PRIMS Full-text transcription (HTML)

A Landskip: OR A BRIEF PROSPECTIVE OF ENGLISH EPISCOPACY, Drawn by three skilfull hands; in PARLIAMENT: Anno 1641.

Say not then, What is the cauſe that the former dayes were better than theſe, for thou doſt not enquire wiſely concerning this.

Eccleſ. 7.10.

Do men gather grapes of thornes, or figgs of thiſtles?

Matth. 7.16.

Though thou ſhouldeſt bray a fool in a morter, among wheat, with a peſtle, yet will not his fooliſhneſſe depart from him.

Proverbs 27.27.

Curſed be the Man before the Lord, that builds up the walls of this City Jericho.

Joſh. 26.6.

For if I build again the things that I have deſtroyed, I make my ſelf a Tranſgreſſor.

Galat. 2.18.

Printed in the Year MDCLX.

To the Ingenuous, and Judicious READER.

THou haſt here put into thy hands three SPEECHES. The Firſt beares in its from the Name of the Learned and Renowned Authour The Lord Viſcount FAULKELAND, whoſe Name is annexed, becauſe, Firſt he was known to be a Friend to Epiſcopacy, and ſo this verie Speech ſhewes him, and therefore His Teſtimonie is the more Authentick: Secondly, Becauſe he is now dead, and ſo out of the reach of Envie and Revenge. But the Names of the other two Gentlemen are concealed, becauſe they are yet living.

Two Things have moved the publiſhing of theſe at this time: Firſt, It is ſuppoſed there are many Hundred Perſons of conſiderable quality in the Nation, either now entering, or already entered upon the Stage for Action, who were either unborn, or at leaſt very young, when the Epiſcopal Controverſie was agitated among us, who are diſpleaſed with what the PARLIAMENT and Nation did against EPISCOPACY, becauſe they onelie knew what they did, but not why, and who are favourers of Biſhops and that party, as knowing onelie how much they ſuffered, not how much they had offended. For their ſakes therefore theſe things are publiſhed at this time: And Secondly, For the ſakes even of the BISHOPS themſelves, that they may be put in remembrance of the Rocks upon which formerlie they have daſhed, and may carefullie avoid them, least a worſe thing happen to them.


A SPEECH made to the Houſe of Commons, concerning Epiſcopacy An. D. 1641.By the Lord Viſcount FAƲLKELAND; who was known to be no Presbyterian.


HE is a great Stranger in Iſrael, who knowes not, that this Kingdome hath long laboured under many and great Oppreſſions, both in Religion and Liberty; and his acquaintance here is not great, or his ingenuity leſſe, who doth not both know and acknowledge, that a great, if not a principal cauſe of both theſe hath been ſome Biſhops, and their Adherents.

Mr. Speaker, A little ſearch will ſerve to find them to have been the deſtruction of Unity, under pretence of Uniformity; to have brought in Superſtition, and ſcandal, under the Titles of Reverence, and Decency; to have defiled our Church, by adorning our Churches; to have ſlackned the ſtrictneſſe of that Union which was formerly between us, and thoſe of our Religion beyond the Sea: An Action as unpolitick, as ungodly.

Master Speaker, We ſhall finde them to have Tith'd Mint and Annice, and have left undone the weightier works of the Law; to have been leſſe eager upon thoſe who damn our Church, than upon thoſe, who upon weak conſcience, and perhaps as weak reaſons (the diſlike of ſome commanded Garment, or ſome uncommanded poſture) only abſtained from it. Nay, it hath been more dangerous for men to go to ſome neighbours Pariſh, when they had no Sermon in their own, than to be obſtinate and perpetual Recuſants; while Maſſes have been ſaid in ſecurity, a Conventicle hath been a crime; and which is yet more, the conforming to Ceremonies hath been more exacted than the conforming to Chriſtianity; and whileſt men for Scruples have been undone, for attempts upon Sodomie they have only been admoniſhed.

Maſter Speaker, We ſhall finde them to have been like the Hen in Aeſop, which laying every day an egge upon ſuch a proportion of barly, her Miſtreſſe increaſing her proportion in hope ſhe would encreaſe her eggs, ſhe grew ſo fat upon that addition, that ſhe never laid more: So though at firſt their Preaching were the occaſion of their preferment, they after made their Preferment the occaſion of their not preaching.


Maſter Speaker, We ſhall finde them to have reſembled another Fable, The Dog in the manger; to have neither preached themſelves, nor imploy thoſe that ſhould, nor ſuffer'd thoſe that would: To have brought in Catechiſing only to thruſt out Preaching; cried down Lectures by the Name of Factions, either becauſe their induſtry in that duty appeared a Reproof to their neglect of it (not unlike to that we read of him who, in Nero's time, and Tacitus his Story, was accuſed, becauſe by his vertue he did appear Exprobare vitia Principis) or with intention to have brought in darkneſſe, that they might the eaſier ſow their tares, while it was night, and by that introduction of ignorance, introduce the better that Religion, which accounts it the Mother of Devotion.

Master Speaker, In this they have abuſed his Majeſty as well as his people; for when he had with great wiſdome (ſince uſually the children of darkneſſe are wiſer in their Generation than the children of light; I may gueſſe, not without ſome eye upon the moſt politick action of the moſt politick Church) ſilenced on both parts thoſe Opinions which have often tormented the Church, and have, and will alway trouble the Schooles, they made uſe of this Declaration to ty up one ſide, and let the other looſe; whereas they ought either in diſcretion to have been equally reſtrained, or in juſtice to have been equally tollerated. And it is obſervable, that that party to which they gave this Licenſe, was that, whoſe Doctrine, though it were not contrary to Law, was contrary to Cuſtome, and for a long while in this Kingdome was no oftener preached than recanted.

The truth is, Maſter Speaker, That as ſome ill Miniſters in our State firſt took away our mony from us, and after endeavoured to make our mony not worth the taking, by turning it into braſſe by a kinde of Antiphiloſophers ſtone: So theſe men uſed us in the point of Preaching, firſt depreſſing it to their power, and next labouring to make it ſuch, as the harm had not been much, if it had been depreſſed; the moſt frequent Subjects even in the moſt facred Auditories, being the Jus divinum of Biſhops and Tithes, the ſacredneſſe of the Clergy, the Sacriledge of Impropriations, the demoliſhing of Puritaniſme and Propriety, the building of the prerogative at Pauis, the introduction of ſuch Doctrines, as admitting them true, the truth would not recompenſe the ſcandal, or of ſuch as were ſo farr falſe, that as Sir Thomas Moore ſayes of the Caſuiſts, Their buſineſſe was, not to keep men from ſinning, but to enform them, Quam propè ad peccatum ſine peccato liceat accedere; ſo it ſeemed their work was to try how much of a Papiſt might be brought in without Popery, and to deſtroy as much as they could of the Goſpel, without bringing themſelves into danger of being deſtroi'd by Law.

