Christ Commands for if as is the Modern practice in Scotland the Lords of the Session never read a word of the Libell'd Summons and they may be Blasphemy or Treason for ought they know yet they set their hands to them as fast as they can be brought and I have my self set my hand to Hundreds of them and that course of Summoning being by Act of Parliament made in time of Popery which we had no power to alter I thought that kind of Justice better than none at all though before Oblatio Libelli it serves to no more Use than our Latitat and Subpoena Offices and others to have a pretence of gathering Money for the People for doing nothing and perhaps if all Truth were spoken for doing Mischief Fourthly If as the ancient Practice was of Sir Thomas More when he was Chancellor of England who used to read over himself in Person every Bill was prefer'd in Chancery and consider whether it were just or no before he would grant a Summons of Subpoena and of Skene in Scotland who as I have been informed there would likewise read the Bills himself before a Summons was granted and if he found them not fit would tear them in pieces and throw them over the Bar. It hath been therefore to no purpose for the Plaintiff to have sent to Judges for Summons who might see that Injustice in his Bill which the Defendant perhaps might not see or might be willing to pass by if it had been first shewn to him at home Fifthly It is unjust for the Plaintiff to make his Oblatio Libelli first to the Judg and to get a Summons thereon before he doth it to the Defendant for the Defendant may perhaps if shewn him shew the Plaintiff so just exceptions against the Bill as may satisfie the Plaintiff himself and save both Parties the Trouble and Cost of going further to Law or he may amend his Bill on such exceptions and if he think it just after amended insist on the same further to shew his bill first therefore to the Defendant though his Enemy if he will except against it is more profitable to the Plaintiff for amendment than if he shewed it his own Councel for a Friend may never shew the Party his Faults as an Enemy will As it is more Just so it is therefore more safe first to make the Oblatio Libelli to the Defendant before it be done to the Judg. Sixthly The Justi dies or time of Returning an Answer cannot be agreed without great Trouble and Cost unless there be first an Emparlance between the Parties without troubling the Judg. Against offend the taking out of Execution on Judgment acknowledged by assent and on Recognizances and Statutes in England and on Registred Bonds in Scotland without Summons or Oblatio Libelli or Warning or Demand Seventhly Because Judges use to take Caution or Plegii de prosequendo of the Plaintiff and the like Pledges of the Defendant purposely to hinder Agreement according to Christ and to set them by the Ears to get in Fees to the Court. 2. That no man ought to be Summon'd before a Judg until a Productio Testium first made to him For Christ saiâ—h If he will not hear thee then take with thee one or two more that in the Mouth of two or three Witnesses every word may be Establish'd whence will follow that the Mock-Probation still falsely mention'd in the end of every Declaration Et inde Producit Sectam and Summons on Motions and Rules of Courts founded on the Infamous Credit of Affidavit-men are abominable Reliques of Popery and Anti-Christian 1. Because they are not produced to the Defendant where he dwells that he may except against their Persons if he hath cause and if he hath none he may see them Sworn and if they Swear false he may have his lawful Remedy against them 2. Because the Affidavit-men are single Witnesses whereas Christ Commands two or three Witnesses 3. They are both such as live in London and Westminster and such as come out of those Parts altogether unknown to the Judges and Masters who take their Oaths if therefore they will proceed on the Testimony of single Witnesses seeing by the Precept of Christ Actor Sequitur forum rei and the Plaintiff is to carry his Witnesses to the Defendant it is far more Just and Equal that the Affidavit be either taken by Commission in the Parish where the Defendant lives or every Minister be Authorized to take the Oath on notice given to his Parishioner to be present if he please at the Taking 4. Because generally the Affidavit-men are Knights of the Post and common Swearers for Hire who will Swear any thing for a Dinner 5. Because