Apostles Peter and Paule doe playnely declare The. 57. vntruthe The Apostles neuer declared any such matter So saye you in déede â—… Stapleton but the Bishops proofes out of Chrisostome and sainct Augustine do playnly declare they did The. 58. vntruth Of misunderstanding sainct Augustine bicause besides this bederoll he also chargeth the Bishop therewith at large in the Counterblast it is answered seuerally in the answere of the. 18. chapter Not meaning only the transgressors of the seconde table in teÌ„porall matters but also agaynst the offendours of the first table in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes or matters The. 59. vntruthe Sainct Augustine meaneth not to teach suche gouernement of Princes in ecclesiasticall matters as you teache but onely to punishe Heretikes and by the same to mayntayne the Catholike fayth decreed by the Clergie not by the ciuill Magistrate Belike ye can tell better what sainct Augustine meant than be could him selfe But S. Augustine is playne he néedeth no suche interpreter Remember your owne note maledicta glossa quae corrumpit textum Cursed be that glose that corrupteth the text S. Aug. interpreting the mynd of the Apostle to be that the authoritie power of Princes hath to deale in ecclesiastical causes so wel as in teÌ„poral The. 60. vntruth Saint Augustine neuer wrote so Ye shoulde haue tolde out the sentence of S. Augustine that the B. citeth which fully proueth it and then haue improued it as an vntruth if ye coulde whiche although ye do not yet in the margine of that sentence ye crye out lustily and say where is there in all this master Horne that the Princes haue to deale in ecclesiastical causes so well as in temporall For sooth master Stapleton euen here at your hand in this present sentence wherein S. Augustine proueth and your selfe also graunt so muche that the Princes authoritie punishethe so well abuses in eccl. causes and faultes againste religion as it doth ciuill or temporall causes but it punisheth all external faultes and abuses in al ciuil and temporal causes that by his supreme authoritie therein not as an others executioner Ergo it punisheth al external abuses and faults in all ecclesiasticall causes and religion and that by his supreme authoritie therein and not as the clergies executioner Eusebius c. vnderstanding the ministerie of the ciuill Magistrate to be about Gods religion and eccle causes so well as temporall The. 61. vntruth Eusebius neuer vnderstoode any such ministerie of the ciuill Magistrate In what things Eusebius vnderstoode the ciuil Magistrats ministerie to consist the B. set downe Eusebius his owne wordes to proue that he vnderstood it so you say he neuer vnderstoode it so but ye set downe neuer a worde neyther here nor in your Counterblaste to proue the contrarie which tyll ye shall be able to do the Byshoppes vnderstanding of Eusebius by his owne wordes is no vntruthe Eusebius saythe that in preaching by hys decrees true godlynesse in setting foorthe the religion of the moste holy lawe and the most blessed faythe the Princes ministerie consisteth in these things so wel as any other or before al other as his best ministerie But these things are not ciuill matters but spirituall and ecclesiasticall Ergo his ministerie by Eusebius vnderstanding consisteth so well in ecclesiasticall or spirituall matters as ciuill or temporall This moste Christian Emperoure did rightly consider as he hadde bene truely taughte of the moste Christian Byshoppes of that tyme that as the Princes haue in charge the mynisterie and gouernement in all manner causes eyther temporall or spirituall The. 62. vntruth impudent and shamelesse concluded but no whit proued And in his Counterblast I say it is a starke and most impudent lye that ye say without any profe Constantine was taught of the Byshoppes that Princes haue the gouernement in all manner causes eyther temporall or spirituall ye conclude after your manner facingly and desperately vvithout any proufe or halfe proufe in the worlde Here are wonderfull boysterous wordes Master Stapleton but greate boast and small roaste as they say For all this hyghe chalenge standeth on I saye and so in déede it appéereth to be your saying but hadde it not béene your saying Master Stapleton I woulde haue thought it hadde béene some cotqueanes cryaleyson and I woulde haue answered a wispe a wispe for setting aside your foule language what vntruthe is here concluded or what concluded that is not proued The Prince hath the setting foorthe of true religion of Gods moste holy lawe and the moste blessed faythe but these thinges are not ciuill but ecclesiasticall and spirituall the Prince hath to puâ—…te awaye and ouerthrowe all euilles that presse the vvoorlde but none presse the worlde more daungerously than superstition Idolatrie erroures heresies scismes sectes and false religion all whiche are no ciuill but ecclesiasticall and spirituall matters The Prince dothe these thinges not as an executioner of an others ministerie but all the dooing hereof is the ministery properly beloÌ„ging to his owne office yea it is his best ministerie Ergo he dothe all these thinges with as muche or more full and proper authoritie of his office â–ª as he dothe any other ciuill thing But his ministerie in ciuill things is by his supreme authoritie vnder God therin whose minister S. Paule calleth him This is the Bishops conclusion moste playne and true all your blackemouthed Rhethorike to the contrarie notwithstanding For this cause also Nicephorus c. compareth Emanuell Paleologus the Emperoure to Constantine For this cause the. 63. vntruthe as shall appeare There is no doubt some great cause that moued you M. Stapleton to put this in your bederoll of vntruthes that the Bishop sayd for this cause And if you were asked for what cause ye doe so it séemeth it would be harde for you to render any and therefore ye take a wise and a short way to tell vs it shall appeare But here ye shewe none nor any at all here appeareth And where it shoulde appeare there appeareth none also except this be sufficient reason onely to denie it and say it is no cause at all For these wordes onely appeare there VVhere ye say for this cause also c. this is no cause at all but is vntrue as of the other Emperour Constantine and muche more vntrue as ye shall good reader straight way vnderstande What cause I pray you is here alleaged and yet this is all that ye say vnto it sauing that as ye sayde before it shoulde appeare referring vs there hither here ye saye as the reader shall straightway vnderstande it And yet neyther straight way nor crooked way ye speake one worde more of the matter but goe about the bushe medling with other matters and not with the truthe or vntruthe hereof any more And so it appeareth nusquam and the reader shall vnderstande it nunquam Neyther is it any maruell if ye can not lette the reader to
master Stapleton here is no small boast I trowe We had nowe néede to beware betymes for feare the Bishoppe be here quite ouerthrowne since that master Stapleton maketh so prowde a chalenge Let vs therefore take héede to hys argument on thys place VVhiche place sayeth he well weighed and considered serueth to declare that I haue sayde that the King and others shoulde receyue not onelye the letter whiche as Saint Paule sayeth doeth kyll but the true and syncere meaning withall wherein standeth the lyfe of the letter as the lyfe of man wythin hys bodie yea the eternall lyfe whereof by following lewde lying expositions of holye wâ—…itte wee are spoyled at the Priestes handes Is this the conclusion of all this great crake M. St. that the B. should be quite ouerthrowne by this sentence what one word is here not only of this sentence but euen of your owne well weighed and considered conclusion theron which hath come nere vnto much lesse ouerthrowne the Bishops assertion Which if ye would haue ouerthrowne ye should haue concluded agaynst it and thus haue reasoned Moses sayde to the people of Israell if any hard or doubtfull thing in iudgement rise vp with thee betwixt bloud and bloud plea and plea plague and plague in matters of strife within the Citie c. Go to the Priestes and vnto the Iudge that shall be in those dayes c. Ergo a Christian king ought not to chalenge or take vpon him any such supreme gouernment in ecclesiasticall matters as doth the Queenes maiestie This conclusion in déede quite ouerthroweth the Bishops assertion But who séeth not that this sentence is to farre fetched to inferre any such conclusion And therfore master Stapleton thoughe this was his buttâ—… on whiche his eyâ—… shoulde haue béene fixed and brought his proues to haue improued this yet durst he not once touche or come nighe it for very shame for if he had he sawe that euery boye in the scholes would haue hissed out his argument And therefore wilyly weighing and considering howe he might make it séeme to serue to some purpose that he had craked on so much This place sayth he well weighed and considered serueth to declare that I haue sayd that Kings and others should receyue not onely the bare letter but the true and sincere meaning withall c. at the priestes handes And is this all that this place serueth to M. Stapleton for I dare say you haue well weighed and considered the matter that from so great a boast are so sodenly fallen into so déepe a consideration of the bare letter killing and the true quickening sense therof Wheras that text if ye would but meanely weigh and consider it once againe neyther talketh of any killing letter or liuing sense at all but of certaine doubtfull cases of strife nor can serue to confirme those sayings of Christ and Saint Paule without manifest wresting of it But to what purpose doe ye so well weigh and consider that whiche is nothing in question and that which is in question denyed and you should proue without any weighing or considering ye take it for confessed Who doubteth of this that Princes should not onely receyue the bare letter but the true sense and meaning withall at the priestes handes This Princes in déede should do which if they had alwayes done they shoulde not haue receyued so many of their lewde lying expositions as they haue done here to fore at the priestes hands who herein deceyued princes and gaue them not the true meaning and sense togither with the copie of Gods worde but debarred Princes of copie thereof of letter sense and all féeding them wyth the vayne fables and lewde lying expositions of theyr owne deuisings Wherefore Lyra noteth here vppon the Hebrue glosse Hic dicit glossa Hebraica c. Here sayth the Hebrue glosse if the priest shall say vnto thee that thy right hande is thy left hande or thy left hande is thy right hande this saying must be vpholden which thing is manifest false For the sentence of no maner of man of what authoritie so euer he be is to be vpholden if it conteyne a manifest falsehoode or errour And this appeareth by this which is set before in the text They shall iudge vnto thee the truth of Iudgement and afterward is set vnder And they shall teach thee according to his lawe whereby it appeareth that if the Priestes speake that which is false or swarue from the law of God they are not to be heard Thus sayth Lyra in confuting the Hebrue glosars of their hye Priests that sayde they could not erre and therefore what soeuer they taught must be beléeued And do not your Papistes say the same of the Pope and your selfe holde the same of your Priestes expositions that theirs alwayes muste be taken for the true sense else wherto bring ye out this conclusion In doubtfull cases of bloud and ciuill actions of strife the highe Priest and the chiefe Iudge muste determine a finall sentence Ergo Princes muste receiue not the letter of the scripture but suche sense as the Popish priestes and the Pope shall determine for the true sense in all controuersies of religion For this is the ful drift of your reason though ye dare not for shame speake so playne But this argument the more it is wayed wayeth lyke a fether in the winde and therefore ye turne the conclusion into generall words and say Ergo Princes and others muste receiue at the Priestes hands not onely the bare letter that killeth but the true and sincere meaning therof withall Which coÌ„clusion is not in controuersie but on both parts graunted they oughtso to do the Priests to deliuer to their Princes and others the worde of God and the true sense therof and the Prince and others oughte so to receiue of them the same word of God and the true sense thereof and not the priests owne deuises and expositions But since that none haue euer done more coÌ„trarie to this rule sythe it was first giuen by Moyses then haue the Popishe priestes had not Christian princes great néede to beware of Popishe Priests gloses and follow the councell of Lyra in reiecting them as other good Princes haue done to displace those false glosing priestes and place faythfull disyensers of Gods mysteries in their roomes and ouersée that their people be not deceiued in receiuing at the priests handes quid pro quo And for this cause the priest shoulde deliuer to his prince a perfect copy of the law which M. St. wickedly termeth the bare letter that killeth and thereto wresteth S. Paule wresteth this sentence of the iudiciall law among the Iewes for their time in the foresaide ciuill controuersies to be a simple rule for all christian common weales in all ecclesiastical causes excluding quite al iudgement from the prince including it in his Pope Priests alone iumbling the Prince and the people togither vnder the priests absolute determination
