this opinion was r◅olued that Supreame Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction was in the Popes And therefore we prouing that Supreame and last Appellation doth by the law of God belong to none but to the Soueraigne Prince conclude vndoubtedly that Supreame Iurisdiction belongeth to him onely 10. Heere a question may be mooued whether Saint Paul did well and orderly when he appealed to Caesar and whether Caesar was made iudge of these questions which were Doctrines We aunswere Saint Paul had no meaning to make C◅sar iudge of any point of faith But whereas hee was persecuted by the high Priests who sought his life in this matter of coactiue power Saint Paul giueth Iurisdiction to Caesar. There is also a difference betweene that power which heathen Princes haue and that which Christian Princes haue for heathen Princes haue all power coactiue whatsoeuer the cause be and without this helpe the Church could neuer deale in matters of this nature Christian Princes besides this coactiue power haue also as appeareth in the gouernment of Israel externall discipline in matters Ecclesiasticall 11. Thus we haue declared the distinct right of the King and the Priest after that they were distinguished by the written law of God we haue prooued that the Soueraigne Iurisdiction coactiue resteth in the Prince by a right which God hath giuen and therefore may not be taken away by man It followeth to consider how this right hath beene accordingly exercised by the godly Kings of Israel Ios◅ commanded the people to be circumcised and not Eleazerus the cause was Eccles◅ticall but to command in such causes declareth iurisdiction Dauid reduceth the Arke he appointeth Priests Leuites Singers Porters to serue at the Tabernacle he assigneth Officers of the sonnes of Aaro◅ All which being matters Ecclesiasticall the Prince as hauing soueraigne authority in both causes ordaineth Solomon buildeth the Temple and consecrateth it Asa remoueth Idols and dedicated the Altar of God that was before the porch of the Lord. Iehosaphat abolisheth Idolatry cutteth downe the groues sendeth Priests and Leuites to teach in Townes and Cities Setteth vp Iudges both ciuill and Ecclesiasticall and commandeth both to iudge according to godlinesse truth and Iustice. Because in the words of Iehosaphat these things are distinctly deliuered we will obserue the whole place The wordes are these And hee set iudges in the land throughout all the strong Cities of Iuda Citie by Citie And said to the Iudges take heed what you doe for you execute not the iudgement of man but of the Lord and he will be with you in the cause and iudgement Wherefore now let the feare of the Lord be vpon you take heed and doe it for there is no iniquitie with the Lord our God neither respect of persons nor receiuing of reward Moreouer in Ierusalem did Iehosaphat set of the Leuites and of the Priests and of the chiefe of the families in Israel for the iudgement and cause of the Lord and they returned to Ierusalem And he charged them saying thus shall you doe in the feare of the Lord with a perfect heart And in euery cause that shall come to you of your brethren that dwell in your Cities betweene blood and blood betweene Law and precept Statutes and iudgements you shall iudge them and admonish them that they trespasse not against the Lord that wrath come not vpon you and vpon your brethren And behold Amariah the high Preist shall be the chiefe ouer you in all matters of the Lord. 12. From which words we collect thus much concerning ◅he Kings Iurisdiction and the things wherein it consisteth ◅irst the King appointeth and placeth both Temporall and clesi◅sticall Iudges and commandeth and chargeth them so placed to execute their functions faithfully we inferre vpon this command in both alike that hee hath Iurisdiction ouer both causes But here let me remember a trifling obiection which some of our aduersaries haue deuised of late they would distinguish betweene command and Iurisdiction For they deny not but that all sortes of persons are vnder the Kings commaund and gouernment whom he may command each to doe their Office and yet they vtterly deny the Kings Iurisdiction and tell vs that command and Iurisdiction must not be hudled vp together Now let vs consider what hudling is in this when the Kings command and his Iurisdiction are set as things depending and cohaering one to the other When we say the King may command we meane plainely as we speake that the King hath from God lawfull authoritie to command and to punish them that breake his command This is the common vnderstanding of the Kings command But these Romish sophisters when they say the King may command do not vnderstand neither will they acknowledge at any hand that the King hath lawfull authoritie from God to punish the breach of his command for they vtterly deny that the King hath any authoritie to punish a Clarke though he should breake his commandement And call you this a command The King may command and goe without as the saying is This is the deuils sophistry taken vp by men hardned against shame content to stoupe downe to gather vp the meanest and basest shifts to dazell the simple The Iesuites resolue of this as of a truth most soundly concluded in their schooles That the King may not punish Ecclesiasticall persons that the Kings Court may not heare examine and iudge them though they should commit murders adulteries robberies or what other wickednesse soeuer And yet they tell vs that the King may command them Now to say one thing and yet to let the world see that they are resolued in the contrary this sauoreth strongly of the spirit of illusion when reason learning honestie and all faileth yet well fare a bold and hardned face which neuer faileth this generation 13. The truth is if the King haue not lawfull authority to punish he hath not lawfull authoritie to command and punish he cannot vnlesse he hath authority to iudge or cause iudgement to be done so that they who take away from the King power to iudge persons Ecclesiasticall take from him power to punish and consequently power to command but the Doctrine of the Papists this day as shall hereafter appeare in his due place taketh from the king power to iudge per sons Ecclesiastical therefore they rob him of power to punish and to cōmaund for nothing can more strongly take away the Kings command then to deny him power to punish and to iudge And yet they are not ashamed to tell vs that they deny not the kings cōmand but his Iurisdiction Then to leaue these men with their absurd and perplexed contradictions where the King ◅ay command he may iudge and punish the breach of that command and therefore his Iurisdiction appeareth in his lawfull authority and command Then by this charge and commaund of Iehosaph◅ is declared his Iurisdiction in these causes wherein he hath this authority
an Oath to stand to the Popes iudgement that at the pleasure of the Pope before the triall of his cause he should be ready either to leaue or to retaine his Kingdom that he should vse no Princely habite or ornament in the meane time that hee should not vndertake any part of gouernement that he should not exact an Oath of Allegeance of his owne subiects that hee should neuer reuenge this wrong vpon the Pope When he had thus hampered the Emperour with an Oath and with such strange and mercilesse conditions such is the Popes mercy where he is Master behold a stratagem a president of humility godlinesse patience mildenesse of a Pope he set vp Rodolph Duke of Sueuia against him in battell 40. The Popes hauing once extorted an Oath of the Emperour were desirous vpon such presidents to make lawes for they had no other meanes to build vp their Iurisdiction therefore when as first by force they extorted some Oathes afterward they set such examples in their Canons and last of all they expounded those Oathes which sometimes Emperours tooke to be Oathes of Allegeance to the Popes For this purpose there is a Canon in the Clementines Clement the first confesseth that Henry the seuenth Emperour refused the Oath which he would haue imposed vpon him and so doe other stories witnesse that the Emperour refused to take that Oath But if we will beleeue Clement in his Canon Henry afterward yeelded to that Oath but would not acknwledge that it was an Oath of Allegeance because the Emperours neuer sweare Allegeance to Popes but Popes to Emperours therefore Clement in that Canon declareth that these which some Emperours yeelded to some Popes were Oathes of Allegeance Declaramns saith he iuramenta praedicta fidelitatis existere censeri debere That is We declare that the foresaid Oathes are and must be accounted to be Oathes of Allegeance 41. By this we see how highly they would aduance the hornes of this Iurisdiction And still we finde this confirmed that the Oath which is giuen to the Pope is vnderstood an Oath of Allegeance And to certifie vs yet more fully of their meaning it is set downe not onely as a law in their Decretals but published as an ordinarie Ceremony which al must take knowledge of In the booke of their Ceremonies it is said that an Oath is to be ministred to all Emperours before their Coronation and before they enter the territories of the Romane Church The Oath is there thus set downe I will exalt the Pope secundum meum posse vitam hee shall neither loose member nor honour by my will councell consent or exhortation In Rome I will make no Decree or ordination of any thing that belongeth to his Holinesse without his councell In the same booke and place before cited it is said that Fredericke the third Emperour tooke that Oath 42. In this Mysterie of Oathes they haue proceeded so far as to exhibite an Oath not onely to the Clergie but to the temporall subiects of other Princes whom they may poyson and peruert by reconciling them to the Pope which as it is a practise most dangerous to them that are so taken and insnared as Birds in the net of their owne destruction so is it no lesse pernitious for such Princes from whose obedience these are drawen whereby the Pope seemeth to bring the question of Iurisdiction to an issue with the Princes of Christendome whether he shall ouerthrow them or they him for it is not possible that both should stand vp together for what is left to Princes if their Crownes and the hearts of their subiects be taken from them Or what is it that Princes can haue a more tender feeling of then of their Crownes and of the hearts of their subiects And what is more forcible to steale away the hearts of subiects from their Prince then to binde them with an Oath of Allegeance to another Prince Then these men that haue bound themselues by an Oath to the Pope how is it possible they should performe true Allegeance to the King For that the Oath which is exhibited to the Pope is an Oath of Allegeance and fidelity the Popes themselues by their Decretals haue assured vs. And if you will seeke it out this you shall finde to be the true reason why Pope Paulus the fift in his late Breues hath forbidden the Recusants of this land to take the Oath of Allegeance to the King because they haue taken an Oath of Allegeance to the Pope Now it is not possible that a man should performe Allegeance to two Soueraignes if one be vassal to the other happily one may hold Allegeance to two as for example a Tenant may sweare homage to his Land-lord and to his Prince also but this cannot be done to two Soueraignes And if one shall take an Oath of Allegeance to diuers Lordes it is concluded that if the Pope be one of those Lords he must be obeyed before all other whatsoeuer Then it is not a Fatherhood in the Church that the Pope striueth for but a power ouer Princes by weakning and vndermining their authority withdrawing the hearts of subiects exacting an Oath of Allegeance of all whom they can reconcile and not permitting their Conuerts to take an Oath of Allegeance to their owne Soueraigne Princes And because we find that moderate and conscionable Papists as Master Hart in the conference with Doctor Reynolds and such like being driuen to vnderstand the cause aright cannot chuse but iustifie our cause and will not yeeld to the Pope a Princehood ouer the world but onely a Fatherhood of the Church not graunting to him a power to depose Princes confessing also that the power which we giue to Princes is not vnderstood of themselues for they before they will vnderstand our cause thinke that wee meane to giue as much to the Prince as they doe to the Pope therefore we haue reason to rest herein assured that if the Iesuites entred not into the Popes battels with a Pontificall furie the Pope would vtterly be forsaken in this wherein all moderate spirits haue already forsaken him or if hee would relinquish this part of the quarrell which hee maintaineth against temporall Princes happily he might make himselfe much more stronger then he is or possibly can be by following this coâ—…rse But as the end is not Religion but a worldly Principality that they shoot at so the meanes which they vse are not the courses of moderation conscience and religion but of force and furie they will haue all or loose all Wherein the wisedome of the Iesuites will be called into great question for setting the Pope vpon such desperate courses at least for being the onely instruments of these new and furious practises which doubtlesse will in the end make an end of his Kingdome §. IIII. Of Inuestitures 43. HAuing spoken somewhat of the meanes whereby this Iurisdiction was sought wee are now to speake of the
successe for fire shall come downe from God out of heauen and deuoure the enemies Vnto which seruice there is nothing so effectuall to animate the princes of Christendome as is this new and strange claime of the popes Iurisdiction ouer princes which thing because it is so much pursued by the Popes and their flatterers and onely by them as the great marke whereunto they addresse all their attempts and the very summe of all their Religion therfore I haue endeuoured to open the whole to distinguish the parts and to set this question in such a light as I could if not to satisfie all yet at least to giue an occasion to the iudicious I was desirous to leaue no part vntouched that all might come to a triall and am ready also withall to bring my selfe to the triall willing to learne and to amend any error after that it shall be manifested by the truth to bee an errour for which cause I submit all to the iudicious and godly censure of the Church My care was also after my seruice to God to performe herein a true seruice to his Maiesty by opening the Iurisdiction of Kings which I haue done not as they vse to doe who serue the Pope respecting no other rules of that seruice then his pleasure and their adulation but I haue disputed the Kings right with a good conscience from the rules of Gods word knowing that the noble disposition of his Maiesty will admit of no seruice whereby God or the truth is preiudiced All which as I commend to your Graces fauour and protection to whom God hath committed the care of his Church here so with my hearty prayers I commend your Grace to the faâ—…our and protection of God who inrich your heart with his plentifull graces that as for your proper comfort and direction you may enioy them so you may vse them to the glory of God and the comfort of his Church through Iesus Christ. Your Graces to be commanded in all duety GEORGE CARLETON An Admonition to the Reader IT may bee thought strange that so many are found to write in this contradicting age one contrary to another the trueth cannot bee on both sides and therefore there is a great fault on the one side the Reader that is desirous to trie where the fault is may be intreated to marke with aduised obseruation some things wherein our aduersaries wanting either knowledge or sinceritie haue broken all the rules of right writing to deceiue such as cannot iudge of which sort the greatest part consisteth I doe therefore intreat the Readers especially such as reade my Booke with a purpose to answere it to consider these things wherein we challeng our aduersaries for euil dealing