accounted chiefe in succeeding the Apostles whose life and conuersation was most Apostolicall Wherefore as the auncients gaue this honour to the Bishops of Rome for their godly liues to call them the Apostles successours so when they found other Bishops who in vertue excelled they gaue these titles in as great honour to them as euer was giuen to the Romane Bishop For we finde these titles as much or more giuen to others then wee can finde giuen to the Romane Bishops Basill writing to S. Ambrose saith of him that he doth hold the sterne of that great and famous ship the Church of God and that God had placed him in the primary and chiefe seat of the Apostles Of the Bishop of Rome it is hard to finde in all antiquity a more honourable title then this is of Ambrose Now if S. Ambrose helde the sterne of that ship the Church of God and if hee sate in the chiefe and highest seat of the Apostles it must follow that an inferiour seat was reserued for the Bishop of Rome as long as Ambrose liued and that hee was esteemed the chiefest in Apostolicall succession who came neerest the Apostolicall vertues or that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 presidents alike in Christs Church And throughout all the Epistles of Basil wee obserue that albeit hee wrote often to the Westerne Church wee finde no such honourable mention of the Bishop of Rome but somewhat sounding to the contrary For in the tenth Epistle he noteth the pride and ambition which then began to be espied in the Bishops of Rome complaining to Eusebius Bishop of Samosata that the Church could haue no help from the pride and ambition of the West Then concerning this title to be called the successour of the Apostles it was somtimes giuen to the Bishops of Rome onely in regard of their vertue godlinesse and faith which once appeared in those Bishops And so it is giuen to Ambrose and to other Bishops In this sense we vnderstand those titles giuen by Sidonius Appollinaris Bishop of Aruern to diuers Bishops in France in his time For writing to Pope Lupus as he calleth him a Bishop in France he testifieth that hee had liued 45 yeares in the sea Apostolicall Insede Apostolica nouem iam decursa quinquennia And againe to the same man he saith Pater officium quod incomparabiliter eminenti Apostolatuituo sine fine debetur c. The same title he giueth also to Fontellus another Bishop in France declaring that therein he greatly reioyced Quod Apostolatus vestri patrocinium copiosissimum conferre vos comperi And writing to the same Fontellus Ego quoque saith he ad Apostolatus tui noticiam accedâ—… 23. Then by this Title Apostolicall no Iurisdiction will rise to the Bishops of Rome seeing the same is giuen to others as well as to them Neither was there then in the Bishop of Rome any power aboue others neither in the whole Church was câ—…actiue power found To prooue this Eusebius reporteth a Storie which we wish to bee well obserued because it maketh an euident proofe of the Iurisdiction of the Church which thing wee seeke The Storie is thus Paulus Samosatenus Bishop of Antioche taught that Christ was a meere man To represse this wicked heresie a Councell was gathered at Antioche The Church was then without the helpe of a Christian Magistrate In chiefe accompt among them that liued in the Church at that time was Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria a man for his great learning and godlinesse much renowned in the Church then and alwayes since he was so aged and weake at that time that he could not be present in the Councell but by writing confirmed the truth against Paulus the Hereticke Among them that were assembled there was Gregorius Bishop of Caesaria who had the gift of working miracles in which respect Basil maketh honourable mention of him in diuers places Dionysius was then Bishop of Rome The famous Bishops of the East had diuers meetings against Paulus the last meeting was in the time of Aurelianus Emperour about the yeere of Christ two hundred seuentie and fiue At what time Paulus was fully refuted and repressed especially by the labour industry and learning of Malchion hee was condemned saith Eusebius of all the Churches of Christ which are vnder heauen After the conuiction of this Heresie the Councell wrote to Dionysius Bishop of Rome and to Maximus Bishop of Alexandria for Dionysius died before this Councell ended and Maximus succeeded him in Alexandria and to all the Church of Christ vnder heauen The Epistle is extant in Eusebius and was directed to these Bishops that by them other Churches might haue knowledge of this thing 24. After all this Paulus Samosatenus held the Church of Antioche and gaue no place to Domnus whom the Councell excommunicating and deposing Paulus had decreed should take his place The Bishops in this case were driuen to seeke the aide of the heathen Emperour Aurelian at the suit of the Councell the Emperour commaunded that the Church of Antioche should be deliuered to him to whom the Church of Italie and the Bishop of Rome would write By this it appeareth that the Church had no Iurisdiction coactiue for when the Bishops of this Councell had proceeded as farre as they could by Ecclesiasticall censures against all which censures Paulus held the Church by force finding that without coactiue power Paulus could not be repressed and finding no such power in themselues they were forced to seeke the Emperours helpe acknowledging thereby that all coactiue power rested in the Emperor Moreouer by this we obserue the beginning of that practise which afterward drew the opinion of Iurisdiction after it For the Bishop of Rome had no authoritie then ouer other Bishops neither did he challenge any And when some fewe of that Sea did seeme to pretend some authoritie in matters of conformitie and ceremonies as Anicetus Victor and some few other they were quickly repressed by the Church were content to be ruled by the Church But because the heathen and persecuting Emperours were content for the glory of Italy to giue this honour to the Church there and especially to the Bishop of Rome that other Bishops should find fauour for his sake as appeareth euidently by this Story wherein it is recorded that the Bishops of that Councell had no meanes to helpe themselues but by the Emperour and the Emperour not regarding the cause onely to honour the Bishop of Rome referred the matter to him hence as reason was the Churches were compelled to make much of the Bishop of Rome and to seeke his fauour without which they sawe the heathen Emperours would not be drawen to doe them iustice 25. About this time Stephanus Bishop of Rome threatned likewise to Excommunicate some Bishops for rebaptising of heretickes but he was repressed by Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria Some also that were excommunicate in Africa came to Rome
conclude directly against the Emperours purposes Thus doth Socrates report the calling of that councell but Sozomen saith it was not obtained of Valens but of Valentinian 9. Besides these publique and generall Synods there were also some more priuate and particular in calling whereof the Bishops had power The Bishop of the Diocesse vsed to call a Synod of his Clergy but could proceed no farther Prouinciall Synodes were called by Metropolitanes but in a generall Synod of many Nations the Emperour had alwayes the right of calling it as a King hath the onely right of calling a Synod of those Nations that are vnder his gouernment For as the counsell of Nice was called by Constantine so were all the counsels of these next three hundred yeares called by the Emperours that gouerned at such times Theodosius gathered the councell of Constantinople against the heresie of Macedonius in the third yeare of his raigne which was the yeare of Christ 383. saith Prosper The councell of Ephesus against Nestorius was gathered by the authority of Theodosius the younger and the fourth generall councell at Chalcedon by the authority of Martianus and Valentinianus Emperours Leo the first was a great man in these affaires and hee is the fittest to certifie vs of the truth against whose witnesse our aduersaries haue no reason to except This Pope then writing to the Emperour Theodosius saith Pietas vestra apud Ephesum constituit Synodale concilium And afterward declaring his obedience and conformity thereto saith Meum studium commodaui vt Clementiae vestrae studijs pareatur And againe Ne autem pijssimi Principis dispositioni nostra videatur praesentia defuisse fratres meos misi c. he hath the same also Epist. 23. ad Theodosium Againe hee writeth to Pulcheria to moue the Emperour to command a councell to be holden within Italy declaring that he wrote to the Emperour to intreat the same Which thing hee moueth also in other Epistles And though he much desired this that the Emperour would haue beene intreated to hold a councell within Italy yet could he not obtaine it and therefore was ready to obey the Emperour attending his pleasure therein who appointed it in another place 10 Which thing we obserue the rather because our aduersaries oflate haue yeelded this as a proper right to the Pope to call councels Catholici munus conâ—…andi concilia generalia saith Bellarmine ad Romanum pontificem propriè pertinere volunt And when they are driuen by these open and euident testimonies they shift it thus as to say another may doe it by the Popes consent but if the Pope neither appoint the place nor no other by his commaundement or consent then it is no councell but a conciliable These bee vaine and friuolous shifts of Friars For it is true that the Popes consent was to these auncient councels but no otherwise then as the consent of all other Bishops They consented because they could not chuse because they were resolued to be obedient but they could not appoint either place or time For Leo could not haue it where hee would but it was where and when the Emperour appointed 11 Before the councell of Chalcedon there is the Writ of the Emperours Valentinian and Martian called Sacra to call Bishops to Nicaea But another Sacra is sent to reuoke that and to call them to Chalcedon So that all this while the Emperors rule as those that haue Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction They call councels they punish offenders of the Clergy they establish Ecclesiasticall Courts they are acknowledged the nourcing Fathers of Religion the keepers and preseruers of both Tables and of the discipline of the Church And therefore Leo writing to Constantinus Emperour who called the sixt Synod saith thus Cognouimus quod sancta vniuersalis maxima sexta Synodus quae per Dei gratiam imperiali decreto in regia vrbe congregata est c Wee know that the holy and vniuersall great sixt Synod which by the grace of God is called and gathered by the imperiall decree in the imperiall City c. And a little after Pietas vestra fructus misericordiae potestas custos disciplinae Your godlinesse is the fruit of Gods mercy your power is the keeper of discipline And againe Nec enim minor regnantium cura est praua corrigere quam de aduersarijs triumphare quia einimirum potestatem suam seruiendo subijciunt cuius munere imperare noscuntur c. Vnde diuinitus praordinata vestra Christianissima pietas c. Caput Ecclesia Dominum Iesum Christum veram pietatis regulam amplectendo c. For Gouernours ought to haue no lesse care to correct vngodly things then to triumph ouer their aduersaries for they submit their power to his seruice by whofe power they are knowne to rule c. Therefore your most Christian zeale preordained of God c. acknowledging our Lord Iesus Christ the true rule of godlinesse to bee the head of the Church Wherein the Bishop of Rome doth acknowledge first that the generall councell is to be called onely by the authority of the Emperour imperiali decreto Secondly that the Emperours power is such a power as is custos disciplinae Hee speaketh here in an Ecclesiasticall cause and of Ecclesiasticall affaires Now that power which is custos disciplinae Ecclesiae what is it but Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction This word Iurisdiction was not then worne in such vse as now it is but we see the auncients vse words counteruailing it The Bishop of Rome acknowledgeth Ecclesiasticall power and Iurisdiction to be in the Emperour when hee yeeldeth him such a power as is preseruer of the discipline Ecclesiasticall Thirdly he confesseth that the care of the Church Church-gouernment for establishing the truth doth no lesse belong to the office of a Prince then to triumph ouer his foes in warre Fourthly the Bishop of Rome as then acknowledgeth no other head of the Church then Iesus Christ as appeareth by his words To the same purpose Saint Augustine saith Diuinitus praecipi regibus vt in regno suo bona iubeant mala prohibeant non solum quae pertinent ad humanam societatem verum etiam quae ad diuinam religionem Contra Crescentium li. 3. cap. 51. That is Kings are commaunded to estalish good things and prohibite euill in their Kingdomes not onely in things belonging to Ciuill societie but in such things also that belong to diuine Religion Gregorie the great following the footsteppes of his Fathers yeeldeth the fame authoritie to the King For writing to Theodoricus King of France he saith Iterata vos per vestram mercedem adhortatione pulsamus vt congregari Synodum iubeatis This part of Iurisdiction for calling of Councels is so fully confirmed to be the Emperours right by the Aunceants that Cardinall Cusanus sure no Lutheran disputing of this priuiledge concludeth from the confessed testimonies of the Aunceants these two things First That Emperours
and Kings by their office must call Councâ—…ls Secondly that their office is likewise by coactiue power to see the things maintained and obserued which are defined in general Councels 12. Hitherto then haue we found the Soueraigne Iurisdiction alwayes in Christian Magistrates and neuer in the Bishop of Rome How then commeth the Bishop of Rome to this practise of Iurisdiction which now he claimeth Let vs here consider one Pageant of theirs which will declare the first claime and beginning of Iurisdiction which they haue so much increased since The first attempt was to winne Iurisdiction ouer Bishops the second was to get the same power ouer Kings and by that meanes ouer all These we meane to open with as much breuitie as we can and the matter will beare First then to bring Bishops of other Nations vnder their power a shamelesse deuise was plotted by the Bishop of Rome discried and reiected by the auncient Fathers that then liued but yet so closely followed afterward by the Popes that in the end it preuailed I will declare the storie as it is deliuered by their owne writers who haue collected the tomes of the Councels 13. The sixt Councell of Carthage was gathered in the yeere of our Lord foure hundred and twentie against the heresie of Pelagius it lasted sixe yeeres and more In it were gathered two hundred and seuenteene Bishops among whom was that worthy Father Saint Augustine and others of famous note as Prosper Orosius and diuers other of great vertue and learning Aurelius Bishop of Carthage Metropolitan of Affrica was chiefe In the time of this Councell three Bishops of Rome succeeding one another mooued great contention and quarell with the Fathers of this Councell for Iurisdiction which the Popes then began to claime affirming that they had Iurisdiction ouer the Church of Affrica which thing these Fathers of this Councell vtterly denied the contention began vpon this occasion 14. Apiarius a Priest of the Church of Sicca in Affrica was for his infamous and scandalous life excommunicated not onely by Vrbanus Bishop of Sicca but by a whole Synode of Bishops met together This fellow thus censured in Affrica fled to Zozimus Bishop of Rome to him he complained of wrong that the Bishops of Affrica had done him as he said Zozâ—…mus without examination of the cause vndertooke to maintaine him and admitted him to the Communion After this vnderstanding that the Bishops of Affrica were gathered in their Synode he sendeth to them Faustinus Bishop of Potentia and with him two Priests Philip and Asellus Them hee chargeth to defend the cause of Apiarius to cause the Synode of Affrica to recciue him to their Communion to excoÌ„municate Vrbanus Bishop of Sicca or else to call him to Rome vnlesse hee will reforme that is vndoe all that he had done against Apiarius Further he commaundeth them to draw the Councell to yeeld to the Iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome and to acknowledge it lawfull for any Bishop or Priest to appeale from the sentence of their Metropolitan to Rome he commaundeth them also to signifie that he sent his Legate into Affrica who might vnderstand the causes of appellants that were grieued To effect this thing the better he chargeth them to declare that the Nicen Councell hath giuen this Iurisdiction to the Bishops of Rome for proofe hereof he deliuereth vnto them in writing a counterfeited Canon of the Nicen Councell 15. Faustinus comming to Affrica with these instructions and being admitted into the Councell declared that he had from Zozimus a Commission which he called Commonitorium and withall he declared the Iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome confirmed by a Canon of the Nicen Councell Aurelius Prosident of the Councel answered let this Commission first be read which our brethren haue brought hereupon Daniel the notary reade and recited the Commission thus Zozimus Bishop of Rome to our brother Faustinus Bishop to our fons Philip Asellus Priests this businesse you know you are to doe all things as if our presence were with you nay because it is with you and the rather seeing you haue both our expresse commaund and the words of the Canons which for more full assurance we haue added to this Commission For thus most beloued brethren it is decreed in the Councell of Nice concerning the appellation of Bishops And then forsooth the forged Canon os the Councell of Nice followeth thus Placuit autem vt si Episcopus accusatus fuerit iudicauerint congregati Episcopi regionis ipsius de gradu suo deiecerint eum appellasse Episcopus videatur confugerit ad beatissimum Ecclesiae Romanae Episcopum valuerit audiri iustum putauerit vt reuocetur examen sâ—…ribere his Episcopis dignetur qui infinitima propinqua prouincia sunt vt ipsi diligentur omnia requirant iuxta fideÌ„ veritatis definiant Quoâ—… si is qui râ—…gat causam suam iterum audiri deprecatione sua mouerit Episcopum Romaâ—…uÌ„ vt è Latere suo presbyterum mittat erit in potestate Episcopi Romani quid velit quid existimet si decreuerit mittendos esse qui presentes cum Episcopis iudicent habentes authoritatem eius à quo destinati sunt erit in suo arbitrio Si vero crediderit sufficere Episcopos vt neggtio terminum imponant faciot quod sapientissimo consilio suo iudicauerit That is We thought good that if a Bishop be accused and the Bishops of that Prouince haue giuen sentence and deposed him if this Bishop seeme to appeale and flie to the most blessed Bishop of Rome and desire to be heard â—…f he thinke good to reuoke the sentence it may please him to write to those Bishops which are in that Prouince that they may diligently search the matter and iudge it truely But if he that moueth his cause may be heard againe shall by his petition intreat the Bishop of Rome to send a Legat from his side it shall be in the power of the Bishop of Rome to doe what hee thinketh best And if he decree to send some who with the Bishops of the Prouince may be present to iudge hauing authoritie from him from whom they are sent it shall be in his pleasure And if he thinke that the Bishops of that Prouince may suffice to end the businesse let him doe whatsoeuer in his most wise Councell he iudgeth best Before I proceed in this narration let some things of note bee obserued First the Bishops of Rome were now growen from the honest and godly conuersation of their Auncestours to admirable impudency that durst suborne a Canon of the Nicen Councell and publish their owne shame in the sight of the Church then and leaue an eternall monument thereof to the world for euer extant in publike Councels Secondly the ground of the Iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome is forgerie famously attempted and famously conâ—…icted at that present time And yet this practise
