Speech 4 December 1648, Speech (2 of 3)

Speech 4 December 1648 · Speech (2 of 3)

p. 554thly, A great security and advantage to the whole Kingdome, whose weal and safety principally consists in Londons welfare, its principall Magazine, Mart, Bulwarke, Refuge, and Military security both by Sea and Land, wherewith the whole Kingdome stands or falls: had the King once gained London in these Warres, the Parliament, and all England had been quickly lost, without hope of recovery, which will be in a secure or recoverable condition at all times, if it be safe and true to the publique interest, from which some have studied of late to disengage it, to ruine it, and the Parliament too, which were alwayes free from eminent danger whiles cordially united, and near to both their ruines being now disjointed.

I have thus as briefly as I could, (with discharge of my conscience and duty) run through all the propositions which concerne the security and settlement of our State against the KINGS armed violence, or Exorbitant civill Sword or Prerogative, and other particulars relating to its peace and safety, with the Kings respective Answers thereunto.

And for mine owne opinion, I humbly conceive them so fully satisfactory, p. 56and abundantly sufficient for our Weal and safety, against all future Dangers, and Encroachments on our Liberties: that if we conjoyn them with those other acts, the KING hath already consented to this Parliament, We can neither desire nor expect any additions to make us more compleatly happy and secure then any people or Kingdome under Heaven.

The KING hath already by Acts of Parliament condemned and suppressed Ship-money, his owne Monopoly of making Gunpowder and Saltpetre, Fines for Knight-hood, Impositions upon Merchants goods, Tonnage and Poundage, without grant by Parliament, Coat and Conduct money, Forrest bounds and Laws, the grand grievances under which we groaned, heretofore, so as we need never feare their revivals, nor any others of that nature: Especially since we have the Nomination of all great Officers and Iudges, the chiefe promoters of them. Besides, by Act of Parliament, hee hath for ever suppressed the Bishops sitting and voting in Parliament, (a great disadvantage to him, they commonly voting what he pleased, and being wholly at his devotion) together with the three Grand Oppressive Courts and shops of Tyranny, Oppression, and Injustice in the Kingdome, the great Terrors of Mens Spirits, the Invaders of their Rights, Members, Liberties, the chiefe inlargers and maintainers of an unlimited prerogative, and Authors of all our late illegall projects, pressures, the Starchamber, the HIGH COMMISSION, and COUNCELL TABLE: the Kings chief Engines to scrue up his Prerogative to the highest, and lay his Subjects lowest; to which a fourth is since added in this Treaty, the Court of Wards. All which being totally abolished, the KING hath now no Court nor instrument left (that I can thinke of) whereby to injure, or oppresse his people as in former times. The oppressions likewise and extortions of the stannary Courts, and of Clerkes of the Market, are rectified by acts this Session, yea this Parliament by Act perpetuated, without any power in the KING to adjourne and dissolve it, till all concurre to dissolve it by an Act of Parliament: and when this shall be so determined, for our future security and redresse of all growing mischiefs which may endanger us, there is a provision by another Law for a Triennall Parl. with power to summon it, in case of the Kings refusall, without him or his writ, and authority for the Houses to sit for a convenient time (sufficient to redresse all grievances, punish all publike Offenders and settle usefull Lawes) without dissolution or adjournment.

p. 57To which I may adde, the Act of Oblivion, Pacification, and union with our Brethren of Scotland: Upon granting of four of which Acts alone, the House of Commons in their**An exact Collection p. 6. Remonstrance of the State of the Kingdome, 15 December 1641, did with much thankefulnesse, acknowledge, that His Majesty had passed more good Bils at that time, to the advantage of the Subjects, then have been passed in many ages. And if he shall now accumulate all the fore-mentioned Propositions turned into Acts, to those already enacted; with some few Laws more for the regulating of some grievances and corruptions in the Common Law: the punishing and restraining of some publike mischiefs and crimes, and punishment of Extortions, (which will be readily assented to, there being no losse or prejudice to the Crowne in passing them) We may through Gods blessing, in all humane probability, (if our sins deprive us not of so great a felicity) be the freest, happiest, securest, most flourishing and best ordered Kingdom, and People in the World, and injoy such priviledges, and immunities, as our Ancestors never so much as once imagined, much lesse aspired after. And if we will not now rest satisfied, and thankfully contented with all these large extraordinary Concessions, and blesse God for this tender of them to our hands, the present, and all future ages, will Chronicle us, for the most unreasonable and ungratefull Creatures that ever sate within these wals, or the world produced since the Creation.

Having now at large demonstrated (I hope to every rationall and honest mans conviction) the satisfactorinesse of the Kings Answers to all our Propositions relating to the safety and settlement of our State:The satisfactoriness of the Kings answers to the Propositions concerning the Church & Religion. I shall in the next place proceed to those Propositions and Concessions which concerne the Peace, Settlement, and Security of our Church and Religion, wherein there appears the greatest difficulty; the most whereof I shall dispatch with greater brevity then the former.

There are three things especially which may endanger and disturb the Peace and settlement of our Church and Religion, 1. Popery, Popish corruptions and innovations, introduced by Jesuites, Papists, and superstitious Clergy-men Popishly addicted; 2. Prophanenesse; 3 Prelacy: and one chiefe thing to promote Religion and the Churches happiness; the propagation of the Gospel, by settling preaching Ministers throughout the Kingdom, and establishing the publick Worship and Church-Government in such sort, as is most agreeable to Gods word. For all these there is sufficient ground in the Kings p. 58answers to our Propositions concerning them, to vote them satisfactory, as I humbly apprehend, and hope to manifest.

For the first of these dangers to our Church and Religion, there is as good security and provision granted us by the King, as we did or could desire, even in our own terms. First, he hath fully consented to pass an Act for the more effectuall disabling of Iesuites, Papists,Propositions and Concessions against Papist, Popery and Popish Innovations. and Popish Recusants, from disturbing the State, and deluding the Lawes; and for the prescribing of a New Oath for the more speedy discovery and conviction of Recusants. Secondly, to an Act of Parliament, for the Education of the children of Papists by Protestants, in the Protestant Religion. Thirdly, to an Act for the due levying of the penalties against Recusants, and disposing of them as both Houses shall appoint. Fourthly, to an Act, whereby the practices of the Papists against the State may be prevented, the Lawes against them duly executed, and a stricter course taken to prevent the saying or hearing of Mass in the Court, or any other part of the Kingdome; whereby it is made Treason for any Priests to say Masse in the Court or Queenes owne Chappel; and so no place left for the suying of Masse throughout the Kingdome, no not in the Queens owne Chamber. Fifthly, to an Act for abolishing all Innovations, Popish Superstitions, Ceremonies, Altars, Rayles, Crucifixes, Images, Pictures, Copes, Crosses, Surplices, Vestments, bowings at the name of Iesus, or towards the Altar, &c. out of the Church, and to prevent the introduction of them for the future. By all which Acts added to our former Lawes against Recusants. I dare affirme, we have now far better provision, and security against Papists, Iesuits, Popish Recusants, their Popish pictures, Innovations, Superstitions, and Ceremonies, both for our Churches and Religions safety, and States too, then any Protestant Church, State, or Kingdome whatsoever; So as wee need not feare any future danger from Papists or Popery, if we be carefull to see those Concessions duly put into execution, when turned into Acts, and our former Laws.

Secondly, against the growth and danger of Prophanenesse, His Majesty hath condescended to an Act of Parliament,Propositions and Concessions against Prophanenesse. as large as can be drawne, against all Prophanations whatsoever of the Lords day, with severe punishment for the prophaners of it in any kinde; and against all such who shall write or preach against its morality, and due observation. And likewise to an Act to be framed and agreed upon by both Houses of Parliament, for the reforming and regulating both Vniversities, and of the Colledges of Westminster, Winchester, and Eaton, the seminaries of Learning and Education of youth, to serve and rule p. 59in our Church and State. By which two Grants, if duly executed, all impiety and prophanenesse which can endanger our Church and Religion, will easily be suppressed for the present, and prevented for the future.

Thirdly, Against the danger and revivall of Episcopacy, and the appendances thereunto belonging, the King hath clearly condescended to these particulars in terminis. First, to an Act for the abolition of all Archbishops, Chancellors, Commissaries, Deanes and Sub-Deans, Deans ard Chapters, Arch-deacons, Canons, Prebendaries, &c. and all other Episcopall, Cathedrall or Collegiate Officers both in England, Wales and Ireland: and to the disposall of all their Lands and Possessions for such uses as the Houses shall thinke meet: So as there is no feare at all of their resurrection to disturb our Church. All the question and difference now between the King and Houses, is onelyonly concerning the Office and power of Bishops, and their Lands and Possessions; in which two I finde most Members declare themselves to be unsatisfied, especially, those who have purchased Bishops Lands, who are very zealous in that point for their own Interests.

