You see, my Countrymen, by my Habit, that I die a Son, tho a very unworthy one, of the Church of England: but I would not have you think that I am a Member of the Schismatical Church, whose Bishops set themselves up in opposition to those Orthodox Fathers, who were unlawfully and invalidly depriv’d by the Prince of Orange. I declare that I renounce that Communion, and that I die a Dutiful and Faithful Member of the Nonjuring Church; which has kept it self free from Rebellion and Schism, and has preserv’d and maintain’d true Orthodox Principles, both as to Church and State. And I desire the Clergy, and all Members of the Revolution-Church, to consider what Bottom they stand upon, when their Succession is grounded upon an Unlawful and Invalid Deprivation of Catholick Bishops; the only Foundation of which Deprivation, is a pretended Act of Parliament.
REMARKS.
Here’s a new Discovery, for which the World is oblig’d to the Speech-makers, that the Habit makes a Son, or a Priest, of the Church. It had been well for the She-Comedian, who acted Roxellana, that this Doctrine had obtain’d in the Reign of King Charles II. for then she might have been a Countess without Dispute, and her Son Heir to an antient Earldom, because she was marry’d to an Earl by his Coachman in a Priest’s Habit. Parson Paul might also have been better inform’d by his good Friends the Papists, among whom ’tis a common Proverb, Cuculla non facit Monachum, That the Coul does not make a Monk: but the plain Design of this Paragraph is to incense the Mob against the Government, as if they were going to hang up the Church. That was the Reason why Mr. Paul went to Tyburn in his Priest’s Vestments, which he needed not have done. We know the time when the Clergy took a great deal of Care to prevent such a Scandal to their Cloth, and that was when they degraded the Reverend Mr. Sam. Johnson, before he was whipt, for writing against Popery and Tyranny; tho he had more Honesty, and a better Title to his Orders, than any of those who pretended to take them from him. But this lets us see where the Blame lies, if carrying Mr. Paul to Tyburn in his Priest’s Vestments was a Disgrace to the Church. There are some in the World, who think the Character of a Jacobite Priest indelible, tho they did not think so of that Brave and Learned Patriot, Mr. Johnson. But however that is, ’tis no more Reflection upon the Government, that Priests should be hang’d in their Habit, than kill’d in the Field for Rebellion; and this we may venture to say, that Parson Paul dishonour’d the Habit more by wearing it in the Pulpit, than at the Gallows.
At the same time his Friends have a very good way to make themselves amends, by laying up his Vestments with those of St. Garnet and Faux, where the Bigots may adore them as precious Relicks; and perhaps this was the reason why the Parson would not die in a Lay-Habit, tho he was disguis’d in one, when taken up for his Treason.
The World is farther oblig’d to this Priest, for another important Discovery; to wit, that he was not a Member of the Schismatical Church, but dy’d a dutiful and faithful Member of the Nonjuring Church of England, which has kept it self free from Rebellion and Schism, and has preserv’d and maintain’d true Orthodox Principles, both as to Church and State. The Folly and Inconsistency of this Declaration is evident at first View, and the Malice of it is what ill became a dying Man. ’Tis well enough known that he liv’d a Priest, tho he did not die a Member, of what he call’d the Schismatical Church; and he continu’d in her Communion till he went to join the Rebels at Preston. This is another of his publick Sins, which he forgot in his Enumeration of ’em in the beginning of his Speech; but he thinks to atone for that, by renouncing her Communion at Death.
’Tis pleasant to hear his Reasons for calling the Establish’d Church Schismatical, and that is, because her Bishops set themselves up in opposition to those Orthodox Fathers, who were unlawfully and invalidly depriv’d by the Prince of Orange. So that according to him the Church of England is Schismatical, Republican, and Antimonarchical, as well as Dissenters: but had the Speech-maker’s Head been cool, he would have consider’d, that his Argument, were it conclusive, could not make all the Establish’d Church Schismaticks, but only those Bishops who came in place of his depriv’d Orthodox Fathers, and such as liv’d under them; now all those Bishops being dead, the Schism, according to Mr. Dodwell, the grand Champion of the Party, ceas’d with them. By this we see, that the Party has no fix’d Principle; for tho they applauded that Author, and look’d upon him as their Oracle, yet now they differ from him: so that we find it to be true of this Set of People, That evil Men and Seducers grow worse and worse.
The Parson equally discovers his Malice and Ignorance, by finding fault with that Deprivation; for had he ever read the Statute of Provisors, made in the 25th of King Edward III. he might thereby have known, ‘That the Church of England was founded in the Estate of Prelacy, by the Kings, Earls, Barons, and other Nobles of this Realm, to inform them and the People of the Law of God, &c. And that certain Possessions, as well in Fees, Lands, Rents, as in Advowsons, which do extend to a great Value, were assign’d by the said Founders to the Prelates, &c.’ And since it is so, ’tis a known Maxim in Law and Reason, That they who have a power to make, have a power to unmake: and it will be acknowledg’d as a very good reason all over the World, to deprive such Prelates as refuse to swear or give Allegiance to the Government, that founded their Prelacys, and protects their Persons.
He might also have seen, by the 5th of the 25th of Henry VIII. that the Bishops of Salisbury and Worcester were depriv’d, because not regarding their Duties to Almighty God, nor the Cures of their Bishopricks, they dwelt at Rome, and other Parts beyond Sea, &c. And the Reason given for this Power, then exercis’d by the King and Parliament, is the same with that already mention’d in the Statute of Provisors. Besides, every one knows, that in King Henry VIII. and King Edward VI’s Time, the Bishops held their Commissions only during the Pleasure of the Prince, and as his Delegates.
If the Speech-maker’s Friends object, that this relates only to the Temporalities of the Bishops, ’tis answer’d, that in the Commission taken out by Archbishop Cranmer for his Archbishoprick, his Power of ordaining and turning out Presbyters, is also deriv’d from the King. The Commission is at large in Dr. Burnet’s History of the Reformation, Collection of Records, p. 90.
But perhaps the Example of that Excellent Primate and Martyr won’t have much weight with the High-Church Party; therefore I shall give them one of Bishop Bonner, who was as Bloody and High a Churchman as any of themselves. He took out a Commission from King Henry VIII. in the Preamble of which ’tis asserted, ‘That since all Jurisdiction, both Ecclesiastical and Civil, flow’d from the King as Supreme Head, and he was the Foundation of all Power; it became those who exercis’d it only at the King’s Courtesy, gratefully to acknowledg that they had it only of his Bounty, and declare that they would deliver it up again when it should please him to call for it.’ The Commission is exhibited at large in Dr. Burnet’s History of the Reformation, Vol. 1. Collection of Records, No 14.