finished, according to our line, that which I first undertook, against the Admonitors pray ensed dangerous alterations, innovations, and inconveniences, and was also purposed, to have added that which (in mine opinion) seemeth to prove that, which the Admonitor by his opinion, denyeth; viz. that the external government of the Church should always, and in all places be one, when (I say) I had thus purposed, by reason of some other present, and for the time more necessary occasion, I was driven to alter my mind, and to show the same, in a place somewhat more convenient. And yet in the mean while, it shall not be amiss, but a thing very necessary, in this place, so to clear the state of the question between the Admonitor and me, as the same being rightly before hand understood, there might no prejudicated opinion be conceived against the truth. The Admonitor against the not having one form of external policy in all ages and states of the Chutch, of Christ, allegeth that in Denmark, they have Bishops, both in name and in office: that in Saxony th●y have Arcbishops, and Bishop's i● office, but not in name: that in Tigure, they have no Senate of Elders; nor the discipline by excommunication, which they more mislike, that in Geneva, in Scotland, and in other places, they have a government not much unlike that platform which is desired to be among us: that in Saxony, and Basil they kneel at the Lords Supper: all Tigure they sit, and it is brought unto them, and that in other places they go and receive it, for the more expedition, as they pass. And that he doubteth not but that the learned men, whom God sent, to instruct those Churches in which the Gospel in those days was first received, have been directed by the spirit of God, to retain this liberty, that in external government, and other outward orders, they might choose such, as they thought in wisdom, and godliness, to be most convenient, for the state of their Country and disposition of the people. Unto all which we answer briefly; viz. that Bishops both in name and in office being of divine institution, aught as well to be in the Church of England as of Denmark, that it is an error (by their leave) in the Church of Saxony, not to have Arch. and Bb. in name, if so be they hold it lawful to have Archb. and Bishops in office. For what should a necessary officer do, without a convenient name? And touching the Church of Tigure, it is not material, what the same Church doth think not tolerable, or doth more mislike, but what she ought not to mislike, or what it ought not to think tolerable. And then what a poor proof is there here made (trow we) for the confirmation of the corruptions in the Church of England by producing of two witnesses, two errors in the Church of Tygure. For not to like a Senate of Elders, and more to mislike excommunication, is more and more to slide out of the right way. And since we have the whole Christian Kingdom of Scotland, the most famous, and renowned Church of Geneva, and sundry Churches, by his confession in other places, to be lights unto us, and to agree with us, in a government not much unlike to that, which we desire: we have not only great cause, to rejoice in this our desires, but also to be much comforted and encouraged, by these examples, by all holy means, to labour the full accomplishment thereof. For by this testimony, and by these instances given and produced by himself, the Admonitor hath quite and clean weakened, and disabled, his own general position, opinion, and thoughts of the unnecessaries, and inconvenientnesse, of having the Apostolical and Primitive government, in the time of Peace, under a Christian Magistrate. For hath not the free Kingdom of Scotland, the free City of Geneva, and other Sovereign and free Princes, Potentates and powers, (not being under Tyrants, and persecution) received the same, as being the best, the fittest, the convenientest, and most necessary government (yea even in the time of peace and under their Christian Magistracy) for the state of their Country, and disposition of their people? And as touching rites and ceremonies, we affirm not, that every rite, ceremony or circumstance to be used in the external execution of Church government, is precisely set down in the holy Scriptures, but touching the substance of government, thus we say, and thus we hold: viz. that the Officers and Governors appointed by our Saviour Christ, to be over the Churches in every Country (observing the general rules of decency, comeliness, and edification) have liberty, with the consent of their Christian King, or other supreme Magistrate, to choose what rites and ceremonies, they in wisdom and godliness shall think most convenient. And therefore we grant that the officers of Christ, in the use and dispensation of their functions, are no more exactly tied, by any direct commandment