The Confession or Acknowledgement of Robert Lalor Priest, made the 22. of December 1606.

FIrst, His confession or acknow­ledgement. he doth acknowledge that he is not a lawfull Vicar-generall in the Dioceses of Dublin, Kildare and Fernes, and thinketh in his conscience that he cannot lawfully take upon him the said Office.

Item, he doth acknowledge our Sovereign Lord King James that now is to be his lawfull, chief and Supreme Go­vernour in all causes, as well Ecclesiasticall as Civil, and that he is bound in conscience to obey him in all the said causes; and that neither the Pope, nor any other forrein Prelate, Prince or Potentate hath any power to controll the King in any cause Ecclesiasticall or Civil within this Kingdome, or any of his Majestie's Dominions.

Item, he doth in his conscience believe, that all Bishops ordained and made by the King's authority within any of his Dominions are lawfull Bishops, and that no Bishop made by the Pope, or by any authority derived from the Pope, with­in the King's Dominions, hath any power or authoritie to impugn, disannull or controll any Act done by any Bishop made by his Majestie's authoritie as aforesaid.

Item, he professeth himself willing and ready to obey the King, as a good and obedient Subject ought to doe, in all his lawfull commandments, either concerning his functi­on of Priesthood, or any other dutie belonging to a good Subject.

[Page 4]After this Confession made, the State here had no purpose to proceed against him severely, either for his contempt of the Proclamation, or offence against the Law: So as he had more liberty then before, and many of his friends had access unto him; who telling him what they heard of his Con­fession, he protested unto them, that he had only acknow­ledged the King's Civill and Temporall power, without any confession or admittance of his authoritie in Spirituall causes. This being reported unto the Lord Deputie by sundry Gen­tlemen, who gave faith unto what he said, his Lordship thought sit, that since he had incurred the pain of Praemunire by exercising Episcopall jurisdiction as Vicar-generall to the Pope, that he should be attainted of that offence, as well to make him an example to others of his profession, (for almost in every Diocese of this Kingdome there is a Titulary Bishop ordained by the Pope;) as also that at the time of his Trial a just occasion might be taken to publish the Con­fession and acknowledgement which he had voluntarily made, signed, and confirmed by oath before the Lord De­putie and Councell, who have likewise subscribed their names as witnesses thereof.

Hereupon, in Hillarie Term 4 Jacobi, an Inditement was framed against him in the King's Bench upon the Statute of 16 Rich. 2. cap. 5. containing these severall points.

The Indite­ment of Lalor upon the stat. of 16 Ric. 2.1. That he had received a Bull or Brief purchased or pro­cured in the Court of Rome, which Bull or Brief did touch or concern the King's Crown and dignity Royall, contai­ning a Commission of Authoritie from the Pope of Rome unto Richard Brady and David Magragh to constitute a Vicar-gene­rall for the See of Rome, by the name of the See Apostolick, in the severall Dioceses of Dublin, Kildare and Fernes, within this Kingdome of Ireland.

2. That by pretext or colour of that Bull or Brief he was constituted Vicar-generall of the See of Rome, and took upon him the style and title of Vicar-generall in the said severall Dioceses.

3. That he did exercise Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction as Vicar-generall of the See of Rome, by instituting divers persons [Page 5] to Benefices with cure of souls, by granting dispensations in causes Matrimonial, by pronouncing sentences of divorce between divers married persons, and by doing all other acts and things pertaining to Episcopal Jurisdiction, within the said several Dioceses, against our Sovereign Lord the King, his Crown and dignity Royal, and in contempt of his Ma­jesty, and disherison of his Crown, and contrary to the form and effect of the Statute, &c.

To this Inditement Lalor pleaded Not guilty; and when the issue was to be tried, the name and reputation of the man, and the nature of the cause, drew all the principal Gentlemen both of the Pale and Provinces that were in town to the hearing of the matter. At what time a substantial Jury of the City of Dublin being sworn for the trial, and the points of the Inditement being opened and set forth by the King's Serjeant; the Attorney general thought it not im­pertinent, but very necessary, before he descended to the particular evidence against the prisoner, to inform and sa­tisfie the hearers in two Points.

1. What reason moved us to ground this Inditement upon the old Statute of 16 Rich. 2. rather then upon some other later Law made since the time of King Henr. 8.

2. What were the true causes of the making of this Law of 16 Rich. and other former Laws against Provisors and such as did appeal to the Court of Rome in those times, when both the Prince and people of England did for the most part acknowledge the Pope to be the thirteenth Apostle, and onely oracle in matters of Religion, and did follow his doctrine in most of those points wherein we now dissent from him.

1. For the first Point, we did purposely forbear to pro­ceed against him upon any later Law, to the end that such as were ignorant might be informed, that long before King Henr. 8. was born, divers Laws were made against the Usurpation of the Bishop of Rome upon the rights of the Crown of England, well-nigh as sharp and as severe as any Statutes which have been made in later times; and that therefore we made choice to proceed upon a Law made [Page 6] more then 200 years past, when the King, the Lords and Commons, which made the Laws, and the Judges, which did interpret the Laws, did for the most part follow the same opinions in Religion which were taught and held in the Court of Rome.

The true cause of ma­king the Sta­tute of 16 R. 2. and other Statutes a­gainst Provi­sors.2. For the second Point, the causes that moved and al­most enforced the English Nation to make this, and other Statutes of the same nature, were of the greatest impor­tance that could possibly arise in any State. For these Laws were made to uphold and maintain the Sovereignty of the King, the Liberty of the people, the Common Law, and the Commonweal, which otherwise had been undermined and utterly ruined by the Usurpation of the Bishop of Rome.

For albeit the Kings of England were absolute Emperours within their Dominions, and had under them as learned a Prelacy and Clergy, as valiant and prudent a Nobility, as free and wealthy a Commonalty, as any was then in Chri­stendom: yet if we look into the stories and records of these two Imperial Kingdoms, we shall find, that if these Laws of Provision and Praemunire had not been made, they had lost the name of Imperial, and of Kingdoms too, and had been long since made Tributary Provinces to the Bishop of Rome, or rather part of S. Peter's Patrimony in demesne. Our Kings had had their Scepters wrested out of their hands, their Crowns spurned off from their heads, their necks trod upon, they had been made Lacquays or Foot­men to the Bishop of Rome, as some of the Emperours and French Kings were; our Prelates had been made his Chap­lains and Clerks, our Nobility his Vassals and Servants, our Commons his Slaves and Villains, if these Acts of manu­mission had not freed them. In a word, before the making of these Laws, the flourishing Crown and Commonwealth of England was in extream danger to have been brought into most miserable servitude and slavery, under colour of Religion and devotion to the See of Rome. And this was not onely seen and felt by the King, and much repined at and protested against by the Nobility, but the Commons, the general multitude of the Subjects, did exclaim and cry [Page 7] out upon it. For the Commons of England m [...]y be an exam­ple unto all other Subjects in the world in this, that they have ever been tender and sensible of the wrongs and dis­honours offered unto their Kings, and have ever contended to uphold and maintain their honour and Sovereignty. And their faith and loyaltie hath been generally such, (though every Age hath brought forth some particular monsters of disloyaltie) as no pretence of zeal or religion could ever withdraw the greater part of the Subjects to submit them­selves to a forrein yoke, no not when Popery was in her height and exaltation; The Statute of Praemunire made at the prayer of the Commons. whereof this Act and divers others of the same kind are clear and manifest testimonies. For this Act of 16 Rich. 2. was made at the prayer of the Com­mons: which prayer they make not for themselves, nei­ther shew they their own self love therein, (as in other Bills which contain their Grievances) but their love and zeal to the King and his Crown. When after the Norman Conquest they importuned their Kings for the Great Char­ter, they sought their own Liberties; and in other Bills pre­ferred commonly by the Commons against Shriefs, Eschea­tors, Purveyors, or the like, they seek their own profit and ease: but here their Petition is to the King, to make a Law for the defence and maintenance of his own honour. The effect of the Statute of 16 R. 2. c. 5. They complain, That by Bulls and Processes from Rome the King is deprived of that Jurisdiction which belongs of right to his Imperial Crown: That the King doth lose the service and counsel of his Prelates and learned men by translations made by the Bishop of Rome: That the King's Laws are defeated at his will, the Treasure of the Realm is exhausted and exported to enrich his Court: And that by those means the Crown of England, which hath ever been free and subject unto none, but immediately unto God, should be submitted unto the Bishop of Rome, to the utter de­struction of the King and the whole Realm; which God defend, say they: and thereupon, out of their exceeding zeal and fervency, they offer to live and die with the King in defence of the liberties of the Crown. And lastly, they pray and require the King by way of justice, to examine all [Page 8] the Lords in Parliament, what they thought of these mani­fest wrongs and usurpations, and whether they would stand with the King in defence of his Royall liberties, or no. Which the King did according to their Petition: and the Lords Spiritual and Temporal did all answer, that these Usurpations of the Bishop of Rome were against the liberties of the Crown, and that they were all bound by their allege­ance to stand with the King, and to maintain his honour and Prerogative. And thereupon it was enacted with a full consent of the three Estates, That such as should pur­chase in the Court of Rome, or elsewhere, any Bulls or Processes, or other things which might touch the King in his Crown and dignitie Royall, and such as should bring them into the Realm, and such as should receive them, publish them, or execute them, they, their Notaries, Proctors, Maintainors and Counsellors, should be all out of the King's protection, their lands and goods forfeited to the King, their bodies at­tached if they might be found, or else processe of Pramuni­re facias to be awarded against them. Upon these motives, and with this affection and zeal of the people, was the Sta­tute of 16 Rich. 2. made, whereupon we have framed our Inditement.

Now let us look higher, and see whether the former Laws made by King Edw. 1. and King Edw. 3. against the Usurpation of the Bishop of Rome were not grounded upon the like cause and reason. The Statute of 38 Edw. 3. cap. 1. expressing the mischiefs that did arise by Breves of Citation, The effect of the Statute of 38 Edw. 3. cap. 1. which drew the bodies of the people, and by Bulls of Pro­vision and Reservation of Ecclesiasticall Benefices, which drew the wealth of the Realm, to the Court of Rome, doth declare, that by these means the ancient Laws, Customes and Franchises of the Realm were confounded, the Crown of our Sovereign Lord the King diminished, and his person falsely defamed, the Treasure and riches of the land carried away, the Subjects of the Realm molested and impoverished, the Benefices of Holy Church wasted and destroyed, Di­vine service, Hospitalitie, Almsdeeds, and other works of charitie neglected.

[Page 9]Again, The Statute of 27 Ed. 3. cap. 1. 27 Edw. 3. cap. 1. upon the grievous and clamorous complaint (for that phrase is there used) of the great men and Commons touching Citations and Provisions, it is enac­ted, That the offenders shall forfeit their lands, goods and chattels, and their bodies be imprisoned and ransomed at the King's will. But in the Statute of 25 Edw. 3. The Statute of 25 Edw. 3. reciting the Statute of 25 Ed. 1. wherein the first Law against Provisors made 25 Edw. 1. is recited, there is a larger declaration of these inconveniences then in the two last Acts before mentioned. For there all the Commons of the Realm do grievously complain, That whereas the Holy Church of England was first founded in estate of Prelacie by the Kings and Nobilitie of that Realm, and by them endowed with great possessions and revenues in lands, rents and Advowsons, to the end the people might be informed in Religion, Hospitality might be kept, and other works of Charitie might be exercised within the Realm; And whereas the King and other founders of the said Prelacies were the rightfull Patrons and Adowees there­of, and upon avoidance of such Ecclesiasticall promotions had power to advance thereunto their kinsmen, friends, and other learned men of the birth of that Realm, which be­ing so advanced became able and worthy persons to serve the King in Counsell, and other places in the Commonweal: The Bishop of Rome, usurping the Seigniory of such posses­sions and Benefices, did give and grant the same to Aliens, which did never dwell in England, and to Cardinals, which might not dwell there, as if he were rightfull Patron of those Benefices; whereas by the Law of England he never had right to the Patronage thereof; whereby in short time all the Spirituall promotions in the Realm would be ingros­sed into the hands of Strangers, Canonicall elections of Pre­lates would be abolished, works of Charity would cease, the founders and true patrons of Churches would be disinheri­ted, the King's Counsell would be weakened, the whole Kingdome impoverished▪ and the Laws and rights of the Realm destroyed. Upon this complaint it was resolved in Parliament, That these oppressions and grievances should not be suffered in any manner: and therefore it was enacted, [Page 10] That the King and his Subjects should thenceforth enjoy the rights of patronage; That free elections of Archbishops, Bishops, and other Prelates elective, should be made accor­ding to the ancient grants of the King's Progenitors and their founders; That no Bulls of Provision should be put in execution, but that the Provisors should be attached, fined, and ransomed at the King's will, and withall imprisoned till they had renounced the benefits of their Bulls, satisfied the partie grieved, and given sureties not to commit the like offence again.

Now, Master Lalor, what think you of these things? Did you believe that such Laws as these had been made against the Pope 200, 250, 300 years since? Was King Hen. 8. the first Prince that opposed the Pope's usurped Authority? Were our Protestants the first Subjects that ever complained of the Court of Rome? Of what Religion, think you, were the propounders and enacters of these Laws? These Laws made by such as did pro­fesse the Ro­mish Religion. Were they good Catholicks? or good Subjects? or what were they? You will not say they were Protestants, for you will not ad­mit the Reformed Religion to be so ancient as those times: neither can you say they were undutifull, for they strove to uphold their liege Lord's Sovereignty. Doubtless the people in those days did generally embrace the vulgar errours and superstitions of the Romish Church, and in that respect were Papists as well as you: but they had not learned the new doctrine of the Pope's Supremacie, and transcendent autho­rity over Kings; they did not believe he had power to de­pose Princes, and discharge Subjects of their allegeance, to abrogate the fundamentall Laws of Kingdomes, and to im­pose his Canons as binding laws upon all nations, without their consents: they thought it a good point of Religion to be good Subjects, to honour their King, to love their coun­try, and to maintain the laws and liberties thereof, howso­ever in other points they did erre and were miss-led with the Church of Rome.

So as now (Master Lalor) you have no excuse, no evasi­on, but your conscience must condemn you as well as the Law; since the Law-makers in all Ages, and all religious Papists and Protestants, do condemn you: unless you think [Page 11] your self wiser then all the Bishops that were then in Eng­land, or all the Judges who in those days were learned in the Civil and Canon Laws as well as in the Common Laws of England. But you, being an Irish man, will say, perhaps, Laws against Provisors made in Ire­land. these Laws were made in England, and that the Irish Nati­on gave no particular consent thereunto, onely there was an implicite consent wrapt and folded up in generall terms given in the Statute of 10 Hen. 7. cap. 22. whereby all Sta­tutes made in England are established and made of force in Ireland. Assuredly, though the first Parliament held in Ireland was after the first Law against Provisors made in Eng­land, yet have there been as many particular Laws made in Ireland against Provisions, Citations, Bulls and Breves of the Court of Rome▪ as are to be found in all the Parliament-Rolls in England. What will you say if in the self-same Parliament of 10 Hen. 7. cap. 5. a special Law were made, enacting, authorizing and confirming in this Realm all the Statutes of England made against Provisors? if before this the like Law were made 32 Hen. 6. cap. 4. and again 28 Hen. 6. cap. 30. the like? and before that, the like Law were made 40 Edw. 3. cap. 13. in the famous Parliament of Kilkenny? if a Statute of the same nature were made 7 Edw. 4. cap. 2. and a severer Law then all these 16 Edw. 4. cap. 4. That such as purchase any Bulls of Provision in the Court of Rome, as soon as they have published or executed the same to the hurt of any incumbent, should be adjudged traitors? Which Act, if it be not repealed by the Statute of Queen Mary, may terrifie Master Lalor more then all the Acts which are be­fore remembred.

But let us ascend yet higher, When the Pope began first to usurp upon the li­berties of the Cr [...]wn of England. to see when the Pope's Usur­pation, which caused all these complaints, began in England, with what successe it was continued, and by what degrees it rose to that height, that it well-nigh over-topp'd the Crown: whereby it will appear whether he had gained a circle by prescription, by a long and quiet possession before the making of these Laws.

