cùm vix esset dare causam quin ratione peccati possit deferri ad Ecclesiam Object 3 Stat. Merton gives them no Jurisdiction It 's alledged That it appears by the Statute of Merton that Henry the Third writ in his time to the Bishop to certifie Marriage and Bastardy First It is to be understood therefore that in the time of Pope Alexander the Third Anno Dom. 1160. which was Anno 6. H. 2. in whose time all Matrimonial Causes beonged to the King's Courts This Constitution was made That Children born before Solemnization of Matrimony where Matrimony followed should be as Legitimate to inherit to their Ancestors as those that were born after Matrimony It is likewise further to be known that King John the Father of Henry the Third who made this Statute of Merton following was by the then Pope Innocent Excommunicated King John Excommunicated as likewise at the same time was the Emperor Otho and the whole Kingdom of England Interdicted and so remained for the space of Six Years Three Months and Fourteen Days during all which time there was no Church open for Marriages or Burials but the poorer People were buried like Dogs in Ditches and where they married God knows Through which King John was driven to such distress by his own Bishops and Barons and the French assisting the Pope against him that he was forced before he could get to be released of this Excommunication to pay the Pope vast Sums of Money and to lay down his Crown and Scepter Mantle Sword and Ring the Ensigns of his Royalty at the feet of Pandolphus the Pope's Legat and submit himself to the Mercy and Judgment of the Church Two Days some write Six it was before the Legat restored him to his Crown which he likewise received again on no better Terms then to hold the Kingdom of England and Lordship of Ireland from the See of Rome at the Annual Tribute of a Thousand Marks Silver and the Excommunication was not to be taken off but deferred till further and full satisfaction was made to the Clergy which was not done till Two Years after The Bishops being hereby arrived at so great an height of their Tyrannical Power over this King The Bishops usurped the exercise of Ecclesistical Laws by force over their Kings As that when the King having obtained absolution had gather'd a great Army to have been revenged on the French King the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury told him 't was against his Oath at his Absolution and the King in a great passion reply'd He would not defer the Business for his pleasure seeing Lay-judgment appertained not to him the Arch-Bishop presumed to threaten his native Soveraign that unless he desisted he would Excommunicate him Note therefore That in the time of H. 3. who was the Eldest Son of King John the Bishops continued to assume the Power of Lay-judments as well in Marriages as they did of shutting up of Churches in which they were made from the Pope to whom they had inforced King John to surrender his Crown and not from the King 's Writ as that Statute of Merton shews rather a proud Renunciation and scorn to answer the King 's Writ concerning Marriage then any use permitted by them to the King of the same unless he would as his Father had done lay down again his Crown to them and have Marriage judg'd according to the Law of the Pope for otherwise they tell him plainly They neither will nor can answer his Writ as appears by the Statute it self the words whereof follow 20 H. 3. Cap. 9. To the King 's Writ of Bastardy Whether one being born before Matrimony may Inherit in like manner as he that is born after Matrimony All the Bishops answer'd That they would not nor could not answer to it because it was directly against the common Order of the Church that is meant the Romish Church And all the Bishops instanted the Lords that they would consent that all such as were born afore Matrimony should be Legitimated as well as they who were born within Matrimony as to the succession of Inheritance for so much as the Church accepteth such for Legitimate And all the Earls and Barons answer'd with one voice That they would not change the Laws of the Realm which hitherto have been used and approved Coke 2 part Inst 97. It is said Though the Bishops are Spiritual Persons yet in case of general Bastardy when the King writes to them to certifie who is lawful Heir to any Lands or other Inheritances they ought to certifie according to the Law and Custom of England and not according to the Roman Canons and Constitutions yet if they do make their Certificate according to the Canon Law No remedy against Bishops making Certificates contrary to the King's Laws General Bastardy uâ—urped by Bishops not given them by Law and not the Law of the Land there appears no Remedy unless such a one as is worse then the Disease Sir Galfred le Scrope Cheif Justice saith Before this Statute of Merton the Party pleaded not general Bastardy but that he was born out of Espousals and the Bishop ought to certifie whether he were born before Espousals or not and according to that Certificate to proceed to Judgment according to the Law of the Land And the Prelates answered That they could not nor would not to this Writ answer and therefore ever since special Bastardy viz. that the Defendant c. was born before Espousals hath been Try'd in the King's Courts and general Bastardy in the Bishops Court and herewith agree out old Books and the constant Opinion of the Judges ever since Coke 2 part Inst 99. It being before granted That the Law of England cannot be changed but by an Act of Parliament and Magna Charta being before made and being a Declaration of the ancient Common Law First That no Freeman was to be put out of his Free-hold or Inheritance but per legale Judicium parium and there being no cause of its own Nature more Temporal or more concerning Succession to Temporal Inheritance then Marriage It was contrary to Magna Charta and the Common Law to judg the Fact of it by any other Judges then Juries and the Law of it by any other Judges then those of Temporal Courts and though the Pope and Bishops in those Superstitious times forced the Kings many times as they did King John to yeild his Crown and the Subjects to yeild their Marriages and other Temporal Rights to their Arbitrary and Saleable Sentence for fear of Excommunication yet doth not this any way prove that the Jurisdiction of Marriage was ever granted them by any Law or Act of Parliament or could be without it were contrary to a known Common Law and Act of Parliament which expressly gave the trial of Temporal Rights and Inheritances to a Legale Judicium parium and not to any Ecclesiastical Judges or Laws Now therefore it being clear they had
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
