tearme it from whence all Spirituall Iurisdiction must proceed to others some adde also Temporall of Spirituall Iurisdiction Bellarmine saith all Bishops receiue Iurisdiction from the Pope The like some of them or some others teach also of Temporall power the difference which they obserue is that Spirituall power is deriued from the Pope to all Bishops but Temporall power is giuen to execute some seruice Augustinus Triumphus of Ancona who wrote about three hundreth yeeres agoe at the commaundement of Iohn 22. Pope set foorth of late by the authoritie and priuiledge of Gregorie 13. did long before the Iesuits dispute this question of the Popes Soueraigne authoritie ouer Princes since which time the Friars haue closely followed his footsteps His assertion is Omnis potestas imperatorum regum est subdelegata respectu potestatis Papae And againe in the same place Omnis potestas saecularis est restringenda amplianda executioni mandanda ad imperium Papâ—… These and the like positions are now resolutely and stiffely maintained by the Iesuits and others of that faction 3. This agreeth well with the Canon lawes which are the fundamentall lawes of the court of Rome For thus they say Nos tam ex superioritate quam ad imperium non est dubium nos habere c. That is we aswell by that soueraignetie and right which without all doubt we haue to the Empire as also by that power whereby we succâ—…ed the Emperour in the vacancie of the Empire and no lesse also by the fulnesse of that power which Christ the King of kings and Lord of lords hath in the person of Saint Peter graunted to vs though vnworthy declare all such sentences and processes made by Henry 7. void and of none effect Thus saith Clement 5. Pope against Henrie 7. Emperour To the same purpose saith Boniface 8. Pope in a Constitution of his Oportet gladâ—…um esse sub gladio c. That is one sword must be vnder another sword and the Temporall authoritie must be subiected to the Spirituall authoritie for when the Apostle saith there is no power but of God and the powers that are are ordained of God They could not be ordinated vnlesse one sword were vnder another and a little after Thus of the Church and of the power Ecclesiasticall is verified the prophecie of Ieremie behold I haue sâ—…t thee ouer nations and kingdomes to plucke vp and to root out and to destroy and to throw downe and to build and to plant And againe we declare we say we define we pronounce that it is necessarie to saluation to beleeue that euery humane creature is subiect to the Pope of Rome These be the lawes of the court of Rome which some of late haue so much adored as to call them Catholike Diuinitie and which for truth and certaintie and for authoritie ouer their consciences they hold comparable euen with the holy Scriptures 4. By all which wee collect the doctrine of the court of Rome or the Popes faction to be that the Pope hath all power Spirituall and Temporall aboue all other whatsoeuer This I call the opinion of the Court of Rome or the Popes faction because we finde the most learned of the Church of Rome to hold the contrary For concerning spirituall power the best learned of the Church of Rome yea and whole councels maintaine the Spiritual power of the Church to be aboue the Pope as hereafter we shall declare And for this Temporall power aboue Kings and Emperours claimed by the Popes in their Canon Lawe maintained by their flatterers it seemeth so straunge so new and absurd that they who maintaine it are not as yet agreed vpon the state of the question For some hold that the Pope hath this power directly ouer Princes as the Canonists to whom some of the Shoole-men may be added as Triumphus and some of late called Congregationis Oratorij as Cardinall Baronius Bozius and such Others denying this direct power hold that the Pope hath the same power but indirectly as depending vpon his Spirituall power of this opinion is Cardinall Bellarmine and others these both hold the same conclusion but differ in the manner of holding it Others there be who are in some sort content to allowe the Popes Fatherhood in spirituall matters in case lie would not prooue incorrigible but vtterly denie this power ouer princes both direct and indirect of this opinion was Guil. Occham Ma' silius Patauinus and other learned men of the Church of Rome And of late Guil. Berclaius a French Lawyer hath with great learning refuted both the former opinions of the Popes power direct and indirect against Bozius and Bellarmine and yet this man professeth himselfe to be resolued to liue and die a Papist so that on the one side stand all the reformed Churches and many of the best learned of the Church of Rome I may say all the Church of old and of late On the other side standeth the Pope with his faction that is his flatterers and this I call with some of former ages the Court of Rome this is the opinion of our aduersaries 5. Our positiue sentence against this standeth in two parts as the Pope hath incroached on two sides both vpon the right of Kings and of the Church Concerning the Kings right we hold that in externall coactiue Iurisdiction the King hath supreame authoritie in all causes and ouer all persons Ecclesiasticall aswell as Ciuill This is that which hath bene published by diuerse writings and ordinances which by publike authoritie haue beene enacted and published declaring that the King within hi Dominions hath this soueraigne authoritie and that heerein there is no forraine power aboue the King The authority of the Church hath beene in like sort vsurped by the Pope by drawing to himselfe a supposed title of the head of the vniuersall Church by deuising a straunge authority in the fulnesse of power by claiming a newe and straunge priuiledge of his not erring iudgement and making himselfe the onely iudge of controuersies of faith This power in iudging and determining of controuersies of faith and religion being partly in the Church partly in the Scriptures the Pope hath wrested from both first extolling the Church aboue the Scriptures and then setting himselfe aboue the Church Then that the limits of each power may be truely knowne we giue all spirituall power to the Church all externall coactiue iurisdiction to the King when each of these shall haue taken vp his owne right there will not be so much left to the Pope as these great flatterers the Iesuits seeke to heape vpon him Our purpose is first to dispute the right which Kings haue in coactiue power ouer all persons and in all causes euen Ecclesiasticall within his dominions by persons ecclesiasticall wee vnderstand Archbishops Bishops Deans Rectors and all other set in calling and place Ecclesiasticall by causes Ecclesiasticall wee vnderstand causes Ecclesiasticall of externall coactiue
