/ acceperunt sibi vyores ex omnibus quas elegerant This ys the sence of this scripture / the childern of God seynge the doughters of men that they were beauteful and fayre / they chose of al theym to their wifis suche as liked them And theis persones write / that the men toke thē wifes at adauentures whome so euer thei hade chosen sparinge nor forberinge no maner of degre of affinite or kindrede / And this saynge can no wise be takyn of the rehersed scripture / but rather by the same scripture it folowithe that thies persons saye false / fore the Scripture saithe that the childern / and the sones of God / seynge the doughters of men fayer and beautiful / toke of them wifes suche as liked them / and it folowith that thei maried not with their mothers nor their own sisters / nor their owne auntis / for they maryed withe the doughters of men whiche were nether their owne mothers / nor their sisters / nor theyr auntes / and therfor it is false to saye that the people maried them wifes forberyng nor sparinge no maner of degre of affinite or kindred / this error ys writen in the .xvi. leyffe of theyr boke ALso in the same first chapiter of theyr boke in the .xvij. and .xviij. leyffe they saye that almighty God did commaunde Moyses to prescribe vnto his people laws of matrimony that shuld be conformable and agreynge with honestye and shamefastnes natural / and to forbide suche mariages that be foule of them self / and haue dishonestye in them / ād al this they say was commaundid in the leuitical boke / in the .xviij. chapiter / And amonge the mariages that they saye be ther forbiden ys forbyden mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife widow left without yssewe / this thies persones speake of / or elles all that they saye is no thing for their purpose / wherfore to this saynge I answere thus / Firste in the xviij chapiter of the leuitical boke is not forbyden that a man may not mary his brothers wife a widowe left without yssew / no nor yet suche mariages are not forbiden in no Place of the hole lawe / but rather where as Moyses did declare the Leuiticall lawe / ye and all the hole law / that he had writen before / he shewid vnto the people how that almyghty God had ordyned and commaundid that euery one of the Iues shuld mary always his brothers wife a widowe lefte with out yssewe as yt ys manifeste in the boke of the deuteronomi wherfore yow maye euidently se that in the .xviij chapiter of the Leuyticall lawe yt was not forbyden that a man myght not mary his brothers wife a widowe lefte withe owte yssewe / and also the prohibicione in the Leuiticall lawe in the .xviij. Chap. xxv Chapiter can not be al vnderstand that they forbide mariage withe all suche persons as be ther namyd For there it ys forbyden that a man may goo to a woman when that she hathe a passion the whiche they call hyr flowers / And yet yet ys euident that a man maye mary a woman when that she hath theym / And lykewise that a woman mayelefully mary when that she hath them wherfore yow may see that the prohibicions that be yn the .xviij. chapiter can not al be vnderstond to forbid mariage withe al suche persons that be ther namyd / But yet parauenture thies false deceyuers that hath made the boke that I answere now to / wil saye that in the .xviij. chapiter of the Leuiticall ys forbiden that a man maye not mary his brothers wife To this I answere that yf they will take that prohibicion to forbide Mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife / and not for the abusing of the brothers wife Than it is thus vnderstand / that no man maye mary his brothers wife while his brother is a lyve Thus saith thies persones great doctor Peter de Palude expowndinge the .xviij. chapiter of the leuitical boke / and so doith other doctors saye as yow shal see here after / and lykewise sayth sayncte Augustyne expowndinge the .xviij. Chapiter of the leuitical boke that ther it is forbyden that a man may not mary his brothers wife while that hyr husbande is a lyue / nor a man maye not mary his brothers wife that was refused and repudiate of hir husband / nor yet a man maye not mary hys brothers wife a widowe hauinge yssew bi hyr firste husband / But now by this rehersed prohibicion nor by no other ys forbiden that a man may not mary his brothers wife a widowe lefte withoute yssewe / yet further more you shal vnderstande that the leuiticall prohibicions can not al be vnderstande to forbyde mariage betwene al those persons that be there expressed / as to forbide that the brother may not mary with the sister / or that the brother may not mary with the brothers wife / for yf mariage betwene thies persons were forbyden there / than it shal folowe that the Egiptians and the canoneis were not poluted in al thies thinges that be called ther abominacions the whiche is playnly agaynste the texte wherfore the prohibicions can not be al vnderstande to forbide mariage betwene all thos persons that be ther namyd / that this shulde folowe it is euident for kynge Pharo did beleve that Sara was not Abrās wif / for as muche as Abraham sayde that she was his sister and the cause why Pharo did so beleue was this for as muche as in egipte the people did not mary their sisters / and therfor when that Abraham shewid kinge Pharo that Sara was his sister / he belevid that she was not his wife as the processe in the texte doith euidently shewe / And likewise for bycause Abraham saide in the contre of Canan to kinge Abymelech that Sara his wife was his sister the kinge Abymelech did beleue that Sara was not Abrahams wife / for as myche as in that contre they dide not vse to mary ther sisters gen xii and al this that the Egiptians and the Cananeis did not vse to mary ther sisters / doithe thies deceyvers affirme in the .cxj. gen xx leife of ther boke speking ther of Abraham and his wife nowe than by this the trewth and ther graunte also / it folowith / that the prohibicions leuiticall can not be all vnderstand of forbiddinge of mariage / when that the Cananeis did not vse to mary ther sisters as thies deceyuers do graunte them selfe / And than it folowith still / that if the Egypcions Cananeis did not vse to mary their owne sisters that than they dyde not vse to mary ther mothers nor their auntis nor their mothers in lawe and so forthe / for yf the Egipcians did iuge to be ageynst honeste and reason to mary their sisters / and therfor they did abstayne for to mary them / than thei must nedes iuge / that it
thei affirme that the Pope hath no power to dispence vppon mariagis made bitwixt the brother and the brothers wife widowe left without yssew / nor yet power to dispence vppon suche mariage to be made This saynge is false lykewise as the other before suche mariage is not forbiden nether in the olde lawe nor in the newe lawe as yow haue herde before / and the same you shal se here aftyr more largely declared and prouid where as I brynge yn the doctours myndes ageynst thies deceyuers opynion wherfore now I saye that this ys false to say and affirme that the Pope haith no power to licence the brother to mary the brothers wife a widowe left without yssewe for it is forbiden that a man maye mary withe her that is ioynyd to hym in the first degre of lateral affynyte but onely by the lawe and ordinaunce of the churche as you shal here aftir se prouyd by the myndis of grete and excellente lernyde men / And the Pope hathe power to dyspence against the prohibicion of his owne lawes onely / this can no man deny wherfore yt is false to affirme and saye that the Pope hathe no power to licence a man to marye his brothers wife a widowe lefte with owt yssewe NOw here yow haue herde howe that thies persones sayngis and opinion ys false whiche ys this that it is agaynste the lawe of God and against the lawe of nature for a man to mary his brothers wife a widowe left without yssewe / and that the Pope hathe no power to dispence vppon suche mariage by the which falshed ye may perceyue how that this proposicion ys trew / that a man may lefully by the law of God and by the lawe of nature mary his brothers wife a widow lefte without yssew / and that the Pope haithe power to dispence vppon suche mariage First ye haue sene that suche mariage ys not againste the lawe of nature Also yowe haue harde howe that suche mariage ys not forbiden by the olde lawe / but in the olde lawe suche mariagis were expresly commaundid and so by the lawe a man myght lefully mary his brothers wife a widowe c. Mat. xxij And also suche mariage owr sauyour Criste did approbate in the newe lawe as yt ys open where as the saduceys came to owre sauiowre Christe and shewid hym howe that there was a woman withe theme that hade maryde seuyn Brothern one after a nothers dethe / the whiche mariage owr sauioure Christe did not reproue nor speke agaynste theym / but suerly yf suche mariage had bene agaynste the lawe of nature and agaynste Christis lawe / than wolde owr sauiour Christe haue spoken agaynste suche mariage like as he spake agaynste the libell of repudiacion wherby the Iues did vse to refuse theyr wifes and mary other when they were a lyue / and also the same wife 's so refusyde and put awaye did take and mary other men their firste husbandes beynge a lyue / and for asmuche as theys manner of mariages were vnlefull and agaynste the lawe of nature owre sauioure Criste did reproue theyme as he dide reproue othere imperfeccions that the Iues vside in their law for owre sauioure Christe came to fulfill the lawe withe perfeccion / and so for asmuche as he did not reproue mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife a widowe lefte without yssewe seynge that owre sauioure hade occasion offeryd to speke vpon suche mariage / yt folowith that he dide alow and approbate suche mariage / Parauenture yet sum persons will saye that thowgh owre sauioure Criste did not speke agaynste mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife widowe c. yet it doith not folowe / that he did approbate suche mariage for owre sauioure dide not forbid the father to mary withe the doughter / and yet it doith not folowe that he did approbate that the father myght lefully mary his doughter / yf this were trewe that owre sauioure did not forbide the father to mary with his dowghter the whiche ys false / yet than this reason ys not lyke the other First by cause that mariage betwene the father ād the doughter ys expresly forbiden bi the law of nature by the olde law and by the newe lawe / and so is not mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife / and secundarily for by cause ther was no occasion offerde / vnto owre saviowre Criste to approbate or to haue reprovid mariage betwene the father and the doughter / as ther was in the other mariage / but yf the Iues had comen vnto our sauyour Criste and shewed hym howe ther was a man that had maried .ij. or thre of hys owne doughters / one after the dethe of an other than he wold haue spoken ageynste suche mariage by cause that suche is yll / and vnlefull but for asmuche as mariage betwene the brother / and the brothers wife widow c / ys good and lefull by the lawe of Nature / and by the lawe of gode ower sauioure Christe did approbate suche mariage / Nowe than seynge that mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife is lefull by the law of nature and commaundide in the olde lawe and approbate bi owr sauiour Crist / than it folowithe that suche mariage is forbiden onely / by the ordinaunce and lawe of the churche / And the pope hathe power to licens againste that ordinaunce / and so consequently he hath power to dispence vpon suche mariage / Thus now you haue somewhat herde thies deceyuers opinion prouid false / and howe that this ys trew / that a man maye by the lawe of God / and by the lawe of nature mary his brothers wife a widowe lefte with owte yssewe / and that the Pope hathe power to dispence vppon suche mariage yet for asmich as these disceuers haue in their boke that I make answere vnto many clokyde reasons with eloquent and rethorik termys and many false argumentis / and grete lyes and muche blasphemy to Gode coueryd withe the same maner of cloth I will discover yow some of their errors to th entent that you shal not be deceuid nor beleue their false saynges / but yet I saye that I wil discouer and reherse yowe but some of theyr errors fore yf I wold tarye to reherse you all I shuld be compellid to make a grete boke / and therfor I wil not take that way but rather towche / and speke of some and by them yowe maye perceue the residewe IN the firste chapiter of theyr boke they saye that before the flowde the people set all their myndes at al tymes to nawghtines and syn / in so muche that they toke theym wifis at adauenturs whom so euer they hade chosen sparinge nor forberinge no maner of degre of affinite or kindered / this is ther saynge / groundinge them of this scripture Ge. vi Videntes filij dei filias hominum quod essent pulchre
is more agaynste reason and honeste / for to mary with ther mothers / with mothers in lawe / with ther fathers sisters / and withe ther mothers sisters / and so they did therfore myche more abstayne to mary with them / This reason can no man deny / wherfore yowe maye see by thies argumentis foundid in theyr owne saynge that the leuiticall prohibicions can not be all vnderstond that they forbide mariage betwene al the persons that be namyd in the .xviij. chapiter of the leuitical boke / so now ye may se euidently that al their grounde / and fundacion is false for in that chapiter they founde falsly there false opinion ALso in the same first chapiter of power boke in the .xix. leyfe thes persons saye / that what man hathe maryed his brothers wife / the whiche is vnderstande of a widowe left without yssew / shuld be Iuged of all the people not onely to haue contempnyd and dispiced God the which hath withe so great magesty commaundid the contrary / but also to haue offendid by infectinge and corruptinge the maners of the people by suche myschevous example to haue done ageinst the law of nature this is their sayng the which I beseche yow to note marke wel First they say that almighty God hathe with greate mageste commaundid the contrary to this that a man may lefully mary his brothers wife a widow left without yssew / but this I wold se them shew / and where but that thei can not do nor yet no man for almyghty God neuer commaundid the contrary / but he did expresly commaunde that a man shuld mary his brothers wife a widow left without yssew / beside this thes persons do greatly blaspheme almyghty God in their sayng / for yf the people shuld iuge hym that hath maryed his brothers wife a widow c. to dispise and displease almyghty god than shuld the people iuge that almyghty God coÌ„maundid the Iwes to contemne him and to dispise him for almighty god as I shewed yow / commaundid the Iwes to mary ther brothers wifes / widows ce Moreouer yf the people shuld Iuge him that hath maryed hys brothers wife a widow cet to offend and infecte to corrupte the maners of the people by suche myscheuous example / to haue doon against the law of nature / thaÌ„ shuld the people iuge the almighty god did coÌ„maund the iues to offend to infecte / to corrupte the maners of the people / also that he coÌ„maundid the Iues to giue mischeuous example / to do agenst the law of nature / for it was almighty God the coÌ„maundid them to mary ther brothrs wifis widows ce thê° ye may now se howe thies ê‘sons blaspheme almyghty god his holy law for they saye that for a maÌ„ to mary his brothrs wif a widow c. ys abominable infection a corruption of the maners of the people a myschevous example and a breking of the law of nature / and yet thei can not deny but that almyghty God did commaunde suche mariagis / and so they laye al this abhominacion vpon almyghty God whiche is great dispisynge and blasphemy vnto hym ITem moreouer in the .xx. leife of their boke thies persons saye ouer and beside al this / Consyder with hou great strenght and weight of wordis and with how great care and thowght God in decerning thes lawes doith ofen reherse / sayng yt is not for a man / yt ys fowlnes yt ys myscheuousnes / yt ys cursidnes / yt ys abominacyon / yt ys not to be spoken / yt is not leful / yt ys agaynst the lawes of God / breuely yt ys fylthy and sclanderows that a man shuld do any suche thinge / Here now agayne thes persones do hiely blaspheme almyghty god for yf that mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife / be so yl and so abhominable as here they saye it ys / than they saye that almyghty God did command that thinge that ys meate for no man to doo / that is to saye fowlnes / that thynge that ys myscheuous / cursednes / abhominacion / yt is not to be spoken / it is not leful / it ys ageynst the very lawes of God / brevely yt ys filthy and sclanderous that a man shulde do any suche thinge / for it was almyghty God that did commaunde that men shulde mary ther brothers wifes widows lefte with out yssew The whiche mariages thies persons call abhominacion / myscheuousnes and sclanderousnes cet For of suche mariage thes persons speke / CoÌ„sider yow here with how great strenght and weight of wordie thes vngracius persons do Blaspheme almyghty god thay call hym the auctor and the commaunder of abhominacion of filthynes / and of cursidnes cet who euer herd so great blasphemy as ys this NOwe where as before they sayd that almyghty God in decerninge the lawes speketh with great strenght and weight of wordes yt ys trew he did so for he speaketh agaynst the greate vices and abhominable lyuynge that the Egipcians and the Cananeis vsid / but let thies persones shewe where almyghty God doith speake with great strength and weight of wordes ageynst mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife a widow lefte without yssew Agaynste suche mariage almyghty God did neuer speke but he did commaunde expresly suche mariage ANd yet thes false decevers do apply the spekinge of almyghty God / where he reprouid and spake agaynst the greate syns of abhominable lyuynge of the Egypcians and the cananes / to be ageynst the mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife / a widowe lefte withe out yssewe / and yt is no thinge so / wherfor yowe muste note and marke wel thies persones saynge for they doo not care how falsly they saye / nor yet how fasely they apply goddis sayng and holy scripture nor other mens saynge / so that they make suche saynges to apere for their false purpose / also you shall se them bringe in many thinges that perteyne no thynge to this / for to shew that it ys forbiden by the law of God and by the lawe of nature for a man to marye hys brothers wife a widow left without yssewe ANd yow must note that in the olde lawe all that euer is spoken withe greate strength and weyghte of wordes and forbidden and callid cursyd and abhominable and fylthynes / ys not thinges that be forbiden by the lawe of nature / Leui. xi nor they be not so callid by cause they be yll of them self / for fysshe that hath no scales aÌ„d sinnes as elys and conger were callid abhominable for to ete / and yete it was not ageynste the lawe of nature for a man to ete elys and counger / Leui. xi Also all that crepith vppon the grounde was forbidden to ete in the olde law / and was callid abhominable / aÌ„d yet to ete snailles ys not agaynst the lawe