of Laws but that he might get the more into his Snares and so have thereby the more plentiful incomes and fines for Dispensations and Condemnations And this take for the up-shot of this Dance for as the old Comedies used to end in Weddings so all the enterprises of the Pope ended in money Study of Ecclesiastical Laws corrupts Protestants Divers Weights and Measures Ad aliud Tribunal aliud Exmen alias Leges Circuit Subornation Perjury Interfering of Courts 4. The study of the Popish Canons corrupts the choicest Protestant Wits in their Education with Popish principles in which rest the whole hopes of the gains of their profession 5. They introduce divers Weights and divers Measures of justice in the same people 6. They compel the Subjects ad aliud Tribunal then Caesars Judgment Seat ad aliud examen then per legem Terrae ad aliud judicium then legale judicium parium 7. They cause endless Circuits of Action Delays and Costs Subornation and Perjury of Witnesses and grind the people between two Mill-stones of interfering Jurisdictions as appears in the Statute following The Recital of the Statute 9 H. 6.11 following concerning the contention of the Heirs of Edmund Earl of Kent in Parliament relating to a Marriage without a Priest and Temple ITem Whereas by a supplication delivered in this present Parliament by the Commons of the same it was declared by Margaret Dutchess of Clarence Joan Dutchess of York Sisters and amongst others Heirs to Edmund Earl of Kent Richard Duke of York Richard Earl of Salisbury and Alice his Wife Ralph Earl of Westmorland John Lord of Typtost and of Powis and Joyce his Wife and Henry Gray Cousins and other of the Heirs of the said Edmund late Earl as in the same supplication is supposed That is to say the said Duke Son to Ann Daughter of Eleanor another of the Sisters of the said Edmund the said Alice Daughter to Eleanor another Sister of the said Edmund the said Ralph Son to Elizabeth another Sister of the said Edmund the said Joyce Daughter to the said Eleanor Mother of Ann and the said Henry Gray Son to Joan Daughter of the same Eleanor That whereas Eleanor Wife to James Lord Audley pretending calling and affirming her self Daughter and Heir to the said Edmund late Earl of Kent and begotten and born in Marriage pretensed had betwixt him and Constance late Wife of Thomas Lord Dispenser whereby the said supplication is supposed That the said Eleanor Wife to the said James is Bastard and never was any Marriage made had nor solemnized betwixt the said Edmund and Constance but the said Edmund by the Ordinance Will and Agreement of King Henry the Fourth Grand-Father to our Lord the King that now is after great notable and long Ambassage had and sent to the Duke of Millain for a Marriage to be had betwixt the said Edmund and Luce Sister to the said Duke of Millain did take to Wife and openly and solemnly Married the said Luce at London The said Constance then living and being there present not claiming the said Edmund to be her Husband nor any other Dower of his Lands after his decease which Marriage betwixt the said Edmund and Luce so had and solemnized continued without any interruption of the said Constance or of any other during the life of the said Edmund as divers Lords and other credible and notable persons of the said Realm do well remember And how after the decease of the said Edmund the said Luce was endowed of his Lands as his Lawful Wife continuing thereof her Estate peaceably all her life Nevertheless the said Eleanor the Wife of James upon great subtilty and process imagined Privy-labour and other means and coloured ways to the intent that she ought to be certified Mulier by some Ordinary in case that Bastardy should be alledged in her person hath brought as it is said in examination before certain Iudges in the Spiritual-Court not informed nor having knowledge of the said Subtilty Imagined Process Privy-labour and coloured ways certain suborned proofs and persons of her Assent and Covin deposing for her That the said Eleanor the Wife of James was begotten within Marriage had and solemnized betwixt the said Edmund and Constance The said Dutchess the Duke of York and Earl of Salisbury and Alice Earl of Westmerland John Lord of Typtost Joyce and Henry nor any of them thereof warned nor knowing untill long time after the deposition so made whereof the said suppliants do fear them to be grieved and impeached of their Inheritance had by the said Edmund by another subtilty and labour in the Temporal Law to be practised and wrought by the said Lord Audley and Eleanor his Wife As if they will commence any Action against any persons of their own assent and covin or otherwise will cause such persons of such assent and covin to pursue an Action against them as is supposed they intend to do in which action by the covin and assent aforesaid Bastardy ought to be alledged in the person of the said Eleanor Wife of James and thereupon by the assent and covin an Issue is to be taken and a Writ to be sent to some Ordinary where it please them not advertised of the said subtilty assent and covin to certifie if the said Eleanor the Wife of James be Mulier or not before which ordinary the same Eleanor Wife of James will alledge and prove her self Mulier by the said depositions of the said suborned Witnesses And then the party reputed as adversary against the Lord of Audley and Eleanor his Wife in the said action taken or to be taken by assent and covin aforesaid will alledge no proof nor matter nor make any defence before the Ordinary against the same Lord Audley and Eleanor his Wife but suffer the matter before the said Ordinary to proceed according to the meaning of the said Lord Audley and Eleanor his Wife So that it is very likely that the same Ordinary will certifie the said Eleanor the Wife of James Mulier which Certificate so had and made ought by the Law of England to disherit the said Dutchess Duke of York Earl of Salisbury Earl of Westmerland John Lord of Typtost Joyce and Henry and their Issue forever of the whole Inheritance aforesaid Whereupon the premises tenderly considered and to Eschew such subtil disherisons as well in the said Case as in other Cases like in time to come By the Advice and Assent of all the Lords Spiritual and also at the special Request of the said Commons in this present Parliament assembled It is Ordained and Established by Authority of this Parliament That if the said Eleanor the Wife of James be certified Mulier in any Court before this time that no manner of Certificate heretofore made for the said Eleanor Wife of James shall in anywise put to prejudice indamage nor conclude any person or persons but him or his Heirs that was party to the Plea And that from
Dioccss of L. the Sixth day of August Anno Dom. 1606 Matrimony true pure and lawful Per verba de praesenti according to the form and rites of the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England between the said A. B. and C. D. was Solemnized by one Mr. A. V. Clerk in the presence of J. J. W. B. W. W. R. M. Witnesses in this part by the said Bishop examin'd and sworn and of other Witnesses then present the said Parties A. B. and C. D. his Wife being of lawful Age and from all other Matrimonial Contracts free clear and clean as the Witnesses so sworn and examined believe This is the Form of Certificate which carries the best Circumstances and Face of a Marriage which can be put on any But the Bishop will give his Certificate as full of a true pure and lawful Matrimony to Coke's Woman with the Adulterous great Belly who lays it down the next day though no Witness will compurgate from other Contracts and transubstantiate as well the Child Adulterous as lawfully begot to be Child of the Husband yet is not this Certificate neither free from fiction and falsity contrary to the Law of God for it is already shewn That it is impossible to make a verbal Contract per verba de praesenti praeterito or futuro matrimonio and that Matrimony cannot be before a Mother nor a Mother before Conception of a Child and that 't is impossible to make a Ceremonial Law of Marriage either of the Church of England or Rome to be the Moral Law of Marriage instituted by God and besides if there were a lawful Marriage there can be no Sequel or Ergo infer'd That the Adulterous Child of the Woman is