by Ceremonies and not by Circumstances Of the manifold mischiefs from the Judgment of Marriage by the Ceremonies of a Priest and a Temple 192 1. It compels to enter into an indissoluble Obligation before the Parties can know each other whether they are sit for Marriage or no. 193 2. It give the Bishop the Monopoly of all Women and their Goods 196 3. It gives him the Monopoly of Successions both in private Families and Kingdoms 197 4. It gives him power to Judg of Marriage Filiation and Succession by Fictions ib. 5. It causeth in the Rich Excess and Vanity of Apparel Tilting Turneaments Masking Gluttony Riot and Drunkenness 198 6. It undoeth the Poor in their Marriages 199 7. It causeth Immodesty in Brides wanton Songs and Ceremonies promiscuous Dancing and corruption of Youth 200 8. It exposeth to publick view what God hath commanded to be secret 201 9. It causeth Community of Women Community of Children Fornication Adultery Stews Brothels and the dissemination of most contegious and deadly Diseases amongst the people ib. 10. It hath caused Prostitution of Brides to Priests Lords Guests and others 205 11. It hath caused Consecration of Incest Whores Sodomites to attend the Service of the Priests and the Temples ib. 12. It hath caused the Consecration and Adoration of Priapus Baal Peor Venus Adonis Flora and the first defiling of the Virgin World with Whoredom and Idolatry 207 13. It first destroyed in the World the Omnipresential Worship of God 208 Prayers in Temples and Synagogues except amongst persons agreed prohibited by Christ and why A Poem on the Omnipresential Worship of God and therein of Marriages in Temples 223 15. It caused the bloody Sacrifices of Virgins Children and Indian Wives 229 16. It lays punishments on lawful Child births and destroys Millions of Infants 234 17. It caused the Parisian Massacre wherein were an Hundred Thousand Protestants slain 240 Why the Ottoman Emperors Marry not by a Priest or in a Temple and of the bloody Murders ensued of the Sons of Solyman the Magnificent by his breaking the Custom and his being drawn by Roxolana to Marry her by a Priest 245 12. Bishops proceed to Judgment in the unknown Language of Law Latine 254 13. They Judg for Fees where of the inconveniences following maintenance of Judges and Officers by Fees and not by Satary Exceptions against Bishops being Judges in reference to the Executive Power 1. They begin the Suit with Execution 263 2. They Pledg before Summons Summon before Copy Copy before Oath Punish before Contumacy Judg before Hearing and Arrest before Judgment all which preposteration begins with Execution 268 Of the Inconveniences ensue by Quorums or more Judges than one in a Court 276 A Satyr against the cruel Preposterations above mention'd both in Ecclesiastical and Temporal Courts Of Summons to answer before a Copy given of what is required to be answer'd 286 Of giving a Copy before an Oath of no Calumny 288 Of the multitude of Fictions and Falsities ensue in Chancery and Common Law by neglecting the Oath of no Calumny ib. ad 305 Of Judgment before Hearing Part of a Satyr translated out of Seneca p. 685. on the settish Emperor Claudius who used to Sentence before Hearing 305 An enumeration of divers Forms of Judicial Proceeding wherein People are Condemned before Hearing 1. By repelling men from the Truth and merit of the Cause and compelling them to make their allegations in Formalities and Fictions 306 A Dispute between two famous Judges Fitzherbert and Brook 14 H. 8.25 concerning Truth and Good Sentence and Formality and Fiction in Judicial Proceeding 306 2. By compelling to Original Writs at Common Law and not serving the Party with a Copy of the Declaration without them 312 Mischiefs of Original Writs 313 3. By compelling to the Writ of Subpoena in Chancery and not serving the Party with a Copy of the Bill without it Mischiefs of Writs of Subpoena 4 By the Capias ut lagatum and Excommunicato capiendo A Satyr on a Papist and a Protestant Imprison'd one on an Outlawry the other on an Excommunication against Imprisonment before Hearing and Judgment 329 A Digression concerning the danger of the Three Kingdoms Condemning one another without Hearing by reason of the Non-Union of their three Parliaments in one House Of the Fatal Dangers attending a Non-Union and the inestimable Benefits of the contrary 335 Of matters requisite to perfect an Union An Elegy on the ill effects of Excommunication of Protestants by Protestants causing a Disunion in the late unhappy Civil Wars 343 5. By Excommunication it self The Form of the Jewish Excommunication 345 The Form of the Greek Excommunication against Thieves 347 The Form of the Popes Excommunication against Queen Elizabeth All Forms of Excommunication wicked and Anti-Christian 348 Of the strange Cheats and Superstition in Excommunications 352 Of the damnable mischiefs arise to Christian Princes and States by tollerating Popes or Prelates to Excommunicate without a Sign of Mission from God 362 All Excommunication Curses and Deliveries to Satan by Bishops or Priests without a Sign of Mission from God if Malefice follow ought to be punish'd as Witchcraft if not as a Cheat. 381 A Satyr in defiance of all Excommunication without a Sign of Mission from God 388 An Epode on Protestants Excommunicated by Papists Considerations concerning a True and False Test between Papist and Protestant 6. By Bishops condemning Protestants of Heresie by the Four first General Councils The other Exceptions against Judicial Forms and what was intended concerning the other Competitor-Judges I am enforced to break off abruptly by Disturbances at the Press Lib. II. Of the Judg of Marriage Filiation Aliment and Succession CHAP. I. Of the Five Competitors to be Judges of Marriage Filiation Aliment and Succession 1. The Bishop 2. The Magistrate 3. The Soldiers 4. The Parents 5. The King and Parliament HAving before shewn unanswerable exceptions against the Ecclesiastical Laws by which Bishops pretend to judg I shall now propose exceptions Declinatory of the Authority and Jurisdiction usurped by them and likewise of their Personal disabilities and incapacities to be Judges of the matters in question all which are 1. In reference to the Legislative 2. The Judicial 3. The Executive or Military Power all usurped or abused by them Exceptions against Bishops being Judges in reference to the Legislative They assume to be Judges Jure Divino without a Sign of Mission from God which overthrows the Legislative Power of King and Parliament For they assume to be Angels and Messengers of God Embassadors of Christ and Successors by his last Will and Testament of the whole Power of Judgment given to the Son yet do they shew no sign of Mission from God no letters of Credence from Christ nor any letters of Probat that they were nominated either Executors or Legatees in any such Testament or in the Testament of any Executor or Apostle of Christ or in the Testament of any Executor of such Executors
are totally Ignorant except only to take account of the Money and Gaines 3. They Judg by a Chancellour and Commissaries and not in Person The Causes are First Ignorance whereof they are before proved Guilty The Second Pride that they may be equal to Kings who pream Judg or Legislative Power can delegate Judgment A Bishop must therefore be a Judg Supream or Delegate if he Arrogate to be Supream he ought not to be suffer'd if a Delegate Delegatus non potest Delegare The Third is Sloth to take the Gains and not the Pains of doing Justice The Fourth is Covetousnes that they may have Plurality of Offices and let them to Farm to Deputies all which are most sad Ingredients to compound a Judg of Marriage Filiation and Succession and it is clean contrary to the known Laws for any Judg Delegate to Act by Deputy and not in Person for the Office of a Judg is an Office of Trust and cannot be granted over and neither ought nor can be executed by any Assign Deputy Commissaries or Chancellour but ought to be served in Person besides they Excommunicate by Lay-deputies contrary to their own Pretences that the Power of the Keys belongs only to Persons in pretended Holy Orders 4. They have Pluralities of Offices and more than they are able to serve yet will be Judges besides One good thing is remembred of Becket Arch-Bishop of Canterbury who though he was a Traitor to King Henry the Second yet being first by him made Chancellor of England and after made Arch-Bishop of Canterbury before he would take upon him the Office of Arch-Bishop he of his own accord first surrendred his Office of Chancellor not thinking it fit for one man to have two such great Offices at once but they now make St. Peters Net of so small a Mash that great or small all is Fish that comes to it And first they begin with the Coronation Office already mention'd then the Offices of Legislation in Parliaments of Legislation in Assemblies of Legislation in Synods of Chancellors of State of Negotiators of Intelligencers of Soldiers of Treasurers of Almoners of Temporal Barons of Masters of the Ceremonies of Worship of Visitors of Inquisitors of Confessors of Penancers of Excommunicators of Pardoners of Absolvers of Dispencers of Faculties of Interdictors of Marriages of Liâ—ncers of Marriage of Interdictors of the Press of Licencers of the Press of makers of Ministers of Licencers of Preachers Curates Lecturers Schoolmasters Physicians of Consecrators of Churches of Consecrators of Church-yards of Interdictors of Burial of Interdictors to cast out the Devil by Fasting and Prayers of Licencers to cast out the Devil and many others out of each of which they reap gains yet are not able to serve the least part of them but let them to Farm to their Spunges whom they squeeze into their own See whereas they cannot so much as pretend any Mission from Christ for more than One Office which is of Teaching in Season and out of Season and would they follow that as they ought the same would be sufficient to take up the whole man and leave them little leisure of being Judges of Marriage Filiation and Succession or to execute any other Temporal Office 5. They are Ambidexter and Amphibious Judges in Spirituals and Temporals They cannot deny that Marriage since it was purified by the Protestant Religion from the defilement of being a Romish Sacrament and Filiation Aliment and Succession incident to the same became meer Temporal matters and nothing can be more Temporal in it self or wherein the higest Temporal Rights of Princes and People of Liberty of Person and Propriety of Goods Freehold and Inheritance are more concerned than in them and it being likewise confess'd both by Common and Ecclesiastical Lawyers That the meer Spiritual Judge ought not to judg of Temporal matters neither was there any such Jurisdiction ever pretended to Marriage by the Pope himself but as to a Spiritual Sacrament and in Ordine ad Spiritualia he by it deposed Kings and disposed of the Succession of Kingdoms at his Will and Pleasure Unless therefore a Bishop will affirm That Marriage continues still a Romish Sacrament or that he may like the Pope judg of any Temporal matters in Ordine ad Spiritualia he hath no pretence or colour of Right to be a Judg of Marriage Filiation Aliment or Succession but let the Right be what it will de Facto he hath got a Spiritual Lord and a Temporal Baron into one Doublet and produced from thence a monstrous Ambidextrous Jurisdiction with the Spiritual Sword in one hand and the Temporal in the other neither Divine nor Humane nor Fish nor Flesh but like the Amphibious Crocodile partly with Tears partly with Terror Raving both by Land and Water and Destroying in both the Elements of Spirituals and Temporals 6. They Judg Marriage by pretended Canons and Laws made by Bishops and Synods which are no Laws but are utterly void they not having had in their making the Assent of the Parliament No English-man can deny That to make a Law are required the joint Assent both of King and Parliament and if either is wanting there can be no Law decreed and enacted by any other Convention Ecclesiastical or Lay whether Council or Synod And this is so great a Birth-right of the People That if any House of Commons who are Elected by the People and intrusted by them to be their Delegates to treat with his Majesty or his Successors to enact Laws of Marriage and other Laws concerning the same should consent and agree That an Act of Parliament should be made that the Bishops and a Synod should instead of the House of Commons have full Power and Authority on their Convention by the Kings Writ to treat with the King and by his Royal Assent to make and enact Canons and Laws concerning Marriage Filiation Succession Religion Liberty and Propriety of the People and such Canons and Laws so made should have the force of Acts of Parliaments and the Commons should declare That to ease themselves of the trouble of so often being summon'd from their remote Habitations in the Country and so long Journies to the City and their not being verst in the difficulties of Legislation or any other probable matter of Excuse that they desired to refer the whole care of the Publick Affairs to Bishops and Synods who are Learned men and they should from time to time as often as they saw necessary on Summons make wholesom Canons and Laws for the People and that the House of Commons desired to be excused from the burden of sitting any more and accordingly such an Act should be passed and thereon a Synod be Summon'd and they should make a Book of Canons concerning Marriage Filiation and Succession by the Royal Consent and these should be proclaimed to be Laws and to have the force of Acts of Parliament yet would such Book of Canons be utterly void and of none effect