in this particular Controuersie First In setting downe our opinion they make it not that which we hold but another thing and then make large discourses in vaine they should vnderstand our cause as we deliuer it for we deuise not their opinion but take it out of their owne bookes especially from the Popes Canons Secondly when they would refute vs they bring their owne Canon law which was deuised in preiudice of the freedome of Princes and is our aduersarie and therefore cannot bee our Iudge Thirdly When they produce the testimonies of ancient fathers the abuse for which we challenge them is that they will not vnderstand the question for the fathers write for the spirituall Iurisdiction of the Church aboue Princes which thing we neuer denied But against the coactiue Iurisdiction of Prinees in matters Ecclesiasticall which thing we hold the Fathers neuer wâ—…ote but they are for it If these things were faithfully obserued as they are all peruerted in this cause by one that termeth himself the Catholick Diuine and if the truth were sought with conscience and not preiudice maintained with resolution men would neuer presume so much vpon the simplicitie of the Readers nor in the confidence of their wit and learning would they suffer themselues to be set to the maintenance of any cause whatsoeuer Let me farther intreate him that would aunswere me to enter into this short and serious meditation with himselfe thus Either my purpose is to serue God for the truth and then I may looke for a blessing vpon my labours or else to serue man though against the truth and then I may looke for a curse vpon my selfe and my labours let this Meditation rule thy pen and heart I aske no more Last of all let me intreate thee of curtesie to amend the faults escaped in printing with thy pen thus P. 2. Lin. 10. Or some others superfluous p. 13. l. 2. as superfluous p. 14. l. 29 for more read meer p. 22. l. 28. the superfluous p. 30. l. 15 for teached r. touched p. 52. marg r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 73. l. 28 r. against the infringers of the priuiledges of the Sea Apostolick p. 85. l. 19. therto superfluous p. 98. l. 27. full superfluous p. 105. l. 8. r. M. Luther p. 107. l. 2. r. M. Luther p. 108. l. 16. r. M. Bucer p. 108. l. 20. r. M. Antonius Flam. p. 109. l. 10. r. M. Chemnicius p. 195. l. 19. Deposed by Pope Stephen r. deposed or his deposition allowed by the consent of Pope Stephen p. 198. l. 4. for the Bishops r. some Bishops p. 211. l. 11. for opportunelyr opportunity p. 228. l. r2 some report the poyson to haue beene giuen in the bread and some in the cup. p. 229. l. 31. for great r. greatest p. 234 l. 15. for Frederic r. Lodouic p. 234. l. 22. for Rhenes r. Rense p. 234. l. 27. for Rhenes r. Rense p. 236. l 19. generall superfluous p. 250. l. 28. r. adhaerentium adhaerere volentium p. 262. l. 21. for ver r. viri p. 272. l. 18. for chusing r. choosen p. 272. l. 22. for to r. in p. 279. l. 30. no supeâ—…fluous p. 294. l. 16. for cultus r. cultu OF THE IVRISDICTION OF PRINCES IN Causes and ouer Persons Ecclesiasticall CHAP. I. The state of the Question THe lawfull authoritie and Iurisdiction of Kings in matters Ecclesiasticall is now and hath beene for some ages heeretofore much impugned by such who by vsurpation hauing incroached vpon the right of Kings seeke by all subtill and colourable deuises to maintaine that by skill and some shew of learning which they haue gotten by fraud All this mischiefe proceedeth from the Bishop of Rome who vsurping powre and taking to himselfe that honour whereunto God hath not called him hath brought all authoritie Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill into great confusion by vsurping the right both of the Church and of States Now our desire being to open the truth and to declare the lawfull right of Princes and power of the Church it seemeth needfull first to set downe what power is giuen to the Pope by them that flatter him so shall the right of the King and of the Church better appeare 2 They yeeld to the Pope a fulnesse of power as they
tearme it from whence all Spirituall Iurisdiction must proceed to others some adde also Temporall of Spirituall Iurisdiction Bellarmine saith all Bishops receiue Iurisdiction from the Pope The like some of them or some others teach also of Temporall power the difference which they obserue is that Spirituall power is deriued from the Pope to all Bishops but Temporall power is giuen to execute some seruice Augustinus Triumphus of Ancona who wrote about three hundreth yeeres agoe at the commaundement of Iohn 22. Pope set foorth of late by the authoritie and priuiledge of Gregorie 13. did long before the Iesuits dispute this question of the Popes Soueraigne authoritie ouer Princes since which time the Friars haue closely followed his footsteps His assertion is Omnis potestas imperatorum regum est subdelegata respectu potestatis Papae And againe in the same place Omnis potestas saecularis est restringenda amplianda executioni mandanda ad imperium Papâ—… These and the like positions are now resolutely and stiffely maintained by the Iesuits and others of that faction 3. This agreeth well with the Canon lawes which are the fundamentall lawes of the court of Rome For thus they say Nos tam ex superioritate quam ad imperium non est dubium nos habere c. That is we aswell by that soueraignetie and right which without all doubt we haue to the Empire as also by that power whereby we succâ—…ed the Emperour in the vacancie of the Empire and no lesse also by the fulnesse of that power which Christ the King of kings and Lord of lords hath in the person of Saint Peter graunted to vs though vnworthy declare all such sentences and processes made by Henry 7. void and of none effect Thus saith Clement 5. Pope against Henrie 7. Emperour To the same purpose saith Boniface 8. Pope in a Constitution of his Oportet gladâ—…um esse sub gladio c. That is one sword must be vnder another sword and the Temporall authoritie must be subiected to the Spirituall authoritie for when the Apostle saith there is no power but of God and the powers that are are ordained of God They could not be ordinated vnlesse one sword were vnder another and a little after Thus of the Church and of the power Ecclesiasticall is verified the prophecie of Ieremie behold I haue sâ—…t thee ouer nations and kingdomes to plucke vp and to root out and to destroy and to throw downe and to build and to plant And againe we declare we say we define we pronounce that it is necessarie to saluation to beleeue that euery humane creature is subiect to the Pope of Rome These be the lawes of the court of Rome which some of late haue so much adored as to call them Catholike Diuinitie and which for truth and certaintie and for authoritie ouer their consciences they hold comparable euen with the holy Scriptures 4. By all which wee collect the doctrine of the court of Rome or the Popes faction to be that the Pope hath all power Spirituall and Temporall aboue all other whatsoeuer This I call the opinion of the Court of Rome or the Popes faction because we finde the most learned of the Church of Rome to hold the contrary For concerning spirituall power the best learned of the Church of Rome yea and whole councels maintaine the Spiritual power of the Church to be aboue the Pope as hereafter we shall declare And for this Temporall power aboue Kings and Emperours claimed by the Popes in their Canon Lawe maintained by their flatterers it seemeth so straunge so new and absurd that they who maintaine it are not as yet agreed vpon the state of the question For some hold that the Pope hath this power directly ouer Princes as the Canonists to whom some of the Shoole-men may be added as Triumphus and some of late called Congregationis Oratorij as Cardinall Baronius Bozius and such Others denying this direct power hold that the Pope hath the same power but indirectly as depending vpon his Spirituall power of this opinion is Cardinall Bellarmine and others these both hold the same conclusion but differ in the manner of holding it Others there be who are in some sort content to allowe the Popes Fatherhood in spirituall matters in case lie would not prooue incorrigible but vtterly denie this power ouer princes both direct and indirect of this opinion was Guil. Occham Ma' silius Patauinus and other learned men of the Church of Rome And of late Guil. Berclaius a French Lawyer hath with great learning refuted both the former opinions of the Popes power direct and indirect against Bozius and Bellarmine and yet this man professeth himselfe to be resolued to liue and die a Papist so that on the one side stand all the reformed Churches and many of the best learned of the Church of Rome I may say all the Church of old and of late On the other side standeth the Pope with his faction that is his flatterers and this I call with some of former ages the Court of Rome this is the opinion of our aduersaries 5. Our positiue sentence against this standeth in two parts as the Pope hath incroached on two sides both vpon the right of Kings and of the Church Concerning the Kings right we hold that in externall coactiue Iurisdiction the King hath supreame authoritie in all causes and ouer all persons Ecclesiasticall aswell as Ciuill This is that which hath bene published by diuerse writings and ordinances which by publike authoritie haue beene enacted and published declaring that the King within hi Dominions hath this soueraigne authoritie and that heerein there is no forraine power aboue the King The authority of the Church hath beene in like sort vsurped by the Pope by drawing to himselfe a supposed title of the head of the vniuersall Church by deuising a straunge authority in the fulnesse of power by claiming a newe and straunge priuiledge of his not erring iudgement and making himselfe the onely iudge of controuersies of faith This power in iudging and determining of controuersies of faith and religion being partly in the Church partly in the Scriptures the Pope hath wrested from both first extolling the Church aboue the Scriptures and then setting himselfe aboue the Church Then that the limits of each power may be truely knowne we giue all spirituall power to the Church all externall coactiue iurisdiction to the King when each of these shall haue taken vp his owne right there will not be so much left to the Pope as these great flatterers the Iesuits seeke to heape vpon him Our purpose is first to dispute the right which Kings haue in coactiue power ouer all persons and in all causes euen Ecclesiasticall within his dominions by persons ecclesiasticall wee vnderstand Archbishops Bishops Deans Rectors and all other set in calling and place Ecclesiasticall by causes Ecclesiasticall wee vnderstand causes Ecclesiasticall of externall coactiue
gouernments I meane Ecclesiasticall and Temporal be directed by coactiue power there is no difference in the point of Iurisdiction betweene Temporall and Ecclesiasticall authoritie For the King and only the King is to appoint iudges in matters Temporall and Ecclesiasticall the King hath no more authoritie in reuersing the iudgement of the one then of the other being true iust and lawfull So that the Kings Iurisdiction standeth not in a power to dissanull true and righteous iudgemens but in a power supereminent by which he is charged First to confirme lawes Ecclesiasticall and Temporall Secondly to place Iudges for both causes Thirdly to see that those iudges of both sortes iudge iustly according to right and equity Fourthly to punish them if they shall be found to giue vniust and corrupt sentences Fiftly and last of all his Iurisdiction appeareth in appellations 7. But heere a question will be moued whether a man may appeale from an Ecclesiasticall iudge to the Prince For that one may appeale from a Temporall iudge I suppose it is not doubted at least I see no reason why it should be doubted But in a cause Ecclesiasticall and from a iudge Ecclesiasticall to appeale to the Temporall Magistrate of this some Romish Doctors doubt This doubt which the Canonists haue made may be increased by that place Deu. 17. 10. Thou shalt not decline from that thing which they shall shew thee neither to the right hand nor to the left And that man that will do presumptuously not hearkning to the Priest that standeth before the Lord thy God to minister there or vnto the iudge that man shall die It might seeme to be collected hence that there is no appellation from the Priest no though hee should iudge as some Rabbins expound the words I will declare their exposition because it sauoureth much like the expositions of some Papists where the text saith thou shalt not decline to the right hand nor to the left they expound it that if the Priest shall say thy right hand is thy left or thy left is thy right this sentence thou must receiue and therein rest 8. But this is a fond assertion not only without reason but against the expresse words of the Scripture for it is said according to the law which shall teach thee and according to the iudgement which they shall tell thee thou shalt doe Where we finde two rules for these two kindes of Iudges the Priest and the iudge the sentence of the Priest must be according to the written lawe the sentence of the other according to the truth of iustice and iudgement If a man be able to shew that he is wronged he may vndoubtedly appeale to a Superiour now a man may be able to shew that he is wronged if hee can shew that the Priest declineth from the law of God which is appointed his rule or the Temporall iudge from iustice And therefore if there be a Superiour in the land he may appeale but if there be no Superiour he is without remedie as when Hely was both Priest and iudge from him at that time there could be no appellation but where the forme of a kingdome is established where one King is set vp in lawfull authoritie by whose power iudges Spirituall and Temporall are placed in his dominions heere appeareth a fountaine of Iurisdiction deriued as it were into two inferiour riuers and from these inferior powers appellation may be brought if they shall not in their sentences keepe their rules prescribed to them the lawe and iustice for the appellation being grounded vpon the lawe of Nature to moderate the peruersitie and partialitie of iudges it were an absurd thing to denie this in causes Ecclesiasticall vnlesse a man would suppose that persons Ecclesiasticall may not be corrupt in their iudgements Now if we shall once graunt appellations then assuredly wee confirme the Iurisdiction of Princes in all matters wherein appellation may bee made to them And because Iurisdiction is assuredly proued by appellation we will for the farther manifestation of the truth seeke to cleere this point the rather becâ—…use our aduersaries tell vs confidently that in matters Ecclesiasticall all appellation belongeth to the Pope The Popes say so and they beleeue them we hold that appellation in causes Ecclesiasticall is to bee directed to the King who is by God set ouer the persons appellant 9. In the Old Testament we haue fewe examples or none that I remember of any that appealed from any inferior iudge Ecclesiasticall to the Soueraigne but in the New Testament there is one example sufficient to confirme the truth S. Paul being accused for causes Ecclesiasticall appealed from the high Priest to Câ—…sar Therfore it is lawfull in matters Ecclesiasticall to appeale from iudges Ecclesiasticall to the Ciuill Magistrate The consequence resteth vpon this that Saint Paul heerein did nothing but that which he might doe iustly and lawfully which thing I suppose the greatest enemie of Saint Pauls Doctrine will not denie for he came vp to Ierusalem with this profession and purpose I am ready not to bee bound onely but euen to die for the name of the Lord Iesus Neither durst he for sauing of his life giue a scandall to the Gospell The antecedent consisteth of these two parts First that the matters for which Saint Paul was accused were matters Ecclesiasticall Secondly that therein he appealed from the high Priest both are witnessed by the expresse words of the Scripture For Festusâ—…aith â—…aith They brought no crime against him but had certaine questions against him of their owne superstition and of one Iesus which was dead whom Paul affirmed to be aliue These questions be out of doubt Ecclesiasticall euen in the iudgement of our aduersaries that he appealed from the high Priest reskuing himselfe from his iudgement it is euident by the words in the twentie three Chapter where the Apostle speaketh to the high Priest as to his iudge Thou sittest to iudge me according to the law And when he was reskued from the Priests by Lysias and sent to Felix and left by him to Festus he neuer thinketh of appealing from any of theâ—…e ciuill gouernours But when Festus asked him if he will goe to Ierusalem and there be iudged of these things then Pâ—…ul vtterly refusing the high-Priest appealed to Câ—…sar by which it followeth that in matters Ecclesiasticall a man may appeale from iudges Ecclesiasticall to the Soueraigne Prince Whereupon this vndoubtedly followeth that there resteth Soueraigne Iurisdiction in the Prince And therefore the Popes their flatterers vnderstanding well that Supreame Iurisdiction could neuer bee prooued to rest in the Popes vnlesse first Appellation should be made to them wrought by all subtilty as hereafter we shall declare by right or wrong they neither cared nor spared to cause Appellations to be made to them which thing when once they had obtained that in all causes Ecclesiasticall Appellation might be made to the Popes then and not before