For the clearing of these two scruples, I shall examine and debate these two particulars.

First, how far the K. hath consented to the Houses Propositions for the abolishing of the office & jurisdiction of Bishops in the Church?

Secondly, how far He hath condescended, to the sale and disposal of their Lands and Possessions? And whether his Concessions in both these be not sufficiently satisfactory, in the sense I have stated the question in the beginning of my debate of it?

For the first of these; It is clear, that the King in his two last Papers hath abolished and extirpated that Episcopacy and Prelacy which we intended, and have so earnestly contested against; and contends now for no other but an Apostolicall Bishop, which is but the same in all things with an ordinary Minister or Presbyter; which Bishop being Apostolicall, and of divine Institution, we neither may, nor can, nor ever intended to abolish by our Covenant. To make this evident to all mens consciences: 1 The King hath yeelded to take away all the power and jurisdiction whatsoever exercised by our Bishops in point of censure or discipline, in his former answer: and contends for nothing now but their power of Ordination only: and that not solely vested in the Bishop, but in him and other Presbyters jointly: yet so as the Bishop should have a negative Voice in Ordinations. But the Houses voting this unsatisfactory, because that the p. 60Bishops for three years, during the continuance of the Presbyterian government, should have the chief power of Ordination; & after those three years the sole power, there being no others vested or intrusted with that power after the three years expired; so as Bishops might by this means creep in, and get up againe by degrees as high as ever. Thereupon the King in his finall Answer hereunto, though not fully satisfied in point of conscience, but that the power of Ordination is principally vested onelyonly in Bishops by Divine Authority, hath yet for our satisfaction, thus far condescended to us: First, that for three years next ensuing, during the Presbyteriall Government, no Bishops shall at all exercise this power of Ordination in the Church. Secondly, That if he can be satisfied in point of Conscience within that time, upon conference with Divines, That this power of Ordination, so far as to have a Negative voice in it, belongs not only unto Apostolical Bishops by a divine Right; then he wil fully consent to the utter abolition even of this power of Ordination in the Bishops. Thirdly, That after the three yeares are expired, if the King can neither satisfie his Houses in point of conscience, nor they him upon debate, That this power of Ordination belongs Iure Divino to Bishops; that yet the exercise of that power shall be totally suspended in them till He and both Houses shall agree upon a Government, and by Act of Parliament settle a Form of Ordination. So as if both Houses never consent that Bishops shall hereafter have a hand or negative voice in Ordination, this power of Bishops is perpetuaily suspended, and as to the exercise of it, perpetually abolished even by this Concession, so as it can never be revived again without both Houses concurring assents. And by this means, Episcopacy is totally extirpated root and branch, according to the Covenant, which hath been so much pressed in this debate, though the words of it have been somewhat mistaken, that we therein absolutely covenant to extirpate Episcopacy; when as the words are only, That we shall endeavour the extirpation of Prelacy, that is, of Archbishops and Bishops, &c. And that certainly we have done, and in a great measure accomplished, so far as to satisfie both the words and intention of the Covenant, though a concurrent power of Ordination be left in Bishops, which yet is now totally suspended: For as we covenant in the same clause to endeavour to root out Popery, Superstition, Heresie, Schisme, Prophanenesse, and whatsoever shall be found to be contrary to sound Doctrine, and the power of Godlinesse; in the extirpation of which, I am certain we have not proceeded by an hundred degrees, so farre as we have actually done in the extirpation of Episcopacy, there being no Proposition at all in the Treaty for the extirpation of Heresie, p. 61Schisme and Errors, as there is of Episcopacy;) and yet the Gentlemen who are so zealous for the Covenant, perswade themselves, they and we have not violated it in these particulars: therefore much less in the point of Prelacy and Bishops, since we have left them nothing at all but a meer power of Ordination, actually suspended from any future execution, but by both Houses assents. Fourthly, the King by abolishing Archbishops, and Deans and Chapters, hath also therein actually abolished all Bishops too for the future, except those who are already made. For by the Laws and custome of the Realm**See the Book of Ordination of Ministers, & Bishops, &c. 1. & 2. Ph. & Mar. c. 8.Mark 8 No Bishop can be consecrated but by an Archbishop, or some deputation from him, in case of sicknesse; nor any Bishop made or consecrated, unlesse he be first elected by the Dean and Chapter, upon a Conge deslier issued out to them to choose one. Now there being no Deanes and Chapters left to elect, nor Archbishop to consecrate any Bishop for the future, there can be no Bishop at all hereafter made in England or Ireland: and so the Bishop being thereby abolished and extirpated, his power of Ordination must be destroyed with his Function, as well as suspended. All which considered, I cannot but conclude, the Kings finall Answer as to the Office of, and Ordination by Bishops, to be compleatly satisfactory to our demands.

And so much the rather, because the King in this particular of Ordination, pleads only dissatisfaction in polnt of Conscience for closing with us in this seeming punctilio; and if it were not meerly Conscience (though some have over rashly censured it for a meer pretence to keep up Bishops still) he that hath granted and yeelded us the greater, would never contest with us for the lesser, nor go so far in the abolition of Episcopacy as he hath done. And truly, I doubt not, but His Majesty by conference may soon be satisfied in this point: Nay, had his own Divines dealt faithfully with him, in the Isle of Wight, He might have beene easily satisfied in this particular: in which I doubt not by Gods blessing to undertake to satisfie him both in point of Episcopacy, that it is in all things the same with Presbytery; and that the ordination of Presbyters and Ministers by divine Right, belongs only to Presbyters as such, and not to Bishops as Bishops; who for above a thousand years after Christ claimed the chief, but not the sole interest in it, not by divine Right and Authority, but meerly by Canons and Custom long after the Apostles time; which I have proved at large long since, in my Vnbishoping of Timothy and Titus, which none of the Bishops or their Patrons ever p. 62yet attempted to answer, though I particularly challenged them to do it.

Only this, I shall now say in brief, for some satisfaction in the point to other Members.

1. That there is no one Text of Scripture to prove, that Bishops Iure divine are distinct from Presbyters in any thing, much less in this particular of having a negative Voice, or sole, or principall interest, as Bishops (so distinguished) in the power of Ordination… but a direct Text to the contrary, 1 Tim. 4. 14 to omit others.

2 That the pretence of impropriating Ordination to Bishops distinct from Presbyters by divine Right, is grounded upon these two gross mistakes, that Timothy and Titus were Bishops properly so called; the one of Ephesus, the other of Crete; and that this power of ordaining Elders, was vested in them quatenus Bishops only, and not otherwise by divine institution; for proof of the first, the Postscript… of Pauls Epistles to them (and no one Text of Scripture) are cited; and the 1 Tim. 5. 22. Tit. 1. 5. relating only to Ordination, for the latter. But it is clear as the noon-day Sun, by Scripture, that Timothy was never a Bishop properly so called, much lesse the first or sole Bishop of Ephesus, as is evident by sundry texts, especially by Act. 20. 4, 5, 6, 15, 17, 18, 21, 29, 30, 31. compared together; nor Titus a Bishop properly so termed, distinct from a Presbyter; much lesse the first or sole Bishop of Crete: nor do either of those texts prove, that they had the power of Ordination by divine Right vested in them two, meerly as Bishops distinct from, or superiour to Presbyters, as I have undenyably manifested in my Vnbishoping of Timothy and Titus. And as for the Postscripts to these Epistles, terming Timothy ordained first Bishop of Ephesus, and Titus of Crete, they are no part of the text, first extant in, and invented by **This I have fully proved in my Vnbishoping of Timothy & Titus. And of the Antipathy of English Prelacy to Unity and Monarchy, par 1. 2. c. 9.Occumenius (none of the authentickst Authors) above 1050 years after Christ, and annexed only to the end of his Commentary on those Epistles, not adjoyned to the Text; and they are not only, omitted in most Manuscripts and printed Editions and Translations of these Epistles, but apparently false in themselves, as I have at large demonstrated in some printed Books. Therefore this point of conscience may soone be satisfied.