Iurisdiction 6. From this consideration of persons and causes arise two great questions First concerning the exemption of all causes Ecclesiasticall from the Kings Iurisdiction secondly concerning the exemption of Ecclesiasticall persons from temporall audience and iudicature For the better vnderstanding hereof we may proceede by some distinctions for when our aduersaries teach that the Pope is the head of the Church and we that the King is the supreame gouernor of the Church though in some sound of wordes these things seeme not much to differ yet in truth there is great difference betweene their meaning and ours For they calling the Pope the head to distinguish him from Christ whom the Apostle calleth the head of the Church say that the Pope is the ministeriall head which deuise was first brought in by the Schoolemen for among the auncients it was not knowne but all that speake of the head of the Church before acknowledge none but Christ. Concerning this deuise of the ministeriall head we say with the ancient Fathers that the Catholike Church is but one and hath one head Christ Iesus because to one bodie there can bee but one head from whom grace is infused to the whole body This Catholike Church is as that head is both perfectly known to God not to man this then is but one in all times and places But the visible Churches or particular are many at many times in many places and therefore must haue heads or gouernours aunswerable to themselues for many Churches many gouernours These are either Spirituall gouernours or Temporall The spirituall gouernment of the Church is committed to spirituall gouernours as first from Christ to his twelue Apostles of whom none was aboue the rest in this spirituall gouernment or kingdome of Christ as the Lord doth often expresly declare to them from them to Bishops and Pastors their successors Temporall gouernours are such as haue the custody of externall coactiue Iurisdiction both in Temporall and Ecclesiasticall causes for the power of the Church with all her spirituall Iurisdiction neuer reached to coaction This was by God first giuen to Magistrates and neuer reuoked in all times practised but when the Church and Kings were oppressed by the great power of Antichrist When wee call the King the supreame gouernour of the Church our meaning is that hee is appointed by God to be a Father and preseruer of religion a keeper of Ecclesiasticall discipline and as the Prophet Isaiah calleth him a nourcing father of the Church he is the soueraigne in all affaires of coactiue Iurisdiction Likewise this word Church is not taken in the same sense by them and vs for our aduersaries saying that the Pope is the head of the Church vnderstand thereby the. Catholike Church spread ouer the whole world but we vnderstand a particular Church yeelding the King to bee gouernour next and immediatly vnder God of his own dominions and consequently of persons and causes within his owne dominions so that there is much difference betweene their meaning and ours Then we must come to such an issue wherein without equiuocating the question betweene vs is set for wee shall otherwise run into that fault which is so rife with the Popes Clarks that Bellarmine himselfe confesseth it Notandum est saith he multos ex nostris tempus terere dum probant quod Caluinus caeteri haeretici concedunt This is most common among them to bee large in disputing that which is not in question betweene vs and it is a signe of some ingenuitie to confesse it but neither doth himselfe for all his confession auoid it neither doe they that write since and depend vpon his learning shunne it after so faire warning neither in truth can a false cause be maintained in so many bookes and large volumes as now they set out vnlesse they tooke this libertie to themselues to be large in disputing things which are not in question The question then is concerning the lawfull authoritie of Kings in their owne dominions touching this part of Iurisdiction which is called Ecclesiasticall coactiue Iurisdiction 7. For better proceeding let the distinction be remembred which is vsually receiued of Ecclesiasticall power for all power Ecclesiasticall is commonly deuided into power of order and of Iurisdiction The power of order by all writers that I could see euen of the Church of Rome is vnderstood to be immediatly from Christ giuen to all Bishops and Priests alike by their consecration wherein the Pope hath no priuiledge aboue other Thus teach Bonauentuâ—…e in 4. sent d. 17. q 1. August Triumphus lib. de potest eccles qu. 1. ar 1. Ioh. Gerson li. de potest eccles consid 1. Cardinal Cusanus lib. de cathol concord 2. cap. 13. Cardinal Contarenus tract de eccles potest pontificis Bellarm. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. cap. 22. This then being the common confession of all that the Pope hath no more power herein then any other Bishop or Pastor we moue no contradiction in this As they confesse that in this power the Pope hath no praeeminence but that it is giuen from Christto all Bishops and pastors equally so wee confesse that in this power the prince hath no part and that Bishops and pastors haue this power onely from the diuine ordinance and not from earthly princes then our question is onely of the power of Iurisdiction 8. This power of Iurisdiction is diuersly vnderstood by the writers of the Church of Rome Augustinus Triumphus doth deliuer it thus The power of Iurisdiction is Temporall or Spirituall and this power considered in generall is threefold immediate deriued or giuen to execute some seruice the power of Iurisdiction immediate of all things Spirituall and Temporall is onely in the Pope The power of Iurisdiction deriued is in Bishops to them deriued from the Pope the power of Temporall Iurisdiction giuen to execute some seruice for the helpe of the Church is in Emperours Kings and secular princes this power is not immediat from God but is giuen first to the Pope and so to Kings for the vse of the Church and â—…elpe of Pope and Prelates I haue deliuered this in the â—…ery words of Triumphus whom in this thing others followe though of late some of the finer Iesuits who hold the same are growen more cunning in the manner of deliuering it Bellarmine loath to leaue the opinion and ashamed so grossely to propose it deuiseth a mollification of it thus Asserimus Pontiâ—…icem vt pontiâ—…icem et si non habeat vllam meré temporalem potestatem tamen habere in ordine ad spirituale bonum summam potestatem disponendi de temporalibus rebus omnium Christianorum That is We auer that the Pope albeit he hath not any power merely Temporall as Pope yet hath power supreame in respect of Spirituall good to dispose of all the Temporalties of all Christians And in the next Chapter concludeth that the Pope hath authoritie to depose hereticall kings and princes
this opinion was r◅olued that Supreame Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction was in the Popes And therefore we prouing that Supreame and last Appellation doth by the law of God belong to none but to the Soueraigne Prince conclude vndoubtedly that Supreame Iurisdiction belongeth to him onely 10. Heere a question may be mooued whether Saint Paul did well and orderly when he appealed to Caesar and whether Caesar was made iudge of these questions which were Doctrines We aunswere Saint Paul had no meaning to make C◅sar iudge of any point of faith But whereas hee was persecuted by the high Priests who sought his life in this matter of coactiue power Saint Paul giueth Iurisdiction to Caesar. There is also a difference betweene that power which heathen Princes haue and that which Christian Princes haue for heathen Princes haue all power coactiue whatsoeuer the cause be and without this helpe the Church could neuer deale in matters of this nature Christian Princes besides this coactiue power haue also as appeareth in the gouernment of Israel externall discipline in matters Ecclesiasticall 11. Thus we haue declared the distinct right of the King and the Priest after that they were distinguished by the written law of God we haue prooued that the Soueraigne Iurisdiction coactiue resteth in the Prince by a right which God hath giuen and therefore may not be taken away by man It followeth to consider how this right hath beene accordingly exercised by the godly Kings of Israel Ios◅ commanded the people to be circumcised and not Eleazerus the cause was Eccles◅ticall but to command in such causes declareth iurisdiction Dauid reduceth the Arke he appointeth Priests Leuites Singers Porters to serue at the Tabernacle he assigneth Officers of the sonnes of Aaro◅ All which being matters Ecclesiasticall the Prince as hauing soueraigne authority in both