and true Copy of the Citation If the day of Appearance be not at least the third day from the Citation or if he hath before Witness given the Apparitor 6 d. to bring him a full and true Copy of the Citation I conceive he needs not appear but listen what they do and if they decree him Excommunicated he may appeal within fifteen days and bring from the Superiour Court an Inhibition to stop their Proceedings against him And further the Rule in that Law is Totus dies debetur delinquenti It is enough for a Person to appear any hour of the day provided it be a Court-hour wherein he is cited to appear so as tho he be called before he comes yet if he appeareth that day he shall be discharged or he may appeal 2. When he appeareth he shall demand his Charge which is either by a Presentment from Churchwardens or by a Libel or Articles which are exhibited by a Promoter Be it which it will he shall demand a Copy if it be denied or delaied he shall bring if he will a Prohibition from the King's Court at Westminster forbidding them to proceed in that Cause till they have given him a full and true Copy of his Charge according to the Statute 5 Hen. 2. 3. If he appeareth in Person he ought to have his Charge the first Court-day If he appeareth by a Proctor they will usually to get the Proctors more Fees give to the second Court-day to bring in the Libel or Articles 4. If they deliver him not his Charge the second Court-day he may appeal if upon his Demand the Judg will not dismiss him or he may if he will bring his Prohibition for want of Articles and stop their further Proceedings 5. If the Proceedings be upon a Promotion and the Promoter hath imployed a Proctor in the Case the Party accused must know that no Proctor can be admitted without a Proxy that is Letters Procuratory under the Promoter's Hand and Seal authorising him to act for him in the Case and when he hath that there must be an Act entred in Court to admit such a Person Proctor in the Case The Party charged may go or send to the Register and demand a sight of both those The Reason in Law is this Because any Proctor is liable to the Party's Action if he molesteth any Person in the name of another without Authority from him And secondly If there be no Act of Court admitting him as a Proctor tho the Party accused be Conquerer in the Case yet he cannot recover Costs because there is no legal Adversary against whom they can be recovered 6. According to the Statute-Law every Informer if overthrown shall pay Charges According to the Civil and Canon Law none ought to be admitted as a Voluntary Promoter till he hath given Security to pay the Charges if he be overthrown The Party accused therefore shall before he answereth the Articles demand this if it be denied by the Judg he may appeal to the superiour Court 7. It is also worth the Persons inquiry who is accused to be well advised by Lawyers whether the Promoter in the Ecclesiastical Courts be not obliged to all those things that an Informer in the Secular Courts is tied to by the Statutes 31 Eliz. 5.18 Eliz. 5.21 Jac. 4. The Reason is because those Statutes say Informers upon any Penal Statutes and commonly Promoters in the Ecclesiastical Courts say such and such things are done contrary to the Statutes of this Realm as well as contrary to the Canons Now what things the Statutes which also name Promoters require of such Informers and Promoters the Statutes do declare 8. When the Party accused hath a Copy of his Libel let him demand time to answer if the Judg denies him time at least till the next Court-day let him appeal 9. Having due time granted in the mean time let him duly consider the matter and form of his Libel As to which let him amongst other things observe these that follow 1. Whether the Matters he be charged with belong to the Cognisance of the Ecclesiastical Court If Lawyers tell him no let that be his Answer and let him hasten to bring his Prohibition which â—es in all such Causes 2. Whether they have put into the Libel the Promoters Petition for Right 〈…〉 to be done him I have seen it several times left out It is a Rule in their Law Libellus est ipso jure nullus ubi nihil petitur If he finds that this is wanting Let his Answer only be That the Libel is in Law utterly void and insufficient and desire to be dismissed If the Judg refuseth to dismiss him let him appeal 3. Let him also observe Whether he be in the Articles laid to be one of the Diocese or a Parishioner of such a Parish for if it be not laid it can never be proved and so the Promoter must fail in his Sa it for what is not laid cannot be proved Quicquid deponitur extra Articulum deponitur extra Legem is a Rule in their Law If he be laid to be a Parishioner of such a place within such a Diocese let him not in his Answer confess it but say He cannot determine the Bounds of Dioceses and Parishes but for that he referreth himself to the Law 4. Let him also observe If the things he be charged to