Cohabitation 3. No lawful Impediment why the Parties should not Marry 4. Chastity and Children 5. Length of time and no Judicial Questioning and Sentence to the contrary while alive 7. Promise of Marriage 8. Acknowledgment by the Father of the Children either by word or writing or by giving them Aliment and Education as Children As to the First Fame and Reputation which are Voces opinio Vulgi are an usual Presumption of Marriage As to the Second The Cannon Law it self Jus Pontificium praesumit ex diuturna Cohabitatione filium esse Legitimum Craig Feud 270. Cohabitation for any time is so high a Presumption of Marriage as it Legitimates the Son And amongst the Old Romans one of their chief ways of Lawful Marriage without Ceremony of Priest or Temple was Vsus that is Cohabitation and Conjugal Society for the space of a year and this was reputed so considerable a time as it made a Marriage by Prescription As to the Third which is where there is no Lawful Impediment nor the Parties are prohibited by the Law of God to Marry this makes a presumption of Marriage because it was no Sin for them by the Law of God to Marry As to the Fourth cause of Presumption which is Chastity and Children where all the Circumstances concur of Lawful Marriage as Cohabitation no Lawful Impediment Chastity of the Lady Children and acknowledgment by the Father of the Children to be his these are not only the strongest presumptions which can be made of a Lawful Marriage but are of themselves as is fully proved in the following Discourse without any Ceremony a Marriage Lawful Holy and Indissoluble As to the Fifth cause of presumption which is no Judicial Questioning and Sentence against the Marriage in the space of Thirty years in which time all Witnesses may be Dead and Writings lost or burnt the same is so high as by the Laws of the Land and of all Nations no proof ought to be admitted to the contrary nor no questioning now to be permitted of the same because it is beyond the time of Limitation of Actions and the peace and security of all Families and Kingdoms must be destroyed should Witnesses be required Thirty years after of all such Marriages as have not been Judicially question'd and sentenced in all that time As to the Sixth cause of presumption which is the Death of either Party without being Judicially question'd or sentenced while alive This by the Law of God and of the Land is so high a presumption for the Parents and so necessary justice for the Children That no Probation ought to be admitted to the contrary nor ought or can the Legitimation of the Child be question'd after the Death of either Parent yea though the Marriage of the Parents were Unlawful as if a man Marry his own Sister which is a far more Unlawful Marriage than to Marry without a Papal or Episcopal Ceremony and have Issue by her if she die before a Judicial hearing and sentence pass'd against her her Children are Inheritable and their Legitimation can never be question'd for she that is Deceased cannot be Summon'd before any Humane Tribunal And if Sentence should be there pass'd against her she is condemn'd without Hearing and therefore that the Children ought to be Legitimate and Inheritable hath been resolved by the Parliament it self as may appear Bro. Deraignement 5. Bro. Bastardy 23.44 24 H. 8. 39 E. 3.32 And it is for the same reason very clear That if Queen Katherine the Wife of H. 8. had died before Judicial Sentence pass'd against her the Legitimation of his Daughter by her who was afterwards Queen Mary could never have been question'd and should the Legitimation of the Royal Lines of England Scotland and Ireland or any other Kingdom in the World be permitted to be question'd after the Death of one or both of the Parents It is impossible but all certainty and security of the Successions to them must be utterly destroyed As to the Seventh cause of presumption which is presumption of a Promise of Marriage to shew which all the foremention'd circumstances concur and though the Ecclesiasticks of Scotland keep the people under sufficient servility of their Ceremonies of Marriage yet even thereby the Laws of the Land doth promise of Marriage without any Proclamation of Banns or other Ceremony both Endow the Mother and Legitimate the Children as appears Craig Feud 269.270 As to the last Cause of Presumption which is Filiation not only the Civil Law but the Law of God in the Scripture Legitimates every Son and makes him Heir to the Father who begot him either of a Primogenial or Filial Portion except of Inheritance intail'd to a former Wife as was that of Abraham to Sarah and whether this Probation of Filiation is made by the Son or Father as in the Civil Law is said Filium alicujus se esse probans videtur probare se esse Legitimum § Et ib. ad Marg. de Adopt who proves himself a Son to any proves himself Legitimate And by the same Law such as are proved Children are Legitimated though there were no Ceremonies of Marriage Authen Collation 6. Novella 174. Tit. 3. quibus modis Natur. cap. primo Siquis 3530. And the Scripture is Positive in the point Rom. 8.17 If Children then Heirs Et Gal. 4.7 If a Son then an Heir 5. To return again to other Laws of the Land besides those of Presumptions It is not necessary to prove a Lawful Marriage by proving Ceremonies But all Marriage is declared Lawful whether with or without Ceremonies by the Doctrine of the Church of England and the Law of the Land which is not Prohibited by the Law of God as appears by the 32 Art of the 39 Articles Roger's Articles p. 185. 187 188. as shewn more at large in the Discourse following and likewise in the Statute 32 H. 8. cap. 38. of Precontracts wherein there is this Clause And that no Reservation or Prohibition God's Law except shall Trouble or Impeach any Marriage without the Levitical Degrees Whereby it is clear that this Marriage being without the Levitical Degrees and not Prohibited by the Law of God ought not by the express words of the Act of Parliament to be troubled or impeach'd by any Humane Law whatsoever Ecclesiastical or Temporal Which said Act of Parliament except as to matter of Pre-contracts stands unrepealed to this Day and of full force And the Reasons of the said Act are expressed in the Preamble of the same to be because the Usurped Power of the Bishop of Rome hath always intangled and troubled the meer Jurisdiction and Regal Power of this Realm of England and also unquieted much the Subjects of the same by his Usurped Power in them and by making that Unlawful which by God's Word is Lawful both in Marriages and other things 6. They whom no Law of the Land makes Illegitimate are Legitimate by the Law of the Land But no Law of the Land either
ubi Rex pervenerit ipsi sibi curatores Eligere posset That the King being under the Age of Fourteen Years Election should be made of a Guardian of great Estate and Wisdom who should be his Regent in the mean while and Administer his Affairs in the King's Name till he arrived at the Age of Fourteen and when he came to that Age he himself might choose his own Guardians Which Election of a Guardian must be intended to be by Parliament for it appears by the words That the Infant or Minor King must not nor is able to choose himself till he come to the Age of Fourteen And it is contrary to Reason that any other should be his own Judge to choose himself to have to himself to his own use the Custody of the Person of the King Dangerous to Commit the Guardianship of a Minor prince to the next Major in whom all his Subjects have an Interest And it would be very Dangerous to the Infant if he who is next Successor to the Crown should get the Custody of the Heir into his hands There is no Third Power can be therefore above Exception who ought to choose the Guardian of an Infant King but the Parliament And accordingly we find it to be the constant Practice of that Kingdom as appears Buchanan Lib. 19. p. 687. when it is said Sed cum homines usu rerum Edocti Perspicerint vix fieri posse ut in tanta fortunae inconstantia non aliquando in pueros aut alioqui Regno ineundo Impares haeredes jus summi Magistratus inciderit c. But when taught by Experience men saw that it could not be but in so great inconstancy of Fortune but the Right of the Supreme Magistracy might fall amongst Children or other Heirs unfit to Govern a Kingdom they Ordained That in the mean time one should be Elected Regent who Excell'd the rest in Estate and Counsel Guardians chosen by Parliament the only Security of Kings in Minority and our Ancestors following this way for the space of Six hundred Years have transmitted thereby the Kingdom safe to Posterity So Robert Bruce being dead Thomas Randolph Earl of Murray and Donald Earl of Mar Andrew Murray John Randolph Robert Stuart succeeded singly and sometimes more number are by Parliament chosen into that place So James II. being a child Alexander Leviston being of no Kin nor of the chief Rank of Nobility but only a Knight and of more repute for Prudence then Antient Descent was elected to be his Guardian Neither can there be alledged any want of persons of the Royal