Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

e and distributed, so as that one man in forty « could have seen and read the book they did so perfectly assent and consent to."*

To conclude. The instruction we are to learn hence is, to say, with Lord Strafford, (whose faithful and long services his sovereign + rewarded with, in effect, signing a death-warrani to out off his head,) Put not your trust in princes, nor in the sons of men; for in them there is no help! But we ihank God, there is a SON OF MAN whom he hath constituted Prince over all the kings of the earth, (Rev. i. 5.) in whose supremacy we triumph, in whom, with firm confidence and security we trust: we glory in being his subjects, and rejoice in the assurance that his kingdom of righteousness, of liberty and truth, shall finally prevail; and that every loss we sustain, and every temporal einolument and advantage we forego, out of conscience towards God, and from allegiance to him, the only King in his church, will be abundantly rewarded in that glorious everlasting kingdom which, according 10 bis promise, we know will shortly take place!

In the mean tiine, we are conient, if the will of God be so, to be cast out and reproached, and to suffer great worldly discouragements, (which, in all ages, hath been the lot of some of the wisest and worthiest, and best men upon earth) in the assured expectation, that there are times of refreshing coming from the presence, f. or appearing, of this great King of the church, when every man will rise in to glory and honour, or sink into shame and everlasting contempt, according to the fidelity or negligence of his present conduct, and that all shall be recompensed according to their present works.

Amen! Even so come Lord Jesus!

Critic. History of England, vol. ii. page 350. Maiz. Collection, page 61.

+ Charles I. Acts.iii. 19.

[N. B The above account hath been given chiefly with a view to shew the great ingratitude ana tie chery of Charles 11. and to set in its true liglit an historical fact, which seems to be forgoitin in the reproaches occasionally thrown out against the Dissenters, as enemies to monarchical governinent; for, otherwise, it reflects no little di honour on the Presbyterians, that they should have been so active in bringing about the restoration without stipulating soine conditions for the future security both of civil and religious liberty. -Conditions, indeed, were intended, and a motion was made in the house of Cominons, for that purpose, by Mr. Hale, afterwards the famous chief justice. Lord Broghill

, in a letter 10 Thurloe, dated May 8, 1660, says, " I heartily beg " of the Lord that our steps may be as safe as “ they are expeditious, and that we may ascertain “ those just rights, by an agreement, which we “ contended for so successfully in the war.

But the fact was, that making any stipulations with the king was prevented by the falsehood, dissimulation, and treachery of General Monk; and the Presby:erians, with the rest of the nation, were also deluded by the king's promises, and admitted him to the throne without making any proper provisions for their own security. They had, afterwards, abundant reason to repent of their weakness and credulity; and the Presbyterians received the most injurious treatment, and experienced the utmost baseness and ingratitude, from a prince'whom they had been highly instrumental in raising from a state of indigence and banishment to all the splendors of & throne!]

• Harris's Life of Charles II. vol. i. pago 837,

NUMBER II.

CASE

Respecting a clergyman's refusing to administer

the Sacrament to an open and notorious evilliver, with the several opinions of

Mr. Serjeant HILL,
Mr. MADOCKS, and
Mr. HARGRAVE.

CASE.

A MAN accepts an office, and, by law, he ought, within three months after accepting the same, to receive the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, in some parish church, according to the usage of the church of England. He gives timely notice of his intention to receive the sacrament to the clergyman of the parish to which he belongs, agreeably to the rubric, and he attends, with others of the congregation, on the proper Sunday, for the purpose of receiving the sacrament as a qualification for holding his office; but the clergyman, knowing him to have long been, and still to be, an open and notorious evil-liver, refuses, for that reason only, to administer the sacrarnent to him; and, by reason of such refusal, he incurs the disabilities and penalties enacted by the stat. of the 25th year of Car. II. c. 2. commonly called the Test-act, for exercising his office contrary to the said statute.

Q Can the man maintain an action against the clergymun for refusing, under these circumstances, lo admit him to receive the sacrament, and are there any adjudged cases on the point ?

The opinion of Mr. Serjeant HILL, on the fore

going Case.

I THINK an action is maintainable by the person who accept d the office against the clergymnan, for refusing, under the above circuinstances, to ailm i him to receive the sacrament; for though I know of no case adjudged in point, yet there are several adjudged on principle applicable to this case, viz. that the two only requisites, in any action on the case, are damnum et injuria, both of which, I think, concur in this case. As to the first, it is in itself apparent, and therefore there can be no question about any thing but the other; that is, whether the refusal was injurious or unlawful, and I think it was; because every parishioner has a right to partake of the sacrament when generally adınınistered in his own parish, if there be not just cause of refusing hiin, which I think there is not in this

The cause pretended is the first of the two in the rubric. Now that in the rubric is this expressed, viz. that the party applying is" an open is and notorious evil-liver, or has done some wrong to his neighbour, by word or deed, so " that the congregation be thereby offended.” The whole description, and more particularly the conclusion, is loose, and scarcely possible to be proved. In the present case it is stated, that the only reason of the refusal is, that the parishioner is an open and notorious evil-liver, which is but part of the description of this cause of refusal, and therefore can be no justification, even if it would were il the whole, which I should think doubtful, as the test-act requires all, who

Case.

bave any of the offices therein described, with out exception, to receive the sacrament; and, being later than the act establishing the rubric, it seems, in that particular, to be a virtual repeal of it, and an action on the case will lie against an ecclesiastical person either for a misfeasance, or a nonfeasance in his office, notwithstanding the matter be spiritual, where a temporal damage is the consequence of it. Dr. & Stud. lib. 2. C. 32.-12, Coke 128. 2. Bulsta. 266. In Siderfin, 34. an action was brought for refusing to administer the sacrament; and though no temporal damage was laid, yet the court declined giving judgment on the point, and determined the case merely on a fault in the pleadings; but in 1, Keb. 947, it is said to have been agreed by the court, that an action on the case will lie for refusing the sacrament to one who was bound to receive it under a penalty. That is a book of very little authority, otherwise this is an opinion, though not a judgment, nearly in point; for it is asserted without any exception, and I think it righi. Watson, in page 315, 316, of the fol. edit. of the Complete Incumbent, is of a contrary opinion ; but I pay po regard to that opinion, being delivered with warmth; and the authorities referred to, and the reason given for the opinion, make against it. The authorities are the two last I have taken notice of; and his reason, that then those who live in schism, and join separate congregations, might be admitted, must, I think, have been inserted whilst the law against occasional conformity subsisted, and by an oversight, continued in the later editions after il was repealed; for the repeal of that law, shews the sense of the legislature, that occasional conformists are not to be retused. However, there being no case adjudged in point, it is nos possible to be certain what the deteribination might be, if the point be brought to a decision:

« PoprzedniaDalej »