for so your booke will growe to a welfauoured volume The outcrie is here for a contradiction But ye should first cléere your selfe of your own foule contradictions before committed and then obiect contradiction to the Bishop But let vs sée what a sore contradiction it is Princes can not do certaine Ecclesiasticall actions Princes are supreme gouernours in Ecclesiasticall causes Here M. St. ye labour to shew where the Bishop saith so but ye should labour to proue them coÌ„tradictionâ—… but that ye take for manifest being manifest false Neither néede there any colour to defende these sayings from contradiction for it was euen the last thing that your selfe defended in putting a difference betwene a principal gouernment of matters and that gouernment that is exercised in doyng the actions of those matters And thus easily your self reconcile this great contradiction and aâ—…were your owne argument that ye make of the Bishop sayings reasoning thus He confesseth that those actions do not belong to the persons of Princes Ergo he confesseth that Princes are not supreme gouernours to direct and ouersee them This argument your owne distinction answereth And therefore where ye lappe vp the matter saying Thus ye see M. Horne walketh like a bare footed man vpon thornes not knowing where to treade ye should remember your selfe M. Stap. that you haue walked all this while like your barefooted goose that ye spoke of before not knowing what last ye creaked The sixth Diuision MAster Feckenham offreth to sweare to obserue and performe that obedience to the Queenes hignesse now that he did before vnto Queene Mary The Bishop sheweth how therein he was forsworne as he had helped to spoyle Q. Mary of a principall parte of hir royall power so would he with no lesse disloyaltie spoile the Queenes Maiestie now M. Stapl. taking after his fashion Non concedenda pro concessis saith the othe is vnlawfull likeneth it to wicked King Herodes othe denieth this gouernment to be any part at all of the Queenes royall power and auoucheth that if the Bishop can once by any meanes proue this gouernment to be a principall parte or any parte at all of the Queenes royall power he dare vndertake that not only M. Fek. but many mo that now refuse shall most gladly take the saide othe he were surely no good subiect that would wish hir highnes any wroÌ„g To wishe wrong to any body is naught in déede M. St. worse to do it but worst of al to wish and do it against your liege and soneraigne What wrong ye wishe and do by all trecherous practises vnto the Q. Maiestie is apparant and therefore your owne iudgement be on your owne head Ye liken hir highnesse to wicked King Herode euen here present yet ye say ye wishe hir no wrong But what reasons should moue ye M. St. to thinke this open wroÌ„g no wrong Neyther can say you the maintenance of the Catholike faith wherof she beareth a title of a defender be counted any iniurie to hir highnesse neither is it to be thought but if there had bene any wrong or iniurie herein done to the Crowne some Christian Prince or other in the worlde haue ere this once in this 1000. yeres more espied it and reformed it to This later argument of former Princes is answered aâ—… large alreadie The other argument standeth on M. Stap. former presupposall that the Popes supreinacie is the Catholike faith His reason is this The maintenance of the Catholike faith is no iniurie to the Queenes Highnesse But our refusall of the othe is the maintenance of the Catholike faith Ergo our refusall of the othe is no iniurie to the Q. Highnes Here where M. St. should proue the Minor being manifest false he letteth that go presupposing it is most true and confirmeth the Maior which none denieth She beareth a Title of defender of the Catholike faith Ergo The maintenance of the Catholike faith is no iniurie to â—…ir highnesse Of this Title we spake also before onely now I note his argument that here couertly he séemeth to make thereon The Qu. highnesse Title calleth hir defender of the faith Ergo If she should also haue the Title of supreme gouernour in all causes Ecclesiasticall then were the former Title iniurie to hir highnesse But the former Title of defender of the faith can not be counted any iniurie to hir highnesse Ergo She can not haue the other Title also This bald reason standeth vpon a presupposal in M. St. head that this is a principall article of the Faith. The Pope is onely head of the Catholike church But graunt not M. St. this his faithlesse principle and he wil proue but a sielie Defender of this His simple reason The seuenth Diuision MAster Feck pretending that he was by the Bishop required prouoked to sweare refuseth that parte of the Othe that toucheth the Quéenes supremacie in the causes Ecclesiasticall vnlesse the Bishop shew him the meanes how he may sweare without periurie The Bishops answere stands on two points the one to detect his false dealing to pretende that the Bishop required the othe The other that this his refusall of the later parte of the Othe is but his nice daliance in woords hauing graunted alreadie the matter in effect The B. reasoneth thus Euery Ecclesiasticall person is called Ecclesiasticall onely in respect of ecclesiastical functions things and causes belonging to ecclesiasticall persons But ye haue graunted that the Queenes highnesse is supreme gouernour ouer al persons in hir realmes so well ecclesiasticall as temporall Ergo ye haue graunted that she is the supreme gouernour ouer them in those their ecclesiasticall functions things and causes also M. Stapletons counterblast is thréefold the first against the Bishops argument The seconde as he calleth it is an heape of vntruthes wherewith M. Feckenham is falsly charged The thirde his shamefull sclaunders that the plague was sent of God to punish the doings of the Parliament that bicause the Bishop required the Othe of D. Bonner he therfore sought his bloud That our Bishops were no Churche Bishops nor parliament Bishops neither But these too friuolous partes I omitte it sufficeth to haue quoted the slannders in their common place As for the vntruthes are answered in their proper bedroll I will answere onely now that which is materiall and that counterblasteth the argument Yet once againe saith M. St. M. Horne taketh in hande M. Feckenhams graunt which may well be graunted and by â–ª his great cunning and skilfulnesse will thereof inferre as before that may not be graunted But now he spitteth in his hande and taketh faster holde as he thinketh and seing the lightnesse of his former reason woulde nowe giue greater weight to it with a new fetche but yet as light and as weake as the other and employing manifest contradiction as before and to be answered as before For albeit a man is not called an Ecclesiasticall person but
beareth not in vayne or by some other bodily punishment may correct him if any man shall refuse to obey the Priestes sentence Therefore we denie not but that bothe before and about and after the Bishoply iudgement there are some partes of kinges but in the office of iudging kings can do more than can priuate men For either of them can bothe giue counsell and shewe what they thinke good but neither of them can define what the diuine or eccl. lawe declareth in that matter VVhiche thing thus declared let vs nowe come to the proofe of the matter it selfe All this then either néedeth none or little answere M. Saunders béeing barely anouched without any proofe to the whiche ye are not yet come but onely declare what ye will denie or graunt to Princes Your graunt we take and sée ye go not from it But will all your fellowes yea wyll your Pope him selfe graunt so muche that the Emperour shall by his authoritie appoynt the certayne place and day where and when the Bishops shal holde their Councels It was wont to be so in the olde time But will your Pope suffer this nowe and that kinges shall do the lyke in their kingdomes Nay M. Sauâ—…ders he will mislike of this and say ye graunt too large a thong of another mans leather howesoeuer you would by qualification eate your grauntâ—… agayne cleane contrarying your selfe ascribing no more to Princes than to priuate men And yet agayn you graunt that bothe of them may giue counsell and shewe what they thinke good in ecclesiasticall matters although they can not determine them Goe to master Saunders till you bring your proofes we will take this graunte also of your liberalitie that Princes may giue counsell and shewe what they thinke good A good manie of your side will not graunt so muche nor you but for a countenaunce sake neither Althoughe yée doe them open iniurie to compare them qualle beeing publique estates to priuate menne As for your determination of Gods law what you meane thereby when yée shewe your meaning playner we will aunswere to it Nowe to your proofes Master Saunders proofes in this Chapter kéepe this order first he alleageth the reasons for his partie Secondly he aunswereth oure obiections Hys firste reason is this Those things that are of God man can not dispose them otherwyse than if God gyue vnto them suche authoritie â–ª but the causes of faythe chiefly of all other are of GOD bycause faythe is the moste necessarie gyfte of GOD that no man can obtayne to him selfe by any force either of nature or arte the causes therefore of fayth can not be iudged of other than of them to whome God hath giuen that power I aunswere the partes of thys argument be true 〈◊〉 the conclusion noughte for there is more in the conclusion than in the premisses â–ª The conclusion shoulde haue 〈◊〉 Therefore 〈◊〉 can not dispose the causes of fayth otherwyse than if God giue them suche authoritie Howebeit we simply denie not M. Saunders conclusion but would haue him distinguish what he meanes by iudgeing 〈◊〉 he meane disposing causes of fayth otherwise than God hath already in his word disposed them or else his argumente hathe no sense nor sequele then the conclusion as it is not proued so is it apparant false Neyther giue we suche iudgement to Princes or to any other creature for suche power God hath giuen to none Althoughe the Popishe priestes falsly clayme suche power to dispose matters of fayth otherwyse than God disposed them But master 〈◊〉 will proue hys conclusion on thiâ—… wyse But God hath giuen suche power to certayne men and not at large to all Christian people Therefore none haue it but they The antecedent he proues from Saincte Paule Ephesians the fourth For God hathe ordeyned some Apostles other Prophets other Euangelistes other Pastors and Teachers to the ediâ—…ying of his mysticall body whiche is the Churche But other hee made as it were sheepe and lambes that they shoulde bee edifyed by their pastors and teachers and too whome their pastors shoulde attende that they should not be caried awaye with euerie blaste of doctrine by the subtiltie of man. I answere agayne as before If he meane by iudgeing â—…eaching with sounde iudgement it is true and this senâ—…ence well applyed but if he meane as his principall â—…roposition was whereon all dependes Disposing thinâ—…es of faythe otherwise Then wée denie the anteceâ—…ente and the conâ—…equence too As for thys sentence â—…roues no suche iudgement giuen to any of these persons but rather confutes it as not to edifie but to destroy and to be caried away by the subtiltie of men with euery blast of doctrine if men might dispose otherwise of fayth than God him selfe hath dispoâ—…ed Nowe vpon this sentence of S. Paule for Pastors be reasoneth thus But Pastors only iudge what is fit or not fit for the sheepe For to conclude that sheepe are indued with equal power to Pastors this were nothing else but to take away the differeÌ„ce that Christ hath set betweene the Pastors and the sheepe and the thinges that he hath distinguyshed to mingle and confounde them Kinges therefore and Magistrates if they be counted sheepe in the floâ—…ke of Christ as in deede sheepe they are iudge not togither with the Pastors The argument is thus made formall Pastors do onely iudge what is fit or not fit for the sheepe But Princes are not Pastors but sheepe of the flocke of Christ. Ergo Princes do not iudge what is fit or not fit for them The maior he proueth thus To conclude that the sheepe haue equall power with Pastors is nothing else but to mingle and confounde and take away the difference that Christ hath set betweene the Pastors and the sheepe But if Princes should iudge the sheepe should haue equall power Ergo For Princes to iudge were to mingle confound and take away the difference that Christ hath set betweene the Pastors and the sheepe First to the maior I answere he siftes the similitude of a shepherde and shéepe too narrowe For although in some resemblaunces it holde yet is it not simply true that the Pastor onely iudgeth what is fitte or not fitte for this kinde of sheepe He him selfe confesseth before and after agayne confesseth that the priuate man or Princes may giue counsell and priuate iudgement And S. Paule speaking not of the pastor but of the spiritual man that is of the sheepe of God sayth Spiritualis omnia iudicat the spiritual man iudgeth all thinges And Christe biddes the people beware of false prophets which can not be without iudgement Neyther is this sufficient proofe of the maior that he alleageth to contende that the sheepe hath equal power is to confounde Christes distinction Wée graunte this it were so But this wée denie that héereby the sheepe is made to haue equall power For the iudgement of the pastor is one thing
vvith all eloquence and learning he set foorth against Horne the false Bishop of VVinchester So stornfully this rayling Papiste speaketh of the Bishop and so he braggeth of his fellowes lerning and eloquence All whiche considered I thought it necessarie and more than high tyme to answer these proude Phariseis least the goodnesse of the cause should become distrusted the truth suspected the Prince slaundered the Bishop defaced the enimie encouraged the godlie offended the simple abused and the whole estate euill spoken of by too muche vnfrutefull silence and ouerlong suffrance of such false and glorious pratlers And although for these causes I was the willinger to sette it foorth yet was I the more emboldned on the request of diuerse that hearing I had trauailed in it by their godlie persuasions vrged me the more thereto The chiefe of the Argument consisteth on the Supreme gouernement of Christian Princes in causes Ecclesiasticall The occasion sprang of a controuersie betweene the Bishop of Winchester and master FeckenhaÌ„ about the Oth of the Supremacie All which is extant abroade in a learned and pithie booke of the Bishops answering to maister Feckenhams scruples The issue they draue the matter vnto was this that maister Feckenham must be resolued for the Princes Supreme Gouernement in Ecclesiasticall causes by any of these foure meanes the Scripture the Doctours the Councels or the Practise The Bishop accepteth the offer and maketh proofe of the Princes Supreme gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes not onely by any one but by euery one of all these forsayd poyntes as the Bishops booke is euident to testifie Maister Feckenham that had made his promise to take the Oth vponany of these proues and seing them all beyond his cunning and expectation proued but neither mynding to keepe touche nor able to answere suborneth a chapman from beyond the seas to wit this Louanist maister Stapleton if he may be called Maister for order of schole degree that is suche a renegate from God and runnagate from his Prince who to saue maister Feckenhams honestie if he woulde aduenture to relieue his cause master Feckenham should to saue his credite vouchesafe to relieue his neede Master Stapleton hauing better furniture of sale eloquence than store of grounded learning and yet more learning than grace well to imploy it in acknowledging the manyfest truth taketh vpon him to aunswere the Bishop and deuides all the matter into foure Bookes whereof this is the fyrst that here is answered This doone he conceiueth suche apride of this his exquisite piece of worke that we must needes haue some fyne new name for this fyne newe booke singular heads ye know must haue singular inuentions and bicause the Bishops name is M. Horne he entitleth his worke forsooth a Counterblast And yet somwhat truer than he himselfe wist beeing in deed a blast scarce worth a Counter if the reader well examine it And that ye maye the better perceiue this volume deserues so rare a name for these two rare gifts eloquence and learning for which maister Sanders so highly extolleth him Mulus mulum scabit And sith these two champions beare now the bell for eloquence among the Papists the one for English the other for Latine I haue sorted maister Stapletons eloquence by it self consisting on certain CoÌ„mon places folowing that we may the easier iudge of the substance of his learning whiche otherwise we should not so well discerne it is so poudred with his eloquence His eloquence I confesse I haue sayde but little vnto nor can say muche nor would say ought vnto it as one that neuer was trained vp in the scholes and arte therof As for maister Stapleton goeth beyond maister Saunders and withoute all comparison is an A perse Doctor in it and therfore I set it asyde the better to viewe the learning to the whiche I had more especiall regarde for when all is done the Eloquence settes it out but the Learning proues the matter And though it be not replyed vpon with suche learning as many other better coulde that rather shoulde haue doone it yet haue I endeuored truly simply and playnely to answere it and I hope to the coÌ„tentation of the modest Reader that rather respecteth the boulâ—…ing out of the truthe the staye of his conscience and the glorie of God than either the estimation of learning or the shewe of eloquence Nowe although the Supremacie be the principall matter yet the importunitie of maister Stapleton hath once or twice caried me perforce away with him to purge our selues of certain auncient Herekes that he layeth to our charge and crieth so faste vpon vs for answere and sayeth we styll slinke from it as though we hearde it not and therefore I haue here at large made aunswere to it which makes the volume aryse the bigger In somuche that I thought for all maister Stapletons exclamations to haue lefte it out or put it in one of his Common places But that Maister Saunders commeth rufflyng in wyth the like argument and therefore I lette it stande as it did And I truste I haue cleerely disburdened vs and iustly burdened them therewyth tyll they shall be hable to discharge themselues therof I desyre good Reader but euen indifferencie in thy iudgement Last of all since Master Sanders hath compiled his great volume of the Popes Uisible Monarchie in the secoÌ„d book wherof he entreth into this argumeÌ„t of the Princes Supremacie I haue chosen out of the second booke 4. chapters of the state of the Ciuil and Ecclesiastical power in the Original in the Use and End of both of the Interest and superioritie of either state chiefly of that he would not only defeate the Prince of all gouernment in matters Ecclesiasticall but also clean dispossesse hir Maiestie of hir Crowne For maister Saunders to mayntein the trecherous fact of Pâ—…us the fift the last Pope if Cardinal Bon Compagnion Pope Good fellowe as the talke wente be not deade woulde proue that Bishops may depose their Princes and assoyle their subiectes from their allegeance Whiche poyntes as they draw nerest to the present argument and in deed are for learning suche learning as it is the principall pointes of all his volume I thought good to ioyâ—… them vnto Stapleton and so in one answer answere both though both be answered seuerally as they drawe neere or farre in resemblance or varietie of Argument example or similitude aboute this matter Wherein what is doone I committe vnto thee good Christian Reader to iudge as God shall moue thy heart and besecche thou him to moue it to the best That the truth may appeare that the falshode may be detected that thou mayst be edified that the Prince may be obeyed that the Gospel maye be prospered and that God aboue al things may be glorified nowe and for euer Amen Master Stapletons common places THat all master Stapletons whole volume as well therein himselfe termeth it a Counterblast is indéede but a verie blast blowne out to encounter the
replie vvill declare Hovv vvell so euer he hath played his partes full ilfauoredly you begin to plaie yours M. Stap. thus to wrangle about the partes of opponent and answerer The B. playeth not the opponent but you playe the Marchant The B. not in playe but in truth good earnest as M. Feckenham pretendeth to 〈◊〉 requireth to be satisfied answereth to his requestes by the foresayde proues that here ye confesse he bringeth forth The partie opponent as in the other scruples still is M. Feckenham But be he opponent or defendaÌ„t as either of theÌ„ in respects may be either if he bring those proues that ye graunt he doth ye haue litle occasioÌ„ to make a playe scoffe at the matter Neither doth this blemish the truth froÌ„ whom he had it wher with ye would séeme as it were with an awke blowe to foyle the B. learning that he founde out these prooues not all by his owne studie but by the helpe of his friends Which as you M. Stapleton for your owne parte were faine to confesse right now so is there no cause ye should measure the Bishops knowledge by your owne defecte But herein ye do but as the residue do this is the fashioÌ„ of all your coÌ„péeres Where truth faileth you â–ª at the least to winne a credite of learning to your selues like prowde Pharisies ye dispise al other besides your selues To which purpose as M. Stapl. would staine the Bishops godly and learned labour herein at the least that all might not séeme to be his owne but gathered by others to his hands so in the telling of his owne well ordered péece of worke he setteth out euery point to the vttermost to coÌ„mende the better vnto vs his great learning industrie and perspicuitie He telleth vs solemnly how to the first parte he replieth in three bookes how he hath deuided eche booke into seuerall chapters what he hath noted at the toppe of eche page But he telleth not what common places he hath set out in eche line He telleth how he hath exceedingly lightned the matter and what recapitulations he hath made thereof To the second parte he telleth vs it shall appeare but when he telleth vs not both what strong and inuincible arguments M. Feknam right learnedly proposed as most iuste causes of his said refusall And also vvhat â—…ely shiftes and miserable escapes M. Horne hath deuised to maynteine that obstinately vvhich he once conceaued erroneously And thus forsoothe nothing to the prayse and setting forth of him selfe M. Feckenham nor to the blemishing of his aduersarie hath M. Stapleton deuided the content of the Bishops answere and his counterblast thereto Now thinking with this preiudice of both their labours he hath sufficiently affectionate the Reader to his partie thirdly he entreth into a generall fore warning of him the effect whereof is to forsake this religion which he beginneth with this earnest adiuring of him Novv good Reader saith Master Stapleton as thou tendrest thine owne saluation â–ª and hopest to be a saued soule in the ioyful and euerlasting blisse of heauen so consider and vveigh vvith thy selfe the importaunce of this matter in hande What hope of saluation M. St. can the Popish doctrine bréede that alwayes doubteth as much of damnation as it hopeth of saluation haÌ„geth wauering betwene dispayre hope admitting no certentie of faith or trust to grouÌ„de vpoÌ„ The attenâ—…ion that ye desire in the Reader we as earnestly desire the same also neither that he come to reade attentiuely with any preiudicate opinion on either parte as you would haue his minde foresâ—…alled on your side but euen with indifferencie as he shall finde the matter in hande to leade him so to weigh and consider the importance thereof euen as he tendreth and verely hopeth his ovvne saluation And as the Reader shall do this for his parte so let vs sée how you do for yours and of what great importance your arguments are to sturre vp this earnest attention in the Reader The first argument that ye make is this First vvithout authoritie is no religion Then if this Religion vvhereby thou hopest to be saued haue no authoritie to grounde it selfe vppon vvhat hope of saluation remayning in this religion canst thou receyue Now as though the Maior were in controuersie and the pointe we sticke vpon he first solemnely strengthneth it with the authoritie of S. Augustine For no true religion saith S. Augustine can by any meanes be receaued vvithout some vvaightie force of authoritie As for the Minor which determineth nothing but hanging on a conditionall pinne maketh no directe conclusion too or fro We graunt him that iâ—… our religion haue no authoritie no hope of saluation can be grounded thereon But then he replieth If it haue any authoritie it hath the authoritie of the Prince by vvhose supreme gouerment it is enacted erected and forced vpon thee other authoritie hath it none Ergo For want of sufficient good authoritie it is no true Religion Ye desired right now M. St. euen as the Reader tendreth his ovvne saluation to consider and vveighe vvith him self the importance of this matter And is this all the importance of your first argument against our Religion that the Reader should weigh coÌ„sider so déepely What is here alleaged besides a bolde and manifest slaunder forced vpon the Reader by the authoritie onely of your bare woorde Which the more the Reader shall consider and especially thus your beginning for an handsell of good lucke to the residue he shall the better perceaue the falshood and impudencie of your whole cause dealing For to set one If against another If the reader better coÌ„sidering weighing with himself shal finde this religioÌ„ not to be of so late enacting erecting forcing but enacted erected and forced of God in his holy woorde shall not this coÌ„sideration detect you to be a malicious slauÌ„derer if the reader with al shall vveigh the peise of your argument that the Prince hath a supreme gouernment in all Ecclesiasticall causes Ergo the Religion that the Prince sets forth hath noâ—…e other authoritie but of him shal be not finde it like the father of it as light as a thing of nought But exhorting the Reader to vveigh and consider the matter not considering nor vveighing what ye say your selfe ye blunder on in your Ifs and say If then that supreme gouernment that hauing none other authoritie enacteth erecteth and forceth a Religion vpon thée be not due to the laie Prince but to the spirituall Magistrate and to one chiefe Magistrate among the vvhole spiritualtie thou â—…eest thy ReligioÌ„ is but a bare name of religion and no religion in deede Here whether he be ashamed to set it downe or thinketh it so cléere it néedeth not recital but is inferred of the Maior he leaueth out the Minor of his argumeÌ„t But that supreme gouernment is due to one chiefe spirituall magistrate only and to
