Lords supper and in such things might appoint what he list This manner of declaring the Kings Iurisdiction did so much offend the reformed Churches that Caluin the writers of the Centuries doe much complaine thereof and worthily For the Bishop of Winchester sought not like a curious triar of mettals to seuere the gold from the siluer and drosse from both but as hee found this massie crown of Iurisdiction vpon the Popes head so he tooke it with gold siluer coper drosse and all and set vpon the Kings head So that the thing which procured so much offence was not the title but the Bishops false and erronious declaration of that title If any obiect against me what then will you take vpon you to handle this thing better then such a learned and prudent Prelate I answer the Bishop wanted neither wit nor learning for the opening of this point but onely a loue to the truth which loue when I shall bring to this question I finde my selfe therby so supported that neither the perfections of other men nor mine owne imperfections can daūt me so much as to cause me to giue ouer the defence of the truth True it is that a more skilfull Archimedes might haue beene set on this worke to distinguish the things that haue lien so long confounded in this question or the common helpe of many might haue beene combined wherin our aduersaries are now growen wiser in their generation then the children of light And though it seeme to be true that an euill cause hath more need of helpes yet there is no reason that they who haue the handling of a good cause should in confidence of the cause neglect any helpe that possibly they may attain vnto Albeit we must confesse that the arme of God hath wonderfully declared it selfe by weak meanes against great For if a man should looke vpon the meanes on both sides with an eye of flesh he would thinke as Vzziah did When the Arke was shaken that the Church could not possibly stand vp by so weake meanes For on the one side the Pope sheweth himselfe with the riches of Saint Peters great and potent patrimony with the helpe of so many great Princes with the councell and policie of his Cardinals with the armies of his Canonists Priests secular and regular but especially in these later years of his Iesuites who glorying so much of their learning and filling the world with their vaunts being supported by wealth and policie abounding with all worldly meanes that their hearts can desire incouraged by preferments march like armed troupes entring a battell On the other side a company of poore men Luther Bucer Zuinglius O◅colampadius Martyr Caluin and such like v◅terly contemned of the Iesuites bringing no other furniture with them sauing a good conscience learning and a loue to the trueth seeme to make a poore shew without force without glory If Gods truth were to ◅e vpholden by humane meanes or if the seruants of the truth were drawne to speake in the Church as Lawyers are for their fees at the barre then what hope could wee haue to stand against the Iesuites the Popes Lawyers who by inuincible clamours facing and obstinacy make not truth but victory the end they aime at But as there is great oddes in the meanes on the one side so there appeareth no lesse difference in the successe on the other side For by these weake and contemned means the world is subdued vnto Christ deliuered from the bondage of superstition wisdome is iustified of her owne children and the truth triumpheth in the sincerity and godlinesse of weake meanes against the malice policy and strength of her prepotent aduersaries Which successe compared with the meanes on both sides doth manifest the arme of God to be in the cause that groweth so much against the expectation of the world and meanes For what other power could make so weake meanes preuaile so much against so great policy and strength but the same power though not in the sam◅ measure which by a company of poore Fishermen despised in the world subdued the whole world vnto the obedience of Christ As this successe and blessing by the presence of God hath beene hitherto apparant in this cause so the Iesuites take order that the same successe and blessing may continually hereafter follow our cause vntill it hath rooted out all the aduersaries that make opposition against it for what greater strength or aduantage can bee giuen to our cause then the wickednesse of our aduersaries doth giue How often doth Moses declare to the Church of Israell that the fauour of God was so much declared towards them not for their owne righteousnes but for the wickednes of their aduersaries So that if we should stand still and looke on and holde our selues in patience our aduersaries will worke the meanes by their owne strange cruelties in their Inquisitions by their prophane and vncleane conuersation by their grosse Idolatry by their horrible treasons and conspiracies against the liues of Princes by their diuelish deuises for subuersion of whole States at one blow by their hypocrisie falshood and aequiuocations and by that most admirable and exquisit villany that euer was inuented in deprauing corrupting altering and chaunging all auncient writers by these and the like practises of wickednes they themselues will worke the meanes of our successe and of their owne destruction And if the Prince of this world and his first begotten had not blinded their eyes and their hearts they could not choose but see and acknowledge the experience of Gods fauour and protection mightily declared from heauen vpon our cause our Prince and State and of late much increased and made apparant to all th◅ world by their owne wicked practises Then the difference being so great in the meanes and in the successe so great also betweene our conuersation and theirs must needes declare a great difference betweene our hopes and theirs our Religion and theirs they haue raised the Princes and armies of the world against vs when they pretended peace wee neuer vsed deceit or wrong against them they haue by barbarous deuises attempted to procure our vtter subuersion we desire hartily their conuersion to God they curse reuile and baspheme vs wee pray for them this difference may shew where truth and Religion is and might if they entred into the serious consideration of things drawe them to cease from all wicked attempts to follow and embrace one trueth and to worshippe one God with vs. But if there be no remedy but that Princes and States must be oppugned by a perpetuall league of Conspiracy from Rome if nothing can satisfie them but the blood of Kings then what remaineth but that the Princes of Christendome prepare themselues to that great battel which S. Iohn saith shal be fought in the plain of the earth against Gog and Magog When God shall raise the spirits of princes to that worke he will open the way and giue the
tearme it from whence all Spirituall Iurisdiction must proceed to others some adde also Temporall of Spirituall Iurisdiction Bellarmine saith all Bishops receiue Iurisdiction from the Pope The like some of them or some others teach also of Temporall power the difference which they obserue is that Spirituall power is deriued from the Pope to all Bishops but Temporall power is giuen to execute some seruice Augustinus Triumphus of Ancona who wrote about three hundreth yeeres agoe at the commaundement of Iohn 22. Pope set foorth of late by the authoritie and priuiledge of Gregorie 13. did long before the Iesuits dispute this question of the Popes Soueraigne authoritie ouer Princes since which time the Friars haue closely followed his footsteps His assertion is Omnis potestas imperatorum regum est subdelegata respectu potestatis Papae And againe in the same place Omnis potestas saecularis est restringenda amplianda executioni mandanda ad imperium Papâ—… These and the like positions are now resolutely and stiffely maintained by the Iesuits and others of that faction 3. This agreeth well with the Canon lawes which are the fundamentall lawes of the court of Rome For thus they say Nos tam ex superioritate quam ad imperium non est dubium nos habere c. That is we aswell by that soueraignetie and right which without all doubt we haue to the Empire as also by that power whereby we succâ—…ed the Emperour in the vacancie of the Empire and no lesse also by the fulnesse of that power which Christ the King of kings and Lord of lords hath in the person of Saint Peter graunted to vs though vnworthy declare all such sentences and processes made by Henry 7. void and of none effect Thus saith Clement 5. Pope against Henrie 7. Emperour To the same purpose saith Boniface 8. Pope in a Constitution of his Oportet gladâ—…um esse sub gladio c. That is one sword must be vnder another sword and the Temporall authoritie must be subiected to the Spirituall authoritie for when the Apostle saith there is no power but of God and the powers that are are ordained of God They could not be ordinated vnlesse one sword were vnder another and a little after Thus of the Church and of the power Ecclesiasticall is verified the prophecie of Ieremie behold I haue sâ—…t thee ouer nations and kingdomes to plucke vp and to root out and to destroy and to throw downe and to build and to plant And againe we declare we say we define we pronounce that it is necessarie to saluation to beleeue that euery humane creature is subiect to the Pope of Rome These be the lawes of the court of Rome which some of late haue so much adored as to call them Catholike Diuinitie and which for truth and certaintie and for authoritie ouer their consciences they hold comparable euen with the holy Scriptures 4. By all which wee collect the doctrine of the court of Rome or the Popes faction to be that the Pope hath all power Spirituall and Temporall aboue all other whatsoeuer This I call the opinion of the Court of Rome or the Popes faction because we finde the most learned of the Church of Rome to hold the contrary For concerning spirituall power the best learned of the Church of Rome yea and whole councels maintaine the Spiritual power of the Church to be aboue the Pope as hereafter we shall declare And for this Temporall power aboue Kings and Emperours claimed by the Popes in their Canon Lawe maintained by their flatterers it seemeth so straunge so new and absurd that they who maintaine it are not as yet agreed vpon the state of the question For some hold that the Pope hath this power directly ouer Princes as the Canonists to whom some of the Shoole-men may be added as Triumphus and some of late called Congregationis Oratorij as Cardinall Baronius Bozius and such Others denying this direct power hold that the Pope hath the same power but indirectly as depending vpon his Spirituall power of this opinion is Cardinall Bellarmine and others these both hold the same conclusion but differ in the manner of holding it Others there be who are in some sort content to allowe the Popes Fatherhood in spirituall matters in case lie would not prooue incorrigible but vtterly denie this power ouer princes both direct and indirect of this opinion was Guil. Occham Ma' silius Patauinus and other learned men of the Church of Rome And of late Guil. Berclaius a French Lawyer hath with great learning refuted both the former opinions of the Popes power direct and indirect against Bozius and Bellarmine and yet this man professeth himselfe to be resolued to liue and die a Papist so that on the one side stand all the reformed Churches and many of the best learned of the Church of Rome I may say all the Church of old and of late On the other side standeth the Pope with his faction that is his flatterers and this I call with some of former ages the Court of Rome this is the opinion of our aduersaries 5. Our positiue sentence against this standeth in two parts as the Pope hath incroached on two sides both vpon the right of Kings and of the Church Concerning the Kings right we hold that in externall coactiue Iurisdiction the King hath supreame authoritie in all causes and ouer all persons Ecclesiasticall aswell as Ciuill This is that which hath bene published by diuerse writings and ordinances which by publike authoritie haue beene enacted and published declaring that the King within hi Dominions hath this soueraigne authoritie and that heerein there is no forraine power aboue the King The authority of the Church hath beene in like sort vsurped by the Pope by drawing to himselfe a supposed title of the head of the vniuersall Church by deuising a straunge authority in the fulnesse of power by claiming a newe and straunge priuiledge of his not erring iudgement and making himselfe the onely iudge of controuersies of faith This power in iudging and determining of controuersies of faith and religion being partly in the Church partly in the Scriptures the Pope hath wrested from both first extolling the Church aboue the Scriptures and then setting himselfe aboue the Church Then that the limits of each power may be truely knowne we giue all spirituall power to the Church all externall coactiue iurisdiction to the King when each of these shall haue taken vp his owne right there will not be so much left to the Pope as these great flatterers the Iesuits seeke to heape vpon him Our purpose is first to dispute the right which Kings haue in coactiue power ouer all persons and in all causes euen Ecclesiasticall within his dominions by persons ecclesiasticall wee vnderstand Archbishops Bishops Deans Rectors and all other set in calling and place Ecclesiasticall by causes Ecclesiasticall wee vnderstand causes Ecclesiasticall of externall coactiue