preuailed mightily afterward this vnblessed deuise of forgerie being attempted in a number of decretall Epistles to drawe in this Iurisdiction a practise wherof no learned Papists can speake or thinke without blushing and yet such is their miserable captiuitie that they are willing to make vse of that falshood whereof they cannot thinke without a secret confession of forgerie Thirdly the ingenuous reader cannot but see and vnderstand the vanitie of the Popes flatterers who striuing now for this Iurisdiction would blasphemously draw it from Scriptures such as thou art Peter c. And feede my Sheepe c. These Scriptures were first drawen by the forged decretall Epistles to proue the Popes Iurisdiction and are now commonly drawen to the same purpose but when Zozimus Bonifac◅ and Caelestinus began first to contend for Iurisdiction they claimed it not frō Scriptures this deuise was not then found out but they laid all the cause vpon a forged Canon of the Councell of Nice So that this is but a late kna◅erie of the Popes flatterers to countenance their newe found Iurisdiction by Scriptures 16. When this Canon was recited by the notarie the Fathers of the Councell were much offended and troubled at the absurditie thereof there were then present some of the best learned Diuines then liuing in the world they knew well there was no such Canon they neuer read it in any copies of the Nicen Councell they neuer heard of this thing before they resolued therefore not onely to denie the Canon but to refute the falshood of the Pope so famously that it might be knowen to all the world and that the Church afterward might take warning of the Romane ambition therefore they aunswered for the present thus that this Canon was not to bee found in their bookes And for a more full and sufficient examination of this matter they would send for the autentike copies of the Nicen Councell before they could graunt the Popes request To this purpose they writ a letter to Zozimus which was presented to Boniface his successour and is extant in the Tomes of the Councels 17. Boniface first receiuing these letters for Zozimus was dead before they returned pursueth the claime of Iurisdiction by corruption of the same Canon and with obstinate and resolute peruersitie maintaineth the falshood begun by his Predecessour In the meane time two copies autentike of the Nicen Canons were sent to the Fathers of the Councell of Carthage one from Cyrillus Bishop of Alexandria another from Atticus Bishop of Constantinople These copies were read but no such Canon could be found as the Bishop of Rome had foisted in the Fathers vnderstanding the fact and hauing taken the Bishop of Rome in a flagrant crime decreed that the true Canons of the Nicen Councell should be obserued reiecting this suborned and supposititious Canon This decree they sent to Pope Boniface but Gods iudgements hastily following these corruptors Boniface was dead before it came to Rome and Caelestinus next succeeding receiued it 18. Caelestinus as stiffe for this Iurisdiction as any of his predecessours maintained the cause by the same meanes resolued with shame ynough to stand for the adulterated Canon which pertinacy after open conuiction declareth that the pollicie of the Church of Rome began then to forsake religious courses and to rest vpon falshood and forgery to obtaine their willes And therefore it is not to be marueiled if the truth of Religion afterward for saked them Apiarius gaue a new occasion to the Pope to worke vpon for after that this man was receiued vnto the Communion by Zozimus and Boniface he returned to the Trabacens where for his foule and scandalous life he was excommunicated againe To recouer this disgrace he flieth to his onely refuge the Bishop of Rome then Caelestinus who receiueth him admitting him to the Communion and directeth his Legats Eaustinus Philippus Asellus to Affrica with a streight charge to draw the Councell to yeeld to the demaunds of his Predecessours for want of other helpe hee furnisheth them throughly with impudencie and inuict audacity for what other vertues were left to maintaine such a cause The Legats cōming with this Commission require of the Councell that Apiarius may be admitted to their Communion and that they would be content to submit themselues to the Romane Iurisdiction The Fathers of the Councell produce the autentike copies of the Nicen Canons which they had procured from Alexandria and Constantinople by which the Romane forgery was euidently conuinced Here began a fresh contention Faustinus resolued to execute his Commission to his vtmost power exclaimeth against the Sea Apostolike against the violatours of the Nicen Canons The Councell protesteth that they will imbrace all true Canons that they will yeeld to the Church of Rome all true priuiledges onely in the lawfull warrantable and necessary defence of their owne freedome and of the Churches freedome they must stand and therefore could not admit a forged claime without shew of truth As they were in the heat of contention the one side striuing to impose the yoke of their Iurisdiction vpon the Church the other resolued to stand close and faithfull for the freedome of the Church behold of a suddaine Apiarius the firebrand of this contention touched by the very finger of God and drawen to giue God the glory and so to end this contention falleth downe on his knees before them all and confesseth all those crimes to be most true which were obiected against him and with humble supplication craueth pardon of the Councell And so this Tragedy ended 19. The Fathers of this Councell hauing this experience of the Popes corruption and dishonestie write to Caelestinus to this purpose They intreat him not to trouble the Church by patronising such wicked men as Apiarius that he would not accept of appellations made by such scandalous and condemned men who would seeke a refuge for their wickednesse at Rome they declare that the Nicen Canonsderogate nothing from the African Church that the Fathers of the Nicen Councell sawe with great wisedome that all suits were to be ended in the places where they began that the grace of the holy Ghost should not be wanting to any Prouince that if any bee offended hee may appeale to a Prouinciall or to a generall Synode that transmaritim iudgments ought not to be admitted where witnesses cannot be conueniently produced either for sexe or age that to send any Legats from the side of the Romane Bishop is a thing found in no Synode established that the Canon of the Nicen Councell by which the Popes claimed this Iurisdiction is not to be found in the autentike copies of that Councell and therefore falsified Last of all they admonish him that hee and his successours must take good heede Ne fumosum typhu◅ saeculi in Ecclesiam Christi c. That is that they induce not the smoke of arrogancie to darken the Church of Christ which Church doth bring the light of simplicitie and
the bright day of humilitie to such as desire to see God Thus write the Fathers of that Councell to Pope Caelestinus intimating by what meanes that smoke did begin to rise to darken the Church which is prophesied in the Reuelation which came out of the bottomlesse piâ—…t like the smoke of a great furnace Vpon these reasons they make a decree to preuent his ambitious desires by which decree they forbid all appellations to Rome or to any other place from Affrica it is extant in the Affrican Councell and this it is Item placuit vt presby teri Diaconi vel caeteri inferiores Clerici causis quas habuerint si de iudicijs Episcoporum suorum questi fuerint vicini Episcopi eos audiant Moreouer it was thought good that Priests Deacons or other inferiour Clarkes if in their causes they complaine of the iudgements of their Bishops they shall bee iudged by the next adioyning Bishops c. And a little after Quod si ab ijs prouocandum putauerint non prouocent nisi ad Affricana Concilia vel ad primates Prouinciarum suarum Ad transmarina autem qui putauerit appellandum â nullointer Affricam in Communionem suscipiatur And if they appeale from them they shall not appeale but to the Affrican Councels or to the Primates of their Prouinces Whosoeuer appealeth to outlandish places shall be admitted to the Communion by none within Affrica This was not so much a new decree as the maintaining of that auncient decreed right which Cyprian doth mention testifying that it was decreed euen in his time by all the Bishops of Affrica Statutum est ab omnibus that the cause should bee there heard and examined where the fault was committed This Canon which was thus established in the Affrican Councell is for clearing of the truth and preuenting of these ambitious courses and claimes of Rome repeated and confirmed also in the Mileuitan Councell where Saint Augustine was also present For it must be obserued that the sixt Carthaginian the seuenth Carthaginian the Affrican and Meleuitan Councels were held all about this time by the same men so great was the care and diligence of the Fathers that by many Councels as it were by so many lights they might dispell the smoake of the darkenesse which they saw then rising out of the Church of Rome which smoake after those times quenched the light and couered the sight of the Church as a mist couereth the heauens 20 Thus did these worthy Fathers dispell this smoke for that time and reiect the yoake of the Popes Iurisdiction In all this businesse S. Augustine had an especiall hand and head And as long as he liued the Popes could neuer preuaile But the Bishops of Rome hauing thus once cast off all regard of truth and modesty were resolued to proceed on in this wretched course and neuer gaue ouer till at last they obtained their purpose There is an Epistle of Boniface the second written after these times extant in the Tomes of councels which whether it bee true or counterfait as much other stuffe is of this argument we are to obserue something out of it because it concerneth this question This Epistle is intituled De reconciliationae Carthaginensis Ecclesiae written to Eulalius Bishop of Alexandria he certifieth the Bishop of Alexandria of great ioy for as much as the Church of Carthage is now returned saith hee ad communionem nostram and receiueth all our mandates which by our Legates wee send them Hee signifieth that supplications must be made to GOD that other Churches may likewise be brought home to the same obedience That the Bishop of Alexandria must giue notice heereof to all the brethren about him that they cease not to giue thanks for such benefites of the heauenly fauour For saith he Aurelius praefatae Carthaginensis Ecclesiaeolim Episcopus cum collegis suis instigante diabolo superbire temporibus praedecessorum nostrorum Bonifacij atque Coelestini contra Romanam Ecclesiam coepit c. That is Aurelius once Bishop of Carthage began with his colleagues by the instigation of the diuell to wax proud against the Romane Church in the dayes of our predecessours Boniface and Coelestinus But Eulalius at this time Bishop of Carthage finding himselfe for the sins of Aurelius cut off from the coÌ„munion of the Church of Rome hath humbled himselfe and sought peace and the communion of the Church of Rome by his subscription and together with his colleagues hath by Apostolicall authority vtterly condemned all Scriptures and Writings which by any wit haue beene framed against the priuiledges of the Church of Rome 21 Whether this Epistle be forged or not it commeth all to one reckoning For if it be forged let the Bishop of Rome take the shame of the fórgery If it be the true writing of the Bish of Rome then he auoucheth that the holy worthy maÌ„ of God S. Augustine with Aurelius and the rest of his colleagues were stirred vp by the instigation of the diuell to withsâ—…and this Romane Iurisdiction We may the better beare the reproaches of the Romish Sinagogue when they sharpen their tongues and pennes against the seruants of GOD in our times seeing they laue done as much against the auncient godly Fathers For what can the late Popes say more against M. Luther Iohn Caluin or any other of the worthies of the reformed Churches then this Boniface the second saith against holy S. Augustine that he with the rest of his company were stirred and instigated by the diuell to stand against the Iurisdiction of the Romish Church Then when we denie their Iurisdiction wee denie it with the Fathers when wee are therefore condemned by the Pope and his Court we are condemned with the auncient Fathers with them we suffer with them we are reuiled and condemned The goodnesse of our cause the fellowship of the auncient Saints the warrant of the truth is able to support vs against the impotent malice and fury of these men that haue no other cause to be offended at vs then their Fathers had against S. Augustine and the rest of the auncient and holy Fathers who haue resisted the Romish Iurisdiction and therein haue left a worthy example to vs to follow their foot-steps Thus we see the Popes Iurisdiction was first attempted by forgery and afterward by falshood and tyrannie effected 22 Other Churches were afterward in time drawne to the obedience of this Iurisdiction The Churches of Rauenna Aquileia and Millane were long after this brought vnder the same yoake by Pope Stephen the third saith Sabellicus But Platina saith that Millaine was drawne to this obedience by Stephen the ninth If this be true then Millain stoode out till the yeare of Christ nine hundred and fourty And thus the quarrell for Iurisdiction was begun by Zozimus maintained by Boniface and Caelestinus but reiected by these Affrican Councels The cause was much helped by some that succeeded as Leo and
tearme it from whence all Spirituall Iurisdiction must proceed to others some adde also Temporall of Spirituall Iurisdiction Bellarmine saith all Bishops receiue Iurisdiction from the Pope The like some of them or some others teach also of Temporall power the difference which they obserue is that Spirituall power is deriued from the Pope to all Bishops but Temporall power is giuen to execute some seruice Augustinus Triumphus of Ancona who wrote about three hundreth yeeres agoe at the commaundement of Iohn 22. Pope set foorth of late by the authoritie and priuiledge of Gregorie 13. did long before the Iesuits dispute this question of the Popes Soueraigne authoritie ouer Princes since which time the Friars haue closely followed his footsteps His assertion is Omnis potestas imperatorum regum est subdelegata respectu potestatis Papae And againe in the same place Omnis potestas saecularis est restringenda amplianda executioni mandanda ad imperium Papâ—… These and the like positions are now resolutely and stiffely maintained by the Iesuits and others of that faction 3. This agreeth well with the Canon lawes which are the fundamentall lawes of the court of Rome For thus they say Nos tam ex superioritate quam ad imperium non est dubium nos habere c. That is we aswell by that soueraignetie and right which without all doubt we haue to the Empire as also by that power whereby we succâ—…ed the Emperour in the vacancie of the Empire and no lesse also by the fulnesse of that power which Christ the King of kings and Lord of lords hath in the person of Saint Peter graunted to vs though vnworthy declare all such sentences and processes made by Henry 7. void and of none effect Thus saith Clement 5. Pope against Henrie 7. Emperour To the same purpose saith Boniface 8. Pope in a Constitution of his Oportet gladâ—…um esse sub gladio c. That is one sword must be vnder another sword and the Temporall authoritie must be subiected to the Spirituall authoritie for when the Apostle saith there is no power but of God and the powers that are are ordained of God They could not be ordinated vnlesse one sword were vnder another and a little after Thus of the Church and of the power Ecclesiasticall is verified the prophecie of Ieremie behold I haue sâ—…t thee ouer nations and kingdomes to plucke vp and to root out and to destroy and to throw downe and to build and to plant And againe we declare we say we define we pronounce that it is necessarie to saluation to beleeue that euery humane creature is subiect to the Pope of Rome These be the lawes of the court of Rome which some of late haue so much adored as to call them Catholike Diuinitie and which for truth and certaintie and for authoritie ouer their consciences they hold comparable euen with the holy Scriptures 4. By all which wee collect the doctrine of the court of Rome or the Popes faction to be that the Pope hath all power Spirituall and Temporall aboue all other whatsoeuer This I call the opinion of the Court of Rome or the Popes faction because we finde the most learned of the Church of Rome to hold the contrary For concerning spirituall power the best learned of the Church of Rome yea and whole councels maintaine the Spiritual power of the Church to be aboue the Pope as hereafter we shall declare And for this Temporall power aboue Kings and Emperours claimed by the Popes in their Canon Lawe maintained by their flatterers it seemeth so straunge so new and absurd that they who maintaine it are not as yet agreed vpon the state of the question For some hold that the Pope hath this power directly ouer Princes as the Canonists to whom some of the Shoole-men may be added as Triumphus and some of late called Congregationis Oratorij as Cardinall Baronius Bozius and such Others denying this direct power hold that the Pope hath the same power but indirectly as depending vpon his Spirituall power of this opinion is Cardinall Bellarmine and others these both hold the same conclusion but differ in the manner of holding it Others there be who are in some sort content to allowe the Popes Fatherhood in spirituall matters in case lie would not prooue incorrigible but vtterly denie this power ouer princes both direct and indirect of this opinion was Guil. Occham Ma' silius Patauinus and other learned men of the Church of Rome And of late Guil. Berclaius a French Lawyer hath with great learning refuted both the former opinions of the Popes power direct and indirect against Bozius and Bellarmine and yet this man professeth himselfe to be resolued to liue and die a Papist so that on the one side stand all the reformed Churches and many of the best learned of the Church of Rome I may say all the Church of old and of late On the other side standeth the Pope with his faction that is his flatterers and this I call with some of former ages the Court of Rome this is the opinion of our aduersaries 5. Our positiue sentence against this standeth in two parts as the Pope hath incroached on two sides both vpon the right of Kings and of the Church Concerning the Kings right we hold that in externall coactiue Iurisdiction the King hath supreame authoritie in all causes and ouer all persons Ecclesiasticall aswell as Ciuill This is that which hath bene published by diuerse writings and ordinances which by publike authoritie haue beene enacted and published declaring that the King within hi Dominions hath this soueraigne authoritie and that heerein there is no forraine power aboue the King The authority of the Church hath beene in like sort vsurped by the Pope by drawing to himselfe a supposed title of the head of the vniuersall Church by deuising a straunge authority in the fulnesse of power by claiming a newe and straunge priuiledge of his not erring iudgement and making himselfe the onely iudge of controuersies of faith This power in iudging and determining of controuersies of faith and religion being partly in the Church partly in the Scriptures the Pope hath wrested from both first extolling the Church aboue the Scriptures and then setting himselfe aboue the Church Then that the limits of each power may be truely knowne we giue all spirituall power to the Church all externall coactiue iurisdiction to the King when each of these shall haue taken vp his owne right there will not be so much left to the Pope as these great flatterers the Iesuits seeke to heape vpon him Our purpose is first to dispute the right which Kings haue in coactiue power ouer all persons and in all causes euen Ecclesiasticall within his dominions by persons ecclesiasticall wee vnderstand Archbishops Bishops Deans Rectors and all other set in calling and place Ecclesiasticall by causes Ecclesiasticall wee vnderstand causes Ecclesiasticall of externall coactiue
