THe design of this Narrative, whatever Censurers it may meet with, hath no other end than to bring truth to light, and that truth more especially which hath been so long masqued and hid under Church-mens Gowns; and which hath been most industri­ously concealed with great Artifice from the ignorant vul­gar, as they are generally pleased to term Lay-men; though some of those Lay men, nay, the most of them, I think, are both for Parts and Piety not in the least inferiour to the best of them, though they call themselves the only Clergy­men, as if every member of Christs Church were not the Clergy or Gods heritage as well as they.

But my present business is only to meddle with the coer­cive power they pretend to in Courts Christian, or Spiri­tual Jurisdiction, which for them to claim such a power in England distinct from the legal power known in this Kingdom, and contrary to the Supremacy of the King, in direct opposition to his Authority, as he is by Law supreme head of the Church of England, is a very great wonder to me, and I believe to the Ingenuous Reader, if he consider the matter of fact as it lyes.

In the first place, the Reader must know that all manner of Spiritual Jurisdiction used in this Nation had its original and foundation from the un-holy Mother Church, the See of Rome, and her Canon Law: and was born or rather brought into this Northern Island of England by Austin the Monk: for before his time we do not find any tract of Church-Government (that is) by way of Excommunication in Court Christian.

When he came here it was with the same specious pre­tence that Rome and her Adherents and Devotaries to this day use, that is, decency and regular government of the Church of Christ: But no sooner had this Monk set foot into this Kingdome but he began to shew his cloven foot [...] as it evidently appear'd in a very short time after, for when he found that the Christians in this Island were more holy than himself; and that they liked not his Pride and Arrogancy, he fell upon the Monks of Bangor, and began to Curse them with Bell, Book, and Candle, till they should submit to him and the unholy See of Rome. And from that time, and not before, all manner of Ecclesiastical Courts and Censures of the Church both grew and continued in this Kingdom (until the time of Henry the Eighth) un­der the Popes Authority: and how they used the people in these Courts, and how many were murdered and destroyed for Religion sake in all that time, is too great a number now to be reckoned.

But not withstanding they had this vast power, and held Courts Canonical (as they term them) by Authority from the See of Rome, even from Austin the Monk, to William the First (commonly called the Conquerour) and from thence to the time of Henry the Eighth, yet the Bishops and Clergy of England sometimes by the Statute Law of the Land met with many rubs in their Canon Law: for their oppressions being become very great, even so great that in those dark times and fogs of Popery the Lay-men began to [Page 3]discover their cheats, and therefore the wings of the Cler­gy began sometimes to be a little clipped by the Statute Law of the Land, as you will find by several Statutes made since Henry the Third: Vide Rot. An. 1257. 3 Ed. primi Cap. 2. particularly in the Statute made in Edward the First's time, which ordains, That a Clerk being indicted of Felony by solemn Inquest of lawful men in the Kings Court, in no manner shall be delivered without due Purgation.

Now before this Statute the Church-men pleaded exem­ption from the Temporal Law; and offenders, it should seem, which were Church-men claimed a priviledge to be only lia­ble to the power of the Church.

In the next place you will find by the Statute of Edward the First in the thirteenth year of his Reign the Spiritual Courts were prescribed what it was they should be suf­fered to take Cognizance of and no more, see the Statute, Viz.

Now after this Kings time those spiritual men finding themselves by his Laws kept within some moderate bounds, Vid. Rot. de Artic. Cleri An. 9 Ed. 2. & A. D. 1315. grew very uneasie; and therefore in Edward the Second's time they began to stir for the enlarging their power: For you will find in his Reign that the Clergy got Laws to pass then, that the Clergy might correct in their Spiritual Courts for defamation, and corporal penance was to be enjoyned, as you may see by the Rolls of those times.

In these Statutes made at Lincoln they had diverse Privi­ledges given them, Idem Cap. 3. as in the third Chapter they had power allowed them to lay Corporal punishment.

And in the fourth Chapter, Cap, 4. Prelates might correct for De­famation by that Statute.

In the eighth Chapter it appears that the Clergy did use to meddle with the Kings servants, Idem Cap. 8. and censure them at their [Page 4]pleasure, till they were limited and bounded by this Ordi­nance: which Ordinance, viz.

And in the same year among the Articles made for to give power, Idem Cap. 14. and to restrain: it is ordained, viz.