Stock to have been the cause of such choice for there was at that time John Kennedy chief of his Family and King James his Nephew by his Sister there were his Uncles James Kennedy Archbishop of St. Andrews Primate of the whole Kingdom in all kind of Vertue and his Brother born of the Kings Aunt Douglass Earl of Angus was not remote from the Kings Blood Archibald Earl of Douglas in Power almost equal to the King and superiour to any of the rest yet did none of these complain of any Injustice in the Parliament for making another choice and not long after four Guardians were given to James III. not taken for the Kindred but chosen by Parliament It was but of late that John Duke of Albin was sent for by the Nobility out of France to moderate the Affairs of Scotland James I. being then a child and was confirmed by a publick Act of Parliament Neither was it done because he was next of Kin for he had an Elder Brother called Alexander But James I. being absent Robert his Uncle ruled the Kingdom And with what Right Was he taken for nearness of Blood No he was chosen by the People Nor so neither How then was he created When Robert III. was so sick in body and mind that he was not able to discharge his Office he made his Brother Robert his Vice-Roy and commended his Children to him So his Brother starved to death David his Eldest Son and sought how to destroy likewise James his Younger had he not escaped by slight But he being now placed in possession of his Tyranny and his Brother dead with grief without Parliament or assent of the People he kept it and by force left it to his Son Mordach c. Buchanan proceeds p. 688. Quid enim minus justum esse poterat quam aetatem innoxiam atque infirmam ejus fidei committere qui pupilli sibi crediti mortem semper expectat optat What can be more injust then to commit the innocent and weak Age to one who always hopes for or wishes the death of the Pupil intrusted in his hands And after he saith Laodice the Queen of the Cappadoceans is related to have killed every one of her children as in order they arrived at fourteen years of age to gain thereby a little more time to reign If a Mother will destroy her Children to get the use of a little time what shall we think will their old Enemies dare yea will they not dare to do inflamed with the Brands of Covetousness to cruelty against a Child hindering their hopes of a perpetual Kingdom If this Example seems old and obscure or far-fetch'd I will add more clear and nearer home For who is so ignorant of things so lately acted as he knows not Galeacius Sfortia though at mans Estate though married and the Son in Law of a Potent King to be killed by Lodowick his Uncle Or to whom are the Calamities unknown which ensued that cruel Parricide the most beautiful Region of Italy brought almost to a Devastation the Sfortian Family The not abolishing Episcopal Laws which pretend to Illegitimate whom they please the sense of the Murder of Edward V. and his Brother so fruitful of valiant men destroyed Barbarians let into the most pleasant Country watered by Po. Against whose Rapine nothing was safe against whose Cruelty nothing was secure Who hath been born in the soil of Great Britain and hath not heard of the cruel Murder by Richard III. King of England of the Sons of his Brother Edward IV A great cause of the murder likewise of these Princes was that Papal and Episcopal Laws were not abolished which pretend to illegitimate whom they please Answ 5 Making a Kingdom hereditary to the eldest Son weakens not the Power of Parliaments And 5. as to the Reason against these Statutes which maketh the Crown hereditary to the eldest Son that the same enervate the strength of Parliaments and without a Contract made by every Prince with a Parliament no Government can be just in regard if he receives not the Kingdom by Contract he assumes it by Conquest which over a Free Nation is unjust To which is answered First that these Acts of Parliament of England and Scotland which entail the Crown to the Eldest Son do no way weaken but confirm and establish the Power of Parliaments and
Canterbury cannot be sent unto to certifie because it was made Beyond-sea the Foreign Catholick Bishop cannot be sent unto to certifie because he is out of the Jurisdiction And besides by Acts of Parliament all Foreign Certificates and all other Foreign Acts of Jurisdiction from the Bishop of Rome or any other Foreign Bishop ought not to be admitted here besides no Foreign Witness can either be Summon'd to appear here or to be examin'd there So as to the Fact of Ceremonies were they never so many at the Marriage they are impossible to be brought to an equal Tryal or Probation here and the Ceremony that 't was in a Church consecrated by a Bishop for as Coke says no House can be a Church without such Consecration which is impossible to be Sworn by any Witness For none but God can make place or time Holy and not a Bishop there remains therefore nothing which ought or can as to the Fact of Marriage be proved here but the Substance of Marriage which is Cohabitation Conjugal Society Chastity and Children which are Notorious and need no Foreign Witnesses Then as to to the Law of the Ceremonies the Protestant Ceremonies of Marriage are by the Law in a Catholick Country Heresie and forbidden The Catholick Ceremonies are forbidden here These Ceremonies therefore in a Foreign Marriage can neither be judged here by the Law of the Catholick Country because it concerns Inheritance which lyes in England nor by the Law of England because the Fact was done in a Foreign County it ought therefore only to be judged by the Moral Law of God which judgeth according to Substance and not Ceremonies and is the Universal Law of all Nations and Countries 2. It were impertinent to prove Ceremonies before a Parliament because the same being a Court of Equity ought to judge according to Trust and Intention of Marriage though the Witness of Ceremonies are Dead and Writings lost or burnt whereby any verbal Promise or Ceremonial form of Words cannot be proved 3. God forbid the Representative of the People in Parliament whom they have intrusted with all they have in Matters of such infinite weight should be so Ludicrous as to cast away the safety of the King's Person to Extinguish his Lineal Blood to Destroy the Religion Liberty Propriety and Lives of all his Protestant Subjects in the Three Kingdoms on such Toys as that there are no Witnesses to be got to prove Ceremonies of Verba de Praesenti or With my Body I thee worship or to Swear that the Ring was Gold and not Brass or that it was put on the fourth Finger and not on the fifth or not on the Tumb but on the Finger 4. It is impertinent to prove Ceremonies in a Court of Equity especially in the Supreme Court of Equity which a Parliament is who ought to judge Right Secundum aequum Bonum without any regard to Ceremonies as to make Estates good without Livery of Seisin Attornment Inrolement Fine Common Recovery or the like so likewise ought they to judge without any regard of the Ceremonies and Formalities of Pleadings according to the Truth and Merits of the Cause yea they ought not only to judge without but contrary to all Ceremonies and Formalities if they find them Estopples to Truth and Bars to Equity yea contrary to the Law it self if they find it Summum Jus. 5. In this very point of Legitimation the High Court of Parliament ought to judge according to Truth and Equity though contrary to all Ecclesiastical Laws and contrary to all Episcopal Certificates as appears by Coke expresly Part 4. fol. 36. where he saith The Parliament may Bastard a Child that is by Law Legitimate viz. Begotten by an Adulterer the Husband being within the four Sees as Rot. Parl. 5. Et 6 E. 6. in the Marquess of Winchester's Case and may Legitimate one that is by Law Illegitimate and born before Marriage that is without the Ceremonies of Marriage And this may be done Absolutely or with Exception of which later way take one Example for many John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster had by Katharine Swinford who was not Married with the Ceremony of a Priest and a Temple four Children Slander'd in those Popish Times with the Name of Illegitimate viz. Henry John Thomas and Joan and because they were Born at Beaufort in France they were vulgarly called Henry de Beaufort c. After at a Parliament holden 20 R. 2. The King by Act of Parliament in the form of a Charter doth Legitimate these three Sons and Joan the Daughter with an Exception which is Excepta dignitate Regali which shews that the King and Parliament may when they please Legitimate according to the Moral Law of God and not only without but contrary to Ceremonies And though they shall not yet is the Legitimation by the Law of God above that of all Humane Laws And though a Right thereby Dormit aliquando yet Moritur nunquam as appears in Henry the Seventh who long after derived his Title from John de Beaufort Duke of Somerset the second Son of John of Gaunt by Katharine Swinford who was only Married according to the Moral Law of God and without the Ceremonies of