Iurisdiction 6. From this consideration of persons and causes arise two great questions First concerning the exemption of all causes Ecclesiasticall from the Kings Iurisdiction secondly concerning the exemption of Ecclesiasticall persons from temporall audience and iudicature For the better vnderstanding hereof we may proceede by some distinctions for when our aduersaries teach that the Pope is the head of the Church and we that the King is the supreame gouernor of the Church though in some sound of wordes these things seeme not much to differ yet in truth there is great difference betweene their meaning and ours For they calling the Pope the head to distinguish him from Christ whom the Apostle calleth the head of the Church say that the Pope is the ministeriall head which deuise was first brought in by the Schoolemen for among the auncients it was not knowne but all that speake of the head of the Church before acknowledge none but Christ. Concerning this deuise of the ministeriall head we say with the ancient Fathers that the Catholike Church is but one and hath one head Christ Iesus because to one bodie there can bee but one head from whom grace is infused to the whole body This Catholike Church is as that head is both perfectly known to God not to man this then is but one in all times and places But the visible Churches or particular are many at many times in many places and therefore must haue heads or gouernours aunswerable to themselues for many Churches many gouernours These are either Spirituall gouernours or Temporall The spirituall gouernment of the Church is committed to spirituall gouernours as first from Christ to his twelue Apostles of whom none was aboue the rest in this spirituall gouernment or kingdome of Christ as the Lord doth often expresly declare to them from them to Bishops and Pastors their successors Temporall gouernours are such as haue the custody of externall coactiue Iurisdiction both in Temporall and Ecclesiasticall causes for the power of the Church with all her spirituall Iurisdiction neuer reached to coaction This was by God first giuen to Magistrates and neuer reuoked in all times practised but when the Church and Kings were oppressed by the great power of Antichrist When wee call the King the supreame gouernour of the Church our meaning is that hee is appointed by God to be a Father and preseruer of religion a keeper of Ecclesiasticall discipline and as the Prophet Isaiah calleth him a nourcing father of the Church he is the soueraigne in all affaires of coactiue Iurisdiction Likewise this word Church is not taken in the same sense by them and vs for our aduersaries saying that the Pope is the head of the Church vnderstand thereby the. Catholike Church spread ouer the whole world but we vnderstand a particular Church yeelding the King to bee gouernour next and immediatly vnder God of his own dominions and consequently of persons and causes within his owne dominions so that there is much difference betweene their meaning and ours Then we must come to such an issue wherein without equiuocating the question betweene vs is set for wee shall otherwise run into that fault which is so rife with the Popes Clarks that Bellarmine himselfe confesseth it Notandum est saith he multos ex nostris tempus terere dum probant quod Caluinus caeteri haeretici concedunt This is most common among them to bee large in disputing that which is not in question betweene vs and it is a signe of some ingenuitie to confesse it but neither doth himselfe for all his confession auoid it neither doe they that write since and depend vpon his learning shunne it after so faire warning neither in truth can a false cause be maintained in so many bookes and large volumes as now they set out vnlesse they tooke this libertie to themselues to be large in disputing things which are not in question The question then is concerning the lawfull authoritie of Kings in their owne dominions touching this part of Iurisdiction which is called Ecclesiasticall coactiue Iurisdiction 7. For better proceeding let the distinction be remembred which is vsually receiued of Ecclesiasticall power for all power Ecclesiasticall is commonly deuided into power of order and of Iurisdiction The power of order by all writers that I could see euen of the Church of Rome is vnderstood to be immediatly from Christ giuen to all Bishops and Priests alike by their consecration wherein the Pope hath no priuiledge aboue other Thus teach Bonauentuâ—…e in 4. sent d. 17. q 1. August Triumphus lib. de potest eccles qu. 1. ar 1. Ioh. Gerson li. de potest eccles consid 1. Cardinal Cusanus lib. de cathol concord 2. cap. 13. Cardinal Contarenus tract de eccles potest pontificis Bellarm. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 22. This then being the common confession of all that the Pope hath no more power herein then any other Bishop or Pastor we moue no contradiction in this As they confesse that in this power the Pope hath no praeeminence but that it is giuen from Christto all Bishops and pastors equally so wee confesse that in this power the prince hath no part and that Bishops and pastors haue this power onely from the diuine ordinance and not from earthly princes then our question is onely of the power of Iurisdiction 8. This power of Iurisdiction is diuersly vnderstood by the writers of the Church of Rome Augustinus Triumphus doth deliuer it thus The power of Iurisdiction is Temporall or Spirituall and this power considered in generall is threefold immediate deriued or giuen to execute some seruice the power of Iurisdiction immediate of all things Spirituall and Temporall is onely in the Pope The power of Iurisdiction deriued is in Bishops to them deriued from the Pope the power of Temporall Iurisdiction giuen to execute some seruice for the helpe of the Church is in Emperours Kings and secular princes this power is not immediat from God but is giuen first to the Pope and so to Kings for the vse of the Church and â—…elpe of Pope and Prelates I haue deliuered this in the â—…ery words of Triumphus whom in this thing others followe though of late some of the finer Iesuits who hold the same are growen more cunning in the manner of deliuering it Bellarmine loath to leaue the opinion and ashamed so grossely to propose it deuiseth a mollification of it thus Asserimus Pontiâ—…icem vt pontiâ—…icem et si non habeat vllam meré temporalem potestatem tamen habere in ordine ad spirituale bonum summam potestatem disponendi de temporalibus rebus omnium Christianorum That is We auer that the Pope albeit he hath not any power merely Temporall as Pope yet hath power supreame in respect of Spirituall good to dispose of all the Temporalties of all Christians And in the next Chapter concludeth that the Pope hath authoritie to depose hereticall kings and princes
consecration of Aaron and his sonnes is done altogether by Moses These things though they make faire shew for the Princes Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall ouer Priests yet wee purpose not to stand vpon them 3. But when the Priest was once consecrated and ordained and all things fully perfected concerning his function and two seuerall and distinct functions set vp then will appeare without faile in Moses his successors the right of Princes in Aaron his successors the right of Priests After all things thus perfected we finde that all the lawes which in truth proceeded originally from God were established by the authoritie of Moses and this we finde true not onely in Iudiciall and Ciuill Lawes which were to rule that state but euen in ceremoniall and Morall Lawes which were to rule the Church There is not so much as one ceremoniall law established by the authoritie of Aaron but in all the name and authoritie of Moses is expressed only we finde concerning Aaron that if any doubt in the lawes ceremoniall did arise for the interpretation of those lawes and of such doubts the high Priest must sit as iudge For the people are charged in matters that are hard to consult with the Priest and ciuill iudge Deut. 17. 8. c. Which the learned interpreters vnderstand thus that if the cause be mixt partly Ciuill partly Ceremoniall or doubâ—…full that then both the Ciuill Magistrate and the Priest must iointly determine it but if the people haue distinct causes some Ciuill other Ceremoniall the Ciuill Magistrate must iudge the causes Ciuill and the Priest must iudge the causes Ceremoniall from the consideration of which place we may drawe certaine inferences 4. First all Lawes euen Ceremoniall that is Lawes whereunto Spirituall or Canon Lawes are answerable are established by the authoritie of the Ciuill Magistrate This taketh away all authoritie of the Popes Canon law in all Christian kingdomes where it is not established by the authoritie of Kings in their kingdomes For it is against all reaâ—…on and rules whether we looke vpon the light of nature or vpon the Scriptures or the lawfull practife of authoritie since the Scriptures were written that any Lawes should be imposed vpon a Prince against or without his consent as the Popes haue indeuoured to impose the Canon Lawes vpon Princes And this appeareth in the practise of Christian Magistrates so long as lawfull authoritie stood up without confusion in the world But heere we consider the fountaine of that practise which was from Gods Law wherein we see all Lawes confirmed and established by the authoritie of the Ciuill Magistrate And if it could bee prooued that in some Lawes Ceremoniall the authoritie of Aaron was requisite yet this helpeth them nothing that plead for the Popes Canons For these men would impose these Canons vpon Princes without their consent but in all these Lawes of Moses wherein is a perfect patterne for all law-makers they cannot shew one Law though neuer so nearely concerning the Church which is established without the authoritie of Moses the Ciuill Magistrate If they obiect these things were all done by an especiall commaundement of God I aunswere this doth more establish the authoritie of Princes and confirme our purpose for let them aunswere why God would haue all these things established by the Ciuill Magistrate and not by the Priest This then maketh a greater and clearer confirmation of the Princes right Then the Church may interpret Scripture determine controuersies of faith but cannot establish a Law the reason is because for the establishing of Lawes coactiue power is requisite which is in the Ciuil Magistrate not in the Church And therefore the Canon Lawes can haue no force of lawes but as they are receiued and established by Princes in their seuerall kingdomes For neither can the law haue the force of a law without coactiue power neither hath the Pope any coactiue power in the kingdomes of other Princes but onely in such places where himselfe is a Temporall Prince 5. Secondly we obserue that the high Priest is appointed by God a iudge for interpretation of those lawes that concerne the Church in questions of conscience in causes mixt or doubtfull This might moderate the humours of some who in loue to innouation would leaue no place of iudicature to Ecclesiasticall persons for these things are insert into Moses lawe taken from the law of Nature and not as things Ceremoniall which thing is apparant from the end vse and necessitie thereof for the things which had a necessary vse before the written law and must haue a necessary vse after the abrogation of that law must be acknowledged to be taken from a perpetuall law because there must be a perpetuall rule for a perpetuall necessity This then being perpetuall and necessary matters of question and of Ecclesiasticall audience still arising the hearing and iudging of such things belong to such as are most skilfull in those affaires And hence is the iudicature of fuch things assigned to the Priest which right of Ecclesiasticall iudgements and courts standeth no lesse now due to them in the time of grace then it was under the law because this office in iugdeing hearing and determining is not heere giuen to Priests as a thing Ceremoniall but as I haue declared deriued from the law of Nature as a perpetuall seruice for a perpetuall vse 6. Thirdly we consider that the lawes Ecclesiastical are established by the authoritie of the Ciuill Magistrate but for interpretation of them the Priest is appointed to iudge Hence riseth the ground of Iurisdiction both Temporall and Spirituall wee consider Iurisdiction here as our question importeth authority coactiue in externall iudicature in the execution of lawes The fountaine of this authoritie is in him principally by whose authoritie the law is established and without whose authoritie it is not The execution of this authoritie is in them that are appointed iudges And heerein there is no difference betweene Temporall and Ecclesiasticall authoritie I speake not nowe of Spirituall gouernment by the lawes of God executed within the court of Conscience but of Ecclesiasticall gouernment in the execution of lawes Ecclesiasticall wherin there is vse of coactiue power These two things being in themselues and in nature so distinct if this one distinction might be remembred it is ynough to aunswere all the confused collections of that Catholike Diuine who wrote of late against the fift part of Reports of the Lord Cooke For all that hee writeth there resting vpon no other ground then vpon the confounding of Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall power is answered in one word by this one poore distinction betweene these two powers Now the distinction is apparant because in Spirituall gouernment there is no coactiue power but in Ecclesiasticall iudicature there is coactiue power which maketh an euident and famous difference in Iurisdiction because this is most certaine that all that Iurisdiction wherin coactiue power is vsed is from the Ciuill Magistrate Then if these two
gouernments I meane Ecclesiasticall and Temporal be directed by coactiue power there is no difference in the point of Iurisdiction betweene Temporall and Ecclesiasticall authoritie For the King and only the King is to appoint iudges in matters Temporall and Ecclesiasticall the King hath no more authoritie in reuersing the iudgement of the one then of the other being true iust and lawfull So that the Kings Iurisdiction standeth not in a power to dissanull true and righteous iudgemens but in a power supereminent by which he is charged First to confirme lawes Ecclesiasticall and Temporall Secondly to place Iudges for both causes Thirdly to see that those iudges of both sortes iudge iustly according to right and equity Fourthly to punish them if they shall be found to giue vniust and corrupt sentences Fiftly and last of all his Iurisdiction appeareth in appellations 7. But heere a question will be moued whether a man may appeale from an Ecclesiasticall iudge to the Prince For that one may appeale from a Temporall iudge I suppose it is not doubted at least I see no reason why it should be doubted But in a cause Ecclesiasticall and from a iudge Ecclesiasticall to appeale to the Temporall Magistrate of this some Romish Doctors doubt This doubt which the Canonists haue made may be increased by that place Deu. 17. 10. Thou shalt not decline from that thing which they shall shew thee neither to the right hand nor to the left And that man that will do presumptuously not hearkning to the Priest that standeth before the Lord thy God to minister there or vnto the iudge that man shall die It might seeme to be collected hence that there is no appellation from the Priest no though hee should iudge as some Rabbins expound the words I will declare their exposition because it sauoureth much like the expositions of some Papists where the text saith thou shalt not decline to the right hand nor to the left they expound it that if the Priest shall say thy right hand is thy left or thy left is thy right this sentence thou must receiue and therein rest 8. But this is a fond assertion not only without reason but against the expresse words of the Scripture for it is said according to the law which shall teach thee and according to the iudgement which they shall tell thee thou shalt doe Where we finde two rules for these two kindes of Iudges the Priest and the iudge the sentence of the Priest must be according to the written lawe the sentence of the other according to the truth of iustice and iudgement If a man be able to shew that he is wronged he may vndoubtedly appeale to a Superiour now a man may be able to shew that he is wronged if hee can shew that the Priest declineth from the law of God which is appointed his rule or the Temporall iudge from iustice And therefore if there be a Superiour in the land he may appeale but if there be no Superiour he is without remedie as when Hely was both Priest and iudge from him at that time there could be no appellation but where the forme of a kingdome is established where one King is set vp in lawfull authoritie by whose power iudges Spirituall and Temporall are placed in his dominions heere appeareth a fountaine of Iurisdiction deriued as it were into two inferiour riuers and from these inferior powers appellation may be brought if they shall not in their sentences keepe their rules prescribed to them the lawe and iustice for the appellation being grounded vpon the lawe of Nature to moderate the peruersitie and partialitie of iudges it were an absurd thing to denie this in causes Ecclesiasticall vnlesse a man would suppose that persons Ecclesiasticall may not be corrupt in their iudgements Now if we shall once graunt appellations then assuredly wee confirme the Iurisdiction of Princes in all matters wherein appellation may bee made to them And because Iurisdiction is assuredly proued by appellation we will for the farther manifestation of the truth seeke to cleere this point the rather becâ—…use our aduersaries tell vs confidently that in matters Ecclesiasticall all appellation belongeth to the Pope The Popes say so and they beleeue them we hold that appellation in causes Ecclesiasticall is to bee directed to the King who is by God set ouer the persons appellant 9. In the Old Testament we haue fewe examples or none that I remember of any that appealed from any inferior iudge Ecclesiasticall to the Soueraigne but in the New Testament there is one example sufficient to confirme the truth S. Paul being accused for causes Ecclesiasticall appealed from the high Priest to Câ—…sar Therfore it is lawfull in matters Ecclesiasticall to appeale from iudges Ecclesiasticall to the Ciuill Magistrate The consequence resteth vpon this that Saint Paul heerein did nothing but that which he might doe iustly and lawfully which thing I suppose the greatest enemie of Saint Pauls Doctrine will not denie for he came vp to Ierusalem with this profession and purpose I am ready not to bee bound onely but euen to die for the name of the Lord Iesus Neither durst he for sauing of his life giue a scandall to the Gospell The antecedent consisteth of these two parts First that the matters for which Saint Paul was accused were matters Ecclesiasticall Secondly that therein he appealed from the high Priest both are witnessed by the expresse words of the Scripture For Festusâ—…aith â—…aith They brought no crime against him but had certaine questions against him of their owne superstition and of one Iesus which was dead whom Paul affirmed to be aliue These questions be out of doubt Ecclesiasticall euen in the iudgement of our aduersaries that he appealed from the high Priest reskuing himselfe from his iudgement it is euident by the words in the twentie three Chapter where the Apostle speaketh to the high Priest as to his iudge Thou sittest to iudge me according to the law And when he was reskued from the Priests by Lysias and sent to Felix and left by him to Festus he neuer thinketh of appealing from any of theâ—…e ciuill gouernours But when Festus asked him if he will goe to Ierusalem and there be iudged of these things then Pâ—…ul vtterly refusing the high-Priest appealed to Câ—…sar by which it followeth that in matters Ecclesiasticall a man may appeale from iudges Ecclesiasticall to the Soueraigne Prince Whereupon this vndoubtedly followeth that there resteth Soueraigne Iurisdiction in the Prince And therefore the Popes their flatterers vnderstanding well that Supreame Iurisdiction could neuer bee prooued to rest in the Popes vnlesse first Appellation should be made to them wrought by all subtilty as hereafter we shall declare by right or wrong they neither cared nor spared to cause Appellations to be made to them which thing when once they had obtained that in all causes Ecclesiasticall Appellation might be made to the Popes then and not before
