cap five of heresy concern heresy five thing fall into consideration first who  be the judge of heresy second what shall be adjudge heresy three what be the  judgement upon a man convict of heresy fourthly what the law allow he to save  his life five what he shall forfeit by judgement against he touch the first a  heretic may be convict a before the archbishop and other bishop and other the  clergy at a general synod or convocation as it appear both by our book and by  history see the statute of h cap revive by el cap I b and the bishop of every  diocese may convict any for heresy and so may he have do before the statute of  h can as it appear by the preamble of that Act in these word whereas the  diocesan of the say realm can by their jurisdiction spiritual without aid of  the say royal majesty sufficient correct the say false and perverse people I  heretic nam before because the say false and perverse people do go from  diocese to diocese and will not appear before the say diocesan but the same  diocesan and their jurisdiction spiritual and the key of the church with the  censure of the same do utter contemn and despise now that statute do provide  that the diocesan of the same place such person or person c may cause to be  arrest and under safe custody in his prison to be detain from this Act and  other act and Authoritiesquoted in the margin these two conclusion be to be  gather first that the day cesan have jurisdiction of heresy and so it have be  put in use in all queen Elizabeth reign and accord it be resolve by Fleming  chief justice Tanfield chief baron William and crook justice hill James r in  the case of legate the heretic and that upon a conviction before the ordinary  of heresy the writ of de heretic comburenedo do lie second that without the  aid of that Act of h the diocesan can imprison no person accuse of heresy but  be to proceed against he by the censure of the church and now see that not  only the say Act of h but h c be repeal the diocesan can imprison any person  accuse of heresy but must proceed against he as he may have do before those  statute by the censure of the church as it appear by the say Act of h c  likewise the suppose statute of r c and the statute of h c h c Ph mar c be all  repeal so as no statute make against heretic stand now in force and at this  day no person can be indict or impeach for heresy before any temporal judge or  other that have temporal jurisdiction as upon perusal of the say statute  appear every archbishop of this realm may cite any person dwellinginany bishop  diocese within his province for cause of heresy if the bishop or other  ordinary immediate thereunto consent or if that the same bishop or other  immediate ordinary or judge do not his duty in punishment of the same touch  the second point if any person be charge with heresy before the high  commissioner they have no authority to adjudge any matter or cause to be  heresy but only such as have be so adjudge by the authority of the canonical  scripture or by the first four general counsel or by any other general Council  wherein the same be declare heresy by the express and plain word of the  canonical scripture or such as shall hereafter he determine to be heresy by  parliament with the assent of the convocation for so it be express provide by  the say Act of Elizabeth and albeit this proviso extend only to the say high  commissioner yet see in the high Commission there be so many bishop and other  divine and learned man it may serve for a good direction to other especial to  the diocesan be a sole judge in so weighty a cause no manner of order Act or  determination for any matter of religion or cause ecclesiastical have or make  by the authority of the parliament in year  Elizabeth shall be accept deamed  interpret or adjudge heresy schism or schismatical opinion any order decree  sentence constitution or law whatsoever the same be notwithstanding there be a  statute suppose to be make in r that Commissionsshould be by the lord  chancellor make direct to sheriff and other to arrest such as shall be certify  into the chancery by the bishop and prelate master of divinity to be preacher  of heresy and notorious error their fautor maintainer and abetter and to hold  they in strong prison until they will justify themselves to the law of holy  church by colour of this suppose Act a certain person that hold that image be  not to be worship c be hold in strong prison until they to redeem their  vexation miserable yield before these master of divinity to take a oath and do  swear to worship image b which be against the moral and eternal law of  almighty God we have say by colour of the say suppose statute c not only in  respect of the say opinion but in respect also that the say suppose Act be in  truth never any Act of parliament though it be enter in the roll of the  parliament for that the Commons never give their consent thereunto and  therefore in the c next parliament the Commons prefer a bill recite the say  suppose Act and constant affirm that they never assent thereunto and therefore  desire that the say suppose statute may be aniented and declare to be void for  they protest that it be never their intent to be justify and to bind  themselves and their successor to the prelate more then their ancestor have do  in time pass and hereunto the king give his royal assent in these word y  pleist au roy and mark well the manner of the pen the Act for see the Commons  do not assent thereunto the word of the Act be it be ordain and astented in  this present parliament that c and so it be be but by the king