in the holy Scriptures, to use at all times, and in all places, one only manner of rites and ceremonies than were the Priests of the Law, to use all one manner of knives, to kill their sacrifices, or the si●gers to sing all songs after one manner of tune, or upon one kind of instrument, or then are Kings and Princes in all Countries commanded, to use all kind of circumstances, in the outward execution of civil justice in their Commonweals. As then, as it was lawful for the Priests to have knives and trumpets of divers fashions; and for the Levites to have their Musical instruments of divers forms: Nay as sundry Justices of Peace, in sundry Shires of the Kingdom, are not bound to keep their quarter Sessions, all in one day to begin, and to break their Sessions at one instant; to stand, to sit, and to walk, whensoever they speak, to wear all one fashion, hats, caps, cloaks, or gowns, and such like: so likewise, is it with the Bishops, Pastors and Elders of the Church. In the ministration of Baptism, there is no direct commandment, that the vessel to hold the water, for the Child's Baptism, should be of stone, of pewter, of brass, or of silver; whether the Minister should descend to the lower end, or the child ascend to the upper end of the Church: Whether the child should have a great handful, or a little spoonful of water poured upon his head. In the celebration of the Lords Supper, it is directly commanded, that the people shall stand, fit, or pass: whether it should be celebrated every first or second Sabbath of the month; whether in the morning, at noon, or at night. In the ordination of Ministers, there is no just proof to be made, that any certain number of Ministers, are to lay on their hands, that the day of ordination should be always one: that the Minister should be of such an age, or that the prayers should be of this or that length and form of words. And therefore touching these and such like things of indifferency, we agree with the Admonitor and Reverend Bishop that one farm of external orders, rites and ceremonies is not of necessity, to be in every Church, because there is no such order witnessed by the holy Scriptures to be of necessity. But touching the joint, and several functions of Bishops, Pastors, and Elders, that they, or any of them, should in any age or state of the Church of Christ be wanting, or that such offices as by warrant of the Scripture are coupled together, should be appointed, to execute any functions in the Church, than such persons only, as for their functions, have warrant from the holy Scriptures, we cannot in any sort thereunto agree. And why? forsooth because all, both offices, and Officers in the Church, must only, and alonely, be derived from our Saviour Christ, as from the only fountain and bestower of all officers, and offices in the House of God. And therefore, albeit we should grant, (as the Admonitor hath said) that the outward order used in the Primitive Church, touching rites and Ceremonies, by Bishops, Pastors and Elders, is neither necessary, nor so convenient as it may be otherwise, in the time of peace, and under a Christian Magistrate, yet we may not hereupon imply, as his negative implieth: viz. that Bishops, Pastors and Elders, or any of them, are neither necessary, nor so convenient officers, or governor's, as other officers of man's invention might be. For which our opinion (by the help of God) we shall assay (as before hath been mentioned) in an other place, to lay down, out of the Word of God, some just proofs, (according to the Admonitors request) that there ought to be in all ages and states of the Church, this outward order and form of government: viz. that Bishops, Pastors and Elders, ought evermore to be spiritual governor's, and that evermore they, and none other, aught to use that essential kind of spiritual government, and none other which was practised by the Bishops, Pastors and Elders, in the Apostolical and Primitive Church. Always leaving the outward rites and ceremonies of their spiritual kind of government, to be indifferent, as erst hath been said. FINIS. Speeches used in the Parliament by Sir Francis Knoles: and written to my LORD Treasurer, Sir William Cecil. TO the end I may inform your Lordship of my dealing in this Parliament-time, against the undue claimed superiority of the Bishops over their inferior brethren, Thus it was, Because I was in the Parliament time, in the 25. year of King Henry the eight. In which time, First, all the Clergy, aswell Bishops as others, made an humble submission to King Henry the Eighth, acknowledging his Supremacy, and detesting the usurpation of the Bishops of Rome's authority. Upon which submssion of the Clergy the King gave unto the said Bishops the same ample rule, that before they had under the Pope, over their inferior brethren; saving that the same rule was