lawfully begot because the Marriage was lawful or ought to be Successor to the Husband 's Goods because born of the Wife for there can be properly no Adultery nor Adulterous Issue born but within lawful Marriage But Logician beware the Bishop's Certificate and a Law of Transubstantiation alter the case if thy profane Reason will dispute Faith or Episcopal Infallibility in Marriage Filiation and Succession thou wilt be Excommunicated The good Woman hath the same advantage whether she go from her Husband's House or stay there for if the good-man leave her at home and march abroad himself a Soldiering or Merchandizing if still it be within the four Seas and his Stock increase and multiply at home the while more then abroad he must not be so ill natur'd as not to bear the charg of his better Factress then himself During the late Civil Wars A Souldier finding his Wives Children transubstantiated into his I was credibly informed of a Soldier who left his Wife at home with one Child and was for divers Years so long out in Service that before he returned home again his Wife had two more to increase his number at length he returned home to the Town where he dwelt and the Neighbours as soon as they understood it went in shew to welcome him home but withal to see how he would like the increase of his Children in his absence where after they had sat a while he appeared very kind to his Wife and very fond of his Child which he had left at home at his departure supposing the other to have been some Children of the Neighbours who were come in to play with his 'till a while after seeing those Children by his Fire-side to draw closer to his Wife then strangers use to do he asked Whose the Children were the Wife and answer'd him Thine whereat he was much amazed and demanded how that could be seeing he had not been at home so many Years The Wife replyed thou might'st have stayed at home then and got them thy self if thou would'st so there being no other Answer to be got the poor man was glad to take up this new Bag and Baggage when he thought to have rested For the fiction of Legitimation dared give the Truth of the Soldier the Lie to his face yet he knew not whom to send a Challenge or a Duel to In no better case had he been had he in the Service of his King and Country lost his life in a fight at Sea if within the four Seas what he had got with his own Blood must have gone to an Adulterous Blood at the pleasure of his Wife and the Certificate of the Bishop Of the Law of Intails on Marriage and the mischiefs insuing by them Law of Intails causeth Adulteries and disinherits true Heirs It is before shewen how mischievously the true Heirs are dis-inherited and destroyed by Intails to two Bodies and by Littleton Coke and the Bishops fictions on the same who in despight of Truth Religion Sence and Reason God and Nature will have the Adulterous issue of the Woman preferred before the true and lawful Children of the Man in Succession to the Man's inheritance I shall likewise here touch some other few but fatal mischiefs which the Chains and Fetters of Estates by Intails to two Bodies on Marriages whether these Intails are made by the Pontificial or Temporal Laws do cause for it is to be noted that the Laws of Theodora and the Popes which Enact That no Children shall be capable of Succession to the Father but where the Father and Mother were contracted by a Priest in a Temple is an Intailing of the Inheritance of the Man to the Heirs of the Body of the Woman and an excluding of the Heirs of the Man if she prove adulterous So there cannot properly be said to be any Fee-simple in England No Fee-simple in England for Fee-simple it self is by the Popish Law Intailed to the Heirs of the Body of the Woman begotten beget them who will and the Priest who would not therefore be married himself to a Wife lest she should put a cheat on him and bring forth a yâ—ung Lay-man but take a Curtezan put cunningly the Fee-simple cheat on the simple Lay-man and his Fils de prestre too by making a Law That none should be his Heirs unless begotten on the Body of such Woman as he should give him in a Temple Littleton deceived in Fee-simple So Littleton in his Chapter of Fee-simple and his Commentator on him understood not the words his Heirs for every Fee-simple where a Woman is married by a Priest in a Temple is to go to her Heirs of her Body begotten and not to his and let her have as many Heirs as she will begotten by the Adulterer the Husband's Land shall go to her Heirs but let the Husband who is perhaps turned off by the Wife get as many as he will by another Woman none of those shall be his Heirs For which reason in favour of the true and natural Children and that the Father might have power by Act executed in his Life-time to provide for his own especially where he found his Wives Adulterous as Britton fol. 122. saith That the Forms of Deeds of Feoffment
them cleérly frustrate and dissolved Further also by reason of other Prohibitions then God's Law admitteth for their lucre by that Court invented the dispensation whereof they always reserved to themselves as in kindred or affinity betweén Cousin-germans and so to the fourth degreé carnal knowledge of any of the same kin or affinity before in such outward degreés which else were lawful and be not prohibited by God's-Law and because they would get money by it keep a reputation of their usurped Iurisdiction whereby not only much discord between lawful married persons hath contrary to God's ordinance arisen much debate and suits at Law with wrongful vexation and great damage of the Innocent party hath been procured and many just Marriages brought in doubt and danger of undoing and also many times undone and lawful Heirs disherited whereof there had never else but for his vain-glorious usurpation beén moved any such question since freédom in them was given us by God's Law which ought to be most sure and certain But that notwithstanding marriages have been brought into such an uncertainty thereby that no marriage could be surely knit and bounden but it should lye in either of the parties power and arbiter casting away the fear of God by means and compasses to prove a pre-contract a kindred and alliance or a carnal knowledge to defeat the same and so under the pretence of these allegations afore rehearsed to live all the days of their lives in detestable adultery to the utter destruction of their own Souls and provocation of the terrible wrath of God upon the places where such abominations were used and suffer'd Be it therefore Enacted by the King our Soveraign Lord the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons in this present Parliament assembled and by the Authority of the same That from the first day of the Month July next coming in the year of our Lord God 1540. All and every such Marriages as within this Church of England shall be Contracted betweén lawful Persons as by this Act we declare all Persons to be lawful that be not prohibited by God's Law to marry such Marriages being Contract and Solemnized in the face of the Church and Consummate with Bodily knowledge or fruit of Children or Child being had therein betweén the parties so married shall be by Authority of this present Parliament aforesaid Deémed Iudged and taken to be Lawful Good Iust and Indissolvable notwithstanding any pre-contract or pre-contracts of Matrimony not Consummate with Bodily knowledge which either of the parties so married or both shall have made with any other person or persons before the time of