Crowne The Councels answer is thus framed This is a-against the sundry Acts of Parliament remaining yet in force confirmed by the King of famous memory Henrie the eight against the letters patents of our late Soueraigne King Edward the sixt and his great seale against the consent of the most part of the noble Vniuersities of Christendome c. Wherefore you that tell vs of a statute of Legitimation as a matter euident in modestie shold not haue concealed your euidence Otherwise you know in a proposition copulatiue if but one point be true the whole is a lie Say then whereof can you accuse Cranmer Ridley and all Protestants wherein you will not make King Henrie the eight King Edward the sixt and many Parliaments guiltie I did neuer heare the whole state of any kingdome termed Traitors but by your boldnesse If you had strooke at the head of that opposition you should not haue needed to haue lopped the branches for if King Henry might haue spoken from the dead in the day of the succession of Queene Mary he would haue pleaded the cause of the opposites as Dauid did in the behalfe of his people Oues hae c. It is I these other what haue they done Notwithstanding we acknowledge her successiō iust and after the proclamation of her title shew vs what Protestant euer resisted what Minister of the Gospel in all that fierie trial did kindle the least sparke of sedition among her people Was it because they wanted hope of succession Behold there was the hand-maide of God Elizabeth their hopefull successor to the Crowne Was it for want of power why death is rightly described to be a Giant hauing a thousand hands able to giue any liuing creature his mortall wound But I abhorre to discourse of these rebellious conceits Lastly of all Protestants which were burned in Queene Maries dayes for Religion name but one that was accused of treason I require instance but in one an apparant demonstration that their Religion taught them loyall subiection The second Instance for England The moderate Answerer Sir Thomas Wyat warranted by Protestants Cleargie with diuers others in the short regiment of Queene Marie may be giuen for instance The Reply The Historie relateth the pretence of Wyat thus A Proclamation against the Queenes marriage desiring all English men to ioyne for defence of the Realme in danger to be brought into thraldome to strangers who be Spaniards The like was the Proclamation of the Duke of Suffolke Against the marriage with the Prince of Spaine Where auouching his loyaltie to the person of the Queene layed his hand on his sword saying Hee that would her any hurt I would this sword were at his heart Againe there is recorded the Oration of Queene Marie against Wyat where there is not to be found any scruple concerning the subiect of our question cause of Religion neither was there to make it more apparant any Minister of the Gospell brought in question as a commotioner in that cause Though therefore it is requisite that that which is lawfull be performed by lawfull proceedings yet if intent the subiect of this dispute might answer for Protestants accused in that name then is it plaine that it was not Religion if for Wyat and his fellowes it is as plaine it was not against the Queene or State but for both that the whole land might continue in their former subiection and that by Spanish insolencie her Highnesse preheminence and soueraignetie might not be impared Let vs heare The third Instance for England The moderate Answerer Goodman published a booke concluding it lawfull to kill Kings transgressing Gods lawes themselues and commaunding others to do the like The Reply If I should iustifie this Goodman though your examples might excuse him yet my heart shall condemne my selfe But what doe you professe to prooue All Protetestants teach Positions rebellious Prooue it Here is one Goodman who in his publike booke doeth mainetaine them I haue no other meanes to auoyde these straites which you obiect by the example of one to conclude All Protestants in England rebellious then by the example of * All the rest to answer there is but one And now let me be beholden to your moderation to remember multitudes of your Priests Iesuites Cardinals and Popes in their publike authorized bookes Bulles Decrees and now you requite mee with one But shall one dramme of drosse prooue the whole masse no golde Let vs therefore leaue this Goodman as a man who by his vnauthorized wicked and false positions hath falsified his name You proceed The fift Instance against English Protestants The moderate Answerer The English Protestants notes vpon the Bible as his Maiestie is witnesse do not disallow the killing of Princes in such case as is shewed by the booke of Conference pag. 47. The Reply It will be requisite without preiudice to the most learned and religious iudgement of his Maiestie to satisfie for two places related from that conference The first place touching the act of the midwiues of Egypt who mercifully spared the liues of the infants of the Hebrewes notwithstanding the commaundement of the King The note Their disobedience herein was lawfull but their dissembling was euill And was not this disobedience lawfull Let vs consult with the holy Ghost Heb. 11. 23. where it is written By faith Moses when he was borne was hid three moneths of his parents neither feared they the Kings commaundement The same is the case of the midwiues disobeying the commaundement of the King Now that which is noted by the Spirit of God as commendable in the parents of Moses may it be condemnable in these mercifull midwiues of the Egyptians Nay for it is also written The midwiues of Aegypt feared God and did not as the King commanded them but preserued aliue the male children and therefore God prospered them But we must discerne in this act two colours white and blacke which S. Augustine distinguisheth They did a worke of mercie in preseruing the liues of the yong babes but they did lie vnto the King for safeguard of their owne liues The first deserued prayse the other needed a Pardon Therefore this their lawfull and mercifull disobedience for preuenting the bloudie Massacre of Infants can be no president for your practises intended in malice to end in the bloud of Protestants of all sorts The other point of the note against Dissimulation doth indeed crosse your equiuocating profession but you are not to be offended with vs if we condemne that as sinfull which as S. Augustine saith needed a pardon The second place 2. Chron. 15. 16. the Text King Asa deposed Maachah his mother from her estate because she had made an Idole in a groue The note Mother or Grandmother yet herein the King shewed that he lacked zeale for she ought to haue bene burnt by the Couenant as vers 13. And by the law of God Deut. 13. but he gaue place to foolish
adde fiue score moe of your side conspiring in these Positions belonging to conspiracie Thirdly They speake say you of a Prince excommunicate which is not our English case at this present Good Now at this present namely when you writ and yet peraduenture whilest I replie the case is presently altered or at the Popes pleasure may be And is not this a safe case for our Soueraigne trow ye Wherof more in the next Section The most moderate Answerer His Maiestie was not excommunicate before his Election neither is he now but is both elected and setled in his throne both without any contradiction of the Pope and with his Iubet of all obedience and Prohibet of deniall thereof All the Catholikes of this Kingdome applauded it as much as Protestants and his vnion and league with Catholike Princes and people abroad is sufficient Answer that this is a malitious slaunder of holy Priesthood and proueth Catholikes innocent Protestants guiltie and this man an vniust Accuser The Reply If his Maiestie was not excommunicate by the Pope before his Election which you should rather call Succession then was he vniustly that I may so say excommuned by the Pope before his Election but your Superior Garnet confessed that he had receiued two Breues from the Pope to make vse of whensoeuer our late Queene Elizabeth should depart out of this mortalitie The content of those Breues was this that None should be acknowledged King of England but such as was a professed and resolute Catholike Nulli quantâcunque sanguinis propinquitate nitantur that is No other though neuer so nigh in bloud Which Breues he perceiuing the generall applause of people yeelding to the right of Succession according to nearenesse in bloud burnt Thus we see if the Popes power had not bene disappointed by want of force his Maiesty though nearest in bloud might not haue entred but with bloud Now therefore what a case am I in If I shall denie my fonner assertion then your superior Priest Garnet will accuse me for a liar for his Maiesties case was not different from others seeing The Pope gaue contradiction to his succession if I still defend it then your Priestship doth accuse me for a Slanderer of holy Priesthood The very moderate Answerer Because the Pope gaue a Iubet of all obedience and prohibet restraint of disobedience The Reply Yea Iubet of obedience Iubet what is that Euery child can expound it literally to signifie To commaund but by Popish Glosse may happily signifie to forbid for we must not be ignorant of your like glozing in the publike Decrees of Popes Whereas your Canon is Statuimus We decree that