The first encroachment of the Bishop of Rome upon the liberties of the Crown of England was made in the time of [Page 12] King William the Conqueror. For before that time the Pope's Writ did not run in England, his Bulls of Excommunication and Provision came not thither, no Citation, no Appeals were made from thence to the Court of Rome. Our Archbishops did not purchase their Palls there, A comparison of the spiritu­al Monarchy of the Church with the tem­poral Monar­chies of the world. neither had the Pope the Investiture of any of our Bishopricks. For it is to be observed, that as under the Temporal Monarchy of Rome Britany was one of the last Provinces that was wone, and one of the first that was lost again: so under the Spiritual Monarchy of the Pope of Rome England was one of the last Countries of Christendom that received his yoke, and was again one of the first that did reject and cast it off. And truly, as in this, so in divers other points, the course of this Spiritual Monar­chy of the Pope may be aptly compared with the course of the Temporal Monarchies of the world. For as the Tempo­ral Monarchies were first raised by intrusion upon other Princes and Commonweals; so did this Spiritual Prince (as they now style him) grow to his greatness by usurping upon other States and Churches. As the Temporal Monar­chies, following the course of the Sun, did rise in the East, and settle in the West; so did the Hierarchy or govern­ment of the Church. Of the four Temporal Monarchies the first two were in Asia, the latter two in Europe; but the Ro­man Monarchy did surpass and suppress them all: So were there four great Patriarchs, or Ecclesiastical Hierarchies, two in the East, and two in the West; but the Roman Pa­triarch exalted himself, and usurped a Supremacy above them all. And as the rising of the Roman Empire was most opposed by the State of Carthage in Africa, (aemula Romae Carthago;) so the Council of Carthage and the African Bi­shops did first forbid Appeals to Rome, and opposed the Su­premacy of the Pope. And doth not Daniel's Image, whose head was of gold, and legs and feet of iron and clay, re­present this Spiritual Monarchy as well as the Temporal, whereas the first Bishops of Rome were golden Priests, though they had but wooden Chalices, and that the Popes of later times have been for the most part worldly and earthly-minded? And as the Northern Nations▪ first re­volted [Page 13] from the Roman Monarchy, and at last brake it in pieces; have not the North and North-west Nations first fallen away from the Papacy? and are they not like in the end to bring it to ruine?

But to return to our purpose; The Pope had no jurisdicti­on in England in the time of the Britans. The Bishop of Rome be­fore the first Norman Conquest had no jurisdiction in the Realm of England, neither in the time of the Britans, nor in the time of the Saxons. Eleutherius the Pope within less then 200 years after Christ writes to Lucius the British King, and calls him God's Vicar within his Kingdom: which title he would not have given to that King, if himself, under pre­tence of being God's Vicar-generall in earth, had claimed ju­risdiction overall Christian Kingdoms.

Pelagius the Monk of Bangor, about the year 400, being cited to Rome, refused to appear upon the Pope's citation, affirming that Britain was neither within his Diocese nor his Province.

After that, about the year 600, Augustine the Monk was sent by Gregory the Great into England to convert the Saxons to Christian Religion; the British Bishops then re­maining in Wales regarded not his Commission nor his doctrine, as not owing any duty▪ nor having any depen­dency on the Court of Rome, but still retained their ceremo­nies and traditions which they received from the East Church upon the first plantation of the Faith in that Island, being divers and contrary to those of the Church of Rome, which Augustine did endeavour to impose upon them.

The like doth Beda write of the Irish Priests and Bishops. For in the year 660. he reporteth, that a Convocation of the Clergy being called by King Oswif, there rose a dispu­tation between Colman one of our Irish Saints, then present in that Synod, and Wilfrid a Saxon Priest, touching the ob­servation of Easter, wherein the British and Irish Churches did then differ from the Church of Rome. Colman, for the celebration of Easter used in Ireland, affirmed it was the same quod beatus Evangel [...]st [...] Joannes, discipulus specialiter à Domino dilectus, in omnibus quibus praeerat Ecclesiis eelebrâsse legitur. On the other part Wilfrid alledged, that all the [Page 14] Churches of Christendom did then celebrate Easter after the Roman manner, except the Churches of the Britans and Picts, qui contra totum orbem (said he) stulto labore pugnant. Whereunto Colman replied, Miror quare stultum laborem ap­pellas, in quo tanti Apostoli qui super pectus Domini recumbere dignus fuit exempla sectamur. Numquid reverendissimum patrem nostrum Columbam & ejus successores, viros à Deo dilectos, divi­nis paginis contraria sapuisse aut egisse credendum est? In this disputation or dialogue two things may be observed: first, that at this time the authority of the Bishop of Rome was of no estimation in these Islands: next, that the Primitive Churches of Britany and Ireland were instituted according to the form and discipline of the East Churches, and not of the West, and planted by the Disciples of John, and not of Peter. Thus much for the time of the Britans. For the Saxons, though King Ina gave the Peter-pence to the Pope, partly as Almes, and partly in recompence of a house erec­ted in Rome for entertainment of English pilgrims; yet it is certain that Alfred and Athelstane, Edgar and Edmund▪ Ca­nutus and Edward the Confessor, and divers other Kings of the Saxon race, did give all the Bishopricks in England per annulum & baculum, without any other ceremony, as the Emperour and the French King and other Christian Princes were wont to doe. They made also several Laws for the government of the Church: Among others Saint Edward begins his Laws with this protestation, that it is his Prince­ly charge, ut populum Domini, & super omnia sanctam▪ Ecclesi­am, regat & gubernet. Aud King Edgar, in his Oration to his English Clergy, Ego (saith he) Constantinis vos Petri gla­dium habetis: jungamus dextras, & gladium, gladio copulemus, ut ejiciantur extra castra leprosi, & purgetur sanctuarium Do­mini. So as the Kings of England with their own Clergy did govern the Church, and therein sought no aid of the Court of Rome. And the troth is, that though the Pope had then long hands, yet he did not extend them so far as Eng­land, because they were full of business nearer home in drawing the Emperour and the French King under his yoke. But upon the Conquest made by the Norman, he apprehen­ded [Page 15] the first occasion to usurp upon the Liberties of the Crown of England. The first usur­pation of the Pope upon the Crown began in the time of King William the Conque­rour. For the Conquerour came in with the Pope's Banner, and under it wone the battel which got him the garland: and therefore the Pope presumed he might boldly pluck some flowers from it, being partly gained by his countenance and blessing. Hereupon he sent two Le­gates into England, which were admitted and received by the Conquerour. By sending Legates into England. With them he called a Synod of the Cler­gy, and deposed old Stigand Archbishop of Canterbury, be­cause he had not purchased his Pall in the Court of Rome; he displaced many Bishops and Abbots to place his Normans in their rooms. And amongst the rest it is to be noted, that the King having earnestly moved Wolstan Bishop of Wor­cester, being then very aged, to give up his Staff, his answer was, that he would give up his Staff onely to him of whom he first received the same. And so the old man went to Saint Edward's Tomb, and there offered up his Staff and Ring, with these words, Of thee, O holy Edward, I received my Staff and my Ring, and to thee I do now surrender the same again. Which proves, that before the Norman Conquest the King did invest his Bishops per annulum & baculum, as I said before.

Thus we see, by the admission of the Pope's Legates, the first step or entry made into his usurped jurisdiction in Eng­land. Albeit the King still retained the absolute power of investing Bishops, and seemed onely to use the advice and assistance of the Legates in Ecclesiastical matters; for that no Decree passed or was put in execution without his Royal assent thereunto. Besides, how far forth he submitted him­self to the Pope, it appeareth by a short Epistle which he wrote to Gregory the 7. in this form. Excellentissimo Sanctae. Ecclesiae Pastori, Gregorio, gratiâ Dei Anglorum Rex & Dux Normannorum Willielmus salutem cum amicitia. Hubertus Le­gatus tuus, Religiose Pater, ad me veniens ex tua parte me ad­monuit, ut tibi & successoribus tuis fidelitatem facerem, & de pecunia quam antecessores mei ad Romanam Ecclesiam mittere solebant melius cogitarem. Vnum admisi, alterum non admisi: fidelitatem facere nolui, nec volo, quia nec ego promisi, nec ante­cessores [Page 16] meos antecessoribus tuis id fecisse comperio. Pecunia tri­bus ferè annis, in Galliis me agente, negligenter collecta est: nunc vero divinâ misericordiâ me in Regnum meum reverso, quod collectum est per praefatum Legatum mittetur; & quod reliquum est, per Legatos Lanfranci Archiepiscopi fidelis nostri, cum oppor­tunum fuerit, transmittetur, &c.

In the time of William Ru­fus the Pope attempted to draw Appeals to Rome, but prevailed not.But in the time of his next Successour King William Rufus they attempted to pass one degree farther, that is, to draw Appeals to the Court of Rome. For Anselme being made Archbishop of Canterbury, and being at some difference with the King, besought his leave to goe to Rome, under pretence of fetching his Pall. The King, knowing he would appeal to the Pope, denied him leave to goe, and withall told him, That none of his Bishops ought to be subject to the Pope, but the Pope himself ought to be subject to the Emperour; and that the King of England had the same absolute liber­ties in his Dominions as the Emperour had in the Empire; and that it was an ancient custome and law in England, used time out of mind before the Conquest, that none might appeal to the Pope without the King's leave; and that he that breaketh this law or custome doth violate the Crown and dignity Royal, and he that violates my Crown (saith he) is mine enemy, and a traitour. How answer you this, quoth the King? Christ himself answers you, saith the Archbishop, Tu es Petrus, & super hanc petram, &c. Where­with the King was nothing satisfied. And thereupon An­selme departing out of the Realm without licence, the King seized his Temporalties, and became so exasperate and im­placable towards the Bishop, as he kept him in perpetual exile during his Reign, albeit great intercession were made for his return, as well by the Pope as the King of France.

In the time of K. Henry the first the Pope usurpeth the donation of Bishoprikks, &c.In the time of the next King Hen. 1. though he were a learned and a prudent Prince, yet they sought to gain a far­ther point upon him, and to pluck a flower from his Crown of greater value, namely the Patronage and Donation of Bishopricks, and all other Benefices Ecclesiasticall. For An­selme being revok'd and re-established in the See of Canter­bury the Bishopricks of Salisbury and Hereford fell void, [Page 17] which the King bestowed on two of his Chaplains. But Anselme their Metropolitan did refuse to consecrate them, so as the Archbishop of York was fain to perform that Of­fice, who with the chief of the English Clergie stood with the King, and withstood Anselme. Hereupon the King requires him to doe his homage: the Bishop denies it. The King de­mands of him whether the patronage and investiture of all Bishopricks were not his rightfull inheritance: the Bishop said it was not his right, because Pope Vrban had lately made a Decree that no Lay person should give any Ecclesiasticall Benefice. This was the first question that ever was made touching the King of England's right of patronage and do­nation of Bishopricks within his dominions. Histor. Jorna­lensis M S. in Archiv. Rob. Cotton Eq. Aur. This new questi­on caused many messages and embassages to Rome. At last the King writes plainly to the Pope, Notum habeat Sancti­tas vestra, quod me vivente (Deo auxiliante) dignitates & usus regni nostri non minuentur, & si ego (quod absit) in tanta me directione ponerem, magnates mei, imo totius Angliae populus id nullo modo pateretur. Besides, William de Warrenast, the King's procurator in the Court of Rome, told the Pope that the King would rather lose his Kingdome then he would lose the do­nation of Bishopricks. The Pope answered, Know you precisely, Sir, I speak it before God, that for the redemption of my head I would not suffer him to enjoy it.

After this Anselme being received into the King's favour, in a Synod of the English Clergie holden at London in the year 1107. a Decree was made, Cui annuit Rex Henricus, saith Matth. Paris, that from thenceforth nunquam per donationem Baculi Pastoralis vel Annuli quisquam de Episcopatu vel Abba­thia per Regem vel quamlibet laicam manum, inv [...]stiretur in An­glia. In recompence whereof the Pope yielded this favour to the King, that thenceforth no Legate should be sent from the Pope's side into England, unless the King required it; and that the Archbishop of Canterbury for the time being should be for ever Legatus natus: and Anselme, for the honour of his See, obtained, that the Archbishop of Can­terbury should in all generall Councils sit at the Pope's foot tanquam alterius orbis Papa. Notwithstanding, as the suc­ceeding [Page 18] Popes kept not their promise touching the sending of Legates, so this self-same King, after the death of An­selme, broke the Decree touching the investiture of the Bi­shops. For he gave the Archbishoprick of Canterbury to Ro­dolph Bishop of London, saith Matth. Paris, Et illum per Annu­lum & Pastoralem Baculum investivit; as before he had in­vested Willielmum Gifford in the B [...]shoprick of Winchester, contra novi Concilii statuta, as the same Authour repor­teth.

In the time of King Ste­phen the Pope gained Ap­peals to the Court of Rome.The times of the next succeeding King Stephen were full of Civil dissensions, which made the land well-nigh waste, so as Saint Peter's Successour could not take any fish in such troubled waters. Yet during this King's reign they wone that point of jurisdiction which they attempted to get, but failed thereof, in the time of King William Rufus; namely, That Appeals might be made to the Court of Rome. For in a Synod at London summoned by Henr. Bishop of Winchester, the Pope's Legate, it was decreed, That Appeals should be made from Provinciall Councils to the Pope. Before that time Appellationes in usu non erant, saith a Monk of that time, donec Henricus Winton. Episcopus malo suo, dum Legatus esset, crudeliter intrusit. Thus did the Pope usurp three main points of Jurisdiction upon three severall Kings after the Conquest, (for of William Rufus he could win nothing:) namely▪ upon the Conquerour, the sending of Legates or Commissioners▪ to hear and determine Ecclesiasticall causes; upon Hen. 1. the Donation and Investiture of Bishopricks and other Benefices; upon King Stephen, the Appeals to the Court of Rome.

In the time of K. Henry 2. the Pope claimed ex­emption of Clerks from the Secular power.Now are we come to King Hen. 2. in whose time they made a farther encroachment upon the Crown, whereby they endeavoured to make him but half a King, and to take away half his Subjects, by exempting all Clerks from Secu­lar power, Hereupon rose that long and great contention between King Hen. 2. and Thomas Becket, which on Becket's behalf may be rightly termed rebellion and treason: the just cause and ground whereof was the same that made the late difference between the Pope and the Venetians. For a [Page 19] Priest had committed a foul murther, A brief of Th. Becket's troubles, or rather trea­sons. and being thereof in­dicted and convicted, prayed the benefit of his Clergie; which being allowed unto him, he was delivered to the Bishop of Salisbury, being his Ordinary, to make his purgation: which the murtherer failing to doe, should by the Law have been degraded, and delivered back to the Secular power. But the Bishop contemning the Law of the land, to enlarge the liberties of the Church, sent his prisoner to Thomas Becket then Archbishop of Canterbury, who shifted him into an Abbey, and so rescued him from the capital punishment he had justly deserved.

This gap of impunitie being once opened, the Clergie grew so outrageous, as the King was informed of a hundred murthers committed by Clerks, and yet not one of them exe­cuted for the same; for that the Archbishop had protected them all after the same manner. The Consti­tutions of Claringdon. For this the King was justly incensed against the Archbishop, who justified his doing here­in. Whereupon a common Council as well of the Bishops as of the Nobility was called, wherein they did revive and re-esta­blish the ancient laws and customes of the Kingdome for the government of the Clergie, and ordering of causes Ecclesia­sticall, whereof these were the principal Heads or Articles.

1. That no Bishop nor Clerk should depart the Realm without the King's licence; and that such as obtained li­cence should give sureties that they should procure no hurt or damage to the King or Realm during their absence in forrein parts.

2. That all Bishopricks and Abbeys being void should remain in the King's hands as his own demesnes, untill he had chosen and appointed a Prelate thereunto; and that e­very such Prelate should doe his homage to the King before he were admitted unto the place.

3. That Appeals should be made in causes Ecclesiasticall in this manner: from the Archdeacon to the Ordinary, from the Ordinary to the Metropolitan, from the Metro­politan to the King, and no farther.

4. That Peter-pence should be paid no more to the Pope, but to the King.

[Page 20]5. That if any Clerk should commit Felony, he should be hanged; if Treason, he should be drawn and quartered.

6. That it should be adjudged high Treason to bring in Bulls of Excommunication whereby the Realm should be cursed.

7. That no Decree should be brought from the Pope to be executed in England, upon pain of imprisonment and confiscation of goods.

