Grammer and to the sence and scope of the Canon which plainly intends to aver that all those degrees prohibited in that table are also forbidden by the laws of God A truth so certain that if either self-love or love of gaine did not betray the eye it is a wonder how it should abide a contradiction It is observable that neither statute nor canon speak of an expresse prohibition in Gods law And the Canon purposely distinguisheth the termes prohibited by Gods law and expressed in the Table as justly supposing there may be as strong a prohibition in a sense implyed as verbally expressed Else if our Lawes as is pretended should give allowance which God forbid to any marriages not expresly in terminis forbidden wee should have strange and uncouth mixtures God by Moses expresly forbad the uncovering the nakedness of Father and Mother hee expressed not the nakednesse of Son and Daughter he expresly names the nakednesse of the Fathers wife he expresseth not the nakednesse of the Mothers husband He expresly names the nakednesse of thy Sister he expresseth not the nakedness of thy Brother he expresseth the nakednesse of thy Sons Daughter he expresseth not the nakednesse of thy Daughters Son He expresseth the nakednesse of thy Fathers wives Daughter he expresseth not the Mothers Husbands Sonne he expresseth the Fathers Sister not the Mothers Brother He expresses the Daughter in law not the Son in law So as by this Rule if it should be carried only by meer verball expressions a woman might marry her Son in law the Nephew might marry his great aunt the neece her grea-uncle the Daughter might marry her Mothers husbands Sonne the Grand-mother might marry her Daughters son the Daughter might marry with her Mothers Husband Were these things to be allowed the world would be all Sodome These things therefore are of necessity included in the law by a clere Analogy no lesse then if they had beene expressed But have there been as hee saith precedents of this march I am sory to heare it surely the more the worse and the more need to redresse it the addition of this if neglected would help to strengthen an ill claim Cozens-german he saith have beene allowed to marry What is that to the present case The difference is as much as betwixt a Nephew and an Uncle The Uncle hath too much of the Parents both right and blood to challenge an equall claim with a Cozen. In the shutting up it pitties me to see your worthy Friend driven to this plea and like a drowning man to snatch at so small a twig Being done he saith it ought not to be undone Alas the Canon is peremptory It is incestuous and unlawfull what plea is there for continuance Speak not therfore of either connivence or dispensation This match is only capable of a late but much wished repentance on the Offenders part and a just diremption on the part of the Judges CASE II. Whether it be lawfull for a Man to marry his wives Brothers widow AMongst all the heads of Case Divinity there is no one that yeeldeth more scruples then this of Marriage whether wee regard the qualification of the Persons or the emergency of actions and events It is the lawfulness of this match that you inquire after not the expedience and I must shape my answer accordingly It hath been the wisdom and care of our godly and prudent Predecessors to ordaine a Table of all the prohibited degrees to be publiquely hang'd up in all the severall Churches of this Nation to which all commers might have recourse for satisfaction This Catalogue you have perused and find no exception of the case specified I know no reason therfore why you may not conclude it not unlawfull The question of the Expedience would require another debate doubt less in all cases of this nature it must needs be yeelded that it were more meet and safe since the world yeilds so large a latitude of choice to look further off a wise and good man will not willingly trespasse against the rules of just expedience and will be as carefull to consider what is fit to be done as what is lawfull but that comes not at this time within your inquiry Whiles therfore I give my opinion for the lawfulness of this Marriage with the Relict of the wives brother I doe no whit clash as you suggest with the judgement of Beza and Master Perkins who professe their dislike of such copulations I shal as readily cry them down for unmeet and inconvenient as those that with too much boldnesse come over neere to the Verge of a sinfull conjunction but for the not unlawfulnesse of this match I did upon the first hearing give my affirmative answer and the more I consider of it I am the more confirmed in that resolution That universal rule mentioned by you as laid down by those two worthy Authors must indure a limitation Cujus non licet inire nuptias ejus nec conjugis licet that there is the same degree and