particulers but neither to nor fro ye proue any one so that he that woulde rebate them againe particulerly might as easily improue them all if with a contrarie if he denie them euery one And if it be so say you then â—…c and if it be not so maye be say so then and so verâ—…a vice And what is this but mock-holiday with the reader whome ye desire to marke you so attentiuely and here is no proofe at all to marke Besides that all these iffs stande on your former wrong principle that supreme gouernement and may be all answered with one if if not the prince in déede but your pope claymeth that supreme gouernment then the othe from the prince as clayming another maâ—…er of supreme gouâ—…rnement is frée from all these absurdities and they onely light on your popes pate that exacteth the same And so must they stande by your owne confession till ye proue that supreme gouernment and these absurdities to make against the prince Yes say you that I do for it followeth immediately That al these absurdities and manie yet more vvhich to auoyde prolixitie I here omitte do hereof depende this replie gentle reader abundantly proueth Whie is this proofe ynough M. St. hauing made so solemne and full a conclusion agaynst our religion the princes supreme gouernment and the othe and will your reader as he hopeth his saluation to marke howe ye proue the importance of your matter And hauing alledged many bitter things when you should come to the proofe of any one thing to prooue nothing but onely tell him yâ—… proue it in your replie and clawing him with the smooth title of gentle reader do ye thinke he can be so satisfied Now sâ—…rely then he might be a gentle reader but he should not be a verye wise reader that woulde thinke this were ynough to answere the hope of his saluation But ye say ye omit the declaration of the proues here to auoyde prolixitie Why auoyde ye not then here such prolixitie also in making your solemne conclusions and reserue them as were more couement to their conuenient places where ye saye ye haue shewed them What néede ye néedelesâ—…y babble of them here or whie maye not I reiecte the answere of them to the place of answere which ye referre vs vnto and there a goâ—…s name let the reader vveigh them In the meane season I answere if with if if nothing hereof be hitherto proued â—…ut is to be proued hereafter in your replie then for any absurditie here concluded the othe is to be taken the princes supreme gouernment is good and lawfull and your owne arguments fond kind of reasoning to conclude simplie on coÌ„ditionals to auoid prolixitie by long vain babling to craue the readers diligent vveying and to bring no proofe the vveight of a straw these are the most absurdities that the reader as yet can finde The like are your vaine crakes that ye beare â—…he reader in hand withall how ye haue euidently proued the primaâ—…ie of the B. of Rome not only in England before and since the conquest but throughout all Christendome as well the east as the vvest Church euen by the authours 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—… 〈◊〉 to the contrarye and howe ye haue proued the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first general councels many nationall besides in Spaine Fraunce and Germanie And nothing is pronounceâ—…â—…y theÌ„ 〈◊〉 the princes supreme gouernment in matters ecclesiastical And here breathing your self as though you 〈◊〉 all 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 as ye beast it is novâ—… thy part 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you not to shut thine eies against the truth so clearely shining before thy face What soft M. St. the Sun shineth not in your Hemisphere as yet Ye are earely vp neuer the nearer Ye haue told the reader his dutie alredie to vveigh coÌ„sider vvith himself the importance of the matter in hand as he hopeth to be a saued soule tendreth his owne saluation This is a sore coniuration and requires that he be not moued lightly with any preiudice or affection nor caried about with euery wind on credite of your word Soft a while till he shall sée these things ye boast of they are not yet in hand when they shal come to hand then giue him leaue to trie view them oâ—… what side he shall find the truth to shine clearely before his face to that part he should open his â—…ies his eares and hart also and shut them to that partie that he shal find loue darknesse can not abide the cleare shining beames of the truth to lighteÌ„ direct him But as though ye had woon the reader already and had determined before hand which is the truth Against the vvhich truth say you bicause master Hornes ansvvere is but as it vvere a vaine blast the confutation of that ansvvere to auoide confusion of replies vvherof so many and diuers haue of late come forth I haue termed for distinction sake a CouÌ„terblast Whatsoeuer the B. answere is the readers attention hitherto séeth nothing in you but vaine wordes and a vaine title of a vaine booke to come as he maye hitherto iudge procéeding of a vaine head to shewe a finer vaine than your fellowes haue Your fetch is in this your vainglorious title to gyrde at the B. name whereat diuerse tymes ye lykewise scoffe as though an other â—…oulde not descant a like on yours But this vaine dealing as it may perhaps delight â—…oad on such as your selfe and yet â—…erchaunce the indignitie of your behauiour against though your aduersarie yet farre your better and your mâ—…lapert arrogancy in aduauncing of your selfe may lose ye some credite with other your friendes nothing 〈◊〉 the Bishoppâ—… nor impeacâ—…eth the cause that the B. defoÌ„deth so the iâ—…different reader betwene both reading both will no doubt regard more the force or weaknesse of your arguments than estéeme the iolitie of your fresh title or feare the boysterousnesse of your Counterblast so conferring the one with the other will iudge as he findeth cause Neither wil the aduised reader be moued with your flattry saying And novv gentle reader most earnestly I besech thee of all other articles that be this day ouer all christeÌ„dom coÌ„trouersious through the great temeritie of selfe vvilled heretiks raised vp most diligeÌ„tly to labor and trauail in this of the supremacie as being such that to say the truth â–ª in effect all other depend vpoÌ„ You besech the reader so 〈◊〉 M. St. that he shold do but well to grauÌ„â—… your vown How be it there are many other articles of nâ—… lesse coÌ„trouersie betwene vs his day far more subtile dauÌ„gerous Neuertheles it shal be necessary for the reader most diligeÌ„tly to labor trauail in this of the supremacie as a mother in déede to the most of your popish errors so the reader shal espie your selfe to be one of those self vvilled heretiks And that for al your earnest beseching him to trauell
conclusion to make the sequele more dreadfull that after diuerse reconciliations with the Romaine Sea they fell into the Turkish captiuitie Why may it not as well be noted thereon that they neuer came into this extreme flanery of the Turke but their Empire continued aboue 1000. yeares till after those their reconciliatioâ—… made with the Pope then within 14. yeares they fell in the Turks captiuitie But of this more hereafter From the Gréek and â—…ast Church he procéedeth to the Affricanes making the like argument on them But to answere him briefly To reason thus from the vnitie of the Romaine Sea in fayth then to the obedience of the Romaine Sea in the supremacie nowe euery scholer will some say is a very good non seqâ—…tur The like common fallace à non causâ—… vt causâ—… he maketh of Hungarie and Lifelande fallen into the handes of the Turkes and Moscouites Bicause sayth he they forsooke the Pope and fell to Luther But if this argument be good demaunde of him how 〈◊〉 the â—…hodes Belgradum Buda and other cities and parts in Austria which likewise the Turk hath gotten be cleane forgetten here of him and not reckened vp in this number was it bicause they acknowledged none more than the Rhodians the Popes supremacie and yet fell into the Turkishe captiuitie so well as the other At the length he 〈◊〉 home to Englande and when he should here make the full conclusion of all these lamentable sequeles of reâ—…olt from the Romaine Sea in other Countreyes that the lyke shoulde lyghte on vs séeyng that his argumente contrarie to hys long and wycked hope doeth fayle in the conclusion least eyther hée shoulde shewe the follie of hys impertinent argumentes or vtter the vnnaturall malice that for his Pope and popishe religion he hath fostred long in his cankred breast agaynst his naturall prince and Countrey he turneth the Catte into the Panne not by concluding hys argument on the lyke issue to Englande but rawly and generally knitteth vp the matter thus But vvhat vvas the issue all the vvorlde knovveth and Englande the more pitie greeuously feeleth To this M. Stap I answere Thanks be giuen to God no suche isâ—…ue as you would conclude of other Countreys from errors and the Turke to vs It is you that abhorring the Gospell more than Turkerie feele this gréefe ye speake of for that your sequele holdeth no better in Englande Englande neither feareth the Turkes nor these your byous threates and would to God no parte of Christendome euen of those that you accounte moste Popishe catholike were no more subiecte to the inuasion and daunger of the Turkishe barbarous and Saraâ—…ins irruptions and tyrannie than Englande is and yet if God shoulde punishe any parte of Christendome by them though he vse by his secret Iustice their furie as a rodde to scourge their offences yet will not we nor may iustly make suche tragicall sequeles reasons to argue pro or contra on Religion as here you doe by these peoples to conclude agaynst vs But prayses be to God you can conclude nothing Englande euer since that through the Quéenes most excellent maiestie it hath enioyed the libertie of Gods moste holy worde hath maâ—…ger all your spites reioyced withall bothe tranquillitie wealth peace fréedome and aboue all things the fauour of God in Christ euen for that it hath escaped the spirituall bondage of your Pope farre worse than the bodily captinitie of the Turke God continue his mercy to vs and make vs thankfull for it Nowe since ye can not fasten any such sequele as ye wishe on Englande ye gather petite quarels and like a poâ—…her seeke corners to finde out some inconueniences not worthy answere And yet bicause ye resume them often times after and make muche ado about them as reading the Byble and other bookâ—…s suppressing Abbeys marriage of Priests oirginitie vovves no Church Byshops but Parliament Byshops the sacrament of the altare c. they are answered where ye handle them at large and not here whereye snatch at them Onely this your grosse lie I will note here about king Henries lawes Bicause ye cite it not that I remember any more Ye say that after his death and in the minoritie of his sonne king Edvvarde all the lavves that he had made touching matters of religion sauing against the supremacie vvere repelled and abolished What a manifest and impudent lie is this King Henrie besides the supremacie made lawes for the abolishing of shrines and pilgrimages of pulling downe Images of depressing popish sectaries Monks Friers Numies Heremits Anachores c. Were these lawes repelled and abolished after his death in the minoritie of king Edwarde Shewe it or else wipe your lippes for a foule lie hath beslabbered them Master Stap. All these former arguments and these extrauagant discourses consist on a wrong principle All this haue I spoken sayeth he to shevve it is most true that I haue sayde that there vvill neuer be redresse of error and heresie or any stay vvhere men are once gone from the vnitie of the Sea Apostolike vvhich is the vvell spring and fountaine of all vnitie in the Catholike fayth This false principle if we denie it him then all his arguments of absurdities and euents theron are not worth a rush But had he put in but one letter more and for vnitie had sayd vanitie it had bene a most true principle nor we woulde or coulde haue euer denyed the same The last reason of his Preface to leaue a pricke of discredite agaynst the Protestants in the readers minde is of our discorde and inconstancie in this question the assumption whereof being in déede nothing but slaunders of the prince the Realme and diuerse Godly learned men is partly sette out in his common place of slaunders and partlye shall be further particulerly aunswered as they come to hande in the booke where he discourseth on them Thus much for the pithe of all his argumentes conteyned in hys Preface to the Reader to winne hys minde to hys cause before hande and alienate it from ours but the wyse Reader wyll first reade or euer he giue his iudgement The answere to M. St. Counterblast on the Bishops Preface The first Deuision IN his answere to the B. Preface whereas the Bishop in the first Deuision for so M. Stapleton termeth euery seuerall portion that he answereth vnto sheweth the necessarie reasons that moued him to answere Master Feckenhams booke and the couert meaning of master Feckenham in secretly scatering his booke abroade that therein he shewed a further meaning than he durst plainely vtter and that the intent of the booke as might iustly be gathered was to engraft in the mindes of the subiects a misliking of the Q. maiestie as though she vsurped a power and authoritie in ecclesiasticall matters whereto she had no right to slaunder the whole realme as though it were estraunged and directly agaynst the Catholike Church tenouncing and refusing to haue communion therewith
markes and haue al mens eyes fixed theron your selfe not fixing your owne eyes on the very marke set vp betwéene them graunt that the B. hitte at the full that which he shot vnto Which graunted the arrow so reboundeth on you your cause that it quite ouerturneth both But M. St. hauing now espied that he hath graunted that which he sawe aâ—…nswereth sufficiently M. Feck issue and also confoundeth these new and false principles and yet he could not for shame playnly recaÌ„t nor reuoke his grauÌ„t he first begiuneth â–ª to pinch nip it saying it is true princes may haue dealing in eccl. matters but in some meaning by whiche some meaning what he meaneth as he dare not here for shame vtter so he quickly slippeth froÌ„ it telling vs it reacheth not home and that the B. doth but face and bragge thinking euery man borroweth of his coÌ„mon places And so to knit vp with his own words is much labour vainly and idelly employed with â—…edious and infinite talke and babling al from the purpose and out of the matter which ought specially to haue bene iustified not in stead thereof to detayne and delude the reader with these newe sixe markes and false presupposed principles The third part of this diuision is his quarelling with the B. for saying he made proofe euen by many Papists them selues Which part he distributeth into thrée members the first he calleth in the margent the vneuen dealing of the Protestants the secoÌ„d a chalenge to M. Horne and the third M. Hornes tale incredible First for the vneuen dealing of the Protestants Now is it worthy saith M. St. to see the ioly pollicie of this man and how euen and corrâ—…spondent it is to his fellow Protestants M. Iewell restrayneth the Catholikes to sixe hundreth yeares as it were by an extraordinarie and nevv found prescription of his owne embarring al latter profes yet he him selfe in the meane tyme runneth at large almoste one thousande yeares later shrynking hether and thither taking tagge and ragge Hereâ—…ike and Catholike for the fortifying of his false assertions When ye haue proued the B. of SaruÌ„ his assertions false then cal them so for before while ye complayne of the Protestantes vneuen dealing ye shal shew most vneuen dealing in suche a Papist as your selfe As with all you shew your ioly Logike that you crake so much vpon how euen correspondent it is to reason M. â—…uel restrayneth the Papists to 600. yeres to proue their articles by Ergo he can not confute their articles with their own coÌ„fessions that are of later yeres As for the tag and rag and mag too that he hath improued them withall be euen them selues their owne ragged rabbines and tagged scholemen be they heretikes or be they catholikes But be they as ye please to call them dothe the limitation of your proues restrayne his improues What if he improued your articles euen by your own mouthes who are now oxtant might it be lawfull for you to câ—…yne yet more newe articles and to alledge proues for them of your own time bicause he confuteth them by proues of your owne tyme this belike were euen dealing with you to let you haue so large scope to proue articles as the improuer may haue to confute theÌ„ But as it is good reason ye should for the profe of your articles be content for shame with so large a scope of 600. yeres nexte after Chrisâ—…e so haue ye accepted thys limitation already and M. Harding your standard bearer your selfe with many of your partners haue vndertaken to bring foorth your proues according to that restraynt of 600. yeres How ye haue done it Scripture as they say maketh mention let the readers iudge Belike your selues doubt of those proues and therfore groyne now at length to be so restrayned for your proues and fayne woulde haue a larger scope saying this is an extraordinarie and nevve founde prescription of his ovvne embarring all later prooues it goeth harde with you he like that ye whine now so fast at that which ye receiued so lustily to soeme to and craked vpon before and now that ye can not proue any one of your articles in all that terme of 600. yeares â–ª ye coÌ„playne of vneuen dealing But what if ye had bene restrayned to the time of the primitine church ye would then haue made an outcrie and yet it had bene requisite that for articles of faith religion ye should not refuse to be restrayned euen to Chryst his Apostles And least ye should thinke we deals vneuenly with you wheras you for to proue those articles of your religion haue the scope of 600. yeres next after christ limit you vs for any one articls of our fayth or religion euen to the time of Christ and his Apostles abode on earth So farre within 600. that we wil proue it euen within sixe score yea within sixe yeres if ye wil. So little haue ye any iust cause to complayne of vneuen dealing â–ª But let goe this your fonde quarell agaynst the B. of Sarum and preserute your argument from him to the B. of Winchester your aduersarie This vvise trade say you this man keepeth also and to resolue M. Feck and settle his conscience he specially staieth him selfe vpon Platina Nauclerus Vâ—…spergensis Sabellicus Aeneas pius Volateranus Fabian PolychronicoÌ„ Petrus Bertradus BeÌ„no the cardinal â–ª DuraÌ„dus â–ª Paulus Emilius Martinus Penitentiarius Polid. Ver. and such like as he him selfe declareth other where and in this place also confesseth Now albeit the catholiks refuse no catholik writer nor in this matter haue cause so to do yet in a matter of such importaÌ„ce vvhich besides the losse of all temporall reliefe and besides bodily death importeth also euerlasting damnation to the catholikes if the case so stande as M. Horne and his fellowes beare vs in hand reason vvould he should haue fetched the substance of his profes much hier yea within the. 600. yeres whervnto they strayne and binde vs The effect of al this is that as the B. of Sa. hath done the B. of Wint â–ª must do the like or else they disagrée and is contriued in this argumeÌ„t If the B. of Saâ—… would haue the papists to proue those their articles vvithin the boundes of 600. yeres then should the B. of Winchester in this so 〈◊〉 an Article fetche the substance of his proufes vvithin those boundes But the B. of Winchester doth not this but to resolue M. Feckenâ—…am and setle his conscience stayeth him selt vpon Platina Nauclerus Abbas Ursperg Sabellicâ—… c. all popish and late writers Ergo Their doings are not euen and correspondent To this I answere no parte of this argument is true neither Maâ—…or Minor nor Conclusion The sequence of the Maâ—…or followeth not bicause the B â–ª of Sarum and the B. of Winchesters cause and occasion were nothing a like The Minor being of two partes both are false For first he fetcheth the
Legates of the sea of Rome as the chiefe principall sea of Christendome Ergo We now in all our disputations of causes Ecclestastical especially concerning the supremacie should acknowledge the Pope by his Legates to be president thereof This argument followeth not M. Stapl. reasoning from that tune to this from their requiring to our submission from Aphrike to England from presence to presidence from certaine questions to all questions from matters of saithe to these in hande which your selfe say are nons From the chiefe and principall sea then to the vniuersall supremacie that the Pope claymeth now in all which pointes there is no sequele and therefore your argument is starke naught nor all your vayne excuses will hide their frowarde disobedience or strengthen the weaknesse of their naughtie cause in the saide disputation But let vs now saith M. St. returne to M. Horne for these matters were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 M. Stapleton looked quite besides his marke The third Diuision THe third Diuision sheweth the cause and occasion why M. Feck deliuered this his treatise to the Bishop not as he pretendeth to be resolued at the Bishops handes for he had sayd before that the matter it selfe was grounded here pointyng to his brest that shall neuer go out But beyng charged of the B. herefore that he had neither conscience nor constancie M. Feckenham shewed and deliuered this his treatise to the B. to shew what he had suffred for the same and how it was grounded and setled in him long before Which argueth first his falshood in pretending to haue offred the booke before to the B. as scruples by him to be resolued in And also his furder falshood in setting forth of his owne bald resolutions to his scruples vnder the B. name To the former parte M. Stapleton replieth it is an vnlikely tale and referreth it to his score of vntruthes Where it is answered vnto The later parte for the resolutions he leaueth it to a place more apropriate where the matter shal be more conueniently and more fully discused And this is all that he saith for the cléering of M. Feckenhams false title The fourth Diuision MAster Feckenham in the beginning of his treatise propounding one chiefe purpose and entente as he saithe of this Othe to be for a more sauegarde to be had of the Queenes royall person and her highnesse most quiet and prosperous raigne Offreth to sweare thus muche that her Highnesse is the onely supreme gouernour of this Realme and of all other her Highnesse dominions and Countries according as the expresse woordes are in the beginning of the sayde Othe And offreth yet furder to sweare That her Highnesse hath vnder God the souerainetie and rule ouer all manner of persons borne within these her Highnes realmes of what estate either Ecclesiasticall or Temporall soeuer they be To this the B. of Winchester answereth that this beyng one chiefe entent of the Othe as is graunted whosoeuer denieth the chiefe parte of the Othe what soeuer in wordes he pretende in his deedes denieth withall the chiefe entent therof But M. Feckenham doth thus Ergo How soeuer by woordes he would seeme to tender her Maiesties safetie his deedes declare his meanyng to be cleane contrarie The Minor that M. Feck denieth the principall parte of the Othe he proueth thus The principallest parte of the Othe is the Q. Highnes supremacie in causes Ecclesiasticall so well as Temporall but about this M. Feck dalieth with dominions and persons denieth the causes which is the matter it selfe wherein the gouernance doth consist Ergo He denieth the chiefest parte of the Othe The Maior that the gouernance in Ecclesiasticall causes is the chiefest thing that the Othe doth purporte is euident The Minor as it appereth by this nice daliance of M. Feck so the B. furder proueth it by this his treatise by his deepe sighes grones desiring a change and ascribing to the Pope this principall parte of the Othe M. St. to counterblast these the B. arguments bloweth apace with bothe his chéekes With the one breathing out dispitefully all riffe raffâ—… that he coulde gleane togither to deface as he thought the protestantes with disobedience With the other he laboreth to qualifie the disobedience of the Papists namely of M. Feckenham But before these two partes wherein the most of his replie consisteth he prefixeth yet one page declaring first that this parcell of the Othe is no parte of the Princes royall power and wherefore the Papists refuse the same First saith he There haue bene many kings in this realme before our time that haue raigned vertuously quietly prosperously most honorably and most victoriously which neuer dreamed of this kinde of supremacie and yet men of such knowledge that they could soone espie wherein their authoritie was empayred and were of such courage and stoutnesse that they would not suffer at the Popes handes or at any other any thing done derogatorie to their Royall power This argument standeth vpon the opinioÌ„ of Princes heretofore and is framed thus What soeuer the noble and prosperous Kinges to fore tooke to be so or tooke not to be so the same was and is so or was not and is not so But many noble and prosperous Kings heretofore tooke this kinde of supremacie to be no parte of their royall power Ergo It was not nor is any parte thereof The Maior which God wote is very fonde and weake he would furnishe and strengthen with their wisedome and stoutnesse if it had bâ—…ne iniuriouâ—… to their authoritie they were so wise they could soone espie it were so stoute they would not suffer it But who seeth not that they could not very soone espie it in that palpable darknesse of poperie and that worldly politike wisedome is no good proofe of soone espying the spirituall wisdome of God and his worde and of their dutie in setting forth thereof This knowledge was not so clerely espied then as thanks be to God now it is being pulled froÌ„ vnder the bushell wherewith it was couered and the Angel of darknesse being stripped out of that shape of the Angell of light that when he was cladde withall be bleared many wise Princes eyes And though many of them were coragious stoute yea espied to what belonged vnto them attempted also to get it yet who seeth not that the Popes tirannie ouermatched them And yet suche Princes were there many wise stoute and vertuouse that dreamed not as you say but well saw this their authoritie and tooke it on them and withstood the Popes vsurpation Which improueth your Maior that ye would séeme to cary away so cléere And withall ouerturneth your argument by the like Some Princes thought it was no parte of their royall power Ergo it was not Some Princes thought it was parte of their royall power Ergo it was Neyther of these argumentes ye sée doth holde for still the matter is where it was who thought so or who
