which is intituled De temporibus diabus pacis Domini Regis Of the times and daies of peace and freedome of our Lord the King he doth explicate that it belongeth to the King and his officers to see these liberties of Ecclesiasticall peace franquises and freedome be exactlie obserued to Ecclesiasticall persons especiallie to punish them double which refuse to put in execution the Bishops sentence of iustice Quod si aliquis â—i foris fecerit saith he Episcopus inde iustitiam faciat veruâ—tamen si quis arrogans pro Episcopali iustitia emendare noluerit Episcopâ—â— Regi notum faciat Rex autem constringet malefactorem vt emendet cui foris facturum fecit scilicet primum Episcopo deinde Regi sic erunt ibi due gladij gladius iuuabit If anie man shall doe anie hurt to him that hath the peace of the Church let the Bishop doe him Iustice but if anie man will bee arrogant not make amends according to the sentence of iustice giuen by the Bishop let the Bishop make it knowne to the King or his Courts and the King shall constraine the malefactor to make amends to him vnto whom hee did the hurte to wit first vnto the Bishop and then to the King and so there shall bee two swords against malefactors and the one sword shall help the other And heere let be considered what he saith of two swords one in the Bishops hand and the other in the Kings and that this must assist that of the Bishops as the principall superiour which is conforme to the speach of K. Edgar if you remember whereof we made mention in the former Chapter and last demonstration therof Wherby is made euident that these auncient Kings beleeued not to any haue spirituall sword or authoritie by right of their Crowns but onlie the temporall to command punish in temporall affaires and to help and assist the others in causes belonging vnto them 18. The third law hath this Title De Iustitia Sanctae Ecclesiae Of the iustice of the holy Church and prerogatiue therof which she is to receiue in temporall tribunals In which law is determined in these words Vbicunque Regis iustitia vel cuiuscunque sit placita tenuerit si vllus Episcopus venerit illuc aperuerit causam Sanctae Ecclesiae ipsa prius terminetur Iustitia enim est vt Deus vbique prae caeteris honoretur Whâ—rsoeuer the Kings Iustice or the Iustice of what other Lord soeuer shall hold pleas or keep courts if any Bishop come thither and open a cause of the holy Church let that cause of all other be first determined for it is iust that God be honoured euery where before all other Marke his reason why the expedition of the Bishops cause is to be preferred before that of the King for that he holdeth the place of God and thereafter must be respected 19. The fourth law hath this Title De vniuersis tenentibus de Ecclesia Of the priuiledges of all those that are any way tenants of the Church And then it followeth in the law Quicunque de Ecclesia aliquid tenuerit vel in fundo Ecclesiae mansionem habuerit extra curiam Ecclesiasticam coactus non placitabit quamuis foris fecerit nisi quod absit in Curia Ecclesiastica rectum defecerit Whosoeuer doth hold any thing of the Church or hath his mansion-house within the land of the Church shall not be constrained to plead any matter of his though he bee a malefactor out of the spirituall courte except which God forbid iustice could not be had in the said Ecclesiasticall court 20. These are the first lawes of all that were made by King VVilliam and after these doe ensue fiue more to the same effect of Churches priuiledges wherof the first hath this Title De reis ad Ecclesiam fugientibus Of malefactors that fly to the Church how they are to haue Sanctuary and protection The second De fractione pacis Ecclesiae Of breaking the peace of the Church that is to say of her priuiledges the breakers wherof are appointed to be sharply punished first by the Bishop then by the King if he be arrogant The third De decimis Ecclesiae maioribus Of the greater tythes belonging to the Church The fourth De minut is decimis Of lesser tythes all which are commaunded to be payed exactly And finally the fifth law which is the tenth in order hath this Title De denario S. Petri qui Anglicè dicitur Rome-scot Of Peter-pence called in old English Rome-scot wherin is appointed the order how the said Peter-pence shall be gathered and made ready against the feast of S. Peter and S. Paul or at the furthest against the feast of S. Peters Chaines as we haue seen also before ordeined by the law of K. Kanutus By all which is vnderstood and much to be considered that neither K. VVilliam nor any of his auncestors tooke vpon them to make any Ecclesiasticall law at all of spirituall matters as of their owne but only did second and strenthen and confirme the lawes of the Church by their temporall lawes by defending the same and punishing the breakers therof Which is a far different thing from the Ecclesiasticall power which M. Attorney will needs haue vs beleeue to haue byn in the auncient Kings of England according to the meaning of the auncient Common-lawes therof but produceth none And I persuade my self he will hardly alleadge me any so auncient as these though he haue studied them as he saith 35. years but fiue hundred more were necessary to find out that which he affirmeth And thus much of lawes for the present 21. There remaineth only one argument more concerning K. VVilliam which is the time of his death and of what sense and iudgment he was in this point at that time when commonly men doe se more cleerly the truth of matters especially Princes then before in their life health and prosperity when passion honour or interest may oftentimes either blind or byasse them And albeit of K. VVilliam diuers ancient writers doe recorde that notwithstanding in his anger vnto secular men he was fierce terrible yet vnto Ecclesiasticall persons he bare still great respect wherof among others this example is recorded by Nubergensis that when at a certaine time Archbishop Aldred of Yorke that had crowned him and was much reuerenced by him while he liued intreating him for a certaine pious worke and not preuailing turned his back and went away with shew of displeasure the Conquerour tooke hold of him and fell downe at his feet promising to doe what he would haue him and when the Nobles that stood round about began to cry to the Arch-bishop that he should take vp the King quickly from his knees he answered let him alone he doth but honour the feet of S. Peter in kneeling at myne Which well declareth saith Nubergensis both what great reuerence
this shall suffice to this point Now will M. Attorney passe to another of the commendation of Truth as though that were with him and his And wee shall follow him to examine that point also as wee haue done this other about Ignorance The Attorney On the other side Truth cannot be supported or defended by any thing but by Truth herselfe and is of that constitution and constancy that she cannot at any time or in any part or point be disagreable to her self She hateth all bumbasting and sophistication and bringeth with her certainty vnity simplicity and peace at the last Putida salsamenta amant origanum veritas pèr se placet honesta per se decent falsa fucis turpia phaleris indigent Ignorance is so far from excusing or extenuating the error of him that had power to finde out the truth which necessarily he ought to know wanted only will to seeke it as she will be a iust cause of his great punishment Quod scire debes non vis non pro ignorantia sed pro contemptu habers debet Error and falshood are of that condition as without any resistance they will in tyme of themselues fade and fall away But such is the state of Truth that though many doe impugne her yet will she of her self euer preuaile in the end and flourish like the palme-tree she may peraduenture by force for a tyme be troden downe but neuer by any meanes whatsoeuer can she be troden out The Catholike Deuine 16. None do more willinglie heare the commendation of Truth then we who say with S. Paul VVee can do nothing against truth but for truth And therfore do I willinglie ioyne with M. Attorney in this point of praisinge Truth Wee do mislike also no lesse then he all bumbasting and sophistication neither are we delighted with stinkinge salt-fish that had need of Orygon to giue it a good sauour Wee allow in like manner of his other latin phrases and do confesse that Truth herselfe may be troden downe for a tyme by force but neuer troden out But what is all this to the purpose we haue in hand of findinge out the Truth in this our controuersie Let vs suppose for the present that both partes do like well of her but what meanes is giuen heere or may be giuen to discouer where she lyeth In all other controuersies lightly our aduersaries are wont to remit vs only to scriptures for tryall which was an old tryck in like manner of their foresaid forernuners as the auncient Fathers testify for that scriptures being subiect to more cauillation many times both for the interpretation and sense then the controuersie it selfe gaue them commodity to make their contentions immortall 17. But the same Fathers vrging them with a shorter way asked them still Quid prius quid posterius What was first and what after for that heresie is nouelty and commeth in after the Catholike Truth first planted And for that euery hereticke pretendeth his heresie to be ancient and from the Apostles the said Fathers do vrge further that this Truth of our Religion must not only be eldest but must haue continued also from tyme to tyme at least with the greater part of Christians Quia proprium est hareticorum omnium saith old Tertullian pauca aduersus plâ—â—a posteriora aduersus priora defendere It is the property of all hereticks and their peculiar spirit to defend the lesser number against the greater and those things that are later against the more auncient Which agreeth with another saying of Tertullian Quod apud multos vnum inuenitur non est erratum sed traditum That which is found one and the self-same with many to witt the greater parte in the Christian Church is no error but commeth downe by tradition So hee But S. Augustine deliuereth another direction much conformable to this in sense though different in words Consider saith he what is KATH'HOLON Id est secundum totum non secundum partem According to the whole and not only to a part and this is the truth And another of his tyme saith Teneamus quod ab omnibus creditum est hoc enim verè Catholicum Let vs hold that which hath byn beleeued by all for this is truly Catholike and consequently Truth it self And another Father before them both Catholicum est quod vbique vnum That is Catholike vndoubtedly trew which euery where is one and the same And this both in tyme place and substance 18 These are the ancient Fathers directions now let vs apply them to our present question which is so much the easier to discusse for that albeit it comprehend some part of doctrine in controuersie concerninge the Right of temporall Princes to spirituall Iurisdiction yet is it principally and properly a question of fact to witt whether by the ancient common laws of England and practice of our Princes according to the same spiritual Iurisdiction they were exercised by them in former ages by force and vertue of their Imperiall crownes as Queene Elizabeth did or might do by the authority giuen her by an Act of Parlament in the first yeare of her raigne wherby she was made head of the Church and supreme gouernesse as well in all causes Ecclesiasticall as temporall In discussion wherof if we wil vse the directions of the forsaid Fathers for cleere and infallible tryall we shall easily find out where the Truth lyeth which is the but we ought to shoore at and not to contend in vayne for that our assertion quite contrary to that of M. Atourneys is That if we consider the whole ranke of our Christian English Kings from the very first that was conuerted to our Christian faith to witt King Ethelbert of Kent vnto the reigne of King Henry the eight for the space of more then nine hundered years and King Henry himself for the greater and best part of his reigne did all and euery one of them confesse acknowledg the spirituall power and Iurisdiction of the Sea of Rome and did neuer contradict the same in any one substantiall point either by word law or deed but did infinite wayes confirme the said authority ech one in their ages reignes And this is that KATH'HOLON or secundum totum which S. Augustine requireth and vbique vnam which the other Fathers do mention which is a Catholike proofe in a Catholike cause and M. Attorney must needs fly ad partem to a parte only to witt to two or three later Kings of aboue halfe a hundered that went before which is a schismaticall proofe as S. Augustine sheweth Contra partem Donati Against the parte of the heretick Donatus And before him Opratus Mileuitanus and diuers other Fathers who alwayes call Sectaries a Part For that they follow indeed but a part and Catholiks the whole and therof saith S. Augustine their name is deriued And thus much shall serue for our
other especiallie in these points following which Catholike deuines and Canon-lawyers doe larglie handle But I shall breiflie touch the sunne onlie in this place so far is it may appertaine to better decision of this our controuersie Noting first by the way for the Reader his better aduertisement that these two Powers of Spirituall and Temporall Iurisdiction being different as hath been said and hauing so different ends and obiects and proceeding so differentlie from God by different means and manners and that they may be separated and remaine seuerally and alone in different subiects as they did for diuers ages togeather in the primitiue Church All this I saie being so it followeth that it is no good argument but rather a manifest fallacie to inferre the one of the other as to saie he hath spiritual Iurisdiction ouer me and therfore also temporall which followeth not and much lesse the contrarie he hath temporall Authoritie ouer any ergo spiritual also And least of all as M. Atorney argueth euery-where A Prince or Monarch hath supreame authoritie temporal ergo also spirituall for that the one may be without the other as comming downe from one origen by different means and to different ends as before hath been declared Now then let vs passe to the decisions aboue mencioned for due Subordination in these two Powers THE THIRD PART OF THIS CHAPTER Shewing how these two Povvers and Iurisdictions may stand well togeather in agreement peace and vnion 4. II. 33. The first affertion both of Deuines and Canonists is that notwithstanding the former Prerogatiues of Spirituall Power aboue Temporall yet when they are conioyned in one Common-wealth as they haue been in the Catholike Church for these thirteene hundred years at least since the Conuersion of Constantine the Emperour the Cleargie and Ecclesiasticall persons of euerie Realme as members of that Common-wealth are subiect vnto the Emperour King or other head of that Ciuill and politicke body or Common-wealth in al temporall laws and ordinances not contrary to Gods law nor the Cannons of holie Church and are punishable for the same though not in temporall courts but spirituall as after ward in the third assertion shall be declared As for example when the Ciuill magistrate appointeth things to be solde at such or such price that no man goe by night with armes or carry out cōmodities of the Realme without licence and the like cleargie men as Cittizens of the Common-wealth are subiect also vnto these laws which are made for direction of of the Common-wealth to peace aboundance and prosperitie and consequentlie are to be obserued also by Bishops Priests and Cleargie-men 34. And in this sense are to be vnderstood the words both of our Sauiour and his Apostles when they ordaine all obedience to be exhibited by all Christians to their temporall Princes without exception of anie yea though they were euill men or infidells AS namely where S. Paul saith Omnia anima potestatibus sublimioribus subdita sit Let euery soule be subiect to higher powers which S. Peter expoundeth siuè Regi siuè Ducibus c. Whether it be to Kings Dukes and the like Vpon which place to S. Paul the holie Doctor S. Chrysostome inferreth that politicall and temporall laws are not abrogated by the ghospell but that both Priests and monkes are bound to obey the same in temporall affairs And Valentinian the good Christian Emperour in a certaine Epistle of his to the Bishops of Asia aboue 12. hundred years gone said◠that good Bishops doe obey not only the laws of God but of Kings likewise Which Pope Nicolas the first writing to Michaell the Emperour doth proue when he saith that Christian Emperours doe need Bishops for the attaining of euerlasting life But that Bishops doe need Kings and Emperours onlie to vse their laws for their direction in temporall affaires And finally the matter is cleer not onlie by the testimonie and practise of the primitiue Church say our Deuines but also by reason it selfe For that if any sorte of people should liue in a Common-wealth and not obserue the laws therof it would be a perturbation to the whole And for that these Ciuill laws albeit their immediate end be temporall good yet may the obseruation therof be referred also to a higher spirituall end by good men and therfore are all good subiects bound to obey them And this for the first point 35. The second is that in causes meere Ecclesiasticall and Spirituall which appertaine to Religion Faith Sacraments holie Orders and the like and are to be determined out of the ghospell Councells Canons and Doctors of the Church In all these affaires Catholike deuines holde that Ecclesiasticall persons are no way subiect to temporall Princes for the reasons before alleadged of preheminēcy of Spiritual Power aboue Temporal in these affaires In respect wherof the holie auncient Bishops did stand with Christian Emperours and auerre their Authoritie to be aboue the others as before out of S. Gregorie Nazianzen S. Ambrose S. Chrisostome and others you haue heard declared So as heere you se a mutuall Subordination of Preists to Princes in Ciuill and temporall matters and of Princes to Preists and Bishops in spirituall affaires which according to S. Gregorie Nazianzen his comparison before mencioned may thus be expressed that the soule in matters of this life though with some griefe and regreate of spirit in good men is bound to follow the direction and law of the body for health strength and other such corporall commodities and the body in matters of life euerlasting must be content to follow the soule and direction of spirit and so is bound to doe though with repugnance oftentimes of the flesh as in fasting praying pennance other such like exercise And wheresoeuer these two mutuall subordinations be wel obserued there the Common wealth goeth forward wel and prosperouslie and contrarywise where the said subordination is neglected or perturbed there all goeth out of order and ioynt 36. But now there remaineth a third point of further moderation between these two Powers which is accordinge to our deuines and Canon-lawyers That albeit Ecclesiastical men be subiect to the obseruation of temporall laws as before is said yet are as well their persons as their goods free and exempted from the temporall magistrate and his tribunalls euen in those causes also in so much that if Cleargie men doe offend against the laws of the Common-wealth they are to be iudged and condemned by Ecclesiasticall iudges in the Courts and tribunals of their prelats and afterward to be deliuered to secular power to inflict the decreed punishmēt vpon them which they shall be found worthie of Their goods also both Ecclesiasticall and temporall are exempted from all secular power and their impositions or exactions by auncient Decrees and Constitutions as well of the Church as of old Christian Emperours in honorem Cleri in honour of the Cleargy to vse the auncient word