vpon thē selues to whō they properly appertayne who in deede denie both Chryst the head and Christ the body that is his catholike Church And that as the Donatistes secte was condemned by Constantine Honorius and other Emperours the highe kings of Christendome So haue they withall condemned you master Stapl. that followe the Donatistes and so may and ought all christian Princes the Emperour nowe whose highe kingdomes besides a bare name in any matter of Christianitie ye make nothing to pull downe suche vsurpers of their highe kingdomes and set vp true and godly ministers in their places to whome they might and ought to submitte their heades vnder their spirituall ministerie To the whiche sorte as is shewed playnely out of Chrisostome your Popishe Priesthoode is cleane contrarie And therefore to returne your wordes vpon your selfe Ye are they that cutte in sunder the vnitie and peace of Christes Churche and rebell agaynst the promises of his Gospell Which Gospell ye can not abyde should come to light and therefore the highe kinges of Christendome should remoue and condemne you Whiche is a better argumente than yours M. Stap. and is sufficient to inferre the supremacie of these highe Kings and Princes The. 23. Diuision THe Bishop in his diuision prosecuting still the wordes of S. Paule Rom. 13. proueth further out of Chrysostome and Eusebius that as the Prince is Gods minister so this ministerie consisteth not onely in ciuill and temporall but also in the well ordering of the Church matters and their diligent rule and care therein The effecte of his argument is this The Prince as Chrysostome sayth prepareth the mindes of many to be made more appliable to the doctrine of the worde and is the great lighte and true preacher and setter foorth of true godlynesse as Eusebius sayth Ergo His ministerie consisteth as well in ecclesiasticall as ciuill causes The antecedent Eusebius proueth by the example of Constantine that his ministerie stretched to the setting foorth of godlynesse to al countreyes and that he preached God and not onely ciuil lawes by his Imperiall decrees and Proclamations And this he confirmeth by Constantines own confession that he taughte by his ministerie the religion and lawe of God that therby he caused the encrease of the true fayth And by the same put away and euerthrewe all the euils that pressed the worlde But the world in Constantines time was pressed with diuers schismes errours heresies false religions and many ecclesiasticall abuses and superstitions besides the heathen Idolatrie Ergo His ministerie stretched not onely ouer temporall causes but also ecclesiasticall Yea he counteth this his best ministerie Ergo. It belongeth to the Prince as well if not more than the other And so the Bishops argument followeth héerevpon that the Apostles sentence the Prince is Gods minister argueth the Princes charge and gouernement in all maner causes ecclesiasticall so well as temporall These proues of the Byshop béeing so euident M. Stap. answereth they are all insufficient saying I see ye not master Horne come as yet neere the matter I answere who is so blinde as he that seeth and will not see Were ye not of the number of those of whome Chryst sayth I came to iudgemēt into this worlde that those that see not shoulde see and those that see shoulde be made blind Ye might then both clearely see that he both cōmeth neere the matter and satisfieth it at large Excepte ye be as blinde of the matter also as ye pretende to be of these the Byshops proufes But if ye woulde haue followed your owne counsell euer to haue set before your eyes the state of the question in issue betwéene them ye shoulde well by this time haue seene that the Byshop digressed nothing frō it And that your selfe of self will or malice will not looke aright theron but cleane awrie stil starting aside and swaruing frō the marke for the nonce to picke occasions wheron to wrangle For wherfore I pray you do ye not see that the Bishop commeth not neere the matter I see not say you that Constantine changed religion plucked downe Altares deposed Byshops c. But that he was diligent in defending the olde and former faythe of the Christians Whatsoeuer you see or see not in Constantine master Stapl. all the world may see false dealing in you and how lyke an vnnaturall subiecte to your naturall Prince ye be As thoughe ye sawe that the Quéenes highnesse had changed religion excepte ye meane false religion and that ye might haue seene in Constantine also He changed the heathen religion of the Paynims and abolished it with all their Altares Byshops Priestes and temples and set foorth the true religion of Iesus Christe He chaunged likewise and abolished suche superstitions Idolatries schismes errours and heresies as troubled the Churche of Christe in his time Which you might easily haue seene in Constantines owne wordes by the Byshop cited That he put away and ouerthre we all the euils that pressed the worlde If you say ye can not yet see that he ment all spirituall and ecclesiasticall euils so well as temporall put on a payre of spectacles master Stapl that are not dymmed with affection and then shall ye see that of suche kinde as the good thinges were whiche he set foorth of suche kinde were the contrarie euils that he put away and ouerthrew but the good things that he set foorthe were true godlynesse decrees of God the religion of the moste holy law the most blessed fayth c. All whiche are matters moste spirituall and ecclesiasticall Ergo all the euils that he abolished were so well spirituall and ecclesiasticall as ciuill and temporall matters If ye say yet ye see nothing but that he was diligent in defending the olde and former fayth of the Christians True in deede neither can ye see any other thing in the Quéenes Maiestie nor any authoritie is giuen héereby to Princes than as Constantine was to bee diligente in defending the olde and former fayth of the Christians founded by Christ and taught by his Apostles And if any other since that time haue brought in any things besides that old and former fayth to remoue the same and reduce vs to the olde and former fayth of the Christians For as Tertullian sayth That is of the Lorde and that is truthe that was before deliuered but that which afterward was thrust in is bothe strange and false And so sayth Constantine I bothe called agayne mankind taught by my ministerie to the religion of the most holy lawe and also caused the moste blessed fayth should encrease grow vnder a better gouernor Nowe séeing that many poynts of the Popish fayth and doctrine haue cropen in since that time and manie of later yeres besides and contrarie to the olde and former fayth of the Cheistians taught by Christ and left vs written by the finger of the holy ghost sealed and confirmed by so many myracles to endure to the
the church in euery cause wherof it is not otherwise disposed in the new testament is to be holden of the law of nations or of lawe ciuil To this I answer First this in part is true but in part so false that himself confutes himself making exceptioÌ„ of diuers things in the ciuill power that sproong immediatly froÌ„ God neither were those things as he falsly saithe Circa res terrenas about earthly matters but about ecclesiasticall matters in the law of Moyses And although their ceremonial causes and iudicials pertayning to ecclesiasticall matters in the ciuil power be taken away with the ceremoniall and indiciall lawe of the Iewes yet the ciuil power hath like authoritie in the like causes ecclesiastical of the new testameÌ„t as is shewed out of S. Aug. against M. St. the Donatistes Secondly where he sayeth all the ciuil power nowe of christian kings and Emperors is all of the law of nations or ciuil except in cases otherwise disposed in the new testament I answer this may well be graunted and yet the ciuil power hath authoritie ouer ecclesiasticall persons in causes ecclesiastical for so not only in the old testament but also in the newe Testament it is playnly disposed Thirdly to this diuision of the original of both these estates that the ecclesiastical is from God immediatly the ciuil by other meanes I answere this distinction faileth both by his own tale saying Ciuilis à deo plerunque est per media quaedam the ciuil power is oftentimes from God by certain meanes If it be oftentimes by certaine meanes then it is not alwayes and but accidentall not of the nature of the estate for so it is also immediatly from God. And the like accident falleth out likewise of the ecclesiastical estate that although the power be immediatly from God yet many causes in it called Ecclesiastical be also Per media quadam humani ingenij interposita by certain meanes of mans wit put betwene For this cause sayth M. sand the ciuil power among the heathen that know not god is found to be the same that is extant with faithful kings although Christ wold not haue such power in the ministers of his kingdom for he said the Princes of the nations rule ouer them and they that are iuniors exercise power ouer them so shall it not be among you I answere first Maister Saunders this is a like slander to M. Stapletons fo 29. a. b. The ciuil power is not found to be the same in heathen Princes that knowe not God and in Christian Princes that know God there is a very great difference betwene these so different estates wherin the one acknowledgeth all his power to be of God and hath it described and limited by Gods word the other takes it al for hu main naturall not so much as knowing God by your own confession from whome the originall of it springeth Secondly to that you saye suche power is debarred by Christe from his ministers If yée meane by suche power suche power as is among the Heathen suche is not onely debarred from them but from christian Princes too If ye meane suche power as Christian Princes haue is debarred from the ministers of Christ then say ye true But howe then dothe youre Pope chalenge and vsurpe bothe suche and the same also Yea your selfe afterwarde reason moste earnestly thoroughout all the fourth chapter following that the ministers of Christe may haue it Wherin ye speak cleane contrary both to Christ and to your self Thirdly I note this eyther youre grosse ignoraunce or your impudent falshood in altering the wordes of Christe He sayth not they that are iuniors or yongers the Texte is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they that are great whiche are cleane contrarie If M. Stapleton were your aduersarie he would rattle ye vp Master Saunders for so foule a scape Nowe to fortifie a difference betwéene the Ecclesiastical power and the Ciuill he vrgeth that the spiritual kingdom of Christ is in this worlde but not of this worlde as for the earthly kingdome is bothe in and of this world but the ecclesiasticall power is the spirituall kingdome of Christ therfore there is a difference but the spirituall kingdom of Christ excelleth all worldlyâ—… kingdomes therfore they are stark fooles that in any ecclesiasticall thing to be administred preferre the earthly kings before the pastors of the Churche I answere all these conclusions are impertinent If there be any follie it is to striue for that that is not in controuersie We graunt a difference betwixt both powers and kingdomes althoughe a question is to be moued what he meaneth here by ecclesiasticall power If he take it as the Papistes do we denie that ecclesiasticall power to be the spiritual kingdome of Christ. For their ecclesiasticall power is ouermuch not in the worlde but of the worlde also If he meane by ecclesiasticall power the spirituall kingdome of Christ as he in his word hath ordeyned the fame although there be a difference betwene the power in the kingdom and the kingdome in the which the power is yet we graunt this gladly that no wise man will preferre the earthly kings in any spiritual thing to be administred before the pastors of the churche But this is nothing againste the earthly kings preferment ouer the spirituall pastor to ouersée him rightly and spiritually to administer his spirituall things in the ministration whereof all earthly kings oughte to giue place vnto him which we did neuer denie And sith there is no comparison betwene Christ the sonne of God who is also God himself and a creature of the law natural or ciuill neither is there any comparison betwixt the power ecclesiastical which is wholly giue vnto vs by only Christ the mediator the power royall which either altogether or almost altogether is not ordeined of God but by the lawe of nations or ciuill for although God hath reuealed froÌ„ heauen that belongeth to the power royall if notwithstandyng that pertained not to eternall saluation which is hid in Christ but to contein peace among men that is to be reckned to be reuealed no otherwise than to be a certain declaration which he had grafted in vs by Nature or else euen necessitie ought to haue wroong out of vs or profite according to the seedes of nature ought to haue brought to light I answere first we graunt that the ecclesiastical power not as the Papists stretche it but as it is giuen vnto vs by only Christ the mediator is farre superior without all comparison than the royal power of Princes Howbeit this hindreth not but as the ministers are mediators thereof to vs the royall power of Princes hath againe an other superior gouernment to ouersée that there be no other ecclesiasticall power exercised by the mediation of the Minister than Christ the only mediator hath ordeyned And to remoue all popish â—…oysting in giuing vs quid pro quo whiche when
force of his royall power oâ—… else a woman also might bothe teache in the Churche and also remitte sinnes and baptise orderly and solemnly and minister the sacrament of thankesgiuing For sithe bothe by the lawe of nations it is receyued that a woman may be admitted to the gouernment of a kingdome and in Moses lawe it is written when a man shall dye without a sonne the enheritance shall passe to the daughter but a kingdome commeth among many nations in the name of enheritaÌ„ce And sithe Debora the Prophetesse iudged the people of Israell and also Athalia and Alexandra haue reigned in Iurie it appeareth playnly that the kingly right appertayneth no lesse to women than to men VVhich also is to be sayde of children bicause according to the Apostle the heire though he be a childe is Lorde of all And Ioas began to raygne when he was seuen yere olde and Iosias reigned at the eight yere of his age But a childe for the defecte of iudgement a woman for the imbecillitie of hir kinde is not admitted to the preaching of Gods worde or to the solemne administration of the Sacraments I permit not sayth the Apostle a woman to teache For it is a shame for a woman to speake in the Churche and the same Apostle sayth that the heire being a childe diffreth nothing from a seruant But it is not the ecclesiasticall custome that he which remayneth yet a seruaunt shoulde be a minister of the Churche Sith therefore in the right of a kingdome the cause is all one of a man of a woman and of a childe but of like causes there is like and all one iudgement but neither childe nor woman and therevpon neither man also that is nothing else but king can do those things in his kingdome which of other ministers of the churche of God are necessarily to be done therfore it commeth to passe that neither the same king can rightly be called the supreme gouernour and head of the Church wherin he liueth All this long argument standeth stil on the foresayd principle that a supreme head or gouernour must be such a person as may do all the actions of all the offices belonging to all the parties gouerned But this is a false principle as alredy is manifestly declared therfore al this long driuen argument is to no purpose The Prince for all this may stil be the supreme head or gouernour ouer all Ecclesiastical persons so well as temporall in all their ecclesiasticall causes so well as in temporall although he himselfe can not exercise all ecclesiasticall functions nor doe himselfe all the ecclesiasticall actions of all ecclesiastical persons For else he might also be debarred of all supremacie ouer all ciuill and temporall persons in all their ciuill and temporall causes bicause he can not himselfe exercise all the ciuil and temporall offices nor do himselfe all the ciuill and temporall actions of all the ciuill and temporall persons neyther And so shoulde â—…e cleane be debarred from supremacie in either power nor haue any supreme gouernment at all Nowe taking this your false principle pro confesso â–ª after your wonted maner ye would driue vs to an absurditie