causes ordaineth Solomon buildeth the Temple and consecrateth it Asa remoueth Idols and dedicated the Altar of God that was before the porch of the Lord. Iehosaphat abolisheth Idolatry cutteth downe the groues sendeth Priests and Leuites to teach in Townes and Cities Setteth vp Iudges both ciuill and Ecclesiasticall and commandeth both to iudge according to godlinesse truth and Iustice. Because in the words of Iehosaphat these things are distinctly deliuered we will obserue the whole place The wordes are these And hee set iudges in the land throughout all the strong Cities of Iuda Citie by Citie And said to the Iudges take heed what you doe for you execute not the iudgement of man but of the Lord and he will be with you in the cause and iudgement Wherefore now let the feare of the Lord be vpon you take heed and doe it for there is no iniquitie with the Lord our God neither respect of persons nor receiuing of reward Moreouer in Ierusalem did Iehosaphat set of the Leuites and of the Priests and of the chiefe of the families in Israel for the iudgement and cause of the Lord and they returned to Ierusalem And he charged them saying thus shall you doe in the feare of the Lord with a perfect heart And in euery cause that shall come to you of your brethren that dwell in your Cities betweene blood and blood betweene Law and precept Statutes and iudgements you shall iudge them and admonish them that they trespasse not against the Lord that wrath come not vpon you and vpon your brethren And behold Amariah the high Preist shall be the chiefe ouer you in all matters of the Lord. 12. From which words we collect thus much concerning ◅he Kings Iurisdiction and the things wherein it consisteth ◅irst the King appointeth and placeth both Temporall and clesi◅sticall Iudges and commandeth and chargeth them so placed to execute their functions faithfully we inferre vpon this command in both alike that hee hath Iurisdiction ouer both causes But here let me remember a trifling obiection which some of our aduersaries haue deuised of late they would distinguish betweene command and Iurisdiction For they deny not but that all sortes of persons are vnder the Kings commaund and gouernment whom he may command each to doe their Office and yet they vtterly deny the Kings Iurisdiction and tell vs that command and Iurisdiction must not be hudled vp together Now let vs consider what hudling is in this when the Kings command and his Iurisdiction are set as things depending and cohaering one to the other When we say the King may command we meane plainely as we speake that the King hath from God lawfull authoritie to command and to punish them that breake his command This is the common vnderstanding of the Kings command But these Romish sophisters when they say the King may command do not vnderstand neither will they acknowledge at any hand that the King hath lawfull authoritie from God to punish the breach of his command for they vtterly deny that the King hath any authoritie to punish a Clarke though he should breake his commandement And call you this a command The King may command and goe without as the saying is This is the deuils sophistry taken vp by men hardned against shame content to stoupe downe to gather vp the meanest and basest shifts to dazell the simple The Iesuites resolue of this as of a truth most soundly concluded in their schooles That the King may not punish Ecclesiasticall persons that the Kings Court may not heare examine and iudge them though they should commit murders adulteries robberies or what other wickednesse soeuer And yet they tell vs that the King may command them Now to say one thing and yet to let the world see that they are resolued in the contrary this sauoreth strongly of the spirit of illusion when reason learning honestie and all faileth yet well fare a bold and hardned face which neuer faileth this generation 13. The truth is if the King haue not lawfull authority to punish he hath not lawfull authoritie to command and punish he cannot vnlesse he hath authority to iudge or cause iudgement to be done so that they who take away from the King power to iudge persons Ecclesiasticall take from him power to punish and consequently power to command but the Doctrine of the Papists this day as shall hereafter appeare in his due place taketh from the king power to iudge per sons Ecclesiastical therefore they rob him of power to punish and to cōmaund for nothing can more strongly take away the Kings command then to deny him power to punish and to iudge And yet they are not ashamed to tell vs that they deny not the kings cōmand but his Iurisdiction Then to leaue these men with their absurd and perplexed contradictions where the King ◅ay command he may iudge and punish the breach of that command and therefore his Iurisdiction appeareth in his lawfull authority and command Then by this charge and commaund of Iehosaph◅ is declared his Iurisdiction in these causes wherein he hath this authority
gouernments I meane Ecclesiasticall and Temporal be directed by coactiue power there is no difference in the point of Iurisdiction betweene Temporall and Ecclesiasticall authoritie For the King and only the King is to appoint iudges in matters Temporall and Ecclesiasticall the King hath no more authoritie in reuersing the iudgement of the one then of the other being true iust and lawfull So that the Kings Iurisdiction standeth not in a power to dissanull true and righteous iudgemens but in a power supereminent by which he is charged First to confirme lawes Ecclesiasticall and Temporall Secondly to place Iudges for both causes Thirdly to see that those iudges of both sortes iudge iustly according to right and equity Fourthly to punish them if they shall be found to giue vniust and corrupt sentences Fiftly and last of all his Iurisdiction appeareth in appellations 7. But heere a question will be moued whether a man may appeale from an Ecclesiasticall iudge to the Prince For that one may appeale from a Temporall iudge I suppose it is not doubted at least I see no reason why it should be doubted But in a cause Ecclesiasticall and from a iudge Ecclesiasticall to appeale to the Temporall Magistrate of this some Romish Doctors doubt This doubt which the Canonists haue made may be increased by that place Deu. 17. 10. Thou shalt not decline from that thing which they shall shew thee neither to the right hand nor to the left And that man that will do presumptuously not hearkning to the Priest that standeth before the Lord thy God to minister there or vnto the iudge that man shall die It might seeme to be collected hence that there is no appellation from the Priest no though hee should iudge as some Rabbins expound the words I will declare their exposition because it sauoureth much like the expositions of some Papists where the text saith thou shalt not decline to the right hand nor to the left they expound it that if the Priest shall say thy right hand is thy left or thy left is thy right this sentence thou must receiue and therein rest 8. But this is a fond assertion not only without reason but against the expresse words of the Scripture for it is said according to the law which shall teach thee and according to the iudgement which they shall tell thee thou shalt doe Where we finde two rules for these two kindes of Iudges the Priest and the iudge the sentence of the Priest must be according to the written lawe the sentence of the other according to the truth of iustice and iudgement If a man be able to shew that he is wronged he may vndoubtedly appeale to a Superiour now a man may be able to shew that he is wronged if hee can shew that the Priest declineth from the law of God which is appointed his rule or the Temporall