Master Speaker, To go yet further, ſome of them have ſo induſtriouſly laboured to deduce themſelves from Rome, that they have given great ſuſpicion, that in gratitude they deſire to return thither, or at leaſt to meet it half way; ſome have evidently labour'd to bring in an Engliſh, though not a Roman Popery. I mean not only the outſide and dreſſe of it, but equally abſolute, a blinde dependance of the people upon the Clergie, and of the Clergie upon themſelves, and have oppoſed the Papacy beyond the Sea, that they might ſettle one beyond the water. Nay common fame is more than ordinarily falſe, if none of them have found a way to reconcile the Opinions of Rome, to the preferments of England; be ſo abſolutely, directly, and cordially Papiſt, that it is all that fifteen hundred pounds a year can do to keep them from confeſſing it.


Maſter Speaker, I come now to ſpeak of our Liberties, and conſidering the great intereſt theſe men have had in our common Maſter, and conſidering how great a good to us they might have made that intereſt in him, if they would have uſed it to have informed him of our general ſufferings; and conſidering how little of their freedome of Speech at Whitchall, might have ſaved us a great deal of the uſe we have now of it in the Parliament Houſe, their not doing this alone were occaſion enough for us to accuſe them, as the betrayers, though not as the deſtroyers of our Rights and Liberties. Though I confeſſe, if they had been only ſilent in this particular, I had been ſilent too: But alas, they whoſe Anceſtors in the darkeſt times excommunicated the breakers of Magna Charta; did now by themſelves and their Adherents both write, preach, plot, and act againſt it, by encouraging Doctor Beale, by preferring Doctor Mannering, appearing forward for Monopolies, and ſhip mony: and if any were ſlow and backward to comply, blaſting both them and their preferment, with utmoſt expreſſion of their hatred, the title of Puritans.

Maſter Speaker, We ſhall finde ſome of them to have laboured to exclude both all perſons, and all cauſes of the Clergy from the ordinary juriſdiction of the temporal Magiſtrate, and by hindting Prohibitions (firſt by apparant power againſt the Judges, and after by ſecret Agreements with them) to have taken away the only legal bound to their arbitrary power, and made as it were a conqueſt upon the common Law of the Land, which is our common Inheritance, and after made uſe of that power to turn their brethren out of their Freeholds, for not doing that which no Law of man required of them to do, and which (in their opinions) the Law of God required of them not to do. We ſhall finde them in general to have encouraged all the Clergy to Suits and to have brought all ſuits to the Councel-table; that having all power in Eccleſiaſtical matters, they laboured for equal power in temporal, and to diſpoſe as well of every Office as of every Benefice, and loſt the Clergie much Revenue and much reverence, (whereof the laſt is never given when it is ſo asked) by encouraging them indiſcreetly to exact more of both than was due; ſo that indeed the gain of their greatneſſe extended but to few of that Order, though the envy extended upon all.

We ſhall finde of them to have both kindled and blown the common fire of both Nations, to have both ſent and maintained that Book, of which the Author no doubt hath long ſince wiſh'd with Nero Uiaam neſcſſimlueras, and of which more than one Kingdome hath cauſe to wiſh, that when he writ that, he had rather burn'd a Library, though of the value oftolmu's. We ſhall finde them to have been the firſt and principal cauſe of hearach, I will not ſay of, but ſince the pacification at Barwick. We ſhall ſ••le them to have been the almoſt ſole abettors of my Lord of Sfrafford, whileſt hwas practiſing upon another Kingdome, that manner of Government which he intended to ſettle in this, where he committed ſo many, ſo mighty, and ſo manifeſt〈8 letters〉ies, and Oppreſſions, as the like have not been committed by any Governour in any Government ſince Verres left Sicily. And after they had called him over from being Deputie of Ireland to be in a manner Deputie or England, (all things here being govern'd by a Junctillo, and that Junctillo govern'd by him) to have aſſiſted him in the giving of ſuch Councels, and the perſuing of ſuch courſes, as it is a hard and meaſuring caſt, whether they were more unwiſe, more unjuſt or4 more unfortunate; and which had infallibly been our deſtruction, if by the Grace of God their ſhare had not been as ſmall in the ſubtilty of Serpents, as in the innocency of doves.

Maſter Speaker, I have repreſented no ſmall quantity, and no mean degee of guilt, and truly I believe, that we ſhall make no little Complement to thoſe, and no little apology for thoſe to whom this charge belongs, if we ſhall lay the faults of the men upon the Order of the Biſhops, upon the Epiſcopacy. I wiſh we may diſtinguiſh between thoſe, who have been carryed away with the ſtream, and thoſe who have been the ſtream that carry'd them; between thoſe, whoſe proper and natural motion was toward our ruine and deſtruction, and thoſe who have been hurl'd about to it contrary to their natural motion by the force and ſwinge of ſuperior orbs; and as I wiſh, we may diſtinguiſh between the more and leſs guilty; ſo I yet more wiſh, we may diſtinguiſh between the guilty and the innocent.

Maſter Speaker, I doubt, if we conſider, that if not the firſt Planters, yet the firſt Spreaders of Chriſtianity, and the firſt and chief Defenders of Chriſtianity againſt Hereſies within, and Paganiſme without, both with their Ink, and with their blood; and the main conducers to the reſurrection of Chriſtianity, (at leaſt) here in the Reformation (and we owe the light of the Goſpel we now enjoy to the fire they then endur'd for it) were all Biſhops: and that even now in the greateſt perfection of that Order, there are yet ſome who have conduc'd in nothing to our late innovations, but in their ſilence; ſome who in an unexpected and mighty place and power have expreſſed an equal moderation and humility, being neither ambitious before, nor proud after, either of the Croſiers ſtaffe, or white ſtaffe: ſome who have been learn'd oppoſers of Popery, and zealous oppoſers of Arminianiſm, between whom and their inferiour Clergy, in frequency of Preaching, hath been no diſtinction, whoſe lives are untouched, not only by guilt, but by malice; ſcarce to be equall'd by thoſe of any condition, or to be excell'd by thoſe in any Calendar. I doubt not I ſay, but if we conſider this, this conſideration will bring forth this Concluſion, That Biſhops may be good men, and let us give but good men good Rules, we ſhall have both good Governours, and good times.

Maſter Speaker. I am content to take away all thoſe things from them, which to any conſiderable degree of probability may again beget the like miſchiefs, if they be not taken away. If their temporal Titles, power and employment appear likely to diſtract them from the care of, or make them look down with contempt upon their Spiritual duty, and that the two great diſtance between them, and thoſe they govern will hinder the free and fit recourſe of their Inferiours to them; and occaſion inſolence from them to their inferiours. Let that be conſidered and cared for, I am ſure neither their Lorſhips, their judging of Tithes, Wills, and Marriages, no, nor their voices in Parliaments are Jure divino; and I am as ſure, that theſe Titles, and this power, are not neceſſary to their Authority, as appears by the little they have had with us by them, and the much that others have had without them.

