A SPEECH OF William Thomas ESQVIRE, IN PARLIAMENT In May, 1641. Being a short View and Examination of the Actions of Bishops in Parliament, from Anno Dom. 1116. to this present of 1641. in the several reigns of 23. Kings and Queens of this kingdom of England, &c.  
In all and each of their times it is made to appear they have been most obnoxious to Prince and People, and therefore that it is not fit or convenient that they should continue members of that Honourable House, in which they have been so disloyally and traitorously affected to Regality, And no less mischievous and pernicious to Church and Commonwealth.   

A SPEECH OF WILLIAM THOMAS ESQVIRE.  
I Have formerly spoken of the present Church government, by Archbishops, Bishops, &c. Declaring the corruption and unsoundness thereof, and how far degenerate, if not contrary to the pure Primitive▪ apostolical institution: Also I have touched a little of the other parts, as how unlawful it was for them to intermeddle in temporal affairs, to use civil power, or to sit as judges in any Court, much less in the Court of Parliament, where they pass censure and judgement not only of our lives and liberties, but on the Estates and inheritance and blood, as of us, so of our posterity: And as this is unlawful by the Divine Law, so by the Canons of the Church, yea of this Church, and Acts of Parliament of this realm, (whereof I shall further enlarge myself in my ●●●●ing discourse:) So hath their sitting there been prejudicial and obnoxious to Kings and Subjects. Now I desire briefly to declare when and how the Bishops came to be members in the Parliaments in the House of the Lords, and by what means they continued their sitting there; because prescription is much insisted upon; although long usage (as King James truly delivereth) confirmeth no right, (if unlawful originally, or at convenient times interrupted.) And whereas it hath been demanded why the first of our reasons, viz. that it hindereth ecclesiastical vocation was not urged 600. years ago. I answer, There was then no cause; for the first beginning of Parliaments was not 74. years after. But if this had been delivered of the lawfulness and conveniency of their intermeddling in temporal affairs, I should have replied that it hath been declared not only 600. but 1600 years ago, and in each century since. But supposing and granting that it was meant of such Parliaments as were before the Conquest, you shall find that above 600. years ago the Prelates are charged (by their intermeddling in secular affairs) to neglect the office of episcopal function. For this we read: The Clergy 
Hollinshead.  altogether were unlearned, wanton, and vicious, for the Prelates altogether neglected the office of episcopal function, which was to tender the affairs of the Church, and to feed the flocke of Christ, lived themselves idle and coveto●s, addicted wholly to the pomp of the world, and voluptuous life, little caring for the Churches and souls committed to their charge.  
And if any (saith Higden) told them that their lives ought 
Rand. Higden Policron. lib. 6. cap. 24.  to be holy, and their conversation without covetousness, according to the sacred prescript, and virtuous example of their Elders, they would scoffingly put them off with a  Nunc aliuá tempus alii pro tempore mores. 
Thus, saith he, they plained the roughness of their doings with the smoothness of their answers. Briefly, they were so loose and riotous (saith Gervasius of Canterbury) that 
Gervasius D●●oberne●s●▪  they fell so fast to commit wickedness, as to be ignorant of sinful crimes, was then held to be a great crime itself.  
And the Clergy (saith Malmsbury) contenting themselves 
William Malmsbury.  with trivial literature, could scarcely hack▪ and hew out the words of the Sacrament. Robert was then Archbishop of Canterbury, who instigated King Edward the Confessor against his mother Queen Emma, charging her with incontinency with Alwyn Bishop of Winchester, (observe how one Locust stings another) which she washed away, 
W●ll. Malmsbury.  and cleared herself of by a sharp trial of fire, Candentes ferri, being put (according to the Law Ordalium) to clear herself, by passing nine ploughshares, glowing red hot, barefooted and blindfolded, which she did without hurt. And as this Bishop had charged the Queen his mother with incontinence, so did he likewise the Queen his wife Edith or Egith with adultery; but no less untruly and unjustly, then maliciously and enviously, as saith Malmesbury, she being a Lady incomparable, as for beauty, so for virtue, in whose breast there was a school of all liberal Sciences. And the like testifies Ingulphus, that had often conference with her, that as she was beautiful, and excellent well learned, so in her demeanour and whole course of life, a virgin most chaste, humble, and unfeignedly holy, mild, modest, faithful, and innocent, not ever hurtful to any. And do we not read that about the year 1040. that Bishop Alfred had his hand deep in the murder of Prince Alfred, who, having his eyes inhumanly put out, lived not long after, in torment and grief: Some say he died by a more horrible kind of cruelty, as his belly was opened, and one end of his bowels fastened to a stake, his body pricked with sharp 
W. Caxton●.  poniards, till all his entrails were extracted, in which most savage torture he ended his innocent life. These Bishops little regarded ecclesiastical vocation or function, but worldly pomp and courtly rule. They cannot be at assemblies of States and Parliaments, but their neglected flock must be starved; these feed not their hungry sheep, but hunger to feed on them; and this care of the world volves them in a world of cares. What hath been spoken of those Bishops, I wish had not been delivered of other latter Prelates, wherein I crave leave to speak what others write. That they are grown to that height of idleness (the mother of ignorance and luxury within themselves) and by reason thereof, in contempt and base estimation with the people, that it is thought high time that blood should be drawn from their swelling veins: I will not (though perhaps I might) say with them, that the Commonwealth hath little use of such (I mean of over Lordly Bishops) out for that they are so far degenerated from the Primitive institution, I wish there were reformation, I speak not of demolishing▪ but of amendment and restitution, and until it appear that the whole is unsound, I shall not assent to utter extirpation or eradication. Thus much I have made bold to deliver, though not in due place, nor in any purpose to plead against those or any of them that have declared themselves to be of contrary opinion: I am not ignorant of my disability to enter the lists with any, or to contend with such Worthies in this or other argument: but I hope there will not be denied to me leave and liberty to declare the cause and reason of my vote in this house, in which I have the honour to sit as a member: and if I have erred, I have been misled not only by learned Fathers and Divines, by Synods and general counsels, but by great Lords and Barons, yea by the whole Peerage of these kingdoms of England and France: Peter Lord Primandy and Barree, who writ the French Academy, and dedicated the same to Henry the 3. King of France and Poland, in that book and chapter of the causes that bred change, saith, that Bishops and Prelates neglecting their charge to bestow their times in worldly affairs, grew to misliking and contempt, have procured great offences, and marvellous trouble, which may more easily be lamented then taken away, or reformed, being such abuses as have taken deep root. And what he affirmeth did the peers of France unitedly deliver, That Bishops should follow Saint Peter's steps, to win souls, and not to meddle with wars, and murder of men's bodies.  