force of relation of a third person in the case of Marriage to the husband and to the wife so as proximity of blood in the one should not be a greater bar then the same proximity of alliance in the other Otherwise many more copulations will fall under censure then common practise will condescend unto and that ground of uxor pars quadam viri The wife is as a part of the husband as it holds not in naturall relation at all so not in all conjugall as might be too easily instanced in divers particulars And if there were not som difference in these relations those second persons which are interessed in the Husband or Wife might not come neer to the next in affinity to them For example my Brother may not marry my Sister therefore by this rule he might not marry my Wives Sister and so it should bee unlawfull for two Brothers to marry two Sisters then which nothing is more ordinary or lesse obnoxious to disallowance That generall rule therefore must be restrained necessarily to the first ranke of affinity if we descend lower it holds not For further explanation our Civilians and Canonists are wont to make two kinds or degrees of Affinity the one primary the other secondary In the first is the affinity between the husband and the Cozens of blood to his wife or è cōverse which indeed is justly held no lesse for a barr of marriage then his own naturall consanguinity for that is an affinity contracted upon interest of blood by virtue of that entire union between Man and Wife wherby they both become one flesh The Secondary affinity is that wherein there is another person added moreover to that first kinde now mentioned the affinity arising only from the interest of an affinity formerly contracted not from consanguinity and this is not so binding as either to hinder a marriage to be contracted or being contracted to dissolve it In this rank are the brothers wife and sisters
authority of a Father may reach so farre as to command or compell the Child to dispose of himselfe in Marriage where he shall appoint 322 V. Whether the marriage of Cousensgerman that is of Brothers and Sisters children be lawfull 331 VI. Whether it be necessary or requisite there should be a witnessed contract or Espousals of the Parties to be married before the solemnization of the marriage 343 VII Whether there ought to be a prohibition and forbearance of marriages and marriage-duties for some times appointed 353 VIII Whether it be necessary that marriages should be celebrated by a Minister and whether they may be valid and lawfull without him 361 IX Whether there be any necessity or use of thrice publishing the Contract of marriage in the Congregation before the celebration of it and whether it be fit that any Dispensation should be granted for the forbearance of it 366 X. Whether Marriages once made may be annulled and utterly voided and in what cases this may be done 372 ADDITIONALS to the fourth Decade I. WHether a Marriage consummate betwixt the Unkle and Neece be so utterly unlawful as to merit a sentence of present separation 383 II. Whether it be lawfull for a man to marry his Wives Brothers Widow 406 III. Whether an incestuous Marriage contracted in simplicity of heart betwixt two Persons ignorant of such a defilement and so farre consummate as that Children are borne in that wedlock ought to be made knowne and prosecuted to a dissolution 412 I Have perused these foure Decades of Practicall Cases of Conscience with much satisfaction and delight and finde them to be in respect of their subject matter so profitable necessary and daily usefull and so piously learnedly and judiciously discussed and resolved that they seem unto me best though they come last like the Wine in the marriage feast made sacred by Christs divine presence and miracle and therefore doe well deserve amongst many other the divine dishes and delicacies wherewith this right reverend pious and learned Authour hath plentiously furnished a feast for the spirituall nourishment and comfortable refreshing of Gods guests both the approbation and commendation of all and my selfe amongst the rest though unworthy to passe my censure on such a subject John Downame RESOLUTIONS The first Decade Cases of Profit and Trafick CASE I. Whether is it lawfull for me to raise any profit by the loane of money YOu may not expect a positive answer either way Many circumstances are considerable ere any thing can be determined First who is it that borrowes A poore neighbour that is constrained out of neede or a Merchant that takes up money for a freer trade or a rich man that layes it out upon superfluous occasions If a poore man borrow out of necessity you may not expect any profit for the loane Deuteronomy 15. 