Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
authority_n bishop_n church_n jurisdiction_n 5,357 5 9.3309 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A05383 The holy pilgrime, leading the way to heaven. Or, a diuine direction in the way of life, containing a familiar exposition of such secrets in diuinity, as may direct the simple in the way of their Christian pilgrimage In two books. The first declaring what man is in the mistery of himselfe. The second, what man is in the happines of Christ. Written by C.L.; Holy pilgrime, leading the way to new Jerusalem Lever, Christopher, fl. 1627. 1618 (1618) STC 15538; ESTC S102377 58,859 294

There are 5 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

the proceedings of the Prelats against himself and their dealings tovvards others of their brethren the theame of vvhich booke he the Defendent desireth the honorable Court● to take a briefe relation of at this time that they may the better be informed of the falsitie of the information And first for the principall theame and matter of the booke it is the State of the questions in his Flagello Pontificis for vvhich he suffered vvith the summe of the Arguments he produced for the confirmation of the trueth The questio●s arising betvveen the Babylonian and the defendent concerning the autoritie of the Pope were these The first whether Christ did constitute Peter sole Monarch of the Catholick Church The second vvhether the Pope of Rome if hee bee a Bishop as hee is a Bishop hath Autoritie jurisdiction over Kings Emperors Thirdlie vvhether Popish Bishops be true Bishops or no and of the discussing of these questios the defendent saith his adversarie vvas the sole cause In the handling of the which the Defenden● f●rther affirmeth that he used all the caution that vvas possible as he supposed for man to use prefacing in his booke that being to dispute about the Autority of the Bishop of Rome he desired candidly to be understood of all men● for while he disputed of Episcopall autoritie he medled nor contended not against such Bishops as ackovvledge their autoritie jurisdiction from Kings and Emperors into vvhose hands the government of States Kingdomes● and Commonvvealths is by God committed For if the Popes themselves vvould acknovvledge their immense and unlimited autoritie from Kings and Emperors he the defendent there said if they commanded nothing contrarie to the vvill and Word of God that he for his part out of the reverence duty ● loyaltie to his Prince vvould obey it The Words in the Original are these Verum de Episcoporum autoritate locutus à bonis bene intelligi cupio Non enim litis litem moveo quatenus ab Imperatoribus Regibus Principibus Terre quorum interest salutem civium tueri potestatem ●us Imperium in socios totumque Dei gregem adepti sunt Nam si Romani Episcopi imm●nsam illam nullis limitibus circumscriptam autoritatem indulgentia Principum acceptam ferrent voluntati Episcopali nihil voluntati divinae inimicum jubenti obtemperandum putem ob reverentiam Principi si volenti debitam c. So that the defendent having thus playnlie set downe his minde before knowing that all the jurisdiction that the Bishops in England now exercise over others is ●rom the King he thought himself not onely secure from danger but expected fav●ur at least from the Bishops their helping hand especially when the opposing the Popes Autority in England is a thing that the King and State have ever so well allowed of And that this honorable Court may yet be f●rther informed of the speciall cause for which the Prelats are so displeased with the defendent it was for the truely and narrowlie disputing and discussing of the second question to wit whether the Pope of Rome if he be a Bishop as he is a Bishop have Autoritie jurisdiction not onelie over his fellow breth●en but over Kings and Emperors which the Defendent there denyed for many warrantable Arguments The summe of which he desireth here to relate unto this honorable Court for his just and necessarie defence justification For by the ve●ie light of nature and unanswerable reason it is evident and manifest that where there is an equalitie and pari●ie amongst men there the one doth not exceed the other in power or Dominion Paris enim in Parem non esse imperium inter Naturae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est Novv Divine constitution hath made Bishops and Presbyters or Elders a like and equall vvhich that it might the better appeare the Defendent propounded there tvvo things to be proved The first vvas That Bishops and Presbyters vvere by the Word of God one and the same Secondlie That Presbyters had equall Autoritie of Government● Ordination Excommunication vvith Bishops vvherein onely consists their preeminency Autoritie above their brethren vvhich things being proved it vvill necessarilie follovv That the Pope of Rome as he is Bishop doth no vvay exceed other Bishops and Presbyters they