draue Theophilact to flight Gregory the sixt he shut vp in prison and after that exiled him he caused the Bishop of Sabinum to relinquish the Papacie and returne to his owne sea and he set vp Pope Clement Hildebrand was commaunded to goe into banishment with his Master Gregory the sixt This Gregory dying in banishment Hildebrand as the same Author saith Perfidiae simul pecuniae â—…ius haeres extitit That is Was heire both of his perfidiousnesse and of his money The Emperours patience pitifull and too gentle nature is touched by the same Author Nimia pietate deceptus nec Ecclesiae Rom. nec sibi nâ—…c generi humano prospiciens nouos Idolatras nimis laxè habuit That is His gentle nature deceiued him for he gaue too much liberty to these new Idolaters neither prouiding well for the Church of Rome nor for himselfe nor for mankinde To make short Hildebrand attaining a release from banishment came to Rome and there falling to his olde practise stroue to make Brazutus Pope of whose friendship he was assured their mutuall familiarity being confirmed by many odious and bloudie practises This is that Brazutus by whose meanes sixe Popes were poisoned as wee haue declared But Hildebrand perceiuing that the Emperour and the Cardinals were wholly auersed from a man so infamous and odious set vp Alexander the second Who perceiuing himselfe set vp against the Emperours will professed that hee would not keepe the place without the licence and fauour of the Emperour For this thing he was well beaten and buffeted by Hildebrand who ruled all and receiued the reuenewes in the time of Alexander and after his death Hildebrand saith the same Author was chosen Pope eâdem horâ à militibus sine assensu cleri populi in cuius electione nullus Cardinalium subscripsit That is At the same instant by Souldiers without the assent of Clergy or people none of the Cardinals subscribed to his election Nauclerus dâ—…clareth an vngratious stratagem of his suddenly practised to draw the Cardinals to consent to his election For when the Clergy and people were gathered together for the celebration of the funerall of the former Pope of a suddaine a cry was raised among them that S. Peter had chosen Hildebrand for Pope That this man may better be knowne I will set downe the iudgement of a Councell gathered at Brixia consisting of a great number of Bishops and Abbots out of Italy Germany France These Prelates meeting in a publike Synod together pronounce Hildebrand to be Falsus monachus magus diuinaculus somniorum prodigiorumque coniector male de religione Christiana sentiens Primus omnium say they there Pontificatum maximum contra morem maiorum inuitis omnibus bonis emit c. ius humanum diuinumque peruertit falsa pro veris dooet sacrilegia periuria mendacia homicidia incendia veluti benefacta indulget collaudat ad haec perpetranda classicum canit c. Suauis homo Sacerdotes qui vxores habent legitimas sacrificos esse pernegat interim tamen scortatores adulteros incestuosos aris admouet A false Monk a Magitian a Witch a South-sayer by dreames and ostents one that thought corruptly of Christian Religion the first that bought the papacie against the custom of his auncestours against the good will of all good men he peruerteth all right humane and diuine teacheth falshood for trueth he fauoreth and commendeth as things good and iust thefe things sacriledges periuries lies murthers burnings he exhorteth and incourageth men to these outrages a sweet companion that denyeth preists that haue lawfull wiues to say Seruice but admitteth whoremongers adulterers incestuous men to the Sacraments This is the iudgement of a full Councell against his vnholinesse as Auentinus and Naucler report 4. This is the man that began the contention for Iurisdiction with the Emperour Henrie the fourth Tali dedicatore damnationis nostrae etiam gloriamur qui enim sâ—…it illum intelligere potest non nisi aliquid bonum grande ab Hildebrando damnatum For of him wee may iustly vse the fame words in the cause of Princes which Tertullian vseth of Nero in the cause of Christians Hildebrand being made Pope began to moue many contentions with the Emperour then being Henrie the fourth one speciall quarrell was for inuestitures For whereas before that time the auncient custome of the Empire was saith Naucler that when a Bishop was dead the chapter vsed to send a ring and the pastorall staffe to the Emperour which the Emperour deliuered to him whom he appointed Bishop of that place this auncient priuiledge of the Empire Hildebrand would not indure and therefore calling a Councell at Rome of one hundred and ten Bishops he cursed Henrie the Emperour and all Bishops that receiued inuestiture at his hands or any other Lay-men In this Councell he remooued married Priests from Diuine Seruice But before he proceeded thus farre he sent first to the Emperour warning him to remooue all Symoniacall Bishops from their places the good Emperour either supposing that this might proceed from an honest zeale or willing to declare that in him there should bee no want in reforming did accordingly thrust out all such as were suspected of Symonie from their Bishoprikes but behold Machiauell set to Schoole Hildebrand hauing made all these Bishops thus hatefull to the Emperour and hating him presently restored euery man to his place againe and to binde them sure to himselfe against the Emperour tooke an oath of them all as mine author saith Quos regi infestos reddiderat eos sibi familiari amiciria Å•econciliabat multis magnis iuramentis sibi fidos obnoxios efficiens prae alijs exaltabat That is When he had once made them to hate the Emperour then he reconciled them to himselfe in familiaritie and hauing made them so obnoxious to himselfe bound them by many and great oathes to be true to him these he preferred aboue all other Giuing the best preferments to them 5. Hauing thus by subtiltie spoiled the Emperour of his friends of a suddaine without any lawfull accusation without Canonicall citation without Iudiciall order he thundreth out an excommunication against him depriueth him absolueth his nobles and subiects from their oath of Allegeance Whilest he denounced this straunge sentence the Pue wherein he sat being made saith Cardinall Beno of new and strong timber of a suddaine brake in peeces Hildebrand thus triumphing ouer the Emperour began to depose all such Bishops as had receiued inuestitures froÌ„ a Lay-hand of this right of inuestitures we shall speake in fit place First let vs take a viewe and suruey of that Iurisdiction which wee finde practised in this age and of the meanes whereby the Pope attained thereto If first we consider the meanes which were vsed for the winning hereof the Iurisdiction will bee more apparant and better knowen which Iurisdiction wee will also declare by the seuerall parts and braunches thereof so farre as we
obserued to speake in the Councell with some freedome as some did especiall marke was taken of such these were withdrawen and recalled thence that other might take their place Of this the Protestant Princes complaine to Charles Fuerunt in eo concessu pauci quidem aliquanto liberiores in dicendo sed inuenta ratio fuit vt ijs reuocatis atque summotis alij summitterentur nequiores That is Some were in that company wâ—…o vsed some freedome of speech but a meanes was inuented to remoue and recall them that other more seruile might be in their places The Pope thus giuing continuall direction to the Councell and appointing by intercourse of messages coÌ„tinually trauelling betweene Rome and Trent what should be concluded insomuch that a common prouerbe was then taken vp among them that the holy Ghost trauelled from Rome to Trent in a packet and finding that after all this his purposes were crâ—…ssed by a certaine number of voyces the number being precisely brought vnto him began to flie to his last reserued shift For of a suddaine he created thirteene Cardinals in one day all Italians to whom hauing giuen vncertaine titles but certaine instruction he sent them to the Councell whom the other Fathers of the Councell welcomed not knowing their end At the next meeting the matters being proposed as before it was found that the voices of these that were come so lately did alter all and east it at the Popes pleasure and yet their wretched pollicies rested not thus If any were supposed to excell in knowledge grauitie learning and godlinesse they were some before the Councell that their presence should not hinder or disturbe the Popes purposes some afterward secretly taken away by poyson this was the end of that worthy Cardinall Contaren and others who for their eminency in vertue were suspected of Lutheranisme And that the world might know and take full notice of the Popes end and scope in calling this Councell that it was not the true faith and religion of the Germanes that hee sought but their blood it is euident by his practise For whilest thus they held the Germanes and all the world in expectation of a Councell the Pope in the meane time raised an army and sent it against the Protestants to be ioyned with other armies prepared for their vtter destruction The generall of the Popes armie Octauius Farnesius Graundchild to Pope Paulus the third by whom hee was sent departing out of Italy was obserued to say That he would destroy so many Germanes that his horse might swimme in the blood of Lutherans This is their holy Councell of Trent consisting of a fewe and those fewe bound by an oath to the Pope restrained prohibited poysoned and at last with many shifts drawen to serue a purpose assembled without lawfull authority called by the vsurped power of the Pope drawen and pulled by fraud and subtiltie ending in blood and warres and remaining the onely cause of all the warres which haue beene raised within these westerne parts of Christendome since that time to this day §. II. Of Friars by whom this Iurisdiction was maintained 20. MY purpose being to note the meanes by which this Iurisdiction hath beene aduanced I thinke it needfull after forgeries to speake of Friars For they haue beene the chiefe aduancers of this Iurisdiction and the fittest instruments that the Pope hath found for his purpose Iohn Wiclife in diuers places declareth out of assured knowledge of storie himselfe being neere those times and therefore more able to iudge therof that before the yeere of Christ one thousand two hundred there were no Friars in the world About which time Dominicus a Spaniard and Francis an Italian began their new orders Fasciculus temporum setteth their beginning about the yeere one thousand two hundred and foure and that they were confirmed by Pope Honorius the third about the yeere one thousand two hundred and fourteene Ordines quatuor mendicantium saith he videlicet Praedicatorum Minorum Augustinensium Carmelitarum consirmantur ab Honorio praeponuntur Praedicatores Minoribus in literis Papalibus quia sex mensibus ante eos confirmatifuerunt Matthaeus Palmerius setteth the confirmation of the Dominicans in the yere one thousand two hundred and sixteene Of the Franciscaâ—…es in the yeere one thousand two hundred twentie and three so that Wiclife hath a good ground for that assertion that Friars were neuer known in the world before the yeere one thousand two hundred 21. This was the first thing that made the alteration of the Church of Rome famous For before the institution of Friars the doctrines of the Church of Rome stood sound and vnchanged in most things The alteration was afterward wrought especially by these Friars both in doctrine Iurisdiction For at the first Friars were set vp to oppresse the old Priests to alter the auncient religion and to exalt the Popes power in a greater measure then it was before In which businesse they haue not beene idle but taking directions onely from the Pope haue brought in a great chaunge in all things Wiclife obserued that Friars pursued imprisoned and burned Priests onely for reprouing their sinnes So that then questions of doctrine made not the quarrell betweene Priests and Friars but only the reproofe of the corrupt and vncleane liues of Friars as in corruption they began so they continue And this is testified by others also that the first cause of the Popes persecutions was not for doctrine but onely for the Popes Iurisdiction Reinerius writing against the Waldenses testifieth thus much that they differed from the Church of Rome in no point of doctrine but onely they denied the Popes Iurisdiction Haec secta Leonistarum for so they were called magnam habet speciem pietatis saith he eo quod coram hominibus iuste viuant benè omnia de Deo credant omnes articulos qui in Symbolo continentur solam Romanam Ecclesiam blasphemant oderunt So that all the heresie which then was found in them was onely against the Popes Iurisdiction they swarued not from the doctrines of the Church of Rome but the Friars made the alteration from that auncient doctrine Then howsoeuer since that time some Popish writers vpon humour and partialitie haue charged them in points of doctrine yet the writers of that age and neere it euen their aduersaries do therin iustifie them and shew that the quarrell was not for points of doctrine but only for the Popes Iurisdiction And it is worth obseruation that the same Reinerius confesseth that there was no origin of this sect knowen some saith he asfirme that this sect hath continued from the time of Siluester others thinke it continued from the time of the Apostles himselfe concludeth that out of question it is ancienter then any other sect Then out of doubt they were much more auncient then Friars and Friars were raised vp paâ—…tly to this end to pull them downe 22. And that this was