The Kings Answer was, ‘They shall be made frée accor­ding to the form of Statutes and Ordinances.’

This power continued to the Clergy till King Henry the Eighth, only sometimes there was some small abridgements by several Statutes and Ordinances, as in 31 Ed. 3. Cap. 4. where their Extortion about Fees was by the Statute regu­lated. Vide Rot. 31 Ed. 3. Cap. 4.

The next thing wherein the wings of the Clergy were clipped, was by the Statute of 16 Rich. 2. Cap. 5. which declares purchasing Bulls from the See of Rome unlawful, and a Premunire so to do: Vide 16 Rich. 2. Cap. 5. and ordains among diverse other things, viz.

In Henry the Seventh's time we find the Clergy prayed Aid of the Common Law, Vide H. 7. cap. 4. to help them to punish their Priests and Clerks for Incontinency.

Which Statute gives the Bishops power to punish such offender by their Episcopal Jurisdiction, as was to them thought most meet, and to be freed from any action to be brought against them for the same at Law.

Thus they continued without any Interruption until the fatal time of Henry the Eighth, and even in his time till the twenty first we do not find any great adding or diminishing from them or the power they pretended to by their Canon Law, for it must be observed, and it will not be denyed by any person, but that still the power the Clergy of En­gland ever had, except what was given them by Statute Law, was only the Canon Law brought with them from their un­holy Mother, the Church of Rome.

In 21 H. 8. cap. 13. Stat. 21 H. 8. cap. 13. Spiritual persons are abridged from having pluralities of Livings, and from taking of Farms, or to deal in Merchandize, and that all Dispensations contrary to this Statute shall be void, by which it seems the Clergy were Merchants for Temporals as well as Spiritual before that time.

In 23 H. 8. cap. 9. 23 H. 8. cap. 9. another Act was made which reaches their Court more especially than any before that time, called, viz. (the Bill of Citetias) in which Law the Arch-Bishops and Bishops are enjoyned not to cite any person out of their own Diocess where they live under a severe penalty, except it be for Heresie and Probates of Wills, in which Law is provi­ded 10 l. damages, besides cost to be recovered by the party grieved by action or otherwise.

Sect. 6 In the same Act, Sect. 6. this very clause also is contained, viz.

But now though this Law is so plain as nothing can be made more plain, yet to this day their Spiritual Courts Conscience are large enough to take instead of 3 d. for every Sealed Citation not less than 6 s. 8 d. or such like summ, to the shame and reproach not only to themselves, but even to the whole Nation that suffers such abuses to be put upon the people contrary to all Law, and when remedy may easily be had.

In 24 H. 8. cap. 12. 24 H. 8. c. 12. Another Act was made, which takes away all Appeals to the See of Rome: and because it may most evidently appear that the Spiritual and Temporal Ju­risdiction was ever a Flower to the Imperial Crown of this Realm, I shall here insert in haec verba part of the second Se­ction of that Statute, viz.

By which recital in this Statute it is most plain, that all Spiritual Jurisdiction is and ought to be derived from and under the Prerogative of the King and the Imperial Crown of England, as will more fully appear by the remaining part of the Statute, too long here to be inserted.

But now in 25 H. 8. cap. [...]9. 25 H. 8. c. 19. the whole power of the Clergy, and all their Authority is acknowledged to be in the King, and all Canons to cease, and they never to make more but by Commissions from and under him, by virtue of that Act entituled, viz. The Submission of the Cler­gy, and restraint of Appeals: Which begins thus, viz.

And then Enacts, viz.

And the Penalty for doing other than this Act directs was imprisonment, and Fine at the Kings will, as by the Statute more at large appears.

So that by this Statute their whole power was now invest­ed in the King, and till new Canons were made, or the old ones confirmed, as the Statute directs, the Clergy of England could in no sort act: and from that time of the ma­king of this Statute until this present, I cannot find that ever any liberty was given, or that any Canons were made or confirmed by Law, other than what were judged unlaw­ful in King Charles the First's time, and damn'd by Act of Parliament in 1640. Which you will hear more of by and by.

If it be thus, then from 25 H. 8. I must date their down­fal, a most happy day to England from that time; and it may be said, all their Canons are now out of doors, or at seast very lame: and if so, then let the Reader judge where is their Authority for their Courts, for they must and do own that it was the Canon Law they acted by; and if so, then sure if they have no Canons to act by, or at best but doubtful Canons, then I conceive they can have no pow­er except they can find it by the Statute Law, which I would be glad to see.