⧠INVICTA VERITAS ¶ An answere That by no maner of lawe / it maye be lawfull for the moste noble Kinge of englande / Kinge Henry the ayght to be diuorsed fro the quenes grace / his lawful and very wyfe Sette a parte Cristen reader all blynde affeccion and read this boke with iugement / conferringe it with the tother boke agenst which this is writen and I doute not / but thou shalt stande on the quenis parte / as a fauourer of the firme and inuincible Verite AD LAVDEM TVAM DOMINE HEr folowith an answer / that I Thomas Abell priest haue made vnto a certain ynglishe boke late put forthe and imprinted which doith falsly affirme and saye that it is againste the law of God / and againste the lawe of nature for a man to mary his brothers wife a widowe left without yssewe / and that the Pope hath no power to dispence vpon suche mariage the which saing you shal se declared and prouid false / more clerly more largely by holy scripture / by holy decrees / by doctours / and expounders of holy scripture / and also by reason here within / than at the beginninge of my answer / And in lyk maner ye shal se this proposicion and sayng declared and prouyd trew / that a cristen man may lefully mary his brothers widowe left c. bothe by the lawe of God / and by the lawe of nature and that the Pope hath power to dispence vpon suche mariage for thowghe at the beginninge of myn answere / I shewe sufficiently the first saynge to be false / and this other last proposicion and saynge to be trew yet for bicause that I am compelled to folow the processe of the ynglyshe boke which I answere to I declare and proue the rehersid proposicions more largely within this myne answere according as the occasion is offerd the which if I had done also in the beginning I shuld haue / rehersed one thing and one profe many tymes / and so my answere wolde haue bene very tedious and longe FOr asmuche as now of late ther be certayn persons that haue made a boke in Latyn and the same haue translated it again into Englishe / where they doo affirme and saye that a man to mary his brothers wife a widowe / left without yssewe / is so vnleful and so againste the law of God / and against the lawe of nature / that the Pope hath no power to dispence vpon suche mariages / whether they be made and contracte al redy / or els yet to be made or contracte I am at this tyme compellid and constrayned by my profession and promesse that I haue made vnto owr sauiour criste to answere vnto this vntrewe sayng and to speke agaynste it FIrst for bicause to saye and affirme that it is forbidden bothe by the lawe of God aÌ„d by the law of nature for a maÌ„ to mary his brothers wife a widow c and that the Pope can in no wise dispence vpon suche mariage made / or yet to be made is very false and vntrew and also gret aÌ„d high blasphemy to god is law and to almighty God him self as I shal shew ye here after ANd secondly I am compellid and bounde to speke against this proposicion and sayng / for to admonyshe and giue my neighbour knowleg of this vntrew opynion that is nowe set owt in printe and goith a brode / to aduertyse hym to take hede of this saynge and to giue in no wise credence vnto it / for it is no smal daungere to mens sowles to beleue this false sayng and gret blasphemy / the which vngraciouse persons haue / and in their bokes do coloure and ornate with myche rethorike and eloquent wordis to th entent that their false proposicions sayngis shuld be the soner beleuyd accepte of the reders And so thus for these causes I am compellid to answere and speke against this before rehershed boke / in the which answere I wil with the assistence helpe of almyghty God shew ye how that this proposicion saynge is false highe blasphemy to almyghty God to affirme saye that it is forbiden to be against the law of God / against the law of nature that eny man shuld mary his brothers wyfe a widowe / lefte c and that the Pope hath no power to dispence vppon suche mariagis whether that they be contracte al redy / or els yet to be made contracte / I wil also here shewe ye that this is trew that a man may by the law of God aÌ„d by the law of nature lefully mary his brothers wife a widowe left with out yssewe / and that the Pope hath power to dispence vppon suche mariages and to licence a man so to mary THre thinges principally I note that the persons the which haue setforth their boke do saye The first is this In the preface of their boke they say that the vniuersites haue confirmed their determinacioÌ„s vpoÌ„ the leuitical laws by the whiche it is forbiden that eny man shulde mary the wife of his brother departed without children The seconde principall pointe and their saynge is writeÌ„ in the forsaid preface the which is this That it is forbiden bothe by the law of God and by the lawe of nature that any Cristen man shulde mary the wife of his brother dyinge without children The thyrde principal pointe and sayng is writen in the same preface ioyned vnto the second sayng whiche is this / that the Pope hath no pow r to dispence vpon eny suche mariagis whether they be contracte all redy or els yet to be contracte Now to their firste sayng where they write that the vniuersites haue confirmed their determinacions vppon thes leuitical lawes by the which yt is foâ—biden that eny man shuld mary the wife of his brother departed without children Beholde here I praye ye vppon how goodly and substanciall a grounde thies persons do say that the vniuersites haue buylded set ther determinacions thei say vpon the leuitical lawes by the which it is forbiden that any man shuld mary the wife of his broth r departed without children wheÌ„ that in al the leuitical law ther is no such mariagis forbideÌ„ as euery maÌ„ may perceue vnderstaÌ„d the loke upon the leuitical lawes / also as ye shal se it more largely declared here after / by this also ye may perceue what thies vniuersites haue determined / that is in dede no thinge but a proposicion the which ys very false euen lyke as theÌ„ grounde is that they haue bilded their determinacions vpoÌ„ Now to the second pointe principal / and saynge of thies persons where as they saye that it is forbiden bothe by the law of God and by the law of nature that eny cristen man shulde mary the wife of his brother departed without children this is likewise falce / First it is not against the lawe of God for in the law of
of nature / for snaillis be good and holsome and be eten in many placis / and so lykewise / yf a woman shulde haue worne a mans germent she hade done abhominable in the olde law / and for abominacion yt was forbidden / and yet yt was not agaynste the lawe of nature And so were thinges in that lawe callyd filthy and vnclenly and forbidden / and yet they were not against the lawe of nature / leu xv as to touche caren of certayn bestes / and many other thinges were forbidden as fylthynes and foule thinges / and finally you must note that the great and greuous punyshementis that were thretenyd yn the olde law / were not always thretenyd for brekynge of the lawe of nature / as the childe that was not circumcisyd was thretened that he shulde perishe from the middest of the people / and yet a childe that is not circumcisyd / doith not offende agaynst the lawe of nature And yet beside all this ye must note that the same thinge that was one against the lawe of nature / ys always against the lawe of nature / for the lawe of nature doith neuer moue nor altere hyr self in no maner of tyme sens Adam fell FIrthermore ye must marke and note that sayncte Ierome saith in the Prologe vppon Oseas that almyghty God doith commaunde no thing but that which ys honeste / nor almyghty God coÌ„maunding vnhoneste thingis doith not make them honest suche as be fowle of them self wherfor by this it folowith that for a man to mary his brothers wif a widow / was neu r foule nor euyl of it self / for than it coulde neuer haue bene good thowghe almyghty god had commaundid yt neuer so muche But almyghty God did commaunde suche mariage / wherfore suche mariage can not be agaynst the law of nature / So nowe these fewe rewlys yow must take / and they shal helpe yowe to perceue the falsite of thies deceyuers NOw where as these deceyuers in the xx seife of their boke say / forsoith yf a man will waye well and examine these forsaid thinges religiously and with goode consciens and so as they owght to be / how can he but approue the trewth allow the conclusions and determinacions of thies vniuersites thinke certaynly that yt is forbiden both by the law of God and by the lawe of nature that a Christen man shuld mary his brothers wife a widowe this is these persons sayng To the whiche thus I answere / forsoith yf a man wil way wel this case of matrimony / yf a Cristen man may mary his brothers wife a widow lefte withe out yssew / and examyn yt with good consciens as it owght to be / how shulde he not streyght waye reproue and disalowe the conclusions and determinations of thies vniuersites that saye the contrary / and to think certaynly that it is nether against the lawe of God nor against the law of nature for a Christen man to mary his Brothers wife a widowe cetera This shal euery lernyd man that haith good consciens iuge to be trewe MOreouer where as thies deceyuers in the .xxi. leife of their boke saye that the sonnis of Cayn the whiche were drouwnyd in Noys flowid / they were so punyshed by cause they did foully abuse theyr sisters and theyr brothers wifes / wherfore these persons wold conclude that it is against the lawe of God and agaynst the law of nature for a man to mary his Brothers wife a widow c. Here yow maye see a goodly Argument Cayn sonnys did fowly abuse theyr sisters and theyr brothers wifes / wherfore yt is ageynst the lawe of God aÌ„d agaynst the lawe of nature for a man to mary his brothers wife a widowe cet What shuld a man saye to so lewid an Argument but as the conclusion is manifeste false / so is all that the makers of the argument go abowt to proue ALso where as they saye in the same leif of theyr boke / Here ye maye see before yower eyes the holy lawes of God / here yow maye see the lyuely Prophecyes and the wordes of excedynge vertue and strength c. And anone after they saye / forsoith it be comyth a Cristen herte more to regard the wordes of God and his auctorite / whiche doith forbide and so hathe in abhominacion / so doith punyshe and reuenge suche matrim mary his stepmother / wherfor yt is forbiden by the lawe of God and by the lawe of nature that a man shulde mary his Brothers wife a widowe lefte without yssew / the maior of this argument is false / the whiche is this That yt is forbiden yn the same place of the lawe for a man to mary his stepmother where yt is forbidden for a man to mary his brothers wife a widowe ce This proposicion I saye is false for yt is not forbidden in all the hoâ—â— lawe for a man to mary his brothers wife a widowe left without yssew and so therfore the wordes of saynte polle helpith nothinge for thies persons Purpose ANd also suche mariage and fornication that the Apostle doith here reproue / ys not spoken of in the Leuitical prohibicion for this yonge man that had maried his mother in lawe / did take hyr from his father and so maryed hyr / his father beyng a lyue / as the wordes of sayncte Poll a fore rehersed do shewe / and therfore sayncte Poll did not grounde hym in the Leuiticall lawe when that he rebwlâ—ed this Coryntheane for mariyng of his fathers wife That the father was a lyue of the Coryntheane that maryed his mother in law / it semyth also by thies wordes of the Apostle where he saithe ther is not suche fornication herde of amonge the gentiles / and sayncte Poll beynge so well lernyd as he was knewe very wel that the Gentils had sum tyme abusyd theyr fathers wifes / also he knewe that the Iues had abusyd their fathers wifes bothe before the lawe and in the lawe before the law Ruben abusyd his fathers wife / aÌ„d so did Absalon in the lawe abuse his fathers wifes / therfore this offence that this Coryntheane did was more than for to lye withe his fathers wife / or ellis saincte Poll wold not haue callid yt suche / so greuous fornication as hath not ben hard of / among the gentiles But for a man to take awaye his fathers wife from hym and openly mary hyr and so kepe hyr still / suche maner of fornication hath not ben herd of amonge the gentilz and for by cause this Coryntheane had done so / therfore the holy Apostle did call that suche fornicacion as had not bene hard of / and therfore he did sharpely rebuke yt and greuously correcte yt ALso Theophilacte expoundinge the v. Chapiter prime Epistole ad Corinthios / doith suppose that the father of this Corintheane was a lyue / when that this yonge man maryed his mother in lawe For
Thephilacte doith cal that mariage adultry / and also in a nother place expoundyng stil the same Chapiter / he callith this Corinthians acte agayne adultry / And the abusion that man doith with a woman that is not maryed is not callid adultry / Wherfore by thse yt semyth that thys yonge mans father was a lyue when that he maryed his Fathers wife ¶ Radulphe of Laundun expoundinge the .vii chapiter of the second Pistill ad Corinthios doith say / this yongman toke awaye his fathers wyfe / and so he did his father iniury and wronge ¶ Iohn de ruppella expoundinge the rehershid Chapiter saith the same ¶ Peter de Tarantase vppon the same Chapiter do likewise affirme and saye ¶ In the .xxij. leif of their boke thay saye that sayncte Iohn Baptiste did reproue herode the kinge by cause he had maried his brothers wyfe and he shewid the kinge that suche mariage was not leful nor that kinge Herode coulde not kepe his brothers wyfe this is trewth for Herode had maried his Brothers wife / his brother beyng a lyue as shewith saynte Ierome in commentarijs super Mattheum Cap. xiiij And so do Iosoph the great storiagraphe of the Iues libro .xviij. Antiquitatis Capite ix And also the same Ioseph againe in the same boke Cap. xi saith that king Herodis brother was a lyue when that Herode maried his brothers wife And lykewise doith saye the olde wryter and doctour Egesipe Libro secundo Capite quinto of the destruccion of Ierusalem ¶ Druthmar writinge vppon sayncte Mathewe sayth Herodes Brother Philipp was a lyue when that Herode toke awaye his brothers wife / and therfor sayncte Iohn did rebuke kyng Herode ¶ Hugh Cardinall writinge vppon Matthewe saith that Philip Herodes Brother was a lyue when that Herode toke awaye his wife and maried hyr / and therfore sayncte Iohn did rebwke Kynge Herode ¶ Albart the great writer vppon sayncte Marke sayth that Iohn did rebwke King Herode because he had maryed his Brothers wife his brother beynge than a lyue ¶ Also the interlynyall gloyse shewith vppon Matthew that Herodes Brother was a lyue when Herod toke awaye his brothers wife / and so dothe manye diuerse other doctours ¶ Sayncte Iohn therfore did iustly reproue kinge herode for he did nowght to mary his brothers wife hir husband beynge a lyue / but now sayncte Iohn did not saye that a man might not lefully mary his brothers wife a widow lefte without yssew / For sayncte Iohn knew very well that suche mariages were good and lefull and commaundid in the lawe So now ye may perceve that this saynge of sayncte Iohn doithe nothinge fauoure thies decevers purposse NOw in the .xxvi. leife of their boke they bringe in the counsels of the Apostils that they kept in Iherusalem where the Apostils decreyd that the gentils that were new come in to cristis faithe shuld absteyne and forbere fornicacion / and forbere to ete of any beste / byrde / or foule that was suffocate or stranguled / and to forbere to ete any maner of flesshe that was offered to ydols / to forbere to ete blode as to forbere to ete puddynges that be made of blode / and nowe thies deceuers affyrme that in / and vnder the name of fornicacion the Apostils did forbide that a man shuld mary his brothers wife a widow left with out yssewe But this is very false / for fornicacion was always forbyden in euery law / But for a man to mary his brothers wife a widowe left withoute yssewe / was neuer forbidden in the lawe of nature nor yn the olde lawe / nor in the newe / but as ye haue harde / suche mariage was in every lawe good and lefull Wherfore you maye see that it is false to saye that the Apostils vnder the name of fornicacion did forbid that a man shuld marey his Brothers wife a widowe left without yssewe ANd agayne these persons can shew no doctour that so expoundith the decre of the apostils Here you maye see howe these deceyuers do expound and apply scripture falsly for theyr false purposse NOwe where as thies persons in the .xxvij. leif of ther boke bryng in Tertulyan the which they say doth affyrme that this Leuiticall forbiddynge that a man shuld not mary his brothers wife / was brought in / tawght / and ordyned specially and by name of Christe hym self / and his apostils / because that all the hole churche and company of Cristes faithe shuld obserue anâ— kepe yt with deuocion and reuerence This thies persons saye Tertulian writeth but yet it helpith them no thing / for their false purpose for after thâ—yr writing and allegyng of Tertulian / he saith that the Leuiticall forbidding that a man shulde not mary his brothers wife was brought in and tawght / and ordyned specially and by name of Criste hym self / his apostils I shew you that for a man to mary his brothrs wyf a widow left without yssew ys not forbidden by the leuitical law and therfore this auctor helpeth thies persones not a whit NOw where as thies persones do bring in Tertuliane agayne in the .xxix. leif and in the .xxx. leif that sayth the comâ—aÌ„dment that bounde the Iues to mary theyr brothrs wife widowe left without yssew ys now ded and ceassed the contrary of this law hath place and he shewith why the commaundement ys nowe caessed / for the causes wherfore suche mariage was commaunded in the olde lawe / be now taken awaye And ther he shewith .iij. causes why almyghty God did commaund the Iues to mary their brothers wifes widowes left without yssewe ¶ The first was because almyghty God wold that the olde blissynge / Encreasse yow and multiply / owght than to run forth and continew ¶ The seconde cause he saith was this For asmuche as the childern were punyshed for the fathers fawtes than ¶ Thyrdly for bycause that the dry and baren persons were had for defamyd persons ¶ Here be now the causes that tertullian allegethe why almyghty God did commaunde in the old lawe that euery man shuld mary his brothers wife a widowe left without yssew And for asmuche as thies causes after Tertulians mynd be now takyn awaye / therfore he saith that the commaundment that bownd the Iues to mary theyr brothers wifes ys now ceassyd and ded / and the coÌ„trary of this taketh now place ¶ First here I will answere to these reasons second I will shew yow how this commaundement that a man shulde always mary his brothers wife a widowe left without yssew / ys now ceassyd deid And thyrdly how this is false to saye that the contrary of that commaundment haith now place And finally I will shew yow / for what reasonable causes almyghty God did commaund the Iues to mary theyr brothers wifes widowes left without yssewe ¶ Now I will turne to the reasons of Tertuliane wher as he saith that the