no Jurisdiction but by Usurpation of so Temporal a Right as Marriage before this Statute let any who thinks he can see Nine Miles into a Milstone once more look into the Statute of Merton before recited and try whether he can screw out of it any word giving the Bishops either a Jurisdiction of Marriage or general Bastardy or that this Statute ever forged so rude a Romish Tool as the two edged Sword of general and special Bastardy to divide the living Child or tear it in peices between the Bishop and the Temporal Judg or how it was then consistent with a Legale Judicium parium to expose a Child no Alien but the King 's Native Subject to be tried for all he had by a then Foraign Ecclesiastical Law and a Judg a sworn Canonical Subject to a Foraign Pope or that the wisdom of that Parliament intended to coin a Chimera of a Distinction without a difference of general and special Bastardy which neither they themselves understood nor any Lawyers which write to this day give any sensibly Interpretation or agree amongst themselves concerning it or that they who made the Statute to oppose the Bishops Jurisdiction of Marriage should create a Notion of general Bastardy which le Scrope says was not in Esse before to give them a new Jurisdiction which was to change the Laws of England which they positively refuse in the Statute it self to change Object 4 No Similitude of fetching the Laws of Athens to Rome and bringing the Romish Laws to England It is further alledged by Coke lib. 5.1 part 9. That as the Romans fetching divers Laws from Athens yet being approved and allowed by the State there they were called Jus Civile Romanorum And as the Normans borrowing all or most of their Laws from England yet baptized them by the name of the Laws and Customs of Normandy So albeit the Kings of England derived their Ecclesiastical Laws from others yet so many as were approved and allowed hereby and with general consent are aptly and rightly called the King's Ecclesiastical Laws o. England To which is answer'd That there is no similitude between making or changing the Laws of the Athenians which were Foraign Laws to become the Laws of the Romans and the making or changing either the Foraign Papal or native Provincial Canons or Ecclesiastical Laws into the King's Ecclesiastical Laws of England For First The Athenian Laws before they were made Denizons of Rome were not admitted in cumulo but Articulated and every Article examined one by one by the Decem viri or Ten Men as our usurped Ecclesiastical Laws were appointed to have been done by the Statute of 25 Hen. 8.19 by the Two and Thirty Men and likewise in time of Edward the Sixth by others but neither succeeded before the same was received for a Roman Law Secondly Such Athenian Laws as were pickt or garbled from the rest were by the Authority of the Legislative Power of Rome both Senate and People caused to be writ in Twelve Tables and inacted to be the Laws of Rome but in England there was never by Authority any Articulation selecting or garbling of Canon Laws effected nor the same reduced into Tables Written or Printed by any Act of Parliament Ecclesiastical Laws in an unknown Language Thirdly The selected Athenian Laws were written in the Roman Language to be understood by the People before they would be received as Roman Laws but there is no such thing in the Ecclesiastical Laws of the Holy-Church concerning Marriage or any thing else but they all still remain in the Language of the Beast and can be neither call'd the Laws of the Church which by the Scripture are forbidden to be spoke in an unknown tongue as appears 1 Cor. 14.19 It is said In the Church I had rather speak five words with my understanding that by my voice I might teach others also then ten thousand words in an unknown tongue It is as utterly unlawful therefore to make that a Law of the Church or an Ecclesiastical Law of Marriage which is in the unknown Language of Latin as it had been to have made any form of Prayer taken from the Romish Church though the Pater Noster it self the form of Prayer of the Church of England while it was in Latin for the Minister would then have been a Barbarian to the English man and the English-man a Barbarian to him and it is as bad for the poor English-man for his Law-sutes in Latin for a Wife in the Court of Arches and other Ecclesiastical Courts as it would be if his Prayers were again in Latin in the Church For though he pay his Lawyers dear to plead his Cause there he cannot understand for his Money whether they call him and his Wife Rogue and Whore or honest People or whether the Judg by his Sentence will give him his Wife or take her from him but by the implicit Faith of an Interpreter as let any one look on the Sentence of Divorce in Kennes Case Coke lib. 7.42 E. he may understand or not understand the same Ecclesiastical Laws are not the Laws of the Land Fourthly The Athenian Laws were not obtruded on the Romans by Conquest of their Bodies by the Temporal Sword or their Souls by the Spiritual Sword of Excommunication but the Ecclesiastical Laws of Marriage have been obtruded on England ever since the Conquest by the superstitious Terrors or actual force of Excommunication either Papal or Episcopal and never by consent in Parliament The suffering of an oppression therefore is no consent nor an abuse against Law an Use Custom or Law neither can a wicked Oppression Use Custom or Law in name only be turned into a Law of England except by consent in Parliament or other humane Power besides it is by the very before recited Statute of Merton declared That the Laws of the Church are not the Laws of England for when the Bishop quarrel'd that the Law of England as to Marriage was not according to the Law of the Church and would have had them changed into the Law of the Church the Earls and Barons with one voice answer'd We will not change the Laws of England Whereby it 's plain the Laws of England and Laws of the Church are opposite Laws and not the same and this is confessed by Coke himself in the exposition of his Statute of Merton 2 part Inst fol. 98. where he saith Here our Common Laws are aptly and properly called the Laws of England because they are appropriated to this Kingdom of England as most apt and fit for the Government thereof and have no dependence upon any Foraign Law whatsoever no not on the Civil or Canon Law other then in Cases allowed by the Laws of England and therefore he saith the Poet spake truly hereof Et penitus toto divisos orbe Britannos So as the Law of England is proprium quarto modo to the Kingdom of England therefore Foraign Precedents are
Title of very good if it had been put in Latine might have been more Complementally express'd Optimo had it not been a Danger lest Maximo would have been added whether the Title of very good given to man is always as great a Fiction as the Titles of Sanctus Clemens and Pius given to Popes may be always doubtful in regard Christ himself in Humility refused the Attribute of Good which is a degree under very good Luke 18.19 And Jesus said unto him Why callest thou me good None is good but One that is God but this Title very good is sometimes certain and not doubtful to be a Fiction when it is attributed to the Leudest Person known the Letter begins After my very hearty commendations to your Lordship This when there is a Mortal Feud between the Chancellor and the Lord must be a Fiction Whereas there hath been of late a Bill of Complaint exhibited into the Court of Chancery against you by H. O. Gent. I have thought good to give you notice thereof rather by these my private Letters than by awarding his Majesties Ordinary Process This if no Bill is come in is as great a Fiction and Falsity in a Private Letter as in a Subpoena and it were far fairer dealing with any Noble-man as well as a Poor man if J. O. first took his Oath of Calumny to his Bill and then made him according to the Precept of Christ an Oblatio Libelli and sent him a Copy of his Bill by his own Letter before he troubled him with a Chancellors Subpoena or Letter and made Use of them only on Probation and declaratory Sentence of Contumacy first obtained and after that obtained far fairer dealing it were with J. O. or any Poor man to grant the same Process of Contumacy that a Noble-man shall have against a Poor man and not put him to the extraordinary cost and incertainty of a Chancellors Private Letter to a Noble-man seeing by Law he ought not to receive any Private Letter from him and such Noble-man ought to be punished by the Civil Law de Ambitu and by the Common Law for Maintenance if he send any and this Justice would prevent Fictions both of Poor and Rich and bring forth Righteousness and Truth The Letter goes on and says Wherefore these are to pray your Lordships to give order for the taking out of the Copy of a Bill and for the putting in of your Answer thereunto according to the usual course in such Cases accustom'd at or before Octab. Hill next ensuing By this Prayer here is a Fiction that the old Episcopal Chancellor had an Imperial Authority over the Commons and only Precarious over the Nobles and was a Fiction if he derived his Authority from the King of the weakness of the Royal Power and of a Dishonour to it as if it was not able to do Justice to the Commons against the Nobles as well as to the Nobles against the Commons if a Sheriff at Common Law should Execute his Praecipe quod reddat and his Praecipe quod faciat whereby he is will'd by the King to command those against whom those Writs are directed by writing his humble Letters when he perceives they concerned Noble-men to pray their Lordships to do what he was appointed to command the Law makes him liable to high punishment and why a Chancellor should not be liable to the same who commits the same offence and having the Kings Process to command in his hand will not or dares not administer Equity by the same equal Process to his Majesties Subjects both Poor and Rich appears no reason or rather an higher Quanto Major qui peccat habetur by how much greater the Power of a Chancellor is extending to a Kingdom than of a Sheriff confined to a single Countrey The next in the Letter is Nothing deubting but that your Lordship will have the care and regard which appertaineth but another man may doubt whether he spake Truth or Fiction He concludes well if not in Hypocrisie I leave your Lordship to the most Merciful keeping of the Almighty from Saint A. the 9th of May 1654. Your very loving Friend J. P. Prolixity caused by Fiction The Bill in Chancery for want of the Oath of Calumny is known to be commonly a Pack of Lies from beginning to the end which is full of infinite Mischiefs and destructive to all Justice and makes it of such immense Prolixity for Lies may be infinite but Truths are few and short that it compels the Answer to be longer than it self for every Lie must be Answer'd as well as the Truth and by reason of such Prolixity neither the Chancellor as he ought to do will take the pains to read nor the Councel to be instructed in either but the Truth like a Grain of Mustard-feed thrown into an heap of Tares is lost and impossible to be found and Sentences and Decrees pass'd both Interloquutory and Final without the least Merit of the Cause Started Stated or Debated The Process of the Chancery is almost as mischievous a Fiction as the Outlawry at Common Law which is the Commission of Rebellion that on non-appearance the most Loyal Subject that is may be Feigned Proclaimed and Imprisoned as a Rebel so the Chancellor needs nothing but a Fiction to elude Magna Charta and the Petition of Right and an Hundred Acts of Parliament more if they were made to that purpose to which the Fiction is point blank contrary and destructive and as inconsistent with all the Fundamental Laws of Liberty and Propriety as Darkness with Light yet is there no necessity of it at all for where it is not necessary to take the Defendants Oath but the Plaintiff can prove his Bill by Witnesses full Justice may be done either by Missio in Possessionem where the Action is Real or where it is to stop Suits by the English Injunction or Scotch Suspension and where the Defendants Oath is necessary either for Discovery or Probation on proof made of the Bill and of the Countumacy and Sentence Declaratory a Capias may be awarded against the Defendant as after a Judgment pass'd Fictions of Latitats If we go to the Common Law Process that is as bad infected with Fictions as the Court of Conscience The Latitat is a meer Lie first it supposeth a Bill of Middlesex to precede where there is no such matter then the Defendant is slander'd Latitare discurrere when he lives as openly as any of his Neighbours and never stirs from his home the suggested Latitations are therefore Lies Then it saith De placito Transgr ' Ac etiam for if the Ac etiam be true of Debt then it is false as to Trespass for there can be no Joindure in Action of Debt and Trespass in the same Writ and so the Kings-Bench ought to have no Jurisdiction of Debt notwithstanding this Fiction except on a Writ of Error which is upon the matter confess'd by Coke himself