is saith your Expositor We abrogate or disallow Is it not as easie for you to turne Iubet to an id est prohibet Howsoeuer we perceiue your subiection stands still vpon the Popes Iubet that as it is recorded of the French If he shall commaund to kill the King you must be his subiects Lastly there is but one of these Authors aboue mentioned who speaketh expresly of the excommunicate and there is not one of them but iudgeth a publike professed Protestant in the state of an Excommunicate To conclude therefore be you admonished not to preiudice your modestie so much as to taxe any for an Vniust Accuser against whom you can shew no iust exception Yet there remaineth two other mysteries to be vnfolded the first is yours the second is your Superiors CHAP. XIIII The new deuice of our moderate Answerer TThere is at this present a great difference betweene the Emperor who is created by the Popes lawes and with his solemnities from whence he receiueth his sword and a King that is absolute and not so created or depending for power or iurisdiction such as our Soueraigne in England for the Emperor is the Popes Minister as saith Molina The Reply We might peraduenture be beholden vnto you for this distinction if we could presume you knew what you said being guiltie herein of a double falshood first to thinke That the Emperor hath no power but from the Pope the second to say you thinke That other Kings haue not any power which is not from the Pope The former is confuted hereafter the other now in this place For your Carerius making vnction by Romish Bishops in Coronation of Kings to be essentiall to royaltie without which they be no Kings saith That this is a doctrine most commonly knowne of all that the Kings of France England Scotland c. were neuer esteemed Kings before their Vnction No more saith your Parsons in the rigor of iustice before Popish Coronation then the Maior of London can be called Maior before his oath Which Vnction whosoeuer shall refuse saith Reinalds can haue no right to gouerne Christians annointed in Baptisme In briefe None is lawfull King or Queene of England saith your Cardinall without the approbation of the See Apostolike All grosly false for first In France saith your Barclay Kings who are to succeed by inheritance are iudged as consecrate and inaugurate before they be solemnely annointed And shall we thinke the French Kings to exceed our English herei◠No I haue heard Lawyers say The King of England neuer dyeth I thinke they speake not without booke otherwise Q. Mary could neuer haue iustified her act when she beheaded the Duke of Northumberland some moneths before her Coronation for high treason against her royall person I returne to your argument If the Emperor saith your Carerius who is held more eminent at least in dignitie then any King may be reiected by the Popes then much more other Kings may be punished by the Popes authoritie For he that can tame an Eagle may much more command Hawkes Here we obserue your spirits of contradiction you from comparison of disparitie betweene the Emperor and other Kings would seeme to free Kings and inthral the Emperor your Doctor Carerius from the contrarie disparitie would bring all Kings into subiection But know that howsoeuer now the Eagle be entangled whom you esteeme no better then the Popes vassall yet Non facile Accipitri rete sternitur And that neither Emperor nor King are lawfully subiect to this yoke is afterward made manifest A second new deuice His Maistie is not in the case of Excommunication as other relapsed Protestants because he was borne in that faith which he professeth The Reply And yet the now Henry 4. King of France sucking Protestants doctrine from his nurce was excluded from his birth-right of the Crowne till he was reconciled vnto the Pope And this same father Garnet had a Breue from the Pope to barre our Soueraigne from Succession except he should be found absolutely a Romish Catholike If then the Borne Protestants be free from Excommunication why did the Pope exclude the King of France or by his Breue to you except against the King of England If the case be otherwise
Queene to depose her as the Priests did Athalia violence Your Reinolds Reuenge and roote out as Iudith did Holofernes violence Your Costerus As an heardsman his cattell violence Your Bellarmine It is not lawfull to suffer a King hereticall but to expell him as the shepheard doth a Wolfe violence Your Creswell Subiects ought to expulse such a King out of his dominion violence Your Simancha As the Scythians who murthered their King violence Your Bannes The English ought to depose their Queene by force all which is violence We hanc also alledged exāples of many Popes who vsed all open violence To which might be added Azorius Salmeron Bristow Stapleton and others all crying Adarma And yet you say Not one What impudent modestie is this to denie before the Reader that which none who readeth can denie idlely conceiting a power to depose without violence in your opinions Heretikes obstinate that is such as cannot be deposed without violence Your comparison of the Emperor with our King is but a shadow which vanisheth in this Treatise following CHAP. XIX The Discouerie Let vs now see this family of Corah WE will omit Henries Frederickes Othoes and like Emperors and Kings of former times call but to mind that which hath bene visible in our dayes the late Henry of Fraunce concerning whom their owne Prophet hath published a Treatise the scope thereof is this The French haue with good conscience borne armes against K. Henry the third and depriued him of his Crowne Returne home there we see a Comet The Rebell Oneale is vp in armes against his Queene the Colledge of Salamane bring pitch to quench this flame and resolue thus Whatsoeuer Catholikes shall not for sake the defence of the English and follow Oneale doth sinne mortally and cannot obtaine life euerlasting except he desist Shall we thinke that other Priests can haue more loyall spirits Impossible as long as they receiue their breath from that Maister who commendeth the former Positions against the foresaid King of Fraunce Those Diuines saith Pope Xistus haue done the parts of good Lawyers Confessors and Doctors His Successor this rancor growing by Succession inueterate Pope Pius against our late Soueraigne We will and command the Subiects of England to take armes against Elizabeth their Queene The moderate Answerer Now let vs heare this the supposed publike practise in this point I answer he alledgeth three authorities onely of priuate men which do not pronounce the iudgement to be publike The Reply You contest for all Catholikes and teach vs to answer that this your Answer is but the writing of a priuate man but you haue publike approbation from your Superior they frō many are publikely authorized And yet againe remember your selfe Not aboue foure or fiue examples say you can be giuen in the whole Christian world for the space of 1500. yeares of Popes of Rome who haue translated titles to depose Princes Well then you grant fiue your Bellarmine doth vrge Seuen as from publike Records a notable contradiction You But foure or fiue willing to substract as one ashamed of the number of your Fathers of Rebellions but he alledgeth Seauen or eight desirous to multiply to make the pride of Romish Prelacie more glorious Whether But seauen or But foure what can this auaile for answer As much as a fellon accustomed to steale he careth not how many horses yet indited for seauen shall answer I had but foure or fiue which commendeth the want of that he would not his will to want Pope Paulus teruus did excommunicate Henry the 8. King of England commaunding his Nobles to beare armes against him Your Pope Pius Quintus now alledged Did excommunicate Queene Elizabeth dissoluing all her subiects from their obedience And yet he that is The King of Kings maintained their Scepters not to suffer them to be deposed by those Popes notwithstanding their good wils were manifested by their acts their acts condemned by the euents which examples none can denie but were publike You further adde The moderate Answerer But his Maiesties case is different except this Discouerer will inrolle him in the number of Excommunicate which is most iniurious to his Highnesse for who seeth not that the Queene was Excommunicate The Reply Why iniurious what euill can ensue for you seeme by this Answer to portend some mischiefe if it should happen his Maiestie should be excommunicate say what euill is it spirituall as onely to be excommunicate by the Pope Why this is nothing because your Tolet saith truly An vniust Excommunication such as we know the Popish is doth not endanger the soule Is it bodily belike his Maiestie shall find you a good Subiect howsoeuer your spirituall being accompanied with violence in this his different case you teach his highnesse to prouide a corporall preuention lest as in the defect of our lawe sometime it happened that a man might haue bene out-lawed and not haue knowne of it and so subiected to the extremitie of that lawe your Excommunication of Bulla Coenae vpon your Maundie Thursday by some Guido be closely executed before his Maiestie be aware CHAP. XX. The Discouerie HItherto hath bene manifested only their violence against the dignitie of Princes now heare of the violating of their sacred persons in conspiring their deaths The sixt Reason Whosoeuer