a Priest and a Temple notwithstanding the Exception in the Act R. 2. Excepta dignitate Regali for what that Act denied him a later Act gave him and before he Married with the Lady Elizabeth the Daughter of Edward the Fourth and Heir of the House of York the Crown was by Act of Parliament intailed to Henry the Seventh and the Heirs of his Body and indeed all Settlements of the Crown by Act of Parliament both in the House of York and Lancaster are in themselves Legitimations without any naming the word where there hath been any Scruples concerning the same and though there have been none are the surest and most undisputable Titles of Successors and of the greatest Advantage to the Possessors which is visible in the Examples of the Kings of England and Scotland the greatest part of whom have made use of Acts of Parliament though their Titles have been unquestionable Upon the whole it seems not possible for any Title of Succession to be more clear both in Divinity Law and Equity than the present except by Act of Parliament wherein the Person is particularly named which is only wanting to make known to others what the same is already in it self And to declare by a particular Act what is already declared by this General Act of E. 3. And all other the General Laws of God and the Land before mention'd WILL. LAWRENCE THE CONTENTS OF The Third BOOK CAP. I. THe words of the Statute 25 E. 3. cap. 2. De Proditionibus as in the Original French Page 1. The Statute of Kenneth 3. and Malcolm Mackenneth 2. concerning the Succession to the Crown of Scotland as related by Buchanan Page 2. Objections against these Statutes made chiefly by Buchanan himself and the Policy of them in
Page 118. CAP. II. WHether necessary in the present juncture of Affairs for the King and Parliament to declare a Protestant Successor to the Three Kingdoms Page 121. Objections against it Answer'd Obj. 1. Declaring a Protestant Successor by the King and Parliament makes a Kingdom Elective and not Hereditary ibid. Obj. 2. Acts of Precedent Parliaments cannot bind Subsequent from repeal Page 122. Obj. 3. Acts of Parliament cannot bind the Power of the Sword from cutting off those Acts by Conquest Page 123. Obj. 4. Declaring a Successor by Act of Parliament incites him to be disobedient and rebellious ibid. Obj. 5. The Ottoman Emperors never declare a Successor Page 124. Obj. 6. Queen Elizabeth refused to Declare a Successor Page 127. Reasons for declaring a Protestant Successor by the King and Parliament with the Great Dangers insue the neglect Page 132. 1. Danger to the Conscience of the Prince ibid. 2. Danger by the incertainty of the Laws of Succession of the Crown Page 133. 3. Danger of the Arbitrary disposing of the Crown by Rome or Canterbury Page 134. 4. Danger of the Predominancy of Papal and Episcopal Laws of Marriage Filiation and Succession above the Moral Law of God and the Laws of the Land ibid. 5. Danger to the King's Person his Lineal Heirs and House Page 135. 6. Danger of Lineal and Collateral Heirs to destroy one another ibid. 7. Danger if the King 's Eldest Son should happen to die before his Father leaving his Heir and younger Children in Minority ibid. 8. Danger of a Successor without Assent of the People Page 137. 9. Danger of a Papist Successor Page 138. A Papist Successor more dangerous to Papists themselves than a Protestant Successor ibid. A Papist Successor or Male utterly Destructive to Protestants and a Female doubly Destructive Page 160. 10. Danger in regard of Foreign Princes Page 182. 11. Danger of exposing Succession to Counterfeit Wills and Testaments Page 190. 12. Danger of incouraging Vsurpers Page 191. 13. Danger in doubtful Titles of Interregnums Page 192. 14. Danger of Cantonizing the Kingdoms ibid. 15. Danger of Exposing the Succession of the Kingdoms to Sale Page 193. 16. Danger of Exposing the Succession of the Kingdoms to Conquest Page 197. LIB III. CHAP. I. The words of the Statute 25 E. 3. cap. 2. De Proditionibus as in the Original French AUxint pur ceo que divers Opinions ont estre eins ceax heurs quel Case doit estre dit Treason et en quel nemy le Roy a le request des Seigniors et Commons ad fait declarisment que ensuist cestassavoire quant home fait compasser ou imaginer la Mort nostre Seignior le Roy Madame sa compaigne ou de lour fits Eigne et Heir The words as Translated by Pulton and Coke into English WHereas divers Opinions have been before this time in what case Treason shall be said and in what not the King at the request of the Lords and Commons hath made a Declaration in the manner as hereafter followeth That is to say When a man doth Compass or Imagine the Death of our Lord the King of our Lady his Queen or of their Eldest Son and Heir The Statutes of Kenneth the Third and Malcolm Mackenneth the Second as related by Buchanan Lib. 6. Rer. Scot. p. 191 196. Adjectae sunt Aliae leges ut quemadmodum Regi maximus natu filius in regnum Succederit ita filio ante Patrem defuncto nepos avo subrogaretur Englished There were other Lawes also added That as the Eldest Son of the King should succeed to him in his Kingdom So if such Son dyed before the Father the Nephew should succeed in his stead to his Grandfather Another Law of Scotland mention'd by Skene Reg. Majest Lib. 2. cap. 33. De Nepote ex Primogenito filio Nepos ex filio Primogenito mortuo jure representationis succedit Avo suo filium postnatum Avi id est Avunculum suum excludit Englished The Eldest Son being dead before the Father the Nephew by the Eldest Son shall in right of Representation Succeed to his Grandfather and exclude any Younger Son of his Grandfather that is to say his Uncle This Law of Scotland was taken out of Glanvil Lib. 7. c. 3. which shews it is the unquestionable Law of England as well as of Scotland and likewise out of the Civil Law L. 3. C. de suis legit Haered l. Posthumorum 13. H. de Injust Testamento c. 33. ex l. 1. § 6. H. de Haered Skene saith further That of this Question between the Son of the Eldest Son and the Uncle Franciscus Vinius Treats at large Lib. 3. Decisionum Decis 501. and he allcadgeth Alciat Cons 101. Bartol in l. post fratres C. 1. de legit haered Bald. Salyc Doctores in l. si viva Mater C. de Bon. Pater The Statute made 10 H. 7. in a Parliament of Ireland called Poyning's Law The words of which are these It is Enacted That all Statutes late made within the Realm of England concerning or belonging to the Common or Publick Weal of the same from henceforth be deemed Good and Effectual in the Law and ever that be accepted used and executed within this Land of Ireland in all Points and at all times requisite according to the Tenor and Effect of the same Coke saith 4 Part 351. That Hil. 10. Jac. Regis it was resolved by the Two Chief Justices and Chief Baron that this word late in the beginning of this Act had the sense of before so that this Act extended to Magna Charta and to all Acts of Parliament made in England before this Act of 10 H. 7. And by the same Reason extends to the Statute of 25 E. 3. cap. 2. De Proditionibus on which this Discourse is founded from whence will be after proved these Conclusions Conclusion 1. This being granted That if the Eldest Son had happen'd to Die in the Life of his Father the Eldest Son of the Prince who died should have Succeeded Jure Representationis of his own Father as Heir Lineal to his Grandfather and excluded the Grandfather's Younger Son who is his Uncle à fortiori must it be granted that if both Grandfather and Father die the Eldest Son who is the Grandchild Surviving he ought to exclude his Uncle for he now comes in Jure proprio which is a greater Right than Jure representationis and if the less Right exclude the Uncle much more must the greater Conclusion 2. When the Right of the Crown shall actual descend from the King in Possession on the Eldest Son in Possession who is the next Lineal Heir of his Blood then is the Son Actually King both De Facto and De Jure as was his Father who died in Possession of the Kingdoms And therefore all the forementioned Acts of Parliament and Common Laws of England Scotland and Ireland and the Imperial Laws with them unanimously declare It will be
