importance which is in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall things or causes as temporall What is this but an importune séeking of a knot in a rushe of no importance 〈◊〉 there any thing in these wordes added more than was â—…ully compreâ—… hended in the other or than King Henrie or King Eâ—…warde claymed and tooke on them 2. Pref. pag. 34. He maketh an other petit quarell at the fourme of the printed letter fol. 49. b. But it is aunswered in his bederoll of vntruthes where he likewise maketh a slurre aboute it Diuerse other petit quarels he dath aboute the distinction of the letter and for cyting the effect of certaine textes and not declaring them worde for worde fol. 50. b. which is aunswered Another quarell he pyketh at the Bishop for citing Emanuell Paleologus â–ª the Emperour of Greeâ—…e Aâ—…other for that he calleth him Christian Emperour 〈◊〉 these arâ—… aunswered in theyr proper places Another â—…or translating Suprema Anchora Supreme Anchore and not the last Anchore but this is likewyse aunswered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 like petit quarels he piketh many which here for breuitie I ouerpasse And although there is none vnaunswered in their places yet aunswere them all with his owne wordes A man woulde here suppose master Stapleton that ye had some great and iust occasion thus grieuously to charge such a man as the Bishop is and that in print where all the worlde may read and consider it Pref. 17. VVhat an offence I beseech you hath the Bishop committed herein so great as woâ—…thie a dash with your pen. 〈◊〉 â–ª b. To these he adioyneth his tenth common place which himselfe calleth wordes of course saying these are but wordes of course 1. Pref. pag. 2. And therefore I vsed his owne terme His vvordes of course that is such as may be better returned on himselfe FIrst his beginning of his first Preface with the parable of the foolishe buylder Luc. 14. Whom he compareth the Bishop vnto for attempting this controuersie which he calleth the Castle of our profession and not able to go through therewith is therefore laughed to scorne saying beholde this man beganne to buylde but hee hath not beene able to make an ende That this may be truely recoursed on the Papists all the worlde beginneth to sée and to laugh them to scorne at the ouerthrowe that God hath made of their Nymrods Babilonicall Towre and howe the more they labour to repayre the decay thereof bycause they buylde not on Iesus Christ the Rocke but on the sandes of theyr Fathers traditions they can not therefore with all theyr force inquisitions deuises and attemptes bring their buylding to any good passe their groundworke iâ—… rotten their stuffe is naught and therfore master Stapletons Fortresse and all their Bulwarks are ouerthrowne spirituoris â—…ius with the spirite of his mouth that is with the worde of God. But ye will say sayth he of this parable they be but words of course Well preuented master Stapleton and in time who can rightly say or iudge any other of them sith they be so indéede as your selfe confesse wordes both of ordinarie course with you and all your side and what is sayde in the whole discourse of them but such course stuffe God wote as in recoursing them to you may be more fitly and truely applyed For ensample euen in the similitude ye alleage of the Apples and Grapes of Sodome and Gomorre Pref. 1. pag. 3. fayre to the eye without within nothing but stinking ashes A most liuely picture of the fruites of Poperie more glorious withoute in pompe riches wealth and might of the worlde More shining in outwarde holinesse counterfeyts myracles Iewish ceremonies and Pharisaical workes and in all other things more faire and delectable to the outward senses than euer were the Apples of Sodome or any thing else but within for sounde doctrine and the right worship of God consisting in spirit truth neyther the Apples of Sodome and Gomorre nor Sodome and Gomorre it selfe had euer the like stinch and infection And all those gay things come but to touche them with the touche stone the holye worde of God they smâ—…lder forthwith into Ashes or rather into nothing Uevobis hypocritae sayth Christ VVo bee to you hypocrites that make cleane that is outwarde c. The like recourse is made of all your glorious pamphlets and of this yours in hande there néede none other aunswere than to returne your owne words to your owne selfe thereon It beareth a countenance of truth of reason of learning but come to the triall and examination of it I finde a pestilent ranke of most shamefull vntruthes an vnsauery and vaine kinde of reasoning and last of all the whole to resolue into grosse ignorance Pag. 4. Likewise where he sayth Pag. 8. After all this strugling and wrastling agaynst the truth by you and your fellowes the truth is dayly more and more opened illustred and coÌ„firmed and your contrary doctrine is or ought to bee disgraced and brought in vtter discredite The aunswere to this is the same that 〈◊〉 made to the quarelling sophister If I say it the argument is true if thou sayst it it is false That which ye forge of a namelesse Protestant from one of your lying fellowes 〈◊〉 that A protestant of late dayes being pressed of a Catholike for extreeme lying and not being able to cleare himselfe sayde plainely and bluntly Quamdiu poterâ—… clades adferam latebunt quamdiu poterant valebunt apud vulgâ—… ista mendacia I will deface them and do some mischiefe to them as long as I am able my lyes shall lie hidde as long as may be and at the least the common people shall fall in a liking with them pag. 20. Aâ—… this is most likely to be your owne and your authors lie on the Protestants that at the least the common people might fall in a misliking with vs so is it euidently true if it â—…e recoursed on your owne side all the world can witnesse it hath bene your sayings and doings in very déede and noâ—…e for feare yâ—… should haue bene preuented obiect it in your Preface to vs It is you that with your crueltie and slaunders haue and do say Quamdin potero clades adferam I wil do mischiefe to them 〈◊〉 long as I can It is you that this long while haue slaundered and deuised horrible lies â–ª by those that haue professed the truth altering and chopping their articles saying they mainteyne such and such he resies as they neuer thought and haue sayde Latebunt quamdiâ—… poterunt valebunt apud vulgâ—… ista mendacia These lies shall lie hidden with the vulgare people so long as may be And so haue yée made the people in executing your crueltie beléeue that they did God good seruice So did the Phariseys and highe priestes abuse the 〈◊〉 and ignorance of the Iewishe people with such vntrue slaunders on Iesu Christ himselfe And to the better compassing hereof ye haue set forth lyes for truth and kept
Gods name let it there appeare where it is also answered folzâ—… For his 48. and. 49. vntruthes he alleageth no reason nor cause onely he sayth the former is boldely auouched but no way proued and the other somewhat more impudent Since therefore he hath nothing wherein to conuince them I may wel returne his boldnesse and impudencie to him selfe and remitte the tryall of the truthe or vntruthe to the discussing of Iosias ensample Nowe haue you shewed your selfe playnely herein to be a Donatist also The. 50. vntruthe most slaunderous M. Horne and his fellowes are in many poyntes Donatistes as shall appeare The triall of this vntruthe is discoursed at large in the proper place where M. Stapleton citeth it to appeare there shall be heard inough for triall of this chalenge pro contra and as the Reader on the viewe of bothe shall there finde it so on Gods name let him estéeme of it The Donatistes sayde they were of the Catholike fayth of the Catholike Church-which shifte for their defence agaynst Gods truthe the Popishe sectaries do vse in this our time beeing no more of the one or of the other than were the Donatistes and suche like The. 51. vntruthe Answere the Fortresse M. Horne annexed to sainct Bede if ye dare to defende this most sensible and grosse lye Howe happie are you M. Stapleton that euer ye buylt suche a Fortresse that ye thus can crake of so lustily bidde vs come and assayle crying aunswere the Fortresse and come if yee dare and if he come not then he dare not come if he set not on your Fortresse then this must néedes be a lye Muste it nowe truely then youre Fortresse is but a weake Fortresse if the prouing this a lye doe aunswere and ouerturne your Fortresse We néede neuer goe thither for the matter to proue your Church noâ—… the catholike Church nor to haue the catholike fayth this wil be proued in this booke well inough I warrant ye or euer it be ended ye shal sée your self more than once or twice confesse it And diuers other haue at large proued it what néede we then runne to your Fortresse In the next diuision which is the. 19. M. St. gathereth an other vntruthe but before it he setteth downe two marginall notes The first where the Bishop sayd All the sectes of the Donatistes whether they be Gaudentians Petilians Rogatists Papistes or any other sect c. Upon this word Papistes master Stapleton maketh a starre saying You should haue sayd Protestantes who in so many points as hath bene shewed resembled the Donatistes It is well inough M. Sta. and ye can let it stand til time be ye haue vntrussed all those poyntes euen from your own sloppes then ye may go perhaps like Baily hosegodowne The. 2 â–ª note is this Where the Bishop hauing alleaged a long sentence of S. Augustine agaynst M. Feckenham Thus farre S. Augustine sayth he by whose iudgement of the catholike Church c. Note sayth M. Stap. that nowe S. Augustines iudgement is also the iudgement of the catholike Churche To the which note I also adde this note withall M. Stapleton that your Church is not then the Catholiks Church whose iudgement herein agréeth not with Sainct Augustines iudgement Loe M. Stapleton howe pretily yourself begin to aunswere your last vntruth if ye holde on thus we shall not greatly néed to scale your fortresse euen this your CouÌ„terblast will encounter and ouerblowe it After these two notes he setteth downe his vntruth Your errontous opinion The. 52 vntruth M. Feckenham holdeth no such opinion The opinion there mencioned and confuted by S. Augustine is this of the Donatists that the order rule and gouernment practised be the Kinges of the olde Testament in ecclesiasticall causes ar not figures and prophecies of the like gouernment to bee in the kings vnder the newe Testament nor the order that Christ lefte behinde him in his Gospell newe Testament This was the opinion of the Donatistes in Saint Augustines time and this is yours Master Fecknams and Master Dormans opinion nowe that they are not such figures and prophecies and therfore ye confesse your selfe fol. 62. that M. Feckenham omitted the proufes of the olde Testament bycause they made against him Nowe whether this be an erroniouse opinion or no I commit you and Saint Augustine togither to scamble about it The. 53 vntruth Whither S. Augustine haue witnessed no such large and supreame gouernment as we attribute now to Princes yea whither Master Stapleton haue graunted so much or no is proued at large in the. 19. 20. Diuisions Your wilfulnesse is such that you delight only in wrangling against the truth The. 54. vntruth â—…claunderous Then are your selfe this â—…claunderer M. Stapleton that confesse Folio 62. he omitted to shewe forthe the truths of purpose bicause it made agaynst him what is this but wiâ—…full wrangling agaynst the truthe Constantine made many holesome lawes and godly constitutions wherewith he restrayned the people with threates forbidding the sacrificing to Idols to seeke after the diuelishe and superstitious soothsaying to set vp Images The. 55. vntâ—…uthe They were Idols not Images that Constantine forbad his subiects to set vp And in his Counterblast fol. 68. he sayth to say that Constantine forbad to â—…et vp Images is an open and a shamelesse lye What shamelesse outfacing is this The very words euen in the same place and many other of the booke are playne agaynst Images and nameth bothe Idols and Images also as the Bishop dothe Which withal confuteth his subtile distinction betwéene Image and Idoll as though an Image might not be an Idoll also Neither can the distinction serue your turne For Constantine forbiddeth bothe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your selfe confesse he forbad whether he forbad Images or no these are Eusebius owne wordes in Gréeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. 2. Euen so Christe our Sauiour confirmed this their authoritie commaunding all men to attribute and giue vnto Cesar that which belongeth vnto him The. 56. vntruthe This place of S. Mathew maketh nothing for the Princes supreme gouernement in ecclesiasticall things It maketh as the Bishop alleaged it to confirme al that authoritie by Christes Gospell that was due before in the time of the olde Testament Which your selfe graunt â–ª but that Princes had supreme authoritie in ecclesiastical things in the time of the olde Testament the Bishop proued before and your selfe also graunted it though ye denied such supreme gouernement as we attribute Therefore this place maketh some thing for Princes supreme gouernment in ecclesiasticall things so bewrayeth your owne vntruth and the truth of the Bishop This to be Christes order and meaning that the kings of the nations should be the supreme gouernours ouer their people not onely in temporall but also in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes the blessed
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
as our sauiour Christ hath lefte behinde him in his Gospell and nevve Testament Either by the vvritinges of suche learned doctors bothe olde and nevve vvhich haue from age to age vvitnessed the order of eeclesiasticall gouernement in Christes Church Either by the generall councels vvherin the right order of ecclesiasticall gouernement in Christes Churche hath bene moste faythfully declared and shevved from time to time Or else by the continuall practise of the like ecclesiasticall gouernement in some one Church or parte of all Christendome By these foure meanes this issue aforesaide as the state of the controuersie betwéene bothe parties must be tryed That by any of these foure meanes proofe be made to him That anie Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may claime or take vpō them anie such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes This requireth master Feckenham to be prored The satisfaction whereof to be proued by the Bishop is this That by some of these foure meanes proufe may be made to him that some Emperour Empresse King or Queene may clayme or take vppon them some such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes If the B. shall be founde to haue proued thus much to M. Feck he hath fully satisfyed his request and M. Feckenham according to his promise ought to sweare with humble thankes notwithstanding master Sapletons quarelling Counterblast The Bishop reducing M. Feckenhams first poynt to a forme of argument repeateth it No man may restifie any thing by a booke oth whereof he is ignorant and knoweth nothing without committing manifest periurie But you neyther knowe that the Queenes highnesse is the onely supreme gouernour of this Realme as well in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall things or causes as temporall neither yet know ye anye waye or meane whereby to haue anye knowledge thereof Ergo ye cannot testifie the same on a boke oth without manifest periurie To this the B. replieth that although he might flatly denie the minor that M. Feck is not without all knowledge and vtterly ignorant of the matter nor destitute of al meanes to attaine therto yet he sayth he wil answere by distinction of ignorance to shew how M. Feck is ignorāt how he is not He alleageth a thréefold deuision of ignorance out of Thomas of Aquine the chiefe of the Popish scholemen ▪ Ignorance of simplicitie Ignorāce of wilfulnes and ignorance of malice Prouing that he is not ignorant of the first sort hauing in king Henries and king Edwards reignes continually knowne acknowledged confessed it and therfore his ignorance is either of wilfulnesse or of malice or of both of them M. St. Counterblast standeth chiefly on thrée matters first his answere to Thom. distinction with an obiecting againe to the B. the opinion of Tho. in this cōtrouersie Secondly a quarrelling chalenging of the B. for vntruthes Thirdly an excuse of master Feckenham for setting forth this supremacie With a quarell ioyned thereto that the B. citing a sentence out of the booke of wisdome called it a sentence of the holy ghost concluding thereon a discorde of our doctrine But or euer he enter into his first part he noteth this for a generall warning before Now are maister Feckenham and master Horne come to couple and ioyne togither in the principall matter If this forewarning be true M. St. that this their coupling and ioyning togither on this issue to wete whether any princes haue takē any such gouernmēt on them be nowe by your confession the principall matter controuersed betweene the partyes standing in variaunce whiche as ye sayde before is conuenient and necessarie to haue before our eyes and then deligently to see howe the proufes are of eche partie applied for the confirming of their assertions Then all those sixe principles whiche ye sette vp before your Counterblast as markes to fixe the eye of the Reader vppon were but false markes and not the principall matter wherein the parties coupled them selues togither to proue or improue the same Then were almost all that hitherto M. Stap. hath sayde as the Reader marking this well shall sée and the most of that which he hath to say in this great Counterblast nothing else but a running about the Bushe and wresting of euerye thing from the principall matter in which they ioyned to some other matters wherein they coupled not Whiche is plaine to beguile and abuse not rightly to direct the eye of the Reader as the Reader fixing his eye on thys issue shall soone espie your falsehoode This issue then being the principall matter as ye say and the Bishop coupling and ioyning herein togither with master Feckenham as ye also say and the Bishop hauing proued that which he endeuoured himselfe to proue which ye likewise haue confessed what remayneth by your owne tale telling but that the Bishop hath fully proued the principall matter in question Neither will you as you say nor any other Catholikes greatly contend with him for that he hath proued and he hath proued that that he laboured in he laboured in that he coupled he coupled in this issue thys issue is the principall matter betwéene them whie then do ye so fiersely contende but that ye woulde shewe your selfe a vaine sophisticall and brabling quarrellour that haue no great cause to contende nor anye cause at all and yet will so greatly contende onely of wylfull malice confessing your selfe the thing to be proued that is the principall matter Master Stap. hauing giuen this forewarning commeth to his first part which he deuideth thréefold First he iesteth out the matter with scoffes which I referre to his common place thereon Secondly he denieth master Feckenham to haue any ignorance in this poynt except it were inuincible ignorance by no study or diligence able to be put away and therfore pardonable Since ye admit the distinction M. Stap. ye bring out of time your other inuincible ignorance How pardonable it is is another question But sée how ignorantly while ye would defende M. Fec you ouerthwart him he pleadeth ignorance for his defence and you say he is not ignorant and woulde put the B. to proue that he should be ignorant of wilfulnesse and malice which the B. hath done alreadie and so ye debarre M. Feckēham of his refuge and make him to haue knowledge of this poynt Which not only he himself denieth but which your selfe afterwards denie also yea that he could not haue knowledge of this poynt But you thinke to escape cleare with helping the matter by a newe pertition of ignorance adding a fourth part of inuincible ignorance Surely say you if there were any ignorance in this point it were such as S. Tho. and other call inuincible ignorance Except M. St. ye confound this fourth ignorance with one of the thrée before named ye quite exclude M. Fec from the whole distinction of Thomas and yet ye say the distinction may be true ye will not stick with him for that distinction So that eyther ye
that he exercised ordinary gouernment ouer priests and all ecclesiastical persons and causes as other Princes did after him â–ª is not to be broughte for example for our christian princes to follow This is the plaine full effect of your tale And what an ilfauorde argument is this I pray you but to hide this sequele after your fashion ye would inserre another yet more darke conclusion saying It must needes therfore follow that Moses was a priest that a high priest which ye heere full peenishly denie Doth this conclusion M. Stap. if it were admitted improue the Byshops assertion and yet this your conclusion standing on thrée partes as it is not to the purpose so is euery parte starke false and like the maker thereof For Moses by his prerogatiue hauing especiall coÌ„maundement of God therto might well do all those things and yet it followeth not of any necessitie that as you say he must néedes therfore haue bene a priest Or if he had bene a priest he must néedes therefore be a high priest or if he had bene a high priest that he must néedes be the highest priest Neither did the byshop denie peeuishly that he denied as you full peeuishly rashely and like your selfe do iudge nor yet denied or graunted or spoke vpon one way or other whether Moses were priest or a high priest yea or no. But denied and that truely that Moses was not the highest or chiefe priest Which words ye durst not alleage nor yet generally terme him the high priest but ye say a priest and that a high priest your selfe séeming euen by your spéeche to graunt that the high priest or highest priest he was not Nor ye can not cauill about your owne phrase vnlesse ye will say it is all one a Lorde and the Lorde a high priest and the high priest so say ye ment the chiefe priest when ye sayd a high priest for all the worlde séeth a great difference betwéene these termes and that your self did subtilly sée to make the reader beléeue ye had performed your promise in prouing him to be the chiefe priest And yet ye bring no profe but onely say a priest and that a high priest â—…go the highest priest So that if the reader more narroâ—…ly viewing your grosse sleight shoulde chalenge ye that you haue not proued him the highest priest simply no will ye say to saue your honestie I onely sayde a priest and a high Priest and no more But why do ye then belie the byshop saying he denied that that he medled not with and proue not your matter in hande nor kéepe touch with your reader in perfourming your promise that Moses was the chiefe Priest Haue ye learned so wel this subtill shift that Omne promissum est aut debitum aut dubium Euery promise is eyther due or doubtfull But howsoeuer ye will discharge your promise this your doutfull conclusion neither dischargeth your falshood nor impugneth the Bishoppes assertion muche lesse ouerturnes it that he was not the chiefe priest but the chiefe Prince or gouernoure and thereby did order and direct Gods true religion bothe to all the Priestes and people as the Bishop affirmed Nowe seeing he can by no meanes neyther olde stuffe nor newe stuffe bring it about as he wold haue it nor proue him to be the highest Priest he will leaue his promise and lyke to the Fore that would eate no Grapes when he could not come by them with all the leapes he coulde make so M. Sta. will nowe euen renounce his solemne marginall crake that he promised to proue Moyses the chiefe prieste and leaping at it but euer leaping shorte that he was a Priest and a little higher that he was a highe Priest but he can not leape so high to obtaine his purpose that he was the highest Priest he will now let him goe for béeing any Priest at all and since he can not get the grape he wil none of it but will hunt after an other praie I say now further with master Dorman sayth he that put the case Moses were no priest yet this exaÌ„ple frameth not so smoothly and closely to your purpose as ye weene for Moses was a prophet and that such a prophetas the like was not againe Giue me now M. Horne Princes prophetes giue mee Pâ—…nces and lawmakers by especiall order and appointement ordeined of God to whose wordes God certainly wold haue giuen as great authoritie as he would and commaunded to be giuen to Moses and then perchaunce I will saye that ye saye somewhat well to the purpose Againe Moyses was suche a speciall Prophete and so singularly chosen of God to bee hearde and obeyed in all thinges that he is in the holy Scripture euidently compared to Christe himselfe compared I saye in the office of teachyng and instructing Moyses in the Deuteronom foretelling the Iewes of a Messias to come sayeth The Lorde thy God will rayse thee vp a Prophete from among thyne owne nation and of thy brethren suche an one as my selfe him thou shalt heare And this so spoken of Moyses in the olde Lawe is in the nevve Testament auouched and repeated firste by S. Peter the chiefe apostle and nexte by Saint Stephan the firste martyr and applyed to Chryste If then Christe must be so heard and obeyed of vs as was Moyses of the Ievves no doubte as Christe is a king a Prince a Prophete a Prieste and a Bishoppe to vs so vvas Moyses to them a Prince a Prophete a Priest and a Bishoppe As Christe is of vs to bee hearde and obeyed as well in all matters Ecclesiasticall as temporall for no temporall lawe can haue force agaynste the lawe of Christe among Christian men so vvas Moyses to be hearde and obeyed of the Ievves in matters and causes as vvell temporall as spirituall For vvhy the Scripture is playne Tanquam meipsum audietis You shall heare that Prophete euen as my selfe Shevve vs Master Horne any prince in the nevve Testamente so conditioned and endevved and then make your argumente on Gods name Verely any prince that novve is namely in Ecclesiasticall gouernement compared vvyth Moyses is as the Poete sayth Impar congressus Achilli Troilus Yea forsoothe novve yee saye somethyng further Maister Stapleton as ye boaste howbeâ—…it nothyng further in substaunce than youre fellowes before but in flourish of Copia verborum yee saye novve further in déede And I maye saye to you it was high tyme to saye something furtherâ—… for hytherto all that ye haue sayde is nothyng Well saye you nowe Put the case Moyses were no Prieste I conclude then he was not hyghe Prieste and so putting this case yée put youre selfe in an yll case that before ye made a false lying crake and nowe with shame are fayne to giue it ouer But if ye put the case as ye say like Master Dorman then dare ye not abide by this case neither lyke Wylliam Sommer for so playde Master Dorman in putting this case
and so I feare in the ende ye must be fayne to do Nay say you it frameth not so smoothely and closely to youre purpose as ye vvene Well Master Stapleton it hath hitherto so framed that ye are fayne to gyue ouer youre tackelyng and forsake the perfourmaunce of youre promyse and to séeke oute other shiftes of descante so that althoughe ye woulde beare vs in hande it frameth not so smoothelie and closelie for the Bishoppe as hée thinkes yet you graunt thereby that it frameth to his purpose But as for your purpose for all youre olde or newe stuffe it neyther frameth wyde nor close smoothe nor roughe but bringes it out of frame For what an argument call ye this Though Moyses was no prieste yet Moyses was a prophete so well as a Prince Ergo Princes in that respect Moyses was a Prince may not followe his princely steppes Was not Saule also for the while a Prophet Num Saul inter prophetas Was not Debora a Prophetesse and yet a Princesse too or Iudge ouer Israel Was not Dauid a Prophete and is commonly called Regius propheta the Kingly Prophete Neuerthelesse all Christian Princes maye and oughte to folowe his princely supreme gouernement And yet you cry Giue me now M. Horne princes prophetes giue me princes and lawemakers by especiall order and appoyntmente ordeined of GOD. Doe ye not sée howe fondly ye reason and howe ye confute your selfe â–ª Yée reason as thoughe there were no difference to be putte betwéene those especiall giftes and appointmentes and the ordinarie gifte of their Princely authoritie bycause one Prince had bothe and that after an extraordinarie and especiall sorte but if those commaundementes lawes and giftes of prophecies were suche specialties as you saye ordeined of God then do your self seuer them from the prince ly authoritie And why do ye then demaund suche prerogatiues in euery Prince whiche they had not in respâ—… â–ª they were Princes but in other especiall respects But by this your fonde rule if bycause they had suche especiall priuileges commaundementes or giftes therfore they are not to be broughte in for an example of the authoritie then you must not alleage them for the Priestes or bishops authoritie in Ecclesiast causes neyther except your Priests Bishops haue the lyke prerogatiues and that God wold haue as great authoritie giuen to them as he would and commanded to be giuen to Moyses And thus your argument maketh directly againste your selfe Yea you may hereby exclude al Princes from al ciuil gouernement too whiche if we proued they might haue bicause Moyses ordered and directed all the Iudiciall lawes of Gods people may ye not replie on this fashion and say Giue me Princes and lawmakers by special order appointment ordeined of God For you knowe wée can giue you none in these lawes neyther that are equall to Moyses May not therfore Moyses ensample herein be alleaged for the Princes authoritie in makyng ciuill lawes bicause the Prince maketh them not with suche speciall order and appointment ordeined of God as Moses did Yes M. Stap. Moyses authoritie may well be alleaged for al Princes authoritie although they haue not the like gifts that Moyses Iosue or Dauid had Yea those singular ornamentes of God in them ioyned to their princely authoritie make so 〈◊〉 an argument to feare Princes from doing the like things bicause they haue not the like excellent giftes that they be rather encouragementes to set such singular Princes gouernement as patternes to folow euermore before their eyes and the better those Princes were the better theyr ensamples be Where as you reason contrarywise such a Prince was more excelleÌ„t than princes be now Ergo our Princes now may not take example of him but ye shoulde conclude that they oughte to take example of him the rather And euen for these causes such Princes are examples to all other bicause they so excell all other So men set their children in writing to the best and most cunning penman at the least to haue them come the nearer to him so muche as they can though they caÌ„not fully attain to his perfectioÌ„ not to say tushe he writes too fine for them and therfore they must not take ensamples of him Yea if a learned Schoolemaister were also an excellent diuine myght not the same man be reckoned for a schoolemaister yea rather for a paterne and ensample for other schoolemaisters to follow bicause of his singular gift to traine the children vp in the feare knowledge of God so well as in the rudimentes of Grammer And will ye then debarre Moyses from being an example to other Princes bicause he was not only a Prince but a Prophete also bicause he had more excellente giftes and prerogatiues than other Princes haue But here thynking thereby the more to abase and dashe Christian Princes oute of countenaunce from taking example of this excellente Prince Moyses ye mounte so highe into the prayse of him that lyke to the Fryer which in the prayse of saincte Frauncis extolling him aboue all the Sainctes aboue Seraphin and Cherubyn yea aboue Christe coulde fynde no place in Heauen to sette him in so where in the prayse of Moyses ye shoulde referre him vnto Christe ye ouershoote your selfe and referre Christe vnto him making Christe to be terminum à quo and Moses terminum ad quem â–ª Moyses sayeth saye you The Lorde thy God will rayse thee vp a prophete from among thyne owne nation and of thy brethren suche a one as my selfe him shalte thou heare Ergo Châ—…ist is so to be hearde of vs as Moyses was of the â—…wes Hereuppon preposterously ye inuerte the reason backewarde not from Moyses to Christe of whome Moyses knowledged hym selfe but a fygure but from Christe agayne to Moyses as though Christe also were a fygure of him saying As Christe is a kyng a Prophet a Prieste and a Bishoppe to vs so was Moyses to them a Prince â–ª a Prophete a Priest and a Bishop As Christe is of vs to be hearde and obeyed â—…s vvell in all matters Ecclesiasticall as temporall so was Moyses to be hearde and obeyed of the Iewes in matters and causes as well temporall as spirituall What a manifest writhing of Scripture is this Who playeth Cacus parte here that drewe Hercules â—…en by the tayles backwarde and so stole them into his theeuishâ—… denne Doe not you so hale this testimonie of Scripture backwarde lyke the witche that sayde hir Pater noster backewarde to make hir payle goe forewarde saying As Christe is King Prophete Prieste and Bishop so was Moyses As Christe is to be hearde and obeyed so was Moyses Where by the testimonie alleaged ye shold rather haue reasoned forwarde thus As Moyses was Prince Prophet priest bishop to theÌ„ so should Christ be to vs As Moyses was hearde and obeyed of them so shoulde Christe be of vs This had bene the right and orderly reason but you sawe that then youre wresting the Text woulde
the marke many tymes than from it But séeing ye deale so vneuenly with the Bishops other shottes for all your bellowing short shorte it hittes not the Butte it commes not home ye giue all standers by suspition of falâ—…e ayme in this shotte and therefore let vs measure it once againe The deposing of Abiathar saye you doth not employ that Salomon was chiefe ruler in all ecclesiasticall causes I pray you who was then chiefe ruler in all ecclesiasticall causes Abiather say you And wherefore he bicause he was the highest Priest or Byshoppe therefore the chiefe rule of them was in him Doth it not then followe if he depose him in whome is all the rule that all this rule is yet restrayned vnder hys higher rule that deposeth him For the more manâ—…fest ensample of our time If I aske in whom the chiefe rule of all ecclesiastical causes is now in the Pope say you wherfore say I bâ—…cause say you he is the hiest Priest or Bishop and therefore he hath the â—…yest rule of all ecclesiasticall causes Well say I if the Emperouâ—… nowe woulde go aboute to cite the Pope to iudge him and tell him he is the childe of death for not acknowledging his olde obedience to him and so deposing hym bydde him departe and meddle no more with that Byshoprike the Emperour can not doe this say you for then the Pope in all ecclesiasticall causes shoulde be the Emperours inferiour if the Emperour might depose 〈◊〉 bicause when he is deposed by the Emperour from all his chiefe rule all his chiefe rule is translated from him and so were hée vnder the Emperour and all his chiefe rule at the Emperours disposition to giue to another But thys saye you were suche a fowle inconuenience as the lyke can not bée And therefore the Emperour can not depose the Pope but the Pope the Emperour This is your common reasoning Wherein doe ye not sée howe the graunting of the deposition of the chiefe Priest inferreth a hyer rule and authoritie in the deposer ouer the deposed in euerie prerogatiue that the partie deposed had before he was deposed But then will ye say the Prince that deposed the highest Priest may not he doe all those matters that the priest might haue done if hée bée the chiefe ruler of them It is one thing master Stapleton to be the chiefe ruler in and ouer all those ecclesiasticall causes that the partie deposed myghte haue done and to bée the chiefe doer or executioner of them For example the Prince maketh an Admirall or chiefe ruler ouer hys Seas a President or Deputie ouer hys Marches a chiefe Iustice or Chauncellour ouer hys lawes c. These Officers agayne the king deposeth the deposition of them is an argument that in all those thinges the King is the chiefe ruler And although the King can not doe anye of those thinges that belong to their Offices yet is that no impayring of hys chiefe rule ouer them and all thinges in theyr offices And therefore hée transferreth the doing to them that better can or wyll doe those offices And so likewyse in the chiefe office of priesthood admitting there were such an one now in all ecclesiasticall causes though the prince can not do all those ecclesiasticall actioÌ„s nor any one of them yet grant the prince that he may depose that chiefe priest to whome the doing of them appertaineth ye graunt with all that he is the chiefe ruler of all those ecclesiasticall things so farre forth as the rule of ouersight gouernance and directing stretcheth vnto which is aboue the ministeriall executing Nowe as youre selfe haue confessed the prince is the causer and the prieste the executor and doer which likewise his name importeth and therefore is called minister whiche name though the prince haue also yet he hath it as your selfe haue likewise confessed in a higher respecte bicause he is Gods especiall minister to ouersée directe dispose and depose all other ministers And thus graunting the ensample euen but of this one facte of Salomon for our princes to followe to depose in their realmes any one whatsoeuer highest or lowest priest it not only hitteth home the butte yea and the pricke to set vp by master FeckeÌ„ham but this one facte of Salomon and the like of christian princes now employeth a chiefe rule of ouer sight and direction though not of executing in al ecclesiasticall causes besides whatsoeuer appertayneth to the parties office that may be so deposed as Abiathar was by Salomon The vntruth that ye note in the end of this ensample is orderly aunswered in your beadrolle The. 15. Diuision TThe Bishop in this diuision alleadging the example of king Iosaphat chiefly of two visitatioÌ„s set forth by him 2. Paral. 17. and. 19. how he reformed religion through out all his dominions appointed preachers and setters foorth of Gods lawe and Iudges in all causes aswell ecclesiasticall as temporal coÌ„cludeth his supreme gouernment herevpon To this Master Stap. counterblasâ—…eth As M. Doctour Harding and M. Dorman haue written so say I that yee are they which frequent priuate hilles aulters and darke groues that the scripture speaketh of VVherein you haue set vp your Idols that is your abhominable heresies In that ye say master Stapleton As they say so say I ye shewe howe well ye haue learned your lessons thus one of another to say what soeuer your master sayd before you and take your bare so saying for proufe good inough But as ye fondly flatter your selues with your owne sayings so more fondly ye obtrude them as principles to your aduersaries that will by and by bid ye either proue them or else will they still estéeme them as they are for mere lying sayings of a knot of thrée false confederates the master his two schollers to outface delude the manifest truth withal And if these your masters sayings and yours hap to become wordes of course then beware you on whose side they are lykest to light that haue mainteyned so open Idolatrie and diuerse false worships of God that he did neuer institute After this master Stapleton drawing néerer to the matter admitâ—…eth this example of King Iosaphat VVee also confesse sayeth he that there is nothing written in the holye Scripture of Iosaphat touching his care and diligence about the directing of ecclesiasticall matters but that godly Princes may at this day do the same doing it in such sort as Iosaphat did Holde ye here master Stapleton and we aske no more of you Ye haue here frankly confessed two things First the care and diligence that Iosaphat had aboute the directing ecclesiasticall matters Which care and diligence was the Bishoppes first proposition nowe twise alreadie graunted by you what followed thereon ye haue heard before alreadie Secondly that godly Princes may at this day doe the same doyng it in such sort as Iosaphat did Herevpon I conclude this argument As Iosaphat did in directing ecclesiasticall matters so doth the Queenes maiestie
farre forth as pertaineth to the ten commaÌ„dements of the tables If it be of the commaundement so farre forth as pertaineth to the other moral points if it be of the precepts of the ten commandements as it were certaine conclusions piked out if it be of the ceremonies so farre forth as pertayneth to ceremoniall matters of iustifications that is to say of iudiciall matters whereby iustice is to be conserued among men Thus is there no parte ecclesiasticall or temporall exempted from the ouersight care directioÌ„ appointment of the king No not the iudgement that ye haue so often alleaged and craked vppon out of the Deut. 17. vnder the which as a generall rule for all examples to be ruled by ye would subdue the Prince vpon paine of death to obey the absolute determination of the priest Euen this same office and all other with all causes to them belonging so farre as stretcheth to the ouersight and supreme gouernment do belong to the Prince to appoint and ordeyne fitte parties to displace and remoue vnfitte parties to sée al these offices so well as any other temporall obserued kept and executed dutifully Which is not so much for the persons as for the persons offices And therefore Iosaphat not only appointed them by his authoritie or regiment as Lyra saith their offices but also he told theÌ„ how they should do their offices Nay say you to each your matter yet with an other shift He doth it not with threates of his highe displeasure or by force of his owne iniunctions but onely saith so then doing you shall not sinne or offende The which very manner of speache christian Emperours and Kinges haue eftâ—…ones vsed in the like case as we shall hereafter in the thirde booke by examples declare Euen in the examples that ye shall there declare M. St. ye shall finde both threates of high displeasures and the iniâ—…nctions also of many godly princes And therefore seing that ye coÌ„pare their doings alike why say you these doings of Iehosophat haue no threates nor iniunctions what call ye this did he not threate them trowe you when he saide Ne veniat tra super vos super fratres vestros Least wrath come vppon you and vppon your bretheren Whiche woordes ye ouerhipped He denouÌ„ced vnto them the wrath of God which declared his great zeale and care of Gods matters as the Bishop saide And thinke you that the high displeasure of God conteyned not this godly Princes high displeasure also do ye suppose that they drad not the Princes high displeasure in the breache of their dueties bicause he threateth them with Gods moste high displeasure Or thinke ye it was not so forcible as any iniuÌ„ctioÌ„ of his vnto them in that as your selfe say he charged them and as the text saithe Praecepit eis he commaunded them which is most plaine and euident to signifie that he enioygned them by his supreme gouernment ouer them And to shew that besides his charge his commaundement his threate of Gods most high displeasure they should incurre his high displeasure also if they or any other disobeyed Lyra saithe on his former visitation Hic oftenditur qualiter c. Here is declared after what sorte he instructed his people to wite by the Priestes and Leuites whom he sent to this purpose and with them certaine of his Princes to bring the people to obedience and to punish the rebelles if they should finde any And of this visitation also saith Lyra He appointed Zabadias to be ouer those workes that belong to the Kinges office that if any rebelles were found they should by him be chastized with due punishmeÌ„t Doth not this import the Kinges highe displeasure in the breach of these his appointments charge coÌ„maundment when he adioyned those that should punish the disobedient Now whereas the Bishop briefly noted all this how King Iosaphat appointed the Priestes to decide and iudge controuersies you snatch thereat and clappe downe thereon a marginall note Yea the Priestes iudged not the king say you ouerskipping that the King appointed them thereto which argueth his supreme gouernment And yet the King iudged also by his deputie not the Priest alone And so saith plaine the texte In Hierusalem quoque constituit c. And Iosaphat appointed also Leuites and Priestes and the Princes of the families of Israel Here M. St. he appointed as well the lay Princes as the Priests And wherto vt Iudicium causam domini iudicarent that they should iudge the iudgement and cause of the Lorde Sée how plaine this is against you but what is there not that ye will spare to wrest to make it sée me to serue your turne For eueÌ„ of the last sentence ye thinke in the ende ye haue gotten so notable a proufe for your matter that greatly ye vrge it and wonderfully triumph therevppon Thus saith say you King Iosaphat Amarias the priest and your Bishop shall haue the gouernment of such things as appertaine to god And Zabadias shal be ouer such workes as appertaine to the kinges office Lo say you the kings office and diuine matters are of distinct functions Lo say I how sone ye would coÌ„clude a lie Your text saith not the kings office and diuine matters are of distinct functions Nor maketh any opposition or distinction betwene the kings office and diuine matters as though it appertained not to the kings office to haue any thing to do with diuine matters Contrary to the which your own coÌ„fession euen in this kings doings witnesseth against you that he reformed religion and had a care and diligence about the directing ecclesiasticall matters And trow you he did this beyond the bouÌ„des of his office How can then his example as ye say fitte well christian princes if it be not a parcell belonging to their office the text is plaine that the king appointeth as wel the Bishop Amarias his gouernmeÌ„t as Zabadias his gouernmeÌ„t to the one to haue the gouernmeÌ„t of such things as appertaine to God to the other to be ouer such workes as appertaine to the king Here in these two such things on the one partie and such workes on the other partie is the distinction made and not betwene the kings office and diuine matters as you falsely conclude And yet I pray you what argument can ye gather herevppon The kings office diuine matters are of distinct functioÌ„s Ergo the King hath no supreme gouernment ouer all ecclesiasticall causes By the like reason he hath no supreme gouernment ouer temporall causes neither For the kingeâ—… office his temporall subiects matters are not they also distinct functione Ergo the king hath no supreme gouernmeÌ„t ouer his temporall subiects matters Againe ye reason thus Thus saith the king the priest shall gouerne in those things that belong to God. Ergo to ouersee the Priests gouerne them rightly appertayneth not to the kinges gouernment Where in deede you should rather reason the quite
contrarie Thus saith the king the priest and the Bishop shal haue the gouernment of such things as appertaine to God. Ergo the Prince that thus appointeth him thereto hath an other supreme gouernment of appointing and ouerseing euen the priests gouernment Doth not the King appoint the one to his office so well as he appointed the other are not both gouerned in their offices vnder him Yet say you ouer gods matters is the priest not as the kings commissioner but as the priests were after the example of Moses The Bishop refuseth not the example of Moses but alleaged euen the same and your selfe then refused that example saying he had such prerogatiues that he of all other could not be alleaged for exaÌ„ple bicause of his especial priuilege And now contrary to your former sayings you say the priests were not as the Kings coÌ„missioners but were alwaies after the example of Moses But go to be it so how doth this helpe your matter or not rather quite confute it In Moses time Aaron and after him Eleazar were the chiefe priestes ouer gods matters vnder whome were the other Priestes and Leuites But all of them yea Aaron and Eleazar so wel as the rest were vnder the supreme gouernement in ecclesiasticall causes so well as temporall of their Prince and ruler Moses Ergo If Moses be an example how the priestes should alwayes gouerne vnder Gods matters then muste their gouernment be alwayes vnder the princes supreme gouernment to ouersée order and direct them as Moses did And where ye say the Priest here was not the Princes commissioner in these matters the very text is most playn to the contrarie I stande not on the worde least I should minister to you occasion of wrangling with me as ye do with the byshop but goe to the matter What call ye him that the Prince sendeth foorth in a commission committing a charge vnto him call ye him not a commissioner and his commissioner that so sendeth him in commission did not Iosaphat so sende about his priestes and Leuites on this commission that they shoulde teache and set foorth euery where the worde of God Tertio annâ—… regni sui misit c. in the thirde yere of his raigne he sent out certayne of hys princes Benail and Obdias and Zacharias and Nathaniel and Micheas that they should teache in the cities of Iuda and with them the Leuites Semeiah Nethamah Zebediah and Asahel and Semiramoth and Ionathas and Adonias and Thobias and Tob Adoniah Leuites and with them Elizama and Ioram Priests And they taught the people in Iuda hauing with them the booke of the lawe of the Lord and they went about throughout all the cities of Iuda and taught the people Were they not héere sent in this commission thus to do froÌ„ the king Their doctrine was not the kings but Gods commission the Lords booke but this their maner of traueling in setting it foorth was the kings commission And they so wel the Priests and Leuites as the Princes were bothe of them the kings commissioners In lyke case the Quéenes maiesty sendeth out hir godly learned commissioners sendeth by them the worde of God Gods booke and truthe to be set foorth The truth thus set foorth hath not his authoritie from hir coÌ„mission nor the preachers to preach only by hir outward commission but they haue another inward coÌ„mission from God and are Gods commissioners by the calling ministerie of their office Howbeit in this outward maner of visitation setting it foorth in this sorte of traueling about hir highnesse townes and cities reforming abuses directing all eccl. causes they are therin euen aswell the Quéenes coÌ„missioners as those priests Leuites in al their reformatioÌ„ of religion were coÌ„missioners from king Iosaphat And thus euery thing in the ende is moste euident agaynst you But yet ye blunder still on in your owne conceite and thinke ye haue héere gotten a wonderfull strong argument And marke well M. Horne this poynt say you Zabadias is set ouer suche workes as belong to the kinges office But suche workes are no maner thing perteyning to the seruice of God for ouer them Amarias the Priest is President Ergo the kinges office consisteth not about thinges perteyning to God but is a distinct function concerning the common weale Ergo if the king intermeddle in Gods matters especially if he take vpon him the supreme gouernement thereof euen ouer the priests theÌ„ selues to whom the charge is committed he passeth the bouÌ„des of his office he breaketh the order appoynted by God and is become an open enemie to Gods holy ordinance Your crakes and reuilings that ye powder your argument with I remitte to their proper common places to the argument I aunswere If it be marked well as ye would haue it saying Marke well this poynte M. Horne First the marker shall finde it neither in any moode nor figure Secondly the marker shall finde an Equiuocation in these words workes kinges office pertayning to Gods seruice Which words béeing diuerfly vnderstoode in either proposition Thirdly make a paralogisme of foure termes Fourthly in these words ye make a Fallation a secundum quid ad simpliciter Lyra liuiteth theâ—…e words super ea operaerit quae ad regis officium pertinent He shall be ouer those workes that perteyne to the kings office onely to the ayding and strengthening the Priests and the Leuites by the temporall sworde to punishe the disobediente But is there no other works of the Kings office besides this Uatablus vnder standeth it that as the priest medled with the weightie causes at Ierusalem so also the Leuites shoulde be ouer the lesser causes Causae CiutuÌ„ cognoscebontur à Leuitis causaeauteÌ„ Regtae à Zabaudiâ—… The causes or controuersies perteyning to the citizens should be herd of the Leuites and the causes and controuersies perteyning to the King should be herd of Zabaudias Neither of these vnderstande these words so generally of al the doings belonging in any wise to the office of a king In lyke case for the priestes gouernment in suche thinges as belong to God Id est sayth Uatablus quod pertinet ad rem diuinam To wite so farre as perteyneth to the diuine seruice or the dyuine administration And you wrest it to be vnderstoode simply for all ecclesiasticall matters and all causes of religion Besides that Fifthly ye reason styll after youre wonted fashion from the distinction of the thynges and vvorkes of eithers perticuler functions to the taking away of the Princes supreme gouernement ouer those distincte workes and functions Howe dothe this argument followe The king appoyntes one ouer Gods workes and another distinct from him ouer his owne workes Ergo the king hath not a supreme gouernement ouer them both to ouersée theÌ„ to do those works Your conclusions therfore last of all are faultie neither directly following vpon your premisses and comprehending much more then they inferre This part of your conclusion that
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
nor there in his humaine nature as Christe himselfe hath testified Which as it dasheth this your case yée put so it confuteth an other chiefe errour of yours that affirme yée haue the humaine nature of Christe closed vp in a boxe and that yée eate him vp or kéepe him vp till he waxe mouldie and then you burne him vp Is this the best honor you can affoorde to Christe being conuersant heere in earth in his humaine nature If it be true that you say he is present how chance yée serue him thus is it bycause he appeareth not in his likenesse but looketh rather like a wafer if it were Christe indéede howsoeuer he loked can you finde in your hearts thus to order him But you will saye that is an other matter answere to this presupposal We speake nowe of Christ appearing in his owne likenesse How say you if he were conuersant in earth as he was shoulde hee not ouer Christian Kings haue superioritie in temporall causes so vvell as in ecclesiasticall that might promote his Churche I answere if this were admitted to be true that Christ againe were conuersant on the earth Christian Kings ought no doubt to giue him all superioritie and be vnder him in all ecclesiasticall and temporall causes that might promote his Churche acknowledging all the power they haue to procéede from him But that Christ if he were againe on the earth woulde raigne ouer Kings and in his humaine nature rule Kings in their secular causes or that he woulde thinke this a way to promote the Church or that he would depose Princes and make their subiectes reuolt from their obedience or that he woulde cease their kingdomes into his handes and make Kings to kisse his féete to leade his Horsse to holde his sturrops or that he would weare thrée Crownes and Princely roabes of gold frette with perle and stone or that he would kepe suche a princely porte and pompe as passed all other Princes which things your Pope pretending to be his Uicar in the absence of his humaine nature doth this would be harde for you to proue M. Saunders although your case were graunted that Christ personally in his humaine nature vvere conuersant in earth againe For if he would haue had any of these thinges he might haue had them when he was here on earth as your selfe confessed in the Chapter going before saying This in this kinde I vvill speake as the chiefest argument that Christe vvhile he vvas here in earth and fulfilled all the lavve and all righteousnesse notwithstanding he would gouern eccl. matters only as a Priest and by no means as an earthly king For he openly refused to administer an earthly kingdome therfore fled when he saw the people go about to do this thing that they might make him a king he denied that he was appointed a deuider betwene the brethreÌ„ Are not these your own wordes M. Sand I knowe you wrest them to an other purpose whiche there is answered vnto But howe serue they not here against your selfe â–ª trow you Christe is now become of an other mynde than he was when he was here on earth if he be still of the same mind then would he not take vpon him if he were here againe on earth the estate of an earthly King nor gouerne in secular causes But trowe you your Pope pretending to be his Uicar would suffer this seese the temporalties he possesseth the kingdomes he hath gotten the honor that is giuen him or any thing else that in eccl. secular causes vnder pretence of the Churches promotion he vsurpeth ouer all kings Christian no he would rather handle Christ worsse if he could lay hands vpon him then euer did the Iewes he wold not onely crucifie Christe againe but burne him cleane to ashes for an hereâ—…ike rather then he would lose this honor or any iote thereof But and if Christe were here againe conuersant on earth in his humaine nature woulde he suffer the Popes intollerable pride and errours would he allowe him to abuse his name as thoughe he were his deputie and Uicar generall I trow not Not that I thinke he séeth it not or suffers it not or hath not by his prouident iustice ordeined that Sathan should set vp such an Antichrist to delude strongly the Children of vnbeleefe and to exercise vnder the Crosse of Christ his litle elected flocke But that if Christe should so come as he here supposeth surely I woulde thinke the cause of his coÌ„ming to be euen to destroy spiritu oris eius with the breath of his mouth this man of sin not to mainteine him in his pompe muche lesse himselfe to take the like vpon him Not that Christe is not a king ouer the house of Iacob not that his kingdome is not eternal as the Angel said to Marie not that he should not subdue al earthly kingdoms to his spiritual kingdome but that his kingdome is spiritual not earthly the subduing of earthly kingdomes is with a sword that conquereth the soule of man that is the word of God with a force from aboue subduing the will of man that is the spirite grace of God and not such a subduing of their kingdomes that it dissolueth their polycies estates or deposeth their kings maketh the people take Armes and exerciseth â–ª in secular causes an earthly Kings authoritie M. Saunders pretendeth this is to promote the Churche of Christ but suche promotion confoundes deuotion and hath poysoned the Church of God as they say a voyce was heard what time Constantine although falsly is supposed to haue endowed the Church with such royall honor Hodie venenum intrauit in ecclesâ—…n This day entered poyson into the Church But Christ hath flatly forbidden it and tolde his Disciples when they asked such promotion that they knewe not what they asked But afterwarde they knewe and founde the saying of Christ to be true that their promotion lay in their affliction and not in their kingly honor And thus we sée the falsehood of the maior forged vpon this fained presupposall whiche is not to be graunted and yet if it were graunted it would fall out to the vtter ruine of the Pope all his Prelates Such ill lucke hath M. Sand stil to light on such examples as he coÌ„ceineth to make for him but being a litle better examined make most of al against him Now to the minor that Christ hath giuen to his Ministers in the visible ministerie all the povver necessarie to saluation that he should haue himselfe in his humaine nature Where find you this M. Sand I thinke it will be ouer hard a matter for you to proue that all the povver necessarie to saluatioÌ„ that he shoulde haue himselfe in his humaine nature in the visible ministerie he hath giueÌ„ it al to his ministers Al power saith Christe is giuen to me in heauen and in earth this is spoken in respecte
¶ The Supremacie of Christian Princes ouer all persons throughout their dominions in all causes so wel Ecclesiastical as temporall both against the Counterblast of Thomas Stapleton replying on the Reuerend father in Christe Robert Bishop of VVinchester and also Against Nicolas Sanders his Uisible Monarchie of the Romaine Church touching this controuersie of the Princes Supremacie Ansvvered by Iohn Bridges The Princes charge in his institution to ouersee the direction of Gods lawe DEVTER 17. After he shall be settled in the throne of his kingdom he shal write out for himself in a volume the copie of this Law taking the same of the Priests of the Leuitical tribe and he shal haue it with him reade it al the days of his life that he may learn to fear the Lord his God and keepe the wordes and ceremonies of him which are written in this law c. ¶ PRINTED AT LONDON by Henrie Bynneman for Humfrey Toye 1573. · HONI · SOIT · QVI · MAL · Y · PENSE · E. R ¶ To the moste high and moste excellent Princesse Elizabeth by the grace of God Queene of Englande France and Ireland defender of the Faith of Christ and in earth next vnder God of the Church of England and Ireland in all Ecclesiastical and temporall causes the supreme Head Gouernor ALbeit most Gracious Soueraigne I might be vvoorthily noted of presumption in dedicating these my trauailes to your Maiestie as vvel for the basenesse of my skill calling as for the vnreuerent demeanour of the aduersaries that here I ansvvere vnvvorthie vvhom your Highnesse should deigne to loke vpon yet bothe bicause the matter entreateth moste of a Princes estate and that vpon the chiefest point therof belonging in general to al Christian Princes but in especiall to your Maiestie against vvhom they chiefly direct their malice and in maintenaunce vvhereof your Maiestie direct your gouernement and herein haue giuen a mirror to al christian Princes to folovv and be partakers in their common vveales of the lyke blessings wherwith God hath beautified your Highnesse and established youre authoritie I thought it therfore not vnfit setting my self and them aside with all such by matters as incidently fal out in disputation betvvixt the Bishop and master Feckenham of me these my aduersaries â–ª to conâ—…ecrate this argumente of Supremacie to youre moste excellent Maiestie as to vvhom chiefly in your dominions next vnder Christ it dothe pertaine VVhich your Highnesse so nobly maintaines by practise of godlie gouernment hovve euer we by the vvord and argument do defend it There is no controuersie at this day betvvixt vs and the enimies of the gospel more impughed thaÌ„ this one of the Supremacie nor more bookes compiled more libels scattered more vaunts made of truth on their partie more sclaunders deuised of oure doctrine and your Maiesties Title more secrete conspiracies and open treasons against your Royal person and state of the Realme than our aduersaries make only for this Supremacie Shall Sathan then vse al this double diligence in promoting the pride tyrannie of his Antichrist the man of sinne the foreigne vsurper of all Christian kingdoms and shall the children of god be negligent in defence of the kingdom of Christ of the Lordes anoynted of the dutifull office and lavvfull authoritie of their naturall Soueraigne â–ª Other meanes I graunt may be had to suppresse their furious dealing And God bee blessed therefore that hath furnished your Maiestie vvith povver couÌ„sell authoritie lavv vvisedome learning vertue courage and al other Princely habilities â–ª suffiâ—…iet to maintein your Highnesse Title protect that portion of Christes Church vvhich he hath committed to your most Gracious gouernment in peace and truth prosperously 〈◊〉 your enemies VVherein as your Maiestie hath euer most zâ—…lously sought and set forth the glorie of god â—…e hath so glorified you again as he hath promised 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 glorificabo that your highnesse may say as king Dauid sayd â–ª he hath deliuered you out of your enimies hands and defeated all their purposes he hath established you a kingdom here on earth in peace and righteousnesse and hath prepared in heauen a Kingdom for you in glorie and eternitie Novv although this be so cleeâ—…e that euen the enimies themselues coÌ„fesse God vvorks vvith you God fights for you God hath takeÌ„ your hart into his handes that haue taken his quarel into yours yet sith the 〈◊〉 do mutteâ—… sclander your Highnesse to take suche kind of GouernmeÌ„t on you as vvere not coÌ„petent as the Pope had vvont to do your Highnes is furthest from if this your claime be not proued to be grouÌ„dedon Gods vvord if those enuious be not coÌ„â—…inced by euident argumeÌ„ts of the seripture al the foresaid prosperitie is couÌ„ted but earthly blessings and such as other vvorldly Princes haue All the due authoritie is 〈◊〉 but extorted violence neither is the mouth of the adoersarie stopped neyther is the mind of the subiect satisfied And therfore vvhen al is don â–ª there is no better meanâ—… to may 〈◊〉 this Title than euen by learning 〈◊〉 for to me it to the vttermost and to fight vvitâ—… the vveapon of Gods vvord for it vvhicheâ—…s sharpeâ—… to vvoâ—…nde the aduersaries heart and conscience than any tvvo edged svvord But some vvil say this is sufficiently done by otherâ—… learned labours vvhen both in the dayes of your Maiesties Father of most renoumed memorie euen the best learned of our aduersaries did not only confesse it but vvrote so effectually in defence therof that shamefully aftervvard reuolting their guiltie conscieÌ„cebore vvitnesse against themselues nor they coulde euer ansvvere their ovvne vvritings And also after that in the godlie gouernment of youre Highnesse blessed Brother many other more excellent fathers in vvriting did confirme it And novv lastly in this your Maiesties happie Reigne diuers famous and lerned men to the further confirming of the godlie and confounding the enimie therein haue vvritten vppon this argument Yet sith oure aduersaries haue neuer doone thervvith but sette on a freshe lyke to him that vvhen in vvrastling he was euer cast of pride and vainglorie vvoulde neuer acknovvledge that he had any fall I thought good to make euident to all your Maiesties subiects euen to the enimies themselues the places vvhere they shamefully fel and lie stil in their errour rather than to vvrastle vvith such vvarblers And yet if they start vp again to trie a further pluck vvith them and by the strength of Gods inuincible truth so to ouerthrovv them that as fast as they boast cauill and sclaunder the truth of our cause and the goodnesse of your Maiesties quarell shall shevve it selfe the cleerer although the simplier handled A number of other vvhom I knovve coulde haue done it farre better vvho may also at their discretions further trauaile in it And in deede vvhere the most of this vvas done a good vvhile sith it vvas layde aside thus long expecting if any other vvould attempte it