as ye suppose by bringing in more examples of a woman and a chyld reasoning thus A pari from the like A woman and a child may be as well a supreme gouernor as may a man and hath as good right thereto But a woman or a childe can not be a supreme gouernour in causes Ecclesiasticall Ergo A man can not be a supreme gouernour neither in causes Ecclesiasticall For to this conclusion the force of bothe the promisses naturally driueth the argument I know ye clap in a paire of parenthesis saying in your coÌ„clusion neither a man also that is nothing else but a king But sith these wâ—…r des ar neither in the maior nor the minor the coÌ„clusion is plain â–ª that a man can not be a Supreme gouernor in causes Ecclesiasticall And I pray ye then tell me who shall be the supreme gouernour in ecclesiasticall causes if neyther man woman nor chyld may be wherby are not only excluded ciuill Princes but youre Popes are debarred from it Pope Ioane and Pope Iohn also For if they vse that order in the election to haue a Cardinall féele that all be safe yf the Uersicle be sayde Testiculos habet howe can the quyre meryly syng in the responce Deo gratias If hée be founde to bée a man he can not be supreme gouernoure Maister Saunders therefore muste néedes mende thys argumente or else the Popes for whome he writes this boke wyl con him small thanks except that they be Eunuches But Master Saunders not marking the sequele of hys conclusion fortifieth the parts of his argument To confirme the maior A woman and a childe may be as wel a supreme gouernour as a man he citeth the lawe Num. 27. he citeth ensamples Debora Athalia and Alexandra for women For children he citeth the Apostle Gal. 4. and the ensamples of Ioas and Iosias But these proues are superfluous sith the controuersie is not on the maior but on the minor Which minor is the point in controuersie and denied of vs that a woman or a childe can not be a supreme gouernour in causes ecclesiastical To confirme this minor for a woman he alleageth that she can not be admitted to preache the woorde of God remit sinnes nor baptize orderly and solemnely nor administer the Lordes Supper bothe for the imbecillitie of hir kinde and for Saint Paules prohibition of teaching in the Church For a chyld he lykewise can not do the same things as well for defect of iudgement in his nonage as for Sainte Paules witnesse that he differs not from a seruant But the Churches vse is not for seruantes to doe these things and so not for children to do them Here for confirmation of his minor master Sanders rusâ—…s to his false former principle that if the woman the chyld be supreme gouernors in these things then muste they be able themselues to do these things But they cannot do these thinges themselues Ergo they can haue no supreme gouernmeÌ„t in them But this reason is alreadie taken away and therfore al this argumeÌ„t falles We graunt it is true that neither women nor children can do these things And therfore the Papistes are to blame that suffer women to bapatize and to saye or sing in theyr quyres theyr ordinarie seruice and reade the Lessons Wee graunte them also that no men neyther but suche as bée lawfully called therevnto maye themselues exercise and do these things but doth this fellow they may not therfore haue a gouernment ouer those that doo them in their orderly doing of them if this were true then take away all their gouernement ouer all lay persons and all ciuil causes too For neyther women can nor ought them selues to do all that men béeing their subiects can and ought to
doo Will ye haue a woman weare a mans apparell it is flat forbidden by Gods worde Will ye haue a Quéene fight hir self in a battaile and breake a speare as a king may do In déed some mannish women as the Quéene of Amazons Thomyris Semiramis and other haue so doone but it is not sitting And by your owne reason the imbecillitie of theyr kynde doth cléere them And a number of such other things may be reckoned vp Shall we now saye the Quéene is not supreme gouernour ouer these persons and causes bicause hir selfe can not doe them Likewyse for a king that is a chylde you know he can not fight in battell himselfe neyther can he himselfe sit in iudgement and debate rights and wrongs in ciuil doubtes manie mo things can he himselfe not doe euen bicause as ye say he hath a defect in iudgemeÌ„t Hath he therfore in these ciuill and temporall thyngs no supreme gouernment Thus ye sée still your examples faile yea they make cleane agaynst you for as a supreme gouernor may wel be a supreme gouernor in those things that he himself can not do so a christeÌ„ princes supreme gouernmeÌ„t ouer al ecclesiastical persons in al ecclesiastical causes is nowhit hindred although the prince he or she yong or old can not do the functions ecclesiastical nor be an ecclesiast person The second argument is that he so often and al the Papists vse of the excellencie of the minister in his ministration aboue the Prince To this he citeth the saying of Saint Paule Let men â—…o esteeme vs as ministers of Christ and dispensers of his mysteries To whiche ministerie kings are not called And here is againe alledged the storie of â—…ziae that presumed to offer incense and was punished with â—…eaprie The effect of all the argument he knitteth vp thus Siergo minister c. If therfore the minister of the Church of Christ exercise a greater and more diuine ministerie than the king or any other prince howe is the king the Supreme heade of that churche wherein he seeth certaine ministers greater than himselfe I answere this is a fallation secundum quid ad simpliciter We graunt in the respect of his ministerie the minister is aboue all Princes But this pertayneth to the actions and function of the minister and not to the ouersight and direction that all those actions and functions be orderly done Nowe this béeing but a common argument Master Saunders vrgeth it further by comparison of eyther estate the Prince and the Priest from the olde Testament to the newe saying Ac nimirum illud c. And thys namely I seeme to take by my right the authoritie of any Christian king in his christian kingdom is not greater than was in tymes paste the authoritie of any Iewishe kyng among the people of the Iewes for if the Citie of God to whyche Chryste of his owne name hathe giuen a newe name maye verily bee the more woorthie but can not be inferiour to the Churche of the Iewes â–ª Surely then it followeth that a christian king ouer his christian kingdome can not obtaine more power than a kyng of the Hebrue nation did obteyne among the Hebrâ—…wes For howe muche the more any Common weale is subiecte too their earthly Kyng the authoritie of that common weaâ—…e is so muche the lesse But the authoritie of the Churche of Christe is not lesse than the authoritie of the Synagoge of the Iewes bycause in the churche of Christe those thinges were fulfilled to the verie image of the things whiche in the Synagoge of the Iewes were scarce figured by the naked shadowes As the truthe in deede in greater than the image so againe the image is greater than the shadowe but this is euident that the authoritie in times past of the only king is lesser than the authoritie of his christian kingdome or of hys Bishops But if it be so then the christian king which is both lesse than the church and the bishops of his kingdom cannot be immediatly vnder Christ the head of the churche This argument is intricate and full of many inuersed cringle crangles to shewe a face of déepe and subtill knowledge beyonde the simple mans capacitie whyche kynd of reasonyng is more suspicious than to edifying The effecte of the argument standeth all on this The greater authoritie is giuen to a christian king the lesser haue the Priestes and the churche But the priestes and the churche haue not lesse authoritie but aboue a christian king Ergo the king hath not supreme authoritie To the Maior that the greater authoritie is giuen to a christian king the lesser haue the priests and the churche he sayeth nothing And yet some what is to be sayde thereto it is not so cléere as he makes it For sith eyther of these thrée haue their authorities in dyuers considerations the Priests authoritie may be greater than the kings authoritie in one respecte that is of his diuine actions and ministerie and yet in an other of the gouernement and publike direction the kinges authoritie is greater than his And so althoughe the Churches authoritie in one respecte be greater than bothe the Kings and the Priestes as they are bothe but membres and children of the Churche yet in regarde that the one is a Pastour and the other a gouernour and both of them Fathers and guyders as it were vnto the church their authorities againe are greater than the Churches And this also sheweth the falshood of the Minor that the Priestes and the Churche haue not lesse authoritie but are aboue the prince Which is not true but in suche respectes as nothing hinder the supreme gouernement that we giue the prince But Maister Saunders to confirme this to bée simply true the prince to be inferior to the Priests and people will proue it by his comparison of the state of the olde and newe Testament And first he will haue the state of the olde Testament in the Churches gouernement to be a figure of the newe But in the estate of the old Testament the Prince was vnder the priest and the people Ergo it must be so in the new To the maior we graunte him the gouernment of the Church in the old testament to be a figure of the churches gouernment in the new testameÌ„t And remember this well that here M. Saunders buyldes vpon For if he himselfe shal be found to swarue from it afterwarde when he findeth it shall make agaynst hym then let him blame himselfe and let vs note bothe inconstancie and cantradiction in him who playeth the snayle puttyng in and out his hornes and will say and eate his worde as he thinketh best to his aduantage And this is the fashions of them all in the examples of the old testament as we haue séene the practise of M. Feckenham M. Stapleton which is a subtile false and vnstedfast kind of dealing But go to we denie the minor that in the state of the
alleaged c. and all thinges else that is here alleaged yet all will not reache home 68. a. VVhich aunswere of his may satisfie any reasonable man for all that ye bring in here of Constantine or all that ye shall afterwarde bring in c. 68. b. VVhich I am assured all Catholikes will graunt 68. b. Giue to Caesar that belongeth to Caesar and to God that beloÌ„geth to God â–ª which later clause â–ª I am assured doth much more take away a supreme regiment in all causes ecclesiasticall than necessalily by force of any wordes binde vs to pay yea any tribute to our Prince 69. b. VVe plainly say that this kinde of supremacie is directly against Gods holy worde 70. a. VVhat can ye conclude of all that ye haue or shall say to win your purpose 74. a. I say that if Saint Augustine were aliue he woulde say vnto you as he saide vnto Gaudentius 74. b. Neither this that ye here alleage out of place nor all the residue which ye reherse of this Constantine c. can import this superioritie as we shall there more at large specific In the meane season I say it is a stark most impudeÌ„t lie 75. b As I haue at large in my returne against master Iewels fourth article declared 77. b. VVhat honour haue ye got what honour haue you I saye wonne by this or by the whole thing it selfe 78. a. And shal we now M. Horne your antecedeÌ„t being so naught the consequent ye will hereof inferre nay pardie 79. a b. VVell I will leaue this at your leasure better to bee debated vpon betwixt you and master Foxe 80. a. Ye are a verie poore sielie clearke farre from the knowledge of the late reuerende fathers Bishop VVhite and Bishop Gardiner 80. a. That I may a little roll in your rayling Rhetorike hearken good master Horne I walke not and wander as ye doe here c. I go to worke with you truely plainly and particularly I shewe you by your owne Emperour and by plaine wordes 81. b. Hitherto ye haue not brought any one thing worth a good strawe to the substantiall prouse of your purpose 82. a. I am right well assured ye haue not proued nor neuer shall be able to proue in the auncient Church while ye liue 82. b. I walke not in confuse and generall wordes as you do 82. b. To all these facings and crakes though many of them be particularly aunswered as occasion requireth these his owne wordes may suffise for aunswere All men knowe that your great vauntes are but wordes of course to saue your poore honestie 1. Pref. pag. 23. Bicause he quarelleth so much with the Bishop as for other things so for his Rhetorike as also Doctour Harding and his fellowes vpbrayde likewise vnto Bishop Iewell his Rhetorike and master Dorman to master Nowell I haue therefore set downe as one of his chiefest common places a briefe note or two by the way to shewe wherein our master Stapletons flourishing Rhetorike doth most consist His obiections of Rhetorike AS for your Rhetorike ye woorke your matters so handsomly and so perswasiuely c. what a newe Cicero or Demosthenes are you 1. Pref. pag. 6. 7. His chiefest floures of Rhetorike partly nothing but copia verboruâ—… an heape of needlesse wordes partly nothing but rolling on a letter With which Rhetorike thou shalt 〈◊〉 his whole booke so poudred that it should be superfluous to trouble thée with any exacter collection of theÌ„ being in effect nothing else but â—…rs bahlatiua Only I will giue 〈◊〉 a light taste thereof throughout his whole volume and the rest thou 〈◊〉 continually finde as thou readest his Counterblast His fift common place of flourishing Rhetorike IT is the Castle of your Profession the Key of your Doctrine the principal Fort of all your Religion the piller of your authoritie the fountaine of your iurisdiction the ankerholde of all your proceedings 1. Pref. pag. 1. Your cause is betrayed your doctrine dissolueth your whole Religion goeth to wracke the want of this right shaketh your authoritie stoppeth your iurisdiction and is the vtter ship wracke of all your proceedings 2. Haue I not grounded this worke c. haue I not posted it c. haue I not furnished it c. haue I not fenced it c. haue I not remooued all c. an outward shewe and countenance a gay glorious glistring face a face I say all is but a face and a naked shewe 3. Most miserably and wretchedly pinched pared and dismembred Most shamefully contaminated depraued and deformed 12. A mishapen lumpe of lewde and lose arguments 5. VVith like good Logike ye lay forth 6. The truth is dayly more and more opened illustred and confirmed 8. T. Turkish trecherie L. Lauashing language 14. B. Bluster and blow F. Fume and freat R. Raile and raue as L. Lowdlyas lewdly as B. Beastly as boldly c. ye B. Bluster not so boysterously as ye L. Lie most lewdly 15. A H. Happie happe for master Horne that happed c. S. Such slender circumstances to M. Minister him matter of such T. Trifling talke 6. b. A prerogatiue appropriate to the Prelate 7. b. You will happly forsake and abandoÌ„ Saint Augustines authoritie with the olde C. Canons and Councels and 〈◊〉 vnder the defence of your B. Brittle Bulwarke 8. b. A pretie legerdemaine played and a leafe put in at the printing which was neuer proposed in the parliament c. what Parliament haue your preachers 9. a. b. O poore and siely helpe O miserable shift c. This is to trouble all things this is as it were to confounde togither heauen and earth 9. a. VVhie good sir make ye such post haste what are you so soone at the ende I see your haste is great VVhat will you leape ouer the hedge ere ye come at it And I might be so bolde I woulde faine demaunde of you the cause of your hastie posting Perhaps there is some eye sore or somewhat that your stomacke cannot beare Grieueth it you to heare Doth it appall you to heare c. Doth it dasell and amase you to heare c. Doe yee take it to the heart Master Horne â–ª Is it a corsey to you Is there yet any other lurking sore priuily pinching your stomack I trow it nipped you at the very heart roote 212. b. 213. a. b. VVhie master Horne can your eares paciently abide all this can your stomacke digest all this master Horne can ye suffer can ye suffer How chaunce we haue not at the least for your comfort one pretie nippe 287. a. A rascall rablement of monstruous hereticall names A rablement of straunge monstrous hereticall names This rascall rablement of huge monstrous names 317. It is so it is so master Horne c. You can not you may not you shall not c. You sawe you sawe master Horne you master Horne 430. Your horrible dissention glistreth so cleare crieth so lowde and blustreth so great that so long as we haue