Iurisdiction 6. From this consideration of persons and causes arise two great questions First concerning the exemption of all causes Ecclesiasticall from the Kings Iurisdiction secondly concerning the exemption of Ecclesiasticall persons from temporall audience and iudicature For the better vnderstanding hereof we may proceede by some distinctions for when our aduersaries teach that the Pope is the head of the Church and we that the King is the supreame gouernor of the Church though in some sound of wordes these things seeme not much to differ yet in truth there is great difference betweene their meaning and ours For they calling the Pope the head to distinguish him from Christ whom the Apostle calleth the head of the Church say that the Pope is the ministeriall head which deuise was first brought in by the Schoolemen for among the auncients it was not knowne but all that speake of the head of the Church before acknowledge none but Christ. Concerning this deuise of the ministeriall head we say with the ancient Fathers that the Catholike Church is but one and hath one head Christ Iesus because to one bodie there can bee but one head from whom grace is infused to the whole body This Catholike Church is as that head is both perfectly known to God not to man this then is but one in all times and places But the visible Churches or particular are many at many times in many places and therefore must haue heads or gouernours aunswerable to themselues for many Churches many gouernours These are either Spirituall gouernours or Temporall The spirituall gouernment of the Church is committed to spirituall gouernours as first from Christ to his twelue Apostles of whom none was aboue the rest in this spirituall gouernment or kingdome of Christ as the Lord doth often expresly declare to them from them to Bishops and Pastors their successors Temporall gouernours are such as haue the custody of externall coactiue Iurisdiction both in Temporall and Ecclesiasticall causes for the power of the Church with all her spirituall Iurisdiction neuer reached to coaction This was by God first giuen to Magistrates and neuer reuoked in all times practised but when the Church and Kings were oppressed by the great power of Antichrist When wee call the King the supreame gouernour of the Church our meaning is that hee is appointed by God to be a Father and preseruer of religion a keeper of Ecclesiasticall discipline and as the Prophet Isaiah calleth him a nourcing father of the Church he is the soueraigne in all affaires of coactiue Iurisdiction Likewise this word Church is not taken in the same sense by them and vs for our aduersaries saying that the Pope is the head of the Church vnderstand thereby the. Catholike Church spread ouer the whole world but we vnderstand a particular Church yeelding the King to bee gouernour next and immediatly vnder God of his own dominions and consequently of persons and causes within his owne dominions so that there is much difference betweene their meaning and ours Then we must come to such an issue wherein without equiuocating the question betweene vs is set for wee shall otherwise run into that fault which is so rife with the Popes Clarks that Bellarmine himselfe confesseth it Notandum est saith he multos ex nostris tempus terere dum probant quod Caluinus caeteri haeretici concedunt This is most common among them to bee large in disputing that which is not in question betweene vs and it is a signe of some ingenuitie to confesse it but neither doth himselfe for all his confession auoid it neither doe they that write since and depend vpon his learning shunne it after so faire warning neither in truth can a false cause be maintained in so many bookes and large volumes as now they set out vnlesse they tooke this libertie to themselues to be large in disputing things which are not in question The question then is concerning the lawfull authoritie of Kings in their owne dominions touching this part of Iurisdiction which is called Ecclesiasticall coactiue Iurisdiction 7. For better proceeding let the distinction be remembred which is vsually receiued of Ecclesiasticall power for all power Ecclesiasticall is commonly deuided into power of order and of Iurisdiction The power of order by all writers that I could see euen of the Church of Rome is vnderstood to be immediatly from Christ giuen to all Bishops and Priests alike by their consecration wherein the Pope hath no priuiledge aboue other Thus teach Bonauentuâ—…e in 4. sent d. 17. q 1. August Triumphus lib. de potest eccles qu. 1. ar 1. Ioh. Gerson li. de potest eccles consid 1. Cardinal Cusanus lib. de cathol concord 2. cap. 13. Cardinal Contarenus tract de eccles potest pontificis Bellarm. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 22. This then being the common confession of all that the Pope hath no more power herein then any other Bishop or Pastor we moue no contradiction in this As they confesse that in this power the Pope hath no praeeminence but that it is giuen from Christto all Bishops and pastors equally so wee confesse that in this power the prince hath no part and that Bishops and pastors haue this power onely from the diuine ordinance and not from earthly princes then our question is onely of the power of Iurisdiction 8. This power of Iurisdiction is diuersly vnderstood by the writers of the Church of Rome Augustinus Triumphus doth deliuer it thus The power of Iurisdiction is Temporall or Spirituall and this power considered in generall is threefold immediate deriued or giuen to execute some seruice the power of Iurisdiction immediate of all things Spirituall and Temporall is onely in the Pope The power of Iurisdiction deriued is in Bishops to them deriued from the Pope the power of Temporall Iurisdiction giuen to execute some seruice for the helpe of the Church is in Emperours Kings and secular princes this power is not immediat from God but is giuen first to the Pope and so to Kings for the vse of the Church and â—…elpe of Pope and Prelates I haue deliuered this in the â—…ery words of Triumphus whom in this thing others followe though of late some of the finer Iesuits who hold the same are growen more cunning in the manner of deliuering it Bellarmine loath to leaue the opinion and ashamed so grossely to propose it deuiseth a mollification of it thus Asserimus Pontiâ—…icem vt pontiâ—…icem et si non habeat vllam meré temporalem potestatem tamen habere in ordine ad spirituale bonum summam potestatem disponendi de temporalibus rebus omnium Christianorum That is We auer that the Pope albeit he hath not any power merely Temporall as Pope yet hath power supreame in respect of Spirituall good to dispose of all the Temporalties of all Christians And in the next Chapter concludeth that the Pope hath authoritie to depose hereticall kings and princes
to seeke the fauour of Cornelius who without examination of the cause receiued them to the Communion Of which thing Cyprian complaineth much they saile to Rome saith he cum merce mendaciorum Against this hee declareth that it was ordained that neither the Bishop of Rome nor any straunger should be iudge of the causes of their Church And to Cornelius he writeth thus Quum statutum sit ab omnibus aquum sit pariter ac iustum vt vniuscuiusque causa illic audiatur vbi est crimen admissum singulis pastoribus portio gregis sit ascripta quam regat vnusquisque gubernet c. Opoâ—…tet vtiqueâ—…os quibus praesumus non circumcursare episcoporum concordiam cohaerentem sua subdola fallaci temeritate collidere sed agere illic causam vbi accusatores habere testes sui criminis possunt That is Seeing it is decreed by all and it is a thing both equall and iust that euery mans cause should be heard there where the crime was committed and a part of the flocke is appointed to each Pastor which each in seuerall must rule and guide c Verily it behooueth that they whom we gouerne should not gad and run about to others nor by their crafty and fallatious rashnesse breake in sunder the coherent concord of Bishops but there ought they to plead their cause where they may haue accusers and witnesses of their crime 26. Thus albeit the Bishops of Rome did seeke some inlarging of their authoritie sometimes by giuing countenance and patronage to criminous and scandalous men yet they were repressed and brought into order by the godly and learned Bishops that then liued in the Church Who would not suffer the priuiledges of the Church to be lost or any title of Iurisdiction to grow where there was no right Thus for the first three hundred yeeres the Church of Rome had no Iurisdiction ouer other Churches but the Bishops there were reuerenced by other partly for their wisedome learning and godlinesse partly because the Emperours fauoured them aboue other and because they were Bishops of the chiefe citie and seat of the Empire For as they had some fauour aboue the rest with heathen Emperours so they found much more fauour from Christian Emperours which thing caused them to be regarded by other Bishops but no Iurisdiction was as yet acknowledged CHAP. V. Of the estate and Iurisdiction of the Church from the end of the first three hundred yeeres vntill the yeere of Christ sixe hundred Wherein is declared that coactiue power was in the Christian Emperors from whom the Church receiued some parts of coactiue Iurisdiction The Popes began to seeke Iurisdiction by forgerie NOwe let vs consider the times that followed when the Church had peace from persecution and found the fauour of Christian Emperours In which time no Iurisdiction will be found in the Church of Rome aboue other and all coactiue Iurisdiction was acknowledged without question to bee in the Christian Emperours from whom the Church receiued some part thereof 2. Constantine who did as much honour the Church and was as much honoured of the Church as euer any Christian Emperour leauing therein an example which standeth as yet alone without a match did notwithstanding take all that to himselfe which is now called Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction coactiue without any let or contradiction nay by the generall approbation of all that then liued When Caecilianus Bishop of Carthage was accused by Donatus and some other of that faction for deliuering the holy Scriptures to the enemies of Religion to be burned Constantine commaunded Caecilianus to come to Rome with a certaine number of Bishops which accused him and other that might heare and vnderstand the cause And commaunded the Bishop of Rome then Milciades with certaine Bishops of Fraunce to the number saith Optatus of nineteene to heare and end the matter the Bishops condemned Donaâ—…us who appealed from the sentence and albeit the Emperour was much offended at his appellation yet hee could not choose but receiue it In all this processe the Emperours Soueraigne Iurisdiction appeared the cause was a pretended crime of a Bishop the Emperour appointeth iudges and receiued the appellation which things declared Iurisdiction 3. Likewise after he had banished Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia and Theognis Bishop of Nice he wrote an Epistle to the people of Nicomedia declaring the iust causes of their banishment and signifieth that his especiall pleasure and desire is to haue Bishops castos orthodoâ—…os humanos and shutting vp his speech he saith Quoasi quis audacter inconsulteque ad memoriam pestium illarum exarserit illius statim audaeia ministri dei hoc est mea exequutione coercebitur Where we see Constantine vseth coactiue Iurisdiction ouer Bishops he punisheth them he declareth the true ground of his Iurisdiction from the word of God by which warrant he is placed the Minister of God This is that coactiue Iurisdiction ouer Ecclesiasticall persons which did alwayes belong to the Soueraigne Magistrate and was neuer by God giuen to any other 4. It was alwayes held by all sober writers of the Church of Rome as hereafter shall be further declared that in the Church there is no power aboue the power of a Councell And yet this authoritie of a Councell so much and so worthily reuerenced could not restraine Constantine but he vpon good and iust causes brought the rash proceedings of some Councels to a newe examination For when Athanasius was wronged by a Councell of Arians he complained to Constantine The Emperour sent for all the Bishops of that Councell to render an accompt of their proceedings before him which declareth that his Iurisdiction coactiue was aboue the power coactiue of the Councell For heere we consider onely Iurisdiction coactiue and not the matter or subiect for otherwise wee acknowledge as before is declared that the determinations of generall Councels are matters of an higher truth and authoritie then the Statutes or decrees of any Emperour But wee speake heere of that Soueraigne Iurisdiction coactiue which hath alwayes appeared in the power of the ciuill Magistrate and wherein the Church had no more part then that she receiued from the liberalitie of godly Emperours for as Kings receiue the knowledge of faith and Religion from the Church and not the Church from Kings so coactiue Iurisdiction the Church receiueth from Kings and not Kings from the Church 5. There was no Councell held in Constantines time whether of Orthodoxe or heretikes but either by the expresse commaundement or license of the Emperour Ruffinus saith he called the Councel of Nice at the request of the Bishops Ex sacer dotum sententia apud vrbem Nicaeam concilium Episcopale conuocat Epiphanius saith that Councell was obtained of the Emperour at the suit of Alexander Bishop of Alexandria So the Bishops who then liued in the Church held it to be of the Emperours right and Iurisdiction to call Councels
