excluded the Clergy that refused to pay from his protection and from the protection of the lawes whereby they being abandoned and exposed to all iniuryes the most of them fell to composition with the King so bought out and purchased their protection againe more deerer then they might haue continued the same by their contribution 13. And as for the Archbishop of Canterbury that stood constant amongst the rest in that denyall Omnia bona eius saith Mathew of VVestminster mobilia immobilia capta sunt in manu Regis All his goods both moueable vnmoueable were taken into the Kings hands And the same Authour doth recount infinite other intollerable vexations laid vpon them that would not agree to the Kings demaunds in those affaires which were accompanyed with such threates and terrors as the Deane of Paules in London named VVilliam Mont-fort comming one day before the King to speake for his Chanons was so terrifyed as he became mute and fell downe dead before him which yet saith out Author moued little the King but that he persisted in his demaundes And one day sending a knight named Syr George Hauering to the Monastery of VVestminster when all the Monkes were there gathered togeather in their Refectory or dyning-place the said knight proposed in the Kings name that they would graunt him halfe their reuenewes for his warrs and if any wil deny this demaund saith he let him stand vp shew himself that he may be handled as one guilty of breaking the Kings peace Whervpon all yeelded saith Mathew of VVestminster and no man would after with so great daunger contradicte the Kings will And thus much of his violent maÌ„ner of proceeding with the Church and Clergy wherevnto I might adioyne many other things as his dryuing out of the Realme the forsaid Robert Archbishop of Canterbury his Statutes made in the last Parlament at Carleile the same yeare he dyed in preiudice of Holy Churches liberty which were the first that are read to haue bin made in that kind and consequently are thought to haue byn a great cause of all the miseryes and calamityes that fell vpon his posterity as after you shall heare 14. But yet all this doth not proue that King Edward denyed or doubted of the Popes spirituall power or tooke the same vpon himself which is M. Attorneys case and conclusion Nay rather they doe shew and proue his acknowledgement of the said authority if we consider them well though in certayne points that seemed to extend themselues to temporall affaires and might be preiudiciall vnto him he sought to decline and auoyde the execution therof But in things meerely spirituall he neuer shewed difficulty As for example that his Bishops and Archbishops went to Rome to receaue their confirmation and inuestitures there and sometymes were chosen also immediatly from thence as when in the yeare 1278. Robert Kilwarby Archbishop of Canterbury was made Cardinall by Pope Nicholas the third and the Monkes of Canterbury by request of the King had chosen his Chancellour the Pope would not admitt him but appointed an other to witt Iohn Peckam Prouinciall of the Franciscan friers in England who being admitted held the said Archbishopricke for 13. yeres vntill he dyed But as for confirmation and inuestitures no doubt can be made but all was to be had from Rome as expresly you may reade of the admission and consecration of VVilliam Archbishop of Yorke In Romana Curia coÌ„secratus saith VValsingam who was consecrated in the Court of Rome in this same yeare of 1278. by Pope Martyn the fourth that succeeded to Nicolas And the same Author affirmeth that the foresaid Iohn Peckam Archbishop of Canterbury being also consecrated in Rome did some two yeares after call a Councell at Reading commaunding all his Suffragan Bishopps to obserue exactly the decrees of the late generall Councell held at Lyons by Pope Gregory the tenth nor did King Edward mislike or repine any thing at this as neither he did at another Councell called by the same Archbishop Peckam in the yeare 1281. wherin he endeauored to force all Abbots and other exempted persons to come to the said Councell but saith Mathew VVestminster the Abbotts of VVestminsters S. Edmonds-Bury S. Albanes and of VValtham appealed from him to the Pope without any mention of the King which had beene iniurious vnto him if he had taken himself to haue had authority and that supreme in Ecclesiasticall affaires 15. Furthermore in the yeare of Christ 1295. being the 22. of King Edwardes raigne when the foresaid Robert VVinchelsey was first chosen Archbishop of Canterbury the sayd King sent him to Rome to be confirmed and consecrated by Pope Celestinus the fifth which soone after gaue ouer the popedome to Bonifacius the eight And three yeares after that againe to wit 1298. the Bishopricke of Ely being voyde and the greater parte of the Monkes