Moses c. But Couaruvias with many catholique Doctors doth avouch that doubtlesse it is an evident sign and strong presumption that in temporall matters and in civill judgements the Levites were not subject unto the High Priest but unto the temporall Prince or Judge Because when Moses by a kind of mean conveyance and resignation as Catholiques would have it transmitted or transferred his whole authority of high Priest and his attendance upon the sacred service unto Aaron yet by no meanes did he then deprive or divest himselfe of authority to judge the Priests and Levits in their temporals And from hence it is evicted that such authority was not knit by any essentiall connexion to the office of the high Priest for had it been connexed in such a manner no doubt Moses would never have so wickedly robbed and cozened Aaron of such a collop as the moety or one halfe of his authority First of all lest he should be noted to wrong his brother Aaron in so high a degree namely by stripping him of no lesse then a whole moety or one halfe of his entire charge again because exemption of Clerics being as you pretend so grounded on Gods Law Moses was to leave the whole course exercise and execution of judgement in the hand of Aaron their ordinary and competent Judge lastly because Moses thereby should have gained the more free scope and greater liberty to serve in other politick imployments and affaires But howsoever Moses was both Priest and high Priest before Aaron if so much must needs be granted yet sure it is a flat Non sequitur to inferre Therefore at one and the same instant two high Priests concurred Quoad exercitium both at once executing and exercising one and the same office For wheresoever the Scripture makes mention of the high Priest it never points out Moses for the man but Aaron as Paul speaking of the high Priest Hebr. 5. saith not Who is called of God the high Priest as Moses was called but as Aaron was called As for the Fathers whom you cite and alleadge adorning Moses with all the foresaid titles I dare take upon me to affirme they witnesse the state and condition of Moses only before the time of Aarons consecration but none of them all do qualifie Moses high Priest Quoad exercitium in point of executing of the high Priests Office after Aaron himselfe was once made and consecrated high Priest For the Church with two heads in spirituals had then bin a very Monster withall the unity of the Church and of Christ himselfe had been thereby very poorely and weakely represented but in case you are so certaine as you seem That Levits were exempted from all power and judgement of the temporall Prince in temporals what meant you to be so farre overseen as to alleadge not so much as one testimony divine or humane in demonstration thereof As I and my Authors have produced two this of Moses for one and that of Solomon 1 Reg. 2. for another Howbeit had you produced any one such testimony yet for so much as the Ceremoniall and Judiciall precepts of the old Law are now abrogated I see not how they could make any thing or stand you in any stead at all for your purpose because I require and stand upon precepts of exemption drawn from Evangelicall and not from legall grounds Hetrod What man It seemes then you purpose now to inferre there was no distinction of Court in the Primitive Church Orthod You have it right in very deed there was no distinction of Court before Justinians time he was the first who upon the humble Petition and suite of Menua Bishop of Constantinople granted that Ecclesiastics might be judged in civill causes by their Prelates Nov. constit 83. Ipso tamen non impedito provided alwaies that his imperiall prerogative thereby were not any manner of way impeached In which case and in case of criminall Delinquents he leaves Ecclesiastics under the power of the temporall Prince and of his Ministers Hetrod I thinke you dreame Orthodox at least I believe you are groslly mistaken S. Paul averres the contrary that in the Primitive Church the Bishop had his peculiar Tribunall and in his own Court gave judgement or sentence upon his ecclesiasticall Subjects I mean his Cleargy Against an Elder saith Paul receive no accusation but under two or three witnesses that is to say admit none to put in a Bill or to preferre Articles against any Priest before thy Tribunall-seat except it be Billa vera or articles verified by the depositions of two or three witnesses I can dazle your eyes with a huge cloud of Councels but I am very loth to impaire your sight a few shall suffice The Councell of Agatha in Provence thus Conc. Canon 32. Clericus nè quenquam praesumat c. A Cleric shall not presume to sue any man before a secular Judge and in case a Cleric be sued in any such Court of Record he shall not put in his answer to the Declaration in any criminall cause before a secular Judge Conc. 1. Canon 