Selected quad for the lemma: woman_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
woman_n	brother_n	daughter_n	sister_n	5,598	5	10.9500	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A15422	Synopsis papismi, that is, A generall viewe of papistry wherein the whole mysterie of iniquitie, and summe of antichristian doctrine is set downe, which is maintained this day by the Synagogue of Rome, against the Church of Christ, together with an antithesis of the true Christian faith, and an antidotum or counterpoyson out of the Scriptures, against the whore of Babylons filthy cuppe of abominations: deuided into three bookes or centuries, that is, so many hundreds of popish heresies and errors. Collected by Andrew Willet Bachelor of Diuinity.	Willet, Andrew, 1562-1621.	1592 (1592)	STC 25696; ESTC S119956	618,512	654

Rachel 1. Laban 2. Rebecca 3. Iacob 4. For in collateral degrees we count not the distance from the roote or stocke but the mutuall distance from themselues And by this reason if Cosin germanes be but in the second degree there should be no degree beyond the second forbidden Leuit. 18. for there is no degree forbidden beyond this neither is this by name and directly forbidden The Papists 3. THeir third rule is this In collaterall degrees vnequall Thare Abraham Aram. Sara error 34 that is when both are not alike distant from the stocke they shall differ in that degree in the which the further of them is remoued from the stocke as in this example Sara is distant two degrees from the stocke and as many from Abraham Bellarm. ibid. The Protestants Ans. NEither is this rule perfect for by this reason he that is indeed a degree further off shall be in the same degree for if the vncle and the nephew be remoued but the second degree and Cosin germanes are but distant in the second degree as they say the vncles sonne shall be in the same degree with his cosin as his father is which is not to be admitted Wherefore in collaterals we preferre the Ciuill account of degrees that is so many persons the stocke of the kinred excepted so many degrees These then are the rules of marriage 1. In the right line ascending and descending all degrees are forbidden 2. In collateral consanguinitie the prohibition reacheth to the third degree as it is not lawfull to marrie the vncle or the Aunt who are in the third degree from their nephew 3. In collateral affinitie the prohibition is extended to the fourth degree for affinitie is alwaies a degree beyond that consanguinitie by the which it commeth in as it is vnlawfull to marrie the vncles wife Leuit. 18.14 which is in the fourth degree from her nephew being one degree beyond her husband who is the vncle in the third degree And this is to be obserued that there is no affinitie in the first or second degree but the neerest is in the third as the wiues or husbands father brother or daughter which are all in the third degree the husband is in the first the wife the second and they in the third THE SECOND PART WHETHER ANY OF THE degrees prohibited in the law may be dispensed withall The Papists THey say not that the Pope may dispense with all but with some of them Concil Trid. sess 24. can 3. As they tooke vpon them to dispense with King error 35 Henry the 8. marriage with his brothers wife their reason is because some of those prohibitions were only iudicial and positiue constitutions not grounded vpon the law of nature Argum. 1. If it be the lawe of nature not to marrie within those degrees it should haue been in force before the law was made but so was it not for Abraham married his brothers daughter and Iacob two sisters Bellarm. cap. 27. Ans. 1. As Augustine sayth of the marriage and copulation of Adams children brothers and sisters together Factum est compellente necessitate It was for necessitie sake because there were then no more women so also may it be in some sort true of those Patriarkes that hauing a necessitie to marrie amongst their owne kinred and not with the Gentiles there was no choise to be had of women of their owne kinred further off in degree 2. Although this example of theirs both in marrying many wiues and so neere of kinne cannot be altogether excused or iustified in them yet because the law of nature was not yet so cleerely knowne as afterward by the giuing of the law which is nothing els but an exposition of the law of nature the offence was not so great in them but might better be tolerated because as Augustine sayth it was neither Contra morem illorum temporum nec contra praeceptum Neither against the custome of those times nor against any flat precept And to conclude although those holy