3 That no Bishops for 1200 years after Christ, did ever claim the chief power in Ordination by any Divine Right as Bishops, but meerly by Canons or Custom long after the Apostles; and that in the Primitive times, before any re…riction by Councels, Presbyters p. 63in many places did not only**See my Vnbishoping of Tim. and Titus, where this is largely proved. ordain Ministers and Deacous without Bishops, and Bishops never but jointly with Presbyters; but likewise ordaine Bishops themselves, as Ierome, Epiphanius, Augustine and others assure us; and sometimes joined in the consecration and enstallment of Popes themselves and Archbishops, for defect of Bishops.

4. That it is the**See this largely proved in my Vnbishoping of Timothy & Titus, and in Gersom. Bucerus de Gubernat. Ecclesiae. constant tenent of all the eminentest Protestant Divines (and some learned Papists too) and the practice of all the reformed Churches, that the Divine right of Ordination belongs originally to the whole Church; but ministerially to Presbyters as such, not to Bishops as Bishops: and that which undeniably clears it up to mee, is this. That in the New Testament wee find both Apostles, some of the 70 Disciples, Evangelists and Presbyters equally ordaining Elders or Presbyters: but not any one who is once in Scripture stiled a Bishop, either conferring orders upon any, much lesse eonomine & jure, as a Bishop. And since the Apostles time wee find in point of use and practice, Popes, Patriarchs, Archbishops, Metropolitans, Cardinalls, Abbots, in some places (who are not Iure Divino, nor Bishops properly so called, but distinguished from them in degree) ordaining Presbyters and Ministers as well as Bishops quatenus Bishops; and that never by themselves, but all by the Presbyters joint concurrence then present, who by the fourth Councell of Carthage, the Canon law, the very Canons of Trent also, and our owne book of Ordination and our Canons ought also to join with them in the Ordination: Now all these distinct Orders and Degrees, claiming and exercising this power by a Divine Right, and many of their Functions being confessed not to be of Divine Right, (as Popes, Patriarchs, Archbishops, Metropolitans, Abbots and Chorall Bishops) who yet ordain; and these alwaies necessarily calling Presbyters (who are clearly of Divine Right) to join with them in their Ordination, and not doing it alone, is an unanswerable proof to me, that they all concur in this action in no other right or notion at all, but meerly as they are Presbyters, in which they all accord, and have one and the same authority; not in their own capacities, wherein they are all discriminated, and are not all of Divine, but only of humane institution; Presbyters, quà Presbyters, being the properest persons to ordain others of their owne degree and function; as Doctors of Divinity, law and Physick in the Universities, create Doctors of their severall Professions; and Bishops consecrate Bishops and Archbishops; even as a man begets a man of his own quality and degree; and all other creatures generate those of their own kind, p. 64without the concurrence of any her distinct species paramount them.

As for the Angel of the Church of Ephesus (much insisted on in the Isle of Wight, to prove an Episcopacy Iure Divino distinct from Presbytery) I never read that this Angell ordained any Presbyters; eit…er quatenus Angel or Bishop: nor find I the name of a Bishop in any of St. Iohn's Writings, but the title of a Presbyter or Elder very frequent, by which himself is stiled. And I wonder much the King or his Bishops should now so much insist upon this Angel, and assert him to bee a Lord Bishop, not an ordinary Minister.

For first,**See my Antipathy of the English prelacy, part. 2. pag. 479. to 484. King Iames himself, and all the Bishops of Engl. with those learned men imployed by them in the last Translation of the Bible, in the very contents prefixed to this Chap. Rev. 2. resolve the Angells of those Churches to be Ministers, in these very words: What is commanded to be written to the Angels, THAT IS THE MINISTERS (not Bishop) of the Churches of Ephesus, Smyrna, &c. If then the Angels, by their joint confessions, when these Contents were first composed and prefixed, were only the Ministers (not Bishops) of these Churches, and have ever since been constantly admitted, confessed, and this published to be so even in our authorized Bibles used in all Churches, Chappels, Families, and printed cum privilegio five or six times a yeer, without any alteration or disallowance of this Exposition: I marvel much how the Bishops now dare inform the King, That these Angels certainly were only Bishops but not Ministers, diametrally contrary to these authorized Contents of their own or Predecessors affixing, with learned King Iames his approbation; or how his Majesty when Hee knowes it can beleeve them, though they should averr it, against His own Fathers, and the whole Church of Englands resolution, which hath so long received and approved this Translation (excluding all others in publick) and these Contents thereto prefixed.

Secondly, Admit this Angell of Ephesus to be a Diocesan Bishop, distinct: from an ordinary Presbyter, yet he was but an Apostate, who had lost his first love, ver. 4. And if Timothy (as they affirm) was sole Bishop of Ephesus, he must be the Apostate (being at that time living) unlesse he resigned his office to some other, which is improbable. And for our Bishops to father that divine Right of their Prelacy upon an Apostate Angell, is no good Divinity, and lesse Policy at this instant. And this their rotten foundation upon an Apostate, may probably be the ground, why so many Prelates in this and former ages have turned Apostates after they were created Bishops.

p. 65Thirdly, if those Angells in the Revelation were really Lord Bishops, then certainly the Elders therein mentioned can bee no other then Presbyters, not Bishops, as the Prelates themselves will grant: And if so, then verily the Presbyter is the supream of the two, both in point of Dignity, Ministry, and precedency; which is very observable. For first, I find the 24 Elders there mentioned, sitting upon twenty four seats round about Christs Throne (and nearest to it) Rev. 4. 4. c. 11. 16. but the Angells standing (not sitting) round about it and them, without any seats at all provided for them (as inferiour attendants,) Rev. 5. 11. c. 7. 11. Secondly, I find these Elders not onelyonly sitting on seats next Christs throne; but likewise cloathed with white rayment and having on their heads Crownes of Gold the embleme of supream Authority, power and honor) Rev. 4. 4. 10. whereas the Angells had neither white rayment nor Crowns; so it seems Bishops had no lawn sleeves, nor Rochets, nor Miters then, though they have since usurped and robd the Presbyters of them.

Thirdly, These Elders, not the Angells, are there alwayes introduced **Rev. 4. 10, 11. c. 5. 8, 9. c. 11. 16, 17, 18.Rev 4:10Rev 4:11worshipping and falling downe before Christs Throne; holding harps and golden viols in their hands full of odors, representing the prayers of the Saints, and singing the new song to him; as the principal Officers and Ministers of Christ) when as the Angells standing by, act or speak little in these kinds, like our late dumb unpreaching and rare-praying Prelates.

Fourthly, the 24 Elders (not the Angells) sing this new Song of praise to Christ, 1 Rev. 5. 9. 10. Worthy art thou to take the booke, &c. And hast made us Kings and Priests (not Angells or Bishops) to God the Father; and we (not the Angels) that REIGN on the Earth, therefore in all these respects, if the Angells in the Apocalypse bee Bishops, as our Prelates dreame; the Elders must of necessity jure divino, bee their Superiors and Lords paramount in point of dignity, honour, Soveraignty, Ministry, and they inferiour in jurisdiction and power unto Presbyters, not superior, as they would really make themselves. When his Majesty shall be informed of these, and many other particulars of this kinde, I doubt not but his conscience will be so much satisfied, as wholly to forgoe and lay aside his pretended Apostolicall Bishops, both in point of function and ordination too, as being the same with Presbyters. And since in his last paper but one, he hath professed to retain no other Bishops, but such as are Apostolicall; p. 66he must presently quit all those about him, and their possessions too, since neither of them are Apostolicall,**Acts 20. 17. 28. Phil. 1. 1. Tit. 1. 5, 6, 7.Acts 20:17Acts 20:28Phil 1:1Titus 1:5Titus 1:6Titus 1:7 the Apostolicall Bishops being many alwaies over one Church and Congregation, not one over many Churches, or an whole Diocesse, as ours are: and having no Palaces, Mannors, Lands and Possessions: as I shall prove in the next particular, which comes to be now debated, having fully cleared this to be satisfactory.

For the second question concerning the sale of Bishops lands, how far the King hath condescended to it? And whether the Kings answers to the first branch of that Proposition bee satisfactory in the premised sense?

I confesse I find this the grand and most swaying Argument of all others used by those who differ from me in the Treaty, as not satisfactory, because the King absolutely refuseth to agree to the sale of Bishops Lands, for the satisfaction of those publike debts, for which they are engaged by both Houses, whereby purchasers and lenders upon that assurance, will be not only defrauded but cheated of their debts and purchases, many of them quite undone and ruined, and the honor and publick faith of both Houses for ever forfeited and laid in the dust. And indeed this is a very sensible argument, especially to such Members who have either purchased Bishops lands, or advanced moneys upon their security, very fit to bee fully answered; which I shall endeavour to doe, I hope to their full satisfaction and content.