7 8 9. To the poorest of all we must give and not lend to the next ranke of poore we must lend freely but if a man will borrow that money which you could improve for the enriching of himselfe or out of a wanton expence will be laying out that which might be otherwise usefull to you for his meere pleasure the case is different for God hath not commanded you to love any man more then your selfe and there can be no reason why you should vail your owne just advantage to another mans excesse Secondly upon what termes doe you lend whether upon an absolute compact for a set increment what ever become of the principall or upon a friendly trust to a voluntary satisfaction according to the good improvement of the summe lent The former is not safe and where there hath been an honest endeavour of a just benefit disappointed either by unavoidable casualty or force may not be rigorously urged without manifest oppression The latter can bee no other then lawfull and with those that are truly faithfull and conscionable the bond of gratitude is no lesse strong then that of law and justice Thirdly if upon absolute compact is it upon a certainty or an adventure for where you are willing to hazard the principall there can be no reason but you should expect to take part of the advantage Fourthly where the trade is ordinarily certaine there are yet farther considerations to be had to which shall make way by these undenyable grounds That the value of moneys or other commodities is arbitrable according to the soveraigne authority and use of severall Kingdomes and Countries That whatsoever commodity is saleable is capable of a profit in the loane of it as an horse or an oxe being that it may be sold may be let out for profit Money it selfe is not onely the price of all commodities in all civill Nations but it is also in some cases a trafiqueable commodity the price whereof rises and falls in severall countries upon occasion and yeeldeth either profit or losse in the exchange There can be no doubt therefore but that money thus considered and as it were turned merchandise may be bought and sold and improved to a just profit But the maine doubt is whether money meerely considered as the price of all other commodities may be let forth for profit and be capable of a warrantable increase For the resolving whereof be it determined That all usury which is an absolute contract for the meere loane of money is unlawfull both by law naturall and positive both divine and humane Nature teacheth us that metals are not a thing capable of a superfoetation that no man ought to set a price on that which is not his owne time that the use of the stock once received is not the lenders but the borrowers for the power and right of disposing the principall is by contract transferred for the time to the hands of him that receives it so as hee that takes the interest by vertue of such transaction doth but in a mannerly and legall fashion rob the borrower How frequent the Scripture is in the prohibition of this practice no Christian can bee ignorant And as for humane lawes raised even from the meere light of Nature amongst Heathen Nations how odious and severely interdicted usurary contracts have been in all times it appeares sufficiently by the Records which wee have of the Decrees of Egypt of Athens of Rome and not onely by the restraint of the Twelve Tables and of Claudius and Vespasian but by the absolute forbiddance of many popular statutes condemning this usage Tiberius himselfe though otherwise wicked enough yet would rather furnish the Bankes with his owne stock to bee freely let out for three yeeres to the Citizens upon onely security of the summe doubled in the forfeiture then he would endure this griping oppressive transaction And how wise Cato drove out all usurers out of Sicilie and Lucullus freed all Asia from this pressure of Interest History hath sufficiently recorded As for Lawes Ecclesiasticall let it be enough that a Councel hath defined that to say usury is not
law against such marriages is so high flowne that no lesse can take it off then an utter diremtion of them even though they be not ratified only but consummate by carnall knowledg and the grave authority of some ancient and holy Fathers and eminent Doctors of the Church besides five severall Councels have passed an hard sentence upon them The maine ground of the supposed unlawfulness is that clause of Gods Law which was more then judiciall No man shall approach unto any neere of kin to his flesh to uncover their nakednesse I am the Lord Levit. 18. 