men had their imperfections yet we must not iudge them in these things according to the euil and corrupt disposition of men in these daies which might vse this great libertie in marriage better then many vse lawfull marriage now as Augustine sayth Castiùs habebant plures quàm nūc multi vnam They vsed many wiues more chastely then many now liue with one De bon coniug cap. 10. The Protestants WE affirme that it is vtterly vnlawfull for any Christian to marrie within the degrees prohibited neither can any humane power dispense with such marriages but the equitie of that lawe being grounded vpon nature is in force for euer Wherefore the Pope of Rome sheweth himselfe plainly to be Antichrist in dispensing against the law of God Argum. 1. Leuit. 18.24 The reason of that law is giuen concerning the forbidden degrees They should not defile themselues in any one of those things because the Gentiles defiled themselues thereby and were cast out before them for it Wherefore it is a naturall and perpetuall law otherwise the Gentiles had not been bound vnto it Argum. 2. Mark 6.18 Iohn sayth to Herode It is not lawfull for thee to haue thy brothers wife Ergo the law was not abrogate being in force in our Sauiour Christs time Neither are they to alleadge that Herodes brother was yet liuing or that he had a child by Herodias and therefore it was not lawfull for him to marrie her for all this being graunted which cannot be proued yet it is plaine out of the text that Iohn reproueth him in no other name but because he married his brothers wife Augustine is against them who speaking of the marriage of Consobrines or Cosin germanes which had been sometime in vse Quia id nec diuina prohibuit nondum prohibuerat lex humana It was as yet thought lawfull because neither the diuine law forbad it neither was it yet prohibited by mans law If that then be thought lawfull which Gods law manifestly forbiddeth not that sure is vnlawful which it plainly forbiddeth Wherfore to marrie within any of the degrees directly forbidden Leuit. 18. is vtterly vnlawfull THE THIRD PART WHETHER ANY OTHER DEgrees may be by humane law prohibited beside those directly forbidden in the law The Papists 1. THey affirme that by the law of Moses those degrees onely are vnlawfull to marrie in which are directly and by name set downe therefore it is error 36 not vnlawfull by Moses law for the vncle or Aunts husband to marrie his niece because it is not by name prohibited as Abraham married his brother Arams daughter for Sara was his niece The marriage also of Cosin germanes was lawfull by Moses law and practized Numb 36. The daughters of Zelophehad married their vncles sonnes Therefore by Moses law no degrees are forbidden which are not directly named Bellarm. cap. 27. The Protestants 1. COncerning Abrahams marriage what is to be thought we haue shewed before but it is a

plaine case that the vncle is no more to marrie his niece then the nephew his Aunt and this being by name prohibited Leuit. 18 14.20.2 the other also is necessarily included for the same rules for degrees of kinred doe proportionably hold both in men and women wherefore such marriage is vnlawfull neither to be contracted and if it be to be dissolued 2. Concerning the marriage of brothers and sisters children there is a greater question First it cannot be proued that Zelophehads fiue daughters married their vncles sonnes that is their Cosin germanes for the Hebrewes call the nephewes sonnes as Iethros daughters are called the daughters of Raguel their grandfather Exod. 2.17 So it is very like that their husbands were their vncles sonnes sonnes as in the 12. verse it may be gathered where the text sayth They were married into the families of the sonnes of Manasses therfore not into one familie But as touching the question in hand the marriage of Cosin germanes seemeth also by some analogie to be forbidden by Moses law for if the degrees of affinitie be limited to the fourth degree as it is not lawfull for a man to marrie his wiues daughters daughter Leuiticus 18.17 why should not the line of consanguinitie hold to the fourth degree likewise And so neither the sonne to marrie his fathers brothers daughter or the daughter the sonne for heere are also foure degrees the sonne one the father two the fathers brother three the brothers sonne foure Yet this we grant that this analogie or proportion is not so strong nor doth conclude so necessarily as the other Wherefore we thus determine of this matter that it is well that the marriages of Cosin germanes are restrained by humane lawe and so they ought to be which kind of marriages may lawfully