especially in this place where our question is only of spirituall Iurisdiction in Ecclesiasticall causes which that it could not be in a woman in regarde of her sex all Catholique deuines doe proue by these reasons following 21. First by the disposition of the Canon-law which contayning the sense of Gods vniuersall Church from time to time both in the right and practise of this affayre of spirituall gouerment ought to be and is with wise learned Godly men of principall accompt credit and authority For that the said Canon-law is deduced from the decrees of Councells Synodes Popes auncient Fathers Doctors and Bishops and from the custome and practise of the said Church from time to time directed by Gods holy spirit according to his promise and receiued throughout all christendome from age to age though now contemned by certayne new maisters whose maistery standeth in this to scoffe at that which they vnderstand not or list not to follow be it neuer so good 22. This law then and iudgment of the Church is so far of euer hath been from graunting spirituall Iurisdiction to be in any Queene as in Capite by right of any temporall Crowne to be deriued from her to others as it doth not allow any woman to be capable of any spiritual power or Iurisdiction though it be but delegated giuen by commission substitution from another as appeareth by the textes of Canon-law cited heere in the margent And the princypall reason herof is that all spirituall power being of two sorts Ordinis Iurisdictionis of holy order Iurisdiction the femynine sex is capable of neither of them Not of the power of Order saith S. Thomas which belongeth to the administring of Sacraments for that a woman by her sex cannot administer them nor is capable of Preist-hood or sacred orders required therunto And in this both Caluin and Cluinists agree with vs though Luther at the beginning held that all Christians baptized might be preists and administer Sacraments aswell women as men yea children and diuells also if they vsed the wordes institution of Christ as in the places of this worke◠here quoted may be seene 23. The second part of Spirituall power appertayning to Iurisdiction either internall or external in fore conscientia or in sore contentioso that is to absolue or loose in the secret Trybunall of conscience or in the open Court of externall contention cannot fall vpon a woman for the infirmity and indecency of her sex saith the Canon-law and for many other absurdities that would ensue therof if a woman should be admitted to the actes of Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction which are principally two Docere Iudicare saith the said law to teach and iudge wherof neither of them standeth well in a woman to exercise ouer men the same lawe noting that albeit Christ our Sauiour loued well Mary Magdalen and other holy women that followed him and serued him vnto his death yet is it neuer read that he committed any part of Iurisdiction in gouerning his Church vnto them no not vnto the blessed Virgin his mother though she were replenished with grace full of the holy Ghost And this of the Canō-law 24. For the Ciuill albeit little occasiō was giuen therin amongst the ancient heathen Romanes the chief Authors therof to talke of of this controuersy of Spirituall Iurisdiction their whole subiect being of temporall Ciuill affayres yet in a certayne Treatise De Regulis Iuris of the rules of that law they haue this direction Faeminas remotas esse ab officijs publicis ideo iudices esse non posse That women are to be remoued by the Ciuill law from all publique offices therfore cannot be Iudges And if in Ciuill matters by that law they could not be Iudges how much lesse can they be supreame Iudges in spirituall causes which are of a far higher dignitie and indecency for women to meddle therin All which better appeare by that which is to eusue out of the law both of Nature and Grace which are the groundes of these Ciuill and Canonicall Constitutions For as the Ciuill law followed the one so the Canon followeth the other or rather both for that both proceed from God and are his lawes 25. To consider then of the law of Nature which is common to all Nations we read in the booke Genesis that the order obserued by God in the creation of man and woman was this that first Adam and all other Creatures were made and placed in paradise and afterward Eua was created for man and out of man and to the liknes of man as man was created before to the likenes of God Out of which order of Creation S. Paul doth in diuers places gather the naturall subiection of woman vnto man especially in spirituall matters appertayning to God to be eternally established by this law of their creation 26. For when to Tymothie he had said Docere autem mulieres non permitto neque deminari in virum I doe not permitt women to teach nor to haue dominion ouer her husband he addeth presently for his reason these words For Adam was first created and then Eua And Adam was not seduced but the woman was seduced And the same Apostle writing to the Corinthians about a certayne precept and ordination of his that woman should be couered in the Church men not and men to haue their hayre cutt women not in signe of subiection and subordination the one to the other he saith I doe prayse you brethren for that you are mindfull of me in all things and doe obserue my precepts as I deliuered them vnto you I will haue you knowe that Christ is the head of euery man and man the head of the woman and God the head of Christ. And as euery man that prayeth or prophesieth with his head couered dishonoreth his head which is Christ so euery woman praying or prophesying with her head not couered dishonoureth her head which is man And the man ought not to couer his head for that he is the Image and glory of God but the woman is the glory of the man for man was not made of the woman but the woman out of man not was the man created for woman but the woman for man c. Ipsa natura docet vos Nature it self doth teach you c. 27. Now then out of these deductions from the law of Nature so much vrged as you see by S. Paul for subiection and subordination of women euen in little small points concerning Religion as about speaking teaching and veiling their heads in the Church it may be inferred how earnest the same Apostle would haue bene if the question had been propoūded about the highest poynt honour office of Religion which is to exercise the place of Christ by mediation betweene God and man and to be as it were high-priest and President ouer men
it must needs bee that he was gouernour vnder the Pope to whome he professeth as you haue heard obedience and subiection 16. But what proofe think you hath M. Attorney out of this King to shew that he exercised spirituall iurisdiction by vertue of his temporall crowne You shall heare it all as it lyeth in his booke for the whole narration is but of 3. or 4. lines taken out of K. Edward his lawes The words are these in Latin Rex autem qui vicarius summi regis est ad hoc constitutus est vt regnum populum Domini super omnia Sanctam Ecclesiam regat defendat ab iniuriosis malefices autem destruat Which M. Attorney Englisheth thus The King who is the vicar of the highest King is ordeined to this end that he should rule and gouerne the Kingdome people of the land and aboue all things the holy Church that he defend the same from wrong-doers and destroy and roote out workers of mischeif Which words supposing them to be truly alleadged as they lye haue a plaine and easy interpretation which is that the King as Gods minister for so S. Paul called also the hea-Magistrate must gouerne the Church and Cleargie of his land in temporal matters for that they are members also of the Common-wealth as before we shewed In which respect they are subiect to the sayd temporall Magistrate and in that sense to be gouerned by him though not in spirituall things 17. And if M. Attorney will inferre that because the King is cal-called Gods Vicar he hath spirituall Iurisdiction then may he as well inferre that the heathen Magistrate had spirituall Iurisdiction ouer Christians for that S. Paul calleth him the minister of God which is as much in effect as Vicar for that the minister supplieth the maisters place And thus you see that albeit we admit these words as heere they ly alleadged by M. Attorney noe aduantage can be rightly inferred against vs by them But I am forced to suspect some little fraud or shuffling to be vsed in the citation of this peece of law and therfore I intreate the Iudicious Reader who is learned and hath the commodity to see the Originals that he will examine both this and the former instance of K. Kenulfus in the authors whence they are taken for I haue them not by mee 18. The reasons of suspicion are first for that I see M. Attorney his translation in these few lines not to be very exact as it will appeare to him that examineth the same and secondly for that I find this clause of S. Edwards law differently alleaged heare by M. Attorney from that which is cited by Roger Houeden in the life of K. Henry the second as also from another allegation therof by Iohn Fox in his Acts and Monuments by all which may be gathered that the verbe regat is wrongly placed in M. Attorneys allegation which being amended and the said verbe placed before in his dew place the sense is perfect to witt vt Rex regnum terrenum populum Domini regat sanctam eius veneretur ecclesiam ab iniuriosis defendat c. that the King rule his earthly Kingdome and the people of God and reuerence and defend the holy Church Thus I say ought the words to stand to make good and congruons sense and not as they are transposed both by M. Attorney and Iohn Fox to make a blind sense who yet agree not in their allegations therof as in the places cited you may see 19. And this our assertion concerning the true sense meaning of the former clause is confirmed yet further by the words of K. Edward immediatly following in the same law omitted heere by M. Attorney but sett downe by Fox which are these Quod nisi secerit nomen regis in eo non constabit verum Papa Ioanne testante nomen Regis perdet If a King doe not perfourme the points before mentioned of gouerninge his people and defending the Church the name of a King agreeth not to him but he must leese that name as testifieth Pope Iohn So he And the same K. Edward in the end of this speach doth cite the authority of the said Pope Iohn againe saying that the wrote to Pipinus and his sonne Charles beâ—ore they came to be Kings of France that no man was worthy to be called a King except he did vigilantly defend and gouerne the Church and people of God So as now this gouernment of the Church which M. Attorney hitherto hath vrged so much against the Popes authority must be vnderstood according to the meaning and sense only of Pope Iohn who I suppose notwithstanding will not meane that temporall Princes shall be heads of the Church and to haue supreme spirituall Iurisdiction in causes Ecclesiasticall deriued from their Crownes as M. Attorneys meaning is And so you see vnto what good issue he hath brought this argument out of S. Edwards lawes which is that Kings haue so much gouernmeÌ„t ouer the Church as Pope Iohn allowed them and no more 20. And finally let vs heare the words of Pope Nicolas the second to this verie K. Edward concernining the gouernment he had ouer the Church for thus he writeth to him Vobis verò posteris vestris Regibus committimus aduocationem eiusdem loci omnium totius Angliae Ecclesiarum vt vite nostrae cum Consilio Episcoporum Abbalum constituatis vbique quae iusta sunt c. We doe coÌ„mitte vnto you and to the Kings of England your Successours the aduocation and protection of the same place or monastery of VVestminster and of all the Churches throughout England to the end that in our name and authoritie you may by the counsell of your Bishops and Abbots appoint euery-where those thinges that are iust c. By which words is easie to see what gouernment and iurisdiction K. Edward had ouer the Church of England to witt by commission of the Pope noe otherwise By which coÌ„mission also diuers other Catholike Princes haue had in sundrie cases coÌ„mitted vnto them haue at this day spirituall Iurisdiction as namely the Kings of Sicily doe pretend to haue had to haue supreme spirituall authority in that Kingdome as legati à latere by concession of Pope Vrbanus the 2. graunted vnto Roger the Norman Earle of Sicily aboue fiue hundered years past to witt from the yeare of Christ 1097. And yet will none of those that defend this spirituall monarchy at this day for by that name it is called say that it descendeth by right of their Crownes but by concession and delegation of Popes And so much of this matter HOW THE ATTORNEY NOT BEING ABLE TO PROVE HIS AFFIRMATIVE PROPOSITION Of English Kings Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall before the Conquest VVe doe ex abundanti proue the negatiue by ten seuerall sortes of most euident demonstrations that there was no such thing in that
by breaking his faith and refuâ—ing his daughter in marriage the secret affection that most of the English nobilitie did beare vnto him with generall hatred to his aduersarie the perill of the Countrey by continuall warrs with the Danes and Scottes the hurt of the Church by Harolds irreligious gouernment but especially his contempt of the said Church Sea Apostolike in that he had taken the Crowne vpon him saith Matthew VVestminster without the ordinarie rites and solemnity therunto appointed and consent of the Prelates of the land And finally saith Malmesbury Iustitiam suscepti bellâ— quantis poterat facundiae verbis allegabat He did alleadge the equitie of his cause vnto Pope Alexander by all the force of eloquence that he could Which Harold on the other side did omit saith he to doe either that he was prowde by nature or distrusted his owne cause or for that he feared that his messengers might fall into VVilliam his hands who had besett all the portes Wherevpon Alexander the Pope hauing weighed his reasons sent vnto him a banner for the warre in token of his consent and Stow addeth these words Duke VVilliam after he had got the victory sent his standard to the Pope which was made after the shape and fashion of a man fighting wrought by sumptuous art with gold and pretious stones And further the said Stow out of Malmesbury and Mathew VVestminster doth ad that Duke VVilliam being arriued in England and offering conditions of composition to Harold before the battaile one was that he was content to stand to the iudgement of the Sea Apostolicke in that controuersie All which is likely he would neuer haue done if he had esteemed so little of the said Sea Apostolicke and authority therof as M. Attorney doth but rather would haue remitted the iustice of his cause to be examined sentenced by the Emperour or by some other teÌ„porall tribunal But he remitted it to the Sea Apostolicke it fell out wel for him as you know 9. Secondly wheras K. VVilliam from his very first entrance had a desire to remoue Stigand from the Archbishoprick of Canterbury partly perhaps for his demerits and partly to haue a sure man in his place that was not English he dissembled the matter for three or foure yeares and this as some thinke in regard that the same Stigand had byn a persuader to K. Edward the Confessor to name Duke VVilliam for his Successor for so the said Duke confesseth in his message sent to Harold before the battaile as Stow relateth But now vpon the year 1070. vnderstanding that Pope Alexander had cited to Rome certayne Archbishops of Germany to wit that of Ments and Bamberge to answere to certaine accusations laid against them of Simony he thought good to take this occasion to demaund also of the said Pope iudgemeÌ„t against the foresaid Stigand and his brother Agelmare Bishop of the East-Angles and certaine Abbots suspected of like crimes Whervpon Pope Alexander sent three Cardinals into England for legats one of them a Bishop and the other two Priests who gathering togeather a Synod at VVinchester the forenamed persons were deposed by sentence of the said legats wherof two returned to Rome and one remained there as both Malmesbury and other historiographers doe write Out of which case we doe inferre that if K. VVilliam had thought his owne authority sufficient to haue depriued the foresaid Bishops he would neuer haue sued to Rome for the matter nor haue byn at the trouble and charge to call from thence three Legats 10. As soone as Stigand was deposed Lanfranke a most famous and learned Abbot of Normandy was called for by K. VVilliam and commaunded in the Popes name by the Legats to accept the same as before you haue heard who obeying thervnto made afterward his recourse confidently to Rome in all matters of importance that fell out as namely in this very first yeare he wrote a letter to Pope Alexander about a case concerning the Bishop of Lichfield in these words Vniuersae Christi Ecclesiae summo Rectori Alexandro indignus Anglorum Archiepiscopus Lanfrancus c. Vnto Alexander the highest gouernour of the vniuersall Church of Christ vnworthy Lanfranke Archbishop of English men c. And proposing sundry busines difficultyes vnto him he saith among the rest that in the forenamed Synod of VVinchester the Bishop of Lichfield being cited thither to answere to certaine crimes of incontinent life layd and proued against him and he refusing to appeare was excommunicated and deposed by the said legates licence giuen to the King to nominate another for that place But afterward at the feast of Easter he comming to the Court in tyme of Parlament resigned vp his Bishopricke vnto the King that was sitting togeather with his Bishops and lay nobility In which case Ego tum nouus Anglus saith he rerumque Anglicarum c. I being but a new English man and vnskillfull in English affaires but what I learne of others doe not presume either to consecrate another Bishop in his place nor yet to giue licence to other Bishops to consecrate any quoadusque praeceptio vestra veniat quae in tantâ— negotio quid oporte atfieri informare nos debeat vntill your commaundment come which in so great a busines must informe vs what we ought to doe So Lanfranke who referreth these matters as you see to the Pope and not to the King though he were the Kings fauorite nor did he feare to iniure or offend the King therby 11. And soone after this againe to wit the very next yeare following which was the yeare of our Lord 1071. and 5. of K. VVilliams raigne the said Lanfrancke elected Bishop of Canterbury Thomas a Norman chosen Bishop of Yorke went both of them to Rome in person to receiue their palls and confirmation at the hands of Pope Alexander by K. VVilliams consent albeit it was a very troublesome yeare in England for that all the North-parte of England rebelled to wit Edwyn Earle of Mercia Morcar Earle of Northumberland Eglewyne Bishop of Durham the famous Captaine Sewardbran manie others with whom ioyned the Scots Danes against the Normans and K. VVilliam had need of the presence of two such trustie chiefe men principall Prelates for staying the people at home And therfore Embassadours were sent to obtaine that their said palls might be sent to them into England But it could not be obtained for that Pope Alexander answered that it was an old custome that Archbishops of England should come receiue their palls at Rome And this answere was written to Lanfrancke in the Popes name by Hildebrand Archdeacon of that Sea who succeeded Alexander in the Popedome and was called Gregorie the 7. By all which is euident what authoritie Ecclesiasticall K. VVilliam did acknowledge to be in the Pope of Rome and how little he ascribed to himself in that kind 12. Furthermore
the 42. yeare of his raigne by a particular Statute And finally vpon the 50. yeare which was the last before he died he made another Statute intituled thus â—he libertyes of the Church confirmed So as all the former restraints were pretended for particular cases only mixt with temporaltyes and for remedy of some excesses and inconueniences without detraction of any thinge from the acknowledged supreme power of the Pope and Sea Apostolicke in meere spirituall matters 41. And how far then is all this that is alleadged here by M. Attorney from prouing that K. Edward the 3. did hold himself for supreme head of the Church euen in spirituall and Ecclesiasticall matters Or that his restraints before made in the cases set downe might bee a president or warrant either de facto or de iure to Q. Elizabeth to K. Henrie the 8. or K. Edward that followed him to denie wholy the Popes authoritie and take it to themselues And so much of this K. Edward the 3. whose religion iudgmeÌ„t though it were euer Catholicke as hath been said yet was his life and actions manie times disordinate and violent as of a souldiar warrier and this not onlie against the liberties of the Church but against the precepts of good life and gouernmeÌ„t also The first appeareth by a longe reprehension written vnto him with threatning likewise of excommunication from Iohn Stratford Archbishop of Canterburie vpon the yeare 1340. wherin he doth sett downe the manie greiuances which he did laie vpon the Church vniustlie And for the second it maie bee vnderstood as wel by the same narration of the foresaid Archbishop wherin he said to the king admonishing him of his fathers miserable end Ferè corda populo terra amisistis You haue almost lost the hearts of all the people of the land As also the same is euideÌ„t by the generall testimonie of our historiographers who make the later parte of his raigne to haue been very much disordered thereby also vnfortunate miserable as maie appeer by these words of VValsingham who hauing much commended other graces in him saith Luxus tameÌ„ motus suae carnis lubricos etiam in aetate senili non cohibuit c. he did not euen in his old age restraine the luxurious and fraile motioÌ„s of his owne flesh being much allured hereunto as is said by the incitation of a certaine dishonest woman named Alice Pierce that was with him vnto the end of his life and was cause of hastening the same And it is greatlie to bee noted as in the former parte of his raigne all things went prosperously with him so towards the later end in his old age through the demerit of his synnes all fell out contrarie c. OF KING RICHARD THE SECOND The tweluth King after the Conquest § I. 42. Next after the death of K. Edward succeded his Nephew K. Richard the 2. for 22. years sonne of Prince Edward surnamed the Black Prince who died not long before his father The child was but an eleuen yeares old when he tooke the Crowne and of verie great expectation but that youth wealth and commaundrie in that age with adulation and peruerse counsaile of licencious people that are wont to accompanie that state and condition of Princes drew him aside to his owne pittifull ruine in the end and would God in his life conuersation gouernment he had as well held the stepps and wisedome of his auncestors as he did in the outward maintenance of their religion and obedieÌ„ce towards the Sea Apostolicke for that probably it would haue preserued him froÌ„ the miseries whereunto hee fell though it bee true also that dissolution of life doth commonlie bring with it conteÌ„pt or neglect or lesse estimation of religion whervnto this man and some that were about him had the more occasion giuen them by the prophane and wicked doctrine of VViâ—kâ—liffe his fellows that preuailed much in these daies and brought many of the Common people to such fury contempt of all religion as their strange tumults and raging rebellions vnder their Captaines wat Tyler Iack Straw and other like vnruly rulers doe well declare 43. But yet the externall face of religion and practice therof receiued and established from the times of all former Kings was continued also by him in particular it is to be noted that no one King did euer more often confirme and ratifie the liberties of the Church then he which is as much to say as to establish the opposite negatiue proposition against M. Attorney professing heerby that he had not supreme authority in causes Ecclesiasticall for so much as the libertyes of the English Church did expressly consist in this that Church-men and Church-matters and all spirituall and ecclesiasticall affaires were a distinct gouernment from the temporall and subordinate only among themselues the one degree to the other and all mediately to the Sea Apostolicke and Bishops therof 44. For proofe then of this that King Richard did confirme and maintaine all the dayes of his raigne these libertyes franquises and priuiledges of the Church and of Clergy-men appeareth by his owne Statutes As for example by the first Statute made in his first yeare with this title A confirmation of the libertyes of the Church and the second Statute made in his second yeare hath the same title and subiect as also hath the first Statute of his third yeare and first of his 5. and first of his 6. and first of his seauenth yeare And so in like manner shall we find the very first Statutes of his 12. and 21. years to containe the same confirmation 45. And if I should stand vpon the enumeration of particular examples of the practice of these libertyes in Clergy-men of those dayes it would be ouerlonge as namely how all Bishops Archbishops Abbots and other Prelates elected according to the agreement before taken repaired to the Bishop of Rome for their confirmations and could not exercise any parte of their offices vntill they had the same And albeit according to the former decrees of the 25. and 27. yeares of K. Edward the 3. confirmed also in the 13. and 16. yeares of the raigne of this King reseruations of benefices or prouisions immediately from the Court of Rome were not admitted which little importeth our controuersie with M. Attorney yet this which includeth the maine ground substantiall fouÌ„dation of all acknowledgement of supreme spirituall power remained still vntouched to wit that no Bishop Archbishop or other Prelate by whomsoeuer he was presented chosen or nominated could or can at this day haue spirituall iurisdiction but either mediaté or immediatè from the Pastor of the Sea Apostolicke And this point did K. Richard maintaine and defend all dayes of his life which is the principal point as hath byn said of acknowledging the soueraigne authority of the Sea Apostolicke in spirituall affaires for that other things are but dependance of this as
