of Christes flesh the onely meane of Resurrection to life And therefore your long talke is to no purpose which you vtter in this place They shal liue by the spirite of Christe who gaue them Faith and Charitie But doth not therefore S. Iohn speake also of real eating as though one effecte may not be wrought by diuers meanes concurring thereunto Ego saith Cyrillus id est Cyrill in Iohā li. 4. cap. 15. corpus meū quod comedetur resuscitabo eū I wil raise him that is to say my body which shal be eaten shal raise him Thus you see plainely that touching this point no lesse Clerke then Cyrillus teacheth the same that I said which you haue vniustly and rashly controlled as you haue done the reste of the Catholike Doctrine That matters of faithe and ecclesiastical causes are not to be iudged by the Ciuile Magistrate The. 14. Chapter Iewel Pag. 637. That a Prince or magistrate maie not lavvfully calae Prieste before him to his ovvne seate of Iudgement or that many Catholique and godly Princes haue not so done and done it lavvfully it is most vntrue Harding I haue tolde you M. Iewel Confut. Fol. 299. ae that the duetie of Ciuil Princes consisteth in Ciuil maters and euer said that Bishoppes ought to be obedient to Princes in suche cases whither so euer they cal them And if they make any temporal Decree the Bishoppe who hath temporal goodes vnder the Prince must obey without grudge Confut. Fol. 302. ae or gaine saying so farre as the Decree standeth with the honour of God But that in Ecclesiastical causes and maters of Faith mere temporal Princes haue any authoritie of them selues to cal Bishoppes and Priestes to their Seates of Iudgement or euer did it lawfully we vtterly denie Ambrosius lib. 5. Epist 32. Priestes only ought to be iudges ouer Priestes by Theosius S. Ambrose said to the Emperour Valentinian Nec quisquà m contumacem iudicare me debet quum hoc asseram quod augustae memoriae patertuus non solùm sermone respondit sed etiam legibus suis sanxit in causa fidei vel ecclesiastici alicuius ordinis eum iudicare debere qui nec munere impar sit nec iure dissimilis Haec enim verba Rescripti sunt Hoc est Sacerdotes de Sacerdotibus voluit iudicare Quinetiam si aliâs quoque arguerelar Episcopus morum esset examinanda causa etiam hanc voluit ad Episcopule iudicium pertinere Neither any man ought to iudge me as stubborne seing I affirme that whiche your father of most renoumed memorie not onely answered in worde but also established by his lawes that in a case of faith or any ecclesiastical order he ought to be iudge that is neither vnequal in office nor vnlike in right or authoritie For these are the wordes of the Rescripte That is he would Priestes to be iudges of Priestes And also if otherwise a Bishop were reproued and a cause concerning behauiour and manners were to be examined he would this cause of manners also to apperteine to the Bishoppes iudgement Vpon these wordes of Theodosius alleged and allowed by S. Ambrose An argument prouing that a Ciuile Magistrat maie not be iudge oner Priestes in causes ecclesiastical and matters of Faith thus I reason with you M. Iewel He can not be iudge of Bishoppes and Priestes nor cal them to his seate of Iudgement in Ecclesiastical causes and maters of Faithe that is vnequal in office or vnlike in right and authoritie But the Prince is vnequal to the Bishop in office and vnlike vnto him in right and authoritie For he hath no right nor authoritie to sacrifice to preache to binde to loose to excommunicate and minister Sacramentes Therefore the Prince can not be iudge of Bishoppes and Priestes nor cal them to his seate of Iudgement in any ecclesiastical cause or mater of Faith Againe no man hath authoritie ouer his superiour But the Bishop in maters of Faithe and Ecclesiastical causes is superiour to euery Prince Therefore in those causes the Prince hath no authoritie ouer the Bishop And if he haue no authoritie ouer him he can not cal him to his seate of iudgement Furthermore were it true that the Prince were equal with the Bishop in Ecclesiastical causes and matters of faith yet could he not cal him to his seate of iudgement ff ad S. Trebel L. ille § Tēpestiuum quia par in parem non habet potestatem bicause the equal hath no authoritie or power ouer his equal But to see M. Iewels arte in facing out this mater let vs consider the authorities that he bringeth to proue his purpose And bicause he blaseth this saying in the toppe of his margent with great letters VVhat it is to be conuēted before a Magistrate Spiegelius in verbo conuenire A Bishop conuented before the Magistrate let vs first define what it is to be conuented before a Magistrate The lawiers saie Conuenire est aliquem in ius vocare To conuent a man is to cal him into the lawe and so Conueniri coram magistratu est in ius vocari à magistratu to be conuented before a magistrate is to be called into the lawe by the magistrate To cal a man into the lawe is a iudicial acte proceding of superiour authoritie in him that is iudge both of the partie so called and also of the cause wherefore he is called As if the Maior of London would conuent any of the Citizens he must both haue iurisdiction ouer that Citizen and also authoritie to iudge in that cause for whiche the Citizen shal be conuented But no ciuil magistrate hath authoritie by vertue of his temporal office to be iudge our Bishoppes in ecclesiastical causes as it is before proued and shal hereafter appeare Therefore no temporal magistrate can conuent any Bishoppe or Priest before him in any Ecclesiastical cause But let vs heare M. Iewel Cod. de Episcopis et clericis L. Nullus Iewel Pag. 637. Iustinian the Emperour him selfe vvho of al others most enlarged the Churches priuileges saith thus Nullus Episcopus inuitus ad ciuilem vel militarem iudicem in qualibet causa producatum vel exhibeatur nisi princeps iubeat Let no Bishop be brought or presented against his vvil before the captaine or Ciuil Iudge vvhat so euer the cause be onlesse the Prince shal so commaunde it Harding Seing Iustinian as you saie of al others did most enlarge the Churches Priuileges is it likely that he would most of al others breake them And whereas he made a lawe Authent 83. Coll. 6. vt Clerici apud proprios Episcopos that Clerici apud proprios Episcopos conueniantur primùm Clerkes shoulde be conuented first before their owne Bishoppes in causa pecuniaria in a money mater and afterwarde before the Ciuil Magistrate if either for the nature of the cause or for some other difficultie the Bishop could not ende it yet he