be hindered and the contract loosed but the marriage being consummate and finished it is not for this cause to be dissolued Augustine also writeth very well of this matter Quis dubitet honestiùs hoc tempore consobrinarum prohibita esse coniugia etiamsi id diuina lex non prohibeat cuius enim debet causa propinquitatis verecundum honorem ab ea contineat quamuis generatricem libidinem Who doubteth but that the marriage of Cosin germanes is honestly forbidden though the diuine lawe doe not prohibite it for to whom a man oweth a shamefast reuerence for kinred sake he ought to refraine his lust The Papists error 37 2. IT is lawful for the Church to restraine other degrees of affinitie and consanguinitie besides those prescribed by Moses and that the decrees of the Church in such cases doe bind in conscience Concil Trident. sess 24. can 3. As to prohibite marriage vnto the seuenth degree in naturall kinred Also their Canons doe make a spirituall kinred that commeth in by Baptisme Confirmation and suffer not the godfather to marrie the godchild or the godfather the godmother Likewise they haue found out an affinitie that commeth in by espousals onely of Matrimonie which bindeth say they in the first degree by the Canon law which is the first and second by the Ciuill law as that it is not lawfull for the brother to marrie her which was espoused to his brother Also another kinred and affinitie by fornication vnlawfull fleshly knowledge which bindeth in the 2. degree Canonicall which is the 3. and 4. Ciuil as it is not lawfull for the sonne to marrie his fathers bastard Bellarm. cap. 24. cap. 30. The Protestants 1. TO forbid more degrees in marriage then are either directly or by necessarie consequence prohibited in the law is a meere Antichristian yoke layd vpon the people of God for the Lord the author of that lawe best did knowe both what persons were fit for marriage and how farre the line of marriage was to extend 2. The inuention of spirituall kinred is but a popish tricke to get the more monie for their dispensations for by this reason no Christians ought to marrie together because they are all of one spirituall kinred in Christ. 3. The new affinitie that commeth by espousals is also but an humane inuention for the law speaketh onely of the kinred of the flesh which ariseth of carnall knowledge and copulation not an intent or purpose onely of marriage Leuit. 18.6 4. The last we admit for the sonne of the father begotten out of marriage is of his fleshly kinred though not lawfully and therefore in marriage matters there is respect also to be had euen of this kinred of the flesh as Ruben is cursed of his father because he lay with his concubine Genes 49.4 which notwithstanding was not his fathers wife THE FOVRTH QVESTION OF OTHER impediments of marriage THere are some impediments which may hinder and dissolue the contract of marriage before it be consummate but not after some which both may error 38 hinder the contract and dissolue the matrimonie euen after carnall knowledge The Papists 1. BEllarmine reckoneth vp diuers impediments of both kinds which may disanull the contract of marriage and dissolue the matrimonie it selfe but he maketh no mention of the consent of the parents And indeed it is their opinion that it is not a necessarie thing to be respected in marriage neither that children are bound to require the consent of their parents Cap. 19. The Protestants FIrst we doe not say that the want of the parents consent may dissolue marriage consummate after mutuall coniunction but that it may breake off the contract and espousals Secondly neither haue the parents power to bestow their children in marriage without their consent Genes 24.57 Thirdly neither must the parents exercise a tyrannicall power ouer their children in forbidding them marriage but must alway haue respect vnto their neede And thus doing their consent is necessarie and without it the contract hath no validitie 1. Corin. 7.37.38 The parent hath power to giue in marriage or not to giue There are also other causes which may dissolue contracts and espousals made as if the honest and lawfull condition propounded in the contract be not kept or if there be an error in the person he heareth afterward of her dishonestie whom he tooke for an honest woman both these may make voyd the contract error 39 but not the marriage if they be once ioyned together The Papists 2. THey set downe many impediments which may make a nullitie of marriage it selfe after it be consummate some of them we acknowledge as afterward it shall appeare but these following we doe renounce First the vow of chastitie and entring into Orders doe loose the bond of marriage Secondly if one marrie with an Infidel the marriage is not onely vnlawfull but actually voyd Bellarm. cap. 23. Thirdly he that marrieth her with whom he committed adulterie before is loose euen after marriage and the matrimonie voyd Bellarm. cap. 22. The Protestants 1. COncerning the inualiditie of vowes to disanull marriage we haue declared the truth before Controu 6. de Monachis For

