CHAP. I.

1. IT is now more than twenty yeares since de­fending the Church of England as it was setled 1 Eliz. for the most perfect and con­formable to Antiquity of any in Europe, a Gentleman, whose conversation for his Learning, I very much affected, tole me, He was never satisfied of our a­greeing with the Primitive Church in two particulars; the one in denying all manner of Superiority to the Bi­shop of Rome, to live in whose Communion the East and Western Christian did ever highly esteem. The other, in condemning Monastique living, so far, as not onely to reform them, if any thing were amiss, but take down the very houses themselves. To the first of these I said, We did not deny such a Primacy in the Pope as the Antients did acknowledge, but that he by that might exercise those acts he of some years before Hen. the 8 ^th had done, and had got by encroaching on the English Church and State meerly by their tolerance, which when the King­dom [Page 2] took to redress and restrain him in, he would needs interpret a departing from the Church; yet if any made the departure, it must be the Pope, the Kingdom stand­ing onely on those Rights it had ever used for its own preservation, which putting in practice, it was interdicted the King, excommunicated by him, &c. To which he replyed in effect that of Henry the eighth in his book a­gainst Luther, That it was very incredible the Pope could doe those acts he had sometimes exercised here by encroachment; for how could he gain that power and none take notice of it? That this argument could have no force if not made good by History, and those of our own Nation, how he had increased his Authority here. Which, truly, I did not well see how to deny, farther than that we might by one particular conclude of an o­ther; As if the Church or State had a right of denying any Clark going without License beyond Seas, it must follow, it might bar them from going, or Appealing to Rome: If none might be acknowledged for Pope with­out the Kings approbation, it could not be denyed but the necessity of being in union with the true Pope (at least in time of Schism) did wholly depend on the King. And so of some other.

2. As for the other point of Monasteries, I told him, I would not take upon me to defend all that had been done in demolishing of them; I knew they had nourished men of Piety and good Learning, to whom the present Age was not a little beholding; for, what doe we know of a­ny thing past but by their labours? That divers well af­fected to the Reformation, and yet persons of integri­ty, are of opinion their standing might have con­tinued to the advancement of Literature, the increase of Piety, and Relief of the Poor. That the King when he took them down was the greatest looser by it himself. Whose opinions I would not contradict, yet it could not be denyed, they were so far streyed from their first in­stitution, [Page 3] as they reteined little other than the name of what they first were.

3. Upon this I began to cast with my self how I could Historically make good that I had thus asserted, which in general I held most true, yet had not at hand punctually every circumstance, Law, and History that did conduce unto it; in reading therefore I began to note apart what might serve for proof any way concerning it: But that Gentleman with whom I had this speech being not long after taken away, I made no great progresse in it, till some years after, I was constreined to abide in London (seque­stred, not onely from publique, but even the private busi­nesse of my Estate) I had often no other way of spend­ing my time but the company a book did afford; inso­much as I again began to turn over our ancient Laws and Histories, both printed and written, whereof I had the perusal of divers of good worth, whence I collected many notes, and began farther to observe the question between us and the Church of Rome in that point, not to be whether our Ancestors did acknowledge the Pope successor of St. Peter, but what that acknowledgment did extend to: Not whether he were Vicar of Christ, had a power from him to teach the Word of God, administer the Sacraments, direct people in the spiritual wayes of hea­ven (for so had every Bishop, amongst which he was e­ver held by them the first, Pater maximus in ecclesia, as one to whom Emperours and Christians had not only allow­ed a primacy, but had left behind them why they did it, Sedis Apostolicae primatum sancti Petri meritum, qui prin­ceps est Episcopalis coronae Romanae dignitas civitatis sacrae etiā Synodi firmarit auctoritas, saies Valentinian Novel 24. i [...] fi [...]. cod. Theod. Valentinian 445. On which grounds, if he will accept it, I know no reason to deny his being prime) but whether they conceived his commission from Christ did extend so far as to give him an absolute authority over the Church and Clergy in England, to redress, reform, correct, amend all things in [Page 4] it, not by advice, but as having power over it, with or a­gainst their own liking, and farther to remove, translate, silence, suspend all Bishops, and others of the Spirituali­ty. In short, to exercise all Ecclesiastique authority with­in this Church above any whatsoever, so as all in Holy Orders (one of the three Estates of the Kingdom) solely and supreamly depended on him, and hee on none but Christ; and whether our Forefathers did ever admit him with this liberty of disposing in the English Church.

4. To wade through which question there was an eye to be cast on all the times since Christ was heard of in England, and therfore to be considered how Christia­nity stood upon the conversion of the Britans, the Sax­ons, and since the irruption of the Normans, under the first of these we have but little, under the second some­what, yet not much, under the third the Papacy swell'd to that height, some parts have been constrained to cast it off, and England without his assent in that point so to re­form it self, as to declare Stat. 25. Hen. 8. cap. 14. no manner of speaking, doing, communication, or holding against the Bishop of Rome, or his pretensed power or authority, made or given by humane Laws, shall be deemed to be Heresy. By which it seems those Episcopal Functions he did exercise common with other Bishops (as Baptizing, conferring Holy Orders, &c.) it did not deny to be good and valid of his admini­stration.

5. But what those particulars were humane Laws had conferred upon the Papacy, and by what constitutions or Canons those preheminences were given him, was the thing in question, and not so easie to be found, because indeed gained by little and little, I cannot but hold Truth more ancient than Errour, every thing to be firmest upon its own bottom, and all novelties in the Church to be best confuted by shewing how far they cause it to deviate from the first original, I no way doubt but the Religion exercised by the Britans before Augustine came, to have [Page 5] been very pure and holy: nor that planted after from S. Gregory, though perhaps with more ceremonies and com­mands, juris positivi which this Church embraced reje­cted or varyed from, as occasion served to be other, but in the foundation most sound, most orthodox; that holy man never intending such a superiority over this Church as after was claimed. The Bishops of England in their condemnation of Wicliffs opinions, do not at all touch upon those Apud Knigh­ton. col. 2648, & in fasciculo zizaniorum Mss fol. 64. a col. 1. in bib­lio theca Ar­chiepiscopo Armachani. concerned the Popes supremacy, and the Concil. Con­stant. sess. 8. Art, 41. Councell of Constance that did censure his affir­ming. Non est de necessitate salutis credere Romanam Ec­clesiam esse supremam inter alias Ecclesias, doth it with great limitations and as but an error: Error est si per Roma­nam Ecclesiam intelligat universalem Ecclesiam, aut concili­um generale, aut pro quanto negaret primatum summi Pon­tificiis super alias Ecclesias particulares: I conceive there­fore the Basis of the Popes or Church of Romes authori­ty in England, to be no other then what being gained by custome, was admitted with such regulations as the king­dome thought might stand with it's own conveniency, and therefore subject to those Vide concor­data inter Hen. 2. & Alexan­drum 3. 1172. Edwardum 3. & Gregor. 11. 1373. Henricum 5. & Martinum. 5. 1418. stipulations, contracts with the Papacy and pragmatiques it at any time hath made or thought good to set up, in opposition of extravagancies arising thence, in the reformation therefore of the Church of England two things seem to be especially searcht into, and a third arising from them fit to be examined.

1. Whether the Kingdome of England did ever con­ceive any necessity jure divino of being under the Pope united to the Church and sea of Rome, which drawes on the consideration how his authority hath been exercised in England under the Britons, Saxons and Normans, what treasure was caryed annually hence to Rome, how it had been gained, and how stopt.

2. Whether the Prince with th' advise of his Cleargy was not ever understood to be endued with authority suf­ficient, to cause the Church within his Dominions be by [Page 6] them reformed, without using any act of power not le­gally invested in him, which leads me to consider what the Royal authority in sacris is. 1. In making lawes that God may be truly honoured. 2 things decently performed in the Church. 3. Profainesse punished, questions of doubt by their Cleargy to be silenced.

3. The third how our Kings did proceed, especially Queen Elizabeth, (under whose reformation we then li­ved) in this act of separation from the sea of Rome, which carries me to shew how the Church of England was refor­med by Henry the 8. Edward the 6. and Queen Elizabeth. Wherein I look upon the proceedings abroad and at home against Hereticks, the obligation to generall Coun­cells, and some other particulars incident to those times.

I do not in this at all take upon me the disputation, much less the Theologicall determination of any contro­verted Tenet (but leave that as the proper subject to Di­vines) this being onely an historicall narration how some things came amongst us, how opposed, how removed by our ancestors, who well understanding this Church not obliged by any forraign constitutions, but as allowed by it self, & either finding the inconvenience in having them urged from abroad farther then their first reception heare did warrant. Or that some of the Cleargy inforced opini­ons as articles of faith, were no way to be admitted into that rank, did by the same authority they were first brought in (leaving the body or essence (as I may say) of Christian religion untouched,) make such a declaration in those particulars, as conserved the Royall dignity in it's ancient splendour, without at all invading the true legall rights of the state Ecclesiasticall, yet might keep the kingdome in peace, the people without distruction, and the Church in Vnity.

CHAP. II.
Of the Britans.

1. I Shall not hear inquire who first planted Christian Religion amongst the Britans, whe­ther Baron. to▪ 1. A. 35. n, 5. Ioseph of Arimathea, Niceph. Ca­list. lib. 2. cap, 40. Simon Zelo­tes, Metaphra­stes Junii de eo vide Baron, to. 1. A ^o. 60. n. 4. Bed. l. 1. c. 4. S. Peter or Elutherius, neither of which wants an author, yet I must confess it hath ever seemed to me by their alleadging the Beda lib. 3. cap. 25. confer. Euseb. hist. lib. 5. cap. κδ'. Asian formes in celebrating Easter, their differing from the rites of Rome In multis no­str [...] consuetudi­ni,—contraria geritis apud Bed. lib. 2. cap. 2. August, Britonibus: in severall particulars, of which those of most note were, that of Easter, and baptizing after another manner, then the Ro­mans used, their often journeying to Palestina, that they re­ceived the first principles of Religion from Asia. And if afterward Caelestinus the Pope did send (according to Prosper. in Chronico Ann. 432. Prosper) Germanus vice sua to reclaim them from Pelagi­anisme, certainly th' inhabitants did not look on it, as an action of one had authority, though he might have a fa­therly care of them as of the same profession with him, as a Beda lib. 1. cap. 17. Synod in France likewise had, to whom in their di­stress they address themselves, to which Beda attributes the help they received by Germanius and Lupus.

2. After this as the Britans are not read to have yeild­ed any subjection to the Papacy, so neither is Rome noted to have taken notice of them, Vide cap. 2. n. 2. for Gregory the great a­bout 590. being told certain children were de Britannia insula did not know whether the Countrey were Christi­an or Pagan, Ioh. Diac. l. 1. cap. 21. vi­ta Gregor. Beda lib, 2, cap, 1. and when Augustine came hither Concil. Spelm. p. 108. and de­manded their obedience to the Church of Rome; the Ab­bot of Bancor returned him answer: That they were obedi­ent to the Church of God, to the Pope of Rome, and to every godly Christian, to love every one in his degree in charity, to help them in word and deed to be the children of God, and o­ther▪ [Page 8] obedience then this they did not know due to him, whom he named to be Pope nor to be father of fathers.

3. The Abbots name that gave this reply to Augu­stine seems to have been Dinooth and is in effect no other then what Galfrid Mo­numeten ubi agit de Augu­stino prope fi­nem. Geffry Monmouth hath remembred of him, that being miro modo liber alibus artibus eruditus Augusti­no p [...]tenti ab episcopis Britonum subjectionem diversis mon­stravit argument ationibus ipsos ei nullam debere subjectio­nem, to which I may adde by the testimony of Lib. 2. cap. 2 Beda their not only denying his propositions, sed neque illum pro Ar­chiepiscopo habiturum respondebant. And it appears Giral I [...]in. Camb. lib. 2. cap. 1. by Gyraldus Cambrensis, this distance between the two Churches continued long even till Henry the first, indu­ced their submission by force, before which Episcopi Walliae à Menevensi Antistite sunt consecrati, & ipse si­militer ab aliis tanquam suffraganeis est consecratus, nulla penitus alii Ecclesiae facta professione vel subjectione: the generality of which words must be construed to have re­ference as well to Rome as Canterbury; for, a little after, he shewes that though Augustine called them to councell, as a legat of the Apostolique sea, yet returned, they did proclaim they would not acknowledge him an Archbi­shop, but did contemn both himself and what he had esta­blished.

4. Neither were the Scots in this difference any whit be­hind the Britans, as we may perceive by the letter of Lau­rentius Iustus, and Mellitus, to the Bishops and Abbots through Scotland; in which they remember the strange perversenesse of one Dagamus a Scottish Bishop, who upon occasion coming to them did not only abstain eating with them, but would not take his meat in the same house they abode, yet they salute them with the honourable titles of their dearest lords and brethren. A certain signe of a wide distance between the opinions of Rome then, and now, when men are taught not so much as Baronius Paraenesis ad Rempub, Ve­netam p, 52. atque his tan­dem sinisesto, sed doleo vehe­mentèr quod absque valete. Iohannes enim Aposto­lus id vetat & [...]um eo omnis simul Ecclesia quod indignos salu [...]atio [...]e ju­stè judice [...] qui non communi­cantes Roma­nae Ecclesiae omnis penitus sunt salutis ex­pertes (2. Io­han.) bid them farewell do not submitunto it, sure our first Bishops [Page 9] know no such rule, who placed in their Calendar for Saints and holy men, as well Hilda, Aydon, and Colman, the opposers of Rome, as Wilfred, Agilbertus, and others who stood for it.

CHAP. III.
Of the increase of the Papall power in En­gland under the Saxons and Nor­mans, and what oppositions it met with.

AFter the planting of Christian religion a­mongst the Saxons, th' Archbishop of Canter­bury became a person so eminent, all England was reputed his Eadmer. p. 12, 29. p. 137, 1. G [...]r­vas. Doro­bern, col, 1661, 54. Diocese, in the colledge of Bishops Lyndwood de poenis. cap. Tanquam. London his Dean, whose office it was to Gervas. Do­robern. col. 1566, 10. sum­mon Councels, Winchester his Chancellour, Sic Lynd. ubi supra, at Ger. Doro­bern. col. 1382, 61. col. 1429, 23 Salisbury or (as some) Winchester his Prec [...]tor, or that begun the ser­vice by singing, Sic Lynd­wood, at Ger. Dorobern. col. 1382, 61. col. 1429, 23. Rof. at 1565. 1. Wigor. Worcester or rather Rochester his Chap­lain, and the other the carrier of his Crosse: Malms. fol. 121. a & Di­ceto col. 437, 64. expected no lesse obedience from York, then himself yielded to Rome Rodulph. Arch. Epist. inter script. x. Angliae, &c. col. 1736, 17., voluntate & beneficio, it being th' opinion of the Church of England, it was but equall Malms. fol. 121; a, 8. ut ab eo loco mutuentur vi­vendi disciplinam, à cujus fomite rapuerunt credendi slam­mam. The dependence therefore of the Clergy in En­gland being thus wholly upon th' Archbishop, it will not be amisse to take a little view both of what esteem he was in the Church, and how it came to be taken off, and by de­grees transferr'd to a forreign power.

2. Upon the conversion of the Saxons here by the preaching of Augustine and his companions, and a quiet peace settled under Theodore, Beda lib. 4. cap. 2. to whom all the English [Page 10] submitted, Lib. MS. in aula Tri [...]ita­tis Cantabrig. Parochiall Churches by his encouragement began to be erected, and the Bishop of Rome greatly reve­renced in this nation, as being the successour of Saint Pe­ter the first bishop of the world, Patriark of the West, that resided in a town Hall 20. Hen. 8. f. 179. held to nourish the best Clerks in Christendome, and the seat of the Empire: insomuch, as the devout Britan (who seemes (as I said) to have recei­ved his first conversion from Asia) Divisus ab orbe nostro Britannus, si in religione processerit, quaerit locum fama sibi tantū & scriptura­rum relatione cognitum. E­pist. Paulae & Eustochii de commigrat. Bethlchem, inter opera Hieronymi Script. circa Ann. 386. did go to Iudea as a place of greatest sanctity, so lib. 4. [...]. 23. Beda. amongst the Saxons Romam adire magnae virtutis aestimabatur. But as this was of their part, no other then as to a great Doctour or Prelate, by whose solicitude they understood the way to heaven, and to a place in which religion and piety did most flou­rish; so th' instructions thence were not as coming from one had dominion over their faith, the one side not at all giving, nor the other assuming other then that respect is fit to be rendred from a puisne or lesse skilfull to more ancient and learned Teachers. As of late times when certain divines at Frankford 1554. differed about the Common-prayer used in England, Knox and Whitting­ham appealed to Calvin for his opinion; and receiving his 200. Epistle, Troubles at Frank­ford pag. xxxvi. Edit. 1575. it so wrought in the hearts of many, that they were not so stout to maintain all the parts of the Book, as they were then against it. And Doctor Cox and some other, who stood for the use of the said Book, wrote un­to him, ibid. pag. [...]1. excusing themselves that they put order in their Church without his counsell asked. Which honour they shew'd him, not as esteeming him ibid. pag. [...]xlvii. to have any auctority of Office over them; but in respect of his learning and me­rits.

3. As these therefore carried much honour, and yield­ed great obedience to Calvin, and the Church of Gene­va by them, ibid. p. [...]lix. then held the purest reformed Church in Christendom: so it cannot be denyed but our Aun­cestors the Saxons attributed no lesse to the Pope and Church of Rome, who yet never invaded the rights of [Page 11] this, as contrary to the Concil. ge­neral. edit. Romae 1608, [...]o. 1. pag. 498. A. councel of Ephesus, and the Ca­nons of the Church of Beda l. 4. cap. 5. England; but left the Govern­ment of it to the English Prelats, yet giving his best ad­vice and assistance for increasing devotion, and main­tenance of the Laws Ecclesiasticall amongst them, in which each side placed the superiority. From whence it proceeded that however the Pope was sought to from hence, he rarely sent hither any Legat. Concil. Spelm. Ann. 787. p. 293. In the Coun­cell of Calcuith held about 180. years after Augustine, it is observed, a tempore Sancti Augustini Pontificis sa­cerdos Romanus nullus in Britanniam m [...]ssus est, nisi nos. And pag. 58, 4 [...]. Eadmerus, that it was inauditum in Britan­nia, quemlibes hominum super se vices Apostolicas gerere, nisi solum Archiepiscopum Cantuariae.

4. But after the Pope instead of being Caus. 2. q. 1. cap. 7, 15. q. 2. cap. 2. 3. 4. &c. subject, be­gan to be esteemed above th' Ecclesiastick Canons, and to pretend a power of altering, and dispensing with them, and what past by his advise and counsell onely, was said to be by his authority, he did question divers particulars had been formerly undoubtedly practic't in this Kingdom, he seeing them, and not shewing any dis­like at it; as Ingulph. fol. 500. a. 43. The receiving Investitures of Churches from Princes, vide literas Paschal. 2. Hen. 1. apud. Eadme [...]um, pag. 113. pag. 115. The calling Synods, The determining causes Ec­clesiasticall without Appeals to Rome, The transferring Bishops, &c. but the removing these from England un­to a forraign judicature, being as well in diminution of the rights of the Crown, as of this Church, past not with out opposition.

5. For Anselm an Italian, the first great promoter of the Papal authority with us, pretending he ought not be barr'd Eadmer. pag. 38, 35. of visiting the Vicar of St. Peter causa regiminis Ec­clesiae, was told as well by the Bishops as lay Lords, Eadmer. p. 39, 30. That it was a thing unheard, and altogether against the use of the realme, for any of the great men, especially himself to presume any such thing without the Kings licence: who affirmed, Eadmer. pag. 26, 1. nequaquam fidem quam sibi debebat simul [Page 12] & Apostolicae sedis obedientiam contra suam voluntatem posse servare. And the Archbishop persisting in his jour­ny thither, had not onely his Bishoprick seized into the Kings hand, but the Pope being shew'd how his carriage was resented here, did not afford him either ibid. pag. 52, 17. Consi­lium or Auxilium, but suffered him to live an exile all that Princes time —Nil judicii vel subventio­nis per Ro­manum prae­sulem nacti. Eadmer. pag. 53, 28. without any considerable sup­port, or adjudging the cause in his favour. Which makes it the more strange that (having found by experience what he had heard before, that it was the King not the Pope could help or hurt him) this visit being so little to his advantage, at his first presenting himself to Henry the first, he should oppose Eadmer. pag. 56, 7. that Prince in doing him homage, and being invested by him, a right continued unto that time from his Auncestors, and by which him­self had received Eadmer. p. 18, 4. p. 20, 35. the Archbishoprick from his bro­ther, and this on a suggestion that it was prohibited in a councell held at Rome: in which he went so far as to tell the King, Ibid. pag. 70, 9. quod nec pro redemptione capitis mei con­sentiam ei de iis quae praesens audivi in Romano Concilio prohiberi, nisi ab eadem sede interdictorum absolutionis pro­deat, à qua constitutionis ipsorum vinculum prodiit.

6. This is the first, if not the onely time that to what was acted at Rome an obedience was required here, as not to be dispensed with but from thence: for it is un­doubted, this Kingdome never held it self tyed by any thing past there, till received here; as Eadmer. pag. 92, 40. vide Concil. Spelm. pag. 166, 9. Eadmerus rightly observes, things done there not ratified here to be of no value. And when Hen. Knighton 1296. col. 2491. vide Mat. West. & W ^m. Thorne. VVinchelsea 1296. would have intro­duced the contrary, it cost him dear, the Clergy forced to reject the command, de immu­nitate Eccles. cap. 3. in S [...]xto. Et Tit. [...]odem cap. 1. in Clement. and the Court to quit her pre­tenses.

7. But the dispute, however the right stood, grew so high, the King told Anselme Eadmer. p. 70, 5. the Pope had not to meddle with his rights, and wrote that free letter we find in Iorvalensis, col. 999, 30. which I have likewise seen [Page 13] in an old hand recorded amongst divers other memo­rialls of the Archbishops of Canterbury: though I must needs say it seems to me by Apud Ead­mer. pag. 59, 48. Paschalis his answer, re­peating a good part of it, not sent by those he names, Ibid. pag. 56. 22. but former messengers. In this controversy the Popes returnes were so ambiguous, that he writ so differing from their relations were sent, it was thought fit Anselme should himself go to Rome: with whom K. Henry sent another, Ibid. p. 73, 13. who spake plainly, his master nec pro amis­sione regni sui passurum se perdere investituras Ecclesia­rum; and (though Rome were willing to comply in other particulars) told Anselme denying that, pag. 75, 27. ibid. he could not assure him of a welcome in England, who thereupon retired to Lyons: where finding Ibid. pag. 79, 24. slender comfort from Rome, he sought the King by letters, and after by the means of Henry's Eadmer. pag. 80, 27. sister made his peace; at which yet he was not permitted (such was his spirit) to enter England, denying to communicate with them had received Bishopricks from the King, but by the Popes dispensa­tion. The conclusion was, Paschalis taught by expe­rience, neither the Court of Rome nor th' Archbishop gained ought by this contest, however he would not at first abate Ibid. p. 63 3. praedecessoris sui sententiae rigorem, yet now admitted great limitations to what Vrban had esta­blisht. So as the King Eadmer. pag. 91, 21. assenting none for the future should be invested per laicam manum (which was no more, but what he formerly did himself, he would now cause to be performed by a Bishop) the other agreed no prelats to be barr'd of promotion, etiamsi hominia Regi fecerint, Ibid. p. 87, 35. & hoc donec per omnipotentis Domini gratiam ad hoc omittendum cor regium molliatur, &c. which yet the King soon after, on the Popes permission of them to the Dutch, did threaten Ibid. p. 100, 1. sine dubio se resumpturum suas investituras, quia ille suas tenet in pace; but for ought I find, it went no farther then their swearing fealty to the King, which seems to have been long Gervas. De­robern. Anno 118 [...]. col. 1503, 36. R. de Glan­villa Abbati de Bello, &c. praecipio tibi ex parte Do­mini Regis, per fidem quam ei debes & per sacramentum quod ei fecisti, &c. W ^m. Thorn, Ann. 1220. col. 1873, 56. Hugo 3. Ab­bas S ^•. Au­gustini gra­tanter admis­sus juravit fidelitatem D. Regi super crucem ipsius▪ legati. continued.

[Page 14]8. The Papacy finding by this contest the difficulty of carrying any thing here by an high hand, thought of more moderate wayes for bringing the Clergy of this nation wholy to depend on Rome; but that could not be without diminishing the power the Archbishop held o­ver them, and therefore must be wonne by degrees: to advance which nothing could more conduce, then to have a person of wisdome reside here, who might di­rect this Church according to the Papall interest. But this was thought fit to be given out before practic't, and likely to be doubly opposed; for th' Archbishop well un­derstood the admitting a Legat for that end to be Mat. Paris pag. 440, 17. Anno 1237. Lond. 1640. in suae dignitatis praejudicium: And the King suffered none to be taken for Pope, but whom he approved, nor any to receive so much as a Letter from Rome, without ac­quainting him with it, and held it an undoubted right of the Crown, Eadmer. pag. 125, 53. p. 6, 25. p. 113, 1. ut neminem aliquando legati officio in Anglia fungi permitteret, si non ipse, aliqua praecipua que­rela exigente, & quae ab Archiep [...]scopo Cantuariorum caeterisque Episcopis regni terminari non posset, hoc fieri à Papa postularet, &c.

9. Things standing thus in the year 1100. th' Arch­bishop of Vienna coming into England, Eadmer. pag. 58, 41. reported him­self to have the Legatine power of all Britain commit­ted unto him; which was with so much admiration of the Nation (as a thing had not been heard of before) that (if he had any) at least he thought not fit to make use of his Commission, but departed a nemine pro Legato sus­ceptus, nec in aliquo Legati officio functus.

10. Fourteen years after Eadmer. p. 113. p. 116. Paschalis the 2. by Letters of the 30. of March and 1. of April, expostulates with the King about severall particulars; of which one is, his admitting neither messenger nor Letter to be received, but by his leave: but see the words; Sedis Apostolicae nuncii vel literae praeter jussum regiae majestatis nullam in potestate tuâ susceptionem aut aditum promerentur, nullus [Page 15] inde clamor, nullum inde judicium ad sedem Apostolicam destinantur, &c. and the year following addrest Eadmer. pag. 118, 28. An­selme (nephew to the late Archbishop, and after Abbot of St. Edmundsbury) hither, shewing by Letters he had committed unto his administration vices Apostolicas in Anglia. This made known here (though the bearer were not permitted to enter the Kingdom) the Clergy and Nobility gathered in councell at London concluded th' Archbishop should go to the King in Normandy, make known unto him the antient custome of the Realme, and by his advice to Rome, (as being the person was most interessed in it) ut haec nova annihilaret; from whence he obtained the Letter, or rather declaration to the King and Clergy the same author hath pag. 120. recorded. So by this care the matter was again stopt.

11. The King 1119. Ordericus Vitalis pag. 857, d. pag. 858, a. sent his Bishops to a Councell held by Calixtus the 2. at Reims, at their departing gave them these instructions: Not to complain of each other, because himself would right each of them at home; That he payed that rent his predecessors had formerly done, and enjoyed likewise those priviledges had been for­merly permitted them; That they should salute the Pope from him, hear his precepts, but bring no superfluities into his Kingdome: but see the words; Rex Anglorum praelatis regni sui ad Synodum ire permisit; sed omnino ne alicujus modi querimoniam alterutrum facerent, prohi­buit: Dixit, omni plenariam rectitudinem conquerenti fa­ciam in terra mea: redditus ab anterioribus constitutos Ro­manae Ecclesiae singulis annis errogo, & privilegia nihilomi­nus ab antiquis temporibus pari modo mihi concessa teneo. Ite, dominum Papam de parte mea salutate, & Apostolica tantum praecepta humiliter audite, sed superfluas adinven­tiones regne meo inferre nolite, &c. Certainly this prince did hold, the Pope with the advice of a Councell might labour to introduce superfluous inventions, which the English were not tyed to receive, the disputes of his Bi­shops [Page 16] be by him ended at home without carrying their complaints beyond Seas, according to th' Assize cap. 8. of Clarendoun; the King in nothing obliged to Rome, but in the payment of Peter-pence, as his father had before Baron. to. 11. anno 1079. n. 25. & Lanfran­ci Epist. 7. exprest himself.

12. In November following the Pope and King had a Eadmer. p. 125, 51. meeting at Gisors in Normandy, where Calixtus con­firmed unto him the usages his father had practic't in England and Normandy, and in especiall that of sen­ding no Legat hither, but on the Princes desire. Yet notwithstanding the same Eadmer. pag. 137, 46. pag. 138, 21. Pope not fully two years af­ter addrest another Legat to these parts: but he by the Kings wisdome was so diverted, ut qui Legati officio fun­gi in tota Britannia venerat, immunis ab omni officio tali via qua venerat extra Angliam à Rege missus est, &c.

13. But here by the way the reader may take notice, these words, Eadmer. pag. 116, 23. Collata, Ibid. p. 125. 21. Impetrata, Concessa, Per­missa, used by our best authors in speaking of the Rights of the Crown in points of this nature, do not import as if it had onely a delegatory power from the Pope by some grant of his, as is fancied by those Answer to Sr. Ed. Cook, de jure Regis Ecclesiast c. 9. [...] ▪ 8. p. 200. would have it so; for we read of no such concessions from him, unlesse that of Nicholas the 2. of which in the next: But that they were continually exercised, the Pope seeing, & either ap­proving, or at least making no such shew of his disliking them, as barr'd their practice, which by comparing the said authors is plain. Eadmerus, p. 125, 53, 54. speaks as if these customes were concessa, fungi permissa from Rome; which pag. 118, 33, 40. he calls antiqua Angliae consuetudo, libertas Regni, &c. So pag. 116, 22. he terms them privilegia Patri & Fratri suo, sibique à Romana Eccle­sia jam olim collata, &c. about which yet it is manifest, even Eadmer. p. 6, 23. & lib. 2. per to­tum. p. 113, 1. &c. p. 115. by him, the Court of Rome was ever in contest with our Kings, about them, who maintained them as their Royalties against it, and challenged by Henry the 1. by no other title then Hen. 1. E­pist. apud Jor­val. col. 999, 46, 49. dignitates, usus, & consuetudi­nes, [Page 17] quas Pater ejus in regno habuit, &c. which the Pope Eadmer. p. 59, 50. calls honores quos antecessorum nostrorum tempore Pater tuus habuer at, and affirmes to be grata in super­ficie, —interius requisita & Legati vocibus exposita, gra­via & vehementissima paruerunt: so far have Popes been from conferring the least unto them. see cap. 3. n. 19.

14. It is true, things done by Princes as of their own vide cap. 5. n. 4. Right, Popes finding not means to stop, would in for­mer ages as later, by priviledge continue unto them. Nicholaus Papa hoc Domino meo privilegium, quod ex paterno jure susceperat, praebuit, Baron. 11. Ann. 1059. n. 23. said th' Emperours Ad­vocate. And the same Pope finding our Kings to expresse one part of their Office to be regere populum Domini, & Ecclesiam ejus, wrote to Edward the Confessor, Vobis & posteris vestris regibus Angliae committimus advocatio­nem ejusdem loci, & omnium totius Angliae Ecclesiarum, & vice nostra cum Concilio Episcoporum & Abbatum constituatis ubique quae justa sunt. As a few years since, Maurocen. Hist. Ven. Ann. 1 Cor. p. 629. c. Ann. 1609. p. 687. b. Card. Ossat. Epist. Romae 17. Sept. 1601. the Republick of Venice not assenting to send their Pa­triarch to an examination at Rome, according to a Decree of Clement the 8 ^th, Paulus Quintus declared that imposte­rum Venetiarum Antistites Clementis decreto eximeren­tur: so that now that State doth by an exemption what they did before as Soveraign Princes. Besides, Kings did many times as graunts ask those things of the Pope, they well understood themselves to have power of doing without him. Narrantur haec p. 56. 57. in vita Henri­ci Chichley ab Arthuro Duck edit. 1617. Henry the 5 ^th. demanded of Mar­tin the 5. five particulars: to which his Ambassadors finding him not so ready to assent, told him se in manda­tis habere, ut coram eo profiteantur, Regem in iis singulis jure suo usurum, utpote quae non necessitatis, sed honoris causa petat, & ut publicam de ea re coram universo Cardi­nalium coetu protestationem interponant. And to the same purpose there are sundry examples yet remaining on record, where Ro [...]. Parl. 17. Ed. 3. n. 59. in sine. 25. Ed. 3. Oct. puri [...]. n. 13. 7. H. 4. n. 114. 3. H. 6. n. 38. [...]ee cap. 4. n. 20. the King on the petition of the Commons for redresse of some things (of Ecclesiastick [Page 18] cognizance) amisse, first chuses to write to the Pope; but on his delay, or failing to give satisfaction, doth ei­ther himself by statute redresse th' inconvenience, or command the Archbishop to see it done.

15. But here before I proceed any farther, because it cannot be denyed, in former times there was often in­tercourse between the Church of England and Rome, and such as were sent from thence hither are by some styled Nuncii, by others Legati; I think it not amisse to consider what the cause was one side so much opposed the sending a Legat, and the other so laboured to gain it.

16. After the erection of Canterbury into an Arch­bishoprick, the Bishops of that See were held quasi al­teri [...]s orbis Papae, as Vrban the 2. Malms. de l ontis. l. 1. in Anselm. fol. 127. 15. Gervas. Do­robern. col. 1527, 58. styled them, did onely exercise Eadmer. p. 58, 44. vices Apostolicas in Anglia, that is used the same power within this Island the Pope did in other parts; the one Ibid. p. 115, 17. claiming, because Europe had been con­verted by disciples sent from Rome; the other, that he had sent Diceto col. 437, 64. preachers through England. And is therefore cal­led frequently in our writers Eadmer. pag. 27, 34. principi ve­stro Anselmo. princeps Episcoporum An­gliae, Ibid. p. 107, 33. pag. 113, 47. Pontif [...]x summus, Gervas. Do­robern. col. 1663, 55. Patriarcha, Eadmer. p. 30, 9. Primas, and his seat Eadmer. pag. 113, 47. continuatio Florent. Wigorn. Ann. 1136. pag. 513. Cathedra Patriarchatus Anglorum; and this not in civility onely, but they were as well Gervas. Do­robern. col. 1663, 55. sic habiti as nomi­nati. It is true, the correspondency between it and the Roman was so great, they were rather held one then two Churches: yet if any question did arise, the determina­tion was in a councell or convocation here; as Florent. Wigorn. Ann. 1070. the de­posing Stygand, post, n. 18, 10, 60. the settling the precedency between Canterbury and York, supra n. 11. the instructions I mentioned of Hen. 1. to his Bishops, vid. Mat. Paris Ann. 1246. p. 699, 10. vide post n. 38. in textu & in margine. the right of the Kingdome that none should be drawn out of it auctoritate Apostolica, do enough assure us; if recourse were had to Rome, it was onely Malms, fol. 152, b. 12. see n. 8. ut majori Concilio decidatur quod terminari non p [...] ­tuit, as to the more learned divines, to the elder Church, of greatest note in Europe, by whom these were conver­ted, [Page 19] and therefore more reverenced by this, as that was most sollicitous of their well-doing, and most respected for their wisdome. All which is manifest by that humble Letter Ibid. de Re­gibus lib. 1. fol. 16. Kenulphus & others of Mercia wrote about 797. to Leo the 3. wherein it plainly appears, he seeks to that See for direction, because the conversion of the Nation first came from thence, and there resided in it men of sound learning, whom he doth therefore desire as qui­bus à Deo merito sapientiae clavis collata est, ut super hac causa (which was the placing an Archiepiscopall chair at Litchfield,) cum sapientibus vestris quaeratis, & quic­quid vobis videatur nobis postea rescribere dignemini. By which it is clear his inquisition was as unto persons of profound literature, (had the key of knowledge con­ferred on them) not as to those had auctority over this Church.

17. As for acts of Ecclesiastick auctority, what pro­ceeded not from the King, did from th' Archbishop, who was not at all commanded by any, Gervas. Dorobern. col. 1663, 55. nullius unquam legati ditioni addictus, but Ibid. col. 1485, 63. preceded them all. Non est a [...]te haec tempora Archiepiscopo Cantuariensi talis illata in­juria, ut in Provincia ejusdem ar­chiepiscopi, immo & in Ecclesia, ut de cruce sileam, Legatus ali­quis mitratus incederet. Gervas. Do­robern. Ann. 1186. col. 1485, 63. None did were a Miter within his Province, or had the Cro­sier carried, nor layd any excommunication; and when he did, the Ger. Dorobern. Ann. 1187. col. 1531, 38. Clergy of the place did teach, both from the King and Archbishop, not to value it, on this ground, that in Dioecesi Archiepiscopi Apostolicam non tenere senten­tiam.

18. As for Councells, it is certain none from Rome did, till 1125. call any here: if they did come to any, as to Calcuith, the King upon the Advise of th' Archbishop Concil. Spelman. pag. 293. statuit diem concilii. So when William the first held one at Winchester 1070. for deposing Stygand, though there came to it three sent from Alexander the second, yet it was held Florent. Wigorn. Ann. 1070, pag. 434. jubente & presente Rege, who was Vita Lanfranci cap. 7. p. 7. col. 1. d. president of it. The difference touching precedency between the [Page 20] Sees of Canterbury and York having been before the same Pope, and by him sent back for a determination at home, it is observable, that in a Councell said therefore to be called [...]x praecepto Alexandri Papae annuente Rege, the Popes Legat subscribed the 16 ^th. after all the English Bishops: as is truly Note, you must [...] these sub­scriptions in the London edition 1572. for in that of Hanau 1605. they are for the most, (I know not on what war­rant,) omit­ted. recorded in the Antiquitat. Bri­tannicae Ecclesiae p. 95, 40. agreeing with a very ancient Ms. copy I have seen of the said Councell; as Diceto and others do Diceto col. 485, 24. rank him after the King, Canterbury, and York. If any shall ask whether I have met no copies in which he was placed otherwise, I must confesse I have seen some books wherein he was above the English Bishops, next after the Queen; but they were onely late Transcripts, not of any Antiquity, as in a in [...]ibliothe­ca Cotton fol. lxxiiii. book of Crou­land writ since the beginning of Henry the 7.

19. The Pope for many years now past, for being a Spirituall Pastor, and Patriarch of the West, hath been treated with more reverence than any Bishop, and for being a potent temporall Prince, with more observance then meerly a Ghostly Father. A Mat. Paris hist. minor. Ann. 1107. grave writer notes, Henry the first having gone through the troubles were on him with his brother, and likewise Anselm, subjugatis omnibus inimicis securus erat, nec aliquem ut primìtus for­midabat praeter Papam, & hoc non propter spiritualem, sed temporalem potestatem. Which as it is recorded of that Prince, so no question is true of many others.

20. By which we may see, when Rome did in former times Apostolica authoritate praecipere, it was to Bishops (whom he styled his brothers,) no other then such fra­ternall commands the elder may and doth ordinarily lay upon the younger brother, of whom he is sollici­tous; such as S ^t. Pauls were [...] Thess. iii. 12. to the Thessalonians, Philem. 8. Phi­lemon, &c. No other then of late Calvins were to Knox, who being chosen by certain of Franckford to be Prea­cher unto them, Knox Hist. Church of Scotland p. 93▪ edit. 1644. their vocation he ob [...]yed, albeit un­willingly, at the commandment of that notable servant [Page 21] of God Iohn Calvin, &c. And a little after the Lords of Scotland sending for him home, Ibid. p. 110 did accompany their letters to him with others to Mr. Calvin, craving of him, that by his auctority he would command the said Iohn once again to visit them, &c. And truly whoso­ever will without partiality seriously consider the whole contexture of our Lawes and Histories, weighing one circumstance with another, must conclude the Popes commanding to have been volentibus, not nolentibus, (as Epitaph. Nepotiani ad Heliodorum to. 1. St. Hierom says those of a Bishop ought to be) for if disliked, his precepts were Eadmer. pag. 92, 40. p. 125, 29. questioned, Gervas. Do­robern. col. 1315, 66. 1316, 8. & 1318, 39. 1359, 41, 59. W ^mus Thorn 1802, 26. 1848, 28. and these may serve in lieu of many others may be alledged. opposed, Ger. Doro­bern. col. 1558, 54. those he sent not permitted to meddle with that they came for, their prohibitions that others should not, neg­lected: The English having ever esteemed the Church of Canterbury in Spiritualls, that is quae sunt ordinis; with­out any intervening superior Ibid. col. 1663, 24. col. 1615, 62. omnium nostrum mater communis sub sponsi sui Iesu Christi dispositione; in other things, as points of Government, the ordering that of right and custome ever to have belonged to the King assisted Si Episcopi tramitem ju­stitiae in aliquo transgrederen­tur, non esse Regis, (viz. alone,) sed c [...]onum judicium, sine publico & Ecclesias [...]ico Concilio illos nulla possessione privari debuisse; Re­gem id non rectitudinis zelo, sed commodi sui compendio fecisse. Malms. fol. 103. a. 18. reports this saying of a Legat. see n. 24. with his councell of Bishops, and others of the Clergy, who was therefore called Vicarius Christi, &c. as I shall shew hereafter more at large. Contra Crescon. Gramm [...]att. l. 3. cap. 51. to. 7. The Church of England holding that of S ^•. Augustine an undoubted truth, In hoc Reges, sicut eis divinitus praecipitur, Deo serviunt in quantum Reges sunt, si in suo reg no bona ju­beant, mala prohibeant, non solum quae pertinent ad huma­nam societatem, verum etiam quae ad divinam religionem: and accordingly our Kings, so far as any Laws or Re­cords of their actions are extant, from Ethelbert by the Saxons to the Conquest, and from the Normans to these later times, have upon occasion exercised a power, shewing such titles were not in vain conferred on them. Neither did any decision, though never so punctually [Page 22] had in Rome, unlesse the parties agreed, stint the strife, till the King concurred with it; as the frequent deter­minations on the behalf of Canterbury in point of supe­riority above York, found in Malms. de Pont. lib. 1. fol. 118, a. to fol. 120, b. Malmsbury and others, may teach us, which yet never received a finall end, till Edward the 3. under the great seal set a Antiquit. Britan. Eccle­siae, in Simone [...]slep. p. 269, 15. period to that long controversy.

21. But after the Pope began to think (or rather to say) himself had onely De auctori­tate & usu Pallii cap. 4. plenitudo Ecclesiasticae potestatis, De Electio­ne & electi potestate c. 4. that no Councell could give Laws to him, but all re­ceive strength from him, and the Canonists flattery ex­tended to declare him Lyndwood de temp. ordi­nand. cap. 2. ad verbum ex­presse. supra jura, & in [...]o sufficit pro ra­tione voluntas; his missives ran in an higher tone then formerly, and his commands, which were at first ac­cording to Philip. iiii. 3. th' example of S ^t. Paul joyned with exhor­tations, entreaties, and the like, to carry W ^m. Thorn. col. 1801, 53. Apostolica au­ctoritate comprimere; and to th' Archbishop demurring in th' execution of them, Ibid. 1814, 34. tuum candelabrum concutie­mus, & tantam praesumptionem cum gravibus usuris exi­gemus; and, Gervas. Dorobern. Ann. 1193. col. 1602, 64. si mandatum nostrum neglexeris vel distu­leris adimplere, quia justum est ut ei obedientia subtraha­tur qui sedi Apostolicae neglexerit obedire, venerabilibus fratribus suffraganeis tuis per scripta nostra mandavimus, ut tibi reverentiam non impendant. Quod si &c. tibi fece­ris exhiberi, s [...]ias te tunc ab Episcopali dignitate suspen­sum, &c. phrases and manners of writing denoting much more of auctority then was used by Popes in elder times. By which is manifest, the point in difference be­tween the Archbishop and the Pope to have been not the sending a Legat hither, but of one with a power a­bove him, to command the English Clergy, that is to re­move their dependency from him to Rome as a superior over him.

22. To his gaining which these usages of th' Arch­bishops were great stops, drawing so near an equality, and so pregnant testimonies of his no-divine right to [Page 23] meddle here, not easy to be removed, unlesse some from the Pope were admitted into the Kingdome, that might at least give an essay to the guiding the English Church after the papall interest: but that, how earnestly soever prest, came to no effect till 1125. Iohannes Cr [...] ­mensis, a person well understanding (as Ordericus Vitalis pag. 862. appeares by his carriage six years before at Reims) the designes of Rome, Simeon Dunelmensis Ann. 1125, col. 251, 61. came to the King in Normandy; where after some stay, his journey hither was permitted; with what qualifications I find not; but coming with Letters to Canterbury at Easter, performed th' Office of the day in a more eminent chair as an Archbishop, for so I English loco summi Pontificis, according to the Eadmer. pag. 107. 33. pag. 113, 4. Ger. Doro­bern. col. 1663, 55. phrase of those times, and, though a Cardinall priest, used in­signiis Pontisicalibus the habit of a Bishop: which being Inusuata no­vitas. Doro­bern. Ibid. an unusuall novelty, past not without scandall. But in a councell which he held and presided in at London, the Kingdom took more offence: I shall deliver it in my authors own words; Ger. Doro­bern. Acta [...]ont. ibid. col. 1663, 42. Totam Angliam in non modi­cam commovit indignationem: Videres enim rem eatenus regno Anglorum inauditam, Clericum scilicet Presbi­terii tantum gradu perfunctum, Archiepiscopis, Episcopis, Abbatibus, totiusque regni nobilibus qui confluxerant, in sublimi solio praesidere; illos autem deorsum sedentes, ad nutum ejus vultu & auribus animum suspen sum habentes. From whence we may conclude it a thing before not heard of, for any Legat, though a Cardinall, to pre­cede Bishops, (the first Councell in which they prece­ded Archbishops I take to have been the Councell of Vienna 1311. where th' Archbishop of York is noted to have been placed Thomas Stubs, Act. Pont. Ebor. col. 1730, 30. primus & praecipuus post Cardina­les, & post Trevirensem Archiepiscopum;) or be seated in a more eminent place over them; (I have Supran 18. shew'd they did not subscribe in English Councells above them;) that these mutations were scandalous to the nation.

23. As this is the first Ecclesiastick Synod called and [Page 24] managed by any Legat from Rome; so before his cre­dentiall Apud Sim. Dunelm. col. 252. 22. Letters from Honorius the 2. as well to the Lay as Clergy, I have not met with the Text Iohn xxi. 15, 16, 17. Pasce oves meas used to prove him the generall Pastor of all the World: it is true, Paschalis the 2. Apud Eadmer. pag. 115, 9. [...]. 1115. ten years before uses it to prove his auctority over Ecclesiarum praepositi. Bishops; but neither doth Eadmer. pag. 27, 37. Anselme 1095. produce it, neither doth this Cardinall at Ordericus Vitalis pag. 862, §. omnes. Reims 1119. mention it, though either of them did alleadge as many places of Scripture as were then com­mon to prove th' extent of his power; and Petrus Ble­sensis, that lived a little after, Petr. Ble­sens. Epist. 148. interprets it as spoken to all Bishops, and to import no other then Evangeli­zare: a certain signe, if that exposition were hatch't be­fore, it was not common, which afterward approved by De conside­ratione ad Eu­gen. lib. 2. cap. 8. S ^t. Bernard, and inserted into Ext. Com. de Majoritat. & obedient, c, 1. the Canon Law by Boniface the 8. about the year 1300. is now stood upon as the Basis of papall greatnesse. But to return to that we were on.

24. The Archbishop sensible of these indignities, proceeds not as his predecessor, by joynt Councell of the Bishops, Abbots and Nobility, but hath himself recourse to Rome (who already knew Malms. de Pont. lib. 1. fol. 131. b. 39. se convertere ad oratorum versutias, dummodo consulat suis profectibus) where the Pope, (which was Honorius the 2.) commit­ted unto him Gervas. Dorobern. col. 1663, 64. vices suas in Angliâ & Scotiâ, & Aposto­licae sedis Legatum constituit: So that he who before was Eadmer. pag. 14, 13. pag. 30, 9. pag. 93, 3. Primas Angliae, Scotiae & Hiberniae, necne adja­centium insularum, that none else Ibid. 58, 43. gerebat vices Aposto­licas in Britannia, and this of his own right, without any delegatory power, might now doing the same be said to do it by a power derived from Rome. An inven­tion highly advantagious to the Papacy: for before the King and Archbishop, or rather the Archbishop by the Kings will and appointment, had ever taken cognizance of all matters of Episcopacy; as the erection of Bishop­ricks, disposing and translating Bishops, &c. So Paschalis [Page 25] the 2. expostulates with Hen. the 1. Apud Ead­mer. p. 115. 48. & that praeter auctori­tatem nostram Episcoporum translationes praesumitis, &c. and the pag. 129, 52. seen. 20. deposing of them to have been in a Synod See Bed. lib. 4. cap. 2, 6 [...] Gervas. Do­robern. col. 1638, 37. Historians of all times before assure us, even unto Lanfrank, who Mat. Pa [...] 1095, pag. 20. 46. Ailredus col. 406, 10. attempted it upon small grounds a­gainst Wolstan. As for dividing Bishopricks, and erecting new where none were, Flor. Wi­gor. pag. 55 [...]. Theodore did five in Mercia cum consensu Regum & principum, (without ever send­ing to Rome) as he did others Beda lib. 3. cap. 7. lib. 4. cap. 6, 12. li. 5. cap. 19. elsewhere. And Henry the 1. long after placed Episcopall Chaires at Ely and Carlisle, without acquainting the Popes with it. It is true, Anselme an Italian, either not knowing the rights of the Kingdome, or rather out of a desire to interest the Pope in every thing, writes to him of Ely, that Eadmer. pag. 95, 50. de vestrae pendet auctoritate prudentiae to adde strength to Ecclesiastick ordinances of this nature; yet it is clear by his very Letter, the King, Bishops and Nobility had already concluded on it, with whom he had con­curr'd, asking Paschalis assent after the deed done: which shews rather he did it in civility, then of necessity, ne à posteris ulla praesumptione violetur, that no cavilling might arise in the future to the disturbance of an action well settled, that past by so great advice, as not onely the English Church, but the first Bishop of the world and Patriarch of the West joyned in seeing the need­fulnesse of it. And it is here not unworthy the remem­bring, that Q. Mary, how much so ever addicted to Rome, yet admitted the Gloce [...] and Chester in Parliamen [...] 1 Mar. 2. A­pril 1554. Parl. 2. item Parl. the 3. 12 November 1554. [...]. and [...] Ph. & Mar. Iournall des Seigneurs: yet the Act of reconciling this Kingdome to Rome, and confirming those Bishopricks by the Pope, past not till the 30. of November after, however they were reputed lawfull Bishopricks before. Bishops of those Sees her Fa­ther had erected during the schism (as they called it) to sit in Parliament, before any confirmation of them by the Pope.