I confesse it to be most just and equall, that all who have purchased Bishops Lands, or advanced moneys to the State upon them, should receive ful satisfaction, and be no losers by it, but rather gainers: And I could have as heartily desired as any Member in this House, that the King in this particular of Bishops lands had given us plenary satisfaction; the rather because I was imployed by the Houses as one of the Contractors (though without my seeking, and to my prejudice, by neglecting my calling, and receiving as yet not one farthing salary for it, though I have spent and lost some hundred of pounds in and by that imployment) and had he really done it, I presume few Members of this House now of a different opinion, would have voted the Kings Answers to the whole Treaty unsatisfactory. But to take them as they are.

p. 67First, the King hath so far condescended to their sale and disposall, made or to be made; as that the purchasers shall by Act of Parliament enjoy a lease of them, not from the Bishops themselves but from the Crown for 99. yeares space, reserving only the reversions afterward to the Crowne, and that for the use of the Church in generall terms.

Secondly, The King will bee content with the reservation only of the old, or some other moderate rent to Him and His Heirs, to bee imployed only for the Churches use and benefit.

Thirdly, That for the absolute sale or alienation of them, he cannot in point of conscience consent unto it, being Sacriledge, and an unlawfull Act in the opinion of all Divines, as well in forraigne Reformed Churches as Domestick.

This (I remember and conceive) is the sum of his finall answer to this Proposition.

To examine these particulars a little in the generall, and then by parts.

First, I must make bold to inform you in the generall; That the King and His Predecessors, Kings of this Realm, were the**See Goodwin, Catalogue of English Bishops. Rastalls abridgement, Tit. Bishops sust fruits & …, Originall founders of all our Bishoprieks, and patrons of them. That all their Lands, Rent and Revenues whatsoever, originally proceeded from the Crown and Kings of England, of whom they are bolden; and that in times of vacancy, the King enjoyes the profits of their temperalities, as a part of His Royall Revenue, and receives both tenths and first-fruits out of them upon every death or translation of the Bishops. And therefore there is very great reason and Justice too, they should be still held of the Crowne, and not totally translated out of it, and that the King and His successors should receive some reasonable Revenue or compensation out of them, parting with such an interest in recompence for them.

Secondly, That in the severall Treaties with the King, Februar. 1. 1641. and Iuly 11. 1646. All the Lands, Possessions, Rents and Reversions both of Archbishops and Bishops, and likewise of Deans and Chapters, and other Officers of Cathedrall and Collegiate Churches, were by Act of Parliament to be settled in the very reall and actuall possession of the King, His Heirs and Successors for ever, to their own proper use, except only their Impropriations, Advowsons, Tythes, and Pensions which are not now to bee sold. And, that the**A Colllection &c. p. 124… 125. 902. Ordinances for setling of Bishops Lands, Rents and Possessions p. 68in Fe…ffees, **A Collection, &c. …. 922, 23, &c.and engaging and selling them for the monies lent upon the Publick saith and doubled, to raise 200000. l. for disbanding of the Scotch Army, passed on the Houses till October and November, 1646: till which time there was no thought nor intent at all, to sell or alienate them from the Crowne. If then the King in two or three former Treaties, by both Houses full and free consent, and a**A Colllection p. 124, 125. Bill passed by them for that purpose; was to enjoy to himselfe, his Heirs and Successors all the demesne Lands, Mannors, Possessions, Reversions, Rents, Inheritances and Revenues of Archbishops and Bishops; and likewise of Deans and Chapters, Prebends, and the like, it seems to me very just & reasonable, that he should demand and enjoy the Reversions of them after ninety nine years, and such a moderate Rent as he and both Houses shall agree on. And that this Answer of the Kings, wherein he demands so little now, only for the Churches use and benefit, not his own should be fully satisfactory, because we were very well content in former Treaties, He and his Heirs should enjoy the whole, only to their own use.

Thirdly, That near one moiety of the Archbishops and Bishops possessions and revenues, consists in Impropriations, Tythes, Pensions, and the like, which the King is content wholly to part with for the encrease of Ministers means, and the benefit of the Church, without any Reservation or Recompence: And with all Deans and Chapters Lands and Revenues to boot. Therefore it should be unsatisfactory, or unreasonable in no mans judgement, for the King to reserve some interest in the Reversions and Rents only of their demesne lands.

Fourthly, The King demands the Riversions of the Lands after ninety nine years, and some present moderate Rent, not for the use and support of the Bishops, and to keep a root for them to grow up again in our Church, (as hath been mistaken by some;) Archbishops and Bishops too, being extirpated root and branch by the Kings former Answers (as I have manifested;) but only for the use of the Church, in such manner as the King and we shall agree to settle them who shall take care that no Bishop shall be a sharer in them, all being to bee setled in the CROWNE alone, and nothing in Reversion or Possession to, in or upon the Bishops.

Fifthly, The King consents, that the Purchasers of Bishops Lands p. 69shall by Act of Parliament have a Lease of them for ninety nine years, reserving the Reversion only after that terme: which I conceive is no ill, but a very good bargain for the Purchasers; such a Lease by Act of Parliament, being far better then the whole Inheritance by a bare Ordinance of both Houses, which for ought I know, if not confirmed by a subsequent Act of Parliament, will prove little better then a Tenancy at Will, or a Lease so long only as this Parliament continues; Ordinances of both Houses only without the Kings Royall assent thereto being a new device of this present Parliament; to supply some present necessities for our necessary defence and preservation, during the Kings absence and hostility, never known nor used in any former Parliaments, what ever hath been conceived to the contrary. Therefore this offer of the K. is no prejudice at all, but a great advantage to the Purchasers, wherewith they should rest fully satisfied. But admit it be any losse at all to them, and not rather a gain (as things now stand in our tottering condition,) yet it is only of the reversion of these lands after ninety nine years, worth not above one quarter or halfe a years purchase at the utmost; which considering the low values at which Bishops lands are sold, and the cheap rate now that most purchasers gave for Bills of Publick faith, with which they bought them, they may be well content to lose, to secure their purchases for ninety nine years, in these tumultuous and fluctuating times; when some wise men who have made such purchases, would very gladly give two or three years purchase, if not more, at the assurance Office, to any who will ensure their estates in Bishops lands for so long a term, and think they had a good bargain too, at leastwise far better then the Bishops in case they should revive again, as some fear, who must be kept starving for 99 years, in expectation of a dry Reversion. All which considered, the Kings Answers touching such Reversions, I humbly conceive will be very satisfactory to the purchasers of Bishops lands themselves; who are most displeased with it.

As to that which hath been objected,Object. that some have purchased Reversions of Bishops Lands after 99 years in being, who must absolutely lose their purchase money after this rate, which is neither just nor honourable for the Parliament.

I answer,Answer. that this is but the case of three or foure only: that their purchases are of no considerable value: nor bought fingly by themselves, but jointly with Lands or Rents p. 70in possession of good value; in which they had the cheaper purchase to take off the Reversion after so long a term, which losse in the Reversion they may contentedly undergoe to purchase their owne and the Kingdomes peace, and enjoy what they have purchased with these Reversions in possession, without trouble or eviction by Act of Parliament for 99, years space, or receive other satisfaction from the King and Parliament to their contentment in such manner as I shall presently inform you.

Sixtly, To that concerning the present Rents which the Kingdemands out of Bishops Lands which sticks most with Purchasers: many of them having purchased nothing but Rents, and others more rents then Lands in possession, which Rents must all be lost, if they must pay their old rents over to the King to their undoing, which would be both unjust, unconscionable, and dishonourable to the Houses, upon whose assurance and engagement to enjoy their bargains, they were induced both to lend money on, and to purchase these Lands afterwards, and would be no better then plain cheating, and render them odious to all the world, as some have objected.

