UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA
LOS ANGELES
SCHOOL OF LAW
LIBRARY
^iy
n ^mmmmtmm. *?• /
in
„>o \ § V c y\l
Kg^
o d \t
•>
SUMMARY VIEW
OF THE
. L A W S
RELATING TO
SUBSCRIPTIONS,^.
WITH
REMARKS,
HUMBLY OFFERED
to the CONSIDERATION of the
BRITISH PARLIAMENT.
LONDON:
PRIKTED IN THE YEAR M DCC LXXfc
Sju, £37
nil
V
-/£-£
in A
i
i SUMMARY VIEW
OF THE
Laws relating to Subscriptions, &c.
with REMARKS,
Humbly offered to the Confideration of the
British Parliament.
[A] TNtheYear i ^53,werepublimedbythe
J_ King's Majefty's authority, "Articles
" agreed upon by the Bifhops andother learn -
" edand godly men in the laft Convocation
" at London, in the year of our Lord 1552,
" to root out difcord of opinions, and efta-
" blifh the agreement of true religion."
Bifliop Sparrow's Collection of Articles, &c.
Remark. — It is however certain, that thefe
Articles were not agreed upon in Convocation.
Archbifhop Cr owner's account of the matter
was this. " I was ignorant of the fetting to of
** that title, and as foon as I had knowledge
•« thereof, I did not like it ; and when I com-
c< plained thereof to the Council, it was an-
" fwered by them, That the Book was fo en-
" titled, becaufe it was fet forth in the time of
" the Convocation." Burnet's Hift. Reform.
Vol. III. p. 210, 211. And Fox's Martyrolo-
gy. Bifhop Burnet fays, " It feemed to be a
u great want, that this" [the publication of thefe
A 2 Articles]
( 4 )
Articles] " had been fo long delayed, as the
tc old Doctrine had ftill the legal authority of
" its fide." What legal authority the old Doc-
trine had, except in the decifions of foreign
Canons which were received in this Kingdom
with great refervation of municipal Rights, &c.
is not clear. The danger of dogmatizing was
not unknown in thofe days, and it would'' have
anfwered the end of the new Eftabiifhment juit
as well to have enjoined Subfcription to the
Article cited below in the Remark upon D
only.
[B] A Mandate bearing date June 19, in
the feventh year of the King's reign [1553]
was ifTued, addreffed to the Officers of the
Archbifhop of Canterbury [Cranmer] (refer-
ring to a previous Mandate addreffed to the
Archbifhop himfelf, and giving him autho-
rity to expound, publifh, denounce, and
fignify the faid Articles to the King's clergy
and people within his jurifdiclion) to fum-
rcon or peremptorily admonifh all and fin*
gular Rectors, Vicars, Prtfbyters, Stipendia-
ries, Curates, Rural Deans, Minillers, M af-
ters of Grammar Schools, public and pri-
vate Preachers of the Word of God, Lec-
turers and all who exercifed any Eccleiiaflical
function of whatever denomination, includ-
ing even Churchwardens, to appear at Lam-
beth, on Friday the 23d day of June:, be-
tween the hours cf feveri and nine, to do
and
( 5 )
and receive what mav be farther agreeable
to reafbn, and becometh their duty to the
royal dignity. Burnet's Hilt. Reform, vol.
III. Collection, p. 202,
Rem. - This Mandate was iflfued purfuant to a
Letter of the Archbifhop's to the King and Coun-
cil, " defiring that all Bilhops might have au-
thority from the King to caufe all Preachers,
Archdeacons, Deans, Prebendaries, Parfons,
Vicars, Curapes, with all their Clergy, to fub-
fcribe the faid Articles."— f he reafon given by
the Archbifhop for fuch his defire was, " that
U he trufted fuch a Concorde and quietnefs in
" Religion ihould fiiortly follow thereof, as elle
" was not to be looked for of many Years."
Probably the good man found this expedient did
not anfwer his expectation. For tho 5 his Pow-
ers by this Mandate were very full, we find
him declaring at his Examination before JVeJton y
that he compelled no man to fubfcribe. A Declara-
tion that fufficiently fhews, he had met with
opposition to this meafure of Peace and Quiet-
nefs. And moft probably it was not only the
gentlenefs of his own difpofition, but the con-
lcioufneis of the incongruity of fuch compulfi-
on, with the original principles of the Proteftant
Reformation, which occasioned his Forbearance.
This is one inttance of thofe difficulties the firft
Reformers found in accommodating the new
Eftablifhment to the temper of the times con-
fidently with their own Profeffions of being
determined in matters of Faith and Doctrine, by
the Scriptures only. It is hardly neceffary to
.obferve,
( 6 )
obferve, that fuch Expedients are not only ufe-
lefs now, but highly difparaging to the improve-
ments we pretend to in the prefent times.
[C] A particular Mandate to the Bi/hop
of Norwich, bearing date June 9, directing
him to caufe the faid Articles to be fub-
fcribed by every manner of perfon prefent-
ed unto him to be admitted to any Eccle-
fkftical Order, Miniftry, Office, or Cure
within his Diocefe, and if any man in that
cafe mall refufe to confent to any of the
faid Articles, and to fubfcribe the fame,
then his Majeftv willeth and commandeth
him the faid Biihop, that neither he, nor
any for him, or by his procurement in any
wife, (hall admit fuch recufant or allow him
as fufficient or meet to take any Order, Mi-
niftry, or Ecclefiaftical Cure. For which
his fo doing, his Majefty promiies to dif-
charge the Bimop from all manner of pe-
nalties or dangers of actions, fuits, or pleas
of Premimire, ^uare impedit, or fuch like.
Burnet , Ibid. p. 203,
Rem. — Here was a flretch of the Royal Pre-
rogative which the end propofed would hardly
jutlify. It was depriving the lubjecTt of the be-
nefit of the Law by an arbitrary Non objlante.