in these Articles Bishops presumed to be Legislators Judges and Executioners in their own Case for the Bishops make the Article 36. whereby they Constitute themselves Arch-Bishops and Bishops and Article 32. They Declare it lawful for all men to Marry Article 34. They Ridiculously make Traditions of the Church to be Changeable according to Diversity of Countries Times and mens Manners so before they come to their Ceremonial Law they set up their Legend-Law and the Ceremonies must be Founded on what Legends they please and no man must oppose either Tradition or Legend or Ceremonies set up by Common Authority that is by Authority of the Bishops for the House of Commons never Authorized them Rog. Art 34. Prop. 2. p. 196. Then Article 33. they Order Excommunication Delivery to Satan Penance and Absolution Then to compell the Observation of these Articles Anno 1603. They assume the Legislative Power to make Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical without the assent of the House of Commons they Order Saying or Singing of Common-Prayer and the Letany with all the Ceremonies prescribed by the Can. 14 15. Copes Surplices and Hoods to be wom in Cathedrals by Can. 17 27. Marriage not to be without Banns or License Can. 62. None to deliver from Satan without the Bishops License Can. 72. And no Minister to Preach Read Lecture or Catechize without Subscription to the 39. Articles Can. 36 37. And then to make clear work they Order That if any affirm any of the Nine and Thirty Articles made by the Arch-Bishops and Bishops to be in any part Erroneous or such as he may not with a good Conscience Subscribe to let him be Excommunicate Ipso facto which is without Summons or Hearing Can. 5. Can. 9. So unless the Protestant-Minister will Popishly acknowledg the Bishop to be Infallible and without Error and that all his Traditions and Ceremonies of Worship of Marriage and the like Ordained by Episcopal Authority are of Divine Right to oblige the Conscience and that he neither can Teach nor Fast nor Pray though to deliver from the Devil without his License Here is a Test wherein the Bishop assumes to be Legislator Judg an Ipso facto Executioner in his own Cause against a Protestant-Minister and not only prohibited to speak Book of 39. Articles and of Canons oblige not the Subjects to Clergy or Lay. but his Conscience to think against it in his own Defence 3. This Subscription to the 39. Articles ought not to be Imposed as a Test because neither the said Book of Articles nor Book of Canons had the Assent of the House of Commons at the time of their Making without whose Actual and Express Assent no Law or Canon or Article can be made to oblige the Subject which is more fully proved before Whether the Positive part of the Oath of Supremacy is a true Test The Form of the Oath 1. Eliz. 1. is as followeth I A. B. do utterly Testifie and Declare in my Conscience That the Kings Highness is the only Supreme Governor of this Realm and of all other his Highness's Dominions and Countries as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Things or Causes as Temporal and that no Foreign Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preheminence or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within this Realm and therefore I do utterly Renounce and Forsake all Foreign Jurisdictions Powers Superiorities and Authorities and do promise that from henceforth I shall bear Faith and true Allegiance to the Kings Highness his Heirs and lawful Successors or Vnited and Annexed to the Imperial Crown of this Realm So help me God and by the Contents of this Book It being granted that no true Test can be which the Conscience of a Protestant weak or strong ignorant or knowing refuseth or is doubtful to take it is manifest that the positive part is refused by a very considerable part of the People and a greater part are doubtful and take it with Reluctancy yet are they such as cannot be doubted to be sincere Protestants in Religion and most Faithful and Loyal Subjects to the King and their Objections seem to be these 1. The words only Supreme Governor are of so infinite and unlimited an Extent in the Letter that there is necessity of limiting them in the intention which intention being Implicit only and not Express may be made so various by Expositors that the same likewise is infinitely ambiguous and unintelligible and that Pious Queen Elizabeth being at her first Entry to the Kingdom as good as under the Wardships of Bishops could not avoid the Forming of this Oath of Supremacy by them on the first Act and Year of her Reign and to impose the same on the Subjects not for her Benefit but their own though after finding the same so general obscure and wrested by false Interpretations she endeavour'd by a subsequent Declaration published to have explained and limited the same according to her true intention and meaning but the same being not done by Act of Parliament proved not sufficient to relieve many doubtful and wounded Consciences amongst the People of which vide more at large before p. 167 168. 2. The words Supreme Governor include both the Legislative Judicial and Executive Power The words only Supreme exclude Parliaments and the word only excludes literally the Parliament from having any Vote in either whereas the known Law of the Land is That no Law can be Enacted to bind the People without the mutual Assent of the King and their lawful Representative in Parliament and that no Contract of Supreme Government can be made without the Assent of two Parties at least and not one only 3. The words only Supreme Governor in all Spiritual things according to the Letter include the Papal Power of Dispensation with the Law of God of Receiving Confessions of Sins Imposing Penance Excommunication Absolution and Pardon of Sins which are Powers only belonging to God in Person and ought not to be Assumed or Exercised by Angels Saints Daemons or Men. 4. The same words include Supreme Power over the Souls and Consciences of men which is a Power belonging only to God in Person and ought not to be Assumed by Angels Saints Daemons or Men. 5. When all this Supremacy in Spiritual things is congested into an Oath and the Flowers inseparable from the Celestial Crown presumptuously attempted to be torn thence and annexed to a Temporal what is the Design and Effect of it but that the Bishop Robs both God and the King of the Supremacy pretended to both but intended to neither for where will the Bishop permit the Temporal Prince to dispense with the Law of God to Receive Confession of Sins to Impose Penance to Excommunicate to give Absolution and Pardon of Sins but he will command him to desist or what is worse with his Temporal Sword to beat the Bush that the Bishop may catch the Bird or with his
Excommunicato Capiendo and Heretico Comburendo to catch and roast the Bird himself for the Bishop to eat it and of the subtlety of the Bishop as to this matter see more before p. 167 168 169. How little incouragement there is therefore for Protestants to take this Oath of Supremacy wherein the Kings name is only abused and made a Stale to draw a Supreme and Arbitrary Power to Bishops both over the King and them and to drein the Royal Treasury into their own Pockets and how untrue a Test such an Oath must be is humbly submitted to Supreme Authority Supremacy granted by Act of Parliament of Marriage and Legitimation to Canterbury yet Sworn to be in the King 6. By the Statute 25. H. 8.21 Power is granted to the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and his Successors by their Discretions to Grant unto the King his Heirs and Successors all such Licenses Dispensations Compositions Faculties Grants Rescripts Delegacies for Causes not contrary to the holy Scriptures and Laws of God as heretofore had been used and accustomed to be held and obtained by his Highness or by any his most Noble Progenitors at the See of Rome and all Children procreated after Marriage by virtue of any such License or Dispensations shall be admitted and reputed Legitimate in all Courts Spiritual and Temporal So this Act of Parliament made in time of Popery translates the Pope from Rome to Canterbury and the Supremacy before used or accustomed by him over the King and his Subjects concerning all the matters mention'd in the Act is placed in the Person of the Arch-Bishop and the Bishops call this a Supremacy in them according to Scripture and the Law of God which is worse and more Papal than to claim it only by Act of Parliament for what more Papal Supremacy can there be than Power to Grant Licenses Dispensations Faculties Compositions Grants Rescripts Delegacies of Marriage Legitimation and all other matters which Popes have formerly granted from Rome to Kings and their Subjects at discretion and this Exceptio is contraria facto for the granting of Licenses by Popes to Kings is contrary to the Law of the Land and is a Power Supreme to the Legislative and Law of the Land so the Grant in the Act is Repugnant to the Exception for 〈◊〉 Licenses or Dispensations are necessary but where there is a standing Law of God or Man to the Licensed or Dispensed with no Composition or Pardon necessary but where there is a standing Law violated or broken no Faculty necessary but where is a standing Law disabling the Party to do what he desires to have a Faâ—ulty for that he may be enabled to do No Rescript is but from a Supreme Prince no Delegacy but from a Superior to an Inferior for the Pope is Superior to his Legate though he be Legatus à Latere and the highest preferment this Popish Act of Parliament allows the King is to be the Arch-Bishop's Legate then the Act having made him Supreme to the Legislative Law and King gives him as high Supremacy over the Judicial Power in all Courts as well Spiritual as Temporal which is Supremacy over the Parliament which is a Court-Temporal This Act therefore doth set up more than Prelacy or Arch-Prelacy at Canterbury for that was there before and the Gyants had piled up Pelion on Ossa already and now they steeple it with Olympus and if they set not on the Gyants head the Triple Crown 't is sure they have the Triple Miter three stories high of Prelacy Arch-Prelacy and Supremacy When the Arch-Bishop got therefore of the Parliament this Act he was something like the Carpenter who begg'd of the Wood only one Helve long enough to turn his Hatchet into an Ax and when he had got that he cut down the whole Wood for he having now got so long a Helve to his Spiritual Hatchet as Supremacy over the Marriage not only of the old Palm Trees and Legitimations of the young at his Discretion that is to say if they give him whatsoever Money he asks for Dispensation and Legitimation this gives him likewise Power to strike both at Root and Branch of all the Royal Protestant-Cedars themselves in the Popish Points of Ceremonial Marriage and Legitimation endeavour'd now to be brought to the true Test of a more Supreme Law and Judg than his the Moral Law of God himself How therefore the Protestant can safely Swear in Conscience the Supremacy to be only in the King when so great a share of it is granted to the Arch-Bishop by the King and Parliament until the same Act of Parliament of 25. H. 8.21 by which 't is done is Repealed I confess my Ignorance and if it be without cause crave Pardon 7. The Party who is to Swear who is the only Supreme Governour must be intended to Swear either who is Supreme De Facto or De Jure if De Facto who hath the Actual Power of the Sword it may happen to be in a time of War when two Armies are in the Field and Inter utrumque Volat Dubiis Victoria pennis It is necessary at such a time that the Swearer unless he will Forswear himself be a Prophet of whom there are not many in this Age amongst such as take the Oath of Supremacy if it be said the Swearer ought to Swear De Jure who hath Right to be only Supreme Governor to this is Answer'd 1. Unless he can Swear to the matter in Fact he cannot Swear to the matter of Law or Right for Ex facio jus Oritur all matter of Law must arise from the matter of Fact therefore the Fact must be first known before the Right can be known which is to be deduced from it 2. The Right when the Oath is required may be as to Succession of the Crown wherein the matter of Fact depending only on Genealogies the Heralds themselves especially after Wars may not be able to make any clear probation of the Descents as Ezra 2.62 and Nehem. 7.64 it is said These sought their Register among those that were reckoned by Genealogie but it was not found therefore were they as Polluted put from the Priest-hood If therefore the Genealogies of Priests who wore themselves the Registers and kept their own Descents as curiously as was possible may be lost much easier may those of the Lay and the Law and Divinity may likewise be so doubtful that it is justly acknowledged by the King and Parliament themselves 25. H. 8.22 That Ambiguities and Doubts touching the Successions of the Crown have been Causes of much Trouble and no perfect and substantial Law hath been made for Remedy of the same and accordingly at the Death of Queen Elizabeth there were no less than Sixteen titles endeavour'd to have been set on foot to the Succession partly by Papists to overthrow the Protestant-Religion partly by others to overthrow the Union between the two Kingdoms in the Person of King James in which the Protestants of