all appeals in causes Ecclesiasticall to the Court of Rome reducing all spirituall authority of determining the same vnto the body spirituall of the English Clergy for so the words of the statute are The body spirituall of the English Church saith he hauing power when any cause of the law diuine happened to come in question or of spirituall learning c. to declare and determine all such doubts to administer al such offices duties as to their roomes spiritual did appertaine without the intermedling of any exteriour person or persons c. Wherby it appeareth that by this Statute he reduceth all spirituall power to a certaine community of the Ecclesiasticall body of England but in the second Statute that followed in the yeare after against suing for licences dispensations facultyes graunts rescripts or delegacyes to Rome he seemeth to establish all authority in the Archbishop of Canterbury that was then Thomas Cranmer newly made by himself for allowing of his marriage with Lady Anne Bullen for so he saith in the statute That the Archbishop of Canterbury for the tyme being and his successours shall haue power and authority from tyme to tyme by their discretions to giue graunt and dispose by an instrument vnder the seale of the said Archbishop vnto the King and vnto his heirs successours Kings of this Realme as well all maÌ„ner of such licences dispensations compositions facultyes graunts rescrips delegacyes instruments and other writings for causes not being contrary or repugnant to the holy scriptures and lawes of God as heertofore had byn vsed and accustomed to be had and obtained by the King or any his most noble progenitors or any of his or their subiects at the Sea of Rome or any person or persons by authority of the same c. 12. Lo heer King Henry giueth authority to the Archbishop of Canterbury to giue vnto him to wit to King Henry himself and his successors Kings of England and their subiects all dispensations which they were wont to â—â—ke and obtaine at the Popes hand so as heer he acknowledgeth that in former times that authority belonged to the Pope and that his auncestors and progenitors were of that opinion but that now he being offended with him he would take it from him and bestow it vpon the Archbishop of Canterbury subiecting himself and his inheritours to aske and obtaine the said dispensations at his hands and his successours which was as you see to make Archbishop Cranmer Pope and not himself for this yeare as the whole body of the English Clergy was for the yeare past 13. And wheras it is euident that King Henry gaue this authority to Cranmer for dispensing c. to the end he should dispense with him for marrying of the said Lady Anne Bullen it seemeth strange that he would vse this so ridiculous circuyt as first to giue authority by Parlament to Cranmer to be able to dispense with him to wit with King Henry the giuer and would not take immediatly either by himself or by Parlament authority to himself to dispense with himself But it is well seen that he had some remorse or shame-fastnes therin at the first beginning though the very next yeare after he amended the matter or rather made it worse by assuming it to himself For calling another Parlament vpon the 26. of his raigne he made the first Statute of all with this Title An act concerning the Kings Highnes to be Supreme head of the Church of England and to haue authority to reforme and redresse all errors heresies and abuses in the same Wherby you may see what gradation was vsed in this matter or rather mistery giuing this power first to the Community of the English Clergy secondly to the Archbishop of Canterbury and thirdly to himself and all this in three distinct yeares immediately following one the other 14. And now if mens euerlasting saluation must depend vpon these mutations of spirituall iurisdiction as no doubt they did in thousands of our Countrey at that tyme and if the eternall wisdome of our Sauiour Christ hath left no more certainty for direction of our soules by spirituall gouernement and authority then this of our English Parlament which changeth so often and easely as you haue heard vpon euery Princes particuler inclination then are we doubtlesse in a pittifull plight for that as hath byn declared before of the certainty of this spirituall power for binding or loosing of our sinnes for SacrameÌ„ts instructions directions and all other spirituall helps and assistance in this life dependeth the surety of our euerlasting saluation or damnation in the life to come 15. But to goe forward a little further in this matter now we haue King Henry head of the Church and M. Attorney no doubt is glad therof for helping of his cause though it help it but little or nothing at all it being the first example that euer could be giuen therof in England or elswhere throughout the Christian world and so much the more to be misliked if we beleiue Iohn Caluin in his sharp reproofe of this attempt which he calleth Tyrannicall Anti-Christian But M. Attorney perhaps will not care for Caluin or Beza or any of their followers in this point for that it maketh not to his purpose Well then he must notwithstanding graunt this in all reason that if this supreme authoritie spirituall was wel and rightly and by gods direction spirit and allowance taken vpon himself by King Henry then is it likely that he was guided also by the same spirit afterward in making his decrees laws and ordinances for directing and gouerning the English Church by that authority and especially for reforming and redressing of all errors heresies and abuses therin according to the speciall title of his said authority before set down wherof it followeth that when vpon the 31. yeare of his raigne which was fiue after the said authoritie giuen him hee calling a Parlament determined six mayne and principall articles of protestant religion to bee heresies to witt The deniall of the reall presence of the communion vnder one kind only That Priests may marrie That vowes of chastitie may bee broken That priuate masses are not lawfull That sacramentall or auricular confession is not necessarie appointing them that should hould any of these heresies so coÌ„deÌ„ned by him to be burned as notorious hereticks it followeth I say that this was decreed by him out of the same spirit and direction of god for that otherwise his Ecclesiasticall supremacy had byn to small purpose if there were no certainty in his determinations or that God would permit him to erre so grosly in so importaÌ„t a busines as this was for the whole Church of England so soone after he had ginen him his said supreme authoritie Ecclesiasticall 16. And that this was done by him against the Protestants with great deliberation consultation aduise maturity in the fullnes of his power Ecclesiasticall appeareth
and thereupon he reiected the one and fauoured the other as more sincere people and more to bee trusted by him that were so trustie and faithfull to their God and his religion yf this I saie were a good censure and iudgment I doe not see how this other of M. Attorney can stand vpon anie ground of reason or Christian charitie that qualifieth so greiuously or rather calumniateth so egregiously the religious standing of Catholicke people in the moderate defence and excuse of their said consciences 22. But heere perhaps hee may demaund or some body for him what great reasons wee haue for this obstacle of our iudgment for not conforming it to his and others in this behalfe Wherunto though sufficientlie hath been alleadged before in the Answere to his Preface yet now may some two or three points or considerations bee further added in confirmation therof among almost infinite that might bee produced And the first may bee that which hitherto wee haue treated in this book with M. Attorney concerning the continuance of that religion for which wee stand throughout the whole race and course of our Christian English-Princes State and Realme from the beginning of our first conuersion vnto our time All which Kings and Queens Counsellors Nobilitie Archbishops Bishops Doctors Vniuersities Lawyers and Sages of all sortes were for so manie ages by one and the self-same religion profession and beleife directed and saued if anie were saued that is to say by the selfsame means doctrine and Sacraments of our auncient Catholicke English Church continuing vntill K. Henry 8. tyme which Church professed the very same faith and beliefe in like maner as in another special booke hath been declared wherby all other Christian nations had been directed and saued for those other ages which went before our English conuersion after Christs assension 23. New then this being so I would aske anie reasonable indifferent English-man whether wee haue iust cause to stand in and for this religion or not and whether if himself were now readie to die for that is the time when men doe iudge with lesse passion and had laid before his eyes the euerlasting ioyes of heauen on the one side and the eternall paines of hell on the other to bee lost or gayned by his election whether I saie hee would aduenture rather to goe in companie and ioyne himself with this large and venerable bodie of old English Catholickes among whome there are recorded by histories to haue been so manie admirable men both for learning wisdome and sanctitye of life or leauing these to take parte and receiue his portion with such later people of the same nation as haue deuided themselues from the other And when M. Attorney in good probabilitie of reason shall substantiallie answere mee this demaund it may doubtlesse bee a great motiue vnto mee and others to draw vs to the current of this present time but in the meane space wee must stand fast least wee fall into the torrent of brimstone if wee goe against our consciences by which wee must bee iudged and euery man damned or saued thereby as out of the Apostles testimonie before hath been declared 24. And thus much for standing in our old religion Now for passing to a new there is another obstacle also that greatlie withholdeth vs and this is that when wee shall haue left this old religion so begun so established so confirmed so promised by God to endure to the worlds end so generallie receiued so vniuersalli-continued as hath been declared wee cannot tell to what otheâ— sorte sect or parte of religion to passe with anie probable securitie or certeynty at all why wee should rather adhere to one sect then to another For when once wee leaâ—â— the said Catholicke religion so grouÌ„ded as you haue seen there is no one substantiall reason à parte rei that can bee assigned by anie man liuing neuer so learned why hee should more or rather follow one parte profession sect or new opinion then another As for example if to a man that vpon anie offence disgust scandall error anger interest leuity or the like for these are the ordinary motiues of changes breaketh from the auncient Catholicke Romain religion there should represent themselues vnto him fiue or six of the principall newest sects and sortes that professe different religions in our time all vnder the name of the Ghospell as namelie of Lutheranes either ridged or soft of Anabaptists Trinitarians new Arrians Zwinglians Calâ—â—nists of both sortes to witt Puritans and other all which haue their different positions professions articles faiths Churches conuenticles in these our daies and if he should demaund of fiue or six distinct Doctors of these new-ghospellers what substantiall reason or infallible grouÌ„d they can alleadge wherewith to persuade him that he ought to take their particular partes or bee of their seueral sects the one aboue the other or why themselues and ech one of them is rather of the one sect then of the other seeing all professe ghospell and scriptures In this case I say they can yeeld him no other reason but this that ech man assureth himself that hee and his parte doe alleadge and vnderstand the scriptures better then the rest which depending onlie as you see vpon the priuate iudgment and persuasion of ech one in particular for other proofes hee caÌ„ bring none except the stand vpon assurance of his particular spirit which euerie one of the other sects will doe in like manner it bringeth no assurance at all being onlie founded vpon ech mans opinion choice and election which properlie is heresie for that hereticks as auncient Fathers doe define are nothing els but choosers who leauing the vniuersall rule of faith deliuered vnto them by tradition of the common Church do chuse vnto themselues seuerall paths and opinions to follow 25. Wheras then no ground at all can bee yeelded by anie reason witt or learning of man why wee should bee rather of one new profession then another after wee haue left the old receiued throughout Christendome and that in the old wee stand not ech-man vpon his particular iudgment to beleiue this or that but vpon the generall testimonie tradition voice vse and authoritie of the vniuersall Christian Church called Catholicke as S. Augustine and others say not onlie by her freinds and followers but also by her enemies this being so I saie wee haue great cause to looke before wee leape as the prouerb is and to consider well where wee shall land or how we shall come to shore before wee leaue the shipp wherin wee are or doe aduenture into M. Attorneys new Current or anie other that hath no staie but maie carry vs further with the streame then wee can staie our selues afterward when wee would And thus much of this consideration 26. A third is which also shall bee the last in this place that terrifieth vs no lesse then anie of the former two and this is
by me ansvvered For as for the other parte concerning treason and the vvhole Act of the late arraignement about the same I haue of purpose forborne to speake as vvell for that it is a matter not appertayning to my facultie as also in regarde of the devv respect I beare both vnto the lavves and customes of my countrie my Princes person and the honour of that great assemblie in all vvhich I haue nothing to complaine of all hauing passed by order but onlie of your extrauagant excursions to confoūd religion and treason togeather nay to make religion the fountaine of treason and therby to inuolue vvithin the hatred of treason all those that by conscience are tyed to that religion be they neuer so innocent than vvhich there can be no greater iniquitie imagined 49. VVith M. Garnets particular cause I vvill not meddle in this place he is gone to his last Iudge before vvhome also you and others that haue had parte in the handling therof must finallie appeare to see confirmed or reuersed vvhatsoeuer hath passed in that affaire As for that vvhich you others so often vrged against him to confesse that he vvas lavvfullie condemned by the tēporal lavv of the land importeth little for the impayring of his innocencie before almighty God You knovv vvho said in a farre vveightier cause concerning the tryal of our Sauiour himself VVe haue a law and according to this law he ought to dy for that he hath made himselfe the sonne of God and their error vvas not so much in the obiect as in the subiect for as for the lavv it self vve fynd it in Leuiticus that blasphemie vvhereof the highest degree vvas for a man to make himself God vvas punishable by death but the subiect to vvit the person of our Sauiour vvas mistaken they esteeming him to be onlie man vvhereas they ought to haue knovvne that he vvas God and man as vvell in respect of the predictions of al the Prophets foretelling that Christ should be the sonne of God as also of his stupendious actions that proued him to be trulie Christ so as though the lavv alleadged by the Ievves against blasphemie blasphemers vvere true and in force of it self yet held it not in the person of Christ but vvas in the highest degree iniurious as all Christian-men must confesse 50. Let vs see then hovv from this case of the maister some light may be dravvne to that of his scholler and seruant You M. Attorney pleaded against him as the Ievves Attorneyes did against our Sauiour and said Nos legem habemus c. vve haue a lavv that vvhosoeuer reuealeth not treason by such a space shall be accessarie of treason and dy as a traytor nor do vve deny the lavv or complaine thereof but yet if this case vvere pleaded in a forrayne Catholicke countrie vvhere the prisoner also shoulde haue his Attorney allovved him he vvould saie on the other side Nos legem habemus superiorem Ecclesiasticam Diuino iure intentam qua sacerdos neque mori neque puniri debet ob proditionem sub confessionis figillo cognitam non reuelatam vve haue a contrarie lavv to vvit an Ecclesiasticall and spirituall lavv higher then your temporall and a lavv founded on the lavv of God vvhereby it is ordeyned that a Priest shal neither dy nor be punished nor be accompted traytor for treason discouered vnto him vnder the seale of confession and not by him reuealed nay he shal be punished that most grieuouslie if he doe for anie cause reueale the same 51. And this plea of the prisoners Attorney vvhich by Catholicke doctrine and schooles is easilie proued in all the partes or members heere set dovvne vvould presentlie haue bene admitted in all Catholicke Countries and Courtes and in ours also vvhiles our Kings and people vvere of that religion and your temporall lavv vvould haue byn put to silence Oh you vvill saie but novv it is othervvise and vve care not for your Ecclesiasticall lavv VVherevnto I ansvvere Veritas autem Domini manet in aeternum If this lavv be foūded in Gods truth vvas left vnto his Church by Christ himself the fountaine of al truth for the honour and defence of his Sacrament of Confessiō as al ancient diuinitie doth affirme then must it for euer endure immutable and novv and then heere and there this countrie and that countrie this and that alteration of religion or Princes temporall lavves must not alter the case or substance of truth either in Gods sight or vvise mens eyes and so M. Garnets case dying for this truth in England novv is no vvorse then if he had dyed a thousand yeares gone for the same either in England or any other Cath. countrey that is to say he dying only for the bare cōcealing of that vvhich by Gods and the Churches Ecclesiastical lavvs he could not disclose giuing no cōsent or cooperation to the treasō it self should haue byn accōpted rather a martyr then a traytor no lesse novv 52. VVhich being so cōsider I besech you M. Attorney vvhat a different reckoning there is like to be betvveene you tvvo at your next meeting in iudgement you knovv somvvhat by experience hovv dreadful a thing the forme of publicke iudgement is but not so much as some others for that hitherto it hath byn stil your lot to be actor not reus predominant both in vvordes povver and consequently terrible nothing terrifyed but vvhen the time and case shal come vvherof the holie-ghost foretelleth vs Stabunt iusti in magna constantia aduersus eos qui se angustiauerunt Iust men that vvere ouerborne in this vvorld shal stand vp boldly vvith great constancy against those that ouerbare them and vvhen the saying of our Sauiour shal be fulfilled that euery man shal receaue be treated according to the measure wherby he hath measured to others then vvil be the day of woe neither doe I say this M Attorney to condemne your office I knovv that in all tymes vnder all Princes your office of Fiscal-Aduocate or Attorney hath byn in vse for the Princes seruice and good also of the Common-vvealth if it be vvell and moderatelie vsed but yet I cannot but friendlie put you in mind of that vvhich holie S. Gregory doth admonish vvhere he handleth the cause and reasons vvhy S. Peter S. Andrew S. Iames and S. Iohn retourned to their art of fishing after the Resurrection of our Sauiour but not S. Matthew to his Custom-hovvse to vvit that certaine artes and occupations there are more dangerous farre the one then the other as more subiect and incident to greater sinnes 53. In vvhich kinde trulie Sir if any office in the vvorld be daungerous in deed yours may be accompted in the highest degree that hath euery day almost his finger in bloud or in particular mens afflictions and ouerthrovves And albeit the act of iustice be laudable necessarie yet the Actor