Contracting that Marriage which is Solemnized and Consummate or whereof such fruit is ensued or may ensue as afore and notwithstanding any Dispensation Prescription Law or other thing granted or confirmed by Act or otherwise And that no reservation or prohibition God's Law except shall trouble or impeach any Marriage without the Levitical degrees And that no person of what estate degreé or condition soever he or she be shall after the first day of the Month of July aforesaid be admitted to any of the Spiritual Courts within this the King's Realm or any his Graces other Lands and Dominions to any Process or Plea or Allegation contrary to this aforesaid Act. 1. Here it appears what a necessary stroke this Act gave against the usurped power of Ecclesiastical Laws and Jurisdiction in this and other points of Marriage forbidding any Spiritual Courts within this Realm or any his other Lands and Dominions to admit any Process Plea or Allegation contrary to this Act. And although hereby one of the heads of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction was as is said of the Beasts Rev. 13.3 as it were wounded to death yet so great was the subtilty of the Serpent that the Ecclesiastics soon after by abusing the minority of that most pious though young King Edward the Sixth got all what the wisdom and courage of his Father had Enacted against them repealed by the Son 2 3 Ed. 6. cap. 23. Edward the Sixth abused by Papists in his Minority to repeal his Father's Act of Precontracts And thinking themselves therein not sufficiently secure they again procured the same to be repealed by 1 Eliz. 1. In which repeals I can see nothing but a Papist Plot against them both to revive those Ecclesiastical Laws by their own Authority against themselves which might have yielded most dangerous pretences against their own Legitimations and Marriages and Issue if they had happen'd to have had any For certainly no Marriage or Issue can be secure or certain if any fraudulent person may secretly pre-contract or pre-copulate with any vile person and take Bonds of him or her to release the same upon request and then marry another person Ignorant and Innocent and have Children procreate between them and then cause the party who had the pre-contract or pre-copulation to sue and obtain a Divorce against the Innocent person to be Divorced and Children Bastardized and Disinherited and then to give a release to the party conspiring in the fraud How is it possible to avoid this wickedness if pre-contract or pre-copulation should be allowed a sufficient cause to dissolve Marriage Consummate by the Birth of a Child And how is it possible propriety to be if a distinction be not kept between it and contract and between obligation and possession according to the old Rule of Law Rem Domino vel non Domino vendente duobus in jure est potior traditione prior And the Rule of the Civil Law and fundamental of all Nations who have propriety Obligatio non impedit translationem Dominii sed translatio Dominii praecedens impedit obligationem l. si quidem 1. C. de donat inter virum Notwithstanding all which Reasons preceding and likewise those in the mention'd Act of H. 8. The Ecclesiastics though straining their Wits and Eloquence to the highest in the Act of repeal by Ed. 6. yet cannot alledge the least reason except only this That if pre-contract should not dissolve Marriage the parties might part from one another at the Church door and then the Wedding Dinner would be spoiled which surely may be sufficiently and over satisfied by recompence in value were it a Half-Crown Ordinary But a lost Virginity to an Innocent Woman who was married bona fide and knew nothing of this pre-contract and her Child can never be repaired if the Marriage be dissolved Nulla reparabilis Arte Laesa pudicitia est deperit illa semel Propert. The Act of Repeal of the said most excellent Law of Henry the Eighth against pre-contracts follows 2 3 Ed. 6. cap. 23. 2 3 Ed. 6. cap. 23. WHereas in the 32 year of the Reign of the late King of famous memory King Henry the Eighth Because that many inconveniences had chanced in this Realm by breaking and dissolving of good and lawful Marriages yea whereupon also sometimes Issue and Children had followed under
the colour and pretence of a former Contract made with another the which Contract divers times was but very slenderly proved and often but surmised by the malice of the party who desired to be dissolved from the Marriage which they liked not and to be coupled with another There was an Act made That all and every such Marriages as within the Church of England should be Contracted and Solemnized in the face of the Church and Consummate with Bodily knowledge or fruit of Children or Child being had between the parties so married should be by Authority of the said Parliament Deémed Iudged and taken to be Lawful Good Iust and Indissolvable notwithstanding any pre-contract or pre-contracts of Matrimony not Consummate with Bodily knowledge which either of the Persons so married or both had made with any other Person or Persons before the time of Contracting of that Marriage which is Solemnized or Consummated or whereof such fruit is ensued or may ensue as by the same Act more plainly may appear Since the time of which Act. although the same was Godly meant the unruliness of Men hath ungodlily abused the same and divers inconveniences intolerable in manner to Christian Ears and Eyes followed thereupon Women and Men breaking their own promises and faiths made by the one unto the other so set upon sensuality and pleasure that if after the Contract of Matrimony they might have whom they more favoured and desired they could be contented by lightness of their nature to over-turn all that they had done afore and not afraid in manner even from the very Church-door and Marriage Feast the Man to take another Spouse and the Spouse to take another Husband more for Bodily lust and carnal knowledge then for surety of faith truth or having God in their good remembrance contemning many times also the Commandment of the Ecclesiastical Iudge forbidding the parties having made the Contract to attempt or do any thing in prejudice of the same Be it therefore Enacted by the King's Highness The Lords Spiritual Temporal and the Commons in this present Parliament assembled That as concerning pre-contracts the said former Statute shall from the first day of May next coming cease be repealed and of no force or effect and be reduced to the estate and order of the King 's Ecclesiastical Laws of this Realm which immediately before the making of the said Statute in this case were used in this Realm So that from the said first day of May when any cause or contract of Marriage is pretended to have beén made it shall be lawful to the King 's Ecclesiastical Iudge of that place to hear and examine the said Cause And having the said Contract sufficiently and lawfully proved before him to give sentence for Matrimony commanding Solemnization Co-habitation Consummation and Tractation as it becometh Man and Wife to have with inflicting all such pains upon the disobedients and disturbers thereof as in times past before the said Statute the King 's Ecclesiastical Iudges by the Kings Ecclesiastical Laws ought and might have done if the said Statute had never been made Any Clause Article or Sentence in the said Statute to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding Of the Law making private Marriage or carnal knowledge between persons not prohibited by the Law