inoleuerat tanta heresis That is Whom Dominicke did speedily ouercome by the helpe of Simon Monford for there was not so much neede of disputation as of armes that heresie was so rooted Then we vnderstand the end why Friars were instituted by their first and chiefe imployment they were founded in blood in treacherous practises against Princes for the seruice of the Pope Wherein wee behold the endes of such Councels as the Pope calleth and wherein he is President as the Councell of Lateran and the Councell of Trent For as vpon the time of holding the Lateran Councell the first Friars were ordained and allowed by the Pope so vpon the time of the Councell of Trent were the Iesuites confirmed to be an order by Pope Paul the third after both Councels great warres and bloodshed followed through Christendome wherein the Friars were the Popes instruments and the procurators of the warres at both times and euer since 27. As these first orders of Friars increased in number swarming like Locusts vnder the Popes protection he like an experienced Captaine prouidently ordered his troupes and set them to their seuerall taskes some to writing of books some to the practises of state against Princes By those that were set to write as Aquinas Scotus and such like the alterations of doctrines were brought into the Church of Rome first so that herein appeareth their full finall end in raising vp rebellions first against God and corrupting of the truth and then against Princes by impugning their soueraigne authoritie and Iurisdiction In both which practises the Friars take continuall direction from the Pope by whose power they were created by whose authoritie they stand from whose spirit they breath and for whose seruice they are deuoted and resolued to spend their breath and blood In these practises the Iesuites being the last brood striue to surpasse all other for their audacious corrupting of the truth and outragious interprises against the liues of Princes For which in the end they will vndoubtedly drawe vpon themselues the anger of God and of the Princes of Christendome I haue stayed the longer in these descriptions for the honour of the Iesuits that their descent and progenie may be knowen that we may behold the aduancers of the Popes Iurisdiction which Iurisdiction will the better appeare if the first and chiefe aduancers of it might be well knowen §. III. Of Oathes exacted by the Pope 28. ANother especiall meanes of aduauncing this Iurisdiction was practised by exacting Oathes which is also much practised now because by experience they finde great vse of it an Oath being the greatest bond of humane societie and the fittest meanes to ingage men throughly in any cause the first exacting of Oathes was from Archbishops and Bishops by which meanes their Allegeance was strangely withdrawen from their Soueraigne Princes Whereas then first princes for their owne safetie and for the safetie of their Countrey vsed to exact an Oath of Allegeance aswell of the Ecclesiasticall as Temporall subiects The Popes began to withdraw the Clergie from this obedience and Allegeance and so farre they preuailed that the Friars taught that the King of England was not lord of the Clergie but that the Pope was their lord as we haue declared from Ioh. Wiclife And now the Pope beginneth in these desperate dayes to forbidde them of the laity to take the Oath of Allegeance to their Soueraigne whereby as they began to steale away the hearts of the Clergie first from the true and lawfull obedience of their Soueraignes so now proceeding in the same course with the laity what will they leaue to Kings in the end And because this containeth an especiall mysterie of Iurisdiction therefore we thinke it needfull to be plainely opened 29. That Kings did out of dutie and Allegeance exact an Oath of their subiects euen of Bishops and had the same yeelded as a due homage to them and confirmed also by decrees of Councels it is well and worthily obserued of late by that booke written most learnedly and exactly intituled Tripliei nodo triplex cuneus Where this vse is confirmed from the practise of the fourth Toletan Councell held in the yeere sixe hundred and thirtie and from the fift Toletan Councell held about the same time And from the sixt Toletan Councell held in the yeere sixe hundred seuentie and sixe And from the tenth Toletan Councell gathered in the yeere sixe hundred ninetie and soure as also from the Councel of Aquisgrane in the yere eight hundred thirtie and sixe We may adde though it be needlesse some fewe and small obseruations thereto It appeareth that this practise of taking an Oath of Allegeance of subiects is drawen from the law of nature as necessary for the preseruation of States and it seemeth to be as auncient as the gouernement of States For Lycurgus the first founder of the State of Lacedemon hauing once well ordered that State by good lawes tooke an Oath of them all that they should preserue those orders till his returne from the Oracle that is alwayes If any thinke that this was not an Oath of Allegeance to the State I suppose it will be hard to distinguish betweene an Oath to preserue the lawes or to be true to the lawes and an Oath to be true to the State For it is certaine that the State of Lacedemon was preserued by those lawes in great honour and felicitie for the space of fiue hundred yeeres as the same Author reporteth Or as hee saith in another place for sixe hundred yeeres and vpon the breach of those lawes came in the ruine of that State as the same Author doth often obserue This declareth the antiquitie of this Oath as proceeding from the law of nature which yeeldeth this helpe to States for the necessarie preseruation of themselues For which cause it hath bene practised whensoeuer the State thought it needful for after the kings were driuen out of Rome L. Brutus and Collatinus Tarquinius being chosen Consuls Valerius Publicola grew so offended because himselfe was not respected in that choise that he retired from the Senate from all publick action to a priuate life This thing drewe the Senate into some suspicion of his Allegeance Wherfore Brutus the Consul called all the Senate to a solemne Oath of Allegance which Oath Valerius first of al others took most cheerefully Thus in the danger of the State they had recourse to this practise as the most lawfull and assured helpe of States And Scipio Africanus is much commended in the Romane stories for vsing this practise in the danger of that State for when hee vnderstood that some had a purpose to forsake the State hee caused them to take an Oath to bee true to the State and not to forsake it After the same manner was this Oath of Allegeance yeelded by the Church of the Iewes of old For Iosephus reporteth that Augustus Caesar required an Oath of Allegeance which Oath saith he all the
point and am more willing to search the truth herein because it is a matter of especiall importance concerning this question of Iurisdiction which wee seeke to know For Robert Persons the masked Catholique diuine confesseth in effect thus much that if wee can proue that Inuestitures belong to temporall Princes we haue in his iudgement questionlesse obtained the cause for which we striue Let me set downe his owne words Three things saith he do concurre in making of a Bishop by diuine and Canon law to wit election confirmation and consecration The first to wit election when it is iustly made doth giue right to the elected to pretend the second and third c. Yet can he not vpon his only Election exercise any part of his office of a Bishop either in Iurisdiction or order But when he hath the second part which is confirmation and induction to the benefice which is properly called Inuestiture then hath he Iurisdiction vpon those people and may exercise the Acts thereof by visiting punishing or the like but not the Acts of order vntill he haue consecration also that is to say he cannot make Priests nor administer the Sacrament of confirmation c. And a little after he saith the second which is confirmation and giuing of Iurisdiction must onely proceede from him that is the fountaine of all spirituall Iurisdiction vnder Christ which is the Bishoppe of Rome or some Metropolitane or Bishoppe vnder him that hath authority and Commission from him Thus much the Catholicke Diuine 66. I forgiue many particular escapes in this short discourse not spending time in the examination of by-points I would meete him there where he thinketh himselfe strongest For where he saith confirmation which also he calleth induction or which properly as he graunteth may be called Inuestiture giueth Iurisdiction this we yeeld And then heere wee ioyne issue with olde Sir Robert in that part of his Collection whereon he layeth his greatest hold and are content to trie the whole cause thereon whether Inuestiture which by his confession and the doctrine of his Church and the consent of all giueth Iurisdiction belong of ancient right to the Pope or to temporall Princes If he be able to proue by any auncient full cleare vnsuspected witnesse that the Popes within the space of the first thousand yeares or before Hildebrand either had that right or did practise or so much as challenge that right I will for my part yeeld the cause and will confesse mine errour if thus much be euidently euicted But seeing we haue proued by vndoubted Histories by the consent of Popes themselues by the Decrees established in Councels that this was an auncient right of temporall Princes called Prisca consuetudo by Pope Stephen Antiqua consuetudo by another that the contrarie was neuer heard of vnder any Christian Prince confessed by Gregory the first Then hath he reason either to yeelde vs the cause wholly or to reuoke his wordes againe that Inuestiture giueth Iurisdiction 67. Then the right of Inuestitures standing as the auncient right of our Kings being neuer questioned in Christendome before the time of Pope Gregory the seuenth neuer questioned in this land before the time of Henry the first that King had reason to pleade the vse of his father and brother for himselfe because it being a thing quietly possessed by them was out of doubt peaceably inioyed before them because before them the Popes neuer made title thereto Now concerning the tumults warres blood and confusion in Christendome both in the Church and temporall states which for this quarrell the Popes procured for fiftie yeares together as Malmsbury witnesseth of this it is not my purpose to speake It is enough for mee to open the time when it began and before which time it was neuer challenged by any Pope and to declare that the Popes late practise is condemned by the Iudgement of the auncient Church §. V. Exemption of criminous Clerkes 68. OVr purpose being to take a suruey of that Iurisdiction which we finde challenged by Popes at and somewhat after the time of the Conquest of England at what time the Popes power was at the highest we are to consider in the next place Exemption of criminous Clerkes for as Inuestiture of Bishoppes began then to be claimed so about these times crept exemption of the Popes Clerkes which is taken to be another part of this Iurisdiction My purpose is not to speake of lawfull exemption of the Clergie for both Diuine and humane lawes approue such immunities without which how could the Clergie attend vpon their heauenly businesse These immunities which Emperours and Princes haue giuen to the Church the Church ought to inioy without disturbance and to withdraw such immunities were high sacriledge and impiety against God and his Church But the question is not of these immunities which Christian Kings haue giuen to the Church but of those immunities which the Pope without the leaue or authoritie of Princes hath bestowed out of his fulnesse of power vpon the Clergie which liue vnder the gouernement of other Princes by which the Clergie inioyed a protection from punishment for any sinne This is the thing for which they are not ashamed to striue euen at this day as earnestly as they did in the midst of blindenesse This thing will be better knowne if we search the originall foundation of this errour from the beginning and the occasion by which it grew in the Church For now this opinion is and for some late hundred yeeres hath beene so rooted in the Court of Rome that the Clergie though neuer so much offending by murther treason theft robberies or such like is priuiledged from all temporall Courts of Princes and punishment from the Laity vnlesse first the Church proceede against them and make them no Clerks that they are perswaded both of the truth and antiquity hereof as of a point of faith the occasion grew thus 69. The first auncient and famous Emperours did out of their godly and zealous affections and as we may well iudge vpon good reasons to helpe the Church and to preserue discipline ioyne the aide of their coactiue lawes to the spirituall censures of the Church ordeining that whosoeuer by the gouernours of the Church could not be brought to obedience and order should by the seuerity of temporall punishment be reduced to obedience The vsuall punishment which Emperours did inflict vpon Clerkes was deportation So did Constantine the great punish Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia and Theognius Bishoppe of Nice And albe it some were threatned with capitall punishment as appeareth by a Letter which Constantine wrote to the Bishoppes of the Nicen Councel recorded by Socrates and inserted in the first Tome of Councels yet the vsuall censure of the Emperour was exile This kind of punishment was often inflicted by other Emperors vpon Bishops the examples are famously knowne and acknowledged I need not to speake of them Insomuch that it began to be
reward that is reserued for you you will commaund that a Synode may bee gathered Another part of the office of a Prince is saith he Confirmare custodire in concilijs 〈◊〉 which thing hee proueth by diuerse auncient authorities and concludeth that Emperours haue euer had this authoritie Hee saith that in this thing hee had made diligent search and had found this practise continued in all generall Councels vntill the eight Synode inclusiuely In which search saith hee I finde by the acts of all generall Councels aswell in Chalceon as in Constantinople Nice Ephesus that either the Emperour was present in person or some iudges his Vicegerents and those not aboue twentie seldome fifteene but when the Emperour himselfe was present in person I finde saith he that hee was alwayes Presedent of the Councell no other secular Prince hath right to be present in the Councell sauing the Emperour Vnlesse the Emperour appoint some to be present but being present they haue no voice in the Councell but may sit onely to heare this he proueth by that testimony of Ambrose in the cause of faith Bishops are the iudges and not the Emperours 61. And whereas this auncient Iurisdiction of Princes was so disordered by the Pope that by Papall intrusions and incroachments the Princes had well-nigh lost their right and temporall Iurisdiction turned into spiritual Iurisdiction of this he much complaineth and openeth the true cause of all this disorder to be in the insatiable couetousnes of the Court of Rome for thus he saith Rabidus appetitus ad ipsa terrena Ecclesijs annexa Dominia Episcopis ambitiosis hodie inest c. de temporalibus omnis cura de spiritualibus nulla Non fuit ista intentio Impâ—…ratorum non volebant spiritualia à temporalibus absorberi c. dum vacant Ecclesiae semper in periculo schismat is existunt c. Si perelectionem prouidendum est ambitio procurat diâ—…isionem vâ—…torum Si per curiam facilius persuadetur pro plus offerente omnia illâ—… grauamina adueniunt pauperibus subditis curia attrahit quicquid pingue est id quod Imperium contulit pro Deicultus bono publico ordiâ—…auit sanctissime auaritia cupiditate exorta palleatis rationibus nouis adinuentionibus totaliter peruertitur Imperiale efficitur Papale spirituale temporale That is Such a rauenous appetite is in ambitious Bishoppes at this day toward the temporall Dominions annexed to Churches c. all their care is for the temporalties not for spirituall matters this was not the meaning of Princes they meant not that the spirituall labours should be deuoured by temporalties c. Whilst the Churches are vacant there is alwaies some danger of a schisme c. If they proceed by election ambition procureth a diuision of the voyces If by the Court he that bringeth most is best heard and soonest preuaileth And all these greeuances come vpon the poore subiects whatsoeueris fat and rich the Court of Rome draweth to her selfe and that which the Empire as well for the worship of God as for the publicke good hath conferred vpon the Church and ordeined to an holy end all is vtterly peruerted through filthy couetousnesse and certaine painted reasons and new inuentions are deuised to colour it And thus the Imperiall right is now made Papall