Iurisdiction be of Gods institution also and duelie to be honoured in his Church and Christian common wealth as before wee haue shewed yet doe they teach the same to be far otherwise deriued and receiued from God then is Spirituall Power that is to saie not immediatlie by Gods owne deliuerie therof but mediatlie rather to witt by meditation of the law of nature and nations For by the law of nature God â—ath ordeined that there should be politicall gouernment for that otherwise no multitude could be preserued which the law of nations assuming hath transferred that gouernment vnto one or more according to the particular formes therof as Monarchie Aristocracy or Democracy or mixt wherin is to be noted that the ordination of God by the law of nature doth giue politicall Power vnto the multitude immediately and by them mediately to one or more as hath been said But Spirituall Power Christ gaue immediatly and by himself to the Apostles and their Successors by these words whatsoeuer you shall bind vpon earth the same sâ—all be bound in heauen And whatsoeuer you shall loose one earth shall be loosed in heauen Wherby you se a generall large commission graunted to them of binding loosing Quaecunque whatsoeuer without exception And the like to S. Peter as head and chiefe by speciall power and commission of those words Pasce oues meas Pasce agnos meos Feed my sheep feed my lambs thryse repeated signifying therby the Preheminence and Primacy of his Pastorall Authoritie in Gods Church as the auncient Fathers haue allwayes vnderstood the same For that to the office of Supreame feedinge is required also all other authoritie necessarie to gouerne direct commaund restraine and punish in like manner when need requireth 8. About which point is to be obserued and considered attentâ—uelie say Catholike Deuines and most learned lawyers that when God almightie giueth any office he giueth also sufficient Power and Authoritie euery way to execute that office as when he giueth the office of a King or temporal Magistrate for good of the Common-wealth he giueth Authoritie therwith not onlie to direct command and instruct but to punish and compell also yea and to extirpate and cut of those when need is that are rebellions or otherwise deserue that punishment And the like is to be obserued in Spirituall Power and Iurisdiction according to which the Ciuil law saith Cui Iurisdictio data est ea quoque concessa esse intelliguntur sine quibus Iurisdictio expleri non potuit To whosoeuer iurisdiction is giuen to him also must we vnderstand to be graunted all those thinges without which his Iurisdiction cannot be fulfilled And the Canon law to the same effect Iurisdictio nullius videretur esse momenti si coërcionem aliquam non haberet Iurisdiction would seeme to be of no moment if it had not some power to compell And finally it is a general rule giuen in the said Canon law that when anie cause is committed to anie man he is vnderstood to receiue also ful authoritie in al matters belonging to that cause 9. Out of all which is deduced that for so much as Christ our Sauiour God and Man hauing purchased to him felfe by the price of his owne blood a most deerlie beloued Church and committed the same as S. Paul saith to be gouerned by his Apostles and Bishops their successours vnto the worlds end it must needs follow that he hath indowed the same Church with sufficient spirituall Authoritie both directiue and coactiue to that end for gouerning our soules no lesse than he hath done the temporal CoÌ„monwealth for affaires of the body Nay much more by how much greater the importance is of the one than of the other as before hath been said 10. If you aske me yet more particularlie where and how by what commission and to whom Christ our Sauiour left this high Spiritual Power in his Church what it is and wherin it consisteth I answere first to the last that it consisteth as often hath been said in guiding our soules in this world to euerlasting saluation in the next Which thinge for that principallie it dependeth of this that we auoide sinnes in this life or if we committ them that they be pardoned vs or corrected by this Power Christ our Sauiour doth most aptlie giue and describe the same Power by the words of binding or loosing sinnes And therefore in the foresaid place alleadged out of S. Matthew his Ghospel he giueth the said commission as you haue heard VVhatsoeuer you shal binde or loose vpon earth shal be bound or loosed in heauen Wherby the Church of God hath allwaies vnderstood full authoritie of Iudicature to haue been giuen to the Apostles and their successors to discerne iudge binde or loose in all things belonging to this end of directing soules 11. Truth it is that diuers learned deuines are of opinion that in these places Christ did but promise to his Apostles to giue them this high iudiciall authoritie in his Church when by his death and resurrection it should be founded And that the actuall performance of this promise was made vnto them in the 20. if S. Iohns ghospell where Christ said vnto them Sicut misit me pater ego mitto vos As my father sent me so I doe send you and then presentlie breathing vpon then he addeth Receiue the Holie-ghost whose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen vnto them and whose you shal retaine they are retained Where we se that Christ speaketh now in the present tense they are forgiuen and they are retained and not in the future as before in the place of S. Matthew his ghospell And we must note that those words of our Sauiour As my father sent mee so I doe send you are vnderstood by auncient Doctors of Authoritie as though he had said that with the same power authoritie that my father sent mee into this world to gather gouerne my Church I doe also send you that is to saie withall spirituall power necessarie to your office and charge both on earth and in heanen And therfore he saith in S. Matthew his Ghospell That whatsoeuer they shall binde or loose vpon earth which are the Acts of high iudges shall be loosed or bound in heauen 12. And to S. Peter in like manner as Cheif of the rest the promise of his Supreame and singular power besides the other which out of the former general commission he receiued with the rest of the Apostles was made vnto him first in S. Matthews ghospell when Christ said Thou art Peter which signifieth a stone or rocke and vpon this rock will I build my Church and will giue vnto thee the keies of the Kingdome of heauen c. Which he perfourmed afterward in the 21. chapter of S. Iohn after his resurrection when asking him three times of his loue towards him he as manie times gaue him coÌ„mission of high-pastor ouer
to a Colledge to visit the same for certaine defects with particular order how to proceed and punish the said offences though in many things he haue greater Authoritie by his extraordinarie commission then is the ordinarie of the President and fellows and other ordinarie officers yet cannot hee either tacitè or à fortiore by vertue of this Maximè take vnto him all the power and manner of proceeding which the said President and fellowes haue by their ordinarie Authoritie of Statutes in admitting and reiecting schollers giuing and changing offices setting and letting of lands and the like except it be epresslie in his Commission Noe not in punishments neither concerning those defects which he hath to visit may he exceed his prescript order they being things as I say stricti Iuris which both law reason and conscience doe forbid to be enlarged beyond his commission And so doth M. Attorney seeme to graunt that it should be so in any iudgement giuen by Commissioners of Oyer and Terminer or other Commissioners or Iudges of the common law insinuating belike that the Canon or Ecclesiasticall law now vsed in England is abritrary to be applied as they please that sit in Authoritie 10. And this seemeth greatlie to be confirmed by another Resolution of his Iudges made to another argument of Caudery wherein his Counsell vrged for him that according to the commission sentence should haue been giuen against him by three at least of the Commissioners ioyntlie concurring which was not obserued but giuen onlie by the Bishop though he pretendeth that it was also by the consent of some of his Colleage It was resolued saith M. Attorney by the whole Courte that the sentence giuen by the Bishop with Consent of his Colleags was such as the Iudges of the Common Law ought to allow to be giuen according to the Ecclesiasticall laws Consider I praie you this Resolution that they out of the Common-law doe allow it to be well done according to the Ecclesiasticall laws but heare the reason for it importeth much to se therby the manner of proceeding for seeing saith hee that their authoritie is to proceed and giue sentence in Ecclesiasticall causes according to the Ecclesiasticall law and they haue giuen a sentence in a cause Ecclesiasticall vpon their proceedings by sorce of that law the Iudges of the common law ought to giue faith and credit to their sentence and to allow it to be done according to the Ecclesiasticall law For Cuilibet in sua arte perito est credendum VVee must beleeue euery skillfull man in his arte c. So hee And is not this a strange Reason of a iudiciall sentence thinke you that for so much as the Bishop of London had depriued Caudery by pretence of an Ecclesiasticall law his fact must be allowed by vertue of this maxime That euery skillfull man is to be credited in his art And was not the poore plainteife well holpen vp who after foure years trauell and cost as it appeereth wherin he followed the suite at the Common-law against the said Bishop he was now answered That euerie skillfull man must be beleeued in his art without further inquiring 11. And yet M. Attorney heere auerreth that it is a common receiued opinion of all bookes and citeth diuerse booke-cases for the same And albeit I haue not by me the bookes themselues nor doe professe my self skillfull therin yet must I needs ascribe so much equitie prudence reason vnto the Common law as to presume that it will not admit this Maxime without some distinction or reasonable restriction As for example that this Peritus or skillfull man that must be so beleeued be eminent in his art and be not interessed nor passionate in the Case proposed For other-wise absurde effects would insue as for example If a surgeon hyred to cure a wound should be suspected to haue intoxicated the same and that the Plainteife should haue this answere that euery skillfull man is to be beleiued in his arte it were iniustice For that he might either of ignorance haue erred therin if he be not knowne to be very well learned in his arte or of malice if he might be presumed to hope or expect gaine by the wounded mans death And howsoeuer it be the matter in right conscience were not to be shuffled ouer with such an answere of the appointed Iudges but the Case were to be examined other surgeons to be consulted them ans skill honestie and reputation to be inquired of and other such diligence to be vsed as might content and satisfie the afflicted partie wherof none was done as it seemeth in the behalfe of Caudery 12. For wheras in this case the Bishop of London was interessed in his honour to defend that which he had done not perhaps the greatest Canoinst or Ciuilian Lawyer in the world for his skill and this poore plainteife as I saie hauinge followed the Common Lawyers to iudge the case for so many years it seemeth a sleight shifting off for the Iudges to tell him now in fauour of the said Bishop and his Colleags Cuilibet in sua arte perito est credendum We must beleeue euery man skilfull in his science which is as much as if they had said he hath depriued you and he is skilfull in depriuing and therfore you must thinke that he hath done it very well And this is all the remedy you are like to haue 31. And by this the reader may also perceiue how much is to be ascribed to M. Attorneyes words before recited when he saith of those Iudges of the Common law from whome he citeth some certaine little peeces of Interpretations Ordinances Statutes or decrees in proofe as he would haue it seeme of the Queens Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction persuading vs that they could not bee daunted vvith any feare moued by any affection nor corrupted vvith any reward which as I beleiue in some so the experience of these our daies and of these our fornamed Iudges and moderne Sages may teach vs to suspect the same in others also of those auncienter times who may be presumed to haue followed the current of their dayes and to haue been no lesse ready to run after their Princes humours than we see many lawyers and Deuines also in our dayes to doe But now to the last argument of Caudery finall Resolution against him 14. After that he had declared the three defects before mentioned of the Bishop of Londons sentence against him First that he was depriued vpon the first accusation Secondlie that hee was conuicted by no Iury wittnesses or confession but vpon not appearance Thirdlie that the sentence was not giuen by three or more Commissioners ioyntlie All which are expresse clauses of their commission sleightly euacuated as before you haue heard he came to the fourth point which is that the Statute wherby this supreame Ecclesiastcall power was giuen to the Queene herself by the Parlament hath a clause
visitation of the Ecclesiasticall estate and persons and for their reformation order and correction of the same and of all manner of errors heresies c. is given to the Queene with full power and authoritie to assigne nominate and authorize others also to exercise and execute vnder her highnes all and all manner of Iurisdiction priuiledges and preheminences in anie wise touching or concerning anie spirituall or Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction and to visit reforme redresse order correct and amend c. 19. Which words may seem by their often naming of visitation and visiting that they meant onlie to make the Queene a visitrix ouer the Cleargie which importeth much limitation of supreme power and yet on the other side they giue her all Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall that euer hath been heertofore or may be exercised by anie Ecclesiasticall authoritie or person and that both she and her substitutes haue all and all manner of Iurisdiction priuiledges and preheminences concerning spirituall affaires as you haue heard So as on the one side they seeme to restraine and limitt not calling her head of the Church as before in the stile of K. Henrie and K. Edward was accustomed but rather a supreme Visitrix as by these words appeereth And on the otherside they giuing her all and all manner of Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall that by anie power or person Ecclesiasticall hath euer heertofore been vsed or may be vsed including no doubt therin both the Pope and all other Bishops or Archbishops that euer haue exercised Iurisdiction in England they make her spirituall head of the Church in the highest degree giuing her the thinge without the name and dazeling the eyes of the ordinarie Reader with these multitude of words subtilie couched togeather And why so thinke yon I shall breefly disclose the mysterie of this matter 20. When K. Henry the eight had taken the Title of Supreame head of the Church vpon him as also the gouernours of K. Edward had giuen the same vnto him being but yet a child of 9. years old the Protestants of other Countries which were glad to se England brake more and more from the Pope whome they feared yet not willing insteed therof to put themselues wholie vnder temporall Princes but rather to rest at their owne libertie of chosing congregations and presbyteryes to gouerne began to mislike with this English stile of Supreame head as well the Lutheranes as appeereth by diuers of their writings as also the Zuinglians and much more afterward the Caluinists whereupon Iohn Caluin their head and founder in his Commentary vpon Amos the Prophet inueigheth bitterlie against the said Title and authoritie of supreame head taken first by King Henry and saith it was Tyrannicall and impious And the same assertion he held during his life as after by occasion more particularlie shall be shewed And the whole body of Caluinists throughout other Countryes are of the same opinion and faith though in England they be vpon this point deuided into Protestants and Puritans as all men know 21. This then being the State of thinges when Q. Elizabeth began her Raigne those that were neerest about her and most preuailed in Counsell inclining to haue a change in Religion that therby also other changes of dignities offices and liuings might insue and desiring to reduce all to the new Queens disposition but yet finding great difficultie and resistance in many of the Caluinists to giue the accustomed Title of headship in respect of Iohn Caluins reprobation therof they deuised a new forme and featute of words wherby couertly to giue the substance without the name that is to saie the whole spirituall power iurisdiction of supreame head vnder the name of Visitrix or supreame gouernesse as in the Oath of the same Statute is set downe where euery man vnder forfiture of all his lands and liuings and life also in the third time is bound to sweare and professe that he beleiueth in his cōscience that the said Qneene is supreame gouernesse in all causes Ecclesiastical in this sense and that there is no other Spirituall power or Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction ouer soules in England but this of the Qneene or such as commeth from her And this was also the high iniquitie of this tragicall Comedye among other that the whole Realme being almost all Catholike and of a contrarie beleife at that time was forced to sweare within thirtie daies after the said Act to this fantasticall deuise of giuing supreame authoritie Spirituall to a woman wherof by naturall diuine and humane law she is not capable as in the next chapter shall bee proued being a deuise of some few in a corner first and then procured by negociation to passe in Parlament or els to incurre the daunger of the foresaid penalties that is to saie either sacrilegiouslie to forsweare themselues against their consciences or to vndoe themselues and theirs in wordlie affaires a hard and miserable choise 22. But now to the point it self what reall and substantiall difference thinke you can their be imagined between the spirituall Authortie of Head-ship giuen vnto K. Henry the 8. by the Statute of the 26. yeare of his reigne and this of visitrix or supreame gouernesse giuen to Q. Elizabeth in the first of her reigne Was not the self-same power and Iurisdiction ment to be giuen And if there bee no difference in the thing it self why doe they fly the word in this which they vsed in that and why doe they vse such large circumloquutions of visiting ordering redressing and the like For as for K. Henries statute it beareth this Title An act concerning the Kings highnes to be supreame head of the Church of England c. And in the statute it self it is said Be it enacted by the Authoritie of this present Parlament that the King our soueraigne Lord his heirs and successors shall be taken accepted and reputed the onlie supreame head on earth of the Church of England called Anglicana Ecclesia And the same Title was 9. or 10. years after giuen in like manner to K. Edward the sixt by the same Authoritie of Parlament if in this Case it had anie authoritie anecting also therunto all Iurisdiction spirituall whatsoeuer as it appeereth by a certaine declaration therof made in the Statute of the first year of the said King It saith thus That for so much as all authoritie of iurisdiction spirituall and temporall is deriued and deducted from the Kings Maiestie as supreame head of these Churches and Realmes of England and Ireland and so iustlie acknowledged by the Cleargie therof and that all Courts Ecclesiasticall within these said two Realmes be kept by no other power and authority either forreine or within the Realme but by the Authoritie of his most excelent Maiesty Be it therfore enacted that all sommons and citations and other processes Ecclesiasticall in all causes of Bastardy Bygamye and such like called Ecclesiasticall shall be made in the name of our King c. And that in
the Archbishops and bishops seals of office for testisying of this the Kings Highnes armes be decentlie sett with Characters vnder the said Armes for the knowledge of the diocesse that they shall vse noe other seale of Iurisdiction but wherin his Maiestyes armes be engraued c. 23. Lo heere not onlie the name and Authoritie of head of the Church giuen to K. Edward the Child and taken from the Pope but all Iurisdiction also and signe of Iurisdiction spirituall taken from the Archbishops and Bishops of England excepting onlie so far forth as it was imparted vnto them by the said Child K. Which importeth much if you consider it well For this is not onlie to haue power to visitt and gouerne Ecclesiasticall persons and to reforme abuses Set downe in the Queenes graunt by parlament but to haue all Ecclesiasticall and spirituall power and iurisdiction originallie included in his owne person and so to be able from him self as from the first fountaine and highest origen on earth to deriue the partes parcells thereof to others which you may consider how different it is from that which here the Statute would seeme to ascribe to the Queene and opposite and contrarye to all that which the ancient Fathers in the precedent chapter did affirme protest not to be in their Kings and Emperours at all but in Bishops and Preists onlie as deliuered immediatlie to them by Christ our Sauiour and by them and from them onlie to be administred to others for their saluation But by this new order of the English Parlament the contrarie course is established to witt that it must come to Bishops and Preists from a laie man yea a Child and from a lay-woman also as the other Parlament determineth and then must it needs follow also as after more larglie shall bee proued that both the one and the other I meane K. Edward and Queen Elizabeth had power not onlie to giue this Ecclesiasticall iurisdictiō vnto others but much more to vse and exercise the same in like manner in their owne persons if they would as namelie to giue holie orders create consecrate Bishops confirme Children absolue sinnes administer Sacraments teach and preach iudge and determine in points of faith and beleife sitt in iudgement vpon errors and heresies and the like And this for K. Edward 24. Now then if it may be presumed as I thinke it may that Queene Elizabeths meaning was to haue no lesse Authoritie Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall giuen vnto her and acknowledged in her then her said Father and Brother had vsed before why did not the makers of this Statute set it downe in plaine words as the other did but disguised the matter by such māner of speach as they might seeme to giue but little wheras they gaue all and more then all The Cause was that which I haue said before for which they laboured not to be vnderstood of all men but to speake as it were in mysterye not to offend so publikelie the Caluinists and yet to include matter inough to ouerthrow Catholikes But the said exacter parte and purer Caluinists quicklie found out the matter and so they began verie shortly after to mutter and write against this and diuers other points of the Statute and so haue continued euer since and the Controuersie betweene them is indeterminable 25. Well then for so much as now we haue laid open the true state of the Question and that M. Attorney is bound to proue his proposition in this sense and explication that heere is sett downe out of K. Henry and K. Edwards Statutes to witt that Q. Elizabeth had all plenarie power of Spirituall Iurisdiction in her self to deriue vnto others at her pleasure as from the head and fountaine thereof And that no Bishop Archbishop or other Ecclesiasticall person within the Realme had or could haue anie spirituall power or iurisdiction but from the wellspring and supreame sourge thereof And this not onlie by vertue of the foresaid Statute of the first yeare of her raigne but before without this also by the verie force of her Princely Crowne according to the meaning of the old and most auncient cōmon laws of England It will be time now to passe on to the veiw of his proofes which for so new strange and weightie an assertion that toucheth if wee beleiue the former alleadged Fathers the very quicke and one of the neerest means of our eternal saluation or damnation ought to bee very cleere sound and substantiall We shall see in the sequent Chapter what they are VVHERAS IN THE CASE PROPOSED THERE MAY BE TVVO KINDES OF PROOFES The one DE IVRE the other DE FACTO M. Attorney is shewed to haue fayled in both and that we doe euidently demonstrate in the one and in the other And first in that DE IVRE CHAP. IIII. THat the late Queene of England had such plenary Ecclesiasticall Power as before had byn said this by the intent meaninge of the old ancient Common-lawes of Englād though vnto me to many others it seeme a most improbable Paradox and doe meane afterwardes by Gods assistance to prooue and euidently demonstrate the same and shew that from our first Christiā Kings vnto K. Henry the eight the Common-lawes of our Land were euer conforme and subordinate to the Canō Ecclesiasticall lawes of the Roman Church in all spirituall affayres yet for so much as M. Attorney hath taken vpon him to prooue the contrary two heades of proofe he may follow therin The first De Iure the second De facto And albeit he entitle his Booke according to the first to witt De Iure Regis Ecclesiastico yet doth he nothing lesse then prosecute that kind of proofe but rather flippeth to the second which is De Facto endeauoring to prooue that certaine Kings made certaine lawes or attempted certaine factes somtimes and vpon some occasions that might seeeme somwhat to smel or taste of Ecclesiasticall power assumed to themselues in derogation or restraint of that of the Bishops Popes or Sea of Rome 2. Now albeit this were so and graunted as after it will be reproued yet well knoweth M. Attorney that an argument De facto inferreth not a proofe De Iure For if all the factes of our Kings among others should be sufficient to iustifie all matters done by them then would for example fornication be proued lawfull for that some of them are knowne to haue had vnlawfull children and left bastardes behinde them And the like we might exemplify in other things Neither doe I alleadge this instance without peculiar cause or similitude For as in that vnlawfull act of the flesh they yelded rather to passion and lust then to their owne reason iudgment knowing well inough that they did amisse when they were voyd of the same passion so in some of these actions of contention about Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction some of them were byassed with interest somtymes by indignation