9. The generall Councell held and celebrated at Chalcedon in Bethinia before Justinian was hatcht hath decreed in these expresse words Si Clericus adversus Clericum c. If one Cleric shall have an action against another the plaintiffe shall enter his action and prosecute the suite before his own Ordinary and not before any secular Judge The third Councell at Carthage in Africa more ancient you know then the former at Agatha Canon 9. about some 130. yeares before Justitian peept out of the shell thus Item placuit c. Furthermore it is decreed that if any Bishop or Presbyter Deacon or Cleric shall decline his own competent Judge and peculiar Court or cause plea to be entered or made in any other Court of judiciall audience and preceeding he shall forfeit his Ecclesiasticall dignity or other his pastorall charge if the action be of any criminall nature or quality though the sentence doth passe for the plaintiffe in case it be a civill action he shall then pay cost and dammage yea he shall forfeit whatsoever he hath evicted by sentence of the said Court The Milenitane Councell of like antiquity to that of Carthage Can. 19. thus Placuit ut quicunque c. Wee decree that whosoever shall petition the imperiall Majesty to take cognizance of his cause for Oyer Terminer thereof in any of his Majesties imperiall Courts he shall be deprived of his ecclesiasticall Dignity Now then Orthodox upon what ground what authority what warrant dare you affirme that in the Primitive Church there was no distinction of Court and that Justinian was the first by whose constitutions it was ordained and provided that Ecclesiasticks were priviledged to have their tryals and sentences before their Prelates But in plain truth at least if you can abide to heare the truth because Iustinian was a Prince who by usurpation of more then competent
authority sought indeed to heare the causes of Ecclesiastics and thereby intruded himselfe to cut as it were their spreading Combes for that reason Menua in all submissive humility petitioned Iustinian to leave the cognisance at least of civill causes unto the Bishop to which Petition the Emperour was pleased to give both gracious care and princely grant How true it is that Iustinian usurped excessive authority it is evident by his practise for he both shufled and cut the cards he intruded himselfe to bridle the Clergy to tye and hold them short unto the stake by his Lawes as well in spirituals as temporals who so lists to read the titles De sanctit Episcop de sacro sanct Ecclesiis may clearely see the same with halfe an eye but more pregnant and positive for the purpose is the Nomocanon of Photius Howbeit you know Orthodox it is the doctrine of all Divines and Canonists yea of Couaruvias himselfe too that by Gods own word the judgement of spirituall causes belongs only to Bishops and to the highest Bishop as to the supreame Judge whereupon both before Iustinian and after the sacred Councels have debarred and restrained the clergy by expresse and peremptory inhibition from procuring any tryals before secular Judges as in the councell of Toledo besides divers other Councels it is more then manifest Perhaps Tholouse in France Can. 13. And that all the world may see the foundation which you have laid I mean that novell-constitution 83. of Iustinian to be but a rotten foundation it is much considerable that Iustinian himselfe in the very same constitution hath decreed it shall not be lawfull for the secular Judge to punish an ecclesiasticall person except first he be deprived by his own Ordinary of his Clericall dignity and thereby brought under the whip or lash of the common lawes Now if ecclesiastics be not found within the compasse and power of the common lawes before they be degraded by the Bâ—shop how shall they be judged and sentenced by any secular power so long as they are still invested with clericall dignity and holy Orders In the same constitution it is professed by the said Emperour that his lawes imperiall thinke not scorn to follow and come after the sacred Canons whereas then by the said Canons it is well and wisely decreed provided and ordered that Ecclesiasticks are to be judged by their own superiors how can the said constitution stand in force and be observed which determines the cleane contrary And now to draw the Arrow up close to the very point of the head the inconvenience of this decree made by the Emperour Iustinian seemed to the judgement of Frederick the second to be of so dangerous a straine and consequence that he repealed the foresaid law of Justinian with all other the like lawes repugnant unto the liberty of the Church for it is found in Fredericks first constitution thus recorded Sanâ— infideliam quorundam c. the pravity of certain miscreant and unjust Princes hath so disborded and over-flown the Banks that now contrary to the discipline of the holy