meanes was deliuered as also M. Crispine shuld haue ben but that death preuented him only M. Moreman stubbornly persisting in his errours remained still in the Tower. In this conference M. Feckenham promised to preache as the Bishop truly charged him Of which conference and promise there be yet many on lyue both worshipfull and honeste men to witnesse the same and proue you a lyer M. Stapleton so impudently to denie it You had nothing to say to the contrarie The. 32. vntruth more slaunderous as may wel appeare by this your booke It appéereth thereby right well in déede and shall further appéere that you also had not any greate thyng else to to saye to the contrarie neyther excepting these and suche lyke your brabbling common places For answere I say they ought to take vppon them such gouernment as doth the Quéens maiestie The. 23. vntruth employing a contradiction to youre former aunswere made to Mayster Feckenham as shall appeare The answere is here cited for an vntruthe but for triall it is referred to appeere in an other place on the other side of the leafe in the counterblast and there being cited also bicause nothing is proued but by M. Stapletons hearesay of an other contrarie answere the matter is there againe further deferred to be hearde an other daye when Maister Stapleton shall be occasioned to entreate more at large hereafter vpon the matter wher at the Calends of Gréece it shal be proued both an vntruth and to implie a contradiction The contradiction that he would enforce is betwéen a suborned answer forged to be made in the bishops name which he neuer made and this present answere which the B. maketh so that in déede there is no contradiction at al in his answere bicause the one of them is of their owne making not of his As for the vntruth of the Bishops answere standeth only on M. Stapletons bare saying that it is false and deceyuable And ye must wel weâ—…e that M. Stapl is of suche indifferencie and credence that he would not saye it on his worde if it were not so and therefore in any case ye must beléeue him or else ye marre his reckoning The. 34. 35. 36. 37. vntruths bicause they are the whole matter throughout the eight chapter wherwith he chargeth the Bishop in the answere to the chapter they are at â–ª large answered Besides a number of Master Stapletons vntruthes detected Moyses was not the chief priest or bishop The. 38. vntruth for Moyses was the chiefe Priest as shall be proued Howe this promise shall be proued or the Bishops saying improued to auoyde anticipations repetitons thou must resort to M. Stapletons proues and the answer thervnto The charge of chiefe gouernment ouer Gods people bothe in causes temporall and ecclesiasticall was committed to Iosue The 39. vntruth Iosue had not the supreme gouernement in Ecclesiasticall causes but Eleazarus had it Whether he had it that commaunded Eleazarus in ecclesiasticall matters or Eleazarus that obeyed his commaundement is easie to iudge And notwithstanding any thing that M. Stapleton bringeth beside his bare allegatioÌ„ Iosue had the supreme gouernement therin To Eleazar only belonged the administration of things belonging to the Priests office The. 40. vntruth For beside in all thinges to be doone of Iosue Eleazar should instruct him If this were beside the administration of things belonging to the Priestes office then to administer instruction in any thing vnto the Prince was not the Priests office For if it were belonging to his office why saye you it was beside being conteyned in it But sée your fonde reason the Bishop saith he had not the supreme gouernement but the administration of things belonging to his office yes say you he should instruct the Prince Ergo he had the supreme gouernment of him Neither had he say you that supreme gouernment as his office or belonging to him but besides and not belonging thervnto whyle the questioÌ„ is whether this supreme gouernement belong to the Priests office or to the â–ª Princes office but your self withal exclude it from the Priestes office And thus to nick vp on the score apace ye speak it séemeth ye can not wel tell what Dauid c. the supreme gouernour ouer all estates both of the laitie and of the clergie in all maneâ—… of causes The. 41. vntruth Dauid was not suprme gouernour in all maner causes but suffered the Leuites in Church matters to liue vnder the rule of their high Priest. As though these two might not bothe agrée verie wel togither except it were in such an vsurper as is your Pope As for the Quéenes Maiestie hir hyghnesse claymeth no suche Papaliâ—…ie but suffreth the inferiour ministers to liue vnder the rules of their superior Bishops yet hir supreme gouernment to ouersée that all of them obserue their rules in their vocations is no whit empaired Salomon deposed Abiathar The 42. vntruth for Salomon of his owne authoritie as your argument runneth deposed not Abiathar but executed only the sentence pronounced before by Samuel Gods minister Your selfe confesse the Bishops wordes M. Stapleton nor ye can for shame denie them the Scripture is plaine for them and therfore ye runne from them to the Bishops sense and say not his wordes but his meaning and argument is vntrue therein for he dyd it but not by his owne authoritie but executed Gods sentence as thoughe these were contradictorie to execute Gods sentence in doing it and to doo it by his owne authoritie when all authoritie of any Prince commeth likewyse from God and he is Gods minister and executer thereof and yet withall it is hys owne authoritie bicause the authoritie is giuen him of God thereto Althoughe herein chalenging the B. of one vntruthe ye vtter two vntruthe your self together on a clap First ye say he executed only the sentence pronounced before by Samuel Gods minister Where the texte that afterwarde ye cite fayth not so but to fulfill the wordes of the Lorde whiche he spake ouer the house of Hely in Silo which wordes of the Lorde we fynde out in thâ—… 2. and. 3. chapters of the first booke of the Kinges where the whole story is at large set out and deteâ—…s your falshoode The wordes that doe threaten Hely and his posteritie in the. 2. chapter were pronounced by a Prophet in déede but he is not named the text only sayth Venit auteÌ„ vir dei ad Hely ait ad eum haec dicit Dominus And there came a man of God to Hely and sayd vnto him thus sayth the Lorde c. This Prophet pronounced and was Gods minister therein among other things euen this deposition of Abiathar But this man of God was not Samuell who was at that time as yet but a childe The seconde time was in the next chapter by God him selfe that called Samuell thrée times and the
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
to forsake this religion In the first parte he sheweth that Master Fekenham could not answere the B. him selfe but he sheweth no other reason thereof than this seing his state is such Secondly that the cause why he more than any other of his complices tooke vpon him to answere this least it should appeare to come of his owne ambitious busiositie was only at the request of some of his friends he will not tell of whom for so perhaps be might detect him selfe to be a disciple of BalaaÌ„s marke hyred for lucre to curse with his cursed and blackmouthed Rhetorike the Churche and truth of god And bicause hereby be would haue the reader couertly to vnderstande what kinne a great clerke he is of what terrour to his enemies and estimation among his friendes to entreate him more than any of all the rest to atchieue this enterprise he telleth vs he was not very willing therto bicause forsooth he purposed hauing so largely prouoked suche sharpe aduersaries especially M. Ievvell for a season to rest and stande to his owne defence if any would charge him Wherein he would not haue ye forget what a lustie prouoker of sharpe aduersaries he is And although for two causes he was lothe to medle therewith first for that many things in this booke pertaine to certaine priuate doinges betwixt M. Feckenham and M. Horne of the vvhich saith he I had no skill secondly for that a number of such priuate matters touching the state of the realme occurred as to them vvithout farder aduice I could not throughly shape any ansvvere yet notwithstaÌ„ding all these thinges that neyther touched M. Stapleton nor he had any skill of them nor could shape any ansvvere to them he must néedes intrude and busie him self to shape some mishapen ansvvere his fingers itched since none of al his sharpe aduersaries would once deigne to answere him to prouoke the B. in these things and where his skill should faile rather than his will should faile he would furnish out his answere with his foresaide common places in which he hath a very good skill and grace As for the residue of his wantes aftervvarde it so hapned saith he that by suche as I haue good cause to credite there came to my knovvledge such instructions as vvell for the one as for the other that I vvas better vvilling to employ some paines and studie in this behalfe How these instructions hapned to him we must not vnderstande all for feare it fall out as they say that asking his felow if he be a theeâ—… two false companions néede no broker As it will I feare me fall out Master Stapleton in the scanning of your false informations whereof your selfe were vnskilfull ye saye but ye haue good cause to credite them were the more vvilling to employ your paines and studie therein and good reason ye should credite them that make any thing for you For why they be credible men of your owne partie be it true or false they tell you recke not you let them beare the blame if they lie you did but tell it for them Why should ye not therefore employ your paines and studie to painte it out that the more willingly since they do paie well for it Now M Stapleton being wel instructed though he promise to take the vvillinger paines and studie in this behalf yet must ye not presuppose that he taketh this vpoÌ„ him for that saith he I thinke my selfe better able than other but for that I vvould not it should seeme there lacked any good vvill in me either to satisfie the honest desire of my friendes or to helpe and releue such as by suche kinde of bookes are already pitifully inuegled and deceaued or to stay other yet standing that this booke be not at any time for lacke of good aduertisement a stumbling stocke vnto them What soeuer here M. Sta. ye pretende of your forward good will who so coÌ„ferreth here with your CoÌ„mon place of boastings crakes may easily returne your own saying on your selfe that these are but vvordes of course to saue your poore honestie least men should sée detest your ambitious vaine glory herein Neyther doth your preposterous zeale couer it any whit except this be to helpe relieue a stuÌ„bler where scarce a straw laye in his waye before to tumble a stocke into his path to make him fall downe right Now that M. St. hath shewed the occasions that pricked him forward to set on the B. He secondly sheweth the manner of his answere Wherein first after his ordinarie crakings of his poore labour of his diligence of his vvhole and full replie he excuseth his long tediouse babling vvherein I rather feare saith he I haue saide to much than to litle which in déede he hath good cause to feare as his Common places do shal declare And yet would he haue euery word put in replied vnto him selfe in his owne coÌ„science hauing sayd to much alreadie But to excuse this faulte he hath a sufficient reason at hande that tediousnes is good to make al perfect and therefore he had rather be tediouse than shorte Thus hauing handsomly excused the matter he secondly sheweth the order of the Bishops booke M. Hornes ansvvere as he calleth it resteth in tvvo partes Why M. St. how call you it may it not thinke you be called an answere that answereth the demaunde or request of an other but as you wrangle péeuishly about the name so that curiouse fine pate of yours disdeyneth the playnâ—… and simple name of an answere or replie or any other vsuall worde as ye pretende to auoyde confusion but in déede to shew some singuler conceite and excelleÌ„cie of your booke which so finely ye Entitle A counterblaste to say the truth a blast not worth a counter to counterblowe and all to blast the Bishops answers with all The two partes that he deuides the Bishops booke into are these In the first saith he and chiefest he playeth the opponent laying forth out of the holy Scriptures both Olde and Nevve out of Councels both generall and nationall out of Histories Chronicles of all couÌ„tries running his race froÌ„ Constantine the great dovvne to Maximilian great grandfather to the Emperour that novv liueth taking by the vvay the Kings of France of Spaigne and of our owne countrie of England since the conquest all that euer he coulde finde by his ovvne studie and helpe of his friendes partly for profe of the like gouernmeÌ„t of Princes in Ecclesiasticall causes as the oth attributeth novv to the crovvne of Englande partely for the disproofe of the Popes supremacie vvhich the othe also principally extendeth to exclude In the secoÌ„d and later parte he playeth the defendaÌ„t taking vpon him to ansvvere and to satisfie certaine of M. Feck â–ª argumeÌ„ts and scruples of coÌ„scieÌ„ce vvherby he is moued not to take the othe Hovv vvell he hath played both his partes â–ª the perusall of this
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
Legates of the sea of Rome as the chiefe principall sea of Christendome Ergo We now in all our disputations of causes Ecclestastical especially concerning the supremacie should acknowledge the Pope by his Legates to be president thereof This argument followeth not M. Stapl. reasoning from that tune to this from their requiring to our submission from Aphrike to England from presence to presidence from certaine questions to all questions from matters of saithe to these in hande which your selfe say are nons From the chiefe and principall sea then to the vniuersall supremacie that the Pope claymeth now in all which pointes there is no sequele and therefore your argument is starke naught nor all your vayne excuses will hide their frowarde disobedience or strengthen the weaknesse of their naughtie cause in the saide disputation But let vs now saith M. St. returne to M. Horne for these matters were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 M. Stapleton looked quite besides his marke The third Diuision THe third Diuision sheweth the cause and occasion why M. Feck deliuered this his treatise to the Bishop not as he pretendeth to be resolued at the Bishops handes for he had sayd before that the matter it selfe was grounded here pointyng to his brest that shall neuer go out But beyng charged of the B. herefore that he had neither conscience nor constancie M. Feckenham shewed and deliuered this his treatise to the B. to shew what he had suffred for the same and how it was grounded and setled in him long before Which argueth first his falshood in pretending to haue offred the booke before to the B. as scruples by him to be resolued in And also his furder falshood in setting forth of his owne bald resolutions to his scruples vnder the B. name To the former parte M. Stapleton replieth it is an vnlikely tale and referreth it to his score of vntruthes Where it is answered vnto The later parte for the resolutions he leaueth it to a place more apropriate where the matter shal be more conueniently and more fully discused And this is all that he saith for the cléering of M. Feckenhams false title The fourth Diuision MAster Feckenham in the beginning of his treatise propounding one chiefe purpose and entente as he saithe of this Othe to be for a more sauegarde to be had of the Queenes royall person and her highnesse most quiet and prosperous raigne Offreth to sweare thus muche that her Highnesse is the onely supreme gouernour of this Realme and of all other her Highnesse dominions and Countries according as the expresse woordes are in the beginning of the sayde Othe And offreth yet furder to sweare That her Highnesse hath vnder God the souerainetie and rule ouer all manner of persons borne within these her Highnes realmes of what estate either Ecclesiasticall or Temporall soeuer they be To this the B. of Winchester answereth that this beyng one chiefe entent of the Othe as is graunted whosoeuer denieth the chiefe parte of the Othe what soeuer in wordes he pretende in his deedes denieth withall the chiefe entent therof But M. Feckenham doth thus Ergo How soeuer by woordes he would seeme to tender her Maiesties safetie his deedes declare his meanyng to be cleane contrarie The Minor that M. Feck denieth the principall parte of the Othe he proueth thus The principallest parte of the Othe is the Q. Highnes supremacie in causes Ecclesiasticall so well as Temporall but about this M. Feck dalieth with dominions and persons denieth the causes which is the matter it selfe wherein the gouernance doth consist Ergo He denieth the chiefest parte of the Othe The Maior that the gouernance in Ecclesiasticall causes is the chiefest thing that the Othe doth purporte is euident The Minor as it appereth by this nice daliance of M. Feck so the B. furder proueth it by this his treatise by his deepe sighes grones desiring a change and ascribing to the Pope this principall parte of the Othe M. St. to counterblast these the B. arguments bloweth apace with bothe his chéekes With the one breathing out dispitefully all riffe raffâ—… that he coulde gleane togither to deface as he thought the protestantes with disobedience With the other he laboreth to qualifie the disobedience of the Papists namely of M. Feckenham But before these two partes wherein the most of his replie consisteth he prefixeth yet one page declaring first that this parcell of the Othe is no parte of the Princes royall power and wherefore the Papists refuse the same First saith he There haue bene many kings in this realme before our time that haue raigned vertuously quietly prosperously most honorably and most victoriously which neuer dreamed of this kinde of supremacie and yet men of such knowledge that they could soone espie wherein their authoritie was empayred and were of such courage and stoutnesse that they would not suffer at the Popes handes or at any other any thing done derogatorie to their Royall power This argument standeth vpon the opinioÌ„ of Princes heretofore and is framed thus What soeuer the noble and prosperous Kinges to fore tooke to be so or tooke not to be so the same was and is so or was not and is not so But many noble and prosperous Kings heretofore tooke this kinde of supremacie to be no parte of their royall power Ergo It was not nor is any parte thereof The Maior which God wote is very fonde and weake he would furnishe and strengthen with their wisedome and stoutnesse if it had bâ—…ne iniuriouâ—… to their authoritie they were so wise they could soone espie it were so stoute they would not suffer it But who seeth not that they could not very soone espie it in that palpable darknesse of poperie and that worldly politike wisedome is no good proofe of soone espying the spirituall wisdome of God and his worde and of their dutie in setting forth thereof This knowledge was not so clerely espied then as thanks be to God now it is being pulled froÌ„ vnder the bushell wherewith it was couered and the Angel of darknesse being stripped out of that shape of the Angell of light that when he was cladde withall be bleared many wise Princes eyes And though many of them were coragious stoute yea espied to what belonged vnto them attempted also to get it yet who seeth not that the Popes tirannie ouermatched them And yet suche Princes were there many wise stoute and vertuouse that dreamed not as you say but well saw this their authoritie and tooke it on them and withstood the Popes vsurpation Which improueth your Maior that ye would séeme to cary away so cléere And withall ouerturneth your argument by the like Some Princes thought it was no parte of their royall power Ergo it was not Some Princes thought it was parte of their royall power Ergo it was Neyther of these argumentes ye sée doth holde for still the matter is where it was who thought so or who
be moued from them And neuer so little a motion for M. Feckenham went not ouer farre I warrant you coulde not be made of mercy and consideration without great displeasure taken Ye haue well described the state of your Popes raigne M. Stap. so vnmercyfull an estate and inconsiderate that for description thereof ye doe best as dyd Timantes when he paynted the mourners at the sacrifice of Iphigenia setting out one wéeping another with this another with that heauie visage when he could not deuise a more dolâ—…rous couÌ„tenance he paynted Agamemnon hiding his face with a kerchiefe so you wheÌ„ ye can not sufficiently set foorth those dolefull tymes ye do wisely in that ye omit to expresse them and therein ye expresse them most of all And woulde ye haue lyke mercy and consideration sheshed nowe to the Papistes as the Papistes shewed then to the Protestantes Alas master Stap. if but halfe a quarter of suche extremitie were shewed nowe as was shewed then it woulde goe harder with master Feckenham and other his complices than it dothe No no M. Stap. their chambers their walkes their libertie their ease their fare is nothing like your doÌ„geoÌ„s your stockes your colehouses your famine your racks your gaggs your whipping there rostmeate at a stake that ye gaue the protestants I warrant ye M Fe. lookes not like a ghost nor like a poore scholler of Cambridge or Oxford perchaunce fares better than some studeÌ„ts of diuinitie in Louayne It is easy to discernâ—… M. St. what spirite either religion is of the protestants and the papists euen by this your own note of vnmercifulnesse and mercy and now saith M. St. let vs proceede on to the residue of your booke The fifth Diuision THe Bishop of Winchester after he hath shewed on M. Feckenhams wordes the entent of the Othe and the entent of M. Feckenh booke to be contrarie and therefore what soeuer he offreth in wordes he denieth the same in déedes and in the beginning for ensample dalieth with the Oth about dominions persons thinking therby he escapeth the principall ende of the Othe in this diuision sheweth first how doublie he dealeth in pretending as though the Bishop had forced him to sweare but there was no such Othe offred or required betwéene them â—…rgo A man might well marâ—…aile that he shamed not to pretende such a lie Secondly the Bishop sheweth how M. Feckenham is taken in his owne daliaâ—…ce The Bishops reason is this In that ye graunt to her Highnesse the onely supreme rule ouer the Laye and Ecclesiasticall persons you haue all ready proued withall the causes also euenby a supreme gouernors definition A supreme gouernour or ruler is one who hath to ouerseâ—… guide care prouide order and directe the thinges vnder his gouernment rule to that ende and in those actions which are appointed properly belong to the subiect or thing gouerned But the Queenes Highnesse is by your own coÌ„fession the only supreme gouernour ouer al manner persons Ecclesiasticall c. Ergo Hir highnes hath to ouersee guide care prouide order and direct to that ende and in those actions which are appointed do properly belong to persons Ecclesiasticall And thus concludeth that M. Feckenham grauÌ„ting thus much for fashion sake in generall speache is but a dissembler and in déede denieth the obedience of the person also or els he péeuishly standeth on the distinction of the cause which in full effect he hath graunted alreadie To the first parte M. Stapleton answereth Here is first a worshipfull reason and cause to meruaile at M. Feckenham that he should by writing presently offer him selfe to receyue an Othe bicause he neuer made mention of any suche othe before neither any suche was at any time of him required surely this is as great a cause to wonder as to see a goose go barefoote Ye plainly falsifie the Bishops woordes M. Stapl â–ª he said not that M. Feckenham neuer made mencion of any suche othe before but he saide that he neuer made any motion of such an offer to him So that this declareth both a double dealing of him also a wresting of you But this in eyther of you muste not be wondered at as a rare dealing that in lying and wresting ye be shamelesse bicause it is as common to you as to sée a goose go barefoote and as rare as to heare a barefoote Foxe preach to shod géese in Louaine Secondly to the Bishops argument he saithe But now will he play the worthy Logitian and M. Feckenham will he nill he shal be driuen by fine force of a Logicall definition to graunt the Queene to be supreme head in all causes Ecclesiasticall for that he graunteth hir to be supreme head of all persons both Ecclesiastical and Temporal Bicause saith he the supreme gouernour or ruler is he that ordereth and directeth all actioÌ„s belonging and appointed to the subiectes and thereby enferreth that the Queenes Maiestie is supreme and onely gouernour eueÌ„ in those actions that belong to Ecclesiasticall persons which are causes Ecclesiasticall But as good skill as this man hath in Logike which is correspondent to his diuinitie he hath brought vs forth a faultie and a vitiouse definition For a supreme gouernour is he that hath the chiefe gouernment of the thing gouerned not in those actions that may any way properly belong to the subiect or thing gouerned as M. Horne saithe but in those actions that belong to the ende whereunto the gouernour tendeth VVhich may well be although he haue not the chiefe gouernment in all the actions of the thing gouerned but in such actions as properly appertaine to him as a subiect to that gouernour Although M. Stapl. arguments hitherto haue shewed some tast of his owne great skill in Logike and what a worthie student of Diuinitie he is him selfe the want of which two he vpbraydeth to the Bishop after his prowde scornefull manner yet in this his couÌ„terblast to the Bishops only reason of a supreme gouernours definition he wil further shew what a passing subtile Logitian déepe Deuine he is But alas the mans ill lucke for while he clerkly laboreth striues to bring M. Feckâ—…ham out of the briers he not only wrappeth him the faster in them but so snarleth entangleth him selfe withall that as one all amased he speaketh he wottes not what And goyng about the Bushe wonderfully to worke when he hath all done he hath not onely left the matter where it was against M. Feckenham but hath made it more playne against him selfe also First he reprehendeth the Bishops definition of a gouernour as faultie but his guiltie conscience was so striken that he durst not or he well wist not how to report the definition as it laie but saith that the Bishop defined A supreme gouernour to be one that ordreth and directeth all actions belonging and appoynted to the subiecte Which the B. said not but M. St. who hath altered hacked and
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
for so your booke will growe to a welfauoured volume The outcrie is here for a contradiction But ye should first cléere your selfe of your own foule contradictions before committed and then obiect contradiction to the Bishop But let vs sée what a sore contradiction it is Princes can not do certaine Ecclesiasticall actions Princes are supreme gouernours in Ecclesiasticall causes Here M. St. ye labour to shew where the Bishop saith so but ye should labour to proue them coÌ„tradictionâ—… but that ye take for manifest being manifest false Neither néede there any colour to defende these sayings from contradiction for it was euen the last thing that your selfe defended in putting a difference betwene a principal gouernment of matters and that gouernment that is exercised in doyng the actions of those matters And thus easily your self reconcile this great contradiction and aâ—…were your owne argument that ye make of the Bishop sayings reasoning thus He confesseth that those actions do not belong to the persons of Princes Ergo he confesseth that Princes are not supreme gouernours to direct and ouersee them This argument your owne distinction answereth And therefore where ye lappe vp the matter saying Thus ye see M. Horne walketh like a bare footed man vpon thornes not knowing where to treade ye should remember your selfe M. Stap. that you haue walked all this while like your barefooted goose that ye spoke of before not knowing what last ye creaked The sixth Diuision MAster Feckenham offreth to sweare to obserue and performe that obedience to the Queenes hignesse now that he did before vnto Queene Mary The Bishop sheweth how therein he was forsworne as he had helped to spoyle Q. Mary of a principall parte of hir royall power so would he with no lesse disloyaltie spoile the Queenes Maiestie now M. Stapl. taking after his fashion Non concedenda pro concessis saith the othe is vnlawfull likeneth it to wicked King Herodes othe denieth this gouernment to be any part at all of the Queenes royall power and auoucheth that if the Bishop can once by any meanes proue this gouernment to be a principall parte or any parte at all of the Queenes royall power he dare vndertake that not only M. Fek. but many mo that now refuse shall most gladly take the saide othe he were surely no good subiect that would wish hir highnes any wroÌ„g To wishe wrong to any body is naught in déede M. St. worse to do it but worst of al to wish and do it against your liege and soneraigne What wrong ye wishe and do by all trecherous practises vnto the Q. Maiestie is apparant and therefore your owne iudgement be on your owne head Ye liken hir highnesse to wicked King Herode euen here present yet ye say ye wishe hir no wrong But what reasons should moue ye M. St. to thinke this open wroÌ„g no wrong Neyther can say you the maintenance of the Catholike faith wherof she beareth a title of a defender be counted any iniurie to hir highnesse neither is it to be thought but if there had bene any wrong or iniurie herein done to the Crowne some Christian Prince or other in the worlde haue ere this once in this 1000. yeres more espied it and reformed it to This later argument of former Princes is answered aâ—… large alreadie The other argument standeth on M. Stap. former presupposall that the Popes supreinacie is the Catholike faith His reason is this The maintenance of the Catholike faith is no iniurie to the Queenes Highnesse But our refusall of the othe is the maintenance of the Catholike faith Ergo our refusall of the othe is no iniurie to the Q. Highnes Here where M. St. should proue the Minor being manifest false he letteth that go presupposing it is most true and confirmeth the Maior which none denieth She beareth a Title of defender of the Catholike faith Ergo The maintenance of the Catholike faith is no iniurie to â—…ir highnesse Of this Title we spake also before onely now I note his argument that here couertly he séemeth to make thereon The Qu. highnesse Title calleth hir defender of the faith Ergo If she should also haue the Title of supreme gouernour in all causes Ecclesiasticall then were the former Title iniurie to hir highnesse But the former Title of defender of the faith can not be counted any iniurie to hir highnesse Ergo She can not haue the other Title also This bald reason standeth vpon a presupposal in M. St. head that this is a principall article of the Faith. The Pope is onely head of the Catholike church But graunt not M. St. this his faithlesse principle and he wil proue but a sielie Defender of this His simple reason The seuenth Diuision MAster Feck pretending that he was by the Bishop required prouoked to sweare refuseth that parte of the Othe that toucheth the Quéenes supremacie in the causes Ecclesiasticall vnlesse the Bishop shew him the meanes how he may sweare without periurie The Bishops answere stands on two points the one to detect his false dealing to pretende that the Bishop required the othe The other that this his refusall of the later parte of the Othe is but his nice daliance in woords hauing graunted alreadie the matter in effect The B. reasoneth thus Euery Ecclesiasticall person is called Ecclesiasticall onely in respect of ecclesiastical functions things and causes belonging to ecclesiasticall persons But ye haue graunted that the Queenes highnesse is supreme gouernour ouer al persons in hir realmes so well ecclesiasticall as temporall Ergo ye haue graunted that she is the supreme gouernour ouer them in those their ecclesiasticall functions things and causes also M. Stapletons counterblast is thréefold the first against the Bishops argument The seconde as he calleth it is an heape of vntruthes wherewith M. Feckenham is falsly charged The thirde his shamefull sclaunders that the plague was sent of God to punish the doings of the Parliament that bicause the Bishop required the Othe of D. Bonner he therfore sought his bloud That our Bishops were no Churche Bishops nor parliament Bishops neither But these too friuolous partes I omitte it sufficeth to haue quoted the slannders in their common place As for the vntruthes are answered in their proper bedroll I will answere onely now that which is materiall and that counterblasteth the argument Yet once againe saith M. St. M. Horne taketh in hande M. Feckenhams graunt which may well be graunted and by â–ª his great cunning and skilfulnesse will thereof inferre as before that may not be graunted But now he spitteth in his hande and taketh faster holde as he thinketh and seing the lightnesse of his former reason woulde nowe giue greater weight to it with a new fetche but yet as light and as weake as the other and employing manifest contradiction as before and to be answered as before For albeit a man is not called an Ecclesiasticall person but
in respect of some church cause and function which we freely graunt to M. Horne yet is he neuer a whit the nearer of his purpose vnlesse he can proue that there were also no other respect why he should be vnder the Prince but for causes Ecclesiasticall For as we haue saide he is a subiect also as other Laye men are and a member beside of the ciuill common wealth in consideration whereof the Prince hath to do with him and not properly as he is a spirituall man though both respects be concurrant in one person and he be named of the worthier As the Bishops argument is plaine and formall against M. Feckenham so here M. Stapleton stepping out to helpe him as it were clapping him on the backe recomforts him saying his graunt of the Minor That the Queenes highnesse is sâ—…preme gouernour of all persons in hir realmes so well Ecclesiasticall as temporall may be well graunted And he will also freely graunte to the Bishop the Maior A man is not called an Ecclesiasticall person but in respect of some church cause and function which is all one with the Bishops affirmatiue Euery ecclesiasticall person is called Ecclesiasticall onely in respect of Ecclesiasticall functions thinges or causes belonging to Ecclesiasticall persons what now can rightly follow hereof but the Bishops flatte conclusion that the Queenes highnesse is supreme gouernour of them in those their functions things and causes also Nay saith M. St. I will graunt him al this freely and yet is he neuer a whitte the neerer of his purpose vnlesse he can proue that there were also no other respect why he should be vnder his Prince but for causes ecclesiasticall for he is a subiect also as other lay men are Ha M. St. I sée you would faine slippe the coller deuising a new diuersitie of respects betwéene ecclesiasticall person and subiect when the question is and M. Feckenham hath confessed that he is a subiect euery way whether he be lay subiect or ecclesiasticall subiect â–ª Otherwise wheÌ„ M. Feckenham saide ouer all persons either ecclesiasticall or temporall of what estate so euer they be if he had ment as you say ouer ecclesiasticall persons in déede but not in that respect that they be ecclesiasticall but temporall and lay persons then had he plainly dalied in coloured speach foolish meaning as thus ouer al persons ecclesiasticall and temporall that is to say ouer all persons temporall and temporall â–ª if he meant ecclesiasticall persons not in that respect they be so called but in that respect they be temporall and lay as other subiectes be But this is your owne wilie deuice which in effect is nothing but wilie beguild him selfe M. Feckenham ment plaine therefore twice togither saith either ecclesiasticall on the one partie or temporall persons on the other partie and to make the matter plainer of what estate saith he that is to say of what condition kinde or degrée of subiects soeuer they be And did not your selfe say before and freely graunt it that an ecclesiasticall person hath not his name of ecclesiastical person for any other respect but for ecclesiasticall causes and functions why say you now contrary to your self he is named here ecclesiasticall person â–ª not in any respect of any ecclesiastical causes or functions but in respect he is a lay and temporal subiect how hangs this togither M. StapleteÌ„ will ye denie so soone that so late ye freely graunted then I perceyue as ye here say the Bishop doth I must be fayne also to spitte on my handes and take faster holde on yours and M. Feckenhams graunt M. Feckenham hath graunted and you also thus much that the Queenes Highnesse is supreme gouernour ouer all persons borne within hir realmes either ecclesiasticall or temporall of what estate soeuer they be That is to say they are all subiect to hir all persons gouerned or vnder hir supreme gouernment but the vsuall worde is subiect Subiect here is the Generall worde or Genus comprehending two members deuiding theÌ„ selues vnder it that is ecclesiasticall person and temporall person Either of these is comprehended a like in the generall woorde subiect for it is neither nearer the one nor the other nor may be more properly spoken of the one than of the other The temporall person is as much subiect and no more than the ecclesiasticall person the ecclesiasticall as much and no more than the temporall nor these two can be confounded togither nor the one taken for the other Membra diuidentia non confunduntur but as the one is temporall in respect onely of the temporall functions so the other as ye say well therein is ecclesiasticall only in respect of functions ecclesiasticall bothe are comprehended vnder their generall worde subiect thus doth M. Feckenham plainly set them foorth as it were in a table Now commeth our student M. St. seing all this so manifest plaine that him selfe is eueÌ„ forced to graunt it he hath studied out this shift first to iumble them altogither iugglerlike then deuides or rather breakes them making ecclesiasticall and subiect to be Membra diuidentia the one to ouerthwart the other which they do not but the one coÌ„prehendes the other And maketh this worde person to be general to them both which here is al one with subiect And thus when he hath plaied Cole vnder the candlestick chopping chauÌ„ging the words now saith he ye shall sée the Bishop is neuer the nearer of his purpose vnlesse he caÌ„ proue that there were also no other respect why he should be vnder the Prince but for causes Ecclesiasticall for as we haue said he is a subiect also As who should say in that respect he is a subiect he is not Ecclesiasticall in that respect he is ecclesiasticall he is no subiect bicause he supposeth these two are contrary respects ecclesiastical subiect But this he doth by presupposall that ye will graunt him al that he saith or els he would neuer so freely haue graunted the Bishop that which after made against him selfe For who seeth not that ecclesiasticall and subiect may well agrée togither which M. Feck saw well inough wheÌ„ he graunted as well the ecclesiasticall person as the temporall to be the princes subiect And againe who seeth not that this is but a fonde shifte of M. Stapl. to say that the Bishop is neuer the nerer of his purpose onlesse he can proue there were also no other respect why he would be vnder the prince but for causes ecclesiasticall For grauÌ„ting him againe there are other respects wherefore he is also vnder his prince What is M. St. the nerer of his purpose doth it follow bicause he is subiect also in other respects that therefore he is not subiect in this respect he should haue proued this but this he lettes alone and thinks all is safe if he be subiect in other respects But what other respects so euer there be him selfe hauing freely graunted â–ª that this
as to receyue it what soeuer hath not his authoritie out of the Scriptures And what so-euer wee finde not in the Scriptures we may vse them euen as we list our selues Why may we not say as S. Augustine saide Quia Canonicum non â—…st non me astringit Bicause it is not the Canonicall Scripture it bindeth me not to beleue or receyue it but of this matter furder as ye giue furder occasion Thirdly your argument of proportion from a Parliament to London fayleth standing on your olde and vayue presupposals that we haue graunted or must graunt you that your Popish Church is the true Churche That Christian realmes haue the same respect to your Popish church that a Citie in any Realme hath to the whole estate of the same Realme and againe that your Popes violent Councels are as frée lawfull and generall and enact onely as Godly decrées and constitutions to the directing of the true Churche as the Parliaments of a realme be frée lawfull and generall and enact godly lawes and constitutions for their policies and estates All these things beyng nothing proportionable we must graunt you to be true and fitte or else this your argument and your former crake neyther barell better herring may go togither a Gods name The rest of your counter blast to this diuision as it is nothing materiall so it is eyther altogither wordes of course or else a petit quarell that ye lappe vp all the matter withall bicause the Bishop called this sentence a sentence of the Holy Ghost In maleâ—…lam animam non 〈◊〉 sapientia VVisedome shall not enter into a frowarde soule which bicause it is mere impertiuent and friuolous I haue reiected it to your common places Discorde on our doctrine can ye gather none thereon but you would faine sowe discorde where none is and yet ye boast of vnitie But if ye remembered setting all other discordes aside how well as is afore sayd your Sorbonists and your Louanists and you Thomas Stapleton agrée euen with your owne swéete S. Thomas of Aquine and how your tale agreeth with it selfe how it excuseth and accuseth M. Feckenham ye should then sée who they be that as ye say in place of vniforme tuning ruffle vs vp a blacke Sanctus who they be that chaunging their shapes like Proteus haue so often altred their religion and whether they touch M. Feckenham and you or any of your chiefe Masters yea or no. The ninth Diuision THe Bishop hauing by Thomas his distinction of ignorance answered M. Feckenhams argument descendeth to cope with M. Feckenham in his issue and to proue the same by all the sayd meanes that he requireth And first to the issue whiche was That any Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may claime or take vpoÌ„ them any suche gouernment in spirituall or Ecclesiasticall causes The Bishop answereth that they ought to take such gouernment Ergo they may lawfully do it For his antecedeÌ„t that they ought he referreth to the foure meanes of the issue that M. Feckenham would haue it tried by M. Stapl. picking by quarels of other pretended answers made by the Bishop before falsely surmising that he then denied or mollified the woordes of the othe and that now he answereth without any molliâ—…iyng or restiaint that the Queene ought to take vpon hir such kinde of regiment these answeres he calleth so â—…arring variable diuerse and so contrary the one to the other that if the one be true the other must be false and so concludes they be false and deceiueable both of them But M. St. this is a false and a deceiuable point of your owne deuising from the which I perceyue by the tenour of your whole counterblast ye will neuer iarre nor varie one iote except God sende you hereafter better grace and iudgement than thus still to ground your self and your writings on manifest lies and forgeries and then presuppose them in your nodâ—…le for manifest principles and truthes Thus do ye all your booke ouer so ye play here First ye ground your selfe on a forged answere that the Bishop should before haue made imagining it must néedes be true bicause you say ye certainly vnderstande that M. Feckenham hath so reported to some of his friendes that the Bishop made then another resolute answere This is all that ye all age for proofe of it ye haue it but by heare say at the hande of some partiall tale bearer some tolde you that M. Feckenham told some that the Bishop tolde him that this was his resolute answere and you beleue it for a certentie and write it solemnly in your booke to deface the Bishop as it were with doubble and contrary answering your selfe in the meane season answering nothing to the argument nor to the Bishops present and printed answere And therfore I neede returne no other answere to you than that one tolde me that another told him that he told you that ye were to light of credence to beleue euery flimme flamme tale and to rash of Iudgement to clap downe such tales in your booke of whiche ye had no better proufe than that all the worlde should see claw me claw thee two false marchants néede no broker they say The tenth Diuision THe Bishop entring into his proufes of the issue that Princes ought to take vpoÌ„ them such gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes as the Queenes Maiestie doth chalenge and take vppon hit among other properties belonging to the Princely office to beginne with all auoucheth out of Deut. the 17. and the 13. with some expositoures vpon the same that the Prince is commaunded to haue by him the booke of the lawe to reade in it diligently to this ende that he himselfe may learne the feare of God and cause his subiects to become Israelites by his princely authoritie redressing the peruersnesse of such aâ—… swerue from the ordinances and ceremonies appointed of god The which beyng true the conclusion consequently followeth thereuppon M. St. answere to this argument resteth on foure faults that he findeth with the Antecedent which he calleth vntruthes so reckoneth them vp also in his score but bicause they are the principall materiall pointes whereon his answere dependes I thought it more fitte to note them here But first after his scoffing craking maner he saith to the Bishop Go on I saie in Gods name M. Horne and prosecute your plea stoutly God sende you good speede And so he doth eueÌ„ such as ye the honestie of your cause deserue c. But all these his fromps and vaunts I ouerpasse and referre them to his common places and will onely answere to that which he chargeth the Bishop withall which is no lesse than infidelitie and vnskilfulnesse And to beginne with the later bicause he saith it is the least matter and noteâ—…h it for the former vntruth Your vnskilfulnesse saith he whiche is the least matter standeth in that ye say the King is commaunded to haue by him
whiche commeth after also and yet your selfe so flatly belye the Scripture for malice to the byshop in saying suche wordes that the byshop lefte out do followe which neither followe at all and your selfe before confessed they went immediatly before Sée see howe enuie hath blinded this mans sighte Lesse maruell it is that ye sawe not the period for although those wordes whiche ye cite as lefte oute taking a copie of the Priest and the Leuiticall tribe â—…e wordes going before the bishops sentence and he shall haue by him c. yet is there a ful period betweene them which you saw not or would not sée so that those former words are no materiall part of the sentence following cited by the byshop but a material part of the senteÌ„ce going before which the byshop cited not But M. St. citeth falsly threapeth that the bishop did cite it and in citing it lefte out a materiall parte thereof charging the byshop in these wordes after suche order as your owne text appoynteth â–ª saying VVhen he is set vpon the seate of hys kingdome he shal write him out this second law in a booke taking a copie of the Priestes of the Leuiticall tribe VVhich latter wordes ye haue bicause they make directly agaynst you quite lefte out Why M. Stap. he left out bothe the latter middle first wordes and all of this sentence he mentioned it not at all ye doe but threapen kindnesse on him to fasten withall vpon him your chalenge of infidelitie Onely he alleaged the nexte sentence and that expounding it so fully that he leaueth oute neither former latter or any materiall poynte at all thereof .. And thus muche doth your selfe also witnesse agaynst your selfe saying that he lefte oâ—…t vvordes that immediatly goe before the vvordes vvhich he alleadged And what were those he shall haue by him c. This then was the texte that he alleaged by your owne confession And therfore when ye vrge him with the former texte that he alleaged not to proue infidelitie in him ye contrarie your selfe ye cleare him ye shewe your owne excéeding vnfaythfull dealing bothe to the scripture and to him also But wherefore should the Byshop haue left out as ye charge him any materiall parte of his texte bycause say you it maketh directly agaynst him In déede that were a shrewde cause and would iolily cloke M. St. infidelitie and cause men to suspect infidelitie in the bishop if he had concealed any thing in his text that directly made against him Which infidelitie who vseth and who approueth it for the poynt of a wise man to conceale that that maketh agaynst him shal after wel appeare But now although it be plainly proued that the byshop in his text left out no part therof Yet for further tryall of this also let vs take not onely the latter wordes of the next period going before which words he complayneth are lefte out but euery worde also of the same sentence concluding two or thrée periodes vnder one bicause we would haue nothing left out and ioyne them to the sentence following cited by the byshop and then behold what maner of conclusion either directly or indirectly they make agaynst him Wherin shall appeare that M. St. hath so besotted himselfe in diuinitie that he had quite forget the logike that so ofte he crakes vpon These textes are these VVhen he is set on the seate of his kingdome he shall write for him selfe out of this seconde law in a booke taking a copy of the Priests of the Leuiticall tribe And he shall haue it with him and he shall reade of it all the dayes of his life that he may learne to feare the Lorde his God and keepe all the wordes and ceremonies that are written in the lawe Upon these words M. St. frameth his argument The king shal write out this second law in a booke taking a copy of the Priestes of the Leuiticall tribe Ergo a king ought not to take vpon him suche gouernement in ecclesiasticall causes as the Quéenes maiestie doth chalenge and take vpon hir For this is the conclusion that directly maketh agaynst the bishop but as herein his logike is altogither vnskilfull so is his diuinitie yet more vnfaithfull For hauing chalenged the bishop for leauing out these words taking a copie of the priests of the Leuiticall trybe as directly against him and theÌ„ immediately foloweth sayth he how he shall busily reade the sayde booke and so foorth In which words he maketh another toto manifest lie falsifying the text yet once againe For these words Et habebit secâ—… he shal haue with him which word he leaueth quite out go betwéene therfore followe not as he sayth immediatly But sée héere whether it be of malice to the byshop or to the Scripture that all this while in quarelling with this little poore text habebit secum he shall haue with him he findeth fault with translating he accuseth the byshop of infidelitie and vnskilfulnesse he complaineth of leauing out wordes going immediatly before of curtalling the texte and leauing out latter wordes of leauing out a material part of words following immediatly he citeth and reciteth these and those wordes in Latin and Englishe he scanneth and descanteth on translations and all this while those onely three wordes habebit secum which the byshop alleaged wrinching and wresting he euer glaunceth by them he will not once name them but leaueth them quite out which was the materiall thing that the byshop alleaged And yet all the while he whineth of leauing oute and leaueth oute him selfe that he should chiefly answere What shall we thinke is the cause that he dothe thus surely there is some force in those wordes that he sawe were more directly against him or else he would neuer do so for very shame But I remember a tale that he hath patched vp into his counterblast of the Simoniacall Priest that béeing commaunded to say In nomine patris filij spiritus sanctâ—… could rehearse all well inough till he came to spiritus sancti as for that he could not pronounce it in any maner of wise But sée your chance M. Stap. that ye there fabled howe here your selfe haue playde the like part The byshop vrgeth you with thrée wordes habebit secum â–ª ye will not onely answere nothing thereto but ye will not in any wise whyle ye repeate the sentences so muche as name those wordes and yet ye goe rounde about them On the other side those wordes that the bishop cited not as no parte of his sentence alleaged Lorde what a doe ye make of curtalling of leauing out of infidelitie vnskilfulnesse peruersitie malice and I can not tell what Onely bicause ye thinke those wordes séeme to make for your massing Priests authoritie bicause they name Priests and yet God wot they make nothing for you nor agaynst the byshop directly or indirectly But you thinke this sentence maketh thus much for your priestes that if the
soone be espyed And that in swaruing from the hearing and obeying of the olde lawe of Moyses and the Gospell of Christe to all proportions of these peâ—…ons offices would be but an homely sequele to serue your â—…urpose and rather abase Christe than serue any thyng for Moyses to make him a Priest and a Bishop And where you make Chryste a fygure of Moyses to make Moyses also a Priest and a Bishoppe bycause Chryste is so the texte maketh a similitude from Moyses to Chryst onely in eyther béeing a Prophete and that the one Prophete and the other shoulde be heard and obeyed But you turne it topsie turuie and making Christes person represente Moyses person conclude thereon not onely Prophete but Priest and Bishop also which the texte citeth not nor any other mentioneth in the scripture that Moyses was priest and Bishop Nor the Priesthood of Christe was prefigured by Moyses priesthoode for that is a question whether Moyses were Priest at all or no but the Scripture expressely for Christes priesthoode testifyeth that Aarons Priesthoode in some respectes but chiefly Melchisâ—…decks were the onely fygures thereof and not any Priesthood of Moyses and therefore your selfe durste not flatly conclude before that hee was the chiefe Prieste but a highe Priest But dare ye saye the lyke of Christe he was a hyghe Priest but not the chiefe or hyghest Priest of all But when ye sawe a glimse that this inuersed argument could not proue Moyses to be a lyke Priest to Christ nor bishoppe at al nor that his béeing a Prophete tooke awaye the ensample of his Princely authoritie as ye did the residue so ye subtilly inuerte and folde vp the conclusion For where it shoulde haue falne out thus As Christe is of vs to hee hearde and obeyed as vvell in all matters Ecclesiasticall as temporall so vvas Moyses to bee hearde and obeyed of the Iewes in all matters and causes as well spirituall as temporall whiche were the playn conclusion yée come indreaming and saye in matters and causes as vvell temporall as spirituall as thoughe the â—…uestion were moued of temporall not of spirituall matters â–ª neither dare ye say all as ye did in the former part But if ye replie that ye ment all and so the proportion of your argument runneth and that I do ye wrong to charge ye with so lighte a matter since the indefinite is taken for the vniuersall maye not I replie agayne that ye doe the Bishop muche more treble wrong that so often call and make suche outcryes for thys syllable all when soeuer he concludes In matters so wel ecclesiastical as temporall Lo say you he leaueth out in all matters Ecclesiast and temporall Whiche althoughe it were no parte of his issue with M. Feckenham and yet he settes it downe oftener than ye woulde haue it though he be not in euery particular proofe bounde thereto yet sée howe thys hitteth your selfe that if ye leaue out this word All ye can make no good conclusion from Christe to Moyses at all Nowe when you haue thus Master Stapleton preferred Moyses before Christe ye crie out vnto the Bishoppe Shewe vs Master Horne any Prince in the newe Testamente so conditioned and endued and then make youre argument on Gods name Haue you made your argument on Gods name M. Stapleton or not rather in his name that exalteth himselfe aboue all that is called God when ye haue made the mayster serue as a fygure to the seruaunte to serue youre purpose But lette Moyses haue hys due estymation vnder Christe and hys especiall prefiguryng of Chryste also and all prerogatiues of dooyng any thyng for the tyme then by Gods especiall appoyntmente that Princes nowe can not doe Yet on Gods name maye anye man argue as the Bishoppe dyd that Moyses care and regarde béeyng the Prince of the Israelites in settyng foorthe and ryghtely orderyng Gods true religion then maye and is and oughte to be a paterne to all Christian Princes to care and regarde in setting foorth and rightely ordering Gods true religion nowe And what though in this coÌ„parison although in déed iâ—… be no comparison as you call it but an example any christian Prince that now is compared with Moyses be Impar congressus Achilli Troilus as vneuen a match as Troilus to contende with Achilles may not therefore a christian Prince followe Moses examples Why bring ye that Poets sentence M. St what Prince goeth about to coÌ„pare contend with Moyses and not rather submit them selues to his example heerein Ye slaunder christian Princes ye deface Christes glory ye belye Moyses ye skippe from Priest to Prophet from Prophet to Priest agayne to delude the bishops ensample and yet all this will not frame neither smoothly nor roughly to your purpose Whiche when ye perceiue leauing all these shifts of descant to infringe the authoritie of this first example that vrgeth you so sore that ye can not tell what to say vnto it but are driuen to the harde wall and that all store olde stuffe and new stuffe is cleane spent then as a desperate man ye quite denie all examples either of Moyses or of any that hereafter shall be alleaged and â—…ée for sanctuarie once agayne to the place of the Deuteronomie mentioned in the former diuision of the doubts arising betweene bloud and bloud plea and plea leprie and leprie to be determined by the priestes Iudge And héere clayming sanctuarie and remouing al examples And the lawier sayth say you legibus non exemplis iudicatur VVe muste iudge according to the precise rule of the lawe and not by examples extraordinary doings enforce no ordinary prescription or rule The ordinary rule of priests iudgements without whyes and what 's and suche other tryfling importune instances as ye are wont to make agaynst it by the lawe of Moyses and by your owne chapter before alleaged in doubtfull cases muste absolutely vpon payne of death be obeyed By this rule of the lawe you must measure all the examples following of kinges and princes vnder this laâ—…e Ye muste square your examples to the rule and not the rule to the examples vnlesse ye will make of the lawe of God Lesbiam regulam and bothe vnskilfully and vnorderly worke therwith And hereon as a ruled case ye set downe your marginall iudgement Men must iudge by lawe and not by examples If ye will not M. St. be iudged by examples wherefore do ye take vpon you to defende M. Feckenham and impugne the byshop For one of the foure meanes whereby he desireth to haue his issue proued and will be iudged by is practise which altogither ye wot standeth of examples and therfore the byshop proueth it by examples And if you will now flée from the authoritie of examples ye should at the beginning haue striken off one of those foure meanes to haue the issue proued by and not first to admit them and â—…id the byshop go on and say ye will yeelde also if he proue ought by
priests and Leuites in their offices and functions ecclesiasticall in appoynting howe the Arke shoulde be borne For sacrifising and blessing for ordeining Psalmes singers instruments officers and all other things for the setting foorthe of the diuine seruice and Gods true religion Whiche argueth that he was their supreme gouernour in all ecclesiasticall causes Master Stap. first for a briefe summarie answere to these doings of Dauid clappeth downe this marginal note Dauid in all these matters determined no doctrine nor altered any religion agaynst the Priestes willes of his owne supreme authoritie This note is bothe malicious and slaunderous as though we ascribed to the Quéenes Maiestie or she tooke vpon hir such authoritie and that of hir owne sway and wil against all hir Clergies minde and counsell to determine and alter what religion pleaseth or displeaseth hir This is the Popes clayme and tyrannie and not oure Princes or any other godly Princes dooing And yet this note is partly false for king Dauid agaynst the will of hys idle Priestes caused the misordering of the Arke to be reformed And did many other thinges about Religion to the which the Priests obeyed And determined doctrine also euen by master Stapl. owne confession in this Chapter The first argument that master Stapl. maketh is this Bothe M. Dorman and M. D. Harding affyrme that the proceedings of king Dauid are nothing preiudiciall to the ecclesiasticall authoritie in redressing of disorders before committed or doing suche thinges as are heere rehearsed Ergo They inferre no supreme gouernment ouer causes ecclesiasticall This argument standeth altogither vpon the authoritie of his good masters M. Dorman and M. D. Harding from whome he boroweth his stuffe For the moste of his owne surplusage is but his common places of descant on them And as they be so great in his bookes so he reasoneth as Pythagoras schollers had wont to reason of their master 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he sayde so Ergo it is so and thus argueth M. Stap. Bothe M. Dorman and M. D. Harding affirme it Ergo it is true But what do they affirme That the proceedings of king Dauid in redressing disorders before committed or doing suche things as heere are rehearsed are nothing preiudiciall to the ecclesiasticall authoritie Why M. Stap. who sayth against them or you herein king Dauids procéedings in deede were nothing preiudicial to the ecclesiasticall authoritie of persons ecclesiasticall they executed all their functions still belonging to their authoritie And bicause his procéedings in redressing suche disorders and all other things that he did declare moste plainly his supreme gouernement in setting foorthe and directing Gods true religion and yet were no preiudice to the Priests ecclesiasticall authoritie it followeth ther vpon that the supreme gouernment in setting foorth Gods true religion in correcting repressing ecclesiastical disorders in reducing and directing good orders and al other doings here rehearsed that ye confesse king Dauid did are no parte of the Priestes ecclesiasticall authoritie for then in doing them he should haue done things preiudicial therevnto and therfore they are no parts therof but of king Dauids royal authoritie And this while fondly ye woulde as it were ouerpresse vs with suche great mens authoritie as is M. Dorman M. D. Harding or euer ye be aware ye make them flatly giue verdite agaynst you with vs A Gods name bring their authoritie so agaynst vs as oft as ye wil neither M. Dorman nor M. D. Harding will giue ye great thanks therfore But for all this ye will bring vs more of D. Hardings stuffe As master D. Harding say you noteth king Dauids proceedings in redressing disorders before committed or doing suche things as are heere rehearsed do no more employ a supremacie in him then the reformation of religion made by Queene Mary But that ye wot well employeth in hir no suche supremacie Ergo No more do those procéedings in him This argument staÌ„deth wholly vpoÌ„ his M. D. Hardings authoritie alone bicause he hath noted that the one dyd no more than the other that their doings were alike héerein But the doings of the one inferre no supremacie Ergo the others neither But if we might be so bolde as to denie this your maior or rather your maxima or principle that ye build vpon of D. Hardings comparison in making king Dauids doings to be none other but such as were Quéene Maries Where were then your argument M. St ye talked righte now of Impar congressus Achilli Troilus the match betwene Troilus Achilles was vneueÌ„ but here is a gret deale more inferiour match betwéene K. Dauid Q. Mary Yea their doings were so little alike that they were cleane contrarie For although she were a princesse of famous memorie yet herein your popish Prelates made hir so beléeue them that she durst not redresse disorders in the Clergie at al but suffred the Pope and his prelates to reduce their false religion Nor she retayned the estate that belonged to hir of supreme gouernment but vtterly renounced it And therfore that reformation or rather deformation was not made at all by hir nor in hir name but by the Pope and his Popelings she only permitting it â–ª But if ye meane as ye speake that it was made by hiâ—… in dâ—…de as your Massers words are Queene Mary did it by the meanes of the Priest so that she was the doer and they were but the mâ—…anes she was the maker and they but hir instruments then your similitude goeth agaynst you and proueth a supremacie in hir as was in Dauid But ye speake colorably to make in suche a 〈◊〉 some proportion in speeche of a similitude For in very déede what soeuer ye say the matter went so that your popishe byshops and priestes were the doers of all And she good Lady was but your instrument and meane whereby ye killed Christ in his members as did the high priestes kill Christ in his body vnder Pontius Pilate I speake not to compare hir béeing hir selfe a noble Christian Prince to him béeing a heathen tyrant but to shewe how you abused hiâ—… authoritie as the Iewes did his But as for king Dauid as he did those things in redressing disorders and all other noted by the Bishop whiche your selfe can not denie so he was the principall in the dooing of them and he reformed euen the Priestes them selues And thoughe in some thinges he vsed the Priestes as meanes yet what dothe this infringe his supreme authoritie and not rather proue it And thus your other argument from D. Hardinges authoritie by D. Hardinges owne confession that they were but the meanes and king Dauid and Quéene Mary the doers of suche ecclesiasticall matters once agayne maketh quite agaynst you and your master D. Harding also and establisheth the Princes supreme gouernement ouer the priests and all I areade ye beware since ye stande so muche vpon your masters woordes héerein that if ye alleage hys authoritie any more