being in all things a like and equall unto him much lesse hath any Autoritie and povver over Kings and Emperours And for the proofe of the first position the vvords Presbyter Bishop do sufficientlie evince i● vvhich in holy Scripture though diverse in sound signifie one and the same thing as not to cite the vvords themselves vvhich would be large The Apostle Paul to Titus in the first chapter doth sufficientlie shew vvhere the words Bishop Presbyter are confounded And likevvise in the first Epistle of Peter and the fift Chapter there Presbyter and Bishop signifie one and the same thing And the Epistl● to the Philippians the first Chapter and the ●irst verse do●h apparentlie demonstrate it● and diverse other places might be produced dilucidating the same thing But the 20● of the Acts puts all out of controversie where Presbyter and Bishop signifie one the same thing● for office● honour and function so that the identity of their office● is signifyed by those tvvo expressions Neither is there a confusion of their names with a difference still of their functions administrations as some vvould cavill for in these places vvhere Presbyters are called Bishops the disputation is not about the title but about the office signified and specified by the title For vvhen S. Paul exhorts the Presbyters to have an eye to their duty charge he useth this reason that the Holy Ghost had made them Bishops● And the trueth of ●his is so evident that the Rhemists themselves as learned men as any Bishops in England and as able to mayntayne an error are forced ingen●ouslie to confesse it saying in expresse vvords in their No●es upon the 28. vers of that Chapter That in the Apostles times there vvas no difference betvveen Presbyter and Bishop● so that for the first position it is not onely by the Word of God clearlie evident but by the very confession of the adversaries of the trueth granted as a thing without controversy Novv for proofe of the second position that Presbyters as vvell as the Bishop of Rome have the povver and right of Government Ordination and Excommunication by vvhich in these times Bishops onely exceed Presbyters the defendent vvill here brieflie demonstrat it referring those of this honorable Court that have a desire to search into the full trueth of it to his booke And for proofe that the Government vvas committed unto them and that they exercised the same it is most perspicuous out of the first of Timothie 5. vvhere the Apostle sayth The Presbyters that rule vvell are vvorthie of double honour especially those that labour in Word and Doctrine By this testimonie it is evident that they
of the Kingdome of Heaven by name are committed those are more vvorthy honorable then those tha● have not that Priviledge But for the Presbyters they have the Priviledge of the Keys granted unto them by name Ergo the Presbyters are more honorable then Bishops For the major no good Christian vvill or rationall man can deny it And for the minor he that readeth the last of Iames shall finde it manifestly enough confirmed and proved By all vvhich Arguments the Defendent did sufficiently beat dovvne the Bishop of Romes autority and by the very light of reason overthew it For if that every Presbyter be by the word of God as good a man as the Bishop of Rome if not better and vvithall if the Presbyters neither can nor may usurp autority over their fellovv brethren much lesse may they doe it over Kings and Emperors and by consequence and necessity of reson it follovve●h that the Bishop of Rome hath no cause to arrogate such autority to himselfe over the vvhole Church as he doth and therefore that his rule Government is a meere usurpation and an abominable tyranny over the vvhole Church of God and ought of all men to be defyed abominated and abhorred vvith all his complices as impious and blasphemous against God●●njuriou● to Kings Princes and nocent to all the faithfull members of Iesus Christ. The recapitulation of all the vvh●ch Arguments this Defendent thought fit to make knovvne to this honourable Court that their illustricityes might in every respect see his innocency vvho first exemted all Bishops that acknovvledge their autorityes from Kings and Emperors out of the number of those against vvhich he disputed and secondly never by name fought against any other but Romish Bishops and vvi●h their ovvne arguments vvounded them● And therefore he could not but take it unkindly that when in this combat they should have helped him against the common enimie they defending him fell upon the poore Defendent to his perdition saying that he meant ●hem and that he vvas erronious and factious in his opinions Novv if the Defendent hath erred in the discussing of these truthes the Scripture that Word of Life hath brought him to it vvhich vvere blasphemie to thinke and therefore vvhen they adjudged his booke to be burnt they might as vvell have burnt th● Scripture also yea all antiquitie and the gravest