Exercise of the same for the Publick safety 1 In regard the Entail being made to the Eldest Son by Act of Parliament the same declares that what is given by Act of Parliament may be taken by Act of Parliament and that every former Act inacted may by a latter Act be repealed according to the known Rule Vnumquodque dissolvitur eodem modo quo conflatum est Secondly according to the General Examples of Acts of Parliament amongst which nothing is more common than for later Acts to change the Entails of the Crown made by former Acts. Thirdly This Power of Parliaments is expresly declared by Act of Parl. 13 El. 1. still in force by which it is enacted that to affirm that the Laws and Statutes do not bind the Right of the Crown and the Descent Limitation Inheritance and Governance thereof is High Treason Fourthly All the Reason alledged of the Antient Custom of New Election of the Successor on every Descent is only lest the Eldest Son should happen to be an Infant or otherwise unfit for Government that the Parliament might choose the fittest which here is satisfied in the Eldest Son who is above all exception known to be the fittest who can be chosen Fifthly though this reserve of Power remain naturally in Parliaments to repeal and change former Acts concerning Succession by new Acts when there is just and necessary cause yet it is necessary likewise there should be a praevious Act to mark out the Heir in whose name the Parliament shall be called to declare the Succession or Guardianship if he happen to be an Infant And what if after a King happens to die there happen a Rebellion or Invasion which makes it impossible to assemble a Parliament will it not be a great safety to the People that a standing Act of Parliament hath before hand appointed the Successor to take care of the Kingdoms till he can call a Parliament to give their assistance therein There is nothing therefore can be justly excepted against these two Acts of Parliament of England and Scotland for ascertaining by Law the Eldest Son to be Heir to the Crown The excellency of the two said Acts of Parliament of England and Scotland which ascertain the Succession of the Crown to the Kings Eldest Son But it were a great unthankfulness to the Providence of God to undervalue such Laws whereby all Accidents are obviated Questions and Doubts resolved and Objections answered by so few words as two Lines in each and the Peace of Succession preserved in Great Britain for so many hundred years which in other Empires and Kingdoms cannot be effected without those horrid Murders of Younger Brothers by Elder or Elder Brothers by Younger of lineal Heirs by collateral or collateral Heirs by lineal of Sons by Fathers or of Fathers by Sons whereby Civil Wars Devastations and Ruines of Kingdoms have ensued and that the want of such Statutes or the Breach of them have been causes of these Evils and Enjoyment of them hath been the Cure will I hope appear in the Objections and Answers following Objections first against the not being of the Kings Eldest Son within these Statutes answered Object Obj. 1. That the Lady his Mother was not a Queen therefore the Kings Eldest Son is not within the Statute Answ Statute false translated in the word Queen Answ To this the answer is easie and clear that the word Madame sa Compaigne are falsly translated our Lady his Queen and ought to have been translated our Lady his Companion which is proved by the Reasons following 1. Because 't is manifest sa Compaigne signifies not the word Queen in specie but any Lady Companion in general 2. Because it is manifest the makers of this Act of Parliament intended not to restrain their several meaning onely to a Queen for they knew Royne was French for Queen as well as Roy for King and if they had intended so could have more certainly and easily said Compas le mort nostre Seignior le Roy sa Royne than Madame sa Compaigne 3. Because at the time of making this Statute the famous Black Prince being the Eldest Son to Edward III. was married to Joan Daughter to Edmund Earl of Kent and had Issue by her Richard of Bourdeaux after King of England and none doubts but it was the intention of the King Edward III. who passionately affected his Grandchild Richard that in case the Princes Wife should happen to die in his life time whereby she should not have been a Queen but that notwithstanding if the Black Prince had happened to have survived him which he did not and been King his Eldest Son Richard should have benefit of this Statute 4. It would have been made doubtful by the Bishops who usurped then the Papal Supremacy over Princes of giving or refusing to give them Coronation when they pleased whether the Kings Wife should be titled Queen if the Bishop refused her Coronation Ralph of Canterbury refuseth to Crown Adeliza Queen unless he should first discrown the King as Ralph Archbishop of Canterbury did to Adeliza the second Wife of H. I. unless the Kings would suffer him to pull off the Crown first from the Kings head and new Crown him in acknowledgment that the Supremacy of the Coronation Office belonged to Ralph the Archbishop Bak. Hist 43. Touching which Office of Coronation of Kings and Queens that it belongs to Parliaments and not to Bishops and that David himself was both crowned and anointed by his Parliament and not by the Priest is shewn lib. 2. cap. 1. p. 169 c. 5. The Law of Saxons and Scots that no Wife of a King should be called Queen Because the Title of Queen was then under Envy and doubtful whether not against the antient Law both of England and Scotland the same not appearing to have been repealed by any Act of Parliament Bak. Hist fol. 6. saith a Law was made by the West Saxons that no Wife of a King should be called a Queen fol. 8. that it was so rigorously observed that when Ethelwolph had married Judith the Beautiful Daughter of the Emperour Charles the Bald in honour of whom in his own Court he ever placed her in a Chair of State with all other Majestical Complements of a Queen contrary to the Law of the West Saxons made to avoid the great Expence of Treasure incident to great Titles and Ceremonies and against other inconveniences and so much displeased his Lords thereby that they were ready to have Deposed him but were prevented by his death not long after Buchanan Rev. Scot. 407. takes notice of this Law and says Saxones lege caverunt ne ulla deinceps Regis Vxor Regina vocaretur aut in sede honoris in publico Regi assideret And 406. mentions the like Law in Scotland Quas Reginas alii suo quisque sermone nos Regum uxores appellamus nec altioris fastigii nomen ullum in iis agnoscimus
Facto by the Birth of a Child Secondly That such Marriage and Matrimony between Persons not prohibited by the Moral Law are Lawful I prove 1 The Lawfulness of such Marriage and Matrimony in Respect no Prohibition by the Law of God of the same though without Ceremony 1. Because all Marriage and Matrimony is Lawful which is not Prohibited by the Moral Law of God but these are not Prohibited by the Moral Law of God Therefore they are Lawful Prohibition of Marriage without Ceremony not Prohibited by the Law of God is the Doctrine of Devils The Major is proved 1 Tim. 4.1 Because all Humane Laws forbidding Marriages or Meats which are not forbidden by the Moral Law of God are declared to come from the Devil and to be the Doctrine of Devils And accordingly all Papal and Episcopal Laws all Ecclesiastical Canon and Civil Laws all Decrees of Councils of Trent or any other Councils or Synods forbidding to Marry in any Circumstance or Ceremony not forbidden by the Law of God came from the Devil and are the Doctrine of Devils which see proved Lib. 1. p. 52. And that the final cause of such Prohibitions of Marriage without Pontifical Ceremonies The final Cause of such Prohibitions is only filthy Lucre of the Priests are only accumulation of Fees and Ambition of Pontiffs and Bishops Vid. Lib. 1. p. 55 56 57. 2. All Marriage and Matrimony is Lawful which is not a Sin or a Transgression but such Marriage and Matrimony which are not Prohibited by the Law of God are no Sin or Transgression Therefore they are Lawful The Minor is proved 1 Joh. 3.4 Sin is the Transgression of the Law And Rom. 4.15 Where no Law no Transgression Where no Law is there is no Transgression 3. What is declared no Sin by Scripture is lawful but Marriage between persons not Prohibited is declared no Sin by Scripture therefore Lawful The Minor is proved 1 Cor. 7.28 If thou marry thou hast not sinned and if a Virgin marry she hath not sinned 4. What is commanded by Scripture is Lawful and not Prohibited But Marriage and Matrimony is commanded by Scripture to young Women therefore Lawful The Minor is proved 1 Tim. 5.14 I will therefore the young women marry bear Children 5. What is in Scripture commanded and blessed between persons not Prohibited is Lawful and not Prohibited But Marriage and Matrimony by Carnal knowledge and multiplying Mankind is commanded and blessed in Scripture Therefore Lawful The Minor is proved Gen. 1.27 Male and Female â—reated he them And God blessed them and said unto them Increase and Multiply and replenish the earth 6. What is rewarded in Scripture in Persons not Prohiâ—ited is Lawful and not Prohibited but Marriage and Matrimony between Persons not Prohibited is rewarded Therefore â—awful The Minor is proved 1 Tim. 2.15 She shall be saved in Childbearing if she continue in Faith and Charity and Holiness with Sobriety The Lawfulness of Marriage which is not Prohibited by the Law of God is acknowledged by the Church of England Which I prove thus All Marriage acknowledged Lawful by the 39 Articles is acknowledged Lawful by the Church of England but the present Marriage whether there are any Witnesses alive or no to prove it Ceremonial is acknowledged Lawful by the 39 Articles Therefore the present Marriage is acknowledged Lawful by the Church of England The Minor is proved thus All Marriage not Prohibited by the Law of God is acknowledged lawful by the 39 Articles But the present