Apostles Peter and Paule doe playnely declare The. 57. vntruthe The Apostles neuer declared any such matter So saye you in déede â—… Stapleton but the Bishops proofes out of Chrisostome and sainct Augustine do playnly declare they did The. 58. vntruth Of misunderstanding sainct Augustine bicause besides this bederoll he also chargeth the Bishop therewith at large in the Counterblast it is answered seuerally in the answere of the. 18. chapter Not meaning only the transgressors of the seconde table in teÌ„porall matters but also agaynst the offendours of the first table in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes or matters The. 59. vntruthe Sainct Augustine meaneth not to teach suche gouernement of Princes in ecclesiasticall matters as you teache but onely to punishe Heretikes and by the same to mayntayne the Catholike fayth decreed by the Clergie not by the ciuill Magistrate Belike ye can tell better what sainct Augustine meant than be could him selfe But S. Augustine is playne he néedeth no suche interpreter Remember your owne note maledicta glossa quae corrumpit textum Cursed be that glose that corrupteth the text S. Aug. interpreting the mynd of the Apostle to be that the authoritie power of Princes hath to deale in ecclesiastical causes so wel as in teÌ„poral The. 60. vntruth Saint Augustine neuer wrote so Ye shoulde haue tolde out the sentence of S. Augustine that the B. citeth which fully proueth it and then haue improued it as an vntruth if ye coulde whiche although ye do not yet in the margine of that sentence ye crye out lustily and say where is there in all this master Horne that the Princes haue to deale in ecclesiastical causes so well as in temporall For sooth master Stapleton euen here at your hand in this present sentence wherein S. Augustine proueth and your selfe also graunt so muche that the Princes authoritie punishethe so well abuses in eccl. causes and faultes againste religion as it doth ciuill or temporall causes but it punisheth all external faultes and abuses in al ciuil and temporal causes that by his supreme authoritie therein not as an others executioner Ergo it punisheth al external abuses and faults in all ecclesiasticall causes and religion and that by his supreme authoritie therein and not as the clergies executioner Eusebius c. vnderstanding the ministerie of the ciuill Magistrate to be about Gods religion and eccle causes so well as temporall The. 61. vntruth Eusebius neuer vnderstoode any such ministerie of the ciuill Magistrate In what things Eusebius vnderstoode the ciuil Magistrats ministerie to consist the B. set downe Eusebius his owne wordes to proue that he vnderstood it so you say he neuer vnderstoode it so but ye set downe neuer a worde neyther here nor in your Counterblaste to proue the contrarie which tyll ye shall be able to do the Byshoppes vnderstanding of Eusebius by his owne wordes is no vntruthe Eusebius saythe that in preaching by hys decrees true godlynesse in setting foorthe the religion of the moste holy lawe and the most blessed faythe the Princes ministerie consisteth in these things so wel as any other or before al other as his best ministerie But these things are not ciuill matters but spirituall and ecclesiasticall Ergo his ministerie by Eusebius vnderstanding consisteth so well in ecclesiasticall or spirituall matters as ciuill or temporall This moste Christian Emperoure did rightly consider as he hadde bene truely taughte of the moste Christian Byshoppes of that tyme that as the Princes haue in charge the mynisterie and gouernement in all manner causes eyther temporall or spirituall The. 62. vntruth impudent and shamelesse concluded but no whit proued And in his Counterblast I say it is a starke and most impudent lye that ye say without any profe Constantine was taught of the Byshoppes that Princes haue the gouernement in all manner causes eyther temporall or spirituall ye conclude after your manner facingly and desperately vvithout any proufe or halfe proufe in the worlde Here are wonderfull boysterous wordes Master Stapleton but greate boast and small roaste as they say For all this hyghe chalenge standeth on I saye and so in déede it appéereth to be your saying but hadde it not béene your saying Master Stapleton I woulde haue thought it hadde béene some cotqueanes cryaleyson and I woulde haue answered a wispe a wispe for setting aside your foule language what vntruthe is here concluded or what concluded that is not proued The Prince hath the setting foorthe of true religion of Gods moste holy lawe and the moste blessed faythe but these thinges are not ciuill but ecclesiasticall and spirituall the Prince hath to puâ—…te awaye and ouerthrowe all euilles that presse the vvoorlde but none presse the worlde more daungerously than superstition Idolatrie erroures heresies scismes sectes and false religion all whiche are no ciuill but ecclesiasticall and spirituall matters The Prince dothe these thinges not as an executioner of an others ministerie but all the dooing hereof is the ministery properly beloÌ„ging to his owne office yea it is his best ministerie Ergo he dothe all these thinges with as muche or more full and proper authoritie of his office â–ª as he dothe any other ciuill thing But his ministerie in ciuill things is by his supreme authoritie vnder God therin whose minister S. Paule calleth him This is the Bishops conclusion moste playne and true all your blackemouthed Rhethorike to the contrarie notwithstanding For this cause also Nicephorus c. compareth Emanuell Paleologus the Emperoure to Constantine For this cause the. 63. vntruthe as shall appeare There is no doubt some great cause that moued you M. Stapleton to put this in your bederoll of vntruthes that the Bishop sayd for this cause And if you were asked for what cause ye doe so it séemeth it would be harde for you to render any and therefore ye take a wise and a short way to tell vs it shall appeare But here ye shewe none nor any at all here appeareth And where it shoulde appeare there appeareth none also except this be sufficient reason onely to denie it and say it is no cause at all For these wordes onely appeare there VVhere ye say for this cause also c. this is no cause at all but is vntrue as of the other Emperour Constantine and muche more vntrue as ye shall good reader straight way vnderstande What cause I pray you is here alleaged and yet this is all that ye say vnto it sauing that as ye sayde before it shoulde appeare referring vs there hither here ye saye as the reader shall straightway vnderstande it And yet neyther straight way nor crooked way ye speake one worde more of the matter but goe about the bushe medling with other matters and not with the truthe or vntruthe hereof any more And so it appeareth nusquam and the reader shall vnderstande it nunquam Neyther is it any maruell if ye can not lette the reader to
haue thought they had done God good seruice too so that he would haue maintayned them And do not you euen so what els maketh ye crie vpon the Princes beyond the seas with all kinde of torments to destroy the Protestants If Princes would aduise them selues or euer they beléeued you so lightly and would not destroy their subiects till they had sit in iudgmâ—…t heard discussed both parties causes throughly ye would not be halfe so hastie Ye would then crie to the contrarie that you must only be iudges they must onely beleue you strike onely them whom you shall bidde them strike Contrarywise where the Princes espying your falshood forsake your errours and sette out euen very milde lawes against you then ye change your coppie and crie out euery thing is extreme crueltie ye are too too sore handled and oppressed then ye extoll beyonde the moone lenitie and sufferance and winche like a gald horse at the least thing that toucheth you And thus euery way do you still shew your selues to be the very Donatistes Now that ye haue as you conceyue with your selfe giuen vs so great a foyle ye enter into your thirde parte saying VVe may now proceede to the remnant of your booke sauing that this in no wise must be ouerhipped that euen by your owne wordes here ye purge M. Feckenham from this crime ye laide vnto him euen now for refusing the proufeâ—… taken out of the old Testament Now for God M. St. since hitherto ye haue cléered him so sclenderly that ye haue more bewrapped him and your selfe also in this crime let nothing in any case be forgotten or ouerhipped that any wayes may helpe the matter forwarde for hitherto it rather hath gone backward but now there is good hope M. Feckenham shall take a good purgation euen of the Bishops owne making that you M. Stap. will minister to him which wil so worke vpon him make him haue so good a stoole that he shal be clerely purged of this crime of Donatistes â—…o to then M. Stapl and let vs sée how apothecarylike you can minister the same For if as ye say say you the order gouernment that Christ left behind in the Gospell new Testament is the order rule gouernment in ecclesiastical causes practised by the Kings of the old Testament then will it follow that M. Feckenham yelding to the gouernment of the new doth not exclude but â—…ather comprehende the gouernment of the old Testament also both being especially as ye say all one Is this the purgation M. St. that ye will minister to M. Feckenham would to God ye could make him receyue anâ—… brooke this sentence if you would take it also I warrent ye it would so purge you of your old leuen sowre dough that ye should no more be Donatists nor Papistes neither if ye receyue and well digest this little sentence The order and gouernment that Christ left behinde in the new Testament is the order rule and gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes practised by the kinges of the old Testament For then giue ye Princes that that ye haue all this while denied theÌ„ But do ye thinke M. Feckenham will wittingly and willingly receiue this sentence that which in déede followeth necessarily thereon The sentence is true but M. Feck for all that may be a lier and you another For I warrant you M. Feck granteth this no â—…urder than as the Donatists he may temper it to make it seeme to serue his turne Why say you if he grant the onâ—… he doth not exclude but rather comprehende the other Nay M. St. M. Feck coÌ„preheÌ„des it not but shoonnes it as agaynst him by your owne confession But the olde being comprehended by the newe Master Feckenham is contrarie wise by force of argument graunting the newe enforced by the olde Not that he comprehendeth it but is comprehended of it and driuen to yeelde thereto of his aduersarie by conclusion of reasoning the one including the other But rather than he will do this voluntarily he will rather exclude them both the olde and the newe testament also and as he hath done burne them both togither The. 20. Diuision THe Bishop in this diuision first gathereth his full conclusion of all these testimonies into this argument What gouernment order and dutifulnesse so euer belonging to any God hath prefigured and promised before hande by his Prophetes in the holy scriptures of the olde Testament to be performed by Christ those of his Kingdom that is the gouernment order and dutifulnesse set forth and required in the Gospell or new testament But that faythfull Emperours Kinges and Rulers ought of dutie as belonging to their office to claime and take vpon them the gouernment authoritie power care and seruice of God the Lorde in matters of Religion or causes Ecclesiasticall was an order and dutifulnesse for them prefigured and forepromised of God by his Prophetes in the Scriptures of the olde Testament as Saint Augustine hath sufficiently witnessed Ergo Christian Emperors Kings and Rulers owe of dutie as belonging to their office to clayme and take vpon them the gouernment authoritie power care and seruice of God their Lorde in matters of Religion or spirituall ecclesiasticall causes is the gouernment order and dutifulnesse setforth and required in the Gospell or new Testament The Bishop hauing thusfully concluded these Testimonies he yet confirmeth them further with more authorities of the Prophete Esay with Lyra his exposition therevpon and the example of Constantine for proufe of the same At this master Stapleton first carpeth by certaine marginall notes or euer he blowe vp the Chapter of his Counterblast thereto The minor of the Bishops conclusion for the Princes gouernment authoritie power care c. he grauÌ„teth but not such supreme gouernment sayth he as the othe prescribeth He graunteth also Saint Augustine to witnesse this the Princes gouernment but no such large and supreme gouernment as we attribute now to them Againe he graunteth this supreme gouernment is in causes ecclesiasticall â–ª but not in all causes ecclesiasticall And so graunting that the Bishop concludeth well in some such thing you conclude not sayth he in all things and causes and therefore you conclude nothing agaynst vs. Lastly he graunteth all the Bishops testimonies concerning Constantine but he denieth that it maketh any thing for vs. Nowe after these marginall notes prefixed he entreth into his Chapter pretending to open the weakenesse of the Bishops conclusion and of other his proues oute of holie Scripture And first his aunswere to this diuision he deuideth in thrée partes First he graunteth all that the Bishop hath sayde but denieth that it is sufficient Secondly he quarrelleth about this that the Bishop calleth the Emperour Constantine a Bishop as Eusebius nameth him Thirdly he chalengeth him for calling Idoll Image Now to the first parte to sée whether all these grauntes make sufficiently for vs and conclude against him yea
giue the aduersaries occasion of sclaundering him For if they yea eueÌ„ vvithout this perfecuted him as a seditious person how much more would they haue persecuted him if he had accepted the kingdome offered of the people Thus euen til this day fleeth he froÌ„ those that only seeke carnall things in him bycause no parte of his spiritual giftes loketh on theÌ„ he despiseth them that are occupied about vile bags â–ª to vvit being giuen to their belly filthinesse He only giueth himselfe to them that seeke spirituall things in him that can say our coÌ„uersation is in heauen Not without cause therfore Christ here fled being sought for vnto a kingdome vvho being sought for vnto deathe offered himselfe freely For first by this he condemned our pryde or coueteousnesse or ambition or deintinesse Secondly he taught to contemne the glorie of the vvorlde than the vvhiche nothing is more vaine and not to feare the aduersitie of the vvorlde than the vvhiche nothing is more shorte Thirdly he taught heerein that those things are but small that in the worlde seeme to be mostegreat They thought they had offered Christe a great thing but he despised it as a litle thing VVe are far of an other iudgement Whom he meaneth by this vve loke a litle before concerning theÌ„ that offered the kingdome to christ This fact saith he declareth what the flesh seeketh in Christ euen his ovvn Cosins that is to say fleshly humaine things Christe is set forth before vs that in him we should seeke the forgiuenesse of sinnes righteousnesse eternal life But the carnall man seeketh nothing in him but licence carnall libertie and the filling of the paunche For hee that is of the earth speaketh and thinketh of earthly thinges yea suche is the nature of the fleshe that it abuseth all the giftes of God and seeketh farre other things in them than God woulde So the fleshely man in the creatures that are giuen to our vse and to this that God might be knowne and feared seeketh no other thing than pleasure And when by theÌ„ he ought to be caried vnto the creator he sticketh in theÌ„ and worshippeth theÌ„ So in the lawe which was giuen of God for the knowledge of sinne the carnall Iewes sought righteoushesse euen as the Papistes doe and so nowe also all those carnall men that in the power of the sworde seeke not that that God wil but only ambition pryde c. yea and that in these thinges that appertaine to the spirituall gouernement those carnall Pastors seeke onely honor ryches idlenesse delightes when as Christ ordeined them to be teachers guides Apostles c. For no other cause than for the edifying of his bodie Thus saith Frier Ferus againste his owne fleshely spiritualtie séeking in Christes spirituall kingdome a worldly kingdome which for these causes abouesaide and not onely for the originall that Maister Saunders here onely mentioneth he refused to be made a King. The like shift Maister Saunders vseth to the other place Luc. 12. of Christs refusall to be a iudge betwene the brethreÌ„ for the diuision of their inheritance saying who made me a iudge or deuider ouer you as though he shoulde say neither the common weale hath made me a iudge neither the Emperor hath made me a iudge As thoughe Christ refused to be their iudge not for that he would not be such a iudge â—…ut for that he was not made such a iudge by humaine authoritie For of such a iudge saith he these brethren thought whether they thought him to be such a iudge or no iâ—… not apparant Maister Saunders and if we may go by coniectures probabilities it rather séemeth the contrarie For neicher could they sée any such tokens in him to haue bin authorised from those that were â—…hen the Magistrats his words going before do argue they could not conueniently so thinke of him both ratling vp the Phariseis that had the humaine authoritie bidding his Disciples not to mistrust what to answere when they shoulde come before the powers Magistrates which these brethren hearing might easily conceiue that Christ himselfe was no such earthly Magistrate But to the causes wherfore Christ refused it that as before euen of the Papists mouthes themselues Hofmeister one of your sloutest champions hath these words Truely those things that haue bin spokeÌ„ and heard from the beginning of this Gospel do ynough declare the kingdom of Christ not to be of this world neither that he would raigne temporally in the world sith he taketh not souldiors that caÌ„ oppugne others but fishermeÌ„ readier to suffer thaÌ„ to strike And so in this place with most manifest wordes Christ declareth that he came not for this purpose to take vpon him the office of a Magistrate but rather that he might raigne in our harts so that it might be our hap to come to the eternal goods whatsoeuer hapned of our tem porall goods Therfore when he was interrupted of a certaine Iewe that he would helpe him in recouering his inheritance he aunswered Man who hath made me a ludge or deuider ouer you As though he shoulde say hath not this worlde iudges that may decide so base controuersies it is not appointed vnto me that this or that man shoulde waxe rich by inheritance but that all men should come to the inheritance of life immortall But in these words Christ woulde betoken many things to wit that he which hath an Apostolicall office ought not to be wrapped with prophane and silthie affaires For so the Apostle saith otherwhere No maÌ„ going to warfare vnder God entangleth himselfe with worldly businesse And the Apostles say all at once it is not meete foÌ„r vs to leaue the word of God and attend on the tables Christ also by this reprouing woulde declare that his doctrine taketh not away the Magistrates offices but rather confirmeth theÌ„ VVhervpon he saith also else where render to Cesar that that is Cesars And wheÌ„ his Disciples striued for prehemineÌ„ce he said â–ª the kings of the nations gouerne them so forth VVhereby he declared that neither he himself nor his ought as they call theÌ„ to be secular iudges neither did he by this refusing abolishe the order of the Magistrate but much more as we haue said confirmed it Thus far your owne Doctor Hofmeister againste you that the entent of Christe refusing to be a iudge herein was chiefely against such vsurpation of worldly Magistracie as the Pope and his Prelates do exercise But say you Christ in that he was appoynted of God to be iudge by his incarnation concerning that parte he saide vnto them that they should beware of couetousnes for he saw that they draue not as yet their inheritance to a spirituall ende that they might beare the iudgement of Christ. As who should say if they had béen Christians he would then haue béen a temporall iudge ouer them that is to say if they had done their duetie
infidelitie beeing expelled and the furie of discorde remooued I shoulde reuoke the people to the knoweledge of faythe and to the â—…eloweshippe of the Catholyke Churche who serued errour vnder the name of Religion Lo master Stapleton here ye sée farre other endes of the ciuile gouernment of Christian Princes than as you most falsely and iniuriouslye alleage to preserue them from all outwarde iniuryes oppressions and enemyes and further to preserue them for theyr safetie and quietnesse for theyr wealth abundaunce and prosperous maintenaunce and that it tendeth and reacheth no further And that thys is common as well to the heathenishe as the Christian gouernement Fye for shame master Stapleton that euer suche heathenishe woordes shoulde procéede out of your catholyke lips But ye are halfe ashamed I sée and woulde mollifie the matter so muche as ye can with a proper qualification that those thinges which these godly Princes did although they did them yet therein were they no more but Aduocates and so saye you All good Princes doe and haue done ayding and assisting the Churche decrees made for the repression of vice and errors for the maintenance of vertue true religion Not as supreme gouernors themselues in all causes spirituall and temporall but as faythfull Aduocates in ayding and assisting the spirituall power that it may the sooner and more effectually take place As ye bring this shifting distinction of Aduocate to late M. Stap. hauing before quite debarred the Princes Ciuill gouernement of goyng anye iote further than ye there did bounde it to meddle no further wyth ayding and assisting the spirituall power than a Saracene doeth ayde and assist it gyuing Princes no more leaue to be Aduocates thereof than ye make the Turke or Souldan saying this theyr so limitted gouernement is common as well to both Heathen as Christian euen so this your office of Aduocateshippe came to late into the Churche by manye yeares to debarre anye of these forenamed Princes in theyr owne supreme gouernement aboute 〈◊〉 matters to make it sownde as though they onely had béene the ayders assisters or Aduocates vnto others and not them selues the doers Whereas on the contrarie they were the verye doers thoughe not of those actions that appertâ—…yned to the Ministers offices yet of the gouerning and directing bothe the Ministers and their actions yea and the principall ouerséers and supreme rulers of them as euen their déedes and wordes before rehearsed plainly declare As for thys shyft of Aduocation was long sithence after theyr tymes deuysed Whiche office of Aduocateshippe séemeth to bée deâ—…yued from this fonde errour of the Papistes that the seculer power is immediately and primarelye as they terme it in the Pope but he hath not also immediatelye the exercise or execution of it but gyueth that to the Prince and so the Prince becommeth the Popes Aduocate or rather his executioner And thus was first say they Carolus Magnus Pope Adrians Aduocate executing the Byshoppe of Romes will agaynste Desiderius King of Lumbardie Wherevpon Charles was made Emperour by the Pope notwithstanding Michaell the Emperour was then lyuing at Constantinople Propter hoc dicunt sayeth Dante 's Aligherius quòd omnes qui fuerunt Romanorum imperatores post ipsum ipse Aduocatâ—… Ecclesiae sunt debent ab Ecclesia aduocari For thys thyng all that were Emperours of Rome after hym and hee hym selfe are Aduocates of the Churche and oughte of the Churche to be called vpon Lupolous de Babenberge also telleth that Pope Zacharie declarauit c. declared or pronounced that Childericus Pepins master shoulde be deposed and Pepine be made the King of Fraunce whome when Pope Steuen the seconde annoynted with his sonnes Carolus and Carolomanus French Kings Ipsos specialiter elegit sayth Lupoldus ad sedem Apostolicam defendendam Ex hac electione putoque reges imperatores Romanorum sint vsque in hodiernum diem ecclesia Romanae aduocati de qua Aduocatia loquuntur iura canonica He chose them especially to defende the Apostolicall Sea. Of this election I thinke it commeth that Kinges and Emperours of the Romaynes are euen to this daye the Aduocates of the Romayne Churche of whiche Aduocacie speake the Canonicall lawes Thus you sée the originall of your deuised Aduocateship commeth nothing neare the examples of the sayde godly Princes béeing themselues supreme gouernours in Ecclesiasticall matters before your Aduocateshippe was first hatched No reason therefore the Punie shoulde debarre the Seniour And yet it is but a sielie shift of your Canonistes descant rather detecting the vnlawfull encroching of the Pope than defeating anye parte of the Princes authoritie in this hys supreme gouernement As for those Princes Carolus Magnus his sonnes and other Emperours since theyr tymes were nothing suche Aduocates as your Pope and you woulde nowe pretende that is to say to be your onelye executioners But as these stories testifie euen these Aduocates also were the chiefe directours and supreme gouernours of all those things they did Yea the Pope hym selfe so well as anye other Byshoppe in theyr territoryes was subiecte to them They ayded and assisted the Byshoppe of Rome I graunt when he humblie aduocated then he called vppon them for ayde and assystance agaynst the wrongers of him But the Pope by commaundement called them not and they obeyed his calling and so became his aduocates which is cleane contrarie to an aduocates office And therefore once agayne your argument is nought They were aiders and aduocates Ergo not supreme gouernours But M. St. will further proue by his former ensamples why this supreme gouernement can not appertayne to the Prince For this supreme gouernement sayth he can he not haue vnlesse he were him selfe a spirituall man no more than can a man be master of a shippe that neuer was a mariner A maior that neuer was a citizen Hys principal gouernement resting in ciuill matters and in that respecte as I haue sayde he is supreme gouernour of all persons in his Realme but not of all their actions but in suche sense as I haue specified and least of all the actions of spirituall men especially of those which are most appropriate to them which can not be vnlesse he were him selfe a spirituall man. You frame your similitude very vnproportionably M. Stap â–ª from the master of a shippe or the maior of a citie to a Prince or supreme gouernour Either of these béeing particuler offices vnder a supreme gouernour that maketh lawes euen both for maiors in cities and masters of shippes also â–ª And albeit no argumeÌ„t builded on similitudes is firme to proue or improue any controuersie though rightly applied they may lighteÌ„ the matter to him that assenteth but not enforce it to him that denieth notwithstanding your similitudes as they proue nothing so they nothing lighten but more obscure the matter yet if these your similitudes were admitted froÌ„ maior and pilot to supreme gouernour what true conclusion can ye inferre vpon
and so I feare in the ende ye must be fayne to do Nay say you it frameth not so smoothely and closely to youre purpose as ye vvene Well Master Stapleton it hath hitherto so framed that ye are fayne to gyue ouer youre tackelyng and forsake the perfourmaunce of youre promyse and to séeke oute other shiftes of descante so that althoughe ye woulde beare vs in hande it frameth not so smoothelie and closelie for the Bishoppe as hée thinkes yet you graunt thereby that it frameth to his purpose But as for your purpose for all youre olde or newe stuffe it neyther frameth wyde nor close smoothe nor roughe but bringes it out of frame For what an argument call ye this Though Moyses was no prieste yet Moyses was a prophete so well as a Prince Ergo Princes in that respect Moyses was a Prince may not followe his princely steppes Was not Saule also for the while a Prophet Num Saul inter prophetas Was not Debora a Prophetesse and yet a Princesse too or Iudge ouer Israel Was not Dauid a Prophete and is commonly called Regius propheta the Kingly Prophete Neuerthelesse all Christian Princes maye and oughte to folowe his princely supreme gouernement And yet you cry Giue me now M. Horne princes prophetes giue me princes and lawemakers by especiall order and appoyntmente ordeined of GOD. Doe ye not sée howe fondly ye reason and howe ye confute your selfe â–ª Yée reason as thoughe there were no difference to be putte betwéene those especiall giftes and appointmentes and the ordinarie gifte of their Princely authoritie bycause one Prince had bothe and that after an extraordinarie and especiall sorte but if those commaundementes lawes and giftes of prophecies were suche specialties as you saye ordeined of God then do your self seuer them from the prince ly authoritie And why do ye then demaund suche prerogatiues in euery Prince whiche they had not in respâ—… â–ª they were Princes but in other especiall respects But by this your fonde rule if bycause they had suche especiall priuileges commaundementes or giftes therfore they are not to be broughte in for an example of the authoritie then you must not alleage them for the Priestes or bishops authoritie in Ecclesiast causes neyther except your Priests Bishops haue the lyke prerogatiues and that God wold haue as great authoritie giuen to them as he would and commanded to be giuen to Moyses And thus your argument maketh directly againste your selfe Yea you may hereby exclude al Princes from al ciuil gouernement too whiche if we proued they might haue bicause Moyses ordered and directed all the Iudiciall lawes of Gods people may ye not replie on this fashion and say Giue me Princes and lawmakers by special order appointment ordeined of God For you knowe wée can giue you none in these lawes neyther that are equall to Moyses May not therfore Moyses ensample herein be alleaged for the Princes authoritie in makyng ciuill lawes bicause the Prince maketh them not with suche speciall order and appointment ordeined of God as Moses did Yes M. Stap. Moyses authoritie may well be alleaged for al Princes authoritie although they haue not the like gifts that Moyses Iosue or Dauid had Yea those singular ornamentes of God in them ioyned to their princely authoritie make so 〈◊〉 an argument to feare Princes from doing the like things bicause they haue not the like excellent giftes that they be rather encouragementes to set such singular Princes gouernement as patternes to folow euermore before their eyes and the better those Princes were the better theyr ensamples be Where as you reason contrarywise such a Prince was more excelleÌ„t than princes be now Ergo our Princes now may not take example of him but ye shoulde conclude that they oughte to take example of him the rather And euen for these causes such Princes are examples to all other bicause they so excell all other So men set their children in writing to the best and most cunning penman at the least to haue them come the nearer to him so muche as they can though they caÌ„not fully attain to his perfectioÌ„ not to say tushe he writes too fine for them and therfore they must not take ensamples of him Yea if a learned Schoolemaister were also an excellent diuine myght not the same man be reckoned for a schoolemaister yea rather for a paterne and ensample for other schoolemaisters to follow bicause of his singular gift to traine the children vp in the feare knowledge of God so well as in the rudimentes of Grammer And will ye then debarre Moyses from being an example to other Princes bicause he was not only a Prince but a Prophete also bicause he had more excellente giftes and prerogatiues than other Princes haue But here thynking thereby the more to abase and dashe Christian Princes oute of countenaunce from taking example of this excellente Prince Moyses ye mounte so highe into the prayse of him that lyke to the Fryer which in the prayse of saincte Frauncis extolling him aboue all the Sainctes aboue Seraphin and Cherubyn yea aboue Christe coulde fynde no place in Heauen to sette him in so where in the prayse of Moyses ye shoulde referre him vnto Christe ye ouershoote your selfe and referre Christe vnto him making Christe to be terminum à quo and Moses terminum ad quem â–ª Moyses sayeth saye you The Lorde thy God will rayse thee vp a prophete from among thyne owne nation and of thy brethren suche a one as my selfe him shalte thou heare Ergo Châ—…ist is so to be hearde of vs as Moyses was of the â—…wes Hereuppon preposterously ye inuerte the reason backewarde not from Moyses to Christe of whome Moyses knowledged hym selfe but a fygure but from Christe agayne to Moyses as though Christe also were a fygure of him saying As Christe is a kyng a Prophet a Prieste and a Bishoppe to vs so was Moyses to them a Prince â–ª a Prophete a Priest and a Bishop As Christe is of vs to be hearde and obeyed â—…s vvell in all matters Ecclesiasticall as temporall so was Moyses to be hearde and obeyed of the Iewes in matters and causes as well temporall as spirituall What a manifest writhing of Scripture is this Who playeth Cacus parte here that drewe Hercules â—…en by the tayles backwarde and so stole them into his theeuishâ—… denne Doe not you so hale this testimonie of Scripture backwarde lyke the witche that sayde hir Pater noster backewarde to make hir payle goe forewarde saying As Christe is King Prophete Prieste and Bishop so was Moyses As Christe is to be hearde and obeyed so was Moyses Where by the testimonie alleaged ye shold rather haue reasoned forwarde thus As Moyses was Prince Prophet priest bishop to theÌ„ so should Christ be to vs As Moyses was hearde and obeyed of them so shoulde Christe be of vs This had bene the right and orderly reason but you sawe that then youre wresting the Text woulde
of all Nations Prouinces and Countreys of what so euer qualitie or condition they were and in all maner causes if the defendant require an ecclesiastiall iudgement it be not lawfull from the Bishops sentence to appeale any higher This lawe is here brought forth master Stapleton very vntimely and impertinently nothing to proue or unproue the ensample or doings of King Dauid vnlesse ye woulde proue it on this wiâ—…e â—…uo alleageth a lawe of Theodosius binding all his subiects of all Nations Prouinces and Countreys of whatsoeuer qualitie and condition they were and in all maner causes if the defendant require an ecclesiasticall iudgement it be not lawful from the Bishops sentence to appeale any higher Ergo king Dauid made the like lawe to this or this was like to king Dauids lawes Howe thys hangeth togither like your Germaines lippes that before yâ—… spake of let others iudge King Dauids lawes were not for priests to be such Iudges but for priests to be subiect to these orders that they should obserue and obey them porter singer Leuit Priest or Prophet high or low of what qualitie or condition soeuer they were These lawes of king Dauid were as ye say by Gods commaundement by the mouth of his Prophets and therefore coulde not be yll The law you cite of Iuâ—… from Theodosius though at that time it were good vpon some godly consideration yet it is not ius diuinum the law of god it is but mans law the princes law sheweth a chief authoritie in him to giue such liberties to the clergie which as they may be very wel vsed especially when princes do looke well to them that they vse their gifts offices and priuileges dutifully so haue they since by your pope and prelates bene very ill vsed euen to the treading down of the doners of theÌ„ Theodosius Iuo or any other And as the Iuy taking al his streÌ„gth growth from the Oke so coÌ„passeth ouergroweth it and that by his gréene pleasant embracings of it till the Iuy haue quite destroied the whole bole of the Oke so haue your clergie by such franchesies liberties of princes at the first by compassing them with counterfeit holines subtile deuises so growne vp aboue them in riches strength and possessions that at the length ye haue destroied brought to nothing all their supreme estate ouer you For whereto bring ye out this priuiledge of the Emperor Theodosius that none might appeale to any higher sentence than the B. but as ye haue brought it now in the end to cal coraÌ„ vobis as your vnderling eueÌ„ the prince himself from whoÌ„ ye coÌ„fesse this your priuilege came And thus ye alleage king Iuo his lawes as it were an Iuy bush to behold how your popish prelates do play the Iuies part But it is hie time with other sharper lawes that princes pull vp such Iuies by the rootes Now as ye haue thus shifted off the answere to king Dauids doings redressings ordrings lawes and chiefe gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes so to knit vp the knot euen like a fawning Iuy about princes your selfe And surely say you no Prince more recognized their obedience to the spirituall magistrate in spirituall causes than such as were most readie and carefull to ayde further and to their power direct all spirituall matters This therefore proueth well that godly princes do further and set foorth godly religion by meanes seemely to their vocations Why master Stap. who desireth or attributeth more to Princes than to set forth Gods religion by meanes semely to theyr vocation If this ensample of Dauid as you say proue thus much then to gouerne direct commaunde and appoynt the Priests yea your hiest Priestes as Dauid did is no vnseemely meanes to their vocation nor vnsitting euen for your Popes vocation to obey the Princes appoyntment and commaundement And if to direct all spirituall matters may be done of Princes yet the obedience to the spirituall Pastor in spirituall matters still recognized then doth not the Quéenes Maiestie any preiudice to them recognizing to them a dutifull obedience in the ministration of spirituall matters for all that she fetteth forth Gods true religion and directeth all spirituall matters as ye graunt she maye Which is as much as the Bishop or any of vs desire or hir Maiestie taketh on hir But say you here is no maner of inckling that Princes do or did euer beare the supreme gouernment in all ecclesiastical matters to decide and determine to alter and chaunge to set vp and plucke downe what religion liked them by their princely authoritie and mere soueraigntie Haue ye gone about to impugne this all this while M. Stapleton then I see well it was not for nothing that alwayes ye aunswered so wide Ye needed not haue sought so many shifting corners The Bishop proponed one thing and you aunswered another Doth the Bishop maintaine or euer sayde that Princes might decide determine alter chaunge set vp pluck downe what religion liked them by their Princely authoritie and mere soueraigntie Quote me the lease name me the place where once the Bishoppe so said Or doth the Q. Maiestie take any such thing vpon hir These be but your wicked I had almost sayde traytâ—…rous slaunders to desace hir highnesse to hir simple subiectes And no doubt so ye report to other Countreys of hir Maiestie as ye write here most opprobiously agaynst hir It is your Pope agaynst whom ye should make this conclusion for he taketh on him to decide and determine to alter and chaunge to set vp and pluck downe what religion liketh him The Quéenes Maiestie God be highly praysed for hir as a most godly supreme gouernour feloweth king Dauids ensample and neyther your wicked conclusion toucheth hir nor these your shifting counterblasts come nere the matter in hande The. 14. Diuision AFter King Dauid the Bishop alleageth the wise King Salomon his sonne citing a briefe summe of his actes that inferre his supreme authoritie For answere to this Master Stapleton chooseth out one act of Salomon as a full aunswere to all the rest besydes and sayth The weight of this obiection resteth in the deposition of Abiathar the high Priest. The weight of this aunswere resteth first vpon a manifest vntruth The Bishop alleaged besides Abiathars deposition the placing of Sadocke the placing of the arke in the temple of Salomon the dedication of the temple the offring sacrifices blessing the people directing the Priestes Leuites and other Church officers after his fathers orders and the Priestes obedience in euery thing to the kinges commaundement none of these obiections resting on Abiathers deposition Onely the néerest that commeth to it is the placing of Sadocke in Abiathars roome And yet sayth M. Stap. the weight of this obiection resteth in the deposition of Abiathar the high priest And so thinketh if he fully aunswere this he hath satisfied all the rest Nowe since M. Stapleton
euen the name of Ministers as euen your selfe do M. St. other where how soeuer here it came vppon you to pretende to bestow a reuerent speach thereon But the Apostles thought not scorne of the name but willed men so to estéeme them as the ministers of God and the dispensers of his mysteries but as your papall Bishops and Priestes be nothing like Gods ministers so least of all are they like the Prophets that were then except ye meane the prophets of Baal that maintayned idolatrie and pleasant leasings to maintayne them selues at Achabs table and fill their paunches with the chéere of Beel and the Dragon The Lords prophets they be not like neither in preaching propheciyng or ought els And yet saith M. Stapl. they be the onely ministers of God now in spirituall matters as prophets were then in the like Why M. Stapl. were the prophets then onely gods ministers in spirituall matters if ye say no how doth your tale hang togither why say ye they are onely Gods ministers now as Prophets were then in the like since the Prophetes were not onely Gods ministers then as ye pretende for your Bishops and Priestes to be onely now If they were not onely then no more be yours only now admitting they were in the like If ye say yea they were onely then Gods ministers as the Bishops and Priests be now what were the Bishops Priestes and Leuites then that were no prophetes were not they Gods ministers in spirituall matters also if yea then were not the Prophets in the like to your Bishops and Priestes that are as ye say only gods ministers now Make your tale for shame hang better togither and withall tell what you meane by this dubble shuffling Ye tolde vs before that your Bishops and Priestes now are like the Bishops and Priestes then and that not the Prophets but the Priestes had that prerogatiue which ye haue so often craked vpon your generall rule of iudgemeÌ„t whereby ye vrged then a supremacie not in the Prophets but in the Bishops Priests And now seing that ye caÌ„ not proue it in these examples where the Bishops Priests obey the Princes ordinance as his inferiours ye shift of the matter to the Prophetes say now your priests prelates succéede are like the Prophetes let go the former claime of priests But these are but your shifts for if the Prophets had this supreme gouernment then the priests had it not If it appertained to the hie priestes chayre so long as the priesthoode of Moses continued then it belonged not to the Prophetes and thus ye contrary your selfe But in very déede neither of theÌ„ both had it but the Prince vnder god They were both Gods ministers in their diuerse functioÌ„s and yet subiecte to their Princes as for the popish Bishops and priestes are like to neither of both The. 17. Diuision THe Bishop with the like example of Iosias concludeth his collection of the Princes in the Old Testament and herevppon maketh in effect this reason All these doinges of these kinges are commended as acceptable seruice and right in the sight of God But the clayming taking vppon them the supreme gouernment ouer the ecclesiasticall persons of all degrees the ruling gouerning and directing them in all their functions in al manner causes belonging to religion were the doings of all these kinges Ergo For Princes to clayme and take vppon them the like supreme gouernment is their right and acceptable seruice in the sight of God. The counterblast of master Stapleton to this diuision is thrée folde First to the example of Iosias Secondly to the argument Thirdly by setting vp newe issues and markes to improue all that the Bishop hath hitherto exemplified as vnsufficient to proue the issue To the first part sayth Master Stapleton King Iosias traueled full godly in suppressing Idolatrie by his kingly authoritie VVhat then so doe good catholike Princes also to plucke downe the Idolles that yee and your brethren haue of late set vp and yet none of them take them selues for supreme heades in all causes spirituall This is all that he aunswereth to the example of Iosias First where the Bishop sayd Iosias had the like care to the foresayde Princes for religion and vsed in the same sorte his Princely authoritie in reforming all abuses in al maner causes ecclesiastical To this aunswereth master Stapleton He traueled full godly in suppressing Idolatrie by his kingly authoritie As though this were a full aunswere denying or graunting the Bishops assertion or as thoughe besides the suppressing of Idolatrie he did nothing else Where as the scripture is plaine how hee also redde the lawe before all his subiects how he made the couenant with God that all hys subiectes shoulde walke after the Lorde and obserue all hys commaundements testimonies and ceremonies Howe hée sware them all to kéepe this couenant Howe he commaunded them to kéepe suche a solemne passeouer as was neuer kept by any of all the kings before him How the Priestes appoynted not themselues but he appoynted them in their offices Howe they exhorted not him but howe he exhorted them to prepare themselues sayth Lyra dutifully to celebrate with deuotion the solemnitie of the passeouer Howe he commaunded the arke to be set vp in the Sanctuarie and to beare it no more on their shoulders Howe he commaunded theÌ„ to minister to the Lord and to his people Israel How he commaunded theÌ„ to prepare them selues according to the houses of their auÌ„cesters in their orders aâ—… Dauid had appointed them How he coÌ„maunded them to minister in the sanctuary by their families and Leuiticall courses How he commaunded them to be sanctified and then to offer the passeouer How he commauÌ„ded them also to prepare or sanctifie the residue of their brethren And when al things were prepared how the Priestes kept their stations and the Leuites were in their orders according as the king had commaunded them And so saith the text after it hath reckened vp the manner of the Priests Leuites singers and porters ministeries all the seruice or worship was orderly accomplished in that day to keepe the passeouer and offer their burnt offrings vppon the aultare of the Lorde according to the commaundement of Iosias the King. All these things M. Stapl. were done by his authoritie and commaundement But all these thinges are matters and causes ecclesiasticall Ergo his authoritie and commaundement stretched furder than in suppressing Idolatrie yea â—…uen ouer the chiefest matters ecclesiasticall But all this had M. Stap. quite forgotten and therefore we must beare with him though he answere the Bishop only with this Iosias traueled full godly in suppressing Idolatrie by his kingly authoritie Wherein we sée also how doubtfully he speaketh for when he perceyued it could not be denied but that which he did he did by his kingly authoritie yet would he not say that he suppressed Idolatrie by
his kingly authoritie but he traueled full godly in suppressing Idolatrie by his kingly authoritie as though his kingly authoritie stretched no furder than to trauell in the execution of seruing the priestly authoritie But the Scripture is most euident that his kingly authoritie and godly trauell was not in executing the Priestes commaundement but the priestly authoritie traueled in the seruice and executing of the Princes commandement For as he destroyed all their Idols and places of Idolatry and abolished or depriued as Uatablus expoundeth it the false priestes of their priestly dignitie so he commaunded by this his kingly authoritie all the true priestes both the high priest Helchias and vnder him the inferiour priestes and porters to trauell likewise in bringing out to him all the Idolatrous vessels and he summoned or gathered togither all the Priestes And all that there is done is named to be done by him that is to say eyther by him selfe or by his appoyntment and commaundement through his kingly authoritie both in abolishing the false worship and in establishing and directing the true worship of God not onely in generall but also in perticuler yea in the chiefest spirituall matters ouer all the Clergie and the high Priest so well as all his other subiectes and all this was done of him by his kingly authoritie But what then saith M. Stapleton to all this as it were with a phillip to ouerturne al the matter with his Masters what then Forsooth M. St. then it was not his godly trauell in a seruiceable execution of the priestes commaundements but his godly trauell in commaunding them their godly trauel in a seruiceable execution of the kinges commaundements And then it was not onely in suppressing Idolatrie as you limite it but in refourming establishing directing appointing the whole true worship of God besides And then was this his kingly authoritie by the which he did all these things though many of them were Moses Dauids yea the Prophetes former ordinances and Gods commaundement long before yet were they done here by the kinges owne authoritie which in the last example of Ezechias concerning Dauid ye would not admitte bicause it was Gods appoyntment by the hande of his Prophetes Such as were many of these things like wise and yet now ye graunt they were done also euen by Iosias his kingly authoritie And then I pray you what so great a difference finde ye betwéene these twaine the King doth it by his kingly authoritie that here ye confesse and the King doth it by his owne authoritie that there ye denied is not the kinges kingly authoritie the Kinges owne authoritie and yet is all his authoritie from god It followeth then to your what then by your owne confession and the manifest Scripture that this his owne kingly authoritie of Iosias was next vnder God the chiefe and supreme ouer all the Priestes Leuites Singers Porters or any other so well as the people in all abolishing of false religion and in all commaunding and directing the true worship and religion of God which are the principall causes ecclesiasticall And what then say you to this M. Stapleton doth it not cléerely proue the Bishops assertion against M. FeckenhaÌ„ for al your counterblasting it with your bigge what then Thinke ye it proues he did no more then than you will suffer Princes to do now abusing them with the title of good catholike Princes and bereauing them of their good catholike and princely authoritie that by the examples of these good catholike princes they ought to take vpon them and your Pope vsurpes it from them And yet you say to abase the doings of Iosias so do good catholike Princes also to plucke downe the Idolles that ye and your brethren haue of late set vp and yet none of them tooke them selues for supreme heades in all causes spirituall The question is not nowe Master Stapleton what those your good catholike Princes as ye call them take them selues to be whome you haue spoyled and make beléeue what it pleaseth you to tell them that their kingly authoritie reacheth no furder but to be seruiceable trauelers and executioners of your commaundements But the question is here what these Princes mencioned in the holy Scriptures tooke them selues to be which appereth by their appointinges and coÌ„maundinges of their Clergie in their functions that they tooke them selues for their Clergies supreme gouernours in these matters And so ought al good catholike princes by their examples to estéeme of them selues and of their high calling and charge in ecclesiasticall causes and trauayle by their godly supreme gouernment to discharge the same Where ye say therefore so do good catholike princes meaning those that submitte themselues with all the gouernment of religion and all ecclesiasticall matters to your Pope and his prelates not medling them selues therewith as did Iosias and these other godly Kinges whome we sée to haue medled with the gouernment and direction thereof it is apparant false and their doinges herein are no more alike than blacke is like to white than to commaunde directe and appoint others is like to be of the same parties in the same matters commaunded directed and appointed themselues than gouerning is like seruing than one contrarie is like to another And yet you say for ye care not what ye saie as did king Iosias so do your good catholike princes now But what is that they do plucke down the Idols say you that you and your brethern haue set vp Whether we our bretheren or you and your bretheren haue set vp Idols let it fal out betwene vs as it shall hereafter we shall come to the reckening onely stande you to this M. Stapleton that the plucking downe of Idols belongeth to Princes by their kingly authoritie and that so they ought to account of them selues their authoritie which if they had done and diligently executed this their kingly authoritie your shifte of Images and Idols had not auayled you for euen to your moste famous Images shrines and pilgrimages hath foule idolatrie bene committed as the chiefe of your brethren them selues are fayne to confesse and crye out vpon and yet durst your princes neuer pull them downe nor you would euer haue suffred thâ—… so to do for your lucre lay muche therein but caused the Princes to mainteine and enriche suche Images as you dayly did set vp As for the Idols that we should haue set vp who séeth not we haue so little set vp any that we reiecte for Idols those which ye call your Images and professe that neither they nor any other thing besides God nor God in them or by them is to be worshipped but God alone and that in spirite and truthe and so receiue his playne simple worde and sacraments But if as ye sayde before those Princes pull downe our heresies and those are the Idols that we set vp except this presupposall should be graunted you that those be heresies which we mainteine
