for the same Offencee eftsoons be Convict before the Iustices and likewise Receiving for the said Offence punishment first by the Iustices shall not for the same Offence eftsoons Receive punishment of the Ordinary any thing contained in this Act to the contrary notwithstanding 3. And he the said Jones saith That the Church-Wardens did not in their Presentment Alledge against him That he had not any Lawful or Reasonable Cause to show why he had not been at Church or Sacrament of so long a time mentioned in the presentment See 1 Eliz. Cap. 2. Paragraph 14. 4. And he the said Jones saith That whereas Errors in an Indictment at Sessions or Assizes or Errors in a Mittimus whereby a man is Committed to prison will when Legally Pleaded overthrow and make void such Indictment or Commitment and so relieve the Indicted and Committed person Even so and much more should the said Jones by reason of a Deficient and Insufficient Presentment be Discharged from the Ecclesiastical Court as he prayed in his aforesaid plea and Supplyment and therefore the said Jones doth conclude that it is better to be concerned with the Kings Justices and Judges who Sitt by Commission from the King in the Kings Courts of Record than to be concerned with any Ecclesiastical Court and such as are Doctors and Judges in the said Courts The said Jones further saith he heard no more from Doctors-Commons till the Twentieth of December and then the Doctor of his Parish viz. St. Bartholomew Exchange did in very friendly manner acquaint the said Jones that an Excomunication against him was come from Doctors Commons and that the said Doctor was ordred to publish the said Excommunication next morning being St. Thomas's day unto which the said Jones Reply'd That the Ecclesiastical Court had proceeded Illegally in going so far as an Excommunication and demonstrated the same in two Particulars First that he the said Jones had given a Plea in Law to that Court against the aforesaid Presentment and was never admitted to be heard upon his Plea which is contrary to the Laws of England to have any Sentence pass upon any man to his damage without his Cause be Legally heard and Debated Secondly That it was not in the power of the Ecclesiastical Court Legally to Excommunicate the said Jones for not taking the Sacrament at any such time as that Court should at their pleasure Appoint there being but one time of the year named for Receiving the Sacrament viz Easter The aforesaid Doctor reply'd he was sorry things were brought to such a point but he could not avoid obeying the Order of Doctors Commons and so the next day being Dec. 23. called St. Thomas day the Excommunication was published in the Parish Church called St. Barthâ—lomew Exchange and upon the Twenty third day of the same Month the said Jones went with a Witness with him to the Registers Office and demanded a Copy of the Libel against him but the said Jones could not have it though he offered payment for the said Libel And upon the Twenty Sixth of the same Month the said Jones took witness with him and demanded a Copy of all the Proceedings of the Court and particularly a Copy of his Plea the Clerk did promise a Copy of the proceedings of the Court but could not let him have them at that time And upon the Thirtieth day of the same Month the said Jones went and a witness with him for the aforesaid Copy but it was not done the said Jones then allowed the Clerk till the next Monday and the Clerk would not promise to have those things copied by that time pleading it was Holy-daies and that was the reason they were not done the said Jones replyed That it was a strange thing to him they could not write their own proceedings upon a Holy-day as well as Excommunicate him upon a Holy-day The said Jones waited till Wedensday the Third of January and then went with his friend for the aforesaid Copy and then the Clerk said That he whom he had appointed to draw out the aforesaid Copy was out of the way himself was going from the Office at that time and so the said Jones came away without what he so much endeavored to have going more times to the Office than he was bound to do Thus things remained till about a fortnight before Hilary Term and then the said Jones went and made Affidavit before Judge Charleton the form of the said Affidavit is as followeth James Jones of London Merchant-Taylor deposeth upon Oath That he was Cited into the Ecclesiastical Court before Doctor Pinfold and made his appearance and since hath been at the Registers Office and there demanded a Copy of his Libel but could not obtain it though he offered payment for the same And after this upon the twenty third day of January 1682. being the first day of the Term the said Jones with a few others moved the Honourable Judges of the Kings Court of Common Pleas for Prohibitions upon the