25. Of these and the like, though cases proper for the Caus. 3. quaest. 6. cap. 7. & de [...], Epist. cap. 2. Bellarm. lib. 4. de Eccles. cap. 8. §. Ratio, &c. Papacy alone, yet being without scruple exercised [Page 26] in the Church of England, and no controul from Rome▪ it would not be easy to dispossesse the Archbishop of medling with, by strong hand, especially on an essay made before in the case of Wilfred, it being affir­med, Apud Malmsb. fol. 152, a. 34. quod esset contra rationem, homini jam bis à tota Anglorum Ecclesia damnato, propter quaelibet Aposto­lica scripta communicare: the way therefore of making him the Popes Legat was invented, by which those par­ticulars he did before without interruption of his own right, he (whom it was not easy to barre of doing them) might be said to act as his agent: which was a­bout 1127. this time first committed unto him of any Arch­bishop of Canterbury; though Baron. tom. 8. Ann. 676. n. 10. Baronius, not finding how the very same past before, fancies Theodore to have done them, cui totius Angliae à Romano Pontifice veluti Apostolicae sedis Legato cura credita erat; who certainly if he were his Legat, was very immorigerous in the case of Wilfred. But to leave that as a Chimaera not to be assented to, mentioned by no ancient author, it is true, not long after he conferr'd the title of Legatus natus on th' Archbishop, n. 40. p. 3 [...] of which hereafter.

26. To return to th' Archbishop, who came home with this Legatine power 1127. Florent. Wigorn. An­nis 1126. 1127. & alii. crowns the King at Windsor, and in May following holds a Councell at Westminster, cui praesedit ipse, sicut Apostolicae sedis lega­tus; which is the first Councell any Archbishop is noted to have held as a Papall Legat; and during his life, which was seven years, England did not see any other.

27. After his death the See of Canterbury lay two years vacant, so a fit time for the Pope to look this way, especially K. Stephen making it part of his title, that he was Apud Malmsbur. fol. 101. Io­hannes Ha­ [...]ulstad. col. 259, 9. Richardus Hagulstad. col. 314, 18. vid. col. 313, 32. confirmed by him in his Kingdome: therefore 1138. Innocentius the second sent hither Albericus Bishop of Hostia, the second stranger I find exercising the Legatine auctority in England; yet he was not at first received for one, but Gervas. Dorobern. col. 1344, [...]. vix tandem pro reverenti [...] [Page 27] Domini Papae. He indeed went farther then ever any had, for he not onely called the Clergy Apostolica auctoritate (as our Historians terme it) to a Synod, (I confesse he avoyds the word in his letters of summons, styling it Gervas. Dorobern. col. 1346, 58. colloquium, perhaps not to enter into dispute with the King, who then took himself to be the onely Eadmer. p. 6, 29. p. 24. 11. caller of them, and the allower of what they did) but did far­ther command the Prior and Convent of Canterbu­ry, &c. Ger. Dor. ibid. lin. 65. to chuse such an Archbishop, cui sacrorum canonum auctoritas in nullo valcat obviare, cui compro­vinciales Episcopi pariter debeant assentire, & cui Domi­nus Rex nec possit nec debet assensum suum juste denegare: but farther not at all intromitting himself. And in the Councell he held, amongst other particulars, he ordai­ned, that if any injured an Ecclesiastick person, Cap. 9. apud Gervas. Do­rob. 1348. & Richard. Ha­gust. 328. Nisi tertio admonitus satisfecerit, anathemate feriatur, neque quisquam ei praeter Romanum Pontificem, nisi mortis ur­gente periculo, modum poenitentiae finalis injungat. This is the first that by Canon, ought done in England was re­ferr'd to Rome, as having a greater power then the English Bishops to absolve: (of the Laws of Hen. the 1. I shall speak n. 30. hereafter.) But whether it were not here much regarded, or th' excesses used by King Stephen against certain Bishops, and the prohibiting a Councell held [...] Winchester to send to Rome, as Malms. fol. 103. a. 1. b. 54, 55. against the dignity of the realm, or that he freed of imprisonment desired to make so potent a party, as the Clergy then was, more of his side, I cannot say; but assuredly it was again renewed in a H. Hunt. fol. 225. a [...]6. Ann. 1142, 8. Steph. Councell at London about some four years after.

28. The same Pope 1139. conferr'd upon Henry, K. Stephens Brother, and the potent Bishop of Win­chester, this Legatine power, which was by him pub­lish't in a Councell at Winchester, where his faculties w [...]re read Malms. fol. 103. a. 31. bearing date the 1. March; and being as well Ger. Do­robern. col. 1343, 44. Angliae Dominus by reason of the power he held wi [...]h Stephen, as Apostolicae sedis Legatus, he called [Page 28] thither th' Archbishop that had then some contest with the Monks of St. Augustines, (whom the Pope gene­rally favour'd against him) referr'd to his decision from Rome, so that he caused both parties the W ^m. Thorne col. 1853, 32. second time to appear there before him 1143. as Legat, and by com­promise ended the businesse. Yet this calling of the Archbishop Gervas. Dorobern. col. 1665, 24. indignatus Theobald▪ unto him was not taken well: and the same year 1143. he did by Apostolick command re­store Ieremy, removed by Theobald, (notwithstanding his appeal to Rome) to be Prior of Canterbury: which re­stitution the said Prior did not think fit to stand by, but for avoiding trouble took an 100. marks to pay his debts, and placed himself in St. Augustines. By these carriages there grew great distasts between these two great Prelats: the one as Archbishop prohibited Win­chester Iohan. Ha­gulstad, col. 275, 42. in­terdixit Epi­scopo, Episco­pale & sacer­dotale officium. all Ecclesiastick functions, however the Popes Legat; and both apply themselves to the Pope; from whence our Historians do fetch the use of Appeals to Rome; as indeed there could not well be any cause of them before: for as the one case is the first ever any Archbishop was called out of his Diocese to make answer to any Legat as his Superior; so I believe it will be hard to give an example of ought done by th' Arch­bishop in his own Bishoprick till now alter'd by a forreign auctority. And here, having mentioned the introducing of Appeals, the reader will give me leave to digresse a little, both to shew what is meant by them, and the man­ner of prosecution of them; and then Num. 40. to return, and ob­serve the event of the Archbishops and Legats in the Court of Rome.

29. It cannot be denyed, the word Appeal to have been used in former times with reference to the Papacy. Malmsb. f. 149, a. 50. Cum praesul sedem Apostolicam appellasset, sayes Malms­bury of VVilfred; and a Councell held in Italy concern­ing him, Bed. lib. 5. cap. 20. & in Iugulpho MS. se [...] addi [...]ionibus eius, in Biblio [...]a Cotton▪ Apostolicam sedem de suâ causâ appellans▪ [Page 29] and of some others. Yet nothing is more certain then those in whose time this was did not at all hold the Pope to have any power of righting him, other then by inter­cession; not as a superior Court, by sentencing in his favour, to undo what had past Theodore; ( Stubs de Archiepisc, Ebor. col. 1691. 10. without whose assent the King could not have deprived him of his seat,) for when the Popes Malm. fol. 150, a, 43. Letters were brought hither for his restitution, Egfrid, with th' advise of his Bishops, not onely refused, but clapt VVilfred in pri­son; and after his death the Ibid. fol. 152. a▪ 32, 34, Pope sending others vita graves & aspectu honorabiles, Alfrith though he recei­ved the men with great reverence, yet would by no means admit the restauration they came about, but af­firmed it against reason to do it (he having been twice condemned) proper quaelibet Apostolica scripta. And as this was in a time when Christianity most flourished in this Nation, having in generall Beda lib. 4. cap. 2. fortissimos Christianos­que Reges; so of the Kings that did it, of Egfrid Apud Malmsbu [...]. f. 10. b, 23, 36 [...] Beda left, that he was piissimus & Deo dilectissimus: neither can he find any other thing to blame in Alfrith worthi­ly, and the Bishops that did Stubs de Archiepisc. Ebor. in Wil­frido col. 1691, 10. concur in the action were Bed. lib. 4▪ cap. 2. cap. 9. lib. 5. cap. 20. holy men, well seen in divine and secular learning; so that it is not imaginable any thing past them not war­ranted by the Doctrine and rules of this Church.

30. For the understanding of which, we are to know the word Appeal is taken severall wayes; sometimes Blasius Da­sium de prodi­tione appella­bat. Liv. lib. 26. such were those Appeals in Parliament, the 11. and 21. of Ric. the 2. which might be otherwise called accusa­tions. to accuse, sometimes for referring our selves to some one for his judgment; such was that of VVilfreds ap­pealing to Rome, as to a great spirituall Doctor and Church whose judgment was very venerable in the World, as of late Iohn Calvins and the Church of Ge­neva was to them of Scotland and Frankford, &c. ano­ther way we take it for removing a cause from an in­ferior to a superior Court or Iudge, that hath power of disannulling whatsoever the former did; and this is that our Historians affirm not to have been in use till af­ter [Page 30] 1140. It is certain, long after VVilfred Eadmer. pag. 39, 21, 30. the Bishops and Nobility did assure Anselme, that for any of the great ones, especially him, to have recourse to Rome without the Kings leave, to be inauditum & usibus ejus omnino contrarium; and therefore required of him an Oath, quod nunquam amplius sedem Sancti Petri, vel ejus vicarium, pro quavis quae tibi ingeri queat causa appelles. I know Anselm, an Italian, where the opi­nion of the Papall absolutenesse had now begun to root, did maintain this was Petrum abjurare, and that Christum abjurare, and is the first of our Bishops spake any thing in that sort; with whose sense the Kingdome did not concur in it. For it is manifest, in those dayes and after, Appeals to Rome were not common. In the year 1115. Apud Had­mer. p. 113, 3. Paschalis the 2. expostulates with Henry the 1. that Nullus inde clamor, nullum judicium ad sedem Apo­stolicam destinatur: and again, Ibid. p. 115. 33. vos oppressis Apostolicae sedis appellationem subtrahitis. And Anselme himself speaking of the proceeding of the King in a case by him esteemed onely of Ecclesiastick cognizance, lays down the manner to be, that it should be onely pag. 85, 41. ad singulos Episcopos per suas parochias, aut si ipsi Episcopi in hoc neg­ligentes fuerint, ad Archiepiscopum & primatem; ad­ding nothing of carrying it to Rome, of which I know no other reason, but that it was not then usuall to remove causes from the Primate thither. Yet after this, either the importunity of the Pope prevailed with the Henry the 1 ^st. King, or the passage was inserted after his dayes into the Lawes carry his name; (as some other in the same chapter may seem to have been) but certain in them though he give for a rule that of Pope Fabiani E­pist. 3. & Sixti 3. tom. 1. Concil. & apud Gratian. c. 3. q. 6. cap. 1. Leg. Hen. 1. cap. 5. p. 178. 28. Fabian or Sixtus 3. ibi semper causa agatur ubi crimen admittitur, yet a Bishop erring in faith, and on admonition appearing incorrigible, Leg. Hen. 1. pag. 179, 9. ad summos Pontifices (the Archbishops) vel sedem Aposto­licam accusetur. This is the onely case wherein I find any English Law approve a forreign judicature.

[Page 31]31. But whether from the countenance of this Law, or the great oppressions used by the Legat King Stephens Brother, or the frequency of them, it is certain, 1151. Appeals were held a Hunt. fol. 227. b. 7. & alii. cruell intrusion on the Churches Liberty; so as in the Assize at Clarendoun 1164. col­lected by the body of the Realm, Gervas. Dorobern. col. 1387. the 8. Chapter is solely spent in shewing the right of the Kingdome in that particular: which Epist. 159. pag. 254. Iohannes Sarisburiensis inter­prets, quod non appellaretur pro causâ aliquâ ad sedem Apostolicam, nisi Regis & Officialium suorum venia im­petra [...]a. Upon which the Bishop of London moved Alexander the third, Beckets cause might be determi­ned Gervas. Do­robern. col. 1396. appellatione remota: at which the Pope seems to be moved, and told him, haec est gloria mea quam alteri non dabo. And though it seems by a Apud Ho­veden, Ann. 1166. fo. 287. b. 44. apud Dicet. Ann. 1168. Letter of the same Prelat, the King would have restrained his power one­ly to such as had first made tryall of receiving justice at home, claiming ex antiqua regni institutione, ob civilem causam nullus clericorum regni sui fines exeat, &c. and that too, if amiss, would have corrected by th' advise of the English Church: yet while th' Archbishop lived, that would not be hearkened to; but after his death, at the peace which 1172. ensued between him and the Church of Rome, it was onely concluded, the King not to hinder Appeals thither in Ecclesiastick causes, yet so as a party suspected before his going was to give se­curity not to endeavour malum suum nec regni. But the Kingdom meeting in Parliament at Northampton 1176. not fully four years after, would not quit their interest, but did again renew th' Assize of Clarendoun, using in this particular somewhat a more close expression: Apud Ho­ved. fol. 314. b. 3. Iusticiae faciant quaerere per consuetudinem terrae illos qui à regno recesserunt, & nisi redire voluerint infra ter­minum nominatum, & stare in curia Domini Regis, ut­lagentur, &c. in effect the same as Gervasius Dorober­nensis well understood, who tells us, Gervas. Dorobern. Ann. 1176, col. 1433, 19. Rex Angliae [Page 32] Henricus convocatis regni primoribus apud Northampto­niam, renovavit assisam de Clarendonia, eamque prae­cepit observari; pro cujus execrandis institutis beatus mar­tyr Thomas Cantuariensis usque in septennium exula­vit, & tandem glorioso martyrio coronatus est.

32. After which the going to Rome remained during this Kings and his Son Richard's time, onely according to their pleasures, the Clergy lying under the penalty of this Law, if they did attempt farther then the Princes liking: of which we have a very pregnant example in the case of Geffrey Archbishop of York, K. Richards Bro­ther, who accused to Coelestinus 3 ^us that he did not onely Epist. Coe­lestini apud Hoveden. Ann. 1195. fol. 426. b. 26. refuse Appeals to Rome, but imprisoned those who made them; upon it the Pope Eadem Epist. commits the cause to be heard by the Bishop of Lincoln and others, who thereupon Idem, f. 427. a. 26. lin. 38. transfer themselves to York, where hearing the Testimonies of those appeared before them, assigned him a time to make his defence to the Pope. But the Archbishop being then well with his Brother, pretended he could not present himself in Rome Hoveden, Ann. 1195, fol. 427. a. 48. for the Kings prohibition, and the indisposition of the aire. Not long after the King and he fell so at odds, Ibid. f. 428. a. 42. quod praecepit il­lum dissaisiri de Archiepiscopatu suo, &c. Coelestinus upon this takes an opportunity to declare a suspension to be notifyed through all the Churches of his Diocese, injoyning, what the King had before, the Lay as well as the Clergy, Hoved. Ann. 1196. fol. 434. a. 23. ne ipsi Archiepiscopo vel officialibus ejus in tempor alibus respondere praesumant, donec de ipso Archiepi­scopo aliud duxerimus statuendum. The offence with his Brother still remaining, the Bishop expecting now no help at home, goes upon this to Rome, makes his peace with the Pope, and returns: but the King Ibid. fol. 435. b. 52. committed the [...]are even of the Spiritualls of his Archbishoprick to others, without permitting him or his Agents to meddle with ought, till about two years after he Ibid. fol. 442. b. 19. reconciled himself to the Crown; after which he gave Innocen­tius [Page 33] 3 ^us occasion to write, Hoveden, Ann. 1 [...]01. fol. 465. a. 21 Non excusare te potes ut de­bes, quod illud privilegium ignoraris, per quod omnibus injuste gravatis facultas patet ad sedem Apostolicam ap­pellandi, cum & iu ipse aliquando ad nostram audientiam appellaris; and a little after, Nec auctoritatem nostram attendis, nec factam tibi gratiam recognoscis, nec appella­tionibus defers quae interponuntur ad sedem Apostoli­cam, &c. And about the same time Hoveden, Ann. 1195. fol. 430. b. 37. Robert Abbot of Thorney, deposed by Hubert th' Archbishop, was laid in prison a year and half without any regard had of the Appeal by him made to the Pope: and this to have been the practice during King Richards time, the continued quarrells of Popes for not admitting men to appeal un­to them doth fully assure as.

33. But Innocentius 3 ^us having prevailed against King Iohn, and the Clergy great instruments in obtaining Magna Charta from that Prince, either in favour of them, or for some other reason, there was inserted, Magna Charta apud Mat. Paris pag. 258, 53. Lond. 1640. Liceat unicuique de caetero exire de regno nostro & redire salvò & securè per terram & per aquam, salva fide nostra, nisi in tempore guerrae per aliquod breve tempus: which clause seems likewise to have been in that of Henry the 3. to his Fathers Mat. Paris Ann. 1224. pag. 323, 28. in nullo dissimilis: after which it is scarce imaginable how every petty cause was by Appeals removed to Rome, and th' Archbshop forced to appear before any had the least auctority from thence.

The Popes themselves wise men saw th' inconve­nience, that these carriages must end either in rendring th' Archbishop contemptible, by taking all power out of his hands, or the Realm resume its ancient right, and prohibit the carrying ought beyond seas, or admit­ting any Legat into the Kingdom; thought of the way of granting severall priviledges to the Archbishoprick, which first began about the time of Innocentius the 2. whom others followed.

34. Gregory the ninth therefore moved by one of [Page 34] them (which seems to be St. Edmund) writes thus unto him: Bulla Gre­gor. ix. in an­tiquo MS. dat. Interamnae 27. Iunii, 1236. Vt cum appellationis remedium non ad defensio­nem malignantium, sed ad oppressorum subsidium sit in­ventum, yet th' Archbishop attempting sometimes excessus corrigere subditorum, quidam eorum, ut correctio­nem effugiant, appellationes frustratorias interponunt, quibus si cite pro reverentia sedis Apostolicae humiliter deferatur, illi ex impunitate deteriores effecti pejora prae­sumunt, & alii eorum exemplo redduntur ad vitia pronio­res; unde humiliter postulastis, &c.—ut providere super haec solita diligentia deberemus: ut igitur auctoritati tuae in rectis dispositionibus nihil tali praetextu deesse contin­gat, fraternitati tuae praesentium auctoritate concedimus, ut, non obstante Frivola Ap­pellatio quae dicitur, vide Lindwood cap. 2. verbo frivole, de Ap­pellationibus. scil. quae vana & inanis—vel quando nulla causa est ex­pressa, vel non legitima, dato quod sit vera, vel licet sit le­gitima, est ta­men manifeste falsa. Et vide ibid. verbo Pallietut. frivolae appellationis objectu, libere va­leas in corrigendis subditorum tuorum excessibus officii tui debitum exercere.

35. At Viterbo 4. Martii, 1235. And for that his Agents here in their citations of th' Archbishop did not use that respect unto him which was fit, but as Gervasius Dorobernensis observes of one of them, Col. 1665, 23. Legati privilegium plusquam deceret extenderet in immensum, suumque Archiepiscopum & Episcopos Angliae ut sibi occurrerent quolibet evocaret; the same Pope did therefore declare, that, cum nimis indecens videatur, ut per literas Apostolicas tacito Sic MS. sed legendum tuae. tuo nomine dignitatis inter privatas personas stare judicio compellaris, nos fraternitatis tuae precibus inclinati, auctoritate tibi praesentium indulgemus, ut per literas à sede Apostolicâ im­petratas quaede dignitate tua non fecerint mentionem re­spondere minime teneris; &c. Dat. Viterbii 4. Non. Martii, Pontif. nono.

36. At Peru­sium 6 Maii 1235. And because th' Archbishop had on many slight occasions been drawn beyond seas, to the great im­poverishing th' Episcopacy, the same Pope two months after writes, Ea propter, venerabilis in Christo frater, tuis supplicationibus inclinati, fraternitati tuae auctoritate praesentium indulgemus, ut per literas Apostolicas extra [Page 35] Angliam invitus non valeas conveniri, nisi de indulgentia hujusmodi fecerint eaeliterae mentionem, aut per te aliquod factum fuerit per quod sit indulgentiae huic derogatum. Dat. Perusii 4. Non. Maii, Pontificat. nono.

Innocentius 4. At Lions the 19 September ut nullus sine speciali Apostolicae sedis licentia, praeter Legatos ipsius ab ejus latere destinatos, in personam tuam praesumat excommunicationis sententiam promulgare. Lugduni 13. Kalend. Octob. Pontif. 4.

37. It would be tedious to repeat all the bulls found in the said old MS. and other books since 1130. (for before it seems there was none in this kind) to conserve some power in th' Archbishoprick, yet so as it might ever depend on Rome; and how much the Papacy gained by these, every man sees.

I. The right of th' Archbishoprick was, none by ap­peal might remove any Ecclesiastick cause from his judi­catory: the Pope grants, he shall proceed notwith­standing a frivolous Appeal.

II. The right was, See before n. 17. he was not at all under any Legat: the grant is, he should not be tyed to answer, if they did not mention his dignity in their citations.

III. The right was, he should not be drawn beyond the seas (of which in the next:) the grant is, he should not be compell'd to go, unlesse mention were made of that Bull.

IIII. The question was, Cap. 2. n. 17▪ whether the Pope might ex­communicate any within the Diocese of Canterbury: the grant is, None but a Legate de latere should th' Arch­bishop.

Yet certainly Popes did what they well could, retain­ing to themselves that vast power they then pretended, to conserve in the Archbishoprick some auctority.

38. But the frequent citing him and others out of the Realm, and the carrying their causes to Rome, did not at all satisfy the subject; whereupon the body of the Kingdome, Apud Mat. Paris p. [...]. in their querulous letter devised and sent by them to Innocentius 4 ^tus. 1245, (or rather to the [Page 36] Councell at Lions) claim as an especiall priviledge, That no Legat ought to come here, but on the Kings desire, Note, this is omitted in the copy of this letter in Mat. Paris which is found in o­ther MS. copies of the same, as in one my learned friend M ^r. W ^m. Dugdale helped me to the sight of, the Book it self belong­ing to M ^r. Roper of Lin­ [...]olus Inne, in which it is fol. 117, b. and ought to be in all; for in the Gravami­na Angliae sent to the same Pope 1246. one is, quod Anglici extra regnum in causis aucto­ritate Apostoli­câ trahuntur. Mat. Paris pag. 699, 10. & ne quis extra regnum trahatur in causam: and at the revising of Magna Charta by Edward the first, the former clause was left out, since when none of the Clergy might go beyond seas but with the Kings leave, as the Regist. 193, b. Cook, Instit. 3. pag. 179. writs in the Register, and the Parl. at Cambridge 12. Ric. 2. cap. 15. apud Henricum Knighton col. 2734, 40. 5. Ric. 2. cap. 2. Acts of Parlia­ment assure us; and what is more, if any were in the Court of Rome, the King called them Hen. Knighton col. 2601, 44. home, not per­mitting any to go or abide there longer then his pleasure. Yet I do not say these times do not furnish examples of Appeals or recourse thither, or receiving commands from thence; I know the contrary: but it was onely between those, and in such cases, as the King (holding good correspondency with the Pope) and State did ei­ther tacitely connive at, as in matters of small moment, or expressely give allowance unto: for if otherwise, no person was so great, but he was forced to gain his par­don for the offence. To which purpose th' example of the Henry Beaufort. rich Bishop of Winchester may not be unfitly re­membred, who being a Cardinall of the Kings blood, was employed by Martyn the 5. as generall against the Bohemians, and to that end erected the Crosse 1429. 8. Hen. 6. but two years after caused a petition to be ex­hibited in Parliament, Rot. Parl. 10. Hen. 6. n. 16. That he the said Cardinall nor none other should be poursued, vexed, impleded, or grieved by the King, his heyres or successors, nor by any other per­son, for cause of any Provision, or offence, or misprision done by the said Cardinall against any statute of Provisions, or per cause of any exemption, receipt, acceptation, admission or execution of any Bulls Papall to him in any manner made: Which was granted, and shews that without it he had been lyable to punishment for his accepting and receiving of them. And here it is not unworthy the re­membring, [Page 37] that this was the first Cardinall England ever saw a Privy Councellor. He having sometimes sought that dignity in Henry the 5 ^ths time, upon the news, the Archbishop of Cant. gave the King notice of it, in a letter yet extant; which did so affect that Prince, as he was sometimes heard to say, Halle 20. Hen. 6. The com­plaint made by the Duke of Glocester a­gainst the said Cardi­nall, Art. 2. that he had as lieve set his crown beside him, as see him wear a Car­dinals hat. But he being soon after taken away, and the honour conferr'd on this Prelate in Iune 1426. by Martin the 5. Rot. Parl. 8. Hen. 6. n. 17. at his coming into England, the Lords of his Ma ^ties Councell caused him to make a Protesta­tion for his comportment in the future; and the 8 ^th of Hen. the 6. it was agreed by the Lords in Parliament, he should be on the Kings part required to attend his Ma ^ties Counsells, sub protestatione tamen subsequente, quod quotiens aliqua, materiae, causae, vel negotia ipsum Dominum Regem aut regna seu dominia sua ex parte una, ac sedem Apostolicam ex parte altera concernentia, hujus concilii regiis communicanda & tractanda fuerint, idem Cardinalis se ab hujusmodi consilio absentet, & com­municationi earundem causarum, materiarum, & nego­tiorum non intersit quovis modo, &c. and yet his former engagement made to the Councell to be firme and in­violable. Upon which the said Cardinall the 18. of December 8. H. 6. Ann. 1429. after his thanks to the King and Lords, and his admitting the said Protesta­tions tanquam rationi consonas, was received for one of the Councell. But I return to that I was treating of.

39. The truth of this barring Appeals is so constantly averr'd by all the ancient monuments of this Nation, as one not finding how to deny it, falls upon another way, Philip Scot of Schism of England pag▪ 174. that if the right of Appeals were abrogated, it concludes not the See of Rome had no jurisdiction over this Church, except one should be so senselesse as to imagine the Prefect of the Pretorian Court were not subject to th' Emperors auctority, because it was not law­full [Page 38] full to appeal from them, according to the Law in the ff. de officio Praefect. Irae­tor. leg. unica. Vide Cassio­dor. lib. 6. rariar. 3. Digests. To which I answer, that if it be granted (which is very disputable) this Law is to be extended to th' Em­peror, yet it proceeded from himself, who might limit his own power: but he is desired to consider, this ca­non of Appeals did not from any Pope; for the Africans did, and the Church of England doth maintain it as an inherent right of their own, to give Laws in that par­ticular, and ever had strong contests with the Papacy about it, which held it an honour not to be parted with; and they opposing him in it, must of necessity have held that superintendency he exercised over them not to be jure divino, for then no man could have exempted himself from having recourse unto him. In France there are severall Courts of Parliament from which no Ap­peal lies, who receiving that priviledge from the King, it cannot be said to be in diminution of his Royalty, be­cause that they have, he gave: but if ever any of them should claim this as of their own right, denying the King to have at any time a power of intermedling with them, I shall leave the objector to draw what conse­quence he will from it; for my part I can no other, but that they esteemed themselves very little his subjects.

40. The reader will pardon this digression, which I have the longerstood upon, to give him the more full satisfaction how Appeals were first brought in, and how pursued; I shall now, in what manner the Legat and Archbishop prosecuted theirs: who being W ^m. Thorn col. 1804, 44. both before Lucius the 2. 1144. the Bishop of Winchester was Iohan. Ha­gulstad. col. 273, 61. Ann. 1145. dis­mist his legatine commission; and the Pope finding with how great difficulty the Ecclesiastick affairs of this King­dome could be managed by any Legat without the Archbishop of Canterbury, thought of a very subtile invention to conserve his own auctority, and not have any crossing with that Prelat, which was to create him and his successors Legatinati; by which, such things [Page 39] as he did before, and had a face of enterfeering with the Papal plenitude, and were not so easy to devest th' Arch­bishop of exercising, he might be said to do by a Le­gatine power: of which it was not long before the Pope made use, as is to be seen in his De Officio Legati cap. 1. Decretalls; where Alexander the 3. resolves he could not hear jure metro­politico matters Episcopall that came not unto him per appellationem, (that is in a legall way) but jure Lega­tionis he might such as were brought unto him onely per quaerimoniam: an invention Vide [...]o­chell. Decreta Eccles. Galsi­can. pag. 918. Concil. Tri­dent. sess. 5. cap. 1. 2. & multis aliis lo­cis. often practic't after­ward, and highly advantagious to the Court of Rome, as what made Bishops but his Deputies.

41. The In Theo­baldo p. 115, 47. edit. 1572. Antiquitates Britannicae Eccles. and from him Seculo xii. p. 328, 15. Harpsfield, speak as if this honour were first be­stowed on Theobald; which it seems to me could not be, till the taking it away from Winchester by Lucius the 3. after the death of Innocentius 2. Ann. 1195. col. 679, 7. Diceto sayes, Cae­lestinus 3. (about some ten years after Lucius) bestowed on Hubert plenitudinem potestatis in officio Legationis in­auditam à seculis. I confesse I do not well understand in what it did consist, that had not been formerly heard of, to whom the Pope had committed Ger. Doro­bern. col. 1663, 64. Vices suas in Anglia & Scotia; but it fully proyes that power derived from The Bishop of Ely 1191. says Rich. the 1. acqui­red him that honour. Ger. Dorobern. col. 1565, 46. and the King himself ex­postulates in Hoveden with the Bishop of Hostia, that it cost 1500. marks. Ho­ved. Ann. 1190. col. 380. b. 14. So that the Court of Rome knew how to turn this, not­withstanding all opposition, to its no small advantage. Rome was then looked on as a thing newly crept in. But whosoever did first confer it, the matter is not great: certain it is, by it the Papall auctority was not a little in time increas't, there being none of the Clergy almost to question ought-came from Rome, the Archbishop, on whom the rest depended, himself operating but as a Delegate from thence.

42. To which purpose it may not unfitly be observed, that when the Papacy did first attempt the exempting some great monasteries from the jurisdiction of their Or­dinary, it was Eadmer▪ 62, 34▪ Malms. f▪ 137. a, 5, salva primatis reverentia, or, as Malms­bury [Page 40] explains it, Archiepiscopi tantum nutum in legiti­mis spectaturus. But however thus carefully penned not to thwart with th' Archbishop, being brought hither was taken away by Lanfrank, not permitted to be made use of, the Abbot finding no other way to regain it but Eadmer. ibid. lin. 37. multorum preces. Yet afterward the Pope without scruple exempted them not onely from their Diocesan, but even such as were under th' Archbishops nose, with all pertaining to them, were taken out of his own juris­diction; and he who at first preserved others rights, had those houses now at an Vide Petri Blesens. E­pist. 68. easy rate removed from his own. A fact of infinite advantage to the Papacy, by which it had persons of learning in all parts, who depending wholy on it, defended what was done to be by one had a power of doing it; and he who at first did solely Eadmer. pag. 58, 44. agere vices Apostolicas in Anglia, was G. Dorob. col. 1663, 55. under no Legat, per­mitted no Bul from Rome to be made use of in England, but by his approbation, was so far now from taking them away from the bearers, as Vide bul. Iohan. 22. apud Gu­lielm. Thorn, col. 2041, 1. private Clerks by de­putation from thence did sit his superiors in determining differences between him, and others who by strength were taken from his jurisdiction.

43. After which, Popes having gained an entrance, found means to reduce the grant of Legatus natus to no more then stood with their own liking, by inventing a new sort of Legat styled Legatus à latere ( De Officio Legati cap. 9. Gloss. ad ver­bum Com­missam. by reason of his near dependance on the Popes person) who em­ployed in matters of concernment, at his being here the power of the former slept: Vide Ger. Dorobern. Ann. 1188. col. 1532, 55. & 1533, 8. which distinction of Le­gats seems to me to have had its birth after 1180. first applyed by any of our writers to Hoveden, Ann. 1189. fol. 377. a. 10. Iohannes Anagninus Cardinalis 1189. by Hoveden; which style yet Diceto col. 649, 42. Ger. Dorob. others who then lived do not give him. Of this Legat it is that Habetur in vita Henrici Chichley ab Arthuro Duck edita. 1617. Henry Chichley in a letter, yet extant under his own hand, wrote to Henry the 5. that Be inspection of Lawes [Page 41] and Chronicles was there never no Legat à latere sent in to no lond, and specially in to your rengme of Yngland, witoute great and notable cause. And thei whan thei came, after thei had done her legacie abiden but litul wyle, not over a yer, and summe a quarter or ij. monthes as the nedes requeryd: And yet over that he was tretyd with or he cam in to the lond, whon he schold have exercise of his power and how myche schold bee put in execution: An aventure after hee had bee reseyved hee would have used it to largely to greet oppression of your peple: as indeed if he stayed long, he sometimes gained the censure of being M. Paris Ann. 1240. pag. 524. 43. occultus ini­micus regni; but this was not till the Popes had brought th' Archbishops much under, by laying a necessity on them of receiving the Pall from Rome, and at the taking of it of making profession de fidelitate & canonica obe­dientia, that is, had obliged them by Oath to defend rega­lia Sancti Petri. Of which, because I find th' introducing (not much touched by our writers) a great means to ad­vance this forraign power, it will not be amisse to say somewhat; and first of the Pall.

44. The Pallium (from whence our English word Pall) was a garment with which the Professors of Arts, as Grammar, Rhetorick, Musick, might cloath them­selves (as it seems to me by De Pallio cap. 6. Tertullian they did); yet was held most proper for such as professed Philosophy: And therefore when a Aul. Gellius Noct. At [...]ic. lib. 9. cap. 2. begging fellow came to a noble Roman palliatus & crinitus, being asked what he was, the man half angry replyed he was a Philoso­pher, & mirari cur quaerendum putasset quod videret: to which the Gentleman returned, Barbam & Pallium, Philosophum nondum video. From whence I gather, it was for the most peculiar to them. So Euseb. Hist. lib. 6. cap. 13. Graec. k. Eusebius shewes on Heraclas, [...] taking the habit of a Philo­sopher, notwithstanding his being a Christian, retained it: and lib. 8. cap. 21. at the martyrdom of Porphyrius a disciple of Pamphilus, he describes that [...] to be [Page 42] a short cloak or Pall covering the shoulders.

45. But it seems the primitive Christians in wearing of it did attribute some Sanctity to the garment; for Tertul. de Pallio cap. 6. grande pallii beneficium est (saith Tertullian) sub cujus recogitatu impii mores vel erubescunt: whereupon the Concil Gan­grense circa Ann. 350. can. 12. Councell of Gangra, not an 100. years after, pro­nounced him Anathema used the Pallium quasi per hoc habere se justitiam credens, &c. Now from the danger of superstition of the one side, and the being especially worne by Philosophers of the other, I am apt to think it became in the end proper onely to some Bishops, who might challenge it as learned Philosophers, yet not at all likely to attribute more to the Robe then reasonable; and in time, either by collation of Emperors, or other­wise, appropriated to some particular Churches, who having that mark, were after the seats of Archbishops for the most part. For though Pallium ni­hil aliud est ni­si discretio in­ter Archiepi­scopum & ejus suffraga­neos. Alcui­nus de Divinis Officiis cap. quid significent vestimenta. Alcuinus be of opinion the Pall is nothing but a distinction between an Arch­bishop and his suffraganes: yet, underfavour, I conceive that must be taken of th' acception of the word in the time he lived; not as used in St. Gregories dayes, who gives Gregor. lib. 12. Epist. 15. Augustine at the bestowing the Pall upon him the title of Archbishop no more then he doth Greg. lib. 7. Epist. 112. Syagrius Bishop of Austun in Burgundy; which Town, not­withstanding that guift by St. Gregory, was never reputed to have other then an Episcopall chair, and suffragan to the Archbishop of Lions to this day. So that certainly, at first, all that had the Pall were not eo nomine Arch­bishops, to whom it became especially proper after the Emperor relinquisht it to the Popes disposing, who at first no question had a good part in the conferring of it himself.

46. The deed is yet extant by which Valentinian be­stowed it on the Church of Ravenna, about the year 430. I know Hieron. Rubeus Hist. Ravennae. Italia Sacra, to. 2 col. 331. & 332. some, who find not how to deny it, hold this an honourable vestment, such as Emperors them­selves [Page 43] wore; which opinion to. 5. Ann. 432. n. 93. Baronius justly confutes, and rather thinks it forged: yet he, Baron. to. 7. Ann. 536. n. 17. citing out of Brevic. Li­berat. cap. 21. to. 2. concil. Li­beratus, that Anthemius expell'd the Church of Con­stantinople, Pallium quod habuit, imperatoribus reddidit, & discessit, gives no glosse how he could return to the Emperor his Pall and depart, if he had nothing to do with it: and it is manifest, in Gregory the greats dayes, that Church did not onely prescribe for the use of the Pall, but for doing it contrary to the will and opinion of that Father. And the same Doctor elsewhere Lib. 1. Epist. 27. saith, he had dealt apud piissimos dominos, the Emperors, to send him Anastasius, concesso usu Pallii: and afterward being desired by Brunichilda to grant it to Syagrius, (of whom before) he shews his readinesse, Greg. lib. 6. Epist. 5. In­dict. 1. propter quod & sere­nissimi Domini Imperatoris prona voluntas est, & concedi haec omnino desider at. So that certainly, at the beginning, if Princes did not bestow it, yet it was not done against their wills; which after-times did in Europe solely appro­priate to the Pope: who yet gave it not against their li­king; as Diceto Ann. 1142. col. 508. Lucius the 2. sending it to the Bishop of Win­chester, who yet never made use of it, teacheth us.

47. But what this Pall imported, or what the re­ceiver had of advantage by it, writers I think do not al­wayes agree. Lib. 1. E­pist. 136. apud Baron. to. 2. Ann. 216. n. 15. & to. 7. Ann. 553. n. 7. Isidorus Pelusiota, who writ about the year 430, is of opinion, the Bishop, as a type of Christ, wears that cloak of wool, to shew himself imitator of the great shepheard that will bear the strayed sheep on his shoulders. Lib. 7. Epist. 129. Indic. 2. St. Gregory sayes, it signifies humility, justice, &c. I have shew'd before Alcuinus his opinion of it. But what soever signification it was at first thought to carry, certainly, the necessity of fetching it from Rome was not so urgent, as in these later the Papall interest made it esteemed. We do not read that ever Lauren­tius or Mellitus received thence the Pall; yet no man doubts of their being as lawfull Archbishops as Augu­stine was. Itin. Cambr. lib. 2. cap. 1. Hoved. Ann. 1199. fol. 453. b Giraldus Cambrensis and Hoveden agree, the [Page 44] Bishops of St. Davids in Wales did use the Pall, till Sam­son, about the time of the Saxons, flying from an in­fection, carryed it with him; yet neither of them report him to have fetch't it from Rome: nor after the wanting it, did the rest of the Bishops there either refuse his con­secration, deny obedience to the See, or make profes­sion to any other, before Henry the first induced them by force. But to come to the Saxons: after Paulinus, there are five in the Catalogue of York expressely Thom. Stubbs in­vit. Archiepi­scop. Ebor. col. 1697. 2. said to have wanted it, (amongst which Wilfred, that Bed. lib. 5. cap. 20. Vide lib. 4. cap. 12. ruled all the North as his Bishoprick) yet are reputed both Arch­bishops and Saints; and of others in that series it will not be easy to prove they ever used it. Albertus the 8. Bishop about 767. had it not till the seventh year Sim. Du­ne [...]m. Epist. ad Hugonem col. 78, 49. & T. Stubs, col. 1697, 15. accepti Episcopatus: nor Ibid. col. 79, 25. & col. 1698, 57. Adilbaldus or Ethelbaldus the 14. Anno 895. till the fourth year postquam acceper at Episco­patum. An undoubted argument that Canon of Pelagius, recorded both by Part. 5. can. 136. Ivo and Dist. 100. cap. 1. Gratian, that no Metro­politane should defer above three months sending for it to Rome, was never received in this Church. Lib. 7. Epist. 5. Gre­gory the great sayes, it ought not to be given, nisi fortiter postulanti: and the same Lib. 4. Epist. 44. Ind. 13. Father with a Councell at Rome Anno 595. decreed, pro pallio omnino aliquid dare prohibeo. So that in those times the one side perhaps did not much urge the taking of it, nor the other greatly seek after a thing brought small advantage, and was so far to be fetch't.

48. But after the Court of Rome began to raise to it self a revenue from other Churches, this Pallium, that was no other then a distinctive ornament, not to be payed for, began to be set at so immense a rate, that Florent Wigorn. pag. [...]95. & In­gulph. fol. 508. a. 53. Malms. f. 41. b. 39. Ca­nutus going to Rome 1031. did mediate with Iohn the 19 that it might be more easy to his prelats: in which though he had a favourable answer, yet in Hen. the 1. his time it was so much, th' Archbishop of York could not pay the money, without an Graviter mutuatam, Eadmer. pag. 98, 30. heavy debt. Mat. Paris pag. 274, 4. Mat. Paris [Page 45] doth intimate as if Walter Gray, translated from Wor­cester to that See 1215, had not his Pall at lesse then ten thousand pounds: accepto pallio (saith he) Episcopus me­moratus rediit in Angliam, obligatus in curia Romana de decem millibus librarum estirlingorum; which was a­bout the silver of 30000 ^l. now, Coin being then after the rate of 20 ^d. the ounce. But after times, according to the Bishop In Catalog. Episc. in fiue Archiepise. tam Cant. quam Ebor. of Landaffe, reduced it to the certainty, that each Bishop payed 5000. duckets for it, every one of the value of 4 ^s. 6 ^d. our money: which yet I do not see how to make agree with the Autiq. Bri­tan. Lond. pag. 382, 32. Hannoviae pag. 327, 48. Antiquit. Brit. Ec­clesiae, that speakes onely of 900. aureos ducatos payed by Cranmer.

49. But to omit the gain came by the garment; that certainly was a means of drawing a great obligation from all Archbishops to the Papacy: for about 1002. a new oath de fidelitate & canonica obedientia was devised, to be tender'd every Archbishop at the reception of it. For the more full understanding of which, we are to know, VVilliam the first, after he had settled the King­dome in quiet, wholy possest of it, would not in any Vide Baron▪ to. 11. Ann. 1071. n. 21, 25. & inter Lanfranci Epist. 7. pag. 304. kind acknowledge a farther obedience to Rome then his predecessors had; but maintained the rights of the King­dome in every thing, against the liking of that Court in many particulars, barring all men for taking any for Pope, but whom he designed; insomuch as after Eadmer. pag. 25, 40. Vide Lanfran­ci Epist. 59. pag. 329. col. 1. §. Non­lando. Gregory the 7. 1084. till 1095. about 11. years, there was no Pope acknowledged in England; denying any to receive letters from thence, but acquainting him with them, and many more; of which elsewhere: all which being exercised by him, were never questioned during his time, nor while Lanfrank lived after him, (though he hath been ever reputed an holy man.) But Anselme succeeding in his seat, great contentions arose between him and VVilliam the second: The Eadmer. pag. 38. p. 39. peri [...]. King with the Nobility pressing him, as the usage of the Realme, [Page 46] not to depend on Rome as of necessity: he, on the other side, Ibid. p. 40, 5. 32. deciating all such customes to be contrary to Divinity, right, &c. chose rather to live an exile all that Kings time, then any way submit to those customes, had been practis't, never disputed or questioned by any Archbishop here before.

50. But, that Prince being soon after taken away, and Paschalis the 2. succeeding almost at the same time, (considering, as it seems, by what weak bands forraign Bishops were tyed to the Papacy, how easy it was for them to fall from it; that Lanfranc. Epist. 8. pag. 305. col. 1. Gregory the 7 ^th. was not satisfied even with Lanfranks carriage in Episcopali honore positus, who restrained his obedience to cano­num praecepta; that Anselme alone had opposed the whole body of the Kingdome; that every Prelat might be neither of his temper or opinions,) framed an oath, the effect of which you may see in Diceto col. 663, 6. Ann. 1191. & in Mat. Paris and others, the Note, where you read in the lives of the Abbots p. 140, 22. regalem, and in his Hist. p. 414, 22. regalis, both should be regalia, for so we find it at the end of the Councell of Vienna, 10. 4. concil. gen. Romae 1608. & 1612. agree­ing with an old Copy of that oath I have seen in th' Exchequer, which the Decretalls de jure jurando cap. 4. read thus: Pa­patum Romanae Ecclesiae & regulas Sanctorum Patrum adjutor er [...], &c. but Ordericus Raynal­dus 10. 13. Ann. 1233. n. 65. citing out of the records in the Vatican the oath St. Edmund Archbishop of Canterbury took, reads it rightly regalia. full which every Arch­bishop at the reception of the Pall was to render. At the tendring this, one in Sicily made a scruple of taking it, as that Nec ab Apostolis post Dominum, nec in conciliis inveniri posse statutum; the like did some Baron. 10. 12. Ann. 1102. n. 6, 7, 8. in Polonia: to whom the Pope answers, as in cap. De electione & electi potes [...]ate cap. 4. significasti, objur­gatorily, quasi Romanae Ecclesiae legem concilia ulla prae­fixerint. And going on with the designe, whereas at the assuming of this Pall by Anselme 1095. it was no otherwise then thus, Eadmer. p. 34, 33. Pallium super altare delatum ab Anselmo assumptum est, atque ab omnibus pro reveren­tia Sancti Petri suppliciter deosculatum, &c. at the taking of it by Raulf 1115. his immediate successor, we find it with this addition, Eadmer. p. 113, 43. Sicque delatum super Altare sal­vatoris pallium est, & à Pontifice inde susceptum, facta [Page 47] prius de fidelitate & canonica obedientia professione. Dei [...]de pro reverentia beati Petri ab omnibus deoscula­tur, &c. Which profession being never met with as made by any Archbishop of Cant. before, but frequently after by such as were his near successors, as Diceto col. 534, 8. Ger. Dorober. col. 1307. 2. Tho. Becket, Baldwine, &c. we must conclude him to have been the first from whom it hath ever been required. I know De Rom. Pont. lib. 3. cap. 11. §. Iu­ramentum. Bel­larmine interprets a Bishops returning out of schisme 602. and voluntarily by oath promising to live in com­munion with the Pope, to be a swearing of obedience to that chair: but certain there is a difference between obeying and living in communion; (of which see cap. 7. n. 4.) between an oath inforced, and one voluntarily taken. After this; as wayes to augment the Court, ma­ny priviledges were annexed to it; De Elect. & Elect. potest. cap. 28. §. 2. verbo praete­rea. as that none be­fore his receiving that ornament might convocate coun­cells, make Chrisme, dedicate Churches, ordain Clerks, consecrate [...]Bishops, that being De auctor. & usu Pallii cap. 3. Vid. concil. Late­ranense sub In­nocentio 3 ⁰. cap. 3. Pontificalis officii plenitu­do, till he had it, none to be styled an Archbishop; things added after mens holding a necessity of seeking it, did so much contribute to the Papall advantage, both in point of honour and profit. For it is manifest, Lanfrank, Anselme and Raulf did dedicate Eadmer. pag. 22, 19. Churches, Ibid. pag. 6, 46. pag. 23, 31. pag. 111, 6, 18, 32. consecrate Bishops and Abbots, were called Ibid. pag. 23, 42. p. 111, 32. & passim apud Histori­cos. Arch­bishops, whilst they wanted it.

51. Now the ice broken, this Oath (at first required onely of Archbishops when they took the Pall) was by De jureju­rando cap. 4. Gregory the 9, mutatis mutandis, imposed on Abbots and Bishops. About 1235. came into England Mat. Paris Vit. Abbat. pag. 140, 31. occulta clausa sub bulla, the Mat. Paris Hist. major. pag. 410, 39. like to which had not been seen, was profered to Iohn 23. Abbot of St. Albans unacquain­ted with it, when he could not Vit. Abbat. pag. 140, 39. ab illa obligatione resi­lire; who is therefore noted, that Ibid. pag. 141, 49. primo invitus & dolens Romanorum jugum subiit servitutis, and that Ibid. pag. 142, 1. prae omnibus Romanorum oppressionibus novis & inauditis coe­pit [Page 48] molestari, &c. The thing I find of greatest exception is, the obligation injoyning them to visit Rome, which being in pursuance of the 26. chapter of the Councell of Lateran, held onely 20. years before, is censured Mat. Par. Vit. Abbat. pag. 133, 23. pag. 141, 52, 56. Damnum, gravamen, praejudicium, injuria, jactura, as that which alter'd the nature of the Church, which had been from the foundation libera & ingenua, and was thus brought to serve the ends of the Court of Rome. Truly after this I cannot see how there can be said to have been a free Papall Councell in Europe, when such as it consists of (being, for the most, Bishops and Ab­bots) come with so high an obligation as an oath to de­fend the usages of Rome, under the title of Regaliae Sancti Petri. In pursuance of which the Sess. 25. cap. 2. Councell of Trent did expressely charge all Patriarchs, Arch­bishops, Bishops, and other, who in future should meet in Provinciall Synods, that veram obedientiam summo Romano Pontifici spondeant, & profiteantur. I wish it had exprest what that had been.

52. To return to that I was treating of. This visiting the Roman Court, however much prest on this Mona­stery of St. Albans, yet was ever-excused till 1290. Iohn the 3. and 25. Abbot was forced to go thither for his confirmation: but because the book is not printed, I will give you my Vitae Abbat. St. Albani MS. in Io­hanne 3. Ab­bate 25. Auctors own words. Iohannes de Berkamsted, vir religiosus & honestae conversationis, Hic in crastino conceptionis beatae & gloriosae virginis Ma­riae, scilieet quinto idus Decembris, anno Domini MCC. nonagesimo, per viam compromissi de gremio Ecclesiae con­corditer electus, ad curiam Romanam primus omnium ab­batum hujus Ecclesiae, pro confirmatione electionis suae obti­nenda, personaliter accessit, ibique confirmatus est à sum­mo Pontifice Nicholao; & à venerabili L. Ostiensi Epi­scopo & Cardinali apud urbem veterem munus accepit be­nedictionis; & sic data maxima pecunia Papae, & Cardi­nalibus, & aliis de curia, quam de mercatoribus Papae [Page 49] duris conditionibus ex mutuo recepit, ab illa insatiabili curia [...]vasit, expletisque negotiis domum redire festina­vit, &c. By which we may see who of this house went on this occasion first thither, and why it was so earnestly urged from thence. As for the Monastery of St. Augustins, by reason of the often contentions with th' Archbishop, the Monks there were much more prone to yield obedience to Rome (who maintained them for the most against him) then these other were: yet the first of them I find to have Wmus Thorn, col. 1899, 22. took this oath was Roger the 2. elected Abbot 1253. For though the Ibid. col. 1880, 3. bene­diction of Robertus de Bello 1224. were at Rome, where he gained th' Abbacy; yet there being no mention of any oath presented to him then, we must think it came in afterwards. But for the fuller understanding how this visiting the Roman Church came in, the Reader will give me leave a little to digresse.

53. Christians in all ages have esteemed it a point of singular piety and devotion, for any Ghostly Father or Doctor to have a care of those to whom they have the relation of being a Spirituall Superior, either by planting Christian Religion amongst them, reducing them out of error, or otherwise some engagement on them. Saint Paul sent for the Elders of Ephesus to come unto him at Miletus, from whom they received those wholesome instructions we read in the Acts xx. 17, to the end. Acts of the A­postles; and according to this example there are divers exhortations in the writings and Epistles of the Fathers. Before the year 517. a Cap. 5. tom. 1. Concil. Councell held at Tarragona in Spain did ordain, that every Bishop, impletis duobus mensibus, se Metropolitani sui repraesentet aspectibus, ut ab illo monitis Ecclesiasticis instructus, plenius quid ob­servare debeat recognoscat: quod si forte hoc implere neg­lexerit, in Synodo increpatus à fratribus corrigatur. A­greeing to which, Novel. 123. cap. 10. Iustinian in the year 541. did esta­blish by Law, that for the better observance of th' Ec­clesiastick [Page 50] rules, every Archbishop, Patriarch, and Metropolitan, Sanctissimos Episcopos sub se constitutos in eadem Provincia semel aut secundo per singulos annos ad se convocare. And Pope Baron. to. 9. Ann. 743. n. 19. Zachary Ann. 743. in a Coun­cell at Rome, Omnes Episcopi qui hujus Apostolicae sedis or­dinationi subjacebunt, qui propinqui sunt, annuè idibus men­sis Maii sanctorum Principis Apostolorum Petri & Pauli liminibus praesententur, omnioccasione seposita, &c. Capit. Car. &c. lib. vii. cap. 108, 109. After which Charls the Great did by law ordain, ut unus­quisque presbyter per singulos annos Episcopo suo rationem ministerii sui reddat, tam de fide Catholica, quam de Baptismo, atque de omni or dine ministerii sui.