cause that almyghty God did commaund his people the iues to mary theyr brothers wifis widows left without yssew / was for by cause as yet the olde blissing of god Encreasse yow and multiply / owght to run forthe and continew This cause ys nothing worthe nor yet meyt to shewe why almyghty God shuld commaund the brothers to mary theyr brothers wyfs widows c. For yf other men beside the brothern had maryed the widows of the Iues that were left without yssew / the olde blissyng of God / Encrease yow / and multyply / myght as wel haue runnfurthe and contynewid as thowghe the Brothers had maryed theyr Brothers widowes lefte without yssew ¶ This no man can deny therfore Tertulians reason yt but small The second cause that Tertuliane doth assigne why almyghty God did coÌ„maunde the Iues to mary theyr brothers wifes widows c. was this for bicause than the children were punyshed for their fathers fawtes / and euery man nowe ys punyshed for his owne syn / this is not trew For almyghty God saith by his Prophet Ezechiel that the soon shall not be punyshed for his fathers fautes Ezech. xviij Also yt were agaynst reason that almyghty God shuld make a lawe to punyshe the childe for the fathers fautis / when the childe is innocent / and the father fautie / also yt were more agaynst reason to punyshe the childe for the fautes of his owne father natural / and for the fautes also of his father that is his father but by the law wherfore this can be no resonable cause why almyghty God did commaund the Iues to mary theyr brothers wifes widows left without yssew THe thirde cause that Tertulian doith assigne why almyghty God did commaund the Iues to mary their brotheâ—s wifis widows left with out yssewe was this bycause that the barren and dry persons were hade for defamyd persons therfore an ordinaunce was made that they shuld haue yssew by other of their kyn as you wold saye by a proctour / This cause lykewyse is nothinge worthe / for the dry and barren persons myght as well haue had yssewe / yf other persons / besides their brothern and kinsfolke / had maryed their wifes widows c. as though their brothern had maryed theyr widows / this is euydent / Wherfore thies saynges of Tertulyan do not seme to be causes why that almyghty God dyd commaund the Iues to marye their brothers wifes widowes left without yssew NOwe to the seconde poynte that I sayd I wold shewe you that this commaundment that bounde the Iues to mary always theyr brothers wyfes widowes lefte without yssewe / is now ceassed and ded that is to saye / that no man now / Iue nor Gentile / nor Christen-man is bounde to mary his brothers wife a widowe left with out yssew vnder a payne For this commaundment was in the olde lawe a Iudiciall and all those commaundements be ded and ceassed Nowe as touchinge the bonde and payne / this is trewe But yet yt folowith not of this that now it is agaynst the lawe of God and agaynst the law of nature for a man to mary his brothers wife a widow left without yssew / and that the Pope haith no power to dispence vpoÌ„ such mariage so it is false / which is the thyrde poynte the I sayd I wold shew you / to saye that this iudicial commaundmeÌ„t / that bound men to mary theyr brothers wifis widows c. ys ceassed and ded after this facioÌ„ thê° the coÌ„trary to haue place as ye may se by exaÌ„ple If a king in his realme wold make this lawe that who so euer put out a mans eye shulde lese his owne eye for it / who than coulde say that this lawe were now agaynst the lawe of god and agaynst the lawe of nature trewly no man And yet this was a Iudicial commaundmeÌ„t and lawe with the Iues the whiche is now ceassid and ded that ys to saye / it byndith no more now by that lawe And yet the same may agayne be a newe constitucion ye and likewise this commaundment myght haue be made agayne by the churche / that a man in certayne causes shuld haue bene bownd to haue maryed his brothers wife a widow left without yssew Wherfore yow maye see / that it is false to saye that this commaundment that bounde men to mary their brothers wifs widows c. ys now ceassid and ded / and the contrary nowe to haue place is false to that is to saye / that it is nowe ageynst the lawe of God and lawe of nature / for a man to mary his Brothers wife a widowe c. ALso that this is false / yt is euident bi the opynion that Tertulyane helde and did conclude vppon this sayng for Tertuliane had this opynion / that it was vnlawfull for any woman to mary agayne after the deth of hyr husband / Thus he makith his reason / the lawe is ceassid wherby a man shuld be bound to mary his Brothers wife / wherfor if a womans husband be ded she maye not mary her husbandes Brother / for that is now forbidden and she may not mary eny heythen man for that is lykewise forbidden to euery cristen woman and all Christen people be brothern in God ergo c. All this saynge is Tertulians / and of this saynge it folowith that a woman after the deth of hir husband may mary no more For first Tertuliane faith that a woman after the deth / of hir husband may not mary hir husbandes brother / for that / he saith is now forbiden / and all Cristenmen be brothern in Christe and so than by that meane they be brothern to hir husband that is dede and than she may not mary any of them / nor agayne / she may mary no heythen man / for that Tertuliane saith is forbidden also Wherfore he concludethe that no Cristen woman maye mary after the deth of hyr husband the whiche I saye is false / and ageinst the holy Apostil saynge where as he writeth / that yf a womans husbande doo dy / let hyr mary / sayth he / where she will / so that she mary a Cristen man i. cor vij And Tertuliane in his saynge / and boke that he writ it he yt in / ys conuicte and condemnid for heresy And thus I saye therfore it is false / and heretical to saye / and affyrme / that this commaundment that bounde the Iues to mary theyr brothers wifis widows c. ys now ded and ceassid and the contrary hathe place that is to saye / that yt is now forbidden by the lawe of God and by the cawe of nature that a man shuld mary his brothers wife a widow left without yssew And the Pope hath no power to dispence vppon suche mariage ALso by brynging in that heretike Tertuliane on this wife and in the boke that ys condemned for heresy / you may perceue with what spirit and consciens
thies persons haue writen and made theyr boke / Here thei leve owt the bokes name / wher they allege Tertulian and they saye on this wise in the .xxviij. leif of their boke and the same Tertuliane writith in an other place / and so they leve owt the name of the boke whiche in dede is callid monogamia the whiche boke is condemnid Also in theyr ynglysshe boke thei leue out parte of Tertulians sayng and argument / wher he wold haue concluded to haue condempned the second mriages By this you euidently perceue that thies persons opinion sayng / where they affirme that it is against the lawe of God and ageynst the law of nature / for a man to mary his brothers wife a widow left without yssewe ys euidently false ye and suspecte hereticall / seynge that they goo about to proue their rehersed opynion and saynge / by tertulian wher he is condemned for an heretike Now to the fowrth I wil shew ye / for what resonable causes it was comaundid in the olde law that euery man shuld mary his brothers wife / a widow left ce The first was that the land is of the iues the which shuld goo and continew by inheritaunce / shuld not goo owte of the blode / and name and house that it cam of / and therfore it was commaundid to the Iues that they myght not sel their inheritaunce leuiti xxv aÌ„d than it was commaundid and ordyned that if a man died without yssew that his brother if he had any / Deute xxv or els his next kinnesman shulde mary his wife / and the first childe that this seconde brother hade by his brothers wife / shuld be namyd the first brothers childe and enioy his lande and so kepe vp the ded mans house and name Wherfore holy Crisostome saithe that almyghty God in commaunding theiues to mary their brothers wifes widows left without yssewe / Super mat homelia xlix did excogite and made a meane to counfort suche persons as shuld chaunce to dye without yssew This ys holy Crisostomes mynde / so by this commaundment and lawe if he chaunced to dye without yssewe he was in a suerty that the next of his blode shuld enioy and inheret his landes / and vpholde his house and name / the which was alwais to him that so died a coÌ„forte For euery man naturalli had leuer that one of his own blode shuld enioy haue his landes than a straunger not of his kyn / also euery man wold gladly haue his name house that he cam of / to remayn continew also beside this conforte that the man had / this lawe was a mene to confort the widow who is husband dyed without yssew / for thowgh she lefte hyr husband / yet she was suer to be maryed agayne to one of his next kyn / whiche was no small counforte to hyr / to be in a suerte to mary one that she louyd for hyr husbandes sake and also to mary one that louid hyr for hyr husbandis sake Also this maner of mariage was a meane to cause hyr husbandes kynred to bere and owe loue and fauour styll vnto the woman that had buryed hyr first husband for by cause she maryed agayne hyr husbandis kynsman for whos sake this kindred had loued hir husband before the whiche loue wold sone haue wexid colde and grown sklender toward the wedow / if she had maryd out of hir husbandis kyndred / as we may see / daily by experyence And finally / this maner of mariage was a speciall meane to kepe and continew the loue and kyndenes that was betwene the womans kynred and the kynred of hyr first husband the whiche loue / and kyndenes wold haue mynyshed and haue decayd / if the wife had maryed out of hir husbandis kindred / wherfore so to marye was a speciall meane to kepe loue and kyndenes betwene kindredis And yf sum of thies causes had strength now in this Realme by an ordinaunce decreyd / they wold not be iuged but good and resonable / As this that no man shuld sell his inheritaunce / nor agayne that many inheritaunces shuld neuer come to one mans hande / this were parauenture a good and a resonable law So thus yowe maye see that thies be resonable and honeste causes / and politicall meanis / and very mete for that tyme for the comen welth of the Iues and therfore almyggty God made this lawe that euery one of the Iues shulde always mary their brothers wifes widows left without yssewe And commaunded the Iues to kepe it / Wherfor you may euidently perceue that it can not be againste the lawe of nature and reason for a man to mary his brothers wife a widow c. And also it is hy blasphemy to almyghty God to saye that he with his infinite sapience and wisdom did make a lawe againste reason and commaunde it to be kepte vppon a great payne But now where as thies persons saye that this lawe that commaundid suche mariage / ys now ded and hath no strengthe sewerly that is trew for men as I shewed ye before but yet standeth it in theyr lyberty to mary or not marye their brothers wifes widows ceter and so it doith not follow that it is now ageynste the law of God and ageynste the lawe of nature for a man to mary his brothers wife a widow left without yssew and that the pope can not dispence vppon suche mariage IN the .xxx. leif of their boke they bâ—ynge in Gregory answeryng to a question that saynte Augustyne had mouid concerning mariage with in degreys of affinyte / saynge on this wise There is a certayn erthly and a worldly lawe with in the dominacion of Rome / that the sone and the doughter of brother and sister or of .ij. brothers germayne / or of .ij. sisters / may mary togither but we haue lernid by experience that ther coulde neuer yssew cum of suche mariage To this it maye be thê° answeryd that nowe at this present time ther ys comen of suche mariage noble and great yssew as the Emperours children for the Emperowr and his wife that now ys / came of .ij. sisters germane / for the Emperours mother and his wifes mother where both sisters and doughters to Don Ferdinando that was kyng of spayne Also we may se great and noble yssewe that is come of a man that maryd .ij. sisters germane the whiche mariage ys hyer in the degreys of affinite than is the children of the brother and sister germane in consanguinite As the kyng of Portingall that now is / and his brothern and the Emperours wife and hyr sisters the whiche cam of the Kynge of Portingaill / this mans father that maryd two sisters germane that were both doughters to Don Ferdinando Kynge of spayne And this sayd Kynge of Portingaill had by bothe thies sisters yssewe / ye and yet after the deth of thies two
sisters / his wifes / he mariyd the thyrde sisters doughter the whiche lady is now the frenche Kynges wife and by this lady also the sayd Kynge of Portyngaill hade yssewe whiche ys yet a lyue Wherfore we maye see that of suche mariage cumythe yssewe IN the .xxxj. leif of their boke thies pesons do aduertyse the reder to marke iij. or .iiij. thinges of Gregores sayng First that the leuitical lawes wher it is forbidden that a man shuld mary his brothers wife with the other / be the very lawes of allmyghty God / And now the same lawes be of the same strength that it is not lefull to contracte matrymoney contrary to that which is forbidâ—en in the same This saynge helpith no thinge to thies deceyuers pupose for it is not forbidden in the Leuiticall lawe that a man maye not mary his brothers wyfe a wydowe cetera As I haue often sayd before Moreouer thies persons saye that saynte Gregory writeth that the occasion of saynte Iohns martyrdome was this / by cause he wolde mayntayne and vpholde the trewth of the same lawes agaynste Herode the kynge / whiche had maryed hys Brothers wife This saynge lykewyse makith no thinge for thies persons purpose First for by cause that for a man to mary hys Brothers wyfe a widowe lefte withowte yssewe / it is not agaynste the trwthe and auctorite of the Leuiticall lawe for there ys no suche Mariage forbidden there / nor saynte Iohn did not suffer martyrdome for reprouynge of Kynge Herode / for mariynge hys Brothers wife a widowe left withowte yssewe for he did not reproue Kynge Herode for suche Mariage But he reprouyd Kynge Herode by cawse he had mareyd his brothers wife / hir husband his brother than beynge a lyue and so in that kyng Herode did agaynste the lawe of nature / and agaynst the leuiticall law / and if saynte Iohn did vpholde the trwth and the auctorite of the Leuitical lawe we must suppose that lykewise he wold vpholde the trouth of the Deuteronomicall commaundement that bound the Iues to mary their brothers wifes widows left without yssew / and than it is manifeste that saynte Iohn spekith no thinge that can make for thies menys false purpose / In the same leif thies persons do affirme that Gregory doith write that mariages whiche certayne ynglysshe men had contracte with their brothers wifes / and that euen before they had taken them saith vpon them to be so vnleful and not to be spoken / that they coulde notwithout dedly syn render the dewty of mariage one to a nother / nor yet abide stil in the same mariage Here thies persons say falsly vppon Gregory and agaynste his wordes and agaynst his minde For Gregory did admitte those ynglyshmen that had maryed their brothers wifes to be Cristen / and to retayne and kepe still theyr wifes and also to cum into the churche and receyue the blessed Sacrament of the Auter / the whiche Gregory wolde in no cause haue sufferd / yf he had Iuged suche mariage to haue ben agaynst the lawe of God and against the law of nature / nor yet Gregory wolde haue sufferd thies ynglishmen to haue continewed still with their wife 's / yf it had bene dedly syn to them to haue continewed withe their wifes And therfore ye may see that thies persons speke directly agaynste Gregoris mynde also ye shal se that they speke agaynste Gregoris wordis if ye wil loke vpon Gregory / but Gregory did exhorte and teche the ynglishemen that were new comen to the faith / that they shuld no more mary as they had done before / and made them lawes of matrimoney that they shuld not marye theyr kynswomen in the first degre of affinite or consanguinite nor in the second / nor in the thyrde / nor in the fowerthe THat they write also in the .xxxij. leif of their boke that Gregory sawe that mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife a widowe c. of this mariage they speke to be playnly vngodly and iuged it abhominable before God and man and also agayne the nature of man / and as nyghe as can be vnto the nature aÌ„d lyfe of bestis This thies persons saye Gregory sawe and did iuge suche matrimony o to be In the whiche saynge they affirme that saynte Gregory doith blaspheme almyghty God and also his holy lawe for if Gregory sawe and iuged mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife / to be abhominable and odious to God man / and also to be against the nature of man / aÌ„d as nyghe as can be vnto the nature and lyfe of bestis / than must it nedes folowe that saynte Gregory sawe that almyghty god in commandinge suche mariage did commaunde that thing that was abhominable and odyous to God and man / and also that thinge that is ageynste the nature of man and that thing that is as nyghe as can be to the nature and lyfe of bestis for as I haue shewed yow almyghty God did commaunde suche mariage / also by this their sayng of saynte Gregory / yt doith folowe that he sawe as myche abhominacyon in the lawe of God whiche commaundid the brother to mary the brothers wife a widow left without yssewe And if it were so / than sayncte Gregory dyd blaspheme godys lawe Here ye maye see what thies persons saye by saynte Gregory / also in the later ende of the same leif thies persons saye that saynte Gregory sawe how greuous punyshment is abydinge them whiche haue defylyd them self with this fowl syn That they vnderstande in the rehersed mariage therfore he iugede that nother peace / nor faith and Cristendome / nor any other thinge in this worlde beside forth / is of suche vertue and goodnes that is able to recompence and waye owt the maliciousnes of this dede and so forthe / withe diuerse grete and sharpe wordes as yow maye see in their boke NOw by this sayng thies persons do greatly blaspheme saynte Gregory and do saye that he blasphemithe almyghty God / for yf saynte Gregory shuld thus iuge by mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife a widowe c. Than saynte Gregory shuld iuge that almyghty God in commaundinge suche mariage / commaunded that thing that is so abhominable and so euill / that ther is no thing in this worlde of suche vertu and goodnes that is able to recompence and waye owt the maliciousnes of this dede / Who euer harde any man saye that almyghty God wolde commaunde so abominable a thinge as these persons saye Gregory iugithe mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife widowe c. to be And suche mariage commaundid almighty God Ancelme wherfore this in no wise may be Gregoris iugement nor mynd for Ancesme as thies deceyuers do allege saith in a Pistell / that for certain honeste causes there were holy men bothe before the law / in the law / that did mary in the