benne halfe in a phrenesie you might haue learned L. NaÌ„ ad ad ea ff de legibus ff de regu lis iuris that ex ijs quaeraro accidâ—nt lages non fiunt of those thinges that happen seldome lawes are not made And Quae propter necessitatem recepta sunt non debent in argumentum trahi those thinges that are receiued for necessitie ought not to be drawen to an argument or president to be followed Wherefore â—â—ither vpon the doinges of the Emperours in that great and lamentable schisme of the Church neither vpon Zabarella you can builde that Bishoppes may ordinarily be conuented before a ciuil Magistrate in ecclesiastical causes But sir seing you thought it conuenient for your purpose to vse the authoritie of Zabarella although you haue fowly falsified and misreported his wordes tel vs by what reason you maie refuse his authoritie if we can allege it against you He saith in the same treatie that you allege Papa est vniuersalis Episcopus Zabarella M. Ievvels ovvne doctor alleged agaiÌ„st M. Ievvel Papa non habet superiorem Papa habet iurisdictionem potestatem super omnes de iure Sedes Apostolica errare non potest The Pope is the vniuersal Bishop The Pope hath no superiour The Pope hath iurisdiction and power ouer al by lawe The Apostolique See can not erre Why admitte you not this Is it reason that you should admitte an authours saying the whiche he spake and allowed in a case of necessitie for auoiding of a greater danger and not admitte the same authours saying in the same treatie whiche he speaketh according to receiued and approued doctrine of the Catholique Church Aske your aduocate L. Si quis Cod. de testibus and he wil tel you that reason and lawe faith That si quis vsus fuerit testibus ijdemque testes producantur aduersus eum in alia lite non licebit personas eorum excipere If one vse witnesses in a cause and the same witnesses be brought against him in an other controuersie it is not lawful for him to make exception against their personnes And if either reason or lawe could preuaile where heresie hath entred you should not onely admitte this but also that whiche he saith in an other place â—â—â—â—stas 〈…〉 immediate pendat à Deo Ioan. 21. per illa verba Pasce 〈…〉 Papa habet potestatem supra omnes quic omnes sunt â—â—â—s Papae vicem Dei gerit in terris Zabarella in ClemeÌ„t de SenteÌ„t reiudicata cap. pastoralis Ibidem in Clement de magistris cap. Inter. de Sentent excommu cap. ex frequeÌ„tib The power of the Pope dependeth immediatly of God by those wordes feede my sheepe The Pope hath power ouer al bicause al be sheepe The Pope beareth the person of God in earth For he spake this with as good aduise as he spake the other And this is generally allowed and that but in a case Wherefore if his authoritie be good in the one ought it not to be good in the other Now therefore M. Iewel I reporte me to your indifferent iudgement how true it is that you saie that a Prince or a ciuil magistrate maie lawfully cal a Priest before him to his owne seate of iudgement and that a Bishop maie be conuented before the Magistrate as his lawful and superiour iudge in ecclesiastical causes No one example or sentence that ye haue yet alleged doth proue that vaine assertion of yours Neither could ye haue had any aduantage by them if ye had truely reported their wordes and declared the circumstances why and wherefore they were spoken But that liked you not Wherefore referring your corruption and false dealing in these matters of weight to the judgement of God and examination of the indifferent and wise I conclude against you with S. Augustine S. Ambrose S. Chrysostome and al other Catholique Fathers that it is not conuenient Extr. de Maiorit obed cap. 2. in marg nor lawful for a king to cal priestes before him to his owne seat of Iudgement as their superiour in ecclesiastical causes As for the note glosed in the Decretalles which ye bring to proue that priestes are exempted from the Emperours iurisdiction by the Popes policie and the princes consent and not by the worde of God we tel you that suche glosed notes declare you to be a very Gloser and argue that your stoare is farre spent when you rest vpon such marginal glosed notes Were it graunted which in no case we graunt that Bisshoppes and priestes were exempted from the Emperours iurisdiction in ecclesiastical causes onely by the Popes policie and consent of princes for confirmation whereof they haue made diuers lawes and geuen out large priuileges yet these lawes standing vnreapealed and priuileges vnauthorized they can not be conuented lawfully before the ciuil magistrate For it standeth not with the Maiestie of a prince to doo against his owne lawes and breake the priuileges by him selfe graunted to others before he hath with as mature aduise and consideration reuoked them as he did first graunte them That the Canonistes are wrongfully charged by the Apologie with teaching the people that Simple Fornication is no sinne The 15 Chapter The wordes of the Apologie Defence Pag. 357. They be the Popes ovvne Canonistâ—â— vvhiche haue taught the people that Fornication betvven single foâ—â—â— iâ— no sinne Harding A sclaunder vttered by the Apologie against the Canonistes not recanted in the Defence touching the thing but only touching the errour of the name IN my CoÌ„futation I saie that this is a greuous offence and worthy to be pounished in processe I saie to the makeâ—s of the Apologie How proue ye it They allege for it one Iohn de Magistris How be it M. Iewel hath recanted that errour and confesseth him selfe to haue ben deceiued For he graunteth it was Martinus de Magistris whom he meant or should haue meant He should doo wel to recant diuers other the like his errours For he hath not only ben deceiued by his note bookes or his Notegatherers in naming Iohn de Magistris for Martinus de Magistris but also in the names of sundrie other menne as it shal be declared in the nexte Chapter But touching the sclaunder of the Canonistes if Martinus de Magistrâ—â— had so taught yet the matter is not cleare for he wâ—â— no Canoniste but a Schoole Doctor of Diuinitie Againâ— he â—â—â—â—ht not the people as our Maisters of the Apologie â—â—e but onely wrote of that matter after the Scholastical manner from vnderstanding whereof the peoples simple capacitie is farre of Wel let these three errours Lyes or ouersightes be â—inâ—â—ed at Hitherto the Canonistes are not touched but sclaundered What shal we answer for Martinus de Magistris Certainely neither that Doctour taught either the people or any other person that vngodly and false Doctrine Certaine it is that in this Treatie De Temperantia quaestione 2. he taught the contrarie where