and learnedest of auncient Fathers vvhose testimonies also hee hath made publick for the greater vindication of the truth against error and cruelty But that the integritie of the defendent may yet more clearlie appeare he most humbly entreateth this Illustrious Tribunall to heare hovv the busines vvas carried against him at his Araignment before the Prelats Barre at Lambeth and hovv submissively he demeaned himself there and hovv superciliously they carried themselves towards the Defendent on the contrary side When it came to his part to speake for himselfe the Advocat having formerly denied to plead his case any farther then about the vvitnesses testimonie vvhich he also did very jejunely beeing an Advocate of such excellent parts of learning and eloquence as he vvas and also at the Bar ●enouncing i● saying That the Defendent should plead himselfe which vvhen it vvas put upon him he then first related vnto the Assemblie the Theame of the booke vvhich vvas the mayntenance of the Kings prerogative royall Then he told them the occasion of his vvriting of it that he vvas provoked thereunto by a Pontifician vvho often had dared him into the list of dispute● which a● last he could not deny as he vvas a Christian and as he vvas a Subiect for by the Word of God he told them and by the Law of the Land and his speciall oath he vvas bound unto it vvhich Oath he also read at large in open Court the vvhich also all the Bishops of England and all the Iudges of the Kingdome had taken and vvere equally bound vvith him to observe Then before he entred into the combat vvith the adversarie he shevved vvhat caution he used that being to vvrite against the Bishop of Rome Italian Bishops it vvas onely as they arrogate their au●oritie over their Brethren and the Church of God yea over Kings and Emperors jure divino against such Bishops onely hee affirmed he did dispute read the vvords of exception formerly cited at the Barre as for such Bishops as acknovvledge their jurisdiction povver and autority from Kings and Emperors he sayd he ha● no controversy against them as he there againe and againe declared himself in the number of vvhich he the Defendent sayd ours were for all the Bishops of England and in his Majst Dominions had and received or at leastvvise ought so to doe their autoritie jurisdiction over their brethren from him For proofe of vvhich he cited read publickly the Statuts and Acts of Parlament as follow First that of the first of Queene Elizabeth of famous memorie vvherein the Oath of Allegiance vvas ratifyed In the which Statute there are these words That all jurisdiction all Superiorities and all Privileges and Preminencies spirituall and temporall are annexed to the Imperiall Crovvne vvhich by Oath he being bound to mayntayn●● could doe no lesse being provoked by an adversary of regal dignity He read also the Statute vvhich was inacted in the 37. of Henrry the eight vvhich is that Archb and Bish. and all other Ecclesiasticall persons have no other Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction but that vvhich they received and had by the King from the King and under his Royall Majest He read also the Statute made in the first of King Edward the sixt in these vvords That all jurisdiction and Autori●ie Spirituall and Temporall is derived and doth come frō the Kings Majest as supreme Head in the Churches and Kingdomes of England and Ireland and that by the Clergy of both the Kingdomes it ought no otherwise to be held or esteemed of and that all Ecclesiasticall Courts vvithin the sayd Kingdomes ought to be held and kept by no other povver and autoritie eyther domesticall or forrain then that vvhich comes from his most excellent Majestie And that vvhosoever did not acknovvledge and venerate this autoritie that the same men are ipso facto in a praemunire under the Kings high displeasure and indignation as the vvords of the Statute run and the mouth of the lavv speaks and then vvith some reason● also vvhich the Defendent produced besides the Word of God hee shevved That no Romish Bishops had autoritie over their fellovv brethren nor could jure divino challenge it much lesse over Kings and Emperors and therefore so long as the defendent had the Word of God the Lavves of the Kingdome and reason it self on his side he told them he thought himself reasonably secure from all danger in that place And then applying his speech unto the right honorable and noble Lord the Earle of Dorset then present the Defendent tolde his honour that he could not but vvonder that hee should stand