conclude directly against the Emperours purposes Thus doth Socrates report the calling of that councell but Sozomen saith it was not obtained of Valens but of Valentinian 9. Besides these publique and generall Synods there were also some more priuate and particular in calling whereof the Bishops had power The Bishop of the Diocesse vsed to call a Synod of his Clergy but could proceed no farther Prouinciall Synodes were called by Metropolitanes but in a generall Synod of many Nations the Emperour had alwayes the right of calling it as a King hath the onely right of calling a Synod of those Nations that are vnder his gouernment For as the counsell of Nice was called by Constantine so were all the counsels of these next three hundred yeares called by the Emperours that gouerned at such times Theodosius gathered the councell of Constantinople against the heresie of Macedonius in the third yeare of his raigne which was the yeare of Christ 383. saith Prosper The councell of Ephesus against Nestorius was gathered by the authority of Theodosius the younger and the fourth generall councell at Chalcedon by the authority of Martianus and Valentinianus Emperours Leo the first was a great man in these affaires and hee is the fittest to certifie vs of the truth against whose witnesse our aduersaries haue no reason to except This Pope then writing to the Emperour Theodosius saith Pietas vestra apud Ephesum constituit Synodale concilium And afterward declaring his obedience and conformity thereto saith Meum studium commodaui vt Clementiae vestrae studijs pareatur And againe Ne autem pijssimi Principis dispositioni nostra videatur praesentia defuisse fratres meos misi c. he hath the same also Epist. 23. ad Theodosium Againe hee writeth to Pulcheria to moue the Emperour to command a councell to be holden within Italy declaring that he wrote to the Emperour to intreat the same Which thing hee moueth also in other Epistles And though he much desired this that the Emperour would haue beene intreated to hold a councell within Italy yet could he not obtaine it and therefore was ready to obey the Emperour attending his pleasure therein who appointed it in another place 10 Which thing we obserue the rather because our aduersaries oflate haue yeelded this as a proper right to the Pope to call councels Catholici munus conâ—…andi concilia generalia saith Bellarmine ad Romanum pontificem propriè pertinere volunt And when they are driuen by these open and euident testimonies they shift it thus as to say another may doe it by the Popes consent but if the Pope neither appoint the place nor no other by his commaundement or consent then it is no councell but a conciliable These bee vaine and friuolous shifts of Friars For it is true that the Popes consent was to these auncient councels but no otherwise then as the consent of all other Bishops They consented because they could not chuse because they were resolued to be obedient but they could not appoint either place or time For Leo could not haue it where hee would but it was where and when the Emperour appointed 11 Before the councell of Chalcedon there is the Writ of the Emperours Valentinian and Martian called Sacra to call Bishops to Nicaea But another Sacra is sent to reuoke that and to call them to Chalcedon So that all this while the Emperors rule as those that haue Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction They call councels they punish offenders of the Clergy they establish Ecclesiasticall Courts they are acknowledged the nourcing Fathers of Religion the keepers and preseruers of both Tables and of the discipline of the Church And therefore Leo writing to Constantinus Emperour who called the sixt Synod saith thus Cognouimus quod sancta vniuersalis maxima sexta Synodus quae per Dei gratiam imperiali decreto in regia vrbe congregata est c Wee know that the holy and vniuersall great sixt Synod which by the grace of God is called and gathered by the imperiall decree in the imperiall City c. And a little after Pietas vestra fructus misericordiae potestas custos disciplinae Your godlinesse is the fruit of Gods mercy your power is the keeper of discipline And againe Nec enim minor regnantium cura est praua corrigere quam de aduersarijs triumphare quia einimirum potestatem suam seruiendo subijciunt cuius munere imperare noscuntur c. Vnde diuinitus praordinata vestra Christianissima pietas c. Caput Ecclesia Dominum Iesum Christum veram pietatis regulam amplectendo c. For Gouernours ought to haue no lesse care to correct vngodly things then to triumph ouer their aduersaries for they submit their power to his seruice by whofe power they are knowne to rule c. Therefore your most Christian zeale preordained of God c. acknowledging our Lord Iesus Christ the true rule of godlinesse to bee the head of the Church Wherein the Bishop of Rome doth acknowledge first that the generall councell is to be called onely by the authority of the Emperour imperiali decreto Secondly that the Emperours power is such a power as is custos disciplinae Hee speaketh here in an Ecclesiasticall cause and of Ecclesiasticall affaires Now that power which is custos disciplinae Ecclesiae what is it but Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction This word Iurisdiction was not then worne in such vse as now it is but we see the auncients vse words counteruailing it The Bishop of Rome acknowledgeth Ecclesiasticall power and Iurisdiction to be in the Emperour when hee yeeldeth him such a power as is preseruer of the discipline Ecclesiasticall Thirdly he confesseth that the care of the Church Church-gouernment for establishing the truth doth no lesse belong to the office of a Prince then to triumph ouer his foes in warre Fourthly the Bishop of Rome as then acknowledgeth no other head of the Church then Iesus Christ as appeareth by his words To the same purpose Saint Augustine saith Diuinitus praecipi regibus vt in regno suo bona iubeant mala prohibeant non solum quae pertinent ad humanam societatem verum etiam quae ad diuinam religionem Contra Crescentium li. 3. cap. 51. That is Kings are commaunded to estalish good things and prohibite euill in their Kingdomes not onely in things belonging to Ciuill societie but in such things also that belong to diuine Religion Gregorie the great following the footsteppes of his Fathers yeeldeth the fame authoritie to the King For writing to Theodoricus King of France he saith Iterata vos per vestram mercedem adhortatione pulsamus vt congregari Synodum iubeatis This part of Iurisdiction for calling of Councels is so fully confirmed to be the Emperours right by the Aunceants that Cardinall Cusanus sure no Lutheran disputing of this priuiledge concludeth from the confessed testimonies of the Aunceants these two things First That Emperours
impropriations turning tithes first from their true and auncient vse persecution for preaching the Gospell exemptions the vse of Legends in the Church and reading of fables to the people Symonie flattery pardons indulgences the heresie of an accident without a subiect singular and blind obedience the vse of commutation of penance into money they were instruments of warres and bloodshed they inuented works of supererogation the doctrin that reprobates are members of the Catholike Church to robbe the land of money These are the things in part which are obserued by Wiclife to haue beene first inuented by Friars Now whereas Iohn Wiclife was reputed an hereticke wee finde that this imputation was laid vpon him especially by Friars For he was a professed enemie to them and to their innouations holding with the Church of Rome and maintaining no other doctrine then that which he found publikely maintained and receiued in the world before Friars altered it Still he pleadeth the cause of the Priests against Friars which sheweth that he taught no otherwise then those Priests did teach And albeit the Friars did marueilouslly disorder the Church in his time yet hee witnesseth that the third part of the Clergie of England defended the truth against Friars Then the Friars being set vp to alter the auncient doctrine and Iurisdiction and to induce new did labour herein throughly imploying their best skill and power for the aduancement of the Pope and suppressing of the truth Heerein the Iesuites succeed their forefathes in this inheritance of innouation daily adding some new monsters to those which these old Friars left to their hands 24. The Vniuersitie of Paris hath likewise declared their iudgement against Friars somewhat before this time wherein Wiclife liued They gathered seuen Articles against Friars which because they proue Friars to be the authors introducers of innouation in the Church I will here set them downe First we say that Friars are not to be admitted into our Scholasticall societie except by our consent because the society ought not to be coact but voluntarie Secondly because wee haue found by experience that their fellowship hath beene many wayes hurtfull and dangerous to vs. Thirdly seeing they are of a diuerse profession from ours for they are regulars and wee schollers we ought not to be ioined or mingled together in one scholasticall office For the Spanish Councell saith Thou shalt not plow with an Oxe an Asse thatis thou shalt not associate men of diuers professions together in one office for how can they agree together whose studies vowes and purposes are diuers Fourthly because they raise dissentions offences but the Apostle saith we beseech you brethren that you obserue them that is that you discerne such as make dissentions for the doctrine which you haue learned of the Apostles and eschewe them for they serue not the Lord but their belly Gloss. for they flatter some they backbite others that they may fill their bellies and by glosing words and their benedictions they beguile the hearts of the simple Fiftly because we feare least they bee such as enter into houses because they thrust themselues into euery mans house they search and sift the consciences of men seduce such as they find like women ready to be seduced And whō they haue once seduced them they draw from the Councels of their owne Prelates to their Councels for they bind them by oath to their Councels such the Apostle commaundeth to eschew Sixtly because we feare they are false Prophets for they are not Bishops nor Parish-priests nor their Vicars nor by them inuited yet they preach being not sent against the Apostle saying Rom. 10. How shall they preach except they be sent For they worke no miracles thereby to witnesse that they may preach the Church then ought to auoid such men being so dangerous Seuenthly because they are curious and hauing no lawfull calling in the Church they busie themselues with other mens businesse thrust themselues into other mens callings and yet they are neither Apostles nor their successours that is Bishops neither are they of the seuenty and two Disciples of the Lord neither their helpers or Vicars as before is said Now the Apostle commaundeth vs to eschewe such as will liue so saying 2. Thess. vlt. We declare brethren