A writ of Quare imp edit is a writ of Rights
and, without the Royal interpofition, would
have compelled the Bifhop to give the Clerk
inllitution,
( 7 )
institution, without fome better Reafon for de-
nying it, than that the Clerk refufed to fub-
fcribe thefe Articles.
[D] A Mandatorial letter from the Bifhop
of Ely (Goodricke) Chancellor, and three
more appointed vilitors of the Univerfitv of
Cambridge y dated 'June t, 1553, addreiTed
to Dr. Sands (probably Vicechancellor) and
to the Regents and Non- Regents of the faid
Univerfity, enjoining an oath to be taken
and fubferibed by every Candidate for' a de-
gree in Divinity, or in Arts, containing,
among others, the following engagement,
Deinde me Articulos de quibus in Sinodo Lcn-
dinenfi Anno Domini 1553.^ tollendam opini-
onum dilfenjionem, et confenfum vera? Religionis
firmandum inter Epifcopos et alios eruditos vi-
ros convener at et Regia Author it ate in lucem
editos, pro veris et certis habiturum, et omni
in loco tanquam confenti elites cum verba Dei
defenfurum, et contrarios Articulos in Scholis
et Pulpitis vel refpondendo vel co?icio?2ando op-*
pugnaturum. Burnet, ubi fupra, p. 205.
Rem. — In the former part of this oath the
Candidate fwore, fe veram Chrijli religionem om^
ni ammo complexurum y Scripture aathoritatem
Hominum judicio prapofiturum, regulam vita et
fummam fidei ex verbo Dei petiturum. Cetera
qua ex verbo Dei non probantur, pro humanis et
non necejfariis habiturum. It was utterly incon-
fiftent
( 8 )
ftftjent v.idi the man's profeffing thefe things, tc*
aflfer^ that he would efteem thefe Articles for
true and certain, and to defend them as fuck
againft all mankind, upon the mere prefump-
tion that they were agreeable to the word of
God,
[E] Upon Queen Elizabeth's aCceffion,
an Ait of Uniformity palled, wherein is no
mention made of Subfcription either to the
Liturgy eitablimed by that Act or to any
Articles of Religion, nor in the vifitatorial
Articles of Inquiry of the fame year, is
there any one intimating that fuch Sub-
fcription was required. See Sparrow's Col-
lection.
Rem, — It is remarkable that by this Statute,;
the Clergyman offending againft it, is to be
lawfully convicted according to the Laws of
this Realm, by verdict of twelve men, or by
his own confeffion; or by the notorious evidence
of the fact •, and was not left folely to the
Bifhop or Ordinary either for his trial or his pu-
niihment •, and as the words " and be thereof
44 in form aforelaid lawfully convict," or words
equivalent, run through the whole Act, it was'
mamfeitly the intention of the Parliament to-
put the inferior Clergy on the footing of the
reft of the free Subjects of the Realm, and not
leave them to the arbitrary cenfures of their re-
spective Ordinaries, as thefe were too apt to en-
croach upon the civil powers, by exercifing
their
4?
( 9 )
their jurifdiction, where the laws of the Realm
ihould have reitrained them, complaints of
which were frequently made in Parliament, dur-
ing this reign, and particularly with refpect
to Sublcription, as will be i'cen by and by.
N. B. There is one inllance of a trial by Jury
upon this Statute, before Lord Chief Jultice
Catlin, Biihop Sandys^ &c. preferved in a Book,
called Part of a Regifter, &c. p. 105. The Cul-
prit was one Robert Johnfon, Preacher at Nor-
thampton. He was indicted for administering
the wine at the Communion without the words
of Confecration, for marrying without the Ring,
and baptizing without making the Sign of the
Crofs. He was convicted of the nrit offence,
fentenced to fuffer a year's imprifonment, and
died in the Gate-houfe before the end of the
year, viz. 1573. In the courfe of the Trial,
and from the circumftances of Johnfon's De-
fence, fome points of Doctrine were difcufTed,
and John/on was faid to defend a horrible Here-
fy, which was probably the chief inducement
with the Jury to find him Guilty. For the
Fact, as Johnfon fhewed, was not a gain ft the
Order of the Book. Sublcription was hotly
urged this year. But Johnfon's notion of the
words of Inltitution, was not provided againit
in the Articles.
[F] In the year 1562. King Edward's
Articles were revifed, and altered, fome
things added, others taken away, and the
number reduced to thirty-nine. At the
end of which, is the following Ratifica-
B ticn.
( io )
tion. " This Book of Articles before re-
hearfed, is again approved, and allowed to
be holden and executed within the realm,
by the afTent and confent of our Sove-
reign Lady Elizabeth, by the Grace of God
of England, France and Ireland Queen, De-
fender of the Faith, &c. Which Articles
were deliberately read, and confirmed again
by the Subfcription of the hands of the
Archbifhop and Bifhops of the upper
Houfe, and by the Subfcription of the
whole Clergy of the nether Houfe in their
Convocation in the year of our Lord 1571 /'
Rem. — The Latin Articles of 1562, differ
very much from thofe [Latin] Articles pub-
limed by Convocation in 157 1. It is probable
there was the like difference between the Englifh
copies, nor is it poflible now to know which of
them is authentic. The Bilhops and Clergy in
1562, fubfcribed Archbifhop Parker's Latin co-
py, and it is likely they fubfcribed a Latin co-
py revifed, in the Convocation of 157 1 . But the
Act of Parliament of that year refers to an Eng-
lifh book, and how that copy agreed with that
now in ufe, is totally unknown. It may be
faid however with great truth, that, on account
of the abovementioned differences, the articles
now fubfcribed, are not the Articles agreed
upon in the Convocation of 1562. There is
likewife a fallacy in the Ratification as it ftands
at prefent, with refpecl to the Queen's content,
as if both books of Articles were precifely the
fame,
( II )
fame, and equally approved by her Majefty ;
whereas the words fubjoined to the Latin Arti-
cles of if, 62, fo far as the Queen's authority is
concerned, are thefe, Quibus omnibus Artuulis
ferenijjima Princeps Elizabeth, Dei gratia Anglice y
Fram i<g et Hibernix Regina, fidei Defenfor, &c.
per feipfam diligeuter prius leclis et examinatis, fuum
ajjenfum piwbuit', which her Majefty might do
without: impofing Subfcription to them on her
iubjects.