or no. Now ye may conclude sayth master Stapleton that there is some regiment that Princes may take vpon them in causes Ecclesiasticall Thankes be giuen to God master Stapleton that yet now at the length contrary to all your felowes to all your owne wranglings hitherto the force of the truth hath enforced you to yelde thus much to the B. ye graunt Now that Princes haue some regiment in ecclesiasticall causes which hitherto except the making a law of burning or punishing be an eccl. cause ye haue altogither denied vnto Princes But what is this some regiment that ye graunt theÌ„ now for neither we graunt them al regiment but some regiment also that is to say a supreme regiment And you also denie not in your marginall note that they may take vpon theÌ„ in ecclesiastical matters supreme gouernmeÌ„t authority power care but not say you such supreme gouernment as the othe prescribeth so that here we both agrée of supreme gouernment but the kinde of supreme gouernment is denied And to specifie your meaning herein how large a kind ye graunt or denie ye adde he should haue concluded in all things and causes else he concludeth not agaynst you signifying that you deny to them a supreme gouernment in all things causes ecclesiastical but ye graunt them a supreme gouernment authoritie power and care in things and causes ecclesiasticall First M. Stap. this is but a iangling and shifting quarell in wordes about things and causes ecclesiasticall and all things and causes ecclesiasticall For not onely the Bishop when he speaketh so indefinitely vnderstandeth all but also it is an ordinarie speach allowed in Logike in all things that be naturall or necessarie where the indefinite is counted as much as the vniuersall As to say a man is a reasonable creature or man is mortall is as much as precisely to say all men and euery man is reasonable and mortall And the saying in the next diuision he came to fulfill the lawe and the Prophetes is all one with this he came to fulfill all the lawe and all the Prophetes And likewise this giue vnto God that belongeth to God and to Caesar that belongeth to Caesar is as much to say as this giue vnto God all that belongeth to God c. and euen your selfe doe commonly speake thus indefinitely ecclesiasticall matters when ye meane all ecclesiasticall matters though now when ye be thus â—…iuen to graunt the effect of the matter yet would ye find some shift of descant to frustrate all the matter and say If ye meane of such regiment as ye preteÌ„d where ye know well ynough none other is ment ye make your reckoning without your host as a man may say and conclude before ye haue brought any proufe that they ought or may take vpon them such gouernment Whether this some regiment be such regimeÌ„t or such gouernment for thus M. St. ye loue in termes to dally though the Bishop hath proued it sufficiently and you haue graunted it standing onely like a daintie Nicie besetter on this quaint poynt in things not in all things yea whether this Nice restraint defeate the full proufe of the question in controuersie betwene master Feckenham and the Bishop shal appeare M. St. by calling them â—…ath coram to recken better with their host that is as you haue like a thriftie tapster called vpon so oft before though still ye brought in false reckonings to set before them and mark the issue that they condiscended vpon that is to weâ—…e Any such gouernmeÌ„t in ecclesiastical causes Lo here the demaund of the hoste himselfe be requireth but any such gouernmeÌ„t and that without putting in all in the reckoning Where therfore ye grauÌ„t the B. hath proued it in some eccl. causes which satisfieth the demaund of any ecclesiast causes euen according to your owne wrangling ye confesse the Bishop hath concluded the very issue that was concluded vpon Thus master St. euen by your owne reckoning the B reckoned with his host at the full and hath payed and satisfied that he promised and M. Feckenham required But nowe looke you what reckoning you will make to your friendes that haue here brought your selfe so farre in the lashe that taking vpon you to impugne the Princes gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes ye haue graunted and yelded to it How will your credite holde with your friends yea how will your reckoning hold with it self here ye haue grauÌ„ted some regimeÌ„t yea supreme gouernment though not such supreme gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes In the last Chap. ye would graunt theÌ„ nothing but punishment of those whom you had condemned which is no ecclesiastical matter at all to hang or burne a man And yet ye gaue them no regiment much lesse supreme regiment therein neyther For you would haue al the appointing whoÌ„ he shal punish the prince hath nothing else to do but to execute him whom you deliuer vp vnto him which agréeth nothing with this that now ye haue grauÌ„ted least of all with that ye further grauÌ„t saying For though I graunt you all your examples ye haue alleaged and that the doings of the olde Testament were figures of the new and the saying of Esay that kings should be nourishing fathers to the Church and all things else that ye here alleage yet all will not reach home no not Constantine the great his example How agréeth this graunt master Stap. with all that ye haue done all this while Why haue ye denied the Bishops ensamples heretofore of Moyses Iosue Dauid c. and made such a long and earnest a do in the matter to be grauÌ„ted at length Did ye stand in it then to dilate your booke or do ye graunt it now to bragge of your skill or did ye resist the truth then contrary to your conscience repent ye now or be ye forced to grauÌ„t with some colour that ye cannot for shame in plaine speach denie howsoeuer it be many odde reckonings will fall out in your account against your selfe although you neuer â—…ecken with your host for the matter Ye graunt the saying of Esay also that Kings shoulde be nourishing fathers to the Church and all things else that the Bishop here alleageth yet will not all reach home no not Constantine the great his example VVill not all this reach home Master Stap. to proue the issue that euen your selfe do confesse the Bishop hath alreadie proued For that is the home that it ought tâ—… reach vnto by master Feckenhams demaund But go to measure it with a true yerde master Stap. and ye shall see it fayre and easily without any stretching at al reach euen as full home as you besides can require euen for the supreme gouernment of all maner ecclesiasticall causes looke what ye recken most vppon and that is euen the féeding with the worde vnder which the Sacraments also are comprehended not that he is the Minister of the worde and Sacraments as
of God you translate it neither appoint any worshipping of God. As though they might not appoint that true worship of God that God hath appointed him selfe to be worshipped by Where Melancthon speaketh only of appointing other new deuised worships such as the Popish worships are Likewise speaking of the functions ye clappe in of your owne these wordes of bothe Magistrates calling the ministers magistrates whiche wordes Melancthon hath not And thus ye loue alâ—…e to tell your fale falsly And as you thus deale with Melancthon so froÌ„ him ye runne to M. Nowell and say Yea M. Nowell him selfe with a great stomacke biddeth vs shew where they denie that godly and learned Priestes might iudge according to the sinceritie of doctrine As though wheÌ„ the Prince and his successours are made supreme gouernours without any limitacion it fall not often out that the Bishop be he neuer so learned or godly shall not once be admitted to iudge of true doctrine except the doctrine please the Prince Ye will neuer leaue your falsehood M. Stap. wâ—… sayth that Princes made supreme gouernours without any limitation Who saith the Bishop be he neuer so godly or learned shall not once be admitted to iudge of true doctrine except the doctrine please the Prince Iâ—… there any that saith so or doth so except your Popâ—…e He in déed chalengeth a supreme gouernaunce without limits in as large and â—…ple 〈◊〉 as belongeth vnto christ He will suffer no doctrine but that which pleaseth him and he will be the onely chiefe Iudge thereof This is not the gouernance that we ascribe to Princes but such as is limitted by Gods worde such as stretcheth not further thaâ—… the 〈◊〉 of their dominions suche as suffreth godly and learned Priestes according to Gods worde to iudge of the synceritie of doctrine for this you confesse that master Nowell sayth and therefore ye confesse your selfe to be a 〈◊〉 lyer and to speake contrariâ—… when ye bring in thâ—… the Protestants to acknowledge a limitation and â—…t 〈◊〉 say we make a gouernement without any lymitation Neither is 〈◊〉 any contradiction in master Nowels saying to be anie more gathered than of Melancthonâ—… wordes Princes are supreme gouernours Ergo Prelates may not iudge of true doctrine Which is as wiâ—…e a sequele as the other agaynst Melancthon Ye might wel conclude it against your Pope that chalengeth such as absolute 〈◊〉 that all the iudgement of doctrine shoulde 〈◊〉 to him to iudge according as he please botâ—… quite besides and quite contrarie to Gods worde As though say you there had not bene a statute made declaring and enacting the Queenes maiestie yea hir highnesse successours without exception or limitation of godly and vngâ—…dly and yet I trowe no Bishops to be the supreme gouernour in all things and causes as well spirituall as temporall As though M. St. this were a good argument The statute declareth hir highnesse supreme gouernment â–ª without limiting it vnder the Bishops gouernment Ergo the Bishops can not iudge of true doctrine and the Princes gouernment is without all limitation As though their were no difference betwéene supreme gouernment and euery other gouernment or betwéene gouernment and iudgement And as though the statute ex 〈…〉 not it selfe what kinde of supreme gouernment is yâ—â—lded in all things and causes Ecclesiasticall nothing debarring the Bishops and ministers of their iudgement and ministerie but rather ouerséeing them to giue their iudgement and administration rightly As though you master Horne say you had not written that in both tables the Prince hath authoritie to erect â–ª and correct to farther and restraine to allow and punish the vertue and vices thereto apperteyning As though your selfe M. Stapl. had not written also and graunted the same euen right now and that not for your selfe onely but for all your followes besides to agree with Melancthon and Caluin therein Or as though say you the gouernour in all causes is not also a iudge in all causes â–ª Or as though M. St. his gouernment or iudgment were any preiudice to the gouernment or iudgement that belongeth to the Pastours office Or as though say you it were not commonly so taken and vnderstanded of a thousand in England which haue taken the othe to their great domnaâ—…ion but if they repent Or as though not rather on the contrarie it were not your so wilfull and malitious mistaking of it with a peuish obstinacie to withstande the manifest truth that refuse the othe of your dutifull obedience to your great damnation in deede but if yee repent betymes And thus still aunswering your As though with another as though ye can finde no contradiction nor absurditie neyther in Melancthon Caluin Master Nowell nor the Bishops sayings herein As though â–ª your selfe iâ—… the meane time were clere aboorde and not in euery one of your quarels either mâ—…st fonde and absurde or quite contrarie to your owne sayings and graunts made so late before The conclusion of this your second part is this You therefore master Horne â–ª which talke so confusely and generally of the Princes authoritie in both tables do yet say nothing nor proue nothing this generall and absolute authoritie in all things and causes as lustily without exception the othe expresseth and therefore ye bring indeed nothing to proue your principall purpose to the which all your proues shoulde be directed For generall and confuse talke of the princes authoritie you belie the Bishop master Stap. he made so plaine and flatte a limitation that you coulde not abide it â–ª it is your Pope that chalengeth such a general and absolute authoritie and your selfe that talke of the Princes authoritie confusely to deface Princes as confounding and intermedling â–ª in the office and authoritie pâ—…rteyning to the clergie whiche the othe requireth not further than such supreme authoritie as ouerseâ—…th careth prouideth for directeth and gouerneth all matter persons Ecclesiasticall and temporal so well in matters of the first table as in the seconde that is to say so well in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall matters as temporall Quod ad externam disciplinam Quod externoâ—… mores attinet So farre as perteynes to externall discipline and belongs to externall behauiour And this is not onely the issue in question but also as is proued compreheÌ„deth the othe and principall purpose whervpon ye call so fast to haue all the proues directed therto as the Bishop here hath done and your selfe hath graunted the same Your third part is a quarelling at the sentence of s. Paule cited by the B. Tim. 2. that kings and rulers are ordeyned of God for these two purposes that their people mighte liue a peaceable lyfe throughe their gouernment both in godlinesse and in honestie comprehending in these two wordes whatsoeuer is commaunded in the first or second table Here as ye sée hath the Bishop cited once againe another sentence oute of the new testament how fitly to the matter how
that be in authoritie no authoritie at all What a saying is this and yet sée how your selfe confute your selfe Going about to embarre their authority ye say he meÌ„â—…ioned their peaceable gouernmeÌ„t â–ª He did so in déede M. St. But what gouernment or what peaceable estate of gouernment had they if they had no authoritie at all It sée meth that while ye 〈◊〉 to saye somewhat against their authoritie ye neytâ—… oâ—… regarde nor can tell what ye say of them nor of the Apostles â—…eyther to maintayne your false quarrell Now as ye further procéede so still ye bring your selfe more in the briers But will yee knowe say you M. Hoâ—…ne why thapostles both Saint Peter and Saint Paule so earnestly taught at that time obedience to Princes Ha go to then M. St. belike they tauâ—…ht obedience to Princes more earnestly than your Popishe Prelates haue taught or pract sed since that time or than your selfe haue herâ—… taught vs not ouer earnestly but God wote full sâ—…enderly or rather by all shifts and fetches of your wits haue sought to deface and impuâ—…nt their authoritie But how agréeth this with S. Paule earnest teaching Yea â–ª howe woulde ye make Saint Paule agrée to himselfe To say that he speaketh there of no authoritie at all in Princes and yet that here he taught obedience to Princes so earnestlye What obedience taught he if he taught not their authoritie at all What earnestnesse vsed he then therein but let vs sée as ye would haue vs what was the cause of the Apostles earnestnesse This was the cause In the beginning of the Church some Christians were of this opinion that for that they were Christian men they were exempted from the lawes of the Infidell Princes and were not bounde to pay them any tribute or otherwise to obey them To represse and reforme this wrong iudgemeÌ„t of theirs the Apostles Peter and Paule by you named diligently employed themselues And was this a wrong opinion and iudgement M. Stapleton and with such earnestnesse and diligence employed of the Apostles Peter and Paule to be repressed and reformed that Christians for that they were Christian men were exempted from the lawes of the Infidell Princes and were not bound to pay them any tribute or otherwise to obey them What a right opinion and iudgement then was this of him that affirmed not only the same of Infidell Princes but of Christian Princes to that we be not bounde by force of anye wordes of Christes sentence which as â—…latly commaundeth vs as any of these the Apostles sentences doe to obey or paye so much as tribute to our Christian Princes Doe ye not knowe who this was that helde this wrong opinion M. Stapleton Well who soeuer it was I thinke be must with shame saye that of him selfe which he spake of another that eyther hee recanteth as better aduised or else writeth playne contrary to himselfe But nowe sayth M. St. for the Apostles sentences VVhose sayings can not implye your pretensed gouernment vnlesse ye will say that Nero the wicked and heathenishe Emperour was in his time the supreme head of all the Church of Christ throughout the Empire as well in causes spirituall as temporall As before M. Stapleton you captiously restrained Christes generall commaundement of obedience to Princes only to the Emperour so doe ye here againe besides that ye sticke also in the person abusing his office and let the dutie of his office go Whereas S. Paule writeth generally not only for those then present but for all kinges or any other in authoritie both then and from thenceforth for euer And so doe all the Expositours gather a generall rule for all Christians towards their christian Princes although Nero and other princes then were wicked and Heathenishe infidels Yet in the duetie of their estate to the which God had called them they ought neither to haue bene wicked nor Heathenish Infidels but godly and faithfâ—…ll defenders and setters forth of Christ his true religioÌ„ To reason therfore from such persons abuses therevpon to denie from all princes the dutie of their lawfull authoritie is as naughtie an argument as Nero himselfe was naughtie And Chrysostome flatly confuteth this cauill of the Princes person Neque enin de quouis c. For neyther I speake now sayth he of any one of the Princes but of the matter itselfe And againe Propterea non dicit non enim princeps est c. VVherefore hee sayth not there is no Prince but of God but he disputeth of the matter it selfe saying there is no power but of god The powers that are they are from God â–ª As when any wise man sayth that the woman is knit of God vnto the man he sayth no other thing thaÌ„ that God hath ordeyned mariage not that euery man how so euer he dwelleth togither with a woman is ioyned vnto him of God for we see many dwelling togither in euill not according to the lawes of mariage which yet notwithstanding we impute not vnto God. This cauillation therefore how naughtie soeuer the Prince were restraineth not the Apostles meaning which tendeth to the office and not to the person least of all to those present persons then liuing For were they neuer so wicked other were good that knew the dutie of their estate gouernment exercising it both in the direction of vertues punishment of vices as well of the first as of the seconde table this your self haue confessed to be the dutie of Princes and why had it not bene Neroes duetie to And I praye you what lacketh this of all ecclesiasticall causes the vertues and vices of the first and seconde table But ye thinke to escape with this your common exception saying And yet in temporall and ciuill matters I graunt we ought to be subiect not only to Christians but euen to infidels also being our Princes without anye exception of Apostle Euangelist Prophete Priest or Monke as ye alleage out of Chrysostome And doe you thinke thus in déede M. St. as ye saye and shall we haue any better holde of you in your graunt once again be it euen but for temporall ciuil matters And yet this fayleth much of that ye graunted before of the first as well as of the second table Be Princes the Clergies superiors now Before ye sayds that Princes should take to much vpon them to thinke themselues ecclesiasticall persons superiors speaking simply of superiours without your distinction of ciuill and temporall or spirituall and ecclesiasticall matters But sée M. St. what ye haue grauÌ„ted here It is not vnknown to you that the Pope in no case can abide no not for ciuill and temporall matters to be subiect to any Christian Prince or Emperour but contendeth euen therein also to be the farre superiour and weareth thrée crownes where the Emperour weareth but one and that one he hath set on turned off with his foote and made him kisse his foote and troad
the church in euery cause wherof it is not otherwise disposed in the new testament is to be holden of the law of nations or of lawe ciuil To this I answer First this in part is true but in part so false that himself confutes himself making exceptioÌ„ of diuers things in the ciuill power that sproong immediatly froÌ„ God neither were those things as he falsly saithe Circa res terrenas about earthly matters but about ecclesiasticall matters in the law of Moyses And although their ceremonial causes and iudicials pertayning to ecclesiasticall matters in the ciuil power be taken away with the ceremoniall and indiciall lawe of the Iewes yet the ciuil power hath like authoritie in the like causes ecclesiastical of the new testameÌ„t as is shewed out of S. Aug. against M. St. the Donatistes Secondly where he sayeth all the ciuil power nowe of christian kings and Emperors is all of the law of nations or ciuil except in cases otherwise disposed in the new testament I answer this may well be graunted and yet the ciuil power hath authoritie ouer ecclesiasticall persons in causes ecclesiastical for so not only in the old testament but also in the newe Testament it is playnly disposed Thirdly to this diuision of the original of both these estates that the ecclesiastical is from God immediatly the ciuil by other meanes I answere this distinction faileth both by his own tale saying Ciuilis à deo plerunque est per media quaedam the ciuil power is oftentimes from God by certain meanes If it be oftentimes by certaine meanes then it is not alwayes and but accidentall not of the nature of the estate for so it is also immediatly from God. And the like accident falleth out likewise of the ecclesiastical estate that although the power be immediatly from God yet many causes in it called Ecclesiastical be also Per media quadam humani ingenij interposita by certain meanes of mans wit put betwene For this cause sayth M. sand the ciuil power among the heathen that know not god is found to be the same that is extant with faithful kings although Christ wold not haue such power in the ministers of his kingdom for he said the Princes of the nations rule ouer them and they that are iuniors exercise power ouer them so shall it not be among you I answere first Maister Saunders this is a like slander to M. Stapletons fo 29. a. b. The ciuil power is not found to be the same in heathen Princes that knowe not God and in Christian Princes that know God there is a very great difference betwene these so different estates wherin the one acknowledgeth all his power to be of God and hath it described and limited by Gods word the other takes it al for hu main naturall not so much as knowing God by your own confession from whome the originall of it springeth Secondly to that you saye suche power is debarred by Christe from his ministers If yée meane by suche power suche power as is among the Heathen suche is not onely debarred from them but from christian Princes too If ye meane suche power as Christian Princes haue is debarred from the ministers of Christ then say ye true But howe then dothe youre Pope chalenge and vsurpe bothe suche and the same also Yea your selfe afterwarde reason moste earnestly thoroughout all the fourth chapter following that the ministers of Christe may haue it Wherin ye speak cleane contrary both to Christ and to your self Thirdly I note this eyther youre grosse ignoraunce or your impudent falshood in altering the wordes of Christe He sayth not they that are iuniors or yongers the Texte is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they that are great whiche are cleane contrarie If M. Stapleton were your aduersarie he would rattle ye vp Master Saunders for so foule a scape Nowe to fortifie a difference betwéene the Ecclesiastical power and the Ciuill he vrgeth that the spiritual kingdom of Christ is in this worlde but not of this worlde as for the earthly kingdome is bothe in and of this world but the ecclesiasticall power is the spirituall kingdome of Christ therfore there is a difference but the spirituall kingdom of Christ excelleth all worldlyâ—… kingdomes therfore they are stark fooles that in any ecclesiasticall thing to be administred preferre the earthly kings before the pastors of the Churche I answere all these conclusions are impertinent If there be any follie it is to striue for that that is not in controuersie We graunt a difference betwixt both powers and kingdomes althoughe a question is to be moued what he meaneth here by ecclesiasticall power If he take it as the Papistes do we denie that ecclesiasticall power to be the spiritual kingdome of Christ. For their ecclesiasticall power is ouermuch not in the worlde but of the worlde also If he meane by ecclesiasticall power the spirituall kingdome of Christ as he in his word hath ordeyned the fame although there be a difference betwene the power in the kingdom and the kingdome in the which the power is yet we graunt this gladly that no wise man will preferre the earthly kings in any spiritual thing to be administred before the pastors of the churche But this is nothing againste the earthly kings preferment ouer the spirituall pastor to ouersée him rightly and spiritually to administer his spirituall things in the ministration whereof all earthly kings oughte to giue place vnto him which we did neuer denie And sith there is no comparison betwene Christ the sonne of God who is also God himself and a creature of the law natural or ciuill neither is there any comparison betwixt the power ecclesiastical which is wholly giue vnto vs by only Christ the mediator the power royall which either altogether or almost altogether is not ordeined of God but by the lawe of nations or ciuill for although God hath reuealed froÌ„ heauen that belongeth to the power royall if notwithstandyng that pertained not to eternall saluation which is hid in Christ but to contein peace among men that is to be reckned to be reuealed no otherwise than to be a certain declaration which he had grafted in vs by Nature or else euen necessitie ought to haue wroong out of vs or profite according to the seedes of nature ought to haue brought to light I answere first we graunt that the ecclesiastical power not as the Papists stretche it but as it is giuen vnto vs by only Christ the mediator is farre superior without all comparison than the royal power of Princes Howbeit this hindreth not but as the ministers are mediators thereof to vs the royall power of Princes hath againe an other superior gouernment to ouersée that there be no other ecclesiasticall power exercised by the mediation of the Minister than Christ the only mediator hath ordeyned And to remoue all popish â—…oysting in giuing vs quid pro quo whiche when
that the Kyng should be obedient to the disposition of the humaine minister of Christ which is the question nowe in hande And yet whether it signifie this mysterie that you say it onely doth or no may be called into question For if it hath such a significatiō it is a very darke mysterie And me thinks it might more easilye signifie other things For oyle sometimes signifieth mercie sometimes plentie sometimes remedie against poyson sometimes it is referred to the Priesthoode sometimes to the kingdome of Christ somtimes to the mysticall members of Christ as they are Kings Priests with him so that the anoynting with oyle which espetially was vsed to Priests and Kings who therefore are called the sons of oyle is applyed to sundry significations and not onely to the incarnation and humaine nature of Christe And yet is there no suche necessitie of anoynting Christian Kings as was of the Iewishe Kings For they had commaundement so to doe and it was a ceremoniall figure of diuerse things in christ Which commaundement and ceremonies Christian Princes are not bound vnto It is cropen vp of a custome I cānot tel how to imitate the Iewes herein But as for the nature of a Kings estate he is neuer a whit the lesse King if he wante the anoynting with oyle and as the Papistes superstitiouslie doe vse it it were muche better away But the Papistes make a great matter of anoynting Kings with oyle yea sayth Maister Saunders they were wont to be annoynted no otherwise than were the Prophetes and Priestes as thoughe they shoulde be so anoynted still And true it is in one sense that they shoulde no other wise be so annoynted still that is to say neyther of them shoulde be anoynted No say you should not the Priestes be annoynted ▪ We are In deede you be Maister Saunders and all your order But the Apostles and Disciples of Christe were not and therefore your order is differing from theirs and all godly ministers should differ from yours be ye shorne or be ye anoynted But if it be true that you say kings should be no otherwise anoynted than you howe chaunce then ye are anoynted otherwise than kings as your glosse doth reason that vpon the King is powred oile but vpon the Bishop is powred Chrisme Kings are anoynted on the righte shoulder but Byshops and Priestes are annoynted vpon their heads but the heade is better than the shoulder and Chrisme is better than oyle Ergo Bishops and Priests are superior vnto Kings Were not they which anoynted their pamphlets with such greasie argumentes to perch vp their balde crownes aboue the imperiall crownes of their natural Soueraignes worthy by the Princes commaundemente to be well anoynted with vnguentum baculinum to make them acknowledge their due subiection if they rather deserue not sharper instice but let vs procéede vnto M. Saunders other arguments Let vs put the case that Christ himselfe is at this day conuersant in the earth as he was conuersant in times paste Can any man doubt but in that he is man al Christian kings ought to be vnder his gouernment both in all eccl. and in those secular causes that may promote the cause of the Chruche for he shall raigne in the house of Iacob for euer and there shal be no ende of his kingdomes If therefore earthly Kings are parte of the house of Iacob Christ shall raigne ouer them and shall subdue their Kingdomes to hys spirituall Kingdome But whatsoeuer power was necessarye vnto Christe to eternall saluation he transformed the externall and and visible ministerie thereof vnto the Apostles when he said as my father hath sent me so I send you The Apostles therefore and their successors doe no lesse rule in spiritual causes ouer Christian Kings so far as the visible Ministerie than Christ himselfe is in truth ouer them so farre as the holy power of his humaine nature VVherevpon sayth Epiphanius Christ hath giuen a kingdome to those that are placed vnder him that it should not be sayde he proceedeth from little things to greater The throne of Christ abideth and of his kingdome there is no ende and he sitteth vpon the throne of Dauid so that he hath translated the kingdome of Dauid together with the Bishoprike and hath giuen it vnto his seruaunts that is to the Bishops of the Catholike Church Beholde so well the priestly as the Kingly power is communicated to the pastors of the Churche of Christe that by that meanes Christ shoulde be declared to raigne for euer yea euen as a spirituall and heauenly man And this truelye dothe that annoynting testifie that the Kings receyue of Priests The argument is thus If Christ himselfe were conuersant in earth in his humaine nature as he hath bene he shoulde haue ouer all Christian kings all eccl. and secular power in those things that might promote the Church But Christ hath giuen to his ministers in the visible ministerie all the power necessarie to saluation ouer Christian kings that belongeth to himselfe in his humaine nature Ergo he hath giuen his Ministers in the visible ministerie all ecclesiasticall and secular power in those things that maye promote the Church First this argument standeth vpon another presupposal which as it is no lesse false than the other so is it more impossible being flat contrarie to the worte of God and to the will of christ He puttes a case that Christ woulde come againe and in his humaine nature be conuersant vpon the earth as he was from his natiuitie till his death Good Lord M. Saūders is your cause so bad and false that you are still driuen to these shiftes to put the cases of false and forged presupposals if your cause were good it woulde stand of it selfe you might go plainely to worke and neuer reason vpon suche deuised cases as you knowe and beleue shall neuer be true except you be a Millenarie indéede as you gaue before a shrewde suspition of that heresie to think Christ shall come againe and here for a thousand yeares in all worldly might and glorie raigne in the earth and then go dwell in heauen But perhaps you wil say what wil you let me to put what case I lyft when the sky falles they say we shal haue Larkes True M. Saunders we can not let you to put what case you lyst be it neuer so absurde and repugnant to the truth But is this the rediest way to boult out the truth to put the case of an euident vntruth and to imagine that to come that neuer shall be to inferre that vsurpation of your Priestes that is and ought not to be But sée howe sone your argument is ouerturned For if your case be not admitted then is all your labour loste and you haue wonne nothing for your Priestes But the Scripture is manifest that this shall neuer come to passe And that the heauens containe Christ til the day of Iudgement he is neither here
iustice and so Samuel is read to haue killed Ameleck But vnderstanding the killing thus bicause these especialties are not to be drawne by any ordinary exaÌ„ple in the spiritual pastors let vs now admit the figure of the spirituall sworde that M. San. driueth this killing vnto Do you know what this spiritual sworde is M. Sand that you speake on Thinke you it is to coÌ„maund others to fight against kings and to murther their subiects If it be true whiche you affirme that none can escape it that it pierceth the soule they might escape this sworde by many meanes as you say So that it is not the exercise of such a sword nor the bidding of such a sworde to be exercised And howe chaunce then your popes do exercise it you contende héere for it and alleage all these examples yet pretend cleane coÌ„trarie herevnto the only spiritual sword Whereas in very déede ye ought to vse none other euen as your owne Glosse saith hereon â–ª Nocentes iustitia c. The diuine iustice causeth some offenders to be punished with the edge of the sword by kings other it stri keth through with the tongue by Prophets and Priests To punish therfore with the bodily sworde belongeth onely to Princes their officers and not to the Pope his Prelats Wherfore your Pope both lieth and vsurpeth in clayming both swords and your selfe confute him that say you haue the onely spiritual sword and also contrarie your selfe sithe the deposition of Princes from their royall estate belongeth to the secular not to the spiritual sword Which belongeth to the spirite is only of the soule is suche as none can escape And therfore your own self coÌ„fute your self applying the power of the spiritual pastors to the deposing of princes froÌ„ their kingdomes For they may well inoughe escape your popes tyrannie as they do God be praised for it better thaÌ„ héeretofore some Princes haue done And as for his curses which also he calleth his spiritual sword béeing not only nothing like the spiritual sword that God hath appointed but cleane contrarie thervnto Princes shal escape them well inough yea God himself doth belsse them as fast as the pope dothe curse them But master Sanders to proue that they can neuer escape thys sworde saythe Elizeus sworde is reckoned in the laste place and the laste he calleth héere the chiefest But howe agréeth this with that he sayde before of the firste place There he woulde proue the Priests authoritiâ—… chiefest bicause he is reckoned in the first place And héere he would proue the Priests sworde chiefest bicause it is reckoned in the laste place And if it were reckoned in the middle place then would be haue proued it also the chiefest bicause that In medio consistit virtus Vertue consisteth in the middle place And thus be the Priest or any thing belonging to the Priest reckoned in the first place in the middle place or in the last place that is still an argument with M. Sanders of the best and chiefest place But nowe to proue yet better the force of this sworde M. sand procéedeth saying Moreouer to this spiritual sword the other material sword obeieth whiche also taketh punishment of him that setteth him selfe agaynst the spirituall sworde For Elias by the sword of the spirite that is by his prayers commaunded the fire to descende from heauen and consume those captaines of fiftie that despising the spirituall power of the Prophet saide vnto him in the name of the earthly power thou man of God the king commaundeth thee to descende And agayne thus saith the king make haste and come downe For these Captaynes of fiftie trusted so well in their earthly power that is so well in the number of souldiors that were vnder them as in the authoritie of the King for whome they were sent on message and in respect of this power they despised that spiritual power that Elias was endued withall And therefore with mocking saluted him the man of god But when at the worde of Elias the fire came down from heauen and deuoured those two Captaynes and their twice fiftie men that were with them the thirde Captayne of fiftie beeing sent of Ochozias the king acknowledged the sworde of Elias and therefore commaunded not him as the other had done but besoughte him and sayde O man of God dispise not my life and the lyues of thy seruauntes that are with me But what is it that the Prophet regarded not to obey the kings commaundement but that he him selfe in that cause was greater than the king and that he taught euen by the thinges them selues the spirituall power of the Church to be greater than the earthly For neither yet beeing moste humbly desired of the thirde Captaine of fiftie he came downe to the king before the Angell of the Lorde bad him not feare but go downe For he sat in the toppe of a mountaine that is in the chiefest place of the Church VVhich place the earthly king â—…ughte rather to haue honored for Christ whose person Elias did beare thaÌ„ by authoritie to commaunde that the man of God leauing his chaire should come as a subiecte to the king For we reade also that Ambrose complayned that he being a Bishop stoode among them of the Consistorie And said vnto the Emperor if thou haddest acknowledged me thou wouldest not see me in this place Not that I denie the Prophets and Pastors of the Churche to be subiects to the king so farre as their goodes and bodies but I contende that their power is not onely equall but higher than the kings owne iurisdiction is so often as the soules saluation is in hande For neither must we be ignorant of that that Elias therefore would not obey Ochozias the king but rather killed his captaynes and his souldiors bicause the king beeing sicke asked counsell not of the Lords Prophet but of Beelzebub the God of Accaron If therefore any king fal obstinately into heresie or schisme the Bishop and Prophet shall not onely not obey him but also punishe him not only denying vnto him the spiritual goods â–ª but also in taking away his corporal goods after a due sort and order But it was vnworthy for the person of Elias for to kill with his owne handes a hundred and two souldiors of the kinges and therefore with his onely worde he spake and fire came downe from heauen that deuoured those two Captaines of fiftie with their souldiors Master Sanders hauing now referred this sworde of Elizeus to the figure of the spirituall sworde will proue both that it is aboue the kinges sâ—…cular power and also destroyeth them that resiste it But firste hys proues for the superioritie of thâ—…se swordes is neyther belonging to this present purpose nor we contende about it but willingly graunt the stroke of the worde of God to be the greater stroke Elias in that case to be greater than the king
the disputation at VVest Anno regnâ—… Elizabeth 1. Which being so fresh in memorie all men can witnessâ—… agaynst him 12. a. b. He likeneth it to the Anabaptists disputations ibid. The fourth Chapter of 13. leaues togither besides that it is almost all impertinent talke is full of shamefull slaunders of many noble vertuâ—… and learned men the Duke of Saxonie the Laâ—…graue of Hesse the Loâ—…le Cobham sir Roger ActoÌ„ Luther Zuinglius Caluin Beza c. to deface them and the professors of Gods worde with tales of â—…umultes cruelties disobedience and rebellions 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. That the ciuil gouernmeÌ„t of Christian Princes stretcheth no further than the ciuil gouernment of heathen princes 29. b. That the O. Maiesties title is not competeÌ„t for hir highnesse and that the auouching of the othe is the eâ—…payring of hir worldly estate 27. a. That the othe bemyreth them which receyue it 30. That it is an vnlawfull oth like to wicked K. Herods 30. That the plague raigned at London to plague the straunge proceedings of the Parliament 33. b. That the Bishop of Winchester bicause he required the othe of dâ—…ctour Bonner therefore sought his bloud ibid. That our Bishops are no Church Bishops ibid. That the Quéenes Maiestie taketh on hir a pretensed regiment 42. That mariage in ministers is filthie 42. â—… That of late yeares lay men durst aduenture to take the guidiâ—…g of the arke and go before the Priestes and not suffer the priestes to go before them And durst alter the state of Christian religion agaynst the will and minde of the Bishops and the whole clergie 46. a. That we attribute to the Quéenes maiestie to alter religion 47. b. That lay men haue not onely put to their handes to sustaine the Arke as Oza did but haue also of their owne priuate authoritie altred chanÌ„ged the great and waightie points of Christes Catholike Religion and in a maner haue quite transformed ouerthrowne the same so haue as a man might say broken the verie Arke itselfe all to fitters 47. b. That wesay that Princes doe heaâ—… the suprâ—… gouernment in all ecclesiasticall matterâ—… to decide and determine â–ª what religion meere soueraigntie 48. b. That the Prince enacteth a new religion 50. a. That the decision of matters of religion aâ—… made Parliament matters ibid. That wâ—… labour to confounde the spirituall and secular power ibid. That the Quéenes Maiestle enacteth a newe religion by force of supreme authoritie contrarie to the commaundement of God. 53. a. That hir highnesse hath altered and abandoned the vsuall religion a thousande yeares and vpwarde customably from age to age receyued and embraced 53. b. That she hath abandoned generall Councels 54. a. That Princes nowe make Bishops by letters patents for such and so long time as please them for terme of yeares monethes or dayes ibid. b. That shee inhibiteth them to visitte their flockes and to preach ibid. For 4. or 5. leaues togither he doth nothing else but slauÌ„der the Protestants with â—…mbers of Heresies that he â—…aisly layeth to their charge But this is answered at large and those herestes with many other returned on the Papists That a thousande in Englande haue taken the othe to theyr great damnation 73. 2. That the Prince and his successors are made absolute gouernours without any limitation or exception 73 â–ª That the Bishop buildeth a newe supremacie on the wicked working of wretched Heretikes 77. b. That the Bishop is of the opinion that the Grecians were of denying the holy Ghost to proceede from the Father and the sonne Wherwith he â—…laundereth the Bishop only bicause hée cyteth â–ª Emanuell Paleologus the Emperour of Gréece out of Nicephorus by the name of a Christian Emperour â–ª where Nicephorus himselfe the Papists that set Nicephorus out cal this Emperour Christianissâ—… The most Christian Emperour ibid. He compareth the reaimes of Boheme Fraunce Scotland Germanie to lerusalem destroyed by the heathen Romaines and to Constantinople captiue to the Turkes 82. b. That the Quéene taketh vpon hir all maner of gouernment and authoritie in all things and causes ecclesiasticall 82. b. That the Quéene taketh vpon hir by hir owne supreme authoritie to enact matters of religion to approue and disproue articles of the faith to determine doctrine to excommunicate and absolue ibid. That the statute and the othe implyeth and concludeth all these particulars 83. a. That by the statute is flatlye excluded all the authoritie of the whole body of the catholike Church without the realme ibid. That the statute implyeth that if a Turke or any hereticke whatsoeuer shoulde come to the Crowne of England all maner superioritie in visiting and correcting Ecclesiasticall persons in all maner matters should be vnited vnto him ibid. That the Quéene taketh on hiâ—… to be a supreme gouernour ecclesiasticall ibid. That hir supreme gouernment giueth hir power in all doubts and controuersies to decide the truth and to make an ende of questioning ibid. That by vertue of this statute the Queenes Maiestie hath iudged determined and enacted a newe religion That she taketh on hir the preaching of the worde the administration of the sacraments binding and losing ibid. That the statute is thus generally conceyued 83. b. That the statute is generally conceyued and not generally meaned ibid. To all these slaunders we may aunswere in a 〈◊〉 with his owne wordes These besuch slaunderous reproches 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the person son whome ye burthen them withall so farre from all suspition of any such foule matter c. that if you were sued hereof vpon an action of the case as you well deserue no lesse or rather in déede you deserue farre sharper punishment for reporting thus of your most gracious soueraigne and all the estates of the Reaime whome thus vnsubiectâ—…ke ye slaunder His owne obiection for scoffes I pray you call to remembraunce what a scoffing and wondring he maketh 407. His. 3. common place of scoffing and scorning In the Prefaces YOu woorke your matters so handsomly and so perswasiuely pag. 6. VVhat a newe Cicero or Demosthenes are you 7. A marueylous kinde of new and false arithmetike 8. Is not this I pray you an important and mighty argument 11. Your owne deare brother Bale the chiefe antiquarie of Englishe Protestants 13. Your hote spurred ministers 14. No newes for a man of your coate 14. VVhose bolde as blynde Bayarde 14. Ye tell your reader in great sadnesse 16. Ye bluster excedingly and are in a vehement rage 16. VVith the like felicitie your brother Iewell c. layde full stoutly and confidently c. with great brauery 81. It pittieth me in your behalfe 19. Maister Iewel hath led vs this daunce 19. Your faire peece of worke 23. Your poore honouâ—… should say honestie 23. The chiefe maisters of the religion 28. Parliament Bishoppes 32. In the aunswere to the Bishops Preface THe holy Brotherhoode of Geneua â—… b. This noble blast so
This worthie Champion ibid. Of his noble worke and of his noble holy martyr ibid. This worthie article ibid. Like to capitaine Kets tree of reformation ibid. Ye make your reckoning without your hoste 68. a. Your reformation or rather deformation 68 b. Master Hornes foolish figuratiue diuinitie 69. a. The great weight of so mightie a proufe 69. b. Master Horne of his great gentlenesse 69. b. These mē make a very VVelshmans hose of Gods word 70. a So aptly and truly you alleage you doctors 73. b. This good Antiquarie and Chronographer 76. b. Gayly and iolilie triumpheth 77. a. Verie good stuffe as good pardie as master Hornes owne booke and as clerkely and as faythfully handled 77. a. O what a craftie Cooper smooth Ioiner is M. Horne 77. b. Your handsome holy dealing 78. a. You are worthie exceeding thankes 78. a. A'iolie marginall note 78. a. O more than childishe folly 78. a. That craftie Cooper ibid. As wise as by the Metaphore of a Cowe to conclude a saddle for as well doth a saddle fit a Cowe 78. b. Such beggerly shifts ibid. Ye haue demeaned your selfe so clerkly and skilfully ibid. Such a personage as ye counterfait 80. a. This blessed Martyr ibid. Ye are a very poore silly Clarke ibid. M. Foxe will not suffer ye to walke post alone ibid. That I may a little roll in your rayling rhetoricke ibid. Your dearlings the Grecians 80. b. Seeing ye deale so freely and so liberally 81. a. Ye haue iuggled in one 82. a. Ye haue so craftily conueyed your galles 82. a. Your darke sconce a sconce of dimme light 82. a. The new pretended clergie the pretended Bishops 84. a. To all this and all other his frumpes and scoffes he may be aunswered with his owne wordes Modestia vestra M Horne not a sit omnibus hominibus Let your modestie M. Stapleton be knowne to all men 435. b. His owne obiection of bragging This is but an impudent facing and bragging 4. a. His fourth common place of bragging In his first Preface NOt beeing able to alleage any authour that maketh not for vs pag. 7. Doe what ye can c. 15. You haue in this replie a iust and a full defence 22. I haue replyed throughout 22. I haue not omitted anie one part or parcell 22. I haue aunswered the whole 22. I wishe that the most honourable c. would commaund you to proue it so to the worlde 22. I haue here replied to all and euerie part 22. If truth be on your side ye haue no cause to sticke hereat ▪ c. go through therefore as you haue begonne c. if ye thinke your foundation good c. go through I say c. if ye now draw backe men will laugh you to scorne 23. The dealing of the Catholike writers is so vpright that suche small occasions must be piked c. else against their dealings haue ye nothing to say 18. Your cause I assure you will come forth starke naked feeble and miserable 19. After all this strugling and wrastling agaynst the truth by you and your fellowes master Iewell and the rest the truth is dayly more and more opened illustred and confirmed and your contrarie doctrine is or ought to bee disgraced and brought in vtter discredite 8. In the seconde preface I VVas fully purposed hauing so largely prouoked suche sharpe aduersaries especially master Iewel for a season to rest me and to stande at mine owne defence if any woulde charge me 24. I haue shaped to the whole booke a whole and full Replie wherein I rather feare I haue sayd to much than to litle 25. Thy religion is but a bare name of religion and no religion in deede 27. These be such absurdities as euery man of meane consideration seeth and abhorreth 28. The primacie of the Bishop of Rome is euidently here proued 28. Master Hornes whole aunswere is but as it were a vayne blast 29. The sea Apostolike is the fountaine and welspring of all vnitie in the Catholike faith 33. Neither shall we euer finde any cause of good and sufficient contentation till we returne thither 35. In the answere to the Bishops Preface AS I assuredly vnderstande that the reuerende father my Lorde Abbate of VVestminster fol. 1. a. But this may I boldly say and I doubt nothing to proue it that in all his booke there is not as much as one worde of Scripture one Doctor one Councell general or prouincial not the practise of any one countrey throughout the world counted Catholike that maketh for such kinde of regimēt as master Horne auoucheth nor any one maner of proufe that hath any weight or pith in the world to perswade I will not say master Feckenham but any other of much lesse wit learning and experience 3. a. I say master Horne commeth not once nighe the principall matter in question 3. a. I say further in case we remoue and sequester all other proufes on our side that M. Horne shall by the verie same fathers Councels and other authorities by himselfe producted so be ouerthrowne in the chief and capitall question vnto the which he cōmeth not nigh as a mā might say by 1000. miles that his own cōpany may haue iust cause to feare c. 3. a I say and master Feckenham wil also say that euen M. Horne himselfe retreateth so farre backe c. 3. b. The premisses then being true and of our side abundantly proued and better to be proued as occasion shall serue as nothing can effectually be brought against them 4. a. Ye haue not no nor ye can not proue any such matters 4. b. In the first booke I Must be so bolde by your leaue as plainlie and bluntlie to go to worke with you as I haue done before with master Grindall and master Iewell 7. b. The Queene cannot make you Lord Bishop of VVinchester as I haue otherwhere sufficiently proued in the Fortresse of of our first faith annexed to venerable Bede 8. a. Luther and Caluine and other being therewith pressed were so messhed and bewrapped therein that they could not in this world wite what to say thereto answering this that they wist nere what nor at what point to holde them 8. a. The Protestants wonderfully troubled about the question of the continuall succession of Bishops 8. a. VVhat haue ye to iustifie your cause 8. b. Master Horne can not defende and maintaine his herisies nor himselfe to be a Bishop by anie law of the realme 9. a. The Catholikes not suffered to replie least their aduersaries weakenesse should as it would haue done in deede and now daylie doth God bee praysed euidently and openly haue beene disciphered and disclosed 13. a. I dare vndertake that not onely master Feckenham but manie mo that nowe refuse shall moste gladly take the saide othe 31. a. VVhat should I reason further with this man. 32. b. Notwithstanding all your great bragges and this your clerkly booke ye knowe not nor neuer shall know but that the