Probatio non admittitur in contrarium whereby Courts overflow with Perjury And as is said Jer. 23.10 Because of Swearing the Land mourns 3. That a Defendant can be guilty of no Contumacy till an Oblatio Libelli and a Productio Testium first made to him For Christ says The Plaintiff is not to tell the Church till two Refusals made by the Defendant one to hear him single the other when he haâ—h produced his Witnesses 4. That no Pledges or Distress ought to be taken till Judgment For Ezek. 18.7 says The Debtour ought to be restored his Pledg And Christ Commands on Contumacy shewn by two Refusals immediately to tell the Church so he is to do nothing further till the Sentence of the Church is pass'd and very just for thus far none hath Judged whether his Cause is just and his Brother Contumacious but himself and he ought not to be Judg in his own Case and much less be his own Carver of Execution by Pledges and Distresses on his own Authority without the Sentence of a Judg. Secondly Otherwise the Ass of the Fatherless the Ox of the Widow and the Pledg of the Poor would be taken from them without Hearing of their Cause and the Creditor Land-lord and every other Person would be Judges in their own Case and Carve Execution for themselves Thirdly Though the Poor may be able to give Convenotinal Pledges yet they are not able to give besides Judicial Pledges when they are enforced to sue for their Conventional unjustly seized and detained from them nor though they are able to Mortgage the Right of their little Living to be seized when they fail paying Interest for the Debt yet are they not able to leave Possession by which they must live if the Creditor unjustly enter before a Judgment Declaratory and a true Account made by him and a Return of the over-plus whereto the Mortgage amounted above the Debt So though a Poor man is able to grant a Rent-charge and a Clause of Distress if he be in Arere on paying Interest for the Debt yet if the Creditor wrongfully or excessively Distrain he is not able on a Replevin to give Pledges de Prosequendo and de Returno habendo to take a Conventional Distress therefore or
no Jurisdiction but by Usurpation of so Temporal a Right as Marriage before this Statute let any who thinks he can see Nine Miles into a Milstone once more look into the Statute of Merton before recited and try whether he can screw out of it any word giving the Bishops either a Jurisdiction of Marriage or general Bastardy or that this Statute ever forged so rude a Romish Tool as the two edged Sword of general and special Bastardy to divide the living Child or tear it in peices between the Bishop and the Temporal Judg or how it was then consistent with a Legale Judicium parium to expose a Child no Alien but the King 's Native Subject to be tried for all he had by a then Foraign Ecclesiastical Law and a Judg a sworn Canonical Subject to a Foraign Pope or that the wisdom of that Parliament intended to coin a Chimera of a Distinction without a difference of general and special Bastardy which neither they themselves understood nor any Lawyers which write to this day give any sensibly Interpretation or agree amongst themselves concerning it or that they who made the Statute to oppose the Bishops Jurisdiction of Marriage should create a Notion of general Bastardy which le Scrope says was not in Esse before to give them a new Jurisdiction which was to change the Laws of England which they positively refuse in the Statute it self to change Object 4 No Similitude of fetching the Laws of Athens to Rome and bringing the Romish Laws to England It is further alledged by Coke lib. 5.1 part 9. That as the Romans fetching divers Laws from Athens yet being approved and allowed by the State there they were called Jus Civile Romanorum And as the Normans borrowing all or most of their Laws from England yet baptized them by the name of the Laws and Customs of Normandy So albeit the Kings of England derived their Ecclesiastical Laws from others yet so many as were approved and allowed hereby and with general consent are aptly and rightly called the King's Ecclesiastical Laws o. England To which is answer'd That there is no similitude between making or changing the Laws of the Athenians which were Foraign Laws to become the Laws of the Romans and the making or changing either the Foraign Papal or native Provincial Canons or Ecclesiastical Laws into the King's Ecclesiastical Laws of England For First