But to come near and to speak of this kingdom of England, let us hear what the English Lords did declare; we read that they did decree in the time and reign of King John, that Bishops should not intermeddle in civil affairs, or rule as Princes over their Vas●alls, and the reason is ●enderd; for Peter, (say they) received no power but only in matters pertaining to the Church: and further enlarging themselves, use these words: It appertains not to Bishops to deal in secular affairs, since Peter only received of our Saviour a power in matters Ecclesiastic all: what (say they) hath the prelates to intermeddle with wars, such are Constantine's successors, not Peter's, whom as they represent not in good actions, so neither do they in authority: Fie on such Rascal ribalds, the words in Paris are Marcidi Ribaldi, how unlike are they to Peter that usurp Peter's place? But this point of intermeddling in secular affairs (though I have often digressed) and intermingled with the former parts, is proved in its proper place to be unlawful (viz.) in that part that treateth thereof, craving pardon for this deviation, I will pursue the present argument (the obnoxiousness of their sitting in Parliament) and come to the points I intended to insist on (viz.) the entrance of Bishops into the Parliament house, and by what means they came there and continued: That they have sat there from the first Parliament to this is not denied: But as we are not now to consider an suerunt, but an profuerunt, so are we not to debate and discuss an factum, but an sieri debuit, for it was the argument of a Pagan (viz.) Symmachus to the Emperor Theodosius recorded by Saint Amb. servanda est tot saeculis fides nostra, & sequendi sunt majores nostri qui secuti sunt faelicitur suos. Our religion which hath continued so many years is still to be retained, and our ancestors are to be followed by us who happily traced the steps of their forefathers, but (with Tertullian) nullam v●lo con●uetudinem defendas, if good, no matter how short, since, if bad, the longer the worse; Antiquity without truth (as saith Cyprian) is but ancient error. The first Parliament (as I read) began 1116. or thereabouts, and in the sixteenth or seventeenth year of King Henry the first, who being an usurper, brought in by the Bishops to the disherison of Robert his elder brother, admitted the said Bishops to be members of the said high Court, partly ingratefulness, but rather for that he durst not do otherwise: for was not Ralph the then Archbishop of Canterbury so proud and insolent a Prelate, that was read of him, that when Roger Bishop of Salisbury was to celebrate the King's Coronation by reason of the palsy of the Archbishop, this ●holerick outdaring Prelate could hardly be entreated by the Lords, to withhold his hands from striking the crown from the King's head: Of such spirits were these spiritual 
Eadmerus.  Prelates, and the jealousy to lose their pompous pre-eminence of honours, yet had he no other reason 
Matth Paris ●no 1119.  for this his sau●ines and bold attempt, but for that Roger did not this by his appointment. At the same time T●ursto● was Archbishop of York, who, though a disloyal and perjured man by breach of his oath to the King, yet was he highly 
〈◊〉. ●7. c. 15.  favoured and countenanced by the Pope, and put into that See by him, in despite of the said King. And as he, so the rest of the Bishops (not less guilty, nor much less potent) were likewise admitted members of that high Court; and to speak plainly, how could he spare their being in that house who were to justify his title to the crown?  
▪ Now pass we to King Stephen, another usurper, nephew 
● Stephen.  to the former King Henry, him (though he had an elder brother, and before them both the title of Aniou by his wife Maud the Empress, as also of his son Henry to precede) the Bishops did advance to the Royal Throne, no less perfidiously 
Matth. Paris.  then traitorously, having formerly sworn to Maud the Empress. We are also to understand, that the Bishop of Winchester was his brother, a very potent man in the State; and it is worthy our noting, that the Bishops did endeavour to salve their disloyalty and perjury, by bringing in the Salic 
●. Hunting●n.  Law to this kingdom, traitorously avowing, that it was baseness for so many and so great Peers to be subject to a woman: Nay, it seemeth the Bishops did not intend to be true subjects to him, though a brave and worthy Prince, (had his title to the crown been as good as the Prelates at his election did declare:) for read we not that the Bishops of 
●●nd●ver.  Salisbury, Lincoln, Ely, and others, did fortify Castles against him, and advanced to him in armed and warlike manner: nay, did not his brother, the Bishop of Winchester forsake him, and in a Synod of clergy accursed all those 
●●is. ●●lmsbury.  that withstood the Empress Maud, blessing all that assisted her. Surely this curse ought to have fallen on himself and the Archbishop, who did trouble the Realm, with fire and sword. Sure as these were too great to be put out of Parliament, so were they very dangerous therein. Unto Stephen succeed Henry 2. In this time Thomas Becket was 
H. 2▪  Archbishop of Canterbury▪ what his demeanour toward his sovereign was, and what mischief was by him occasioned to the kingdom, would take too much time to declare; and though some Papists that adore him for a Saint, 
Caesarius Dial. lib. 8. c. 69.  will say, he resisted on just cause, yet I will deliver what I read, and render him with the Chronicles, an archtraitor, and tell you that the Doctors in Paris did debate whether 
B●le B●●●. Cent. 2.  he were damned for his disloyalty, Rogerus the Norman avowing, that he deserved death and damnation for his contumacy toward the King, the Minister of God. From him I pass to his son Richard the first, who had two brothers 
R. 1.  that were Bishops, the one of Duresme, the other of Lincoln, and after Archbishop of York, and going to the holy Land, appointed for governor of the kingdom, 
Fox ● 289▪  William Longchampe chief justiciar, and Lord chancellor of England, and papal Legat.  