Apostles and to the name of sacred Canons they make no bones to contrive new Statutes and to frame new lawes against Church-men and Church-liberty A little after Statuimus ut nullus c. Wee decree that none shall presume to sue any ecclesiasticall person before a secular Judge in any criminall or civill cause contrary to the imperiall constitutions and canonicall decrees and in case any suite shall be otherwise commenced or entered wee decree the plaintiffe to lose his cause and to take no benefit of the Judges order or sentence as also the Judge himselfe to be put out of the commission for Judicature Likewise the Emperour Basilius long before Frederick repealed a law made by the Emperour Nicephorus against ecclesiastics liberty with asseveration that infinite calamities like epidemicall diseases or publique ulcers and botches had runne over and infected the whole body of State and common wealth with poyson of the said pestiferous and unwholsome lawes let Balsamon upon the Nomocanon of Photius be consulted and viewed where he expounds the first Canon of the first and second Councels celebrated at Constantinople and thus much touching the authority of your great Iustinian Orthod I am not ignorant Hetrodox in whose goodly Vivaries or fresh Ponds you have taken so great paines to fish for this dish of dainty Mullets as you suppose but saving his savour with whose heifers you have thus plowed up the goodly field of the Emperour Iustinians 38. Novel the said Novell comprehends three distinct parts the first is that upon petition of Menua this noble Emperour sealed a patent and passed a most gratious priviledge for the Cleargy of this faire tenure and tenour that in matter of pecuniary causes called after the common stile civill causes Church-men might be tryed and judged by their Prelates Non ex scripto without some formall drawing of Bils Bookes or pleas except both parties agreed to have some necessary essentiall and materiall points of the case formally drawn couched and put down in writing and in case the knot or difficulty of the matter would not beare and suffer such summary decision then it should be free and lawfull for the complainants to take the benefit of civill Courts and to commence their suites before the ordinary secular Judges The Emperours own words lye penned thus Petiâ—i sumus c. Menua beloved of God Arch-bishop of this most flourishing City and universall patriarch by humble Petition hath moved our imperiall highnesse to grant unto the most reverend Cleargy this gracious priviledge that if any shall have just and lawfull occasion to sue Churchmen in a pecuniary cause he shall first repaire unto the Archbishop beloved of God as unto his Diocesan within whose jurisdiction he then liveth and inhabiteth and shall require the Archbishop to take information of the cause whereby he may merit his judgement Ex non scripto by summary proceeding without drawing of Bookes or breviats And in case the Archbishop shall undertake to proceed in such forme the Cleric shall not be molested nor drawn into any Court of civill Audience nor driven to intermit the exercises of his holy Function but rather without damages the cause it selfe shall be throughly canvased and sifted Ex non scripto Howbeit withall the said cause may be couâ—hed in written forme if the parties be willing and condescend both alike to require that course and to relinquish the other but in case for the quality of the cause or for some other emergent difficulty the Bishop beloved of God shall not be able by any meanes possible to make a full and finall end of the matter then shall it be lawfull to bring the said cause before civill Judges and Magistrates and all priviledges granted to the right reverend Churchmen preserved it shall be lawfull to implead to take examinations to make a finall end of the suite and contention in the
plaintiffs or defendants in criminall cases inhibits Churchmen to runne that course to the end they might avoid the danger of running into the state of irregularity Non permittente Episcopo when the Bishop gives no way to the said course This practise I grant is still in use and to this day goes currant But what force what vigour what sinew is in this moderne practise to prove distinction of Court in the Primitive ages and times Nay it rather inferres the contrary that doubtlesse then there was not any other Court authorized besides that of the secular and temporall Magistrate unto which in as much as Churchmen were to have recourse in criminall cases for feare of incurring irregularity the said Councell hath taken due care and order for the Bishops good care and free consent And this jarres not with my doctrine but jumpes with it hand in hand besides the said ancient Councels were called and held alwaies with consent of the secular Prince and yet all this here spoken is no demonstrative