of holy Church and all that is giuen to vs is giuen to holy Churche And so ye grounde your consciences after your owne lawes and Cannons as the wolfe did after his Are not these good woluishe consciences But haue ye no better grounde of your conscience than these two yes say you finally we ground our consciences vpon holy Scripture namely that saying of S. Peter oporteâ—… obedire deo magis quam hominibus God must be obeyed more than men In déede M. St. if ye can make this a grounde it is a much surer grounde than the other twayne the sacred worde of God and the obedience that ye owe to god Howbeit sithe euery pretence of obedience to God and euery wresting of Gods worde is no good grounde of conscience neither the worde of God nor the obedience to God taketh away the obedience that is due to the Prince Howe do ye frame your argument from S. Peters saying God muste be obeyed more than man Ergo the Q. Maiestie can not be obeyed for supreme gouernour vnder God in all ecclesiasticall causes within hir dominions This argument is so fonde it might serue any traytor or any other to disobey his Prince vnder pretence of conscience and therefore can not cleare you from the sighes and grones that ye make for your foresayde change where with the Bishop rightly chalengeth M. Feckenham These arguments nowe pretending conscience béeing not sufficient to discharge the Papistes of disobedience M. St. addeth to them two more the one by obiecting the like to vs that we sighe and grone for the change of other princes nor affected in religion as we be And so he thinketh to put away this reason from them selues that the B. maketh agaynst them The Papistes do not obey but impugne the Q. Maiesties authoritie Ergo they wishe and looke with diepe sighes and groanes for a change therof The other argument that M. St. maketh agaynst this he frameth thus diuers papists haue lost their goods and are ready to lese their life Ergo they wishe not for this change This argument as it serueth no more their cause than any other heretikes so it followeth not but rather the contrarie that the more they léese the more they wishe the change And to shew this as one that had forgotten himselfe whyle he craketh what witte body and lyfe he would employ for his prince and countrey adding withall this exception if the case so require he bursteth out into a diepe sighe and groane for a change saying And for my parte I pray God hartily the tryall once woulde come What case is this ye speake off so doubtfully master St. if it be not a change that leauing your argumente ye fall thus deuoutly to your beades pray so hartily promising to employ your pregnant witte your proper body yea venture your life and all that once it might come if it be not a change if ye meane well why be you not at home and in your natiue countrey employ your witte body like a good subiect as ye ought to do but subtract your bodie and bende your witte your body and all your endeuour by all malicious practises agaynst hir Malesties authoritie herein â–ª abusing dayly not onely by suche your inuectiue Pamphlets dispearsed abroade in hucker mucker hir Maiesties subiectes here quiet at home to make them mislike hir Highnesse regiment but also to slaunder hir abroade to other Nations besides your continuall whisperers whom ye sende aboute instilling into the peoples heades a hope or feare of a chaunge to come bearing the people in hand euen from hir Maiesties first raigne that the nexte Easter the nexte Midsomer the nexte Michelmas the nexte Christmas the nexte quarter the nexte halfe yeare the nexte yeare we shall haue a chaunge And thus from yere to yeare ye fode them on with vayne hope nourishing priuie rebellion in their hearts or at least to make the people to faynt and murmure as the searchers of the lande of promise did to the children of Israell But God be blessed that hitherto hath defeated all your blinde prophesies He will confounde the hypocrites hope and establishe his truthe for euer Nowe to put away this cryme from the Papists and to charge vs therewith he alledgeth first the practise of the Paynims and Ievves and Heretikes The effecte of hys argument is this Diuers Heretykes vsed greate cruelties and seditions for that they misliked the contrarie religion to theirs Ergo the Papistes misliking the Quéenes maiesties authoritie and wishing a chaunge thereof make not in so dooing a preparation to sedition but we that acknowledge the same do make it I answere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est A false Papiste is a perillous beast And if hotte burnyng cruell handeling trayterous poysoning pitifull murdering horrible tragedies tragicall enormities priuie and great conspiracies all which he obiecteth to vs in the sustian fumes of his boystrous Rhetorike be arguments of Paynims Iewes or Heretikes then â—…one better than the Papistes haue deserued those titles And here as he thinketh béeing gotten into a plentyfull â—…ayne he runneth into Germanie Denmarke Swethlande Englande Fraunce and Scotlande froÌ„ these to the low countreys of Brabant Hollande Flaunders and Lukelande from thence to Monster then to the Duke of Saxonie and the Lantgraue of Hesse agayne to Denmarke and Swethlande and for his witnesse he bringeth in one as good as him selfe Frederike Staphilus From thence sodenly to Charing crosse and to Towre hill then haue ouer the water agayne to Fraunce Piemont Geneua Gascoigne Rhone Orleance Lions skipping in and out and it were a Iacke of Bedlam raking euery corner to picke quarels and deuise lyes by the Protestants And what proofe of all this alledgeth he forsooth I referre you M. Horne to an oration made of this matter expressely and pronounced here in Louayne and translated eloquently and printed in our Englishe tongue Naye then it must néedes be true M. St. who dare gainesay it if suche a man of credence as you will referre all these discourses vnto that oration yea and that it was pronounced among you in Louayne where God wot neuer lye is pronounced yea and besides all this it is translated eloquently in our Englishe tongue and printed too these are sore arguments I promise you as euer I heard so wise a man make to proue the truth of all thâ—…se accusations that ye lay to the protestants charge But M. Stap. and ye would follow my councell ye should let all these by quarels go and referre your selfe to your matter But ye wil first make an other vagarie and sée the countreys once agayne so may ye write vs ouer lies â—…owe by authoritie as ye do full handsomly for after ye haue bene at Scotlande and are returned to your lovve countreys of Flaunders we haue fiue leaues togither entituled the rebellion of Flaunders with a swarme of reprocheful staunders to deface the Gospell with sedition hurliâ—… bâ—…rlies and
And herein hath the Quéenes highnes followed as ye say both her Fathers and Brothers faith also But ye wring al to that faith wherein he was before beguiled as though she should follow him in that he was deceiued not wherein he founde out forsoke the deceyuers that you with your painted wordes might likewise deceyue her Highnes now as they deceâ—…ued her Maiest father then But sée how God turned their deceyt agaynst them selues That where your Pope to flatter K. Henrie withall ascribed to him this title as it were the prophecie of another Caiphas Defender of the faith the King espying the falshood of the Pope became the very defender of the true faith in déede abolishing the Pope the very impugner peruerâ—…er therof and so as you say truer than ye wist M. Stap. atchieued to him and his and transported as by hereditarie succession the worthy title and stile yet remaining in her Highnesse of the defendour of the faith Neither as you faintly say this title onely remayneth in her Highnes but the thing that the title doth entende her highnesse is in very déede not in a â—…aked name the defender thereof And hath defended her subiects not from foreyne power of straungers onely brought in by the Papistes and from all bodily iniurie and oppression of Popish firebrandes or any other tirannie but defendeth euen our faith from all errours heresies superstitions and Idolatries And this it is for a Prince to be a defender of the faith in déede which argueth a plaine supremacie Now after M. Stapl. hath thus flattred and on his knees humbled him selfe to obtayne a placard of their disobedience vp he starteth once againe and geueth another fling at vs to reuerse this crime of disobedience on vs thinking so to excuse this disobedience of the Papistes thereby And first he setteth on those whome he calleth round cap Ministers howbeit if he remembred that within this hundreth yeres and vpward the popish priestes themselues did weare round cappes he would not be so hastie to giue that nick name He asketh who are those that haue preached with a chaine of golde about their neckes in steade of a tippet Assoyle your question your selfe M. Stapl. I know no such protestant What slaunderous reporte you haue heard of any singuler person I know not no such order is alowed Although it be common among your popish Cardinals Bishops Abbottes Deanes Canons and other beyonde the Seas so to ruffle as ye speake not onely with a chayne of golde but with hatte and feather cappe and agglets rapier and cloke hawke and houndes ruffians fooles wayting on them and oftentimes in complete harneys on a great courser or on a palfrey with a courtisane behinde them thus go the chiefest of your fleshly spiritualtie belike they learned it of that royster Pope Iohn 13. howbeit no Pope doeth amende this disorder Upbrayd not therefore such petit and perticular things to vs which is so great and so common a fault with you But Master Stapleton will go more certainely to worke and charge the Protestantes ex scripto wyth their owne writings VVho are those I pray you sayth he that write sint sanè ipsi Magictratuâ—… membra paries ciues ecclesiâ—…dei imo vt ex toto corde sint omnes precari decet Flagrent quoque ipsi zelo pietatis sed non sint capita Ecclesiâ—… quia ipsis non competit iste 〈◊〉 Let the Magistrates also be members and partes and citizens of the Church of God yea and that they maye bee so it behoueth vs all wyth all our heart to praye Let them bee feruent in the godly zeale of Religion but they may not be heades of the Churche in no case for thys supremacie doth not appertaine to them These are no Papists I trow M. Horne but your owne dere brethren of Magdeburge in their new storie ecclesiasticall by the which they would haue all the worlde directed Yea in that storie wherof one percell Illiricus and his fellowes haue dedicated to the Queenes maiestie that beare the worlde in hande they are the true and zelous schollers of Luther Thus triumpheth M. Stapleton against the wryters of the storie of Magdeburge The effect of his argument is this These wryters do say that Princes may not be heades of the Church Ergâ—… no prince ouer all Ecclesiasticall persons causes in his owne dominions may be supreme gouernour Howe euill this argument followeth is easie to perceyue and the better in behâ—…lding howe impudently master Stapleton wresteth these wryters But he forceth not thereof bicause they be his aduersaries For that which they write not simplie agaynst the supremacie of princes in Ecclesiasticall causes but agaynst suche supremacie of princes as the Pope vsurped that wresteth he as spoken agaynst such supreme gouernment as the Quéenes maiestie claymeth and vseth The writers hereof hauing set forth two â—…nsamples of that age the one of a godly princes gouernmet by Constantinus Pogonotus the other of a wicked tyrant by â—…eraclius to declare what kinde of supremacie they disalow Thâ—…y she we that this is the scope of the matter iste est scopuâ—…res ê™ magistratibuâ—… politicis non sit licitum cudere formaâ—… religionuÌ„ in perniciem veritatis ita vel coÌ„cilietur veritaâ—… meÌ„daâ—…ium vel vtraque simul sopiant id quod tandem â—…um habet exitum vt regnent errores veritas crucifigatur sepeliatur This is the â—…cope of the matter that it is not lawfull for politike magistrates to coyne formes of religion to the destruction of the truth so that thereby truth and falsehoode should be reconciled togither or both of them togither quayled VVhich at the length commeth to this ende that errors raigne the truth is crucified buried And so followeth the sentence that M. St. citeth let the magistrates also be mebers c. but let them not be heades of the Church Whereby appeareth plainly what maner of heades they meane And this they do not once nor twise setting forth the doings of the wicked â—…yrant Heraclius for ensample that was altogither led by affection and not indifferent to heare â—…ither party nor called in counsell lerned and faithfull men nor called any synode to trie the matter nor serched the truth diligently but being puffed vppe with pride and deuising oâ—…ely with a flattring Monke that after set vp the false fayth of Mahomet determineth in a corner of a moste weightie controuersie and afterwardes will haue the matter neuer called into question This Emperour they call Architectum religionis and demaund what man well in his wittes woulde alowe such attempts processe and executions concluding it is not lawfull form as religionum conflare c. To make newe formes of religions and obtrude them to the Church without all kind of godly honest modest and comely gainsaying refuting therof All this and much more say they of that kinde of supreme gouernement in
Princes that they mislyke and is in déede to be vtterly mislyked of all Christians But as this is a plaine description of your Popes supremacie that playeth in all these poynts Heraclius part so it nothing toucheth that supremacie that the Quéenes maiestie claymeth It is but your wicked malice to slaunder hir with such tyrannicall vsurpation of Heraclius as they condemne Whie doe ye not rather take theyr other comparison from Constantinus Pogonotus to al other godly Princes and referre that to hir regiment With what care and singuler diligence trauaile and godlinesse when the Churches were horibly deformed and torne by the sect of the Monothelites He summoned the sixt generall Councell he ouerwhelmed not the debating of the controuersie of doctrine by might or preiudice He willed the Ministers of the Churche and preachers of the worde of God to searche out which opinion was and which was not agreable to holye writte He regarded not the ensamples of hys auncesters who by publike Edictes had approued the doctrine of the Monothelites which was harde for him to abolishe Neyther did the authoritie of the Patriarches and Bishoppes in Constantinople and all ouer the East that stifly helde that opinion any thing moue him Nor he suffred himselfe to be made afrayde although he heard that the pryde of the Byshop of Rome was incredible as one that wickedly chalenged a dignitie and authoritie aboue other Bishops and teachers But sent his letters to him exhorting him to come or sende some other in his place Neyther gaue he him any prerogatiue nor craueth licence of hym to call the Councell but of hys owne duetie he defineth him selfe for the appoynting of the Councell He louingly biddeth the Romaine and other Bishoppes not to bee absent at so necessarie matters and concerning the Churches publike weale The Emperour himselfe is present at the Synode not as a dumbe or deafe person like a cifer in Algorisme or receyuing the decrees without iudging of them or placing the B. of Romes Legates in the chiefest place and receyuing them without all contradiction as oracles from them as it were from Apollos triuet but modestly reuerently and godly as much as became his calling he gouerned the Synode propounding to them the state or scope of the cause and enquiring on a rowe gathered their sentences togither least ought should be done rashly or confusedly He commaunded not the one partie but the contrarie partie also plainly and without subtilties to declare their opinions and what groundes they had of their sentences out of the holye scriptures and what autenticall witnesse of the approued fathers And so forth they declare howe indifferently he dealt with either partie knowing that he must not condemne any before he knewe the full matter And when it was euidently found out that the Monothelites could not defend their opinion by the clere testimonies of the scripture nor any sentences of the doctours allowed yea when it was founde out they hacked of purpose certaine of the Doctours sayings and in place of them cited certeyne sayings falsly fathered in the Doctors names theÌ„ the Emperor subscribed to the iudgemeÌ„t of al those that thought aright and earnestly and stoutly executed the condemnation made in the name of them all Here these wryters commend this Emperor the more for that he had about him no doubt say they such parasites as woulde tickle in his eare that these thinges were vnsitting foâ—… his maiestie to intermeddle him selfe with the brawles of the Churches pelting Doctours It were a blemish to him to condemne his ancesters to cal into doubt or retract things already decreed This were not the safest way Let the bishops alone with the matter for euen they are able to make lawes agaynst the Emperors estate and abase it The Emperour by his authoritie may do no more than commaund silence sende into exile or punish with other violence those that make clamors or disobey the councels decree But the Emperor not regarding these fancies thought it honorable to him to be present in the midst of the teachers of gods worde assisting not a little the triall and iudgement of the coÌ„trouersie This ensample these wryters thus set out for a princes gouernmeÌ„t dealing ouersight in the chiefest ecclesiastical causes And thus before they determined in generall that God or deined not Princes to spoile their subiects and make themselues â—…at Neither onely to attende to outward discipline and that men may liue in honest tranquilitie for say they seing that magistrates are in the scriptures called Gods this ought to bee their first and chiefest care that their subiects serue God after such a sorte that his kingdome in their dominions may bee knowne encreased and conserued that is to were sincere doctrine c. may be deliuered remaine passe froÌ„ theÌ„ to their posteritie To this end tendeth all politike administration all defence of peace and neighborhod that laborsome care of getting the liuing gathering goodes that these spirituall euerlasting goodes both of the body of the mind should be gotten Thus do they stretch out further than doth M. St. the bounds of a princes gouernment to al ecclesiastical canses And all that they write on the other part is against such a popish supremacie as establisheth maketh a new religioÌ„ quicquid imperitaâ—…erit reâ—… And yet sée howe spitefully and falsly M. St. wresteth it as writteÌ„ against the Q. maiestie When as he confesseth himselfe they coÌ„mend hir euen by the ensample of Constantine they allow that supreme gouernment that she doth take vpon hir Now M. St. after his maner presupposing we will reiect these writers as though they spake against the supreme gouernmeÌ„t of the Quéene In case ye thinke sayth he theyr testimonie not to haue weight ynough then herken to your their Apostle Luther who writeth that it is not the office of kings princes to coÌ„firm no not the true doctrine but to be subiect and serue the same The effect of this argument is this princes must not take on them so to confirme the true doctrine that they be not subiect therevnto nor serue but rule the same Ergo Princes may not set forth the true doctrine nor be supreme gouernors in their dominions ouer all ecclesiastical persons and causes This argument is like to his fellowe aboue And as ye wrested the former writers so wrest ye Luthers saying also whose seÌ„tence as it is nothing against the godly gouernment of our most noble soueraigne subiect to the principall authoritie of Gods word that it might be of chiefest authoritie subduing thereto the authoritie of all other writers remouing those superstitions that exalted them selues in authoritie equall or aboue Gods worde so this sentence is eftsones as the other agaynst such vsurpation as is euident that your Pope taketh vpon him But M. Stapleton dreaming that he hath so sore pressed vs and this is so harde and straunge a case that
him agayne making the king become vassall feodatarie to the Pope and to holde the crowne and realme of him in fee farme and pay 700. marks a yere for England and. 300. for Irelande And hath not the Pope chalenged other kingdomes also yea doth he not clayme to be the chiefe Lorde and Prince of all kingdomes and to set vp and depose what king or prince he pleased And he that beléeued not this was not counted a noddie but an heretike And yet sayth M. St. was there euer any so much a noddie to say and beleeue the Pope raigned here but all Papistes muste be noddies with him yea his owne Pope in steade of a triple crowne muste weare a cockes combe and him selfe for companie will beare the bell But here he leapeth backe agayne to M. Gilbie not for the matter of supremacie but for his misliking of certayne orders of religion in king Edwards dayes and here vpon pleadeth that the Papistes are nowe more to be borne withal if they can not beare the seruice and the title set foorth I answere first M. St. another mans faults excuse not yours Neither Anthonie Gilbies and yours are alike For were his greater or any of those Protestants that ye vpbrayde vnto vs afterwards yet are they lesse in that they obstinately maynteyned not the same nor persisted therin nor attempted any conspiracies nor would haue a foraigne supreme nor suche an other as your Pope the father of errors and so on their submission or repentaunce their fault is pardoned or made lesse But you obstinately maynteine a playne refusall of obedience would haue a foraigne vsurper be your supreme and not onely subdue the realme and our bodies to his tyrannie but our soules to his errors neither do ye repente therof but perseuer in it and by wicked Libels priuie conspiracies and all other meanes that ye can deface Gods worde your natural prince natiue countrey your fault therfore is much greater thā his or theirs And therfore your wilful obstinacie is not to be borne withal especially since after so long and gentle tollerance of the Quéenes moste gracious lenitie towards you ye encrease your malice and harden your hearts with Pharao abusing hir highnesse lenitie Now where the Bishop sayd these dealings were a preparation to rebellion agaynst the Queenes person M. Stap. sayth that it nothing toucheth hir person nor hir crowne And that without the ecclesiasticall authoritie the crovvne hath continued and flourished moste honorably many hundreth yeres ▪ and shall by Gods grace continue full well and full long agayne when it shall please God. Why M. Stap. what meane ye by this dothe not the crovvne flourishe and continue euen nowe also God be praysed for it why say you then it hath flourished and shal agayne when it shall please God as though it dyd not now And the state of the Crovvne were nowe no estate or a very ill estate in the reigne of the Quéenes maiestie If this be not a preparation to rebellion to make the Subiectes mislike the estate of the Crovvne is it not then euen a rebellious Proclamation it selfe but let vs sée your argument that ye make hereon to excuse your selues Diuers Princes haue continued and flourished honorably of long time without the ecclesiasticall authoritie Ergo it is nowe no preparation to rebellion agaynst the Quéenes person to refuse hir authoritie ouer all causes ecclesiasticall and to defende that it apperteyneth not to hir person or Crowne I answere First the worde ecclesiasticall authoritie is very subtilly and doubtfully spokē as though hir highnesse went about to play the minister If ye meane so the antecedent is then true The ecclesiasticall authoritie nothing toucheth hir person or crowne ▪ without the whiche it hath most honorably continued and flourished many hundreth yeres and shall by Gods grace continue ful wel and ful long agayne when it shal please God. But then is this your most spitefull slaunder to say that the Quéene now taketh vpon hir eccl. authoritie and that it is now vnited to hir person or crowne which is most euident false And therefore the crowne flourisheth for any suche matter so well as euer it did And God graunt it neuer to flourish worsse than it doth vnder hir Maiestie now But the antecedent béeing so farre foorth true as is declared then the consequent followeth not that it is now no preparation to rebelliō to refuse hir authoritie ouer all eccl. causes and to defende that it perteyneth not to hir person or crowne But if in the antecedent by ecclesi authoritie ye meane authoritie ouer ecclesiasticall matters then the antecedent is false and so to be proued by the issue of the practise in this Realme Neither is it any good argument Bicause many tooke it not on them Ergo none may Bicause they did not vse it Ergo they ought not Bicause they had worldly prosperitie without it Ergo it was not necessarie to them Bicause the denial was no preparation to rebellion then Ergo it is none nowe None of these causes are sufficient M. St. and therefore your subtile and false reason fayleth Now when ye sée nothing will fadge this way eyther to defende you or to accuse vs ye will set vpon vs for other matters that we are those that make this preparation to rebellion Let this title and eccl. iurisdiction goe say you which all good princes haue euer forgone as nothing to them apperteyning let vs come to the very temporall authoritie and let vs consider who make any preparation of rebellion the Catholikes or the Protestants In letting that go M. Stap. that appertayneth to this title and ecclesiasticall iurisdiction ye let go your matter and after your maner make so many impertinent discourses contrarie to that ye called vpon before neuer to swerue from the question in hande and nowe your selfe swerue of purpose from it Howebeit shall we let you go so rounde away with suche a heape of notorious lyes that all good Princes haue euer forgone this title and ecclesiasticall iurisdiction as nothing to them appertayning that not some or many but all good Princes haue forgone and euer forgone both this title and also ecclesiasticall iurisdiction and so euer forgone it as nothing pertayning to them If ye coulde haue shewed this ye should haue well spent your time and kept ye nearer your matter ye néeded not haue fisked about so many by quarels But this could ye not proue and therfore it was necessarie ye should runne to them picking quarels at vs not marking your owne wicked defacing of your Prince whome otherwhiles so fauningly ye flatter For whereto else tendeth this saying all good princes haue euer forgone this tytle and ecclesiasticall iurisdiction as nothing perteyning to them but to inferre that all those princes that take on them or will at any time not forgoe thys title eccl. iurisdiction as apperteyning to them are ill and wicked Princes What else can be made of
your saying And so not onely ye playnly reuile the Lordes anoynted the Quéenes most excellent maiestie but also hir highnesse brother and father whom so muche ye praysed before For neither of them did forgo it no not Quéene Mary hir selfe that dyd forgoe it did euer forgoe it so ye rayle at hir also Besides many other godly princes of this other realmes for the eccl. iurisdiction as ye call it whiche some of them did neuer some of them did not euer forgoe And therfore ye both reuile them and belye theÌ„ but chiefly the Quéenes highnesse and is not this neither a preparation to rebellion But M. Stap. muste néedes be let goe whether he list to range and therefore let him goe First he asketh vvho vvere they that set foorth deuises of their ovvne for the succession of the crovvne vvithout the Princes knovvledge Surely sayth he no Catholikes but the very Protestantes them selues Ye doill M. Stap. to make a generall conclusion of the Protestantes simply from the priuate dooinges of some Should a man say that the pedigrée that M. Christoferson set from Iohn of Gaunt for king Philips title to the Crowne of Englande prouing him to be euen nearer than Quéene Mary hir selfe was the dooing of all the Papistes No the Papistes mystiked and corrected it Howebeit when it was best corrected it tended to a farre worsse ende which ende was all their dooings and fetche to bring this Realme to perpetuall slauery and bondage of Aliens than dyd these mens facte in deuising for the succession which though it were not lawfull to be done vvithout the Princes knovvledge as ye say yet was their entent farre otherwise than to make a preparation to rebellion yea rather to stoppe all gappes as they thought the better from Popishe rebellion althoughe they medled further than became them to do But what excuseth this the Papistes disobedience thinke ye these faultes of the Protestantes be couerings large inoughe to hyde the Papistes wickednesse but to stretche them further he discourseth on the writinges of master Knox and master Goodman For we shall haue all layde in our dishe noughte shall be lefte behinde concealed that any Protestants vnaduisedly euer dyd or spake And it is good to sée our owne faâ—…ts and follies this profite of foes Plutarche teacheth vs to be one of the greatest commodities for that that our friendes would not tell vs our enimies will not layne but spâ—…e out all that they knowe to our shame good and badde false and true togither And therfore we had néede beware that professe the word of God how circumspectly we lead our liues least we giue occasion to the aduersarie and his ministers to slaunder the Gospell and that the vncircumcised Philistians rayle not of the God of Israell by reason of our defaults as héere this enimie dothe Howbeit his argument is all insufficient either to proue any disobedience in vs or to excuse the Papistes disobedience the argument is this M. Knox and M. Goodman wrote agaynst the raygne of women Ergo the Protestantes acknowledge not the Quéenes supremacie in all causes ecclesiasticall Such slender arguments he gleaneth togither agaynst vs séeking bye matters But what should he do else should he haue nought to furnishe his counterblast withall At last giuing ouer the pursuite of the Protestantes he returneth to the defence of his clyent that this can be layde of all men least to M. Feck And héere lyke a wel enstructed proctor he reckneth what good déedes he did in Q. Maries dayes and appealeth to certayne Right honorables as the Lorde Earle of Leicester the lorde Earle of Bedforde the lorde Earle of VVarwike Sir VVilliam Cecill secretarie Yea the Queenes maiestie hir selfe to defende and purge him The good déedes that he reckneth vp are these two First that sir Iohn Cheekes life landes and goodes by his trauayle and humble suite were saued The other His hope is that the Queenes highnesse his soueraigne good Lady will thus muche reporte of hym how in the beginning of hir highnesse trouble hir highnesse then beeing imprisoned in the Court at VVestm and before hir committie to the Towre his good hap was to preache a sermon before Queene Mary and hir honorable councell in the Courte where he moued hir highnesse and them also to mercy and to haue consideration of the Queenes highnesse that now is then in trouble and newly entred in prison VVhat displeasure he susteined therfore I do heere saith M. St. omit to expresse but this I certenly know that he hath reported and hath most humbly thanked almightie God and hir highnesse that hir highnesse had the same in remeÌ„brance at the first last talke that euer he had with hir in hir palace at VVestin before hir highnes coronation I trust these are suffycient personages for M. Feck purgation and discharge against your false 〈◊〉 And so he concludeth with a prayer that M. Feck may be made partaker of the like dooinges as he then shewed to other men That downe M. St. God hath graunted him long time M. Fec hath felt it nor if he be not too vnthaÌ„kful can deny it yea your selfe graunt that he confesseth the Q. highnesse to be his soueraigne good lady reported that hir highnesse forgot not the same I warrant you forslacked not the large recompence of his sermon not only if he would haue reuoked his errars superâ—…titions but also euen as he wilfully refused hir highnes fauourable inclinatioÌ„ towards him I haue herd him ofteÌ„ times my selfe publikely priuately acknowledge what the Q. maiestie most liberally gaue him at the reducing of the Minster to the former estate But what doth this Pharisaicall repetition of his former good déedes then excuse his obstinate disobedience now or proue that his booke set foorth agaynst the Queenes maiesties authoritie dispersed among hir subiects is notnowe a very preparation to rebellion if he did any thing then to deserue fauour now let him now so behaue him selfe that he may finde it the Quéenes maiestie is most mercyful and beneficiall What hindreth him then but his owne rebellions obstinacie and yet he hathe founde since what little fauour so euer he got for other then tenfolde muche more doubled to him agayne Little fauoure God knoweth and hir Highnesse felte founde she in that hir trouble and streight imprisonment after M. Feck sermon But ye will not expresse what displeasure M. Fec susteined for mouing Quéene Mary and hir Councell to mercy and to haue but consideration of the Queenes highnesse that now is What gotte he so great displeasure for thus much M. St was it so sore a matter to moue them to mercy and consideration of their doinges I had thought they had done all thinges with mercy and great consideration But why will ye not expresse it forsooth ye should then expresse what excéeding crueltie whiche can hardly be expressed what inconsiderate doings the Papistes vsed then neither coulde they
