Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	ecclesiastical_a	king_n	temporal_a	3,017	5	8.3913	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A16170	A courteous conference with the English Catholikes Romane about the six articles ministred vnto the seminarie priestes, wherein it is apparantly proued by their owne diuinitie, and the principles of their owne religion, that the Pope cannot depose her Maiestie, or release her subiectes of their alleageance vnto her. And finally, that the bull of Pius Quiutus [sic] pronounced against her Maiestie is of no force eyther in lawe or conscience, all Catholicke scruples to the contrarie beeing throughly and perfectly cleared and resolued, and many memoriall matters exactly discussed, which haue not beene handled by man heeretofore. Written by Iohn Bishop a recusant papist.	Bishop, John, d. 1613.; Frewen, John, 1558-1628.	1598 (1598)	STC 3092; ESTC S102284	61,282	90

counsell and of my will see that you doe giue all men entrance into the Church that are desirous to come in for if I shall vnderstande that any man that desireth to be made partaker of the Church shall eyther be let by you or forbidden to enter in I will immediately sende one of mine that by my commaundement shall remooue you from your Sea and giue your place vnto another Note that hee saieth I will sende not the Bishoppe of Rome his officer but one of mine owne men who shall displace you and place another therein not by commaundement of the counsell or Bishoppe of Rome but by my commaundement The like also writes Socrates he threatned vnto Alexander the Bishoppe of Constantinople if he woulde not receiue Arrius into the Church But you will say that the Emperour iniuried both Athanasius and Alexander I denie not that but although Theodoretus doth blame his ouermuch light credulitie and doth excuse it by the like in Dauid against Miphiboseth yet doth neyther hee nor any other ancient author accuse him of tyranny for medling with matters that he had nothing to do withall or punishing of them ouer whom he had no lawfull iurisdiction and also doth refute that you affirme that Constantine refused to iudge Bishoppes Nowe to returne againe to the history the same Socrates doth say that when the Arrians had accused Athanasius Macarius and other of their complices vnto the Emperour of foule factes Constantine wrote vnto his sisters sonne D●linatius who was then abiding at Antioch 500 miles from Alexandria to call the parties before him and to punish them that he shoulde finde faultie But afterwarde because the Bishoppes were assembled at Tyrus about the dedication of his newe Church at Hierusalem he referred ouer the hearing of those matters vnto them So that at the first he had committed both the triall and the punishment of the greatest Bishoppe of all the East Church vnto a temporall officer of his the which fact and the other which I haue before rehearsed doe plainly proue that Constantine did not account nor acknowledge his Empyre or him selfe empaired or of lesse commaund by accepting of the Christian religion but that he still executed his princely prerogatiue on all persons both spirituall temporall and still clamed to be the minister immediate of God not any vnder officer of the Bishops of Rome Gods vicar on earth rightly to for as Paul saith 1. Tim. 6. Let all bondmen whatsoeuer they be that be vnder yoke repute their lords worthy of al honor lest the name of the lord his doctrine be blasphemed but they which haue beleeuing Lords let them not cōtemne them because they bee their brethren but rather serue them because they bee beleeuers and belooued who are pertakers of the benefite Teach these thinges and exhort them If any man teach otherwise and doth not yeeld vnto the ●ound speaches of our Lord Iesus Christ and that doctrine which is agreeable to godlinesse is proud knoweth nothing is mindesicke of questions quarrelles about wordes So also might it haue been saide Ye Popes Byshoppes account your princes worthie of all honour least the name and doctrine of Christ be euill spoken of but ye Byshoppes that haue Christian Kinges contemne them not because they be Christians but be the more obedient and dutifull vnto them because they haue embraced Chrst and are pertakers of his benefit This teach and exhorte but whosoeuer teacheth otherwise teacheth contrary doctrine to Christ is a proude prelate and quite voide of knowledge And as Peter writeth 1 Epistle 3. Ye bondmen bee subiect in all feare vnto your Lordes not onely vnto them that are good and moderate but also vnto them that are waywarde and vnreasonable for this is grace or worthie of fauour if a man doe beare sorrowes for conscience of GOD suffering vniustly So also might it haue beene rightly saide vnto the Popes and Byshoppes in Constantines time and now also be ye subiecte in all feare vnto your Princes not onely vnto such as are good and gratious but also vnto vngodly and tyrannicall