To these and other Constitutions of the like nature made at Claringdon all the rest of the Bishops▪ and great men did subscribe, and bound themselves by oath to observe the same absolutely; onely the Archbishop would not subscribe, and swear, but with a Saving, salvo suo ordine & honore sanctae Ec­clesiae: yet at last he was content to make the like absolute Subscription and Oath as the rest had done, but presently he repented; and to shew his repentance suspended him­self from celebrating Masse, till he had received absolution from the Pope. Then he began to maintain and justifie the exemption of Clerks again; whereat the King's displea­sure was kindled anew: and then the Archbishop once a­gain promised absolute obedience to the King's Laws. (See the fickleness and mutability of your constant Martyr.) The King, to bind fast this slippery Proteus, called a Parliament of the Bishops and Barons, and sending for the Roll of those Laws, required all the Bishops to set their Seals thereunto. They all assented but the Archbishop, who protested he would not set his Seal, nor give allowance to those Laws. The King, being highly offended with his rebellious demea­nour, required the Barons in Parliament to give Judgement of him, who being his Subject would not be ruled by his Laws: Citò facite mihi justitiam de illo, qui homo meus ligeus est▪ & stare Juri in Curia mea recusat. Whereupon the Barons proceeding against him, and being ready to condemn him; I prohibit you (quoth the Archbishop) in the name of Al­mighty God to proceed against me, for I have appealed to the Pope; and so departed in contempt of that high Court, Omnibus clamantibus, saith Hoveden, Quò progrederis, proditor? exspecta & audi judicium tuum. After this he lurked secret­ly [Page 21] near the Sea-shore, and changing his apparell and name (like a Jesuit of these times,) he took shipping with a pur­pose to fly to Rome: but his passage being hindered by con­trary winds, he was summoned to a Parliament at Northamp­ton, where he made default wilfully; for which contempt his Temporalties were seized, and his body being attach'd, he was charged with so great an account to the King, as that he was found in arrear thirty thousand marks, and committed to prison; whence he found means to escape shortly after, and to passe out of the Realm to Rome. He was no sooner gone, but the King sends Writs to all the Sherifs in England to attach the bodies of all such as made any Appeals to the Court of Rome. Hereupon many mes­sages and letters passing to and fro, all the Suffragans of Canterbury joyn in a letter to the Pope, wherein they con­demn the fugitive Archbishop, and justifie the King's pro­ceedings. Upon this the Pope sends two Legates to the King being then in Normandy, to mediate for the Arch­bishop. They, with the mediation of the French King, pre­vailed so far with King Henry, as that he was pleased to accept his submission once again, and promised the King of France, that if he would be obedient to his Laws, he should enjoy as ample liberties as any Archbishop of Canterbury ever had: and so sent him into England with recommendation unto the young King his Son,, then lately crowned; who, hearing of his coming, commanded him to forbear to come to his presence, untill he had absolved the Archbishop of York and others, whom he had excommunicated for per­forming their duties at his Coronation. The Archbishop re­turned answer, that they had done him wrong in usurping his office; yet if they would take a solemn oath to become obedient to the Pope's commandment in all things concer­ning the Church, he would absolve them. The Bishops un­derstanding this, protested they would never take that oath unless the King willed them so to doe. King Henry the Fa­ther being hereof advertised into France, did rise into great passion and choler, and in the hearing of some of his servants uttered words to this effect; Will no man revenge me of mine [Page 22] enemies? Whereupon the 4 Gentlemen named in the Stories of that time passed into England, and first moving the Arch­bishop to absolve the Bishops whom he had excommunica­ted for performing their Duties at the young King's Coro­nation, and receiving a peremptory answer of deniall from the Archbishop, they laid violent hands upon him, and slew him: for which the King was fain not onely to suffer cor­poral penance, but in token of his humiliation to kisse the knee of the Pope's Legate. And this is the a­bridgement of Becket's Troubles, or rather Treasons, for which he was celebrated for so famous a Martyr. Four points of jurisdiction usurped upon the crown of England by the Pope be­fore the reign of K. John. And thus you see by what degrees the Court of Rome did within the space of one hundred and odde years usurp upon the Crown of England, four points of Jurisdiction. Viz. First, sending out of Legates into England. Secondly, drawing of Appeals to the Court of Rome. Thirdly, do­nation of Bishopricks and other Ecclesiasticall Benefices. And fourthly, exemption of Clerks from the Secular pow­er. And you see withall how our Kings and Parliaments have from time to time opposed and withstood this unjust Usurpation.

Now then the Bishop of Rome having claimed and wel­nigh recovered full and sole jurisdiction in all causes Eccle­siasticall, and over all persons Ecclesiasticall, with power to dispose of all Ecclesiasticall Benefices in England, whereby he had upon the matter made an absolute conquest of more then half the Kingdome, (for every one that could read the Psalm of Miserere was a Clerk, and the Clergie possessed the moietie of all temporall possessions,) there remained now nothing to make him owner and proprietor of all, but to get a surrender of the Crown, and to make the King his Farmer, and the people his Villains, which he fully accom­plished and brought to passe in the times of King John and of Hen. 3.

The cause of the quarrell between K. John and the Pope.The quarrell between the Pope and King John, which wrested the Scepter out of his hand, and in the end brake his heart, began about the Election of the Archbishop of Canterbury. I call it Election, and not Donation or Investi­ture: [Page 23] for the manner of investing of Bishops by the Staffe and Ring after the time of King Hen. 1. was not any more used, but by the King's licence they were Canonically e­lected, and being elected, the King gave his Royall assent to their election, and by restitution of their Temporalties did fully invest them. And though this course of election began to be in use in the time of Rich. 1. and Hen. 2. yet I find it not confirmed by any Constitution or Charter before the time of King John, who by his Charter dated the fifteenth of January, in the sixteenth year of his Reign, When Cano­nical election began first in England. granted this privilege to the Church of England in these words, viz. Quod qualiscunque consuetudo temporibus praedecessorum nostrorum hactenus in Ecclesia Anglicana fuerit observata, & quidquid juris nobis hactenus vindicaverimus, de caetero in universis & singulis Ecclesiis & M [...]nasteriis, Cathedralibus & Conventua­libus, totius regni Angliae liberae sint in perpetuum electiones quorumcumque Praelatorum, majorum & minorum. Salvâ nobis & haeredibus nostris custodiâ Ecclesiarum & Monasteriorum va­cantium quae ad nos pertinent. Promittimus etiam quod nec im­pediemus nec impediri permittemus per ministros nostros, nec pro­curabimus, quin in universis & singulis Monasteriis & Ecclesiis, postquam vacuerint praelaturae, quemcunque voluerint libere sibi praeficiant electores Pastorum, petitâ tamen à nobis priùs & hae­redibus nostris licentiâ eligendis quam non denegabimus nec dif­feremus. Et similiter, post celebratam electionem, noster requi­ratur assensus, quem non denegabimus, nisi adversus eandem ra­tionale proposuerimus, & legitimè probaverimus propter quod non debemus consentire, &c.

But to return to the cause of his great quarrell with the Pope. The See of Canterbury being void, the Monks of Canterbury suddenly and secretly without the King's licence elected one Reignold their Subprior to be Archbishop, who immediately posted away to be confirmed by the Pope. But when he came there, the Pope rejected him, because he came not recommended from the King. Hereupon the Monks made suit to the King to nominate some fit person to whose election they might proceed. The King com­mends, John Gray Bishop of Norwich, his principall Coun­sellour, [Page 24] who was afterward Lord Justice of this Kingdome, who with a full consent was elected by them, and after­wards admitted and fully invested by the King. These two elections bred such a controversie as none might determine but the Pope, who gave a short rule in the case, for he pronounced both elections void, and caused some of the Monks of Canterbury, who were then present in the Court of Rome, to proceed to the election of Stephen Langton, late­ly made Cardinal at the motion and suit of the French King: who being so elected was forthwith confirmed and consecra­ted by the Pope, and recommended to the King of England with a flattering Letter, and a present of four Rings set with precious stones, King John's round and Kingly Letter to the Pope. which were of great value and estimation in those days. Howbeit the King more esteeming this Jewell of the Crown, namely, the Patronage of Bishopricks, returned a round and Kingly answer to the Pope, That in­considerately and rashly he had cassed and made void the election of the Bishop of Norwich, and had caused one Langton, a man to him unknown, and bred up and nou­rished amongst his mortal enemies, to be consecrated Arch­bishop, without any due form of election, and without his Royal assent, which was most of all requisite by the ancient laws and customes of his Realm. That he marvelled much, that the Pope himself and the whole Court of Rome did not consider what a precious account they ought to make of the King of England's friendship, in regard that his one Kingdome did yield them more profit and revenue then all the other countries on this side the Alpes. To conclude, he would maintain the liberties of his Crown to the death, he would restrain all his subjects from going to Rome. And since the Archbishops, Bishops and other Prelates within his dominions were as learned and religious as any o­ther in Christendome, his subjects should be judged by them in Ecclesiasticall matters, and should not need to run out of their own country to beg Justice at the hands of strangers.

But what followed upon this? The Pope, after a sharp reply, sendeth forth a Bull of Malediction against the King, [Page 25] and of Interdiction against the Realm, The Pope curseth the King, and interdicteth the Realm. whereby all the Churches in England were shut up, the Priests and Religious persons were forbidden to use any Liturgies or Divine ser­vice, to marry, to bury, or to perform any Christian duty among the people. This put the King into such a rage, that he on the other part seized the Temporalties of all Bi­shops and Abbots, and confiscated the goods of all the Clergie. Then doth the Pope by a solemn sentence at Rome depose the King, and by a Bull sent into England dis­chargeth his subjects of their allegeance, and by a Legate sent to the King of France gave the Kingdome of England to him and his successours for ever.

These things brought such confusion and miserie to all e­states and degrees of people in England, as the King became odious to all his subjects, as well to the Laietie as to the Clergie. For as the Bishops and religious people cursed him abroad, so the Barons took arms against him at home, till with much bloudshed they forced him, by granting the Great Charter, to restore King Edward's Laws containing the ancient Liberties of the subjects of England. The Pope be­ing a spectator of this Tragedy, and seeing the King in so weak and desperate estate, sent a Legate to comfort him, and to make a reasonable motion unto him; to wit, that he should surrender and give up his Crown and King­dome to the Pope, which should be re-granted unto him again to hold in Fee-farm and Vassalage of the Church of Rome: And that thereupon the Pope would blesse him and his Realm again, and curse his rebells and enemies in such sort, as he should be better establisht in his Kingdome then he was before. In a word, this motion was presently em­braced by that miserable King, so as with his own hands he gave up the Crown to the Pope's Legat, and by an In­strument or Charter sealed with a Bull or Seal of gold he granted to God and the Church of Rome, the Apostles Peter and Paul, and to Pope Innocent the third and his successours, the whole Kingdome of England, and the whole Kingdome of Ireland; and took back an estate thereof by an Instru­ment sealed with Lead, yielding yearly to the Church of [Page 26] Rome over and above the Peter-pence a thousand marks ster­ling, viz. seven hundred marks for England, and three hun­dred marks for Ireland, with a flattering saving of all his Li­berties and Royalties. The Pope had no sooner gotten this conveiance, though it were void in law, but he excommuni­cateth the Barons, and repeals the Great Charter, affirming that it contained liberties too great for his subjects; calls the King his Vassall, and these Kingdomes Saint Peter's Pa­trimony; grants a general Bull of Provision for the bestow­ing of all Ecclesiasticall Benefices, and takes upon him to be absolute and immediate Lord of all. And thus, under colour of exercising Jurisdiction within these Kingdomes, the Pope by degrees got the very Kingdomes themselves. And so would he doe at this day, if the King would give way to his Jurisdiction.

But what use did the Pope make of this grant and sur­render of the Crown unto him? what did he gain by it, if our Kings retained the profits of their Kingdomes to their own use? Indeed we do not find that the Fee-farm of a thousand marks was ever pay'd, but that it is all run in arrear till this present day. For the troth is, the Court of Rome did scorn to accept so poor a revenue as a thousand marks per annum out of two Kingdomes. But after the death of King John, during all the reign of Hen. 3. his son, the Pope did not claim a Seignioury or a Rent out of Eng­land and Ireland, but did endeavour to convert all the pro­fits of both Lands to his own use, as if he had been seized of all in demesne. For whosoever will reade Matth. Paris his story of the time of King Hen. 3. will say these things spoken of before were but the beginnings of evils. For the exactions and oppressions of the Court of Rome were so con­tinuall and intolerable, as that poor Monk, who lived in those times, though otherwise he adored the Pope, doth call England Baalam's Asse loaden, beaten, and enforced to speak; doth call the Court of Rome Charybdis and bara­thrum avaritiae, the Pope's Collectors Harpyes, and the Pope himself a Stepfather, and the Church of Rome a Stepmother. He sheweth that two third parts of the Land being then [Page 27] in the hands of Church-men, the entire profits thereof were exported to enrich the Pope and the Court of Rome: which was done for the most part by these two ways and means. First, by conferring the best Ecclesiasticall Benefices upon Italians, and other Strangers resident in that Court, whose farmers and factors in England took the profits, turned them into money, and returned the money to Rome. Se­condly, by imposing continuall taxes and tallages, (worse then Irish cuttings) being sometimes the tenth, sometimes the fifteenth, sometimes the third, sometimes the moietie of all the goods both of the Clergie and Laietie, under co­lour of maintaining the Pope's holy wars against the Empe­rour and the Greek Church, who were then said to be in rebellion against their Lady and mistresse the Church of Rome. Besides, for the speedy levying and safe return of these moneys, the Pope had his Lombards and other Italian Ban­kers and Usurers resident in London and other parts of the Realm, who offered to lend and disburse the moneys taxed, and return the same by exchange to Rome, taking such penal Bands, the form whereof is set down in Matth. Paris, and such excessive Usury, as the poor Religious houses ware fain to sell their Chalices and Copes, and the rest of the Clergie and Laiety had their backs bowed and their estates broken under the burthen. Besides, the Pope took for perquisites and casualties the goods of all Clerks that died intestate, the goods of all Usurers, and all goods given to charitable uses. Moreover he had a swarm of Friers, (the first cor­rupters of Religion in England) who perswaded the Nobi­lity and Gentrie to put on the sign of the Crosse, and to vow themselves to the Holy wars, which they had no soo­ner done, but they were again perswaded to receive dis­pensations of their vows, and to give mony for the same to the Church of Rome. I omit divers other policies then used by the Pope's Collectors to exhaust the wealth of the Realm, which they affirmed they might take with as good a conscience as the Hebrews took the Jewells of the Egyp­tians. Briefly, whereas the King had scarce means to maintain his Royall family, they received out of England [Page 28] seventy thousand pounds sterling at least yearly, which a­mounteth to two hundred and ten thousand pounds sterling of the moneys currant at this day. Besides, they exported six thousand marks out of Ireland at one time, which the Emperour Frederick intercepted. Lastly, the King himself was so much dejected, as at a Royal Feast be placed the Pope's Legate in his own Chair of State, himself sitting on his right hand, and the Bishop of York on his left, non sine multorum obliquantibus oculis, saith Matth. Paris.

Thus we see the effect of the Pope's pretended Jurisdicti­on within the dominions of the King of England. We see to what calamity and servitude it then reduced both the Prince and people. Was it not therefore high time to meet and oppose those inconveniences? Assuredly if King Edw. 1. who was the Son and heir of Hen. 3. had inherited the weak­ness of his Father, and had not resisted this Usurpation and insolencie of the Court of Rome, the Pope had been propri­etor of both these Ilands, and there had been no King of England at this day. King Edw. 1. opp [...]seth the Pope's Vsur­pation.

But King Edward 1. may well be styled vindex Anglicae li­bertatis, the Moses that delivered his people from slavery and oppression: and as he was a brave and victorious Prince, so was he the best Pater patriae that ever reigned in England since the Norman Conquest, till the Coronation of our gra­cious Sovereign. At the time of the death of his father he was absent in the war of the Holy land, being a principal Commander of the Christian Armie there, so as he returned not before the second year of his reign. But he was no sooner returned and crowned, but the first work he did was to shake off the yoke of the Bishop of Rome. For the Pope having then summoned a generall Council, before he would licence his Bishops to repair unto it, he took of them a so­lemn oath, that they should not receive the Pope's blessing. Again, the Pope forbids the King to war against Scotland; the King regards not his prohibition: he demands the First-fruits of Ecclesiasticall Livings; the King forbids the payment thereof unto him. The Pope sendeth forth a ge­neral Bull prohibiting the Clergie to pay subsidies or tributes [Page 29] to Temporal Princes. A Tenth was granted to the King in Parliament, the Clergie refused to pay it: the King sei­zeth their Temporalties for their contempt, and got pay­ment notwithstanding the Pope's Bull. After this he made the Statute of Mortmain, whereby he brake the Pope's chief net, which within an Age or two more would have drawn to the Church all the temporall possessions of the King­dome, &c. Again, one of the King's subjects brought a Bull of Excommunication against another; the King com­mandeth he should be executed as a traitour, according to the ancient Law. But because that Law had not of long time been put in execution, the Chancellour and Treasurer kneeled before the King, and obtained grace for him, so as he was onely banished out of the Realm. And as he judged it treason to bring in Bulls of Excommunication; so he held it a high contempt against the Crown to bring in Bulls of Provision, or Briefs of Citation, and accordingly the Law was so declared in Parliament 25 Edw. 1. which was the first Statute made against Provisors: the execution of which Law, during the life of King Edw. 1. did well-nigh abolish the usurped Jurisdiction of the Court of Rome, and did re­vive and restore again the ancient and absolute Sovereign­ty of the King and Crown of England.