Marriage is not Prohibited by the Law of God Therefore the present Marriage is acknowledged Lawful by the 39 Articles Though it is no ways necessary amongst so many clear and unanswerable Precepts and Examples of Scripture it self as are here cited establishing the Lawfulness of the present Marriage to add the Humane Authority of the Church of England or any other National Church yet in regard the Bishops in their Practice and Certificates deny that Doctrine of the Lawfulness of Marriage which they themselves acknowledge and pretend to establish in their own Book of Articles To confute therefore those Certificates of theirs out of their own mouths I have here inserted their own 32d Article without which they are not able to secure the Lawfulness of their own Marriages and Legitimation of their own Children against Papists Ossens Gnosticks Nicholaitans Hermogenians and other Hereticks but only on this Principle That all Marriages not Prohibited by the Law of God are Lawful as appears by the Article it self made Anno Dom. 1562. in the Fourth year of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth Roger's Articles p. 185 187 188. where is mentioned 1. That Bishops Priests and Deacons are not Prohibited by God's Law to Marry therefore it is Lawful for them to Marry 2. That it is Lawful for them and all other Christian men to marry at their own discretion as they shall judge the same to serve best to Godliness Whence will likewise follow That the Doctrine of the Church of England and the Ceremonies of the Church of England are two distinct things and to use the words of the Article As every Christian may Marry or not Marry according to his Discretion where not Prohibited by the Law of God so he may Marry with or without Ceremonies where not Prohibited by the same Law of God As Adam might have eaten of all the Fruits in Eden with Ceremony or without Ceremony according to his Discretion where not Prohibited by the Law of God And I think no man will question this 32d Article not to be according to the Doctrine of the Church of England And the same Article touching Marriage is known to be the Doctrine of the Helvetian Bohemian Saxon Suevian and all the Reformed Churches If therefore the Tree is Holy the Fruit is Holy if the Marriage is Lawful the Son is Lawful I have therefore proved him Lawful by Three unanswerable Laws 1 The Act of Parliament of Treasons 2 The Law of the Church of England 3 The eternal and immutable Law of God in the Scriptures 2. The Lawfulness of such Marriage and Matrimony without Ceremony appears in Respect of no Command of any Ceremony by the Law of God 1. There 's no Commandment of any Ceremony in Marriage in the whole Scriptures either Old Testament or New of Moses or Christ of Prophets or Apostles but the same as hath been already shewn have been invented by Priests of Priapus Venus Juno Diana Popes and Bishops either for Lust Covetousness or Ambition No Sin where no breach of a Commandment of God 2. The Scripture makes nothing unlawful nor Sin but what is a breach of the Commandment of God where there 's no Commandment therefore of God of joyning Ceremony with Marriage or Matrimony Marriage and Matrimony between Persons not Prohibited is lawful without them This is proved Luk. 18.18 And a certain Ruler asked him saying Good Master What shall I do to inherit eternal life The answer is
is not always necessary he should be his first begotten Son for the Second after the Death of the first begotten without Issue is Fitz-Eigne with the Statute Et sic de caeteris which doth implicitly seem to affirm That till the Issue of the Eldest Son fails the second Son shall not Succeed by this Statute which implicitly prefers the Nephews in Successions before the Uncle but he shewing no Authority therein but his own and that only implicit and not Express and the Common Law and Customs of the Crown being very incertain obscure and as often broken as kept when not Confirmed by Act of Parliament And King Edward himself the Wife Author of this Act when the Black Prince Died and left his Eldest Son Richard of Bindeax who was after R. 2. Doubting of the certainty of the Law in the Point did as the wisest way procure Richard to be Declared Successor by Act of Parliament in his Life-time to secure him against his Uncles Tâ—â—â—aw of Eâ—… not clear in point of Succession of the Crown between Nephew and Uncle where the Father dies before the Grandfather The certainty of the Law of England therefore may be not without Cause doubted in this Point of Succession between Nephew and Uncle and Danger there may be lest the incertainty of the same give the same Pretences to create Civil Wars here as it doth in other Countries unless prevented by an Act of Parliament as in Scotland Vt filio ante patrem Defuncto Nepos Avo Subrogaretur 8. Danger without Assent of the People Danger if the Successor assume the Crown without the Assent of the People by their Representative in Parliament the Right of a Successor is not here Disputed nor the Law whether he is King before Coronation or not until Contract with his Parliament and Coronation received from them Highest a Successor can say is only as Paul saith 1 Cor. 10.23 All things are lawful for me but all things are not expedient All things are lawful for me but all things edifie not Though the manner whereby a Successor ascends the Throne may be lawful yet may it not be Expedient neither may it Edifie the Throne H. 8. was a King of great Courage and Wisdom and doubted not the Right of him and his Posterity to the Crown Yea though he had more than any other King Power granted him by Act of Parliament himself to Declare his own Successor either by his Letters Patents or last Will yet he shewed therein his great Wisdom and Moderation and would not do it without Assent of his Subjects as appears in the already mentioned Statute 35 H. 8. cap. 1. in these words viz. And albeit that the King 's most Excellent Majesty for default of such Heirs as are Inheritable by the said Act might by the Authority of the said Act give and dispose the said Imperial Crown and other the Premisses by his Letters Patents under his Great Seal or by his Last Will in Writing Signed with his most gracious Hand to any Person or Persons of such Estate therein as should please his Highness to Limit and Appoint Yet to the Intent that his Majestie 's Disposition and Mind therein should be openly Declared and Manifestly known and notified as well to the Lords Spiritual and Temporal as to all other his Loving and Obedient Subjects of this his Realm to the intent that their ASSENT and CONSENT might appear to Concur with thus far as followeth of his Majestie 's Declaration in this behalf For so Wise a King well know that let the Right of a Successor be what it will yet if he lose the Love of his People which cannot be obtained without their Assent and Consent he loseth the Chief Defence under God of that and all other Right he hath if therefore a Successor is Declared by Act of Parliament so great a Danger is avoided of not having the Assent and Consent of his Subjects seeing such an Act of Parliament cannot be without the Assent and Consent of the major part of the People included in the plurality of Votes of their Representative 9. Danger of assuming the Crown by a Papist The next great Danger is The assuming of the Crown by Force by a Papist Successor if not prevented by a Declaration of a Protestant Successor by the King and Parliament That a Papist Successor is most Dangerous to all Lay-Papists themselves and that they may Live far more Happy under a Protestant than one of their own Religion A Distinction ought to be made between Lay-Papists and Papist Priests Both Religion Justice and Mercy ingage all those who are affected with the least of any of them to put a great difference betwixt the Deceived and Deceivers and betwixt the Blind and those who mislead them to fall into the Ditch A Distinction is therefore necessary to be made by all Protestants between the Lay Papist and the Papist Priest Mercy is to be shewn the one and Justice the other And if this just Course had been used from the Beginning of the Reformation that no Penal Statute had been made against the Lay-Papists but only against the Papist Priests The Protestant cannot be secure unless the Lay Papist be likewise secure from Penal Laws against Conscience No Bishop Bencroft under pretence of maintaining the Dominicans against the Jesuits and Regulars against Seculars had been able to maintain Legions of both in Secret to Destroy the Protestants in their own Land nor under the blind name of Recusants to turn the edge of all the Penal Laws pretending to be made against Papists to cut off the Protestants And the Sacrament of the Paschal Lamb to be a Destruction to the Israelites and a Passover to the Egyptians those Penal Laws being pursued with the highest Rigour against the Protestants but came not near the Papists Dwellings or if they did they took more easie Pardons from the Exchequer than from the Pope So if the late Act concerning Oaths and Sacraments had been Restrained only to Papists Protestants had not suffered in so high a Degree as now they do But I pass from what is past to what is future to shew what Mischiefs the Papists themselves are to expect from a Papist Successor and what benefit from a Protestant 1. The first Mischiefs they will meet with in a Papist Successor is a most miserable one take what Covenant what Vow what Promise what Oath they can from him yea an Hundred Oaths his Conscience cannot be bound with any of them and the Catholicks themselves shall take as little hold of his Catholick Faith as the most of those whom they think or call Hereticks As for Example William the Conqueror was a Papist and is mentioned Dan. Hist 36. to get Assistance of the King of France who was then young in his Design for England William the Conqueror a Papist King forswore himself to Papist Subjects promised if he obtained the Kingdom to hold it