The Athenian Laws before they were made Denizons of Rome were not admitted in cumulo but Articulated and every Article examined one by one by the Decem viri or Ten Men as our usurped Ecclesiastical Laws were appointed to have been done by the Statute of 25 Hen. 8.19 by the Two and Thirty Men and likewise in time of Edward the Sixth by others but neither succeeded before the same was received for a Roman Law Secondly Such Athenian Laws as were pickt or garbled from the rest were by the Authority of the Legislative Power of Rome both Senate and People caused to be writ in Twelve Tables and inacted to be the Laws of Rome but in England there was never by Authority any Articulation selecting or garbling of Canon Laws effected nor the same reduced into Tables Written or Printed by any Act of Parliament Ecclesiastical Laws in an unknown Language Thirdly The selected Athenian Laws were written in the Roman Language to be understood by the People before they would be received as Roman Laws but there is no such thing in the Ecclesiastical Laws of the Holy-Church concerning Marriage or any thing else but they all still remain in the Language of the Beast and can be neither call'd the Laws of the Church which by the Scripture are forbidden to be spoke in an unknown tongue as appears 1 Cor. 14.19 It is said In the Church I had rather speak five words with my understanding that by my voice I might teach others also then ten thousand words in an unknown tongue It is as utterly unlawful therefore to make that a Law of the Church or an Ecclesiastical Law of Marriage which is in the unknown Language of Latin as it had been to have made any form of Prayer taken from the Romish Church though the Pater Noster it self the form of Prayer of the Church of England while it was in Latin for the Minister would then have been a Barbarian to the English man and the English-man a Barbarian to him and it is as bad for the poor English-man for his Law-sutes in Latin for a Wife in the Court of Arches and other Ecclesiastical Courts as it would be if his Prayers were again in Latin in the Church For though he pay his Lawyers dear to plead his Cause there he cannot understand for his Money whether they call him and his Wife Rogue and Whore or honest People or whether the Judg by his Sentence will give him his Wife or take her from him but by the implicit Faith of an Interpreter as let any one look on the Sentence of Divorce in Kennes Case Coke lib. 7.42 E. he may understand or not understand the same Ecclesiastical Laws are not the Laws of the Land Fourthly The Athenian Laws were not obtruded on the Romans by Conquest of their Bodies by the Temporal Sword or their Souls by the Spiritual Sword of Excommunication but the Ecclesiastical Laws of Marriage have been obtruded on England ever since the Conquest by the superstitious Terrors or actual force of Excommunication either Papal or Episcopal and never by consent in Parliament The suffering of an oppression therefore is no consent nor an abuse against Law an Use Custom or Law neither can a wicked Oppression Use Custom or Law in name only be turned into a Law of England except by consent in Parliament or other humane Power besides it is by the very before recited Statute of Merton declared That the Laws of the Church are not the Laws of England for when the Bishop quarrel'd that the Law of England as to Marriage was not according to the Law of the Church and would have had them changed into the Law of the Church the Earls and Barons with one voice answer'd We will not change the Laws of England Whereby it 's plain the Laws of England and Laws of the Church are opposite Laws and not the same and this is confessed by Coke himself in the exposition of his Statute of Merton 2 part Inst fol. 98. where he saith Here our Common Laws are aptly and properly called the Laws of England because they are appropriated to this Kingdom of England as most apt and fit for the Government thereof and have no dependence upon any Foraign Law whatsoever no not on the Civil or Canon Law other then in Cases allowed by the Laws of England and therefore he saith the Poet spake truly hereof Et penitus toto divisos orbe Britannos So as the Law of England is proprium quarto modo to the Kingdom of England therefore Foraign Precedents are