and temporall right is made spirituall Then these be the obseruations of the learned men of the Church of Rome long before vs that the Pope had intruded vpon the Emperours right now what soeuer the Pope had once practised that must be called spirituall Thus the Iurisdiction of the Emperor being once by cunning or force wrested from the Emperour being found in the Popes hand it was presently called spirituall Iurisdiction as he doth most truely obserue Imperiale efficitur Papale spirituale temporale 62. By all which we find the iudgement of this man to be directly against the Popes pretensed Iurisdiction and for the right of temporall Magistrates when we finde the Cardinals of the Church of Rome to write thus before the time of the contention and before M. Luther was borne wee are not so much to consider their priuate iudgements in these things as the receiued iudgement of the Church wherein they liued that is the Church of Rome from the iudgement of that Church they departed not but in these things do faithfully deliuer vnto vs the iudgement of the same Church standing against the iudgement of the Pope and his Court consisting of Friars and flatterers Thus we see the cause of the Reformed Churches throughly iustified by this learned Cardinall their separation from the Pope and the Court of Rome warranted because the Pope hath first made the separation from the profession of Saint Peter and from the faith of holy Scriptures and the idugement of auncient fathers In which case he granteth that the Church may depart from the Pope and thereby doth iustifie the separation that is made §. VII Aeneas Siluius 63. AT this time wrote Aeneas Siluius afterward called Pope Pius the second he hath written a booke of the actes and proceedings of the Councell of Basil from which I will note some things wherein the iudgement of this man may appeare concurring with the iudgement of the Church of Rome in his time but repugnant to the Pope and his flatterers First handling that Text Tues Petrus super hane Petram c. he saith thus A quibus verbis ideó placuit exordiri quod aliqui verba hâ—…c ad extollendam Rom Pontificis authoritatem solent adducere sed vt statiâ—… patebit alius est vâ—…rborum Christi sensus That is With which words I thought good to begin because some vse to alledge these words to extoll the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome but as it shall soone appeare there is another sense of Christs words Who are they who in the iudgment of this man do peruert the words of Christ Let the Iesuites aunswere and let them giue vs some reason able to satisfie a man of reason why that cause should not bee helde damnable which is condemned by their owne writers their Bishoppes their Cardinals their Popes Let them not tell vs that this Pope Pius was of another mind afterward when he was Pope and before he was Pope he might erre but after he was once Pope he could not erre these bee plaine collusions of them who write such things and illusions of such as beleeue them For it is not possible that any man should write or speake or thinke such things from conscience Shall I thinke that any learned man can thinke in conscience this to bee true that the Pope cannot erre when I heare the testimonie of the Church so full against it When I heare such as come to be Popes refute it before they come to that place When I heare such as haue beene in the place exclaime in the extremitie of desperation that no man in
Lords supper and in such things might appoint what he list This manner of declaring the Kings Iurisdiction did so much offend the reformed Churches that Caluin the writers of the Centuries doe much complaine thereof and worthily For the Bishop of Winchester sought not like a curious triar of mettals to seuere the gold from the siluer and drosse from both but as hee found this massie crown of Iurisdiction vpon the Popes head so he tooke it with gold siluer coper drosse and all and set vpon the Kings head So that the thing which procured so much offence was not the title but the Bishops false and erronious declaration of that title If any obiect against me what then will you take vpon you to handle this thing better then such a learned and prudent Prelate I answer the Bishop wanted neither wit nor learning for the opening of this point but onely a loue to the truth which loue when I shall bring to this question I finde my selfe therby so supported that neither the perfections of other men nor mine owne imperfections can daūt me so much as to cause me to giue ouer the defence of the truth True it is that a more skilfull Archimedes might haue beene set on this worke to distinguish the things that haue lien so long confounded in this question or the common helpe of many might haue beene combined wherin our aduersaries are now growen wiser in their generation then the children of light And though it seeme to be true that an euill cause hath more need of helpes yet there is no reason that they who haue the handling of a good cause should in confidence of the cause neglect any helpe that possibly they may attain vnto Albeit we must confesse that the arme of God hath wonderfully declared it selfe by weak meanes against great For if a man should looke vpon the meanes on both sides with an eye of flesh he would thinke as Vzziah did When the Arke was shaken that the Church could not possibly stand vp by so weake meanes For on the one side the Pope sheweth himselfe with the riches of Saint Peters great and potent patrimony with the helpe of so many great Princes with the councell and policie of his Cardinals with the armies of his Canonists Priests secular and regular but especially in these later years of his Iesuites who glorying so much of their learning and filling the world with their vaunts being supported by wealth and policie abounding with all worldly meanes that their hearts can desire incouraged by preferments march like armed troupes entring a battell On the other side a company of poore men Luther Bucer Zuinglius O◅colampadius Martyr Caluin and such like v◅terly contemned of the Iesuites bringing no other furniture with them sauing a good conscience learning and a loue to the trueth seeme to make a poore shew without force without glory If Gods truth were to ◅e vpholden by humane meanes or if the seruants of the truth were drawne to speake in the Church as Lawyers are for their fees at the barre then what hope could wee haue to stand against the Iesuites the Popes Lawyers who by inuincible clamours facing and obstinacy make not truth but victory the end they aime at But as there is great oddes in the meanes on the one side so there appeareth no lesse difference in the successe on the other side For by these weake and contemned means the world is subdued vnto Christ deliuered from the bondage of superstition wisdome is iustified of her owne children and the truth triumpheth in the sincerity and godlinesse of weake meanes against the malice policy and strength of her prepotent aduersaries Which successe compared with the meanes on both sides doth manifest the arme of God to be in the cause that groweth so much against the expectation of the world and meanes For what other power could make so weake meanes preuaile so much against so great policy and strength but the same power though not in the sam◅ measure which by a company of poore Fishermen despised in the world subdued the whole world vnto the obedience of Christ As this successe and blessing by the presence of God hath beene hitherto apparant in this cause so the Iesuites take order that the same successe and blessing may continually hereafter follow our cause vntill it hath rooted out all the aduersaries that make opposition against it for what greater strength or aduantage can bee giuen to our cause then the wickednesse of our aduersaries doth giue How often doth Moses declare to the Church of Israell that the fauour of God was so much declared towards them not for their owne righteousnes but for the wickednes of their aduersaries So that if we should stand still and looke on and holde our selues in patience our aduersaries will worke the meanes by their owne strange cruelties in their Inquisitions by their prophane and vncleane conuersation by their grosse Idolatry by their horrible treasons and conspiracies against the liues of Princes by their diuelish deuises for subuersion of whole States at one blow by their hypocrisie falshood and aequiuocations and by that most admirable and exquisit villany that euer was inuented in deprauing corrupting altering and chaunging all auncient writers by these and the like practises of wickednes they themselues will worke the meanes of our successe and of their owne destruction And if the Prince of this world and his first begotten had not blinded their eyes and their hearts they could not choose but see and acknowledge the experience of Gods fauour and protection mightily declared from heauen vpon our cause our Prince and State and of late much increased and made apparant to all th◅ world by their owne wicked practises Then the difference being so great in the meanes and in the successe so great also betweene our conuersation and theirs must needes declare a great difference betweene our hopes and theirs our Religion and theirs they haue raised the Princes and armies of the world against vs when they pretended peace wee neuer vsed deceit or wrong against them they haue by barbarous deuises attempted to procure our vtter subuersion we desire hartily their conuersion to God they curse reuile and baspheme vs wee pray for them this difference may shew where truth and Religion is and might if they entred into the serious consideration of things drawe them to cease from all wicked attempts to follow and embrace one trueth and to worshippe one God with vs. But if there be no remedy but that Princes and States must be oppugned by a perpetuall league of Conspiracy from Rome if nothing can satisfie them but the blood of Kings then what remaineth but that the Princes of Christendome prepare themselues to that great battel which S. Iohn saith shal be fought in the plain of the earth against Gog and Magog When God shall raise the spirits of princes to that worke he will open the way and giue the
to command for otherwise the Kings command is but as the word of a priuat man or of a child if he haue not power to iudge and punish 14. Moreouer whereas Iehosaphat commandeth the Priests and Leuites to iudge betweene blood and blood Law and precepts statutes and iudgements In things that concerned questions of blood as when blood was shed by casualtie in which case the party offending had remedy by sanctuary and the high Priest was the immediat iudge as also in matters concerning lawes precepts â—…tutes iudgements that is ordinances ceremoniall or morall In these things stood the Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction which then was practised in the Church for to take that distinction which we must often remember in this question it is confessed that all Ecclesiasticall power is either of order or Iurisdiction In both which the King hath a part bâ—…t differently In the power of orders the Kings part and office was to see that things of that nature were orderly done and the breach thereof punished but himselfe was not to execute any thing whereunto the Priests were apointed by the power of their orders as to offer incense c. Wherefore Vzziah was smitten with leprosie for medling with that part of the Priests office Now Iurisdiction is diuided into power internall which as often wee haue said belongeth not to the King and power externall which power externall when it is coactiue is nothing but that which wee call the Kings Iurisdiction though it be in matters Ecclesiastical And this Iurisdiction is here testified to be in Iehosaphat and from him deriued to all to all iudges vnder him both Temporall and Ecclesiasticall For as he commaunded the Temporall iudges so in like sort he commaunded the Ecclesiasticall And as the Ecclesiasticall iudges might replie if they had bene such as now these are of the Romane Clergie that Ecclesiasticall iudgements were holy and the cause of God and not of the King so doth the King witnesse of Temporall iudgements for speaking to Temporall iudges he saith you execute not the iudgements of man but of the Lord. Then Temporall iudgements are the Lords cause aswell as Ecclesiasticall and herein they differ not 15. Now this Iurisdiction which is in coactiue power wee prooue to be in the King and onely in the King I speake according to the forme of the state of Israel in those dayes wherof we now speake aunswerable to which is the Soueraigne magistrate in any other state This right I say we prooue to bee onely in the King and from him deriued to other iudges both Temporall and Spirituall by these reasons first the King and onely the King commaundeth both iudges to doe their duties in their seuerall places and hath lawfull power to punish them if they doe otherwise therfore the Kings Iurisdiction coactiue is ouer both sorts alike The antecedent hath two parts the first drawen from the expresse words of the Scripture in this text the second followeth by a necessitie For the commaund of a King is ridiculous and no commaund vnlesse he haue authoritie to punish The consequence followeth by the very definition of Iurisdiction which will prooue the second part of the antecedent For this Iurisdiction for which we plead is defined by the most learned of the Church of Rome authority coactiue If it be authoritie it may command if coactiue it may punish then it followeth that where Iehosaphat had first authoritie to commaund and last to punish that questionlesse hee had this Soueraigne Iurisdiction 16. If against this any obiect that the King may command in matters of orders of preaching the Word administring the Sacraments c. In all these things the King may lawfully command the parties to doe their duties and may punish them if they doe otherwise and yet no man will put the Kings Iurisdiction in these matters of orders Preaching Sacraments c. For aunswere let me intreat the reader with attention to consider these three things First to commaund secondly to execute thirdly to punish Iurisdiction standeth wholly in the first and last and nothing at all in the second that is in authoritie and not in action So that though the King should execute a thing which belongeth to his office yet in the execution therof his Iurisdiction should not appeare howsoeuer his wisedome knowledge and actiue vertues might appeare therein for Iurisdiction is in the authoritie of commaunding and power of punishing and supereminence that riseth from both And therefore in the preaching of the Word administration of Sacraments the King hath no part because therein Iurisdiction standeth not these things being matters of execution not of commaund but the authoritie to commaund these things by making or vrging lawes for them and to punish the transgression by corporall punishments this because it includeth coactiue power is in the Soueraigne Magistrate onely If the Magistrate should either neglect his dutie as the heathen did or commaund false doctrines to be preached as the Arian Emperours did in this case the Church hath warrant to maintaine the truth but without tumults and rebellion and rather in patience to loose their liues then to forgo any part of the truth 17. Another reason to prooue this Soueraigne authoritie coactiue to be only in the King and from him respectiuely deriued to both sorts of iudges may thus bee drawen For the iudges Temporall there is not so much question made all the doubt is of iudges Ecclesiasticall the chiefe of which iudges Ecclesiasticall in the Church of Israel was the high Priest Then this Iurisdiction whereof we speake must be confessed to haue been principally and originally either in the king or in the high Priest but in the high Priest it was not Therefore in the King it must be That it was not in the high Priest we proue by these reasons The high Priest is commaunded corrected punished and deposed by the King and not the King by the Priest therefore the Soueraigne Iurisdiction is not in the high Priest but in the King Againe the high Priests did neuer practise coactiue authoritie vnlesse when they were Soueraigne Magistrates as sometimes the high Priests in Israel were but as high Priestâ—… they had no such power for the causes betweene blood and blood which were of their cognisance are by the interpreters vnderdood such cases wherein a man was killed by chaunce without the purpose or against the will of the offender in which case the high Priest might graunt him the prâ—…uiledge of sanctuary and so deliuer him from the auenger of blood but he had no power coactiue to inflict death or such punishments at his pleasure which trueth was so constantly receiued and preserued in the Church afterward that euen in the greatest power highest ruffe of Poperie the Church of Rome did not take this full â—…oactiue power but onely proceeded to degradation and then to deliuer men vp to the secular powers which was a â—…ecret confession that they had no right to