of all Nations Prouinces and Countreys of what so euer qualitie or condition they were and in all maner causes if the defendant require an ecclesiastiall iudgement it be not lawfull from the Bishops sentence to appeale any higher This lawe is here brought forth master Stapleton very vntimely and impertinently nothing to proue or unproue the ensample or doings of King Dauid vnlesse ye woulde proue it on this wiâ—…e â—…uo alleageth a lawe of Theodosius binding all his subiects of all Nations Prouinces and Countreys of whatsoeuer qualitie and condition they were and in all maner causes if the defendant require an ecclesiasticall iudgement it be not lawful from the Bishops sentence to appeale any higher Ergo king Dauid made the like lawe to this or this was like to king Dauids lawes Howe thys hangeth togither like your Germaines lippes that before yâ—… spake of let others iudge King Dauids lawes were not for priests to be such Iudges but for priests to be subiect to these orders that they should obserue and obey them porter singer Leuit Priest or Prophet high or low of what qualitie or condition soeuer they were These lawes of king Dauid were as ye say by Gods commaundement by the mouth of his Prophets and therefore coulde not be yll The law you cite of Iuâ—… from Theodosius though at that time it were good vpon some godly consideration yet it is not ius diuinum the law of god it is but mans law the princes law sheweth a chief authoritie in him to giue such liberties to the clergie which as they may be very wel vsed especially when princes do looke well to them that they vse their gifts offices and priuileges dutifully so haue they since by your pope and prelates bene very ill vsed euen to the treading down of the doners of theÌ„ Theodosius Iuo or any other And as the Iuy taking al his streÌ„gth growth from the Oke so coÌ„passeth ouergroweth it and that by his gréene pleasant embracings of it till the Iuy haue quite destroied the whole bole of the Oke so haue your clergie by such franchesies liberties of princes at the first by compassing them with counterfeit holines subtile deuises so growne vp aboue them in riches strength and possessions that at the length ye haue destroied brought to nothing all their supreme estate ouer you For whereto bring ye out this priuiledge of the Emperor Theodosius that none might appeale to any higher sentence than the B. but as ye haue brought it now in the end to cal coraÌ„ vobis as your vnderling eueÌ„ the prince himself from whoÌ„ ye coÌ„fesse this your priuilege came And thus ye alleage king Iuo his lawes as it were an Iuy bush to behold how your popish prelates do play the Iuies part But it is hie time with other sharper lawes that princes pull vp such Iuies by the rootes Now as ye haue thus shifted off the answere to king Dauids doings redressings ordrings lawes and chiefe gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes so to knit vp the knot euen like a fawning Iuy about princes your selfe And surely say you no Prince more recognized their obedience to the spirituall magistrate in spirituall causes than such as were most readie and carefull to ayde further and to their power direct all spirituall matters This therefore proueth well that godly princes do further and set foorth godly religion by meanes seemely to their vocations Why master Stap. who desireth or attributeth more to Princes than to set forth Gods religion by meanes semely to theyr vocation If this ensample of Dauid as you say proue thus much then to gouerne direct commaunde and appoynt the Priests yea your hiest Priestes as Dauid did is no vnseemely meanes to their vocation nor vnsitting euen for your Popes vocation to obey the Princes appoyntment and commaundement And if to direct all spirituall matters may be done of Princes yet the obedience to the spirituall Pastor in spirituall matters still recognized then doth not the Quéenes Maiestie any preiudice to them recognizing to them a dutifull obedience in the ministration of spirituall matters for all that she fetteth forth Gods true religion and directeth all spirituall matters as ye graunt she maye Which is as much as the Bishop or any of vs desire or hir Maiestie taketh on hir But say you here is no maner of inckling that Princes do or did euer beare the supreme gouernment in all ecclesiastical matters to decide and determine to alter and chaunge to set vp and plucke downe what religion liked them by their princely authoritie and mere soueraigntie Haue ye gone about to impugne this all this while M. Stapleton then I see well it was not for nothing that alwayes ye aunswered so wide Ye needed not haue sought so many shifting corners The Bishop proponed one thing and you aunswered another Doth the Bishop maintaine or euer sayde that Princes might decide determine alter chaunge set vp pluck downe what religion liked them by their Princely authoritie and mere soueraigntie Quote me the lease name me the place where once the Bishoppe so said Or doth the Q. Maiestie take any such thing vpon hir These be but your wicked I had almost sayde traytâ—…rous slaunders to desace hir highnesse to hir simple subiectes And no doubt so ye report to other Countreys of hir Maiestie as ye write here most opprobiously agaynst hir It is your Pope agaynst whom ye should make this conclusion for he taketh on him to decide and determine to alter and chaunge to set vp and pluck downe what religion liketh him The Quéenes Maiestie God be highly praysed for hir as a most godly supreme gouernour feloweth king Dauids ensample and neyther your wicked conclusion toucheth hir nor these your shifting counterblasts come nere the matter in hande The. 14. Diuision AFter King Dauid the Bishop alleageth the wise King Salomon his sonne citing a briefe summe of his actes that inferre his supreme authoritie For answere to this Master Stapleton chooseth out one act of Salomon as a full aunswere to all the rest besydes and sayth The weight of this obiection resteth in the deposition of Abiathar the high Priest. The weight of this aunswere resteth first vpon a manifest vntruth The Bishop alleaged besides Abiathars deposition the placing of Sadocke the placing of the arke in the temple of Salomon the dedication of the temple the offring sacrifices blessing the people directing the Priestes Leuites and other Church officers after his fathers orders and the Priestes obedience in euery thing to the kinges commaundement none of these obiections resting on Abiathers deposition Onely the néerest that commeth to it is the placing of Sadocke in Abiathars roome And yet sayth M. Stap. the weight of this obiection resteth in the deposition of Abiathar the high priest And so thinketh if he fully aunswere this he hath satisfied all the rest Nowe since M. Stapleton
of ciuill iustice neither for he is therein also a minister and executor of Gods sentence that by his Propheâ—…es commaundeth the Prince to minister and execute iustice And by this rule howe coulde 〈◊〉 prooue this superioritie to bée iâ—… youre Pope eyther would ye make him haue such a claime that he should not be Gods minister and executer of Gods sentences or would ye not rather reason contrary He is in all spirituall causes the minister and executer of Gods sentences published by his Prophets Ergo he is the supreme gouernour vnder God in all spirituall causes If ye had any sentence of God to proue this antecedent I warrant ye then ye would reason on this wise Yea you do reason on this wise though ye haue no sentence of God at all therefore As for vs we haue as by your owne testimonie the worde of God to warrant that the Prince in deposing the hiest Priest and figure of your Pope as ye say hath so good warrant of authoritie therefore that euen hee was Gods minister therein and executer of Gods sentence which plainly argueth his supreme authoritie next and immediately vnder god To be a minister and executer on that fashion next and immediately vnder God is no argument to abase the princes authoritie If ye had proued he had béene the priestes vnderling minister and executour herein this had béene somewhat to your purpose But this ye could not proue and ye sayd the contrary before that the priest was the princes minister and executour and that he deposed Abiathar not by himselfe but as he sacrificed by causing another to minister and execute for him Nowe when ye say the Prince is Gods minister and executer the priest is the princes minister and executer doe not your self I pray you acknowledge in the ministerie and the execution the priest to be vnder the prince and that the prince is not onely Gods minister and executer but as ye say further the causer commaunder and procurer also therof to the priestes Is this the ouerthrowing of the Bishop as your margin maketh boast or is it not rather the ouerthrowing of your selfe can ye speake any thing more plaine for the Bishop and agaynst your cause than this and yet ye crie eut that the Bishop omitted and dissembled â—…his guilefully craftily verily M. Stap â–ª there was no cause ye see why he should so do the craft and guile is but your owne the Bishop as he did in all the other doings onely touched them per transâ—…nnam not describing any one of the circumstances but in a worde or two shewed the fact and so passed ouer to other factes of Salomon But whatsoeuer the Bishop tolde or left vntolde it had béene better for you as ye haue vsed guylefully and craftily many other poyntes to haue omitted and dissembled this if ye haue no better shift than this that not onely maketh nothing agaynst the Bishoppes assertion in Salomons supreme gouernment but still more and more euen by the mouth of God by his Prophets doth confirme the same Nowe that none of all 〈◊〉 shifts will hitherto sâ—…rue against this one ensample of Salomon yet hath M. St onâ—… shift more behinde and that a trimme shift to Besides sayth he that the deposing of Abiathar doeth not employ that Salomon was the chiefe ruler in all causes ecclesiasticall whiche is the Butte that ye must shoote at and then must ye prouide another bowe for this will not shoote home This is one of your olde sâ—…ale shiftes M. Stap. I sée you are nowe euen at the last cast to let the arrowe alone and quarrell about the bow and the butte but and ye would as ye gaue good counsell to others haue followed it your selfe in firing still your eye on the issue betwéene the parties in controuersie neyther would yemake so many vagaryes as ye do nor here haue quarelled at the Bishopâ—… short shooting The wordes of the issue whiche is the butte that M. Feck requireth the Bishop to shoote vnto if ye be remembred are these to make proofe vnto me that any Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may claime or take vppon them any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes meaning as doth the Quéene if the Bishop proue this then he hittes the Butte His artillerie the Bow and Arrowes that he must shoote withall at thys Butte are appoynted by him likewise the Scriptures the doctors the Counsels and the practise the testimonies allegations decrées and examples therein conteyned The Bishop hitherto hath with many arrowes out of the Scripture hit the Butte so full that as yet ye coulde not make this quarrell but sought other peltyng shiftes Nowe séeing that none of all those paltrie brablings will serue ye say hée shootes not home and must chaunge his Bowe His Bowe here is the Scripture his Arrowes here are the ensamples of Salomon of which the Bishop shotte a good many seuerall Arrowes and factes and euery one hitte the Butte He alleaged not onely the facte of Abiathars deposition but also of Sadockes placing of consecrating the Temple of sacrificing of placing the Arke therein of blessing the people of directing the Priests Leuites and other Churche officers and of their obedience to all his commaundements Of all these allegations you your selfe master Stapleton choose one to answere vnto whiche is the deposition of the highe Priest and say all the obiection dependes thereon And so guylefully omitting the residue stande onely a measuring thys shotte and in the ende after muche warbling crie out shorte shorte ye muste prouide another Bowe for thys wyll not shoote home The deposing of Abiathar doeth not employe that Salomon was the chiefe Ruler in all ecclesiasticall causes First what if it doth not M. Stapleton one fact of Salomon employes not all ecclesiasticall causes Go to doth it employ some ecclesiasticall causes to be in the chiefe rule of the Prince If ye graunt me this ye graunt the issue and this is the ende ye graunt But ye say it employes not all ecclesiasticall causes â–ª and therefore is short â–ª Did the Bishop againe shoote no more but that one how chaunce ye medled not in measuring of the other Did ye foresee that as this had hitte one cause another woulde hitte another and so at the least euery one one cause yea perchaunce euery one 〈◊〉 and so a number of your causes might be hitte and perchaunce all causes by some one shot not yet measured and therefore guylefully and crastily disâ—…embling and omiâ—…ting them you let all the rest alone Yet should ye not then for shame haue thus cryed out agaynst this one first shotte since if it were shorte though short shooting léese the game yet one shorte shotte leaseth it not And if one bee shorte manye other maye come home and wynne the game for all this especially matching with one that shooteth so faire and Gentlemanlyke as you doe Maister Stapleton that it were better to stande at
nowe But all godly Princes ought so to do as Iosaphat did in directing ecclesiasticall matters Ergo the Quéenes Maiestie doth now as all godly Princes ought to do To proue that she doth as did king Iosaphat your selfe confesse that he reformed religion and was carefull and diligent about directing ecclesiasticall matters But the Queenes Maiesties clayme is none other herein but this to reforme religion and to be carefull and diligent about directing ecclesiasticall matters Ergo King Iosaphats doings and hirs are not vnlike But this importeth in hir a supreme gouernment Ergo King Iosaphats example hitteth home the Butte and is a fitte patterne to hir and all godly Princes of supreme gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes Here séeing that for fashions sake where ye durst not denie the manifest truth ye haue graunted so much that in déede ye haue graunted all ye would now restraine your graunt and say it was conditionall that though all Princes may reforme religion and with care and diligence direct all ecclesiasticall matters yet they must do it in suche sort as Iosaphat did and therefore leauing your simple and generall termes of reformation and direction by godlye Princes yée will haue them perticulerly leueled by that sort that Iosaphat did them Whiche as we gladly graunt you in all thinges that Iosaphat did well and godly as were the moste of his doings and in al that which the Bishoppe rehearseth yet in some thinges Princes muste not doe in that sort but go beyonde him For althoughe for the moste part he did those thinges Quae placâ—…ta erant domino That were acceptable to the Lorde 〈◊〉 en excelsa non abstulit Notwithstanding he tooke not away the high places wherein godly princes muste do after a more zealous sort than Iosaphat did As for all those things that the Bishop citeth sée that ye stand to your graunt made vnto vs that Iosaphat reformed religion and vsed care and diligence about the directing of ecclesiasticall matters and then that godly princes may at this day do all the same And feare ye not but we will also graunt to you and not starte therefrom that they may reforme religion and directe ecclesiasticall matters in such sort as Iosaphat did And so excepte ye be disposed to quarell or will falsefie the sorte and manner of Iosaphats or the Quenes Highnesse doings I trust we shall anon agree herein They may do it say you in such sort as Iosaphat did that is to reforme religion by the priests First this is very subtilly spoken master Stapleton by the priests if ye meane by the aduise or godly counsell of the prestes true it is so might king Iosaphat well haue done If ye meane by the authoritie and commaundemente of the priestes then is it false nor you can euer proue that Iosaphat did it by theyr commaundement and authoritie but they contrarywise by his Nowe in suche sort as Iosaphat did hath the Quéenes Maiestie done and this proueth bothe their supremacies herein Not to enact say you a new religion which the priestes of force shall sweare vnto Indéede this did not Iosaphat no more hath the Quéenes Maiestie done it is but your surmised sclander Item to suffer the priests to iudge in controuersies of religion not to make the decision of suche things a parliamente matter This latter parte of your sentence is agayne but youre manifest sclander to suffer the priestes to iudge in controuersies of religion after the rule of Gods word and not after their owne pleasures in suche sorte Iosaphat not onely suffred but ordeyned them commanded and ouersaw them so to do and so doth the Quéenes maiestie And this sufferance commaundement and ouersight argueth their chiefe authorities Item not to prescribe a newe forme order in ecclesiasticall causes but to see that according to the lawes of the church before made the religion be set forthe as Iosaphat procuâ—…ed the obseruation of the old religion appointed in the lawe of Moyses And euen thus and none otherwise hath the Quéenes Maiestie procured the obseruation of the old religion of Iesus Christ whome Moyses prefigured and the orders of the apostles and most auncient fathers after them to be restored remouing as Iosaphat did all other newe formes and orders of ecclesiasticall abuses And this restoring and procuring of the aunciente religion and ceremonies the suppressing and abolishing of new is againe in both these princes a good argument of their supreme gouernement Briefly say you that he do all this as an aduocate defender and son of the Churche with the authoritie and aduice of the cleargie so Iosaphat furdered religion not otherwise Your word aduocate how it came vp is declared already but neither aduocate defender sonne or daughter herein are any thing contrary to supreme gouernour But where ye adde al these words aduocate defender and sonne to the prince and to the cleargy authoritie aduice this sheweth your subtile deuise to deceyue princes with youre paynted termes But princes begin to waxe wise and learned as Dauid exhorted them and perceaue howe ye haue foaded them with these names and stiles that were but nomen sine re a bare name without any matter for the authoritie and aduice ye reserued to your selues The princes to whome ye gaue these gay titles had neither authoritie nor might giue their aduice according as Hosius woulde not haue them so much as to talke of matters of religion much lesse to reforme religion to directe ecclesiasticall matters with care and diligence as before ye graunted And nowe to eate againe your worde ye woulde haue them be carefull and diligent without aduice reforme and direct without authoritie of their owne except onely the clergies aduice and authoritie Thinke ye Iosaphat did so not otherwise as ye sayâ—… ye may well tell vs so but the Scripture telleth vs otherwise howe he gaue aduice to the Clergie and by his authoritie directed them though I denie not he might vse their aduice and admitte their authoritie to yet the supreme authoritie apperteyned vnto him Not say you as a supreme absolute gouernour contrary to the vniforme consent of the whole clergie in full conuocation yea and of all the Bishops at once This worde absolute is but your absolute and malicious slaunder M. Stap. Such absolute supreme gouernment did your Pope vsurpe as sayth Franciscus de Ripa that the Popes power is absolute and that he may do what he will. As Baldus in the proheme of the decrées alleageth that his power is absolute from all bondes and from all rule of restraint And that we must beléeue him absolutely as Marcus Mantua and Pope Boniface himselfe affirmeth Thus doth not the Quéenes maiestie no more did king Iosaphat and therefore I inferre the conclusion that the Queenes Maiestie doth all these things in such sort as losaphat did them excepting these quarelous slaunders which are your owne put them vp in your purse agayne master Stapleton and
commaunded and prescribed vnto the chiefe priests what fourme and order they should obserue in ecclesiasticall causes and controuersies of religion Is not this then your own abhomination and contradiction â—…atly to say here is no fourme or order prescribed and that the Bishop belieth Gods holy woorde which in one that goeth for a student of Diuinitie to sclaunder one that goeth for a Bishop what can be done more malapertly But as ye thus sawfely misuse your better so full fondly and malitionsly do yâ—… gather that thereon then the which the Bishop minded nothing lesse nor can instly be gathered thereupon Yâ—… say the Bishop writeth thus to make folke weene that religion proceded then by way of commission from the Prince onely This is your owne spitefull sclander M. Stapl. not onely on the Bishop but on the Quéenes Maiestie your argument is this He prescribed them a fourme and order to obserue in coÌ„trouersies of Religion Ergo He attempted to make Religion proceede by way of commission from the Prince onely This is a false and maâ—…itions collection M. Stapl. from the fourme and order of athing to the thing it selfe It is your holy father the Pope to whom ye may obiect this conclusion he maâ—…eth religion to depende on him and to proceede from him onely â–ª by his Commissions and Legacies â—… latere We-acknowledge all true religion to procéede onely from God the father through Iesus Christ his sonne by the insâ—…ctioÌ„ of the holy ghost in the mouth of the Patriarches Prophets and Apostles And from the Prince to procéede onely such godly orders and formes of directing and setting foorth that true religion as he by the notable examples of these godly Kinges shall finde out paterns most expedient for him and his people to gouerne and order them of what â—…state soeuer they be in that true religion and all other ecclesiastical causes belonging thereto So did Iosaphat then so doth the Quéenes Maiestie now FroÌ„ whose authoritie next â—…nder â–ª God the order direction procéeded though the religioÌ„ procéeded not from them but altogither from God. Nay say you king â–ª Iosaphats dealings were rather with 〈◊〉 persoâ—… thâ—…n with matters ecclesiasticall This was M. FeckeÌ„hams former shifte and many proper ensamples and similitudes you also vsed thereon to dally about the 〈◊〉 of the ecclesiasticall person but not in ecclesiastical matters But those were but séely shifts and euer turned against your selfe in the ende And therefore ye darâ—… not abide by this shifte but within a litle while after yea euen in this Chapter ye recant and denie the obedience of the persons and all And what hath bene your practise any other than cleane to ridde your selues out of al obedience from the Princes authoritie ye knowe your Pope hath bene vnder the Emperour ere now but vnder what Princes obedience euen for his person will ye confesse your Pope at this day to be And do not all the packe of the popishe Priestes as his chickens clâ—…cke vnder his winges and exempt euen their persons also from the dutifull obedience they owe to their naturall soueraignes in so much that where the Popes primacie is admitted Princes can not by any of their laweâ—… â–ª fasten any condigne punishement vppon any ecclesiasticall persons â–ª what mischiefe soeuer they committe and all bicause the ecclesiasticall persons were priuileged and exempted from their Princes authoritie Wherein your generation dealt surely for themselues that hauing graunted them an inche got an elle For seing that if they should graunt againe the obedience of the person the cause and all would at last returne to his old master the Prince as it did before but you thinke your selfe sure inough if ye graunt that Iosaphat dealed with ecclesiasticall persons but not with their matters As ye shifted of the matter before that the Prince dealeth with a Bishop for his homage baronie and temporalties but not otherwise Thinke ye M. Stapl. and tell me on your fidelitie did Iosaphat meddle with the high Priestes and all other of the Clergie so well as his temporaltie onely in respecte of their persons or in respecte of their reuenues and linings vnder him or chiefly in any of these respectes did he thus commaunde them and deale with them or not rather and most of all in respect of refourming abuses in religion and setting in order all ecclesiasticall causes he appointed not onely the persons but the places where the persons shoulde execute their offices and what matters these and those persons shoulde entreate vppon and how they shoulde do them as your selfe haue confessed the manner And least we should thinke he â—…ubbered ouer the matter as ye say many good and godly princes among the Christians also haue charged their Bishops and clergie to see diligently vnto their flockes and charges Ye say true M. Stapleton many godly Princes haue thus done to your further confutation in this issue But you meane they haue onely giuen them a generall exhortation and yet neuerthelesse lefte the matter wholly in their Clergies hands not medling themselues therewith Least ye should thinke that Iosaphat did it thus sclenderly not that his chiefe charge of ouersight lay thereon not onely of them all generally but particulerly in euery kinde of matter the holy ghost hath penned out how precisely he went to worke that rather hauing his care about the matters then the persons For this was his principal marke care not so much that the person might sit in authoritie as that the matter might wisely and truly be iudged and discerned and therfore saith the text In Hierusalem quoque constituit Iosaphat Leuitas sacerdotes principes familiaruÌ„ ex Israel vt iudicium causam domini Iudicarent habitatoribus eius c. Praecepitque eis c. And Iosaphat appointed in Ierusalem Leuites and Priests and families of Israell that they might giue iudgement and iudge the cause of the Lorde to the inhabitants thereof c. And he coÌ„maunded them saying Thus shall ye do in the feare of the Lord faithfully and with a perfecte harte and in euery cause that shall come vnto you of your brethren that dwell in their Cities betweene bloud and bloud betweene lawe and precepte statutes and iudgements ye shall iudge them and admonish them c. Whervpon saith Lyra Hic ordinatur regimeâ—â— populi in arduis causis c. Here is ordeyned the gouernment of the people in difficult causes which could not well be cutte of without recourse had to Ierusalem according to that which is coÌ„maunded Deuter. 17. Where it is saide if thou shalt perceyue the iudgement before thee to be difficult and doubtfull arise and get thee vp to the place which the Lord shall choose c. And therefore Iosaphat appointed iudges there to determine such difficult matters Wherefore it followeth euery cause which commeth vnto you c. VVheresoeuer the question is if it be of the lawe so
the kings office is a distinct function from the Priests neither impugneth the byshops assertion nor the princes supreme gouernement Conclude this M. Stap. agaynst them that confounde their offices The other parte of your conclusion that the kinges office medleth onely with the common weale by which ye meane onely the ciuill policie and hath nothing to do with any matters perteyning to God or euer ye shall directly proue it on this or any other place in the whole scripture it will finde ye somewhat more to do than ye suppose it will. As for the kinges intermedling with Gods matters your selfe before haue graunted a king may intermedle and be no breaker nor enimie to Gods order And that euen this king Iosaphat vsed a care and diligence about the directing of ecclesiasticall matters that he reformed religion and that godly christian Princes may at this day do the lyke This your selfe haue already graunted And is all this no intermedling dothe it not rather proue he intermedled that as supreme gouernour thereof yea euen ouer the Priestes them selues to whome that charge of doing those matters is committed and yet he neither breaketh the order appoynted by God nor is become an enimie to Gods holy ordinance Ye say it was Gods ordinance and appoyntment what followeth it was not therefore the Princes ordinance and appoyntment also as though these were contrary and coulde not stande togither the one vnder the other the ordinance of God and the ordinance of the king Put case the Priest had ordeined it might it not haue béene Gods ordinance too but the priest ordeined it not but the prince Ergo the Prince immediatly ordeyning it vnder God sheweth that he hath an immediate power vnder him euen aboue the Priests Of whome are these words so precisely spoken he appoynted he commaunded he sayde it shall be so thus shall ye do c was it the Prince or was it the Priest Did Amarias commaunde Iehosaphat or Iehosaphat commaunde Amarias and all the other Priestes and Leuites who is the supreme gouernour of the twaine the commaunder and appointer or he that is commaunded and appoynted Untill therefore that ye can proue that the high Priest Amarias commaunded and appoynted vnto King Iosaphat these things and that the king did not commaund nor appoynt these things to the Priest and Bishop euerie man that hath any vnderstanding will easily perceyue and iudge that the Prince was the Priestes supreme gouernour next vnder God both ouer his person and ouer the thing also wherein he appoynted and commaunded him But sée your constant dealing in this matter â–ª before you made the gouernance of the thing to be more than the gouernance of the person And here as though it were a greater matter to gouerne the person you say If he take vpon him the supreme gouernment thereof euen ouer the Priests themselues to whom the charge is committed Againe before you sayde that Iosaphats dealings were rather with persons than with matters ecclesiasticall But now ye exempt the persons to saying If he take vpon him the supreme gouernment euen ouer the Priests themselues c. he passeth the boundes of his office And thus although for a while ye would shift off the matter by séeming to graunt somwhat to bleare the reader withall yet in the ende contrary to your former graunt ye eaâ—…e your worde and debarre the Prince of all both for matter and persons to But thankes be to God this insample of Iosaphat is so plaine that all these fetches and shiftes that ye are dryuen vnto can so little any way improue his supreme gouernment that euery thing which ye bring agaynst it maketh more and more for it Such is the force of the truth and so doth falsehoode in his owne trippe still ouerturne it selfe The. 16. Diuision THe Bishop alleaging the example of king Ezechias fiâ—…st sheweth what great commendation for his godly gouernment in reforming religion the scripture attributeth vnto him Secondly how he called togither the clergie telleth them their faults declareth to them the wrath of God exhorteth commaundeth them to do their dueties in clensing themselues in making their sacrifices and appointeth their offices prouideth them conuenient portions to liue by and that in all things the clergie and the people obeyed the Kings commaundement which argueth his supreme gouernment ouer all ecclesiasticall persons and causes To this master Stapleton aunswereth first on the olde warrant of his good masters wordes by reiecting all this as insufficient Here is nothing brought in by you sayth he or before by the Apologie as M. Dorman and M. D. Harding do well aunswere that forceth the surmised soueraigntie in King Ezechias but that his power and authoritie was readie and seruiceable as it ought to be in all prynces for the execution of things spirituall before determined not by him as supreme head newly established How well or yll master Stap. your masters haue aunswered this obiection and are aunswered againe is apparant and easie to be iudged by viewing both their answeres Howbeit vnto their wel doings for feare they should not fal out so well as ye pretend you haue done well also to better their answeres with the surplusage of your new stuffe And if it were graunted you M. Stap. that those things which Ezechias did had not bene by him as supreme heade newly established would it folow therevpon that they were not by him as supreme head or gouernour newly reformed neyther hauing bene some of them of olde established before by the priests negligence hauing long time bene corrupted But what letteth why they may not also be sayde to haue bene by him newly established being quite decayed before And so sayth Lyra of the ioy at the great passeouer that long time had ceassed Propter quod quado Ezechias eam renouaeuit fuit maior exultatio quòd noua placent delectant For the which cause wheÌ„ Ezechias renued it there was greater reioising for bicause new things do please and delight So that to them it was a newe establishing But was the brasen serpent pulled downe and destroyed euer before as other Images and hill aulters had béene was the feast of the passeouer euer chaunged before was that order of collations euer ordeyned before was this the Leuites doings of the Priests partes euer done before So that at the least some of these doings were by him newly established and neuer done before but as the necessitie of the time was then so were they commaunded to be done by him and well allowed of God. Yet say you they were not newly established by him as supreme hed but his power authoritâ—…e was ready seruiceable for the execution of things spiritual before determined But if these things were not before determined I pray you master Stapleton whose executioner was he then neither the priests nor the prophets had before determined that he should do or commaund to be done these things
vse it throughout all your counterblast to make your continuall outrodes and vagaries quite from the matter No Flie is busier in buzzing on entrye dish than your Counterblast is blowing on euery flim â—…am tale If ye thinke ye maye be borne withall for the enlarging of your volume yet ye make your Readers loosely and altogither vnfruitfully to employ their labours carying them at roauers as ye say and at randon to â—…s ye had woont to do the people after all Hallowes from the very state of the question in controuersie For shame therefore vpbrayde not this to the Bishop of straying from the marke excepte you kéepe your selfe better to the marke or else shewe your Dispensation that yée may styll babble all besides the question of what impertinent tryfles yée please to descante vppon and will not suffer your aduersary once to wincke awrye nor to alleage anye thing thoughe it neuer so muche appertayne to the purpose if it doe not directly conclude the very state of the question This dealing master Stapleton is very vneuen If ye will deale vprightly call vpon the Bishop hardly so oft as ye will but then stande you for shame to your tackling to least an other come and call as fast on you to marke and regarde better the matter ye meddle withall But perhappes ye will say admitte that I ranne astray from the matter my selfe yet doth my faulte excuse the Byshoppes In déede it doth not Master Stapleton if hée bée faultie therein but it lesseneth hys and it maketh yours the greater and the more to your shame except yée be a verye impudent man for your fault herein is manifest and therefore deciphered oute vnto you in one of your common places If ye be belied there purge your selfe whiche tâ—…ll ye doe the more ye call vppon the Bishop to kéepe him to his marke he that shall marke your dealing shall wish you had either lesse impudencie or more remembrance of your selfe Neuerthelesse since ye so sharply chalenge the Bishop that all his examples draw nothing neare the mark but runne at randon and shoote all at Rouers I pray you sir call to your remembraunce what was the marke and issue in question betwene them was it not this that if the Bishop by any of the foure abouesayde meanes coulde make proofe to master Feckenham that any Emperor or Empresle King or Queene may clay me or take vpon them any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes that then he would yéelde Was not this the state of their question accorded they not on this issue and ought not the Bishop to direct all his examples to proue this And if he proue this whether he shotte at Buttes or Rouers hath he not hytte the marke and what woulde ye haue more Nowe that he hath done this is plainely proued by euery of these examples and that not onely as the wordes of the issue inforce that they tooke vpon them some suche gouernement in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes which being prooued is ynough to discharge the Bishop of straying from his matter but also that they daymed and tooke vppon them suche supreme gouernement in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes And you haue counterblasted nothing to the contrary that were able to remoue these prooues from this marke and issue sauing your facing and bracing of the matter and a number of blynde pelting and foreworne shiftes except ye haue any better behinde to come For all these shiftes hitherto notwithstanding the Bishoppes examples are both directly directed to the issue and directly and fully prooue the same And wher 's ye findâ—… faulte with straggling from it ye touch not him but wring your selfe by the nose For ensample whereof I remitte the Reader to your common place thereon or to spare his paynes and go no further than euen here to marke the markes that your selfe set vp and conferre them with the issue betwéene the Bishoppe and master Feckenham and the Reader shall soone discerne howe farre of purpose ye stray from it yea from those false markes also that your selfe set vp before And yet ye crie the Bishop strayes from the marke and will the Reader to fixe his eye thereon But herein ye play as the common people say the Lapwing or Pewet doeth who when they seeke hir Neast draweth them still further and further from it wyth hir noyse and flittering about them crying as the simple people imagine here is it here is it when it is nothing neare it And euen as they conceyue of the Pewet so do you with vs with great noyse and earnestnesse bidding vs regarde and set before our eyes the very state of the question and busily pretende to tell vs wherein lyeth all the chiefe question when vnder the cloake and credite of this your earnestnesse ye carie the reader quite away from the question and issue in controuersie to runne vp and downe after such newe and so many questions that the Reader dared as a man in a maze shoulde neyther perceyue the true question in déede nor finde out the weakenesse and falsehoode of your cause nor well knowe where himselfe is become But that he maye winde himselfe the better oute of this your Laberinthe let him as is sayde before directe his eye euer on the issue betweene the parties and then shall hée still see whereaboutes hée is and howe farre or neare not onely the Bishop is but you also are to or from the matter The issue as is before sayde is this That any Emperor or Empresle King or Queene claymed or tooke vpon them any such gouernment By this issue in all his examples hath the Byshoppe directed him selfe that Moses Iosue Dauid Salomon Iosaphat Ezechias and Iosias did take vpon them suche gouernment But all these were Kings and Princes of Gods people commended of God for their godly gouernance Therfore Emperours and Empresses Kings Quenes may and ought to take such gouernment vpon them This being alwayes the Bishops conclusion wherein strayed he from the issue But nowe come you ruffling in with Nine newe issues for aduauntage not one of them all béeing the verie issue and state of the question in controuersie and yet you crie the Bishop draweth nothing nigh the marke True in déede master Stapleton he draweth nothing neare the markes that you haue set vp for the nigher hee shoulde drawe to them he shoulde drawe the further from the question betwéene master Feckenham and him as you doe of purpose in all these your markes to deceyue and beguâ—…le the simple Reader that thinkes ye meane good truth when ye â—…rte so often on the question and runne so farre from the same For ensample was this I pray you good master Stapleton to vse your owne phâ—…ase the issue and question betwéene them whether these Kings acknowledged or not acknowledged the highe Priest â—…t is true and the Byshoppe demeth not that they did agnise the highe Priest euerie one of them
worshipped ye then and that with such high worship to your solemne Saint Thomas Becket that dyed for no matter of Religion at all But eyther for his obstinacie agaynste his liege Lorde and agaynst all the Barons Spirituall and Temporall of the Realme or if ye colour it neuer so fayre yet was it but in mainteyning his honour and the priuileges of the Clergie and that contrarie to the auncient custome of the Realme except yée will graunt that the Popishe Religion doeth consiste herein Whiche if ye bée ashamed to confesse vpbrayde not then for shame false Martyrs vnto vs nor yet the Canonising of wicked Sainctes We vse no such Canonization at all It redoundeth on your selfe on your Legende on your Popes and on your Pope holy Saincts Whome by this rule you make both Donatists Montanists Manicheans or what soeuer Heretikes ye can obiect besides As for all these Comparisons hitherto betwéene the Protestantes and the Donatists wherein ye thinke ye haue be stowed great cunning there is not 〈◊〉 poyâ—… that is not violently wrested to make it séeme to touch vs and not one poynt that being returned on your selues doeth not rightly and fully hitte you home againe And therefore I for my part am content as you concluding say you be To ende this talke with the whole conference leauing it to the indifferent Reader to consider whether the Popishe Catholikes or the Protestants drawe nearer to the Donatists To come newe at length to the sixt and last parte of this Chapter which consistes in remâ—…ing such motiues as the Bishop alleageth to burtheâ—… Master Feckenham with the practise of the Donatists First master Stapleton deuideth these motiues in twaine Let vs then sayth master Stapleton proceede foorth and consider vpon what good motiues ye charge master Feckenham to be a Donatist whiche are to say truth none other but falsehoode and follie But as ye surmise the one is bicause hee craftily and by a subtile shifte refuseth the prooues of the olde Testament as the Donatists did The other bicause hee with the sayde Donatists should auouch that secuâ—…er Princeâ—… haue not to meddle in matters of Religion or causes ecclesiasticall nor to punishe any man for such causes These two motiues ye say Master Stapleton are to say the truth none other but falsehoode and follie In déede they are the worsâ—… by comming through so false a marchantes handes as yours For shame either tell the wordes as they â—…e at least the true and full effect of them or neuer sette them out in a distinct letter syâ—… you so often but euer falsly vpbrayde the Bishop hereof Else all the follie and falsehoode will proue to be in your selfe and not in the Bishops motiues The Bishop spâ—…ke not of Princes medling or punishing for Ecclesiasticall 〈◊〉 as though the Donatists simpliâ—… denied that anâ—… yâ—… graunted Princes yet so much as to meddle or punishe for your Ecclesiasticall causes that is to say to be your executioners therin as though the Emperors other Christian Princes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more vpon them at that time But the Bishop tolde how the godly fathers craued aide assistance of the magistrats and rulers to reforme them to reduce them to the vâ—…itie of the church to represse their heresies with their au thoritie godly lawes made for that purpose to whome it belonged of duetie and whose especiall seruice of Christ is to see care and prouide that their subiects be gouerned defended and mainteyned in the true and syncere religion of Christ without all errours superstitions and heresies This is that the Bishop wrote and to proue this he alleageth Saint Augustine Thus did Christian Princes gouerne in Ecclesiasticall causes then This did the Donatists then denie vnto them and this do now the Papists denie and ye come sneaking in and tell vs the Bishoppes motiue was this In charging Master Feckenham to followe the Donatists by cause hee with the Donatistes shoulde auouche that seculer Princes haue not to meddle in matters of Religion or causes Ecclesiasticall nor to punishe anie man for suche causes As though the controuersie had bâ—…ne for anie kinde of medling or punishing whiche you sâ—…ming to graunt to Princes to bée your seruaunts and droyles in suche ecclesiasticall causes and so farre as you assigne them might therefore séeme not to play the Donatists when ye play their partes so liuely as can bée and so subtilly that the Donatistes were but Babes vnto you in séeming to giue them some medling or punishing in Ecclesiasticall causes but if they meddle with or punishe you or anie other otherwise than ye commaunde and restrayne them you so little then suffer them to meddle in Ecclesiasticall matters that with solemne curses ye debarre them from medling in anie temporall and ciuill matters too so farre ye passe the Donatists For shame master Stapleton tell your tale plainely that we may sée whether M. Feckenham played the Donatistes part or no or else your doubling wyll declare your selfe to be a Donatist also for companie But let vs sée how ye aunswere these motiues euen as your selfe propounde them The one is say you bicause he craftily and by a subtile shifte refuseth the proues of the old Testament as the Donatistes did Your Stale Iestes M. Stapleton of a fine blast of a horne â–ª of a â—…oule slawe of a blinde betell blunte shifte I ouer passe them When M. Feckenham ye say offereth to yelde if ye can proue this regiment either by the order that Christ left behinde him in the new Testament either by the Doctours either by Councels or els by the continuall practise of any one Churche thinke you M. Horne that this is not a large and an ample offer The largenesse of this offer is not here in questioÌ„ M. St. the offer is large and ample inough â–ª taken of the Bishop at his handes and proued vnto him at his owne demaunde It remaineth then that he stande to his promise and yelde to the truth or else he sheweth that he minded to offer more than he purposed to perfourme Onely now it is examined why here he specifieth the new Testament and quite leaueth out the old Testament â–ª This doing in this pointe saith the B. smelleth of a Donatist Nay say you There is not so much as any coÌ„iecture to gather this vppon yea the old Testament is not by this offer excluded but verely included For if the new Testament which rehearseth many things out of the old haue any thing out of the old Testament that make for this regiment if any Doctour old or new if any Councell haue any thing out of the old Testament that serue for this regiment then is Master Feckenham concluded yea by his owne graunt For so the Doctour or Councell hath it he is satisfied according to his demaunde VVhereby it followeth he doth not refuse but rather allowe and affirme the proufes of the old Testament It might
haue thought they had done God good seruice too so that he would haue maintayned them And do not you euen so what els maketh ye crie vpon the Princes beyond the seas with all kinde of torments to destroy the Protestants If Princes would aduise them selues or euer they beléeued you so lightly and would not destroy their subiects till they had sit in iudgmâ—…t heard discussed both parties causes throughly ye would not be halfe so hastie Ye would then crie to the contrarie that you must only be iudges they must onely beleue you strike onely them whom you shall bidde them strike Contrarywise where the Princes espying your falshood forsake your errours and sette out euen very milde lawes against you then ye change your coppie and crie out euery thing is extreme crueltie ye are too too sore handled and oppressed then ye extoll beyonde the moone lenitie and sufferance and winche like a gald horse at the least thing that toucheth you And thus euery way do you still shew your selues to be the very Donatistes Now that ye haue as you conceyue with your selfe giuen vs so great a foyle ye enter into your thirde parte saying VVe may now proceede to the remnant of your booke sauing that this in no wise must be ouerhipped that euen by your owne wordes here ye purge M. Feckenham from this crime ye laide vnto him euen now for refusing the proufeâ—… taken out of the old Testament Now for God M. St. since hitherto ye haue cléered him so sclenderly that ye haue more bewrapped him and your selfe also in this crime let nothing in any case be forgotten or ouerhipped that any wayes may helpe the matter forwarde for hitherto it rather hath gone backward but now there is good hope M. Feckenham shall take a good purgation euen of the Bishops owne making that you M. Stap. will minister to him which wil so worke vpon him make him haue so good a stoole that he shal be clerely purged of this crime of Donatistes â—…o to then M. Stapl and let vs sée how apothecarylike you can minister the same For if as ye say say you the order gouernment that Christ left behind in the Gospell new Testament is the order rule gouernment in ecclesiastical causes practised by the Kings of the old Testament then will it follow that M. Feckenham yelding to the gouernment of the new doth not exclude but â—…ather comprehende the gouernment of the old Testament also both being especially as ye say all one Is this the purgation M. St. that ye will minister to M. Feckenham would to God ye could make him receyue anâ—… brooke this sentence if you would take it also I warrent ye it would so purge you of your old leuen sowre dough that ye should no more be Donatists nor Papistes neither if ye receyue and well digest this little sentence The order and gouernment that Christ left behinde in the new Testament is the order rule and gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes practised by the kinges of the old Testament For then giue ye Princes that that ye haue all this while denied theÌ„ But do ye thinke M. Feckenham will wittingly and willingly receiue this sentence that which in déede followeth necessarily thereon The sentence is true but M. Feck for all that may be a lier and you another For I warrant you M. Feck granteth this no â—…urder than as the Donatists he may temper it to make it seeme to serue his turne Why say you if he grant the onâ—… he doth not exclude but rather comprehende the other Nay M. St. M. Feck coÌ„preheÌ„des it not but shoonnes it as agaynst him by your owne confession But the olde being comprehended by the newe Master Feckenham is contrarie wise by force of argument graunting the newe enforced by the olde Not that he comprehendeth it but is comprehended of it and driuen to yeelde thereto of his aduersarie by conclusion of reasoning the one including the other But rather than he will do this voluntarily he will rather exclude them both the olde and the newe testament also and as he hath done burne them both togither The. 20. Diuision THe Bishop in this diuision first gathereth his full conclusion of all these testimonies into this argument What gouernment order and dutifulnesse so euer belonging to any God hath prefigured and promised before hande by his Prophetes in the holy scriptures of the olde Testament to be performed by Christ those of his Kingdom that is the gouernment order and dutifulnesse set forth and required in the Gospell or new testament But that faythfull Emperours Kinges and Rulers ought of dutie as belonging to their office to claime and take vpon them the gouernment authoritie power care and seruice of God the Lorde in matters of Religion or causes Ecclesiasticall was an order and dutifulnesse for them prefigured and forepromised of God by his Prophetes in the Scriptures of the olde Testament as Saint Augustine hath sufficiently witnessed Ergo Christian Emperors Kings and Rulers owe of dutie as belonging to their office to clayme and take vpon them the gouernment authoritie power care and seruice of God their Lorde in matters of Religion or spirituall ecclesiasticall causes is the gouernment order and dutifulnesse setforth and required in the Gospell or new Testament The Bishop hauing thusfully concluded these Testimonies he yet confirmeth them further with more authorities of the Prophete Esay with Lyra his exposition therevpon and the example of Constantine for proufe of the same At this master Stapleton first carpeth by certaine marginall notes or euer he blowe vp the Chapter of his Counterblast thereto The minor of the Bishops conclusion for the Princes gouernment authoritie power care c. he grauÌ„teth but not such supreme gouernment sayth he as the othe prescribeth He graunteth also Saint Augustine to witnesse this the Princes gouernment but no such large and supreme gouernment as we attribute now to them Againe he graunteth this supreme gouernment is in causes ecclesiasticall â–ª but not in all causes ecclesiasticall And so graunting that the Bishop concludeth well in some such thing you conclude not sayth he in all things and causes and therefore you conclude nothing agaynst vs. Lastly he graunteth all the Bishops testimonies concerning Constantine but he denieth that it maketh any thing for vs. Nowe after these marginall notes prefixed he entreth into his Chapter pretending to open the weakenesse of the Bishops conclusion and of other his proues oute of holie Scripture And first his aunswere to this diuision he deuideth in thrée partes First he graunteth all that the Bishop hath sayde but denieth that it is sufficient Secondly he quarrelleth about this that the Bishop calleth the Emperour Constantine a Bishop as Eusebius nameth him Thirdly he chalengeth him for calling Idoll Image Now to the first parte to sée whether all these grauntes make sufficiently for vs and conclude against him yea
that be in authoritie no authoritie at all What a saying is this and yet sée how your selfe confute your selfe Going about to embarre their authority ye say he meÌ„â—…ioned their peaceable gouernmeÌ„t â–ª He did so in déede M. St. But what gouernment or what peaceable estate of gouernment had they if they had no authoritie at all It sée meth that while ye 〈◊〉 to saye somewhat against their authoritie ye neytâ—… oâ—… regarde nor can tell what ye say of them nor of the Apostles â—…eyther to maintayne your false quarrell Now as ye further procéede so still ye bring your selfe more in the briers But will yee knowe say you M. Hoâ—…ne why thapostles both Saint Peter and Saint Paule so earnestly taught at that time obedience to Princes Ha go to then M. St. belike they tauâ—…ht obedience to Princes more earnestly than your Popishe Prelates haue taught or pract sed since that time or than your selfe haue herâ—… taught vs not ouer earnestly but God wote full sâ—…enderly or rather by all shifts and fetches of your wits haue sought to deface and impuâ—…nt their authoritie But how agréeth this with S. Paule earnest teaching Yea â–ª howe woulde ye make Saint Paule agrée to himselfe To say that he speaketh there of no authoritie at all in Princes and yet that here he taught obedience to Princes so earnestlye What obedience taught he if he taught not their authoritie at all What earnestnesse vsed he then therein but let vs sée as ye would haue vs what was the cause of the Apostles earnestnesse This was the cause In the beginning of the Church some Christians were of this opinion that for that they were Christian men they were exempted from the lawes of the Infidell Princes and were not bounde to pay them any tribute or otherwise to obey them To represse and reforme this wrong iudgemeÌ„t of theirs the Apostles Peter and Paule by you named diligently employed themselues And was this a wrong opinion and iudgement M. Stapleton and with such earnestnesse and diligence employed of the Apostles Peter and Paule to be repressed and reformed that Christians for that they were Christian men were exempted from the lawes of the Infidell Princes and were not bound to pay them any tribute or otherwise to obey them What a right opinion and iudgement then was this of him that affirmed not only the same of Infidell Princes but of Christian Princes to that we be not bounde by force of anye wordes of Christes sentence which as â—…latly commaundeth vs as any of these the Apostles sentences doe to obey or paye so much as tribute to our Christian Princes Doe ye not knowe who this was that helde this wrong opinion M. Stapleton Well who soeuer it was I thinke be must with shame saye that of him selfe which he spake of another that eyther hee recanteth as better aduised or else writeth playne contrary to himselfe But nowe sayth M. St. for the Apostles sentences VVhose sayings can not implye your pretensed gouernment vnlesse ye will say that Nero the wicked and heathenishe Emperour was in his time the supreme head of all the Church of Christ throughout the Empire as well in causes spirituall as temporall As before M. Stapleton you captiously restrained Christes generall commaundement of obedience to Princes only to the Emperour so doe ye here againe besides that ye sticke also in the person abusing his office and let the dutie of his office go Whereas S. Paule writeth generally not only for those then present but for all kinges or any other in authoritie both then and from thenceforth for euer And so doe all the Expositours gather a generall rule for all Christians towards their christian Princes although Nero and other princes then were wicked and Heathenishe infidels Yet in the duetie of their estate to the which God had called them they ought neither to haue bene wicked nor Heathenish Infidels but godly and faithfâ—…ll defenders and setters forth of Christ his true religioÌ„ To reason therfore from such persons abuses therevpon to denie from all princes the dutie of their lawfull authoritie is as naughtie an argument as Nero himselfe was naughtie And Chrysostome flatly confuteth this cauill of the Princes person Neque enin de quouis c. For neyther I speake now sayth he of any one of the Princes but of the matter itselfe And againe Propterea non dicit non enim princeps est c. VVherefore hee sayth not there is no Prince but of God but he disputeth of the matter it selfe saying there is no power but of god The powers that are they are from God â–ª As when any wise man sayth that the woman is knit of God vnto the man he sayth no other thing thaÌ„ that God hath ordeyned mariage not that euery man how so euer he dwelleth togither with a woman is ioyned vnto him of God for we see many dwelling togither in euill not according to the lawes of mariage which yet notwithstanding we impute not vnto God. This cauillation therefore how naughtie soeuer the Prince were restraineth not the Apostles meaning which tendeth to the office and not to the person least of all to those present persons then liuing For were they neuer so wicked other were good that knew the dutie of their estate gouernment exercising it both in the direction of vertues punishment of vices as well of the first as of the seconde table this your self haue confessed to be the dutie of Princes and why had it not bene Neroes duetie to And I praye you what lacketh this of all ecclesiasticall causes the vertues and vices of the first and seconde table But ye thinke to escape with this your common exception saying And yet in temporall and ciuill matters I graunt we ought to be subiect not only to Christians but euen to infidels also being our Princes without anye exception of Apostle Euangelist Prophete Priest or Monke as ye alleage out of Chrysostome And doe you thinke thus in déede M. St. as ye saye and shall we haue any better holde of you in your graunt once again be it euen but for temporall ciuil matters And yet this fayleth much of that ye graunted before of the first as well as of the second table Be Princes the Clergies superiors now Before ye sayds that Princes should take to much vpon them to thinke themselues ecclesiasticall persons superiors speaking simply of superiours without your distinction of ciuill and temporall or spirituall and ecclesiasticall matters But sée M. St. what ye haue grauÌ„ted here It is not vnknown to you that the Pope in no case can abide no not for ciuill and temporall matters to be subiect to any Christian Prince or Emperour but contendeth euen therein also to be the farre superiour and weareth thrée crownes where the Emperour weareth but one and that one he hath set on turned off with his foote and made him kisse his foote and troad
againe to common furder of Constantines doings I pray ye do not as hitherto ye haue done in other answears telling the reader ye will specifie it more at large in such a place hereafter when ye come to the answering of that place ye tell him againe that ye specified that more at large before and so sende your Reader from hence thither and from thence againe hither to trotte vp and down he satisfied in neither place Howbeit this is a good readie answere for you for by this shift one answere serueth both places Neuerthelesse what néede any more large specifying either hers or there For ye tell vs roundly to make a shorte tale of the matter that all is to shorte Neither this say you â–ª that is here alleaged neither al the residue which ye reherse of Constantine with whose doings ye furnish hereafter six ful leaues caÌ„ import this superioritie This is in déede a round answere and a shorte and if it were withall as true â–ª ye néede not M. Stapleton promise to specifiâ—… it more at large hereafter but belike ye thought this answere was to short and therefore ye do well to referre the Bishop furder As for the Bishops present allegation out of Constantine fully importeth this superioritie that the ministerie of the Prince hath to set forth Ecclesiasticall causes so well as Temporall or rather much more in so muche as it is the Princes best ministerie to set forth by his decrees the true religion the lawe of God and the most holy faith and to remoue and punish all euils that trouble the worlde such as chiefly are errours Heresies Schismes superstitioÌ„s abuses false or wicked pastors c. all which is euident by Constantines owne auouching And I pray you M. St. marke all these things a little more aduisedly tell me then what wanteth of the issue in question betwene these parties that the Prince hath supreme gouernment so well in Ecclesiasticall causes as in Temporall And whether these be facings without proufe or halfe proufe in the world as ye say or rather these be not your to to impudent facings and bracings without any proufe or half proufe or any iote of proufe in the world but say only it importeth it not neither tel â–ª how nor why and say it is here alleaged out of place and ye will specifie it there more aâ—… large and so shift it off here vnanswered and there say here ye haue answered to it and neither here nor there meddle furder withit Doth this trow you importe a full sufficient answere The. 24. Diuision WHereas the Bishop on S. Paules sentence declared before out of Eusebius commending Constantine that the Princes best ministerie consisteth in setting forth all true Religion and abolishing all false doctrine and errours in this Diuision he confirmeth the same with the iudgement of another later Ecclesiasticall historier Nicephorus whom the Papists set out for Catholike Comparing in these things these two Emperours the one with the other Paleologus with Constantine commending this Emperour of Gréece aboue al other things for this his rule and dealing in reforming religion as did Constantine For which cause as Constantine called it his best ministerie so Nicephorus calleth it a vertue among all other belonging to an Emperour and most seemely for his imperiall dignitie which what it is and wherein this ministerie doth chiefly consist the Bishop gathereth togither diuerse sentences out of the Preface of Nicephorus to the Emperour in his commendation for his zeale his defence his chiefe authoritie his gouernaunce his restoring his clensing his establishing his setting forth of true religion and pulling downe the contrarie whereby Nicephorus protesting that he speaketh nothing for fanor or statterie declareth his iudgement to agrée with Eusebius on Saint Paules sentence that the Princes supreme gouernment in these things is his best ministerie and most properly belonging to hys charge and office To this allegation of Nicephorus Master Stapleton deuideth his Counterblast into two windes The former blast procéedeth altogither out of his stinking breath of rayling Rhetorike to deface not onely the Bishop his aduersarie the Bishop of Sarum and the Homelies set forth agaynst Idolatrie chalenging them for lyes and forgeries but also to deface the authoritie of Nicephorus and the Emperour whome he affyrmeth to be wicked and wretched Heretikes In the other blast admitting the authoritie of Nicephorus he bloweth as fast to ouercome the force of the Bishops allegations as insufficient to proue hys purpose In his first part to get the more credite for plaine and true dealing with his Reader and to blemish the Bishop with suspition of cloked dissembling he promiseth saying But first we will dissipate and discusse the mist that master Horne hath cast before thine eyes where indéede none was for the Bishop most clearely set downe the wordes of Nicephorus Master Stapleton himselfe of purpose rayseth a miste whereby not onely he dimmeth the Readers eyes but also wandreth in his owne mist vp and downe slunâ—…bling at many impertinent matters and al besides the purpose For whereto else serueth all that he discourseth about the Greâ—…ians Heresie of the holy Ghostes procéeding or the Councell of Lions of Michaell Paleâ—…logus that agréed with the Latins therein of the â—…recians reuolt of the malicious spite of the Gréeke Bishoppes of the denying Michaell his buriall what néede all these declarations Which if the Bishop had set forth as he had nothing thereby opened the matter so had he giuen occasion to Master Stapleton of iust reproouing him for straying of purpose from the marke and dalâ—…ying in vayne circumstaunces And nowe that he hath not stoode in anye suche long 〈◊〉 and fodings off of the matter master Stapleton sayeth he casteth mistes And thus which way soeuer the Bishop take â–ª Master Stapleton woulde finde an occasion to picke a quarrell And pretending to dissipate and discusâ—…e a myste in the fayre and cleare Sunne shyne hée rayseth suche a smoke that blundering foorth he wotteth not well whether he stâ—…uibleth hee can not tell on whome and falleth into a bitter innectiue at the authour of the Homelie â–ª agaynst Idolatrie onely vpon this occasion that he chaunced on the name of Michaell Paleologus Wherein he playeth as I heard once of a â—…opishe Priest in Cambrige that in his Sermon naming Abraham in his discourse to dissipate and discusse all mystes as he pretended but most likely to stretche out his matter beganne to tell what manner a man Abraham was and hauing named his sonne beganne to tell of Isaac and so of Iacob and on a rowe of all the twelue Patriarkes and of Egypte of the lande of promiss of the wildernesse and waded so farre that he had quyte loste himselfe in the Wildernesse and his theame be beganne withall After whiche sorte fareth Master Stapleton bicause the Bishoppe mentioned Michaell Paleologus herevppon he entreth into an exclamation agaynste the Authour of the
if ye meane by this visitation the outward execution of the Church lawes and decrees confirmed by the ciuill magistrate roborated with hisedicts and executed with his sword For in such sort many Emperors Princes haue fortified streÌ„gthned the decrees of Bishops made in Councels both general National as we shall in the processe see And this in christian Princes is not denied but coÌ„mended What the state of the question in hande is the reader hath often hearde How be it such is your importunitie that ye will neuer leaue your olde warbling But for the full satisfying of the Reader berein let him once againe resort to the issue that M. Feck requireth of the bishop to direct all hys foure meanes vnto wherin he would be satisfied And that is conteyned in these flat wordes VVhen your L. shall be able by any of these foure meanes to make proofe vnto me that any Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may claime or take vpon them any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes I shall herein yeelde c. This then is the state of the question betwéen theÌ„ whether any Prince may take vpon him any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes as the Queenes Maiestie doth Now wheresoeuer the B. proueth anything by the foure fore said meanes that any Prince hath taken vpon him any such gouernement as doth the Queenes Maiestie in causes ecclesiasticall there the bishop kéepeth himselfe to the state of the question in hande and satisfieth M. Fecknams issue What the bishop hath done in the two foresaide meanes is euident by that that is past let others iudge thereon Here the B. entring into the other two meanes prefixeth this issue againe before him to leuell his proues by The issue is now that by any of these two meanes remayning he shall proue that anye Prince may claime or take vpon him any such gouernment as the Queenes Maiestie in Ecclesiasticall matters doth And where the B. by any of these two meanes shall proue that any Princes haue taken â—…pon them any such gouernment in ecclesiasticall matters as the Q. Maiestie doth there the B. digresseth nothing from his question also satisfieth M. Feck â–ª demaunde This then being the state of the question betwéene them the proofe of any such gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes the B. first setteth here down the particulars that plainly declare what gouernment this is that the Q. Maiestie taketh on hir wherto he must direct his proues So that now that question in hande is this What is that gouernment in what particulars consisteth it that the Q. maiestie taketh on hir Which when here the B. doth specifie in the last Chapter M. Stapl. himselfe commended the bishop for his orderly going to worke therein and now crieth out here is a state framed farre square from the question in had whether it be so or no whether it be not plain dealing of the B. and plain warbling of M. St. let any man be indifferent iudge betwéene them But M. Stapl. sayth the question is not nowe betweene M. Feck and you whether the Prince may visite reforme and correct all maner of persons for all maner of schismes heresies and offences in Christian religion True in déede M. St. the question is not nowe whether the Prince may doe these things that you rehearse or no but the question that is nowe in hand being deducted out of the words of the issue any such gouernment demaundeth first what kinde of gouernment that is that the Q. maiestie doth claime and take vpon hir to the which question the B. aunswereth the gouernment that hir highnesse taketh on hir is such and such c. And so the state of the question is knowne what kinde of gouernment the B. must proue And looke where he proueth any such gouernment there M. Feckenhams request is aunswered And if he can not prooue any such then M. Feckenham may complaine that he is not satisfied And as he is bounde to performe his promise of thankfull yéelding so haue you no cause to warble at this the B. diligent enumeration of those particularities of the principal question least both ye should wander in an obscure generalitie also coÌ„trarie your late vaunt that ye go to worke plainly truly and particularly But sée your falshoode how chaunce ye set not downe the Bishops wordes as he spake them but abridge them 〈◊〉 of thrée parts of them and more crying Here is a state framed farre square from the question in hande Here is a false subtiltie of you M. St. farre square from any truth in hand or out of hande The Bishops wordes are these The gouernment that the Q. Maiestie moste iustly taketh vpon hir in eccles causes is the guiding caring prouiding ordering directing and ayding the ecclesiasticall state within hir dominions to the furtherance maintenance and setting forth of true religion vnitie and quietnesse of Christes Church ouerseeing visiting refourming restrayning amending and correcting all maner persons with all maner errours superstitions heresies schismes abuses offences contemptes and enormities in or about Christes religion whatsoeuer In place of all these wordes euery one béeing materiall to shewe the particular things wherein hir gouernment consisteth that she claymeth you onely for all these set downe these wordes The Prince may visite reforme and correcte all maner of persons for all maner of heresies schisines and offences in Christian religion As though the Bishops particular words specifying the poynts of hir gouernmeÌ„t conteined no more but this Neuerthelesse had the bishop specified no more but these words that ye thus contracte yet had he not swarued from the issue betweene them Any suche gouernment nor from the directâ—… answering to the question declaring any suche gouernment chiefly the chiefe poynts therof that the Quéenes maiestie claymeth and you refuse to yéelde vnto hir For euen these particularities that you set out ye will not graunte without an exception and that is in effecte vtterly to denie them althoughe in daliaunce of spéeche saying in some sense ye would onely séeme to mollifie them For what else meane these your words VVhich perchaunce in some sense might somewhat be borne withall if ye meane by this visitation and reformation the outwarde execution of the Churche lawes and decrees confirmed by the ciuill magistrate roborated with his edicts and executed with his sworde for in suche sorte many Emperours and Princes haue fortified and strengthened the decrees of Byshops made in Councels bothe generall and nationall as we shall in the processe see And this in Christian Princes is not denied but commended Christian Princes haue héere gotten afaire catche by this your graunt and commendation to become your seruants your souldiours your slaughtermen only executing with their swords that you with your authoritie decrée and appoint vnto them Now forsooth a fayre supreme authoritiâ—… But let vs sée how this doth hang togither Ye graunt theÌ„ to visite reforme