doth intend designe or practise the murther of Princes must necessarily be holden for desperate Traitors But all Popish Priests are guiltie in some of these kinds Ergo. The Minor proued by their Positions They professe all that it is lawfull to take armes against their Kings as we haue proued from whence we may argue against them as he against a seditious one Quis sensus armorum what other meaning can armes haue but onely bloud But not to dispute from our suppositions but their Positions by these degrees First the french defence saith that Anie man may lawfullie murther Tyrant which I defend saith he by common consent Now It is euident saith our Reinolds That euerie Heretike Prince is most proper lie and perfectlie a Tyrant which is supposed by the Spanish Iesuite speaking of this point That if saith he they may be bereaued of their liues then much more of their liuings and Crownes And which is the height of furie Hereticall Kings saith Simancha deserue more grieuous punishment then priuate men therefore the Scythians as he well deserued did put to death their King Scylen for violating their Bacchanals Scythia a most barbarous Nation is the fittest glasse that these Priests can finde to looke their faces in Well shew vs then your Scythian and heathenish practises But first let vs heare your answere to these positions The very moderate Answerer I answere that the late Lord Treasurer was thought in his dayes a man not second to manie in politicall wisedome And yet he telleth vs in
is this There is a Canon contrarie to them that shall say Priests may take armes Ergo Priests haue no Positions contrarie to the Canon or else is not your Order freed from all iealousie in this point It will be therefore first materiall to shew the doctrine of your Priests concerning this militarie discipline of Priests Was not the Iesuite and Author of the Booke De iusta Abdicat a Priest and yet he admonisheth Priests to be the first of them that forsake the Oppressor of Religion imitating Elias zeale when he killed the false Prophets Was not your Reinolds a Priest and yet he would perswade That holymen euen Priests may resist by force Kings oppressing Religion whensoeuer oportunitie will serue and that dying in such a quarrell they are not to be accompted Traitors but Martyrs not deseruing punishment of God herein but as the souldiers of Christ an eternall reward in heauen Adding further As the Priests of Greece resisting their Emperours * A presumption absolutely false by force of armes thought it not a sinne of treason but rather iudged it an hainous crime not to resist Your Cardinall Allane was a Priest and yet he wickedly and falsely defendeth that The auncient Bishops might haue excommunicated Arian Emperours and haue defended themselues against them by force but they did not saith he by reason of the greater forces of the Persecutors This Answer he calleth A true and modest defence of English Cathotholikes which in his Admonitionâ—e â—e indeuoureth to proue from the example of Gods Priest Against Athalia And againe in behalfe of the Pope whome you esteeme as High Priest he saith In truth if it be lawfull for the Pope to occupie his forces which God hath giuen him against the Heathen much more may he employ them against those whom he accompteth Rebels against the Catholike Church which be properly vnder his correction Yet all this is nothing to the resolution of your Sanders a Priest also It belongeth vnto Bishops saith he both to pronounce the King an Heretike and the Subiects freed from their obedience ought to indeuour to place another instantly in his throne but if the Subiects shall faile in this their dutie then it is the office of Pastors Priests to prouide Kings must looke to the Priests mixed Chalices perfumed gloues priuie sheaths by what means soeuer that such a King raigne not in the Church of God Againe who was it that would haue killed the now King of Fraunce with a knife was he not a Nouice deuoted to be a Priest And he that killed your last King Henry the third I meane your Monke Clemens had he no affinitie with a Priest Such an one was that Monke who poisoned Iohn King of England And who I pray you did commend and magnifie that your Clemens his desperate exploite You know who Pope Xistus Quintus your high Priest A fact also highly commended by your French Iesuite sure one of your Priesthood saying That he is worthie to bee esteemed another Ahod who killed Aeglon the Moabite yea more forcible then Ahod for he the Monke stabbed the King through the guttes so that we need not now to wonder at former histories where we reade how Iudith killed Holofernes Dauid Goliah Samson a thousand men with the iawbone of an Asse this act is farre more maruellous These be thy Priests O Babylon who boasting falsely of a real vnbloudie sacrifice of Christ to be offered to God Now in later times by rebellions haue offered sacrifice to their Moloch the man of Rome in bloud Secondly to this your consequent Therefore all of this Order are absolutely freed from iealousie of Rebellion As though in warre onely the fighâ—ing souldiers were enemies doth not Reason in the Apologue teach you the contrarie For there The Trumpeter that gaue the Alarme to excite men to warre was taken of his enemies and to free himselfe O good Sirs saith he kill not me for I would neuer haue slaine any of you alas you see I haue no weapon the onely instrument I possesse is this trumpet to whome they answered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore thou shalt rather die because when thou canst not fight thy selfe yet doest thou incite and encourage others to fight Your Order will make the morall for in Fraunce your Reinolds did sound his trumpet for the battell thus All that we haue spoken are to this end to perswade Generals Captaines and all Ecclesiasticall men who follow the battell that these are the warres of the Lord. Hearken another trumpet sounding so loude that it is heard from Rome into Ireland the Pope a Priest Promising his blessing to Tyrone and all his adherents who should fight for the Catholike cause against their Queene And another in the same Ireland of the Colledge of Priests in Salamane resounding Benediction of the same Pope to encourage the Oâ—eale in the same warres Listen yet againe and you shall heare another terrible sound in England for the ioyning with the Spanish Armado in that their expected inuasion Anno 1588. Cardinall Allane a Priest Now therefore Lords Nobles and deare Countrimen for the honor of Knighthood fight And lest we should be too deafe in sense not to heare or dull in heart not to beleeue that Priests secular were interested in these affaires Parsons a Priest doth proclaime against the Seculars who would seeme herein to be onely excusable saying Was not Doctor Storie Doctor Lewis secular Doctors who are knowne principally to haue furthered the action of Sir Thomas Stukeslâ—y for Ireland were not Ballard Gifford and Gartly secular Priests And of all Priests in generall This holy sedition if you call it so which is to send warre into the world I confesse our Priests do and will teach These are the phrases of Baals Priests except it be that those launced themselues these let others bloud These are their alarmes against Protestants neither can we reade of any one of note among them who by publike writing did euer sound a retraite A question materiall for if Popes were not pleased with all these abouenamed Positions and practises shew vs where euer he did condemne seditious Priests Can you then apply the sentence of holy Ambrose to this order Is this to pray for vs and not to prey altogether vpon vs Wherein also I cannot but maruell at your modestie who bring in an old Canon teaching not to fight to the end you may cloake their shame who openly professe they must fight which is to couer a bald head with a Chrystall glasse There is yet another point you would satisfie The moderate Answerer Lastly he addeth the late vnhappie Stratageme and conspiracie against the house of Parliament but I trust that all Priests will be innocent in so vile a practise against our present Soueraigne The Reply If as S. Gregorie calling the first transgression of mankind foelix facinus an happy