In the next place another Law is made against them in 25 H. 8. which takes away all First-fruits to the Bishop of Rome, 25 H. 8. c. 20. and ordains that Elections of all Bishops shall be by the Kings Writ under a severe pain.

In the same year an Act is made to take away Peter-pence and Dispensations, Idem cap. 21. in which Statute it is expresly declared [Page 9]that this Land ought not to be subject or bound to any hu­mane Laws but such as are of their own making within this Realm.

The King being declared head of the Church, 26 H. 8. cap. 1. it is ex­presly there enacted (viz.) ‘ Shall have full power and au­thority from time to time to visit, repress, redress, re­form, order, correct, restrain all such errors, heresies, abuses, offences, contempts and enormities, whatsoever they be, which by any manner of Spiritual Authority or Iuris­diction ought or may lawfully be reformed, repressed, order­ed, redressed, corrected, restrained or amended, most to the pleasure of Almighty God, &c.’

This being the Case, what colour can here be for any Spi­ritual or Ecclesiastical power to any person whatever, but what must be derived from and under the King, and by his Authority and Commission, and in his name and not in their own, nor in the Bishop of Rome.

But because the Reader may be more fully satisfied, I have here inserted the Statute made 37 H. 8. cap. 17. 37. H. 8. c. 17. Entitu­led, viz. A Bill that the Doctors of Civil Law being mar­ried may exercise Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction.

Now here it appears plain, that all Authority must be derived from the King, and he alone as head of this Church hath power to correct or amend Heresies, and all other Misdemeanours, having the sole jurisdiction in Courts Spi­ritual, called Ecclesiastical Courts, and none to be made, or Synold held, but by his authority and permission, so that it cannot be imagined by any that the Clergy had power to make Canons either new, or to go on with their old ones, till another Law be made, and power given them by the King as the Law directs.

And from this time of the making of this Law none of the Canons, or pretended Canons, are any more in force in England than if there never had been any such thing in the world, This therefore I lay down as a sure rule that the Ecclesiastical Courts have no power but what must be given them by the Statute Law of the Land.

And therefore to come nearer to the matter, I shall set down what Laws have been since made in their favour, and what against them. Which is thus:

King Edward the Sixth being a Protestant, and having a wise and honest Council about him, foreseeing the great be­nefit did accrue to the Crown and whole Nation by those good Laws made in his Fathers time, made a Law that takes away all scruple and doubt whatsoever about the Ecclesiasti­cal Courts, and gives them not so much as power to hold any Courts in their own name, nor to use their own Seal, although they were suffered to act by, from, and under the [Page 12]King, according to the Laws made by his Father. And it appears by the Statute, Entituled, viz. An Act for the Election of Bishops.

Which Act, for the better information I have inserted at large, hoping those worthy Spiritual men will vouchsafe the reading it. Which is as follows:

This being then the Law that not only the power of Spi­ritual Courts, and all manner of Jurisdiction must be deri­ved from and under the King, but also if they hold any, it must be in the Kings name with his Arms in their Seals, and all Process must have the Kings Title and not their own, otherwise than to the Test of the Process as in judicial pro­ceedings in other Courts.

If this be so, as there is no man dare own the contrary, then what colour have the Bishops in their Spiritual Courts at this day to hold them in their own names, and to send out Process under their own Seals as if they were all pa­ramount the King, and even as big as the Pope himself? for so runs their Process, viz. I cite you to appear before me, &c. at such a place. Now I would feign know what this [I] is, whether it be I Pope, or I Jesuite, or I Turk, that dare be thus bold with the Law and their Soveraign, not only in eclipsing his Prerogative, but indeed fetting themselves above him and the Law too: surely should but a Fanatick dare to do but one half so much, it would be both hell and damnation, if not the Fanatick Plot, so much talked of by these great Loyalists.

But I must now come to shew you what they pretend against this Law, for had they no excuse at all they would not be legitimate.

Their pretence therefore is this, that Queen Marr when she came to the Crown repealed all Laws that diminished the authority of the See of Rome; among which, they say, this Act was one, but how this will help them, the Reader may judge, if it were so, which cannot be al­lowed.