His Successour K. Edw. 2. being but a weak Prince, E. 2. suffe­reth the Pope to usurp a­gain. the Pope attempted to usurp upon him again: but the Peers and people withstood his Usurpation. And when that un­happy King was to be deposed, amongst many Articles fra­med against him by his enemies, this was one of the most hainous, that he had given allowance to the Bope's Bulls.

Again, during the minority of King Edw. 3. and after that in the heat of the wars in France, the Pope sent many Briefs and Bulls into England; and at last presumed so far, as that he gave an Italian the title of a Cardinall in England, and withall by his Bull gave him power to bestow all Ec­clesiasticall promotions as they should fall void from time to time. This moved the King and the Nobility to write to the Pope to this effect: ‘We and our ancestours have rich­ly endowed the Church of England, and have founded Ab­beys [Page 30] and other Religious houses for the jurisdiction of our people, E. 3. resisteth the Vsurpa­tion of the Pope. for maintenance of hospitalitie, and for the ad­vancement of our countrymen and kinsmen. Now you pro­vide and place strangers in our Benefices, that come not to keep residence thereupon; and if they come, under­stand not our language; and some of them are subjects to our mortal enemies: by reason whereof our people are not instructed, hospitalitie is not kept, our Scholars are unpreferred, and the Treasure of the Realm is expor­ted.’ The Pope returneth answer, That the Emperour had lately submitted himself to the Church of Rome in all points, and was become the Pope's great friend; and in menacing manner advised the King of England to doe the like. The King replies, That if the Emperour and French King both should take his part, he was ready to give bat­tell to both in defence of the liberties of his Crown. Here­upon the severall Statutes against Provisors before recited were put in execution so severely, as the King and his sub­jects enjoyed their right of patronage clearly: and their exemption of Clerks took no place at all; for that the Ab­bot of Waltham and Bishop of Winchester were both attain­ted of high contempts, and the Bishop of Ely of a capital of­fence, as appeareth in the Records of this King's reign. King Rich. 2. Yet during the nonage of Richard 2. they began once again to en­croach upon the Crown, by sending Legates and Bulls and Briefs into England; whereof the people were so sensible and impatient, as that at their special prayer this Law of 16 Rich. 2. (whereupon our Indictment is framed) was enacted, being more sharp and penall then all the former Statutes against Provisors. And yet against this King, as against Edw. 2. it was objected at the time of his Deprivation, that he had allowed the Pope's Bulls to the enthralling of the Crown.

After this in the weak time of King Hen. 6. they made one attempt more to revive their usurped Jurisdiction by this policy: The Commons had denied the King a Subsidy when he stood in great want of moneys. The Archbishop of Canterbury and the rest of the Bishops▪ offered the King a large supply of his wants if he would consent that all the [Page 31] Laws against Provisors, and specially this Law of 16 Rich. 2. might be repealed. But Humphrey Duke of Gloucester, who had lately before cast the Pope's Bull into the fire, did like­wise cause this motion to be rejected. So as by special pro­vidence these Laws have stood in force even till this day in both these Kingdomes.

Then the Atturney generall descended to the evidence, The Evidence against Lalor. whereby he proved fully all the parts of the Indictment. First, it was proved by Lalor's own Confession, upon seve­rall Examinations taken before the Lord Deputie and Lord Chancellor and others, that he had accepted the Office and title of Vicar-general in the Dioceses of Dublin, Kildare and Fernes, by virtue of the Pope's Bull. Secondly, it appeared by the copies of sundry Letters found among his papers at his apprehension, that he styled himself the Pope's Vicar, in this form, Robertus Dublinien. & Kildaren. & Fernen. Dioeces. Vicarius Apostolicus. Thirdly, there were produced the co­pies of divers Acts and Instruments, written for the most part with Lalor's own hand, some of Institutions of Popish Priests to Benefices, others of Dispensations with Marriage within the degrees, others of Divorces, others of Dispensati­ons for non-payment of Tithes. Whereby it was manifestly proved that he did execute the Pope's Bull, in usurping and exercising Episcopall jurisdiction as Vicar-generall of the See Apostolick within the Dioceses before named.

To this evidence he made a threefold answer. First, That he was no suiter for the office of Vicar-generall, but it was im­posed on him, and he accepted virtute obedientiae, onely to obey his Superiours. Next, That he did exercise the office of Vicar-generall in foro conscientiae tantum, and not in foro ju­dicii. And lastly, that those copies of Institutions, Dispen­sations and Divorces were many of them written with his man's hand, as precedents of such Acts and Instruments, without his privity or direction. Hereupon Sir James Ley Chief Justice told him, that—he could not well say that he accepted that unlawfull office virtute obedientiae, for there was no vertue in that obedience: That he ow'd an obe­dience to the Law, and to the King, who is the true Supe­riour [Page 32] and Sovereign over all his subjects, and hath no Peer within his dominions; and that the Superiours whom he meant and intended were but Usurpers upon the King's Ju­risdiction, and therefore this excuse did aggravate his con­tempt, in that it appeared he had vowed obedience to those who were apparent enemies to the King and his Crown. And though it were manifest that he exercised ju­risdiction in foro judicii, (for every Institution is a Judgement, and so is every Sentence of divorce:) yet were his offence nothing diminished if he had executed his office of Vicar-generall in foro conscientiae tantum; for the court of man's conscience is the highest tribunall, and wherein the power of the Keys is exercised in the highest degree.

Hereunto the Atturney generall took occasion to adde thus much, That Lalor had committed these high offences, not onely against the Law, but against his own Conscience, and that he was already condemned in foro conscientiae. For that he upon his second Examination had voluntarily ac­knowledged himself not to be a lawfull Vicar-generall, and that he thought in his conscience he could not law­fully take upon him the said office. He hath also acknow­ledged our Sovereign Lord K. James to be his lawfull, Chief and Supreme Governour, in all causes, as well Eccle­siasticall as Civile; and that he is in conscience bound to obey him in all the said causes, &c. as it is contained in his Acknowledgement or Con­fession before set down. Which being shewed forth by the Atturney generall, Lalor's Con­fession pub­lickly read. the Court caused it to be publickly read; and thereupon demanded of Lalor, if that were not his free and voluntary confession signed with his own hand, and confirmed by his oath be­fore the Lord Deputie and Councill. He was not a little abashed at the publishing of this Acknowledgement and Con­fession in the hearing of so many principal Gentlemen, to whom he had preached a contrary doctrine: therefore, said he, the shewing forth of this Confession is altogether imper­tinent and besides the matter. Howsoever he could not de­ny but that he made it, and signed it, and swore it, as it was testified by the Lord Deputie and the rest.

[Page 33]Then was it demanded of him, whether since the ma­king of this Confession he had not protest [...] [...]o divers of his friends, that he had not acknowledged the King's Supre­macie in Ecclesiasticall causes. His answer was, That indeed he had said to some of his friends who visited him in the Castle of Dublin, that he had not confessed or acknow­ledged that the King was his Supreme Governour in Spiritu­all causes, for that the truth is, in the Confession there is no mention made of Spirituall causes, but of Ecclesiasticall.

This is a subtile evasion indeed, said the Atturney gene­rall: I pray you what difference do you make between Ec­clesiasticall causes and Spirituall causes? This question, said Lalor, is sudden and unexpected at this time, and therefore you shall doe well to take another day to dispute this point. Nay, said the Atturney generall, we can never speak of it in a better time or fitter place: and therefore though you, that bear so reverend a title, and hold the reputation of so great a Clerk, require a farther time; yet shall you hear that we Lay-men that serve his Majestie, and by the dutie of our places are to maintain the Jurisdiction of the Crown, are never so unprovided but that we can say somewhat touching the nature and difference of these Causes.

First then, When the distinction of Ecclesiasti­call & Spiri­tuall causes from Civil and Temporal causes began in the world. let us see when this distinction of Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall causes from Civile and Temporall causes did first begin in point of jurisdiction. Assuredly for the space of three hundred years after Christ this distinction was not known or heard of in the Christian world. For the causes of Testaments, of Matrimony, of Bastardy and Adultery, and the rest which are called Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall c [...]uses, were meerly Civil, and determined by the rules of the Civil Law, and subject onely to the jurisdiction of the Civil Magistrate, as all Civilians will testifie with me.

But after that the Emperours had received the Christian Faith, out of a zeal and desire they had to grace and honour the learned and godly Bishops of that time, they were pleased to single out certain speciall Causes wherein they granted jurisdiction unto the Bishops: namely, in causes of Tithes, because they were paid to men of the [Page 34] Church; in causes of Matrimony, because Marriages were for the most part solemnized in the Church; in causes Testa­mentary, because Testaments were many times made in ex­tremis, when Church-men were present, giving spiritual comfort to the Testator, and therefore they were thought the fittest persons to take the probates of such Testaments. Howbeit these Bishops did not proceed in these causes ac­cording to the Canons and Decrees of the Church, (for the Canon Law was not then hatched or dream'd of) but ac­cording to the rules of the Imperiall Law, as the Civil Ma­gistrate did proceed in other causes: neither did the Empe­rours, in giving this Jurisdiction unto them, give away their own Supreme and absolute power, to correct and punish these Judges as well as others, if they performed not their severall duties. This then is most certain, that the primi­tive Jurisdiction in all these causes was in the Civil Magi­strate, and so in right it remaineth at this day; and though it be derived from him, it remaineth in him as in the foun­tain. For every Christian Monarch (as well as the godly Kings of Juda) is custos utriusque Tabulae; and consequent­ly hath power to punish not onely Treason, Murther, Theft, and all manner of Force and Fraud; but Incest, Adultery, Usury, Perjury, Simony, Sorcery, Idolatry, Blasphemy. Neither are these Causes in respect of their own quality and nature to be distinguished one from another by the names of Spirituall or Temporall▪ For why is Adultery a Spirituall cause rather then Murther, when they are both offences alike a­gainst the Second Table? or Idolatry rather then Perjury, being both offences likewise against the First Table? And indeed if we consider the natures of these Causes, it will seem somewhat absurd that they are distinguished by the name of Spirituall and Temporall: for, to speak properly, that which is opposed to Spirituall should be termed Car­nall; and that which is opposed to Temporall should be cal­led Eternall. And therefore if things were called by their proper names, Adultery should not be called a spi­rituall offence, but a carnall. But shall I expresse plain­ly and briefly why these Causes were first denomina­ted, [Page 35] some Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall, and others Temporall and Civil.

Truly they were so called, not from the nature of the Causes, as I said before, but from the quality of the persons whom the Prince had made Judges in those Causes. The Clergie did study spirituall things, and did professe to live secundum spiritum, and were called spirituall men; and there­fore they called the Causes wherein Princes had given them jurisdiction spirituall causes, after their own name and qua­lity. But because the Lay-magistrates were said to intend the things of this world, which are temporall and transitory, the Clergie called them secular or temporall men, and the Causes wherein they were Judges temporall causes. This distinction began first in the Court of Rome, where the Clergie having by this Jurisdiction gotten great wealth, their wealth begot pride, their pride begot ingratitude towards Princes, who first gave them their Jurisdiction, and then, according to the nature of all ungratefull persons, they went about to extinguish the memory of the benefit: for whereas their Jurisdiction was first derived from Caesar, in the execution whereof they were Caesar's Judges, so as both their Courts and Causes ought still to have born Cae­sar's image and superscription, as belonging unto Caesar; they blotted Caesar's name out of the style of their Courts, and called them Courts Christian, as if the Courts holden by other Magistrates had been in comparison but Courts of Ethnicks; and the Causes which in their nature were meer­ly Civil, they called Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall. So as if the Emperour should challenge his Courts and Causes again, and say, Reddite Caesariquae sunt Caesaris, they would all cry out on the contrary part and say, Date Deo quae sunt Dei; our Courts bear the name and title of Christ, the superscrip­tion of Caesar is quite worn out, and not to be found upon them. And this point of their policy is worth the obser­ving, that when they found their jurisdiction in Matrimo­niall causes to be the most sweet and gainfull of all other, (for of Matrimony they made matter of money indeed) to the end that Caesar might never resume so rich a perquisite of [Page 36] their Spirituall jurisdiction, they reduced Matrimony into the number of the 7 Sacraments: after which time it had been Sacriledge, if the Civil Magistrate had intermeddled with the least matter that had relation to Matrimonie, or any dependencie thereupon. So then it appeareth, that all Causes whereof Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall persons have cognisance or jurisdiction by the grants or permission of Princes are called Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall causes. And as all their Courts are called Spirituall Courts, so all Causes determinable in those Courts are called Spirituall Causes. And therefore where Mr. Lalor hath acknowledged the King's Majestie to be Supreme Governour in all Ecclesiasticall causes, he hath therein acknowledged the King's Suprema­cie in all Spirituall causes; wherein he hath but rendered to Caesar that which is Caesar's, and hath given unto his Ma­jestie no more then all the Bishops of England have yielded to his Predecessours, not onely in this latter Age, but also in former times both before and since the Conquest, as hath been before at large expressed.

Here the day being far spent, the Court demanded of the prisoner if he had any more to say for himself. His answer was, That he did willingly renounce his office of Vicar-generall, and did humbly crave his Majestie's grace and par­don. And to that end, he desired the Court to move the L. Deputy to be favourable unto him. Then the Jury de­parted from the Bar, and returning within half an hour, found the prisoner guiltie of the Contempts whereof he was indicted. Whereupon the Solicitor generall moved the Court to proceed to Judgement. And Sir Dominick Sars­field, Knight, one of the Justices of his Majestie's chief place, gave Judgement according to the form of the Statute whereupon the Indictment was framed.

In the Reign of King Edward the Confessor.

THe King, St. K. Edw. laws, ca. 19. who is the Vicar of the Highest King, is ordai­ned to this end, that he should govern and rule the Kingdome and people of the Land, and above all things the Holy Church, and that he defend the same from wrong­doers, and destroy and root out workers of mischief. And this shall suffice for many before the Conquest.

In the Reign of King William the First.

7 E. 3. tit. Quare Impe­di [...] 19. IT is agreed that no man can make any Appropriation of any Church having Cure of Souls, being a thing Ecclesi­astical, and to be made to some person Ecclesiastical, but he that hath Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction: But William the First, of himself, without any other, (as King of England,) made Appropriation of Churches with Cure to Ecclesiastical persons: Wherefore it followeth that he had Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction.

In the Reign of King Henry the First.

HEnry by the Grace of God King of England, The Charter of H. 1. Foun­der of the Ab­bey of Rea­ding, in the 26. year of his reign, and in the year of our Lord 1125. Duke of Normans, To all Archbishops, Bishops, Abbots, Earls, Barons, and to all Christians as well present as to come, &c. We do ordain, as well in regard of Ecclesiasticall as Royall power, that whensoever the Abbot of Reading shall die, that all the possession of the Monastery, wheresoever it is, do remain entire and free, with all the rights and customs thereof, in the hands and disposition of the Prior and Monks of the Chapter of Reading. We do therefore ordain and e­stablish this Ordinance to be observed for ever: because the Abbot of Reading hath no Revenues proper and peculiar to himself, but common with his brethren; whosoever by God's will shall be appointed Abbot in this place by Canoni­call election, may not dispend the Alms of the Abbey by ill usage with his secular kinsmen, or any other, but in en­tertaining the poor Pilgrims and Strangers, and that he have a care not to give out the Rent-lands in fee, neither that he make any Servitors or Souldiers but in the Sacred garment of Christ; wherein let him be advisedly provident he entertain not young ones, but that he entertain men of ripe age or discreet, as well Clerks as Lay-men.