such proceedings If you yet insist and vrge to know the causes why Popes did so insult vpon Emperors moderate your appetite a while till we come to the confutation where I doubt not but you will at least satisfie your selfe if not surfet For the interim it will content the Reader to vnderstand that which your Barckley proueth namely That in true historie it cannot be found that euer heresie was a cause of abrogating the authoritie of Emperors The moderate Answerer He accuseth Cardinall Allane for approuing of the rendring vp of Douentore vnto the hands of the King of Spaine the true owner by which he condemneth himselfe to be within the compasse of his owne conclusion of Rebellion for all the world can witnesse that towne truly to belong to that King The Reply Was the King of Spaine the true owner Who are you I pray you that can thus define if you will be a true Diuine then learne from our Sauiour Who made me a Iudge ouer you to diuide inheritances among you If you will be according to your State-style a Statesman to iustifie that the King of Spaine was then the true owner of Doâ—entore and for confirmation call all the world to witnesse we shall not greatly maruell at this in you being of the Order of them who would make that King the Monarch of all the world How the case might stand I may be lawfully ignorant excepting onely that howsoeuer Sir William Stanley being no subiect to either parties but onely a substitute to the States and subiect to his Queene from whose command he had receiued that charge he is therin intolerably perfidious for if the right were doubtfull then it is a conclusion which your Iesuite cannot denie but that When the souldiers shall doubt whether the warre and so the possession he holdeth which his Prince maketh be lawfull in all such doubts he ought to obey his Prince for euen to obey doth remoue the doubt Secondly if the case were plaine yet many things are lawfull to be done which are not lawfull for this man or that man to do for our Lawe saith A man as he that shall go to his neighbours house and take twenty pound he lent his neighbour may be hanged for taking his owne and is there no iustice against him who will render vp that which is not his owne But what his intent was he hath discouered to all the world who as he then in violating his Princes repose fled from her subiection so in the inuasion in 88. was bent to returne not as a good subiect but as a mortall enemie against his Soueraigne Lastly for the States in this point suppose their getting of Deuentore were vniust yet another Iesuite though I should condemne it would defend their possession who in like case thus resolueth Admit saith he that it was a great sinne for the Spaniards to vsurpe the Kingdomes and possessions of the Indian people yet can they not O Confessors now be restored for to whom and how can this be performed nay though it could yet will not the danger of decay of O Religion Religion permit restitution Yet there remaineth another example to be satisfied of you which is this CHAP. XXIII The Discouerie An example of a notable Patron of high Treason XIstus Quintus maketh a publike OratioÌ„ in his Consistorie of Cardinals the subiect matter he sheweth is this The King of France is slaine by the hand of a Monke And what of this This saith he is a notable rare and memorable act But why Because he slue not saith he a King painted in paper or grauen in stone but the King of Fraunce in the middest of his hoast Is it a wonder any should wonder that a Monke could murther a mortall King seeing Popish histories do record that Pope Hadrian being guiltie of the like seditious practise against the Emperor Henry the second was choaked with a Flie Nay but if the Monke had killed a painted Image that had bene an act farremore memorable and lesse intolerable notwithstanding no fact is good because great but therefore great because good Say then what is to be thought of the worthinesse of the fact It was a fact done by the admirable prouidence will and succour of Almightie God How by Gods will counselling and approuing it Holy Iudith is famous saith he for the slaying of Holophernes which she did not without the suggestion of Gods Spirit But this religious man hath done a farre more maruellous worke O maruellous Relgioâ— Yet so it is in this sinne of parricide where A Monke doth murther a King The best word the Pope affoordeth the murdred is An vnhappie King and one perishing in his sinne The worst he doth bestow vpon the murtherer is Religious man And thus in not condemning but rather commending one Traitor he hath made vp two Lastly this Henry a note very materiall was a Papist onely he fauoured the Protestants and especially Prince Nauarre because a Protestant excommunicate By this Pope this was his crime vpon which ensued This fact to paraphrase truly of the Popes words rare for the attempt not able for the wickednesse memorable for the shame of the Sect. The moderate And most modest Answerer The Reply What nothing not one word in behalfe of Pope Sixtus Sixtus who First did confirme the league in France for the vtter destruction of Protestants Sixtus who Did excommunicate in that name the King Nauarre and Prince of Condie Neither onely them but expresly All Lutherans and Caluinists proclaiming a Iubilie and indulgence for all in Fraunce who should pray for the successe of the Leaguers against the Protestants One to whom you ascribe power of absoluing you from all your sinnes and yet not one syllable to free him from the suspition of but one sinne patronizing a most brutish parricide Could you not answer that his speech was onely an admiration and no approbation or that he did declaime onely and not determine taking vpon him the person of an Orator and not of a Pastor or that he spake as a priuate Doctor and not as a Pope Nay all such answers you know had bene friuolous for he vseth examples of commendation arguments of asseueration and the Oration was not pronounced in his priuate closet but in the publike Consistorie and Conuent of his Cardinals And therefore herein onely you haue giuen vs a token of your extraordinarie modestie who not finding one ragge to couer your Fathers shamefull nakednesse you shut your eyes as loth to behold it God grant you grace truly to detest it But we find as in all Societies in your Synagogue men of diuers foreheads For the Pope and his Acolythus do extoll the Monke for an Excellent instrument of God whom your Lawyer doth decipher to be a Wicked faithlesse Monke â—nd a most hateful monster He depresseth that King as One
pittie and would also seâ—me after a sort to satisfie the lawe The truth then of this exposition as al Orthodoxal Comentaries shew is grounded vpon the direct Scripture the Oracle of truth for in the law Deut. 13. 6. 9. If thy brother c. the summe whereof is repeated in the Text in question vers 13. Whosoeuer will not seeke the Lord God of Israel shall be slaine whether he were small or great man or woman What shall we say then is the Soueraignty of Kings disabled God forbid but it is rather established hereby for the King is made the Deposer yea euen of whosoeuer Now that Commentarie doth not defend deposing a King neither possibly can it be defended by any ordinarie commaund of God in all Scripture which is proued Wherefore supposing that the Relation of the Conference be direct yet may you not thinke that his Maiestie whose iudgement is so diuinely illuminated by the light of the word of God that he neuer refused Conference with the greatest Iesuite or Doctor Romish could take exception to the note as from an offence thereby giuen but onely in suspition an offence taken by weake ones prepossessed with your Romish maladie whereof you haue giuen vs experience in your many controuersies For wheresoeuer in all Scripture almost you feele but any sent of fire O behold this doth Proue Purgatorie fire after death Whereas indeed the context is plaine there is onely signified * Afflictions of this life Where you reade promised Reward for goodworkes there you presently conclude Amerit of Condignitie when as all is the onely iustice of Gods promise and the consequent of the onely grace and mercie of God who giueth to will to worke to perfect and crowneth his gift of grace with the grace of the gift of glorie I may not digresse Here doubtlesse his Maiestie doubted lest some impotent Reader not ignorant of your suggestions vnderstanding a Prince deposed by the King might iustifie your proceedings where so many popishly inspired haue assumed the office of Kings to depose a Prince But know you there is not in any part of our Commentarie vpon the Bible any one sparke whereat any Guido may light his match to giue fire to his powder The last instance for England The moderate Answerer If I had trauelled no further into that doctrine then to the late printed booke by your Maiesties Printer of the late intended Conspiracie I might easily performe a iust defence for the Protestant Author giueth it out as a generall rule and vndoubted Maxime to all Professors of worship to take armes if their Religion be in hazard and that no priuate man should thinke his life more happie then to fight pro Aris. Which is greater libertie then our Aduersarie can find in Catholike Writers so of him attached of Treason and Rebellion The Reply This shoot is but twelue score wide of the marke you ayme at your bent is to defend them who professe it lawfull for Catholikes in the maintenance of Religion to murther Kings and harrow Kingdomes in their opinion hereticall This Author teacheth vs to Fight his owne words pro Aris pro focis pro Patre patriae his Reason Because the indangering of one of these would at once stirre the whole bodie of a Commonwealth not any more as diuided members but as a solid and indiuiduall lumpe What is then the difference he in the whole Treatise teacheth euery priuate man to arme himselfe by all possible meanes but first armed with authoritie of the King and State You teach to fight for Religion violating the obedience of God against your King and kingdome to destroy them The difference may be illustrated by the like A priuate man if without authoritie temporall he kill a murtherer he is a murtherer but authorized by the publike lawe he is now no more priuate but an Officer but the lawles homicide doth best pattern your lawlesse parricide So that there is no more oddes betweene our and your Authors opinion then cum Rege contra Regem to fight with and against the King You can find no more exception in England whither will you now