For thus it is, 1 & 2 P. & M. Cap. 8. in the first and second of Philip and Mary, an Act was made, viz. An Act repealing all Articles and Provisions made against the See Apostolick of Rome since the 20th of K. H. 8. and for establishing all Spiritual and Ecclesiastical possessions and hereditaments conveyed to the Laity.

In this Statute there are diverse Acts repealed by name, but this Act of Ed. 6. is not named, but is supposed to be implyed, because that was against the Jurisdiction of Rome, but if that be a good repeal without naming, the Statute it ought to be well considered;

However if it were so, that will stand them in but small stead, for in Queen Elizabeth's reign all this whole Statute of Repeal is repealed; then if so, those Acts are in force again. And so this excuse for holding Courts in their own names, and by the Authority of their Canons cannot help them, but leaves them in the same condition as in Hen­ry the Eighth and Edward the Sixth's time, in which they had no power at all.

This plainly appears by the Statute of 1 Eliz. cap. 1. which restores to the Crown the Ancient Jurisdiction, and abolishes all foreign power in Causes Ecclesiastical, and repeals the Statute of Repeal made in the first and se­cond of Philip and Mary. Which is as follows:

An Act to restore to the Crown the ancient Jurisdiction over the Estate Ecclesiastical and Spiritual, 1 Eliz. cap. 1. and abolishing all foreign power repugnant to the same. Which begins thus:

Now by these Branches of this Statute it is most clear that all manner of Jurisdiction in Causes Spiritual and Ec­clesiastical is more absolutely invested in the Crown then ever before, so that if that of Edward the sixth be re­pealed, yet here it is past all doubt that Act is now by this more inforced then ever: And that it may appear more plain, that no Court Spiritual was to Act any more but by Authority from the Queen in the next Section of this Statute of 1. Eliz. Power was given to the Queen in ex­press words to grant Commissions (to hold Courts) under the great Seal of England, or else by this Statute none could be held at all neither in their own name, nor in the name of the Queen, which branch of the said Statute runs thus.

Here it is most evident that the Queen had the only sole power to nominate, and appoint by her Commission under the great Seal of England, both lay-men as well as Bishops to exercise Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction when and as often as she pleased, and it is most evident it was not to be done at all without such Commissions.

But besides this Law it was the practice both in the times of Edward the sixth, Queen Elizabeth and King James; That all the Bishops, and the Spiritual Courts whatsoever were held by such Commissions and to satisfie the Reader I have here inserted a Copy of one of them taken out of the Rolls, Verbatim, viz.

Thus by what hath been said, you see both by Statute, Law and President, of the very Commission themselves which the Bishops Acted by, it is clear they ought not to Act or Hold any Courts whatsoever in their own Names, nor in the Kings, without his Special Commission under the great Seal of England. And altho' there was a Statute made in the First of Queen Mary, Intituled, An Act for Repeal of certain Statutes made in the time of King Edward the Sixth; vid. 1 Jac. Cap. 25. yet by the First of King James, Cap. 25. that Statute of Re­peal is Repealed, so that cannot stand our Spiritual Persons in no stead at all, tho' my Lord Cook did insist upon it in his 2d. Institutions.

But to proceed, In the 8th Year of Queen Elizabeth, you will find the very same thing asserted by the Act made, 8 Eliz. Cap. 1 8 Eliz. Cap. 1. Intituled, An Act declaring the making and Consecrating of the Archbishops and Bishops of this Realm, to be good, Lawful and Perfect. In which Act, Sect. 2. it is De­clared thus, VIZ.

Here again you see that the very Commissions are again Confirmed, and all Ecclesiastical Power absolutely in the Queen to make and Appoint by her Commission whom She please to exercise Spiritual Jurisdiction, and no Man ever pretended this Statute to be touched.

This being the Case to the end of Queen Elizabeths Reign, we must see what was done in King James time, and so to this Day.

