Where he says, so far we have gone after you, or with you, rather," it had been more correct to have said, "or beside you!" "We must next look upon you whilst you plead your cause, as it reflects upon the illegality' of the judge's proceedings.' Heylyn is willing to stop and gaze awhile here, as well he might, at Burton's "division," into "two parts: the one, general, which concerns their usual practice' in all other cases; the other, particular, in your own case:" yet he admonishes Burton for this; "It had been fitter sure, you had left out the general, and fallen on the particular only; for in such things which are, you say, their usual practice,' what cause have you to make appeal,' more than other men?" Some would have thought it had been still 'fitter" to have left out the "particular" also ; since most " other men" were terrified into silence, and why should not Burton? But "people's heads" being set a buzzing that the proceedings of the High Commission Court "are contrary to piety, to law, to charity, and utterly against the liberty of the King's good subjects, we must do what we can, to rase it out again!" This, then, is part of Heylyn's undertaking: now for the execution or accomplishment of it. "Your first exception is against the oath 'ex officio.'" Heylyn's defence of this oath, borrowed chiefly from Dr. Cosin, as he acknowledges, we are relieved, happily, from introducing. We insert only this passage. "In such cases [causes] as principally do concern the high commission, it hath not been thought fit to admit counsel for drawing up an answer unto the Articles objected; the better to avoid delays, and that foul palliating of schisms and errors which might thence arise." We are indebted to Heylyn for letting out the secret from its prison-house. But it is our happiness to be able to show beyond cavil, that the men who, like Burton, and "some that had" what Heylyn calls "as evil will to the church as he, in Queen Elizabeth's time," have proved themselves to be some of Britain's best champions for constitutional liberty; which the celebrated exponent of "The Laws of England" thus certifies: "The canonical doctrine of purgation, whereby the parties were obliged to answer upon oath to any inatter, however criminal, that might be objected against them,-though long ago overruled in the Court of Chancery, the genius of English law having broken through the bondage imposed on it by its clerical chancellors, and asserted the doctrines of judicial as well as civil liberty, -continued till the middle of the last century to be upheld by the Spiritual Courts; when the Legislative was obliged to interpose to teach them a lesson of similar moderation." This historical testimonial releases us also from noticing correlate "exceptions" slurred over Mr. Justice Blackstone's Commentaries, bk. iii. ch. vii." When the High Commission Court was abolished by Statute 16 Car. I. c. ii. this 'Oath ex-officio' was abolished with it," chap. xxvii.-" By the Statute of 13 Car. II. c. 12, it is enacted, That it shall not be lawful for any Bishop, or Ecclesiastical Judge, to tender or administer to any person whatsoever, the Oath usually called the oath ex-officio,' or any other Oath whereby he may be compelled to confess, accuse, or purge himself of any criminal matter or thing, whereby he may be liable to any censure or punishment." Chap. vii. or quibbled at by Heylyn; who finishes this his first chapter, occupied chiefly upon Burton's Apology," wherein is nothing to be found but poor surmises;" and yet, notwithstanding this unprofitable labour, Heylyn tells Burton, "I am resolved to dissect you thoroughly, and lay you open to the world, which hath so long been seduced by you!" How the vaunting anatomist succeeded will be shown. Hitherto it should seem that Heylyn has been wasting his labour, for continuing to follow his calling, as in duty bound, he commences his Second Chapter, with a sentence of depravation; "declining" from "an 'Apology' that was full of weakness, unto a 'Sermon or rather a Pasquil, far more full of wickedness!" After exhibiting various coruscations of a heated imagination, and having warned Burton of that "calamity" which "is now like to fall" upon him, "Now," exclaims Heylyn, "for the method of your Sermon'-I mean to call it so no more, though you observe no method in it!" The passages “therein, either of scandal or sedition, I shall reduce," so he goes on, "especially unto these two heads; those which reflect upon the King's most excellent Majesty; and, those which strike directly against the bishops." "First, for the King; you may remember what I told your was the Puritan tenet,―That kings are but the ministers of the commonwealth; and, that they have no more authority than what is given them by the people. This, though you do not say expressly and in terminis, yet you come very near to it-to a tantamount-finding great fault with that unlimited power which some give to kings; and also, with that absolute obedience which is exacted of the subject. .. Finally, you reckon it amongst the Innovations' wherewith you charge the prelates, in point of doctrine, That they have laboured to make a change in the doctrine of Obedience to Superiors; setting man so in God's throne, that all obedience to man must be absolute, without regard to God, and conscience, whose only rule is the word of God."b "Now, Sir, I pray you, what are