In the Reign of King Henry the Third.

IN all the time of H. 3. and his Progenitors Kings of England, and ever fithence, 2 H. 3. Tit. Prohibition .13. 4 H. 3. ibidem 15. 15 H. 3. Tit. Prohib. 22. Register fol. if any man did sue afore any Judge Ecclesiasticall within the Realm for any thing where­of that Court by allowance and custome had not lawful conusance, the King did ever by his Writ under his great Seal prohibit them to proceed: And if the suggestion made to the King, whereupon the Prohibition was groun­ded, were after found untrue, then the King by his Writ of Consultation under his great Seal did allow and permit [Page 50] them to proceed. Also, in all the Reign of H. 3. and his Progenitors King of England, and ever fithence, if any issue were joyned [...]pon the loyalty of Marriage, general Ba­stardy, or such like, the King did ever write to the Bishop of that Diocese, as mediate Officer and Minister to his Court, to certifie the loyalty of Marriage, Bastardy, or such like: all which do apparently prove, that those Ecclesiastical Courts were under the King's Jurisdiction and command­ment; and that one of the Courts wure so necessarily in­cident to the other, as the one without the other could not deliver Justice to the parties, as well in these particular ca­ses, as in a number of cases before specified, whereof the King's Ecclesiasticall Court hath Jurisdiction. Now to com­mand and to be obeyed belong to Sovereign and Supreme Government.

By the ancient Canons and Decrees of the Church of Rome, the issue born before solemnization of marriage is as lawfully inheritable (marriage following) as the issue born after marriage: But this was never allowed or appointed in England, and therefore was never of any force here. And this appeareth by the Statute of Merton, The Statute of Merton an. 20 H. 3. made in the 20. year of King Henry the 3.

To the King's Writ of Bastardy, whether one being born afore matrimony may inherit in like manner as he that is born after matrimony, all the Bishops answered, that they would not nor could not answer to it, because it was direct­ly against the common order of the Church. And all the Bishops instanted the Lords, that they would consent, that all such as were born afore matrimony should be legitimate, as well as they that be born within matrimony, as to the succession of inheritance, forsomuch as the Church accepteth such to be legitimate. And all the Earls and Barons with one voice answered, We will not change the Laws of Eng­land which hitherto have been used and approved.

In the Reign of King Edward the First.

IN the Reign of King Edward the First, Vide 30 E. 3. Li. ss. pl. 19. Brook tit. Premunire pl. 10. Note, this was by the common Law of England before any Statute made. 19 E. 3. tit. Quare non admisit 7. Vide 39 E. 3.20. a Subject brought in a Bull of Excommunication against another Subject of this Realm, and published it to the Lord Treasurer of Eng­land: and this was by the ancient Common Law of England adjudged Treason against the King, his Crown and Digni­ty; for the which the offendor should have been drawn and hanged, but at the great instance of the Chancellour and Treasurer he was onely abjured the Realm for ever.

The said King Edward the 1. presented his Clerk to a Benefice within the Province of York, who was refused by the Archbishop, for that the Pope by way of Provision had conferred it on another. The King thereupon brought a Quare non admisit. The Archbishop pleaded that the Bi­shop of Rome had long time before provided to the said Church, as one having supreme Authority in that case, and that he durst not nor had power to put him out, which was by the Pope's Bull in possession. For which his high Con­tempt against the King, his Crown and Dignity, in refusing to execute his Sovereign's Commandment, fearing to doe it against the Pope's Provision, by judgement of the Common Law the Lands of his whole Bishoprick were seized into the King's hands, and lost during his life. Note. Which Judge­ment was before any Statute or Act of Parliament was made in that case. And there it is said, that for the like offence the Archbishop of Canterbury had been in worse case by the judgement of the Sages of the Law, then to be punished for a Contempt, if the King had not extended grace and favour to him. The Statute of Bigamie, [...] 4 E. 1. Observe how the King by advice of his Council (that is, by authori­ty of Parlia­ment) expoun­ded how the said Council should be un­derstood, and in what sense it should be received and allowed here.

Concerning men twice married, (called Bigamy) whom the Bishop of Rome by a Constitution made at the Council of Lions hath excluded from all priviledge of Clergy, where­upon certain Prelates (when such persons have been at­tainted for Felons) have prayed for to have them delivered as Clerks which were made Bigamy before the same Con­stitution; [Page 52] It is agreed and declared before the King and his Council, that the same Constitution shall be understood in this wise, That whether they were Bigamy before the same Constitution or after, they shall not from henceforth be delivered to the Prelates, but Justice shall be executed upon them as upon other Lay people.

In an Act made at a Parliament holden at Carlile in the 25. year of the said King Ed. the First, Statutum de anno 25 E. 1. Carlisle. Vide 20 E. 3. tit. Essoin 24. it is declared, That the Holy Church of England was founded in the state of Prela­cy within this Realm of England by the King and his Pro­genitors, &c. for them to inform the people in the Law of God, and to keep Hospitality, give Alms, and doe other works of Charity, &c. And the said Kings in times past were wont to have the Advice and Counsel, for the safe­guard of the Realm, when they had need, of such Prelates The and Clerks so advanced. Nota: The first attempt was to usurp upon such Ec­clesiasticall things as per­tained to the Clergy of England, who at that time stood in great awe of the Church of Rome. The Bishop of Rome, usurping the Seigniories of such Benefices, did give and grant the same Benefices to Aliens which did never dwell in Eng­land, and to Cardinals which might not dwell here, &c. in adnullation of the state of the Holy Church of England, disherison of the King, Earls, Barons and other Nobles of the Realm, and in offence and destruction of the Laws and Rites of this Realm, and against the good disposition and will of the first Founders. It was enacted by the King, by assent of all the Lords and Comminalty in full Parliament, That the said Oppressions, Grievances and Dammages in this Realm from thenceforth should not be suffered, as more at large appeareth by that Act.

In the Reign of King Edward the Second.

The Statute of 9 E. 2. Ar­tic. Cleri cap. 16. See the Ordi­nance of Cir­cumspectè agatis an. ALbeit by the Ordinance of Circumspectè agatis, made in the 13. year of Edw. 1. and by general allowance and usage, the Ecclesiasticall Court held plea of Tithes, Obventions, Oblations, Mortuaries, Redemptions of pe­nance, Laying of violent hands upon a Clerk, Defamations, &c. yet did not the Clergy think themselves, assured nor [Page 53] quiet from Prohibitions purchased by Subjects, 13 E. 1. to this effect. By this Sta­tute of 9 Ed. 2. and the Statutes of 15 E. 3. cap. 6. 31 E. 3. cap. 11. and by o­ther Statutes heretofore mentioned, the Juris­diction of the Ecclesiasti­call Court is allowed and warran­ted by consent of Parliament in all cases wherein they now have Jurisdiction, so as these Laws may be justly called the King's Ecclesiasti­call Laws, or the Ecclesia­sticall Laws of England. untill that King Edw. the 2. by his Letters Patents under the great Seal, in and by consent of Parliament, upon the Petitions of the Clergy, had granted unto them to have Jurisdiction in those cases. The King in a Parliament holden in the 9. year of his Reign, after particular Answers made to their Petitions concerning the matters abovesaid, doth grant and give his Royall Assent in these words.

‘We desiring as much as of right we may to provide for the state of the Church of England, and the tranquillity and quiet of the Prelates of the said Clergy, to the honour of God, and the amendment of the state of the said Church, and of the Prelates and Clergy, ratifying and approving all and singular the said Answers which appear in the said Act, and all and singular things in the said Answers contained, We do for us and our Heirs, grant and command that the same be inviolably kept for ever: Willing and granting for us and our Heirs, That the said Prelates and Clergy, and their Successors for ever, do ex­ercise Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction in the premisses accor­ding to the tenour of the said Answer.’

In the Reign of King Edward the Third.

AN Excommunication by the Archbishop, albeit it be disannulled by the Pope or his Legates, 16 E. 3. Tit, Excom. 4. is to be al­lowed; neither ought the Judges to give any allowance of any such Sentence of the Pope or his Legate. In the Reign of E. 3.

It is often resolved that all the Bishopricks within Eng­land were founded by the King's Progenitors, and there­fore the Advowsons of them all belong to the King, and at the first they were donative. And that if an Incumbent of any Church with Cure die, if the Patron present not with­in 6 months, the Bishop of that Diocese ought to collate, to the end the Cure may not be destitute of a Pastor: If he be negligent by the space of 6 months, the Metropolitan of that Diocese shall confer one to that Church: And if he also [Page 54] leave the Church destitute by the space of 6 months, then the Common Law giveth to the King, as to the Supreme within his own Kingdome, and not to the Bishop of Rome, power to provide a competent Pastor for that Church.

17 E. 3.23. The King may not onely exempt any Ecclesiasticall per­son from the Jurisdiction of the Ordinary, but may grant unto him Episcopal Jurisdiction. As thus it appeareth there the King had done of ancient time to the Archdeacon of Richmond.

20 E. 3. Ex­com. 9. 16 E. 3. tit. Bre. 660. 21 E. 3.60. 6 H. 7.14. Fit. Na. Br. 20 E. 3. Tit. Excom. 6. 21 E. 3. fol. 40. All Religious or Ecclesiasticall Houses whereof the King was Founder are by the King exempt from ordinary Juris­diction, and onely visitable and corrigible by the King's Ecclesiasticall Commission.

The Abbot of Bury in Suffolk was exempted fron Epi­scopall Jurisdiction by the King's Charter.

The King presented to a Benefice, and his Presentee was disturbed by one that had obtained Bulls from Rome; for which offence he was condemned to perpetuall impri­sonment, &c.

22 E. 3. lib. Ass. pl. 75. Tithes arising in places out of any Parish the King shall have, for that he, having the Supreme Ecclesiasticall Ju­risdiction, is bound to provide a sufficient Pastor that shall have the Cure of souls of that place which is not within any Parish. And by the Common Laws of England it is evident that no man, unlesse he be Ecclesiasticall, or have Ecclesi­asticall Jurisdiction, can have inheritance of Tithes.

27 E. 3. fol. 84. Fit. Na. Br. fol. 34. The King shall present to his free Chappels (in default of the Dean) by Lapse in respect of his Supreme Ecclesiasti­call Jurisdiction. And Fitzherbert saith, that the King in that case doth present by Lapse as Ordinarie.

30. E. 3. lib. Ass. pl. 19. 12 H. 4.16. 14 H. 4.14. 8 H. 6. fol. 3. 35 H. 6.42. 28 H. 6.1. 7 E. 4.14. 12 E. 4.16. An Excommunication under the Pope's Bull is of no force to disable any man within England: And the Judges said, that he that pleadeth such Bulls, though they concern the Excommunication of a Subject, were in a hard case, if the King would extend his justice against him. If Excommuni­cation, being, the extreme and final end of any Suit in the Court at Rome, be not to be allowed within England, it [Page 55] consequently followeth, Fit. Na. Br. fol. 64. F. Vide 9. E. 4. fol. 3. Hereaf­ter fol. 11. It ought to be determined in the [...]cclesia­sticall Courts in England. that by the ancient Common Laws of England, no Suit for any Cause, though it be spiritual, rising within this Realm, ought to be determined in the Court of Rome, Quia frustrà expectatur eventus, cujus effectus nullus sequitur: And that the Bishops of England are the immediate Officers and Ministers to the King's Courts.

In an Attachment upon a Prohibition, the Defendant pleaded the Pope's Bull of Excommunication of the Plain­tif. The Judges demanded of the Defendant, 31 E. 3. Tit. Excom. 6. if he had not the Certificate of some Bishop within the Realm testi­fying this Excommunication. To whom the Counsell of the Defendant answered, that he had not, neither was it as they supposed necessarie; for that the Bulls of the Pope under Lead were notorious enough. But it was adjudged that they were not sufficiet, for that the Court ought not to ave regard to any Excommunication out of he Realm: And therefore by the rule of the Court the Plaintif was not thereby disabled. 33 E. 3. tit. [...]yde de Roy 103.38. Ass. pl. 20.

Where a Prior is the King's debtor, and ought to have Tithes of another Spiritual person, he may chuse either to sue for subtraction of his Tithes in the Ecclesiastical Court, or in the Exchequer, and yet the persons and matter also were Ecclesiastical. For seeing the matter by a mean concer­neth the King, he may sue for them in the Exchequer as well as in the Ecclesiastical Court, and there shall the right of Tithes be determined. And Fitzherbert in his Na­bre. fol. 30. holdeth, that before the Statute of 18 E. 3. cap. 7. right of Tithes were determinable at the Temporal Courts at the election of the party; and by that Statute assigned to be determined in the Ecclesiastical Court, and the Temporal Court excluded thereof. And the Courts of divers Mannors of the King's, See the Sta­tute of 15 E. 3. cap. 6. 31 E. 3. cap. 11. and of other Lords, in ancient times had the Probates of last Wills and Testaments. And it appeareth by 11 H. 7. fol. 12. that Pro­bate of Testaments did not appertain to the Ecclesiasticall Court, but that of late time they were determinable there. So as of such Causes, and in such manner as the Kings of [Page 56] the Realm by general consent and allowance have as­signed to their Ecclesiasticall Courts, they have Jurisdiction by force of such allowance.

38 Lib. Ass. pl. 22. The King did by his Charter translate Canons Secular into Regular and Religious persons, which he did by his Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction, and could not doe it unlesse he had Jurisdiction Ecclesiasticall.

The Abbot of Waltham died in the 45. year of E. 3. and one Nicholas Morris was elected Abbot, 46 E. 3. Tit. Premun. 6. who, for that the Abbey was exempt from ordinary Jurisdiction, sent to Rome to be confirmed by the Pope: And because the Pope by his Con­stitutions had reserved all such Collations to himself, he did recite by his Bull, that he, having no regard to the E­lection of the said Nicholas, gave to him the said Abbey, and the Spiritualties and Temporalties belonging to the same, of his spirituall grace, and at the request (as he feig­ned) of the King of England. This Bull was read and considered of in Councill, that is, before all the Judges of England: and it was resolved by them all, that this Bull was against the Laws of England, and that the Abbot for obtaining the same was fallen into the King's mercy: whereupon all his possessions were seised into the King's hands, as more at large by the said Case appeareth.

49 E. 3. Lib. Ass. pl. 8. Where the Abbot of Westminster had a Prior and Convent who were Regular and mort in law, yet the King by his Charter did divide that Corporation, and made the Prior and Convent a distinct and capable Body to sue and be sued by themselves.

Statut. de 25 E. 3. de Provisoribus.At a Parliament holden in the 25. year of King Edward the Third, it was enacted by consent of the whole Parlia­ment, That as well they that obtained Provisions from Rome, as they that put them in execution, should be out of the King's protection; and that a man might doe with them as with the enemies of the King; And he that offen­deth against such Provisors in body, goods, or other pos­sessions, should be excused against all people, and should never be impeached or grieved for the same. By which Law every man might lawfully kill such an Offendor, as a com­mon [Page 57] enemy against the King and his Countrey, so hainous were such offences then holden.