to you in the name of the Lord Iesus Christ that you withdraw your selues from euery brother that walketh inordinately and not according to that tradition which they haue receiued of vs c. 25. Thus haue we set downe the sincere iudgement of that Vniuersitie before it was corrupted and infected with Friars They haue prooued that Friars haue no lawfull calling in the Church to preach or administer the Sacraments because they haue no institution of Christ or his Apostles And howsoeuer since those times the iudgement of that Vniuersitie was chaunged after they had once receiued these serpents into their bosomes yet the reasons which they haue brought against Friars are vnchaungeably true and will alwayes prooue that which then they prooued that neither the old Friars nor the new Iesuits haue any lawfull calling in the Church As thus they haue beene the bane of the Church in chaunging the old bounds so they haue beene the ruine of Princes and the cause of great warres and bloodshed yea of all the persecutions that haue bene since For before that time that the orders of Friars were brought foorth by a new and monstrous birth in the Church there was no bloodshed nor persecution offered by the Pope nor the Church of Rome for matters of Religion Berengarius was forced to a Recantation before but no blood was shed But after that Dominicke had instituted the order of the Iacobites or preaching Friars and Francis the order of the Minorites professed beggars then began great bloodshed and persecution to be practised vpon men that did not allow the Popes Iurisdiction in blood was it first founded and so it hath beene euer since maintained 26. The first persecution began against them that were called Albingenses whose opinions are made hainous by some that write affectionately since that time but by the writers of that time there appeareth no other thing wherewith they were charged but onely that they withstood the Popes pride and Iurisdiction for which they were persecuted The Earle of Tholouse who fauoured them was depriued of his Earledome his landes were giuen to Simon Monford the forces of the French and the Pope were raised against him when they were not able to vanquish him by force by fraud and falshood of the Friars and Popish Bishops they ouerthrew him In this ouerthrow of the Earle the industry and valour of Dominicke is much celebrated by the stories of this time Insomuch as the whole praise is attributed to him of him Platina witnesseth thus much Quos Albingenses Dominicus mira celeritate compescuit adiuuante etiā Simone Monteforti non enim disputationibus verum armis opus fuit adeo
it must be before his Bishoppe if he will accuse the Bishoppe it must be in a prouinciall Synode if he will draw a Metropolitane to answer for some things which he hath done it must be either before the Primate or before the Bishoppe of Constantinople All this we graunt to be orderly established the things intended are matters of Ecclesiasticall Cognisance which are to bee heard in such Courts but our question is of Clerks that are conuinced to be murtherers or Traytors c. Whether such are to bee exempt from triall at Common Law Of which exemptions these auncient Bishops neuer dreamed 76. It is moreouer to be noted that diuers of these places which he citeth as that from Sulpitius of S. Martin and from Ambrose c. are vnderstoode of another thing and not of exemption of Clarkes at all For the auncient Bishops as before I haue declared thought it not lawfull that matters of faith and doctrine should be determined in ciuill Courts by ciuill Magistrates This is true and this is that which those testimonies speake of but what is this to criminous Clarks that Robbers Traytors murtherers of the Clergy should be protected by reason of their Order from triall in Kings Courts this is a doctrine neuer knowne to the auncients It was first knowne in England in the dayes of Henry the second stirred seditiously by Thomas Becket Archbishop of Canterbury when as before that time it was neuer heard of in this land The manner heereof I will briefly recite out of Roger Houeden 77. In the yeare of Christ 1163. the contention concerning exemption of Clerkes grew famous betweene King Henry the second and Thomas Becket Archbishop Rex volebat saith Houeden Presbyteros Diaconos Subdiaconos alios Ecclesiae rectores si comprehensi fuissent in latrocinio vel murdra vel felonia vel iniqua combustione vel in his similibus ducere ad saecularia examina punire sicâ—…t laicum Contra quod Archiepiscopus dicebat quod si Clericus in sacris ordinibus constitutus vel quilibet alius rector Ecclesiae calumniatus fuerit de aliqua re per viros Ecclesiasticos in curia Ecclesiastica debet iudicari Et si conusctus fuerit ordines suos amittere sic alâ—…enatus ab officio beneficio Ecclesiastico si postea forisfecerit secundum voluntatem Regis baliuorum suorum iudicetur That is The King required that Priests Deacons Subdeacons and other Rectors of Churches if they were taken in murther robbery felony burning of houses or such like should be brought to secular Courts and there punished as Lay-men were Against this the Archbishop affirmed that if a Clerke being within holy Orders or any other Parson of a Church were accused of any thing he must be iudged by Ecclesiasticall Iudges in the Ecclesiasticall Court and if he were conuict he should loose his orders And so being excluded from office and benefice Ecclesiasticall if after this he incurred the like fault then might he be iudged at the pleasure of the King and his Officers Thus farre Houeden 78. This manner of degrading and afterward deliuering criminous Clarkes to the Secular power crept in about the time of the Conquest Bellarmine pretending greater antiquity for it can neither bring reason nor testimony for his opinion For whereas he saith Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia was first deposed by the Nicen Councell and afterward banished by Constantine by this offering to proue that they must first be deliuered to the Secular power before the Magistrate may punish and reproueth Caluin for not considering thus much We answere Bellarmine sheweth his skill in shifting and hiding the truth to deceiue the simple For Caluin in that place which he citeth against this Romish immunitie proueth two things First that coactiue power is in the hand of the Prince and not of the Church Ecclesia cogendi non habet potestatem de ciuili coactione loquor saith he Secondly that criminous Clarkes had no immunities from the ciuill Courts of Princes Now that Bellarmine saith Eusebius was first deposed by the Councell and then banished is nothing against Caluin but for him For the Church did not inflict the coactiue punishment of banishment but the Emperour And Caluin proueth at large in the same place that Kings and Emperours haue no authority to iudge in causes of faith Producing the example of Ambrose who in such a cause resisted the Emperour Valentinian Such a cause was that of Eusebius the Emperour knew not whether he was in fault or not before the Church had iudged the cause But Caluines iudgement and our question standeth in two thinges against which Bellarmine doth not so much as speake one word First that coactiue power was not then in the Church but in the Emperour Secondly that criminous Clerkes were then punished by the Magistrate Eusebius is not there proposed as a criminous Clerke but as an example wherein the coactiue power of the Magistrate appeared But now they say if a Clerke bee proued to be a felon murderer traytor c. the Kings Courts may not censure this man before he be degraded Against these immunities wee speake for which Bellarmine offereth not any proofe Let the manner of Bellarmines answering bee considered for it is easie for him thus to answere Caluin and all Protestants when he toucheth not the point in question but singling out of some peece from the whole wresteth that also from the true intent that he may shape a mis-shapen answere to it Then we say that before those desperate times wherein Iohn Wiclife saith and often affirmeth that Satan was loosed no man claymed such a beastly priuiledge as to be exempt from the Kings Lawes for murder treason and such like Godlinesse reason and the light of Nature seemeth to be extinguished in these men that being contented to take the benefite of Lawes will not be contented to bee ordered by Lawes This hath forced some Princes and States to ordaine Lawes that such should be out of the Kings protection Thus did that noble Prince Edward the third King of England Wherein the King seemed to open the true way to his successors to deale with these men for seeing as then they did so now they doe denie themselues to be the Kings subiects and affirme that neither by Diuine nor humane right they are bound to obey the King with his coactiue Lawes and that they are onely vnder the subiection of the Pope that for no crimes they are to bee examined in the Kings Courts is it not great reason that the protection of the King and of his Lawes should bee denyed to them that reiect both 79. Houeden declareth also that in the yeare one thousand one hundred sixtie foure the King called a Synod and required the Bishops vpon their allegeance to receiue his Graundfathers Lawes to vse and obserue them Thomas Becket answered for him and the rest they would keepe all the Lawes
gouernments I meane Ecclesiasticall and Temporal be directed by coactiue power there is no difference in the point of Iurisdiction betweene Temporall and Ecclesiasticall authoritie For the King and only the King is to appoint iudges in matters Temporall and Ecclesiasticall the King hath no more authoritie in reuersing the iudgement of the one then of the other being true iust and lawfull So that the Kings Iurisdiction standeth not in a power to dissanull true and righteous iudgemens but in a power supereminent by which he is charged First to confirme lawes Ecclesiasticall and Temporall Secondly to place Iudges for both causes Thirdly to see that those iudges of both sortes iudge iustly according to right and equity Fourthly to punish them if they shall be found to giue vniust and corrupt sentences Fiftly and last of all his Iurisdiction appeareth in appellations 7. But heere a question will be moued whether a man may appeale from an Ecclesiasticall iudge to the Prince For that one may appeale from a Temporall iudge I suppose it is not doubted at least I see no reason why it should be doubted But in a cause Ecclesiasticall and from a iudge Ecclesiasticall to appeale to the Temporall Magistrate of this some Romish Doctors doubt This doubt which the Canonists haue made may be increased by that place Deu. 17. 10. Thou shalt not decline from that thing which they shall shew thee neither to the right hand nor to the left And that man that will do presumptuously not hearkning to the Priest that standeth before the Lord thy God to minister there or vnto the iudge that man shall die It might seeme to be collected hence that there is no appellation from the Priest no though hee should iudge as some Rabbins expound the words I will declare their exposition because it sauoureth much like the expositions of some Papists where the text saith thou shalt not decline to the right hand nor to the left they expound it that if the Priest shall say thy right hand is thy left or thy left is thy right this sentence thou must receiue and therein rest 8. But this is a fond assertion not only without reason but against the expresse words of the Scripture for it is said according to the law which shall teach thee and according to the iudgement which they shall tell thee thou shalt doe Where we finde two rules for these two kindes of Iudges the Priest and the iudge the sentence of the Priest must be according to the written lawe the sentence of the other according to the truth of iustice and iudgement If a man be able to shew that he is wronged he may vndoubtedly appeale to a Superiour now a man may be able to shew that he is wronged if hee can shew that the Priest declineth from the law of God which is appointed his rule or the Temporall iudge from iustice And therefore if there be a Superiour in the land he may appeale but if there be no Superiour he is without remedie as when Hely was both Priest and iudge from him at that time there could be no appellation but where the forme of a kingdome is established where one King is set vp in lawfull authoritie by whose power iudges Spirituall and Temporall are placed in his dominions heere appeareth a fountaine of Iurisdiction deriued as it were into two inferiour riuers and from these inferior powers appellation may be brought if they shall not in their sentences keepe their rules prescribed to them the lawe and iustice for the appellation being