| OCR Text |
Show l 132 l [133] irrjzfliw, of which he complains, is {till this even Without any exception orjuf't continued; viz. the inequitable preten- difiinc‘tion concerning (Mir/m! or inter- fion to dim! the Subjects of Ireland by Laws made wit/20a! their flY/Pw W) 7m! Government ; for the Iriflz themfelves and do this Winchefler, (anno 30th E) 3.) that r/yg‘; mwr quartz Smttzzc. Lil). Afiifixruzn, p. 173. " S/Jard. Negativa nihil " itnpllcilt. l‘lt ceo que vous parles del' Statut [is Bi" gmmlr, ceo ne fuit unquam afcun Statuf." ‘14 l I III/[WIND . ,-m. var , h. ther articles, that dial'olz'ml popifh Deeretal of P0pe Gregory IX. for tiilcOIzraging lawful Alarriage: of \Vidows or \Vidowers ! The Marriages oftlw C/crgy had been abfolutely forbid H about 200 years before, and thofe who were already married firrz'éljflpamtgd Another objection aghinll this filjyiq/E'I/ Statut e is the apparent evil intention of the 5th Articl e, " d2 Bi- from their wives, * (in open contradiction to the LawS " gzrmir," (from whence it: has acqui red its title,) was {till further enforced by his fuccefrors ; and the which was, to acknowledge a foreign popilh Law, as i Clergy il~ it were already (without interpofition of Parliament) of legalflrre in Eng/mm], and neede d only fome {mall explanation, with relpeft to the manne r of put. ting it in execution ; an idea this, which allfma Englilh Parliaments, even in papr'yk'nimn, molt zea10ufly oppofed l But, above all, the [my/Hr}: of the flrrzgn Dart: r'r/é/f, which is introduced by this 5th Article, ufords the molt ample argument againl l the rw/Jo/e Smmn‘, as it lecms to haye been drawn up principally for purpoie of enforcing, and {mugg ling in, arnongfl 0- ther mall}: repealed by an Aft of Parliament in the the ill of Edward VI. (cup. 12. § 3.) as if they had really been Slants: attained by the Authori:y or‘ the whole Legifla mre; and all the three filfe Slatutes together are recited, atlznowledgcd, and revived, by another Aft of Parliament, inthe 1. & 2. P. 3: M. (Cap. 6.) and are yet again rxprel'sly intitled Smut/er, and as {och are formally repealed by a third A3 of Parliament in the 1!? of Eliz. C. I. §. 15. But yet thcf" ff- xcml great Authorities by no means lnl‘ulldtie the Evidence which Sir Edward Coke has produced, to prove that the [aid three wicked O: dinances were rm/tj r1) Slant". of God,) by a Decree of Pope Gregory VII. which ll As the "firbidn'ing f0 marry" is ranked by-the apofile Paul amonglf the " Doflrines of Devi/r," (I Tim. W. l.) {0 the papal in very early times, began to difcouragc the Illar- Antichrifi, ringer of the Clergy: but Pope Gregory VII. alias Hi/a'elvmm', a Monfler in Iniquity, (to prove which Dr. Care has cited unexception - able authorities, Hi/i. Liter. p. 535.) more openly revealed " tbs pm " offin" inthe nth Century, and, amongflt other notorious mani- {citations of mofi: impious Tyranny, " made a Decree"(in'ro74) that, " from that time forward, it {hou'd no more be lawfull for " Prieitksto Margie," C5516. Berm': RA/igxcs (4" Rome, p. 3: [5, T1"; was apparently a rowrmry Dsfirine to what St. Paul preached, and con- {equcnrly it fubjcé‘ts the Roman See to the Anathema of that: Apoflle! " Though we, or an Angel from Heaven, preach any other Cofpel " unto you than that which we havemeached unto you, let him be " accurtcd." Gal. i. 3 8: 9. The Marriage of the Clergy had never before been forbidden except among the worfi of Heretics, but had been allowed by the whole Church of Chrifi, from the time of the Apottles, ferabov: 1000 years, down to this unhappy Century: and, with iefpefl to Iszan in particular, Sir Edward Coke mtorms no, that, " at a Synod holden 1": Ireland, by Sir Palrr'u'r, their Apoltlr, t: " was unanimouflyagrecd that III/b Pritfls lhould have Wives." 41m}. r- 356. " Becon‘s Reliques of Rome; P- 32 5' |