this opinion was r◅olued that Supreame Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction was in the Popes And therefore we prouing that Supreame and last Appellation doth by the law of God belong to none but to the Soueraigne Prince conclude vndoubtedly that Supreame Iurisdiction belongeth to him onely 10. Heere a question may be mooued whether Saint Paul did well and orderly when he appealed to Caesar and whether Caesar was made iudge of these questions which were Doctrines We aunswere Saint Paul had no meaning to make C◅sar iudge of any point of faith But whereas hee was persecuted by the high Priests who sought his life in this matter of coactiue power Saint Paul giueth Iurisdiction to Caesar. There is also a difference betweene that power which heathen Princes haue and that which Christian Princes haue for heathen Princes haue all power coactiue whatsoeuer the cause be and without this helpe the Church could neuer deale in matters of this nature Christian Princes besides this coactiue power haue also as appeareth in the gouernment of Israel externall discipline in matters Ecclesiasticall 11. Thus we haue declared the distinct right of the King and the Priest after that they were distinguished by the written law of God we haue prooued that the Soueraigne Iurisdiction coactiue resteth in the Prince by a right which God hath giuen and therefore may not be taken away by man It followeth to consider how this right hath beene accordingly exercised by the godly Kings of Israel Ios◅ commanded the people to be circumcised and not Eleazerus the cause was Eccles◅ticall but to command in such causes declareth iurisdiction Dauid reduceth the Arke he appointeth Priests Leuites Singers Porters to serue at the Tabernacle he assigneth Officers of the sonnes of Aaro◅ All which being matters Ecclesiasticall the Prince as hauing soueraigne authority in both causes ordaineth Solomon buildeth the Temple and consecrateth it Asa remoueth Idols and dedicated the Altar of God that was before the porch of the Lord. Iehosaphat abolisheth Idolatry cutteth downe the groues sendeth Priests and Leuites to teach in Townes and Cities Setteth vp Iudges both ciuill and Ecclesiasticall and commandeth both to iudge according to godlinesse truth and Iustice. Because in the words of Iehosaphat these things are distinctly deliuered we will obserue the whole place The wordes are these And hee set iudges in the land throughout all the strong Cities of Iuda Citie by Citie And said to the Iudges take heed what you doe for you execute not the iudgement of man but of the Lord and he will be with you in the cause and iudgement Wherefore now let the feare of the Lord be vpon you take heed and doe it for there is no iniquitie with the Lord our God neither respect of persons nor receiuing of reward Moreouer in Ierusalem did Iehosaphat set of the Leuites and of the Priests and of the chiefe of the families in Israel for the iudgement and cause of the Lord and they returned to Ierusalem And he charged them saying thus shall you doe in the feare of the Lord with a perfect heart And in euery cause that shall come to you of your brethren that dwell in your Cities betweene blood and blood betweene Law and precept Statutes and iudgements you shall iudge them and admonish them that they trespasse not against the Lord that wrath come not vpon you and vpon your brethren And behold Amariah the high Preist shall be the chiefe ouer you in all matters of the Lord. 12. From which words we collect thus much concerning ◅he Kings Iurisdiction and the things wherein it consisteth ◅irst the King appointeth and placeth both Temporall and clesi◅sticall Iudges and commandeth and chargeth them so placed to execute their functions faithfully we inferre vpon this command in both alike that hee hath Iurisdiction ouer both causes But here let me remember a trifling obiection which some of our aduersaries haue deuised of late they would distinguish betweene command and Iurisdiction For they deny not but that all sortes of persons are vnder the Kings commaund and gouernment whom he may command each to doe their Office and yet they vtterly deny the Kings Iurisdiction and tell vs that command and Iurisdiction must not be hudled vp together Now let vs consider what hudling is in this when the Kings command and his Iurisdiction are set as things depending and cohaering one to the other When we say the King may command we meane plainely as we speake that the King hath from God lawfull authoritie to command and to punish them that breake his command This is the common vnderstanding of the Kings command But these Romish sophisters when they say the King may command do not vnderstand neither will they acknowledge at any hand that the King hath lawfull authoritie from God to punish the breach of his command for they vtterly deny that the King hath any authoritie to punish a Clarke though he should breake his commandement And call you this a command The King may command and goe without as the saying is This is the deuils sophistry taken vp by men hardned against shame content to stoupe downe to gather vp the meanest and basest shifts to dazell the simple The Iesuites resolue of this as of a truth most soundly concluded in their schooles That the King may not punish Ecclesiasticall persons that the Kings Court may not heare examine and iudge them though they should commit murders adulteries robberies or what other wickednesse soeuer And yet they tell vs that the King may command them Now to say one thing and yet to let the world see that they are resolued in the contrary this sauoreth strongly of the spirit of illusion when reason learning honestie and all faileth yet well fare a bold and hardned face which neuer faileth this generation 13. The truth is if the King haue not lawfull authority to punish he hath not lawfull authoritie to command and punish he cannot vnlesse he hath authority to iudge or cause iudgement to be done so that they who take away from the King power to iudge persons Ecclesiasticall take from him power to punish and consequently power to command but the Doctrine of the Papists this day as shall hereafter appeare in his due place taketh from the king power to iudge per sons Ecclesiastical therefore they rob him of power to punish and to cōmaund for nothing can more strongly take away the Kings command then to deny him power to punish and to iudge And yet they are not ashamed to tell vs that they deny not the kings cōmand but his Iurisdiction Then to leaue these men with their absurd and perplexed contradictions where the King ◅ay command he may iudge and punish the breach of that command and therefore his Iurisdiction appeareth in his lawfull authority and command Then by this charge and commaund of Iehosaph◅ is declared his Iurisdiction in these causes wherein he hath this authority
Christian Magistrates but was alwayes vnderstoode to belong to the ciuill Magistrate whether he were Christian or heathen We denie not but that the Apostles did sometimes take vengeance vpon the disobedient but that was not by the materiall sword in the power whereof we place coaction but by the spirituall sword which alwayes shewed it selfe in their Ministery sometimes in an extraordinary manner as in the striking of Ananias and Saphira with present death in the striking of Elimas the Sorcerer with blindnesse and such like These were signes of extraordinary power but wee seeke heere the ordinary Iurisdiction of the Apostles which they left to their successours 10 Vpon these grounds ioyned with the assured knowledge of the History of those times the auncient Fathers deliuer it as a truth neuer questioned nor doubted that in the gouernment of the Church the Bishops are the vndoubted successours of the Apostles Irenaeus speaking of heretikes saith Omnes hi posteriorâ—…s sunâ—… episcopis quibus apostoli tradiderunt ecclesias If Bishops were before any heretikes they were questionlesse in the Apostles time and by the Apostles instituted because some heretikes were euen in the Apostles time Irenaeus saith also Habemus annumer are eos qui ab Apostolis instituti sunt episcopi in Ecclesiis And a little after Quibus etiam ipsas Ecclesias committebant And againe in the same place Quos successo es reliquerunt suum ipsorum locum magisterij tradentes Cyprian saith Potestas peccatorum remittendorum Apostolis data est Ecclesiis quas illi à Christo missi constuuerunt et episcopis qui eis ordinatioâ—…e 〈◊〉 successerunt The same hee hath also Epist. 69. Hierome saith Potentia diuitiarum paupertatis humilitas vel sublimiorem vel inferiorem Episcopum non facit Caeterum omnes Apostolorum successores sunt It were hard to kicke against all these pricks Against so euident grounds of Scripture so expresse testimonies of Fathers to deuise a new gouernment of the Church Leauing the auncient and knowne gouernment which hath the testimonie of those that liued in the first age and heard and sawe those that were endued with miraculous gifts as Irenaeus testifieth of himselfe that hee heard those which spake by the spirit in all languages and sawe them who often raised the dead to life againe Leauing I say the testimonie of these whose name and authority is so reuerend in the Church and striuing for a gouernment which came but of late to the knowledge of men seemeth to proceede from affections too much blinded with the loue of innouation 11 But though this be true that Bishops in the gouernment of the Church succeede the Apostles yet we are cautelously to distinguish betweene the things wherein they succeede the Apostles and those things which since the Apostles times haue beene added to their gouernment by godly Princes For the preseruation of true doctrine in the Church the Bishops are the great watch-men Herein they are authorized by God If Princes withstand them in these things they haue warrant not to obey Princes because with these things Christ hath put them in trust Therefore S. Paul saith not that it is the Kings office but the Bishops to commaund that they teach no other doctriâ—…e Vpon which ground S. Ambrose was bolde to withstand Valentinian Emperour For Ambrose as the watch-man of the Church of Millaine would not suffer Auxentius an Arian Bishop to haue any place to teach in his Diocesse Auxentius complained to the Emperour as the contention grew thus betweene them the one like a vigilant watch-man seeking to remoue all dangers from his flocke the other like a Wolfe seeking to spoile at the earnest entreaty of Auxentius the Emperour willed that the cause betweene these two might be heard in the Ecclesiasticall consistorie and that the Emperour might sit as Iudge in the cause This thing Ambrose vtterly denied and of this hee writeth thus to the Emperour Quando audisti clemeÌ„tissime imperator in causasidei Laicos de Episcopo iudicasse And againe Sivel Scripturarum seriem diuinarum vel catera tempora retractemus quis est qui abnuat in causa fidei in causa inquamsidei Episcopos solere de imperatoribus Christianis non imperatores de Episcopo iudicare And in another place Volens nunquam ius deseram coactus repugnare non nout arma enim nostra preces sunt lachrymae This example of Ambrose his courage is worthily commended by all posterity wherein this worthy man seemeth to direct a true rule of obedience For Iustina the Emperours mother seeing she could not draw Ambrose to fauour the Arians purposed to put him from the gouernment of the Church Which thing would haue beene effected if he had not refused to appeare in the Court where the Emperour was to sit as Iudge There appeared in him courage godlinesse and exact obedience all truly tempered He denieth the Emperour to be a sufficient Iudge in a cause of faith and religion In causafidei in causa inquam fidei For this hee repeateth precisely desirous to be rightly vnderstood he would rather die then admit such an example as to betray the trueth and that commission and charge wherein GOD had set him And yet if the Emperour would by force doe any thing he denieth that there is any power in him or in the Church to resist by force The faith and right of the Church was not in his iudgement to be maintained by force and armes but by prayers and teares Thus resolute is this godly man in the cause of faith against the Emperour but in other causes he claimeth no priuiledge no immunities and therefore in the same place hee faith Si tributum petit imperator non negamus agri Ecclesiae tributum soluunt Athanasius ad solitar vitam agentes speaking to Constans the Emperour saith Let religious Bishops perswade the Emperor that he corrupt not the Church nor mingle the Romane Empire with Ecclesiasticall constitutions And Hillarie writing to Constantius saith to the same purpose Prouideat decernat clementia tua c. Let your clemency prouide and establish that all Iudges to whom the care of publike businesse belongeth may abstaine from religious constitutions Thus did the auncient Bishops gouerne the Church not suffering any King or Emperour to meddle with the determinations of matters of faith For of such matters are these testimonies to be vnderstood and onely of such In like manner Chrysostome resisted Gaina generall of the forces of Arcadius Emperour Who would haue had a Church within Constantinople for himselfe and the Arians The Emperour was willing to gratifie him or not willing to displease him for his greatnesse but Iohn Chrysostome did vtterly denie it as a thing vnlawfull Thus by the warrant of Scriptures and examples of Fathers we giue to Caesar all coactiue power which is due to him but spirituall gouernment we giue not to him this is that
gouernment which is reserued to Bishops as the Apostles successours After which example Gregorie the first writeth thus Serenissimi domini animum non ignoro quod se in causis sacerdotalibus miscere non soleat Gregorie calleth those causes with which the Emperours medled not causas sacerdotales meaning therby the same which Ambrose calleth causes of faith 12. Besides this Spirituall gouernment which is peculiar to Bishops there is also another part of gouernment giuen to Bishops which commeth from Princes which Constantine first gaue as hereafter we shall declare Of this Chrysostome saith I am vero pars illa quam Episcopum tractare in iudicijs conuenâ—…t infinita odia infinitas offensiones parit quae ipsa praetâ—…r quam quod negâ—…tijs quamplurimis plena est tam multas etiam difficultaies affert quam multas ne forenses quidem iudices sustinent and much more to the same purpose Augustine complaineth that he was too much troubled with these matters of iudic ture And Synosius professeth that he can not attend both businesses Antiquum tempus saith he tulit eosdem sacerdoâ—…es iudices eâ—…nim Aegyptij Hebraeorumque gens multum temporis â saceraotibus gubernata est and a little after Non condemno Episcopos qui versantur in negotiis c. Si qui vero sunt qui à rerum diuersarum aggressione non laeduntur illi for sitan possunt simul â—… fungi ciuâ—…tatibus praeesse In all these parts of Episcopal Iurisdiction which either by Apostolicall right or institution or by the fauour of Princes haue beene giuen to them the Pope hath intruded like a Foxe and maintaineth his intrusion like a Lion For as Christ left an equalitie and paritie among his Apostles often affirming and confirming that one of them should not be greater then another and yet the Apostles were in gouernement aboue other Ministers and that by the institution of Christ himselfe For the Lord after that he had chosen his twelue Apostles did chuse also seuentie Disciples and sent them two and two bâ—…fore him into euery citie where he himselfe should come saith S. Luke then Christ himselfe is the authour of this order in the Church which the Church hath since that time euer held the Bishops succeeding the Apostles as the inferiour Pastors succeeded the seuentie Disciples So the Apostles after them left the like equality among Bishops that one of them should not bee aboue another and yet Bishops in gouernment aboue other Ministers for Iurisdiction was neuer in the multitude but in gouernours the Bishops theÌ„ being the gouernors after the Apostles the like IurisdictioÌ„ was in all As Cypr. saith Episcopatus vnus est cuius à singulis pars in solidum tenetur And Hierom saith Vbicunque fuerit Episcopus siue Romae siue Eugubij c eiusdem meriti eiusdâ—…m est sacerdotij Which power in Bishops the Pope hath by surreption drawen to himselfe and now out of his fulnesse imparteth to Bishops at his pleasure as if hee were the fountaine of Iurisdiction 13. As thus he hath drawen their auncient right from Bishops so hath he drawen from Temporall Princes that which of auncient right was theirs we shall better vnderstand what he hath taken from Temporall Princes if we consider the true limits beâ—…weene the power of Princes and the power of the Church We say therefore that the Iurisdiction of the Church was neuer extended to coactiue power because God hath giuen all coactiue power to the Ciuill Magistrate to whom hee hath committed the sword And as coactiue power belongeth not to the Church so neither dooth it belong to the power of the Church to erect or establish to dissanull or dissolue this coactiue power as the Pope pretendeth to doe by excommunication deposing Kings and freeing their subiects from their faith and allegeance This dissolution of coactiue power cannot belong to the Church because this is both Temporall and coactiue the power of the Church being Spirituall cannot bee called either Temporall or coactiue Now that the power exercised by the Pope in excommunication is Temporall and coactiue is the graunt of Bellarmine for hee saith that the Church of old did not depose Nero Diocletian Iulian â—… c. Quia deerant vires temporales then he graunteth that in this present practise of the Popes there are vires temporales what is this but temporall coaction The Church in old time had all that power which Christ committed to his Church but then by the confession of Bellarmine the Church had no coactiue power therefore this coactiue power which the Pope vseth by Temporall force in deposing of Kings was not by Christ graunted to his Church And if we should yeeld Temporall coaction to the Church what power is left to the Magistrate Thus we see the auncient hedge is plucked vp and the bounds are chaunged which of old stood betweene these two powers Ciuill and Spirituall 14. Against this disordering of the auncient bounds wee haue the words of our Sauiour Christ. My kingdome is not of this world i f my kingdome were of this world my seruaunts would surely fight that I should not bee deliuered c. But because when these wordes are vrged against our aduersaries they looke ascant vpon them as if they touched them not Let vs consider how the kingdome of the Pope and his pretended Iurisdiction in deposing of Kings is vtterly ouerthrowen by these words which declare the power properly belonging to Christs kingdome that is to his Church Christ aunswereth heere to Pilats question Verse 33. Art thou the King of the Iewes By which question it appeareth there was some suspition and feares that Christ pretending for a kingdome might conspire against the state and worke the trouble and dissolution of the gouernment established For as Herod when he heard that Iesus was borne the King of the Iewes was troubled and all Ierusalem with him and entred into such feares and suspition that mooued him to kill all the young children from two yeeres old and vnder so the high Priests suggested the same suspitions to Pilate From this ground riseth this question of Pilate Art thou the King of the Iewes To this he aunswereth my kingdome is not of this world From which aunswere applied to such a question these positions issue It is against the nature of the kingdome of Christ to worke any trouble to the kingdomes of the world And that kingdome which worketh trouble to the kingdomes of this world is not the kingdome of Christ. Christs kingdome which is not of this world is his Church which is in this world but not of this world as himselfe saith If you were of this world the world would loue her owne but because you are not of this world but I haue taken you out of this world therefore this world hateth you Then we reason thus The gouernment of Christs Church breedeth no trouble
to seeke the fauour of Cornelius who without examination of the cause receiued them to the Communion Of which thing Cyprian complaineth much they saile to Rome saith he cum merce mendaciorum Against this hee declareth that it was ordained that neither the Bishop of Rome nor any straunger should be iudge of the causes of their Church And to Cornelius he writeth thus Quum statutum sit ab omnibus aquum sit pariter ac iustum vt vniuscuiusque causa illic audiatur vbi est crimen admissum singulis pastoribus portio gregis sit ascripta quam regat vnusquisque gubernet c. Opoâ—…tet vtiqueâ—…os quibus praesumus non circumcursare episcoporum concordiam cohaerentem sua subdola fallaci temeritate collidere sed agere illic causam vbi accusatores habere testes sui criminis possunt That is Seeing it is decreed by all and it is a thing both equall and iust that euery mans cause should be heard there where the crime was committed and a part of the flocke is appointed to each Pastor which each in seuerall must rule and guide c Verily it behooueth that they whom we gouerne should not gad and run about to others nor by their crafty and fallatious rashnesse breake in sunder the coherent concord of Bishops but there ought they to plead their cause where they may haue accusers and witnesses of their crime 26. Thus albeit the Bishops of Rome did seeke some inlarging of their authoritie sometimes by giuing countenance and patronage to criminous and scandalous men yet they were repressed and brought into order by the godly and learned Bishops that then liued in the Church Who would not suffer the priuiledges of the Church to be lost or any title of Iurisdiction to grow where there was no right Thus for the first three hundred yeeres the Church of Rome had no Iurisdiction ouer other Churches but the Bishops there were reuerenced by other partly for their wisedome learning and godlinesse partly because the Emperours fauoured them aboue other and because they were Bishops of the chiefe citie and seat of the Empire For as they had some fauour aboue the rest with heathen Emperours so they found much more fauour from Christian Emperours which thing caused them to be regarded by other Bishops but no Iurisdiction was as yet acknowledged CHAP. V. Of the estate and Iurisdiction of the Church from the end of the first three hundred yeeres vntill the yeere of Christ sixe hundred Wherein is declared that coactiue power was in the Christian Emperors from whom the Church receiued some parts of coactiue Iurisdiction The Popes began to seeke Iurisdiction by forgerie NOwe let vs consider the times that followed when the Church had peace from persecution and found the fauour of Christian Emperours In which time no Iurisdiction will be found in the Church of Rome aboue other and all coactiue Iurisdiction was acknowledged without question to bee in the Christian Emperours from whom the Church receiued some part thereof 2. Constantine who did as much honour the Church and was as much honoured of the Church as euer any Christian Emperour leauing therein an example which standeth as yet alone without a match did notwithstanding take all that to himselfe which is now called Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction coactiue without any let or contradiction nay by