addeth priuilegijs omnibus custodit is quae reuerend issimis Clericis sacrae praestant cōstitutiones al Priuileges kepte whiche the Emperours lawes doo graunt vnto the reuerend Clerkes And saith farther Si verò Ecclesiasticum sit delictum egens castigatione ecclesiastica mulcta Deo amabilis Episcopus hoc discernat nihil communicantibus clarissimis prouinciae Iudicibus Neque enim volumus talia negotia omnino scire ciuiles iudices quum oporteat talia ecclesiasticè examinari emendari animas delinquentium per Ecclesiasticam mulctam secundùm sacras diuinas regulas quas etiam sequi nostra non dedignantur leges If the faulte be ecclesiastical and neede ecclesiastical pounishment and discipline let the wel beloued Bishop of God iudge and discerne it and let not the honorable Iudges of the Prouince intermedle with it at al. For it is not our pleasure that Ciuil Magistrates haue at al the examination of suche matters seing suche matters must be examined ecclesiastically after the order of the Canons and the offenders must be punished by Ecclesiastical discipline according to the holy and diuine Canons whiche our lawes doo not disdaine to folow Seing Iustinian hath so ordeined no wise man that hath read his Lawes wil saie that either he in fringed those Priuileges or as one contrarie to him selfe made a lawe against the Liberties of the Churche without any mention of the former that he him selfe had made Wherefore Iustinian in the Law that you reherse M. Iewel is to be vnderstanded to speake of ciuil and tēporal cases and that in those cases no Bishop should be brought before the Lieutenant and Ciuil Magistrate except the Prince so commaunded it Now whereas you vpon those wordes say that a Bisshop maie be conuented before a Ciuil Magistrate we graunt and euer so said that in Ciuil causes and temporal maters of which Iustinian speaketh Bishops may be cōuented before a temporal Magistrate But that is not our question But this is that which we say The very point of this Question that it is not lawful for a Prince to cal a Priest to his seate of iudgemēt in Ecclesiastical causes And in this your owne authour Iustinian condemneth you He saith as you heard before Autent 83. col 6. vt Clerici Si ecclesiasticū sit delictū c. If the faulte be ecclesiastical let the welbeloued Bisshop of God iudge and discerne it Let the honorable Iudges of the Prouince intermedle nothing at al with it For we wil not that Ciuil Magistrates haue the examination of suche matters And againe Cod. de Episco clericis L. Clericus Si verò crimen sit Ecclesiasticum episcopalis erit examinatio castigatio If the faulte be Ecclesiastical the examination and pounishing of it shal apperteine vnto the Bisshoppe But peraduenture you wil replie to this and saie that Iustinian in the lawe by you rehersed speaketh not onely of Ciuil but also of ecclesiastical causes and willeth a Bishop in qualibet causa in any cause to be conuented before the temporal magistrate if the Prince do so commaunde If you or your lawier make this obiection we answer that it can not be shewed out of al Iustinians lawes Anthent 83. col 6. vt Clerici that he willed a Bishop or Prieste to be conuented before a temporal Magistrate in an Ecclesiastical cause or to be pounished for any hainous offence before he were degraded of his Bishop And hereof if you had but a meane smattering in the Ciuil Lawe you could not be ignorant Besides that already alleged you find in the Code this Lawe Cod. de Episco Clericis L. Statuimus Statuimus vt nullus Ecclesiasticā personam in criminali quaestione vel ciuili trahere ad iudicium seculare praesumat contrae cōstitutiones imperiales canonicas sanctiones We ordeine and decree that no man presume to bring any Ecclesiastical person to the seate of iudgement of any seculare Magistrate in a criminal or ciuil cause contrarie to the Imperial Constitutions and canonical Decrees By this you see that it is against both the Emperours constitutions and Canons of the Churche that a Bishop should be conuented before a Magistrate in an Ecclesiastical cause As for the vantage which you seeke in those wordes In qualibet causa in any cause it is none at al. Had not you benne blinded with malice and your lawier with ignorance you might haue learned A Maxima amōg the lavviers that it is a Maxima and a Principle with the lawiers that Leges tales indefinitè loquentes intelligendae sunt secundùm aliam legem speciatim loquentem Such lawes speaking indefinitely must be vnderstanded by an other lawe that speaketh specially and particularly Wherefore seing the lawe Clericus in the Code and the Antentike vt Clerici in the new Constitutions make special mention that Bishops and Priestes should not be conuented before Ciuil Magistrates in Ecclesiastical causes and permitte no temporal Iudge to meddle with Ecclesiastical personnes excepte it be in Ciuil matters and that with a Limitation and a Prouiso also it had ben your parte and your blinde Lawiers also to haue vnderstanded those wordes In qualibet causa in any cause spoken there indefinitely by the other Lawes that speake more specially But then had you lost a peeuish sophistical Argument and menne had not knowen your worthy skil in the Lawe which no doubte wil appeare great by your practise Iewel pag. 637. 638. The Emperour Martianus cōmaundeth if the cause be criminal that the Bisshop be conuented before the Lieutenant vt coram Praeside conueniatur Harding For your credite touching Martianus commaundement you referre vs to the Code of Iustinian L. Si qui ex consensu de Episco Audient L. Cum Clericis de Episco Clericis As for the first you may tel your lawier that he hath fouly deceiued you and therefore is not worthy to haue his fee. That lawe Si qui ex consensu Cod. de Episcop Audient was neuer made by Martianus the Emperour but by Arcadius and Honorius and requireth neither Bishop nor Prieste nor Clerke to be conuented before the Lieutenant but declareth that if any by mutual consent wil haue their matter debated before the Bishop as an arbiter it shal be lawful for them so to do as euery man that either considereth the law or readeth the Summe set before it may easily see M. Ievv forgeth As for the other lawe Cum Clericis although it be Martianus decree yet hath it not those wordes vt coram Praeside conueniatur that the Bishop be conuented before the Lieutenant nor any clause or sentence sounding to that pupose For trial whereof I referre me to the booke and to any indifferent man that can reade and vnderstande it But suppose it to be true that the Emperour Martianus had geuen suche a commaundement what could it aduantage your cause M. Iewel You should proue