turne ye are to gredie man remember that qui cupit totum perdit totum But let vs sée your sixe demaundes whether they be reasonable and to be graunted yea or no. There are therefore say you many thinges to be considered first that Christ lefte one to rule his vvhole Churche in his steade from time to time vnto the ende of the vvorlde Is this your first request to be considered and graunted M. Stapleton now surely a reasonable demaund to be considered vpon And woorthie to haue that Salomon graunted to Adonias for asking of Abisaâ—…g to wife Wise king Salomon saw he might aswell haue asked the crowne from his head yea his head from his shoulders and who so vnwise that seeth not ye might aswell aske the whole controuersie to be graunted you and graunt ye this what néede ye propounde your other principles following How be it let vs sée what they be also Secondly we muste consider ye say that this one vvas S. Peter the Apostle and novv are the Bishops of Rome his successours Out of doubt ye had on some great considering câ—…ppe M. Stapleton when you considered that the Bishop should haue considered this He was much to blame he considered it not but M. Stapl. and ye were as wise as God might haue made you ye would haue better coÌ„sidered with your selfe than to thinke others haue so litle consideration as to graunt ye this your false and foolishe principle Thirdly say you that albeit the Bishop of Rome had no such vniuersall gouernment ouer the vvhole yet that he is and euer vvas the Patriarche of Englande and of the vvhole VVest Church and so hath as much to do here as any other Patriarche in his Patriarchshippe It is a signe M. Stap â–ª ye shrewdly doubte the former twains woulde neuer be graunted that so soone would be content to become a Patriarche of a piece from a Pope of the whole which though it sheweth lesse haughtinesse in you that would play small game rather than sit out yet perchance your Pope is of Alexanders spirite to whome Darius hauing offred halfe his dominions if I were Alexander ê™ Parmenio I would take it so would I ê™ Alexander if I were Parmenio And so perchance your Pope will say to you if I were Master Stapleton I would be content at least to be a Patriarche and perchance a worse rowme woulde serue But beyng the Bishop of Rome he will say Aut Papa aut nihil And therefore least ye get his curse before ye aske our consent the surest way were to know how he will like of this your limitation and when he shal be content then propose it to vs to consider thereon But I see ye like not greatly to stande hereon for fourthly say you Then all vvere it that he had nothing to intermedle vvith vs nor as Pope nor as Patriarche yet can not this supremacie of a ciuill Prince be iustified VVhereof he is not capable especially a vvoman but it must remayne in some spirituall man. Your must is very mustie M. Stapl. and smelleth of the pumpe of Romes ship Your Sequence is as badde the B. of Rome neyther as Pope nor as Patriarche is supreme gouernour in Ecclesiasticall causes in England Ergo No ciuill Prince man or woman is capable of it Againe There must be one spirituall man that must haue an vniuersall gouernment ouer the whole Churche Ergo â–ª A ciuill Prince may haue no particuler gouernement in his particuler Churche The antecedents in déede are true of bothe For neither hath the Pope as Pope or Patriarche or any otherwise any supreme gouernement ouer Englande as you presuppose he had none and yet the Prince both may haue and hath some supreme gouernement ouer vs For in déede all supreme gouernement suche as the Pope vsurped she neither hath nor may haue nor requireth nor belongs to any creature but is due to Christ alone He is that spirituall man that your other antecedent speaketh of if ye meane him it is true if you meane any other it is but your false presupposall though the consequentes whereon we stande followeth neither way neither doe ye laboure once to proue them But is here all things we muste consider no say you for fiftly Besides this the Catholikes say that as there vvas neuer any such president heretofore in the catholike Church so at this present there is no suche excepte in Englande neither among the Lutherans the Suinglians the Suenkfeldians or Anabaptists or any other secte that at this day raygneth or rageth in the vvorlde None of these I say agnyse their ciuill Prince as supreme gouernour in al causes spirituall and temporall Let goe these raging termes of sectes M. Sta. to their common places and I pray ye tell vs once agayne who sayth thus Who euen the Catholikes say so But whome meane you by the Catholiks The Papists Then gentle M. Stap. haue me commended to those your Papisticall Catholikes that ye say say so and aske them agayne if all be Gospell that they do say or no. Tushe man will M Stap. replie will ye not beléeue the Catholikes Why then sixtly and Laste of all I saye and M. Feck vvill also say that euen M. Horne him selfe in this his aunsvvere retreateth so farre back from his assertion of supreme gouernement in all causes spirituall and temporall vvhiche is the state and keye of the vvhole question that he plucketh from the Prince the chiefe and principall matters and causes ecclesiasticall as vve shall hereafter playnely shevve by his ovvne vvordes This geare goeth harde indéede The B. is nowe driuen to asore straight But syr might a man be so bolde to aske your mastership what are you and M. Feck are ye not Catholikes that when ye haue saide the catholikes say so ye come rushing in say Last of all I say and M. Feck vvill also say you make vs doubte least ye be no Catholikes and withall to suspect when ye cal your selfe and your client M. Feck to witnesse some partialitie in your sayings least the sole will holde with the shoe and that as two false witnesses came in agaynst our sauiour Christ with I say so and he vvill say so also so woulde you compact togither to slander the B. herein with I say so and M. Feck vvil say so also But by both your leaues may I be so bolde as to set your I say so and his I say so also asyde and desire ye to proue your so saying Why say you doubt ye of that we shall here after plainly shevve it by hys owne vvordes These are but vvords M. Stap. and ioly promises if ye can shevve it so playnly why shevve ye it not playnly here where ye say it so playnly or else haue shevved at the least where the B. doth thus which till ye shall playnely shewe this your â–ª bolde and playne saying may be suspected for a playne lye But M. Stap. shaking of the further
them when both the ensamples that ye make your similitude from and the matter that ye apply them too are false For a man may be master of a shippe though he neuer was a maryner in the shippe and also â—…e made the Maior of the towne wherein he was neuer citizen before As many a noble or gentleman is made the captayne of a forte of a towne or an armie that neuer was prest before a souldier and yet a good captayne to hauing the knowledge howe to gouerne souldiers though he him selfe were none Yea to draw néerer than mariners Maiors captaines reade ye not that S. Ambrose was neuer so much as any of the clergie and that more is no not baptized yet he was a better byshop than the best bishop of the Romish making now or than the byshop of Rome him selfe yea your holy Pope Felix 5. was he before he was Pope any other than as ye call it a méere lay man neither Cardinall Byshop Priest nor had so much that we reade of as your benet collet and therfore your examples are not true of Maior Pilot that they must haue bene citizen mariner before And yet where herevpon ye would néedes haue christian Princes to be spirituall men if they should be supreme gouernours of spiritual matters it is graunted you and so they be And if you thinke godly christian Princes not to be spiritual but vtterly voyde of spiritualnesse then is this in you a lying and carnall spitefulnesse All godly Princes yâ—…a all godly persons are spiritual and that muche better than any shaued or oyled massing priest But if ye meane after the common distinction those that haue any spirituall office in the ministerie of the worde and sacraments as deacons elders byshopâ—… c. then your similitude as is before declared fayleth Such Offices are not necessarie to haue gone before in a Supreme gouernour ouer them although the knowledge is necessarie how to gouerne them Besides this the proportion of your similitude fayleth in that to proue a supreme gouernour should withall be a spiâ—…ituall man yoâ—… alledge ensamples of suche gouernours as be not but haue bene suche or suche persons before and so from the master which hath bene a maryner and nowe iâ—… â—… master you conclude the prince béeing a gouernour in spiritual matters should withal be a spiritual person Neither doth the proportion hold in the necessarie relation of the similitude from a Maâ—…or to his citizen from a master of a ship to a mariner seruing in the ship which hath relation froÌ„ the gouernours to the parties in their offices gouerned to any like relation betwéene a supreme gouernour ouer eccl. causes persons to a spirituall person â–ª but from a spirituall gouernour to a spirituall subiect this were the right relation Now the Prince néedeth neither to haue bene a spiritual subiect nor yet a spirituall person in your common sense of spiritualtie neither so claymeth he to be a spirituall gouernour And therefore neither the ensamples of your similitude nor the proportion holdeth But sée how still your owne tale ouerturneth your selfe For if his principall gouernement resteth in ciuil matters as immediatly ye say that in that respect he is supreme gouernour of al persons in his realme but not of their actions why is he not of their actions also syth they be ciuil or temporal matters in which respect he is their supreme gouernor is it not bicause though he be their supreme gouernor yet he professeth not all their seueral offices scieÌ„ces handy crafts mysteries or vocations and so is not a dealer in their actions which hindreth nothing his principal gouernemeÌ„t ouer them al that he is nor euer was a prentise of any of their sciences nor practiseth the actions of their callings being all ciuill matters And yet say you truely he hath the principall gouernement in ciuill matters But why then also notwithstanding the prince dealeth not with the actions of spirituall men may he not haue a principall gouernement in spirituall matters thoughe him selfe haue not the spirituall function or office of a spirituall man Doe ye not â—…ée by your owne wordes that to haue a principall gouernement or to be a supreme gouernor ouâ—…r all persons and matters â–ª is one thing and to do all the particuler actions of those persons or matters is another thing not requisite in the supreme gouernour and why then wilfully confounde ye them so often as though we made the Prince the doer of the actions bicause we acknowledge the Prince the gouernour of the matters And why sayde ye before in your last similies that he coulde not be a principall gouernour of any ciuill matters excepte he had bene a doer of the actions and as it were a prentise to the occupation before concluding the like for a gouernour of spiritual persons and causes that he must be a spirituall man and do the spirituall actions But if now béeing better aduised ye perceiue that a man may be a gouernour in ciuil matters and yet be not the doer of the ciuill actions I then conclude likewise for spirituall matters that the Prince may be a supreme gouernour in spirituall causes and yet the same not the doer of the spirituall actions The two vntruthes therfore M. Stap. that ye gather of the Byshop saying VVherefore we haue heere two vntruthes the one in an vntrue definition the other in saying the Prince is supreme gouernour in all causes spirituall are no vntruthes The Byshops definition is clearer and truer than yours Neither haue ye or hitherto coulde ye improue his conclusion with all your ensamples or your similitudes Yea euery similitude that ye haue made béeing throughly weyed hath proued the Byshops conclusion and confuted and contraried your selfe But beside al this we haue sayth M. St. a playne contradiction of M. Horne directly ouerthrowing his owne assertion heere The Bishoply rule and gouernement of Gods Church sayth M. Horne coÌ„sisteth in three poyntes to feede the Church with Gods word to minister Christes Sacraments and to bynde and lose to gouerne the Churche sayth he after this sorte belongeth to the onely office of Byshops and Church ministers and not to Kinges Queenes and Princes The like he hath afterwarde Now then these being by his owne confession the actions that properly belong to Ecclesiasticall persons and the Prince by his sayd confession hauing nothing to do therewith how is it then true that the Prince is the onely supreme head and gouernour in causes Ecclesiasticall Yea in those that do properly belong to persons Ecclesiasticall or by what colour may it be defended that this saying is not plaine contradictorie and repugnant to this later saying which we haue alleaged and whereof we shall speake more largely when we come to the saide place There is no doubt M. St. but ye will recken it vp there at large and here also and in many other places ye still sing Decies repetita placebunt