and those Laws which follow them they will on Divorce under the name of Alimony give the Woman more then the Interest of her Portion amounts to which incourages all Women to seek Divorces whereas the form of Divorce amongst the Romans was Res tuas tibi habeto and she was not to have more then she brought with her and the same is the Law of the Jews and all other Nations except such as live under Popish Ecclesiastical Laws And the injustice of our Ecclesiastical Laws to the contrary is not one of the least causes why Divorce and Separations are of late grown so frequent because Women know they shall gain by the Divorce and rob their Husbands of more then ever they brought them Of the Law of Divorcing after Procreation of a Child for precontract or pre copulation without pre procreation Of the Law prohibiting liberty of private Marriage without publick Witnesses Of the Law giving the Jurisdiction of the secret causes of Divorce between Parents and secret uncleanness of Children in their Parents Houses to publick Tribunals Of the Law compelling persons married though mortal Enemies to Co-habitation Of the Law of Divorce à Mensa Thoro. Of the Canon compelling the parties on Divorce for Adultery to give Bonds and Sureties not to marry again during each others life Of the custom of Protestants marrying with Papists Edward the Fourth was as is alledged first verbally contracted to Eleanor Daughter to john Talbot Earl of Shrewsbury married after to Sir Thomas Butler Baron of Sudley after this verbal contract he married Elizabeth the Widow of Sir John Gray she lived his Wife Eighteen Years and Eleven Months and he had issue by her Three Sons and Seven Daughters Elizabeth his eldest Daughter was first promised in marriage to Charles Dauphin of France but married after to King Henry the Seventh Edward the Fourth being dead leaving his two Sons young in the custody of his Brother Richard the Third they were after murdered by him to make his own way to the Crown but first in preparation thereto Dr. Shaw in a Sermon by him Preached at Paul's-Cross took for his Text Spuria vitulamina non agent altas radices And to make short work they were after by Act of Parliament Proclaimed Bastards and not inheritable to the Crown on no other Allegation made but the pre-contracts before mention'd with Eleanor Butler as is recorded in the Parliament Roll. Husband divorces the Wife for cause of precopulation committed by himself Buchanan rerum Scoticarum lib. 11.652 relates That Earl Bothwel aspiring to obtain the marriage of Mary Queen of Scots compelled his Wife to accuse him of pre-copulation with another Woman before he married his Wife Gordonia Bothuelii uxor cogitur in duplici foro litem de Divortio intendere apud judices Regios accusat uxor maritum adulterii quae una justa apud eos erat divortii causa apud judices Papanos lege vetitos tamen ab Archiepiscopo fani Andreae ad hanc litem cognoscendam litem dare accusatur idem ante Matrimonium cùm propinqua uxoris stupri consuetudinem habuisse nulla in Divortio faciendo nec in testibus nec in judicibus fit mora intra enim decimum diem lis suscepta disceptata dijudicata est After he saith one thing thought necessary was ut consuetae servarentur Ceremoniae ut videlicet publice in conventu civium tribus diebus Dominicis nuptiae futurae inter Jacobum Heburnum Mariam Stuartam denuntiarentur ut si quis quid vitii ant impedimenti sciret quo minus legitimè coirent rem ad Ecclesiam deferrent And after he saith Cùm de nuptiis in Ecclesia denunciandis ageretur lector cujus id munus erat constanter recusare collecti Diaconi seniores cùm reluctari non auderent jubent Ecclesiastem nuptias futuras de more edicere is quidem hactenus paruit ut se vitium quidem scire profiteretur ac paratum seu Reginae seu Bothuelio cum vellent judicare is cum in arcem accersitus venisset Regina eum ad Bothuelium remisit qui quanquam nec blanditiis nec minis Ecclesiastem de proposito deduceret nec rem disputationi committere auderet tamen nuptias apparat unus Orcadum Episcopus est inventus qui gratiam aulicam veritati praeferret caeteris reclamantibus causasque proferentibus cur Legitimae non essent nuptiae cum eo qui duas uxores ad huc vivas haberet tertiam ipse suum nuper fassus adulterium demisisset ita indignantibus omnibus bonis vulgo etiam execrante propinquis per literas improbantibus inchoatus publicis Ceremoniis simulatis etiam factas detestantibus tamen Matrimonium celebratur Which fore-mention'd pre-contract alledged against Edward the Fourth was no more just cause to Illegitimate his Children then it was to