that a Christian Prince may lawfully cal a Bishop to his Consistorie for matters of Faith and Ecclesiastical causes And not hable to do that you tel vs like a Trifler that if the cause be criminal a Bishop may be conuented before the Lieutenant And in so doing you prooue that which no man denieth As Cranmare Archebishop of Cantorburie was called to the Princes Consistorie Cranmare and imprisoned in the Tower for treason against the Quenes Maiestie and afterwarde degraded and burned at Oxford for heresie So any Bishop for like treason or like hainous and criminal offence may not only be summoned to the Princes seate of Iudgement but also be cast into prison and after degradation according to the Canons be depriued of his life This we do not denie But that whiche we denie and you should prooue for I must tel you one thing often bicause you are alwaies forgetful of the very point that is in controuersie is that in matter of Faith and in Ecclesiastical causes a Prince may cal Bishops to his consistorie as their superiour and gouernour in Ecclesiastical causes This is the matter in controuersie betwen you and the Catholiques M. Iewel Let vs heare how substanrially you proue that Iewel Pag. 638. Pope Innocentius 3. him selfe confesseth De maior obedient ca. 2. Innocent 11. q. 1. Cleric nullus that the Pope may make a laie man his Delegate to heare and determine in Priestes causes The like hereof ye maie finde in your ovvne Glose Papa laico delegat causam spiritualem The Pope committeth the hearing of a spiritual mater vnto a laie man Harding If any reason may be forced vpon the Authoritie of Innocentius and the Glose to your purpose it is this The Pope may make a Laie man his Delegate to heare and determine Priests causes Ergo Bishops and Priestes may be conuented before the Ciuil Magistrate in Ecclesiastical causes But to vnrippe the rudenes of this Argument imagine M. Iewel that you were infamous for Simonie and accursed for extorsion and vniuste exactions amongest the clergie of Sarisburie Dioces vnder the name of a beneuolence towardes the setting vp of your howse And that the Metropolitane hearing of it fearing least great dishonour should rise to your Person and infamie to the Gospel as ye cal it would haue the mater examined and to that ende sendeth a commission to the Maior and Bailiffes of Sarisburie and maketh them his Delegates to examine and enquire of your doinges and that the Maior and Bailiffes vppon vertue of that Commission from the Metropolitane conuent you before them Al this then imagined to be true shal it be said that M. Iewel was conuented in a cause of Simonie and extorsion before the Maior and Bailiffes of Sarisburie as Maior and Bailiffes of Sarisburie or as commissioners and delegates from the Metropolitane If you confesse that you were conuented before them as the Metropolitanes Delegates then must you confesse that you were not conuented before them as Maior and Bailiffes of Sarisburie and mere laie Magistrates In like manner when the Pope maketh a Laie man his delegate to heare and determine Priestes causes the Priestes cause whiche is hearde and determined by that Laie man so delegated by the Pope can not be said to be heard and determined by a Laie man as a Laie man but by the Popes Delegate And seing Extr. de offic Deleg c. Sanè Delegatus gerit vices delegantis a degate susteineth the steede of him that geueth him commission the Bishop or Priest who is conuented before the Popes delegate shal be said to be conuented before the Pope him selfe and not before the Laie Magistrate as a mere Ciuile and temporal Magistrate M. Ievvel begileth his Reader vvith false allegations But what meane you M. Iewel thus to begyle your Readers with false allegations Innocentius hath no such wordes as you reporte de Maior obedient cap. 2. Innocent Neither is the Decree that is there registred the Decree of Innocentius but of Gregorius and nothing at al God wote to the purpose for which ye allege it More ouer the Glose brought out of the 11. cause and first question saith not Papa Laico delegat causam spiritualem the Pope committeth the hearing of a spiritual mater vnto a Laie man but Si Papa if the Pope doo committe a spiritual mater to a Laie man And what then M. Iewel Forsooth in that case a Clerke maie be conuented before a temporal Iudge But that temporal Iudge is the Popes delegate and deriueth his authoritie from him as the Commissioners in London haue their authoritie from the Queene So that the exceptions there alleged by the glose proue ius commune esse in contrarium that the common lawe is to the contrarie that is that no Bishop or Prieste ought to be conuented before a Ciuile Magistrate Iewel Pag. 638. Yea further ye shal finde euen in the Popes ovvne Decrees that the Pope hath committed a spiritual mater in a cause of Simonie to be heard 2. q. 5. Mennam and ended by a vvoman and that Brunichildis being a vvoman by Vertue of the Popes commission summoned a Bisshop to appeare and solemnely to make his purgation before her Harding If the Pope did euer committe any spiritual cause to a woman VVhat vvas that Brunichildis had to do in the cause of Menna by coÌ„missioÌ„ of S. Gregorie as you tel vs he did to Brunichildis Queene of Fraunce then was the Queene of Fraunce by your Confession the Popes commissioner in that cause and Delegate to heare and ende that mater of Simonie But what if we can not finde in the Popes Decrees to whiche you referre vs that the Pope euer committed a spiritual mater in a cause of Simonie to be heard and ended by a woman and that Brunichildis had neither commission from the Pope to summon a Bishoppe neither euer summoned a Bishop to appeare and solemnely to make his purgation before her What then shal we say but that M. Iewel is a shamelesse falsifier a deceiuer of al that beleeue him The wordes of that Decree being the woordes of S. Gregorie Grego lib. 11. epist 8. 2. q. 4. Mennam stand thus Mennam verò reuerendissimum fratrem coëpiscopum nostrum post quà m ea quae de eâ—… dicta sunt requirentes in nullo inuenimus esse culpabilem qui insuper ad Sacratissimum corpus beati Petri Apostoli sub iureiurando satisfaciens ab ijs quae obiecta fuerant eius opinioni se demonstrauit alienum reuerti illum purgatum absolutúmque permisimus quia sicut dignum erat vt si in aliquo reus existeret culpam in eo canonicè puniremus Ita dignum non fuit vt eum adiuuante innocentia diutius retinere vel affligere in aliquo deberemus Purgationem tamen antè duobus sibi sacerdotibus iunctis vbi accusator cessauerit eundem ex se praebere tuo commisimus arbitrio We