iudge from iustice And therefore if there be a Superiour in the land he may appeale but if there be no Superiour he is without remedie as when Hely was both Priest and iudge from him at that time there could be no appellation but where the forme of a kingdome is established where one King is set vp in lawfull authoritie by whose power iudges Spirituall and Temporall are placed in his dominions heere appeareth a fountaine of Iurisdiction deriued as it were into two inferiour riuers and from these inferior powers appellation may be brought if they shall not in their sentences keepe their rules prescribed to them the lawe and iustice for the appellation being grounded vpon the lawe of Nature to moderate the peruersitie and partialitie of iudges it were an absurd thing to denie this in causes Ecclesiasticall vnlesse a man would suppose that persons Ecclesiasticall may not be corrupt in their iudgements Now if we shall once graunt appellations then assuredly wee confirme the Iurisdiction of Princes in all matters wherein appellation may bee made to them And because Iurisdiction is assuredly proued by appellation we will for the farther manifestation of the truth seeke to cleere this point the rather becâ—…use our aduersaries tell vs confidently that in matters Ecclesiasticall all appellation belongeth to the Pope The Popes say so and they beleeue them we hold that appellation in causes Ecclesiasticall is to bee directed to the King who is by God set ouer the persons appellant 9. In the Old Testament we haue fewe examples or none that I remember of any that appealed from any inferior iudge Ecclesiasticall to the Soueraigne but in the New Testament there is one example sufficient to confirme the truth S. Paul being accused for causes Ecclesiasticall appealed from the high Priest to Câ—…sar Therfore it is lawfull in matters Ecclesiasticall to appeale from iudges Ecclesiasticall to the Ciuill Magistrate The consequence resteth vpon this that Saint Paul heerein did nothing but that which he might doe iustly and lawfully which thing I suppose the greatest enemie of Saint Pauls Doctrine will not denie for he came vp to Ierusalem with this profession and purpose I am ready not to bee bound onely but euen to die for the name of the Lord Iesus Neither durst he for sauing of his life giue a scandall to the Gospell The antecedent consisteth of these two parts First that the matters for which Saint Paul was accused were matters Ecclesiasticall Secondly that therein he appealed from the high Priest both are witnessed by the expresse words of the Scripture For Festusâ—…aith â—…aith They brought no crime against him but had certaine questions against him of their owne superstition and of one Iesus which was dead whom Paul affirmed to be aliue These questions be out of doubt Ecclesiasticall euen in the iudgement of our aduersaries that he appealed from the high Priest reskuing himselfe from his iudgement it is euident by the words in the twentie three Chapter where the Apostle speaketh to the high Priest as to his iudge Thou sittest to iudge me according to the law And when he was reskued from the Priests by Lysias and sent to Felix and left by him to Festus he neuer thinketh of appealing from any of theâ—…e ciuill gouernours But when Festus asked him if he will goe to Ierusalem and there be iudged of these things then Pâ—…ul vtterly refusing the high-Priest appealed to Câ—…sar by which it followeth that in matters Ecclesiasticall a man may appeale from iudges Ecclesiasticall to the Soueraigne Prince Whereupon this vndoubtedly followeth that there resteth Soueraigne Iurisdiction in the Prince And therefore the Popes their flatterers vnderstanding well that Supreame Iurisdiction could neuer bee prooued to rest in the Popes vnlesse first Appellation should be made to them wrought by all subtilty as hereafter we shall declare by right or wrong they neither cared nor spared to cause Appellations to be made to them which thing when once they had obtained that in all causes Ecclesiasticall Appellation might be made to the Popes then and not before
to command for otherwise the Kings command is but as the word of a priuat man or of a child if he haue not power to iudge and punish 14. Moreouer whereas Iehosaphat commandeth the Priests and Leuites to iudge betweene blood and blood Law and precepts statutes and iudgements In things that concerned questions of blood as when blood was shed by casualtie in which case the party offending had remedy by sanctuary and the high Priest was the immediat iudge as also in matters concerning lawes precepts â—…tutes iudgements that is ordinances ceremoniall or morall In these things stood the Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction which then was practised in the Church for to take that distinction which we must often remember in this question it is confessed that all Ecclesiasticall power is either of order or Iurisdiction In both which the King hath a part bâ—…t differently In the power of orders the Kings part and office was to see that things of that nature were orderly done and the breach thereof punished but himselfe was not to execute any thing whereunto the Priests were apointed by the power of their orders as to offer incense c. Wherefore Vzziah was smitten with leprosie for medling with that part of the Priests office Now Iurisdiction is diuided into power internall which as often wee haue said belongeth not to the King and power externall which power externall when it is coactiue is nothing but that which wee call the Kings Iurisdiction though it be in matters Ecclesiastical And this Iurisdiction is here testified to be in Iehosaphat and from him deriued to all to all iudges vnder him both Temporall and Ecclesiasticall For as he commaunded the Temporall iudges so in like sort he commaunded the Ecclesiasticall And as the Ecclesiasticall iudges might replie if they had bene such as now these are of the Romane Clergie that Ecclesiasticall iudgements were holy and the cause of God and not of the King so doth the King witnesse of Temporall iudgements for speaking to Temporall iudges he saith you execute not the iudgements of man but of the Lord. Then Temporall iudgements are the Lords cause aswell as Ecclesiasticall and herein they differ not 15. Now this Iurisdiction which is in coactiue power wee prooue to be in the King and onely in the King I speake according to the forme of the state of Israel in those dayes wherof we now speake aunswerable to which is the Soueraigne magistrate in any other state This right I say we prooue to bee onely in the King and from him deriued to other iudges both Temporall and Spirituall by these reasons first the King and onely the King commaundeth both iudges to doe their duties in their seuerall places and hath lawfull power to punish them if they doe otherwise therfore the Kings Iurisdiction coactiue is ouer both sorts alike The antecedent hath two parts the first drawen from the expresse words of the Scripture in this text the second followeth by a necessitie For the commaund of a King is ridiculous and no commaund vnlesse he haue authoritie to punish The consequence followeth by the very definition of Iurisdiction which will prooue the second part of the antecedent For this Iurisdiction for which we plead is defined by the most learned of the Church of Rome authority coactiue If it be authoritie it may command if coactiue it may punish then it followeth that where Iehosaphat had first authoritie to commaund and last to punish that questionlesse hee had this Soueraigne Iurisdiction 16. If against this any obiect that the King may command in matters of orders of preaching the Word administring the Sacraments c. In all these things