neyther release your selues of your alleagence for if yee doe take and beare wrong quietly for regarde of GOD God will abundadtly rewarde your patience for the consequent is very strong and good seeing the thinges are all together alike and equall for if the Christian bondmen were not enfranchised because they were spirituall brothers vnto their Lordes neyther were the Popes and Byshoppes discharged of subiection vnto their Princes because they were become their spirituall bretheren and if you will to their spirituall fathers But they say with Phigl●ius that Christ cōmitted the gouernement of his Church vnto Peter What prince Peter was and his successors and therefore all Kinges that are of the Church are subiect vnto the Byshoppes of Rome And if we grant this can there bee ought else inferred then subiection in causes and censures ecclesiasticall and not in causes and punishmentes secular and temporall for what fonde Frenchman will say that because in olde time the Kinges of England were vassals vnto the French Kinges for the Duchies of Normandy and Guien that therefore the crowne of Englande was subiect vnto the Kinges of France or that they coulde commande the Kinges of England in any matter touching their crowne of England or because the Byshoppes Chanceller can excommunicate a man for adultery that therefore he can also depriue a man of life and liuing Mat. 20 for a greater fault Moreouer did not Christ plainelye enough declare what kinde of Kingdome he gaue to Peter and the rest of the Apostles and how vnkingely kinges they shoulde bee when they contended among themselues who should be greatest The kinges of nations saide he be Lordes ouer those countries and their princer haue power ouer them but so it is not in you doth he not here in plaine wordes take from them all earthlye and bodily Empire and power and that too from the greatest of them So that the Pope that claimeth to bee greatest and chiefest is also hereby excluded neyther will a shifte of humilitie serue to escape seeing that to depose Princes is to raigne ouer nations is to be their Lord is to haue power ouer them all which thinges Christ saith the greatest of his Apostles his successors should not haue nor consequently authoritie to release all subiectes of their allegiance the which is a supreeme point of Earthly Empire the which neuer any mortall man yet had and onely belongeth vnto the great God the supreeme Lord and soueraigne of the whole world for neuer yet was there any so mightie a monarch that had all the world vnder his Empire neither then could his authoritie extend ouer all nations but his power determined within the bonds of his owne Empire could not stretch beyonde his owne vassals among whom only he might decree in what cases their seignories should be forfeated and their bondmen be enfranchised of

although he write very directly against the Pope popery yet in many respects doth he shew himself a papist as in following of corrupt translations in the places of scripture which he alledgeth in misapplying many of them contrary to the true sense meaning of the holy Ghost wherein although some warni●g is giuen by a few marginall notes added of purpose and signed wit● this letter yet cannot the godly reader for all that be too wearie and circumspect in the particular consideration of the same Faults escaped Pag. 2. for euery read euery Pag. 3. for iu read ni Pa. 4. for Iunius read Fumus Pag 7. for 〈…〉 A COVRTEOVS conference with the English Catholicks Romane about the six Articles ministred vnto the Seminarie priestes wherein it is apparantly proued by their owne diuinitie and the principles of their owne religi●n that the Pope cannot depos● her Maiesty or relea●e her subiects of their Allegiance vnto her NOw then to proue my first proposition that the Pope and all the Bishoppes and Priestes are subiect by the law of God vnto the temporall magistr●te All persons subiect to the temporal magistrat in whose realme and dominions they doe dwell thus I prooue Salomon Prou. 24. saith my sonne feare the Lord and King and intermeddle not or be not among detractors for their distruction wil arise sodainly and who knoweth the ruine of them both Likewise Saint Paul the Apostle in his writing to the Romaines thus exhorteth or rather commandeth them Chap. 13. Let euery soule be subiect to the higher power for there is noe power but from God but those which are were ordained by God c. So then he that resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God but they which doe resist do get themselues dānation for princes be no feare of good worke but of il but wilt thou not feare the power doe well and then shalt thou haue praise thereby for he is the minister of God vnto thee to good but if thou haue done ill then feare for he beareth not the sword without cause he is the minister of God a reuenger in wrath to him that doth ill And therfore ye must needes be subiect not onely for