I will not answer it with Caveat emptor, but desire them to observe that the King in his answer, doth not peremptorily require the Bishops old rents during the 99. years, but only disjunctively, either the old Rent, or some other moderate Rent to be agreed on, and if only a moderate proportion of the old rent be paid to the King, the Purchaser is sure to enjoy, the residue during the 99 yeares, and so his purchase money not totally lost, as is objected. Besides, the King will not reserve these Rents to the use of himselfe, or the Crown, but only to the Church, and maintenance of the Ministers, in such manner as He and his Houses shall agree in the Bill for setling these Lands, in the way propounded by him. Which offer opens this just and honourable way for the Houses to give all Purchasers of Bishops Land and Rents full satisfaction both for the losse of their reversions after 99 years, and for the present rents which shall be reserved to the Crown out of Bishops Lands to the Churches use, which I beleeve the King and Houses will readily consent to; and that is, to settle by Act of Parliament, so much of the Dean and Chapters demein Lands and Rents, upon the Purchasers, as the losse of their p. 63Reversions after 99. years, and present Rent to the Crowne shall amount unto, upon a just computation. By which means the Purchasers, by way of Exchange of Deans and Chapters Lands and Rents for their Bishops, shall have such full and satisfactory content, even in kind, as will cleare the Honour, justice, and Reputation of the Houses fair dealings in this particular, throughout al the world, and give the Ministers full satisfaction likewise, for the augmentation of whose livings and maintenance the Deanes and Chapters Lands and Rents are designed; by settling the reversion and Rents reserved to the Crown out of the Bishops Lands, for the Churches use, upon those who should have enjoyed the Deans and Chapters Lands thus settled on the Purchasers by exchange, which being of equall value, can be no losse nor prejudice to any.

This is such a visible and reall satisfaction to all purchasers, as none of them can justly open their mouths against, being both for their owne security and advantage, and the Kingdomes settlement. But if any of them dislike this reall satisfaction (which the King no doubt will yeeld to) there is an other means provided by this very Treaty for their satisfaction; and that is, by ready money, for what ever they shall lose by Bishops Lands in possession or reversion, by this Reservation to the Crown, which I am sure they never will nor can refuse in Justice or equity; they having the Bishops Lands conveyed to them only, by way of Morgage or security for Moneys lent upon the publike faith. And the houses by the 12th. Article of this Treaty have time within two years space by Act or Acts, to raise any summes of money for the payment of the publique debts of the Kingdome, whereof the moneys lent upon Bishops Lands and the publique faith, are a principall part; and the same Justice of the Houses which hath already provided by severall Ordinances, a sufficient recompence and satisfaction for purchasers of Bishops Lands in cases of eviction, or of emergent charges and incumbrances discovered after the purchases made, may be a sufficient assurance to them of the Houses Justice, that they will give them as good or better satisfaction by one of these two wayes I have here propounded, for any thing they shall part with to the King or Church for the settlement of the Kingdomes peace.

p. 64Seventhly, it hath beene the solemn Protestation and Declaration of both Houses of Parliament, in all their Remonstrances to the King, Kingdome and forraigne States, that they have taken up defensive Armes against the Kings Party, onelyonly for the maintenance of Religion, Lawes, Liberties, &c. and to bring Delinquents to condigne punishment. Now Bishops Lands and Rents, I am certaine, are neither our Religion, Lawers, nor Liberties; and I thinke they are no Delinquents, though most Bishops are. And shall we now after seven yeares Warres, and sixty dayes Treaty, make Bishops Lands, which for five yeares time or more of our Warres were never thought of, the sole or principall cause at least of our present breach with the King, and the onelyonly ground of a new Warre? God forbid: will not the world then justly censure us for notorioūs hypocrites and impostors, pretend…ng one thing, and intending another? will they not then say, that Bishops Palaces and Lands were the onelyonly Religion and Liberty we have fought for, the onelyonly Delinquents we have brought to publick Justice and execution? that we would never have suppressed Archbishops and Bishops, nor entred into a solemne League and Covenant, with bands listed up to heaven, to endeavour to extirpate them as Antichristian, but onelyonly to gaine and retaine all their Lands and Revenues, and never condemned their Functions, but onelyonly to seize on their Possessions? And that we must now maintaine an Army upon their exhausted Purses and Estates, only to defend these Parchasers Titles to the Bishops Inheritances? If so, for shame let us never break off this Treaty, nor ruine two or three Kingdomes upon such an absurd dissatisfaction as this: And if our Parchasers of Bishops Lands shall still refuse to rest satisfied with that twofold recompence I have formerly mentioned, and keep up an Army to maintaine their Purchases, rather then yeeld to any reason, I shall humbly move, that not the whole Kingdome, but themselves may defray the Armies Taxes and Quarters, and then I am certaine they will have a dearer bargaine then what the King or I have proposed for their satisfaction.

And the better to perswade them to embrace this compensation I have onelyonly this more to offer both to them and you; That if you break off with the King upon this point, or close with the Army, they are most certaine to lose all for a bare Ordinance of both Houses in no legall Title, nor good security aganst King or Bishops, without the Kings concurrence and Royall assent unto it, p. 65and valid no longer then maintained by the Sword, the worst and most hazardous Title of all others, which will quickly cost the Purchasers and Kingdome treble the value of all the Bishops Revenues: and if they close with the Army to break the Treaty, they tell them in direct termes in print, in The Case of the Army truly stated (presented to the Generall by the Agitators of the Army at Hampstead, October, 15. 1647.) pag. 16. That whereas the times were wholly corrupt, when persons were appointed to make sale of Bishops Lands; and whereas Parliament-men, Committee-men, and Kin…folks were the onelyonly buyers, and much is sold, and yet it's presended, that little or no money is received: And whereas Lords, Parliament-men, and some other rich men, have vast summes of Arrears allowed them in their Purchase, and all their moneys lent to the State paid them, while others are left in necessity, to whom the State is much indebted, and so present Money that might be for the equall advantage of all, is not brought into the publike Treasury by those sales: Its therefore to bea insisted on, that the sale of Bishops Lands bee reviewed, and that they may be sold to their worth; and for present Moneys for the publike use, and that the sale of all such be recalled as have not been sold to their worth, or for present money.

This particular among others, they professe they have entred into a solemne engagement to prosecute, and are now marched up to London accordingly to pursue it, as their late Remonstrance and Declaration intimates, and themselves professe by word of mouth; which I desire the Members who have purchased Bishops Lands (who are generally most unsatisfied with the Kings answers, especially in this particular) seriously to consider, and then to make their Election; Whether they will now close with the Kings Concessions, and what I have here propounded for satisfaction of their Reversions after 99. years, and present Rents they may chance to part with, and so secure their purchases for this terme by Act of Parliament, and have full compensation for what they part with, either in ready money, or Deans and Chapters Lands and Rents, and so be no losers, but great gainers by the bargaine; or else break with the King to please the Army, and so be certaine to lose all between them, not onelyonly once, but twice over: for the Agitators in the Army tell them plainely, That all their Purchases shall be reviewed; and if they have purchased them to an under rate, or not for ready Money (which not one of them hath done, but by Tickets of their owne, or bought at very low values of others, which 'tis like p. 66they will also examine) that then their sales shall be absolutely recalled, and sold to others at full values for ready money, and so all is lost in good earnest; or else they must re-purchase them for ready moneys at higher values, without any assurance from the King by Act of Parliament, and so lose them againe the second time, if ever He or his Prelaticall party should prevaile, and yet be enforced to answer and restore all the meane Profits they have taken to boot. A very hard chapter and bargain to digest, if they advisedly consider it, which by accepting the Kings offer is most certainly prevented: Who perchance in shore time, upon second thoughts, and conference with learned men for the satisfaction of his conscience in the point of sacriledge, if he should consent to the totall alienation of these Lands from the Church, may come up fully to our desires, and part with the very inheritance to the purchasers, as amply a… they have purchased it, rather then leave his owne and the Kingdomes interest wholly unsettled.

And for my part, I make little question, that had the Prelates and Clergy-men with the King at the Isle of Wight, dealt candidly and cleerly with him in this particular, of the sale of Bishops Lands, that might have easily satisfied his conscience in this very thing, as well as in others; from these grounds and matters of fact, which I shall but point at, to satisfie others, who perchance are scrupulous herein (even in point of conscience) as well as the King.