yet is it not best for euery man to be rich God seeth it good that some men should be poore So single life is the best for those that haue the gift of chastitie that can with a quiet conscience liue single otherwise matrimonie were much better for Saint Paul that wisheth that euery one would liue single as hee did yet afterward sayth It is better to marrie then to burne So that by the Apostles iudgement to marrie is best for him that hath not the gift of continencie Iewel pag. 232. defens Apolog. The Protestants THat it is not onely lawfull but conuenient that all men both Ministers and others that haue not receiued a proper gift of continencie should marrie and that it is agreeable and consonant to the word of God thus wee shew it 1 The scriptures are most playne for the mariage of Ministers 1. Timoth. 3.2 Saynt Paul sayth a Bishop and generally euery Minister may be the husband of one wife and verse 11. their wiues are described howe they ought to behaue themselues Let their wiues be honest Ergo it is lawfull for them to bee maried Bellarmine answereth that Saynt Paul speaketh of the wiues which they had before their calling and ordayning not those which they should marry after But there appeareth no such thing out of the text Nay Saint Paul say wee had libertie as well as others to leade about a sister a wife euen after hee was an Apostle 1. Corinth 9. Wherefore it is as lawfull afterward as afore Bellarmine answereth We must thus read a Sister a woman and it is like they were women that did minister vnto the Apostles and followed them We replie First the word Sister doth implie a woman and therefore it had been an improper and needlesse speech to say a sister a woman therefore we must rather read a sister a wife Secondly if they were other women which ministred of their substance what neede the Apostles to be mayntained of the Churches if they ministred but in their seruice and attendance who were more fit to doe it and to follow them from place to place then their wiues Thirdly the phrase of leading about a sister importeth a superioritie and authority such as the husband hath ouer his wife Another place we haue Hebr. 13.3 Mariage is honourable among all men Ergo amongst Ministers Bellarmin If it were meant of all mariages then to marrie within the degrees of consanguinitie were also honourable Answere This is a very childish cauill First hee might haue read further And the bedde vndefiled Saint Paul therefore speaketh of lawfull mariage and indeede the other ioyning and coupling of men and women together contrarie to GODS lawe is not to bee counted Matrimonie or Wedlocke but Incest rather and Fornication as the brother to marrie his brothers wife and such like Secondly Saint Paul sayth not all mariages are honourable but mariage is honourable for all men the generalitie is not of the thing but the persons Wherefore we doe fittly conclude out of this place that marriage is lawful and commendable euen among ministers argum Caluin Further Saint Paul saith For auoyding of fornication let euery man haue his owne wife 1. Corinth 7.2 Here is no restraint for Ministers Bellarm. this is to be vnderstoode of those that haue not made a vow of continency Answer First our Sauiour Christ commaundeth no such vowes it is a cruell Antichristian yoke laide vpon Ministers to binde them when they receiue orders to vowe single life therefore your Antichristian decree ought not to abridge the generall libertie granted by the Apostle Secondly the end of marriage is generall to auoyde fornication and therefore the remedie also is generall for euerie man hauing not a proper gift of continencie may be in danger of that inconuenience if he be denyed the ordinarie helpe Melancthon Againe 1. Timoth. 