If their revenue ſhall appear likely to produce the ſame effects (for it hath been anciently obſerved, that (Religio peperit divitias, & Filia devoravit matrem;) Let ſo much of that, as was in all probability, intended for an attendant upon their temporal Dignities, wait upon them out of the doores. Let us only take care to leave them ſuch proportions, as may ſerve in ſome good degree to the dignity of Learning, and the encouragement of Students; and let us not invert5 that of Jeroboam, and as he made the meaneſt of the people Prieſts, make the higheſt of the Prieſts, the meaneſt of the people.

If it be feared, that they will again employ ſome of our Lawes, with a ſeverity beyond the intention of thoſe Lawes, againſt ſome of their weaker Brethren; that we may be ſure to take away that power, let us take away thoſe Lawes, and let no Ceremonies which any number counts unlawful, and no man counts neceſſary (againſt the Rules of Policy, and S. Paul) be impoſed upon them. Let us conſider that part of the Rule they have hitherto gone by, that is, ſuch Canons of their own making as are not confirm'd by Parliament, have been, or no doubt ſhortly will be by Parliament taken away, that the other part of the Rule (ſuch Canons as were here received before the Reformation, and not contrary to any Law) is too doubtfull to be a fit Rule, exacting an exact knowledg of the Canon Law, of the Common Law, of the Statute Law knowledges, which thoſe who are thus to govern have not, and it is ſcarce fit they ſhould have. Since therefore we are to make new Rules, and ſhall no doubt make thoſe new Rules ſtrict Rules; and be infallibly certain of a triennial Parliament, to ſee thoſe Rules obſerv'd as ſtrictly as they are made, and to encreaſe or change them upon all occaſions, we ſhall have no reaſon to fear any innovation from their tyranny, or to doubt any defect in the diſcharge of their duty. I am confident, they will not dare either ordain, ſuſpend, ſilence, excommunicate, or deprive, otherwiſe than we would have them. And if this be believed, I am as confident, we ſhall not think it fit to aboliſh upon a few dayes debate, an Order, which hath laſted (as appears by Story) in moſt Churches theſe Sixteen hundred years, and in all from Chriſt to Calvin or in an inſtant change the whole face of the Church, like the ſcene of a Maske.

Master Speaker, I do not believe them to be Jure Divino, nay I believe them not to be Jure divino; but neither do I believe them to be Injuria humana. I neither conſider them as neceſſary, nor as unlawfull, but as convenient or inconvenient. But ſince all great Mutations in Government are dangerous, (even where what is introduc'd by that Mutation is ſuch as would have been very profitable upon a primary foundation) and ſince the greateſt danger of Mutations is, that all the dangers and inconveniences they may being, are not to be foreſeen, and ſince no wiſe man will undergo great danger, but for great neceſſity; my Opinion is, That we ſhould not root up this Ancient tree, as dead as it appears, till we have tryed, whether by this or the like lopping of the branches, the ſap which was unable to feed the whole, may not ſerve to make what is leſt both grow and flouriſh. And certainly, if we may at once take away both the inconveniences of Biſhops, and the inconvenience of no Biſhops, that is of an almoſt univerſal Mutation; this courſe can only be oppoſed by thoſe, who love Mutation for mutations ſake.

Maſter Speaker, To be ſhort (as I have reaſon to be, after having been ſo long,) this Tryal may be ſuddenly made, let us commit as much of the Miniſters Remonſtrance, as we have read, that thoſe Heads both of Abuſes and Grievances which are there fully collected, may be marſhal'd and ordered for our debate; If upon that Debate it ſhall appear, that thoſe may be taken away, and yet the Order ſtand; we ſhall not need to commit the London Petition at all, for the cauſe of it will be ended: if it ſhall appear, that the abolition of one cannot be, but by the deſtruction of the other, then let us not commit the Lond. Pet. but grant it.


A SPEECH made in the HOUSE of COMMONS; Anno 1641.

Mr. Speaker,

NOw that we are about to brand theſe Canons in reſpect of the matter contained in them, it is the proper time to open the foulneſſe thereof: and though much of this hath been anticipated in the general Debate, yet if any thing hath been omitted, or if any thing may be farther cleared in that kinde, it is for the Service of the Houſe that it ſhould now be done.

Sir, I conceive theſe Canons do contain ſundry matters, which are not only contrary to the Lawes of this Land, but alſo deſtructive of the very principal and fundamental Lawes of this Kingdome. I ſhall begin with the firſt Canon, wherein the framers of theſe Canons have aſſumed unto themſelves a Parlamentary power, and that too in a very high Degree, for they have taken upon them to define what is the Power of the King, what the Liberty of the Subjects, and what propriety he hath in his goods. If this be not proper to a Parliament, I know not what is: Nay it is the higheſt matter that can fall under the conſideration of a Parliament, and ſuch a point as wherein they would have walked with more tenderneſſe and circumſpiction, than theſe bold Divines have done. And ſurely, as this was an act of ſuch Preſumption as no Age can parrallel, ſo it is of ſuch dangerous conſequence as nothing can be more. For they do not only take upon them to determine matters of this nature, but alſo under great Penalties forbid all Parſons, Vicars, Curates, Readers in Divinity, &c. to ſpeak any other wayes of them than as they had defined; by which means having ſeiſed upon all the Conduits, whereby knowledg is conveyed unto the people, how eaſie would it be for them in time to undermine the Kings Prerogative, and to ſuppreſſe the Subjects Liberty, or both.

And now (Sir) I beſeech you to conſider how they have'd ſined this high and great point: They have dealt with us in matter of Divinity, as the Judges had done before in matter of Law: They firſt took upon them to determine a matter that belonged not to their Judicature, but only to the Parliament, and after by their judgment they overthrew our propriety; and juſt ſo have theſe Divines dealt with us, they tell us, That Kings are an Ordinance of God, of Divine Right, and founded in the Prime Lawes of nature, from whence it will follow, that all other Formes of Government, as Ariſtocraſies and Democraties, are wicked Formes of Government contrary to the Ordinance of God, and the Prime Lawes of Nature, which is ſuch new Divinity as I never read in any Book, but in this new Book of Canons.


Mr. Speaker, We all know, That Kings, and States, and Judges, and all Magiſtrates are the Ordinances of God, but (Sir) give me leave to ſay, they were the Ordinances of men before they were the Ordinances of God. I know I am upon a great and high point, but I ſpeak by as great and as high a warrant, if Saint Peters chair cannot erre (as Saint Peters Epiſtles cannot) thus he teacheth us, Submit your ſelves to every Ordinance of man for the Lords ſake, whether it be to the King as ſupream, or to the Governour, at to him that is ſent by him, &c.