wrath but also for conscience for therefore doe yea also pay tribute for they are the ministers of God seruing for this very purpose Also in his epistle to Titus Cap. 3. he writes warne them to be subiect to principalities powers to obey their commandements Moreouer S. Pet●r from whom the Pope clameth his mo●arc●● thus writeth in his first vniuersall epistle Cap. 2. Be ye ●ub ect to euery humain creature for the Lord whether it be 〈…〉 most excellent or vnto the presidents as sent 〈◊〉 him to the reuenge of euil deedes but to the praise of 〈◊〉 good because so is the will of God that ye doing well ●ay make m●re the ignorance of the vnskilfull as free men 〈…〉 as men that haue libertie for a cloake of naughtinesse but a● the bondmen of God and anone after feare God and honour the King Ye do see how the old and new law doe agree in the supreeme authoritie of princes ouer all persons borne or abiding within their dominions Paul vsing this vniuersall euery excepting none and Salomon and Peter an indefinite in this place equall vnto an vniuersall And Peter and Paul doe in expresse wordes giue vnto him the supreeme Emp●re of administring iustice in punishing the wicked rewarding the good and that he is so the Apostle doth proue by that ●ll men pay him tribute the which also he commandeth to be paide and also chargeth all men to be obedient vnto him and not for feare onely lest otherwise the prince would make them smart but also for cōscience sake because the● are in duety bound so to do for that God had ordained them to be his lieuetenants in gouernement And therefore if they were not obedient vnto them they must needs be accounted reputed for rebels vnto God that would not accept him for their soueraigne whom God had set ouer them And Peter to suppres the carnal cogitation of the Iewes vnto whom he wrot that thought that the messias had enfranchised them by his redēption from al subiection to man also to preuēt the proud opinion of the clergy that should come after who would clame exemption from earthly subiection because they were appointed ordained dispensers of the misteries of the Messias he flatly affirmeth the claming of such libertie to be nothing else put a plaine pretence cloake for their naughtinesse For he would they shoulde remēber that although they were deliuered by Christ from the bondage tiranny of sin death the Deuill yet they remained still his his fathers bondmen therfore ought duetifully to obey still the ciuill magistrats whom God hath placed in his owne throne his king his lieuetenant ouer them And therefore Salomon in the place afore alleadged An appellation in secular causes cannot be made to the Pope ioyneth them together saying feare God and the King God principally saith Lyra writing on that place and secundarily the King who is his Vicar in temporall things This being so I cannot chuse but much maruaile at that saying in Cap. Licet de sor comp that an appellation may be made from all princes temporall Yea such as do acknowledge no superiour in temporalities when none other can be had and the matter is of som weight For if as Tertullian saith in his Apologie that there is no man aboue the Emperour et quem soli Deo subiicio and whome I make vnder none but God in annother place of the same Apologie he saith of the Emperours of Rome in Dei solius potestate sunt a quo sunt secundi post quem primi ante omnes et super omnes deos quid in cum super omnes homines they are vnder God only vnto whom they are seconde after whom they are first before all men and aboue all gods and why not seeing they are aboue all men And againe if it be true that the graue and learned light of our Lawiers Bracton that liued almost foure hundreth yeares agoe in the raigne of Henry the thirde doth affirme in the beginning of his booke that a King cannot be a King if he haue any superiour in those things that doe appertaine vnto his crowne and kingdome and may not haue in his kingdome any equall much lesse any superiour especially in administration of iustice that it may be saide of him Great is our Lorde greate is his power c. And that he doth aff●irme him to be the vicar of God on earth This place Psal 14● 5 〈…〉 o●●od I can not see by what right or reason an appellation in a secular cause can be made from an Emperour King or any supreame temporall magistrate vnto the Pope seeing he is not theire superiour in temporalities For all the worlde knoweth that an