this power coactiue though they had vsurped many parts thereof 18. A third reason to prooue this authoritie to bee in the Ciuill Magistrate is as I teached before confirmed by the right of Appellations For in matters of coactiue Iurisdiction a man might appeale from the high Priest to the King as Saint Paul did to Caesar which was vtterly vnlawfull for him to doe vnlesse he might as lawfully haue appealed to a King if that state of Israel had then beene ruled by a King as at other times it was For that right which Saint Paul giueth to Nero to heare Appellations he would vndoubtedly yeeld to Dauid or Ezekâ—…as or any other godly King in his owne Dominions Wherefore it followeth that either Saint Paul must be condemned for yeelding an vnlawful power to Emperors or Kings must haue the same priuiledge which thing being admitted in matters Ecclesiasticall doth inuincibly prooue the Kings Iurisdiction in such matters The same thing is also confirmed from those words of the Apostle he is the minister of God and he beareth the sword If the Magistrate be the minister of God then he hath full authoritie and Iurisdiction from God whose minister and vicegerent he is if he beare the sword hee hath all power coactiue for coactiue power doth alwayes follow tâ—… sword which God hath giuen to the Ciuill Magistrate to beare Therefore Ioh. Chrysostoâ—… saith Regi corpâ—…ra commissa sunt sacerdoti animâ—… reâ—… maculas corporum remittit sacerdos maculas peccatorum illâ—… cogit hic exhâ—…rtatur ille habet arma sensibilia hic arma spiritualia Hâ—…m 4. de verb. Esa. vidi dom Then the true difference betweene the Magistrate and the Priest concerning this point is Ille cogit hic exhâ—…rtatur so that coactiue power is left wholy to the Magistrate Ambrosâ—… likewise speaking of the authoritie of the Church and of Bishops saith Coactus 〈◊〉 nâ—…n noui arma enim nostra preces sunt 〈◊〉 â—…at iâ—… Auxâ—…t where he declareth the difference betweene these two powers leauing nothing to the Church but preces 〈◊〉 wherin there is no coaction In which sense Thomas Aquinâ—…s faith vindicta quae fit authâ—…ritate publicae potestatâ—… sâ—…cundum 〈◊〉 iudicis pertieet ad iusticiam commutatiuam 2. 2. qu. 8. art 1. Therefore vindicatiue power or coaction belonges not to the Church but the Magistrate that exerciseth coâ—…utatiue iustice 19. In regard of which high power Princes are called Gods I haue said you are Gods And because an aduersarie of late hath told vs that this name is giuen aswell to Ecclesiasticall gouernours as to Kings we reply that it cannot be shewed that this name is giuen to Ecclesiasticall gouernours but either where such gouernours haue receiued authoritie from the Ciuill Magistrate or where themselues are the chiefe Magistrates so that it is a name giuen in respect of Soueraigne power For to manifest the Soueraigne emmency of the Prince compare the Prince and Priest togâ—…ther and by this comparison wee shall euidently know the truth for we find the Prince called a God not onely in respect of the people but in respect of the Priest also Where the Lord himselfe speaketh to Moses of Aaron comparing their power and offices together he saith thus He shall be thy spokesman vnto the people and he shall be as thy mouth and thou shalt be to him in stead of God In this comparing of these two great offices Moses is the directour Aaron the interpretour and preacher Where the Prince or Soueraign Magistrate is called a God not onely in respect of the people as in diuers other Scriptures but in respect of the Priest thou shalt be to him euen to Aaron as a God We find then that the Prince is called a God in respect of the Priest but we can neuer find that the Priest is called a God in respect of the Prince This declareth a Soueraigne authoritie of the Prince in matters of God and of Gods true Religion For he who by his office is to establish true Religion in his dominions doth heerein represent a liuely exâ—…mple both of the goodnesse and power of God and therefore Magistrates are called Gods as being Gods Vicegerents for establishing of true Religion 20. And this our Sauiour Christ confirmeth for whereas Psal. 82. They are called Gods I haue said you are Gods Our Lord expoundeth that place declaring in what sense they are so called For he saith If he called them Gods vnto whom the word of God was giuen and the Scripture cannot be broken c. Then the Magistrates who are here called Gods are such to whom the word of God is giuen For further declaration of the truth let this question be demaunded to whom is the word of God principally giuen to whose Soueraigne custodie is the word of God committed The words of our Sauiour Christ containe an aunswere to the Ciuill Magistrate For it is certaine that all that Psalme whence Christ taketh those words is wholly and intirely vnderstood of the Ciuill Magistrates and not of Priests or Ecclesiasticall gouernours Why then and is not the word of God giuen to Ecclesiasticall gouernours aswell as to Kings Yes verily but diuersly for to Ecclesiasticall gouernours the knowledge of the word is giuen to publish by preaching For the Priests lippes shall preserue knowledge and they shall seeke the law at his mouth for hee is the messenger of the Lord of hostes Then if the question be asked to whom is the word giuen by the way of knowledge to preach and publish it The answere is to the Priest but Christ speaketh not here of that manner of giuing the word but he toucheth that Commission which is giuen to Magistrates For to Magistrates it is not giuen by way of especiall knowledge to preach it but by way of an especiall commission to keepe it to establih it by authoritie to command obedience vnto it and to punish the violatours of it This is the authority of a Christian Prince for he hath called them Gods to whom the word was giuen Whom hath hee called Gods Ciuill Princes for of such onely of such that Psalme speaketh Why are they called Gods Because they are Gods vicegerents by their authority to establish Gods word Therefore they are acknowledged to bee custodes vtâ—…insque tabulae for which cause it was an ancient ceremony in the Church of Israel that at the Kings Coronation the Booke of God should be giuen into the hand of the King as we read in the Coronation of Ioash Which thing is confirmed by a commaundemant in the Law why was this thing so solemnly commanded so religiously preached but to shew that God hath committed the care of Religion principally to the King that by the vtmost of his power and authority it might be established in his Dominions 21. This doth proue that Moses was a Prince and not a Priest and Aaron a Priest but not a Prince because Moses
gouernment which is reserued to Bishops as the Apostles successours After which example Gregorie the first writeth thus Serenissimi domini animum non ignoro quod se in causis sacerdotalibus miscere non soleat Gregorie calleth those causes with which the Emperours medled not causas sacerdotales meaning therby the same which Ambrose calleth causes of faith 12. Besides this Spirituall gouernment which is peculiar to Bishops there is also another part of gouernment giuen to Bishops which commeth from Princes which Constantine first gaue as hereafter we shall declare Of this Chrysostome saith I am vero pars illa quam Episcopum tractare in iudicijs conuenâ—…t infinita odia infinitas offensiones parit quae ipsa praetâ—…r quam quod negâ—…tijs quamplurimis plena est tam multas etiam difficultaies affert quam multas ne forenses quidem iudices sustinent and much more to the same purpose Augustine complaineth that he was too much troubled with these matters of iudic ture And Synosius professeth that he can not attend both businesses Antiquum tempus saith he tulit eosdem sacerdoâ—…es iudices eâ—…nim Aegyptij Hebraeorumque gens multum temporis â saceraotibus gubernata est and a little after Non condemno Episcopos qui versantur in negotiis c. Si qui vero sunt qui à rerum diuersarum aggressione non laeduntur illi for sitan possunt simul â—… fungi ciuâ—…tatibus praeesse In all these parts of Episcopal Iurisdiction which either by Apostolicall right or institution or by the fauour of Princes haue beene giuen to them the Pope hath intruded like a Foxe and maintaineth his intrusion like a Lion For as Christ left an equalitie and paritie among his Apostles often affirming and confirming that one of them should not be greater then another and yet the Apostles were in gouernement aboue other Ministers and that by the institution of Christ himselfe For the Lord after that he had chosen his twelue Apostles did chuse also seuentie Disciples and sent them two and two bâ—…fore him into euery citie where he himselfe should come saith S. Luke then Christ himselfe is the authour of this order in the Church which the Church hath since that time euer held the Bishops succeeding the Apostles as the inferiour Pastors succeeded the seuentie Disciples So the Apostles after them left the like equality among Bishops that one of them should not bee aboue another and yet Bishops in gouernment aboue other Ministers for Iurisdiction was neuer in the multitude but in gouernours the Bishops theÌ„ being the gouernors after the Apostles the like IurisdictioÌ„ was in all As Cypr. saith Episcopatus vnus est cuius à singulis pars in solidum tenetur And Hierom saith Vbicunque fuerit Episcopus siue Romae siue Eugubij c eiusdem meriti eiusdâ—…m est sacerdotij Which power in Bishops the Pope hath by surreption drawen to himselfe and now out of his fulnesse imparteth to Bishops at his pleasure as if hee were the fountaine of Iurisdiction 13. As thus he hath drawen their auncient right from Bishops so hath he drawen from Temporall Princes that which of auncient right was theirs we shall better vnderstand what he hath taken from Temporall Princes if we consider the true limits beâ—…weene the power of Princes and the power of the Church We say therefore that the Iurisdiction of the Church was neuer extended to coactiue power because God hath giuen all coactiue power to the Ciuill Magistrate to whom hee hath committed the sword And as coactiue power belongeth not to the Church so neither dooth it belong to the power of the Church to erect or establish to dissanull or dissolue this coactiue power as the Pope pretendeth to doe by excommunication deposing Kings and freeing their subiects from their faith and allegeance This dissolution of coactiue power cannot belong to the Church because this is both Temporall and coactiue the power of the Church being Spirituall cannot bee called either Temporall or coactiue Now that the power exercised by the Pope in excommunication is Temporall and coactiue is the graunt of Bellarmine for hee saith that the Church of old did not depose Nero Diocletian Iulian â—… c. Quia deerant vires temporales then he graunteth that in this present practise of the Popes there are vires temporales what is this but temporall coaction The Church in old time had all that power which Christ committed to his Church but then by the confession of Bellarmine the Church had no coactiue power therefore this coactiue power which the Pope vseth by Temporall force in deposing of Kings was not by Christ graunted to his Church And if we should yeeld Temporall coaction to the Church what power is left to the Magistrate Thus we see the auncient hedge is plucked vp and the bounds are chaunged which of old stood betweene these two powers Ciuill and Spirituall 14. Against this disordering of the auncient bounds wee haue the words of our Sauiour Christ. My kingdome is not of this world i f my kingdome were of this world my seruaunts would surely fight that I should not bee deliuered c. But because when these wordes are vrged against our aduersaries they looke ascant vpon them as if they touched them not Let vs consider how the kingdome of the Pope and his pretended Iurisdiction in deposing of Kings is vtterly ouerthrowen by these words which declare the power properly belonging to Christs kingdome that is to his Church Christ aunswereth heere to Pilats question Verse 33. Art thou the King of the Iewes By which question it appeareth there was some suspition and feares that Christ pretending for a kingdome might conspire against the state and worke the trouble and dissolution of the gouernment established For as Herod when he heard that Iesus was borne the King of the Iewes was troubled and all Ierusalem with him and entred into such feares and suspition that mooued him to kill all the young children from two yeeres old and vnder so the high Priests suggested the same suspitions to Pilate From this ground riseth this question of Pilate Art thou the King of the Iewes To this he aunswereth my kingdome is not of this world From which aunswere applied to such a question these positions issue It is against the nature of the kingdome of Christ to worke any trouble to the kingdomes of the world And that kingdome which worketh trouble to the kingdomes of this world is not the kingdome of Christ. Christs kingdome which is not of this world is his Church which is in this world but not of this world as himselfe saith If you were of this world the world would loue her owne but because you are not of this world but I haue taken you out of this world therefore this world hateth you Then we reason thus The gouernment of Christs Church breedeth no trouble