name of person ecclesiasticall hath no other respect but to the causes ecclesiasticall and being gouerned or subiect as M. Feckenham hath graunted in respecte of eyther parte of this diuision temporall or ecclesiasticall if fellowes that in all respectes what soeuer of causes or persons ecclesiasticall or temporall the Prince is supreme gouernour Nor all M. Stapl. crooked shiftes and crabbed respects to hinder the sequele of this argumeÌ„t are any more to be respected than â—…ere trifles and toyes to delude the Readers withall But M. St. will not giue ouer the matter thus but will bring his darke respects to the aspect and light of all mens eyes by a familiar though somwhat an homely simâ—… As if master Robert Horne were a lay man and a paynter sayth he the Queene properly hath not to do with him as a paynter vnlesse it were for some lavve or order concerning paynters but as Robert Horne hir highnesse subiect and borne vnder hir obeysance Sée how enuye hath blynded this man that whereas for very spite he likeneth the reuerent and godly learned father in Christ to a paynter this his paynted similitude maketh also flat agaynst him For as he confesseth the Prince hath to doe vvith a paynter not onely in that he is simply hir highnesse subiecte borne vnder hir obeysance but also in respect he is suche a subiecte in whiche regarde he saythe she maketh lavves and orders also concerning paynters thoughe she entermeddle not with the Paynters pencell in drawing lynes and laying colours and other their perticuler actions euen so hath hir highnesse to do with all ecclesiasticall persons not onely in that they be simply subiectes borne vnder hir obeysance but also euen in that they be suche manner of ecclesiasticall subiects in which respect she may also make lawes and orders concerning ecclesiastical persons though she entermeddle not with preaching ministring the sacramentes and other their particuler actions Thus as God would haue it doth your owne similitude M. Stap. which of pure enuye ye bring foorth to deface the byshop withall so liuely in euery poynt make agaynst you as any similitude can do At length ye discende from your similitude to your playne purpose saying So shoulde the Queene haue also to doe with you yea in case ye were the true Byshop of VVinchester but not properly as Byshop or for your byshoply function for the whiche ye are immediatly vnder your Archbyshop and the Pope but considering you as a subiecte othervvyse or as Byshop either touching your temporalties and no further For the which the true Byshops also to their Prince do their homage With muche adoe for it sticketh in your throte lyke a boane ye admitte at length this case that the Bishop were the true Byshop of VVinchester but without any stay at the matter ye could compare him to a paynter but now beeing a Bishop he is as you say vnder his Archbishop and the Pope and vnder the Queene onely for his temporalties Here is no argument M. Stapleton but your bare assertions as though the matter were cleare and all out of question I ye had still reasoned from the similitude of the paynter and paynted it out in his true meaning ye had concluded another maner of tale that as the Prince mighte meddle euen with lawes and orders for paynters so she hath to do with Byshops not onely concerning their temporalties but euen coÌ„cerning that they be Byshops And so agayn your similitude excludeth your Pope And where ye say in that he is byshop he is immediatly vnder his Archbyshop and the Pope what if his Archbishop be not vnder the Pope neither is he not then also béeing immediatly vnder him exempted likewise from your Pope and thus ye stammer euen in your owne false principles Now when ye haue thus without any reasoning determined the Byshop to be vnder the Pope and that he dothe homage to the Quéene onely for his temporalties and no farther ye conclude the matter saying But what should I further reason with this man vvhiche as I haue sayde hathe remoued the Prince from all superioritie concerning the meere Byshoply or Priestly function and so with a notable contradiction hathe full vvorshipfully concluded agaynst hym selfe and eased hys aduersarie of any other proofe and eased master Feckenham also for taking any othe that the Queene is supreme head in all causes temporall and spirituall This notable contradiction is so sore a matter that you muste néedes haue a fling at it once agayne the contradiction is this The Prince hath not the iurisdiction of the meere Priestly or Byshoply functions The Prince hath the superioritie ouer the priestly or Byshoply functions Is not héere a notable contradiction and worthy to make thys finall conclusion thereon The Prince hathe not the iurisdiction of the meere Priestly or Byshoply functions Ergo He is remoued from all superioritie ouer the same functions Full vvorshipfully concluded to vse your owne termes master Stapleton What should ye reason further with this man but in steade of reasoning fall to making principles or sit downe and ease you with master Feckenham without any further proofe But mighte it please you to starte vp agayne and looke better aboute ye ye shoulde sée that betwéene euen that superioritie which worde notwithstanding the Byshop sayde not but power or iurisdiction of the meere byshoply or priestly function that is to saye his office and the proper actions of his office preaching binding and losing the ministring of the Sacramentes and betwéene the superioritie that is the ouersight and supreme gouernement in caring for directing and prouiding that all those functions and actions be duetifully done on their partes to whome they properly belong there is a great difference as all your similitudes hitherto haue proued and concluded agaynst you And that betwéene the dooing of the one and the not dooing of the other is no contradiction or opposition at all And therefore ye be not so eased yet but that ye muste take a little more paynes or else where ye had thought to haue wonne the spurres ye may happe to lose the saddle The eight Diuision MAster Feckenham standeth on foure poyntes whereby he thinketh he should periure himselfe if he should sweare to this laste parte of the othe in eccl. causes The first point is that he muste testifie it on a booke othe But to testifie any thing on a booke othe and not to knovve the same is periurie Then for him selfe he pleadeth ignoraunce that he neither knovveth it nor knovves any meanes hovv to come to the knovvledge of it Whervpon he ioyneth an issue with the Byshoppe which issue is this If the Byshop make proofe to him that any Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may clay me or take vpon them any suche gouernement in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes then he will yéelde and receiue the othe The meanes whereby he will haue this issue proued are these foure Either by suche order of gouernement
ye alleage that the king as soone as he is chosen shall bestowe his studie vppon the reading of the Deuteronomie VVhere Moses sayth that in doubtfull causes the people shoulde haue their recourse to the sayde Priestes and to the iudge for the time being meaning the highe Priest of whome they shoulde learne the truth and are commaunded to doe accordingly euen vnder paine of death All this ye say the Bishop wilily and sleightly slipt ouer and yet in the verie sayde Chapter it was euen the next to that he alleaged Alacke master Stapleton that euer yée should for shame haue thus ouerslipt your selfe Were ye not halfe a sléepe when ye made this slippe For I will not recharge you so harde wyth wylinesse and sleight but with palpable grosnesse and marueylous negligent ignoraunce in a student of diuinitie to beate so much vppon a text as you doe here charging your aduersarie wyth wylinesse sleight vnfaythfulnesse vnskilfulnesse leauing out curtalling and ouerslipping and your selfe shewe so little skil or regarde in citing your text that eyther ye know not or ye care not what commeth before what commeth after what commeth next what commeth not next nor nere it Ye saye that the sentence of the Priestes and the Iudges iudgements on doubtfull cases commeth euen the next to that the Bishop alleaged in the verie sayde Chapter Turne your booke to the Chapter once againe M. Stap. reade the wordes that come next yea all the wordes that follow in that Chapter Nor his heart shall be lifted vp in pride aboue his brethren neyther shall he turne to the right hande or to the left that both he and his childe may raigne long time ouer Israell Doth not this follow next and is not this the last sentence of the sayde Chapter Then if it be in that verie Chapter it commeth not as you say next vnto it but must néedes go before and so doth it Neyther yet the next before for there commeth betwene them fiue or six periods at the least And as they are two diuerse places so are they two sundrie matters Ye charge therefore the Bishop amisse with wilie and sleight ouerslipping where nothing is ouerslipped though the former sentence be not alleaged And ye falsely ioyne them togither saying The King shall bestow his studie vpon the reading of the Deuteronomie where Moyses sayth that in doubtfull causes c. When as Moses there sayth not so Ye falsely say it commeth next to it which it doth not but goeth before in another matter and diuerse sentences betwene What a foule ouerslippe was this of you that could prie so narrowly to séeke a slippe ouer a slipper in anothers footing where was not so muche as any tripping awrie and your selfe vnawares haue slipt into a foule lie ouer the sloppes and all But if we let slippe this as but a grosse ouerslippe yet maye we not so let slip M. Stapletons slipperie and false exposition for all he sayeth that their priestes can not expounde the scripture amisse For where the text sayth the people sholde haue their recourse to the priestes and to the iudge for the time beeing meaning sayth M. Stapleton the high priest In déede so doth his popishe glosse interline it and yet euen Lyra that woulde shift of the matter as much as he might for his Pope with his morall or rather marre all gloses hereon both noteth in his margin that these be twaine summâ—… sacerdos iudex the high Priest and the Iudge And sayth in his casibus c. In these and the like cases they must runne vnto the higher Iudges that is to say â–ª to the high Priest and to the chiefe Iudge of Israell And althoughe sometime it chaunced that one person had both these offices as appeareth by Hely who was both chiefe Iudge and chiefe Priest yet for the most part as they are distinct offices so were they commonly in distinct and seuerall persons And to proue this further by the penaltie which as you say was vnder the paine of death the which iudgement apperteyned to the Iudge but ordinarily it was not lawfull for the high priestes to iudge any man to death as euen the wicked priestes to cloke their murther when Pilate sayde vnto them Accipite eum vos c. Take you him and iudge him according to your law coulde replie like to the papisticall Priestes that post of the bodyes death to the temporall power Nobis non licet quemque interficere It is not lawfull for vs to kill any man but the Iudge that this place speaketh of should ordinarily condemne to death the refuser Ex indicis decreto moriatur homo ille Let that man die by the iudges decree Ergo he meaneth not that this ordinarie Iudge shoulde be the high priest Besides this the very text is plaine in making this distinction to the Priestes and to the Iudge not to the Iudge meaning the priest Againe The commandement of the high Priest and the decree of the Iudge Which fully importeth that he meaneth not the one by the other but expresseth two diuerse persons and two seuerall offices distinctly Wherfore master Stapleton apparantly wresteth the text thus flatly to say that he meaneth the high Priest by the name of Iudge to proue that his Pope hath no péere but all iudgement remayneth in him alone in euery difficult matter of religion And here againe appeareth another of his false and purposed ouerslippes Moses sayth he doth say that in doubtfull causes the people should haue their recourse to the priests Whie doe ye here master Stapleton forget your former marginall censure of leauing out anie materiall partes of the sentence telling vs of doubtful causes but not telling vs what those doubtfull causes were and speake as doubtfully as though they were matters of doctrine religion and ecclesiasticall ordinaunces which are the matters in question betwéene the partyes when this place speaketh onely of decyding a difficult or doubtfull matter betweene bloud and bloud plea and plea plague and plague in matters of stryfe But none of these specifications what maner of doutfull causes hée ment woulde you expresse for feare it woulde then bée to soone espyed that this sentence made nothing at all for the supreme iudgement of your Pope And yet after these two sleightes the one of remoouing the ciuill Prince or iudge from this iudgement with the Priestes and ascribing all to the Priestes alone to make it serue your purpose the better The other by slipping ouer all these doubtfull causes in the sentence expressed as thoughe it were simplie spoken wythout anye specification to make it serue for the Priestes absolute iudgemente in all ecclesiasticall ordinaunces When ye haue wyth thys dubble sleyght and wylinesse thus wrested the Text then come yée in ruffling lyke a lustye Rutterkin and swappe mée downe hereon this iolie marginall note An other sentence in the sayde Chapter by master Horne alleaged that ouerthroweth all his boast God saue al
