Selected quad for the lemma: body_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
body_n	beget_v	heir_n	issue_n	17,580	5	10.3087	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A49781	The right of primogeniture, in succession to the kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland as declared by the statutes of 24 E.3 cap 2. De Proditionibus, King of England, and of Kenneth the third, and Malcolm Mackenneth the second, Kings of Scotland : as likewise of 10 H.7 made by a Parliament of Ireland : with all objections answered, and clear probation made : that to compass or imagine the death, exile, or disinheriting of the King's eldest son, is high treason : to which is added, an answer to all objections against declaring him a Protestant successor, with reasons shewing the fatal dangers of neglecting the same.	Lawrence, William, 1613 or 14-1681 or 2.	1681 (1681)	Wing L691; ESTC R1575	180,199	230

it is not in his Power to make her a Mother for the conception and birth of a Child is a Miracle which none but God can do and of this the Scripture is full Birth of a Child the Act of God and not of Man Psa 127.3 Children are an Heritage of the Lord and the fruit of the womb is his reward Psa 139.14 I am fearfully and wonderfully made which is the same with Miraculously made and ver 15. My substance was not hid from thee when I was made in secret and ver 16. Thine eyes did see my Substance yet being unperfect and in thy book all my members were written And when all this is done he saith further Psa 22.9 Thou art he that took me out of the womb And we find Jacob was of the same mind for when Rachel Gen. 30.1 said unto Jacob Give me Children or else I die ver 2. Jacob's anger was kindled against Rachel and he said Am I in God's stead who hath withheld from thee the fruit of the womb whereby there was something else necessary to Rachel's Matrimony than a fruitless Marriage and that Jacob though he Contracted to marry Rachel Contracted not to make her a Mother And till she conceived a Child there was a Marriage but no Matrimony The Objection was She was not Married according to the Law of God therefore the Eldest Son is not within the Statutes Statute requires neither a King de Jure nor a Lady Companion de Jure but only de Facto Ans 2 It were enough still to deny the Sequel 1 Because the Letter of the Statute requires not a Lady Married or lawfully Married or Married according to the Law of God but only a Lady Companion 2 Because it requires not a King De Jure as appears Coke 3 part fol. 7. nor a Lady Companion De Jure nor a Son De Jure But only a King De Facto and a Lady Companion De Facto and a Son De Facto For though the Statute neither doubted King Edward to be a King De Jure or in English a Lawful King as well as De Facto nor his Lady Philippa being one of the most virtuous Ladies in the world to be his Lawful Lady Companion yet should the Statute have said To compass the Death of our Lawful Sovereign Lord the King or of the Lady his Lawful Companion it would have left Succession more doubtful than before For there never was a Law of the Land The word Lawful Incertain and Litigious or Law of God or Contract so clear but Lawyers Ecclesiastical or Common for Money have raised Questions and Doubts in where the word Lawful or any word aequipollent or to that Effect is express'd For first when the word is not expressed there can no Law be Implied or Intended to Judge Lawfulness by but the Moral Law of God But when it is express'd as in the words Lawful Marriage or Lawfully begotten they will expound them by Laws Papal and Episcopal which are not the Laws of the Land and by Laws making Mala prohibita and not Mala in se which are not the Laws of God whereas where it is not express'd it can only be Expounded by the Moral Law of God which is above all Humane Laws and Statutes Secondly A Lawful Successor may be of an unlawful Marriage Because an Act of Parliament may make the Issue of a Marriage though unlawful and contrary to the Law of God Heir to a Kingdom As the Marriage of David to Vriah's Wife accomplished by Adultery with her and the Murder of her Husband yet was Solomon Lawfully made Heir to succeed David So Edward the Sixth succeeded to Henry 8th yet was his Mother Married while Anne of Cleve his former Wife was alive And that the unlawful Marriages of Parents ought not Illegitimate or be an Impediment to the Succession of Children is fully already proved Lib. 1. p. 80. And to the same end the present Statute Enacts no more in general for the safety of the eldest Sons of all Kings than the Famous Queen Elizabeth 13 Eliz. 1. doth for her own Heirs in particular