to seeke the fauour of Cornelius who without examination of the cause receiued them to the Communion Of which thing Cyprian complaineth much they saile to Rome saith he cum merce mendaciorum Against this hee declareth that it was ordained that neither the Bishop of Rome nor any straunger should be iudge of the causes of their Church And to Cornelius he writeth thus Quum statutum sit ab omnibus aquum sit pariter ac iustum vt vniuscuiusque causa illic audiatur vbi est crimen admissum singulis pastoribus portio gregis sit ascripta quam regat vnusquisque gubernet c. Opoâ—…tet vtiqueâ—…os quibus praesumus non circumcursare episcoporum concordiam cohaerentem sua subdola fallaci temeritate collidere sed agere illic causam vbi accusatores habere testes sui criminis possunt That is Seeing it is decreed by all and it is a thing both equall and iust that euery mans cause should be heard there where the crime was committed and a part of the flocke is appointed to each Pastor which each in seuerall must rule and guide c Verily it behooueth that they whom we gouerne should not gad and run about to others nor by their crafty and fallatious rashnesse breake in sunder the coherent concord of Bishops but there ought they to plead their cause where they may haue accusers and witnesses of their crime 26. Thus albeit the Bishops of Rome did seeke some inlarging of their authoritie sometimes by giuing countenance and patronage to criminous and scandalous men yet they were repressed and brought into order by the godly and learned Bishops that then liued in the Church Who would not suffer the priuiledges of the Church to be lost or any title of Iurisdiction to grow where there was no right Thus for the first three hundred yeeres the Church of Rome had no Iurisdiction ouer other Churches but the Bishops there were reuerenced by other partly for their wisedome learning and godlinesse partly because the Emperours fauoured them aboue other and because they were Bishops of the chiefe citie and seat of the Empire For as they had some fauour aboue the rest with heathen Emperours so they found much more fauour from Christian Emperours which thing caused them to be regarded by other Bishops but no Iurisdiction was as yet acknowledged CHAP. V. Of the estate and Iurisdiction of the Church from the end of the first three hundred yeeres vntill the yeere of Christ sixe hundred Wherein is declared that coactiue power was in the Christian Emperors from whom the Church receiued some parts of coactiue Iurisdiction The Popes began to seeke Iurisdiction by forgerie NOwe let vs consider the times that followed when the Church had peace from persecution and found the fauour of Christian Emperours In which time no Iurisdiction will be found in the Church of Rome aboue other and all coactiue Iurisdiction was acknowledged without question to bee in the Christian Emperours from whom the Church receiued some part thereof 2. Constantine who did as much honour the Church and was as much honoured of the Church as euer any Christian Emperour leauing therein an example which standeth as yet alone without a match did notwithstanding take all that to himselfe which is now called Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction coactiue without any let or contradiction nay by the generall approbation of all that then liued When Caecilianus Bishop of Carthage was accused by Donatus and some other of that faction for deliuering the holy Scriptures to the enemies of Religion to be burned Constantine commaunded Caecilianus to come to Rome with a certaine number of Bishops which accused him and other that might heare and vnderstand the cause And commaunded the Bishop of Rome then Milciades with certaine Bishops of Fraunce to the number saith Optatus of nineteene to heare and end the matter the Bishops condemned Donaâ—…us who appealed from the sentence and albeit the Emperour was much offended at his appellation yet hee could not choose but receiue it In all this processe the Emperours Soueraigne Iurisdiction appeared the cause was a pretended crime of a Bishop the Emperour appointeth iudges and receiued the appellation which things declared Iurisdiction 3. Likewise after he had banished Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia and Theognis Bishop of Nice he wrote an Epistle to the people of Nicomedia declaring the iust causes of their banishment and signifieth that his especiall pleasure and desire is to haue Bishops castos orthodoâ—…os humanos and shutting vp his speech he saith Quoasi quis audacter inconsulteque ad memoriam pestium illarum exarserit illius statim audaeia ministri dei hoc est mea exequutione coercebitur Where we see Constantine vseth coactiue Iurisdiction ouer Bishops he punisheth them he declareth the true ground of his Iurisdiction from the word of God by which warrant he is placed the Minister of God This is that coactiue Iurisdiction ouer Ecclesiasticall persons which did alwayes belong to the Soueraigne Magistrate and was neuer by God giuen to any other 4. It was alwayes held by all sober writers of the Church of Rome as hereafter shall be further declared that in the Church there is no power aboue the power of a Councell And yet this authoritie of a Councell so much and so worthily reuerenced could not restraine Constantine but he vpon good and iust causes brought the rash proceedings of some Councels to a newe examination For when Athanasius was wronged by a Councell of Arians he complained to Constantine The Emperour sent for all the Bishops of that Councell to render an accompt of their proceedings before him which declareth that his Iurisdiction coactiue was aboue the power coactiue of the Councell For heere we consider onely Iurisdiction coactiue and not the matter or subiect for otherwise wee acknowledge as before is declared that the determinations of generall Councels are matters of an higher truth and authoritie then the Statutes or decrees of any Emperour But wee speake heere of that Soueraigne Iurisdiction coactiue which hath alwayes appeared in the power of the ciuill Magistrate and wherein the Church had no more part then that she receiued from the liberalitie of godly Emperours for as Kings receiue the knowledge of faith and Religion from the Church and not the Church from Kings so coactiue Iurisdiction the Church receiueth from Kings and not Kings from the Church 5. There was no Councell held in Constantines time whether of Orthodoxe or heretikes but either by the expresse commaundement or license of the Emperour Ruffinus saith he called the Councel of Nice at the request of the Bishops Ex sacer dotum sententia apud vrbem Nicaeam concilium Episcopale conuocat Epiphanius saith that Councell was obtained of the Emperour at the suit of Alexander Bishop of Alexandria So the Bishops who then liued in the Church held it to be of the Emperours right and Iurisdiction to call Councels
conclude directly against the Emperours purposes Thus doth Socrates report the calling of that councell but Sozomen saith it was not obtained of Valens but of Valentinian 9. Besides these publique and generall Synods there were also some more priuate and particular in calling whereof the Bishops had power The Bishop of the Diocesse vsed to call a Synod of his Clergy but could proceed no farther Prouinciall Synodes were called by Metropolitanes but in a generall Synod of many Nations the Emperour had alwayes the right of calling it as a King hath the onely right of calling a Synod of those Nations that are vnder his gouernment For as the counsell of Nice was called by Constantine so were all the counsels of these next three hundred yeares called by the Emperours that gouerned at such times Theodosius gathered the councell of Constantinople against the heresie of Macedonius in the third yeare of his raigne which was the yeare of Christ 383. saith Prosper The councell of Ephesus against Nestorius was gathered by the authority of Theodosius the younger and the fourth generall councell at Chalcedon by the authority of Martianus and Valentinianus Emperours Leo the first was a great man in these affaires and hee is the fittest to certifie vs of the truth against whose witnesse our aduersaries haue no reason to except This Pope then writing to the Emperour Theodosius saith Pietas vestra apud Ephesum constituit Synodale concilium And afterward declaring his obedience and conformity thereto saith Meum studium commodaui vt Clementiae vestrae studijs pareatur And againe Ne autem pijssimi Principis dispositioni nostra videatur praesentia defuisse fratres meos misi c. he hath the same also Epist. 23. ad Theodosium Againe hee writeth to Pulcheria to moue the Emperour to command a councell to be holden within Italy declaring that he wrote to the Emperour to intreat the same Which thing hee moueth also in other Epistles And though he much desired this that the Emperour would haue beene intreated to hold a councell within Italy yet could he not obtaine it and therefore was ready to obey the Emperour attending his pleasure therein who appointed it in another place 10 Which thing we obserue the rather because our aduersaries oflate haue yeelded this as a proper right to the Pope to call councels Catholici munus conâ—…andi concilia generalia saith Bellarmine ad Romanum pontificem propriè pertinere volunt And when they are driuen by these open and euident testimonies they shift it thus as to say another may doe it by the Popes consent but if the Pope neither appoint the place nor no other by his commaundement or consent then it is no councell but a conciliable These bee vaine and friuolous shifts of Friars For it is true that the Popes consent was to these auncient councels but no otherwise then as the consent of all other Bishops They consented because they could not chuse because they were resolued to be obedient but they could not appoint either place or time For Leo could not haue it where hee would but it was where and when the Emperour appointed 11 Before the councell of Chalcedon there is the Writ of the Emperours Valentinian and Martian called Sacra to call Bishops to Nicaea But another Sacra is sent to reuoke that and to call them to Chalcedon So that all this while the Emperors rule as those that haue Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction They call councels they punish offenders of the Clergy they establish Ecclesiasticall Courts they are acknowledged the nourcing Fathers of Religion the keepers and preseruers of both Tables and of the discipline of the Church And therefore Leo writing to Constantinus Emperour who called the sixt Synod saith thus Cognouimus quod sancta vniuersalis maxima sexta Synodus quae per Dei gratiam imperiali decreto in regia vrbe congregata est c Wee know that the holy and vniuersall great sixt Synod which by the grace of God is called and gathered by the imperiall decree in the imperiall City c. And a little after Pietas vestra fructus misericordiae potestas custos disciplinae Your godlinesse is the fruit of Gods mercy your power is the keeper of discipline And againe Nec enim minor regnantium cura est praua corrigere quam de aduersarijs triumphare quia einimirum potestatem suam seruiendo subijciunt cuius munere imperare noscuntur c. Vnde diuinitus praordinata vestra Christianissima pietas c. Caput Ecclesia Dominum Iesum Christum veram pietatis regulam amplectendo c. For Gouernours ought to haue no lesse care to correct vngodly things then to triumph ouer their aduersaries for they submit their power to his seruice by whofe power they are knowne to rule c. Therefore your most Christian zeale preordained of God c. acknowledging our Lord Iesus Christ the true rule of godlinesse to bee the head of the Church Wherein the Bishop of Rome doth acknowledge first that the generall councell is to be called onely by the authority of the Emperour imperiali decreto Secondly that the Emperours power is such a power as is custos disciplinae Hee speaketh here in an Ecclesiasticall cause and of Ecclesiasticall affaires Now that power which is custos disciplinae Ecclesiae what is it but Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction This word Iurisdiction was not then worne in such vse as now it is but we see the auncients vse words counteruailing it The Bishop of Rome acknowledgeth Ecclesiasticall power and Iurisdiction to be in the Emperour when hee yeeldeth him such a power as is preseruer of the discipline Ecclesiasticall Thirdly he confesseth that the care of the Church Church-gouernment for establishing the truth doth no lesse belong to the office of a Prince then to triumph ouer his foes in warre Fourthly the Bishop of Rome as then acknowledgeth no other head of the Church then Iesus Christ as appeareth by his words To the same purpose Saint Augustine saith Diuinitus praecipi regibus vt in regno suo bona iubeant mala prohibeant non solum quae pertinent ad humanam societatem verum etiam quae ad diuinam religionem Contra Crescentium li. 3. cap. 51. That is Kings are commaunded to estalish good things and prohibite euill in their Kingdomes not onely in things belonging to Ciuill societie but in such things also that belong to diuine Religion Gregorie the great following the footsteppes of his Fathers yeeldeth the fame authoritie to the King For writing to Theodoricus King of France he saith Iterata vos per vestram mercedem adhortatione pulsamus vt congregari Synodum iubeatis This part of Iurisdiction for calling of Councels is so fully confirmed to be the Emperours right by the Aunceants that Cardinall Cusanus sure no Lutheran disputing of this priuiledge concludeth from the confessed testimonies of the Aunceants these two things First That Emperours
partes of this Iurisdiction as wee finde the same practised at this time when it was at his height The partes of this Iurisdiction so much pursued by Popes we gather to be these power ouer Bishops power ouer generall Councels Inuestitures exemption of criminous Clerkes the Popes power in giuing lawes appellation and last of all a power to depose and depriue Kings In all which the Pope hath proceeded dâ—… facto to practise that power whereunto hee neuer had right The two first we purpose not to speake of here because of the first we haue spoken already Chapt. 5. Of the second we purpose to speake in the last Chapter the rest are here to be handled in Order and first of Inuestitures 44. The first Pope that claimed Inuestitures was Hildebrand William Malmsbury saith Hic Hildebranduâ—… quod alij iâ—…usitauerant palam eâ—…tulit excommunicans electos qui Inuestituras 〈◊〉 de manu Laici per annulum bacuâ—…m accipereâ—… That is He openly by excommunication thrust out them that had taken Inuestitures of Churches from a Lay hand by a Ring and a Staffe which thing before Hildâ—…bi and other Popes had not done Whereunto all the Histories of this time giue consent declaring that the first claime that the Popes made for Inuestitures was begunne by Hildebrand And because that the Popes were so peremptorie herein raising and continuing so great and so long a contention about this thing therefore it is thought by many that this right of Inuestitures was the Churches right and consequently the Popes And that Emperours and Kings did vsurpe it by inuasion and intrusion first priuately and then more publiquely We are therfore to seeke out this point to whose right Inuestitures did auncieâ—…tly belong whether to Kings or to Popes Now that they were a part of the auncient right of Emperours and Kings it is witnessed by Gratian for he bringeth an ancient testimonie which doth witnesse That Pope Hadrian did intreat Charles the great to come to Rome and defend the affaires of the Church and that there the Emperour held a Synode in which this auncient right was confirmed to him by Pope Hadrian Hâ—…drianus autem Papa cum vniuersa Synodo Carolo ius potâ—…statem eligendi pontificem ordinandi Apostolicam sedem dignitatem quoque patritiatus ei concesserunt Et Episcopos per singulas prouinciaâ—… ab eo Inuestituram accipere defiâ—…iuit vt nisi à rege laudetâ—…r Iâ—…uestiatur Episcopus à nemine consecretur That is Pope Hadrian with the whole Synode graunted to Charles the right and power of choosing the Pope and ordaining the Sea Apostolike and the priuiledge of the Romane Nobility and defined that Bishoppes through all Prouinces should take Inuestitures from him that a Bishoppe should be consecrated by none vnlesse he were first inuested by the Emperour Thus much is also testified by Sigebert and many moe The same is confirmed by Pope Leo who graunteth this to be the right of Otho the first as Hadrian did to Charles for thus saith Leo Othoni primo Teâ—…tonicorum Regi eiusque sâ—…ccessoribus c. perpetuam facultatem â—…ligendi successorem summae sedis Apostolicae Pontificem ac per hoc Archiepisâ—…opos seâ—… Episcopos vt ipsi ab eo Inuestituram accipiant To Otho the first Germane Emperour and to his Successours c. We grant the chusing our successour the Bishop of the chiefe Apostolicke Sea and by this to chuse Archbishoppes and Bishoppes that they may receiue Inuestitures from him 45. In both these Decrees as wel of Hadrian as of Leo there is Anathema denounced to the violators thereof Now Hildebrand was the first violator of them The things which the Popes decree in their Consistory in a full Synode vnder Anathema are things which must be vnchangeably kept or els there may be errours and vncertainty in the Decrees of his Holines which the Iesuites will not confesse But some of late presume that the Popes first graunted these Inuestitures to temporall Princes and that they haue no greater right or Title to them then from the Popes gift and the same authority say they which gaue them may reuoke this gift We answere this was