and therfore good reason that yours giue place to his senior the popish later base born religion of your Romish church to thâ—… first most auncient true religion of that Alpha Omega Iesus Christ himself Master Stap. hauing now set vp these two false markes like to one being out of his way that after he is once ouer his shooes in the myre careth not howe he benâ—…yre himselfe but running deeper through thicke and thinne cryeth this is the way to haue other to followe him so rusheth on master Stapleton still further from the issue and yet taketh euerye thing in his way to bée hys marke and directorie Setting vp the perticuler factes of those Princes that chalenge and take vppon them this supreme gouernement that the selfe same factes must be founde in the ensamples of the olde testament or else hée sayth the Bishop strayeth from the marke VVhat euidence haue ye brought forth sayth he to shew that in the olde lawe anye King exacted of the Clergie In verbo Sacerdotiâ—… that they shoulde make none Ecclesiasticall lawe without his consent as King Henrie did of the clergie of Englande Is this the marke master Stap. betwene the Bishop and master Feckenham to proue in their supreme gouerments euerye selfe same perticuler fact yea the circumstances about or concerning the fact to be all one in them that clayme this gouernment nowe and those that claymed it then since bothe the states the times yea all the ceremonies of religion of the Iewes then and ours nowe are nothing like and trow ye then the princes perticuler doings must be like and euen the same and euidence must be giuen out of the one for euery fact of the other or else their supreme authorities be not alike The issue betweene them is not so straight laced but requireth onely any such gouernment some such gouernment yea he it al suche gouernment to I meane not all suche actions in the gouernment but the supreme directing gouernance authoritie or powre are proued both alike in either princes estate so well ouer eccl. persons in all their functions then or now as ouer the temporall in theirs For by this rule wheras that most famous prince king Henry the eight did sweare also to his obedience all his temporall subiects in ciuill causes as other Princes likewise haue done and do it would be harde to alleâ—…ge an euidence thereof out of the old Testament and yet their supreme gouernments therin were not therefore vnlike As for the ministring of the othe is but a circumstance to confirme the matter and not the matter itselfe And if king Henry were by the obstinate and craftie malice of his popishe clergiâ—… then constrayned for his more assurance to take an othe or promise of them on the honestie of their priesthoode which God wâ—…t was but a small holde as it went then in the moste of them and that no king of those ancient yeres mentioned in the olde testament béeing not moued by the wickednesse or mistrust of his clergy tooke the like othe or promise of their priestes honestie or fayth of their priesthoodâ—… then what is this to or from the matter why their supreme authorities shoulde not be alike in bothe Do not you also say for your side that the highe Priest had suche supreme gouernment then as your Pope â—…othe chalenge now ouâ—…r all eccl. causes â—…nd dothe â—…ot your Pope nowe exacte of all his clergie in verbo â—…acerdotij by the worde of their priesthoode that they shall make no eccl. law without his consent May we not then returne your owne words on your selfe VVhat euidence can you bring foorth to shew that in the olde lawe any highe Priest exacted this of the clergie vnder him And if ye can not as ye can not dothe not then this your wyle reason and newe marke ouerturne the false clayme that your Pope claymeth of such supreme gouernment now as the high Priest had then But his clayme is false his gouernment nothing like For the high priest then tooke not vpon him to make eccl. lawes as doth now your Pope but only obserued such eccl. lawes as God had made to his hande till time of the Pharisies corruption who not content with Gods lawes had deuised besides many fond lawes of their own inuentions when there wanted amoÌ„g them this kingly authoritie To the which so long as it continued the high priest al other obeyed receyuing and obseruing such eccl. constitutions as their godly princes made vnto them So did Aaron first receiue the eccl. coÌ„stitutions of Moses So after him did alâ—…re residue admit the eccl. constitutions of Dauid the rest of the foresaid princes their priests made none of theÌ„ selues without the Princes consent But the princes ordâ—…ined diuers eccl. orders partly with the aduise and consent partly without yea agaynst the wil coÌ„sent of their clergy now then and yet those godly princes exacted of them euen as they were true priests as the stories of Iosaphat and Ezechias mention how they charged their priests euen in that they were the Lords priests which is all one with that you alleage in verbo sacerdotij that they should do suche things as they appoynted them to do And is not this good and authenticall euidence for king Henries doings but that the priests appoynted any suche ordinance without their princes consents will be harde for you to bring the like or any â—…uidence at all for your Popes exacting And if as ye conclude herevpon this exacting to make no eccl. law without his consent be to make the ciuil magistrate the supreme iudge for the final determinatioÌ„ of causes ecclesiasticall then your Pope hauing no such euidence for him by this your marke is no supreme iudge for suche finall determination but it â—…latly proueth agaynst you that the Princes should be the supreme iudges therein And if the exacting of consent importe suche supreme authoritie as héere ye confesse then whereas not onely these ancient kings but also the ancient christian Emperors in the confirming of your Pope exacted that none shoulde be a lawfull Pope to whome they gaue not their consent it argueth that those Emperours were the supreme Iudges for the finall determination of the Popes ecclesiasticall election Which afterwarde when ye come to the handling therof ye renie affirming that although his consent was necessarie to be required yet it argued no suche supreme iudgement in the matter And thus you care not may ye for the time shuffle out an answere howe falsly or how contrary ye counterblast your false The nexte marke is yet further wyde from the issue and more fonde than any of the other for abandoning his Pope and generall Councels VVhat can ye bring foorthe sayth he out of the olde Testament to aide and relieue your doings who haue abandoned not onely the Pope but generall Councels also and that by playne acte of Parliament And
Augustine that is their accuser who saith they did refuse the proufes of the old Testament And you say ye haue not redde it had ye redde S. Augustine or so much as the wordes taken out of him that the Bishop citeth and you take vppon you to answere vnto for Master Feckenhams defence how could ye not haue redde it but ye would slippe off the matter vnder the colour of the Manicheans refusall bicause the Donatistes did not refuse it as they did therefore they did not refuse it at all whereas the Manichées did simplie and vtterly refuse the old Testament which the Donatistes did not but refused it like such wise men as the Papistes when they thinke it maketh against them â–ª and admit vrge it when they thinke it maketh for them thus did they and thus do you and therfore for this handling of the old Testament ye be like the Donatistes But for your handling of the newe Testament ye be like the Manichées of whome S. Augustine saith Ipsiâ—…sque nouâ—… Testaments c. And they so reade the sentences of the new Testament as though they had bene falsified that what they lust they take from thence and what they like not they reiect and as though they contained not all the truth they preferred many bookes that were Apocrypha And saide that in their Archemanichee the promise of the Lorde Iesus Christ was fulfilled wherevppon in his letters he called him selfe the Apostle of Iesus Christe bicause Iesus Christe promised to sende him and sente in him Iesus Christe Whiche how nere it toucheth your Popes practise looke you to it and cléere him of it M. Stapleton els ye will not onely proue Donatistes I am afrayde but also Manicheans Thus muche then for the former motiue that the B. had to charge M. Feckenham with the Donatistes And if this suffise as you say for this branche to purge M. Feckenham content is pleased and so am I let it suffise in Gods blessed name I commit it to the readers iudgement Now to the other motiue Concerning the other say you besides your falshood your great follie doth also shew it selfe too aswell as in the other to imagine him to be a Donatiste And to thinke or say as you say they did that Ciuill Magistrates haue not to do with Religion nor may not punishe the transgressours of the same Master Feckenham saith no such thing and I suppose he thinketh no such thing And furder I dare be bold to say that there is not so much as a light coniecture to be grounded thereof by any of M. Feckenhams words vnlesse M. Horne become suddenly so subtile that he thinketh no difference to say the Prince should not punishe an honest true man in steede of a theefe and to say he should not punishe a theefe or to say there is no difference betwixt all thinges and nothing For though M. Feckenham and all other Catholikes do denie the ciuill Princes supreme gouernment in all causes Ecclesiasticall yet doth not M. Feckenham nor any Catholike denie but that ciuill Princes may deale in some matters Ecclesiasticall as Aduocates and Defenders of the Churche namely in punishing of Heretikes by sharpe lawes Vnto the whiche lawes Heretikes are by the Church first giuen vp and deliuered by open excommunication and condemnation Here first as ye did in the other motiue so againe ye charge the Bishop with falshood and folly but take héede M. Stapleton the falshood and follie light not on your owne pate as it did in the other Whether it be follie in you or crafte let other déeme certainely falshood it is that when ye come to the setting downe of the Bishops wordes in a distincte letter ye dare not for both eares on your head set downe the full wordes of the Bishop nor of S. Augustine nor yet of the Donatistes whereby it might haue bene knowne what the Donatistes attributed or denied to Princes and how néere or how farre ye had come vnto or diffred from them Thus durst ye not do and thus should ye haue done which argueth your owne falsehood But ye turne the catte into the panne and say that the Donatistes saide Ciuill magistrates haue not to do with religion nor may not punishe the transgressours of the same but say you M. FeckeÌ„ham saith no such thing and you suppose he thinketh no such thing and furder ye dare be bolde to say there is not so much as a light coniecture to be grounded thereof by any of M. Feckenhams wordes and hereon you conclude him to be no Donatiste Now since ye will be thus bolde for M. Feckenham as to enter into his thought ye should not haue bene afrayde with the Byshop to haue set downe his playne written wordes or so muche as the full content therof Did ye feare they would bite ye in déede they woulde haue shewed you to haue bene a Donatist they would haue shewed howe ye haue altered the Donatistes refusall and S. Augustines complaynt on them to make it séeme you were none Ye saye M. Feckenham and you graunt Princes may deale with matters ecclesiasticall Why M. Stapl. so diâ—… the Donatistes too Haue not your selfe confessed that they ranne for succour to Iulianus the Apostata and highly commended him And ye knowe in Cecilians controuersie that they refused not the Emperours dealing till he delte still agaynst them and therfore as you say you do not no more did they simply denie that princes might deale in matters of religion Ye should therfore haue adioyned the wordes that the Byshop reciteth out of S. Augustine howe and after what manner they denied their dealing in matters of religion and punishment of heretikes Whether they denyed it as you dâ—… that they should not dealing as supreme gouernours as punishers by their owne authoritie yea or no for this you denie Now that Princes had and tâ—…ke vpon them and oughte to haue this kinde of dealing the Bishop proued out of S. Augâ—…stine that magistrates and rulers â—…ught to reforme theÌ„ to reduce them to the vnitie of the Church and to represse their heresies with their authoritie and godly lawes made for that purpose to whoÌ„ it belonged of duetie and whose speciall seruice to Christ is to see care and prouide that their subiectes be gouerned and maynteined in the true and sincere religion of Christ without all errors superstitions and heresies This was the maner of the Princes dealing then with religion and this you now denie to Princes to deale on this wise â–ª And on this fashion saide the Donatistes The seculer Princes haue not to deale in matters of religion or causes eccl. That God committeth not the teaching of his people to kings but to Prophets Christ sent not souldiors but fishers to bring in and further his religion Pretending the ordering and disposing of all eccl. causes to be in the Clergie and by the Clergie they ment them selues As you do likewise when ye say heretikes
worlds end and neuer to be altered added vnto or taken from all suche nouelties besides or contrarie to the olde and former fayth hathe the Q. highnes god be thaÌ„ked therfore remoued as CoÌ„staÌ„tine did and all Princes ought to do and hath called vs agayne to the religion of the most holy lawe as a most diligent defender of the olde and former fayth from the Popishe corruptions in faith that haue sprong vp since And as ConstaÌ„tine deposed such Bishops as obstinately mainteined those later errours and not the olde and former fayth except on their repentance submission they were by him restored so hath our most gracious souer aigne deposed such Popish Bishops and Pastors as obstinately defended and mainteined their later errours Wherin she hath shewed hir selfe a moste diligent defender and recouerer of the oldest and formost fayth of the Christians Thus as hir doings swarue not héerein from Constantines â–ª as you pretende so hath she no lesse right and authoritie in hir dominion than Constantine had in his and all Princes ought to haue in theirs béeing all as S. Paule sayth Gods ministers in this behalfe To the which senteÌ„ce of S. Paule with Chrysostomes and Eusebius iudgement theron full coldely ye say If S. Paule call the ciuill Magistrate a minister bicause through feare he constrayneth the wicked to embrace the godly doctrine as by your saying S. Chrysostome construeth it we are well content therwith Now well ye be content therwith as your obstinate refusal of this the Princes ministerie the stormes counterblastes ye rayse agaynÌ„st it do declare so also that ye be not halfe pleased with Chrysostomes construction theron how well soeuer ye would seeme to be contented appeareth in this your pinching wringing of Chrysostomes sentence by the Bishop cited For neither the Bishop cited him as you say he doth neither you cite Chrysostome fully nor rightly whiche argueth ye are not very well contented therwith Chrysostome sheweth not that the prince is called the minister of God onely bicause through feare he constrayneth the wicked to embrace the godly doctrine but also he speaketh of honoring coÌ„mending or aduancing whereby he prepareth mens mindes to be the more apte to receyue the worde of doctrine Which phrase of Chrysostome the worde of doctrine ye could not also abide least ye should haue ouerturned thereby all those points of doctrine that are not contained in the worde of God whiche neuerthelesse ye terme godly doctrine though God in his worde hath not allowed the same but are the traditions and commaundements of men And thus making what doctrine it liketh you godly or vngodly and reseruing to your selues the authoritie thereof ye say ye are well content that the ciuill magistrate be a minister bicause through feare he coÌ„strayneth that is to say ye make him serue your turne to hang to draw to burne to racke to banish to emprison and to force men to embrace what doctrine you appoint and tell him is godly doctrine This ye be well content withall This ye call his best ministerie And that this is his setting forth of Christes true religion that this is his preaching the same with his imperiall decrees and proclamations But if once he take vppon him carefully to examine by the worde of God whether those doctrines and that religion that ye pretende to be godly and the old and former faith be so or no and finding them cleane contrary he remoue them by force coÌ„straine his subiects to embrace the doctrine of Gods worde and