This Viceroy, or rather King▪ (for so Paris calls him) 
Pa●i●▪ Hovedon, & ●ll●●▪ Guil. Nu●●●▪ ●. 4. ●. 14. Hovedon. Nub. l. 4. c. 17. Hovedon p. 399.  Rex & Sacerdos, had joined with him Hugh Bishop of Duresme for the parts beyond Humber. This Kingly▪ Bishop (as Authors deliver) did use incredible insolence and intolerable tyranny, and commit a most sacrilegious and barbarous outrage upon the person of Jeffery, Archbishop of York, and natural brother to K. R. the first; for which afterwards (being taken in a courtesans apparel and attire, velut delicata muliercula) he was banished the realm. Now as it was very difficult to turn such papal Bishops and Regulos out of Parliament: so certainly such Lord Bishops did there work no little mischief to regal power, the subjects liberties, and the weal public▪ Certainly this was not the duty and office of a Bishop; surely the silk and 
Matth. Paris. holin. ●n 〈◊〉▪  Scarlet Robes of Princes and justiciars, were as undecent for these Bishops, as was the coat of Iron of the Bishop of Beavois, taken prisoner by this King, which he sent to the Pope, with a vide an tunica silii tui sit, an non: to which he made answer, That he was not his son, nor the son of the Church. For he had put off the peaceable Prelate, and put on the warlike soldier, took a Shield in stead of a Cope, a Sword for a stole, a Curac● for an Albe, a Helm●● for a mitre, a Lance for a Bishop's staff, perverting the order and course of things. Thus we see that a Bishop must destroy men's lives either as a justiciar in Court, or as a soldier in Camp. Qui si non aliqua nocuisset mortuus est, they will do any thing but what they ought to do (Feed the flock;) they desire rather to sit in Parliament then stand in a pulpit, accounting preaching (according to B. Juel) so far below their greatness, as indeed it is above their goodness. We neither deny or reject Episcopacy or Church government itself, but the corruptions thereof: and we say, that the Bishops who stiffly maintained those corruptions, have enforced this our distaste.  
When Jacob was forced to depart from Laban for ill usage, I conceive that the breach was in Laban, not in Jacob.  
So also those that did forsake Babylon (God commanding to depart from it) lest they should be partakers of their punishment, as they were guilty of their crimes, did not occasion the schism or breach, but the sins of Babylon: And we confess, that true it is, that we refuse and forsake the present Church government, but no further than it hath forsaken pure and primitive institution, therefore let none say that we are desirous of innovation: for I think we may boldly with the sore-named reverend Bishop jewel, affirm, Nos non sumus novatores.  
From K. R. I come to K. John, an usurper likewise, who 
John.  was advanced to the regal Throne by Archbishop Hubert and the Prelates. This lewd Bishop unjustly declaring this and all other kingdoms to be elective, and that no man hath right or fore-title to succeed another in a kingdom, 
Paris. ●●. major.  but must be by the body of the kingdom thereunto chosen, with invocation of grace and guidance of God's holy Spirit; alleging further, and that (most plainly) by example of David and Saul, that whosoever in a kingdom excelled all in valour and virtue, aught to surmount all in rule and authority; and therefore they had all u●an●●●●usly elected John (first imploring the Holy Ghosts assistance) as well in regard of his merits, as royal blood. And thus the Bishops blanch their disloyal assertion with sacred Writ, and their lewd devised plot with the holy Ghosts assistance. Hereby they rejected the just Title and hereditary succession of Arthur his elder brother's son. And as he did this disherision unjustly and disloyally, so did he this election lewdly and fraudulently, as himself after confessed, when being demanded the reason of his so doing, he replied, That as John by election got the crown, so by ejection upon demerit▪ he might lose the same; which after he did endeavour to his utmost, and at last effected by depriving him of life and kingdom. Let me not be misconceived, I know Hubert died eight or ten years before him, 
Matth. Paris. R. Hovedon. Girald Car●. who called him, Principio ●●aenum.  but what he did begin and forward, was furthered and pursued by Stephen Langton, and other Bishops and Prelates, too long to rehearse. His other brother being Archb. of York, a strange example, saith Malm. to have a King ruled by two brethren of so turbulent humours. Many of their treasonable acts and disloyalties, I will omit, and passing by as well particular Bishops and Prelates, as Stephen Archdeacon of Norwich, and others, as also of them in the general, I will only relate one villainous passage of traitorous disloyalty; whereof (as good authors deliver) the Archbishops and prelates were principal Abetters and Conspirers. The King being at Oxford, the Bishops and Barons came 
Paris.  thither with armed multitudes without number, and forced him to yield, that the government should be swayed by twenty five selected peers. Thus one of the greatest sovereigns was but the six & twentieth petty King in his own dominions, &c. To him succeeded his son, K. H. 3, who 
H. 3.  being at Clarkenwell in the house of the Prior of S. John's, was told by him no less saucily then disloyally (if I may not say traitorously) that he should be no longer King than he did right to the Prelates. Whereto he answered: What? do you mean to deprive me of my Kingdom, and afterward murder me, as you did my Father? And indeed they performed little less, as shall hereafter appear. But now to take the particular passages in order. In this King's reign Stephen then Archbishop of Canterbury, as we read, was the ringleader of disorders both in Church and State; and no better was Peter Bishop of Winchester. But not to speak of them in particular, but of them all in general, and that in Parliament at Oxford thus we read, To the Parliament at Oxford, saith Matth. Paris, and Matth. Westm. came the seditious Earls and Barons with 
Paris. Westm.  whom the Bishop's Pontisice's (ne dicam Pharisei, those were his words) had taken counsel against the King, the Lord's anointed, who sternly propounded to the King sundry traitorous Articles, to which they required his assent; but not to reckon all the points, you shall hear what the same authors deliver of their intent, I will repeat the words as I find them. These turbulent Nobles, saith M. West. had yet a further plot than all this, which was first hatched by the disloyal Bishops, which was, that four and twenty persons should there be chosen to have the whole administration of the K. and State, and yearly appointment of all great Officers, reserving only to the King the highest place at meetings. Primus accubitus in caenis, and salutations of honour in public places. To which they forced him and his son Prince Edward to swear for fear (as mine author saith) of perpetual imprisonment, if not worse: for the traitorous Lords had by an edict threatened death to all that resisted. And the perfidious and wicked Archbishop and Bishops, cursing all that should rebel against it: which impudent and traitorous disloyalty (saith Matth. Paris, and Matth. Westm.) the Monks did detest, asking with what foreheads the Priests durst thus impair the Kingly Majesty, expressly against their sworn fidelity to him. Here we see the Monks more loyal and honest than the Lord Bishops: we have cashiered the poor monks, and are we afraid of the Bishop's lordliness, that they must continue and sit in Parliament, to the prejudice of the King and people? And so we may observe, that this traitorous Bishop did make this King as the former had done his father, merely titular.  