[G] In the year J 564 were publimed,
Advertifements partly for due order in the
public adminiftration of the Sacraments,
and partly for the Apparel of all perfons
Eccleliaftical. The Title of the laft fec-
tion is, * J Proteftations to be made, pro^
u mifed and fubfcribed by them that mail
" hereafter be admitted to any office, room
" or cure in any church, or other place
' c EcclefiafticaL" Under this Title are the
following Proteftations; " I mall not preach
or publicly interpret, but only read what
is appointed by public authority, without
fpecial licence of the Bimop under his
Seal. I do alfo faithfully promife in my
perfon — to obferve, keep and maintain fuch
order and uniformity in all external Policy,
Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, as by
the Laws, good Ufages and Orders, are al-
ready well provided and efhbliihed." Spar*
y ?w's Collection.
B 2 Rem.—-
( 12 )
Rem.- — What is here provided againft, by
this Proteftation and Subfcription, was in a
great meafure fecured by the A£t of Uniformi-
ty, fave in the Article of preaching and inter-
preting, concerning which there feems to have
been no Law or Ordinance in being at that
time, except the Queen's Injunctions of 1559 ;
which were not underftood then to have the
force, or to make a part of the Laws of this
Realm. Thefe advertifements feem to have been
calculated by Archbimop Parker to take the
Clergy intirely into the hands of the Bifhops.
What oppofition thefe Advertifements met with
in the Queen's Council and elfewhere, and how
diftafteful they were to many confiderable men
in different departments, may be fcen in Slrype's
Life of Archbimop Parker, Book 2. chap. xx.
[H] In the year 1571, An Adl of Par-
liament pafTed injoyning Subfcription in
thefe words ; " Every perfon under the de-
gree of a Bifhop which doth or fhall pre-*
tend to be a Priefl or Minifter of God's
Holy Word and Sacraments, by reafon of
any other form of inftitution, confecration
or ordering, than the form fet forth by
Parliament in the time of the late King
of moft worthy memory, King Edward the
fixth, or now ufed in the reign of our
moft gracious Sovereign Lady, before the
feaft of the Nativity of Chrijl next fol-
lowing, mall in the prefence of the Bifhop
or
( 13 )
or the Guardian of the Spiritualities of
ibme one Diocefe, where he hath or (hall
have EccleliafHcal living, declare his af-
fent, and fubfcribe to all the -Articles of
Religion, which only concern the Confef-
iion of the true ChrifHan Faith, and the
Doctrine of the Sacraments, comprifed in
a Book imprinted, intitled, Articles where-
upon it was agreed, &c. and mall bring
from fuch Bimop or Guardian of Spiri-
tualities in writing, under his Seal au-
thentic, a Teftimonial of fuch his A/Tent
and Subfcription, and openly on fome Sun-
day in the time of the public fervice afore-
noon in every Church, where, by reafon
of any Eccleliaftical living he ought to
attend, read both the faid Teftimonial and
the faid Articles, upon pain that every fuch
perfon, which mall not before the faid
feafr, do as is above appointed, mail be
ipfo faofo deprived, and all his Ecclefiafti-
cal promotions mall be void, as if he then
were naturally dead." Statutes 13 Eliz.
c. 12.
Rem. — The noble fland made by the Houfe
of Commons in the reign of Queen Elizabeth
on divers occafions againft Ecclefiaftical en-
croachments, and in favour of Religious liber-
ty, plainly fliews, that the limiting the Sub-
scription of the Clergy to fuch Articles . <£ as
only concern the Confeffion of the true Chriflian
B 3 faith,
( 14 )
faith, and the doctrine of the Sacraments," in
this Aft, was no idle provifion, or words with-
out meaning. Much has been faid concerning
the uncertainty, what Articles were not to be
fubfcribed under 'this reftriction, and an argu-
ment has been drawn from thence for an unlimit-
ed Subfcription. It appears however from the
Converfarion between Archbiihop Parker and
Mr. Peter IVentworth in 1571, that the Articles
for the Homilies, Confecrating of Bifnops and
fuch like, were put out of the book, and were
doubtlefs flruck out in the copy annexed to the
Bill. And as that copy is now irrecoverable,
and as it hath been faid, feparated by fome un-
fair practice from the Act which refers to it.
the Clergy muft be left to their own judgement,
which of the Articles are or are not excepted in
the Statute. Some learned and worthy perfons
have thought that Subfcription to the 6th and
25th Articles is fufficient to fatisfy the intention
of the Legislature, the rather as the article
which concerns the Homilies was certainly in-
tended to be left out ; and therefore as moil of
the doctrinal articles are but abridgements of
what the Homilies treat of at more length, the
Houfe of Commons had no more time to exa-
mine thofe Articles how they agreed with the
word of God, than they had to examine the
Homilies., as both muft have been examined to-
gether. It is only neceffary to obferve farther^
that whatever Articles were enjoined by this Act
to be fubfcribed, the fame and no other were to
be read and aliened to, as prescribed by the
fubfequen,t
( H )
fubfequent Sections of this Statute. See D'czves's
Journal, p. 239.
[I] In the fame year (1571.) the Bi-
Ihops put forth a Collection, intituled, Li-
ber quorundam Canonum Difciplince Ecclefic?