grounded vpon the lawe of Nature to moderate the peruersitie and partialitie of iudges it were an absurd thing to denie this in causes Ecclesiasticall vnlesse a man would suppose that persons Ecclesiasticall may not be corrupt in their iudgements Now if we shall once graunt appellations then assuredly wee confirme the Iurisdiction of Princes in all matters wherein appellation may bee made to them And because Iurisdiction is assuredly proued by appellation we will for the farther manifestation of the truth seeke to cleere this point the rather becâ—…use our aduersaries tell vs confidently that in matters Ecclesiasticall all appellation belongeth to the Pope The Popes say so and they beleeue them we hold that appellation in causes Ecclesiasticall is to bee directed to the King who is by God set ouer the persons appellant 9. In the Old Testament we haue fewe examples or none that I remember of any that appealed from any inferior iudge Ecclesiasticall to the Soueraigne but in the New Testament there is one example sufficient to confirme the truth S. Paul being accused for causes Ecclesiasticall appealed from the high Priest to Câ—…sar Therfore it is lawfull in matters Ecclesiasticall to appeale from iudges Ecclesiasticall to the Ciuill Magistrate The consequence resteth vpon this that Saint Paul heerein did nothing but that which he might doe iustly and lawfully which thing I suppose the greatest enemie of Saint Pauls Doctrine will not denie for he came vp to Ierusalem with this profession and purpose I am ready not to bee bound onely but euen to die for the name of the Lord Iesus Neither durst he for sauing of his life giue a scandall to the Gospell The antecedent consisteth of these two parts First that the matters for which Saint Paul was accused were matters Ecclesiasticall Secondly that therein he appealed from the high Priest both are witnessed by the expresse words of the Scripture For Festusâ—…aith â—…aith They brought no crime against him but had certaine questions against him of their owne superstition and of one Iesus which was dead whom Paul affirmed to be aliue These questions be out of doubt Ecclesiasticall euen in the iudgement of our aduersaries that he appealed from the high Priest reskuing himselfe from his iudgement it is euident by the words in the twentie three Chapter where the Apostle speaketh to the high Priest as to his iudge Thou sittest to iudge me according to the law And when he was reskued from the Priests by Lysias and sent to Felix and left by him to Festus he neuer thinketh of appealing from any of theâ—…e ciuill gouernours But when Festus asked him if he will goe to Ierusalem and there be iudged of these things then Pâ—…ul vtterly refusing the high-Priest appealed to Câ—…sar by which it followeth that in matters Ecclesiasticall a man may appeale from iudges Ecclesiasticall to the Soueraigne Prince Whereupon this vndoubtedly followeth that there resteth Soueraigne Iurisdiction in the Prince And therefore the Popes their flatterers vnderstanding well that Supreame Iurisdiction could neuer bee prooued to rest in the Popes vnlesse first Appellation should be made to them wrought by all subtilty as hereafter we shall declare by right or wrong they neither cared nor spared to cause Appellations to be made to them which thing when once they had obtained that in all causes Ecclesiasticall Appellation might be made to the Popes then and not before
this opinion was r◅olued that Supreame Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction was in the Popes And therefore we prouing that Supreame and last Appellation doth by the law of God belong to none but to the Soueraigne Prince conclude vndoubtedly that Supreame Iurisdiction belongeth to him onely 10. Heere a question may be mooued whether Saint Paul did well and orderly when he appealed to Caesar and whether Caesar was made iudge of these questions which were Doctrines We aunswere Saint Paul had no meaning to make C◅sar iudge of any point of faith But whereas hee was persecuted by the high Priests who sought his life in this matter of coactiue power Saint Paul giueth Iurisdiction to Caesar. There is also a difference betweene that power which heathen Princes haue and that which Christian Princes haue for heathen Princes haue all power coactiue whatsoeuer the cause be and without this helpe the Church could neuer deale in matters of this nature Christian Princes besides this coactiue power haue also as appeareth in the gouernment of Israel externall discipline in matters Ecclesiasticall 11. Thus we haue declared the distinct right of the King and the Priest after that they were distinguished by the written law of God we haue prooued that the Soueraigne Iurisdiction coactiue resteth in the Prince by a right which God hath giuen and therefore may not be taken away by man It followeth to consider how this right hath beene accordingly exercised by the godly Kings of Israel Ios◅ commanded the people to be circumcised and not Eleazerus the cause was Eccles◅ticall but to command in such causes declareth iurisdiction Dauid reduceth the Arke he appointeth Priests Leuites Singers Porters to serue at the Tabernacle he assigneth Officers of the sonnes of Aaro◅ All which being matters Ecclesiasticall the Prince as hauing soueraigne authority in both causes ordaineth Solomon buildeth the Temple and consecrateth it Asa remoueth Idols and dedicated the Altar of God that was before the porch of the Lord. Iehosaphat abolisheth Idolatry cutteth downe the groues sendeth Priests and Leuites to teach in Townes and Cities Setteth vp Iudges both ciuill and Ecclesiasticall and commandeth both to iudge according to godlinesse truth and Iustice. Because in the words of Iehosaphat these things are distinctly deliuered we will obserue the whole place The wordes are these And hee set iudges in the land throughout all the strong Cities of Iuda Citie by Citie And said to the Iudges take heed what you doe for you execute not the iudgement of man but of the Lord and he will be with you in the cause and iudgement Wherefore now let the feare of the Lord be vpon you take heed and doe it for there is no iniquitie with the Lord our God neither respect of persons nor receiuing of reward Moreouer in Ierusalem did Iehosaphat set of the Leuites and of the Priests and of the chiefe of the families in Israel for the iudgement and cause of the Lord and they returned to Ierusalem And he charged them saying thus shall you doe in the feare of the Lord with a perfect heart And in euery cause that shall come to you of your brethren that dwell in your Cities betweene blood and blood betweene Law and precept Statutes and iudgements you shall iudge them and admonish them that they trespasse not against the Lord that wrath come not vpon you and vpon your brethren And behold Amariah the high Preist shall be the chiefe ouer you in all matters of the Lord. 12. From which words we collect thus much concerning ◅he Kings Iurisdiction and the things wherein it consisteth ◅irst the King appointeth and placeth both Temporall and clesi◅sticall Iudges and commandeth and chargeth them so placed to execute their functions faithfully we inferre vpon this command in both alike that hee hath Iurisdiction ouer both causes But here let me remember a trifling obiection which some of our aduersaries haue deuised of late they would distinguish betweene command and Iurisdiction For they deny not but that all sortes of persons are vnder the Kings commaund and gouernment whom he may command each to doe their Office and yet they vtterly deny the Kings Iurisdiction and tell vs that command and Iurisdiction must not be hudled vp together Now let vs consider what hudling is in this when the Kings command and his Iurisdiction are set as things depending and cohaering one to the other When we say the King may command we meane plainely as we speake that the King hath from God lawfull authoritie to command and to punish them that breake his command This is the common vnderstanding of the Kings command But these Romish sophisters when they say the King may command do not vnderstand neither will they acknowledge at any hand that the King hath lawfull authoritie from God to punish the breach of his command for they vtterly deny that the King hath any authoritie to punish a Clarke though he should breake his commandement And call you this a command The King may command and goe without as the saying is This is the deuils sophistry taken vp by men hardned against shame content to stoupe downe to gather vp the meanest and basest shifts to dazell the simple The Iesuites resolue of this as of a truth most soundly concluded in their schooles That the King may not punish Ecclesiasticall persons that the Kings Court may not heare examine and iudge them though they should commit murders adulteries robberies or what other wickednesse soeuer And yet they tell vs that the King may command them Now to say one thing and yet to let the world see that they are resolued in the contrary this sauoreth strongly of the spirit of illusion when reason learning honestie and all faileth yet well fare a bold and hardned face which neuer faileth this generation 13. The truth is if the King haue not lawfull authority to punish he hath not lawfull authoritie to command and punish he cannot vnlesse he hath authority to iudge or cause iudgement to be done so that they who take away from the King power to iudge persons Ecclesiasticall take from him power to punish and consequently power to command but the Doctrine of the Papists this day as shall hereafter appeare in his due place taketh from the king power to iudge per sons Ecclesiastical therefore they rob him of power to punish and to cōmaund for nothing can more strongly take away the Kings command then to deny him power to punish and to iudge And yet they are not ashamed to tell vs that they deny not the kings cōmand but his Iurisdiction Then to leaue these men with their absurd and perplexed contradictions where the King ◅ay command he may iudge and punish the breach of that command and therefore his Iurisdiction appeareth in his lawfull authority and command Then by this charge and commaund of Iehosaph◅ is declared his Iurisdiction in these causes wherein he hath this authority
to command for otherwise the Kings command is but as the word of a priuat man or of a child if he haue not power to iudge and punish 14. Moreouer whereas Iehosaphat commandeth the Priests and Leuites to iudge betweene blood and blood Law and precepts statutes and iudgements In things that concerned questions of blood as when blood was shed by casualtie in which case the party offending had remedy by sanctuary and the high Priest was the immediat iudge as also in matters concerning lawes precepts â—…tutes iudgements that is ordinances ceremoniall or morall In these things stood the Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction which then was practised in the Church for to take that distinction which we must often remember in this question it is confessed that all Ecclesiasticall power is either of order or Iurisdiction In both which the King hath a part bâ—…t differently In the power of orders the Kings part and office was to see that things of that nature were orderly done and the breach thereof punished but himselfe was not to execute any thing whereunto the Priests were apointed by the power of their orders as to offer incense c. Wherefore Vzziah was smitten with leprosie for medling with that part of the Priests office Now Iurisdiction is diuided into power internall which as often wee haue said belongeth not to the King and power externall which power externall when it is coactiue is nothing but that which wee call the Kings Iurisdiction though it be in matters Ecclesiastical And this Iurisdiction is here testified to be in Iehosaphat and from him deriued to all to all iudges vnder him both Temporall and Ecclesiasticall For as he commaunded the Temporall iudges so in like sort he commaunded the Ecclesiasticall And as the Ecclesiasticall iudges might replie if they had bene such as now these are of the Romane Clergie that Ecclesiasticall iudgements were holy and the cause of God and not of the King so doth the King witnesse of Temporall iudgements for speaking to Temporall iudges he saith you execute not the iudgements of man but of the Lord. Then Temporall iudgements are the Lords cause aswell as Ecclesiasticall and herein they differ not 15. Now this Iurisdiction which is in coactiue power wee prooue to be in the King and onely in the King I speake according to the forme of the state of Israel in those dayes wherof we now speake aunswerable to which is the Soueraigne magistrate in any other state This right I say we prooue to bee onely in the King and