it is but a step to Scotland what see you there CHAP. IIII. The Obiection of the moderate Answerer against the Church of Scotland KNox and Buchanan defended the power of people ouer their King The Reply You might haue added that there was in Scotland an Act of Parliament to call in that Chronicle of Buchanan censuring all such contempts and innouations but it stood your modestie in hand to conceale this lest we might reply vpon your moderation thus That is not to be called the doctrine of Scotland which the general currant of that Church and State in publike Parliament doth condemne such is this seditious doctrine of resisting and deposing Kings a learning substantially popish your Popes being Authors thereof your other Priests of Rome suggestors publikely authorized herein and your traiterous Actors canonized for Saints in the conceit of all Romish And now you may bid great Britaine adiew you may make a short cut into France CHAP V. The Obiections of the moderate Answerer against the Protestants in France both in their Positions and Practises LEt vs come into France The Reply But vpon condition that you will not returne Yet what of Fraunce The moderate Answerer Caluin and Beza and the rest of that holy Synode say that the Kings and Queenes their children posteritie and all Magistrates must be put to death and so euery Protestant must be more then a Pope The Reply Nay God forbid that any should be so great a man in Rebellion as your Popes who haue bene the heads of the greatest tumults in Christendome Caluin and Beza whom you traduce if your moderation will suffer that which iustice doth exact must answer for themselues Caluins iudgement in this case In his booke of Institutions which he framed for instruction of all the Church of Christ touching the case now controuerted he beginneth to consult with God saying The word of God teacheth vs to obey all Princes who are established in their thrones be it by what meanes soeuer yea and though they shall do nothing lesse then the Offices of Kings yet must they be obayed though the King be neuer so wicked and indeed vnworthie of the name of a King yet must subiects acknowledge the image of diuine power in his publike authoritie and therefore must in all temporall duties reuerence and obey him as well as if he were the godliest King in the world To contract his other sentences into a briefe We are instructed saith Caluin by many documents of holy writ neuer to suffer these seditioâ—s coÌ„ceits to possesse our minds as to thinke an euill King must be so dealt withall as he deserueth but we are directly charged to obey the King though he be a sauage Tyrant and neuer so wicked which I therefore often vrge that in such a case it
me to kill a fellon I denie his authoritie this is against the commission of his and my King and in this case of too peremptorie a commaund I acknowledge him no Iustice yet not absolutely no Iustice for if presently he shall commaund me to apprehend the same fellon I willingly obey him He therefore in his former commaund was as it were disjusticed onely by that act of disobedience wherein obedience to him had bene disobedience against the Crowne but yet he remained Iustice in office and therefore comanding iustly I dutifully obeyed him Thus is it in Caluins iudgement in the comparison betweene man and God If the King exalt himselfe to Gods throne then pull him downe that is do not obey yet so that we dispossesse him not of his owne throne which is Gods footstoole Therefore said Caluine In the most wicked King that is enemie to God there is by Gods ordinance an impression of maiestie which is inuiolable and his authoritie is not to be contemned This is cleare in Daniels case wherein Caluin doth insist for Daniel commaunded by the King to worship the Idoll refused cast among Lions was miraculously preserued in the end deliuered then he thus answered the King Against thee O King haue I done none iniquitie Wherein Caluine obserueth that No King ought to thinke it iniquitie to be disobeyed in that which he shall commaund contrary to God because the order of obedience to Kings beginneth at God as S. Peter saith Feare God honour the King This is the summe And is there any King which feareth God that can call this exposition rebellious For to * giue to God that which is Gods doth not depriue a King though most wicked of his due for it followeth Giue vnto Caesar that which belongeth vnto Caesar but you doe not onely take away duties belonging vnto Caesar but also take out of the way Caesar himselfe if opposite vnto your superâ—â—itious doctrines Thus haue I satisfied according to the truth of Caluins opinion Now for his phrase The Phrase of Caluin iniuriously vrged The moderate Answerer But Caluine saith that such a King is to be bereaâ—ed of all authoritie and not to be numbred among men but rather to be spit vpon then obeyed The Reply You haue weighed the words of Caluine in false ballances I would I could say ignorance onely and not also malicious deceit but first of ignorance For when we consider man created with a reasonable soule and after rebelling against his maker shall we not thinke him vnworthy of the name of reasonable man What is this els then that which we reade Man in honour hath no vnderstanding and is become like the beast that perisheth Shewing as ancient Fathers do comment that man by disobedience to God is degenerate froÌ„ his kind and therefore as God said for the presumption of his transgression by an Ironie Behold man is become as one of vs c. So the beasts may say in mans confusion thus Behold man is become like one of vs because he is degenerated froÌ„ the first sanctified reason for which cause our Sauior called Herod a Foxe and his owne Disciple Satan And yet in regard of their offices neither did the Apostle cease to be an Apostle nor Herod to be acknowledged King Nay Nabuchadnezzar by a sauage distraction metamorphosed into the disposition of a brute beast to liue in deserts with beasts yet lost not in the interim the right of his empire The next word of rather spitting in their faces spoken comparatiuely doth not rebelliously teach irreuerence to the maiestie of a King but only emphatically inforce a more zealous obedience vnto God as wheÌ„ I say I had rather burne my hand then write any thing against my conscience I do not danger my hand but I auouch the sinceritie of my conscience Notwithstanding if the word had bin vsed simply yet could it not haue bin vnderstood literally but figuratiuely As when it is written of God that God will spue the luke-warme professor out of his mouth signifying he doth loath such Therefore you must not deale with mens speeches as Salomon teacheth men not to deale with their owne noses He that wringeth his nose too much doth fetch bloud 2. Dâ—ceit Caluin saith say you that such a King is to be bereaued of all authoritie It is noted of Satans temptation that in alledging a text of Scripture He hath giuen his Argels charge oâ—er thee to keep thee in all thy wayes c. the subtile Tempter left out the words of greatest importance In al thy wayes I wil not charge you with imitation of that spirit of lying by substracting for you do but adde onely one word All bereaued of All authoritie But Caluine Abdicant se potestate bereaued of authoritie meaning only in that case of contradiction against God But this kinde of dealing is but ordinary in your moderation Thus is Caluin iâ—stified concerning his doctrine in him also Beza because Beza say you his successor in place succeeded him also both in opinion and practise We haue heard of their opinion Haue you any thing to except against their practise The practise of Caluin and Beza obiected by The moderate Answerer Both Beza and Caâ—…n armed subiects against their Prince at Geneua and as Caluâ—… himselfe Doctor Suâ—cliâ—â—e and the Arch-bishop of Canterburie be witnesses deposed their Soueraigne from his temporall right and euer since continue in that state of Rebellion The Reply I am sure if Caluin hath written to that effect your modesty would not haue concealed it but as the Comedian Poet maketh his parasite to speake Aequè quidquam nunc quidem â—…uen any thing so I mâ—y seeme to say something The booke of Doctor Sutcliâ—fes I could not find and I needed not seeke it for I haue conâ—erred herein with the master who answered me that the booke De Iure Magistratus he neuer thought to be Beza his worke and concerning the State of Geneua the Bishop thereof whom you call Prince and Gouernor of Geneua was neuer there Prince but the state of the towne was a free state of it selfe To make a question whether I should rather beleeue him or you is to doubt whether he that hath bin at Geneua or he that neuer saw it can better report the state thereof The words of Caluine his confession which should haue beâ—e produced are these We haue restored to the Magistrate of Geneua all the ciuill power which those false Bishops had vnder colour of liberâ—ie and priuiledge taken from the Magistrate and by collusion did chalenge to themselues Adde that which may be obserued the continuall contentions partly betweene the Bishops and the Dukes of Sauoy about that soueraignetie partly also of the citizens against them both An argument of no constant consent The conclusion will be that you may rather proue those Bishops to haue bene iniuriously ambitious then the citie rebellious CHAP.