hauing chosen the Prior of their Couent for Bishop the other party chose Iohn Langhton the Kings Chancellour who going to Rome by the Kings fauour coÌ„mendatioÌ„ to pleade his cause before Pope Boniface could not preuaile nor yet the Prior but that the said Pope gaue the Bishopricke of Ely to the Bishop of Norwich and the Bishopricke of Norwich to the Prior and the Arch-deaconry of Canterbury to the Kings Chancellour 16. Moreouer in the yeare 1305. when Pope Clement the fifth a French-man borne in the Diocese of Burdeaux was made Pope and came into France in person first of all others translating the Sea of Rome to Auinion where it continued seauenty yeares King Edward sent Embassadours vnto him the Bishops of Lichfield and VVorcester togeather with the Earle of Lincolne presenting vnto him Singula vtensiliae saith Mathew of VVestminster quibus ministraretur ei in Camera in mensa omnia ex auro purissimo All necessary plate for the seruice of his chamber and table of most pure gold And at the same time he sent two new Bishops elected for Yorke and London to be confirmed by him Quos dimisit ad propria consâ—â—â—â—â—tos saith our Authour whome the said Pope Clement sent home againe with their confirmation And finally when not long after the King fell out with the forsaid Archbishop of Canterbury Robert VVinchelsey for that he had shewed himself againe not so forward to follow his will in all things Dictum Robertum Cantuariensem saith VValsingham apud Dominum Papam accusauit Rex Anglia The King of England did accuse the said Robert Archbishop of Canterbury vnto Pope Clement the fifth that he was combyned with his enemyes c. for the which the said Archbishop was cited to appeare before the Pope and suspended from the execution of his office quousque de sibi impositis legitimè se purgaret vntill he should lawfully purge himselfe of the imputations layd against him by the King Whereby we see what authority this King did acknowledge to be in the Pope and Sea of Rome 17.
lost during his life which iudgement was before any Statute or Act of Parlament was made in that case And there it is said that for the like offence the Archbishop of Canterbury had byn in worse case by the iudgement of the Sages of the law then to be punished for a contempt if the King had not extended grace and fauour to him The Catholicke Deuine 26. Here againe is another case or two de facto wherof M. Attorney wil needs inferre de iure The Archbishop of Yorke his lands saith he were seased by the King and lost during his life for that he admitted not to a benefice within his Diocesse a Clerke presented by the King whereas the same benefice had an incumbent before put in by the Popes prouision according to the custome of those dayes which incumbent the said Archbishop pleaded that he could not put out and for this high contempt against the King his crowne and dignity in refusing to execute his soueraignes commaundement saith M. Attorney by iudgement of the Common-law he lost the landes of his whole Bishopricke But here I would aske M. Attorney what high contempt could this be against the King his crowne and dignity if the Archbishop pleaded that he could not doe it eyther in right or in power Not in right for that nothing was more receaued at that tyme in England then for the Bishop of Rome to prouide certayne benefices in England and not only benefices but also Bishopricks and Archbishopricks as before in the life of this King and his ancestours hath byn declared And as for power no maruaile if the Archbishop durst not vse violence in those dayes against the Popes prouisions wherby he might incurre excommunication for so much as the King himself so greatly respected the same and made such diligent premunition least my such excommunication should come against him as in the answere to the former instance hath byn declared 17. And besides this if the Archbishop did put the matter in plea to be trayed and to the Kings writt of Quare non admisit did yeelde so reasonable a cause as is here touched that the King himself had admitted diuers Bishops and Archbishops by like prouision of Popes how and with what reason can M. Attorney call this answere of the Archbishop so high a contempt against the King his crowne and dignitie Or how could the Common-law condemne the same with so great a punishment And still I must demaund what is this Common-law by whome was it made how came it in where is it founded either in reason vse consent of the people or authority of law-giuers For if it consist in none of these but only in the particular will and iudgement of the Prince himself neuer so passionate and in the approbation execution of these Sages which here M. Attorney mentioneth then any thing that displeased the said Prince may be called high contempt against his person crowne and dignity