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
or else woulde haue the royall that is to say the ciuill power to be superiour to the ecclesiasticall Howe madly for so wise a man ye haue proued these differences let wise men iudge M. Saunders and howe badly if not madly ye make your conclusions agaynst vs let wise men also iudge For we neither confounde these powers nor giue bothe to the Prince nor make the Ciuill power simply superiour to the ecclesiastical power although we giue the prince a superiour power in respect of the ouerséeing that the eccl. power whiche in the administration therof is higher although not in the direction and maynteining therof be not abused by the ecclesiasticall person Nowe M. Saunders hauing sayde thus muche of these three differeÌ„ces setteth downe a long sentence out of Chrisostome wherein he extolleth the Priestly power aboue the Kinges power which notwithstanding is nothing agaynst this superioritie that we attribute to Princes although the office and administration of the ecclesiasticall power be graunted to be neuer so muche superiour and this is answered vnto sufficiently already in M. St. Yet bicause we haue hereafter to deale at large with M. Stapleton on the same sentence of Chrysostome I referre it to the proper and more fitter consideration of it And thus much hath M. Sanders for these thrée differences which he sayth he speaketh agaynst thrée errours The first errour is of them that say the royall power in a christian Prince is higher than any ecclesiasticall power which opinion the Englishe Protestantes defende The seconde errour is of them that extende the power royall to certayne causes ecclesiasticall to be knowne and iudged by the kings law To conclude the thirde is of them that thinke a christian Prince at the least in all ciuill businesse and in his owne realme alwayes and without all exception to be greater thaÌ„ any ecclesiastical Magistrate nor that for any sin that he shall commit in the Church of God he can be remoued from the administration of the kingdome I answere neither these conclusions are sufficiently proued on these foresayd proues hitherto nor some of them at all before mentioned As the deposing of the Prince which is another question and héere as madly thrust in as maliciously and trayterously ment Neither any of these conclusions touche the English Protestants for they defend none suche as you haue héere set downe Name the parties and their assertions Else in steade of M. Saunders ye deserue to be rather called M. Slaunders The seconde Chapter The argument vvherof is this No Christian king in his kingdome is the supreme gouernour in ecclesiasticall causes immediatly vnder Christ. IN this Chapter as commonly else where M. Saunders rhethorically dothe hide his methode howbeit for perspicuitie sake I will deuide this Chapter into three partes â–ª The first is his arguments why he thinketh the Prince can not be this gouernour The seconde is the reasons why he thinketh vs heerein deceyued The thirde is the meâ—…nes to dissuade vs from the acknowledging of it by the euent and euill successe that hath ensued thereon And first for the first parte his argumentes are of two sortes the one à definitione from the definition of a gouernour the other à dignitate from the greater dignitie of Priesthood bring the argument by comparing the dignitie of bothe these estates from the olde testament to the Newe His first argument beginneth thus He that may be called a supreme head or chief gouernour hath of necessitie the power of doing all those things which can be wrought by the inferiours to the magistrates of that congregatioÌ„ by their office or by any charge beloÌ„ging properly to the same coÌ„gregation This shal be made playner by putting of example He that iâ—… chieftayne in an armie hath not only the Imperial power ouer al Tribunes and Centurions but besides may lawfully chaleÌ„ge to himself to occupie the Tribunes place â–ª or to be captayne ouer an hundreth if at any tyme he shall thinke it meete for him selfe to do it He that can gouerne a whole common weale can if he will knowe of euery meane man and not onely sustayne the turne and fulfill the offices of the Prince of them all but also of his Maior or of the inferiour Iudges He that is a Bishoppe hathe power of baptising and of shutting the Churche dores and of distributing the Churches treasure although those thinges are wonte to be done of the inferiour ministers To this definition and these examples I answere the definition is false the examples are insufficient Fyrste for the definitioÌ„ it is not true of euery supreme gouernour that he can or oughte to worke and execute all those things and duties that euery one of his inferiours can or ought to worke and execute For the gouernment of thinges is one thing and the execution of thinges gouerned is another thing Yea these two are relatiua and can not be confounded the one with the other although they haue respecte the one to the other for so the gouernour shoulde become the person gouerned Secondly these thrée examples are insufficient For although we admitte these thrée yet we may obiecte a great many moe examples in which this difinition holdes not Set aside the doing of all dyle and vnséemely offices for a farre more meane estate than a Prince to doe of which he hath neither knowledge nor it were tollerable he should â—…o them I pray ye M. sand howe could a king ruling in his own realme be his own ligire Embassadour in another realme Wil ye say he might make a deputie at home and be Embassadour to his deputie abroade and so the deputie to the king shall be the king and the king the deputie to the king that is the kings deputie But perchaunce ye will admitte this absurditie bicause ye will not go from your worde and say well the king may be so and he wil. Here what if one should do with you as I heard once M. Feckenham tel the tale of a gentlemaÌ„ that defended mustard was good with all meate One sayd nay it was nought with this meate another with that but looke what any coulde recken vp he still affirmed his saying that mustard was good with euery meate were it neuer so vnsauery a sauce therto Nowe when euery man had reckoned what he liste at length quoth his owne man that wayted on him I pray you master and is a messe oâ—… mustard good with a messe of milke Ha quoth his master â–ª thou haste marde all thou shouldest haue heldae thy peace This was master Feckenhams tale Nowe if master Feckenham that tolde this tale shoulde deale thus with you M. Sanders that as lustily affirme the king may lawfully do any thing that any of his subiectes may lawfully dâ—… as the Gentleman sayd mustard was good with al meate â–ª If M. Feckenham would say sir and can the king do all that euen his owne
had not deliuered vs from it and yet sée if these Papistes that can so narrowly spie and proll at euery note in king Henry and kings Edwards dayes can in Quéene Maries dayes espie anye one of these great beames that were such apparante tokens of gods wrath that all men sawe and felt what euents succeeded the refusall of this title and the yéelding it to the Pope nerehand the cleane subuersion of this Realme if we may iudge by sequels Now after Quéene Marie he comes to the Quéenes Maiestie that now God be praised most prosperously raigneth ouer vs. But vvhen very many giuen to heresies vvere offended at this notable modestie of the Queene neither vvould they yet vnderstande his Counsell in gouerning his Churche God brought to passe that Marie of happie memorie being dead the kingdome of England should deuolue to such a vvoman as novve vvriteth hir selfe The supreme gouernesse in all matters and causes asvvell ecclesiasticall as secular That yet so at the length by the successe it selfe men of hard harte and obstinate necke mighte marke hovv euill king Henry tooke this office vpon him the vvhiche of his heire and successour could not duely and orderly be fulfilled For to whom it is not permitted to teach vvhich is the most necessarie office of an ecclesiasticall Head hovv shal she performe those greater offices that are occupied in the chastisement and correction of them that ought to teache the people or shall she vvhich is vnvvorthie that she should hir selfe teache publiquely in the lovvest degree moderate and reprehend vvith lavvful authoritie other publique teachers in the highest degree or if she can not lavvfully reprehend them shall she yet be lavvfully supreme gouernesse of the Church I omit here the things that in these yeares vvhich are last passed haue bene I knovv not hovv vncomely done and preached in Englande vnder such supreme heads of the Church I spare the dignitie of theÌ„ that gouerne Another time if God vvill I vvill handle them particularly hovve greatly both from the lavve of God and from the sentence of the auncient Churche and from righte reason that state of a common vveale is farre in vvhiche any king arrogateth to himselfe the office and name of the supreme head of the Church Is your part so false and weake of proues Maister Saunders that it can win no credite but by discrediting of ours with sclaunders and yet we woulde pardon this in you ascribing it either to some passion of choler against your aduersaries or to blinde affection of your selues that ye call verie manie of vs giuen to heresies hard harted and obstinate necked which are termes fitter to muster in M. Stapletons coÌ„mon places than to stuffe vp M. doctor Saunders volumes howe they redownde vpon your selues let other iudge â–ª that will reade and view of both But if we forgiue you this for our parts shal we stil suffer you to raile vpoÌ„ sclander the Lordes annoynted saying she arrogateth to hir selfe the office and name of the supreme Head of the Church speaking at randon withoute limitation of the Churche as the Pope doth arrogate to himselfe and taketh on hir to be an ecclesiasticall head and publique teacher of other that should teach hir these are too too infamous sclauÌ„ders of hir Maiestie that claimeth no such title nor attempteth any such thing What supreme gouernement is ascribed to hir highnesse we haue tolde you a thousand times but I sée ye will not vnderstand it bicause ye would of set purpose sclander it But to knit vp your argument of the euent and sequele of the Quéenes Maiesties raigne ye say many things haue bin done and preached in England ye cannot tell hovv vnsemely â—… thinke euen the same M. Saunders ye can not tell howe â—…ndede But howe vnseemely a thing is this for one of your â—…rofession to chalenge ye cannot tell what nor howe ye set owne nothing but vnder a pretence of sparing vs to bréede â—…et a furder sclaunderous suspition ye threat vs that ye will â—…serue theÌ„ til a furder leisure that is to say ad Kalendas graecas til â—…e shall first know them and then be able to proue them in the meane seasoÌ„ ye take the wisest way to say such ther are but what they are ye cannot now tell ye wil learne theÌ„ out and tell vs another time but tell the worste ye canne ye shal neuer be able to tell of any fals doctrine preached and by the Prince approued to be preached nor of anye wicked facte allowed by publike authoritie to be done No Maister Saunders in all the Quéenes Maiesties raigne ye can neuer be able to proue any suche things but in the raigne of your Popes we can proue many such things as whordome committed and maintained murder done and maintained Idolatry vsed and maintained and infinite errors preached and maintained by publique authoritie among the Papists As for the Quéenes maiesties raigne that now is if the euent and sequele may make an argument God hath so blessed it maugre all your spites and practises that no Realme christian hath florished like nor Englande more at anye tyme The Lord be praised for it and for his mercie sake long continue it that hath giuen so goodly a token of his well liking hir Maiesties supreme gouernment The thirde Chapter The argument is that Princes can not iudge nor define in causes Ecclesiasticall OF those errors that are about the povver of kings and magistrats the secoÌ„d error is of theÌ„ that thinke kings are not in dede the chief heads of the Churches in vvhich they raigne but in certaine causes Ecclesiastiall to bee euen as vvorthie members as Bishops â–ª for although in one certaine thing as in the office of teaching they preferre Bishops before kings yet partly in another Ecclesiasticall matter as in deposing a Byshop from his seat or in moderating any synode they preferre kings before Bishops partly they vvill haue it free for kings that almoste in euery ecclesiasticall matter they may knowe and decerne as Iudges Of the confutation of whiche errour this is the reason that I should shewe in euery cause of the ecclesiastical lawe that is to be knowne and iudged Kinges to be so muche in the place of priuate men that this trial can not of the ecclesiasticall Iudges be committed vnto them Although I denie not but that of some facte that perteyneth to the eccl. lawe the knowledge may be committed to Kinges and Magistrates But before the eccl. cause be known the king may orderly intermeddle his authoritie to that ende that a quiet place may be graunted where the Bishops should iudge And also that the Bishops may be called at a certayne day to that place And that in the meane season whyle the ecclesiasticall cause is knowne the publique peace yea euen in the assembly of Priestes may be conserued To conclude after the cause knowne and iudged of the Pristes the king either by the sworde that he
as ye sayde before disposing otherwyse than Christ hath done your Priestes do so but they ought not to do so The Prince can not do it nor he dothe it nor claymes to doe it nor it is ascribed vnto him Yea thoughe you meane by disposing no alteration yet is this an harde phrase to say that Princes or priestes either dispose of the Churche of Christe but rather dispose of matters in the Church of Christ. And this as the Priest may doe in his vocation so may the Prince in his estate Which though it be not expressed by name but comprehended in the newe Testament yet is it euen by name expressed in the olde Testament in diuers places of the disposing of Church matters by Moyses Iosue Dauid Salomon Iosaphat Ezechias c. And since your selfe confesse the one gouernment is a figure of the other And that the gouernment before Christ he neither brake it nor diminished it it followeth that theÌ„ he left it entire and confirmed it And therfore although the Princes disposing of Churche matters be not by name expressed yet is it by your reasoÌ„ necessarilie comprehended and so you answere your selfe Now after he hath thus as he supposeth debarred Princes from all warrant oute of the law of God and the newe Testament he examineth the other lawes saying Except therefore by the lawe of nature the law of nations or the lawe ciuill such power be permitted too the king it is cleare that he hath no power at all ouer these things But certaine it is that those lawes cannot giue to the king any power ouer things that are not subiect to those lawes For no law can establishe ought either of other things or persons or actions than those things that fall vnder the compasse of it But Ecclesiasticall matters do infinitly excede the power of the lawe of Nature of nations and the ciuill For of these three the law of nature is the first and greatest But neither that sith it begaÌ„ in the earth can decree ought vpon the mysteries of Christe which draw their originall from heauen onely For that I may speake nothing of the force of nature being yet entire truely after that the nature of all mankynd by the sinne of Adam was corrupted and death entring by one man passed into al it can not be that from that infected originall any good thing shoulde come forth For an ill tree can not bring forth good fruites neither doth the fleshely man such as we all be by nature perceiue those things that are of the spirite of God. All this labor is a néede not M. Saunders to run for confirmation of a Christian doctrine from the law of God to the lawe of nature and the lawe of man we vse not so to doe Neither desire we anye doctrine to be admitted that is not proued by the lawe of God reuealed in his worde vnto vs it is you the Papists that stand on such proues and grounds not we Howbeit you do iniurie to the law of nature to measure it altogether by the corruption of our nature For howsoeuer we be degenerate from it the law of nature remaineth in it selfe both good and perfect and is called likewise the law of God. Neither can I thinke that euery ecclesiasticall thing as ecclesiasticall things are commonly vnderstoode is infinitely aboue the power of the law of nature By which reason many petit matters would be farre aboue great principles Yea many great Ecclesiasticall matters doe fall within the compasse of the lawe of nature It is true that you say of the corruption of our nature that by the fall of Adam sin hath infected the Masse of all mankinde Death by one man hath entred into all men No goodnesse can come of such a corrupted originall An ill tree can not bring forth good fruite and that the fleshely man perceiueth not the things that are of the spirit of God. All this is true but is it not as much against a Priest as a Prince for the Priest in that he is a man is borne in sinne and dyeth by death the reward of sinne nor caÌ„ bring forth any good fruites nor perceiue the things of the spirit of God. And the prince in that he is a ChristiaÌ„ is washed from his sinne The sting of death hath no power ouer him but is a passage to eternall life He is regenerate by a newe originall from aboue He is a good tree and bringeth good fruits and is become a spirituall man perceiuing and working the things that are of the spirite of God and that perchaunce a great deale better than many a good Priest and without all doubt farre more spirituall than any Popishe priest And therefore that ye speake of the corruption of nature is nothing to the purpose excepte it be to confute your errors of pura naturalia fréewill preparatiue workes c. But Maister Saunders drist is this that onely the Priests are spirituall men and so may onely Iudge of spiritual things and Princes are but naturall fleshely and sinnefull men and so can giue no Iudgement of spirituall matters But howe vntrue this is how presumptuous on his partie and iniurions to all Christian Princes and how contrary to his owne selfe that faith else where Christian Princes are spirituall I thinke anye that haue but meane Iudgement may easily Iudge it But Maister Saunders procéedeth saying But to Iudge of Ecclesiasticall matters is no small good thyng but one of the chiefest that Christe hath gyuen vnto his Church bycause he hath gyuen the power of feeding of losyng and bynding to his Apostles that is to the chiefest Magistrates of hys Churche euen as the greatest gifte VVhich gifte they coulde neuer well exercise but wyth Iudgement eyther goyng before or goyng with it For he that shall binde nothing but that that shoulde be bounde and shall lose nothing but that that shoulde be losed must of necessitie before hande deliberate and decree that this is to bee bounde and that is to bee losed But to decree suche a thing to bee done or not to be done in Christian Religion this is euen that that we call to Iudge in matters of Faith. Syth therfore a power so heauenly and notable can not spring oute of the beginnings of our corrupte nature it followeth that it commeth onely of the free mercie of god But that mercie of God is made manifest vnder the time of the new Testament partlye by the lawe written partly not written but neyther waye anye povver is gyuen to Kyngs in Ecclesiasticall causes This argumeÌ„t M. SauÌ„ders is like the hopping of a reuÌ„d that from the law of the new Testament went about to infirme it by the lawe of nature and so fetching a circumquaque commeth in again with this conclusion that it is not by the law of the newe Testament So that where we thought we had procéeded â—…urder wée are nowe where wée were before But to let goe the
naughtinesse of the argument We graunt that to iudge aright of Ecclesiasticall matters is a great gift of God but that the iudgemeÌ„t of ecclesiasticall matters is onelie to be restrained to binding and losing as you here define what you meane by iudging in matters of faith this is a manifest falsehood True it is that binding and losing can not rightly be withoute iudgement nor withoute right iudgement and therefore your Pope and you doe erre so often herein both binding that that should be losed and losing that that should be bound errante claue as ye terme it your key erring and erring also not onely in things to be bounde or losed but in the power it selfe of binding losing too Yet notwithstanding binding and losing and the iudgement requisite in binding and losing are two distinct and seueral things and iudgement reacheth furder to other things also euen in the Priest himselfe besides the Princes iudgement And therefore as this definition of iudgement in matters of faith is preposterously brought in for ye oughte before to haue defined what ye ment by iudgemente so is it false for other matters of faithe require iudgement besides binding and losing Now where you say this power commeth not of the principles of our corrupt nature but of the free mercie of God you say truth But that ye adde the mercie of God is made manifest vnder the time of the newe testament partlye by the law written partly not written is spoken ambiguously For that Princes iudged in matters of faith was also made manifest in the olde Testament but that Princes haue power to binde and lose we graunt is neither manifest nor couert neither in the olde or newe As for the newe lawe to be deuided into written and not written is another error and impertinent to this question Your vnwritten lawe of the new Testament we stand not vpon But to affirme that by neither way written or vnwritten no power is giuen to kings in Ecclesiasticall matters that we denie and your self haue rather confuted it thaÌ„ hither to confirmed it But to confirme it ye bring out this reason Neither were thene at the beginning any Christian Kings to whom Christ shoulde haue committed any power nor the Apostles gaue any rule according where vnto the kings should iudge of Ecclesiasticall causes That there were no Christian kings then is not materiall For by this rule they should be no defenders of the faith neither bicause Princes were not theÌ„ defenders of it But that the Apostles gaue no rule whereby they should iudge is false For whosoeuer should iudge shuld iudge by gods word and this rule Christ and his Apostles gaue in generall But that Princes mighte iudge is both proued from the olde Testament and by the text that M. Saunders himselfe citeth out of the new yea by that he saith immediatly For if any man say kings are appointed iudges in a cause of the faith only bicause by Baptisme they are made spiritual meÌ„ who iudge all things and the spirites do trie those things that are of God this in dede I graunt to be true in the kynde and maner of the priuate but not of the publique iudgement For it is another thing when thou art a member of the Catholike Church nor preferrest thy selfe before thy pastours what is necessarie for thee priuately to Iudge and this the vnction teacheth and another thing to take vpon thee power to teache others and to prescribe to thy Pastors what they ought to do or teache when thou art not called to the publique ministerie of the Church as Aaron was We know there is a difference betwéen priuate and publique Iudgement But that this place of S. Paule The spirituall man Iudgeth all things is only to be vnderstoode of prinate Iudgement is but the priuate iudgement of M. Saunders But it is well that he graunteth priuate iudgement to euery Christian man Neither is it any reason then it shuld be debarred irom any Christian Princes neither is it anye reason that the Prince although in his priuate Iudgement â–ª rightly iudging a matter of faithe to be true shoulde not approue set forth the same publiquely by his princely authoritie And so his priuate Iudgement directs his publique Iudgement For a Prince is not only a priuate man but a publique man also not that he may doe all things of his owne priuate or publique Iudgement nor take vpon him the publique ministerie of the pastour in teaching being not called as Aaron was for this is not ascribed to the Prince bicause he giueth a publique Iudgement in respect he is a publique person but his Iudgement is a publique approbation and establishing of that that is alreadie by others Iudgement â–ª iudged to whome the discussing appertaineth In which discussing althoughe the godly learned clergie being called as Aaron was haue the greatest skill and charge of Iudgement yet the lay men suche as are also learned and godly haue a publique Iudgement too Or else why saith Panormitane we shoulde more beleue a lay man alleaging scripture than the whole councell besides but nowe the truth being once founde out by these learned Iudgements the Princes publique Iudgement as it called them together as it gaue them their charge so it prescribeth what the pastors ought to doe and teache therin without any preiudice to the spirituall pastors Iudgement in the function of his doing and teaching Now hauing thus set downe his owne assertions he will enter on the other part to confute our obiections And first he alleageth this reason of the protestantes In all the olde Testamente we sée gouernors and Kings both to haue prescribed to the priests what they ought to doe in ecclesiasticall matters and also to haue remoued them froÌ„ the ministerie that haue negligently done their dutie To this obiecton M. Saunders answere is this that this reason holdes not from the olde Testament to the new If this came so to passe in the olde Testament saith he yet no reason shuld compell that the same shuld be so in the new Testament sith the reason of the eccl. gouernment is changed And are you changed too M. Saunders that saide before after say make all your booke of it that the ecclesiastical kind of gouernment hath bene alwayes one and that is a viâ—…ble Monarchie euen from Adam to Pope Pius â–ª 5. and said that if the gouernement be changed the Churche must needes be changed tâ—…o and made the gouernement of the olde Testament to be a figure of the new But now that you are beaten with your owne arguments you say they hold not by reason the ecclesiasticall gouernment is changed But I see Maister SauÌ„ders you woulde deale with vs as the riche man dealt with his poore neighbor When the poore maÌ„ complained saying I beseeche your worship be good vnto me for my Cowe hath goared your Bull. What hath he quoth the riche maÌ„
a. Stap. 48. The papistes shiftes from Priestes to Peophets and from Prophets to Priests for the Popes primacie How highely Popâ—…sh priests esteeme of theÌ„ solues Deut. 13. 3. Reg. 22. 3. Reg. 18. Math. 7. 1. Pap. 25. 1. Par. 23. 1. Par. 24. 1. Par. 25. 1. Par. 26. Both the chiefe prophets and cheife priestes vnder the appoyntment of the king 2. Par. 29. Stap. 48. a. Carolus Magnus an vnlike match to Dauid Stap. 48 â–ª The lawe of King â—…uo Priuileges of Princes to the clergie well or yll vsed The Pope and his prelates like the Iuy Stap. 48. b. Stap. 49. a. The Queenes Ma estie by the Papists shamefully 〈◊〉 Win. Pag. 9. a. Cap. 12. Stap. 48. b. The example of the supreme gouernment of K. Salomon Salomons dedeposing the high priest Stap. 48. b Salomons example deposing Abâ—…athar applied by the papists to Queene Mâ—…rie deposing the archbishop Cran. Fol. 44. b 45 b. 47. a. 48. b The difference betwene Q. Maries and king SalomoÌ„s doings Stap. 49. â—… Stap. 49. â—… Stap. 49. a. Master Stap. question and dilemma Stap. 49. a. The difference of the phrase for the princes sacrificing and the princes de posing Abiathat The question and the dilemma returned on the papists Sup. fol. 217. a Stap. 4 9. â—… The highest priest a traytor A traytor The Bishop of Rome a traytor to the â—…mperor of Rome Stap. 4 9. a. 3. Reg. 2. Stap. 4 9 a. The ministerie and executing of Gods sentence debarreth not the princes supremacie Stap. 49. â—… The issue 〈◊〉 question Master Stap. graunteth the Pâ—…ince to be chiefe ruler in some ecclesiasticall causes What the authoâ—…tie of depâ—…sing the Pope implieth A difference betweene the chiefe â–ª ruler of ecclesiasticall causes and the chiefe doer of them The example of king Iosaphats supreme gouernment Cap 13. Sta. 50. a. Sta. 50. a. Wherein christian Princes must go beyondâ—… kâ—…ng 〈◊〉 hat 2. Par. 20. Sâ—…a 50 a. Iosaphat direc ted ecclâ—…siastical matters not by the commandement but by the aduise of the prests Sta. 50. a. Sta 50. a. Sta. 50. a. Sta. 50. a. Psalm 2. Sta. 50 a. In cle si Rom. N 22. de prebendis Supra 205. a. Stap. 50. a. b. Sta. 50. b. Stap. 50. b. How contemp tuously the papistes esteeme of the examples of the scriptures 2. Par. 17. Preachers sent of the prince Lyra in 2. patal 17. The princes progresse about religion Lyra in 2. paral 19. Vatablus Lyra. Iustices of the peace Lyra. Stap. 50. b. Sâ—…apl 51. â—… The princes forme and order in proceeding Stapl. 51. â—… Stap. 51. â—… Religion only proceedeth froÌ„ God the preaching proceedeth from the ministers the direction and ordering from the Prince Stapl. 50. b. The Papistes denie not only the Princes go uernment of ecclesiasticall matters but also of ecclesiastical persons Supra pa 47. â—… Stapl. 5â—…â—… King Iosaphat did not deale sclenderly in ecclesiasticall matters but as his chiefest charge 2. Paral. 19. Lyra in 2. Paral 19. Nothing ecclesiasticall or temporal exeÌ„pted from the chief ouersight of the Prince no not of the cases Deut. 17. that the Papists chiefly boast vppon Stap. 51. â—… The iniuÌ„ctioÌ„â—… of princes for the obseruatioÌ„ of ecclesiastical matters and threates of displeasure for the breache of them Lyra in 2. Paâ—…al 19. The king iudged ecclesiasticall causes in that his debiâ—â—e iudged them 2. Paral. 19. Stap 51. b. Diuine matters not excluded from the kings office The priest the princes commissioner 2. Paral. 17. Stap. 51. a. Lyra in 2. Paral. 19. Vatablus Sta. 50. a. The prince commandeth the Priest. Fol. 52. a. The example of king â—…zechias supreme gouernment in ecclesiastical causes 4. Reg. 18. 2. Pat. 29. Stapletoa Caput 14. Fol. 52. b. Lyra. Ecclesiasticall matters by K. Izechias newly established To be readie and seruiceable to fulfill Gods determination debarreth not the Princes supreme gouernment Ezechias executed Gods commaundement and the clergie the coÌ„maundement of Ezechias Lyra in 2. Par. 29. 2. Par. 29. Lyra in 2. Par. 29. Lyra. Iniunxiâ—… 〈◊〉 Praecepit renouationem diuini cultus Imagines Idololatriae multas The popishe fond destinction of â—…mage and Idoll 4. Reg. 18. The Princes predecessors disposing debarreth not his supreme gouernment The subiection to Gods commaundement embarreth not the Princes supreme gouernment The doing it by the handes of the prophets or any other embarreth not the Princes supreme gouernment Stap 53. â—… The asking counsell of others debarieth not the Princes supreme authoritie in the doing 2. paâ—…al 30. Lyra in 2. Par 30. Sâ—…ap 53. â—… Ezechias did many things neuer so done before â—… Paâ—… 30. Lyra in 2. Paral. 30. Lyra in â—… Paral. 3â—… 2. paral 31. The commendation and application of K. Ezechias Stap 59. a. A proper shifting answere muche vsed by M. St in these examples Supra 50. b. Stap. 53. a. Daniel 7. Apoc. 12. Gal. 1. The name of ministers 1. Cor. 4. 3. Reg. 18. Daniel 14. Stapl. 53. a. The popish priestes now not like the true prophetes The Papistes shifte from Priests to Prophetes Fol 53. a. The example of King Iosias his supreme gouernmeÌ„t in ecclesiasticall causes Sta. Caput 15. Stapl. 53. a. b. 4. Reg. 23. 2. Par. 34. 35. Lyrâ—… Iosias trauaile by his kingly authoritie Stap. 53. a. b. The trauailes of good catholike princes Whether we or the Papists let vp Idols Sta. 50 a. How the popish prelaâ—…s vsed christian Princes Howe the Q. Highnes follo with the ensample of Iosias 4. Reg. 23. Monkes and Nunnes celles pulled downe Sta. 53 b. Stap. 53. b. Master Stap. stragleth from the marke and calleth on the Bishop to kepe him to the marke The issue in question betvvene the Bishop and master Fecknam Sup. â—…ol 136. a M. Stap. settes vp ix â–ª nevve markes both differing from M. Feck and the Bâ—…shops issue and also from his ovvne former marks and yet cryes oâ—…t on the B. for straying from the question The Papistes play like the Lapvving The issue Stapl. 53. b. M. Stapletons first falâ—… marke The kings agnising the high Priest in the old testament inferreth not that they agnised him their â—…npreme gouernour St. fol. 53. b. St. fol. 53. b. M. St. second false marke The conferring of the Q Maiesties doing with these auncient and godly kings The Papistes vaunt of 1000 yeares antiquitie The Papistes dare not stretch their crake of antiquitie to Christe or to 1500. yeareâ—… and vpvvarde Galat. 1. Stap. 54. a. M. Stap. thirde false marke In the proofe of the supreme gouernment the proofe of euery particuler fact is not necessarie The issue betweene the B. and M. Feck The taking an othe The othe to the Pope The high priest in the olde law did not as the pope doth novv The kingâ—… in the olde lawe charged their clergy on their priesthood for eccl. matters Sta. 54 â—… Stap. 54. â—… M. St. fourth false marke The Prince abandoneth not godly bishops though he abaÌ„ don the Pope The abandoning of the
vvith all eloquence and learning he set foorth against Horne the false Bishop of VVinchester So stornfully this rayling Papiste speaketh of the Bishop and so he braggeth of his fellowes lerning and eloquence All whiche considered I thought it necessarie and more than high tyme to answer these proude Phariseis least the goodnesse of the cause should become distrusted the truth suspected the Prince slaundered the Bishop defaced the enimie encouraged the godlie offended the simple abused and the whole estate euill spoken of by too muche vnfrutefull silence and ouerlong suffrance of such false and glorious pratlers And although for these causes I was the willinger to sette it foorth yet was I the more emboldned on the request of diuerse that hearing I had trauailed in it by their godlie persuasions vrged me the more thereto The chiefe of the Argument consisteth on the Supreme gouernement of Christian Princes in causes Ecclesiasticall The occasion sprang of a controuersie betweene the Bishop of Winchester and master FeckenhaÌ„ about the Oth of the Supremacie All which is extant abroade in a learned and pithie booke of the Bishops answering to maister Feckenhams scruples The issue they draue the matter vnto was this that maister Feckenham must be resolued for the Princes Supreme Gouernement in Ecclesiasticall causes by any of these foure meanes the Scripture the Doctours the Councels or the Practise The Bishop accepteth the offer and maketh proofe of the Princes Supreme gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes not onely by any one but by euery one of all these forsayd poyntes as the Bishops booke is euident to testifie Maister Feckenham that had made his promise to take the Oth vponany of these proues and seing them all beyond his cunning and expectation proued but neither mynding to keepe touche nor able to answere suborneth a chapman from beyond the seas to wit this Louanist maister Stapleton if he may be called Maister for order of schole degree that is suche a renegate from God and runnagate from his Prince who to saue maister Feckenhams honestie if he woulde aduenture to relieue his cause master Feckenham should to saue his credite vouchesafe to relieue his neede Master Stapleton hauing better furniture of sale eloquence than store of grounded learning and yet more learning than grace well to imploy it in acknowledging the manyfest truth taketh vpon him to aunswere the Bishop and deuides all the matter into foure Bookes whereof this is the fyrst that here is answered This doone he conceiueth suche apride of this his exquisite piece of worke that we must needes haue some fyne new name for this fyne newe booke singular heads ye know must haue singular inuentions and bicause the Bishops name is M. Horne he entitleth his worke forsooth a Counterblast And yet somwhat truer than he himselfe wist beeing in deed a blast scarce worth a Counter if the reader well examine it And that ye maye the better perceiue this volume deserues so rare a name for these two rare gifts eloquence and learning for which maister Sanders so highly extolleth him Mulus mulum scabit And sith these two champions beare now the bell for eloquence among the Papists the one for English the other for Latine I haue sorted maister Stapletons eloquence by it self consisting on certain CoÌ„mon places folowing that we may the easier iudge of the substance of his learning whiche otherwise we should not so well discerne it is so poudred with his eloquence His eloquence I confesse I haue sayde but little vnto nor can say muche nor would say ought vnto it as one that neuer was trained vp in the scholes and arte therof As for maister Stapleton goeth beyond maister Saunders and withoute all comparison is an A perse Doctor in it and therfore I set it asyde the better to viewe the learning to the whiche I had more especiall regarde for when all is done the Eloquence settes it out but the Learning proues the matter And though it be not replyed vpon with suche learning as many other better coulde that rather shoulde haue doone it yet haue I endeuored truly simply and playnely to answere it and I hope to the coÌ„tentation of the modest Reader that rather respecteth the boulâ—…ing out of the truthe the staye of his conscience and the glorie of God than either the estimation of learning or the shewe of eloquence Nowe although the Supremacie be the principall matter yet the importunitie of maister Stapleton hath once or twice caried me perforce away with him to purge our selues of certain auncient Herekes that he layeth to our charge and crieth so faste vpon vs for answere and sayeth we styll slinke from it as though we hearde it not and therefore I haue here at large made aunswere to it which makes the volume aryse the bigger In somuche that I thought for all maister Stapletons exclamations to haue lefte it out or put it in one of his Common places But that Maister Saunders commeth rufflyng in wyth the like argument and therefore I lette it stande as it did And I truste I haue cleerely disburdened vs and iustly burdened them therewyth tyll they shall be hable to discharge themselues therof I desyre good Reader but euen indifferencie in thy iudgement Last of all since Master Sanders hath compiled his great volume of the Popes Uisible Monarchie in the secoÌ„d book wherof he entreth into this argumeÌ„t of the Princes Supremacie I haue chosen out of the second booke 4. chapters of the state of the Ciuil and Ecclesiastical power in the Original in the Use and End of both of the Interest and superioritie of either state chiefly of that he would not only defeate the Prince of all gouernment in matters Ecclesiasticall but also clean dispossesse hir Maiestie of hir Crowne For maister Saunders to mayntein the trecherous fact of Pâ—…us the fift the last Pope if Cardinal Bon Compagnion Pope Good fellowe as the talke wente be not deade woulde proue that Bishops may depose their Princes and assoyle their subiectes from their allegeance Whiche poyntes as they draw nerest to the present argument and in deed are for learning suche learning as it is the principall pointes of all his volume I thought good to ioyâ—… them vnto Stapleton and so in one answer answere both though both be answered seuerally as they drawe neere or farre in resemblance or varietie of Argument example or similitude aboute this matter Wherein what is doone I committe vnto thee good Christian Reader to iudge as God shall moue thy heart and besecche thou him to moue it to the best That the truth may appeare that the falshode may be detected that thou mayst be edified that the Prince may be obeyed that the Gospel maye be prospered and that God aboue al things may be glorified nowe and for euer Amen Master Stapletons common places THat all master Stapletons whole volume as well therein himselfe termeth it a Counterblast is indéede but a verie blast blowne out to encounter the
eyes to see eares to heare and handes to feele we can not choose but beholde it in the face 434. a. Ye had neede looke well to your selfe remember nowe among other things master Horne c. Take heede master Horne Thinke vpon this at your good laysure remember also howe ye stande c. VVherein I pray you resteth a great part of your newe clergie B. But in Butchers C. Cookes Catchpoles and Coblers D. Diers Daubers F. Fellons Fishermen G. Gunners H. Harpers I. Inkeepers M. Merchants and Mariners N. Netmakers P. Potters Poticaries and Porters of Belingsgate R. Ruffling Ruffians S. Sadlers Sheremen and Shepeheardes T. Tanners Tylers Tinkers Trumpetters VV. VVeauers VVherrymen 481. a. b. This and such other is his Rhetorik eyther flourishing with 〈◊〉 wordes running on a letter and nowe and then sifting the whole crosse rowe for them Or else doubling and trâ—…bling of 〈◊〉 phrases or multiplying of wordes with which euery sentence is in a maner farced For 〈◊〉 is not commonly content to expresse his minde with one worde be it 〈◊〉 so plaine except he vnderproppâ—… it with an other at the least as thus miserable and wretched peruerting and deprauing The full illustration and opening of whole and entyre matter Euidently and openly disciphered and disclosed espied and vnbuckled bewrayed and detected opened illustred and confirmed Which as it is most vaine babling so is it altogither vnworthy the noting except briefly to shew the reader what kinde of vanitie he hath puft vp this his Counterblast withall His sixt common place of impertinent discourses His ovvne obiection of the same LIke a wanton Spaniell hee runneth from his game at riot 243. Master Horne sayth he seeketh out bye matters leauing the principall as the Donatistes did 321. a. That thou mayest the better sée howe he obserueth this and kéepeth himselfe to his matter or no first beholde the issue and state of the question betwéene the Bishop and M. Fëckhenham which is this VVhether any Prince haue taken on them any such supreme gouernment as dothe the Q. Maiestie in ecclesiasticall causes Which issue to be resolued in Master Feckenham desireth the proufe by any of these foure wayes eyther by the Scriptures or by the Doctors or by the Councels or by the continuall practise in any one part of Christendome To the which issue by all these foure said wayes the Bishop directeth all his prooues and in this first booke he prooueth it by two of them the Scriptures and the Doctors Now whether Master Stapleton kéepe himself to this issue or to the proufes thereof or to the Bishops answere without playing the wanton Spaniell and the part of the Donâ—… iudge when thou hast read this his sixt common place And withall thou shalt sée what good plentie of bye matters he had in store when substantiall matter â—…ayled him In his first Preface taking on him to gather abriefe summe of such things as he thought specially he might deface the Bishop withall throughout all his Preface he neuer setteth 〈◊〉 the issue in controuersie but quarelleth about other things with the Bishops rashnesse follie Grammer Logike Rhetorike Arithmetike And where at the length he speaketh of king Henrie 1. his dealings in punishing Priestes whoredome to shewe â—…ow of purpose he séeketh out his quarelles he slinketh from the Princes dealing wherewith he is vrged and sayth this is not the thing we now seeke for but to know what kinde of whoredome it was that the Priestes shoulde be punished for Pag. 12. And Pag. 18. letting go the matter that he is in hande withall he discourseth agaynst the Bishop of Sarum about Sabellicus titles In the 2. Preface where he bindeth himselfe 〈◊〉 than in the. 1. to declare the whole pith of the question and course of the Bishops and his owne â—…ke he digresseth into a common quarell about diuersitie of fects and heresies which he ascribeth to the Protestants he câ—…eth into Greece Affrica Bohemia Hungarie Lifelande pag. 30 and so commeth home to Englande digressing from the question and issue to English bookes to forbidding of the Bible to be read to the iudgemeÌ„t of Lambert to burning to religious houses Pag. 31. to vowes to repealing lawes to setting forth a newe religion to mariage of Priestes to consecrating â–ª Bishops to the reall presence Pag. 32. Then runneth he to search out discorde in the Protestants and quarelling about wordes in the act and iniunction he maketh an exhortation to returne to the Romaine Church 33. 34. 35. In the aunswere to the Bishops Preface the first whole diuision fo 1. 2. a. b. A loâ—…g impertinent discourse to molliâ—…e master Feckenhams pretence for setting out his booke A number of bie matters falsely charging the Bishop with diuerse impertinent slaunders 2. b. 3. a. Pretending to direct the reader to the question here in trouersie for the nonce he setteth vp a number of newe markes that master Feckenham and the Bishop medleth not withall 3. b. Fol. 4. a. He quarelleth at the Bishop of Sarum for the 600. yeares and the Bishop of Winchester for alleaging testimonies of later yeares calling this vneuen dealing of the Protestants He quarelleth about precise wordes He maketh a new chalenge to the Bishop he chargeth the Bishop of a late bragge none of all these things belonging any whit to the matter 4. b. 5. a. In his first booke A long outrode whether the Bishop were well called by M. Feck the Lorde Bishop of VVinchester or no. 7. a. b. Whether he be Bishop or prelate of the Garter 7. b. succession of Bishops 8. a â–ª against the mariage of Bishops of flesh on Frydayes of a Pigge turned into a Pike That the Protestants be Heretikes euen by the Apologie of England 8. b. An inuectiue against the actes of Parliament of altering religion agaynst the will of the whole clergie that the Bishop can not defende himselfe to bee a Bishop by any lawe of the Realme About the reall presence transubstantiation and adoration 9. a. Deniall of free will the necessitie of baptising children vnlawfull mariage 9. b. A long inuectiue agaynst the disputation at VVestminster Anno. reginae 1. with a number of friuolous excuses whie they shranke from it 12. a. b. 13. a. A long digression almost of 13. leaues togither nothing to the question but discoursing into all countreys Boheme Germanie Denmarke Swethland Brabant Hollande Flaunders Lukelande Englande Fraunce Scotlande Saxonie Hessia VVestphalia besides many townes and Cities chiefly about the businesse in the lowe Countreys to deface the Gospell by the tumults there raysed as the worlde well séeth onely by the practises of the Papists Fol. 33. b. Hauing mentioned the plague he falleth into wicked ghessing that the procedings in that Parliament were the cause of the plague that reigned at London and once againe a â—…ing at the Bishops that they be no Church nor yet Parliament Bishops A long impertinent bibble babble about master Feckenhams ioly disputations begon at London and ended at
digressed from it for otherwise ye must vnderstande his bigge Counterblast had béene but a verie shorte and little puffe of wind But to all this impertinent stuffe though the most of it for his importunitie be aunswered at large I answere it with his owne wordes fol. 4. Much labour vainely and ydly employed with tedious and infinit talke and babling al from the purpose out of the matter which ought specially to haue bene iustified 4. His seuenth common place of false translations â–ª THe reason why I place this among his other common places is that although he cite fewe allegations in this first booke for the Popes supremacie and therefore coulde not be much noted here of this fault yet in his other bookes following he is full of false translations or at the leastwise so captions translations that he might séeme any wayes to further his purpose thereby His ovvne obiection MAster Horne doth not faythfully but most corruptly and falsly alleage the authours wordes and vseth his owne in steade of theirs and to such as he truely rehearseth he giueth an vnmeete and vnprofitable sense of his owne making Interpreting a sentence out of the storie of Magdeburge wrested as spoken agaynst vs defending the supreme gouernment of the Quéenes Maiestie where it was spoken of a Popishe supremacie he translateth Non sint capita Ecclesiae They may not be heads of the Church in no cafe Which wordes in no case as though it denied all kinde of supremacie is his owne addition and not his Authours wordes fol. 22. a. To pretende a iolie antiquitie and authoritie for the Popish errour of penance and that it is a Sacrament alleaging S. Aâ—…g whose words are these Nunquid enim perfecte de Trinitate tractatuÌ„ est anteque oblatrarent Ariant nuÌ„quid perfecte de peniteÌ„tia tractaâ—… est anteque obsistereÌ„t Nouatiani sic non c. VVas the matter of the Trinitie throughly discussed before that the Arrians barked agaynst it Concerning repentance was it euer throughly handled before the Nouatians withstoode it c. which master Stapleton translateth the Sacrament of penance was neuer throughly handled c. Where Saint Augustine nameth not penance but repetance neyther speaketh he of any Sacrament at all but onely sayth de poenitenâ—…a of repentance 37. b. Where the Bishop alleaged King Dauids actes to inferre a supreme gouernment Master Stapleton aunswering by this sentence 1. Par. 24. Ut ingrediantur domum dei iuxta ritum suum sub manu Aaron patris eorum That they should enter into the house of God according to their rite or maner vnder the hande of Aaron their father to make the matter sâ—…me to serue his turne the better he Englisheth these later wordes Sub manu patris Aaron Vnder the spirituall gouernment of their spirituall father and his successors the hie Priests which wordes his text hath not Translating the wordes that he hath picked out of an Epistle of Theodosius that which is there spoken of a particular controuersie of the â—…ayth and the Priests then about the Bishop of Constantinoples deposition and appeale he translateth locum ac faâ—…ultatem habeat de fide ac sacerdotibuâ—… iudicare That he may haue place and libertie to giue iudgement in such matters as concerne faith and priests As though it were spoken simplie of all such matters where his allegation hath neyther these generall wordes suche matters as concerne nor any such generall meaning onely the Emperour Ualentinian writeth to Theodosius being also Emperour that the Bishop of Rome may haue place and licence to iudge of the fayth and the Priestes meaning of that controuersie of the fayth that was then sproong vp and the quarell about Flauianus for so the ende of the sentence in expresse wordes expoundeth it selfe Which wordes master Stap. leaueth out least his false and captious translation should be espied His ovvne obiections of contradictions THese fellowes iarre alwayes among themselues and in all their doctrines fall into such poynts of discorde that in place of vniforme tuning they ruffle vs vp a blacke sanctus Quo teneam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prâ—…tea nodâ—… His eight common place of contradictions to him self and his fellovves THis controuersie sayth he of the supremacie is the only matter the Papists stand in which if it were so then they admitte all other thingâ—… and stand not in them but straight he contraryâ—…th his owne tale saying other matters in controuersie are not so oppressed Ergo they be pressed and the Papistes stande in them â–ª 1. Pref. pag. 2. The Princes inuesturing of Bishops is but an impertinent matter And yet anon he sayth The inuestiture of Bishops is a matter quite destroying the Princes supremacie He often complayneth that the title of King Henrie the eight and King Edwarde the â—…ixt was so simple and large that it was faine to be mollified with the Queenes title And yet he sayth in his 2. Preface Pag. 34. the Queenes title hath more added than theirs and that of greatest importance He sayth Princes may meddle and deale with ecclesiasticall causes which neither master Feckenham nor any Catholike will greatly contende with him in 4. a. Where not onely the contrarie is most apparant but also Cardinall Hosiâ—… will not suffer Princes so muche as Mouere sermoneÌ„ To moue any talke of ecclesiastical matters Fol. 1â—… b. He sayth the matters debated in the disputation at Westminster were but three the seruice in English the alteration of ceremonies and the Sacrifice propiciatorie But in the next page where he sayth there woulde haue beene more deliberation he addeth a fourth the controuersie of the supremacie 13 2. He sayth those matters that were debated were nothing touching fayth and yet in the page before he onely sayd the first and the seconde be no matters of fayth He sayth also they were no principall matters but dependant and accessorie And yet in the first he sayth of the supremacie that it is of such and so great importance as no matter more nowe in controuersie and for the other poyntes who séeth not what principall matters otherwhiles they will make these séeme to be especially the sacrifice of the Masse for the whiche they burned so fast in the late raigne of Quéene Marie when this was one of their first and chiefest questions Againe that the Papistes be most obedient subiects to the Queenes Maiestie he craketh almost in euery place And yet about this disputation he confesseth that eueÌ„ in a trifling matter they disobeyed the Queenes commaundement 11. b. Fol. 29. a. b. Christian Princes ciuill gouernment reacheth and tendeth to this ende to preserue their subiects from outwarde and inwarde iniuries oppressions and enemies to prouide for their safetie quietnesse for their welth abundance and prosperous maintenance and no further What is here more than in a Sarasin Prince But anon he sayth Christian Princes most of all are muche more bounde to employ themselues to their possibilitie towarde the tuition and defence furtherance and amplification of
chiefly directed to dissuade hir subiects myndes to whome in hucker mucker ye sende these bookes ouer from the acknowledging of the sayde hiâ—… Maiesties supreme authoritie maye it not truly be sayde men maye iustly gather this as youre chiefe ende Is not euery wriâ—…ers chiefe ende to persuade his reader in his principall matter is not this here youre principall matter to improue the taking vpon hir of this authoritie If ye haue any chiefer ende or more principall purpose that is better than this cléere your self and shew it Uerâ—…ly our chiefest end in writing hereof is to persuade hir subiectes that by your deceiuings stand in any mammering to a godly liking of the sayd title as most dâ—…e and lawfull to hir highnesse estate And if yours be not the contrarie hereto let your doings be according and we shal like it the better But see here M. Stapleton how soone ye folter in your numbers and misse in your tale at the fyrste beginning of all ye haue scored vs vp in your marginall score two vntruthes when ye come to counting them twaine afterward in your answere ye recken vs vp thrée saying of the second in your score This is an vntrue and false surmise of Maister Horne as are the other two here also reckning vp that that ye counted for the first And thus wée knowe not whether we haue euen or odde 2. or 3. Wherby all your reckening is marde and false counted Is this your daunce M. Stap. in beginning to trip the round when one lye tumbles out so proprely in the necke of an other But hoysta God blesse them they fallout faire Howbeit as they say it is a good horse that neuer stumbled thoughe it be an euill signe to stumble yea to fall downe right at the first setting out I make proofe by the continuall practise of the Church in like gouernment as the Queenes Maiestie taketh vpon hir The thirde vntruth you neuer proue the like gouernment namely in all Ecclesiasticall thinges and causes The truthe or vntruthe of this being referred to the triall in the sayde practise will soone pull backe this thirde dauncer from hopping in your rounde And as for your self ye are a false piper M. Stapleton thus soone vnto your liâ—… to pipe a wrong rounde harping on an other issue than was required of the B. to proue Wherin as your greate falshood â—…hal appeare so your selfe do here halfe graunt this to be no vntruth daring not flatly say the Bishop neuer pro ued the like gouernment which the Bishop only here affirmeth but you denie it in a respect namely say you in al ecclesiasticall things and causes â–ª which the Bishop here affirmeth not nor it is his propre issue in question demaunded of Master Feck and yet he proueth euen that also I haue put into englishe the authors myndes and sentences The fourth vntruth for he wrongfully alleageth both the wordes and meanings of his authours He bringeth no instance at al wherby to proue this that he sayth which til he can do it must go for a lie of his owne making wherby he measureth other mens translations by his owne corrupting his authors wordes sentences mindes and all as is alreadie declared This title is so replenished with vntrue reportes The fyfth vntruth in wrongfully charging M Feckenham for the title of his treatise Whether Master FeckeÌ„hams treatise had a true title or no lette others déeme Maister Feckenham made a treatise entituled by the name of An ansvvere to the Queenes Maiesties Commissioners and the same by writing be deliuered to the Bishop of Winchester and afterwarde sent abroade the sayd Treatise entituled by name The declaration of suche scruples c. as Maister Iohn Feckenham by vvryting did deliuer vnto the Lorde Bishop c. when he neuer deliuered any suche entituled treaâ—…ise vnto him Is this then vntruly or wrongfully donâ—… to charge him of the title of his treatise His sixth and seuenth vntruth trifling denials You. c. not without the helpe of the reste as may be gathered deuised wrote and purposed to deliuer this booke to the Commissioners The eyght vntruth slaunderous Neither doth the Bishop flatly affirme it but only sayth as may be gathered whervpon M. Stapl. can not iustly gather a flat asseueration one way or other â–ª to conclude his vntruth Neither doth M St. improue it any way thoughe â—…e himselfe and that verie often without any coniecturing of the matter and yet can he gather no iust coniecture therof doth boldly charge the Bishop with the helpe of other Which so often as he doth he shoulde remember that this vntruth returneth on himselfe In al which points ye were so answered that ye had nothing to obiecte but seemed resolued and in a manerfully satisfyed The. 9. vntruth M. Feck was neuer so answered And in his couÌ„terblast he saith had not the B. put in these wordes In a maner otherwise it had passed al goodmaner honestie too so vntruly to make report the contrary being so wel known that he neuer yelded vnto you in any one poynt of religion neither in Courte nor yet in mannour nor else where Ye are a mannerly man I perceyue mayster Stapleton and as full of good manners or honestie it appeareth as an egge is full of oatemeale Belike ye haue bene brought vp neyther at courte nor mannour but at Hogges norton as they saye for otherwise what good manner or honestie is this to chalenge youre better of so heynous vntruth and proue nothyng at all agaynste hym but saye the contrarie is well knowne when your selfe knowe it not at al but speake without the booke For shame M. Stapl. learne better maners to referre it to them that were present at the hearing of both parties and then shal ye hazard your honestie and truth a great deale the lesse and shewe your nourture to be the more Wherevpon I made afterwarde relation of good meaning towardes you to certayn honourable persones of the good hope I had conceyued c. The. 10. vntruth incredible VVhat good meaning coulde he haue to him when he would haue him reuolt from the religion by him receiued and professed at Baptisme to reuolt from the faith of Christes catholike churche c. Why Master Stapleton is this incredible that the Bishop hoping of his conformitie in making relation thereof to the honourable might not haue therin a good meaning yea admitte the truth whiche he professeth were as false as you woulde haue it séeme to bée mighte he not for all that haue a good meaning Saule had a good meaning ye wot when he did full ill And how say ye to your Scholemen that speake so muche good of a good meaning yea euen in ill causes But as the Bishop meant wel to him so the cause was good also and your cause naught how well so euer ye meane in an
vnderstande it for I thinke ye vnderstoode not the Byshops wordes your selfe which if ye had done ye wold neuer haue quoted it for an vnâ—…th for shame Ye knowe the Byshop before hauing for the vnderstanding of saint Paules wordes for the Princes ministerie alleaged the ensample of Constantine to shewe that his best ministerie consisteth in his carefull zeale direction of Gods glorie and truth and other matters of religion wherein Eusebius commendeth him being a famous ecclestastical writer and allowed amongst you sythe also Nycephorus another your late famous ecclesiasticall writer coÌ„parâ—…th moste expresly herein the Emperour of his time to Constantine the great what vntruth hath the Byshop committed to say For this cause Nycephorus compareth the one to the other for that he did so neerely imitate his duetifulnesse in ruling procuring and reforming religion to the purenesse thereof If Nycephorus haue not thus in these poynts compared them then a Gods name blame the Byshop that sayde for this cause alâ—…o Nicephorus c. but if Nicephorus haue so done then is the Bishop cleâ—…red of this vntruâ—… that said â—…e did so And if ye haue any quarrel to picke go picke it against Nicephorus that so did and not againste the Byshop that only sayde he did so Nowe whither Nicephorus haue done as the Byshop sayde 〈◊〉 did or no let the reader be vâ—…per The words of Nicephorus are long notwithstanding I will set downe some of them writing to the Emperoure he sayth thus Verily one shall suffice me as I mighte â—…aye for all with whome also perchaunce for that kinred and likelyhood whiche is betweene you and him you will gladly suffer your selfe to be compared and is this any other than that ConstaÌ„tine the great valoure and name among all men Constantine whose memorie ought to be as it were a certaine sprite in all menne VVho helped â—…s in oure moste necessitie and so mightely Constantine the greate in suche artes as belong to an Emperour in prudence incomparable but in feruencie towardes God and in great actes atchieued and contentions susteyned for the true godlynesse he is aboue all euen as the Sun is shining aboue the starres And art not thou O most excellent Prince the verie certain image of him here 〈◊〉 noteth in the margent coÌ„paratur c. The Emperor is coÌ„pared to Constantin the great and is conferred with him verily eueÌ„ so doth the glasse render the right shape of the Image as thou expressest the diuine shewe of his mynde and glisterest again being very like vnto him none otherwise than euen the naturall sonne doth represent his father and although I know well thou wilt disalowe my boldnesse which art chiefly wont to auoyde and beware of such prayses notwithstanding I will not doubte to saye this thing whiche I beeseech thee â—…o suffer me and consider my reason sith I chiefly knowe that thou art the sonne of God by grace and the Lords anointed aboue the reste that thou art the Image of him in all poyntes alyke which manifestly hast obtained the very godly form of him and the force and impression eyther of his liuing or imperial substance c. And so he runneth into particular poyntes wherin he compareth them togâ—…ther Is not all this enough master Sta. to proue the Bishops saying true for this cauâ—…e alâ—…o Nicephorus â–ª c. compareth these two Emperours togither but you 〈◊〉 this and shewing no cause in the world why ye chalenge the Bishop therefore runne to an other quarell about the Emperours name bycause the B. sayde as followeth For this cause also Nicephorus in his Preface before his ecclesiasticall hystorie dothe compare Emanuell Paleologus the Emperoure to Constantine The. 64. vntruth In putting Emanuel for Andronicus Ye are aunswered to this at large in the replye to your Counterblasting theron What soeuer his name were as it is called in question so the Byshop is cleared thereof following your owne principall auâ—…ors doctors that translâ—…ting and setting out this story named him euen as the 〈◊〉 â—…oth Emanuel Paleologus not once nâ—…r twice neyther â—…s the blinde man castes his â—…affe but as they say theÌ„selues on good considerations among them therevnâ—…o And so rehearsetâ—… his noble vertues The. 65. vntruth For this Emperour wâ—… a starke heretike So say you M. Stapleton and so ye reuile him in your Counterblaste for a wretched heretike also and a wicked dooer But your ecclesiasticall writer Nicephorus saith not so of him he reciteth 〈◊〉 many vertue â–ª and also 〈◊〉 and excellent vertues of this Emperour If he were not suche a one or had not such vâ—…rtues as Nicephorus rehearâ—…eth him to haue what is that to the Byshop who only sayth Nicephorus reciteth his noble vertues And to proue this true the whole preface of Nicephorus is manifest beeing for the most part nothing but the Princes coÌ„mendation of such noble vertues as Nicephorus sheweth he was endewed withall He calleth him principâ—…n omniuÌ„ Christi aâ—…antissimo atque humanissimo qui prorsus omnes virtutes complexus nihil rerum pulcâ—…errimarum excellentissimaâ—…um pretermisisti The Emperor most louing of Christ and most â—…teous who hauing throughly aâ—…tained all vertues haste let slip nothing that is moâ—…e faire and excellent It were tedious to râ—…cite al or the quarter of that he citeth in the prayse of this Emperours vertues The preface throughout is manyfest the Byshops allegations that ye can not denie the comparison aforesaide betweene him and Constantine do declare yea your self confesse that Nicephorus doth highly aduance and exâ—… this Emperour But as Nicephorus saith if wée may beléeue him on his credite beeing called of all your side scriptor per onmia verè catholicus a verye catholike writer in all poynts he flattreth him not nor forgeth but speaketh the truth in praysing of him al which dothe sufficiently acquite the Byshoppe for saying that Nicephorus rehearâ—…eth his noble vertues The Princes supremacie in repairing religion decayed The. 66. vntruth Fonde and foolishe as shall appeare This is onely a marginal note that the Bishop prâ—…fireth to all the allegations that he citeth out of Nicephorus to any one sentence of which allegations M. Stapleton answereth nothing But thus iustleth at the marginall note and sendeth vs to his Counterblaste thereon where it shall appeare how vntrue howe fonde and foolishe it is Which the reader shall iudge when he hath read his Counterblaste the answere thereto That by their rule ministerie and seruice not onely peace and tranquillitie but also godlynesse and religion should be furdered and continued amongst men The. 67. vntruth No such wordes in S. Paule Ye doe the Byshoppe manifest iniury M. Stapleton neyther haue ye any vauntage to pretende any of your former quarels at the printe of the letters it is euident the Byshop setteth not down those words as the bare words of the tâ—…rt of S. Paule whiche he cited the line before adverbum