not only then High Treason to Compass the Death Exile or Disinheriting of the King 's Eldest Son but whatsoever else is High Treason against a King will be the same against him Objections chiefly by Buchanan against these Statutes and the Policy of them making Kingdoms Hereditary to the Eldest Sons Answered Object Who is best able to defend a Kingdom should have it Object 1. Salus Populi is above all Statutes and the Power of Kings and Parliaments themselves and above all Acts of Parliament Statutes therefore which Repeal the Ancient Fundamental Laws which were in Great Britain of Election by Parliament and in Ireland by the Custom of Tanistry of Succession of the Brother before the Son such Statutes ought themselves to be repealed and not to repeal those which are better and it being most necessary pro salute Populi that he who is best able to defend a Kingdom against Enemies Foreign and Native and hath learnt the same by Age and Experience should succeed which the Brother being more able and fit to do than the Son ought according to those Ancient and Necessary Customes to succeed before the Son which Custome as to Scotland is recited by Buchaman Mos majorum qui è propinquis Regum defunctorum non proximos sed maximè idoneos eligerent modo à Fergusio primo Scotorum Rege essent oriundi The Custom of Scotland was That the Parliament chose out of the Kindred of the King deceased not the next but the fittest so as they were such as were descendents from Fergusius the first King of the Scots and on this Custome Kenneth the Third who was the Brother of King Duffus was by Election of the Parliamem of Scotland preferred before Milcolumbus the Son of Duffus though a Youth of great hopes which Kenneth began his Reign Anno Dom. 970 and proved a most Valiant and Wife Prince and repell'd a Mighty Invasion of the Danes whom he overthrew in a Battel with a great Slaughter of them but the same Kenneth afterwards inflamed with Ambition Covetousness and Cruelty secretly poysoned Milcolumbus the then Prince of Scotland being the said Son of his Brother Duffus deccased and with great dissimulation counterseiting even Tears and great Grief for him Convened a Parliament at Scone whom partly by Terror and partly by Deceit he got to Abrogate the Law of Succession of Brothers before Sons which had made him King and been the Sanctuary of Publique Safety and Enacted a Law of Succession for his own private and not the Publique Interest clean contrary viz. That the Kingdom should be from that time Hereditary in this manner That his own Eldest Son should be Prince of Scotland That when any King dyed his Eldest Son should next succeed to the Crown and if the Eldest dyed living his Father the Nephew should succeed instead of his Son who dyed And other Constitutions as appears Buchanan rer Scotl. 190 191. Who saith further Kenneth making the Kingdome of Scotland Hereditary tormented in Conscience Ita Rex per scelus posteris uti putabat regno stabilito animum tamen suum confirmare non pot uit c. The King saith he having by so great a Wickedness established his Kingdom as he thought to his Posterity he could not Establish his Mind for although he courted all sorts of Men with the highest shew of Love and Courtesie and so managed the Affairs of the Kingdom that there was nothing wanting which shewed him not a good King Yet his Mind perpetually disquieted with the conscience of his wicked fact suffered him not to have any solid or sincere joy but the thoughts of his foul Crime rushing into his memory vexed him by Day and by Night most horrible Dreams disturbed his rest at length whether truly as some affirm or whether his troubled thoughts made him so fancy what oftentimes happens to Guilty persons a voice came from Heaven by which he seemed in his sleep to be warned Doest thou think the Murder of Milcolumbus an Innocent Person committed by thee most wickedly in Secret is hid from me or that I will any longer suffer it to pass without punishment For already there are Plots laid by Treason which thou shalt not escape to take away thy Life neither shalt thou as thou thinkest leave thy Kingdom Stable or Secure but full of Tumults and Tempests to thy Posterity With which fearful Dream the King being terrified Early in the Morning he flyes to the Bishops and Monks and declares to them the Confusion of his Mind and Anguish of his Conscience for his Crime but they gave him no true Remedy from the Doctrine of Christ for they had already degenerated from the Piety and Learning of the Ancient Professors But advised those many absurdities Long since invented by wicked Persons for their own gains and rashly believed of the Unlearned and Overcredulous That he should inrich with Gifts the Holy Places and Temples and should visit the Sepulchres of the Saints kiss their Reliques redeem his Sins by Masses and Alms and should have a greater Honour and Reverence for the Monks and Priests than he had formerly us'd to have Neither did he omit any of these Explations which he believed would help him But he was notwithstanding after by appointment of Fenella a Lady formerly Injured by him and an Ambuscada of Horse laid for him taken and killed as Buchanan p. 192. after the death of Kenneth and this Intayl of the Crown to his Issue by the Murder of his Brother's Son It appears Buchan rer Scotl. lib. 6. p. 192 193. That Constantinus the Son of Caten called Calvus Constantine Calvus procures the Law of Kenneth to be repealed began to dispute much against the Injustice of this Law to which they were circumvented by fear to assent and thus he begins Quid enim Stultius quam rem unam omnium maximam à prudentium censura Suffragiis ad Arbitrium fortunae revocare c. What saith he is more foolish than to take away a matter of the greatest concern from the Votes of Wise Men in Parliament and to cast it on the Wheel of Fortune and that these should bind themselves to be ruled by a Child who hath the chance to be born and who is ruled by some petty Woman and drive away most Valiant Men from assistance in the Government What if the Children of Kings should have any infirmity of Body or Mind whereby they are utterly disabled to perform necessary Acts of Empire what if Children should have possessed the Kingdom in such time when we fought with the Romans Britons Picts English and Danes not for the Kingdom but for Life or what can be said more Mad than what God threatens to the Contumacious that Children should reign over them as the highest Calamity we should enact as a Law on our selves and the greatest Threats of the Divine Prophets we should either contemn or run headlong into it of our own accord Neither is there any
in the World And his Predecessors had been fresh in Memory too much turmoyl'd with the Bishop of Rome and their own Bishops and John Stratford Arch-Bishop of Canterbury sent himself though in the Head of a Victorious Army in France an Insolent Letter wherein he charged him with Violation of the Rights of the Church and Magna Charta and many other Matters and threatned to Excommunicate all his Officers Too great Affronts for so Great a Prince not to become sensible how dangerous It would be to suffer Bishops to have to do with the Marriages Filiations and Successions of Kings and thereby to put power into their hands to Depose and Dis-inherit his Successors when they pleased and William Whickham Bishop of Winchester who was Confessor to his Queen Philippa and ingratiated himself by Alice Peirce the King's Concubine An incredible Lie by a Bishop concerning John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster Tinsell's Hist 78. for Money shewed after how ready they should be to Act such Feats for Alice Pierce against Sons of first Wives for out of hatred to the Famous John of Gaunt King Edward's Fourth Son for no other cause but because he was a great Favourer of Wickliff's Doctrine the Proto-Protestant of England spread a false fame on him That the Queen Philippa one of the most Vertuous Wives that ever was had confess'd to him at her Death That he was not the King's Son but that she to please the King the more who desired Sons above Daughters she being Delivered of a Daughter caused her Daughter to be secretly conveyed