(Sir) It is worthy noting, that they are Ordinances of men, but that they are to be ſubmitted unto for the Lords ſake; and truely their Power is as juſt, and their Subjects allegiance as due unto them, though we ſuppoſe them to be firſt ordinances of men, and then ednfirmed and eſtablined by God. Ordinance, as if we ſuppoſe them to be immediate Ordinances of God, and ſo received by men. But there was ſomewhat in it, that theſe Divines aimed at, I ſuppoſe it was this, If Kings were of Divine Right, as the Office of a Paſtour in the Church, or founded in the prime Lawes of Nature, as the power of a Father in a Family; then it would certainly follow, that they ſhould receive the faſhion and manner of their Government only from the Preſcript of Gods Word, or of the Lawes of Nature; and conſequently, if there be no Text neither of the Old nor New Teſtament, nor yet any Law of Nature, that Kings may not make Lawes without Parliaments, they may make Lawes without Parliaments; and if neither in the Scripture nor in the Law of Nature, Kings be forbidden to lay Taxes or any kinde of Impoſitions upon their people without conſent in Parliament, they may do it out of Parliament: and that this was their meaning, they expreſſe it after in plain termes, for they ſay, That Subſidies and Taxes, and all manner of aides are (due unto Kings by the Law of God, and of Nature. (Sir) if they be due by the Law of God and of nature, they are due, though there be no Act of Parliament for them, nay (Sir) if they be due by ſuch a right, a hundred Acts of Parliament cannot take them away, or make them undue. And (Sir) that they meant it of Subſidies and Aids taken, without conſent in Parliament, is clearly that addition that they ſubjoyn unto it, that this doth not take away from the Subject the propriety he hath in his goods, for had they ſpoken of Subſidies and Aids given by conſent in Parliament, this would have been a very ridiculous addition; for, Who ever made any queſtion, whether the giving Subſidies in Parliament did take away from the Subject the Propriety he hath in his Goods, whenas it doth evidently imply, they have a propriety in their goods? for they could not give, unleſſe they had ſomething to give: But becauſe that was alleadged as a chief Reaſon againſt ſhip-money, and other ſuch illegal Payments levied upon the people, without their conſent in Parliament, that it did deprive themf their right of propriety which they have in their goods; Theſe Divines would ſeem to make ſome Anſwer thereunto, but in truth their Anſwer is nothing elſe but the bare aſſertion of a Contradiction, and it is an eaſie thing to ſay a contradiction, but impoſſible to reconcile it; for certainly if it be a true Rule (as it is moſt tru) Quo meum eſt, ſine conſenſu meo non poteſt ſieri alienum; To take my goods without my conſent muſt needs deſtroy my propriety. Another thing in this firſt Canon, wherein they have aſſumed unto themſelves a Parliamentary Power, is in that they take upon them to define what is Treaſon, beſide what is determined in the Statute of Treaſons They ſay, To ſet up any coactive Independent Power8 is treaſonable both againſt God and the King, The Queſtion is not whether it be true they ſay or no, but whether they have power to ſay what is treaſon, and what not? But now (Sir) that I am upon this point, I would gladly know what kind of power that is, which is exerciſed by Archbiſhops, Biſhops, Deans, Archdeacons, &c. Coactive certainly it is, all the Kingdome feels the laſh thereof, and it muſt needs be Independent, if it be jure Divino, as they hold it, for they do not mean by an Independent power, ſuch a power as doth not depend on God. Beſides, if their Power be dependant, of whom is it dependent? not of the King, for the Law acknowledgeth no way whereby Eccleſiaſtical Juriſdiction can be derived from his Majeſty, but by his Commiſſion under the great Seal, which, as I am informed they have not: I ſpeak not of the High Commiſſion, but of that Juriſdiction which they exerciſe in their Archiepiſcopal, Epiſcopal, Archidiaconal Courts, &c and therefore, if their own Sentence be juſt, we know what they are, and what they have pronounced againſt themſelves. But (Sir) it were worth knowing what they aimed at in that Independent coactive Power, which they terme Popular. I will not take upon me to unfold their meaning; but we know Doct. Beal had a hand in making of theſe Canons, and if we apply his Paraphraſe to the Text, it may give us ſome clearneſſe. I remember amongſt other Notes of his this was one, ſhat we did acknowledg the Kings Supremacy, but would joyn unto him an Aſſiſtant, (viz.) the People, meaning this Houſe, which being the Repreſentative body of the COMMONS of England, and claiming, as it is ſo, a ſhare in the Legiſlative Power, Doctor Beal calleth this, a joyning of an Aſſiſtant to the King, in whom ſolely he placeth the Power of making Lawes, and that it is but of grace, that he aſſumeth either the Lords, or Commons for the making of Lawes with him. Now (Sir) The Legiſlative power is the greateſt Power, and therefore coactive; and it is the Higheſt power, and therefore Independent; and if every Eſtate for the Proportion it hath therein, ſhould not have ſuch a power, it ſhould not have it of right, as founded in the fabrick and frame of the policy and Government, but of Grace, or by Commiſſion, as Doctor Beal affirmeth. I have done with the firſt Canon, only I ſhall add this, That conſidering the Principles and Poſitions that are laid down therein, and comparing them with a clauſe toward the end of the Canon, that in no caſe imaginable it is lawfull for Subjects to defend themſelves, we may judge how farre forth theſe Canons were to prepare mens mindes for the force that was to follow after; if the Accuſation againſt my Lord of Strafford be laid aright. For the matter it ſelf, I hope there will never be any need to diſpute that Queſtion, and I do believe they had as little need to have publiſhed that poſition, had it not been upon deſigne. As for the ſecond Canon, therein alſo they have aſſumed to themſelves a Parliamentary power, in taking upon them to appoint Holydaies, whereas the Statute ſaith in expreſſe words, That ſuch daies ſhall be only kept as Holidayes, as are named in the Statute, and no other; and therefore, though the thing may be bonum, yet it was not done benè, becauſe not ordained by Parliament, notwithſtanding what hath been alledged to the contrary: It ſeemeth to me to be the appointing of an Holiday, to ſet a time apart for Divine Service, and to force men under penalties to leave their labours, and buſineſſe, and to be preſent at it. And of the ſame nature is that other clauſe, in the ſame Canon, wherein they take upon them without Parliament, to lay a charge upon the People, enjoyning two Books at leaſt for that day, to be bought9 at the charge of the Pariſh, for by the ſame right, that they may lay a penny on the Pariſh without Parliament, they may lay a pound, or any greater Summe.

As to the Third Canon, I ſhall paſſe it over, only the Obſervation that my neighbour of the long Robe made upon it, ſeems unto me ſo good, as that it is worth the repeating, That whereas in the Canon againſt Sectaries, there is an eſpecial Proviſo, that it ſhall not derogate from any Statute, or Law made againſt them, (as if their Canons had any power to diſanull an Act of Parliament,) There is no ſuch Proviſo in this Canon againſt Papiſts, from whence it may be probably conjectured, that they might have drawn ſome colour of exemption, from the penal Lawes eſtabliſhed againſt them from this Canon, becauſe it might ſeem hard that they ſhould be doubly puniſhed for the ſame thing, as we know in the point of abſence from the Church; the Law provideth, that if any man be firſt puniſhed by the Ordinary, he ſhall not be puniſhed again by the Juſtices.