proofe of your pretended distinction 7. The Câ—non of the third Councell held at Carthage speakes not in your language affords no such matter as you insert and inferre makes no distinction of the judiciall Court It layes inhibition upon Bishops and Churchmen after the controversie once is on foot before secular Judges or christian Arbiters at no hand to cast off and relinquish the said Aâ—biters but rather to labour for the deciding and knitting up of such controversie without seeking to any other competent Judge not agreed upon by both parties to rest in their finall determination and arbitrement for the better averting and avoyding of scandall or offence For the better conceiving of this Canon it is to be understood that Christians in the Primitive Church came to agreement in certain controversies growing betwixt parties and with reciprocall or mutuall consent made choise of Infidell or unbelieving Arbiters a fault for which the Apostle Paul somewhat roundly and sharply tooke up the Corinthians in these words Secularia igitur judicia c. If then yee have judgemènts of things pertaining to this life set up such in the Church as are contemptible or at loast esteemed to give judgment I speake this to your shame is it so 1 Cor. 6. that amongst you of the Church there is not one wise man Not one that can judge the causes of Bretheren These words are not very many as all men see and yet do minister diverse matters to be considered As that Paul here speakes of secular busines and temporall causes item of such Judges as by any one might be chosen and appointed of indâ—fferent arbitrators men without any Presidentsh p or commission in tribunals or Courts for he saith Hes constituite set yee up such c. Item the Apostle speakes not of chusing and setting up Bishops in these cases but of such as were of no great ability or sufficiency for the discharging of the said good office men whom there he calls Contemptibiles men of no speciall regard or estimation of which Apostolicall text Chrysostome hath given this excellent exposition Apostoli talibâ—â— non vacabant c. The Apostles themselves never troubled their heads never busied their braines they were at no leisure to deale or to take any paines about litigious occurrents between party and party or about secular judgements their whole Ministery was imployed and spent altogether in travailing through all Nations and teaching in all places where they went but men of the more discreet sort and ranke howsoever otherwise they were men of the meaner condition and lesser merit had the managing or working upon things of that nature And so S. Gregory according to the glosse Terrenas causas examinant c. I advise that men of discretion in outward matters may fift and bolt out causes of worldly nature as for men of endowment with spirituall and heavenly gifts of another element and more transcendent efficacy and power they are not by any meanes to intangle their mindes or to be taken like wild and untame Deere in the strong toyles of terrene matters too farre out of their proper element Item S. Paul what power and authority soever he was armed withall and by some it is thought with Papall power saith not I set up or I appoint but referring such matters to the parties interessed themselves he saith see that yee set up be it your own act and ordinance Nor speakes he of Priests or of priestly orders or of Bishops but in a generall comprehension he speakes of the faithfull who had no exemption from the Princes Tribunals at least seculars according to the opinion of all were not exempted Now this was practised in Africa but whereas many Prelates Bishops and Church men when they first practised this course commenced a new course afterwards by recourse to secular and competent Judges the Councell therefore to meet with so great a mischiefe made that ninth Canon by you cited before in this tenour and stile Item placuit ut quisquis Episcoporum c. Wee moreover appoint and ordaine That whensoever a Bishop Deacon or Cleric charged with any crime and sued in any civill cause shall decline and forsake the Court ecclesiasticall or shall seeke to purge and quit himselfe in any other Court of public judgement he shall then be deprived yea though he carry the cause and winne the day by sentence of his dignity and place if the judgement be criminall but in case it be civill he shall then loose the cause if he mean to preserve and keepe his dignity For he that hath free liberty to make choise of his Judge where he lists himselfe and best likes declares himselfe to be unworthy of the ranck and fellowship of Christian bretheren when he carries a sinister partiall and prejudicate opinion of the Church not forbearing to crave the helpe and favour of secular judgement whereas the Apostle commands the causes of private Christians to be brought to the cognisance of the