both were so much concern'd and others for their own private Ambition if therefore Parliaments themselves have not or shall not sufficiently clear Ambiguities and Doubts to answer so many pretences How can it be expected that Ignorant people can clear the same upon their Oath or Conscience 3. It is permitted to Grand Juries when it doth not appear to them whether the Bill is true or false to find an Ignoramus and where the people are totally Ignorant both of the Fact and Law of Supremacy why ought they not to be allowed the same Equity according to the Truth to Answer Ignoramus 4. It is against the known Maxim That Only matters of Fact can be Testified by Witnesses and matters of Law or Right cannot be Testified but by the Law it self 8. An Usurper or Idolater may happâ—n to get the Possession of the Crown How then can a Protestant Swear to the Right of the first in Temporals or of the second in Spirituals 9. It doth not appear how a Protestant may Swear That no Foreign Prince or Person ought to have any Power Authority or Preheminence Ecclesiastical within this Realm and that he doth renounce all Foreign Power in regard it may so happen that a Protestant-Prince hath or may be born beyond Sea and be a Foreign Person and yet on failure of a Lineal Heir may happen to be the next right Heir to a Protestant King after his Decease it may seem therefore to cross Gods Providence to Swear to Renounce or Abjure all Foreign Protestant-Power as to the Succession for the Oath puts no distinction between Protestant and Papal Power but Renounces all alike if they are Foreign Persons Of the Mischiefs which ensue a false Test between Protestant and Papist 1. By the same Power is given to the Favourers of Popery to turn the Edg of all the Penal Statutes made and intended against Papists to destroy the Protestants and the Preteritions and Pardons intended the Protestants are wholly apply'd in favour of the Papist the Plagues designed against the Aegyptians are wholly let loose on the Israelites and the Passeover to which were invited the Israelites is made only a Feast for the Papist So did Bishop Bancrost in the time of Queen Elizabeth persecute all Anti-Papist-Protestants under the name of Puritans and Protected all Dominican Priests Seminaries and Papists under pretence of Opposing the Jesuits by pressing the false Tests of Recusancy to Pray in a Temple to Pray after the Common Form to Receive the Sacrament after the Common Form to take the Oath of Supremacy to use all Episcopal Ceremonies in the Worship of God and the utmost Rigor and Penalties of such Recusancy against the Anti-Papist Protestant who hath been the only Counterpoise against the Papist that he hath not over run the Land and giving Protection to Papists against the very same Tests and Penal Laws so furiously Prosecuted against the Anti-Papist Protestant So did the subtle Gundamore give a new Whet to the High-Commission-Court and turn'd the Edg of the same Originally intended against the Papists to be against the Anti-Papist Protestant And since Bishops have been discharged of that Commission yet the same Course of Bancrofts and Gundamores hath been still continued against the Anti-Papist-Protestants as then under the name of Puritans so since under the name of Fanaticks such Protestants have had the Penalties of Recusancy laid on them when Papists have Compounded for Trifles or been absolutely Pardon'd such Protestants have had the Oath of Supremacy forced on them against their Conscience when Papists have neither had Supremacy nor Allegiance required of them nor their Consciences troubled but have remained absolutely unsworn from so much as any Oath of Fidelity unless to Foreign Princes such Protestants have had their Houses utterly Disarmed and not so much left as sufficient to keep out a Thief when Papists have had their Houses full of Arms and not so much as searched such Protestant's Children have been by the Usurped Power of Bishops Certificates made Bastards because not Married with the Ceremonies of the Book of Common Prayer and this they have done by pretence of the Canon of the Council of Trent a Foreign Jurisdiction long since abolish'd by Act of Parliament but such Bishops have never troubled Papist's Marriages made by Priests or Jesuits with Romish Ceremony nor Null'd them or Bastardized their Children such Protestants have been Excommunicated Cursed and given to Satan when a Dog hath not dared against Papists to move his Tongue such Protestants have been Confiscated and cast into Prison when Papists have Triumphed in Liberty and Propriety 2. Many Able Loyal Zealous Protestant-Ministers are hereby Excluded from Preaching and Teaching the Gospel 3. Many able Loyal and Useful Instruments both in Civil and Military Offices who are Protestants are Excluded and the King and Parliament deprived of their Service 4. The Offices and Arms of the Three Kingdoms are ingross'd into the hands of Persons Recommended by Papists An Essay of the Form of a Test whereat it seems no Protestant can scruple I A. B. do utterly Testifie and Declare in my Conscience and in the presence of God and do believe that the Pope or Bishop of Rome or any Bishop on Earth is not the Head of the Catholick Church nor of any National Church of England Scotland or Ireland and that they are not Infallible and that all such Popes and Bishops as pretend to Supremacy either Spiritual or Temporal or Infallibility without a Sign of Mission from God are Hereticks I believe that the Host Consecrated Crucifixes Images Idols Reliques of Saints or Saints themselves ought not to be Worshipt or Prayed to in Publick or Private and that the Mass is Idolatry I believe neither Popes nor Bishops have any Power or Mission from God to Exact Auricular Confession or to Impose Penance or to give Absolution Indulgence or Pardon of Sin or to Redeem from Purgatory or to give or sell Heaven or Paradise or any Place in the same or to Excommunicate Curse or Deliver to Satan And I do therefore utterly Abjure and Renounce all Absolutions Indulgences Pardons of Sins and Redemptions from Purgatory given or to be given by any such said Popes or Bishops or any deriving Authority from them and defie all their Excommunications And I do Promise and Swear to be True and Faithful to our Sovereign Lord the King his Heirs and lawful Successors So help me God Whether any Test of the Conscience ought to be Penal either to Protestant or Papist It seems not 1. Because to Plant Religion by Penalty is to Plant it by the Sword whereof Christ gave neither Precept nor Example but rather a Prohibition Implicit in his Express Command to Peter Matth. 26.52 Then said Jesus unto him Put up again thy Sword into his place for all they that take the Sword shall perish with the Sword Which though it prohibit not lawful Defence to those who have the Power of the Sword which Peter had
tend most to the Peace of the Church for unless there were an Interval for the Bell to Toll a space after the end of the Prayer before the beginning of the Sermon the Parish who love not long Prayer will not be able to know when the Sermon begins and very many of them though they would be all glad to join with the Chaplain in his Prayer for the King yet will they many of them perhaps have Scruples in Conscience to join with him in Prayer for his Patron Patron if to be Prayed for in Publick 1. Because he may sometimes happen to be a Papist and one that seeks the Destruction of the Protestant Religion and all Protestants and many may grow doubtful to Pray for the Prosperity of such a one the same seeming to be Prohibited 2 John 10 11. Where it is said If there come any unto you and bring not this Doctrine receive him not into your House neither bid him God speed For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of all his Evil Deeds Patron a Papist 2 As to Publick Persons we are directed by the Scripture to Pray in Publick for none but Persons in publick Authority but a Papist is by Acts of Parliament Excluded from all publick Authority and Office therefore no publick Person 3. As to private Persons the Scripture and practice of the Primitive Christians direct to Pray for no private Persons particularly and by name but such as are sick or possess'd by the Devil for in such Case the direction of Christ and practice of the Primitive Church was to cast him out by Fasting and Prayer but many Patrons are neither sick nor possess'd therefore there is no direction in Scripture for them to be Prayed for by name in publick 4. The Chaplain useth to Pray for Bishops especially if Patrons wherein many Protestants may not be free to join in regard they many of them assume to themselves to be Judges of Heresie and the Rule of Heresie they make is the Four first General Councils and the Papal Canons for Ceremonies and against Lollaries the Parliament deceived by the Bishops to leave the Four first Councils the Rule of Heresie was 1. Eliz. 1. In which Act to Prohibited Commissioners appointed by the Queen by virtue of that Act If Bishops are Papists or to be Prayed for who Judge Heresy by the four first Councils to proceed in Judgment of Heresie beyond the words prescribed them the words-Prohibited in a Proviso are these viz. Shall not in any wise have Authority or Power to Order Determine or Adjudg any Matter or Cause to be Heresie but only such as heretofore have been Determined Order'd or Adjudged to be Heresie by Authority of the Canonical Scriptures or by the first Four General Councils or any of them or by any other General Council wherein the same was declared Heresie by express and plain words of the said Canonical Scriptures or such as shall hereafter be Order'd Judged or Determined to be Heresie by the High Court of Parliament of this Realm with the Assent of the Clergy in their Convocation Of the Four first General Councils by which Bishops would Judg Heresie and of the Suspition lies on such Judges to be Papists and not to be Prayed for in Publick The Four first General Councils which I suppose they mean were the Council of Nice in Bithynia the Council of Constantinople where the Great Turk Lives the Council of Ephesus where the Great Diana of the Ephesians and the Image which fell from Jupiter were Worshipt and the Council of Chalcedon in Bithynia Council of Nice As to the Council of Nice there were two one about Anno Dom. 330. the other about Anno Dom. 381. In the First called by Constantine the Great there were 318 Bishops in another call'd by another Constantine there were 350 Bishops which of these our Bishops would have I cannot tell but they may wink and choose and though each was Nice yet neither of them was more Nice than Wise for the Profit of the Bishops and the Bishops 1. Eliz. were as wise as they to join the Canonical Scriptures and the Council of Nice that nothing should be Judged Heresie without their Joint Consent for the Canonical Scripture hath not so much as one Bishop they having falsely translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Bishop which ought to have been an Overseer of the Poor so as there is not one Bishop to be found in Scripture to be a Judg of Heresie any more than of Marriage whereas at one of the Nices there were 350. And in the Scripture is not one Image found lawful to be Worshipped whereas at both the Nices there were a multitude Set up Images and at the last Nice all the Holy Images of Irene the Empress which the Emperor Leo Isaurus had knockt to pieces were Restored and Two and Twenty Canons thereupon made That all Image-breakers should be adjudged Hereticks to the great profit no doubt of the Holy Bishops who knew as well as the Silver-Smiths of Diana wherein their Gain lay Council of Constantinople The Council of Constantinople was a General Council call'd about the Year of our Lord 383 by Theodosius the Emperor where were 150 Bishops of several Sects 36 of them were Macedonians who held the Holy-Ghost to be an Angel because Christ is said to send him and Macedonius their Teacher was then Bishop of Constantinople the place where this Council Sate Him this Council Deposed and his Party became thereon Excluded Members whereby all Votes passed for the Bishop of Romes Doctrine with whom the Bishop of Constantinople was always a dangerous Corrival for Supremacy there were joined in this Council Theodosius Gratian Confirmed Images and Damasus the Pope this Council confirmed the Nicene Faith and their Worshipping of Images for a Pope could not live without them Council of Ephisus Another General Council was called at Ephesus about the Year 834 by the Emperor Theodosius the Second and by the Instigation of Pope Celestine the First against Nestorius then Bishop of Constantinople who according to Evagrius l. 1. c. 7. held That the Blessed Virgin Mary ought to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Mother of Christ Continued Images and not the Mother of God which Doctrine being dangerous to the Worshipping of Images and the drawing of the Supremacy from Rome to Constantinople the Pope got the Council called and not to sit as formerly at Constantinople but at Ephesus where Nestorius had not so much Power and there being not able to bring him to Submit to the See of Rome they Deposed him and Banished him to Oasis This Council of Ephesus is said to have left Two Copies of its Canons in certain and variant one from another and some of them are Condemn'd by the Council of Chalcedon as Suppositious which besides the Worshipping of Images continued by this Council makes it a