In King James time the Bishops and Ecclesiastical Courts were holden as in Queen Eliz. time, as is most apparent; for meeting with an Objection, that the Bishops held Courts in their own names time out of mind, notwithstanding the Sta­tutes, [Page 27]and that the long custome would excuse them therein, especially when the King did permit it. I took an occasion to inform my self from the Journals and Records, and do find that the Ecclesiastical Power was held and used in the time of King James, under him by Vertue of Commission, as before, and to put it out of all doubt, I shall demonstrate it thus: Vide Journ. ho. Lords. 7 Jac. & 10. 1610. 7 Jacobi, A Dispute arose about the Spiritual Courts of their Extortion and going beyond their Commissions; the Com­mons in Parliament complained to the King against the Eccle­siastical Courts, and pray that no more such power may be given them by Commissions, And a Question arose in the 10th of Jacobi, whether they had any power at all; in full Parliament it was Resolved, and the King gave his Answer, and the Judgement of the House of Peers, That they had no Power but by the Kings Commission, which he would take care for the time to come that it should not be any Burthen to the Peo­ple. Which Answer and Judgement in Parliament you have here in hec Verba set down, VIZ.

Sure if this Record be considered, there is ground enough to justifie that the Spiritual Courts cannot be holden but by the Kings Commission; Therefore I need say no more, the Case being plain the Law was so to this Year of 1610. which I set down the rather because a use will be made of it by and by.

But in King Charles the First's time, the Bishops cast about them how to get rid of these Shackles; And therefore in Bishop Laud's time, the point about Holding Courts in their own Names, without the Kings Commission, was by him sta­ted, and in the Star-Chamber where he ruled the Rost got the Judges there, tho' it was but an extra Judicial Judgment to declare in their favour, which was easie enough to be done when both the Judges and His Grace were resolved upon the point, for those very Judges most of them were the same that gave their Judgment about the Shipp-Money; And we know what became of that Judgment and them: And for your Prelate he met with his due at Tower-Hill after, but be­fore his Lordship had finished his Ministry, so prevalent he was, that I am told he got a Proclamation to publish the Ex­tra judicial Opinion, which made a great noise in the World, for Noyse and Decency was all along the Cheat that was put upon the People in those Days by that Prelate and his Gang.

But I think no Man will say that that Extra Judicial Opini­on is either equal with the Statute Law, or with the Judge­ment of Parliament, therefore I shall say no more, but pro­ceed.

After that Extra Judical Opinion of the Judges, and by means of the long Intervals of Parliament, the Spiritual Courts as well as the Star-Chamber, were Lords Paramont, and so great, that they became a most Heavy Burden to the peo­ple of all sorts; therefore before the Troubles began, the Parliament in 16 Car. primi, made an Act to take away the Power that was given by the Statute of 1 Eliz. for the Grant­ing any Commissions at all; by which means they well knew that no Courts could be held at all; And therefore an Act passed to Repeal that Branch of the Statute of 1 Eliz. which was only one Clause about the granting Commissions, as by the Act of Car. primi, appears, and all Spiritual Courts were utterly Abolished by that Act, The Title of the Act runs thus, VIZ.

After the making of this Act all Jurisdiction of the Spiritual Courts, was wholly dain'd as appears plainly by the Statute. Thus it stood still, 13 Car. 2d. Now in this Act of Car Primi, it must be observed that it meddles no farther with the Act of Eliz. then that one branch about Commissions, it meddles not with the Ecclesiastical power being in the Crown nor with the Statute, 8 Eliz. Nor any thing of Edward 6. or Henry 8. which must be ob­served.

Thus then their power was wholly discontinued till the thirteenth of Charles 2d. And then coming into their Bishopricks and great Estates, they thought it hard that they must have their Spiritual Swords tied, therefore all hands to work to get loose, and so an Act is passed the 13 Charles 2d. For Repeal of part of the Act Car Primi. And now they thought all was sure, but as it fell out this will do them no good at all neither, for the Act which was intended to Repeal this Act of the 16 of Charles the first hath misrecited it, and called it an Act made the 17 of Charles the first, not only in the Title but all along in the body of the Act, which is plain upon the Roll, though not in the Statute Books, viz.

An Act for Explanation of a Clause, contained in an Act of Parliament, made in the seventeenth year of the late King Charles, Intituled an Act of Repeal of a Branch of a Statute Primo Elizabethe, concerning Commissions for Causes Ecclesiastical, viz.

So that then it follows that except they can find such an Act as this Repeals, which must be one of the 17 of Charles the first, this will not help them for they will not find that this in Law can repeal the Act made the 16 of Charles the first. And what follows if they have acted all this while and had no legal power, let the world Judge what a fine [Page 36]threed they have spun for themselves, if either the King shall call them to account or any private man that hath been Excommunicated, but it will be objected that this may be remedied it being but a mistake to which I answer it may be mended, but it must be in Parliament.