the generall approbation of all that then liued When Caecilianus Bishop of Carthage was accused by Donatus and some other of that faction for deliuering the holy Scriptures to the enemies of Religion to be burned Constantine commaunded Caecilianus to come to Rome with a certaine number of Bishops which accused him and other that might heare and vnderstand the cause And commaunded the Bishop of Rome then Milciades with certaine Bishops of Fraunce to the number saith Optatus of nineteene to heare and end the matter the Bishops condemned Donaâ—…us who appealed from the sentence and albeit the Emperour was much offended at his appellation yet hee could not choose but receiue it In all this processe the Emperours Soueraigne Iurisdiction appeared the cause was a pretended crime of a Bishop the Emperour appointeth iudges and receiued the appellation which things declared Iurisdiction 3. Likewise after he had banished Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia and Theognis Bishop of Nice he wrote an Epistle to the people of Nicomedia declaring the iust causes of their banishment and signifieth that his especiall pleasure and desire is to haue Bishops castos orthodoâ—…os humanos and shutting vp his speech he saith Quoasi quis audacter inconsulteque ad memoriam pestium illarum exarserit illius statim audaeia ministri dei hoc est mea exequutione coercebitur Where we see Constantine vseth coactiue Iurisdiction ouer Bishops he punisheth them he declareth the true ground of his Iurisdiction from the word of God by which warrant he is placed the Minister of God This is that coactiue Iurisdiction ouer Ecclesiasticall persons which did alwayes belong to the Soueraigne Magistrate and was neuer by God giuen to any other 4. It was alwayes held by all sober writers of the Church of Rome as hereafter shall be further declared that in the Church there is no power aboue the power of a Councell And yet this authoritie of a Councell so much and so worthily reuerenced could not restraine Constantine but he vpon good and iust causes brought the rash proceedings of some Councels to a newe examination For when Athanasius was wronged by a Councell of Arians he complained to Constantine The Emperour sent for all the Bishops of that Councell to render an accompt of their proceedings before him which declareth that his Iurisdiction coactiue was aboue the power coactiue of the Councell For heere we consider onely Iurisdiction coactiue and not the matter or subiect for otherwise wee acknowledge as before is declared that the determinations of generall Councels are matters of an higher truth and authoritie then the Statutes or decrees of any Emperour But wee speake heere of that Soueraigne Iurisdiction coactiue which hath alwayes appeared in the power of the ciuill Magistrate and wherein the Church had no more part then that she receiued from the liberalitie of godly Emperours for as Kings receiue the knowledge of faith and Religion from the Church and not the Church from Kings so coactiue Iurisdiction the Church receiueth from Kings and not Kings from the Church 5. There was no Councell held in Constantines time whether of Orthodoxe or heretikes but either by the expresse commaundement or license of the Emperour Ruffinus saith he called the Councel of Nice at the request of the Bishops Ex sacer dotum sententia apud vrbem Nicaeam concilium Episcopale conuocat Epiphanius saith that Councell was obtained of the Emperour at the suit of Alexander Bishop of Alexandria So the Bishops who then liued in the Church held it to be of the Emperours right and Iurisdiction to call Councels
Theodoret rehearseth a Dialogue betweene Constans the Emperour and Liberius Bishop of Rome who afterward for feare and through weakenesse and irksomnesse of his exile was drawen to subscribe to Arianisme as witnesseth Hierom Ruffinus Platina and other In that Dialogue these words are worth the noting Constans willing Liberius to forsake the Communion with Athanasius and to condemne him Liberius his answere is Ecclesiastica iudicia cum summa iusticiae obseruatione fieri debent quare situae pietati places iudicium cogi impera vbi si damnandus Athanasius videatur sententiam illum ordine modoque Ecclesiastico feratur nam fieri nequit vt condemnetur à nobis de quo iudicium datum non sit That is Ecclesiasticall iudgements ought to proceed with exact obseruation of iustice Therefore if it please your Godlinesse command a Councell to be called wherein if Athanasius seeme worthy to be condemned let sentence passe against him in Ecclesiasticall order and manner For it cannot be that by vs hee should bee condemned seeing wee haue no authoritie to iudge him The Bishop of Rome here confesseth first That Iudicia Ecclesiastica Ecclesiasticall iudgements are to be appointed and established by the Emperour then he graunteth him Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction and granteth that to call a Councell belongeth to his Iurisdiction Secondly the Emperour cannot make a man an hereticke but this must be done by a Councell or by the iudgement Ecclesiasticall This being a thing not of coactiue Iurisdiction but of knowledge in the word of God Thirdly the Bishop of Rome renounceth all right and authority of iudicature vpon Athanasius therefore in those daies hee had no Iurisdiction ouer other Bishops 6. This mixt Iurisdiction which now is practised by Bishops began in the time of Constantine So Nicephorus witnesseth Constantinus Clericos omnes constitutione lata immunes liberosque esse permisit iudiciumque iurisdictionem in eos Episcopis si ciuilium iudicum cognitionem declinare vellent mandauit quod Episcopi iudicassent id robur autoritatem sententiae omnem habere debere decreuit That is Constantine by an edict graunted the priuiledge of immunity to all Clerkes and graunted to Bishops iudgement and Iurisdiction ouer Clerkes in case they would decline from the courts of ciuill Iudges and he decreed that whatsouer the Bishops iudged that should stand in all strength and authority of a decree Sozomen declareth by what occasion it grew first For some began then to appeale from ciuill iudgements to Ecclesiasticall and some Bishops receiued the appellations which thing being approued by Constantine gaue great authority to this kind of Iurisdiction Episcopi saith he in causis ciuilibus sententias pronuntiarunt si qui à iudicibus ciuilibus ad eorum autoritatem appellassent Quam rem propter venerationem Episcoporum adeò approbauit Constantinus vt ratas haberi pâ—…tioresque quam aliorum iudicum sententias nec minus quam ab ipso imperatore essent pronunciatae per Magistratus milites Magistratuum ministres ad effectum perduci lege edixerit That is Bishops pronounced sentence in ciuill causes if any appeaed to them from ciuill Iudges This thing for the reuerence of Bishops Constantine approued so much that hee ordained by Law that these iudgements should be ratified and of greater authority then the sentences of other Iudges yea to be held of â—…o lesse force then if the Emperour himselfe had pronounced â—…hem so to be executed by the Shriefs their seruants 7 By which it appeareth that these courts with this Iurisdiction were vnderstood then no other then the Emperours courts The Emperour graunteth this Iurisdiction saith Nicephorus the Emperour ratifieth these iudgements saith Sozomen the Emperour commaundeth that the sentence of the Bishop should be euery where receiued as if it proceeded out of his owne mouth Which words are well to be obserued For the Emperour commaundeth not that the Bishops sentence should be receiued as a diuine sentence but only as an humane not as proceeding from the mouth of God but as proceeding from the mouth of the Emperour Now if these Courts were then so euidently proued to be the Emperours Courts our aduersaries may acknowledge their owne ignorance folly who make declamations and many idle discourses without solid proofe against them that call Ecclesiasticall Courts the Kings Courts as if this were a thing new strange and neuer heard of before these late yeares Their error is that common Sophisme which filleth most of their bookes which Aristotle calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compounding confounding those things which we distinguish and which are distinct in nature For in this word of Iurisdiction they confound these two distinct things both that which is spirituall Iurisdiction yeelded by vs the right of the Church and all that also which Princes haue giuen to Ecclesiasticall Courts such as these priuiledges which Constantine gaue to Bishops Courts and other Princes since haue continued and enlarged If these things be not distinguished the truth can neuer appeare in this question by this the Reader may vnderstand who they are that hide and deface the truth by new varnishing of olde rotten Sophismes 8 Then all coactiue Iurisdiction came into the Church from the authority of Princes for as the power of the Church is internall and spirituall so externall and coactiue power was the right of Princes To this purpose Eusebius reporteth a speach of Constantine at a banquet calling himselfe a Bishop for things externall as they were for matters internall His words are these Vos quidem eorum quae intus sunt in Eccle sia agendâ—… ego vtro eorum quae extra hanc sunt Episcopus à Deo sum constitutus And whereas Iurisdiction is best knowne by appellations it hath been often seen that froÌ„ the Pope men haue appealed to a councel as hereafter we are todeclare but from a councel we find no appellation to the Pope but to the Emperor for some personall wrong Athanasius being vniustly condemned by the Synod of Tire appealed to Cinstantine as Socrates witnesseth In like sort Flauianus appealed to the Emperour when the Synod of Capua had referred his cause to Theophilus and the Bishops of Egypt Yea the heretiques themselues in those dayes knew no means to appeale from the Emperour Augustine saith that Donatus did still appeale to the Emperour being condemned by the Bishops and by Synodes And so religious were these auncient Bishops in preseruing the Emperors Iurisdiction and yet maintaining the truth without feare that when they were oppressed by Arians and by the power of an Arian Emperour yet they would vse no other meanes then these direct meanes And therefore the Bishops hauing a purpose to condemne the Arians craued a counsell of Valens an Arian Emperor who granted them a counsell at Lampsacum wherein they condemned the Arian doctrine So that without the Emperour they would not gather a counsell though it were to
Catholike 10. If this kinde of proofe please them to prooue the Popes Soueraigne supreame authoritie â—…hey may haue ynough thereof For as Pope Zaâ—…harie dispensed with the oath of Pipin and all the French Barons and subiects so doe the Popes since practise this part of Iurisdiction with great feruency or rather surie they dispense with the oathes of subiects they raise vp rebellions against true natural and lawfull Kings they aduance vsurpers This Iurisdiction wee graunt Popes haue practised but with shame ynough heere is the difference betweene them and vs betweene an euill cause and a good betweene impudencie and confidence in the truth both they and we bring the same examples but to contrary ends they bring these examples of the Popes practises to prooue Iurisdiction wee vrge the same examples to shame the Pope with his Iurisdiction Let the indifferent and ingenuous reader iudge whether applie them to the true right and proper end For let them aunswere vs if they can whence the Popes haue authoritie to execute such a Iurisdiction as they haue neither from Christ nor from the Princes of this world For certaine it is that to dispense with oathes to stirre vp subiects against their naturall Princes to mooue rebellions is a power which the Pope hath not receiued from Christ nor from the Princes of this world From whence then hath he it let them tell vs who make it a part of his Iurisdiction 11. After this Charles the great sonne to Pipin was made Emperour by Leo the third Pope At this time it appeareth that the Iurisdiction which by the Emperour before this was vsually practised vpon the Bishop of Rome and other Bishops began to be taken out of the hand of the Magistrate For when Charles hearing many complaints against this Leo concerning his life and conuersation called him to an examination in a great meeting of Bishops it was aunswered by a great acclamation Sedem Apostolicam omnium Ecclesiarum caput à nemine laico praesertim iudicari debere That is It is not meet that the Apostolicke Sea the head of all Churches should be iudged of any man especiall a Lay-man This moued Châ—…rles to omit the matter so soone had they learned to turne this power against the Emperor which they had some two hundred yeres before receiued from the Emperor This Iurisdiction then by this time had receiued a great change for in former times as the inquisition of false doctrines belonged to the care of Bishops so the examination of the life and manners of Bishops belonged alwayes to the Magistrate So Solomon deposed Abiathar So Constantine banished diuers Bishops and reformed the Clergie The godly Popes and Bishops in former times yeelded this power to the Magistrate which God hath giuen him knowing that euery soule is subiect to them euen Bishops euen Popes yea Apostles themselues But now by the fall of the Empire Papacy rising and a newe straunge image of the Empire rising vp in the Papacy this Iurisdiction was then in hatching which afterward was brought foorth by a monstrous birth 12. My purpose is to note the occasions of alteration of Iurisdiction in the Church of Rome and how the Popes hauing cast off the Iurisdiction of the Ciuill Magistrate did in time draw to themselues a new forme of Iurisdiction increasing the same by degrees For wheras at the beginning as we haue shewed the Bishops of Rome with others were vnder the coactiue Iurisdiction of the Ciuill Magistrate the absence and fall of the Empire gaue opportunity to the Bishops of Rome to raise theÌ„selues The first beginning of their Iurisdiction was by getting appeales to be made to them the enlarging aduancing of it was by obtaining the title of caput Ecclesiae vniuersall B. The Pope was not called caput Ecclesiae but the Church of Rome got that title vnder Phocas the Pope got it by his flatterers long after And in the time of Charles the great they had gotten in one foote farther into this Iurisdiction for then they began to refuse the coactiue Iurisdiction of the ciuill Magistrate All this while they were not come to the height and top of thei Iurisdiction to practise coactiue power ouer and against the ciuill Magistrate to depose Princes to raise vp rebellions to absolue subiects from their faith and alleageance though some of these things were a new founding yet they were not come to their perfection till after this time as we purpose in order to declare And as we note their practises so we must no lesse haue an eye to the men and meanes which withstood them in these ambitious courses 13 These attempts of Iurisdiction were then most famously withstood when they were brought to their full hight For after that the Popes had begun to stretch their Iurisdiction to the preiudice of Kings and Princes then began the opposition most to appeare learned men being stirred vp to write and throughly to examine this question Whereof my purpose is to speake farther in the last Chapter of this Treatise Here we will onely note what resistance it found at the beginning before it was growne vp to that hight whereunto it came in time First wee finde that both Charles the great himselfe and other Princes and Bishops haue withstood the Bishop of Rome heerein and seeking to giue euery one his right haue giuen many parts of that Iurisdiction which now the Pope claimeth to the ciuill Magistrate For after that Charles had subdued the Lumbards as his father Pipin had done before him and besieging Desiderius King of the Lumbards came to Rome from the siege to know what hee should haue for his trauaile for recouering S. Peters Patrimonie as the late Patrimonie of the Emperour faling to the Pope then began to be called for the Pope had promised to Charles for oppressing the Lumbards and recouering this new Patrimonie so much desired so hotely pursued so dearely bought that hee should be made Emperour of the West and the auncient authority and Iurisdiction of the Empire should be restored to him For the better effecting of these affaires Charles hauing set a strong siege about Pauy and taken order with his Captaines for that seruice left the siege came to Rome bringing with him a great number of Bishops Abbots to holde a Synod with Pope Hadrian and therein by all their industry and knowledge to finde out what were the true and auncient priuiledges of the Empire and what was the Emperours Iurisdiction confessed Pope Hadrian receiued Charles honourably and at his pleasure called a councell Wherein questionlesse some parts of the auncient Iurisdiction were restored to Charles For that Synod gaue him power to choose the Bishop of Rome and in all Prouinces of his gouernment to inuest all Archbishops and Bishops Thus much is acknowledged by as many witnesses in a manner as are Writers of the Story of this time But of late some haue quarrelled against this Story denying it to be true which
so that we are not to looke for any helpe from this Edition Baronius hauing done his lust vpon it and so many eyes watching and handes working to see that nothing may come to light which may disproue that which Baronius hath once with such confidence vndertaken But these workes of darkenesse though neuer so cautelously handled will be found out and bring shame vpon the workers For Platina witnesseth that Anastasius Bibliothecarius wrote this that Pope Hadrian yeelded this right to Charles the great His wordes are these Bibliothecarius scribit Lodouicum liberam eligendorum Episcoporum potestatem Paschali 〈◊〉 cum antea â—…a quoque in re Imperatores consulerentur quam potestatem ab Hadriano Pontifice Carolo concessam idem autor refert That is Bibliothecarius writeth that Lodouic graunted to Pascalis the free choise of Bishoppes when as before that time the consent of the Emperours was required in this thing which power the same author Bibliothecarius declareth that Pope Hadrian gaue to Charles Then we are certified that Anastasius wrote it And though this late Printed Anastasius haue it not yet that dooth not impaire our cause but our aduersaries and dooth testifie before God Angels and men the execrable impietie of them who like Giants fight against God and truth expunging and defacing auncient Records Then Platina assureth vs that Anastasius wrote it and therefore Sigebert was not the first reporter of it 57. Theodoricus de Niem doth also witnesse that this same narration was transcribed by him out of an auncient Copie written so long before his time that for age the Bookes and places where they were kept were almost consumed hac scripta reperiuntur saith he iâ—… antiquissimis Bibliothecis poene praenimia vetustate consumptis In which Bookes he found it written thus Carolus rex ingressus Italiam Papiam obsedit c. Post haec reuersus est Romam vbi constituta est sancta Synoduâ—… a beato Papa Hadriano in Palatiâ—… Lateranensi videlicet in Ecclesia sancti Saluatoris qua reuerendissiâ—…è celebrata est ab 153. viris religiosis Episcopis abbatibus c. ab vniuersis regionibus ordinibus almae vrbiâ—… â—… cuncto etiam clero huius sanctae Rom. Ecclesiae exquirentibus usus leges â—…res eiusdem Ecclesiâ—… imperij Where the same testimony for Inuestitures followeth at large This mans credite hath not beene called in question for ought that I could finde and there can be no reason to except against him being the Popes Register or in some chiefe place vnder him for writing And the better to declare the truth and fidelity of this man it is worth the obseruing that he hath with exact care recorded where he found these antiquities naming the place where these bookes might haue beene seene of all men at that timâ—… when he wrote for before his booke he writeth thus Incipit descriptio de Inuestitura Episcopatuum regum Teutonicorum ex quodam antiquissimâ—… libro Florentino per me Theodoricum de Niem Litâ—…rarum Apostolicarum scriptorem abbreuiatorem reperto dum Dominus Papa Iohannes 23. illiâ—… cum curia sua resideret fide liter extracta sequitur de verbo ad verbum prout in dicto libro videbatur scriptum 58. This man then liuing in the time of Iohn the three and twentieth being the Popes Register or Secretary or in some such office dealeth faithfully For this extreame impudencie was not then knowen in the world which is now so much practised in the Court of Rome We haue also declared from the testimonie of Nauclorus whom Iohn Reuclin a man so much reuerenced for learning in his time did so much reuerence for fidelity and diligence as appeareth by that Preface which the same Reuclin hath set before Nauclers historie that this question of the Emperours right for Inuestitures came to a hearing and examination betweene Henry the fift Emperour and Pope Paschalis the second where the Emperor shewed records proouing for three hundred yeares before his time the custome of Inuestitures to haue beene continued from Charles the great On the other side for the Pope there could nothing be shewed but Synodale decretum Some decree which Hildebrand or some Pope after him did make Moreouer vpon that Canon of Gratian which before we cyted there is reference to Iuo Carnotensis Lib. 8. de Election Rom. Pont. So that it seemeth that Iuo also wrote this before Gratian. Howsoeuer it be we haue witnesses enow to proue Sigebert an honest man and yet haue wee iust cause to exclaime O sâ—…lus O impostura O fraus For when we finde the mouth of antiquity stopped the testimonies of approued writers partly reiected as impostures only because they make against the Popes Iurisdiction partly expunged by sacrilegious hands and malicious and cruell hearts that the truth by all meanes may be defaced and falshood adored and maintained by a generation framed and fashioned to vanity and vntruth appearing with the countenance and haire of women that is of Harlots for their impudency with the teeth of Lions for their cruelty with the tailes of Scorpions for their stinging and expunging of auncient Authours leaning the Markes of their poysoned strokes in all bookes which they handle haue we not then iust cause to exclaime O profound villany O admirable cousenage O Antichristian imposture drawen from the depth of Sathans pollicies And what could make Baronius so confident to assure that none before Sigebert wrote thus but a sure confidence and repose in the expunging of Anastasius And yet hath he not so expunged that Authour but that the true markes of that Narration remaine still in his booke as presently we shal declare But behold into what wretched times we are now fallen for we cannot write for the truth without feares least we should by conuincing falshood giue an opportunity to falsifiers to worke more falsly For who can warrant vs that this which we haue produced shall not hereafter bee cleane expunged out of these Authors that no memory in antiquitie may remaine against them And when they haue corrupted all auncient Recordes and their posterity shall triumph in the wickednesse of their Fathers then our hope is that Christ from heauen will shew himselfe and will not suffer that Kingdome long to indure which standeth vp by no other supporters then falshood and vngodlinesse These outragious practises against the truth cannot but raise vp the spirits of GODS children to an earnest longing and expectation of Christs comming to deliuer his truth out of this captiuity and filthy prison wherein vnrighteous men seeke to holde it downe suppressed 59. Baronius proceedeth and telleth vs that Eginhardus saith that Charles came but foure times to Rome then Baronius laboureth to proue that this thing could not be done at any of those times We answere It is enough for our purpose if Charles came but once to Rome for all those Authours which I haue cyted doe proue that this was