Valentinian the elder who refused to be present and much more President in certaine conferences about religion betwene the Catholicke Bishops the Arrians vpon consideration of these two distinct Orders of Clergie and lay-men though he were inuited therunto by Catholicke Bishops themselues Mihi quidem saith he cum vnus de populo sim fas non est talia perscrutari verum sacerdotes qui bus haec cura est apud semetipsos congregentur vbi voluerint Vnto me that am but one of the lay people it is not lawfull to examine such things as appertayne vnto religion but let priests to whome this care is committed meet togeather amoÌ„g themselues to discusle the matter where they will So much was this distinction between lay-men and priests esteemed by this auncient Christian Emperour 11. Secondly I demaund of M Attorney concerning his distinction of Courtes and causes to be handled therin Temporll Spirituall how it commeth to passe that the Conusaunce of such causes as here he calleth Spirituall belong not as he saith to the Common-lawes of England No nor as presently after he affirmeth could not belong For that they are not within the conusaunce of the sayd Common-laws And why is this I praye you For if the temporall Prince be equallie head in both causes and in both Iurisdictions and that the power to knowe discerne iudge in both sortes doe descend only from the temporall Prince as before out of the Statute of King Edward the 6. you haue heard by the Statute-makers determined and M. Attorney confirmeth euery where in these Reportes then should the common-Lawes of our Realme which are the temporall Princes law be coÌ„mon indeed according to their name to all causes aswel Spirituall as Temporall for that their author and origen which is the King hath equall Power Iurisdiction in both for that it is a maxime vncontrollable that according to the Iurisdiction of the Lâ—w maker vertue and power of the law doth extend it selfe And then doth M. Attorney affirme that the conusaunce of so many Ecclesiasticall causes as he setteth downe is not within the compasse of our Common-lawes or what compasse will he assigne or lymitt to that Princes lawes that according to this assertion hath power in all Is not this to contradict himself and to ouerthrow with the one hand that which he goeth about to establish with the other For if the Kings power be common to both causes aswell Ecclesiasticall as Temporall then must the Kings Common-lawes be common to both Courtes and matters therin handled 12. But let vs see a certaine sleight or euasion of his worth the noting As in temporall causes saith he the King by the mouth of the Iudges in his Courtes of Iustice doth iudge and determyne the same by the temporall lawes of England so in causes Ecclesiasticall as Blasphemy Apostacy Heresyes Ordering Institutions of Clerkes c. the same are to be determined and decyded by Ecclesiasticall Iudges according to the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes of this Realme Marke here gentle reader how M. Atnorney playeth wyly beguyly For according to the proportion of his coÌ„parison he should haue coÌ„cluded thus So the King by the â—outh of his Ecclesiasticall Iudges doth iudge and determine the said Spirituall Ecclesiastical causes by his owne Ecclesiasticall lawes But this he foresaw would include this great inconuenience among others that if he said that the King did iudge determine by the mouthes of his spirituall Iudges the aforesaid spirituall causes as he doth the temporall then might he doe the same yea and exercise them also immediatly by himself if need were aswell as by others for in all temporall iudgments and affayres the King may sit himself in courte and performe in person whatsoeuer his Officers by his authority doe or may doe which yet M. Attorney saw would be somwhat absurde to graunt in the spirituall causes proponed by him of Blasphemy Ordering of Priests or giuing holy Orders Institutions of Clerkes Celebration of diuine seruice and the like to witt that the King should performe them immediately in his owne person for who would not say it were absurde for example that the King should sing or say the common seruice to the people or administer the Sacrament of Absolution or Marriage or giue holy Orders and the like which yet the Bishop of Rome and all other Bishops or Prelates neuer so great doe may doe without inconuenience And in truthe it followeth euidently that he who can giue authority or power for another to doe a thing as from himself and in his name may performe the same in person also if he list at least wise it cannot be vnlawfull for him so to doe And therfore coming to the application of his comparison he changeth his phrase and saith that the same are to be determined and decyded by Ecclesiasticall Iudges according to the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes of this Realme 13. Wherin you must note another shifte more poore and silly then the former for that hauing declared vnto vs before that there are two generall partes and members of the Realme to witt the Clergy and the Laity and that these two haue two seuerall Tribunalls in their affaires gouerned by two sortes of different lawes Temporall and Ecâ—lesiasticall Common and Canon and these deriued from two different Authors and origens the Common-law from the temporall Prince and Commonweath Ecclesiasticall from others saith M. Atorney but specifieth not from whom or whence though all the world knowe that they come originally from the Church Sea Apostolique all which inferreth distinct originall Iurisdictions M. Attorney by his great witt hath deuised a newe sleight neuer perhaps yet heard of in the world before which is to make these Ecclesiasticall lawes though deriued from others to be the Kings owne lawes for that he approueth and alloweth them within the Realme and consequently that all lawes both Temporall and Spirituall doe come from the King as their Author which is a token that he hath full Supreame power And this singular deuise pleaseth him so well as he repeateth the same sundrie tymes in this Treatise You shall heare the same in his owne words in this place how dangerous and preiudicyall a Conclusion he buildeth vpon the same against Catholiques 14. For as the Romans saith he fetching diuers lawes from Athens yet being approued and allowed by the State there called them notwithstanding Ius Ciuile Romanum And as the Normans borrowing all or most of their lawes from England yet baptized them by the name of the lawes or customes of Normandy so albeit the Kings of England deriued their Ecclesiasticall lawes from others yet so many as were approued and allowed here by and with a generall consent are aptly rightly called the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes of England which whosoeuer shall deny he denyeth that the King hath full and plenary power c. And consequently that he is no coÌ„plete Monarch nor head
Chapter and fourth demonstration therof I will remitt the Reader therunto Only I cannot let passe to recite vnto you in this place a certaine Charter of K. Ethelbert of Kent our first Christian English King confirmed by a Bull in lead of S. Augustin first archbishop of Canterbury and legate of the Sea Apostolike vnto the monastery of S. Peter Paul in CaÌ„terbury erected by the said K. Ethelbert the words of the Charter are these In nomine Domini nostri Iesu Christi c. Ego Ethelbertus Rex Cantij c. In the name of our Lord Iesus c. I Ethelbert King of Kent with the consent of the venerable Archbishop Augustine and of the Princes of my Realme do giue and graunt in the honour of S. Peter and S. Paul a certaine peâ—ce of my land which lyeth in the East parte of Canterbury to this intention only that a monastery be buylded in that place with this condition that my said land be for euer in the power of the said Abbot which there shall be ordeined And therfore I doe adiure and commaund in the name of allmightie God that is the iust Iudge of all that the foresaid gift of lands made by mee be held for euer firme so as neither it bee lawful for mee or any of my Successours Kings or Princes or for any Ecclesiasticall person of what degree or dignitie soeuer to defraud the said monastery of the same or any parte therof And if any man shall goe about to impeach or diminish any point or parte of this donation let him bee seperated in this life from the holie communion of the body and bloud of Christ at the day of iudgment for the demeritt of his malice be sequestred from the company of Saints and all good men Giuen at Canterbury Anno Christi 605. the 8. indiction 12. Thus goeth that Charter and in the same forme went all other Chartes of this Kinde wherin is to be noted first the dreadfull imprecation against all breakers therof confirmed by the Authority of so great a Saint as S. Augustin was how many lamentable inheritours wee haue of these curses and imprecations in our countrey and round about vs at this day where all such pious works are ouer throwne And secondly for that he saith expresly that he did all by the counsell and consent of S. Augustine it may be inferred that whatsoeuer priuiledges he gaue that may seeme to appertaine to Ecclesiasticall matters or Iurisdiction he did them vnder ratihabition of the said S. Augustine that was not only Archbishop but legat also of the Sea Apostolike and confequentlie had authoritie to exempt the said monastery as we see he did not only from the Iurisdiction of all other Bishops but of his owne Sea also in such sorte as no Archbishop of Canterbury had any authoritie ouer them which is much more then the Charter of Kenulsus alleadged heere by M. Attorney And we doe reade that the monks of Canterbury did pleade this Charter of K. Ethelbert confirmed by S. Augustine for their liberties against the Archbishop Richard Successor of S. Thomas Becket in the yeare of Christ 1180. 13. Wherfore to conclude this matter it seemeth that M. Attorney hath gotten nothing at all by this his instance of K. Kenulfus whether in his Charter he meant of temporal or spiritual iurisdiction For if he meant of teÌ„porall that is to say that the Abbey of Abindon should be free from molestation of the Bishops officers in temporall affaires it is nothing to our purpose and if he meant of spirituall Iurisdiction cleere it is that the said King had it not of himself by right of his crowne as M. Attorney often repeateth and vrgeth without all grounde but either from the Bishops of his Realme gathered togeather in Parlament which seemeth very probable by the words of the Charter Consilio Consensu Episcoporum That he did it by the Counsell and Consent of his Bishops or that he had it immediatly from the Pope as we haue shewed the vse to be in those dayes shall doe more largly in the ensuing Chapter 14. And that which is yet more and seemeth to conuince the whole matter to decide our very case in particular I doe reade of one Bishop Rethurus who was Abbot also of Abindon during the reigne of the said Kenulfus who went to Rome to obteine the confirmation of priuiledges to the said Abbey of Abindon about the yeare .812 Romam profectus saith the Story Pontificia authoritate privilegia Canobij communiuit He going the Rome by consent no doubt of K. Kenulfus himself obteined the confirmation of the priuiledges of the said monastery of Abindon by the Apostolike authoritie of the Sea of Rome And it is no doubt that among other priuiledges this Charter also of Kenulfus was one which being so euery man may see how much this instance hath holpen M. Attorney his cause or rather made against him that Kenulfus procured the confirmation of his Charter from the Pope himself 15. And surely if in this M. Attorney committed an errour in alleadging Kenulfus for an example of one that tooke supreme IurisdictioÌ„ Ecclesiasticall vpon him he being so obedient and subordinate to the Church of Rome as we haue said much more did he erre in choosing S. Edward the Confessor for his second instance for he hath but two as before I haue said out of all our Kings before the Conquest which K. Edward of all others was most deuoutly obedient to the Sea Apostolicke as may appeare both by that which before we haue touched of him as by that which after we shall more largly shew in the next Chapter that he presumed not to found his monastery of VVestminster without particular licence and approbation of the Pope In like manner for that hauing made a vow to goe in pilgrimage to Rome to shew his deuotion and obedience to that Sea he finding afterward some difficulties therin in respect of his Kingdome that repined at his absence and of the troublesome times that then were he remitted all first to Pope Stephen the tenth and when he being dead to his successour Nicholas the 2. who determined that he should not take that voiage but bestow the charges therof vpon the buylding of that monastery of VVestminster to which effect both their letters are extaÌ„t in Alredus that liued about 400. years gone wrote the same Kings life The Kings letter hath this Title Summo vniuersalis Ecclesiae Patri Nicolâo Edwardus Dei gratia Anglorum Rex debitam subiectionem c. To the high Father of the vniuersal Church Nicolas Edward by the grace of God King of England doth offer due subiection and obedience Wherby is euident that if K. Edward did hold himself for supreme head and gouernour of the Church in spirituall matters as M. Attorney would inferr vpon certaine words of one of his lawes as presentlie you shall heare
greatly this violent seuerity towards Ecclesiasticall persons One thing saith he among so many excellent monuments of your royall vertues doth greatly mislike and afflict me and contristate my louing heart towards you that in the taking and detayning prisoner your brother Otho Bishop of Baion you had not that care which was conuenient of your Princely reputation but did prefer the secular caution of your temporall state before the law of God in not bearing more reuerence vnto Priestly dignity So he 4. And this very same violent nature of K. VVilliam who had byn a souldiar and borne armes and brought vp in continuall bloud-shed from eight years old as himself testifieth was that which pious and learned Lanfranke nominated chosen Archbishop of Canterbury after the deposition of the foresaid Stygand did so much feare and mislike at his first comming into England as may appeare by an epistle of his to Pope Alexander the second that had commaunded him sore against his will to leaue his monasterie in Normandy and to take that Archbishoprick vpon him but now being come into England and seeing how matters did passe there he was vtterly dismayed and besought the Pope by all means possible and by all the most effectuall wayes of persuasion he could deuise that he might be rid of it againe Your legat said he hauing gathered a Synod heer in Normandy commaunded mee by the authority of the Apostolike Sea to take the gouernment of the Church of Canterbury vpon mee neither could any resistance of my parte by laying forth the weaknes â—f my body the vnworthines of my person the lack of skill in the English tongue the barbarousness of the people nor any other such excuse take place with them wherefore at length I gaue my consent I am come hither into England and haue taken the charge vpon me wherin I find so great trouble and affliction of mind such rediousnes of my soule such want of courage in my self such perturbations such tribulations such afflictions such obdurations such ambition such beastlynesse in others and doe euery day heare see and feele such misery of the Church as it loatheth me to liue and am sory that I haue liued vnto this day For as the euils are great for the present so doe I expect far greater for the time to come c. Wherfore I doe most humble beseech your Highnes euen for Gods sake and for your owne soule that haue bound me to this charge that you will absolue me againe let me returne to my monasticall life which aboue all things in this world I loue and desire and let not me haue denyall in this one petition which hath both piety iustice and necessity in it c. 5. So wrote the Archbishop Lanfrank And that the most of this was meant in respect of difficulties with K. VVilliam himself it may be gathered by that in the same letter he desireth the Pope to pray for the said King VVilliam and among other points Vt cor eius ad amorem suum Sanctae Ecclesia spirituali semper deuotione compungat That God allmighty will stir his heart to loue him and his holy Church and bring it to compunction by spirituall deuotion For this was the thing that King VVilliam had most need of to wit spirituall compunction with a tender conscience whose affections were more out of order commonly then his iudgement which himselfe confessed with great lamentation at his death as you may read in Stow and other Authors For he I meane the King hauing related his hard proceedings in England he said that he was pricked and bitten inwardly with remorse and feare considering that in all these actions saith he cruell rashnesse hath raged And therfore I humbly beseech you ô Priests and ministers of Christ to commend me to the allmightie God that he will pardon my sinnes wherwith I am greatly pressed c. And wheras a little before he had raged in his warres against the Towne of Meaux in France and had burned diuers Churches therin and caused two holie men Anchorites to be burned in their Cells wherin they were included which might seem to be an act of no very good Catholike man God stroke him for it presentlie yet was not this of iudgement but of rage to vse his owne word and he sorely repented the same soone after and sent a great summe of money saith Stow to the Cleargie of Meaux that therby the Churches which he had burned might be repayred 6. And the same might be shewed by a like passionate accicident that fell out on the 13. yeare of his raigne and of Christ 1079. when hauing vpon ielousie of his estate forbidden that anie of his Bishops should goe ouer the sea to Rome Pope Gregorie the 7. wrote a sharpe reprehension therof to be denounced vnto him by Hubert his legat then residing in England saying that it was Irreuerentis impudentis animi praesumptio c. the presumption of an irreuerent and immodest mind to prohibite his Bishops to make recourse to the Sea Apostolike Which reprehension made him so enter into himself as he sent two Embassadours to Rome in Company of the said Hubert when he returned to excuse the matter and shewed himself afterward a most obedient and faithfull child to the said Church euen in that troublesome and tempestious time when Henry the Emperour with all forces impugned the same as appeareth by the letters yet extant of the same Pope Gregorie vnto him 7. Wherfore hauing premissed this for K. VVilliam and all his Successours of the Norman French English race in number aboue twentie for the space well neere of 500. years vntil K. Henry the 8. that whatsoeuer some particular actions of theirs vpon interest anger feare preuention of imagined daungers coÌ„petency or some other such like motiue may seeme to make doubtfull sometimes and in some occasions their iudgment or affection to the supreame Ecclesiasticall power and iurisdiction of the Sea Apostolike of Rome yet were they indeed neuer of anie contrary opinion faith or iudgment but held the very same in this point which all their auncestors the English Kings before the Conquest did and all Christian Princes of the world besides in their dayes And for K. VVilliam Conqueror in particular the seueral reasons that doe ensue may easilie conuince the same Reasons that shew VVilliam Conquerour to haue acknowledged euer the Authoritie of the Sea Apostolicke §. I. 8. First that before he would take in hand or resolue anie thing vpon the enterprice of England as already we hane notedâ— he sent his whole cause to be considered of examined and iudged by Pope Alexander the second shewing him the pretence he had by his affinity to K. Edward the Confessor deceased as also the said Kings election and nomination of him by testament the vnworthines of Harold the inuader the occasion of iust warre which he had giuen him