For the Fourth Canon againſt Socinianiſme, therein alſo theſe Canon makers have aſſumed to themſelves, a Parliamentary power, in determining an Hereſie not determined by Law, which is expreſly reſerved to the determination of a Parliament. It is true, they ſay it is a complication of many hereſies condemned in the four firſt Councels, but they do not ſay what thoſe Hereſies are, and it is not poſſible that Socinianiſme ſhould be formally condemned in thoſe Councells, for it is ſprung up but of late, therefore they have taken upon them to determine and damn a Hereſie, and that ſo generally, as that it may be of very dangerous conſequence, for condemning Socinianiſme for an Hereſie, and not declaring what is Socinianiſme, it is left in their breſts whom they will judge, and call a Socinian. I would not have any thing that I have ſaid to be interpreted, as if I had ſpoken it in favour of Socinianiſme, which (if it be ſuch as I apprehend it to be) is indeed a moſt vile and damnable Hereſie, and therefore the framers of theſe Canons are the more to blame in the next Canon againſt Sectaries, wherein, beſides that in the preamble thereof, they lay it down for a certain ground, which the Holy Synod knew full well, that other Sects (which they extend not only to Browniſts and Separatists, but alſo to all perſons that for the ſpace of a moneth do abſent themſelves, without a reaſonable cauſe, from their own Pariſh Churches,) do equally endeavour the ſubverſion of the Diſcipline, and Doctrine of the Church of England with the Papiſts, although the worſt of them do not bear any proportion in that reſpect to the Papiſts; I ſay, beſides that they make them equall in crime, and puniſhment, to the Papiſts, notwithſtanding the great diſproportion of their Tenents, there is another paſſage in this Canon relative, to that againſt Socinianiſme, which I ſhall eſpecially offer to your conſideration, and that is this, If a Gentleman coming from beyond Seas ſhould happen to bring over with him a Book, contrary to the Diſcipline of the Church of England, or ſhould give ſuch a Book to his friend, nay, if a man ſhall but abett, or maintain an Opinion contrary thereunto, though it were but in Parliament, if he thought it fit to be altered, by this Canon he is excommunicate, ipſo facto, and lyeth under the ſame conſideration, and is lyable to the ſame puniſhment; as if he had maintained an Opinion againſt the Deity of CHRIST, and of the Holy Ghoſt, and of our Juſtification by the ſatisfaction of Chriſt.


(Sir) If in theſe things that are in their own nature indifferent, if in things diſputable, it ſhall be as heynous to abett or maintain an Opinion, as in the moſt horrible and monſtrous Hereſies that can be imagined, What Liberty is left to us as Chriſtians? What Liberty is left to us as men?