Afterwards, Statut. de 25 E. 3. in the same 25. year of King Edward the Third, it was in open Parliament by the grievous com­plaints of all the Commons of this Realm shewed, that the Grievances and Mischiefs aforesaid did daily abound, to the great dammage and destruction of all this Realm, more then ever before, viz. That of late the Bishop of Rome, by procurement of Clerks and otherwise, had reserved and did daily reserve to his Collation, generally and specially, as well Archbishopricks, Abbies and Priories, as all other Dignities and other Benefices of England, which were of the Advowrie of people of Holy Church, and gave the same as well to Aliens as to Natives, and did take of all such Benefi­ces the First-fruits, and many other Profits; and a great part of the Treasure of the Realm was carried away and dispen­ded out of the Realm by the purchasors of such graces: and also by such privy Reservations, many Clerks, advanced in the Realm by their true Patrons, which peaceably had holden their Advancements by long time, were suddenly put out. Whereupon the said Commons did pray their said Sovereign Lord the King, Note. that fithence the right of the Crown of Eng­land and the Law of the said Realm was such, that upon the mischiefs and dammages which happened to his Realm, he ought and was bound of the accord of his said people thereof to provide remedie and law, for the avoiding the mischiefs and dammage which thereof came, That it might please him thereupon to ordain remedy. The said King Ed. the 3. seeing the mischiefs and dammage before named, and having regard to the Statute made in the time of his Grand­father King Ed. 1. and to the causes contained in the same, which Statute holdeth always his force, Note. and was never de­feated nor adnulled in any point; and forasmuch as he was bound by his Oath to see the same to be kept as a Law of this Realm, though that by sufferance and negligence it had been fithence attempted to the contrary; also having re­gard to the grievous complaints made to him by his people in divers his Parliaments holden heretofore, willing to ordain remedy for the great dammage and mischiefs which [Page 58] had happened, and daily did happen, to the Church of England by the said cause; by the assent of all the Great men and the Commonalty of the said Realm, to the honour of God, and profit of the said Church of England, and of all his Realm, did order and establish, That the free Election of Archbishops, Vide 10 E. 3. fol. 1. & 2. Bishops, and all other Dignities and Bene­fices electory in England, should hold from thenceforth in the manner as they were granted by the King's Progeni­tors, and founded by the Ancestors of other Lords: And that all Prelates, and other people of Holy Church, which had Advowsons of any Benefices of the King's gift, or of any of his Progenitors, or of other Lords and Donors, to doe Divine Service and other charges thereto pertaining, should have their Collations and Presentments freely, in the man­ner as they were infeoffed by their Donors: And in case that Reservation, Collation or Provision be made by the Court of Rome of any Archbishoprick, Bishoprick, Dignity, or other Benefice, in disturbance of the Elections, Collations or Presentations afore named, That at the time of the A­voidance, that such Reservations, Collations and Provisi­ons ought to take effect, the said King Edward the Third and his Heirs should have and enjoy the same Collations to the Archbishopricks and other Dignities elective, which be of his Avowry, as his Progenitors did before that free Election was granted, fithence that the Elections were first granted by the King's Progenitors upon a certain form and condition, as to demand licence of the King to chuse, and after the Election to have his Royall Assent, and not in other manner: which conditions not kept, the King ought by reason to resort to the first nature, as by the said Act more at large appeareth.

Statutum de 27 E. 3. In the 27. year of the Reign of the same King it was grievously complained to the King in a Parliament then holden, by the Great men and Commons of the Realm, how that divers of the people were and had been drawn out of the Realm to answer to things whereof the conusance per­tained to the King's Court, and also that the Judgments given in the same Court were impeached in other Courts, [Page 59] in prejudice and disherison of the King and of his Crown, and of all the people of his said Realm, and to the undoing and destruction of the Common Law of the same Realm at all times used. Whereupon good deliberation being had with the Great men and others of his said Council, it was assented and accorded by the King and the Great men and Commons aforesaid, That all the people of the King's alle­geance, of what condition that they be, which should draw any out of the Realm, for plea whereof the conusance per­tained to the King's Court, or for things whereof Judg­ments were given in the King's Court, or which did sue in any other Court, to defeat or impeach the Judgments given in the King's Courts, should incur the danger of Premunire, as by the said Act appeareth.

To nourish love, Statut. de 28 E. 3. cap. 1. & 2. peace and concord between Holy Church and the Realm, and to appease and cease the great hurt and perils and importable losses and grievances that had been done and happened in times past, and that should happen hereafter, if the thing from thenceforth be suffered to pass, because of personal Citations, and other that be passed before this time, and commonly did passe from day to day out of the Court of Rome, by feigned and false Sugge­stions and Propositions against all manner of persons of the Realm, upon Causes whose cognisance and final discussing pertained unto the King and his Royal Court; and also of Impetrations and Provisions of Benefices and Offices of Holy Church pertaining to the gift, presentation, donation and disposition of the King, and other Lay Patrons of this Realm, as of Churches, Chappels, and other Benefices appropriated to Cathedrall Churches, Abbies, Priories, Chauntries, Hos­pitalls, and other poor Houses, and of other Dignities, Offices and Benefices occupied in times past, and presented by divers and notable persons of the said Realm: for which causes, and dispensing whereof, the good ancient L [...]ws, Usages, Customes and Franchises of the said Realm had been and were greatly appaired, blemished and confounded, the Crown of their Sovereign Lord the King minished, and his Person falsely defamed, his Treasury and Riches of the [Page 60] Realm carried away, the inhabitants and subjects of the Realm impoverished and troubled, the Benefices of Holy Church wasted and destroyed, Divine Service, Hospitali­ties, Alms-deeds and works of charity withdrawn and set apart, the Commons and Subjects of the Realm in body and goods consumed: The King at his Parliament holden at Westminster in the Vtas of S. Hillary, Statut. de 38 E. 3. ca 3. the 38. year of his Reign, having regard to the quietness of his people, which he chiefly desired to sustain in tranquillity and peace, to go­vern according to the Laws, Usages and Franchises of his Land, as he was bound by his Oath made at his Coronation, following the ways of his Progenitors, which for their time made certain good Ordinances and Provisions against the said Grievances and Perils; which Ordinances and Pro­visions, and all the other made in his time, and especially in the 25. and 27. years of his Reign, the King by the as­sent and expresse will and concord of the Dukes, Earls, Barons, and the Commons of this Realm, and of all other whom these things touched, by good and meet deliberati­on and advisement, did approve, accept, and confirm, as by the said Act appeareth.

But those which should execute the said good Laws a­gainst such capitall Offendors were cursed, reproved and defamed, by such as maintained the usurped Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome: Against which an especial Act of Parliament was made by the King and his whole Realm, prohibiting thereby such Defamations and Re­proofs.

In the Reign of King Richard the Second.

12 R. 2. tit. Jurisdiction 18.AGainst an Incumbent of a Church in England another sueth a Provision in the Court of Rome, and there pur­sueth untill he recovereth the Church against the Incum­bent, and after brought an Action of Account against him, as receiver of divers sums of money, (which in troth were the Oblations and Offerings which the Incumbent had re­ceived.) [Page 61] And the whole Court was of opinion against the Plaintif, and thereupon he became non-suit.

It is declared by that Parliament, Statutum de 16 R. 2. cap. 5. that the Crown of Eng­land hath been so free at all times, that it hath been in sub­jection to no Realm, but immediately subject to God, and none other; Note. and that the same ought not in any thing touching the Regalty of the same Crown be submitted to the Bishop of Rome, nor the Laws and Statutes of this Realm by him frustrated or defeated at his will, to the per­petuall destruction of the King, his Sovereignty, Crown and Regalty, and of all his Realm. And the Commons in that Parliament affirmed, that the things attempted by the Bishop of Rome be clearly against the King's Crown and his Regalty, used and approved in the time of all his Progeni­tors. Wherefore they and all the liege Commons of the same Realm would stand with the King and his said Crown, and his Regalty, in the cases aforesaid, and in all other ca­ses attempted against him, his Crown and his Regalty, in all points to live and to die. And moreover they did pray the King, and him required by way of justice, that he would examine all the Lords in the Parliament, as well Spiritual as Temporal, severally, and all the States of the Parliament, how they thought of the cases aforesaid, which were so openly against the King's Crown, and in derogati­on of his Regalty, and how they would stand in the same cases with the King, in upholding the Rights of the said Crown and Regalty. Whereupon the Lords Temporal so demanded did answer every one by himself, That the cases aforesaid were clearly in derogation of the King's Crown and of his Regalty, as it was well known, and had been of long time known; and that they would stand with the same Crown and Regalty in those cases especially, and in all other cases which should be attempted against the said Crown and Regalty, in all points, with all their power. And moreover then was demanded of the Lords Spiritual there being, and the Procurators of others being absent, their advice and will in all those cases: which Lords, that is to say, the Archbishops, Bishops and other Prelates, being [Page 62] in the Parliament severally examined, making protestati­ons that it was not their mind to deny or affirm that the Bishop of Rome might not excommunicate Bishops, nor that he might make Translation of Prelates after the Law of Holy Church, answered and said, That if any Executions or Processes in the King's Court, as before, were made by any, and censures of Excommunications be made against any Bishop of England, or any other of the King's liege people, for that they had made execution of such commandments; and that if any executions of such Translations be made of any Prelats of the same Realm, which Prelats were very profitable and necessary to the King and to his said Realm; or that his sage men of his Council without his assent and against his will be withdrawn and e­loigned out of the Realm, so that the substance and Treasury of the Realm might be destroyed; that the same was against the King and his Crown, as it was contained in the Petition before named. And likewise the same Procurators, every one by himself examined upon the said matters, did an­swer and say in the name and for their Lords as the said Bi­shops had said and answered: And that the said Lords Spi­ritual would and ought to stand with the King in these ca­ses, lawfully in maintaining of his Crown, and in all other cases touching his Crown and his Regalty, as they were bound by their Allegeance. Whereupon the King by the assent aforesaid, and at the prayer of his said Commons, did ordain and establish, That if any purchase or pursue, or cause to be purchased or pursued, in the Court of Rome or elsewhere, any such Translations, Processes and Sentences of Excommunication, Bulls, Instruments, or any other things which touched the King their Lord, against him, his Crown and his Regalty, or his Realm, as is aforesaid, and they which bring them within the Realm, or them receive, or make thereof notification, or any other execution, within the same Realm or without, that they, their notorious procura­tors, maintainers, fautors and counsellors, should be put out of the King's protection, and their lands and tenements, goods and chattels forfeit to the King, and they be attached by their [Page 63] bodies, if they may be found, and brought before the King and his Council, there to answer to the cases afore­said; or that processe be made against them by Premunire facias, as it is ordained in other Statutes of Provisors, and others which do sue in any other Court in derogation of the Regalty of the King, as by the said Act also appea­reth.

In the Reign of King Henry the Fourth.

IT is resolved that the Pope's Collector, 1 H. 4. fol. 9. though he have the Pope's Bulls for that purpose, hath no Jurisdiction within this Realm: and there the Archbishops and Bi­shops, &c. of this Realm are called the King's Spirituall Judges.

By the ancient Laws Ecclesiasticall of this Realm, Fitz. Na. [...]r. 269. no man could be convicted of Heresie, being high Treason a­gainst the Almighty, but by the Archbishop and all the Cler­gy of that Province, and after abjured thereupon, and after that newly convicted and condemned by the Clergy of that Province, in their general Council of Convocation: This had a re­semblance to an Attainder of Treason, wherein there must be first an Inditement by one Jury, and a Convi­ction by ano­ther. But the Statute 2 H. 4. cap. 15. doth give the Bishop in his Diocese power to condemn an Heretick. And before that Statute he could not be committed to the Secular power to be burnt, untill he had once abjured, and was again relapsed to that or some other Heresie. Whereby it appeareth that the King by consent of Parliament directed the proceedings in the Ecclesiasticall Court in case of Heresie, and other matters more spirituall.

The Pope cannot alter the Laws of England. 11 H. 4.37.

The Judges say, 11 H. 4. fol. 69.76. that the Statutes which restrain the Pope's Provisions to the Benefices of the advowsons of Spi­ritual men were made, for that the Spiritualty durst not in their just cause say against the Pope's Provisions: So as those Statutes were made but in affirmance of the Common Laws. 14 H. 4. fol. 14. Vide 30 E. 3. lib. Ass.

Excommunication made by the Pope is of no fore in Eng­land, [Page 64] and the same being certified by the Pope into any Court in England ought not to be allowed; pl. 19. before. Vide 13 E. 3. Certificate 6. Vide 20 H. 6.1. 37 H. 6.42. 7 E. 4.14. Fitz. Na. Br. 64. F. neither is any Certificate of any Excommunication available in law, but what is made by some Bishop of England: for the Bishops are by the Common Laws the immediate Officers and Mi­nisters of justice to the King's Courts in Causes Ecclesiasti­call.

14 H. 4.14. If any Bishop do excommunicate any person for a Cause that belongeth not unto him, the King may write unto the Bishop, and command him to assoil and absolve the par­ty.

Statut. de 2 H. 4. cap. 3. If any person of Religion obtain of the Bishop of Rome to be exempt from obedience Regular or ordinary, he is in case of Premunire, which is an offence, as hath been said, contra Regem, Coronam & Dignitatem suas.

Statut. de 6 H. 4 cap. 1. The Commons did grievously complain to the King, at the Parliament holden in the 6. year of H. 4. of the horrible mischiefs and damnable customes which then were intro­duct of new in the Court of Rome, that no person, Abbot or other, should have provision of any Archbishoprick or Bi­shoprick which should be void, till he had compounded with the Pope's Chamber, to pay great and excessive sums of money, as well for the First-fruits of the same Archbisho­prick or Bishoprick, as for the other lesse Services in the same Court; and that the same sums, or the greater part there­of, be paid before hand; which sums passed the treble or the double at the least of that that was accustomed of old time to be paid in the said Chamber and otherwise by the occasions of such Provisions: whereby a great part of the Treasury of this Realm had been brought and carried to the said Court, and also should be in time to come, to the great impoverishing of the Archbishops and Bishops within the same Realm, and elsewhere within the King's dominions, if convenient remedy were not for the same provided. The King, to the honour of God, as well to eschew the dam­mage of this Realm, as the perils of their souls which owen to be advanced to any Archbishopricks and Bishopricks within the Realm of England, and elsewhere within the [Page 65] King's dominions out of the same Realm, by the advice and assent of the Great men of his Realm in the Parliament, did ordain and establish, That they and every of them that should pay to the said Chamber or otherwise, for such Fruits and Services, greater sums of mony then had been accu­stomed to be paid in old time past, they and every of them should incur the forfeiture of as much as they may forfeit towards the King, as by the said Act appeareth.

No person, Religious or Secular, Statut. de 7 H. 4., cap. 6. of what estate or condi­tion that he were, by colour of any Bulls containing privi­ledges to be discharged of Tithes pertaining to Parish­churches, Prebends, Hospitals, Vicarages, purchased before the first year of King Richard the 2. or after, and not exe­cuted, should put in execution any such Bulls so purchased, or any such Balls to be purchased in time to come, upon the pain of a Premunire, as by the said Act appeareth.

In the Reign of King Henry the Fifth.

IN an Act of Parliament made in the third year of King H. 5. it is declared, Statut. de 3 H. 5 cap. 4. That whereas in the time of King H. 4. Father to the said King, in the 7. year of his Reign, to es­chew many discords and debates, and divers other mis­chiefs, which were likely to arise and happen because of ma­ny Provisions then made, or to be made, by the Pope, and also of Licence thereupon granted by the said late King, a­mongst other things, it was ordained and established, That no such Licence or Pardon so granted before the same Ordi­nance, or afterwards to be granted, should be available to any Benefice full of any Incumbent at the day of the date of such Licence or Pardon granted; Nevertheless divers per­sons, having Provisions of the Pope of divers Benefices in England and elsewhere, and Licences Royall to execute the same Provisions, have, by colour of the same Provisions, Li­cences and Acceptations of the said Benefices, subtilly exclu­ded divers persons of their Benefices, in which they had been Incumbents by a long season of the collation of the very Pa­trons [Page 66] Spiritual, to them duely made to their intent, to the final destruction and enervation of the states of the same In­cumbents: The King, willing to void such mischiefs, hath ordained and established, That all the Incumbents of every Benefice of Holy Church, of the Patronage, Collation or Pre­sentation of Spirituall Patrons, might quietly and peacea­bly enjoy their said Benefices, without being inquieted, mo­lested, or any ways grieved, by any colour of such Provisions, Licences abd Acceptations; And that all the Licences and Pardons upon and by such Provisions made in any manner should be void, and of no value; And if any feel himself grieved, molested, or inquieted, in any wise from thence­forth by any, by colour of such Provisions, Licences, Par­dons, or Acceptations, that the same molestors, grievors or inquietors, and every of them, have and incurre the pains and punishments contained in the Statutes of Pro­visors before that time made, as by the said Act appea­reth.

Stat. de 2 H. 5. cap. 7. Lol­lardry à lolio: For as Cockle is the destru­ction of the Corn, so is He­resie the de­struction of true Religion. A Statute was made for extirpation of Heresie and Lol­lardry, whereby full power and authority was given to the Justices of Peace, and Justices of Assise, to inquire of those that hold Errours, Heresies or Lollardry, and of their main­tainers, Infelix lolium & steriles dominantur avenae. Virgilius. &c. And that the She­riffe or other Officer, Et careant loliis oculos vitiantibus agri. Ovidius. &c. may ar­rest and apprehend them.

Statutum de 2 H. 5. cap. 1.The King, by consent of Parliament, giveth power to Ordinaries to enquire of the foundation, erection and go­vernance of Hospitals, other then such as be of the King's foundation, and thereupon to make correction and refor­mation according to the Ecclesiasticall Law.

In the Reign of King Henry the Sixth.