the King may lawfully command the parties to doe their duties and may punish them if they doe otherwise and yet no man will put the Kings Iurisdiction in these matters of orders Preaching Sacraments c. For aunswere let me intreat the reader with attention to consider these three things First to commaund secondly to execute thirdly to punish Iurisdiction standeth wholly in the first and last and nothing at all in the second that is in authoritie and not in action So that though the King should execute a thing which belongeth to his office yet in the execution therof his Iurisdiction should not appeare howsoeuer his wisedome knowledge and actiue vertues might appeare therein for Iurisdiction is in the authoritie of commaunding and power of punishing and supereminence that riseth from both And therefore in the preaching of the Word administration of Sacraments the King hath no part because therein Iurisdiction standeth not these things being matters of execution not of commaund but the authoritie to commaund these things by making or vrging lawes for them and to punish the transgression by corporall punishments this because it includeth coactiue power is in the Soueraigne Magistrate onely If the Magistrate should either neglect his dutie as the heathen did or commaund false doctrines to be preached as the Arian Emperours did in this case the Church hath warrant to maintaine the truth but without tumults and rebellion and rather in patience to loose their liues then to forgo any part of the truth 17. Another reason to prooue this Soueraigne authoritie coactiue to be only in the King and from him respectiuely deriued to both sorts of iudges may thus bee drawen For the iudges Temporall there is not so much question made all the doubt is of iudges Ecclesiasticall the chiefe of which iudges Ecclesiasticall in the Church of Israel was the high Priest Then this Iurisdiction whereof we speake must be confessed to haue been principally and originally either in the king or in the high Priest but in the high Priest it was not Therefore in the King it must be That it was not in the high Priest we proue by these reasons The high Priest is commaunded corrected punished and deposed by the King and not the King by the Priest therefore the Soueraigne Iurisdiction is not in the high Priest but in the King Againe the high Priests did neuer practise coactiue authoritie vnlesse when they were Soueraigne Magistrates as sometimes the high Priests in Israel were but as high Priestâ—… they had no such power for the causes betweene blood and blood which were of their cognisance are by the interpreters vnderdood such cases wherein a man was killed by chaunce without the purpose or against the will of the offender in which case the high Priest might graunt him the prâ—…uiledge of sanctuary and so deliuer him from the auenger of blood but he had no power coactiue to inflict death or such punishments at his pleasure which trueth was so constantly receiued and preserued in the Church afterward that euen in the greatest power highest ruffe of Poperie the Church of Rome did not take this full â—…oactiue power but onely proceeded to degradation and then to deliuer men vp to the secular powers which was a â—…ecret confession that they had no right to
conclude directly against the Emperours purposes Thus doth Socrates report the calling of that councell but Sozomen saith it was not obtained of Valens but of Valentinian 9. Besides these publique and generall Synods there were also some more priuate and particular in calling whereof the Bishops had power The Bishop of the Diocesse vsed to call a Synod of his Clergy but could proceed no farther Prouinciall Synodes were called by Metropolitanes but in a generall Synod of many Nations the Emperour had alwayes the right of calling it as a King hath the onely right of calling a Synod of those Nations that are vnder his gouernment For as the counsell of Nice was called by Constantine so were all the counsels of these next three hundred yeares called by the Emperours that gouerned at such times Theodosius gathered the councell of Constantinople against the heresie of Macedonius in the third yeare of his raigne which was the yeare of Christ 383. saith Prosper The councell of Ephesus against Nestorius was gathered by the authority of Theodosius the younger and the fourth generall councell at Chalcedon by the authority of Martianus and Valentinianus Emperours Leo the first was a great man in these affaires and hee is the fittest to certifie vs of the truth against whose witnesse our aduersaries haue no reason to except This Pope then writing to the Emperour Theodosius saith Pietas vestra apud Ephesum constituit Synodale concilium And afterward declaring his obedience and conformity thereto saith Meum studium commodaui vt Clementiae vestrae studijs pareatur And againe Ne autem pijssimi Principis dispositioni nostra videatur praesentia defuisse fratres meos misi c. he hath the same also Epist. 23. ad Theodosium Againe hee writeth to Pulcheria to moue the Emperour to command a councell to be holden within Italy declaring that he wrote to the Emperour to intreat the same Which thing hee moueth also in other Epistles And though he much desired this that the Emperour would haue beene intreated to hold a councell within Italy yet could he not obtaine it and therefore was ready to obey the Emperour attending his pleasure therein who appointed it in another place 10 Which thing we obserue the rather because our aduersaries oflate haue yeelded this as a proper right to the Pope to call councels Catholici munus conâ—…andi concilia generalia saith Bellarmine ad Romanum pontificem propriè pertinere volunt And when they are driuen by these open and euident testimonies they shift it thus as to say another may doe it by the Popes consent but if the Pope neither appoint the place nor no other by his commaundement or consent then it is no councell but a conciliable These bee vaine and friuolous shifts of Friars For it is true that the Popes consent was to these auncient councels but no otherwise then as the consent of all other Bishops They consented because they could not chuse because they were resolued to be obedient but they could not appoint either place or time For Leo could not haue it where hee would but it was where and when the Emperour appointed 11 Before the councell of Chalcedon there is the Writ of the Emperours Valentinian and Martian called Sacra to call Bishops to Nicaea But another Sacra is sent to reuoke that and to call them to Chalcedon So that all this while the Emperors rule as those that haue Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction They call councels they punish offenders of the Clergy they establish Ecclesiasticall Courts they are acknowledged the nourcing Fathers of Religion the keepers and preseruers of both Tables and of the discipline of the Church And therefore Leo writing to Constantinus Emperour who called the sixt Synod saith thus Cognouimus quod sancta vniuersalis maxima sexta Synodus quae per Dei gratiam imperiali decreto in regia vrbe congregata est c Wee know that the holy and vniuersall great sixt Synod which by the grace of God is called and gathered by the imperiall decree in the imperiall City c. And a little after Pietas vestra fructus misericordiae potestas custos disciplinae Your godlinesse is the fruit of Gods mercy your power is the keeper of discipline And againe Nec enim minor regnantium cura est praua corrigere quam de aduersarijs triumphare quia einimirum potestatem suam seruiendo subijciunt cuius munere imperare noscuntur c. Vnde diuinitus praordinata vestra Christianissima pietas c. Caput Ecclesia Dominum Iesum Christum veram pietatis