Church and there to have both full and finall determination which words make evident demonstration of diverse points First of all that you Hetrodox have slily sought to put out mine eye with a text or Canon of this councell which you make but a plain Curtall with a Manâ— undecently shorne with a â—â—it nose and cropt eares as if it had stood upon some Pillory lime and limping besides of the neâ—re lâ—g before Secondly That in this Canon there is no mention at all of any public Court of any competent Judge or of any Prelate but only of Arbiter Judges of seculars and of private judgement Thirdly That by the said Councell it is carefully provided and ordained that whensoever Churchmen shall give any public offence or open scandall then they are to be punished with deprivation and lossâ— of their Free-hold Fourthly and lastly that in the Canon there is couched no expresse precept or direct charge for chusing the said Arbiters when the
VII for the sins of King Boneslaus interdicted the whole Kingdome of Polonia excommunicated the King and deprived him of the Regall Title The King persisted indurate and impenitent God punished the King first by making him underprised or despised by his owne Subjects and abhorred by strangers This potion wrought not upon the King God sent a second scourge by raising Rebellion in some part of the Kingdome with great dissentions and seditions in the rest This Medicine also tooke no effect God sent a third scourge made the King runne as it were out of his wits wander thorow Woods and wild Forrests of Chase with his pack or kernell of hounds at his heeles fall downe suddenly dead and suddenly to be devoured by his owne dogs Such was the horrible end of this King for despising the Excommunication and Interdict of Christs Vicar though the King never had the heart never presumed to command the Interdict should not be observed by his people or Subjects The Emperour Ludovicus Bavarus made the same end He despised the Censures of Pope John XXII and after that of Pope Benedict XII His own horse upon a time fell upon his body by mishap and at unawares and so he suddenly dyed without anie time to be absolved of his sins and from the said Censures The same God is now that was then and of the same Omnipotencie which then he had So that if Almightie God hath so severely and rigorouslie punished those who forced not others to despise the Discipline and Censures of the Church but onely have themselves in their owne persons despised the power and Authoritie of the Keyes What marvaile if in these times present he shall punish those who not onely themselves despise the said Censures but likewise by threatning of death compell and inforce their Subjects to despise the same Let us therefore be obedient to the voice of the Holie Ghost in the Psalmes Psal Ps Ps To day if ye will heare his voice harden not your hearts and elsewhere Touch not mine Annointed and yet elsewhere Be wise now therefore ye Kings be lâ—â—â—ed ye Judges of the Earth lay fast hold on Instruction least he be angry and ye perish in the way Orthodox There speakes not an Angell but indeed the Spirit of God If you Hetrodox will lay hold on this Instruction you should be sure not to perish in the way But my Proposition you say is false because it is drawne out of false Principles which you have battered with your Pieces downe to the ground No such matter Sir they stand as firme and stedfast as ever they did There is no necessitie to make repetition of my former Defence and therefore I will hasten to make Demonstration of your Errours 1. You confound two severall Actions of great Disparitie the Action of a Superiour Judge who in the Tribunall Seate of Justice doth judge the Sentence of another Judge inferiour and subject unto himselfe to be void and of none effect and the action of a private person who thinkes and holds the same sentence of the same Judge to be of no validitie because he judges it such by certaine evidence and assurance concerning the Nullitie thereof The first Juridical Action cannot be exercised but by one to whom the foresaid Authoritie and Superioritie doth properlie belong the other Action may be exercised by anie one of mean and common judgement Now Sir the Prince of Venice doth judge esteeme and hold the Censures of his Holinesse to be forcelesse and fectlesse not as Judges Superior to the Pope in Causes of that Nature but as those to whom it is lawfull and permitted by the cleere and manifest evidence of the Fact it selfe to hold and esteeme them for no better This being lawfull for all private persons must needs be much more lawfull in Princes for the conservation of Libertie Peace and Religion in their severall States 2. Whether a Sentence be unjust and in state of meere Nullitie or no credit you say should not be given to the Delinquent or Malefactor but rather to the Judge I have