their conclusion which is this In the Old Testament the Kings authority was aboue the Priests And therefore they can not prooue the souerainty of the Pope ouer Kings by the state of the Olde Testament Albeit this is infallible yet are not the Romish ashamed to argue from thence both by typicall Analogy and by examples Their Analogie CHAP. II. The second Obiection The Romish Pretence THe Olde Testament was a figure of the New in Christ. And Therefore in the New the Spirituall as Popedome is the Substantiue the Kingdome is but the Adiectiue The Answer In this Obiection there is more childhood than manhood babish Grammar than sound Diuinitie The Olde Testament indeed in his earthly elements was a figure of the spirituall and heauenly but of the truely heauenly the day of that eternall Sabbath and the celestiall Hierusalem the mother citie of the Saints of God And the Argument may be retorted The Argument returned vpon the Romish Christ being King and Priest was shadowed by the types of the Olde Testament but in Christ his kingdome had the preheminence of Priesthood because he is Priest only for vs but he is King ouer vs secondly as Priest he is suppliant to the Father as King he is predominant ouer all powers and principalities equally with the Father Ergo this order inherent in Christ ought to holde as conuenient among Christians An argument Demonstratiue CHAP. III. Obiect 3. from 14. examples The Romish Pretence IN the old Testament we finde Saul deposed by the Prophet Samuel Rehoboam by the Prophet Achia Athalia by Iehoiada the Priest Mattathias lift vp his sword against Antiochus and did remooue him Elias also and Elizeus both Prophets did kill the false Prophets and other Ministers of the King Iudith did kill Holophernes Ahod Aeglon Iabel Sisera Saul was dispossessed of his kingdome by Dauid Ahab by Iehu Amon by the people and the Mâ—ccaâ—ees sought against Kings for defence of Godâ— worship Lâ—stly king Ozias for exercising the Priests office was by the high Priest depriued of his kingdome The Answer to six kinds of these examples Heere we heare of nothing but fighting dispossessing killing of Kings and those chieflie by Priests and Prophets of God in the old Testament propounded to the Prelates of the new to teach them to erect their miters aboue crowns But first our question is of the obedience of Subiects to their lawfull Kings not of forâ—aine inuadors oâ— false vsurpers But Manie examples of the old Testament saith your Doctor we reade of such as haue borne armes and vsed hostilitie against Kings who being not their naturall Princes either did or would inuade their kingdomes to bring them into thraldome Such both by the law of nature and ordinance of God may be resisted And this was the case of Ahod against Aeglon Iabel against Siserâ—… Iudith against Holophernes the Macchabees against Antiochâ—… Therefore our aduersaries haue roaued at a wrong marke for by this your Cunerus confession your 3. example of â—ehoâ—d your 4. of Mattathias your 7. of Iudith your 8. of Ahod your 9. of Iabell and your 13. of Macchabees Who onely resisted vniust inuadors and not naturall kings pertaine nothing to the purpose The Answer to two other examples Secondly we dispute of lawfull examples of deposing kings but behold your 1 Saul was killed of an Amalachite whoÌ„ therfore Dauid commanded to be slaine Your 12 Ammon also was slaine of his owne seruants who were therefore pursued and slaine of the people because of thâ—ir conspiracie against the king Thus your 1. and 12. examples which you propound for your imitation rather shew what you would then what you should be yet so it is that wicked acts are the best examples you can alledge to proportionate your godlesse conclusions The Answer to fiue other examples Thirdly extraordinarie acts can be no presidents for ordinary or generall axioms But your selues cannot deny many of your examples were specially priuiledged functions by Prophets and others extraordinarily and immediately from God appointed to those offices and therefore cannot inferre any ordinarie power of altering States and kingdomes Of this kind was 1. Samuel the Prophet who dissolued the succession of Saul 2. Achia the Prophet who diuided Ieroboam from Rehoboam 5. Elias the Prophet who slew these Baalites and destroyed the messengers of the King 6. Elizeus the Prophet who raised vp Iehu against Ahab and his family and Nathan and Dauid Prophets who preferred Salomon in succession Therefore your 2. 5. 6. examples be satisfied For in them that will holde which Bellarmine acknowledgeth in one Elias To haue beene done by zeale and not by Pontisicall authoritie like that act of Phinâ—es in destroying those fornicators of Israel The last two examples obiected In the 2. Chron. 26. The high Priest deposed Oziah or Vziah from his kingdome And in the 2. Chron. 23. Iehoida the Priest put downe Athalia and commanded her to be slaine The answer to the former example King Ozias was strucke by the hand of God with leprosie and therefore by the law of God might not come into the common societie of men for feare of contagion He was not therefore deposed from his soueraigntie but only as a sicke King disabled and debarred the ordinarie execution A thing so manifest that your owne Doctor calleth this your assertion Most false and contrarie to the direct historie of the Bible and ancient Interpretors because it is manifest saith he that he died a King and his Sonne during his leprosie was only Rector c. It falleth out oftentimes that some Noble-man is ordained Regent to moderate matters during the minoritie of the King is therefore the right and reall King bereaued of his crowne The Answer to the example of 3 Athalia This example is satisfied already only now I will adde a confirmation of that which hath beene said Athalia 2. King 11. put to death all the Kings seed excepting onely Ioash who by good meanes was hidde from her after he was come to age produced and according to his right of succession proclaimed lawfull King commanding Athalia as an vsurper to be slaine So plaine that the fore-cited Doctor doth yeeld vnto it She was deposed saith he for destroying the Princes of the blood royall and vsurping the kingdome Now what maner of disputation call you this when to the defenders of the soueraigntie of lawfull Kings you oppose only the examples of intolerable vsurpers The last Answer to all the former examples in generall Fourthly example without law is as a bodie without a soule for though God be a law to himselfe yet his reuealed commandement is a law to man As Gen. 4. vers 7. His desire shal be subiect vnto
the common-wealth and a King is as well a King of the Cleargie as of the Laitie therefore the Cleargie is subiect vnto the ciuill autoritie in temporall things for such matter is not ruled by any power spirituall a plaine demonstration The third Obiection from the prophecie of the old Testament and the euents of the new The Romish pretence This is the tenor of the late yongue Buls of Popes as of Paulus 3. Pius 5. and all their followers I the seruant of the seruants of God placed in the seat of iustice according to the Prophecie of Ieremie where it is written Ierem. 1. Behold I haue appointed thee ouer Nations to roote them vp and destroy them to plant and establish them doe excommunicate these Kings and their fauorites absoluing subiects from their obedience and commanding them to take vp armes to roote them out Is this the true sense of that Prophecie It was spoken to the Bishops of Rome in the person of Christ The Answer O arrogant glossers yea impudent glosers and peruerters of the sacred Oracles of God! Did euer Ieremie put downe Kings to root them out Hearken to your Lyranus No he did onely denounce Gods iudgements against wicked Kinges Hearken to that godly Pope Gregorie who sheweth that Ieremies act was onely By preaching and not by fighting If you demaund in whom this prophecie was fulfilled listen to your Doctor Capella It was fulfilled in Christ at whose comming Idols and false Oracles ceased and the Prince of the World was cast out Which Scripture lest the Pope might vnaduisedly applie to himselfe holie Bernard doth forewarne him to Beware of insolent pride for these wordes being applied vnto the Pastors of the church betoken onely an industrioâ—s ministrie but no predominant autoritie CHAP. VII The antiquitie of this pretended Papall power is examined from the Apostles times The Romish pretence THe Priest of the new Testament in the Priesthood of Christ haue more authoritie than that of the law ouer Kinges to depose them The Answer This is not probable except you can shew some footings either of Christ or his blessed Apostles or their holie successors in the purer periods of times But 1. Christ vsed not this ciuill iurisdiction For Princely autoritie as your chiefe Iesuite confesseth had beene supersâ—uouâ— in Christ whose end was to worke the worke of Redemption of man whereunto the onelie spirituall power was sufficient 2. Peter and the other Apostles neuer challenged