First, the King in his last Paper …, in expresse terms protesseth, That he hath abalished all but the Apostolicall Bishops, invested with a Negative Vay…e or Power in point of Ordination: And if so, then I am certain, he hath likewise abolished all Bishops Palaces, Lordships, Revenues, Rents and Possessions; it being most certaine, that neither the Apo…ls themselves, not any Apostolicall Bishops of their Ordination, in their dayes, or for above 300. yeers after, had any Lands or Possessions annexed to their Apostleships, or Bishopricks, but lived meerely upon the aaMat. 8. 22. Luke 8. 2. Acts 3. 6. c. 4. 34. 35. 36. 37. c. 10. 10 5. c. 20. 34. 1 Cor. 4. 12. 1 Thes. 2. 9. Phil. 4. 10. 10. 20. 1 Cor. 11. 7, 8, 9. Gal. 1. 8.Matt 8:22Luke 8:2Acts 3:61 Cor 4:121 Thess 2:9Phil 4:10Phil 4:201 Cor 11:71 Cor 11:81 Cor 11:9Gal 1:8a…ms and voluntary contributions of the people, (as Christ himselfe, Paul and the other Apostles did) as allbbSee M. Seldens Hist. of Tythes. Historiant accord If then his Majesty will retain none but Apostolicall Bishops, he must necessarily take away their temporall, Lands and possessions annexed to then Bishopricks, to make them such, if he hath not already done is by his finall Answer to this proposition, as I conceive he hath.

p. 67Secondly, it is generally agreed by Historians, that Constantine the great, (our owne Country-man borne, and first Crowned Emperour at York, ccPolychron. l. 4. c. 26. See. D. Crakenthorp of Const. Donat. Euseb. de. v…a Constamin.to the eternall honour of our Island, he being the first Christian Emperour, and greatest advancer of the Christian Religion, and destroyer of Paganism) was the first who endowed the Church and Bishops with any temporall Possessions, about 350. yeers after Christ, though his pretended donation to the Pope, be but a meere fable; as Doctor Crakenthorp and others have manifested at large. Nowddc. 22. in vita Sylvestri. Ioannes Parisiensis, Nauclerus eeHist. l. 4. c. 26:Polychronicon, our English ApostleffDialog. l. 4. c. 15, 16, 17. 26. Iohn Wickliffe, our noble Martyr theggFox Acts and Monu. p. 517. 522. Lord Cobham, hhAnswer to the Preface of M Moores Book, p 116.Iohn Frith a Martyr, learnediiSer. on Hag. 1 p. 176. Defence of the Apology. part 6. c. 9. divis. 3.Hag 1 Bishop Iewell, andkkTho. Becons Reports of certaine men, vol. 3. f 341. others out of them record, That when Constantine endowed the Church and Bishops with temporall Lands and possessions, the voice of an Angel was heard in the Ayre, crying out; Hodie venenum insunditur in Ecclesiam, this day is poyson powred into the whele Church of God: And from that time, say they, because of the great Riches the Church had, she was made the more secular; and had more worldly businesse, then spirituall devotion; and more pomp and boast outward, then holinesse inward: Religio peperit divilias, & filia devoravit matrem, which our Bishops and Translators of the Bible likewise mention in their Epistle prefixt to it. AndllOpus 90. Dierun, c. 124. Ockam saith, and others observe, That whereas all or most of the Bishops of Rome before that time were Martyrs, scarce one of them proved a Martyr afterwards; but in stead of being Martyrs, fell a persecuting and making Martyrs. And if this voyce of the Angel (perchance a Bishop, since our Prelates will needs have the Angels in Rev. 2. to bee Bishops) weretrue, and subsequent experience hath found it so, That Bishops and Church-mens Temporall Lands, Possessions and endowments, are no other but poyson to the Church, and his Majesty be convinced of the truth of this story, I hope he will be satisfied in point of Conscience, that it is no sacriledge, but wholesome Physick, to take away this poyson from the Church, which hath so much infected, corrupted, and would in fine destroy it and the Bishops too, and eat out all their piety and devotion.

Thirdly, most Bishops long after Constantines time, had very small or no Revenues, Lands, and no other Palaces to reside in, but poor little Cottages; it being all mens opinion in those dayes,mmFox Acts and Monu. vol. 2. p. 609. 610. That stately Palaces belonged onelyonly unto Emperours and Princes, and Cottages and Churches unto Bishops. ThennGra. dist. 41. fourth councell p. 68of Carthage, about the yeare of our Lord 390. decreed, That the Bishop should have HOSPITIOLVM, ali…tle COTTAGE or Hospitall to dwell in, neer the Church, not a Palace. And in the ooSpel. Concil. tom. 1. p. 261. 263.Excerptions of Egbert Archbishop of York, An. 750. I find the same Canon renewed among us, as the Canon Law of this Realm, That Bishops and Presbyters should have Hospitiolum, a small Cottageneer the Church to live in; not a stately Mansion. So as our Bishops in those dayes had no great Palaces, Mannours, Temporalities, and their very Cathedrals were built onelyonly with Wattle, or a few boards pieced together, and covered but with reed; Stone-Churches covered over with Slat or Lead, being not in use among the Britians, Scots or Irish for many hundred yeers, as ppDe Brit. Eccl. Primordiis c. 4. p. 661. 736. 737. 13. 14.Bishop Vsher himselfe asserts out of Beda, Eccles. hist. l. 3. c. 4. 5. and Bernard in the life of Malachy: And if their Cathedrall Churches were so meane, their Palaces certainly were but answerable (poor little Cottages) and their revenues little or nothing… but the peoples Almes. Saint Augustine that renowned Bishop of Hippo, had but a meane house to live in, his Dishes and Trenchers were all Earthen, Stone, or Wood, his Table furnished with Pulse, Hearbs and a little Pottage onelyonly, for the most part, seldome with Flesh: he had no Plate, but five or fix Spoones, and when he dyed he made no Will at all, because the poore Saint of Christ had nothing to bequeath; asqqc. 21, 22. &c. Possidonius records in his life.rrSee his Life before his Works, ho. 33. in Matth. 21. in 1 Cor.Matt 21 Saint Chrysostome the Great famous Patriarch of Constantinople,… and Gregory Nazianzen his Predecessor, had no stately Palace, Furniture, Houshold stuffe, traine of Attendance, nor any goods or Revenues at all, norttNiceph. Eccl. hist. l. 18. c. 39. n Niceph. l. 8. c. 42. Socra. eccl. hist. l. 1. c. 12. Iohn the Almoner that succeeded them, nor that famousssNaz. ora… 35. Spiridion, who kept a stocke as a mean Shepherd, though a Bishop: and eminent Saint Hierom (though no Bishop, yet the learnedst and famous Scholar in his age, or any after, and of great repute,xxEpist. 2. writes of himselfe, that he lived in pa…peri Tuguriolo, in a poore little cottage, having scarce clothes to cover his nakednesse. SoyyM. Wheten. p 44, 45, 46. Saint Ambrose, Bishop of Millaine, was very poore, brake the Chalices in pieces to relieve poore people, and used this Maxime, Gloriosa in Sacerdotibus Domini paupertas. And if these great Lights, Bishops and Fathers of the Church (in whose Names our Prelates so much triumph) were so poor, that they had no Palaces, Houses and temporall Possessions, as our Arch-bishops and Bishops had; I can yet discerne no matter of concience in it, why our Bishops should have more then these Pillars of the Church, either enjoyed or desired, they being content p. 69with food and raiment as Paul was, and desiring no more. It iszzSulpitius Scverus sacr. hist. l. 2. Vssertus de Brit. Ec. Primordiis, p. 196. storied of our ancientest Bishops that I read of, present at the Councell of Ariminum, Anno Domini 379. That they were so poore, that inopia preprii, publico ust sunt, they were maintained at the Emperours publique cost, for want of private maintainance of their owne; yet they were eminent both for Piety and Learning. And if their Predecessors were anciently so poore, it is no point of conscience to deprive our Lord Bishops, not onelyonly of their Lands, but Function too, for the peace and settlement of three Kingdoms, now at the point of ruine. When the Church of Christ was miserably rent and torn in Affrica by the schismaticall Donatists, who would have no Prelates and Bishops; that eminent Bishop of Hippo Saint Augustine, and almost three hundred Affrican Bishops more, were content to lay downe their Bishopricks wholly for that Churches peace: and thereupon SaintaaAugust. de Gestis … Emeri…a, Dona…. Tom. 7. parl. 1. p. 772. Augustine uttered these memorable words, which I heartily with all our Bishops would consider, and then they would lay downe both their Lands and Bishopricks too, for our three Kingdomes present peace. An vero Redemptor noster, &c? What verily did our Redeemer descend from Heaven it selfe into humane members, that we should bee made his members, and doe we feare to descend out of our Chaires, left …is very members should be torn in pieces with cruell divisions? We are ordained Bishops for Christian people; that therefore which profitith Christian people to Christian peace, that let us doe concerning our Episcopacy. What I am, I am for thee, if it profit thee; I am not if it hurt thee. If we be profitable Servants, why do we envy the eternall gains of our Lord for our temporall sublimities? Our Episcopall dignity will be more fruitfull to us, if being laid downe, it shall more unite the flock of Christ, then if it shall desperse it being retained. If when I shall retaine my Bishoprick, I shall disperse the flock of Christ, how is this dammage of the flocke the honour of the Pastour? for with what forehead shall we hope for the honour promised in the world to come from Christ, if our honour in this world hinder Christian Vnity? They had no Bishops Lands then to part with, but yet for Peace and Unity sake, they were thus content to part with their very Bishopdoms themselves. And will not the King then in point of conscience part with the Bishops Lands for our present Peace, when he shall know or be truly informed of all this?