Anglic ame , Anno 1 571. in which, under the
Title de Epifcopis, it is ordained, that per-
fons approved for public preachers, fhould
have their Licences renewed, ita tamen ut
prius fubfcribant articulis chrijliance reli-
giotjis publice in Synodo approbatis, fidemque
dent fe velle tueri et defender e doffirinam earn
quce in Hits continetur ut confentientiffimam
veritati verbi divini. And under the Title
Concionatores, there is the following injunc-
tion. Et quoniam articuli illi religionis chri-
jliance in quos confenfwn eft ab Epifcopis in
legitima et fancla Jynodo, jujfu et autho-
ritate ferenijfimce principis Elizabeths con-
vocata et celeb rat a' baud dubie col/ecJi funt
ex facris Uteris ceteris et novi 1'ejtamenti, et
rum ctflejii doBrind qua in 'illis continetur ,
per omnia congruunt; quoniam etiam liber
publicarum prccum, et liber de inaugura-
tion archiepifcoporum, epi/coporum, prefbyte-
rorum et diaco?ioru t n i nihil continent ab ilia
ipfa doolrina alienum, quicunque mittentur ad
docendum populum, illorum articulorum, au+
thoritatem et fidem, non tantum concionibus
Jills, fed etiam fubfcriptione confrmabunt. Qui
B 4 fecus
( i6 )
ft'cus fecerit, et contrarid doblrina popidum
turbaverit , excommunicabit ur. S p ar ro w ' s
Collection.
Rem. — The intention of thefe Injunctions
for Subfcription to the Articles, was to fupply,
what the Biihops thought the Parliament had
left fhort, namely, to require a Subfcription to
all the Articles, as appears by their making the
Subfcriber aiTert their agreement with the word
of God, and particularly mentioning the Book
of Confecrating of Bifhops, &c. It is however
certain, that the Queen never gave her Sanction
to thefe Canons, and Grip da I then Archbifhop of
York " doubted whether they had vigorem legis"
[which out of all doubt they had not] " and
'? thought the Queen's verbal alien t would not
" ferve them, if they mould be impleaded in
cc a Cafe of Premunire," in which he was very
much in the right.
[K] In the year 15S4. the Biiliops and
Clergy of the Province of Canterbury ai-
fembled in Convocation, put forth a Col-
lection intituled, Articuli pro Clero, in
which it was injoyned, that no Biihop
fhould thereafter admit any perfon to Holy
Orders, except be was of his own Diocefe,
f-zc. vet fa It em, nip rat ion cm jidei Jhcr juxta
articuhs. illos Religioiris in Synodo Epifcoporum
cf clcri appro bat os latino fermone redderc pofjit,
adeo ut facramm litcrarum tcJli?nonia quibm
eofundem
( '7 )
eorundem Articuhrum Veritas innititur red"
tare etiam valeat. Sparrow's Colle&ion.
Rem. — Archbiihop Whitgift was now pro-
moted to Canterbury. His predeceflbr Grindal
had complained greatly of the ignorance of the
Clergy, and had ufed his utmoft endeavours to
fupply the Church with abler men ; but gene-
rally without effect. By this time, it is likely,
the Bifhops began to fee the impropriety of re-
quiring Subicription of poor Curates and Can-
didates for Orders to a fet of Articles of which
they knew fo little \ and to obviate any reproach
that might arife from this practice, enjoined the
examination mentioned in thefe Canons. And
had they ftuck to this expedient, it may eafily
be imagined they muft not have ordained a
Tithe of the Candidates who afpired to the
Friefthood. Perhaps very few at this day
would undertake to recite the testimonies of
Holy writ, on which the truth of thefe Arti-
cles depends. The Spirited Commons, how-
ever, became fenfible of this arbitrary impofiti-
on, and in the Parliament of 1585 petitioned
the Houfe of Lords, among other matters re-
lating to the Church, " That for the encourage-
" ment of many to enter into the Minifhy
" which are kept back by fome conditions of
" Oaths and Subfcriptions whereof they make
f\ fcruple, it may be confidered, whether this
f c favour may be fhewed them, that hereafter
f* no Oath or Subfcription be tendered to any
e i that is to enter into the Miniftry, or to any
'* Benefice with Cure, or to any place of preach-
ing,
( 18 )
" ihg, but fuch only as be exprefly prefcribed
" by the Statutes of this Realm •, lave only that
" it fhall be lawful for every Ordinary to try
tc any Minifters prefented to any Benefice
* s within his Diocefe by his Oath, whether he
< c is to enter corruptly or ihcorruptly into the
" fame." D y ewes'* Journal, p. 358. It is hum-
bly prefnmed, that the Anfwer of the Arch-
bifhop of York to this reafonable Petition, is far
from being fatisfactory upon Proteftant princi-
ples.
[L] In the year 1 ^97 were put forth,
Capitida five Conjiitutiones Ecckfiajiicce, by
the Archbifhop, Bifhops, and Clergy of the
Province of Canterbury affembled in Con-
vocation, faid in the Title-page to be con-
firmed under the Great Seal of England*
In this colle6tion, the requifite qualifica-
tion of Minifters, fo far as relates to the
Articles, is prefcribed in the fame words.
Sparrow's Collection.
Rem.— By this time Archbifhop Whitgift had
fo far eftablilhed his power that all oppofition
w his fyftem of Difcipline became frnitlefs even
in Parliament. Sirype relates that, " a great
t£ heap of Grievances in the Church were thrown
*l into the Parliament [of 1597] by Bills put in
" by divers perfons •, but were not read, by
" means, no doubt, of fome higher influence.'*
Among others, cc A grievance no way inferior
" to the former the ungodly ufe of the Statute
" of
( 19 )
** of 1 3 Eliz. concerning Faith and Sacraments,
i' by which men are forced to Subfcription,
" and forced to accufe themfelves," i. e. by de-
claring their difient from fuch Articles as did not
concern Faith and Sacraments. N. B. Thefe
Canons were confirmed under the Great Seal,
and they feem chiefly to aim at reforming fome
abufes in the Eccleliaftical courts ; by way, one
may fuppoie, of precluding enquiries into fuch
matters, in Parliament. Strype's Life of Whit-
gift, p. 509.