From him I pass to his son Edward the first: In his reign Boniface was Archbishop of Canterbury and Brother to the Queen, what he and the rest of the prelates did in prejudice to the regal authority and weal public I will pass over, the rather for that they declare themselves in his sons reign so wicked and disloyal that no age can parallel, of which thus in brief; doth not Thomas De la More call the Bishop of Hereford Arch plotter of treason, Omnis mali Architectum, and not to speak of his contriving the death of the late chancellor, and other particular villainies, he is branded together with Winchester than chancellor, and Norwich Lord Treasurer, to occasion the Dethroning of this Prince: nay, after long imprisonment, his very life taken away by Bishop Thorltons' enigmatical verse (though he after denied it) Edwardum occidere nolite timere bonum est. But this, Adam de Orleton, alias To●leton, and his fellow Bishops in this King's reign, I may not slightly pass over: Therefore I desire we may take a further view of them. First of this Adam Bishop of Hereford, we find that he was stripped of all his temporalties, for supporting the Mortimers in the Baron's quarrel. He being (saith Thomas de la More) a man of most subtle wit, and in all worldly policies profound, daring to do great things, and factious withal, who made against King Edward the second a great secret party. To which H●nry Burwash Bishop of Lincoln (for like causes deprived of his temporalties) joined himself, as also Ely and others, Walter Stapleton, Bishop of Exeter, a turncoat, left the Queen and came to England to in●orme the King of his Queens too great familiarity with Mortimer, which after cost him his head. Perhaps some now (as Thomas de la More) will say, he was therein a good man; yet I will take leave to think▪ nor do I fear to speak it, This was no part of episcopal function. But I will pass him by, not concluding him either good or bad, every man may think as he pleaseth, I will declare the traitorous and disloyal actions of the other Bishop formerly mentioned. This Bishop of Hereford, whom I find called the Queen's bosom counsellor, preaching at Oxford, took for text, My head, my head aketh, 2 Kings 4. 19 concluding more like a Butcher then a Divine, that an a king and sick head of a kingdom, was of necessity to be taken off, and not to be tampered with by any other physic, whereby it is probable, that he was the author of that enigmatical verse formerly recited, Edwardum occidere, &c. And well may we believe it▪ for we find that he caused Roger Baldock Bishop of Norwich, the late Lord chancellor, to die miserably in Newgate. Not much better were Ely, Lincoln, Winchester, and other Bishops that adhered to the Queen, Mortimer and others of her part. Nor can I commend those Bishops that were for the King and the Spencers. The Archbishop of Canterbury, and his Suffragans, decreeing the revocation of those pestilent Peers, the judgemen given against them judged a● erroneous. Thus these Lord Bishops, as all in a manner, both before and after, in stead of feeding the flock o● Christ only, plotted dismal wars, death and destruction of Christians. I might tell you how in this King's reign, as in others, they persuaded the Lords, and peers of the realm, that they had power and right not only to reform the King's House and council, and to place and displace all great Officers at their pleasure, but even a joint interest in the regiment of the kingdom, together with the King. And now will any say, No Bishop no King: yet one word more before I part with these Bishops: What groundwork they laid, and what means they used for the ruin of King and kingdom, was it not their working upon the impotence of a woman's will, insinuating what indignity it was, that a she daughter of France, being promised to be a Queen, was become no better than a waiting woman, living upon a pension; and so nourishing in her great discontents, persuaded her going to France, which was the matter and embryo, and as I may say, the chief cause of common destruction, which after ensued. God keep all good Princes from harkening or consenting to the pernicious counsels of such pestilent Priests, and prating Parasites. To declare all their disloyalties in Parliament, and out, would fill a large volume. But now Brevis esse laboro, therefore I only say, that as it was not for their goodness, but greatness, that they sat● in Parliament, so their sitting there did (I think I may say) almost evert Monarchy, yea Regality: with what face can they inculcate that aspersion, No Bishop, no King? Certainly, by what I have already delivered, and shall now declare in the reigns of succeeding Princes, it will appear quite contrary, that where Lordly Bishops dominsere and bear rule and sway, neither Kings nor Kingdoms, themselves or subjects are secure.  
