pope himself. They, perhaps, had seen no difference, but for his want of the pope's facerdotal capacity. Yet even this defect was in fome measure made up to him by his regal. So that between the majesty of the kingly character, and the confecration of his perfon by this mysterious endowment of the fpiritual, it is easy to fee how well prepared the minds of men were to allow him the exercife of any authority, to which he pretended."

And to what degree this spiritual character of head of the church operated in the minds of the people, we may understand from the language of men in ftill later times, and even from the articles of our church, where the prerogative of the crown is faid to be that, which godly kings have always exercised; intimating, that this plenitude of power was inherent in the king, on account of that spiritual and religious character, with which, as head of the church, he was neceffarily invefted.

It cannot be denied, but that the 24th of Henry VIII. operated as the tranflation of a part of the headship of the civil establishment of the church of England, from the pope to the fovereign. The operative part of that act, in as much as it affected the constitutional church establishment and royal prerogative,

The fubject matter of this act clearly relates to the civil

gative, enacted, that all causes teftamentary, caufes of matrimony and divorces, rights of tythes, oblations, and obventions, fhould be in future beard, examined, difcuffed, clearly, finally, and definitively adjudged and determined within the king's jurifdiction and authority, and not elsewhere, notwithstanding any foreign inhibitions, appeals, fentences, fummons, citations, fufeftablishment. pensions, interdictions, excommunications, reftraints, judgments, or any other process or impediments from the See of Rome, &c. Every fort of procefs there mentioned is, upon the very face it, the direct creature of the civil eftablishment of the Roman Catholic religion in this nation; and if the nation chose to seek their redress by reforting to the legal courts of Rome upon certain fubjects, I know of no authority above themselves, that could check or prevent them from doing it; they were certainly bound to it by no article of the Roman catholic doctrine; and they were as free to defift, as they had been to commence the ufage. I wonder much, that the nation did not fooner ease themselves of the expence, trouble, and delay of carrying their fuits to fo diftant and foreign a judicature; and I wonder not lefs, that to this day they refer the decifion of fo many of their rights and

The prefent fpiritual courts like thofe

courts at Rome to which we formerly reforted.

liberties to what are now called the spiritual

courts

courts, which continue to be ruled and determined by the fame civil Roman and canonical laws, to which they formerly reforted. But I am concluded by the act of the majority, and I fubmit with refpectful deference to their jurifdiction.

In their nature, our fpiritual or ecclefiaftical courts at this day partake juft as much of real Spiritual jurisdiction, as the courts, to which our ancestors were wont to refort at Rome, If the judges or practitioners in either happened to be in orders, it was accidental, or at least immaterial to their official jurifdiction; for they derived no more jurifdiction nor fanction from their ordination, than our ferjeants practising at common law did of old, who introduced the use of the coif, to conceal their clerical tonfures from the eyes of the public, as by canon they were prohibited to be either advocates or judges. Although the jurifdiction of their courts went to the decifion of difputes and litigations, arifing out of or connected with fubjects of a spiritual or ecclefiaftical nature, yet the courts themfelves were purely civil or temporal, in as much as they were created, fupported, and maintained merely by the civil or temporal power, and acquired their whole force and authority from the civil legiflative body of

that

Excommunication of thefe courts no real

fpiritual excommunication.

that community, in which they were establifhed, or which chose to submit to their authority and jurifdiction, It would be equally abfurd to look for any divine miffion, or authority, or fpecial guidance of Almighty God, in the old judges of the confiftory or other courts of Rome, to which our anceftors reforted, as it would be ridiculous to expect a peculiar gift of divine grace and inspiration in a modern furrogate or proctor of doctors commons, whither we now carry our fuits of the like nature. The origin of these courts, and of the fuits profecuted in them, the objects of many fuch fuits (as wills, &c.) the method of carrying them on, the effects of their determination and judgments, all befpeak them the direct creatures of a civil establishment.

The excommunication, which is pronounced in these courts, is as different from that spiritual excommunication, which I have before fpoken of, as the power of the grand fignior over his janiffaries is different from that of a christian bishop over his diocefe. No civil effect whatever can be produced by a mere Spiritual excommunication, as I have before faid; and there can be no excommunication pronounced by these courts, which does not produce fome civil effect.

Sir Edward Coke moft curiously labours

to prove, that whatever spiritual jurifdiction, right, power, or authority, either by ufurpation or right, was admitted or pretended to be exercised by the popes of Rome within this nation, was vested in equal plenitude in her majesty queen Elizabeth; alledges amongst many other, this very fingular reafon. * « Reges facro oleo uniti, funt fpiritualis jurifdictionis capaces; kings, being anointed with the facred oil, are capable of spiritual jurifdiction." I am furprised, that the fertile and diffused genius of Sir E. Coke has not enlarged upon this fpiritualizing unction of his queen. In another part of his works, however, he recurs to a more folid ground for the temporal or civil powers interfering with the effects of ecclefiaftical excommunication; for taking notice, that by the 25 Edward I. (c. iv.) the archbishops and bishops were directed to pronounce sentence of excommunication against all thofe, that by word, deed, or council, fhould do contrary to the thereby confirmed charters, or that in any point fhould break or undo them, fays,

Sir Edward

Coke's idea of

the fpiritual caElizabeth.

pacity of queen

very confiftently and truly, †" This excom- Whatever ex

communication produces a civil effect fubject to the power of parliament.