have done or omitted be within the compass of a Year and whether there hath since been no Act of Grace or Oblivion which hath pardoned them and whether they be not such things as he hath been punished for or such things as the Statute Law hath limited the Prosecution of to a less time than a Year For if any of these things be they may be given in answer to avoid either the whole or any part of the Charge If the Judg will not accept the Answer the Party may sue out a Prohibition and stop them 5. Let him also observe Whether he be charged certainly or particularly as to time and place or only generally and incertainly if he be charged only generally as for the most part he is in Church-wardens Presentments not mentioning Time and Place or incertainly with or 's that he did not come to his Parish Church such and such Months and Days or was absent in some one or more or most of them Let his Answer be that this Charge is void in Law for the generality or incertainty of it If the Judg will not receive his Answer let him appeal for the Law of England alloweth no such Charges from which can be no discharge or where the Crime is not fixed to a certain time But it may be in this Case a Prohibition will be his best remedy 6. Let him observe Whether he be charged only upon Statute Law or upon Canons if upon Canons let him in his Answer modestly refer himself to Persons learned in the Statute Laws Whether any such Canons were ever enacted ratified allowed or confirmed by
which it appears that no Nation under Heaven gives Church-men such a Power for the Person being imprisoned is to lye there without Bail No habeas corpus no Action or Indictment upon Magna Charta no Writ do Odio Atia no Writ de homine plegiande will help him no nor any Supersedeas unless the Imprisonment in contempt of the King 's Writ of Prohibition or an Attachment or Appeal Depending The Prelates their Chancellours and Commissaries in times of Popery never had any Inch of Power given into their hands to torment Christians but they used it and stretched it to an Ell so many are the Instances of this almost in every Leaf of the book of Martyrs that he that reads it will think all those Officials were descended from Canibals or those the Roman Historian tells us which he says were Homines ad stragem Humans generis nati Men born to the ruine of Mankind This inforced our Forefathers here in England in the highest Popish Times having given the Prelates a Power to command them to execute their Passions having Excommunicated Men right or wrong to take out a Writ after forty Days to Imprison them without remedy till they were satisfied to devise another Writ to retrench a little their Power in this matter This is called the Writ de Cautione admittenda I cannot find the Original of this Writ it was certainly before any Statutes in our ordinary Statute Books nor do I remember any notice they take of it it is in one Register of Writs and it is mentioned by Dr. Cozens in his Apology for some Ecclesiastical Proceedings p. 1. c. 2. where he doth give a large and full account and he who understands Latine and will look into the Register of Writs will find it to be a true one and may there read at large the form of the Writs altho in those times the whole Magistracy of the Nation were Papists and so by their Principles more inslav'd to those they call the Church then any Protestants are and yet it is very remarkable what care they took for the Liberty of the Subject in this one particular In our Register of Original Writs Fol. 65. are the Writs for taking and imprisoning the Party Excommunicated having stood so forty days Immediately follow the King's Writs for his Delivery upon his giving sufficient Caution But Fol. 66. saith the same Register If the Bishop refuseth to receive from such an Excommunicated Person Imprisoned a fitting Caution to obey the Commands of the Church in Form of Law having a mind to oppress the Person Imprisoned then he may send a Friend to the Court and he shall have a Writ 1. First to the Bishop the Copy of which there follows where the King tells him He wonders at his refusing the Caution offered then commanding him to take it and to deliver the Prisoner then telling him that in case he doth not do it he himself will do what is his part to do 2. If the Bishop doth not presently deliver it he shall have a second Writ to the High Sheriff commanding them to go to the Bishop and to require him to take the Caution and to deliver the Prisoner and also commanding him to do it himself if the Bishop shall refuse to do it in his presence 3. He may have Atias's Pluries in both these Causes But in case the Sheriff shall not obey he shall have another Writ to the Coroner commanding him to take Security of the Sheriff to appear such a Day in his Majesties's Court at Westminister to shew reason why he contemneth the King's Writs and also commanding the Coroeer himself to take the Caution and to deliver the