not obtaining Copies of their Libels when demanded and payment offered for the same the particular Affidavits of that matter being read in Court and moved by several Serjeants at Law the Judges were pleased to grant Prohibitions with a Nisi causa viz. if Doctor Pinfold could not shew cause against them and a Rule of Court was served upon Doctor Pinfold to Appear before the Judges of the Common Pleas on Fryday the twenty Sixth of the same Month but the said Jones thought it expedient to move the honourable Judges of the Kings-Bench for a Prohibition and therefore made Affidavit of not obtaining a Copy of his Libel before the honourable Judge Dolben and it was read before the Judges of the Kings Bench upon the twenty fifth of the same Month and that honourable Bench was pleased to grant a Prohibition for the said Jones but the next day being the twenty sixth of January Doctor Pinfold engaged Sir George Jefferies who is well known to be a Lawyer that will stoutly defend and maintain the cause he is engaged in either for the King or any of his own Clients against the plaintiff or defendant on the other side and in this Case there was no want of words by Sir George to overthow the Prohibitions both at Kings Bench and Common Pleas but the said Jones doth take it a little unkindly that Sir George Jefferies should with such sharpness of Spirit reflect upon him before the honourable Judges as if he had surreptitiously obtained the grant of a Prohibition and highly blamed the said Jones for moving in two of His Majesties Courts for the said Prohibition but if the said Jones had been then in Court he would have ventured by humble desire to the honourable Judges to make a modest and honest reply to that Gentleman without being so sharp upon him and therein have shewed that the obtaining that Grant of a Prohibition could not fairly be counted Surreptitious because the honourable Judges granted
it upon the Affidavit of the said Jones then read in Court the truth of which Affidavit the said Jones would have sworn before all the Judges of England viz. that he had been at the Registers Office and demanded a Copy of his Libel and could not obtain it though he offered paymnent for the same and in this very case the Law hath provided a Prohibition for the the releif of the Kings Subjects who are too often vexed by the Ecclesiastical Courts See the Statute of the 2 Hen. V. chap. 3. the words are these Item Forasmuch as divers of the Kings liege people be daily Cited to appear in the Spiritual Court before Spiritual Iudgee there to Answer to divers pexsons as well of things which touch Free-hold Debts Trespass Covenants and other things wherof cognisance partaineth to the Courts of our Lord the King as of Matrimony and Testament and when such persons so Cited appear and demand a Libel of that which against them is surmised to be informed to give their answer thereunto or otherwise to purchase a Writ of our Lord the King of Proâ—ibition according to their Case which Libel to them is denied by the said Spiritual Iudges to the intent that such persons should not be aided by any such Writ against the Law and to the great damage of such persons so impleaded our said Lord the King by the advice and assent of his Lords Spiritual and Temporal and at the request and iâ—stance of the said Commons hath Ordained and established that at what time the Libel is grantable by the Law that it may be granted and delivered to the party without any difficulty From which good Statute let these things be considered 1. That the Spiritual Courts ought to have Libels of those matters that are surmised against the Kings Leige people 2. That upon demand without any delaies copies of such Libels ought to be given to such of the Kings Leige people as make a demand of them that thereby they may be enabled to make a legal defence for themselves either respecting the matter of fact surmised against them or any illegal Proceedings in the mannagement thereof 3. That such of the Kings leige people as are denied or cannot obtain a copy of such Libel when grantable by Law shall have the Kings Writ of Prohibition for their releif or if the matters surmised against them in the Spiritual Court be such things whereof cognisance pertaineth to the Court of our Lord the King besides those of Freehold Debt Trespass or Covenants they may have for their releif a Prohibition Now the said Jones humbly conceives that the matters surmised against him in the Spiritual Courts are such things whereof cognisance pertaineth to the Court of our Lord the King viz. an uncertain Information of the Church-Wardens saying in their Presentment They could not of their own knowledge prove who of the Parishioners have and who have not been at Church and that they did not remember to have seen the said Jones at Church for some time