Murder them nor was his pre-copulation with another Woman confess'd by Earl Bothwel any more just cause to Divorce his Wife then it was to aspire to the Kingdom 32 H. 8. cap. 38. takes notice of the great mischiefs insuing by dissolving by pre-contract Marriage consummate by bodily knowledge and fruit of Children or Child which Statute follows in these words WHereas heretofore the usurped power of the Bishop of Rome 32 H. 8. cap. 38. Of precontract hath always entangled and troubled the meér Iurisdiction and regal power of this Realm of England and also unquieted much the Subjects of the same by his usurped power in them as by making that unlawful which by God's Word is Lawful both in Marriage and other things as hereafter shall appear more at length and till now of late in our Soveraign Lord's time which is otherwise by learning taught than his predecessors in time past long time have beén hath so continued the same whereof yet some sparks be left which hereafter might kindle a greater fire and so remaining his power not to seem utterly extinct Therefore it is thought most convenient to the King's Highness his Lords Spiritual and Temporal with the Commons of this Realm assembled in this present Parliament that two things especially for this time be with diligence provided for whereby many inconvemences have ensued and many more mought ensue and follow As where heretofore divers and many Persons after long continuance together in Matrimony without any allegation of either of the parties or any other at their Marriage why the same Matrimony should not be good just and lawful and after the same Matrimony Solemuized and Consummate by carnal knowledge and also sometimes fruit of Children ensued of the same Marriage upon pretence of former Contract made and not Consummate by carnal Copulation for proof whereof two Witnesses by that Law were only required beén divorced and separate contrary to God's Law and so the true Matrimony both so Solemnized in the face of the Church and Consummate with bodily knowledge and confirmed also with fruit of Children had betweén
take any Oath unless it be only in Cases Matrimonial or Testamentary But whereas also by a certain Act in Parliament began and holden at Westminster the 8th Day of May in the 13th Year of our Reign and there continued till Wednesday the 30th Day of July in the 13th Year of our Reign afâ—resaid and from the same Day the Parliament Adjourned till the 20th Day of November then next following amongst other things it was Enacted by the Authority of the said Parliament That it should not be lawful for any Arch-Bishop Bishop Vicar General Chancellor Commissary or any other Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to offer tender or administer to any Person whatsoever the Oath usually called the Oath Ex Officio or any other Oath by which such Person to whom it may be offered or administred might be burdened or compelled to confess or accuse him or her self of any Criminal matter or thing whereby he or she might be burdened with any Censures or Punishments as in the said Act amongst other things it is more fully contained Yet you the aforesaid Bishop after the Coming forth of this Act viz. the 23d Day of July in the 27th Year of our Reign in no wise regarding the said Law and Statute at Chichester in the County of Sussex did offer and tender unto the said Thomas Watersfield being then Church-Wapden of the Parish Church of Arundel in the said County of Sussex a certain illegal Oath Ex Officio to be performed by the said Thomas Watersfield in a Cause neither Matrimonial nor Testamentary by which the said Thomas Watersfield might be forced to accuse himself of divers matters Criminal and with which he might be Burdened with divers Punishments and Censures Ecclesiastical In which Oath as it was then tendered the said Thomas Watersfield should with his utmost Diligence Present every Person which then or lately was Inhabiting within the said Parish of Arundel who hath done any offence or neglected any Duty mentionâ—d in certain Articles contained in a certain Printed Book which Book was then and there shewn by you the said Bishop to the said Thomas Watersfield and the said Thomas Watersfield doth Aver at the time of the Tendering of the said Oath and before and afterwards ever since and hitherto That he hath dwelt and been Resident in Arundel aforesaid and that in the said Printed Book at the said time that the said Oath