alleaged c. and all thinges else that is here alleaged yet all will not reache home 68. a. VVhich aunswere of his may satisfie any reasonable man for all that ye bring in here of Constantine or all that ye shall afterwarde bring in c. 68. b. VVhich I am assured all Catholikes will graunt 68. b. Giue to Caesar that belongeth to Caesar and to God that beloÌ„geth to God â–ª which later clause â–ª I am assured doth much more take away a supreme regiment in all causes ecclesiasticall than necessalily by force of any wordes binde vs to pay yea any tribute to our Prince 69. b. VVe plainly say that this kinde of supremacie is directly against Gods holy worde 70. a. VVhat can ye conclude of all that ye haue or shall say to win your purpose 74. a. I say that if Saint Augustine were aliue he woulde say vnto you as he saide vnto Gaudentius 74. b. Neither this that ye here alleage out of place nor all the residue which ye reherse of this Constantine c. can import this superioritie as we shall there more at large specific In the meane season I say it is a stark most impudeÌ„t lie 75. b As I haue at large in my returne against master Iewels fourth article declared 77. b. VVhat honour haue ye got what honour haue you I saye wonne by this or by the whole thing it selfe 78. a. And shal we now M. Horne your antecedeÌ„t being so naught the consequent ye will hereof inferre nay pardie 79. a b. VVell I will leaue this at your leasure better to bee debated vpon betwixt you and master Foxe 80. a. Ye are a verie poore sielie clearke farre from the knowledge of the late reuerende fathers Bishop VVhite and Bishop Gardiner 80. a. That I may a little roll in your rayling Rhetorike hearken good master Horne I walke not and wander as ye doe here c. I go to worke with you truely plainly and particularly I shewe you by your owne Emperour and by plaine wordes 81. b. Hitherto ye haue not brought any one thing worth a good strawe to the substantiall prouse of your purpose 82. a. I am right well assured ye haue not proued nor neuer shall be able to proue in the auncient Church while ye liue 82. b. I walke not in confuse and generall wordes as you do 82. b. To all these facings and crakes though many of them be particularly aunswered as occasion requireth these his owne wordes may suffise for aunswere All men knowe that your great vauntes are but wordes of course to saue your poore honestie 1. Pref. pag. 23. Bicause he quarelleth so much with the Bishop as for other things so for his Rhetorike as also Doctour Harding and his fellowes vpbrayde likewise vnto Bishop Iewell his Rhetorike and master Dorman to master Nowell I haue therefore set downe as one of his chiefest common places a briefe note or two by the way to shewe wherein our master Stapletons flourishing Rhetorike doth most consist His obiections of Rhetorike AS for your Rhetorike ye woorke your matters so handsomly and so perswasiuely c. what a newe Cicero or Demosthenes are you 1. Pref. pag. 6. 7. His chiefest floures of Rhetorike partly nothing but copia verboruâ—… an heape of needlesse wordes partly nothing but rolling on a letter With which Rhetorike thou shalt 〈◊〉 his whole booke so poudred that it should be superfluous to trouble thée with any exacter collection of theÌ„ being in effect nothing else but â—…rs bahlatiua Only I will giue 〈◊〉 a light taste thereof throughout his whole volume and the rest thou 〈◊〉 continually finde as thou readest his Counterblast His fift common place of flourishing Rhetorike IT is the Castle of your Profession the Key of your Doctrine the principal Fort of all your Religion the piller of your authoritie the fountaine of your iurisdiction the ankerholde of all your proceedings 1. Pref. pag. 1. Your cause is betrayed your doctrine dissolueth your whole Religion goeth to wracke the want of this right shaketh your authoritie stoppeth your iurisdiction and is the vtter ship wracke of all your proceedings 2. Haue I not grounded this worke c. haue I not posted it c. haue I not furnished it c. haue I not fenced it c. haue I not remooued all c. an outward shewe and countenance a gay glorious glistring face a face I say all is but a face and a naked shewe 3. Most miserably and wretchedly pinched pared and dismembred Most shamefully contaminated depraued and deformed 12. A mishapen lumpe of lewde and lose arguments 5. VVith like good Logike ye lay forth 6. The truth is dayly more and more opened illustred and confirmed 8. T. Turkish trecherie L. Lauashing language 14. B. Bluster and blow F. Fume and freat R. Raile and raue as L. Lowdlyas lewdly as B. Beastly as boldly c. ye B. Bluster not so boysterously as ye L. Lie most lewdly 15. A H. Happie happe for master Horne that happed c. S. Such slender circumstances to M. Minister him matter of such T. Trifling talke 6. b. A prerogatiue appropriate to the Prelate 7. b. You will happly forsake and abandoÌ„ Saint Augustines authoritie with the olde C. Canons and Councels and 〈◊〉 vnder the defence of your B. Brittle Bulwarke 8. b. A pretie legerdemaine played and a leafe put in at the printing which was neuer proposed in the parliament c. what Parliament haue your preachers 9. a. b. O poore and siely helpe O miserable shift c. This is to trouble all things this is as it were to confounde togither heauen and earth 9. a. VVhie good sir make ye such post haste what are you so soone at the ende I see your haste is great VVhat will you leape ouer the hedge ere ye come at it And I might be so bolde I woulde faine demaunde of you the cause of your hastie posting Perhaps there is some eye sore or somewhat that your stomacke cannot beare Grieueth it you to heare Doth it appall you to heare c. Doth it dasell and amase you to heare c. Doe yee take it to the heart Master Horne â–ª Is it a corsey to you Is there yet any other lurking sore priuily pinching your stomack I trow it nipped you at the very heart roote 212. b. 213. a. b. VVhie master Horne can your eares paciently abide all this can your stomacke digest all this master Horne can ye suffer can ye suffer How chaunce we haue not at the least for your comfort one pretie nippe 287. a. A rascall rablement of monstruous hereticall names A rablement of straunge monstrous hereticall names This rascall rablement of huge monstrous names 317. It is so it is so master Horne c. You can not you may not you shall not c. You sawe you sawe master Horne you master Horne 430. Your horrible dissention glistreth so cleare crieth so lowde and blustreth so great that so long as we haue
Peter and Saint Paule so earnestly taught at that time obedience to Princes But what obedience coulde they require in subiectes if they comprehended not with all authoritie in Princes fol. 75. b. Aunswere these contradictions with his owne wordes I am here in the beginning put to the knowledge by the varietie of your aunsweres that they cannot be both true but if the one be true the other must be false fol. 40. a. By your contradictions ye shewe the vnstablenesse of your owne Iudgement 1. Pres. pag. 19. His ninth common place of petit quarels at Grammer and other trifles to prolong his booke thereby His ovvne obiection of the same WHo seeth not nowe that all this was but a quarell picked without desert and you master Stapletonn to haue shewed yourselfe amost ridiculous wrangler But Gods name be blessed the dealing of Catholike wryters is so vpright that suche small occasions must bee piked and vppon suche trifles your Rhetorike must bee bestowed else agaynst their dealing ye haue nothing to say 1. Preface pag. 18. IN his first Preface where he giueth a briefe antedate of all those things that he is â—…ust offended withall he maketh this a verie heynous faulte that the Bishoppe called Conuenâ—…t It ought to bee for It is meete or conuenient to bee â–ª 1. Pref. Pag. 4. As who saye if a thing bée meete and conuenient it ought not to bee or if it ought to be it is not meete and conuenient to bee But if Oportet muste néedes alwayes signifie it ought to bee then ought your Bishops if they bée Bishops to bée maryed For Saint Paule sayth not Conuenit but Oportet Episcopuâ—… esse vniâ—… vxâ—…r is viruâ—… A Bishop ought to be the husbande of one wife In the same place he maketh a sorer matter aboute this worde recenâ—…endam to reherse which worde the Bishoppe went not aboute to interprete in that place as the letter sheweth but onelye to tell the sentence and intente of their doyng and wherefore did the Councell present their doynges to bée read or rehearsed before the Emperour but that he might examine and confyrme the same Besides that they them selues beséeche him to ratifie and confirme them which he could not well doe hauing not examined and perused them ibid. Likewise about irrogare priuilegia that eyther by escape of the Printer as many such escapes in any booke may hap or by the ouersight of the writer of the Printers copie was printed to take away for he gaue of which escape Lord what a wonderfull triumphant outcrie he maketh also in his Counterblast while the materiall purpose is all one agaynst him whether the Prince made priuileges or abrogated priuileges and tooke them from the Clergie For if his taking away were lawfull his authoritie remayned equall in both except ye will say â–ª Princes haue authoritie to make priuileges for the Clergie giue or make for them what and how much they will but they that haue learned holdefast the first point of hawking will not suffer them by the same authoritie to take any away agâ—…ine for that is against their profite But the lawe sayth contrary the same authoritie that may make the same authoritie may vndâ—…e and take away againe ibidem But lesse maruaile is it that he quarelleth about the former wordes that cauilleth about the Englishing of quauiâ—… causa any cause which must be sayth he euery cause calling this interpreting foule shiftes neuerthelesse of much importance to call quauis any yet himself euen in the next lease not of quauis qualibet or quacunque whereon he descanteth Grammarian like but euen of nothing can make Any a foule shift and yet not of any other importance at all than to shewe that any or all these causes of his brablings are in conclusion of no importance at all But admitting as he would haue it the Kings and the Councels decrée agaynst the carying of causes out of the Realme to be pleaded at the Court of Rome should signifie not any but eueâ—…y cause then coulde not the penaltie of the breach thereof extend to any that had tryed excéeding many causes at Rome and dayly did for all this decrée vnlesse it had â—…ene proued he had there tried euerie cause and so the decrée it selfe had bene of nonâ—… importance at all whereat so heynous a matter is made and yet the worde in that place admitteth so well none other interpretation ibid. The like quarell he piketh aboute supremuâ—… gâ—…bernator supreme gouernour in the Queeneâ—… Maiesties title to the othe administred at Oxenfordâ—… of the which othe he sayth A scholler might make an honest refusall were it nothing but for false Latine Which rule of his if it holde then many of their poâ—…ishe ceremonies their Latine seruice their Masse yea euen their consecration might honestly he refused were it but for false Latine when their ignoraunt Priestes did pronounce corpus 〈◊〉 c. in nomina patria filia spirita sancta c. 〈◊〉 for sumâ—…simus or such like wordes about the which your best scholemen make somewhat more 〈◊〉 standing vpon the intentioâ—…s and not so much vpon the sillables that euen for the false construction of sir Iohn lackâ—… Latine that patreth Latine like a Parat they might honestly refuse the same but to saue the honestie of theyr priests and their ignoraunt escapes they haue a contrarie glosse to your rule quia error sillabae non nocet the error of a sillable hurteth not althoughe they that vsed this phrase knewe as well howe to set the Substantiâ—…e and the Adiectiue togither as master Stapleton I dare say and were it so as he sayth might take the phrase vsually receyued not respecting the gender so much as the selfe thing and power As we vse in Englishâ—… to say without quarelling thereat the Quéenes Royall or regall estate though shee by hir seâ—…e be Queene and by Grammer shoulde say reginall estate likewise we call hir gouernour defender and your selfe call hir often Prince not Princesse all these and suche like wordes or phrases setting aside the exacting of Grammer rules in respect of hir kingly power the lawyers say they may vse this licence of speach to whome I remitte you and to other your Canonists scholemen and Historiographers that haue vsed the same or like with no reproche or quarell piked thereat And if now the Quéenes Maiesties supremacie must néedes be renouÌ„ced for this phrase bicause by the censure of our new Aristarchus it is not so Grammerlike then must your Pope himselfe léese his vsurped supremacie so oft as it often falleth out he is no Grammarian at all ibidem Likewise he maketh a quarell about these wordes supreme head in the title of King Henrie and King Edwarde and the wordes of the title vsed nowe supreme gouernour where all men knowe that the sense is all one but that this title more plainly expresseth the matter to preuent such ianglers Yea but sayth he there is a certaine addition of greatest
vntruth M. Feckenham may repent that euer he hired you that haue not as ye saye slaundered him but spoyled him of all his faith and honestie Now where the Bishop sayd he spoyled hir Of a principall parte of hir Royall power ryghte and dignitie Yée adde youre 24 vntruthe saying The. 24. vntruth this is no part at all of the Princes royall power Yedenye this too late Maister Stapleton For where before the Byshop charged hym that hée spoyled hir of a principall parte and you saye for him he did so youre selfe bothe directly graunte it a principall parte and indire â—…ely bycause hee spoyled hir whereof I praye you but of that béelonged vnto hir For otherwyse hée spoyled hir not if it were not hir ryghte And then shoulde you haue sayde he dydde not so whyche you doo not but flatlye confesse hee dydde so and therefore it was a parte thereof You play nowe after your retourne into your holde as you did after the Parliament before ye came out of the Tower to me The. 25. vntruth The Tower is not M. Feckenhams hold for it holdeth him not he it This vntruth in the yrkesome number of his ragman roll is chiefly noted to recreate the spirits of the reckoner with some pleasaunt deuise as M. Stapleton in his merrie conceyt thought good to sporte at the name of holde saying the Tower is not his holde for it holdeth him but not he it He lerned belike that iest of the fellon in Newgate to whoÌ„ when one sayde he was in for a birde that is vntrue quoth he I am in for an horsse so dalieth M. Stapleton about the ambiguousnesse of this word holde And when al his holde is done it is no vntruth of any matter nor spéech neyther so long as men vse it both ways commonly but I dare say M. Stapleton would be loth to haue the Tower no lesse his holde than it is M. Feckenhams His two laste vntruthes proued that M. Feckenham deserued that holde As for M. Stapleton who thinketh himself safe in his holde at Louain what holde he well deserueth elsewhere his reuerent spéeches on the Quéens maiestie hir Parliament and Realme in this his boke declare besides his open and stubborne disobedience Whereby your friendes might be the rather induced to continue their good opinion conceyued of you and also pay your charges weekely in the Tower sente vnto you 26. euery Saturdaye by your seruant who wrote and deliuered the Copies abroade as ye tolde me your selfe The. 26. vntruthe The Queenes Highnesse wordes in the Towre can testifie the contrarie Did the Quéenes highnesse in the Tower saye that M. Feckenhams friendes did not send vnto him wéekly to pay his charges did hir highnesse say so M. Stapleton ye affirme it boldly and nicke it on youre score But till yee proue it ye shall giue me leaue to thinke that youre wits were occupied about some other matter or else ye woulde haue set this note in some other place For in your counterblast speaking of this matter purposely ye haue nothing to say there to it but that it is as farre as I can vnderstand stark false And so calling it the Bishops gueste and suâ—…mize ye would put him to his proofe by some circumstance so that there it séemeth ye can not flatly improue it but requiryng further proofe déeming it a guesse daring not say it is stark false but as far as ye vnderstand and yet in your score so flatly to auouche it for a certain vntruth and so redily and precisely to affirme that the Queenes Maiestie sayde the contrarie therto iudge your self how these things haÌ„g togither Now that ye ar returned again to the tower and perceyuing that your frendes as you gaue them iust cause haue some mistrust of youre reuolt and wauering inconstancie whereby youre estimation and fame with your seruice to youre God the belly is decayed 27 A heape of slaunderous and rayling vntruthes Ye still confounde your talie M. Stapleton in nicking on so fast without aduisement making one an whole heap and an whole heape of vntruthes but one vntruth Belyke yée doe it by the figures of Arithmetike diminution and multiplication that ye vpbrayde to the Bishop in your preface wherby many are but this one and yet this one is many yea many slaunderous and rayling vntruths Although ye proue neither one slaunder or railing or any one vntruth at all but lette it quite alone for feare of opening further matter A sore head ye wist is soone broken and if they shoulde fall out in the ripping of them to be true M. Feckenham might rather beshrew your heart than con ye any thanke for noting suche vntruthes Other vntruthes he chiefly standeth vpon in his counterblast but they are none of the reckoning As the Bishops noting of M. Feckenhams impudencie saying VVhervnto presently I am required to svveare when no othe by the Bishop was required at all of him These and other falsehoodes that the B. layeth to M. Feck charge M Stap. though he say in his counterblast that the B. accumulate an huge heape of vntruths yet for shame durst he not put them in his score neither one by one nor alon a plump for feare his reckoning shoulde be called to an accompt but thruste them vp together in the thicke of his booke And yet séeing in the ende hée coulde not excuse Maister Feckenham of those thinges wherewith the Bishop charged hym Howe soeuer it be sayeth he this matter is nothing appertayning to the state of the principall question and of small importaunce Where in déede it muche apperteyneth to the purpose of the controuersie betwéen the parties and is of great importance to shewe the entrie into the whole controuersie But if it had ben as light as he would haue it séeme is it therfore lawfull for M. Feck to lie so impudently therin or for M. Stapl. so to excuse his lying You did know acknowledge and confesse this supreme authoritie in causes ecclesiasticall to be in king Henrie the eight and his heires The. 28. vntruth For no man can knowe that which is not true As ye were before disposed to be somwhat pleasant in your note of the holde so here you vtter an other knack of your budget to shewe howe déepe a Philosopher ye were in suttle knowledge and therfore where the Bishop according as eche man vseth to speake did say that M. Feckenham did know and acknowledge it then in confessing this supreme authoritie of the Prince you contend on the word knowe that hée did not knowe it bycause it is not true and cite Aristotle to witnesse Why sir dothe not the Scripture euen in the beginning mention Arborem scientiae boni mali The tree of the knowledge of good and euill And yet doe all the Philosophers say that Verum bonum malum falsum conuertuntur looke what is true that is good and looke what is euill that is
replie vvill declare Hovv vvell so euer he hath played his partes full ilfauoredly you begin to plaie yours M. Stap. thus to wrangle about the partes of opponent and answerer The B. playeth not the opponent but you playe the Marchant The B. not in playe but in truth good earnest as M. Feckenham pretendeth to 〈◊〉 requireth to be satisfied answereth to his requestes by the foresayde proues that here ye confesse he bringeth forth The partie opponent as in the other scruples still is M. Feckenham But be he opponent or defendaÌ„t as either of theÌ„ in respects may be either if he bring those proues that ye graunt he doth ye haue litle occasioÌ„ to make a playe scoffe at the matter Neither doth this blemish the truth froÌ„ whom he had it wher with ye would séeme as it were with an awke blowe to foyle the B. learning that he founde out these prooues not all by his owne studie but by the helpe of his friends Which as you M. Stapleton for your owne parte were faine to confesse right now so is there no cause ye should measure the Bishops knowledge by your owne defecte But herein ye do but as the residue do this is the fashioÌ„ of all your coÌ„péeres Where truth faileth you â–ª at the least to winne a credite of learning to your selues like prowde Pharisies ye dispise al other besides your selues To which purpose as M. Stapl. would staine the Bishops godly and learned labour herein at the least that all might not séeme to be his owne but gathered by others to his hands so in the telling of his owne well ordered péece of worke he setteth out euery point to the vttermost to coÌ„mende the better vnto vs his great learning industrie and perspicuitie He telleth vs solemnly how to the first parte he replieth in three bookes how he hath deuided eche booke into seuerall chapters what he hath noted at the toppe of eche page But he telleth not what common places he hath set out in eche line He telleth how he hath exceedingly lightned the matter and what recapitulations he hath made thereof To the second parte he telleth vs it shall appeare but when he telleth vs not both what strong and inuincible arguments M. Feknam right learnedly proposed as most iuste causes of his said refusall And also vvhat â—…ely shiftes and miserable escapes M. Horne hath deuised to maynteine that obstinately vvhich he once conceaued erroneously And thus forsoothe nothing to the prayse and setting forth of him selfe M. Feckenham nor to the blemishing of his aduersarie hath M. Stapleton deuided the content of the Bishops answere and his counterblast thereto Now thinking with this preiudice of both their labours he hath sufficiently affectionate the Reader to his partie thirdly he entreth into a generall fore warning of him the effect whereof is to forsake this religion which he beginneth with this earnest adiuring of him Novv good Reader saith Master Stapleton as thou tendrest thine owne saluation â–ª and hopest to be a saued soule in the ioyful and euerlasting blisse of heauen so consider and vveigh vvith thy selfe the importaunce of this matter in hande What hope of saluation M. St. can the Popish doctrine bréede that alwayes doubteth as much of damnation as it hopeth of saluation haÌ„geth wauering betwene dispayre hope admitting no certentie of faith or trust to grouÌ„de vpoÌ„ The attenâ—…ion that ye desire in the Reader we as earnestly desire the same also neither that he come to reade attentiuely with any preiudicate opinion on either parte as you would haue his minde foresâ—…alled on your side but euen with indifferencie as he shall finde the matter in hande to leade him so to weigh and consider the importance thereof euen as he tendreth and verely hopeth his ovvne saluation And as the Reader shall do this for his parte so let vs sée how you do for yours and of what great importance your arguments are to sturre vp this earnest attention in the Reader The first argument that ye make is this First vvithout authoritie is no religion Then if this Religion vvhereby thou hopest to be saued haue no authoritie to grounde it selfe vppon vvhat hope of saluation remayning in this religion canst thou receyue Now as though the Maior were in controuersie and the pointe we sticke vpon he first solemnely strengthneth it with the authoritie of S. Augustine For no true religion saith S. Augustine can by any meanes be receaued vvithout some vvaightie force of authoritie As for the Minor which determineth nothing but hanging on a conditionall pinne maketh no directe conclusion too or fro We graunt him that iâ—… our religion haue no authoritie no hope of saluation can be grounded thereon But then he replieth If it haue any authoritie it hath the authoritie of the Prince by vvhose supreme gouerment it is enacted erected and forced vpon thee other authoritie hath it none Ergo For want of sufficient good authoritie it is no true Religion Ye desired right now M. St. euen as the Reader tendreth his ovvne saluation to consider and vveighe vvith him self the importance of this matter And is this all the importance of your first argument against our Religion that the Reader should weigh coÌ„sider so déepely What is here alleaged besides a bolde and manifest slaunder forced vpon the Reader by the authoritie onely of your bare woorde Which the more the Reader shall consider and especially thus your beginning for an handsell of good lucke to the residue he shall the better perceaue the falshood and impudencie of your whole cause dealing For to set one If against another If the reader better coÌ„sidering weighing with himself shal finde this religioÌ„ not to be of so late enacting erecting forcing but enacted erected and forced of God in his holy woorde shall not this coÌ„sideration detect you to be a malicious slauÌ„derer if the reader with al shall vveigh the peise of your argument that the Prince hath a supreme gouernment in all Ecclesiasticall causes Ergo the Religion that the Prince sets forth hath noâ—…e other authoritie but of him shal be not finde it like the father of it as light as a thing of nought But exhorting the Reader to vveigh and consider the matter not considering nor vveighing what ye say your selfe ye blunder on in your Ifs and say If then that supreme gouernment that hauing none other authoritie enacteth erecteth and forceth a Religion vpon thée be not due to the laie Prince but to the spirituall Magistrate and to one chiefe Magistrate among the vvhole spiritualtie thou â—…eest thy ReligioÌ„ is but a bare name of religion and no religion in deede Here whether he be ashamed to set it downe or thinketh it so cléere it néedeth not recital but is inferred of the Maior he leaueth out the Minor of his argumeÌ„t But that supreme gouernment is due to one chiefe spirituall magistrate only and to
turne ye are to gredie man remember that qui cupit totum perdit totum But let vs sée your sixe demaundes whether they be reasonable and to be graunted yea or no. There are therefore say you many thinges to be considered first that Christ lefte one to rule his vvhole Churche in his steade from time to time vnto the ende of the vvorlde Is this your first request to be considered and graunted M. Stapleton now surely a reasonable demaund to be considered vpon And woorthie to haue that Salomon graunted to Adonias for asking of Abisaâ—…g to wife Wise king Salomon saw he might aswell haue asked the crowne from his head yea his head from his shoulders and who so vnwise that seeth not ye might aswell aske the whole controuersie to be graunted you and graunt ye this what néede ye propounde your other principles following How be it let vs sée what they be also Secondly we muste consider ye say that this one vvas S. Peter the Apostle and novv are the Bishops of Rome his successours Out of doubt ye had on some great considering câ—…ppe M. Stapleton when you considered that the Bishop should haue considered this He was much to blame he considered it not but M. Stapl. and ye were as wise as God might haue made you ye would haue better coÌ„sidered with your selfe than to thinke others haue so litle consideration as to graunt ye this your false and foolishe principle Thirdly say you that albeit the Bishop of Rome had no such vniuersall gouernment ouer the vvhole yet that he is and euer vvas the Patriarche of Englande and of the vvhole VVest Church and so hath as much to do here as any other Patriarche in his Patriarchshippe It is a signe M. Stap â–ª ye shrewdly doubte the former twains woulde neuer be graunted that so soone would be content to become a Patriarche of a piece from a Pope of the whole which though it sheweth lesse haughtinesse in you that would play small game rather than sit out yet perchance your Pope is of Alexanders spirite to whome Darius hauing offred halfe his dominions if I were Alexander ê™ Parmenio I would take it so would I ê™ Alexander if I were Parmenio And so perchance your Pope will say to you if I were Master Stapleton I would be content at least to be a Patriarche and perchance a worse rowme woulde serue But beyng the Bishop of Rome he will say Aut Papa aut nihil And therefore least ye get his curse before ye aske our consent the surest way were to know how he will like of this your limitation and when he shal be content then propose it to vs to consider thereon But I see ye like not greatly to stande hereon for fourthly say you Then all vvere it that he had nothing to intermedle vvith vs nor as Pope nor as Patriarche yet can not this supremacie of a ciuill Prince be iustified VVhereof he is not capable especially a vvoman but it must remayne in some spirituall man. Your must is very mustie M. Stapl. and smelleth of the pumpe of Romes ship Your Sequence is as badde the B. of Rome neyther as Pope nor as Patriarche is supreme gouernour in Ecclesiasticall causes in England Ergo No ciuill Prince man or woman is capable of it Againe There must be one spirituall man that must haue an vniuersall gouernment ouer the whole Churche Ergo â–ª A ciuill Prince may haue no particuler gouernement in his particuler Churche The antecedents in déede are true of bothe For neither hath the Pope as Pope or Patriarche or any otherwise any supreme gouernement ouer Englande as you presuppose he had none and yet the Prince both may haue and hath some supreme gouernement ouer vs For in déede all supreme gouernement suche as the Pope vsurped she neither hath nor may haue nor requireth nor belongs to any creature but is due to Christ alone He is that spirituall man that your other antecedent speaketh of if ye meane him it is true if you meane any other it is but your false presupposall though the consequentes whereon we stande followeth neither way neither doe ye laboure once to proue them But is here all things we muste consider no say you for fiftly Besides this the Catholikes say that as there vvas neuer any such president heretofore in the catholike Church so at this present there is no suche excepte in Englande neither among the Lutherans the Suinglians the Suenkfeldians or Anabaptists or any other secte that at this day raygneth or rageth in the vvorlde None of these I say agnyse their ciuill Prince as supreme gouernour in al causes spirituall and temporall Let goe these raging termes of sectes M. Sta. to their common places and I pray ye tell vs once agayne who sayth thus Who euen the Catholikes say so But whome meane you by the Catholiks The Papists Then gentle M. Stap. haue me commended to those your Papisticall Catholikes that ye say say so and aske them agayne if all be Gospell that they do say or no. Tushe man will M Stap. replie will ye not beléeue the Catholikes Why then sixtly and Laste of all I saye and M. Feck vvill also say that euen M. Horne him selfe in this his aunsvvere retreateth so farre back from his assertion of supreme gouernement in all causes spirituall and temporall vvhiche is the state and keye of the vvhole question that he plucketh from the Prince the chiefe and principall matters and causes ecclesiasticall as vve shall hereafter playnely shevve by his ovvne vvordes This geare goeth harde indéede The B. is nowe driuen to asore straight But syr might a man be so bolde to aske your mastership what are you and M. Feck are ye not Catholikes that when ye haue saide the catholikes say so ye come rushing in say Last of all I say and M. Feck vvill also say you make vs doubte least ye be no Catholikes and withall to suspect when ye cal your selfe and your client M. Feck to witnesse some partialitie in your sayings least the sole will holde with the shoe and that as two false witnesses came in agaynst our sauiour Christ with I say so and he vvill say so also so woulde you compact togither to slander the B. herein with I say so and M. Feck vvil say so also But by both your leaues may I be so bolde as to set your I say so and his I say so also asyde and desire ye to proue your so saying Why say you doubt ye of that we shall here after plainly shevve it by hys owne vvordes These are but vvords M. Stap. and ioly promises if ye can shevve it so playnly why shevve ye it not playnly here where ye say it so playnly or else haue shevved at the least where the B. doth thus which till ye shall playnely shewe this your â–ª bolde and playne saying may be suspected for a playne lye But M. Stap. shaking of the further
that vve vvere baptised in Sée what a wicked slaunder to couer your disobediēce ye charge your most gratious prince withall as though she went about to make you renie that fayth ye vvere baptised in And this ye doe euen where ye pretende to kneele on your knees vvith moste humble and lowely submission Sée what cankred hearts ye beare for all your counterfayte crouching If ye knowe M. Stap. the fayth ye were baptised in at least if ye were rightely baptised and be a true Christian man it is not in the name fayth or obedience of the Pope but in the name fayth and obedience of the father the sonne and the holy ghost and this fayth the Q. maiestie goeth so little about to haue you abandon that hir Graces supreme gouernemēt is chiefly directed to this end to haue ye without any superstition error idolatrie or any other pollution therof kéepe maintein it inuiolate as in baptisme ye promised to do and therfore this is not subiect like though ye be on your knees neuer so muche to accuse hir highnesse as to cause ye to abandon the fayth ye were baptised in She requireth ye to kéepe it not abandon it neither on the soden nor at leisure And if this were all the cause of your refusall of obedience as hir Grace neuer denied you it ye doe but slaunder hir so néeded ye not haue runne away nor shew yet such disobedience to hir authoritie since she euer graunted and maynteined the thing ye séeme to craue Howbeit your counterfeite humilitie detecteth it selfe to be very stubborne disobedience And that while ye pretende to craue one thing ye entende another thing And that is ye would be borne with still to refuse her graces supreme authoritie ouer you in Ecclesiasticall causes this is the thing in deede ye meane and ye would the rather be borne withall bicause it is a matter that commeth vpon the sodaine therefore ye can not vpon the sodaine graunt it In déede M. St. ye pretende reason Weightie matters require not to be done on a sodeyne passion but with deliberation ▪ But is this so sodeyne a matter yet vnto you did ye neuer heare of this questiō before haue ye not had leasure to deliberate thereon but who seeth not that and ye had neuer so much leasure this matter would still come vpon the sodeyne to you and of reason ye must haue time to take aduisement vpō it which you will take all at your leasure and so for feare ye should become an obedient subiect vpon the sodeyne ye craue to remayne still vpon deliberation an obstinate enemie But M. St. pretēding this refusall to be for the abandoning of the faith that we were Christened in procéedeth And as we are assured all our auncetours and her Maiesties owne most noble progenitours yea her owne most noble father King Henrie the eight yea that faith which he in a clerkly booke hath most pithily defended and thereby atchieued to him and his and transported as by hereditarie succession the worthie title and stile yet remayning in her Highnesse of the Defendour of the Faith. As ye slaunder most wickedly the Quéenes Maiestie to cause ye to abandon the faith of your baptisme ▪ so ye slaunder not only al our auncestors but that most famouse Prince her highnesse Father K. Henrie the 8. as christened in the faith of the Popes obedience hereof ye say ye are assured when it is most assured most euident false For although our fathers the Q. Maiesties father also yea many of vs our selues the Q. Maiestie also her selfe were borne and baptised when all the errours of poperie or many of them did chiefly abounde yet can no more any one of these be said now to be baptised in those errours that they helde which baptised them if they kept the right formall words of baptisme I baptise thée in the name of the Father of the sonne of the holy Ghost thā in the old time any of their childrē or they themselues could be saide to be baptised in such errours as they helde that were Nouatians Donatists Rogatists Pelagians or any other Heretikes that notwithstāding kept the right element formal words of baptisme Neither can any Papist say now to any that dissuadeth him from his popish errours that he goeth about to will him to abandon the faith wherein he was baptized any more thā a Pelagian or any such Heretike being moued to forsake his heresie could pretēd he were moued to forsake the faith he was baptised in bicause they that baptised him yea his auncesters before him were Pelagians c. Ye should therefore M. St. make your distinction betwene the faith of your baptisme and the faith that your popish Church putteth in diuers erronious pointes of doctrine As for the faith that K. Henrie the 8 ▪ the Q. Maiesties most noble Father set out in the Booke that ye mencion therby labour to stayne the Q. Maiestie as setting out a contrarie faith to her father as you for your parte M. St. shew your extreme malice nothing subiectlike to blemish her highnesse with the famous renown of her father which notwithstanding ye cā not do so for the King her father I answere you howbeit his booke were clerkly yet clerklines is one thing truth is an other what maruel if he thē wrote in defence of your doctrines whē your popish prelates hid the very truth frō him bore him in hand that your falshoodes were truth till it pleased God not to suffer so noble a Prince to be any longer deluded by such false prelates but first in this question after in other according to the measure of his merciful riches reueled the truth vnto him how chance ye speake not of his faith then what clerkly sincere doctrine he set out thē against your Pope And as for the Q. Maiestie herein which is the proper questiō now in hād followeth most zealously the steppes of her highnesse father not wherein he was abused as many other princes were by false teachers but in that he forsooke those errours he abolished those false teachers their captaines vsurped authoritie in that he obeyed the truth reueled to him before all his own clerkly bookes before all worldly glory securitie aduentured himselfe his kingdome against all his enemies in setting forth the truth gouerning his subiects after the word of god Which though it were not so plentifully set forth then nor all wéedes so thoroughly rooted vp by reason of some false Gardiners whom he trusted ouer much howbeit at lēgth thanks be to God he espied them also had procéeded furder if God had lent him furder life yet is he rather to be commended for that he did than to be euil spoken or euell thought of for that he could not throughly bring to passe in his time but left his most vertuouse Sonne King Edwarde to bring to more perfection
him agayne making the king become vassall feodatarie to the Pope and to holde the crowne and realme of him in fee farme and pay 700. marks a yere for England and. 300. for Irelande And hath not the Pope chalenged other kingdomes also yea doth he not clayme to be the chiefe Lorde and Prince of all kingdomes and to set vp and depose what king or prince he pleased And he that beléeued not this was not counted a noddie but an heretike And yet sayth M. St. was there euer any so much a noddie to say and beleeue the Pope raigned here but all Papistes muste be noddies with him yea his owne Pope in steade of a triple crowne muste weare a cockes combe and him selfe for companie will beare the bell But here he leapeth backe agayne to M. Gilbie not for the matter of supremacie but for his misliking of certayne orders of religion in king Edwards dayes and here vpon pleadeth that the Papistes are nowe more to be borne withal if they can not beare the seruice and the title set foorth I answere first M. St. another mans faults excuse not yours Neither Anthonie Gilbies and yours are alike For were his greater or any of those Protestants that ye vpbrayde vnto vs afterwards yet are they lesse in that they obstinately maynteyned not the same nor persisted therin nor attempted any conspiracies nor would haue a foraigne supreme nor suche an other as your Pope the father of errors and so on their submission or repentaunce their fault is pardoned or made lesse But you obstinately maynteine a playne refusall of obedience would haue a foraigne vsurper be your supreme and not onely subdue the realme and our bodies to his tyrannie but our soules to his errors neither do ye repente therof but perseuer in it and by wicked Libels priuie conspiracies and all other meanes that ye can deface Gods worde your natural prince natiue countrey your fault therfore is much greater thā his or theirs And therfore your wilful obstinacie is not to be borne withal especially since after so long and gentle tollerance of the Quéenes moste gracious lenitie towards you ye encrease your malice and harden your hearts with Pharao abusing hir highnesse lenitie Now where the Bishop sayd these dealings were a preparation to rebellion agaynst the Queenes person M. Stap. sayth that it nothing toucheth hir person nor hir crowne And that without the ecclesiasticall authoritie the crovvne hath continued and flourished moste honorably many hundreth yeres ▪ and shall by Gods grace continue full well and full long agayne when it shall please God. Why M. Stap. what meane ye by this dothe not the crovvne flourishe and continue euen nowe also God be praysed for it why say you then it hath flourished and shal agayne when it shall please God as though it dyd not now And the state of the Crovvne were nowe no estate or a very ill estate in the reigne of the Quéenes maiestie If this be not a preparation to rebellion to make the Subiectes mislike the estate of the Crovvne is it not then euen a rebellious Proclamation it selfe but let vs sée your argument that ye make hereon to excuse your selues Diuers Princes haue continued and flourished honorably of long time without the ecclesiasticall authoritie Ergo it is nowe no preparation to rebellion agaynst the Quéenes person to refuse hir authoritie ouer all causes ecclesiasticall and to defende that it apperteyneth not to hir person or Crowne I answere First the worde ecclesiasticall authoritie is very subtilly and doubtfully spokē as though hir highnesse went about to play the minister If ye meane so the antecedent is then true The ecclesiasticall authoritie nothing toucheth hir person or crowne ▪ without the whiche it hath most honorably continued and flourished many hundreth yeres and shall by Gods grace continue ful wel and ful long agayne when it shal please God. But then is this your most spitefull slaunder to say that the Quéene now taketh vpon hir eccl. authoritie and that it is now vnited to hir person or crowne which is most euident false And therefore the crowne flourisheth for any suche matter so well as euer it did And God graunt it neuer to flourish worsse than it doth vnder hir Maiestie now But the antecedent béeing so farre foorth true as is declared then the consequent followeth not that it is now no preparation to rebelliō to refuse hir authoritie ouer all eccl. causes and to defende that it perteyneth not to hir person or crowne But if in the antecedent by ecclesi authoritie ye meane authoritie ouer ecclesiasticall matters then the antecedent is false and so to be proued by the issue of the practise in this Realme Neither is it any good argument Bicause many tooke it not on them Ergo none may Bicause they did not vse it Ergo they ought not Bicause they had worldly prosperitie without it Ergo it was not necessarie to them Bicause the denial was no preparation to rebellion then Ergo it is none nowe None of these causes are sufficient M. St. and therefore your subtile and false reason fayleth Now when ye sée nothing will fadge this way eyther to defende you or to accuse vs ye will set vpon vs for other matters that we are those that make this preparation to rebellion Let this title and eccl. iurisdiction goe say you which all good princes haue euer forgone as nothing to them apperteyning let vs come to the very temporall authoritie and let vs consider who make any preparation of rebellion the Catholikes or the Protestants In letting that go M. Stap. that appertayneth to this title and ecclesiasticall iurisdiction ye let go your matter and after your maner make so many impertinent discourses contrarie to that ye called vpon before neuer to swerue from the question in hande and nowe your selfe swerue of purpose from it Howebeit shall we let you go so rounde away with suche a heape of notorious lyes that all good Princes haue euer forgone this title and ecclesiasticall iurisdiction as nothing to them appertayning that not some or many but all good Princes haue forgone and euer forgone both this title and also ecclesiasticall iurisdiction and so euer forgone it as nothing pertayning to them If ye coulde haue shewed this ye should haue well spent your time and kept ye nearer your matter ye néeded not haue fisked about so many by quarels But this could ye not proue and therfore it was necessarie ye should runne to them picking quarels at vs not marking your owne wicked defacing of your Prince whome otherwhiles so fauningly ye flatter For whereto else tendeth this saying all good princes haue euer forgone this tytle and ecclesiasticall iurisdiction as nothing perteyning to them but to inferre that all those princes that take on them or will at any time not forgoe thys title eccl. iurisdiction as apperteyning to them are ill and wicked Princes What else can be made of
spirituall Churche so on thys principle you gather a moste false assumption That the heads of this spiritual or mystical body the church of Christ are vicars parsons byshops archbyshops patriarkes and ouer them all the Pope In which assumption ye take for true grauÌ„ted sundry manyfest errors flatly of vs denied chiefly foure The first about the spirituall and mysticall body of christ Wherin ye shew great vnskill not knowing what is ment by the spiritual mystical body For in that respect as there are no ciuil princes emperours kings or quéenes so there ar no Bishops neither no not Greke nor Scythian Gentile nor Iew neither male nor female but all the elect that haue bene are or shall be either in heauen aboue or here dispersed in any parte of the earth without any respect of person are al members and Christ the only head And so M. St. your selfe also call it the kingdome of the faythfull so that if any bishop be vnfaithful he is so far from beeing a head in this misticall corporation that he is no member or any part therof And your selfe confessed before that now theÌ„ your Pope was no good maÌ„ neither therfore vnfaithful hauing not the true liuely effectual faith in Christ as they only haue that be meÌ„bers of this body wherby he is quite excluded froÌ„ it Your first error therfore is in not discerning betwéene the inuisible and visible estate of the Church Secondly taking it as after contrarie to your former sayings ye seeme to expounde it to be the visible estate of the church saying coÌ„moÌ„ly called Christes catholike church then erre ye in that ye say vicars parsons bishops archbyshops and popes be rulers and heades of it For excepting parsons taking them for pastors Bishops the scripture knoweth none of thâ—…se rulers The other titles haue come in since with deanes archâ—…eacoÌ„s abbots priors cardinals patriarches c. although I speake not against the names of theÌ„ no not of the name of Pope neither which béeing well vsed I reueriÌ„ce admit but against the Popish hierarchie proud abuse of them And therfore thirdly where ye say the Pope is ouer them all that he is so ouer all those degrées in your Churche I graunte ye but that he is so ouer those or any other degrées in the true visible Churche of Christ it is but your facing maner to take that for confessed that is chiefly denyed Fourthly that ye affirme the Pope and his Prelates gouernemente chiefly to serue for the furtheraunce and encrease of the Spirituall kyngdome of Chryst where it is euident to the contrarie what hauocke and decrease so muche as they can these Rulers make of the members of Christes Churche to maynteine infidelitie and exautorate the worde and kingdome of Christ thereby M. Stap. now presupposing that the christian Princes gouernement is only outward and for the body and coÌ„mon with the heathen and stretcheth no further and that on the other parte the Pope ouer al and his fleshly chaplens vnder him are the heades and meÌ„bers of the spiritual and mysticall body of Christ nowe he will proue and God before that this gouernement of the pope his chaplaines is far aboue the kings gouernement and that kings he subiect therto Now sayth he as the soule of man incomparably passeth the body so doth this kingdome the other and the rulers of these the rulers of the other And as the body is subiecte to the soule so is the ciuill kingdome to the spirituall His reason is thus The soule or spirite incomparably passeth the body The kings gouernement is onely for the body and the Priests gouernement onely is for the soule and spirite Ergo the Priestes gouernement incomparably passeth the Kinges As this argument is noughte so the conclusion béeing rightly vnderstoode dothe noughte infirme the Princes supreme gouernement ouer all ecclesi causes For thoughe the maior be true the minor is moste false that the kinges gouernement is onely for the body Yea though the spirituall gouernement be onely the Priestes yet the gouernement ouer spirituall matters and matters apperteyning to the soule may still for all that and dothe belong euen ouer the Priests to the Prince Neither dothe M. St. proue the coÌ„trarie or alledge ought for his minor than as we haue heard the foresaide principles of limiting the Princes gouernement to be all one with the Turkes But you might haue done well M. Stap. to haue eâ—…sed your paynes euen here and haue troubled your selfe no further to proue your matter if these your vaine presupposals be such true and vndoubted principles But as though we had alredy graunted them M. St. still goeth on To the which kingdome sayth he as well Princes as other are engrafted by baptisme and become subiects to the same by spirituall generation as we become subiectes to our princes by course and order of natiuitie which is a terrestrial generation The argument is thus As the childe that is borne by a terrestriall generation in the earthly Princes kingdome is subiect to the earthly Prince so euen the Prince being borne againe by spirituall generation is become subiect to the spirituall kingdome But the rulers of the spirituall kingdom are the pope c. Ergo the Prince is become subiect to them Thus fondly still ye reason on your principle in so much that we can say nothing agaynst you But nowe while ye thinke ye may say what ye will sodenly see how ye haue ouerturned these your mightie principles with a trippe of your owne contrarie sayings euen in the same place Furthermore say you as euery man is naturally bounde to defende mainteyne encrease adorne â–ª and amplifie his naturall countrey so is euery man bounde and much more to employ himselfe to his possibilitie towarde the mition and defence furtheranee and amplification of this spiritual kingdome and most of all the princes themselues As such which haue receyued of God more large helpe and facultie toward the same by reason of their great authoritie and temporall sworde to ioyne the same as case requireth with the spirituall sworde Thinke ye this to be true indéede M. St. may we trust you on your wordes then is religion an ende of the Princes gouernment which a little before ye not onely most vntruly denyed but buylded as ye thought iolye arguments therevpon All whiche come nowe downe of themselues with an heaue and hee your selfe pulling awaye the soundation wherevppon they were buylt And nowe ye make an other platforme contrarie to the former which is that Princes moste of all are bounde as those that haue receyued of God more large helpe and facultie towarde the same to employ them selues to their possibilities to these endes to defende mainteyne encrease adorne and amplifie not onely the ciuill peace and prosperitie but much more the spirituall kingdome And ioyne the temporall sworde with the spirituall sworde as the case requireth Upon this as a better platforme than the