[M] In the year 1603, the Convocation
compofed the Book of Canons now in ufe,
the thirty-fixth of which injoyns Subfcrip-
tion, 1. To the King's Supremacy. 2. To
the Book of Common Prayer, as containing
in it nothing contrary to the word of God.
^. To the thirty-nine Articles, acknow-
ledging all and every the faid Articles to be
agreeable to the word of God. Which
Subfcription is to be made in this form of
words. s f I A T . N. do willingly and ex
animo fubferibe to thefe three Articles above-
mentioned, and to all that are contained in
them." The Royal afTent to thefe Canons
is attefted under the GreatSeal oiEnzland**
^'
Rem. — It is queflionable how far thefe Canons
are binding. Some great authorities fay, they have
no force with refped to the Laity, and that they
bind the Clergy only by virtue of their Oath of
* Sse the Grace annexed.
Canonical
( 2° )
Canonical obedience, which however is limited
to things lawful and honejl, and what is lawful
and honefi in Canonical commands or injunctions
cannot in equity be determined before the Perfon
againft whom the crime of difobedience is com-
mitted. It is againft the principles of juftice,
and the genius of the Britifh conftitution, that
the fame man fhould be both judge and party.
Prohibitions from the temporal Courts lye
againft the Courts ecclefiaftical, in cafes which
concern the Clergy as well as the laity. Why
fhould not the cafe of this Canonical Subfcrip-
tion (as- the temporalities of beneficed Clerks are
tiow made to depend upon a compliance with
it) be. fubje<5t to the verdict of twelve men, as
other cafes of lefs importance are made to be,
by the Act i. Eliz. cap. 2 ? Very many of thefe
Canons are totally fallen into difufe, on account
of the impracticability of carrying them into
execution. Others, which might be executed,
are wholly neglected, poffibly becaufe the exe-
cution of them might fet the exercife of Cano-
nical diicipline in fo many trifling matters, in
too odious a light. But can any thing be more
odious than to compel a learned and Proteftant
clergy to fubfcribe implicitly to all thefe anti-
quated propofitions, on the pain of being ex-
cluded from the benefit of any temporal emo-
lument in the Church, where they might be of
the greateft ufe to the people ?
[N] In the year 16 13. A Grace was
parted by the Univerfity of Cambridge, in.
confequence of Letters from King James I.
pre-
( 21 )
prescribing Subfcription to the three Articles
in the 36th Canon to the Candidates for the
Degree of Batchelor of Divinity> and of
Doctor in each faculty *.
[O] In the year 161 6, the King {James
I.)*fent directions to Dr. "John Hill, then
Vice Chancellor, and the Heads of Houfes
in the Univerlity of Cambridge, fignifying
his pleafure that he would have all who
take any degree in the Schools, to fub-
fcribe to thefe Articles.
Rem. — Remarks on thefe Royal Directions,
will be found under the Letter [S].
[P] In the year 1628 King Charles I.
caufed the 39 Articles to be republished,
prefixing thereto a Declaration, prohibiting
the lean: difference from the faid Articles,
and configning thofe who mould affix any
new fenfe to any Article to the Church's
cenfure in his Majefty's Commiffion Eccle-
fiaftical, declaring that his Majefly would
fee due execution done upon them.
Rem. — Nothing can be more inconfiftent than
to continue this Declaration at the head of the 39
Articles, while every Subfcriber is, by Canon 36,
confined to a particular invariable form of
words, in expreffing his affent and confent to
* See the Grace annexed.
them ;
s
( 22 )
them-, nor can any judgment be made, whefe-
ah article is ambiguoufly expreffed, which of th<?
fenfes given to it by different interpreters, may
be called drawing it afide from the plain and full
meaning thereof: Nor is thepunilhmcnt threatened,
for offences againfl this declaration, now poffible
to be executed, as, thanks be to God and a virtu-
ous Legiflature, the Commiffion ecclefiafticah to
which the Offender is configned for his cenfure,
is no longer in being.
[Q^ | In the year 1640 were framed by
the Archbiihops* Bifhops, and Clergy in
Convocation, Constitutions and Canons
Ecclefiaftical, in the fixth of which an Oath
is injoyned to be taken by all Archbifhops
and Bifhops and all other Priefts arid Dea-
cons, all Mailers of Arts (the Sons of
Noblemen only excepted) all Batchelors
and Doctors in Divinity, Law or Phyfic,
all that are licenfed to praclife Phyfic, all
Regiflers, Actuaries and Proctors, all School -
matters, all fuch as being Natives or natu-
ralized, do come to be incorporated into
the Univerfities here, having taken a degree
in any foreign Univerlity, " that they ap-
prove the Doctrine and Discipline or Go-
vernment eftablifhed in the Church of Engr
land, as containing all things neceifary to
Salvation." Sparrow's Collection.
Rem. — For the objections made to this arbi-
trary
( 23 )
trary oath, See Fuller*?, Church Hift. xi. Book, p.
170, 171. And Heylin's Life of Arch bp. Laud,
P- 443-
[R] December 16 : 1640. Upon a de-
bate in the Houfe of Commons concerning
thefe Canons, it was refolved, nemine Con-
tradicente, " that the Clergy of England
convened in a Convocation or Synod, or
otherwife, have no power to make any Con-
ftitutions, Canons or Act whatfoever in
matter of Doctrine, Difcipline or other-
wife, to bind the Clergy or Laity of the
land, without common confent of Parlia-
ment." And at the fame time it was un-
animoufly refolved " that thefe particular
Canons do contain in them matter contrary
to the King's Prerogative, the fundamental
Laws and Statutes of the Realm, to the
Rights of Parliament, to the property and
liberty of the Subjects, and matters tend-
ing to fedition, and of dangerous confe-
quence." Rufiwortb, Vol. IV. p. 112.