first and seconde degre of consanguynite / as Abraam Isaac Iacob Ios xv ther may be honest causes why a man may mary his sister in libro de Patriarcha abraam In the lawe Caleb that maryd his brothers doughter / than if ther may be honest causes why a man may mary his sister / ther may be honest causes why a man maye marye his Brothers wyfe a widow cetera And than it folowithe that by sum honest cause ther maye be a recompence for any offence in suche mariage ALso saynte Ambrose doith excuse the doughters of Lothe / saynge that the good zele that they had for to conserue mankynde / the whiche they thowght shulde haue perished did reward them so vniuersally / that it coueryd their inhoneste priuate acte / and than it folowith that yf their good zele that they had did excuse their particulare faute / ther may be sum thinge in this worlde of suche vertue and goodnes that it is able to recompense and waye owt the maliciousnes of matrimoney betwene the brother and the brothers wife a widow c. For in this or suche mariage is none offence agaynst the lawe of God nor against the lawe of nature / as ye haue hard before Wherfore it semith by this that saynte Gregoris mynde was neuer to iuge suche mariage to be so euyl as thies persons wold haue hym to do NOr Gregoris wordis do not so sownde nor signifie / nor Gregory doith not saye that it is against the law of God and against the lawe of nature for a man to mary his brothers wife a widowe c. And that the Pope haith no power to dispence vpon suche mariage / and so al that thies persons bringe in of Gregory do nothinge helpe theyr malicyouse purpose IN the .xxxiij. leyf of theyr boke they bringe in Pope zachary / the which answerd the bishop Theodore to his question whether that a mans natural sone maye marye with his fathers god doughter and the Pope answerid on this wise / we be / saith he / by the lawe of God comaundid to abstayne from owr owne kyndred Carnal / mychmore it is conuenient that we shuld with all strength be ware of hyr that ys owr fathers doughter spiritual / Wher vppon thies persones wolde conclude that it is against the lawe of God and agaynste the lawe of nature for a man to mary his brothers wife a widowe left without yssew and that the Pope hath no power to dispence vppon suche mariage / But this saynge of Pope zachary directly agaynst their conclusion For of his saynge it folowith / that the Pope maye dispence and licence the brother to mary the sister / and than it folowith that the Pope may licence a man to marye his brothers wife a widowe left without yssewe for it is no more forbidden for a man to marye his brothers wife a widowe cete than it is for a man to mary his sister / but the pope hath power by this zacharias saynge / to licens a man to marye hys sister This you shal see prouyd The Pope hath power to licence a man to mary his fathers godoughter / for that affinite doith not let mariage by no lawe / but onely by the lawe of the churche / as of it self it is euident / and the Pope maye dispence against the puer prohibicion of the churche Wherfore the Pope may licence a man to mary his fathers goddoughter / and now Pope zachary saithe that it is more forbidden that a man shuld mary his fathers goddoughter than his fathers doughter / and yet vppon suche mariage the Pope hathe power to dispence Wherfore than he haith power to dispence that the brother may mary the sister / for yf the Pope maye dispence in the thing that is more prohibit / he may dispeÌ„ce in that thing that is lese prohibite / and than further / if the Pope may dispence vppon mariage betwene the brother and the sister / he hath than power to dispence vpon mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife a widowe c. This you se doith followe of this Pope zachary his sayng / the whiche makith for the trewth / and against thies deceyuers false conclusion IN the same leif thies persons do brynge in the glose that doith goo vppon the wordes of Pope zachary / the whiche glose doith make argumentis that the Pope can not dispence thoughe he wold / in the seconde degre of consanguinite nor yet in the second degre of the first maner of affinite / for the second degre of consanguinite and of this affinite hath / his begynninge of the lawe of nature / and agayne bycause of the same degre it is forbidden expresly in the olde testament of God Here thies persons shewe that the gloser makith Argumentis / and saye that the Pope cannot thoughe he wolde dispence in the seconde degre of consanguinite nor in the seconde degre of the firste maner of affinite c. But they will not shew yow how the same gloser doith also make arguments to shewe that the Pope may dispence in theyse degreys of consanguynite and of affinite / and yet the same gloser makith argumentis for bothe partes and finally he determineth nother this / that the pope may dispence / nor yet this / that the Pope can not dispence / but this these deceyuers wil not reherse in their boke / and so nowe ye maye see that the gloser whiche they do allege doith nothynge for their purpose / And also if the glose had sayd that the Pope coulde not haue dispencyd in the rehershâ—d degreys of consanguinite and of affinite / he had spoken directly agaynste the texte for the texte sayth that affinite spirituall in the firste degre ys more forbidden in the whiche the Pope may dispence than ys consanguynite Carnall in the same degre / as you haue hard before / and thus thies persons wold haue the glosse to destroye the texte whiche can not be FIrthermore they bringe in Pope Innocent the thyrde to whom sent the Archâ—diacon of biturs to know whether that wife that was departed from hir husband without iugement of the churche / by cause hir husband and she were in so nyghe degre of kyndred that the sea Apostolyk coulde not / nor yet was wonte to dispence with / owght to be restored agayne to hyr husbande marke wel this questyon and case that this archediacon asked of the Pope and than yowe shall and maye perceue better the Popis answere that he made to the question and case / The Pope answerithe and sayth this woman whiche doith knowe the kynred betwene hir husband and hir specially in thies degres whiche be forbidden by the law of God can not haue to do Carnally withe this hir husband without dedly syn / and so finally the Pope saith that the woman shal not be restored agayne to hyr husband Here the Pope answerith verey wel /
spreyd abrode and sowe loue and charite by mariage amonge the people that were not ioynid togither in kynred and affinite Here ye haue hard the causes why the counsels and decreys did forbid mariage in the first / the seconde / and the thyrde / and fowerth degre of affinite and kyndred wherby ye may see that for a man to mary his brothers wife a widow ce or his nece or cosyn germane / ys not against the lawe of God / nor agaynst the lawe of nature but againste the lawe of the churche with the whiche the Pope maye dispence IN the .xxxvij. leif of their boke / thyes persones bryng in the counsaile of Necene and the synode of Gregore the yongar where it was decreyd accordinge to the wordes of God that a woman whiche had ben maryed to .ij. Brothern shulde be put bake frome communyon / and from the receyuinge of the sacrement vntyl she died / and a man that had maryed his brothers wife / shuld be an Anatheme / In the whiche synode / al to gither answeryd / Anatheme be he / that is as myche to saye as thies pestilent persones do expounde it as damnacion to euerlastynge dethe / To this sayng of the counsel and synode / I answere that theyr saynge and excommunycacion ys vnderstād to be applyed vnto suche persons as do mary them selues in suche degreys of affinite without licence of the Pope As that woman that doith mary hyr self after the deth of hir husband to hir husbandes brother and so in lyke wise / that man which maryeth his brothers wife a widowe cet For they that presume to mary on the rehersed maner / owght to be punyshed as it is a fore spoken of except that they be penitent and sory for that they haue done / ye and leaue and forsake / the men their wifes / and the women their husbandis without the Pope lycence them to mary the saide men and women that thei hade taken before / But yet the counsel and synode did not decre to punyshe that woman / whiche after the deth of hir husband / maried hir husbandis brother nor yet the man whiche maryd his Brothers wife a widow c. for by cause they maryed agaynste the lawe of God / and agaynste the lawe of nature / as it is manifest For ther is nother the counsell / nor the synode that doith decre and saye that suche mariage is against the law of god and agaynste the lawe of nature But the counsel and synode did orden and decre the punyshements before rehersed for suche persons as did presume to mary / as the woman with hir husbandis brother / or the man with the Brothers widow against the prohibicion and decre of the churche / And so nowe this counsel and sinode do not helpe thies vngracious persones false opinion / But yet if these deceyuers will saye that the sinode and counsell / or any other decre or counsell doith forbid that a man shal not mary his brothers wife a widow c. for by cause that suche mariage is against the law of God and against the lawe of nature when that they shew me this of any decre or counsell I shal be redy to make answere to it IN the .xxxij. leif of their boke / they say on this wise last of all / and for a conclusion That the sentence of Wiklif wherin he did holde that the prohibicions of matrimoney writen in the Leuitical / be onely iudicial preceptis of Moyses / therfore the causes of diuorce brought in by the meane of kinred of affinite to be brought in without ground fundacion / onely by the ordinance of man / was condempnyd as contrary to all vertu ād goodnes / as heretical / expresly agaynste holy scripture / in the great conuocation that was first at London / after at Oxforde last of al in the counsel of Constancy Here these persons saye falsly / they lye on Wicleffe for Wik lef did neu r say that al the prohibicions of matrimoney writen in the leuiticall law be but only iudicials nor the cōuocation / nor yet the counsel doith not condempne Wiklyf in the point yet if he had sayd / that al thies prohibicions of matrimoney had bene but onely Iudicials / the conuocacion and counsel to haue condempnyd hym for the same saynge / and to haue iuged all thies prohibicions to be moralles yet al thies wold no thing haue holpen thies deceuers fals opiniō For as mych as in the leuitical prohibiciōs ys not forbid◠as I often tymes sayd that a mā shal not mary his brothrs wife a widowe lefte withoute yssewe / and thus ye maye see that all that they bringe in / for them can do them no seruice IN the same leif of their boke / they say there be decres of other counsails and answers in writing of other of the popes whiche do subscribe agree to thies forsayd determinacions / and a none after this / it folowithe in theyr boke But we truste gētill ād indifferent reder / that thies forsaid rehersyd thinges shal fully content the / for thow seyst here first of all in maner an hole comen assent and agrement of the holy churche / and firthermore thow seist the Popes them selues do gyue so great magestye and godly auctorite vnto the Leuiticall prohibicions / that they doo playnly affirme and hold stedfastly that who so euer doith mary contrary to the commandment of thies lawes be not in ded man and wife nor they cannot render one to the other the dewty of matrimony without dedly syn nor they can not be togither by any iugement of the churche / thus say the Popes / all this ys these deceyuers sainge / and so with thies wordes saynges they wold swade and moue the reder to beleue that it is against the lawe of God / against the lawe of nature / for a man to marye his Brothers wife a widowe left without yssew that the Pope hath no power to dispence vppon suche mariage / but this as ye haue sene prouyd before ys verey false and where as they saye yow maye in maner se a hole comen assent and agrement of the hole churche / the whiche they vnderstand to their opinion this ys also false For the hole assent and agrement of the churche hath agreyd that the Pope maye dispence vppon mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife widow c. And consequently that suche mariage is nother agaynst the lawe of nature for ells the hole churche / and lernyd men of the Princes and Popes counsaill / wolde not haue consentyd that he shuld haue dispenced vppon suche mariage if it had bene agaynste the lawe of God / and againste the law of nature / and thus you maye see / that thies persons saynge is false / whiche is this That the hole assent of the churche doith affirme matrimony
betwene the brother and the brothers wife / to be agaynst the lawe of God and agaynst the law of nature / But the hole church of Cristendom hath without reclamacion approued suche matrimoney lefull and good Where as thies persons saye that the Popes them selue haue geuen greate magestye and godly auctorite vnto the Leuiticall prohibicions thies persons name verey often and reherse their Leuiticall prohibicions in generall But I wold see them name one prohibicion Leuiticall / whiche doith forbide that a man may not mary his brothers wyfe wydowe lefte wythe owte yssew This they shulde bringe of the Leuiticall lawe the whiche wolde doo them sum seruice / and make well for their purpose but this they cannot doo nor no man for them for as I haue shewed you suche mariage is not forbiden in the leuitical law / and therfore yowe maye playnly see that to brynge in the Leuiticall lawe / ys no thynge for theyr purpose IN the .xxxviij. leif of their boke / they saye finally to make an ende Thow shalt vnderstand gentill reader / that the requestis and suetes of diuerse persons / whiche haue desyred dispensacions in thies degreys haue many tymes here to fore bene denyed and repellid by the Popes of Rome whiche answered them thus It is not in any case leful for vs to dispence with the lawes of God ād this we shall shewe yow here after To this their reason and sophistical argument / I answere that al thowghe sum Popes haue denyed to dispence in suche degreys of affinite yet vppon this no mā can conclude that therfore suche degre is of affinite do set mariage by the lawe of God and by the law of nature For the Pope may deny to dispence in the thyrde degre of consanguinite / and affinite in the side lyne / and yet euery man knowithe / that the thyrde degre of affinite and consanguinite doith not let matrimony by the lawe of God / and by the law of nature / and also theyr argument ys nowght and sophistical Also the Pope maye lefully denye and not lycence a manis sone to mary his fathers goddoughter / and yet suche mariage ys neyther forbidden by the lawe of God / nor by the lawe of nature / and thus yow may see / that thies persons reason is no thinge worthe Thei say / that you shal vnderstande / that Popes hath denyed to dispence in suche degreys And I saye that yowe shall vnderstonde that Popes haue dispencyd and lycencyd the Brother to marye the sister and the son to mary the Fathers Sister / and the Brother to mary the Brothers widowe / and one man to mary two Sisters / and also the same man to mary his wifes nece And that Popes haue licencyd moo persons to marye in suche degreis of affinite and consanguinite / as I shall shewe yowe here after Wherfore yowe maye perceyue thies deceyuers reason is of no strength NOw where as they saye that the Popes / whan they denyed to dispence in suche degreys / they answeryd thus yt is not in eny case lefull for vs to dispence withe the Lawes of God / and this thies persons saye they will shewe here after / and I wyll make answere vnto yt whan that they shewe it Finally to make an ende yow shall