past or to have Received the Sacrament for three Months past and besides these things surmised when they were in the Ecclesiastical Court a Copy of a Libel concerning them could not be obtained when demanded upon which the said Jones moved for a Prohibition but Sir George Jefferies in mannaging the cause for Doctor Pinfold did plead there was no Libel in that case and therefore the Ecclesiastical Court could not grant it when demanded and that Doctor Pinfold had proceeded by the Presentment of the Church-Wardens The said Jones doth not blame Sir George for making this Plea for the Doctor but the question is Whether Doctor Pinfold ought not to have a Libel in the Case as well as a Presentment the Statute mentioning a Libel of things surmised against the Kings liege people however the Kings Subjects have good cause to esteem the Proceedings of the Kings Courts of Justice where there is not only Presentments but afterwards Indictments and time allowed to the Kings Subjects to defend themselves and the Accusers brought to the face of the Accused and upon not making substantial proof of matters of fact the Kings accused subjects are by the Judges and the Law discharged but the said Jones and a multitude of his fellow Protestants have not had such fair dealings in Doctor Pinfold's Court and therefore the said Jones hath cause to say From such Courts and such Proceedings Good Lord deliver us And whereas the said Jones is informed that Sir George did reflect upon him for moving in the Kings Court of Common Pleas before he came to move in the Kings Bench for a Prohibition as being willing to have two strings to his Bow the said Jones doth humbly desire Sir George to consider that it is every mans concern to do his best and use the utmost means in a legal way to accomplish his relief and the said Jones doth believe that if it had been his happiness to have engaged Sir George Jefferies as his Conncel in this case it had not been lost for want of speaking to it as it was by the Silence of some Serjeants at Law that were expected to make some Reply in that Case and the Lord Chief Justice Pemberton then Sitting upon the Bench was willing to hear a Reply What was the cause of that silence whether because they could not speak or because they would not speak or because they dared not to speak or because they had not sufficient Fees to speak Grand-father Time must shew But whether because one Serjeant spoke so much and others said nothing at all Prohibitions weare overthrown in Westminster-Hall shall be lest to consideration However the said Jones saith That he was encouraged to take this way because divers of the Kings Subjects have thereby had releif formerly from the power of the Ecclesiastical Courts who were under the same circumstances and therefore the said Jones doth humbly pray Sir George Jefferies to consider that not every cause he hath mannaged either for the Plaintiff or Defendant hath gone currant before the Judges in Westminster-Hall which is a sufficient evidence that either the cause undertaken was not right or else that Sir George's Clients had some wrong and therefore no marvel if one or other of these things have attended poor Jones and others who have proceeded by the Advice of the Learned in the Law however this little victory over Jones and his fellow Protestants gave occasion to Doctor Pinfold to rejoice and boast and glory that night at Doctors Commons as if his cause were fifty in the hundred the better for that daies work but it is humbly desired by the said Jones that the Doctor would seriously cousider that saying in a good old Book called The Holy Bible Let not him that girdeth on his harness Boast himself as he that putteth it off 1 Kings 20. 11. Furtthermore The said Jones doth certifie Doctor Pinfold and all others concerned That he hath a
The Admonisher Admonished IN A MODEST and IMPARTIAL NARRATIVE Of the Proceedings of the Ecclesiastical Court AGAINST JAMES JONES Citizen of LONDON Of the Parish of St. Bartholomew Exchange Being a True Account of matter of Fact from his Citation to Doctors Commons to their taking out the Writ of Excommunicato Capiendo against him AND ALSO An Account of the several Ways made use of for the taking off the said Writ WITH Useful Observations Upon several Particular Passages and Statutes Dedicated to the Worshipful Doctor Pinfold Isa 59. 