yeelded to Charles when he was first made Emperour as the auncient right of the Empire This is proued first because in the same Distinction of Grâ—…tian this is often called antiqua consuetudo and prisca conâ—…uetudo and cap. 18. Pope Stephen answereth that he deferred the consecration of a Bishoppe Quod imperialem nobis vt mos est absolutionis minimè detulit Epistolam And a little after Uestrâ—… solertia imperialâ—… vt prisca dictat consuetudo percepta licentia nobis quem â—…dmodum vos scire credmus imperiali directa Epistola tunc voluntati vâ—…strae de hoc parebimuâ—… And againe Non debet ordinari qui electus fuerit nisi prius deâ—…retum generale introducatur in regiam vrbem secundum antiquam consuetudinem vt cum â—…ius scientiâ iussionâ—… debeat ordinaâ—…io prouenire Then the Bishops of Rome themselues graunt that this was the auncient vse and custome of the Empire The same is also confirmed from the reason that drew Charles then from the siege of Ticinum to that Synod it was to haue the auncient rights of the Empire confirmed to him Which thing is declared by diuers Histories especially by Theodoricus de Niem who testifieth that the reason which drew Charles to Rome at that time was to haue the right and auncient vses of the Empire clearely knowne There was saith he a Synod holden by Pope Hadrian and one hundred fifty three Bishops Abbats exquirentibâ—…s vsus leges mores eiusdem Ecclesiâ—… Imperij That is Making search of the vses lawes and customes of the same Church and of the Empire For all that could bee proued to be the auncient priuiledges of the Empire was Charles to haue then to be confirmed to him but then were Inuestitures confirmed to him therefore they were part of the auncient priuiledges of the Empire 46. Hincmâ—…rus Archbishop of Rhemes liued and wrote about the yeare eight hundred sixtie At what time without any question the auncient practise was continued of choosing Bishops by the consent of the King For he writing to the Bishops of France saith of the manner of choosing Bishops Consensu principis terrae qui res Ecclesiasticas diuino iudicio ad 〈◊〉 defendendas suscepit electione cleri atque plebis quisque ad Ecelesiasticum regimeâ—… absque vlla venalitate â—…rouehi debet That is By the consent of the Prince of the land who by the Diuine ordinance hath vndertaken the defence and preseruation of Ecclesiasticall causes and by the election of the Clergy and people ought euery one to be promoted to the Ecclesiasticall gouernment without Simony This then is the auncient right of euery Prince within his owne dominions As the same Hincmarus saith afterward Principi terrae
it must be before his Bishoppe if he will accuse the Bishoppe it must be in a prouinciall Synode if he will draw a Metropolitane to answer for some things which he hath done it must be either before the Primate or before the Bishoppe of Constantinople All this we graunt to be orderly established the things intended are matters of Ecclesiasticall Cognisance which are to bee heard in such Courts but our question is of Clerks that are conuinced to be murtherers or Traytors c. Whether such are to bee exempt from triall at Common Law Of which exemptions these auncient Bishops neuer dreamed 76. It is moreouer to be noted that diuers of these places which he citeth as that from Sulpitius of S. Martin and from Ambrose c. are vnderstoode of another thing and not of exemption of Clarkes at all For the auncient Bishops as before I haue declared thought it not lawfull that matters of faith and doctrine should be determined in ciuill Courts by ciuill Magistrates This is true and this is that which those testimonies speake of but what is this to criminous Clarks that Robbers Traytors murtherers of the Clergy should be protected by reason of their Order from triall in Kings Courts this is a doctrine neuer knowne to the auncients It was first knowne in England in the dayes of Henry the second stirred seditiously by Thomas Becket Archbishop of Canterbury when as before that time it was neuer heard of in this land The manner heereof I will briefly recite out of Roger Houeden 77. In the yeare of Christ 1163. the contention concerning exemption of Clerkes grew famous betweene King Henry the second and Thomas Becket Archbishop Rex volebat saith Houeden Presbyteros Diaconos Subdiaconos alios Ecclesiae rectores si comprehensi fuissent in latrocinio vel murdra vel felonia vel iniqua combustione vel in his similibus ducere ad saecularia examina punire sicâ—…t laicum Contra quod Archiepiscopus dicebat quod si Clericus in sacris ordinibus constitutus vel quilibet alius rector Ecclesiae calumniatus fuerit de aliqua re per viros Ecclesiasticos in curia Ecclesiastica debet iudicari Et si conusctus fuerit ordines suos amittere sic alâ—…enatus ab officio beneficio Ecclesiastico si postea forisfecerit secundum voluntatem Regis baliuorum suorum iudicetur That is The King required that Priests Deacons Subdeacons and other Rectors of Churches if they were taken in murther robbery felony burning of houses or such like should be brought to secular Courts and there punished as Lay-men were Against this the Archbishop affirmed that if a Clerke being within holy Orders or any other Parson of a Church were accused of any thing he must be iudged by Ecclesiasticall Iudges in the Ecclesiasticall Court and if he were conuict he should loose his orders And so being excluded from office and benefice Ecclesiasticall if after this he incurred the like fault then might he be iudged at the pleasure of the King and his Officers Thus farre Houeden 78. This manner of degrading and afterward deliuering criminous Clarkes to the Secular power crept in about the time of the Conquest Bellarmine pretending greater antiquity for it can neither bring reason nor testimony for his opinion For whereas he saith Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia was first deposed by the Nicen Councell and afterward banished by Constantine by this offering to proue that they must first be deliuered to the Secular power before the Magistrate may punish and reproueth Caluin for not considering thus much We answere Bellarmine sheweth his skill in shifting and hiding the truth to deceiue the simple For Caluin in that place which he citeth against this Romish immunitie proueth two things First that coactiue power is in the hand of the Prince and not of the Church Ecclesia cogendi non habet potestatem de ciuili coactione loquor saith he Secondly that criminous Clarkes had no immunities from the ciuill Courts of Princes Now that Bellarmine saith Eusebius was first deposed by the Councell and then banished is nothing against Caluin but for him For the Church did not inflict the coactiue punishment of banishment but the Emperour And Caluin proueth at large in the same place that Kings and Emperours haue no authority to iudge in causes of faith Producing the example of Ambrose who in such a cause resisted the Emperour Valentinian Such a cause was that of Eusebius the Emperour knew not whether he was in fault or not before the Church had iudged the cause But Caluines iudgement and our question standeth in two thinges against which Bellarmine doth not so much as speake one word First that coactiue power was not then in the Church but in the Emperour Secondly that criminous Clerkes were then punished by the Magistrate Eusebius is not there proposed as a criminous Clerke but as an example wherein the coactiue power of the Magistrate appeared But now they say if a Clerke bee proued to be a felon murderer traytor c. the Kings Courts may not censure this man before he be degraded Against these immunities wee speake for which Bellarmine offereth not any proofe Let the manner of Bellarmines answering bee considered for it is easie for him thus to answere Caluin and all Protestants when he toucheth not the point in question but singling out of some peece from the whole wresteth that also from the true intent that he may shape a mis-shapen answere to it Then we say that before those desperate times wherein Iohn Wiclife saith and often affirmeth that Satan was loosed no man claymed such a beastly priuiledge as to be exempt from the Kings Lawes for murder treason and such like Godlinesse reason and the light of Nature seemeth to be extinguished in these men that being contented to take the benefite of Lawes will not be contented to bee ordered by Lawes This hath forced some Princes and States to ordaine Lawes that such should be out of the Kings protection Thus did that noble Prince Edward the third King of England Wherein the King seemed to open the true way to his successors to deale with these men for seeing as then they did so now they doe denie themselues to be the Kings subiects and affirme that neither by Diuine nor humane right they are bound to obey the King with his coactiue Lawes and that they are onely vnder the subiection of the Pope that for no crimes they are to bee examined in the Kings Courts is it not great reason that the protection of the King and of his Lawes should bee denyed to them that reiect both 79. Houeden declareth also that in the yeare one thousand one hundred sixtie foure the King called a Synod and required the Bishops vpon their allegeance to receiue his Graundfathers Lawes to vse and obserue them Thomas Becket answered for him and the rest they would keepe all the Lawes
a Canon in some Church notwithstanding the priuiledges of that Church the customes to the contrary or statutes confirmed either by Oath or by Apostolicall confirmation or by any other strength c. By this Lawe as by many other it appeareth that the Popes Canons allowe that men should goe against their owne Oathes when the Popes letters doe commaund them so to doe Which is a forbidding of things honest iust and godly and commanding thinges euill and vnlawfull Therefore these Lawes forbid vertue and commaund vice and are consequently no iust Lawes in the iudgement of Bellarmine 89. The last condition that in Bellarmines opinion is required to make a Law iust is drawne from the forme Because saith hee the Law must keepe that proportion in distributing honours which the Subiects haue in the Common-wealth For example saith he if the Pope should make a Law that onely rich and noble men should be made Bishoppes and not poore and meane men otherwise more learned and more worthy this Law were simply vniust but it is certaine that the Popes Lawes are such I speake not here of their corrupt practise which since the Canon lawes came in was neuer found without strong and strange Simonie but I speake of their Lawes which command it For who made that Law which saith Pallium non datur nisi fortiter postulaâ—…i The Pall is not giuen to any man vnlesse he make a strong suit What is meant by a strong suit they know best that haue purchased Palls at the Popes hand But it is certaine that a poore man did neuer purchase a Pall therefore poore men though more learned then the rich purchaser are excluded from this honour by the Law that alloweth none to make suit but such as can make strong suit then the Law is vniust by Bellarmines confession It is also an vniust and an vngodly Law which saith Though the Pope should draw innumerable soules with himselfe downe into hell yet no mortall man may presume to say to him Sir why do you so It is an vncleane Law which so strictly denying the mariage of Priests yet doth allow them to haue Concubines Many other Lawes there be of this forme So that by all those conditions which Bellarmine will haue to be requisite in all Lawes that bee iust the Popes Lawâ—…s are found to be vniust By all which is euinced that the Pope commeth in his owne name maketh Lawes to rule those Subiects ouer whom he hath no authority respecteth therein his owne ends taketh vp a new Iurisdiction which hath beene denied by the auncient Bishops and which was vnknowne in the world all the while that the Popes liued vnder the obedience of the Emperours as other Bishoppes did vnder seuerall Princes § 7. Of Appellation 90. ANother part of this pretended Iurisdiction stoode in appellation to the Pope This they haue chalenged but it hath alwayes beene denied by the Kings of this land as being a thing preiudiciall to the auncient Lawes and customes of the Kingdome The first question about appeales in this land that I can finde began by Anselme Archbishop of Canterburie in the time of William Rufus For after that some breach was made betweene the King and the Archbishop the Archbishoppe Anselme desired leaue to depart the land to goe to Rome for his Pall. The King perceiuing that hee had a purpose to appeale to the Pope Aunswered That if hee should appeale to Pope Vrban or any other for at that time two stroue for the Papacy without his leaue then should he falsifie his alleageance The King reasoned thus saith Malmsbury Consuetudo Regâ—…imes est à Patre meo instituta vt nullus praeter licentiam Regis appelletur Papa Qui consuetuâ—…ines Regnitollit potestatem quoque toronam Regni violat qui coronam mihi aufert inimicitias infidelitatem in me agit For there was contention betweene the King the Archbishop First because the Archbishop would nominate a Pope without the Kings leaue Secondly because he would appeale to the Pope Concerning this matter of appeale the same Author a little after declareth that there grew an hot contention betweene them Anselme his answere was Tues Petrus super hanc Petram c. And therfore quoth he to the King the obedience which I offer to S. Peters Vicar is not against mine alleageance to the King Thus had the Popes with a strong kind of poyson as it were so enchaunted those words of holy Scripture as to make them serue for a cloake of disobedience and breach of alleageance to temporall Princes Anselme being further vrged by the King that he had promised to keepe all the customes of his kingdome and hee was bound to performe alleageance aunswereth thus What doe you tell me that I breake mine alleageance to the King by appealing to the Sea Apostolique I grant I promised but conditionally that I would keepe those customes which are agreeable to the lawes of God and honesty And therfore where you tell me that I haue broken mine alleageance by preuaricating your laws in appealing to the Sea Apostolique sauing your honour it is not true if another had spoken it For the faith which Iowe to the King I haue it from the faith of God whose Vicar is S. Peter to whose Sea I appeale with much stirre and strife to this effect Anselme held his resolution stiffely 91. Nowe let the Reader bee entreated to compare these times with the times of the Affrican Councell and Anselme Archbishop of Canterburie with Augustine Bishop of Hippo. S. Augustine with the rest of the Affrican Councell condemned appellations to Rome as standing against godlinesse order the freedome of the Church as quenching the light of simplicitie as inducing darkenesse pride and ambition into the Church Now that which in Saint Augustines time was vngodly can it be made godly and lawfull in Anselmes time Yet Anselme we see maketh this thing the cause of God Augustine condemned appellations to Rome simply without consideration of disobedience to Princes What then would he haue done if thereunto had beene added the commaundement of his Prince against such Appellations Anselme standing for Appellation to Rome which Augustine denied and withstanding the iust and 〈◊〉 commaundement of his Soueraigne hath no other coâ—… to cast ouer the matter then the pretence of God and Saint Peters Vicar If this obedience had beene required of God to Saint Peters Vicar in Anselmes time Why was not the same required and yeelded in Saint Augustines time This is the difference betweene the opinions brought in by men and the truths of God that the one standeth alwayes the same in the Church without chaunge the other hath his times of rising and falling as this opinion of Appellation to the Pope which was so strongly reiected by Augustine found a time to rise vp betweene the pride of the Popes and the seruile flattery of some Bishoppes And what greater signe of pride in the Pope and