replie vvill declare Hovv vvell so euer he hath played his partes full ilfauoredly you begin to plaie yours M. Stap. thus to wrangle about the partes of opponent and answerer The B. playeth not the opponent but you playe the Marchant The B. not in playe but in truth good earnest as M. Feckenham pretendeth to 〈◊〉 requireth to be satisfied answereth to his requestes by the foresayde proues that here ye confesse he bringeth forth The partie opponent as in the other scruples still is M. Feckenham But be he opponent or defendaÌ„t as either of theÌ„ in respects may be either if he bring those proues that ye graunt he doth ye haue litle occasioÌ„ to make a playe scoffe at the matter Neither doth this blemish the truth froÌ„ whom he had it wher with ye would séeme as it were with an awke blowe to foyle the B. learning that he founde out these prooues not all by his owne studie but by the helpe of his friends Which as you M. Stapleton for your owne parte were faine to confesse right now so is there no cause ye should measure the Bishops knowledge by your owne defecte But herein ye do but as the residue do this is the fashioÌ„ of all your coÌ„péeres Where truth faileth you â–ª at the least to winne a credite of learning to your selues like prowde Pharisies ye dispise al other besides your selues To which purpose as M. Stapl. would staine the Bishops godly and learned labour herein at the least that all might not séeme to be his owne but gathered by others to his hands so in the telling of his owne well ordered péece of worke he setteth out euery point to the vttermost to coÌ„mende the better vnto vs his great learning industrie and perspicuitie He telleth vs solemnly how to the first parte he replieth in three bookes how he hath deuided eche booke into seuerall chapters what he hath noted at the toppe of eche page But he telleth not what common places he hath set out in eche line He telleth how he hath exceedingly lightned the matter and what recapitulations he hath made thereof To the second parte he telleth vs it shall appeare but when he telleth vs not both what strong and inuincible arguments M. Feknam right learnedly proposed as most iuste causes of his said refusall And also vvhat â—…ely shiftes and miserable escapes M. Horne hath deuised to maynteine that obstinately vvhich he once conceaued erroneously And thus forsoothe nothing to the prayse and setting forth of him selfe M. Feckenham nor to the blemishing of his aduersarie hath M. Stapleton deuided the content of the Bishops answere and his counterblast thereto Now thinking with this preiudice of both their labours he hath sufficiently affectionate the Reader to his partie thirdly he entreth into a generall fore warning of him the effect whereof is to forsake this religion which he beginneth with this earnest adiuring of him Novv good Reader saith Master Stapleton as thou tendrest thine owne saluation â–ª and hopest to be a saued soule in the ioyful and euerlasting blisse of heauen so consider and vveigh vvith thy selfe the importaunce of this matter in hande What hope of saluation M. St. can the Popish doctrine bréede that alwayes doubteth as much of damnation as it hopeth of saluation haÌ„geth wauering betwene dispayre hope admitting no certentie of faith or trust to grouÌ„de vpoÌ„ The attenâ—…ion that ye desire in the Reader we as earnestly desire the same also neither that he come to reade attentiuely with any preiudicate opinion on either parte as you would haue his minde foresâ—…alled on your side but euen with indifferencie as he shall finde the matter in hande to leade him so to weigh and consider the importance thereof euen as he tendreth and verely hopeth his ovvne saluation And as the Reader shall do this for his parte so let vs sée how you do for yours and of what great importance your arguments are to sturre vp this earnest attention in the Reader The first argument that ye make is this First vvithout authoritie is no religion Then if this Religion vvhereby thou hopest to be saued haue no authoritie to grounde it selfe vppon vvhat hope of saluation remayning in this religion canst thou receyue Now as though the Maior were in controuersie and the pointe we sticke vpon he first solemnely strengthneth it with the authoritie of S. Augustine For no true religion saith S. Augustine can by any meanes be receaued vvithout some vvaightie force of authoritie As for the Minor which determineth nothing but hanging on a conditionall pinne maketh no directe conclusion too or fro We graunt him that iâ—… our religion haue no authoritie no hope of saluation can be grounded thereon But then he replieth If it haue any authoritie it hath the authoritie of the Prince by vvhose supreme gouerment it is enacted erected and forced vpon thee other authoritie hath it none Ergo For want of sufficient good authoritie it is no true Religion Ye desired right now M. St. euen as the Reader tendreth his ovvne saluation to consider and vveighe vvith him self the importance of this matter And is this all the importance of your first argument against our Religion that the Reader should weigh coÌ„sider so déepely What is here alleaged besides a bolde and manifest slaunder forced vpon the Reader by the authoritie onely of your bare woorde Which the more the Reader shall consider and especially thus your beginning for an handsell of good lucke to the residue he shall the better perceaue the falshood and impudencie of your whole cause dealing For to set one If against another If the reader better coÌ„sidering weighing with himself shal finde this religioÌ„ not to be of so late enacting erecting forcing but enacted erected and forced of God in his holy woorde shall not this coÌ„sideration detect you to be a malicious slauÌ„derer if the reader with al shall vveigh the peise of your argument that the Prince hath a supreme gouernment in all Ecclesiasticall causes Ergo the Religion that the Prince sets forth hath noâ—…e other authoritie but of him shal be not finde it like the father of it as light as a thing of nought But exhorting the Reader to vveigh and consider the matter not considering nor vveighing what ye say your selfe ye blunder on in your Ifs and say If then that supreme gouernment that hauing none other authoritie enacteth erecteth and forceth a Religion vpon thée be not due to the laie Prince but to the spirituall Magistrate and to one chiefe Magistrate among the vvhole spiritualtie thou â—…eest thy ReligioÌ„ is but a bare name of religion and no religion in deede Here whether he be ashamed to set it downe or thinketh it so cléere it néedeth not recital but is inferred of the Maior he leaueth out the Minor of his argumeÌ„t But that supreme gouernment is due to one chiefe spirituall magistrate only and to
and vnder the B. name to deface the ministers of the Church that therfore he could not but of dutie shape M. Fec an answere To this M. St. omitting the B. motiues laboureth like a clearkly proctour for his client to purge M. Feck for the setting forth of his booke and accuseth the B. of false surmising laying to the B. charge his first two vntruthes which are answered in their proper Kalender The clearing of Master Feckenham he deuideth into thrée partes First whie M. Feckenham made this booke or as he calleth it a Shedule or little treatise Secondly why he deliuered the same to the Bishoppe Thirdlye whye hée afterwardes caused the same to bée publyshed and deliuered to some of the councell But first whatsoeuer he wil set downe for master Feckenham whom he calleth the reuerent father my lord Abbot of VVestminster bicause him selfe hath no knowledge hereof but by hearesay all that he declareth he buildeth on this grouÌ„d as I assuredly vnderstand Now who gaue him thus assuredly to vnderstande a man may easily deuine euen forsooth this reuerent father who as we must vnderstande with all would tell M. Stap â–ª nothing that should be partiall to himselfe in his owne case We must therefore beléeue that all is true that Master St. telleth of Master Feckenham for assuredly master Feck his own self no worse man hath let him so to vnderstand The drift of all this first deuision is to chalenge the B. of vntruthes which is answered into the boderoll as before and therefore is but superfluous to repeate it The second deuision draweth nerer to the matter The second Deuision THe B. in the seconde deuision of his Preface declareth by what maner of proufes in this answere he satisfieth maister â–ª Feckenhams demaunde by the scriptures by the Doctors by the couÌ„cels and by the Churches practise And that euen by some such authors as themselues are papists and in this matter partiall to the Pope To this M. St. replieth in three partes The first part is nothing else but an heape onely of slaunders and bragges The seconde is a setting vp of markes before his counterblast for the reader to direct himselfe vnto wherby to sée who swarueth from who kéepeth him niest to the question in controuersie The thirde is a quarrelling with the B. for saying that he brought foorth proufes euen of the papists them selues The first part is set out in hys common places thereon whereto howbeit his slaunders and bragges be very lauishe there néede no furder answere In the seconde remembring at the length himselfe that he hath hitherto spoken nothing materiall to the question after his facinges he saith VVherfore as it is meeâ—…e in all matters so is it here also conuenient and necessarie to haue before thine eyes good Reader the state and principall question controuersed betvvene the parties standing in variance and then diligently to see hovv the proofes are of eche partie applied for the confirming of their assertions This is very good and necessarie councell that here ye giue the Reader M. Stap. and it had bene to be wished your selfe had eyther in time remembred it or not forgot it so soone againe But ye would not remember it of purpose for had ye set this rule alwayes before your eyes and as ye should haue followed your owne precept ye well foresawe what a leane carrion Pamphlet your puft vp Counterblast should haue ben lookyng with a thinner payre of chéekes by thrée deales and more than it dothe Neuerthelesse I wishe as you do the Reader still to marke this rule and he shall sée it is no good fatte nor sounde fleshe but foggy winde that this whole Counterblast is bolne and swolne vp with all Now hauing this warning of his owne mouth to haue still before our eyes the state and principall question of the booke and thereby to sée hovveche parties proues are applied let vs see how here he sets it downe before his owne eyes and applies his proues thereto What the state and principall question is betvveene the parties M. Feckenham and the B. of Winchester standing in variance Looke M. Feckenhams owne woordes desiring therein to be resolued VVhether any such gouernment in Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall causes as the Queenes Maiestie claymeth may be proued by any of these foure meanes the Scripture the Doctours the Councels or the continuall practise of any one Church of Christendome On this state being demaunded to be proued or improued standeth the principall point in variance betvveene these twaine This M. Feckenham earnestly calleth vpon and offereth readily to sweare if this by any of these foure partes can be proued This the B. of Winchester laboreth directly to proue and fully hath proued euen by all foure partes vnlesse you can disprooue his proues And this now is your principall parte M. St. alwayes while ye labour to confute him to haue set and fixed your eyes on this point being the issue the state and principall question betvveene these tvvaine in variance And to shew wherein the Bishop swarues from this or makes any defect herein And not to looke vpon other so many impertinent matters as your CoÌ„mon place thereon declares your vagaries nor to stande so long on them nor to prie and poare out new starting holes nor direct the eye of your reader to a wrong marke point out a new butte to the which wheÌ„ your aduersarie directly shooteth not but to the issue couenanted betweene them twaine desired of the one to be shotte vnto shotte vnto fully hitte of the other and then you like a bootie ayme giuer to crie out as ye do that he shooteth vvide and shorte coÌ„meth not nere the marke by a 1000. miles Ye are a false ayme giuer M. Stap. all the world may sée withall how when ye sée the marke is hit at the full euery time ye haue no other shifte but this to denie that to be the marke set vp But now let vs sée how properly your selfe shoote at the marke and set before your eyes the state of the question in variance betvveene them twayne If ye starte away therefroÌ„ hauing now saide thus much ye quite shame your selfe and your cause Looke to it therfore play the good archer shoote you néerer hit the marke to winne the B. shotte ye can But â—…o howe ye beginne to wrangle euen at the first entrie and swarue from your owne principle to set before your eyes the principall state in variance betvveene them whiche saye you is conuenient and necessarie If it be so M. St. then followit Nay say you ye shall first graunt me sixe thinges and when ye haue graunted them then will I enter into this matche with you and shew how ye euer shot amisse and so beate you out of the fâ—…elde Is this euen dealing M. St. to demaunde sixe things at once to be graunted What will not one two or thrée serue your
examining of this matter hastneth to the full determination and solemnly sitteth downe like a Pope him selfe or Patriarth pronouÌ„ceth the definitiue sentence of this matter saying The premisses beeing true and of oure side abundantly proued and better to be proued as occasion shall serue as nothing can effectually be brought agaynst them so master Horne as ye shall euidently perceiue in the processe straggleth quite from all these poynts Ha sir howe Popelike ye haue handled all this matter But were it lawfull to appeale from your sentence or call it in question mightâ—… it not be asked whether the promisses were all true Yea might it not be doubted whether they were not all moste false mighte it not be thoughte that it were scarse abundantly proued of your side to say the Catholikes say so and I say so and masâ—…er Fecken vvill say so Might it not be suspected that ye still say ye haue proued it ye will proue it better â–ª ye shall hereafter shew it playnely â–ª we shall euidently perceiue in the processe and presently that we can perceiue ye proue nor shevve any thing at all and so sitte downe to sentence as though the matter were out of all doubte and controuersie determining solemnly that al these premisses be true and M Horne erreth in defending the contrarie This is an harde lawe M. Stap. presently to condemne and behead the man and then after to examine the facte But it is the dayly practise of your holy father and so lyke a good sonne ye follow his ensample But now sir whereto were all these sixe so vndoubted principles broughte foâ—…rthe They are say you the principall questions in variaunce betvveene the parties controuersed to fixe their eye vppon What are these but questions that were suche true and infallible principles righte nowe If they be but questions I see they bée still disputable for all master Stapletons definite sentence A man maye still doubte of them yea dispute of them And they may chaunce proue as false in the ende after diligent discussing them as master Stapleton without further doubt would haue them presupposed to be true But to saue all vprighte he sayth they are the principall questions controuersed betvveene them and yet master Horne dothe not once touche them he commeth not nighe them What doth he not man not once touch them nor come nighe them and yet M. Feck and he be most at variance about them What a variance is that belike he alloweth them go to go to M. Stap. leaue this fonde lying for shame Your selfe knoweth ech man may see that he toucheth and toucheth home as occasion serued him all those of them that were incident to his matter Some of them in déede he little medleth withall as questions principally sucked out of your owne fingers and deuised nowe by you to defeate all that he touched as though he touched other things and not the matter in question from the whiche ye say he straggleth quite But this is your doing M. Stap. ye bring in newe controuersies that were not the issue betwéene them on whiche you should haue fixed your eyes But the B. so touched the matter he had in variaunce and so touched you also that thus malapertly woulde varie with him and hitte you so full that your eyes stared belike in your head that ye coulde not or woulde not sée the question but quite straggled from it to other questions and those also which we must graunt ye for principles and theiâ—… no doubt but ye will conquere all alone These newe premisses béeing thus craftelie deuised and set vp by you as the principall questions in variaunce betvveene them that striued cleane about another matter as though neither the B. nor M. Feck sawe where aboutes they striued noâ—… fixed their eyes any thing néere their matter But fought more Andabatarum beating the ayre and them selues they wiste not about what and béeing nowe reuoked to their matter by you that neuer caste your eye so much as one glimpse aside therefrom these béeing also suche principall matters as muste withall of our liberalitie be graunted you for moste assured principles thinking nowe all is proued on your side M. Horne say you straggleth quite from al these poynts besetting him selfe all his studie and endeuour to proue that vvhich neither greatly hindreth our cause nor muche bettreth his and for the which neither M. Fek nor any other Catholike vvill greatly contende vvith him vvhich is vvhen all is done that Princes may meddle and deale in causes ecclesiasticall Ye do nowe like a liberall gentleman M. Stap. graunt vs more than some of your highest estates euer would allow Cardinall Hosiâ—…s durst not be so frée to Princes as to graunt them thus much as mouere sermonem to moue any talke of ecclesiasticall matters and dare you that are nothing like to come to so â—…ye promotion graunte that Princes may medle and deale with causes ecclesiastical What moued you hereto belike ye still dreamed of your former Papall sentence and that we had graunted or we must néedes graunt bicause you haue sayd so that these are the principall questions and these are also moste true principles â–ª and that nothing can effectually be brought agaynst them which when ye presupposed we must néedes graunt ye were content to graunt agayne to the B. that straggling as ye say from these poynts that whiche he proueth mayâ—… well be graunted him that Princes may medle and deale vvith causes ecclesiasticall But nowe sir put the case that this were but your owne fonde dreame that he graunteth you those to be his questions or those questions to be suche principles that eche man vtterly denieth that which you fancie eche man grauntâ—…th yea that M. Feck wil tell you that not one of these your sixe questions were any of his questions and that he dreamed not like you but saw well inough what be dyd when he stoode wholly on hys sayde issue of the dealing of Princes in ecclesiasticall matters yea and all your fellowes are ashamed that all the world should sée 〈◊〉 ye set vp wrong markes and fondly tooke for graunted that almoste eche man denies or doubteth of When your selfe béeing come to your selfe shall sée all this will ye not repent ye of your hastie liberalitie and saye your selfe sawe not so muche for if ye had ye would not haue graunted it so 〈◊〉 Which beeing in déede the thing in question and the thing wherein ye graunt the B. hath beset him selfe all his studie and endeuour to proue it not onely as you graunt agaynst yourselfe some what hindreth your cause somewhat bettreth his saying it neyther greatly hindreth our cause nor muche bettreth his but also it fully proueth the question in variaunce on his parte and cleane ouerthroweth M. Feck assertion therin And thus of your too muche prodigalitie as M. Feck may call it laboring to defende him ye haue quite foilde him and while ye would set vp new
markes and haue al mens eyes fixed theron your selfe not fixing your owne eyes on the very marke set vp betwéene them graunt that the B. hitte at the full that which he shot vnto Which graunted the arrow so reboundeth on you your cause that it quite ouerturneth both But M. St. hauing now espied that he hath graunted that which he sawe aâ—…nswereth sufficiently M. Feck issue and also confoundeth these new and false principles and yet he could not for shame playnly recaÌ„t nor reuoke his grauÌ„t he first begiuneth â–ª to pinch nip it saying it is true princes may haue dealing in eccl. matters but in some meaning by whiche some meaning what he meaneth as he dare not here for shame vtter so he quickly slippeth froÌ„ it telling vs it reacheth not home and that the B. doth but face and bragge thinking euery man borroweth of his coÌ„mon places And so to knit vp with his own words is much labour vainly and idelly employed with â—…edious and infinite talke and babling al from the purpose and out of the matter which ought specially to haue bene iustified not in stead thereof to detayne and delude the reader with these newe sixe markes and false presupposed principles The third part of this diuision is his quarelling with the B. for saying he made proofe euen by many Papists them selues Which part he distributeth into thrée members the first he calleth in the margent the vneuen dealing of the Protestants the secoÌ„d a chalenge to M. Horne and the third M. Hornes tale incredible First for the vneuen dealing of the Protestants Now is it worthy saith M. St. to see the ioly pollicie of this man and how euen and corrâ—…spondent it is to his fellow Protestants M. Iewell restrayneth the Catholikes to sixe hundreth yeares as it were by an extraordinarie and nevv found prescription of his owne embarring al latter profes yet he him selfe in the meane tyme runneth at large almoste one thousande yeares later shrynking hether and thither taking tagge and ragge Hereâ—…ike and Catholike for the fortifying of his false assertions When ye haue proued the B. of SaruÌ„ his assertions false then cal them so for before while ye complayne of the Protestantes vneuen dealing ye shal shew most vneuen dealing in suche a Papist as your selfe As with all you shew your ioly Logike that you crake so much vpon how euen correspondent it is to reason M. â—…uel restrayneth the Papists to 600. yeres to proue their articles by Ergo he can not confute their articles with their own coÌ„fessions that are of later yeres As for the tag and rag and mag too that he hath improued them withall be euen them selues their owne ragged rabbines and tagged scholemen be they heretikes or be they catholikes But be they as ye please to call them dothe the limitation of your proues restrayne his improues What if he improued your articles euen by your own mouthes who are now oxtant might it be lawfull for you to câ—…yne yet more newe articles and to alledge proues for them of your own time bicause he confuteth them by proues of your owne tyme this belike were euen dealing with you to let you haue so large scope to proue articles as the improuer may haue to confute theÌ„ But as it is good reason ye should for the profe of your articles be content for shame with so large a scope of 600. yeres nexte after Chrisâ—…e so haue ye accepted thys limitation already and M. Harding your standard bearer your selfe with many of your partners haue vndertaken to bring foorth your proues according to that restraynt of 600. yeres How ye haue done it Scripture as they say maketh mention let the readers iudge Belike your selues doubt of those proues and therfore groyne now at length to be so restrayned for your proues and fayne woulde haue a larger scope saying this is an extraordinarie and nevve founde prescription of his ovvne embarring all later prooues it goeth harde with you he like that ye whine now so fast at that which ye receiued so lustily to soeme to and craked vpon before and now that ye can not proue any one of your articles in all that terme of 600. yeares â–ª ye coÌ„playne of vneuen dealing But what if ye had bene restrayned to the time of the primitine church ye would then haue made an outcrie and yet it had bene requisite that for articles of faith religion ye should not refuse to be restrayned euen to Chryst his Apostles And least ye should thinke we deals vneuenly with you wheras you for to proue those articles of your religion haue the scope of 600. yeres next after christ limit you vs for any one articls of our fayth or religion euen to the time of Christ and his Apostles abode on earth So farre within 600. that we wil proue it euen within sixe score yea within sixe yeres if ye wil. So little haue ye any iust cause to complayne of vneuen dealing â–ª But let goe this your fonde quarell agaynst the B. of Sarum and preserute your argument from him to the B. of Winchester your aduersarie This vvise trade say you this man keepeth also and to resolue M. Feck and settle his conscience he specially staieth him selfe vpon Platina Nauclerus Vâ—…spergensis Sabellicus Aeneas pius Volateranus Fabian PolychronicoÌ„ Petrus Bertradus BeÌ„no the cardinal â–ª DuraÌ„dus â–ª Paulus Emilius Martinus Penitentiarius Polid. Ver. and such like as he him selfe declareth other where and in this place also confesseth Now albeit the catholiks refuse no catholik writer nor in this matter haue cause so to do yet in a matter of such importaÌ„ce vvhich besides the losse of all temporall reliefe and besides bodily death importeth also euerlasting damnation to the catholikes if the case so stande as M. Horne and his fellowes beare vs in hand reason vvould he should haue fetched the substance of his profes much hier yea within the. 600. yeres whervnto they strayne and binde vs The effect of al this is that as the B. of Sa. hath done the B. of Wint â–ª must do the like or else they disagrée and is contriued in this argumeÌ„t If the B. of Saâ—… would haue the papists to proue those their articles vvithin the boundes of 600. yeres then should the B. of Winchester in this so 〈◊〉 an Article fetche the substance of his proufes vvithin those boundes But the B. of Winchester doth not this but to resolue M. Feckenâ—…am and setle his conscience stayeth him selt vpon Platina Nauclerus Abbas Ursperg Sabellicâ—… c. all popish and late writers Ergo Their doings are not euen and correspondent To this I answere no parte of this argument is true neither Maâ—…or Minor nor Conclusion The sequence of the Maâ—…or followeth not bicause the B â–ª of Sarum and the B. of Winchesters cause and occasion were nothing a like The Minor being of two partes both are false For first he fetcheth the
you say for the which I referre me to all autentike and auncient recordes as well of Englande as of other nations Ye say well herein master Stapleton and we take your offer And fiâ—…st let vs sée for other Nations Did Iames euen the first Bishop of Hierusalem acknowledge the supremacie of the Sea of Rome Was he confirmed by the same Sea when as yet the same Sea was not to be acknowledged or be confirmed by If as you say the B. can be no prelate of the Gaâ—…ter being no prelate at all how could that Sea be acknowledged that was not at all Moreouer do ye thinke that Timothie Bishoppe of Ephesus or Titus of Crâ—…ta and all other Bishoppes of Asia or Grece that Sainte Paule made acknowledged the supremacie of the Sea of Rome or were confirmed by the same when Sainte Paule that ordeyned them sayeth he receyued his authoritie of no man And when he came to Rome he neyther came to haue his Bishops confirmed of the Sea of Rome nor he founde anye Sea there nor sought Peter for the saide purpose else where nor thought himselfe any whitte inferiour to him much lesse thought he of any suche supremacie eyther of his Sea or him Nowe if the first and originall of all those Bishoprikes Eastwarde neyther acknovvledged anye supremacie of that Sea nor were confirmed by the same What plea can you make of theyr succession If they swarued from theyr predecessours and first founders your selfe confesse it is no good succession but a newe sewte and race And if it be good and lawfull succession that the Bishops of the East Churches succeded by then neyther acknowledged they anye supremacie of the Sea of Rome nor were confirmed by the same euen which not onelye the true autentyke and auncient recordes doe testifie howe they agréed although in sayth yet nothing lyke in disciplines rytes and orders to whiche the Romaine Sea doth sweare all those Bishoppes that are confyrmed by it and acknowledge obedience therevnto But also euen to this daye thoughe one or two Bishoppes nowe and then of late time for verye necessitie and hope of reliefe haue runne to the Sea of Rome yet by theyr ordinarie and customable succession euen from the Apostles times so long as they continued Christian neuer acknowledged they the supremacie of the Sea of Rome nor were confirmed by the same The like recordes for the Churches southward remaine not only of their beginnings from the other Apostles not from the Sea of Rome but also of their continuance howe they woulde not admitte anye supremacie of the same Sea ouer them and what contention they had thereabout As for their confirmations that they had them not from the sea of Rome but euen from the Emperour yea the Bishop of Rome himselfe and other from their princes the practise when we come thereto shall shewe And as east warde and southwarde so may we like wise reason of the Church westward where S. Paule after he had bene two yeare at Rome by the space of tenne yeares trauelled in Italie Spaine and Fraunce as witnesse Eusebius Epiphanius Ierome Euthalius Diaconus Nicephorus Beda Platina yea Frier Perionius that wrote the other daye de vitâ—…s Apostolorum that in Langue doâ—… he made a Bishoppe at Narbona who trauelled after with him in Spaine And if in all that space as it is most likely he made other Bishops shall we suppose they were not full Bishops till they had their Bulles from the Sea of Rome And if the first B. did not so your reason of succession fayleth So that your maior is false concerning other Nations Now let vs briefly sée howe it likewise fayles for England And as you say Namely in the foresayde Sea of VVinchester that from the first grafting and planting of the fayth in England there was not no not one in that Sea that did not acknowledge the supremacie of the Sea of Rome and was not confirmed by the same vntill the late time of master Poynet who otherwise also was but an vsurper the true Bishop then liuing by no lawful or ecclesiasticall order remoued or depriued The lawfull order and sufficient causes of B. Gardeners depriuation is extant and sette out in the booke of Monumentes Howe true a Bishop as ye call him he was if the acknowledging of obedience to the Sea of Rome bée an argument of a true Bishop his booke de vera obedientia of true obedience doth declare and almost all the time of his bishopriche he neuer acknowledged the supremacie to apperteine to the Sea of Rome but to the prince as the Bishop now doth there néede no recordes for the matter And as for olde recordes since the first grafting and planting of the faythe in Englande whiche is farre longer than eyther from your Apostle monke Augustine or from Birinus Bishop of Winchester the recordes do testifie howe the Christians whome your Augustine and his mates founde in thys Realme neyther kept the ceremonyes and rytes of the Romaine Churche nor admitted the Legantine authoritie of your sayde Apostle which argueth that theyr Bishoppes acknowledged not as you saye the supremacie of the Sea of Rome nor were confirmed by the same euen from Lucius till almost King Arthures tyme when the Heathen Sarons so preuayled in the west parts that euen in Winchester in King Arthures reigne Cerdicius erected a Temple of Heathen Idolles falsely called yet to this daye the Temple of Dagon as the olde recordes doe mention And therefore your maior is false for Englande also Now M. St. séeing the falsenesse of this argument of succession to be such that he dare not abide the triall of his recordes he flyeth from it and graunteth at the length the B. vocation to be good and sownd Yet hath he a stronger reason to disable him which is this No heretike ought to be admitted to a Byshops roome or if he be he forthwith ought to be remoued But for that yee are yoked or as ye pretende maryed ye are no doubt an Heretike Ergo were your vocation good and sounde yet haue you disabled your selfe to occupie that roome and eyther ought not to be admitted or forthwith ought ye to be remoued I aunswere the maior iâ—… true and if it were as truely executed none should better féele it than the popish prelates who confesse them selues not only for other Seas but euen for their hed and mother sea of Rome that diuers hereâ—…ikes haue bene B. thereof Who being so admitted I demaunde with Piers PlowmaÌ„ of you M. St. by this your maior who shall hang the Bell about the rattons necke who shall remoue an heretike Bishop of Rome I thinke it will belong or euer he remoue him selfe The minor of this argument is of the diuels sophisâ—…rie so S. Paule calleth it doctrinam daemoniorum and sayth let a B. be the husbande of one wife and so was Saint Peter who ye say was your first Bishoppe of Rome And yet neither was Saint
togither of such matters as he noteth in the B. for vntruthes which I referre to his common place theron Thirdly where the B. speaking of the occasion of M. Fe. wrangling in his conference with the B mentioned hys shrinking from his confederates in the conference at W. in the. 1. yere of the Q. maiestie Herevpon though he coÌ„fesseth saying I might now passe forth to the residue of M. Hornes booke yet must he not in any wise let slip this occasion of digression for otherwise he should want matter to sâ—…uffe vp his connterblast And so at large entreth to proue that they were vneuenly delt withall for proofe wherof he alledgeth diuers reasons First they were disaduantaged to be put to the profe of that wherof they were in possessioÌ„ I answer they were in possession of possessions in â—…éede not of the truth vnlesse they had it in their possession of imprisonmeÌ„t Secondly they gaue ouer the disputatioÌ„ not bicause they had not or did not shevve suffycient euidence but bicause they were very muche strayted for shortnesse of tyme and so belike coulde not finde it out Thirdly it was a fruitlesse and superfluous enterprise to dispute of those three matters only whether the seruice may be in the mother tong VVhether any one realme may alter and change the rites and ceremonies in the Church make new VVhether the masse â–ª be a sacrifice propiciatorie seeing that the. 1. and. 2. question be no questions of fayth And the 3. dependeth vpon the questioÌ„s of transubstantiation the reall presence vvhich ought first to haue bene discussed and then this as accessorie therevnto What a nuÌ„ber of starting holes the papists had to auoide the disputation they were farre better armed to find excuses to giue it ouer than prouided to go throughstitche therwith But had they had such euidence ready as ye pretende M. St. what néede they finde fault with the time although they had as much time as their aduerfaries had to prepare them selues And if they were strayghted for shortnesse of time to dispute onely of three matters and those as ye say not the weightiest neither why complayne ye of their questions to haue bene but three onely in so many and weightie matters as nowe stande in controuersie Could they dispatch so many great matters in so straight a time and would they whine to be straited for only three lesse matters Ha M. St. this is to broade before But ye wrythe the excuse an other way not so muche for the number as the lightnesse of the matters to be dependant and accessory to other questions aâ—…d to be no matters of fayth How light so euer ye woulde séeme to make them now ye haue made theÌ„ as waightie an other time before But let theÌ„ be as light as ye would haue them lesse to did ye not agrée on them yea did you not your selues deuise them vnwitting to the other parties Did ye not prepare for them might ye not the easelier haue answered vnto them these are but childishe excuses let vs heare what more ye haue Fourthly it was made before lay men as Iudges Yea there M. St. ye hitte the nayle on the head Ye woulde be disputers and Iudges too your selues His example of the Anabaptists disputation at Monster which he likeneth to this at VVestminster I passe ouer to his raylings and slaunderous common places Fifthly they should haue bene suffred to haue replied to their aduersaries which they could not be suffred to do If ye had put in disorderly ye had said true But would they haue kept the order by them selues deuised and agreed vpon they might haue replied at the full the doing was not in hucker mucker inowe heard it that can tell And your owne other excuses do plainly argue not that ye coulde not be suffred but that ye could not for the time or would not for the matter and néeded not pleading possession and thought not good for bicause of the Iudges with such other excuses that as your selfe confesse moued you to giue ouer the disputation Which howe it agréeth with this fifth excuse that ye could not be suffred to replie is easie to discerne and to take a lyer tardie in his owne tale Sixtly last say you surely amoÌ„g al other concerning the supremacie of the Prince in causes eccle c. there shoulde haue ben much more mature deliberation Deliberation is good in al things M. St. but wilfull prolonging foding on the time is neither good nor godly chiefly in Gods matters wherein we are bidden hodie si vocem 〈◊〉 andieritis nolite obdurare corda vestra But when would your deliberation be ripe M. St it appeareth by these your excuses that your selfe would be rotten or euer it would be ripe Ye would go to it with ripe deliberation that is to say as a beare goeth to the stake ye would aduise your self long or euer ye would willingly come to try your doctrine religion by disputation if ye could otherwise chose Howbeit by your owne tale these matters néede no such long protracting the time béeing so few so light as here in your excuses you pretend they be Yea but surely say you among al other things coÌ„cerning the supremacy of the Prince in causes ecclesiastical c there would haue ben much more mature deliberation Why M. St. here was neither al causes nor the cause of supremacie debated But onely as your selfe say three accessarie matters and matters nothing touching faith And therefore ye ouershoote your selfe once againe to put in this excuse But what is your small drift of all these excuses forsooth this The Popes legate should haue bene president at the disputation of these matters and then it had bene a formall disputatioÌ„ Then the Catholikes had ben indifferently delt withall Then would ye haue refused no controuersie Then would ye not haue complained of the straightnes of time Nor desired furder delaye Nor refused either to haue answered or replied if the Popes legate had bene president at it But who seeth not that this is no indifferencie but what argument bring ye to proue that the Popes legate should be president thereof Especially considering say you that aboue ten hundreth yeares past in disputations of matters of faith whereto the Catholikes were prouoked in Aphrica the saide Catholikes required that at the saide disputations should be present the Legates of the sea of Rome as the chiefe and principall sea of Christendome Ye forget M. St. that in Aphrica likewise the Catholikes refused the B. of Rome his anthoritie and detected his falshoode in forging of Canons therefore Wel let that now go as forgotten And let vs sée your argument which in effect is this Aboue ten hundreth yeres past when the sea of Rome florished in more perfect religion and faith the Catholickes of Aphrica in their disputations of faith required that at the sayd disputations should be present the
of holy Church and all that is giuen to vs is giuen to holy Churche And so ye grounde your consciences after your owne lawes and Cannons as the wolfe did after his Are not these good woluishe consciences But haue ye no better grounde of your conscience than these two yes say you finally we ground our consciences vpon holy Scripture namely that saying of S. Peter oporteâ—… obedire deo magis quam hominibus God must be obeyed more than men In déede M. St. if ye can make this a grounde it is a much surer grounde than the other twayne the sacred worde of God and the obedience that ye owe to god Howbeit sithe euery pretence of obedience to God and euery wresting of Gods worde is no good grounde of conscience neither the worde of God nor the obedience to God taketh away the obedience that is due to the Prince Howe do ye frame your argument from S. Peters saying God muste be obeyed more than man Ergo the Q. Maiestie can not be obeyed for supreme gouernour vnder God in all ecclesiasticall causes within hir dominions This argument is so fonde it might serue any traytor or any other to disobey his Prince vnder pretence of conscience and therefore can not cleare you from the sighes and grones that ye make for your foresayde change where with the Bishop rightly chalengeth M. Feckenham These arguments nowe pretending conscience béeing not sufficient to discharge the Papistes of disobedience M. St. addeth to them two more the one by obiecting the like to vs that we sighe and grone for the change of other princes nor affected in religion as we be And so he thinketh to put away this reason from them selues that the B. maketh agaynst them The Papistes do not obey but impugne the Q. Maiesties authoritie Ergo they wishe and looke with diepe sighes and groanes for a change therof The other argument that M. St. maketh agaynst this he frameth thus diuers papists haue lost their goods and are ready to lese their life Ergo they wishe not for this change This argument as it serueth no more their cause than any other heretikes so it followeth not but rather the contrarie that the more they léese the more they wishe the change And to shew this as one that had forgotten himselfe whyle he craketh what witte body and lyfe he would employ for his prince and countrey adding withall this exception if the case so require he bursteth out into a diepe sighe and groane for a change saying And for my parte I pray God hartily the tryall once woulde come What case is this ye speake off so doubtfully master St. if it be not a change that leauing your argumente ye fall thus deuoutly to your beades pray so hartily promising to employ your pregnant witte your proper body yea venture your life and all that once it might come if it be not a change if ye meane well why be you not at home and in your natiue countrey employ your witte body like a good subiect as ye ought to do but subtract your bodie and bende your witte your body and all your endeuour by all malicious practises agaynst hir Malesties authoritie herein â–ª abusing dayly not onely by suche your inuectiue Pamphlets dispearsed abroade in hucker mucker hir Maiesties subiectes here quiet at home to make them mislike hir Highnesse regiment but also to slaunder hir abroade to other Nations besides your continuall whisperers whom ye sende aboute instilling into the peoples heades a hope or feare of a chaunge to come bearing the people in hand euen from hir Maiesties first raigne that the nexte Easter the nexte Midsomer the nexte Michelmas the nexte Christmas the nexte quarter the nexte halfe yeare the nexte yeare we shall haue a chaunge And thus from yere to yeare ye fode them on with vayne hope nourishing priuie rebellion in their hearts or at least to make the people to faynt and murmure as the searchers of the lande of promise did to the children of Israell But God be blessed that hitherto hath defeated all your blinde prophesies He will confounde the hypocrites hope and establishe his truthe for euer Nowe to put away this cryme from the Papists and to charge vs therewith he alledgeth first the practise of the Paynims and Ievves and Heretikes The effecte of hys argument is this Diuers Heretykes vsed greate cruelties and seditions for that they misliked the contrarie religion to theirs Ergo the Papistes misliking the Quéenes maiesties authoritie and wishing a chaunge thereof make not in so dooing a preparation to sedition but we that acknowledge the same do make it I answere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est A false Papiste is a perillous beast And if hotte burnyng cruell handeling trayterous poysoning pitifull murdering horrible tragedies tragicall enormities priuie and great conspiracies all which he obiecteth to vs in the sustian fumes of his boystrous Rhetorike be arguments of Paynims Iewes or Heretikes then â—…one better than the Papistes haue deserued those titles And here as he thinketh béeing gotten into a plentyfull â—…ayne he runneth into Germanie Denmarke Swethlande Englande Fraunce and Scotlande froÌ„ these to the low countreys of Brabant Hollande Flaunders and Lukelande from thence to Monster then to the Duke of Saxonie and the Lantgraue of Hesse agayne to Denmarke and Swethlande and for his witnesse he bringeth in one as good as him selfe Frederike Staphilus From thence sodenly to Charing crosse and to Towre hill then haue ouer the water agayne to Fraunce Piemont Geneua Gascoigne Rhone Orleance Lions skipping in and out and it were a Iacke of Bedlam raking euery corner to picke quarels and deuise lyes by the Protestants And what proofe of all this alledgeth he forsooth I referre you M. Horne to an oration made of this matter expressely and pronounced here in Louayne and translated eloquently and printed in our Englishe tongue Naye then it must néedes be true M. St. who dare gainesay it if suche a man of credence as you will referre all these discourses vnto that oration yea and that it was pronounced among you in Louayne where God wot neuer lye is pronounced yea and besides all this it is translated eloquently in our Englishe tongue and printed too these are sore arguments I promise you as euer I heard so wise a man make to proue the truth of all thâ—…se accusations that ye lay to the protestants charge But M. Stap. and ye would follow my councell ye should let all these by quarels go and referre your selfe to your matter But ye wil first make an other vagarie and sée the countreys once agayne so may ye write vs ouer lies â—…owe by authoritie as ye do full handsomly for after ye haue bene at Scotlande and are returned to your lovve countreys of Flaunders we haue fiue leaues togither entituled the rebellion of Flaunders with a swarme of reprocheful staunders to deface the Gospell with sedition hurliâ—… bâ—…rlies and
that vve vvere baptised in Sée what a wicked slaunder to couer your disobediēce ye charge your most gratious prince withall as though she went about to make you renie that fayth ye vvere baptised in And this ye doe euen where ye pretende to kneele on your knees vvith moste humble and lowely submission Sée what cankred hearts ye beare for all your counterfayte crouching If ye knowe M. Stap. the fayth ye were baptised in at least if ye were rightely baptised and be a true Christian man it is not in the name fayth or obedience of the Pope but in the name fayth and obedience of the father the sonne and the holy ghost and this fayth the Q. maiestie goeth so little about to haue you abandon that hir Graces supreme gouernemēt is chiefly directed to this end to haue ye without any superstition error idolatrie or any other pollution therof kéepe maintein it inuiolate as in baptisme ye promised to do and therfore this is not subiect like though ye be on your knees neuer so muche to accuse hir highnesse as to cause ye to abandon the fayth ye were baptised in She requireth ye to kéepe it not abandon it neither on the soden nor at leisure And if this were all the cause of your refusall of obedience as hir Grace neuer denied you it ye doe but slaunder hir so néeded ye not haue runne away nor shew yet such disobedience to hir authoritie since she euer graunted and maynteined the thing ye séeme to craue Howbeit your counterfeite humilitie detecteth it selfe to be very stubborne disobedience And that while ye pretende to craue one thing ye entende another thing And that is ye would be borne with still to refuse her graces supreme authoritie ouer you in Ecclesiasticall causes this is the thing in deede ye meane and ye would the rather be borne withall bicause it is a matter that commeth vpon the sodaine therefore ye can not vpon the sodaine graunt it In déede M. St. ye pretende reason Weightie matters require not to be done on a sodeyne passion but with deliberation ▪ But is this so sodeyne a matter yet vnto you did ye neuer heare of this questiō before haue ye not had leasure to deliberate thereon but who seeth not that and ye had neuer so much leasure this matter would still come vpon the sodeyne to you and of reason ye must haue time to take aduisement vpō it which you will take all at your leasure and so for feare ye should become an obedient subiect vpon the sodeyne ye craue to remayne still vpon deliberation an obstinate enemie But M. St. pretēding this refusall to be for the abandoning of the faith that we were Christened in procéedeth And as we are assured all our auncetours and her Maiesties owne most noble progenitours yea her owne most noble father King Henrie the eight yea that faith which he in a clerkly booke hath most pithily defended and thereby atchieued to him and his and transported as by hereditarie succession the worthie title and stile yet remayning in her Highnesse of the Defendour of the Faith. As ye slaunder most wickedly the Quéenes Maiestie to cause ye to abandon the faith of your baptisme ▪ so ye slaunder not only al our auncestors but that most famouse Prince her highnesse Father K. Henrie the 8. as christened in the faith of the Popes obedience hereof ye say ye are assured when it is most assured most euident false For although our fathers the Q. Maiesties father also yea many of vs our selues the Q. Maiestie also her selfe were borne and baptised when all the errours of poperie or many of them did chiefly abounde yet can no more any one of these be said now to be baptised in those errours that they helde which baptised them if they kept the right formall words of baptisme I baptise thée in the name of the Father of the sonne of the holy Ghost thā in the old time any of their childrē or they themselues could be saide to be baptised in such errours as they helde that were Nouatians Donatists Rogatists Pelagians or any other Heretikes that notwithstāding kept the right element formal words of baptisme Neither can any Papist say now to any that dissuadeth him from his popish errours that he goeth about to will him to abandon the faith wherein he was baptized any more thā a Pelagian or any such Heretike being moued to forsake his heresie could pretēd he were moued to forsake the faith he was baptised in bicause they that baptised him yea his auncesters before him were Pelagians c. Ye should therefore M. St. make your distinction betwene the faith of your baptisme and the faith that your popish Church putteth in diuers erronious pointes of doctrine As for the faith that K. Henrie the 8 ▪ the Q. Maiesties most noble Father set out in the Booke that ye mencion therby labour to stayne the Q. Maiestie as setting out a contrarie faith to her father as you for your parte M. St. shew your extreme malice nothing subiectlike to blemish her highnesse with the famous renown of her father which notwithstanding ye cā not do so for the King her father I answere you howbeit his booke were clerkly yet clerklines is one thing truth is an other what maruel if he thē wrote in defence of your doctrines whē your popish prelates hid the very truth frō him bore him in hand that your falshoodes were truth till it pleased God not to suffer so noble a Prince to be any longer deluded by such false prelates but first in this question after in other according to the measure of his merciful riches reueled the truth vnto him how chance ye speake not of his faith then what clerkly sincere doctrine he set out thē against your Pope And as for the Q. Maiestie herein which is the proper questiō now in hād followeth most zealously the steppes of her highnesse father not wherein he was abused as many other princes were by false teachers but in that he forsooke those errours he abolished those false teachers their captaines vsurped authoritie in that he obeyed the truth reueled to him before all his own clerkly bookes before all worldly glory securitie aduentured himselfe his kingdome against all his enemies in setting forth the truth gouerning his subiects after the word of god Which though it were not so plentifully set forth then nor all wéedes so thoroughly rooted vp by reason of some false Gardiners whom he trusted ouer much howbeit at lēgth thanks be to God he espied them also had procéeded furder if God had lent him furder life yet is he rather to be commended for that he did than to be euil spoken or euell thought of for that he could not throughly bring to passe in his time but left his most vertuouse Sonne King Edwarde to bring to more perfection
And herein hath the Quéenes highnes followed as ye say both her Fathers and Brothers faith also But ye wring al to that faith wherein he was before beguiled as though she should follow him in that he was deceiued not wherein he founde out forsoke the deceyuers that you with your painted wordes might likewise deceyue her Highnes now as they deceâ—…ued her Maiest father then But sée how God turned their deceyt agaynst them selues That where your Pope to flatter K. Henrie withall ascribed to him this title as it were the prophecie of another Caiphas Defender of the faith the King espying the falshood of the Pope became the very defender of the true faith in déede abolishing the Pope the very impugner peruerâ—…er therof and so as you say truer than ye wist M. Stap. atchieued to him and his and transported as by hereditarie succession the worthy title and stile yet remaining in her Highnesse of the defendour of the faith Neither as you faintly say this title onely remayneth in her Highnes but the thing that the title doth entende her highnesse is in very déede not in a â—…aked name the defender thereof And hath defended her subiects not from foreyne power of straungers onely brought in by the Papistes and from all bodily iniurie and oppression of Popish firebrandes or any other tirannie but defendeth euen our faith from all errours heresies superstitions and Idolatries And this it is for a Prince to be a defender of the faith in déede which argueth a plaine supremacie Now after M. Stapl. hath thus flattred and on his knees humbled him selfe to obtayne a placard of their disobedience vp he starteth once againe and geueth another fling at vs to reuerse this crime of disobedience on vs thinking so to excuse this disobedience of the Papistes thereby And first he setteth on those whome he calleth round cap Ministers howbeit if he remembred that within this hundreth yeres and vpward the popish priestes themselues did weare round cappes he would not be so hastie to giue that nick name He asketh who are those that haue preached with a chaine of golde about their neckes in steade of a tippet Assoyle your question your selfe M. Stapl. I know no such protestant What slaunderous reporte you haue heard of any singuler person I know not no such order is alowed Although it be common among your popish Cardinals Bishops Abbottes Deanes Canons and other beyonde the Seas so to ruffle as ye speake not onely with a chayne of golde but with hatte and feather cappe and agglets rapier and cloke hawke and houndes ruffians fooles wayting on them and oftentimes in complete harneys on a great courser or on a palfrey with a courtisane behinde them thus go the chiefest of your fleshly spiritualtie belike they learned it of that royster Pope Iohn 13. howbeit no Pope doeth amende this disorder Upbrayd not therefore such petit and perticular things to vs which is so great and so common a fault with you But Master Stapleton will go more certainely to worke and charge the Protestantes ex scripto wyth their owne writings VVho are those I pray you sayth he that write sint sanè ipsi Magictratuâ—… membra paries ciues ecclesiâ—…dei imo vt ex toto corde sint omnes precari decet Flagrent quoque ipsi zelo pietatis sed non sint capita Ecclesiâ—… quia ipsis non competit iste 〈◊〉 Let the Magistrates also be members and partes and citizens of the Church of God yea and that they maye bee so it behoueth vs all wyth all our heart to praye Let them bee feruent in the godly zeale of Religion but they may not be heades of the Churche in no case for thys supremacie doth not appertaine to them These are no Papists I trow M. Horne but your owne dere brethren of Magdeburge in their new storie ecclesiasticall by the which they would haue all the worlde directed Yea in that storie wherof one percell Illiricus and his fellowes haue dedicated to the Queenes maiestie that beare the worlde in hande they are the true and zelous schollers of Luther Thus triumpheth M. Stapleton against the wryters of the storie of Magdeburge The effect of his argument is this These wryters do say that Princes may not be heades of the Church Ergâ—… no prince ouer all Ecclesiasticall persons causes in his owne dominions may be supreme gouernour Howe euill this argument followeth is easie to perceyue and the better in behâ—…lding howe impudently master Stapleton wresteth these wryters But he forceth not thereof bicause they be his aduersaries For that which they write not simplie agaynst the supremacie of princes in Ecclesiasticall causes but agaynst suche supremacie of princes as the Pope vsurped that wresteth he as spoken agaynst such supreme gouernment as the Quéenes maiestie claymeth and vseth The writers hereof hauing set forth two â—…nsamples of that age the one of a godly princes gouernmet by Constantinus Pogonotus the other of a wicked tyrant by â—…eraclius to declare what kinde of supremacie they disalow Thâ—…y she we that this is the scope of the matter iste est scopuâ—…res ê™ magistratibuâ—… politicis non sit licitum cudere formaâ—… religionuÌ„ in perniciem veritatis ita vel coÌ„cilietur veritaâ—… meÌ„daâ—…ium vel vtraque simul sopiant id quod tandem â—…um habet exitum vt regnent errores veritas crucifigatur sepeliatur This is the â—…cope of the matter that it is not lawfull for politike magistrates to coyne formes of religion to the destruction of the truth so that thereby truth and falsehoode should be reconciled togither or both of them togither quayled VVhich at the length commeth to this ende that errors raigne the truth is crucified buried And so followeth the sentence that M. St. citeth let the magistrates also be mebers c. but let them not be heades of the Church Whereby appeareth plainly what maner of heades they meane And this they do not once nor twise setting forth the doings of the wicked â—…yrant Heraclius for ensample that was altogither led by affection and not indifferent to heare â—…ither party nor called in counsell lerned and faithfull men nor called any synode to trie the matter nor serched the truth diligently but being puffed vppe with pride and deuising oâ—…ely with a flattring Monke that after set vp the false fayth of Mahomet determineth in a corner of a moste weightie controuersie and afterwardes will haue the matter neuer called into question This Emperour they call Architectum religionis and demaund what man well in his wittes woulde alowe such attempts processe and executions concluding it is not lawfull form as religionum conflare c. To make newe formes of religions and obtrude them to the Church without all kind of godly honest modest and comely gainsaying refuting therof All this and much more say they of that kinde of supreme gouernement in
Princes that they mislyke and is in déede to be vtterly mislyked of all Christians But as this is a plaine description of your Popes supremacie that playeth in all these poynts Heraclius part so it nothing toucheth that supremacie that the Quéenes maiestie claymeth It is but your wicked malice to slaunder hir with such tyrannicall vsurpation of Heraclius as they condemne Whie doe ye not rather take theyr other comparison from Constantinus Pogonotus to al other godly Princes and referre that to hir regiment With what care and singuler diligence trauaile and godlinesse when the Churches were horibly deformed and torne by the sect of the Monothelites He summoned the sixt generall Councell he ouerwhelmed not the debating of the controuersie of doctrine by might or preiudice He willed the Ministers of the Churche and preachers of the worde of God to searche out which opinion was and which was not agreable to holye writte He regarded not the ensamples of hys auncesters who by publike Edictes had approued the doctrine of the Monothelites which was harde for him to abolishe Neyther did the authoritie of the Patriarches and Bishoppes in Constantinople and all ouer the East that stifly helde that opinion any thing moue him Nor he suffred himselfe to be made afrayde although he heard that the pryde of the Byshop of Rome was incredible as one that wickedly chalenged a dignitie and authoritie aboue other Bishops and teachers But sent his letters to him exhorting him to come or sende some other in his place Neyther gaue he him any prerogatiue nor craueth licence of hym to call the Councell but of hys owne duetie he defineth him selfe for the appoynting of the Councell He louingly biddeth the Romaine and other Bishoppes not to bee absent at so necessarie matters and concerning the Churches publike weale The Emperour himselfe is present at the Synode not as a dumbe or deafe person like a cifer in Algorisme or receyuing the decrees without iudging of them or placing the B. of Romes Legates in the chiefest place and receyuing them without all contradiction as oracles from them as it were from Apollos triuet but modestly reuerently and godly as much as became his calling he gouerned the Synode propounding to them the state or scope of the cause and enquiring on a rowe gathered their sentences togither least ought should be done rashly or confusedly He commaunded not the one partie but the contrarie partie also plainly and without subtilties to declare their opinions and what groundes they had of their sentences out of the holye scriptures and what autenticall witnesse of the approued fathers And so forth they declare howe indifferently he dealt with either partie knowing that he must not condemne any before he knewe the full matter And when it was euidently found out that the Monothelites could not defend their opinion by the clere testimonies of the scripture nor any sentences of the doctours allowed yea when it was founde out they hacked of purpose certaine of the Doctours sayings and in place of them cited certeyne sayings falsly fathered in the Doctors names theÌ„ the Emperor subscribed to the iudgemeÌ„t of al those that thought aright and earnestly and stoutly executed the condemnation made in the name of them all Here these wryters commend this Emperor the more for that he had about him no doubt say they such parasites as woulde tickle in his eare that these thinges were vnsitting foâ—… his maiestie to intermeddle him selfe with the brawles of the Churches pelting Doctours It were a blemish to him to condemne his ancesters to cal into doubt or retract things already decreed This were not the safest way Let the bishops alone with the matter for euen they are able to make lawes agaynst the Emperors estate and abase it The Emperour by his authoritie may do no more than commaund silence sende into exile or punish with other violence those that make clamors or disobey the councels decree But the Emperor not regarding these fancies thought it honorable to him to be present in the midst of the teachers of gods worde assisting not a little the triall and iudgement of the coÌ„trouersie This ensample these wryters thus set out for a princes gouernmeÌ„t dealing ouersight in the chiefest ecclesiastical causes And thus before they determined in generall that God or deined not Princes to spoile their subiects and make themselues â—…at Neither onely to attende to outward discipline and that men may liue in honest tranquilitie for say they seing that magistrates are in the scriptures called Gods this ought to bee their first and chiefest care that their subiects serue God after such a sorte that his kingdome in their dominions may bee knowne encreased and conserued that is to were sincere doctrine c. may be deliuered remaine passe froÌ„ theÌ„ to their posteritie To this end tendeth all politike administration all defence of peace and neighborhod that laborsome care of getting the liuing gathering goodes that these spirituall euerlasting goodes both of the body of the mind should be gotten Thus do they stretch out further than doth M. St. the bounds of a princes gouernment to al ecclesiastical canses And all that they write on the other part is against such a popish supremacie as establisheth maketh a new religioÌ„ quicquid imperitaâ—…erit reâ—… And yet sée howe spitefully and falsly M. St. wresteth it as writteÌ„ against the Q. maiestie When as he confesseth himselfe they coÌ„mend hir euen by the ensample of Constantine they allow that supreme gouernment that she doth take vpon hir Now M. St. after his maner presupposing we will reiect these writers as though they spake against the supreme gouernmeÌ„t of the Quéene In case ye thinke sayth he theyr testimonie not to haue weight ynough then herken to your their Apostle Luther who writeth that it is not the office of kings princes to coÌ„firm no not the true doctrine but to be subiect and serue the same The effect of this argument is this princes must not take on them so to confirme the true doctrine that they be not subiect therevnto nor serue but rule the same Ergo Princes may not set forth the true doctrine nor be supreme gouernors in their dominions ouer all ecclesiastical persons and causes This argument is like to his fellowe aboue And as ye wrested the former writers so wrest ye Luthers saying also whose seÌ„tence as it is nothing against the godly gouernment of our most noble soueraigne subiect to the principall authoritie of Gods word that it might be of chiefest authoritie subduing thereto the authoritie of all other writers remouing those superstitions that exalted them selues in authoritie equall or aboue Gods worde so this sentence is eftsones as the other agaynst such vsurpation as is euident that your Pope taketh vpon him But M. Stapleton dreaming that he hath so sore pressed vs and this is so harde and straunge a case that