eternall life they testifie of mee And in the 3. of the Acts ver 22 23. S. Peter brings all men unto Christ to be taught by him not in somethings onely but that Prophet must be heard in all things and no other in Gods matters must be listened unto the words are these For Moses truely sayd unto the Fathers a Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren like unto mee him shall you heare in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you And it shal come te passe that every Soule which will not heare that Prophet shall be destroyed from among the people And in the 12. of Iohn vers 48. our Saviour sayth He that rejecteth mee and receiveth not my Words hath one that judgeth him the Word that I have spake the same shall judge him in the last day And therefore doth it not stand with all good reason that we should guide square our lives and actions by that word and rule onely by which we shall at the last day be judged Paul in the 2. of the Rom. ver 16. sayth That the secrets of mens hearts shall at that day be judged according to his Gospell shall not all our doctrines yea and our whole Religion be squared and regulated by the same all good reason vvould dictate so They have Moses the Prophets sayth Abraham● let them heare him saith he Luc. 16. ver 29. We have Christ and his Apostles we are onely to heare them in all things not the Fa●hers not the traditions of the Elder● not the use customes of former ages if they dissent from the holy Scriptures and vvritten word of God For the great Doctor of his Church telleth the Saduces saying Yee erre not knovving the Scriptures Matth. 12. vers 24. indeed from the ignorance of the Scriptures commeth all error they that follovv the Scripture for their guide can never stray or straggle from the right vvay neither have they need to borrovv the candle of the Fathers to be directed by so long as the glorious Sun of the vvord shineth so clearly and it was the eternall praise and commendations of the more noble Bereans that they did dayly search the Scriptures vvhether the things the Apostles taught vvere so or no. Acts 17 ver 11. and Paul is greatly honored vvith this applause in the 26. of the Acts ver 22. that he taught no other things then those vvhich the Prophets and Moses did say should come te passe And so Christ taught his Apostles Luc. 24 that all things ought to be fullfilled concerning him vvhich vvere vvrit in Moses the Prophets and the Psalmes So that the Scriptures alone are the Foundation of all our religion and to say that the meaning of the Scriptures can not be knowne without the Fathers is an unsufferable wickednes done unto that holy booke and an infinite contempt and disgrace of it to say it hath need of the ayde of man to support it Christ vanquished the Devill by the Scriptures Matth. 4. drove away the Saduces Matth. 22 and S. Iames by the Scriptures put an end unto the great controversy of the Churches at Ierusalem set the Churches of the Gentiles free for ever from all Ceremonyes vvhatsoever but those God himselfe had appoynted Acts 15. and onely by the Scriptures did Paul resolve all questions So that according to Gods ovvne instruction and direction vvhich must ever be obeyed and listened unto the Scriptures onely soly must bee the Iudge Law square rule of all our religion vvords actions Not the Autority of the Fathers not the traditions of men not the practice custome of the ancient and the name of Antiquity For they that shall preferre these things before the Word of God or at least affirme that these Holy Oracles and Divine records cannot be understood vvithout the Fathers do not only blasphemously disgrace and contemne the Holy Scriptures but neglect the great Prophet vvhom vve ought to heare in all things so that listening unto the voice of men before the vvords of this great Prophet accusing the Scriptures of obscurity and saying they are the refuge of all Schismaticks and Hereticks is great impiety contumacy against God most injurious to the Holy Scriptures All which the Prelats being so highly guilty of the Defendent will never be a frayd to charge them with it that they are disgracers contemners of Holy Scripture withall that they are very ungratefull to the King their master invaders of his Prerogative Royall all which he shall make also evidently appeare to this honorable Court and how unwor●hily yea prophanely they have abused not onely the King their now Soveraigne but his most excellent Father of pious memory And that they are invaders of his Prerogative it i● most certayne not onely by the Statuts Lawes of the Kingdome but by this very information For by the Lawes Statuts specified before with many others it is solemnly inacted That whatsoever Autority is here exercised under the King in his Dominions whether it be Spirituall or Temporall whether by Archbishops Bishops or any Ecclesiasticall men it is meerly in by and from the King and so ought to be acknowledged and that all jurisdictions superiorities all privileges and preeminencies spirituall and Ecclesiasticall are annexed unto the Imperiall Crowne so to be acknowledged And whosoever doth not acknowledge that all jurisdiction and Autoritie both Spirituall and Temporall is derived and doth flow immediatly from the Kings Majest● as supreme head under Christ in these Churches and in his