vnderstand / that in the .xxxviij. leif of their boke / they make an Epilogacyon / And a great heape of shamefull lyes / saynge / Moreouer thow seest and excepte we be deceyued thow doist graunte c. I reherse no more of their letter / because yow may see the residewe in their boke whiche ys all togither false / and so in the ende of their second chapiter in the .xxxix. leif that maketh a conclusion of the same stuffe / sayng / that the sentence and determinacyons of their vniuersites is of as vndowtyd credence and auctorite / as can be Where they saye / that to mary hir that is left of his brother dyinge without children / is so forbidden / both by the lawe of God / and by the law of nature that the Pope is not of power to dispence with any suche maryage / whether they be all redy contracte / or ells to be contracte This is the sentence and determinacions of theyr vniuersites yet thies persones as ye haue sene haue not prouyd it / nother by auctorite / nor reason / nor they neuer shal / for the sentence and the determinacions of theyr vniuersites / ar manifest false and a great error hereticall wherfore yf these persons had sayd that the sentences and determinacions of the vniuersites / be as vndowtid falsehed as can be / where they saye That to mary hyr that is lefte of his brother dying without children / is so forbidden bothe by the lawe of God / and by the lawe of nature / and that the Pope is not of power to dispence with any suche mariage / than they hade said trewth for without faile / the sentences and determinacions of theyr vniuersites are vndowtid falsehed / as yow haue partly harde / and as ye shal heare more / her after IN the third chapiter in the .xxxix. leif of theyr boke / thei say thus We thinke that we haue wel and sufficiently confirmyd and stabilished owr entent and purpose by the Popes lawes / and by the auctorite and counsels Nowe next we will go about to fortifye and make goode the same by the most excellent and most faithfull interpreters and most trew doctours that expownde holy scripture Here they saye that they haue well and sufficiently confirmid and stablysshed their entent by the Popes lawe and by the auctorite of counsels And yet yow may see that they haue brought nether Popes law nor counsels that affirme thys theyr false purpose That it is againste the lawe of God / and againste the lawe of nature / for a mā to mary his brothers wife a widow c. And that the Pope hath no power to dispence vppon suche mariage Wherfore they shuld haue sayd that they hade nother well nor sufficiently confyrmyd ād stabilyshed their purpose nor yet neuer shal by no faithful interpreters and trew doctours that expownde holy scripture / had thies persones said thus / they had sayd trowth But that they loue to saye as theyr boke doith euidently shew / Nowe I beseche you marke and note well what thies doctours saye that they bring in / and how well they fortify thies deceyuers purpose First they bring in and allege the great clerke Origene / wher he expowndith the .xx. chapiter of the Leuitical Now I beseche yowe loke well vppon all that they bringe of Origene / and yowe shall see that in noo poynte he helpith or favoryth their opinion IN the .xli. leif of theyr boke / they say that Crisostom doith agre with Origen / and they say trewth / for he doith no thinge say that makithe for theyr purpose IN the .xlij. leif of theyr boke / they
say that Basilius the greate / ys of the same sentence and mynde / that thies other two forsayd doctours be / ād if yt be so / than he doith not fortyfye theyr opinion for the other two doctours in no case fauour and affirme this thies persons opinion That it is agaynste the law of God and agaynste the lawe of nature / for a man to mary his brothers wife a widow c. nor yet thies doctours do not saye that the Pope haith no power to dispence vppon suche mariage Nor this can not be gatherid of thies doctours wordes nor conclude / as yow maye se in thies persons boke / wher they allege thies doctours / and if this doctoure Basilius be of the same sentence and mynde / that Origene and Crisostome be than he helpith no thinge thies persons opinion and it is in dede trewth / for Basilius in al his goodly pistill doith not saye that it is agaynste the lawe of God / and againste the lawe of nature / for a man to mary his Brothers wyfe a widowe left without yssewe IN the .xliij. leif they allege Basilius agayn saynge / If it fortune a man to be ouercum with shameles and vnclenly affeccion to ioyne so vnlefully / that he coupilith hym self by mariage with two sisters / this man is iuged not to haue contracte any mariage And that he must not be admitted in to the communion of the churche / or cum in the company of Cristen folke before that they haue broken this so vnlefull couple or bonde / and be departid the on from the tother / To this saynge I answer thus That it is vnderstand on this wise that if a man ouercomen with shameles affeccion / couplyth him self by mariage with .ij. sisters without the Popes licence / that than he owght to be iuged not to haue contracte any mariage with the second sister for by cause he did agaynste the ordinaunce of the church whiche hath decreyd that no man shall mary two sisters and also if any man will attempte the contrary / and mary .ij. sisters that than the couplynge withe the seconde Sister to be iuged no mariage but rather the persons that so did couple them selues vnder the pretence of mariage agaynste the lawe of the churche / not to be admitted in to the communion of the churche or cum emonge Christen people before that they haue broken theyr vnteafulle couple and bonde / and be departid the one from the tother Thus on this wise all Basilius saynge is trwthe / and makith against thies persons purpose and opinion But they shuld rather haue brought yf they hade coulde Basilius to haue said that he / whiche couplyth hym self to .ij. sisters one after the deth of the tother for honest respectis causes with the Popes lycence doith againste the lawe of God / and agaynste the lawe of nature / so that the Pope can not dispence vppon suche mariage If thies persones hade brought in this of basilius saynge / it wolde haue done them sum seruice But they can not / and therfore Basilius helpeth them nothynge IN the .xlviij. leife these persons allege ysichyus / Gregorye Nazanzeus scolere an excellent lernyd man in holy scripture to be of Origens Chrisostome and of Basilius side / for he expunding the Leuitical lawe saith thus ce To this I answere / that yf ysichius be of the rehersed doctours syde / than it folowith that he saythe no thinge for to ayde thies deceyuers false opinion For nether Origen Chrysostom nor Basilius speke no thing in to the fauour of thies persons opinion and thus Isychius / being of the other doctours side / cā not helpe thies persons opinion / nor he doith not helpe them in dede in no maner of point as you may manifestly se in thies persons boke / where they doo allege hym / for they allege hym where he expoundith the .xviij. Chapiter in the Leuiticall boke where it is not forbidden that a man shal not mary his brothers wife a widowe lefte without yssewe As I haue often tymes shewid yow Nor Isichius doith not say that suche mariage is ther forbidden nor he doith not saye that suche mariage is forbidden by the lawe of God and by the lawe of nature / nor yet he doith saye that the Pope haith no power to dispence vppon mariage betwene the brother and the brothers wife a widowe left with out yssewe And therfore ye may perceue that Isichius doith nothing for thies deceuers purpose IN the .li. leif of their boke / they saye on this wise Now with all thies doctours opinions agre saynte Ambrose / saynte Hierome / and saynte Austyne And first thies persons allege saynte Ambros where as he answereth to one Paterne which wold haue maryed his dowghters dowghter vnto his owne soone whiche son was the maydens half vncle For Paterne the father had his sone by an other woman / and in this case saynte Ambros sayd thus That the sone myght not mary with the fathers dowghters dowghter / nor yete the nece with the nece / saynge that the lawe of God forbiddith that the sone shulde mary with the brothers dowghter This is now saynte Ambrose his mynde To this I answere that expresly we haue in the same lawe of God that saynte Ambrose spekith of that the vncle maryed the nece / and the nece maryed with the nece As Othoniel maryed his Brothers dowghter / which was callid Axa and the nece maryed with the nece / as the doughters of Salphat maryed with their vncles sones / Nume vltimo and here no man can saye that thies persons maryed theyr vncles sones by a dispensacion and lycence of almyghtye God for they were not lycencyd but commaundid by almyghty God so to mary / for ther was a law made and publyshed by the reason of the dowghters of Salphat as the very texte here sheweth Respondit Moyses filijs Israel domino precipiente ait recte tribus filiorum Ioseph loquuta est / hec lex super filiabus Salphat a Domino promulgata est / sequitur / fecerunt filie Salphat vt sibi fuerat imperatum And so thies women maryed their vncles sones according to the lawe and commaundement of almyghty God / and so in lykwise / the doughters of Eleazar maryed theyr vncles sones i. Par. xxiij By this you may se it is not forbiden by the law of god the sone to marye withe the Brothers dowghter / nor the nece with the nece but suche mariages were commaunded by almyghty God in his lawe Thies persons saye in the .lij. leif / that sainte ambrose doith affirme to be against the law of nature for a man to mary his doughter This is trew ād noman will saye the contrary but this saynge ys no thing for thies persons purpose / let them shewe where saynte ambrose saith It is agaynst the law of nature for a man to mary his brothers
wif a widow left without yssewe This thies deceyuers promise to shewe and brynge in / but they do not IN the .liiij. leif of their boke / they brynge in saynte Hierome that meruelyth at the Patriarke abraham for by cause he maryed his sister seing the thinge is so abhominable / and seynge agayne that almyghty God ordenyd afterward a law for it wherin he thretenith that who so euer shal take his sister / other on the fathers side / or on the mothers side shal se hir fowlnes yt is a rebuke a shame / he shal be dryuen owt of his countre in sight of his owne kynne he haithe vnhilled the priuetes of his sister / he shal receiue his reward for his synne after this saing / thies deceuers make an exposicion vpon sainte Hieroms writing for bycause yt is not to the purpose / I let it passe / thowghe it be false / to saynte Hierome sayng I answere thus what so euer saynte Hierome saith wher they do allege him / I wolde shewe ye / that saynte Hierome doith not meruell nor iuge abrahams mariage to be euyl but doith excuse abrahaÌ„ in that he maryd his sister saynge / In the Hebrew tonge / yt soundith that Sara was abrahams sister In qÌ„sti hebraicis super gen in his excuse he sayth that at that tyme suche mariage was not forbiden by the law Here ye may se that sainte Hierome doith excuse the Patriarche abram in that he maryed his sister saith that in the tyme of abraÌ„ suche mariage was not forbidden by the lawe the whiche must be vnderstand / that suche mariage was not forbidden bi the lawe of nature For yf that suche mariage had bene lefull and againste the lawe of nature than saynte Hierome had not iustifyed and excused Abraham in that he maryed his sister saynge that suche mariages at the tyme were not foebidden by the lawe And so thus nowe yow maye perceyue that Saynte Hieroms mynde and writinge here ys / that it is not agaynste the lawe of nature for a man to mary his sister And so by this saynte Hierome is agaynst thies persones false opinion IN the .lv. leif of their boke / thies persons brynge saynte Augusten wher he writith againste Faustus the greate heretik and saythe that the commaundment of God that bownde the iues to mary with theyr brothers wifes widowes lefte without yssew / was a figure / and dyd signifie that the preachers shuld labour in the gospell to styre vp the sead / vnto his brother departyd that ys to our sauiour Crist / which died for vs. Here ye maye see that saynte Austen saith that the commaundment of God that bownde the Iues to mary theyr brothers wyues widows / was a figure / then it can not be againste the lawe of nature as to offer vp incense and to be circuncysed were figurs / yet now they be not agaynste the lawe of nature and thus Saynte Augustyn is not for these menis purpose IN the .lvi. leif / They brynge in saynte Augustyn in an other place where as he saith Althowghe in tyme past men maried thier sisters / yet that thinge was doen bycause necessite compellid men vnto it / but this thinge is not now so olde / nor was neuer so necssary but it was made afterward as damnable / bicause religion doith forbidde yt Thus here is the englisshe of saynte austens wordes / and after the same wordis that thies persons haue in their Latyn boke but they haue in theyr ynglishe boke that it is not now as damnable / by cause religion doith forbide it / And saynte Austen saith is was made afterwarde as damnable / bycause religion doith forbide yt And than yf this / for a man to mary his sister be nowe made dampnable bycause religion doith forbide yt Than it is euident that for a man to mary his sister / is not damnable of the owne nature for that thynge that is damnable by nature / was / and ys always dampnable and saynte augusten saith that this thyng / for a man to mary his sister / was made afterward dampnable / because religion doith forbid yt and therfore it is not agaynst the lawe of nature for a man to mary his sister also saynte augustyn saith in the same place where thies persons allege hym / that in the begynninge of man kynde 〈◊〉 was leful by al meanys the brothern to mary witâ— sisters but now saith he the custom ys so agaiâ—â—â—â—e mariage as thoughe siche mariage had â—â—â—er ben lawfull By this ye may se that for a maÌ„ to mary his sister / is leful by the law of nature it is â—â—â—â—â—den 〈◊〉 â—e custome than yt folowith that yf suche 〈◊〉 â—e be lefull by the lawe of nature / it is 〈◊〉 â—y the same lawe for a man to mary h◠〈◊〉 â—s wife a widowe lefte withowt yssewe For this can be no more forbiden than for a man to marye his Sister And thus yowe maye perceyue that sainte augustyn is against thies persons false opinion IN the same leif / thies persons wold haue yow call to yowr rememberaunce of the iugement of thies great diuines fower / or fyue thinges First what so euer persone of Cristes beleue brekith eny of the leuiticall prohibicions of mariage / he shal be dampned both body and sowle into euerlastinge deith in hell Note here I beseche ye how thies pestilent persons openly sclaunder and saye false vpon sainte ambrose / sainte Hierome / and sainte Augustin For ther is none of them that doith iuge / that what so euer person of Cristes beleue brekith eny of the leuiticall prohibicions of mariage that he shall be dampned bothe body and sowle into euerlastinge deith in hell / as thies persons do saye vppon them but it is thies ' pestilent persons owne malicious iugement and yet all this makith nothing for their false opinion For ther is no prohibicion leuitical that doith forbide that a man shal not mary his brothers wife a widowe c. THe second thinge that thei wolde haue yow note of the iugement of sainte ambrose / sainte Hierome / and sainte augustin is this That not only the Iues did abstaine frome marying their Brothers wiues euen as yow wold say / for fere of sum mischef / and yet thei might haue don it bi auctorite of their law but the very heythens also after the deth of their wiues / did euermore abstaine frome mariage of their wiues sistern / as frome a certain impiete or abominacion againste nature Here thies shameles persons falsly sclaunder againe thies holy Doctours / for they neuer did iuge nor saye that the Iues did abstayne frome maryinge of their Brothers wiues for fere of sum myschefe that shulde fall vppon them / for so maryinge Nor yet thies holy men neuer sayde that the heythens did euermore absteyne from maryinge their wiues sisterne / as frome a certaine