54. About which time Boniface an Englishman, the Popes Legat in Germany, and Archbishop of Mentz, in a Councell held in Germany (the decrees whereof he sent to Cutbert then in the seat of Canterbury) Concil. Spelm. pag. 237, 238. declaring how great the care of the Metropolitan ought to be of those under him, shews how every Presbyter should once a year in Lent give an account to his Bishop, who was to instruct him, and with such things as he could not correct himself, to acquaint th' Archbishop in a Sy­nod; Vt si Sacerdotes vel plebes à lege dei deviasse vide­rim, & corrigere non potuerim, fideliter semper sedi Apo­stolicae & vicario Sancti Petri ad emendandum indicave­rim: Sic enim, ni fallor, omnes Episcopi debent Metro­politano, & ipse Romano Pontifici, si quid de corrigendis po­pulis apud eos impossibile est, notum facere, & sic alieni fient à sanguine animarum perditarum. Cutbert, accor­ding to this advise, doth appoint the proceedings of the Bishop to be to the Archbishop, in the same words he had received it from Boniface; but Confer Con­cil. Spelm p. 238, §. ut E­piscopi, & p. 251, cap. 25. passeth no farther to the Pope: an undoubted argument, it was not then usuall in England. I have touched before, the Conque­ror did suffer no other correspondency with Rome then what he liked; Paschalis the 2. quarrell'd with Hen. the Eadmer. pag. 113, 2. first, that Nullus inde clamor: to prevent which, [Page 51] this visiting Rome was at the very first inserted into the oath of an Archbishop, who being head of the Pro­vince, all the rest might have the same dependance.

55. But because this did not reach such houses and persons as were exempt from the jurisdiction of th' Or­dinary, acknowledging no superior but the Pope; the Councell of Lateran under Innocentius 3. 1215. tom. 4. Concil. gen. Rom. pro­vided, such as pertained immediately to his rule should present themselves before him for confirmation, si com­mode potest fieri; which was here misliked▪ But this Councell speaking not home, in that it tolerated the sending cap. 26. Concil. La­teran. personas idoneas, per quas diligens inquisitio su­per electionis processu & electis possit haberi, &c. to make th' excuse, (and being it self (as I shall shew hereafter) not much regarded till Gregory the 9, nephew to In­nocentius, inserted it for the most into the Decretalls, and framed, as I have said, an oath too, for the stricter obligation unto him;) it was again urged by Alexan­der the 4. Mat. Paris Ann. 1257. pag. 951. 41, 44. ut quilibet qui in Abbatem exemptum ex­tun [...] eligeretur, Romanam curiam adiret confirmandus & benedicendus: which the same author styles pag. 956, 7. Statu­tum enorme and cruentissimum. And whereas some, finding the burthen of running to Rome, had obtained as a priviledge from thence, Reynald. Annal. Eccles. to. 14. Ann. 1257. n. 50. ut non teneantur sedem A­postolicam usque ad certa tempora visitare, contra formam praestiti juramenti, ex quo illud evenit inconveniens, quod Apostolicae sedis dignitas rarius visitatur, in derogationem reverentiae quae ab omnibus debetur eidem, &c. the same Pope therefore revokes all manner of such concessions to whomsoever formerly granted. In which year, or perhaps 1258, Simon (elected Abbot of St. Edmunds­bury) confirmed by Alexander the 4. the 22 October, is Monasticon Anglicanum pag. 296. col. 1. noted to have been primus exemptorum in Anglia ad curiam Romanam pro sua confirmatione vocatus.

56. Yet the Court of Rome, however thus earnest at first, (either perceiving it ill relisht abroad, and that [Page 52] forcing sodain mutations in Religion not to be of so good consequence) in her prosecution was more mo­derate. Vitae Abbat. MS. On Roger the xxiiii Abbot of St. Albons 1263. I do not find at all prest; his successor Iohn the xxv, I have shew'd, was the first went thither for it. So like­wise Mat. Paris pag. 972, 51. Philip Abbot of Westminster 1258. obtained the favour to stay at home, and Richard Ware his successor fetcht his consecration first thence. But after the Court was fully in possession of what turned so much to her ad­vantage, an excuse was W ^m Thorn, col. 2185. & sequent. col. 2153, 46. hardlier admitted; and if any did obtain the favour to stay at home, he payed a good round summe for it. It is remembred, Michael Abbot of St. Augustins, elected 1375, did give Papae & Car­dinalibus ut possit benedici in Anglia 183 ^l-02 ^s-06 ^d. and accordingly some other. The Papacy having by these wayes abated the power of th' Archbishop, found it easy, his lett removed, to bring the rest of the Clergy wholy to depend upon it, by raising whom it liked to oppose that Prelat, who were bound to maintain the Papall auctority which supported them in what they did, and wringing the Investitures (so far as lay in their power) out of the hands of Princes, to interest the Pope and his party in severall particulars, under the notion of being matters Ecclesiasticall; by which he brought the elections of Bishops solely to the Convent, excluding both King and others, and became as Patron of most Spirituall promotions in England: which card. Ossat. Epist. 296. Rom. 22 De­cembr. 1601. forme he yet laboured in the end to break too, by reducing all to his own gift. For the understanding of which, as not im­pertinent to that I treat of, it will be necessary to look a little higher.

57. When any place became destitute of a Bishop, it is certain, in the primitive Church, the Lay as well as the Clergy did concur in nominating who were to suc­ceed in the charge; that he who was to have th' in­spection of all, might not be brought into it with the [Page 53] repugnancy of any. And this custome was so generall, as Cypr. Epist. 68. n. 4. edit. Pamelii. St. Cyprian and 36. Bishops more, meeting in Coun­cell about the year 255. writing to certain in Spain, spake as if it did descend de divina auctoritate. It is not to be doubted but this course gave sometime opportunity to ambitious and contentious spirits (as Epist. 110. St. Augustine calls them) of troubling the Churches peace: and there­fore Cap. 13. the Councell of Laodicea before the year 360. did appoint the elections to Priesthood not to be turbis. & apud Gratia­num, Dist. 63, cap. 6. by multitudes; and divers holy Bishops desiring peace might continue after them in their flock, were carefull or ever they dyed to know the person was to succeed in their chair. Severus Bishop of Milevis. Mela in Africa had exprest to the Clergy onely, whom he thought fit to have been admitted after him to his Episcopacy. This was likely to have bred some stir, in respect the people were not acquainted with it; had not August. Epist. 110. St. Augustine by his pains and wisdome allayed the dispute: to avoid which, that good man nominated one Eradius for his successor, whom the people with loud acclamations ap­proved.

58. This concurrence or joyning of the Lay with the Clergy (that qui praefuturus est omnibus ab omnibus eligatur, as Leo Epist. 89, cap. 5. Leo speaks) in choice of Bishops, I do no way question to have continued in the Church till af­ter Charles the Great, in whose Capitulars we find, Caroli Ma­gni Capit. lib. 1. cap. 84. Episcopi per electionem cleri & populi eligantur; and to have been sent hither by Gregory the Great, who in Lib. 2. Epist. 26. Ind. 10. Epist. 22, 26. Ind. 11. & alibi. his Epistles makes often mention of it, as we do find Vide conti­nuat. Flor. Wigorn. Ann. 1128. p. 506. Ann. 1139. pag. 532. steps of it in our own Historians. Yet certainly, however there might be some formalities of the people, the chief of elections here ever depended on the Prince; as may be gathered by that Speech of Wolstan to the Con­fessors tombe, Ailred de miraculis Edwardi, col. 406. 37. that he had compell'd him to take the pastorall staffe. And Edward the 3. wrote to Clement [Page 54] the 6. Epist. Ed­wardi 3. apud Walsingh. pag. 151. 42. Ann. 1343. Cathedrales—Ecclesias progenitores nostri du­dum singulis vacationibns earundem personis idoneis jure suo regio libere conferebant, & postmodum, ad rogatum & ad instantiam dictae sedis, sub certis modis & conditionibus concesserunt; quod electiones fierent in dictis Ecclesiis per capitula earundem, &c. So likewise in the Parliament the 50. Ed. 3. the Commons shew, the King and great men were formerly in peaceable possession of giving preferments in holy Church. But I will give the words themselves, because I will not erre in the Translation. Rot. Parl. 50. Ed. 3. n. 94. Le Roy & les grandes—feurent en peisible possession de doner les Esvesches & les benefices de seint Esglise, come le fest le Roy St. Edward, qe dona l' Evesche de Worcestre a seint Wolston; & puts par devotion des Roys fust, & par la Courte de Rome conferme, qe les Cathedralx Esglises averoient frank election de lour Prelatz, solonc la ley de Dieu & de seint Esglise, ent ordeigne perpetuel­ment a durer, &c. and a little Ibid. n. 111. after, Les Roys d'Engleterre soleient doner Eveschez & autres grantz dignites tres­touz, come il fait aujourdui Esglises parochiels, & le Pape ne se medlast de doner nul benefice deinz le Royalme tanqez deinz brief temps passe, &c.

59. And this to have been likewise the custome in France, the complaint of the French Ambassador to Innocentius 4 ^tus assures us. Additament. Mat. Paris MS. in Biblio­theca Çotton. fol. 135, a. cui initium Dicturus, &c. of which hereafter. Non est multum temporis (saith he) quod Reges Francorum conferebant omnes Epi­scopatus in camera sua, &c. and our writers do wholy look upon the placing Lanfrank in Canterbury as A Williel­mo Lanfran­cus electus est. Malms. fol. 116, b. 38. Rex constituit Lanfrancum Archiepiscopum Cant. Florent. Wigor p. 436. Ann. 1070. Sim. Dunelm. col. 202, 6. the Kings act, though it were not Eadme [...]. p. 6, 41. without th' advise of Alexander the 2. Neither did Vide ibid. p. 16, 48. p. 17, 18. Anselme ever make scruple of refusing the Archbishoprick, because he was not chosen by the Monks of Canterbury: and in that letter of them to Paschalis the 2. 1114. though they write Raulf in praesentia gloriosi Regis Henrici electus [Page 55] à nobis & clero & populo; yet whosoever will note the Ibid. p. 109, 40. &c. series of that election, cannot see it to have been o­ther then the Kings act; insomuch as our Hunt lib. 7. fol. 219, a. 1. writers use often no other phrase then the King gave such prefer­ments, &c. And whilst things stood thus, there was never any interposing from Rome, no question who was lawfully chosen: the Popes therefore did labour to draw this from the Princes medling with, as much as was possible. Some essay might be 1108. at the settling Investitures, for then Anselme Apud Ead­mer. pag. 93, 42. writ to Paschalis, Rex ipse in personis eligendis nullatenus propria utitur volun­tate, sed religiosorum se penitus committit consilio. But this, as the practice proved afterwards, was no more but that he would take the advise of his Bishops, or other of the Clergy: for, as Ann. 1175, col. 587, 21. Diceto well observes, our King did in such sort follow the Ecclesiastick Canons, as they had a care to conserve their own rights. The [...]ittest way therefore for the Pope to get in was, if there should happen any dissensions amongst themselves, that he, as a moderator, a judge, or an Arbitrator, might step in.

60. About the Conquest, an opportunity was offer'd on the contentions between the two Archbishops for primacy; in which Canterbury stood on Vide eas apud Malmsbu­riensem fol. 118, a. 32. the bulls (true or false) of former Popes, that had as a great Patriarch made honourable mention of them. When they were both 1071. Lanfranc. Epist. 3. pag. 301. with Alexander the 2. by his advise it was referr'd to a determination in England; and accordingly 1072. W ^m. the first with his Bishops made some settle­ment, which by them of York was ever stumbled at, pre­tending the King Stubs de Arch. Ebor. col. 1706, 31▪ out of reason of State sided with Can­terbury. But this brake into no publick contest till 1116. Thurstan elected to York, Eadmer. p. 118, 5, 15. endeavored at Rome to di­vert the making any profession of subjection to Cant. but failing in th' attempt (that Court not liking to fall into a contest it was not probable to carry) resigned his Archbishoprick, Spondens Regi & Arch [...]epi [...]copo, se dum [Page 56] viveret non reclamaturum: yet after the Eadmer. p. 120, 50. p. 121, 6. Clergy of York sued to the Pope for his restitution, which pro­duced that letter from Paschalis the 2. in his behalf to Hen. the 1. is in Eadmerus; wherein he desires, if there were any difference between the two Sees, it might be discust in his presence. Which was not hearkned to; but Calixtus the 2. Eadmer. pag. 125. in a Councell by him held 1119. at Reimes (of which before) (the English Bishops not ar­rived, the Kings Agent protesting against it, the Arch­deacon of Cant. telling the Pope that jure he could not do it) consecrated him Archbishop of York: upon which Henry prohibits him all return into his dominions. And in the enterview soon after at Gisors, though Calixtus earnestly laboured th' admitting him to his See, the King would by no means hearken to it. So the Pope left the businesse as he found it, and Thurstan to prove other wayes to gain th' Archbishoprick.

61. Who thereupon became an actor in the peace a­bout that time treated between England and France: in which his comportments were such, that Sim. Du­nelm. Ann. 1120. col. 242, 25. proniorem ad sese recipiendum Regis animum inflexit; so as upon the Popes letters he was afterwards restored, Eadmer. pag. 136, 43. ea dispo­sitione, ut nullatenus extra provinciam Eboracensem di­vinum officium celebraret, donec Ecclesiae Cantuarien­si, &c. satisfaceret. This I take to be the first matter of Epi­scopacy that ever the Pope (as having a power else­where of altering what had been here settled) did meddle with in England. It is true, whilst they were raw in Christianity, he did sometimes recommend Pastors to this Church; so Beda, lib. 4. cap. 1. Vitalian did Theodore: and farther shewed himself sollicitous of it, by giving his fatherly instructions to the English Bishops to have a care of it; so did Formosus or some other by his letters 904. Note, Malms­bury fol. 26. a. [...]3. says this was Ann. 904. but that agrees not with Formosus his Popedome: Baronius therefore corrects it to. 10. and makes Ann. 894. n. 11. but at that time Edward was not King. upon which Edward th' elder congregated a Synod, wherein [Page 57] five new Bishops were constituted, by which an inun­dation of Paganisme ready to break in on the West for want of Pastors was stopt. But it is apparent, this was done not as having dominion over them; for he so left the care of managing the matter to their discretion, as he did no way interesse himself in it farther then advise.

62. A meeting of English Bishops 1107. at Canter­bury, or (as Florentius Wigorniensis stiles it) a Councell restored the Abbot of Ramsey deposed 1102. Flor. Wi­gorn. p. 47 [...]. jussu A­postolico, or, as Eadmerus, Eadmer. pag 92, 14. juxta mandatum Domini Papae. It is manifest, this command from Rome to be of the same nature those I mentioned of supra n. 20. Calvins, or at the most no other then the intercession of the Patriarch of a more noble See, to an inferior, that by his means had been converted: For his restitution (after the re­ception of the Papall letters) seems to have been a Hoc per lite­ras olini man­daverat. Ead­mer. good while defer'd; so that what past at Rome did not disannull his deprivation here, till made good in England, as at a time when nothing thence was put in execution but by the Regall approbation; as the Pope himself Eadmer. pag. 113. pag. 115. complained to the King. But after the Church of Rome, with th' assistance of th' English Clergy, had obtained all elections to be by the Chapters of the Ca­thedralls, upon every Scruple she interposed herself.

63. The greatest part of the Convent of Lon­don 1136. Diceto col. 506, 507. chose Anselme Abbot of St. Edmundsbury for their Bishop, contrary to the Deans opinion and some few of the Chanons, who appealed to Rome; where th' election 1138 was disannulled, the Bishop­rick by the Pope recommended to Winchester, his then, or rather soon after, Legat; which so remained till 1141. This is the first example of any Bishop chosen, received and in possession of a Church in this King­dome, whose election was after quash't at Rome, and the sentence obeyed here; as it is likewise of any Com­mendam on Papall command in the Church of England: [Page 58] all which seems to have past with the Kings concur­rence.

64. For to Vide Iohan. Hagulstad. ab Ann. 1142. ad Ann. 1152. deprive VVilliam elected some whataf­ter Archbishop of York, where he did not joyn, was not so easy: This man chosen 1142 by the greater part of the Chapter, after five years sute in the Court of Rome, Bernard. Epist. 106▪ 234, 235, 237, 238. St. Bernard opposing him, had in the end his election annull'd by Eugenius 3. in a Councell held at Reims; the Chanons of York exhorted to chuse another; some of which made choice of Henry Murdack, then as it seems with the Pope: who coming as Archbishop in­to England, was not suffer'd to enter on his Arch­bishoprick, and excommunicating Hugh de Puzat, a person preferr'd by VVilliam, was himself by him ex­communicated, no intermission of divine service in the City admitted; and Henry's means to gain his See was by drawing the Bishop of Duresme, Carlisle, the King of Scots, and, by the Popes advise, this very Hugh by sweetnesse to his party, and in the end by the Kings Son (whom it seems he promised to get advanced to the Crown by the power of Rome) making his peace with Stephen, who soon after employed him thither on that errand. And this I take to be the second English election was ever here annull'd by Papall auctority.

65. Here I may observe, that at first, when ever the Pope made voyd an election, he did not take upon him to appoint another in the place vacant: but either sent to the Clergy of the same Church to chuse ano­ther, as those to whom it appertained; so did Eugenius 3. to York when this Iohan. Hagulst. col. 276, 8. H. Murdack was chosen, Innocen­tius 3. when Mat. Paris Ann. 1207. pag. 222, 40. Stephen Langton; or else the Bishoprick lay vacant, as Diceto col. 507, 53. & 508, 20. London after Anselme from 1139. to 1141. But elections being with much struggling settled who­ly in the Clergy, and Innocentius 3. having Mat. Paris Ann. 1206, p. 214, 44. by defini­tive sentence excluded the English Bishops from having any part in that of th' Archbishop of Canterbury, they [Page 59] becoming wholy appropriated to the Chapters of Ca­thedralls, the Pope began to creep in, and Tulla Gre­gor. 9. apud Mat. Paris Ann. 1229. pag. 355, 46. ex con­cessa plenitudine Ecclesiasticae potestatis, as he speaks, without any formality of choice, to confer not onely Bishopricks, but other Ecclesiastick promo­tions, within the precincts of others Dioceses, and by that means to fill the fat benefices of the Nation. The first Archbishop of Canterbury promoted by this abso­lute power of the Church of Rome seems to have been Richard 1229. Mat. Paris pag. 355, 44. non electo, sed dato ad Archiepiscopa­tum.

66. The Additament. Mat. Paris MS. in Biblio­theca Cotton. sol. 135. cui initium, Dicturus quod injun­ctum est mi­hi French Agent, in his Remonstrance to Innocentius 4 ^tus, attributes the beginning of these colla­tions to Innocent the 3 ^d. and I have not read that ei­ther Paschalis the second, Gelasius, Calixtus, or In­nocent 2. though forced to live sometimes out of Rome, did ever exercise auctority that way. But I will give it in his own words.

Certe non multum temporis clapsum est, ex quo Domi­nus Papa Alexander, persecutionis cogente incommodo, venit in Franciam, confugiens ad subsidium inclytae re­cordationis Regis Ludovici patris Regis Philippi; à quo benigne susceptus est, & stetit ibi diu; & forte vivunt ali­qui qui viderunt eum: ipse tamen in nullo gravavit Ec­clesiam Gallicanam, ut nec unam solam praebendam aut aliud beneficium ipse Papa dederit ibi, sed nec aliquis prae­decessor suus, nec multietiam de successoribus dederunt in sua auctoritate beneficium aliquid, usque ad tempora Do­mini Innocentii 3. qui primus assumpsit sibi jus istud in tempore suo: Revera dedit multas praebendas, & similiter post ipsum Dominus Honorius & Dominus Gregorius simili modo fecerunt; sed omnes praedecessores vestri, ut publice dicitur, non dederunt tot beneficia ut vos solus de­distis, &c.

67. In what year th' Ambassador from France made this complaint, is not set down: But Mat. Paris Hist. minor. Ann. 1252. pag. 287. fol. 143. b. col. 1. MS. in Biblio­theca Regia Westmonast. Mat. Paris in his [Page 60] Historia minori makes mention of it as done in or a­bout 1252.

Diebus sub eisdem, Episcopo Lincolniens [...] computante, compertum & probatum est quod iste Papa, scilicet Inno­centius quartus, plures redditus extortos ad suam contu­lit voluntatem, quam omnes ejus praedecessores; prout ma­nifeste patet in lugubri querimonia quam reposuerunt Franci coram Papa pro suis intolerabilibus oppressionibus, quae redacta est in scriptum Epistolae admodum prolixae, quae sic incipit, Dicturus quod injunctum est mihi, &c. quaere Epistolam, &c. By which it appears, that great liberty the Papacy took in conferring Ecclesiastick pre­ferments within the Dioceses of others, took its rise from Pope Innocent, and, as it seems to me, not at the very beginning of his time; for 1199. Roger, Ho­ved. fol. 453. b. 39. 454. b. 2. Gervas. Dorobern. col. 1682, 27. in vitâ Huber. Gelardus Arch­deacon of St. Davids coming from Rome, quia idem G. Menevensis Ecclesiae in curia Romana se dicebat electum, hoc ipsum cassavit Archiepiscopus, & alium-sacravit ca­nonice electum; though he after bestowed on him a Church of 25. marks: and this in a case the Pope had so earnestly espoused, as he wrote to the Bishops of Lincoln, Duresme and Ely, si Archiepiscopus Cantua­riae saepe dictum Gilardum consecrare differret, ipsi Apo­stolica authoritate freti illum consecrare non differrent: which yet th' Archbishop, as against the English liberty, did not doubt to oppose, and disannul.

68. But thus it continued not long; for In antiquo MS. Bulla­rum Romano­rum. Pontifi­cum Archiepi­sc, Cant. Pulla [...]. Honor. 3. Honorius, the immediate successor to Innocentius 3 ^us, shewing such as served th' Apostolick see, and resided with it, were worthy congruis beneficiis honorari, and were therefore possest of divers both in England and other parts, which they did administer with so great care, quod non minus beneficiantibus quam beneficiatis utiliter est provisum; unde, quia nonnunquam beneficiatis hu­jusmodi decedentibus, beneficia quae obtinuerant, inconsul­tis hiis ad quos eorum donatio pertinebat▪ aliis successive [Page 61] collata, perpetuo illis ad quos pertinent videbantur amit­ti, propter quod etiam murmurabant plurimi, & alii se difficiliores ad conferendum talibus beneficia exhibebant: Nos volentes super hoc congruum remedium adhibere, ne cuiquam sua liberalitas sit dampnosa, per quam potius meruit gratiam & favorem, statuimus, ut clericis Ec­clesiae Romanae, vel aliis Ytalicis, qui praebendas vel Ec­clesias, seu alia Ecclesiastica beneficia in Anglia obtinent vel obtinuerint à modo decedentibus, Praebend [...]e vel Ec­clesiae, seu alia beneficia nequaquam à nobis vel alio illa vice alicui conferantur, sed ad illos libere redeant ad quos illo­rum donatio dinoscitur pertinere, &c. Dat. Lateran. 26. Febr. 12 [...]1. quarto Kalend. Martii, Pontificatus nostri anno quinto.

69. Yet neither this, nor the renewing of it by Gre­gory the 9. with a speciall indulgence In eodem▪ MS. Gregor. 9. Bulla 3. directed venera­bilibus fratribus universis Archiepiscopis & Episcopis, a [...] dilectis fil▪ is Abbatibus, & aliis Ecclesiarum Praelatis per Angliam constitutis—ut si quando ad vos literae Apo­stolicae pro beneficiandis hujusmodi de caetero emanarunt, ad provisionem ipsorum inviti non teneamur, nisi de hac indul gentia plenam fecerint mentionem. Dat. Lateran. April. 17: Ann. 1230. 15. Kalend. Maii, Pontificatus nostri anno 4 ^to., &c. could quiet the English, or keep them from that confedera­tion in Mat. Paris 1231. beginning, Mat. Pariss p. 371, 18. Tali Episcopo & tali capitulo, Vniversitas eorum qui magis volunt mo­ri quam à Romanis confundi, &c. Which the Popes, by wisdome, and joyning the Regall auctority with their spirituall, sound means to bring to nought; and pursuing the Papall interest without regarding what had past from them, gave the Kingdome occasion 1241. to Mat: Paris▪ Ann▪ 1241. p [...]. 549, 18, 22 [...], &c. observe, that in onely three years Otho had remained Legat here, he bestowed more then 300. spirituall promotions, ad fuam vel Papae voluntatem; the Pope having Idem Ann [...]. 1240, p. 5329, 43. contracted (as the report went) with the Romans, to confer to none but their Children and Allies the rich benefices here, especially of Religious [Page 62] houses, (as those perhaps he had most power over) and to that effect had writ to the Bishops of Canterbury and Salisbury, ut trecentis Romanis in primis beneficiis vacantibus providerent. So that in the Councell at Lions 1245. they complain of these exorbitances, Apud Mat. Paris p. 6 [...]7, 36. and shew the revenues the Italians received in England not to be lesse then 60 thousand marks; of which more cap. 4. n. 17. here­after: and in the year following 1246. reiterated their griefs to Innocentius 4 ^tus. Mat. Paris Ann. 1246. pag. 6 [...]9, 9. quod Italicus Italico succedit. Which yet was with little successe: for the Popes ha­ving (as we have heard) first settled all elections in the Ecclesiasticks, and after upon severall occasions, on the submitting of the English to his desires, bestowed the benefices in this and other Kingdomes on his de­pendents, Cardinal. Ossat. Epist. 296. d [...]t. Rom, 1601. Decembr. 2 [...]. Iohn the 22. (or, as Rot. Parl. 3. R. 2. n. 37. some seem to think, Cle­ment the 5. his immediate predecessor) endeavored the breaking of elections by Cathedralls and Con­vents, reserving the free donation of all preferments to himself alone.

70. From whence proceeded the reiterated com­plaints [...] against Papall Provisions, in the Parliaments of Edward the 3. and Ric. the 2. for this Kingdome never received his attempts in that kind: to which purpose the History W ^m Thorn 2082, 2. & sequent, vide Walsingham Ann. 1374. pag. 184, 1. Thorn, Ann. 1373. col. 2187, 57. See the Hi­story of Ni­cholaus de Spyna resigning the Abby of St. Augustins, and on his nominating him, Thomas Fyndon prefer'd to be Abbot thereby Martin the 4. who on the receipt of the Papall Bulls, acquainted Edward the 1. with what had past at Rome himself being in England; yet by command the house was seized into the Kings hand, and he at the Parliament held at Acton Burnell fined at 400. marks, pro eo quod sic fuerat creatus in Abbatem, licentia Domini Regis minime petita. Thorn, Col. 1939, 1. & 1934. of Iohn Devenish is remarkable. The Ab­bot of St. Augustines dying 1346. the 20. Ed. 3. the Convent by the Kings leave chose VV ^m. Kenington; but Clement the 6. by Provision bestowed the Abbacy on Iohn Devenish, whom the King did not approve of, yet came thither armed with Papall auctority. The Prior and Convent upon command absolutely denyed him entrance, ingressum monasterii in capite denegando; [Page 63] who thereupon returned to Avignon. The businesse lying two years in agitation, the King in the end, for avoyding expences and other inconveniences, Fide varias lectiones ad col. 2117. 54. quae vero ibi debent inter­seri pertinent ad Hist. de qua hic agitur col. 2082. ex abundanti concessit ut, si idem Iohannes posset obtinere à summo Pontifice quod posset mutare stylum suae creationis [...]ive provisionis, scilicet non promoveri Abbatia praedicta ratione donation [...]s vel provisionis Apostolicae, sed ratione electionis capituli hujus loci, illa vice annueret, & suis temporalibus gaudere permitteret: sed quidem hujusmodi causa coram ipso summo Pontifice proposita, concludendo dixit, se malle cedere Pontificio, quam suum decretum ta­liter revocare, &c. Which so afflicted the poor man, as the grief killed him on St. Iohn Baptists Eve 1348. without ever entring the Abby; and the dispute still con­tinuing, the Pope 1349. wrote to the King, Hen. Knighton col. 2601. 37, 49. Ne Rex impediret, aut impediri permitteret promotos à curia per bullas acceptare beneficia sibi taliter incumbentia. To which his Mary answer'd. Quod Rex bene acceptaret pro­visos clericos qui esse [...]t bonae conditionis, & qui digni es­sent promoveri, & alios non.

71. But the year following 1350. the 25. Ed. 3. the Rot. Parl. octav. P [...]rif. 25. Ed. 3. n. 13. See the words of the peition, cap. 4. n. 15. Commons meeting in Parliament complain with great resentment of these Papall grants, shewing the Court of Rome had reserved to it self both the collation of Ab­beys, Priories, &c. as of late in generall all the dignities of England, and Prebends in Cathedrall Churches, &c. Upon which the statute of Provisors was in that Parlia­ment enacted; which was the leader to those other sta­tutes, 27, and 38. Ed. 3. Walsing. hist. 1374. pag. 184, 6. Rot. parl. 1. R. 2. n. 66. Thorn, 1373. col. 2187, 58. The 48. Ed. 3. 1374. the treaty between Ed. the 3. and Gregory the XI, was concluded after two years agitation, wherein it was expressely agreed, quod Papa de caetero reservationibus beneficio­rum minime uteretur, &c. Notwithstanding which, the Commons the next Parliament prefer'd a petition, shewing Rot. Parl. 50. Ed. 3. n. 110, 115. all the benefices of England would not suffice the Cardinalls then in being, the Gregory 11. Pope having by the [Page 64] addition of XII. new ones raised the number to XXX. which was usually not above XII. in all; and therefore they desire it may be ordained and proclaimed, that nei­ther the Pope nor Cardinalls have any Procurator or Collector in England, sur peine de vie & de membre, &c. Yet the inconveniences still continuing, 3. Ric. 2. pro­duced that [...]. Ric. 2. cap. 3. 7. Ric. 2. cap. 12. statute is in the print: I shall not here re­peat otherwise, then that the Commons in the Roll, seem to lay the beginning of these excesses no higher then Clement the 5.

72. By these arts, degrees and accessions, the Church of Rome grew by little and little to that immensenesse of opinion and power it had in our nation; which might in some measure (whilst it was exercised by con­nivence onely, upon the good correspondency the Papacy held with our Kings and Church,) be tolerated, and the Kingdome at any time by good Lawes redresse the inconveniences it susteined. But that which hath made the disputes never to be ended, the parties not to be reconciled, is an affirmation that Christ com­manding Peter to feed his sheep, did with that give him so absolute a power in the Church, (and derived the like to his successors Bishops of Rome,) as without his assent no particular Church or Kingdome could re­form it self: and for that he as a Bishop cannot be denied to have as much power as others from Christ, and may therefore in some sense be said to be Christi vi­carii sacerdo­tes sunt qui vice Christi legatione funguntur in Ecclesia. Eu­sebii Papae E­pist. 3. to. 1. Concil. Ele­ctum à Fratribus Christi Vicari [...]m suscipiant, (scil. in Abbatem:) Hydensium leges ab [...]dgaro cap. 15. Concil. Spelm. pag. 440. quis locus poterit esse tutus, si rabies sancta sancto­rum cruentat? & Vicarios Christi, alumnos Ecclesiae dilacerat? Epist. W ⁱ, Senonensis, apud Hoved, Ann. 1171. fol. 299. b. 32. de marie Thomae Archiepiscopi. Christs Vicar, to ap­propriate it onely to the Pope, and draw thence a con­clusion that jure divino he might and did command in all particulars Vice Christi. And though no other Church in the Christian World doth agree with the Roman in this interpretation; though Historians of unquestioned sincerity have, as we have (in some measure) heard, [Page 65] in their own ages deliver'd when and how these addi­tions crept in, and by what oppositions gained; that our Princes have, with th' advise of the Lay and Clergy, ever here moderated th' exorbitances of the Papacy in some particular or other, and likewise reformed this Church; though the stipulations between our Kings and Rome have not been perpetuall, but temporary, not absolute, but conditionall, as is to be seen in that past between Alexander the 3. and Hen. the 2. viz. Gervas. Dorobern. col. 1422, 18. Hoved fol. 303. a. 1. Ann. 1172. juravit quod ab Alexandro summo Pontifice, & ab Catholicis ejus successoribus non recederet, quamdiu ipsum sicut Regem Catholicum habuerint; that the English Bishops being excommunicated by the Pope Iohan. Sa­risbur. Epist. 279. p. 483. might not take an oath of obedience to his commands, quia regni consuetu­dines impugnabat; though he did never exercise any authority here, but according to such stipulations, con­tracts and agreements with our Princes, as the Lawes permitted; and therefore when he sent hither a Legat à Latere, Epist. Hen Chichly in vita ejus, pag. 79. he was tretyd with or he cam in to the lond, whon he schold have exercise of his power, and how myche schold bee put in execution: An aventure after he had bee reseyved, he whold have used it to largely, to greet op­pression of your peple, &c. as the Archbishop wrote to Hen. 5. as I have shewed numb. 53.

73. Though the Lawyers of the Kingdome do Fitz. Ex­commenge­ment, 4, 6, 10. con­stantly affirm, as the Law and Custome of the Realm, the Kings Courts never to have carried regard to any forraign excommunication, and if any such came from Rome, [...]ide Ho­veden. fol. 284. b. 23. not to be put in execution, but by allowance first had: to which effect it is remembred, the Bishops of London and Norwich having publish't in their Dio­ceses the Popes excommunication of Hugh Earl (as it seems) of Chester, without the privity of Hen. the 2. or his Chief Iusticiar, the Kings writ issued out in this manner; Ex antiquo MS. Londoniensis & Norwicensis Episcopi sint in misericordia Regis, & summoneantur per Ficecomites [Page 66] & Bedellos, ut sint [...]oram. Ho­veden. contra Iusticias Regis, ad rectum fa­ciendum Regi & Iusticiis ejus de eo quod, contra statuta de Clarendone, interdixerunt ex mandato Papae terram co­mitis Hugonis, & excommunicationem quam Dominus Papa in ipsum fecerat per suas parochias divulgaverunt sine licentia regis. This however contracted in Hoveden 1165. and in pag. 103, 43. Paris 1164. yet the difference is such as may deserve a remembrance. It seems to me, what our Kings claimed, not to be altogether unlike the Girolamo Catena vita di Pio 5 ^to. pag. 96, 97. 98, 100. in 8 ^vo. Romae 1587. & Adriani Hist. lib. 19. pag. 1378. A. Exe­quatur of Naples, observed to this day in that Kingdome, notwithstanding all contests from Rome.

74. Neither did the Crown ever relinquish this right, not at the peace after Beckets death, when Ger. Doro­bern. col. 1422, 50. Hen­ry the 2. assented to quit no other then Consuetudines quae introductae sunt tempore suo; which it is manifest this was not, as appears by pag. 6. Eadmerus. It is farther observ­able, that by the common Laws (that is 2. H. 4. Ac­cion sur le case. 25. Fitz. the com­mon Custome of this Realm) the 31. Ed. 3. Excommen­gement. 6. sentence of the Archbishop is valid in England, and to be allowed in the Kings Courts, though controuled by the Pope: and to shew our Princes had no regard to anything of this nature from thence, other then such a complying with a reverend Prelat as I have formerly mentioned did ad­mit, it may not here be unfitly inserted what Froissard. to. 1, cap. 47. pag. 58. Gall. Froissard writes of Edward the third, with whom the Flemings joyned against the French; upon which, (but I shall de­liver it in his own words) Adonc le Roy de Frances' en complaignit au Pape Benedictus xii. Iacobus Meierus An­ [...]al. Flandr. Ann. 1▪ 40. fol. 141, a. Clement sixieme, qui getta une sen­tence d' excommuniement si horible, qu'il n' estoit nul prestre qui asast celebrer le divin service: De quoy les Flamens envoyerent grande complainte au Roy d' Engleterre; lequel pour les appaiser, leur manda, que la primiere fois qu'il rappasseroit la mer, il leur ammeneroit des Prestres de son pais qui leur chanteroient la Messe, vousist le Pape ou non [...]ar il estoit bien privilegié de ce faire: & par ce moyen s' ap­paiserent les Flamens, &c. As for the priviledge here [Page 67] spoken of, that can be no other then the obligation all Kings owe unto God, for seeing his word sincerely taught them live under their protection, without the disturbance of any.

75. In which kind ours have been so far from yield­ding obedience to the Papall attempts, as Edward the first could not be induced to spare the life of one brought a Assise lib. 30. placit. 19. Bull from the Pope, might have made some distur­bance, but by his abjuring the Realm; as his grand­child Edward the 3. did Walsing­ham Hist. Ann. 1358. pag. 165, 48. cause some to suffer for the same offence. And on occasions our Kings have prohi­bited all entercourse with Rome; Vide Ho­ved. fol 284. b. 13. Rot. Parl. 16. March, 3. H. 5.▪ n, 11, see the 9. 11. 4. 11. 37. denied their Bishops going thither so much as for confirmation, but the Me­tropolitans, if need were, should by the Kings writ be charged to confirm them; Gervas. Do­robe [...]. col. 1552, 51. commanded their sub­jects not to rely on any should come from thence, af­firming, quod in regnum nostrum nec propter negotium nostrum nec vestrum ullatenus intrabit ad terram nostram destruendam. Yet notwithstanding so notorious a truth, back't with so many circumstances, grounded upon un­questioned monuments of antiquity, hath not been received; but the bare affirmation, Christ by pasceoves meas intended Peter, and by consequence the Pope, to be the generall Pastor of the world, and the meaning of those words to be, that he should Bellarm. Recognit. pag. 21. Edit. In­golstat. 1608. regio more impe­rare, hath so far prevailed with some, as to esteem the standing for the rights of the Kingdome, the Laws and Customes of the Nation, to be a departing from the Church Catholick; and to esteem no lesse then Here­ticks those, who defending that which is their own from th' invasion of another, will not suffer themselves to be led hood-winkt, to think the preservation of their proper liberty is a leaving Christ, his Church, or the Catholick faith.

76. I dare boldly say, whoever will without partiality look back, shall find the reverence yielded from this [Page 68] Church to Rome for more then a thousand years after Christ, to have been no other then the respect of love, not of duty, and Popes rather to consulere then impe­rare; their dictats to have been of the same nature Tacit. de moribus Ger­manorum. Vide Lanfranci E­pist. 8. p. 305. the German Princes were of old, auctoritat [...] suadendi magis quam jubendi potestate; never requiring a necessity of obedience eo nomine that they came from Rome, but for that they were just and reasonable: neither did the Pope send any Agent hither to see them put in execution; but th' Archbishop, according to the exigent of times, re­ceiving his wholesome advises, caused such as he held of them did conduce to the good of the English Church to be observed. So Theodore Beda lib. 4. cap. 17. received those of Pope Martin, but Malmsbur. fol, 150, &c. did not them concerning Wilfred, from Agatho. When Alexander the 2. had exempted the Vide Ead­mer. pag. 62, 36. Lanfranci Epist. 20. pag. 311. Abbot of St. Edmunds-bury from the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Norwich, Lanfrank took the Act from the Abbot: and Gregory the 7. is so far from using com­mands in the cause, as he onely earnestly intreats the Archbishop he would stop the Bishop of Norwich from molesting the said Abbot; yet himself as it seems did not restore the Bull of immunity to him during that Popes life. (but of this before.) In the year 1070. on the Kings desire in a Councell at Windsor, Florent, Wigorn. Ann. 1070. pag. 435. & 436. Sim Du­nelm. col. 29 [...]. Age [...]icus Bishop of the South-Saxons is degraded, and his Bishoprick con­fer'd on Stigandus: Alexander the 2. not approving what had past, Baron. 10. 11. Anno 1071. n. 11. writes to the King, this cause seemed to him non ad plenum tractata, ideoque sicut in canonibus cautum est, in pristinum locum debere restitui judicavi­mus; Deinde, causam ejus, juxta censuram canonicae traditionis diligenter retractandam & definiendam, prae­dicto fratri nostro Archiepiscopo Lanfranco commisimus. It is certain (however some writers might upon this or for [...] other causes think his degradation to have been non ca­nonice) those times did not interpret this (though writ with so great earnestnesse) for other then advise or in­tercession, [Page 69] not as of a person had an absolute power of commanding in the businesse; for we never read of any proceedings upon it, not Lanfrank at all ever to meddle in the case, that he ever esteemed Lanfranci Epist. 27, 28. & apud Ead­mer. pag. 13. Stigand a lawfull Bishop Epist. 27, 28. who in the year 1075. Malms. de pontif. lib. 1. fol. 121. b. 27. Vita Lanfran­ci cap. 12. pag▪ 13. C. col. 1. being in a Councell at London, according to the De­crees of it, removed his Episcopall Chair from Selsey to Chichester, of which he Florent. Wigorn. Ann. 10 [...]7. pag. 449. died Bishop 1087. without being at all, for what appears, questioned or disturbed after the first grant of it. Divers examples of the like na­ture occur too long to be repeated, where the King or Vide Ger­vas. Do [...]o­bern. Ann. 1087. col. 1503, 38. his chief Iustice prohibit the Papall precepts from being put in execution: and it is agreed by Lawyers, that not the command, but the constant obedience, is it which denotes a right of commanding; and in cases of this na­ture prohibentis potior est condito, one example in the ne­gative, when the thing is stood upon, being of more weight then twenty by compliance in the affirmative.

77. It is probable, neither the King nor the Bishops would introduce any new matter of great concernment into this Church, without the privity of so great a Doctor, Patriarch of a See, from which their aunce­stors had received the first principles of Christian Reli­gion; but it is manifest, what past, (if he were acquain­ted with it) was by their own auctority, not his. When Off a intended the erecting of Litchfield into an Arch­bishoprick, he did it by a Councell at Calcuith: Lamber­tus (as what he approved not) producing Malms. de regibus lib. 1. fol. 15. b. 34. crebra sedis Apostolicae & vetera & nova edicta against it, yet the thing proceeded. Lucius the 2 Diceto Ann. 1142. Mat. West. went so far in his intentions to raise Winchester to an Archiepiscopall Chair, as he sent the pall to the Bishop: yet it being not approved here (as the event shews) that Town never yet had the honour. Henry the first having in his Leg. Hen. 1. cap. 73. pag. 204, 29, Lawes appointed how a Bishop, Presbyter, Monk, Deacon, &c. should suffer, com­mitting homicide, concludes, Si quis ordinatum occi­dat, [Page 70] velproximum suum, exeat de patria sua, & Romam adeat, & Papam, & consilium ejus faciat; de adulterio, vel fornicatione, vel Legendum Nunnae cum MS. Lon­don. Seld. & nostro, non nimio, ut MS. Schachar. Nunnae concubitu similiter poeniteat. Where it is observable, the King ordains the Penance, permits the delinquents peregrination to Rome, to re­ceive from the Pope (as from a great Doctor of the Church) spirituall counsell, which else he was not ad­mitted to seek; for Leg. Hon. 1. cap. 31. p. 187. 29. peregrina judicia modis omnibus sub­movemus; and again, Ibid. cap. 5. pag. 17 [...], 28. ibi semper causa agatur, ubi cri­men admittitur.

78. VVilliam the first (who began his expedition a­gainst Harald by the counsell of Alexander the 2. and re­ceived a Ingulph. sol. 522, a. 6. banner from him) minding the deposition of th' Archbishop of Canterbury, procured the Pope to send certain Ecclesiasticks hither to joyn in the action, as likewise soon after for determining the question of pre­cedency between Canterbury and York; upon which there grew an opinion, Eadmer. pag. 29, 23. Archiepiscopum Cantuarien­sem à nullo hominum, nisi à solo Papa, judicari posse vel damnari, nec ab aliquo cogi pro quavis calumnia cu [...]quam, eo excepto, contra suum velle respondere. This no doubt was promoted by th' Archbishops, as what exempted them from all home jurisdiction, the Bishops in gene­rall did after think in some sort to introduce; and there­upon put in this petition in Parliament Ro [...]. Parl. 18. Ed. 3. n. 23. 24. pet. 1. du Clergie. 18. Ed. 3. qe pleise a Roy, en maintenance del estat de seint Esglise, graunter & ordeiner en cest Parlement, qe nul Ercevesque ou Evesque [...]oit desormez, arreynez, ne empes [...]hez devaunt ses Iusticos, en cause criminele, par quecunque voye, de si come sur tiele cause nulle alme ne les poet juger, si noun le Pape seulement. But to this the answer is no other then, Il est avis, qe en cause de crime, nul Ercevesque ou Evesque soit empesche devant les Iustices, si le Roy ne le commande especialment tant qe autre remedie soit ordeinez: which he did likewise confirm by Charter there registred, and as Walsing. Hist. Ann. 1344. p. 155, 1. Walsingham hath truly recorded.

[Page 71]79. This opinion, though Protinus in tellexerunt quod prius n [...]n animadverte­runt. Ead­mer. p. 29, 21. new to the English, questionlesse incouraged Anselme to oppose the King in many particulars, and Popes to go farther; as to claim Princes should not confer Investitures, nor de­fine matters of Episcopacy, &c. then to bestow prefer­ments within this Kingdome, at first by consent, and with the limitation no Italian to succeed another, then to reserve to themselves the collation of all benefices; of which before. To conclude this; whosoever will without prejudice weigh the reformation of England by Hen. the 8. Edward the 6. and more especially Queen Elizabeth in the point of supremacy, must grant these Princes did not assume to themselves any thing, but such particulars as the Court of Rome had in a long se­ries of time incroached in on the Crown and English 1 Church. If at any time our auncestors styled the Pope Princeps Episcoporum, it was in no other sense then they did▪ St. Peter Princeps Apostolorum; by which what principality they intended him, we cannot better un­derstand then by the Saxon, who renders it Beda Latin-Saxon edit. 1644. lib. 2. cap 6 p. 123. lib. 4. cap. 18. p. 302. & a. libi. [...] Apostola, the Elder of the Apostles. If they 2 called him successor or Vicarius Pet [...]i, they were not alone appropriated to him, for Epist. 113, 148. Vide▪ Stubs de Archiepisc. E­bor. in Al­dredo col. 1703, 37. 1704, 13. vide supr. c. 2. n 72. Petrus Blesensis and others give the Bishop of York the same titles; and the Bish. of Bath, who had a Church dedicated to St. Peter, he bids remember quia Petri Vicarius estis. So did they like­wise in some sense call Kings [...]eg. Edwar­di Confessoris cap. 17. Sel­deni Notae ad Eadmer. p. 155, 12, &c. Christs Vicars, as well as Bi­shops. 3 If at any time they gave the Pope the title of Rot. Parl. at Glocest. n. 7 [...]. in [...]ounullis libris im­pressis cap. 6, & 7. head of the Church, it was, as being the first Bishop, he was held to be, as St. Bernard tells us, Bernard. de consideratione lib. 3. cap. 3. in beneficam causam; as they Rot. Parl. 1. Iien. 6. n. 43. termed Oxford the fountain and mother of our Christian faith. I cannot therefore but with a Philip Scot his treatise of Schisme, p. 165. late wri­ter, [Page 72] that sayes England had a known subjection to Rome acknowledged even by our Laws, ever from the conver­sion of our Country under St. Gregory, had expressed in what particulars that subjection did consist, what those Laws are, and where to be found. The truth is, as there is no doubt our Auncestors in former times would not have joyned with the Synod of Gap, in causing so I will not undertake to maintain that the Pope is An­tichrist, pro­fessing my weakness & ignorance of those pro­pheticall Scriptures to be so great, that I dare not be confi­dent in my interpreta­tions of them, Paxter his Christian concords Ex­plication, p. 69. dis­putable ambiguous a question as that the Pope is An­tichrist to have been taught as the faith of the English Church; so there is no question, but it hath been ever the Tenet of it, Pontificem Romanum majorem aliquam jurisdictionem non habere sibi à Deo collatam in Sacrâ Scripturâ in hoc regno Angliae, quam alium quemvis ex­ternum Episcopum: Which our Diceto, Ann. 607. & 608. col. 437, 23. Historians do mention as what proceeded from the constitutions of the Church and assent of Emperors, not as of a thing in it self juris divini: insomuch as,

80. That proposition, Antiquit. Bri­tan. Eccles. pag. 384, 37. edit. London, 1573. when it was propounded 1534. in Henry the 8 ^ths time in convocation, all the Bishops without exception, (and of others onely one doubted, and four placed all Ecclesiastick power in the Pope,) both the Universities, and most of the Mona­steries and Collegiat Churches of England, approved & avowed as the undoubted opinion of the Church of this Nation in all ages. Neither can I see how it can be o­therwise: for if the Church of Canterbury Ger. Doro­bern. col. 1663, 24. col. 1615, 60, 63. were omnium nostrum mater communis sub sponsi sui Iesu Christi disposi­tione, if it were Mater omnium Anglicanarum Ecclesia­rum, & suo post Deum proprio laetatur pastore; that is, if th' Archbishop had no mediate spirituall superior but Christ & God; if the power the Pope exercised over him within this Realm were Epist. Ra­dulph. Archi­episc. Calixto 2. col. 1736. 1. volu [...]tate & beneficio, gained, as I have shewed, by little & little, voluntarily submitted unto; it could be no other then jure humano: and then it must be granted, the Church of England could not hold any necessity of being in subjection to the See or [Page 73] Church of Rome jure divino; as it is manifest they did not, in that they Eadmer. pag. 25, 40. sometimes acknowleded no Pope, Mat. Paris, Ann. 116 [...]. pag. 107, 45. pag. 111, 24. Vide Epist. Gilberti Lon­donensis Episc. apud Hove­den. fol. 288, 34. 38. Ann. 1166. otherwhiles shewed an intent of departing from his union, and the Bishops as well as Lay Lords advised Anselm, Eadmer. p. 28, 23. Vrbani obedientiam abijcere, subjectionis ju­gum excutere, &c. Neither could the Church of Eng­land be any way possible guilty of Schism, adhering to their Ghostly Superior next and immediate under Christ Iesus.

As for the temporall profits the Court of Rome re­ceived hence, though the denying them can be no just cause of such a spirituall imputation, especially on pri­vat men; yet certainly who will examin their beginning, as he shall find it to have been by the bounty or permis­sion of our Princes, so upon search he will perceive the Kingdome went no farther then the Common Law, the precedent of former times, and such an exigency did force them to: of which therefore I shall adde a word or two.

CHAP. IV.
Of the Payments to the Papacy from England.