them when both the ensamples that ye make your similitude from and the matter that ye apply them too are false For a man may be master of a shippe though he neuer was a maryner in the shippe and also â—…e made the Maior of the towne wherein he was neuer citizen before As many a noble or gentleman is made the captayne of a forte of a towne or an armie that neuer was prest before a souldier and yet a good captayne to hauing the knowledge howe to gouerne souldiers though he him selfe were none Yea to draw néerer than mariners Maiors captaines reade ye not that S. Ambrose was neuer so much as any of the clergie and that more is no not baptized yet he was a better byshop than the best bishop of the Romish making now or than the byshop of Rome him selfe yea your holy Pope Felix 5. was he before he was Pope any other than as ye call it a méere lay man neither Cardinall Byshop Priest nor had so much that we reade of as your benet collet and therfore your examples are not true of Maior Pilot that they must haue bene citizen mariner before And yet where herevpon ye would néedes haue christian Princes to be spirituall men if they should be supreme gouernours of spiritual matters it is graunted you and so they be And if you thinke godly christian Princes not to be spiritual but vtterly voyde of spiritualnesse then is this in you a lying and carnall spitefulnesse All godly Princes yâ—…a all godly persons are spiritual and that muche better than any shaued or oyled massing priest But if ye meane after the common distinction those that haue any spirituall office in the ministerie of the worde and sacraments as deacons elders byshopâ—… c. then your similitude as is before declared fayleth Such Offices are not necessarie to haue gone before in a Supreme gouernour ouer them although the knowledge is necessarie how to gouerne them Besides this the proportion of your similitude fayleth in that to proue a supreme gouernour should withall be a spiâ—…ituall man yoâ—… alledge ensamples of suche gouernours as be not but haue bene suche or suche persons before and so from the master which hath bene a maryner and nowe iâ—… â—… master you conclude the prince béeing a gouernour in spiritual matters should withal be a spiritual person Neither doth the proportion hold in the necessarie relation of the similitude from a Maâ—…or to his citizen from a master of a ship to a mariner seruing in the ship which hath relation froÌ„ the gouernours to the parties in their offices gouerned to any like relation betwéene a supreme gouernour ouer eccl. causes persons to a spirituall person â–ª but from a spirituall gouernour to a spirituall subiect this were the right relation Now the Prince néedeth neither to haue bene a spiritual subiect nor yet a spirituall person in your common sense of spiritualtie neither so claymeth he to be a spirituall gouernour And therefore neither the ensamples of your similitude nor the proportion holdeth But sée how still your owne tale ouerturneth your selfe For if his principall gouernement resteth in ciuil matters as immediatly ye say that in that respect he is supreme gouernour of al persons in his realme but not of their actions why is he not of their actions also syth they be ciuil or temporal matters in which respect he is their supreme gouernor is it not bicause though he be their supreme gouernor yet he professeth not all their seueral offices scieÌ„ces handy crafts mysteries or vocations and so is not a dealer in their actions which hindreth nothing his principal gouernemeÌ„t ouer them al that he is nor euer was a prentise of any of their sciences nor practiseth the actions of their callings being all ciuill matters And yet say you truely he hath the principall gouernement in ciuill matters But why then also notwithstanding the prince dealeth not with the actions of spirituall men may he not haue a principall gouernement in spirituall matters thoughe him selfe haue not the spirituall function or office of a spirituall man Doe ye not â—…ée by your owne wordes that to haue a principall gouernement or to be a supreme gouernor ouâ—…r all persons and matters â–ª is one thing and to do all the particuler actions of those persons or matters is another thing not requisite in the supreme gouernour and why then wilfully confounde ye them so often as though we made the Prince the doer of the actions bicause we acknowledge the Prince the gouernour of the matters And why sayde ye before in your last similies that he coulde not be a principall gouernour of any ciuill matters excepte he had bene a doer of the actions and as it were a prentise to the occupation before concluding the like for a gouernour of spiritual persons and causes that he must be a spirituall man and do the spirituall actions But if now béeing better aduised ye perceiue that a man may be a gouernour in ciuil matters and yet be not the doer of the ciuill actions I then conclude likewise for spirituall matters that the Prince may be a supreme gouernour in spirituall causes and yet the same not the doer of the spirituall actions The two vntruthes therfore M. Stap. that ye gather of the Byshop saying VVherefore we haue heere two vntruthes the one in an vntrue definition the other in saying the Prince is supreme gouernour in all causes spirituall are no vntruthes The Byshops definition is clearer and truer than yours Neither haue ye or hitherto coulde ye improue his conclusion with all your ensamples or your similitudes Yea euery similitude that ye haue made béeing throughly weyed hath proued the Byshops conclusion and confuted and contraried your selfe But beside al this we haue sayth M. St. a playne contradiction of M. Horne directly ouerthrowing his owne assertion heere The Bishoply rule and gouernement of Gods Church sayth M. Horne coÌ„sisteth in three poyntes to feede the Church with Gods word to minister Christes Sacraments and to bynde and lose to gouerne the Churche sayth he after this sorte belongeth to the onely office of Byshops and Church ministers and not to Kinges Queenes and Princes The like he hath afterwarde Now then these being by his owne confession the actions that properly belong to Ecclesiasticall persons and the Prince by his sayd confession hauing nothing to do therewith how is it then true that the Prince is the onely supreme head and gouernour in causes Ecclesiasticall Yea in those that do properly belong to persons Ecclesiasticall or by what colour may it be defended that this saying is not plaine contradictorie and repugnant to this later saying which we haue alleaged and whereof we shall speake more largely when we come to the saide place There is no doubt M. St. but ye will recken it vp there at large and here also and in many other places ye still sing Decies repetita placebunt
in respect of some church cause and function which we freely graunt to M. Horne yet is he neuer a whit the nearer of his purpose vnlesse he can proue that there were also no other respect why he should be vnder the Prince but for causes Ecclesiasticall For as we haue saide he is a subiect also as other Laye men are and a member beside of the ciuill common wealth in consideration whereof the Prince hath to do with him and not properly as he is a spirituall man though both respects be concurrant in one person and he be named of the worthier As the Bishops argument is plaine and formall against M. Feckenham so here M. Stapleton stepping out to helpe him as it were clapping him on the backe recomforts him saying his graunt of the Minor That the Queenes highnesse is sâ—…preme gouernour of all persons in hir realmes so well Ecclesiasticall as temporall may be well graunted And he will also freely graunte to the Bishop the Maior A man is not called an Ecclesiasticall person but in respect of some church cause and function which is all one with the Bishops affirmatiue Euery ecclesiasticall person is called Ecclesiasticall onely in respect of Ecclesiasticall functions thinges or causes belonging to Ecclesiasticall persons what now can rightly follow hereof but the Bishops flatte conclusion that the Queenes highnesse is supreme gouernour of them in those their functions things and causes also Nay saith M. St. I will graunt him al this freely and yet is he neuer a whitte the neerer of his purpose vnlesse he can proue that there were also no other respect why he should be vnder his Prince but for causes ecclesiasticall for he is a subiect also as other lay men are Ha M. St. I sée you would faine slippe the coller deuising a new diuersitie of respects betwéene ecclesiasticall person and subiect when the question is and M. Feckenham hath confessed that he is a subiect euery way whether he be lay subiect or ecclesiasticall subiect â–ª Otherwise wheÌ„ M. Feckenham saide ouer all persons either ecclesiasticall or temporall of what estate so euer they be if he had ment as you say ouer ecclesiasticall persons in déede but not in that respect that they be ecclesiasticall but temporall and lay persons then had he plainly dalied in coloured speach foolish meaning as thus ouer al persons ecclesiasticall and temporall that is to say ouer all persons temporall and temporall â–ª if he meant ecclesiasticall persons not in that respect they be so called but in that respect they be temporall and lay as other subiectes be But this is your owne wilie deuice which in effect is nothing but wilie beguild him selfe M. Feckenham ment plaine therefore twice togither saith either ecclesiasticall on the one partie or temporall persons on the other partie and to make the matter plainer of what estate saith he that is to say of what condition kinde or degrée of subiects soeuer they be And did not your selfe say before and freely graunt it that an ecclesiasticall person hath not his name of ecclesiastical person for any other respect but for ecclesiasticall causes and functions why say you now contrary to your self he is named here ecclesiasticall person â–ª not in any respect of any ecclesiastical causes or functions but in respect he is a lay and temporal subiect how hangs this togither M. StapleteÌ„ will ye denie so soone that so late ye freely graunted then I perceyue as ye here say the Bishop doth I must be fayne also to spitte on my handes and take faster holde on yours and M. Feckenhams graunt M. Feckenham hath graunted and you also thus much that the Queenes Highnesse is supreme gouernour ouer all persons borne within hir realmes either ecclesiasticall or temporall of what estate soeuer they be That is to say they are all subiect to hir all persons gouerned or vnder hir supreme gouernment but the vsuall worde is subiect Subiect here is the Generall worde or Genus comprehending two members deuiding theÌ„ selues vnder it that is ecclesiasticall person and temporall person Either of these is comprehended a like in the generall woorde subiect for it is neither nearer the one nor the other nor may be more properly spoken of the one than of the other The temporall person is as much subiect and no more than the ecclesiasticall person the ecclesiasticall as much and no more than the temporall nor these two can be confounded togither nor the one taken for the other Membra diuidentia non confunduntur but as the one is temporall in respect onely of the temporall functions so the other as ye say well therein is ecclesiasticall only in respect of functions ecclesiasticall bothe are comprehended vnder their generall worde subiect thus doth M. Feckenham plainly set them foorth as it were in a table Now commeth our student M. St. seing all this so manifest plaine that him selfe is eueÌ„ forced to graunt it he hath studied out this shift first to iumble them altogither iugglerlike then deuides or rather breakes them making ecclesiasticall and subiect to be Membra diuidentia the one to ouerthwart the other which they do not but the one coÌ„prehendes the other And maketh this worde person to be general to them both which here is al one with subiect And thus when he hath plaied Cole vnder the candlestick chopping chauÌ„ging the words now saith he ye shall sée the Bishop is neuer the nearer of his purpose vnlesse he caÌ„ proue that there were also no other respect why he should be vnder the Prince but for causes Ecclesiasticall for as we haue said he is a subiect also As who should say in that respect he is a subiect he is not Ecclesiasticall in that respect he is ecclesiasticall he is no subiect bicause he supposeth these two are contrary respects ecclesiastical subiect But this he doth by presupposall that ye will graunt him al that he saith or els he would neuer so freely haue graunted the Bishop that which after made against him selfe For who seeth not that ecclesiasticall and subiect may well agrée togither which M. Feck saw well inough wheÌ„ he graunted as well the ecclesiasticall person as the temporall to be the princes subiect And againe who seeth not that this is but a fonde shifte of M. Stapl. to say that the Bishop is neuer the nerer of his purpose onlesse he can proue there were also no other respect why he would be vnder the prince but for causes ecclesiasticall For grauÌ„ting him againe there are other respects wherefore he is also vnder his prince What is M. St. the nerer of his purpose doth it follow bicause he is subiect also in other respects that therefore he is not subiect in this respect he should haue proued this but this he lettes alone and thinks all is safe if he be subiect in other respects But what other respects so euer there be him selfe hauing freely graunted â–ª that this
name of person ecclesiasticall hath no other respect but to the causes ecclesiasticall and being gouerned or subiect as M. Feckenham hath graunted in respecte of eyther parte of this diuision temporall or ecclesiasticall if fellowes that in all respectes what soeuer of causes or persons ecclesiasticall or temporall the Prince is supreme gouernour Nor all M. Stapl. crooked shiftes and crabbed respects to hinder the sequele of this argumeÌ„t are any more to be respected than â—…ere trifles and toyes to delude the Readers withall But M. St. will not giue ouer the matter thus but will bring his darke respects to the aspect and light of all mens eyes by a familiar though somwhat an homely simâ—… As if master Robert Horne were a lay man and a paynter sayth he the Queene properly hath not to do with him as a paynter vnlesse it were for some lavve or order concerning paynters but as Robert Horne hir highnesse subiect and borne vnder hir obeysance Sée how enuye hath blynded this man that whereas for very spite he likeneth the reuerent and godly learned father in Christ to a paynter this his paynted similitude maketh also flat agaynst him For as he confesseth the Prince hath to doe vvith a paynter not onely in that he is simply hir highnesse subiecte borne vnder hir obeysance but also in respect he is suche a subiecte in whiche regarde he saythe she maketh lavves and orders also concerning paynters thoughe she entermeddle not with the Paynters pencell in drawing lynes and laying colours and other their perticuler actions euen so hath hir highnesse to do with all ecclesiasticall persons not onely in that they be simply subiectes borne vnder hir obeysance but also euen in that they be suche manner of ecclesiasticall subiects in which respect she may also make lawes and orders concerning ecclesiastical persons though she entermeddle not with preaching ministring the sacramentes and other their particuler actions Thus as God would haue it doth your owne similitude M. Stap. which of pure enuye ye bring foorth to deface the byshop withall so liuely in euery poynt make agaynst you as any similitude can do At length ye discende from your similitude to your playne purpose saying So shoulde the Queene haue also to doe with you yea in case ye were the true Byshop of VVinchester but not properly as Byshop or for your byshoply function for the whiche ye are immediatly vnder your Archbyshop and the Pope but considering you as a subiecte othervvyse or as Byshop either touching your temporalties and no further For the which the true Byshops also to their Prince do their homage With muche adoe for it sticketh in your throte lyke a boane ye admitte at length this case that the Bishop were the true Byshop of VVinchester but without any stay at the matter ye could compare him to a paynter but now beeing a Bishop he is as you say vnder his Archbishop and the Pope and vnder the Queene onely for his temporalties Here is no argument M. Stapleton but your bare assertions as though the matter were cleare and all out of question I ye had still reasoned from the similitude of the paynter and paynted it out in his true meaning ye had concluded another maner of tale that as the Prince mighte meddle euen with lawes and orders for paynters so she hath to do with Byshops not onely concerning their temporalties but euen coÌ„cerning that they be Byshops And so agayn your similitude excludeth your Pope And where ye say in that he is byshop he is immediatly vnder his Archbyshop and the Pope what if his Archbishop be not vnder the Pope neither is he not then also béeing immediatly vnder him exempted likewise from your Pope and thus ye stammer euen in your owne false principles Now when ye haue thus without any reasoning determined the Byshop to be vnder the Pope and that he dothe homage to the Quéene onely for his temporalties and no farther ye conclude the matter saying But what should I further reason with this man vvhiche as I haue sayde hathe remoued the Prince from all superioritie concerning the meere Byshoply or Priestly function and so with a notable contradiction hathe full vvorshipfully concluded agaynst hym selfe and eased hys aduersarie of any other proofe and eased master Feckenham also for taking any othe that the Queene is supreme head in all causes temporall and spirituall This notable contradiction is so sore a matter that you muste néedes haue a fling at it once agayne the contradiction is this The Prince hath not the iurisdiction of the meere Priestly or Byshoply functions The Prince hath the superioritie ouer the priestly or Byshoply functions Is not héere a notable contradiction and worthy to make thys finall conclusion thereon The Prince hathe not the iurisdiction of the meere Priestly or Byshoply functions Ergo He is remoued from all superioritie ouer the same functions Full vvorshipfully concluded to vse your owne termes master Stapleton What should ye reason further with this man but in steade of reasoning fall to making principles or sit downe and ease you with master Feckenham without any further proofe But mighte it please you to starte vp agayne and looke better aboute ye ye shoulde sée that betwéene euen that superioritie which worde notwithstanding the Byshop sayde not but power or iurisdiction of the meere byshoply or priestly function that is to saye his office and the proper actions of his office preaching binding and losing the ministring of the Sacramentes and betwéene the superioritie that is the ouersight and supreme gouernement in caring for directing and prouiding that all those functions and actions be duetifully done on their partes to whome they properly belong there is a great difference as all your similitudes hitherto haue proued and concluded agaynst you And that betwéene the dooing of the one and the not dooing of the other is no contradiction or opposition at all And therefore ye be not so eased yet but that ye muste take a little more paynes or else where ye had thought to haue wonne the spurres ye may happe to lose the saddle The eight Diuision MAster Feckenham standeth on foure poyntes whereby he thinketh he should periure himselfe if he should sweare to this laste parte of the othe in eccl. causes The first point is that he muste testifie it on a booke othe But to testifie any thing on a booke othe and not to knovve the same is periurie Then for him selfe he pleadeth ignoraunce that he neither knovveth it nor knovves any meanes hovv to come to the knovvledge of it Whervpon he ioyneth an issue with the Byshoppe which issue is this If the Byshop make proofe to him that any Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may clay me or take vpon them any suche gouernement in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes then he will yéelde and receiue the othe The meanes whereby he will haue this issue proued are these foure Either by suche order of gouernement
as our sauiour Christ hath lefte behinde him in his Gospell and nevve Testament Either by the vvritinges of suche learned doctors bothe olde and nevve vvhich haue from age to age vvitnessed the order of eeclesiasticall gouernement in Christes Church Either by the generall councels vvherin the right order of ecclesiasticall gouernement in Christes Churche hath bene moste faythfully declared and shevved from time to time Or else by the continuall practise of the like ecclesiasticall gouernement in some one Church or parte of all Christendome By these foure meanes this issue aforesaide as the state of the controuersie betwéene bothe parties must be tryed That by any of these foure meanes proofe be made to him That anie Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may claime or take vpō them anie such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes This requireth master Feckenham to be prored The satisfaction whereof to be proued by the Bishop is this That by some of these foure meanes proufe may be made to him that some Emperour Empresse King or Queene may clayme or take vppon them some such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes If the B. shall be founde to haue proued thus much to M. Feck he hath fully satisfyed his request and M. Feckenham according to his promise ought to sweare with humble thankes notwithstanding master Sapletons quarelling Counterblast The Bishop reducing M. Feckenhams first poynt to a forme of argument repeateth it No man may restifie any thing by a booke oth whereof he is ignorant and knoweth nothing without committing manifest periurie But you neyther knowe that the Queenes highnesse is the onely supreme gouernour of this Realme as well in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall things or causes as temporall neither yet know ye anye waye or meane whereby to haue anye knowledge thereof Ergo ye cannot testifie the same on a boke oth without manifest periurie To this the B. replieth that although he might flatly denie the minor that M. Feck is not without all knowledge and vtterly ignorant of the matter nor destitute of al meanes to attaine therto yet he sayth he wil answere by distinction of ignorance to shew how M. Feck is ignorāt how he is not He alleageth a thréefold deuision of ignorance out of Thomas of Aquine the chiefe of the Popish scholemen ▪ Ignorance of simplicitie Ignorāce of wilfulnes and ignorance of malice Prouing that he is not ignorant of the first sort hauing in king Henries and king Edwards reignes continually knowne acknowledged confessed it and therfore his ignorance is either of wilfulnesse or of malice or of both of them M. St. Counterblast standeth chiefly on thrée matters first his answere to Thom. distinction with an obiecting againe to the B. the opinion of Tho. in this cōtrouersie Secondly a quarrelling chalenging of the B. for vntruthes Thirdly an excuse of master Feckenham for setting forth this supremacie With a quarell ioyned thereto that the B. citing a sentence out of the booke of wisdome called it a sentence of the holy ghost concluding thereon a discorde of our doctrine But or euer he enter into his first part he noteth this for a generall warning before Now are maister Feckenham and master Horne come to couple and ioyne togither in the principall matter If this forewarning be true M. St. that this their coupling and ioyning togither on this issue to wete whether any princes haue takē any such gouernmēt on them be nowe by your confession the principall matter controuersed betweene the partyes standing in variaunce whiche as ye sayde before is conuenient and necessarie to haue before our eyes and then deligently to see howe the proufes are of eche partie applied for the confirming of their assertions Then all those sixe principles whiche ye sette vp before your Counterblast as markes to fixe the eye of the Reader vppon were but false markes and not the principall matter wherein the parties coupled them selues togither to proue or improue the same Then were almost all that hitherto M. Stap. hath sayde as the Reader marking this well shall sée and the most of that which he hath to say in this great Counterblast nothing else but a running about the Bushe and wresting of euerye thing from the principall matter in which they ioyned to some other matters wherein they coupled not Whiche is plaine to beguile and abuse not rightly to direct the eye of the Reader as the Reader fixing his eye on thys issue shall soone espie your falsehoode This issue then being the principall matter as ye say and the Bishop coupling and ioyning herein togither with master Feckenham as ye also say and the Bishop hauing proued that which he endeuoured himselfe to proue which ye likewise haue confessed what remayneth by your owne tale telling but that the Bishop hath fully proued the principall matter in question Neither will you as you say nor any other Catholikes greatly contend with him for that he hath proued and he hath proued that that he laboured in he laboured in that he coupled he coupled in this issue thys issue is the principall matter betwéene them whie then do ye so fiersely contende but that ye woulde shewe your selfe a vaine sophisticall and brabling quarrellour that haue no great cause to contende nor anye cause at all and yet will so greatly contende onely of wylfull malice confessing your selfe the thing to be proued that is the principall matter Master Stap. hauing giuen this forewarning commeth to his first part which he deuideth thréefold First he iesteth out the matter with scoffes which I referre to his common place thereon Secondly he denieth master Feckenham to haue any ignorance in this poynt except it were inuincible ignorance by no study or diligence able to be put away and therfore pardonable Since ye admit the distinction M. Stap. ye bring out of time your other inuincible ignorance How pardonable it is is another question But sée how ignorantly while ye would defende M. Fec you ouerthwart him he pleadeth ignorance for his defence and you say he is not ignorant and woulde put the B. to proue that he should be ignorant of wilfulnesse and malice which the B. hath done alreadie and so ye debarre M. Feckēham of his refuge and make him to haue knowledge of this poynt Which not only he himself denieth but which your selfe afterwards denie also yea that he could not haue knowledge of this poynt But you thinke to escape cleare with helping the matter by a newe pertition of ignorance adding a fourth part of inuincible ignorance Surely say you if there were any ignorance in this point it were such as S. Tho. and other call inuincible ignorance Except M. St. ye confound this fourth ignorance with one of the thrée before named ye quite exclude M. Fec from the whole distinction of Thomas and yet ye say the distinction may be true ye will not stick with him for that distinction So that eyther ye
Where this place ioyneth togither as colleages the prince with the priest or rather ascribeth the skil in suche doubtes to be defined by the learned and faythfull priest and the full authoritie to giue iudgement and to ratifie the Priestes sentence in condemning the refusers to death and in approuing the receyuers to consist not in the high Priest but in the Iudge or Prince And thus this place that he would so fayne wrest euery way agaynst Christian Princes and for his Pope and popelings béeing well wayed and considered according to his owne request maketh nothing for his matter nor for his shauelings but cleane agaynst them And béeing better wayed and considered maketh nothing against the Bishops cause nor against christian Princes supreme gouernment in ouerséeing correcting such false priests but very muche for their duetie and chiefe authoritie therin M. St. hauing thus shamefully counterblasted the Byshops allegatioÌ„ to set a good face on an euilfauorde matter biddes the byshop go on and crieth out that he hath goâ—…ten the victorie that the bishop is at his first encouÌ„tring ouerblowne and discomfited euen with his owne blast And that it is not likely hereafter that he shall bring any thing to resolue his aduersarie But as God would haue it all these wordes are no blowes nor arguments but vayne triuÌ„phes before he haue gotten the victorie of the which he reckoneth him selfe so sure that he graunteth the Byshops other allegation Deut. 13. For as for the next place sayth he it enforceth no supremacie we freely graunt you that princes may sharply punish teachers of false and superstitious religion and Idolatrie beeing therof by the Priests instructed whiche is the matter of your texte This parenthesis M. St. beeing therof by the priests instructed is the levvde lying glose of your owne forge The text hath no such matter of the priests instruction but what thinke you doth enstruction more enforce an authoritie in the priest than powre to punish correct doth enforce an authoritie in the prince or doth this follow that bicause the prince by the priests enstruction doth punish false teachers Ergo he punisheth theÌ„ by the priests authoritie but as you fréely graunt that the prince may punish noughtie false and idolatrous priests so that the priests instructioÌ„ is any matter of the byshops text or that his instruction should more enforce authoritie ouer the prince than the princes punishment doth ouer false teachers is both euident false this we as flatly deny as you do fréely graunt the other Howbeit presupposing that we would also grauÌ„t him this that all things must still be done by the priests instruction But then sayth master Stap. take heede to your selfe master Horne and as though he him selfe were this instructour for I say to you sayth he that ye and your fellowes teache false and superstitious religion many and detestable heresies and so withall playne idolatrie In déede sir so ye say that full stoutly braying out with I say to you but thanks be to God ye do but say it to vs ye do not proue it to vs but and it were put to a double post might it not proue a worde of course and then take heede to your selfe master Stapl. for we not onely say to you but by the worde of God proue it to you that you and your felowes teach false and superstitious religion many and detestable heresies so withal plaine idolatrie c. and so haue ye giuen sentence agaynst your selfe haue told the magistrate his office to punishe you as false teachers that care not how ye falsifie wrest the scriptures to deface your aduersarie the vnskilfulnesse and vnfaythfulnesse wherwith ye falsly charge him euer double or treble redounding vppon your selfe The residue of your proces on these two chalenges of vnskilfulnesse vnfaythfulnesse I referre to your common places of rayling scoffes and slaunders and will answere to the thirde great faulte that ye finde in this diuision Nowe that ye bring out of Glossa ordinaria say you that the Prince is commanded by his princely authoritie to cause his subiectes to become Israelites it may perhaps be in some ordinarie glose of Geneua his notes Bales or some such like but as for the olde ordinary Latin glose I am right sure M. Horne it hath no suche thing Are ye right sure therof M. Stap and hath it no suche thing in déede will ye venter your poore honestie thereon I dare say ye would haue vs thinke that ye haue looked on the ordinarie glose whether any suche thing were there or no else would ye neuer for shame so boldly affirme it But what speake I of shame in so shamelesse a face that boldly dare auouche he is right sure there is no suche thing when if he had looked in the ordinary glose except he would of purpose looke from it he could scantly misse it euen at the first viewe The wordes of the glose vpon super Israel are these Benedictio est regnare super Israel 1. regnando facere Israel s. deum videntes It is a blessing to raigne ouer Israell that is to saye by raigning which the Byshop Englished by his Princely authoritie to make or cause to become Israelites that is to wete folkes seeing God. The Bishop Englished the sentence playnly by his Princely authoritie to cause his subiectes to become Israelites And what is here that is not onely in summe of sentence but in the very emphasis or force of the bare wordes all one with the glose and yet this moste impudent what should I call him vnskilfull or vnfaythfull lyer or both chalengeth the Bishop of vntruth and sayth he is right sure there is no such thing In what thing wil this man stick to outface the simple vnlearned that dare thus deale with such a lerned father and coÌ„mit it to print to be examined of any lerned reader and crake of such assurance as though he had poared ouer al the booke for it euen at the first chop he is found an open lyer But I doubt whether euer he looked on the booke at all but trusted some retchelesse superuisor For if he had looked but ouer the head of the verie texte Ut longo tempore regnet That he might long time reigne hée shoulde haue founde noted on this worde Regnet corporaliter spiritualiter That hee shoulde reigne or exercise his Princely authoritie a long tyme Bodily and spiritually not onely to haue a regiment in lay temporall and ciuile matters as M. St. affirmeth but euen in spirituall matters also And had he but looked a little higher on these wordes Legetque illud omnibus diebus vitae suâ—… He should read it all the days of his life He should haue found Vsus reddit magistrum the vse of reading the worde of God makes the king a maister in Gods worde that is to say a setter forth or teacher thereof as it were Upon whiche the
ordinarie Glose sayth Nota quanâ—… assidâ—…itate legere debent Sacerdotes câ—… assidue legant reges Lectio ipsa est lux vitâ—… vnde verba qua ego loquor spiritus vita sunt Note with howe muche continuaunce the Priestes ought to reade the worde of God when Kings should reade it continually The reading is it selfe the lyghte and the life whereuppon sayth Christe the words which I speake are spirite and life Here M. Stapleton the lyfe lyes not as you sayde right nowe in the Priests exposition but in the word it selfe and the continuall reading thereof wherein not onely the Priest but the Prince is a kynde of Maister But are ye not right sure none of this is there neyther ye were best to say so for I perceyue ye haue an excellente grace to face downe a matter bée it neuer so playne and open Let vs nowe come to the fourthe and laste fault that he gathereth against the Bishop in this diuision whiche is also an vntruth as he saith in his margin the place of the Deuteronomie flady belied and adding this vnto the other before he saith This therfore may wel stand for an other vntruth as also that which immediatly you alleage out of Deu. 13. for in al that chapter or in any other of that booke there is no such worde to be founde as you talke of Uerily I beléeue our student M. St. had for studied himself in a lasie slumber and wrote this nodding half a sléepe for ful awake for pure shame he would neuer haue suffred such lewd lyes to scape his pen come in dropping thus one in an others necke as though he were at a poynte he cared not what he sayd neither against the playne truth nor against himselfe much lesse against the bishop Euery worde that the B. rehearseth in the last end of this diuision is fâ—…uÌ„d plainly exprest in the xiij and â–ª 17. of Deut. which chapters the Bishop quoted The wordes of punishing teachers of falâ—…e and superstitious religion and idolatrie in the former side of the leaf he grauÌ„teth himself to be in Deut. the. 13. Notwithstanding he forgetteth straight wayes what he sayd affirmeth on the other side of the leaf that there is no such word to be found But as he trippeth on the truth in the first side so on the other side of the same leaf he flatly falleth into a flat lye in both he tumbleth into a foule contradiction Moreouer in both sides he graunteth that by the. 13. of the Deut. The prince by his authoritie may punish teachers of falâ—…e religion superstition and idolatrie And may he do it withoute examining whether the doctrine wherewith the teacher is charged be true or false and being false whether he taught it or no Suche may be the order in the Popes consistorie but in Gods Courtes it is farre otherwise For God commaundeth Deut. 17. as the Bishop auouched the Prince when any is denounced vnto him to haue taught any false religion that he make diligent examination Quia noâ—… est procedendum ad sententiam sayth Lyra vpon these wordes fine diligeÌ„ti examinatione praeuia bicause he must not procede to giue sentence without diligent examination had before And this beeing found by the Princes diligent examination that he hath taughte false religion he shall be put to deathe The Bishoppes woordes comprehende all this The laste wordes also of the Bishops diuision to wete Et aufâ—…res malum de medio tui And thou shalt take away euil from among thee Are they not plainly set foorth in both those chapters So that a man might wonder that knewe not well Master Stapletons impudencie seeing that all the poyntes that the Bishoppe speaketh of in the later parte of this Diuision in the places of the Deuter â–ª aboue mencioned are so manifestly expressed with what face M. Stapleton can so boldly affirme that in al the â–ª 13. chapter or any other of that boke ther is no such word to be found as the bishop talketh of And thus with more than a full messe of notorious vntruthes to returne your owne conclusion M. Stapl. moste worthyly vpon your selfe ye haue furnished the firste seruice brought yet to the table concerning the principal matter howbeit perhappes though this be verie course yet you haue fine dishes and dayntie cates comming after Lette vs then proceede And as he sayth in the entrance of this diuision Go on I say in Gods name M. St. and prosecute your plea stoutely God send ye good speede and so he doth euen such as you and the honestie of your cause deserue and at the first entrie of your plea causeth you and your clerkly and honest dealing forthwith to your high commendation so to appeare that euen the firste authoritie that ye handle of all the holy Scripture playnly discouereth you and causeth you to be espied and openeth as well your fidelitie as the weakenes of youre whole cause the which euen with youre owne firste Counter blast is quite ouerblowen So fitly M. St. al these your owne words do serue against your selfe Diuision 11. IN this diuision the Byshop bringeth for his purpose two things first he alleageth generally that the beste and moste godly princes that euer gouerned Gods people did perceiue and rightly vnderstand that to be Gods will that they haue an especiall regarde and care for the ordering and setting foorth of Gods true Religion and therefore vsed great diligence with feruent zeale to performe and accomplishe the same Secondly for proofe héereof he entreth into his ensamples of the olde Testament beginning with Moyses that he was not the chiefe Priest or Byshop but the supreme gouernour or Prince and as chiefe gouernoure had the ordering of religion whiche he dutifully executed with great zeale and care To the former parte and generall assertion of the Bishop M. Stapleton only answereth by a marginall note saying Regarde and chiefe rule care and supreme gouernement are two diuers things â–ª Nowe forsoothe a solemne studied answere of a student in diuinitie he is a silly wise man that vnderstoode not thus muche before without this marginal note Too simple were he in déed that séeth they be not al one as he hath simply set them out But he that complained so late of curtalling and leauing out a materiall parte of the sentence whiche dooing he calleth vnfaithfulnesse sée howe vnfaithfully he hoffeth and curtalleth the Bishoppes sentence The Bishop spake not of simple care and reregarde but of an especiall care and regarde for the ordering setting foorth of Gods true religion With which assertion M. Stap. findeth no fault neither â—…y any worde goeth about to improue it and so sheweth himselfe to agrée therewith and by silence to confesse the truth thereof Now therefore let vs resolue the Bishops assertion and then consider thereon The Bishops assertion hath these thrée partes First that godly Princes ought to order and set forth Gods true
surmile vppon my silence any suche distrust ▪ I will compendiously as the matter shall require abbridge their aunsweres and that master Horne shall thinke that our stuffe is not all spent ▪ I shall on the other syde for a surplussage adioyne some other things to our opponent accomodate An Almonde for Parate so finely our student begins to speake that a good plaine simple man can scarce vnderstande his 〈◊〉 termes But this is the effect of it we shall now haue new stuffe of some olde store good stuffe and God will for all their stuffe as he crakes is not yet spent but I perceyue it goeth harde with them in their store house and that this stuffe is some of the last cast God sende it be not such stale stuffe when it comes to the view as Cardinall Campeius moiles did bring into Englande and vttered in Cheape side But such as it is we must take it in good worth it is the best he hath to answere the Bishops ensample withall The first ensample is of Moses in whome the Byshop noteth thrée things First that he was the supreme gouernour of Gods people Secondly that hée ordred and set forth Gods true Religion wyth great regarde and care prescribing aswell to Aaron and the Leuites as to the people Thirdly that he was not the chiefe priest therfore could not do them in suche respect but as he was supreme gouernour The first and the seconde propositions that Moses was the supreme gouernour and that he did order and direct all things M. St. graunteth The thirde parte he denieth and affirmeth that Moses was the chiefe priest and in that respecte dyd all these foresayde thinges This assertion he sayth he will proue bothe by his masters olde and by his owne surplusage of newe stuffe also His argument of both these stuffes is this I say with M. D. Harding and S. Augustine that Moses was a Priest aswell as a Prince I say the same with M. Dorman ▪ with Philo Iudeus with S. Hierome and with S. Hieroms master Gregorie Nazianzene Ergo Moses was the chiefe Priest. By the like reason if M. St. be a priest he might proue him selfe to be the Pope of Rome He is a Romish priest Ergo he is the chiefe Romish priest which is the pope The one reason is as good as the other But here he will cry out and say I do him wrong to change his conclusion for he inferreth no such words but these And so consequently Moses ensample serueth not your turne but quite ouerturneth your assertion True it is in déed this is your cōclusion M. St. but what was the bishops assertion which this ye say quite ouerturnes was not this his assertion that Moses was not the chiefe priest and did not you denie this assertion affirme it to be an vntruth saying for Moses was the chiefe priest as shal be proued did ye not héere make promise to proue it did ye not say that to answere this example ye had other freshe stuffe not yet spent must not then this stuffe be directed to this ende conclusion to fulfill your promise ouerturne the bishops assertion which was that Moses was not the chiefe priest but Aaron and you should proue as ye haue freshly promised that Moses was the chiefe priest And therfore if this be not your conclusion ye subtilly falsly swerue frō the cōclusion that ye ought to haue cōcluded ye performe not your promise to proue Moses the chiefe priest nor your conclusion as ye crake ouerturnes the byshops assertion which was that Moyses was not the chief priest but Aaron And therfore either this is your argument Moses was a Priest Ergo he was chiefe Priest or else ye conclude not agaynst the bishops assertion If ye say ye conclude this al the world séeth what a fonde conclusion it is And if ye haue a poleshorne priests crowne of your owne as I doubt not but ye haue a faire one ye may aswell conclude to your self the Popes triple crowne And if ye cōclude it not ye conclude not agaynst the bishop nor fulfill your promise for all your proues stande on this profe that Moses was a priest Nowe the question was not whether Moses was a priest or no which is another question in controuersie But the question is whether he or Aaron were the chiefe priest Yet will ye peraduenture say though I haue herein as ye haue proued swarued from the directe conclusion in hande that Moses was not the chiefe priest nor kepte my promise yea and made a scape in saying that I ouerturned the bishops assertion when I did not or if I went about it yet mine argument proued but a fonde reason from priest to chiefe priest yet in the ende I haue proued Moses a priest and so consequently it serueth not your turne vnlesse ye will king Henry the eight and his sonne king Edwarde yea our gratious Queene to be a priest to but rather quite ouerturneth your assertion and think you M. Horne that the Queenes authoritie doth iumpe agree with the authoritie of Moses in causes ecclesiasticall then may she preache to the people as Moses did then may she offer sacrifices as Moses did then may she consecrate priests as Moses did consecrate Aaron and others then may it be sayde of the imposition of handes as was sayde of Moyses Iosua the sonne of Nun was full of the spirite of wisdome for Moses had put his hande vpon him It must needes therefore followe that Moses was a priest and that a high priest whiche ye heere full peeuishly denie Where ye aske M. Stap. of the Byshop And thinke ye M. Horne that the Queenes authoritie do the iumpe agree with th' authoritie of Moses might not the byshop demaund agayne the like of you and thinke you ▪ M. Stap. that euen your Popes authoritie admitting it were not the vsurped tyrannie which it is dothe iumpe agree with the authoritie of Moyses yea admitting also that question that he was a Priest and so consequently agayne it serueth not your turne nor master D. Hardings nor master Dormans neither I am sure as ye confesse he was a priest so ye will admit a difference betwéene your Pope and him and euen so since ye reason thus precisely of differences in the persons ye ought also to haue made a difference betwéene Moyses his diuerse offices and to haue giuen either office his proper actions and so to haue applied them and not to haue confounded them admitting that he one person were both a Prince and a Priest also which hangs in controuersie for all your cited authors But you reason confusedly à secundum quid ad simpliciter Moyses by an especiall priuiledge was a Prieste as well as a Prince and thereby did preache offer sacrifice consecrate Aaron lay imposition of handes and did other offices of Priests and many extraordinary things besides Ergo Moses in that he was a Prince not a Priest in