of God to marry Fornication Private Marriage or carnal knowledge is of two sorts the one without publick Witness the other without any Witness at all and both by the Popish Laws because if permitted they would spoil their gains are prohibited and called clandestine Marriages The publick Witnesses are the Priest or Magistrate private Witnesses are any other Marriage without Witness nor clandestine not appointed by Law The Law of England makes all private Marriage and carnal knowledge without publick Witness Fornication The Law of Scotland in some cases relieves though there be a defect and no publick Witness of the Marriage by the Priest as appears in the before cited Author Craig Feud 269. If there appear private Witnesses of Men or Instruments but in all cases likewise where there are neither publick or private Witnesses they leave it to be Fornication That which I here affirm against both is Marriage without Witness not Fornication 1. That carnal knowledge between parties not prohibited by the Law of God to marry is not Fornication nor any other Crime though in the highest secrecy and without any Testimony of Men or Instruments whatsoever 2. That privacy of Marriage being not prohibited nor publication commanded by God all parties ought to have liberty of Conscience to use the one or the other according as suits best with their occasions As to the first there are these reasons That private Marriage without Witness is not Fornication nor any other Crime 1. There is no Law of God prohibiting private Marriage without Witness Where there is therefore no Law there is no transgression Rom. 4.15 2. It is before shewen That for any human Law to prohibit Marriage or Meat where not prohibited by the Law of God the same came from the Devil 1 Tim. cap. 4. v. 1 2 3. And that therefore the Law of the Pope and Council of Trent which nulls all Marriages except made before a Priest in a Temple and two Witnesses came from the Devil and the Priests of Priapus and Venus for filthy lucre to the Priests 3. Isa 45.7 It is said I create evil And Isa 5.20 It is said Wo unto them that call good evil and evil good That put darkness for light and light for darkness Here is therefore a curse pronounced against those who if God created not marriage without Witnesses evil of their own heads call it evil and where God created it to be in darkness and natural modesty of their own heads will have it by Torch-light and the whole Parish of Witnesses 4. All Fornication is Polyandry and Confusio seminum whereby the Child cannot know the Father nor the Father the Child but here is no such thing it is impossible therefore to be Fornication Liberty Conscience to marry with or without Witnesses As to the second Point which I am to maintain That privacy of Marriage without Witnesses being not prohibited by the Law of God nor publication commanded by the same no human power ought to presume to prohibit what Marriage God hath not prohibited but all persons ought to be left liberty of Conscience to marry publickly or privately with or without Witnesses as it suits best with their conveniences and occasions as is the use and practice in all other civil Contracts which men do with or without Witnesses as they think best and were never accused of sin if they had no Witnesses whereon to bring their Action only that Party is justly charged with sin who wilfully breaks his Contracts because there are no Witnesses but God to prove it against him Against these Positions I shall first answer the Objections and then shew further Reasons to confirm the same
it doth dot null a Protestant's which is not made according to that Form That it doth not null a Papist's Marriage appears by the Act 3 Jac. 5. where a Papist is prohibited to be Married otherwise then in some open Church or Chappel by a Minister Lawfully authorized upon pain that the Man shall lose to be Tenant by the curtesie and the Woman her Dower Widows estate and Frank Bank or if the Woman hath no Land whereof the Man may be Tenant by the curtesie then the Man is to lose a hundred pounds So in case of a Papist nothing ought to be exacted for Non-conformity in Marriage but the express penalties nor can the Marriage of a Papist though not according to the Act be made null or the Children thereby illegitimate why then should a Protestant's 2. Because the Council of Trent which made the Canon That all Marriages should be null and void except contracted before two Witnesses and a Priest in a Temple is a Forein Jurisdiction and the Canon was made after the abolishing all Forein Jurisdiction the same ought not therefore be admitted to null any Marriage in England or illegitimate any Child 3. This is confessed by a Learned Civilian and Canonist of our own belonging to the Ecclesiastaical Court Swimburn Swimburn of Wills and Test 1 part 34. Who there saith That an unsolemn Marriage or not having Canonical Ceremonies is not therefore no Marriage because it is unsolemn the Banes perhaps not being asked or the Marriage not Celebrated in the face of the Church but privately in a Chamber or some other Rite or Ceremony omitted but is nevertheless a true Marriage And in the Margent he adds to this effect Insolemnitas autem est defectus juris civilis non juris naturae nam illa requisita de quibus in C. cumin hibitio de Cland. despon sext non esse deforma substantia matrimonii Legitimationis prolis sed de solennitate tantùm ipsius decore introducta Post Theolog. Canonistas prodidit Granis Consul Civil 168. hanc op communi calculo receptam dicit Jo. Lub Mascard de probat verb. filius conclu 798. n. 8. licet hodie per Concil Tridentin hujusmodi matrimonia fiunt irrita Nos tamen sequimur antiquum jus commune tanquam non mutatum Insolemnity is a defect in the Civil Law and not of the Law of Nature for those requisites of 1 C. inhibitio de clan despon Granis Concil Civil 168. hath delivered after many Divines and Canonists the same not to be of the substance of Matrimony and Legitimation of Children but only introduced for their greater Ornament And Jo. Lub and Mascard de Probat verb. Filius 798. say likewise The same opinion to be received by general approbation and though of late the Council of Trent hath made such Marriages void yet they follow the ancient Common Law as not changed Whereby it appears that the Canon of the Council of Trent to make Marriages not according to the Romish Ceremonies is rejected in many other places and much more in England where all Forein Jurisdiction is abolished and there is no other Law of England if that of the Council of Trent is excluded which makes any Marriage of Protestant or Papist void or illegitimates the Children If the Marriage is not therefore void it is valid and hath all the rights of a valid Marriage and the Children all the rights of Legitimate Children 4. It is already in part and will hereafter be further shewen That carnal knowledge and not Ceremonies are Marriage and that the same and the birth of a Child and not Ceremonies make Matrimony and that both Marriage and Filiation are impossible to be proved by any Witnesses except the Parents admit Therefore if the Canon of Trent were confirmed by Act of Parliament or a thousand Acts of Parliament yet can they not make that Matrimony and Filiation by a Ceremonial Law of Man void which is established by the Moral Law of God as will be further shewen under the Title of Ceremonial Law and Law of God Of the Custom of Super-alimentary gifts in consideration of carnal knowledge between a Man and Woman both before and