Kingdomes as the Statutes declare at large is ipso facto in a praemunire and under his Majest high displeasure For it is the Prerogative of Princes and the priviledge that onely agrees to Kings and Potentates to be absolute in their Dominions and that all other jurisdictions superiorityes exercised by any other in their Kingdomes are derived from them and that of themselves they have none but as from the Kings So that it is arbitrary and in the Princes power to have or not to have such jurisdictions and preeminencies under them And that they may abdicat or annihilate them when they please And whosoever shall deny this or clayme any right of Government to themselves in Princes Dominions jure Divino are delinquents against their Kings and Masters and by our Lawes and Statutes they are proclaymed enimyes of the King and his Prerogative Royall that is true the mouth of the Law hath spake it And therefore the Defendents booke cannot be called a Libell without the Lawes first be proclamed such for the lawes say That all such persons as shall challenge any Autority unto themselves in his Majest Dominions but from the King are delinquents against his Majest and invaders of his prerogative Royall his Highnesses enimyes and so they are Now that the Prelats are such they sufficiently declared it in the censure of the Defendent For he reading
the Statuts at the Barr they notwitstanding affirmed that they had not their Autority and jurisdiction from the King but that Iesus Christ made them Bishops and bestowed their Autority upon them and that they were jure Divino and that they were before Christian Kings held the Crovvnes of Kings upon their heads for no Bishop no King and all this in a publick Court of judicature and in a most crouded assembly So that it seemeth the King is beholding to them and not they to his Majest And if this bee not to invade the Prerogative and to be enimyes of it and to be ungratefull unto his Highnes the Defendent knovveth not what it is to bee enimies of the prerogative The Lavves say it and therefore if the Defendent hath erred the Lavves have brought him into this error Neither did the Prelats ovvne Words at the Bart onely declare their disloyalty to the King and their independency on him but this very information vvhich comes from the Prelats in the name of the Attorney Generall sufficiently demonstrates it For in it the Defendent is accused as guilty of a great crime for vvriting against the Hierarchy and prefer●ing a Presbyterian pa●ity before the Sacred Orders of Bishops Priests and Deacons What the Defendent hath Writ the occasion of it concerning the Presby●e●y the honorable Court hath been informed in part and vvithall if so vvriting be libello●s and the Defendent have erred in it the Holy Scripture is also libellous which vvere impiety to thinke and hath been the cause of it from vvhich he varied nothing at all in that discourse further the Defendent resolveth to live and die in that error concerning the parity of Ministers and Presbyters vvhich he is ready to prove and make good against all the host of Prelats Doctors Proctors Commissaries Officials and Surrogats this day living But the thing that the Defendent desireth the honorable Court to take notice of is the contumacy of the Prelats for they call their Hierarchy and the Orders of their Bishops Priests and Deacons Sac●ed which if it bee graunted and so bee indeed then the Prelats are from God and not from the King of whom they have no depence For speaking of the King wee say His sacred Majestie because God himselfe hath appointed Him over us for by mee saith GOD Kings raigne and all Authority is from God and Kings are called Gods so that Kings are sacred Persons But that Hierarchy should be sacred and that there should be a holy Principality of Pastors and Ministers the prime and forman of which should have the Keyes of Heaven Earth and Hell and that hee should dispose of Kingdomes and Empires and make the greatest Potentates and Rulers his Subjects and Vassals and should have his domineering servants under him in all Common-wealths and Princes Courts to pry into their royall proceedings to their revenues riches and treasuries to know their powers their allyes and confederates and be Counsellors of their most secret admission should have an autority and jurisdiction independent over their Subjects and Lawes and Canons of their owne making to rule by and by them to persecute and undoe them at pleasure in the number of which are Cardinals Patriarchs Prime-mates Metropolitans Arch●Bishops Bishops Deanes and innumerable such like vermin a member of which monstrous body our Hyrarchy is the Defendent saith this is not knowne in Sacred Writ nor never came from God but rather from the Pope and the Devill Diabolus cacavitillos Yea the Word of God is absolutely against it And that our Arch-Bishops Prime-mates and Metropolitans are members of that body let not onely our Martyrs writings