And so may be iustified all the most passionate actions not only of this King Edward before recited but of all other Kings whosoeuer And by the same meanes M. Attorney maketh his auncient Cōmon-law which often he calleth our birth-right and best birth-right to be nothing else in effect but the Princes pleasure frō time to time and the execution of his Sages which commonly in those auncient times for I will speake nothing of our dayes were to wise and Sage to withstand the Princes will in any thing 28. Sure I am that in this particular fact of seasing Bishops lands and temporalityes vpon any offence or displeasure taken by the King as it hath byn vsed by some English Princes in their anger so hath it bin condemned also in diuers Parlaments lawes and Statutes as in the first yeare of King Edward the third where it is thus expressed Because before this time in the time of King Edward Father to the King that now is he by euill Counsellours caused to be seased into his handes the temporalty of diuers Bishoppes with their goods and cattell c. The King willeth and graunteth that from hence forth it be not done c. And againe in the 14. yeare of the same raigne VVe will and graunt for vs and for our heires that from henceforth we shall not take nor doe to be taken into our handes the temporalities of Archbishops Bishops Abbot c. without a true and iust cause according to the law of the land c. 29. And to the end that M. Attorney may not say that this case of his is excepted it followeth in an other Statute in the 25. yeare of the same King saying VVhereas the temporalities of Archbishops and Bishops haue beene oftentimes taken into the Kings hand for contempt done to him vpon writts of Quare non admisit and for diuers other causes c. The King willeth and graunteth in the said Parlament that all Iustices shall from henceforth receaue for the contempt so iudged reasonable fyne of the party so condemned according to the quantity of the trespasse and after the quality of the contempt c. Which last words may be thought to be added for that the King had right to present to diuers benefices at that tyme as particular patrone therof ex iure patronatus for that the said benefices were fouuded or erected by himself or his auncestors and in those cases the Bishops not admitting such Clerkes as he presented might doe some iniury or trespasse against him and therin shew contempt worthy some fyne or for-faite which the law doth here appoint especially for so much as it is be ore recorded that Pope Innocentius the 4. presently vpon the first Councell of Lyons wrote as you haue heard in the life of K. Henry the third that he would not let by his prouision the right of any patrone in presenting to any benefice wherof he had the aduowson or Ius patronatus 30. And as for the other example alleadged heere by M. Attorney for strengthning his instance of the Archbishop of Canterbury saying that for the like offence the Archbishop of Canterbury had byn in worse case by the iudgement of the Sages of the law then to be punished for a contempte if the King had not extended grace and fauour to him If he vnderstand the displeasure taken against Archbishop VVinchelsey before mentioned by K. Edward for resisting his demaund of the one halfe of all Ecclesiasticall rents for which before we haue heard out of Mathew of VVestminster that all his lands and goods were seased into the Kings hands you haue heard also how the same King afterward repented both that and other like facts of his and asked pardon publikly with teares But if he meane the other offence againe after this when he accused the said Archbishop VVinchelsey to the Pope and caused him to be called to Rome and to be suspended from his office as before we haue declared then doth this
that from the beginning of the world there was neuer any such thing heard of either among Christians Iewes or Gentiles 48. Wherfore we hauing now proued this our negatiue â—e Iure against M. Attorney by so many different sortes of proofe as you haue heard aswell out of the Canon Ciuill lawes as of Nature Nations Mosaicall and Euangelicall and of all the partes and members therof as Scriptures Fathers Doctors of all sortes yea and by the testimony of our Common Municipall ancient lawes of England and the concurrence and consequence of reason it self and lastly by the consent and asseueration of the best-learned Protestants of ech sorte both Lutherans and Caluinians I doe not see what M. Attorney wil be able to bring to the contrary to proue his affirmatiue propositions De Iure with any shew of probability Wherfore I shall conclude this whole Chapter noting only to the Reader two considerations for his better memory out of all the premisses The one worthie of laughter the other of teares 49. The former is the euill lucke that M. Attorney