after Marriage Portions of Daughters Nuptial love is like the gift of God impossible to be bought for mony Cant. 8.7 If a Man would give all the substance of his House for Love it would utterly be contemned Solon the Athenian Law giver ordained That Wives should not bring their Husbands above three Gowns and some other movables of small value Lycurgus instituted That Virgins should be married without Portions 1. That none might remain unmarried for their poverty 2. That none should be taken for their riches but their vertues Plut. In Poland Fathers give no more with their Daughters then their Wedding Clothes And the truth is as to Fahers it comes all to one whether they give Portions with Daughters or none if there were such a Law for if A. and B. have each of them three Sons and three Daughters and A give Portions with his Daughters to the Sons of B and B give back again those Portions with his Daughters to the Sons of A there is nothing got on either side but the trouble and hazard of tumbiing in and out the money and the vexation of Lawyers with their foul Fines and crabbed Concords to do and undo all again like Juglers knots The Venetians had a Law none should give above fifteen hundred Crowns others say sixteen hundred Duckats with a Daughter yet are they very rich Bodin cries out against high Portions and saith That by the Antient custom of Marseilles it was not lawful to give above an hundred Crowns with a Daughter and five Crowns in Apparel And a Law was made by Charles the Ninth forbidding to give a Daughter above a thousand pounds sterling And yet the Ordinance of Charles the fifth doth give no more unto the Daughters of the House of France and though Elizabeth of France Daughter to Philip the Fair was married to the King of England yet had she but Twelve hundred pounds sterling to her Dowry Some will say it was very much considering the scarcity of Gold and Silver in those days but the difference is likewise very great betwixt a thousand pounds and four hundred thousand Crowns It is true she was the goodliest Princess of her Age and of the greatest House that was at that day Henry the Eighth gave for Portions to his Daughters Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth but Ten thousand pounds a piece And if we will seek higher we shall find that in the Law of God the Marriage of a Daughter was taxed but a fifty Skekells which makes at most but four pounds sterling of our money Gifts by Men to Women Amongst the Jews there appeared almost no other distinction in the Scripture between a Wife and a Whore but one took hire and the other none and indeed if there were no
in the said Chancery-Orders Printed 1669. presumes to do in the Court of Conscience what was never heard of to be done in the Courts of Turks Infidels or the most Barbarous Judicatories in the World for he is not ashamed publickly to give License to Cursitors and their Clerks to commit Crimen Falsi which we call Forgery by Antedating Writs taking them out of Returns past or of a former Term by reason of which Forgery of Writs and Forgery of Returns Antedated Capiases Proclamations Exigends and Outlawries Antedated have been likewise Forged and Thousands of Poor men unjustly cast in Goals and miserably undone without any Summons or Hearing and these are likewise the damnable effects of the Chancellours Writs by which as by others the Plaintiffs so here the Defendants are destroyed without Hearing and certainly these Crimes of Antedating and Forgery of Judicial Acts though here Licensed by Orders of Chancellors and Protected by Courts by not Licensing Averments against them are by the Civil Law and Laws of Scotland and of many other Nations both of these and Instruments Death and even by our own the imbeselling of a Record by a Clerk and Counterfeiting of Fines is Felony and if the second time so is the Forgery of Deeds Writings and Court-Rolls and deservedly the Offender better deserving death than a Robber on a High-way and why any Crimes of this Nature should be publickly Licensed to the Ruin of all Truth and Justice by any Chancellour in his Chancery Orders is very strange the mischievous effects of which said Attachments on Affidavit and Antedating Writs and Forgery of Outlawries are notoriously known and not complained of here without good Cause and Testimony and some particular experience of my own to my loss who have as well as others suffer'd in an high degree by the false Affidavit of a Fellow who Subscribed and Swore it by a false name and not his own and likewise procured a Forged Outlawry antedated against me It belongs not to a Chancellour to be a Judg of Equity in England 5. It belongs not to the Chancellours Office to be a Judg of Equity or to make Orders Edicts Laws or Writs and thereby to Imprison the Persons and dispose of the Lands and Goods of the Subjects Arbitrarily and at his Pleasure Coke 4. part 82. saith That all Statutes which give Authority to the Chancellour to determin Offences in Chancery are to be intended only in the Ordinary Court there which proceeds in Latine and is Secundum Legem c. and not in any Extraordinary Court which proceeds in English Secundum Aequum bonum and 37. H. 6.14 27. H. 8.18 it is Resolved That the Court of Chancery Proceeding by English Bill is no Court of Record and therefore it cannot bind either the State of the Subjects Lands or the Property of his Goods or Chattels and therefore they there admit he may Imprison the Person Chancellour cannot bind the Subject's Goods not Persons which is not only a Non sequitur but a contrary conclusion follows on it for if he cannot bind the Subjects Goods à Fortiori he cannot bind his Person For the Life is more than Meat and the Body is more than Raiment Luke 12.23 And though those Common Law Judge of H. 6. and H. 8. so sordidly deliver'd the Subject Prisoner to the Chancellour so as they might keep his Lands and Goods to themselves yet had they no more Law or Right to do it than they had to deliver him Prisoner to the Turks or to send him to the Barbado's for the Subject is no Slave neither ought he to be given or sold for one without his own Assent by his Representative in Parliament and having so good a Protection against the Chancellours and Common Law Judges and the Orders and Writs of both as Magna Charta and the Petition of Right both for his Lands Goods and Person they ought to shew some greater Laws than their Writs and Orders of Courts or Forgeries of Clerks before they presume to invade either 6. There being no Law in England which ever Ordained a Chancellour to be a Judg of Equity or to make Edicts or Orders concerning the same he can pretend no Title thereto unless from the Laws of France and to that effect Polydor Virgil saith The Chancery came in with the Conquest to which though my Lord Coke saith Perperam Erravit because the Mirror saith The Constitutions of the ancient Kings were that every one should have out of the Chancery of the King a Writ Remedial for his Flaint without difficulty yet he himself seems to be in the Error and not Polydore for though the name of Chancellour and Chancery was before the Conquest and divers other Countries use the name of Chancellour as well as England yet the greatest part of the Writs came from Normandy and are mention'd in their Customary as who will peruse it shall find but as to the Writ of Subpoena Centum librarum and Arbitrary Power of the Chancellour and to be a Judg of Equity came first from the Conquest and was never used before nor did it belong to the