in al thinges touching the royaltie of the same Crowne shoulde be submitted to the sea of Rome We doe also reade there that all the Barons and all the Byshoppes present and the deputies of those which were absent being asked euery man seuerally saide that therein they would to their vttermost stand with the King against the Pope so zealous were all good Englishmen in those daies of the auncient honour and libertie of their country and the soueraignetie of their King Moreouer Saint Germanye in the xxxix Chapter of the second booke entreating how ecclesiasticall persons may dispose of their goodes he vtterly reiecteth the Canon law therein and sheweth what they may doe by the lawes of this Realme and at the length he saith thus And moreouer a parson of a Church vicar Chauntery priest or such other all such goods as they haue by reason of the parsonage vicarage or Chauntery as that they haue by reason of their owne person they may lawfully giue and bequeth after the common law And if they dispose part among their parishoners and part to the building of Churches or giue part to the ordinary or to poore men or in any such manner as is appoynted by the law of the Church they offend not therein vnlesse they thinke thēselues bound thereunto by duety authoritie of the law of the Church not regarding the Kings lawes For if they doe so it seemeth they resist the ordinance of God which hath giuen power to princes to make lawes But whereas the Pope hath soueraignety in temporall things as he hath in spirituall thinges there some say that the goods of priests must in conscience be disposed as it is contained in the same summe But it holdeth not in this Realme for the goodes of spirituall men bee temporall in what manner soeuer they come to them and must be ordered by the temporall law as the goodes of temporall men must be Thus farre Sainte Germany then may I inferre if that the Pope the counsell and thee conuocation can not make a Lawe touching the goodes of the spirituallty within this Realme and that those which doe dispose of their goodes according to such a Canon doe sinne although it doe agree with the law of this Realme if they did it as bounde by that Canon shall wee thinke that the Pope the councell or the conuocation can giue away the goodes and landes of temporall men within this Realme yea and the Crowne and kingdome and that they doe not sinne mortally that doe obey any such decrees And what account is to bee made of the Popes dispensation in temporall causes the same learned author plainely declareth in the xli Chapter of the seconde booke where hee saith That although by the Canon law euery man may lawfully kill an Assasin such a fellow as will at euery mans request kill any man for money yet he affirmeth it is altogether vnlawfull in this land and that notwithstanding the Popes dispensation and pardon he that slayeth an Assasin is a fellon and so ought to bee punished as a fellon Moreouer in his xliiii Chapter hee doth conctantly holde that the Canon summes that do determine all scruples of conscience according to the Canon law doe rather hurt English mens consciences then giue them light and that there bee many cases in them ruled according to the Canon law that are not to bee obserued in this Realme neyther in law nor conscience And in xlii Chapter that although many sayings in the same summes doe agree with the lawes of this Realme yet they are to be obserued by the authoritie of the Lawes of this Realme and not by the authoritie alleaged by them Finally in the xxix Chapter of the same booke hee doth flatly ouerrule our present case whereas by the Canon Law an heretike hath ipso facto lost all his goodes and therefore can make noe execution he affirmeth that it holdeth and bindeth not here for if he doe abiure hee hath forfeited noe goods but if hee be conuicted of heresie and deliuered to laye mens handes he hath forfeyted all his goodes that he hath at that time that he was deliuered vnto them but not his landes before that he be put to death To this the Doctor answereth me thinketh that as it onely belongeth vnto the Church to determine heresies that so it belongeth vnto the Church what punishmēt he shal haue for his heresie except death which they can not be iudges in but if the Church decree that therfore he shall forfeite his goods me thinkes that they be forfeyted by that decree vnto this obiection he thus answered vnder the name of student Nay verely for they be tēporall things and belong to the iudgement of the kings court And I thinke that the ordinarie might haue set no fine vpon one impeached of heresie vntill it was ordained by the statute of Henry the fourth that he may set a fine if hee see cause and that the king shall haue that fine If this were the vniuersall beliefe of all good Englishmen in the time when the Popes authoritie most flourished heere and before this controuersie arose that neither the Pope nor counsell nor Church hath authoritie to ordaine any temporall punishment for heresy can he be accounted a true Englishman that doth holde that the Pope can depriue her maiestie of her crowne and dignitie for a pretence of heresy Of the counsell of Laterane or that the Canon made in the counsell held at Laterane doth binde vs heere in England But because we vnderstand that the greatest scruple in conscience of our Catholickes Romane is grounded vpon this Canon we will make a particular treatise thereof and to vncomber and discharge their