Rule of great incertainty to Judg Heresie Council of Chalceldon The last of the Four was the Council of Chalcedon in Bithynia which was called by the Emperor Martianus about the Year 455. whereat the Emperor was present in Person and 630 Bishops and Reverend Fathers from the greatest part of the World What a work is here who should Judg Heresie yet they never placed the Power of Judgment in the Right hand neither will it be possible to be taken out of the Wrong nor did any of these Emperors nor shall any else dare do it as long as Bishops continue hired with their own Treasure and Revenue and their own Temporal Sword deliver'd into their hands for Rome and Constantinople to Fight for Supremacy over themselves and to Sentence and Judg them and their Subjects as Rome hath done since it obtain'd Supremacy at their pleasure The Bishop of Rome had at this time got a Bishop at Constantinople placed for his purpose who was content to acknowlege the Supremacy of Judging Heresie to be in the Bishop of Rome or any else if he might be Second and enjoy so Fat an Office as to be Bishop of Constantinople but the City differ'd from their Mercenary Bishop who was call'd Anatolius and disdaining in their Religion to bow to Rome set up Eutyches an Abbot or Archimandrite of Constantinople to publish a Doctrine That Christ had no Humane but only a Divine Nature in him To suppress which Opininion Flavianus a former Bishop of Constantinople had moved the Emperor Theodosius the Second to call a Council at Ephesus Anno. 449. wherein Eutyches was Condemn'd by Flavianus yet by the help of Chrysaphius the Eunuch and Endoxia the Empress who favour'd that opinion Theodosius was prevailed with to make another Synod Judg of this Heresie which was again Summon'd by the Emperors Authority at Ephesus and Dioscorus of Alexandria made President at which Synod Eutyches is again cleared and declared Orthodox and Flavianus opposing it was so upon that Three Days after he died and all this being done in the Council of Ephesus Anno 449. in Theodosius's time was again Repealed and Abrogated Anno 455. in Martianus's time at the Council of Chalcedon And Leo the First Bishop of Rome by the help of Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople and his other Pensioners carried the Day for Supremacy of Judgment and Punishment of Heresie and Anatolius and the See of Constantinople was to be only next in Dignity to the Infallible Chair of Rome Considerations on the Judgment of Heresie when assumed by Bishops according to the Four first General Councils if it make them suspect to be Papists and not sit to be Prayed for in Publick 1. Coke says this Parliament 1. Eliz 1. was doubtful what they ought to determine Heresie and Schism and what not which was as much as the Bishops needed to desire that the Layity might be Ignorant and they have Power to keep them so and Heresie a Quaere to be Judged by themselves pro Arbitrario 2. It appears that the Pious Queen the Dawning of the Reformation but newly entring with her she could not suddenly Dispell the Darkness yet hanging over her own Protestant Party nor the Blacker Clouds gathering from Foreign and Native Papists against her nor resist her own Bishops designing to continue those Privileges of Profit translated by from Rome to Canterbury for certainly if the Protestant Party had understood That the Four first Councils had adjudged all those to be Hereticks who would not Worship Images and had been able to have over-Voted the Popish Party and Bishops they would never have given them Power to Judg Heresie according to those Idolatrous Councils for thereby they might Sentence them and all Protestants that were against Images to the Stake 3. The Bible was but little before Translated into English yet to keep it more dark still than if it had continued in Latine they who alledged themselves protestant-Protestant-Bishops sent the People to Learn the same of Greek Councils and to Read there the Law of Heresie while they Judged them at home in their latine-Latine-Law and Latine-Courts the mean while 4. They equal Councils with Canonical Scriptures that their Convocations and Provincial Synods may have the same Authority 5. They equal their Convocation with the King and Parliament for the words of the Statute are or Determined to be Heresie by High Court of Parliament of this Realm with the Assent of the Clergy in their Convocation Knowing if the Miter once get equal 't is but one step more to be above the Crown 6. By those words they Constitute to themselves the Power of a Negative in Legislation against the King in Parliament and the two other Estates which makes them a Fourth Estate in the Legislative Power knowing such Fourth Estate like the Fourth Beast in Daniel may easily Devour all the rest 7. They Judg since no Commissioners were made every Bishop in his Diocess a Judg of Heresie Jure Divino and they by their own Popish Canons and the old Popish Acts against Lollards who were the followers of Wickliff and the Primitive Protestants and the Proto-Martyrs of England Judged Protestancy to be Lollary and Heresie and all the Sheriffs of England take an Oath with all their Power to Destroy all Heresies and Errors commonly call'd Lollaries which is Protestancy and to assist the Bishops in the same whensoever by them Required whereby they have the whole Military Power at their Command to Judg and Destroy Protestants as Hereticks 8. They Judg Heresie by their own Ceremonial Laws and Canons whereby they Arrogate a Power above the Moral Law of God by which alone all Heresies and Schisms and all Error and Truth ought to be Judged I conclude therefore That such Bishops if there are any such as Exercise all these ways of Popery many Protestants may happen to suspect them to be Papists for their profit and therefore scruple to join with their Chaplains in their Prayer before Sermon for God to speed them It will not agree with the Consciences of many Protestants to join with the Chaplain in publick Prayer for his Patron 1. Because all Patronages were invented and erected by the Pope and Papal Laws all Patroage came from the Pope and the Strength and Riches of all Popery consists in Patronages or Power of Presentation to Cathedral Collegiat Parochial or other Religious Churches or Houses 2. It is very unjust that any who must pay the Lawyer or Physician his Fees should not have Election of such a one of either as he can Trust and much more as to a Divine Lawyer and Physician of his Soul that any should be Imposed on him whom he cannot Trust and who may perhaps Poison him in the Sacrament it self of which Examples have been already Cited but the Chaplain who Prays for the Patron is obtruded on the Pay of the Parish without their Assent and the Patron many times pays him not a Penny but Sells to him
Father as we say He quha will have mony Gods he 's na God Postremo Blundus lib. 8. Romae triumphantis is inquit qui illegitimè natus esset ex Concubina vel scorto contumeliae causa Spurius dicitur cò quòd Sabini muliebre pudendum Sporon appellarunt haec ille in bonesto originis genere in lucem editos infami inhonesta appellatione not are voluerunt Veteres And that part of Weemens Claiths sick as of their Gown and Petticoat quhilk under the Belt and before is open commonly is called the Spare As concerning the Succession of Bastard these short rules are to be observed conform to the Law and Practice of this Realm First That na Bastard nor na Person notch procreat and gotten in lawful Marriage maie ony ways be lauchful Aire or Successor to ony of our Soveraine Lordis Leiges lib. 2. c. in Custodiis 50. for be the Law of God Ismael being Bastard gotten upon ane bound Woman Agar micht not be Aire to Abraham with Isaac Gen. 21.10 Because all right of Succession is by reason of bluid and Consanguinity of the Fathers side quhilk is called Jus Agnationis and theirfar ane Bastard quhais Father is incertain be the Law Kin. is understand be reason of bluid to be sib to na man and nane to him I have done both Coke and Skene right and presented what they say to the full now I hope I may have liberty to do the Truth right against them and if I answer but these two I need trouble the Reader with no more for I shall answer all the Law of the highest repute in Great Britain and with the same stroke overthrow all the Bastard-Law of Lawyers and Bastard-Divinity of Bishops in the three Kingdoms Question The Question is Whether Mamzer in the Old Testament and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the New are falsely translatèd Bastard Coke and Skene whether retained by the Bishops or free appears not but their best endeavours appear as far as they can to defend the charge of falsity of the translation and to prove the same true which they try to do by the ways following 1. By Etymologies 2. By Authority 3. By Rhime 4. By Reason As to Etymologies they derive Bastard from Bassaris which they say signifies Meretrix 1. What is this to the purpose to prove Nothus a Bastard 2. It is denyed that Bassaris signifies Meretrix for Eustathius will have Bassara to signifie Nutrix Bacchi or a Drunken Mad Woman and Bassaris to signifie Vulpecula First They derive Etymologies from Spurius from Aerd from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 privativa particula 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from Sporadene from Sporan from the Spare but what agreement have these in sound or sense with Mamzer or Nothus or what Sequel as to the Question can be deduced from them had it not been as pertinent for them to have recited those ridiculous Etymologies which derive Lepus from Levipes and Lapis from Laedipes and Beere from Be here and Money from My honey and concluded Ergo the Bishops have not falsely translated Mamzer and Nothus for there is no reason why Meretrix may not come from an Hare as well as a Fox loquendum cum Vulgo they call her a light Woman And Solomon Prov. 7.11 saith Her Feet abide not in the House Now she is without now in the streets which she ws she is a Levipes And did not Fabius Maximus shew his shoe to one who askt him why he put away his Wife and say Is it not a fair shoe yet none knows besides my self where it wrings my Foot which shews she is a Laedipes then may she not be as well Drunk and Mad with Beer as with Wine which shews such Women may be derived from the one as well as the other and may she not better be called Meretrix from Money then from Wine for Meretrix dicitur à Merendo from letting her self to hire for Money or Reward and this as well agrees with My honey as Money for Solomon saith Prov. 5.3 The lips of a strange Woman drop as an honey-comb and do not the Poets say That a Bee which makes honey stung Cupid by the Finger while he was stealing it whereof he complained to his Mother and doth not this as well prove that Venus came from Bassaris and that Cupid is in Hebrew Mamzer and in Greek Nothus and that therefore Mamzer and Nothus do signifie Bastard which is to infer quodlibet ex quolibet and conclusions from non sequitur's Behold the fantastick Fundamentals of a Matrimonial Divinity and Law built on Etymologies of sounds and air inveloped in the darkness and Clouds of strange Languages of Hebrew Chaldee Syriack Greek and Latine the like to which if done in English would be derided by the very Boys Secondly The next Argument to make good their Bastard-Law is Authority Coke to begin fetches an Author out of Goal without an Habeas Corpus to give him Authority to bring him to any Court he calls him Fleet. lib. 1. cap. 5. Next he makes bold with Bracton and the Book of Assizes E. 3. H. 4. H. 6. E. 4. Skene musters up as before mention'd old King Malcomb the Second Paloeotus Budaeus the Pandects all having the unhappiness to be born bred buried and made in the times of the highest Popery and Superstition and though Plutarchus writ excellently against Superstition and was no Papist he was a Pagan Priest of Apollo who was a Devil and his Priest partial in whatsoever tended to Daemonalatry or the great gains accruing thereby to the Diabolical Priesthood Grotius whom I shall after cite as to his Gigantomachia in making all Giants Bastards in his learned Peice de Jure Bell. Pacis wheresoever he comes to touch on Marriage Filiation Aliment and Succession instead of the immutable Law of Nature collects together the old Superstitious Laws Customs and Ceremonies of the Pagans Greeks and Romans and on that sandy Foundation builds Marriage Filiation and Successions on private Pacts and Covenants of Parties or on the publick Pacts or Precepts of human Laws and the Mercenary considerations of Portions Dowries Jointures Morgengabicas Taâ—ls contrary to the Divine ends instituted by God of Marriage All which Authorities or were there numberless more of private Persons or publick States or of Nations Angels Daemons or Men are already shewn to signifie nothing against the least Commandment in the Moral-Law of God Thirdly As to the Rhyming Verses if so great Laws and Nations are no Authority a Poet can be none Pictoribus atque Poetis quidlibet audendi semper fuit aequa Potestas And it shall be further shewn after That if Coke allow but this his own Poet to be Authenteck three words of his two Verses confute him unanswerably Fourthly As to Arguments of Reason Coke hath none at all except Quia Filiatio non potest probari which hath been answer'd before in the Law of the Husband 's Fathering the Wive's