15. â—ea Truth faileth and he that departeth from Evil maketh himself a Prey and the Lord saw it and it displeased him that there was no Judgment LONDON Printed for Thomas Malthus at the Sun in the Poultrey 1683. To the Right Worshipful THOMAS PINFOLD Doctor of Laws and Official to the Arch-Deacon of London Worshipful Doctor AFter those Respects due to you this is humbly to entreat you with patience to read and consider this following Narrative of matters between you and my self in which I have been careful to give a true Account without any bad Language or any bitter Reflections which are too common in matters of this kind My only design in this is to discover past Proceedings as well on my own part as on yours that so such as may hereafter be concerned with Ecclesiastical Courts as I have been with yours may by these Proceedings learn either to forbear to do as I have done or else improve the same to do better or find out some other way more for their own Advantage And for as much as your Worship hath loaded a Multitude of his Majesties Protestant Subjects with Admonitions and Excommunications and with the Writ de Excommunicato Capiendo to force them into a Jail if they do not pay you great Sums of money for not obeying your Admonitions I beseech you to receive a few Protestant Admonitions agreeable to the Holy Scripture I. That you being a Doctor and Judge of a Court called Spiritual it highly concerneth you to see that you are a true Spiritual man not walking according to the Lusts of the Flesh Spiritual persons ought to maintain Spiritual practices Rom. 8. 1. II. Take heed that you do not force any Persons by your Admonition to come unto the holy Communion who are unholy in their Conversation and that they may escape your Excommunication Venture to Eat and Drink their own Damnation 1 Cor. 11. 20. III. Take heed you do not force the Godly to partake with the Vngodly least you make them Partakers of other mens Sins but purge out the Old Leaven that you may be a new Lump for a little Leaven leaveneth the whole Lump 1 Cor. 5. 6 7 8 9. IV. Take heed you do not that to others which you would not have them do to you viz. You would not be willing the Protestant Dissenters considered as Independents Presbyterians or those falsly called Anabaptists should compel you to take the Holy Sacrament amongst any of them Mat. 5. 12. Therefore why should you do the like V. Take heed that you do not force Persons to the holy Sacrament against their Wills seeing God must be served with a perfect heart and with a willing mind 1 Chron. 28. 9. VI. Take heed you ' do not force Persons to the Holy Sacrament who have not a right unto it or such as for fear of your further Proceedings may come unto it contrary to their own Consciences of whom it may be said as Paul said to the Corinthian Professors 1 Cor. 11. 20. This is not to eat the Lords Supper for the abusing of Gods Ordinance is a losing Gods Ordinance to the Abusers of it and it may be said Such eat mans Dinner rather then the Lords Supper VII Take heed that whilst you proceed in handling Persons about Spiritual things that you let your Proceedings be according to Spiritual Rules contained in the Holy Scriptures in which there is no Directions to inflict outward Penalties upon Persons for not performing of Spiritual Duties VIII Take heed that you do not debase Religion in making Spiritual matters bow and Truckle unto Temporal matters for base ends and let not the Holy Sacrament be made a Qualification for keeping an Alehouse or for being Electors of Magistrates it is enough that men be Free-holders in the Country or free-men and of the Livery in the City for such things IX Take into your Consideration the many miseries that now attend a great number of his Majesties good Subjects some constrained to be as Prisoners in their own Houses others fled into the Countrey others let their Houses and put off their Trades and others remove from those Parishes where they were prosecuted in hopes to be more quiet elsewhere and some are carried to Prison and all by reason of your Proceedings X. Take heed that the Sighs and Cries of poor Women and Children who groan under this Distress do not go up to the God of Compassion and be returned against you as the Cause of them XI Do not think it will be enough for you to say you have proceeded according to Law if you could prove that but consider that the Ecclesiastical Doctors and such as were called Spiritual Judges in Queen Maries days had the same Plea for their Persecuting the poor Protestants XII I Beseech you consider that the Non-Compliance of Protestant-Dissenters in matters of Religion as imposed by you is not for want of Loyalty to his Majesty but for fear they should corrupt Christianity And now worthy Sir be not afraid to put your self upon a Tryal by this Christian Jury of Sober Admonitions which are humbly and honestly Impannelled by His Majesties Loyal Subject and your VVorships Humble Servant James Jones A Famous Example for Ecclesiastical Doctors ANd now Doctor because worthy Examples and good Patterns are sometimes more Prevalent then Admonitions and Precepts I will humbly set before you the good Example of a Famous Doctor of Law belonging to the Ecclesiastical Court in the famous City of Jerusalem Who when the