Now to the reign of King Edward the third, did not John Archbishop of Canterbury persuade and incite this King and the Parliament, to a most dangerous war with France, whereby the death of millions hath been occasioned. To such mischief d●e they use their learning and eloquent Orations in Parliament. What Epiphanius delivered of Philosophers, that they were In re stulta sapientes, so may we say of such Bishops, that they are In malo publico facundi. But to pass by particular men and actions, I shall only deliver unto you some notable passages in Parliament Anno 1371. The Parliament did petition the King to have them deprived of all Lay Offices and government, they being commonly the plotters and contrivers of all treasons, conspiracies and rebellions, the very incendi●ries, pests and grievances both of tho Church & State, the chiefest instruments to advance the people's usurped authority, though with prejudice of the kings (which they never cordially affected) and the Arch-enemies of the commonwealth through their private oppression, covetousness, rebellion and tyranny, when they have been in office, as may appear by Antiquitates Ecclesiae Britannicae, in the lives of Anselm, Becket, Arundel, &c. Here we see, that they never affected the authority of Kings, but rather were scourges to their sides, and thorns in their eyes.  
Now we come to Richard the second, his grandchild 
R. 2.  who succeeded him: we read that when in Parliament in London the Laity had granted a fifteenth, on condition that the clergy would likewise give a●tenth and a half; William le Courtney then Archbishop, did stiffly oppose it, alleging, they ought to be free, nor in any wise to be taxed by the laity, which answer so offended the Lords and 
●ho. Wal●ngham.  Commons, that with extreme fury they befought the King to deprive them of their temporalties, alleging that it was an almesdeed and an act of charity, thereby to humble them; that was then delivered for an almesdeed and an act of charity, which is now accounted sacrilege and cruelty.  
The next that succeeded him, was Henry the fourth, but 
H. 4.  an usurper also, for at that time there were living of the house of York others whose right by the title of Clarence was before his as Mortimer, &c. In opposition to his claim and right, the Bishop of Carlisle made a most eloquent oration; 
〈◊〉. yward.  but to what purpose? to persuade his dethroning now vested in the regal government; and thereby to engage the kingdom in a civil war, (which when his oratory could not effect) he laboured and so far prevailed, that by his subtle insinuations, and persuasions many Princes of the blood royal and other great Lords were drawn to a conspiracy, himself laying the plot, (and together 
Ioh. Stow ex ●onymo ●●al ●ron.  with the Abbot of Westminster, the chief wheels of all the practice, as moving the rest) for the King's death whereby he brought to the block those noble peers, and as his pestilent counsel had infected their minds, so was the blood of them and theirs, tainted by this foul treason; 
Ioh. Stow. ●●n●ll. ●●●l ex Tho. Walsingh.  but as I discommend his disloyal actions, so I no better approve the other flattering and timeserving Bishops, who did plead the right of the title of the said King more eloquently then honestly, more rhetorically then divinely; for which their expressions they were employed as ambassadors to foreign parts to declare and justify his title and right to the sceptre; the Bishop of Hereford to Rome, the Bishop of Duresme to France, the Bishop of Bangor to Germany, and the Bishop of St. Asaph to Spain; which Bishop of Asaph sat as judge in that Parliament and pronounced the sentence of deposition against King Rich. The form (as near as I remember) was: We John Bishop of St. Asaph, John Abbot of Glastenbury, Commissioners, named by the house of Parliament, sitting in place of judgement, &c. Here you may note that the Bishop did pass judgement of a great inheritance, no less than two or three kingdoms, and though not between two brothers, but cousins, yet did adjudge most wrongfully, as was most apparent. I note withal, that the title of Lord is not assumed by this King-deposing Bishop, nor any other that I read of. Now what he had judged in Parliament his holy brother of Canterbury must make good in Pulpit, delivering, What unhappiness it was to have a child either 
Fabian 1. concor. Hall ex Fab.  of age or discretion to be a King, and what felicity it was to a kingdom to have it governed by a man. Certainly a most dangerous position to an hereditary Monarchy. I also note that this Archbishop was brother to the Earl of Arundel, and at the same time the Archbishop of York a near kinsman to the Earl of Wiltshire; and who durst then plead against the right of the Bishops sitting in Parliament?  
In the same King's reign Richard le Scroop the Archbishop of York, did in Parliament enter into conspiracy with Thomas Mowbray Earl Martial, against the said King, for which they were both beheaded; I say the Archbishop as well as the Earl Martial had his head cut off, iterate it, because some have doubted whether an Archbishop may be beheaded. And now in the said Kings reign, in the Parliament of Coventry, let me also tell you that in the said Parliament, as in other both before and after, a Bill was exhibited against the Temporalties of the Clergy, who called that Parliament Parliamentum indoctorum, saying that the Commons were fit to enter Common with their cattle, having no more reason than bruit beasts. This is Speeds delivery; but I take it that he repeateth it as the Prelates censure of the house of Commons.  
But to him succeeded Henry the 5. in his time did not 
H. 5. Hall in 8. R. a.  Henry Chichley in an eloquent oration in Parliament revive the wars with France, by declaring the King's right thereunto; to the effusion of much Christian blood, and to the loss of all we had there? To expiate which, he built a college in Oxenford, to pray for the souls slain in France. Though what he did then deliver was true of the King's right to the crown of France (as was also the other of John Archbishop of the same See in Ed. 3. time, and no less true was that of Carlisle against Hen. 4. title:) Yet I may say it was not the office or function of a Bishop to incense wars domestic or foreign. Nay this Bishop did set this war on foot to divert the King from reformation of the Clergy. For in that Parliament held at Leicester there was a petition declaring that the temporal lands which were bestowed on the Church were super●●uously and disorderly spent upon hounds and hawks, horses and whores, which better employed would suffice for the maintenance of 15. Earls, 1500. Knights, 6200. Esquires, an hundred almshouses, and besides of yearly rent to the crown 20000 pounds.  