between them and the Prince they never pretend any such thing as Consecration in either but a civil Contract obliged by mutual Oaths To shew some farther Authority therefore that never any Pope of Rome or Ralf of Canterbury or other Bishop had any Authority from Christ in the New or the Prophets or Priests in the Old Testament to make Tradition of a Crown to any Temporal Prince but the same belonged to the People or their Representative who were to be Subjects It is evident 1. as to Christ John 18.36 His Kingdom is not of this World 2. He never had any Crown but that of Thorns Matth. 27.29 Nor any Robes but the seamless Coat John 19.23 As to the Prophets and Priests in the Old Testament they never made Tradition of any Crown to any King of Israel or Judah but they received them from the People such as wore them and not from any Prophet or Priest for though Nunrod as is already mention'd alledged or feigned before his Usurpation of the first Monarchy that God shewed him miraculously a Crown in the Clouds and Constantine likewise alledged or feigned that God shewed him miraculously a Cross in the Clouds yet never any material Crown or Cross dropt from the Clouds neither doth it appear in Scripture or any History that any material Crown was ever by Miracle made by God or sent by any Prophet or Priest who should have Authority to make Tradition thereof and thereby give Investiture of a Kingdom nor Robes for though Gen. 3.21 God made Coats of Skins and clothed Adam and Matth. 6.30 clothed the Lillies yet it is before said Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these Which shews though God made the Lillies he made not Solomon's Robes And the Prophet Ahijah 1 Kings 11.30 though he prophesied the Kingdom to Jeroboam gave him neither Crown nor Robes but rather disrobed him for he caught his new Garment he bad on and rent it in twelve pieces and gave him ten of them And they were the People only that gave him the Investiture by Crown and Robes if those Ceremonies were at all used for it is said Cap. 12.20 The People sent and called him unto the Congregation and made him King over all Israel there was none that followed the House of David but the House of Judah only And Verse 24. It appears that this was from God yet were not the Priests hand in it to Crown him for they would not forsake the Sacrifice at Jerusalem which Verse 27. made Jeroboam to fear that if the people should go thither to sacrifice they would again return to Rehoboam and caused him for prevention to set up the two Golden Calves at Dan and Bethel As to the Coronation of Saul and David we find Saul had a Crown for the Amalekite 2 Sam. 1.10 who tells David he slew him saith I took the Crown that was upon his Head and the Bracelet that was on his Arm and have brought them hither unto my Lord. Coronation of Saul not by the Priest but People 1. It appears not that Samuel gave him this Crown neither is it probable for as hath been said before it appears not in any History that God ever sent a material Crown by any Prophet and as to the Jewish Priests Custom they could have none Saul being the first King in that Kingdom and Law they could have none for the Priest to make Tradition of the Crown to the King for Moses mentions no such thing therefore it was done by the People who were of necessity to shew their assent and acknowledgment by some external Ceremony of acknowledgment of their Governor which after the manner of the Nations after whose example they desired to have a King was by Tradition of a Crown and bringing him Presents which Presents appear 1 Sam. 10.27 to be made by the People and not the Priest for it is there said The Children of Belial said How shall this man save us and they despised him and brought him no Presents Coronation of David on a Conquest by himself As to the Coronation of David it was in a Kingdom he obtained by Conquest made by himself by taking the Crown from the Conquer'd King's Head and setting it on his own head without Prophet or Priest or Contract with the People 2 Sam. 12.26 And Joab fought against Rabbah of the Children of Ammon and took the Royal City And Joab sent Messengers to David and said I have fought against Rabbah and have taken the City of Waters Now therefore gather the rest of the People together and encamp against the City and take it lest I take the City and it be be called after my name And David gather'd all the People together and went to Rabbah and fought against it and took it And he took their Kings Crown from off his Head the weight whereof was a Talent of Gold with the Pretious Stones and it was set on David's Head Thus appears Coronation to be over a Conquer'd People Coronation of David on a Contract by the People but when David hath to do with a free People of Judah and Israel it appears he neither assumed the Crown himself with his own hand nor received Tradition or Investiture of any Prophet or Priest of the same but from the People on Contracts mutually agreed Yea not only the Crown but the Anointing it self which signified the Kingdoms was given by the People or which is all one by their Representative in Parliament and not by the Priest as will appear from the Texts following viz. 1 Sam. 16 13. where it is said concerning David when he was brought before Samuel Then Samuel took the Horn of Oil and anointed him in the midst of his Brethren and the Spirit of the Lord came on David from that day forward 2 Sam. 2.4 The men of Judah came and there they anointed David King over the House of Judah And 2 Sam. 5.1 Then came all the Tribes of Israel to David unto Hebron And Verse 3. So all the Elders of Israel came to the King to Hebron and King David made a League with them in Hebron before the Lord and they anointed David King over Israel And 1 Chron. 1.1 Then all Israel gather'd themselves to David unto Hebron And Verse 3. Therefore came all the Elders of Israel to the King to Hebron and David made a Covenant with them in Hebron before the Lord and they anointed David King over Israel according to the word of the Lord by Samuel By which appears first that the anointing by Samuel of David gave him no Investiture of the Kingdom for Saul was then alive but only he prophesied by this he should be King and Successor after Saul's death and by Miracle prepared and made him capable and fit to execute the Office by giving him from that time the Spirit of God which Miracle likewise followed the anointing of his Predecessor Saul 1 Sam. 10.1 to the 12th Verse But
Free-born Subject Arbitrarily at their pleasure is contrary to the Acts of Parliament both of Magna Charta and the Petition of Right so late in memory which abolish all Imprisonment both of Nobles and Commons without the lawful Judgment of their Peers so likewise is it contrary to all other Fundamental Laws of the Land made for defence of the liberty of the People which is more necessary and more dear than Life as may appear by the Reasons following 1. There is an Act of Parliament made 15. H. 6. cap. 4. That none shall Sue a Subpoena until he find Surety to satisfie the Defendant his Damages if he do not verifie and prove his Bill to be true this Statute had nipt in the Bud the Overflow of all those innumerable Fictions and Falsities which have since followed in the Suggestions of Bills in Chancery for this being made 15. H. 6. there is no mention made in all the Year-Books of any quarrel between the Common-Law-Judges and a Subpoena till 37. H. 6. which is above Twenty Years after so great a Fright had this Act falling from the Supreme Power put amongst the Froggs though now despised as a dead Logg as likewise are all the rest and it is in vain to make more unless the Honour of these is vindicated by the same Authority that made them for Chancellors as if Jura negant sibi nata they were two-great to be bound by Acts of Parliament though they have not the least pretence to colour their Authority against these Three the greatest Acts for Security of the Subjects against false Imprisonments that ever were made in England for there is no Prescription or Custom of any Court can be alledged against an Act of Parliament be it never so old and there is no Pretence to alledg any against the Petition of Right Chancellour hath no Authority to impose a Fine being in so fresh memory and no longer since than 3. Car. 1. they have trampled under soot the Authority of these Supreme Acts and all lawful Judgments on them 1. To lay Fines on the Subject thus Trin. 3. Jac. did Chancellour Egerton impose a Fine on Sir Thomas Themilthorp for not performing his Decree concerning Land of Inheritance and Estreated the same into the Exchequer and upon Process against him the Party appearing pleaded that the Chancellour had no Authority to impose a Fine the Attorney General Petiit advisamentum Curiae concerning the Authority of the Chancellour and on mature advice It was adjudged That he had no Power to Fine in the Case Coke 4th part 84. 2. To Extend according to which pretended Power the said Chancellour Decreed against Waller certain Lands and for not obeying the Decree imposed a Fine and upon Process out of the Court of Chancery extended the Lands that Waller had in Middlesex whereupon Waller brought his Assise in the Court of Common-Pleas where the Opinion of the whole Court agreed in omnibus with the Court of the Exchequer ib. 3. Not only to proceed to Imprison the Subjects on false Suggestions without taking any Surety of the Complainant according to the Statute to verifie his Bill but without so much as taking his Oath of Calumny to his Bill and have further presumed so high as by their Edicts and Orders of Chancery which they have not the least Authority to make to order the Subjects to be Attached and Imprison'd on every Affidavit of any Knight of the Post and no Probation to be admitted to the contrary and if while the Innocent Party is imprison'd being remote from his Home and suffering great Loss and Damage by this his false Imprisonment he shall at length offer to prove the Affidavit false and Knight of the Post perjur'd he shall be discharged but without any Cost for the great Service the Knight of the Post did the Court to Forswear himself against the Prisoner whereby they get some Fees See here a Chancellour in desiance of Three Acts of Parliament without any Sureties without any Oath of Calumny without any Judgment of Peers publisheth in sight of the Sun his abominable Orders to cast into Prison the most Innocent Person on the false Affidavit of every Perjur'd Knight of the Post yea a single Affidavit as appears by the Orders of the Chancellour and Master of the Rolls Printed 1669. Page 67. and yet they pretend Page 65. under the Title of Commitment that they are tender of the Liberty of mens Persons and of their Imprisonments on Affidavits and confess they are often Malitious and made by one mean and ignorant Person yet in the same breath Page 67. as if they soon forgot or understood not what they said in the beginning of their Order they the next leaf conclude That a single Affidavit of such a malitious mean and ignorant Person yea though he is proved afterwards to be Perjured shall be sufficient to Imprison the Innocent Subject and when he again gets out of Gaol if he can let the Innocent Party be indamaged his whole Estate he shall not have a Farthing Cost for the false Imprisonment and observe the depth of the Reason why given by a Chancellour and as the Printed Orders say with advice and assistance of the Master of the Bolls 't is this as appears Page 68. at the top of the leaf viz. IN RESPECT OF THE OATH MADE AGAINST HIM AS AFORESAID that is to say the Oath though false of a Villain Perjured against the Innocent Person for so is the implication of the Order and likewise though they durst not say so in express terms yet so is the implicit Non Obstante notwithstanding any Law of God or Man or Acts of Parliament to the contrary Doth not here a Chancellour assume the Omnipotent Power of the Pope to dispense with the Laws of God and Men and assume a Power of Imprisoning the Subjects above the King and Parliament yea contrary and in contempt of their Laws he doth for the Law of God and Precept of Christ is known to prohibit the Imprisonment of any No Imprisonment ought to be but where the Witnesses and Party are brought Face to Face without two Witnesses at least and without bringing the Witnesses and the Party accused face to face that he may know them and except against their Persons or Testimony if he hath cause which is never done on an Affidavit And the Laws of the Land Magna Charta and Petition of Right utterly prohibit all Imprisonment of the Subject on Affidavits whether they are true or false without bringing the Witnesses and the Party face to face and a Judgment on such Testimony against him by his Peers and if such Evil Precedents be suffer'd to pass without some example of Justice shewn on them all Acts of Parliament which ever have been or shall be for protection of the Liberty of the Subject Forgery Licensed in Chancery thereby to Imprison the Subject falsely will be vain and to no purpose 4. The Chancellour