had in making choyse of Q. Elizabeth for an example of Ecclesiasticall supremacy in a temporall Prince For wheras three Princes only of our Nation from the beginning of the world had taken vpon them this title to witt K. Henry the 8. K. Edward the 6. and Q. Elizabeth M. Attorney chose the worst and weakest of all the three to be defended For as for K. Henry though by the Canon-law he were incapable of Priesthood or holy orders wherof dependeth spirituall Iurisdiction for that he was marryed when he tooke the same vpon him and not only marryed but many times marryed which is another Canonicall impediment for he was not only Bigamus and Trigamus but twice also Trigamus hauing bene marryed the sixth tyme yet was all this in rigour of Ecclesiasticall power dispensable by the Church being but only Iuris humani impedimenta non diuini Impediments of humane not diuine lawe and so K. Henry either by dispensation or by occasion that this last wife had dyed might haue been made Priest and capable of spirituall Iurisdiction 50. But K. Edward being a child of 9. yeares old and consequently vnder the vse of reason when this supreame spirituall Iurisdiction was giuen vnto him he was so vncapable therof as by no dispensation it might be made lawfull vntill he came to the years of perfect reason and so doe proue both Canonists Ciuilians for that Iurisdiction cannot be giuen nor admitted but where perfect vse of reason is for that otherwise it should be no humane act But yet this impediment though not dispensable for the present would haue come afterwards to be remoued without dispensation by tract of tyme it self which would haue brought the perfect vse of reason 51. But in Q. Elizabeth in regard of her sex no tyme no dispensation no authority humane nor other circumstance could remoue the impediment or incapacity of her sex which God and nature had layd vpon her so as in this point M. Attorney his choyse was very erroneous but whether the Twynne of Ignorance were also conioyned which before he said to be inseparable from error I leaue to himself to consider And thus much of this former consideration 52. The other which I said to be worthie of greife and teares consisteth in this that the former position of the said Queenes Ecclesiasticall Supremacy being a thing vnpossible in it self for so many respects and causes as before hath byn shewed humane and diuine and that the very Protestants themselues of the more learned sort doe laugh at it and condemne the same as a new inuention neuer heard of in the world before yet notwithstanding that the same in our countrey should passe by Parlament as a matter of faith and to Religion and be prest vpon men by corporall oathes vnder paine of extreame punishments must needes be a matter of great compassion to euery pious mynd that considereth the infinite danger of soules therby Euery Archbishop and Bishop saith the Statute and euery Ecclesiasticall person of vvhat estate dignitie preheminence or degree soeuer he or they be and all and euery temporall Iudge Iusâ—icer Mayor and other lay or temporall officer c. And all that sâ—all suc out the liuery of their lands and inheritances when they come to lawfull age All that shall take any order office benefice promotion dignity or degree in the vniuersity c. shall make and take and receiue a corporall oath vpon the Euangelist according to the tenour and effect following I A.B. doe vtterly testifie and declare in my conscience that the Queenes highnes is the only Supreame Gouernour c. aswell in all spirituall or Ecclesiasticall things or causes as in temporall c. So goeth the oath And by the last words that giue her as much spirituall Iurisdiction in all things and causes Ecclesiasticall as she had or could haue in temporall you may see how farr they extended the meaning of this power though they left out the word Supreame head for the causes before mentioned 53. Now then pious and godly Reader consider with thy self out of thy Christian compassion Quae strages animarum What a slaughter of soules ensued vpon this new deuise And first how many thousands were forced or allured by feare and terror or desire of preferment to take this oath against their consciences the far greater parte of the Realme being then Catholike and condemning the said oath in their iudgments and beleefe And when afterward God styrred vp another generation that had more care of their said consciences and therupon refused so wilfully to damne themselues as to take such oathes with repugnant consciences what troubles what afflictions haue ensued therof in all the time of that Queene And among many others aboue an hundred learned preests that in conscience were most free and innocent in all matters meant against the State gaue their bloud for preseruation of their said consciences in that case and