him agayne making the king become vassall feodatarie to the Pope and to holde the crowne and realme of him in fee farme and pay 700. marks a yere for England and. 300. for Irelande And hath not the Pope chalenged other kingdomes also yea doth he not clayme to be the chiefe Lorde and Prince of all kingdomes and to set vp and depose what king or prince he pleased And he that beléeued not this was not counted a noddie but an heretike And yet sayth M. St. was there euer any so much a noddie to say and beleeue the Pope raigned here but all Papistes muste be noddies with him yea his owne Pope in steade of a triple crowne muste weare a cockes combe and him selfe for companie will beare the bell But here he leapeth backe agayne to M. Gilbie not for the matter of supremacie but for his misliking of certayne orders of religion in king Edwards dayes and here vpon pleadeth that the Papistes are nowe more to be borne withal if they can not beare the seruice and the title set foorth I answere first M. St. another mans faults excuse not yours Neither Anthonie Gilbies and yours are alike For were his greater or any of those Protestants that ye vpbrayde vnto vs afterwards yet are they lesse in that they obstinately maynteyned not the same nor persisted therin nor attempted any conspiracies nor would haue a foraigne supreme nor suche an other as your Pope the father of errors and so on their submission or repentaunce their fault is pardoned or made lesse But you obstinately maynteine a playne refusall of obedience would haue a foraigne vsurper be your supreme and not onely subdue the realme and our bodies to his tyrannie but our soules to his errors neither do ye repente therof but perseuer in it and by wicked Libels priuie conspiracies and all other meanes that ye can deface Gods worde your natural prince natiue countrey your fault therfore is much greater thā his or theirs And therfore your wilful obstinacie is not to be borne withal especially since after so long and gentle tollerance of the Quéenes moste gracious lenitie towards you ye encrease your malice and harden your hearts with Pharao abusing hir highnesse lenitie Now where the Bishop sayd these dealings were a preparation to rebellion agaynst the Queenes person M. Stap. sayth that it nothing toucheth hir person nor hir crowne And that without the ecclesiasticall authoritie the crovvne hath continued and flourished moste honorably many hundreth yeres ▪ and shall by Gods grace continue full well and full long agayne when it shall please God. Why M. Stap. what meane ye by this dothe not the crovvne flourishe and continue euen nowe also God be praysed for it why say you then it hath flourished and shal agayne when it shall please God as though it dyd not now And the state of the Crovvne were nowe no estate or a very ill estate in the reigne of the Quéenes maiestie If this be not a preparation to rebellion to make the Subiectes mislike the estate of the Crovvne is it not then euen a rebellious Proclamation it selfe but let vs sée your argument that ye make hereon to excuse your selues Diuers Princes haue continued and flourished honorably of long time without the ecclesiasticall authoritie Ergo it is nowe no preparation to rebellion agaynst the Quéenes person to refuse hir authoritie ouer all causes ecclesiasticall and to defende that it apperteyneth not to hir person or Crowne I answere First the worde ecclesiasticall authoritie is very subtilly and doubtfully spokē as though hir highnesse went about to play the minister If ye meane so the antecedent is then true The ecclesiasticall authoritie nothing toucheth hir person or crowne ▪ without the whiche it hath most honorably continued and flourished many hundreth yeres and shall by Gods grace continue ful wel and ful long agayne when it shal please God. But then is this your most spitefull slaunder to say that the Quéene now taketh vpon hir eccl. authoritie and that it is now vnited to hir person or crowne which is most euident false And therefore the crowne flourisheth for any suche matter so well as euer it did And God graunt it neuer to flourish worsse than it doth vnder hir Maiestie now But the antecedent béeing so farre foorth true as is declared then the consequent followeth not that it is now no preparation to rebelliō to refuse hir authoritie ouer all eccl. causes and to defende that it perteyneth not to hir person or crowne But if in the antecedent by ecclesi authoritie ye meane authoritie ouer ecclesiasticall matters then the antecedent is false and so to be proued by the issue of the practise in this Realme Neither is it any good argument Bicause many tooke it not on them Ergo none may Bicause they did not vse it Ergo they ought not Bicause they had worldly prosperitie without it Ergo it was not necessarie to them Bicause the denial was no preparation to rebellion then Ergo it is none nowe None of these causes are sufficient M. St. and therefore your subtile and false reason fayleth Now when ye sée nothing will fadge this way eyther to defende you or to accuse vs ye will set vpon vs for other matters that we are those that make this preparation to rebellion Let this title and eccl. iurisdiction goe say you which all good princes haue euer forgone as nothing to them apperteyning let vs come to the very temporall authoritie and let vs consider who make any preparation of rebellion the Catholikes or the Protestants In letting that go M. Stap. that appertayneth to this title and ecclesiasticall iurisdiction ye let go your matter and after your maner make so many impertinent discourses contrarie to that ye called vpon before neuer to swerue from the question in hande and nowe your selfe swerue of purpose from it Howebeit shall we let you go so rounde away with suche a heape of notorious lyes that all good Princes haue euer forgone this title and ecclesiasticall iurisdiction as nothing to them appertayning that not some or many but all good Princes haue forgone and euer forgone both this title and also ecclesiasticall iurisdiction and so euer forgone it as nothing pertayning to them If ye coulde haue shewed this ye should haue well spent your time and kept ye nearer your matter ye néeded not haue fisked about so many by quarels But this could ye not proue and therfore it was necessarie ye should runne to them picking quarels at vs not marking your owne wicked defacing of your Prince whome otherwhiles so fauningly ye flatter For whereto else tendeth this saying all good princes haue euer forgone this tytle and ecclesiasticall iurisdiction as nothing perteyning to them but to inferre that all those princes that take on them or will at any time not forgoe thys title eccl. iurisdiction as apperteyning to them are ill and wicked Princes What else can be made of
cut halfe away of the Bishops definition which within eight lines after though nipping and wresting the woordes yet some what more truly than before he expresseth saying in those actions that may any way properly belong to the subiecte or thing gouerned Wherein he séemeth vnskilfully or as one astonnied to make no difference betwixt the subiect which is the person and the obiect which is the matter and action or not to vnderstande that properly the gouernour is not said to order and direct the obiect but the subiect in or about the obiect In which point as the Bishops definition is distinct and cleere so M. Stap. finding fault therewith but not able to saie here lieth the faulte nor to amende it and yet going about to amende it either in conclusion maketh one nothing differing in matter or farre worsse so much as it differeth from it A supreme gouernour saith M. Stapl. is he that hath the chiefe gouernment of the thing gouerned not in those actiōs that may in any wise belong to the subiect or thing gouerned as M. Horne saith but in those actions that belong to the ende whereunto the gouernour tendeth This is your perfect definition M. St. which either is Idē per Idem a gouernour is he that gouerneth in those actions wherein he is a gouernour and so your fautles definition is very faultie it selfe or els it is in effect and matter all one with the Bishops definition that ye reprehende though ye would in wordes séeme to make some difference so againe it is the more vitious the more obscure it is But this may well be say you to confirme your definitiō although he haue not the chiefe gouernment in al the actions of the thing gouerned but in such actions as properly appertaine to him as a subiect to that gouernour M. St. we stande not now in question what may well be but what is of necessarie consequence But ye séeke out corners and darke speaches to wrappe the truth in such obscuritie after the Popishe manner that your readers might rather meruayle at ye than vnderstand ye Which if they did they should sée your folly and contradictions and that your selfe scarce vnderstād your owne wordes if they were your owne for if ye vnderstoode your selfe when ye say he hath chiefe gouernment in such actions as properly pertayne to him as a subiect to that gouernour then would ye also sée how it followeth that being a subiect to him as M. Feckenham hath confessed as well in that he is an Ecclesiasticall person as Temporall he is also a subiect to him in such actions as are so well Ecclesiasticall as Temporall The argument is euident He that is subiect to the Princes supreme gouernment is vnder him in all such actions as appertaine to him as a subiect to that gouernour But euery manner person so well Ecclesiasticall as Temporal borne in the Princes dominiōs is subiect to the Princes supreme gouernment Ergo The Prince hath the supreme gouernment ouer euery manner person borne in his dominions in all such actions as are Ecclesiasticall so well as Temporal And thus his owne darke speaches being brought to light make flatte agaynst him selfe But to make the Reader vnderstande his meaning better and to vnwrappe him selfe out of this obscuritie in the which he hath rather hindred than bettered his cause he setteth out the same with sundrie ensamples of a Master and his Seruaunt a Father and his Sonne a Mayor and a Citizen the Prince and his subiect a Schoolemaster and his scholers the Shipmaster and the Mariners For in one man saith he many rulers may and do dayly concurre which in some sense may euery one be called his supreme gouernour As if he be a seruant the Maister and if he be a sonne in that respect the father and if his father and Master dwell in a citie the Mayor also is the fathers maisters so his chiefe gouernour to for things concerning the chiefe gouernment of the citie and of all these the Prince chiefe and supreme gouernour as they be subiects Otherwise the Prince doth not intermeddle with the fathers office in duetifulnesse dewe to him by his sonne nor the Master for that gouernmēt he hath vpō his seruant no more than with the scholemaster for the gouernment of his schollers and their actions or the maister of the ship for the actions doings of the mariners otherwise than any of these offende the positiue lawes of the realme and so hath the Prince to do with him as his subiect or when he shal haue neede to vse them for the cōmon welth wherein as subiects and members of the said common welth they must to him obey Much like is it with the spiritual men which be also members of the said common welth and therefore in that respect subiect to the Prince and his lawes and so is it true that the Prince is supreme gouernour of all persons as well spirituall as temporall But that therefore he should also be supreme gouernour in al their actions will no more follow than of the actions of thē before rehersed yea much lesse M. St. thinketh he hath now clered the coast that by all these ensamples the matter goeth cléere with him Shewyng first how euery one of these rulers master father mayor and Prince may in some sense be called supreme gouernours But yet either he doth not or wil not sée withal how in the sense now in controuersie all these ensamples are also flat against him For as the father in all causes that haue respect from the father as father to the sonne as sonne ▪ is the sonnes supreme gouernour as he saith and as the master in all causes that haue respect from the master as master to the seruant as seruant is likewise the seruants supreme gouernour and as the mayor in all causes that haue respect frō the mayor in that he is mayor to the citizen in that he is a citizen is also the citizens supreme gouernour so the supreme gouernour of ecclesiasticall persons in all causes that haue respect from him in that he is a supreme gouernour to ecclesiasticall persons in that they be ecclesiasticall persons is in all those causes their supreme gouernour but the causes in respecte whereof they be called ecclesiasticall persons beyng no other than ecclesiasticall causes it followeth that he is not onely supreme gouernour of the persons but also in the causes belonging to the persons as the father or master is not onely supreme gouernour of the sonnes or seruaunts persons but also in those causes in respect whereof he is the sonne or seruant Yea but saith M. St. though the Prince be supreme gouernour to these and all other persons in the realme yet as he entermedleth not with father schoolemaster shipmaster c. in their seuerall actions of their offices or vocations so though the Prince be supreme gouernour of all persons ecclesiasticall yet is he not supreme gouernour in
infidelitie beeing expelled and the furie of discorde remooued I shoulde reuoke the people to the knoweledge of faythe and to the â—…eloweshippe of the Catholyke Churche who serued errour vnder the name of Religion Lo master Stapleton here ye sée farre other endes of the ciuile gouernment of Christian Princes than as you most falsely and iniuriouslye alleage to preserue them from all outwarde iniuryes oppressions and enemyes and further to preserue them for theyr safetie and quietnesse for theyr wealth abundaunce and prosperous maintenaunce and that it tendeth and reacheth no further And that thys is common as well to the heathenishe as the Christian gouernement Fye for shame master Stapleton that euer suche heathenishe woordes shoulde procéede out of your catholyke lips But ye are halfe ashamed I sée and woulde mollifie the matter so muche as ye can with a proper qualification that those thinges which these godly Princes did although they did them yet therein were they no more but Aduocates and so saye you All good Princes doe and haue done ayding and assisting the Churche decrees made for the repression of vice and errors for the maintenance of vertue true religion Not as supreme gouernors themselues in all causes spirituall and temporall but as faythfull Aduocates in ayding and assisting the spirituall power that it may the sooner and more effectually take place As ye bring this shifting distinction of Aduocate to late M. Stap. hauing before quite debarred the Princes Ciuill gouernement of goyng anye iote further than ye there did bounde it to meddle no further wyth ayding and assisting the spirituall power than a Saracene doeth ayde and assist it gyuing Princes no more leaue to be Aduocates thereof than ye make the Turke or Souldan saying this theyr so limitted gouernement is common as well to both Heathen as Christian euen so this your office of Aduocateshippe came to late into the Churche by manye yeares to debarre anye of these forenamed Princes in theyr owne supreme gouernement aboute 〈◊〉 matters to make it sownde as though they onely had béene the ayders assisters or Aduocates vnto others and not them selues the doers Whereas on the contrarie they were the verye doers thoughe not of those actions that appertâ—…yned to the Ministers offices yet of the gouerning and directing bothe the Ministers and their actions yea and the principall ouerséers and supreme rulers of them as euen their déedes and wordes before rehearsed plainly declare As for thys shyft of Aduocation was long sithence after theyr tymes deuysed Whiche office of Aduocateshippe séemeth to bée deâ—…yued from this fonde errour of the Papistes that the seculer power is immediately and primarelye as they terme it in the Pope but he hath not also immediatelye the exercise or execution of it but gyueth that to the Prince and so the Prince becommeth the Popes Aduocate or rather his executioner And thus was first say they Carolus Magnus Pope Adrians Aduocate executing the Byshoppe of Romes will agaynste Desiderius King of Lumbardie Wherevpon Charles was made Emperour by the Pope notwithstanding Michaell the Emperour was then lyuing at Constantinople Propter hoc dicunt sayeth Dante 's Aligherius quòd omnes qui fuerunt Romanorum imperatores post ipsum ipse Aduocatâ—… Ecclesiae sunt debent ab Ecclesia aduocari For thys thyng all that were Emperours of Rome after hym and hee hym selfe are Aduocates of the Churche and oughte of the Churche to be called vpon Lupolous de Babenberge also telleth that Pope Zacharie declarauit c. declared or pronounced that Childericus Pepins master shoulde be deposed and Pepine be made the King of Fraunce whome when Pope Steuen the seconde annoynted with his sonnes Carolus and Carolomanus French Kings Ipsos specialiter elegit sayth Lupoldus ad sedem Apostolicam defendendam Ex hac electione putoque reges imperatores Romanorum sint vsque in hodiernum diem ecclesia Romanae aduocati de qua Aduocatia loquuntur iura canonica He chose them especially to defende the Apostolicall Sea. Of this election I thinke it commeth that Kinges and Emperours of the Romaynes are euen to this daye the Aduocates of the Romayne Churche of whiche Aduocacie speake the Canonicall lawes Thus you sée the originall of your deuised Aduocateship commeth nothing neare the examples of the sayde godly Princes béeing themselues supreme gouernours in Ecclesiasticall matters before your Aduocateshippe was first hatched No reason therefore the Punie shoulde debarre the Seniour And yet it is but a sielie shift of your Canonistes descant rather detecting the vnlawfull encroching of the Pope than defeating anye parte of the Princes authoritie in this hys supreme gouernement As for those Princes Carolus Magnus his sonnes and other Emperours since theyr tymes were nothing suche Aduocates as your Pope and you woulde nowe pretende that is to say to be your onelye executioners But as these stories testifie euen these Aduocates also were the chiefe directours and supreme gouernours of all those things they did Yea the Pope hym selfe so well as anye other Byshoppe in theyr territoryes was subiecte to them They ayded and assisted the Byshoppe of Rome I graunt when he humblie aduocated then he called vppon them for ayde and assystance agaynst the wrongers of him But the Pope by commaundement called them not and they obeyed his calling and so became his aduocates which is cleane contrarie to an aduocates office And therefore once agayne your argument is nought They were aiders and aduocates Ergo not supreme gouernours But M. St. will further proue by his former ensamples why this supreme gouernement can not appertayne to the Prince For this supreme gouernement sayth he can he not haue vnlesse he were him selfe a spirituall man no more than can a man be master of a shippe that neuer was a mariner A maior that neuer was a citizen Hys principal gouernement resting in ciuill matters and in that respecte as I haue sayde he is supreme gouernour of all persons in his Realme but not of all their actions but in suche sense as I haue specified and least of all the actions of spirituall men especially of those which are most appropriate to them which can not be vnlesse he were him selfe a spirituall man. You frame your similitude very vnproportionably M. Stap â–ª from the master of a shippe or the maior of a citie to a Prince or supreme gouernour Either of these béeing particuler offices vnder a supreme gouernour that maketh lawes euen both for maiors in cities and masters of shippes also â–ª And albeit no argumeÌ„t builded on similitudes is firme to proue or improue any controuersie though rightly applied they may lighteÌ„ the matter to him that assenteth but not enforce it to him that denieth notwithstanding your similitudes as they proue nothing so they nothing lighten but more obscure the matter yet if these your similitudes were admitted froÌ„ maior and pilot to supreme gouernour what true conclusion can ye inferre vpon
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
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
religion Secondly that they ought to doe this with an especiall regards and care Thirdely they perceyue and rightly vnderstande that it is Gods will they shoulde so doe Now since that this by master Stapletons déepe silence is agréed vpon betwixt the Bishop and him I make hereon this argument To order and set forth Gods true religion with especiall regarde and care is the Princes duetie But the only sort of gouernment that the Quéenes Maiestie doth chalenge and take vpon hiâ—… in ecclesiasticall causes is to order and set forth Gods true Religion with an especiall regarde and care Ergo Prinâ—… ought to take vpon them such gouernment as the Quéenes Maiestie doth claime and take vpon hir in ecclesiasticall causes And thus is the Bishops antecedent directly proued and so consequently the principall matter of M. Feck issue Nowe as the former part being the generall assertion to all the ensamples following is no whitte impeached by any aunswere of master Stap. to it but by silence whiche with him is an argument of confession graunted so like a very Counterblaster in déed he blusâ—…reth and puffeth at the seconde part as though he would all to blast it Moses sayth the Bishop was supreme gouernour ouer Gods people and was not chief priest or Bishop for that was Aaron Here master Stapleton denyeth not Moses to be the supreme gouernour but that he was not chiefe priest or Bishop he vtterly gainsayeth it It is an vntruth sayth he in his score for Moses was the chiefe priest as shall be prooued Here is a flat promise of proufe but I feare me it wil neuer be perfourmed neyther doth master Stapleton here go about the perfourmance of it And therefore the Bishops denial of Moses to be the chiefe Priest must stand for a truth till by prouing Moses to be the chiefe Priest he haue proued it to be an vntruth And in the meane time his promise must stande but for a crake as also his prowde entraâ—…nte into his Chapter That the Scripture by the Bishop alleaged reacheth nothing home but rather infringeth and plainely marreth the Bishoppes purpose and fullye standeth on our syde sayeth this student so greatly hath arrogancie sotted him He fareth as did the Souldiour who when his aduersarie had manye tymes in wrastling hurled him downe in the sighte of euerie stander by yet woulde hée neuer confesse that hée had anye fall yea most arrogantlye â–ª he styll affyrmed that hée had â—…ast the other And euen so playeth this student for this of wrastling is one of his common similitudes he contendeth to wrastle with the Bishoppe whiche is in verys déede as hée sayeth in this Chapter Impar congressus Achâ—…lls Troilus An vneuen matche betweene Troylus and Achilles What a number of â—…oule falles hée hath had yea howe hée hath béene ouerturned in hys â—…wne trippes is apparaunt to euery Readers eyes and goe no further but euen to hys last Chapter And yet sée howe hée craketh that all the Byshoppes allegations marre hys owne cause and fully stande on hys syde Where contraryewyse they haue drie beaten him backe bellie side and all And as hée thus fondely maketh vaunt of his former victorie â—…o I doubt nothing sayth he it will fare with his examples Well sayd of a student like an other Gawin he doubteth nothing But sée a sodaine qualme of hys inconstancie for euen streyght wayes after he hath cryed out all comes to shorâ—… he sayth but here am I shrewedly â—…ncombred and in a great doubt what to doe Whie master Stapleton are ye now so soone in a great doubt and right nowe as doeth bolde Bayarde doubted nothing and haue before alreadie without any stammering thereat clapped downe your marginall note for a full resolute aunswere that Moyses was the chiefe Priest and nowe doubt ye what to answere But master Stapleton hath so many weapons that he is shrewdly encombred with them as it were another armed Golias and yet one smal poebble stone will soone ease him of this encombrance He telles vs he hath so many aunsweres that he doubteth with which he should beginne for I could sayth he make a short but a true aunswere that these ensamples are fully aunswered alreadie by master D. Harding and master Dorman In déede master Stapleton this were a short aunswers but I sée your selfe feare as ye sayde before it woulde come to short and not reache home to the matter Yet say you if ye shoulde referre the Reader thither to his and your great ease it should be to the sparing not only of penne ynke and paper but of the time also which of all thinges is most precious It séemeth master Stapleton ye are a man of déepe casting these are good considerations of penne ynke paper and tyme. But whie followe ye not your owne councell whiche if ye had obserued and left out so many impertinent vagaries and other your trifling common places ye had saued more paper penne ynke and tyme by thrée halues than ye haue done And here as séeming full resolued to follow this aduise ye clappe downe another marginall note All master Hornes examples out of the olde Testament aunswered alreadie by master Doctour Harding and master Dorman Here sayth he is a shorte but a true aunswere To this shorte aunswere I aunswere againe All M. Doctor Hardings and M. Dormans answeres confuted alreadie by the B of Sarum and M. Nowell Here is another as short an answere as yours M. Stap. and a great deale truer whiche I remitte to the indifferent viewers of both their answeres Nowe might we both rest and breath vs from further answering of these ensamples and spare penue ynke paper and time also that he séemeth to accompt most precious But another thing was more precious vnto him and that was master Feckenhams hyre and his friendes largesse for so much Paper penne ynke and time spent about his booke and the gaine of the printed copies which the bigger volume it came vnto for he woulde not séeme a thréehalfepennie student the fatter exhibition it should yéelde and he séeme the greater clerke yea to go beyonde his masters And therefore there is no remedie he will spare neyther penne ynke paper time nor paynes also but that his Counterblast shall be blowne vp to so large and full a volume that it may encounter euen the best of theirs To whose answeres if he shoulde referre himselfe and saye no more thereto Then I feare me sayth he woulde steppe forth if not master Horne a good simple plaine man in his dealings yet some other ioly fine freshe pregnant wittie fellowe yea and bring me to the streightes which way so euer I did treade You are loath I perceiue master Stapleton to be brought into the streight way to treade aright therein for then your wrie treading woulde soone be espied But ye séeke crookes and shifting answeres for the nonce And lyke the vayne talkatiue Arrian Philosopher ye dispise the right reuerende and learned father calling
is the full effect of your whole answere which how effectuall it is to infringe the Bishops assertion let all the worlde be indge And yet ye so triumphe hereon that as it were some instie freshe Champion hauing beaten all downe before him ye crie out for another aduersarie Here I wish say you to encounter with master Nowell Ye are all heart to the hard héeles I sée M. St. and were it not herein that ye resemble the wise captayne that in the beginning you mentioned out of Luke 14 I woulde haue sayde this chalenge had procéeded of a noble and hawte â—…orage but bicause it wanteth that naturall wisdoâ—…e and foresight so rashly to runne vpon one aduersarie hauing more than bothe your handfuls with him yet more fondly to chalenge another on your toppe your caâ—…se beeinâ—… so badde and your selfe so weake and vnskilfull a souldiour withall all wise men will iudge it in you neither pollicie nor manhoode but that in your foole hardie presumption ye play but the desperate Dicke if not a Thom of Lâ—…dlem The. 12. Diuision NExt to Moses the Bishop adioyneth the ensample of Iosue prouing by diuers testimonies and doings of Iosue that the supreme gouernement in all ecclesiasâ—…i also well as temporall causes was committed to him â—…ot to Eleazar the high priest who onely had the ministration of things belonging to the priestly office M. Stap. in al the residue of the examples â—…auing before promised to be as briefe as he may yet to amplifie his answere least it should be too briefe or his counterbâ—…ast too small in the beginning and so throughout his answers picketh bye quarels at the Apologie at master Nowell at the Conuocation and other thinges not to the present purpose but for any materiall or directe answere to any of Iosues doinges he vseth nothing but méere shiftes or very childishe arguments First to Iosue his example generally M. D. Harding sayth he sheweth that allegation to importe no chiefe rule in spirituall matters as in deede it doth not As though the whole matter M Stap. muste be determined by â—…hat so euer your M. D. Harding hath sayde and you with it is learned proofe in deede it dothe not haue confirmed your masters saying Now as though this were betwéene his allegation and your coÌ„firmation a sufficient and ful prooâ—…e ye set downe theron your marginall note as a cleare case Iosue no supreme gouernour in all ecclesiasticall causes What kinde of arguing call ye this M. Stapl but sée howe soone at the first ye confounde your selfe and 〈◊〉 that Iosue had the gouernement in eccleuasticall matters For where ye picke by quarels already answered agaynst the Apologie and master Nowell about this phrase to goe foorth and come in and will not haue it vnderstoode onely of going and comming to and fro the warres as M. Nowell hath fully proued it dothe as also Ruvi 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 Aben â—…zra do expounde it and Lyra expresseth the meaning of the phrase do a quod noâ—… siâ—… 〈◊〉 ad labores sed priâ—…us so that he be not the last but the first to labour But say yau Immediatly before it is generally vvritten prohoc si quid agendum crit Eleazar sacerdos consulet dominum For him meaning Iosue Eleazar 〈◊〉 aske counsell of God when any thing is to be done In which words we see euidentâ—…y that Iosue whatsoeuer he did touching the gouerning of the people in ecclesiasticall matters he did nothing of him selfe but was in all suche matters instructed of Eleazarus the high Priest. Doe ye not see withal euidently master Stapleton that admitting this to be vnderstood so generally as you preteÌ„d howe your selfe doe piaynly graunte that the gouernement in ecclesiasticall matters appertayned to Iosue in saying VVhat soeuer he did touching the gouerning of the people in ecclesiasticall matters and what now will ye make Iosue a Priest no say you but in all such thinges he was instructed of Eleazarus the highe priest VVhos 's parte therfore it was alwayes to aske counsell of God when Iosuâ—… had anything to doe Why what then M. Stap. the question is not asked heere of asking counsell who asked it of God or whether Iosue asked it of Eleazar but by whose gouernment it was done We graunt the Princes shoulde aske counsell in all ecclesiasticall matters of their godlye learned clergie and they shoulde aske it of God that is to say of his holy worde wherein he hath reuealed his will. But what letteth this asking counsell the ordering doing setting forth and gouerning of those ecclesiasticall matters to be in the Prince What hindreth this that the Prince ought to aske counsell also in euery weightie ciuill affayre the chiefe gouernment thereof to be in the Prince Though he follow in all points the aduice of his counsellers yet haue not they the chiefe authoritie This exception therefore of asking counsell taketh not away your graunt that Iosue had the doing of those things that touched the gouerning of the people in ecclesiasticall matters And so is this a fit ensample euen by your owne flatconfession And with all ye haue graunted the full issue that godly Princes haue and may take vpon them such gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes as the Q. maiestie now doth Here if ye would flée touch and say ye graunt Iosue had the gouernement in causes ecclesiasticall but not the supreme gouernment although this be but a shifting toy so long as he did not those things by any others gouernance and yet is it much more than your fellowes or your selfe otherwhiles will confesse that he was any gouernour at all in ecclesiasticall matters so contrarie ye are to your fellowes and your selfe yet what can ye shew why as ye grauÌ„t Iosue to be gouernour so he should not be supreme gouernour also but be subiect to another If ye stand on this argument Iosue must in all things aske counsell of the Priest Ergo Iosue in all things is subiect to the Priestes iudgement By this argument you will make the kinges counsell to be the kings supreme gouernours to But they for all theyr good counsell giuen to the king be he neuer so much bâ—…und to take it are but his subiectes still therein and he their soueraigne Lord for by him when al their couÌ„sell is done the thing must be set forth established through his authoritie As therfore you haue grauÌ„ted Iosue had the gouerning of the people in ecclesiastical matters so this exceptioÌ„ doth nothing embarre his supreme gouernment therein but rather establish it that in all his doings were they neuer so generall the priest was but the counsellour first learning of God and then instructing his Prince but the gouerning and setting forth thereof belonged vnto Iosue And to reason on the contrarie from asking or giuing counsel and instruction to a chiefe authoritie or from following good counsell to obedience and subiection is but an homely argument and fitte for
in his owne person throughout al his couÌ„trey What fault find ye herewith that he called it a progresse call you it an egresse or by what ye can finde a more vsuall or â—…itter name where the prince him selfe doth trauell The text is 〈◊〉 egressus est ad populuÌ„ and again he went foorth vnto the people Stande ye on that he said it was in his owne person In déede Lyra saith per sacerdotes Leuit as sicuâ—… ante ficaraâ—… He went foorth by the Priests Leuites as he had done before But the text séemeth coÌ„trary that he traueled him selfe Wheron Uatablus noteth vt ambularet per populuÌ„ fortasse queÌ„ offenderat â—…alo exeÌ„plâ—… vel per populuÌ„ cut praeâ—…rat quasi dicat peâ—…agrauit regioneÌ„ sibi subditam That he might trauel by the people whoÌ„ perhaps he had offended by his euill exaÌ„ple for personally he went out with them to Achabs warres or by the people whoÌ„ he ruled as though he should say he trauelled all ouer the realme that was subiect to him Are ye offended that he sayth throughout al his countrey The text is playne De Bersabe vsque ad monteÌ„ Ephraim from Beersabee euen to the mount Ephraim Id est sayth Lyra à principio regni sui vsque ad finem that is from the beginning of his kingdome euen to the end therof Of which progresse in the note before sayth Lyra Hie consequenter ponitur ipsius Iosaphat emeÌ„datio in se populo primo in cultu diuino Here consequently is set foorth the amendment of Iosaphat in him selfe and in the people and first in the worship of God. In none of these words hitherto there is any indignitie nothing to be detested or any ridiculous tale to be laughed at but euery word is agreable to the most graue holy and infallible worde of God. If there were therfore any such leuitie detestablenesse in the bishops termes it is only in this that he likened those parties to iustices of the peace But this name I am sure is neither to be detested nor laughed at except you be some od wicked Lucian or Timon â—…all godly christians can allowe this name with reuerence Is the ridiculcusnesse detestablenesse in saying the one might resemble the other reade the text Constituitque Iudices terrae in cunctis ciuitatibus Iuda munitis per singula loca and he appointed Iudges of the land in all the walled cities of Iuda through all places Now could a man expresse this by a liuelyer example than to say those petit iudges were as it were Iustices of the peace if you can shewe a more apter estate to expresse them by do it on Gods name I dare say for the Byshop he will giue you good leaue though ye somewhat missed the quishion make no such haynous matter therat Lyra sayth Hic secundo describitur ipsius Iosaphat populi melioratio in regimine populi primo in communibus causis secundo in arduis in quibus erat recursus in Hierusalem Circa primum dicitur constituitque Iudices vt non oporteat populum discurrere à loca ad locum ad habendum in causis communibus Heere secondly is described the bettering of Iosaphat him selfe and his people in the gouernance of the people first in common causes secondly in difficulte causes wherein the recourse was vnto Hierusalem Concerning the firste it is sayde and he appoynted Iudges to be had in the common matters that the people shoulde not runne vp and downe from place to place And is not this exposition of Lyra so agreable to the Byshops that it conteyneth euen the same what cause then had ye héere Master Stapl. to make this haynous exclamation Were not this youre dealing rather ridiculous and to be laughed at sauyng that the indignitie of your enuious demeanour is more to be detested But nowe in the matter of all this what is héere that directly inferreth not Iosaphats supreme gouernement not onely ouer the nobles and the people but ouer the Priests Leuites preachers al the clergy in directing and setting foorth the word worship of God that not only in coÌ„moÌ„ matters but eueÌ„ for those matters also of the priests senteÌ„ce at Ierusalem for the which hitherto ye haue made so muche ado but all this M. Stap. though he saw it plaine inough yet he thought best not to meddle therwith But rather least the reader shoulde marke it also to finde him play about the printing of words and phrases and here at to hallow and make suche outcries as though all the matter lay therein Yea he bursteth out into such a vehemencie of his spirite that not contente with his former haynous quarels he layeth yet greater to the Byshops charge saying But from fonde counterfayting he proceedeth to flat lying for where he sayth that Iosaphat commanded and prescribed vnto the chiefe Priests what fourme and order they should obserue in the ecclesiasticall causes and controuersies of religion c. This is a lewde and a horrible lye flatly belying Gods holy worde the which in one that goeth for a Byshop what can be done more abhominable In déede M. Stapl. it were an abhominable thing to belye Gods holy worde were it in any man chiefly in a Byshop but this abhomination besides many worsse not only lewdly flatly horribly to belie but to deface blaspheme yea to take away and burne Gods holy worde are the right properties of your Popish Bishops not of ours But what hath the Bishop nowe héere saide that belyeth and accordeth not with the holy scripture for the wordes which you your selfe set foorth do they not playnly comprehende a fourme and order which they should obserue in ecclesiasticall matters and controuersies of religion Sic agetis c. Thus shall ye do in the feare of the Lorde faythfully and with a perfect heart And as your selfe expound it They should do their duetie faythfully and perfectly as they had done before in the dayes of Asa and Abias Lo do not your owne selfe héere confesse a maner and fourme of order which be prescribed them to do those things by Agayne are not these your owne words howe Iosaphat appoynted the Leuites and priestes to these ecclesiasticall functions it shal appeare in the next Chapter by the example of Ezechias Where ye say howe he did it had that how no maner or fourme of order in it Yes but ye say that maner of fourme shall appeare in the example of Ezechias A Gods name so let it doe in the meane season ye graunt he did it after the fourme of order that Ezechias dyd it And there ye say that Ezechias did it as Dauid did it But ye wotte well the Scripture sheweth at large the fourmes and orders of Dauids appoyntments if therefore Ezechias did it like to Dauid and Iosaphat like to Ezechias then is the bishops saying proued true by all these your confessions that he
his kingly authoritie but he traueled full godly in suppressing Idolatrie by his kingly authoritie as though his kingly authoritie stretched no furder than to trauell in the execution of seruing the priestly authoritie But the Scripture is most euident that his kingly authoritie and godly trauell was not in executing the Priestes commaundement but the priestly authoritie traueled in the seruice and executing of the Princes commandement For as he destroyed all their Idols and places of Idolatry and abolished or depriued as Uatablus expoundeth it the false priestes of their priestly dignitie so he commaunded by this his kingly authoritie all the true priestes both the high priest Helchias and vnder him the inferiour priestes and porters to trauell likewise in bringing out to him all the Idolatrous vessels and he summoned or gathered togither all the Priestes And all that there is done is named to be done by him that is to say eyther by him selfe or by his appoyntment and commaundement through his kingly authoritie both in abolishing the false worship and in establishing and directing the true worship of God not onely in generall but also in perticuler yea in the chiefest spirituall matters ouer all the Clergie and the high Priest so well as all his other subiectes and all this was done of him by his kingly authoritie But what then saith M. Stapleton to all this as it were with a phillip to ouerturne al the matter with his Masters what then Forsooth M. St. then it was not his godly trauell in a seruiceable execution of the priestes commaundements but his godly trauell in commaunding them their godly trauel in a seruiceable execution of the kinges commaundements And then it was not onely in suppressing Idolatrie as you limite it but in refourming establishing directing appointing the whole true worship of God besides And then was this his kingly authoritie by the which he did all these things though many of them were Moses Dauids yea the Prophetes former ordinances and Gods commaundement long before yet were they done here by the kinges owne authoritie which in the last example of Ezechias concerning Dauid ye would not admitte bicause it was Gods appoyntment by the hande of his Prophetes Such as were many of these things like wise and yet now ye graunt they were done also euen by Iosias his kingly authoritie And then I pray you what so great a difference finde ye betwéene these twaine the King doth it by his kingly authoritie that here ye confesse and the King doth it by his owne authoritie that there ye denied is not the kinges kingly authoritie the Kinges owne authoritie and yet is all his authoritie from god It followeth then to your what then by your owne confession and the manifest Scripture that this his owne kingly authoritie of Iosias was next vnder God the chiefe and supreme ouer all the Priestes Leuites Singers Porters or any other so well as the people in all abolishing of false religion and in all commaunding and directing the true worship and religion of God which are the principall causes ecclesiasticall And what then say you to this M. Stapleton doth it not cléerely proue the Bishops assertion against M. FeckenhaÌ„ for al your counterblasting it with your bigge what then Thinke ye it proues he did no more then than you will suffer Princes to do now abusing them with the title of good catholike Princes and bereauing them of their good catholike and princely authoritie that by the examples of these good catholike princes they ought to take vpon them and your Pope vsurpes it from them And yet you say to abase the doings of Iosias so do good catholike Princes also to plucke downe the Idolles that ye and your brethren haue of late set vp and yet none of them tooke them selues for supreme heades in all causes spirituall The question is not nowe Master Stapleton what those your good catholike Princes as ye call them take them selues to be whome you haue spoyled and make beléeue what it pleaseth you to tell them that their kingly authoritie reacheth no furder but to be seruiceable trauelers and executioners of your commaundements But the question is here what these Princes mencioned in the holy Scriptures tooke them selues to be which appereth by their appointinges and coÌ„maundinges of their Clergie in their functions that they tooke them selues for their Clergies supreme gouernours in these matters And so ought al good catholike princes by their examples to estéeme of them selues and of their high calling and charge in ecclesiasticall causes and trauayle by their godly supreme gouernment to discharge the same Where ye say therefore so do good catholike princes meaning those that submitte themselues with all the gouernment of religion and all ecclesiasticall matters to your Pope and his prelates not medling them selues therewith as did Iosias and these other godly Kinges whome we sée to haue medled with the gouernment and direction thereof it is apparant false and their doinges herein are no more alike than blacke is like to white than to commaunde directe and appoint others is like to be of the same parties in the same matters commaunded directed and appointed themselues than gouerning is like seruing than one contrarie is like to another And yet you say for ye care not what ye saie as did king Iosias so do your good catholike princes now But what is that they do plucke down the Idols say you that you and your brethern haue set vp Whether we our bretheren or you and your bretheren haue set vp Idols let it fal out betwene vs as it shall hereafter we shall come to the reckening onely stande you to this M. Stapleton that the plucking downe of Idols belongeth to Princes by their kingly authoritie and that so they ought to account of them selues their authoritie which if they had done and diligently executed this their kingly authoritie your shifte of Images and Idols had not auayled you for euen to your moste famous Images shrines and pilgrimages hath foule idolatrie bene committed as the chiefe of your brethren them selues are fayne to confesse and crye out vpon and yet durst your princes neuer pull them downe nor you would euer haue suffred thâ—… so to do for your lucre lay muche therein but caused the Princes to mainteine and enriche suche Images as you dayly did set vp As for the Idols that we should haue set vp who séeth not we haue so little set vp any that we reiecte for Idols those which ye call your Images and professe that neither they nor any other thing besides God nor God in them or by them is to be worshipped but God alone and that in spirite and truthe and so receiue his playne simple worde and sacraments But if as ye sayde before those Princes pull downe our heresies and those are the Idols that we set vp except this presupposall should be graunted you that those be heresies which we mainteine
immunities the priuileges of the heatheÌ„ priests they are so like vnto your popish priesthoode but I spare the reader Neuerthelesse what cause soeuer moueth you to write so fauorably for the Egiptian Priests none of these causes or any other maintenance of Idolaters moued Ioseph nor that any other suche lyke priesthoode to come shoulde take hereat any suche prerogatiue of béeing exempt from all fines to their princes The reason that moued Ioseph is apparant in the text He tooke the fift part of the peoples fruites bicause before they helde theÌ„ not of their king but the priests liuing was altogither of the kings gift finding And therfore they payed no portion to the king but the king allowed theÌ„ al the portioÌ„ they had But this that al that they had to liue vpoÌ„ was of the kings gift you quite forgat which argueth their subiectioÌ„ to him ye reasoÌ„ vpoÌ„ their priuiledge Where ye shâ—…ld note withal that al those other their priuiledges liuings came froÌ„ depeÌ„ded on the king And theÌ„ sée how fit a marke therby ye caÌ„ set vp against the Princes gouernmeÌ„t ouer priests Your Ninth and last marke is yet more fond and confused than all the rest besides wherin ye demaund of the Bishop saying Are ye able suppose ye to name any one king that wrote him selfe supreme head of the Iewishe Churche and that in all causes aswell spiritual as temporall and that caused an othe to the priestes and people the nobilitie onely exempted to be tendred that they in conscience did so beleeue and that in a woman prince to yea and that vnder payne of premunire and playne treason too Me thinkes ye play huddle now in the latter end M. St. sixe or seuen markes togither in one For the title of supreme head for receyuing the othe for the persons receyuing it the persons exempted the maner of receyuing it the Princes person and the penaltie of the refusall All these matters on a plumpe for haste come in one liuerie with the cognisance of your Ninth marke how neere the issue betwéene the Bishop and M. Feckenham I remit to the view of others To all these demaundes bicause ye are in hast and therfore thrust them out on an heape togither that the one might be a cloake to the other I will briefly answere them as they lye To your first demaunde for the Title thinke ye this a good argument No king of the Iewes wrote this title of supreme head or gouernour Ergo No king of the Iewes was so By the same argument no king of Englande before king Henrie wrote him selfe Defender of the faythe neither any king of the Iewes wrote that tytle Ergo None of them were defenders of the faythe And by the same argument your holy Father myghte léese a ioly Uicarige that he claymeth from Christ and Peter for neither of them wrote suche titles as he doth nor the highe Priest in the olde Testament wrote any suche stile as he dothe Ergo he claymeth his supremacie from them in vaine But this is a vaine argument if you can proue not the title so muche an the matter the thing and effecte of the title to come from them to him no man will stande with you in the stile but graunt your Pope his clayme This can you not do and therfore your Popeâ—…tytle is but vaine But this for the Princes supreme gouernment the Bishop hath named the Princes in the olde Testament and fully proued it that in matter thing and effect they tooke vppon them this supreme gouernance that the Quéenes Maiestie iustly claymeth now And this béeing proued as before till ye can improue this what babble ye of the title and yet since ye can bring no sufficient proofe of your Popes title neither why maketh this argument more agaynst the Prince than it doth agaynst the Pope Your second quarell is at the othe but the content therof as is proued béeing true why ought they not to sweare therto yea thoughe there were in the olde Testament no such ensample of an othe ministred by the Prince to hys subiects And yet we read how Iosias swore al his subiects to the lord But ye wil say this othe is not for the Prince to sweare them to Gods religion but to his estate If his estate be dutiful by gods religioÌ„ is he not therby also sworn thervnto And why then may not the Prince for his more assurance make an especiall othe thereof so well as a generall But was it lawfull for your Pope to sweare them to his vndue supremacie and is it not lawfull for the prince in a matter so due vnto him If you stil vrge a playne manyfest ensample to be shewed you where in expresse wordes suche an othe was then required I pray you and you will not deale partially M. Stap â–ª shewe you another example where the highe Priest of the Iewes required such an othe of the Clergie as your Pope dyd minister to those vnder him To that ye stande on the tendring the othe to the Priestes and the people and to aggrauate the matter as partiall say the Nobilitie be exempted partely is fonde and partely false For the Nobilitie or any other in certayne offices are not exempted But see the proude orgulous harte of this Priest howe he picketh quarels agaynst the Noibilitie bicause heerein they haue any prerogatiue ouer his priestly order But he maketh a matter in that the othe is that they in conscience did so beleeue as thoughe they coulde sweare therto and can not beleeue it in their consciences Belike master Stapleton your popishe Priestes make good otheâ—… and haue good consciences and beléefes that can sweare to a thing and haue no conscience or can haue conscience and not beléeue it so to be as ye sweare It is to be feared that some of your order haue so done Whether you haue done so or no I will not say for I knowe not your dealing nor am ouer curious to search out your olde reckonings But I thinke some of your good masters are not all in cleane life thereof Your outcrie at a womans Prince to haue thys Tytle yea and that say you in a woman Prince to sheweth your impudent spite agaynst your most gracious soueraigne and withall your impudent follie A woman Prince to say you If a Prince Master Stap. and why not a woman Prince to Will ye graunt hir to be a Prince and take from hir the duty that these ensamples shew doth belong vnto a prince Therefore eyther ye muste denie that a woman may be a prince or else graunt this authoritie yea to a woman prince to And doth not the Scripture commende yea a woman Prince to to suppresse Idolaters and tyraunts to gouerne and iudge Gods people And why may not now a woman Prince to deliuer vs as the Quéenes Maiestie hath done from the yoke of a greater tyrant and all his Idolaters to and
their swordes villes bowes and gunnes to lay on and strike onely when the Priests bid them and those onely whome the Priestes appoint to be slaine Now forsoth and forsoth M. St. this is a proper dealing of Princes in Ecclesiasticall causes and a goodly kinde of making lawes and constitutions for the furtherance of Christes religion Well whatsoeuer it be this is all they are like to haue of you and yet will ye kéepe touche with them in your graunt to But thinke ye M. St. was this all that princes ought to do and nothing else but to punish heretikes on this fashion nothing else say you for that was in deede the very occasion why S. Aug. wrote all this A â—…a M. St. then I perceyue S. Aug â–ª wrote something more than ye would perticulerly answere vnto Well say you what soeuer he wrote this was the very occasion whie he wrote it to make lawes for punishing Heretikes and nothing else How M. St to make the Emperor that then was none other dealer in their punishment than your Pope maketh the Emperour now or than your Prelates made Q. Marie of late your executioner and the Nobilitie your droyles whome soeuer ye determine to prick by your excoÌ„munication condemnation what fooles were the Donatists then to crie out vpon the Emperour This were like the furie of the angrie Dogge that being bitte with a stone wreaketh his anger vpon the stone and not on him that hurled it What fellon is offended with the executioner or layeth his death to the beheaders charge when the Prince commaundeth to behead him but to the Prince But in this case you are the Princes that are the Priests and the Prince is but as it were the stone in your bande is but the executioner of your sentence Why should the Donatists then haue blamed the Prince except the Prince then had beene not the Priestes instrument but euen the principall in making lawes of punishment for them And so did Saint August acknowledge the Prince He decréed not lawes for the Emperour to put in execution but desired the Emperour to reforms them by suche sharpe lawes as séemed best to himselfe And although this were the verie occasion as ye say why Saint Augustine wrote all this Yea though it were the onely occasion to of writing all that he wrote what is that to this purpose For whatsoeuer the occasion were the occasion is not vrged but the wordes that he wrote A particuler occasion maye haue generall prooues The occasion of Saint Augustines wryting ye saye was the punishing of the Donatists And yet woulde Saint Augustine so haue written thoughe they had béene other Heretikes And it serueth agaynst all Heretykes Whie bycause hys prooues are generall whatsoeuer were the occasion And yet his occasion was not onely aboute the punishing of the Donatists for the Donatists denyed more than hys authoritie in punishing them they denyed hys authoritie to â—…ette foorth the true Religion and to ouersee that it bee in all estates duely preserued This sayde they was committed to Fishers not to Souldiours to Prophets not to Kinges as you nowe saye the lyke it was committed to the Apostles and Priestes not to Kings This was another verie occasion also and many other besydes might be whie Saint Augustine wrote all this But what is this All this that ye speake vppon I pray ye tell vs at least the summe of all this that saint Augustine wrote And then shall we sée if it be all none other but lawes of punishment for Heretikes that he layde and ment or no. And whether you haue hitherto truly sayde and ment or no all your falsehoode will then appeare Let vs here therefore resume some of those Testimonies of Saint Augustine God dothe inspire sayth he into Kinges that they shoulde procure the commaundement of the Lorde to be performed or kept in their Kingdoms Is this onely master Stapleton for punishing of Heretikes Againe In that hee is also a King hee serueth in making lawes of conuenient force for to commaunde iust things and to forbidde the contrarie Is this onely ment of lawes to punishe Heretikes Againe The Ensample of the King of Niniue that it apperteyned to the Kinges charge that the Niniuites shoulde pacifie Gods wrath Was thys onely mente of making lawes for punishing Heretikes What Heretikes were in Niniue Heathen Idolaters there were store but of Heretikes we read none And who made the decree of their fasting and repentance not the Prophete he onely denounced the wrath and iustice of God nor highe Priest of Aarons order was there any among them that the Scripture mencioneth Idolatrous Priestes no doubt they had more than ynowe but the lawe of that Ecclesiasticall discipline was not set out by them but by the King. Generally to conclude Saint Augustine sayth that the auncient actes of the godly Kinges mencioned in the Propheticall Bookes were figures of the lyke factes to bee done by the godlye Princes in the tyme of the newe Testament Were nowe these theyr doynges and auncient actes nothing else but lawes and constitutions for punishing Hereâ—…ykes and false teachers Were all the constitutions and doyngs of Moyses Iosue Dauid Salomon Iosaphat Ezechias Iosias and others nothing else Master Stapleton but this O good GOD that euer any that shoulde professe the studie of diuinitie shoulde be founde so false and shamelesse not onely thus to dallie with Princes but also to delude the fathers and the Scriptures and all to enfringe and takeaway the Princes interest and authoritie Nowe that ye haue thus in your first part brought the matter about giuing a graunt in wordes and expounding the wordes haue taken away the graunt againe ye enter into your seconde part to set a fresh on vs as ye did in your former Chapter would make these testimonies of S. Aug. to serue against vs which ye go about two maner of ways First hauing nowe abridged the princes authoritie to nothing else but to make lawes to punish Heretikes ye crie out vpon vs that we be the heretikes and that they must punish vs â–ª Secondly ye woulde proue that we be the Heretikes to be punished for denying euen this title to Princes of punishing Heretikes And for the first part ye say But nowe that master Horne may not vtterly leese all his labour herein let vs see howe these matters do truely and trimly serue agaynst his deare brethren and master Foxes holy Martyrs Here is all made sure on euery side euery way preuented least the poore â—…elie Protestants shoulde escape your violence by any starting hole First you your selues our enemies will onely haue the making of the decrées and lawes what shall be true religion what shall be false Secondly the Prince shall haue nothing to doe in examining the matter betwéene vs who haue in déede the true religion who haue the false but they must beléeue before hand that that which you shall say against vs is
or no. Now ye may conclude sayth master Stapleton that there is some regiment that Princes may take vpon them in causes Ecclesiasticall Thankes be giuen to God master Stapleton that yet now at the length contrary to all your felowes to all your owne wranglings hitherto the force of the truth hath enforced you to yelde thus much to the B. ye graunt Now that Princes haue some regiment in ecclesiasticall causes which hitherto except the making a law of burning or punishing be an eccl. cause ye haue altogither denied vnto Princes But what is this some regiment that ye graunt theÌ„ now for neither we graunt them al regiment but some regiment also that is to say a supreme regiment And you also denie not in your marginall note that they may take vpon theÌ„ in ecclesiastical matters supreme gouernmeÌ„t authority power care but not say you such supreme gouernment as the othe prescribeth so that here we both agrée of supreme gouernment but the kinde of supreme gouernment is denied And to specifie your meaning herein how large a kind ye graunt or denie ye adde he should haue concluded in all things and causes else he concludeth not agaynst you signifying that you deny to them a supreme gouernment in all things causes ecclesiastical but ye graunt them a supreme gouernment authoritie power and care in things and causes ecclesiasticall First M. Stap. this is but a iangling and shifting quarell in wordes about things and causes ecclesiasticall and all things and causes ecclesiasticall For not onely the Bishop when he speaketh so indefinitely vnderstandeth all but also it is an ordinarie speach allowed in Logike in all things that be naturall or necessarie where the indefinite is counted as much as the vniuersall As to say a man is a reasonable creature or man is mortall is as much as precisely to say all men and euery man is reasonable and mortall And the saying in the next diuision he came to fulfill the lawe and the Prophetes is all one with this he came to fulfill all the lawe and all the Prophetes And likewise this giue vnto God that belongeth to God and to Caesar that belongeth to Caesar is as much to say as this giue vnto God all that belongeth to God c. and euen your selfe doe commonly speake thus indefinitely ecclesiasticall matters when ye meane all ecclesiasticall matters though now when ye be thus â—…iuen to graunt the effect of the matter yet would ye find some shift of descant to frustrate all the matter and say If ye meane of such regiment as ye preteÌ„d where ye know well ynough none other is ment ye make your reckoning without your host as a man may say and conclude before ye haue brought any proufe that they ought or may take vpon them such gouernment Whether this some regiment be such regimeÌ„t or such gouernment for thus M. St. ye loue in termes to dally though the Bishop hath proued it sufficiently and you haue graunted it standing onely like a daintie Nicie besetter on this quaint poynt in things not in all things yea whether this Nice restraint defeate the full proufe of the question in controuersie betwene master Feckenham and the Bishop shal appeare M. St. by calling them â—…ath coram to recken better with their host that is as you haue like a thriftie tapster called vpon so oft before though still ye brought in false reckonings to set before them and mark the issue that they condiscended vpon that is to weâ—…e Any such gouernmeÌ„t in ecclesiastical causes Lo here the demaund of the hoste himselfe be requireth but any such gouernmeÌ„t and that without putting in all in the reckoning Where therfore ye grauÌ„t the B. hath proued it in some eccl. causes which satisfieth the demaund of any ecclesiast causes euen according to your owne wrangling ye confesse the Bishop hath concluded the very issue that was concluded vpon Thus master St. euen by your owne reckoning the B reckoned with his host at the full and hath payed and satisfied that he promised and M. Feckenham required But nowe looke you what reckoning you will make to your friendes that haue here brought your selfe so farre in the lashe that taking vpon you to impugne the Princes gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes ye haue graunted and yelded to it How will your credite holde with your friends yea how will your reckoning hold with it self here ye haue grauÌ„ted some regimeÌ„t yea supreme gouernment though not such supreme gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes In the last Chap. ye would graunt theÌ„ nothing but punishment of those whom you had condemned which is no ecclesiastical matter at all to hang or burne a man And yet ye gaue them no regiment much lesse supreme regiment therein neyther For you would haue al the appointing whoÌ„ he shal punish the prince hath nothing else to do but to execute him whom you deliuer vp vnto him which agréeth nothing with this that now ye haue grauÌ„ted least of all with that ye further grauÌ„t saying For though I graunt you all your examples ye haue alleaged and that the doings of the olde Testament were figures of the new and the saying of Esay that kings should be nourishing fathers to the Church and all things else that ye here alleage yet all will not reach home no not Constantine the great his example How agréeth this graunt master Stap. with all that ye haue done all this while Why haue ye denied the Bishops ensamples heretofore of Moyses Iosue Dauid c. and made such a long and earnest a do in the matter to be grauÌ„ted at length Did ye stand in it then to dilate your booke or do ye graunt it now to bragge of your skill or did ye resist the truth then contrary to your conscience repent ye now or be ye forced to grauÌ„t with some colour that ye cannot for shame in plaine speach denie howsoeuer it be many odde reckonings will fall out in your account against your selfe although you neuer â—…ecken with your host for the matter Ye graunt the saying of Esay also that Kings shoulde be nourishing fathers to the Church and all things else that the Bishop here alleageth yet will not all reach home no not Constantine the great his example VVill not all this reach home Master Stap. to proue the issue that euen your selfe do confesse the Bishop hath alreadie proued For that is the home that it ought tâ—… reach vnto by master Feckenhams demaund But go to measure it with a true yerde master Stap. and ye shall see it fayre and easily without any stretching at al reach euen as full home as you besides can require euen for the supreme gouernment of all maner ecclesiasticall causes looke what ye recken most vppon and that is euen the féeding with the worde vnder which the Sacraments also are comprehended not that he is the Minister of the worde and Sacraments as
you captiously gybe and cauill for that belongeth not to supreme gouernment But that he is so the supreme gouernour in ouerséeing the consecration and deliuerie of the true foode wherewith the people of God ought to be fedde that euen he ouerséeth the féeder himselfe And for this cause the King is called of the Prophete the nourishing father and Quéenes are named Nourses that although the ministerie of féeding pertaine to the ministers yet the prouision for the foode the ouersight that the children of God be duely fedde with the right milke with the true bread and water of lyfe belongeth to the Princes And therefore haue they the name of nourses not to nourishe them in ciuill matters and corporall fâ—…de onely but as in ciuil so in â—…acte verbi in the milke of the worde of God also Is this only the cherishing of the good childe by giuing landes reuenewes maintenaunce and lyuing to the Churche Is this onely the displing of the frowarde childâ—… or as ye call it the punishing of the heretike No M. Stapleton Lyra his exposition and yours doe not agrée He sayth they are nourses what to doe to feede whom the faithfull ones wherewith with the milke of the worde whose worde euen the worde and sacraments of God. Wherof sith the ministery and execution belongeth not vnto them but to the ministers it followeth necessarily thervpon that the prouision direction appointment care and ouersight which is the supreme gouernement belongeth to them And this is that which Lyrâ—… confesseth the B. vrgeth of Constantine that he was such another nourse as did kepe defend maintaine vpholde and feede the pore faithfull ones of Christ yea caried them in his bosome as it were and procured them to be fedde did set forth proclamations not only against false religion but also to set forth to exhort and allure vnto the Christian faith caused not only the Idolatrous religion to bee suppressed but caused also on the other parte the true knowledge and religion of Christ to bee brought in and planted among his people and did not only make lawes for punishing heretikes and Idolaters but also reformed all manner abuses about Gods seruice Thus sayth the Bishop out of Eusebius did Constantine play the nourses part Nowe what saye you to all this M. Stapleton All this of Constantine say you is graunted and maketh nothing for you Whether it maketh for vs or no we will not contende But it maketh for the matter and being graunted it maketh vp the matter For and ye will graunt thus much from your heart inwarde which ye nowe graunt from the téeth outwarde by compulsion of the manifest truth ye might come home well ynough with a wannion and bestow your wit and trauell better than thus to graunt vnto and yet with pieuishnesse to wythstande the manifest truth of the matter The Quéenes Maiesties othe requireth no more of you to giue to hir than here ye graunt to giue to Constantine to set foorth Christes religion to make lawes and constitutions not only of punishment but of reformation of all maner abuses about Gods seruice to prouide that the Church be fed with Gods worde and in all pointes aboue sayde shewe her selfe a very nource of the Church committed to hir gouernement as the childe is to the nourse What one thing ecclesiasticall is not here comprehended or can ye shewe cause why she ought not to haue the same authoritie in hir dominions as well as Constantine to whome ye graunt it had in his if ye saye she doth not this but the contrarie this is but your wicked slaunder M. Stapleton But graunt hir hir interest and then trie that Hir right is one thing and whether she dischargeth well the same or no is another thing Graunt hir hir right as you doe to Constantine and then spare not to improue what ye can proue amisse Nowe hauing graunted thus much which in dede concludeth vp all the matter least he shoulde vtterly be discrâ—…dited of all his friendes he goeth about so much as he can in wrangling of wordes to defeate once againe all his former graunt according to his practise in the Chapter before For where the Bishop by the example of Constantyne proueth the Prince to be herein not only a nourse to the people but also to bee appoynted vnto them of God as it were the common or vniuersall Byshop as Eusebius testifieth of Constantine and Constantine to other Byshops calleth himselfe a Byshop signifying his carefull ouersight ouer all his people in setting forth Gods true religion Maister Stapleton first snappeth at thys worde Byshoppe secondlye hée challengeth the Byshoppe for curtalling Eusebius sentence And when Eusebius sayeth he calleth hym as it were a common or vniuersall Byshoppe I suppose yee meane not that hee was a Byshop in deede For your selfe confesse that Princes Bishops offices are farre distincted and disseuered that the one ought not to break into the office of the other The Bishops meaning is euident master Stap. and so are his words But your meaning is to brabble to tickle in the Readers heade a suspition that he confounded these offices Is there no difference betwéene these sayings he was as it were a Bishop and he was a Bishop in dede Yes M. St. and ye were not a very wrangler in dede ye might perceyue by these wordes as it were he plainly ment and as it were spake it that he was no B. in deede And what though he were no Bishop in dede in the function and office of a Bishops ministerie no more was he also a nourse in deede nor the people were suckling babes in deede nor the worde of God is milke in deede yet as these things be not falsly spoken but being borowed speaches in their senses import not onely a true but a more excellent vnderstanding than the bare wordes vsually betoken so the Emperour being named to be as it were a common or vniuersall Bishop and yet in deede being no Bishop it argueth that he had this name bicause of his common and vniuersall gouernment ouersight and care ouer all Bishops and causes Ecclesiasticall This shift therefore to slinke away from the manifest meaning of the wordes by threaping on the Bishop this kindnesse that he shoulde meane to proue him a very Bishop in dede is a very meane shift though it haue in dede a shrewde meaning Master Stapleton And if you did so meane say you Eusebius himself would soone confounde you if you reherse Constantines whole sentence that he spake to the Bishops What a good year meane ye M. St. ye vrge this meaning further than néedes that the B. should meane to make the Emperor a Bishop in the Bishoply ministerie therfore curtalled as ye call it Eusebius sentences If Eusebius sentence set it downe as whole as ye list confound them that meane to confound these offices it will neuer soone or late confound the B. the popish Bishops