Authority from them and that they were chosen and called by their several Congregations or what is all one Cities or Parishes and not by the Emperor or Prince till Constantine to corrupt them under pretence of prevention of Schisms and Heresies which he thereby encreased took away the free Election of the People of their Pastors which they had always before enjoyed to make them Pensioners and the Christians Mercenaries to Fight all their Quarrels Right or Wrong That Presbyters were only Parochial and not Provincial is not doubted That Bishops were all one with Presbyters and therefore were Parochial and not Provincial A Bishop and a Presbyter all one is proved first by the Authority of Jerome who saith ad Tit. Cap. 1. That a Bishop and Presbyter was all one And that it may not depend solely on humane Authority this is proved by the words of Paul to the Philippians Chap. 1. 1. Paul and Timotheus the Servants of Jesus Christ to all the Saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi with the Bishops and Deacons Grace be unto you and Peace Now Philippi is one of the Cities of Macedonia and in one City there could not be many Bishops unless they were Parochial and not Diocesan or Provincial and the same the Presbyters were Acts 20.17 It is said Paul from Miletum sent to Ephesus and called the Elders of the Church and verse 27. he saith to them For I have not shunned to declare unto you the whole Counsel of God Take heed therefore unto your selves and to all the Flock over the which the Holy-Ghost hath made you Bishops to feed the Church of God which he hath purchased with his own Blood For I know this that after my Departing shall grievous Wolves enter in among you not sparing the Flock Here appears that the same Persons whom Paul first verse 17. calls Elders Presbyters of Ephesus he after in the same Chapter verse 27. calls Bishops or Overseers And 1 Pet. 5.1 The Elders which are among you I Exhort who am also an Elder and a Witness of the sufferings of Christ and also a partaker of the Glory which shall be revealed Feed the Flock of God taking the oversight thereof not by constraint but willingly not for filthy Lucre but of a ready mind Neither as being Lords over God's Heritage but being Examples to the Flock From which Scripture appears 1. That the great Apostle Peter himself from whom the Bishop of Rome pretends his Succession to Imperial Supremacy Bishops ought not to be Lords calls himself no more than an Elder or Presbyter and that he had other Co-presbyters with him 2. That these Presbyters who are now call'd Bishops ought not to be Lord Bishops for the words are they are not to be Lords of Gods Heritage In one Chapter of Mahomets it is forbidden to all Persons of what Quality soever to call themselves in any sort Lords except the great Caliph or great Bishop the Successor of Mahomet who at the first was the only Lordly Monarch and Lord of all giving unto Kings and Princes their Principalities and Kingdoms during pleasure untill that the Ottoman Princes the Cundes and the Kings of the higher part of Asia and Africk by little and little Exempted themselves out of their Power by Reason of the Division between them and the Anti-Caliphs Bod. 203. 3. That they ought not to have Temporal Baronies for they are not to take charge of Souls for filthy Lucre but of ready mind 4. That they ought neither to Counterfeit a Nolo Episcopare when they take Baronies nor to Refuse the Charge of Souls when they have none for the words are not by constraint but willingly Cranmer That Bishops were Presbyters and chosen by the Parish And it is likewise acknowledged by that Pious Protestant Martyr Arch-Bishop Cranmer though he were a Provincial and chosen by the King himself yet That amongst the Primitive Christians the Bishops were chosen by the Congregations and were all one with Presbyters From all which Premises these Sequels follow 1. That if a Bishop were chosen by his City or Parish he came not in Jure Divino but by human Election and was only a Servant and not a Lord of the City or Parish 2. That he had no Sign of Mission from God unless he had a Gift of Miracles 3. That he could not Excommunicate any of his own Parish for the Inferior cannot Excommunicate the Superior and Electors are Superiors to Persons Elected and the Host is Superior in his own House to the Guest and he who gives the Pension to the Pensioner Bishops cannot Excommunicate 4. That a Bishop Elected by the People cannot on Excommunication deliver any Person to Satan without the Gift of Miracles as a Sign of Mission for Nemo potest plus Juris ad alium Transferre quà m ipse habet the Electors themselves had no Power to deliver to Satan therefore Bishops Elected by them cannot without Miracle 5. Though he hath the Power of Miracles to deliver the Body to Satan he cannot deliver the Soul nor can he have any Sign of Mission to do the same for that is a Prerogative inseparable from the Person of God to send the Soul to Heaven or Hell and Inter insignia imperii which cannot be Delegated 6. That as a Bishop cannot Excommunicate a Citizen or Parishioner who Elected him so he can much less Excommunicate a King or Interdict a Kingdom who if he had any Jurisdiction at all can be no greater than within the Petty Bounds of his City or Parish and cannot extend to Empires or Kingdoms 7. That he can give no Consecration or Ordination to a Bishop or Priest for where the Office ought to go by Election of the People it cannot go by Ordination of the Bishop and where it goes by human Election it cannot go by Consecration and after the Gift of Miracles ceased both the Election by Missioners from God and Consecration and Ordination likewise ceased Subjects free from Superstition the safety of the Prince 8. That 't is a great Safety to Princes to have their Subjects well Educated and Instructed against the Superstition and Popery of Consecration Ordination and Excommunication of Bishops and Priests for by this only means we see the Grand Seignior though he Tolerates a multitude of Sects and Religions in his Empire yet he is endanger'd by none because all Mahumetan Priests are chosen by the Parish and though they are in great Reverence of the People yet they have neither Consecration nor Ordination but continue as perfect Lay-men as our Ordinary Clerks of our Parishes and much less have they Power of Excommunication or Absolution but Preach That those that Fight Valiantly and Die in the Field for their Prince and Prophet go to Paradise and who slie Cowardly go to Hell whereby none of his People are Educated in the Superstition of Pontifical Excommunication and therefore fear it not but deride it And for the Greck
Duaren lib. 1. Disp c. 1. Hermann vult lib. 1. discep c. 1. Goed ad l. 9. n. 1.6.7 ff de verb. sign 2. By the Law si vis vocationi fuat testamini igitur em capito appears that after the Defendant had a Copy of the Declaration deliver'd no Capias before Judgment was to issue against him without a Fugam fecit or at least an hiding himself and the word Testamini shews there must be Productio testium Probation by witnesses of the flight or absconding and not a Latitat granted on a meer false Suggestion and Lie or on the Forgery of an Outlawry to destroy that inestimable Right of Liberty from wrongful Imprisonment and more valuable than Life it self 3. By the Law si vindiciam falsam tulit rei si velit is Arbitros tres dato forum Arbitriis fructus duplione damnum deciditor appears That the Plaintiffs were Fined pro falso elamore double the value on a Writ of Enquiry of Damage to a Jury of Three which like Commissioners for examination of Witnesses being equally chosen by the Parties were more able and equal than a numerous Jury of Twelve all chosen by the Sheriff 4. This being granted that by the Ancient Roman and Athenian Laws Oblatio Libelli preceded vocatio in jus and vocatio in jus preceded Contumacy and Probation by Witnesses preceded Sentence of the same and that Plaintiffs were punish'd for false Suggestions it follows there was neither taking of Pledges Distress Attachment Satisdation Exaction of Bail or Arrest in their Original Process nor before Judgment except on Contumacy proved by Witnesses which shews that neither Romans nor Athenians were Authors of beginning Law-Suits with Execution 5. It appears by the Law Aeris confessi rebusque jure judicatis c. That the Pagan Execution it self after Judgment was more Just and Merciful than the Papal and Episcopal is now with us before Judgment for first they were so far from Arresting before Demand and before Judgment that they could not Arrest the Defendant on Hearing and Trial and Judgment pass'd against him without giving him Monition of the Judgment and till Thirty Days Justi dies to provide the Money were expired but now on a bare Bond before Judgment and before so much as a Demand made they cast into the Goal the Husbandman from his Plow the Tradesman from his Shop and the Merchant from the Exchange without giving the least notice Thirty or so much as Three Days to provide the Money whereby they and their Families their Reputation and Trade are oftentimes destroyed not only to the ruin of themselves but great damage of the Publick for the greatest bulk of Trade of the Nation being driven on Money borrowed on Interest if it be intended what is borrowed should be applied to Trade it is impossible that they can pay interest for it to the Creditor if they must keep it at their Chambers for the Creditors to call it in again on an hour's warning or as they now do without any warning at all and imploy it at their Trade they cannot unless they may have at least warning for so small a pittance of Time as Thirty Days which the very Heathen allowed their Debtors to be free from Arrest though Judgment was past against them This abominable Cruelty of beginning Suits with Execution came not therefore from the Heathen but from the pretended Christian Romish Bishops and Clerks All Attachments Distresses Exactions of Pledges Bail and Arrests before Judgment are Executions before Judgment and come from Romish Bishops against whom the Heathen shall rise in Judgment Now that beginning of Suits with Executing by exacting of Pledges before Oblatio Libelli Bail before Flight Judgment before Hearing Distress Attachment and Arrest before Judgment was brought into Great Britain by the Romish Bishops appears by these Reasons 1. Because the Register of Writs that old Romish Idol to which more innocent Causes and Persons have been Sacrificed and Destroyed according to the proportion of the Territory it Commands than to the Turkish Alcoran is in Latine which is the Romish Language in which Register all the Original Process of Summons Attachment and Distringas are composed for Exacting of Pledges and Bail Distress imposing Penalties and Forfeitures Arrest and Imprisonment in Personal Actions and Grand-capes and Petty-capes in real before Oath of Calumny Oblatio Libelli Hearing Probation or Judgment and in Indictments by Inquisition 2. Because all old Formalities of Entries and Pleadings of Instruments and Contracts Publick and Private were Originally in Latine which shews they were formed by Romish Bishops or their Clerks in their own Language conform to their Romish Idol the Register beginning with Execution as particularly appears in all Instruments concerning Feudal Jurisdiction are Clauses and Conventions of Distress Reentry Penalties and Forfeitures horrible unjust before Oath of Calumny Ohlatio Libelli dies justi Hearing Probation Judgment or Judg but the Lord himself in his own Case over his Vassal 3. Because anciently the Romish Bishops have been Chancellors in that Court which is Officina Brevium the Shop of Writs where they are forged and have been likewise chief Judges in the other Courts of the King keeping all their Proceedings in Latine Court-hand and Chancery-hand secret from the understanding of King and People whereby they exercised what Tyranny and Oppression they pleased 4. Because they and other Ecclesiastical Persons as Abbots Priors and the like have Possess'd the Third part of all the Baronies Honors and Mannors in the Land and had they not been stopt by the Statutes of Mortmain might by this time have got all this way therefore of taking Distress Penalties and Forfeitures before Judgment advanced their Interest in Tyranny and made them Arbitrary and absolute Judges in their own Case 5 Because anciently the Romish Bishops have been Outlawries and Excommunicato Capiendos and Judgment of Heresies the Romish Inquisition in Disguise and to the shame of Protestants still claim to be in their Ecclesiastical Courts Judges of Heresie whereby as the Common Law Judges by their Outlawries which are Temporal Excommunicato Capiendos they by their Excommunicato Capiendos which are Spiritual Outlawries have brought in the Romish Inquisition to begin all Suits with Execution before Judgment 6. Because the Greek Bishops first destroyed the Equal Law of the Twelve Tables Si in jus vocet aâ—que eat which is before interpreted Statim eat and made it in jus vocati statim eant aut satisdent which Satisdation included all the Rabble of Distresses Pledges Bail Mainprize Arrests and Imprisoments before Oblatio Libelli Hearing Probation or Judgment which Greek Bishops were the Instruments of that wicked Empress Theodora who foisted into the Laws of Justinian what they pleased concerning Judicial Proceeding touching Marriage Filiation and Succession and all other matters and the Romish Bishops followed them in their wickedness in whatsoever was for their gain and brought the same with themselves and the