From him I come to his son H. 6. I read many accusations 
Matt. in  that Gloucester the good protector did lay to the charge of Beaufort the Cardinal of Winchester, and Lord Chancellor, great uncle to the King living, son to John of Gaunt, alleging him a person very dangerous both to the King and State; his brother of York a Cardinal also, together with the other Bishops no better. For we read of Archbishop Bourchier and other Bishops, that they did shamefully countenance the distraction of the time. These as I delivered before, though bad in Parliaments, yet too great to put out, I will not now speak of many other particulars, that I might either in this King's reign, or his successors to King H. 8. for that I desire to declare what they did since the reformation, yet therein will be as brief as I may, having already too much provoked your patience, for which I crave humble pardon.  
To Henry the sixt succeeded Edward the fourth who indeed had the better title to the crown, notwithstanding Archbishop Nevil Brother to the King-make-Warwick with others, did conspire and attempt his dethroning, and after took him prisoner, and kept him in his Castle of Midleham; and after in Parliament at Westminster, did they not declare him a traitor and usurper, confiscate his goods, revoke, abrogate, and make frustrate all Satutes made by him, and entail the crown of England and France upon Henry and his issue male, in default thereof to Clarence, and so disabling King Edward his elder Brother?  
But to hasten, I will pass over Edward the fift, whose 
E. 5.  crown by means of the Prelates as well as the Duke of Buckingham, was placed on the head of his murderous uncle that cruel Tyrant; for had not the Cardinal Archbishop by his persuasion with his mother, taken the Brother Richard Duke of York out of Sanctuary, the crown had not been placed on his Vnkes head, nor they lost their lives; and not to speak of Doctor Pinker, and Doctor Shaw's Sermons, and other foul passages of Prelates (as Morton & others) who sought also the destruction of K. Richard, 
Rich. 3.  and that when his nephews were dead, and none had right before him to the crown which he then wore; what disloyal long speeches made he to the Duke of Buckingham to persuade the said Duke to take the crown to himself?  
From Richard I pass to Henry the seventh: I told you before 
H. 7.  that Morton would have persuaded Buckingham to dethrone King Richard the third, and take the kingdom to himself, to which he had no right; and failing therein he addressed himself to Henry then Earl of Richmond, and as by his counsel he prevailed with him, so he prevailed against and won from Richard the garland; this persuader and furtherer of bad Titles was advanced to the See of Canterbury, his desire whereof perhaps caused his disloyalty, and being in high favour with this Prince by his special recommendations, procured one Hadrian de Castello an Italian to be be made first Bishop of Hereford, after of Bath & Wells, who also was made Cardinal, by that Antichristian and devilish Pope Albert the sixt; and as Morton had endeavoured 
Goodw. Ca●●l. of BB in Bath▪ &c. pag. 309. Paulus Jovius.  the dethroning of his Lord and King, so did the other conspire the murder of Pope Leo the tenth, when he was told by a Witch that one named Hadrian should succeed.  
As to Henry the eighth, I need not speak much of his opinion of Bishops, who he saith were but half subjects, if subjects at all to him, when he caused Sir Thomas Audley, Speaker, to read the oath of Bishops in Parliament. And that it was so, appeared when Wolsie and Campeius refused 
●ede.  to give judgement for the unlawfulness of the marriage of Henry the eighth, and thereupon a divorce: Whereupon the Duke of Suffolk said, and that truly, It was never merry in England since Cardinal Bishops came amongst us. It were too large to repeat all the petitions, and supplications, and complaints of Divines against them, in this King's reign, as of Doctor, Barnes, Latimer, Tindal, Beane and others. 
●s supplic. ●i.  This last named saith, that the Bishops alone have the keys of the English kingdom hanging at their girdles▪ and what they traitorously conspire among themselves, the same is bound and loosed in Star-chamber, Westminster Hall, privy council and Parliament. This and much more he. But as their sitting there hath been obnoxious, so it is useless, as may appear by the Statute 31. Hen. 8. yet in force, 
ry 8. 31. ●  where it is enancted, That as the than Lord Cromwell, so all other that should thereafter be made Vicegerents, should sit above the Archbishop in Parliament; nay, hold general visitations in all the dioceses of the realm, as well over the Archbishops, Bishops, Archdeacons, as Laity, to inquire & correct their abuses, to prescribe Injunctions, Rules and Orders for reforming of religion, for abolishing of superstition and Idolatry, and correction of their lives and manners, &c. And read we not that in the 37. of this King's reign, letters patents were granted to Laymen, to exercise all manner of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, as the King's officers, 
●ry 8. 37.  not the Bishops. Thus we see the government of Bishops as well as their sitting in Parliament, may be spared. And that they neither have, nor heretofore had any Ecclesiastical jurisdiction in making of Canons or Constitutions, but by the King's Writ, nor promulge or execute any such, without the King's royal assent and licence, under pain, appears by the Statute of the 25. of the same King, upon 
●ry 8. 25.  the Clergies own submissive petition. And the Bishops themselves in the prosecution of this Act 1603. in the beginning of King James his reign, did decree the same, and pronounce excommunication ipso facto upon all or any that should ordain or execute the same without royal assent. Now you have seen their demeanour in Parliament for three or four hundred years, or there abouts. The delivery hereof hath taken up much time, and perhaps thereby most are satisfied, that they have been hurtful, and therefore that it is not convenient they should longer continue members of that honourable House, where they have done such mischief to King and commonwealth: yet in regard of my promise, and undertaking to declare them prejudicial from the first Parliament to this present, by testimony of credible authors in each King's reign, as also to meet with an objection which I conceive will be offered to make all that hath been proved, as extravagant, so invalid, That those actions, practices, plots, conspiracies, or treasons, were done and perpetrated in time of Popery; and that it was done by papal command, I will deliver their actions no less detestable, nay rather more heinous after the reformation then before. In the several reigns of King Edward the sixth, Queen Mary, Queen Elizabeth, King James, of blessed memory, and our present sovereign, whom God long preserve. But I desire I may be rightly understood, that when I charge these reverend Bishops that were very good men, chief pillars of the Church, great lights of learning, and charge them to have done those things as Bishops, which I believe they would not have done as private Ministers; if (I say) I declare that they, to hold their bishoprics, and in expectance of great preferment, and to please great Lords and Princes, Kings and Emperors, have not only yielded to, but persuaded to introduce Idolatry, to disinherit the right heirs of kingdoms, and force good Princes to do acts unnaturalll and unjust: Let me not be thought to speak in depravation or detraction, I do not intend their infamy (and so desire to be understood) their memory ought to be dear to us all, and it ever hath been, and is precious in my esteem; but I thereby insinuate, that corrupt Lordly episcopacy hath an infection in it, tainting the purest Divines and godliest▪ Ministers.  