consciences shew first that it is no determination of faith that the Pope may depose princes and secondly that it doth not binde in this realme not onely because as I haue proued before the Church can make no decree of temporalities but also because by the verie Canon Lawe it neither is nor euer was in force within this realme and finally neither orderly executed according to the order of the Canon And first because I shall haue occasion to examine euerie worde of one member thereof I will set it downe verbatim worde for worde Ca. 33● Si ver● dominus temporalis requisitus admonitus ab ecclesia terram suam purgare neglexerit ab hac haeretica foeditate per Metropolitanum comprouinciales episcapos excommunicationis vinculo innodetur etsi satisfacer● contempserit intra annum significetur hoc summo pontifici Romano vt extunc ipse vasallos ab eius fidelitate denuntiet absolutos terram exponat Catholicis occupandam qui cam exterminatis haereticis sine contradictone possideant in fidei puritate conseruent ita quod bona huiusmodi damnatorum si laici fuerint confiscentur si vero clereci applicentur ecclesijs a quibus stipendia per ceperint Which may thus be englished If the temporall Lord beeing requested

happely they could bring him within the compasse of treason by denying the paiment of tribute vnto the Emperour and so procure his death by the Romaine president as seditious And therefore he asked them why they tempted him and willed them to shew him a peny and then he demaunded of them whose image was stamped on the peece and they answered the Emperours then saide he giue the Emperour that which is his and so likwise ynto god that which is gods a very obscure sentence giuen by a iudge in a sute but a wise and wittie answere for such false traterous Interrogants And with the like trisles doth the same Felisius also trouble vs when he goeth about to proue the exemption of the clergy frō free subiection of secular princes because Melchisdech was both a king and a priest so likewise Moses a priest supreme gouernor of the Iseralites And finally Hely was both high priest and also secular Prince or iudge of the Iewes For if Melchisedech were both a King and a Priest what is that to the controuersie that we haue now in hand whether that Priestes be subiect vnto the temporall Prince but perhaps it touched the matter if we had disputed whether that a Bishop may be also a temporall Prince See Fenestella As for a King to be a Priest was an vsual thing in many countries among the heathen Yea all the Romaine Kings had the chiefe charge of the sacrifices temples and worshippe of the gods and therefore when the Kinges were expelled they ordained a priest whom they called the sacrificing King who should execute those publicke sacrifices which did of right belong vnto the Kings function but for hatred of their kings made him subiect vnto the chiefe Priest or Pontifiex Maximus the which office of Pontifiex Maximus all the heathen Romaine Emperours continually had See Dion c. But that Moses was both the ciuill magistrate and also a priest it maketh very much against himselfe for although we doe grant that Moses was a Priest yet it is most manifest that he was not high Priest but his brother Aaron whome yet to be subiect vnto Moses all men seene in the sacred scriptures do knowe so that nothing can make more for the superioritie of the ciuill magistrate then this example that Aaron being high Priest and head and chiefe of all Priestes was yet subiect to Moses an ordinary Priest Moses was a prophet and not a priest because he had the soueraigntie temporall Likewise what is it to the purpose if that Hely the high Priest was also created secular magistrate for so were all the high Priestes after the returne of the people from Babilon vntill they were conquered by the Romaines and the kingdome was giuen by them vnto Herodes a stranger and Idumean Now seeing we haue aboundantly prooued in generall the superioritie of the ciuill magistrate ouer all men liuing within their dominions both by expresse places of scripture and authorities of auncient fathers and also conuinced the subiection of the high Priest in the olde law vnto the ciuill Prince and clearely shewed Christs kingdom to be spirituall and that he gaue none other to Peter and the rest of the Apostles and their successors and haue fully answered all obiections of the aduersaries I will descende vnto practise and prooue the superioritie of Emperours and Italian Kings ouer the Popes and Bishoppes of Rome by the prescripsion of seauen hundreth yeares after Christ 〈◊〉 kinde of proofe which we Catholickes Romaine exact of the Protestants crying vnto them to shew their successiion But because Pighius the Popes proctor in the secular primacy doth subiect his client vnto the heathen Emperours The Pops subiect to the Emperours and Italian kings I neede fetch my limmitation noe higher then Constantine the greate the first Christian Emperour