4. to forbid marriage is called a doctrine of diuels but the Popish Church forbiddeth marriage Bellarm. Wee doe not forbid marriage to any but we require single life of all that are entred into orders which it is at their owne choyce to receiue or to refuse Ans. First it is necessarie that some should receiue orders and be consecrate to the Church ministerie wherefore requiring this condition of all such to liue single though particularly you prohibite not this man or that to marrie yet generally you prohibite the whole calling which is worse Secondly if you say you doe not forbid marriage simplie to all no more did the Manichees for they suffered their scholars and auditors to marrie And Saint Augustines words are generall Ille prohibet matrimonium qui illud malum esse dicit he forbiddeth marriage that thinketh it is euil you therefore forbidding marriage must needs hold opinion that is wicked and euill 2 This restraint of the marriage of Ministers hath not been of ancient time in the Church but imposed vpon the Church of late 1000. yeere after Christ Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus anno 180. had seuen of his progenitors before him Bishops of the same See In the Nicene Councel Paphnutius stoode vp and stayed the decree that should haue past for restraining of the marriage of Ministers and it is saide Synodus landauit sententiam Paphnutij The Synod commended Paphnutius sentence Sozomen lib. 1. cap. 11. Gregorie the father of Gregorie was Bishop of Nazianzum The Greeke Church neuer yet receiued this popish decree of single life and their Bishops are married at this day Bellarmine saith that the Church of Rome hath dispenced with them cap. 18. Ergo if the Pope would dispence with the Latine Church it might be lawfull enough then for Ministers to marrie wherefore it is but a humane constitution Againe it is false that they haue dispenced with the Greeke Church they care not for their dispensations but vse their owne Christian libertie neither was the Greeke Church euer subiect to the Bishop of Rome Thus we see that in times past marriage was lawfull for all men vntill Pope Nicholas the second Alexander the second and Gregorie the seuenth that notable sorcerer and adulterer for these three comming together one not long after another began by publike decree to restraine Priests marriage not long after them Anselme began to play the Rex here in England anno 1104. who stoutely proceeded in his vngodly purpose and enacted that married Priests should either leaue their wiues or their benefices At which time 200. Priests at once came barefoote to the Kings palace to make complaint And for all Anselmes Popelike and outragious proceedings against married Priests yet they continued married well nie two hundred yeeres after Anselmes time doe what he could and thus it is manifest that the restraint of Ministers marriage is no ancient thing but then began most to be vrged when Antichrist fullie was reuealed to the world when as the orders of Friers came in and were confirmed and priuiledged vnder Boniface 8. about anno 1300. 3 What

congregate or called to condemne such open wickednes as if neuer any heresie had been condemned but in a Synode or Councel Cont. 2. epistol Pelag. lib. 4. cap. 12. This is that heretical opiniō as they call it which the Councel of Constance condemned in Iohn Husse him together with it because he said That an heretike whatsoeuer he be ought first to be instructed and taught with Christian loue gentlenes by the holy scriptures by reasons drawn out of the same before he suffer corporall or bodily punishment Fox pag. 610. articul 18. Which his saying is grounded vpon that rule of the Gospell Math. 18.15 That if we see one offend we should first tell him priuatly then before 2. or 3. lastly declare it to the Church and if he will not heare the Church that is by scripture conuincing him then continuing obstinate let him be as a publicane This rule the papists kept not in their bloudie persecutions here in England They put many hundreds to death were not able to cōuince any one of heresie but in disputation were themselues put to silence and made ashamed Their onely arguments were the fire and fagot 3 Againe they vsed vnlawfull waies and vniust in sifting and examining by error 104 cruel tormēts the poore innocents brought before them neither shewing accusers nor witnesses Iohn Browne Martyr appearing before Warrham and Fisher two bloudsuckers was burned with hot coales his bare feet being set vpon thē Fox p. 1292. Cutbert Symsons fingers were grated with an arrow and he himself piteously racked to be made betray his innocēt brethren p. 2032. Tomkins hand was burned by Bonner till the sinewes sparkled againe pag. 1533. And these were the witnesses and accusers that were brought against them This was cleane contrarie to the law of Moses At the mouth of two or three witnesses shall he that is worthie of death dye Deuteron 17.6 Augustine saith Quis iudex accusantis sumat personam c. What Iudge would take vpon him to be an accuser Our Lord Christ knewe Iudas to be a