Gods minister to see iustice ministred and the Violences and iniuries of his Lieutenantes and Officers pounished and these ciuil causes of Felonie Murder and Rape to be truely and thoroughly examined ad vindictam malorum to the reuenge of malefactours wrote his letters to al them that had ben at the foresaid conuenticle at Tyrus and required them to appeare before him as before the syncere minister of God and to render accompte of their dealing against Athanasius in those Ciuil cases Of this mater See the Returne Art 4. Item the Countreblast lib. 2 Cap. 2. 3 For he might wel doo it and nothing further M. Iewel in proufe of his desperate cause that a Bishoppe was conuented in maters of Faith and ecclesiastical causes before the Ciuil Magistrate as his lawful and ordinarie Iudge Iewel Pag. 638. Iustinian the Emperour in the lavve that he maketh touching the publique praiers of the Churche saith thus we commaunde al Bishoppes and Priestes to minister the holy oblation Authentica constit 123. and the prayer at the holy Baptisme not vnder silence but with suche voice as maie be heard of the faithful people to thintente the hartes of the hearers maie be stirred to more Deuotion c. Aftervvarde he addeth further And let the holy Priestes vnderstand that if they neglecte any of these thinges they shal make answere therefore at the dreadful iudgement of the great God and our Sauiour Iesus Christe And yet neuerthelesse we our selues vnderstanding the same wil not passe it ouer nor leaue it vnpounished Hereby vve see that Godly princes maie summone Bishoppes to appeare before them euen in causes Ecclesiastical to receiue such pounischement as they haue deserued Harding For answere to this or any thinge that you can bring out of Iustinian for breuities sake I referre you to Iustinian him selfe By whose constitutions and Godly lawes it maie easily appeare how farre he was from claiming superioritie ouer Bishoppes or gouernment as supreme iudge in causes Ecclesiastical as he who decreed according to the definitions of the 4. general Councelles that in Spiritual causes the Pope of the elder Rome should be taken for the chiefe of al Priestes and aduertised Pope Iohn that there should be nothing moued perteining to the state of the Churche but that he would signifie it to his Holinesse being Heade of al Churches and declared that in all his Lawes and dooinges for matters Ecclesiastical he gaue place to the holy Canons made by the Fathers and willed that when any Ecclesiastical matter were moued his Laie officers should not intermelde but suffer the Bishoppes to ende it according to the Canons In this very Constitution whiche you haue alleged with these special wordes he committeth the Iudgement and pounishment of al sortes of offences committed by them of the Clergie to such as the Canons haue put in authoritie Authentica constit 123. Thus he decreeth Quotiescunque aliquis vel Sacerdotum vel Clericorum vel Praesulum vel Monachorum vel de fide vel de turpi vita vel quòd contra sacros aliquid Canones peregerit accusatus fuerit si quidem is qui accusatus Episcopus fuerit huius Metropolitanus ea quae proferentur examinato Si verò Metropolitanus beatissimus Archiepiscopus sub quo censetur si Presbyter aut Diaconus aut alius Clericus aut Praesul Monasterij aut Monachus Religiosissimus Episcopus sub quo hi censentur delata in accusationem examinato veritate cōprobata vnusquisque pro modo delicti Canonicis censuris subijcitor iudicio eius qui causae examinationem accommodat As often as any either of the Priestes or of the Clerkes or of the Prelates or of the Monkes is accused either of faith or of filthy life or that he hath done ought against the holy Canons in case he that is accused be a Bishop let his Metropolitane examine the thinges that shal be laid to his charge if he be a Metropolitan let the Archebishop vnder whom he is haue the examination If he be a Priest or a Deacon or some other Clerke or a Prelate of a Monasterie or some Monke let the Bishop vnder whose iurisdiction they are examine the thinges that be laid in accusation And when the truth is tried out let euery one abide the Censures of the Canons for the rate of the faulte by the iudgement of him that sitteth vpon the examination of the matter Againe how farre he was from the minde and wil that Bishops or any other whatsouer Ecclesiastical personnes should be summoned to appeare before him or his temporal officers in iudgement for any Ecclesiastical cause this expresse Decree which there also ye might haue founde sufficiently witnesseth Si Ecclesiasticum negotium sit nullam Communionem habento Ciuiles Magistratus cum ea disceptatione sed Religiosissimi Episcopi secundùm sacros Canones negotio finem imponunto If the matter be Ecclesiastical that is to be iudged let the Ciuile Magistrates haue nothing to doo with it But let the most Religious Bishoppes make an ende of it according to the holy Canons By these as also by the purporte of sundrie other Iustinians constitutions ordinances and decrees al menne maie see that he neither chalenged any supreme dominion ouer Bishops and Priestes in Ecclesiastical causes nor enacted this nor any other lawe as chiefe Gouernour of the Churche but followed the holy Councels and willed the Canons to take place and confirmed that which was decreed by them For special answer then to this special obiection made out of the 123 constitution I saie that Iustinian threatned to pounishe them with the seueritie of temporal lawes who would not be conteined in their duetie by Ecclesiastical discipline and order of the Canons that feare might force where loue and conscience could not binde Which policie we doo not mislike seing Duo vincula fortius ligant two bondes binde faster then one To be shorte Iustinian leaueth the correction of Clerkes offending in any thing against the Canons to the cēsures of the Canons And if any refuse to abide the order appointed by the Canons and vtterly shake of the yoke of the Canons then that is to say in the case of extreme stubbornesse and contempte of the Canons like a Godly prince he threateneth reuenge and pounishment In which case the Church doth now cal and alwaies hath called for the aide of the Seculare Arme against those that vtterly refuse to be corrected by the censures of the Church and seeme incorrigible So neither by the lawes of Iustinian neither by the example of Brunichildis neither by the Gloses that you so solemnely allege it can not be seene that Godly Princes might euer summone Bishops to appeare before them to receiue any pounishment at their handes as their superiours and supreme gouernours in ecclesiastical causes Peraduenture if we put on eyes of better sighte we maie see it hereafter if wee diligently attende what you saie Foorth therefore M. Iewel Iewel Pag. 638.