Dissenters and Non-Conformists of that day were cited and brought before the said Ecclesiastical Court and by the Authority thereof were decreed to be Excommunicated out of the Church and out of the World also The aforesaid Doctor of Law favoured and defended the Cause of those poor Dissenters by making an excellent speech against the violent Proceedings of that Court which take as followeth as it is Recorded not in Acts of Parliament but in the Acts of the Apostles Chapter 5. Vers. 34. Then there stood up one in the Counsel a Pharisee named Gamaliel a Doctor of Law had in Reputation of all the People and commanded to put the Apostles forth a little space Vers. 35. And said unto them Ye men of Israel take heed to your selves what ye intend to do as touching these men Vers 38. And now I say unto you Refrain from these men and let them alone for if this Counsel or work be
of Edward the 6th Chap. 2. which take as followeth ANd whereas the Arch-Bishops and Bishops and other Spiritual Persons in this Realm do use to make and send out their Summons Citations and other Processes in their own names and in such Form and manner as was used in the time of the Vsurped Power of the Bishop of Rome contrary to the Form and Order of the Summons and Process of the Common-Law used in this Realm seeing that all Authority of Iurisdiction Spiritual and Temporal is derived and deducted from the Kings Majesty as Supream Head of these Churches and Realms of England and Ireland and so justly acknowledged by the Clergy of the said Realms That all Courts Ecclesiastical within the said two Realms be kept by no other Power or Authority either Forreign or within the Realm but by the Authority of his most excellent Majesty Be it therefore further Enacted by the Authority aforesaid that all Summons and Citations or other Process Ecclesiastical in all Suits and Causes of instance betwixt party and party and all Causes of correction and all Causes of Basterdy or Bigamy or Inquiry de Jure Patronatus Probates of Testaments and Commissions of Administrations of Persons deceased and all Acquittances of and upon Accounts made by the Executors Administrators or Collectors of goods of any dead Person be from the first day of July next Following made in the Name and with the Style of the King as it is in Writs Original or Iudicial at the Common Law and that the Teste thereof be in the Name of the Arch-bishop or bishop or other having Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction who have the commission and Grant of the Authority Ecclesiastical immediately from the Kings Highness and that his Commissary Official or Substitute Exercising Iurisdiction under him shall put his name in the Citation or Process after the Teste Furthermore be it Enacted by the Authority aforesaid that all manner of person or persons who have the Exercise of Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction shall have from the first day of July before expressed in their Seals of Office the Kings Highnesses Arms decently set with certain Characters under the Arms for the Knowledge of the Diocess and shall use no other Seal of Iurisdiction but wherein his Majesties Arms be ingraven upon pain that if any person shall use Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction after the day expressed in this Realm of England Wales or other his Dominions or Territories and not send or make out the Citation or Process in the Kings Name or use any Seal of Iuri sdiction other then before Limited that every such Offender shall incur and run in the Kings Majesties Displeasure and Indignation and suffer Imprisonment at his Highnesses Will and Pleasure Now whether the Ecclesiastical Courts have such Authority from the Kings Majesty by Commission under the great Seal of England and do proceed in the Exercise thereof according to the recited Statute of the 1 Edw. 6. the said Jones doth humbly leave it with Doctor Pinfold to give a Satisfactory Demonstration of it However the said Jones hath yet no cause to conclude that the Ecclesiastical Courts have such Power or have so Legally Proceeded with him and many other Persons first because the first step of Proceeding viz. the Citation was not in the Kings Name Secondly Because Doctor Pinfold refused to show the Kings Commission when humbly desired and honestly demanded in the place where he held his Court which if the said Doctor had been impowered according to the former Statute it had been very easy for him to have given some convincing Demonstration thereof and then the said Jones would have so declared the matter to others of his fellow Protestants as might have prevented many People from finding fault with the said Court and have caused them to give the more Reverence and Respect because of his Majesties Authority according to Law But it may be some will say that the aforesaid Statute of 1 Edw. 6. 