I proceed to the Sixt Canon, wherein theſe Canoniſts have aſſumed to themſelves a Parliamentary Power, and that in a very high Degree, in that they have takn upon them to impoſe new Oaths upon the Kings Subjects. (Sir) under favour of what hath been alledged to the contrary, To impoſe an Oath, if it be not an higher power then to make a Law, it is a power of making a Law of a moſt high nature, and of higher and farther conſequence than any other Law, and I ſhould much rather chuſe that the Convocation ſhould have a power to make Lawes, to binde my perſon, and my Eſtate, than that they ſhould have a power to make Oaths to binde my conſcience: A Law bindes me no longer than till another Law be made to alter it, but my Oath bindes me as long as I live. Again, A Law bindes me either to obedience, or to undergo the penalty inflicted by the Law, but my Oath bindes me abſolutely to obedience. And Laſtly, A Law bindes me no longer than I am in the Land, or at the fartheſt, no longer than I am a member of the State, wherein, and whereby the Law is made, but my Oath once being taken doth binde me in all places, and in all conditions, ſo long as I live. Thus much I though good to ſpeak concerning the power of impoſing new Oathes: as to the matter of this new Oath, it is wholly illegall. It is againſt the Law of this Land, it is againſt the Law and Light of Nature, it is againſt the Law of GOD, it is againſt the Lawes of this KINGDOME; and that, no obſcure Lawes, nor concerning any mean or petty matters. It is againſt the Law of the Kings Supremacy, in that it maketh Arch-Biſhops, Biſhops, Deans, Arch-Deacons, &c. to be jure Divino, whereas the Law of this Land hath annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm, not only all Eccleſiastical Juriſdiction, but alſo all Superiority, over the Eccleſiaſtical STATE, and it is to be derived from him by Commiſſion under the Great Seal, and conſequently it is Jure humane. Again, it is againſt the Oath of Supremacy, eſtabliſhed by Law point-blanck, for therein I am ſworn, not only to conſent unto, but alſo to aſſiſt, and to the uttermoſt of my power, to defend all Juriſdictions, Preheminences, &c. annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm, of which this is one (and that which immediately precedeth this Oath in the Statute, and whereunto it doth eſpecially relate) that his Majeſty may exerciſe any Juriſdiction, or Eccleſiasticall Government by his Commiſſion under the Great Seal, directed to ſuch perſons as he ſhall think meet; ſo that, if he ſhall think other Perſons meet, than Arch-Biſhops, Biſhops, &c. I am ſworn in the Oath of Supremacy, not only to aſſent thereunto, but to aſſiſt, and to the utrermoſt of my power defend ſuch an appointment of his Majeſty, and in this new Oath I ſhall ſwear never to conſent unto ſuch an alteration. In the like manner it is againſt the Law, and Light of Nature, that a man ſhould ſwear to anſwer, (&c.) to he knowes not what. It is againſt the Law and Light of Nature, that a man ſhould ſwear never to conſent, to alter a thing, that in its own nature is alterable, and may prove inconvenient, and fit to be altered. Laſtly, It is againſt the Law of God: for whereas there are Three Rules preſcribed to him that will ſwear aright, that he ſwear in Judgement, in Truth, and Righteouſneſs: He that ſhall take this new Oath, muſt needs11 break all theſe three Rules. He cannot ſwear in judgment, becauſe this Oath is ſo full of ambiguities, that he cannot tell what he ſwears unto; not to ſpeak of the unextricable ambiguity of the &c. there is ſcarce one word that is not ambiguous in the principal part of the Oath; as firſt, what is meant by the Church of England? whether all the Chriſtians in England, or whether the Clergy only, or only the Arch-Biſhops, Biſhops, Deans? &c. or whether the Convocation? or what? In like manner it is as doubtfull what is meant by the Diſcipline, and what by the Doctrine of the Church of England; for what ſome call Superſtitious Innovations, if others affirm to be conſonance to the Primitive, and that the pureſt Reformation in the time of Edward the 6. and in the beginning of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth; and ſo for the Doctrine of the Church of England, if all the Poſitions that of later years have been challenged by ſome of our Divines to be Arminian and Popiſh, and contrary to the Articles of our Religion, and which on the other ſide have been aſſerted and maintained as conſonant to the Doctrine of our Church, and the Articles of Religion were gathered together, they might make a pretty Volumne; nay, Sancta Clara will maintain it in deſpire of the Puritans, That the Doctrine of the Church of Rome, is the Doctrine of the Church of England. Truly it were very fit that we knew, what were the Doctrine and Diſcipline of the Church of England, before we ſwear to it; and then (Sir) give me leave to ſay, that I ſhould be very loath to ſwear to the Diſcipline, or to the Doctrine and Tenents of the pureſt Church in the World, as they are collected by them, farther than they agree with the Holy Scriptures. Laſtly, It is as doubtfull what is meant by the Doctrine and Diſcipline eſtabliſhed, and what by altering and conſenting to alter, whether that is accom­pted or eſtabliſhed, which is eſtabliſhed by Act of Parliament, or whether that alſo that is eſtabliſhed, by Canons, Injunctions, &c. and whether it ſhall not extend to that which is publiſhed by our Divines, with the allowance of Authority: and ſo for conſenting to alter, whether it be only meant that a man ſhall not be active in altering, or whether it extend to any conſent, and ſo that a man ſhall not ſubmit to it, nor accept of it, being altered by the State. More ambiguities might be ſhewen, but theſe are enough to make it clear, that he that ſhall take this Oath cannot ſwear in judgment. Nor can he ſwear in truth, for it is full of untruths. It is not true that Diſcipline is neceſſary to Salvation It is not true, that Arch-Biſhops, Biſhops, Deans, Arch-Deacons, &c. are Jure Divino, as they muſt needs be, if the Law-makers ought of right to eſtabliſh them, as they are eſtabliſhed, for the Law-makers are not bound as of right, to frame their Lawes to any other than the Lawes of God alone. Now, whether Biſhops be Jure Divino, we know it is a Diſpute amongſt the Papiſts, and never did any Proteſtant hold it till of late years, but that Arch-biſhops, Deans, Arch-Deacons, &c. ſhould be Jure Divino, I do not know, that ever any Chriſtian held it before, and yet he that taketh this Oath muſt ſwear it. Laſtly, As he that taketh this Oath cannot ſwear in judgment nor in truth, ſo neither can he ſwear in righteouſneſs, for it is full of unrighteouſneſs, being indeed, as hath been well opened, a Covenant in effect againſt the King and Kingdome; for if the whole STATE ſhould finde it neceſſary, to alter the Government by Arch-Biſhops, Biſhops, &c. a great part of the Kingdome, eſpecially of the Gentry, (for not onely the Clergy, but all that take degrees in the Univerſities, are bound to take it) will be preingaged not to conſent to it, or admit of it. Again, it is a great wrong12 to thoſe that ſhall be Parliament men, that their freedome ſhall be taken away, being bound up by an Oath, not to conſent to the altering of a thing, which it may be fit and proper for a Parliament to alter. And ſuppoſe that for the preſent it be no hinderance to the ſervice of God, nor yet burdenſome to the King, and Kingdome, yet if it ſhould prove ſo hereafter, for a man to be bound by an Oath never to conſent to alter it, may be a great wrong to God in his ſervice, and to the King and Kingdome in their peace and well-fare, and therefore this Oath cannot be taken in righteouſneſſe. For the other Oath, de parendo juri Eccleſiae, & ſtando mandatis Eccleſiae, though it make leſſe noiſe than the other, yet is it not of leſte dangerous conſequence. If I remember well the Story, this was the Oath that the Pope made King John to take, and when he had ſworn ſtare mandatis Eccleſiae, the Pope commanded him to reſigne his Kingdome to him; and truly, be he Gentleman or Nobleman, or whatever elſe, when he hath once put his neck into this nooſe, his Ghoſtly Fathers may drag him whither they will, for they have the quantity and the quality of the penance in their own breſts, and if they ſhall enjoyn him to give any Sum towards the building of a Church, or the adorning of a Choppel, he muſt pay it, or if they ſhould enjoyn him any ſervile or baſe Action (as there are not wanting Examples of that kinde, in the time of Popery) they are ſworn ſtare mandatis Eccleſiae, and ſo cannot recede, but muſt performe it: Nay, I dare not warrant any man from the rods of Henry the ſecond, or of Raymond of Tholouze; what hath been done may be done, I am fure the power is the ſame. And that other Oath alſo (though more uſual in practice, and more confirmed by theſe new Canons) which is adminiſtred to Church-Wardens, would be looked into. For it is hardly poſſible for them that take it not to be forſworn, being they ſware to ſo many particulars, that they cannot mind and to ſome that they cannot underſtand; as, how many Church-Wardens are there in England, that underſtand what Socinianiſme is, in caſe they be ſworn, to preſent the Offenders againſt that Canon, which concerns that matter.

I ſhall only add a word or two concerning two Canons more, which ſeem to be Canons of Reformation:

The Firſt is, concerning Excommunication, to be pronounced only by a Divine, wherein it is alledged for the Framers of theſe Canons, that if they have not more Law on their ſides, yet they may ſeem to have more reaſon. For my part, as in all other things, I think they have ſo mended the matter, that they have made it farr worſe; for before that which was found fault with was this, That a Lay man did that which the grave Divine ſhould have done, and now the grave Divine muſt do whatever the Lay man would have done, for the cognoſcence of the Cauſe, and the power of Judicature is wholly in the Lay man, only the grave Divine is to be his ſervant, to execute his Sentences, and hath ſuch a kinde of managing the ſpiritual ſword, allowed only unto him, as the Papiſts in ſome caſes were wont to afford unto the Civil Magiſtrate, in reſpect of the temporal ſword; for, as if the Civil ſword by an implicite faith had been pinned to the Lawn ſleevs, they condemned men of Hereſie, and then delivered them over to the Secular Power; but what to do? not to have any cogniſance of the cauſe, nor to exerciſe any power of judicature but only to be their Executioners, and to burn the Heretick whom they had condemned, and ſo they judged men excommunicate, and then the Civil Power was to ſend out Writts, de excommunicato capiendo, againſt them: But one ſaid well, that the ſword,13 without Cogniſance of the cauſe, and judgment, was like Polyphemus without his eye, it became violence and fury, but being accompanied with the eye of judgment, it is equity and juſtice: and ſurely where the Spiritual or Civil Governour is called upon to ſtrike, he muſt be allowed to ſee and judg whom, and wherefore he ſtrikes, otherwiſe he will be able to give but an ill accompt to God, of the managing of the ſword, wherewith he is inſtructed.