The Emperour Constantinus in his letters to the people of Nicomodia Theodorit li. 1. c. 19. speaking of the vvilful errours and heresies of Priestes and Bishoppes saith thus Illorum temeraria praesumptio mea hoc est ministri Christi manu coercebitur Their rashe attemptes shal be repressed by my hande that is to saie by the hande of Christes seruant August cōtra epist Parme. li. 1. cap. 7. So likevvise S. Augustine saith to the Donatistes An fortè de religione fas non est vt dicat Imperator vel quos miserit Imperator Cur ergo ad Imperatorem legati vestri venerant Is it not lavvful that the Emperour or the Emperours deputie shoulde pronounce in a case of Religion VVherefore then vvent your ovvne Ambassadours to the Emperour Harding If you had said M. Iewel that Constantinus in his epistle to the Nicomedians had threatned to pounishe Bishoppes and Priestes that were Arians that is cursed and abominable heretiques you had in some parte said the truthe But where you saie that he spake of the wilful errours and heresies of Priestes and Bishoppes and adde not Arian Priestes and Arian Bishoppes you conceele parte of the true Storie and declare your malicious hart against Priestes and Bishoppes But to leaue that cankred spite of yours to the iudgement of God why doo ye not report the Emperours wordes as they are in your authour Theodoritus M. Ievvels corruptiō Wil you neuer leaue this your accustomed vile corruption Theodoritus saith not as you reporte but thus Theodorit lib. 1. cap. 19. Quòd si quis audacter inconsultéque ad memoriam laudē pestium illarū exarserit illius statim audacia ministri Dei hoc est mea executione coercebitur If any man be inflamed boldely and incircumspectly at the remembrance and cōmendation of those wicked and pestilent heretiques his boldenes shal be repressed straightwaie by execution done by me that am the minister of God And these threatning wordes of the Emperour are to be referred to the people of Nicodemia for to them the epistle was directed And hauing tēporal iurisdiction as power of life and death ouer them he put that terrour into their hartes that they should be neither in loue nor in admiration of those accursed Bishoppes whom he had bannished for the Arian heresie Or if M. Iewel wil haue those wordes of the Emperour to be referred as wel to the Bishoppes and Priestes as to the laie people Let him vnderstand that as it is lawful for any Prince to pounish heretiques that are excommunicate by the Churche and deliuered to the secular power be they Bishoppes or priestes So it was lawful for Constantine to pounishe these wicked Arian Bishoppes excommunicated and accused by the. 318. Bishoppes in the Councel of Nice And as the prince that now as an executour of Iustice pounisheth heretikes by death is not for that cōsideration neither iudge in causes of heresie nor supreme gouernour of the Churche So Constantine at that time had no iurisdiction ouer Bishoppes in ecclesiastical causes albeit he bannished them and threatned them other pounishmēt if they fel in loue of those cursed Arians For the princes threatning of pounishment for heresie is no argument to build a superioritie in ecclesiastical causes As for the place whiche you bring out of S. Augustine you brought it before in your Replie to proue that Emperours might receiue Appeales in ecclesiastical causes Art 4. fol. 104. 105 106. And a sufficient answere was made vnto it in the Returne of Vntruthes vpon you Why conceele you that If you had ben studious of the truthe for Goddes sake you should haue yelded vnto it or if you had iudged it false haue confuted it and not let it passe in silence and now trouble the Reader with the same stuffe againe But peraduenture you wil saie that you neuer sawe that booke and therefore that you dissemble not the answer If it were credible that you would not see a booke written directely against you and one that toucheth you so neare this excuse were tolerable But seing it hath no colour of truthe there can be litle pretended to saue you from the gilte of dissimulation and hypocrisie in this case I answere you therefore as he did S. Augustine spake in that place against the stubborne Donatistes of whom Parmenianus was one whiche complained that the Emperour Constantine eos ad campum id est ad supplicium duci iussit commaunded them to be brought foorth into the fielde that is to pounishement And in reasoning against him he tooke aduantage of his owne doinges not as allowing the Appeale to the Emperour but as prouing him vnreasonable who for aduantage would appeale to the Emperour and when the Emperour had pronounced sentence against him would striue and repine at the sentence and saie that he being a temporal prince ought not to pounishe Bishoppes Like as if you M. Iewel hauing made the Queene supreme gouernour of your Churche should saie in case you were condemned of heresie or of Simonie by the Prince Her grace ought not to condemne me in these cases a Catholique that flattereth her not with that title would reason against you and saie No sir Is it not laweful for the Queene to condemne you in a case of heresie and Simonie Why then made you the Queene supreme gouernour of your Churche Euen so did S. Augustine reason against the Donatistes And bicause by their appeale to his Maiestie they had chosen him iudge in their cause and after said he could not condemne them S. Augustine vsed their owne weapon against them to cōuince their folie and said as you saie Is it not lawful that the Emperour or the Emperours deputie should pronounce in a case of Religion Wherefore then went your owne Ambassadours to the Emperour c. But as the Catholique reasoning in suche wise against you can not be said by that to allowe the Queenes supremacie So S. Augustine in this talke against the Donatistes can not be said to allowe the Emperours authoritie in condemning of Bishoppes and other ecclesiastical causes For he answering an other Donatiste that said Augustinus epist 162. Non debuit episcopus proconsulari iudicio purgari a Bishop ought not to make his purgation before a temporal magistrate said If he be worthy to be blamed whom the temporal iudge hath absolued whereas he him selfe did not require it how much more are they to be blamed whiche would haue a temporal prince to be iudge in their cause By this it appeareth that he thought that Princes could not be iudges ouer Bishoppes Ibidem Moreouer he reporteth that Constantine who appointed iudges to heare their cause did it à sanctis Antistitibus veniam petiturus as minding to aske pardon of the holy Bishoppes for his facte And the same Emperour seing their importunitie in repairing to him as iudge said Optatus li. 1. cōtra Parmen O rabida furoris audacia Sicut in causis