Canterbury where the glorious body of Thomas the martyr lay where with abundance of teares and sighes going bare-foote and casting himself prostrate on the ground he did demaund pardon and mercie humbly beseeching first that the Bishops there present would absolue him and then that euery religious man would giue him three or fiue strokes of a discipline or whip on his bare flesh then putting one his apparell againe which in all their presence he had put of he rose from the ground and then gaue precious gifts to the said Martyr and his sepulcher and among other forty pounds by the yeare of perpetuall rent for maintenance of lights at the said Sepulcher and so giuing himself to waching fasting prayer for three dayes togeather it is not to be doubted saith he but that the said martyr being pleased with his repentaunce and deuotion God also by his intercession tooke away the Kings sinne So VValsingham 20. And presently in token heerof he saith that the verie same day wherin the King was most deuout in humbling â—imself and kissing the said martyrs Tombe in Canterbury God deliuered into his hands VVilliam King of Scotland who was taken prisoner by his Captaines and that vpon the same day also his rebellious sonne K. Henry the 3. hauing taken shipping to come with a great Nauye into England against him was driuen back by tempest the King himself going to London was receiued with extraordinary ioy of al his people by whose help he soone pacified and conquered all his rebells and thence going presently ouer into Normandy with a great armie and leading prisoner with him the foresaid K. of Scotland with diuers other enemies fallen into his hands hee so terrified the King of France and other his confederates that beseiged the Cittie of Roane as they retired presentlie and his sonnes Henry Richard Geffrey so humbled themselues vnto him as they were reconciled and receiued to grace againe all comming home togeather in one shipp saith VValsingham whom a little before it seemed that the wide world could not containe 21. And this was the effect of K. Henries deuotion at that time which Petrus Blesenâ—is also that was most inward with him doth â—estifie recouÌ„t at large in an epistle to his freind the Archbish. of Palermo in Sicilie wherin hee affirmeth not onlie that K. Henry assured himself that hee had all these good successes by intercession of the said holy martyr S. Thomas but moreouer that hee tooke him for his speciall Patron in all his aduersities Illud quoqâ—â— noueritis saith he Dominum Regem gloriosum martyrem in omnibus angustijs suis Patronum habere praecipuum This also you must know that my Lord the King doth hold the glorious martyr S. Thomas for his cheife Patrone in all his straites and necessities and the same you may read in Nubergensis that liued at the same time though not so intrinsecall with the King as the other And this passed at that tyme though afterward he committing his said Q Eleanor to prison for diuers years before his death and continuing his loose life with other women as hath byn said God for punishment permitted that albeit two of his sonnes Henry and Geffrey died before him yet the other two remaining Richard and Iohn and falling from him againe did so afflict and presse him as they brought him to that desolate end which before hath byn mentioned Though some other doe ascribe the cause heerof not so much to his loose life as to his irreuerent dealing sometymes in Church-matters For so two Bishops that were his Embassadours wrote vnto him in confidence as Petrus Blesensis doth testify saying Non est quod magis hostes vestros incitat ad conflictum quam quod arbitrantur Vos Ecclesia Dei minus extitisse deuotum There is nothing that doth more stir vp or animate your enemyes to fight against you then for that they persuade themselues that you haue sometymes shewed your self lesse deuout towards the Church of God And thus much of K. Henry OF THE RAIGNE OF K. RICHARD THE FIRST The sixt King after the Conquest §. II. 22 For that we haue byn somewhat large in the life of K. Henry the Father we meane to be breefer if it may be in his children who were only two that seruiued him and raigned after him to wit Richard Iohn for that the two other Henry that was crowned and named by him K. Henry and Geffrey Duke of Brittany after their many tumultuations conspiracies disobediences against their said Father died in his life tyme and of these two that liued he had little comforte as before you haue heard 25. And yet proued this Richard no very euill King afterward for the space of ten years that he raigned though vnfortunate both in warre and peace which men ascribe in great parte to the demerit of his owne disobedience against his said Father For punishment wherof both his owne brother Iohn conspired often against him and K. Philip of France hir colleage and confederate brake his faith with him and the Duke of Austria persidiously tooke and held him prisoner in his returne from Ierusalem and Henry the Emperour laid him in fetters and many other miseries followed and fell vpon him vntill at length he was disasterously slaine by a poisoned arrow shot out of a Castle against him as our histories doe testifie 24. But as for his religion it was all wayes truly Catholicke in no point different from that of all Christendome in his dayes And particularly in that which appertaineth to our controuersy he was most obedient deuout to the spiritual authority of the Sea Apostolicke in all his actions which I may proue by the authority of a whole Synod of the Archbishop of Roane and all his Bishops writing to Pope Celestinus the third in recomendatioÌ„ of his cause when he was Captiue sayinge Christianissimus Princeps Rex Angliae illustrissimus Dominus noster deuotissimus Ecclesia Romanae filius quem specialiter in suam protectionem susceperat in sua peregrinatione c. The most Christian Prince Richard King of England and our most honorable Lord and most deuout sonne of the Romaine Church whome the said Church had specially taken into her protection in his iourney to Ierusalem is now vniustly detained c. 25. But if this testimony were not yet all his other life and actions as hath byn said doe sufficiently testifie the same For first to goe in order and name some few of many it is registred by Houeden that liued at that tyme and was present perhaps at his coronation how religiously and humbly he receiued the same at the hands of the Archbishop and Clergy not calling himself King but Duke only vntill he was crowned Cum autem Dux saith he ad altare veniret c. When the Duke came before the Altar in presence of the Archbishops Bishops Clergie and people he first fell downe
sonne Prince Lâ—wes and the Barons of England that made warre against him All whom he first coÌ„maunded to surcease their said warrs and emnities against the said K. Iohn and then for that they obaied not he threatned and â—enounced excommunication against them and besides this he sent his Legat named VVaellâ— to be with K. Iohn and assist him in person in all his needs and necessities which was no small help and comforte vnto him in those distresses And finall in after his death he was a principall cause why his young sonne Henrie the â— was admitted for King notwithstanding the Barons firme resolution promise and oath to the contrarie and that Prince Lawes was forsaken and forced to 〈◊〉 of England the said Legaâ— being made generall Gouernour both of the King and Kingdome for that present togeather with the Earle of 〈◊〉 Lord Marshall of the land 64. And as for the said Barons that so resolutely stoods 〈◊〉 K. Iohn and his succession their cause was about the priuiledged and laws of the Realme as well concerning the Glergie as lay men which were the same priuiledges as they affirmed that were graunted and set downe in King Edwards daies the Confessor confirmed by the Conquerour allowed published againe by K. Henry the first and not disallowed by this mans Father K. Henry the 2. in witnes wherof they produced a Charter of the said K. Henry the first All which liberties laws and ordinances K. Iohn promising them at his first recoÌ„ciliation to giue grâ—inâ— and ratifie was vrged afterward by them to publish the same â—â— writing vnder the great seale of England as he did at Oxford in the presence of al his nobility in the 17. yeare of the said Kingâ— raigne which was the next before his death syaing in the 〈◊〉 writing Ex mera spontanea a voluntate nostra concessimu Charâ—aâ—â—stra coÌ„firmauimus eam obtinuimus à Domino Papa Innocencia confirmâ—n quaÌ„ nos obseruabimus ab haredibus nostris in perpetuuÌ„ bona fide 〈◊〉 obseruari We haue graunted out of our owne meere free good will haue confirmed the same by our Charter and haue contained of Pope Innocentius that he confirme the same also with his assent which Charter both we shall obserue our selues and will haue to bee obserued faithfullie by our heirs for euen behold that K. Iohn doth not onlie confirme these liberties himself but procured the same to be confirmed also by Pope Innocentius for more stabilitie And the beginning of the said liberties it thus set downe Quod Anglicana Ecclesia libera sit habeat iurasâ—â— integra suas libertates illasas maximè libertatem electionum qâ—â— maximae magis necessaria reputatur Ecclesia Anglicunae That the English Church be free and haue all her rights whole and all hâ—â— liberties inuiolate and especiallie her liberties of elections 〈◊〉 choosing her Prelates which is held to bee the greatest and most necessarie to the English Church And then follow the othâ—â— liberties of Barons noble-men and the common people 65. And for that it was vnderstood that notwithstanâ—â—â—â— these two graunts and confirmations of these laws and priuileâ—ges K. Iohn by the counsaile of certaine strangers that weeâ—â—bout him of his Countreyes in France was perswaded to 〈◊〉 the same againe and to informe the Pope wrong fullâ—e 〈◊〉 intentions of the said Barons as though they meane not so 〈◊〉 the conseruation of these priuiledges indeed aâ—â—â—soâ—◠〈◊〉 Kingdome to the King of Fâ—â—nce and the Pope inclining to beâ—â—uâ—e him the said Barons were so much exasperated therby as they made the vow before mentioned neuer to obey him or his anymore And thervpon calling ouer the said Prince Lewes of France gaue him London and all the South-parts of England and would haue gained him the rest in like manner if the Popes resistanes had not byn so great and K. Iohn had not died at that very instant in the heat of all the warre not poisoned by a monke as foolish Iohn Fox doth affirme and set forth in many printed and painted pageants of his booke but vpon greife of mind trauaile and disorder of diet as all auncient authors by vniforme consent doe agree And Iohn Stow citeth foure that liued in K. Iohns dayes to wit Mathew Paris Roger VVyndouer Raph Niger and Raph Gogshall in their histories of that tyme. 66. Wherfore to conclude this Chapter of K. Henry the second and of his two sonnes wee see how firme they were all three in this beleife and acknowledgement of the Popes spirituall authority ouer all the world and no lesse ouer England in those dayes and how fully the same was in practise among them And that albeit in some cases causes wherin they receiued some distast they strugled sometimes about the particular execution therof indeauoring to mak some restraint especially when it seemed to strech indirectly also to temporall affaires yet did they neuer so much as once deny the said Ecclesiasticall supremacy to be in the Sea of Rome and much lesse did euer ascribe it to themselues which so cleerly ouerthroweth M. Attorneys position as I maruaile what he will say to these and like demonstrations 67. And for that his often repeated ground is that Queen Elizabeth had her supreame authority in cases Ecclesiasticall according to the auncient common lawes of England hitherto he graunteth that there was no Statute-lawes at all by Parlament vntill the ensuing King K. Henry the third And for other lawes we see heere what they were by the testimony of the Bishops Barons of England vnder the Charters both of 〈◊〉 K. Henry the first and other Kings vpward vnto K. Edward the Confessor to wit all in fauour of the Church her liberties â—â—nquises and priuiledges which liberties as other where I have noted and must often heerafter doe the same doe infer our conclusion of Ecclesiasticall and spirituall iurisdiction subordinate to the Sea of Rome and wholy distinct from temporall power and doe ouerthrow M. Attorneys assertion for the said spirituall 〈…〉 those liberties were as they were that 〈…〉 should haue iurisdiction in 〈…〉 ctions choise of Prelates of the 〈…〉 liberties are mentioned cited allowed◠〈…〉 by any King as you shall see they were by 〈…〉 them vnto K. Henry the 8. so often receiueâ—◠〈…〉 tion and his whole new books an open out 〈…〉 field And thus much of K. Iohn OF KING HENRY THE THIRD That vvas the eight King after the Conquestâ—â—â— And the first that left Statutes vvritten And vvhaâ— instances and arguments M. Attorney alleadgeth out of him for his purpose CHAP. X. HITHERTO haue we passed ouer six hundred 〈◊〉 since our first English king receâ—ued and therby put themselues vnder the of 〈…〉 Bishops depending therof for 〈◊〉 of their 〈◊〉 Which Spirituall 〈…〉 haue byn euer beleeued 〈…〉 both Kings and Subiect from the 〈…〉 their lawes and continued by su 〈…〉 Which as it hath byn
iudge of such possessions as depend of legitimation we commaund your brotherhoods that leauing the iudgment of the said possessions to the King and his Courts you examine onlie the principall cause concerning the loialtie of the marriage it self and determine the same 43. Heerby then wee see first that M. Attorney alleadging this instance hath alleadged nothing at all against vs or for himself For that when the Earls and Barons refused to change the laws of England concerning inheritance vpon legitimation they said no more then is allowed them by the Canon-law it self as you haue heard And how will M. Attorney inferre of this that K. Henry the third held himself to haue supreme authority ecclesiasticall for that this must be his conclusion out of his instance or els he saith nothing 44. And it shall not be amisse to note by the way how these men doe vse to ouer-lash in their asseueratioÌ„s to help their feeble cause thereby By the auncient Canons and Decrees of the Church of Rome saith he the issue borne before solemnization of marriage is as lawfull and inheritable marriage following as the issue borne after marriage But this is not sincerely related For the Canon-law as you haue heard putteth diuers restrictions both in the persons to be legitimated and in the ends and effects whervnto they are legitimated as also concerning the Countries Kingdomes wherin they are legitimated Of all which variety of circumstances and considerations M. Attorney saying nothing his intention therin may easily be ghessed at And so much for this matter OF THE LIVES AND RAIGNES OF KING EDVVARD The first and second Father and sonne And what arguments M. Attorney draweth from them towards the prouing of his purpose CHAP. XI HAVING now come downe by orderly descent of seauen hundred yeares more of the raignes of our Christian English Kings shewed them all to haue byn of one and the self same Catholicke Roman religion comforme also in the point of this our controuersie about the acknowledgement and practise of the spirituall power and authoritie of the Sea Apostolicke in England concerning ecclesiasticall affaires And hauing declared the same so largely as you haue heard in three Henries since the Conquest of famous memory and authoritie aboue the rest and the last of them author also and parent of all Statute-law in our Realme we are to examine now in order three Edwardes lineally succeeding the one to the other and all three proceeding from this last named Henry Vnder which Edwardes and their ofspring M. Attorney preteÌ„deth more restraint to haue byn made in some points of the Popes externall iurisdiction then vnder former Kings which though it be graunted vpon some such occasions as after shal be shewed yet will you fynd the matter far shorte of that conclusion which he pretendeth to maintayne that hereby they tooke vpon them spirituall soueraingty in causes Ecclesiasticall You shall see it by the triall OF KING EDVVARD THE FIRST VVhich vvas the nynth King after the Conquest §. I. 2. When King Henry the third dyed his eldest sonne Prince Edward was occupied in the wars of the Holy land being then of the age of thirty three yeares who hearing of his Fathers death retourned presently homeward and passing by the Citty of Rome found there newly made Pope Gregory the tenth called before Theobald with whome in tymes past he had familiarly byn acquainted whiles he was Legate for his predecessor Vrbane the fourth in the said warrs of the Holy-land who receaued him with all honour and loue and graunted vnto him saith Stow the tenth of all Ecclesiasticall benefices in England as well temporall as spirituall for one yeare the like to his brother Edmund for an other in recompence of their expences made in the Holy-land Whervpon when the next yeare after the said Gregory called a generall Councell at Lions in France which was the second held in that place of aboue fiue hundred Bishops and a thousand other Prelates King Edward sent also a most honourable embassage thither both of Bishops and Noble-men 3. This King Edward beginning his raigne in the yeare of Christ 1272. continued the same for almost 35. yeares with variable euents For as he was a tall and goodly Prince in person high in stature and thereof surnamed Long-shanke so was he in mynd also no lesse war-like haughty earnest and much giuen to haue his owne will by any meanes whatsoeuer when once he set himself theron though yet when he was in calme out of passion he shewed himself a most religious and pious Prince 4. Of the later may be example among other things his speciall deuotion to the Blessed Virgin mother of our Sauiour which both Mathew VVestminster and VValsingham doe recount from the very beginning of his raigne doe coÌ„tinue the same throughout his life by occasion of many strange and miraculous 〈◊〉 from imminent dangers which himself ascribed to the said dâ—uotion and to our Blessed Ladies speciall protection Wherevnto may be referred in like maÌ„ner the piety of the said King shewed in diuers other occasions As first of all when in the first yeare of his raigne he voluntarily set forth published and confirmed the Great Charter made by his Father in fauour of the Church saying as in the said Charter is to be read Pro salute animae nostrae animarum antecessorum successorum nostroruus Regum Angliae ad exaltationem Sanctae Ecclesiae emendationem Regni nostri spontanea bona reluntate nostra dedimus concessinius c. We haue giuen and graunted freely of our owne good will this Charter for the health of our soule and of the soules as well of our predecessours as successours Kings of England to the exaltation of holy Church and amendment of our Kidgdome c. 5. And the like piety he shewed in many other occasions in like manner as namely when he being in his iourney with a great army towards Scotland and his wife Q. Eleanor daughter to King Ferdinand the third of Spaine surnamed the Saint a most vertuous religious Lady falling sicke dying neere the borders therof he leauing his course retourned backe with her dead body to London Cunctis diebus vitae suae eam plangebat saith Walsingham Iesum benignum iugis precibus pro ea interpellabat eleemosynarum largitiones Missarum celebrationes pro ea diuersis Regni locis ordinans in perpetuum procurans The King did bewayle this Queenes death all the dayes of his life and did by continual prayers call vpon mercifull Iesus to vse mercy towards her ordeyning great store of almes to be giuen for her as also procuring Masses to be said for her soule in diuers partes of the Kingdome 6. And moreouer in all the places where the said body rested as it came to London he erected great goodly crosses in her memory Vt à transeuntibus saith VValsingham