be moued from them And neuer so little a motion for M. Feckenham went not ouer farre I warrant you coulde not be made of mercy and consideration without great displeasure taken Ye haue well described the state of your Popes raigne M. Stap. so vnmercyfull an estate and inconsiderate that for description thereof ye doe best as dyd Timantes when he paynted the mourners at the sacrifice of Iphigenia setting out one wéeping another with this another with that heauie visage when he could not deuise a more dolâ—…rous couÌ„tenance he paynted Agamemnon hiding his face with a kerchiefe so you wheÌ„ ye can not sufficiently set foorth those dolefull tymes ye do wisely in that ye omit to expresse them and therein ye expresse them most of all And woulde ye haue lyke mercy and consideration sheshed nowe to the Papistes as the Papistes shewed then to the Protestantes Alas master Stap. if but halfe a quarter of suche extremitie were shewed nowe as was shewed then it woulde goe harder with master Feckenham and other his complices than it dothe No no M. Stap. their chambers their walkes their libertie their ease their fare is nothing like your doÌ„geoÌ„s your stockes your colehouses your famine your racks your gaggs your whipping there rostmeate at a stake that ye gaue the protestants I warrant ye M Fe. lookes not like a ghost nor like a poore scholler of Cambridge or Oxford perchaunce fares better than some studeÌ„ts of diuinitie in Louayne It is easy to discernâ—… M. St. what spirite either religion is of the protestants and the papists euen by this your own note of vnmercifulnesse and mercy and now saith M. St. let vs proceede on to the residue of your booke The fifth Diuision THe Bishop of Winchester after he hath shewed on M. Feckenhams wordes the entent of the Othe and the entent of M. Feckenh booke to be contrarie and therefore what soeuer he offreth in wordes he denieth the same in déedes and in the beginning for ensample dalieth with the Oth about dominions persons thinking therby he escapeth the principall ende of the Othe in this diuision sheweth first how doublie he dealeth in pretending as though the Bishop had forced him to sweare but there was no such Othe offred or required betwéene them â—…rgo A man might well marâ—…aile that he shamed not to pretende such a lie Secondly the Bishop sheweth how M. Feckenham is taken in his owne daliaâ—…ce The Bishops reason is this In that ye graunt to her Highnesse the onely supreme rule ouer the Laye and Ecclesiasticall persons you haue all ready proued withall the causes also euenby a supreme gouernors definition A supreme gouernour or ruler is one who hath to ouerseâ—… guide care prouide order and directe the thinges vnder his gouernment rule to that ende and in those actions which are appointed properly belong to the subiect or thing gouerned But the Queenes Highnesse is by your own coÌ„fession the only supreme gouernour ouer al manner persons Ecclesiasticall c. Ergo Hir highnes hath to ouersee guide care prouide order and direct to that ende and in those actions which are appointed do properly belong to persons Ecclesiasticall And thus concludeth that M. Feckenham grauÌ„ting thus much for fashion sake in generall speache is but a dissembler and in déede denieth the obedience of the person also or els he péeuishly standeth on the distinction of the cause which in full effect he hath graunted alreadie To the first parte M. Stapleton answereth Here is first a worshipfull reason and cause to meruaile at M. Feckenham that he should by writing presently offer him selfe to receyue an Othe bicause he neuer made mention of any suche othe before neither any suche was at any time of him required surely this is as great a cause to wonder as to see a goose go barefoote Ye plainly falsifie the Bishops woordes M. Stapl â–ª he said not that M. Feckenham neuer made mencion of any suche othe before but he saide that he neuer made any motion of such an offer to him So that this declareth both a double dealing of him also a wresting of you But this in eyther of you muste not be wondered at as a rare dealing that in lying and wresting ye be shamelesse bicause it is as common to you as to sée a goose go barefoote and as rare as to heare a barefoote Foxe preach to shod géese in Louaine Secondly to the Bishops argument he saithe But now will he play the worthy Logitian and M. Feckenham will he nill he shal be driuen by fine force of a Logicall definition to graunt the Queene to be supreme head in all causes Ecclesiasticall for that he graunteth hir to be supreme head of all persons both Ecclesiastical and Temporal Bicause saith he the supreme gouernour or ruler is he that ordereth and directeth all actioÌ„s belonging and appointed to the subiectes and thereby enferreth that the Queenes Maiestie is supreme and onely gouernour eueÌ„ in those actions that belong to Ecclesiasticall persons which are causes Ecclesiasticall But as good skill as this man hath in Logike which is correspondent to his diuinitie he hath brought vs forth a faultie and a vitiouse definition For a supreme gouernour is he that hath the chiefe gouernment of the thing gouerned not in those actions that may any way properly belong to the subiect or thing gouerned as M. Horne saithe but in those actions that belong to the ende whereunto the gouernour tendeth VVhich may well be although he haue not the chiefe gouernment in all the actions of the thing gouerned but in such actions as properly appertaine to him as a subiect to that gouernour Although M. Stapl. arguments hitherto haue shewed some tast of his owne great skill in Logike and what a worthie student of Diuinitie he is him selfe the want of which two he vpbraydeth to the Bishop after his prowde scornefull manner yet in this his couÌ„terblast to the Bishops only reason of a supreme gouernours definition he wil further shew what a passing subtile Logitian déepe Deuine he is But alas the mans ill lucke for while he clerkly laboreth striues to bring M. Feckâ—…ham out of the briers he not only wrappeth him the faster in them but so snarleth entangleth him selfe withall that as one all amased he speaketh he wottes not what And goyng about the Bushe wonderfully to worke when he hath all done he hath not onely left the matter where it was against M. Feckenham but hath made it more playne against him selfe also First he reprehendeth the Bishops definition of a gouernour as faultie but his guiltie conscience was so striken that he durst not or he well wist not how to report the definition as it laie but saith that the Bishop defined A supreme gouernour to be one that ordreth and directeth all actions belonging and appoynted to the subiecte Which the B. said not but M. St. who hath altered hacked and
spirituall Churche so on thys principle you gather a moste false assumption That the heads of this spiritual or mystical body the church of Christ are vicars parsons byshops archbyshops patriarkes and ouer them all the Pope In which assumption ye take for true grauÌ„ted sundry manyfest errors flatly of vs denied chiefly foure The first about the spirituall and mysticall body of christ Wherin ye shew great vnskill not knowing what is ment by the spiritual mystical body For in that respect as there are no ciuil princes emperours kings or quéenes so there ar no Bishops neither no not Greke nor Scythian Gentile nor Iew neither male nor female but all the elect that haue bene are or shall be either in heauen aboue or here dispersed in any parte of the earth without any respect of person are al members and Christ the only head And so M. St. your selfe also call it the kingdome of the faythfull so that if any bishop be vnfaithful he is so far from beeing a head in this misticall corporation that he is no member or any part therof And your selfe confessed before that now theÌ„ your Pope was no good maÌ„ neither therfore vnfaithful hauing not the true liuely effectual faith in Christ as they only haue that be meÌ„bers of this body wherby he is quite excluded froÌ„ it Your first error therfore is in not discerning betwéene the inuisible and visible estate of the Church Secondly taking it as after contrarie to your former sayings ye seeme to expounde it to be the visible estate of the church saying coÌ„moÌ„ly called Christes catholike church then erre ye in that ye say vicars parsons bishops archbyshops and popes be rulers and heades of it For excepting parsons taking them for pastors Bishops the scripture knoweth none of thâ—…se rulers The other titles haue come in since with deanes archâ—…eacoÌ„s abbots priors cardinals patriarches c. although I speake not against the names of theÌ„ no not of the name of Pope neither which béeing well vsed I reueriÌ„ce admit but against the Popish hierarchie proud abuse of them And therfore thirdly where ye say the Pope is ouer them all that he is so ouer all those degrées in your Churche I graunte ye but that he is so ouer those or any other degrées in the true visible Churche of Christ it is but your facing maner to take that for confessed that is chiefly denyed Fourthly that ye affirme the Pope and his Prelates gouernemente chiefly to serue for the furtheraunce and encrease of the Spirituall kyngdome of Chryst where it is euident to the contrarie what hauocke and decrease so muche as they can these Rulers make of the members of Christes Churche to maynteine infidelitie and exautorate the worde and kingdome of Christ thereby M. Stap. now presupposing that the christian Princes gouernement is only outward and for the body and coÌ„mon with the heathen and stretcheth no further and that on the other parte the Pope ouer al and his fleshly chaplens vnder him are the heades and meÌ„bers of the spiritual and mysticall body of Christ nowe he will proue and God before that this gouernement of the pope his chaplaines is far aboue the kings gouernement and that kings he subiect therto Now sayth he as the soule of man incomparably passeth the body so doth this kingdome the other and the rulers of these the rulers of the other And as the body is subiecte to the soule so is the ciuill kingdome to the spirituall His reason is thus The soule or spirite incomparably passeth the body The kings gouernement is onely for the body and the Priests gouernement onely is for the soule and spirite Ergo the Priestes gouernement incomparably passeth the Kinges As this argument is noughte so the conclusion béeing rightly vnderstoode dothe noughte infirme the Princes supreme gouernement ouer all ecclesi causes For thoughe the maior be true the minor is moste false that the kinges gouernement is onely for the body Yea though the spirituall gouernement be onely the Priestes yet the gouernement ouer spirituall matters and matters apperteyning to the soule may still for all that and dothe belong euen ouer the Priests to the Prince Neither dothe M. St. proue the coÌ„trarie or alledge ought for his minor than as we haue heard the foresaide principles of limiting the Princes gouernement to be all one with the Turkes But you might haue done well M. Stap. to haue eâ—…sed your paynes euen here and haue troubled your selfe no further to proue your matter if these your vaine presupposals be such true and vndoubted principles But as though we had alredy graunted them M. St. still goeth on To the which kingdome sayth he as well Princes as other are engrafted by baptisme and become subiects to the same by spirituall generation as we become subiectes to our princes by course and order of natiuitie which is a terrestrial generation The argument is thus As the childe that is borne by a terrestriall generation in the earthly Princes kingdome is subiect to the earthly Prince so euen the Prince being borne againe by spirituall generation is become subiect to the spirituall kingdome But the rulers of the spirituall kingdom are the pope c. Ergo the Prince is become subiect to them Thus fondly still ye reason on your principle in so much that we can say nothing agaynst you But nowe while ye thinke ye may say what ye will sodenly see how ye haue ouerturned these your mightie principles with a trippe of your owne contrarie sayings euen in the same place Furthermore say you as euery man is naturally bounde to defende mainteyne encrease adorne â–ª and amplifie his naturall countrey so is euery man bounde and much more to employ himselfe to his possibilitie towarde the mition and defence furtheranee and amplification of this spiritual kingdome and most of all the princes themselues As such which haue receyued of God more large helpe and facultie toward the same by reason of their great authoritie and temporall sworde to ioyne the same as case requireth with the spirituall sworde Thinke ye this to be true indéede M. St. may we trust you on your wordes then is religion an ende of the Princes gouernment which a little before ye not onely most vntruly denyed but buylded as ye thought iolye arguments therevpon All whiche come nowe downe of themselues with an heaue and hee your selfe pulling awaye the soundation wherevppon they were buylt And nowe ye make an other platforme contrarie to the former which is that Princes moste of all are bounde as those that haue receyued of God more large helpe and facultie towarde the same to employ them selues to their possibilities to these endes to defende mainteyne encrease adorne and amplifie not onely the ciuill peace and prosperitie but much more the spirituall kingdome And ioyne the temporall sworde with the spirituall sworde as the case requireth Upon this as a better platforme than the
as our sauiour Christ hath lefte behinde him in his Gospell and nevve Testament Either by the vvritinges of suche learned doctors bothe olde and nevve vvhich haue from age to age vvitnessed the order of eeclesiasticall gouernement in Christes Church Either by the generall councels vvherin the right order of ecclesiasticall gouernement in Christes Churche hath bene moste faythfully declared and shevved from time to time Or else by the continuall practise of the like ecclesiasticall gouernement in some one Church or parte of all Christendome By these foure meanes this issue aforesaide as the state of the controuersie betwéene bothe parties must be tryed That by any of these foure meanes proofe be made to him That anie Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may claime or take vpō them anie such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes This requireth master Feckenham to be prored The satisfaction whereof to be proued by the Bishop is this That by some of these foure meanes proufe may be made to him that some Emperour Empresse King or Queene may clayme or take vppon them some such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes If the B. shall be founde to haue proued thus much to M. Feck he hath fully satisfyed his request and M. Feckenham according to his promise ought to sweare with humble thankes notwithstanding master Sapletons quarelling Counterblast The Bishop reducing M. Feckenhams first poynt to a forme of argument repeateth it No man may restifie any thing by a booke oth whereof he is ignorant and knoweth nothing without committing manifest periurie But you neyther knowe that the Queenes highnesse is the onely supreme gouernour of this Realme as well in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall things or causes as temporall neither yet know ye anye waye or meane whereby to haue anye knowledge thereof Ergo ye cannot testifie the same on a boke oth without manifest periurie To this the B. replieth that although he might flatly denie the minor that M. Feck is not without all knowledge and vtterly ignorant of the matter nor destitute of al meanes to attaine therto yet he sayth he wil answere by distinction of ignorance to shew how M. Feck is ignorāt how he is not He alleageth a thréefold deuision of ignorance out of Thomas of Aquine the chiefe of the Popish scholemen ▪ Ignorance of simplicitie Ignorāce of wilfulnes and ignorance of malice Prouing that he is not ignorant of the first sort hauing in king Henries and king Edwards reignes continually knowne acknowledged confessed it and therfore his ignorance is either of wilfulnesse or of malice or of both of them M. St. Counterblast standeth chiefly on thrée matters first his answere to Thom. distinction with an obiecting againe to the B. the opinion of Tho. in this cōtrouersie Secondly a quarrelling chalenging of the B. for vntruthes Thirdly an excuse of master Feckenham for setting forth this supremacie With a quarell ioyned thereto that the B. citing a sentence out of the booke of wisdome called it a sentence of the holy ghost concluding thereon a discorde of our doctrine But or euer he enter into his first part he noteth this for a generall warning before Now are maister Feckenham and master Horne come to couple and ioyne togither in the principall matter If this forewarning be true M. St. that this their coupling and ioyning togither on this issue to wete whether any princes haue takē any such gouernmēt on them be nowe by your confession the principall matter controuersed betweene the partyes standing in variaunce whiche as ye sayde before is conuenient and necessarie to haue before our eyes and then deligently to see howe the proufes are of eche partie applied for the confirming of their assertions Then all those sixe principles whiche ye sette vp before your Counterblast as markes to fixe the eye of the Reader vppon were but false markes and not the principall matter wherein the parties coupled them selues togither to proue or improue the same Then were almost all that hitherto M. Stap. hath sayde as the Reader marking this well shall sée and the most of that which he hath to say in this great Counterblast nothing else but a running about the Bushe and wresting of euerye thing from the principall matter in which they ioyned to some other matters wherein they coupled not Whiche is plaine to beguile and abuse not rightly to direct the eye of the Reader as the Reader fixing his eye on thys issue shall soone espie your falsehoode This issue then being the principall matter as ye say and the Bishop coupling and ioyning herein togither with master Feckenham as ye also say and the Bishop hauing proued that which he endeuoured himselfe to proue which ye likewise haue confessed what remayneth by your owne tale telling but that the Bishop hath fully proued the principall matter in question Neither will you as you say nor any other Catholikes greatly contend with him for that he hath proued and he hath proued that that he laboured in he laboured in that he coupled he coupled in this issue thys issue is the principall matter betwéene them whie then do ye so fiersely contende but that ye woulde shewe your selfe a vaine sophisticall and brabling quarrellour that haue no great cause to contende nor anye cause at all and yet will so greatly contende onely of wylfull malice confessing your selfe the thing to be proued that is the principall matter Master Stap. hauing giuen this forewarning commeth to his first part which he deuideth thréefold First he iesteth out the matter with scoffes which I referre to his common place thereon Secondly he denieth master Feckenham to haue any ignorance in this poynt except it were inuincible ignorance by no study or diligence able to be put away and therfore pardonable Since ye admit the distinction M. Stap. ye bring out of time your other inuincible ignorance How pardonable it is is another question But sée how ignorantly while ye would defende M. Fec you ouerthwart him he pleadeth ignorance for his defence and you say he is not ignorant and woulde put the B. to proue that he should be ignorant of wilfulnesse and malice which the B. hath done alreadie and so ye debarre M. Feckēham of his refuge and make him to haue knowledge of this poynt Which not only he himself denieth but which your selfe afterwards denie also yea that he could not haue knowledge of this poynt But you thinke to escape cleare with helping the matter by a newe pertition of ignorance adding a fourth part of inuincible ignorance Surely say you if there were any ignorance in this point it were such as S. Tho. and other call inuincible ignorance Except M. St. ye confound this fourth ignorance with one of the thrée before named ye quite exclude M. Fec from the whole distinction of Thomas and yet ye say the distinction may be true ye will not stick with him for that distinction So that eyther ye
sticke at that ye will not sticke and make that false that ye graunt true or else ye proue master Feck not to be ignorant contrarie to his defence and all the rest of your owne défence of him as we shall sée your wordes afterwarde In the meane time let vs sée howe pretily ye shift off the matter onely bicause the Bishop names Tho. of Aquine a schole Papist for the diuision of Ignoraunce thinking ye haue gotten a wonderfull aduauntage thereby for the Popes supremacie But nowe sayth M. Stap. the verye authour brought forth by master Horne so fullie and effectually dischargeth M. Feck of all three and chargeth M. Horne with the worst of them three that is wilfulnesse and malice as he shal winne small worship by alleaging of S. Thomas For S. Tho. sayeth plainely that we are obliged and bounde vpon paine of euerlasting damnation to beleeue that the Pope is the onely supreme heade of the whole Church Nowe fearing as not without good cause that the B. would in this matter reiect the authoritie of this Thomas whom our Thomas calleth a late latine writer and to much affectionate to the Pope as it were by preuention He can not well reiect his authoritie sayeth he vsing it him selfe And why so Sir I pray you must euery one that citeth him in any one poynt receyue and admit his authoritie to in euerie poynt Is it lawfull for the Sorbonistes the Scholemen and the whole rabble of the Papistes yea for Thomas Stapleton him selfe to accept Thomas of Aquines authoritie in some poyntes and to reiect his authoritie in other some poyntes and is it not lawfull for the Bishop or anye other to vse the same libertie The Sorbonistes affirme of this Thomas Illa doctrina non potest esse in omnibus sic approbata c. That doctrine can not in all thinges be so approued that conteyneth many thinges erronious in fayth but as they say the foresayde doctrine of Saint Thomas not onelye in the matter of the absolute necessitie of a creature c. but also in manye other thinges conteyneth manye matters erronious in fayth And againe Non oportet credere c. VVee muste not beleeue that the doctrine it selfe is in no parte thereof erronious or hereticall wherein are conteyned manye contrarieties and repugnancies yea euen in the matter perteyning to the sayth â–ª but manye suche contrarieties and repugnancies are conteyned in the doctrine of Saynt Thomas Agayne 〈◊〉 dicunt aliqui c. And some saye for thys that manye maye denye the glosses of the decrees and Decreâ—… when the glosse doeth openlye denye the texte and lykewyse some saye of the ordinarye glosses of the Byble that notwithstanding seeme to bee of greater authoritie when they are alleaged for authoritie than is the Doctryne of Saint Thomas The sixte example maye bee giuen of certayne Doctours whiche are not canonized Saintes as the venerable Anselme Byshoppe of Cant. Hughe of Saint Victor and certayne other whose sayinges or wrytinges are in certayne poyntes founde erronious and yet theyr doctrine seemeth to bee no lesse authenticall than the doctrine of Saint Thomas sithe they are of the skilfull in their scolasticall actes alleaged for authoritie nor are wonted to bee denyed but their sayinges reuerently to be glosed and expounded whiche notwythstanding the Schoolemen are not woont to doe on the sayinges of Saint Thomas and therefore it seemeth presumptuous so to extoll hys Doctrine ouer them and other Doctours that wee maye not beleeue and affirme that hee erred in fayth euen as other also haue erred And after this as likewise before reckoning vp diuerse errours these spéeches are common Ista locutio est de virtute sermonis falsa multum impropria c. This speech in the force of the wordes is false and verie improper Ista doctrina multos errores continet c. This Doctrine conteyneth manie errours Uidetur multipliciter erroneum c. It seemeth diuerse wayes erroneous Deficit in multis c. If fayles in many poyntes Non est verum c. It is not true Et breuiter haec alia multa erronea falsa impropriè dicta videÌ„tur multis in praedicta doctrina contineri quae tamen ex taediâ—… pertransimus And briefly these and many other erronious false improper sayings seeme to many to be conteyned in the foresaide doctrine the which notwithstanding we ouerpasse for tediousnesse And from hence they discend to manifest errours in diuinitie And in conclusion write thus of him They say also that in verie many places of his doctrine he erred by reason of this that he applied to much the principles of philosophie or rather certaine wordes of Philosophers to the conclusions of Diuinitie Thus say the great Censors of the Popish doctrine agaynst Thomas of Aquine so well they agrée togither in vnitie of doctrine obiecting discorde vnto vs Yea the whole swarme of Papists not excepting our Thom. St. here him selfe vnlesse he be returned to the truth since he wrote his booke reiecteth and condemneth Thom â–ª of Aquines iudgement and authoritie in one of the most necessarie matters of Christian religion namely the doctrine of iustification For expounding this sentence of S. Paule Arbitramur hemâ—…neÌ„ iustificari absque operibus legis Arbitramur enim nos c. For we being taught of Christ thinke sayth Thomas according to the truth of the Apostle that euerie man whether he be Iewe or Gentile is iustified by faith Actes 15. By fayth purifying their hearts that without the workes of the law and that not onely without the ceremoniall works which did not giue grace but also without the works of the moral commandements according to that saying to Titus 3. Not of the works of the righteousnes that we haue wrought The reason is presumed that we are saued for our merits the which he excludeth when he sayth not of the works of the righteousnesse which we haue done But the true reason is the onely mercy of god There is not therefore in them the hope of iustification sed in sola fide but in fayth alone VVorkes are not the cause that any bodie is iust before God but they are rather executions and the manifestings of righteousnesse Where Tho. of Aquine thus according to Gods worde speaketh the truth as in this poynt here of iustification the Bishop and all other faythfull receyue his iudgement and admit the same with better reason than the Papists reiect it But where as in many other poyntes he swarueth from the truth though the Papists saint him neuer so much yet there all true saintes with good reason refuse him As in this that master Stapleton citeth out of him who confesseth him selfe that Thomas being a late latine writer wrote partiallye in this poynte bycause hée was to muche affectioned to the Pope and shall we beléeue such an affectionate wryter in hys partiall affection Or shall we beléeue master Stapleton no