from him deriued to other iudges both Temporall and Spirituall by these reasons first the King and onely the King commaundeth both iudges to doe their duties in their seuerall places and hath lawfull power to punish them if they doe otherwise therfore the Kings Iurisdiction coactiue is ouer both sorts alike The antecedent hath two parts the first drawen from the expresse words of the Scripture in this text the second followeth by a necessitie For the commaund of a King is ridiculous and no commaund vnlesse he haue authoritie to punish The consequence followeth by the very definition of Iurisdiction which will prooue the second part of the antecedent For this Iurisdiction for which we plead is defined by the most learned of the Church of Rome authority coactiue If it be authoritie it may command if coactiue it may punish then it followeth that where Iehosaphat had first authoritie to commaund and last to punish that questionlesse hee had this Soueraigne Iurisdiction 16. If against this any obiect that the King may command in matters of orders of preaching the Word administring the Sacraments c. In all these things the King may lawfully command the parties to doe their duties and may punish them if they doe otherwise and yet no man will put the Kings Iurisdiction in these matters of orders Preaching Sacraments c. For aunswere let me intreat the reader with attention to consider these three things First to commaund secondly to execute thirdly to punish Iurisdiction standeth wholly in the first and last and nothing at all in the second that is in authoritie and not in action So that though the King should execute a thing which belongeth to his office yet in the execution therof his Iurisdiction should not appeare howsoeuer his wisedome knowledge and actiue vertues might appeare therein for Iurisdiction is in the authoritie of commaunding and power of punishing and supereminence that riseth from both And therefore in the preaching of the Word administration of Sacraments the King hath no part because therein Iurisdiction standeth not these things being matters of execution not of commaund but the authoritie to commaund these things by making or vrging lawes for them and to punish the transgression by corporall punishments this because it includeth coactiue power is in the Soueraigne Magistrate onely If the Magistrate should either neglect his dutie as the heathen did or commaund false doctrines to be preached as the Arian Emperours did in this case the Church hath warrant to maintaine the truth but without tumults and rebellion and rather in patience to loose their liues then to forgo any part of the truth 17. Another reason to prooue this Soueraigne authoritie coactiue to be only in the King and from him respectiuely deriued to both sorts of iudges may thus bee drawen For the iudges Temporall there is not so much question made all the doubt is of iudges Ecclesiasticall the chiefe of which iudges Ecclesiasticall in the Church of Israel was the high Priest Then this Iurisdiction whereof we speake must be confessed to haue been principally and originally either in the king or in the high Priest but in the high Priest it was not Therefore in the King it must be That it was not in the high Priest we proue by these reasons The high Priest is commaunded corrected punished and deposed by the King and not the King by the Priest therefore the Soueraigne Iurisdiction is not in the high Priest but in the King Againe the high Priests did neuer practise coactiue authoritie vnlesse when they were Soueraigne Magistrates as sometimes the high Priests in Israel were but as high Priestâ—… they had no such power for the causes betweene blood and blood which were of their cognisance are by the interpreters vnderdood such cases wherein a man was killed by chaunce without the purpose or against the will of the offender in which case the high Priest might graunt him the prâ—…uiledge of sanctuary and so deliuer him from the auenger of blood but he had no power coactiue to inflict death or such punishments at his pleasure which trueth was so constantly receiued and preserued in the Church afterward that euen in the greatest power highest ruffe of Poperie the Church of Rome did not take this full â—…oactiue power but onely proceeded to degradation and then to deliuer men vp to the secular powers which was a â—…ecret confession that they had no right to
this power coactiue though they had vsurped many parts thereof 18. A third reason to prooue this authoritie to bee in the Ciuill Magistrate is as I teached before confirmed by the right of Appellations For in matters of coactiue Iurisdiction a man might appeale from the high Priest to the King as Saint Paul did to Caesar which was vtterly vnlawfull for him to doe vnlesse he might as lawfully haue appealed to a King if that state of Israel had then beene ruled by a King as at other times it was For that right which Saint Paul giueth to Nero to heare Appellations he would vndoubtedly yeeld to Dauid or Ezekâ—…as or any other godly King in his owne Dominions Wherefore it followeth that either Saint Paul must be condemned for yeelding an vnlawful power to Emperors or Kings must haue the same priuiledge which thing being admitted in matters Ecclesiasticall doth inuincibly prooue the Kings Iurisdiction in such matters The same thing is also confirmed from those words of the Apostle he is the minister of God and he beareth the sword If the Magistrate be the minister of God then he hath full authoritie and Iurisdiction from God whose minister and vicegerent he is if he beare the sword hee hath all power coactiue for coactiue power doth alwayes follow tâ—… sword which God hath giuen to the Ciuill Magistrate to beare Therefore Ioh. Chrysostoâ—… saith Regi corpâ—…ra commissa sunt sacerdoti animâ—… reâ—… maculas corporum remittit sacerdos maculas peccatorum illâ—… cogit hic exhâ—…rtatur ille habet arma sensibilia hic arma spiritualia Hâ—…m 4. de verb. Esa. vidi dom Then the true difference betweene the Magistrate and the Priest concerning this point is Ille cogit hic exhâ—…rtatur so that coactiue power is left wholy to the Magistrate Ambrosâ—… likewise speaking of the authoritie of the Church and of Bishops saith Coactus 〈◊〉 nâ—…n noui arma enim nostra preces sunt 〈◊〉 â—…at iâ—… Auxâ—…t where he declareth the difference betweene these two powers leauing nothing to the Church but preces 〈◊〉 wherin there is no coaction In which sense Thomas Aquinâ—…s faith vindicta quae fit authâ—…ritate publicae potestatâ—… sâ—…cundum 〈◊〉 iudicis pertieet ad iusticiam commutatiuam 2. 2. qu. 8. art 1. Therefore vindicatiue power or coaction belonges not to the Church but the Magistrate that exerciseth coâ—…utatiue iustice 19. In regard of which high power Princes are called Gods I haue said you are Gods And because an aduersarie of late hath told vs that this name is giuen aswell to Ecclesiasticall gouernours as to Kings we reply that it cannot be shewed that this name is giuen to Ecclesiasticall gouernours but either where such gouernours haue receiued authoritie from the Ciuill Magistrate or where themselues are the chiefe Magistrates so that it is a name giuen in respect of Soueraigne power For to manifest the Soueraigne emmency of the Prince compare the Prince and Priest togâ—…ther and by this comparison wee shall euidently know the truth for we find the Prince called a God not onely in respect of the people but in respect of the Priest also Where the Lord himselfe speaketh to Moses of Aaron comparing their power and offices together he saith thus He shall be thy spokesman vnto the people and he shall be as thy mouth and thou shalt be to him in stead of God In this comparing of these two great offices Moses is the directour Aaron the interpretour and preacher Where the Prince or Soueraign Magistrate is called a God not onely in respect of the people as in diuers other Scriptures but in respect of the Priest thou shalt be to him euen to Aaron as a God We find then that the Prince is called a God in respect of the Priest but we can neuer find that the Priest is called a God in respect of the Prince This declareth a Soueraigne authoritie of the Prince in matters of God and of Gods true Religion For he who by his office is to establish true Religion in his dominions doth heerein represent a liuely exâ—…mple both of the goodnesse and power of God and therefore Magistrates are called Gods as being Gods Vicegerents for establishing of true Religion 20. And this our Sauiour Christ confirmeth for whereas Psal. 82. They are called Gods I haue said you are Gods Our Lord expoundeth that place declaring in what sense they are so called For he saith If he called them Gods vnto whom the word of God was giuen and the Scripture cannot be broken c. Then the Magistrates who are here called Gods are such to whom the word of God is giuen For further declaration of the truth let this question be demaunded to whom is the word of God principally giuen to whose Soueraigne custodie is the word of God committed The words of our Sauiour Christ containe an aunswere to the Ciuill Magistrate For it is certaine that all that Psalme whence Christ taketh those words is wholly and intirely vnderstood of the Ciuill Magistrates and not of Priests or Ecclesiasticall gouernours Why then and is not the word of God giuen to Ecclesiasticall gouernours aswell as to Kings Yes verily but diuersly for to Ecclesiasticall gouernours the knowledge of the word is giuen to publish by preaching For the Priests lippes shall preserue knowledge and they shall seeke the law at his mouth for hee is the messenger of the Lord of hostes Then if the question be asked to whom is the word giuen by the way of knowledge to preach and publish it The answere is to the Priest but Christ speaketh not here of that manner of giuing the word but he toucheth that Commission which is giuen to Magistrates For to Magistrates it is not giuen by way of especiall knowledge to preach it but by way of an especiall commission to keepe it to establih it by authoritie to command obedience vnto it and to punish the violatours of it This is the authority of a Christian Prince for he hath called them Gods to whom the word was giuen Whom hath hee called Gods Ciuill Princes for of such onely of such that Psalme speaketh Why are they called Gods Because they are Gods vicegerents by their authority to establish Gods word Therefore they are acknowledged to bee custodes vtâ—…insque tabulae for which cause it was an ancient ceremony in the Church of Israel that at the Kings Coronation the Booke of God should be giuen into the hand of the King as we read in the Coronation of Ioash Which thing is confirmed by a commaundemant in the Law why was this thing so solemnly commanded so religiously preached but to shew that God hath committed the care of Religion principally to the King that by the vtmost of his power and authority it might be established in his Dominions 21. This doth proue that Moses was a Prince and not a Priest and Aaron a Priest but not a Prince because Moses