you; or by what spirit are you guided; that you should find yourself aggrieved at unlimited power,' which some of better understanding than yourself, have given to kings; or [that you should] think it any innovation' in point of doctrine, in case the doctrine of Obedience to our Superiors be pressed more home of late than it hath been formerly ?"c 'd "Your reprehension,' is of those that so advance man's ordinances and commandments, as though they be contrary to God's law and the fundamental laws of the state, yet press men to obedience to them; your instance, is of one which was shrewdly threatened . . for refusing to do that which was not agreeable' to the Word of God; namely, for refusing to read the Book for Sports.' . . . So then, the case is this, The king permits his people honest recreations on the Lord's day, according as had been accustomed, till you and your accomplices had cried it down; with order to the bishops, to see his Declaration published in the churches of their several dioceses respectively.' This b P. 26, 27. a P. 10. e Ibid. in marg. < P. 28. It publication you conceive to be repugnant to God's word,—though none but a few factious spirits so conceived it, and, that your doctrine of the Sabbath, be contrary to all antiquity, and modern churches;-and, therefore, by your rule they do very well that refuse to publish it. is true indeed, in things that are directly contrary to the Law of God, and such as carry in them a plain and manifest impiety, there is no question to be made but it is better to obey God' than man: but, when the matter chiefly resteth either in misapplying, or misunderstanding the Word of God,-a fault too incident to ignorant and unstable men'; and to none more than' to your disciples, and their teachers too!—or that the Word of God be made a property, like the Pharisees' corban,b to justify your disobedience unto kings and princes; your rule is then as false as your action [is] faulty.' "Since you are so much grieved at the unlimited power'—as you please to call it-which some give to kings, will you be pleased to know that kings do hold their crowns by no other tenure than Dei gratia ; and that whatever power they have, they have from God, by whom kings reign, and princes decree justice.'"'d "But you go further yet, and tell us of some things the King cannot do; and, that there is a power which the King hath not. What is it, say you, that the King cannot do? Marry! you say he cannot institute new rites and ceremonies with the advice of his Commissioners Ecclesiastical, or the Metropolitan, according as some 'plead' from the Act of Parliament before the Communion Book! Why so?"e Ah, say we too, Why so? And now let the reader see wherein lies not accordance but discordance between Heylyn's statement and Burton's. Having shown "wherein the Prelates" endanger a division between the King and his subjects, Burton asks, "But upon what ground is all this ? What authority do they show for these outrages? The King? That is answered before, by his solemn protestations to the contrary. But they plead the Act of Parliament for Uniformity, before the Communion Book, wherein is reserved a power to the Queen with advice of her Commissioners, or of the Metropolitan, to ordain and publish such further ceremonies or rites as may be most for the advancement of God's glory, the edifying of his church, and the due reverence of Christ's holy mysteries and sacraments.' Hereupon they ground all their Innovations. But, for this first observe, that this clause of the Act is limited to Queen Elizabeth, and not extended to her successors of the crown; they are still expressed.' A fairer specimen of priestcraft for shifting an odium from the shoulders of the "holy hierarchy" upon the King's, than that presented by Burton, cannot be expected to be produced. His charge is, that the Prelates have availed themselves of a defunct statutable authority, to cover their Innovations beneath the King's name; although, as he shows, the King cannot exercise any authority derivable from that statute; thus leaving the force of his argument against the Prelates augmented by a proof of the illegality of their doings. Heylyn labours again, in his Third Chapter, particularly to turn the brunt of Burton's arguments from the Bishops upon the King: arguing still that every thing done in the King's name, was rather the act and counsel of those about him and under him." For a dexterous way of evading a point, and a determination that the scandal of the Book of Sports shall lie upon King James, although it was drawn up by Bishop Morton, mark Heylyn's" sounding brass," where he tells Burton, "You lay a scandal on the dead who are now laid to sleep in the bed of peace, and tell us of that Prince of blessed memory, King James, that the said Book for Sports was procured, compiled, and published in the time of his Progress into Scotland, when he was more than ordinarily merrily disposed.'d When he was more than ordinarily merrily disposed!' Good Sir, your meaning. Dare you conceive a base and disloyal thought, and not speak it out; for all that appŋoia' which you so commend against kings and princes ?e Leave you so fair a face with so foul a scar; and make that peerless Prince, whom you and yours did blast with daily libels when he was alive, the object of your Puritanical, aye and uncharitable scoffs, now he is deceased? Unworthy wretch! whose