regulam amplectendo c. For Gouernours ought to haue no lesse care to correct vngodly things then to triumph ouer their aduersaries for they submit their power to his seruice by whofe power they are knowne to rule c. Therefore your most Christian zeale preordained of God c. acknowledging our Lord Iesus Christ the true rule of godlinesse to bee the head of the Church Wherein the Bishop of Rome doth acknowledge first that the generall councell is to be called onely by the authority of the Emperour imperiali decreto Secondly that the Emperours power is such a power as is custos disciplinae Hee speaketh here in an Ecclesiasticall cause and of Ecclesiasticall affaires Now that power which is custos disciplinae Ecclesiae what is it but Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction This word Iurisdiction was not then worne in such vse as now it is but we see the auncients vse words counteruailing it The Bishop of Rome acknowledgeth Ecclesiasticall power and Iurisdiction to be in the Emperour when hee yeeldeth him such a power as is preseruer of the discipline Ecclesiasticall Thirdly he confesseth that the care of the Church Church-gouernment for establishing the truth doth no lesse belong to the office of a Prince then to triumph ouer his foes in warre Fourthly the Bishop of Rome as then acknowledgeth no other head of the Church then Iesus Christ as appeareth by his words To the same purpose Saint Augustine saith Diuinitus praecipi regibus vt in regno suo bona iubeant mala prohibeant non solum quae pertinent ad humanam societatem verum etiam quae ad diuinam religionem Contra Crescentium li. 3. cap. 51. That is Kings are commaunded to estalish good things and prohibite euill in their Kingdomes not onely in things belonging to Ciuill societie but in such things also that belong to diuine Religion Gregorie the great following the footsteppes of his Fathers yeeldeth the fame authoritie to the King For writing to Theodoricus King of France he saith Iterata vos per vestram mercedem adhortatione pulsamus vt congregari Synodum iubeatis This part of Iurisdiction for calling of Councels is so fully confirmed to be the Emperours right by the Aunceants that Cardinall Cusanus sure no Lutheran disputing of this priuiledge concludeth from the confessed testimonies of the Aunceants these two things First That Emperours
Lords supper and in such things might appoint what he list This manner of declaring the Kings Iurisdiction did so much offend the reformed Churches that Caluin the writers of the Centuries doe much complaine thereof and worthily For the Bishop of Winchester sought not like a curious triar of mettals to seuere the gold from the siluer and drosse from both but as hee found this massie crown of Iurisdiction vpon the Popes head so he tooke it with gold siluer coper drosse and all and set vpon the Kings head So that the thing which procured so much offence was not the title but the Bishops false and erronious declaration of that title If any obiect against me what then will you take vpon you to handle this thing better then such a learned and prudent Prelate I answer the Bishop wanted neither wit nor learning for the opening of this point but onely a loue to the truth which loue when I shall bring to this question I finde my selfe therby so supported that neither the perfections of other men nor mine owne imperfections can daūt me so much as to cause me to giue ouer the defence of the truth True it is that a more skilfull Archimedes might haue beene set on this worke to distinguish the things that haue lien so long confounded in this question or the common helpe of many might haue beene combined wherin our aduersaries are now growen wiser in their generation then the children of light And though it seeme to be true that an euill cause hath more need of helpes yet there is no reason that they who haue the handling of a good cause should in confidence of the cause neglect any helpe that possibly they may attain vnto Albeit we must confesse that the arme of God hath wonderfully declared it selfe by weak meanes against great For if a man should looke vpon the meanes on both sides with an eye of flesh he would thinke as Vzziah did When the Arke was shaken that the Church could not possibly stand vp by so weake meanes For on the one side the Pope sheweth himselfe with the riches of Saint Peters great and potent patrimony with the helpe of so many great Princes with the councell and policie of his Cardinals with the armies of his Canonists Priests secular and regular but especially in these later years of his Iesuites who glorying so much of their learning and filling the world with their vaunts being supported by wealth and policie abounding with all worldly meanes that their hearts can desire incouraged by preferments march like armed troupes entring a battell On the other side a company of poore men Luther Bucer Zuinglius O◅colampadius Martyr Caluin and such like v◅terly contemned of the Iesuites bringing no other furniture with them sauing a good conscience learning and a loue to the trueth seeme to make a poore shew without force without glory If Gods truth were to ◅e vpholden by humane meanes or if the seruants of the truth were drawne to speake in the Church as Lawyers are for their fees at the barre then what hope could wee haue to stand against the Iesuites the Popes Lawyers who by inuincible clamours facing and obstinacy make not truth but victory the end they aime at But as there is great oddes in the meanes on the one side so there appeareth no lesse difference in the successe on the other side For by these weake and contemned means the world is subdued vnto Christ deliuered from the bondage of superstition wisdome is iustified of her owne children and the truth triumpheth in the sincerity and godlinesse of weake meanes against the malice policy and strength of her prepotent aduersaries Which successe compared with the meanes on both sides doth manifest the arme of God to be in the cause that groweth so much against the expectation of the world and meanes For what other power could make so weake meanes preuaile so much against so great policy and strength but the same power though not in the sam◅ measure which by a company of poore Fishermen despised in the world subdued the whole world vnto the obedience of Christ As this successe and blessing by the presence of God hath beene hitherto apparant in this cause so the Iesuites take order that the same successe and blessing may continually hereafter follow our cause vntill it hath rooted out all the aduersaries that make opposition against it for what greater strength or aduantage can bee giuen to our cause then the wickednesse of our aduersaries doth giue How often doth Moses declare to the Church of Israell that the fauour of God was so much declared towards them not for their owne righteousnes but for the wickednes of their aduersaries So that if we should stand still and looke on and holde our selues in patience our aduersaries will worke the meanes by their owne strange cruelties in their Inquisitions by their prophane and vncleane conuersation by their grosse Idolatry by their horrible treasons and conspiracies against the liues of Princes by their diuelish deuises for subuersion of whole States at one blow by their hypocrisie falshood and aequiuocations and by that most admirable and exquisit villany that euer was inuented in deprauing corrupting altering and chaunging all auncient writers by these and the like practises of wickednes they themselues will worke the meanes of our successe and of their owne destruction And if the Prince of this world and his first begotten had not blinded their eyes and their hearts they could not choose