and the lord it  be to be know that of ancient time when any act of parliament be make to the  end the same may be publish and understand especial before the use of print  come into England the act of parliament be ingross into parchment and bundle  up together with a writ in the king name under the great seal to the sheriff  of every county sometime in Latin and sometime in French to command the  sheriff to proclaim the say statute within his bailiwick as well within  liberty as without and this be the course of parliamentary proceed before  print come in use in England and yet it continue after we have the print till  the reign of h now at the parliament hold in r John Braibrook bishop of London  be lord chancellor of England cause the say ordinance of the king and lord to  be insert into the parliamentary writ of proclamation to be proclaim among the  act of parliament which writ I have see the purclose of which writ after the  recital of the act direct to the sheriff of n be in these word our willing  speech concurrence agreement sive in ranks in omnibus et one n'est  point of time inviolable to watch flute to take beforehand quad prediction  concurrence agreement sive in ranks in region infra bailiff thy where well  to extricate to will tam infra freedom how extra publice proclamar et tender   faciasjuxta form praenotatam testae king at Westminster may year  royal power  king r but in the parliamentary proclamation of the act pass in year  r the  say Act of r whereby the say suppose Act of r be declare to be void be omit  and afterward the say suppose Act of R.2.wascontinually print and the say Act  of r have by the prelate be ever from time to time keep from the print certain  man call lollard be indict for heresy upon the say statute of h for these  opinion videlicet quoth non be lodging  and sanctum thomam nec and saint  Mariam de Walsingham peregrinar nec imagine crucifix et another sanctorum  to call upon no one priesthood to acknowledge nisi soli a god c which opinion  be so far from heresy as the maker of the statute of Elizabeth have great  cause to limit what heresy be and afterward they think not good to contain  these opinion in any indictment but indict they in general word one of which  indictment as to lollardy and heresy follow being under oath to say super  the dawn sacrament quoth a r e d lollardi falsehood heretic die Jupiter post  hebdornadam Paschae year  royal power king h post complaint  Nono at Abendon  in Com Berks infra twig falsely et proditiorie ut communes traitor et  insurrectores conspiraveru to give an image of fuerut et and invicero  consoederaverunt come quamplurimis traitor strike against goes with felon de  the dawn comitiva et the dawn falsehood ill will praecogitata ut communes  Infidiatores altaram viaram and faith general principle to tear down et ibidem  falsely et proditory ut communes traitor et felon dictidAi king secerunt et  to scratch to visit falsehood billas writing full of discord some  trust  education the most Christian opposite direction essential point to go  poplar tree domini king to make public credend falsehood culpably in to visit  region videlicet in community London Sarum shaggy hair de Coventria Marleburgh  badly to put down to fix projeceru a indies such to scratch  to affix as a brand to throw forth to put down non cessant nec the hydrophobia  in heavy grandeur coronae rank king our men  collision the most Christian  trust mockery peace speech domini king disturbance all Christ trusty  in an unjust manner contempt  which general indictment and all other of like  from be utter insufficient in law for albeit the word of the statute be  general yet the indictment must contain certainty whereunto the party indict  may have a answer also where the party be indict ut communes inidiatores a way  that also be insufficient as it appear by the statute of h can John keyser be  excommunicate by the great excommunication before Thomas archbishop of  Canterbury and legate of the apostolic see at the suit of another for a  reasonable part of good and so remain eight month the say keyser open affirm  that the say sentence be not to be fear neither do he fear it and albeit the  archbishop or his commissary have excommunicate I yet before God I be not  excommunicate and he say that he speak nothing but the truth and it so appear  for that he the last harvest stand so excommunicate have as great plenty of  wheat and other grain as any of his neighbour say to they in scorn as be urge  against he that a man excommunicate shall not have such plenty of wheat the  archbishop deny these word to be within the say Act of h do by his warrant in  write comprehend the say cause by pretext of the say Act commit the body of  the say keyser to the gaol at Maidstone for that say he in respect of the  publish of the say word dictum Johan non unjustly to have de a sect esteem by  reason whereof the say John keyser be imprison in Maidstone gaol and in prison  detain under the custody of the keeper there until by his counsel he move sir  John Markham then chief justice of England and other the judge of the king  bench to have a habeas corpus and thereupon as it ought a habeas corpus be  grant upon which writ the gaoler return the say cause and special matter and  withal accord to the writ have his body there the court upon mature  deliberation peruse the say statute and upon conference with divine resolve  that upon the say word keyser be not to be suspect of heresy within the say  statute as the archbishop take it and therefore the court first bail he and  after he be deliver