that he exercised ordinary gouernment ouer priests and all ecclesiastical persons and causes as other Princes did after him â–ª is not to be broughte for example for our christian princes to follow This is the plaine full effect of your tale And what an ilfauorde argument is this I pray you but to hide this sequele after your fashion ye would inserre another yet more darke conclusion saying It must needes therfore follow that Moses was a priest that a high priest which ye heere full peenishly denie Doth this conclusion M. Stap. if it were admitted improue the Byshops assertion and yet this your conclusion standing on thrée partes as it is not to the purpose so is euery parte starke false and like the maker thereof For Moses by his prerogatiue hauing especiall coÌ„maundement of God therto might well do all those things and yet it followeth not of any necessitie that as you say he must néedes therfore haue bene a priest Or if he had bene a priest he must néedes therefore be a high priest or if he had bene a high priest that he must néedes be the highest priest Neither did the byshop denie peeuishly that he denied as you full peeuishly rashely and like your selfe do iudge nor yet denied or graunted or spoke vpon one way or other whether Moses were priest or a high priest yea or no. But denied and that truely that Moses was not the highest or chiefe priest Which words ye durst not alleage nor yet generally terme him the high priest but ye say a priest and that a high priest your selfe séeming euen by your spéeche to graunt that the high priest or highest priest he was not Nor ye can not cauill about your owne phrase vnlesse ye will say it is all one a Lorde and the Lorde a high priest and the high priest so say ye ment the chiefe priest when ye sayd a high priest for all the worlde séeth a great difference betwéene these termes and that your self did subtilly sée to make the reader beléeue ye had performed your promise in prouing him to be the chiefe priest And yet ye bring no profe but onely say a priest and that a high priest â—…go the highest priest So that if the reader more narroâ—…ly viewing your grosse sleight shoulde chalenge ye that you haue not proued him the highest priest simply no will ye say to saue your honestie I onely sayde a priest and a high Priest and no more But why do ye then belie the byshop saying he denied that that he medled not with and proue not your matter in hande nor kéepe touch with your reader in perfourming your promise that Moses was the chiefe Priest Haue ye learned so wel this subtill shift that Omne promissum est aut debitum aut dubium Euery promise is eyther due or doubtfull But howsoeuer ye will discharge your promise this your doutfull conclusion neither dischargeth your falshood nor impugneth the Bishoppes assertion muche lesse ouerturnes it that he was not the chiefe priest but the chiefe Prince or gouernoure and thereby did order and direct Gods true religion bothe to all the Priestes and people as the Bishop affirmed Nowe seeing he can by no meanes neyther olde stuffe nor newe stuffe bring it about as he wold haue it nor proue him to be the highest Priest he will leaue his promise and lyke to the Fore that would eate no Grapes when he could not come by them with all the leapes he coulde make so M. Sta. will nowe euen renounce his solemne marginall crake that he promised to proue Moyses the chiefe prieste and leaping at it but euer leaping shorte that he was a Priest and a little higher that he was a highe Priest but he can not leape so high to obtaine his purpose that he was the highest Priest he will now let him goe for béeing any Priest at all and since he can not get the grape he wil none of it but will hunt after an other praie I say now further with master Dorman sayth he that put the case Moses were no priest yet this exaÌ„ple frameth not so smoothly and closely to your purpose as ye weene for Moses was a prophet and that such a prophetas the like was not againe Giue me now M. Horne Princes prophetes giue mee Pâ—…nces and lawmakers by especiall order and appointement ordeined of God to whose wordes God certainly wold haue giuen as great authoritie as he would and commaunded to be giuen to Moses and then perchaunce I will saye that ye saye somewhat well to the purpose Againe Moyses was suche a speciall Prophete and so singularly chosen of God to bee hearde and obeyed in all thinges that he is in the holy Scripture euidently compared to Christe himselfe compared I saye in the office of teachyng and instructing Moyses in the Deuteronom foretelling the Iewes of a Messias to come sayeth The Lorde thy God will rayse thee vp a Prophete from among thyne owne nation and of thy brethren suche an one as my selfe him thou shalt heare And this so spoken of Moyses in the olde Lawe is in the nevve Testament auouched and repeated firste by S. Peter the chiefe apostle and nexte by Saint Stephan the firste martyr and applyed to Chryste If then Christe must be so heard and obeyed of vs as was Moyses of the Ievves no doubte as Christe is a king a Prince a Prophete a Prieste and a Bishoppe to vs so vvas Moyses to them a Prince a Prophete a Priest and a Bishoppe As Christe is of vs to bee hearde and obeyed as well in all matters Ecclesiasticall as temporall for no temporall lawe can haue force agaynste the lawe of Christe among Christian men so vvas Moyses to be hearde and obeyed of the Ievves in matters and causes as vvell temporall as spirituall For vvhy the Scripture is playne Tanquam meipsum audietis You shall heare that Prophete euen as my selfe Shevve vs Master Horne any prince in the nevve Testamente so conditioned and endevved and then make your argumente on Gods name Verely any prince that novve is namely in Ecclesiasticall gouernement compared vvyth Moyses is as the Poete sayth Impar congressus Achilli Troilus Yea forsoothe novve yee saye somethyng further Maister Stapleton as ye boaste howbeâ—…it nothyng further in substaunce than youre fellowes before but in flourish of Copia verborum yee saye novve further in déede And I maye saye to you it was high tyme to saye something furtherâ—… for hytherto all that ye haue sayde is nothyng Well saye you nowe Put the case Moyses were no Prieste I conclude then he was not hyghe Prieste and so putting this case yée put youre selfe in an yll case that before ye made a false lying crake and nowe with shame are fayne to giue it ouer But if ye put the case as ye say like Master Dorman then dare ye not abide by this case neither lyke Wylliam Sommer for so playde Master Dorman in putting this case
soone be espyed And that in swaruing from the hearing and obeying of the olde lawe of Moyses and the Gospell of Christe to all proportions of these peâ—…ons offices would be but an homely sequele to serue your â—…urpose and rather abase Christe than serue any thyng for Moyses to make him a Priest and a Bishop And where you make Chryste a fygure of Moyses to make Moyses also a Priest and a Bishoppe bycause Chryste is so the texte maketh a similitude from Moyses to Chryst onely in eyther béeing a Prophete and that the one Prophete and the other shoulde be heard and obeyed But you turne it topsie turuie and making Christes person represente Moyses person conclude thereon not onely Prophete but Priest and Bishop also which the texte citeth not nor any other mentioneth in the scripture that Moyses was priest and Bishop Nor the Priesthood of Christe was prefigured by Moyses priesthoode for that is a question whether Moyses were Priest at all or no but the Scripture expressely for Christes priesthoode testifyeth that Aarons Priesthoode in some respectes but chiefly Melchisâ—…decks were the onely fygures thereof and not any Priesthood of Moyses and therefore your selfe durste not flatly conclude before that hee was the chiefe Prieste but a highe Priest But dare ye saye the lyke of Christe he was a hyghe Priest but not the chiefe or hyghest Priest of all But when ye sawe a glimse that this inuersed argument could not proue Moyses to be a lyke Priest to Christ nor bishoppe at al nor that his béeing a Prophete tooke awaye the ensample of his Princely authoritie as ye did the residue so ye subtilly inuerte and folde vp the conclusion For where it shoulde haue falne out thus As Christe is of vs to hee hearde and obeyed as vvell in all matters Ecclesiasticall as temporall so vvas Moyses to bee hearde and obeyed of the Iewes in all matters and causes as well spirituall as temporall whiche were the playn conclusion yée come indreaming and saye in matters and causes as vvell temporall as spirituall as thoughe the â—…uestion were moued of temporall not of spirituall matters â–ª neither dare ye say all as ye did in the former part But if ye replie that ye ment all and so the proportion of your argument runneth and that I do ye wrong to charge ye with so lighte a matter since the indefinite is taken for the vniuersall maye not I replie agayne that ye doe the Bishop muche more treble wrong that so often call and make suche outcryes for thys syllable all when soeuer he concludes In matters so wel ecclesiastical as temporall Lo say you he leaueth out in all matters Ecclesiast and temporall Whiche althoughe it were no parte of his issue with M. Feckenham and yet he settes it downe oftener than ye woulde haue it though he be not in euery particular proofe bounde thereto yet sée howe thys hitteth your selfe that if ye leaue out this word All ye can make no good conclusion from Christe to Moyses at all Nowe when you haue thus Master Stapleton preferred Moyses before Christe ye crie out vnto the Bishoppe Shewe vs Master Horne any Prince in the newe Testamente so conditioned and endued and then make youre argument on Gods name Haue you made your argument on Gods name M. Stapleton or not rather in his name that exalteth himselfe aboue all that is called God when ye haue made the mayster serue as a fygure to the seruaunte to serue youre purpose But lette Moyses haue hys due estymation vnder Christe and hys especiall prefiguryng of Chryste also and all prerogatiues of dooyng any thyng for the tyme then by Gods especiall appoyntmente that Princes nowe can not doe Yet on Gods name maye anye man argue as the Bishoppe dyd that Moyses care and regarde béeyng the Prince of the Israelites in settyng foorthe and ryghtely orderyng Gods true religion then maye and is and oughte to be a paterne to all Christian Princes to care and regarde in setting foorth and rightely ordering Gods true religion nowe And what though in this coÌ„parison although in déed iâ—… be no comparison as you call it but an example any christian Prince that now is compared with Moyses be Impar congressus Achilli Troilus as vneuen a match as Troilus to contende with Achilles may not therefore a christian Prince followe Moses examples Why bring ye that Poets sentence M. St what Prince goeth about to coÌ„pare contend with Moyses and not rather submit them selues to his example heerein Ye slaunder christian Princes ye deface Christes glory ye belye Moyses ye skippe from Priest to Prophet from Prophet to Priest agayne to delude the bishops ensample and yet all this will not frame neither smoothly nor roughly to your purpose Whiche when ye perceiue leauing all these shifts of descant to infringe the authoritie of this first example that vrgeth you so sore that ye can not tell what to say vnto it but are driuen to the harde wall and that all store olde stuffe and new stuffe is cleane spent then as a desperate man ye quite denie all examples either of Moyses or of any that hereafter shall be alleaged and â—…ée for sanctuarie once agayne to the place of the Deuteronomie mentioned in the former diuision of the doubts arising betweene bloud and bloud plea and plea leprie and leprie to be determined by the priestes Iudge And héere clayming sanctuarie and remouing al examples And the lawier sayth say you legibus non exemplis iudicatur VVe muste iudge according to the precise rule of the lawe and not by examples extraordinary doings enforce no ordinary prescription or rule The ordinary rule of priests iudgements without whyes and what 's and suche other tryfling importune instances as ye are wont to make agaynst it by the lawe of Moyses and by your owne chapter before alleaged in doubtfull cases muste absolutely vpon payne of death be obeyed By this rule of the lawe you must measure all the examples following of kinges and princes vnder this laâ—…e Ye muste square your examples to the rule and not the rule to the examples vnlesse ye will make of the lawe of God Lesbiam regulam and bothe vnskilfully and vnorderly worke therwith And hereon as a ruled case ye set downe your marginall iudgement Men must iudge by lawe and not by examples If ye will not M. St. be iudged by examples wherefore do ye take vpon you to defende M. Feckenham and impugne the byshop For one of the foure meanes whereby he desireth to haue his issue proued and will be iudged by is practise which altogither ye wot standeth of examples and therfore the byshop proueth it by examples And if you will now flée from the authoritie of examples ye should at the beginning haue striken off one of those foure meanes to haue the issue proued by and not first to admit them and â—…id the byshop go on and say ye will yeelde also if he proue ought by
suche a counsellour as your selfe are M. Stap. But when ye sée this weakenesse of your argument by and by you start backe againe from all that you haue sayd And as before ye forsooke the ensamples from Moyses and referred them to your foresayde wrested rule so woulde ye nowe also deale with Iosue that if the Priestes counselling would not inferre his authoritie yet his iudgement should as ye thought enforce it Your argument is this The Priest and the Iudge must discusse all doubtes of bloud strife cleane and vncleane Ergo all the testimonies of the holy scripture brought forth by master Nowell and before him by master Horne can not induce supremacie in causes ecclesiasticall but the execution of the high Priestes or lawes commaundement This friuolous argument grounded on this impertinent and weake ankerholde which master Stapleton maketh his generall rule and succour whensoeuer he is driuen to a plunge then backe againe to this as a foxe to his earth is so fully aunswered and confuted that it were but superfluous to stande any longer about it And here sayth master Stapleton I will not quarrell with master Nowell c. Under pretence that he will not he beginnes to picke by quarrelles with him A pretie figure he will not but he doth The quarels are a couple of miâ—…quotings of figures for 33. 34. for 23. 24. For vsing such examples as the Bishop of Winchester doth For detecting M. Dormans sâ—…ealth the noting wherof he calleth childish and boyish rhetoâ—…ike for feare in deede that his owne childishe and boyish rhetorike stealing so many sentences arguments and in maner whole leaues from Doctor Harding and master Dorman as master Dorman stale from Hosius maâ—…ler Harding shoulde be also detected as master Dormans is and therefore he flourisheth it out with his common places but the stuffe is the olde stâ—…ffe still though newe furbished for rusting to seeme the fresher to the shewe After he hath done with M. Nowell he returneth to Iosue and least he should seeme to haue answered no particuler point he choseth out one of Iosue his doings in the place of all the rest alleged not so much to make any answere at all to the obiection thereof as thereby to picke yet another by quarrell and so to shake of the matter as though he had made a clerkly answere thereto The Bishop shewed how at the appoyntment of Iosue the priestes 〈◊〉 the arke of Couenant and placed the same so goeth on through many perticuler actions that declaâ—…e Iosues supreme gouernment ordring of ecclesi matters To this when M. St should directly answere whether this declare an authoritie of the Prince euer the priestes in ecclesiasticall matters yea or no in sâ—…eed of answere he sayth But for the doyng of Ioâ—…ue I will further note that then the Priestes tooke vp the arke of couenant and went before the people But I pray you master Horne how was this obserued of laâ—…e yeares when the lay men durst aduenture to take the guiding of the arke and go before the Priestes and not suffer the priests to go before them And durst alter the state of Christian religion agaynst the will and minde of â—…he B. the whole clergie then at their conuocation asâ—…embled And I pray you againe master Stapleton What doth this answere the Bishops proposition â—…t shewâ—…th your shifting it detecteth your malice that witâ—…ingly slaunder your most gracâ—…ous priâ—…ce natiue countrey Hir Maiestie hath onely done therein euen after the example of this moste Godly priâ—…ce Iosue In coÌ„maunding the arke that is is to say gods holye worde in the syncere setting forth of it by the godly ministers thereof to be caried before hir hir subiects And when your popish prâ—…lates priests which in deed are neyther preâ—…ates nor prieus refused â—…o to cary it otherwise thaÌ„ after your oâ—…n devises to cart it â—…ot after Gods 〈◊〉 or rather would not cary it about at al but bury it vnder a bushel â—… in 〈◊〉 therof cary about maâ—…mets toyes to mâ—…ke 〈◊〉 peoplâ—… commit most barbarous idolatrie hir high â—…sse as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath abolished iuch caryage and as did Salo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 out of office your 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aud 〈◊〉 clergie and placed other 〈◊〉 painful 〈◊〉 in their â—…ooues to cary this erke as goo hath appointed it before hir highnes all hir people Now when ye haue thus 〈◊〉 the prince the clergie the whole realme and yet answered not one worde to the obiection VVell say you â—…et tâ—…ts palâ—…e for this present I say no 〈◊〉 for Iosue his doing sauing that otherwise they are not to be drawne into an ordinarie rule for that the spirite of God was certainly in him and for that hee had part of Moses glorie and the people commaunded to heare him and those things that he did wherof M. Nowell M. Horne would inferre a soueraigntie in causes spiritual he did them by the expresse commaundement of god And from such princes to all princes indifferently to gather the like preheminence in all poynts were no sure and found gathering and collection Your argument is this those Princes in whom the spirit of God certainly is and haue part of Moses glorie and whom thâ—… â–ª people are coÌ„maunded to heare and whose doings are by Gods expresse coÌ„mandement are not ensamples for all godly Princes to follow in their gouernments But such another was Iosue Ergo it were no sound gathering collection to set Iosue for ensample for other Princes to follow For that which ye inferre of like preheminence in al points to Iosue both maketh your argument vicious hauing more in the conclusion than is in any of the propositions neyther doth the Bishop or any other contende for like prehemmence in all point as Iosue had but inferre of his ensample a like charge of their dueties a like care and regard of gouerning Gods people to be required of theÌ„ being princes rulers as Iosue was But where lerned you this wicked false principle wheron ye ground your argumnet that the doings of any are not to be set for examples for other Princes to follow that had certainly the spirite of God in them or that had a part of Moses glorie or the people were commaunded to heare them or bicause they did their doings by the expresse commaundement of God are they not a great deale the more to be set for ensamples to follow Would ye haue them follow such as certainly had the spirite of errour in them suche lying Papistes as your selues Woulde ye haue them follow your expresse commaundements and then they were to be followed but not if they followed the commaundements of God Are those Princes not to be followed whome God commaundeth the people to heare And are they to be followed whom you commaund the people to heare If they be godly Princes God commaundeth all people both to heare them and obey them chiefly where they
priests and Leuites in their offices and functions ecclesiasticall in appoynting howe the Arke shoulde be borne For sacrifising and blessing for ordeining Psalmes singers instruments officers and all other things for the setting foorthe of the diuine seruice and Gods true religion Whiche argueth that he was their supreme gouernour in all ecclesiasticall causes Master Stap. first for a briefe summarie answere to these doings of Dauid clappeth downe this marginal note Dauid in all these matters determined no doctrine nor altered any religion agaynst the Priestes willes of his owne supreme authoritie This note is bothe malicious and slaunderous as though we ascribed to the Quéenes Maiestie or she tooke vpon hir such authoritie and that of hir owne sway and wil against all hir Clergies minde and counsell to determine and alter what religion pleaseth or displeaseth hir This is the Popes clayme and tyrannie and not oure Princes or any other godly Princes dooing And yet this note is partly false for king Dauid agaynst the will of hys idle Priestes caused the misordering of the Arke to be reformed And did many other thinges about Religion to the which the Priests obeyed And determined doctrine also euen by master Stapl. owne confession in this Chapter The first argument that master Stapl. maketh is this Bothe M. Dorman and M. D. Harding affyrme that the proceedings of king Dauid are nothing preiudiciall to the ecclesiasticall authoritie in redressing of disorders before committed or doing suche thinges as are heere rehearsed Ergo They inferre no supreme gouernment ouer causes ecclesiasticall This argument standeth altogither vpon the authoritie of his good masters M. Dorman and M. D. Harding from whome he boroweth his stuffe For the moste of his owne surplusage is but his common places of descant on them And as they be so great in his bookes so he reasoneth as Pythagoras schollers had wont to reason of their master 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he sayde so Ergo it is so and thus argueth M. Stap. Bothe M. Dorman and M. D. Harding affirme it Ergo it is true But what do they affirme That the proceedings of king Dauid in redressing disorders before committed or doing suche things as heere are rehearsed are nothing preiudiciall to the ecclesiasticall authoritie Why M. Stap. who sayth against them or you herein king Dauids procéedings in deede were nothing preiudicial to the ecclesiasticall authoritie of persons ecclesiasticall they executed all their functions still belonging to their authoritie And bicause his procéedings in redressing suche disorders and all other things that he did declare moste plainly his supreme gouernement in setting foorthe and directing Gods true religion and yet were no preiudice to the Priests ecclesiasticall authoritie it followeth ther vpon that the supreme gouernment in setting foorth Gods true religion in correcting repressing ecclesiastical disorders in reducing and directing good orders and al other doings here rehearsed that ye confesse king Dauid did are no parte of the Priestes ecclesiasticall authoritie for then in doing them he should haue done things preiudicial therevnto and therfore they are no parts therof but of king Dauids royal authoritie And this while fondly ye woulde as it were ouerpresse vs with suche great mens authoritie as is M. Dorman M. D. Harding or euer ye be aware ye make them flatly giue verdite agaynst you with vs A Gods name bring their authoritie so agaynst vs as oft as ye wil neither M. Dorman nor M. D. Harding will giue ye great thanks therfore But for all this ye will bring vs more of D. Hardings stuffe As master D. Harding say you noteth king Dauids proceedings in redressing disorders before committed or doing suche things as are heere rehearsed do no more employ a supremacie in him then the reformation of religion made by Queene Mary But that ye wot well employeth in hir no suche supremacie Ergo No more do those procéedings in him This argument staÌ„deth wholly vpoÌ„ his M. D. Hardings authoritie alone bicause he hath noted that the one dyd no more than the other that their doings were alike héerein But the doings of the one inferre no supremacie Ergo the others neither But if we might be so bolde as to denie this your maior or rather your maxima or principle that ye build vpon of D. Hardings comparison in making king Dauids doings to be none other but such as were Quéene Maries Where were then your argument M. St ye talked righte now of Impar congressus Achilli Troilus the match betwene Troilus Achilles was vneueÌ„ but here is a gret deale more inferiour match betwéene K. Dauid Q. Mary Yea their doings were so little alike that they were cleane contrarie For although she were a princesse of famous memorie yet herein your popish Prelates made hir so beléeue them that she durst not redresse disorders in the Clergie at al but suffred the Pope and his prelates to reduce their false religion Nor she retayned the estate that belonged to hir of supreme gouernment but vtterly renounced it And therfore that reformation or rather deformation was not made at all by hir nor in hir name but by the Pope and his Popelings she only permitting it â–ª But if ye meane as ye speake that it was made by hiâ—… in dâ—…de as your Massers words are Queene Mary did it by the meanes of the Priest so that she was the doer and they were but the mâ—…anes she was the maker and they but hir instruments then your similitude goeth agaynst you and proueth a supremacie in hir as was in Dauid But ye speake colorably to make in suche a 〈◊〉 some proportion in speeche of a similitude For in very déede what soeuer ye say the matter went so that your popishe byshops and priestes were the doers of all And she good Lady was but your instrument and meane whereby ye killed Christ in his members as did the high priestes kill Christ in his body vnder Pontius Pilate I speake not to compare hir béeing hir selfe a noble Christian Prince to him béeing a heathen tyrant but to shewe how you abused hiâ—… authoritie as the Iewes did his But as for king Dauid as he did those things in redressing disorders and all other noted by the Bishop whiche your selfe can not denie so he was the principall in the dooing of them and he reformed euen the Priestes them selues And thoughe in some thinges he vsed the Priestes as meanes yet what dothe this infringe his supreme authoritie and not rather proue it And thus your other argument from D. Hardinges authoritie by D. Hardinges owne confession that they were but the meanes and king Dauid and Quéene Mary the doers of suche ecclesiasticall matters once agayne maketh quite agaynst you and your master D. Harding also and establisheth the Princes supreme gouernement ouer the priests and all I areade ye beware since ye stande so muche vpon your masters woordes héerein that if ye alleage hys authoritie any more
of ciuill iustice neither for he is therein also a minister and executor of Gods sentence that by his Propheâ—…es commaundeth the Prince to minister and execute iustice And by this rule howe coulde 〈◊〉 prooue this superioritie to bée iâ—… youre Pope eyther would ye make him haue such a claime that he should not be Gods minister and executer of Gods sentences or would ye not rather reason contrary He is in all spirituall causes the minister and executer of Gods sentences published by his Prophets Ergo he is the supreme gouernour vnder God in all spirituall causes If ye had any sentence of God to proue this antecedent I warrant ye then ye would reason on this wise Yea you do reason on this wise though ye haue no sentence of God at all therefore As for vs we haue as by your owne testimonie the worde of God to warrant that the Prince in deposing the hiest Priest and figure of your Pope as ye say hath so good warrant of authoritie therefore that euen hee was Gods minister therein and executer of Gods sentence which plainly argueth his supreme authoritie next and immediately vnder god To be a minister and executer on that fashion next and immediately vnder God is no argument to abase the princes authoritie If ye had proued he had béene the priestes vnderling minister and executour herein this had béene somewhat to your purpose But this ye could not proue and ye sayd the contrary before that the priest was the princes minister and executour and that he deposed Abiathar not by himselfe but as he sacrificed by causing another to minister and execute for him Nowe when ye say the Prince is Gods minister and executer the priest is the princes minister and executer doe not your self I pray you acknowledge in the ministerie and the execution the priest to be vnder the prince and that the prince is not onely Gods minister and executer but as ye say further the causer commaunder and procurer also therof to the priestes Is this the ouerthrowing of the Bishop as your margin maketh boast or is it not rather the ouerthrowing of your selfe can ye speake any thing more plaine for the Bishop and agaynst your cause than this and yet ye crie eut that the Bishop omitted and dissembled â—…his guilefully craftily verily M. Stap â–ª there was no cause ye see why he should so do the craft and guile is but your owne the Bishop as he did in all the other doings onely touched them per transâ—…nnam not describing any one of the circumstances but in a worde or two shewed the fact and so passed ouer to other factes of Salomon But whatsoeuer the Bishop tolde or left vntolde it had béene better for you as ye haue vsed guylefully and craftily many other poyntes to haue omitted and dissembled this if ye haue no better shift than this that not onely maketh nothing agaynst the Bishoppes assertion in Salomons supreme gouernment but still more and more euen by the mouth of God by his Prophets doth confirme the same Nowe that none of all 〈◊〉 shifts will hitherto sâ—…rue against this one ensample of Salomon yet hath M. St onâ—… shift more behinde and that a trimme shift to Besides sayth he that the deposing of Abiathar doeth not employ that Salomon was the chiefe ruler in all causes ecclesiasticall whiche is the Butte that ye must shoote at and then must ye prouide another bowe for this will not shoote home This is one of your olde sâ—…ale shiftes M. Stap. I sée you are nowe euen at the last cast to let the arrowe alone and quarrell about the bow and the butte but and ye would as ye gaue good counsell to others haue followed it your selfe in firing still your eye on the issue betwéene the parties in controuersie neyther would yemake so many vagaryes as ye do nor here haue quarelled at the Bishopâ—… short shooting The wordes of the issue whiche is the butte that M. Feck requireth the Bishop to shoote vnto if ye be remembred are these to make proofe vnto me that any Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may claime or take vppon them any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes meaning as doth the Quéene if the Bishop proue this then he hittes the Butte His artillerie the Bow and Arrowes that he must shoote withall at thys Butte are appoynted by him likewise the Scriptures the doctors the Counsels and the practise the testimonies allegations decrées and examples therein conteyned The Bishop hitherto hath with many arrowes out of the Scripture hit the Butte so full that as yet ye coulde not make this quarrell but sought other peltyng shiftes Nowe séeing that none of all those paltrie brablings will serue ye say hée shootes not home and must chaunge his Bowe His Bowe here is the Scripture his Arrowes here are the ensamples of Salomon of which the Bishop shotte a good many seuerall Arrowes and factes and euery one hitte the Butte He alleaged not onely the facte of Abiathars deposition but also of Sadockes placing of consecrating the Temple of sacrificing of placing the Arke therein of blessing the people of directing the Priests Leuites and other Churche officers and of their obedience to all his commaundements Of all these allegations you your selfe master Stapleton choose one to answere vnto whiche is the deposition of the highe Priest and say all the obiection dependes thereon And so guylefully omitting the residue stande onely a measuring thys shotte and in the ende after muche warbling crie out shorte shorte ye muste prouide another Bowe for thys wyll not shoote home The deposing of Abiathar doeth not employe that Salomon was the chiefe Ruler in all ecclesiasticall causes First what if it doth not M. Stapleton one fact of Salomon employes not all ecclesiasticall causes Go to doth it employ some ecclesiasticall causes to be in the chiefe rule of the Prince If ye graunt me this ye graunt the issue and this is the ende ye graunt But ye say it employes not all ecclesiasticall causes â–ª and therefore is short â–ª Did the Bishop againe shoote no more but that one how chaunce ye medled not in measuring of the other Did ye foresee that as this had hitte one cause another woulde hitte another and so at the least euery one one cause yea perchaunce euery one 〈◊〉 and so a number of your causes might be hitte and perchaunce all causes by some one shot not yet measured and therefore guylefully and crastily disâ—…embling and omiâ—…ting them you let all the rest alone Yet should ye not then for shame haue thus cryed out agaynst this one first shotte since if it were shorte though short shooting léese the game yet one shorte shotte leaseth it not And if one bee shorte manye other maye come home and wynne the game for all this especially matching with one that shooteth so faire and Gentlemanlyke as you doe Maister Stapleton that it were better to stande at
nowe But all godly Princes ought so to do as Iosaphat did in directing ecclesiasticall matters Ergo the Quéenes Maiestie doth now as all godly Princes ought to do To proue that she doth as did king Iosaphat your selfe confesse that he reformed religion and was carefull and diligent about directing ecclesiasticall matters But the Queenes Maiesties clayme is none other herein but this to reforme religion and to be carefull and diligent about directing ecclesiasticall matters Ergo King Iosaphats doings and hirs are not vnlike But this importeth in hir a supreme gouernment Ergo King Iosaphats example hitteth home the Butte and is a fitte patterne to hir and all godly Princes of supreme gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes Here séeing that for fashions sake where ye durst not denie the manifest truth ye haue graunted so much that in déede ye haue graunted all ye would now restraine your graunt and say it was conditionall that though all Princes may reforme religion and with care and diligence direct all ecclesiasticall matters yet they must do it in suche sort as Iosaphat did and therefore leauing your simple and generall termes of reformation and direction by godlye Princes yée will haue them perticulerly leueled by that sort that Iosaphat did them Whiche as we gladly graunt you in all thinges that Iosaphat did well and godly as were the moste of his doings and in al that which the Bishoppe rehearseth yet in some thinges Princes muste not doe in that sort but go beyonde him For althoughe for the moste part he did those thinges Quae placâ—…ta erant domino That were acceptable to the Lorde 〈◊〉 en excelsa non abstulit Notwithstanding he tooke not away the high places wherein godly princes muste do after a more zealous sort than Iosaphat did As for all those things that the Bishop citeth sée that ye stand to your graunt made vnto vs that Iosaphat reformed religion and vsed care and diligence about the directing of ecclesiasticall matters and then that godly princes may at this day do all the same And feare ye not but we will also graunt to you and not starte therefrom that they may reforme religion and directe ecclesiasticall matters in such sort as Iosaphat did And so excepte ye be disposed to quarell or will falsefie the sorte and manner of Iosaphats or the Quenes Highnesse doings I trust we shall anon agree herein They may do it say you in such sort as Iosaphat did that is to reforme religion by the priests First this is very subtilly spoken master Stapleton by the priests if ye meane by the aduise or godly counsell of the prestes true it is so might king Iosaphat well haue done If ye meane by the authoritie and commaundemente of the priestes then is it false nor you can euer proue that Iosaphat did it by theyr commaundement and authoritie but they contrarywise by his Nowe in suche sort as Iosaphat did hath the Quéenes Maiestie done and this proueth bothe their supremacies herein Not to enact say you a new religion which the priestes of force shall sweare vnto Indéede this did not Iosaphat no more hath the Quéenes Maiestie done it is but your surmised sclander Item to suffer the priests to iudge in controuersies of religion not to make the decision of suche things a parliamente matter This latter parte of your sentence is agayne but youre manifest sclander to suffer the priestes to iudge in controuersies of religion after the rule of Gods word and not after their owne pleasures in suche sorte Iosaphat not onely suffred but ordeyned them commanded and ouersaw them so to do and so doth the Quéenes maiestie And this sufferance commaundement and ouersight argueth their chiefe authorities Item not to prescribe a newe forme order in ecclesiasticall causes but to see that according to the lawes of the church before made the religion be set forthe as Iosaphat procuâ—…ed the obseruation of the old religion appointed in the lawe of Moyses And euen thus and none otherwise hath the Quéenes Maiestie procured the obseruation of the old religion of Iesus Christ whome Moyses prefigured and the orders of the apostles and most auncient fathers after them to be restored remouing as Iosaphat did all other newe formes and orders of ecclesiasticall abuses And this restoring and procuring of the aunciente religion and ceremonies the suppressing and abolishing of new is againe in both these princes a good argument of their supreme gouernement Briefly say you that he do all this as an aduocate defender and son of the Churche with the authoritie and aduice of the cleargie so Iosaphat furdered religion not otherwise Your word aduocate how it came vp is declared already but neither aduocate defender sonne or daughter herein are any thing contrary to supreme gouernour But where ye adde al these words aduocate defender and sonne to the prince and to the cleargy authoritie aduice this sheweth your subtile deuise to deceyue princes with youre paynted termes But princes begin to waxe wise and learned as Dauid exhorted them and perceaue howe ye haue foaded them with these names and stiles that were but nomen sine re a bare name without any matter for the authoritie and aduice ye reserued to your selues The princes to whome ye gaue these gay titles had neither authoritie nor might giue their aduice according as Hosius woulde not haue them so much as to talke of matters of religion much lesse to reforme religion to directe ecclesiasticall matters with care and diligence as before ye graunted And nowe to eate againe your worde ye woulde haue them be carefull and diligent without aduice reforme and direct without authoritie of their owne except onely the clergies aduice and authoritie Thinke ye Iosaphat did so not otherwise as ye sayâ—… ye may well tell vs so but the Scripture telleth vs otherwise howe he gaue aduice to the Clergie and by his authoritie directed them though I denie not he might vse their aduice and admitte their authoritie to yet the supreme authoritie apperteyned vnto him Not say you as a supreme absolute gouernour contrary to the vniforme consent of the whole clergie in full conuocation yea and of all the Bishops at once This worde absolute is but your absolute and malicious slaunder M. Stap. Such absolute supreme gouernment did your Pope vsurpe as sayth Franciscus de Ripa that the Popes power is absolute and that he may do what he will. As Baldus in the proheme of the decrées alleageth that his power is absolute from all bondes and from all rule of restraint And that we must beléeue him absolutely as Marcus Mantua and Pope Boniface himselfe affirmeth Thus doth not the Quéenes maiestie no more did king Iosaphat and therefore I inferre the conclusion that the Queenes Maiestie doth all these things in such sort as losaphat did them excepting these quarelous slaunders which are your owne put them vp in your purse agayne master Stapleton and
commaunded and prescribed vnto the chiefe priests what fourme and order they should obserue in ecclesiasticall causes and controuersies of religion Is not this then your own abhomination and contradiction â—…atly to say here is no fourme or order prescribed and that the Bishop belieth Gods holy woorde which in one that goeth for a student of Diuinitie to sclaunder one that goeth for a Bishop what can be done more malapertly But as ye thus sawfely misuse your better so full fondly and malitionsly do yâ—… gather that thereon then the which the Bishop minded nothing lesse nor can instly be gathered thereupon Yâ—… say the Bishop writeth thus to make folke weene that religion proceded then by way of commission from the Prince onely This is your owne spitefull sclander M. Stapl. not onely on the Bishop but on the Quéenes Maiestie your argument is this He prescribed them a fourme and order to obserue in coÌ„trouersies of Religion Ergo He attempted to make Religion proceede by way of commission from the Prince onely This is a false and maâ—…itions collection M. Stapl. from the fourme and order of athing to the thing it selfe It is your holy father the Pope to whom ye may obiect this conclusion he maâ—…eth religion to depende on him and to proceede from him onely â–ª by his Commissions and Legacies â—… latere We-acknowledge all true religion to procéede onely from God the father through Iesus Christ his sonne by the insâ—…ctioÌ„ of the holy ghost in the mouth of the Patriarches Prophets and Apostles And from the Prince to procéede onely such godly orders and formes of directing and setting foorth that true religion as he by the notable examples of these godly Kinges shall finde out paterns most expedient for him and his people to gouerne and order them of what â—…state soeuer they be in that true religion and all other ecclesiastical causes belonging thereto So did Iosaphat then so doth the Quéenes Maiestie now FroÌ„ whose authoritie next â—…nder â–ª God the order direction procéeded though the religioÌ„ procéeded not from them but altogither from God. Nay say you king â–ª Iosaphats dealings were rather with 〈◊〉 persoâ—… thâ—…n with matters ecclesiasticall This was M. FeckeÌ„hams former shifte and many proper ensamples and similitudes you also vsed thereon to dally about the 〈◊〉 of the ecclesiasticall person but not in ecclesiastical matters But those were but séely shifts and euer turned against your selfe in the ende And therefore ye darâ—… not abide by this shifte but within a litle while after yea euen in this Chapter ye recant and denie the obedience of the persons and all And what hath bene your practise any other than cleane to ridde your selues out of al obedience from the Princes authoritie ye knowe your Pope hath bene vnder the Emperour ere now but vnder what Princes obedience euen for his person will ye confesse your Pope at this day to be And do not all the packe of the popishe Priestes as his chickens clâ—…cke vnder his winges and exempt euen their persons also from the dutifull obedience they owe to their naturall soueraignes in so much that where the Popes primacie is admitted Princes can not by any of their laweâ—… â–ª fasten any condigne punishement vppon any ecclesiasticall persons â–ª what mischiefe soeuer they committe and all bicause the ecclesiasticall persons were priuileged and exempted from their Princes authoritie Wherein your generation dealt surely for themselues that hauing graunted them an inche got an elle For seing that if they should graunt againe the obedience of the person the cause and all would at last returne to his old master the Prince as it did before but you thinke your selfe sure inough if ye graunt that Iosaphat dealed with ecclesiasticall persons but not with their matters As ye shifted of the matter before that the Prince dealeth with a Bishop for his homage baronie and temporalties but not otherwise Thinke ye M. Stapl. and tell me on your fidelitie did Iosaphat meddle with the high Priestes and all other of the Clergie so well as his temporaltie onely in respecte of their persons or in respecte of their reuenues and linings vnder him or chiefly in any of these respectes did he thus commaunde them and deale with them or not rather and most of all in respect of refourming abuses in religion and setting in order all ecclesiasticall causes he appointed not onely the persons but the places where the persons shoulde execute their offices and what matters these and those persons shoulde entreate vppon and how they shoulde do them as your selfe haue confessed the manner And least we should thinke he â—…ubbered ouer the matter as ye say many good and godly princes among the Christians also haue charged their Bishops and clergie to see diligently vnto their flockes and charges Ye say true M. Stapleton many godly Princes haue thus done to your further confutation in this issue But you meane they haue onely giuen them a generall exhortation and yet neuerthelesse lefte the matter wholly in their Clergies hands not medling themselues therewith Least ye should thinke that Iosaphat did it thus sclenderly not that his chiefe charge of ouersight lay thereon not onely of them all generally but particulerly in euery kinde of matter the holy ghost hath penned out how precisely he went to worke that rather hauing his care about the matters then the persons For this was his principal marke care not so much that the person might sit in authoritie as that the matter might wisely and truly be iudged and discerned and therfore saith the text In Hierusalem quoque constituit Iosaphat Leuitas sacerdotes principes familiaruÌ„ ex Israel vt iudicium causam domini Iudicarent habitatoribus eius c. Praecepitque eis c. And Iosaphat appointed in Ierusalem Leuites and Priests and families of Israell that they might giue iudgement and iudge the cause of the Lorde to the inhabitants thereof c. And he coÌ„maunded them saying Thus shall ye do in the feare of the Lord faithfully and with a perfecte harte and in euery cause that shall come vnto you of your brethren that dwell in their Cities betweene bloud and bloud betweene lawe and precepte statutes and iudgements ye shall iudge them and admonish them c. Whervpon saith Lyra Hic ordinatur regimeâ—â— populi in arduis causis c. Here is ordeyned the gouernment of the people in difficult causes which could not well be cutte of without recourse had to Ierusalem according to that which is coÌ„maunded Deuter. 17. Where it is saide if thou shalt perceyue the iudgement before thee to be difficult and doubtfull arise and get thee vp to the place which the Lord shall choose c. And therefore Iosaphat appointed iudges there to determine such difficult matters Wherefore it followeth euery cause which commeth vnto you c. VVheresoeuer the question is if it be of the lawe so
vse it throughout all your counterblast to make your continuall outrodes and vagaries quite from the matter No Flie is busier in buzzing on entrye dish than your Counterblast is blowing on euery flim â—…am tale If ye thinke ye maye be borne withall for the enlarging of your volume yet ye make your Readers loosely and altogither vnfruitfully to employ their labours carying them at roauers as ye say and at randon to â—…s ye had woont to do the people after all Hallowes from the very state of the question in controuersie For shame therefore vpbrayde not this to the Bishop of straying from the marke excepte you kéepe your selfe better to the marke or else shewe your Dispensation that yée may styll babble all besides the question of what impertinent tryfles yée please to descante vppon and will not suffer your aduersary once to wincke awrye nor to alleage anye thing thoughe it neuer so muche appertayne to the purpose if it doe not directly conclude the very state of the question This dealing master Stapleton is very vneuen If ye will deale vprightly call vpon the Bishop hardly so oft as ye will but then stande you for shame to your tackling to least an other come and call as fast on you to marke and regarde better the matter ye meddle withall But perhappes ye will say admitte that I ranne astray from the matter my selfe yet doth my faulte excuse the Byshoppes In déede it doth not Master Stapleton if hée bée faultie therein but it lesseneth hys and it maketh yours the greater and the more to your shame except yée be a verye impudent man for your fault herein is manifest and therefore deciphered oute vnto you in one of your common places If ye be belied there purge your selfe whiche tâ—…ll ye doe the more ye call vppon the Bishop to kéepe him to his marke he that shall marke your dealing shall wish you had either lesse impudencie or more remembrance of your selfe Neuerthelesse since ye so sharply chalenge the Bishop that all his examples draw nothing neare the mark but runne at randon and shoote all at Rouers I pray you sir call to your remembraunce what was the marke and issue in question betwene them was it not this that if the Bishop by any of the foure abouesayde meanes coulde make proofe to master Feckenham that any Emperor or Empresle King or Queene may clay me or take vpon them any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes that then he would yéelde Was not this the state of their question accorded they not on this issue and ought not the Bishop to direct all his examples to proue this And if he proue this whether he shotte at Buttes or Rouers hath he not hytte the marke and what woulde ye haue more Nowe that he hath done this is plainely proued by euery of these examples and that not onely as the wordes of the issue inforce that they tooke vpon them some suche gouernement in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes which being prooued is ynough to discharge the Bishop of straying from his matter but also that they daymed and tooke vppon them suche supreme gouernement in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes And you haue counterblasted nothing to the contrary that were able to remoue these prooues from this marke and issue sauing your facing and bracing of the matter and a number of blynde pelting and foreworne shiftes except ye haue any better behinde to come For all these shiftes hitherto notwithstanding the Bishoppes examples are both directly directed to the issue and directly and fully prooue the same And wher 's ye findâ—… faulte with straggling from it ye touch not him but wring your selfe by the nose For ensample whereof I remitte the Reader to your common place thereon or to spare his paynes and go no further than euen here to marke the markes that your selfe set vp and conferre them with the issue betwéene the Bishoppe and master Feckenham and the Reader shall soone discerne howe farre of purpose ye stray from it yea from those false markes also that your selfe set vp before And yet ye crie the Bishop strayes from the marke and will the Reader to fixe his eye thereon But herein ye play as the common people say the Lapwing or Pewet doeth who when they seeke hir Neast draweth them still further and further from it wyth hir noyse and flittering about them crying as the simple people imagine here is it here is it when it is nothing neare it And euen as they conceyue of the Pewet so do you with vs with great noyse and earnestnesse bidding vs regarde and set before our eyes the very state of the question and busily pretende to tell vs wherein lyeth all the chiefe question when vnder the cloake and credite of this your earnestnesse ye carie the reader quite away from the question and issue in controuersie to runne vp and downe after such newe and so many questions that the Reader dared as a man in a maze shoulde neyther perceyue the true question in déede nor finde out the weakenesse and falsehoode of your cause nor well knowe where himselfe is become But that he maye winde himselfe the better oute of this your Laberinthe let him as is sayde before directe his eye euer on the issue betweene the parties and then shall hée still see whereaboutes hée is and howe farre or neare not onely the Bishop is but you also are to or from the matter The issue as is before sayde is this That any Emperor or Empresle King or Queene claymed or tooke vpon them any such gouernment By this issue in all his examples hath the Byshoppe directed him selfe that Moses Iosue Dauid Salomon Iosaphat Ezechias and Iosias did take vpon them suche gouernment But all these were Kings and Princes of Gods people commended of God for their godly gouernance Therfore Emperours and Empresses Kings Quenes may and ought to take such gouernment vpon them This being alwayes the Bishops conclusion wherein strayed he from the issue But nowe come you ruffling in with Nine newe issues for aduauntage not one of them all béeing the verie issue and state of the question in controuersie and yet you crie the Bishop draweth nothing nigh the marke True in déede master Stapleton he draweth nothing neare the markes that you haue set vp for the nigher hee shoulde drawe to them he shoulde drawe the further from the question betwéene master Feckenham and him as you doe of purpose in all these your markes to deceyue and beguâ—…le the simple Reader that thinkes ye meane good truth when ye â—…rte so often on the question and runne so farre from the same For ensample was this I pray you good master Stapleton to vse your owne phâ—…ase the issue and question betwéene them whether these Kings acknowledged or not acknowledged the highe Priest â—…t is true and the Byshoppe demeth not that they did agnise the highe Priest euerie one of them