Fourthly, for the Judgement of Divines, I could produce divers against the great Possessions of Bishops in all ages; as making them p. 70secular, proud, vitious, lasie, which I havebb…n my breviate of the Prelares Vsur-Pations Epist. Dedicatory and Appendix; The antipathy of English Prelacy, par. 2. formerly published at large: but I shall onelyonly at present informe you, that our famous ccDialogo…um, l. 4 c. 15, 16, 17, 18. 26, 27. Walsing. hist. p. 305. 302 to 307. Fox Acts & Monuments 398. 414. 431. 434.Iohn Wickliffe professedly maintained, That the King and temporal Lords grievously sinned, in endowing the Bishops with large temperall possessions, which hath reversed Christs Ordinances, and procreated Antichrist; and that they were bound in conscience to take away their Lands and Temporalties from them, which they had abused to Pride, Ambition, Discord &c. His Disciples, or noble Martyrs, William Swinderby, Iohn Purvey, Sir Iohn Oldcastle; and after them, Pierce Plowman, Geffrey Chaucer, Mr. Tyndall, Doctor Barnes, Iohn Firth, Sir Iohn Borthwike, (a Martyr) the Author of a Supplication to King Henry the eight, the Author of the Image of a very Christian Bishop, and of a Counterfeit Bishop: William VVraughton, in his Hunting of the Remish Fox; Mr. Fish, in his Supplication of Beggers; Henry Stalbridge, in his exhortatory Epistle, and others, are of the like judgement; and Roderick Mors, in his Supplication to the Parliament, (in Henry the eight his Reigne;) to omit Penry, and others, in Queene Elizabeths Reigne. And why there should be more Sacriledge in taking away Bishops Lands in England then in Scotland, or Abbey Lands heretofore from Abbeys and Priories, I cannot yet discerne. All which considered, I hope his Majesties conscience may and will be rectified in this particular, before the Treaty be absolutely confirmed by Acts of Parliament; so as this of Bishops Lands shall make no breach between us: In clearing which, I have beene the more prolix, because it is most insisted on of any thing, in point of dis-satisfaction, both by the King and us.

As for all our other Propositions, relating to the Peace and settlement of the Church, the King hath fully assented to them interminis: as namely, to the Bill for the better advancement of the preaching of Gods word, and setting godly Ministers in all parts of the Kingdome: To a Bill against Pluralities, and Non residencie: To an Act of Confirmation for the calling and setling of the Assembly of Divines: To an Act for the confirmation of the Directory, and abolishing the Booke of Common-Prayer throughout the Kingdome, and in the Kings owne Chappell too (yeelded unto in the Kings finall answer, though formerly stuck upon;) to an Act for taking the covenant throughout the Realme, only the King sticks at it (as yet unsatisfied in conscience) as to the taking of it himselfe without some qualifications in it, which a Committee were appointed p. 71to consider of, but have not yet reported ought to the House. Besides, he hath approved the lesser Catechism as far as you desired, who rest satisfied with his answer concerning it: And as for the Presbyteriall Government, he hath absolutely consented to settle it for three years.

But it hath been much insisted on by many,Object. That the Kings Grant of the Presbyterian Government is no wayes… satisfactory, because only for three years; And therefore they will break off the Treaty for this reason, and vote the Kings answers upon the whole unsatisfactory, because too short in this particular.

To which I answer,Answ. That the King in terminis hath granted as much as we desired. We desired its settlement but for three years, and many who most pretend dissatisfaction in this point now did, and do indeed desire no setled Government at all, no not for three years space: Therefore if there be any default in this, it was in the Houses Proposition only, not in the Kings answer, who was not obliged to grant us in this particular, or any other, more than we desired. Secondly, after the three years expiration the Presbyterian Government must remain till a new be agreed upon by consent of the King and both Houses, upon conference and advice with the Assembly of Divines, or that further established if found best and most sutable in the interim.

So as now upon all the branches of this Treaty, and the Kings answers thereunto, I conceive the Kings answers to be compleatly satisfactory in that sense I have stated and debated the question, as well for the safety and settlement of our Church and Religion as Kingdom; though the Kings Answers come not up fully to the Propositions in some two or three particulars only.

It is storied of**Plut. Apop…th. Alexander the Great, that one demanding of him to give him a penny, he returned him this answer; That it was too little for Alexander to give: Whereupon he demanded a Talent of him; whereunto he replyed, It was too much for a begger to receive. We have demanded of the King in our own and the Kingdomes behalf in former Treaties, but a penny in comparison, and then the King refused to grant it, though we would have been heartily contented with it, or lesse: But now we have in this Treatty demanded a Talent, and the King hath not thought it overmuch for him to grant, or for us to receive, and if we shall now ungratefully reject it, we know not why our selves, unlesse it be that God hath infatuated, and designed us unto speedy ruine for our sins; I must p. 72needs take up our Saviours Lamentation over dying Ierussalem, in relation unto England: **Luk 19 42.Luke 19:42O that thou hadst known in this thy day, the things that belong unto thy Peace; but now they are hid from thine eyes. And I pray God they be not so far hid, that we shall never live to see any peace or settlement at all in Church or State, if we embrace not those Concessions now; the best, the largest, the honourablest, the safest, and most beneficiall that ever was tendred to any People by a King; and if we now reject, we shall never have the moity of them granted us again, no though we soek them carefully with tears, as Esau did his last blessing, when he had overslipt his time but a very little.

For mine own part, I value no mens bare opinions in this debate, but their reasons which inforce them; and if I have not quite lost my reason and senses too, I have not heard one solid reason given by any Gentleman that differs from me, why the Kings Concessions upon the whole Treaty should be so unsatisfactory as utterly to reject them, and proceed no further. Most of the reasons to the contrary have been either cleer mistakes, both of the question, and Kings Answers, or our Propositions; (and mistakes are no reasons, but irrationall;) or a fear in some Purchasers of Bishops Lands of an ill bargain, which I presume I have fully satisfied,Object. or that which is to me the most unreasonable (though many Gentlemens chief and only reason) the Armies discontent and dissatisfaction, in case we vote it satisfactory: to which I shall give this Answer:

That though I honour the Army for their good services heretofore in the Field and Wars,Answ. and should as readily gratifie all their just desires as Souldiers, as any man; yet I must with just disdain and censure look upon their Magisteriall encroachments upon our Councels, and prescriptions to us, what to vote in our debates, or else they will be incensed, as the highest violation to the Freedom, … Honour and Priviledges of Parliament, not to be Presidented in former times, nor now to be endured. We all sit here, freely to speak our own Mindes, not the Armies pleasure; to follow our own consciences and judgments, not their imperious dictates; to satisfie the whole Kingdom, and those who have intrusted and sent us hither, whose Representatives and servants we are (not the Armies) by pitching upon that which is most conducing to their p. 73welfare and our own too; not to satisfie the Army in all their unreasonable extravagant demands, (who are but ours and the Kingdoms servants, not Masters) to the Kingdoms, Peoples, our own ruine, and the Armies too. And so much the rather, because I have observed a dangerous practice in some Officers and Members only of the Army, to make use of the whole Armies name, (without their privity or consents) forcibly to drive on their own private pernicious Designs in the House, and to fright and cudgell us into Votes (as some say we were cudgelled into a Treaty) with the very name of the Army, without any reason at all; and if that will not doe the feat, then they presently mutiny, and bring up the Army it self to or neer the Houses doors against them, contrary to our expresse commands (as heretofore and now they have done) to force us to Vote against our judgements, consciences, reason, and the publique safety, what ever they shall dictate, be it never so absurd, dishonorable to our selves, or destructive to the Kingdom; and though the Army, and those who usurp their name be not present at our debates (as they seldom are, though some of them are Members) yet if they suit not with their foreplotted Designs, they will presently censure them and those that passe them, without hearing or weighing of their reasons: And though they contend most earnestly for Libertie of Conscience for themselves, and all others of their confederacy out of the House, and for a Liberty for their own Party, to enter **Remonstrance of the Generall and Officers, Novemb. 20. 1648: p. 6, 7 69.their particular Protestations and Dissents to the House to any Vote they like not; yet they will admit no Liberty of Conscience, nor Freedom of dissenting unto us, nor us to be Masters of our own reason, Votes or discretions in the House it self, where wee should have most freedom, (as is evident by sundry Magisteriall, over-ruling, censorious Passages in their late**Pag 62. to 70. ibid. Their Declaration, Novemb. 3. and Answ. Ian. 3. Remonstrance, November 20.) and if we vote not fully with them, they presently take us for Apostates and violaters of our trust, fit, not only to be secluded the House for the present, but not to be entrusted for the future; to such an height of insolency are they grown. Therefore for any Members to make their pleasing, or displeasing of the Army, whom they thus abuse, the sole or principall reason of their Ay, or No, is such a Solecism and breach of Priviledge, as ought not now to be named, much lesse pressed as a reason, without some severe censure or exclusion from the House; especially in this instant debate, for the p. 74settlement of our Peacè, to which those who make a Trade of War, will certainly be most averse, having little else to live on, or support their present greatnesse, if the wars be ended.