it must be before his Bishoppe if he will accuse the Bishoppe it must be in a prouinciall Synode if he will draw a Metropolitane to answer for some things which he hath done it must be either before the Primate or before the Bishoppe of Constantinople All this we graunt to be orderly established the things intended are matters of Ecclesiasticall Cognisance which are to bee heard in such Courts but our question is of Clerks that are conuinced to be murtherers or Traytors c. Whether such are to bee exempt from triall at Common Law Of which exemptions these auncient Bishops neuer dreamed 76. It is moreouer to be noted that diuers of these places which he citeth as that from Sulpitius of S. Martin and from Ambrose c. are vnderstoode of another thing and not of exemption of Clarkes at all For the auncient Bishops as before I haue declared thought it not lawfull that matters of faith and doctrine should be determined in ciuill Courts by ciuill Magistrates This is true and this is that which those testimonies speake of but what is this to criminous Clarks that Robbers Traytors murtherers of the Clergy should be protected by reason of their Order from triall in Kings Courts this is a doctrine neuer knowne to the auncients It was first knowne in England in the dayes of Henry the second stirred seditiously by Thomas Becket Archbishop of Canterbury when as before that time it was neuer heard of in this land The manner heereof I will briefly recite out of Roger Houeden 77. In the yeare of Christ 1163. the contention concerning exemption of Clerkes grew famous betweene King Henry the second and Thomas Becket Archbishop Rex volebat saith Houeden Presbyteros Diaconos Subdiaconos alios Ecclesiae rectores si comprehensi fuissent in latrocinio vel murdra vel felonia vel iniqua combustione vel in his similibus ducere ad saecularia examina punire sicâ—…t laicum Contra quod Archiepiscopus dicebat quod si Clericus in sacris ordinibus constitutus vel quilibet alius rector Ecclesiae calumniatus fuerit de aliqua re per viros Ecclesiasticos in curia Ecclesiastica debet iudicari Et si conusctus fuerit ordines suos amittere sic alâ—…enatus ab officio beneficio Ecclesiastico si postea forisfecerit secundum voluntatem Regis baliuorum suorum iudicetur That is The King required that Priests Deacons Subdeacons and other Rectors of Churches if they were taken in murther robbery felony burning of houses or such like should be brought to secular Courts and there punished as Lay-men were Against this the Archbishop affirmed that if a Clerke being within holy Orders or any other Parson of a Church were accused of any thing he must be iudged by Ecclesiasticall Iudges in the Ecclesiasticall Court and if he were conuict he should loose his orders And so being excluded from office and benefice Ecclesiasticall if after this he incurred the like fault then might he be iudged at the pleasure of the King and his Officers Thus farre Houeden 78. This manner of degrading and afterward deliuering criminous Clarkes to the Secular power crept in about the time of the Conquest Bellarmine pretending greater antiquity for it can neither bring reason nor testimony for his opinion For whereas he saith Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia was first deposed by the Nicen Councell and afterward banished by Constantine by this offering to proue that they must first be deliuered to the Secular power before the Magistrate may punish and reproueth Caluin for not considering thus much We answere Bellarmine sheweth his skill in shifting and hiding the truth to deceiue the simple For Caluin in that place which he citeth against this Romish immunitie proueth two things First that coactiue power is in the hand of the Prince and not of the Church Ecclesia cogendi non habet potestatem de ciuili coactione loquor saith he Secondly that criminous Clarkes had no immunities from the ciuill Courts of Princes Now that Bellarmine saith Eusebius was first deposed by the Councell and then banished is nothing against Caluin but for him For the Church did not inflict the coactiue punishment of banishment but the Emperour And Caluin proueth at large in the same place that Kings and Emperours haue no authority to iudge in causes of faith Producing the example of Ambrose who in such a cause resisted the Emperour Valentinian Such a cause was that of Eusebius the Emperour knew not whether he was in fault or not before the Church had iudged the cause But Caluines iudgement and our question standeth in two thinges against which Bellarmine doth not so much as speake one word First that coactiue power was not then in the Church but in the Emperour Secondly that criminous Clerkes were then punished by the Magistrate Eusebius is not there proposed as a criminous Clerke but as an example wherein the coactiue power of the Magistrate appeared But now they say if a Clerke bee proued to be a felon murderer traytor c. the Kings Courts may not censure this man before he be degraded Against these immunities wee speake for which Bellarmine offereth not any proofe Let the manner of Bellarmines answering bee considered for it is easie for him thus to answere Caluin and all Protestants when he toucheth not the point in question but singling out of some peece from the whole wresteth that also from the true intent that he may shape a mis-shapen answere to it Then we say that before those desperate times wherein Iohn Wiclife saith and often affirmeth that Satan was loosed no man claymed such a beastly priuiledge as to be exempt from the Kings Lawes for murder treason and such like Godlinesse reason and the light of Nature seemeth to be extinguished in these men that being contented to take the benefite of Lawes will not be contented to bee ordered by Lawes This hath forced some Princes and States to ordaine Lawes that such should be out of the Kings protection Thus did that noble Prince Edward the third King of England Wherein the King seemed to open the true way to his successors to deale with these men for seeing as then they did so now they doe denie themselues to be the Kings subiects and affirme that neither by Diuine nor humane right they are bound to obey the King with his coactiue Lawes and that they are onely vnder the subiection of the Pope that for no crimes they are to bee examined in the Kings Courts is it not great reason that the protection of the King and of his Lawes should bee denyed to them that reiect both 79. Houeden declareth also that in the yeare one thousand one hundred sixtie foure the King called a Synod and required the Bishops vpon their allegeance to receiue his Graundfathers Lawes to vse and obserue them Thomas Becket answered for him and the rest they would keepe all the Lawes
Now this is the crueltie of our Lord the King that is so much spoken of through the world against the Church this is that persecution that he raiseth Then it is an auncient complaint of these Romish Catholickes to call the iust lawfull godly and necessary execution of iustice crueltie and persecution this complaint hath beene euer since continued by them and most of all where there is least cause euen in the milde and mercifull gouernement of the late Queene of famous memory What crueltie did they impute to her What persecution to her Gouernement When they are not able to proue that one man was executed for Religion but for treason Which was so much the more dangerous because it was masked with the visard of Religion but Religion is not nor euer was the cause why our Kings punished the Popes Clerkes but onely Iurisdiction For when the Pope will stretch his Iurisdiction so farre as to include coactiue power and to exclude Kings from the gouernement of their Subiects drawing the Clergie from the obedience of their Kings to the obedience and subiection of the Pope drawing the subiects of other Kings vnder his subiection by an Oath of Allegiance and hereupon perswading al that will hearken to him that they may not yeelde an Oath of Alleageance to their owne Princes the Popes Iurisdiction being drawne to these points as now by the confession of themselues they are the question betweene the Pope and Christian Princes is not of Religion but of Iurisdiction of ciuill and coactiue Iurisdiction and the summe of all is this Whether the Princes of Christendome shall be free Princes or the Popes Vassals 82. By this which we haue declared we see the cause of our Kings iustified against the Archbishoppe and the exemption of Clerkes for which the Archbishoppe stroue and which since that time is claimed to be an especiall priuilege of that Church to be condemned by the chiefe of the Clergy by all the Bishops of that Prouince and that euen to the Pope himselfe Which thing the Bishoppes of the English Church would neuer haue done vnlesse they had beene well assured that the Kings cause was good and that the contrary opinion was a pernicious nouelty a late vpstart deuice in the Church But howsoeuer the Popes Clerkes pretended their new forged priuiledges yet the Kings of this land held still their olde course in the auncient manner of execution of iustice against them that offended And therefore Henry the second by law commaunded as Houeden saith that the Bishoppes of London and Norwich should be summoned that they might be before the Kings Iustices to answere for that they against the statutes of the kingdome did interdict the land of the Earle Hugh 83. This exemption of Clarks was a new practise in the time of Marsilius of Padua and not so new as pestiferous occasioning the ruine of States and being as a furie sent abroad from hell to disorder all gouernment For thus he complaineth of it Quibus non contenti sed saecularium contra Christi Apostolorum praeceptum appetentes fastigia in legum Lationes seorsum ab ijs quae Ciuium vniuersitatis sunt proruperuut Omnem clerum ab his decernentes exemptum ciuile sâ—…hisma principatuum supremoruÌ„ pluralitatâ—…m inducentes ex ipsis c. Haec pestilentiae Italici regni radix est origo ex qua cuncta scandala germinauerunt prodeunt qua stante nunquaÌ„ ciuiles ibidem cessabunt discordiae c. That is Not content herewith they the Popes seeking the honour of secular gouernement against the commandement of Christ and his Apostles haue taken vpon them the ordaining of Lawes and Canons other then such as serue for the common good They decree that all the Clergie are exempt from temporall Princes heereby inducing a pluralitie of Soueraignties c. This is the roote and spring of the pestilence of the Empire from whence all scandals grow and which standing ciuill discord shall neuer haue an end c. Thus were these exemptions then found and acknowledged to be the pestilence and ruine of all states especially of the Empire And his reason is well to be obserued because saith he it bringeth in Pluralitatem supremorum principatuum quam velut impossibilem humanae quieti demonstrauimus he proueth the plurality of Soueraignty a thing impossible to stand with the quiet and peaceable Gouernement of the world Now this exemption must eyther induce a plurality of Soueraignties when the Pope is one Soueraigne and the Prince another which is impossible in nature saith Marsilius or else it denieth the Kings Soueraignty to establish the Popes which thing can neuer bee indured by any Prince §. VI. Of the Popes power in giuing lawes 84. ANother thing whereby this new Iurisdiction of the Pope was so highly aduanced was giuing of Lawes to Princes and their subiects whereas before Princes had giuen lawes to him Marsilius in the wordes last cyted in the end of the last Paragraffe speaking of these laws saith They now break out into a practise of Iurisdiction taking vpon them to make lawes separat and distinct from such lawes as are for the common and publique good of all meaning the Canon lawes which because they intend onely the priuate aduancement of the Pope and not the publique good of the Church being also made onely by the authority of the Pope and not by the publique consent of the Church therefore he doth not account them lawes but Oligarchicall and tyrannicall Decrees these lawes are to be considered because they make so great a shew of the Popes Iurisdiction 85. The Church before was gouerned by Bishoppes and Metropolitanes in such order that the affaires of euery particular Diocesse were ordered by the Bishoppe or by a Synode of his calling the affaires of the Prouince were determined by the Metropolitane or by a Prouinciall Synode of his calling from an Episcopall Synode a man might appeale to a prouinciall Synode and from a Prouinciall Synode to a nationall but from a prouinciall or from a nationall Synode none might appeale to the Bishoppe of Rome for which thing diuers Decrees were made in prouinciall Synodes as we haue before declared As the Bishoppes were Gouernours so the lawes whereby they did then gouerne the Church were the Canons of auncient Councels especially of those foure most famous Councels of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon For that the Canons of these Councels were held for the lawes of the Church it appeareth by a Constitution of Iustinian extant in the fift Synode held at Constantinople wherein Iustinian the Emperour declareth that Aâ—…thimus was deposed from the Bishoprike of Constantinople by Pope Agapetus and a whole Synode with him consenting for that he had departed from the doctrines of those foure holy Synodes the Nicen the Constantinopolitan the Ephesian and the Chalcedonian The Emperor also declareth that he being deposed by the Church should be banished by him ioyning his
flatterie in his seruants then to resume these old condemned priuiledges and therewithall to patch yp a Iurisdiction standing so directly against the iudgement and practise of the ancient godly Fathers 92. And yet was Anselme as resolute in this as Augustine was in the contrarie But heerein a great difference appeared which might much sway the iudgement of indifferent readers if there were no other meanes to informe them that Saint Augustine standing against appellations to Rome had heerein the full consent of all his fellow Bishoppes not one dissenting But Anselme standing for appellations to Rome stood alone without the consent of so much as one Bishoppe which thing I report for the honour of the Church of England and of all the Bishoppes of England at this time who heerein resisted their Archbishoppe standing for the ancient liberties of the Church William Malmsburie witnesseth thus much In his exequendis saith he omnes Episcopi Angliae Primati suo suffragium negarunt That is In the execution of these things all the Bishops of England denied their consent to their Primate This sheweth that Archbishoppes were made the Popes seruants before Bishoppes were the reason was because the Archbishoppes vsed to purchase a Pall from the Pope which Pall Anselme had not yet at this time of his variance with the King obtained for Malmsbury saith he first asked leaue to goe to Rome for the Pall. Now the Pope in graunting the Pall conueyed an Oath of Alleageance with it as before we haue obserued which was the reason that moued our Archbishopps to stirre such rebellious tumults against the Kings of this land Such was this faction which Anselme maintained for the Pope against the King wherein he was condemned by all the Bishops of England in the question of Appellation as Thomas Becket was after this time condemned by all the Bishoppes in like sort in the question of Inuestitures 93. And therefore Henry the second had iust cause to publish that law which Roger Houeden calleth graue edictum execrabile against the Pope beginning Si quis inuentus fuerit literas vel mandatū ferens Domini Papae c. capiatur de eo sicut de regis traditore regui siue dilatione fiat iusticia That is If any be found bringing in the Popes Letters or Mandat c. let him be apprehended and let iustice be executed without delay vpon him as vpon a traytor to the King and Kingdome In the same law it is said Item generaliter interdictum est ne quis appellet ad Dominum Papam That is It is simply by law prohibited that no man appeale to the Pope This was not a new law now inuented by Henry the second but an auncient law now renued and vpon a iust occasion put in execution for William Rufus as before we haue declared vrged this law against Anselme proouing it to be one of his Fathers lawes and auerring that such appeales did stand against the auncient lawes and customes of his Kingdome so that the Kings Iurisdiction in such matters was maintained by the auncient lawes of this land 94. But because the antiquity of the lawes of our land is questioned by our aduersaries though this thing belong not to my profession yet let me in a few wordes declare what I haue met with in Stories concerning this point that it may appeare that the lawes of this land are much more auncient then that Religion which now is called the Religion of the Church of Rome King William Rufus the Conquerours sonne declareth as Malmsbury witnesseth that it was a custome of this kingdome confirmed by his father that without the Kings licence no man might appeale to the Pope Now these lawes and customes which William the Conquerour did publish and confirme were the auncient lawes and customes of the Saxons before him not first inuented by the Conquerour though enacted and established by him For Roger Houeden writing of these lawes which the Conquerour enacted saith that the King being once in minde to establish the lawes of the Danes was after much and earnest intreaty of the Barons perswaded to yeelde that the lawes of King Edward the Confessour should be retained still The Barons saith Houeden vrged the King Pro anima regis Eduardi qui et post diem suum concesserat coronam regnum cuius erant Leges Unde Concilio habito praecatui Baronum tandem acquieuit ex illa ergo die visa authoritate veneratae per vniuersam Angliam corroboratae confirmatae sunt prae caeteris patriae legibus leges Eduardiregis quae prius inuentae Constitutae erant in tempore Adgari aui sui For King Edwards soule who bequeathed him his Crowne and Kingdome after his death and whose lawes they were whereupon holding a Parliament he yeelded at last to the Barons request from that day forward the lawes of King Edward were by his authority honoured established and confirmed through all England which lawes were before found out and enacted in the time of Edgar Grandfather to King Edward After this Houeden entreth into a large discourse to proue that the lawes which the Conquerour established were King Edwards lawes which lawes saith he were called King Edwards lawes not because hee inuented them first but because after they had beene buried in some neglect lying vnregarded and not put in due execution for the space of three score and eight yeares after Edgars death for so many yeares are betweene King Edgars death and S. Edwards Coronation he reuiued them And thus much he confirmeth that the lawes established by the Conquerour were S. Edwards lawes and the same which were in vse here in the daies of that peaceable King Edgar And it is not without good reason collected that the same lawes proceeded from King Alphred for he like another Iustinian is reported to haue compiled certaine volumes of lawes not onely from the lawes of the Britaines Saxons and Danes but also of the ancient Grecians and other Besides that he translated into the Saxon tongue those lawes which were called the Molmucin lawes and also the Martia◅ lawes the one of Dunwallo Molmucius an auncient Brittish King the other so named of Martia Proba an auncient Brittish Queene And that William the Conquerour established the Saxon lawes it is likewise testified by Henry Huntingdon who saith thus Saxones pro viribus paulatim terram bello capessentes captam obtiuebant obtentam aedificabant aedificatam legibus regebant Nee non Normanici cito breuiter terram subdentes sibi victis vitam libertatem legesque antiquas regni iure concesserunt The Saxons by a strong hand ouercame the land in time by war built as they ouer came and as they built gouerned it by lawes The Normans also quickly subduing the land vnder them yet graunted by the right of the Kingdome lise and libertie and the auncient lawes to them whom they subdued 95. Then whereas William Rufus