6. Which though Cornelius à Lapide following his Radulphus would seeme to restraine to the ensuing particularities onely yet they may not think that God will suffer so universal a charge to be so straitly pent especially when we know that there are divers other no lesse unlawful copulations omitted in this black Roll of uncleannesses then those which are expresly mentioned the rest being intended to come in by way of analogy only for it is easy for any reader to observe that all the severalities of the degrees prohibited run still upon the male under which if the like exorbitances of the other sexe were not meant to be comprehended females should be lawlesse and the lawe imperfect To marry then with a Cousen-german is apprehended by these Canonists to be an approach to one neare kinne to our flesh and therefore intimated in that inhibition Doctor Willet a man much deserving of Gods Church conceives these marriages to bee analogically forbidden in this catalogue of Moses For saith he if the degrees of affinity be limited to the third or fourth degree as it is not lawfull for a man to marry his wives daughters daughter Levit. 18. 17. why should not the line of consanguinity hold to the fourth degree likwise and so neither the sonne to marry his fathers brothers daughter or the daughter the sonne But that worthy Divine did not heedfully observe the great difference betwixt these instanced degrees for the one of these is an equal line the other in an unequal the one is a collaterall consanguinity the other is in a directly descending affinity so as the husband should bee grandfather in law to the wife which in all reason were very unlawful and absurd since in all those descending degrees there is a kinde of reverential inequality betwixt the lower and superiour which abhorres from all proportion of a match whereas the collateral equidistance of Cousensgerman from the stock whence both descend hath in it no such appearance of inequality Certainly then no analogy can draw these marriages within the prohibition whether the neerenesse of approach to our flesh be a just bar to them must be further considered Gregory whom some would faine interess in our English Apostle ship writing to his Augustine in way of answere to his Interrogations puts these mariages in the same rank with the marriages of brothers and sisters which hee brands with this note that they seldom ever prove fruitfull As for those of brothers and sisters which were usual as Dio dorus Siculus tells us amongst the Egiptians and are this day in use in barbarous nations nature it selfe abominates the mention of them In the first plantation of the world there was a necessity of them as without which there could have been no humane generation but afterwards as the Earth grew more peopled so these matches grew still more odious like as it was also in the first plantation of the Church the holy Seed being confined to a narrow compasse were forced unlesse they would joyne with Infidels to match somtimes over-neer to themselves as even Abraham himself the father of the faithfull married his brothers daughter but when the bounds of men and beleevers came to be enlarged the greater elbow room opened a wider liberty of choice and now Gods select people found it meet to observe a due distance in the elections of their wives so regarding the entireness of their Tribes as that they fell not within the lines of prohibition wherein no mention being made of brothers and sisters children in all ages and nations some have thought fit to make use of their free-dom in this kind What neede I to urge the case of Zelophehads five daughters Num. 36. 11. who by Gods own approbation were married to their fathers brothers sonnes To mince the matter and to make these sonnes nephews according ao the Hebrew phrase as Doctor Willet indeavors to doe is without either need or warrant since these scruples were not since that time stood upon by the Jewish people yea this practise was no lesse current among the civiller heathens of old I could tell you of Cluentia by Ciceroes relation married to her cousen Marc. Aurius of Marcus Antonius the wise and vertuous Philosopher marrying his cousen Faustina and a world of others were not this labor saved me by the learned lawyer Hotoman who tells us how universall this liberty was of old as being enacted by the lawes of the Roman Empire and descending to the lawes of Justitian confidently affirmes that for five hundred yeeres all Christian people magno consensu allowed and followed these Imperiall constitutions concerning Matrimony Although I might here put him in minde of Theodosius enacting the contrary in his time as it is like by S. Ambroses instigation who then sharply inveighed against these matches in a vehement epistle to Paternus being then in hand with a marriage betwixt his son his sisters daughter But excepting that good Emperour the coast was cleare perhaps for the Cesarean constitutions not so for the judgement of Divines amongst whom it were enough that S. Ambrose and S. Augustine the flower of the Latine fathers if no other doe bitterly oppose it This judgement being found not probable only but exceeding