Prisoner If the Bishop indeed suspects the Sheriff will deliver the Prisoner without Caution the Bishop may have a Writ to prevent that So careful were our Fore-fathers for the Liberty of the Subjects Persons Dr. Cozens a great Civilian gives the Reader a full account of all this in his before mentioned Apology and the learned Reader may himself find all this in the Register of Original Writs 66 67. from whence I infer 1. That by Law the Common Law of England and the Ancient Canon Law every Bishop is bound to take such Caution especially fidejussory Caution by Bond and Sureties and to absolve the Prisoner Excommunicated tho he will not take an Oath to obey the Commands of the Church 2. That if he will not do it till the Person be in Prison he hath no remedy the Bishop is a Transgressor of the Law that is all 3. That if he be in Prison the Writ Originally was to be granted of Course paying the ordinary Fees to the Cursitor For the Rubrick doth not say he shall move the Judges or Petition any but he may send a Friend to the Court and have the Writ 4. That if the Bishop will not obey he shall have no Attachment against the Bishop in Popish times Bishops Persons were too facred for such things but he nay if he will have a second and third Writ to the Bishop 5. If he chuseth it rather he ought to have the second Writ to the High Sheriff and that in Course too according to the Register 6. If the Sheriff will not obey it he may if he will take out a second and a third or more Writs to the Sheriff but if he will not he may have an Attachment against the Sheriff sent to the Coroners with a Writ commanding them to take the Caution and to deliver the Prisoner 7. That all this is but the old Common Law of England and a just Enforcement of the Bishop to do what he ought to have done without any of this in Obedience to the Canon Law which the Canonical Men pretend to be their Rule and this is but an Enforcement of them to keep to their own Rules and therefore the most just thing imaginable Here a Question may be started What such a Person that is Excommunicated and Imprisoned must do over and above giving a cantionary Bond to be discharged 1. Whether he is by the Law obliged to desire Absolution 2. Whether he be bound to pay the Charges of the Prosecutor In the first Case we must distinguish betwixt the Case of one that is Legally Excommunicated and one that is Excommisnicated Illegally If a Person be Illegally Excommunicated I cannot see how he can avoid the desire of and obtaining Absolution because this is the Course of the Canon Law If he be Illegally Excommunicated and the King's Courts have so determined it and by their Writ of Prohibition have commanded the Ecclesiastical Courts to proceed no further and if they have Excommunicated him to absolve him He is not in this Case bound to beg it of them he hath begged the hearing of his Cause by the King's Courts of Justice they have determined him no Transgressor what hath he to ask them Pardon or Absolution for There is more reason for his absolving them for they are
I do not remember that this Case hath been tried but were it my own concern I do think that I should upon a Refusal to admit my Appeal either presently appeal to the King in his High Court of Chancery that is to the Delegates or else complain in some of his Majesties's Courts at Westminster that my Appeal was refused contrary to the Stature 24. Hen. 8.12 and hear the Opinions of the Judges about it for this Practice is a meer Artifice to â—y up the Subject to the pleasure of a single Arbitrary Judge This is all I know can be done to avoid an Excommunication and I dare not promise my Reader but that notwithstanding this he may be excommunicated for besides that this is the great Prize they wait for and so take all Advantages they think they have to wound one with this Thunder-bolt there is nothing more ordinary then for Judges and Surrogates in those Courts to go on notwithstanding Prohibitions and Appeals The last thing therefore which I have to do is to inform my Reader what Course he may take if he be imprisoned upon the Writ de Excommunicato capiendo to get out of Prison He must know no Prohibition nor Inhibition will serve him in that Case not the first because no Prohibition will lye against the King's Writ Besides the Prohibition is to the Bishop who hath done his utmost and hath no more to do in the Case till be come to signify for the Delivery of the Person and for the same Reason an Appeal and an Inhibition will do him no good for no Ecclesiastical Court shall controul the King 's Writ No Writs of Habeas Corpus or de Homine replegiando will help him nor any Indictment upon Magna Charta because tho the Person be not imprisoned per judicium parium upon the Verdict of a Jury yet he is imprisoned per Legem Terrae according to the Common Law of England They are therefore ill advised who seek Deliverance any of these ways and they only augment their own