Yea, but they further object,Object. That if we discontent the Army by voting the Answers satisfactory, we are undone, they will all lay down their Arme (as one Commander of eminency hath here openly told you he must do) and serve us no longer, and then what will become of us, and all our faithfull friends?

I Answer,Answ. That I hope the Army will not be so sullen, as to desert or turn against us, for voting what our consciences and judgments prompt us, is most for theirs, ours, and the Kingdoms safety; and that without hearing or scanning our debates: If they be, I shall not much value the protection of such unconstant, mutinous, and unreasonable servants; and I doubt not but if they desert us on so sleight a ground, God himselfe and the whole Kingdome will stand by us who else I fear will both unanimously rise up against us, to ours, and the Armies destruction: And if the King and we shall happily close upon this Treaty, I hope we shall have no great need of their future service. However, fiat justitia, ruat coelum, Let us do our duty, and leave the issue to God. It is better for us to perish doing our own duties, then to be justly destroyed by following other mens wills against our duties and consciences too. He that thinks to save himself or the Kingdom, by such a sinful and unworthy compliance, shall be certain to lose both himself and it in conclusion.

However, both the Arguments of displeasing the Army, and the ill consequents of it, are altogether extraneous and impertinent to the question, and amount but to this Non sequitur. The Army will not have us proceed further upon the Treaty to settle peace; Ergo, the Kings Answers are unsatisfactory. What will all wise men, what will the Kingdom, what will Scotland, Ireland, and our friends abroad (whose eyes are all intent upon the result of the Treaty, and must be satisfied in the reasons of our breach upon it lest they all fall foul upon us) think of such absurd Nonsense as this? Had the Treaty been only between the King and the Army, not him and the Houses, this reason might have contented some men; without expressing any grounds of their dissatisfaction (of which they think the Army more competent Judges then the Parliament:) but the Treaty being only between the King and both Houses, not the Army; that p. 75we who are the only Parties to the Treaty, and Judges of the satisfactorinesse thereof, should set aside our own reasons, consciences, judgements, and make the Armies absolute peremptory will, the only principall reason of our dissatisfactorinesse with the Kings Concessions, (which I am confident not ten men in the Army ever heard of, but by report alone and never seriously scanned, as we have done) is such an absurdity, as will render us for ever both ridiculousand odious to all our friends and foes, to present, to future Ages. For shame therefore let us no more insist upon such extravagancies.

Having answered these two Iron Arguments, against the unsatisfactorinesse of the Kings Answers, and all others hitherto insisted on: I humbly conceive, I have fully satisfied every rationall mans conscience, that the King hath granted us all we have demanded, that is really necessary or conducing to the speedy settlement of a lasting and well-grounded Peace, and the future security of our State, Kingdom, Church, Religion, against all feared dangers from the King or any others; and I shall challenge and put it to the conscience of any Gentleman dissenting from me, whether he can propound any one thing more (except an Oath which is intended when all is concluded) essentiall, for the fuller and firmer setling of our Laws, Liberties, Priviledges, Lives, Estates, Religion, Kingdoms, Parliaments, Army, and satisfying of all publike interests, then what have been already propounded and the King compleatly granted in this Treaty: If then the King hath granted us every thing, our selves during seven years advice and consultation could possibly think of for our security and settlement, far more then we our selves demanded in two or three former Treaties, and would have bin glad with the moity of it within these few months, & ten thousand times more then we can gain by a breach with the King upon such disadvantages; why should we not all rest thankfully contented, and blesse our God, that he hath at last inclined the Kings heart to grant so much, whereas heretofore he refused to condescend to the tithe of that he hath granted now… Doubtlesse we can never answer such a peevish absurd ingratitude either to God or men, and those Counties, Cities, and Buroughs, who sent us hither in their steads, will conne us little thanks, for refusing Peace, upon such honorable, beneficiall and safe Concessions, as neither they nor we can ever hereafter hope for, if rejected now; upon no grounds of reason, but peevishnesse and will.

p. 76If any objectObject. (as some have done) that the King indeed hath granted all we can desire; yet he is so perfidious in his Oaths and Promises (as we have found by sad experience, in all his Reign) that we cannot trust him; and therefore all he hath granted, is to little purpose.

I answer,Answ. That if all he hath granted were still in his own power to dissolve or recall at pleasure, this Argument were materiall: But since he hath put all our desired security in our hands alone, and such as our selves shall appoint, and left nothing unto his sole or joint disposall with us, the objection is but weak, and recoils upon our selves, that we dare not trust our selves with our safety. It a Sha…k come to borrow some money of a Usurer, whose word and hand he dares not take; yet if he give him a Pawn or Morgage of his Lands in hand, he will then trust him without any scruple: The King hath given such a sufficient Pawn, Morgage, and put it into our own hand, therefore we need not doubt him now.

Besides, if we cannot trust him for what he hath granted, it was a mockery of him and the Kingdome to treat with him to grant it: and if so, the Kingdom will say, they have little cause hereafter to trust us for such palpable dissimulation, as the King. For my part, I have seen so much experience in the world, that I dare trust none with my own or the Kingdoms safety, but God… alone.**Psalm. 145. 3. P…al. 118. 8, 9.Ps 145:3 Put not your trust in Princes, nor in any son of man in whom there is no help: It is better to trust in the Lord, then to put confidence in men or Princes, have been my Maxims, and we have seen such strange Mutabilities and perfidiousnesse in men of all sorts since our troubles, that we cannot trust neither the King, nor Prince, City nor Countrey, this Generall, nor that Generall; this Army, nor those that were before it, nor yet our selves who are jealous one of another, trecherous one to another, distrustfull of all; and now distrusted by all, ever since we began to confide in men, and found out a new generation of confiding men: Let us begin to trust in God alone in the first place, and then we need not distrust the King for time to come any more then others, or our selves, whose dear bought experience of breach of former trust and promises, will make him more carefull of violating his present Concessions for the future, especially having put such security… unto our own hands to bind him to an exact performance.

p. 77But it hath been objected by the Generall and Officers in the Army, in their late**Object. Nov. 20. p. 32, 33, 34, 35. Remonstrance, and by some who have spoken in this debate (who would teach the King before hand how to elude and vacat all his grants and promises) that all the Kings Concessions are and will be void, because made by duresse of imprisonment whiles under restraint.

I answer,Answ. That the King during all this Treaty hath been in such a condition of honour, freedom, and safety, and had such free liberty of consultation and debate upon his own earnest desire and his parties too, as well as the Houses; that he can neither with honour nor justice avoid those. Concessions by any pretext of Duresse; especially since he hath denyed some things, and had the same liberty not to have granted other things, had he been pleased not to grant them. Besides, the King is to confirm the whole Treaty by Acts of Parliament, to which he is to give his Royall assent (and Oath too) when all is concluded, and that in a free condition; & then no Duresse can avoid them, nor more then Magna Charta it self first gained by the sword, and oft confirmed in Parliament by our Kings against their wills. In the year of our Lord 1222 **Matth. Paris, p. 305. Speed, p. 597.The Barons demanding of King Henry the third, the confirmation of the great Charter, and their Liberties according to his Oath upon the conclusion of the Peace with Lewis of France: William Brewer one of his (evill) Councell, answered; That the Liberties they demanded were not to be observed nor confirmed, because they were forcibly extorted: Whereupon words growing between the Barons, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Brewer; the King closed up the strife with this honourable Answer: All of us have sworn to these Liberties, and that which we have assented and sworn to, ALL OF VSUS ARE BOVND TO OBSERVE. We to this day injoy these Liberties, being confirmed by Act of Parliament, and sworn to by our Kings, though forcibly extorted at the first. And so may we much more enjoy the Kings Concessions when turned into Acts, and sealed with a sacred Oath, superadded to a Royall assent.