profitable to the Roman See it is no wonder if it obteyned both credit and vigour from thence Decrees Decretals make this inhibition good not without damning the contrary practise and now the Civill and Canon lawes clashing with one another how can it be but the prevalence must be according to the power of the abettor What liberty the Court of Rome hath taken to it self in the restraint of marriages and upon what ground all Christendom both sees and feeles One while their prohibition reaches to the seventh degree in natural kindred then to the fourth One while the impediment of spirituall cognation is streched so far without any colour of divine authority as that what by Baptisme what by Confirmation twenty severall persons are excluded from the capacitie of intermarriage Anotherwhile the market is faln to fourteene And wherefore this but for the sweet scarce valuable gaine of Dispensations upon these occasions flowing in to the Lateran treasure For which considerations wee have learned not to attribute too much to the judgement or practise of the Roman courtiers in this point Upon the sūming up then of this discourse
were Iscah Nahor his neece Milcha Amram his Aunt Jochebed and these not without a large bles-upon the bed Let him tell me also that Jacob married two Sisters and conversed conjugally with both which were now shamefully incestuous yet was herein blessed with the issue of six of those Patriarchs who were the root of those glorious stemmes of Israel If we should speak most favourably of these conjunctions to ranke them under malum quia prohibitum it must needs follow that till the prohibition came they could not bee censured as evill Though good Authors make it justly questionable whether these fore-alledged marriages should deservedly bee charged with a sin or excused by Gods extraordinary dispensation in the meane time the blessing was to the person not to the act even Lots incestuous copulatio with his daughters sped well two famous nations sprang thence of one of them the gracious progenitrice of the Saviour of the world Yet this is no plea for the allowance of that monstrous conjunction After â—he law one justifiable example were worth a thousand before it Lo good Caleb saith he married his daughter Achsah to his brother Othoniel Joshua 15. 16 17. Indeede this case comes as home to the businesse as it is farre off from the text See whether mes-prision of Scripture may mislead us a man that understands nothing but the english or vulgar latin may easily run into so foul an error weigh but the place well you will soon find the fault without me Othniel the son of Kenaz Calebs brother tooke Kerath-Sepher and Caleb gave him Achsah his daughter to wife The English wanting cases expresses it doubtfuly it will be cleare in the Latin as Montanus and Pagnine two great Masters of the Hebrew in their Interlinear read it Othniel filius Kenaz fratris Calebi Othniel the sonne of Kenaz which Kenaz was Caleb's brother both the Hebrew Chaldee cleare that sense So the Septuagint as Emanuel-Sa also urges upon that place Judg 1. 13. expresly say that Kenaz was the brother of Caleb and not Othoniel wherein yet I cannot much blame an unballanced judgement whiles I find the Septuagint contrary to themselves For in Josh. 15. 16 they say Othniel was Calebs younger brother In Judg. 3. 9. they say Kenaz the father of Othniel was so for which there is no excuse but the large sense of a brother in the Hebrew We are brethren saith Abraham to Lot yet he was Lots uncle so was Kenaz a progenitor to Othniel for Caleb is stiled the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite Josh. 14. 14. Num. 32 12. The case was only this Kenaz was the ancestor of Caleb and one of the same name was his brother the father of Othniel what can be more plain then 1 Chron. 4. 13. And the sons of Kenaz Othniel Seraiah So as if wee take this most strictly to the letter it implies nothing but the marriage of two cozens german Othniel the son of Kenaz and Achsah the daughter of Caleb brothers children as Bucer upon the place Melanchton in his Tract De Conjugio Junius and indeede who otherwise And now by this time you see what a poore ground this is to build upon rather you see a castle not built on the sand but in the ayre meer misconceit But saith the Advocate this marriage is no where directly forbidden in the Law I must tell him it is but a meer shuffle to stand upon the terms of a direct prohibition when there is one no lesse forceable convictive Two wayes may ought be effectually forbidden in the law Either in plain expression of terms or in clear implication of sense surely that is rather more in the law which it means irrefragably than what it verbally expresseth now however this be not in the letter of the law yet in the sense it is the same law