We read also that when in the yeare 1299. King Edward was passed ouer with a great army into Flanders and did destroy that Countrey by fire and sword Pope Boniface sent two Cardinall-Legates to entreat him that he would be content to make truce for two yeares to the intent that peace in the meane time might be concluded adding further-more saith our Author paenam excommunicationis interdicti terrarum suarum the payne of excommunication and Interdict of his countreys if he yeelded not therevnto Sed Rex perpendens c. consensit in treguas indictas saith he the King considering well all circumstances c. did consent vnto the truce appointed by the Pope And wheras the next yeare after by other messengers sent vnto him in Canterb. the said Pope Boniface desired him to put at liberty Iohn King of Scotland which he had in hold assuring him that the King of England should leâ—se nothing by this Eorum petitioni Rex condescendens respondit se ipsum loannem tanquam seductorem falsum periurum ad Papam missurum The King condescending to their petition made answere that he would send the said Iohn as a false periured deceauer vnto the Pope to be punished by him And so he did and they caried him into France with them 18. And when afterward in the yeare 1301. King Edward was busily attent to his warrs in Scotland and Pope Boniface enformed by the grieuous complaints of the Scottish-men that K. Edward did them iniury wrote and gaue in commission to the Archbishop of Canterbury by an expresse messenger named Humbert to goe vnto the King and will him to desiste and to remit the iustice of the matter to be examined and tryed by the Sea Apostolicke anyd though the said King for the present tooke the matter very grieuously and sware that he would prosecute his said enterprize to the vttermost yet a little while after in the same yeare he sent the Earle of Lincolne and Syr Hugh Spencer to the said Sea Apostolicke to shew the right of his cause and what iniuries he had receaued at the Scots hands Iusuper Dominum Papam deprecarentur ne mendacij fabricatoribus sinum aperiret And that moreouer they should beseech the Pope that he would not open his bosome of beliefe vnto the Scottish-men that deuised lyes wherevnto the Pope hearkening wished notwithstanding that the King for his cause would giue the truce for a tyme by him assigned wherevnto the King yeelded 19. And when in the yeare following the said Pope Bonifacius vpon instance of the said Scottish-men wrote more earnestly to K. Edward in this affayre alleadging that Scotland was in the protection of the Sea Apostolicke yea and that it apperteyned also to the temporal right of the Church by submission belike of the Prince and inhabitants thereof at that tyme made the King gathering a Parlament at Lincolne determined therin first to write himself to the Pope about this matter and then that the lay-nobility and people should write another letter somewhat more earnestly to the same effect The Kings letter began thus Sanctissimo in Christo Patri Domino Bonifacio diuina prouidentia Sancta Romanae vniuersalis Ecclesiae summo Pontifici Edwardus Dei gratia Rex Angliae salutem deuota pedum oscula beatorum To the most holy father in Christ Boniface by Gods prouidence supreme Bishop of the holy Romane and vniuersall Church Edward by the grace of God King of England sendeth greeting and the deuout kissing of his blessed feete By which title we may see in what estimation he held the Pope at that day albeit in that letter he doth protest that he doth not send this his iustification for his pretence to Scotland in forme of iudgement to haue it tryed by the Sea Apostolicke as making any doubte therof but only to enforme his Holines conscience which he doth very largely beginning from the comming of Brutus himself into England yet doth he conclude beseeching him not to beleeue the informations of his aduersaryes and emulators Sed Statum nostrum iura nostra Regia supradicta habere velitis si placet paternis affectibus commendata That it may please you to haue our State and Kingly right before laid downe recommended to your fatherly affection 20. But the Earles and Barons and lay nobility of the land that wrote a seuerall letter to the Pope as before hath byn said were more earnest in defence of the Kings title saying Manu tenebimus cum toto posse totisque viribus c. We will hold and defend the same with all our power and forces nor will we permit our King though he would to leaue of this title Quocirca Sanctitati Vestrae reuerenter humiliter supplicamus c. Wherefore we doe reuerently and humbly make supplication to your Holines that you will defend our said King that is a deuout sonne of the Catholicke Romane Church as also his rightes libertyes customes and lawes and permit him to continew therin without diminution or molestation c. Giuen at Lincolne 1301. 21. And by all this now we may perceaue the state of things in our countrey at that time as also the sense and iudgement of K. Edward and his realme about this our controuersie of spiritual and Ecclesiasticall authority And that if this King did vse sometymes some rigorous dealing towards the Clergy it was not for that he doubted of their spirituall authority or esteemed the same to be in himself but partly vpon his forsaid necessity of warre and partly for the emulation conceaued against them by the laity for their wealth and other such causes And as for the lawes which he made in their preiudice as that of Mort-main wherby is prohibited that any thing shall passe ad manum mortuam that is to say to any of their communityes that pay not tribute to the King without the Kings speciall licence some other lawes in like manner for restraint as it seemed of their externall iurisdiction in certaine affaires it proceeded of the same emulation and complaints of the subiects begun in the time of King Henry the third as you haue heard and continued in this mans dayes as also in the dayes of diuers of his succesors But this is nothing to our question in hand though M. Attorney hath nothing else but such matter as this as presently you shall see for now shall we passe to his obiections vnder this King which are foure of very small moment as by handling will appeare The Attorney In the raigne of K. Edward the first a subiect brought in a Bull of excommunication against another subiect of this Realme and published it to the Lord Treasurer of England and â—his was by the auncient common-law of England adiudged treason against the King his Crowne and dignity for the which the offender should haue byn drawne and hanged but at the great instance of the
lost during his life which iudgement was before any Statute or Act of Parlament was made in that case And there it is said that for the like offence the Archbishop of Canterbury had byn in worse case by the iudgement of the Sages of the law then to be punished for a contempt if the King had not extended grace and fauour to him The Catholicke Deuine 26. Here againe is another case or two de facto wherof M. Attorney wil needs inferre de iure The Archbishop of Yorke his lands saith he were seased by the King and lost during his life for that he admitted not to a benefice within his Diocesse a Clerke presented by the King whereas the same benefice had an incumbent before put in by the Popes prouision according to the custome of those dayes which incumbent the said Archbishop pleaded that he could not put out and for this high contempt against the King his crowne and dignity in refusing to execute his soueraignes commaundement saith M. Attorney by iudgement of the Common-law he lost the landes of his whole Bishopricke But here I would aske M. Attorney what high contempt could this be against the King his crowne and dignity if the Archbishop pleaded that he could not doe it eyther in right or in power Not in right for that nothing was more receaued at that tyme in England then for the Bishop of Rome to prouide certayne benefices in England and not only benefices but also Bishopricks and Archbishopricks as before in the life of this King and his ancestours hath byn declared And as for power no maruaile if the Archbishop durst not vse violence in those dayes against the Popes prouisions wherby he might incurre excommunication for so much as the King himself so greatly respected the same and made such diligent premunition least my such excommunication should come against him as in the answere to the former instance hath byn declared 17. And besides this if the Archbishop did put the matter in plea to be trayed and to the Kings writt of Quare non admisit did yeelde so reasonable a cause as is here touched that the King himself had admitted diuers Bishops and Archbishops by like prouision of Popes how and with what reason can M. Attorney call this answere of the Archbishop so high a contempt against the King his crowne and dignitie Or how could the Common-law condemne the same with so great a punishment And still I must demaund what is this Common-law by whome was it made how came it in where is it founded either in reason vse consent of the people or authority of law-giuers For if it consist in none of these but only in the particular will and iudgement of the Prince himself neuer so passionate and in the approbation execution of these Sages which here M. Attorney mentioneth then any thing that displeased the said Prince may be called high contempt against his person crowne and dignity And so may be iustified all the most passionate actions not only of this King Edward before recited but of all other Kings whosoeuer And by the same meanes M. Attorney maketh his auncient Cōmon-law which often he calleth our birth-right and best birth-right to be nothing else in effect but the Princes pleasure frō time to time and the execution of his Sages which commonly in those auncient times for I will speake nothing of our dayes were to wise and Sage to withstand the Princes will in any thing 28. Sure I am that in this particular fact of seasing Bishops lands and temporalityes vpon any offence or displeasure taken by the King as it hath byn vsed by some English Princes in their anger so hath it bin condemned also in diuers Parlaments lawes and Statutes as in the first yeare of King Edward the third where it is thus expressed Because before this time in the time of King Edward Father to the King that now is he by euill Counsellours caused to be seased into his handes the temporalty of diuers Bishoppes with their goods and cattell c. The King willeth and graunteth that from hence forth it be not done c. And againe in the 14. yeare of the same raigne VVe will and graunt for vs and for our heires that from henceforth we shall not take nor doe to be taken into our handes the temporalities of Archbishops Bishops Abbot c. without a true and iust cause according to the law of the land c. 29. And to the end that M. Attorney may not say that this case of his is excepted it followeth in an other Statute in the 25. yeare of the same King saying VVhereas the temporalities of Archbishops and Bishops haue beene oftentimes taken into the Kings hand for contempt done to him vpon writts of Quare non admisit and for diuers other causes c. The King willeth and graunteth in the said Parlament that all Iustices shall from henceforth receaue for the contempt so iudged reasonable fyne of the party so condemned according to the quantity of the trespasse and after the quality of the contempt c. Which last words may be thought to be added for that the King had right to present to diuers benefices at that tyme as particular patrone therof ex iure patronatus for that the said benefices were fouuded or erected by himself or his auncestors and in those cases the Bishops not admitting such Clerkes as he presented might doe some iniury or trespasse against him and therin shew contempt worthy some fyne or for-faite which the law doth here appoint especially for so much as it is be ore recorded that Pope Innocentius the 4. presently vpon the first Councell of Lyons wrote as you haue heard in the life of K. Henry the third that he would not let by his prouision the right of any patrone in presenting to any benefice wherof he had the aduowson or Ius patronatus 30. And as for the other example alleadged heere by M. Attorney for strengthning his instance of the Archbishop of Canterbury saying that for the like offence the Archbishop of Canterbury had byn in worse case by the iudgement of the Sages of the law then to be punished for a contempte if the King had not extended grace and fauour to him If he vnderstand the displeasure taken against Archbishop VVinchelsey before mentioned by K. Edward for resisting his demaund of the one halfe of all Ecclesiasticall rents for which before we haue heard out of Mathew of VVestminster that all his lands and goods were seased into the Kings hands you haue heard also how the same King afterward repented both that and other like facts of his and asked pardon publikly with teares But if he meane the other offence againe after this when he accused the said Archbishop VVinchelsey to the Pope and caused him to be called to Rome and to be suspended from his office as before we haue declared then doth this
notorious and might be declared by infinite examples that â— remained now as before vnder all other Catholicke Princes For among other points we reade that when in the yeare of Christ 1312. Robert VVinchelsey Archbishop of Canterbury dyed the Monkes of that place according to the custome chose by the liking and procuration of the King one Thomas Cobham a man of eminent learning and vertue who going to Auinion in France where Pope Clement the fifth lay at that tyme to receaue his confirmation and inuestiture as the manner was in those dayes the said Pope told him that long before in the other Archbishops life he had reserued the collation of that Archbishopricke to himself for that tyme and therevpon pronounced that election to be voyde adding further this coÌ„sideration that England being â—â— that day in great troubles and disgust for that many Lords Barons had shewed their mislike against the King and the King against them it was needfull to haue in that place of Canterbury a man of great credit and experience in such affaires and therefore named one VVilliam Reynoldes Bishop of VVorcester and Chancellour of the Realme at that day and presently sent him both his inuestiture and pall wherewith the King and Queene being greatly contented were present at his consecration and so he liued and gouerned 19. yeares after in that Sea with great commendation So as we see that the restraint of Papall prouisions made at Carliele vnder this mans father was not yet put in practice 46. And the like reseruatioÌ„ we read that Pope Iohn the 22. made of the Bishopricke of VVinchester afterward in the yeare 1320. and therby did disanull the election made by the Monkes of that place with consent of the King and placed another of his owne choice which the King also after some time admitted So as this was very ordinary in those dayes We reade likewise that in the yeare 1324. a Parlament being called at London and King Edward growing now by euill counsaile of the Spencers and others into great disorder he caused one Adam Bishop of Hereford that fauoured not his proceedings to be arrested of treason brought forth publickely to be tryed laying to his charge that he had â—â—ceaued and fauoured diuerse of those Barons which had taken armes against him But the forsaid Archbishop of Canterbury and his brethren Bishops seeing this disorder made first humble supplication to the King that he might be tryed according to his place degree and that not preuayling they required the same by law according to the liberties and priuiledges of the Church confirmed by Magna charta other lawes of the Realme Whervpon he was deliuered to the custody of the said Archbishop of Canterbury but afterward he being called for againe by the instigation of such as were his enemyes and carryed to the barre the said Archbishop of Canterbury and the other of Yorke with ten other Bishops went thither in iudiciall maÌ„ner with their crosses borne before them commaunding vnder paine of excommunication that no man should stay him or lay hands on him and so tooke him away to the Archbishops custody againe Whereby we may see in what vigour Ecclesiasticall power was at this day in England And albeit the King being in passion did storme greatly thereat and seased presently vpon all the said Bishops goods and lands as he had done vpon those of the Bishop of Lincolne and of others before yet could he not deny but that this was law iustice which the Bishops did according to the Ecclesiasticall priuiledges of the Realme whervnto the King himself and all his ancestours in their coronations had solemnely sworne For breaking wherof it may be presumed that so great a punishment fell vpon him as soone after ensued to the horror of the whole world by depriuation both of his Kingdome and life And so much of him Now let vs see what instance M. Attorney can draw from him to his purpose It is but one and thus it runneth in his owne words The Attorney 47. Albeit by the ordinance of Circumspectè agatis made in the 18. yere of Edward the first and by generall allowance and vsage the Ecclesiasticall Courtes held plea of tythes obuentions oblations mortuaries redemptions of pennaunce laying of violent handâ— vpon a Clerke defamations c. yet did not the Clergy thinke themselues assured nor quiet from prohibitions purchased by subiectes vntill that King Edward the second by his letters parents vnder the great seale in by consent of Parlament vpon the petitions of the Clergy had graunted vnto them to haue iurisdiction in these cases The King in a Parlament holden in the â— yeare of his raigne after particular answers made to their petitions concerning the matter aboue said doth graunt and giue his Royall assent in these words We desiring as much as of right we may to prouide for the state of the Church of England the tranquillity and quiet of the Prelates of the said Clergy to the honour of God and the amendment of the State of the said Church and of the Prelates and Clergy ratifying and approuing all and singular the said answers which appeare in the said act and all and singular things in the said answeres conteyned we doe for vs and our heires graunt and commaund that the same be inuiolably kept for euer willing and graunting for vs and our heires that the said Prelates and Clergy and their Successours for euer doe exercise Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in the premisses according to the tenour of the said answere The Catholicke Deuine 48. If a man would aske M. Attorney in this place why he hath brought in this instance and what he would proue therby I thinke verily he would be much graueled in answering especially if we respecte his principall Conclusion that by this and like presidence Q. Elizabeth might take vpon her supreme authority Ecclesiasticall for that by this narration nothing else is declared but that a certaine abuse being crept in that when any externall matter seeming any way to belong to temporalityes was handled in Ecclesiasticall Courtes and by Ecclesiasticall Iudges the party that feared or suspected his owne cause would informe the Kings Courtes that the matter belonged to them and therevpon would get out a prohibition from the Chauncery to sursease in that cause vntill it were tryed to which Court it belonged By which deceytfull and malitions proceeding of some much trouble was procured and many causes rested indetermined both in the one and the other Courte for so saith the Statute it self made in the time of King Edward the first this mans Father in these words VVhereas Ecclesiasticall Iudges haue oftentymes surceased to proceed in cases moued before them by force of the Kings writ of prohibition c. to the great damage of many as the King hath byn aduertised by the grieuous complaints of his subiects c. For this cause many orders and Statutes were
and little pertinent as you will see to the manie conclusion which he should proue that this King did take supreme spirituall authority and iurisdiction vpon him And for that the grounds of all that is heer obiected haue byn discussed and answered in that wee haue set downe before and this booke groweth to more length then was purposed at the beginning and finally for that the law-bookâ—◠〈◊〉 cited of collections and obseruations by later authors which bookes I haue not by mee are of small authority to our purpose I shall passe ouer the said obiections with the greatest breuity that I can remitting mee for the most part to that which before hath byn said and answered The Attorney An excommunication by the Archbishop albeit it be disanulled by the Pope or his Legats is to be allowed neither ought the Iudges giue any allowance of any such sentence of the Pope or his Legate The Catholicke Deuine 15. This assertion I doe not see how it can be admitted for true as it lieth for so much as no author maketh mention that K. Edward did euer deny absolutely the Popes authority to excommunicate by himself or by his Legats in England especially vpon the 16. yeare of his raigne as heere it is noted in the margent when he was most deuout to the Sea Apostolicke wrote the humble letter before mentioned the next yeare after according to the date of the said letter as you haue heard only there might be this accorde between them for more authority of the said Archbishop and peace of the Realme that when he had giuen forth any excommunication no annullation therof from the Pope which might perhaps be procured by false suggestion should be admitted or executed vntill the Pope were informed of the truth this is vsed also in other Catholicke Kingdomes at this day 16. And it were to much simplicity to imagine that English men in those dayes admitting the Archbishops excommunication as heer they doe and for confirmation therof we doe read in VValsingham that vpon the yeare 1340. and 14. of King Edwards raigne Iohn Stratford Archbishop of Canterbury threatned the said King to excommunicate all his counsell if he amended not certaine points wherin they offered iniury to Clergy men it were simplicity I say to thinke that the said Archbishops excommunication could not be controlled by that of the Pope from whom they acknowledged the said Archbishop at that time to haue his spirituall authority if he had any at all For froÌ„ whence should they imagine him to haue it for that the Kings as we haue seen had not so much as the nomination or presentation of Archbishops in that season but only the Popes much lesse their induction confirmation or inuestiture Whervpon it must needs follow that he which gaue them spirituall iurisdiction had greater higher iurisdiction himself though in some cases by agreement not to be vsed as before hath byn said The Attorney It is often resolued that all the Bishopricks within England were founded by the Kings progenitours and therfore the aduowsons of them all belong to the King and at the first they were donatiue and that if an incumbent of any Church with Cure dy if the Patron present not within six moneths the Bishop of that Diocesse ought to collate to the end the Cure may not be destitute of a Pastor If he be negligent by the space of six moneths the Metropolitan of that Diocesse shall confer one to that Church and if he also leaue the Church destitute by the space of six moneths then the Common-law giueth to the King as to the supreme within his owne Kingdome and not to the Bishop of Rome power to prouide a competent pastor for that Church The Catholicke Deuine 17. Is it be true which M. Attorney hath so often repeated before that the Conusaunce and deciding of Ecclesiasticall causes doe not appertaine to the Common-law and that the prouision or induction of Clerks to benefices and giuing them spirituall iurisdiction ouer the soules of those that be within the compasse of that benefice be of the number of those causes which I take to be set downe in like manner by M. Attorneys owne pen before vnder the names of admissions and institutions of Clerks then how can it be true which heere is said that the Common-law giueth to the King as to the supreme to prouide competent Pastors for that or those Churches that within the space of a yeare and halfe are not prouided by the particular patron Diocesian or metropolitan Or where is this Common-law How or when did it begin as often elswhere I haue demaunded Either by vse or statute or common agreement between the Prince and people For none of these haue we heard of hitherto vnder former Kings though for presenting and nomination to benefices we haue oftentymes said that there is no difficulty but that the temporall Prince may present in such benefices or Bishopricks as he is patron of either founding the said benefices or by particular concession of the Sea Apostolicke vnto him as we haue shewed more largly before in the life of K. VVilliam the Conquerour and before him againe vnder K. Edward the Confessor to whom the Sea of Rome in those dayes gaue spirituall iurisdiction also in some cases ouer the Abbey of VVestminster some other places of his Realme 18. But that the Common-law should dispose of these things and especially giue spiritual iurisdiction to the King ouer benefices for so must the meaning of M. Attorney be if he delude not his Reader with equiuocation of words this I say is both contrary to his owne rule before set downe and much more to reason For that to giue Ecclesiasticall iurisdictiom is much more then to haue the conusaunce of Ecclesiasticall causes which he denying to his Common-law in diuers places of his booke as before we haue seen caÌ„not in reasoÌ„ ascribe to th' other 19. Wherefore though we graunt this graduation heer set dovvne as good and conueuient that if the particular patron doe not present within six moneths nor the Ordinary or Metropolitan within their tymes prescribed the Prince as supreme gouernour of the Common-wealth to see all things done in due order may present as if he were patron to the said benefice yet first this cannot come originally from the Common-law for the reasons alleadged Secondly this proueth no spirituall iurisdiction at all in any presentor but only power of presentation which may be in any man that hath Ius patronatus allowed by the Church and head therof as before hath byn said Thirdly much lesse doth this proue supreme authority spirituall in the Prince as M. Attorney would inferre which is euident among other reasons by this For that the Prince when he doth present in this manner by lapse of tyme or omission of others is the last in power of presentation after the Metropolitans and Bishops which yet