by which Statute it is Enacted to be High Treason To affirm that any ought to be Heir and Successor to the Queen The Crown entailed to the Natural and not Lawful Issue of the Body of Queen Elizabeth except the same be the natural Issue of Her Body So the old Lesson of the Lawyers of the words Lawfully begotten is left out yet no question that Pious Queen intended more Lawful Heirs than they with their Indentures and the Priests with their Banns or Benedictions used to make 4 Because though Successions to private Patrimonies may be held in suspence by Disputes of lawful and unlawful yet ought not Successions to Kingdoms so to be which many times not only the least Delay but even the neglect of clearing all Doubts and declaring the Successor before-hand destroys or involves in most bloody Civil Wars to be after destroyed 5 Because as is before touched concerning the word Queen no Penal Statute ought or can be Extended by Equity nor any thing be made within an Act of Treason but what is within the Letter of the same But such Marriages or other Matters which are by any other Statute made High Treason ought to be Expounded to be within that Statute within the Letter of which is so named or made And not within the Intention of this Statute wherein it is not so made As by the said 13 Eliz. 1. It is made High Treason to affirm That the Laws and Statutes do not bind the Succession of the Crown that is Treason within the 13 Eliz. 1. But not within the 25 E. 3. for all which Reasons though as 't is at first said It were sufficient to deny the Sequel and say no more yet that Malice it self may not have any pretence to Cavil I hope by God's assistance Briefly Cleerly and Unanswerably when the next Objection is answered to prove she was both De Facto and De Jure Married according to the Law of God Object 5 No Wife no uxor Obj. 5. The fifth Objection is That the Lady Mother was no Wife according to the Law of God in Scripture The Reasons of this Objection are 1 Because the Scripture calls a Woman taken without Ceremonies only a Concubine or half-Wife 2 Because No Concubine or half-Wife or uxor in Scripture The word Uxor signifies only a Woman made a Wife by the Ceremony of Vnction of the Husbands Door-Posts or some other Ceremony Ans 1. Though it were sufficient to shew that there 's no such word as Wife Concubine or half-wife in the Statute and what is not in the Letter of a Penal Law cannot be supplied in the Intention nor extended by Equity and though it were sufficient to deny the Sequel yet to display the more the falsity of the Allegations I shall shew there are no such words in Scripture

Emperors of this Realm whereby hath insued great Effusion and Destruction of man's Blood as well of a great number of the Nobles as of other Subjects and especially Inheritors in the same and the greatest occasion thereof hath been because no perfect and substantial Provision in Law hath been made within this Realm of it self when Doubts and Questions have been moved and proponed of the Certainty and Legalty of the Succession and Posterity of the Crown By which Statute appears the Judgment of the King and Parliament to be That the great incertainty of the Law in points of Succession of the Crown was one great Cause of the great Mischiefs of effusion of Blood both of Nobles and Commons which insued thereby and the fittest Remedy to be the Declaration of the Successor incertain by the King and Parliament which is accordingly therefore done in the same Statute And it likewise appears that the same Doubt in Law was raised then as to Succession which is now Whether the King's Marriage and Issue by the Mother of Queen Elizabeth was Lawful and Legitimate which is Declared by this Act of Parliament that it was And H. there is first intendency there to Declared a Legitimation of the same Marriage with Queen Ann the said Mother of Queen Elizabeth And that all the Issue had and procreate or to be had procreate without saying Lawfully between the King and Queen Ann shall be his Lawful Children and be Inheritable to the Crown Then is the Crown Declared to be to the King for Life and the Remainder to be to the first Son of his Highness of his said Lawful Wife Queen Ann begotten and to the Heirs of the Body of the said first Son Lawfully begotten and for default of such Issue with divers Remainders over and make it High Treason to slander the King's Marriage in prejudice of the Heirs of the same 3. Danger of Arbitrary disposing the Crown by Rome or Canterbury 3. The other great Danger from the incertainty of the Laws of Succession besides effusion of Blood which is the Arbitrary disposing by Episcopal Sees