theefe sayth he yet because he was not accused he did not cast him off He counteth it a very vnnaturall thing for the Iudge to be an accuser and to proceede without witnesses which although in some criminall cases is more tolerable yet in the cases of life and death ought in no wise to be vsed The same iudgement also Augustine giueth of that cruell custome of tormenting men to conuince them by their own mouth which was inuented by the heathen but neuer more cruelly practised then among the papists Hoc intolerabile est saith he rigandum fontibus lacrymarum cum propterea torqueat iudex accusatum ne occidat nesciens innocentem fit per ignorantiam vt tortum innocentem occidat quem ne innocentem occideret torserat How intolerable a thing is it and to be much lamented that while the Iudge tormenteth the partie accused lest vnwittingly he should put an innocent man to death it falleth out that he adiudgeth to death a man both innocent beside tormented whom lest he should slay as an innocent he before put to torment His meaning is that when a man is put to the racke or otherwise tortured that he might confesse the truth and cleere himselfe it commeth to passe that through extremitie of the payne he maketh himselfe guiltie and so the innocent is both wrongfully tormented and vniustly put to death Which kind of forcing men by torture though in some dangerous cases as of high treason and such like where there is great perill in the concealing of the truth and no other way to sift it out may be admitted yet to vse it as an ordinarie course as the papists did and in causes of religion it is to too shameful and of all Christians to be abhorred 4 Where haue they learned so hotly and fiercely to pursue simple men and women to death for none or very small offences which they notwithstanding error 105 falsely called heresie Was it heresie for Iames Brewster to heare one Sweeting to reade many good things out of a certaine booke or for the same Sweeting when as the sayd Iames should say Now the sonne of the liuing God helpe vs to answere Now almightie God so doe yet for these heresies were they both condemned and burnt in Smithfield Anno. 1511. Fox pag. 818. A woman of Auspurge had like to haue been burned for asking a priest that carried the Host to a sicke man with Taper-light what he meant to goe with a light at noone day if Mary the Emperours sister had not made sute for her Anno. 1550. Anno 1525. a Monke burned in France because he had forsaken his abominable order and married a wife pag. 896. Iohannes de Cadurco being at a feast where it was agreed that euery one should bring forth this posie or sentence because he brought forth this Christ reigne in our hearts and prosecuted it out of the scriptures was burned Anno. 1533. pag. 897. A Tailour burned at Paris anno 1549. for working vpon an holy day ex Iohan. Crispin Fox p. 903. Ralfe Hare constrained to abiure for saying before the Bishop of Winchester The Lord is my witnes It is Symbolum Haereticorum saith Winchester a marke to know heretikes by to say the Lord the Lord page 1225. One Thomas Sanpaulinus Matyr because he rebuked a man for swearing was thereupon suspected to be a Lutheran examined condemned and burned at Paris anno 1551. pa. 904. Many such like examples might be produced of holye Martyres which for these and such other great heresies were put to death And as the offences were very smal as we see so their māner of proceeding was most cruell void of all humanity They spared not women with childe We haue not forgotten that famous example of their crueltie which shall be remēbred to their perpetuall shame and infamie Howe they burned 3. simple women in the Isle of Garnsey anno 1556. which had submitted thēselues to their mercie one of the three was great with childe which brast out of her wombe in the midst of the fire and was throwne in againe pa. 1944. They had no compassion of the tender age of children In the towne of Byrbroke while Richard Chapman did pennaunce in the Church beeing inioyned to kneele barefoote and bare legged all the sermon while vppon the colde steps of the Church a little boy for giuing him his hat to kneele vpon was had into the vestrie and piteously scourged pa. 1047. Cruel Bonner burned Richard M●kins a childe of 15. yeeres for speaking against the sacrament of the aultar who notwithstanding at the stake was taught to speak much good of the B. of London and so did pa. 1202. John F●ttie his childe being of 8. yeere oulde for saying to one of the Bishoppes Chaplens that he had Balaams marke was scourged so cruelly that within 14 dayes hee died Nay such was their cruelty they