Theodoret rehearseth a Dialogue betweene Constans the Emperour and Liberius Bishop of Rome who afterward for feare and through weakenesse and irksomnesse of his exile was drawen to subscribe to Arianisme as witnesseth Hierom Ruffinus Platina and other In that Dialogue these words are worth the noting Constans willing Liberius to forsake the Communion with Athanasius and to condemne him Liberius his answere is Ecclesiastica iudicia cum summa iusticiae obseruatione fieri debent quare situae pietati places iudicium cogi impera vbi si damnandus Athanasius videatur sententiam illum ordine modoque Ecclesiastico feratur nam fieri nequit vt condemnetur à nobis de quo iudicium datum non sit That is Ecclesiasticall iudgements ought to proceed with exact obseruation of iustice Therefore if it please your Godlinesse command a Councell to be called wherein if Athanasius seeme worthy to be condemned let sentence passe against him in Ecclesiasticall order and manner For it cannot be that by vs hee should bee condemned seeing wee haue no authoritie to iudge him The Bishop of Rome here confesseth first That Iudicia Ecclesiastica Ecclesiasticall iudgements are to be appointed and established by the Emperour then he graunteth him Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction and granteth that to call a Councell belongeth to his Iurisdiction Secondly the Emperour cannot make a man an hereticke but this must be done by a Councell or by the iudgement Ecclesiasticall This being a thing not of coactiue Iurisdiction but of knowledge in the word of God Thirdly the Bishop of Rome renounceth all right and authority of iudicature vpon Athanasius therefore in those daies hee had no Iurisdiction ouer other Bishops 6. This mixt Iurisdiction which now is practised by Bishops began in the time of Constantine So Nicephorus witnesseth Constantinus Clericos omnes constitutione lata immunes liberosque esse permisit iudiciumque iurisdictionem in eos Episcopis si ciuilium iudicum cognitionem declinare vellent mandauit quod Episcopi iudicassent id robur autoritatem sententiae omnem habere debere decreuit That is Constantine by an edict graunted the priuiledge of immunity to all Clerkes and graunted to Bishops iudgement and Iurisdiction ouer Clerkes in case they would decline from the courts of ciuill Iudges and he decreed that whatsouer the Bishops iudged that should stand in all strength and authority of a decree Sozomen declareth by what occasion it grew first For some began then to appeale from ciuill iudgements to Ecclesiasticall and some Bishops receiued the appellations which thing being approued by Constantine gaue great authority to this kind of Iurisdiction Episcopi saith he in causis ciuilibus sententias pronuntiarunt si qui à iudicibus ciuilibus ad eorum autoritatem appellassent Quam rem propter venerationem Episcoporum adeò approbauit Constantinus vt ratas haberi pâ—…tioresque quam aliorum iudicum sententias nec minus quam ab ipso imperatore essent pronunciatae per Magistratus milites Magistratuum ministres ad effectum perduci lege edixerit That is Bishops pronounced sentence in ciuill causes if any appeaed to them from ciuill Iudges This thing for the reuerence of Bishops Constantine approued so much that hee ordained by Law that these iudgements should be ratified and of greater authority then the sentences of other Iudges yea to be held of â—…o lesse force then if the Emperour himselfe had pronounced â—…hem so to be executed by the Shriefs their seruants 7 By which it appeareth that these courts with this Iurisdiction were vnderstood then no other then the Emperours courts The Emperour graunteth this Iurisdiction saith Nicephorus the Emperour ratifieth these iudgements saith Sozomen the Emperour commaundeth that the sentence of the Bishop should be euery where receiued as if it proceeded out of his owne mouth Which words are well to be obserued For the Emperour commaundeth not that the Bishops sentence should be receiued as a diuine sentence but only as an humane not as proceeding from the mouth of God but as proceeding from the mouth of the Emperour Now if these Courts were then so euidently proued to be the Emperours Courts our aduersaries may acknowledge their owne ignorance folly who make declamations and many idle discourses without solid proofe against them that call Ecclesiasticall Courts the Kings Courts as if this were a thing new strange and neuer heard of before these late yeares Their error is that common Sophisme which filleth most of their bookes which Aristotle calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compounding confounding those things which we distinguish and which are distinct in nature For in this word of Iurisdiction they confound these two distinct things both that which is spirituall Iurisdiction yeelded by vs the right of the Church and all that also which Princes haue giuen to Ecclesiasticall Courts such as these priuiledges which Constantine gaue to Bishops Courts and other Princes since haue continued and enlarged If these things be not distinguished the truth can neuer appeare in this question by this the Reader may vnderstand who they are that hide and deface the truth by new varnishing of olde rotten Sophismes 8 Then all coactiue Iurisdiction came into the Church from the authority of Princes for as the power of the Church is internall and spirituall so externall and coactiue power was the right of Princes To this purpose Eusebius reporteth a speach of Constantine at a banquet calling himselfe a Bishop for things externall as they were for matters internall His words are these Vos quidem eorum quae intus sunt in Eccle sia agendâ—… ego vtro eorum quae extra hanc sunt Episcopus à Deo sum constitutus And whereas Iurisdiction is best knowne by appellations it hath been often seen that froÌ„ the Pope men haue appealed to a councel as hereafter we are todeclare but from a councel we find no appellation to the Pope but to the Emperor for some personall wrong Athanasius being vniustly condemned by the Synod of Tire appealed to Cinstantine as Socrates witnesseth In like sort Flauianus appealed to the Emperour when the Synod of Capua had referred his cause to Theophilus and the Bishops of Egypt Yea the heretiques themselues in those dayes knew no means to appeale from the Emperour Augustine saith that Donatus did still appeale to the Emperour being condemned by the Bishops and by Synodes And so religious were these auncient Bishops in preseruing the Emperors Iurisdiction and yet maintaining the truth without feare that when they were oppressed by Arians and by the power of an Arian Emperour yet they would vse no other meanes then these direct meanes And therefore the Bishops hauing a purpose to condemne the Arians craued a counsell of Valens an Arian Emperor who granted them a counsell at Lampsacum wherein they condemned the Arian doctrine So that without the Emperour they would not gather a counsell though it were to
obserued to speake in the Councell with some freedome as some did especiall marke was taken of such these were withdrawen and recalled thence that other might take their place Of this the Protestant Princes complaine to Charles Fuerunt in eo concessu pauci quidem aliquanto liberiores in dicendo sed inuenta ratio fuit vt ijs reuocatis atque summotis alij summitterentur nequiores That is Some were in that company wâ—…o vsed some freedome of speech but a meanes was inuented to remoue and recall them that other more seruile might be in their places The Pope thus giuing continuall direction to the Councell and appointing by intercourse of messages coÌ„tinually trauelling betweene Rome and Trent what should be concluded insomuch that a common prouerbe was then taken vp among them that the holy Ghost trauelled from Rome to Trent in a packet and finding that after all this his purposes were crâ—…ssed by a certaine number of voyces the number being precisely brought vnto him began to flie to his last reserued shift For of a suddaine he created thirteene Cardinals in one day all Italians to whom hauing giuen vncertaine titles but certaine instruction he sent them to the Councell whom the other Fathers of the Councell welcomed not knowing their end At the next meeting the matters being proposed as before it was found that the voices of these that were come so lately did alter all and east it at the Popes pleasure and yet their wretched pollicies rested not thus If any were supposed to excell in knowledge grauitie learning and godlinesse they were some before the Councell that their presence should not hinder or disturbe the Popes purposes some afterward secretly taken away by poyson this was the end of that worthy Cardinall Contaren and others who for their eminency in vertue were suspected of Lutheranisme And that the world might know and take full notice of the Popes end and scope in calling this Councell that it was not the true faith and religion of the Germanes that hee sought but their blood it is euident by his practise For whilest thus they held the Germanes and all the world in expectation of a Councell the Pope in the meane time raised an army and sent it against the Protestants to be ioyned with other armies prepared for their vtter destruction The generall of the Popes armie Octauius Farnesius Graundchild to Pope Paulus the third by whom hee was sent departing out of Italy was obserued to say That he would destroy so many Germanes that his horse might swimme in the blood of Lutherans This is their holy Councell of Trent consisting of a fewe and those fewe bound by an oath to the Pope restrained prohibited poysoned and at last with many shifts drawen to serue a purpose assembled without lawfull authority called by the vsurped power of the Pope drawen and pulled by fraud and subtiltie ending in blood and warres and remaining the onely cause of all the warres which haue beene raised within these westerne parts of Christendome since that time to this day §. II. Of Friars by whom this Iurisdiction was maintained 20. MY purpose being to note the meanes by which this Iurisdiction hath beene aduanced I thinke it needfull after forgeries to speake of Friars For they haue beene the chiefe aduancers of this Iurisdiction and the fittest instruments that the Pope hath found for his purpose Iohn Wiclife in diuers places declareth out of assured knowledge of storie himselfe being neere those times and therefore more able to iudge therof that before the yeere of Christ one thousand two hundred there were no Friars in the world About which time Dominicus a Spaniard and Francis an Italian began their new orders Fasciculus temporum setteth their beginning about the yeere one thousand two hundred and foure and that they were confirmed by Pope Honorius the third about the yeere one thousand two hundred and fourteene Ordines quatuor mendicantium saith he videlicet Praedicatorum Minorum Augustinensium Carmelitarum consirmantur ab Honorio praeponuntur Praedicatores Minoribus in literis Papalibus quia sex mensibus ante eos confirmatifuerunt Matthaeus Palmerius setteth the confirmation of the Dominicans in the yere one thousand two hundred and sixteene Of the Franciscaâ—…es in the yeere one thousand two hundred twentie and three so that Wiclife hath a good ground for that assertion that Friars were neuer known in the world before the yeere one thousand two hundred 21. This was the first thing that made the alteration of the Church of Rome famous For before the institution of Friars the doctrines of the Church of Rome stood sound and vnchanged in most things The alteration was afterward wrought especially by these Friars both in doctrine Iurisdiction For at the first Friars were set vp to oppresse the old Priests to alter the auncient religion and to exalt the Popes power in a greater measure then it was before In which businesse they haue not beene idle but taking directions onely from the Pope haue brought in a great chaunge in all things Wiclife obserued that Friars pursued imprisoned and burned Priests onely for reprouing their sinnes So that then questions of doctrine made not the quarrell betweene Priests and Friars but only the reproofe of the corrupt and vncleane liues of Friars as in corruption they began so they continue And this is testified by others also that the first cause of the Popes persecutions was not for doctrine but onely for the Popes Iurisdiction Reinerius writing against the Waldenses testifieth thus much that they differed from the Church of Rome in no point of doctrine but onely they denied the Popes Iurisdiction Haec secta Leonistarum for so they were called magnam habet speciem pietatis saith he eo quod coram hominibus iuste viuant benè omnia de Deo credant omnes articulos qui in Symbolo continentur solam Romanam Ecclesiam blasphemant oderunt So that all the heresie which then was found in them was onely against the Popes Iurisdiction they swarued not from the doctrines of the Church of Rome but the Friars made the alteration from that auncient doctrine Then howsoeuer since that time some Popish writers vpon humour and partialitie haue charged them in points of doctrine yet the writers of that age and neere it euen their aduersaries do therin iustifie them and shew that the quarrell was not for points of doctrine but only for the Popes Iurisdiction And it is worth obseruation that the same Reinerius confesseth that there was no origin of this sect knowen some saith he asfirme that this sect hath continued from the time of Siluester others thinke it continued from the time of the Apostles himselfe concludeth that out of question it is ancienter then any other sect Then out of doubt they were much more auncient then Friars and Friars were raised vp paâ—…tly to this end to pull them downe 22. And that this was