away and this John the Son of a Flemish Priest to be brought and put to Nurse instead of her for the King's Son A most Incredible Lie but such a one as shews what Certificates Kings Sons may happen to have from Bishops for being Favourers of the Protestant Religion It is not therefore to be imagined that it was intended by this Statute in those times the Bishops and their Mass-Books and Certificates should have any thing to do with the Lady Companion of the King or their Eldest Son The King likewise then knew that by the then Laws of the Land A King is Supreme Ordinary of his own Marriage he had in himself the Right of Ecclesiastical Supremacy and that he was the Supreme Ordinary of his own Marriage and did never therefore intend to give away his own Prerogative to Pope or Bishop who being Supreme Ordinary could Self-Marry himself and without the Bishop Certifie his own Marriage 8. Books of Canons Common Prayer-Books Banns Lycenses Priests Temples and all other Ceremonies without which Marriage is forbidden being only Mala Prohibita and the Scripture prohibits the Prohibitions themselves of these Mala Prohibita to Marriage and calls such Prohibitions the Doctrine of Devils which is already proved Lib. 1. p. 52. What is Borum in se by the Law of God cannot be made Malum in se by the. Law of Man 9. Marriage without the Common Prayer-Book and Priest being only Malum Prohibitum by the Law of Man and the same Marriage being Bonum in se by the Moral Law of God Malum Prohibitum by the Law of Man cannot make that Malum in se which is Bonum in se by the Law of God As it was Bonum in se for Daniel to pray to God though Darius Dan. 6.7 by his Decree made it Malum Prohibitum to pray within Thirty Dayes except to the King or if he had said Except by the Book of Common-Prayer or Book of Canons it had been all one And under a great Penalty of being cast into the Den of Lyons yet notwithstanding this had not nor could make it Malum in se in Daniel to pray to God without the King Common Prayer-book or Book of Canons within the Thirty Daies prohibited much Less had it been a Malum in se for Darius himself who had the Supremacy notwithstanding this Ecclesiastical Law of his own whereby he Prohibited prayer or if he had prohibited Marriage to his Subjects to have Prayed or Marryed himself in the Manner himself and not the Law of God had Prohibited 10. Priests use to Self-Sacrament themselves though they have not Supremacy without any other Priest What hinders therefore why they may not Self-Marry themselves A Priest may self marry himself seeing Popery it self could never pretend to Raise Marriage to a higher Pitch then a Sacrament 11. If Priests may Self-Marry themselves there is no Reason why Lay-men should not be allowed the same Liberty of Conscience to Self-Marry themselves without a Priest A Lay-man may self-marry himself As a King who is Supreme Ordinary may Marry himself without Ceremonies by the Law of the Land So the Subject may marry himself by the Law of God which is above the Law of the Land 12. Qui potest majus potest minus And that Act which doth perfect Marriage is greater than any Act which doth only prepare or inchoat and leave it imperfect Now it is not denyed by the Popish Casuists and Schoolmen and the Civilians and Canonists themselves But carnal knowledg only perfects Marriage if therefore a Lay-Man may self-Ly with his Woman which perfects Marriage without a Common-Prayer Book or Book of Canons after the Priest hath first had her before him by his Bell Book and Candle why may not the poor Lay-man save all his Money and Selfe Ring the Bell Selfe take the Book Selfe light the Candle or Torch Selfe contract himselfe per verba de praesenti And then Selfe lye with a Woman or do it first without acting all this impertinent Pageantry and Running Round about Church unless they would bring in again the old Pagan way for the Priest likewise to Do the Act of Perfection of Marriage The Kings of Israel and Judab The Ottoman Emperours and Subjects Self-Marry themselves without a Priest as the Indian Priests and too many of the Popish Priests do Ly with the Woman first before the Husband 13. It is very well known that the Ottoman Emperours and Subjects of their Mighty Dominions self-Marry themselves according to the Moral Law of God without Priest Temple Bell Book or Candle yet to the shame of such as call themselves by the name of Christians may it be said Their Marriages are more Chast their Filiation and Successions more Certain and no such Adulteries Fornications Stewes Brothel-houses and Poxes and Plagues and other Mischiefs thereby as those who use all these and all the Luxuriancy of Papal and Episcopal Ceremonies besides in their Marriages And of the Mischiefs came to Solyman the Magnificent by being seduced by Roxalana to break the Custome of Emperours to Selfmarry themselves to Marry her by a Priest appears at large Lib. 2. p. 245. c. Object 3 Not HIS Companion Object 3. The Third Objection is That though the Lady Mother was a Companion to the King Yet she was not HIS Companion which is the Article of Propriety
of him as he did his Dutchy of Normandy and do him Homage for it which would add a great Honour to that Crown Then was he be-before-hand with Pope Alexander to make Religion give Reputation to his Pretended Right he promised likewise to hold it of the Apostolick See if he prevailed in his Enterprize whereupon the Pope sent him a Banner of the Church with an Agnus of Gold and one of the hairs of Saint Peter And he likewise by great Promises got his own Brother Odo Bishop of Baieux to furnish him with Forty Ships for his Expedition After William had with great difficulty got the Battel at Hastings wherein King Herold happen'd to be kill'd with an Arrow in his Eye some of his Nobility with all their Power strove to establish Edgar Atheling the next of the Royal Issue in his Right to the Crown but the false Bishops rather bent to let in a Foreign Enemy being fool'd by him with fair Promises than to assist the Native Prince and by their Example drew in the Nobility to trust to his Personal Oath made at his Coronation before the Altar of St. Peter to defend the Holy Church that was the Papist Church and the Rectors and to Govern the Universal People according to the Laws but this Oath and his Promises were as weak to bind him as the single hair of St. Peter he had got from the Pope for as soon as he had Establish'd himself he was not such a Fool to do Homage for England to the French King nor to hold the same of the Apostolick See nor to defend the Bishops and Abbots in their fat Bishopricks and Abbies but as Cambden saith He made such clear work with them that he did not leave one English Ecclesiastick whom he thrust not out of his place and fill'd their Rooms with Erench Sr. Johns And for the English Nobility he drove some to fly to Scotland some to Norway some to Hungary and any other Places where they could be received till in the end he had totally destroyed them and filled their Places with French Contes and to shew himself no partial Dealer with those who would trust his word he spared not his own Brother Odo the Bishop of Baieux but notwithstanding the Forty Ships with which he had Supplied him on promise of better dealing he seized and Confiscated all his Treasure which he had which was very great and hoarded up with an Intention to have bought the Papacy And it is no wonder if mali Corvi malum ovum And he practised the same deceit against themselves and their false Religion had taught him towards others for let a Papist Prince swear never so many Oaths to Papists of his own Religion and break them all the same Religion fits him with Popes enough at his Elbow to Confess and Absolve him instantly or if he doubts his Trencher-Popes cannot do it he can have for Money his Unholiness himself to Absolve him from any Oath Covenant or League with any other Papist Prince whether of Peace or War and how many Examples are there of the same And more easily can he do it with his own Subjects as Dan. Hist fol. 143. King John a Papist King forswore himself to Papist Subjects being Absolved from his Oath by the Pope King John for the Glory of God and Emendation of the Kingdom in Parliament makes Articles of Agreement between him and the Barons wherein are Confirmed all the Laws and Liberties of the Kingdom and Mutual Oaths taken on both sides by the King and Barons in Solemn manner for the Observation of the same Articles The King likewise sends his Letters Patents to all Sheriffs of the Kingdom to cause all Men of what degree soever within their several Shires to Swear to observe the Laws and Liberties thus granted by his Charter There we see a Papist King agrees with Papist Subjects on Oath in the highest manner and both the King and Barons and the whole Body of the People of what degree soever are solemnly Sworn before God And the Laws and Liberties are likewise Confirmed by Act of Parliament But the next News in the History we hear of is He hath some Papist evil Councellors who tell him he was now a King without a Kingdom a Lord without a