Charge Dr. Cozens who I think was in Queen Elizabeth's time Dean of the Archers in his Apology for some Proceedings in Causes Ecclesiastical tells us He could never learn more than two ways by which a Person so imprisoned could deliver himself The first is by Submission to the Bishop and giving him Caution by Bond by Pledg or by Oath that for the time to come he will be obedient to the Commands of the Church in Form of Law The second is In case the Party appealeth to a Superiour Court Ecclesiastical He might have reckoned many more of the same nature with the second which supposeth the Court from whence the Excommunication proceeded to have proceeded wrongfully In which case there are several Remedies according to the various Errors committed in the Proceedings I will mention some of them 1. If the Party imprisoned hath brought a Prohibition by which the Ecclesiastical Court hath been commanded to proceed no further and to absolve the Person if excommunicated and the Judg hath disobeyed the Writ and signified and procured the Party to be imprisoned the Person that is imprisoned at any time in Term upon a motion shall have first an Attachment against the Judg and then a Writ of Supersedeas to the Sheriff to deliver the Prisoner to follow the Attachment without any Submission to the Bishop at all or any Caution Such a Writ may be found in the Register of Original Writs p. 66. Nay if the Attachment be granted and the Person be imprisoned or a Writ out commanding him to be taken and the Term be done before the Attachment can be served the Register tells us that he shall have the same Writ during the Vacation out of Chancery Nay it is the Opinion of Men skilled in the Law that he shall have such a Supersedeas upon Affidavit made that the Proceedings are contrary to a Prohibition served upon the Judg tho no such Attachment be taken out 2. If the Party imprisoned or against whom the Writ is to take him tho he be not taken hath appealed according to the Statute 24. Hen. 8.12 if he bringeth into the Court of Chancery an authentick Copy of his Appeal he shall have a Writ of Supersedeas to stop the Sheriff from apprehending him or to deliver him if he be apprehended only this must be within a Year after his Appeal that it may appear to the Court he hath not deserted his Appeal you may find Forms of such a Supersedeas also in the Register of Original Writs both these are founded upon excellent Reason The Law of England will not suffer Ecclesiastical Judges either to invade their Right or to exalt themselves against their Authority nor yet suffer Inferiour Ecclestastical Courts to invade the Right Power and Authority of Superiour Courts in their own order 3. If a Person be sued in the Ecclesiastical Courts for a matter not within their Jurisdiction and they have caught him upon Contempt in not appearing or not obeying their Sentence Upon a Suggestion to the King's Courts if it appear to them that the Original Matter was not cognoscible in the Ecclesiastical Courts they will supersede the Proceedings and order the imprisoned Person to be discharged 4. If the imprisoned Person or he against whom the Writ is out tho he be not taken bring a Copy of the Bishops Significavit into the Courts at Westminster and make it appear to the Judges there that the cause of Excommunication is not therein expressed together with the day when it was pronounced if he be not said to be excommunicated majori Excommunicatione if it be not signed by the Bishop or said to be done Authoritate nostra ordinarta If the Party excommunicated be not expressed by Name the Court will deliver the Person Dr. Cozens mentions three of these Cases and the Reader also may find them in the Register of Writs The first he saith he cannot find in the Register viz. That the Articles or matter of the Libel must be expressed nor indeed do I find it there but it is in several Reports The Reasons are 1. Because the Law will not suffer Men to be imprisoned for every light Offence this Dr. Cozens gives 2. The second is because the King's Courts can receive Significavits from none but the Person to whom if need be they may write to discharge the Prisoner Nor will the Court suffer a Person to be excommunicated and lye in Prison for a Crime which the Ecclesiastical Court hath no Judgment in nor yet unless it appeareth to the Court he hath stood forty days excommunicated Again heretofore whole Cities and Communities have been excommunicated therefore the Person must be expressed by Name or he shall not lye there 5. Let him procure the Copy of the Writ de Excommunicate capiendo and observe 1. If it be issued in Term-time 2. If there were full twenty days betwixt the Test and the Return 3. If it be made returnable
