popish canon law; and tho' it is common for all ecclefiaftical courts to be fubject to a prohibition from the courts of Westminster, yet this privilege was feldom allowed. These commiffioners fported themselves in the most wanton acts of tyranny and oppreffion, till their names became hateful to the whole nation; fo at last their proceedings were condemned by the united voice of the people of England, and the court was diffolved by act of parliament, with this claufe, that no fuch jurifdiction fhould be revived for the future in any court whatfoever.

Bishop Burnet thinks that this fupremacy falls fhort of what King Henry the Eighth claimed, and what was fometimes practifed by Elizabeth, who often ftretched her prerogative beyond it. However far fome Princes have gone beyond this act of fupremacy, yet it is abundantly plain that it grants power to the Kings of England, in matters of religion, which is inconfiftent with the free exercise thereof. Henry the Eighth declared to the convocation of York, that he claimed no higher fupremacy than chriftian Princes had done in the primitive times over their subjects; yet it is capable of demonftration, that no christian Emperors claimed fuch a jurifdiction as that which both Henry and all the Kings of England fince have a right to claim by virtue of this act of fupremacy. By this fupremacy the whole power which was originally in the times of popery lodged in the Bishop of Rome, was now lodged in the hands of the Kings of England, and they have it in their power to Vol. II.

D

alter

alter or reform religion according as they fhall feem meet. Hooker allows, in his Ecclefiaftical Polity, that if the whole ecclefiaftical ftate fhould ftand in need of being vifited or reformed; or when any part of the church is infested with errors, fchifms, or herefies, whatsoever spiritual powers the Legates had from the fee of Rome, and exercised in right of the Pope for remedying evils, without violating the laws of God or nature; as much in every degree have our laws granted to the King for ever, whether he thinks fit to exercife it by ecclefiaftical fynods, or otherwife according to law.

What Hooker fays belongs to the Kings of England by law, has been frequently claimed by them to the no fmall grief of many of their fubjects. This fupremacy fets afide the twentieth article of the church of England, which fays, "that the «church has authority in matters of faith;" for by this act the King or his delegates have a right to determine what is found doctrine or herefy, and to command the clergy to preach it under pain of a premunire. And it is beyond all difpute, that the King of England is the ultimate judge in all difcipline in fpiritual courts.

The act of uniformity, which paffed at the fame time with the act of fupremacy, very much ftrengthens and enlarges the power of the Queen; for it fays, "that the Queen's Majefty, by advice " of ecclefiaftical commiffioners, or of her metro"politan, may ordain and publish fuch ceremonies "or rites as may be most for the glory of God, and the edifying of the church." Accordingly

her

her Majefty published her injunctions, without fending them to either the convocation or parliament, and fet up a court of high commiflion for ecclefiaftical causes, confifting of commiffioners of her own appointing, to fee them put in execution. So zealous was Elizabeth for this branch of her prerogative, that she would not fuffer her high court of parliament to pafs any bill for the amendment or alteration of the ceremonies of the church, it being, as fhe faid, an invafion of her prerogative.

From this time the Kings and Queens of England have on many occafions claimed the fupreme jurifdiction in all matters of religion, not only over the common people, but likewise over the very chief of the clergy; and they have it yet in their power to do fo, and act according to law when they do it. They have and may ftill claim the fole power of the nomination of Bifhops; for the Dean and Chapter are obliged to choose whom the King names, under the penalty of a premunire, and after they are chofen they cannot act except they have a commiffion from the crown.

No convocations or fynods of the clergy can af femble but by a writ from the crown, and when affembled they can do no bufinefs without the King's letters patent, appointing them the particular fubjects they are to debate upon and after all, their decrees are of no force without the royal fanction.

It is abundantly evident from the exprefs words. of several statutes, that all jurifdiction, ecclefiaftical as well as civil, was given to the King, and taken away from the Bishops, except by delegation from him. Vol. II.

D 2

'The

The King was made chief in the determination of all caufes in the church; he had authority to make laws, ceremonies, and conftitutions, and without him no fuch laws, ceremonies, or conftitutions are, or ought to be, of any force. All appeals which were formerly made to Rome, are for ever hereafter to be made to his Majefty's Chancellor, to be decided and determined by delegates.

66

66

The greatest part of the catholics refufed the oath of fupremacy, as inconfiftent with their allegiance to the Pope; but the friends of the reformation took it, according to an explanation thereof given by the Queen, annexed to her injunctions. This explanation fets forth, " that her Majefty meant no more than that, under God, fhe had "the fovereignty over all perfons born in her "realms, either ecclefiaftical or temporal, fo as no foreign power had, or ought to have authority 66 over them." This was far from being the whole import of the oath of fupremacy; and thofe perfons who fwore the oath could not but perceive that more was intended. Elizabeth's explication of the act of the fupremacy, is exprefsly contrary to the act itself, which affirms, that her Majefty, under Chrift, is head of the church of England; whereas the explanation makes her Majefty only fovereign over all fubjects born within her realms.

In this age the boundaries between things civil and ecclefiaftical were not well afcertained: things civil and religious were blended together, without confidering the juft and neceffary diftinctions which revelation hath fixed between them. The pride of

Princes,

Princes, and the selfish difpofition which prevailed among churchmen, difpofed the first to mingle religion with state affairs, and the latter to receive the mifcellany as good and neceffary. The power of the civil magiftrate appears chiefly to refpect the civil welfare and happiness of the fubjects: it is his duty to protect them in their properties, and in the peaceable enjoyment of their civil and religious rights; but there is no warrant from revelation for magiftrates affuming a lordship over the confciences of men, or any authority in matters of faith. It is equally contrary to reafon, which teacheth, that religion fhould proceed from free and deliberate choice. There is no more reafon that fubjects fhould believe as the King believes, than there is for their believing as the Pope and the church doth. The understandings of men are not all alike, and are not equally capable of receiving the fame doctrine; and while they do not underftand, they cannot rationally believe. To make ecclefiaftical laws, to oblige men to practice the fame form of religion under fevere penalties, with or without conviction of the truth thereof, is a manifest encroachment upon the kingly power of Jefus Chrift, and a violation of the rights of confcience, which ought always to be left free. Besides, the jurifdiction of all churches, according to the New Teftament, is fpiritual, and no perfon can be obliged by rewards or punishments to become a member of a chriftian fociety, or to continue longer in it than he perceives it to be his duty. The weapons of the chriftian warfare