8 H. 6. fol. 3.EXcommunication made and certified by the Pope is of no force to disable any man within England: And this is by the ancient Common Laws, before any Statute was made concerning forrein Jurisdiction.

[Page 67]The King onely may grant or licence to found a Spiritu­al Incorporation. 9 H. 6. fol. 16. 1 H. 7. fol. 10.

In the Reign of King Henry the 6. the Pope writ Letters in derogation of the King and his Regalty, and the Church­men durst not speak against them: But Humfrey Duke of Gloucester, for their safe keeping, put them into the fire.

In the Reign of King Edward the Fourth.

IN the Reign of King Edward the Fourth the Pope gran­ted to the Prior of Saint Johns to have Sanctuary with­in his Priory; 1 H. 7. fol. 20. and this was pleaded and claimed by the Pri­or: But it was resolved by the Judges, that the Pope had no power to grant any Sanctuary within this Realm, and therefore by judgement of the Law the same was disallow­ed.

There it appeareth, 9 E. 4.3. Fitz. Na. Br. fol. 44. H. a­greeth here­with. that the opinion of the King's Bench had been oftentimes, that if one Spiritual person sue another Spiritual man in the Court of Rome for a matter spiritual, where he might have remedy before his Ordinary, that is the Bishop of that Diocese within the Realm, quia trahit ip­sum in placitum extra regnum, incurreth the danger of a Premunire, a hainous offence it being, Note. contra legiantiae suae de­bitum, in contemptum Domini Regis, & contra Coronam & digni­tatem suas. By which it appeareth how grievous an offence it was against the King, his Crown and Dignity, if any sub­ject, although both the persons and cause were Spirituall, did seek for justice out of the Realm, as though either there wanted Jurisdiction, or Justice was not executed in the Ec­clesiastical Courts within the same; which (as it hath been said) was an high offence, contra Regem, Coronam & digni­tatem suas.

In the King's Courts of Record, 9 E. 4.28. where Felonies are deter­mined, the Bishop or his Deputy ought to give his atten­dance, to the end that if any that is indicted and arraigned for Felony do demand the benefit of his Clergy, that the Or­dinary may inform the Court of his sufficiency or insuffici­ency, [Page 72] that is, whether he can reade as a Clerk or not; whereof notwithstanding the Ordinary is not to judge, but is a minister to the King's Court; and the Judges of that Court are to judge of the sufficiency or insufficiency of the party, whatsoever the Ordinary doth inform them, and upon due examination of the party, may give judgement against the Ordinarie's information: for the King's Judges are Jud­ges of the cause.

12 E. 4. fo. 16.The Pope's Excommunication is of no force within the Realm of England.

In the Reign of King Edward the Fourth, a Legate from the Pope came to Calice, to have come into England; but the King and his Council would not suffer him to come within England, until he had taken an oath that he should attempt nothing against the King or his Crown: and so the like was done in his Reign to another of the Pope's Legates. And this is so reported in 1 Henrici 7. fol. 10.

In the Reign of King Richard the Third.

IT is resolved by the Judges, 2 R. 3. fo. 22. That a Judgement or Ex­communication in the Court of Rome should not bind or prejudice any man within England at the Common Law.

In the Reign of King Henry the Seventh.

1 H. 7.10.IN the Reign of King Henry the 7. the Pope had excom­municated all such persons whatsoever as had bought Al­lum of the Florentines: And it was resolved by all the Jud­ges of England, that the Pope's Excommunication ought not to be obeyed or to be put in execution within the Realm of England.

Statut. de 1 H. 7. cap. 4.In a Parliament holden in the first year of King Henry the Seventh, for the more sure and likely reformation of Priests, Clerks and Religious men, culpable or by their demerits [Page 69] openly noised of incontinent living in their bodies, contrary to their Order, it was enacted, ordained and established, by the advice and assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and the Commons in the said Parliament assembled, and by authority of the same, That it be lawful to all Archbishops and Bishops, and other Ordinaries, having Episcopal Juris­diction, to punish and chastise Priests, Clerks and Religious men, being within the bounds of their Jurisdiction, as shall be convicted afore them by examination, and lawfull proof requisite by the law of the Church, of Advoutrie, Fornica­tion, Incest, or any other fleshly Incontinency, by commit­ting them to ward and prison, there to abide for such time as shall be thought to their discretions convenient for the quality and quantity of their trespass: And that none of the said Archbishops, Bishops or Ordinaries aforesaid, be thereof chargeable, of, to, or upon any action of false or wrongfull imprisonment, but that they be utterly there­of discharged in any of the cases aforesaid, by virtue of this Act. 10 H. 7.18.

Rex est persona mixta, because he hath both Ecclesiastical and Temporal Jurisdiction.

By the Ecclesiastical Laws allowed within this Realm, 11 H. 7.12. a Priest cannot have two Benefices, nor can a Bastard be a Priest; but the King may, by his Ecclesiasticall power and Jurisdiction, dispense with both of these, because they be mala prohibita, and not mala per se.

In the Reign of King Henry the Eighth. Statut. de 24 H. 8. cap. 12. This Statute is declarato­rie of the an­cient laws of England, as manifestly ap­peareth by that which hath been said.

BY an Act of Parliament made in the 24. year of King Henry the 8. that is to say, by the King, 24 Bishops, 29 Abbots and Priors, for so many were then Lords of Parliament, by all the Lords Temporal and the Commons in that Parliament assembled, it is declared, That where by divers sundry old authentick Histories and Chronicles it was manifestly declared and expressed, that this Realm of England is an Empire, and so hath been accepted in the [Page 70] world, See Br. A­bridgment, tit. Present­ment al Es­glise pl. 12. The Pope was permitted to doe certain things with­in this realm by usurpation, and not of right, until the reign of H. 8. governed by one Supreme Head and King, having the Dignity and Royal estate of the Imperial Crown of the same, unto whom a Body politick compact of all sorts and degrees of people, divided in terms and by names of Spi­ritualty and Temporalty, been bound, and ought to bear, next to God, a natural and humble obedience; he being also institute and furnished by the goodness and furtherance of Almighty God with plenary, whole and entire Power, Preheminence, Authority, Prerogative and Jurisdiction, to render and yield Justice and final determination to all manner of folk resiants or subjects within this his Realm, in all causes, matters, debates and contentions happening to occur, insurge or begin within the limits thereof, without restraint or provocation to any forrein Princes or Potentates of the world: The Body Spiritual whereof having power, when any cause of the Law Divine happened to come in question, or of Spiritual learning, that it was declared, in­terpreted and shewed by that part of the said Body politick, called the Spiritualty, then being usually called the Eng­lish Church, which alwaies had been reputed and also found of that sort, that both for knowledge, integrity, and suf­ficiency of number, it had been always thought, and was also at that hour sufficient and meet of it self, without the intermeddling of any exteriour person or persons, to declare and determine all such doubts, and to administer all such offices and duties as to the rank spiritual did appertain. For the due administration whereof, and to keep them from corruption and sinister affection, the King's most noble Pro­genitors, and the antecessors of the Nobles of this Realm, did sufficiently indow the said Church both with honour and possessions. And the Laws Temporal, for trial of pro­perty of lands and goods, and for the conservation of the people of this Realm in unity and peace, without ravine or spoil was administred, adjudged and executed by sundry Judges and Ministers of the other part of the said Body po­litick, called the Temporaltie. And both their Authori­ties and Jurisdictions did conjoyn together in the due ad­ministration of Justice, the one to help the other. And [Page 71] whereas the King, his most noble Progenitors, and the Nobility and Commons of the said Realm, at divers and sundry Parliaments, as well in the time King Edward the 1. Edward the 3. Richard the 2. Henry the 4. and other noble Kings of this Realm, made sundry Ordinances, Laws, Statutes and Provisions, for the entire and sure conserva­tion of the Prerogatives, Liberties and Preheminences of the said Imperial Crown of this Realm, and of the Juris­diction Spiritual and Temporal of the same, to keep it from the annoiance as well of the See of Rome, as from the au­thority of other forrein Potentates, attempting the diminu­tion or violation thereof, as often and from time to time as any such annoiance or attempt might be known or espied: And notwithstanding the said good Statutes and Ordinan­ces, made in the time of the King's most noble Progenitors, in preservation of the Authority and Prerogative of the said Imperiall Crown, as is aforesaid; yet nevertheless fithence the making of the said good Statutes and Ordinances, di­vers and sundry inconveniences and dangers, not provided for plainly by the said former Acts, Statutes and Ordinan­ces, have risen and sprung by reason of Appeals sued out of this Realm to the See of Rome, in causes Testamentary, causes of Matrimony and Divorces, right of Tithes, Oblations and Obventions, not onely to the great inquietation, vexa­tion, trouble, costs and charges of the King's Highness and many of his subjects and resiants in this his Realm, but also to the great delay and lett to the true and speedy deter­mination of the said causes, forasmuch as the parties appea­ling to the said Court of Rome most commonly did the same for delay of Justice, and forasmuch as the great distance of way was so far out of this Realm, that neither the necessa­ry proofs nor the true knowledge of the cause could be so well known, or the witnesses there so well examined, as within this Realm, so that the parties grieved by means of the said Appeals were most times without remedy: In con­sideration thereof, the King, his Nobles and Commons, considering the great enormities, dammages, long delaies and hurts, that as well to his Highness, as to his said Noble [Page 68] subjects, Commons and resiants of this his Realm, in the said causes Testamentary, causes of Matrimony and Divorces, Tithes, Oblations and Obventions, did daily ensue, did there­fore by his Royall assent, and by the assent of the Lords Spi­ritual and Temporal, and the Commons in that Parliament assembled, and by Authority of the same, enact, establish and ordain, That all causes Testamentary, causes of Matri­mony and Divorces, rights of Tithes, Oblations and Ob­ventions, the knowledge whereof by the goodness of Prin­ces of this Realm, and by the Laws and Customes of the same, appertained to the Spiritual Jurisdiction of this Realm, then already commenced, moved, depending, be­ing, happening, or hereafter coming in contention, de­bate or question within this Realm, or within any of the King's dominions, or Marches of the same, or elsewhere, whether they concern the King, his Heirs or Successors, or any other subjects or resiants within this Realm, of what degree soever they be, This also is declaratory of the ancient Law, as it appeareth both by 9 E. 4.3. Fitz. Na. B. 44. and ma­ny other cases and statutes abovesaid. should be from thenceforth heard, examined, discussed, clearly, finally and defini­tively adjudged and determined, within the King's Juris­diction and Authority, and not elsewhere, in such Courts Spiritual and Temporal of the same as the natures, condi­tions and qualities of the Cases and matters aforesaid in contention, or thereafter happening in contention, should require, without having any respect to any custome, use or sufferance in hinderance, lett or prejudice of the same, or to any other thing used or suffered to the contrary there­of, by any other manner person or persons in any manner of wise; any forrein Inhibitions, Appeals, Sentences, Sum­mons, Citations, Suspensions, Interdictions, Excommuni­cations, Restraints, Judgements, or any other Process or Impediment, of what natures, names, qualities or conditi­ons soever they be, from the See of Rome, or any other forrein Courts or Potentates of the world, or from and out of this Realm, or any other the King's dominions, or Marches of the same, to the See of Rome, or to any other for­rein Courts or Potentates, to the let tor impediment thereof, in any wise notwithstanding, as by the said Act appeareth.

[Page 73]By an Act of Parliament in 25 H. 8. it is declared by the King, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, Statut. de 25 H. 8. cap. 21. This was also declaratory of the ancient Law, as by that which hath been said appeareth. and the Commons in that Parliament assembled, That neither the King, his Heirs nor Successors, Kings of this Realm, nor any his subjects of this Realm, nor of any other his dominions, should from thenceforth sue to the said Bishop of Rome, cal­led the Pope, or to the See of Rome, or to any person or persons having or pretending any Authority by the same, for Licences, Dispensations, Impositions, Faculties, Grants, Rescripts, Delegacies, or any other Instruments or Writings, of what kind, name, nature or quality soever they be, for any cause or matter for the which any Licence, Dispensati­on, Composition, Faculty, Grant, Rescript, Delegacy, Instru­ment or other Writing, theretofore had been used and ac­customed to be had and obtained at the See of Rome, or by au­thority thereof, or of any Prelat of this Realm; nor for any manner of other Licences, Dispensations, Compositions, Fa­culties, Grants, Rescripts, Delegacies, or any other Instruments or Writings, that in cases of necessity might lawfully be granted without offending of the Holy Scriptures and Laws of God: But that from thenceforth every such Licence, Dis­pensation, Composition, Faculty, Grant, Rescript, Delegacy, Instrument, and other Writing afore named and mentioned, necessary for the King, his Heirs and Successors, and his and their people and subjects, upon the due examination of the causes and qualities of the persons procuring such Dispensa­tions, Licences, Compositions, Faculties, Grants, Rescripts, De­legacies, Instruments, or other Writings, should be granted, had and obtained from time to time within this his Realm, and other his dominions, and not elsewhere, in manner and form following, and not otherwise. That is to say, The Archbishop of Canterbury for the time being, and his Suc­cessors, should have power and authority from time to time by their discretions to give, grant and dispose by an Instru­ment under the Seal of the said Archbishop unto the King, and unto his Heirs and Successors Kings of this Realm, as well all manner of such Licences, Dispensations, Compositi­ons, Faculties, Grants, Rescripts, Delegacies, Instruments, [Page 74] and all other Writings, for causes not being contrary or re­pugnant to the Holy Scriptures and Laws of God, as there­tofore had been used and accustomed to be had and obtai­ned by the King, or any his most noble Progenitors, or any of his or their subjects, from the See of Rome, or any person or persons by authority of the same; and all other Licences, Dispensations, Faculties, Compositions, Grants, Rescripts, Delegacies, Instruments, and other Writings, in, for and upon all such causes and matters, as should be convenient and necessary to be had for the honour and surety of the King, his Heirs and Successors, and the wealth and profit of this his Realm: so that the said Archbishop, or any his Successors, in no manner wise should grant any Dispensati­on, Licence, Rescript, or any other Writing before rehear­sed, for any cause or matter repugnant to the Law of Al­mightie God, as by the said Act also appeareth. If it be de­manded what Canons, Constitutions, Ordinances and Syno­dals provincial, are▪ still in force within this Realm; I an­swer, that it is resolved and enacted by Authority of Parlia­ment, That such as have been allowed by general consent and custome within the Realm, and are not contrariant or repugnant to the Laws, Statutes and Customes of this Realm, nor are to the dammage or hurt of the King's Prero­gative royal, are still in force within this Realm, as the King's Ecclesiastical Laws of the same. Now, as consent and custome hath allowed those Canons; This appea­reth by resolu­tion of all the Judges in 7 H. 8. Lib. Keylw. fo. 181. And this was long be­fore any Act of Parlia­ment was made against forrein Juris­diction by King Henry the 8. so, no doubt, by general consent of the whole Realm any of the same may be corrected, inlarged, explained or abrogated. For example; There is a Decree that all Clerks that have received any manner of Orders, greater or smaller, should be exempt pro causis criminalibus before the Temporal Judges: This De­cree had never any force within England. First, for that it was never approved and allowed of by general consent with­in the Realm. Secondly, it was against the Laws of the Realm, as it doth appear by infinite precedents. Thirdly, it was against the Prerogative and Sovereignty of the King, that any subject within this Realm should not be subject to the Laws of this Realm.

In the Reign of Queen Elizabeth.