temporall authority This also is confessed Apostles saith Carerius were subiect vnto the heathen Kings in all temporall respects because Pontificall gouernment is only ouer Christians within the church but the Heathens are said by the Apostle to be without 1. Cor. 6. Heereupon your Saunders doth conclude that Peter receiued of Christ no power ouer Heathen Kings He conceiteth a reason There is a double power of fortitude and Christian valour saith he The one in suffering aduersitie constantly the other in attempting and effecting hard matters couragiously that power of suffering as more excellent Christ chose as fittest for himselfe and his Apostles and their successors for the gaining of the world to the faith and therefore they did abstaine from armes and prescribe obedience The Romish insist As though there were not a difference of the condition of the church as of a vine there is one time to plant and water it an other to loppe and prune it The Answer As though the Church which before time was planted watred with the blood and deaths of holie Martyrs ought now for that is this mans scope to be lopped in the cutting off of the heads of wicked Kings Nay but if the patient suffering of the tyranny of Kings be as your Sanders truely said the more excellent Christian power than acting and working the death of Kings and that therefore that power was practized of our Lord Christ and bestowed on the Apostles for the confirmation of the glorious faith pardon vs if we fall at Iesus feet to choose the better part especially knowing that To all those who suffer vniustly for iustice there remaineth a crowne of iustice which the iust Iudge will giue in that day of Reuelation CHAP. VIII The primitiue Successors of the Apostles for the space of two hundred yeares and long after did acknowledge all Obedience temporall to all Emperours and Kings whether heathen or baptized although Tyrants or Heretickes or Apostatates yea euen then when they wanted no force to resist The Romish pretence IN former ages Christians said your Bellarmine did not depose wicked Emperours as Diocletian Iulian and such because they wanted force Which maketh some Catholicks said your Bannes now not resisting their Kings excusable because they want force For it is commendable said your Frenchman to suffer when thou canst not resist Otherwise Catholickes said your Creswell are bound to hazard their liues in this cause assooue as they can make resistance Whereunto might haue beeneadded your Cardinall Allen Ancient Bishops saith he might haue excommunicated the Arian Emperours and hauedefended themselues from them by force of armes but they did not by reason of greater forces of their Persecutors The Answer This is the very Arche of all your rebellious building which all your Iesuites haue erected and whereupon our bastard English Cardinall doth insist in his booke intituled A True and modest Defence for English Catholickes which how false and shamelesse it is I am now ready to shew vnto all true catholickes for their confirmation and to the others for their conuersion First in generall For. For the space of two hundred yeares we cannot reade saith your learned Tolossanus of any christians resisting Emperours of other times or in their most bloudy persecutions to haue raised any tumult in the Common-wealth no not then when they were able both by equall number and power to match them But heerin they thought their religion aduanced before all others and gloried in this behalfe to be called Christians who professed this as a most holy doctrine namely obedience to Magistrates True the patient Christian did aduance Christian religion by suffering vnder Kings but the now pragmaticall Christian God grant I may be a false Prophet by acting and plotting Strategemes in resisting Kings will ruinate the holy faith To Tolossanus agreeth your Cunerus saying The Martyrs of those times when they by reason of their multitude might easily haue conspired against their persecuting Tyrants Hearken you conspirators and be ashamed yet for the honour of Christ by performing obedience to the higher power chose rather to suffer then resist For as saith S. Augustine they would demonstrate their hope of the life to come and by their confessions and deaths whereby they gaue witnesse to the truth of God were called Martyrs witnesses whose number was so great that if it had pleased Christ to arme them and aid them as he did
doe not resist although our number be great S. Nazianzene Not though the people be prone to resist you S. Ambrose Not when the people are present and offer a defence S. Augustine yeelding the cause Because Christian subiection is to be performed in loue and not in feare or by constraint A doctrine for those times namely the first 600. yeares in generall vse saith your Bellarmine And continued after Christ the space of 1000 yeares saith your Beâ—â—laâ—â—s neuer changed till the yeare 1060. saith your Tolossanus Friburgens Espencaeus and others And shall we dare to remooue The ancient Land-markes of our forefathers CHAP. XVII Other Proofs of Protestants from Antiquity in two most Christian and potent Nations England and France THat this soueraignity of his Maiesty whereunto notwithstanding all Papall iurisdiction we doe willingly subscribe may be knowen to be as anciently as earnestly challenged I will only point at some few heads of examples of our ancient Christian Kings which Sir Edward Cooke his Maiesties Attorney generall in his alwaies reportable and memorable Reports hath lately published In the raigne of K. Edward the first a Subiect brought in a Bull of excommunication against another Subiect of this realme and published it But it was answered that this was then according to the ancient lawes of England Treason against the King the Offendor had beene drawen and hanged but that by the mercy of the Prince he was only abiured the Realme Compare this Bull which did only push at a Subiect against his benefice with that Bull which more mankeen goareth Kings to giue them their mortall wound At the same time The Pope by his Bull had by way of prouision bestowed a benefice vpon one within the prouince of Yorke the King presented another the Arch-bishop refuseth the Kings presentation and yeelded to the Popes prouision This Arch-bishop then by the common law of the land was depriued of the lands of his whole Bishoprick during life In the raigne of King Edward the third the King presented to a Benefice and his Presentee was disturbed by one who had obtained Buls from Rome for the which cause he was condemned to perpetuall imprisonment Compare this Bull of disturbing onely the Present of Kings with that which doth ordinarily violate the Kings person In the raigne of Richard the second it was declared in the Parliament R. 2. cap. 2. that England had alwaies beene fâ—ce and in subiection to no Realme but immediatly subiect to God and to none other and that the same ought not in any thing touching the regality of the crowne to be submitted to the Bishop of Rome nor the lawes of their Realme by him frustrated at his pleasure Compare this English King immediately not subiect to the Pope and the aboue mentioned Iesuâ—ticall principle All Kings are indirectly subiect to Popes In the raigne of King Henry the fourth it was confirmed that Excommunication made by the Pope is of no force in England Compare this Of no force in England with those excommunications which in these later times haue been made against England In the raigne of King Edward the fourth the opinion of the Kings bench was that whatsoeuer spirituall man should sue another spirituall man in the Court of Rome for a matter spirituall where hee might haue remedy before his Ordinary within the Realme did incurre the danger of premunire being an hainous offence against the honour of the King his crowne and dignity Compare this with their Acts who haue made no other sute at Rome but meanes to dispossesse English Kings of their crowne and dignity Many other examples of like nature I pretermit and remit the Reader desirous to be further satisfied to the booke of Reports Habet enim ille quod det dat nemo largius The conclusion is that that challenge of Soueraigntie which was in opposition to the Popes Buls ancient right and iustice in Kings which were predecessours be not traduced now as an irreligious impiety in the successors The like might be spoken of France but I hasten to the last Argument presuming that my studious Reader perusing the French stories will ease me of that trauell CHAP. XVIII The last Argument of Protestants from Reason IT will be sufficient onely summarily to recapitulate the Arguments dispersed in this former Treatise The first Reason was long since Christened for The Apostles saith your Sanders did chuse rather to suffer euill than to reuenge wherein they were seconded by other heroicall Martyrs of Christ Who thought saith your Tolossanus their faith glorified in this that being persecuted yet they performed obedience Questionlesse they had some reason