fraud diuelish pride and Necromancy aspiring to the Papacy and was at last made Pope not onely without the consent of the Emperor but without the consent of the Cardinals also onely a company of armed men with some few of the Clergie gaue out that Hildebrand was chosen Pope by S. Peter he was much furthered by one Maude a Gentlewoman of great riches then in Italy with whom he had great familiarity 104. Henry the fourth Emperour called a Councell at Wormes to represse Hildebrand The Bishops of that Councell condemned Hildebrand for intruding into the Papacy for his infamous prodigious conuersation adiudgedhim to be deposed Hildebrand vpon the knowledg of these news excommunicated the Emperor depriued him of Gouernement absolued his subiects from their Oath of Alleageance The Emperor of a sudden being robbed of his friends subiects by the practise of them whom HildebraÌ„d had set to negotiate this matter was driuen to the greatest debasement of himselfe that hath bin heard of bare-foot in a sharp Frost in deepe Winter three daies attending at Canusium with his wife child before he was admitted to the Popes presence when he was admitted and had craued pardon his censure was to stand at the mercy of Hildebrand Which when he had confirmed by an Oath the Pope absolued him but afterward set vp Rodolph Duke of Sueuia in warre against him Rodolph being thus stirred vp to Rebellion against his Soueraigne was so wounded in a battell that being carried to Merseburge without hope of life called the Nobles and Bishoppes that had fauoured him and in their presence beholding his right hand which was smitten off in the battell This quoth he is that hand by which I confirmed an Oath of mine Alleageance to my Master Henry this haue I gotten by following your Councell returne you to your Master and keep your first faith as for me I goe to my Fathers 105. The Emperour after this gathered a Synode at Brixia The Bishoppes of Italy Lumbardy Germany meeting there condemned Hildebrand for a disturber of Christendome a disorderer of the Church a periurous sacrilegious Incendiary a Witch and Necromancer The Emperour besieged him in the Castle of S. Peter but Hildebrand vnderstanding that the Emperour vsed to resort to S. Maries Church to pray set a knaue aboue the place where he vsed to pray to throw downe a great stone vpon him and to kill him VVhilst the varlet was setting the stone for that purpose downe comes the stone and the traytor with it who was crushed to peeces therewith After that Hildebrand had set vp many such practises against the Emperour without effect he betooke himselfe to flight And â—…andring like a Vagabond without comfort without helpe without hope though brought to a most pitifull estate yet pitied of no man trauelling vnder the vnsupportable burden of a restlesse conscience he died for griefe at Salernum By all which we see that this new and monstrous practise of deposing Kings was resisted by the Emperour as pestiferous against his estate disclaimed by Bishoppes as a thing strangely disordering the Church and ciuill States and iustly reuenged by God as a thing abhominable The Chronicles obserue as it is noted in Vspergensis Fol. 226. that this Henry the fourth had fought three score and two pitched battels in number surpassing M. Marcellus and Iulius Caesar of whom the one fought thirty the other fiftie Henry the fift 106. WHen Hildebrand and Rodolph both conspiring against Henry the fourth were both ouerthrowne the succeeding Popes maintaining the same pollicy and practise for it were pittie but that these Apostolicall practises were well knowne raised Henry the fift in armes against his father Henry the fourth this old Emperour being wearie of troubles and desirous to haue some repose made his purpose knowne that hee would resigne all gouernment to his sonne and goe himselfe in person to visite the Sepulcher of Christ but the sonne was stirred vp by the Popes to rebell against his Father before hee had vndertaken that iourney To colour his rebellion hee protested that hee sought not his Fathers Throne for desire of dominion neither wished he the deprination of his Lord and Father but if his Father would bee subiect to Saint Peter and his Successours then would he yeeld him the Empire The end of this contention was this The old Emperour was surprised imprisoned by his sonne and so died There is an Epistle of this Emperour extant in Naucler wherein he complaineth that he was betrayed against all humane and diuine Lawes being inuited by his sonne to a Treaty of peace after faith and assurance giuen for his life and honour comming peaceably to Mentz was surprised treacherously After all this Henry the fift comming to Rome found no more fauour then his Father had done For Paschalis the second contended with him so earnestly for Inuestitures which was the quarrell for which his Father felt so much the Popes anger that thereupon a tuâ—…ult was raised in that tumult Pope Paschalis was taken Who being in the Emperours power confirmed the Emperors Iurisdictión and disclaimed the right of Inuestitures yeelding it to the Emperour in that sort as his auncestours had vsed the same in former times 107. At this time the Cities of Italy tooke an Oath of aleageance to the same Emperour But after all this grant of Pope Paschalis no bond being sufficient to hold fast a Pope he called a Councell at Rome wherein he condemned all that himselfe had done in yeelding Inuestitures to the Emperour and excommunicated the Emperour The Emperor to preuent the dangers that might ensue came again into Italy and sent Ambassadors to the Pope to try if these matters might be brought to a peaceable end The Pope in the mean time calleth a Councell at the Lateran In this Councell Pope Paschalis excusing that fact of his for yeelding Inuestitures to the Emperour desired all that were present to pray for him that God would forgiue him For saith he that writing which I made which is called a priuiledge I doe heere condemne vnder an euerlasting curse and pray that all you will doe the same There followed a generall acclamation Fiat fiat that is be it so Then Bruno Bishop of Signinum faid We haue cause to thanke God that we haue heard the Pope from his owne mouth condemne this priuiledge Which is not a priuiledge but rather a prauiledge because it containeth prauity and heresie Whereupon another stood vp and said If that priuiledge containe heresie then hee who made it is an heretique Caietan being moued with the sharpnesse of that speach answered What dost thou in this Councell in the hearing of vs all call the Pope an heretique that writing was not heresie but it was euill Nay quoth another it was not euill c. Paschalis by his hand commaunding silence appeased the clamour and tolde them that heresie neuer entred into the Church of Rome This I haue
his Kingdome to such as would inuade it absolued his Subâ—…ects from their faith alleageance drew those that had taken the Crosse for the warres of Ierusalem to fight against Peter And when Martiâ—… was dead Hoâ—…orius the fourth did redouble his curses vpon Peter After all these curses and so much bloud and warres procured by the Popes to the vexation of Christendome yet Peter maintained his chalenge and held those Kingdomes Philip the French King 136. BOnâ—…face the eight pretending to aduance the holy warres for this was not the least pollicy of that Sea to send Princes abroad that in the meane time they might suck their Kingdomes and draw the sinewes thereof to Rome for this purpose sent the Bishop of Ariminum to Philip the faire the French King The Bishop hauing vsed all perswasions hee could by faire meanes and finding the King nothing mooued with all that he alleadged from perswasions hee fell to threatnings The King being much offended at his threatnings and because as some adde the Bishoppe had rauished an ingenuous maid threw the Bishoppe in prison Others say he apprehended the Bishoppe Quod esset paterinus 〈◊〉 Whatsoeuer the cause was of the Kings offence Boniface was highly displeased and sent the Archdeacon of Narbon to command the King to acknowledge that he held his Kingdome of the Church of Rome or else to denounce the Anathema against him and obsolue all French men from their Oath of Alleageance When the Archdeacon arriued at Paris the King would not permit his Bulles to be published The Popes letters were taken from him and burned with fire The King also vnderstanding the end of the Popes earnest motion for his iourney to Ierusalem to be that in his absence he might draw great treasures out of France to Rome published an Edict wherein it was made vnlawfull for any to depart out of France to Rome or thither to carry money Whereupon Boniface cursed Philip to the fourth generation absolued his Nobles and gaue his Kingdome to Albert the Emperour inuesting Albert by his letters into the Kingdome of France but Albert protested that he would not stirre against the King vnlesse hee might haue thaâ—… Kingdome confirmed to him and to his heyres No quoth the Pope that may not be as long as Iezebell liueth meaning Elizabeth wife to Albert a woman of great fame and honour whom he hated for no other cause but for that her brethren and auncestors had done valiantly against the Sea of Rome 137. Against this furious attempt of Boniface Philip the French King in an Assembly at Paris appealed from the Pope to a generall Councell this appeale is diuersly reported All agreâ—… that he appealed from the Pope Platina confoundeth the Narration thus Adsedeâ—… Apostolicam tum vt ipse dicebat 〈◊〉 futuruâ—… que Concilium appellauit That is He appealed to the Sea Apostolicke then vacant as he said and to a Councâ—…ll which should after this be held Naucler deliuereth it thus Rex 〈◊〉 congregari fâ—…cit Paritijs omnâ—…s Praelatos Franciâ—… nec non Barones facto Concilio pro sui iustificatione appellauit ab illa senteÌ„â—…a se excusando contra Bonifacium inuehendo c. That is The French King gathered a Councell at Paris of Prelates and Barons and for his owne iustification hee appealed from that sentence excusing himself inueighing against Boniface This man then hath nothing of any appellation to the emptie Sea but the appellation was as diuers were about these times from the Pope to a generall Councell this appeale was sent by Sarra Columna a Nobleman of Rome and one Nogarelius a French Knight a man faithfull to the King The pretence was diuulged that they should goe to publish the Kings appeale against the Popes Decree but Sarra hauing another secret purpose came into Italy in the habite of a seruant gathered closely by the helpe of his friends a band of souldiers and with great secresie and silence came to Anagnia where the Pope lodged then in his fathers house Sarra breaking vp the doores tooke Boniface in bed bound him and brought him to Rome where after a few daies in great sorrow and desperation he ended his wretched life Ranulphus saith that he was set vpon an Horse vnbridled with his face turned to the horse taile and so running to and fro was famished with hunger and died like a Dogge as the common saying was of him that he entred like a Foxe raigned like a Lion and died like a Dogge It may be truely said of all the Popes that liued since the yeare of Christ one thousand which Naucler obserueth of this Pope Imperatoribus Regibus Principibus nationibusque torrorem potius quam religionem inij cere conabâ—…tur dare regna auferre pro arbitrio c. He sought not so much to plaâ—… Religion as terrour in Emperours Kings Princes and nations to giue and take away kingdomes at his pleasure Where hee doth truely describe the fruite of the Popes excommunications it is not for planting of Religion but for striking a terrour in Princes and breeding a confusion in the world and therfore it is no censure of Christs Church because all these censures plant Religion without confusion of Princes and disordering of the world 138. Finding in Story two Epistles one from Boniface to this Philip the other from Philip to Boniface I thought good to set them downe they are but short Boniface seruant of Gods seruants to Philip the French King feare God and keepe his commandements VVEe will haue you to vnderstand that you are subiect to vs both in spirituall and temporall affaires No collation of Benefices or Prebends belongeth to you and if you haue the vacation of any reserue the fruits thereof to the successours if you haue made any collation we iudge that such shall be of no validity that are to come and those that are past we reuoke reputing all Hereticks that thinke otherwise Dated at Later an c. The answere was thus returned Philip by the grace of God King of France to Boniface bearing himselfe as Pope health little or none at all YOur singular fooleship may vnderstand that in temporall affaires we are subiect to none that the collation of Churches and Prebends perteineth to vs by royall prerogatiue and the fruits thereof during the Vacation that the collation already made or hereafter to bee made are of iust force and validity and thatwe will defend the possessours thereof against all men reputing all foolish and madde men that thinke otherwise Henry the seuenth 139. HEnry the seuenth Emperor was much fauoured at the first by Clement 5. Pope for that Clement was highly offended with Philip the French King who then sought the Empire the hatred of Philip drew fauour to Henry but as passion ruled the Pope so pride ouer-ruled the passion and turned this fauour into greater hatred for when Henry came to order the State of Italy at that
great learning and iudgement I will record heere some obseâ—…uations of his for it seemeth that he had a purpose to reâ—…ute that former worke of Triumpâ—…us though the truth is hee nameth not Triumphâ—…s throughout all his booke concerning this point of Iurisdiction one especiall ground which hee layeth is this Ab â—…fficio principatâ—…s siâ—…e 〈◊〉 iurisdiction is 〈◊〉 soâ—… coactiuâ—… 〈◊〉 cuiuslibet in hoc sâ—…lo Christâ—…s seipsum Apostâ—…los exclusit 〈◊〉 vâ—…luit That is Christ hath excluded and purposed to exclude hiâ—…selfe and his Apostles from principalitie or contentious iurisdiction or regiment or any coactiue iudgment in this world Which thing he prouâ—…th at large both by Scriptures Fathers because Christ â—…aith his kingdome is not of this world by which words coactiue Iurisdiction is excluded as was the doctrine of Christ such was his example of obedience for he was alwayes subiect to the coactiue power of the Magistrate Thus by the â—…ound and cleere Scriptures with the expositions and iudgement of the ancient Fathers he resuâ—…eth that noueltiâ—… which had no other ground then the Popes decretals 8. Therefore he examineth the authority of the Popes deâ—…retals and giueth a learned and iuditious distinction declaring thereby how the Pope may bee obeyed or not obeyed commaunding against the Emperour for saith he if the Emperour commaund any thing against the law of God and the Pope commaund things agreeable to that law thou must ouâ—… of doubt obey the Pope and not the Emperour But if the Emperour commaund something according to his imperial law the Pope command somthing according to his decretals against the imperiall lawes no man subiect to the Emperour ought in such things to obey the Pope Which thing he proueth at large because the ciuill Magistrate beareth the sword because he is the Minister of God the reuenger of disobedience because euery soule is subiect to him Which things saith hee are not spoken of any spiritual Gouernour but of the Temporall Magistrate For the Goueâ—…nours to whom in coactiue Iuâ—…isdiction we must obey are such as by armed power defend their Countries and people which in no case can agree to a Bishop or Priest 9. By such reasons he proceedeth and proueth infallibly his purpose and conclusion that no spirituall Gouernour hath from Christ any Iurisdiction coactiue but this power is left wholly in the hands of the ciuill Magistrate And thus doth cut in sunder the sinewes of their disputations who plead for the Popes Iurisdiction which Iurisdiction they make to consist in power coactiue Of the Popes decretals which then were lately deuised Lawes against the auncient Iurisdiction of the Church as also against the Iurisdiction of Princes he saith Vt ipsi fabulantur in sâ—…is decretalibus quâ—… secundum veritatem nihil aliud sunt quà m ordinationes quaedam Oligarchicae quibus in nullo obedire tenentur Chrsti fideles in quuntum hâ—…smodi That is As they bable in their decretals which in truth are nothing but certaine Oligarchicall ordinations to which Christians are in no case bound to obey as they proceed from the Pope Wherein he deliuereth thus much that these Canon lawes or decretals ought to haue no force among Christians vnlesse they be confirmed by the lawes of the land and by Princes in their Dominions so many as Princes shall thinke fit for the gouernment of the Church in their proper Dominions may be established being established ought to be obeyed but not as the Popes laws vse but as the laws of those Princes for that is it which Marsilius saith the decretals are not to be obeyed in quaÌ„tuÌ„huiusmodi Now that all coactiue power is by God deliuered to the Temporall Magistrate hee prooueth solidly from these words he is the Minister of God to take vengeance by vengeance all coactiue power is vnderstood Neither doth he denie but that the Church gouernours may execute coactiue power but then they must haue it from Princes and from such Temporall powers which haue the same Which being expresly and distinctly written by him three hundred yeres agoe is no other thing then that which we now maintaine at which our aduersaries seeme to wonder as at some new doctrine neuer heard before when the same truth after the saâ—… manner beene maintained by the learned men that haue handled this question before vs. Nec in quenquam presbyterum saith he aut non pres byterum conâ—…enit coactiâ—…am in hoc saeculo Iurisdictionem habere quenquam Episcopum siâ—…e Papam â—…isi eadem siâ—…i per humanum legisâ—…atorem concessa fuerit in cuiâ—…s potestate semper est hanc ab ipsis reuocare That is No man Priest or not Priest can haue Iurisdiction coactiue in this world Bishop or Pope vnlesse it be granted to them by the humane law-maker in whose power it is at his pleasure to recall it from them 10. Concerning the right of calling Councels his determination is this If a cause of religion rise in question the Pope saith he may signifie the same to the chiefe Temporall Gouernour but the authority of gathering and calling the Councell belongeth to him that hath coactiue Iurisdiction and ought to bee gathered by his coactiue precept When it is gathered he leaueth the first and chiefe seat therein to the Bishop of Rome hee giâ—…eth him the honour to propose the matter to collect all together that is spoken to communicate the things determined to others and to excommunicate the transgressors And all this to doe not at his owne pleasure or vpon his owne head sed ex concilij sententia onely by the direction of the Councell This principality he yeeldeth to the Bishop of Rome and to that Church so long as thus it standeth and so long as it doth nothing to the contrary whereby this honour may be iustly withdrawen Secundum quâ—…m modum saith hee Romanae vrbis quamdiâ—… extiterit obicemque ad hoc non apposuerit populus ille c. poterit licitè ac debebit iâ—…m â—…ict a principalitas in Episcopo Eccleâ—…a continue reseruari That is According to which maner this principality may lawfully and ought to be reserued alwayes for that Bishop and that Church as long as it thus standeth and doth nothing to the contrary This honour if the Pope would haue held himselfe contented therewith might long time enough beene reserued vnto him But when this could not content him but he must haue all Iurisdiction ouer the Church and ouer secular Princes if he finde not that honour yeelded to him which hee expecteth he may thanke himselfe because he hath procured his owne contempt and by vsurpation of vndue honour he hath lost that which though it was not due to him yet from some custome was giuen might haue beene continued to this day if himselfe had not caused the Church to withdraw it For saith mine Author Licet circa 〈◊〉 Ecclâ—…sia 〈◊〉 Episcopi Ecclesiae fidelium neque diuina neque