2. hath been Repealed The said Jones doth grant that to be true but then let it be well considered by whom it was Repealed and that was by Queen Mary a shee-Popish Successor an Enemy to the Protestent Religion and to Protestants of all sorts who made a change in Ecclesiastical Courts as well as in other Courts Popish Persons being made Judges Officials and Surrogates to manage Ecclesiastical Affairs according to the Popish way and then were the poor Protestants the Dissenters of that time and were handled accordingly being Cited to the Ecclesiastical Courts and Excommunicated and then delivered up to the Temporal Power for Imprisonment and death also because they were the Non-Conformists of that day and did not in all things submit themselves to the Government as Established by Law though they had the holy word and Law of God on their sides This may teach all Persons to take heed of insisting too much upon National Laws in matters of Religion because they who are the Conformists in one Kings Raign may be the Non-Conformists in his Successors Raign and they would not think it a sufficient Argument against them that their Opinions and Practices are contrary to the Government Established by Law But whether the men of Doctors-Commons may not believe that a change of Religion Established by Law is not a sufficient Argument to keep their places and plead Conformity shall be left for time to manifest And now the said Jones will return to the Repeal of the former Statute Anno Primo Mariae Sessio Secunda chap. 2. A Repeal was made of the Statute of the first of Edw. 6. 2. called an Act for the Election of Bishops which is the afore-cited Statute But then it must be again considered the Statute of Repeal of 1 Mary 2. was repealed by King James see Anno 1 Jacobi Regis Chap. 25. in these very words And be it â—urther enacted by the Authority of this present parliament that an Act made in the first year of the Reign of Queen Mary Entituled An Act for the Repeal of certain Statutes made in the time of King Edward the sixth shall stand Repealed and Void So that now it is Evident that Queen Maries repealing Statute being repealed and made void by King James those Statutes of King Edward the sixth are now in full force they being left in the same Life and Strength as when they were first made unless it can be proved that a Repeal of them hath been made since the Statute of 1 Jacobi Chap. 25. And so the said Jones will return to give a further Account of his owne Case and further saith that between the time of the Admonition and the time appointed by Doctor Pinfold for him to take the Sacrament he did advise with such as were learned in the Laws of England and had a Plea in Law prepared and drawn up as an Answer to what he was charged with in the Presentment of the Church-wardens of his said Parish A Copy of which Presentment take as followeth
does insist upon and prays this Court to take the same into their Consideration and that he may be hence Discharged Subscribed and delivered into the Ecclesiastical Court by the hand of James Jones on the Sixth day of December 1682. THE said Jones having thus proceeded he waited several daies thinking he should be Cited to have some kind of Answer to his Plea whether it was Accepted or Rejected but not hearing any thing at all upon the Eleventh of December the said Jones went again to Doctor Pinfolds Court in the Tabernacle of Old-Fish-Street London that so he might observe Proceedings and to make answer if he should be called upon Which day many Pleas were delivered into the said Court which the Doctor received with great civillity and promised a Hearing of them all the next Fryday following The said Jones being not that day called kept silence and did not urge his own Case least he should be counted a Troubler of that Court and therefore resolved to attend Doctor Pinfold the Fryday following concluding that then he should have opportunity to have his Plea debated as well as others Especially considering that his Plea was one of the first that was delivered into that Court. When Fryday came which was the Fourteenth of December the said Jones with a great number of His Majesties Protestant Subjects went to Doctors Commons for Doctor Pinfold had ordered the Hearing of the Pleas to be there in a very large place like a great Hall which looked somewhat more like a Court than the Tabernacle At which time Doctor Pinfold appeared as Judge And Counsellor Welden and Counsellor Hooke and one of the Doctors belonging to the same Court viz. Doctor Rains appeared to Plead for them that had put in their Pleas. And the Cause of Mr. Mortymer and one Mr. Duberry were debated with great Soberness and strength of Argument touching the Errors of the Presentments and that Courts Imposing the