as to receyue it what soeuer hath not his authoritie out of the Scriptures And what so-euer wee finde not in the Scriptures we may vse them euen as we list our selues Why may we not say as S. Augustine saide Quia Canonicum non â—…st non me astringit Bicause it is not the Canonicall Scripture it bindeth me not to beleue or receyue it but of this matter furder as ye giue furder occasion Thirdly your argument of proportion from a Parliament to London fayleth standing on your olde and vayue presupposals that we haue graunted or must graunt you that your Popish Church is the true Churche That Christian realmes haue the same respect to your Popish church that a Citie in any Realme hath to the whole estate of the same Realme and againe that your Popes violent Councels are as frée lawfull and generall and enact onely as Godly decrées and constitutions to the directing of the true Churche as the Parliaments of a realme be frée lawfull and generall and enact godly lawes and constitutions for their policies and estates All these things beyng nothing proportionable we must graunt you to be true and fitte or else this your argument and your former crake neyther barell better herring may go togither a Gods name The rest of your counter blast to this diuision as it is nothing materiall so it is eyther altogither wordes of course or else a petit quarell that ye lappe vp all the matter withall bicause the Bishop called this sentence a sentence of the Holy Ghost In maleâ—…lam animam non 〈◊〉 sapientia VVisedome shall not enter into a frowarde soule which bicause it is mere impertiuent and friuolous I haue reiected it to your common places Discorde on our doctrine can ye gather none thereon but you would faine sowe discorde where none is and yet ye boast of vnitie But if ye remembered setting all other discordes aside how well as is afore sayd your Sorbonists and your Louanists and you Thomas Stapleton agrée euen with your owne swéete S. Thomas of Aquine and how your tale agreeth with it selfe how it excuseth and accuseth M. Feckenham ye should then sée who they be that as ye say in place of vniforme tuning ruffle vs vp a blacke Sanctus who they be that chaunging their shapes like Proteus haue so often altred their religion and whether they touch M. Feckenham and you or any of your chiefe Masters yea or no. The ninth Diuision THe Bishop hauing by Thomas his distinction of ignorance answered M. Feckenhams argument descendeth to cope with M. Feckenham in his issue and to proue the same by all the sayd meanes that he requireth And first to the issue whiche was That any Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may claime or take vpoÌ„ them any suche gouernment in spirituall or Ecclesiasticall causes The Bishop answereth that they ought to take such gouernment Ergo they may lawfully do it For his antecedeÌ„t that they ought he referreth to the foure meanes of the issue that M. Feckenham would haue it tried by M. Stapl. picking by quarels of other pretended answers made by the Bishop before falsely surmising that he then denied or mollified the woordes of the othe and that now he answereth without any molliâ—…iyng or restiaint that the Queene ought to take vpon hir such kinde of regiment these answeres he calleth so â—…arring variable diuerse and so contrary the one to the other that if the one be true the other must be false and so concludes they be false and deceiueable both of them But M. St. this is a false and a deceiuable point of your owne deuising from the which I perceyue by the tenour of your whole counterblast ye will neuer iarre nor varie one iote except God sende you hereafter better grace and iudgement than thus still to ground your self and your writings on manifest lies and forgeries and then presuppose them in your nodâ—…le for manifest principles and truthes Thus do ye all your booke ouer so ye play here First ye ground your selfe on a forged answere that the Bishop should before haue made imagining it must néedes be true bicause you say ye certainly vnderstande that M. Feckenham hath so reported to some of his friendes that the Bishop made then another resolute answere This is all that ye all age for proofe of it ye haue it but by heare say at the hande of some partiall tale bearer some tolde you that M. Feckenham told some that the Bishop tolde him that this was his resolute answere and you beleue it for a certentie and write it solemnly in your booke to deface the Bishop as it were with doubble and contrary answering your selfe in the meane season answering nothing to the argument nor to the Bishops present and printed answere And therfore I neede returne no other answere to you than that one tolde me that another told him that he told you that ye were to light of credence to beleue euery flimme flamme tale and to rash of Iudgement to clap downe such tales in your booke of whiche ye had no better proufe than that all the worlde should see claw me claw thee two false marchants néede no broker they say The tenth Diuision THe Bishop entring into his proufes of the issue that Princes ought to take vpoÌ„ them such gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes as the Queenes Maiestie doth chalenge and take vppon hit among other properties belonging to the Princely office to beginne with all auoucheth out of Deut. the 17. and the 13. with some expositoures vpon the same that the Prince is commaunded to haue by him the booke of the lawe to reade in it diligently to this ende that he himselfe may learne the feare of God and cause his subiects to become Israelites by his princely authoritie redressing the peruersnesse of such aâ—… swerue from the ordinances and ceremonies appointed of god The which beyng true the conclusion consequently followeth thereuppon M. St. answere to this argument resteth on foure faults that he findeth with the Antecedent which he calleth vntruthes so reckoneth them vp also in his score but bicause they are the principall materiall pointes whereon his answere dependes I thought it more fitte to note them here But first after his scoffing craking maner he saith to the Bishop Go on I saie in Gods name M. Horne and prosecute your plea stoutly God sende you good speede And so he doth eueÌ„ such as ye the honestie of your cause deserue c. But all these his fromps and vaunts I ouerpasse and referre them to his common places and will onely answere to that which he chargeth the Bishop withall which is no lesse than infidelitie and vnskilfulnesse And to beginne with the later bicause he saith it is the least matter and noteâ—…h it for the former vntruth Your vnskilfulnesse saith he whiche is the least matter standeth in that ye say the King is commaunded to haue by him
whiche commeth after also and yet your selfe so flatly belye the Scripture for malice to the byshop in saying suche wordes that the byshop lefte out do followe which neither followe at all and your selfe before confessed they went immediatly before Sée see howe enuie hath blinded this mans sighte Lesse maruell it is that ye sawe not the period for although those wordes whiche ye cite as lefte oute taking a copie of the Priest and the Leuiticall tribe â—…e wordes going before the bishops sentence and he shall haue by him c. yet is there a ful period betweene them which you saw not or would not sée so that those former words are no materiall part of the sentence following cited by the byshop but a material part of the senteÌ„ce going before which the byshop cited not But M. St. citeth falsly threapeth that the bishop did cite it and in citing it lefte out a materiall parte thereof charging the byshop in these wordes after suche order as your owne text appoynteth â–ª saying VVhen he is set vpon the seate of hys kingdome he shal write him out this second law in a booke taking a copie of the Priestes of the Leuiticall tribe VVhich latter wordes ye haue bicause they make directly agaynst you quite lefte out Why M. Stap. he left out bothe the latter middle first wordes and all of this sentence he mentioned it not at all ye doe but threapen kindnesse on him to fasten withall vpon him your chalenge of infidelitie Onely he alleaged the nexte sentence and that expounding it so fully that he leaueth oute neither former latter or any materiall poynte at all thereof .. And thus muche doth your selfe also witnesse agaynst your selfe saying that he lefte oâ—…t vvordes that immediatly goe before the vvordes vvhich he alleadged And what were those he shall haue by him c. This then was the texte that he alleaged by your owne confession And therfore when ye vrge him with the former texte that he alleaged not to proue infidelitie in him ye contrarie your selfe ye cleare him ye shewe your owne excéeding vnfaythfull dealing bothe to the scripture and to him also But wherefore should the Byshop haue left out as ye charge him any materiall parte of his texte bycause say you it maketh directly agaynst him In déede that were a shrewde cause and would iolily cloke M. St. infidelitie and cause men to suspect infidelitie in the bishop if he had concealed any thing in his text that directly made against him Which infidelitie who vseth and who approueth it for the poynt of a wise man to conceale that that maketh agaynst him shal after wel appeare But now although it be plainly proued that the byshop in his text left out no part therof Yet for further tryall of this also let vs take not onely the latter wordes of the next period going before which words he complayneth are lefte out but euery worde also of the same sentence concluding two or thrée periodes vnder one bicause we would haue nothing left out and ioyne them to the sentence following cited by the byshop and then behold what maner of conclusion either directly or indirectly they make agaynst him Wherin shall appeare that M. St. hath so besotted himselfe in diuinitie that he had quite forget the logike that so ofte he crakes vpon These textes are these VVhen he is set on the seate of his kingdome he shall write for him selfe out of this seconde law in a booke taking a copy of the Priests of the Leuiticall tribe And he shall haue it with him and he shall reade of it all the dayes of his life that he may learne to feare the Lorde his God and keepe all the wordes and ceremonies that are written in the lawe Upon these words M. St. frameth his argument The king shal write out this second law in a booke taking a copy of the Priestes of the Leuiticall tribe Ergo a king ought not to take vpon him suche gouernement in ecclesiasticall causes as the Quéenes maiestie doth chalenge and take vpon hir For this is the conclusion that directly maketh agaynst the bishop but as herein his logike is altogither vnskilfull so is his diuinitie yet more vnfaithfull For hauing chalenged the bishop for leauing out these words taking a copie of the priests of the Leuiticall trybe as directly against him and theÌ„ immediately foloweth sayth he how he shall busily reade the sayde booke and so foorth In which words he maketh another toto manifest lie falsifying the text yet once againe For these words Et habebit secâ—… he shal haue with him which word he leaueth quite out go betwéene therfore followe not as he sayth immediatly But sée héere whether it be of malice to the byshop or to the Scripture that all this while in quarelling with this little poore text habebit secum he shall haue with him he findeth fault with translating he accuseth the byshop of infidelitie and vnskilfulnesse he complaineth of leauing out wordes going immediatly before of curtalling the texte and leauing out latter wordes of leauing out a material part of words following immediatly he citeth and reciteth these and those wordes in Latin and Englishe he scanneth and descanteth on translations and all this while those onely three wordes habebit secum which the byshop alleaged wrinching and wresting he euer glaunceth by them he will not once name them but leaueth them quite out which was the materiall thing that the byshop alleaged And yet all the while he whineth of leauing oute and leaueth oute him selfe that he should chiefly answere What shall we thinke is the cause that he dothe thus surely there is some force in those wordes that he sawe were more directly against him or else he would neuer do so for very shame But I remember a tale that he hath patched vp into his counterblast of the Simoniacall Priest that béeing commaunded to say In nomine patris filij spiritus sanctâ—… could rehearse all well inough till he came to spiritus sancti as for that he could not pronounce it in any maner of wise But sée your chance M. Stap. that ye there fabled howe here your selfe haue playde the like part The byshop vrgeth you with thrée wordes habebit secum â–ª ye will not onely answere nothing thereto but ye will not in any wise whyle ye repeate the sentences so muche as name those wordes and yet ye goe rounde about them On the other side those wordes that the bishop cited not as no parte of his sentence alleaged Lorde what a doe ye make of curtalling of leauing out of infidelitie vnskilfulnesse peruersitie malice and I can not tell what Onely bicause ye thinke those wordes séeme to make for your massing Priests authoritie bicause they name Priests and yet God wot they make nothing for you nor agaynst the byshop directly or indirectly But you thinke this sentence maketh thus much for your priestes that if the
novv But then is it most euident that the Popishe Churche is not the true Churche nor was figured hereby at all For first the popishe Prestes deliuered not a coppie of the lawe of God to wete of the Old and New testament vp into their Kings Queenes and Princes handes to write it out and haue it alwaies by them to studie vppon but rather do the contrary as did the Pharisies keping the key of knowledge away from them of purpose telling them it appertaineth not to their estates but that they may go play them or employ them selues in other foreigne matters onely the worde of God they must in no case meddle withall which belongeth alonely to the Priests Nor they will be bounde to deliuer vp to their Princes any coppie thereof at all But thus much yet they will do for their Princes to giue them a péece here and there and that either must be the bare letter as M. Stapleton calleth it or els such expositions as it shall please them to leauen the dough withall And is this now the perfect bodie of that shadow the veritie of that figure set forth in Moses order or not rather the full accomplishing of the Scribes and Pharisies doings whom they haue so followed in not giuing vp a coppie to their Princes in wresting defacing and taking away Gods worde that theirs may better be said to be a very shadow and figure of the Popish priests dealings herein And that we rather expresse the veritie of that figure and shadow of Moses order rendring vp to our Princes a full perfect and sincere coppie of Gods lawe that they may write it out set it forth haue it by them and meditate therein day and night as King Dauid counsayleth to learne thereby to be wise and feare the Lord their God and by them all their subiects And thus his importune vrging of this place hath so properly helpt his matter forwarde that where he saith the Bishop left it quite out as making directry against him what soeuer the Bishop did it had bene better for M. Stapl. to haue left it quite out also or not to haue triumphed so much on that which at the better view thereof so directly maketh against all his popishe Priestes But for all this M. Stapleton will proue that the popish priestes must not onely haue the handling of Gods worde but also that they can not be deceyued nor erre in the sense thereof And this will he proue euen by the Protestants them selues For sayth he as the Protestants them selues are forced by plaine wordes to confesse that they knowe not the true worde or booke of God but by the Churche whiche from time to time deliuered these bookes euen so by all reason and learning they shoulde also confesse that the Churche can no more be deceyued in deliuering the sense of the sayde worde than in deliuering the worde it selfe VVhich seeing they will not confesse for then we were forthwith at a point and ende with all their errours and heresies they must nedes continue in the same The argument is this The Protestants confesse that they know not the worde of God but by the Churche of Christ that kéepeth witnesseth and agnizeth the same from time to time Ergo the Protestants must néedes confesse that the Church he meaneth the Popishe priestes in deliuering of the worde can not be deceyued in the sense thereof In stéede of aunswere hereto master Stapleton him selfe maketh a preoccupation for perceyuing the falsenesse and follie thereof woulde soone be reiected VVhich seeing sayth he they will not confesse for then we were at a point with all their errours and heresies they must needes continue in the same Do we not confesse master Stapleton that ye woulde haue vs confesse why then haue ye reasoned all this while thus fondly taking that for confessed which your selfe now are forced by plain wordes to confesse that we confesse not but vtterly denie that you be the Catholike Church that you haue deliuered these bookes from time to time which you haue rather hid away that you can not erre in the sense â—…f the scripture and such like wrong principles Which in déede if we shoulde falsely confesse with you then all the matter were at a poynt and ende as ye saye But since we denie it and reiect your fonde reasoning à petitione principij it is tyme that ye séeke out other arguments more substantiall or else as your cause is at a poynte or not worth a poynt so in conclusion ye stande on this poynt to slaunder vs as following euery man his owne heade and that we shal neuer haue done and errours will neuer cease more and more to encrease and multiplie vnlesse we take forth say you the lesson I haue shewed you And what lesson is that Forsooth that we must graunt and confesse to be most true all these your false principles And then we shall be your white sonnes and good scholers I dare say if once we would conne that lesson Ye would giue vs a fat remedie and leaue to play the fooles truands all day long if we would learne that lesson of yours But such scholemasters as yâ—… are such schollers ye desire to haue and suche lessons ye take them forth Caecus autem si caeco ducatum prestet ambo in foueam cadunt If the blinde leade the blinde both of them fall into the ditch Thus ye deceyued the princes and people in tymes past But God be praysed both Princes and people haue now taken forth that lesson out of Gods holy word that ye could not or neuer would teach read or expound vnto them Nowe when ye haue redde this lesson vnto vs with so false a glosse and commentarie vpon the text as ye complaine left out ye determine that the best remedie were the exact obseruation of this place that ye haue say you so wilyly and sleightly slipt ouer This is but a poynt of your apparant impudencie master Stapleton to set a beâ—…de face on the matter for God knoweth ye would nothing lesse than that the diligent reader shoulde exactly obserue this place Whiche if he did this place alone were there no more woulde sufficiently shewe howe ye haue haled and racked it and all the lawe of God besides That this place therefore if the exact obseruation thereof be the best remedie to your cause as ye say might remedie your cause the better I haue somewhat the more exactly obserued it and if your cause haue founde any remedie thereby muche good doe it you ye shall haue more of it So that I trust yée shall not néede to complaine of ouerslipping any thing materiall Which least ye should doe the Chapter shall be yet more exactly obserued than perchaunce ye would haue it to be And to begin with that ye quarrell at next as wilily and sleightly slipt ouer But most of all say you another sentence in the verie said Chapter And euen the next to this
religion Secondly that they ought to doe this with an especiall regards and care Thirdely they perceyue and rightly vnderstande that it is Gods will they shoulde so doe Now since that this by master Stapletons déepe silence is agréed vpon betwixt the Bishop and him I make hereon this argument To order and set forth Gods true religion with especiall regarde and care is the Princes duetie But the only sort of gouernment that the Quéenes Maiestie doth chalenge and take vpon hiâ—… in ecclesiasticall causes is to order and set forth Gods true Religion with an especiall regarde and care Ergo Prinâ—… ought to take vpon them such gouernment as the Quéenes Maiestie doth claime and take vpon hir in ecclesiasticall causes And thus is the Bishops antecedent directly proued and so consequently the principall matter of M. Feck issue Nowe as the former part being the generall assertion to all the ensamples following is no whitte impeached by any aunswere of master Stap. to it but by silence whiche with him is an argument of confession graunted so like a very Counterblaster in déed he blusâ—…reth and puffeth at the seconde part as though he would all to blast it Moses sayth the Bishop was supreme gouernour ouer Gods people and was not chief priest or Bishop for that was Aaron Here master Stapleton denyeth not Moses to be the supreme gouernour but that he was not chiefe priest or Bishop he vtterly gainsayeth it It is an vntruth sayth he in his score for Moses was the chiefe priest as shall be prooued Here is a flat promise of proufe but I feare me it wil neuer be perfourmed neyther doth master Stapleton here go about the perfourmance of it And therefore the Bishops denial of Moses to be the chiefe Priest must stand for a truth till by prouing Moses to be the chiefe Priest he haue proued it to be an vntruth And in the meane time his promise must stande but for a crake as also his prowde entraâ—…nte into his Chapter That the Scripture by the Bishop alleaged reacheth nothing home but rather infringeth and plainely marreth the Bishoppes purpose and fullye standeth on our syde sayeth this student so greatly hath arrogancie sotted him He fareth as did the Souldiour who when his aduersarie had manye tymes in wrastling hurled him downe in the sighte of euerie stander by yet woulde hée neuer confesse that hée had anye fall yea most arrogantlye â–ª he styll affyrmed that hée had â—…ast the other And euen so playeth this student for this of wrastling is one of his common similitudes he contendeth to wrastle with the Bishoppe whiche is in verys déede as hée sayeth in this Chapter Impar congressus Achâ—…lls Troilus An vneuen matche betweene Troylus and Achilles What a number of â—…oule falles hée hath had yea howe hée hath béene ouerturned in hys â—…wne trippes is apparaunt to euery Readers eyes and goe no further but euen to hys last Chapter And yet sée howe hée craketh that all the Byshoppes allegations marre hys owne cause and fully stande on hys syde Where contraryewyse they haue drie beaten him backe bellie side and all And as hée thus fondely maketh vaunt of his former victorie â—…o I doubt nothing sayth he it will fare with his examples Well sayd of a student like an other Gawin he doubteth nothing But sée a sodaine qualme of hys inconstancie for euen streyght wayes after he hath cryed out all comes to shorâ—… he sayth but here am I shrewedly â—…ncombred and in a great doubt what to doe Whie master Stapleton are ye now so soone in a great doubt and right nowe as doeth bolde Bayarde doubted nothing and haue before alreadie without any stammering thereat clapped downe your marginall note for a full resolute aunswere that Moyses was the chiefe Priest and nowe doubt ye what to answere But master Stapleton hath so many weapons that he is shrewdly encombred with them as it were another armed Golias and yet one smal poebble stone will soone ease him of this encombrance He telles vs he hath so many aunsweres that he doubteth with which he should beginne for I could sayth he make a short but a true aunswere that these ensamples are fully aunswered alreadie by master D. Harding and master Dorman In déede master Stapleton this were a short aunswers but I sée your selfe feare as ye sayde before it woulde come to short and not reache home to the matter Yet say you if ye shoulde referre the Reader thither to his and your great ease it should be to the sparing not only of penne ynke and paper but of the time also which of all thinges is most precious It séemeth master Stapleton ye are a man of déepe casting these are good considerations of penne ynke paper and tyme. But whie followe ye not your owne councell whiche if ye had obserued and left out so many impertinent vagaries and other your trifling common places ye had saued more paper penne ynke and tyme by thrée halues than ye haue done And here as séeming full resolued to follow this aduise ye clappe downe another marginall note All master Hornes examples out of the olde Testament aunswered alreadie by master Doctour Harding and master Dorman Here sayth he is a shorte but a true aunswere To this shorte aunswere I aunswere againe All M. Doctor Hardings and M. Dormans answeres confuted alreadie by the B of Sarum and M. Nowell Here is another as short an answere as yours M. Stap. and a great deale truer whiche I remitte to the indifferent viewers of both their answeres Nowe might we both rest and breath vs from further answering of these ensamples and spare penue ynke paper and time also that he séemeth to accompt most precious But another thing was more precious vnto him and that was master Feckenhams hyre and his friendes largesse for so much Paper penne ynke and time spent about his booke and the gaine of the printed copies which the bigger volume it came vnto for he woulde not séeme a thréehalfepennie student the fatter exhibition it should yéelde and he séeme the greater clerke yea to go beyonde his masters And therefore there is no remedie he will spare neyther penne ynke paper time nor paynes also but that his Counterblast shall be blowne vp to so large and full a volume that it may encounter euen the best of theirs To whose answeres if he shoulde referre himselfe and saye no more thereto Then I feare me sayth he woulde steppe forth if not master Horne a good simple plaine man in his dealings yet some other ioly fine freshe pregnant wittie fellowe yea and bring me to the streightes which way so euer I did treade You are loath I perceiue master Stapleton to be brought into the streight way to treade aright therein for then your wrie treading woulde soone be espied But ye séeke crookes and shifting answeres for the nonce And lyke the vayne talkatiue Arrian Philosopher ye dispise the right reuerende and learned father calling