THe vast summes the Court of Rome did of late years upon severall occasions export out of this Kingdome, mentioned in the 25. Hen. 8. cap. 21. statute of the 25. Hen. the 8. are spoken of by severall of our writers: and though some Apud Mat. Paris Epist. universitat. Angli [...]e, Anno 1245. p. 667. 38. have in generall expressed how much the Nation suffer'd in that kind; yet none, that I know, in one tract did ever shew by what degrees the Papacy gained so great a re­venue, as the Commons in Edward the thirds dayes had cause to complain, it did turn Rot. Parl. octav. Purific. 25. Ed. 3. n. 13. of which hereafter n. 15. a plus grand destruction du Royaume qe toute la guerre nostre Seigneur le Roy. I have thought therefore that it will not be amisse to set down, how the Pope came to have so great an influence over the treasure of the Clergy in this Land, by seeking out how and when the greatest of the paiments made to him began, what interruptions or oppositions were met with, either at the beginning or in the continuance of them.

2. The first payment, that I have read of, which gave the Pope an entrance as it were in to it, was that bounty of our Princes known to this day by the name of Peter-Pence: and this as it was given for an Vide Epist. W ^m•. 1. apud Baron. to. 11. Ann. 1079. & inter Lan­franci Epist▪ 7. Almes by our Kings, so was it no otherwise received by the Court of Rome; Epist. Hen­rico 1. apud Eadmer. pag. 113, 27. Eleemosyna beati Petri, prout audivimus, ita perpera [...] doloseque collecta est, ut neque mediam ejus par­tem hactenus Ecclesia Romana susceperit, saith Paschalis the 2. So that no question Hist. lib. 4. p. 89, 40, 43. Polidore Virgil very inconsi­derately termes it vectigal, and others, who by that gift contend the Kingdome became Notae in Lanfranci E­pist. 7. p. 347. col. 2. d. tributarium feudata­rium S ^to. Petro ejusque successoribus: for though the word tributum may perhaps be met with in elder Malmsbur. sol. 128. b. 25. writers, [Page 75] yet never did any understand the Pope by it to be­come a Superior Lord of the Lay fee, but used the word metaphorically; as we do to this day terme a constant rent a kind of tribute, and to those who pay it, and over whom we have in some sort a command, we give the title of subjects; not as being Princes over them, but in that particular being under us, they are for it styled our inferiors.

3. What Saxon King first conferred them, whether Ina, as Polychronic. lib. 5. cap. 24. See Brompton col. 802, 23. Ranulphus Cestrensis sayes report carryed, or Offa, as Col. 7 [...]6, 37. Iorvalensis, I will not here enquire, as not greatly materiall. Lib. 4. p. 89, 44. Polidore Virgil tells, some write Ethelwolphus continued it: with whom Brompton seems to concur. It is true, our Historians remember he caused Florent. Wigorn. Ann. 855. pag. 300. & Sim. Du­nelm. 300. mancusas denariorum ( De Regibus lib 2. cap. 2. fol. 22. a. 27. Malmsbury renders it trecentas auri marcas (which was ten times the value of silver) as Iorvalensis col. 802, 27. another trecenta talenta) to be carried every year from hence to Rome; which could be no other then the just application of Peter-Pence: for amongst sundry complaints long after from This ap­peares by the Epistle of Wil­liam the 1. to Paschalis the 2. before cited, and so to Henry the 1. Rome, we find the omission of no paiment instanced in, but of that duty onely; neither do the body of the Kingdome in their Apud Mat. Paris p. 698, 51. Remonstrance to Innocentius 4. 1246. mention any other as due from hence to Rome.

4. This therefore thus confer'd by our Kings, was for the generality continued to the Papacy; yet (to shew, as it were, that it proceeded only from the liberality of our Princes,) not without some stops. Of those in the times of VVilliam the first & Henry his Son I have Cap. 3. n. 11. cap. 4. n. 2. spoke, Henry the 2. during the dispute with Becket and Alex­ander the 3. commanded the Sheriffs through England, that Apud Mat. Paris Anno 1164. p. 103, 45. & Ho­veden Anno 1165, so. 284. b. 26. Denariibeati Petri colligantur, & serventur, quous­que inde Deminus Rex voluntatem suam praeceperit. Du­ring the Reign of Edward the 3. the Popes abiding at Avignon, many of them French, their partiality to that side, and the many Victories obtained by th' English be­gat [Page 76] the proverb, Hen. Knighton col. 2615, 41. Ore est le Pape devenu Françeis, & Iesu devenu Angleis, &c. about which time our Histo­rians observe, the King gave command Caxton. Continuat. Polychronic. ca [...]. 2. Stow Ann. 1365. no Peter-Pence should be gather'd or pay'd to Rome. And this restraint, it seems, continued all that Princes time; for Richard the 2. his successor at his beginning caused Iohn Wick­liffe, esteemed the most Hen. Knighton c [...]l. 2664, 66, & 2644, 31. knowing man of those times, to consider the right of stopping them; whose deter­mination in that particular yet remains, entituled In fasciculo ziz [...]niorum MS. in Bi­bliotheca An­tistitis Arm [...] ­chani, fol. 59, b. col. 2. Re­sponsio Magistri Iohannis Wicliff ad dubium infrascri­ptum, quaesitum ab eo per Dominum Regem Angliae Richar­dum secundum & magnum Concilium, anno regni sui pri­mo: then the question followes, Dubium est, utrum regnum Angliae possit legitime, imminente necessitate suae defensionis, thesaurum Regnidetinere, ne deferatur ad exteros, etiam Domino Papa sub poena censurarum & vir­tute obedientiae hoc petente; & relicto viris peritis quid dici debet in ista materia, secundum jus canon [...]cum, secun­dum jus Angliae velcivile solum restat suadere partem af­firmativam dubii, secundum principia legis Christi: then shews, those paiments being no other then Almes, the Kingdome was not obliged to continue them longer then stood with its own convenience, and not to its detriment or ruine; agreeing therein with that of Di­vines, extra casus necessitatis & superfluitatis Eleemosyna non est in praecepto.

5. But in the Parliament held the same year, the question was concluded: for there this petition being prefer'd, Rot. Parl. 1 Ric. 2. n. 84. que y puisse estre declaree en cest present Parle­ment, si la charge de la denir Seint Pierre, appelle Rome peny, seraleve des dites Commes, & paye al Collector nostre Seint Perele Pape ou noun; the answer was, soit fait come devant ad este usee: By which the use of them being again returned, did so remain till Henry the 8 ^ths. time. For though in a Walsing. Hist. Anno 1408. p. 420, [...]. councell held at London 1408, it was treated de censu & obedientia Papae subtrahendis vel non subtra­hendis; [Page 77] yet that it past farther then words I have not ob­served. But King 25. Hen. 8. cap. 21. Henry 1533/4 took them so absolute­ly away, as though Queen Mary repealed that Act, and Paulus Quartus dealt earnestly with her Hist. Concil. Trident. lib. 5. Agents in Rome for restoring the use of them; yet I cannot find they were ever gather'd, and sent thither during her time: but where some Monasteries did answer them to the Pope, and did therefore collect the taxe, that in processe of time became as by custome pay'd to that house; which being after derived to the Crown, and from thence by grant to others, with as ample profits as the Religious persons did possesse them, I conceive they are to this day pay'd as an appendant to the said Man­nors, by the name of Smoak-mony.

6. Before I passe from this, one thing is not to be omitted: that however the Pope had this as a due, and for that end his Collector did abide in England; yet he might not raise the auncient accustomed proportion of the Taxe, nor in any kind alter the manner of taking it: for when Rigandus from the Pope endeavored that, he was streightly prohibited by Edward the 2. The Fox Acts Monuments in Edw. 2. Act it self is printed.

As for the value these Peter-Pence did amount to, I have seen in an old MS. belonging to the Church of Chichester, a Bull said to be of Vide Concil. Spelm. p. 313. Gregory 5 ^ths. that did proportion them after this manner.

Dat. apud Vrbem Veterem x. Kalend. Maii, Pontifica­tus nostri anno secundo.

[Page 78] But this could not be the Bull of Gregory the 5. who dyed about 997. before Florent. Wigorn. Ann. 1109. p. 482. & alii. Ely was erected, or Episcopall chaires placed in Remigius circum Ann. 1080. tr [...]n­slulit sedem Episcopalem de Dorkecestra Lincoln. & Herebertus circa 1086. de Thetfordia, Norwi [...]ch. Malmsbur. de Pont. Lincoln or Norwich.

7. The last article in the oath prescribed the Clergy from the Pope, of obedience to him, was, not any way to alienate the possessions of their houses inconsulto Ro­mano Pontifice. Whether this clause were inserted when 1115, it was first required of Cap. 3. n. 50. Raulf th' Arch­bishop of Cant. I have not been able to certify my self; and am apt to believe it was not: for though we find it in Vitae Abbat. p. 140, 27. Hist, major. pag. 414, 26. Math. Paris, when it was first imposed on Abbots and Bishops, yet that was after the Court of Rome had tasted the sweetnesse of taxing other Churches; neither is it in any of those conditions mentioned by Ann. 1191. col. 663. 6. Diceto. But when ever it came in, it implying a right of alienating the possessions of Religious houses and Churches, with the Papall licence, bred an opinion, that without his as­sent there could be no good sale made of their estates, by any temporall or spirituall power whatsoever, though with their own concurrence: and the Court of Rome grew to maintain, Mat. Paris Ann. 1226. pag. 328, 13. That being a Mother, she ought to be relieved by her Children. Ordericus Vitalis pag. 846. c. Gelasius the se­cond in his distresse 1118, is said to have desired à Nor­mannica Ecclesia subsidium orationum, & magis pecunia­rum: yet certainly the Norman Church did not then at all condescend to any; for the French Agent in the Mat. Paris Additament. MS. ubi su­pra, cap. 3. n. 66. Lugubri querimonia (of which before) mentions him a­mongst divers others who, expell'd Italy, fled into France for succour, yet, non in aliquo gravaverunt Ecclesiam Gallicanam, nec dando beneficta, nec petendo subsidium pe­cuniae vel armorum, sed spiritualibus armis, scilicet la­crymis & orationibus, quae sunt arma ministrorum Christi, maluerunt esse contenti, &c. So that certainly if any col­lection were made for Gelasius, it was so private, pub­lick notice was not taken of it.

8. The first extraordinary contribution raised by [Page 79] allowance for the Popes use in this Kingdome, I take not to have been before 1183. when Lucius 3 ^us. at odds with the Citizens of Rome, not any ways able to resist their fury, sent to Henry the 2. postulans ab eo & à clerica­tu Angliae auxilium. The thing was taken into conside­ration, and for the precedent, it was not thought fit any thing should be given as from the Clergy, but that they might raise a supply amongst themselves for the King, without permitting a forraign Agent to intermeddle; and his Majesty might with that relieve the Pope as he should see occasion. But take in the Historian his own words. Hoveden Ann. 1183. fol. 354. b. 43. Consuluit Rex Episcopos suos & clerum Angliae de petitione summi Pontificis: cui Episcopus & Clerus con­suluerunt, ut ipse secundum voluntatem suam & hono­rem faceret auxilium Domino Papae, tam pro se quam illis; quia tolerabilius esset, & plus placeret eis, quod Dominus Rex, si vellet, accepisset ab eis recompensationem auxilii illius, quam si permisisset nuncios Domini Papae in An­gliam venire, ad capiendum de iis auxilium; quia si aliter fiere [...], posset verti in consuetudinem, ad detrimentum regni. Adqu [...]vit Rex consilio corum, & fecit auxilium magnum Domino Papae in auro & argento. The judicious reader may observe hence things very remarkable: as, that the King did in points concerned the Pope consult with the English Church, and followed their advise; the great care the Clergy took to avoid any sinister consequence in future, and therefore did themselves give to the Prince, as to whom it was due from them, and not to the Pope, who by custome might come to claim it: as indeed he did after step so far, as to prohibit their gi­ving the King at all, without De immuni­tate Ecclesiae in Sexto cap. 3. vid. Knig [...] ­ton col. 2489, 37. his license, endeavouring the gaining a supremacy over them as well in Tempo­ralls as Spiritualls, who hitherto had not meddled with collections of that nature.

For the Gervas. Dorobern. Ann. 1166. col. 1399▪ 7. same Henry, about 17 years before, (after th' example of the French) did cause a supply be made [Page 80] for the relief of the Eastern Church; but I do not find it to have been either upon any motion from Rome, or any part of what was so levyed to have been con­verted that way.

9. But the former granted 1183. passing with so great circumspection, perswaded the Popes not to think fit sodainly (as it seems) of attempting the like; yet that the Church of England might not be unaccu­stomed to paiments, they sometimes exhorted Chri­stians to the subvention of the Holy Land, and thereupon did distribute Spirituall Indulgences (which cost them [...]ot a farthing) and procured Princes to impose on their Subjects for that end: so did Newbri­gensis lib. 3. cap. 21, 22, 23, &c. Hoved. Ann. 1187. fol. 363. b. & sequentibus. Ger. Doro­bern. c. 1522. 11. Clement the 3. or rather Gregory the 8 ^th. about 1187. stir up Hen. the 2. and Phi­lip Augustus, Mat. Paris Ann. 1201. pag. 206, 54. Ann. 1292, pag. 20 [...]. 12. Innocentius 3. King Iohn: and, as a generall Superintendent over the Clergy, did then in­tromit himself and his Agents in the raising of it, and so did convert some good proportion to his own use; inso­much as Iohannes Ferentinus, sent hither 1206. from the same Innocentius 3 ^us, Mat. Paris Ann. 1206. pag. 214, 33. carryed hence a good quantity; upon which King Iohn writ unto the Pope 1207. Mat. Paris p. 224, 25. quod uberiores sibi fructus proveniant de regno Angliae, quam de omnibus regionibus citra Alpes constitutis, &c. Yet truly, to raise any considerable summe of mony from the whole body of the Clergy, for support of the Papall designs, I do not find any great attempt before Gregory the ix. 1229. Mat. Paris pag. 361, 2, 49. pag. 362, 9. demanded a tenth of the move­ables, of both Lay and Ecclesiasticks: to which the Tem­porall Lords would not at all assent, Nolentes Baronias vel laicas possessiones Romanae Ecclesiae obligare; and the Clergy were unwillingly induced to the contribution. The Pope thus entred, meddled no more with the Lay, but of Mat. Paris Ann. 1240. pag. 526, 20. the Clergy eleven years after he demanded by his Legat a fifth part of their goods. Many meetings were had about it: Pag. 534, 8, 39. they shewed the King, they held their Baronies of him, and could not without his assent [Page 81] charge them; that having formerly given a tenth, this of a fifth might create a custome: and at a meeting in Bark­sh [...]re exhibited sundry solid reasons (too long to be here repeated) against the contribution. But nothing would serve; the King made for it, and th' Archbishop out of private ends paying it, they were in the end forced to yield such a supply, as at his departure the year follow­ing it was say'd, Mat. Paris Ann. 1241. pag. 549, 2 [...]. there did not remain so much treasure in the Kingdome, as he had in three years extorted from it (the vessells and ornaments of Churches excepted.)

10. But neither the paying it with so great reluctancy, nor the Apud Mat. Paris p. 666, 51. Remonstrance prefer'd in the Councell of Lions 1245. from the body of the Kingdome, of the seve­rall exactions the Nation lay under from Rome, and like­wise Apud Mat. Paris Anno 1246, p. 698, 40, 51, &c. to the Pope himself the year following, could any way stop the proceedings; but Innocentius 4 ^tus. 1246, Ibid. pag. 701, 56. pag. 707, [...]0. pag. 708. invented a new way, to charge every Religious house with finding and paying a quantity of souldiers for his service in the wars for one year: which being required from both the English and French, produced here those prohibitions in the same Author against raising any Tal­lagium or auxilium. But the French caused their Agent to use a serious expostulation in the businesse; which, because it is not printed, I shall deliver at large as I In Lugubri querimoni [...] Additament. Mat. Paris MS. de qua supra, cap. 3. n. 59, 67. find it. Nuncii de novo accesserunt, nova gravamina addentes supradictis: Nuper enim mandavistis Ecclesiis, ut quia persecutor vester ad partes istas venturus est, mittant vobis militiam munitam ad resistendum ei, quia non est conci­lium cedere venienti; super quo satis excusabiles sunt Ec­clesiae, quia non habent militiam, nec est in parte eorum mit­tere quod non habent, quos etiamsi haberent & mitterent, non est tutum confid [...]re de ipsis. Nec scitur etiam de illis, utrum venturus sit, quia etiamsi veniret, praeferendum esset (ut videretur) concilio humano concilium Domini, qui dicit, Si persecuti fuerint vos in unam civitatem, fugite in aliam, &c. And in the same year he Mat. Paris Ann. 1246. pag. 707, 2. ut si clericus ex tunc de­cederet inte­status, ejus­dem bona in usus Domini Papae con­verterentur. attempted the [Page 82] making himself heir to any Clerk that should die in­testate; and the year Mat. Paris p. 730, 16. following received from the Clergy eleven thousand marks, exceptis exemptis & tri­bus clericis, as an addition to six thousand he had re­ceived the Ibid. Ann. 1246. p. 715, 16. year before.

11. I shall not here take upon me to repeat all the times and wayes by which the subject had his purse thus drained, the labour would be too great, and the profit too little: it shall suffice to note, the Court of Rome, by much strugling, overcame in the end all diffi­culties, & did arrive to that height, the Rot. Parl. 50. Ed. 3. n. 107. Commons were forced in Parliament 1376. to prefer this petition: Si tost come le Pape voet avoir monoie pur maintenir ses guer­res de Lombardy, ou ailleurs pur despendere, ou pur raun­son auscuns de ses amys prisoners Fraunceys prises par Englois, il voet avoir subsidie de Clergie d' Engleterre; & tantost celuy est grantez par les Prelats, a cause qe les Evesqes n'osent luy contrestere, & est leve de Clergie sans lour assent ent avoir devant: Et les Seculers Seigneurs my preignent garde, ne ne font face coment le Clergie est de­struict, & la monoye de Royalme malement emporte.

12. And indeed the Kingdome had great reason thus to complain: see one of many examples that may be alledged. In the year 1343, the 17. Ed. 3. Clement the 6. sent hither to provide for two Cardinall Priests, one out of the Province of York, the other Canterbury, in spirituall livings, to the value of 1000. marks a piece, Rot. Parl. 17. Ed. 3. n. 59. sur une si generale & coverte maniere, qe la somme pas­ser a dix mille marqes avant qe le doun soit accept. But the State would not endure this, Walsing. Hist. p. 150, 30. but chasing their Agents out of the Kingdome, the King sent through every County, Hen. Knigh­ton. col. 25 [...]3, 50. Ne quis ab eo tempore & deinceps admitte­retur per bullam, sine speciali licentia Regis: And a little after, the Parliament held the 20. of Ed. 3. 1346. the Commons yet more plainly, Rot. Parl. 20. Ed. 3. n. 33. [...]. 35▪ Nous ne voulons soeffrer qe payement soit fait as Cardinalx, pour lour demoere en [Page 83] France de treter, &c. And soon after they represent this very particular of 2000. marks to be N. 35. en anientisse­ment de la terre, and encrese de nos enemies; and therefore qu' [...]ls ne soient en nul maniere so [...]fferts, &c. In both which his Ma ^tie. gives them content.

13. Neither did the Papacy, having gained the pos­session (as I may term it) of taxing, impose these pay­ments for one year onely upon forreign Churches, as at first, but for six successively one after the other. So did W ^mus Thorne col. 1926, 27. Iohn the 21. in the year 1277. and Wasing. Hist. p. 73, 3. Clement the 5. in the Councell of Vienna 1311. pretending an employ­ment against the Infidells; but procuring Princes to joyn with them in the collecting, that it might be pay'd with more facility, (and therefore gave them either the Vide Mat. Paris Anno 1252. p. 849, 12. whole, or part of what was so raised; from whence no doubt grew that proverb so full of infamy, Ibid. Anno 12 [...]5. p. 917. 39. That the King and Pope were the Lion and Wolf) did in the end (as we have heard) convert the treasure to the ransoming their friends, the maintenance of their wars, and such like mundane ends. The Chronicon de Regibus Fran­corum ad fi­nem Pauli Aemilii, Ann. 1326. & du Tillet in Chronico. French affirm, the first of their Kings who shared with Rome in these levies, to have been Charls le Bel, about 1326. which if it were, our Kings were before them; but such as succeded knew there as well as elsewhere, how to apply what was thus gather'd wholy to themselves, wiping the Popes clean out: and notwithstanding all Vide Hist. del Concil. Trident. in 4 ^to, lib. 5. p. 408. complaints in that kind from Rome, De benefi­ciis lib. 7. c. 1. in fine. Duarenus observes the Crown of France to have none more certain or speedy revenue, then that is thus raised of the Ecclesiasticks.

14. But these exactions grew so burthensome, Mar­tin the 5 ^th. at Concil. Con­stant. Sess. 43. de Decimis & aliis one­ribus: concii. gen. Romae, pag. 279. & pag. 297. the Councell of Constance 1417. was con­strained to establish, Nullatenus imponantur generaliter super totum clerum, nisi ex magna & ardua causa, & uti­litate universalem, Ecclesiam concernente, & de consilio & consensu & subscriptione fratrum nostrorum, sanctae Ro­manae Ecclesiae Cardinalium & Praelatorum, quorum con­silium [Page 84] commode haberi poterit; nec specialiter in aliquo regno vel provincia, inconsultis praelatis ipsius regni vel provinciae, &c. Upon which Decree a supply of the Tenth being Herbert. Hist. Hen. 8. pag. 57. p. 59▪ & [...]ullae sive Epistolae Leo­nis de eadem re, quas vidi manuser. twice demanded, viz. 1515, and 1518. by Leo the x ^th. against the Turk, th' English Clergy de­nyed them both times. Thus the Papacy by little and little gained in England the power of sometimes lay­ing that Tax on Church-men, is to this day known by the name of a Tenth, which became limited, as we have seen; and after by 26. Hen. 8. [...]ap. 3. statute the 26. Hen. 8 ^th. transfer'd to the King to be pay'd annually unto him; as were like­wise the First fruits or profits of one year, commonly called Annats, (for I take them to be the same) of all spirituall livings: of which a word.

15. The first raising of them seemeth to have been, that when the Court of Rome did confer on Clerks and Chaplains residing with them, benefices in the Dioceses of others, they who thus obtained from that Chair not onely the Spirituall, of Ordination, but likewise the Temporall of Profit, did at first, either to shew their gra­titude, or for that the Pope would have it so, voluntari­ly give the whole, or some part of the first years revenue to the Court, by whose favour they received all: and the Papacy perceiving the gain did thus accrue, laboured to extend it farther; was in some sort imitated by other Bishops; and for avoyding the shew of Simony, cover'd what was thus took with the names of Annates, Va­cantiae, Minuta servitia were small pai­ments, such as had any expe­dition in the Court of Rome were lyable unto, as fees to certain Officers or servants of the Pope, called therefore familiares Dui. Pa­pae: as of late, such as renewed leases of the Archbishop of Cant. did to his Secretaries, and [...]thers of [...]is retinue. 1389. there was payed 4 of these to the [...]ope, and one to the dependents on the Cardina [...]ls. Thorn col. 2194, 31. the rest have no difficulty. Minuta servitia Scripturae, and such like. But as St. Gregory Lib. 4. Epist. 44. Indict. 13. tolerating onely a liberality to be given after the reception of the Pall, his successors knew how to turn it to a revenue; so these, however at first begun, did afterwards become an [...]ually a profit. What [Page 85] others did in this kind, is not necessary to that I treat of; but upon the practice of the Church of Rome, the 25. Ed. 3. the Commons Rot. Parl. Octav. Purif. 25. Ed. 3. n. 13. exhibit this petition to the King: Prie sa Commune, &c. de veer & regarder, &c. Coment le Pape ne soloit avant ces heures faire reservations de nul benefice de seint Esglise, si'l ne fust de benefice de ses Cha­pleyns, ou de ses Clerks qe moreront en la Court de Rome; & ore tard & de novel pur covetise d'avoir les primers fruicts, & les autres profitz qe endependent, ad' reservee & reserve de jour en autre a sa collation generalement & especialment, si bien Abb [...]ies & Priories, come toutz les autres grantz beneficez d'Engleterre qe sont de Patronag [...] espiritel, & generalementil ad' reservee ore tard toutes les dignites d'Engleterre, & Provendres en Esglises Cathe­dralles, & les donne si bien as Aliens come as Denezeins, & issint ad le Pape toutz les primers fruicts des dits bene­fices. By which it appeares, the Papacy, that former­ly took the first-fruits of onely such livings as men dyed possest of in the Court of Rome, had an intent of ex­tending them to all were de Patronage espiritel: but whe­ther an active King stopt upon this the endeavours of that See, or the Popes, wise men, thought it not [...]it to make too sodain an irruption into the profits of other Churches, is not greatly materiall; [...]ot. Parl. 50. Ed, 3. n. 1 [...]9. but 25. years af­ter, the Commons again represent the Popes Col­lector, Ore de novel cest an & nele prest unqes devant al oeps du Pape les primiers fruitz de ches [...]un benefice, dont il fait provision ou collation, except de graces grantez aux povres, ou il ne soleit prendre nulles fruictes [...]orsqe soule­ment des beneficez vacantz en la Court de Rome.

16. But in whose time these first-fruits began to be taken, there seems to me some difference amongst writers. Theodoricus à Niem (who lived in the Court of Rome, Secretary as some write to Gregory the xi. or ra­ther, as it seems to me, of Vrban the vi.) De schismate [...] inter Vrba­n [...]m 6. &c. lib. 2. [...]. sayes, Boni­face the ix. circa decimum annum sui regiminis, viz. 1399. [Page 86] primos fructus unius anni omnium Ecclesiarum Cathedra­lium & Abbatiarum vacantium suae camerae reservavit, it a quod quicunque extunc per eum promoveri voluit, ante omnia cogebatur solvere primos fructus ecclesiae, vel mo­nasterii cui praefici voluit, &c. With whom Platina in Vita Ponifu­cii ix. Platina agrees; Annatarum usum primus imposuit, (Bonifa­cius ix.) hac conditione, ut qui beneficium consequere­tur, dimidum annui proventus fisco Apostolico persolve­rent: sunt tamen qui hoc inventum Iohanni xxii. ascri­bunt, &c. The same likewise De invent. rerum lib. 8. cap. 2. Polidore Virgil affirms, though he speak as if some thought them of an higher time, which under favour I do not credit; for Tract, de Annatis non solvend's, in fasciculo re­rum expetend. & fugiend. fol. 18. 9. E [...] interopera ejus pag. 82. col. 2. Nicho­laus Clemanges, in the treatise he writ concerning them, saith, that when such reservations fell into considera­tion in the Councell of Constance (he lived whilst it [...]ate) no beginning could be assigned before Iohn the xxii. began them, pro certo passagio ultramarino, & quibus­dam aliis necessitatibus suis. To which I may adde the opinion of the wise and learned Epist. 296. Romae 22 De­cembr. 1601. Cardinall d'Ossat: I [...]han xxii. François de nation, dont il me deplaist, fust le primier que outre les taxes & Annates qu'il inventa, &c. And Ranulphus Cestrensis, one of that time, Polychron. lib. 7. cap. 42. apud Hen. Knighton col. 2534, 8. saith of him, Beneficiorum per mortem seu resignationem va­cantium, sive per translationem, primos fructus reser­vavit, ita ut Rector iustitutus taxationem beneficii sui aut residuum taxationis acceptaret: ex qua cautela innu­merabiles thesauri ad manus Papae devenerunt, &c. and Knighton himself, col. 2565, 47. reservavit curiae omnes primos fructus vacantium Ecclesiarum, sive per mortem sive per re­signationem, &c. Hist. Anno 1316. p. 84, 45. Walsingham 1316. Summus Ponti­fex reservavit camerae suae primos fructus beneficiorum omnium in Anglia per trienntum vacantium: which not occurring of any Pope before, I cannot ascribe other to have begun them then he; who though, in a De praebendis & dignitati­bus cap. 11. extravagant. Commun. bull dated the 5. Ianuary 4. Pontificatus, he mention Fructus redditus, proventus, primi anni beneficiorum, yet by the [Page 87] doubts he there resolves, shews the practice of them then newly brought into the Church. But whereas the Cle­manges, Pla­tina, Polidor. writers before-named agree, the English, of all Nations, never received in this the full extent of the Papall commands, I conceive it to arise from the good Laws they made against them: of which before, and after.

17. It is hardly credible how great a masse of trea­sure was by these wayes sent hence into Italy. Mat. Paris Ann. 1245. pag. 658, 49. pag. 667, 36. The re­venues th' Italians were possest of in England 1245. are accounted not lesse then 60. thousand Marks; Ibid. pag. 859, 48. 1252. it was thought they did amount to 70. thousand (all which for the most drained thither:) and in Rot. Parl. Octav. purif. 25. Ed. 3. n. 13. tent. Ann. 1351. the Parliament held about an hundred years after, the Com­mons shew, what went hence to the Court of Rome, tourne a plus grand destruction du Royalme qe toute la guerre nostre Seig ^r. le Roy: yet, notwithstanding so ma­ny statutes as were made by that Prince, for mode­rating the excesses in this kind, the 50 ^th. they complain, (I shall give it contractedly) Rot. [...]arl. 50. Ed. 3. n. 105. 10 [...] the Popes collect [...]r here held a receipt equall to a Prince or Duke; sent annually to Rome from the Clergy, for Procuration of Albeys, Priories, First-fruits, &c. xx. thousand Marks, some years more others lesse, and to Cardinalls and other Clerks beneficed in England as much, besides what was conveyed to English Clerks remaining there to sollicite the affairs of the Nation: upon which they desire his Ma ^•y, no col­lector of the Pope may reside in England.

18. But the King, as it seems, not greatly complying with their desires, the Rot. [...]arl. 51. Ed. 3. n. 78, 79. year following they again in­stance, that certain Cardinalls, notorious enemies, had pro­cured a clause d'anteferri to certain benefices, within the Provinces of Canterbury and York; that the Popes Col­lector was as very an enemy to this State as the French themselves; that his house-keeping here at the Clergies cost was not lesse then 300 ^l. by the year; that he sent an­nually [Page 88] from hence beyond Seas a la foitz xx. Mill. mares; a la foitz xx. Mill. lib. at one time 20 thousand marks, sometimes 20. thousand pounds; and what was worse, espyed the secrets of the Kingdome, vacations of benefices, and so dayly made the certainty known to the said Court; did now raise for the Pope the first-fruits of all dignities and other smaller promotions, causing by oath to pay the true value of them, surmounting the rate they were formerly taxed at: which now in the very beginning ought to be crusht, &c. Vpon which considerations they desire, all strang [...]rs, Clerks and others (excepting Knights, Esquires, Merchants, Artificers) might sodainly avoid the Kingdom; no subjects, without the Kings expresse licence, to be Proctors, Aturneys, F [...]rmors to any such Alyen, under the pain, after Proclamation made, of life, member, losse of lands and goods, and to be dealt with as theeves and robbers; no mony during the wars to be transported out of the Kingdom by exchange or otherwise, on the forfei­ture of it. But to this the answer onely was, Setiegnent les estatutz & ordonances ent faites. Whereupon the Rot. Parl. 1. Ric. 2. n. 66, 6 [...]. 68. next Parliament the Commons prefer'd again three Petitions, touching I. The paiment of What each Bishop payed to the See of Rome at his entrance for First-fruits, vide God­win. Catal. in fine unius cujusque Episcopatus. First-fruits taken come due a la chambre nostre seint Pere, yet not used in the Realme before these times, was contrary to former treaties with the Pope, &c. II. Reservations of be­nefi [...]es. III. By that way bestowing them on Alyens, who sundry times employed the profits of them towards the raun­soming or araying their friends, enemies to the King. Of all which they desire his Ma ^ty. to provide remedy; as also that the Petitions the two last Parliaments (of which be­fore) might be consider'd, and convenient remedy or­dained. To which the answer is, Les Seig ^rs. du grand conseil ordeigneront due remedie sur les matires comprises en [...]estes trois billes precedentes. And here I take the grand Councell to be the Privy Councell, not the Lords in or out of Parliament; called the grand Councell for the greatnesse of the affairs fell within their cognizance, [Page 89] and Rot. Parl. 5. Hen. 4. n. 37. vide 10. Ric. 2. n. 20. 13. Ric. 2. n. 6. 7. Hen. 4. n. 31. 11. Hen. 4. n. 39. named the 5. of Hen. the 4. to consist onely of six Bishops, one Duke, two Earls, and other in all to the number of 22.

19. What order they establisht, I have not met with; it is manifest not to have been such as gave the satis­faction hoped for, by the Commons Rot. Parl. 3. Ric. 2 n. 37. & cap. 3. & Crast. anima­rum. 5. R. 2. n. 90, 91. renewing in ef­fect both 3 ^o. and 5 ^to. Ric. 2. the same suites: and the in­conveniences still continuing, Wm. Thorne col. 2184, & sequent. in the year 1386/7. 10. Ric. 2. William Weld was chosen Abbot of S. Au­gustins (in the place of Michael newly dead,) who trou­bled with a quartan ague, the French and Dutch on the seas, the King inhibited his going to Rome for con­firmation, &c. He thereupon employs William Thorn, (from whose pen we have the relation) hoping to be excused himself of the journey; who col. 2187, 62. shewing the suf­ferings of the house, the miserable state he must leave it in, that he would expose it irrecuperabili casui & ruinae, that the King had commanded his stay, was in the end told by the Pope (after all means he could use) col. 2186, 40. Rex tuus praecipit quod non veniat electus ille, Ego volo quod compareat & examini se subjiciat: and again, after yet more earnest sollicitation, quia audivimus turbationem inter Regem & Barones suos, (the fittest time to contest with a prince) & multa sinistra de persona electi, & quod cederet Romanae ecclesiae in cap. 3. n. 13, 14. praejudicium, absque personali comparitione non intendimus ipsum confirmare, ne daretur posteris in exemplum. The cause hanging three years in suspense, the Abbot in fine was forced to appear in Rome for his benediction, and returned with it not to his house till about the end of March 1389. the 12. Ric. 2. After which, the next 13. Ric. 2. cap. 2. & 3. stat. 2. Parliament obtained the sta­tute of Premunire, against the Popes conferring any Be­nefice within the said Kingdome from the 29 of Ianuary then ensuing; and no person to send or bring any sum­mons, or sentence of excommunication against any for the execution of the same law, on the pain of being arrested, put [Page 90] in prison, forfeiture of his lands, tenements &c. and incurring the pain of life, member, &c. The intent of which law In Ric. 2. hist. lib. 20. pag. 417, 32. Polidor Virgil rightly interprets to have been, a confining the Papall auctority within the Oce­an, and for the frequent exactions of Rome, ut nulli mor­talium deinceps liceret pro quavis causa agere apud Roma­num Pontificem; ut quispiam in Anglia ejus autoritate impius religionisque hostis publice declararetur, neve exe­qui tale mandatum si quod ab illo haberet, &c. To which law three years after some other 16. Ric. 2. cap. 5. additions were made: and none of these were ever repealed by Queen Mary, who though she did admit a union with the Church of Rome, yet in restoring the Popes Supremacy the State u­sed so 1. & 2. P. & M. c. 8. see Cook Iust. 3. pag. 127. great caution, as it ever seemed to me rather a verball then reall admission of his auctority; which it seems her Majesty well understood, in that she would never permit Peito to appear before her in the quality of either Cardinall, Bishop, or Legat, to all which he was preferred by Paulus 4. But where Catholick Divine his an­swer to Sr. Ed. Cook, cap. 12. n. 37. 49. pag. 305, 311. some would ex­cuse these and such like laws, as past by consent and tole­ration from Rome, or at least by the importunity of the Lay; that I have said doth enough shew the Papall care, in suf­fering nothing, they could stop, might any way prejudice that See. And for the Bishops passing the 16 Ric. 2. pres­sed by the Temporalty, it is so much otherwise, as that Statute is enrolled on the desire of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rot. Parl. 16. Ric. 2. numero 20. in fine.

20. In the same Parliament, the Commons, as it seems, much exasperated against the Popes collectour, do yet farther Rot. Parl. 13. Ric. 2. n. 43. petition, he may have the warning of fourty daies given him to be gone out of the kingdome, sur peine d'estre pris come enemy du Roy & ranceone; & qe desore en avant▪ nul collectour soit demoerant deinz le Royalme d' Engleterre, s'ilne soit lige du Roy, & qe mesme cestui face nul rien a contraire de l'estatute de Provisors fait en cest present Parlement, sur peine de vie & de membre, [Page 91] sanz perdon, considerant les meschiefs & damages qe les Collectours estranges ount faitz deinz le Royalme devant ces heures. But to this the answer only is, Le Roys' advisera.

21. After these petitions and laws, however they suf­ficiently barr'd the Court of Rome from medling with this Church, and enough shewed the right of the Kingdome in reforming of it self, and redressing all inconveniences came unto it from beyond sea; yet the King having a power of dispensing with those statutes, this mischief en­sued: divers who easily obtained letters of provision to a good benefice from the Papacy, sued to the King (who held fair correspondency with the Popes) that they might put his bulls in execution; who delayed his con­cessions sometimes a year or longer, after the vacation of the living, during which the Ordinary had admitted some able person into the place, who then began to be distur­bed: for prevention of which, the 7 Hen. 4. cap. 8. 3 Hen. 5. cap. 4. statutes of 7. Hen. 4. and 3. Hen. 5. were made, that no licence should be avail­able against any possest of a living at the day of the date thereof, and farther to make void all so granted. After Concor­data inter Martinum 5. & Ecclesiam Anglicanam in Actis publi­cis Archiepisc. & in Biblio­theca Cotton. Manuser. which the contract, too long to be here inserted, be­tween Martin the 5. and the English Church, for setling severall disputes of Ecclesiastick cognizance, as of uniting benefices, consolidations, &c. was concluded; in which the Papacy seems to permit such particulars to the En­glish Clergy, as they would not be restrained in, though formerly claimed not to be exercised but by his auctori­ty. Yet the 8. Hen. 5. n. 10. the Commons petition, qe nul persone, de quel estate ou condition qu'il soit, ne amesne &c. hors du Royalme d' Engleterre—or ne argent pour marchandise de seinte Esglise, ou autre grace ou priviledge d'seinte Esglise avoir, ne pour autre cause queconque, &c.

22. It would be here tedious, and not greatly perti­nent, to repeat all the provisions made in this kind, for the well-governing the Clergy of this Kingdome, and preserving of them free of destruction from abroad; [Page 92] which yet were never such, but the Pope and his officers did export a great quantity of treasure from them. Wil­liam Thorne hath recorded the disbursements to the Court of Rome at the election of Michael Abbot of Saint Augustine 1375. not to have been lesse then 428 ^l.—17 ^s.—10 ^d. beside the expence of such as were sent, and what was paid for the loan of mony to make these payments, viz. 130 ^l.—18 ^s.—2 ^d. Our Historians Antiqui­tat. eccles. Britann. in vita Cranmeri pag. 381. 2. edit. 1572. Hall 24. Hen. 8. fol. cciii. a. Herb. in Hen. 8. p. 330. observe, in the Parliament held 1532. 23 Hen. 8. it was compu­ted, the Papacy had received out of England for only the Investitures of Bishopricks, in the fourty years last past, an hundred and sixty thousand pound sterling, which is four thousand pound by the year: an incredible summe, considering the poverty of the Realm for lack of silver, the weight of the mony then currant, and the strict laws of former Princes against such like transportations.

23. Thus having shew'd the beginning of the Papall auctority with us, and how from the generall power all Bishops received from Christ, and the fatherly care such as were instrumentall in the conversion of a people did carry to them as their spirituall children, and the obedi­ence they likewise yielded to their ghostly fathers, the Pope began by steps (as I may say) to exercise a domini­on over the Clergy here, and not stopping there, upon various pretences, by severall waies, and (as it appears) degrees, to become so far lord of their Temporalls, that they might not dispose of them, well, contrary to his liking, because he had the sole rule of all committed to him from Christ: the first point I conceive sufficient­ly proved, viz. that what was gained thus by great indu­stry, at sundry times, by severall means, could no way speak his superintendency over this Church jure divino.

The second point remains, whether our Princes, by the advise of their Clergy, had not auctority to cause them reform this Church, without any new assumpti­on of power, not formerly invested in the Crown: [Page 93] which leads me to shew what the Regall power in sacris was here held to be, before Hen. the 8. and Rome divided each from other.

CHAP. V.
How far the Regall power did extend it self in matters ecclesiasticall.

1. BEfore I enter into the dispute of the right the kings of England did exercise in the regi­ment of this Church, I hold it not unneces­sary to see, in what Divines hold ecclesiastick auctority doth consist. De Roman [...] Pontif. lib. 4. cap. 22. §. 1. Bellarmine, Sum Ec­cles. lib. 1. cap. 93, 96. Turrecremata and others divide spirituall power into Ordinis, which they refer to the administration of the Sacraments; and Iuris­dictionis, which they hold double, internall, where the Divine by perswasions, wholesome instructions, ghostly counsell, and the like, so convinces the inward consci­ence, as it is wholly obedient to his dictates, such as those of St. Peter were Acts ii. 37. and externall, where the Church in foro exteriori compells the Christians obedi­ence. Now for the first and second of these, the King did not take upon him at all to meddle: for he neither assumed to himself a power of preaching, teaching, binding, or loosing in foro animae, administring the holy Sacraments, conferring Orders, nor to any particular is properly annexed to them; only to such things as are of the outward policy of the Church, as that God may be truly served, such as transgresse the received lawfull constitutions even of the Church, fitly punished, by the right of his Crown, the continued practice of his Ance­stours, he could not doubt but he might deal in, causing all others, be they Clerks or other, that offend, to suffer condigne punishment.

[Page 94]2. For the better understanding how far the ecclesia­stick rule of our Princes did extend, we are to know, they were never doubted to have the same within their domi­nions, Constantine had in the Empire; and our Bishops to have that St. Peter had in the Church. Ego Constan­tini, vos Petri gladium habetis in manibus, said King Edgar to his Clergy, in that his speech so apud Ailre­dum col. 361, 16. Bea [...]o Petro cujus vicem Episcopi ge­runt. Capitul. Carol. & Lu­dovic. lib. 5. cap. 163. recommended to posterity. And therefore, as after the Christian magi­strate began to have government, affairs of most con­cernment in the Church (as is Socrat. pro­log. ad lib. 5. Hist. said) had their depen­dance on the Emperour, the greatest Synods called by him, and the holy men of those times did not doubt the continuing to him the title of Pontifex maximus, as tom. 3. Anno 312. n. 100. Ba­ronius notes, sine ulla Christianitatis labe; and as Euseb. de vita Constanti­ni lib. 4. cap. 24. Con­stantine did esteem the Ecclesiasticks [...], but himself [...], them for things within, but himself for matters without by God appoin­ted a Bishop: so the same King Edgar, Flor. Wi­gorn. Anno 974. p. 360. no lesse to be remembred by the English then Charls the Great by the French, was Regularis concordia &c. notis Seldeni ad Eadmer. pag. 146, 16. & 155, 6, 15. & Concil. Spelm. pag. 437. cap. 7. pag. 438. cap. 8. vide leg. Edwardi cap. 17. solicitous of the Church of his King­dome, veluti Domini sedulus Agricola, and Pastorum Pastor, was reputed and writ himself the Vicar of Christ, and by his Concil. Spelm. à pag. 444, ad pag. 476. laws and Canons assured the world he did not in vain assume those titles, and yet sine ulla Christiani­tatis labe, so far as antiquity ever noted.

3. What particulars those were the Emperours did hold [...], to be without the Church, be­longing as I may say to their Episcopacy, nothing can bet­ter teach us then their commands yet remaining in the laws they publisht; as in Cod. Theodos. de feriis, de nup­tiis, &c. de fide catholica, de Episcopis eccleis. & Cle­ricis, de Monachis, de Haereticis, de Apostatis, de religione, de episcopali judicio, &c. Cod. Iust. lib. 1. Tit. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. & passim in eo: and in the Novells, Novel. 6. Quomodo oporteat episcopos & caeteros clericos ad ordinationes perdu­ci. Novel. 137. de ordinatione Episcoporum & Clerico­rum. [Page 95] The prefaces to which two laws are remarkable: the first shewing the Priestly office is Divinis ministrare, and the Princely, maximam habere sollicitudinem circa ve­ra D. idogmata, & circa sacerdotum honestatem, &c. the o­ther beginning thus, Si civibus leges, quarum potestatem nobis Deus pro sua in homines benignitate credidit, firm as ab omnibus custodiri ad obedientium securitatem studemus, quanto plus studii adhibere debemus circa sacrorum Canonum & divinarum legum custodiam? And accordingly Novel. 123. in 43 chapters he did establish many particulars per­taining to the government of the Church and Church­men; and Novel. 131. not only cap. 1. appointed the obser­vance of the four first generall Councels, but cap. 2, 3, 4. decrees the place or precedency of the Pope of Rome and Arch­bishop of Constantinople should be according to their de­finitions above all other seats, and how far the Dioce­ses of some Chairs by him newly erected should extend, besides other points in severall chapters to the number of 15, See Novel. 146. treating of particulars solely held now of ecclesia­stick cognizance; as did likewise Charls the Great, and Ludovicus Pius in their capitulars in very many places. But with these I have not took upon me farther here to meddle, then by naming some, to shew, they having been practis'd by Emperours, the Kings of England, en­dowed from above with the same auctority in ecclesiasti­cis, might very lawfully within their dominions exercise the like: the question therefore will be, what they did understand their power in the Church to be, and accor­dingly how far they did extend it in use.

4. As for the first, nothing can speak more clear then what themselves publisht on mature and sad deliberati­on, yet remaining in their laws; in which we find the Regall office thus Leg. Edw. Confes. cap. 17. pag. 142. described: Rex, quia vicarius sam­mi Regis est, ad hoc est constitutus, ut regnum terrenum, & populum Domini, &, super omnia, sanctam veneretur ec­clesiam ejus, & regat, & ab injuriosis d [...]fendat: and a lit­tle [Page 96] after, Debet Rex Deum timere super omnia, & diligere, & mandata ejus per totum regnum suum servare; debet etiam sanctam ecclesiam regni sui, cum omni integritate & libertate, juxta constitutiones patrum & praedecessorum, ser­vare, fovere, manutenere, regere, & contra inimicos de­fendere, ita ut Deus prae caeteris honoretur, & prae oculis semper habeatur, &c.

Canutus, Leg. Canut. cap. 11. pag. 109. Iorval. capite 31. col. 923. vide cap. 25. pag. 106. Iorval. cap. 23. Nobis omni ope atque opera enitendum erit, qua potissimum ratione ea exquiramus consilia, quae ad Rei­publicae pertinent utilitatem, pietatem confirment Christia­nam, atque omnem funditus injustitiam evertant, &c. Ior­valensis renders it, quomodo possit—recta Christianitas propensius erigi.

Ina, Leg. Inae in praefat. pag. 1. apud Iorval. col. 761, 41. In magna servorum Dei frequentia religiose stu­d bam, tum [...]apla Saxon. animorum nostrorum saluti, tum communi regni nostri conservationi; which Iorvalensis reads, solli­citus de salute animarum nostrarum & de statu regni, shew­ing the care both of his subjects souls and bodies, howe­ver after a differing way, did in some measure pertain unto him.

5. Neither did these expressions passe only from the worst of our Kings; but from Ina, Rex maxime pius, as tom. 9. Anno 740. n. 14. See Hunt, fol. 194, 30, 42. Baronius stiles him; from Canutus, who not only him­self 1031. went in devotion to Rome, but was acknow­ledged Fubbert, Carnotensis epist. 97. fol. 93. a. edit. Paris. 1608. erga ecclesias atque Dei servos benignissimus lar­gitor; Edward the Confessour, a canonized Saint; fa­mous for being the best Kings and holyest men: who did not only leave us in their laws the Kings part, but what they conceived likewise the Bishops was, viz. to be Leg. Canut. cap. 26. pag. 106. apud Iorval. cap. 24. col. 922, 17. Dei praecones, divini juris interpretes, that they were rerum divinarum commoda praedicare palam, that for and to the people they should vigilare, excubare, proclamare, &c. as those that Sequor in re­liquis Iorva­lensem. contra spirituales nequitias debent po­pulo praevidere, by letting them know, qui Dei praeceptis o­bedire negl [...]xerit, hic cum ipso Deo commune non habeat. And this is that sword of St. Peter mentioned by King [Page 97] Edgar, which when the holy Bishops of the primitive times did only put in execution, they neither found Princes backward in supporting their designes, nor peo­ple refractory to their exhortations. Thus we see, as they declared the office of a King, they were not silent in that of a Bishop, shewing how either laboured in his way the reducing people to piety, and a vertuous life; the one by making good laws for compelling the wicked, the other by giving such instructions as convinced the inward man.

6. So that we often meet with the Prince extending his commands to the same things the Priest did his per­suasions: as

I. In point of Sacraments, Jorval. cap. 2. col. 761. That children should be baptized within 30 days after birth. Leg. Inae cap. 2. pag. 1.

II. And, because it seems some Priests were negli­gent performers of that duty, Iorval. leg. Aluredi cap. 5. col. 830. That such as were not prepared, or denied the baptizing of them, should be pu­nished. Leg. Ed. & Guthruni cap. 3. pag. 42. excerptiones Egberti cap. 10, 11, 12. in concil. Spelm. pag. 259. where you may observe the Kings precept to impose on the transgressor the payment of 12 What Ora was, see Mr. Sumners Glossary. ora, but the Bishops to be onely persuasive.

III. No person to be admitted to the Eucharist, be a Godfather, receive confirmation from a Bishop, not knowing the Pater Noster and Belief. Canones dati sub Edgaro & legibus ejus annexi, cap. 17. 22. p. 67. & Iorval. cap. 23. col. 921. 57. Leg. Canuti cap. 22. p. 105. Spelm. Concil. cap. 22. pag. 599.

IV. That persons instructed should receive the Com­munion thrice every year. Jorvalensis cap. 21. col. 921. 57. Leg. Canut. cap. 19. p. 104.

V. Restrained by their laws matrimony to the 6 ^th de­gree of consanguinity. Apud Iorval. cap. 11 co. 919 Leg. Canut. cap. 7. p. 101.

VI. Reserved to themselves a liberty of dispensing with the marriage even of Nuns. Iorval. cap. 9. col. 823. Leg. Alured. cap. 8. p. 25. And it is not to be forgot, in that particular, Lanfrank joyns the Kings advise (as a person of equall power) with his own, Lanfranc. Epist. 32. & hoc est, saith he, consilium Regis & nostrum.

[Page 98] VII. Commanded th' observance of Lent principali auctoritate. Beda lib. 3. cap. 8.

VIII. Appointed certain daies to be held festivall by the better sort, but allowed the servant and labourer to work in them. Iorvalensis cap. 50. col. 826, 60. Leg. Aluredi cap. 39. pag. 33. which the laws of Canutus seem after to take away. Iorval. cap. 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, col. 927. vide ibidem col. 920. cap. 17, 18, 19, 20. Thorn col. 2197, 15. Leg. Ca­nut. cap. 42, 43. pag. 118. See there pag. 103. cap. 14, 16, 17. which was likewise exercised 1393. by Richard the 2.

I omit here their edicts for the observation of the Lords day, payment of Tythes, Incontinency, and such like, (held now merely of Ecclesiastick cognizance) for the multiplicity of them.

IX. Divided old, and erected new Bishopricks. Beda lib. 3. cap. 7. lib. 4. cap. 12. lib. 5. cap. 19.

And yet this is that de eccles. lib. 4. cap. 8. §. Nota tertio. Cardinall Bellarmine holds a point of so high concernment, no man can do it without au­ctority obtained from Rome: which yet we never read to have been asked, Florent. Wigor. p. 559. though Theodore 679 erected five ( consensu Regis) at one time; and some other altogether without the Popes liking, as those in the North, after th' expulsion of Wilfrid. Confer Beda lib. 4. cap. 12. cum libro 5. cap. 20. But of this before.