I pray you misconceive me not, I am not against Episcopacy, truly understood, or a Church-government rightly used, but I conceive, and therefore (under correction) say, that it hath (with Theseus' ship) received so many new pieces and additions to the first building, that it doth justly occasion a dispute whether it be the same, little or nothing of the first substance and materials remaining. So that we have episcopal government in name, but want the substance; Vox & praeterea nihil: With I●ion we embrace but a cloud in stead of a Juno, or (at best) but a blear-eyed Leah in stead of a beautiful Rachel. This tree (I say) is almost rotten, this salt somewhat unsavoury, this light very dim, this building scarce sound or sure, which (if propping will help) I would not have demolished, till a model of a better be agreed upon.  
In King Edward's reign did not the reverend Bishop (O 
●. 6. ●x acts and ●n.  grief to hear! saith mine author) persuade and subscribe to the disinheriting of the two daughters of Henry the 8. the sisters of his King, contrary to the Statute of the 35. of Henry the 8. as also in prejudice of the right of Scotland, Margaret being eldest sister to Mary, grandmother to Jane, on whose head they would settle the crown; which plot I think I may say, wicked and disloyal, if it had taken effect, in all likelihood, the blessed union of both kingdoms had not ensued, which, as I said before, was hindered by Betton Bishop of Saint Andrew's in Henry the 8. time.  
I have not yet spoke any thing as to the point of Idolatry, the most wicked & highest degree of treasons being against the King of Kings; did not the Archb. Cranmer and Bish. Ridley, persuade, nay earnestly press K. Edward the sixth, that the Lady▪ Mary might have mass said in her 
Speed.  house, and that to be done without all prejudice of Law, the greatness of her person being the immediate successor, and the might of Charles the Emperor moved those Bishops too forward, and so far urged this to the King, and from Divines becoming Politicians, alleged the danger in breach of amity with the Emperor, and when he convincing them by scripture, and told them he would rather hazard his life then grant that which was not agreeable to truth, they allege the bonds of nature, at last tell him they would not be said nay; this they offered, and thus far they pressed, although they could not prevail with this pious Prince.  
These were not the baits that Peter angled with to catch souls, or the weapons that Saint Paul fought with when he professed they were not carnal, but mighty through God to cast down holds, they propose not honour and security to Christ's disciples, but hazard and baseness. A most godly speech of a good Christian Prince, the like whereto I read that King James uttered in his protestation made to Watson, as he after confessed to the▪ Earl of Northampton upon some occasion offered: All the crowns and kingdoms in this world (saith he) shall not induce me to change one jot of my profession, which is the pasture of my soul, and earnest of my eternal inheritance. A pious speech of a magnanimous King, whose memory shall ever be justly blessed; and I doubt not but our gracious sovereign, as he holdeth his kingdoms, so possesseth the like religious courage and constancy.  
But to return to our former Bishops, viz. Cranmer, Ridley, &c. did they repent them of this upon better consideration, and upon the death of this good King advance the title of the right heir? Nothing so; for when queen Mary 
Q Mary's L●tter to the BB. and LL. from Kening●ll 9 July 1553. Their answer from the Tower, die & anno praedict. B. Ridley his Sermon at Paul's cross, defending Janes' title.  hearing that Jane her x was to be proclaimed Queen, writ her letter to the Lord, declaring her own right, and marveling that they so unjustly attempted to put her from it, contrary to their loyalty, allegiance, and the Statute which had formerly settled the crown upon her; they (I mean the Bishops as well as the Lords, for I find Canterbury and ●ly to have subscribed) told her that she had no right thereto, but ●●n● must be Queen, and she must submit herself to her as her sovereign. And what they w●it did Ridley Bishop of London preach. And though this was not done or spoken in Parliament, yet no men doubteth but if it had been effected, they would have pleaded in justification thereof, and confirmed it as rightful in the next Parliament that should have been called. Now I have declared them disloyal traitors, and most unjust and ungodly in these passages.  
To pass from this Queen to the next, I find that in the first year of good Queen Elizabeth there was a further reformation desired; and what was then earnestly pressed by good Divines, as Doctor Scory, Cox, Mr. jewel, Elmer, Grindal, 
Jo. Stow pag. 1034.  Whitehead, horn, Gest, was thus far granted by that godly Princess that there should be a conference at Westminster; where being come, they were opposed by the Bishop of Winchester, Lincoln, Lichfield, Carlisle, and Chester, together with some others. These Bishops (saith mine Author Stow, abruptly broke off this conference, pleading a mistaking of their directions: and in the next sitting utterly refused either to write their own, or to read the others reasons, whereby all was undone that was intended, whereof part was imprinted by Richard Jugge and John Cawood, as is to be seen: and this was in time of Parliament. Much more I might declare of Bishops actions in this Queen's time, as that the Bishops at Queen Elizabeth's inauguration, did refuse to anoint or consecrate her (viz.) York, (Canterbury dying a little before;) also these chief Bishops denied the same, as London, Duresme, Winchester, Ely, Lincoln, Exeter, Bath and Wells, Coventry and Lichfield, Chichester and Peterborough.  