for that the archbishop have no power by the say Act for  those word to commit he to prison Hillary Warner be a inhabitant within the  parish of S Dunstan in the west hold opinion publish there in diverse other  place quad non to hold to loosen  once Decimus  of to a curator sive church  parochial where inhabitaba whereupon Richard bishop of London command Edward  Vaughan and other to arrest the say Hillary Warner by force whereof they do  arrest he and detain he in prison a day and a night and then he escape Hillary  Warner bring his action of false imprisonment against Edward Vaughan and other  in bar whereof the defendant plead the statute of h and that the plaintiff  hold and publish the opinion aforesaid which opinion be contra faith  general principle seu Determinationem saint Ecclisiae and that the defendant  as servant to the say bishop and by his commandment do arrest the plaintiff  and justify the imprisonment whereupon Hillary Warner the plaintiff demand in  law and after long and mature delieration it be by Brian chief justice and the  whole court of common plea adjudge that the say opinion be not within the say  statute of h for that it be a error but no heresy which I have the rather  report for that the reporter of this case do not only misreport the time of  the bring of the action but the statute which be the ground of the matter in  law and leave out the judgement the record it self be worthy the read upon  that which have be say touch the say statute of h four conclusion do necessary  follow first that see that many opinion be by the bishop take to be heresy  which in troth have no shadow of heresy and so mistake and unjust extend by  the bishop further then the Purvien and true intention thereof as by that  which have be and may be say appear the maker of the say Act of parliament of  Elizabeth have great reason to limit as have be say what opinion shall be  judge heresy by authority of that commission ground upon that Act second that  if any ecclesiastical judge or commissioner shall by pretext of any statute or  other cause commit any man to prison upon motion in court on the behalf of the  party imprison the judge of the commonlaw ought to grant a habeas corpus for  he upon the reforn of which writ if it shall appear to the judge that the  imprisonment be well warrant by law the party shall be remand and if the  imprisonment be without warrant of law then the party ought to be deliver  three if the imprisonment be not warrant by law the party imprison may have  his action of false imprisonment and recover his damage fourthly that when a  Act of parliament be make concern matter mere spiritual as heresy c yet that  Act be part of the law of the realm the same shall be construe and interpret  by the judge of the commonlawes who usual confer with those that be learned in  that profession but let we now descend to the three point to the three a it  appear by Bracton Britton Fleta Stanford and all our book that he that be due  convict of heresy shall be burn to death to the four b the ecclesiastical  judge at this day can commit the person that be convict of heresy to the  sheriff albeit he be present to be burn but must have the king Writ de heretic  to burn up accord to the commonlaw for now all act of parliament as have be  say before against heretic be repeal and the reason wherefore heresy be so  extreme and fearful punish be for that heavy be aternam how of a time to hurt  grandeur and haeres be lepra mind c the party due convict of heresy may recall  and abjure his opinion and thereby save his life but a relapse be fatal for as  in case of a disease of the body after recovery recidivation be extreme  dangerous so in case of heresy a disease of the soul a relapse be  irrecoverable and as he that be a leper of his body be to be remove from the  society of man lest he shall infect they by the king Writ de leper  to move away so he that have leprosy mind that be to be convict of heresy  shall be cut off lest he shall poison other by the king Writ de heretic  to burn up but if the heretic will not after comviction abjure he may by force  of the say Writ d de heretic to burn up be burn without abjuration as to the  five e the statute make in the year of h cap whereby the forfeiture of land in  feesimple and good and chattel be give in case of heresy stand repeal by the  Act of Elizabeth cap the book that speak of this forfeiture be ground upon the  say Act of h which then stand in force save r which be before that statute for  there though Belknap swear per ma foy si home soit miscreant sa terre be  forfeitable Le signior avera Ceo p voy descheate yet be his opinion never hold  for law for neither land nor good f before the make of that statute of h be  forfeit by the conviction of heresy because the proceed therein be mere  spiritual pro salute mind and in a court that be no court of record and  therefore the conviction of heresy work no forfeiture of any thing that be  temporal videlicet of land or good g for what cause the say heretic be call  lollard you may read in Caudries case and Linwood thereto agree and it be to  be observe that in proceed against lollard the prelate beside their opinion do  charge they with heinous offence as conspirary with multitude of people  insurrection rebellion or some other treason or great crime we have speak thus  much of this argument because there be diverse wander opinion concern some of  these point that be not agreeable to the law as it stand at this day see the  four part of the institute cap chancery in the article against cardinal  woolsey Artic