whether of Rome or Canterbury though only Rome named unless a Successor is Declared by the King and Parliament is likewise mentioned in the said Statute 25 H. 8. cap. 22. in these words viz. By Reason whereof the Bishop of Rome and See Apostolick Contrary to the great and inviolable Grants of Jurisdictions by God immediately to Emperors Kings and Princes in Succession to their Heirs hath Presumed in time past to invest who should please them to Inherit in other mens Kingdoms and Dominions which thing we your most humble Subjects both Spiritual and Temporal do most Abhor and Detest 4. Danger of Predominancy of Papal and Episcopal Laws of Marrlage above the Moral Law of God 4. One great Cause of the incertainty of the Laws of Succession of the Crown is That Papal and Episcopal Ceremonial Laws of Marriage Filiation and Succession are tollerated in the Three Kingdoms to Usurp a Predomination not only over the Law of the Land but the Moral Law of God It is therefore necessary to avoid the Danger mention'd to proceed from the incertainty caused by Papal and Episcopal Laws That a Declaration by King and Parliament be Who shall be Successor in Particular and by Name which clears all Doubts and is the highest Security under God on which any Crown or Succession to it can depend 5. Danger to the King's Person Line and House 5. The not Declaring a Successor is Dangerous to the Person of the King and his House of which we need not look on any other Example than Alexander the Great of whom Justin Lib. 15. relates That he being desired to Declare a Successor though he had a Son called Hercules and though his Wife Roxana were Great with Child yet would he Declare neither but Will'd That he who was most worthy should Succeed which was the same in effect as if he had Will'd they should after his Death destroy one another with Civil Wars and his own House amongst them for so they did And Cassander one of his mean and not Chief Officers destroyed his Mother Olympias and all his Kindred Such was the Fate of so great a Monarch who while alive thought the World too little yet was he himself Poison'd and when Dead nor he nor his Mother nor his Children nor any of his Kindred retained any Spot but their Graves being all destroyed with him of which there appears no second Cause but his Neglect to Declare his Son Hercules his Successor who might have been a Preservative to him according to Tacitus Pravas aliorum spes cohiberi si Successor non in incerto The wicked hopes of Plots against the Possessor are Checkt if the Successor is not incertain 6. Danger of Lineal and Collateral Heirs to destroy one another 6. The Danger of the Lineal and Collateral Heirs destroying one another doth cause all those Murthers Poisoning Strangling Burning out the Eyes or perpetual Imprisonments of the Blood Royal of the Turkish Persian Aethiopian and other Eastern Kings and Emperors but that they have no Parliaments Elected by the people to Declare their Successor and to Protect the Liberty Propriety and Lives of their younger Children by standing Laws but on the Death of the old Emperor the Election or rather Sale of the Empire to the New is left to the Lawless will of the Priest or Soldier 7. The Danger if the King 's Eldest Son should die and leave Children in Minority of Guardians in Majority of Contention for the Crown between Nephews and Uncles This Danger is not so great in Scotland as in England for there as hath been already said as Buchanan mentions their Ancient Act of Parliament Enacts Vt quemadmodum Regi maximus Natu filius in Regnum Succederet ita filio ante Patrem Defuncto Nepos avo subrogaretur That as the Eldest Son of the King should Succeed to him in the Kingdom so the Son being Dead before his Father the Nephew should Succeed in his stead to his Grandfather It hath been already before shewn how dangerous Guardians Uncles are to Nephews in Minority and if in Majority all Histories witness under how great incertainty the Law is in most Nations to determin the Question which ought to be preferred the Uncle or Nephew in Succession to a Kingdom that is to say in such Kingdoms who have no Parliaments Elected by the People to establish the manner of Succession And how great Wars and Devastations have been made between Nephews and Uncles on the incertainty of the Law of the Country in that point And though in Succession to Common Inheritances in England the Nephew is by Custom preferred Jure Representationis to the Uncle and though my Lord Coke likewise in his Exposition on the said Statute of 25. E 3. cap. 2. Coke 3. Part. fol. 8. saith to be the Fitz-Eigne the Eldest Son of the King within that Statute it