But I hasten to conclusion. And as this virtuous Queen did yield that a disputate should be had for reformation; so did the gracious Prince King James grant the like at Hampton Court, where were Doctor Reynolds and Doctor 
Conference at Hampton court upon Thursd. January 12.  sparks of Oxford; and Knewstubs, and Chaderton of Cambridge. Now who resisted the reformation? Sure none other but the Bishop of Canterbury, Duresme, London, Winchester, Chichester, Worcester, Carlisle and Saint David's; and the Deans of Westminster, Windsor, Paul's, Chester, Worcester and Christchurch, alleging that there was no need of reformation: But God and good men did know the contrary▪ but I will not trouble you with their actions 〈◊〉 this King's reign, their introduction of 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉, and idolatry, of ●opery and 〈◊〉, and what not of irreligion to the Deity, mischief and danger to the King, and prejudice to the people and kingdom, few or none within these walls but know them, and felt the harmful fruits thereof. As for their actions in his majesty's reign, which I think do poy●e down and overbalance all formerly done since the beginning of Parliaments, put together in the other Scale, I will refer them to the reports of the Committees for the ●ope of Lambeth, and his Cardinal's Wren and others, and briefly conclude, That whereas from their first sitting in Parliament to this time, they have as well in Parliament as ou●, been so prejudicial, and appeared to have during their sitting there, plotted and contrived treasons and conspiracles, rebellion and war, domestic and foreign, been incendiaries and grievances to State and Church, and Arch-enemies to King and commonweal, introducing Salic Law, making this kingdom elective, and our Princes only King's durant● been g●rend▪ or rather bene placi●. in worse case and less hold than a Duke of Venice, I hope his majesty will ●ege talionis make their episcopacy to be only titular, which is as much as is due to them, whether Archbishops or Bishops: for they are to have priority or precedency, quoad ordinem, not quoad ministerium, wherein the poorest Curate is his equal and his fellow Minister. And as I am not for equality and parity, so I would not have too great a distance, the danger whereof to any Estate, be pleased to hear, as I receive it from an author formerly mentioned, in these words rendered:  
Too much increase and unproportionable growth, is a cause that procureth the change and ruin of Common-we●les. For a● the body is made and compounded of parts, and aught to 〈◊〉 by propo●●●on, that 〈◊〉 may sleep a ●ust treasure; so e●●ry commonweal bei●g compounded of orders and estates as it were of parts, they must be maintained in concord▪ one with another, as it were with equal and due proportion observed between each of them. For if one estate be advanced too much above another, dissension ariseth, equality being the nursing mother of peace, and contrariwise, inequality the beginning of all enmity, factions, hatred, and partaking. But seeing it is meet that in every well established policy there should be a difference of rights and privileges betwixt every estate, equality may continue, if provision be made that one estate grow not too much before the other: but more of this elsewhere in its more proper place.  
And as for these reasons, I yielded my vote for the unlawfulness and inconvenience of their sitting there: therefore I wish they may be no longer members of that most Honourable House.  
I humbly crave leave to add a word or two to what I formerly spoke.  
I am not ignorant, that the foresaid assertion, No Bishop no King, is received as the delivery of King James▪ but though it might be admitted in the sense he meant and intended, to wit, that those that dislike a Church-government will hardly admit regal rule; yet we can no way allow thereof as it is commonly offered and pressed▪ that the regal power cannot subsist without the present Episcopacy. Now, what that wise, learned, and religious King did conceive of the rules and tenants of Bishops and Prelates, how consonant to the majesty▪ of temporal Princes, or whether he thought them rather to tend to the trampling thereof under foot, and laying their honour in the dust, may appear by his quotations in the latter end of his Apology for the Oath of Allegiance, which I thought fitter to annex hereunto, then to have delivered then in the proper place, when I spoke of Bishops in the reign of E. 2. being then desirous to continue the historical narration of their sitting and actions in Parliament, having too much transgressed by my so often enterweaving other passages therewith, I overpassed the same.  
King James Collection out of Cardinal Bishop Bellarmine are as followeth:  

1 That Kings are rather slaves than Lords. 
1 De laic●● c● 7.   
2 That they are not only subjects to Popes, to Bishops, to 
2 De Pont▪ Rom. l. 1 cap. 7.  Priests, but even to Deacons.  
3 That an Emperor must content himself to drink, not only 
3 Ibid.  after a Bishop, but after a Bishop's chaplain.  
4 That Kings have not their authority nor office immediately 
4 Ibid. &. de cl●r cap. 20.  from God, nor his Law, but only from the law of Nations.  
5 That Popes have degraded Emperors, but never Emperor 
5 De pontiff lib. 3 cap 16  degraded the Pope: nay, even 
* Lib. 5. cap. 8.  Bishops that are but the Pope's vassals, may depose Kings, and abrogate their laws.  
6 That churchmen are as far above Kings, as the soul is 
6 De Laic●s, ● 〈◊〉.  above the body.  
7 That Kings may be deposed by their perple for divers respects. 
7 De pontiff l. b. 5 cap. 8.   
8 But Popes can be deposed by no means: for no flesh hath power 
8 De Pontif. lib. 2. cap. 26.  to judge of them.  
9 That obedience due to the Pope is for conscience sake. 
9 De Pontif. lib. 4 cap 15.   
10 But obedience due to Kings is only for certain respects of 
10 De Clericis cap 28.  order and policy.  
11 That those very Churchmen that are borne and inhabit in 
11 Ibidem.  sovereign princes' countries, are notwithstanding not their Subjects, and cannot be judged by them, although they may judge them.  
12 And that the obedience that Churchmen give to Princes 
12 Ibidem.  even in the meanest and mere temporal things, is not by way of any necessary subjection, but only out of discretion, and for observation of good order and custom.   
Here we find what base estimation Prelates had of Princes, may we not then justly except against their delivery (as it is by them urged, No Bishop, no King?