suche a counsellour as your selfe are M. Stap. But when ye sée this weakenesse of your argument by and by you start backe againe from all that you haue sayd And as before ye forsooke the ensamples from Moyses and referred them to your foresayde wrested rule so woulde ye nowe also deale with Iosue that if the Priestes counselling would not inferre his authoritie yet his iudgement should as ye thought enforce it Your argument is this The Priest and the Iudge must discusse all doubtes of bloud strife cleane and vncleane Ergo all the testimonies of the holy scripture brought forth by master Nowell and before him by master Horne can not induce supremacie in causes ecclesiasticall but the execution of the high Priestes or lawes commaundement This friuolous argument grounded on this impertinent and weake ankerholde which master Stapleton maketh his generall rule and succour whensoeuer he is driuen to a plunge then backe againe to this as a foxe to his earth is so fully aunswered and confuted that it were but superfluous to stande any longer about it And here sayth master Stapleton I will not quarrell with master Nowell c. Under pretence that he will not he beginnes to picke by quarrelles with him A pretie figure he will not but he doth The quarels are a couple of miâ—…quotings of figures for 33. 34. for 23. 24. For vsing such examples as the Bishop of Winchester doth For detecting M. Dormans sâ—…ealth the noting wherof he calleth childish and boyish rhetoâ—…ike for feare in deede that his owne childishe and boyish rhetorike stealing so many sentences arguments and in maner whole leaues from Doctor Harding and master Dorman as master Dorman stale from Hosius maâ—…ler Harding shoulde be also detected as master Dormans is and therefore he flourisheth it out with his common places but the stuffe is the olde stâ—…ffe still though newe furbished for rusting to seeme the fresher to the shewe After he hath done with M. Nowell he returneth to Iosue and least he should seeme to haue answered no particuler point he choseth out one of Iosue his doings in the place of all the rest alleged not so much to make any answere at all to the obiection thereof as thereby to picke yet another by quarrell and so to shake of the matter as though he had made a clerkly answere thereto The Bishop shewed how at the appoyntment of Iosue the priestes 〈◊〉 the arke of Couenant and placed the same so goeth on through many perticuler actions that declaâ—…e Iosues supreme gouernment ordring of ecclesi matters To this when M. St should directly answere whether this declare an authoritie of the Prince euer the priestes in ecclesiasticall matters yea or no in sâ—…eed of answere he sayth But for the doyng of Ioâ—…ue I will further note that then the Priestes tooke vp the arke of couenant and went before the people But I pray you master Horne how was this obserued of laâ—…e yeares when the lay men durst aduenture to take the guiding of the arke and go before the Priestes and not suffer the priests to go before them And durst alter the state of Christian religion agaynst the will and minde of â—…he B. the whole clergie then at their conuocation asâ—…embled And I pray you againe master Stapleton What doth this answere the Bishops proposition â—…t shewâ—…th your shifting it detecteth your malice that witâ—…ingly slaunder your most gracâ—…ous priâ—…ce natiue countrey Hir Maiestie hath onely done therein euen after the example of this moste Godly priâ—…ce Iosue In coÌ„maunding the arke that is is to say gods holye worde in the syncere setting forth of it by the godly ministers thereof to be caried before hir hir subiects And when your popish prâ—…lates priests which in deed are neyther preâ—…ates nor prieus refused â—…o to cary it otherwise thaÌ„ after your oâ—…n devises to cart it â—…ot after Gods 〈◊〉 or rather would not cary it about at al but bury it vnder a bushel â—… in 〈◊〉 therof cary about maâ—…mets toyes to mâ—…ke 〈◊〉 peoplâ—… commit most barbarous idolatrie hir high â—…sse as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath abolished iuch caryage and as did Salo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of office your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aud 〈◊〉 clergie and placed other 〈◊〉 painful 〈◊〉 in their â—…ooues to cary this erke as goo hath appointed it before hir highnes all hir people Now when ye haue thus 〈◊〉 the prince the clergie the whole realme and yet answered not one worde to the obiection VVell say you â—…et tâ—…ts palâ—…e for this present I say no 〈◊〉 for Iosue his doing sauing that otherwise they are not to be drawne into an ordinarie rule for that the spirite of God was certainly in him and for that hee had part of Moses glorie and the people commaunded to heare him and those things that he did wherof M. Nowell M. Horne would inferre a soueraigntie in causes spiritual he did them by the expresse commaundement of god And from such princes to all princes indifferently to gather the like preheminence in all poynts were no sure and found gathering and collection Your argument is this those Princes in whom the spirit of God certainly is and haue part of Moses glorie and whom thâ—… â–ª people are coÌ„maunded to heare and whose doings are by Gods expresse coÌ„mandement are not ensamples for all godly Princes to follow in their gouernments But such another was Iosue Ergo it were no sound gathering collection to set Iosue for ensample for other Princes to follow For that which ye inferre of like preheminence in al points to Iosue both maketh your argument vicious hauing more in the conclusion than is in any of the propositions neyther doth the Bishop or any other contende for like prehemmence in all point as Iosue had but inferre of his ensample a like charge of their dueties a like care and regard of gouerning Gods people to be required of theÌ„ being princes rulers as Iosue was But where lerned you this wicked false principle wheron ye ground your argumnet that the doings of any are not to be set for examples for other Princes to follow that had certainly the spirite of God in them or that had a part of Moses glorie or the people were commaunded to heare them or bicause they did their doings by the expresse commaundement of God are they not a great deale the more to be set for ensamples to follow Would ye haue them follow such as certainly had the spirite of errour in them suche lying Papistes as your selues Woulde ye haue them follow your expresse commaundements and then they were to be followed but not if they followed the commaundements of God Are those Princes not to be followed whome God commaundeth the people to heare And are they to be followed whom you commaund the people to heare If they be godly Princes God commaundeth all people both to heare them and obey them chiefly where they
ye bryng hym foorthe to better purpose or else whyle yee thynke by clawyng hym thus to wynne hys good fauour yee gette hys heauy displeasure and that he answere ye flatly non hercule veniam tertio he will not come at your cal Howbeit ye will once agayne in hope of better lucke bring him foorth and alleage his authoritie better than ye haue done hitherto Besides that say you it is to be considered as M. D. Harding toucheth that he passed other Princes herein bicause he had the gifte of prophecie So that neither those thinges that the Apologie sheweth of Dauid or those that ye and master Nowell adde therevnto for the fortification of the sayde superioritie can by any meanes induce it This friuolous argument he was a Prophet also aswell as a Prince Ergo his superioritie in that he was a Prince can not be alleaged for other Princes to followe ye vsed before as your owne freshe stuffe to shifte off Moses ensample but as it nothing helped your cause then no more dothe it nowe Onely it detecteth héere your vayne crake there of vnspent stuffe where in déede it was olde rotten stuffe spent before by D. Harding on king Dauid as héere your selfe coÌ„fesse yet there ye brought it as a notable fresh surplusage beyonde all that had bene sayde But as you thus of D. Hardings olde scroppes héere would haue made vs there newe fresh stuffe of your owne wherby the alleaging of him agayne this third time openeth your shame so yet once agayne ye make your M. D. Harding and your selfe for companie confounde your owne tales and speake contrarie to your selues Right now ye sayde and alleaged your masters authoritie for it that king Dauids doings were no more than Queene Maries doings to employ a supremacie Nowe ye say agayne and like wise alleage your master for it that king Dauid passed other princes heerein bicause he had the gifte of prophecie If he passed other princes héerein then he passed Quéene Mary whome many other Princes haue also héerein passed and so his doings were more than were Quéene Maries doings héerein For who knowe not that she was no Prophete and thus the oftner ye alleage your master ye take your master tardie in one lie or another and make him still contrarie both himselfe and his cause also Againe it King Dauid were a Prophete as I graunt he was a Prophete ye wote might and did determine doctrine but your selfe sayde before Dauid in all his doings determined no doctrine and thus ye lie on your owne head and make your master witnesse thereto Well leaue at the length to cite your masters authorities for shame master Stapleton since ye can bring them out no handsomer or howe well so euer ye haue brought them out to your aduantage since they be no better proues than that He affirmeth he noteth he toucheth as though all were gospell that master Doctor Harding affirmeth noteth or toucheth Are ye so fond to thinke any man would yéelde so soone vnto them vnlesse he were as wise as your selfe But since none of all these reasons will serue we shall now haue other stuffe of your owne though not very fresh but such stale refuse as your masters haue refused but to you all is fishe that commes to nette ye do wisely to let go nothing that maye any waye be wrested to helpe so yll a cause And first ye reason from the authoritie of the scripture In déede this is a better way than to reason from D. Hardings authoritie The Scripture say you in the sayde place by you and master Nowell alleaged sayth that Dauid did worke iuxta omnia quae scripta sunt in lege dominâ—… according to all things written in the lawe of God. What conclusion can ye inferre hereon agaynst the Bishops allegation of Dauid Ergo he had not an especiall care and regard in ordring and setting forth Gods true religion if ye make the quite contrarie conclusion He did worke according to all things written in the lawe of God Ergo as the B. sayth he had an especiall care and regard in ordring directing Gods true religion then should ye make a most true conclusion where otherwise rightly applied it can no ways serue your turn Thus bring ye out that which once again ouerturnes your cause and proues K. Dauids supreme gouernmeÌ„t And euen so the Q. Maiestie by this ensample of K. Dauid is taught to do the like as praysed be to god for hir therfore she foloweth wel herein the steps of K. Dauid doing iuxta omnia quae scripta suÌ„t in lege domini according to all things written in gods law And where the papists in al their errors this amoÌ„g other of the supremacie do praeter coÌ„tra omnia quae scripta sunt in lege domini besides against all things writteÌ„ in gods law As Dauid redressed eccl. disorders crept in before his time so the Q. highnes now hath redressed such disorders as she fouÌ„d before hir time crept in Thus the more ye reason the more stil ye make against your selfe Ye had néed adde some better stuffe thaÌ„ this or els if ye thus hold on your friends wold wish M. Fec had hired ye to hold your peace when he first moued you to plead for him Master Stap. séeing it now more than high time to adde some notable thing to better his cause VVherevnto I adde sayth he a notable saying of the scripture in the sayd booke by you alleaged concerning Dauids doings by you brought foorth touching the Priestes and Leuits Vt ingrediantur domum dei iuxta ritum suum sub manu Aaron patris corum sicut prâ—…ceperat dominus deus Israel King Dauids appoyntment was that the Leuits and Priestes should enter into the house of God there to serue vnder the gouernment of whome I pray you not of King Dauid but vnder the spirituall gouernment of their spirituall father Aaron and his successours The gouernour of them was Eleazarus Upon this notable sentence for your purpose as ye thinke you gather thrée notes And bicause ye would go orderly ye begin first with the last note VVhere we haue to note first say you that Dauid appoynted hereto the Leuits nothing of himself But sicut praeceperat dominus deus Israel as the Lorde God of Israel had before appoynted VVe haue here againe to note first in you M. Stap. no plaine dealing that begin with the last part of the sentence first And wherefore I pray you but that that which is spoken here of this matter in especiall ye woulde make it séeme to serue for all Dauids doings in generall VVe haue to note againe your hacking and wresting of this sentence which sheweth a playne destination betweene theyr turnes of comming in and their ordinarie ministerie in theyr turnes in attending on the highe priest The text is thus â—…ae vices eorum secundum ministeria sua vt ingrediantur domum domini iuxta ritum
farre forth as pertaineth to the ten commaÌ„dements of the tables If it be of the commaundement so farre forth as pertaineth to the other moral points if it be of the precepts of the ten commandements as it were certaine conclusions piked out if it be of the ceremonies so farre forth as pertayneth to ceremoniall matters of iustifications that is to say of iudiciall matters whereby iustice is to be conserued among men Thus is there no parte ecclesiasticall or temporall exempted from the ouersight care directioÌ„ appointment of the king No not the iudgement that ye haue so often alleaged and craked vppon out of the Deut. 17. vnder the which as a generall rule for all examples to be ruled by ye would subdue the Prince vpon paine of death to obey the absolute determination of the priest Euen this same office and all other with all causes to them belonging so farre as stretcheth to the ouersight and supreme gouernment do belong to the Prince to appoint and ordeyne fitte parties to displace and remoue vnfitte parties to sée al these offices so well as any other temporall obserued kept and executed dutifully Which is not so much for the persons as for the persons offices And therefore Iosaphat not only appointed them by his authoritie or regiment as Lyra saith their offices but also he told theÌ„ how they should do their offices Nay say you to each your matter yet with an other shift He doth it not with threates of his highe displeasure or by force of his owne iniunctions but onely saith so then doing you shall not sinne or offende The which very manner of speache christian Emperours and Kinges haue eftâ—…ones vsed in the like case as we shall hereafter in the thirde booke by examples declare Euen in the examples that ye shall there declare M. St. ye shall finde both threates of high displeasures and the iniâ—…nctions also of many godly princes And therefore seing that ye coÌ„pare their doings alike why say you these doings of Iehosophat haue no threates nor iniunctions what call ye this did he not threate them trowe you when he saide Ne veniat tra super vos super fratres vestros Least wrath come vppon you and vppon your bretheren Whiche woordes ye ouerhipped He denouÌ„ced vnto them the wrath of God which declared his great zeale and care of Gods matters as the Bishop saide And thinke you that the high displeasure of God conteyned not this godly Princes high displeasure also do ye suppose that they drad not the Princes high displeasure in the breache of their dueties bicause he threateth them with Gods moste high displeasure Or thinke ye it was not so forcible as any iniuÌ„ctioÌ„ of his vnto them in that as your selfe say he charged them and as the text saithe Praecepit eis he commaunded them which is most plaine and euident to signifie that he enioygned them by his supreme gouernment ouer them And to shew that besides his charge his commaundement his threate of Gods most high displeasure they should incurre his high displeasure also if they or any other disobeyed Lyra saithe on his former visitation Hic oftenditur qualiter c. Here is declared after what sorte he instructed his people to wite by the Priestes and Leuites whom he sent to this purpose and with them certaine of his Princes to bring the people to obedience and to punish the rebelles if they should finde any And of this visitation also saith Lyra He appointed Zabadias to be ouer those workes that belong to the Kinges office that if any rebelles were found they should by him be chastized with due punishmeÌ„t Doth not this import the Kinges highe displeasure in the breach of these his appointments charge coÌ„maundment when he adioyned those that should punish the disobedient Now whereas the Bishop briefly noted all this how King Iosaphat appointed the Priestes to decide and iudge controuersies you snatch thereat and clappe downe thereon a marginall note Yea the Priestes iudged not the king say you ouerskipping that the King appointed them thereto which argueth his supreme gouernment And yet the King iudged also by his deputie not the Priest alone And so saith plaine the texte In Hierusalem quoque constituit c. And Iosaphat appointed also Leuites and Priestes and the Princes of the families of Israel Here M. St. he appointed as well the lay Princes as the Priests And wherto vt Iudicium causam domini iudicarent that they should iudge the iudgement and cause of the Lorde Sée how plaine this is against you but what is there not that ye will spare to wrest to make it sée me to serue your turne For eueÌ„ of the last sentence ye thinke in the ende ye haue gotten so notable a proufe for your matter that greatly ye vrge it and wonderfully triumph therevppon Thus saith say you King Iosaphat Amarias the priest and your Bishop shall haue the gouernment of such things as appertaine to god And Zabadias shal be ouer such workes as appertaine to the kinges office Lo say you the kings office and diuine matters are of distinct functions Lo say I how sone ye would coÌ„clude a lie Your text saith not the kings office and diuine matters are of distinct functions Nor maketh any opposition or distinction betwene the kings office and diuine matters as though it appertained not to the kings office to haue any thing to do with diuine matters Contrary to the which your own coÌ„fession euen in this kings doings witnesseth against you that he reformed religion and had a care and diligence about the directing ecclesiasticall matters And trow you he did this beyond the bouÌ„des of his office How can then his example as ye say fitte well christian princes if it be not a parcell belonging to their office the text is plaine that the king appointeth as wel the Bishop Amarias his gouernmeÌ„t as Zabadias his gouernmeÌ„t to the one to haue the gouernmeÌ„t of such things as appertaine to God to the other to be ouer such workes as appertaine to the king Here in these two such things on the one partie and such workes on the other partie is the distinction made and not betwene the kings office and diuine matters as you falsely conclude And yet I pray you what argument can ye gather herevppon The kings office diuine matters are of distinct functioÌ„s Ergo the King hath no supreme gouernment ouer all ecclesiasticall causes By the like reason he hath no supreme gouernment ouer temporall causes neither For the kingeâ—… office his temporall subiects matters are not they also distinct functione Ergo the king hath no supreme gouernmeÌ„t ouer his temporall subiects matters Againe ye reason thus Thus saith the king the priest shall gouerne in those things that belong to God. Ergo to ouersee the Priests gouerne them rightly appertayneth not to the kinges gouernment Where in deede you should rather reason the quite
his free mercie not of our freewill workes So that what we haue now either in will or worke to do any thing acceptable to his most blessed will and pleasure the same in déede is in vs bicause his spirite is in vs but not of vs but of him bringing forth in vs Uelle perficere Both to will and to worke as fruites of his holy spirite within vs And if this agrée with the pestiferous Fables and lies of Simon Magus Marcion and Manes then ye haue mounted faire and well If not had ye mounted farre higher than they write Simon Magus did yea than euer Lucifer did yet as Simon Magus fell downe and brake his necke as Lucifer was throwen downe to hell fire so must you M. Stapleton with shame come downe againe for feare ye be hurled downe with them Now if as ye rashly mounted vp ye will orderly come downe through out all ages as it were by steppes ye may descende by this doctrine euen to your owne time againe But I pray you M. Stapleton in your comming downe let Pelagius be your host What maÌ„ drinke with him at least one free draught of his erroneous doctrine He is a free companion and will let ye drinke at will freely and he hath pleasannt licour well swéetned with pure naturall drugges and brewed with strong spices of your owne habilitie perfection and merites delectable to the palace of mans selfeloue But swéete soppes must haue sowre sawce they say â–ª This pleasaunt errour is but a sugred poyson and as ill on the other parte as Sâ—…noÌ„ Magus fatall necessitie was if not a great deale worse But ye will come neere vs and touche ye say the very foundation and well spring of this your newe Gospell which altogither is grounded vpon Iustification without good workes In that also ye drawe very nighe to the sayde Simon Magus Do we drawe nighe him M. St God sende grace you draw not with him and that many of your works yea euen of your good works and suche as ye ascribe iustification vnto be not suche as Simon Magus and his disciples workes were We grounde not vpon iustification without good workes you grounde vpon lyes without good consciences that thus do slaunder vs Iustification in déede may well be without your good workes yea it can not be with them The good workes that God commaundeth iustification bringeth foorth and therfore it can not be without them bicause they be the necessarie fruites of Iustification we seuer not them therfore from Iustification but discerne them from the Acte of God in iustifying Not to make our selues our owne iustifiers in whole or in parte We discerne theÌ„ from the causes of our iustification and ascribe the causes to the loue fauor and mercies of God the father for Christ his sonnes sake by the sanctification of his holy spirite We discerne our workes from the merite and deserte of iustification muche more from the merite of our saluation and say it is onely wrought by his merites and giuen to vs gratis freely All haue sinned sayth S. Paule and wante the glory of God but they are iustified freely by his grace through the redemption which is in Iesu Christ whom God hath appoynted to be the reconciliatioÌ„ through fayth by his bloud comming betweene Which worde freely is contrary to merite and excludeth it as S. Paule reasoneth Sâ—… ex gratia iam non ex operibus alioquin gratia non est gratia If it come of grace then commeth it not of workes otherwyse grace is not grace That is to say it is not frée fauour but bound fauour as deserued or bought As Barnard said NoÌ„ est quo gratia intreâ—… vbi iam merituÌ„ occupauit VVhere merite hath taken vp the rowme there is no place for grace to enter And so S. Aug Haec est electio gratia c. This is the electioÌ„ of grace bicause all good merites of man are preuented For if it were giuen by any good merites then were it not giuen free but rendred as ought And by this meanes it is not by a true name called grace where reward is As the same Apostle sayth it is not imputed according to grace but according to duetie but if that it be true grace that is to saye freely giuen it findeth nought in man to whom it may be worthily owing Infinite are the places that may be cited out of the fathers and many are by others at large collected in this behalfe yea I haue shewed you Thomas his iudgement alredy therin who is the prince of al your scholemeÌ„ For merite of works therfore in iustification we are of S. Paules minde Arbitramur hominem iustificari fide absque operibus legis we suppose that man is iustified by fayth without the works of the law Thus in the poynt of iustification workes are excluded as he sayde immediately before VVhere is then thy boasting it is excluded By what lawe of workes no but by the lawe of fayth Althoughe our workes are not at all excluded in respect of the fruites of those that are already iustified For they are ipsius factura c. His workemanshippe created in Iesu Christ in good workes which God hath prepared that we shoulde walke in them But before this workemanshippe of Iustification we were but very enimies And therefore as sainct Augustine saith Quae merita bona tuÌ„c habere poter amus quando Deum non diligebamus VVhat good merites could we then haue when as yet we loued not God VVithout fayth it is impossible to please god And what soeuer is not of fayth is sinne Nowe this fayth which lykewise is not of vs but is the gifte of God we discerne from workes bicause it hath relation to the onely mercies of God promised in Christ vnto vs Which promises fayth catching holde vpon is the only meanes and instrumeÌ„t that God hath giuen vs to receiue the frée offer of his grace and to applie to vs forgiuenesse of our sinnes And so stedfastly beléening the same we are iustified by God onely as the efficient and actiue worker by Christ onely as the formall cause in whome our righteousnesse consisteth and by faythe onely as the instrument giuen of God vnto vs wherby we receiue the same And this sayth S Paule exemplifying it by Abraham Quid enim dicit scriptura For what sayth the scripture Abraham beleeued God and it vvas imputed to hym for righteousnesse But to him that worketh rewarde is not imputed according to grace but according to duetie But vnto him that worketh not but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vvycked his faythe is imputed to righteousnesse according to the purpose of the grace of God. And this is that we say fayth onely iustifieth that is fayth is the onely eye that séeth the onely hande that catcheth holde vpon the onely meanes whereby we receiue the onely instrument wherewith we applye to our selues