greatest and most pure devotion had never so much heaven in it as his greatest mirth!" Sage and disinterested reproof, from the pen of a chaplain to two monarchs and to an archbishop to boot! We cannot but hasten to his next chapter, wherein we are promised "A plain discovery of H. B.'s quarrels against the Bishops, in reference to their Calling and their Persons." Arrived at Heylyn's Fourth Chapter, it is our first care not to lose sight of the fact, that while attempting to vindicate the claim of Apostolic Succession through the Church of Rome, Heylyn is compelled to admit that a flaw is found, where, he says, "Irenæus brings down the succession till his own time; during which time the lineal succession in that church, by reason of many persecutions under which it suffered, might be made most questionable:" this he follows, by-the-bye, with the remark, "We may receive our Orders from them, and challenge a Succession by them, from the blessed Apostles; and yet not be partakers with them in their corruptions. . . If you have any other pedigree, as perhaps you have, from Wicliffe, Huss, the Albigenses, and the rest which you used to boast of, keep it to yourself." Heylyn preferred affinity to the line of the Gardiners and Bonners, whence might come his high reverence for his patron Archbishop, whom it was his business to screen even at the expense of his Sovereign: "For his Majesty's Declaration about Lawful Sports, you have no reason to charge that on my Lord Archbishop, as if it were a matter of his procuring; or, if it were, to reckon it amongst his faults. His sacred Majesty, treading in the steps of his royal father, thought fit to suffer his good subjects to enjoy that innocent freedom, which before they The Seventeenth Article of Bishop Wren's Impeachment is that "Finding the people dislike his Innovations, he often publicly said, he introduced them by the King's command,' and thereby endeavoured to raise an ill opinion of his Majesty in the hearts of his subjects." Wren's Parentalia, 1750. fol. p. 14. b Neal, Hist. Purit. vol. ii. ch. 2. 1 Cor. xii. 1. d Serm. p. 58. Ibid. p. 26, 27. f Lib. iii. cap. 3. did; in using moderate and lawful recreations on the Sunday. . . A pious and a princely act, however you and such as you, traduce it every day in your scandalous pamphlets. . . All that my Lord Archbishop had to do therein, was to commit the publication of it to his suffragan bishops, according to his Majesty's just will and pleasure; and if that be the thing you except against, your quarrel is not at his act, but his obedience." Such is Laudean loyalty. It cannot be thought undutiful of Heylyn that he should magnify both the Office and the Persons of the Bishops, against whom, he has made it indisputably clear that Burton preached and prayed for their extirpation. We seek not to cover Burton's excesses, nor to excuse or palliate his incivilities. The policy which the bishops practised was not calculated to conciliate, and their ruin "is a pregnant evidence"* that however sycophants might applaud them as the wisest of men and the most watchful of shepherds, their government was tyrannical and their flock consequently rebellious. As Heylyn's former chapter treated of "the Calling and the Persons" of the Bishops, so the Fifth has reference to "their place and calling," or, as the heading is, "Their Jurisdiction and Episcopal Government." For one particular herein, we are presumptuous enough to put Heylyn on his trial. Other particulars, here and elsewhere, deserve special notice, but that the limits of our undertaking compel our forbearance. The reader will bear in mind that Heylyn is now defending the Bishop of Norwich; but he looks back to Burton's instance of "the Ministers of Surrey," and asks, "What want of remedy can you or they complain of, if they have not sought it; or rather, if their conscience tell them, and those with whom they had advised advertise them, that, in such cases as this, the judges cannot by the law award a prohibition, if they should desire it? Do you conceive the case aright? If not, I will take leave to tell you. His Majesty having published his Declaration about lawful pastimes on the Sunday, gives order to his Bishops that publication thereof be made in all their several dioceses respectively.' The Bishops hereupon appoint the Incumbent of every church to read the book unto the people, that so the people might the better take notice of it; and finding opposition to the said appointment, made by some refractory persons of your own condition, press them to the performance of it by virtue of that canonical obedience, which, by their several oaths, they were bound to yield unto their Ordinaries. But seeing nothing but contempt; and contempt upon contempt: after much patience and long suffering, and expectation of conformity to their said appointment, some of the most perverse amongst them have, in some places, been suspended, as well a beneficio as officio, for an example to the rest. No inan deprived or 'outed' as you say, of his means' and livelihood [freehold,' in Burton,] that I hear of yet! This is the case: which being merely Ecclesiastical as unto the ground, being a contempt of and against the Ordinary; and merely Ecclesiastical as unto the censure, which was suspension; I cannot see what remedy you can find for them amongst the lawyers, a Heylyn, p. 106. Se back, vol. i. p. 55k. |