reward that is reserued for you you will commaund that a Synode may bee gathered Another part of the office of a Prince is saith he Confirmare custodire in concilijs 〈◊〉 which thing hee proueth by diuerse auncient authorities and concludeth that Emperours haue euer had this authoritie Hee saith that in this thing hee had made diligent search and had found this practise continued in all generall Councels vntill the eight Synode inclusiuely In which search saith hee I finde by the acts of all generall Councels aswell in Chalceon as in Constantinople Nice Ephesus that either the Emperour was present in person or some iudges his Vicegerents and those not aboue twentie seldome fifteene but when the Emperour himselfe was present in person I finde saith he that hee was alwayes Presedent of the Councell no other secular Prince hath right to be present in the Councell sauing the Emperour Vnlesse the Emperour appoint some to be present but being present they haue no voice in the Councell but may sit onely to heare this he proueth by that testimony of Ambrose in the cause of faith Bishops are the iudges and not the Emperours 61. And whereas this auncient Iurisdiction of Princes was so disordered by the Pope that by Papall intrusions and incroachments the Princes had well-nigh lost their right and temporall Iurisdiction turned into spiritual Iurisdiction of this he much complaineth and openeth the true cause of all this disorder to be in the insatiable couetousnes of the Court of Rome for thus he saith Rabidus appetitus ad ipsa terrena Ecclesijs annexa Dominia Episcopis ambitiosis hodie inest c. de temporalibus omnis cura de spiritualibus nulla Non fuit ista intentio Impâ—…ratorum non volebant spiritualia à temporalibus absorberi c. dum vacant Ecclesiae semper in periculo schismat is existunt c. Si perelectionem prouidendum est ambitio procurat diâ—…isionem vâ—…torum Si per curiam facilius persuadetur pro plus offerente omnia illâ—… grauamina adueniunt pauperibus subditis curia attrahit quicquid pingue est id quod Imperium contulit pro Deicultus bono publico ordiâ—…auit sanctissime auaritia cupiditate exorta palleatis rationibus nouis adinuentionibus totaliter peruertitur Imperiale efficitur Papale spirituale temporale That is Such a rauenous appetite is in ambitious Bishoppes at this day toward the temporall Dominions annexed to Churches c. all their care is for the temporalties not for spirituall matters this was not the meaning of Princes they meant not that the spirituall labours should be deuoured by temporalties c. Whilst the Churches are vacant there is alwaies some danger of a schisme c. If they proceed by election ambition procureth a diuision of the voyces If by the Court he that bringeth most is best heard and soonest preuaileth And all these greeuances come vpon the poore subiects whatsoeueris fat and rich the Court of Rome draweth to her selfe and that which the Empire as well for the worship of God as for the publicke good hath conferred vpon the Church and ordeined to an holy end all is vtterly peruerted through filthy couetousnesse and certaine painted reasons and new inuentions are deuised to colour it And thus the Imperiall right is now made Papall and temporall right is made spirituall Then these be the obseruations of the learned men of the Church of Rome long before vs that the Pope had intruded vpon the Emperours right now what soeuer the Pope had once practised that must be called spirituall Thus the Iurisdiction of the Emperor being once by cunning or force wrested from the Emperour being found in the Popes hand it was presently called spirituall Iurisdiction as he doth most truely obserue Imperiale efficitur Papale spirituale temporale 62. By all which we find the iudgement of this man to be directly against the Popes pretensed Iurisdiction and for the right of temporall Magistrates when we finde the Cardinals of the Church of Rome to write thus before the time of the contention and before M. Luther was borne wee are not so much to consider their priuate iudgements in these things as the receiued iudgement of the Church wherein they liued that is the Church of Rome from the iudgement of that Church they departed not but in these things do faithfully deliuer vnto vs the iudgement of the same Church standing against the iudgement of the Pope and his Court consisting of Friars and flatterers Thus we see the cause of the Reformed Churches throughly iustified by this learned Cardinall their separation from the Pope and the Court of Rome warranted because the Pope hath first made the separation from the profession of Saint Peter and from the faith of holy Scriptures and the idugement of auncient fathers In which case he granteth that the Church may depart from the Pope and thereby doth iustifie the separation that is made §. VII Aeneas Siluius 63. AT this time wrote Aeneas Siluius afterward called Pope Pius the second he hath written a booke of the actes and proceedings of the Councell of Basil from which I will note some things wherein the iudgement of this man may appeare concurring with the iudgement of the Church of Rome in his time but repugnant to the Pope and his flatterers First handling that Text Tues Petrus super hane Petram c. he saith thus A quibus verbis ideó placuit exordiri quod aliqui verba hâ—…c ad extollendam Rom Pontificis authoritatem solent adducere sed vt statiâ—… patebit alius est vâ—…rborum Christi sensus That is With which words I thought good to begin because some vse to alledge these words to extoll the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome but as it shall soone appeare there is another sense of Christs words Who are they who in the iudgment of this man do peruert the words of Christ Let the Iesuites aunswere and let them giue vs some reason able to satisfie a man of reason why that cause should not bee helde damnable which is condemned by their owne writers their Bishoppes their Cardinals their Popes Let them not tell vs that this Pope Pius was of another mind afterward when he was Pope and before he was Pope he might erre but after he was once Pope he could not erre these bee plaine collusions of them who write such things and illusions of such as beleeue them For it is not possible that any man should write or speake or thinke such things from conscience Shall I thinke that any learned man can thinke in conscience this to bee true that the Pope cannot erre when I heare the testimonie of the Church so full against it When I heare such as come to be Popes refute it before they come to that place When I heare such as haue beene in the place exclaime in the extremitie of desperation that no man in
to command for otherwise the Kings command is but as the word of a priuat man or of a child if he haue not power to iudge and punish 14. Moreouer whereas Iehosaphat commandeth the Priests and Leuites to iudge betweene blood and blood Law and precepts statutes and iudgements In things that concerned questions of blood as when blood was shed by casualtie in which case the party offending had remedy by sanctuary and the high Priest was the immediat iudge as also in matters concerning lawes precepts â—…tutes iudgements that is ordinances ceremoniall or morall In these things stood the Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction which then was practised in the Church for to take that distinction which we must often remember in this question it is confessed that all Ecclesiasticall power is either of order or Iurisdiction In both which the King hath a part bâ—…t differently In the power of orders the Kings part and office was to see that things of that nature were orderly done and the breach thereof punished but himselfe was not to execute any thing whereunto the Priests were apointed by the power of their orders as to offer incense c. Wherefore Vzziah was smitten with leprosie for medling with that part of the Priests office Now Iurisdiction is diuided into power internall which as often wee haue said belongeth not to the King and power externall which power externall when it is coactiue is nothing but that which wee call the Kings Iurisdiction though it be in matters Ecclesiastical And this Iurisdiction is here testified to be in Iehosaphat and from him deriued to all to all iudges vnder him both Temporall and Ecclesiasticall For as he commaunded the Temporall iudges so in like sort he commaunded the Ecclesiasticall And as the Ecclesiasticall iudges might replie if they had bene such as now these are of the Romane Clergie that Ecclesiasticall iudgements were holy and the cause of God and not of the King so doth the King witnesse of Temporall iudgements for speaking to Temporall iudges he saith you execute not the iudgements of man but of the Lord. Then Temporall iudgements are the Lords cause aswell as Ecclesiasticall and herein they differ not 15. Now this Iurisdiction which is in coactiue power wee prooue to be in the King and onely in the King I speake according to the forme of the state of Israel in those dayes wherof we now speake aunswerable to which is the Soueraigne magistrate in any other state This right I say we prooue to bee onely in the King and from him deriued to other iudges both Temporall and Spirituall by these reasons first the King and onely the King commaundeth both iudges to doe their duties in their seuerall places and hath lawfull power to punish them if they doe otherwise therfore the Kings Iurisdiction coactiue is ouer both sorts alike The antecedent hath two parts the first drawen from the expresse words of the Scripture in this text the second followeth by a necessitie For the commaund of a King is ridiculous and no commaund vnlesse he haue authoritie to punish The consequence followeth by the very definition of Iurisdiction which will prooue the second part of the antecedent For this Iurisdiction for which we plead is defined by the most learned of the Church of Rome authority coactiue If it be authoritie it may command if coactiue it may punish then it followeth that where Iehosaphat had first authoritie to commaund and last to punish that questionlesse hee had this Soueraigne Iurisdiction 16. If against this any obiect that the King may command in matters of orders of preaching the Word administring the Sacraments c. In all these things the King may lawfully command the parties to doe their duties and may punish them if they doe otherwise and yet no man will put the Kings Iurisdiction in these matters of orders Preaching Sacraments c. For aunswere let me intreat the reader with attention to consider these three things First to commaund secondly to execute thirdly to punish Iurisdiction standeth wholly in the first and last and nothing at all in the second that is in authoritie and not in action So that though the King should execute a thing which belongeth to his office yet in the execution therof his Iurisdiction should not appeare howsoeuer his wisedome knowledge and actiue vertues might appeare therein for Iurisdiction is in the authoritie of commaunding and power of punishing and supereminence that riseth from both And therefore in the preaching of the Word administration of Sacraments the King hath no part because therein Iurisdiction standeth not these things being matters of execution not of commaund but the authoritie to commaund these things by making or vrging lawes for them and to punish the transgression by corporall punishments this because it includeth coactiue power is in the Soueraigne Magistrate onely If the Magistrate should either neglect his dutie as the heathen did or commaund false doctrines to be preached as the Arian Emperours did in this case the Church hath warrant to maintaine the truth but without tumults and rebellion and rather in patience to loose their liues then to forgo any part of the truth 17. Another reason to prooue this Soueraigne authoritie coactiue to be only in the King and from him respectiuely deriued to both sorts of iudges may thus bee drawen For the iudges Temporall there is not so much question made all the doubt is of iudges Ecclesiasticall the chiefe of which iudges Ecclesiasticall in the Church of Israel was the high Priest Then this Iurisdiction whereof we speake must be confessed to haue been principally and originally either in the king or in the high Priest but in the high Priest it was not Therefore in the King it must be That it was not in the high Priest we proue by these reasons The high Priest is commaunded corrected punished and deposed by the King and not the King by the Priest therefore the Soueraigne Iurisdiction is not in the high Priest but in the King Againe the high Priests did neuer practise coactiue authoritie vnlesse when they were Soueraigne Magistrates as sometimes the high Priests in Israel were but as high Priestâ—… they had no such power for the causes betweene blood and blood which were of their cognisance are by the interpreters vnderdood such cases wherein a man was killed by chaunce without the purpose or against the will of the offender in which case the high Priest might graunt him the prâ—…uiledge of sanctuary and so deliuer him from the auenger of blood but he had no power coactiue to inflict death or such punishments at his pleasure which trueth was so constantly receiued and preserued in the Church afterward that euen in the greatest power highest ruffe of Poperie the Church of Rome did not take this full â—…oactiue power but onely proceeded to degradation and then to deliuer men vp to the secular powers which was a â—…ecret confession that they had no right to
others Who though in some things they were deceiued and by the sleighty and subtill worke of Sathan drawne to doe it vpon this so much fancied Iurisdiction of Rome Yet as in charity we are to iudge they were preserued by the mercie of God from that shamelesse impudency of some of their predecessours and were content to leaue things as they found them And so the Church of Rome stoode vntill the time of Gregorie the first CHAP. VI. Of the state and Iurisdiction of the Church from the yeare of Christ 600. vntill the conquest of England Wherein is declared how this Iurisdiction was first refuted by the Popes and after obtained by the succeeding Popes How the Popes resisted the Emperour and surprised the Emperours Iurisdiction and lands and how some Emperours recouer Iurisdiction againe NOw we enter into those fatall times of our captiuity For wee confesse that our Fathers were by a iust iudgement of God brought into a captiuity farre greater then the Babilonian Our Kings our Bishops our people our Church and all were oppressed And they that led vs captiues aske vs where was our Church then Wee answere in captiuity For though the greatest number then followed the pleasures and delights of Babilon yet among them the true Israel of God remained And we are able by the grace of God to proue a true Church to haue continued in the doctrines of the trueth vntill God sent in his wonderfull mercy a deliuerance from this captiuity But this belongeth to another question 2 After these times the Iurisdiction of Princes and of the Church was oppressed by the Pope But before they came into that great oppression and captiuity it pleased God for better testification of his truth to all ages and for the confusion of this tyrannie gotten and maintained by forgerie to cause one of the Popes to dispute this question with such zeale and courage that it remaineth an euerlasting testimonie against this Iurisdiction and against all his successours For when Iohn Bishop of Constantinople would haue had this title of Oecumenicall Bishop confirmed to him Gregory the first questionlesse the best Pope that hath beene since his time vseth such reasons against Iohn as are sufficient to proue that no Bishop hath right to that Iurisdiction which now the Popes claime and that hee who vsurpeth that place aboue his brethren is Antichrist And if the iudgement of Gregory be sufficient to determine this controuersie it will follow that Antichrist hath beene raised vp in the Church of Rome presently after Gregory and hath in the succession of those Bishops sit there euer since because since the time of Gregory they haue taken and claimed this title and thereby so much increased in pride ambition and enormous practises against the Church and against states that he that cōpareth these times with the former shall finde it another state then it was in the time of Gregory 3 And because the Pope now glorieth in this title of vniuersall Bishop from which title he would draw a Iurisdiction ouer all Bishops Gregory herein is peremptory that whosoeuer taketh that title robbeth Christ of his place and glory For saith he Sub vno capite omnes membra sunt Ecclesiae sancti ante legem sub lege sancti sub gratia et nemo se vnquam vniuersalem vocari voluit All the Saints as members of the Church are vnder one head the Saints before the Law vnder the Law and vnder grace and no man would euer suffer himselfe to be called an vniuersall Bishop This was then the learning of the Church of Rome that because Christ was the onely head of the vniuersall Church therefore no man may be For the deuise which after this the Friars brought in of caput ministeriale was then vnknowne The reason of Gregory is well to be obserued because euery man is a member of the vniuersall Church no man can be both head and member of the same And therefore hee vrgeth this thing often as namely where he saith Vniuersa sibi tentat ascribers omnia quae soli vni capiti cohaereut videlicet Christo per elationem Pompatici sermonis eiusdem Christi sibi studet membra subiugare That is he seeketh to ascribe all to himselfe and whosoeuer as members are knit to one onely head that is Christ he deuiseth by the pride of this Pompaticall title to subdue to himselfe Thus saith Gregory of him that sought this title of vniuersall Bishop In many other places he proueth the same that Christ is the onely and sole head of the Church and therefore no man can challenge this title of vniuersall Bishoppe or head of the vniuersall Church Whosoeuer doth it must bec that Antichrist that thrusteth Christ out of his place For it is well to bee obserued that the reasons of Gregorie against the claime of vniuersall Bishoppe or head of the vniuersall Church doe as well and truely refute all these names of pride now chalenged by the Popes as this which then was chalenged by Iohn of Constantinople For now these titles are giuen to the Pope as his due stile Princeps Sacerdotum Uicarius Christi caput Ecclesiae fundamentum Ecclesiae pater doctor omnium fidelium sponsus Ecclesiae Episcopu◅ vniuersalis All these being titles of the like pride and pompe are alike condemned by Gregory Of this title of vniuersall Bishop Gregory saith so much as might iustly deterre all his successours from that or any of the like nature For he calleth it Vocabulum profanum vanum nomen vanitatis vocabulum peruersum vocabulum elationis scelestum superstitiosum superbum Thus in diuers places he setteth out that title and farther saith that it is Appellatio nefan◅inominis profani nominis superbia appellatio friuoli nominis vanitas stulti nominis nomen Pompaticum By all which termes dispersed in diuers parts of his workes hee hath declared his zeale against the pride of them that take such names vpon them declaring that the blasphemy of this name was a proofe that Antichrist was rising in the Church For he saith that hee that taketh this name of vniuersall Bishop is the fore-runner of Antichrist For that Antichrist must be Lord of the Clergy Gregory witnesseth saying Sacerdotum ei praeparatur exercitus 4. Now seeing that from these names of pride they would proue the Popes Iurisdiction We answer this proofe is founded vpon a rotten and ruinous ground-worke seeing their auncient Popes haue vpon the same reasons grounded the proofe of Antichrist After the death of Gregory Sabinian succeeded who sate but fiue moneths and nineteene dayes And then came Boniface the third who obtained of the Emperour Phocas that title which Gregory had so condemned Then and neuer before was the Church of Rome made the head and Mistresse of all other Churches and the Pope the chiefe Bishop of all Bishops This was done in the yeare of Christ sixe hundred and sixe And this Boniface is accounted the threescore