Man out of the Kingdom of God and are equally heinous and scandalous as these such as are reckoned up by the Apostle 1 Cor. 6.9 10. Idolaters Adulterers Effeminate Persons such as abuse themselves with Mankind Theeves Murderers Sorcerers profane Swearers and Cursers these are all scandalous Offenders and so within the Precept Matth. 18. 3. Yet neither are all these the Objects of this Censure unless they be Stubborn Contumacious and Incorrigible An Heretick is not to be avoided till after the first and second Admonition Tit. 3.10 Nor an Offender till after that he hath refused to hear the Church Mat. 18. Conformable to this was the general Judgment of the Churches of God for more than a thousand Years after Christ as might be made appear from infinite Quotations out of the Ancients and out of the Canon Law which steadily determineth That none but Hereticks and such as are guilty of Mortal Sins and Contumacious in them are to be Excommunicated It is a most unreasonable thing to think that it is the Will of God that any should be Excommunicated for what is no Sin Christ never willed the cutting off true Members from his Body And it is altogether as unreasonable to imagine that it is the will of Christ who hath Compassion on the Ignorant and those who are out of the Way and who hath declared his readiness to receive repenting Sinners should have willed the cutting off of those from the Communion of his Church who are not Contumacious But this is granted on all hands that none be they never so great Transgressors unless Contumacious should be the Objects of this Censure at least what they call the greater Excommunication for the Separation of some open notorious Transgressors from Communion in some Ordinances being under the Church's Admonition it cannot indeed properly be called Excommunication But when a Person is to be judged Contumacious is the great Question The Papists making the Laws and Decrees of their Church equal if not superiour to the Laws of God make all Disobedience to their Canons persisted in to be Contumacy And in abuse of that Text Matth. 18. If he will not hear the Church let him be unto thee as an Heathen and a Publican determine all Persons contumacious who will not hear those whom they call the Church 1. Either commanding them to appear at their Consistories 2. Or tho appearing if they will not within such a time as they set do what in those Courts they think fit to enjoyn them But indeed that Contumacy which renders any according to the Will of God the Objects of this Censure must be a Contumacy against the Commands of Christ If indeed any Person hath done any thing for which according to the Will of God he is censurable by the Church and they send for him and he will not appear to answer and justify himself Or if they command him to do what Christ hath in his Gosppel commanded them to do and he refuseth after several Admonitions to do it he may be judged Contumacious but other Contumacy the Scripture knoweth not nor can any Person by the Law of the Gospel be judged a Person fit to be Excommunicated but one who hath been a scandalous Sinner who being sent for by the Church of which he is a Member refuseth to come at them or coming to them being required to do what is the will of Christ peremptorily refuseth to yield Obedience but will still go on in his sinful Courses CHAP. IV. The Divine Order Method and Manner to be proceeded in with Reference to Excommunication There is yet one thing more to be considered and that is the Order and Manner of the Execution of this Sentence according to the Will of God Whoso considereth it as an Ordinance of God an Action done in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the Power of our Lord Jesus Christ as the Apostle expresseth it in 1 Corinth 5.4 will easily conclude it ought to be done with all the Seriousness and Gravity imaginable and as is usually said in our Officials Sentences how truly God knoweth Christi nomine prius invocato after a first calling upon the Name of Christ The Name and Power of Christ cannot be trifled with without Profanation and Blasphemy and an high degree of taking the Name of God in vain which is a Crime that whosoever presumeth to incur shall not be held guiltless as we are assured in the third Commandment Again whoso considereth it as an Action by which Mens Sins are retained and by which a Person is cast out of God's special Providence and put into the condition of an Heathen and a Publican and debarred of the greatest Priviledges of the Gospel viz. the Vse of the Sacrament and the Communion of Saints if he be a Person who hath any thing of the Fear of God before his Eyes or any thing of brotherly Love and Compassion toward Souls in his Heart will easily conclude it is a thing ought not to be done passionately rashly or suddenly but upon mature Deliberation after grave Admonitions and patient waiting for the due effect of them And as the very Nature of the thing thus far instructeth any Men of Common Sense and Moralities so that no other manner of performing this can be expected from any but such as in their ordinary Discourse are so used to throw out The Divel take you that