cases of heresie hath no substance in it at all for so much as you see it was directed by the Canon law long before K. Henry was borne 15. Wherefore to his last instance that the Pope cannot alter the laws of England I answere it is true touching temporall laws for they are to be made or altered by the English Prince and Parlament but Ecclesiasticall laws of the Church if they be positiue not deuine he might in all those auncient times vpon iust causes alter as I thinke M. Attorney will not deny and then by good consequence if it be true which euery where he striueth to proue that Ecclesiasticall laws though made by the Pope are laws also of England and may be called English lawes when they are admitted in England it followeth I say against himself in this assertion that the Pope might alter the lawes of England in that he might alter those Canon-lawes that were admitted in England thereby made English lawes The Attorney 1. The Iudges say that the Statutes which restraine the Popes prouisions to the benefices of the aduowsons of spirituall men were made for that the spiritualty durst not in their iust cause say against the Popes prouisions so as those Statutes were made but in affirmance of the common laws 2. Excommunication made by the Pope is of no force in England and the same being certified by the Pope into any Courte in England ought not to be allowed neither is any certificate of any excommunication auailable in law but that is made by some Bishop in England for the Bishops are by the common laws the immediate officers ministers of iustice to the Kings Courts in causes Ecclesiasticall 3. If any Bishop doe excommunicate any person for a cause that belongeth not vnto him the King may write vnto the Bishop and commaund him to assoile and absolue the party 4. If any person of religion obtaine of the Bishop of Rome to be exempt from obedience regular or ordinary he is in case of Premunire which is an offence as hath byn said contra Regem Coronam Dignitatem suam The Catholicke Deuine 16. I haue conioyned three or foure obiections togeather for that indeed all make not the due waight of one Wherfore to the first I answere that little it importeth to our controuersie what those Iudges said why the Statutes were made against the Popes prouisions in affirmance of the Common-laws for this may be said of euery new Statute whatsoeuer that it is made in affirmance of ancient Common-law albeit the said law supposed to be common no where appeare nor any reason proofe or probability be alleadged why it should be Common-law before that fact or Statute appeared So as this Common-law is now by M. Attorney made so common as it cometh to be Ens transcendens embracing all that is or can be deuised by any of his Iudges or Reuerend Sages or rather he maketh it Ens rationis or a meere Chymera that as Logitians hold hath no essence or being at all à parte rei but only in imagination For seing that the Popes prouisions had endured in England for so many ages before as all doe and must graunt how may the common law be presumed all that while to haue byn against the same yet no mention euer made therof These are morall impossibilityes to say no more 17. The second point doth answere it self and we haue touched the same before that by agreement in England the Popes Buls of Excommunication when they were sent should not be admitted ordinarily but by the certificate of some Bishop of England for preuenting the fraudes or false suggestions which particular men might vse therein And wheras M. Attorney heere againe saith that the Bishops are by the Common lawes the immediate officers and ministers to the Kings Courtes in causes Ecclesiasticall he runneth againe to his old Chymera of imaginary Common lawes For where is this Common-law that maketh Bishops to be officers and ministers to the Kings Courts in causes Ecclesiasticall For if the Common-law or Iudges thereof cannot so much as heare or take conusaunce of any spiritual causes belonging to Bishops Courts as often M. Attorney affirmeth in this his booke how much lesse can it or they by vertue therof appoint Iudges or make them officers in those spirituall Courts which haue their authority from the Canon and not Common lawes 18. To the third obiection little answere is needfull For who seeth not but that euery King in his Kingdome may commaund all â—â—â—es of people to doe their duty to surcease from wrong And so if a Bishop for a cause not belonging vnto him should excommunicate any the Prince may commaund him to absolue 〈◊〉 party whome vniustly he hath excommunicated if the iniustice bee so apparant as heere is presumed But M. Attorney should haue proued that the King himself might haue absolued him as in truth he might if he had Superiour authority to the Bishop in Ecclesiasticall causes as he may absolue immediately by himself all that are censured or sentenced adiudged or condemned by his Chauncellour lay Iudges or temporall officers and ministers nor hath he need to send the party to be assoiled by them or to will them to doe it as heer he doth the Bishop but might doe it himself or by some other giuing him authority thervnto which yet neuer King of England did attempt before King Henry the 8. 19. To the 4. braunch is answered that by good reason it was agreed that no religious man hauing made his vow of obedieÌ„ce in England should seeke to Rome for exemption therof without proposing his causes first in England it self for that otherwise vpon false informations suggestions of the party against his Superiours many troubles and inconueniences might follow by such exemptions and this is that which is touched in the Statute it self here alleadged affirming that no man shall goe to Rome for that which may be determined in England c. And now consider I pray you what all these foure instances laid togeather doe weigh in poyse of good reason But let vs see further 20. A fourth instance of M. Attorneys is taken out of a Statute of the 6. yeare of K. Henry the 4. where the commons doe againe make complaint of other new aggreiuances by the Courte of Rome to wit that such as are to be preferred to Bishopricks Archbishopricks and other Prelacyes cannot be admitted vntill they haue compounded with the Popes Chamber for paying of the first fruites of the said benefices and other dutyes required vvhervpon the King saith the Statute by the aduise and assent of the Great men of his Realme in Parlament and note that he nameth not heer the spirituall Lords did ordaine that whosoeuer should pay heerafter to the said Chamber or otherwise for such fruites and seruices greater summes of money then had byn accustomed in time past
is a lawyer and delighteth in the word that hath byn so beneficiall vnto him but yet alleadgeth here no law at all nor can he doe For what law is that by iugment wherof the Sanctuarie of S. Iohns Church in London grauÌ„ted by the Pope was disalowed for so much as all other Sanctuaries had and haue from that Sea their franquises and liberties Was it Common-law or Canon and Ecclesiasticall Not Ecclesiasticall For that all such law dependeth from thence and consequently cannot be supposed to haue disanulled the Popes authority in graunting Sanctuary Common law if it were it must appeare how it came in by whom it was admitted by what right it came to haue conusauÌ„ce of this Ecclesiasticall cause which M. Attorney so often hath denyed before to apperteyne to his Common-law wherof ensueth that eyther those temporall Iudges exceeded their limites in handling this cause or that there was some temporall circumstance therein that brought it into that Courte 10. And surely it may bee that this Sanctuarie pretended by the Prior of the Knights of S. Iohns in London might not onlie bee the ordinary Sanctuarie of their Church and appurtenances thereunto which all Churches haue by Canon law more or lesse but also of some greater circuite round about their said Church and habitatioÌ„ which they being Knights and souldiars might importe some inconueniences to the common wealth by occasion of contentions fights brawles that might there fall out the temporall officers hauing no accesse by reason of the said pretended Sanctuary And so this case not being meere spirituall but mixt also with temporall interest of the Common-wealth the common Iudges vntill the matter were better discussed and resolued in ecclesiasticall right might put difficultie about the admission or execution of the said priuiledges without the Kings expresse consent And this is answered according to M. Attorneys allegation supposing it to bee sincere not hauing by me the bookes as before I haue said out of which he hath taken the same the view whereof no doubt would discouer more therfore I recommend the examination to the Reader that may haue commoditie to see and read the places But let vs see another Instance of two more of his out of this Kinges raigne The Attorney There it appeareth that the opinion of the Kings-bench had been oftentimes that if one spirituall person sue another spirituall man in the Courte of Rome for a matter spirituall where he might haue remedy before his Ordinary that is the Bishop of that Diocesse within the Realme Quia trabit ipsum in placitum extraregnum incurreth the dauÌ„ger of a Premunire a hainons offence being contra legiantiae suae debitum in contemptum Domini Regis contra â—oronam dignitatem suas By which it appeareth how greiuous an offence it was against the King his Crowne and dignity if any subiect although both the persons cause were spirituall did seeke for iustice out of the Realme as though either there wanted iurisdiction or iustice was not executed in the Ecclesiastical Courts within the same which as it hath byn said was an high offence contra Regem Coronam dignitatem suas The Catholicke Deuine By this instance a man may greatly suspect that M. Attorney dealeth not sincerely but amplifieth and exaggerateth matters to his purpose But howsoeuer this bee cleere it is that he dealeth not substantially For heere only the note alleadged saith that the opinion of the Kings-bench had byn oftentymes that if one spirituall or Ecclesiasticall person should sue another in the Courte of Rome when he might haue remedy before his Ordinary at home he incurreth the daunger of a Premunire for that he draweth a Plea out of the Kingdome without necessity Well then this is but the opinion of some temporall lawyers of the Kings-bench that a man that should doe this should be in daunger of a Premunire for that he draweth a Plea out of the Kingdome when he might haue sufficient remedy by his spirituall Iudge at home And this is according to the Statutes before made vnder King Edward the third and Richard the second as you haue heard that matters may not be carryed to Rome at the first instance but by way of appellation when they cannot haue iustice at home And this taketh not away the Popes authority as you see but rather confirmeth the same and punisheth only disorderly people that will vex and trouble men with citing them to Rome without necessitie 12. Which being so you will see how friuolous M Attorneys exaggeration is heer in painting out vnto vs with so great an hyperbole of words this haynons offence against the duty of loyalty in contempt of the King our Lord and contrary to his crowne and dignity c. And why is all this adoe For that saith he a subiect of the realme doth seeke for iustice out of the Realme in spirituall causes as though there wanted iurisdiction or iustice within the Realme which is an high offence contra Regem coronam dignitatem suas Whereto I aunswere that what high offence it may be against suas here twise repeated in the English but corrected by the Latyn Interpreter I know not but sure I am that against King Crowne or Royall dignity it can be none no more in England then in other Catholicke Kingdomes round about vs. And the reason here alleadged by M. Attorney excludeth all appellations betwene subordinate Courts as wel within the Realme as without if it should be admitted and taken for good Wherefore when he writeth in the margent Note as though some great argument were alleadged for his purpose It is a note that he hath small store of substance to note when he standeth so much vpon such a toy The Attorney In the Kings Courts of Record where felonies are determined the Bishop or his deputy ought to giue his attendance to the end that yf any that is indicted and arraigned for felony doe demaund the benefit of his Clergy that the Ordinary may informe the Court of his sufficiency or insufficiency that is whether he can read as a Clarke or not wherof notwithstanding the Ordinary is not to Iudge but is a minister to the Kings Court the Iudges of that Court are to Iudge of the sufficiency or insufficiency of the party whatsoeuer the Ordinary doe informe them and vpon due examination of the party may giue iudgement against the Ordinaryes information For the Kings Iudges are Iudges of the cause The Catholicke Deuine 13. I am content to admitt anie iudges in this cause whether it be not impertinent to M. Attorneys purpose to bring in this instance For howsoeuer he goeth about in words to dazel this case yet is it euident that for so much as the Church by her priuiledge of Superioritie taketh out of the hands of temporall iustice men condemned to dy for felony onlie for that they can read like Clerkes though they bee no Clarkes
of the whole entire body of the Realme 15 You see whervnto this deuise tendeth to make yt a matter of treason to deny this fancy of M. Attorney that for so much as the Canons and Ecclesiasticall lawes of the Church made by Popes and by Generall Councells from tyme to tyme and receued vniuersally for spirituall and Ecclesiasticall matters throughout the Christian world were receued also and allowed by the Kings Comnn wealth of England which was an euident argument of their acknowledging of the said Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction of the Church and spirituall gouernours therof of this approbation and allowance he would inferr that these lawes were the Kings lawes though deriued as he sayth from others that is to say from Popes and Bishopps At which inference I doubt not but that his fellow-lawyers will smile And truly I am sory that he being accoumpted so great a man in that faculty which is wont to reason well hath giuen so manifest occasion of laugther For that euery puney young student of law will see by common reason that the admitting of an other mans lawe doth not make it his lawe or that he had power to make that lawe of himself but rather to the contrary it sheweth that the admitter acknowledgeth the other for his Superiour in all matters contained vnder that law For the power of making lawes is the highest power that principally proueth dominion in any Prince and the admitting and obeying therof by another Prince is an euident argument of inferiority and subiection and so here the admitting of the Popes Ecclesiasticall and Canon-lawes was an argument that the admitters acknowledged his supreme authority in Ecclesiasticall affayres 16. Neyther is M. Attorneys example of the Romans or Normans any thinge to the purpose all For that the Romans did not take from the Athenians any formall lawes made by them for the gouernment of the Romans for that had been to acknowledg superiority as before hath bene said but rather they taking a suruey of all the Grecian lawes aswell of Athens as other Common-wealthes or States they tooke parcells therof here and there and applied the same to their Common-wealth which was properly to make lawes of them selues And the like may be sayd of the Normans if they borrowed any of their lawes from England which yet I neuer read in any Author besides M. Attorney but rather that the Normans gaue lawes to England 17. But nowe in the Canon-lawes receiued in England for almost a thousand yeares together after our first Conuersion the matter is farr different for that these were receiued wholy and formally as lawes made by another superior power in a different Tribunall different causes sent expresly to England and to all other Christian Kingdomes to be receiued and obserued and some also out of the same Ecclesiasticall power made within the land by Synodes and Prelates therof and promulgated to be obserued both by Prince and people formally and punctually as they lay and so were receiued admitted allowed and put in execution by the said Prince and his Officers except perhaps some tymes some clause or parte therof might seeme to bring some inconuenience to the temporall State for which exception was made against it and the matter remedied by common consent And this was another manner of admitting lawes then the Romans admitted some peeces of there lawes from Athens or rather translated some pointes of the Athenian lawes into theyrs which was to make them selues Maisters of thus lawes and not receiuers or admitters And finally wee see by this to what poore and pittifull plight M. Attorney hath brought the title of his booke De Iure Regis Ecclesiastico Of the Kings Ecclesiasticall law to witt that it is the Popes Ecclesiasticall law◠in deed made and promulgated by him and his but receiued and obeyed by the King and consequently not the Kings law but the Popes 18. Wherfore to conclude the first part of this Chapter for so much as M. Attorney by these two arguments De Iure which are the only he mentioneth hath proued no right at all of supreme spirituall Iurisdiction to haue accrewed to Q. Elizabeth by the title and interest of her temporall Crowne but rather the contrary to witt that both his Arguments haue proued against himself we see therby how vnable he is to proue his said affirmatiue proposition by this first head and sorte of proofe De Iure I shall now in the second part of this chapter endeuour to prooue the negatiue by as many sortes of rightes and lawes as any thing may be proued that is to say not only by Canonicall Ciuill lawes but by law of Nature also of Nations Mosaycall Euangelicall and by our ancient Common-lawes of England all which doe concu◠in this that Q. Elizabeth being a woman could not haue any supreame spirituall power or Iurisdictiō in Ecclesiasticall matter◠THE SECOND PART OF THIS CHAPTER VVherin is shevved that Q. Elizabeth in regard of her sex could not haue supreame Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction §. I. 19. First then being to performe this we are professe in this place that we meane not to imitate the proceeding of some Protestants in this behalf who following no certayne rule of doctrine no◠moderation in their doings or writings doe passe to extreames therfore feeling themselues greiued vnder Q. Maryes raigne with the course of Catholike religion then held tooke vpon them to publishe that women were not capable of any gouerment at all Temporall or Spirituall nor to be further obeyed than they would make Reformation in Religion for so they called it comforme to their willes and prescriptions as appeareth by the bookes writings and actions both of Goodman VVhitingham Gilbye Knockes others who taking their fire of fury from Geneua sought first to kindle the same in England and being repulsed thence brake into open flames of combustion in Scotland and neuer coassed vntill it brought two Noble Queens mother and daughter to their ruyne and afterward put their heire and successor into such plunges by those and other heades of like doctrine and desperate attemptes answerable therunto as Gods right hand did only preserue him from like ruyne 20. But we are not of this spirit to seeke reuenge by such new brayn-sicke doctrine we graunt that Queens may lawfully raigne inherite that Successiō which euery Countrey by their peculiar lawes doth allow them The great Kingdome of France doth excude them so doe many lesser States in Italie and Germany and other Countryes yet doth Spaine England Scotland and Flanders admitt them for preuenting other inconueniences when Male-sucessors doe fayle So as for this point of Q. Elizabeths temporall gouerment we haue no controuersie in this place If any fell out betweene her and the Bishop of Rome whose authority she tooke from him and applyed it to her self and many otherwayes exasperated him that fact appertayneth not to vs that are priuate men to iudge