Chancellour's Office either of England or Scotland that having other employment and more than a Chancellour could do though he never troubled himself with Judgment but left the same to the Judges to whom the King Delegated the cause by Writ and this the very name of Chancellour testifieth who was Originally no other than a Master of Requests to the Prince whom he served and on Petitions deliver'd to him by the Subjects if unfit to be Granted he strook cross lines over them like Cancelli or Lettices by which he Cancell'd them and thence had his name of the Canceller or Chancellour as Turn lib. 11. advers c. 25. and not according to that Fictitious Verse of his Power Hic est qui Leges Regni Cancellat iniquas For when was ever any Chancellour in England allowed to Cancel any Roll or Act of Parliament And when these Petitions for Justice were deliver'd by the People to this Master of Requests call'd the Canceller of such of them as were Evil such as were Just he Cancelld not but on behalf of the Petitioner Granted the Princes Rescript or Warrant to the Praeses Provinciae where the cause of Action arose or the Defendant lived for Actor Sequitur Forum Rei which Rescript or Warrant we now call a Writ containing in it self 1. A Questus est nobis a short recital of the Complaint 2. Si A. fecerit te securum a taking Security or Pledges of the Plaintiff de Prosequendo 3. A Summoneas or Summons of the Defendant to appear before the Prince himself or such Judges as he Delegated though out of the Province or County where he lived which was the Reason of taking Pledges of the Plaintiff because he made the Defendant appear many times Hundreds of Miles from his Home when he might in those days implead him before the President
Brother yâ—ur self when Caught you find In snares for others you designed Learn Who ill Principles extends Against his Foes destroys his Friends And when for us you dig a Pit You are the next fall into it It was your Church what er'e it saith Law Latine left and Latine-Faith And Babbled without Mood or Tense In Church and Court and without Sense That blind might lead the blind and they Rob so all pass'd through their dark way You before Hearing first did Curse And Oulaw too to take a Purse Of which too late you now complain And we to help have tri'd in vain The Papist too brought Fictions in And Forgery that foulest Sin The Papists too were the first sharks And sate in Courts Bishops and Clerks And left their Cursed Presidents Of Forms for their wicked Intents Which still continue now and you As well as we begin to Rue At least the Poor of either side Though they touch not the Prelat's Pride And if you Perish by the same Who but your selves now can you blame The Protestant at length Essai'd Although by greater Power dismai'd Forms Fictions and Forgeries By Papist left to blind the Eyes Of Justice and Religion And in a Language still unknown And the High Places of old Baal Which did both Souls and Bodies Thrall To take away and teach their Youth Worship in Spirit and in Truth And Justice too by those who swayed In a True Ballance to be weighed For Fictions and Forgeries Come from the Father of all Lies But still the Protestant in vain To Supreme Power did complain While Papist-Peers in Parliament And Pensioners the Publick Rent Force from the Common's Skin and Bones It was in vain to make our moanes From Justice then with many Jeers You kept and first made us shed Tears Although deceived in your hope Perhaps now from your selves they drop And you and we suffer alike From strokes which you and us did strike Am I not in as bad a Case As you within this Dismal Place And me to make yet in a worse They Outlaw may as well as Curse You have unto the Dreadful Doom Of God Appeal'd which is to come You nothing owe I to the same Appeal and his most Dreadful Name I have committed no Offence ' Gainst men nor ' gainst my Conscience For which I 'm Sentenc'd to lie here And be your Fellow-Prisoner Who Rule the Conscience can but God Or who can change it with a Nod I see not when the Bishop winks Or if I think not as he thinks Or cannot by Implicit Faith Believe what e're the Bishop saith Is' t just because that I cannot I should lie here to Starve or Rot Pap. Brother I 'le freely tell my mind And say where Protestants are kind To Catholicks in Recompence They each enjoy their Conscience And Toleration hath united Not only those before Recited But bloody Wars could not be ceased In Germany 'till Conscience eased On each side was in the same Nation By a mutual Toleration The like in Hungary was acted And no Peace there could be transacted Between the Emperor and them 'Till Grafted both on the same Stem And many other like appear Too many to be Cited here They are not Commons but our Peers Who set us both now by the Ears They Pensions take from Rome and France Poor Us to Tyburne to advance And with some part when 't is espi'd They Pardon Buy and us Deride Why then should English Freedom miss More than our Neighbour Dutch or Swiss Or Driven be to Gaol or Church Conscience and Justice both to Lurch Prot. Brother I 'm not so void of Sense As Punishment on Conscience To wish who in so high degree Suffer for it my self you see But on what Terms the wiser State Will both Religions Tolerate I cannot tell or if no fears They have of Poor but only Peers I know not only this I say We should small Prudence then bewray To trie for others and in vain 'Till our own Liberty we gain Pap. Yet we in this do both agree Though Toleration none there be And both alike for this contend That whether he is Foe or Friend Yet before Hearing he ought not In Cruel Prison Starve or Rot And Magna Charta none can be Of Property or Liberty Unless 't is in the same Expres't Before a Judgment no Arrest 7. The Three Kingdoms condemn one another without Hearing by a Non-Union of their Three Parliaments Of the Fatal Danger threatning all Protestants by the Division of the Three Parliaments of England Scotland and Ireland and the inestimable Benefits ensue the Union of the same in one House Unless the Supreme Judicatory is rightly constituted to Judg between the King and his Subjects Church and Church Kingdom and Kingdom Nation and Nation Possession and Succession and between one Subject and another it is in vain to constitute inferior Judicatories to any of those great ends of Preservation of Religion and Justice Peace and Truth Liberty and Propriety for there being no Supremeequal Judg constitute there will-be no inferior Judg equally constitute and being no equal Judg Supreme or inferior if Kingdoms happen to become Plaintiffs and Defendants one against another for Religion or any other Quariel they are necessitated to condemn one another without Hearing because they agree not by what Judg they will be heard but will like the Scythians worship the Sword and Fortune for the Gods and Judges of the World and begin their Sute one against another with Execution by the unjust Capiases and Outlawries of War and Proclamations of the same by the Trumpet 1. First therefore the great danger these Three Protestant Kingdoms lie under is If any Papist should again as they have by their perpetual Plots hitherto endeavour'd to kindle a Civil War there can be nâ— Judg equal Elected by them able without the Persons Elected sit in one House to punish the Incendiaries and prevent the War Succession of the Crown divided by divided Parliaments 2. If the Succession of the Crown should happen to become contentious between Competitors and the Parliaments continue as they do divided in several Houses and several Places the Three Kingdoms if they depart from the immutable Moral Law of God either to the Ecclesiastical Laws of their several Churches or to the Temporal Laws of the several Kingdoms they may each have several Laws Privileges and Customs of Succession one from another and the Houses of Lords may have different Customs and pretences to Judicatories from Houses of Commons and the Episcopal Assemblies and Synods may pretend several Rights of Judicature from the Law-Courts so every Kingdom may happen to be divided in their Sentence of Succession and one to Judg it to A. another to B. another to C. the House of Lords in one to Judg it to D. in the other to E. in the other to F. the House of Commons to Judg it in one to G. in the other to H. in the other to