and speeches Henry Stubbridge his exhortatory Epistle but even Masons Booke be looked into concerning the Succession of Bishops and it will be ●ound That hee derives their pedigree from Rome and so doth P●cklington in his Booke Sunday no Sabbath wherein hee saith● That our Prelats are lineally descended from Saint Peters Chaire at Rome they being therefore a branch of that Synagogue and standing by the same autority the Pope pretends to stand which is as they all chal●●nge jure divino they are enemies to the King and ●●vaders of his prerogative and so they are justly g●ilty of all those crimes they accuse the Pope of and as great enemies of God as hee is all which the Defendent hath sufficiently proved in his Apo●ogy For they challenge their Autoritie jure divino and say That Iesus Chr●●t made them Bishops and the holy Ghost consecrated them and that they we●e before Kings and held the Crownes of Kings upon their heads and the Pope sayes no more They call also their Hierarchy Sacred the Pope doth no more and for the erecting of this sacred Hierarchie Emperors Kings must be thrust down and made vassals of and all Kingdomes that are under their jurisdiction made slaves to it and all those stinking slavelings that depend upon it as the whole Christian world by woefull experiēce daily findeth But this same tearme of Sacred Hierarchie and sacred orders of Prelats ought here a little to be discussed That which is sacred is from God But the Hierarchie is not from God Ergo it is not sacred For the minor it is evident● That vvhich God hath peremptorily forbid to his Ministers and Servants and is an enemie to that is not of God and by his institution but hee hath forbid Lord●y dominion to all the Ministers of the Gospell saying The Princes of the Gentiles beare rule over them but it shall not be so among you you shall not Lord it over your Brethren Ergo th● Hierarchie is not of God but of the Devill that is the cause of all disorder and ignorance For God forbad his Apostles and in them all Ministers to be Lords over one an other and set his owne example before them of service and commanded them to immitate him and to bee humble and meeke and told them plainly That the office of Principalitie and Dominion belonged unto Kings and Princes and that their imployments consisted in their obedience to Kings in praying for them that they might live in all godly peace under them and that they should diligent●y feed the flock of Iesus Christ committed to their charge in season and out of season as they love him and will answere it at his last appearing● and this was all the businesse that Christs Ministers Servants vvere to be taken up in they were not to be intangled with the things and affaires of this life nor to bee incombred with worldly matters they have speciall commands and presidents to the contrary and their charge and dutie assigned unto them from which station they must not goe which is onely to feed the flocke with all care and diligence vvith the sincere milke of the Word to preach unto them day and night and to goe before them in godly and holy example and to neglect th●s and to be taken up vvith domination and
there at the Barr as a Delinquent for mayntayning the Religion established by publick Autority the honour of the King and the glory of his Majestie and that one Chouny a Sussex man a laick as vvell as himselfe should vvrite a Booke and set it forth by publicke autoritie mayntayning the Church of Rome to be a true Church and never to have had so much in her as the suspition of error in fundamentall poynts and that this booke should be dedicated to the Prelate of Canterbury patrionized by him vvhich Book● the Def●ndent both read and exhibited in Court by vvhich notwithstandig the King himselfe and all his Subiects were made Schismaticks and hereticks to the infinit dishonour of God our Gratio●s King and King Iames of blessed memorie and our most holie profession and religion This as the defendent told the Lord of Dorset struck an amazement in him especially vvhen the author of it must be favoured and co●ntenanced by Canterburie and for the defending of the honour and dignitie of our Church and the honour of the King the Defendent should stand as an evill doer Novv vvhen the defendent vvas come thus farre and vvas then approaching more closely unto them all intending more fullie in the pleading of his cause to have set forth their unjust dealing they tolde him that he rayled and imperiouslie commanded him to hold his peace vvhich vvas the reason of his Apologeticus ad Praesules Anglicanos vvhere he tooke libertie to vvrite that and publish it to the vievv of all the vvorld vvhich he vvould have then spoke But after that they had silenced him they then fell a thundering against him everie one as he pleased all of them joyning in this one onely excepted that they censured him onely for his Booke and in their censure they unanimously agreed that the Defendent