they cannot forbear it in their most solemne Actions so God hath sufficiently instructed us in his Will as to this thing The secret Sinner must have a private and Fraternal Correption before the Church hear of his Crime Mat. 18. The Heretick must not be rejected till after a first and second Admonition Tit. 3.10 and certainly he that hath commanded us In meekness to instruct those that oppose themselves if God peradventure will give them Repentance to the acknowledging of the Truth And that they may recover themselves out of the Snare of the Divel who are taken captive by him at his will 2 Tim 2.26 And again If a Man be overtaken with a Fault restore such a one in the Spirit of Meekness considering our selves lest we also be tempted Gal. 6.1 never intended that Men should be delivered up to the Devil cast out of the Communion of the Saints in haste And indeed this is so evident a piece of the Will of God so consonant to Humane Reason that not only all Divines as well Ancient as Modern have agreed it but the very Canon Law it self in several places determines it and maketh it a grievous Sin for any Bishop or Priest to proceed to this Sentence without a leisurable and full hearing of the Cause And I remember the Instance of God himself is brought in resolving to go down and see if the Merits of the Men of Sodom were according to the cry come up and as to the deliberate proceeding of the Judge as in the hearing and proof of the Cause so in the denouncing the
those who have done the wrong Nor is it usual when an Appeal is against an unjust Excommunication by an Inferiour Officials Court for the Party appealing to beg Absolution of the Court that is presumed to have wronged him he is absolved of Course from the Superiour Court It is true The Courts at Westminster do not absolve Persons but they command them to be absolved nor is the Party further bound to beg it they are to yield Obedience to the King 's Writ and to do it For the second thing it is the most unreasonable thing that can be imagined and those who insist upon it must aliquid monstri alere 1. The same Judge Ecclesiastical that decrees Excommunication in any Case of Contumacy hath also a Power to condemn the Party so decreed in Costs of Suit which being done if the Costs taxed be legal he to whom they are decreed hath a legal way to recover them and no Bishop can justify an insisting upon the Payment of them before he deliver the Prisoner Admit that at the Suit of any Person one be Imprisoned the person judging himself falsly Imprisoned brings his Writ of habeas corpus or his Writ de Odio Atia or de Homine replegiando or any other Writ and so brings himself before a Superiour Judge he upon the hearing the Cause judgeth the Plaintiff wrong'd and dischargeth him from his Imprisonment Was it ever heard of or can any such a thing be imagined in a Court of Justice that the Judge should refuse to deliver the Prisoner till he hath agreed to pay the Charges his Adversary hath been at in doing him that Wrong 2. The Duty of the Judge Ecclesiastical in this Case is to be learned from the Writ which commandeth him no more than to take the Caution and deliver the Prisoner if indeed the Writ said first paying the Charges of the Suit it were another Case but it saith no such thing nor is there any reason it should for possibly the Prosecution hath been wholly Illegal Injurious and Malicious and it is too much to pay a Person for playing the Knave But it may be justly admired why when these Prosecutors having overthrown their Adversaries and so are in a Capacity to have Costs of Suit taxed by the Judge They are yet so cautious as to sollicit Ecclesiastical Judges not to discharge such Prisoners in Obedience to the King 's Writ till they have paid the Charges or ingaged to pay them May it not be presumed that the Charges they would have thus secured are illegal Extortions which they would have confirmed and come into by the Authority of the Judge Ecclesiastical 3. I would gladly see it tried Whether if the Ecclesiastical Judge should make a return upon the Writ de Cautione admittenda that he could not discharge the Person because he refused to pay the Prosecutor's Charges whether that would by the Lord Chancellor be judged a Legal and Justifiable return to a Writ which requireth no such thing I do humbly conceive that all the Legal Returns that can be made to such a Writ are either 1. There is no such Person in Prison upon my Denunciation Or 2. He refuseth to give me fitting Caution What may be reckoned a fitting and sufficient Caution saith Dr. Cozens in his before mentioned Apology p. 1. c. 2. I find not determined or colligible out of the Books of Common Law But I am sure the Doctor was not such a Stranger to the Sexti Decretalia as not to know it is expressed there three or four times over either Fidejussoria by Sureties or Pignoratitia by Pawn or Pledg or Juratoria by Oath And indeed the Doctor tells us of all these