now both they and shee are gone to plead their cause before the high and euerlasting Iudge And if this matter of her spirituall supremacy were but a iest and fancy and new deuise for for the tyme as you haue heard the best sorte of forreine Protestants to affirme and as her self would sometimes merily but seriously say then was the same both deerly bought and sold in this life by some and will cost more deere in the other where now the matter is in handling 54. And this shall suffice for this chapter and for the first head of profe De Iure wherin you may haue seene how sparinge M. Attorney hath carryed himself we shall now passe to the other sorte of his proofes De facto wherin consisteth the whole corpes of his booke and shall examine whether any better substance may be found in that then hath byn in this The proofe wil be the
out of King Henry which shall goe in this owne words as before we haue accustomed The Attorney In all the time of K. Henry the third and his progenitours Kings of England and ouer sithence if any man doe sue afore any Iudge Ecclesiasticall within this Realme for any thing wherof that court by allowance and custome had not lawfull Conusaunce the King did euer by his writ vnder the great seale prohibite them to proceed And if the suggestion made to the King whervpon the prohibition was grounded were after found vntrue then the King by his writ of consultation vnder his great seale did allow and permit them to proceed Also in all the raigne of Henry the third and his progenitours Kings of England and euer sithence if any issue were ioyned vpon the loyalty of marriage generall bastardy or such like the King did euer write to the Bishop of that Diocesse as mediate officer minister to his courte to certifie the loyalty of marriage bastardy or such like all which doe apparantly proue that those Ecclesiasticall Courts were vnder the Kings iurisdiction and commaundement and that one of the Courts were so necessarily incident to the other as the one without the other could not deliuer iustice to the parties as well in these particular cases as in a number of cases before specified wherof the Kings Ecclesiasticall Courte hath iurisdiction Now to commaund and to be obayed belonge to soueraigne and supreme gouernment c. The Catholike Deuine 28. The conclusion or inference vpon this narration must be noted by the Reader to be M. Attorneys owne and not to be taken out of any other lawyers booke as the former parte of the narratiō is that telleth vs how the King appointeth that ech Court both spirituall and temporall shall handle matters and causes proper and peculiar vnto them and the one not to intrude it self into the affaires of the other and to this effect are his vvrits appointed of prohibition where matters are assumed which ought not in that Courte to be treated and of consultation to will them to proceed when their right is knowne All which maketh for vs shewing that the King would haue the subordination between these two Courts to be obserued and the spirituall to direct the temporall where any one thing might belonge vnto them both As for example if any man were impeached of bastardy thervpon his inheritance were claimed by another the Ecclesiasticall Court was first to giue sentence of the marriage whether it were lawfull or no then according to that sentēce was the tēporal Court to giue possession or not of the inheritāce 29. And that this was the true sincere meaning of the law at that time intending therby to shew the excellency and prerogatiue of the Bishops spirituall Courts aboue the Kings temporall is plaine and euident by an other Statute of this maner which M. Attorney would not see made in the 9. yeare of King Henry the 6. where it is ordained in explication of the former that when any such Plea of bastardie is held in any Courte of the Kings the Iudges therof shall make proclamation once in their Courte the Chauncelour of England certified therof by them shall cause to be made 3. seuerall proclamatiōs in 3. seuerall moneths in the Chaūcery That al persons pretending any interest to obiect against the party shall sue to the Ordinary or Bishop to whom the writ of certificate from the said Iudge or Iudges is or shall be directed to make their allegations and obiections against the party as the law of Holy Church requireth And that without this forme obserued al other processe shal be voide c. 30. And by this we may see how carefull the auncient lawes were to haue the spirituall Courte as the superiour well informed according to the law of Holy Church and how not only ordinary Iudges but the Chauncellour of England himself his highest Court of Chauncery was appointed to serue vnto this for that of the spirituall Courts iudgement depended in all such causes the iudgement of the temporall Courts And by this you