should pay the costs of suite a thousand pounds unto the King for a fine be debarred of his practice that his booke should be burnt and that the Defendent should lye in prison till recantation and in the meane time be delivered unto Satan And thus did the Sublime Court deale with the Defendent for doing his duty But here the Defendent craveth favour againe of the honorable Court that he may briefly letting the puny Iudges and their nonsen●e dye in silence say something of the Prelats haranges because they onely were the men that found themselves aggreeved a● his writing to say the trueth all the other are Officiers under them and are the Prelats hangbyes he meanes the Doctors to doe what they would have thē as hourely experience teache●h all men And so much the more earnestly he desireth this liberty because it will make much for the demōstration of the justice of his accusation against the Prelats both in respect of the dishonor they have don unto God by it the dishonour of the King their Master King Iames of precious memory and the wrong done to himself in particular Now the first that entred this combat was Francis White Bishop of Ely who in the first place most blasphemously and with many contumelyes reproached the holy Scriptures making nothing of their divine Autority as all the standers by can witnes for he reviling the Defendent sayd That he had nothing in his booke but Scripture which was as he tearmed it the refuge of all Hereticks and Schismaticks openly averring withall That the Scrip●ures could not be knowne to be the Word of God but by the Fathers and Saint Augustin would not have beleeved the Scriptures to be the Word of God had not the Church told him so Further he sayd That the Scripture could not be knowne distinguished from ●he Apocrypha but by the Fa●hers nor the meaning of the Scripture found out but by the Fathers that all the Fa●hers from all Antiquity which is most false as the defendent in a speciall booke hath sufficiently shewed made and proved a vast difference between Bishops and Presbyters and that there was ever a greater excellency and Autority in the Bishop then in Presbyters And this with an unan●mous cōsent they all agreed in till a base fellow Calvin for so he tearmed that ever to be honoured Divine rose up in an obscure corner of the World vi●lated and overtrew all order Autority in the Church and would allso have demolished the Autority of the Magistrates And then turning his speech to the Defendent unhumanly he called him Base fellow Brasen faced Fellow Base Dunce and sayd in the face of the Court That if he could not mayntayne his Episcopall Autority to be Iure Divino he would fling away his Rotchet And so concluding with those that had gone before him in his censure he sat downe in a very great fu●y and passion Af●er him came forth the Bishop of Yorke and in that numerous Assembly proclaymes That Iesus Christ made him a Bishop and the holy Ghost consecrated him and that he had not his Autority from the King for Bishops were before Kings and that Bishops held the Crownes of Kings upon their heads and so peremptorily averring that the Defendent ought to be knockt downe with club-Law for his ignorance assenting with the rest in their Censure he fell a sleep In the third place the Bishop of London advanced forwards speaking very loud and temerarious words against the Holy Scriptures saying That he had thought to have found some great Matters in the Defendents booke seeing him so confident and so peremptory but diligently reading of it he met with nothing in it but Scripture which as he sayd was the refuge of all Schismeticks Hereticks so according with his predecessors in their opinion and censure he concluded his part of speech But last of all came forth the Prelat of Canterbury who with a frontlesse boldnes avouched his Episcopall Autority preeminency over his bre●hren to be onely from God very much blaming Calvin for his fa●tious Spirit saying That their Ecclesiasticall Autority the power they exercised was from Christ Iesus and produced Timothy and Titus to prove● the same assertion and that Bishops were before Christian Kings and they held the Crownes of Kings upon their heads For no Bishop no King those that would have no Bishops sought to overthrow all Government in his censure he jumped in all things with the rest saving in the Fine which as he sayd hee thought too little and therefore ought of meere conscience as he told the other Iudges hee fined the Defendent a Thousand pounds more But he had one thing more to speake as he sayd concerning the Ch●rch of Rome and about that he resolved publickly there to declare himself in regard the Defendent had cast Chounyes book unto him in open Court and of the Synagogue of Rome he spake verie honorably affirming That shee was a true Church and that shee did not erre in fundamentall poynts and all this hee spake in that publick Sessions All which the Defendent hath