but see and acknowledge the experience of Gods fauour and protection mightily declared from heauen vpon our cause our Prince and State and of late much increased and made apparant to all th◅ world by their owne wicked practises Then the difference being so great in the meanes and in the successe so great also betweene our conuersation and theirs must needes declare a great difference betweene our hopes and theirs our Religion and theirs they haue raised the Princes and armies of the world against vs when they pretended peace wee neuer vsed deceit or wrong against them they haue by barbarous deuises attempted to procure our vtter subuersion we desire hartily their conuersion to God they curse reuile and baspheme vs wee pray for them this difference may shew where truth and Religion is and might if they entred into the serious consideration of things drawe them to cease from all wicked attempts to follow and embrace one trueth and to worshippe one God with vs. But if there be no remedy but that Princes and States must be oppugned by a perpetuall league of Conspiracy from Rome if nothing can satisfie them but the blood of Kings then what remaineth but that the Princes of Christendome prepare themselues to that great battel which S. Iohn saith shal be fought in the plain of the earth against Gog and Magog When God shall raise the spirits of princes to that worke he will open the way and giue the
successe for fire shall come downe from God out of heauen and deuoure the enemies Vnto which seruice there is nothing so effectuall to animate the princes of Christendome as is this new and strange claime of the popes Iurisdiction ouer princes which thing because it is so much pursued by the Popes and their flatterers and onely by them as the great marke whereunto they addresse all their attempts and the very summe of all their Religion therfore I haue endeuoured to open the whole to distinguish the parts and to set this question in such a light as I could if not to satisfie all yet at least to giue an occasion to the iudicious I was desirous to leaue no part vntouched that all might come to a triall and am ready also withall to bring my selfe to the triall willing to learne and to amend any error after that it shall be manifested by the truth to bee an errour for which cause I submit all to the iudicious and godly censure of the Church My care was also after my seruice to God to performe herein a true seruice to his Maiesty by opening the Iurisdiction of Kings which I haue done not as they vse to doe who serue the Pope respecting no other rules of that seruice then his pleasure and their adulation but I haue disputed the Kings right with a good conscience from the rules of Gods word knowing that the noble disposition of his Maiesty will admit of no seruice whereby God or the truth is preiudiced All which as I commend to your Graces fauour and protection to whom God hath committed the care of his Church here so with my hearty prayers I commend your Grace to the faâ—…our and protection of God who inrich your heart with his plentifull graces that as for your proper comfort and direction you may enioy them so you may vse them to the glory of God and the comfort of his Church through Iesus Christ. Your Graces to be commanded in all duety GEORGE CARLETON An Admonition to the Reader IT may bee thought strange that so many are found to write in this contradicting age one contrary to another the trueth cannot bee on both sides and therefore there is a great fault on the one side the Reader that is desirous to trie where the fault is may be intreated to marke with aduised obseruation some things wherein our aduersaries wanting either knowledge or sinceritie haue broken all the rules of right writing to deceiue such as cannot iudge of which sort the greatest part consisteth I doe therefore intreat the Readers especially such as reade my Booke with a purpose to answere it to consider these things wherein we challeng our aduersaries for euil dealing in this particular Controuersie First In setting downe our opinion they make it not that which we hold but another thing and then make large discourses in vaine they should vnderstand our cause as we deliuer it for we deuise not their opinion but take it out of their owne bookes especially from the Popes Canons Secondly when they would refute vs they bring their owne Canon law which was deuised in preiudice of the freedome of Princes and is our aduersarie and therefore cannot bee our Iudge Thirdly When they produce the testimonies of ancient fathers the abuse for which we challenge them is that they will not vnderstand the question for the fathers write for the spirituall Iurisdiction of the Church aboue Princes which thing we neuer denied But against the coactiue Iurisdiction of Prinees in matters Ecclesiasticall which thing we hold the Fathers neuer wâ—…ote but they are for it If these things were faithfully obserued as they are all peruerted in this cause by one that termeth himself the Catholick Diuine and if the truth were sought with conscience and not preiudice maintained with resolution men would neuer presume so much vpon the simplicitie of the Readers nor in the confidence of their wit and learning would they suffer themselues to be set to the maintenance of any cause whatsoeuer Let me farther intreate him that would aunswere me to enter into this short and serious meditation with himselfe thus Either my purpose is to serue God for the truth and then I may looke for a blessing vpon my labours or else to serue man though against the truth and then I may looke for a curse vpon my selfe and my labours let this Meditation rule thy pen and heart I aske no more Last of all let me intreate thee of curtesie to amend the faults escaped in printing with thy pen thus P. 2. Lin. 10. Or some others superfluous p. 13. l. 2. as superfluous p. 14. l. 29 for more read meer p. 22. l. 28. the superfluous p. 30. l. 15 for teached r. touched p. 52. marg r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 73. l. 28 r. against the infringers of the priuiledges of the Sea Apostolick p. 85. l. 19. therto superfluous p. 98. l. 27. full superfluous p. 105. l. 8. r. M. Luther p. 107. l. 2. r. M. Luther p. 108. l. 16. r. M. Bucer p. 108. l. 20. r. M. Antonius Flam. p. 109. l. 10. r. M. Chemnicius p. 195. l. 19. Deposed by Pope Stephen r. deposed or his deposition allowed by the consent of Pope Stephen p. 198. l. 4. for the Bishops r. some Bishops p. 211. l. 11. for opportunelyr opportunity p. 228. l. r2 some report the poyson to haue beene giuen in the bread and some in the cup. p. 229. l. 31. for great r. greatest p. 234 l. 15. for Frederic r. Lodouic p. 234. l. 22. for Rhenes r. Rense p. 234. l. 27. for Rhenes r. Rense p. 236. l 19. generall superfluous p. 250. l. 28. r. adhaerentium adhaerere volentium p. 262. l. 21. for ver r. viri p. 272. l. 18. for chusing r. choosen p. 272. l. 22. for to r. in p. 279. l. 30. no supeâ—…fluous p. 294. l. 16. for cultus r. cultu OF THE IVRISDICTION OF PRINCES IN Causes and ouer Persons Ecclesiasticall CHAP. I. The state of the Question THe lawfull authoritie and Iurisdiction of Kings in matters Ecclesiasticall is now and hath beene for some ages heeretofore much impugned by such who by vsurpation hauing incroached vpon the right of Kings seeke by all subtill and colourable deuises to maintaine that by skill and some shew of learning which they haue gotten by fraud All this mischiefe proceedeth from the Bishop of Rome who vsurping powre and taking to himselfe that honour whereunto God hath not called him hath brought all authoritie Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill into great confusion by vsurping the right both of the Church and of States Now our desire being to open the truth and to declare the lawfull right of Princes and power of the Church it seemeth needfull first to set downe what power is giuen to the Pope by them that flatter him so shall the right of the King and of the Church better appeare 2 They yeeld to the Pope a fulnesse of power as they