will se also the vaine sleight of M. Attorney in telling vs that the King did euer write vnto the Bishop of that Diocesse as mediate officer and minister to his Courte to certifie the loyaltie of marriage c. For where doth he find in any ancient law at all those words as mediate officer and minister to his Courte in the latine himself leaueth out the words to his Courte though in calling the Bishop mediate officer or minister which is as much to say as superior officer for that in mediation and subordination of officers and ministers that gouerne the mediate hath the higher roome in respect of the people and Court wherof he is officer he includeth a contradiction against himselfe for then is the said Bishop also aboue all immediate temporall Iudges that must giue him certificate wherof the Chauncellour we se is one euen in the Kings temporall Courts themselues 31. But the inference is much more subtile when M. Attorney saith All which doe apparantly proue that those Ecclesiasticall Courts were vnder the Kings iurisdiction and cōmaundement But M. Attorney must not so huddle vp iurisdiction and commaundement for that no man will deny but that all sortes of persons as before hath byn said are vnder the cōmaundement gouernement of the temporall Prince whom he may commaund ech one to doe their office duty in the Cōmon-wealth And so may he appoint Ecclesiastical Courts to notifie their sentences iudgements proceedings to his Courts his Courts to informe the Ecclesiastical Courts for good mutuall correspondence between them both which we graunt also to be necessary in euery Common-wealth 32. But iurisdiction which M. Attorney craftely confoundeth heer and shuffleth vp with commaundement is a far different thing importing a higher authority in the same kinde as if the temporall Prince haue iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall vpon Bishops and their spirituall Courtes then doth it follow that all their power in spirituall matters is subordinate to him and deriued from him and so were there no necessity of this distinction and subordination of spirituall and temporall Courts For that the Prince hauing both powers in himself might giue the same vnto any temporal Iudge to decide Ecclesiastical matters also in his Court which yet M. Attorney doth often deny that the Common-lawes can take conusaunce of such affaires And surely it is worth no lesse then laughter to heare him repeat so often The Kings Ecclesiasticall Courte as though this were sufficient to proue the Kings Ecclesiasticall authority in those Courts for that all Courts are the Kings Courts in that they are vnder his protection gouernement and direction and to the vse and profit of his people And so were also the Ecclesiasticall Courts of King Henry the third in this sense who yet chalenged no spirituall authority therin as by
annexed sequels 46. And I might alleadge heere diuers particular examples of King Kichards respectiue proceedings towards both the Sea of Rome and Clergy of his Countrey as namely in the first wheras Pope Vrban the 6. being truly and Canonically elected Pope in Rome afterward against him the Archbishop of Arles in France being chosen for Anti-Pope by a faction of French-Cardinals that named him Clement the 7. King Richard stood zealously with the said true Pope and not only made a Statute in Parlament that whosoeuer should be obedient to any other person as Pope but only to Pope Vrban should be out of the Kings protection and his goods seased as the words of the Statute are but also some yeares after that againe when the said Pope Vrban had appointed Henry Bishop of Norwich to be his Captaine general to passe ouer into Flanders and by force to constraine the said schismaticall Pope to surcease that diuision the said King not only allowed but assisted also that enterprise 47. And as for the Clergy of his Realme and their spirituall iurisdiction how much he respected it appeareth by that the Archbishop of Canterbury and some other Bishops that assisted him hauing publikely pronounced the sentence of excommunication vpon the yeare 1379. against certaine persons that had broken the priuiledges of Sanctuary in the Church and Monastery of VVestminster and shed bloud therin for taking out a certaine person in the Kings name the said King albeit he was thought to haue byn the abetter â—hereof yet did he finally obay the said Censures and soone after in the same yeare at his Parlament of London it was ordained saith VValsingham Quod immunitates priuilegia Ecclesia VVestmonasteriensis illibata manerent that the libertyes priuiledges of the Church of VVestminster should remaine whole and inuiolate 48. Wherefore now to answere the instance or obiectioÌ„ which M. Attorney alleadgeth out of the foresaid Statute of the 16. yeare of this King where the law