Sacrament at such particular times as the the Law doth not Impose it upon any of His Majesties Subjects Doctor Pinfold saw he was hard put to it in the beginning of this work and therefore after a little Debate of the matter between him and the Counsellers he spread forth his hands and said he would hear no more Pleas but he would Answer them all by the Seal of the Court to morrow morning And so the Doctor went away without any Formal Adjourning the Court or dismissing that great Assembly not any Officer appearing to open his mouth so much as to say God save the King And so that great Assembly departed in very peaceable manner as became His Majesties peaceable Subjects though greived in their minds at such proceedings The said Jones was ready to appear in his own Case if he had been called or if there had been opportunity he being prepared with a Supplyment to his Plea drawn up by the Learned in the Law A Copy whereof take as followeth The further Answer and Supplyment of James Jones to the Presentment aforesaid THE said James Jones saving and reserving as in his former Answer he hath already prayed saith That it doth not appear by the said Presentment or pretended Presentment That the same was made upon the Oaths of the said Church-Wardens which the said James Jones is Advised ought to have been Asserted in the said Presentment or pretended Presentment in regard as the said Jones is advised no Presentment is legal and sufficient in the Law to be Answered unto nor ought the said Jones to Answer any Presentment but what is given in upon Oath to this Court. The Laws and Customs of this Land not pemitting any of the Kings Leige Subjects to be any ways vexed or greived or to be called into question by any Court whatsoever thereby to be Charged with any Offence but upon the Oath of One or more persons Nor ought any Accusations to be received by this Court against the said James Jones but upon Oath For that the said James Jones is a free born Subject of England unconvicted or Accused legally of any Crime and therefore is Advised he ought not to make any Answer to such a Presentment until it doth appear to be according to Law 2. And the said James Jones saith That by no Law of this Realm any Lay-man can be compelled or Obliged to Receive the Sacrament more or oftner than three times in the year viz at Easter and the two other times in the year are left free and Indifferent to the party when he is best fitted and prepared And the said James Jones saith he is a Layman and doth not know of any Law that doth Abridge him of that Liberty or oblige him to Receive it oftner or otherwise in any fixed time wherefore forasmuch as the Church-Wardens that made the said Presentment or pretended Presentment could not Legally Present the said James Jones for any Offence but such as do or shal arise since Easter last and for that there is abundantly sufficient time for him the said James Jones to perform what by Law is required viz. to Receive the Sacrament twice betwixt this and Easter and once then And that as the said James Jones hath not broken any Law so neither as he conceives and is advised is there any ground for any Citation or Admonition against him nor that any Admonition should or can limit him where the Law hath left him free nor may this Court Compell him by Ecclesiastical Censures or otherwise to Receive the Holy Sacrament in a shorter or fixed Time or any otherwise limit him than the Law hath specified directed or allowed Which the said James Jones insists upon with what before he hath already insisted on and prayed as before he hath already prayed James Jones An Addition to the Supplyment AND furthermore the said Jones saith That besides all that is contained in his Plea and Supplyment to the said Plea he had more Matter to be Argued in his Defence against the aforesaid Presentment to show the deficiency and insufficiency thereof A brief account of which take as followeth 1. He the said Jones saith That there is no mention of what Diocess the aforesaid Parish and he as Inhabitant thereof is which should have been plainly Expressed in the said Presentment 2. The said Jones saith That he was Prosecuted for Non-conformity before His Majesties Justices of the Peace in the County of Surrey and particularly for not coming to Church which is the same thing mentioned in the Church-Wardens Presentment and for which the said Jones is Excommunicated Now for the said Jones to be punished in the Temporal Courts and in the Ecclesiastical Court at or about the same time seems be contrary to the Statute of Anno primo Regni Eliz. Chap. 2. which saith Provided alwaies and be it Enacted That whatsoever persons Offending in the premises shall for their Offences first receive Punishment of the Ordinary having a Testimonial thereof under the said Ordinaries Seal shall not