The other Canon is the Laſt Canon, againſt Vexatious Citations, wherein they ſeem to have ſome ſence of the great grievance that poor people lye under, by occaſion of Vexatious Citations, and Moleſtations in Eccleſiaſtical Courts, and I verily believe that there is not a greater Oppreſſion in the whole Kingdome upon the poorer ſort of people, than that which proceedeth out of theſe Courts. But now (Sir) Let us ſee what proviſion they have made againſt it by this Canon. They ſay, becauſe great grievances may fall upon people by citations upon pretence only, of the breach of that law without any preſentment, or any other juſt ground, that no citations grounded onely as aforeſaid ſhall iſſue out, except it be under the hand and Seal of the Chancellour, Commiſſary, Arch-Deacon, or other competent Judg, ſo that, (if there be any ſence in theſe words) though there be no Preſentment at all, nor any other juſt ground, yet a citation may iſſue out, ſo it be under the hand and Seal of the Chancellour, Commiſſary, or other competent Judg, and the party ſhall not be diſcharged without paying his Fees, nor have any relief by this Canon. But ſuppoſe the Citation be not under the hand and Seal of any Competent Judge, and that there was neither Preſentment nor any juſt grounds for it, ſhall he then be diſmiſſed without paying any Fees? no, unleſs firſt contrary to the Law of Nature, there being no Preſentment nor juſt ground of Accuſation againſt him, he ſhall by his Oath purge himſelf of pretended breaches of Law, and then too he ſhall only have the Fees of the Court remitted, but ſhall have no ſatisfaction for his troubleſome and chargeable journey, and for the loſſe of his time, and being drawn away from his Affairs. Nay leaſt they ſhould ſeem to have been too liberal of their favour, they add a Proviſo in the cloſe of the Canon, that this grace of theirs ſhall not extend to any grievous crime, as Schiſme, incontinency, misbehaviour in the Church, or obſtinate Inconformity. And what do they call misbehaviour in the Church? It a man do not kneel at the Confeſſion, or have his hat on when the Leſſons are reading. In like manner what do they call obſtinate inconformity? If a man will not think what they would have him think, If a man will not ſay what they would have him ſay, if a man will not ſwear what they would have him ſwear, if a man will not read what they would have him read, if a man will not preach what they would have him preach, if a man will not pray what they would have him pray: In ſhort, if a man will not do whatever they would have him do, then he is an inconformiſt, and after that they have duely admoniſhed him, primò, ſecundò tertiò, all in one breath, then he is contumacious, then he is an obſtinate Inconformiſt.

Now (Sir) my humble Motion is, that in conſideration of all the Premiſes, and what beſides hath been well laid open by others; we ſhould proceed to damn theſe Canons, not only as contrary to the Lawes of the Land, but alſo as containing ſundry matters, deſtructive of the right of Parliaments, and of the fundamentall and other principal Lawes of this Kiagdome, and otherwiſe of very dangerous conſequence.


A SPEECH in the Houſe of Commons, at a Committee for the Bill againſt Epiſcopal-Government, Mr Hide ſitting in the Chair. June 11, 1641.

Mr. Hide,

THE debate we are now upon is, whether the Government by Arch­biſhops, Biſhops, Chancellors, &c. ſhould be taken away out of the Church and Kingdom of England: for the right ſtating where­of, we muſt remember the Vote which paſt yeſterday, not only by this Committee, but the Houſe, which was to this effect: That this Government hath been ſound by long experience, to be a great impedi­ment to the perfect Reformation and growth of Religion, and very prejudicial to the civil State.

So that then the Queſtion will lie thus before us, Whether a Government, which long experience hath ſet ſo ill a Character upon, importing danger, not only to our Religion, but the civil State, ſhould be any longer continued a­mongſt us, or be utterly aboliſhed? For my own part, I am of the opinion of thoſe, who conceive that the ſtrength of reaſon already ſet down, in the Preamble to this Bill, by yeſterdaies Vote, is a neceſſary deciſion of this Queſtion: For one of the main ends for which Church-government is ſet up, is to advance and further the perfect reformation and growth of Religion; which we have alrea­dy voted, this Government doth contradict; ſo that it is deſtructive to the ve­ry end for which it ſhould be, and is moſt neceſſary and deſirable? in which reſpect certainly we have cauſe enough to lay it aſide, not only as uſeleſs, in that it attains not its end, but as dangerous, in that it deſtroys and contradicts it.

In the ſecond place, we have voted it prejudicial to the civil State, as having ſo powerful and ill an influence upon our Laws, the Prerogative of the King, and Liberties of the Subject, that it is like a ſpreading leproſie, which leaves nothing untainted and uninfected which it comes near.

May we not therefore well ſay of this Government, as our Saviour in the fifth of Matthew ſpeaks of ſalt (give me leave upon this occaſion to make uſe of Scri­pture, as well as others have done in this debate) where it is ſaid that ſalt is good; but if the ſalt hath loſt its ſavour, wherewith will you ſeaſon it? It is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be caſt out, and troden under foot of men: ſo Church-government, in the general, is good, and that which is neceſſary, and which we all deſire; but when any particular form of it hath once loſt its ſavour, by being deſtructive to its own ends, for which it is ſet up (as by our Vote al­ready paſted we ſay this hath) then furely, Sir, we have no more to do but to caſt it out, and endeavour, the beſt we can, to provide our ſelves a better.

But to this it hath been ſaid, that the Government now in queſtion, may be ſo amended and reformed, that it needs not be quite pulled down or aboliſhed; becauſe it is conceived, it hath no original ſin or evil in it: or if it have, it is ſaid, regeneration will take that away.

Unto which I anſwer, I do conſent that we ſhould do with this Government as we are done by in regeneration, in which all old things are to paſs away, and all things are to become new, and this we muſt do, if we deſire a per­ſect reformation, and growth of our Religion, or good to our civil ſtate. For the whole Fabrick of this building is ſo rotten and corrupt, from the very foun­dation of it to the top, that if we pull it not down now, it will fall about the cars of all thoſe that endeavour it, within a very few years.


The univerſal rottenneſs or corruption of this government, will moſt evi­dently appear by a diſquiſition into theſe enſuing particulars.

Firſt, Let us conſider in what ſoil this root grows: Is it not in the Popes Paradiſe? do not one and the ſame principles and grounds maintain the Papacy or univerſal Biſhop, as do our Dioceſan or Metropolitan Biſhops? All thoſe au­thorities which have been brought us out of the Fathers and antiquity, will they not as well, if not better ſupport the Popedom, as the order of our Biſhops? So like wiſe all theſe arguments for its agreeableneſs to Monarchy, and cure of Schiſm, do they not much more ſtrongly hold for the acknowledgment of the Pope, than for our Biſhops? and yet have Monarchies been ever a whit the more abſolute for the Popes univerſal Monarchy? or their Kingdoms leſſe ſubject to ſchiſmes and ſeditions? whatſoever other Kingdoms have been, I am ſure our Hiſtories can tell us, this Kingdom hath not: and therefore we have caſt him off long ſince, as he is forteign, though we have not been without one in our own bowels. For the difference between a Metropolitan, or Dioceſan, or uni­verſal Biſhop, is not of kinds, but of degrees: and a Metropolitan or Dioce­ſan Biſhop is as ill able to perform the duty of a Paſtor to his Dioceſs or Pro­vince, as the univerſal Biſhop is able to do it to the whole world: for the one cannot do but by Deputies, and no more can the other; and therefore ſince we all confeſs the grounds upon which the Papacy ſtands are rotten, how can we deny but theſe that maintain our Biſhops are ſo too, ſince they are one and the ſame.