heereof One is specified by S. Cyprian Christians must be Preachers of the supernaturall vertue patience and not of vengeance Another by S. Augustine that Induring the misery of this life they may auouch their hope of a life eternall And lastly by Arnobius Heereby to make distinction of Christian obedience from that other of Pagans that whereas these yeeld onelie obedience proceeding from feare of man ours should appeare to be from Conscience towards God The second Reason is politicke which is that of your Victoria that the Clergy be members of the common-wealth Ergo they ought to be subiect vnto the state temporall I will adde another of this kind which wee borrowed from your Acosta shewing that licence of deposing Kings is an occasion of much spoiles and bloudshed The third Reason is violent inforcing you by your owne confessions to grant our conclusion your confessions be of two kinds first The Pope hath not temporall Soueraignty ouer Kings directly but onely indirectly in ordine ad bonum spirituale that is as the temporall doth necessarily helpe or aduance the spirituall good of the Church But So you may as well say saith your Carerius that a King hath not iurisdiction temporall but only indirectly because his authority doth intend a spirituall good aâ— namely preseruation of iustice in a common-wealth And he saith truely as may be confirmed by Saint Augustine A king as a man saith he doth serue God by his owne good life as a King by gouerning other mens liues to see that they doe that which is good It is his office not only to ordaine lawes for the preseruation of the politicke peace but also to establish true religion From hence I conclude that if this your distinction be good The Pope hath temporall iurisdiction ouer Kings to depose them indirectly that is as far foorth as may be behooffull for Religion then must you grant that Kings haue iurisdiction temporall onely indirectly because their Office also is ordained of God in ordine ad Deum as a minister of God for defence of his Church If your position be false then hath not your Pope that power ouer Princes no not indirectly The second Confession I take from
detestable lying vnder the shadow of Equiuocation is authorized for truth where desperate Rebellion is aduanced in the pretence of Religion where most barbarous massacres of Christian people and monstrous murthers of Kings and Princes are magnified as glorious Stratagemes be preindiciall to the holinesse of any cause I dare call heauen earth yea and hell also to witnesse between vs. Thus I leaue you as persons conuicted of high Treason God grant you grace of repentance and now I proceed to pleade the cause of Protestants generally impeached by you as persons guiltie of the same crime The second Part containing a Iustification of Protestants against slaunderous imputations obiected vnto them by this Answerer in two points Doctrine of Rebellion And sacrilegious Aequiuocation CHAP. I. THE second kind of answer in this our moderate Answerer is by Recrimination to make Protestants as much or rather more guiltie of crimes Rebellious and Aequiuocations then the Romish sect First is the case of Rebellion 1. generally 2. more particularly 1. In generall The moderate Answerer Let the Discouerer battle himselfe against his Protestant brethren which of all the people in the world that euer were or will be are most guiltie in these proceedings All iumping together in this conclusion that Kings differing in Religion from them are not worthy to be accounted either Princes or men but must be deposed We haue read and seene many conspiracies and rebellions proceeding from the dogmaticall men of this profession and their Rebels sâ—aine in their actuall rebellions and approued of them and canonized for holy Martyrs The Reply Lowd clamour and lewd Which your generall accusation must haue a general satisfaction to shew that it is childish extrauagant and slaunderous As childish as your boy-trick when about to be conuicted for a truant you accused some other for fellowship Admit then this to be a true recrimination yet as S. Augustine reasoneth of two kind of theeues so may I of diuers kinds of rebels This theefe saith he is not therefore good because the other is worse Can the one of these be saued by the other mans halter 2. Extrauagant wandring out of the circuit of the question thus The question was whether Romish Priests can be true subiects vnto our Protestant King you would satisfie by examples of Protestants disloyaltie to Romish Gouernors Suppose it be so although we condemne all such Protestants yet here is your iniquitie those Protestants in the Romish regiments you call Rebellious traitors and yet you Romish in Protestants kingdomes will be called dutifull and faithful subiects contrary to the naturall law of all equitie Feras legem quam fers To be iudged by your owne law and acknowledge your like case with such Protestants if yet there haue bin any such worthy of the like condemnation 3. Slanderous for those whom you in this place accuse rebellious in another place by consequent you acquit as innocent Protestants you say alledge this Scripture Omnis anima potestatibus sublimioribus subdita sit Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers c. to proue Princes supremacie By the which also Protestants proue That the Pope of Rome saith Bellarmine ought not to ouer-rule Princes or depriue them of their regiments although otherwise they deserued to be depriued of this opinion be all Protestants Now I would demaund of any indifferent Reader whether they do suffer any to resist who chaleÌ„ge euery one â—o acknowledge obedience We may deuine now what moderation you will keepe in the rest of your accusations who haue thus plainely confuted your selfe in this first CHAP. II. The particular Recriminations are fetched from diuers Kingdomes First to begin at home England The moderate Answerer The Discouerer hath made a fond argument against the Protestant ministers in England conuinced of sedition for taking armes against their Soueraigne The Reply I would this your obiection were such whereby we might onely charge you of foâ—dnesse and not of falshood also and malice For of the Church of England your Iesuite hath giuen a contrary verdit The English Protestants saith he do acknowledge their Christian Prince supreme euen in causes Ecclesiasticall Which is true in his lawfull sence But here againe we behold the spirits of giddinesse you defame the English Christians as denying due subiection to their Soueraigne your Iesuite accuseth the same English for yeelding more then due But I leaue you both to battle together you to accuse him of impudencie and he you of stupiditie This hath bin of English onely yet in generall Next you CHAP. III. Descend vnto Indiuiduals in our English nation The moderate Answerer I must put the Discouerer in mind that he hath beheld his visage too much in the glasse of Cranmer Ridley Latimer Sands Rogers and all Protestants of all places What haue these men done It was the consent of these and the chiefest Protestant Bishops and Diuines that Queene Marie might be deposed and not onely she but her sister Queene Elizabeth a Protestant which was put in practise both with wit and weapons to the vttermost of the Protestants power by the Duke of Northumberland and Suffolke and many others of great estate and not this only against the expresse statutes of the kingdome but their owne oath to the Lady Marie in her fathers life Thus did these wth their Protestant Preachers and forces against the succession of Queene Elizabeth For England I haue spoken already more then I desire had not such wicked accusations against vs vrged me to the breach of silence Now I will onely say that the publike and dogmaticall positions and practises of rebellions by the greatest Protestant subiects of this kingdome the Dukes of Northumberland and Suffolke and so many Nobles to be passed with oblinion with the whole Cleargie against not onely God and their Queene but oathes of fidelitie to King Henrie the eight that I am bold to affirme c. The Reply No maruell though you be bold to affirme thus much concerning the knowledge of these things seeing you verifying the vulgar article are herin blind Seeke therfore into historie the light of veritie and life of antiquitie and you will easily see how much you haue bin ouerseene First your boldnesse touching historie hath presumed to affirme that K. Henrie the eight did illegitimate his two daughters M. and E. and after declared the contrary making them legitimate by statute I haue inquired into the Acts which are extant and I find three Acts whereby the aforesaid daughters were disabled as namely in annis 25. 28. 33. of King Henrie his raigne But for establishing of them in the right of succession I think you cannot shew it except it be in anno nunquam canone nusquam The case is more manifested by the answer of the whole Councell to the letters of Queene Marie wherein she now after the death of King Edward made chalenge to the right of the