But then it is objected, That this Act of the 13th of this King intends them a power to hold Courts.

The Answer is plain, very true it doth so, but it must be according to the Kings Majesties Ecclesiastical Laws still, and it must be from and under him, as by Law, and sure the Sta­tutes before is the Law they must walk by, until the same are truly and exactly Repealed.

But for a further Answer, If they observe this Statute well, and allow it to be a mistake, as I affirm it is, they are not at all the better for this of Car. 2d. as to their Ecclesiastical pow­er they now Act by, if there were no mistake at all for this of Car. 2d. does not help them in the least, for in the last Para­graph of this Statute of the 13th of this King, it is expresly said, They shall have no more power than they had in the Year 1639.

Then see what they had in 1639, it is most plain all the rest of the Statutes were then in force against them both of Henry the 8th. and Edw. 6th. Q. Eliz. and King James Laws.

For this very Sentence and Judgement in Parliament before recited, was but in 1610. And I do aver they had no other power then but what those Laws gave them; thus I have done with matter of Fact, as it lies, I leave all Men to judge, and govern themselves as they shall see occasion, and would be glad my Error might be corrected by them, if in any thing I have misquoted or misrepresented the Case, hopeing that a more judicious person will undertake to correct it in what way or Method he likes best.

There are Two or Three several Objections which I have met with in this Affair, the First is this, That the King per­mits it, and if any wrong be done by the Spiritual Courts, it is to him, and what hath any private person to do to con­cern himself therein.

In that the King may pass it by, 'tis true, but wrong may be done by these Courts to the Subject as well as to the King; and there may be Damage to a single Person by these Courts by being Excommunicated, which cannot be to the King, and whoever suffers under that Burden hath cause enough to complain and seek their Remedy, tho' the King think fit to forgive the wrong done to himself.

The other Objection, is, That the Course of the Ecclesia­stical Courts hath been such time out of mind, and no hurt comes to the Subject by their Courts, whether it be done by Commission or not.

To which I Answer, That I never yet heard of any Good ever did come from those Courts, but many have been ruined and undone by them; And in the next place for their Custome time out of mind, there is no such thing, if Custome should prevail against Law, which it cannot be, for the long­est time they can bring for this Custome is but 1610 at the furthest time; and there are some persons yet living, can re­member that time. But I believe it will be hard for them to prove that they exercised Ecclesiastical Power by their own Authority in any time in the Reign of King James; How­ever if they do they cannot make it a Law, for an evil Custom against Law never yet made a Law, and for them to say Cu­stome will carry it, the Highway-Man may as well plead the same for Robbery, and say, Oh Sir, I have been accustomed to Rob, tho' there be a Law against it.

There is another Objection which carries as little weight as the rest, and that is the Opinion of the Judges in the Star-Chamber, which ought to have the Answer that before is gi­ven, that it was an Extra-Judicial Opinion, and given at such a time, and by the same Judges that over-ruled the Plea of the Lord Hollis and Elliot, which was many Years after rever­sed in Parliament.

Therefore to Sum up all, the case lies thus, before the 20 of H. the 8. The Spiritual Jurisdiction and all the pro­ceedings in England by the Ecclesiastical Courts, was by from and under the power and authority of the See of Rome and by there Cannon Law afterwards to the end of his Reign all that power was invested wholly in the King, and no au­thority belonged to them in any matters whatever, but what must be derived by from and under him.

King Edward the 6. of Famous memory did by his honest and wise Councel, not only approve of what was dune in the Church affairs, in H. the 8ths. time, but goes on furder and takes away the very form and mould of the Spiritual Courts, by making a Law that those Courts should not so much as beheld in their one name, but in the name of the King and all there Citations and Prosses whatever was to be in the Kings name as in Judicial proceeding at Law, and the Bishops name of the Diosess to be at the bottom, as test to the writ and not as Lord Paramount, the Kings [Page 33]authority: and by this Kings Law they were not to use any Seal to the Court, but with the Kings Arms in Graven, so it rested in his time.