not affirmed that either the one or the other should be credited For both may be interessed and blinded with passion But I onely affirme That he should be credited who discovers and manifests the truth of his Assertions by certaine and evident reasons And in so doing he doth not sin or offend because he doth not anie thing unlawfull or unpermitted Neither can anie power whatsoever controule or curbe his judgement and restraine his free opinion from affirming a thing to be certaine whensoever by the certainty and evidence of strong reasons he is induced to affirme and hold the said opinion nor the judgement or free opinion of those to whom the said certainty and evidence is apparent from affirming and holding the same opinion I say moreover that howsoever those upon whom any unjust Sentence is executed with force and violence cannot shun or avoid the execution thereof neverthelesse they may in publike declare their griefe and sorrow for such injustice and yet shall remaine quit from anie merit of blame No more are those to be blamed who lay open to the whole world the Nullity and Injustice of a Censure published when it is lawfull for them not onelie to hold and affirme the said Censure to be invalid and unjust by the cleer evidence of the Fact but also to refraine from the observation of the said Censure 3. You presume to say the Religious of Venice by departing out of the City and abandoning the same have not given any scandall to the Church or State or other private persons you shall not now heare anything of mine own invention Head or Braine but onely whaâ— with mine Eares I have heard the scandalized people not mutter and mumble betweene the teeth but manifest in bread termes of Speech The people say that some few Religions in the City should not preferre and prize their owne judgement above or before the Cathedrall Church the observance whereof was given to the Religious by the sacred Canons for a Rule of observance in the matter of Censures and should not by their Example condemne others no lesse learned and Religious then they presumed or perswaded themselves to be Secondly that little handfull of Religious forsooke the City as men ambitiously gasping after Chapters and Bishopricks to gaine and purchase grace at his Holinesse hands and not as men thinking and in truth perswaded the cause to be just on the Popes part Thirdly that whereas the Religious had been alwaies before defended protected and succoured in all their necessities by the Prince they did ill to declare themselves wanting in Loyaltie and Fidelitie to the Prince in a Temporall cause and wherein the Prince himselfe wanted neither good â—or important Reasons of State Fourthly their profession was nothing agreeable or correspondent to their Fact For they made profession to go into the most remote Regions and Countries amongst the Indians and Heretiques partly Ethmics
award the said penalties they alwaies intend it of ecclesiasticall offences that such judgements and penalties are to be passed without stâ—p or impeachment by any corporall voices and to reflect or to tend onely to the reformation of delinquents Per Paternam correctionem by a fatherly chastisement or corrâ—ction a kind of ecclesiastâ—c censure and by such like penalties which are not corporall Now Sir for as much as this distinction of delicts faults offences judgements punishments and Courts is not read in written Monuments before Iustinians time upon this ground I have affirmed and am perswaded that herein I have not plaid the blind and unskilfull Cobler in seeing beyond my Last and Latchet that no such distinction of Court for which you fight and contend with so much heat and alacrity had got any the least footing in the primitive Church And because this word Court intends or implyes the civill Court it is very certain that before Iustinian granted this gracious priviledge to the Patriarch Menua no man had recourse in the foresaid cases unto Prelates as unto publique Magistrates but only unto secular Judges It is high time now to lay open your palpable errors Hetrod Well remembred hold you to your method and therein use your best skill to turne my Argent into Subtes my Whites into Blacks Orthod My chiefest aime shall be bent unto none other white Is it not first a grosse error to wrest S. Pauls words written to Timothy with a wrench of wrong and idle supposition For you suppose that godly Timothy Lorded it in some publique Tribunall or solemne seat of judgement sitting upon offences that were not ecclesiasticall and spirituall whereas you cannot chuse but know that Paul there treats not of any judiciary forme but only of ecclesiasticall and paternall correction his words are evident Against an Elder receive no accusation but under the testimony of two or three Againe Them that sinne rebuke openly that others may fear where the word rebuke