in the Civil Law If the Doctor means that the Common Law hath not determined the Quantum of the Bond or Pledge I am apt to believe it will be judged otherways viz. That no greater Quantum shall be insisted upon than hath before been usually given in the Case which I have not heard to have exceeded 10 or at most 20 l. Nor indeed is there any reason any great Sum should be insisted on For if the contempt be for not appearing at Court surely that is enough to secure that If it be not obeying an Order or Decree if the Decree be a just Decree for making some Satisfaction in case of Wrong the Canon Law allowes no Caution till that be done neither I believe will the Common Law for the Common Law in this Case is plainly in Affirmance of the Canon Law which in former times was the Law Paramount and is so still in Popish Countries Now the Canon Law allowing Caution the custom of the Nation which is the Common Law came in to inforce Eccesiastical Judges to keep to the Rule of their own Law and innovate nothing to the Prejudice of the Subjects Liberty of Person Thus far I have shewed what remedy the Law of England hath provided for the Oppressions of the Subjects in the Ecclesiastical Courts either by way of Prohibition Writs of Attachment and Supersedeas or the Writ de Cautions admittenda Several Statutes have also provided against the Extravagancies of their Power in other things The Stat. 25. Henry 8.19 provides against the Church-men's making or putting in Practice any Canons which have not first had the King's assent or any Canons contrariant or repugnant to the Laws and Statutes of the Land The Scari 5. Hen. 2. provides against their Proceeding refusing to give a true Copy of the Libel The Stat. 23. Hen. 8.9 provides against Citation of Persons out of the Diocess and taking above a 3d. for a Citation 21 Hen. 8.5 provides against Extortion by them in the Probates of Wills So in many other particulars but I shall keep to my Theme to declare what I have found in the Law of England with Reference to Excommunications There is one Statute more which relates to the Writ de Excommunicato capiendo It is that 5. Elizab. 23. which commands that those Writs shall not be issued but in Term time That they shall have at least twenty days betwixt the Test and the Return that they shall be entered upon Record in the King's Bench c. And that no Capias shall further issue out but in ten Cases there expressed with many other things When it will please our Parliament to consider whether the Writ de Excommunicato capiendo should be continued or run the same fate with that Cousin to it de Hereticis comburendis I cannot tell but certainly it is very unreasonable that the Civil Magistrate should be by it haled in to ruine Persons and Families whose Guilt was never proved before him and be but Servants to Ecclesiastical Judges to confirm their it may be passionate as well as unjustifiable Decrees Persons that are imployed to take away the Lives Liberties or Goods of any Persons had certainly need to be first satisfied that they have done something worthy of Death or Bonds or such Degrees
prosecuted according to Rutes of the Common Law of England in all Causes or the particular Rules of that Law which belongeth to such Courts upon the Subjects Motion and Suggestion to that purpose The Courts of the King's-Bench Common Pleas or Exchequer grant a Writ of Prohibition according to the Nature of the Complaint either absolutely forbidding them to proceed in such a Case or limitedly until they have amended such or such an Error in their Proceedings If the Ecclesiastical Judge thinks himself injured he may have an hearing and argue the Case If the Secular Judges be convinced of any mistake they will grant them a Writ of Consultation after the Receipt of which they may proceed notwithstanding any former Prohibition For Appeals the Reader must know that even in the vilest and most Popish times the Law of England never left the Subject to the Mercy of an Inferiour Arbitrary Judge in a Court Ecclesiastical but gave him a Liberty to appeal from an unjust definitive Sentence or an unjust Grievance upon an Interlocutory Decree to the next Superiour Court and from thence to the next and at last to the Pope and Court at Rome Upon the Reformation of England it was just to cut off Appeals to Rome being a Forreign Jurisdiction otherwise the old Law of England was kept to It was therefore Enacted and ordained by the Stat. 24 Hen. 8.12 That Appeals should be made from the Arch-deacon's Court to the Bishop's from the Bishop's or his Commissaries to the Archbishop's Court or Arches And by the Stat. 25. Hen. 8.19 from the Arches to the King's Majesty in the High Lourt of Chancery This is vulgarly called the Delegates because upon Petition the Cord Chancellour doth delegate some Common-Lawyers and some Civil or Canon Lawyers to hear and determine the Cause This saith the Stat. 24. Hen. 8.12 shall be done by any of