it may rather confounde for they confounde their offices turning Bishops not as it were into lay men but into lay men in deede What the Bishops wordes do meane is most playne to a man of meane witte that list not to Iangle about nothing neither the wordes importe any such meaning nor this is any thing in question the ministeriall office but the supreme gouernment which are two farre different things But since that to no purpose ye chalenge the B. for curtalling Eusebius words let vs behold how you do set them downe For thus say you he saith to the Bishops Vos quidem eorum quae intus sunt in Ecclesia agenda ego vero eorum qua extra sunt Episcopus à Deo sum constitutuâ—… You are Bishops saith he of those thinges that are to be done within the Church I am Bishop of outwarde thinges which answere of his may satisfie any reasonable man for all that ye bring in here of Constantine or all that ye shall afterwarde bring in which declareth him no supreme Iudge or chiefe determiner of causes Ecclesiasticall but rather the contrarie and that he was the ouerseer in ciuill matters And the most that may be enferred hereof is that he had the procuration and execution of Churche matters which I am assured all Catholikes will graunt Ye would faine I sée M. Stapl. reuoke your graunt and it could be cleanly conueyde or so to limite it that it might not appéere ye haue granted that that all your fellowes denie But this reuocation is to late Neuerthelesse fuli pretely ye compasse the matter to defeate all these most plaine not wordes but doings of Constantine by shoouing at this name B. shop in the Emperour which in any case ye caÌ„ not abide And therefore as who though B. went aboute to confounde the offices of a Bishop and of a Prince and thereto had concealed Eusebius words ye solemnly take on yâ—…n to set them out both in Latine and in English. But tell me by that false faith of yours M. Stapleton why ye haue not translated the wordes aright in English that ye haue set downe in Latine did ye sée in déede they made nothing for you but rather much against you is the English of intus in Ecclesia within the Church And the English of eorum quae extra Outward ciuill things or matters or Ego vero c. Episcopus à ' Deo sum constitutâ—… I am a Bishop what is manifest corruption of plaine wordes and euident sense if this be not this is past cutting of the tayle M. St. or slitting his nose and paring his eares to dresse it like a perfect curtall but euen to cutte both buttockes and heade away and make it a carrion karkasse this translating is trans I ordanem in déede But the wordes of Constantine the sense are plaine You saith he speaking to the spirituall pastours are Bishops of those thinges that in the Churche are to be done within or inwardly But I am appointed of God a Bishop of those things that are forthout or outwardly As who should say your Bishoply office in Gods Churche is in the ministeris of those things that worke inwardly that perce the heart enter into the soule cleaue the thoughtes in sunder and properly belong to the inwarde man the liuely worde of god My Bishoply office in Gods Churche is distinguished from this and is in things without that is in the outwarde setting forth and publique direction of Gods worde to be duly taught by you Thus both their offices were in Gods Church the matter and groundworke of both their Bishoprikes was Gods true religion But the doing of the one was pertayning to the inwarde man the doing of the other to the outwarde man. And this is the very distinctioÌ„ that Constantine maketh which being not falsely translated as you do and so misunderstoode may satisfie as ye say any reasonable man But your vnderstanding is very vnreasonable to vnderstand by inward things things ecclesiasticall and by outward things only ciuill things in déede they be out and quite out of the consideration of the Churche But wherefore then called he him selfe a Bishop also with them yea an vniuersall Bishop as Eusebius termeth him but to declare that his ouersighte was in the same matter that was theirs the matter was Gods truth and Religion in bothe the manner was outwarde or inwarde as eithers Bishoprike required Otherwise if he had meant onely of ciuill matters as you expounde he had bene no more a Bishop thereby than the very Soldane or great Turke or any other Heathen Prince that ouersee their ciuill matters very circumspectly And so as ye did in your fourth Chapter ye make Constantine for all these notable things in him that your selfe before haue graunted no better than an infidell Prince in this behalfe For by outward ye say is meant ciuill matters But the ciuill gouernement ye say also reacheth no furder than the peoples quietnesse wealth abundance and prosperouse maintenance that these thinges are common as well to the heathen as to the Christian gouernment Thinke ye M. Stapleton these Fathers meant no furder gouernment nor in other matters than these when they called Constantine an vniuersall Bishop and that Constantine measured his office no furder when he called him selfe by the name of a Bishop â–ª for shame M. Stapleton deface not to Christian a Prince after so Turkish a manner nor thereto so manifestly falsifie your authour nor abuse your reader with such a shamelesse impudence Well say you And the moste that may be inferred thereof is that he had the procuration and execution of Churche matters which I am assured all Catholikes will graunt May we be assured M. Stapleton on your worde that all your popish Catholikes will graunt euen thus much For I verily feare they will graunt it no furder than it pleaseth them And where ye are so readie to assure vs of others graunts what assurance haue we had alreadie of all your owne liberall graunts when ye were disposed to wrangle as now againe ye do for how agreeth this euen with your former graunt that Princes might make lawes and constitutions for the furtherance of Christes religion that Princes might take some regiment vppon them in Ecclesiasticall causes yea might do as much as all these ensamples specifie and that now ye make the most to be but the procuration and execution of Church matters Although what ye meane by these wordes ye tell not would ye haue them onely the Churches that is as you meane by the Churche onely the Priests proctours and executioners now truly ye limite them a full faire office But thinke ye the name of B. and vniuersall B. did importe nothing els was that the most that may be inferred thereof and yet that is more than onely to be their executioner as ye said before to be as ye adde here to it their proctour also Yea it is
agaynst Gods holy worde Is this an argument M. St. that we abuse the worde of God bicause you playnly say this supremacie is directly agaynst Gods worde In déede I heare ye say it and saye it playnely and as playne as ye can saye it and that very often too and make it a sufficient cause saying For we playnly say But ye shoulde once at the least proue it as playnly withall and not so often tell vs that ye playnely say so and then we shoulde playnely sée and say also with you that ye vsed playne dealing as well as playne sayings The. 21. Diuision IN this diuision the Byshop procéedeth further with other testimonies out of the Apostles with the fathers expositions therevpon First where Sainct Peter â—… Ep. cap. 2. and Sainct Paule Rom. 13. do not licence but commaunde obedience vnto Princes Chrisostome stretcheth this obedience to euery kinde of Ecclesiasticall person so well as lay person And maketh the obiecte or matter wherein the Princes gouernement is exercised to be for the furthering and aduauncing of all vertuous actions the correcting and repressing of all vices and that not onely in all matters of the seconde Table betwéene man and man but of all matters in the first table betwéene God man so well as of the other To the confirmation wherof he citeth agayne S. Paule 2. Timoth. 2. stretching the duetie of Princes not onely to honestie of life but also to godlinesse Wherby Sainct Augustine meaneth the chiefe or proper worship seruice and religion of god Shewing at large by Sainct Augustine who reasoning on the thirtéenth to the Rom. confuteth the Donatistes héerein that Princes haue authoritie for the furtherance and setting foorth of true religion and suppressing of all heresies schismes and other ecclesiasticall abuses so well as the furtheraunce and setting foorth of ciuill iustice and the punishement of morall vices To this M. Stapletons answere is parted into foure First gathering a contraction of the Byshops allegations he graunteth vnto them and proueth that he and the Protestantes agrée héerevpon Secondly he pincheth and restrayneth his graunt and endeuoreth to proue contradiction in the Protestantes Thirdly he entreth into the answere of certayne wordes and testimonies by the Byshop alleaged Fourthly he replieth on the bishop with other allegations out of Chrysostome and theron frameth an argument on them for his Priestes superioritie The residue of his answere to S. Augustine he passeth ouer in wordes of course In the first sayth M. Stapleton Heere is nothing M. Horne that importeth your surmised supremacie The effect of your processe is Princes haue authoritie to mainteine praise and further the vertues of the first table and to suppresse the coÌ„trarie wherein onely consisteth the true religion and spiritual seruice that is due from man to God And that he hath authoritie herein not only in the vertues or vices bidden or forbidden in the second table of Gods coÌ„maundementes wherein are conteyned the duties that one maÌ„ oweth to another This is grauÌ„ted M. Horn both of the Catholikes and of the soberer sort of the Protestantes for Carolostadius Pelargus Struthius with the whole rable of th' Anabaptistes denie it that Princes haue authoritie both to further the obseruation and to punishe the breache of Gods coÌ„maundements as well in the first table as in the seconde that is as well in suche actions as concerne our duetie to God himselfe as in the duetie of one man to another This were meetely well sayde M. St. that héere agayne thus liberally ye grauÌ„t if it made any gret matter what ye graunted or denied The bishop you should soone agrée sauing for your instabilitie that after you haue made your large graunts ye still reuoke theÌ„ againe with some pelting distinction or qualification of them Your graunt is this Princes haue authoritie both to maynteine praise further the obseruation and to suppresse and punish the breach of Gods coÌ„mandements aswel in the first table as in the seconde that is aswell in suche actions as concerne our duty to God himselfe wherin onely consisteth the true religion and spirituall seruice as in the duetie of one man to another But thus wel haue Princes authoritie to mainteine further or to suppresse and punish in actions of the duety of one man to another conteyned in the second table that no suche actions be exempted from their authoritie but they ought to prayse maynteine and further al such actioÌ„s as are bidden and suppresse and punish al such actions as are forbidden and that to do with moste great care diligence and ouersight yea supreme authoritie also vnder God therin Ergo They may do so by like righte in all the actions of the first table concerning the true religion and spirituall seruice of god Or else this aswell that ye put in twyce togither for more confirmation commeth an ace behinde and is belike as muche to say as not as well the quite contrarie to aswell Thus if ye stande to your owne words that the Princes authoritie is aswell in the one as in the other they sufficiently importe all that we demaunde and are as muche as this The Prince is supreme gouernour not onely in all temporall â–ª but also in all ecclesiasticall causes And therefore where ye say that they be Anabaptistes that denie it ye conclude all the Papistes to be Anabaptistes for they denie it And your selfe are in the table also that haue puâ—…te oute this your Counterblast chiefly to ouerturne it Although when ye be pressed ye oftentimes graunte that whiche ouerturnes your selfe Neither dothe your distinction helpe â–ª ye to the which ye runne for succour euen to your enimies But all this is say you as not onely the Catholike wryters but Melancthon him selfe and Caluine doe expound Quod ad externam disciplinam attinet As muche as appertayneth to externall discipline And the Magistrate is the keeper and defender of bothe Tables saythe Melancthon but agayne he addeth Quod ad externos mores attinet As muche as belongeth to externall maners behauiour and demeanour Ye promise héere agayne to agrée with Caluine and Melancthon in all this whiche ye haue graunted that the Prince hathe authoritie as well in the firste Table as in the seconde this onely excepted as they excepte Quod ad externam disciplinam externos mores attinet So long as appertayneth to outwarde discipline and outwarde maners But al Ecclesiastical causes and orders for setting foorth religion are either outwarde disciplines or outwarde rites maners behauiours or demeanoures for as for inwarde actions or thoughtes the Prince meddleth not withall but God alone the minister onely pronounceth Gods threats or promises for them â–ª Ergo Euen by this your own distinction ye confesse once agayne the Princes supremacie in all eccl. causes Neither dothe your reason folowing helpe ye any thing at all For say you in the first Table are coÌ„teined many offences and breaches of the which
of God you translate it neither appoint any worshipping of God. As though they might not appoint that true worship of God that God hath appointed him selfe to be worshipped by Where Melancthon speaketh only of appointing other new deuised worships such as the Popish worships are Likewise speaking of the functions ye clappe in of your owne these wordes of bothe Magistrates calling the ministers magistrates whiche wordes Melancthon hath not And thus ye loue alâ—…e to tell your fale falsly And as you thus deale with Melancthon so froÌ„ him ye runne to M. Nowell and say Yea M. Nowell him selfe with a great stomacke biddeth vs shew where they denie that godly and learned Priestes might iudge according to the sinceritie of doctrine As though wheÌ„ the Prince and his successours are made supreme gouernours without any limitacion it fall not often out that the Bishop be he neuer so learned or godly shall not once be admitted to iudge of true doctrine except the doctrine please the Prince Ye will neuer leaue your falsehood M. Stap. wâ—… sayth that Princes made supreme gouernours without any limitation Who saith the Bishop be he neuer so godly or learned shall not once be admitted to iudge of true doctrine except the doctrine please the Prince Iâ—… there any that saith so or doth so except your Popâ—…e He in déed chalengeth a supreme gouernaunce without limits in as large and â—…ple 〈◊〉 as belongeth vnto christ He will suffer no doctrine but that which pleaseth him and he will be the onely chiefe Iudge thereof This is not the gouernance that we ascribe to Princes but such as is limitted by Gods worde such as stretcheth not further thaâ—… the 〈◊〉 of their dominions suche as suffreth godly and learned Priestes according to Gods worde to iudge of the synceritie of doctrine for this you confesse that master Nowell sayth and therefore ye confesse your selfe to be a 〈◊〉 lyer and to speake contrariâ—… when ye bring in thâ—… the Protestants to acknowledge a limitation and â—…t 〈◊〉 say we make a gouernement without any lymitation Neither is 〈◊〉 any contradiction in master Nowels saying to be anie more gathered than of Melancthonâ—… wordes Princes are supreme gouernours Ergo Prelates may not iudge of true doctrine Which is as wiâ—…e a sequele as the other agaynst Melancthon Ye might wel conclude it against your Pope that chalengeth such as absolute 〈◊〉 that all the iudgement of doctrine shoulde 〈◊〉 to him to iudge according as he please botâ—… quite besides and quite contrarie to Gods worde As though say you there had not bene a statute made declaring and enacting the Queenes maiestie yea hir highnesse successours without exception or limitation of godly and vngâ—…dly and yet I trowe no Bishops to be the supreme gouernour in all things and causes as well spirituall as temporall As though M. St. this were a good argument The statute declareth hir highnesse supreme gouernment â–ª without limiting it vnder the Bishops gouernment Ergo the Bishops can not iudge of true doctrine and the Princes gouernment is without all limitation As though their were no difference betwéene supreme gouernment and euery other gouernment or betwéene gouernment and iudgement And as though the statute ex 〈…〉 not it selfe what kinde of supreme gouernment is yâ—â—lded in all things and causes Ecclesiasticall nothing debarring the Bishops and ministers of their iudgement and ministerie but rather ouerséeing them to giue their iudgement and administration rightly As though you master Horne say you had not written that in both tables the Prince hath authoritie to erect â–ª and correct to farther and restraine to allow and punish the vertue and vices thereto apperteyning As though your selfe M. Stapl. had not written also and graunted the same euen right now and that not for your selfe onely but for all your followes besides to agree with Melancthon and Caluin therein Or as though say you the gouernour in all causes is not also a iudge in all causes â–ª Or as though M. St. his gouernment or iudgment were any preiudice to the gouernment or iudgement that belongeth to the Pastours office Or as though say you it were not commonly so taken and vnderstanded of a thousand in England which haue taken the othe to their great domnaâ—…ion but if they repent Or as though not rather on the contrarie it were not your so wilfull and malitious mistaking of it with a peuish obstinacie to withstande the manifest truth that refuse the othe of your dutifull obedience to your great damnation in deede but if yee repent betymes And thus still aunswering your As though with another as though ye can finde no contradiction nor absurditie neyther in Melancthon Caluin Master Nowell nor the Bishops sayings herein As though â–ª your selfe iâ—… the meane time were clere aboorde and not in euery one of your quarels either mâ—…st fonde and absurde or quite contrarie to your owne sayings and graunts made so late before The conclusion of this your second part is this You therefore master Horne â–ª which talke so confusely and generally of the Princes authoritie in both tables do yet say nothing nor proue nothing this generall and absolute authoritie in all things and causes as lustily without exception the othe expresseth and therefore ye bring indeed nothing to proue your principall purpose to the which all your proues shoulde be directed For generall and confuse talke of the princes authoritie you belie the Bishop master Stap. he made so plaine and flatte a limitation that you coulde not abide it â–ª it is your Pope that chalengeth such a general and absolute authoritie and your selfe that talke of the Princes authoritie confusely to deface Princes as confounding and intermedling â–ª in the office and authoritie pâ—…rteyning to the clergie whiche the othe requireth not further than such supreme authoritie as ouerseâ—…th careth prouideth for directeth and gouerneth all matter persons Ecclesiasticall and temporal so well in matters of the first table as in the seconde that is to say so well in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall matters as temporall Quod ad externam disciplinam Quod externoâ—… mores attinet So farre as perteynes to externall discipline and belongs to externall behauiour And this is not onely the issue in question but also as is proued compreheÌ„deth the othe and principall purpose whervpon ye call so fast to haue all the proues directed therto as the Bishop here hath done and your selfe hath graunted the same Your third part is a quarelling at the sentence of s. Paule cited by the B. Tim. 2. that kings and rulers are ordeyned of God for these two purposes that their people mighte liue a peaceable lyfe throughe their gouernment both in godlinesse and in honestie comprehending in these two wordes whatsoeuer is commaunded in the first or second table Here as ye sée hath the Bishop cited once againe another sentence oute of the new testament how fitly to the matter how
vpon him with his foote and as his page to holde his stirrop to his foote and claimes to giue or take awaye his estate And you say here for all estates of the clergie VVe ought to be subiect not onely to Christians but euen to Infidels also being our Princes without any exception of Apostle Euangelist Prophete Priest or Monke What and is your Pope none of these Maister Stapleton an Apostle he is not without a pseudo nor he calles himselfe an Apostle but Apostolicall Much lesse he is an Euangelist and least a Prophete except a lying Prophete Sometimes in déede he hath bene a Monke but is there any Pope not a priest If he be a Priest then ought he by your owne confession to be subiect to the Emperour and in refusing this subiection what can ye make of him but as your selfe to your Prince so he to his Prince a very rebell and vsurper against his prince If ye say the Emperour is not his prince why is he then named the Emperor of Rome is not the name of an Emperor the name of the chiefest Principalitie And then if he be Emperor or king of the Romaines howe ought not the Pope being a Romaine or dwelling at Rome within this Princes kingdome or Empyre be subiect to this king or Emperour at the least as ye say in temporall and ciuill matters Doe ye thinke to escape in saying VVe ought to be subiect to our Princes without exception but he ought not I had thought ye had spoken of all Christiana and had simply mâ—…nt as Chrysostome did to whome ye referre your selfe who speaketh in generall of euery man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fuerâ—… or whosoeuer thou art which wordes ye dissemble and omit So that if your Pope be of 〈◊〉 calling and he be no more a Priest than Pope Ioane 〈◊〉 he a soule be he a bodye he ought by your owne graunt to 〈◊〉 subiect to the Emperour of Rome in these matters 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 the Emperour to be subiect vnto him Whiche 〈◊〉 the Pope shall vnderstande â—…owe for his 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 and for all his ciuill and temporall matters you woulde bring him to hys olde obedience 〈◊〉 the Emperour as he hath bene I thinke he will 〈◊〉 sâ—…all thanke Maister Stapleton for your labour But all this subiection saye you is but graunted in temporall and ciuill matters Doth Saint Paule Maister Stapleton alleage this distinction or Chrysostome to whoÌ„ ye reforro your selfe no M. St. they make no such restraint but stretch this obedience as to al ecclesiastical persons so principally to all ecâ—…l â–ª matters to the setting forth Gods religon â–ª And so Pauledoth call the Prince Gods minister â–ª And Chrysostome sayth Neque enim ista subiectio piâ—…tatem subuertit for neyther this subiectioÌ„ ouerturneth godynesse And vpon these words He is the minister of God a reuenger to him that doth euil He saith Againe least thou shouldst start back hearing of punishment correction and the sword he mentioneth againe that the Prince fulfilleth the lawe of God for what though the Prince himselfe know it not yet God hath so formed and ordeined it If therfore either he punish or aduance he is the minister of God maintaining vertue abolishing wickednesse euen bicause God would haue it so By what reason repugnest thou in striuing against him that bringeth such good things and goeth before thee and prepareth a way for thy affaires for many there are which at the first exercised vertue for respect of the magistrate but at the length they cleaued thervnto euen for the feare of god For things to come do not so moue the grosser sort as present things He therfore that prepareth the minds of many both with feare and honor that they may be made fitter for the worde of doctrine is worthily called the minister of God. In which words he plainly sheweth that the Princes ministery wherby he is called Gods minister consisteth in making vs fit apt receiuers of the wordâ—… of doctrine which the minister teacheth the Prince by punishing or rewarding goeth before prepareth a waye and bringeth to vs making vs apt to receyue either for feare 〈◊〉 loue this benefit by his ministâ—…rie In which work as the Apostles Preachers for the vtteraÌ„ce of the word of doctrine are called the workers togither with God so the Prince in preparing this way to the worde making vs apt to it is likewise said of Chrysostom that he worketh togither with the will of God. Wherin as we must not repâ—…gne against the prince so this obedience that we owe vnto him is not only in temporall and ciuill matters but in making vs apt for the worde of doctrine in which all eccl. matters are comprehended Now after M. St. hath thus stoode quarrelling in vain with the B. allegations he fourthly entreth into a reply vpon the B. with other allegations collected out of the same father Chrysost theroÌ„ frameth an argument against the Princes superiority In the forhed wherof he prefixeth this marginal note the Priesthode is aboue a kingdom which note as it is true in the sense that Chrysost. vnderstandeth it so maketh it nothing that he is abouâ—… him in the supreme gouernment directioÌ„ of all eccl. causes which is the present questioÌ„ the thing that M. 〈◊〉 â–ª calleth so osteÌ„ at other times vpoÌ„ But now saith M. St. As contrariwise the Prince himselfe is for ecclesiasticall spirituall causes subiect to his spiritual ruler VVhich Chrysostome himselfe of all men doth best declare Alij sunt termini c. The boundes of a Kingdome and of Priesthoode sayth Chrysostome are not all one this Kingdome passeth the other this King is not knowne by visible things neither hath his estimation for precious stones he glistreth withall or for his gay golden glistring apparel The other King hath the ordring of those worldly things the authoritie of Priesthood commeth from heauen VVhatsoeuer thou shalt binde vpon earth shall be bounde in heaueâ—… To the King those things that are here in the worlde are committed but to me celestiall things are committed VVhen I say to mee I vnderstande to a priest Andanon after he sayth Regi corpora c. The bodies are coÌ„mitted to the King the soules to the priest The King pardoneth the faultes of the bodie the Priest pardoneth the faultes of the soule The King forceth the Priest exhorteth the one by necessitie the other by giuing councel the one hath visible armour the other spirituall He warreth agaynst the barbarous I warre agaynst the deuill This principalitie is the greater and therefore the King doth put his heade vnder the Priestes handes And euery where in the olde scripture Priestes did annoynt the Kings Among all other bookes of the said Chrysostome his booke de sacerdotio is freighted with a number of like and more notable sentences for the Priestes superioritie aboue the Prince For the other sentences in Chrysostome I can not directly aunswere
them master Stapleton till ye set them downe I thinke they will all come in the ende to the effect of this sentence here so often by all yourside alleaged Ye cite Chrysostome as though it were at the full Where in déede ye cut off both the heade the middle and taile of his sentence whereby considering the occasion and purpose of his wordes we might sée that they shoulde not be wrested from his meaning Chrysostome vpon these wordes of the Prophet Esay Factum est anno quo mortuâ—…s est Ozias rex It came to passe in the yere that king Ozias died after a Preface made of Priestes mariage taking occasion of the Prophet Esays wife telleth of Ozias presumption Uerum hic Ozias c. but this Ozias when he was a crowned King bicause he was iust waxed hawtie in minde and conceyuing a greater courage than was for his estate entred into the temple And what sayth Esay He entred into the holy of holies and sayde I will offer incense He being a King vsurpeth the principalitie of the priesthood I will sayth he offer incense bicause I am iust But abide within thy bounds And so Chrysostome procéedeth in the sentence cited by you Alij sunt termini The boundes of a kingdome of a priesthood are not al one c. Which sentence ye truly cite til ye come to these wordes VVhen I say to me I vnderstand a priest And there ye strike of mâ—… words of Chrysostam than ye cited Which belike ye do for two purposes Partly for that ye could not abide to heare of any vices or discommendation in priests therfore ye cull out only that which soundeth to their praise dignitie Partly for that this would haue made the purpose of Chrysost playner reprouing them that disâ—…erne not betwene the office the persoÌ„ At which fault your self so late did stuÌ„ble in princes not discerning between Neroes vices a princes office As in Chrysostoms time same despised the office of a priest bicause of the faults of diuerse priests The wordes of Chrysostome folowing those you cite are these Therefore when thou seest an vnworthie priest slaunder not the priesthod For thou oughtest not to coÌ„demne the things but him that euill vseth a good thing Syth Iudas also was a traytor howbeit for this the order Apostolical is not accused but the mind of him Neither is it the fault of the priesthood but of the euill mind And thou therfore blame not the priesthod but the priest that vseth euill a good thing For if one dispute with thee and say seest thou yonder Christianâ—… answere thou but I speak not to thee of the persons but of the things or else how many phisitions haue bene made slaughtermen haue giuen poisons for remedies And yet I dispise not the arte but him that euill vseth the arte How many shipmeÌ„ haue guided euill their ships yet is not the arte of sayling euill but the mind of them If the Christian man be wicked accuse not thou the profession the priesthood but him that euill vseth a good thing These are Chrysostomes wordes which you omit and then followeth as you recite Regâ—… corpora c. The bodies are coÌ„mitted to the king and so forth as ye say til ye come to the knitting vp of the sentence with Ozias which again you omit VeruÌ„ rex c. But that king going beyond his bounds and passing the measure of the kingdom atteÌ„pted to adde somwhat more and entred into the temple willing with authoritie to offer incense VVhat therfore sayth the priest It is not lawfull for thee Ozias to offer incense Behold libertie behold a mind that knoweth not boÌ„dage behold a tong touching the heauens behold liberty that cannot be restrained behold the body of a maÌ„ the mind of an angel behold one that goeth on the grouÌ„d is coÌ„uersant in heaueÌ„ Thou sawest a king thou sawest not a diademe Tel not me it is a kingdom where is the transgression of lawes It is not lawful for thee O king to offer inceÌ„se It is not lawful for thee to come into the holy of holies Thou passest thy bouÌ„ds thou sekest things not grauÌ„ted to thee therfore shalt leese the things thou hast receiued It is not lawful for thee to offer inceÌ„se but this is giuen vnto the priests This is not thine but this is mine haue I vsurped on me thy purple vsurpe not thou my priesthod It is not lawful for thee to offer inceÌ„sâ—… but only for the sons of AaroÌ„ By this it plainly appeareth wherevpon Chrysost. speaketh to wete of the seuerall functions of the spirituall pastor and the prince and that it is not lawfull for the prince to intrude himself into the office of the diuine minister He may not more take vpoÌ„ him to administer the diuine sacraments of christ his church now although he be the prince to the which not with standing you admitted womeÌ„ thaÌ„ might Ozias sacrifice then For as then God had appoynted who should sacrifice so hath he apointed who should now minister his sacrameÌ„ts Now if ye had shewed that the supreme gouernment ouer ecclesiasticall causes the ouersight and direction of the setting forth of Gods true religion the abolishing of false religion and the deposing of Idolatrous Priestes that obsâ—…inately mainteyne errours agaynst the expresse worde of God be the like doing to this fact of Ozias if ye had proued that the Prince hath euer done or doth or claymeth to do the like fact to this of Ozias in ministring the sacrament then had you alleaged this sentence to some purpose else maketh it nothing to the purpose but maketh agaynst your popish mid wiues they rather play the part of Ozias It maketh not agaynst the Q. Maiestie but most of all against your Pope himselfe that thinketh he playth the high priests part and is so farre therfrom that none is more like than he to this vsurper entring into the holyest place and vsurping the priesthood the sacrifice the power and the honour that belongeth onely to Iesus Christe himselfe As for the office of the true minister of God which neyther your Pope nor you his shaâ—…elings arâ—… is in déede as Chrysostom sayth both a distinct function from the princes and hath other boundes and also we graunt surmounteth farre the boundes of the Princes office in respect of his spirituall ministerie of administring the sacraments of preaching the glad tydings of saluation of denouncing to the obstinate sinners the threates of Gods wrath and vengeance to the penitent the most comfortable promises of Gods mercie fauour whose sentence being rightly applyed in earth God hath promised to ratifie the same in heauen And for this cause doth Chrysost â–ª so highly extoll this priesthood referring all his prayses to the dignitie of his ministerie in respect whereof the Princes ministeris is but outwarde and earthly medling nothing with the administration of this high function but onely with the
there is wedlocke But what say we to Philip had he not foure daughters but where soure daughters were there was both a wife and matrimonie But what then doth Christ he was indeede borne of a virgin but he came to a mariage and brought his gift with him They haue saith she no wine and he turned water into wine with virginitie honoring mariage commending with his gift the thing that was done that thou shouldest not abhorre mariage â–ª but shouldest hate whooredome For at my perill I behoofe the saluation although thou shalt wed a wife Looke to thy selfe a woman if shee be good is an helper to thee c. All this more saith Chrysostome in the coÌ„mendation of the ministers mariage euen in the same Homelie cited by you M. St. which estate of mariage to be ioyned in sith the Pope his Priests can not abide and alleage such impediments as here Chrysostome confuteth it is an euident argument by the way that they 〈◊〉 nothing lesse than such Priests as Chrysostome ascribeth this spirituall kingdome of the ministerie of Gods worde and Sacraments vnto and where Chrysostome as your selfe haue cited him saith that the Princeforceth the Priest exhorteth the one by necessitie the other by giuing counsell the one hath visible armour the other spirituall Contrarywise your Pope not only exhorteth but extorteth and forceth too not only by counsell but by necessine extreme violence Not only pretending spirituall armour such as he calleth his curses with booke bell and candle but also with visible armour muironed about where he rideth or on mens backes is caried with a gard of Swarâ—…trutters Switchers with gunnes Harquebushes partesans glayues and weapons as if it were Iudas with his armed bande to take our Sauiour Christ. And he claymeth thriurisoiction of â—…oth the swords wresting thertâ—… the wordes of the Disciple Eâ—…ce 〈◊〉 gladiâ—… hic Beholde heere are two swordes to the temporall and visible armour so well as to the spiritual Wherevpon Eonifacius the eight did not onely hang seuen keyes at his girdle in token of his spirituall power but girte him selfe also with a sworde in token of his temporall power These Prelates the refore are not such kinde of Priests as Chrysostome speaketh of Neither notâ—… I this as a faultâ—… in this or that person but as errours defended and maynteined by them for the aduauncement of their naughtie Priesthoode What maketh then this sentence of the excellencie of the Priestes ministerie for the ministerie of the Popes Priesthoode that is all the quitâ—… contrarie Suche false Priestes therefore the Prince hath authoritie to remoue them and to place suchâ—… Priests as Chrysostome speaketh of and so to bowe his head vnder their hands that is to oâ—…ey their ministerie which is no derogation to the matter in hande of the Princes supreme gouernement Thus muche M. Stap. to your sentence alleaged out of Chrysostome vpon the which you and all your side do harpe so often and yet beeing well considered it not onely makes nothing for you but muche agaynst you Nowe to your argument that ye gather héere vpon saying Nowe then M. Horne I frame you suche an argument The Priest is the Princes superiour in some causes ecclesiasticall Ergo The Prince is not the Priestes superiour in all causes ecclesiasticall The antecedent is clearely proued out of the words of Chrysostome before alleaged Thus. The Priest is superiour to the Prince in remission of sinnes by Chrysostome â–ª but remission of sinnes is a cause ecclesiastical or spirituall Ergo The Priest is the Princes superiour in some causes ecclesiasticall or spirituall To this argument béeing thus framed vpon the which M. Stap greatly triumpheth I answere it hath thrée fallations in it for fayling The first in this worde superiour béeing vnderstoode two ways either in respect of the ministerie or function or in respect of the publique ouersight ordering and direction In the former sense the maior is true The Priest is superiour to the Prince in respect of his ministerie or function But this worde superiour béeing thus vnderstoode in the conclusion for superioritie onely in the ministerie or function concludeth nothing agaynst the Princes superioritie which is only the publike ouersight ordering and direction that this superiour ministerie and function be not abused Now if the word superiour be not thus vnderstoode but simply to be the superiour or in the later sense that is to say the Priest is superiour in the publike ouersight ordering and direction that the office be duely administred by the minister then is this maior false for the Priest is not thus the Princes superiour The second fallation is in the words remission of sinnes If he meane thereby the ouersighte to sée suche remission be duely made by the Priest then is the maior also false The Priest is not the Princes superiour therin If he means by remission of sinnes the action of remitting them or the function of the office in pronouncing them remitted then is the maior true but the minor false For so remission of sins is not a cause ecclesiasticall but an action or function ecclesiasticall Wheron ariseth the third fallation of these words ecclesiasticall cause Which the statute and the title mentioning that the Prince hath supremacie in all ecclesiasticall causes he wilfully wresteth as though all actions and functions eccl were yéelded to the Princes supremacie Where neither the Prince requireth nor the statute title yéeldeth any such supremacie in the actions but onely a supremacie in the causes not to do them but to sée them rightly done And thus by resolutioÌ„ of these words it appeareth how the Priest in one sense as Chrysostome sayth is superiour to the Prince not only in this one thing of remission of sinnes But in al other actions of his dutie and the Prince is farre inferiour to him and yet the Prince in the other sense of the general direction and publike ouersight is in this and all other causes eccl. superiour to the Priest and the Priest farre inferiour vnto him And so the superioritie of the Priest hindreth nothing the supremacie of the Prince Master St. hauing now as he thinketh by this mightie argument wonne the fielde and quite confounded the Byshop setteth out as a trophaâ—…m or monument of his historie this marginall note Euidently proued by S. Chrysostome the Prince not to be the supreme gouernour in causes ecclesiasticall And crieth out for ioy Which being most true what thing caÌ„ you coÌ„clude of al ye haue or shal say to win your purpose or that ye heere presently say And thus on the triumph of this argument M. St. reiecteth all that the B. hath said as insufficieÌ„t would returne vpon him the sentence of S. Augustine against the Donatists that the Byshop cited agaynst M. Feck Wherein he bringeth nothing a freshe that is not before declared and answered vnto besides vayne words of course worthy no other answere than to be returned
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
mightie defences That which was pulled downe thou haste made vp agayne and haste made the same whole and sounde agayne with a conuenient knitting togither of all the partes and members To be shorte thou haste saythe Nicephorus to the Emperour established true religion and godlynesse with spirituall butresses namely the doctrine and rules of the auncient fathers These are the Bishops allegations out of Nicephorus for this Princes dealing in ecclesiastical matters Wherin are comprehended as eche man may sée all the chiefe ecclesiasticall causes The true religion the sincere fayth the diuine doctrine godlynesse making constitutions the fathers rules the catholike vniuersal church Neither ascribeth he to the Prince herein a power LegaÌ„tine froÌ„ Priest Byshop Patriarke or Pope muche lesse to be their onely executioner but vnder God he giueth him a supreme gouernement in calling him not onely the defender but the mightie supreme and very holy anchor and stay the guyde the restorer the clenser the establisher the entrencher and maker vp of all these things On the contrarie the puller downe and banisher of newe deuises counterfeit naughtie vnlawfull and impure doctrines of horrible errors and heretical deprauers And this his chief dealing herein to be most seemely for him and chiefly belonging to his princely office Dothe all this M. Stap. little or nothing further our cause if it doe not then it lyttle or nothing hindreth yours Why graunte ye not then vnto it if ye graunte but thus muche we wil vrge you little or nothing further for what is not héere conteined that is either conteined in the issue betwéene the Bishop and M. Feck or in the othe of the O. Maiesties supremacie that ye refuse to take But as light as yâ—… would séeme to make of this it pincheth you and ye dare not grauÌ„t nor answere any sentence therof Onely ye giue a snatche at a worde and bayte at the bishops marginal note vpoÌ„ these former allegatioÌ„s Wherin ye play like Alciates dogge at whom when one hurled a stone he let go him froÌ„ whom the stone came wreaked his anger on the stone So set you vpon the marginall note that in déede hitteth you a good souse but the allegations from wheÌ„ce the marginal note doth come ye let alone and fal to tugging of the note Only as I saide ye snatche at a word as though all the weight of the marginall note were setched only from thence and not from all these sentences But say you M. Home will not so leese his long allegation out of Nicephorus He hath placed a note in the margine sufficient â—… trow to conclude his principall purpose And that is this The Princes supremacie in repayring religion decayed This is indeede a ioly marginall note But where findeth M Horne the same in his text for soothe of this that Nicephorus calleth the Emperour the mightie supreme and very holy anchor and stay in so horrible wauering c. of the worde supreme anchor he concludeth a supremacie But O more than childishe follie Coulde that craftie Cooper of thys allegation informe you no better master Horne was he no better seene in Grammer or in the profession of a schole master than thus foully and fondely to misse the true interpretation of the Latine worde for what other is suprema anchora in good Englishe than the laste anchor the laste refuge the extreme holde and staye to rest vpon As suprema verba doe signifie the laste wordes of a man in hys laste wyll as summa dies the laste daye supremum iudicium the laste iudgement with a number of lyke Phrases So suprema anchora is the laste anchor signifying the laste holde and staye as in the perill of tempeste the laste refuge is to caste anchor In suche a sense Nicephorus calleth this Emperour the laste the mightie and the holy anchor or stay in so horrible wauering and errour Signifying that nowe by him they were stayed from the storme of schisme as from a storme in the sea by casting the anchor the shippe is stayed But by the metaphore of an anchor to conclude a supremacie is as wyse as by the Metaphore of a Cowe to conclude a Saddle For as well dothe a saddle fitte a Cowe as the qualitie of an anchor resemble a supremacie But by suche beggerly shiftes a barren cause muste be vpholded First all is saide by the way of amplification to extoll the Emperour as in the same sentence he calleth him the sixt element reaching aboue Aristotels fifte body ouer the foure elementes with suche lyke Then all is but a Metaphore which were it true proueth not nor concludeth but expresseth and lightneth a truth Thirdly the Metaphore is ill translated and last of all worsse applied A sirra M. St. héere is a whot sturre and highe wordes A man would thinke all is nowe answered to the full and yet when all coÌ„mes to all héere is nothing of all this a do agaynst any one sentence of the Byshops allegations But the poore marginall note and one poore séelie worde of all these long allegations shall abye for this geare First ye say M. Stapl. that M. Horne will not so leese his long allegation out of Nicephorus What ye meane by leesing I know not But it appeareth he may leâ—…e or finde them all for any thing ye wil answere to them Ye slinke for the nonce to the marginall note which is this The Princes supremacie in repayring religion decayed This is in deede say you a ioly marginal note but where findeth M. Horne the same in his texte forsoothe of this that Nicephorus calleth the Emperour the mightie supreme and very holy anchor and stay in so horrible wauering of the worde supreme anchor he concludeth a supremacie Is there nothing M. Stap. in all these allegations that ye coulde sée wherfore the Bishop set downe his marginal note of the Princes supremacie in repayring religion decayed but onely this sentence yea onely that worde do not all the other sentences importe as muche as this that he is the guyde of the profession of our fayth the restorer of the catholike and vniuersall Church the banisher from the Church of all vnlawful and impure doctrine the clenser of the temple with the worde of truth froÌ„ choppers and changers of the diuine doctrine and from hereticall deprauers thereof That he is the entrencher of true religion with mightie defences That he is the establisher of the doctrine and maker of constitutions for the same that he is the maker vp agayne the maker whole and sounde agayne of al that was pulled downe Might not all this to an indifferent reader be thought sufficient to answere the marginal note and comprehende in all poyntes as muche as the note yea though ye quite set aside the sentence and word wherat ye wrangle And yet with M. Stap. this one sentence must beare the weight of all that the bishop alleaged the mightie supreme and very holy anchor and stay in so
gouernment in Church causes as the Queenes Maiestie taketh vpon hir of dutie to belong to ciuill magistrates he concludeth ther vpoÌ„ by these two parts of the request so satisfied that they may and ought to take the same vpon them Which done he promiseth to enter into the other twaine to proue the same by the continuall practise of like gouernment in some one part of Christendome and by the generall Councels To this answereth M St. Hitherto ye haue not brought any one thing to the substaÌ„tial proufe of your purpose worth a good straw neither Scripture nor Doctor nor Emperour This is a short aunswere indéede as if Iacke Strawe had made it and not a student of diuinitie All is not worthe a strawe with you Such was the iudgement of Esops dunghill Cocke when he found the precious stone Haue ye done nothing master Stapleton but scraped strawes though you estéeme better of your owne doings wherevpon as it were an other Chaunticlere ye crâ—…we and crake so often yet set not so little by the doings of other men and thâ—…se that are farre your betters But what are the Bishops proues the lesse worth for this your strawish iudgement Your bolt M. St. is soone shotte but a raylers tongue is they say no slaunder Let others iudge that haue more iudgement what the Bishops proues amount vnto And let them iudge euen by this your Counterblast that ye haue blowne out agaynst these proues to ouerturne them Which had they bene as light as a strawe ye might haue easily done and neuer haue puffed vp such a stormie Counterblast But let them iudge what your Counterblast hath done and whether ye haue blown away so much as one straw bredth from the matter one proufe of al the Bishops proufes But least I should also be like to you I remit the iudgement of the whole to other yea in Gods name to any of your owne side that with any indifferencie will examine both Ye quarell further at the least to blemish the Bishop with suspition of heresie saying Among your foure Emperors by you named ye haue iugled in one that was a starke Heretike but as subtilly as yee thought ye had handled the matter ye haue not so crastily conueyde your galles but that you are espied Ye haue told vs of this often inough master Stapleton if that would helpe you though ye tolde it not so Iuglerlike as now although with as much bitternesse of gall as euer y Iugler or sorcerer SimoÌ„ Magus had With Heretike starke Heretike wretched Heretike c. But ye neuer tell how the Bishop cited him For were he Heretike or were he not as it is a question by Saint Augustines definition of an Heretike yet in that point that the Bishop cited him ye can proue him no Heretike But whatsoeuer he were the B. is clearely discharged to your owne shame and to all your doctors of Louaine where ye learne your good diuinitie And this is al that ye haue to say to the Bishops proues hitherto Now to that he promiseth to enter into the residue there is yet one thing that after all your raylings ye coÌ„mend him for Yet for one thing say you are ye here to be commended that now you woulde seeme to frame vs a certaine fixed state of the matter to be debated vpoÌ„ and to the which you would seeme to direct your proufes that ye will bring And therein you deale with vs better than hitherto ye haue done seeming to seke by dark generalities as it were corners to lusk lurk in Neither yet here walk ye so plainly and truly as you would seeme but in great darknesse with a sconce of dimme light that the readers should not haue the clere view sight of the right way ye should walk in whoÌ„ with this your darke sconce ye lead far awry For thus you frame vs the state of the questioÌ„ These are but wordes M. Stap. to spend time and fil paper Ye know best your owne practises Ye tell vs before hand the Bishop will do so Tell vs so when ye come to it It séemeth he mindeth it not euen by your owne confession prefixing a state of the matter to be debated vpoÌ„ to direct his proues vnto This is not the way of one that would luâ—…ke or lurke with darke sconces in corners nor the B hitherto hath gone thus to work it is one of your ordinarie slaunders his proues are euident name one that is not directed to the issue set betwene him M. Feck that fully proueth it not but that sconce of your own hath left no corner vnsought to â—…usk and lurke in and to lead the Reader about the bush as besides this your common place of impertinent matters will for the most part declare The. 27. Diuision THe B. hauing proued his issue by the two forsaid parts the scriptures the Doctors being entred into the other twaine the Councels the practise since the issue requireth the proofe of Any such gouernement as the Q maiestie now taketh vpon hir the B. first expresseth hir Maiesties gouernment theron according to the issue maketh his generall state to leuell his proues vnto the B. words are these The gouernement that the Q. Maiestie most iustly taketh vpon hir in ecclesiasticall causes is the guiding caring prouiding ordering and ayding the ecclesiasticall state within hir dominions to the furtherance maintenance and setting foorth of true religion vnitie and quietnesse of Christes Church ouerseeing visiting refourming restrayning amending and correcting all maner persons with all maner errors superstitions heresies schismes abuses offences contemptes and enormities in or about Christes religion whatsoeuer This same authoritie rule and gouernement was practised in the catholyke Church by the most Christian kings and Emperours approued confirmed commended by the best Councels both generall and Nationall The effect of M. Stapletons aunswere to this is all against the state of the question that the Bishop here setteth downe and is diuided chiefly into thrée pointes In the first he chalengeth the bishop to alter the state of the question in hande and setteth himselfe downe another state to the which he woulde haue the Bishop direct his prooues Secondly he trauayleth to show that the Bishop concealed two clauses of the statute that should chiefly haue expressed the state and what inconuenience may insue thereby Thirdly he alleageth the excuses of the Papists for refusing the othe In his first part being deducted into these two members to quarell at the Bishops state and to set vp his own for the former thus sayth M. Stapleton Here is a state framed of you M. Horne but fane square from the question in hande For the question is not nowe betwene M. Feckenham and you whether the Prince may visit reforme and correct all maner of persons for all maner of heresies and schismes and offences in Christian religion which perchance in some sense might somwhat be borne withall
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
Prince had it What if there were an heretike Pope what if there were a Pope not only by his natiue countrey a Turke but also one that practiseth priuie conspiracies leagues yea â—…reasons with the Turke against christian Princes in all mischiefe of life yea and errours of fayth also were worsse than the Turke and that the Turkes erroneous Alkaron speaketh yet more reuerently of Iesus Christ than doth the pope that pretendes to be his vicar What if there were a Iew pope or one that would cause Christians to receiue Iudaisâ—…e yea to cruâ—…e Christ agayne What if there were a heathen Pope or one that caused as grosse Idolatrie to be vsed as dyd the Paynims and beléeued as much of heauen or hell of God or the diuell of the bodies resurrection or of the soules immortalitie as the Epicures or the Saduces dyd What if there were a whoremaster Pope yea a whore Pope a Sodomiticall Pope a Iudas Pope a Neronian Pope an Antichrist Pope and suche a Pope as hath done more for the diuels kingdome than eueÌ„ the deuill him selfe could haue done If this clause were for euer vnited vnto the Pope how should we do then master St I pray you helpe vs héere at a pinche out of the briers If ye shall denie there can come any suche Popes shewe why there may not come suche hereafter as well as there hath gone suche heretofore If ye denie there hath bene any such Popes heretofore and put me to my profes wel then I must proue it and God willing so will I when ye shall bid me But if beforehand ye thinke I shal be able to do it and you wil preuent me with a shift of descant that though they were such ill Popes yet in respect they were popes they were none of al these things but in respect they were meÌ„ for so ye afterward excuse y matter to which distinctioÌ„ there you shall be answered God willing yet here admitting also this distinction why may not I replie that what soeuer the person shall be that shall haue hereafter the crowne of this realme the statute and the lawe respecteth not the man that shall haue it but the estate and authoritie that â—…e shall haue and entendeth not that he is a man but that he is a king and so medling not with his vices and affections setteth out his duetie and office what he oughte to do what maner of man he ought to be in this respect he hath this authoritie And so euery way your wicked and malicious presupposall is answered simply but truely I trust howsoeuer other woulde answere it better or as iâ—… better deserueth giue it no answere at all Nowe hauing cast foorth your presupposition as a snaring bayte to bréede a scruple of some marueylous inconuenience and after your false maner of concluding hauing inferred that of the statute that it implyeth not ye begin to buskle vp your feathers and crow saying This kinde of regiment therefore so large and ample I am right well assured ye haue not proued nor neuer shall be able to proue in the auncient Church while ye liue In déede for that kinde of regiment master Stapleton that you inferre and would as a maâ—…e set vp it is a Papal or Turkish regiment and that the Bishop shall neuer be able to proue it I bolde well with you nor be goeth about to proue it but to improue it But that kinde of regiment that he here setteth downe of the Quéenes Maiestie that will he proue and hath alreadie proued it for al this your Thrasonicall crake which I commit to muster in your common place thereon And let this his fellowe go with it for companie VVhen I say say you this kinde of regiment I walke not in confuse and generall wordes as ye doe but I restrayne my selfe to the foresayde perticulers nowe rehersed and to that platforme that I haue alreadie drawne to your hande and vnto the which master Feckenham must pray you to referre and applie your euidences otherwise as he hath so may he or any man else the chiefe poynts of all being as yet on your side improued still refuse the othe For the which doings neither you nor any man else can iustly be grieued with him You maye saye like a lustie Gentleman what ye please master Stapleton I say this kinde of regiment and that kinde of regiment and tell vs of your walkes of your restrayntes of your platformes that ye haue drawne but these are but néedelesse vauntes Tell vs of that regiment that is in question walke there a Gods name restraine your selfe to that be contente with the platforme that is alreadie drawne to your handes otherwise master Feckenham and all other will sée that ye doe but brabble And as ye would drawe the Bishop to driue his proues thither whether he is not bounde to referre them so ye doe not onely deceyue the Reader but offer wrong also euen to master Feckenham whome ye take in hande to defende and here ye make him such a childe that he knewe not how to frame his issue nor wherein he would be resolued But M. Feckenham if ye defende him thus may biâ—… you meddle with your Fortresses and let him alone with his cause And if the Bishop haue not in these two meanes satisfied the demaund of his issue then tell master Feckenham that he may still refuse the othe But if the Bishop haue proued by any of these two poynts the Scriptures or the Doctours master Feckenhams issue that he desired to be proued that is any such gouernment as the Queenes Maiestietaketh on hir in ecclesiasticall causes then can not maister Fecken iustly refuse the othe but must vvith heartie thanks yelde therevnto as he hath promised by wryting to the Bishop or else he shall be holden as an vniust man and as obstinate a wrangling Papist as you shewe your selfe to be Which wilfull refusall though it be a griefe to all the godly affected that beholde your frowarde blindnesse yet shall it be the lesse griefe vnto them when they sée that neyther truth nor honestie will reclaime you Here after the vaunts of your selfe and the excusing of master Feckenham ye enter into your thirde part of excusing all the Papists calling it in your margine A reasonable defence of the Catholikes for refusing the othe This reasonable defence hath two partes the one the excuse of the Papists the other the accusing of the Bishop For the former sayth master Stapleton As neither with vs master Horne ought you or any man else be grieued for declaring the truth in this poynt as if we were discontented subiects or repining against the obedience we owe to our gracious Prince and countrey No man is grieued with you master Stapleton as ye pretende for declaring the truth in this poynt or any other but onely for your not declaring the truth but concealing the truth and outfacing the matter with false countenances of
tâ—…cet consentire videtur for he that holdeth his peace seemeth to consent Howbeit I crie you mercie the case is altered For there ye defend your client here ye oppugne your aduersarie And belike ye haue some priuiledge from Rome euer to turne the matter so as may best serue your turne But and it were not for this your priuiledge surely I woulde further aske ye howe chaunce so soone ye haue forgotten your late vaunt and euen in this leafe wherin ye crake that ye walke not in generall wordes but restrayne your selfe to particulars now stande quarrelling about the generall words of the statute and mocke the B. for particulars if ye shalâ—… laye forth your priuiledge to doe this when ye thinke ye may get some aduauntage thereby yet I thinke your priuiledge stretcheth not both to wrest the state of the question in hande and of the issue to the statute and to wrest and belâ—…e the statute as ye please and thereof to gather what false conclusion ye lyst For first ye do the Bishop wrong â—…th Maister Feckenham hath set vp his issue to be prooued Anye suche gouernement in Ecclesiasticall causes to driue the bishop from thence to the wordes of the statute that expresse it in all ecclesiasticall causes Herein ye offer the bishop wrong For by this issue betwéene them though the Bishop in euery Prince continually alleage not ensamples in euery Ecclesiasticall cause but nowe and then in all nowe and then in some for your Popes daily encroched on Princes and at length got the mâ—…st of all yet hath the Bishop proued and satisfied the vertue of this issue Any such gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes Howbeit ye do him further wrong to chalenge him here for leauing out any poynt of gouernment in any Ecclesiasticall cause that euen the statute giueth hir maiestie that is to say A supreme gouernement in all things and causes Doth not the bishop set downe this M. St hath he not specified euen the same wordes oftentimes already and doth not his particular specifications coÌ„teine as much here also Nâ—… say you he leaueth out the principall cause ecclesiasticall and most necessarie meete and conuenient for a supreme gouernor Ecclesiasticall Soft M. St. stay here or euer we demaund what this cause should be I demaunde only now why ye say supreme gouernour Ecclesiasticall is this your honestie in handling the statute doth the Quéene take vpon hir to be a supreme gouernor Ecclesiasticall or doth the statute giue this title to hir maiestie A supreme gouernor Ecclesiasticall the statute saith A supreme gouernor in all Ecclesiastical causes â–ª And is there no differeÌ„ce betwene an ecclesiastical gouernor a gouernor in eccles causes but you vse this your false captious speach to make that people beleue the slaÌ„der that ye raise on hir Maiesty as though she toke vpon hir to bean ecclesiasticall person to be a B. and a minister of the worde sacraments and by hir chiefe gouernmeÌ„t ouer bishops chalenged to be a chief or head bishop of Bishops like vnto your Pope And so hauing raised vp this slauÌ„der on the Quenes maiestie the statute ye chalenge the Bishop for omitting a principall ecclesiastical cause But what is that you aske forsooth iudgement say you determining and approuing of doctrine which is true and good and which is otherwise Here againe M. Stapl. ye speake as captiously for if by this iudgement ye meane an authoritie aboue the doctrine of Gods worde as all your side maintaineth that the word of God receyueth his authoritie of the Churches iudgement â–ª which Church ye call the Priestes and is authenticall bicause they haue ratified it so to be otherwise it were not true nor good then in déede as the Bishop hath set downe no such iudgement determining or approuing of doctrine neyther so coulde he haue done for the Quéenes Maiestie â—…keth no such supreme gouernement vpon hir nor such supreme gouernement is due to any other than to God alone who hath by Iesus Christ his sonne already fully determined in his holy worde what doctrine is good and true â–ª And what doctrine soeuer is besides that is neyther true nor good whosoeuer take vpon him to iudge determine and approue the same be it eyther your Pope or your Church neuer so much yea were it an angell from heauen â—…e must 〈◊〉 helde accursed But if ye meane by iudging determining and approuing of doctrine such authority as only acknowledgeth giueth testimonie admitteth alloweth setteth forth and strengthneth the doctrine of Christes onely worde not aâ—… ruler ouer it but as seruant vnto it and the reiecting or abolishing of all other doctrine against or besides that wordâ—… then hath the bishop not left out this ecclesiasticall cause in the statute though not iudging in that maner that the ecclesiasticall gouernour Bishop or Minister doth in his sermons or debating thereon but for so much as belongeth to a supreme gouernour And so sayth the bishop The gouernment that the Queenes Maiestie most iustly taketh on hir in ecclesiasticall causes is the guiding caring prouiding ordering directing and ayding the eccl. state within hir dominions to the furtherance maintenance and setting foorth of true religion buitie and quietnesse of Christes Church visiting reforming restrayning amending and correcting all maner persons with all maner errours superstitions heresies schisâ—…es abuses offences contempts and enormities in or about Christes religion whatsoeuer Marke these words a little better M. Stap. and I trust you shall sée it was you that ouershot your selfe and lefte out good attention béeing caried away in a cocke brayne â—…ume with too hastie a preiudice And that the bishop left out héere no part of such iudgement determination and approuing of doctrine which is true and good which is otherwise as belongeth to suche a supreme gouernour as groundeth himselfe on Gods iudgement â–ª determining and approbation What do ye thinke is true religion no good doctrine with you If it be the bishop hath not omitted it Can he care and prouide for it direct and set it foorth without iudgement without the determining of it to be good and true without the approbation of it On the other side are errours and heresies no false nor naughtie doctrine with you if they be then the bishop named them and thinke ye the visiting reforming restrayning amending and correcting can be without a iudgement and determination agaynst them Then sithe he in playne spéeche ascribeth all this to the Prince which fully answereth all this that ye call for if as I sayd ye vnderstande this iudgement determining and approuing a right ye shewe what a very continuall wrangler ye be where no cause at all is giuen But incontinent ye declare what ye meane by this iudgement of doctrine For what say you is more necessarie in the Churche than that the supreme gouernour therof shoulde haue power in all doubtes and controuersies to decide the truthe and
