Anno 1 Will. ableness of fuch a Chriftian Temper; we apprehend, it will III. 1688-9. raile Sufpicions in Mens Minds of fomething different from the Cafe of Religion or the Public, or a Design to heal our Breaches, when they find, that, by confining fecular Employments to ecclefiaftical Conformity, thofe are fhut out from Civil Affairs whofe Doctrine and Worfhip may be tolerated by Authority of Parliament, there being a Bill before us, by Order of the House, to that purpofe; efpecially when, without this exclufive Rigour, the Church is fecured in all her Privileges and Preferments, no body being hereby let into them who is not ftrictly conformable.

3dly, Because to fet Marks of Diftin&tion and Humiliation on any fort of Men, who have not render'd themselves juftly fufpected to the Government, as it is at all times to be avoided by the Makers of juft and equitable Laws, fo may it be particularly of ill Effe&t to the reformed Interest at Home and Abroad, in this present Conjuncture, which stands in need of the united Hands and Hearts of a Proteftants against the open Attempts and fecret Endeavours of a reftlefs Party, and a potent Neighbour, who is more zealous than Rome itfelf to plant Popery in thefe Kingdoms, and labours, with his utmoft Force, to fettle his Tyranny upon the Ruins of the Reformation all through Europe.

4thly, Because it turns the Edge of a Law (we know not by what Fate) upon Proteftants and Friends to the Government, which was intended against Papifts, to exclude them from Places of Truft, as Men avowedly dangerous to our Re. ligion and Government; and thus the taking the Sacrament, which was enjoined only as a Means to discover Papists, is now made a diftinguishing Duty amongst Proteftants, to weaken the whole by cafting off a Part of them.

5thly, Becaufe Myfteries of Religion and Divine Worship are of Divine Original, and of a Nature fo wholly distant from the fecular Affairs of Public Society, that they cannot be applied to thofe Ends; and therefore the Church, by the Law of the Gofpel, as well as common Prudence, ought to take care not to offend either tender Confciences within itfelf, or give Offence to thofe without, by mixing their facred Myfteries with fecular Interefts.

6thly, Because we cannot fee how it can confist with the Law of God, common Equity, or the Right of any free-born Subject, that any one be punished without a Crime: If it be a Crime not to take the Sacrament according to the Ufage of the Church of England, every one ought to be punished for it, which no body affirms; if it be no Crime, those who are capable, and judged fit for Employments by the King, ought to be punished with a Law of Exclufion, for not doing that

which is no Crime to forbear: If it be urged ftill, as an effectual Teft to difcover and keep out Papifts, the taking the Sacrament in thofe Proteftant Congregations, where they are Members and known, will be at least as effectual to that =purpose.

y

Oxford, R. Montague, Mordaunt, P. Wharton, J. Love-
lace, W. Paget.

The 28th, the Committee of both Houses met at a Conference on the Bill for removing Papifts from London; the Refult of which fee in CHANDLER's Hift. Anno 1 W. & M. 1689, Page 292, 297.

Anno 1 Will.
III. 1689..

On the 28th likewife, the Earl of Shrewsbury acquainted His Majesty's the House of Peers, That his Majefty, out of an earnest Meffage by the Defire to deliver his People from the Guilt, Reproaches and Earl of Shrewfbury, relating Penalties, which many of them might be liable to; and o to a general put an end to all Controverfies arifing between the Subjects, Pardon. by reafon of any Difcord in later Times, and to take away all Diftinctions, and Occafions of Difcord among them, to the end that they having an entire Confidence in his Majefty. and perfect Union among themfelves, might be encouraged in their Duty to his Government, and more fully and fecurely enjoy the Benefit of it: And his Majefty judging, that the best way to render this his gracious Intention moft extenfive and effectual, was to pass a free and general Pardon, Indemnity and Oblivion, his Majefly did moft earnestly recommend the Confideration thereof to both Houfes of Parliament; That with all the Expedition a Matter of that kind would admit, they might prepare a Bill for that Purpose for the royal Affint, with fuch Exceptions only, as to them fhould feem neceffary, for the Vindication of public Juftice, the Safety of their Majefties, and the Settlement and Welfare of the Nation for the future.' At the fame time the Earl of Shrewsbury defired Leave of the House to bring in a Bill for naturalizing the Prince of Denmark, whom his Majefty intended to create a Duke of this Kingdom, and so to bring him to fit in that Houfe, and to have the like Precedency as other Princes had had. Whereupon the Lords ordered the Marquis of Winchester, and the Earl of Bedford, to attend the King with the Thanks of their Houle, for his Majefty's gracious Meffage to them concerning the Bill of Thanks thereIndemnity and free Pardon, and for his Intention of creating on. his Royal Highness Prince George a Duke of this Realm.