that forbids the nephew to marry the aunt doth eadem operâ forbid the uncle to marry the neece In regard as of neerness yea identity of blood the case is the same however som inequality may be conceived in respect of government subjection And if upon som oeconomicall termes it be more unfit for a Nephew to marry his Aunt than for an Uncle to marry his Neece yet in regard of blood and that bodily conjunction which God principally aymes at in this prohibition what difference can possibly bee conceived Nature hath made no other distance betwixt the Nephew and the Aunt than bewixt the Neece the Uncle or if there be any they must be sharper eys than mine that can discerne it God himself me thinks hath put this out of doubt the reason wherewith hee backs his command is iresistible The Nephew shall not marry the fathers sister why so For she is thy fathers neer kinswoman v. 12. Lo it is the neerness of blood that makes this match unlawfull not respect of civil inequality Where the blood then is equally neere the marriage must be equally unlawfull That rule of law which is pretended in prohibitoriis quicquid non prohibetur permittitur What is not forbidden is permitted had neede of a fair construction Indeed that which is not forbidden either in words or in necessary analogy implication of sense is supposed to be left at large But what place hath this Axiome in a case not less really forbidden than the expressed And if wee should strictly follow the letter of this Maxime it would lead us into Sodome since there are marriages not specified which would be monstrously incestuous such as honesty would blush to mention as shall appeare in the sequele Neither is there any more force in that other In poenalibus non fit extensio That penall lawes should not bee stretcht further then their words import Certainly in som sense I know no law that is not penall but why this law Thou shalt not marry thy Aunt or Neece should be rather penal than Thou shalt not commit adultry I know not I am sure learned Zanchius accounts these of the 18. of Leviticus equally morall and Bucanus holds them to be against the law of nature And if in humane laws this axiom may challenge a place yet in the roy all laws of our Maker where under one sin mentioned all the species appendances and the whols claim of that wickednesse is wont to be comprised doubtless it is utterly unsufferable Neither is here any extension of this prohibition beyond those limits which God hath fixed in the undoubted sense of his law In the seventh Commandement nothing is expressed but adultry shall we therefore say neither fornication nor pollution nor sodomie is there forbidden were not this to destroy that lawe which God makes to be spirituall and to open the flood gates to a torrent of licentiousnesse surely it is easy to observe that Gods Spirit no lesse meanes that which he pleaseth to suppresse The Psalmist sayes Promotion comes neither from the East nor from the West nor from the South Psal. 75.
6. Shall we therefore say Is is from the North Is not that coast equally excluded though not expressed It is too much boldness to hold God too strictly to syllables when it is easie to determin what he meant to imply These rules then are useless Let me see now if the Advocat can as easily shake off one or two rules of law which I shall return upon him in lieu of his Is committit in legem c. Hee wrongs the law who keeping close to the letter strives against the intent and purpose of the law And that other not unlike In fraudem legis facit qui salvis verbis legis sententiam ejus circumvenit If this be not the case in hand I shall professe to know nothing From rules let us look to authorities It is directly maintained hee saith by the Canonists and Scholemen but what is it that is so maintained Not this match let no man think so but that proposition viz that this match is no where directly forbidden in Gods law If wee take it of express terms no wise man ever denied it not Canonists Scholemen only or those few named Authors but all reasonable men concurre in this truth what needs a citation of some where all agree But if we take it of the necessary cleare sense of the law by just Analogy and infallible implication now none of the forecited or any other orthodox Authors will deny the certaine and indubitable prohibition of this marriage How well the rest will speed judg by their fore-man Tho Aquinas who expresly determines it a false position that those are joyned together by God who match within the fourth degree whereas this is in the third Not to say how stifly Peter Lombard urges the unlawfulness of marriages to the very seventh degree vel quousque parentela possit agnosci even as farre as the kindred may bee discerned following herein Pope Gregory and Nicholas To shut up short none of all his