armes not young Timothy with any authority to attach the body to lay in close prison to send into banishment to condemne either to the Gallies or Gallowes but onely to give private admonition for private offences and public reproofe for public scandals The text is expounded by S. Augustine according to the glosse after this manner Aliquando debes corripere c. sometimes thou shalt rebuke him that sinneth betwix your selves in private sometimes thou shalt not spare to pay his coat as it were and to chastise him with open rebuke that others may be the more affraid to runne or to chop into the like snare S. Paul therefore in that place speakes not of any Tribunal as you very fain would make us believe but of ecclesiasticall correction proper to an Evangelâ—st and to no Judge according to the same Apostles words Improve rebuke exhort with all long suffering and doctrine do the worke of an Evangelist make thy Ministery fully known Howbeit I do not deny that mens qualities degrees and the enormities of their offences being weighed in just and equall scales it is lawfull for those unto whom authority for such purpose is deputed and committed to practise Ecclesiasticall correction cum omni imperio with all Mâ—jesty and power that is without all feare as the same Apostle speakes But whosoever shall so beare himselfe in his lawfull authority hath need to be endowed furnished besides the former qualities with all those abilities conditions complements of a good rightworthy Prelate which are mustered rancked by the same Apostle Oportet autem Episcopum esse irreprehensibilem c. A Bishop therefore must be unreproveable c. For between one that fits upon the seat of justâ—ce as a Judge upon the Bench and one that hath authority to rebuke here lyes the main odds The sentence of the Judge is profitable though the man himselfe be as bad as Barabbas but he that reproves or gives verball correction seldome or never workes any deep impression or good effect in his hearer if he teach that a man shall not steale and yet steales himselfe 2. By witnesses you understand such as are juridically to be sifted by examination deposition and such other juridicall courses of Court whereas to give a fatherly admonition or paternall correction who doth not know that a Bishops bare and simple word for such purpose is held sufficient and will serve the turne to the end he be not induced to passe against a Priest by way of correction but when with great reason his conscience is duely certified and informed that the accusation or presentment hath been materially confirmed and substantially veryfied by the testimony of two or three Thus Ambrose in the glosse to the same purpose Quoniam vero non facile c. And because accusations against Priests are not hand over head to be admitted with easy credence the crime or accusation pretended and objected must clearely be proved or in case the matter be manifest otherwise that a Priests deportment or demeanour in his orders hath been very scandalous and notoriously unreverend the Apostle layes his charge upon Timothy to rebuke the party before the face of others that others may feare to runne the like scandalous and unreverend courses which manner of proceeding is very profitable not onely for such as are in orders but likewise for the common sort of People when they shall see one of the long robe a man of such Priestly marke and ranke so roundly taken up for his misdemeanors by which the holy Father S. Ambrose meanes offeâ—ces of a conversation mis-becoming the estate condition and calling of a religious person all this tends not in any wise to point at any Court much lesse at any distinction of Court but beares a reflecting eye and gives ayme with a kind of nod and bending of the head only to paternall correction 3. You argue upon a vaine supposition that even by Pauls own testimony there it is necessary for Churchmen in all temporall causes and offences to have recourse and refuge unto the ecclesiasticall Judge that were doubtlesse to approve a distinction of Court But be not you Hetrodox wilfully blind to close or to seal up your own eyes from beholding the cleare light of truth For Canon by the helpe of your own spectacles and none other You maintain that by the same Canon Church-men are barred from the benefit of recourse unto secular Judges whereas the Councell presupposes the contrary viz. That Clerics may take the benefit of that course howsoever not before they have put in practise the meanes to have the matter taken up and ordered by their Prelate whom the Councell even by the averrement of your own mouth termes the competent Judge of their cause whereas in the text or body of that Canon Point des paroles not one such word 6. The Councell held at Agatha upon your supposition that Clerics for criminall delicts fled for their lawfull reliefe to the secular Tribunals as