much more than not to meddle in Church matters at all But as ye falsly expounded Eusebius before so here ye controlle and falsefie your owne saying affirming that the most which may be enferred hereof is that he had the procuration and execution of Church matters If this be either the most or ought at all then your former exposition of ciuill ouersight was at the least a false corruption of you But and ye marke it well ye shall finde and neuer goe to the moste for the matter that this title and other the doings of this noble Christian Emperour comprehended much more thâ—…n either to be a Priestes proctour or executioner in Churche matters yea to betoken in very déede a chiefe and supreme gouernour Your thirde parte of this diuision is altogither an impertinent quarell of Images chalenging the Bishop of an vntruth and therefore besides that is saide alreadie sufficiently on the same argument is answered in his proper place The. 21. Diuision THe Bishop hauing thus fully proued that the ensamples and prophecies of the old Testament were figures to be perfourmed in the new entreth into the confirmatioÌ„ therof by the newe Testament And first in this diuision proueth by two allegations of our Sauiour Christ that this authoritie of Princes in the olde Testament is confirmed by Christ to christian Princes in the newe But the Princes authoritie in the olde Testament stretcheth not onely to ciuill matters but also to the ouersight mayntenance setting foorth and furtherance of religion and matters ecclesiasticall Ergo Christ hath confirmed in the newe Testament that christian Princes power stretcheth not onely to ciuill matters but also to the ouersighte mayntenance setting foorth and furtheraÌ„ce of religion and matters ecclesiastical The minor is proued already by these foresayde examples of the olde Testament The maior the Bishop proueth by two testimonies of Iesus Christ. The first generally in Matt. 5. that he came to accomplishe the lawe and the Prophetes The seconde out of Math. 22. where he commaunded all men to giue that vnto Cesar that belonged to Cesar and bounded the Princes authoritie by the worde of God. To the minor master Stap. sayth not one worde neither in his marginall notes nor Counterblast Belike that he relenteth to it according to his owne rule Qui tacet consâ—…re videtuâ—… he that holdes his peace seemeth to consent The maior likewise he graunteth in saying Master Horne goeth yet needlesly forward to proue that Christ did not destroy the rule of Princes in Church causes figured in the olde lawe Whervpon till M. St. shall denie one of these two propositions the conclusion foloweth of necessarie consequence against him Onely M. St. thinketh it inough for him to euerturne all the argument if he denie the proues of the maior graunting to the other proofe and ther vpon bendeth all his answere against this sentence Giue vnto Cesar that belongeth vnto Cesar. But this no whit hindreth the argument so long as he graunteth the other proofe yea thoughe he denied that also so long as he graunteth the maior it selfe to the confirmation whereof bothe these allegations were broughte foorth But let vs sée howe properly he handleth them And nowe at the length sayth M. St. catcheth he one testimonie out of the newe Testament to proue his saying which is giue vnto Cesar that belongeth vnto him VVhich place nothing at all serueth his turne but rather destroyeth I will not say any figure of the olde Testament but master Hornes foolishe figuratiue diuinitie I feare me master Stapleton that you which vpbrayde others for foolishe figuratiue diuinitie will euen in this diuision shewe not the wysest diuinitie in Louayne I had almoste sayde also your owne more than foolishe diuinitie without any figure at all But firste let vs sée your false diuinitie The Byshop héere togither citeth two testimonies out of the newe Testament and you come in saying Now at the length catcheth he one testimonie out of the newe Testament to proue his saying But to winke at this false diuinitie with what wise diuinitie do ye improue this one testimonie For it is so farre off say you that of this place master Horne maye make any grounde for the ecclesiasticall authoritie of Princes that it dothe not as much as inferre that we ought to pay so muche as tribute to our Princes but only that we may pay it Surely M. Stap. this is a trim diuinitie and as trim logike as diuinitie Christ commaundeth vs saying giue that vnto Cesar that belongeth vnto Cesar Ergo we may but we ought not to giue it him Where haue ye founde this new logike and diuinitie M. Stap Is it Louayne stuffe a 〈◊〉 would haue thought this reason better of the twayne that if we ought not then of righte we neither mighte nor shoulde giue vnto euery body that belongeth to them and so denie to the Prince that belongeth to him But this we may not nor should do but to giue him and all men their duetie therfore we ought to do it But stil sée how ye wrap your words in contradiction Ye graunt that this sentence Giue vnto Cesar that belongeth vnto Cesar doth not destroy any figure of the olde Testament if it do not destroy it then it confirmeth it and ratifieth to the Prince that belonged to the Prince and that the Prince had in the olde Testament but the Prince had then authoritie in ecclesiasticall matters as ye confessed in the two laste diuisions Ergo by this sentence the same authoritie is nowe confirmed How then say ye héere it maketh no grounde for the authoritie of Princes in ecclesiasticall matters since their authoritie was a figure and this sentence ye say doth not destroy it but nowe you haue made this sentence destroy the figure quite For that duetie that belonged to Princes before stoode not on a may bawe it lay not in the subiectes choyse to choose whether they woulde yéelde the Prince that belonged to him or no as thoughe they mighte if they woulde they néede not if they list but they must and ought of necessarie duety and obedieÌ„ce haue yéelded to the Prince whatsoeuer to him belonged in the time of that figure of the olde Testament And this sentence say you hath not destroyed the figure Ergo This sentence now bindeth and confirmeth it with as great duetie and necessitie and not lesse But say you this sentence dothe not so much as inferre that we oughte to paye so muche as tribute to our Princes Ergo This sentence hath destroyed the figure set vs at libertie in that the figure bounde vs And thus not onely ye speake quite contrarie to your selfe and to all reason but besides with your good diuinitie haue taken away al humanitie For what pollicie can consist in any sure estate if their subiectes be not bounde of duetis but at their pleasures may or may not yéelde their dueties to their soueraigne
agaynst Gods holy worde Is this an argument M. St. that we abuse the worde of God bicause you playnly say this supremacie is directly agaynst Gods worde In déede I heare ye say it and saye it playnely and as playne as ye can saye it and that very often too and make it a sufficient cause saying For we playnly say But ye shoulde once at the least proue it as playnly withall and not so often tell vs that ye playnely say so and then we shoulde playnely sée and say also with you that ye vsed playne dealing as well as playne sayings The. 21. Diuision IN this diuision the Byshop procéedeth further with other testimonies out of the Apostles with the fathers expositions therevpon First where Sainct Peter â—… Ep. cap. 2. and Sainct Paule Rom. 13. do not licence but commaunde obedience vnto Princes Chrisostome stretcheth this obedience to euery kinde of Ecclesiasticall person so well as lay person And maketh the obiecte or matter wherein the Princes gouernement is exercised to be for the furthering and aduauncing of all vertuous actions the correcting and repressing of all vices and that not onely in all matters of the seconde Table betwéene man and man but of all matters in the first table betwéene God man so well as of the other To the confirmation wherof he citeth agayne S. Paule 2. Timoth. 2. stretching the duetie of Princes not onely to honestie of life but also to godlinesse Wherby Sainct Augustine meaneth the chiefe or proper worship seruice and religion of god Shewing at large by Sainct Augustine who reasoning on the thirtéenth to the Rom. confuteth the Donatistes héerein that Princes haue authoritie for the furtherance and setting foorth of true religion and suppressing of all heresies schismes and other ecclesiasticall abuses so well as the furtheraunce and setting foorth of ciuill iustice and the punishement of morall vices To this M. Stapletons answere is parted into foure First gathering a contraction of the Byshops allegations he graunteth vnto them and proueth that he and the Protestantes agrée héerevpon Secondly he pincheth and restrayneth his graunt and endeuoreth to proue contradiction in the Protestantes Thirdly he entreth into the answere of certayne wordes and testimonies by the Byshop alleaged Fourthly he replieth on the bishop with other allegations out of Chrysostome and theron frameth an argument on them for his Priestes superioritie The residue of his answere to S. Augustine he passeth ouer in wordes of course In the first sayth M. Stapleton Heere is nothing M. Horne that importeth your surmised supremacie The effect of your processe is Princes haue authoritie to mainteine praise and further the vertues of the first table and to suppresse the coÌ„trarie wherein onely consisteth the true religion and spiritual seruice that is due from man to God And that he hath authoritie herein not only in the vertues or vices bidden or forbidden in the second table of Gods coÌ„maundementes wherein are conteyned the duties that one maÌ„ oweth to another This is grauÌ„ted M. Horn both of the Catholikes and of the soberer sort of the Protestantes for Carolostadius Pelargus Struthius with the whole rable of th' Anabaptistes denie it that Princes haue authoritie both to further the obseruation and to punishe the breache of Gods coÌ„maundements as well in the first table as in the seconde that is as well in suche actions as concerne our duetie to God himselfe as in the duetie of one man to another This were meetely well sayde M. St. that héere agayne thus liberally ye grauÌ„t if it made any gret matter what ye graunted or denied The bishop you should soone agrée sauing for your instabilitie that after you haue made your large graunts ye still reuoke theÌ„ againe with some pelting distinction or qualification of them Your graunt is this Princes haue authoritie both to maynteine praise further the obseruation and to suppresse and punish the breach of Gods coÌ„mandements aswel in the first table as in the seconde that is aswell in suche actions as concerne our duty to God himselfe wherin onely consisteth the true religion and spirituall seruice as in the duetie of one man to another But thus wel haue Princes authoritie to mainteine further or to suppresse and punish in actions of the duety of one man to another conteyned in the second table that no suche actions be exempted from their authoritie but they ought to prayse maynteine and further al such actioÌ„s as are bidden and suppresse and punish al such actions as are forbidden and that to do with moste great care diligence and ouersight yea supreme authoritie also vnder God therin Ergo They may do so by like righte in all the actions of the first table concerning the true religion and spirituall seruice of god Or else this aswell that ye put in twyce togither for more confirmation commeth an ace behinde and is belike as muche to say as not as well the quite contrarie to aswell Thus if ye stande to your owne words that the Princes authoritie is aswell in the one as in the other they sufficiently importe all that we demaunde and are as muche as this The Prince is supreme gouernour not onely in all temporall â–ª but also in all ecclesiasticall causes And therefore where ye say that they be Anabaptistes that denie it ye conclude all the Papistes to be Anabaptistes for they denie it And your selfe are in the table also that haue puâ—…te oute this your Counterblast chiefly to ouerturne it Although when ye be pressed ye oftentimes graunte that whiche ouerturnes your selfe Neither dothe your distinction helpe â–ª ye to the which ye runne for succour euen to your enimies But all this is say you as not onely the Catholike wryters but Melancthon him selfe and Caluine doe expound Quod ad externam disciplinam attinet As muche as appertayneth to externall discipline And the Magistrate is the keeper and defender of bothe Tables saythe Melancthon but agayne he addeth Quod ad externos mores attinet As muche as belongeth to externall maners behauiour and demeanour Ye promise héere agayne to agrée with Caluine and Melancthon in all this whiche ye haue graunted that the Prince hathe authoritie as well in the firste Table as in the seconde this onely excepted as they excepte Quod ad externam disciplinam externos mores attinet So long as appertayneth to outwarde discipline and outwarde maners But al Ecclesiastical causes and orders for setting foorth religion are either outwarde disciplines or outwarde rites maners behauiours or demeanoures for as for inwarde actions or thoughtes the Prince meddleth not withall but God alone the minister onely pronounceth Gods threats or promises for them â–ª Ergo Euen by this your own distinction ye confesse once agayne the Princes supremacie in all eccl. causes Neither dothe your reason folowing helpe ye any thing at all For say you in the first Table are coÌ„teined many offences and breaches of the which
there is wedlocke But what say we to Philip had he not foure daughters but where soure daughters were there was both a wife and matrimonie But what then doth Christ he was indeede borne of a virgin but he came to a mariage and brought his gift with him They haue saith she no wine and he turned water into wine with virginitie honoring mariage commending with his gift the thing that was done that thou shouldest not abhorre mariage â–ª but shouldest hate whooredome For at my perill I behoofe the saluation although thou shalt wed a wife Looke to thy selfe a woman if shee be good is an helper to thee c. All this more saith Chrysostome in the coÌ„mendation of the ministers mariage euen in the same Homelie cited by you M. St. which estate of mariage to be ioyned in sith the Pope his Priests can not abide and alleage such impediments as here Chrysostome confuteth it is an euident argument by the way that they 〈◊〉 nothing lesse than such Priests as Chrysostome ascribeth this spirituall kingdome of the ministerie of Gods worde and Sacraments vnto and where Chrysostome as your selfe haue cited him saith that the Princeforceth the Priest exhorteth the one by necessitie the other by giuing counsell the one hath visible armour the other spirituall Contrarywise your Pope not only exhorteth but extorteth and forceth too not only by counsell but by necessine extreme violence Not only pretending spirituall armour such as he calleth his curses with booke bell and candle but also with visible armour muironed about where he rideth or on mens backes is caried with a gard of Swarâ—…trutters Switchers with gunnes Harquebushes partesans glayues and weapons as if it were Iudas with his armed bande to take our Sauiour Christ. And he claymeth thriurisoiction of â—…oth the swords wresting thertâ—… the wordes of the Disciple Eâ—…ce 〈◊〉 gladiâ—… hic Beholde heere are two swordes to the temporall and visible armour so well as to the spiritual Wherevpon Eonifacius the eight did not onely hang seuen keyes at his girdle in token of his spirituall power but girte him selfe also with a sworde in token of his temporall power These Prelates the refore are not such kinde of Priests as Chrysostome speaketh of Neither notâ—… I this as a faultâ—… in this or that person but as errours defended and maynteined by them for the aduauncement of their naughtie Priesthoode What maketh then this sentence of the excellencie of the Priestes ministerie for the ministerie of the Popes Priesthoode that is all the quitâ—… contrarie Suche false Priestes therefore the Prince hath authoritie to remoue them and to place suchâ—… Priests as Chrysostome speaketh of and so to bowe his head vnder their hands that is to oâ—…ey their ministerie which is no derogation to the matter in hande of the Princes supreme gouernement Thus muche M. Stap. to your sentence alleaged out of Chrysostome vpon the which you and all your side do harpe so often and yet beeing well considered it not onely makes nothing for you but muche agaynst you Nowe to your argument that ye gather héere vpon saying Nowe then M. Horne I frame you suche an argument The Priest is the Princes superiour in some causes ecclesiasticall Ergo The Prince is not the Priestes superiour in all causes ecclesiasticall The antecedent is clearely proued out of the words of Chrysostome before alleaged Thus. The Priest is superiour to the Prince in remission of sinnes by Chrysostome â–ª but remission of sinnes is a cause ecclesiastical or spirituall Ergo The Priest is the Princes superiour in some causes ecclesiasticall or spirituall To this argument béeing thus framed vpon the which M. Stap greatly triumpheth I answere it hath thrée fallations in it for fayling The first in this worde superiour béeing vnderstoode two ways either in respect of the ministerie or function or in respect of the publique ouersight ordering and direction In the former sense the maior is true The Priest is superiour to the Prince in respect of his ministerie or function But this worde superiour béeing thus vnderstoode in the conclusion for superioritie onely in the ministerie or function concludeth nothing agaynst the Princes superioritie which is only the publike ouersight ordering and direction that this superiour ministerie and function be not abused Now if the word superiour be not thus vnderstoode but simply to be the superiour or in the later sense that is to say the Priest is superiour in the publike ouersight ordering and direction that the office be duely administred by the minister then is this maior false for the Priest is not thus the Princes superiour The second fallation is in the words remission of sinnes If he meane thereby the ouersighte to sée suche remission be duely made by the Priest then is the maior also false The Priest is not the Princes superiour therin If he means by remission of sinnes the action of remitting them or the function of the office in pronouncing them remitted then is the maior true but the minor false For so remission of sins is not a cause ecclesiasticall but an action or function ecclesiasticall Wheron ariseth the third fallation of these words ecclesiasticall cause Which the statute and the title mentioning that the Prince hath supremacie in all ecclesiasticall causes he wilfully wresteth as though all actions and functions eccl were yéelded to the Princes supremacie Where neither the Prince requireth nor the statute title yéeldeth any such supremacie in the actions but onely a supremacie in the causes not to do them but to sée them rightly done And thus by resolutioÌ„ of these words it appeareth how the Priest in one sense as Chrysostome sayth is superiour to the Prince not only in this one thing of remission of sinnes But in al other actions of his dutie and the Prince is farre inferiour to him and yet the Prince in the other sense of the general direction and publike ouersight is in this and all other causes eccl. superiour to the Priest and the Priest farre inferiour vnto him And so the superioritie of the Priest hindreth nothing the supremacie of the Prince Master St. hauing now as he thinketh by this mightie argument wonne the fielde and quite confounded the Byshop setteth out as a trophaâ—…m or monument of his historie this marginall note Euidently proued by S. Chrysostome the Prince not to be the supreme gouernour in causes ecclesiasticall And crieth out for ioy Which being most true what thing caÌ„ you coÌ„clude of al ye haue or shal say to win your purpose or that ye heere presently say And thus on the triumph of this argument M. St. reiecteth all that the B. hath said as insufficieÌ„t would returne vpon him the sentence of S. Augustine against the Donatists that the Byshop cited agaynst M. Feck Wherein he bringeth nothing a freshe that is not before declared and answered vnto besides vayne words of course worthy no other answere than to be returned
vpon thē selues to whō they properly appertayne who in deede denie both Chryst the head and Christ the body that is his catholike Church And that as the Donatistes secte was condemned by Constantine Honorius and other Emperours the highe kings of Christendome So haue they withall condemned you master Stapl. that followe the Donatistes and so may and ought all christian Princes the Emperour nowe whose highe kingdomes besides a bare name in any matter of Christianitie ye make nothing to pull downe suche vsurpers of their highe kingdomes and set vp true and godly ministers in their places to whome they might and ought to submitte their heades vnder their spirituall ministerie To the whiche sorte as is shewed playnely out of Chrisostome your Popishe Priesthoode is cleane contrarie And therefore to returne your wordes vpon your selfe Ye are they that cutte in sunder the vnitie and peace of Christes Churche and rebell agaynst the promises of his Gospell Which Gospell ye can not abyde should come to light and therefore the highe kinges of Christendome should remoue and condemne you Whiche is a better argumente than yours M. Stap. and is sufficient to inferre the supremacie of these highe Kings and Princes The. 23. Diuision THe Bishop in his diuision prosecuting still the wordes of S. Paule Rom. 13. proueth further out of Chrysostome and Eusebius that as the Prince is Gods minister so this ministerie consisteth not onely in ciuill and temporall but also in the well ordering of the Church matters and their diligent rule and care therein The effecte of his argument is this The Prince as Chrysostome sayth prepareth the mindes of many to be made more appliable to the doctrine of the worde and is the great lighte and true preacher and setter foorth of true godlynesse as Eusebius sayth Ergo His ministerie consisteth as well in ecclesiasticall as ciuill causes The antecedent Eusebius proueth by the example of Constantine that his ministerie stretched to the setting foorth of godlynesse to al countreyes and that he preached God and not onely ciuil lawes by his Imperiall decrees and Proclamations And this he confirmeth by Constantines own confession that he taughte by his ministerie the religion and lawe of God that therby he caused the encrease of the true fayth And by the same put away and euerthrewe all the euils that pressed the worlde But the world in Constantines time was pressed with diuers schismes errours heresies false religions and many ecclesiasticall abuses and superstitions besides the heathen Idolatrie Ergo His ministerie stretched not onely ouer temporall causes but also ecclesiasticall Yea he counteth this his best ministerie Ergo. It belongeth to the Prince as well if not more than the other And so the Bishops argument followeth héerevpon that the Apostles sentence the Prince is Gods minister argueth the Princes charge and gouernement in all maner causes ecclesiasticall so well as temporall These proues of the Byshop béeing so euident M. Stap. answereth they are all insufficient saying I see ye not master Horne come as yet neere the matter I answere who is so blinde as he that seeth and will not see Were ye not of the number of those of whome Chryst sayth I came to iudgemēt into this worlde that those that see not shoulde see and those that see shoulde be made blind Ye might then both clearely see that he both cōmeth neere the matter and satisfieth it at large Excepte ye be as blinde of the matter also as ye pretende to be of these the Byshops proufes But if ye woulde haue followed your owne counsell euer to haue set before your eyes the state of the question in issue betwéene them ye shoulde well by this time haue seene that the Byshop digressed nothing frō it And that your selfe of self will or malice will not looke aright theron but cleane awrie stil starting aside and swaruing frō the marke for the nonce to picke occasions wheron to wrangle For wherfore I pray you do ye not see that the Bishop commeth not neere the matter I see not say you that Constantine changed religion plucked downe Altares deposed Byshops c. But that he was diligent in defending the olde and former faythe of the Christians Whatsoeuer you see or see not in Constantine master Stapl. all the world may see false dealing in you and how lyke an vnnaturall subiecte to your naturall Prince ye be As thoughe ye sawe that the Quéenes highnesse had changed religion excepte ye meane false religion and that ye might haue seene in Constantine also He changed the heathen religion of the Paynims and abolished it with all their Altares Byshops Priestes and temples and set foorth the true religion of Iesus Christe He chaunged likewise and abolished suche superstitions Idolatries schismes errours and heresies as troubled the Churche of Christe in his time Which you might easily haue seene in Constantines owne wordes by the Byshop cited That he put away and ouerthre we all the euils that pressed the worlde If you say ye can not yet see that he ment all spirituall and ecclesiasticall euils so well as temporall put on a payre of spectacles master Stapl that are not dymmed with affection and then shall ye see that of suche kinde as the good thinges were whiche he set foorth of suche kinde were the contrarie euils that he put away and ouerthrew but the good things that he set foorthe were true godlynesse decrees of God the religion of the moste holy law the most blessed fayth c. All whiche are matters moste spirituall and ecclesiasticall Ergo all the euils that he abolished were so well spirituall and ecclesiasticall as ciuill and temporall matters If ye say yet ye see nothing but that he was diligent in defending the olde and former fayth of the Christians True in deede neither can ye see any other thing in the Quéenes Maiestie nor any authoritie is giuen héereby to Princes than as Constantine was to bee diligente in defending the olde and former fayth of the Christians founded by Christ and taught by his Apostles And if any other since that time haue brought in any things besides that old and former fayth to remoue the same and reduce vs to the olde and former fayth of the Christians For as Tertullian sayth That is of the Lorde and that is truthe that was before deliuered but that which afterward was thrust in is bothe strange and false And so sayth Constantine I bothe called agayne mankind taught by my ministerie to the religion of the most holy lawe and also caused the moste blessed fayth should encrease grow vnder a better gouernor Nowe séeing that many poynts of the Popish fayth and doctrine haue cropen in since that time and manie of later yeres besides and contrarie to the olde and former fayth of the Cheistians taught by Christ and left vs written by the finger of the holy ghost sealed and confirmed by so many myracles to endure to the
or else woulde haue the royall that is to say the ciuill power to be superiour to the ecclesiasticall Howe madly for so wise a man ye haue proued these differences let wise men iudge M. Saunders and howe badly if not madly ye make your conclusions agaynst vs let wise men also iudge For we neither confounde these powers nor giue bothe to the Prince nor make the Ciuill power simply superiour to the ecclesiastical power although we giue the prince a superiour power in respect of the ouerséeing that the eccl. power whiche in the administration therof is higher although not in the direction and maynteining therof be not abused by the ecclesiasticall person Nowe M. Saunders hauing sayde thus muche of these three differeÌ„ces setteth downe a long sentence out of Chrisostome wherein he extolleth the Priestly power aboue the Kinges power which notwithstanding is nothing agaynst this superioritie that we attribute to Princes although the office and administration of the ecclesiasticall power be graunted to be neuer so muche superiour and this is answered vnto sufficiently already in M. St. Yet bicause we haue hereafter to deale at large with M. Stapleton on the same sentence of Chrysostome I referre it to the proper and more fitter consideration of it And thus much hath M. Sanders for these thrée differences which he sayth he speaketh agaynst thrée errours The first errour is of them that say the royall power in a christian Prince is higher than any ecclesiasticall power which opinion the Englishe Protestantes defende The seconde errour is of them that extende the power royall to certayne causes ecclesiasticall to be knowne and iudged by the kings law To conclude the thirde is of them that thinke a christian Prince at the least in all ciuill businesse and in his owne realme alwayes and without all exception to be greater thaÌ„ any ecclesiastical Magistrate nor that for any sin that he shall commit in the Church of God he can be remoued from the administration of the kingdome I answere neither these conclusions are sufficiently proued on these foresayd proues hitherto nor some of them at all before mentioned As the deposing of the Prince which is another question and héere as madly thrust in as maliciously and trayterously ment Neither any of these conclusions touche the English Protestants for they defend none suche as you haue héere set downe Name the parties and their assertions Else in steade of M. Saunders ye deserue to be rather called M. Slaunders The seconde Chapter The argument vvherof is this No Christian king in his kingdome is the supreme gouernour in ecclesiasticall causes immediatly vnder Christ. IN this Chapter as commonly else where M. Saunders rhethorically dothe hide his methode howbeit for perspicuitie sake I will deuide this Chapter into three partes â–ª The first is his arguments why he thinketh the Prince can not be this gouernour The seconde is the reasons why he thinketh vs heerein deceyued The thirde is the meâ—…nes to dissuade vs from the acknowledging of it by the euent and euill successe that hath ensued thereon And first for the first parte his argumentes are of two sortes the one à definitione from the definition of a gouernour the other à dignitate from the greater dignitie of Priesthood bring the argument by comparing the dignitie of bothe these estates from the olde testament to the Newe His first argument beginneth thus He that may be called a supreme head or chief gouernour hath of necessitie the power of doing all those things which can be wrought by the inferiours to the magistrates of that congregatioÌ„ by their office or by any charge beloÌ„ging properly to the same coÌ„gregation This shal be made playner by putting of example He that iâ—… chieftayne in an armie hath not only the Imperial power ouer al Tribunes and Centurions but besides may lawfully chaleÌ„ge to himself to occupie the Tribunes place â–ª or to be captayne ouer an hundreth if at any tyme he shall thinke it meete for him selfe to do it He that can gouerne a whole common weale can if he will knowe of euery meane man and not onely sustayne the turne and fulfill the offices of the Prince of them all but also of his Maior or of the inferiour Iudges He that is a Bishoppe hathe power of baptising and of shutting the Churche dores and of distributing the Churches treasure although those thinges are wonte to be done of the inferiour ministers To this definition and these examples I answere the definition is false the examples are insufficient Fyrste for the definitioÌ„ it is not true of euery supreme gouernour that he can or oughte to worke and execute all those things and duties that euery one of his inferiours can or ought to worke and execute For the gouernment of thinges is one thing and the execution of thinges gouerned is another thing Yea these two are relatiua and can not be confounded the one with the other although they haue respecte the one to the other for so the gouernour shoulde become the person gouerned Secondly these thrée examples are insufficient For although we admitte these thrée yet we may obiecte a great many moe examples in which this difinition holdes not Set aside the doing of all dyle and vnséemely offices for a farre more meane estate than a Prince to doe of which he hath neither knowledge nor it were tollerable he should â—…o them I pray ye M. sand howe could a king ruling in his own realme be his own ligire Embassadour in another realme Wil ye say he might make a deputie at home and be Embassadour to his deputie abroade and so the deputie to the king shall be the king and the king the deputie to the king that is the kings deputie But perchaunce ye will admitte this absurditie bicause ye will not go from your worde and say well the king may be so and he wil. Here what if one should do with you as I heard once M. Feckenham tel the tale of a gentlemaÌ„ that defended mustard was good with all meate One sayd nay it was nought with this meate another with that but looke what any coulde recken vp he still affirmed his saying that mustard was good with euery meate were it neuer so vnsauery a sauce therto Nowe when euery man had reckoned what he liste at length quoth his owne man that wayted on him I pray you master and is a messe oâ—… mustard good with a messe of milke Ha quoth his master â–ª thou haste marde all thou shouldest haue heldae thy peace This was master Feckenhams tale Nowe if master Feckenham that tolde this tale shoulde deale thus with you M. Sanders that as lustily affirme the king may lawfully do any thing that any of his subiectes may lawfully dâ—… as the Gentleman sayd mustard was good with al meate â–ª If M. Feckenham would say sir and can the king do all that euen his owne