so prepare them to receyue the truth by punishing the wicked and obstinate seducers by placing in their roumes and honoring the godly setters forth of the worde of doctrine then in no case ye are well content therewith but raile at and sclaunder the doings of such a Prince and deuise al the trecheries that ye can to his destruction Neuerthelesse would ye well consider what here once againe M. St. you haue grauÌ„ted That the best ministerie and seruice of the great Constantine rested in the setting foorth of Gods true religion Then if the setting forth thereof be the Princes best ministery and seruice may he not Iudge of his best ministery and seruice yea how shall he set forth that whereof he shall not iudge Of other partes of his ministerie he may iudge and may he not Iudge of his beste ministerie are the setting forth of ciuill lawes properly a part of his office bicause they be a good parte of his ministerie is the setting forth of true religion being the best parte as ye are content to call it no parte at al thereof or not rather if it be his best ministerie it is the best part of his office also And seing the setting forth of true religioÌ„ is not properly a ciuill matter but distinct therefrom then doth the beste parte of the Princes office consist in the ministerie of an ecclesiasticall matter and that of such an one as containes the ouersight of all other matters ecclesiasticall For as in true religion they are or ought to be all coÌ„teyned so in the setting forth of theÌ„ is coÌ„tained their ouersight direction For how can he well set forth any thing that he ouerâ—…eeth not nor directeth which ouersight and direction being the supreme gouernment that the Quéenes Maiestie only claymeth and we ascribe vnto hir how haue ye not graunted withall M. St. that this supremacie ouer all causes Ecclesiasticall aboue all other things belongeth to hir Maiestie But for all this that he him selfe hath graunted or the Bishop hath inferred saith M. Stapleton Neither this that ye here alleage out of place nor al the residue which ye reherse of this CoÌ„stantine with whose doings ye furnish hereafter sixe full leaues can importe this superioritie as we shall there more at large specifie This is alleaged out of place ye say M. St. for Constantine But who seeth not that this is but a pelting quarrel the Bishop on good consideration order declareth both by Chrysostoms exposition Constantines example how this sentence of S. Paule that the Prince is Gods minister stretcheth not only to his ministerie in ciuil but also in causes Ecclesiastical But this is alleaged out of place â–ª say you It is no meruaile M. Stap. if it séeme out of place with you for all is alleaged out of place that hauing any place displaceth your assertion And thus pretending it is alleaged out of place ye passe it ouer post vs offâ—…il an other time when ye wil declare it more at large ad Calendas Graecas when ye shall haue more leasure But sir had ye any leasure at this time ye might better haue satisfied your Reader to haue fully answered here to that is here obiected and not thus to dallie off the matter till another time But there is no remedie the reader must haue pacieÌ„ce and waite your furder leasure Neuerthelesse when ye shall M. St. vouchsafe to méete
and correct all maner of persons for al maner of heresies schismes and offences in Christian religion This is inough M. St. for your part to grauÌ„t the Prince thus much Nay soft ye say you I graunt this but with a perchaunce What doth so waightie a matter hang by so rotten a thread Nay I graunt not this perchauÌ„ce neither say you but in some condition This goeth hard with Princes M. St. to stand at this smal reuersion But go to let vs see how many Princes visite reforme and correct all maner persons heresies schismes and offences What is the condition ye wil make Forsooth the condition is this looke what maner lawes and decrees the Priests will make the Prince shall only confirme them by outwarde execution of them Looke what maner persons the priests do say are heretikes â—…chismatikes and offenders the Prince shall execute them with the sworde and kill them Looke what maner religion doctrine and doings the Priests and Bishops shall in their Councels both generall and nationall decrâ—… to be heresie schisme and offence the Prince shal roborate fortifie and streÌ„gthen them And this is the only sense sayth M. St. that I meane that they should visite reforme and correct all maner persons heresies schismes and offences in Christian religion Why M. Stapl. this sense and this graunte are quite contrarie the one to the other The Prince shall visite reforme and correct all maner of persons heresies schismes and offences that is to say he shall not visite reforme nor correct any maner of person for any maner of all these things but the Priest shall do it and he shall onely be the Priestes slaue and executioner Well sayth M. Stap. be it as be may construe it as ye will this is the onely some sense that we may graunt it in and in none other sense And this in Christian Princes is not denied but commended Is not héere a proper graunt to Princes and is not master Stap. to be commended for this some sense of christian Princes gouernment But who is so senselesse that he seeth not in this sense that the Prince hath no gouernement at all but is made a very slaue to the Popish priests authoritie And in this some sense coulde master Stapl. finde in his heart to acknowledge a gouernement to the Queenes maiestie and yet not without a perchaunce neither But without perchaunce master Stap. your sense sheweth what good harte ye beare hir Maiestie and all other christian Princes Now that M. Stap. hath thus chalenged the state which the bishop framed and yet graunteth with a perchaunce thereto in some sense which sense is as you haue heard he taketh vpon him to set downe the true state of the question in hande and prefixeth these words in his margine The state of the question and so procéedeth saying But the question is here nowe whether the Prince or lay magistrate may of him selfe and of his own princely authoritie without any higher eccl. power in the Church within or without the Realme visite reforme and correct and haue all maner of gouernment and authoritie in all things causes eccl. or no. As whether the Prince may by his own supreme authoritie depose and set vp Bishops and priests make iniunctions of doctrine prescribe order of Gods seruice enact matters of religioÌ„ approue and disproue articles of the faith take order for administration of Sacraments commaund or put to silence Preachers determine doctrine excoÌ„municate and absolue with such like which al are causes eccl. and al apperteyning not to the inferiour ministerie which you grauÌ„t to Priests and Bishops only but to the supreme iurisdiction and gouernment which you do annexe to the Prince only This I say is the state of the question now present For the present question betweene you and M. Feck is grounded vpon the othe comprised in the statute which statute emplieth and concludeth all these particulars I had thought séeing your earnestnesse M. St. when ye came to meÌ„tioning the statute that we should haue herd all these things that ye haue thus as it were on your fingers endes particularly named expressed in the statute But wheÌ„ al coÌ„meth to al ye knit vp the matter with this which statute implyeth concludeth al these particulars But I sée you employ your selfe like your self stil to false coÌ„clusions And such as your coÌ„clusions are such are your proues You pretende here after ye haue controlled the B. to set down the true state of the questioÌ„ But as ye played in the beginning so ye holde out rubbers euen to the ending Ye are stil the same man that cried out of short wide shoting hauing set vp new markes of your owne making by this doing both to defeate the bishops profes also to deceiue the reader Ye would fayne driue all to the othe and make the othe the present question And why so bicause say you the present question is grounded on the othe True in déede bothe the present question and all other questions about this controuersie and the issue also agréed vpon betwéene these parties is grounded as ye say vpon the oth And bicause the present question is grounded theron it is a good argument against you that the oth is not theÌ„ the present questioÌ„ bicause the present questioÌ„ is grouÌ„ded theron a question is not grounded on it selfe Ye shoulde haue marked that though the originall be of the othe yet both the issue the present questioÌ„ in haÌ„d being by degrées deducted from thence make nowe an other state To the which to this issue if the bishop satisfie ye can not iustly chaleÌ„ge him any further As for that state of the question that you set downe and the particulars thereof that ye say are implyed and concluded in the statute that all those things are apperteining not to the inferiour but to the supreme iurisdiction and gouernment that ye say we annexe to the Prince only al these are your most manifest vntruthes slanders nor ye can finde them either specified emplyed concluded comprised or any wayes to be ment in the othe or in the statute or in any parte therof Neither the othe or the statute giue al maner of gouernment and authoritie in all things and causes ecclesiasticall to the Prince but ascribe to the Prince the supreme gouernment and authoritie in al things and causes ecclesiasticall True it is that supreme gouernement is aboue ouer them but yet the one is not the other supreme gouernment is not all maner of gouernment Neither bothe the othe or the statute either in wordes or effect of wordes ascribe to this the Princes supreme gouernment the making of Priests and Bishops the making iniunctions of doctrine the determining of doctrin the approuing or disprouing articles of the faith excommunicating and absoluing the preaching of the worde and the administration of Sacramentes Where fynde ye any of these things so muche as to be gathered out
and the power of the pastor is another althoughe it oughte to haue iudgement concurring with it Neither ascribe wée iudgement alike to the pastors and the sheepe although in this spirituall kinde of sheepe some of them haue more sounde and perfect iudgement than their pastors To the minor I answere it is not simply true neyther for in one sense not onely the pastors them selues are lyke wyse sheepe but also the Princes them selues are pastors In the former sense euery faythfull Christian is a sheepe vâ—…der Christe the onely shepehearde and must heare his voyce And so the Prieste is a shéepe also or else he shall neuer be in the folde of the Churche nor placed at the righte hande of Christe In the other sense not onely the Prince is suche a Pastor as Homer calleth Agaâ—…emnon and rules and féedes the body and so the Priestes are his sheepe as well as other subiectes but also in protection setting foorth of Gods worde throughout his Dominions he is their pastor too in appoynting the pastors to féede the sheepe onely in Gods pastures And in this sense we ascribe supreme Pastorship vnto him ouer the Priest also Althoughe in the ministerie of the worde and Sacramentes the Prieste agayne is his superiour pastor and the Prince is but his sheepe But master Saunders replies But if they be counted as Pastors I aske whence they proue it that Christe gaue them suche power for what haue they that they haue not receiued but Christ as he tooke not awaye or diminished the auncient power of kinges graunted by the lawe of Nations so neither annexed he vnto them a newe power of feeding his sheepe Moreouer the auncient power of kinges althoughe it be of God yet is it of him by the meane of the lawe of Nations and the Ciuill and not by any especiall and chiefe constitution of the Gospell as is before declared If therefore Kinges and polytike Magistrates haue any power in causes of faythe either they receiued it from the lawe naturall of Nations and of the Ciuill or of the lawe of God that is reuealed to the Churche But to beginne with the later member firste by the lawe of God that is reuealed to the Churche no suche thing is graunted to kinges For nothing else is reuealed in the newe Testament concerning Princes than that that is Cesars shoulde be giuen to Cesar that tributes shoulde be payde that kings should be prayed for that bothe the King and the gouernours sent from him should be obeyed and finally that al power proceedeth froÌ„ God that euery Magistrate beares not the sworde in vaine but in that matter is to be acknowledged to be Gods minister Moreouer none of these places do bid the king by name dispose of the Churche of Christ or in causes of fayth to arrogate ought to him self The argument in briefe is thus If princes be counted as pastors they haue suche power giuen them But they haue no suche power giuen them Ergo They are not counted as pastors I answere firste to the maior rightly vnderstoode it is true that if princes may be counted as pastors the authoritie is giuen them But it is truely to be vnder stoode by distinction of pastorall authoritie Secondly to the minor that Princes haue no pastorall authoritie giuen them it is false Neither doe his proues proue it If any were giuen them it was giuen them either by the lawe of Nations or by the Ciuill or by Christ in the new Testament But it is giuen them by neither of these three Ergo they haue none giuen them To the maior I aunswere it is false Bycause he leaueth oute the olde Testament whiche he confessed hym selfe before was a figure of the pastorship of the new Testament here he leaues out the old Testament quite Which had he named as he ought to haue done he should both haue séene Princes to haue bene ordeyned immediately of God as Moyses Iosue all the Iudges Saule Dauid and Salomon and not by the meane of the lawe of Nations nor the lawe Ciuill comming betweene And he should haue â—…ounde that the Prince of Gods people is appoynted namely to be a pastor or shepheard vnto them Num. 27. Moses spake to the Lorde saying Let the Lorde God of the spirite of all fleshe appoynt a man ouer the congregation who maye go oute and in before them and leade them out and in that the congregation of the Lorde be not as sheepe without a Pastor 2. Reg. 5. All the Tribes of Israell came to Dauid vnto Hebron and sayde thus Beholde we are thy bones and thy fleshe and in times past when Saule was our king thou leddest Israell in and out and the Lorde hath sayde vnto thee thou shalt feed my people Israel In which words Dauid was made their pastor or shepherd which was reseÌ„bled before in his kéeping of natural shéepe as he confesseth of him self He chose Dauid also his seruant and toke him away froÌ„ the sheepe foldes as he was following the Ewes great with yong ones he tooke him that he might leade Iacob his people Israel his inheritance So he fed theÌ„ with a faythfull and true heart and ruled theÌ„ prudently with al his power Which worde of féeding belonging to a pastor God ascribeth also to al the Iudges saying â–ª VVhen I commaunded the Iudges to feede my people And in 1. Chro. 11. And the Lorde sayde vnto thee thou shalt feede my people of Israell and be the prince c. And in the. 3. booke of the Kings wheÌ„ Micheas described in his vision the kings destruction he sayth I saw Israel dispersed on the mountaynes as sheepe without a pastor and the Lorde sayde these haue no master c. By these and many other places it appeareth that God appoynted the Prince to be a pastor in his office but his office as is proued at large before stretchetâ—… to the setting â—…oorthe the lawe of God and gouernement of the priests so well as the laytie therefore his pastorshippe stretcheth so farre also although not to the taking vpon him the office of the spirituall pastor Secondly I aunswere to the minor it is false For not only by the lawe of Nations and Ciuill a politike pastorshippe is committed to the Prince but also a Christian pastorshippe to a christian Prince euen in the newe Testament also Which as it is comprehended in these sentences that M. Saunders here sets down so are there more sentences that declare the Princes pastorship But sayth he none of these do bidde the king by name to dispose of the Church of Christ or in causes of fayth arrogate ought to him selfe This is a wrong conclusion M. Saunders from iudgement pastorship to inferre disposing arrogating As for arrogating neither the Prince nor the Priest ought to do it nor the Prince attemptes it althoughe the Priestes haue and do attempte it Likewyse for disposing if you meane