fathers and canons so that kynsfolke beyng in the .vi degre maye not marey toghither by this you may se that sainte Ancelme doith speke of suche mariage as is forbiden bi the lawe of the churche and therfore in the ende of his pistel he shewith that bothe before the law and in the law / men vpon certaine honest causes and consideracions maried their nere knswomen / as their sisters and their neces before the lawe / as Abraham / Isaac / and Iacob In the law / Othoniel / the whiche mariages sainte Ancelme doith not saye that thei were against the lawe of nature But he doith approue them good for bicause the persons which so maryed / did marey for good consideracions and honest causes / yet for all that saith he Cristiane religion the perfytnes that owght to be in a Cristen man wil iuge nothinge to be honest that is against the honestie of nature So here sainte Ancelme doith swade that we shuld not mary nowe owr kinneswomen / but mary other for to spreyd a brode loue and charite / for it is against the honestye of nature aftir his mynde / to mary within the .vj. degre For men and women do bi the reason of affinite kindred bare loue naturally vnto that degre And therfore sainte Ancelme did extende the honestie of nature to the .vi. degre / as it aperith bi his sainge before / And thus yow may se that sainte ancelme doith not saye that it is againste the law of nature for a man to mary his sister and nere kynswoman but that for honeste cawses men haue so maryed IN the .lxv. leif / thies persons bring in Hughe Cardinal Rauffe Flamacensis / Rute Tintiensis / Hildebart Cenomanese / Iuo Carnotense / al bishops and one water of constance archedeacon of Oxforde / and truly the first two Hughe Cardinal / and Rauffe flauiacensis expoundinge the xviij chapiter leuitical Brefely here I answere / there is none of thies Doctours that saith it is againste the law of God and againste the lawe of nature / for a man to mâ—ry his brothers wife a widow left without yssew nor yet this that the Pope haith no power to dispence vpon suche mariage nor this can not be concludid of their saynges Wherfore I passe ouer vnto the .lxxv. leif of thies deceyuers boke where they allege for their purpose the scholasticall doctours NOw amonge the scolastical doctours thies persons do bringe in Thomas in the .lxxviij. leyf of their boke whiche saith that at the beginning of mankinde there were exceptid frome mariage the father and the mother / that is to be vnderstand / that the father myght not marey with the doughter / nor the mother with the soon / but afterward when mankynde was encreaside and multiplied there were many moo persons excepte bi Moyses lawe Brefely saynte Thomas in all hys reasons before and after doith no thinge but declare that the father and the dowghter / the mother and the soon were forbiden to mary togither bi the lawe of nature The othâ—r persons that were afterward except / he saith were forbiden to mary togither by the lawe of Moyses whiche law / Thomas callith sum tyme the lawe of God This maye yowe see plainly in al the processe that thies persons do bringe in of Thomas from the .lxxv. leif / vnto the .lxxix. leif / and thus Thomas speketh not one worde against this that a man maye mary his brothers wife a widowe lefte withowte yssew / nor yet againste this / that the Pope haithe power to dispence vpon suche mariage THies persons promised to bring doctours to speke againste thies thinges but they be verey slake in performinge their promesse IN the same leife / thies persons doo bring in Thomas sayng / infidels contracte within the degreis forbiden in the xviij Chapiter of Leuitical / contrary to the lawe of God whether both to or one of them be conuertid to the faith they maye not bide still togither in suche mariage for as myche as saynte Thomas speketh here of the degreys forbiden in the .xviij. chapiter of the leuitical I wil answere no other wise but thus / yt is not forbiden in the .xviij. Chapiter of the leuiticall that a man shal not mary his brothers wife a widowe left with out yssew and therfore saynte Thomas spekith nothinge for thies deceyuers purpose ALso to Altissiodorensis saynge / where thei allege him to saye that the preceptis Leuitical be moralles this saynge doith no seruice to thies deceyuers false opinion For as I haue shewid you / and am compellid often tymes to shew yow / that it is not forbiden in the Leuitical lawe that a man shal not mary his brothers wife a widow left without yssew And if thies deceiuers were not paste shame they wolde not allege so often the leuitical lawe and prohibicions as they do seyng it makith nothinge for their purpose / or ells they shuld reherse sum prohibicion leuiticall that doith forbede that a man shal not mary his Brothers wife a widowe left c. IN the .lxxxij. leif / thei bringe Peter de Palude whiche saith the Pope hathe no power to dispence in the first degre of affinite no more than he haith in the first degre of consanguinite for mariageis forbiden bi the lawe of God in the first degre of consanguinite or affinite not one streghter aboue the other but the one of syde half to the other as the brother and the sister in this degre Also the Pope hath power to dispence bycause it is sumwhat against the lawe of nature / and a litle after this Docter Peter de Palude saith that the Pope hath no power to dispence that a man shulde mary the wife of his brother althowgh he died without children / for how be it men were sufferde to do thus in tymes past yet that was not but by dispensacion / ye and that dispensacion was by the lawe of God and not by the lawe of men / and agayne a litle after this he saith that the Pope hath no more power to dispence with a man to mary his brothers wife a widow left without yssew / than he haith to dispence for a pluralite of wiues For mariage betwene the brother and the brothers widowe left without yssewe was sufferd for a certayn tyme by the dispensacion of almyghty God / like as it was to haue many wifes Here is this Doctours mynde whiche spekith sum what for thies persons purpose NOw to this Doctours saynge I answere thus / and first to this pointe where he saith that the Pope hath no power to dispence in the first degre of affinite no more than he hath in the first degre of consanguinite and that not only in the right lyne no more than in the side lyne as the brother to mary with the sister for by cause this is sumwhat against the lawe of nature To this / this Doctour Peter de Palude expownding the
.xviij. Chapiter of the leuitical saith that the Pope maye dispence in al the degreis of affinite conteyned in the leuiticall / for al thies degreys saith he seme to be forbidden bi the lawe posytiue And now yow maye see by this doctours mynde that mariage betwene the brothers widowe and the Brothere / ys not against the lawe of nature for this doctour saith that the Pope maye dispence in that degre of affinite and where as he sayd that the Pope coulde not dispence that a man shuld mary his brothers wife a widowe left without yssewe here he saith the contrary For he saith the Pope may dispence in al degreis of affinite that be conteyned in the leuiticall lawe Also where as he said that the Pope hath no more power to dispence with a man to marey hys Brothers wyfe a widowe left with owt yssewe / than he hath to dispence for a pluralite of wyfes here yowe maye see that this Doctour saith the contrarey For he affirmeth that the Pope maye dispence in all degreys of affinite conteyned in the Leuiticall lawe And finally where as he saith / that it was suffered for a certayne tyme that the brother shulde mary the Brothers wyfe a widowe left withowte yssewe / but this he sayth was but by the dispensacion of almyghty God like as it was to haue many wifes This saynge can in no case be trew for almighty god did not despence in the olde law / that a man might mary his Brothers wife a widowe left without yssewe but did expresly commaund that al the Iues shuld always marey their brothers wifes widowes lefte withowt yssewe And they shuld so mary vppon a great payne And therfore it is not trew to saye that almyghty God did dispence withe the Iues that they might mary their Brothers wifes widowes left without yssewe / for thei were bownde to mary their Brothers wife 's left withoute yssewe / by an expressid lawe of almyghty God / also this can in no wyse be callid a dispensacion for a dispensacion doith alwayes presuppose a commaundment contrary to the lycense and dispensacion but in all the hole lawe ther is no commaundement that forbiddeth that a man shal not mary his Brothers wife a widowe lefte with owte yssewe as it is manifeste Wherfore it can not be sayd that almyghty God did dispence and licence the Iues to mary theyr Brothers wifis widowes lefte withe owte yssewe Finally by licence and dispensacion a man is set at libertye to vse his dispensacion or not to vse it but the Iues were not at libertie and at choyse to marey their brothers wifes widowes lefte withe owte yssewe / or ellis to leue them But rather the lawe compellid the Iues to marey theyr Brothers wifes widowes lefte withe owte yssewe or ells to punyshe suche as wold not marey their Brothers wifes widowes lefte without yssewe / with perpetuall infamy and great dishoner Wherfore it can not be sayd that almyghty God did dispence withe the Iues to marey theyr Brothers wyfes widowes lefte withe owt yssewe / but he commaundid them so to marey The example also and similitude that this doctour Peter de Palude brought to shewe that almyghty God did dispence withe the Iues that they might mary their brothers wifes widows c. doith not proue in eny case He saith on this wise that almighty God suffered the Iues to mary their brothers wifes widowes c. lyke as he did suffer sum persons to haue mo wifes at ons than one This saynge is not like for the first / almyghty God did commaund / and bounde euery man to it but the second / that a man myght haue mo wifes at ons than one / almyghty God did neuer commaunde to persons in general nor in special and so yow maye see that the exemple and similitude doith not proue Here parauenture sum will meruyll at this doctour Peter de Palude whiche in expowndinge the lawes leuitical doith so directly speke againste that he wrote in his boke vppon the sentences To this it may be answeryd that whan he wrote vppon the sentences he helde that opinion but when he cam afterward and wolde expounde the leuiticall / he forsoke his opinion / whiche he helde before and here vppon the leuiticall boke he wrote the trewthe wherfore vppon the .xviij. chapiter leuitical he saith thus In certayne bokes it is writen / no man maye take his brothers wife whiche saith he is thus vnderstand No man maye take his brothers wife his brother beynge a lyue for asmuche as the lawe in a nother place doith commaunde that a man shal mary his brothers wife a widowe And now by this saynge / this Doctour peter de Palude is not onely against the deceyuers opinion in many pointis as ye haue sene before but here also he vtterly doith destroye all the grounde where on thies persons wolde bilde their false opinion For he saith that the prohibicion leuitical that forbiddithe a man to take his brothers wife ys vnderstande / to forbide him that he taketh not his brothers wife while his brother is a lyue / for asmuch as in an other place the lawe doith commaund that a man shal mary his brothers wife a widow Thus ye may perceue that this their great Doctour Peter de Palude doith vtterly destroye al thies deceyuers false opinion / for he shewith and affirmith that for a man to mary his brothers wife a widow / ys not forbiden in the leuitical lawe but he saithe suche mariage is commaundid in another place of the lawe IN the .lxxxiij. leif of their boke / thies persons bringe in the auctorite of the byshop of florens and Iohne de Turre cremata whiche as thies persones do say / do agre in this matter with Pet r de Palude / now if yt be so / than they speke directly against their false opinion for Peter de Palude spekith against yt / And if these deceyuers wil saye that thâ—rchbishope of florens and Iohn de Turre cremata doith agre with Peter de Palude / wher he did erre / and not where he sayd trewth than suerly they shuld noth r be beleuid nor accept Breuely thies two rehersed Doctours and Alexander de Ales whose saynge and opinion thies deceyuers do not recyte / they al grownde them in Peter de Paluddes first opinion / whiche he him self did after forsake and reproue / and in the prohibicions leuiticall to the whiche I haue answered often tymes that it is not forbiden there that a man shal not marey his brothers wife a widowe left witheout yssewe / and likewise doith the Doctours that they bringe after the sayd Cardinals and Walden that saith the Leuitical lawes be morall preceptis and of the x. commaundements and that euen to so many degreys as be rekennyd vp ther vnto the fowerthe / this vnto the fowerthe / these deceyuers leue owt of Waldens saynge thowghe this opinion of Walden be false / yet I
wold not tarry vpon it / nor vppon Pope martines approuinge of Waldens boke / nor yet vpon the Doctours whiche thei name without eny rehersinge of their writinges and opinions For all thies be impertinent to the purpose as euery man may see in these deceyuers boke Wherfore I passe ouer to the .lxxxvii. leif IN the .lxxxvij. leif / thies persones doo allege two glosers of the lawe of Canon / Iohn Andre and Iohn Imola which do gather and conclude by the wordes of the very texte of the chapiter Literas and also bi the wordis of gloses there / that the degreys writen in the leuiticall lawe be the same self degreis in the whiche Pope innocent hym self doith saye that the Pope hath no power to dispence with Here thies persons saye falsly of Iohn Andre for in the ende of his answere he concludith that the Pope may dispence in the first degre of consanguinite after that the matromony be ons coÌ„summat / thus ye may se how thies shamles persons doo lye IN the .lxxxviij leif / thei say that maister Abbot is of Iohn andres opinion here also thei say falsely vpon Maister abbot / for he ther rehersinge diuers opinions / finally doith conclude that the Pope may dispence in the first degre of affinite after that matrimony be consummate Thus ye may se that thies false deceyuers do not ceasse to lye IN the .lxxxix. leif / thies persons say that to those persons which the law of god doith cal neyest of blode / ther can be no good nor iuste cause for the which it might be sufferd or dispensed with the one of theÌ„ that shuld diskou r the fowlnes of a nother / nor the r can not be alleged anything so honeste / that is able to cov r the dishonesty of this thing This is your own pestilent saynge here they greatly accuse AbraÌ„ / Isaac / Iacob for thei maryd with their sistern with their vncles doughters / if ther can not be allegid eny thing so good honeste / that is able to couer the dishonestie of suche mariages / than thies persons do condempne thies holy patriarkes / say that in mariyng their kinneswomen thei did shamfully / euen that thing which is so euyl that ther can not be alleged eny thinge soo honeste that is able to couer the dishonestye of their Mariages Who will saye thus by thies holy fathers and patriarchâ—s / but thies vngracious persons Sainte Hierom doith excuse Abraham in that he maryed his sister / and shewith that in so mariynge he did not offend / as ye haue harde before And sainte austen against Faustus the manachye / shewith that Iacob did not offende in maryinge of his vncles doughter / and saynte ancelme in the epistle / that thies persons affirme to be his / sayth that for certain consideracions and honest causes / men sum tyme maryed their nere kynswomen both before the lawe and in the lawe / before the lawe / as abraham / and Isaac / and Iacob / in the lawe / as Othoniel / thies holy men iuge thies mariages to be honeste / iuste / and goode whiche thies vngracyous persones do falsely dampne for to coloure their dampnable opinion IN the lxxxx leif / of their boke thies persones wold haue yow to marke specially / which diuerse of thies holy and approbate doctours do holde / also that the brother can not mary a woman that is but only handfaste vnto his brothere and if he doo the mariage can not stande by helpe of eny dispensacion / and that al suche mariages must nedes be vtterly broken / Of this opinion thies persones saye is mayster lyre / and also the noble diuine Hugh de sancto victore and so in the lxxxxij leif of their boke / they saye that mariage in the firste degre of consanguinite and of affinite is not only forbiden in the leuitical lawe but also mariage in the first degre / for a iustice groundid only vppon a certain comyn honeste and comelines / is forbidden by the lawe of God in the leuitical and so can not be dispensid with all by me Here ye may se howe openly and without all shamfastnes they lye they bid yow marke whiche diuerse of the holy aÌ„d approbate Doctours do hold that the brother can not mary a woman that is but only handfaste to his brother after his dethe thus they muste vnderstande yt and if a man doo the mariage can not stande by helpe of eny dispensacion First thies persons haue brought no doctoure that this doith affirme / and ther is nether maister Lyre / nor Hughe de sancto Victore that doith saye that the pope can not dispence with a man that he maye mary that woman whiche was only but handfast to his broth r aft r his brothrs deth Hugo de S. vic in al his longe processe that thies persons bring in / hath not a worde of the Popes power and dispensacion / nor maister Lyre in this case / moreouer yt is euident that it is but only forbiden by the lawe of the churche that a man may not mary his brothers spouse after the dethe of his brother ther is no scripture nor Doctour saynge that suche mariage ys forbiden by the leuitical lawe / nor agayne ther is no Doctour that doith saye that the Pope can not dispence in this case yow may se what persons be thies / thei care not howe falsly thei saye / thei be not ashamid to speke agaynst al reason and lerning FOr to proue their a fore rehersed saynge / thei bring in a case that ther was a man whiche had his eldest soon hand fast to a mayde / and so this yonge men died and than his father bounde him selfe by an other to the mayden / that he wold marey his yongest sone to hyr / and vppon this / he made suyte to the Pope whiche was Alexandre the thirde and he wolde not dispence and lycence this mannis yonger sone to marey the maiden but lete the man that swore he wolde mary his yonger soone to the mayden be pariuride where vppon thies persons wold conclude / that the Pope can not dispence that a man maye mary his Brothers spouse after his brothers dethe / which is false for this argument ys nought to saye The Pope will not dispence vppon suche mariage wherfore it folowith that he can not dispence vppon suche mariage This yow se doith not folowe For the Pope doith not alwais dispence where he may dispence Also if the Pope were bounde to dispence in the thyrde and fowerth degre of affinite withe euery man that did or wolde swere to mary in thies degreis / than the prohibicion were no prohibicion / Also where as thies persones saye that the Pope alexandre did affirme in his answere to the Bishope of Papye / the it is writen in the leuitical / that the Brother can not haue the Brothers spouse / and