Language of the Beast into Great Britain and Ireland to infect with the same Plague all Judicatures of these Noble Kingdoms vid. How Satisdation before Judgment came in the Authorities cited Calv. Lex tit vocare They Pledg before Summons Summon before Copy Copy before Oath Punish before Contumacy Judg before Hearing or Probation and Arrest before Judgment It cannot be here objected That I proceed partially against Ecclesiastical Judges seeing the Temporal are here equally Taxed with the same Errors and I contend with the Vices and not with the Persons of either Yet so much I may affirm for Truth and shall after prove against Ecclesiastical Judges that the Papal and Episcopal Forms of Preposteration of Execution before Judgment by beginning the Original Process with Attachments Distresses Exactions of Pledges Bail Mainprize Penalties Forfeitures Confiscations Arrests and Imprisonments before a Coppy of the Declaration given and before Oath of Calumny Hearing Probation or Judgment and Outlawries and Excommunicato Capiendos both before and after Judgment were Originally brought both in the Ecclesiastical and Temporal Courts of the Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland by Romish Bishops and Priests and Parliaments in time of Popery have been so far deceived by them to confirm their Superstitious Formularies in the Temporal Courts in so high a degree as now the Temporal Judges are not able to Reform without the Assistance of an Act of Parliament But I shall first prove that the said Forms are contrary to the Scriptures and Anti-Christian The Texts of Scripture follow Job 24.3 They drive away the Ass of the Fatherless and take the Widows Ox for a Pledg Verse 9. They pluck the Fatherless from the breast and take a. Pledg of the Poor Ezek. 18.7 And hath not Oppressed any but Restored to the Debtour his Pledg Ezek. 33.15 If the Wicked restore the Pledg give again that be had Robbed Amos 2.8 And they lay themselves down upon Cloaths laid to Pledg Psal 37.21 The Wicked borroweth and payeth not again Matth. 5.25 Agree with thine Adversary quickly while thou art in the may with him lest at any time the Adversary deliver thee to the Judg and the Judg deliver thee to the Officer and thou be cast into Prison Verily I say unto thee Thou shalt by no means come out thence till thou hast paid the uttermost Farthing Matth. 18.15 If thy Brother trespâ—ss against thee go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone if he shall hear thee thou hast gained thy Brother But if he will not hear thee then take with thee one or two that in the Mouth of two or three Witnesses every word may be established And if he shall neglect to hear them tell it unto the Church but if he neglect to hear the Church let him be to thee as an Heathen man and a Publican After the Servant who had been forgiven by his Lord Ten Thousand Talents Verse 28 Went out and found one of his fellow-servants which ought him an Hundred Pence and he laid hands on him and took him by the Throat saying Pay me that thou owest And his fellow-servant fell down at his feet and besought him saying Have patience with me and I will pay thee all And he would not but went and cast him into Prison till be should pay the Debt Verse 32. Then his Lord after that he had called him said unto him O thou wicked Servant I forgave thee all that Debt because thou desiredst me Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellow-servant even as I had pity on thee And his Lord was wroth and delivered him to the Tormenters till he should pay all that was due unto him As to Criminal Proceeding the Texts are 1 Tim. 5.19 Against an Elder receive not an Accusation unless under two or three Witnesses Numb 35.30 Whoso killeth any Person the Murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of Witnesses but one Witness shall not Testisie against any Person to cause him to die Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a Murderer which is guilty of death but he shall be surely put to death Deuter. 17.8 If there arise a matter too hard for thee in Judgment between Blood and Blood between Plea and Plea and between Stroke and Stroke being matters of Controversie within thy Gates then shalt thou arise and get thee up into the place which the Lord thy God shall chuse And thou shalt come unto the Priests the Levites and unto the Judg that shall be in those days and enquire and they shall shew thee the Sentence of Judgment From all which may be infer'd 1. That no man ought to be Summon'd before a Judg till a Copy of the Plaintiffs Declaration be first given him For Christ saith If thy Brother Trespass against thee go and tell him his Fault between thee and him alone which is fully performed by giving him a Copy of the Declaration or Bill of Complaint and without it the same cannot be done nor the full State of the Case be Represented to him nor he take time of deliberation for an Answer And from this Precept of Christ will follow first the Ordaining of Editio vocatio in jus simul ex continenti by the Popish Theodor an Bishops in the Civil Law is a corruption and destroying of the Excellent Law of the Twelve Tables Si in jus voces atque eat which is already proved to have implied a Preceding Oblatio Libelli and was the clear Law of Nature and immutable in all Civil Actions 2. That the Law of Scotland of including the Libel in the Summons though it far excel our Summons by Writs yet it is not so perfect as the Precepts of Christ to make the Oblatio Libelli or to give the Copy of the Declaration to the Defendant before Summons for first he must be forced to send many times Hundreds of Miles to a Judg to get a Summons before the Return of which all the business if there is no Contumacy may be far better agreed and ended between him and his Brother at home Secondly If there is no Contumacy as there can be none before a Copy of the Declaration delivered by which the Demand is made it is unjust to lay such a Punishment on a Defendant to run Hundreds of Miles to his great Cost and Trouble in England to appear before a Judg at Westminster and when he comes there no Bill in Chancery nor any Declaration at Common Law is put against him And in Scotland to appear at Edenburgh at a longer day when he was ready and tender'd to satisfie his Brother at home in a shorter and he refused only to put him to Charge and Vexation Thirdly It is unreasonable and unjust that the Plaintiff should be compell'd to send so far for such a Trivial Formality as the hand of a Judg to his Libell'd Summons or to expect no Judicial assistance from it if he gratis make Oblatio Libelli as
John Stratford Arch-Bishop of Canterbury on whom the King likewise laid the blame of his Wants writes a proud Letter to the King and desired him and his Council without delay to deliver the said Prisoners otherwise he plainly writes That according to his Pastoral Charge he must proceed to the Execution of the Sentence of Excommunication concluding how notwithstanding it was not his Intention to include the King Queen or their Children so far as by Law they might be Excused It was well for the King he was in the head of a brave Army in France for if he had been single as his Father was they who durst Menace him amongst all his Forces in the Field if he had lost the Day as his Father did were as likely to bring him for a French Pension to as miserable a destruction as they brought his Father but by Gods Providence he proved afterward Victorious but first Replied by another Letter to the Arch-Bishop That Relying on his Council he was first put on the Action of the French and that he had promised and assured him he should not want Treasure to perform the work and that notwithstanding by the negligence and malice of the said Arch-Bishop and his Officials those Provisions Granted him by his Subjects in Parliament were in so slender proportion Levyed and with such delays sent over as he was pressed of necessity to his great Grief and Shame to Condescend to the late Truce with the French though extreme Wants charged with mighty Debts forced him to throw himself into the Gulf of the Usurers in such sort as he began to look into the Dealing of his Officers some of which upon apparant notice of their ill Administration of Justice their Corruptions and Oppressions of his Subjects he removed from their Places and others of mean Degree he Committed to Prison and there detained them to the end he might find out by their Examinations the truth of their Proceedings Then he charges the Arch-Bishop with his own Corruption and declares how himself being under Age had through his ill Council made so many Prodigal Donatives prohibited Alienations and excessive Grants and Gifts that thereby his Treasury was utterly Exhausted and his Revenues diminished and how the Arch-Bishop corrupted with Bribes Remitted without reasonable cause great Sums which were due unto him applying to his own Use or Persons ill deserving many Commodities and Revenues which should have been preserved for his necessary Provisions and concluded Unless he desisted from his Rebellious obstinacy he intended in due time and place more openly to proceed against him and the King before the Arch-Bishop Submitted caused a Letter to be sent to the Pope from the Parliament not to make any more Collations of Benefices in England and prohibited them on pain of Death on any that should present or admit them which Resolute slighting of Excommunication both from Arch-Bishop and Pope though in the very time of War with France made the Pride of the Arch-Bishop stoop and with much ado got himself Reconciled to the Kings favour for which the King was bound to thank God and not the Pope or Bishop who gave him that Victory and Success against the French as neither Pope or Arch-Bishop dared to Excommunicate him Against Richard the Second one of the Articles brought against him to have him deposed was That whereas the Realm is immediately holden of God after he had obtained divers Acts for his own particular Ends he obtained Bulls heavy Censures from Rome to observe and perform them contrary to the Honour and ancient Privilege of this Kingdom whereby appears That even in a time of Popery the Assistance of the Pope and Bishops which were included in it was so far from being a Protection to the King that it was Destructive to him much more is the Assistance of Bishops likely to be Destructive rather than a Safety in a time of Protestancy The Bishop likewise Concurr'd with the rest and accused him That he had taken Money Jewels and Plate from them at his going into Ireland Bishops accuse R. 2. for Trifles to Depose him so far were they from seeking to preserve the Kings Life with those Superfluities of theirs where they could keep them and their Bishopricks together that they shewed their Fidelity to their Native King by endeavouring to destroy him For such Trifles divers other Articles were laid against him in behalf of the Bishops by whose doing only the King was utterly undone Truss 46. And not one of all the Bishops in England or Ireland spoke so much as one word to preserve their Native Sovereigns Life but only one namely Thomas Mercks Bishop of Carlisle Dilemma of danger from Excommunication As to the Dilemma a Prince falls under in expecting safety of Government from the Power of Excommunication of Popes or Bishops either the greater part of his Subjects will be Religious or Superstitious if Religious they will so easily see through the Superstition of Consecration and Excommunication as it will rather Irritate and Provoke them as it did in the late unhappy Civil Wars but if Superstitious will the Pope or Bishop make Use of the great Interest and Strength they gain thereby in the People to advance their pretended Spiritual Sword above the Temporal and their own Supremacy above Temporal Kings and Princes which if Resisted by the Princes of such Subjects hazards their being Deposed and losing Kingdoms and Lives together as appears by the Examples before Recited In the same danger is a Prince who Trusts a Temporal Officer whether Treasurer or other with too much Power of Money as Theocritus Anno 518. caused Amantius an Eunuch to give Justin Amantius the General of the Army a great Sum of Money to give the Soldiers to choose Theocritus Emperour but Justin distributed it for himself and so obtained himself the Empire The Western Emperours first raised the Popes to that height as to Excommunicate the Eastern Emperours the succeeding Popes to return their Advancers due thanks Excommunicated after the Western Emperour The French Kings assisted and after raised the Popes to such height that they Excommunicated Deposed and Poisoned the Western Emperour after by the same Power the French King gave them in thanks they Excommunicated and Assassinated the French Kings The Princes of Sicily and Naples had been mighty defendors of the Papacy but when they had made it mightier than themselves the Succeeding Popes took from them their Sovereignty to themselves As to the Impossibility of Safety of Princes amongst Subjects Educated in fear of Excommunication Subjects Educated in fear of Excommunication dangerous to Princes It is to be Noted as well from the Testimony of approved Authors as from the Scripture it self that amongst the Primitive Christians those who are now called Bishops but in the Original word signifie only Overseers were Parochial Bishops or Overseers and not Provincial and that they were the same with Presbyters and differ'd not in