and therfore good reason that yours giue place to his senior the popish later base born religion of your Romish church to thâ—… first most auncient true religion of that Alpha Omega Iesus Christ himself Master Stap. hauing now set vp these two false markes like to one being out of his way that after he is once ouer his shooes in the myre careth not howe he benâ—…yre himselfe but running deeper through thicke and thinne cryeth this is the way to haue other to followe him so rusheth on master Stapleton still further from the issue and yet taketh euerye thing in his way to bée hys marke and directorie Setting vp the perticuler factes of those Princes that chalenge and take vppon them this supreme gouernement that the selfe same factes must be founde in the ensamples of the olde testament or else hée sayth the Bishop strayeth from the marke VVhat euidence haue ye brought forth sayth he to shew that in the olde lawe anye King exacted of the Clergie In verbo Sacerdotiâ—… that they shoulde make none Ecclesiasticall lawe without his consent as King Henrie did of the clergie of Englande Is this the marke master Stap. betwene the Bishop and master Feckenham to proue in their supreme gouerments euerye selfe same perticuler fact yea the circumstances about or concerning the fact to be all one in them that clayme this gouernment nowe and those that claymed it then since bothe the states the times yea all the ceremonies of religion of the Iewes then and ours nowe are nothing like and trow ye then the princes perticuler doings must be like and euen the same and euidence must be giuen out of the one for euery fact of the other or else their supreme authorities be not alike The issue betweene them is not so straight laced but requireth onely any such gouernment some such gouernment yea he it al suche gouernment to I meane not all suche actions in the gouernment but the supreme directing gouernance authoritie or powre are proued both alike in either princes estate so well ouer eccl. persons in all their functions then or now as ouer the temporall in theirs For by this rule wheras that most famous prince king Henry the eight did sweare also to his obedience all his temporall subiects in ciuill causes as other Princes likewise haue done and do it would be harde to alleâ—…ge an euidence thereof out of the old Testament and yet their supreme gouernments therin were not therefore vnlike As for the ministring of the othe is but a circumstance to confirme the matter and not the matter itselfe And if king Henry were by the obstinate and craftie malice of his popishe clergiâ—… then constrayned for his more assurance to take an othe or promise of them on the honestie of their priesthoode which God wâ—…t was but a small holde as it went then in the moste of them and that no king of those ancient yeres mentioned in the olde testament béeing not moued by the wickednesse or mistrust of his clergy tooke the like othe or promise of their priestes honestie or fayth of their priesthoodâ—… then what is this to or from the matter why their supreme authorities shoulde not be alike in bothe Do not you also say for your side that the highe Priest had suche supreme gouernment then as your Pope â—…othe chalenge now ouâ—…r all eccl. causes â—…nd dothe â—…ot your Pope nowe exacte of all his clergie in verbo â—…acerdotij by the worde of their priesthoode that they shall make no eccl. law without his consent May we not then returne your owne words on your selfe VVhat euidence can you bring foorth to shew that in the olde lawe any highe Priest exacted this of the clergie vnder him And if ye can not as ye can not dothe not then this your wyle reason and newe marke ouerturne the false clayme that your Pope claymeth of such supreme gouernment now as the high Priest had then But his clayme is false his gouernment nothing like For the high priest then tooke not vpon him to make eccl. lawes as doth now your Pope but only obserued such eccl. lawes as God had made to his hande till time of the Pharisies corruption who not content with Gods lawes had deuised besides many fond lawes of their own inuentions when there wanted amoÌ„g them this kingly authoritie To the which so long as it continued the high priest al other obeyed receyuing and obseruing such eccl. constitutions as their godly princes made vnto them So did Aaron first receiue the eccl. coÌ„stitutions of Moses So after him did alâ—…re residue admit the eccl. constitutions of Dauid the rest of the foresaid princes their priests made none of theÌ„ selues without the Princes consent But the princes ordâ—…ined diuers eccl. orders partly with the aduise and consent partly without yea agaynst the wil coÌ„sent of their clergy now then and yet those godly princes exacted of them euen as they were true priests as the stories of Iosaphat and Ezechias mention how they charged their priests euen in that they were the Lords priests which is all one with that you alleage in verbo sacerdotij that they should do suche things as they appoynted them to do And is not this good and authenticall euidence for king Henries doings but that the priests appoynted any suche ordinance without their princes consents will be harde for you to bring the like or any â—…uidence at all for your Popes exacting And if as ye conclude herevpon this exacting to make no eccl. law without his consent be to make the ciuil magistrate the supreme iudge for the final determinatioÌ„ of causes ecclesiasticall then your Pope hauing no such euidence for him by this your marke is no supreme iudge for suche finall determination but it â—…latly proueth agaynst you that the Princes should be the supreme iudges therein And if the exacting of consent importe suche supreme authoritie as héere ye confesse then whereas not onely these ancient kings but also the ancient christian Emperors in the confirming of your Pope exacted that none shoulde be a lawfull Pope to whome they gaue not their consent it argueth that those Emperours were the supreme Iudges for the finall determination of the Popes ecclesiasticall election Which afterwarde when ye come to the handling therof ye renie affirming that although his consent was necessarie to be required yet it argued no suche supreme iudgement in the matter And thus you care not may ye for the time shuffle out an answere howe falsly or how contrary ye counterblast your false The nexte marke is yet further wyde from the issue and more fonde than any of the other for abandoning his Pope and generall Councels VVhat can ye bring foorthe sayth he out of the olde Testament to aide and relieue your doings who haue abandoned not onely the Pope but generall Councels also and that by playne acte of Parliament And
to go vp to Ierusalem and there to be tryed in the assemblie of the highe Priestes So Athanasius abandoned the councels at Lyre Smirna and Ephesus â–ª So Maximus abandoned the Councell at Antioche So Pauiinus abandoned the Councel at Milayne So Chrisostome abandoned the Councell at Constantinople And so we abandoned the Popes violent councels at Rome and Trident that we might say with Dauid Non consedâ—… iâ—… consilio 〈◊〉 cum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non introâ—…bo odi ecclesiâ—…m maligâ—…atium cum impijs non â—…edebo I haue not sitten in the counsell of vanitie I will not enter in with wicked doers I haue hated the Churche of the malignant and I will not sitte with the wicked These Councels we haue abandoned M. Stay. but no generall Councels wherein all things are tryed to be truthe or heresies by the touche of the worde of God and not by the Popes the councels or any creatures dâ—…cree besides Omnis homo mendax euery man is a lyer and the worde of God is onely the truthe of doctrine And therefore in all Councels we must crie with the Prophet Adlâ—…gem ad testimonium Let them râ—…nne to the lawe of God to the testimonie of his worde quod si â—…on dâ—…xerint iâ—…xta verbum hoc non erâ—…t eis â—…x 〈◊〉 If the Councell declare any thing to be heresie not according to the worde of God the morning light the 〈◊〉 of righteousnesse shall not shine on them but they shall erre in the shadowe of death But sayth Ambrose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vs eâ—…rare non possis followe the â—…pture that thou mayest not erre And if the Councell do not follow them we are made free from following yea licenâ—…ed to abandon and accurse those Councels by your owne Canons Sâ—… quis prohâ—…t vobâ—… quod a Domino 〈◊〉 est rursâ—…s imperâ—…t fieri quod Dominus prohibet exeâ—…rabilis sit ab omnibus qui dilâ—…nt Deum If any body forbid you that that is commanded of the Lorde and agayne commaunde that thing to be done that the Lorde hath forbidden lâ—…t him be accursed of all that loue the Lorde And your Abbote Panormitane willeth vs so to estéeme of your Councels without the scripture that plus credendum vel simpliâ—… lâ—…co 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qâ—… toti simul conâ—… we muste more beleeue euen a simple lay man alleaging the scripture than all the whole Councell togither And your famous doctor Iohn Gersoâ—… Chauncelour of the vniuersitie of Paris sayth Prima veritâ—…s 〈◊〉 stat c. this truthe standeth first to weete that any simple man beeing not authorized may be so excellently learned in holy writ that we muste more beleeue his assertion in a case of doctrine than the Popes declaration bicause it is euident that we must more beleeue the Gospell than the Pope Neither sayth he thus for the Pope alone but euen for your Councels yea for generall Councels in sacris c. VVe must more beleeue an excellent learned man in the scriptures and alleaging the catholike authoritie than we muste beleeue euen a generall Councell Thus by your owne doctors yea by the Pope him selfe that sayth no proofe oughte to be admitted agaynst the Scripture we may and muste abandon your Councels wherein many things besides and many thinges expressely agaynst the Scripture are determined for truthe and the expresse truthe of the scripture is condemned for heresie And therefore where ye say we renounce them onely for this cause bicause they grounde not them selues on the authoritie of the Scriptures ye shewe a good cause to cleare vs of all heresies and errors and shewe sufficient cause withall why we admitte not your Councels nowe your obstinate frowarde heresies to be suche that ye can not aâ—…ouche for them nor defende them by the holy Scriptures The authoritie whereof if those your Councels doe adâ—…itte as did the olde generall Councels then the clause in the Act of ParliameÌ„t doth no more abandon your Councels than it reiecteth those foure firste or any other that grounde their proues thereon But ye haue some better reason belike why ye set vp this fourth markâ—… of abandoning the Pope and his councels to be exemplified in the olde Testament Partly and most of all say you I say it for an other clause in the Acte of Parliament enacting that no foreigne prince spirituall or temporall shall haue any authoritie or superioritie in this realme in any spirituall cause Either your fingers itche master Stapl. at this clause wherwith ye be pidling so often before ye come to the proper place where this is handled more at large Or else ye do vse the figure of anticipation so mutch and so impertinently to puffe vp your counterblast withall But were it the chiefest cause why ye set vp this marke bicause we reiecte all foraigne authoritie then hath the Bishop hit this marke also at the full euen in all these examples Excepte you can on the other side proue that these godly Princes admitted in their dominions the authoritie of any foraigne Prelate ouer them Of which till you shal be able to bring profe the commaunding and directing of their owne priestes as is sayde before yea euen of the highest Priest of all is argument sufficient to inferre that they admitted not any other straunge Priest ouer them all straunge Priests then béeing heathen Idolaters and therefore this clause of foraigne prelates is also by the Bishop out of the olde Testament fully proued But say you The Popes authoritie ecclesiasticall is no more foraigne to this Realme than the Catholike faythe is foraygne You say so M. Stapl. I will beare ye witnesse but ye shoulde proue it and not say so onely Neuerthelesse be it not foraigne then is he not excluded by that clause nor ye néede so storme thereat that it should be the cause moste of all why ye haue sayde all this and nowe ye lyke it vvell inough saying And yet mighte the Pope reforme vs well inough for any thing before rehearsed Why rehearsed ye this clause then and found most fault therwith since those words hinder nothing his clayme Sauing that say you he is by expresse words of the statute otherwise excluded How chaunce your quarell then M. Stap. is not at that exclusion But wilily ye sawe well inough that he is exempted euen in that he is a foraigne powre And had his name not bene exempted yet the clause that before tâ—…kled ye so muche though now ye would make so light thereat did fully exclude your Pope bicause he is a foraygne power Or elsefull fondly ye quarell moste at that wherat ye had no cause Yes say you there is a cause why I mislike this clause agaynst foraigne authoritie For then I pray you if any generall Councel be made to reforme our misbeleefe if we wil not receiue it who shall force vs And so ye see we be at libertie to receiue
immunities the priuileges of the heatheÌ„ priests they are so like vnto your popish priesthoode but I spare the reader Neuerthelesse what cause soeuer moueth you to write so fauorably for the Egiptian Priests none of these causes or any other maintenance of Idolaters moued Ioseph nor that any other suche lyke priesthoode to come shoulde take hereat any suche prerogatiue of béeing exempt from all fines to their princes The reason that moued Ioseph is apparant in the text He tooke the fift part of the peoples fruites bicause before they helde theÌ„ not of their king but the priests liuing was altogither of the kings gift finding And therfore they payed no portion to the king but the king allowed theÌ„ al the portioÌ„ they had But this that al that they had to liue vpoÌ„ was of the kings gift you quite forgat which argueth their subiectioÌ„ to him ye reasoÌ„ vpoÌ„ their priuiledge Where ye shâ—…ld note withal that al those other their priuiledges liuings came froÌ„ depeÌ„ded on the king And theÌ„ sée how fit a marke therby ye caÌ„ set vp against the Princes gouernmeÌ„t ouer priests Your Ninth and last marke is yet more fond and confused than all the rest besides wherin ye demaund of the Bishop saying Are ye able suppose ye to name any one king that wrote him selfe supreme head of the Iewishe Churche and that in all causes aswell spiritual as temporall and that caused an othe to the priestes and people the nobilitie onely exempted to be tendred that they in conscience did so beleeue and that in a woman prince to yea and that vnder payne of premunire and playne treason too Me thinkes ye play huddle now in the latter end M. St. sixe or seuen markes togither in one For the title of supreme head for receyuing the othe for the persons receyuing it the persons exempted the maner of receyuing it the Princes person and the penaltie of the refusall All these matters on a plumpe for haste come in one liuerie with the cognisance of your Ninth marke how neere the issue betwéene the Bishop and M. Feckenham I remit to the view of others To all these demaundes bicause ye are in hast and therfore thrust them out on an heape togither that the one might be a cloake to the other I will briefly answere them as they lye To your first demaunde for the Title thinke ye this a good argument No king of the Iewes wrote this title of supreme head or gouernour Ergo No king of the Iewes was so By the same argument no king of Englande before king Henrie wrote him selfe Defender of the faythe neither any king of the Iewes wrote that tytle Ergo None of them were defenders of the faythe And by the same argument your holy Father myghte léese a ioly Uicarige that he claymeth from Christ and Peter for neither of them wrote suche titles as he doth nor the highe Priest in the olde Testament wrote any suche stile as he dothe Ergo he claymeth his supremacie from them in vaine But this is a vaine argument if you can proue not the title so muche an the matter the thing and effecte of the title to come from them to him no man will stande with you in the stile but graunt your Pope his clayme This can you not do and therfore your Popeâ—…tytle is but vaine But this for the Princes supreme gouernment the Bishop hath named the Princes in the olde Testament and fully proued it that in matter thing and effect they tooke vppon them this supreme gouernance that the Quéenes Maiestie iustly claymeth now And this béeing proued as before till ye can improue this what babble ye of the title and yet since ye can bring no sufficient proofe of your Popes title neither why maketh this argument more agaynst the Prince than it doth agaynst the Pope Your second quarell is at the othe but the content therof as is proued béeing true why ought they not to sweare therto yea thoughe there were in the olde Testament no such ensample of an othe ministred by the Prince to hys subiects And yet we read how Iosias swore al his subiects to the lord But ye wil say this othe is not for the Prince to sweare them to Gods religion but to his estate If his estate be dutiful by gods religioÌ„ is he not therby also sworn thervnto And why then may not the Prince for his more assurance make an especiall othe thereof so well as a generall But was it lawfull for your Pope to sweare them to his vndue supremacie and is it not lawfull for the prince in a matter so due vnto him If you stil vrge a playne manyfest ensample to be shewed you where in expresse wordes suche an othe was then required I pray you and you will not deale partially M. Stap â–ª shewe you another example where the highe Priest of the Iewes required such an othe of the Clergie as your Pope dyd minister to those vnder him To that ye stande on the tendring the othe to the Priestes and the people and to aggrauate the matter as partiall say the Nobilitie be exempted partely is fonde and partely false For the Nobilitie or any other in certayne offices are not exempted But see the proude orgulous harte of this Priest howe he picketh quarels agaynst the Noibilitie bicause heerein they haue any prerogatiue ouer his priestly order But he maketh a matter in that the othe is that they in conscience did so beleeue as thoughe they coulde sweare therto and can not beleeue it in their consciences Belike master Stapleton your popishe Priestes make good otheâ—… and haue good consciences and beléefes that can sweare to a thing and haue no conscience or can haue conscience and not beléeue it so to be as ye sweare It is to be feared that some of your order haue so done Whether you haue done so or no I will not say for I knowe not your dealing nor am ouer curious to search out your olde reckonings But I thinke some of your good masters are not all in cleane life thereof Your outcrie at a womans Prince to haue thys Tytle yea and that say you in a woman Prince to sheweth your impudent spite agaynst your most gracious soueraigne and withall your impudent follie A woman Prince to say you If a Prince Master Stap. and why not a woman Prince to Will ye graunt hir to be a Prince and take from hir the duty that these ensamples shew doth belong vnto a prince Therefore eyther ye muste denie that a woman may be a prince or else graunt this authoritie yea to a woman prince to And doth not the Scripture commende yea a woman Prince to to suppresse Idolaters and tyraunts to gouerne and iudge Gods people And why may not now a woman Prince to deliuer vs as the Quéenes Maiestie hath done from the yoke of a greater tyrant and all his Idolaters to and
â–ª are by the Churche giuen vp and deliuered By the Churche that is say you onely by vs that are the Priests Heretikes ye say are first giuen vp by the Churche vnto the ciuill Princes sharpe lawes do ye not héere make your selues onely the Churche Yea do ye not make these two distincte members the Church that giueth them vp and the Prince to whose sharpe lawes the partie condemned is giuen vp and so exclâ—…de the Prince from the Church as no member at all therof And héerein ye agrée or rather are worsse than they So that still the similitude holdeth betwéene M. Feckenham and the Donatists bothe of them refusing the olde Testament for the proofe of Princes supreme gouernement Yea although the Donatists had gone further than the Papistes do where in déede the Papists go further than did the Donatistes what soeuer liberalitie ye pretende to giue Princes to deale in religion wherin ye dare be bolde ye say But yet for all that M. St. be not ouer bolde in allowing Princes a dealing in religion for feare your friendes that allow not Princes so muche as to talke of religion count your boldnesse to procéede of Bayards blindnesse Although your self espying by by your ouer hardie and hastie boldnesse step backe agayn and so qualifie this your bolde graunt of Princes dealing in some eccl. matters that in conclusion ye say as the Donatistes saide or rather giue Princes lesse than they did either making them the enrichers of your coafers whiche ye terme by the name of aduocates or defenders of the Church or else the executioners of your crueltie and to deale not one ioâ—…e further Which béeing no ecclesiasticall matters at all excepte to defende or put a man to death be an eccl. matter your bold graunt that they should deale in some eccl. matters is so cunningly resolued that wheÌ„ all coÌ„mes to al they shal deale in none at all but onely be the defenders or executioners of them that are the onely dealers ther with Thus do ye play in words mockholiday with Christian princes Do ye think M. St. that Christian princes did nothing else nor had any other authoritie but this in punishing the Donatistes in S. Augustines time the wordes of S. Augustine are agaynst you the story of Cecilians cause dothe confute you yea euen the â—…ning refusall of the Donatistes sheweth the plainâ—… 〈◊〉 And thinke you if princes had at that time no fâ—…her authoritie to punishe the Donatistes than ye limit princes now that the Donatists would haue refused and cried out vpon the Emperors authoritie therein if they had béene but the onely executours of the fathers iudgementes Naye they woulde then haue cryed that the fathers as principall had had nought to doe therein and that the Princes were misruled by the fathers and that the fathers had made the Princes their executioners Thus no doubte would they and néedes muste they haue cried if they woulde haue cried out at all presupposing Princes had then no more to doe in matters of religion â–ª than the fathers woulde permitte appoynt and allowe them as you order Princes nowe But the Donatistes cryed not out so nor in déede they could but they cried out chiefly agaynst the authoritie of the Princes it argâ—…th then the Princeâ—… had the chiefe authoritie to sâ—…t foorth the true religion and to suppressâ—… theirs 〈◊〉 all other heresies and not the fathers and Byshops â–ª Nowe what difference is tâ—…ere betweene your crie and the Dâ—…ies VVhy say you is there no difference betweene al things and nothing Yes M. Stap. there is something betwixte them For who sayth the Prince hath or maye haue the doing of all thing obiecte it to them that say so We say the Prince hath vnder God the supreme gouernement ouer all things ecclesiasticall That is to say to ouersée and direct that all thinges be duetifully done by them to whom they belong Nowe in this behalfe you giue the Prince not so muche as any something but bare nothing vnder a name of something Whether then it be something or it be nothing ye still are lyke the Donatistes about this matter in euery thing Is there no difference say you to say the Prince shoulde not punishe an honest true man 〈◊〉 stead of a thiefe and to say he should not punishe a 〈◊〉 Yes for soothe M. Stap. there is a great difference But dothe this example also make any thing agaynst the Princes supreme authoritie in dealing in ecclesiastical matters Go too then let this stande for an example As the Prince though the right of his authoritie stretche not so farre that he should punishe an honest true man in steede of a thiefe yet to punishe a thiefe he hath authoritie so although the right of the christian Princes authoritie stretch not so far that he should punish a true and faythful Christian in stéede of a false théeâ—…ishe Christian A thiefe in this behalfe is he that followeth not the doctrine of Christ of whom he saith Omnes qui venerunt antâ—… me fures sunt latrones â–ª All that came before me were theeues and robbers bicause they rob God of his glory yet to punishe the very thiefe he hath authoritie Nowe M. Stapl. by what authoritie dothe the Prince punishe the thiefe dothe he not punishe him by his owne supreme authoritie next to God you will saye he punisheth him by his lawes But who maketh the lawe forcible doth not next vnder God the Princes supreme authoritie Yea what though the Prince him selfe sat not on him nor pronounced the sentence nor executed the punishement of the thiefe yet is not all this done by theirs to whome these offices appertayne but by the Princes supreme authoritie The Prince is not the Iudges executioner but the Iudge and the officer are the Princes If then your similitude holde euen there where it shoulde principally holde and in the matter in controuersie betwéene vs then that authoritie that the Prince hath to punishe spirituall theeues Idolaters heretikes false Prophetes c. is next vnder God his owne supreme authoritie And though he him selfe pronounce not the sentence on the heretike nor execute the punishment of him yet is it done by his supreme authoritie Nor the Prince is the Clergies executioner but the Clergie therin and the officers are rather the Princes executioners Thus ye sée howe your owne similitude directly and playuely applied maketh cleane agaynst you Now for the testimoâ—…ies that the byshop citeth out of S. Aug. to open and confuâ—…e the practises of the Donatistes which should hauâ—… sheweâ—… how like your doing had bene to theirs as though ye heard not on that â—…ide or as though ye would counterfeit the wise man your selfe that vseth not greatly to shew that that maketh agaynst him ye quite omit them saying As for S. Augustines testimonies they nothing touche M. Feck and therfore we will say nothing to them but keepe our accustomable
it is of master Foxes owne setting foorth I graunt M. St. he is the chronicler setteth downe that he findeth Doth that argue that he acknowlegeth for true euery such article as he setteth downe nay he maketh often exception to the contrarie that many of suche articles are falsly obiected which neuerthelesse he setteth downe Yea but there is moe thinges layde vnto him than this By whome M. Stap Forsoothe euen by sir Thomas More A trustie witnesse on your owne side But go to be it he sayde euen so Yet is this iniustly done of you master Stapleton to charge all Protestantes with his opinion in this poynt when they manyfestly mainteine the contrarye We deale not so with you we burden not your whole Churche where ye openly defende the contrarie with the seuerall iudgement of euery writer much lesse of euery obscure author and suche an one as of whome we haue nothing but heresay and that such heresay as his aduersaries loue to reporte and wrest to make it odious to the hearer this is not vpright dealing But yet for al this ye can not héere vpon fasten that whiche so fayne ye would that therfore he is a Donatist The Donatistes denied to Princes the punishment of heretikes and would haue beleefe free This man denieth neither of these First his quarel was not of faith alone but as ye tell it for any maner of crime to be punished by death and yet it followes no more hereon that he woulde haue faith free to beléeue what eche man woulde then he woulde haue it â–ª frée for any manner of cryme to doe what eche man woulde Secondly thoughe he denie the punishment by death yet he denieth not but thereâ—… â–ª graunteth that Princes might make lawes of other kind of punishement which if he graunt them your selfe cleare him of béeing a Donatist But leauing him ye tell vs of greater businesse concerning sir Iohn Oldecastle whoÌ„ ye rattle vp with a susurrauit calling him traytor and detestable Donatist And nowe say you all the weight resteth to proue this substantially to you and to master Foxe And to stoppe all your froward quarellings and accustomable elusions against our proofes VVell I will bring you as I thinke a substantiall and ineuitable proofe that is master Foxe him selfe and no worsse man. Héere is a lustie crake M. Stap. to bumbaste the matter withall out of doubt we shall héere haue some great foyle But let vs sée what all this haynous matter is Forsoothe M. Foxe setteth downe the articles that the Papistes haue composed to be sir Iohn Oldecastles articles the tenth article whereof is this That manslaughter either by warre or by any pretended lawe of iustice or for any temporall cause or spirituall reuelation is expressely contrary to the new Testament which is the lawe of grace and mercie Why M. Stap. is this your substantiall and ineuitable proofe that is master Foxe him selfe and no worsse man this is none of master Foxes saying nor opinion he dothe but write â–ª playne and plat what soeuer articles it pleased his enimies your auncestors to deuise in the name of Sir Iohn Oldecastles articles Lo thus he writeth say you of this worthy Champion and that euen in his owne huge martyrologe who doubteth but to the great exalting and amplification of this noble worke and of his noble holy martyr The worthy prayse of this noble worke in déede and of this noble and holy martyr are no whit blemished by these your scoâ—… raylings M. St. but what kinde of argument call ye this he reciteth this article among the rest and therfore out of doubt he alloweth it and sets it out to hys great exalting and amplification By this argument your selfe allowe the article too for ye haue héere also recited it But what would ye haue sayde if he had subtracted it and the one of the twayne he must haue done either haue left it out or set it out as he founde it But howe chaunce you lefte out that whiche in many places of his worke M. Foxe noteth of the Papists corrupting of those martyrs articles yet which is in déede to his great exalting and amplification he setteth them downe euen as he founde them For the thing to any indifferent reader will easily shewe it selfe But yet goe to once agayne Were this article his or not his it proues not him a Donatist First the Donatistes allowed manslaughter thoughe vnlawfully done as your selfe haue proued before of the Circumcelions But héere ye graunte that he vtterly disalloweth all manslaughter and so ye cleare him héerein of béeing a Donatist Agayne the Donatistes vtterly reiected as your selfe say all the Princes authoritie and all punishement in false religion Contrarywise Sir Iohn Oldecastle allowed their authoritie yea ouer the Pope and his Prelates to punishe them for their false religion And thoughe he disallowed manslaughter yet can ye not gather that he allowed no punishment for false religion Onlesse as ye shewed in the dayes of your late crueltie there be no punishement with you but manslaughter Whereby we maye more iustely gather that he acknowledged their authoritie in willing Princes to punishe thoughe not by deathe than you can any way gather héereon that he vtterly denied all kinde of punishement And if ye would deface his martyrdome for this or couÌ„t it Donatisticall of the same minde was euen sir Thomas More him selfe your owne mery martyr whome ye cited to witnesse a fewe lynes before as appeareth in his Vtopia although more couertly yet he quite disaloweth manslaughter and deuiseth other punishments in stead thereof Is he therefore a Donatiste And I pray you what was all the auncient order in banishing heretikes was it death or were they Donatistes then bicause they allowed not punishment by death So was S. Augustine a Donatiste also whome ye cite agaynst the Donatistes For it was long or euer he came to this opinion that the Donatistes might be slayne and vpon what considerations I wil shew you out of that learned clarke Erasmus who for this matter also had great conflict with your Sorbonistes I denie saythe he that euer I readde that Byshoppes sholude haue stirred vp Kinges to kyll Heretikes For this is not to warne Princes in generall but to appoynte oute vnto them a kynde of punishement But I speake in my reprehension not of these tymes but of Sainct Augustine and the Byshoppes of his age For nowe certayne Abbotes and Byshoppes thinke it a moste acceptable sacrifice to God if they may kyll a great many with their owne sworde and their owne hande And to confesse the truthe in that they tell howe Sainct Augustine was first of that opinion that he denied the Emperoures power to be called vpon but when he sawe the heresie succeeded he changed his mynde euen so is it as true that I wrote But then had they to do with Donatistes that were more than heretikes
Cesar then Emperour and stretch no furder If it determine nothing but money If it inferre no necessitie or dutie but only giue licence how then did these Fathers alleage vrge this sentence against these Princes and how do you alleage them against the Bishop do ye not sée how ye speake against your selfe but I forbeare you till ye come to your appointed place Although furder here I might admonish you since ye reherse here no wordes of those authours but referrâ—… yourselfe to another fitter occasion not to stande dalying in so often preuentions and rehersalls and all to no purpose but onely to encrease your volume Much lesse to triumphe therevppon till ye haue sette downe some proufe either of them or of other to confute the Bishop for els ye do but triumphe before the victorie and such commonly in the ende do lâ—…se the victorie For hitherto ye haue alleaged nothing against the Bishops allegation and yet say you This ill happe hath M. Horne euen with his first authoritie of the newe Testament extraordinarily and impertinently I can not tel how chopped in to cause the leaues and his booke and his lies to make the more muster and shewe This was an happie happe for you M. Sta. to ruffle in your Rhetorike that it happed the B. to haue so ill an hap by alleaging this sentence for hereby ye haue shewed first your truth honestie That where the Bishop citeth two plaine sentences out of the new Testament together to coÌ„firme his assertioÌ„ you say he alleageth here but one Where the Bishop citeth this of Cesar the later of the twaine you quite omitting the other say this is his first authoritie of the new Testament Good happe haue you M. St. to haue chopped in two lies so round togither to make the more muster of lies in your booke but happie man happy dole they say With the like happinesse haue ye founde out this grammar rule that Reddite is ye may giue But chiefly this happie new Diuinitie to refuse your Princes lawfull authoritie that necessarily by force of any wordes ye be not bounde to pay so much as any tribute to your Prince All these happes was it your hap first to finde out And therefore all your side haue good cause M. St. to count ye an happie man. But M. St. not content withall these happes stormeth yet against the Bishop for adioyning these wordes Admonishing not withstanding all Princes people that Cesars authoritie is not infinite or without limites for such authoritie belongeth only to the King of all Kinges but bounded and circumscribed within the boundes assigned in Gods worde This M. St. calleth a foolish and a friuolous admonition without any cause or ground grounded on M. Hornes fantasticall imagination and not vpon Christ as he surmiseth Is this M. Stapl. a foolish and a friuolous admonition a groundlesse fantasticall Imagination to say that the Princes authoritie is not infinite but circuÌ„scribed within the boundes assigned in Gods worde what would ye haue had the Bishop to say that it had bene infinite without any boundes such as onely belongeth to God but how would ye then haue triumphed at the matter and in déede ye had had good cause Where now ye haue none but that ye be disposed to quarel at euery thing be it neuer so well spoken Neyther was it without cause or grounde syth the wordes that immediately are ioyned so togither make an expresse limitation that the former part of the sentence is bounded with the later parte that the Prince ought to haue such due belonging to him as hindreth not the yéelding of that due that belongeth to god And therfore the Bishops admonition was not onely godly and true but grounded on Christes wordes yea and comprehendeth them also and was no lesse necessarie for the Bishop to haue vsed both for that it maketh a distinction of that supremacie that your Pope chalengeth intruding and incroching on those things that are only due to God and not suffring his authoritie to be limitted by Gods worde and woulde rule Gods worde and go beyonde the boundes thereof And also for that to the ignorant simple of your side ye slauÌ„der the B. and other setters forth of gods word yea the Quéenes maiestie her self to take on hir and we to yelde to hir such an absolute and indefinite authoritie as taketh from god from his word from his ministers that authoritie that belongeth vnto them Which syth it is your vsuall lying and malicious slaunder to sturre offence to the simple to bring the Prince and Preachers in obloquie and the authoritie in suspition and hatred it was not a friuolous fantasticall imagination as your fantasticall braine imagineth but a most necessarie cause for the B. to haue giuen that admonition to shew what authority we allow in the prince the Prince taketh on hir agréeable to that that Christ coÌ„mauÌ„ds to render Nay say you it is not grouÌ„ded vpoÌ„ christ VVho willeth that to be giuen to Caesar that is Caesars and to God that is Gods but determineth expresseth nothing that is to be giuen to Caesar but onely payment of money And yet if we consider as I haue sayde what was the question demaunded it doth not determine that neither thoughe the thing it selfe be most true Doth this M. St. determine nothing but money yea not so much as that neither whie what doth it determine then nothing say you if we consider as I haue sayde what was the question demaunded In déede M. Stap. if we considered as you haue sayde it would be a very meane determination of any thing And yet if you would better haue considered euen that you haue sayde ye shoulde haue found this your saying to haue bene sayde without your considering cappe For then ye tolde vs that thoughe it forced not that we ought to pay tribute yet it forced that we might pay it which inforceth yet somewhat more than bare nothing And euen héere present ye say that Christ determineth expresseth nothing that is to be giuen to Cesar but onely paymeÌ„t of money And by by ye say it doth not determine that neither And so ye tell vs it dothe determine nothing and yet it determines something and that something it doth determine and yet it dothe not determine it If we consider it as you haue sayde it howe would ye haue vs consider it master Stap. when your selfe so inconsiderately haue saide suche contradictions Besides this as repugnant as the rest before ye sayd his wordes imported onely that they might which is not to will a thing to be done but to permit or licence that a thing may be done or may not be done And héere ye playnly say he willeth that to be giuen to Cesar that is Cesars and to God that is Gods. But Christes willing a thing to be done is his commaundement that it be done and not a licence that may or may not
agaynst Gods holy worde Is this an argument M. St. that we abuse the worde of God bicause you playnly say this supremacie is directly agaynst Gods worde In déede I heare ye say it and saye it playnely and as playne as ye can saye it and that very often too and make it a sufficient cause saying For we playnly say But ye shoulde once at the least proue it as playnly withall and not so often tell vs that ye playnely say so and then we shoulde playnely sée and say also with you that ye vsed playne dealing as well as playne sayings The. 21. Diuision IN this diuision the Byshop procéedeth further with other testimonies out of the Apostles with the fathers expositions therevpon First where Sainct Peter â—… Ep. cap. 2. and Sainct Paule Rom. 13. do not licence but commaunde obedience vnto Princes Chrisostome stretcheth this obedience to euery kinde of Ecclesiasticall person so well as lay person And maketh the obiecte or matter wherein the Princes gouernement is exercised to be for the furthering and aduauncing of all vertuous actions the correcting and repressing of all vices and that not onely in all matters of the seconde Table betwéene man and man but of all matters in the first table betwéene God man so well as of the other To the confirmation wherof he citeth agayne S. Paule 2. Timoth. 2. stretching the duetie of Princes not onely to honestie of life but also to godlinesse Wherby Sainct Augustine meaneth the chiefe or proper worship seruice and religion of god Shewing at large by Sainct Augustine who reasoning on the thirtéenth to the Rom. confuteth the Donatistes héerein that Princes haue authoritie for the furtherance and setting foorth of true religion and suppressing of all heresies schismes and other ecclesiasticall abuses so well as the furtheraunce and setting foorth of ciuill iustice and the punishement of morall vices To this M. Stapletons answere is parted into foure First gathering a contraction of the Byshops allegations he graunteth vnto them and proueth that he and the Protestantes agrée héerevpon Secondly he pincheth and restrayneth his graunt and endeuoreth to proue contradiction in the Protestantes Thirdly he entreth into the answere of certayne wordes and testimonies by the Byshop alleaged Fourthly he replieth on the bishop with other allegations out of Chrysostome and theron frameth an argument on them for his Priestes superioritie The residue of his answere to S. Augustine he passeth ouer in wordes of course In the first sayth M. Stapleton Heere is nothing M. Horne that importeth your surmised supremacie The effect of your processe is Princes haue authoritie to mainteine praise and further the vertues of the first table and to suppresse the coÌ„trarie wherein onely consisteth the true religion and spiritual seruice that is due from man to God And that he hath authoritie herein not only in the vertues or vices bidden or forbidden in the second table of Gods coÌ„maundementes wherein are conteyned the duties that one maÌ„ oweth to another This is grauÌ„ted M. Horn both of the Catholikes and of the soberer sort of the Protestantes for Carolostadius Pelargus Struthius with the whole rable of th' Anabaptistes denie it that Princes haue authoritie both to further the obseruation and to punishe the breache of Gods coÌ„maundements as well in the first table as in the seconde that is as well in suche actions as concerne our duetie to God himselfe as in the duetie of one man to another This were meetely well sayde M. St. that héere agayne thus liberally ye grauÌ„t if it made any gret matter what ye graunted or denied The bishop you should soone agrée sauing for your instabilitie that after you haue made your large graunts ye still reuoke theÌ„ againe with some pelting distinction or qualification of them Your graunt is this Princes haue authoritie both to maynteine praise further the obseruation and to suppresse and punish the breach of Gods coÌ„mandements aswel in the first table as in the seconde that is aswell in suche actions as concerne our duty to God himselfe wherin onely consisteth the true religion and spirituall seruice as in the duetie of one man to another But thus wel haue Princes authoritie to mainteine further or to suppresse and punish in actions of the duety of one man to another conteyned in the second table that no suche actions be exempted from their authoritie but they ought to prayse maynteine and further al such actioÌ„s as are bidden and suppresse and punish al such actions as are forbidden and that to do with moste great care diligence and ouersight yea supreme authoritie also vnder God therin Ergo They may do so by like righte in all the actions of the first table concerning the true religion and spirituall seruice of god Or else this aswell that ye put in twyce togither for more confirmation commeth an ace behinde and is belike as muche to say as not as well the quite contrarie to aswell Thus if ye stande to your owne words that the Princes authoritie is aswell in the one as in the other they sufficiently importe all that we demaunde and are as muche as this The Prince is supreme gouernour not onely in all temporall â–ª but also in all ecclesiasticall causes And therefore where ye say that they be Anabaptistes that denie it ye conclude all the Papistes to be Anabaptistes for they denie it And your selfe are in the table also that haue puâ—…te oute this your Counterblast chiefly to ouerturne it Although when ye be pressed ye oftentimes graunte that whiche ouerturnes your selfe Neither dothe your distinction helpe â–ª ye to the which ye runne for succour euen to your enimies But all this is say you as not onely the Catholike wryters but Melancthon him selfe and Caluine doe expound Quod ad externam disciplinam attinet As muche as appertayneth to externall discipline And the Magistrate is the keeper and defender of bothe Tables saythe Melancthon but agayne he addeth Quod ad externos mores attinet As muche as belongeth to externall maners behauiour and demeanour Ye promise héere agayne to agrée with Caluine and Melancthon in all this whiche ye haue graunted that the Prince hathe authoritie as well in the firste Table as in the seconde this onely excepted as they excepte Quod ad externam disciplinam externos mores attinet So long as appertayneth to outwarde discipline and outwarde maners But al Ecclesiastical causes and orders for setting foorth religion are either outwarde disciplines or outwarde rites maners behauiours or demeanoures for as for inwarde actions or thoughtes the Prince meddleth not withall but God alone the minister onely pronounceth Gods threats or promises for them â–ª Ergo Euen by this your own distinction ye confesse once agayne the Princes supremacie in all eccl. causes Neither dothe your reason folowing helpe ye any thing at all For say you in the first Table are coÌ„teined many offences and breaches of the which
vpon him with his foote and as his page to holde his stirrop to his foote and claimes to giue or take awaye his estate And you say here for all estates of the clergie VVe ought to be subiect not onely to Christians but euen to Infidels also being our Princes without any exception of Apostle Euangelist Prophete Priest or Monke What and is your Pope none of these Maister Stapleton an Apostle he is not without a pseudo nor he calles himselfe an Apostle but Apostolicall Much lesse he is an Euangelist and least a Prophete except a lying Prophete Sometimes in déede he hath bene a Monke but is there any Pope not a priest If he be a Priest then ought he by your owne confession to be subiect to the Emperour and in refusing this subiection what can ye make of him but as your selfe to your Prince so he to his Prince a very rebell and vsurper against his prince If ye say the Emperour is not his prince why is he then named the Emperor of Rome is not the name of an Emperor the name of the chiefest Principalitie And then if he be Emperor or king of the Romaines howe ought not the Pope being a Romaine or dwelling at Rome within this Princes kingdome or Empyre be subiect to this king or Emperour at the least as ye say in temporall and ciuill matters Doe ye thinke to escape in saying VVe ought to be subiect to our Princes without exception but he ought not I had thought ye had spoken of all Christiana and had simply mâ—…nt as Chrysostome did to whome ye referre your selfe who speaketh in generall of euery man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fuerâ—… or whosoeuer thou art which wordes ye dissemble and omit So that if your Pope be of 〈◊〉 calling and he be no more a Priest than Pope Ioane 〈◊〉 he a soule be he a bodye he ought by your owne graunt to 〈◊〉 subiect to the Emperour of Rome in these matters 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 the Emperour to be subiect vnto him Whiche 〈◊〉 the Pope shall vnderstande â—…owe for his 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 and for all his ciuill and temporall matters you woulde bring him to hys olde obedience 〈◊〉 the Emperour as he hath bene I thinke he will 〈◊〉 sâ—…all thanke Maister Stapleton for your labour But all this subiection saye you is but graunted in temporall and ciuill matters Doth Saint Paule Maister Stapleton alleage this distinction or Chrysostome to whoÌ„ ye reforro your selfe no M. St. they make no such restraint but stretch this obedience as to al ecclesiastical persons so principally to all ecâ—…l â–ª matters to the setting forth Gods religon â–ª And so Pauledoth call the Prince Gods minister â–ª And Chrysostome sayth Neque enim ista subiectio piâ—…tatem subuertit for neyther this subiectioÌ„ ouerturneth godynesse And vpon these words He is the minister of God a reuenger to him that doth euil He saith Againe least thou shouldst start back hearing of punishment correction and the sword he mentioneth againe that the Prince fulfilleth the lawe of God for what though the Prince himselfe know it not yet God hath so formed and ordeined it If therfore either he punish or aduance he is the minister of God maintaining vertue abolishing wickednesse euen bicause God would haue it so By what reason repugnest thou in striuing against him that bringeth such good things and goeth before thee and prepareth a way for thy affaires for many there are which at the first exercised vertue for respect of the magistrate but at the length they cleaued thervnto euen for the feare of god For things to come do not so moue the grosser sort as present things He therfore that prepareth the minds of many both with feare and honor that they may be made fitter for the worde of doctrine is worthily called the minister of God. In which words he plainly sheweth that the Princes ministery wherby he is called Gods minister consisteth in making vs fit apt receiuers of the wordâ—… of doctrine which the minister teacheth the Prince by punishing or rewarding goeth before prepareth a waye and bringeth to vs making vs apt to receyue either for feare 〈◊〉 loue this benefit by his ministâ—…rie In which work as the Apostles Preachers for the vtteraÌ„ce of the word of doctrine are called the workers togither with God so the Prince in preparing this way to the worde making vs apt to it is likewise said of Chrysostom that he worketh togither with the will of God. Wherin as we must not repâ—…gne against the prince so this obedience that we owe vnto him is not only in temporall and ciuill matters but in making vs apt for the worde of doctrine in which all eccl. matters are comprehended Now after M. St. hath thus stoode quarrelling in vain with the B. allegations he fourthly entreth into a reply vpon the B. with other allegations collected out of the same father Chrysost theroÌ„ frameth an argument against the Princes superiority In the forhed wherof he prefixeth this marginal note the Priesthode is aboue a kingdom which note as it is true in the sense that Chrysost. vnderstandeth it so maketh it nothing that he is abouâ—… him in the supreme gouernment directioÌ„ of all eccl. causes which is the present questioÌ„ the thing that M. 〈◊〉 â–ª calleth so osteÌ„ at other times vpoÌ„ But now saith M. St. As contrariwise the Prince himselfe is for ecclesiasticall spirituall causes subiect to his spiritual ruler VVhich Chrysostome himselfe of all men doth best declare Alij sunt termini c. The boundes of a Kingdome and of Priesthoode sayth Chrysostome are not all one this Kingdome passeth the other this King is not knowne by visible things neither hath his estimation for precious stones he glistreth withall or for his gay golden glistring apparel The other King hath the ordring of those worldly things the authoritie of Priesthood commeth from heauen VVhatsoeuer thou shalt binde vpon earth shall be bounde in heaueâ—… To the King those things that are here in the worlde are committed but to me celestiall things are committed VVhen I say to mee I vnderstande to a priest Andanon after he sayth Regi corpora c. The bodies are coÌ„mitted to the King the soules to the priest The King pardoneth the faultes of the bodie the Priest pardoneth the faultes of the soule The King forceth the Priest exhorteth the one by necessitie the other by giuing councel the one hath visible armour the other spirituall He warreth agaynst the barbarous I warre agaynst the deuill This principalitie is the greater and therefore the King doth put his heade vnder the Priestes handes And euery where in the olde scripture Priestes did annoynt the Kings Among all other bookes of the said Chrysostome his booke de sacerdotio is freighted with a number of like and more notable sentences for the Priestes superioritie aboue the Prince For the other sentences in Chrysostome I can not directly aunswere