Rein. — This Refohuion mofl certainly repro-
bated the Canons of 1603, as well as thofe of
1640. The former, any more than the latter,
never had any common confent of Parliament.
It is in vain to pretend that this vote was paiTed
in times of irregularity. The forms of Parliament
were never more folemnly or religioufly obferv-
ed : and, as it fens, this refolution is not at ail
5 different
( 24. )
different from the language of the Statute 13
Car. 1. chap. xii. wherein it is faid, that nothing
in that Statute fhall be conttrued " to confirm
" the Canons made in the Year 1640, nor any
» e of them, nor any other Ecclefiaftical laws or
" canons not formerly confirmed, allowed or
" enacted by Parliament, or by the eftablifhed
" Laws of the Land, as they flood in the year
cc of our Lord 1639." The Canons of 1603,
had no ejlabli/hment but King James's Licenfe
and Ratification : and no lels had the Canons
of 1640, the Licenfe and Ratification of King
Charles I. And if ever the matter fhould come
to a fair Trial, King James's Canons could no
more ftand before the eftablifhed Law of the
Land, than thofe of King Charles. And what-
ever authority one of theie Princes derived from
the 25th of Hen. 8. the other had equally the
fame.
[S] January 19 : 1640-41. " Upon Mr.
Whites report from the Grand Committee
for Religion, it was refolved upon the quef-
tion, that the Statute made about twenty-
{evtn years ago in the Univerfity of Cam-
bridge, impofing upon young Students a
Subfcription according to the 36th Article
of the Canons, made in the Year 1603, is
againft the Law and Liberty of the Subject,
and ought not to be preffed upon any Stu-
dent or Graduates whatsoever." Ibid, p. 149.
Rem. — From the manner in which this Refo-
Lution
( *5 )
lution is expreffed, it is probable the Cafe
flood thus. King James's Letters to the Uni-
verfity required Subscription of Batchelors in
Divinity and Doctovs iri each Faculty. This
became a Statute, but was probably extended to
other graduates pro arbitrio, and this being ob-
jected to, the Univerfity might apply in 1616
to the King for his farther pleafure in this mat-
ter, and the affair coming before the Parliament
in 1640, they feem to have taken both orders to-
gether. Otherwile it is certain that the Statute
of 161 3 extends to no younger ftudents than
Batchelors in Divinity, and Doctors in each Fa-
culty. But this is wholly conjectural. The ma-
terial oblervation is, that the whole Practice is
juftly and feverely condemned in a moft wife and
righteous Parliament.
[T] In the year 1662. 13 & 14 Car. XL
Was patted the lait Act of Uniformity, by
which Subfcription to the Declaration of
Conformity to the Liturgy of the Church of
England, as by Law eftablifhed, is required
of every Dean, Canon, Prebendary of every
Cathedra] or Collegiate Church, and of all
Matters and other Heads, Felloes, Chap 7
lains and Tutors, of or in any College, Hall,
Houfe of learning or Hofpital, and of every
public ProfefTor and Reader in either of the
Univeriities, and in every College elfewhere,
and of every Parfon, Vicar, Curate, Lec-
turer, and of every other perfon in holy Or-
ders, and every Schoolmafter keeping any
C public
( 26 )
public or private School, and of every per-
fon intruding or teaching any Youth in
any houfe or private family as a Tutor or
School matter. And by the fame Statute
Subfcription unto the nine-and-thirty Ar-
ticles mentioned in the Statute made in the
13th year of the reign of the late Queen
Elizabeth, is required of the Governor or
Head of every College or Hall in either of
the Univeriities, and of the Colleges of
Wejlminfier, Winchejler and 'Eaton, and all
upon the pain of forfeiting their refpe&ive
offices or preferments, from the Dean down
to the petty Schoolmafter.
Rem. — This vindictive Statute, having now
compleatly done its work, ar.d occafioned fuch
a variety of diflrefs from the Reftoration to this
prefent hour, to fuch of the clergy as could not
afTent to the principles of King Charles the fe-
cond's Biihops, may now, we hope, be foftened
and qualified, without any detriment to the
Church of England. Neither King, Lords nor
Commons have any thing to fear from the mu-
tinous fpirit of a peevifh, irritated and obitinate
generation of Nonconformifts. The Toleration
laws have rendered Proteflant Diflenters of all
Denominations, peaceable, rational and valuable
Subjects to the Civil Government ; and the
Clergy of the eflablifhed Church, who iolicit a
relaxation of their prefent bonds, derive their
pretenfions only from the original principles of
the Proteflant reformation, and thole generous
4. maxims
( *7 )
maxims of Civil and Ecclefmftical policy which
give a fanction to the Revolution of 1688, apd
to the Settlement of the Crown in the lineage of
our moft gracious Sovereign, to whom and his
Royal Houie they profefs the moft fincere and
cordial attachment. They fly for afilftance on
the prefent occafibn to that auguft Body, who
have ever been the Protectors of the Rights and
Privileges of the Britijh Subject, and who have
in many periods of our Hiftory, from the firft
dawn of Reformation, fliewn their care and con-
cern to deliver the pious -and confcientious
Clergy, not only from the oppreffions of the Ro-
man Pontiff, but from the attempts and en-
croachments of many in high places, whofe am-
bition difpoied them to eftablifh the like ufur-
pations, under a more plaufible pretext. The
time is now come, they hope, when a candid
hearing will be given to their reafonable and
modeft Remonftrances, and all obftructions to
their relief removed, which are founded in no-
thing, but a defire of exercifing a defpotic Rule
over the Confciences, or in pretended fears and
apprehenfions of Confequences, which can have
no place, where the freedom folicited has no
other object than the promotion of peace and
unity, virtue and true piety among Clergy and
People in the prefent ftate of things, and the
everlafting Salvation of all in the world to come.