Queen Mary she came in Popishly affected, and by the help of Cardinal Poole Legate from Rome, prevails with her for the good of her Soul and Honour to the unholy Church of Rome, to pass an Act, called an Act of repeal to take away all those Laws that abridged the Power and Supremacy of the See of Rome sence the 20 year of H. the 8. And as some will have it this Law of Edward the 6. must be meant to be one of those, but what reason can be in Law given is not yet known for it is not perticularly Repealed as other Laws are in that Statute of Repeal and; then in the next place being not so perticularly, it is believed it could not be Re­pealed by that Act of Repeal, because that in the very same Act it doth set fourth perticularly. all other Acts intended to be repealed, and not that. Then Queen Elizabeth in her first year Repealed the Act of Repeal made in Queen Mary's days, and restores all again, as was in Henry the 8ths. time, and Edward the 6. And declared particu­larly that all manner of Ecclesiastical power must be from, and under her, and by her Authority and none else, and more particularly to shew all the Church power, was then lost without new power given by that Act, a Clause, is incerted in the said Act that She and her Successors shall give command under the great Seal of England to such com­mmissions, as she pleased from time to time to hold Court Ecclesiastical and not otherwise.

To the same effect it is again declared by the Statute made the 8th of her Reign. And it is most certain, that by Vertue of the Clause in that Statute Primo Eliz. That gives power of granting Commissions to hold Spiritual Courts they did Act, and without it neither Queen or King could grant such Commissions, nor they hold any Courts, without such Commissions.

Thus then it continued all the time of Q. Eliz. and by such Commissions they acted and no other Authority was known, nor from her time can they shew other Authority to impower them but on the contrary they will find them­selves lessened.

For in King Jame's time they acted by the same Autho­rity, and in full Parliament, in 1610, it was owned of all hands.

In King Charles the first's time the Spiritual Courts became a Burden to the Nation, so great that the people were not able to bear them although they did Act by such Com­missions, or at least ought so to do which appears plain by the Statute, 16 Car Primi, which takes away all their whole power, and as a reason or means to take away their power; what do the Parliament do, why it is most clear both by the Title and Body of the Act, they tell you they must repeal that part of the Law of Q. Eliz. that gave power to grant Com­missions for them to hold Spiritual Courts. Therefore the taking away and Repealing that Branch of the Statute of Eliz. that gives power to grant Commissions, it was taken for grant, then that they had no power at all. For no more of that Statute was Repealed is evident, then what related to the Comissions, they did not let them loose to Act as before it was so far from that, that it appears they intended not to let them Act at all, neither under the King in his Name nor any otherways whatever then in this of Car. 2d. The Ecclesiastical persons meant to Repeal the Act of Primo Car. But mistook the year, so in truth they did nothing at all but they may be liable to be called to account, for all they have acted ever since nor can they Act with safety, till this Law be mended for Acts of Parliament must be punctually repealed, and exactly recited or else in Law it will not do.

But if that had been well Repealed it is far short of giving them any power, for it is only to take away the Clause, that was repealed about given Commissions to hold Courts but gives them no new power at all, it doth not tell them notwithstanding the Laws of H. 8. Ed. 6. The rest of the Statutes of Elizabeth, and the practice in King James time, that they shall hold Courts in their own Names, no, it is so far from that, that the Act saith expresly they shall have no other power by this Act, or was it intended them, then what they had in 1639, now if they can shew that they had any power given them between the year 1610, to the year 1639. Then I say, they are right and may go on, if not, I appeal to all mankind what culler or pretence these men can have to hold Courts Spiritual at all, much less by their own Prerogative or in their own Names; which I take to be as unlawful, and as directly against the Kings Prerogative as any thing can be, For that since all power Spiritual and Temporal is by Law invested in the King, [Page 35]they may as well hold Courts again under the Popes Au­thority, and in his Name, as in their own Names, and it is a wonderful thing to consider that these Churchmen who cry down all for Phanaticks, and tells the World at every turn they are Sedious and Disloyal that do not obey the Kings Laws and say as they say, although sometimes they say and do they know not what themselves. And yet what Phanatick is there this day in England, does or ever did make so bold with the Kings Prerogative, as these high Churchmen, who in every of their Courts as they call them, and every process they make, say in effect as the great Car­dinal Woolsey did, when in his splender and glory in Eng­land, Ego & Rex meos. But I considering we are here discoursing of Protestant Churchmen, and knowing well their very Tongues are tipped with Loyalty. We must not therefore venture to say more or meddle further then to beg their Charitable opinion once to a Discenter both from their Courts, and Cannons.