was tendered to be performed there was contained amongst other thâ—ngs this Question viz. Whether every Person Inhabiting or Sojourning within the Parish of Arundel aforesaid did daily resort every Lords-day and Festival appointed for Divine Service to the Church and whether they did there remain the whole time of Divine Service quietly with Reverence Order and Decency and whether Church wardens and Officers called Sides-men did observe those which came late after the beginning of Divine Service or went away before the end of the same and whether they did suffer some to stand idle or to talk in the Church-Porch or to walk in the Church-Yard during the time of Prayer and Preaching or other Sacred Duties And forasmuch as the said Thomas Watersfield did then and there refuse to take the said Oath you the aforesaid Bishop did pronounce the Sentence of Excommunication upon him afterwards that is to say upon the 23d Day of July in the 27th Year of our Reign aforesaid at Chichester aforesaid In Contempt of Us and the manifest Damage Prejudice and Impoverishment of the said Thomas Watersfield and against the Form and Effect of the said Statute and the Common Law of this Our Realm of England And whereas such Pleas by the Laws of England of Right belong to Us and not to You We therefore being willing to maintain the Laws of our Crown and the Law and Custom aforesaid as by the Bond of our Oath we are bound to do We forbid you firmly enjoining you not to intermeddle or hold before you the said Bishop the Plea and Sentence aforesaid as to any Answers in the said Articles concerning the said Thomas Watersfield or any thing from thence attempted But that you Release and Dissolve all Decrees and Sentences if any be against the said Thomas Watersfield by reason of the said Fulmination And that you do absolutely Release him the said Thomas Watersfield from all Decrees and Sentences upon occasion of the said Fulmination Teste at Westminster the 6th Day of May in the 28th Year of Our Reign Wurley The Suggestion on which this Prohibition is granted remains Recorded in the said Court of Common-Pleas in Mr. Wurley's Office Roll 551. Excommunicators Murderers John Hus and Jerome of Prague held That Priests ought to Preach notwithstanding Excommunication That Bishops were Murderers for delivering men over to the Lay-power for Disobeying them That such Excommunication was a humane Invention to maintain the Pride and Cruelty of the Clergy And were Martyr'd for this and other Truths The King shall be forced to Execute every Decree of the Pope or Priests with the Temporal Sword though contrary to his Conscience otherwise he shall be Censur'd if obstinate not worthy to hold his Crown Sheriff of Englands Oath The Sheriffs of England are compell'd to be Sworn to Assist and Execute all the Commands of Bishops not excepting against the King himself which is a most wicked Oath to be suffer'd For though it doth not Swear in express words to give the Supremacy of the Temporal Sword to this Spiritual Sword of Excommunication that the Priests were too subtle to have appear openly in their Form Excommunicators Usurp Supremacy yet doth it require him to Swear what is Aequipollent to assist and maintain the Bishops and Commissioners of the Holy Church as often as by them requirâ—d whereby their Spiritual Sword is made the Imperant and the King 's Temporal Sword the Obedient The Imperant hath Supremacy over the Obedient as it is said Rom. 6 16. Know ye not to whom ye yeild your selves Servants to Obey his Servants ye are to whom ye Obey Shall the Sheriff therefore be compell'd to be a Traitor to deliver the Temporal Sword intrusted in his hand by the King to those who assume that Luciferian Title of the Holy-Church to be Supreme above the King which is point-blank contrary to his Oath of Supremacy which obliges him to suppress with it such a Rebellious Pride to the utmost of his Power The Sheriff is likewise by the Law of Scotland to do Execution on Excommunicate Persons as appears Skene de verb. signif tit Schiriff Sheriff of Scotland whose words are The Sheriff shall take and apprehend all Cursed and Excommunicate Persons at the desire of the Bishop or his Official and put them in Prison untill they satisfie God and the Kirk Stat. 2. Reb. Br. specially them quhahes remained under the Censure of Excommunication by the space of Forty Days Quon Attach Rextali 76. And by Ja. 2. P. 4. cap. 7. it is Enacted That