Upon the whole, the feveral Statutes enjoin-
ing Subfcription to the thirty-nine Articles are,
in their prefent ftate, liable to different conftruc-
tions, particularly with refpect to the limitation
in the Statute, 13 Eliz. c 12. And the Sta-
tute,
( 28 )
tfute, 13 & 1 4. Car. II. commonly called the Act
of Uniformity, referring where Subfcription to
the Articles is by that Act enjoined, to the Sta-
tute of Queen Elizabeth before-mentioned ; it is
now become uncertain to which, or to how many
of the faid Articles, the Clergy are bound, by
the faid Statutes, to fubfcribe : And with refpect
to their Obligation to fubfcribe the faid Articles,
as a condition of holding their Temporalties, the
faid Uncertainty is not removed by the requisi-
tion of the 36th Canon to fubfcribe to all and
every the faid Articles, inafmuch as the faid Ca-
non hath never been authorifed or confirmed by
Parliament •, and as by the Conftitution of this
Realm no Freehold can be paffed or legally held
by Virtue of the Canon Law only, as that would
give the Canon Law a paramount authority over
the common and ftatute Law of thefe Kingdoms,
and would be moreover an infringement of his
Majcfty's Supremacy.
P 1 N i s.
[ *9 ]
APPENDIX;
Since the foregoing fummary View
was printed off, we have been favoured
with the following account of the Ori-
gin of Subfcript ions to the 39 Articles
and the i^th Catton, in the Univer-
Jity of Oxford.
AFTER Queen Elizabeth had vifit-
ed Oxford, feveral Regulations, re-
" fpecting Drefs and Difcipline, were by her
" recommended to the Univeriity. Ac-
** cordingly, in the year 1573, among
" many other Acts to put her Majefty's
" Reformation in execution, it was decreed
** in Convocation, That each Candidate for
" the future, previous to his taking his De-
" gree, mould fubfcribe the Articles, as the
" form requires at prefent.
" Afterwards, in the year 1576, it was
*' farther decreed, That every perfon above
•' the age of fixteen, who entered his name
<c in any College or Hall, mould, before
f* the Friday fe'nnight after his entrance, be
" matriculated, and then fubfcribe the Ar-
*' tides of the Church; and that the Vice-
D " chan-
L 3° J
" chancellor or Proctors mould give him a
" certificate of having done fo.
" Anthony Wood fays, that the Puritans
" of thofe days complained fidly of this
" itnchrijlian rejlraint-, that many of them
" refufed to comply with it, and abfolutely
cc fufTered themfelves to be deprived of their
" emoluments in the Univerfity.
(t But whether it was owing to the oppo-
*' fitioii of the Puritans, or becaufe thefe
" Decrees of Convocation were not armed
" with fuflicient authority, this Subfcrip-
" tion foon came into difufe.
st In the year 1616 the Univerfity ap-
" plied to King James, for powers to make
" new Decrees to enforce Subfcription. The
" account which Wood gives of it, is as fol-
" lows:
" Having mentioned the founding of
" J ejus and Wadham Colleges, he adds, that
" this additional number of Colleges, con-
" tributed to the fpreading of Calvinifm ;
" it was therefore intimated to the King,
" that there was danger that Prefbyterian-
*' ifm would overrun the whole kingdom,
" if Students mould imbibe the Principles
" of it along with the rudiments of acade-
* c micai learning; and that this was the ra-
" ther to be apprehended, in that fo very
" few fubfcribed their affent to the three
" Articles contained in the 36th canon ;
whence
[ 3' ]
" whence it would happen, that they who
" were difarYected to the ecclefiaftical go-
" vernment of the Church, and the Liturgy,
" and made no account of the other facred
" offices, would give their whole attention to
" Sermons; by which means thofe filly fel-
" lows, called Lecturers, would have an op-
" portunity of fpreading opinions directly
" contrary to the doctrine of the Church of
" England. Thefe things being infinuated
" to the King, he held a confultation with
" his Bifhops, and fome other Churchmen
" about him, on the 1 8th of 'January, and,
" after mature deliberation, tranfmitted cer-
(< tain orders to the Vice-chancellor, fome
" Heads of Houfes, the Doctors of Divi-
f< nity, and the two Proctors, requiring
(t them to affiil in the execution of them.
" The firft of them was, That every one ad-
" mitted to a Degree in the Univerfity
" mould fubfcribe to the three Articles
M abovementioned. The execution of thefe
" orders was committed by the Earl of Pern-
(i broke, newly made Chancellor of the
" Univerfity, to the Vice-chancellor, Heads
t( of Houfes, and fome others, whom his
* c lordfhip exhorted to put them in prac-
" tice with all diligence. And that thefe
" orders might not want the authority of
*' Statutes, or rather might be reduced into
*' the form qf Statutes, certain Delegates
P % <( out
[ 3* 3
Cf out of the Heads of Colleges were ap-
tc pointed, who, by their joint labours and
" counfels, finished and iflued, on the laft
" day of March, the following Decrees. —
" With refpedt to the Articles of faith, it
" was decreed, that Subfcription mould be
" made in this form:
" Ego A. (vel nos, A. B.) perlectis pri-
" us, vel ab alio coram me (vel nobis)
'* recitatis Orthodoxy fidei et Religionis
" Articulis xxxix, et in Sacra Synodo
" Londini habita A. D. 1562, conftabi-
" litis, fimulque tribus capitibus in alia
" Synodo Londinenfi fub annum 1604 de-
" cretis, et in Canonem 36to. redactis,
" fciens volenfque (feu fcientes et volen-
*' tes) ex animo fubfcribo (vel fubfcribi-
" mus.")
" The prefent form of prefenting people
" to their degrees was alfo at the fame time
" appointed, to be faid by their refpeclive
" Deans,ending — .Quern infuper fciolegiife,
*' vel ledlos audiviffe omnes articulos fidei
" quibus coram Procuratoribus fubfcripfit."