abridged by stature by this parenthesis following, that is to say (without offending the prerogative Royal of the Crown of England, and the laws and customs of the Realm.) In the later end of the Statute, it was added, that whosoever offendeth in any one part of that statute, and their Aydors, Counsellors, and Abettors, they did all fall into the penalty of the praemunire. And after I had recited this statute in the Parliament house, I declared that in King Henry the Eight days after this: There was no Bishop that did practise superio rity over their inferior brethren. And in King Edward's days, the said Bishops, obtained a statute, whereby they were authorized to keep their Courts in the King's name: the which statute was repealed in Queen Mary's days, and was not received in her Majesty's time that now is, whereupon it was doubtful to me, by what authority the Bishops do keep their Courts now in their own names, because it is against the Prerogative Royal of the Crown of England, that any should keep a Court, without sufficient warrant from the Crown. Whereupon I was answered, that the Bishops do keep their Courts now by prescriptions, and it is true that the Bishop may prescribe, that King Henry the 8. gave them authority, by the statute of 25. of his reign, to have authority and rule over their inferior brethren, as ample as they had in the Pope's time. But this was no special warrant for them to keep their Courts by, and that in their own names. And yet they have none other warrant to keep their Courts (as they do now in their own names) to my knowledge. And this was the cause that made them obtain a statute in King Edward's days, to keep their Courts by, in the King's name. Now, it is a strange allegation, that the Bishops should claim authority at this present to keep their Courts in their own names, (as they do) by prescription, because the statute of 25. doth restrain them generally from offending of the Prerogative Royal of the Crown of England, and the Laws and customs of the Realm. And no man may justly keep a Court without a special warrant from the Crown of England, as is aforesaid. And the general liberty given by King H. the 8. to the Bishops to rule and govern, as they did in the Pope's time, is no sufficient warrant to the Bishops to keep their own Courts in their own names by prescription, as I take it. And therefore the Bishops had done wisely, if they had sought a warrant by statute to keep their Courts in the Queen's name, as the Bb. did in K. Edward's days: In which time Arch. Cranmer did cause Peter Martyr and Bucer to come over into this Realm to be placed in the two Universities, for the better instruction of the Universities in the word of God. And B. Cranmer did humbly prefer these learned men without any challenge to himself of any superior rule in this behalf over his inferior brethren. And the time hath been, that no man could carry away any grant from the Crown of England by general words, but that he must have special words to carry the same by: Therefore how the B. are warranted to carry away the keeping of their Courts in their own names, by prescription: it passeth my understanding. Moreover, where as your Lordship said unto me, that the Bishops have forsaken their claim of superiority over their inferior brethren, (lately) to be by God's ordinance, and that now they do only claim superiority from her Majesty's supreme government▪ If this be true, then is it requisite and necessary, that my L. of Canterbury, that now is, do recant and retract his saying in his book of the great volume against Cartwright, where he saith in plain words (by the name of D. Whitgift) that the superiority of B. is Gods own institution: Which saying doth impugn her Majesty's supreme government directly, and therefore it is to be retracted plainly and truly. For Christ plainly and truly confesseth, joh. 18. 36. That his Kingdom was not of this world. And therefore he gave no worldly rule or pre-eminence to his Apostles, but the heavenly rule, which was to preach the Gospel, saying: Ite, predicate in omnem mundum, qnicunque crediderit & baptizatus fuer●t, salvus erit: qui non crediderit, condemnabitur. Go and preach in all the world, whosoever shall believe & be baptised, shall be saved: but he that will not believe, shall be condemned, Mark. 16. 15. But the Bishops do cry out, saying, that Cartwright and his fellows, would have no government, etc. So, belike, the B. care for no government, but for worldly and forcible government over their brethren, the which Christ never gave to his Disciples nor Apostles, but made them subject to the rule of Princes, who ought not to be resisted, saving that they might answer unto Princes, that they must rather obey God than men (Acts 5. 29.) and yet in no wise to resist the Prince, but to take up the Cross and follow Christ. FINIS.