Apostle Archbishop of Mentz an English man by birth named Winefride For Pope Gregorie the second desirous to draw the Germanes vnder the yoake of his ceremonies the Christian religion being long before planted among them sent this Winefride otherwise called Boniface to reduce all to the obedience of Rome as much as might be For this purpose he exacted an Oath of Boniface the forme of the Oath is extant in Auentinus thus In the name of our Lord and Sauiour Leo being Emperour c. I Boniface promise to thee S. Peter which wast the chiefe of Christs Apostles and to Gregorie who now representeth thy person and to all thy successours by the Father the Sonne and the holy Ghost c. I vow by this thy holy body that I will follow the sincere truth of Christian pietie as long as my life and strength last I will keepe concord I will shunne persons excommunicated I will giue notise of lying sects of pestiferous errours against the decrees of our Elders to the Bishop of Rome This Oath carrieth a shew of great moderation being compared with the formes of those Oathes which succeeding Popes exacted 34. We declared before how Hildebrand caused the Emperour Henrie the fourth to displace certaine Bishops and presently after that he had made a breach betweene the Emperour and them he restored them all to their seuerall places againe and exacted an Oath of them to be true to him the forme of that Oath I find not but it seemeth that then an Oath was exacted much in preiudice of Princes For Anselme Archbishop of Canterburie by reason of that Oath which then the Popes exacted was enboldened to raise a contention with William Rufus about inuestitures And Thomas Becket by vertue of the like Oath contended with Henry the second for that vpon the quarrell for inuestitures Bishops were strictly tied to the Pope by an Oath we finde in the contention which was betweene Pope Paschalis the second and Henrie the fift Emperour For when Henrie the fift had bene set vp by the Pope to raise warres against his owne Father and had at the Popes instigation robbed him of his Empire and life he himselfe found afterward the same measure at the Popes hands which his Father had found before him for claiming the right of inuestitures as belonging to the auncient right of the Empire he was denied the matter brake out into a tumult in which tumult Pope Pascbalis was taken and being in the Emperours power graunted and confirmed vnto him the right of inuestitures From which graunt the Pope reuolted afterward and shewed himselfe more vehement in this quarrell then any before him After some stirres and contention the Pope held a Synode at Trecae in France this Synode was held in the yeere one thousand one hundred and seuen Wherein the Bishops of Germanie were suspended by the Pope for doing any part of Episcopall function saith Vspergensis because fauouring the Emperor they were not present in this Synode And Auentinuâ—… saith that all they that were present were bound by an Oath to the Pope to obey him herein A singulis Episcopis saith he iusiurandum exactum futuros in potestate Romani Pontificis That is An Oath was exacted of euery Bishop that they should be in the power and at the pleasure of the Pope 35. Thus were Kings robbed of their strength when Bishops were by an Oath so bound to the Pope that what hee commaunded they must doe And if the Pope listed to quarrell Princes for their auncient rights and priuiledges it was enough for him to say those priuiledges of Princes were matters Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall and must therefore belong to the Pope and not to Temporall Princes What thing could more weaken Princes and bring them to that poore state that the Pope might triumph ouer them as he did then this subtill practise whereby Bishops who before with other subiects held their Allegeance inuiolated to their Soueraignes were now by a new policie of Popes brought by Oath to the Popes subiection and forced to violate their Allegeance to their Princes Consider then what seruice Princes may expect from Popishbishops who are so bound by Oath to the Pope that they can doe no seruice either to God or their Prince if it be against the Pope but they must violate their Oathes And this is the great bond of their spirituall Iurisdiction as they call it The Popes haue wrested from Princes their auncient right by violence excommunications warres and great bloodshed these rights of Princes thus withdrawen from them the Popes hold as matters of their Iurisdiction and to strengthen them herein they bind Bishops and other chiefe of the Clergy by Oaths to themselues against their owne Kings these practises set the Pope in the possession of this Iurisdiction 36. Onuphrius speaking of that Oath which all Doctors tooke that were to bee made Bishops doth at large set downe the forme of it and among other particulars this Romano Pontifici B. Petri Apostolorum principis successori ac Iesu Christi vicario veram obedientiam spondeo ac iuro This Oath was ministred to all that proceeded Doctors which was the cause that some men of great worth and learning refused to take that degree in those dayes for besides other daungers it brought two great mischeifes vpon them that tooke it The first concerning Allegeance of subiects to their kings the second concerning Bishops or Doctors that might be called to a Councell For if a quarrell fall betweene the King and the Pope it is hard for any man to be a true subiect to the King that taketh such an Oath to the Pope Especially when the Pope must interprete that obedience which is vowed and sworne to him in such a sort as that it includeth a contradiction to the faithfull seruice and Allegeance which euery Subiect oweth to his King Moreouer if a Councell should bee called to determine Religious affaires and to reforme the abuses of the Court of Rome how can sinceritie and indifferencie bee expected of them that are aforehand bound by Oath to the Pope and ingaged so farre that as a Pope chargeth the Bishops of Germanie they cannot speake the trueth against the Pope but they breake their Oath And therefore since this Oath was exacted of the Clergie there were neuer such free sincere and holy Synodes held like to those which were in former times But of all Oathes or vowes that is the most seruile which the Iesuites by vertue of their Order professe to the Pope that they will serue him as Christs Vicar 37. These Oathes by the Pope were first exacted of Archbishops though in processe of time they came to bee farther imposed To this purpose there is a Canon in the Decretals of Gregorie the ninth which Canon because it openeth somewhat both of the reason and antiquitie of this Oath I will set downe the whole Thus it is Significasti Reges
thus For other learned men deuoted to the seruice of the truth entred into a further search of this Iurisdiction among whom Michael Cezena and William Occham were famous The occasion whicâ—… stirred them vp to make search of this point was this Michael Cezena Generall of the Order of the Minorites refuted three Constitutions of Pope Iohn the two and twentieth Ad conditorem Canonum Cum inter Quia quorundam These hee refuted and sent his bookes abroad against these Constitutions whereupon Iohn the two and twentieth depriued him and disabled him from taking any other dignity But Michael appealed from the Pope 15. Here arose the question whether a Christian might appeale from the Pope William Occham once a worthy fellow of Merton Colledg in Oxford vndertooke this question disputeth it throughly in that booke which he intitleth Opus nonaginta dierum He concludeth that a man may and might appeale from the Pope and that a Councell is aboue the Pope And saith that many moe learned men wrote diuers bookes at that time for confirmation of the same truth wherein they alleadge strong reasons to proue their purpose and answere all doubts De ista materia saith he plures libri prolixi sunt editi in quibus praedicti 〈◊〉 motiua adducunt quam plurima obiectiones refellunt quae possunt oriri dubia declarare nituntur That is Of this matter many long bookes set forth wherein these foresaid Disputers alledge many reasons refute obiections and seeke to cleare all doubts that can rise Of the Pope he saith thus Iohâ—…es 22. coâ—…scius 〈◊〉 suorâ—… ad iudiciâ—… generalis concilij veâ—…ire recusat That is Pope Iohn the two and twentieth his owne consciâ—…nce accusing himselfe of his errours refuseth to come to the iudgement of a Geâ—…erall Councel Thus the Pope hath euer bin affraid of a General Councell since the time that first he vsurped Iurisdiction The same Author confuteth the Constitutions of Iohâ—… the two and twentieth first by Scriptures then by Canons of Councels and testimonies of holy Fathers and last of al by the determination of the Church of Rome And for this question of Iurisdiction because the Popes then began to chalenge tempâ—…rall Iurisdiction ouer Princes his assertion is â—…eatus â—…etrus non fuit vicarius Christi quantum ad officium regâ—…i temporalis nec in â—…omporalibus qusbâ—…e That is S. Peter was not Christs Vicar in respect of a temporall Kingdome nor in respect of any tempoâ—…alities whatsoeuer Which Assertion he proueth thus If it were so that S. â—…eter were Christs Vicar in temporall Dominion then should S. Peter haue Iurisdiction ouer Emperours and Kings but this the Popes themselues denie for Pope Nicholas saith thus Quuâ—… ad verâ—… veâ—…tum est nec Imperator iura sibi Pontificatâ—…s c. That is When we come to know the truth neither hath the Emperour taken vpon him the right of the Pope nor the Pope vsurped the title of the Emperour for one Mediator of God and man Iesus Christ hath distinguished the Offices of both these powers by their proper actions and distinct dignities Ex hiâ—… saith Occhaâ—… datur 〈◊〉 quod Rom. Pontifex ex successione Petri non habet Iurisdictionem temporalem super 〈◊〉 That is Hence we may vnderstand that the Pope by succeeding Petâ—…r hath no temporall Iurisdiction ouer the Emperour 16. Against this determination he moueth some obiectious or rather taketh the â—…easons of 〈◊〉 Triumphus and maketh them his obiections though he suppresse the name of 〈◊〉 The obiectious are these First The Pope deposeth Kings 15. qu. 6. cap. aliâ—… Secondly The Pope trauslated the Empire Extra de Elect. cap. venerabilem Thirdly The Emperor taketh an Oath of Alleageance These are the reasons of Augustiâ—… Triumphus whereunto he aunswereth thus To the first he saith Rationâ—… eriminis habet spiritualâ—…m Iurisdictionem non temporalem That is In respect of some fault hee hath spirituall Iurisdiction but not temporall Then all the Iurisdiction which the Pope or any other Bishoppe hath is onely spirituall in his opinion in respect of sinne which may be censured by spirituall censures But a power to depose Kings includeth temporall Iurisdiction To the second he saith The Pope translated the Empire Non in qâ—…antum successor Petri sed authoritate Romanorum qui sibi potestatem huinsmodi concesserant That is Not as the successour of Peter but by the authority of the Romanes who graunted him that power To the third he saith the Emperour that first tooke an Oath of Alleageance did it from deuotion and humility and therefore afterward refused it Marfilius answereth to this last obiection somewhat otherwise for he vtterly reiecteth the testimony of that Canon that witnesseth that the Emperour tooke an Oath of Alleageance Intaâ—…tum vero ipsorum quidam prorupit aâ—…daciam saith Marsil vt in suis edectis expresserit Romanum Principem sibi iurameâ—…o fidelitatis ástringitanquam coactiâ—…a Iâ—…risdictione subiectum vt ex suarum narrationum quas decretales appellant derisibili contemptâ—… prorsus inuolucro septimo de Sent re iâ—…dicata palam se inspicientibus offert That is One of them to wit Clement the fift hath broken out in such impudency in his Edicts that he affirmeth the Emperor is bound to him by an Oath of Alleageance as subiect to him in coactiue Iurisdiction as is openly to bee seene in 2. de Sent. re â—…udic out of that ridiculous and most contemptible collection of their Narrations which they call Decretals 17. But to returne to William Occham and Michael Cezena in whose cause Occhaâ—… was ingaged Michael was deposed by Iohn the two and twentieth in Iune in the yeare of Christ one thousand three hundred twentie and eight in his behalfe letters were directed to the Chapter of the Minorites assembled in Parpinian and Auinion in the yeare one thousand three hundred thirty and one These letters were subscribed by Henricus de Chalchem Franâ—…iscus de Esculo and Guilielmus de Occham not onely these men fauoured his cause but those two famous Vniuersities Oxford and Paris did approue the same Whereuppon Michael being arrested by the Pope did appeale from the Pope Consider the nature of his appeale for it openeth the sense and iudgement of learned men then liuing being approued by the greatest learned men then liuing and by all the learned men of that order in England and in Paris for so it is said there Quae determinatio fuit etiam ab omnibâ—…s Magistris baccalarijs in sacra pagina de Parisijs de Aâ—…glia dicti ordinis approbata Vâ—…iuersis Christi fidelibus destinata That is Which determination was also approued of all the Masters and Bachelours in Diuinity of the said order of Paris and England and directed to all Christians I will set downe the forme of his appeale as in the same place I finde it expressed and thus it is Habito prius