theâ—for he commaundid the bishope that he shulde not suffer henry that hath sworne to mary his yonge soon to the maide to fulfill his purpose To this I answere that it is not forbidden in the Leuitical law that a man shal not mary his brothers spouse nor there is no maner of mencion made of eny suche mariage / and so ye may see that all that euer thei bring / ys not for their false purpose IN the lxxxxiij leif of their boke / vpoÌ„ their vndowted fals lyes and sayngis / thei wold thus conclude their false purpose sayng Wherfor seyng that thies thinges be thowghte trewe to so many and discrete auctours that it is not leful for a man to marey his brother spouse how much more vnlawful owght we to thinke this thing / that a man shuld mary his brothers wife a widowe with whome his brother hath had carnally to do and that he shuld vncouer the priuites of hir cet Here agayn they continew in their customable lying For thei say the many discrete auctours haue iuged that it is forbiden in the leuitical law that a man shal not mary his brothers spowse that suche mariage is so vnleful / that the Pope can not dispeÌ„ce vpoÌ„ it This ye se is manifestly false for ther is no discrete auctor that so saith / if ther be eny auctores that so iuge why do not theis persons bring them in but they saye verey falsly for ther be no discrete auctoâ—râ— that so iuge and saye WHerin this their sayng thei wolde haue men to iuge beleue that it is vnlawful for a man to mary his brothers spowse And than muche more vnlawful for a man to mary his brothers widowe with whome his brother hath hade carnally to doo c. Here thies false deceyuers speke couertly but I wil shewe yow a verey treuth / whiche is this The Quenis grace that now is / was a mayden when hir grace was maryed laste / and in witnes and recorde that this is trewe hir grace haith sworne / and testyfyed vppon a boke and receyued the blessid Sacrament of the auter / that she was a mayden when hir grace was last maryed Wherfore the determinacions of the facultye of diuinite and the canon of the vniuersite of Paryse thoughe that thei be false yet they make nothing against this matrimony / nor the determinacions of both the facultes of lawe / of thuniuersite of Angew nor the determinacion of diuinite of the vniuersite o Biturs / for thies haue determined on this wise That if ther were paste betwene the husband and the wife / carnal copulacion that than the brother / may not marey his brothers widowe nor the Pope can not dispence vpon suche mariage / so now thowgh the determinacioÌ„s of thies vniuersites be false / as be al the o th r yet thies reherside / helpe no thing the pestileÌ„t malicious purpose of thies pestilent ê‘sons for asmuche as the Quenis grace was a mayden / when she was last maryed HEre now ye haue harde parte of thies shameles persons maners parte of their manifeste errours / parte of their dampnable lyenge and parte of their blasphemy / yow haue also herde how that thei haue brought in holy scripture / counsels and doctours for to haue coloured and fortified their vngracious and false opinion and yet thei can not bringe it to passe nor neuer shal Wherfore / althowghe in the beginninge of this my answere I shewid and prouid sufficiently the trewthe of this proposicion That it is not against the law of god nor against the law of nature / for a man to marey his brothers wife a widowe left without yssewe And that the pope haith no power to dispence vppon suche mariage now yet / I wil shewe yow the same more largely by holy fathers / doctours / and Popes saynges / aÌ„d first that suche mariage is not agaynst the law of nature FIrst sainte Hierome doith excuse Abraham / in that he maryed his sister / doith iustifye and defende Abraham for so mariynge In qÌ„st heb super gen For suche mariages saith saynte Hierome / were not than forbiden of the law of nature And if it be not forbiden bi the lawe nature a man to marey his sister miche lesse was it forbiden / a man to marey his brothers widowe left without yssew SAynte Austen saith that in the tyme of Abraham / men might lefully mary with their sisters of the one side coÌ„t faustum li. xxij ca. xxxv or of bothe sides if yt were leful not agaynst the law of nature than for men to mary their sisters it is not against the law of nature then for a man to mary his brothers c. super mat ho m. xlix HOly Crisostome doth shewe reasonable causes why almighty God did commaund the Iues to mary their brothers widows c. aÌ„d than suche mariage cannot be against the law of nature and reason TErtulian / theis deceyuers doctoure doith allege certayne causes which be iuged good and reasonable why the iues shulde in the tyme of the olde law marey their brothers wiues widows c. Wherfor he did not iuge suche mariage to be against the lawe of reason seinge he assigned after his mynde reasonable causes wherby men might lefully mary their brothers widows yet ye shall vnderstonde that I doo not approue Tertulians reasons / that he shewith for suche mariage but yet by his reasons it appereth that he did not iuge mariage betwene the brother and the brothers widow c. to be against the lawe of reason and nature RVperte vpon the leuitical / saith that Abraham after the custome of the heithens / among the which he dwellyd / did marey his owne sister and yet for all that he did not syn / for asmoche as vnto that tyme / he had not by the law commaundement to the contrary nor yet by the voice of almyghty god Now where ther is no commaundment saith he there is no transgression of the law so by this doctours saynge / ye may clerely se / that it is not against the law of nature for a man to mary his sister / aÌ„d than it is not against the law of nature for a man to marcy his brothers wife left without yssewe HEwgh of saynte victore saith that in the institution of matrimony / there were but two persons excepte li. iij. de sacramento p. ij ca. iiij that is but the fath r and the mother so that it was forbiden than / that the father shulde not mary with the doughter / nor the mother with the sonne but al other persones might lefully mary togither by the first institucion of matrimony After this saith this doctour came the seconde institution of matrimony / which was made by the lawe writen / and that did excepte certayne other persones besyde the father and the mother / and this was done / other for to ornate nature
/ or els to augment and encrease chastite And than to marey the Brother wythe the Sister or the nere kynsman withe the nere kynswoman began to be vnlefull by the prohibicion that before was lefull / and graunted by nature By this doctours mynde ye may euidently se / that it is not against the law of nature for a man to mary his sister / and than it folowith that it is not against the lawe of nature / for a man to mary his brothers wife a widowe c. ix lib. iiij art xiij SAinte Thomas saith that the prohibicion leuitical that forbideth that a man may not mary his sister / ys a prohibicion and a commaundment iudiciall / and he in likewise saith in another place / p̄ ij 2. q. 9. arti iiij that it was not forbiden bi the law of nature that a man shulde not marey his sister / wherfore yf it be not against the law of nature for a man to marey his sister / it is not against the law of nature for a man to marey his brothers wife a widowe left c. In .iiij. sen dis xl corpor q̄st SAynte Thomas agayne saith that by the lawe of nature / it is forbiden that the father shal not marey his doughter nor the mother hir sonne other persones nere of kyn be forbiden / bi the lawe of God / and than it folowith that for a man to marey his brothers widowe c. is not against the law of nature PEter of Blesen saith that at the beginninge there were no mo persons excepte from matrimony / but the father and mother / is to saye that the father may not mary the doughter / nor the mother with the sone And therfor saith this doctour / it was sayd for matrimony / a man shal leaue and forsake his father and his mother / and take him to his wife But afterwarde saith he the lawmaker did excepte mo persons and forbade mo degres SAinte Bonauenture in answeringe to an argument that infideles whiche tourne to cristes faith ought not to retayne their wiues whiche they had maried before / In .iiij. distinct xxxix q̄st iiij yf so be they had maryed thē self to their sisters / or nere kinswomen / suche as be against the ordre that Christen people do kepe in mariage / saith thus that for a man to mary his sister is forbiden bi the commaundment of the churche and therfore when heithen turne to the faith they must conforme thēself afterward to the ordre of the chirch not to mary against the churches prohibicion but if thei maried their sisters befor than thei may not be separate for the ordinaunce of the churche doith not extende to that / so saynte bonauenture doith saye that for a man to mary his sister / is but against the law of the churche / and not against the law of nature for yf it were against the law of nature than the ordinaunce of the church wolde dissolue and breke it the whiche saynte Bonauenture saith / the church can not do and than / yf it be not agaynst the law of nature for a man to mary his sister / it is not against the law of nature for a man to mary his brothers widowe cete In .iiij. dist xl conclusione ij THomas also of Argentyne shewe that infidelis maye marey in the degreis that be forbiden to Cristen men For if they be Iues / than thei may mary with their kinswomen in the .iii. and .iiij. degre for ther was forbidden to them but the firste and seconde degre as shew the xviij Chapiter of the leuitical / and yf the infideles be gentils and folowe onely the law of nature than they may mary in the first and second degre for thowgh the writen law positiue / do forbid such mariages yet it semith that the law of nature doith not forbid them the which is manifest in the olde fathers that were before the law For abraham maried his sister / and Iacob his vncles doughter and if yt be not againste the lawe of nature / for a a man to mary his sister it is not againste the lawe of nature for a man to mary his brothers widowe left without yssew ALso Pope zachary saith which these deceiuers do allege for them in their boke that it is more forbidē that a man shal not mary his fathers goddoughter and that a man ought more forbeer to marey with hir / than to marey with his fathers doughter yet it is euident / that it ys not against the law of God nor against the law of nature for a man to marey his fathers goddoughter for that is forbiden but onely by the lawe of the churche Wherfore it folowith that it is not agaynst the law of nature for a man to mary his fathers dowghter For yf that thinge that is more forbiden be not against the law of nature than that thinge that is lesse forbidden in the same kynde of forbidinge / ys not agaynst the law of nature / and this pope Zakary speaketh of one maner of forbiddinge of mariage / and than yt folowith vpon this saynge of this Pope that it ys not againste the lawe of nature for a man to mary his sister And so than it is not against the law of nature for a mā to marey his brothers widowe c. NOw ye haue harde by theis holy fathers and men of greate lernynge how that it ys not againste the lawe of nature / for a man to mary his sister Wherof folowith that it is not agaynste the lawe of nature for a man to mary his brothers wife a widowe left withe owte yssewe The hole vniuersal numbre of expownders of holy Scripture doo affyrme / that frome the firste Institucion of matrimony vnto the tyme of the lawe of Moyses there were no moo persones excepte and forbidden to marey to gether by the lawe of nature but these / The Father wythe the Dowghter / and the Mother withe the Sone / All other persones myght marey to gether in the side lyne yn eny maner of degre of consanguinite or affynite cō fan li. xxij ca. xlvij Wherfore Saynte Augustyn dothe defend the holy Patriarke Iacobe the whiche maried two sisters and hade them bothe at ons ād they were his nere kynswoman / for in the seconde degre / and the one of them was ioyned to hym by Alians in the first degre of affinite / and besyde theis two wiues / this holy man Iacob had oth r two wiues and thei were to him and amonge them self in the same degre of affinite And yet saynte Augustyn doth iustify this holy patriarke Iacob in thus marying sayng on this wise yt is said on to Iacob for a greate offence that he had fower wyves but he is cleryd and quite of this offence by a generall proclamacion First for asmoche / as when the maner and custome was to haue moo wiues than one / than to
their brothers widows / as it appereth yn the decretallis / capi deus qui ecclesiam ALso Pope Martin the fiueth did dispence and licence that the brother which had knowen his own sister carnally / to mary afterwarde the same sister ANd Pope Alexandre the sixte did licence the kinge of Portingale that fast was / to mary his wiues sister / not withstanding that he had by his first wife a childe And also the same Pope dispensed with the same kinge after the dethe of his seconde wife / his first wiues sister to mary his wiues neâ—e and yet he had many children by the second wife ALso Pope Alexandre did licencâ— dispence with Don ferdinando king of Cycill to marey his fathers sister which is more than to dispence with a man to marey his brothers widow c. ANd Pope Iuly the second did dispence withe the king of Englonde that he myght marey his brothers wife a widowe left c. ANd Pope Leo the tenth grauntid vnto the Austyn fryers thorowgh Cristendome that they myght dispence in the first degre of affinite that is to say that yf the brother had maryed or contracte with the brothers widow wittingly or otherwise that thois fryers might licence thois persons to continewe still so maryed so that the persones maryed or contracte in that degre of affinite were not accused / nor openly complayned on befor a iuge or ere they required the dispensacion ALso in lyke degre of affinite the Pope did dispence nowe of late withe a noble man of France / who is called my Lorde of luce so thus now yowe maye se by the Doctours myndes / and bi the experience of the Popes excercisinge in this case licens and dispensacion / that the Pope maye licence a man to mary his brothers widowe ceter FInally / this confirmith the greate lernyd coÌ„sel of Princes Kingis whiche were examined to shew the treuth / wheth r that the Pope had power to licence men to marey in the afore reherside degreis of affinite consanguinite / And theis great lerned men that were of those kingis princes counssailles affirmed graunted / that the Pope myght licence dispence vpon suche mariage / so did also the popes lernyd counsayl / ye so dide the vniuersal noumbre of the lernyd men in Cristendome for thei herde knew of suche licences dispensacions graunted And the mariages bi the licences were made / and yet they neuer reclamyd nor spoke against them Wherfore now ye may euidentli se and perceue / that the opinion of these deceyuers is false where as they say that it is against the lawe of God / against the law of nature for a man to mary his brothers widowe cet And that the Pope hath no power to dispence vpon suche mariage / that this is verey trew / that for a man to mary his brothers wife a widowe / is nother against the law of God / nor againste the lawe of nature and that the Pope hath power to dispence vppon suche mariage And also by this / yowe maye clerely see / that the determinacions of the vniuersytes / be manyfestly false NOw these deceyuers opinion thus openly reprouide / and shewid to be false / and the trewth in this matter declared I wil retourne agayne vnto their boke In the lxxxxiiij leif of their boke theis persons saye that there be many / and that stronge and inuincible resons / the which may seme to declare lyghten the sentence of thuniuersites / theys reasons thei wil bring in for this purpose thei bring in many diffinicions and descriptioÌ„s of the law of God / of the law of nature c. The which I doo not passe vpon bycause I wolde not be to longe / so I come to the .c. viij leif of their boke / where as they say on this wise THerfore seyng that God him self here doith playnly pronounce giue sentence that the Cananeis and Egipcians did file their lande and spot yt with filthynes / while that they did contracte mariage with their brothers wifes that he / for that cause did greatly aborre them did most rightfully take vengeaunce vppon them punyshed them most sharply yt cannot be no nother wise / but it must nedis folowe / that god hath iuged this thinge to be shamfully vnhonest of it self as they say morally evill nowght aÌ„d also againste the rightwisnes of natural law reason ye to be abhominable abhorred This is these false deceyuers owne saynge / note merke it wel First it is manifestly false / for almyghty god did neuer punyshe the Egipcians Cananeis for because they maryed their brothers wiues widowes left c. Nor he did neuer abhorre them / nor ther is no scripture / nor doctour the saith that almyghty God did destroye / punyshe the Cananeis Egiptians / because thei maried their brothers widows Wherfor it is shamfully false to say that almighty God did punyshe destroy the Cananeis the EgipciaÌ„s for marying their brothers wiues widowes left ce ALso in this their sayng / these deceyuers speke directly against their owne writinge / for in the .lvj. leif of their voke they write / that the verey heythens after the deth of their wiues did euermore abstayne fro mariyng of their wiues sisters as from a certayne impietie or abhominacion ageynst nature This thei wrote there / here they write the almighty God did take vengeaunce vpon the Cananeis Egipcians for marying of their brothers widows c. the whiche is nomore impietie than for a man to mary his wyues sister after their owne opinion yet beside this / these deceyuers in their a fore rehersid saynge do greatly dispise and hiely blaspheme almighty God / for it folowithe of this their saynge that almyghty God in commaundinge the iues to mary their brothers wiues widowes lefte c. that he commaundid theÌ„ to fyle spotte their lande with filthines / while that they did contracte mariage with their brothers widows c. that for fulfillinge of his commaundmeÌ„t he did abhorre the Iues / ye of these deceyuers sayng / it folowith that almighty God in commaunding them to mary their brothers wiues widows / did commaunde them to do that thinge for the which he shulde take right vengeaunce vpon theÌ„ punyshe them most sherpely / also that almighty God did commaunde the Iues to do the thinge / the which ys shamfully vnhonest / of it self morally euill / nowght / against the rightwisnes of naturall lawe and reason / ye to be abhominable abhorred Al this these persons saye by mariage betwene the brother the brothers widowe c. For of this maner of mariage / is their spekinge or els it is not for their purpose / almighty God commaundide the Iues to mary their Brothers widowes left
