But * suppose (say you) a false enterance, yet that no more disanulls* 1.1 the ministery, then doth a faulty enterance to mariage, disanul that ordinance between two conioyned to be lawful man, and wife.
But first, I deny your very office of ministery in it self to be a* 1.2 spirituall ordinance of God, as is mariage a civill ordinance.
2. If one of these two persons were vncapable of mariage, ther would follow a nullity: and so is it with you, where your parish as∣semblies are all of them vncapable of the ministery of Christ, and the ministrations thereof.
3. If this mariage were made without the free consent, and choise of the one party, were it not to be disanulled? and this is your case, if you consider it, where the minister is put vpon the people, without their free choise, and election.
Lastly, if two persons were maryed with this condition, that they should leave one another vpon the imperious commaund of some great man, for some small, and sleighty matter, or other; were this true, and lawfull mariage? And is not this the estate of your Ministers, and people vnder their imperious Lords the Prelates? by whom they are in continuall danger of divorce, for want of canonicall conformity in some triviall, and trifling cere∣mony.
Thus much of this similitude, as also of this matter.