Bill to naturalize Prince George.

Addrefs of

On the 4th of April, the Houfe of Lords entered into a Bill for uniting Confideration of the Report of the Amendment in the Bill Proteftant Subfor uniting their Majeflies Proteftant Subjects; and upon jects reported. Debate the Queftion was put, Whether to agree with the Committee in leaving out the Claufe about the Indifferency

Y y 2

of

Anno 1 Will of the Pofture at receiving the Sacrament? The Votes were III. 1689. equal, and therefore, according to the antient Rule in the like Cafe, it was carried in the Negative. The next Day the Lords resumed the Debate of the Report of the said Amendments, particularly of the Claufe concerning a Commiffion to be given out by the King, to Bishops and others of the Clergy: And it being propofed whether the Laity should be added, the Votes were equal on both Sides, fo it was likewife carried in the Negative.

On which Occafion Leave was given for any Lords to enter Diffents; accordingly thefe Lords following do enter their Diffents in the Reafons enfuing:

ift, Because the Act itself being, as the Preamble sets forth, defigned for the Peace of the State, the putting the Clergy into the Commiffion, with a total Exclufion of the Laity, lays this Humiliation on the Laity, as if the Clergy of the Church of England were alone Friends to the Peace of the State, and the Laity lefs able, or lefs concerned to provide for it.

2dly, Because the Matters to be confidered being barely of human Constitution, viz. the Liturgy and Ceremonies of the Church of England, which had their Eftablishment from the King, Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, aífembled in Parliament, there can be no Reason why the Commiffioners for altering any thing in the Civil Conftitution fhould confift only of Men of one fort of them, unless it be fuppofed that human Reason is to be quitted in this Affair, and the Infpiration of fpiritual Men to be alone depended on.

3dly, Because, tho', upon Romish Principles, the Clergymen have a Title alone to meddle in Matters of Religion, yet with us they cannot, where the Church is acknowledged and defined to confift of Clergy and Laity; and fo thofe Matters of Religion which fall under human Determination, being properly the Bufinefs of the Church, belong equally to both; for in what is of Divine Inftitution, neither Clergy nor Laity can make any Alteration at all.

4thly, Because the pretending that Differences and Delays may arife by mixing Lay men with Ecclefiaftics, to the fruftrating the Defign of the Commiffion, is vain and out of doors; unless those that make use of this Pretence fuppofe the Clergy-part of the Church have diftin&t Interefts or Defigns from the Lay-part of the fame Church; and this will be a Reafon, if good, why one or other of them should quit the House for fear of obftructing the Bufinefs of it.

5thly,

Content 28, Proxy 1, in all 29. Not Content 27, Proxies 2, in

5thly, Becaufe the Commiffion being intended for the Sa- Anno 1 Will. tisfaction of Diffenters, it would be convenient that Laymen III. 1689, of different Ranks, nay, perhaps of different Opinions too, fhould be mixed in it, the better to find Expedients for that End, rather than Clergymen alone of our Church, who are generally obferved to have very much the fame way of rea foning and thinking.

6thly, Because it is the most ready way to facilitate the pas fing the Alterations into a Law, that Lay-Lords and Commons fhould be joined in the Commiffion, who may be able to fatisfy both Houses of the Reasons upon which they were made, and thereby remove all Fears and Jealoufies ill Men may raise against the Clergy, of their endeavouring to keep up, without grounds, a distinct Intereft from that of the Laity, whom they fo carefully exclude from being joined with them in Confultations of common Concernment, that they will not have those have any Part in the Deliberation, who muft have the greatest in determining.