the King's Subjects and Resiants without any Limitation except of time for which the Statute mentioneth 15 Days after the pronouncing the Sentence Assoon therefore as any definitive Sentence or any Interlocutory Decree is given or made it will be the Party's Wisdom to send to some Proctor in the Court to which his next Appeal lyeth to enter an Appeal for him and to send him an Inhibition and Monition and if Excommunication hath been denounced against him an Absolution The Inhibition forbids the Inferiour Judge to proceed till the Appeal be determined if he disobeyeth the Party sending to his Proctor shall have an Excommunication against him The Monition is to admonish the Register to send up to that Superiour Court by such a time all the Proceedings in the Case If he disobeyeth upon complaint an Excommunication shall be sent down against him There is a Practice of the Officers of Superiour Courts sometimes upon Caveats entered by Prosecutors sometimes without to deny the Subject the Liberty settled upon him by the Stat. 24. H. 8.12 refusing to admit his Appeal until he hath sworn and subscribed Conformity according to the 98 Canon made 1603. The Case stands thus By the Stat. 25. Hen. 8.19 which was after that for Appeals 24 Hâ—â— 8.12 it was enacted That the Clergy should not presume to make any new Canons or put the same in use unless they might have the Kings Assent first 1. It is not said The Royal Assent and Licence of the King his Heir and Successors 2. Nor is it said Whether there must be an Assent to the particular putting in Execution of each Canon or a whole lump of them in gross 3. Nor is it said his Assent in or out of Parliament which hath made Questions amongst Lawyers Whether any Canons made since that time be of force yea or no especially considering the Stat. made 13. Car. 2. for restoring the Ecclesiasticall Jurisdiction taken away by Stat. 17. Car. 1. Since that time we have had Canons made 1603 and Anno 1640 which last are in Terms left out as not confirmed by the Stat. 13. Car. 2. For the others there have been the former Doubts raised I shall leave them to Lawyers to determine but the Doubt riseth by the Phrase used in the King's Assent prefixed to those Canons 1603 as far as lawfully being Members of the Church it may concern them And again According to the Form of a certain Statute made on that behalf 25. Hen. 8. He who hath a mind to read something Lawyers have said upon this Point may read Mr. Maynard's Argument against the Canons made 1640. Some of the Heads of which he may find in Dr. Fuller's Church History relating to that Year But certain it is that Stat. 25. Hen. 8.19 saith Provided alwayes That no Canons Constitution or Ordinance shall be made or put in Execution within this Realm by Authority of the Convocation of the Clergy which shall be contrariant or repugnant to the King's Prerogative Royal or the Customs Laws or Statutes of this Realm any thing contained in this Act to the contrary notwithstanding So that be the Validity of Canons made by the Convocation and confirmed by the King's Assent out of Parliament as it will by force of that Act yet no Canon can be of force contrariant or repugnant to the Laws or Statutes of the Realm Now the Stat. 24. Hen. 8.12 was at that time a Statute of the Realm and had given any of his Majesties Subjects and Resiants a Liberty of Appeal without any Restriction or Limitation except as to time or Qualification whatsoever Four score Years after this the Convocation 1. Jacobi makes a body of Canons the 98 of which is in these words Forasmuch as they who break the Laws cannot claim any Benefit or Protection by the same By the way then all the King's Subjects are Out-Laws We decree and appoint That after any Judge Ecclesiastical hath proceeded judicially against obstinate and factious persons and Contemners of Ceremonies for not observing the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England no Judge ad quem shall admit or allow any his or their Appeals unless he having first seen the Original Appeal the Party Appealant do first promise and avow That he will faithfully keep and observe all the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England and also the prescript Form of Common Prayer and do also subscribe to the three Articles formerly by us specified and declared Now the Question is Whether this Canon be not made void and not to be put in Execution by the Proviso before mentioned in the Stat. 25. Hen. 8.19 The Statute makes Appealing the Liberty of any of the King's Subjects and Resiants without any Restriction or Qualification The Canon restrains this and decrees The Appeals of none but such or such shall be admitted Nor can the Validity of the Canon with the King's Assent be pleaded for the Proviso saith any thing in this Act to the contrary notwithstanding nor doth the King confirm the Canon but according to this Statute and so far as lawful may concern his Subjects