Bernard fol. 12. a. Hovv M. Ievv may be pleased fol. 38. b. Flovvres of M. Ievvels modeste speache fol. 50. 51. 52. M. Ievvels scoffes and scornes against God his Church and his Saintes fol. 52. a. b. M. Ievvels Sacramentarie scoffes fol. 52. b. M. Ievvels scoffes against the Pope Bishops and Priestes fol. 52. b. 53. a. M. Ievvels general and particular scoffes fol. 53. 54. M. Ievvels Outcries and scoffing Oes fol. 55. b. M. Ievvels modest marginal Notes fol. 54. b. 55. a. b. M. Ievv plaieth many vntrue partes at once fol. 68. a. M. Ievv falsifieth my ansvver made in the Confutation fol. 44. b. 45. a. 68. b. 69. a. 128. b. 141. a. 147. a. 153 b. 180. b. 223. a. what it is to confute M. Ievv vvritinges fol. 76. b. M. Ievv repeateth obiections and allegations already ansvvered ād confuted dissembling vtterly al answer made fol. 83. b. 84. a 226. a. 227. b. 248. 249. 253. b. 255. b. 256. b. M. Ievvel defendeth opē rebellion and treason 86. a. b. 88. a. Item 183. and 184. in defending wickless trayterous heresie M. Ievvel reasoneth against the Church euen as the Donatistes did fol. 90. b. 91. a. M. Ievv blasphemously maligneth the conuersion of infidels to the faith fol. 96. b. 97. a. M. Ievv contrary to him selfe fol. 98. a. 101. b. M. Ievvels extreme impudencie fol. 106. b. 160. a. b. 221. a. M. Ievvels deceite in equiuocation of termes fol. 119. a. 134. a. M. Ievvels fond limitation against Lirinensis fol. 124. b. 125. a. M. Ievv fond conditions to admit one head of the Churche fol. 138. a. M. Ievvels vaine skoffing fol. 141. b. 150. b. M. Ievvels negatiue argumentes fol. 143. a. 226. b. M. Ievv alleageth obiections of the Doctors made against the Truth as Truthes auouched by the Doctours fol. 144. a. M. Ievvels vvaie to continevve vvrangling fol. 147. b. M. Iewelles ridiculous and loose Argumentes fol. 143. a. 152. b. 155. b. 160. b. 161. a. 162. a. 184. b. M. Iewel falsely alleageth the Fathers sayinges fol. 6. b. 113. a. 156. b. 157. a. 166. b. 173. b. 208. a. 240. b. 269. a. 286. a. 333. b. 387. a. M. Iewel falsifierh the holy Scripture fol. 160. a. 202. a. 222. a. 265. a. 266. b. M. Iewelles dissembling shifte fol. 163. a. M. Iewel misseallegeth the Ciuil Lawe fol. 168. b. 169. a. 380. b. M. Iewel missealleageth and falsifieth Gratian and his Glose fol. 169. a. b. 190. a. 191. a. 204 b. 383. a M. Iewel falsifieth the Councels fol. 183. a. 189. a. M. Iewels forging of the Fathers sayinges fol. 185. a. 186. 290. a. b. 203. b. 209. a. M. Iewel chargeth me with three mayne Lyes 189. b. Item with moe Lies fol. 287. a. 285. a. 295. b. 316. b. 303. a. 285. b. 310. b. 374. b. M. Iewel a scatterer no Successour of any one Bishop fol. 203. a. M. Iewel falsifieth al his Testimonies against Succession fol. 206. b. M. Iewel plaieth the very parte of Antichrist fol. 210. b. 245. a. M. Iewel falsifieth Bitontinus fol. 213. b. M. Iew. continually alleageth those mens sayinges for him vvhose dedes he knovveth to be against him fol. 213. b 229. a M. Ievvel neuer ordered Priest nor Bishop fol. 230. b. 222. a. b. M. Ievvel sticketh not to saie vntruely I vvas present and consented to his Election fol. 232. b. M. Ievvel can shevve no one Predecessour of his Religion in the See of Sarisburie fol. 241. 242. 243. M. Ievvel bevvraieth his lurking heresie fol. 244. M. Ievvels daie and night fol. 246. b. M. Ievvels Lying and Rhetorical addition of vvordes and sentences to his Authors sayinges fol. 199. a. 201. b. 203. b. 204. a. b. 205. b. 208. a. 258. a. 265. a. 302. a. 313. b. 305. a. Intercession to Saintes to praie for vs. fol. 358. a. Iohn the. 22. his errour fol. 64. b. 65. 66 255. b. Iohn Huss fol. 83. a. b. 103. b Iohn of Sarisburie fol. 258. 259. 260. Iohn 22. charged by M. Iew. with the errour of Iohn fol. 23. 66. b. Iohn of Constantinoples ambition fol. 141. a. Iosue mistaken for Osee confessed fol. 143. b. Iouinians heresie making Marriage and virginite of equal merite fol. 296. a. Iuuenalis and Thalassius not condemned in the Councel of Chalcedon fol. 73. b. 74. a. Iuste who maie be called in this life fol. 367. a. L. LAteran great Councel fol. 105. a. 110. b. Lady Interpreter noted of presumption fol. 120. The Lawe by what meanes it is fulfilled fol. 369. a. Leaders awaie of the Flocke who be they fol. 202. b. 267. b. A Legende of Leo alleged by M. Iewel a fonde fable fol. 251. a. Lenten Fast a custom of the Churche fol. 327. a. Leo the first defended from Arianisme fol. 172. b. 173. 174. 175. 176. 177. 251. 252. Liberius defended from Arianisme fol. 62. a. b. 250. a. Life euerlasting how freely geuen and how for good workes fol. 372. b. Light not put out in the Churche for a thousand yeres fol. 90. a. This terme my Lorde vsed of the Antiquitie fol. 175. a Loose Apostates whether the diuisers of this new Gospel maie not so be called fol. 35. b. Luthers dogge eloquence fol. 127. Lutherans and Zuinglians dissension fol. 322. b. M. MAcabees booke Canonical among the faithful fol. 321. b. Magistrate Ciuil not iudge in Ecclesiastical causes fol. 377. a. Manichees heresie denying Christes true flesh fol. 345. a. Marie the Virgin aduocate for Eue. fol. 359. b. Marie our Ladie Queene of al hope of the Fathers c. fol. 365. a. Marcellinus Pope Martyr fol. 248. b. Marcus Callidius an Oratour fol. 42. b. Marriage after Vowe of Chastitie what the Fathers haue iudged thereof fol. 278. b Married twise maie not be made Bisshoppes fol. 279. b. Marriage after holy Order euer accompted vnlawful amōg Catholiques fol. 280. a. Married Priestes in England in Anselmus time fol. 280. b. Marriage vnlawful in twoo cases fol. 281. a. Marriages three good thinges fol. 284. a. Married Priestes in olde time called Apostates fol. 296. b. Marriage a let vnto perfiter life by S. Chrysostome fol. 305. a. Matrimonie a Sacrament that geueth grace fol. 328. b. Masse said by Iohn Husse in his last daies fol. 83. a. b. Menna absolued fol. 382. a. b. Merite changed by M. Iewel into Preeminence fol. 163. a. Merites of Christes death be not receiued by faith only fol. 356. b. Merites of workes fol. 369. b. sequentib Ministers of Tourney fol. 85. a. Monica S. Augustines mother laboured to conuert her husband fol. 315. a. Montanistes heresies fol. 327. a. N. NEstorius a scatterer of the flocke fol. 203. a. Nicephorus belied by M. Iew. fol. 303. a. Nilus a late Greeke Schismatike fol. 225. a. Nipping of Doctours by M. Iewel fol. 305. a. North partes conuerted to the faith in these later ages fol. 94. b. O. Oddes betwene the Protestantes and Catholiques fol. 30. a. 107. b. An Oration forged in the name of Pius fol. 4. 97. b. Order