7thly, Becaule fuch a reftrained Commiffion lies liable to this great Objection, that it might be made ufe of to elude repeated Promiles and the present general Expectation of Compliance with tender Confciences, when the providing for it is taken out of the ordinary Courfe of Parliament, to be put into the Hands of thofe alone who were lateft in admitting any need of it, and who may be thought the more unfit to be the fole Compofers of our Differences, when they are looked upon by fome as Parties.

Lastly, Because, after all, this carries a dangerous Suppofition with it, as if the Laity were not a Part of the Church, nor had any Power to meddle in Matters of Religion; a Suppofition directly oppofite to the Constitution both of Church and State, which will make all Alterations utterly impoffi ble, unless the Clergy alone be allowed to have Power to make Laws in Matters of Religion, fince what is established by Law cannot be taken away or changed, but by Consent of Laymen in Parliament, the Clergy themselves having no Authority to meddle in this very Cafe, in wh ch the Laity are excluded by this Vote, but what they derive from Layhands,

Winchefter, Mordaunt, J. Lovelace.

I diffent for this and other Reasons:

Because it is contrary to three Statutes made in the Reign of Henry VIII. and one in Edward VI. which empowers thirty two Commiffioners to alter the Canon and Ecclefiaftical Laws, &c. whereof fixteen to be of the Laity and fixteen of the Clergy.

Stamford

On

Anno 1 Will.
III. 1689.

On the 9th of April the King went to the Houfe of Peers, and gave his royal Affent to an Act for establishing the Coronation Oath, which by Directions from the Court was provided to be administered either by the Archbishop of Canterbury, or the Bishop of London. The Choice of one of these two Prelates being left to the King, his Majesty, left he should be denied by the first who still continued discontented, thought fit to pitch upon the Bishop of London who accordKing and Queen ingly officiated inftead of the Archbishop of Canterbury, at their Majefties Coronation; which was on the 11th performed with the ufual Magnificence.

owned.

A Conference between the two Houfes.

Not long after their Majetty's Coronation, the Churchmen, who, contrary to the Expectation of the Court, proved more numerous than the Diffenters, being fenfible, by many Inftances, that the King inclined to favour the latter, agreed upon an † Addrefs, which was approved by the Lords, and prefented by both Houses.

The fame Day there was a ‡ Conference between both Houfes, chiefly about an Amendment made by the Lords in the Bill for abrogating the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy; by which Amendment the Clergy were exculed from taking the Oaths, and to which the Commons difagreed.

After which the Houfe of Lords was adjourned into a Reported by the Committee to debate and confider the Reasons of the House Earl of Bridge- of Commons; and the House being resumed, the Earl of

water.

Bridgewater reported, that, after a long Debate in the Committee, this Queftion, Whether to agree with the House of Commons, was carried in the Negative; Contents 32; Not content 36. Whereupon the Earl of Macclesfield and Monmouth entered their Diffents for the following Reafons:

Ift, Be

* The Day appointed for their Majefties Coronation drawing near, his Royal Highnef Prince George of Denmark, was created Baron of Ockingham, Earl of Kendal, and Duke ofumberland: The Marquis of Winchester was made Duke of Bolton; the Earl of Danby, Marquis of Carmarthen; Monfieur Bentinck, Baron Cirencester, Viscount Woodftock, and Earl of Portland; Viscount Fauconberg, Earl of Fauconberg; Viícount Mordant, Earl of Monmouth: The Lord Montagu, Viscount Mount-Hermer, and Earl of Montagu; the Lord Churchill, Earl of Marlborough; Henry Sidney, Efq; Baron of Milton, and Vicount Sidney of Sheppey in the County of Kent; Viscount Lumley of Waterford in Ireland, Viscount Lumley of Lumley (aftle in the ouaty Palatine of Durham, and Earl of Scarborough; the Viscount Cholmondley of Kellis in Ireland, Baron Cholmondley of Witchmalbanck, alias Namptwich in Cheshire. Marefchal de Schomberg (who, with the Earl of Devonshire, had already been elected Knight Companion of the most noble Order of the Carter) was naturaliz'd by Act of Parliament, and foon after created Duke.

See CHANDLER's Hift. Anno 1 W. and M. 1689. Page 298.

See CHANDLER's Hift. Anno 1 W. and M. 1689. Page 301 302.