c. ANd this did not almyghty God onely comaunde but also commaundid to punyshe with a greuous payne al these that wolde not mary their brothers widows / wherfore to dispise suche mariage / is nothing els / but to dispise blaspheme almyghty God which commaunded suche mariage Who euer herde eny man that durst saye that almyghty God did commaunde eny maner of people to do that thing / which is shamfully vnhonest of it self / morally euil c. as these blasphemers saye mariage to be betwene the brother and the brothers widowe lefte witheowte yssew / ys Whiche Almyghty God did commaunde Therfore yowe maye clerly se how hiely greuously these persones blaspheme almightye God Here now yowe haue herde one of these persones inuincible reasons / that they sayd they wolde bringe in for to gyue light vnto the determinacions of their vniuersites IN the .c. and .xj. leif of their boke these persones saye that ther was neuer nacion so beistly / none so withoute al humanite / but that they perceyued and knew / that thei ought this honour dewtye / and reuerence to their brothern / brothers wiues that they shuld refrayne from their mariages This is these persons owne sayng here thei dispise blaspheme almyghty God agayne for of this their sayng / it folowith that almyghty God in commaundinge the Iues to mary their brothers wiues / that he was more best lier than eny nacion / and that he did not perceiue / nor knew that the people oughte this honore / dewtie / and reuerence vnto their brothern / and brothers wiues that thei shuld refrayne frome their mariages This great blasphemy yow maye se folowith of their saynge And thus nowe yowe haue herde a nother of theis persons inuincible reasons In the same leif of their boke / theis persones saye / that he that haith sene eny thynge yn the olde stories and lawes must nedis know that this maner of inceste haue bene hadde in great infamy / reproue / sclaundre / that not onely in one cite / or contrey but almost in euery place / emong al men bene condempned as a certayne wikednes against nature This is agaynst these persons owne sayng wheryn thei adde more blasphemy For of this sayng it foloweth that almyghty God in commaunding the iues to mary their brothers widows c. commaundid them / that vpon a great payne / to do that thinge that is condempned in al contreis cities / for a certayne wikednes against nature Here now ye haue herde another of their reasons inuincible Sewrely these may wel be called stronge inuincible reasons / in blaspheming dispisinge of almygty God for I thinke no man / no nor yet the deuyl him self can make none stronger / nor more inuincible for to dispise blaspheme almyghty God than these pestilent persones do here make BVt now for asmuche as these vngracious persones do thus dispise blaspheme / not onely almyghty God but also his holy lawe commaundment I am compellid to desire ye to cal to yowr remembraunce that thing which I haue shewid ye before / that ys to saye / that almighty God did neuer in al the olde lawe commaunde eny thinge to be continually kepte / that vpon a payne but that which was iuste / goode / holy / a meane that the kepers of it might besauide / come to euerlastinge life And therfore almighty God sayth Custodite leges meas atque iudicia leuiti xviij que faciēs homo / viuet in eis And this ys the cause that the blissed Apostle callith the olde lawe holy / the commaundment holy / iuste gud / sayng ro vij Lex quidem sancta / mandatum sanctum / iustum / bonum For thowghe the Iues in the olde lawe vsed certayne thinges that were neth r good nor godly / yet was ther nothing commaundid in the olde law to be continually kepte / but that was holy iuste good to the keper as I haue sayd a meane / wherby he might be iustified sauid / in that lawe it was commaundid that euery man shulde always mary their brothers widow c. wherfore suche mariage was holy / iuste / gud This Argument is euident / both by the very wordes of almyghty God / and also by the wordes of the Apostle / so now by this ye may euidently perceyue howe that these vngracious persones / in dispisinge of mariage betwene the brother the brothers widowe c. do dispise blaspheme almighty God his holy law IN the .c. vij leife of their boke they say that they wil shew two reasons / which shal proue as opēly as it can be / that a man can not mary his brothers wife First bicause that affinite doith aswell lete mariage as doith consanguinite Seconde / because that he that so marieth dothe shame dishonestye vnto his father And for to proue the first reason / these persones saye / that not onely by the lawe of God so many persons be excludid from mariage in the lyne of affinite / as to be excludid and forbide in the lyne of consanguinite but that also the church is compellid to set the bondes of mariage in the lynes / bothe of affinite and consanguinite in like distance and degre / and for to shewe this ordinaunce of the churche / theis persons bringe in saynte Gregore / and Pope Iuly / saynte Austen / Isodore / maister Abbot Thus nowe I suppose these persones wold make their argument Affinite doith as wel let mariage as consauguinite but it is forbiden by the lawe of God / bi the law of nature that a man shal not mary his sister / bicause of their cōsanguinite Wherfor it is forbidē bi the law of god bi the law of nature that a man shal not mary his brothrs wife because of their affinite To this argumēt I wil answer First with theyr own doctours saynge Peter de Palude which expounding the .xviij. chap. leuitical / saith that it femeth the the pope may dispence in al the degreis of affinite ther conteyned / but not in all the degreis of consanguinite / with this sayng / this doctour doith deny these persons principal proposicion of their argument which is this that affinite doith as well let mariage as cōsanguinite / for he saith that affinite doith not let mariage as doith cōsanguinite / bicause that after his mynde the Pope may dispence in al degreis of affinite cōteyned in the .xviij. chap. of the leuitical law so he can not in al degreis of consanguinite that be there forbiden ALso this first principal proposition of these persons argument is false that affinite doith aswel let mariage as consanguinite for consanguinite may let mariage by the law of nature / as the father may not mary with the dowght r / nor the sone with the moth r / by
and blode with hir mother and with hyr father in lawe / by the reason that he is one flesshe blode with her mother / and who so euer mariyth his fathers flesshe and blode doith against the lawe of nature / wherfore the sone may not mary with his mother in lawes dowghters which is manifestly false OF this reason ye may conclude that .ij. brothern may not mary .ij. sistern / thus he that marye his brothers wiues sister maryeth his brothers flesshe blode / for the brother hys wife be one flesshe blode / the brothers wife hyr sister be one flesshe blode / the brothers wiues sister is one flesshe blode with hir sisters husbandis / he is one flesshe blode with his father wherfore his brother may not mary his wyues sister for asmuche as she is his fathers flesshe blode / by reason that hyr sister hath maried his brother / ye may se whate a Sophistical reason these persons bringe in greatly to their owne rebuke shame yf they had ony shame ALso this is manifestly false / that they saye that he which maryeth his fathers flesshe blode / doith plainly against the law of nature for a manis sone may mary by the law of nature his brothers doughters doughter / which is his fathers flesshe blode This no man wil deny wherfore it is false to saye that he that marith his fathers flesshe blode / doith against the law of nature Here now ye haue harde these persones seconde reason / by the which they said that thei wolde proue that a man might not mary his brothers widowe c. thei haue nothinge done but shewed them selfe sophestres / ful of wordes and empty of al treuthe and reason ALso in this their seconde reason / they saye yt is more against the law of God against the law of nature for a man to mary his brothers widow c. than for a man to mary his aunte of eny syde / of this sayng / it folowith that almyghty god in commaundinge the iues to marey their brothers widowes did commaunde / them to do that thing that was against the law of god agaynst the law of nature bonde them to the same vpon a great payne that thing that was lesse against the law of nature / he forbadde them whiche is a commaunding a doyng against the right ordre of reason For reason willith that the thing which is moste euyll / shuld be most forbiden / of theis persons saynge it folowith that almyghty God did contrary in the olde law / thus these persons / despiseth almighty Goddis commaunding doyng IN the .c. .xlj. leif of their boke / thei say that criste nother did nothinge / nor sayd no thing but that he had takyn of his fath r nor brake no thinge of them which his father commaundid / aÌ„d wolde haue doon This they vnderstande in thinges that were commaundid in suche as were forbiden in the olde law for they wold by this their sayng conclude that the Pope haith no power to dispence / licence a man to mary his brothers wife a widowe ce for by cause thei saye / that suche mariage was forbiden in the olde law And our sauiour crist did neuer breke nothing of them whiche his father commaundid / and wolde haue doon wherfore the Pope that is Cristes vicare / can not licence vpon suche mariage / vpon this their saynge / yt folowith that the Iues be bounde still to mary their brothers widowes lefte withoute yssewe and to circumcision and to al the ceremonies and Iudicialls For almighty God wolde that the Iues shulde kepe them / and commaundid them to kepe these and owr sauiour Criste did neuer breke nothing of them which his father wolde haue kepte Wherfore the Iues be now bounde to al these / ye and to al the hole law of Moyses This ys false and against the techinge of the Apostle where he sayth yf ye be circumcised Crist shal do yow no goode Gala. iiij v Gal. ij nor the keping of his commaundements shal be nothing profitable to yow And agayne saynte Pol speketh against Peter to his face / because he wold the gentils that were conuertid to kepe the ceremonies of the Iues. Here now ye may see that the Apostle did teche the people to breke to do contrary to the olde lawe ye and so haith the churche decreid and made / that no man shal now mary his brothers widow whiche is against the commaundment of the olde lawe BVt for asmuche as they saye that our sauiour Crist did neuer breke â—o thinge of them which his father almighty God commaundid and wold haue done yow must note and vnderstond that almighty God did commaunde certayne thinges to be kepte for a certayne tyme / and in like maner certayn thinges he did forbide for a certain tyme / as the Iudicialles and ceremonies of the olde law he wolde haue suche as were commaundid to be done / the people to fulfill them and kepe them and suche as he forbade that the people shuld not do them / and yet for al this / almighty God did not commaunde the Iudiciallis nor ceremonies always to be kepte but he willid that the Iues shulde kepe them vnto the tyme that it shulde please him to sende his sone to take vpon him our nature so to be very God and man our sauiour Crist and so to shewe vnto the worlde further his fathers wil and pleasure / and what he wolde haue all maner of people to kepe and obey frome that tyme forewarde and than our sauiour crist did dissolue the Iudicialles and Ceremonies of the olde lawe / so that no man shulde be bounde to kepe them eny longer nor put eny longer hope or truste of saluacion in them ¶ And frome that tyme forth warde that almaner of people shulde put there hope of saluacion in beleuinge yn Almyghty God and yn Iustely kepinge suche Lawes and suche commaundmentis as almyghty God had sent vnto them by hys sone ower Sauioure Criste And thus owr Sauioure Criste toke away after hys comynge the Iudicialles Ceremonyes of the olde lawe accordinge vnto his fathers will and commandement For the tyme of them was than exspired / but nowe I muste returne vnto theis persons saynge which is this It was commaundid by almyghty God in the olde law that a man shulde not mary his brothers widow c. o r sauio r crist neuer brake nothinge of them / which almyghty God commaundid wolde haue done wherfor the Pope can not dispence vpon suche mariage To this reason I answer that the maior of the reason is false which is this / that almighty God commaunded in the olde law that no man shuld mary his brothers wife widowe c. for yn the olde law almighty God did expresly commaunde the Iues always to mary their
brothers wiues widowes left c. that vpon a great payne / therfore it is false to saye that almighty God did commande in the olde law that no man shulde mary his brothers widowe c. so therfore is this false that the Pope haue no power to dispence vpon suche mariage which these persons wolde conclude vpon there false proposicion IN the .c. .xlv. leif of their boke these persons write that the leuitical prohibicion that a man shulde not mary his brothers wife a widow c. Thus thei must vnderstand yt or ells it is not to the purpose thoughe it was lymyted restrayned of almighty God in the Deuteronomi / yet for al that bicause afterwarde the said restraynt was taken awaye of God him self by the comyng of Cr st here these persons do not declare whate they meane vnderstande / by lymytynge restrayninge of the leuiticall prohibicion / nor yet what they wolde haue vnderstanden by the taking awaye of the restraint / at the coming of o r sauiou r crist but where as thei say that the leuitical prohibicion that a man shuld not mary his brothers widowe c. was restraynide in the Deuteronomi / here these persons say manifestly false for as I haue saide oftin tymes / as ye haue harde many doctours saye / ye as the leuitical law it self sayth / that ther is no suche prohibicion there therfore ther was no restraint made vpon that prohibicion nor yet owr sauiour Criste did not at his cominge take awaye the restraynt for ther was none to be taken away but in the Deuteronomi almyghty God did playnly streyghtely commaunde that the Iues shulde mary always their brothers wyues widowes left c. this confirmeth Isichius sayng in commē leui that the law Deuteronomical did not onely commāde mē to mary their brothers wiues widows but it did also compell them so to mary This therfor can be callid no restraynt and thus all these persones saynge ys false IN the same leif / theis deceyuers say / that yf the Pope now a dayes coulde by dipensacion / cause that a man might mary after the law of the Deuteronomi his brothers wife which doith dye hauing none yssewe for to reyse vp sede to his brother withoute doughte he shulde make Cristen men at thys daye to folow the Iues ceremonyes supersticion sues / which the Pope can not do / no more than he can cause that we shulde kepe the Sabot daye or that thei shulde be circuncisid To this I answere / that the Pope can not by dispēsacion cause a mā to mary his brothers widow c. as the Iues in the olde law maryed theirs Nor the Pope doith not licence a man to mary his brothers widowe after the facion maner but the Pope doith licence dispence that a Cristen man may mary his brothers widow as a kynge or a prince to mary his brothers widowe / to be meane that queytnes peace may be kepte betwene realme realme for to continew loue frendeship betwene Cristen princes / for other suche reasonable profitable causes concerning the comyn welthe of Cristendome / thus for theis / suche causes the Pope doith maye dispence that a man may mary his brothers widowe c. not after the maner of the Iues therfore theis persons bringe yn a thing that no man will deny / and yet it is nothing for their purpose IN the .cliij. leif of their boke / these persones saye that like as a man may frely fulfil his purpose of a more holyer lyuynge the sayng nay frowarde forbiddinge of his indiscrete prelate notwithstanding euen so it is yn mariage that if a mans consciens moue him to diuorse that he dyuorse hym self though the church say contrary Here now ye may se perceyue theis pestilent persons vngracious maliciouse entent what thei counsail / wolde haue done the is to saye a man to diuorse him selfe / to forsake his wife yf his conscience moue him to diuorse without eny further profe or shewing of eny iust cause to mary where yt plesid him thoughe the churche sayd the contrary which is clerly against al reason ALso by this their saynge yowe may perceyue that these persones wolde vtterly destroye the blissed sacrament of matrimony For by this meane waye euery man as often as he wold chaunge his conscience to diuorse / so often he might chaunge his wife / ye the wife hyr husband / without shewinge of eny other profe or cause / without eny maner of sentence iugement of the churche ye thowgh the church said commaundide the contrary / so by this / shulde the sacrament of matrimony be destroid Here ye may se what pestlent persons these be / whiche haue compiled this boke that I answere to FVrthermore theyr comparison and similitude wherby they wolde proue that a man maye diuorse hym selfe frome hys wyfe by hys conscience / thowghe the Churche saye contrarey / ys openly false Fore thowghe yt be so that a Prieste / be mouede yn hys mynde to be a religious man / may frely fulfil his purpose of a more holier lyuinge notwithstanding the nay of his indiscrete prelate yet it doith not folowe / that euen so yt is in mariage that yf a mans conscience moue him to diuorse / that he may diuorse him self forsake hys wife / mary anoth r / thowghe the church say contrary This case is not like the oth r first forbicause that a priest which goith to religion for a more holier lyuing / may fulfil his godly purpose lefully notwithstanding the frowarde / forbidding of his vndiscrete prelate for asmuche as the priest beyng at libertye / doing no wronge to no person by the reason of his going to religion but seruith almighty God better Thus he may fulfil his godly purpose thoughe his vndiscreite prelaite saye contrary / but so may not a man that is maryed / diuorse hym self whan his conscience mouith him to diuorse / for bicause the maried man is not at libertie / For he is bounde to continew with his wife accordinge to the lawes of matrimony during al the tyme of his lyfe / nor he can not departe frō his wife for to mary anoth r while that his wife is a lyue Wherfore there is no conscience that can helpe a maryed man in the mater of diuorse / excepte he can manifestly proue some iuste cause befor the church that his mariage ys not good And than he must abyde stonde to the churches iugement determinacion And therfore this is false / to say that lyke as a priest may for a more holier lyuinge / fulful his purpose notwithstanding the forbiddinge or nay of his vndiscreite prelate euen so it is in mariage / that if a mans conscience moue him to diuorse that he diuorse hym self thowghe