X. Caused the Clergy of their Kingdome to meet in councels. Malms. fol. 26. a. 38. and sometimes presided themselves in them, though the Popes Legate were pre­sent. Concil. Spelm. pag. 292, 293. pag. 189, & passim ibid. Vita Lanfranci cap. 6. col. 1. pag. 7. Vide Florent. Wi­gorn. An. 1070. pag. 434.

7. Of the Crowns commanding in these particulars, it is apparent to have been in possession, the Pope seeing and not interrupting any whit, whilst the Saxon and Dane bare here the sway; when, to speak truth, it seems to me not so much to have been insisted on, by whose auctori­ty the thing commanded was done, as a care taken of all sides nothing should be required but just, and pious; [Page 99] which made each precept, without dispute, from what author soever it proceeded, be readily yielded unto: and so the Normans found it, under whom the first conten­tions (concerning jurisdiction) with the See of Rome be­gan. For before William the first possest himself of this Crown, it is certain, the English Bishops had no ordina­ry Courts distinguish'd from the Lay, but both secular and ecclesiastick Magistrate fate and judged together, what pertained ad observantiam religiouis locis suis, & à suae diaoeceseos synodis; as was likewise the custome Carol. & Ludovic. cap. lib. 6. cap. cxi. in France.

8. This were enough manifest, in that we find the Lay not only present, but subscribers to many of our an­cient in concil. Spelman. passim. Councels; did not the laws of apud Ior­val. col. 845, 36. Ethelstan, cap. 5. p. 64. Iorval. pag. 872, 13. cap. 10. Ed­gar, cap. 17. pag. 3. Iorval. cap. 38. pag. 924. Canutus farther assure us. It is probable, inferiour judicatures did refer matters of doubt to the greater Courts or scy [...]egemor, to be held twice a year, as the former edicts and Concil. Cal­cuith, apud Spelman. cap. 3. pag. 293. some Councels did establish: which produced that care in the Councel of pud Spel­man. concil. p. 3 [...]0. cap. 9. Celichyth 816. the Bishop should transcribe judgements given in quali­cunque synodo of what pertained to his diocese, and he to keep one copy, and the party whom it concerned an­other of such determination (which I take to be those laws mentioned by Ead [...]erus apud Gervasi­um Dorober­nensem, col. 1292, 18. Eadmerus, which as they were re­posed in some parts of the Church, so were the pleas (as it seems) usually Apud Ger­vas & Sim. Dunelm. five Turgot. de Du [...]elmensi ecclesia lib. 3. cap. 10 col. 35. 6. there held.) But the Conqueror, fin­ding these proceedings to be non bene, neque secundum sanctorum canonum praecepta, &c. did by his Charter make a distinction of the Courts, that such as were con­vented by the Bishop should answer non secundum Hun­dred, sed secundum canones & episcopales leges &c. The Charter to Remigius Bishop of Lincoln is upon record, See it in Sr. Ed. Cook Inst. 4. cap. 53. p. 259. published by many, and was certainly by the Conque­rour directed to every Diocese through the Kingdome: for I have seen in an hand of in antiquo Manusur. Edward the first one for [Page 100] London, testifying it was then found in the Episcopall re­gister there.

9. When this past the King, whether at the Popes Legats being here for deposing Stygand 1070. (about which time Historians remember he made some begin­ning for settling the English laws, and is therefore likely to have then past this) or when they were here for set­tling the dispute between York and Canterbury, or at what other time, is uncertain. Yet I cannot deny, it seemeth to me to have given th' occasion of those ex­pressions in apud Baron. tom. 2. Anu. 1071. n. 9. Alexander the 2. his letter to him, that the world, in maligno positus, plus solito pravis incumbat studiis; tamen inter mundi principes & rectores egregiam vestrae religionis famam intelligimus, & quantum honoris sanctae Ecclesiae tum Simoniacae vires opprimendo, (which is apparently spoken of Stygand) tum catholicae libertatis usus & officia (by which questionlesse he points at this charter) confirmando, vestra virtus impendat, non dubia relatione cognoscimus, &c. Now certainly, if he did grant it during the life of the Pope, it must not have been after 1073. in which year he died. I confesse, I have not met with any clear example of the practice of it during the reigns of that King, or either of his children: For though Anselme about 1106. writes to Henry the first, (who had punisht certain Clerks not observing the de­crees of a Councell held at Westminster 1102) Eadmer. p. 85, 40. quod ha­ctenus inauditum & inusitatum in ecclesia Dei de ullo Rege & de aliquo principe; non enim pertinet secundum legem Dei hujusmodi culpam vindicare, nisi ad singulos episcopos per suas parochias: yet I conceive this is to be interpre­ted of the King doing it alone without the Bishop, not when they both joyned together after the manner then in use, which himself elsewhere apud Ead­ [...]er. pag. 24, [...]8. advises Rufus unto; Conemur una, tu regia potestate & ego Pontificali authori­tate, quatenus tale quid inde statuatur, quod cum per totum fuerit regnum divulgatum, solo etiam auditu, quicunque il­lius [Page 101] fautor est paveat & deprimatur. I can take this for no other, but that in the laws of Apud I or­valensem, col. 845, 36. Ethclstan, Debent episco­picum seculi judicibus interesse judiciis, ne permittant, si possint, ut aliqua pravitatum germina pullulaverint. And the laws of Leg. Hen. 1. cap. 7. p. 180. 30. Henry the first are expresse, the use to have continued in his daies; for they approve the ancient in­stitution, That generalia Comitatuum placita certis locis & vicibus convenire debere, That the Iudges in those Courts were Episcopi, Comites, Vicedomini, &c. The causes they dealt in, and order of proceeding, agantur primo debita verae Christianitatis jura, secundo Regis placita, postremo causae singulorum, &c. And why may not certa loca here be what Anselme calls Parochia, the Conqueror Hun­dred?

10. But good laws are not alwaies suddenly put in ex­ecution; Leges institu­untur cum promulgantur, firmantur cum moribus uten­tium approban­tur. Dist. 4. cap. 3. and this of the Conqueror we may take to have slept, till towards the beginning of King Stephen's time it had got some strength, for then we meet with plain precedents of the Ecclesiastick Courts being sever'd from the Lay. Theobald of Canterbury molesting the mo­nastery of St. Augustines concerning certain Priviledg­es granted from the Papacy, th' Abbot obtained a bull from Innocentius 2. of the 20 November 1139. in his hou­ses favour, in which the Pope expostulates with th' Arch­bishop, Habetur haec bulla in splen­dido Ms. re­posito in aula Stae. Trinitatis Cantabr. ante 200. annos ex­arato, & in alio Ms. opti­me notae ante quadringentos annos scripto in Scachario. fol. 49. b. quod occasione privilegii nostri, idem monasteri­um vehementer infestas, & ecclesias eidem coenobio perti­nentes eundem abbatem ordinare non sines, quin potius vio­lent a dominatione ecclesias eorum firmatas diceris infregis­se, & presbyteros tous, invito Abbate, & ejusdem loci fra­tribus, contra Romanae ecclesiae privilegia, quibus idem coenobium est munitum, in eis ponere praesumpsisse: nec his contentus, abbatem ipsum, & homines ejus, ad placitan­dum super hoc in curiam tuam, prout asserunt, praesum­ptuose traxisti, eisque ob eam rem poeuam molieris inflige­re, &c.

11. VVilliam Thorne, who Col. 1800. 46. mentions this 1139. 4. [Page 102] Steph. observes (which is warranted by the bull it self) quod iste Theobaldus primo Abbatem & conventum ad causas trahere conatus est, and is the first I have noted in which th' Ecclesiasticks alone did force men to plead in their Courts; which, as it doth prove they then had them, so we may conclude them not long to have been possest of that power: for it is altogether improbable, if that act of King VVilliam had been in his and his sonns time generally practic't, but some Archbishop, in above fifty years, might have attempted as much, if not to the Abbot, at least to some other; as after this the examples are frequent, of which one in the 122 epistle of Iohannes Sarisburiensis is not unworthy the remembring. Sym­phorian a Clergy-man of York, accused one Osbert, Arch­deacon of the same Church, before king Stephen, the Bishops and Lords, 1154. for making away VVilliam the late Archbishop of that See by poyson. A question grew, to whether Court this cause belonged. The King affir­med it to belong to the temporall, for the heynousness of the fact, and because it was first entred upon in his presence. But before the decision Stephen dyed, and Henry the 2. succeeded; de cujus manibus (saith my Au­thor) vix cum summa difficultate, in manu valida, cum indignatione Regis & omnium procerum, jam dictam cau­sam ad examen ecclesiasticum revocavimus; from whence it was by Appeal carryed to Rome.

12. But what this manus valida should be, that took the case from the King, I cannot imagine: for it is un­doubted, in all disputes of this nature, the Kings Courts have been ever Iudges to what Court the cause did be­long. Bracton speaks very clearly; Lib. 5. de exceptionibus cap. 15. §. 3. fol. 412. a. Iudex ecclesiasticus cum prohibitionem à Rege susceperit, supersedere debet in omnicasu, saltem donec constiterit in curia Regis ad quem pertineatat jurisdictio: quia si Iudex Ecclesiasticus aestimare possit an sua esset jurisdictio, in omni casu indifferenter pro­cederet non obstante regia prohibitione, &c. and 1080 VVil­liam [Page 103] the first, in a Concil. Ille­bon. cap. 47. apud Orderi­cum Vitalem p. 552, 554. Councell at Illebon in Normandy, by th' advise of both estates, Ecclesiastick and Secular, did settle many particulars to belong to the cognizance of the spirituall Iudge; and concludes, that if any thing were further claimed by them, they should not enter upon it, donec in curia Regis monstrent quod habere debe­ant. Neither were the Lay to molest them in the exer­cise of ought there mentioned, Donec in curia Regis mon­strent quod Episcopi inde habere non debeant. So in both reserving the decision to his own Courts, of what per­tained to each: in so much as, what that strong hand should be, did thus take this from the King, I must pro­sesse not to understand. And that our Kings had ever an inspection over those Courts, is not to be doubted, by the Charge against Becket, in which Henry the 2. ur­geth, Apud Ger. Dorobern. col. 1389, 37. An [...] 1164. see Rot. Parl. at Leicester, 2. Hen. 5. pet. des Coes. 5. quod cuidam Iohanni coram ipso litiganti plenam justitiam non exhibuit, & super hoc ad Regis praesentiam vocatus, venire contempsit. To which th' Archbishop answered, praefato Iohanni condignam non defuisse justiti­am, & Iohannem non legaliter curiam suam infamasse, qui non super evangelium, ut moris est, sed super veterem cantuum codicillum, quem secum tuler at, voluerit pejer a­re, &c. and for his not attending the King, to give him sa­tisfaction in the point, pleaded th' excuse of sicknesse; yet for that contempt was adjudged to loose his move­ables.

By which it is evident, th' Archbishop did then Gervas. Do­robern. col. 1389, 42. Hoveden, An. 1165. fol. 283, a. [...]2. ex­act oaths of such as were called into his Court, that he was to give an account to the King of his carriage in it, who by his constitutions hath ever directed the man­ner of proceedings in it. See Mat. Paris Anno 1247. pag. 727, 29. Anno 1246. pag. 716. 1. But of this n. 17. §. xvii. more hereafter.

13. The Conqueror, though he did shew so much complyance with the Romanist, as not to deny any thing former Kings had acknowledged to the Papacy as due, yet [Page 104] farther then W ^mu•. Cre­gor. 7. inter Lanfrance. ep. 7. p. 304. & apud Baron. tom. 11. An. 1079. n. 25. they had gone would in nothing submit unto it: and as they had by their edicts guided the ecclesi­astick affaires of this kingdome, so he proceeded in his lawes, Hoveden, fol. 343. a. 19. à l gibus sanctae matris Ecclesiae sumens exordium, as did his sonne Leg. Hen. 1. cap. 5, 7. & p [...]ssim ibidem. Henry the 1. How far they did conceive this their power to extend in those to matters, nothing can better teach us then the lawes they and such as came af­ter them (princes against whom no exceptions can lye) establisht, and usages they maintained as the rights of the Kingdome, in opposition of all encroachments whatsoever.

14. To enumerate all these Priviledges (I conceive them with our auncestors better called Rights) I hold impossible, the foundation or ground upon which they are built being that power the divine wisdome hath in­vested the secular Magistrate with, for preservation of his Church and people in peace, against all emergencies from whomsoever proceeding; as the Bishops of the Province of Canterbury writ to Thomas Becket 1167. Apud Ho­ved fol. 292. b. 5. Rex à Domino constitutus paci providet subjectorum per omnia; ut hanc conservet Ecclesiis, & commissis sibi popu­lis, dignitates Regibus ante se debitas & exhibitas sibi vult exhiberi. And this issuing from so great auctority, as in effect the body of all the Clergy of the realm, cannot be imagined to be other then the constant opinion of th' English Church. In what these Rights have been put in practise in opposition to Rome (of which I now treat) may in some sort be told: but to say these they are, and no other, is that I mean cannot be. So that we may say the affirmative, these they are, but not the nega­tive, others they are not. Therefore Eadmerus will have it of the Conquerour, that Eadmer. p. 6. 21. Cuncta divina si­mul & humana ejus nutum expectabant, that is in foro exteriori; insomuch as, when the Clergy 1530. gave the King the title of Head of the Church, they intended no other then their fore-fathers, when they [Page 105] called him the Mat Paris An. 1241. pag. 555. 15. Defender, Patron, governor, Epist. Vni­versu. Angliae ibid. An. 1245. pag. 667. 38. ibidem. Tutor of it.

15. Which the French do attribute to their Kings with more hard expressions; Claude Fau­chet en les li­bertes de l' Es­glise Gallicane in 4 ^to. à Paris 1612. avec Priviledge, p. 234. & 1639. p. 179. Ce que monstre (says one) que les evesques de ce temps la, estimerent le Roy, assistè de son conseil d' estat, estre apres Dieu Chef terrien de l' Esglise de son Royaume, & non pas le Pape, in the negative: Which another Charles le Faye ibid. pag. 287. in edit. 1639. p. 230. explains thus, Ce n'est point pour cela que je vueille dire, ce que aucuns ount trop indistinctement profe­rè, que les dits Roys & Princes Souveraignes soient en leurs estats privativement à tous autres, Chefs uniques & ab­solus de l' Esglise, & de tous les minister d' icelle; car pour lereguard de ce que concerne le maniement des choses pure­ment sacrees, come l' administration de la parole de Dieu, & des Sacrements, & la puissance de lier ou delier, voire de regler en particulier le dedans de chacune Esglise, la sur­intendance en appartient aux Evesques, & autres Chefs de la Hierarchie Ecclesiastique, a chascun selon leur rang & de­gr [...]. Then shewing by a comparison, that as the head-Architect leaves to his inferior Agents the use of such instruments as are proper for their undertakings; so, il n' appartient poynt au Roy de manier les choses sacrees, ny supporter comme l' on dit l' arche d' alliance, ils doivent lais­ser cela a ceux de la vocation; mais ils peuvent voire so [...] tenuz devant Dieu, veiller sans cesse, & avoir l' oeil ou­vert a ce que ceux de cest ordre & profession principale, aussi bien que ceux des autres moindres, apportent enloyaute & sain conscience tout soin, diligence, purete, & sincerite, au maniement des charges a eux commises, conformement a leur loix, regles & canons; lesquels au cas qu' ils serroient negligez, & [...]ffacez par la rouille de l' antiquite, ou que par la malice des hommes il fust besoign d' enfaire des noveaux, ils sont tenu user de leur puissance, pourn y sapporter des re­medes, soit par leur Ordonances & pragmatiques, soit par leurs jugements, arrests, & executions d' iceux. e'est ce qu'en France nos predecesseurs ont tousjours appelle, la police ex­terieure sur l' Esglise, de la quelle les Empereurs, Roys & [Page 106] Princes ont use & jouy sans contredit, tant que l' esglise s'est conservee en sapurete, & qu' aucuns d' icelle ne se sont in­gerez, sortants de leurs bornes & l. miles d' usurper les functions Royales. Insomuch as Benigne Miletot doth not onely affirm their Kings to be du delict commun p. 528. edi [...]onis 16, 9. Chess, Protecteurs, & Con­servateurs de leur esglise Gallicane; but pag. 657. recites a speech of th' Archbishop of Vienna made to Henry the 4. 1605. in which he did affirm, que le Roy estcit le Coeur & la Teste de l. ur corps.

16. And other Headship then this I do not know to have been ever attributed to any of our Princes: Cer­tainly they did never take on them the exercise of any thing purely sacred, but as supream 26. Hen. 8. cap. 1. 1. Eliz. cap. 1. Head, Rulers or Go­vernours, under God, by their Commissioners (of which such as bare most sway were ever the Spirituality) to visit, reform, redresse &c. all errours, Heresies, schisms, abuses, &c. And for that the rust of antiquity (as that authour styles it) had much over-spread the Canons of the Church, Stat. 3. & 4. Ed. 6. cap. 11. see before. 25. lien. 8. cap. 19. 27. Hen. 8. cap. 15. 35. Hen. 8. cap. 16. to assigne sixteen of the Clergy, whereof four to be Bishops, and as many of the Lay, of which four to be learned in the Common laws of this realme, to per­use and examineth' ecclesiasticall laws of long time here u­sed, and to gather, order and compile such laws ecclesiasticall, as shall be thought to his Majesty, his said Councell. Counsell, and them or the more part of them, to be practised and set forth within this realme. In pursuance of which, the 11. No­vember 5 ^to of Edward the 6. he nominated two Bishops, two Divines, two Doctours of the Law, two Esquires, to supervise the ecclesiastick laws of this Kingdome, and to compile such a body as were fit to be put in pra­ctise within his Dominions; whose intendments (for it past no further) were after printed by Iohn Day 1571. and are no other then what the French (for the manner of doing) maintain their King might do: neither doth th' Inquisition of Spain publish any thing of that nature, without th' allowance of their King, as I shall shew cap 7. n. 12. here­after.

[Page 107]17. So that, in my opinion, the question cannot be, whether Princes are not capable of such a Right; but whether it were invested in the Crown formerly, and made good by such a continued practise, as might au­thorise ours to take that title (when offered by the Cler­gy 1530.) as well as the French Kings have, without in­croaching on that power th' ecclesiasticks had, and by our laws ought to exercise in England. Now, certain, our Kings did in many things go along with the French in causes ecclesiasticall: Mat. Paris Anno 1247. p. 727, 26. Rex Anglorum, exemplum acci­piens ab illis Baronibus qui sua statuta sanxerunt in Francia, quibus & Dominus Francorum favorem jam praebuit, & si­gillum apposuit, &c. Clement the 7. being held prisoner 1527. by th' Emperour, the 18 ^th. of August Cardinall Woolsy made an agreement with the French, for setling [...]h' ecclesiastick government of each Kingdome during the Popes captivity. For the French, I shall remit the reader to the Preuves des libertes de l' es­glise Callicane, cap. 20 n. 33, p. 529. Deed which is printed; but th' English were to be such as should be agreed to, praelatis accitis de mandato & auctoritate praedicti invictissimi Angliae Regis, whose deter­minations were to be consensu ejusde invictissimi Angliae Regis. But where Hist. Hen. 8. p. 219. my Lord Herbert conceivs this to have been the first taste our King took in governing the Clergy, I can no way be of his opinion; for, without peradventure, the Cardinall neither did nor durst have moved one step in making the Ecclesiasticks lesse depend on the Papacy, then the Common law or custome of the realm war­ranted, knowing he must without that back have lost not onely Clement the 7. but all Popes and the Court of Rome, which must and had been his support, on the de­clining favour of so heady and dangerous a Prince as Henry the 8 ^th, had he not cast off both the Cardinall and his obedience to that See almost together. But how much he had the Clergy before this under his govern­ment, the History of See Hall 6. Hen. 8. Richard Hunne is witnesse suffi­cient: and the rights the Conquerour and his successours [Page 108] were ever in contest with the Papacy about, and main­tained as the laws & customs of the Realm, enough shew they did not command th' Ecclesiasticks here according to the will of any forraign potentate, nor were meer lookers on, whilst another govern'd the English Church: some of which I shall therefore here set down.

I. They Eadmer▪ p. 6, 26, ride e­pist. Hen. [...]ic [...]ley in vita ejus, edit. 1617. p. 77, 78. admitted none to be taken for Pope but by the Kings appointment.

II. Eadmer. ibid. & pag. 113, 1. Thorn, col. 2152, 1. & 2194, 18. & alibi. Cook Inst. 3. p. 127. None to receive letters from him without shew­ing them to the King, who caused all words prejudiciall to him or his crown to be renounced by the bringers, or receivers of them.

III. Eadmer. p. 24. 5. 11. Permitted no councels, but by their liking, to assemble; which gained the name of convocations; as that Stat. 25. Hen. 8. cap. 19. alwayes hath been and ought to be assembled by the Kings writ.

IV. Mat. Paris Anno 1237. p. 447, 51. Caused some to sit in them might supervise the actions, and legato ex parte Regis & regni inhiberent, ne ibi contra Regiam coronam & dignitatem aliquid statuere attentaret: and when any did otherwise, he was forced to retract that he had done, as Vide Seld. de Synedriis part. 1. p. 373. did Peckham; or were Lyndwood de [...]oro compe­tenti, cap. 1. Gloss. 1. in paucis servatae, as those of Boniface.

V. Eadmer. p. 6, 29. Suffered no Synodicall deree to be of force, but by their allowance and confirmation. Flor. Wi­gorn. Anno 1127. p. 505. Rex auditis con­cilii gestis, consensum praebuit, auctoritate regia & potestate concessit & confirmavit statuta concilii à Gulielmo, Cantu­ariensi Archiepiscopo, & sanctae Romanae ecclesiae legato, apud Westmonasterium celebratt. Gervas. Dorobern. Anno 1175. col. 1429, 18. In hoc concilio, ade­mendationem ecclesiae Anglicanae, assensu Domini Regis & primorum omnium regni, haec subscripta promulgata sunt capitula, &c.

VI. Permitted no Bishop to Eadmer. p. 6. 31. excommunicate, or inflict any ecclesiastick censure on any Baron or Officer, nisi ejus praecepto.

VII. M. Paris Additament. p. 200 num. 7. See Articuli cleri 9. Ed. 2. cap▪ 7. Caused the Bishops appear in their Courts, to give account why they excommunicated the subject.

[Page 109] VIII. ibid. n. 10. Caused such as were imprisoned, after fourty dayes standing excommunicate, to be freed by writ, without th' assent of the Prelat, or satisfaction giving; ibid. n. 12. the King and his Iudges communicating with them tam in divinis quam profanis, ibid. n. 13. and commanding none to shun them, though by the Ordinary denounced excom­municate.

IX. Eadmer. p. 58, 40. p. 113, 1 p. 118, 28. Suffered no Legat enter England but with their leave; of which before.

X. Eadmer. p. 115, 23, 31. Determined matters of Episcopacy, inconsulto Romano Pontifice.

XI. Permitted no Appeal to Rome; of which before.

XII. Flor. Wi­gorn. Anno 1070. p. 536. Hunt. fol. 219. a. 1. Bestowed Bishopricks on such as they liked, and Eadmer. p. 95. Flor. Wigorn. An­no 1109. translated Bishops from one See to another.

XIII. Erected new Bishopricks: so did Hen. the 1. 1109. Ely, taking it out of Lincolne, Johannes Hagulstad. col. 257, 48. Carlisle 1133. out of York or rather Duresme: but of this before.

XIV. Vide Cook Instit. 2. p. 625. Commanded by writ their Bishops to resi­dency.

XV. Rot. Parl. 16. March 3. Hen. 5. n. 11. Anno 1414. Io [...]n 23. [...]ope. Commanded their Bishops, by reason of Schism, vacancie of the Popedome, &c. not to seek confirmation from Rome, but the Metropolitan to be charged by the Kings writ to bestow it on the elected.

XVI. Mat. Paris Additament, p. 200. n. 6. Placed by a lay hand Clerks in Prebendary or Parochiall Churches, Ordinariis penitus irrequisitis. And it is not here unworthy the remembring, that VV ^m Lyndwood, a very learned Canonist, who writ about an 100. yeares before Henry the 8 ^ths difference with Cle­ment the 7. finding the Crown in possession of this par­ticular not agreeing with the rules of the Canon law, is so perplext, as in the end he finds no way to make the act valid, De cohabita­tione Clerico­rum & Muli­erum, cap. 1. ad verbum Beneficiati, fol. 64. b. but that he doth it by Papall priviledge: For if by prescription, Episcopo s [...]iente & tolerante, it could not be good; for though the King might confer the tem­poralls of the Church, non tamen potest dare jure suo pote­statem circa spiritualia, viz. circa ea quae pertinent ad regi­men [Page 110] ecclesiasticum, & ministrationem sacramentorum & sacramentalium, nec non circa ecclesiasticae jurisdictionis ex­ercitium, & hujusmodi, quae jure spiritualia sunt; nec in hoc casu potest sibi prodesse praescriptio etiam longissimi temporis, quia talia spiritualia non possunt per regem possideri, &, per consequens, nec ut transeant sub sua potestate possunt prae­scribi, nec consuetudine introduci, &c. In which he will havean hard contest with divers French and Italians, who maintain, Consideratio­ni di [...]adre [...]a­olo Venet. 1606. fol 31. a. vide Ful­gentio in di­fesa d'essi, p. 312. & se­quent. Che tutte le raggioni che si possono ac­quistare per dispensa del Papa, si possono acquistar anco per consuetudine, la quale sopravenga contraria alla legge: that a prince may prescribe for such acts as he can acquire by the Popes dispensation.

XVII. Mat. Paris Additament. p. 200, n 9. & in historia majori p. 716, 7. vide Sel­den. de Syne­driis part. 1. c. 10. p. 383. Prohibited the Lay yielding obedience, or answering by Oath to their Ecclesiastick superiour inqui­ring de peccatis subditorum: which I take to have been in cases not properly of their cognizance, not of wit­nesses either in causes Matrimoniall or Testamentary.

XVIII. I shall conclude these particulars with one ob­servation in Mat. Paris; where the Ecclesiasticks, having enumerated severall cases in which they held them­selves hardly dealt with, adde, Mat. Paris Additament. p. 202. n. 30. That in all of them, if the spirituall Iudge proceeded contrary to the Kings prohi­bition, he was attached, &, appearing before the Iustices, constrained to produce his proceedings, that they might determine to which court the cause belonged: and if found to pertain to the secular, the spirituall Iudges were blamed, and, on confession they had proceeded after the prohibition, were amerced; but denying it, were com­pell'd to make it good by the testimony of two Vilissimi ri­baldi. vile Var­lets, but refusing such purgation, were imprisoned, till by oath they freed themselves to the Iustices; that being cleared even by the Lay, they had no satisfaction for their expence and trouble. By which, by the way, it is mani­fest how much the Kings Courts had the superintenden­cy over the Ecclesiastick.

[Page 111]18. These, and many other particulars of the like na­ture, daily exercised, notwithstanding the clamour of some Ecclesiasticks, more affecting their own party then the rights of the Crown, make there can be no scruple, but the English did ever understand the outward policy of this Church, or government of it in foro exteriori, to have much depended on the King; and therefore the writs for summoning Parliaments, expresse the cause of his calling them to be, pro quibusdam arduis, urgentibus negotiis, nos, statum, & defensionem regni nostri Angliae & ecclesiae Anglicanae concernentibus, Evesque d' Exce [...]re Chanceller. Rot. Parl. 20. Ric. 2. n. 1. or, as our Bi­shops have sometimes exprest it in the Rolls of Parlia­ment, à l' onour & reverence de Dieu & de seinte esglise, & al salvation & amendement de son roialme, &c. Likewise the Commons, that their gift of the 9 ^th sheaf, &c. to Edw. the 3. to have been for his defence of the King­dome, & de seinte esglise d' Engleterre: Rot. Parliament. 15. Ed. 3. n. 25. According to which our Kings joyned both together, professing their care for amending the Church to be equall with that of the Commonwealth. Rot. Parl. at Leicester 2. Hen. 5. [...]. 10. Item fait assavoir, que nostre tressoveraigne seign ^r le Roy, eiantz grande volunte & desir de l'estate de son esglise, & de son Royalme, en les choses ou mesteir est d' amendement, al honor de Dieu, & pur la pees & la commune profit de seinte esglise d' Engleterre, come de tout son Royalme, d' el' advis & assent des seig ^rs esperituells, &c. ad fait, &c. In pur­suance of which interest residing in the Crown, the Lords and Commons under Rich. the 2. fearing the o­pinions called Lollardy might prevail, Hen. Knighton col. 2708. 40. Anno 1387. petierunt à Rege de istis remedium apponi, ne forte archa totius fidei ecclesiae talibus impulsionibus in illius temporibus, pro de­fectu gubernaculi, irremediabiliter quateretur. Upon whose desires, he commanded th' Archbishop of Cant. and his other Bishops, ut officium suum singuli i [...] suis dioe cesibus secundum jura canonica acrius & ferventius ex­ercerent, delinquentes castigarent, librosque eorum An­glicos [Page 112] plenius examinarent, errata exterminarent, popu­lumque in unitatem fidei orthodoxae reducere stude­rent, ecclesiamque urticis, [&] vepribus destoratam li­liis & rosis ornarent, &c. After which, the said authour records a Commission, by which his Majesty, as Defender of the Catholick Faith, did impower certain to seize upon hereticall books, and bring them before his coun­cell: and such as after proclamation shall be found to hold such opinions, being called and examined before two Commissioners (who were of the Clergy) and law­fully convicted thereof, to be by his Majesties ministers committed to the next prison. R [...]. Parl. 2. Hen. 4. n. 47. Fourteen years after which, the Commons shew Hen. the 4 ^th the Parliament might be compared to a Masse, in which th' Archbishop of Cant. began th' office, reading th' Epistle and ex­pounding the Gospel, (which, it seems, they took to be the part of the Ecclesiastick, as did the cap. hoc, n. 6. Saxons before) & à la mesne qe feust la sacrifice d' estre offeriz à Dieux pur touz Christiens, le Roy mesmes à cest Parlement, pour accomplir cellemesne, plusieurs foitz avoit declarez pleine­ment a toutz ses lieges, coment sa volunte feust, qe la foy de seint esglise feust governez en maniere come il' ad este en temps de ses nobles progenitors, & come il est affirme par seint esglise, par les seints Doctours, & par seint Escriture, &c. and a little after, shewing they the Commons were onely to say, Deo gratias, which they were obliged to do for three reasons, the second of which is, pur c [...]o qe la ou la Foy de seint esglise, par malvaise doctrine, feust en point d' avoir este anientz, en grand subversion du Roy & du Roy­alme, mesme nostre Seig r le Roy ent ad fait & ordeignez bon & joust remede, en destruction de tiel doctrine, & de la sect d' ycel, peront ilz sont ensement tenuz de dire cel parole Deo gratias. By all these it must be granted, they did hold the chief care of the English Church to have de­pended (in the outward policy of it) on the prince; or else that they did speak and do very unadyisedly in attri­buting [Page 113] so much unto his care of it, and providing that he might be supplyed to defend it, without at all mentio­ning any other to whose care it belonged.

19. Neither did these expressions and petitions passe the Commons onely, or the Clergy over-ruled by the numbers of the temporality; but the Bishops by them­selves acknowledged how much it stood in his M ^tios care to provide against any novelties creeping into the En­glish Church, and that it might enjoy the rights and li­berties belonging to it: and therefore, when the said doctrine of Lollardy continued encreasing, they, in the names Praelatorum & cleri regni Angliae, petition Rot. Parl. 2. H. 4. n. 48. Hen­ry the 4 ^th. Quatenus—inclitissimorum progenitorum & antecessorum vestrorum laudabilia vestigia graciose conside­rantes, dignetur vestra regia celsitudo pro conservatione di­ctae Ecclesiae Anglicanae, ad Dei laudem, vestrique meri­tum, & totius regni praedicti prosperitatem & honorem, & pro hujusmodi dissentionibus, divisionibus, dampnis & pe­riculis evit indis, super novitatibus & excessibus praedictis in praesenti Parliamento providere de remedio opportuno &c. Did not these then hold it the office of the King, as that his progenitors had ever done; to provide, no dissensions, scandalls, divisions might arise in the Church, the Ca­tholick faith might be truely conserved and susteined? and what other did any of our Princes ever challenge or assume?

20. When the Clergy likewise went at any time beyond their bounds, or were negligent performers of their duties, the subject upon all occasions had recourse unto his M ^ty, as to whose care the seeing what was amiss redrest did especially belong: as Rot. Parl. 50. Ed. 3. n. 84. 1 R. 2. n. 108. when th' Ecclesiastick Courts were grievous for the fees, Rot. Parl. Octav. Purif. 25. Ed. [...]. n. 35. or their pecuniary pennances too heavy, when they were opprest by Papall provisions (of which before) when through the absence of their Curat they were not so well taught &c. Rot. Parl. Octav. Purif. 25. Ed. 3. n▪ 31. when [Page 114] the frequency of the writ de excommunicato capiendo▪ made it burthensome, Rot. Parl. at Lecester 2. Hen. 5. pet. des Cōes. 5. vide Rot. Parl. 46. Ed. 3. n. 36, 37. n. 41, 42. when men were cited by them on causes neither Matrimoniall nor Testamentary, and appearing were not allowed a copy of the libell a­gainst them. In which case the Kings answer is not un­worthy the repeating, shewing clearly, he directed how they should proceed; le Roy voet que a quel heure la co­pie de le libel est grantable par la ley, q' [...]l soit grauntè & live­rè a la partie, sanz d [...]fficulee. It is true, Kings would re­fer matters of that nature to their Bishops, unto whose care under them it did especially belong: so Richard the 2. being Rot. Parl. 17. Ric. 2. n. 43. petitioned in point of Residency, answered, Il appartient aux offices des Evesques, & le Roy voet qu' ils facent lour office & devoirs &c. Rot. Parl. 7. H. 4. n. 114. His successor being a­gain prest in the same kind, gives his command thus, Fa­cent les Ordinaires lour office & devoirs: & per cause qe les pluralites q' ont este grantees devant ces heures sont & ount este la greindre cause de l' absence des tiels curats, y plest au Roy nostre Seig ^r. de l' advis & assent des Seig ^rs ▪ en Par­lement, es [...]rire par ses honourables lettres a nostre seint pier le Pape, de revoker & repeller toutes les pluralites ge­neralement, & qe d' es ore en avant nulle pluralite soit graunte a ascuny en temps a venir. But the Pope, it seems, giving no satisfaction in the particular, the Rot. Parl. 11 Hen. 4. n▪ [...]0. 11. Hen. 4. the Commons again petition, That the riches of the kingdome being in the hands of Church-men, those li­vings upon which the incumbent of common right ought to reside, half of the true value should remain to himself, but the other to the King. To which the an­swer is, Geste matiere appertient a seinte Esglise, & quant a la residence, remede ent fust purveuz en la darrain Con­vocation. Yet this matter of non-residence still molest­ing the Commonwealth, 3. Hen. 6. the King tells them, by th' advise of the Lords of Parliament, Rot. Parl. 3. Hen. 6. n. [...]37, 38. vide 4. Hen. 6. n. 31. He had deli­vered their bill to my Lord of Canterbury, charging him to pourvey of remedy for his Province, and semblably shall [Page 115] write to the Church of York for that Province. By which we may see the King, Archbishop, and Convocation did conceive themselves to have a power of redressing things in this Church, which yet in civility they thought [...]it See cap. 3. n. 14, 19. first to acquaint the Pope with, as a spirituall Doctor or Patriarch, however of great esteem, yet not endued with a power of commanding in this Church otherwise then the lawes of the Kingdome, the contracts with the Papacy did bear.

21. Now it cannot be doubted that all these peti­tions of the Commons, and sundry more which may be produced, had been by them vainly prefer'd, had they not taken the King to have been vested with a power of redressing things blameable in the government of the Church. But when we say the Prince, as the principall, without whom nothing is done, may be rightly termed Head in the act of reformation; our meaning is not, that he will deal in points of Ecclesiastick cognizance without the advise of his Bishops, and other learned of the Clergy: we know, in things proper Numbers xxvii. 21. Iosuah is to take counsell of Eleazer, and the Kings of this nation have ever done so.

22. When Edgar intended the advancing Christi gloriam, he chose him three Bishops to be his Concil. Spelm p. 433. patres spirituales and consiliarios. But to speak of later times: Hall 23. Hen. 8. fol. 202. b. 24. Hen. 8. fol. 205. a. Her­bert p. 329. 153 ½. when the Commons endeavoured a reformation of some things in the Church, Hen. the 8 ^th. would not an­swer their desires, till he had first acquainted the Spiritu­ality. When he intended to publish a Stat. 32. H. 8. cap. 26. book of the prin­cipall articles and points of our faith, with the declaration.—of other expedient points, and also for the lawfull rites and ceremonies to be observed within this realme, he ordai­ned it to be by th' Archbishops and sundry Bishops of both Provinces, and also a great number of the best learned, ho­nestest, and most vertuous sort of Doctors of Divinity, men of discretion, judgement, and good disposition, &c. And Ed­ward [Page 116] the sixth minding a farther reformation of some usages in the administration of the Eucharist, he caused it to be Fox Acts and Monuments, tom. 2. p. 6, 8. col. 1. & pag. 659. col. 2. made by the most grave and learned of his realm, for that purpose by his directions assembled at Windfor; who afterwards, Statut. 2. & 3. Ed. 6. cap. 1. for taking away divers and sundry dif­fering forms and fashions had formerly been used in sundry Churches of England and Wales, appoynted th' Arch­bishop of Canterbury, and certain of the most learned and discreet Bishops, and other learned men of the realm, to con­sider of the premises, who, by the ayd of the Holy Ghost, with one uniform agreement concluded on and set forth the book of Common prayer &c. Upon which the two houses of Parliament, considering as well the most godly travell of the Kings highnesse,—in gathering and collecting the said Archbishops, Bishops and learned men together, as &c. do give to his Highnesse most hearty and lowly thanks &c. So that it is apparent, the King, in composing this book, did not assume to himself, or the Parliament attribute un­to him any other then assembling of the Bishops and o­ther learned men together, to take their consultations.

23. And they observing the great Preface to the book of Ed. the 6. 1549. diversity in saying and singing in severall Churches, the difficulty of finding what was proper for each day, (apt to breed con­fusion) reduced the publick service of the Church to one form more facile and of better edification, follow­ing therein the examples of divers holy Bishops and o­thers: for if Mat. Paris vi [...]. Abba [...]. S▪ Albani, p. 101, 17, 19. p. 123, 28. Guarinus Abbot of S ^t Albans, in the Of­fice used in his Church about 1190, might superflua re­secare, to reduce the prayers there to one form, if Agobardi opera, Paris, 1605 p. 392. A­gobardus in France might amputare superflua vel levia &c. if Harpsfield Hist Anglican. Eccles. sect. xi. cap. 19 p. 251, 48. Osmund Bishop of Salisbury in England, quoniam singulae fere Dioeceses in statis & precariis horis dicendis va­riabant, ad hanc varietatem tollendam, & ut quasi absolu­tum quoddam precandi, quo omnes uti possent, exemplar ex­staret, eas in eum fere ordinem & commodam rationem, quam hodie omnes prope Angliae, Cambriae, & Hiberniae [Page 117] (viz. the Course of Salisbury) Ecclesiae sequuntur, magno & prudenti rerum ex sacris scripturis, & probatis Ecclesiae historiis delectu, distribuit & digessit; if these, I say, might do it on their own motion, there is no question, such of the Clergy as were appointed by the King, might on his desire take it into consideration, and remove matters of­fensive, or lesse to edification.

24. Neither did Queen Elizabeth at the begin­ning of her reign Camden. Annales Eliz. alter some passages in it, but by the opinions of Divines eruditis & moderatis; to whom was added a learned Knight S ^r Thomas Smith, to whose care the supervising of it had by the house of Commons been committed the second of Edward the sixth, and therefore knew better then any other to give an account of that book.

Nor did her self, or the house of Lords use differing wayes, Iourn. des Cōes 23. Eliz. March 3. & 7. & 27. Eliz. Februar. 25. when the Commons at other times have sought some change in the Ecclesiastick government; as the 23. and 27. of her reign, where though the Lord Trea­surer made a short beginning, yet he left the satisfactory answers to be given them by th' Archbishop of York.

Insomuch as we may safely conclude, when the Clergy in Convocation styled Henry the 8 ^th Ecclesiae Anglicanae protectorem unicum, & supremum dominum, &, quantum per Christi leges licet, supremum caput, they added nothing new unto him but a title; for he and his successors after it, did never exercise any auctority in causes Ecclesiastick, not warranted by the practise of for­mer Kings of the nation.

By all which the second question remains sufficiently proved, that our Kings were originally endued with auctority to cause the English Church be reformed by th' advice of their Bishops, and other of the Clergy, as agreeing with the practise of all ages. For who introdu­ced the opinion of Transubstantiation? made it an article of Faith? barr'd the Lay of the Cup? Priests of mar­riage? [Page 118] who restored the Mass in Queen Maries dayes be­fore any reconciliation made with Rome? but the Ec­clesiasticks of this Kingdome under the Prince for the timebeing, who commanded or connived at it.

CHAP. VI.
How the Kings of England proceeded in their separation from Rome.

1 IT being by what is already said undoubt­ed, the Clergy called together by the Prince, or meeting by his allowance, have e­ver had a power of reforming this Church, commanding things juris positivi in it, and likewise dis­pensing with them, and that the statute 24. Hen. 8. cap. 12. that saith in effect as much, is no other then a declara­tion of the Common law, that is the custome of the realm; the next enquiry will be, for acquitting the Church of England in point of schism, how this separa­tion from Rome was made.

2. Henry the 8 ^th having long pursued a cause Matri­moniall with Clement the 7. who shewed so much complyance to determine it in his favour, as he sent Cardinall Campeius hither to joyn with Wolsey the Kings creature in the businesse, and upon the Emperours suc­cesse in Italy, the cause, after many delayes, being revo­ked to Rome, the King, upon the opinions of many for­reign Divines of the invalidity of his marriage with Queen Katharine, caused the case to be determined by the English Church: which judgement yet he would have in some measure submitted to the Court of Rome, so as he might have given the persons to whom it was delegated by the Pope full information, and the [Page 119] Cardinalls of the Imperiall faction excluded having any part in the decision. But Clement hearing what had past in England, with more then ordinary hast determins the cause against him: which how much it would irri­tate any Prince of so great power, and so high a spirit as our Henry, I shall leave others to judge. And here I might alledge many forreign examples, of those who upon lesse indignities have stopt all entercourse with Rome, as Whose coin is yet extant, ha­ving on one side his picture, and an inscription shewing him to be King of France and Naples, on the other the armes of France, and these words, Perdam Ba­bylonis no­men. Thuanus lib. 1. p. 11. c. Lewis the 12. and Henry the 2. of France, if I had undertook to write an apology for him.

3. The King, upon the advertisement of these pro­ceedings by the Pope, which was at the beginning of the year 1534, falls first to those courses his auncestors had formerly done, when they had occasion to know how they ought to comport themselves in any thing towards Rome, which was to have the advise of the English Church; and thereupon wrote to the Universities, great Monasteries and Churches of the Kingdome, & the 18. May 1534. to the University of Oxford, In archivis Oxon. ad An­num 1534. p. 127, &c. requiring them, like men of virtue and profound literature, to diligently in­treat, examine, and discusse a certain question, viz. An Romanus Episcopus habeat majorem aliquam jurisdi­ctionem sibi collatam in sacra Scriptura in hoc regno Angliae, quam alius quivis externus Episcopus; and to return their opinion in writing under their common seal, according to the meer and sincere truth of the same, &c. To which, after mature deliberation, and examination not onely of the places of holy Scripture, but of the best interpreters, for many dayes, they returned answer the 27. Iune 1534. (without all peradventure according to the ancient tenet of the English) Romanum Episcopum majorem aliquam jurisdictionem non habere sibi à Deo col­latam in sacra Scriptura in hoc regno Angliae, quam alium quemvis externum▪ Episcopum. Of this answer I have thought fit to make particular mention, (though assented to by all the English Clergy) because Oxford hath been [Page 120] ever Mat. Paris Anno 1252. p. 859, 3. & Anno 1257. p. 945, 28. held aemula Parisiensis, Ecclesiae fundamentum, Rot. Parl. 1. Hen. 6. n. 43. fountain & Mere de nostre foy Chrestiene, as I former­ly touched: whose opinion the English Church hath therefore highly esteemed, and sought on all occasions of this nature; of which to give some examples.

4. Upon the election of Vrban the 6. France, Scotland, Flanders, and divers other parts adhering to Clement, who resided at Avignon, Hen. Knigh­ton col. 2671, 24. col. 2742, 23. the French King 1395. cau­sed a meeting of the Clergy of his dominions, to search whether had the better right to the Papacy: whose judg­ment was for Clement; which under the seal of the U­niversity of Paris was sent to Richard the 2. who there­upon fecit convocationem Oxoniae de peritioribus Theolo­gis tam regentibus quam non regentibus totius regni, and they on the contrary judged Vrban to have the better ti­tle; whose opinion under the seal of the University of Oxford returned to the King was by him transmitted into France. 1408, Walsing. Hist. Anno 1408. p. 420, 1. in Concilio Cleri celebrato Londoniis, as­sistentibus doctoribus Vniversitatum Cantabrigiae & Oxo­niae, tractatum est de censu & obedientia Papae subtrahendis vel non subtrahendis: about which time twelve of the U­niversity of Oxford, on the Archbishops desire, in the name of the rest, examined the books & Doctrines of Wickliffe, & sent their resolutions to a Synod at London in an epistle yet In fascie [...]lo zizaniorum Ms. in bibli­otheca Archie­piscopi Arma­chani. extant. By all which it is manifest, how much their opinions were esteemed in this Kingdome. And I hold it undoubted, a Prince following so great advise, chalk­ed out to him by the practise of his ancestors, could not be guilty of so heinous a crime as schism, arising onely from disobedience to any spirituall superior whatsoever. Circa male­riam excom­municationum resolutio, consi­derat. 11. to. 2. col. 349. a. Ed. Paris 1606. Gerson sayes, a private person runs into no contempt of the Keyes in divers cases by him enumerated; as one, dum dicit aliquis juristarum vel theologorum juxta consci­entiam suam, quod hujusmodi sententiae non sunt timendae vel tenendae, & hoc praesertim si observetur informatio seu ca [...]tela debita, ne sequatur scandalum pusillorum, qui aesti­mant [Page 121] Papam esse unum Deum: And Navar, the greatest Canonist of his time, N [...]var. cap. cum contingat de Rescript. remed. 2. n. 30. to. 2. editionis Colon. Anno 1616. p. 59. col. 1. § [...] ▪ qui unius doctoris eruditione ac animi pietate celebris auctoritate ductus fecerit, aliquid excusatur, etiamsi forte id non esset justum, & alii contrari­um tenerent. And to this purpose many more Doctors may be alleged.

5. This as it was done by him, so he was led unto it by the example of his predecessors, as I have partly toucht before; and shall therefore alledge no other, but that in the disputes between Becket and Henry the 2. the Archbishop endeavouring to interesse Alex­ander the 3. in the difference, that Prince Hoveden Anno 1166, fol. 287. b. 48. caused it to be written unto him, Si juri vestro vel honori praejudica­tur in aliquo, id se totius Ecclesiae regni sui consilio corre­cturum in proximo pollicetur: and a little after, Ibid. fol. 288▪ [...]. Domi­nus Rex plurimum sibi justificare videtur, cum in omni­bus quae dicta sunt, Ecclesiae regni sui consilio simul & judi­cio se pariturum pollicetur. And this the often repeating of it, not onely in a particular letter of the Bishop of London, but of all the Bishops of the Province of Canter­bury, both to the Apud Ho­veden fol. 292. b. 11. 49. 293. a. 33. Pope and Becket, enough assure us how undoubted it was in those dayes, that our Kings following the advise of the English Church, did proceed on safe grounds for their justification in such quarrells.

6. Neither was the opinion returned by these Divines so differing from the writings of other learned men, as might make them any way guilty of schism. Gerson de vita spirituall animae corol. 7. to. 3. col. 183. b. c. Gerson speaking of the severall degrees of Divine truths, places for the first such as are expresse in Scripture, secondly those that are by evident consequence deduced from thence, thirdly such as being delivered by Christ, have been by the constant tradition of the Church derived to us, of which he holds this proposition, Vniversalis Eccle­sia Pontifici Romano subjecta sit; and adds, non enim posset evidenter aut per consequentiam pure de fide ex le­gibus primi generis humana deductione fulciri, &c. and [Page 122] Cont. de potestate Pon­tificis ad Ni­cholaum Teu­polum. Contarenus, in a small tract de potestate Pontificis, of that question sayes, An Auctoritas illa & potestas, qua Pon­tifex maximus fungitur, sit ei consensu quodam hominis tributa, an potius divinitus tradita; qua de re hisce tempori­bus maximos tumultus excitatos esse perspicimus, nec etiam veriti sint viri in omni disciplinarum genere celebres, ac in Christianae Theologiae studio illustres, in magno hominum conventu asserere, hoc jus Pontificis humanume esse; & then adds that he ab horum hominum sententia maxime dissen­tire, ac prope compertum habere, divinitus concessum esse Pontifici jus illud &c. So that this learned Cardinall was not altogether resolved in the point, but as a disputable question had it prope compertum. The truth of which I leave him to dispute with the Orientall Christians. It is manifest, Sleidan▪ lib. 9. prope finem. Francis the first was of the contrary judge­ment; and our Countryman Staplet. de principiis fidei lib. 13. cap. 15. § Dixeram. Stapleton delivers it as a Catholick tenet of former times, (undoubtedly agree­ing with that of the English Church) non divino, sed huma­no jure, & positivis ecclesiae decretis primatum Romani Pontificis niti &c.

7. But I return to our Hen the viii. King, who now fortifyed by the opinion of the Universities, publick disputations in the convocation, and severall precedents of former Princes his predecessors, in his rights, whereas the Parliament before in some particulars restrained the profits of Rome, as in the payments of Annates, Peter-pence, making Appeals to it, whose beginnings with us I have formerly noted, did Stat. 26. Hen. 8. cap. 1. begun the 3. November and ended the 18. December 1533. the 26. Hen. 8. 1533, declare his Ma ^ty, his heirs and successors, Kings of this realm, shall have full power & aucto­rity from tyme to tyme to visit, represse, redresse, &c. all such errors, heresies, abuses, &c. which by any manner spiritu­all authority or jurisdiction may be lawfully reformed, repressed, ordered, redressed, &c. This the Court of Rome interpreted a falling off from the Church, and the English no other then a declaration of that right had ever resided in the Crown, and which I believe it will be a dif­ficult task to disprove them in.