" Wood fays, that when thefe Statutes
" came to be publifhed, they gave great of-
" fence to, and were considered as grievances
" by, the Puritans, and occafioned not a few
" invidious reflections upon Doctor Laud,
" as he was not only the advifer of thefe
*' Articles" (meaning the particulars com-
q prehended
[ 33 ]
prehended in thefe new Statutes) " but
" one of the delegates who framed the faid
" Statutes; to which however the Puritans
" conformed, though with reluctance, left,
" by (lighting what was enjoined by the
* c King's authority, they mould expofe them-
" felves not only to expulfion, but to fome
" more grievous punimment."
REMARKS.
All this, in the opinion of Wood, was ex-
tremely right, and as it Ihould be. Pafling
by, however, the practifing in this manner upon
the King, and the views of diftrefling thofe who
were diftinguifhed by the name of Puritans
(views, worthy only of the wretched Policy of
thofe days) we may be allowed to examine what
legal authority thefe injunctions may be fuppofed
to have in the prefent times. It does not ap-
pear that Queen Elizabeth gave any particular
directions concerning Subfcription to the 39 Ar-
ticles. This was merely the effect of a Decree
of the Univerfity affembled in Convocation.
The difufe of Subfcription, notwithstanding this
Decree, and the fubfequent application to King
James, difcover a confcioufnefs in the Governors
of Oxford, that a Decree of their Convocation
was void of authority to inforce Subfcription.
With refpect to King James's, Orders or Man-
dates, it does not appear, whether, by the word,
Edixit, we are to underftand a formal Edifl in
writing, authenticated by the King's fign ma-
nual ; or fome general directions, to put in exe-
cution what his Majefly would have decreed by
the
[ 34 ]
the Univerfity •, or laftly, fome verbal Orders
given to their Chancellor, the Earl of Pembroke.
It may be questioned, whether the Delegates, in
reducing thefe Orders into the form of Statutes,
did not exceed their Commiffion ; or indeed, whe-
ther the Univerfity had any fuch authority to de-
legate. For to whatever the Royal Mandate
might amount, previouQy to the coinpofing new
Statutes, the academical doctrine has been, if I
miftake not, that no Statutes are binding upon
them, which have not the Royal AiTent or Ra-
tification ; and nothing of that fort appears from
IVocd's account, which, indeed, is very confuted,
and wants explanation in many particulars. If,
on the other hand, our Universities have autho-
rity to make valid Statutes, without the Royal Ra-
tification, they muil have authority to repeal them.
And yet this is what the Cambridge men lately-
denied, and thought moreover, that recourfe mult
be had to the LegiJIature to have fuch Statute
repealed or altered, tho' it has only the fanct ion
of a Grace pafied in the Senate. Which fuggefts
a quefiion, By what authority their predecefibrs
abol:fned the practice of requiring Subfcription
from the Students at the time of their matricula-
tion ? It mould be mentioned, to the honour of
Cambridge, that there was no Subfcription re-^
quired of the Students, or Candidates for Degrees,
in that Univerfity, in the days of Queen Elizabeth^
which 1 think amounts to a proof, that the Queen
did not give any particular directions concerning
that matter at cither of the Univerfities, and that
without fuch directions, Cambridge did wifely in
not taking the Decree of Oxford for a precedent
lit for them to follow. The authority, given by
Kins
r 3s ]
King James to the Univeriity of Cambridge, in
1616) to require Subfcription of young Students,
feems to be* very weak. It is only the fignification
of his Majeftfs pleafure, feconded by a letter from
the Bifhop of Wiv.chefier, to the Vice-chancellor,
which feems to leave much to the option of the
University, the Heads of which did not, that I
can find, follicit his Majefly's directions on this
behalf, after the example of Oxford. But, fince
the practice of inquiring Subfcription of young
Students, obtains at both Univenitie.% it had been
well if Cambridge had followed the example of
Oxford, in taking care that the young Subfcribers
mould either read the Articles, or hear them-
read, previous to their figning their affent to
them. The formality with which this circum-
flance is attefted, by the perfon who prefents the
Candidates at Oxford, mould feem to imply
more than a bare reading ; fomething, perhaps,
like an explanatory Lecture upon thefe Articles.
But this is conjecture ; and, by an eafy figure,
reading may include under/landing them. Indeed,
as reading the Articles before taking the firft
Degree, would be a novelty at Cambridge, fome
of the young fophifters might be pert enough to
afk queftions, or form fyllogifms upon particu-
lar paffages, which it might take more time to
anfwer than could well be fpared at the bufy fea-
fon of conferring Degrees. And probably they
who have the ordering of fuch things, may think
it fufficient to fay, They may read the Articles if
they will. No-body hinders them. If they do not, it
is their own fault. This is eafily laid ; but fome
people may be of opinion, that, be the /^/ob-
ligation to fubferibe what it may, there is a point
of
[ 36 ]
of equity inseparable from fuch cafes as this,
namely, That they who undertake the education
of thefe young men, mould not content them-
felves with knowing that they have read thefe
Articles. If they will have Degrees, it is not
at their option whether they will fubfcribe them
or not. Mull not honed and confcientious Tutors
and Governors be fenfible,that it pertaineth to the
faithful difcharge of their offices, to inftruct thefe
young men in the Doctrines of thefe Articles,
to apprize them of the nature and tendency of
Subfcription, and to give fatisfactory anfwers to
fuch doubts or difficulties as the fenfe and appre-
henfion of the Candidates may fugged to them ?
The whole affair is too melancholy to be farther
dwelt upon. Let us blufh for what is pad, and
unite our endeavours, that thefe fhameful ble-
mifhes in our difcipline, may be no longer our
opprobrium.
FINIS,
£ /^*>r
■Y/
J=r
mnm
UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
AA 000 834 228 9