Now to shew how he banished Bishoppes perhappes will be thought to small purpose because they doe giue this earthly Empire not vnto the Clergy but onely vnto the Bishoppe of Rome as Christs lieuetenant generall in all causes as well spirituall as temporall See for these histories Paul Dia● Platina and Sabellicus But I doe finde that his sonne and successor Constantius did banish Liberius the Bishoppe of Rome because he would not subscribe to the deposition of Athanasius and caused another to be c●osen in his place Moreouer when the Cytie of Rome and the Country of Italy came by conquest into the possession of the Ostrogothes in Anno Domin 483. Liberius Theodoricus the King of the Ostrogothes or of Italy commanded to come before him to Rauenna whether he had transferred the seate of the Empire of Italy leauing the city of Rome in the gouernement of the Senate Symmachus And least some man vnskilfull of antiquities should dreame that it was then the Popes by the donation of Constantine Theodoricus I say summoned before him at Rauenna Symmachus and Laurentius who contended for the Bishopperickes of Rome to the diuision of the whole Cytie I●hn that he as soueraing might determine the controuersy vpon hearing of the matter And afterward when Iustinus Emperour of Constantinople had banished the Arrians out of all his dominions Theodoricus sent Iohn the byshoppe of Rome and their Senatours Embassadours vnto Iustinus willing them in threatning sort to tell the Emperour from him that vnlesse hee did spedily restore to the Arrians theire Churches and suffer them to liue in peace that he would extinguish 〈…〉 Italy They comming to 〈…〉 honorably receiued by him did with 〈…〉 beeing very hoofull for the safetie of themselues and 〈◊〉 countrymen entreat the Emperour gratiously to graunt the ●●nor of their Embassage although it were vniust and to haue regard and compassion of Italy which otherwise would vtterly perish with whose teares the Emperour beeing mooued granted them their request But when the Bishoppe with his associates were returned to Rauenna to make relation vnto the King of the Emperours answere Theodoricus mooued with malice because 〈◊〉 a defender of the Catholicke pietie had receiued him so honorably killed him and his fellowes with painefull imprisonment Then Theodotus annother king of the Ostrogothes sent Agapetus Agapetus the Bishoppe of Rome Embassadour as his subiect vnto Iustinian the Emperour which Iustinian not long after hauing recouered Rome from the Ostrogothes did not by his Lieuetenant but by his Lieuetenant Belsarius his wife spoyle Siluerius Silberius the Bishoppe of Rome of his Bishopprick● Bishoppes robes and putting him in monasticall needes confined him into an out Iland Charging him that he would haue betrayed the gate Asmaria that adioyned vnto his house vnto the Ostrogothes but in deed perhappes there was some other priuie grudge hidden in the Empresse her heart But the manner of the doing doth manifestly declare for how smale Princes Popes were reputed in those daies for Belsarius sending an officer for him the Bishoppe was brought into his bedde Chamber because Belsarius sate by his

the temple because hee offred incense but because the wraith of GOD had made him a leper the which kinde of men by the expresse commaundement of GOD might not conuerse with other And if wee will receiue the report and assertion of Iosephus a learned Priest and historian of the Iewes the priestes did not thrust him out of the temple but admonished him to depart the which hee did soone obey when he saw himselfe made so loathsome on a sodaine was astonied with the manifest wraith of God and hereunto the text seameth to assent which saith and hastily they expelled him c. But he himselfe also made hast to goe out because he had presently felt the plague or strooke of God But that he was as some seeme to say deposed of his Kingdome therefore we doe reade neither in the scriptures nor in Iosephus But onely this saith Paralyp So King Ozias was a leeper euen to his dying day and dwelt in an house by himselfe because he was full of leprosie for the which he had beene cast out of the house of the Lord Furthermore Ioathan his sonne gouerned the kings house and iudged the people of the land And almost the same words wee reade in the booke of the kings Soe that by the wordes of the text it doth not appeare that he was either deposed or did giue vp the Kingdom but onely abandoned al resort by reason of his contagious sicknesse and ignominy gaue vp the maneging of matters of state and the princely port vnto his sonne and so accordingly whosoeuer doth marke diligently the supputiaton of yeares which the booke of the Kings maketh shall manifestly see that he reckoneth Ozias his raigne euen vntill his dying day Neither if that Ozias had beene deposed because of his leprosy would it soe much further theire cause as they faine in saying that heresy is inward leprosy then