Luke 15.10 There is joy in the presence of the Angels of God over one Sinner that Repenteth Nor though they call themselves Shepherd of the Flock are they like the good Shepherd of whom Christ speaketh Matth. 18.12 If a man have an Hundred Sheep and one of them be gone astray doth he not leave the Ninety and Nine and goeth into the Mountains and seeketh that which is gone astray And if so be that he find it Verily I say unto you he rejoiceth more of that Sheep than of the Ninety and Nine which went not astray Nor like Christ who saith John 8.50 I seek not my own Glory Nor like Paul who saith 2 Cor. 12.14 I seek not yours but you And Hebr. 13.14 Here have we no continuing City but we seek one to come Nor like those he saith died in the Faith Hebr. 11.13 Not having received the Promises but having seen them afar off and were persuaded of them and embraced them and confessed that they were strangers and Pilgrims on the Earth For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a Countrey And truly if they had been mindful of that Countrey from whence they came out they might have had opportunity to have returned But now they desire a better Countrey that is an Heavenly None of which Examples would the Alexandrian or Syadan Bishop nor many others follow nor do they with their Penal Tests Forms and Ceremonies Persecute to Convert but to Pervert and to that end form their Tests Oaths and Ceremonies as contrary to Sense Reason and Conscience as they can possible and as numerous as they are in the 39. Articles that they may have all either under blind obedience and take Arbitrarily from them what they please or if they will not Renounce their Sense Reason and Conscience they may have a pretence to Plunder them of their Goods and a Terrible Disappointment it would be to Bishops and their Chaplains if all Ministers should have turn'd Conformists to their Faith Oaths Subscriptions and Ceremonies for then would all Pluralities have been supplied with single Incumbents Residents on the Places and perhaps the greater part of the Bishopricks and Benefices with men more above Exception than many of the Possessors may be and there might have been many Peters in the Church yet not a Simon found amongst them 9. There ought to be no Compulsion used to Papists to Pray in a Temple because it is already proved to be Prohibited by Christ for any to Pray in a Temple or publick Place except the Parties are agreed 10. It is a Compulsion many times of a doubtful Conscience either to Sin or Damnation as some have doubted Rom. 14.23 or Martyrdom or Hypocrisie to save their Lives or Goods 11. It is as great a mockery of God to force men to play the Hypocrites in Ceremonies or Prayers against their Consciences in a place of Publick Convention as to drive Horses and other Cattle into the Church at the time of Prayer there and as Banks did his Horse make them fall on their Knees and Worship the Cross 12. Compulsion of Papists or Protestants to Forms of Common-Prayer deprives them of the Benefit of being taught the Gospel by Reason that no distinction of the place and time of Prayer and Preaching is made according to the Examples and Precepts of Christ already shewn for all the Common-Prayer being Formed by Popes or Bishops is chopt into so many pieces of Prayers Chapters Lessons Responds Letanies Psalms pieces of Epistles pieces of Gospels c. as Confound both Method and Memory and thereby while the People endeavour to Pray and Learn both at once they can do neither effectually 13. Compulsion to Common-Prayer deprives both Papist Protestant of the Benefit of either Reading or Hearing the Scripture Read 1. Because it is Read in such a mangled immethodical way neither according to the Contexture of the History nor according to the Titles of a Concordance or Polyanthy but both Examples and Precepts broken off confusedly from what preceded or followed them whereby they are made unintelligible and not again joined with such of one another as should mutually expound them and both Prayers and Psalms are Read in such a Canting Note in Cathedrals as they are not intelligible so as there is no human Author Art or Science Read or Taught so confusedly immethodically and Cantingly as the Scripture whereby such as cannot Read themselves never hear the same Read in any Edifying way their whole Lives which is done only on design of gain to make more Dissentient Ministers and fewer of the Trade 2. Those who are able to Read themselves are thereby deprived of the Reading the same at their Homes the Papists by their own Priests being not suffer'd to have an English Bible in their Houses and the Protestants in England being not suffer'd by their Priests to keep themselves at their Houses whereas in Holland many Devout Pious Protestants never go to Churches to hear the Scripture Read but Read the same on Sundays at home at their own Houses and are far more ready and skilful and more Pious in practice of the same than those that do Repair to the Publick Reading neither is there any man Compell'd to Church or Chappel there but may if they desire follow the Precept of Christ to Read or Pray privately in their Closet and the Example of the Primitive Christians amongst whom there was not a Temple or Altar for neer 300 Years after Christ till Constantine corrupted them to set up Cathedrals 3. Many things in the Common-Prayer being offensive to many Consciences I dispute not whether weak or strong or whether they are offences given or taken but being offensive to many such as are offended and who would gladly come to the Church to hear the Scripture Read by it self or Expounded in an Exposition or Lecture or Sermon if the same were done as Christ always used to do it in a Synagogue without Prayer mixt with it the Reasons whereof are sufficiently before shew p. 〈◊〉 but some Consciences scrupling to mix any Prayers with Preaching in a Synagogue contrary to the Precept of Christ others scrupling the Forms of Common-Prayer whether single or mixt they lose the hearing of Scripture Read because they shall be forced to hear such Prayers as offend them Read or mixt with it as long as they are compell'd how can it be expected but the number of Non-Conformists will be far greater than Conformists Nonconformity to the Prayer before Sermon 14. As the mixture of Common-Prayer deprives both Papists and Protestant of the Benefit of hearing the Scripture Read in the Historical Contexture and Order wherein it was left written so the Prayer before Sermon deprives them of the Benefit of hearing the Scripture Expounded either in that Method and Order it was left written or in any other Order or Method appointed by the King and Parliament of such matters as are necessary to Salvation and