[Page 123]8. For those two articles Bulla Pauli 3. in Bullar [...]o dat. 17. Ianuar. 1538. Paulus 3. accuses the King of, as Hereticall and schismaticall, viz. quod Romanus Pontifex caput ecclesiae & Christi vicarius non erat, & quod ipse in Anglica ecclesia supremum caput existebat &c. for the first, I never heard it affirmed by the King in that generality the words import; for the Pope is a tempo­rall prince, as well as a spirituall father; and so far as I know he never denyed him to be the head of the Church of his own dominions, nor of France and Spain &c. if those Kingdomes will admit him to so great a preemi­nence: the thing he onely stood upon is, that he was not so instituted by Christ Universall Bishop, and had a­lone from him such an omnipotency of power, as made him absolute Monarch in effect of the universall Church, and was so in England. For his being vicar of Christ in that sense other Bishops may be said to be his vicegerents, (as Cap. 3. n. 72. [...] before) I do not see how it can be well denyed him; but that this Vicarship did import the giving him that power he did then exercise here, is what the Church of England hath ever constantly denied. As for the Kings being Head of Church, I have before shewed he nei­ther took it, nor the Parliament gave it, in other sense then the French have alwayes attributed it to their Prin­ces: neither for ought I find was it so much sought by King Henry, as prest on him by the Clergy, of which the Bi­shop of Rochester was one that subscrib [...]d to it; and his Ancestors did the same things before, he did after, under the names of Protectors, Tutors, Concil. Spelm. p. 437▪ cap. 7, 8. Seld. notis ad [...]d­mer. p. 175. [...] ▪ 17. Christi vicarii, Domi­ni Agricolae, &c.

9. For the other particulars mentioned in the Bull, as his beheading the Bishop or Cardinall of Rochester, the burning of Beckets bones, the taking the treasure and or­naments at his Shrine, to which may be added the sup­pressing, and converting into Lay hands the Monaste­ries of the Kingdome, I shall not say much, having not taken on me to defend that Princes actions. Yet for the [Page 124] taking off the head of Rochester (if he were convict of trea­son) I must give the answer Rot. Parl. sest. S. Hillair 25. Ed. 3. n. 60. petitions de Cleargy. of Edward the 3. to the Clergy in that kind, en droict de Clerks convictz de trea­son; purceo qe le Roy, & toutz ses progenitors ount este sei­sis tut temps de faire jugement & execution de Clercz con­victz de treson devers▪ le Roy & sa Royale Mageste, come de droict de la corone, si est avis au Roy, qe la ley en tien cas ne se poet changer: and then he cannot be said to have dy­ed other wise then by law. As for the goods and orna­ments of Churches by him layd hold on, it is certain, his predecessors in their extremities had shew'd him the way; as the Flor. Wi­gorn. Anno 1070. Conquerour, who took all the ready money was found in Religious houses; Neubrigen­sis lib. 4. cap. 38. Richard the first, who took all, to the very Chalices of Churches, and yet th' Archbishop afterwards Hoveden. Anno 1198. fol. 444. a 8. regio munimine septus—universos monachorum (to wit, of Christ Church) reddi­tus & oblationes tumbae beati martyris Thomae fecit saisi­ari in manu Regis; Walsingh. anno 1296. p. 29, 24. and Edward the first 1296, fecit om­nia regni monasteria perscrutari, & pecuniam inventam Londonias apportari, fecitque lanas & corias arrestari, &c. And in those dayes Bishops did tell Kings, Gervas. Dorobern. [...]el. 1554. 44. The saurus ec­clesiae vester est, nec absque vestra conscientia debuit amove­ri: to which the King, verum est, The saurus noster est ad defensionem terrae contra hostes peregrinos &c. And perhaps it would be no hard labour to shew, all Prin­ces, not onely here, but elsewhere, to have had (how justly I will not determine) a like persuasion. And he then being excommunicated by Paulus 3. for maintain­ing what the Crown had ever been in possession of, can no way be said to have departed from the Church; but the Pope to have injuriously proceeded against him, who maintained onely the just rights and liberties of his kingdome, according to his coronation oath.

10. And this is the case, and fully answers (so far as it appears to me) whatsoever can be objected against the reformation begun by him, or made more perfect by [Page 125] Edward the 6. for the manner of doing it, viz. that they, as supreme Princes of this Kingdome, had a right to call to­gether their own Clergy, and with their advise, to see the Church reformed by them. And if otherwise, I should desire to know how the Masse without any intermission was restored by Queen Mary: for it is manifest, she retur­ned the use of it immediately after her brothers death, & yet Cardinall Pool reconciled not this Kingdome to Rome till the 30 ^th of November above a year after, and then too Stat. 1. 2. P. & Mar. cap. 8. on such conditions onely as the Parliament appro­ved; during which space, she as Queen gave See Fox, vol. 3. p. 38. directions to the Ordinaries how they should carry themselves in severall particulars; which as it is probable she did by th' advice of her Bishops, so there is no reason to con­demn the like proceedings in Edward the 6.

11. I have before shewed how far the royal power went in compiling the book of Common prayer: for a Catechism published by the same Prince, it being com­posed by a learned person, presented to his Ma ^ty, and by him committed to the scrutiny of certain Bishops and o­ther learned men, quorum judicium (sayes Literae aute Catechismum directae omni­bus Ludima­gistris, & iis qui scholas grammaticas aperiunt, dat. 20. Maii an­no regni 7. his Ma ^ty) ma­gnam apud nos authoritatem habet, after their allowance it was by him recommended to be publickly taught in Schools. Likewise the Articles for taking away diver­sity of opinions in points of religion, were agreed upon in a Synod at London by the Bishops and other learned men, & Regia authoritate in lucem editi. The King in fra­ming them taking no farther on himself, then he had in the book of Common prayer. And Queen Mary, though she quitted the title of head of the Church (which yet she did not so suddenly as Saunders intimates) did in effect as much. So that hitherto there is no way of fix­ing any schism on the English Church, for neglect of o­bedience, it having been eversubject to the Archbishop of Canterbury and others its lawfull superiors, restoring to him the ancient right belonged to his chair, of being [Page 126] their spirituall pastor Cap. 3. n. 80. next and immediately under Christ Iesus. But the Kingdome being re-united to the See of Rome by Queen Mary, though what I have said doth in a good part free it of schism, yet in respect the refor­mation I onely took upon me to defend was made by Queen Elizabeth, and continued since, it will be neces­sary to make some more particular mention how it did passe.

CHAP. VII.
How the reformation was made under Queen Elizabeth.

1. ELizabeth, the daughter of Henry the 8 ^th by Queen Anne Bolen, being received by all the estates of the Kingdome, (assembled in Parliament) and proclaimed Queen, caused her sisters Ambassador, S ^r Edward Kerne, then residing at Rome, to give an account of this her being cal­led to the Crown to Paulus 4 ^tus the Pope; who being in union with France, and out with the house of Austria then strictly joyned with England, and both at odds with the French, told him, either perswaded by them, or upon his own heady disposition, Hist. Councel of Trent Ital. lib. 5. Anno 1558. p. 399. edit. Lond. 1619. & Ge­nevae p. 420. England was a Fee of the Church of Rome; That she could not succeed, as illegi­timate; That he could not go against the declarations of Clement the 7. and Paulus 3 ^ius; That her assuming the name and government without him, was so great an auda­city, she deserved not to be hearkned to: But he being willing to proceed paternally, if she would renounce her pretensions, and freely remit her self to his arbitrement, he would do what lay in his power with the dignity of the Apostolick See. A strange reply to a civil message, were it not deri­ved to us by an unquestionable hand, and that it came [Page 127] from Paulus 4 ^ius, to whom it was not an unusuall saying, Ibid. paulo an­te eodem libro. that hee would have no Prince his compagnion, but all subjects under hys foot. Upon this unwillingnesse to ac­knowledge her Queen at Rome, th' Archbishop of York (who had before His speech at the making known Queen Maries death to the Commons, in Camden, Ho­linshead, Graf­ton, & aliis affirmed no man could doubt of the justnesse of her title) and the rest of the Bishops refused to Crown her. As for that The defence of the Catholicks a­gainst the book styled The Exe­cution of Ju­stice in Eng­land, pag. 51. some write, it was because they had evident probabilities she intended eyther not to take, or not to keep the oath was then to be administred unto her, espe­cially in the particular of not maintaining holy Churches lawes, in respect she had shewed an aversenesse to some cere­monies, as commanding the Bish▪ of Carlile not to elevate the consecrated Host. (who stoutly refused her) and out of fear she would refuse in the time of her sacre the solemn di­vine ceremony of Vnction; these are certainly without a­ny colour, and framed since. For as for the last, the ce­remony of anointing, she had it performed; as had King Iames who succeeded her, who See Spots­wood's History of the Church of Scotland, p 381. would not have his Queen crowned in Scotland without it. For the other, it is altogether improbable that he to whom the com­mand was by her given, would of all the rest have assen­ted to crown her, had he conceived that a cause why it might have been denied: neither indeed did she alter any thing materiall in the service of the Church, till after the conference at Westminister. 1559. the 31. March, and the Parliament ended.

2. To passe therefore by these, as excuses found out after the deed done, the true reason being (no question) something came from the Pope, in pursuance of that answer he had given her Agent; the Queen seeing she could expect nothing from the Papacy, laboured to make all safe at home, or, to use her own phrase, to take care of her own house; and therefore (as she had reason) desired to be assured of her subjects fidelity, by propoun­ding an oath to certain of them, (which is seldome a tie to other then honest minds.) But the way (mens minds [Page 128] distracted in points of religion, the Stat. 28. Hen. the 8. cap. 10. law of Henry the 8. (extinguishing the auctority of the Bishop of Rome) be­ing very severe, for securing himself, in bringing such as did but extoll the said auctority, for the first offence, with­in the compass of a praemunire, and that refused to take it, of treason,) was not easy to be pitcht upon: besides styling the King head of the Church, which many made a scruple at; to Iourn. des C [...]es 1. Eliz. which effect a bill being presented to the house of Commons the 9. of February, after many arguments had upon it, the 13. of February upon the se­cond reading it was absolutely dasht, and upon great consideration taken the 14. Febr. a Committee appoin­ted to draw a new Bill, in which an especiall care was ta­ken for restoring onely the ancient jurisdiction of the Crown, and the Queen neither styled supreme Head, nor the penalty of refusing the Oath other, then the being excluded from such places of honour and profit as they held in the Common-wealth: yet with this proviso, that he who had an estate of inheritance in a temporall Office, & refused to take the said oath, did after upon better per­swasion conform himself, should be restored unto the said estate; and that such as should maintain or defend the auctority, preeminence, power or jurisdiction, spi­rituall or ecclesiasticall, of any forreign Prince, Prelate, Person, State or Potentate whatsoever (not naming the Pope, as her father had done) should be three times con­vict before he suffered the pains of death.

3. This Bill, which no doubt the Popes carriage drew on, being expedited in the house of Commons, received reformation by the Lords, committed the 13. March to the Lord Marquess of Winchester, Lord Treasurer, the Duke of Norfolk, the Earls of VVestmorland, Shrewsbury, Rutland, Sussex, Penbrook, viscount Mountague; Bishops, Exeter, Carlisle; Barons, Clynton Admirall, Morley, Rich, Willoughby, North, no one of them then noted for Pro­testantisme; the 18. March past the Lords, none dissenting [Page 129] but 8. Bishops, the Earl of Shrewsbury, Viscount Mount­ague, and the Abbot of VVestminster: and the same day sent to the house of Commons, who upon perusall found again what to amend it in; so as it had not it's per­fection in both Houses till Saturday the 6 ^th of May (when the Parliament ended the Monday following) at which time onely Viscount Mountague & the interessed Clergy opposed it. By which it cannot be questioned, but the ge­nerality of the Lords did interpret that law, no other then, as indeed it was, a restoring the Crown to it's ancient rights; for if otherwise, without doubt there would have been as great an opposition at least made against it, as some other statutes which past that Parliament met with, that the Marquess of VVinchester, the Lords Morley, Stafford, Dudley, VVharton, Rich, North, joyned with the Earls of Shrewsbury, Viscount Mountague, and the Pre­lats, to have stopt.

4. But whereas some were induced to think by the ge­nerality of the words, that affirm her Highness to be su­preme governour as well in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes as temporall, as if it had been an usurping upon the sacred function in the interior (as I may say) of the Church, properly belonging to them in holy Orders, her Ma ^ty the same year The Admo­nition in In­junctions 1 Eliz. did declare, She did not challenge any o­ther auctority then was challenged and lately used by King Henry the 8 ^th and Edw. 6. which is, and was of ancient time due to th' imperiall crown of this Realme; that is, un­der God to have the Soveraignty and rule over all manner of persons born within these her realms, &c. And that to be the onely sense of the Oath she caused to be confirmed the next 5 Eliz. cap. 1. Parliament; at which time a Synod being held, for avoiding diversity of opinions, and establishing of consent touching true religion &c. it did expresly declare, Art. 37. they did not give to our Princes the ministring either of Gods Word or the Sacraments,— But that onely prerogative is given in holy Scripture by God himself, that [Page 130] is, that they should rule all estates and degrees committed to their charge by God, whether they be ecclesiasticall or tem­porall, and restrain with the civill sword the stubborn and evil-doers, &c. And these articles were likewise confir­med by Parliament 13. Eliz. cap. 12. so that no man can doubt this to have been other then an acknowledge­ment, what Princes had done formerly in all ages might be justly continued; not an introductory of a new law, but the assertion of the old right of our Kings.

5. Another matter of great weight then likewise ex­pedited was, the settling the publick service of the Church in one uniform way. King Edward the 6. inten­ding such a reformation as might serve for edification, caused certain pious and learned men to meet together, who (as it seems) taking for their pattern the practise of the primitive times, casting out of the Liturgies then used such particulars as were any way offensive, shew'd their scope to be, what they pretended, to reform, not make a new Church or Service; and thereupon had, by the aid of the holy Ghost, ( Stat. 2. & 3. Ed. 6. cap. 1. as the Act of Parliament speaks) concluded on, and publisht the book of Common prayer, with a form of administration of the holy Commu­nion, commonly called the Mass. But nothing humane is perfect at first: this Book some few years after recei­ved in his time alteration, and the word Mass (I know not why more offensive in it then the Cap. de Missa. Reline­tur Missa a­pud nos, & summa reve­rentia celebra­tur. Augustane Con­fession) expunged, with some other phrases in it.

6. But for the better understanding how Queen Eli­zabeth found this Church, it will not be amiss to look a little back. Henry the 8. dying in Ianuary 154 6/7, leaving the Roman Service, with some alterations not greatly con­siderable in it, the wisdome of the State (however in­tending a farther reformation) was not immediately to abolish it; so as the Lords meeting in Parl ^nt. 1547. No­vember the 4. though they had the Mass sung in English, yet the Liturgy of the Church was not common in that [Page 131] language till after Easter 1548. This Session continu­ing till December 23. restored the Communion in both kinds, upon which certain learned men by appoint­ment met at VVindsor, to consider of a decent Form for the administration of it; which in March his Ma ^ty gave out backt with a Proclamation, so as at Easter it began (without compulsion of any,) to be put in practise, and after Easter, severall parochiall Churches to cele­brate divine Service in English, which at VVhitsuntide was by command introduced into Paul's; but hitherto no book of Common prayer extant, onely the manner of administring the holy Eucharist somewhat altered.

7. During this while, the Archbishop of Cant. 6. Bi­shops, 3. Deans Doctors, and 3. other onely Doctors, were busied in reforming the publick Liturgy of the Church, Iohn Calvin of Geneva, a person then of high esteem, advertised of it, thereupon wrote to the Duke of Somerset the 22. October 1548, giving his judgement in these Iohan. Cal­vin. Epist. 87. words [quod ad formulam precum & rituum ec­clesiasticorum, valde probo ut certa illa extet, à qua pastori­bus discedere in functione sua non liceat, tam ut consulatur quorundam simplicitati & imperitiae, quam ut certius ita conslet omnium inter se ecclesiarum consensus, postremo e­tiam ut obviam eatur desultoriae quorundam levitati qui novationes quasdam affectant.] and taking notice of the form already had for celebrating the Communion, adds this, Audio recitari isthic in Coenae celebratione orationem pro defunctis, neque vero hoc ad purgatorii Papistici appro­bationem referri satis s [...]io, neque etiam me latet proferri pos­se antiquum ritum mentionis defunctorum faciendae, ut eo modo communio fidelium omnium in unum corpus con­junctorum declaretur; sed obstat invictum illud argumen­tum, nempe Coenam Domini adeo sacrosanctam esse, ut ullis hominum additamentis eam conspurcare sit nefas.

8. This Letter received about the Note, the printed book of statutes is, as if their meeting were the 4. November: which I conceive [...]rroueous, as not at all agreeing with the Iournall. beginning of the [Page 132] Parliament, which met the 24. of November 1548. may have been the cause of deferring th' exhibition of it to the House of Commons till the 19. December 1548. when the consideration of it was referred to S ^r Thomas Smith, his Ma ^ties Secretary, and a very learned Knight, who returned it back again the 19. Ianuary, having kept it by him a full moneth; after which it was expedited and printed in March following, and the 6 ^th of April 1549. the Mass by Proclamation removed. But this book was not so perfect, as it yielded no exceptions, whether just or not I shall not hear examine, I know learned men have judged variously: it shall suffice me to say, it was a­gain revised by Bucer (a great patron of Discipline, and Martyr, both in England,) and reprinted 1552. and to ought in or of this second edition during King Edwards reign I have not heard any Protestant did ever except.

9. In Queen Maries time divers learned men retired from the heat of Persecution, and by the favour of the Magistrate permitted a Church 1554. at Frankford, la­boured to retain this Liturgy; whom Knox, VVhitting­ham, and some others opposed so far, as one Haddon desired to be their Pastor, excused himself, and M ^r. Cham­bers coming for that end from Zurick, finding it would not be allowed, retired back again, and xvi. learned men then at Strasburgh (amongst which this Haddon, Sandis afterward Archbishop of York, Grindall of Can­terbury, Christopher Goodman famous for his book of O­bedience) remonstrated unto them, Troubles at Frankford p. xxii. That by much alte­ring the said book they should seem to condemn the framers, now ready with the price of their bloud to confirm it, should give their adversaries occasion to accuse their doctrine of imperfection, themselves of mutability, and the Godly to doubt of what they had been perswaded; that the use of it permitted they would joyn with them by the first of Februa­ry: their Letter bearing date the 23. of November 1554.

10. But nothing could move them to be like Saint [Page 133] Paul, all things to all that he might gain some, 1 Corinth. ix. 22. or relent any thing of their former rigour; onely a Type of it drawn into Latine was sent to Calvin for his judgement, who returned an answer the 18. Ianuary 1554/5. Epist. 200. some­what resembling the Delphick oracles, That the book did not contein the purity was to be wisht; that there were in it ineptias, yet tolerabiles; that as he would not have them be ultra modum rigidos, so he did admonish others ne sibi in sua inscitia nimis placeant, &c. And here I cannot de­ny to have sometime wondred, why in these disputes the opinion of Peter Martyr, then at Strasburgh, a per­son for learning no lesse eminent, was never required: but I have since heard him to have been alwayes a pro­fest patron of it, as one by whose care and privity it had been reformed.

11. Whilst matters went thus in Germany, certain learned men at Geneva were composing a Form for the use of the English Church there, which 1556. was prin­ted by Crispin, with this title,

Ratio & forma publice orandi Deum atque administran­di Sacramenta &c. in Anglorum ecclesiam, quae Genevae colligitur, recepta, cum judicio & comprobatione D. Iohan­nis Calvini.

But this did not satisfy all, for Mr. Lever coming to Frankford to be their Minister, requested they would trust him to use such an order as should be godly, yet without any respect to the book of Geneva or any other. But his endeavours were soon rejected, as not fit for a right reformed Church, and the book it self hath recei­ved since sundry changes from that first type.

12. In this posture Queen Elizabeth found the Church, the Protestant party abroad opposing the book of Common prayer, few, varying in judgement, not at u­nity with themselves, nor well agreeing what they would submit unto: She hereupon caused it to be again revi­sed by certain moderate and learned men, who took a [Page 134] great care for removing all things really lyable to exce­ption; and therefore where Henry the 8. had caused to be inserted into the Letany, to be delivered from the Tyranny of the Bishop of Rome & all his detestable enormi­ties, which remained all King Edwards time, this, as what might give offence to that party, was thought fit to be strook out; and where in the delivery of the Eu­charist the first book of Ed. the 6. had onely this clause, The first book of Ed. 6. sol. 130. b. The body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life, and at the giving of the Cup no other then The bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ which was shed for thee preserve thy bo­dy and soul unto everlasting life, and the second book which was in force at his death had removed those two clauses, and instead of them inserted Take and eat this in remembrance that Christ dyed for thee, and feed on him in thy heart by faith with thanksgiving, and accordingly at the delivery of the Cup, from whence some might, and perhaps did infer the faithfull Receiver not to have a real communication of Christs body, in taking the Sa­crament, but onely a remembrance of his sufferings; it was now thought fit both expressions should be retai­ned, that no man might have any just cause of scandall: for be Christs presence never so reall, even by Transub­stantiation, in the holy Sacrament, we may upon 1 Cor. xi. [...], 25 [...] Saint Pauls warrant do it in remembrance of him.

Thus at the first of her reign matters in religion past with so great moderation, as it is not to be denyed very few, or none, of the Romish inclination (if they did at any time go to Mass,) refused to be present in our Churches during the time of Divine Service.

But of another thing that likewise past at the same time, it will be necessary to make some more particular mention.

CHAP. VIII.
How Queen Elizabeth settled in this Kingdome the proceeding against Hereticks.

1 ANother particular, no small argument of the Queens disposition, fell into consideration this Parliament. Her 1. 2. P. M. cap. 6. Sister had revived all the laws of former Princes against Hereticks, even that 2. Hen. 4. cap. 15. re­pealed. 25. H. 8. cap. 14. of Hen. the 4. which her Father had on weighty considerations repealed, and all proceedings against them, till they came to their very execution, per­taining to the Ecclesiastick: how to find a means to pre­serve her subjects, and yet not leave a license to every old heresy, new invention, fanatick spirit, to ruffle the Church and trouble the world, was a matter of no small difficulty. But for the better understanding of what then past, it will be requisite to consider, how the condemn­ing of Heresy and proceeding against Hereticks hath been, both here and elsewhere, how her Ma ^ty found it abroad in the Christian world, and at home, how thereupon she settled it.

2. The words Heresy and Heretick were in the primi­tive Church not alwayes of so ill a sound as these later Ages have made them. De Haereti­cis cap. 63. S ^t Augustine doth name some opinions for hereticall have small affinity with Divinity; and who shall read To. 4. bibli­othec. patrum. cap. 54. 82. Philastrius of Heresies, must needs approve De Scriptori­bus. Cardinall Bellarmin's censure of him, that he accounts amongst them many are not pro­perly Heresies, as the word is now taken. The first Councell Concil. Gen. Rom. to. 1. p. 88. cap. 6. of Constantinople held 381. expresly af­firms by the name of Heretick to understand such as pro­fessing the same faith, yet did make a separation from [Page 136] those canonicall Bishops were of their communion. But the construction what opinion was hereticall, did ever, so far as I have observed, belong to the spirituall Magi­strate, who, after the pattern held out in Acts xv. holy Writ, if any new erroneous opinion did peep, the neighbour Bi­shops and Clergy taking notice of it, did assemble, condemn it, and by their letters gave notice of what had past them to absent Churches: if the case were difficult, the presence of any famous Clerk was desired, who for settling peace (as who would not?) was easily drawn out of his own home; so was Euseb. lib. 6. cap. λζ'. al. 30. Origen sent for into Ara­bia, And that this form continued in condemning He­resy till Constantine, seems to be very plain by the Euseb. lib. 7. cap. κζ'. &c. ad cap. λ'. al. cap. 22, 23, 24. pro­ceedings against Paulus Samosatenus and divers others, remaining yet in history, and the writings of the fathers. But for the prosecution of an Heretick farther then to avoid him, I know no example, till after God having given peace to his people under Christian Emperours, they Euseb. lib. 10. cap. 7. Socrat. pro­oem. lib. 5. vide epist. Theodosii Cyrillo apud Baron. to. 5. Anno 430. n. 64. finding, if the Church were in trouble, the State to be seldome otherwise, did provide as well for the cal­ling of Bishops to Councells that might condemn He­resies, as by lawes to punish Hereticks.

3. The Councell of Nice therefore having in the year 325. censured the opinions of Arius for hereticall, the Emperour that had formerly granted priviledges to Christians 326, declared Codex Theo­dos. lib. 16. de Haereticisleg. 1. Vide Euseb. de vita Con­stantini cap. 61, 62. lib. 3. haereticos atque schismaticos his privilegiis alienos &c. and that no man might be de­ceived by the ambiguity of the word Heretick, Cod. Theod. lib. 16. de Fide Catho­lica leg. 2. Grati­an and Theodosius in the year 380. did declare who one­ly were to be so reputed, viz. all who secundum Apo­stolicam disciplinam evangelic amque doctrinam patris & filii & spiritus sancti unam deitatem sub parili majestate & sub pia trinitate credamus, hane legem sequentes, Christi­anorum Catholicorum nomen jubemus amplecti, reliquos vero dementes vesanosque judicantes haeretici dogmatis in­famiam sustinere: and the year following did not onely [Page 137] in Ianuary Ibid. de Haeretic. leg. 6. renew the said Edict, but in Iuly Ibid. de fide Catholi­ca leg. 3. & [...] 2. com­manded all Churches to be delivered those Bishops who held that profession, nihil dissonum profana divisione faci­entes, sed Trinitatis ordinem, personarum adsertionem, divi­nitatis ordinem &c. and for the more assurance, as a mark of their being orthodox, Ibid. leg. 2, 3. Annis 380, 381. & ibid. de his qui religione contendunt, leg. 6. did hold communion with the Catholick Bishops of any one seat there remembred, as Damasus of Rome, Nectarius of Constantinople, Pela­gius of Laodicea, Diodorus of Tarsus, Optimus of Anti­och, &c. omnes autem qui abeorum quos commemoratio spe­cialis expressit fide communionis dissentiunt, ut manifestos haereticos ab ecclesits expelli. Which note Novel. Constii. 109. in praesat. Iustinian like­wise in the year 541. having prescribed, goes farther, that sacram communionem in Catholica ecclesia non perci­pientes à Deo amabilibus sacerdotibus, haereticos juste vo­camus.

4. Before these lawes, it is not to be wondred if every one desired to be joyned in communion with some one of those seats, whose Bishops were so recommended, for conserving the Apostolick faith, for the sanctity of their manners, and for keeping schism out of the Church; which being usually joyned with sedition in the Com­mon wealth, Cod. Theo­dos. lib. 16. de his qui re­ligione con­tendunt, leg. 6. 3. Princes seem to have an especiall eye how it might be avoided, but after these Edicts they certain­ly did it much more: and there being in the world no Bishop more famous then the Roman, nor any other na­med in these parts of Europe then he, every one endea­voured to live united to that Church, whose form the Councell of Nice 325. (for before that, Aeneae Sil­vii Epist. 301. in edit. Lug­duni 1505. [...] Bellarmino e­pist. 288. ad Roma­nam ecclesiam parvus habebatur respectus, as Pius secun­dus writes) approving in distribution of the ecelesiastick government, and Emperours now in point of belief, the Roman Chair became so eminent, as, for to shew them­selves orthodox, many, especially of the Latins, did hold it enough to live in the communion of that See, and the Fathers in that Age to give high expressions of being in [Page 138] union with it. Ambros. oratio de obitu fra [...]ris. S. Ambrose shewing the devotion of his brother Satyrus in a tempest, adds yet farther as a mark of it, Advocavit ad se Episcopum—percontatus. que ex eo est utrumnam cum episcopis catholicis, hoc est cum Romana ecclesia, conveniret: and S. Hieron. ad Damasum e­pist. Hierom, a per­son very superlative in praising and reprehending, wri­ting about the same time to Damasus, Ego nullum pri­mum nisi Christum sequens, Beatitudini tuae, id est cathe­drae Petri communione consocior &c. and in the year 602. a certain Bishop returning out of schism spontanea volun­tate did swear, Gregor. lib. 10. epist. 31. he in unitate sanctae ecclesiae catholi­cae, & communione Romani Pontificis, per omnia perman­surum &c. All which in time bred an opinion, that Chair could not entertain an error, and the beginning of the mark absolutely inverted; for those men who at first were, as others, sought unto Cod. Theo­dos. lib. 16. de fide Catholi­ca leg. 2. because they did conserve the religion S. Peter had planted in Rome, must in after­ages be onely held to maintain the same doctrine because they are in that See; so that the Doctrine did not com­mend the person, but the being in that seat, and recom­mended from thence, be it what it will, it ought to be received: insomuch as De Roma­no Pontif. lib. 4. cap. 5. §. Quod autem. Cardinall Bellarmine doubts not to write, Si Papa erraret praecipiendo vitia vel prohi­bendo virtutes, teneretur ecclesia credere vitia esse bona & virtutes malas, nisi vellet contra conscientiam peccare: for which he was Recognit. pag. 19. edit. 1608. Ingol­stat. afterward forced to an Apology; yet is not in my opinion so absurd as the Regul. 13. rule left by certain religious persons 1606. to their confidents at Padoua, containing ut ipsi Ecclesiae catholicae (un­derstanding the Pope) omnino unanimes conformes­que simus: si, quod oculis nostris apparet album, nigrum illa esse definierit, debemus itidem quod nigrum sit pronun­tiare &c.

5. But to return whence I have a little digress't: it being plain by these lawes, the Emperours restrained points of Heresy to the Catholick Doctrine of the [Page 139] Father, Son and holy Ghost, the ground of the four first generall Councils; and others not to be esteemed hereticks: in which sense I conceive sundry of the ancients take the word; as Hier. in Ierem. 19. S. Hierome, when he sayes all Hereticks leave God; and Socrates, when he agrees such as [...]. Socrates lib. 6. cap. [...] al. 12. condemned Origen, finding not to blame his opinion of the holy Trinity, must confesse he held the right faith: and Leo the first, when in an epistle about 449. he exhorts the Emperour Theodosius to consider the glory of S. Peter, the Crowns of the Apostles, cun­ctorumque Martyrum palmas, quibus alia non fuit causa patiendi, nisi confessio verae divinitatis, & verae hu­manitatis in Christo, doth intimate the true faith to be contained in that profession. After these restri­ctions in the declaration of Heresy, it is likely divers Sects grew very audacious, either conceiving them­selves without the compass of law, or trusting in their friends and numbers; insomuch as Arcadius, Theo­dosius and Valentinian, in the year 395. were forced to declare, Cod. Theo­dos. lib. 16. leg. 28. de Haeret. Haereticorum nomine continentur, & latis adversus eos sanctionibus debent subcumbere, qui velle­vi argumento judicio Catholicae religionis & tramite de­tecti fuerint deviare: which August. in Psa [...]. 57. to. 8. S ^t. Augustine explains, eos utique haereticos appellant, qui non sunt communio­nis eorum, as the Councell of Constantinople had be­fore, taking the word in a larger sense then others had done. Upon which the Donatists, that were the most Ibid. leg. 38. vide August. epist. 68. & to. 7. contra lit. Petil. cap. 83. furious, so as neither the persons nor goods of Catholicks that dwelt amongst them were safe, are more Cod. Theo­dos. de Haeret. lib. 16. leg. 37, 38, 39, 40▪ 52, 54, 65. severely censured in them, then others, whose opinions were certainly more dangerous, yet whom Emperours did think worthy of more fa­vour.

6. But whilst Princes did thus by their lawes onely correct Hereticks, and the temporall Magistrate execute their commands, they did rarely think fit to proceed [Page 140] I cannot but with the lear­ned Wesem­bechius (in Cod. lib. 1. Tit. 5. de Hae­reticis &c.) understand those words, Manichaeos de civitatibus pellendis & ultimo sup­plicio traden­dis, not to be meant of ta­king away their lives; though I am not ignorant Celsus the lawyer so in­terprets ul i­mum suppli­cium ff. de poenis leg. 21. for to what use were the banishing them the City, if they were to be instantly executed? and that law being taken out of Cod. Theodos. leg. 65. de Haeret. where those words are altogether omit­ted, I conceive Iustinian intended by them no other but those Capitales poenae that were morti pro­ximae, as metalli coercitio, in insulam deportatio, &c. ff. de poenis leg. 28. The like may serve for answer to those other Rescripis in Cod. Theodos. de Haeret. leg. 9. 36. It is manifest by many places of S. Augustine, as to. 7. contra lit. Petiliani, lib. 2. cap. 86. that there was no law during his time against the life of an heretick; and Bellarmine himself confesseth as much, de laicis cap. 21. § Augustinus. But however the matter is not great, being onely against some particular hereticks, whose deportments may be thought to have been seditious as well as their Con­science erroneous to bloud, unlesse perhaps De Haeret. leg. 8. Cod. Iustin. against some seditious preacher; and the holy men of those times used earnest persuasions to deter any inclined to that severity, as not esteeming it to agree with the entire charity of a Christi­an. S. Augustine, whose labours no man equalled to pre­serve the Church from that contagion, when Donatus the Proconsul of Africa went farther then that holy man liked in that kind, Epist. 127. & Retract. lib. 2. cap. 5. professeth he had rather be himself slain by them, then by detecting the Donatists be any cause they should undergo the punishment of death. S ^t. Prosper Prosper in Chronico An. 392. remembers four Bishops to have been excom­municated 392. for being accusers of Priscilian (the first I have read of had his opinions confuted not by Syllo­gisms but steel.) From whence To. 4. Anno 386. n. 23. Vide Iohan. Royas singular. 107. n. 6. Directorium Inquisitor. 2. part. cap. 27. p. 131. col. 1. par. 3. quaest. 102. p. 702. col. 2. edit. Romae 1585. vide formulas &c. ad finem praxis judiciariae Inquisit. p. 524. & p. 526. Baronius conceives it proceeds, that such as deliver an Heretick to the Secu­lar for execution, to this day, effectually intercede he may not be punisht with death; yet, as it were to mock God and delude the world, if the Lay having him in his power, shall defer the doing it more then ordinary, Direct. part. 3. in quaest. 36. Franc. Pegn. comment. 85. p. 608. col. 2. Iohan a Royas singular. 107. n. 2. vide part. 2. n. 450. it is the constant tenet of the Canonists, relying on a Bull of Alexander the 4. 1260. he is to be compell'd unto it by spirituall censures, yet may not take any congnizance of the cause at all.

7. It being then the course in the primitive times, that in the proceeding against Hereticks, the Ecclesia­stick [Page 141] did conclude what Statute at Leicester 2. H 5. cap. 7. Here I cannot but ob­serve, Possi­donius in the life of St. Au­gustine cap. 18. no [...]ing the manner used then in the Catholick Church in con­demnation of Hereticks, conformable to what is here specifyed, adds, Et hoc tale de illis Eccle­siae Dei catho­licae prolatum. judicium e­tiam piissi­mus Impera­tor Honorius audiens ac sequens, s [...] it cos legibus damnatos, inter haereti­cos haberi debere con­stituit. against which some had added in: the margin, Caesar pro­nuntiat hae­reticos: but that shewing too apparent, the custome of those times might perhaps (when the place it self was not) be regarded. The Inquisitors therefore of Spain in their Index at Madrid 1612. p. 37. col. 1. appoint i [...] to be blotted out. But this edict against the Pelagians, of whom that Father speaks, is not now found ei­ther in the Codex of Theodos. or Iustinian. But see Baronius [...]om. 5. anno 419. n. 57, 58. Tenets were Heresy, and the Temporall whether the party accused were guilty of the imputation, and likewise of his punishment (as is mani­fest by imperiall constitutions, the writings of the anci­ent Doctours, the custome of the Catholick Church, that never prayed against Hereticks, but Heresy,) did so remain at least 800. yeares after Christ: but about that time the division of the Empire falling out, and Episco­pall Consistories establisht through Europe, Bishops did begin to claim as matters ecclesiasticall, and onely pro­per for their Courts, the acting in those causes; which in some sort might be, so far as the determination what is Heresy did extend. And about the year 1000, the Chri­stian world (as branches not bearing fruit in Christ, and therefore to be cast into the fire, Iohn XV. 6.) began to take that way of punishing Miscreants; so in Baron. to. 10. Anno 1000. n. 4. Italy Ibid. to. 11. Anno 1017. n. 4. and France, jussu Regis & universae plebis consensu, some were thus destroyed: and in imitation of Emperors, who had by their edicts prohibited all complyance with Here­sy Cod. Theod. de Haeret. leg. 12, 21, 34, 36. &c. so far, as to punish any lending for that end places to resort unto, Hoved. fol. 334. a. 42. & apud Neubrigens. lib. 2. cap. 15. canon. 6. Alexander the 3. 1163. in a Councill held at Tours, & in another at Rome 1179. making very strict canons against Hereticks, declared, eos & defensores eorū & receptores anathemati decernimus subjacere, & sub anathemate prohibemus ne quis ipsos in domo vel in terra sua tenere velfovere, vel negotiationem cum eis exercere praesu­mat. Of which the later being De Haereticis cap. 8. registred in the Canon law, is the first ecclesiastick constitution in it I have obser­ved to condemn rather Hereticks then Heresy. Soon after which Ro­ger Hoveden, Anno 1182. fol. 352. b. 29. in fine anni. Publicani comburebantur in pluribus locis per re­gnum [Page 142] Franciae, quod Rex Angliae nullo modo permisit in terra sua, licet ibi essent perplurimi.

8. Yet the pious men of those times seem not to ap­prove of this rigour. S ^t. Bernard, one of the most devout persons of that Age (vir plane Apostolicus sayes De scriptor. Bellar­mine) following the doctrine of one much more Apo­stolick, Bernard. in Cant. serm. 6 [...]. to. 1. col. 987. k. edit. 1586. explaining Cantic. ii. 15. Take us the little fox­es that spoyl the vines, writes, si juxta allegoriam ecclesias vineas, vulpes haereses, vel potius haereticos ipsos intelliga­mus, simplex est sensus, ut haeretici capiantur potius quam effugentur; capientur dico, non armis, sed argumentis, qui­bus refellantur errores eorum, ipsi vero si fieri potest recon­cilientur Catholicae, revocentur ad veram fidem—hoc denique velle se per hibet, qui non simpliciter capite vulpes, sed capite nobis, inquit, vulpes parvulas; sibi ergo & sponsae suae, id est Catholicae, jubet acquiri has vulpes, cum ait ca­pite eas nobis. and a little after, Quod si Haereticus reverti noluerit, nec convictus post primam jam & secundam ad­monitionem—erit devitandus. Thus the holy men of the Age in which they stopt first mens mouths not with arguments but armes, did judge of it: and indeed we have not many examples of any suffered meerly for con­science till after 1216.

9. In which year, as some write, Innocentius 3 ^us. Paramo de origine Inqui­sit. lib. 2. Tit. 1. cap. 1. n. 7. p. 90. Siman­ca Cathol. In­stitut. Tit. 25. n. 4. p. 182. Romae 1575. on the ignorance or remissness of Bishops in prosecution of Hereticks, did give beginning to the Paramo de origine Inqui­sit. erection of a new Court, called since the Inquisition: of whose institution and use, because it hath highly served to the raising the Papacy, it will be necessary to say something. He there­fore at that time appointing Dominicus a Spaniard, foun­der of the Dominican Order, by a Commission delegated from him, his Inquisitor against the Albigenses in France, (without abrogating the power of Episcopacy in that kind) gave to him, onely a private Friar, such a power, as caused divers of them to be destroyed by that aucto­rity in another Princes Dominions. Though such as [Page 143] Franciscus Pegna, Lu­dovicus à Paramo, Famianus Strada de bello Belgico lib. 2. p. 41. in foi. Romae 1640. I have seen do conclude the auctority he exercised to have been from Innocentius 3 ^us. yet of the time when it was granted they do somewhat disagree. Franciscus Peg­na, a Spanish Doctor, who publisht his annotations on the Directorium Inquisitorum at Rome 1585. yet it seems Ossat. Epist. 59. Romae 5. Iun. 1596. could not secure himself from them, In Director. part. 3. com­ment. 32. p. 495. col. 1. b. holds it to have been first committed unto him about 1200. on the otherside Paramo of the same nation, that was himself an Inquisitor in Sicily, and expresly writes of that sub­ject, is De origine Inquisit. lib. 2. Tit. 1. cap. 1. n. 13. cap. 2. n. 3. p. 96. col. [...]. clearly of an opinion it could not be before the conclusion of the Councell of Lateran; and for proof gives in my judgement a very probable reason, viz. That no Papall Decretall, or History preceding, did ever name any such Inquisitor, that very Cap. 6, 7, 8. Councell when it treats of Heresy speaks of no other Judge then the Bishop: now it ending about Easter 1216. ( Cap. 8. n. 36. as I shall shew here­after) if granted by Innocentius, it must be at some time between March and the 16. Iuly 1216. when that Urspergen­lis p. 321. o­biit apud Pe­rusium 1216. 16. Calend. August. Pope dyed. Yet I cannot omit that Edit. Romae 1579. p. 149. concilio abso­luto Bernardus presbyter car­dinal. ipsum legationis of­ficiumobtinuit, qui praedecesso­rum exemplo B. Dominicum Inquisitorem similiter insti­tuit. Camillus Cam­pegius, in his additions to Zanchinus, speaks as if after that Councell Friar Dominick had not his auctority from the Papacy immediately, but from one Bertram or Bertrand a Cardinall Priest: but who that Bertram was, I confess I have not been able to satisfie my self. Alphonsus. Ciaconius de Cardinalibus, Romae 1630. p. 650. col. 1. & pag. 663. ol. 1. Ciaconius re­members one of the name employed against the Albi­genses, promoted to that honour by Innocentius 3 ^us. 1212. but he styles him onely a Cardinall Deacon; as he hath another so called that was a Priest, but he was no Cardinall, till Honorius 3 ^us in December 1216 preferr'd him to the honour, so was not capable of serving Pope Innocent in that degree.

10. But whosoever first began it, Frederick the 2d. certainly much augmented their power, Vide Bull. Innocent. 4. da [...]. 11. Kalend. Iunii Pontific. anno 11. 1254. in. Bullario a Francisco Pegna edit. ad calcem Directorii, p. 16. & Alexandri 4. ibid. p. [...]4. [...] [...]lementis 4 [...]i. ibid. p. 57. &c. publishing [Page 144] the 22. of February 1224. three lawes at Padua, by which he did constitute the Dominicans Inquisitors through the Empire, yet taking all others under his protection; and appointing such as should be convict of Heresy, ut vivi in conspectu hominum combur antur, flammarum commissi judicio, &c. That these edicts were publisht at the onely instance of Honorius 3 ^us. is very probable, in that they are not any way In sexto de haereticis cap. 18. Glossa ad leges quasdam. recorded but in papall bulls quoad ver­ba, ( n. 18. as I shall shew hereafter.) After which, severall persons in divers parts proceeded against them by com­mission from Rome: so as the Bishop, who was the or­dinary detector of Heresy, had little to do, and be­came daily to have lesse and lesse; that although his pow­er be not in those cases absolutely taken off, yet it is so impaired, as it gives place to the Inquisitor; insomuch as if one suspected of Heresy be cited by him and the Bishop Paramo de potestate dele­gatae lib. 3. Quaest. 2. n. 109. p. 536. col. 1. at the same time, his appearance must first be in the Inquisition: and the reason given is, because they have a power by a delegated commission from the Pope, Ibid. lib. 2. cap. 2. n. 11. p. 133. col. 1. whereas to the other jure divino haec cura incumbit in hae­reticos inquirere; and Instit. Ca­thol. Tit. 25. n. 5. Simanca yet more plain, Cum E­piscopi non habeant secretum car [...]erem, nec ministros idone­os ad procedendum adversus haereticos, non possunt servare ordinem illum qui praefinitus est Inquisitoribus: quam ob remusque eo tantum procedere debent, ut in haereticos vel suspectos inquirant, & summariam probationem Inquisito­ribus secreto mittere debent. So that what power the Bi­shop hath in this kind from Christ, he is now become little other then agent or substitute to the Inquisitor in point of Heresy.

11. But these Commissioners exercising their aucto­rity with Fire, Tortures, and the like, in short time found themselves infinitely mistaken, in expecting by such vi­olence to render that peace in the Church, and obedi­ence in the world, the primitive Fathers by the truth of their Dictats, evidence of reason, and piety of their lives, [Page 145] drew men unto: for in some places they were Vide addi­tiones ad Lambertum Schasnabur­gensem anno 1232. Tritem. Chronic. Hir­saug. anno 1214. p. 223. & anno 1233. p. 235. Mat. Paris Anno 1236. p. 429. anno 1238. p. 482. Munste­ri Cosmograph. p. 477. ex­pell'd by the peoples fury, hardly any where continued but by strong hand; their carriage being so full of Scan­dall, as Clement the 5. in the Councell of Vienna could not but acknowledge they had so exceeded the power committed to them by the Apostolick See, In Clement. de Haereticis, cap. 1. ut quod in augmentum fidei per circumspectam ejusdem sedis vigilan­tiam salubriter est provisum, (dum sub pietatis specie gra­vantur innoxii) cedat in fidelium detrimentum. For these men took upon them under the Pope, not onely to con­strue what was heresy, or complying with it, but on those imputations to imprison, fine, confiscate mens goods, to the destruction of honest people, and families; which forced some States Vide Gio­vanni Villa­ni lib. 12. cap. 57. to limit their proceedings, barre them of prisons proper to themselves, and the wise Ve­netian appoint three Senators to supervise their actions: insomuch as this delegated power did so decline, as not­withstanding the many constitutions of Innocentius 4 ^tus, Alexander the fourth, and severall other popes yet ex­tant for regulating of it, out of Italy it was little taken notice of; Paramo de origine Inqui­sit. lib. 2. Tit. 2. cap. 2. n. 13. p. 133. & cap. 3. n. 5. p. 136. in Spain it remained obscurum debilitatum­que, till Ferdinand and Isabella 1479. by agreement with Xistus 4. or, as Francis. Pegna in Di­rector. part. 3. com. 32. p. 49 [...]. col. 1. others, 1484. with Innocentius 8, did so renew it, as Cathol. In­stit. Tit. 34. n. 5. See Pe­gna ubi supra, Simanca doubts not to write, they did in­troduce it into that Kingdome: which I conceive to be in respect of the alterations in the proceedings now used to those were formerly; for that tribunall, in pre­ceding times committed from the Papacy to Friars regu­lars (who most depended on Rome,) and therefore said to be the Popes Court, is since by this concord become in effect no other then the Kings, being recommended to the care of Clerks secular and Lawyers, the Do­minicans who formerly governed it altogether ex­cluded, unlesse where the Inquisitors require their counsell.

12. The style or manner there used being, that his [Page 146] Ma ^ty Vide Para­mo de origine Inquisit. lib. 2. Tit. 2. cap. 4. per totum: & Simanca ubi supra, Tit. 34. n. 6, 7. names an Inquisitor generall, whom the Pope approves, and after is not at all admitted to interpose; for that Inquisitor nominates a Councell, of which him­self is President, for number and persons as the King likes (as sometimes five to which Philip the 2. added two more,) and these be of the gravest divines of Spain, e­ver residing at or near the Court, who compose all differences arising in particular Courts, receive all ap­peals, punish the defect of agents, and relates to none but the King. Of this Councell, as I said, the Inquisi­tor generall is President, whose auctority is very ample; for he nominates all provinciall Inquisitors and their Officers, (who yet enter not on their charges but by the Kings allowance) whom on occasion he removes and punishes, releases all penances, appoints visitors over particular Courts, and though he be directed by the rule of the Canon Law and papall bulls, yet on occasion va­ries from them, as is manifest by Instruct. Hispal. cap. 28. ut citatur à Paramo p. 146. col. 2. n. 4. these Instructions, Relinquendum est arbitrio & prudentiae Inquisitorum, ut procedant juxta juris dispositionem in his quae hic non ex­presse d [...]clarantur, is answerable to none but the King, admitting the Pope either very little or not at all: inso­much as Adriani Hist. lib. 19. p. 1341. & ibid. lib. 18. p. 1 [...]73. [...]escas Hist. Pont. Madriti 1606. lib. 6. in Pio 4. fol. 342. a. col. 2. Pius 4 ^tus. 1565. sending the Cardinall Buon compagno into Spain, upon the cause of the Archbishop of Toledo, committed by the Inquisition there six yeares before on an imputation of heresy, the Kings counsell liked not he should alone examine that Prelate, without joyning two Spaniards both in the processe and sen­tence. Neither did that State receive the Councell of Trent 1564. by other auctority then the Kings onely, who by his edict of the 12. of Iuly commanded the Cardinalls and others of his Clergy to observe it, with­out making any mention of the Pope. So that in that Kingdome this Catholick Prince doth not take on him much less over Ecclesiastick Courts and causes then the King of England, however he do not style himself Head [Page 147] of the Church. And therefore Cathol. In­stit. Tit. 34. n. 5. Simanca speaking of this Inquisition, plainly sayes, Ferdinand and Isabella ju­dicii ordinem quo etiam hodie utimur magna ex parte insti­tuerunt. Insomuch as if we meet it at any time termed the Popes Court there, it is, no question, but a nominall ap­pellation, of that is neither subject to his rules, nor to follow his commands, but as another will.

13. But this Court in Spain, and other places con­forming themselves much to the papall interest, is be­come very infamous, things being carried in it, as we read in Hist. lib. 3. p. 81. Anno 1547. Monst de Thous excellent history, praepostera ju­dictorum forma, contra naturalem aequitatem, & omnem legitimum ordinem,—tum etiam immanitas tormento­rum, quibus plerumque contra veritatem, quicquid delega­tis judicibus libebat, à miseris & innocentibus reis, ut se cru­ciatibus eximerent, torquebatur. And indeed the directi­ons Popes have set them, do not agree I think with the practise of any standing Court of Justice the world ever saw: as that of Apud Ey­mericum Di­rector. Inqui­sit. par. 2. p. 145. Innocentius 4 ^us and Bulla [...]ii 4. cui initium cum sicut. à Francisco Pegna post Directorinm edita p. 162. Pius 4 ^us, that no man shall know the names either of his accuser or that testifies against him, which Constanter asserere a [...] deo, q [...]od nec ipsis pe­ritis tot s process [...]s in­tegraliter c [...]m nomini­b [...]s & cir­c [...]mstantiis publicandus est, &c. Additiones ad cap. 14. Zanchini p. 104. Romae 1579. edit. Camillus Campegius will not have communicated to those learned men th' Inqui­sitors shall call to their assistance in judgement. Ano­ther Bul­la pii 5ti, cui initium Inter multiplices curas. dat. Romae 21. December. 1566. ubi supra, p. 169. of Pius 5 ^tus, that no declaratory or definitive sen­tence in favour of the accused, though after a canonicall purgation, posse facere transitum in rem judicatam, but that they may again proceed tam de antiquis quam novi­ter super eisdem articulis: which in effect is no other, but that a man once accused before them can never be freed. Of a third of the Bulla Pii 5ti, cui initium Si de protegendis, dat. Romae 1. A­pril. 1569. ibid. p. 174. same Pope, that whosoever should strike or terrify any belonging to the said Office, (even a Notary or servant) should assi [...]t any to escape, imbezzle [Page 148] any writings of that Court, besides the being by that Bull declared Anathema, should be guilty of treason, and suffer according as men found culpable in primo capite dictaelegis, their children subject to the paternall infamy, to be not onely incapable of succeeding in the fathers inhe­ritance, but of receiving any legacy from friend or stran­ger, or attaining any place of dignity whatsoever; and others of the like nature, too long to be insisted on.