of Premunire the losse of goods and lands other punishments are appointed for such as doe procure processe and sentences of excoÌ„municatioÌ„ which touched the king their Lord against him his crowne and his regalitie c. as larglie you maie see it set downe in the whole Statute out of M. Attorneys booke I answere that whosoeuer shall attentiuelie read the whole contexture of this Statute with that which before wee haue sett downe both in this in the precedent kings life he shall see that this Statute doth rather make against M. Attorneys purpose of supreme spirituall iurisdiction then anie waie for him For that first of all the verie proposition to the Parlament doth concerne temporal power and not spirituall saying that the Crowne of England hath been at all times free and onlie subiect to God immediatlie and to none other and that the same ought not in anie thing touching the maiesty or regalitie of the same Crowne bee submitted to the Bishop of Rome nor the laws and Statutes thereof to bee taken away or mablect by him c. 49. This then being the proposition of the Commons which is euidently to bee vnderstood of temporall regalitie and thinges thereunto belonging the temporall Lords assented absolutelie vnto it But the Archbishop Bishops Abbots and other Ecclesiasticall Prelates that made the cheife and highest parte of the Parlament distinguished yea made protestations as the Statute saith that it was neuer their meaning to witt either in K. Edwards daies or now to saie that the Bishop of Rome might not excommunicate Bishops or make translation of Prelates from one Sea to another after the law of holie Church yet if this should bee done at anie time in great preiudice of the King or his realme as that sage men or Counsellours should therby be drawne from him without his knowledge or against his will or that the substance and treasurie of his Realme should bee in daunger to be destroyed by sending out money or giuing it to his aduersaries or other like inconueniences ensue against the Kings state and realme indeed then they did graunt that this might bee esteemed against the Kings regalitie c. whereby wee see in what sense and with what limitation they did yeeld to such like Statutes in those daies pressed by the importunitie of the laie partie but yet far from the meaning of M. Attorney who would haue men thinke that heerby they confessed K. Richard to bee Head of the Church which himself expresly denieth in his forenamed Statute in fauour of Pope Vrban whom hee calleth the onlie true head of the Church and for such commaundeth him to bee obaied and respected vnder the paines before mencioned And so much of K. Richard who not long after fell into great misery lost both his commaundry and life and came to a pitifull end full of affliction and desolation as our histories doe testify and set forth at large OF THE THREE KING HENRYES OF THE HOVSE OF LANCASTER The fourth fifth and sixth vvho raigned for the space of threescore years And what is obserued out of their raignes concerning our Controuersie with M. Attorney CHAP. XIII AFter the three Edwards before mentioned vnder whom the first restraints were made for the exercise of certaine externall points of Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction as you haue heard and after the pitifull end of their successor inheritour K. Richard the 2. entred and ensued in the Crowne three Henries of the line of Lancaster who had variable successe in their liues and temporall affaires though in religion and particularly in this point of our controuersie about spirituall power and iurisdiction they were all one 2. King Henrie the 4. being Duke of Lancaster and sonne of the often fore named Iohn of Gaunt that was the fourth sonne of K. Edward the 3. seing the disorderly gouernment of K. Richard the 2. his Cosen germaÌ„ the auersion of his peoples affection from him for the same cause came out of France where he liued in banishement raised powers against him pursued and tooke his person caused him to be deposed by Parlament and himself chosen in his place with great applause of the people which yet turning away from him soone after againe he was forced for his safetie defence not onlie to make away the same K. Richard in Pomfret Castle but also to take armes suppresse and cut of the greatest and cheifest men that had aided and assisted him to gaine the said Kingdome And finallie after a troublesome raigne of 13. yeres he died vsing these words before his death as they are registred by Stow and others I sore repent mee that euer I charged my self with the Crowne of this Realme c. 3. King Henry the 5. his eldest sonne succeeded him for the space of ten years and though he were a most excellent Prince warlike and fortunate gained the possession of almost the whole Kingdome of France yet had