with you or rather you with them They renounced the Popes Primacie they condemned Purgatorie they called Images by the name of Idolles they contemned holy Water and such other good and holesome ceremonies they reproued the Religion of the Begging friers with such like al as ye doo I marueile therefore why they are none of yours Verely Aeneas Syluius saith that Iohn Huss Iohn Hu◠whom in the nexte line you allowe for yours imbraced the wicked secte of the Waldenses And why then are not the one yours as wel as the other As for Imagebreakers Image-breakers if they be not yours whose are they They were no Papistes your selfe wil confesse I trowe that haue ouerthrowen Images in England and in Scotland in Fraunce and now of late here in sundry places of the low Countrie They be yours they be yours M. Iewel and such others a great many moe with whom in a rueful procession ye are like to ioine singing Vae with them if ye repent not and sing an other song Iewel Pag. 48. Of Iohn Huss Hierome of Prage and Berengarius and other like vertuous learned menne vve haue no cause to be ashamed Harding The more verely is your shame if any sparke of shame be leafte in you Albeit no great wonder For it must needes be true that the wise man saith Prouer. 18. Impius cū in profundum venerit contemnit When the wicked man is come vnto the bottom of wickednes then he passeth of nothing Neither the Whoare at length taketh shame of any her filthinesse what soeuer And therefore it is said of such pastshame wretches Ierem. 3. Frons mulieris meretricis facta est tibi Thou hast gotten thee a whoares forehead Though I haue smal hope of any good to be done with you yet for the sake of others thus I maie saie vnto you You denied a litle before the Waldenses to be yours But the Hussites followed altogether the Waldenses as witnesseth Aeneas Syluius Therefore the Hussites also ought to be none of yours Yet you are not you saie ashamed of Iohn Hus. I marueile now the lesse yf you be not ashamed of your so many so notorious and shamelesse Vntruthes vttered before in your Replie and confuted by diuers but now repeted and renewed againe the Confutation thereof vtterly dissembled The most shameful heresies of Hus of vvhō M. Ievvel professeth him selfe not to be ashamed Alphōsus de Castro aduersus haereses lib. 6. Concil Constant post 45. Sess But if you meane good faith and that you are not in deede ashamed of Iohn Hus neither of Hierome of Prage then tel vs I praie you how like you these heresies of theirs First of Iohn Hus who with the olde Donatistes affirmed that in the Churche are onely good men Are you not ashamed of that heresie so clearely and so fully confuted by S Augustine Againe of that other to pounish one that is excommunicate with the secular sworde is a pharisaical tyrannie Allowe you also that dissolute Heresie And if you be not ashamed to professe this Doctrine why are ye not then ashamed to doo that whiche is repugnant to the Doctrine ye professe For how saie you Doo ye not excommunicate such as wil not condescende vnto your pestiferous opinions and refuse to come to your heretical Seruice And then further if they stand constantly in the mainetenance of the truth as it becommeth menne that haue the feare of God before their eyes not yeelding to your great but vaine threates doo ye not cause their persons to be apprehended by the secular officer and to be cast in prison and then in your wicked and bloudy preachinges crye ye not out vnto the prince to drawe her sworde Are ye not I saie ashamed thus to fight with your selues teaching one thing and doing the cleane contrarie Alphonsus lib. 12. Cōcil Cōstantien Thirdely haue ye no shame of that other heresie that who soeuer is in deadly sinne is neither kinge nor ciuile Magistrate nor Bishop How like you of this brutish heresie Haue you no cause to be ashamed of Iohn Hus I let passe other his infamous heresies Ioan. Cochlaeus Hus said Masse a litle before he vvas burnt Suprà ca. 3. fol. 83. Hierom of Prage But if you be not ashamed of any of his heresies how saie you to that he said Masse as it is proued before and that but a fewe daies before he was burnt Be ye neither ashamed of that What is that ye wil be ashamed of in an heretique then being neither ashamed of his heresies nor of that he iudgeth wel of the Masse But now touching Hierome of Prage haue you no cause M. Iewel to be ashamed of him Verely it appeareth by the Councel of Constance Concil Constant Sessio 21. Sessi 19. he helde and professed al and singular the heresies of Wiclef and Iohn Hus. He recanted once openly and abiured them al as Cranmar did in Oxforde but after reuolting againe to his former vomite he was burned for an Heretique Hierom of Prage recanted and returned to his vomite as Cranmar was If you thinke it no shame to be an heretique as Hierome was yet I trowe ye thinke it a shame to recante as he did How be it I maie doubte thereof for your selfe haue trodden that trace and perhappes maie once more be brought to tread it againe and like it is that you wil not be ashamed of it and to reuolte once backe againe so litle shame is in you Go your waie then M. Iewel It booteth not vs to goe aboute to make you blush For I perceiue there is nothing whereof lightly you wil be ashamed such a shamelesse grace you haue As for Berengarius Berengarius of whome likewise you saie you haue no cause to be ashamed I marueile the lesse considering the natural propertie of heretikes which is to increase their errours daily and to procede from il to worse Luther the first brocher of your religion was ashamed of Berengarius and would neuer condescende to Carolostadius though fiue yeres continually he trauailed with him to bring him to be of Berengarius opinion Flacius Illyricus with his felowes of Magdeburg al the Protestantes of Wittenberg of Lipsia of the vpper Saxonies Nicolaus Gallus George Maior Westphalus Brentius and diuers others whom your selfe accompte for Gospellers for the true godly and right beleeuers are al to this daie ashamed of Berengarius and be at defiance with you and them of his opinion and doo in their writinges and preachinges plainely condemne your Sacramentarie Heresie of whiche Berengarius was the first publisher Tom. 2. fo 260. Luther condemneth the heresie of Berengarius reuiued by Zuinglius in these wordes I must needes eschew and auoide them as men condemned by their owne iudgement Neither maie I ioine with them in any meanes by letters In parua Confess de Caena Domini In publica Confes pura doctrina Lib. cōtra 11. sectas