14. Certain it will not be easy (at least to my under­standing) to prove these proceedings of a Court Chri­stian to agree with those rules and examples Christ him­self hath left us in holy Scripture: but the pursuing these Maximes, and the like, hath brought a great obloquy up­on this Court, so as it is held an undoubted truth, the Inquisition under the Spaniard hath an eye rather to Adriani lib. 17. p. 1258. c. Hist. Concil. di Trent. lib. 8. p. 776. empty the purse, and is upholden more for temporall ends, then to cure the conscience. And to this purpose it may not be here unfitly remembred, that a Spanish In­quisitor, employed by Philip the 2. into Sicily, writes, it is found amongst the records of that Kingdome, Paramo de origine In­quisit. lib. 2. cap. 11. n. 17. p. 203. quod quando in anno 1535. fuit limitata seu suspensa jurisdictio temporalis hujus sancti officii in aliquibus casibus per invi­ctissimum Carolum 5 ^tum faelicis memoriae, jurisdictio spiritu­alis causarum fidei fuit in suspenso, & quasi mortua: which I take no other then a confession, the Church, which it maintains, without the temporall power would fail and come to nought; as indeed Risposta ad fol. 22. A­polog. del Pa­dre Paolo p. 85. Cardinall Bellarmine some­where in effect confesseth, that to restrain ecclesiastick jurisdiction to spiritualls, that pertain to the soul, is to reduce it to nothing.

15. But because I am here entred upon this fining or confiscation of the goods of a Lay person by a spirituall judge, on the conviction (or rather imputation) of He­resy, it will not be amiss to see how the Ecclesiasticks have gained that addition to the power left them by Christ; which is so necessary, as without it, that onely [Page 149] was committed to them from him, which the ancient Fathers practis't, would be as it were dead. It cannot be denyed, Princes did in former times by their edicts im­pose pecuniary penalties on some actions concerned religion; so did Cod. Theod. de Haeret. leg. 21. Theodosius 392. on such as did ordain or were ordained in Haereticis erroribus; which law a Concil. Afric. cap. 60. & Baron. to. 5. Anno 404. 11. 123. Councell held in Africk about 404. (provoked by the inhumanity of the Donatists) did petition th' Empe­rour Honorius might be of force against them: but never any holy Bishop of those times took upon him to con­fiscate any mans estate for his opinions, much lesse to damnify the son for the fathers tenets; and the lawyers do expresly resolve, ff de poenis leg. 20. si poena alicui trrogatur—ne ad haeredes transeat, and give this reason, Ibid. & leg. 26, Poena constitui­tur in emendationem hominum, quae, mortuo eo in quem constitui videtur, desinit; again, no man is alieni cri­minis successor: and accordingly, many Cod. Theod. de Haereticis leg. 40. lata Anno 407. in Cod. Iust. tit. eodem leg. 4. 19. lata Anno 530. & in Authenticis Novel. 115. cap. 3. §. 14. lata Anno 541. &c. imperiall con­stitutions do expresly provide, the Catholick children of hereticall parents (though the father were deprived of them) should succeed in their paternall goods; and thus it stood for ought I know for above a 1000 yeares, the Christian world thinking it hard the son should suffer for an erroneous perswasion of the father, neither did ever any holy Bishop for that space (unlesse as Deputy to some Prince) take upon him that way of punishing, and if any did, it was not approved in him.

16. In the year 1148. Vide Ger­vas. Doro­bern. col. 1363, 1364, 1366. 1. 1666. 20. Willielmus Thorn col. 1807. 52. &c th' Archbishop of Canterbury called by Eugenius 3 ^us to a Councell at Reims, the King denied him passage; yet he stole thither; for which on his return he was expell'd England: into which notwith­standing he got, shrouding himself, as it seems, in those tempestuous times, and to make himself the more for­midable, interdicted divine service through the King­dome (which is the first experience the nation ever had of that censure.) To this the Prior of S. Augustines re­fused to yield obedience: and th' Archbishop having [Page 150] now made his peace with Stephen, got the sentence confirmed from Rome; upon which Thorn, col. 180 [...], 63. omnes seculares in hoc monasterio servientes, praeter censuram ecclesiasticam, ad gravem pecuniae redemptionem, contra juris aequitatem & sanctorum patrum decreta, cocgit. On this complaint being made to the Pope, he writ unto him, Thorn, 1809, 55. Sicut no­bis significatum est, homines ejusdem monaster [...]i, pro parti­cipatione excommunicatorum, praeter ecclesiasticam poenam fuerunt ad redemptionem coacti; and thereupon com­mands him, quatenus omnia quae hac occasione sunt eis ab­lata sine vexatione restitui facias, nolumus enim ut nova in vestra ecclesia inducantur &c. so that certainly it did but then begin to bud: & after 1160, Alexander the 3. De poenis, cap. 3. con­demns the use of the Archdeacons of Coventry, who pro corrigendis excess [...]bus & criminibus puniendis, à cleri­cis & laicis poenam pecuniariam exigunt, affirming it see­med to proceed de radice cupiditatis & avaritiae: yet the same Pope in a Apud Ro­gerum Hove­den fol. 334 B. 3. & con­cil. general. Romae cap. 3. p. 33. col. 2. Councell at Rome 1179. appoints the goods of hereticks to be confiscated, but gives not at all any auctority to the spirituall judge in the execution of it; and at the compiling of the Decretalls by Gregory the 9. De Haereticis cap 8. that particular is omitted.

17. But not long after Innocentius 3, that vere stupor mundi and immutator seculi, as Hist. minor. Anno 1217. Matthew Paris styles him, about the year 1200 De Haeret. cap. 10 & Regist. Inno­cent. 3. lib. 3. epist. 1. appointed the goods of He­reticks under his jurisdiction should be confiscated, and out of it the like to be done by the secular magistrate, upon pain of Ecclesiastick censures; adding from cer­tain Cod. The­od. de sicariis leg. 3. & Cod. Just. ad le­gem Iuliam Majestatis leg. 5. §. Filii. imperiall constitutions, that it being onely an act of mercy, that the children of such as commit treason have their lives spared, when they loose their goods, and the crime far greater to offend God then man, that the severity should not give scandall to the faithfull, in see­ing children exposed to misery for the parents offence, there being many cases wherein according to the divine justice sons may be punisht for the fathers fault, which he [Page 151] leaves the Canonists to justify by th' examples of Chanaan, the children in Sodom, of Achan &c. as I do the reader to Alphonsus à Castro de just [...] haeretico­rum punitione, lib. 2. cap. 11. Simancas In­stit. Cathol. Tit. 9. n. 5. 6. Iohan. Royas singular. 66. n. 5, 6. Vide St. August. lib. 6. Quaestion. 8. super Ios. 10. 4. seek in them. But it seems to mean hard gloss, from prophetick speeches of the primitive times, or extraor­dinary examples, when God himself directed what he would have done, for us now to conclude a practise law­full contrary to expresse precept, Deut. xxiv, 20. ler. xxxi, 30. Ezech. xviii, 20. made good likewise by the ordina­ry 2 Kings xiv, 6. 2 Chron. xxv, 6. use of those times. Besides, I am not satisfied with the reason, that temporall Lords punishing treason with the heirs losse of Estate, Heresy being an offence of the same or a worse nature against the Divine Majesty, chil­dren ought so to suffer: For doubtlesse all treason against a Prince presupposeth malice to his person or govern­ment, (and therefore we do not read that for meerly ca­suall misfortunes, such as Tirrells in England, or Mon­gomeries in France, men have been so punisht) and for that they take away the offenders life upon the first fact, which th' Ecclesiastick De Haeret. cap. 9. pardons: now questionlesse Heresy is out of an erroneous opinion the holder hath of pleasing God.

18. This of Innocentius 3 ^us I take to be the first pa­pall constitution in the kind; yet some 16. yeares before it, divers of severall qualities being discovered in that part of the Netherlands was then within the province of Reims, the Archbishop and Earl of Flanders joyned in an edict, Chronicon Aquicinctinū à Miraeo 1608. editum ad calcem Si­geberti Gemblacen­sis & aliorum, p. 236. anno 1183. ut deprehensi incendio trader entur, substantiae vero eorum sacerdoti & principi resignarentur. After this in Concil. Lat. cap. 3. & de Haeretic. cap. 13. the Councell of Lateran 1215. under the same Pope it was again establisht, bon a damnatorum [de haeresi] si lai­ci fuerint, confiscentur; si vero Clerici, applicentur eccle­s [...]is à quibus stipendia perceperunt &c.

Nine yeares after which Fredericus 2 ^dus publisht those lawes at Padoua, of which before, in which he did especi­ally establish the confiscation of their goods, and is the first imperiall constitution of that kind; which remain [Page 152] no where now entire save in some Eduntur à Francisco Pegna, ad fi­nem Directorii. papall bulls, as of Innocentius 4. Alexander the 4. and Clement the 4. as is noted in Gloss. de Haeret. cap. 18. in sexto ad verb. leges quasdam: yet some part of them are now inserted into De Episco­pali audien­tia, cap. Sta­tuimus, & de Haeret. Mani­chaeis, cap. Gazaros &c. the Codex of Iustinian, under the titles of Authenticae or nova constitutio Frederici 2. de statu & consuetud. &c. as I have touched before.

19. But these lawes, though they confiscated the goods of Hereticks, did not appoint how they should be employed; insomuch as the same Emperour, being that very year 1224. at Palermo in Sicily, Apud Para­mum de origi­ne Inquisit. lib. 2. tit. 2. cap. 11. n. 8. p. 198. expressed his in­tent to all his Officers through the Empire, but more espe­cially in that Kingdome, that whereas formerly his Exche­quer did receive the benefit of those confiscations, they should be divided into three parts, viz. one third Fisco, a­nother Apostolicae sedi, & the other third eisdem Inquisitori­bus. After which Bul. Innoc. 4. dat. idibus Maii 9. Pon­tif. cui initium Ad extirpan­da &c. in bullario. et à Francisco Pegna ad fi­nem Directorii, p. 11. §. Tene­antur. Innocentius 4 ^us 1252. did appoint a dis­tribution in some sort imitating him, as did likewise Ibid. p. 37. §. Teneatur. dat. Anagniae 2. Kalend. Decem. 1259. A­lexander the 4 ^th, including as liable to the same punish­ment such as were receivers of Hereticks: to Ibid. p. 65. §. Teneatur. bulla Clem. 4. dat. Perusti 3. Non. Novemb. 1. Po [...]tificat. which Clement the 4. 1265. added, that the houses in which Hereticks were found, to be destroyed without hope of reedifying, the materialls sold, and a threefold division made, &c. These deprivations confined hitherto to Ita­ly onely, Boniface the 8. 1295, or rather Annal. eccle­siast. Renaldi to 14. Anno 1297. n. 41. 1297, publi­shing the sixth book of the Decretalls, made generall, de­creeing, De haereticis in sento cap. 19. vide cap. 17, 18. bona Haereticorum ipso jure decernimus confiscata: whereupon, and some other by him then inserted into the Canon law, Bishops laboured to draw from th' lnqui­sitors part of the profits thus distributed; but Extrav. com­mun. cap. 1. Benedict the 11. 1303. did absolutely prohibit that, tanquam juri absonum. After which, because (as it seems) the Clergy were not free from prosecuting men onely for their e­states, Clement the 5 ^th in the Councell of Vienna 1311. strictly In Clem. de Haereticis cap. 2. injoyned, ne praetextu officii Inquisitionis, qui­busvis [Page 153] modis illicitis ab aliquibus pecuniam extorqueant; and likewise, ne scienter attentent ecclesiarum bona, ob clericorum delictum, praedicti occasione officii fisco etiam ec­clesiae applicare; changing what the Councell of Lateran had before establisht.

20. Yet notwithstanding this grave admonition of the Pope, their Agents did not carry themselves without scandall in this kind, by reason of an Giovanni Villani lib. 12. cap. 57. outrage arising from a Franciscan Inquisitor 1346. in Florence; a Scruti­ny was had of his actions, and found he had raised from the Citizens 7000 florens of gold in two yeares, as com­positions, or fines, upon the imputation of Heresy, yet never lesse in the town; but any erroneous or lesse cau­telous word was censured as criminall. This drew the Florentine to conform themselves to the usages of Peru­gia, Spain, and other parts, in making a law, no Inquisi­tor should condemn any Citizen or borderer pecuniari­ly, but if an heretick, send him to the fire. By which we may gather, these bulls were not generally received in the world; for then in Spain th' Ecclesiastick did not fine men, and now the King there hath the benefit of those confiscations. In Arrest de la court de Par­liament a Pa­ris 27. Iun. 1542. habetur in libro des preuves des libertes del' es­glise Gallicane cap. 38. n. 9. p. 1082. France they do not to this day impose on the Laicks amendes pecuniares, but onely on the Clergy, which must be expended en aumosnes and ouvres pitoiables, not to the enriching themselves, &c. Neither doth the wise Venetian permit confiscating of estates to arise from any sentence of theirs, but that is to devolve to the next heir. I do not here mention the constitutions of Boniface Archbish. of Cant. 1260. nor of Stratford 1343. in this kind; because of the first little rec­koning was made, and the second did onely refer to commutation of penance, which the law allowes: he that would may find them in Lyndwood lib. 3. de immuni­tate ecclesiae cap. Accidit, and lib. 5. de poenis cap. Evenit.

21. If any ask a cause, why the ancient Fathers did proceed with so great lenity against blasphemous here­ticks, [Page 154] as the Arrians, Nestorians, &c. why, when the August. E­pist. 68. Em­perour would have punisht the furious Donatists with a pecuniary mulct, the holy men of those times so earnest­ly interceded as to procure the remission, and did requite their fury with such love & meeknesse, August, contra literas Petiliani Do­n [...]t, lib. 2. cap. 83. as to be able to say, no one of them had payed what th' imperiall edicts might challenge▪ when of late yeares men have been brought to the fire, children exposed to misery by the loss of their parents estates, even by Bishops and other of the Clergy, whose opinions were neither so blasphe­mous as the Arrians, nor their comportments so inhu­mane as the Donatists: why they preached, men [...] Socrates de Chrysostomo lib. 6. cap. κα', lat. 19. relap­sed, even to a thousand times, might yet live reconciled to the Church; when as now such as have renounced an opinion Rome calls heresy, being after found to hold it, is De H [...]reticis cap. 9. & tit. eodem cap. 4. in Sexto. Si­manca Instit. Cathol. Tit. 57. n. 10. seculari judicio sine ulla penitus audientia relinquendus; which yet is not observed if he be a Prince, as was Henry the 4. or perhaps a private man out of their power:

22. To these demands I can give no other answer, but, that their offences being against the holy Trinity, the pious Bishops of those times, as men who watched for soules, did content themselves to denounce what was heresy, but having done that, finding it not received, to leave the punishment to him who assures it shall go worse with Sodom and Gomorrah then those refused their instructions, and under him to the Secular magistrate; did likewise follow his precept, in forgiving even to Mat. xvlii, 22. seven­ty times seven times: when on the other side, the opini­ons of these later hereticks (as they call them) be rather against men and their Institutes, then God, as that Aeneas Syl­vius histor. Bohemica cap. 35. Ro­manum praesulem reliquis episcopis paremesse, Purgatorium ignem non inventri, Celebritates sanctorum rejiciendas, Ie­juntis ab ecclesia institutis mhil inesse meriti &c. and a per­swasion gained, none but the Ecclesiastick can Cognitio haeresis & ipsius puni­tio pertinet ad episcopos. Lyndwood de H [...]reticis cap. Item quia, verbo Ordinarii. punish Heresy, who judge the opposer by the law of man, how­beit they style it Christian, yet how it agrees with divi­nity [Page 155] Iremit to the Canonists decision. In the mean time I cannot but observe, Cathol. Instit. Tit. 57. Simanca finds nothing out of holy writ, but onely in divine Plato lib. 10. de legibus, to maintain the position that semel tantum haereticis poeni­tentibus parcitur &c.

23. This being then the proceeding against Here­ticks in generall, it will be necessary to see how it was formerly in England, and how the Queen found it. First, it will not be unfit to premise, Neubrigen­sis lib. 2. cap. 13. that from the Conversi­on of the Saxons to the year 1166. no heresy was ever known to have been in England; insomuch as we may safely conclude, whatever doctrine we meet with in the publick homilies of the Church, or other writers of el­der times, must be esteemed catholick, however it now stand censured: but in that year about XXX Dutch came hither, that detested baptisme, the Eucharist &c. who being convict by Scripture in an episcopall councell cal­led by the King at Oxford, were remitted to his disposi­tion, that caused them to be whipt, and burnt in the face, and a command given none should either receive or re­lieve them, so that they miserably perisht: which severity his Ma ^ty did not think fit afterward to extend to those were then called Publicani, as I have before n. 7. shew'd, though there were many in his dominions.

24. For the punishment of Hereticks, it cannot be doubted by the common Law (that is the custome of the Realm) of England to have been here, as in other parts of the world, by consuming them by fire. De script. Brit. Cent. 3. cap. 65. in Appendice. Balaeus, from the testimony of a chronicle of London, reports one of the Albigenses to have been so made away there 1210. to which the Apparat. Elizab. learned Camden seems to allude, when he sayes more dyed in Queen Maries time, then this nation had seen ex quo regnante Iohanne Christiani in Christianos apud nos flammis saevire coeperunt. The same Paramo saith is made good by an epistle of Tho. Walden­sis to Martin the 5. but I have not seen it; I am sure in [Page 156] that VValdensis I use it is not found. But of the truth of the thing there is no question; for Lib. 3. de corona cap. 9. n. 2. fol. 124. a. Britton cap. 9. Bracton writes of an Apostate Deacon, that in a Councell held at Oxford 1222. by Stephen Langton was first degraded, and then by the Lay committed to the fire: with whom for the thing agrees Lib. 1. cap. 29. in fine, p. 46. Fleta; yet, by the way, where you read in him per manum comburentur clericalem, it is to be Laicalem, for so is Bracton, out of whom he transcribed it, agreeing with the continuall practise both of this and other nations; for the Clergy meddles not with execu­tion.

25. In Edward the 3 ^ds dayes, about the year 1347. Hist. Angl. lib. 19. p. 382, 39. Polydore Virgil testifyes two Franciscans to have been burnt, quod de religione male sentirent. Neither did VVilli­am Sautry, a relapsed priest, dye by any statute-law 2. H. 4. but convicted in a provinciall councell of th' Arch­bishop of Cant. the writ de haeretico comburendo, bearing date the 26. February was by th' advice of the Lords Temporall sent to the Major of London to cause him be executed, Rot. Parl. 2. Hen. 4. n. 29. attendentes, sayes it, hujusmodi haereticos, sic convictos & damnatos, juxta legem divinam, humanam, canonica instituta, & in hac parte consuetudinaria, ignis incendio comburi debere &c. But where Ypodigma Neustriae an­no 1401. p. 158, 9 VValsingham speaks as if he dyed during the sitting of the Parliament, by vertue of 2. Hen. 4. cap. 15. the law then made against hereticks, the historian is without peradventure mistaken; for that Parliament, begun about the 20. Ianuary, ended the 10. March following, did expresly provide, on the petition of the Commons, Rot. Parl. 2. Hen. 4. n. 116. qe touz les estatutz & ordenances faitz ou affaire en cest Parliament qe sont penalz, ne tieg­nent lieu ne force devant le feste de Peatecoste prochin ve­nant, les queles en le mesme temps puissent estre proclamez: to which the answer is, le Royle voet. So that certainly he could not dye by that law, which was not to take effect till so long after.

26. But I confesse I did a little doubt of two particu­lars: [Page 157] The one, whether by the common Law a Lay man could be sent to the fire for any conviction by the Ecclesiastick; for all the undoubted precedents I have met with (unlesse that of the Albigenses were other­wise) were of some Clearks, within the pale of the Church, that were so punisht; and Bracton and Fleta both agree, Clerici Apostatae comburantur; whose words being pe­nall, I conceived stricti juris not to be construed by equi­ty. But indeed Fleta elsewhere speaks more generally, Christiani Apostatae I read it de­trectari, not, a [...] the print, detractari. detrectari debent & comburi; and Cap. 9. fol. 16. b. Britton of Miscreants so to be served, without distincti­on of the quality; with whom S ^r. Edward Cook concurs. Another thing I questioned, whether any Bishop with­in his Diocese alone could convict one of heresy before 2. Hen. 4. cap. 15. (of which hereafter:) for whatever the power of the Ordinary was, there is very little ex­ample of his putting it in exercise before the times of VVickliff.

27. Who began to be taken notice of about the end of Edward the 3. or rather the beginning of Rich. the 2. in whose doctrine, at least that they fathered on him, though there were good Corn, yet was it not without Tares. But when it grew common, and to be hearkned unto, the Prelats laboured to procure 5. Ric. 2. cap. 5. stat. 2. a law, his Ma ^ties Commissions should be directed to the Sheriffs and o­ther his Ministers, to arrest all preachers, their fautors &c. to hold them in prison, till they will justifi themselves accor­ding to reason, and the lawes of the holy Church. How this past I should be glad to learn; for not onely 5. Ric. 2. cap. 1. the printed statutes, but Rot. Parl. lendemain Ie­han port La­tin. 5. Ric. 2. n. 13. the Roll of Parl ^nt expresly mentions the Commons agreeing to those Acts, yet the Rot. Parl. Octaves St. Michel. 6. Ric. 2. n. 52, next meeting they do disclaim to have given any assent unto it, quiel ne fust unques assentu ne grante parles coēs, mes ce qe fust parle de ce fust sanz assent, de lour qe celuy estatut soit annt­enti: to which the Kings answer is, y plest au Roy. How it fell out this latter was not counted an Act, Cook Inst. 3. p. 41. S ^r. Edward [Page 158] Cook hath shew'd, which tells us why it past again with­out opposition in 1 & 2. P. & M. cap. 6. Queen Maries dayes. I wish that learned Gentleman had given his opinion how the re­cord came to be so faulty, as to affirme a concurrence of the lower House to that they never assented.

28. In King Hen. the 4 ^ths time his successour, that 2 Hen. 4. cap. 15. law past, which greatly increased the power of the Ordinary, allowing him to imprison, fine, determine all causes of heresy, according to the canonicall Decrees, with­in three moneths: on which words Canonicall Sancti­ons the Bishops so behaved themselves, 25 Hen. 8. cap. 14. That the most learned man of the realm, diligently lying in wait upon him­self, could not eschue and avoid the same act and Canonicall Sanctions, if he should be examined upon such captious inter­rogatories as is and hath been accustomed to be ministred by the Ordinaries of this realm, in cases where they will su­spect of heresy &c. Upon which, if any did refuse obedi­ence to his Diocesan in ought, Cook Instit. 3. cap. 5. p. 42. as paying a legacy &c. there would be means found to bring him within the su­spicion of heresy. And certainly the proceeding of some Diocesans upon this statute gave quickly scandall: for onely nine yeares after, we find the Commons petition, Rot. Parl. 11. Hen. 4. n. 29. qe please a nre soveraigne Seig ^r le Roy grantier, qe si ascun soit ou serra arreste par force de l' estatute fait l' an de vostre regne seconde, al requeste des Prelats & Clergie de vostre Royalme d' Engleterre, q' il purra estre lesse a mainprise, & faire sa purgation franchement sanz destourbance d' ascun en mesme le Conteou il est arrestu, & qe tieles arrestes soient desore en avant faitz en due forme de ley, par les Viscount, Mairs, Baillifs ou Conestables nostre Seign ^r le Roy, sanz vio­lent affray, our force & armes, en depredation de leur biens, ou autre extortion ou injurye queconcque en celle affaire. But to this, le Roy se voet ent aviser is all the answer gi­ven. But whereas Walsing. Anno 1410. p. 422. VValsingham speaks of this Parl ^nt. as insected with Lollardy, certainly to me there is no such thing appeares in the Roll, but rather the contrary. But I [Page 159] confesse I did think before that law of H. 4. no Bishop in his Diocese, without a Provinciall Councell, could have convicted any man of heresy, so as to have caused him been burnt; for mans life being a point of so high con­cernment in the law, and heresy laying so great an impu­tation on the party, it seemed not to me probable, eve­ry angry Bishop in his Court should alone have power of determining what was by the canonicall Sanctions so esteemed, and whose words or writings could admit no other sense then hereticall: and with this it seemed to me the practice did concur, for the Deacon burnt at Oxford suffered after conviction in a Provinciall Synod; and the conviction of VVilliam Sautry shewes plainly to have been after the same manner, Rot. Parl. 2. Hen. 4. n. 29. the Writ running, Cum vener abilis pater Thomas &c. de consensu & assen­su, ac consilio coepiscoporum, ac confratrum suffragancorum suorum, nec non totius cler [...] Provinciae suae, in concilio suo provinci ili congregato, juris ordine in hac parte requisito in omnthus observato &c. intimating (as it seemed to me) if otherwise, the Order of law had not been observed. And I did ever conceive this Law had increased the Power of the Ordinary, as well in permitting him singly to pursue the canonicall Sanctions in convicting an here­tick, as in sining and imprisoning of him; especially the statute 1 & 2. P. & M. cap. 6. of Q. Mary, that gave it life after the repeal of Hen. the 8, affirming, before such revivall the Ordina­ry did want auctority to proceed against those that were in­fected with Heresy. But I have since found, Cook Inst. 3. cap. 5. p. 39. better opi­nion it was otherwise.

29. After this 2. Hen. 5. Stat. 2. Hen. 5. cap. 7. a Parliament at Leicester enacted, The Chancellour, Treasurer, Justices of the peace, Sheriffs, &c. should take an Oath for destroying all manner of Heresies, commonly called Lollardries, to be assistant to the Ordinary therein; Persons convict of Heresy to loose their fee-simple land; Iustices of the Kings Bench, of the Peace and of Assize, to enquire of all holding any errours or [Page 160] heresies as Lollards, their maintainers, receivers, fau­tors, &c. and for that end a clause to be put into the Com­missions of Iustice of the Peace: yet forasmuch as the cog­nizance of heresie, errours, and Lollardries belonged to Iudges of holy Church, and not to the secular, the inditement taken by them not to be evidence, but for information be­fore the spirituall Iudge, into whose hands the person suspe­cted to be delivered within ten dayes after his enditement; every man empanell'd in the Enquest for the tryall of them to have in England 5 pounds, in Wales forty shillings in land by the year &c. Which three lawes were each re­pealed by Hen. the 8 ^th or Ed. the 6. and again restored by Q. Mary, under whom, by vertue of them, had in lesse then three yeares been spoyled for religion more Christi­an bloud of her subjects, then in any Princes reign since Lucius.

30. Things standing thus when Queen Elizabeth came to the Crown, the Ecclesiastick auctority exerci­sed at home and abroad with rigour and austerity, rather then Christian mildnesse; still to permit that, was the con­tinuing a fire to consume her people, and yet for every one to think and do without controule what him list, was to let loose all reins of government, to leave open a door for sedition to disquiet her Kingdome, and the Commonwealth perhaps not to be ever in peace: her Ma ^ty therefore took a middle way to agree with the pri­mitive times, and yet not let every profane humor dis­turb the Church, by Stat. 1. Eliz. cap. 1. erecting a Court with power to visit, reform, redresse order, correct and amend all such errours, heresies, schismes &c. which by any spirituall or ec­clesiasticall power, authority, or jurisdiction can or may law­fully be reformed, ordered, redressed, corrected, restrained or amended; yet restraining them from adjudging any thing to be heresy, that had not been heretofore adjudg­ed such by the plain words of the canonicall Scriptures, or by any one of the first four generall Councells, or by any other [Page 161] generall Councell, wherein the same was declared heresy by the expresse and plain words of the canonicall scripture, or that should hereafter by the Parliament with the assent of the Convocation &c.

From whence ariseth a question of some intricacie, how it came to passe those times spake with so great sub­mission to the four first generall Councells, and yet so re­strained the other, without expressing which they were, nor any other particular concerning them. For the soluti­on of which, we are to know, those have been ever looked on by the Catholick Church with more reverence then any other that ever yet were held. The Novel, 131. cap. 1. & in Cod. de summa tri­nitate & side Catholica leg. 9. Emperour Iustinian 541. declared which they were, and that he did receive earum dogmata sicut sanctas scripturas, & re­gulas sicut leges observamus; who made not the like men­tion of the fifth, though Concil. gen. Romae, to. 2. p. 524, col. 1. E. called by him, and held in his time. Neither did Gregory the great, who did reverence them, Gregor. lib. 1. epist. 24. sicut sancti Evangelii quatuor libros, make the same esteem of the fifth; for having made honourable mention of it in a letter to a Queen of Lombardy, sent by a Bishop of Milan, the Bishop gave it her not, on an opinion she might be scandalized at his naming of it: upon which Gregor. lib. 3. epist. 37. S ^t. Gregory sent him word he did well, and in that altered his epistle. And the year following, viz. 596, Lib. 5. [...]n­dict. 14. epist. 2. the People of Ravenna opposing one Maximia­nus in being their Bishop, as not of sound belief, in that he did not carry so great veneration to the Councell of Chalcedon, hodoth assure them of the contrary, that he did receive those four Councells, but makes no mention of the fifth. I do not deny but Beda lib. 4. cap. 17. Con­cil. Calcuth. cap. 1. apud Spelm. p. 293. the faith of the fifth and sixth were by this Church approved, yet never any of them had that great reverence yielded their dictats the first four had, which are therefore said to have been Canones Aelsrici ad Wulfinum a­pud Spelman. Concil. Can. 33. p. 581. vide Egberti Archiepise. de sacerdotali jurecap. 4. ibid. p. 278. Synodi firmissimae by Elfrick, in his Canons to VVulfin.

32. But these, however of this high esteem, yet had not the name of generall appropriated unto them till [Page 162] long after; for certainly that distinction was not sudden­ly brought into the Church, at least in that sense it is now taken, many Synods by our writers being styled ge­nerall, to which yet th' obligation was never of that nature, as if they did not or could not erre. p. 24, 7. Eadmerus writes, Anselm told VVilliam the 2, generale concilium Episcopo­rum ex quo Rex factus fuisti non fuit in Anglia celebra­tum: and the like phrase is used very frequently for Eng­lish councells not onely in him, but in our other eldest and best historians, as Anno 1044. p. 405. Flor. VVigorniensis, Anno eod. fol. 180, 23. Simeon Dunelmensis, Hunt. fol. 226. b. 3. Huntington, Ger. Dor. col. 1369, 62. Gervas. Dorobernensis, Hoved. An­no 1044. fol. 252, a. 35. Anno 1200. fol. 458, b. 18. Hoveden, &c. Hist. minori & majori, p. 131. 19. Mat. Paris speaking of a councell held at VVestminster 1175. calls it Concilium generale, which in Diceto col. 585, 63. Diceto is changed to Concilium Regionale, and in the margin added (out of the Mss. copy sometimes belong­ing to S ^t. Albans, and now at Saint Iames's, (the best and fairest I ever saw) and which I conceive Mat. Paris him­self used) solius Papae est concilium generale, Romanae ec­clesiae & Constantinopolitanae est concilium universale: which I know not how he will make good, having To. 1. Con­cil. Con. Carth. 3. cap. 7. concil. 4. in prooem. the 3 ^d and 4 ^th Councell of Carthage, Ibid. Honor. Augusto & [...]umorido C [...]ss. and one held there 403. the Councell Tom. 2. Concil. Crab. c. 20. of Matiscon and others to contest with, which being no other then particular, as we now esteem them, have in their acts the titles of being uni­versall Councells. So the 4 ^th Councell Ibid. in proaemio. of Toledo is said to have been generall; as by Eymericus a Director. par. 2. quaest. 5. 6. in sine p. Councell in Tarragona.

33. Now of such as have been so called, it is mani­fest the value set on them is altogether vanisht, and was so long since. De vit. Pont. in An­selmo. fol. 129, b. 30. Malmsbury records, the Councells held by Anselm were in his time become obsoleta, their cre­dit lost: and so we may say of the rest, for De poenis, cap. ad haec, verbo mini­me admit­tantur. Lyndwood is very clear no English Councells oblige this Church, be­fore 1222. Stephen Langton held one at Oxford. As for those which the Popes called as Patriarchs of the West, which Diceto conceives were properly generall, the rite [Page 163] of former times was, never to send hence more then four Bishops unto them; which when it came in question 1179. Hoveden fol. 332. a. 55. Episcopi Angliae constanter asseruerunt, quod ad generale concilium Dom. Papae quatuor Episcopi de Anglia tantum Romam mittendi sunt: which is so full a testi­mony of his having no absolute power over our Bishops, not so much as to cause them meet in councell, as there cannot well be a greater; and therefore when he impo­sed the oath (of Cap. 3. n. 50, 51. which before) on them, one clause was, Vocatus ad Synodum veniam, nisi praepeditus fuero canonica praepeditione. Yet in after Ages the going thither did onely remain at the Princes pleasure, Vide Seld. ad Eadmer. p. 214. ex. Archivis po­testatem com­missam Am­basciatoribus ad interessend. concilio Basi­siliensi. who gave them auctority consentiendi, &, si opus fuerit, dissentien­di his quae juxta deliberationem dicti concilii inibi statui & ordinari contigerit. All which I have spoke of generall Councells, that the Reader may know, when he meets that phrase in any author, he is not necessarily to con­clude him to have conceived an obligation of follow­ing whatever they said, nor that he held it to have been void of Errour; for it is unquestionable, they and we give the name to such Synods as were esteemed full of im­perfections, far from that freedome ought to be in Ge­nerall Councells, to whose Canons they did not hold themselves tyed.

34. But because in these cases examples of former times do more convince mens judgements, then present affirmations, to give some instances, not of other then of such as have been 1608 & 1612. Rom. lately printed, and with that title, at Rome; as the Councell of Vienna 1311. Which by Gualterus Hemingford Gisburnensis. Gis­burnensis, who lived about that time, is noted to have been nothing lesse then a free Councell: the book is not printed, I will give you the whole therefore as I find it in him.

Dominus Papa Clemens tennit concilium suum Vien­nae Anno Dom. Mccexi. primo die mensis Octobris: in quo quidem conciliotres fecit sessiones.

[Page 164] I. In prima sessione, facto sermone, exposuit Clero tres arti­oulos super quibus erat principaliter tractandum, & consu­lendum; super negotio terrae sanctae, quomodo posset recupe­rari & tueri, & super ordine Templariorum, qui pro nullo habebatur; praecepitque omnibus Praelatis, & singulis qui convenerant, quod super praemissis articulis usque ad secun­dam sessionem deliberarent.

II. In secunda sessione facta est long a disputatio de ordi­ne Templariorum, utrum stare posset, vel deleri de jure deberet. Et erant pro ordine Templariorum praelati quasi omnes, praeter praelatos Franciae, qui propter timorem Re­gis Franciae (per quem, ut dicebatur, totum illud scanda­lum fuerat) aliud facere non audebant. Erant in toto Conci­lio (quod Concilium dici non merebatur, quia ex ca­pite proprio omnia fecit Dominus Papa, non respon­dente neque consentiente sacro Concilio) baculi pastora­les circa cxxx.

III. In tertia sessione Dominus Papa [sedit] pro tribu­nali, & ab uno latere Rex Franciae, ab altero Rex Naverniae filius ejus: surrexit que quidem Clericus, & inhibuit sub poena excommunicationis majoris, ne aliquis loqueretur verbum in concilio, nisi licentiatus vel requisitus à Papa. Re­citatoque processu Templariorum, adjecit Papa, Quod licet ex processu praehabito ipsum Ordinem de jure delere non posset, tamen ex plenitudine potestatis Ordinem de­levit, nomen & habitum, terras eorum & possessiones Hospitalariis conferendo, aggregando, & uniendo.

35. The like may be said of the Councel of Lateran under Innocentius 3. in which there was onely recitata (as what the Pope had before concluded on) capitula Sic Mat. Paris Anno 1215. p. 272, 26. lege tamen capitula lxx. lx, quae aliis placabilia, aliis videbantur onerosa, &c. Which with the great extortion then exercised on the prelats appeared in it, the little credit it gained in England, might justly cause p. 151, 19. edit. Lond. th' Antiquitates Britannicae Eccle­siae write it to end in risum & scomma: which words are none of Mat. Paris, but of the auctors; though the mar­ginall [Page 165] note against them in p. 158, 47. the edition of Hanaw 1605. hath given an occasion of mistake, which should have been placed five lines lower, as it is in that p. 151, 23. of London 1572. for that he there speaks of the prelats borrowing to satisfy the papall avarice, is as Archbishop Parker, or whosoever else composed those lives, thus delivered in Mat. Paris. hist. minor. Ms. p. 172. & fol. 86. sive 89. col. 2. An­no 1216. Vide Abbatum vi­tas pag. 117, 39, 43. Historia minori; Tunc autem temporis solutum est concilium generale: Papa vero praelatis petentibus licen­tiam repatriandi minime concessit, immo à singulis auxi­lium in pecunia postulavit, quam recessurt cum viaticis cogebantur à Mercatoribus curiae Romanae duris conditio­nibus mutuare, & sic cum benedictione papali ad propria remearunt—per idem tempus instante festo Paschali, &c.

36. This I have the rather transcribed, because some are of opinion that Councell ended 1215; which cer­tainly it did not till towards Easter the year following; and then too abruptly, the Pope called away on a sud­dain for appeasing the wars growing in Italy, the 16 Iu­ly 1216. dyed: which makes it without either time when it began or ended, nothing being fully concluded but th' expedition against the Sarazins, for the recovery of the Holy land. Of this I have made the more particular mention, for that having given advertisement of it to Doctor Wats (who hath with great sincerity and judg­ment put out Mat. Paris,) that he might clear the Arch­bishop in his Adversariis, I know not by what fate he applies his note to pag. 138, 5. which referrs to the Councell held there by Alexander the 3. 1179. when it should have been to pag. 272. or pag. 274. 6. and thinks he called the lives of the Abbots the Historia minor; who I am perswaded See the prae­face to Mat. West. pag. 5. never saw that book, but did write candidly what he found in Historia minori.

37. But that this Councell was never received gene­rally here is manifest, in that divers Canons in it were not of force in England, as the 3, the 41, the 46, to which I may adde the very first; for though Lyndwood, de summa Trinitate & fide Catho­lic â, cap. Al­tissimus. Peckham 66 years [Page 166] after did make a constitution in that point; yet he did, to my understanding, not speak of Christs presence in the Eucharist so grossely, nor determine it to be by Transub­stantiation, as the first chapter of the other doth: but of that hereafter. And whosoever shall persue ibid. de poe­uitentiis & remissionibus. Simon Sudburies constitions 1378 touching confession, will find so much variation from the 21 chapter of that Sy­nod, as he cannot think he took that for a rule not to be varied from. To which I may adde, that De custodia Eucharist. cap. 2. Peckham pro­vides the punishment of the negligent conserver of the holy Sacrament to be secundum regulam concilii genera­lis, meaning the 20 ^th chapter of this I speak of; which had it been of force otherwise, he had no doubt com­manded the due observance of it, not by his command added strength to the rule there given. It is true, Stephen Langton, to ingratiate himself with Rome (whom he had so much displeased, as Mat. Paris Hist. minor. Anno 1216. § Barones, p. 172. col. 2. the Pope intended to remove him from his Archbishoprick on the Kings desire, but stopt on the intercession of the Court, and his being a Cardinall) did at the end of his Synod at Oxford 1222 enjoyn the Councell Which Coun­cell of Lateran this was, is uncertain, whe­ther that under Innocentius 2. or this by In­nocentius 3. but most likely that under In­nocent 3. at which himself was present. of Lateran held under Pope Inno­cent, in the paying of Tythes and other litigious Binius reads, & aliis capi­tulis, thereby adding strength to every chapter of that Councell: when certain the reading should be, according to ancient copies, in praestatione De­cimarum & aliis causis, referring onely to what past there touching Tythes, and the payment of them by the Cistertiam order, for land acquired after that time, which severall Acts of Parl. confirmed afterwards. As for the other constitutions there propounded, he after gives the rule with what cau­tion they were to be expounded and recited, as they should be held expedient, and not otherwise. causes, to be observed, & in Synodis episcopalibus constitutiones illius concilii, una cum istis, prout videbitur expedire, [ex­poni volumus & recitari:] which last words Binius hath changed, I know not on what auctority, to volumus ob­servari, when questionlesse th' English took them for advise, not a precept: and their little regard of them ap­pears by the particulars mentioned. Neither doth Lynd­wood make any mention of this part, though he have, I think, all the rest were agreed there: & is it self altogether omitted in some old copies of that Councel I have seen; [Page 167] one of which is joyned with the Mss. Annals of Burton Abby in S ^r Thomas Cottons Library. But the Acts of this Councell being, with divers others, printed at the end of the constitutions of Otho and Othobon at Paris 1504, and since by Binius transferred into his third tome the second part, this is alledged by some men, as if what past at Lateran had been of undoubted validity with us; when no question, what was done there hath never been taken here as the decrees of a generall Councell, like that of Nice or &c. but of Innocentius 3 ^us, as they stand in the Decretalls (compiled by Gregory the 9 ^th his Ne­phew) with this title, Innocentius 3. in Concilio Latera­nensi, as those by him propounded, but not fully con­cluded in councell, according to Plantina, and from which this Church varied as occasion served. Yet if any shall insist this conclusion of 1222. to have been of greater validity then I speak, I must adde, that if it really were made with such an intent by the Ecclesiasticks, it cannot be thought to have obliged us more then that declaration of the Bishops 1615 did the French; who Preuves des libertes de l' Esglise de France p. 325. having meurement delibere sur la publication du concile de Trente, ont unaniment recognu & declarè, & re­cognoissent & declarent, estre obligez par leur devoir, & conscience, a recevoir, come de fait ils ont receu & recoivent, le dit concile, & promettent l'observer entant qu' ils peuvent par leurs fonctions, & auctorite spirituele, & pastorele, and caused the same to be printed. Yet that of Trent had ne­ver validity in France, nor the other in England, notwith­standing what thus past the Clergy.

38. Neither was that other Councell of Lateran un­der Innocentius 2. ever received here: though the Pope there Ordericus Vitalis lib. 13. p. 919. B. insignem sacrorum Decretorum textum congessit, yet nimis abundans per universum orbem nequitia terrige­narum corda contra ecclesiastica scita obduravit: from whence it proceeded, that when they were divulged they did no good, quoniam à principibus & optimatibus [Page 168] regnorum, cum subjectis plebibus, parvi pensa sunt. Now that it was never received here appears, (besides this testimony) in that the marriage of a professed Nun was Regist. Islep. fol. 166. b. adjudged valid, contrary to the 7. Canon of it, and that too after it was registred in the Apud Gra­tian. caus. 27. q. 1. cap. 40. Canon Law: which shews, this Church did neither admit the Canons of forreign Councells, nor the Canon Law it self to alter their ancient customes; as is farther manifest by the sta­tute of Merton cap. 9. Neither was the Councell of Sardis ever allowed in England, as is manifest by what before of Appeals, which yet by the Capitulars of Carol. & Lud. Capit. lib. 7. cap. 323. Charls the great and Ludovicus Pius was even in that particular in France; which made Bern. de consideratione ed Eugenium, lib. 3. cap. 2. S ^t. Bernard write of them, in multas posse eas devenire perniciem, si non summo [mode­ramine actitentur: Appellatur de toto mundo ad te] id quidem &c. for so the place is to be read, as I have seen in two very good Mss, and one late printed, not as in the former editions of him, as at Paris 1586. By these precedents the Reader may judge how necessary it was for the Parliament to make a distinction of Councells. Now in these, with sundry of as doubtfull credit, being of late Concil. gen. Romae, 1608, 1612. printed at Rome, as if they were of equall value with the first, I have thought fit to instance. And here ha­ving made mention of receiving Councells, as if that added strength unto them, it will be necessary to say something of that too, for the fuller clearing of this Church.

39. The Apostles as they shewed a pattern for Acts the xy. hold­ing Councells to settle disputes amongst Christians; so Paul and Silas in their travells delivering the Acts xvi, 4. Decrees by them ordained to be kept by severall Churches, shew'd it to be reasonable, such as were absent should receive what was done in any Synod, before they were obliged by it; and accordingly, in the primitive times, those were not present at the holding a synod, had the results sent or brought unto them after the conclusion taken, who did in their own Churches subscribe (find­ing [Page 169] them just and pious) what the others had in Councell agreed upon, and then reposed them amongst their Records, called by S ^t Hierom Hieron. ad­versus Luci­ferianos to. 2. fol. 52. a. Paris 1534. Scrinia publica, Ec­clesiarum arcae &c. So Con. 6. Carthag. cap. 9. Cecilian, being present at Nice, brought to Carthage the Decrees there concluded, who submitted unto them; and Epist. ad Aphto; inter­prete Petro Nannio. Pa­ris 1572. col. 537. c. S. Athanasius of that Councell sayes, Huic Concilio universus orbis assensum praebuit; & quanquam multae habitae sunt Synodi, hujus ta­men omnes sunt memores, tumper Dalmatiam, Dardani­am, alias (que) insulas, Siciliam, &c. & pleri (que) in Arabia hanc agnoverunt, & subscriptione approbarunt, &c. And of the Concil. gen. p. 64. c. Councell at Sardis it is recorded, [...] which I English thus; Osius the Bishop subscribed, and so did th [...] rest. These things be­ing copied out, the Synod [...]n Sardis sent to those could not be present, who were of the same mind w [...]th what had been determined of those subscrib [...]d in the Synod; and of the o­ther Bishops these are the names.

40. After which Epist. ad Aegyp. ios &c. col. 424. a. b. Athanasius (from whom this e­pistle is taken) adds, qui igitur decretis [...] sunt isti—in universum 344. Hence it grew, that though some Councells had but few at the holding of them, yet the subscriptions were numerous. Tom. 5. ann [...] 419. [...]. 59. Baronius observes the 5 ^th Councell of Carthage to have been held by 22 onely, (I conceive it should be 72.) yet had 217. subscribers, which was after the ending of it, by Bishops in their own Churches, when they admitted of it. So the Concil. An­tioth. to. 1. Concil. in pro [...]in. Sy­nod of Antioch about 341. sending their conclusions to absent Churches, writ unto them, they did believe they would assent to what they had done, et ca quae visa sunt recta roborantes cum consensu sancti Spiritus consigna­bitis. It is of no use to dispute here, whether this were an Arrian or a Catholick Councell: be it either, it still denotes the manner then used; as doth the Concil. To­let. 3. §. Con­suemur. to [...]. concil. 2. third Coun­cell [Page 170] of Toledo held Anno 589. which speaks thus, Consti­tutiones sanctorum conciliorum, Niceni, Ephesini, Con­stantinopolitani vel Chalcedonensis, quas gratissima au­re audivimus, & consensione nostra veras esse probavimus, de toto corde & de tota anima & de tota mento nostra subscri­psimus: and another held there, having received with the letters of Pope Leo the 2. the sixth generall Coun­cell, invited all the Prelats Baron to. 8. Anno 685. n. 25. of Spain, ut praedicta synoda­lia instituta quae miserat, nostri etiam vigoris manerent au­ctoritate suffulta, omnibusque per nos sub regno Hispaniae consistentibus patescerent divulganda.

41. By all this it is plain, the manner of former times was to disperse the Decrees of Councells to absent Churches, who by subscriptions were said to have con­firmed, and, so far as lay in them, by suffrage, to have gi­ven strength to that such meetings had agreed unto. And as Popes did thus confirme what other Bishops had concluded in their Synods, so did they in like man­ner his. In the year 1095. Vrban the 2. held a Councell at Clermont in Auvergne, at which were present severall Prelats of Normandy, who at their return brought letters from the Synod, upon which VVilliam Archbishop of Roan caused the Norman Bishops to meet there, Ordericus Vitali [...] lib. 9. p. 721. [...]. who capitula Synodi quae apud Clarum-montem facta est unani­miter contemplati sunt, scita quoque Apostolica confirmave­runt. It is true, the Pope being the Patriarch of most note in the world, and of greatest dignity in the West, usually the Acts of forraign Councells were directed un­to him, Vide Eu [...]eb. [...]ediolanens. post epist. 52. Leon [...]s. which he dispersed through Italy and other parts of Europe; but his approbation was not enough to oblige other Churches, till what came from him was by themselves allowed: neither was this dis­persing so appropriated to his Papacy, as if there were never any other divulging of them; the se­cond Councell of Nice held 787, or 788 as Di [...]eto ac­counts, was sent from Constantinople to Charls the great, [Page 171] then onely Rex Francorum, and by him 792. hither, where it was rejected.

42. From hence it proceeded, that part of the Acts of one Councell did not bind some Churches, which did others; as some parts of the Councell of Chalcedon and Ephesus seem not to have been received in Rome in Gregor, lib. 6. epist. 31. & lib. 7. epist. 47. Indict. 2. S. Gregories time, to which may be added some General. Concil Rom [...], tom. 3. p. 684, 685. in margine. Canons of the 7 ^th Councell. But I believe it will be hardly shewed from the ancients, that any Church, neither intervening in Councell by proxy, nor that did after admit of it, were ever held concluded by any, though never so numerous. Certainly none was ever held of greater esteem amongst Catholicks then the Councel of Nice; yet [...]ontra Ma­ximinum Arri­anorum epist. lib. 3. cap. 14. to. 6. vide etiam de unitate Ec­cles. cap. 16. to. 7. S. Augustine, in his dispute with an Arrian, confesses neither the Coun­cell of Nice ought to prejudice the Arrian, not that held at Ariminum him, sed utrisque communibus testibus, res cum re, causa cum causa, ratio cum ratione concertet. And De Synodis advers [...] Ar­rianos prope finein. p. 243. St. Hilary, comparing two Councells, one of 80. Bi­shops which refused the word [...], with that of Nice which received it, sayes, si contraria invicem senserunt, de­bemus quasi judices probare meliora: so not onely taking from them all infallibility, but allowing others to judge of their doings, before they submitted unto their deter­minations.

And this hath been the so constant observance in all times, as no age ever held the Latin obliged by the Gre­cian Synods which they have not received; neither doth the Greek Church to this day hold themselves tyed by the determinations of Florence, or to the many other of the La­tin touching the procession of the holy Ghost, and other points in difference, to which they have not submitted.

43. But for that the Acts of Councells, without tem­porall auctority to inforce the observance of them, were no other then persuasive, Princes (either on the incita­tion of their Bishops, or convinced of the justnesse and piety of what had past in those Ecclesiastick Assemblies) [Page 172] did often by their letters exhort, or by their laws com­mand the observance of what resulted from them. So Con­stantine, after the Councell of Nice, wrote that letter re­mains recorded in Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 6. Theodor. lib. 1. cap. 10. Socrates and Theodoret to some ab­sent Churches, for their admitting the resolutions of it: in which he tells them he had undertook that what the Romans had already, [...], that their judgment would willingly receive. Cod. Theo­dos. de fide Cathol. leg. 3. & de Haeret. leg. 6. And Gra­tian, Valentinian, Theodosius did in the year 381. by their rescripts establish the same Councell, as n. 31. Iustinian by the law before mentioned did all the fourfirst; which I take to be the same To. 8. in Psal. 57. S ^t Augustin calls inserting them actis proconsularibus.