wife or any other mans wife daughter or mayde in things perteyning to their duties and offices can and ought to doe Especially sithe your selfe in prosecuting this argument vrge the example of a woman All the women in his kingdome are his subiects so well as the men He hath a supreme gouernment ouer all persons in all causes can he therfore do their duties and yet he can haue the supreme gouernment to maynteine all lawes of matrimonie and to punishe all whordomes and yet not like euery somoner or other executioner of their punishements If ye say a woman may be no inferiour gouernour That is false a wife hath inferiour gouernment in hir housholde and many women haue had inferiour gouernments vnder kings in common weales as the Lady regentes in Flaunders c. But what if she were not an vndergouernour yet if she be a subiect gouerned the words of your definition coÌ„prehend hir saying A chiefe gouernour hath of necessitie the power of doing all those thinges which may be wrought of the inferiours to the magistrates of that congregation by their office or by any charge belonging properly to the same congregation But you will say perhaps that women are of an other kinde so that the king can not do al their offices As likewise for the ecclesiastical gouernment the Apostles might not lawfully do all those things that the widdowes chosen to serue in the congregation mighte and ought to do nor the ciuill magistrate of those congregations might or ought to do them Then will M. Feckenham presse you that your definition is false a gouernour can not do all things that belongeth to a subiect If ye say a woman is not a subiecte that is false If ye say she is not a subiect in respect she is a woman that is false also for both men and women are subiectes to their gouernours If ye say she is not a subiecte in respect she is a wife although I graunt the worde wife hath an other relation than to the king to wife vnto hir husbande yet what auayleth this sithe many offices haue many other relations also the sonne to his father the seruant to his master the scholler to his scholemaster and yet all these be subiects to the Prince although the Prince can not deale in all their seuerall offices But you thinke to salue all the matter with this exception I say not that he which is endowed with chiefest power should straight wayes haue the knowledge of euery lesser office for this perteyneth to the fact and not to the right Neither say I it is alwayes comely that he should execute the inferiour offyce by him selfe but I say there is no lawe to let him no power wants whereby the chiefe magistrate shoulde not do those things which the inferiours in the same common weale are wonte to doe Go to go to M. Saunders ye will still be like the gentleman that would fayne haue eaten his worde if he durst for shame Ye come in pretily and beginne to make some exceptions already you admitte he may wante knowledge of many things perteyning not to his office yea and that it is vncomely he should do them And in déede M. Saunders if you be thinke ye of euery subiectes doings ye shall finde many vncomely and vnreuerent things for so highe an estate to do and many things that he knowes no more howe to do them him selfe than that Cooke that would put mustarde into his milke to season it What and may the Prince do those things him self that are so vile and wherof he hath no knowledge He may say you and he will what righte or lawe may let him If ye talke M. Saunders of a wilfull foole that will caste him selfe and his kingdome away if ye talke of a tyraunt whose will is lawe that sayth as the Pope doth Sic volo sic iubeo stet pro ratione voluntas that is another matter But if ye talke of a king and of a lawfull power then I say his will and power oughte to be restrayned by lawe to do nothing vnskilfully nor vncomely for his estate I graunt he may abase him selfe to some inferiour kinde of offices to do them but not to all no not by the right of his royall estate And yet by his gouernment all those thinges are done that are orderly done Although he him selfe may not do them though he would Do ye not remember S. Paules similitude so ofteÌ„ vsed by your selfe M. Saunders of a coÌ„mon weale resembled to our body The head ye say often gouerneth all the parts and meÌ„bers but the head it selfe doth not nor can not do al that al the parts members do We stande not we go not we sit not on our heads our head reacheth not nor caÌ„ reach euery thing that our hande can reache doth Nor the head doth or can do the office of the shouloers back or belly yet ye graunt the head hath supreme gouernment ouer al these parts deuiseth lawes orders diets prouisioÌ„s helpes for all the parts and actions in the parts of all the body Thus ye sée not only by similitudes examples in which I might be infinite agaynst your thâ—… exaÌ„ples but also by good reason your definition of a supreme gouernour faileth he may be a lawful supreme gouernour yet can not do al the offices of his inferiours Yea it were vnlawful for him to attempt many such things and yet his lawfull supreme gouernmeÌ„t euen ouer all those things that he him selfe can not do nor ought to do is no whit therby empayred And therfore this is a false principle to builde as ye do thereon Nowe this béeing thus playnly proued a false groundeworke let vs sée howe ye procéede to frame your argument on it VVhich things beeing thus foretouched I adde vnto them that the supreme head or gouernour of any Church is the supreme magistrate of that coÌ„mon weale which no man hauing his right minde will denie Therfore if the king may rightly and worthily be named the supreme head or gouernour of that Churche as nowe this good whyle is done in Englande the same king shall also necessarily haue the facultie of working all those things which of that magistrate of that Churche may be wrought otherwyse he is not the gouernour of that Church in respecte it is a Church But in euery christian kingdome there are and ought to be many that shoulde preache the worde of God to the faythfull that shoulde baptise in the name of the father and of the sonne of the holy ghost the nations coÌ„uerted that should remitte sinnes that shoulde make the sacrament of thanksgiuing distribute it therfore he that is the supreme gouernour of any Church ought to be endowed with such power that no law should let wherby he might the lesse fulfil do al these things But a secular king although he be a christian can not do these things by the
force of his royall power oâ—… else a woman also might bothe teache in the Churche and also remitte sinnes and baptise orderly and solemnly and minister the sacrament of thankesgiuing For sithe bothe by the lawe of nations it is receyued that a woman may be admitted to the gouernment of a kingdome and in Moses lawe it is written when a man shall dye without a sonne the enheritance shall passe to the daughter but a kingdome commeth among many nations in the name of enheritaÌ„ce And sithe Debora the Prophetesse iudged the people of Israell and also Athalia and Alexandra haue reigned in Iurie it appeareth playnly that the kingly right appertayneth no lesse to women than to men VVhich also is to be sayde of children bicause according to the Apostle the heire though he be a childe is Lorde of all And Ioas began to raygne when he was seuen yere olde and Iosias reigned at the eight yere of his age But a childe for the defecte of iudgement a woman for the imbecillitie of hir kinde is not admitted to the preaching of Gods worde or to the solemne administration of the Sacraments I permit not sayth the Apostle a woman to teache For it is a shame for a woman to speake in the Churche and the same Apostle sayth that the heire being a childe diffreth nothing from a seruant But it is not the ecclesiasticall custome that he which remayneth yet a seruaunt shoulde be a minister of the Churche Sith therefore in the right of a kingdome the cause is all one of a man of a woman and of a childe but of like causes there is like and all one iudgement but neither childe nor woman and therevpon neither man also that is nothing else but king can do those things in his kingdome which of other ministers of the churche of God are necessarily to be done therfore it commeth to passe that neither the same king can rightly be called the supreme gouernour and head of the Church wherin he liueth All this long argument standeth stil on the foresayd principle that a supreme head or gouernour must be such a person as may do all the actions of all the offices belonging to all the parties gouerned But this is a false principle as alredy is manifestly declared therfore al this long driuen argument is to no purpose The Prince for all this may stil be the supreme head or gouernour ouer all Ecclesiastical persons so well as temporall in all their ecclesiasticall causes so well as in temporall although he himselfe can not exercise all ecclesiasticall functions nor doe himselfe all the ecclesiasticall actions of all ecclesiastical persons For else he might also be debarred of all supremacie ouer all ciuill and temporall persons in all their ciuill and temporall causes bicause he can not himselfe exercise all the ciuil and temporall offices nor do himselfe all the ciuill and temporall actions of all the ciuill and temporall persons neyther And so shoulde â—…e cleane be debarred from supremacie in either power nor haue any supreme gouernment at all Nowe taking this your false principle pro confesso â–ª after your wonted maner ye would driue vs to an absurditie as ye suppose by bringing in more examples of a woman and a chyld reasoning thus A pari from the like A woman and a child may be as well a supreme gouernor as may a man and hath as good right thereto But a woman or a childe can not be a supreme gouernour in causes Ecclesiasticall Ergo A man can not be a supreme gouernour neither in causes Ecclesiasticall For to this conclusion the force of bothe the promisses naturally driueth the argument I know ye clap in a paire of parenthesis saying in your coÌ„clusion neither a man also that is nothing else but a king But sith these wâ—…r des ar neither in the maior nor the minor the coÌ„clusion is plain â–ª that a man can not be a Supreme gouernor in causes Ecclesiasticall And I pray ye then tell me who shall be the supreme gouernour in ecclesiasticall causes if neyther man woman nor chyld may be wherby are not only excluded ciuill Princes but youre Popes are debarred from it Pope Ioane and Pope Iohn also For if they vse that order in the election to haue a Cardinall féele that all be safe yf the Uersicle be sayde Testiculos habet howe can the quyre meryly syng in the responce Deo gratias If hée be founde to bée a man he can not be supreme gouernoure Maister Saunders therefore muste néedes mende thys argumente or else the Popes for whome he writes this boke wyl con him small thanks except that they be Eunuches But Master Saunders not marking the sequele of hys conclusion fortifieth the parts of his argument To confirme the maior A woman and a childe may be as wel a supreme gouernour as a man he citeth the lawe Num. 27. he citeth ensamples Debora Athalia and Alexandra for women For children he citeth the Apostle Gal. 4. and the ensamples of Ioas and Iosias But these proues are superfluous sith the controuersie is not on the maior but on the minor Which minor is the point in controuersie and denied of vs that a woman or a childe can not be a supreme gouernour in causes ecclesiastical To confirme this minor for a woman he alleageth that she can not be admitted to preache the woorde of God remit sinnes nor baptize orderly and solemnely nor administer the Lordes Supper bothe for the imbecillitie of hir kinde and for Saint Paules prohibition of teaching in the Church For a chyld he lykewise can not do the same things as well for defect of iudgement in his nonage as for Sainte Paules witnesse that he differs not from a seruant But the Churches vse is not for seruantes to doe these things and so not for children to do them Here for confirmation of his minor master Sanders rusâ—…s to his false former principle that if the woman the chyld be supreme gouernors in these things then muste they be able themselues to do these things But they cannot do these thinges themselues Ergo they can haue no supreme gouernmeÌ„t in them But this reason is alreadie taken away and therfore al this argumeÌ„t falles We graunt it is true that neither women nor children can do these things And therfore the Papistes are to blame that suffer women to bapatize and to saye or sing in theyr quyres theyr ordinarie seruice and reade the Lessons Wee graunte them also that no men neyther but suche as bée lawfully called therevnto maye themselues exercise and do these things but doth this fellow they may not therfore haue a gouernment ouer those that doo them in their orderly doing of them if this were true then take away all their gouernement ouer all lay persons and all ciuil causes too For neyther women can nor ought them selues to do all that men béeing their subiects can and ought to
had not deliuered vs from it and yet sée if these Papistes that can so narrowly spie and proll at euery note in king Henry and kings Edwards dayes can in Quéene Maries dayes espie anye one of these great beames that were such apparante tokens of gods wrath that all men sawe and felt what euents succeeded the refusall of this title and the yéelding it to the Pope nerehand the cleane subuersion of this Realme if we may iudge by sequels Now after Quéene Marie he comes to the Quéenes Maiestie that now God be praised most prosperously raigneth ouer vs. But vvhen very many giuen to heresies vvere offended at this notable modestie of the Queene neither vvould they yet vnderstande his Counsell in gouerning his Churche God brought to passe that Marie of happie memorie being dead the kingdome of England should deuolue to such a vvoman as novve vvriteth hir selfe The supreme gouernesse in all matters and causes asvvell ecclesiasticall as secular That yet so at the length by the successe it selfe men of hard harte and obstinate necke mighte marke hovv euill king Henry tooke this office vpon him the vvhiche of his heire and successour could not duely and orderly be fulfilled For to whom it is not permitted to teach vvhich is the most necessarie office of an ecclesiasticall Head hovv shal she performe those greater offices that are occupied in the chastisement and correction of them that ought to teache the people or shall she vvhich is vnvvorthie that she should hir selfe teache publiquely in the lovvest degree moderate and reprehend vvith lavvful authoritie other publique teachers in the highest degree or if she can not lavvfully reprehend them shall she yet be lavvfully supreme gouernesse of the Church I omit here the things that in these yeares vvhich are last passed haue bene I knovv not hovv vncomely done and preached in Englande vnder such supreme heads of the Church I spare the dignitie of theÌ„ that gouerne Another time if God vvill I vvill handle them particularly hovve greatly both from the lavve of God and from the sentence of the auncient Churche and from righte reason that state of a common vveale is farre in vvhiche any king arrogateth to himselfe the office and name of the supreme head of the Church Is your part so false and weake of proues Maister Saunders that it can win no credite but by discrediting of ours with sclaunders and yet we woulde pardon this in you ascribing it either to some passion of choler against your aduersaries or to blinde affection of your selues that ye call verie manie of vs giuen to heresies hard harted and obstinate necked which are termes fitter to muster in M. Stapletons coÌ„mon places than to stuffe vp M. doctor Saunders volumes howe they redownde vpon your selues let other iudge â–ª that will reade and view of both But if we forgiue you this for our parts shal we stil suffer you to raile vpoÌ„ sclander the Lordes annoynted saying she arrogateth to hir selfe the office and name of the supreme Head of the Church speaking at randon withoute limitation of the Churche as the Pope doth arrogate to himselfe and taketh on hir to be an ecclesiasticall head and publique teacher of other that should teach hir these are too too infamous sclauÌ„ders of hir Maiestie that claimeth no such title nor attempteth any such thing What supreme gouernement is ascribed to hir highnesse we haue tolde you a thousand times but I sée ye will not vnderstand it bicause ye would of set purpose sclander it But to knit vp your argument of the euent and sequele of the Quéenes Maiesties raigne ye say many things haue bin done and preached in England ye cannot tell hovv vnsemely â—… thinke euen the same M. Saunders ye can not tell howe â—…ndede But howe vnseemely a thing is this for one of your â—…rofession to chalenge ye cannot tell what nor howe ye set owne nothing but vnder a pretence of sparing vs to bréede â—…et a furder sclaunderous suspition ye threat vs that ye will â—…serue theÌ„ til a furder leisure that is to say ad Kalendas graecas til â—…e shall first know them and then be able to proue them in the meane seasoÌ„ ye take the wisest way to say such ther are but what they are ye cannot now tell ye wil learne theÌ„ out and tell vs another time but tell the worste ye canne ye shal neuer be able to tell of any fals doctrine preached and by the Prince approued to be preached nor of anye wicked facte allowed by publike authoritie to be done No Maister Saunders in all the Quéenes Maiesties raigne ye can neuer be able to proue any suche things but in the raigne of your Popes we can proue many such things as whordome committed and maintained murder done and maintained Idolatry vsed and maintained and infinite errors preached and maintained by publique authoritie among the Papists As for the Quéenes maiesties raigne that now is if the euent and sequele may make an argument God hath so blessed it maugre all your spites and practises that no Realme christian hath florished like nor Englande more at anye tyme The Lord be praised for it and for his mercie sake long continue it that hath giuen so goodly a token of his well liking hir Maiesties supreme gouernment The thirde Chapter The argument is that Princes can not iudge nor define in causes Ecclesiasticall OF those errors that are about the povver of kings and magistrats the secoÌ„d error is of theÌ„ that thinke kings are not in dede the chief heads of the Churches in vvhich they raigne but in certaine causes Ecclesiastiall to bee euen as vvorthie members as Bishops â–ª for although in one certaine thing as in the office of teaching they preferre Bishops before kings yet partly in another Ecclesiasticall matter as in deposing a Byshop from his seat or in moderating any synode they preferre kings before Bishops partly they vvill haue it free for kings that almoste in euery ecclesiasticall matter they may knowe and decerne as Iudges Of the confutation of whiche errour this is the reason that I should shewe in euery cause of the ecclesiastical lawe that is to be knowne and iudged Kinges to be so muche in the place of priuate men that this trial can not of the ecclesiasticall Iudges be committed vnto them Although I denie not but that of some facte that perteyneth to the eccl. lawe the knowledge may be committed to Kinges and Magistrates But before the eccl. cause be known the king may orderly intermeddle his authoritie to that ende that a quiet place may be graunted where the Bishops should iudge And also that the Bishops may be called at a certayne day to that place And that in the meane season whyle the ecclesiasticall cause is knowne the publique peace yea euen in the assembly of Priestes may be conserued To conclude after the cause knowne and iudged of the Pristes the king either by the sworde that he
be the pastor So that this place as it maketh nothing for the power of the Priests ouer the goods and bodily things of the faithfull so it maketh much here in against them For if S. Paule in such matters of goods and bodily things rather than they should not haue a Christian iudge woulde haue them chose among themselues euen a contemptible person how much more now when the Church hath faithfull iudges and Christian Princes it ought in such controuersies to run to them for Iustice rather than to the Priests and Bishoppes that are of another calling Moreouer least any shoulde say that the Churche of Christ hath nothing to do with the businesse of this worlde he sayth expressely do ye not know that the saintes shall iudge of thys world and if the world shal be iudged by you are ye vnworthy to iudge of small things know ye not that we shall iudge the Angels how much more worldly things Behold the Apostle reasoneth from the spirituall power to the temporall on this wise To whom that which is more is lawfull to him is lawfull that which is lesse But we Christians shall iudge of the world and we shall iudge the renegate Angels and the Deuils themselues the which commeth by the spirituall power â–ª wherby we be made the sonnes of God and the coinheritors of Christ much more therefore may we exercise secular iudgements VVherby it appeareth that secular things are both inferior â—…o spirituall and are not estranged from the spirituall power but may light vnder it chiefely then when the matter is in hand of punishing or iudging those men that are the meÌ„bers of the Church of Christ. 〈◊〉 saye not Master Saunders that the Churche of Christ hath nothing to doe vvith the businesse of this world this is but your sclaunder We say that the spirituall Ministers of the Churche of Christe haue not so to do with such vvorldly businesse that they maye turquise all the vvorlde and alter the states of vvorldly kingdomes and occupie them selues about vvorldly affaires in such vvorldly dominion as you pretende they maye Whereto you abuse shamefully Saint Paules sayings He speaketh there of vvorldly matters and you applye it to all iudgementes yea to the iudging of a kingdome â–ª But you replle he saith the Saints shall iudge the worlde and the Angels vvhiche are greater thinges than kingdomes howe muche more then kingdomes that are lesser things Trowe you Master Saunders he speaketh there of such iudging the vvorlde that they should iudge like chiefe Iustiâ—… of realmes and kingdomes whether this or that Prince shall enioye them or shall be dispossessed of them No M. Saunders she speaketh of no suche thing The worlde shall be iudged in them as Chrysostome well noteth Iudicabunt non ipsi iudices c. They shal iudge â–ª not they themselues sitting in iudgemeÌ„t exacting an accouÌ„t God forbid but they shal coÌ„demne the vvorld the vvhich signifying he saith and if in you c. He saith not of you but in you As who should say the iust condemnation of these that are the vvorldlings shall shine in the saluation of you that are the Saints This therefore proueth 〈◊〉 such worldly iudgemeÌ„t as you pretend Secondly you abuse S. Paule as though in speaking of the Saints he spake onely of the spirituall Pastors wheras he speaketh in generall of the whole congregation Are Saintes and Christians only Priestes with you this is both manifest wresting of S. Paule and shamelesse arrogancie in your selues But you say the Churche hath it by the spirituall povver vvherby vve be made the sonnes of God and coinheritors of Christe We graunt you Master Saunders But doth this spirituall povver belong onely to Priestes you say it appeareth hereby vve maye exercise secular iudgementes whome meane you by this vve Master Saunders your selues that are the Priestes But S. Paule speaketh of Christian people and not of the Pastors only yea least of al of the Pastors Wherevpon saith Haimo out of Gregorie on these wordes choose him that is contemptible Secundum Gregorium c. According to Gregorie by contemptible persons vvee may vnderstande secular men hauing the knovvledge of humaine lavves and in their personages being honorable who in comparison of them that vnderstand the diuine lawes and pierce the mysteries of the holy Trinitie are contemptible and simple although they be faithful â–ª And according to this sense vvee muste reade it affirmatiuely bicause suche are to be appointed vvhiche of the Canons are called the Sonnes of the Church I sprake it to your shame bycause althoughe I commaunde it not you ought to haue done it And therefore he commaundeth such to be ordeyned bycause they that ought to serue on the altare and meditate Diuine Sermons and giue the vvorde of preaching to the people ought to estraunge themselues from secular businesse and iudgements Likewise saithe your Cardinall Hugo The glosse calleth them contemptible that are not apt to great offices in the Church as to preach and teach And this is an argument that my lord the Pope ought not to appoint Masters of Diuinitie to be Iudges of temporall things To your shame saith the glosse that those should examine earthly causes that haue gotten the vvisedome of outvvarde things But those that are enryched vvith spirituall giftes ought not to be entangled vvith earthly businesse that vvhile they be not driuen to inferior goods they may be able to attende on the higher goods Hovvebeit this must greatly be cared for that they that shine in spiritual goods forsake not vtterly the businesse of their vveake brethreÌ„ Thus your Papists theÌ„selues are of a contrarie iudgement to you M. Saunders besides all your Popes and Councels Canons that the spirituall Pastors should not be these Iudges in secular things that here Saint Paule speaks on To wrest therefore these wordes spoken of any faithfull Christian only to your Priestes to wring this sentence from the state of the Churche then being without any faithfull Magistrate to the time now when they haue many and those not choseÌ„ of theÌ„selues but ordeyned of the higher Magistrate to wrythe it from the iudgements and taking vp of their petit quarels to the deposing or setting vp of Kings or altering kingdomes is clean beyond the meaning of S. Paule an euident violence iniurie to Gods word Now vpoÌ„ this sentence thus wrested you procéed to your argumeÌ„t saying For their goodes are so muche subiecte to the ecclesiasticall povver that it is lavvfull for the Churche of priuate men to ordeine Magistrates that should iudge of secular causes and not only of ecclesiasticall But no man can passe more righte to an other than he hath himselfe Therefore the Churche vvhich hath povver to make them Iudges that vvere priuate men before hath much more it selfe ouer those secular causes receiued povver by the Ministers of God that as Aaron are called to the