In the ſecond place, let us conſider by what hand this root of Epiſcopacy was planted, and how it came into the Church.

It is no difficult matter to find this out, for is not the very ſpirit of this or­der, a ſpirit of pride, exalting it ſelf in the Temple of God, over all that is called God? Firſt, exalting it ſelf above its fellow-Presbyters, under the form of a Biſhop; then over its fellow Biſhops, under the title of Archbiſnops, and ſo ſtill mounting over thoſe of its own profeſſion, till it come to be Pope, and then it ſticks not to tread upon the necks of Princes, Kings and Emperors, and trample them under its feet. Alſo thus you may trace it from its firſt riſe, and diſcern by what ſpirit this order came into the Church, and by what door, even by the back-door of pride and ambition, not by Chriſt Jeſus. It is not a plant which Gods right hand hath planted, but is full of rottenneſs and corruption; that myſtery of iniquity which hath wrought thus long, and ſo fit to be plucked up, and removed out of the way.

Thirdly, Let us conſider the very nature and quality of this tree, or root in its ſelf, whether it be good or corrupt in its own nature; we all know where it is ſaid, A good tree cannot bring forth corrupt fruit, nor a corrupt tree good fruit: Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thiſtles? By its fruit therefore we ſhall be ſure to know it; and according as the fruits of the Government have been amongſt us, either in Church or Common wealth, ſo let it ſtand, or fall with us.

In the Church.

1. AS it ſelf came in by the back door into the Church, and was brought in by the ſpirit of Antichriſt, ſo it ſelf hath been the back-door and in-let of all ſuperſtition and corruption into the worſhip and doctrine of this Church, and the means of haſtening us back again to Rome. For proof of this, I ap­peal to all our knowledges in late years paſt, the memory whereof is ſo freſh, I need eater into no particulars.


A ſecond fruit of this Government in the Church, hath been the diſplacing of the moſt godly and Conſcientious Miniſters; the vexing, puniſhing, and baniſhing out of the Kingdom, the moſt religious of all ſorts and conditions, that would not comply with their ſuperſtitious inventions and Ceremonies; in one word, the turning the edge and power of their Government againſt the ve­ry life and power of Godlineſs; and the favour and protect on of it unto, all pro­phane, ſcandalous and ſuperſtitious perſons that would uphold their party. Thou­ſands of examples might be given of this, if it were not moſt notorious.

A third fruit hath been Schiſm and Fractions within our ſelves, and alienati­on from all the reformed Churches abroad.

And laſtly, the prodigious monſter of the late Canons, whereby they had de­ſigned the whole Nation to a perpetual ſlavery and bond age to themſelves, and their ſuperſtitious Inventions. Theſe are the fruits of the Government in the Church. Now let us conſider theſe in the Civil State: As, 1. The countenau­cing all illegal Projects and proceedings, by teaching in their Pulpits the law­fulneſs of an arbitrary Power. 2. The overthrowing all proceſs at Common Law, that reflected never ſo little upon their Courts. 3. The kindling a War between theſe two Nations, and blowing up the flame, as much as in them lay, by their Councels, Canons and Subſidles they granted to that end. 4. The plots, practiſes and combinations during this Parliament, in all which they ſeem to have been intereſted more or leſs. Thus have they not contented themſelves with encroachments upon our ſpiritual priviledges, but have envied us our civil freedom, deſiring to make us grind in their mill, as the Philiſtims did Sampſon, and to put out both our eyes. O let us be avenged of theſe Philistims for our two eyes. If then the tree be to be known by its fruits, I hope you ſee by this time plainly the nature and quality of this tree.

In the laſt place, give me leave for a cloſe of all to preſent to your conſide­ration the miſchiefs, which the continuance of this Government doth threaten us with, if by the wiſdom of this Committee they be not prevented. 1. The dan­ger our Religion muſt ever be in, ſo long as it is in the hands of ſuch Governors, as can ſtand firmly in nothing more than its ruine; and whoſe affinity with the Popiſh Hieratchy makes them more confident of the Papiſts, than the Profeſſors of the reformed Religion, for their ſafety and ſubſiſtence. 2. The unhappy condition our civil State is in, whilſt the Biſhops have vete in the Lords Houſe, being there as ſo many obſtructions, in our body Politick, to all good and whol­ſom Laws tending to ſalvation. 3. The improbability of ſetling any firm or du­rable peace, ſo long as the cauſe of the war yet continues, and the bellowes that blow up this flame. 4. And that which I will aſſure you goes neareſt my heart, is the check which we ſeem to give to divine Providence, if we do not at this time pull down this Government. For hath not this Parl. been call'd, continued, preſerved and ſecured by the immediate finger of God, as it were for this work? had we not elſe been ſwallowed up in many inevitable dangers, by the practiſes and deſigns of theſe men and their party? hath not God left them to themſelves, as well in theſe things, as in the evil adminiſtration of their Government, that he might lay them open unto us, and lead us as it were, by the hand, from the finding them to be the cauſes of our evil, to diſcern that their rooting up muſt be our only cure? Let us not then halt any longer between two opinions, but with one heart and reſolution give glory to God, in complying with his providence, and with the good ſafety and peace of this Church and State, which is by paſſing this Bill we are now upon.


About this transcription

TextA landskip: or a brief prospective of English episcopacy, drawn by three skilfull hands in Parliament: anno 1641.
AuthorFalkland, Lucius Cary, Viscount, 1610?-1643..
Extent Approx. 64 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 11 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images.
SeriesEarly English books online.
Additional notes

(EEBO-TCP ; phase 2, no. A88612)

Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 168971)

Images scanned from microfilm: (Thomason Tracts ; 155:E1045[13])

About the source text

Bibliographic informationA landskip: or a brief prospective of English episcopacy, drawn by three skilfull hands in Parliament: anno 1641. Falkland, Lucius Cary, Viscount, 1610?-1643., Fiennes, Nathaniel, 1607 or 8-1669., Vane, Henry, Sir, 1612?-1662., England and Wales. Parliament. House of Commons.. [4], 16 p. s.n.],[London :Printed in the year MDCLX. [1660]. (Three speeches made in 1641 to the Commons: the first by Lucius Cary, Viscount Falkland; the second (anonymous) by Nathaniel Fiennes; and the third (anonymous, made in a committee for the bill against episcopal government, 11 June) by Sir Henry Vane.) (Place of publication from Wing.) (Annotation on Thomason copy: "Oct: 1".) (Reproduction of the original in the British Library.)
  • Episcopacy -- Early works to 1800.

Editorial statement

About the encoding

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

Editorial principles

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database ( The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.

Publication information

  • Text Creation Partnership,
ImprintAnn Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2012-10 (EEBO-TCP Phase 2).
  • DLPS A88612
  • STC Wing L324
  • STC Thomason E1045_13
  • STC ESTC R202705
  • EEBO-CITATION 99862902
  • PROQUEST 99862902
  • VID 168971

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.