44. Of later times Popes, having by severall arts ac­quired the greatest part of Episcopall power to be de­volved to them, have likewise claimed it as a right be­longing to the Papacy, not onely to call Councels, but to determine which are generall, who are to vote in them; and therefore Bellarm. de concil. lib. 1. cap. 15. §. At Catholicorum. though properly, or dinarie, none but Bishops have there (say they) jus suffragii, yet ex pri­vilegio & consuetudine Cardinalls, Abbats, and Gene­ralls of Orders are to be allowed voice; and that there needs no other then the Popes confirmation in Rome, to oblige all Christians to the observance of any he shall hold out for such, as Pius 4 ^tus by his bull of the 18 Iuly 1564. declared, all in the Councell of Trent juris positivi did the world from the first of May before, &c. And though all History agree, and the very Councells them­selves assure us, the causing the East and West to meet in those assemblies, to have been ever done by Emperours, and that Princes on occasions have called the Clergy within their estates together for composing disputes in religion; yet the bare affirmation, without any real proof, hath so far prevailed with some men, as to esteem him little other then an heretick shall maintain the con­trary.

[Page 173]45. But Kings have not so easily parted with these rights: for the State of France, notwithstanding the many sollicitations of Pope [...] from abroad, and their Clergy at home, hath no hitherto been induced to approve what was determined at Trent; however you shall hardly meet with any of the Roman party, but he will tell you that the points of faith there agreed upon, are received in France, but not of manners, and government: which is in a kind true, yet contains a notable fallacy; for the Ecclesiasticks of that kingdom finding the difficulty of procuring that Councell to passe, have in their provincial Synods, Bochellius [...] ope­ris ratio. conspiratione quadam, venia in quaque Dioecesi cogendi Synodos impetrata, inserted the greatest part of the doctri­nall points of it into those Councells; so that it is truth, they are indeed there received, yet not for that they were concluded upon in Trent, but because Episcopall Coun­cells have each in their Dioceses establisht what they could perswade nec regibus, nec supremis Parlamentorum curiis, ut Synodi istius Canones in acta sua referrent, & observandos publicarent. Neither hath the Councell of Florence under Eugenius 4 ^tus, or of Lateran held by Iu­lius the 2. and Leo the 10, been hitherto allowed by France, or England, where the most zealously affected to Rome, as S ^r Thomas Moore, have See his letter to Cromwell at the end of his works, and the originall in S ^r Thom. Cottons Library. maintained the supe­riority of a generall Councell above the Pope Concil. Flo­rent. Sess. 25. Concil. gen. Romae. tom. 4. p. 584. ibid. Concil. Later. sub Iulio 2. & Leone 10. Sess. 11. p. 175. col. 2. in oppo­sition to either of them; though Bellar. de concil. lib. 2. cap. 17. §. [...]. that be a point rather of faith then manners. Upon which grounds, those Councells before spoken of did not bind here, farther then what was in them hath been made good by provin­ciall Synods within the Nation.

By all which it being certain, neither this Church nor Kingdom hath ever been tyed by the Acts of any forraign councell not admitted here, and being perhaps a thing of some intricacy, what determinations the Realm had received after the four first generall Councells, her Ma­jesty took the way of receiving them as absolutely neces­sary, [Page 174] but others with such limitations as are in 1 Eliz. cap. 1. the sta­tute, and for the future, nothing to be heresy, but what should be determined to be such by the Parliament, with th' assent of the Convocation.

CHAP. IX.
Of the farther proceeding of Queen Eliza­beth in the Reformation.

1. THings thus settled in 1 ^o Eliz. the Parliament ended, the Liturgy of the Church, com­monly called the book of Common prayer, reformed, and published, the Queen, Canones dati sub Eadgaro & legibus ejus annexi. p. 67. Leg. Ca­nut. cap. 22. p. 105. See be­fore cap. 4. n. 6. §. iij. following the examples of her predecessors, and relying on the ancient Symbols as the doctrine of the Catholick Church, gave command the Creed, the Pater­noster and ten Commandements (as the grounds for a Christian to believe, and frame his life after) should be taught her subjects, and none to presume to come to the Lords table before they could perfectly say them in English.

2. Hitherto to my understanding her Majesty had not done any thing not warranted by the practise of her pre­decessors, not that could be justly interpreted a departing from the Apostolick faith, or indeed from Rome it self; where she kept an Agent. Camden. Annal. Anno 1559. till Paulus 4 ^•s during the Parliament commanded him to relinquish the title of Ambassadour, and not to stir out of Rome. So that if there were any departure, it must needs be the Pope made it, not the English; (who was so incensed, he would not at first acknowledge her Queen, nor after permit any from her in the quality of Ambassador to reside with him, though she had not done any thing but according to [Page 175] the ancient rights of the Kingdom, and the usages of for­mer Princes.) But suppose (which will never be proved) her Ma ^tie to have gone farther then was fit for a Chri­stian Prince in settling Religion, certainly she had just cause to conceive she might do it, having so many pre­cedents of her ancestors in the case. Yet Paulus 4 ^tus breaks off all entercourse: some of his party first would not Crown her, then spake of excommunicating of her; in­dignities no Prince but must be sensible of.

3. Yet it seems, the first heat past, the Queens mode­ration was better received at Rome then at home: where the Pope, however a violent heady man, considering no doubt his own loss in breaking off all commerce with so potent a Kingdom, Tortura Tor [...]i, p. 142. began to hearken to terms of ac­commodation, and was content things should stand as they are, the Queen acknowledging his primacy, and the reformation from him. But his death ensuing the 18 Au­gust 1559. left the designe to be prosecuted by his suc­cessor Pius 4 ^tus, who by letters (sent by Vincentius Parpa­lia, a person of great experience, employed by Cardinall Poole in his former negotiations, and of late in that hi­ther,) of the 5 ^th of May 1560. directed charisimae in Christo filiae Elizabethae Reginae Angliae, did assure her, In Camde­ni Annal. Anno 1560. omnia de nobis tibi polliceare, quae non modo ad animae tuae salutem conservandam, sed etiam ad dignitatem regiam sta­biliendam & confirmandam, pro authoritate, pro loco ac­munere quod nobis a Deo commissum fuit, a nobis desidera­res, &c. Upon this, and their relations who then lived, and had part in the action, the English affirm Pius 4 ^tus would have confirmed the liturgy of the Church of England: and indeed how can any imagine other? for doubtlesse nothing could have been more to her disho­nour, then so suddainly to have changed what she had with so great consideration establisht; and the Pope assuring her, she might promise her self from him all he could do, I know not what lesse or other he could ex­pect [Page 176] she would ask. But where S ^r Edward Cook, in his charge at Norwich, as it is now printed, sayes this offer came from Pius 5 ^tu•, I conceive it a mistake, and should have been Pius 4 ^tus, (as in another place he names Cle­ment the 9. who yet never was, for Clement the 8.) and the rest of the narration there not to be without absurdi­ties, and to be one of those deserves the authors cen­sure, when he says, Praesut. lib. 7. relat. there is no one period in the whole expressed in the sort and sense that he delivered it; for cer­tainly Pius 5 ^tus from his coming to the Popedome 1566, rather sought by raising against her forraign power abroad, and domestick commotions at home, to force her to his obedience, then by such civil ways as we now speak of to allure her; though the thing it self is no que­stion true, how ever the person that offer'd it be mistaken in some circumstances.

4. They Parallel. Torti & Tor­toris, p. 241. that make a difficulty in believing this, object it to have been first divulged 1606. 46 years after the profer of it. That S ^r Edward Cook averr'd to have received it from the Queen her self, not then alive to con­tradict him. But for my part I confess I find no seruple in it, for I have ever observed the wisdome of that Court, to give what it could neither sell nor keep; as Paulus 4 ^tus did the Kingdom of Ireland to Queen Mary, admitted the five Bishopricks erected by her father, approved the dissolution of the Monasteries made by him, &c. of which nature no question this was. For the being first mentioned 46 years after, that is not so long a time but many might remember; and I my self have received it from such as I cannot doubt of it, they having had it from persons of nigh relation unto them who were actors in the managing of the businesse. Besides, the thing itself was in effect printed many years before; for he Servi fide­lis subdito in [...]ide li re­sponsio, apud Iohannem Dayum 1573. that made the answer to Saunders his seventh book de visibili monarchia, p. 121. who it seems had been very care­full to gather the beginnings of Queen Elizabeth, that [Page 177] there might be an exact history of her, tandem aliquando, qui omnia act a diligenter observavit, qui summis Re [...]p [...]blicae negotiis consulto interfuit, Ibid. p. 70. 71. the book is not printed with pages, but they are added with a pen. relates it thus.

5. That a noble-man of this Country being about the beginning of the Queens reigne at Rome, Pius 4 ^tus asked him of her Ma ^ties casting his auctority out of England, who made answer that she did it being perswaded by te­stimonies of Scripture, and the laws of the realm, nullam illius esse in terra aliena jurisdictionem. Which the Pope seemed not to believe, her Majesty being wise and learn­ed, but did rather think the sentence of that Court a­gainst her mothers marriage to be the true cause; which he did promise not onely to retract, sed inejus gratiam quaecunque possum praeterea facturum, dum illa ad nostram Ecclesiam se recipiat, & debitum mihi primatus titulum reddat. and then adds, extant apud nos articuli Abbatis Sancti Sal­vatoris Cam­den Anno 1560. calls him. who in the year 1562. seems to have been em­ployed by the said Pope into France. Hist. Concil. Trid. lib. 6. p. 501. and of whom mention is made in the life of Cardi­nall Poole. Sanctae salutis manu conscripti, extant Cardinalis Moro­nae literae, quibus nobilem illum vehementer hortabatur, ut eam rem nervis omnibus apud reginam nostram sollicitaret. Extant hodie nobilium nostrorum aliquot, quibus Papa mul­ta aureorum millia pollicitus est, ut istius amicitiae atque foederis inter Romanam cathedram & Elizabetham sere­nissimam authores essent. This I have cited the more at large, for that Camden seems to think, what the Abbot of St. Saviour propounded was not in writing, and be­cause it being printed seven years before the Cardinall Moronas death, by whose privity (as Protector of the En­glish) this negotiation past, without any contradiction from Rome, there can no doubt be made of the truth of it. And assuredly, some who have conveniency and lei­sure may find more of it then hath been yet divulged: for I no way believe the Bishop of Winchester would have been induced to write, it did constare of Paulus 4 ^tus; nor the Queen her self, and divers others of those times, per­sons of honour and worth, (with some of which I my self have spoken) have affirmed it for an undoubted [Page 178] truth, did not somewhat more remain (or at least had formerly been) then a single letter of Pius 4 ^tus, which ap­parently had reference to matters then of greater priva­cy. And here I hold it not unworthy a place, that I my self talking sometime with an Ital [...]an gentleman (verst in publick affairs) of this offer from the Pope, he made much scruple of believing it; but it being in a place where books were at hand, I shew'd him on what ground I spake, and asked him if he thought men could be Devils, to write such an odious lie, had it not been so. Well (says he) if this were heard in Rome amongst religious men, it would never gain credit; but with such as have in their hands the Maneggi della corte, (for that was his expres­sion) it may be held true.

6. Indeed, the former author doth not expresse, (as perhaps then not so fit to be publisht) the particulars those articles did contain were writ with the Abbots own hand; (which later pens have divulged) but that, in ge­nerall, it should be any thing lay in the Popes power, on her acknowledging his primacy: and certain no other could by him have been propounded to her, nor by her with honour accepted, then that of his allowing the English Liturgy: so that they who agree he did by his Agent (according to his letter) make propositions unto her, must instance in some particulars, not dishonorable to her self and Kingdom to accept, or allow what these writers affirm to have been them. And I have seen and heard weighty considerations, why her Majesty could not admit her own reformation from Rome; some with reference to this Church at home, as that it had been a tacite acknowledgment it could not have reformed it self, which had been contrary to all former precedents; others to the State of Christendom as it then stood in Scotland, Germany, and France: but with this I have not took upon me to meddle here.

7. Yet what the Queen did upon this message, seems [Page 179] to have given no very ill satisfaction; for Hist. Concil. Trident. Ann [...] 1560. p. 446. S ^r Edw. Carne, then in Rome, advised the Pope the same year to invite her to the Councell of Trent, promising him half the Kingdom with her own liking would receive his mes­senger; which yet was found otherwise: the reasons why, are some toucht by Historians, and may more at large be seen in S ^r Nicholas Throgmortons negotiations, then her Ambassador in France. Certainly Ib. p. 522. p. 528. the French were not altogether out of an opinion (or at least would have it thought so) of her sending to the Synod; which the Pope however he invited her, was not a little trou­bled at. But the great combination of the Popish par­ty, supported by France against England, made her see she could expect no good where they were predomi­nant: upon which she caused the divines of her King­dom in councell to consider of a just and lawfull refor­mation; who meeting 1562, reviving the Acts of a Synod held at London ten years before under Ed. the 6 ^th, and explaining some few expressions, and omitting some points rather of dispute then faith, did conclude on 39 articles so just, so moderate, so fully agreeing with the doctrine of the primitive fathers, and with the ancient tenets and practise of this very Church in the times of the Britons and Saxons, as if any shall say no Clergy in any age or place have held out a more exact rule, he may be easilyer contradicted, then justly blamed, or con­futed.

8. For having laid their ground, that Art. 6. holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation, so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of Faith, &c. they do upon that Basis establish the doctrine of the three Creeds, the Nicen, Athanasian, and Apostles, heretofore ever held to contain Ecclesiarum omni­um fidem, and that the Art. 22▪ Romish doctrine of Purga- [Page 180] of Purgatory, Pardons, worshipping & adoration of Images, relicks, Invocation of Saints, &c. is not warranted by Scri­pture, that is, are no articles of faith: and then proceed to settle such other things as are juris positivi, with so just a moderation, as is hardly elsewhere to be found; chan­ging nothing for the generall, but where the practice of their own ancestors did justify their doings, without at all extending themselves to any thing where they had not antiquity their warrant.

9. Following which, they restored the cup, having the Councell of Clermont under Vrban the 2, that Apud Or­dericum Vi­talem Anno 1095. p. 720. a. Cor­pus Dominicum & sanguis singulatim accipiantur, the com­mand of Apud Baron. to. 12. Anno 1118. n. 2. in nonnullis in Appendice. Paschalis the 2. and the practice of the English Church, where sickly people, women as well as men, were to be provided of a pipe to receive it by; as was Statu [...]a Gil­bertinorum Ms. de canoni­cis cap. 33. vi­de adversaria Doctoris Wat­sii ad Mat. Pa­ris p. 9. lin. 6. expresly injoyned the order of the Gilbertines about [...]200. The thing being already printed, I need here repeat no more, but onely add, that this permission of theirs was no other but a restoring to minores ecclesias, that is Parochial or Country Churches, that liberty Peckham had deprived them of not 300 yeares before. For I do not find any prohibition, but the Lay might ever have been partakers of it with us in majoribus, that is Cathe­drall Churches; for De summa Trinita [...]e & fide Catholi­ca, cap. Al­tissimus, ver­bo minoribus [...]cclesiis. Lyndwood in his gloss upon the English constitutions about 1430, propounds this que­stion, Sed numquid in istis ecclesiis Cathedralibus, & aliis majoribus, liceat non celebrantibus dum communicant reci­pere sanguinem Christiin specie vini? videtur ex hac lite­ra, quod sic, argumento sumpto à contrario sensu, quod est in jure fortissimum, ut &c.— & hoc bene putarem verum; saltem quoad ministrantes sacerdoti ministranti &c.

10. For the permitting of Matrimony to the Clergy, it is undoubted all here had the liberty of marrying, be­fore Antiquit. Britan. p. 98, 10. in Lan­fran [...]i vita. Lanfrank in a Councell at VVorcester 1076. did ra­ther advise then command the contrary; which Hun­tington (who was himself the Hunt. fol. 217, b. 26. & a. 10. son of one in holy orders) [Page 181] sayes was first prohibited by Anselm 1102. But Eadmer, p. 94, 48. multi presbyterorum statuta Concilii Londoniensis—post. ponentes, suas soeminas retinebant, aut certe duxerant quas prius non habebant &c. so that his constitutions came quickly neglected, Priests both marrying, and retaining their wives. At which though the King were Eadmer. p. 105, 27. some­what displeased, yet soon after Hunt. fol. 220, a. 26. Saxon. Chron. Petroburg. Ms. he took a piece of mo­ney of them for it, and they kept them by his leave. Di­vers constitutions were after made by severall Archbi­shops and Legats in the point, as by Steph. Langton at Ox­ford 1222, registred by De cohabi­tatione [...]le­ric, & muli­erum, & de Clericis con­jugatis. Lyndwood: Constit. Otho [...]is cap. Innotuit. yet it is manifest they did secretly contract marriage, which some are of opinion they continued till towards the end of Edward the 3 ^ds reign. This I am the rather induced to believe out of that in Col. 2584, 7. Clericus apud Leice­stri [...]m. Knighton, that Quaere whi­ther this were not the Priest of the town that was thus inha­biting there. Iohn de Alithwerl Clerk was slain by his wife and servant in his own house at Leicester 1344. for which fact she was burnt, and he hanged. Now I conceive, had she been onely his concubine, not his servant, she had not suffer'd by the judgement of burn­ing for the murther, but hanging onely: neither can I interpret the word Clericus for other then one in holy Orders, prohibited marriage by the Canons of Rome; though I know, large loquendo, as our De locato & conducto, cap. Venden­tes, verbo Si quis Clericus.. Lyndwood hath it, omnes in Ecclesia ad divinum officium ordinati are some­times so styled, Lynd. de clericis conju­galis, cap. 1. Vide Monasti­cum Anglica­num, p. 899. & p. [...]00. of which such as were infra subdiacona­tum might retain their wives, but those were in subdiaco­natu or above were to quit them. But the Canons yet remaining made at sundry times, from Lanfrank even to Chichly, by the space of more then 300 yeares, enough assure us this point of Celibat was not easily imposed on the English Clergy, and assures us such▪ as laid it might take it off again.

11. For Images, if the Saxons had any use at all of them in their Churches (for ornament, for history, Greg▪ lib. 7. epist. 109. & lib. 9. epist. 9 [...]. to which end S. Gregory holds they might be permitted, for memorialls of holy men departed, (as we have of late [Page 182] seen) & they being only thus applyed, I conceive, Reply to Harding▪ Art. 14. in princi­pi [...]. with the Bishop of Salisbury, the weight of the question not so great,) yet it was a thing voluntary, no command of the Churches injoyning it, till after the Conquest. And here the question is not, whether Augustine might or did bring the picture of our Saviours Crosse in his ban­ner, as most Protestants yet retain it; but whether he placed them in the Church, with an intent to have worship of any kind attributed unto them: for which purpose, I confesse, I have not heard of them till many yeares after; for the vision of Egwinus, and the Councell of London setting up of Images being made good (so far as I know) by no author of any antiquity, I cannot but take it To. [...]. anno 714. [...]. 2. with Baronius for a meerfigment.

12. It is certain, Simeon D [...]nelm. col. 111, 50. Hoyeden fol. 232. b. 3. Mat. West. Anno 793. p. 283. 792 the Bishops of England decla­red their dissent from the second Councell of Nice in point of Images, held onely 4 yeares before, according to Anno 788. At Baron. anno 787. tom. 9. [...]. 1 [...]. 38. Diceto: and where some interpret that they did one­ly condemn the worship the Greeks call [...], by using the Latin word adorare; it cannot be denyed but they did reject that Concil. gen. Rom. Synod. 7. p. 661, lin. ult. [...] the Orientall Bishops had established, in which sense they used the word adorare, which is often, as well in holy writ as by humane au­thors, taken for that reverence is given a creature, as for the religious duty we only owe to the Divine Majesty: see Gen. xxiii. 7, 12. Ingulphus, a writer not long after, Ingulph. fol. 514. a. 17. Constantinopolim pervenimus, ubi Alexim imper ato­rem ador antes &c. So Arundell in his constitutions, Lyndwood de Haeret. cap. Nullus quo­que. ado­rationem crucis gloriosae.

13. To this narrative Seculo 8. cap. 5. p. 126. 9. Harpsfield gives the title of com­mentitia & insulsa fabula, and thinks it not writ by Sim. Dunelmensis or Mat. VVestminster (he might have added Hoveden, the Ms. I [...] bibliothe­ca Cotton. history of Rochester,) but that it was anciently inserted into them. For answer to which, he would be desired to produce any one old copy without it, not mangled, so as it doth prodere furtum by wanting [Page 183] it: I have seen divers of Hoveden Mss. some of Math. West. but never did one wherein it was not found, not in the margin but in the text it self, and so it is in Dunel­mensis his Ms. at Bennet Colledge in Cambridge. For my part, I do not know how any thing we mislike in History, may not after this manner be rejected, if a relation ga­thered from monuments of an elder date, which are perisht, yet cited by one who lived not so long after the time he speaks of, but they might well come to his hands, whom we find very sincere in such citations as yet re­main out of more old authors then himself, ever esteem­ed of good credit in the Church of God, and in his nar­ration followed ad verbum by those who writing of the same matter succeeded him, I confesse, I say, if this may be cast away, as a lying & foolish fable, I know not what shall gain credit. But what will men not lay hold on in a desperat shipwrack? I remember To. 10. an­no 963. 2, 3. Anno 968, 10. Baronius prest with the testimony of Luitprandus in the deposition of Iohn the 12. by imperiall auctority, makes no question of denying the five last chapters of his 6. book to have been written by him, though never doubted for more then 600 years since he lived.

14. Another Richard Smith Archi­episc. Chal­cedon. Flores▪ hist. Anglic. lib. 2. cap. 7. p. 134. Doctor, I confesse, seems to give a more difficult objection; that De Divinis officiis, die Pa [...] ­rasce [...]. Al [...]uinus, who is said to have writ against the second Nioen Councell in the point of Images, doth in his book de divinis officiis say, prosterni­mur corpore ante crucem, mente ante Deum; veneramur crucem per quam redempti sumus &c. and this from an au­thor had written against Images, he would have imply a veneration of them (even in his time who opposed them) by the English Church. But what hath the reverence of the Crosse to do with the worship of Images? It is not to be denyed but Christians, in their talk and writings, did extoll and magnifie the Crosse, forced thereunto by the Gentiles, who spake ignominiously of him that dyed upon it; yet I believe it will be difficult to shew any Law [Page 184] or Canon before the Conquest, injoyning the use, much lesse that attributed any religious worship unto I­mages.

15. It is true, the Concil. Spelm. cap. 2. p. 328. Councell of Celicuith 816. did charge unicuique Episcopo, ut habeat depictam in pariete oratorii, aut in tabula, vel etiam in altaribus, quibus sanctis sint utr aque dedicata, &c. which was clearly for memo­riall and ornament; as it hath been very common, in some Churches, to have on the wall the Image of Queen Eli­zabeth, and such as have built an Isle or window, to have their statue or picture set up in it, which in some parts per­haps remain to his present; yet no man ever held any re­ligious duty fit to be given them, nor any man compell'd to set them up. Now that there was no precept of the Church commanding their use, I speak Institutio­nes Mss. bea­ti Gilber [...]i & successorum ejus per capi­tula genera­lia institutae; de exordio, ordinatio­ne, institutio­ne ordinis Canonico­rum, Sancti­monialium, fratrum & sororum lai­carum ordi­nis de Sem­pringham. de [...]anonicis cap. 15. § Scul­p [...]urae. from the rules of Sempringham about 1148. that doubtlesse did not va­ry from the generall practise of Christians here, yet hath this expresse statute; Sculpturae vel picturae superfluae in Ec­clesiis nostris seu in officinis aliquibus Monasterii ne fiant interdicimus, qui [...] dum talibus intenditur, utilitas bonae me­ditationis vel disciplina religiosae gravitatis saepe negligitur: cruces tamen pictas quae sunt ligneae habemus. So that it seems to me they did account all pictures so superfluous as not to have them, but onely painted crosses: & this was one of the first foundation. And in another De fratribus cap. 13. place, which I take to be somewhat after, the buying of them and silk, as things indifferent, are alike interdicted; yet a direction how to bestow any thing of that nature should be left them: but see the words; Nihil de serico ematur à nostris vel de nostro ad nostrorum opus, vel ad aliquid religioni con­trarium, & seculi vanitatibus amminiculum, [...]nec etiam ad quodlibet sacerdotale indumentum, nisi constet esse necessa­rium: Si vero datur, secundum arbitrium Prioris omni­um communi utilitati & usui mancipetur. hoc idem de Y­coniis vel aliis sculptilibus dicimus, quae adbeatae Mariae Virginis vel aliorum sanctorum sunt fabricata memoriam; [Page 185] quae tamen gratis Sic Mss. sed lege gratis data, as it is in other places (as you will see here after) repeated. grata, prout de serico praediximus, ad sororum altare, vel hospitium, vel alio apto loco honeste po­nenda decernimus. So that it is apparent then their use was esteemed no other then that of silk; and these two arti­cles seem to have been resolved on nigh the first founda­tion (being in an hand differing from some other I shall mention) by the Founder himself.

16. In the year 1200 the house of Sixle or Sixhill in Lincolnshire was visited by the Abbat of Wardon or Wardun was a monastery of the Cist [...]r­tian Order in Bedford­shire. Waredune, as Commissioner of Quaere whe­ther this were that Otho was after Cardinall, viz. in Sep­tember, 1227. Otho the Popes Legat; where about 20 articles were concluded for the government of the Or­der: the fifth of which, though it gave some more liberty then the former, yet was not without restraint: but take it from an hand of those times. Anno gratiae MCC in vi­sitatione facta de Sixl' per Abbatem de Wardūn auctoritate Domini Otonis Legati, statuta sunt haec firmiter observanda. Inprimis, &c. cap. 5. Item inhibetur ne picturarum varie tas aut superflu [...]tas sculpturarum de caetero fieri permitta­tur, nec liceat alicubi yconias haberi, nec imagines, praeter ymaginem Salvatoris, & y. beatae Mariae, & Sancti Johan­nis Evangelistae. Hitherto questionlesse, the Church of England following the doctrine of Lib. 9. Epist. 9. Indict. 4. S ^t Gregory, had been taught by testimonies of holy writ, that omne manufactum [...] adorare non liceat; and though they might be lawfully made, yet by all means to avoid the worship of them: but see the progress.

17. Sixty eight years after this, Othobon, being the Popes Legat in England, did in his own person visit the chiefhouse of this Order, and committed the others to Rodulphus de Huntedune, the said Cardinalls Chaplain, and penitentiary; who associating to himself one Richard Gen [...]rali e [...]sdem ordi­nis de Sem­plingham scrutatore. generall inquisitor of the Order of Semplingham, did in the year 1268. conclude upon 74 or 75. heads or chap­ters for the government of them; the 54 of which, under the title de ymaginibus habendis, is this:

Item, cum secundum Johannem Damascenum, ymagi­nis [Page 186] honor ad prototypum, id est, ad eum cujus est ymago per­tineat, ad instantiam Monialium, & earum devotionem ferventius excit andam, conceduntur eis ymagines crucifixi & beatae Mariae & sancti Johannis Evangelistae, & quod possint habere in quolibet altari dedicato ymaginem ipsius sancti in cujus honore altare dedicatum est. Sitamen gratis detur eisdem, sicut beatus Gilber [...]us. G. de serico & de ymaginibus duxit statuendum, & celebretur ipso die festivitatis illius sancti, & die dedicationis ejusdem altaris, missa ad dicta altaria, etiamsi sint infra clausuram monial [...]um. Thus they.

18. By which it is manifest, this Kingdom had not then received Concil. Ni­cen. 2. the 7 ^th Councell; for if they had, there can be no thought they would have built their Article upon Damascens opinion onely. But by all these we may see, Images were brought into this Church by degrees, by little and little: First they were to have none, onely wooden crosses were tolerated; then they might not buy any, but being given they might accept the image of our Lady and other Saints; then an inhibition of all Saints, ex­cept our Saviour, the Blessed Virgin, and S ^t Iohn the E­vangelist, to which was added the image of that Saint their Altars were dedicated unto, and these onely by con­cession, not bought, but given. So that it is plain, they were then taken for things onely indifferent, as silk, which they might use or be without, no processions, bowings, kissing, &c. of them prescribed; but how the practise was afterward, that chapter of Arundell registred by Lyndwood may tell you, which because it is long, I shall not farther repeat, it being printed, then to adde that it is in him, lib. 5. de Magistris, cap. Nullus quoque: and in another place he propounds this question, Lyndwood de Ecclesiis [...]dificandis cap. ut parochia­ni, verbo Ima­ginis. Num­quid ymago Christi sit ador anda cultu latriae? and resolves, si consideretur ut ymago, tunc quia idem motus est in ymagi­ginem in quantum est ymago & ymaginatum, unus honor debetur ymagini & ymaginato; & ideo cum Christus la­tria [Page 187] adoretur, ejus imago debet similiter latria adorari. Nec obstat Exod. xxvi. ubi dicitur, non facies tibi ymaginem nec sculptam similitudinem; quia illud pro eo tempore erat prohibitum quo Deus humanam naturam non assumpserat, &c.

19. The Synod at Westminster finding things in this posture, and their retention in many parts to have been joyned with a great abuse, if not impiety, took a middle course; first to condemn all manner of adoration or wor­ship of them, (and therefore every Sculptile had been re­moved out of Churches) but whereas some use might be made of them for remembrance of histories past, to re­tain in sundry parts such windows and pictures, as might without offence instruct the ignorant in severall passages not unworthily preserved: which if any man have since been offended at, it must be on other grounds then I un­derstand.

20. As they proceeded with this circumspection, not to depart from the primitive Church in matters juris posi­tivi, so did they take no less care in points of opinion; for having declared which were the books of holy Scripture, they did not absolutely reject the use of the other, though they had been Iohan. Sa­risb, Epist. 172. p. 281. 285. Walden­sis tom. 1. lib. 2. Art. 2. cap. 23. n. 2. [...]ol. 203. a. col. 2. edit. Venet. 1571. taught by the doctrine Prae [...]at. in proverb. Salo­monis to. 3. sol. 9. c. of S ^t Hierom and S. Gregor. Moral. lib. 19. cap. 17. S ^t Gregory, not to repute them in Canone, but to admit them quia fidem & religionem aedificant, or, as they Art. 6. say, for example of life, and instruction of manners.

21. For praying to Saints, however the Saxons might honor holy men departed, [...]o cultu dilectionis & societa­tis quo & in hac vita coluntur homines, as Contra Fa [...] ­slum Ma­nichaeum lib. 20. cap. 21. to. 6. S. Augustine speaks, (which what it is he explains elsewhere) yet I am hardly perswaded to think they did admit any publick praying to them in the Church; for I have seen and per­used three ancient Saxon Psalters full of prayers, but no one petition to any Saint whatsoever. Lib. 2. p. 48, [...]. Eadmerus sayes the report went of VV ^• the second, that crederet, & publica voce assereret, nullum sanctorum cuiquam apud De­um [Page 188] posse prodesse; & ideo nec se velle, neo aliquem sapien­tem debere beatum Petrum interpellare: yet he doth not censure this as hereticall, but onely mentis elatio. In Canon. Missae lect. 3. D. Ga­briel Biel long after confesseth in his time, some Christi­ans as well as Hereticks were deceived, in thinking Saints departed nobis auxiliari nec meritis possunt nec pre­cibus. The Church of England therefore, following August, de vera religione cap. 55. to. 1. S. Augustine, condemns all religious invocation of them, as those were non adorandi propter religionem; yet in re­spect they were honorandi propter imitationem, to retain their commemoration, by appointing a set service for the dayes on which it celebrated their memorialls; there­by to provoke us to imitation of their piety, and to thank God that left such lights, who by their doctrine instru­cted us, and whose lives were examples for us to follow: and in respect there are sundry Saints for whom there is no proper office, to retain one day to praise God for the generality of all, and beg of him that we may follow their pattern in all vertuous and godly living. This if any mislike, I intreat him to pardon me if I joyn not with him; and if he will add more, to give me leave to think he attributes to them (by what name so ever he style it) that is onely due to the Divine Majesty.

22. For Purgatory, however it might be held a pri­vate opinion, yet certainly as an Article of Faith it could not be; for the Greeks, who have ever Errores Graecorum in fasciculo Zizaniorum Mss. per Thomam Wal­dens. fol. 156. b. col. 1. in bibliotheca Archiepisc. Armach. constantly de­nyed it, were in communion with the Church of Rome till Mat. Paris hist. minor. Ms. Ann. 1237. & 1238. Vide Hist. ma­jor. Anno 1237, p. 457, 16. p. 465, 22. 1238. after which onely they began to be accounted schismaticks, not so much for their opinions, as deny­ing subjection to the See of Rome; for some of them co­ming to Rome 1254 Mat. Paris. Hist. major. p. 892, 28. de articulis fidei & sacramentis fidei satis toler abiliter responderunt: so that questionlesse the Historian could not then hold Purgatory an Article of Faith, when those who did affirm Nullum Purgatorium est, did give a tolerable account of their Faith. Our Di­vines therefore charge these opinions Art. 22. onely as fond in­ventions, [Page 189] grounded on no warrant of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the word of God; that is, as I have said before, they deny them to be Articles of faith.

23. In like manner, having first Art. 28. declared the bread we break in the holy Communion to be a partaking of the body of Christ, and the cup of blessing of his bloud, they censure Transubstantiation, or the change of the substance of bread and wine, as Vide Bellar­min. de Eu­char. lib. 3. cap. 23. §. secundo dicit. what is not proved by holy writ, and therefore no Article of faith &c. And in­deed how could they say lesse of so doubtfull a tenet, so newly crept in, that had burnt so many, was so contrary to the ancient doctrine even of the English Church, as the Saxon Homily yet remaining in an old Mss, with this ti­tle, Liber Cath [...] ­licorum sermo­num per annu [...] recitandus. p. 355. A book of Catholick sermons to be repeated each year, doth undoubtedly assure us? It is true, some of late have strove to give an answer to it; as he that styled himself Flor. Hist. Eccles. &c. lib. 1. cap. 24. p. 91. Bish. of Chalcedon will have the author perhaps to have been an heretick; but that the time and title confutes, all Ab hac & aliis pestibus Haereticis immunis semper exsti­tit Anglia,—ubi hanc in­sulam expul­si [...] Britonibus natio posse­dit Anglorum, ut non jam Pritannia sed Anglia dice­retur, nullius unquam ex ca pestis hae­reticae virus cbullivit: sed nec in eum aliunde us (que) ad tempora Regis Henri­ci secundi—introivit. Newbrigen­sis lib. 2. cap. 13. Vide Pit­seum de scrip. Anno 1159. p. 220. writers agreeing England to have been free from any he­resy after S. Gregory, till about the year 1166. If that there­fore will not do, he hath another, viz. the Sermon to make more for Transubstantiation then what the Prote­testants cite doth against it; yet is silent both where the words are in it, and who are the citers of them. For my part, to speak once for all, take the whole Homily as it lies, not one piece torn from the other, and if the do­ctrine of it be such as he can digest, I know not why we differ. As for those two miracles, which some dislike so far as to think them infarced into the work, I confess them not to displease me at all; for if they were inserted to prove the verity of Christs body in the Sacrament, a­gainst those who held it bare bread, yet it must be after such a ghostly and spirituall manner as is there represen­ted, without any other change in the substance of the bread and wine then is in the water of Baptism, Editionis Iohannis Dayi [...] in octavo, [...] p. 33. not bodily but ghostly pag. 38. 36. a remembrance [Page 190] of Christs body offered for us on the Cross. p. 46.

24. And this may serve for answer to that his Achil­les, by which his doctrine of Transubstantiation p. 90. vide Malms. de pont. lib. 1. in vita Odonis fol. 114, b. 36. manife­stius patebit, of Odo Archbishop of Canterbury about 940. converting miraculously the Eucharist in formam carnis, ad convincendum quosdam, qui suo tempore coepe­runt de ea dubitare: to which I shall first remember, that when De unitate Eccles. cap. 16. tom. 7. S ^t Augustine was prest with certain miracles of Donatus and Pontius, which the Donatists urged to prove the truth of their doctrine, he gives this answer, Remo­veantur ista vel figmenta mendacium hominum, vel porten­ta fallacium spirituum; aut enim non sunt vera quae dicun­tur, aut si haereticorum aliqua mira facta sunt, magis cavere debemus; and after a learned discourse, he tells of some in the Catholick Church had happened in the time of S ^t Ambrose at Milan, upon which he gives this grave censure, Quaecunque talia in catholica fiunt, ideo sunt ap­probanda, quia in catholica fiunt; non ideo ipsa manifestatur catholica, quia haec in ea fiunt. Ipse Dominus Jesus cum re­surrexisset à mortuis, & discipulorum oculis videndum ma­nibusque tangendum corpus suum offerret, ne quid tamen fallaciae se pati arbitrarentur, magis eos testimoniis Legis & Prophetarum & Psalmorum confirmandos esse judicavit, ostendens ea de se impleta, quae fuerant tanto ante praedicta, &c. and a little after, Hoc in Lege & Prophetis & Psalmis testatus est, hoc ejus ore commendatum tenemus, Haec sunt causae nostrae documenta, haec fundamenta, haec firma­menta.

25. To apply this to our case; the Church Catholick hath ever held a true fruition of the true Body of Christ in the Eucharist, and not of a signe, figure, or remem­brance onely, but as the French confession, Vide Cha­mier. de Sa­cramentis lib. 10. cap. 1. 2. que par la vertue secrete & incomprehensible de son Esprit, il nous nourrit & vivifie de la substance de son corps & de son sang, &c. and therefore we can agree to these verses:

Here is then a Catholick Sermon, commanded to be read in the Church many years before the word Transub­stantiation was heard, as the doctrine of it, teaching me this participation with Christ, however true, yet is not fleshly, but spirituall: if therefore this miracle were not to convince those held the communicating of Christ in the Sacrament, to have been no other then fantasticall, and the bread to have been, and conveyed no other to us then bare bread, must not I, according to S ^t Augu­stine, avoid it as the fancies of lying men, or the opera­tion of deceiving spirits? &c. And this as it may serve in generall for all miracles, so in particular for that of late di­vulged, of a poor mans legg cut off in Spain and buried, yet four years after restored: which if it be not some im­posture, as the golden tooth in Silesia, or of Arnald Tilly (taken in Francis the 2 ^ds time not onely by others, but by the very wife of Martin Guerre, for her husband, and which held the Parliament of Tholous so much per­plexed to resolve) we must not (according to this holy mans doctrine) believe for that or any of the like nature, farther then is proved by the Law and the Prophets, &c. Yet there is one thing in my opinion very considerable; what the Apostles did, were such, and in those places, no man could deny them: but these the Church of Rome holds out for confirmation of their religion, are either in corners, as Garnets Face in the Eare, with so dark proofs, as when they are looked into, res tota cum contemptu di­missa est; or else done in Italy, or Spain, where the Inquisi­tion will suffer none but themselves to examine the fact: whereas if they followed th' Apostles example, they should be in England or Germany, that the Pro­testants might say, indeed a notable miracle hath been done [Page 192] by our Lady, is manifest to all, and we cannot deny it. Acts iiij. 16.

26. I. R. his spe­ctacles to Sr Humfrey Lynde, p. 135. §. 4. Another will have that homily, at least what he takes on him to confute, to contain no other then Ca­tholick doctrine; and then falls upon the Archbishop of Armach, whom he conceives to have ill translated it out of the Latin, in which language there is not now found any ancient copy of it; p. 143. cap. 9. §. 10. insisting, that though it were printed at London 1623. it was not to be heard of when he writ, which was about 1631. insinuating as if more might be said, if he could see the author himself. For the first of these, it must be said to contain Catholick Do­ctrine on the grounds N. 23. before; but if it be that the Church of Rome admits for such, I am glad to understand that from him. For the Primat of Ireland's translating the La­tin to the disadvantage of the Romish, I shall give no an­swer, but that his English are indeed some parts of that sermon, but the Latin pieces of Bertram so agreeing with them, as they were undoubtedly taken out of him, (by which he gives a far elder testimony to that author then Oecolampadius) who was, no question a Ca­tholick Doctor; but being so why is he prohibited Index cer­rorum aucto­rum. Romae. by the Roman Index? why if at all permitted, must it be exco­gitato commento? For the other, that it could not be had in London only eight years after it was printed, I can say no­thing, but some men will not hear that they mislike: for that Homily, of which (if he say any thing) he speaks, first set out by Iohn Day, with the subscription of 15 Bishops attesting the truth of the Copy, after 1623 reprinted by Henry Seal, alwayes in the book of Acts and monu­ments &c. Tom. 2. p. 450. in the life of Hen. the 8, and of late by Mr. VVhelock put into Latin, and taken without any interve­ning transcription from the originall Saxon, (that he might not vary in a tittle) was with his translation of it printed at Cambridge 1644. p. 462. amongst divers other ex­cellent notes of that learned man upon Beda, that such as [Page 193] understand not the language, may in that point see the doctrine of our forefathers.

27. A third Malon his Reply to the Archbishop of Armach, p. 320. Doctor, who cannot deny but it makes directly against Transubstantiation, gives an answer I could not have expected, yet in my opinion more inge­nuous; That it is unreasonable to produce the forcelesse au­ctority of these Saxon Homilies, which have no warrant of truth from any other but from our selves; and the margin, These Homilies were never heard of, but now of late amongst Protestants, onely framed and printed by themselves, with­out the warrant of any one indifferent witnesse. This is, I say, what I could not have looked for. Can any man ima­gine two Archbishops, thirteen Bishops, besides divers other personages of honour and credit, could have been induced to subscribe so palpable a lye? as it must be, if this and the other passages, by them there testified to be found in the ancient monuments of this Church, were lately framed. But the old books that yet In bibliothe­ca publica Cant. remain, writ above five hundred yeares since, do enough vindicate the Protestants, in that which I dare say no one of them who alledge it do in their hearts believe, not to have been extant in them, as the Archbishop first sent them to the Press.

28. Of the little credit the Councell of Lateran in this point gained here, I have Chap. 7. n. 37. touched before: neither did Peckham's constitution, sub panis specie simul dari cor­pus &c. speak home, nor was the thing ever absolutely determined with us till 1382: so that the opinion of Transubstantiation, that brought so many to the stake, had not with us 140 yeares prescription before Martin Luther began; for in that year VVickliff having propoun­ded, In fasciculo zizaniorum Mss. per Thom. Wal­dens. & Hen. Knighton, qui tunc vixit scripsitque, col. 2648, 8. & 2654, 44. quod substantia panis materialis aut vini manet post consecrationem &c. the Archbishop taking it into Knight, col. 2649, 31. consi­deration, did not think fit to condemn the Tenet, with­out farther advice with the University of Oxford, Col. 2650, 49. where libratis singulis, every saying weighed, (and in especiall, [Page 194] as it seems, those Col. 2654. concerned the Eucharist) he did con­demn some as hereticall, others as onely erroneous, and farther, singulos defensores eorum imposterum senten­tia excommunicationis innodatos fore, and gave com­mand, 2652, 67. ne quis de caetero cujuscunque status &c.— haereses seu errores praedictos vel corum aliquem teneat, do­ceat, praedicet seu defendat. The Col. 2653. Chancellor likewise of the Academy repeating VVickliffs opinions touching the ho­ly communion, shews they had been diligently discuss't by Doctors in Divinity, and professors in the Canon Law, ac tandem finaliter est compertum atque judicio om­nium declaratum, ipsas esse erroneas, fidei orthodoxae con­trarias, & determinationibus Ecclesiae repugnantes: and then after all this search, delivers the doctrine of Tran­substantiation as the conclusion agreed to be held, Quod per verba sacramentalia à sacerdote prolata, panis & vtnum in altari in verum corpus Christi & sanguinem transub­stantiantur, seu substantialiter convertuntur sic, quod post consecrationem non remanent in illo venerabili sacramento panis materialis & vinum secundum suas substantias, sed se­cundum species earundem. And this I take to have been the first plenary determination of the Church of England in the case, which yet how well it will be liked by such as hold the manner of conversion to be by a Vide Bellar. de Eucharistia lib. 4. cap. 24. §. ult. succession of Christs body to the substance of the bread, I leave others to dispute. But certainly the Archbishop not Noluit Arch. plenarie procedere. adventuring to proceed in it a­lone, nor by his own councell, by Imposterum, de caetero tene­at. his extending what he did onely to the future, both for punishment and Tenet, and after Tandem [...]i­naliter. long enquiry concluding the truth of it, enough proves it not to have been in former times fully resolved on in this Church; so that we may say of our Auncestors, as A sparing discourse pag. 13. writ by a secular Priest against the Iesuites Anno 1601. the Iesu­ites here about some 60 yeares since did of the Fa­thers, rem Transubstantiationis ne attigerunt. And it may not here unfitly have a place that In Confess. contra Wick­liff. in biblio­theca Archie­pisc. Armach. Mss. Iohn [Page 195] Tissington a Franciscan, whom Pitseus (from Baleus, not Leland, as he would have us think) affirms to have been an assistant in this dispute at Oxford 1382, or as some 1381. cannot deny the truth of the assertion, quod panis & vinum remanent post consecrationem in naturis suis, adhuc servatur Laicis, & antiquitus servaba­tur. And here it is not unworthy the remembring, that by the law of the 6 Articles 31. Hen. 8. cap. 14. (containing in effect the body of Popery) no man was to dye as an Heretick but he who denyed this Tenet; all others onely as felons, or men en­dangering the peace of the Kingdome, by teach­ing contrary to what was publickly received. By which it likewise appears, in fixing th' imputation of Here­sy, the English looked on their home Determinations, not those of any forreign Church.

29. But I do not take upon me to dispute matters controversall, which I leave as the proper subject to Di­vines; it shall suffice onely to remember, the Church of England having with this great deliberation reformed it self in a lawfull Synod, with a care as much as was possible of reducing all things to the pattern of the first and best times, was interpreted (by such as would have it so) to depart from the Church Catholick; though for the manner, they did nothing but warranted by the continuall practice of their predecessors, and in the things amended had antiquity to justify their actions: and therefore th' Archbishop of Canterbury, in a provin­ciall Synod begun in S. Pauls the 3 of April 1571, and all other Bishops of the same Province, gave e­specially in charge to all preachers, to The book of Canons of the same Synod printed by John Day 1571. chiefly take heed, that they teach nothing in their preaching, which they would have the people religiously to observe and believe, but that which is agreeable to the doctrine of the old Testa­ment and the new, and that which the Catholick Fathers and ancient Bishops have gathered out of that doctrine. So that [Page 196] nothing is farther off truth, then to say, such as reformed this Church made a New religion; they having retained onely that which is truly old and Catholick, as Articles of their faith.

30. Thus was Religion reformed, and thus by the Queen establisht in England, without either motion, or seeking any new way not practised by our Ancestors, but using the same courses had been formerly traced out unto them, for stopping profaneness and impiety, when ever they peeped in the Church. And certainly, to my un­derstanding, there can be none that will with indifferen­cy look upon those times, but he must (however he mislike the thing done) approve the manner of doing it. Yet the favorers of Rome ceased not to proclaim all had thus past to have been hereticall (without instancing any particular, as to say such a carriage was after the manne [...] of Hereticks, ever condemned by the Catholick Church, and by orthodox writers in former times, or such a Te­net in your confession was held heresy from this place of Scripture anciently, by such holy Fathers met in generall Councell) and to raise stirs and commotions in the Com­monwealth, Bulla Pii 5ti March 28. 1569. to excommunicate the Queen as flagitio­rum serva, free her subjects of their allegeance, to give out we had Harding his confutation of the Apol. part 6. a Parliament-religion, Parliament-Gospell, Par­liament-Faith, and this before ever the 39 Articles, one main pillar of the English reformation, were confirmed by Parliament.

31. Upon the whole, it is so absolutely false that the Church of England made a departure from the Church, which is the ground and pillar of truth, as I am perswaded it is impossible to prove she did make the separation from the Roman it self; but that having declared in a lawfull Synod certain opinions, held by some in her commu­nion, to be no articles of faith, and according to the pre­cedent of former times, and the power God and nature had placed in her self, redressed particular abuses crept [Page 197] into her, the Pope and his adherents, without ever exa­mining what was the right of the Kingdom in such like cases, that had from all antiquity done the same, would needs interpret this a departing from the Church, be­cause he resolved to maintain as articles of faith, & thrust on others as such, some ambiguous disputable questions the English did not think fit to admit into that number. To make a departure from Christs Church is certainly a very hainous offence, she never commanding ought but what is conformable to his will, nor Bellarm. de justif. lib. 3. cap. 8. §. pri­ma ratio. & ibid. lib. 1. cap. 10. §. prima ratio. requiring her children to believe any thing as matter of faith, but what is immediately contained in the word of God, or by evi­dent consequence drawn from it: and as she excludes no Christians from being her children, who by their own demerits deserve not to be out of the divine favour; so in opposing those who endeavour to procure some te­nets to be admitted for hers, which cannot be deduced from that ground, we do not depart from her, but gainsay humane errours, and conceipts, which they would infer to be her commands who acknowledges them not. But as S ^t Augustine in a dispute with a Donatist, Contralite­ras l'etiliani lib. 2. cap. 85. tom. 7. utrum schismatici nos simus an vos, non ego, nec tu, sed Christus interrogetur, ut judicet Ecclesiam suam: so may I, whether we are the schismaticks or the Church of Rome, Christ himself be the Iudge. But whether divided from the other, being matter of fact, let the histories of former times, the extraordinary proceedings of the See of Rome of late a­gainst the Queen and this Commonwealth be com­pared, and I am confident the judgment may be referr'd to any indifferent person (though of that belief) who made the separation, and whether this Kingdom on so high provocations, did any thing would not have been parallell'd by former times, had they met with the like at­tempts.

32. Neither can the Crown in this reformation be any way said to have enterprised on the papall primacy, [Page 198] which (for ought I know) it might have acknowledged so far as is exprest or deduced from holy Scripture, or laid down in the ancient sacred Councells, or the con­stant writings of the orthodox primitive Fathers, and yet done what it did;) but to have exercised that auctority alwayes resided in it, for conserving the people under it in unity and peace, without being destroyed by the Canons and constitutions of others; not suffering a forraign power ruine them to whom it owed protection. In which it did not trench upon the rights of any, but conserved its own; imitating therein the Imperiall e­dicts of severall Princes, and of those were in possession of this very diadem, conformable to their Coronation oath.

33. And from hence may be answered that which Rome brings as her Achilles, touching the succession and visibility of the Protestants Church and doctrine in all ages since Christ: for if theirs have been, it is impossible to say the others have not; the former adding onely more articles for a Christian to believe, which the latter will not embrace as needfull: so that if theirs (as they so much glory) have had the continuance from the Apostles, these needs must, which onely denies some part of that they hold. Fortresse of faith, at the end of Bedas Hist. fol. 47. b. Protestants (says Stapleton) have many things lesse then Papists, they have taken away many things which Papists had, they have added nothing. And here to my understanding the Romanists require of us what lies on their part to prove; for we denying in the succession of Bishops from Cranmer, Warehom, even to Augustine, and so of the Britons, ever any one to have held the points we differ in to have been points of faith, in that degree of necessity they are now required, and for proof cite not onely the Apostles, Nicen, Athanasian Creeds, but even that of Peckham, which we find so to differ from the late one set out by Pius 4 ^tus, as we cannot but say it is unjust in them to presse us to a profession in religion [Page 199] farther then our ancestors were; they on the contrary af­firming all those holy Bishops preceding, not onely believed them as these now do, but did require them of others with the like necessity they now are; ought certain­ly to prove what they thus boldly affirm, which when they have done, truly for my part I shall think fit to yield: but till they do it, let them cease from proclaiming us he­reticks, who hold no other then the ancient faith at first deliver'd unto us.

But this as a point rather dogmaticall for Divines, then historicall, the subject I undertook, I shall not here farther wade into.