————— ll el CU 
107 
Archbishop had a means ever ready to stop such “ men of abilitie.’ 
The petition is subscribed in his own hand—I desire Sir John 
Lambe* to peruse this petition and give me an account of it, for 
if my Court of Arches be made a subterfuge for such persons I 
shall take another course with them by the High Commission. 
Nov. 6, 1637. W. CANT. 
There were formerly two degrees of excommunication, the 
greater and the lesser. By the first those under sentence were 
deprived of all the church services and the fellowship of their 
neighbours. They could sit at table with none but their 
own family, could not perform any legal act, were to be avoided 
in all daily life, and if they died unabsolved were treated as 
heathens and denied the usual burial. Any persons corresponding 
with one excommunicate were liable to the lesser sentence which 
barred them from the church services only. Besides, if within 
forty days the offenders did not submit, the Bishop could certify 
their contempt to the Court of Chancery ; when there was issued 
to the Sheriff a writ, de excommunicato capiendo, by which they 
were sent to the county gaol until such time they were reconciled, 
or for not longer than six calendar months. But if any were 
excommunicated for a cause which they considered unjust there 
was a right of appeal to the Court of Arches. Unlike penance, a 
money payment could not be substituted for excommunication. 
Another case and a more interesting one is that of Roger Fort, 
Robert Fort, Edward Hebditch, Richard Hebditch, Francis Boyce 
and John Budgett, all of South Petherton,t 
It appears that Roger Fort, being churchwarden of South 
Petherton, gave orders that a coffin of lead, lying in a vault in the 
church there, “covered with a blew stone and neare a faire 
monument of an Earl of Bridgewater and his Countess,” should 
* Dean of the Arches Court, 
+ State Papers. Domestic 1637. Vol. ccclxxxiii. Art. 31, 