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
the royall power hath done it submitteth it selfe to the true power ecclesiasticall as not hauing a superioritie of all ecclesiasticall matters to exercise or doe them but hauing a superioritie in all ecclesiastical matters to ouersée them rightly don and exercised And this distinction of of and In M. Sanders him selfe vsed immediatly before and vseth againe in the fourth chapter folowing which also is a common distinction and therfore I maye well vse it bycause it not onely expresseth the manner of the Princes Supremacie but also detecteth the Papistes common fallatiâ—…n as thoughe by the name of Supreme gouernour the Queenes Maiestie tooke vppon hir the gouernement Ecclesiasticall when shée onely taketh vpon hir that is due vnto hir a gouernement in causes ecclesiasticall Secondly I answere that although there be no comparison betwene these two powers yet is the royall power farre aboue that which here he makes it that nothing belonging to this power hath bâ—…n reuealed from heauen pertaining to eternal saluation hid in Christ but only to matters that conserue peace among men springing of the seedes of nature either for profite or necessitie Herein he saith in dede as St. doth but this is no lesse manifest vntruth than shamefull slauÌ„der to all christian princes estates The Scripture is euident to the contrarie as well in Gods institution of the royall power as in all the examples of godly Princes commended in the Scripture not so much for their worldly policie Iustice peace and naturall giftes as for matters pertaining to eternall saluation both hidde in Christe and reuealed in Christe also And let these things sayth he be spoken for the originall of either power The seconde point of difference he maketh in the vse and office saying But so farre as belongeth to the vse and office of those thynges wee knovve that distinction to bee obserued in them that he which had the full power ecclesiasticall might also haue had in gouernyng the people of God vvithoute any especiall consecration as happened in Noe in Melchizedech in Abraham in Moyses in Helie and in Samuel and in the Machabees Howebeit it was not onlyke sorte true that hee vvhiche eyther by the Lawe of Nations oâ—… the Ciuil was kyng whiche is the firste degree of honour in this kynde shoulde streightway haue also the power Ecclesiasticall except that right had ben giuen vnto him by especiall consecration Yée confonnde your owne tale Maister Saunders and speake contraries Before ye sayde speakyng of the Ciuil power of faythfull Kinges Christus talem in sui regni Ministris esse noluerit Christe in the Ministers of his his kingdome woulde haue no suche power Now ye say He that hadde the one power had vvithout any especiall consecration the other also And hereto yée â—…ite these holye Fathers Noe Melchizedech Abraham Moyses Hâ—…lie Samuel and the Machabees Were none of these Ministers in the kingdome of Chryste Besydes this ye confoâ—…nde your distinction heaping vp confusedly these wytnesses of the whych but one serueth proprely to the purpose of the former part of youre distinction for the Priestes to haue had the Ciuil power â—…nd that is Helie to whome proprely the Ecclesiasticall power belonged being the high Priest and likewise had the Ciuil power béeing the Iudge also But yet this was not without some especiall consecration or appoyntment of God thervnto For else eyther it had ben ordinarie to his predecessours or he had vsurped it sithe none was Iudge among the Israelites all the whyle that the Ciuil power was directed by that kinde of gouernement but those that were by especiall calling appointed of God thereto As for the other were of dyuerse tymes and sortes The holye Patriarkes Noe Melchizedech and Abraham hadde I graunte also bothe powers Ecclesiasticall and Ciuil But at that tyme before the lawe when bothe estates pertayned to them by their birthrighte And this maketh rather for the Ciuill magistrate to haue had the ecclesiastical power than for the Ecclesiastical magistrate to haue had the ciuill power For the gouernment descending to them by reason of their birthright was a naturall or ciuill gouernment as your selfe before confessed saying Eâ—…enim vt pater infilium c. For as the father hath a certain power ouer his sonne the grandsier ouer his nephew and so foorth the elder ouer the yonger this verily god hath wrought by the lawe naturall while by the maner and order of my birth he declareth him to be my superiour which either ministred the cause why I should be borne or else is ioyned in some kindred with him by whome I was borne And so these Patriarkes by birthright hauing the ciuil power by the law of Nature as ye confesse had not the ciuil power bycause they had the Ecclesiasticall but rather had the Ecclesiasticall power bycause they had Ciuile power by natural righte till these two offices were by the Lawe of Moyses seuered As for Moyses and the Machabees were indeed of the tribe of Leui. Moyses had power in bothe estates but béeing before the Ecclesiasticall power was lotted to the tribe of Leui and béeing the lawemaker in appoynting it to the race of his brother Aaron his example maketh agayne for the Ciuile Magistrate rather to haue hadde the gouernement in Ecclesiasticall matters than the Ecclesiasticall in the Ciuill The Machabees by an extraordinarie vocation had the Ciuile power As for Samuell was also of the tribe of Leui but yeÌ„t no Prieue althoughe a Prophet and the Iudge also but by especiall calling of God thereto Nowe all these estates béeyng thus diuers bothe in sortes and tymes hee confoundeth together to enforce his obseruation that the Priestes ordinarylye maye deale in the Princes office but in no case the Prince maye deale with any thing belonging to the Priests and yet his owne examples make agaynst him But he addeth without some especiall consecration But what especiall consecration had Dauid had Salomon had Ezechias c. to gouerne the Priests in their ecclesiasticall matters We reade of no especiall consecration other than the dutie of their royall power But wherto tendeth all this forsooth priests may deale with Princes and take the Ciuil power vpon them ordinarily but Princes in no case may deale with Priests Herevpon say you when Ozias woulde haue offred incense vpon the altar of incense Azarias the Priest wente in after him and with him the Priestes of the Lorde resisted the king and sayde It is not thy office Ozia to offer incense to the Lorde but it is the office of the Priests that is to say of the sonnes of Aaron that are consecrated to suche mysterie The example of Ozias is often â—…rged of himselfe and al his fellowes howbeit it is méere impertinent flaundederous The Prince taketh not vpon hir as Ozias woulde haue done the power nor office nor administration ecclesiasticall But suche power as Ozias did well take vpon him while
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
I tell thée plaine thou shalt pay for him then I cry you mercy sir quoth the poore maÌ„ I should haue said your bull hath goared my cowe tushe quoth the rich maÌ„ the case is altered that it is another matter And so I perceiue M. SauÌ„ders it is with you when the Priest is said to haue any authoritie in the olde Testament marke that say you that maketh for vs and why so bicause the olde Testament is a figure of the new the gouernement ye marke it was for the priest but the gouernment must not alter the states must be a like and all this geare But now sir it is proued the kings gouernement was aboue the priests Is it so say you that is another maner of matter tush theÌ„ the case is altered If this came to passe in the olde Testament yet no reason shoulde compell that the same should be so in the new Testament fith the reason of the ecclesiasticall gouernement is changed But as the prouerbe sayth the case is altered but the matter is where it was What a mockerie is this in so waightie and plaine a matter But let vs heare your reasons Maister Saunders Nor without cause say you for the Synagog of the Iewes although it coÌ„tained in it som true Israelits iust meÌ„ yet both it was was called a earthly rather thaÌ„ a heueÌ„ly kingdoÌ„e in so much that Augustine doubteth whether in the olde Testament the kingdome of heauen be euer named or no much lesse that it is promised for rewarde For those things that were done did signifie in dede diuine things and so the lawe it selfe was also spirituall but the things themselues were not in themselues so diuine as our things are in so much that the Apostle teacheth that the glorie of the Synagoge was no glory at all in respect of the excellente glorye of that Ministerie whiche nowe is exercised in the Church by the Ministers of the newe Testament not in the letter but in the spirite Therfore sith the people of God consisteth of a bodie and a soule or spirite the carnall part obtained the principalitie in the olde people and was ordained to signifie spirituall things VVhervpoÌ„ as mount Synai the kindled fire the whirlewind the darknesse the storme and sounde of the trumpet and voyce of the words was onely of the earth and carnall so nowe all things are spirituall and internall There raigned the seruile feare of God and the bodily sworde but here is moste deare loue and the spirituall sworde they abuse therfore the holy Scriptures that for those things that were done of the Kings in the olde Testamente thinke now also that the kingdome of heauen which is the Church should be subiect to earthly kings This answere why the gouernement is changed is a depressing of their estate in comparisoÌ„ of ours that theirs was more earthly ours more spirituall which as in part we denie not yet repute not theirs so grossely as here he makes it yet is this comparison plainely wrested to inferre alteration of gouernement thervpon from the Princes ouer the Priests then to the Priests ouer the Princes nowe For this alteration maketh the olde not to prefigure the newe but to destroy it as no comparison but a cleane contrarietie But the true comparison being such as the one estate prefigured the other the excellencie is in the difference of this aboue that retaining still the same estate of gouernment so that if those godly Princes did so well order their gouernement in those causes that in comparison were but earthly and not so deuine as ours then muche more shoulde our Christian Princes order their gouernment better in much more excellent ecclesiasticall matters And thus both the figure and the comparison holdeth But M. Saunders turneth all as though the King and the Prieste were compared togither that the kings gouernement was but earthly then and the priestes gouernement now is spiritual Wheras the coÌ„parison is of the things gouerned and not of the gouernors And yet to compare those with these gouernors those earthly Princes were not so litle spirituall then but these spirituall Priestes are ten times more earthly grosse and carnall nowe What S. Augustine douteth I remember not but we without doubting know now that the kingdome of heauen was promised then to them so well as nowe to vs and they without doubting hoped for it and vndoubtedly did receiue it and do enioy it The comparison of glorie that Saint Paule maketh that theirs was nothing to ours is true But he speaketh not thereof comparing visible glories the one with the other such as the ministerie of the Popishe Church settes for the it selfe withall For in such outwarde glorie the olde Lawe passed the new the Pharisies passed Christe the Heatheus passed the Christians both in the Apostles time and long while after till the glorious ministerie of the Pope hath far excelled them all The examples of the glorie and terror in Mount Synai of the seruile feare of the bodily sword are iumbled togither disorderly and are compared to spirituall resemblances or contraries in the Gospell But as they take not away the Christian Magistrates bodily sword nor glorie so meddle they not with alteration of Princes gouernement ouer Ministers in causes ecclesiasticall therefore are méere impertinent But if all these shiftes will not serue then saith M. Saunders sée the inconueniences Othervvise if the state of the olde kings shall be drawne to the time of the newe Testament shall not the state of the Byshops of the Leuiticall tribe by the same reason be drawne to our time also lette there be therefore one tribe appointed to the outwarde Priesthoode let there be one Temple in the world let there be but one Byshop and let bloud sacrifices be restored But if thou confesâ—…est these things are made voyde wherefore grauntest thou not also that those things are voide that kings haue done about diuine matters â–ª are only the doings of kings eternal nor could they be changed so farre as pertained to the disposing of holy things What could or what could not be done M. Saunders we stande not vpon but what is or what is not done is the question And that the state of the ciuill gouernement is not altered your selâ—… haue often graunted that the gouernment still was one that the one was a figure of the other that Christe toke not away nor diminished the Princes authoritie As for the Leuiticall Law of the Priests the scripture is plaine in many places that it is cleane dissolued you cannot therefore make these alike except you wil become a iewe And so it seemeth by this your wicked reason you had rather renounce the Priesthoode sacrifice of Christe bring in againe the priesthoode sacrifice of the olde law than you woulde giue Princes authoritie ouer Priestes in the newe lawe But now that M. Sanders hath thus answered the
Kingdomes and depose Kings as they shall thinke expedient and to proue this â–ª we must saye they be in the Churches power and to proue that wee must saye they are spirituall â–ª and so spirituall men may deale with spirituall thyngs And for this reason we can sée no cause nowe but that Christian Kingdomes are spirituall that we spirituall men which are the Church might haue the disposing of them Well then I see also Maister Saunders that for aduantage you can and you can not see And play seest me and seest me not But who seeth not that hath any indifferent eyes that this is but legerdemain and that you speake flat contraries in one thing although you turne your tale to other purposes But let go that you saw not before let vs loke what you see in Princes now Nowe you see that they are spirituall And why so not bicause they doe the spirituall actions of the Priests but bicause of their better part that is of the spirite of God and bicause of the end wherto they driue al their things to become as it were spirituall Why then M. Saunders your eyes mighte serue you if your hart could serue you to see this withall that although the Prince can not do the spirituall actions of spirituall persons yet this hindreth not that he may notwithstanding be a gouernor ouer ecclesiasticall persons in causes ecclesiasticall and maye ouersee them both And if you can see the one and not the other surely your sight is partiall But newe M. Saunders loking another way will haue Princes no furder spirituall than in that they are vnder the Church And here making the Maior the Minor the former the later by a figure called Hysteron proteron the carte before the horse he will proue that all spirituall things are so much vnder the Churche of Christ that the Church may freely dispose and decree of them to the profite of the whole mysticall body and so Kings and Kingdomes as is sayde before beyng spirituall things are so muche vnder the Churche of Christ that she may freely to the profit of the whole mysticall body dispose and decree of Kings and kingdomes But first Maister SauÌ„ders we denie your Maior For although in certaine things it be true to wit in such things as are left to the disposition of the Church that is to order and dispose such things as of their nature are indifferent to the profite of the whole mysticall body or any part thereof for these things are called spirituall things not properly in their owne nature but as in spirituall causes the spirituall persons vse them and yet all this is not so freely lefte to the Churches disposition that some principall persons in the Church as the Prince or the Pastors haue not the chiefest stroke in the disposition of them For if they were so free that euery member in the Churche shoulde haue his nay or yea in disposing of theÌ„ when would they be disposed And if at length they were it would peraduenture fall out in the end so little to the profite of the whole mysticall body that it woulde be rather the hinderaunce and disquieting of it But besides these spiritual thinges there are a great many other of whiche some in déede are méere spirituall as the worde of God the Sacramentes of Christ the Articles of fayth the Commaundementes of life and all suche thinges as God hathe either expressed in his worde or is necessarily conteyued in it These thinges béeing spiritual are not so vnder the churche of Christ that the churche may freely dispose and decree of them But they statly dispose and decree of the churche and the churche can not alter nor swarue one iote from them Whiche if she shoulde she shoulde not profite hir selfe for she is the whole mysticall body but destroy hir selfe and dissolue the whole body and euery part therof And such as these things are is the estate of a King and kingdome whiche althoughe it be not so méere a spirituall thing but so farre foorthe spirituall as your selfe confesse yet bicause it is the ordinaunce of God and God hath in his worde set foorthe the office of a King and declareth that the setting vp and pulling downe of Kinges and the alterations of kingdomes belongeth to him selfe and neuer gaue that authoritie to his Churche muche lesse to his Ministers to set vp and depose Kinges and alter kingdomes Kinges therefore and their kingdomes no more than other spirituall thinges are not so vnder the churche of Christe that she maye freely dispose and decree of them to the profite of the whole mysticall body Neither hathe the whole mysticall body any more thraldome or lesse fredome that Kings and kingdomes are not so vnder hir or that she maye not freely dispose and decree of them as she shall thinke moste profitable to the whole mysticall body than she hathe more thraldome or lesse freedome bicause she can not alter nor dispose the other spirituall things Yea in this case the Churche léeseth lesse libertie than in the other for the freedome of the Churche â–ª béeing a mysticall body is cleane another matter pertayning to the conscience and is a mysticall freedome from the tyrannie of Sathan from the cursse of the lawe from the bondage of sinne from ceremonies and humayne constitutions and not from obedience to kinges and to haue superioritie ouer them and libertie to depose them and to translate their kingdomes Whiche freedome and superioritie is not spirituall but carnall and worldly And if the Churche had it she woulde not onely bring kinges and kingdomes but euen hir selfe in bondage and therefore Christe hathe barred it Whiche freedome bicause the Popishe Churche aspireth vnto and claymeth and holdeth ouer â–ª kinges and kingdomes she is not the true Church of Christ that they boast of but rather a Iewishe Synagoge dreaming vpon an earthly Messias or rather a Persian or Turkishe Temple that measureth the freedome and dignitie of Gods Church by the pompe and mighte of the worlde to depose kings and dispose of their kingdomes at their pleasures But to proue that kings and kingdomes pertayne not to the free disposition of the Church but of God I will desire no better prooues nor example than euen M. Saunders heere brings foorthe Sithe therefore sayth he the â–ª people of Israell would needes desire a king to be giuen theÌ„ Samuel by the commaundement of God tooke a cruse of oyle and powred it vpon the head of Saule and kissed him â–ª and sayde beholde God anoyâ—…teth thee to be the Prince ouer his Inheritaunce which to me seemeth to signifie as though it had bene sayde except the Lorde anoynted thee to be the Prince thou couldest not rightly and orderly be the Prince ouer his people whiche he hathe chosen and reserued out of all the worlde to be as it were peculiar to him selfe For in that that is Gods no man can take power
to him selfe without Gods permission If this be true that héere you say M. Saunders as it is moste true if Samuels words do so sounde in your eares as though he had sayde Saule coulde not be king ouer Gods people except the Lorde anoynted him If the Lorde reserue this prerogatiue to him selfe to appoynt Princes and giue kingdomes where he onely pleaseth howe then is this true that kings and kingdomes are so vnder the Churche that she may freely dispose decree of theÌ„ as she pleaseth Although the Church be the Lordes spouse and wyfe yet is she not hir selfe the Lorde nor the Lorde is ruled by hir but she by the Lorde neither hathe he giuen hir this prerogatiue but as you héere confesse it is a thing belonging onely to him And therefore by your owne confession Kinges and kingdomes are not so vnder the Church that she may dispose and decree as she thinketh good of them And as your owne witnesse thus beateth your selfe in your owne example So to consider this example further Saule was appoynted King of God and thoughe at the firste he was a good King yet afterwarde he became bothe a tyrant in lyfe and an Apostata in doctrine by which occasion he was a great offence to the Churche of god What nowe did the Churche of God saye she had suche freedome ouer him and his kingdome that she might freely dispose and decree thereof as should be profitable for the whole â–ª mysticall body Surely to the Churches iudgement it appeared more profitable if this ill Kyng hadde béene deposed and some other godly man placed in hys steede muche more if Dauid hadde beene placed â–ª whom GOD likewyse had anoynted to be their king Dyd the Churche this No coulde they haue done this No they had no suche fréedome but they let Saule alone and committed the case to God who at his good oportunitie as he onely sent the king so he only tooke him away and sent them another For onely God transposeth kingdomes and not the Churche as he him selfe testifieth who is the best Iudge we can appeale vnto saying Per me Reges regnant Kinges rule by me and not by my Churche And so confesseth Daniel He chaungeth times and ages he translateth kingdomes and establisheth them His Church therefore hathe not the free disposition of them But sayth master Saunders God anoynted Saule to be the Prince not by him selfe but by his Minister wherefore whosoeuer ruleth ouer the Christian people whiche is no lesse acceptable to God than was the people of the Iewes he besides the right that he receyued by the consent of the people ought also to acknowledge his power to be of Christe by his Ministers if so be that he be suche an one as worshippeth the fayth of Christe VVherevpon to this day all christian Kinges are anoynted of some christian Bishop or some other minister of God referring therein their principalitie not onely to the people and so vnto God But referre it besides by the Ministers of Christe to Christe whose Ministers they are Your argument is this The King is anoynted of God. But this is done by the ministerie of Gods Prophetes or Ministers Ergo Not onelie God but his Ministers haue the free disposing and decreeing of Kings and kingdomes Your conclusion is not in so playne English but colourably you fetche the matter about the bushe saying therefore they muste referre their principalitie not onely to the people and so to God but referre it besides by the ministers of Christ to Christ whose ministers they are What néede this nice daliaunce and circumquaques M. Saunders that almoste men can scarse tell what you meane but that you meane some fal shode If you meane they shoulde referre it to the Ministers of Christ that is an vntruth If you meane they must refeâ—…e it so to Christe by his Ministers that it takes the authoritie of the Ministers that is another vntruthe If you meane it muste be referred to Christe that worketh it by the ministerie of his Ministers howbeit there is no suche necessitie neither in the making of Kinges althoughe it be orderly and ordinarily done by their ministerie yet what serueth this to the purpose Speake playnely man and say the king is made king by the Bishops Ergo the Bishops may dispose and decree of him and his kingdome and may depose him and giue the kingdome to another as they shall thinke good â–ª For this is your playne drifte But we denie your argument for by the like you mighte make euery mans baptisme and sayth to hang of the free disposition decreeing and alteration of the Minister sithe these things are receyued by the Minister but the force of them dependes not on the minister And much lesse that bicause suche a Bishop crowned the King therefore he may rule the King and haue free disposition to decree what the King shall doe and whether he shall continue King or no. No M. Saund. and if he had the authoritie to make the King yet the King beeing made it followeth not that he may marre him too But the moste that you can make of the Minister in the Kings Coronation â–ª is but Causa sine qua non that he can not well be made without him and yet in very déede it is not so muche and therefore this is but a slender argument But sée how you runne héere craftily from the Church to the Bishop your argument was of the Church and your conclusion is of the Bishop Wherby you meane that your Prelates only are of the church â–ª Which as it is most false so is it rather to be examined whether you be any ministers or parts of the churche at al if you speake of the churche of Christ. For as was shewed before neither the church â–ª nor the spirituall Ministers of Christ â–ª did euer take vpon them this deposing of kings and disposing of kingdomes that you chalenge Samuel whome you cite had béene a gouernour by an extraordinary calling béeing the laste Iudge before the Kings but after he had â–ª anoynted and declared Saule to be king he neuer tooke vpon him the publike gouernment of the kingdome And though God sent him to tell Saule how God would cast him off and though also God had him anoynt another yet would he not medâ—…e in the gouernmeÌ„t nor depose Saule nor incite Dauid or the people to depose him althoughe God had caste him cleane off but onely mourned for him If you can shewe any example of the contrarie I am sure we shall heare it but as yet we heare of none You tell vs of an elegante sentence of Pope Leo to the Emperour Leo. But as there is no greate elegancie in it so it maketh nothing to this purpose and the purpose that it maketh for is rather for the Princes gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes than agaynst it Howbeit to alleage a Pope for the vsurpation of the Pope is
be the pastor So that this place as it maketh nothing for the power of the Priests ouer the goods and bodily things of the faithfull so it maketh much here in against them For if S. Paule in such matters of goods and bodily things rather than they should not haue a Christian iudge woulde haue them chose among themselues euen a contemptible person how much more now when the Church hath faithfull iudges and Christian Princes it ought in such controuersies to run to them for Iustice rather than to the Priests and Bishoppes that are of another calling Moreouer least any shoulde say that the Churche of Christ hath nothing to do with the businesse of this worlde he sayth expressely do ye not know that the saintes shall iudge of thys world and if the world shal be iudged by you are ye vnworthy to iudge of small things know ye not that we shall iudge the Angels how much more worldly things Behold the Apostle reasoneth from the spirituall power to the temporall on this wise To whom that which is more is lawfull to him is lawfull that which is lesse But we Christians shall iudge of the world and we shall iudge the renegate Angels and the Deuils themselues the which commeth by the spirituall power â–ª wherby we be made the sonnes of God and the coinheritors of Christ much more therefore may we exercise secular iudgements VVherby it appeareth that secular things are both inferior â—…o spirituall and are not estranged from the spirituall power but may light vnder it chiefely then when the matter is in hand of punishing or iudging those men that are the meÌ„bers of the Church of Christ. 〈◊〉 saye not Master Saunders that the Churche of Christ hath nothing to doe vvith the businesse of this world this is but your sclaunder We say that the spirituall Ministers of the Churche of Christe haue not so to do with such vvorldly businesse that they maye turquise all the vvorlde and alter the states of vvorldly kingdomes and occupie them selues about vvorldly affaires in such vvorldly dominion as you pretende they maye Whereto you abuse shamefully Saint Paules sayings He speaketh there of vvorldly matters and you applye it to all iudgementes yea to the iudging of a kingdome â–ª But you replle he saith the Saints shall iudge the worlde and the Angels vvhiche are greater thinges than kingdomes howe muche more then kingdomes that are lesser things Trowe you Master Saunders he speaketh there of such iudging the vvorlde that they should iudge like chiefe Iustiâ—… of realmes and kingdomes whether this or that Prince shall enioye them or shall be dispossessed of them No M. Saunders she speaketh of no suche thing The worlde shall be iudged in them as Chrysostome well noteth Iudicabunt non ipsi iudices c. They shal iudge â–ª not they themselues sitting in iudgemeÌ„t exacting an accouÌ„t God forbid but they shal coÌ„demne the vvorld the vvhich signifying he saith and if in you c. He saith not of you but in you As who should say the iust condemnation of these that are the vvorldlings shall shine in the saluation of you that are the Saints This therefore proueth 〈◊〉 such worldly iudgemeÌ„t as you pretend Secondly you abuse S. Paule as though in speaking of the Saints he spake onely of the spirituall Pastors wheras he speaketh in generall of the whole congregation Are Saintes and Christians only Priestes with you this is both manifest wresting of S. Paule and shamelesse arrogancie in your selues But you say the Churche hath it by the spirituall povver vvherby vve be made the sonnes of God and coinheritors of Christe We graunt you Master Saunders But doth this spirituall povver belong onely to Priestes you say it appeareth hereby vve maye exercise secular iudgementes whome meane you by this vve Master Saunders your selues that are the Priestes But S. Paule speaketh of Christian people and not of the Pastors only yea least of al of the Pastors Wherevpon saith Haimo out of Gregorie on these wordes choose him that is contemptible Secundum Gregorium c. According to Gregorie by contemptible persons vvee may vnderstande secular men hauing the knovvledge of humaine lavves and in their personages being honorable who in comparison of them that vnderstand the diuine lawes and pierce the mysteries of the holy Trinitie are contemptible and simple although they be faithful â–ª And according to this sense vvee muste reade it affirmatiuely bicause suche are to be appointed vvhiche of the Canons are called the Sonnes of the Church I sprake it to your shame bycause althoughe I commaunde it not you ought to haue done it And therefore he commaundeth such to be ordeyned bycause they that ought to serue on the altare and meditate Diuine Sermons and giue the vvorde of preaching to the people ought to estraunge themselues from secular businesse and iudgements Likewise saithe your Cardinall Hugo The glosse calleth them contemptible that are not apt to great offices in the Church as to preach and teach And this is an argument that my lord the Pope ought not to appoint Masters of Diuinitie to be Iudges of temporall things To your shame saith the glosse that those should examine earthly causes that haue gotten the vvisedome of outvvarde things But those that are enryched vvith spirituall giftes ought not to be entangled vvith earthly businesse that vvhile they be not driuen to inferior goods they may be able to attende on the higher goods Hovvebeit this must greatly be cared for that they that shine in spiritual goods forsake not vtterly the businesse of their vveake brethreÌ„ Thus your Papists theÌ„selues are of a contrarie iudgement to you M. Saunders besides all your Popes and Councels Canons that the spirituall Pastors should not be these Iudges in secular things that here Saint Paule speaks on To wrest therefore these wordes spoken of any faithfull Christian only to your Priestes to wring this sentence from the state of the Churche then being without any faithfull Magistrate to the time now when they haue many and those not choseÌ„ of theÌ„selues but ordeyned of the higher Magistrate to wrythe it from the iudgements and taking vp of their petit quarels to the deposing or setting vp of Kings or altering kingdomes is clean beyond the meaning of S. Paule an euident violence iniurie to Gods word Now vpoÌ„ this sentence thus wrested you procéed to your argumeÌ„t saying For their goodes are so muche subiecte to the ecclesiasticall povver that it is lavvfull for the Churche of priuate men to ordeine Magistrates that should iudge of secular causes and not only of ecclesiasticall But no man can passe more righte to an other than he hath himselfe Therefore the Churche vvhich hath povver to make them Iudges that vvere priuate men before hath much more it selfe ouer those secular causes receiued povver by the Ministers of God that as Aaron are called to the
sayings Stapl. 62. b 63. a M. Sta. vnlyke similitude to disburthen M. Fecknham Howe falsely M. Sta. chalengeth vs for heretikes for leauing oute an article of the common crede in the Apologie How cunning M. Stap. himselfe â—…s in the coÌ„mon creede M. Stap. notes the Bishop and other for graÌ„mar and â—…o what a Grammarian he shewes himselfe to be Contr. Valent. lib. 1. cap. 2. lib. 3. cap. 4. De praescript haereticorum Fol. 423. li. â—… Diuis 159. cap. 4. M. Stap. taketh on him to teache the bishop his Catechisme Stap. fol. 423. M Sta. in saying the Common crede leaueth out these words And in Iesus Christe our Lorde Stapl. 423. a M. Sta. leaueth out againe in saying the coÌ„mon Creede these wordes crucified dead and buryed Stapl. 423. a Aâ—… other article left oute by M. Sta. in saying the common creede That he sitteth at the right haÌ„d of God the father almighty Whether Cardinall Hosi ' be iustly chalenged to maintain the SweÌ„k feldians heresiâ—… or no. Stap. 63. 2. Stap. 63. â—… The Dâ—…natists did not simply refuse the oldâ—… â–ª testamente as the Manichees did but subâ—…ly as the Papistes do Aug. de haereâ—… Ad quod vult Stapl. 63. a. b The seconde motiue that moued the Bishop to chalenge M Feck to followe the Donatisteâ—… Supra pag. Diuis 18. pag. 11. How the Donatists and Papistes denie the Princes gouernement in Ecclesiasticall cau ses and refâ—…rie it onely to the clergie What the Papistes meane by the Church M. Sta. reâ—…oketh his grauÌ„t The Donatists exclaming on the Princes for Ecclesiasticall causes argueth that the supreme gouernemente of them was in the Princes Stap. 63. b Stapl. 63. b M. Stapl. example of the Princis punishing an honest man for a theefe A theefe in christen religion Iohn 10. M. Sta. simili tude returned vpon himself M. Stapl. letteth go the testimonies of S Aug. alleaged by the Bishop Stapl. 63. b Winton pag. 12. b. The speciall 〈◊〉 oâ—… christian princis Further examples of the old Testament alledged by S. Aug. for princes dealing in ecclesiasticall matters Stapletons order to this di uision Stap. 65. a Number of testimonies Whereto the former testimonies of S. Aug. were alleaged Wherto serue the authorities present Here M. Stapl. confesseth that Princes ought to make lâ—…wes for the â—…rance of Christes religion The Papistes denying the Queene to make lawes and say no catholike denyeth it denye them selues to be catholikes The Papistes subtill meaning in theyr plaine speaches The holde of a Papists worde and the holde of a weat Eele by the tayle Howe trimly the Papists and we do here agree in words See a subtill â–ª Papist At a dead life well fare a papists shift M. Stapl. renueth an olde knacke of Arrius Howe finely M. Stapl. can turne his tale Stapl. 65. a. 65. b Belyke M. Sta. wantes good neighbours Stapl. 65. b Here M. Stapl. bewrayeth all the â—…etche of his former graunte Howe craâ—…tyly M. Stap. limited the Princes making of lawes All M. Stapletons ioly grauÌ„t to Princes is nowe come to nothing but to make them the clergies slaughtermen and droyles M. Stapletons fayâ—…e texte and foule glose Stapl. 65. b. How S Augustine acknowledged the Prince M. Stap. telleth of all this that August wrote but what this all this is he duist not vtter August contr Gaudent epist. 2 li. 2. câ—… 26. Epist. 50. The testimonies of S. Aug. to proue the princes dealing in ecclesiastical causes to reach further than making lawes for punishing heretâ—…kes Epist. 48. M. Stapl. wold returne S. Augustines words vppon vs. Stapl 65 b. How sure the Papistes make all pointes againste the Protestantes Stap. 65. b Howe Princes punished deprauers of religion in saint August tyme. Stapl. 65 b. The Princes lawes for blasphemers The Princes carefull prouiding Stap. 65. b M. Stapletons strong proues Stapl. 65. b. Contempte of Sacraments Popish Sophistâ—…e can make 7. of 2. Stapl 65 b. Councels Matth. 26. Ioho 11. The Papistes maynteyn coÌ„demned doctrines 1. Tim. 4. Stap. 65. b Howe the Bishop called the Papists Donatistes Howe darke and subtilly M. Stapl. speaketh How farre the examples of the olde Testament stretche to directe christian princes M. Stapl. will proue that we denie that whi che we affirm What it is that we affirme of the Princes authoritie Stapl. 66. â—… Stap. 65. a Who bee the true Donatistâ—… for saying Princes maye not punishe in causes of Godâ—… religion M. Stapl. himself cleereth vs of that he falsly burdeneth vs. Stapl. 66. a Howe Luther sayd Faith can not be forced Croyses and Turkishe warres The question whether Princes maye punishe heretikes by death How the Papistes proue vs to be heretikes The Princes dutie where any are chalenged to be heretikes An inuectiue gainst M. Fox M. Foxes boke and B. Iewels great eyesores to the Papists Stap. 66. a. Sir Thomas Hitton priest False slaunders and malicious misseconstructions of the faithfull Luc. 23. Matth. 26. Iohn 19. Act. 6. Hewe the Papistes deale with the Protestantes and their articles Math. 5. The vneuen dealing of the Papistes Sir Thomas Hitton priest no Donatist Sir Iohn Oldcastell Stap. 66. b. â—… Stap. 66. b. M. Stapletons weake argument Maister Foxes synceritie in the Papistes falshoodes Sir Iohn Oldcastle proued no Donatist Sir Thomas More himselfe mislyked the punishment of manslaughter in many offen ceâ—… The aunciente punishment of of heretikes Declar. Erasmi tit de puniendis her 76. 77. The myld spirit of popishe Bishoppes and Abbots S. August opinion of the pu nishement of heretikes The Circumcelions Punishement by the purse Banishment The popishe crueltie The difference herein betwen Erasmus and the Popishe Bishops S. Hieroms opinioÌ„ herein and the resons mouing him thereto The Papistes in crueltie come neerest the Donatistes Eras. decla tit de pun hâ—… The mercie of the Gospell Though the Gospell taketh not awaye politike lawes or punishmentes yet is there a 〈◊〉 betweene them and the Gospell The Sorbonistes coÌ„fession In declar bras tit de pun haer Howe the Papistes yet neerer resemble the Donatistes Stap. 66. b. 67. a Stap. 67. a How M. Feck yeldes not to the examples of the olde testament and yet yelding to the new Testa ment is comprehended by it though he comprehended it not Pag. 14. a. M. Stapleton cap. 7. fol. 68. a M. Stapl. order in this diuision Stapl. 68. a. M. Sta. now at the length is driuen to graâ—…t Princes some regiment in Ecclesiasticall causes M. Stapleton graunteth also to Princes supreme gouernement in all ecclesiasticall causes In natural and ordinarie propositions the indefinite betokens the vniuersall Stap. 68. â—… â–ª M. Stap â–ª confesseth that the Bishop hath proued the full issue in question betweene M. Fecknham and him Stap. 68. a M. Sâ—…apl grant of all that the Bishop hathe hitherto alleaged Esai 49. Whether the Bishops examples and allegations beeing granted of M. Stapl. reache home or no. The prince supreme gouernour of all and
euery ecclesiasticall cause What this supreme gouernement is Why kings Queenes are called Nourishers and Nurses of Gods Churche Stâ—…p 67. â—… M. Stâ—…p grantes to CoÌ„stantine this supreme gouerment and denieth it to the Queenes Maiestie M. Stap. goeth now about by wrangling to defeate all his former graunt The princebeing called Metaphorically as it were a Bish. maketh no breach into the offico of a Bishop What these vvordes Bishop and nourse betokeÌ„ although in deede the Prince be neyther nourse nor Bishop Stap. 68. a. Stapl. 68 b M. Stapl. false translation of Constantineâ—… wordes The sentence of Constantine and the true meaning therof Euseb. de vita Const. li. 4. Hovv M. Stap. vnderstandeth invvard things and outvvarde things hovv vve vnderstand them in Constantines sentence The matter maner of eyther Bishoprik Stapl. 29. b. As M. StapletoÌ„ vnderstandes this sentence the Turke is as good a bishop as a Christian â–ª Prince Procuration execution of Churche matters The Papistes vvould haue Princes to bee bâ—…t the Priests proctours and executioners â–ª at the moste Fol. 69. a. The Bishops allegatioÌ„s ouâ—… of the nevve Testament 62. b. Stap. 69. a â—… Sta. graunteth the Bish. argument Stap. 69. a M. Stapletons diuinitie Stap. 69. â—… M. Stapletoâ—… vp braydyng the Bishops diuinitie see what good diuinitie he hym selfe maketh M. Stapl. Logike Matth. 22. The nevv Testament confirmeth the figure of the old Testament That subiectes may paye tribute â–ª but they ought not All humanitie iâ—… destroied by by M. Stapletons good diuinitie Stap. 69. a The captious questions of the Iewes The flatte and generall aunswer of christ M. Stapl. dea leâ—…h as captiously as the Iewes An externall Prince An infidell Prince Luc. 2. Stap. 69. a. b By the name of Cesar Christe compreheÌ„deth all princes Christes aunswere a general commaundement Stapl. 69. b. M. Sea. manyfest vntruâ—… Stap. 69. B By M. Stapletons exposition of Christes Sentence not all obediencâ—… to Princes 〈◊〉 seâ—…e at libertie but all obedience to God. The one parte of the sentence bindeth asmuche as the other Matth. 22. M. Stapletons Grammer The iudgemeÌ„t of the writers of this sentence cleane contrarie to maister Stapleton Lib. de fug in persecution In Matth. 22. tract 21. The same saith M. Stapl. Orig. ibid. In. 20. Luc. homil 38. In Mat. câ—… 23. In regula Monachorum In Matth. 22. homil 71. In Luc. lib. 9. cap. 20. Contr. FaustuÌ„ Manichaeuâ—… lib. 22. ca. 74. In. 22. Math. Lyra in Matth. 22. M. Stapletons contradictions Stapl. 69. b. Stap. 70. â—… This admonition godly and necessarie Stap. fol. 70. What a proper determination M. Sta. maketh of Christes sentence Stapl. 70. a M. Stapleton measureth our doings by his owne The practise of the Popes with christian princes Sta pag. 70. â—… The Bishoppes further testimonies of the newe Testament with the fathers iudgementes theron The order of M. Stapletons ansvvere Stap. pag. 71. b M. Stapletons maner at firste to graunte aooÌ„ after by some wrangling distinction to reuoke his graunt M. Sta. graunteth the Prince hath the ouersight as well of the first as the second table Stapl. pag. 72. Stap. pag. 72. M. Stapletons shifte of the court of conscience Melancth v â–ª supra The Prince dealeth neither with the fyrst nor secoÌ„d table in respect of the court of conscience but of the outwarde facte Stap. pag. 7â—… Stapl. 7â—… b. M. Stapl. after his pinching taketh cleane away his own graunt M. Stapleton woulde proue contradiction to MelancthoÌ„ Stap. fol. 72. b M. Stapl. subtile and false translating Stap. fol. 73. a. M. Stapletons cauill agayoste Mast. Nowell Christian Prin ces clayme not supreme goâ—…ement without limitation but the Pope clamyeth it Stapl. 73. â—… The acte of parliament Sta. pag. 73. â—… Stap. pag. 73. a Stap. pag. 73. a What maner of authoritie the othe of the supremacie requireth M. Stapletons quarell at the Bishops interpretation of this word godlynesse lib. 1. de trin cap. 14. S. Augustines exposition The exposition of other fathers Chrysost. in 1. Tim. 2. bomil 7 Ambâ—…osius in 1. Tim. 2. Hâ—…ymo in 1. Tim 2. Glossa interlineata â—…ytanus Hugo Card. Stapl. 73. b. Stap. fol. 73. b Stap. fol. 73. b. Sta. 73. b. The cause why the Apostles taughte obedience so earnestly Stap. fol. 72. b Stapl. fol. 73 b A distinction betweene the the Princes person or vices and his estate or office Chrysost. in Rom. Stapl. 73. b. The Pope claimeth superioritie in ciuile and temporall matters The Pope oughte to bee the Emperours subiect by M. Staplet owne graunt Chrysosto in Rom. 13. homil 23. Why the Prince is called gods minister Stap. fol. 73. b. Chrysost. homil 4. de eo ê™ scripsit Esa. Howe M. Sta â–ª citeth Chrysostome The facte of Czias whâ—…me the Papists alleage maketh agaynst themselues not against vs. Wherein the Pastor being the ministâ—…r of God surmouÌ„teth the Prince being also the ministâ—…s of God. Wherin againe the Princes ministerie surmounteâ—…h the pastours ministerie The sentence that the Papistes cite out of Chrysostome for their priestes maketh cleane against them Priestes mariage Chrysosto dâ—… verbis Esa. homil â—… Stap. fol. 74. a M. Stapletons argument The answere to the argument Stapl. 75. a. Stap. pag. 75. a Stap. 74. b. Fol. 75. a. Stapl. cap. 19. fol. 75. b Iohn 9. Constantine chaunged religion Tertull. The Queenes highnesse hath not altered but restored the olde and former faith What Bishops the Queenes Maiestie hathe deposed Stap. foll 7â—… b Why the prince is called the minister of God. The worde of doctrine Stapl. 75. b The Princes best ministeris and seruice Stap. fol. 75. b M. Stapletons shifting ansvvere Stap. 75. b. Stap. 75. b. Nicephorus iudgement of the Princes supremacie Stap. fol 76. b M. Stapletons Miste M. Stapletons inâ—…ect â—…e agaâ—…nst the homilie of images Matth. 23. Anthropol lib. 23. Lascaris The contention betweene the greeke and Latine churche for images Stap. 76. b. In the homilie against idolatrie Baruch 6. Stapl. 77. b. The Bishop of Sarum and the author of the homilie discharged of M. Stapl. chalenge Petrus Crinit l b. 9 cap. 9. de honest diâ—…c Te Papistes offended at our Homelies Bedes Homelies Sta. 79. a. b Mistaking the name of an Emperour Langus in prâ—…fa Niceph. Anthropolog lib. 23. The Papisteâ—… themselues call this Emperour as the Bishop did Stapl. 77. a. What a bragger M. Stapl. is Nicephorus selaundered â–ª lib. 4. cap. 8. fol. 468. b How M. Stap. reuileth the Emperour Praefat Langi in Eccl. histor Niceph. Stap. 77. b. Whereon wee buyld the Prin ces supremacie and whereon the Papistes buyld the Popes supromacie Langi Epist. ad Ferdin M Stapletoâ—…s order Stapl. 77. b M. Sta. burdeneth the Greke priests to farre The supremecie of the Greeke Emperours The Grecians opinion in the holie Ghostes proceeding Math. 7. Stapl. 77. b. 〈◊〉 77. b Stapl. 77. b. Stapl. 77. b. Stapl. 77. b â–ª Stapl. 78â—… Pag. 17. b. The Bishops proues
that M. Stapl. passeth so slightly ouer proue the full matter M. Stapleton letteth go the principall mat ter and quarels at the margin Stapl. 77. a. The englishing of the worde supremus The last taken for the chiefest The proportion betweene the stay of an anchor and the staye of a Prince Sadliâ—…g â—… Cowe Beggerly shifts Stapl. 78. b Nicephorus his amplification Stap. fol. 78. b The force of a metaphore 2. Tim. â—… Stapl. 78. b. 1. Tim. 8. M Stapletons order to this diuision Stapl. 79 b Stapl. 80. a. Stapl. 80. a Comparison of learning betweene bishop Gardineâ—… bishop White and Bishop Horne Sta. 80. a. Prouer. 12. Wherfore Nicephorus dedicated his ecclesiastical historie to the Emperour Prefa Niceph. The princes exact iudgement and censure in ecclesiastical matters The Princes reformation of the priestes and of the Churche Stapl. 80. b 79. â—… M. Stapl. inconstancie and contradiction Stapl. 80. b M Stap. grauÌ„teth the good regiment of magistrates to be the spring of true religioÌ„ Prosperitie religion ioyned in a Prince Prâ—…fa Niceph. Stap. 80. b. Stapl. 85. â—… The Grecians fell into the Turkes captiuitie after this submission to the Pope The Papistes haue as muche cause or more to beware by the Grecians captiuitie than the ProtestaÌ„ts The Pope the chiefe cause of the Greke emperours decay The Pope also the chief cause of the Weast Emperours decay The Greeke church neuer became captiue to the Turke till they became thrall to the Pope Stap. 81. a The countreys that obeyed the Pope become thrall to the Turks cap tiuitie Stapl. 81. â—… Blearing the readers eyes How M. Stapl. answeres the Bishops allegation Cyril epi. 17. â—…om â–ª 4. Wherein the Emperoures chief care consisted Obscuritie 2. Cor. 2. Stapl. 8 â—… â–ª b Generalities Particularities Cyril epi. 17. tom 4. The discussing and debating Ecclesiasticall matters argueth not the supreme gouernement of theÌ„ How the Papistes elude the examples of christian princes Stapl. 81. b Stapl. 81. b. M. Stapl. false and subtile translation Principalitie of priest â—…ode Priesthoode sprong not froÌ„ Peter Gal. 2. The Papistes saye S. Iames sayd the 〈◊〉 Masse Peter no massing priest What manner of principalitie of priesthoode Valentinian ment Concil tom 1. The Epistle of Placidia to Theodosius The Epistle of Eudoxia to Theodosius Theodosius Epistle to Valentinian Wherein the Emperour had the gouernement of the councell The Emperor decreeth the decree of the Councell No appeale after the Emperours decree Stapl. 82. â—… Stapl. 82. â—… Act. â—… Stapl. 82. â—… Pag. 19. b. M St. order to this diuision Stapl. 82. b. cap. 20. The state of the question Supra pag. 136. Stap. 82. b. The supreme authoritie the Papistes grauÌ„t to Princes and in what sense they graunt it Stap. 82. b. What state of the question M. St. setteth downe The oth of the supremacie The othe and the statute slaâ—… deâ—…ed by the Papistes Supreme gouernmeÌ„t is not all maner of gouernement How the ministers are higher or inferiour Stapl. 83. a. Stapl. 83. a. The statute eâ—… cluding any forain persons authoritie excludeth net the authoritie of the whole churche Gala. 3. Coloss. 3. Ephe. 2. What authoritie it is that the true catholike church hath Iohn 15. Stap. 8â—… a M. Stapl. quarell for vniting the supremacie to the crovvne M. Stapl. at the ende of his booke woulde leaue a scruple in the readers head of misselyking the state The answere to M. Stapl. inconneâ—…ence of a Turke or an heretike to haue this supremacie Difference betwene a Turke and an heretike What a Turke would doe if he had the crovvne Iob. 34. Psalm 147. The Princes certain and pre sente righte oughte not to be forsakeÌ„ for feare of vncertain inconueniences that may be doubted to come Difference betwene a Princes authoritie and a Princes tyrannie The Statute cleared from M. Stap. inconuenieÌ„ce Howe muche the Papistes regarde the crowâ—…e of 〈◊〉 How well the Pope wisheth to England Whether M. St. inconuenience wold not fall oute if the clause of supre macie were vnited to the Pope What the lawe respecteth in the statute Stapl. 83. a. b. Stapl. 83. b Stapl. â—…3 b. Stapl. 83. b. The excuses of the Papists Stapl. 83. b The Papistes pretence of zeale to God to disobey their Prince The absolute obedience to God hindreth not the conditionall obedience to the Prince What the Papists meane here by God. Hovv Thomas Becket died for Gods cause Sta. 83. b. The accusation of vs. Stapl. 83. b The B. charged for omitting the Principall ecclesiasticall cause Cap. 63. b M. Stapletons contradiction M. Stap. wold driue the B from his issue The Prince and the statute slâ—…undered Difference betwene ecclesiasticall gouernour and gouernour in ecclesiasticall causes How iudgement in ecclesiasticall causes is ascribed to the Prince how not Gal. 1. The statute slaundred The Popishe churche claymeth superioritie in iudgeging of doctrine aboue the Pope Stap. 48. a. Stap. 48. b. Math. 12. The original of bothe powers Lib. 2. cap. 1. pag 56. M. Saunders beginneth with contradictions to himselfe Saund. pag. 57 Saund. 57. Saund. 57. sand pag. 57. Supra pa. 108. Difference betwene the ciuill power of heathen and christian Prin ces Maister Saunders contradictions Saund. pag. 57 The kingdom of Christe in this world but not of this worlde Ecclesiasticall power Saund. pa. 57. How the royal power submitteth it selfe to the Ecclesiasticall power The distinction of In of Stapleton fol. 29. a. b. Deuter. 17. Saund. pa. 57. The vse of both powers M. Saunders contradictioÌ„ Supra pag. 791. Howe Hâ—…lie had the ciuil and ecclesiâ—…sticall power Howe Noe Melchizedech and Abraham had both powers Sâ—…und pa. 56. Howe Moyses had bothe powers How the Machabees had them Howe Samuel had them Speciall consecration Sauâ—… pag. 57. Ozias example Supra pag. sand pag. 57. Supra pag. 670. sand pag. 57. 58. The ende of both powers Math. 10. 1. Tim. 2. How farre the ende of the ciuill power stretcheth Supra pag. 117. M. San. maymeth S. Paules sentence Supra pag. 669. Killing the â—…o dy is not the proper ende of the Princes power An ill Priest killes the soule Platina de sententijs Pij 2. Pag. 80. M. Sanders contrarieth him selfe sand pag. 58. What superiour power we ascribe to the Prince Saund. pa. 5â—… M. sand order in this chapter sand pag. 58. M. Saunders Definition of a gouernour M. sand examples to coÌ„firme his definition M. sand definition false M. sand examples insufficient Diuers instances against M. sand exaÌ„ples The instance of an Embassadour M. Feck tale of a gentleman defending that mustard was good with all meate The instance â—… of woman sand pag. 58. Maister Saunders exceptioÌ„ The vvill and povver of a king restrayned by lavve The similitude of a mannes body Sand. 58. Matth. 28. Iohn 20. 1. Cor. 11. Num 27. Iud. 4. 4. Reg. 11. Gal. 4. 4. Reg. 11. 4. Reg 22. 1. Tim. 2. 1. Cor. 14. Gal. 4. M Saunders argumeÌ„t standeth all
Peter and Saint Paule so earnestly taught at that time obedience to Princes But what obedience coulde they require in subiectes if they comprehended not with all authoritie in Princes fol. 75. b. Aunswere these contradictions with his owne wordes I am here in the beginning put to the knowledge by the varietie of your aunsweres that they cannot be both true but if the one be true the other must be false fol. 40. a. By your contradictions ye shewe the vnstablenesse of your owne Iudgement 1. Pres. pag. 19. His ninth common place of petit quarels at Grammer and other trifles to prolong his booke thereby His ovvne obiection of the same WHo seeth not nowe that all this was but a quarell picked without desert and you master Stapletonn to haue shewed yourselfe amost ridiculous wrangler But Gods name be blessed the dealing of Catholike wryters is so vpright that suche small occasions must bee piked and vppon suche trifles your Rhetorike must bee bestowed else agaynst their dealing ye haue nothing to say 1. Preface pag. 18. IN his first Preface where he giueth a briefe antedate of all those things that he is â—…ust offended withall he maketh this a verie heynous faulte that the Bishoppe called Conuenâ—…t It ought to bee for It is meete or conuenient to bee â–ª 1. Pref. Pag. 4. As who saye if a thing bée meete and conuenient it ought not to bee or if it ought to be it is not meete and conuenient to bee But if Oportet muste néedes alwayes signifie it ought to bee then ought your Bishops if they bée Bishops to bée maryed For Saint Paule sayth not Conuenit but Oportet Episcopuâ—… esse vniâ—… vxâ—…r is viruâ—… A Bishop ought to be the husbande of one wife In the same place he maketh a sorer matter aboute this worde recenâ—…endam to reherse which worde the Bishoppe went not aboute to interprete in that place as the letter sheweth but onelye to tell the sentence and intente of their doyng and wherefore did the Councell present their doynges to bée read or rehearsed before the Emperour but that he might examine and confyrme the same Besides that they them selues beséeche him to ratifie and confirme them which he could not well doe hauing not examined and perused them ibid. Likewise about irrogare priuilegia that eyther by escape of the Printer as many such escapes in any booke may hap or by the ouersight of the writer of the Printers copie was printed to take away for he gaue of which escape Lord what a wonderfull triumphant outcrie he maketh also in his Counterblast while the materiall purpose is all one agaynst him whether the Prince made priuileges or abrogated priuileges and tooke them from the Clergie For if his taking away were lawfull his authoritie remayned equall in both except ye will say â–ª Princes haue authoritie to make priuileges for the Clergie giue or make for them what and how much they will but they that haue learned holdefast the first point of hawking will not suffer them by the same authoritie to take any away agâ—…ine for that is against their profite But the lawe sayth contrary the same authoritie that may make the same authoritie may vndâ—…e and take away againe ibidem But lesse maruaile is it that he quarelleth about the former wordes that cauilleth about the Englishing of quauiâ—… causa any cause which must be sayth he euery cause calling this interpreting foule shiftes neuerthelesse of much importance to call quauis any yet himself euen in the next lease not of quauis qualibet or quacunque whereon he descanteth Grammarian like but euen of nothing can make Any a foule shift and yet not of any other importance at all than to shewe that any or all these causes of his brablings are in conclusion of no importance at all But admitting as he would haue it the Kings and the Councels decrée agaynst the carying of causes out of the Realme to be pleaded at the Court of Rome should signifie not any but eueâ—…y cause then coulde not the penaltie of the breach thereof extend to any that had tryed excéeding many causes at Rome and dayly did for all this decrée vnlesse it had â—…ene proued he had there tried euerie cause and so the decrée it selfe had bene of nonâ—… importance at all whereat so heynous a matter is made and yet the worde in that place admitteth so well none other interpretation ibid. The like quarell he piketh aboute supremuâ—… gâ—…bernator supreme gouernour in the Queeneâ—… Maiesties title to the othe administred at Oxenfordâ—… of the which othe he sayth A scholler might make an honest refusall were it nothing but for false Latine Which rule of his if it holde then many of their poâ—…ishe ceremonies their Latine seruice their Masse yea euen their consecration might honestly he refused were it but for false Latine when their ignoraunt Priestes did pronounce corpus 〈◊〉 c. in nomina patria filia spirita sancta c. 〈◊〉 for sumâ—…simus or such like wordes about the which your best scholemen make somewhat more 〈◊〉 standing vpon the intentioâ—…s and not so much vpon the sillables that euen for the false construction of sir Iohn lackâ—… Latine that patreth Latine like a Parat they might honestly refuse the same but to saue the honestie of theyr priests and their ignoraunt escapes they haue a contrarie glosse to your rule quia error sillabae non nocet the error of a sillable hurteth not althoughe they that vsed this phrase knewe as well howe to set the Substantiâ—…e and the Adiectiue togither as master Stapleton I dare say and were it so as he sayth might take the phrase vsually receyued not respecting the gender so much as the selfe thing and power As we vse in Englishâ—… to say without quarelling thereat the Quéenes Royall or regall estate though shee by hir seâ—…e be Queene and by Grammer shoulde say reginall estate likewise we call hir gouernour defender and your selfe call hir often Prince not Princesse all these and suche like wordes or phrases setting aside the exacting of Grammer rules in respect of hir kingly power the lawyers say they may vse this licence of speach to whome I remitte you and to other your Canonists scholemen and Historiographers that haue vsed the same or like with no reproche or quarell piked thereat And if now the Quéenes Maiesties supremacie must néedes be renouÌ„ced for this phrase bicause by the censure of our new Aristarchus it is not so Grammerlike then must your Pope himselfe léese his vsurped supremacie so oft as it often falleth out he is no Grammarian at all ibidem Likewise he maketh a quarell about these wordes supreme head in the title of King Henrie and King Edwarde and the wordes of the title vsed nowe supreme gouernour where all men knowe that the sense is all one but that this title more plainly expresseth the matter to preuent such ianglers Yea but sayth he there is a certaine addition of greatest
Empresses write for Flauianus Bishop of Constantinople and for the Bishop of Rome Wherein though they ascribe the dealings to the Councell and to the Bishop of Rome yet the licence and authoritie to do any thing or to stay any thing they al ascribe to the Emperour And as they ascribe this in these Epistles vnto him which argueth his supreme gouernement in all these matters so the Emperour in the answeres to these Epistles that are immediatly set downe to those by you cited acknowledgeth and claymes his supreme authoritie therein In the answere to the first from whence ye bring your allegation for the Popes primacie he saith The Emperour Theodosius to my Lord Valentinian Emperour In the beginning of your letters it is signified by your Maiestie both that your mildenesse came to Rome and that a petition was offered vp to you by Leo the most reuerende Patriarche As concerning your safe returne to the Citie of Rome O my Lorde my moste holy Sonne and honorable Emperour we render thankes accordingly to the diuine Maiestie but as concerning those things which the foresaide most reuerende man hath spoken it is already declared vnto him more plainly and fully as we suppose and he knoweth that we swarue in no parte from the Religion of our fathers and the tradition of our auncetours We will no other thing than the fathers sacraments deliuered as by succession to keepe them inuiolably For this cause therefore hauing knowledge that certaine persons with hurtfull noueltie trouble the most holy Churches we haue decreed a Synod to be holden at Ephesus VVhereas in the presence of the most reuerend Bishops with much libertie and with sounde truth both the vnworthie were remoued from their Priesthood and those that were iudged to be worthy were receyued VVe therefore know nothing committed of them contrary to the rules of faith or iustice Therefore all the contention was examined of the holy Councell Flauianus which was founde giltie of hurtfull newfanglednesse hath receiued his dew and he being remoued all peace and concorde remaineth in the Churches and nothing but truth doth florish Thus the dealing and determining of the controuersie remayning Synodically to the Priests and Bishops the decreing of the Councell the assigning of the time and place thereto the giuing them in charge to boulte out the truth the receyuing intelligence from them of their iudgements the allowing and ratifying their determination belonged to Theodosius And in respect of this his supreme doing though at other times he extoll the Bishop of Rome yet here he onely calleth him but most reuerende Patriarche and most reuerend man as he calleth other Bishops The answere to the second Epistle hath the like Theodosius to my Ladie Placidia the honorable Empresse our highnesse vnderstandeth by the letters of your mildenesse what the most reuerende patriarch Leo hath desired of your highnesse To these your letters we declare that concerning those things whiche are spoken of the most reuerende Bishop we haue written often times alreadie more fully and more at large by which writing it is without doubt manifest that we haue defined or decreed or vnderstoode nothing besides the fayth of the fathers or the diuine opinions or the definitions of the most reuerende Bishops which were gathered togither in the Citie of Nice vnder Constantine of godly memorie or of late were gathered togither at Ephesus by our precept But this onely we commaunded to be ordeyned that all persons which by noisome hurtfulnesse troubled the holy Churches should worthily be remoued c. Thus doth the Emperour commaunde the Councell to be holden He giueth a generall charge to the Bishops to ordeyne that that they ordeyned to wete the expulsion or deposition of perturbers of the Church whatsoeuer they were and in what matter ecclesiasticall soeuer they were And when the Bishops had according to the Emperours commaundement ordeynes this decrée and in their synodicall discussing of the matter found out Flauianus though therein they did him wrong to be culpable hereof then the Emperor peruseth ratifieth and confirmeth the same their synodicall iudgement and sayth he defined and decreed it himselfe bicause he approued and confirmed their definition and decrée Which is a manifest argument of Thodosius supreme authoritie ouer all the Bishops debatings and determinings of their ecclesiasticall constitutions To the same effect is the other Epistle to Eudoxia Wherin he telleth the Empresse flatly that since these things were alreadie decreed it was not possible to determine of the matter any more In which deniall of suffring the matter to be tryed any further he sheweth also his supreme authoritie of debarring and frustrating any appeales to Rome that you make so great accompt vpon The Emperour will not onely not suffer it to take place and to infringe the Councels and his owne doing but sayth it is impossible to procéede on the matter alreadie determined And thus he reiecteth Flauianus appeale from the Epheâ—…ine Councell to the Bishop of Rome Which Councell notwithstanding should also haue bene held by the Emperours leaue and appoyntment But he would not allow it although Pope Lee laboured to him and to Ualentinian Emperors to Eudoria and Placidia Empresses neuer so much therefore Lo M. St. here are the generalities and the particularities also Wherein ye may sée what belongeth to eyther partie Hearken good M. Stap. and giue good aduertisement therto since ye will not vtter it your selfe and yet woulde haue vs listen to you You say ye wander not in obscure generalities but ye go to worke plainly truly and particularly And yet of all this ye speake not one word Ye would neither answerâ—… the Bishops allegation but set another agaynst it which is no plaine nor true kinde of aunswering neither yet for that you alleage ye alleage it either plainely or truely or particularly as ye pretende But cull out a piece of that that séemeth to set forth your cause by extolling the Bishop of Rome and when the matter is plainly truly and particularly sifted out it neither proueth any supremacie for him and in all poynts sheweth the Princes supremacie against you But ye are the more to be borne withall for I thinke ye read not the whole particulars but either as your commoÌ„ places led you or the title prefixed tickled you that saith In qua quoque Romani Pontificiâ—… authoritas comâ—…ndatur VVherein also the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome is commended And so gréedily ye snatched at that sentence and let go all the residue But call ye this plainly truly and particularly going to worke master Stapleton The. 26. Diuision THe Bishop hauing hitherto as master Feck required in his issue proued by the Scriptures both by the olde testament and the newe and by some such Doctours as haue written thereon and also which was more than M. Feck requested by the ecclesiasticall writers Nicephorus and by some of those Emperors whom they commend for most godly proued the like