there is wedlocke But what say we to Philip had he not foure daughters but where soure daughters were there was both a wife and matrimonie But what then doth Christ he was indeede borne of a virgin but he came to a mariage and brought his gift with him They haue saith she no wine and he turned water into wine with virginitie honoring mariage commending with his gift the thing that was done that thou shouldest not abhorre mariage â–ª but shouldest hate whooredome For at my perill I behoofe the saluation although thou shalt wed a wife Looke to thy selfe a woman if shee be good is an helper to thee c. All this more saith Chrysostome in the coÌ„mendation of the ministers mariage euen in the same Homelie cited by you M. St. which estate of mariage to be ioyned in sith the Pope his Priests can not abide and alleage such impediments as here Chrysostome confuteth it is an euident argument by the way that they 〈◊〉 nothing lesse than such Priests as Chrysostome ascribeth this spirituall kingdome of the ministerie of Gods worde and Sacraments vnto and where Chrysostome as your selfe haue cited him saith that the Princeforceth the Priest exhorteth the one by necessitie the other by giuing counsell the one hath visible armour the other spirituall Contrarywise your Pope not only exhorteth but extorteth and forceth too not only by counsell but by necessine extreme violence Not only pretending spirituall armour such as he calleth his curses with booke bell and candle but also with visible armour muironed about where he rideth or on mens backes is caried with a gard of Swarâ—…trutters Switchers with gunnes Harquebushes partesans glayues and weapons as if it were Iudas with his armed bande to take our Sauiour Christ. And he claymeth thriurisoiction of â—…oth the swords wresting thertâ—… the wordes of the Disciple Eâ—…ce 〈◊〉 gladiâ—… hic Beholde heere are two swordes to the temporall and visible armour so well as to the spiritual Wherevpon Eonifacius the eight did not onely hang seuen keyes at his girdle in token of his spirituall power but girte him selfe also with a sworde in token of his temporall power These Prelates the refore are not such kinde of Priests as Chrysostome speaketh of Neither notâ—… I this as a faultâ—… in this or that person but as errours defended and maynteined by them for the aduauncement of their naughtie Priesthoode What maketh then this sentence of the excellencie of the Priestes ministerie for the ministerie of the Popes Priesthoode that is all the quitâ—… contrarie Suche false Priestes therefore the Prince hath authoritie to remoue them and to place suchâ—… Priests as Chrysostome speaketh of and so to bowe his head vnder their hands that is to oâ—…ey their ministerie which is no derogation to the matter in hande of the Princes supreme gouernement Thus muche M. Stap. to your sentence alleaged out of Chrysostome vpon the which you and all your side do harpe so often and yet beeing well considered it not onely makes nothing for you but muche agaynst you Nowe to your argument that ye gather héere vpon saying Nowe then M. Horne I frame you suche an argument The Priest is the Princes superiour in some causes ecclesiasticall Ergo The Prince is not the Priestes superiour in all causes ecclesiasticall The antecedent is clearely proued out of the words of Chrysostome before alleaged Thus. The Priest is superiour to the Prince in remission of sinnes by Chrysostome â–ª but remission of sinnes is a cause ecclesiastical or spirituall Ergo The Priest is the Princes superiour in some causes ecclesiasticall or spirituall To this argument béeing thus framed vpon the which M. Stap greatly triumpheth I answere it hath thrée fallations in it for fayling The first in this worde superiour béeing vnderstoode two ways either in respect of the ministerie or function or in respect of the publique ouersight ordering and direction In the former sense the maior is true The Priest is superiour to the Prince in respect of his ministerie or function But this worde superiour béeing thus vnderstoode in the conclusion for superioritie onely in the ministerie or function concludeth nothing agaynst the Princes superioritie which is only the publike ouersight ordering and direction that this superiour ministerie and function be not abused Now if the word superiour be not thus vnderstoode but simply to be the superiour or in the later sense that is to say the Priest is superiour in the publike ouersight ordering and direction that the office be duely administred by the minister then is this maior false for the Priest is not thus the Princes superiour The second fallation is in the words remission of sinnes If he meane thereby the ouersighte to sée suche remission be duely made by the Priest then is the maior also false The Priest is not the Princes superiour therin If he means by remission of sinnes the action of remitting them or the function of the office in pronouncing them remitted then is the maior true but the minor false For so remission of sins is not a cause ecclesiasticall but an action or function ecclesiasticall Wheron ariseth the third fallation of these words ecclesiasticall cause Which the statute and the title mentioning that the Prince hath supremacie in all ecclesiasticall causes he wilfully wresteth as though all actions and functions eccl were yéelded to the Princes supremacie Where neither the Prince requireth nor the statute title yéeldeth any such supremacie in the actions but onely a supremacie in the causes not to do them but to sée them rightly done And thus by resolutioÌ„ of these words it appeareth how the Priest in one sense as Chrysostome sayth is superiour to the Prince not only in this one thing of remission of sinnes But in al other actions of his dutie and the Prince is farre inferiour to him and yet the Prince in the other sense of the general direction and publike ouersight is in this and all other causes eccl. superiour to the Priest and the Priest farre inferiour vnto him And so the superioritie of the Priest hindreth nothing the supremacie of the Prince Master St. hauing now as he thinketh by this mightie argument wonne the fielde and quite confounded the Byshop setteth out as a trophaâ—…m or monument of his historie this marginall note Euidently proued by S. Chrysostome the Prince not to be the supreme gouernour in causes ecclesiasticall And crieth out for ioy Which being most true what thing caÌ„ you coÌ„clude of al ye haue or shal say to win your purpose or that ye heere presently say And thus on the triumph of this argument M. St. reiecteth all that the B. hath said as insufficieÌ„t would returne vpon him the sentence of S. Augustine against the Donatists that the Byshop cited agaynst M. Feck Wherein he bringeth nothing a freshe that is not before declared and answered vnto besides vayne words of course worthy no other answere than to be returned
if ye meane by this visitation the outward execution of the Church lawes and decrees confirmed by the ciuill magistrate roborated with hisedicts and executed with his sword For in such sort many Emperors Princes haue fortified streÌ„gthned the decrees of Bishops made in Councels both general National as we shall in the processe see And this in christian Princes is not denied but coÌ„mended What the state of the question in hande is the reader hath often hearde How be it such is your importunitie that ye will neuer leaue your olde warbling But for the full satisfying of the Reader berein let him once againe resort to the issue that M. Feck requireth of the bishop to direct all hys foure meanes vnto wherin he would be satisfied And that is conteyned in these flat wordes VVhen your L. shall be able by any of these foure meanes to make proofe vnto me that any Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may claime or take vpon them any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes I shall herein yeelde c. This then is the state of the question betwéen theÌ„ whether any Prince may take vpon him any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes as the Queenes Maiestie doth Now wheresoeuer the B. proueth anything by the foure fore said meanes that any Prince hath taken vpon him any such gouernement as doth the Queenes Maiestie in causes ecclesiasticall there the bishop kéepeth himselfe to the state of the question in hande and satisfieth M. Fecknams issue What the bishop hath done in the two foresaide meanes is euident by that that is past let others iudge thereon Here the B. entring into the other two meanes prefixeth this issue againe before him to leuell his proues by The issue is now that by any of these two meanes remayning he shall proue that anye Prince may claime or take vpon him any such gouernment as the Queenes Maiestie in Ecclesiasticall matters doth And where the B. by any of these two meanes shall proue that any Princes haue taken â—…pon them any such gouernment in ecclesiasticall matters as the Q. Maiestie doth there the B. digresseth nothing from his question also satisfieth M. Feck â–ª demaunde This then being the state of the question betwéene them the proofe of any such gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes the B. first setteth here down the particulars that plainly declare what gouernment this is that the Q. Maiestie taketh on hir wherto he must direct his proues So that now that question in hande is this What is that gouernment in what particulars consisteth it that the Q. maiestie taketh on hir Which when here the B. doth specifie in the last Chapter M. Stapl. himselfe commended the bishop for his orderly going to worke therein and now crieth out here is a state framed farre square from the question in had whether it be so or no whether it be not plain dealing of the B. and plain warbling of M. St. let any man be indifferent iudge betwéene them But M. Stapl. sayth the question is not nowe betweene M. Feck and you whether the Prince may visite reforme and correct all maner of persons for all maner of schismes heresies and offences in Christian religion True in déede M. St. the question is not nowe whether the Prince may doe these things that you rehearse or no but the question that is nowe in hand being deducted out of the words of the issue any such gouernment demaundeth first what kinde of gouernment that is that the Q. maiestie doth claime and take vpon hir to the which question the B. aunswereth the gouernment that hir highnesse taketh on hir is such and such c. And so the state of the question is knowne what kinde of gouernment the B. must proue And looke where he proueth any such gouernment there M. Feckenhams request is aunswered And if he can not prooue any such then M. Feckenham may complaine that he is not satisfied And as he is bounde to performe his promise of thankfull yéelding so haue you no cause to warble at this the B. diligent enumeration of those particularities of the principal question least both ye should wander in an obscure generalitie also coÌ„trarie your late vaunt that ye go to worke plainly truly and particularly But sée your falshoode how chaunce ye set not downe the Bishops wordes as he spake them but abridge them 〈◊〉 of thrée parts of them and more crying Here is a state framed farre square from the question in hande Here is a false subtiltie of you M. St. farre square from any truth in hand or out of hande The Bishops wordes are these The gouernment that the Q. Maiestie moste iustly taketh vpon hir in eccles causes is the guiding caring prouiding ordering directing and ayding the ecclesiasticall state within hir dominions to the furtherance maintenance and setting forth of true religion vnitie and quietnesse of Christes Church ouerseeing visiting refourming restrayning amending and correcting all maner persons with all maner errours superstitions heresies schismes abuses offences contemptes and enormities in or about Christes religion whatsoeuer In place of all these wordes euery one béeing materiall to shewe the particular things wherein hir gouernment consisteth that she claymeth you onely for all these set downe these wordes The Prince may visite reforme and correcte all maner of persons for all maner of heresies schisines and offences in Christian religion As though the Bishops particular words specifying the poynts of hir gouernmeÌ„t conteined no more but this Neuerthelesse had the bishop specified no more but these words that ye thus contracte yet had he not swarued from the issue betweene them Any suche gouernment nor from the directâ—… answering to the question declaring any suche gouernment chiefly the chiefe poynts therof that the Quéenes maiestie claymeth and you refuse to yéelde vnto hir For euen these particularities that you set out ye will not graunte without an exception and that is in effecte vtterly to denie them althoughe in daliaunce of spéeche saying in some sense ye would onely séeme to mollifie them For what else meane these your words VVhich perchaunce in some sense might somewhat be borne withall if ye meane by this visitation and reformation the outwarde execution of the Churche lawes and decrees confirmed by the ciuill magistrate roborated with his edicts and executed with his sworde for in suche sorte many Emperours and Princes haue fortified and strengthened the decrees of Byshops made in Councels bothe generall and nationall as we shall in the processe see And this in Christian Princes is not denied but commended Christian Princes haue héere gotten afaire catche by this your graunt and commendation to become your seruants your souldiours your slaughtermen only executing with their swords that you with your authoritie decrée and appoint vnto them Now forsooth a fayre supreme authoritiâ—… But let vs sée how this doth hang togither Ye graunt theÌ„ to visite reforme
and correct all maner of persons for al maner of heresies schismes and offences in Christian religion This is inough M. St. for your part to grauÌ„t the Prince thus much Nay soft ye say you I graunt this but with a perchaunce What doth so waightie a matter hang by so rotten a thread Nay I graunt not this perchauÌ„ce neither say you but in some condition This goeth hard with Princes M. St. to stand at this smal reuersion But go to let vs see how many Princes visite reforme and correct all maner persons heresies schismes and offences What is the condition ye wil make Forsooth the condition is this looke what maner lawes and decrees the Priests will make the Prince shall only confirme them by outwarde execution of them Looke what maner persons the priests do say are heretikes â—…chismatikes and offenders the Prince shall execute them with the sworde and kill them Looke what maner religion doctrine and doings the Priests and Bishops shall in their Councels both generall and nationall decrâ—… to be heresie schisme and offence the Prince shal roborate fortifie and streÌ„gthen them And this is the only sense sayth M. St. that I meane that they should visite reforme and correct all maner persons heresies schismes and offences in Christian religion Why M. Stapl. this sense and this graunte are quite contrarie the one to the other The Prince shall visite reforme and correct all maner of persons heresies schismes and offences that is to say he shall not visite reforme nor correct any maner of person for any maner of all these things but the Priest shall do it and he shall onely be the Priestes slaue and executioner Well sayth M. Stap. be it as be may construe it as ye will this is the onely some sense that we may graunt it in and in none other sense And this in Christian Princes is not denied but commended Is not héere a proper graunt to Princes and is not master Stap. to be commended for this some sense of christian Princes gouernment But who is so senselesse that he seeth not in this sense that the Prince hath no gouernement at all but is made a very slaue to the Popish priests authoritie And in this some sense coulde master Stapl. finde in his heart to acknowledge a gouernement to the Queenes maiestie and yet not without a perchaunce neither But without perchaunce master Stap. your sense sheweth what good harte ye beare hir Maiestie and all other christian Princes Now that M. Stap. hath thus chalenged the state which the bishop framed and yet graunteth with a perchaunce thereto in some sense which sense is as you haue heard he taketh vpon him to set downe the true state of the question in hande and prefixeth these words in his margine The state of the question and so procéedeth saying But the question is here nowe whether the Prince or lay magistrate may of him selfe and of his own princely authoritie without any higher eccl. power in the Church within or without the Realme visite reforme and correct and haue all maner of gouernment and authoritie in all things causes eccl. or no. As whether the Prince may by his own supreme authoritie depose and set vp Bishops and priests make iniunctions of doctrine prescribe order of Gods seruice enact matters of religioÌ„ approue and disproue articles of the faith take order for administration of Sacraments commaund or put to silence Preachers determine doctrine excoÌ„municate and absolue with such like which al are causes eccl. and al apperteyning not to the inferiour ministerie which you grauÌ„t to Priests and Bishops only but to the supreme iurisdiction and gouernment which you do annexe to the Prince only This I say is the state of the question now present For the present question betweene you and M. Feck is grounded vpon the othe comprised in the statute which statute emplieth and concludeth all these particulars I had thought séeing your earnestnesse M. St. when ye came to meÌ„tioning the statute that we should haue herd all these things that ye haue thus as it were on your fingers endes particularly named expressed in the statute But wheÌ„ al coÌ„meth to al ye knit vp the matter with this which statute implyeth concludeth al these particulars But I sée you employ your selfe like your self stil to false coÌ„clusions And such as your coÌ„clusions are such are your proues You pretende here after ye haue controlled the B. to set down the true state of the questioÌ„ But as ye played in the beginning so ye holde out rubbers euen to the ending Ye are stil the same man that cried out of short wide shoting hauing set vp new markes of your owne making by this doing both to defeate the bishops profes also to deceiue the reader Ye would fayne driue all to the othe and make the othe the present question And why so bicause say you the present question is grounded on the othe True in déede bothe the present question and all other questions about this controuersie and the issue also agréed vpon betwéene these parties is grounded as ye say vpon the oth And bicause the present question is grounded theron it is a good argument against you that the oth is not theÌ„ the present questioÌ„ bicause the present questioÌ„ is grouÌ„ded theron a question is not grounded on it selfe Ye shoulde haue marked that though the originall be of the othe yet both the issue the present questioÌ„ in haÌ„d being by degrées deducted from thence make nowe an other state To the which to this issue if the bishop satisfie ye can not iustly chaleÌ„ge him any further As for that state of the question that you set downe and the particulars thereof that ye say are implyed and concluded in the statute that all those things are apperteining not to the inferiour but to the supreme iurisdiction and gouernment that ye say we annexe to the Prince only al these are your most manifest vntruthes slanders nor ye can finde them either specified emplyed concluded comprised or any wayes to be ment in the othe or in the statute or in any parte therof Neither the othe or the statute giue al maner of gouernment and authoritie in all things and causes ecclesiasticall to the Prince but ascribe to the Prince the supreme gouernment and authoritie in al things and causes ecclesiasticall True it is that supreme gouernement is aboue ouer them but yet the one is not the other supreme gouernment is not all maner of gouernment Neither bothe the othe or the statute either in wordes or effect of wordes ascribe to this the Princes supreme gouernment the making of Priests and Bishops the making iniunctions of doctrine the determining of doctrin the approuing or disprouing articles of the faith excommunicating and absoluing the preaching of the worde and the administration of Sacramentes Where fynde ye any of these things so muche as to be gathered out
of the othe or statute Why say you they all appertaine not to the inferiour ministerie whiche ye graunt to Priests and Bishops only but to the supreme iurisdiction and gouernement which you doe annexe to the Prince only In déede these thinges you make to appertayne to youre Pope to whome ye giue such supreme iurisdiction and gouernement as annexeth all this to his papal authoritie But ye doe wickedly herein and iniurie to our sauiour Christe to whom only such supreme iurisdiction and gouernment belongeth and vnder whome the inferiour ministers maye do these things not as they please but as he hathe prescribed them The Iurisdiction and authoritie appertaineth onely to ministers bishops or priestes as ye call them To whome herein we doe not as ye sclaunder vs graunt only an Inferiour ministerie but euen an higher ministerie than wée giue to Princes In their spirituall ministration they are higher ministers but in gouerning them ouerséeing them directing punishing maynteyning placing or displacing them as they shall do their dueties well or yll the Prince therein is higher than they and his gouernement vnder God is supreme and chiefe in all suche causes as belongeth to the Ecclesiasticall persons or any other in his territories This is that the statute ascribeth and the othe requireth farre from youre malicious and sclaunderous slate of the question that you haue here deuised Whiche as ye say the truthe therein the Bishop proueth not for it is no part for him to proue But that this is the â—…slue he fully preueth Yea and proueth the full contentes of the Othe also to the whyche ye woulde so fayne driue the question nowe in hande After ye haue thus sette vp a false and wrong state and quarelled at the verie state of the question in hande playnly and truely set downe by the Bishop ye enter into your second part wherin prefixing an other marginal note Master Hornes dissembling falsehood ye chalenge the B. to omit two clauses of the statute the one at the beginning therof the other at the ende The former is this That no foraine person shall haue any maner of authoritie in any spirituall cause within this realme By whiche wordes is flatly excluded saye you all the authoritie of the whole bodie of the Catholike Churche without the realme as in a place more conuenient towardes the ende of the laste booke it shall by Gods grace be euidently proued If that be a place more conuenient why doe ye anticipate it here not so conueniently where it appertayneth not to the question in hand The Bishop now medleth not with that parcell that excludeth all foraine authoritie but onely with that parte that expresseth what manner of authoritie it is that the Quéenes Maiestie taketh vpon hir And this the Bishop playnely and faithefully dothe not here intermedlyng with other pointes of the statute But where that conuenient occasion is there ye shall sée the Bishop touch that that here ye call for And there a Gods name answere hym if ye can But your fingers itched ye coulde not holde youre hande but néedes ye muste euen nowe haue a fling thereat for a farewell Althoughe therein ye proprely ouertourne youre selfe and yet to make somewhat of the matter yée playe all the false playe yée can For where the Statute mencioneth onely anye forraine persone to haue no authoritie you conclude that it excludeth all the authoritie of the whole bodye of the Catholike Churche withoute the Realme Where as there the Statute mencioneth not the catholike Churche at all And besides who séeth not a great difference betwéene these twayne any persons authoritie and the whole bodies authoritie And who séeth not withall that if England be a parcell and membre of the whole bodie of the Catholike Churche of Christe and all the membres make one vnited bodie then neither is the whole bodie foraine to the members thereof nor the particular membres foraine to the whole bodie Nor in déede any parte of this mysticall bodie is excluded But in that respect that one countreyman is foraine to an other suche foraine authoritie of any foraine person is thereby excluded But in regarde of the bodye of the Catholike churche if ye meane Christes holie Catholike Churche there is neyther Iew nor Gréeke Scythian nor Barbarian nor any forayne Countreyman we are no straungers and forainers but Citizens of the Saintes and of the householde of God and all compacte in Christe nor any is excluded oute of this Churche if he be in and of this Churche bycause he is not forayne And where ye saye the whole bodie of the Churche without the Realme youre wordes implie a contradiction to themselues For if the realme be a parcell of the bodie of the churche whiche perchaunce you will denye or if the realme be a parcell of the bodie of the Churche whyche you wyll not denie then that which is without the realme is not the whole bodie as ye call it But lettyng this goe what is that authoritie be it of the most part or be it as you saâ—… of the whole bodie of the Churche without the realme that ye would haue the realme allowe If it be the verie Catholike church of Christe then is it also the wyfe and spouse of Christ and hath no authoritie to make any faith doctrine or religion besides that hir husband hath appointed neyther England Fraunce Germanie Italy Spayne or any other parte or all the whole bodie of this spouse hath authoritie to doe it And looke what parte doth not this or presumeth to doe otherwise becommeth foraine and as foraine is cut off euen as a rotten and putrified member seuered from the bodie Euery braunche sayth Christ that beareth not fruite in me my father will cut it away But if this authoritie be for such ecclesiastical discipline as Christ hath giuen therof no expresse coÌ„maundement then euery seuerall part may receyue or not receyue the same and yet is not estranged or made forrain from the whole corps of Christendome yea though the most parte of the churche besides authorised and vsed the same But euery particular Churche hath in it selfe authoritie to establish orderly suche disciplines as shall be thought best and fittest for their estate and yet is there no diuision or schisme from the whole thereby But sith ye referre your selfe to a more conuenient place where ye say it shall by Gods grace be euidently proued it is not much conuenient to stand any more hereon sith it is here but accessorie and ye confesse your self that ye doe not but ye will hereafter by Gods grace proue it euidently But I doubt me of two things the one of your euident prouing therof the other that ye will doe the same by the grace of God the dooing wherof is agaynst the grace of God. The other clause saye you you omitte at the ende of the statute whiche is this That all maner superiorities that haue or may lawfully be exercised
he was a good king in ouerséeing the Priestes do their dueties and not him selfe intruding into the doing of their duties But of this exaÌ„ple we haue heard somwhat already in answering master Stapleton and we shal haue more agayne in M. Saunders fourth Chapter and therfore I reserue my selfe to the larger answere of it To this he addeth an Item of Iosaphat saying Itemque c. And also Iosaphat the king of Iuda distinguishing both powers sayde to the Leuites and the Priests Amarias the Priest and your Bishop stil gouerne in those things that perteine to god Moreouer Zabadias the sonne of Ismaell who is the captayne in the house of Iuda shal be ouer those workes that perteyne to the office of the king Beholde other thinges perteyne to the office of the Bishop and other to the the kinges office This we haue beholden alreadie in Master Stapletons obiection of the same and there may you M. Saunders beholde the answere And thus muche agayne for the vse of both these powers Now thirdly for the end therof saith M. Saunders Of the ende of both powers not the last but the middle ende that the ciuill power toucheth nought but this lyfe Christ saith Feare not theÌ„ that kil the body but they can not kill the soule And agayne the Apostle willeth vs to pray for kings those that are in authoritie that we may hue a quiet and peaceable life A quiet life therefore is the last ende of the ciuill power dwelling without the Churche But of that which is in the Church it is not the last but yet the proper ende it is VVhyle in the meane time the eccl. power belongeth to the lyfe to come as Christ hath sayde whatsoeuer ye lose on earth shall be loosed in heauen To this distinction of the endes of these powers I answere it is false not only the laste ende as he graunteth but the meaner endes also of the ciuill power in the church of Christ stretche further than this lyfe I appeale to the Princes institution and office Deuter. 17. I appeale to all the doings of the godly Kings Iudges and ciuill magistrates described in the scripture I appeale to Constantine the great that thought religion to be the chiefe ende of hys gouernment Yea I appeale to the places that euen héere M. Sanders citeth for his purpose â–ª manifestly wresting â—… mayming that of S. Paule to Timothie For he sayth not onely Ut quietam tranquillam vitam agaâ—…us That we may leade a quiet and peaceable life and there endeth but he addeth further withall in omni pietate honestate in all godlynesse honestie In which two words chiefly al godlinesse what is included is at large declared against master Stapleton But before this place M. Sanders citeth the testimonie of Christ that the prince can do no more but kill the body I answere Christe makes not the proper ende of the Princes power to kill the body but rather as you said before out of S. Paule to saue it To kill it is an accidentall tude of his power yet Iwisse Christ spake not there onlye of ciuil Princes but as muche agaynst the tyrannie of the highe Priests or any other that woulde persecute the ministers of Christ to death as your Pope you his chaplaynes do But I pray you M. sand may not an ill Prince wrest his authoritie to destroy the soule also with maynteyning Idolatrie false religion In déede he can not kill the soule for properly it can not be killed But that kind of killing that the soule may suffer which is sinne and damnation the rewarde of sinne with the one striken of the deuil by malice and wounded of him selfe by errour with theother striken of God by Iustice and deserued of him selfe by sinne may not the ill Prince make his power be a meane therto and may not an ill priest on this wise kill the soule as wel and sooner than he I wot what your pope Pius 2. was wont to say Malâ—… medâ—…ci corpus imperiti sacerdotes animam oâ—…cîdunt Ill Phisitions kil the body but vnskilfull Priests kill the soule You say your power stretcheth to the life to come In déede M sand the true eccl. power stretcheth to the life to come I feare me yours doth stretch to life as ye say but not to come but onely to the present life of the body but to death of body and soule both nowe and to come for euer Besides al this I appeale euen to your owne selfe M. sand that affirme the ciuil power in the church of Christ to stretch to farre further more proper endes thaÌ„ this life for in your fourth chapter folowing ye haue this quotation Christianâ—…rum regna leâ—…ularia non sunt Christian kingdomes are not worldly Wheron ye haue these words Moreouer the kingdomes of the faythfâ—…ll Princes whose people feare â–ª God are not altogither earthly or worldly for in that parte that they haue beleeued in Chryst they haue as it were lefte to be of the worlde and haue begonne to be members of the eternall kingdome For although the outwarde face of thinges which is founde in kingdomes meere secular be in a Christian kingdome Yet sithe the spirite of man is farre the moste excellent parte of him and the whole spirite acknowledgeth Christ his king and onely Lorde I see nothing why Christian kingdomes ought not to be rather iudged spirituall according to their better parte than earthly And this is the cause why now so long since those which gouerned the people of God were wont to be anointed of his ministers no otherwise than were the Prophetes and Priests For euen the kings them selues also are after a sort â–ª partakers of the spiritual ministerie wheÌ„ they are anoynted Not that they shoulde do those thinges that are committed to the onely priestes hereto orderly consecrated but that those thinges whiche other kinges referre to a prophane and worldly ende these kinges shoulde nowe remember that they ought to directe to an holy ende For when they them selues are meere spirituall it is fitte that they shoulde wyll that all their thinges shoulde also be accounted as it were spirituall Loe M. Saunders in these wordes ye confesse farre other proper endes and farre other estates also in the ciuill power of Christian Princes than this lyfe of the body and the quiet tranquillitie therof And therfore what néede further witnesse when your selfe are not onely contrarie to your selfe but also beare witnesse agaynst your selfe Now wheÌ„ M. Sanders hath thus prosecuted these three differences of these two estates he collecteth his conclusion saying But if the ecclesiasticall power differ from the ciuill in the originall in the vse and in the ende and so well the beginning of the ecclesiasticall power as the vse and ende is farre the more worthy shall they not of wise men be iudged mad which either confounde these powers
vvere in times past the Leuitical priests yea rather sith the Apostle treating of the Ministers of the nevve Testament conferring them with the olde Leuites sayth that they ministred death and the letter that killed but these minister the spirit which quickneth and righteousnesse and therfore the ministers of the nevve Testament are more vvorthie than the olde Leuites vvhat maner of king shal vve thinke him to bee vvhiche contemning the ministers of the nevve Testamente calleth himselfe the supreme head of his Christian kingdome and that immediatly vnder Christ This comparison Maister Saunders of the ministers of the olde and nevve Testament rightly vnderstood wée acknowledge The nevve is more vvorthy than the olde but the vvorthinesse and glory of the nevv ministration that saint Paule speakes on is spirituall and not outvvard glory For although the ministers of the olde Testament had outwarde glory and some of them by especiall calling had the visible supreme and ciuill gouernement although seldome yet the ministers of the nue testament are by Christ as your owne selfe haue confessed flatly forbidden it Vos autem non sic but you shall not be so And therefore where ye woulde haue them of no lesse dignitie meaning of outvvard glory and gouernment or else your example holdes not they are of farre lesse dignitie therein notwithstanding in a spirituall and invvarde glory they are againe of a farre greater dignitie than the olde Which spirituall dignitie if any King shoulde contemne you might then well demaunde vvhat maner of king he were and we woulde answere you hée were a wicked King but as these are two distinct dignities the spirituall dignitie of the minister and the visible supremacie of the King so may they be and are with vs well and godly vsed both of them Where both the Prince hath the outward dignitie of supreme head or gouernour vnder Christ and yet the ministers spirituall dignitie is not onely no whit contemned but hath his honor yelded due vnto him And therefore we denie not that which followeth For if he acknowledge not the Ministers of Christe ouer him he can not be blessed of them VVherevpon neither can he be pertaker of the sanctifying spirite whose ministers they are We graunt Maister Saunders that the Prince humbly receiueth their blessing and is partaker of the holy spirite of God whose ministers they are in these actions Wherein the Prince acknowledgeth them to represent God and is vnder them But what hindreth this that in other respectes they againe are vnder him and he their supreme gouernour but Maister Saunders procéedeth saying Dauid cryeth and nowe ye kings vnderstande and be ye learned ye that iudge the earth apprehend discipline least the Lorde waxe wroth and ye perishe oute of the right waye But if kings must be learned then so farre forth they must be vnder For he that is learned is learned of some maister and is scholler to him of whome he is learned the disciple is not aboue his maister but in that thing that he learneth of his maister of necessitie he is inferior That kings ought to be learned we gladly confesse and are glad that you confesse it althoughe againste your wylls for ye would rather haue them altogither vnlearned whom ye haue so long detained in blindnesse But why woulde ye haue them nowe learned forsothe bicause you would onely be their maisters and so they shoulde be still your vnderlings not onely in learning suche ill lessons as you woulde teache them but vnder pretence of teachers to be their gouernours too True it is in that the teacher teacheth he is aboue and in that the learner learneth he is vnder â—…ut the teacher is not aboue nor the learner vnder in other things Thoughe Moyses learned of Iethro yet in gouernement Moyses was aboue him Thoughe Dauid learned of Nathan yet in gouernement he was aboue him Thoughe Ozias learned of Iudith yet in gouernement he was aboue hir And so all princes that are taughte of their schole maisters their scholemaister maye be the better in learning but he is the worser in authoritie And thoughe he be the maister in knowledge yet he makes euen his knowledge wherby he is maister to serue the Prince also Yea although the Prince be not his maister in learning yet in all causes of learning the Prince hath a generall supreme gouernement to sée by his lawes euery kinde of learning maintayned in his order to forbid naughtie artes to be learned to appoint such suche an order methode to be taught or learned as learned men enforme him is good and easie to the attaining of learning to appaynt scholes and learned scholemaisters for learning and to giue them lawes statutes and stipendes for the maintenance of learning all this may the Prince doe by his supreme authoritie ouer all learned persons and in all causes of learning althoughe he himselfe be altogether vnlearned and can not one letter on the booke Althoughe woulde to God all Princes were learned not as the Papistes woulde haue them but as Dauid was and exhorteth all Princes to bée And thus as thys sentence makes nothing in the worlde for him so hys example thereon makes verye muche againste him But for all thys argumente be thus simple he wyll loâ—…de vs with further proues saying Sithe therefore it is sayde to the Apostles Go teache ye all nations and sith vnder the names of nations the kings of them are comprehended and Byshops and Priests haue succeeded the Apostles in the office of teaching truely in the offyce of teachyng the Byshoppe is greater than his king so farre is it off that the king can be the Bishops hed in all things causes VVhich title notwithstanding is not onely of these men giuen to a king but also by publique decree of late in Englande giuâ—…n vnto a Queene To reason froÌ„ teaching to gouerning is no good teaching M. SauÌ„ders If ye teach this doctrine theÌ„ your Pope should haue little gouernment for God wot he teacheth little being often times vnlearned and alwayes to proud to teache If ye say he teacheth by others so caÌ„ a prince too And though he could himselfe teache and would also teach the truth and not suppresse it yet sith ye say he succedes the Apostles but in the office of teaching he is no furder superior than he teacheth by your owne reckoning Neither would this superioritie be denyed him of any that he ought to teache if he in dâ—…de succeded the Apostles But if the succession of the Apostles consist in teaching as here ye confesse then hath not the Pope to crake muche of succeeding Peter and Paule that teacheth not as Peter and Paule did as woulde to God he did and all priests or Bishops else Whiche if they did and taught truely this woulde augment and not diminishe the Princes supreme authoritie yea and the Quéenes too Maister Saunders for in gouernement before ye
had not deliuered vs from it and yet sée if these Papistes that can so narrowly spie and proll at euery note in king Henry and kings Edwards dayes can in Quéene Maries dayes espie anye one of these great beames that were such apparante tokens of gods wrath that all men sawe and felt what euents succeeded the refusall of this title and the yéelding it to the Pope nerehand the cleane subuersion of this Realme if we may iudge by sequels Now after Quéene Marie he comes to the Quéenes Maiestie that now God be praised most prosperously raigneth ouer vs. But vvhen very many giuen to heresies vvere offended at this notable modestie of the Queene neither vvould they yet vnderstande his Counsell in gouerning his Churche God brought to passe that Marie of happie memorie being dead the kingdome of England should deuolue to such a vvoman as novve vvriteth hir selfe The supreme gouernesse in all matters and causes asvvell ecclesiasticall as secular That yet so at the length by the successe it selfe men of hard harte and obstinate necke mighte marke hovv euill king Henry tooke this office vpon him the vvhiche of his heire and successour could not duely and orderly be fulfilled For to whom it is not permitted to teach vvhich is the most necessarie office of an ecclesiasticall Head hovv shal she performe those greater offices that are occupied in the chastisement and correction of them that ought to teache the people or shall she vvhich is vnvvorthie that she should hir selfe teache publiquely in the lovvest degree moderate and reprehend vvith lavvful authoritie other publique teachers in the highest degree or if she can not lavvfully reprehend them shall she yet be lavvfully supreme gouernesse of the Church I omit here the things that in these yeares vvhich are last passed haue bene I knovv not hovv vncomely done and preached in Englande vnder such supreme heads of the Church I spare the dignitie of theÌ„ that gouerne Another time if God vvill I vvill handle them particularly hovve greatly both from the lavve of God and from the sentence of the auncient Churche and from righte reason that state of a common vveale is farre in vvhiche any king arrogateth to himselfe the office and name of the supreme head of the Church Is your part so false and weake of proues Maister Saunders that it can win no credite but by discrediting of ours with sclaunders and yet we woulde pardon this in you ascribing it either to some passion of choler against your aduersaries or to blinde affection of your selues that ye call verie manie of vs giuen to heresies hard harted and obstinate necked which are termes fitter to muster in M. Stapletons coÌ„mon places than to stuffe vp M. doctor Saunders volumes howe they redownde vpon your selues let other iudge â–ª that will reade and view of both But if we forgiue you this for our parts shal we stil suffer you to raile vpoÌ„ sclander the Lordes annoynted saying she arrogateth to hir selfe the office and name of the supreme Head of the Church speaking at randon withoute limitation of the Churche as the Pope doth arrogate to himselfe and taketh on hir to be an ecclesiasticall head and publique teacher of other that should teach hir these are too too infamous sclauÌ„ders of hir Maiestie that claimeth no such title nor attempteth any such thing What supreme gouernement is ascribed to hir highnesse we haue tolde you a thousand times but I sée ye will not vnderstand it bicause ye would of set purpose sclander it But to knit vp your argument of the euent and sequele of the Quéenes Maiesties raigne ye say many things haue bin done and preached in England ye cannot tell hovv vnsemely â—… thinke euen the same M. Saunders ye can not tell howe â—…ndede But howe vnseemely a thing is this for one of your â—…rofession to chalenge ye cannot tell what nor howe ye set owne nothing but vnder a pretence of sparing vs to bréede â—…et a furder sclaunderous suspition ye threat vs that ye will â—…serue theÌ„ til a furder leisure that is to say ad Kalendas graecas til â—…e shall first know them and then be able to proue them in the meane seasoÌ„ ye take the wisest way to say such ther are but what they are ye cannot now tell ye wil learne theÌ„ out and tell vs another time but tell the worste ye canne ye shal neuer be able to tell of any fals doctrine preached and by the Prince approued to be preached nor of anye wicked facte allowed by publike authoritie to be done No Maister Saunders in all the Quéenes Maiesties raigne ye can neuer be able to proue any suche things but in the raigne of your Popes we can proue many such things as whordome committed and maintained murder done and maintained Idolatry vsed and maintained and infinite errors preached and maintained by publique authoritie among the Papists As for the Quéenes maiesties raigne that now is if the euent and sequele may make an argument God hath so blessed it maugre all your spites and practises that no Realme christian hath florished like nor Englande more at anye tyme The Lord be praised for it and for his mercie sake long continue it that hath giuen so goodly a token of his well liking hir Maiesties supreme gouernment The thirde Chapter The argument is that Princes can not iudge nor define in causes Ecclesiasticall OF those errors that are about the povver of kings and magistrats the secoÌ„d error is of theÌ„ that thinke kings are not in dede the chief heads of the Churches in vvhich they raigne but in certaine causes Ecclesiastiall to bee euen as vvorthie members as Bishops â–ª for although in one certaine thing as in the office of teaching they preferre Bishops before kings yet partly in another Ecclesiasticall matter as in deposing a Byshop from his seat or in moderating any synode they preferre kings before Bishops partly they vvill haue it free for kings that almoste in euery ecclesiasticall matter they may knowe and decerne as Iudges Of the confutation of whiche errour this is the reason that I should shewe in euery cause of the ecclesiastical lawe that is to be knowne and iudged Kinges to be so muche in the place of priuate men that this trial can not of the ecclesiasticall Iudges be committed vnto them Although I denie not but that of some facte that perteyneth to the eccl. lawe the knowledge may be committed to Kinges and Magistrates But before the eccl. cause be known the king may orderly intermeddle his authoritie to that ende that a quiet place may be graunted where the Bishops should iudge And also that the Bishops may be called at a certayne day to that place And that in the meane season whyle the ecclesiasticall cause is knowne the publique peace yea euen in the assembly of Priestes may be conserued To conclude after the cause knowne and iudged of the Pristes the king either by the sworde that he
beareth not in vayne or by some other bodily punishment may correct him if any man shall refuse to obey the Priestes sentence Therefore we denie not but that bothe before and about and after the Bishoply iudgement there are some partes of kinges but in the office of iudging kings can do more than can priuate men For either of them can bothe giue counsell and shewe what they thinke good but neither of them can define what the diuine or eccl. lawe declareth in that matter VVhiche thing thus declared let vs nowe come to the proofe of the matter it selfe All this then either néedeth none or little answere M. Saunders béeing barely anouched without any proofe to the whiche ye are not yet come but onely declare what ye will denie or graunt to Princes Your graunt we take and sée ye go not from it But will all your fellowes yea wyll your Pope him selfe graunt so muche that the Emperour shall by his authoritie appoynt the certayne place and day where and when the Bishops shal holde their Councels It was wont to be so in the olde time But will your Pope suffer this nowe and that kinges shall do the lyke in their kingdomes Nay M. Sauâ—…ders he will mislike of this and say ye graunt too large a thong of another mans leather howesoeuer you would by qualification eate your grauntâ—… agayne cleane contrarying your selfe ascribing no more to Princes than to priuate men And yet agayn you graunt that bothe of them may giue counsell and shewe what they thinke good in ecclesiasticall matters although they can not determine them Goe to master Saunders till you bring your proofes we will take this graunte also of your liberalitie that Princes may giue counsell and shewe what they thinke good A good manie of your side will not graunt so muche nor you but for a countenaunce sake neither Althoughe yée doe them open iniurie to compare them qualle beeing publique estates to priuate menne As for your determination of Gods law what you meane thereby when yée shewe your meaning playner we will aunswere to it Nowe to your proofes Master Saunders proofes in this Chapter kéepe this order first he alleageth the reasons for his partie Secondly he aunswereth oure obiections Hys firste reason is this Those things that are of God man can not dispose them otherwyse than if God gyue vnto them suche authoritie â–ª but the causes of faythe chiefly of all other are of GOD bycause faythe is the moste necessarie gyfte of GOD that no man can obtayne to him selfe by any force either of nature or arte the causes therefore of fayth can not be iudged of other than of them to whome God hath giuen that power I aunswere the partes of thys argument be true 〈◊〉 the conclusion noughte for there is more in the conclusion than in the premisses â–ª The conclusion shoulde haue 〈◊〉 Therefore 〈◊〉 can not dispose the causes of fayth otherwyse than if God giue them suche authoritie Howebeit we simply denie not M. Saunders conclusion but would haue him distinguish what he meanes by iudgeing 〈◊〉 he meane disposing causes of fayth otherwise than God hath already in his word disposed them or else his argumente hathe no sense nor sequele then the conclusion as it is not proued so is it apparant false Neyther giue we suche iudgement to Princes or to any other creature for suche power God hath giuen to none Althoughe the Popishe priestes falsly clayme suche power to dispose matters of fayth otherwyse than God disposed them But master 〈◊〉 will proue hys conclusion on thiâ—… wyse But God hath giuen suche power to certayne men and not at large to all Christian people Therefore none haue it but they The antecedent he proues from Saincte Paule Ephesians the fourth For God hathe ordeyned some Apostles other Prophets other Euangelistes other Pastors and Teachers to the ediâ—…ying of his mysticall body whiche is the Churche But other hee made as it were sheepe and lambes that they shoulde bee edifyed by their pastors and teachers and too whome their pastors shoulde attende that they should not be caried awaye with euerie blaste of doctrine by the subtiltie of man. I answere agayne as before If he meane by iudgeing â—…eaching with sounde iudgement it is true and this senâ—…ence well applyed but if he meane as his principall â—…roposition was whereon all dependes Disposing thinâ—…es of faythe otherwise Then wée denie the anteceâ—…ente and the conâ—…equence too As for thys sentence â—…roues no suche iudgement giuen to any of these persons but rather confutes it as not to edifie but to destroy and to be caried away by the subtiltie of men with euery blast of doctrine if men might dispose otherwise of fayth than God him selfe hath dispoâ—…ed Nowe vpon this sentence of S. Paule for Pastors be reasoneth thus But Pastors only iudge what is fit or not fit for the sheepe For to conclude that sheepe are indued with equal power to Pastors this were nothing else but to take away the differeÌ„ce that Christ hath set betweene the Pastors and the sheepe and the thinges that he hath distinguyshed to mingle and confounde them Kinges therefore and Magistrates if they be counted sheepe in the floâ—…ke of Christ as in deede sheepe they are iudge not togither with the Pastors The argument is thus made formall Pastors do onely iudge what is fit or not fit for the sheepe But Princes are not Pastors but sheepe of the flocke of Christ. Ergo Princes do not iudge what is fit or not fit for them The maior he proueth thus To conclude that the sheepe haue equall power with Pastors is nothing else but to mingle and confounde and take away the difference that Christ hath set betweene the Pastors and the sheepe But if Princes should iudge the sheepe should haue equall power Ergo For Princes to iudge were to mingle confound and take away the difference that Christ hath set betweene the Pastors and the sheepe First to the maior I answere he siftes the similitude of a shepherde and shéepe too narrowe For although in some resemblaunces it holde yet is it not simply true that the Pastor onely iudgeth what is fitte or not fitte for this kinde of sheepe He him selfe confesseth before and after agayne confesseth that the priuate man or Princes may giue counsell and priuate iudgement And S. Paule speaking not of the pastor but of the spiritual man that is of the sheepe of God sayth Spiritualis omnia iudicat the spiritual man iudgeth all thinges And Christe biddes the people beware of false prophets which can not be without iudgement Neyther is this sufficient proofe of the maior that he alleageth to contende that the sheepe hath equal power is to confounde Christes distinction Wée graunte this it were so But this wée denie that héereby the sheepe is made to haue equall power For the iudgement of the pastor is one thing