BY the said Act of Parliament (whereupon the principal case then in question partly dependeth) made in the first year of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, The Statute of 1 Q. Eliz. it is declared, That where in the time of the Reign of King Henry the 8. divers good Laws and Statutes were made and established, as well for the utter extinguishment and putting away of all usur­ped and forrein powers and authorities out of this Realm, and other her dominions and countries, as also for the resto­ring and uniting to the Imperial Crown of this Realm the ancient Jurisdiction, Authorities, Superiorities and Prehe­minences to the same of right belonging and appertaining by reason whereof her most humble subjects, from the 25. year of the said King Henry the 8. were continually kept in good order, and were disburthened of divers great and into­lerable charges and vexations, before that time unlawfully taken and exacted by such forrein power and authority as before that was usurped; And to the intent that all usurped and forrein power and authority, Spirituall and Temporal, might for ever be clearly extinguished, and never be used or obeyed within this Realm, or any other her dominions or countries: It was by the Authority of that Parliament en­acted, That no forrein Prince, person, Prelate, State or Po­tentate, Spiritual or Temporal, should at any time after the last day of that Session of Parliament use, enjoy or exercise any manner of Power, Jurisdiction, Superiority, Authority, Preheminence or Priviledge, Spiritual or Ecclesiastical, within this Realm, or within any other the Queen's domini­ons or countries, that then were or hereafter should be, but from thenceforth the same should be clearly abolished out of this Realm, and all other her dominions for ever, any Sta­tute, Ordinance, Customes, Constitutions, or any other mat­ter or cause whatsoever, to the contrary in any wise not­withstanding. And it was then also established and enacted by the Authority of that Parliament, That such Jurisdicti­ons, [Page 76] Priviledges, Superiorities and Preheminences Spiritual and Ecclesiastical, as by any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical pow­er or authority had heretofore been, or might lawfully be, exercised or used for the visitation of the Ecclesiastical state and persons, and for reformation, order and correction of the same, and of all manner Errours, Heresies, Schisms, Abu­ses, Offences, Contempts and Enormities, should for ever by Authority of that Parliament be united and annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm: And that the Queen, her Heirs and Successors, Kings or Queens of this Realm, should have full power and authority by virtue of that Act, by Let­ters Patents under the great Seal of England to assign, name and authorize, when and as often as the Queen, her Heirs or Successors, should think meet and convenient, and for such and so long time as should please the Queen, her Heirs or Successors, such person or persons, being natural-born Sub­jects to the Queen, her Heirs or Successors, as the said Queen, her Heirs or Successors, should think meet, to exercise, use, occupy and execute, under the said Queen, her Heirs or Successors, all manner of Jurisdictions, Priviledges and Preheminences, in any wise touching or concerning any Spi­ritual or Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, within these Realms of England and Ireland, or any other her dominions and coun­tries; and to visit, reform, redress, order, correct and amend all such Errours, Heresies, Schisms, Abuses, Offences, Con­tempts and Enormities whatsoever, which by any manner Spiritual or Ecclesiasticall power, authority or jurisdiction, could or might lawfully be reformed, ordered, redressed, corrected, restrained or amended, to the pleasure of Almigh­ty God, the encrease of vertue, and the conservation of the peace and the unity of this Realm: And that such person or persons so to be named, assigned, authorized and appoin­ted by the said Queen, her Heirs or Successors, after the said Letters Patents to him or them made and delivered as is a­foresaid, should have full power and authority, by virtue of that Act, and of the said Letters Patents, under the said Queen, her Heirs or Successors, to exercise, use and execute all the premisses, according to the tenour and effect of the [Page 77] said Letters Patents, any matter or cause to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding., as by the said Act also appea­reth.

It was adjudged in the Court of Common Pleas by Sir James Dyer, 12 Eliz. Reg. Dyer. Weston, and the whole Court, that a Dean or any other Ecclesiasticall person may resign to the Crown, as divers did to King Edward the 6. for that he had the Autho­rity of the supreme Ordinary.

From the 1. untill the 11. year of Queen Elizabeth's Reign, no person, of what perswation of Christian Religion soever, at any time refused to come to the publick Divine Service celebrated in the Church of England, being evident­ly grounded upon the Sacred and infallible Word of Al­mighty God, and established by publick Authority within this Realm. But after the Bull of Pius Quintus was pub­lished against her Majesty, in the 11. year of her Reign, con­taining (amongst other things too long to be repeated for this purpose) these words, ‘ Pius Bishop, Servant of God's servants, Psalm. 109.28. Though they curse, yet bless thou, O Lord, and let them be confounded that rise a­gainst me: but let thy ser­vant rejoyce. Which was the prayer her Majesty made when this Bull was published against her. &c, She (Queen Elizabeth, hath clean put away the Sacrifice of the Mass, Prayers, Fastings, Choice or dif­ference of meats, and Single life; She, possessing the King­dome, and by usurping the place of the Supreme Head of the Church in all England, and the chief Authority and Ju­risdiction of the same, hath again brought the said Realm into miserable destruction; Unto her all such as are the worst of the people resort, and are by her received into safe protection, &c. We make it known, that the said Elizabeth, and as many as stand on her side in the matter above named, have run into the danger of our Curse: We make it also known, that we have deprived her from that right she pretended to have in the Kingdome aforesaid, and also from all and every her Authority, Dignity and Priviledge: We charge and forbid all and every the No­bles, Subjects and people, and others aforesaid, that they be not so hardy as to obey her, or her Admonitions, Com­mandments or Laws, upon pain of the like accurse upon them: We pronounce that all whosoever by any occasion have taken their Oath unto her, are for ever discharged of [Page 78] such their Oath, and also from all Fealty and Service which was due to her by reason of her Government, &c. (’as by the said Bull more at large appeareth) After this Bull, all they that depended on the Pope obeyed the Bull, disobeyed their gracious and natural Sovereign, and upon this occasion refused to come to the Church. The publishing of this Bull by a subject against his Sovereign (as appeareth by that which hath been oftentimes said) was Treason in the highest degree by the ancient Common Laws of England. For if it were Treason to publish a Bull of Excommunicati­on within this Realm against a Subject thereof, as it was adjudged in the Reign of King Edward the 1. à fortiori it is Treason in the highest degree to publish such a Bull against the Sovereign and Monarch her self. After this Bull ma­ny Bulls of Absolution and Reconciliation to the Church of Rome were published and dispersed amongst her Majestie's subjects, to withdraw them from their natural Loyalty and Allegeance to their Sovereign; whereupon no small incon­veniences (as hereafter appeareth) followed. The Statute of 13 Eliz. And therefore at a Parliament holden in The 13. year of her Reign it was declared by the whole Body of the Realm, That divers se­ditious and very ill-disposed people, minding very seditiously and unnaturally, not onely to bring this Realm and the Im­perial Crown thereof (being in very deed of it self most free) again into the thraldome and subjection of the forrein usur­ped and unlawful Jurisdiction, Preheminence and Authori­ty, claimed by the said See of Rome, but also to estrange and alienate the minds and hearts of sundry the Queen's sub­jects from their dutiful Obedience, and to raise and stir Se­dition and Rebellion within this Realm, did then lately procure and obtain to themselves, from the said Bishop of Rome and his said See, divers Bulls and Writings, the effect whereof had been, and then was, to absolve and reconcile all those that would be contented to forsake their due Obe­dience to the Queen, and to yield and subject themselves to the said feigned, unlawful and usurped Authority; and by colour of the said Bulls and Writings, the said persons very secretly and most seditiously, in such parts of this Realm [Page 79] where the people for want of good instruction were most weak, simple and ignorant, and thereby farthest from the good understanding of their duties towards God and the Queen, did by their lewd and subtil practices and perswasi­ons so far forth work, that sundry simple and ignorant per­sons had been contented to be reconciled to the said usurped Authority of the See of Rome, and to take Absolution at the hands of the said naughty and subtil practisers: Note the fruits of the Bull. whereby did grow great disobedience and boldness in many, not one­ly to withdraw and absent themselves from all Divine Ser­vice, 1. then most godly set forth and used within this Realm, 2. but also to think themselves discharged of and from all O­bedience, Duty and Allegeance to her Majesty; 3. whereby most wicked and unnatural Rebellion did ensue, and, to the farther danger of this Realm, 4. was thereafter very like to be renewed, if the ungodly and wicked attempts in that behalf were not by severity of Laws in time restrained and bridled. For remedy and redress whereof, and to prevent the great mischiefs and inconveniences that thereby might ensue, it was enacted by the Queen, The parts of the Act. with the assent of the Lords Spi­ritual and Temporal, and the Commons in that Parliament assembled, and by the Authority of the same, That if any person or persons, 1. after the first day of July then next com­ing, should use or put in ure in any place within this Realm, or in any the Queen's dominions, any such Bull, Writing or Instrument, written or printed, of Absolution or Reconcili­ation, at any time theretofore obtained and gotten, or at any time thereafter to be obtained or gotten, from the said Bi­shop of Rome, or any his Successors, or from any other per­son or persons authorized or claiming authority by or from the said Bishop of Rome, his Predecessors or Successors, or the See of Rome; Or if any person or persons, 2. after the said first day of July, should take upon him or them, by colour of any such Bull, Writing, Instrument or Authority, to absolve or reconcile any person or persons, or to grant or promise to any person or persons within this Realm, or any other the Queen's dominions, any such Absolution or Reconciliation, by any speech, preaching, teaching, writing, or any other [Page 80] open deed; 3. Or if any other person or persons within this Realm, or any the Queen's dominions, after the said first day of July, should willingly receive and take any such Absolu­tion or Reconciliation; 4. Or else if any person or persons had obtained or gotten sithence the last day of the Parliament holden in the first year of her Reign, or after the said first day of July should obtain or get, from the said Bishop of Rome, or any his Successors, or the See of Rome, any manner of Bull, Writing or Instrument, written or printed, containing any thing, 5. matter or cause whatsoever; Or should publish, or by any waies or means put in ure, any such Bull, Writing or Instrument: That then all and every such act or acts, offence and offences, should be deemed and adjudged by the Authority of the said Act to be high Treason, and the Offen­dor and Offendors therein, their Procurors, Abettors and Counsellours to the fact, and committing of the said offence or offences, should be deemed and adjudged high Trai­tours to the Queen and the Realm; and being there­of lawfully indicted and attainted, according to the course of the Laws of this Realm, should suffer pains of death, also lose and forfeit all their Lands, Tenements, Hereditaments, Goods and Chattels, as in cases of high Treason by the Laws of this Realm ought to be lost and forfeited, as by the said Act appeareth.

And albeit many of her subjects, after the said Bull of Pius Quintus, adhering to the Pope, did renounce their former O­bedience to the Queen in respect of that Bull; yet all this time no Law was either made or attempted against them for their Recusancy, though it were grounded upon so disloyal a Cause. Now that these speechless Bulls were declared by Act of Parliament to be so dangerous, then in place of them Jesuites and Romish Priests were sent over, who in secret cor­ners whispered and infused into the hearts of many of the unlearned subjects of this Realm, that the Pope had power to excommunicate and depose Kings and Princes; that he had excommunicated the Queen, deprived her of her King­dome, and discharged all her subjects of their Oath, Duties, and Allegeance to her; and therefore they ought not to [Page 81] obey her, or any of her Commandments or Laws, under pain of the Pope's Curse. This was high Treason by the ancient Laws of England: And thereupon Campion, Sher­win, and many other Romish Priests, being apprehended, and confessing that they came into England to make a party for the Catholick cause when need should require, were in the 21. year of the said Queen's Reign, by the ancient Common Laws of England, indicted, arraigned, tried, adjudged and executed for high Treason against their natural Allegeance which they ought their liege Sovereign. But all this time there was no Act of Parliament made either against Recu­sants, or Jesuites, or Priests, her Majesty still desiring and expecting their conversion, and that by clemency and mildness they might be reclaimed to their former obedience and conformity before the said Bull. After Priests and Je­suites were punished by sentence of Law according to their demerits: then great numbers of slanderous and seditious Books ( libri falsidici) against her Majesty and the State were dispersed and scattered within this Realm, tending to the inciting and stirring of the Subjects to Insurrection and Re­bellion.

Her Majestie in open Parliament, having with the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, mature considerati­on of so weighty and important causes, The Statute of an. 23 Re­ginae Eliz. in the 23. year of her Reign made two several Laws. One against the makers and publishers of Seditious Books, ordaining that offence to be Fe­lony: another against Recusants, inflicting the penalty of twenty pounds the month for their Recusancie: and yet up­on their submission according to the Act, to be thereof freely and absolutely discharged, (a milde and merciful Law, consi­dering their former Conformity, and the cause of their Re­volt.) But after these Jesuites and Romish Priests coming daily into and swarming within the Realm, instilling still this poi­son into the Subjects hearts, that by reason of the said Bull of Pius Quintus her Majesty was excommunicated, deprived of her Kingdome, & that her Subjects were discharged of all O­bedience to her, and by all means endeavouring to withdraw them from their Duty and Allegeance to her Majesty, and to [Page 84] reconcile them to the Church of Rome; The Statute of an. 27 Eliz. Reginae. in the 27. year of her Reign, by Authority of Parliament, her Majesty made it Treason for any Jesuite or Romish Priest, being her natu­ral-born Subject, and made a Romish Priest or Jesuite sithence the beginning of her Reign, to come into any of her domi­nions; intending thereby to keep them out of the same, to the end that they should not infect any other Subjects with such treasonable and damnable perswasions and practices as are aforesaid, which without controversie were high Treason by the ancient Common Laws of England. Nei­ther would ever magnanimous King of England, fithence the first establishment of this Monarchy, have suffered any (especially being his own natural-born Subjects) to live, that perswaded his Subjects that he was no lawfull King, and practised with them (within the heart of this Realm) to withdraw them from their Allegeance and Loyalty to their Sovereign, the same being crimen laesae Majestatis by the ancient Laws of this Realm.

BY this and by all the Records of the Indictments it ap­peareth that these Jesuites and Priests are not condem­ned and executed for their Priesthood and Profession, but for their treasonable and damnable Perswasions, and Practices against the Crowns and Dignities of Monarchs and absolute Princes, who hold their Kingdoms and Dominions by law­ful Succession, and by inherent Birth-right and descent of inheritance, (according to the fundamental Laws of this Realm) immediately of Almighty God, and are not Tenants of their Kingdomes (as they would have it) at the will and pleasure of any forrein Potentate whatso­ever.

Now albeit the proceedings and process in the Ecclesiasti­cal Courts be in the name of the Bishops, &c. it followeth not therefore, that either the Court is not the King's, or the Law whereby they proceed is not the King's Law. For, taking one example for many, every Leet or View of Frank­pledge holden by a Subject is kept in the Lord's name, and [Page 85] yet it is the King's Court, and all the proceedings therein are directed by the King's Laws: and many subjects in England have and hold Courts of Record and other Courts, and yet all their proceedings be according to the King's Laws and the Customes of the Realm.

Observe, (good Reader) seeing that the determination of Heresies, Schisms, and Errours in Religion, Ordering, Ex­amination, Admission, Institution and Deprivation of men of the Church, (which do concern God's true Religion and Service) of right of Matrimony, Divorces, and general Bastardy, (whereupon depend the strength of mens Dis­cents and Inheritances) of probate of Testaments, and letters of Administration, (without which no debt or dutie due to any dead man can be recovered by the Common Law) Mortuaries, Pensions, Procurations, Reparations of Churches, Simony, Incest, Adultery, Fornication and In­continency, and some others, doth not belong to the Com­mon Law, how necessary it was, for administration of Ju­stice, that his Majestie's Progenitors, Kings of this Realm, did by publick authority authorize Ecclesiasticall Courts un­der them, to determine those great and important Causes Ecclesiastical (exempted from the Jurisdiction of the Com­mon Law) by the King's Laws Ecclesiastical. Which was done originally for two causes, 1. That Justice should be administred under the Kings of this Realm with­in their own Kingdome, to all their Subjects, and in all Causes. 2. That the Kings of England should be furnished upon all occasions, either forrein or domestical, with lear­ned Professors as well of the Ecclesiasticall as Temporall Laws.

THus hath it appeared, as well by the ancient Common Laws of this Realm, by the Resolutions and Judge­ments of the Judges and Sages of the Laws of England in all succession of ages, as by Authority of many Acts of Parlia­ment, ancient and of latter times, That the Kingdome of England is an absolute Monarchy, and that the King is the [Page 88] onely Supreme Governour, as well over Ecclesiasticall per­sons and in Ecclesiastical causes, as Temporal, within this Realm; to the due observation of which Laws both the King and the Subject are sworn. I have herein cited the very words and texts of the Laws, Resolutions, Judgements, and Acts of Parliament, all publick and in print, without a­ny inference, argument, or amplification; and have parti­cularly quoted the books, years, leaves, chapters, and such like certain references, as every man may at his pleasure see and reade the Authorities herein cited. This Case is repor­ted in the English and Latine tongues, (as some other Wri­ters of the Law have done,) to the end that my dear Coun­trymen may be acquainted with the Laws of this Realm, their own Birth-right and inheritance, and with such evi­dences as of right belong to the same; assuring my self that no wise or true-hearted English-man, that hath been per­swaded before he was instructed, will refuse to be instruc­ted in the truth, (which he may see with his own eyes) lest he should be disswaded from errour, wherewith blindfold he hath been deceived. For miserable is his case, and worthy of pity, that hath been perswaded before he was instructed, and now will refuse to be instructed, because he will not be perswaded.