Dominion and a Subject to his Subjects whereon this Papist King sends to the Pope and by Bribery he Absolves the King from his Oath Nullifies the Act of Parliament and Excommunicates the Lords Now therefore let it be shewn how these Papist Lords being laid in the Pickle of Excommunication and not having Personam standi in Judicio could have done to have bound the Conscience of their Papist King to have performed to them his Contract Covenant League and Oath or let it be no wonder if Protestants are very fearful to have a Successor of such a Religion or if they think that these Lords had not been more happy if they had had a Protestant King or of any Religion which would have bound his Conscience to have kept his Word and much more his Oath to his Subjects The Papist Lords grown Desperate of Right from their English Papist King run into the other Extreme and will Trust themselves to the Oath of a Foreign Papist King seeing their own would not keep his they send therefore over-Sea and go in great haft to Louys the French Kings Son to Sollicit him to take upon him the Crown of England who is their tres humble Serviteur and as ready to Swear to them as they to him A French Oath pretended surer than an English and to make wise to them that a French Oath was surer than an English over therefore he comes to England in Person with as great a Fleet and Army as the Power of France could make on so likely hopes of a Conquest incouraged by so great a Power of the English Barons who call'd them in and joyned with them and being Landed in Kent in May the Lords bring him to London where he takes his Solemn Oath to Restore their Laws and Liberties and recover their right for them King John who had first forsworn himself was notwithstanding in the Field with another Army against King Louys but fell into a Feaver and Died or as some say was poisoned On his Death many of the English Lords hoping to find more Truth in the Son than in the Father returned from Louys to their Native King and suddenly Crowned Henry the Third the eldest Son of King John being then but Nine years old in a great Parliament Assembled at Gloucester 28 Octob. by which Parliament his Tutelage by Reason of his Minority was Committed to the Great Marshal William Earl of Pembrook a Man Eminent both in Courage and Council And it is likewise to be noted That this Henry was begotten by King John of Isabel the Daughter and Heir of Aymer Earl of Angloulesm who was before the Marriage pre-contracted to Hugh le Brun Earl of March
Lucan Nobilitas cum plebe perit lateque vagatur Ensis à nullo revocatum est rectore ferrum Stat cruor in Templis multaque rubentia caede Lubrica saxa madent nulli sua profuit aetas Non senis extremum piguit vergentibus annis Praecipitasse diem nec primo in limine vitae Infantis miseri nascentia rumpere fata Crimine quo parui caedem potuere mereri Sed satis est jam posse mori And will any Protestants be Self-Murderers by committing themselves to the Oaths of such a Religion to return home from Foreign Popish perfidiousness and Perjuries to those in Great Britain Queen Mary of England most Cruel and perfidious to Protestants there hath been but one Papist Successor in England since the Reformation which was Queen Mary and she promised but perfidiously Liberty of Conscience to the Protestants and used their help to obtain the Crown which perhaps if they had not afforded her she might have missed but as soon as she became possessed of the Royal Power how faithlesly she broke her promise to them is well known and with what Cruelty incited by the Bishops prodigious in her Sex she delighted to see them Burning with her own Eyes and what a Tophet she made of the Land appears in the Acts and Monuments What eyes can behold the fiery Pictures there or read the bloody Characters of her Butcheries without tears And she had increased the number of them to so many as no Volume could have contained had not God in his Mercy sortned those days Queen Mary of Scotland and her Agents there most perfidious and cruel to Protestants It is known likewise Queen Mary of Scotland likewise broke Promise and Oath the Papist Faith and Oaths were no better kept to Protestants in Scotland than in England of which I shall only mention one Example of Mr. George Wischard persecuted to Death by the Bloody Cardinal Beton as is mentioned in Buchanan Lib. 15. rer Scot. 536. and in the History of the Reformation of the Church of Scotland p. 48 Mr. George Wischard a Protestant Minister first indeavoured to be assassinated by Cardinal Beton c. Mr. Wischard was a Diligent Preacher of the Gospel and most acceptable to the people for which reason Cardinal Beton prohibited him to Preach and he not desisting he corrupting with Money a desperate Priest named Sir John Weighton to kill the said Mr. Wischard and upon a Day the Sermon ended and the People departing no man suspecting Danger and therefore not heeding the said Mr. George the Priest that was corrupted stood waiting at the foot of the Steps his Gown loose and his Dagger drawn in his Hand under his Gown the said Mr. George marked him and as he came near he said My friend what would you do and therewith he clapped his hand on the Priests hand where the Dagger was and took it from him the Priest abashed fell down at his feet and being heard by other Company they cryed out Deliver the Traytor to us or we will take him by force and so they burst in at the Gate but Mr. George took him in his Arms and said Whosoever troubles him shall trouble me for he hath hurt me in nothing but hath done great Comfort to you and to me to wit he hath let us understand what we may fear in time to come we will watch better The Gentlemen of the West had written that Mr. George should meet them at Edinburgh for they would require Disputation of the Bishops and that he should be publickly heard whereto he willingly agreed He lays a Second Plot for the same The Cardinal dared not let it come to a publick Dispute therefore he Plots the second time to kill Mr. George as the surest way to defend their Murdering Religion and to that end he causeth a Letter to be Counterfeit in the Name of the Laird of Keimeir Mr. Wischard's familiar Friend which desires him with all possible diligence to come to him for he was strucken with a sudden Sickness and in the way layes an Ambush of Threescore Men with Jacks and Spears to dispatch him but this was likewise discovered the Cardinal vexed to be twice thus disappointed in his wicked design and got Intelligence that Mr. Wischard lodged at the House of John Cockburne Laird of Ormeston Seven miles from Edenburgh whereupon a Party of Horse was sent thither to demand Mr. George to be delivered them as a Prisoner to be carried before the Assembly of Prelates at Edenburgh the Laird made many Excuses and Spun out the time it being late hoping to pass Mr. Wischard out at a private Postern to escape when dark of which the Cardinal having notice by his Spies came together which the Governour thither at an unseasonable hour of Night and beset round all passages whereby none could escape Mr. Wischard betrayed by trusting to the perfidious Faith of Earl Bothwell yet neither by Promises Flatteries or Threats could he get Mr. George delivered into his hands till he called thither the Earl of Bothwell from his Country House which was near at hand to whom it was agreed he should be delivered on which the Earl gave his Solemn Faith and Promised on his Honour that he should be Safe and that it should pass the Power of the Cardinal to do him any harm and that neither the Governour or the Cardinal should have the Custody of him but he would retain him in his own hands and in his own House till either he should make him free or restore him to the same place whence he received him But being Corrupted by the Cardinals Gold and by the Queen he most perfidiously broke his Faith and Honour and delivered him a Prisoner into the hands of his Enemies the Prelates assembled at Edenburgh who having got their long sought for prey send him away to St. Andrews where the Cardinal had a Castle as he thought Impregnable where he was kept in hold in the Sea Tower of the same Castle which was done in the end of January Anno Dom. 1546. The Cardinal delayed no time but caused all the Bishops yea all the Clergymen who had any preheminence to be called to St. Andrews against the Seven and Twentieth day of February that Consultation might be had against this great Protestant who had so dangerously shaken the Foundations of Babel upon the last of February was sent to the Prison where Mr. George Wischard lay bound in Chains the Dean of the Town by Command of the Cardinal to Summon him to be before the Judge the morrow following to give account of his Seditious and Heretical Doctrine upon the next morrow the Lord Cardinal caused his Servants to address themselves in their most Warlike Array with Jack Knapscall Splent Spear and Axe and when these armed Champions marching in Warlike Order had conveyed the Bishops into the Abby Church incontinently they sent for Mr. George who was conveyed into the same by the