naughtinesse of the argument We graunt that to iudge aright of Ecclesiasticall matters is a great gift of God but that the iudgemeÌ„t of ecclesiasticall matters is onelie to be restrained to binding and losing as you here define what you meane by iudging in matters of faith this is a manifest falsehood True it is that binding and losing can not rightly be withoute iudgement nor withoute right iudgement and therefore your Pope and you doe erre so often herein both binding that that should be losed and losing that that should be bound errante claue as ye terme it your key erring and erring also not onely in things to be bounde or losed but in the power it selfe of binding losing too Yet notwithstanding binding and losing and the iudgement requisite in binding and losing are two distinct and seueral things and iudgement reacheth furder to other things also euen in the Priest himselfe besides the Princes iudgement And therefore as this definition of iudgement in matters of faith is preposterously brought in for ye oughte before to haue defined what ye ment by iudgemente so is it false for other matters of faithe require iudgement besides binding and losing Now where you say this power commeth not of the principles of our corrupt nature but of the free mercie of God you say truth But that ye adde the mercie of God is made manifest vnder the time of the newe testament partlye by the law written partly not written is spoken ambiguously For that Princes iudged in matters of faith was also made manifest in the olde Testament but that Princes haue power to binde and lose we graunt is neither manifest nor couert neither in the olde or newe As for the newe lawe to be deuided into written and not written is another error and impertinent to this question Your vnwritten lawe of the new Testament we stand not vpon But to affirme that by neither way written or vnwritten no power is giuen to kings in Ecclesiasticall matters that we denie and your self haue rather confuted it thaÌ„ hither to confirmed it But to confirme it ye bring out this reason Neither were thene at the beginning any Christian Kings to whom Christ shoulde haue committed any power nor the Apostles gaue any rule according where vnto the kings should iudge of Ecclesiasticall causes That there were no Christian kings then is not materiall For by this rule they should be no defenders of the faith neither bicause Princes were not theÌ„ defenders of it But that the Apostles gaue no rule whereby they should iudge is false For whosoeuer should iudge shuld iudge by gods word and this rule Christ and his Apostles gaue in generall But that Princes mighte iudge is both proued from the olde Testament and by the text that M. Saunders himselfe citeth out of the new yea by that he saith immediatly For if any man say kings are appointed iudges in a cause of the faith only bicause by Baptisme they are made spiritual meÌ„ who iudge all things and the spirites do trie those things that are of God this in dede I graunt to be true in the kynde and maner of the priuate but not of the publique iudgement For it is another thing when thou art a member of the Catholike Church nor preferrest thy selfe before thy pastours what is necessarie for thee priuately to Iudge and this the vnction teacheth and another thing to take vpon thee power to teache others and to prescribe to thy Pastors what they ought to do or teache when thou art not called to the publique ministerie of the Church as Aaron was We know there is a difference betwéen priuate and publique Iudgement But that this place of S. Paule The spirituall man Iudgeth all things is only to be vnderstoode of prinate Iudgement is but the priuate iudgement of M. Saunders But it is well that he graunteth priuate iudgement to euery Christian man Neither is it any reason then it shuld be debarred irom any Christian Princes neither is it anye reason that the Prince although in his priuate Iudgement â–ª rightly iudging a matter of faithe to be true shoulde not approue set forth the same publiquely by his princely authoritie And so his priuate Iudgement directs his publique Iudgement For a Prince is not only a priuate man but a publique man also not that he may doe all things of his owne priuate or publique Iudgement nor take vpon him the publique ministerie of the pastour in teaching being not called as Aaron was for this is not ascribed to the Prince bicause he giueth a publique Iudgement in respect he is a publique person but his Iudgement is a publique approbation and establishing of that that is alreadie by others Iudgement â–ª iudged to whome the discussing appertaineth In which discussing althoughe the godly learned clergie being called as Aaron was haue the greatest skill and charge of Iudgement yet the lay men suche as are also learned and godly haue a publique Iudgement too Or else why saith Panormitane we shoulde more beleue a lay man alleaging scripture than the whole councell besides but nowe the truth being once founde out by these learned Iudgements the Princes publique Iudgement as it called them together as it gaue them their charge so it prescribeth what the pastors ought to doe and teache therin without any preiudice to the spirituall pastors Iudgement in the function of his doing and teaching Now hauing thus set downe his owne assertions he will enter on the other part to confute our obiections And first he alleageth this reason of the protestantes In all the olde Testamente we sée gouernors and Kings both to haue prescribed to the priests what they ought to doe in ecclesiasticall matters and also to haue remoued them froÌ„ the ministerie that haue negligently done their dutie To this obiecton M. Saunders answere is this that this reason holdes not from the olde Testament to the new If this came so to passe in the olde Testament saith he yet no reason shuld compell that the same shuld be so in the new Testament sith the reason of the eccl. gouernment is changed And are you changed too M. Saunders that saide before after say make all your booke of it that the ecclesiastical kind of gouernment hath bene alwayes one and that is a viâ—…ble Monarchie euen from Adam to Pope Pius â–ª 5. and said that if the gouernement be changed the Churche must needes be changed tâ—…o and made the gouernement of the olde Testament to be a figure of the new But now that you are beaten with your owne arguments you say they hold not by reason the ecclesiasticall gouernment is changed But I see Maister SauÌ„ders you woulde deale with vs as the riche man dealt with his poore neighbor When the poore maÌ„ complained saying I beseeche your worship be good vnto me for my Cowe hath goared your Bull. What hath he quoth the riche maÌ„
therof so let this by the way be noted that he giueth Princes most free Principaliue 〈◊〉 thoâ—…e causes that 〈◊〉 not the faith and Religion of Christ. But to place good Bishops and pastors in gods Churche to remoue euill Bishops and pastors from gods Church â—…o puâ—… Idolatrie out of gods Gods Church to set forth suâ—…h 〈◊〉 seruice as is to edifie gods church to coÌ„mand the word of God to be read in the vulgar tongue to reforme Ecclesiasticall abuses to punishe whordoms to allow as honorable matrimonie in all men to call councels to commaund the Sacraments to be vsed as Christ ordeined theÌ„ to ouersée al estates degrées of persons in gods Church to do in al things to the glory of God to the publique preseruation of the Church to the faithful administratioÌ„ of their particular callings doth not diminishe the faith and ReligioÌ„ of Christ Therfore Christian Princes haue most free principalitie that is to say supreme gouernment in al these eccl. so wel as in ciuil causes Now that he hath granted to Princes thus much which coÌ„prehendeth all the question he declareth on the other side what he exempteth from the Bishops but so subtily that vnder pretence of debarring them from hauing authoritie in those things that he ascribeth to the Princes principalitie he both reuoketh his former graunt to Princes and conueyeth all those things vnto the Bishops Neither Pastors of the Church saith he doe intermeddle their authoritie in those things saue nowe and then to admonishe them and giue theÌ„ faithfull counsell neither doe we defend all dominions and kingdomes to be giuen by gods lawe euery where and in all things to be subiect to the pastors of the Church but in those causes onely which would hinder the faith and Christian saluation except they were partly forbidden as diuorces vsuries and such other sinnes which the natioÌ„s committe without punishment partly commaunded as giuing of almes the defence of neighbours and chiefly of the poore the fortifying of the Church of Christ and Christian Religion and to conclude all other things which the lawe of God commandeth and prescribeth as necessarie to saluation In these wordes Maister Saunders speaketh cleane contraries the Princes haue the moste frée principalitie in all causes that diminishe not the faith and Religion of Christe and the Bishops doe onely admonishe and giue councel and yet he ascribeth all to the Bishops both to punishe all that would hinder the faith and Christian saluation and to fortifie all that would furder it What is not here againe giuen to the Bishoppes and what is not here againe taken from the Princes yea their Kingdomes and all in some places and nothing left for Princes for what else meaneth he by this we defend not all dominions and kingdomes to be giuen by gods lawe euery where and in all things to be subiecte to the pastors of the Church As who should say some are subiect to them by the law of God where the lawe of God is flat to the contrarie that no kingdomes are subiect vnto them But as Maister Saunders contrarie to gods law maketh some kingdomes subiect in all things vnto Bishops so maketh he all kingdomes subiect vnto them in matters of diuorces vsuries and such other sinnes saith he as the nations commit without punishment Which as it is a sclaunder to Christian Princes as mainteining such sinnes which rather they punishe and Popishe Prelates both permit and commit without punishment of them so he ascribeth these punishmentes to the Popishe Prelates for nothing but for aduauntage as also the gyuing of Almes defence of neighbours and chiefely of the poore As thoughe that Princes did not or could not doe these things but the Priestes who by suche fetches gat all things into their clutches Maister SauÌ„ders hauing thus séemed at the first to yelde vnto Princes great authoritie and streight to take away all againe from them and giue it vnto themselues least Princes might worthily thinke themselues abused he mitigateth the matter with this reason Neither ought it seeme strange to anye man that kings in these matters should obey Christ for this standeth theÌ„ chiefly vpon sith otherwise they cannot get eternall life As thoughe your Pope Maister Stapleton and you hys â—…riests were christ Good reason it is they shuld obey Christ otherwise as you say most truely therein they cannot get eternall life But sith you are not Christ this reason holdeth not But you will say you be Christs and represent christ Woâ—…ld to God you were M. Saunders and not rather â—…tichristes For if you were Chrittes you woulde oâ—…ey your Prince And not haue the Prince in authoritie of gouernement obey you whom you ought to obey since a Christian Prince is Christs also and in authoritie â—…f gouernment immediatly to Christians representeth Christ. Thinke you that Princes can not get eternall life excepte they obey your Pope so you tel them in dede make manâ—…e Princes afraid therof by which meanes you haue gotteÌ„ their gouernement from theÌ„ And thus prâ—…tending the name of Christ you saye VVâ—…en therefore we say that earthly kings ought to be vnder Christes ministers we say onely this that they no otherwise can be saued neither receiued of Christian people to a kingdome or oughte to be suffred in the administration of a kingdome than iâ—… they both doe and pretermit those things that the lawe of Christ commaundeth to be done and pretermitted If you meane the obedience to the ministers of Christ no furder than this to doe and 〈◊〉 those things that â—…he law of Christ commaundeth to be done and pretermitted theÌ„ were the controuersie at an end for this obedience was never denied But before you went furâ—…er and would hauâ—… the Prince to doe and preteâ—… those things that the lawe of the Pope and his Priests would haue done and pretermitted 〈◊〉 you repâ—…e they be 〈◊〉 of Christ their 〈◊〉 is the 〈◊〉 of Christ this would be proued M. Saunders for it is 〈◊〉 of the chiefest pointes in controuâ—…sie As for Christs lawe we graunt that excepte the Prince obey it he can not be saued But that he which in any one poynt doth any thing which Christs lawe commaundeth nâ—…t or 〈◊〉 any thing that Christs lawe commaundeth is not to be receiued 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 people to a kingdome or bâ—…ing receiued ought not to be â—…tred in the administration of a kingdome is a perilouâ—… doctrine For who should thâ—… be a king or who shoulde noâ—… be turned oute of his kingdome For who offendeth not herein chiefely expounding the law of Christ as your selues â—…ed in what daunger and thraloâ—…me to you should kings become so that it were better be a begger and beg his bread than be a Christian king and rule and be ruled on this wise if these your rules were true But now to helpe the matter you will expound what ye meane by the â—…aw of Christ. But what the
life for me he can not be my Disciple much more then must he hate his kingdome and be readie to leaue his kingdome and all the good in the vvorlde for Christe or else hee is no Christian. You say true M. Sanders he must forsake and hate al for Christes sake But that he must do this for your Byshoppes sakes when they will say it is expedient he should so do that I finde not in the words of Christe and yet muste you beware howe you expounde that saying For he is bound also to loue and to kéepe to the vttermost all these thinges in their kindes not to renounce nor hate theÌ„ except they hinder him from Christ whom he must prefer before al things But this loue to Christe in principall maye stande togither with these loues wel inough Neither is he any more bounde to resigne his kingdome than to resigne his vvife into the Priestes hands Nor if he abuse his kingdome the Prieste can no more turne him out of it than he can if he abuse his goods and his vvife turne him not of his dores and take his goodes and his vvife from him and kéepe hir himself or giue hir vnto an other This can not the Byshop do although the Prince and euerie man be bounde to lose al for Christes cause Yea the Byshop is bounde hereto as well as any other And God knowes how some of them kepe this bonde and yet wil not they léese one halfpennie for Christes sake howsoeuer they breake it But the kingdome is a â—…oule moate in their eye and therefore the King poore soule must lose all and they must take it from him But now to Master Saunders other arguments Moreouer the kingdomes of faithfull Princes whose people feare God are not altogether earthly or worldlye For in that part that they haue beleued in Christ they haue as it were lefte to be of this worlde and haue begonne to be members of the eternall kingdome for although the outwarde face of things which is founde in kingdomes meere secular be in a Christian kingdome yet sith the spirite of man is farre the more excellent parte of hym and the whole spirite acknowledgeth Christ his King and onely Lorde I see nothing why Christian kingdomes ought not rather to be Iudged spirituall according to their better part than earthly And this is the cause why nowe long since those which gouerned the people of God were wont to be annoynted of his Ministers no otherwise than were the Prophetes and Priestes For euen the Kings them selues also are after a sort partakers of the spirituall Ministerie when they are annoynted not that they should do those things that are committed to the onely Priestes herevnto orderly consecrated but that those things which other Kings referre to a prophane and worldly ende these Kings should now remember that they oughte to directe to an holye ende For when they themselues are made spirituall it is fitte they should will that all their things should be counted as it were spirituall But nowe are spirituall things so vnder the Church of Christ that the Church may freely dispose and decree of them to the profite of the whole mysticall body Syth therefore the people of Israell woulde needes desire a King to be giuen them Samuel by the commaundement of God toke a cruse of oyle and powred it vpon the heade of Saule and kissed him and sayd beholde God annoynteth thee to be the Prince ouer his inheritaunce VVhich to me seemeth to signifie euen as though it had bene sayde except the Lord annoynted thee to be the Prince thou couldest not rightly and orderly be the Prince ouer hys people whiche hee hathe chosen and reserued out of all the worlde to be as it were peculiar to hymselfe For in that that is gods no man can take power to him selfe without Gods permission But God anoynted Saul to be the Prince not by himselfe but by Samuel his minister wherfore whosoeuer ruleth ouer the Christian people which is no lesse acceptable to God than was the people of the Iewes hee besides the right which he receyueth of God by the consent of the people ought also to acknowledge his power to be of Christe by his Ministers if so be that he be suche an one that worshippeth the Fayth of Christe VVherevpon to thys day all Christian kingdomes are annoynted of some Christian Bishop or some other Minister of God referring therein their principalitie not onely to the people and so vnto God but that moreouer by the Priests of Christ they referre it vnto Christ whose Ministers they are For Pope Leo wrote elegantly vnto Leo the Emperour Thou oughtest to marke stedfastly the Kingly power not onely to bee giuen to thee to the gouernement of the worlde but to be giuen thee chiefly for the succour of the Churche that in suppressing naughtie attemptes thou shouldest bothe defende those things that are well decreed and restore the true peace to those things that are troubled If Maister Saunders woulde goe plainely to woorke and make his argumentes shorte and formall and woulde rather shewe his Logike than his Rethorike the truth or falsehoode woulde appéere the sooner the reader perhappes mighte be the lesse delyghted but withoute perhappes hee shoulde be lesse beguyled and the aunswere mighte bée the clearer and the shorter â—…ll this long argument in effect is this All spirituall things are so vnder the Church of Christ that the Church may freely dispose and decree of them to the prosite of the whole mysticall body All Christian Kings and kingdomes are spirituall things Ergo all Christian Kings and Kingdomes are so vnder the Church of Christ that she maye freely dispose and decree of them to the prosite of the whole mysticall body And firste Maister Saunders trauels in the Minor. To proue Christian Kyngs and Kyngdomes spirituall that bycause the better parte of them is spirituall therefore hée seeth nothyng why they oughte not to bee rather iudged spirituall Yea Kings were woâ—…e to bee annoynted no otherwyse than Prophetes and Priestes not to doe theyr actions but to referre all theyr affayres to holy and spirituall dedes And can you sée this Maister Sanders Now how chance you coulde not seeit before when you made the Christian Princes ciuill power to be no better than the Turkes or Tartars to stretch no furder thaÌ„ to the body a quiet lyfe haue you now espied not onely the endes wherevnto they rule but the estate also itselfe by reason of the better parte to be spirituall what hath made you see so cléerely nowe forsooth now is now and then was then You were pleading then that the Christian Princes ciuill estate was so farre different and vnlike that Princes might not meddle in spirituall matters and therfore then was fitte oportunitie to denie that Christian Princes Ciuill power had any spirituall thing in it But nowe we are in another argument that Priestes maye order and dispose
Kingdomes and depose Kings as they shall thinke expedient and to proue this â–ª we must saye they be in the Churches power and to proue that wee must saye they are spirituall â–ª and so spirituall men may deale with spirituall thyngs And for this reason we can sée no cause nowe but that Christian Kingdomes are spirituall that we spirituall men which are the Church might haue the disposing of them Well then I see also Maister Saunders that for aduantage you can and you can not see And play seest me and seest me not But who seeth not that hath any indifferent eyes that this is but legerdemain and that you speake flat contraries in one thing although you turne your tale to other purposes But let go that you saw not before let vs loke what you see in Princes now Nowe you see that they are spirituall And why so not bicause they doe the spirituall actions of the Priests but bicause of their better part that is of the spirite of God and bicause of the end wherto they driue al their things to become as it were spirituall Why then M. Saunders your eyes mighte serue you if your hart could serue you to see this withall that although the Prince can not do the spirituall actions of spirituall persons yet this hindreth not that he may notwithstanding be a gouernor ouer ecclesiasticall persons in causes ecclesiasticall and maye ouersee them both And if you can see the one and not the other surely your sight is partiall But newe M. Saunders loking another way will haue Princes no furder spirituall than in that they are vnder the Church And here making the Maior the Minor the former the later by a figure called Hysteron proteron the carte before the horse he will proue that all spirituall things are so much vnder the Churche of Christ that the Church may freely dispose and decree of them to the profite of the whole mysticall body and so Kings and Kingdomes as is sayde before beyng spirituall things are so muche vnder the Churche of Christ that she may freely to the profit of the whole mysticall body dispose and decree of Kings and kingdomes But first Maister SauÌ„ders we denie your Maior For although in certaine things it be true to wit in such things as are left to the disposition of the Church that is to order and dispose such things as of their nature are indifferent to the profite of the whole mysticall body or any part thereof for these things are called spirituall things not properly in their owne nature but as in spirituall causes the spirituall persons vse them and yet all this is not so freely lefte to the Churches disposition that some principall persons in the Church as the Prince or the Pastors haue not the chiefest stroke in the disposition of them For if they were so free that euery member in the Churche shoulde haue his nay or yea in disposing of theÌ„ when would they be disposed And if at length they were it would peraduenture fall out in the end so little to the profite of the whole mysticall body that it woulde be rather the hinderaunce and disquieting of it But besides these spiritual thinges there are a great many other of whiche some in déede are méere spirituall as the worde of God the Sacramentes of Christ the Articles of fayth the Commaundementes of life and all suche thinges as God hathe either expressed in his worde or is necessarily conteyued in it These thinges béeing spiritual are not so vnder the churche of Christ that the churche may freely dispose and decree of them But they statly dispose and decree of the churche and the churche can not alter nor swarue one iote from them Whiche if she shoulde she shoulde not profite hir selfe for she is the whole mysticall body but destroy hir selfe and dissolue the whole body and euery part therof And such as these things are is the estate of a King and kingdome whiche althoughe it be not so méere a spirituall thing but so farre foorthe spirituall as your selfe confesse yet bicause it is the ordinaunce of God and God hath in his worde set foorthe the office of a King and declareth that the setting vp and pulling downe of Kinges and the alterations of kingdomes belongeth to him selfe and neuer gaue that authoritie to his Churche muche lesse to his Ministers to set vp and depose Kinges and alter kingdomes Kinges therefore and their kingdomes no more than other spirituall thinges are not so vnder the churche of Christe that she maye freely dispose and decree of them to the profite of the whole mysticall body Neither hathe the whole mysticall body any more thraldome or lesse fredome that Kings and kingdomes are not so vnder hir or that she maye not freely dispose and decree of them as she shall thinke moste profitable to the whole mysticall body than she hathe more thraldome or lesse freedome bicause she can not alter nor dispose the other spirituall things Yea in this case the Churche léeseth lesse libertie than in the other for the freedome of the Churche â–ª béeing a mysticall body is cleane another matter pertayning to the conscience and is a mysticall freedome from the tyrannie of Sathan from the cursse of the lawe from the bondage of sinne from ceremonies and humayne constitutions and not from obedience to kinges and to haue superioritie ouer them and libertie to depose them and to translate their kingdomes Whiche freedome and superioritie is not spirituall but carnall and worldly And if the Churche had it she woulde not onely bring kinges and kingdomes but euen hir selfe in bondage and therefore Christe hathe barred it Whiche freedome bicause the Popishe Churche aspireth vnto and claymeth and holdeth ouer â–ª kinges and kingdomes she is not the true Church of Christ that they boast of but rather a Iewishe Synagoge dreaming vpon an earthly Messias or rather a Persian or Turkishe Temple that measureth the freedome and dignitie of Gods Church by the pompe and mighte of the worlde to depose kings and dispose of their kingdomes at their pleasures But to proue that kings and kingdomes pertayne not to the free disposition of the Church but of God I will desire no better prooues nor example than euen M. Saunders heere brings foorthe Sithe therefore sayth he the â–ª people of Israell would needes desire a king to be giuen theÌ„ Samuel by the commaundement of God tooke a cruse of oyle and powred it vpon the head of Saule and kissed him â–ª and sayde beholde God anoyâ—…teth thee to be the Prince ouer his Inheritaunce which to me seemeth to signifie as though it had bene sayde except the Lorde anoynted thee to be the Prince thou couldest not rightly and orderly be the Prince ouer his people whiche he hathe chosen and reserued out of all the worlde to be as it were peculiar to him selfe For in that that is Gods no man can take power
be the pastor So that this place as it maketh nothing for the power of the Priests ouer the goods and bodily things of the faithfull so it maketh much here in against them For if S. Paule in such matters of goods and bodily things rather than they should not haue a Christian iudge woulde haue them chose among themselues euen a contemptible person how much more now when the Church hath faithfull iudges and Christian Princes it ought in such controuersies to run to them for Iustice rather than to the Priests and Bishoppes that are of another calling Moreouer least any shoulde say that the Churche of Christ hath nothing to do with the businesse of this worlde he sayth expressely do ye not know that the saintes shall iudge of thys world and if the world shal be iudged by you are ye vnworthy to iudge of small things know ye not that we shall iudge the Angels how much more worldly things Behold the Apostle reasoneth from the spirituall power to the temporall on this wise To whom that which is more is lawfull to him is lawfull that which is lesse But we Christians shall iudge of the world and we shall iudge the renegate Angels and the Deuils themselues the which commeth by the spirituall power â–ª wherby we be made the sonnes of God and the coinheritors of Christ much more therefore may we exercise secular iudgements VVherby it appeareth that secular things are both inferior â—…o spirituall and are not estranged from the spirituall power but may light vnder it chiefely then when the matter is in hand of punishing or iudging those men that are the meÌ„bers of the Church of Christ. 〈◊〉 saye not Master Saunders that the Churche of Christ hath nothing to doe vvith the businesse of this world this is but your sclaunder We say that the spirituall Ministers of the Churche of Christe haue not so to do with such vvorldly businesse that they maye turquise all the vvorlde and alter the states of vvorldly kingdomes and occupie them selues about vvorldly affaires in such vvorldly dominion as you pretende they maye Whereto you abuse shamefully Saint Paules sayings He speaketh there of vvorldly matters and you applye it to all iudgementes yea to the iudging of a kingdome â–ª But you replle he saith the Saints shall iudge the worlde and the Angels vvhiche are greater thinges than kingdomes howe muche more then kingdomes that are lesser things Trowe you Master Saunders he speaketh there of such iudging the vvorlde that they should iudge like chiefe Iustiâ—… of realmes and kingdomes whether this or that Prince shall enioye them or shall be dispossessed of them No M. Saunders she speaketh of no suche thing The worlde shall be iudged in them as Chrysostome well noteth Iudicabunt non ipsi iudices c. They shal iudge â–ª not they themselues sitting in iudgemeÌ„t exacting an accouÌ„t God forbid but they shal coÌ„demne the vvorld the vvhich signifying he saith and if in you c. He saith not of you but in you As who should say the iust condemnation of these that are the vvorldlings shall shine in the saluation of you that are the Saints This therefore proueth 〈◊〉 such worldly iudgemeÌ„t as you pretend Secondly you abuse S. Paule as though in speaking of the Saints he spake onely of the spirituall Pastors wheras he speaketh in generall of the whole congregation Are Saintes and Christians only Priestes with you this is both manifest wresting of S. Paule and shamelesse arrogancie in your selues But you say the Churche hath it by the spirituall povver vvherby vve be made the sonnes of God and coinheritors of Christe We graunt you Master Saunders But doth this spirituall povver belong onely to Priestes you say it appeareth hereby vve maye exercise secular iudgementes whome meane you by this vve Master Saunders your selues that are the Priestes But S. Paule speaketh of Christian people and not of the Pastors only yea least of al of the Pastors Wherevpon saith Haimo out of Gregorie on these wordes choose him that is contemptible Secundum Gregorium c. According to Gregorie by contemptible persons vvee may vnderstande secular men hauing the knovvledge of humaine lavves and in their personages being honorable who in comparison of them that vnderstand the diuine lawes and pierce the mysteries of the holy Trinitie are contemptible and simple although they be faithful â–ª And according to this sense vvee muste reade it affirmatiuely bicause suche are to be appointed vvhiche of the Canons are called the Sonnes of the Church I sprake it to your shame bycause althoughe I commaunde it not you ought to haue done it And therefore he commaundeth such to be ordeyned bycause they that ought to serue on the altare and meditate Diuine Sermons and giue the vvorde of preaching to the people ought to estraunge themselues from secular businesse and iudgements Likewise saithe your Cardinall Hugo The glosse calleth them contemptible that are not apt to great offices in the Church as to preach and teach And this is an argument that my lord the Pope ought not to appoint Masters of Diuinitie to be Iudges of temporall things To your shame saith the glosse that those should examine earthly causes that haue gotten the vvisedome of outvvarde things But those that are enryched vvith spirituall giftes ought not to be entangled vvith earthly businesse that vvhile they be not driuen to inferior goods they may be able to attende on the higher goods Hovvebeit this must greatly be cared for that they that shine in spiritual goods forsake not vtterly the businesse of their vveake brethreÌ„ Thus your Papists theÌ„selues are of a contrarie iudgement to you M. Saunders besides all your Popes and Councels Canons that the spirituall Pastors should not be these Iudges in secular things that here Saint Paule speaks on To wrest therefore these wordes spoken of any faithfull Christian only to your Priestes to wring this sentence from the state of the Churche then being without any faithfull Magistrate to the time now when they haue many and those not choseÌ„ of theÌ„selues but ordeyned of the higher Magistrate to wrythe it from the iudgements and taking vp of their petit quarels to the deposing or setting vp of Kings or altering kingdomes is clean beyond the meaning of S. Paule an euident violence iniurie to Gods word Now vpoÌ„ this sentence thus wrested you procéed to your argumeÌ„t saying For their goodes are so muche subiecte to the ecclesiasticall povver that it is lavvfull for the Churche of priuate men to ordeine Magistrates that should iudge of secular causes and not only of ecclesiasticall But no man can passe more righte to an other than he hath himselfe Therefore the Churche vvhich hath povver to make them Iudges that vvere priuate men before hath much more it selfe ouer those secular causes receiued povver by the Ministers of God that as Aaron are called to the
can be made among ChristiaÌ„s that either the bishops of any kingdom much lesse the B. of Rome for al kingdomes ought to know the causes of kings Emperors whether they be iust or vniust This generalitie can not iustly be inferred on such a specialtie For neither al kings estates 〈◊〉 like to this kings estate nor all Bishops estates like to this Bishops estate as by the causes aforesayd appeareth Fourthly I answer that as here is inferred no ordinary rule for Bishops to haue knowledge in kings Emperors cau ses froÌ„ the coÌ„trarie here is inferred an ordinary rule for kings Emperors to haue knowledge of B. causes For eueÌ„ at the kings 〈◊〉 althogh he wer an infaÌ„t had no more skil of religioÌ„ thaÌ„ of gouernmeÌ„t the text saith they put the crowneâ—… vpon him and gaue him the lawe in his hande And so saythe Lyra the testimonie that is the law wherein he was ordeined ought to studie and meditate and keepe it and cause it to be kept True it is that the high Prieste did teach him and the King did well so long as he was taught of so godly a father And therevpon maye well be inferred that Byshops maye teach Kings that vvhich is right before the Lorde But this teaching of the King inferreth no publike gouernement of the King which the Pope claimeth and M. Saunders pleadeth for The authoritie of teaching the King and the authoritie of gouerning the King are â—…arre different authorities That of teaching we graunt to Ioiada and to al Godly Byshops not to teach what they will but that vvhiche is right before the Lord. And to sée that they do this the Prince hath the lavve of God giuen into his handes so well as the crowne set on his head to shewe that although the Byshops mustâ—… teach true doctrine and Godly exhortatioÌ„ yet must the King haue knowledge to ouersée that it be taught â–ª as well much more than any other matters of his kingdoms What shall we say then to the popishe Byshops which will not giue the lavve of God into the Princes handes but wring it out of his handes that he should not knowe it but blindly followe such false doctrine and naughtie examples as they woulde teache him are these Byshops like to the Byshop Ioiada And if this king fel to Idolatrie when he wanted this good teacher how shall that King doe that neuer had suche a teacher and yet for all this teaching of Ioiada that was as it were a father to the King the King notwithstanding while he continued good bothe commaunded all the Priestes and taught them how they should deale in their oblations collections reparations and other thinges belonging to the Temple And Ioas saide to the Priestes all the siluer of thinges dedicated that be brought to the house of the Lorde c. Let the Priestes take it vnto them euery one of his acquaintance and they shall repayre the broken places of the house vvheresoeuer any decaye is founde And in the 23. yeare of King Ioas the Priestes had not amended that vvhich vvas decayed in the Temple Then King Ioas called for Ioiada the Priest and the other Priests and saide vnto them VVhy repaire ye not the ruines of the Temple Novv therefore receiue no more money of your acquaintance except ye deliuer it to repaire the ruines of the Temple Thus did the King not only knovv of the Priestes causes but called them before him yea euen his vncle Ioiada the high Priest also appointed an order vnto them how to bestow their offerings And when they were negligent therein he rebuked theÌ„ reuoked his former ordinance except on their amendement Neither did the Priests no nor his vncle Ioiada the highe Prieste grudge or grumble hereat nor sayde that the offerings were theirs not his to dispose nor told him they were his superiors but as his inferiors most humbly obeyed his ordinances Al vvhich things fithe they vvere vvell done is not novve true according to the sense of the diuine Scripture that we may make a better ordinarie rule herâ—…on for Kings and Emperors to knovve of Byshops causes than for Byshops to knovve of Kings and Emperors causes If you replye this was but a money matter I answere yet was this money oblations and offerings But will you graunt Princes thus much to make ordinances howe all your money offerings shall be vsed when ye shall gather them and when not of whom ye shal take them and howe ye shall bestowe them â—…ay 〈◊〉 will neuer doe this for money is the chiefest thing ye shoote at no penie no pater noster all your eâ—…cl causes depende so on money offerings that as good ye gaue the prince authoritie in al ecclesiastical matters as let him deale thus with your money offerings as Ioas did with theirs But doth your own glosse expound this no further than to money matters Ioas saithe your glosse both in this name and in this vvorke signifieth Christ for it is interpreted the strength of the Lorde He commaundeth the teachers that they should take all the money that is offered into the Lordes house of the passers by to vvit whatsoeuer spirituall knovvledge or good vvorke is brought into the Lords treasorie that by the offices of the preachers it may be bestovved on the repayring of the spirituall Temple that vvhatsoeuer he shall finde torne by errour or hurte by Vices they should repaire least the multitude of hearers should perishe by the doctors negligence â–ª Here this facte of the King is compared to the representation of Christe and to the ouersight of all eccl. matters So that if Kings will account the studie of the Lawe of God as well to belong vnto them as their crowne if they will looke vnto know and examine the causes of the Byshops and their reuenues and appoint them orders to repair the ruines of the Lords temple and sée that the preachers lay out their talents of spirituall knowledge good workes towards the building then should kings truely represent Christe and be indéede the strength of the Lorde bycause they haue the Lords power authoritie thervnto And thus this example better considered maketh more for the Kings authoritie ouer the Byshops than for the Byshops ouer the Kings authoritie Fiftly I answere that althoughe a Godly Byshop be a sequester betwéen God the Prince betwéene the Prince and the people in prayer in the Sacramentes and in preaching yet â–ª is he not a sequester betwéen God and the Prince or betwene the Prince the people in matters of the kingdome least of all he may sequester him from his kingdome And though he be the Angell of the Lord in his message if he be a Godly byshop for otherwise he is the Angell of SathaÌ„ yet is the King the Lordes anoynted or the Lordes Christe in authoritie but the Lords Christ in authoritie is aboue the lordes Angels in message therefore the King
sayings Stapl. 62. b 63. a M. Sta. vnlyke similitude to disburthen M. Fecknham Howe falsely M. Sta. chalengeth vs for heretikes for leauing oute an article of the common crede in the Apologie How cunning M. Stap. himselfe â—…s in the coÌ„mon creede M. Stap. notes the Bishop and other for graÌ„mar and â—…o what a Grammarian he shewes himselfe to be Contr. Valent. lib. 1. cap. 2. lib. 3. cap. 4. De praescript haereticorum Fol. 423. li. â—… Diuis 159. cap. 4. M. Stap. taketh on him to teache the bishop his Catechisme Stap. fol. 423. M Sta. in saying the Common crede leaueth out these words And in Iesus Christe our Lorde Stapl. 423. a M. Sta. leaueth out againe in saying the coÌ„mon Creede these wordes crucified dead and buryed Stapl. 423. a Aâ—… other article left oute by M. Sta. in saying the common creede That he sitteth at the right haÌ„d of God the father almighty Whether Cardinall Hosi ' be iustly chalenged to maintain the SweÌ„k feldians heresiâ—… or no. Stap. 63. 2. Stap. 63. â—… The Dâ—…natists did not simply refuse the oldâ—… â–ª testamente as the Manichees did but subâ—…ly as the Papistes do Aug. de haereâ—… Ad quod vult Stapl. 63. a. b The seconde motiue that moued the Bishop to chalenge M Feck to followe the Donatisteâ—… Supra pag. Diuis 18. pag. 11. How the Donatists and Papistes denie the Princes gouernement in Ecclesiasticall cau ses and refâ—…rie it onely to the clergie What the Papistes meane by the Church M. Sta. reâ—…oketh his grauÌ„t The Donatists exclaming on the Princes for Ecclesiasticall causes argueth that the supreme gouernemente of them was in the Princes Stap. 63. b Stapl. 63. b M. Stapl. example of the Princis punishing an honest man for a theefe A theefe in christen religion Iohn 10. M. Sta. simili tude returned vpon himself M. Stapl. letteth go the testimonies of S Aug. alleaged by the Bishop Stapl. 63. b Winton pag. 12. b. The speciall 〈◊〉 oâ—… christian princis Further examples of the old Testament alledged by S. Aug. for princes dealing in ecclesiasticall matters Stapletons order to this di uision Stap. 65. a Number of testimonies Whereto the former testimonies of S. Aug. were alleaged Wherto serue the authorities present Here M. Stapl. confesseth that Princes ought to make lâ—…wes for the â—…rance of Christes religion The Papistes denying the Queene to make lawes and say no catholike denyeth it denye them selues to be catholikes The Papistes subtill meaning in theyr plaine speaches The holde of a Papists worde and the holde of a weat Eele by the tayle Howe trimly the Papists and we do here agree in words See a subtill â–ª Papist At a dead life well fare a papists shift M. Stapl. renueth an olde knacke of Arrius Howe finely M. Stapl. can turne his tale Stapl. 65. a. 65. b Belyke M. Sta. wantes good neighbours Stapl. 65. b Here M. Stapl. bewrayeth all the â—…etche of his former graunte Howe craâ—…tyly M. Stap. limited the Princes making of lawes All M. Stapletons ioly grauÌ„t to Princes is nowe come to nothing but to make them the clergies slaughtermen and droyles M. Stapletons fayâ—…e texte and foule glose Stapl. 65. b. How S Augustine acknowledged the Prince M. Stap. telleth of all this that August wrote but what this all this is he duist not vtter August contr Gaudent epist. 2 li. 2. câ—… 26. Epist. 50. The testimonies of S. Aug. to proue the princes dealing in ecclesiastical causes to reach further than making lawes for punishing heretâ—…kes Epist. 48. M. Stapl. wold returne S. Augustines words vppon vs. Stapl 65 b. How sure the Papistes make all pointes againste the Protestantes Stap. 65. b Howe Princes punished deprauers of religion in saint August tyme. Stapl. 65 b. The Princes lawes for blasphemers The Princes carefull prouiding Stap. 65. b M. Stapletons strong proues Stapl. 65. b. Contempte of Sacraments Popish Sophistâ—…e can make 7. of 2. Stapl 65 b. Councels Matth. 26. Ioho 11. The Papistes maynteyn coÌ„demned doctrines 1. Tim. 4. Stap. 65. b Howe the Bishop called the Papists Donatistes Howe darke and subtilly M. Stapl. speaketh How farre the examples of the olde Testament stretche to directe christian princes M. Stapl. will proue that we denie that whi che we affirm What it is that we affirme of the Princes authoritie Stapl. 66. â—… Stap. 65. a Who bee the true Donatistâ—… for saying Princes maye not punishe in causes of Godâ—… religion M. Stapl. himself cleereth vs of that he falsly burdeneth vs. Stapl. 66. a Howe Luther sayd Faith can not be forced Croyses and Turkishe warres The question whether Princes maye punishe heretikes by death How the Papistes proue vs to be heretikes The Princes dutie where any are chalenged to be heretikes An inuectiue gainst M. Fox M. Foxes boke and B. Iewels great eyesores to the Papists Stap. 66. a. Sir Thomas Hitton priest False slaunders and malicious misseconstructions of the faithfull Luc. 23. Matth. 26. Iohn 19. Act. 6. Hewe the Papistes deale with the Protestantes and their articles Math. 5. The vneuen dealing of the Papistes Sir Thomas Hitton priest no Donatist Sir Iohn Oldcastell Stap. 66. b. â—… Stap. 66. b. M. Stapletons weake argument Maister Foxes synceritie in the Papistes falshoodes Sir Iohn Oldcastle proued no Donatist Sir Thomas More himselfe mislyked the punishment of manslaughter in many offen ceâ—… The aunciente punishment of of heretikes Declar. Erasmi tit de puniendis her 76. 77. The myld spirit of popishe Bishoppes and Abbots S. August opinion of the pu nishement of heretikes The Circumcelions Punishement by the purse Banishment The popishe crueltie The difference herein betwen Erasmus and the Popishe Bishops S. Hieroms opinioÌ„ herein and the resons mouing him thereto The Papistes in crueltie come neerest the Donatistes Eras. decla tit de pun hâ—… The mercie of the Gospell Though the Gospell taketh not awaye politike lawes or punishmentes yet is there a 〈◊〉 betweene them and the Gospell The Sorbonistes coÌ„fession In declar bras tit de pun haer Howe the Papistes yet neerer resemble the Donatistes Stap. 66. b. 67. a Stap. 67. a How M. Feck yeldes not to the examples of the olde testament and yet yelding to the new Testa ment is comprehended by it though he comprehended it not Pag. 14. a. M. Stapleton cap. 7. fol. 68. a M. Stapl. order in this diuision Stapl. 68. a. M. Sta. now at the length is driuen to graâ—…t Princes some regiment in Ecclesiasticall causes M. Stapleton graunteth also to Princes supreme gouernement in all ecclesiasticall causes In natural and ordinarie propositions the indefinite betokens the vniuersall Stap. 68. â—… â–ª M. Stap â–ª confesseth that the Bishop hath proued the full issue in question betweene M. Fecknham and him Stap. 68. a M. Sâ—…apl grant of all that the Bishop hathe hitherto alleaged Esai 49. Whether the Bishops examples and allegations beeing granted of M. Stapl. reache home or no. The prince supreme gouernour of all and
Popes cru 〈◊〉 to his cap tiueâ—… vnlike the cuâ—…sie of Elizeus Elizeus caused the kings messanger to be kept out of the 〈◊〉 4. Reg. 6. Elizeus resisted not the King in keeping out his Mesâ—…anger Lyra in 4. Reg. 6. Caleâ—…anus in 4 Reg. 6. Elizeus cursed the children that mocked him and the Beares deuoured them 4. Reg. 2. Glossa cum 〈◊〉 â—…a in 4. Reg. â—… Sâ—…nd 87. Zacha. 13. Deut 17. 2. Cor. 3. Where faithful princes wanted 〈◊〉 Prophet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mâ—…nt to â—…od The obedience to the 〈◊〉 oâ—… nee 〈◊〉 to Christianitie by M sand ar gument No neede of myracles Zacha. 13. Zacha. 13. The prophecie for punishing of false Prophetes The punishment of false Prophetes belongeth to the Prince The popishe clergie be such false prophetes as Zacharie prophecied of The fountaine of grace Idolatrie Teaching of lyes Ignorance Hipocrisâ—… of rough garmâ—… The detection and punishmeÌ„t of popery prophecied by Zacharie The wresting of the comâ—…oÌ„ alleaged place Deut. 17. Zacharie 11. Zacharies prophecie of the Pope Lyra in Za. 11. The Pope an Idol Glossa cum Lyra. sand pag. 87. Deut. 17. 1. Cor. 3. The ministration of the popish ministerie sand pag. 87. 2. Paraâ—… 26. Aug. Quest. lib. 2. q. 40. The example of king Ozias attempting to offer incence The pope readier to casâ—…e Princes out of heauen than to bring the into heauen In what case a Bishop maye excommunicate a â—…icked Prince The Priestes withstoode the king but not with any bodily violence â–ª 2. Paâ—…al 26. Caietanus in 2 Paâ—…al 26. The Pope dealeth not with Princes as Azarias did 1. Tim. 3. Gal. 2. This king was neuer deposed for all this offence sand pag. 87. Leuit â–ª 13. 1. Cor. 10. 2. Paral. 26. The similitude of leprie compared to heresie Aug. â—… Quest. 2. Q. 40. A similitude of man is no manifest testimonie of the vvorde of God. This similitude is applied of the Papistes to other things The Priest did but discerne of the disease and not dispossesse men of their goods The excluding of the Leper from coÌ„panie belongeth not to the priest Num. 5. The texâ—… of scripture 〈◊〉 alleagâ—…d This law was Iudicial and so vve are not bounde to it nor it is any figure to vs. S. Paule vvrested Haymo in 1. Cor. 10. Rom. 15. Math. 13. 1. Cor. 7. The morall or mysticall signification of separating the leper separareth not the â—…king from his kingdome The example of king Ozâ—…s confuâ—…es M. sand figure This figure maketh agaiÌ„st popish priests not against protestant Princes sand pag. 87. 3. Reg. 11 â–ª 3. Reg. 12. Malach. 2. The example of Ioiada the high priest that caused Athalia to be killed Ioas to be made king M. sand confuse citing of the scripture No king is here deposed but an vsurper killed Lyra in 4. Reg. 11. The doings of Ioiada were vpon such occasioÌ„n that they can not be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 example The close nou rishment of so as by the high priest his vncle in the Temple was extraordinarie Lyra in 3. Reg. 11. The close doing of Ioiada argueth he had no ordinarie authoritie In what respect this doing belonged chiefly to the high Priest. Lyra in 3. Reg. 11. That which Ioiada did he did it not by his owne authoritie but by consent of the prin ces nobilitie Wherein Ioiadaes facte may be drawne to an example In what respect ioiada had knowledge of the Kings causes The King might haue knowledge in the Byshops causes 2. Paral. 23. 4. Reg. 12 How the king delt with the priests for their â—…blations Glossâ—… in Lyra. Ioas gouernement ouer the priestes stretched fâ—…ther than to money matters Howe the B. is a sequester betweene God the Prince The B the Lords Angell or Messanger and the Prinâ—…es the Lordes Christe or annoynted The euent of 〈◊〉 off al wâ—…rres and â—…umults if the Pope might de pose and set vp all Princes The hurlie burlies that the Pope haâ—…h made The popes wiâ—… kâ—…d peace if it were admitted M. Sand arguments out of the new Testament Mar. 5. Iohn 2. 1. Cor. 5 â–ª 1. Tim 1. Act. 5. Faultes escaped in the prince Faultes Corrections good ministers good ministers 232. 〈◊〉 24. the summâ—… the 〈◊〉 316. 〈◊〉 23. the reasâ—… the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 377. 〈◊〉 8. secundâ—… secundâ—…m 386. lin 12. tamen 〈◊〉 tamen â–ª 391. lin 14. also â—…ll 〈◊〉 403. lin 21. renouned 〈◊〉 408. lin 16 â–ª that is that it is â–ª 408. lin 34. in the in 〈◊〉 410. in the 〈◊〉 treaâ—…ise 〈◊〉 432. lin 24. peccatum peccati 469. lin 10. together thether 512. lin 10. godly 〈◊〉 541. lin 32. let hiâ—… to let him 577. lin 12. dealing deale 581. lin 20. whom against whome 593. lin 14 â–ª yuo you 599. lin 2. et despetto de diâ—… in dispetto di dio 599. lin 9. yemay he may 605. lin 19. causes is causes as 617. lin 5. as who though B. as though the B. 625. lin 31. though follow though it follow 632. lin 28. giuing giuâ—… 636. lin 9. reddit reddite 641. lin 10. not not onely 636. in the margine but yet â—…r elsâ—… 649. lin 1. so long so farre 652. lin 22. Emperors the Emperors 674. lin 11. about about it 705. lâ—…n 12. as are 717. lin 2. that that that yet 721. lin 8. is simply â—…s simply 731. lin 19. grautned graunted 732. lin 19. or if the or if in the. 767. lin 30. prioris prioribus â–ª 788. lin 22. which was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was not 824. lin 5. you youâ—… 83â—… lin 16. â—…ereth 〈◊〉 955. lin 10. not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lin 12. the breast their breast 〈◊〉 lin 34. can do more câ—… do no more 865. lin 22. qualle equally 866. 〈◊〉 15. thereof thâ—… of 881. lin 21. authoritie of 〈◊〉 authoritie and. 897. lin â—…4 is a Cathoâ—… 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 â—…08 lin 26. inconuenâ—…t incompetent 915. lin 14. ye the yet he 925. lin 16. that 〈◊〉 that it is 928. lin 25. and in deede and then in deede 959. lin 20. or couetousnesse our couetousnesse 1024. lin 2. or ambition our ambition ibidem lin 2. or dainteâ—…es our dainteynes ibidem lin â—… sprake speake 1042. lin 17. that that that 1045. lin 2. the that 1056. lin 1. there thereon 1107. lin 22. from so from ibidem lin 32. Manie other faultes are escaped in the printing by reason the author vvas not alvvayes present but they are such as thou maist gentle reader thy selfe correct them