Idolatry is And yet can they not finde that euer any King of the Iewes was deposed by the high Priest for Idolatry nor any Christian prince by the Pope for any cause for the space of seauen hundreth yeares after Christ although those times yeelded many vngodly Princes as we haue shewed you before of Emperours one flatly fallen from the faith vnto Paganisme sundry Arrians some Monothlets and Eutiches and many cruell persecutors of the Catholickes And so likewise many of the Ostrogothes in Italy were Arrians and many moe in the same prouince of the Lombard kinges And yet a farre longer race of the Westgotish Kings in Spaine But if any man will rubbe his face and say that the Byshoppes of Rome in those ages eyther had not so much knowledge in the worde of GOD or else so greate zeale as there successors since all men that shall heare them will shoute at them They write that when Nero whipped Senatoures executed noble men spoyled Citizens wasted prouinces without cause or colour and finally in all things made his lust law he triumphing at this iolitie boasted that neuer any man before him did know what an Emperour might doe Act. 5. Certes the holy and learned fathers in ancient time knew not this diuinitie that when there princes wrongfully oppressed them they should straightway cast off their yoke but rather patiently beare whatsoeuer ill should be inflicted on them for Gods cause Mat. 5. They remembred that the Apostles from whom they set their light and learning being whipped at a conuocation of the Iewish Pristes and Elders went away reioycing because they were counted worthie to suffer reproach for the name of Iesus Athanatius in epla 2. ad vlit vit Agent They had not forgotten the saying of their Sauiour Mat. 5. Blessed are they that suffer persecution for righteousnesse for theires is the Kingdome of heauen Ye are blessed when men shall curse you and persecute you and lying shall say all manner of euill against you for me Reioyce and be glad because your reward in heauen is abundant for so they persecuted the Prophets that were before you When Constantius the wicked Emperour vrged Hosius the holy Byshoppe of Cordula the Byshoppe of Rome his deputy and the three hundreth Byshoppes assembled at Sa●dica with bitter banishment as he had alreadie serued many of there colledges vnlesse they would subscribe to the wicked errour of Arrius they all refused to doe it but they did not menace the Emperour with deposition if hee woulde not relinquish his false faith and reuoke the godly banished Byshoppes bur contrariwise confessed vnto him Non nob●s fas est imperium in te●riis tenere it is not lawfull for vs to holde Empire on the earth And not withstanding all his hurtfull wickednesse yet they affirmed that he that should cast but a malignant eye at his Empire did resist the ordinance of God so farre were they from thinking that his subiectes might openly take armes against him Don Iohn De Austria in his warres in the low Cuntries Don Iohns ensignes bare in his ensigne a deuise of a crosse with this word In hoc signo vicī Turcos in h c signo vincam hereticos with this signe I ouercame the Turkes with this signe I will vanquish the heretikes so if the latter Popes had saide with this vertue and weapon of patience our ancestors ouercame the heathen and heriticall Emperours and with the same we will ouercome the Emperours that will intrude vppon our temporalities perhappes their state had not bene now so staggering for whosoeuer shall marke the course of the history of the Church of God shall finde that it hath growen greate by patience but hath rather decreased then encreased by armes and violence Moreouer if the Popes will vouchsafe to reade their old recordes they shall see and vnderstande that such of their predecessors as armed themselues with patience and vsed none other but the spirituall sword and that also sparingly and seldome were had of all men in greater reputation and reuerence and could doe more in the world then their successors that after the spirituall sword which Christ had deliuered vnto them sharpe and dreadfull to be vsed onelie in extremitie but in his cause quarell had through there continuall abusing and drawing at euery light priuate braule became so hagled blunt and contemptible that euery boy laught at it did furiously fall to catching of the secular sworde out of the temporall magistrates hand Like as they report of Iulius the seconde whether meerely deuised or done in deede I saith Ferou know not that when he went in person into the fielde against the French armed with a paire of keyes in his hande and a sworde by his side hee threw his keyes into the riuer of Tiber and therewith all drawing his sworde saide seeing Peters keyes haue done noe good Paules sworde shall helpe mee And surely therein the Pope fared like Ioakin the King of Iuda who trusted in a rotten reede the king of Egypt to defende him against the Assyrian And so they incurred