therof so let this by the way be noted that he giueth Princes most free Principaliue 〈◊〉 thoâ—…e causes that 〈◊〉 not the faith and Religion of Christ. But to place good Bishops and pastors in gods Churche to remoue euill Bishops and pastors from gods Church â—…o puâ—… Idolatrie out of gods Gods Church to set forth suâ—…h 〈◊〉 seruice as is to edifie gods church to coÌ„mand the word of God to be read in the vulgar tongue to reforme Ecclesiasticall abuses to punishe whordoms to allow as honorable matrimonie in all men to call councels to commaund the Sacraments to be vsed as Christ ordeined theÌ„ to ouersée al estates degrées of persons in gods Church to do in al things to the glory of God to the publique preseruation of the Church to the faithful administratioÌ„ of their particular callings doth not diminishe the faith and ReligioÌ„ of Christ Therfore Christian Princes haue most free principalitie that is to say supreme gouernment in al these eccl. so wel as in ciuil causes Now that he hath granted to Princes thus much which coÌ„prehendeth all the question he declareth on the other side what he exempteth from the Bishops but so subtily that vnder pretence of debarring them from hauing authoritie in those things that he ascribeth to the Princes principalitie he both reuoketh his former graunt to Princes and conueyeth all those things vnto the Bishops Neither Pastors of the Church saith he doe intermeddle their authoritie in those things saue nowe and then to admonishe them and giue theÌ„ faithfull counsell neither doe we defend all dominions and kingdomes to be giuen by gods lawe euery where and in all things to be subiect to the pastors of the Church but in those causes onely which would hinder the faith and Christian saluation except they were partly forbidden as diuorces vsuries and such other sinnes which the natioÌ„s committe without punishment partly commaunded as giuing of almes the defence of neighbours and chiefly of the poore the fortifying of the Church of Christ and Christian Religion and to conclude all other things which the lawe of God commandeth and prescribeth as necessarie to saluation In these wordes Maister Saunders speaketh cleane contraries the Princes haue the moste frée principalitie in all causes that diminishe not the faith and Religion of Christe and the Bishops doe onely admonishe and giue councel and yet he ascribeth all to the Bishops both to punishe all that would hinder the faith and Christian saluation and to fortifie all that would furder it What is not here againe giuen to the Bishoppes and what is not here againe taken from the Princes yea their Kingdomes and all in some places and nothing left for Princes for what else meaneth he by this we defend not all dominions and kingdomes to be giuen by gods lawe euery where and in all things to be subiecte to the pastors of the Church As who should say some are subiect to them by the law of God where the lawe of God is flat to the contrarie that no kingdomes are subiect vnto them But as Maister Saunders contrarie to gods law maketh some kingdomes subiect in all things vnto Bishops so maketh he all kingdomes subiect vnto them in matters of diuorces vsuries and such other sinnes saith he as the nations commit without punishment Which as it is a sclaunder to Christian Princes as mainteining such sinnes which rather they punishe and Popishe Prelates both permit and commit without punishment of them so he ascribeth these punishmentes to the Popishe Prelates for nothing but for aduauntage as also the gyuing of Almes defence of neighbours and chiefely of the poore As thoughe that Princes did not or could not doe these things but the Priestes who by suche fetches gat all things into their clutches Maister SauÌ„ders hauing thus séemed at the first to yelde vnto Princes great authoritie and streight to take away all againe from them and giue it vnto themselues least Princes might worthily thinke themselues abused he mitigateth the matter with this reason Neither ought it seeme strange to anye man that kings in these matters should obey Christ for this standeth theÌ„ chiefly vpon sith otherwise they cannot get eternall life As thoughe your Pope Maister Stapleton and you hys â—…riests were christ Good reason it is they shuld obey Christ otherwise as you say most truely therein they cannot get eternall life But sith you are not Christ this reason holdeth not But you will say you be Christs and represent christ Woâ—…ld to God you were M. Saunders and not rather â—…tichristes For if you were Chrittes you woulde oâ—…ey your Prince And not haue the Prince in authoritie of gouernement obey you whom you ought to obey since a Christian Prince is Christs also and in authoritie â—…f gouernment immediatly to Christians representeth Christ. Thinke you that Princes can not get eternall life excepte they obey your Pope so you tel them in dede make manâ—…e Princes afraid therof by which meanes you haue gotteÌ„ their gouernement from theÌ„ And thus prâ—…tending the name of Christ you saye VVâ—…en therefore we say that earthly kings ought to be vnder Christes ministers we say onely this that they no otherwise can be saued neither receiued of Christian people to a kingdome or oughte to be suffred in the administration of a kingdome than iâ—… they both doe and pretermit those things that the lawe of Christ commaundeth to be done and pretermitted If you meane the obedience to the ministers of Christ no furder than this to doe and 〈◊〉 those things that â—…he law of Christ commaundeth to be done and pretermitted theÌ„ were the controuersie at an end for this obedience was never denied But before you went furâ—…er and would hauâ—… the Prince to doe and preteâ—… those things that the lawe of the Pope and his Priests would haue done and pretermitted 〈◊〉 you repâ—…e they be 〈◊〉 of Christ their 〈◊〉 is the 〈◊〉 of Christ this would be proued M. Saunders for it is 〈◊〉 of the chiefest pointes in controuâ—…sie As for Christs lawe we graunt that excepte the Prince obey it he can not be saued But that he which in any one poynt doth any thing which Christs lawe commaundeth nâ—…t or 〈◊〉 any thing that Christs lawe commaundeth is not to be receiued 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 people to a kingdome or bâ—…ing receiued ought not to be â—…tred in the administration of a kingdome is a perilouâ—… doctrine For who should thâ—… be a king or who shoulde noâ—… be turned oute of his kingdome For who offendeth not herein chiefely expounding the law of Christ as your selues â—…ed in what daunger and thraloâ—…me to you should kings become so that it were better be a begger and beg his bread than be a Christian king and rule and be ruled on this wise if these your rules were true But now to helpe the matter you will expound what ye meane by the â—…aw of Christ. But what the
to make an ende of questioning This in the statute by master Hornes silence is not comprised True in déede M. Stapl. this kinde of iudgement is not mentioned by the Bishop â–ª but it is moste falsly mentioned by you For where ye say this in the statute moste maliciously ye slaunder the statute for this in the statute is neither named comprised or can be gathered thereon Neither the Quéenes Maiestie claymeth or taketh on hir this kinde of iudgement It is due onely to Gods worde and your Pope and popishe Churche violently snatcheth it from Gods worde chalenging it to them selues euen aboue Gods worde it selfe although they agrée not héerein togither For the popishe Churche will be aboue the Pope in thys poynt of iudgement maugre his bearde and yet they graunt the Pope to be their supreme gouernour ecclesiasticall Though they will not relent to him this supreme iudgement but giue it to the Churches iudgement And therefore they be of a contrarie iudgement to you that say this poynt is moste necessarie meete and conuenient for a supreme gouernour ecclesiastical By which poynt you wil make your Pope either no supreme gouernour eccl ouer you or spoyle him of a most necessarie meete and couenient poynt of the supreme gouernment that ye giue him but these are your iarres agrée as ye wil like cats in a glitter about theÌ„ This popish churches or papall iudgement the Q. Maiestie taketh not vpon hir nor the statute ascribeth it vnto hir and therefore the B. had nought to do therewith Yet haue we one thing more which after a couple of your slauÌ„ders that I answere not but referre to your common place thereon ye charge the Bishop once more for this omission Agayne say you preaching the worde administration of the sacraments bynding and loosing â–ª are they not things and causes eccl How then are they heere omitted by you master Horne or how make you the supreme gouernment in all causes to rest vpon the Queenes Maiestie if these causes haue no place there What should a man vse many words with suche a brabler who though he haue nought to say yet will neuer lâ—…e saying of that which is nought to purpose Ye have beene often inough and fully inoughe answered to this master St. if the Quéenes Maiestie taketh not these thinges vpon hir then the B. omitteth not any thing that hir highnesse taketh on hir in omitting these things Neither doth the â–ª sratute yéelde vnto hir the doing of them It is but your slaunderous obtruding of the statute It giueth a supreme gouernmeÌ„t in al these things to the Q. Maiestie And so these causes haue place there so farre as is néedful to a supreme gouernour But from a supreme gouernour which consisteth in caring for ordering directing prouiding guyding maynteining setting foorth to the executing doing preaching and administring of those things is as farre from any good conclusion as you your matter are farre from truthe and honestie Neuerthelesse such is your great coÌ„fidence in this your Counterblast as though ye had so puft vp the falshood therof that no man could espie it ye lustely blowe vp the last blast of this your first booke saying VVhich is nowe better I appeale to all good consciences playnly to maynteine the truthe than dissemblingly to vphold a falsshod playnly to refuse the othe so generally conceiued than generally to sweare to it beeing not generally meaned â–ª But nowe let vs see how M. Horne wyll direct his proufes to the scope appoynted Why may not you appeale to all good consciences M. Stap. as well as that mayden Priest of yours that mighte bidde his maydenhead Goodmorrowe and haue as good a conscience for your owne parte as he for his parte had a maydenhead And to shew your good conscience for a farewell while ye shake handes at the very parting ye lash â–ª out a couple of slaunderous vntruthes togither Ye haue not many words to speake and therfore ye huddle them vp You say the othe is conceiued so generally that it giueth to the Prince your foresayde absolute power of determining all doubts and controuersies of preaching the worde administration of the sacraments bynding and loosing This lie to lappe vp all in the ende was worthe a whetstone M. Stapl. and his fellowe that iutteth with him chéeke by chéeke is as good as he That the othe generally conceyued is not generally meaned But set aside your malitious meaning to wrest the othe and the othe is playne and all one bothe in wordes and meaning But howe soeuer the othe were not so generally conceiued your meaning is playnely to refuse the othe And therefore héere in the ende for a remembraunce to all the rest you must néedes strike vp the stroke with ala lia and desperatly without al dissembling for the matter vpholde a falshoode with falshoodes euen to the laste breathe Et fiunt nouissima illius hominis peiora prioris And the latter ende of that man is worsse than the beginning ¶ The answere to foure Chapters in Doctor Saunders seconde booke of the visible Monarchie of the Churche concerning the question here in hande of a Christian Princes supreme gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes First of the difference of both povvers the ciuill and Ecclesiastical in the original in the vse and in the end of eyther Secondly vvhether the Prince be the Supreme gouernour immediatly vnder Christ. Thirdly vvhether the Prince may iudge and define of ecclesiasticall matters Fourthly whether Bishops maye depose Princes from their estate and take from the realme their povver of electing their Prince if they differ in religion from their Bishops VVhich foure chapters I thought good here to answere vnto both bicause he is the last writer and chiefest novve of accompte among the aduersaries And these chapters aboue al other in his volume both draw neerest to the question of the Princes estate and shew vvithall the full drift of the Papists not only striuing agaynst the Princes supremacie but into vvhat extreme slauerie they vvould reduce all Christian Kinges and kingdomes The argument of the fyrst Chapter of the difference betweene the Ciuile and Ecclesiasticall Magistrate in the originall in the vse and in the ende of bothe MAster Saunders firste beginning with the original lconfesseth that both powers are of God but not both immediatly from God the ciuile power he granteth to be of God but by the lawe of Nations or the consent of people and other meanes of mans wit put betweene But streight he correcteth himselfe that some thing in the ciuill authoritie was reuealed immediatly from God yea Per multa in lege Mosaica diuinitus instituta suerunt verie manie things pertaining to the ciuill power were in Moses law ordeyned of God. And thus at the fyrst he speaketh contraries Herevpon he concludeth thus I thinke therfore it is agreed vpon among all men that the royal imperial power which at this day is exercised in