cited Authors dare be any other then professed enemies to this match no lesse then the most zealous Commissioner of that now abolished Court whose late sentence is upon Record enough to this purpose As for Lyra who is trailed in here and cited strongly in Othniels Case what shall I say It grieves my soul to see any well-minded Christian so abused by mis-information This author hath thus Turpitudinem sororis c. Thou shalt not uncover the nakednesse of thy Fathers sister or thy Mothers sister eodem modo and in the same manner is forbidden the marriage betwixt the brother and the daughter of the Aunt for it is the same degree so Lyra Nothing can be more peremptory against this case in favor of which he is alledged This would be the issue of all the rest if it were worth the while to examin them in that which yeelded nothing advanceth the cause of the producer They are all as professed enemies to this match as my selfe only they deny an expresse mention of this cause which was never either thought needfull or intended to be pleaded For the Protestant Divines which are cited to give testimony to the non-prohibition of this marriage I must cry shame upon those false hands which have so palpably abused both your friend the Authors Let me give but a taste of som Melancthon Zanchius Bucanus who are said to allow the match by admiting only the degrees mentioned to bee prohibited No place is instanced versatur in generalibus You know the word but let your eyes be judges of their opinion Melancthon mentioning the marriage of Abraham and Sarah in the second degree Hoc gradu saith he in linea inaequali c. In this degree in an inequallline marriages are forbidden by Gods law because God doth universally ordaine a greater reverence to be yeelded to a superior degree then to an equall It is the very case in hand which Melancthon thus sentenceth For Zanchius he citing the Text of Levit. 18 13. Thou shalt not uncover the nakednesse of thy Mothers Sister adds ergo neque mater teram c. Therfore no man saith he may marry his Aunt and that charge which he gives concerning the Aunt would God have to bee understood also of the Uncle which is the Fathers brother or the Mothers brother whiles he adds a reason of the prohibition For she is the neer kinswoman of thy Father or Mother Thus Zanchius in his book de Operibus Dei Lib. 4. de Sponsalibus who absolutely condemnes this marriage as incestuous and indispensable Bucanus moving the case of Abrahams marriage with Sarah and Amrams with Jochebed c. Leaves it in doubt whether these men were as the times stood particularly dispensed with by God or whether they sinned in thus marrying even before the law against the law of nature by which he holds these matches utterly prohibited With what forehead then could any Scholar obtrude these fals allegations upon an honest client whether to draw his foot into a snare or to keep it there under pretence of favoring what they professedly oppose As for the moderne Jewes to whom he stretches out his hand for succour it matters little what they now teach or do they are not more without God then without honesty or credit Their opinions are fabulous their judgement frivolous and their practise not worth our knowledge or regard I rather descend to the resolution of our owne Church That our ever honoured Mother hath passed her condemnatory sentence upon this marriage in her ratification of that Orthodox and just Table of forbidden degrees set forth by authority under Archb. Parker what doubt we now Do we acknowledg the Oracular Voice of our dear and holy mother the Church of England and yet question whether we should obey it Certainly in a case of Conscience a dutifull son mee thinks should rather hold fit to follow the sacred determination of the Church then the municipall Acts of the civill state It is an ill office of those that would set Church and State Canons and Statutes together by the eares even in these points wherin they are perfect friends The statute of 32 of Henry 8. c. 38. intending to marre the Romish market of gainfull dispensations and injurious prohibitions professeth to allow all marriages that are not prohibited by Gods law such is this in hand prohibited though not in the Letter yet in necessary inference and interpretation The Canon 99. of 1603. hath thus No person shall marry within the degrees prohibited by the lawes of God and expressed in a Table set forth by authority in the yeer 1563. and all marriages so made and contracted shal be adjudged incestuous and unlawfull What scruple can arise hence here is a perfect harmony betwixt Statute and Canon It is a meer Cavill no better to take And for Or as if the meaning were that all degrees whether prohibited by the lawe of God or expressed in that Table are forbidden This is a foule straine both to