Christian Magistrates but was alwayes vnderstoode to belong to the ciuill Magistrate whether he were Christian or heathen We denie not but that the Apostles did sometimes take vengeance vpon the disobedient but that was not by the materiall sword in the power whereof we place coaction but by the spirituall sword which alwayes shewed it selfe in their Ministery sometimes in an extraordinary manner as in the striking of Ananias and Saphira with present death in the striking of Elimas the Sorcerer with blindnesse and such like These were signes of extraordinary power but wee seeke heere the ordinary Iurisdiction of the Apostles which they left to their successours 10 Vpon these grounds ioyned with the assured knowledge of the History of those times the auncient Fathers deliuer it as a truth neuer questioned nor doubted that in the gouernment of the Church the Bishops are the vndoubted successours of the Apostles Irenaeus speaking of heretikes saith Omnes hi posteriorâ—…s sunâ—… episcopis quibus apostoli tradiderunt ecclesias If Bishops were before any heretikes they were questionlesse in the Apostles time and by the Apostles instituted because some heretikes were euen in the Apostles time Irenaeus saith also Habemus annumer are eos qui ab Apostolis instituti sunt episcopi in Ecclesiis And a little after Quibus etiam ipsas Ecclesias committebant And againe in the same place Quos successo es reliquerunt suum ipsorum locum magisterij tradentes Cyprian saith Potestas peccatorum remittendorum Apostolis data est Ecclesiis quas illi à Christo missi constuuerunt et episcopis qui eis ordinatioâ—…e 〈◊〉 successerunt The same hee hath also Epist. 69. Hierome saith Potentia diuitiarum paupertatis humilitas vel sublimiorem vel inferiorem Episcopum non facit Caeterum omnes Apostolorum successores sunt It were hard to kicke against all these pricks Against so euident grounds of Scripture so expresse testimonies of Fathers to deuise a new gouernment of the Church Leauing the auncient and knowne gouernment which hath the testimonie of those that liued in the first age and heard and sawe those that were endued with miraculous gifts as Irenaeus testifieth of himselfe that hee heard those which spake by the spirit in all languages and sawe them who often raised the dead to life againe Leauing I say the testimonie of these whose name and authority is so reuerend in the Church and striuing for a gouernment which came but of late to the knowledge of men seemeth to proceede from affections too much blinded with the loue of innouation 11 But though this be true that Bishops in the gouernment of the Church succeede the Apostles yet we are cautelously to distinguish betweene the things wherein they succeede the Apostles and those things which since the Apostles times haue beene added to their gouernment by godly Princes For the preseruation of true doctrine in the Church the Bishops are the great watch-men Herein they are authorized by God If Princes withstand them in these things they haue warrant not to obey Princes because with these things Christ hath put them in trust Therefore S. Paul saith not that it is the Kings office but the Bishops to commaund that they teach no other doctriâ—…e Vpon which ground S. Ambrose was bolde to withstand Valentinian Emperour For Ambrose as the watch-man of the Church of Millaine would not suffer Auxentius an Arian Bishop to haue any place to teach in his Diocesse Auxentius complained to the Emperour as the contention grew thus betweene them the one like a vigilant watch-man seeking to remoue all dangers from his flocke the other like a Wolfe seeking to spoile at the earnest entreaty of Auxentius the Emperour willed that the cause betweene these two might be heard in the Ecclesiasticall consistorie and that the Emperour might sit as Iudge in the cause This thing Ambrose vtterly denied and of this hee writeth thus to the Emperour Quando audisti clemeÌ„tissime imperator in causasidei Laicos de Episcopo iudicasse And againe Sivel Scripturarum seriem diuinarum vel catera tempora retractemus quis est qui abnuat in causa fidei in causa inquamsidei Episcopos solere de imperatoribus Christianis non imperatores de Episcopo iudicare And in another place Volens nunquam ius deseram coactus repugnare non nout arma enim nostra preces sunt lachrymae This example of Ambrose his courage is worthily commended by all posterity wherein this worthy man seemeth to direct a true rule of obedience For Iustina the Emperours mother seeing she could not draw Ambrose to fauour the Arians purposed to put him from the gouernment of the Church Which thing would haue beene effected if he had not refused to appeare in the Court where the Emperour was to sit as Iudge There appeared in him courage godlinesse and exact obedience all truly tempered He denieth the Emperour to be a sufficient Iudge in a cause of faith and religion In causafidei in causa inquam fidei For this hee repeateth precisely desirous to be rightly vnderstood he would rather die then admit such an example as to betray the trueth and that commission and charge wherein GOD had set him And yet if the Emperour would by force doe any thing he denieth that there is any power in him or in the Church to resist by force The faith and right of the Church was not in his iudgement to be maintained by force and armes but by prayers and teares Thus resolute is this godly man in the cause of faith against the Emperour but in other causes he claimeth no priuiledge no immunities and therefore in the same place hee faith Si tributum petit imperator non negamus agri Ecclesiae tributum soluunt Athanasius ad solitar vitam agentes speaking to Constans the Emperour saith Let religious Bishops perswade the Emperor that he corrupt not the Church nor mingle the Romane Empire with Ecclesiasticall constitutions And Hillarie writing to Constantius saith to the same purpose Prouideat decernat clementia tua c. Let your clemency prouide and establish that all Iudges to whom the care of publike businesse belongeth may abstaine from religious constitutions Thus did the auncient Bishops gouerne the Church not suffering any King or Emperour to meddle with the determinations of matters of faith For of such matters are these testimonies to be vnderstood and onely of such In like manner Chrysostome resisted Gaina generall of the forces of Arcadius Emperour Who would haue had a Church within Constantinople for himselfe and the Arians The Emperour was willing to gratifie him or not willing to displease him for his greatnesse but Iohn Chrysostome did vtterly denie it as a thing vnlawfull Thus by the warrant of Scriptures and examples of Fathers we giue to Caesar all coactiue power which is due to him but spirituall gouernment we giue not to him this is that
much lesse dissolution to the states of this world but the gouernement of the court of Rome now commonly called the Church of Rome breedeth trouble and dissolution to the states of this world therefore the gouernment of that court is contrary to the gouernment of Christs Church the assumption is a confessed truth too well knowen that the gouernment of the Popes court or Church breedeth trouble and dissolution to States by excommunications The proposition is prooued by the aunswere of Christ to Pilats feares my kingdome is not of this world whereby hee satisfieth Pilate that he needed not feare any trouble or dissolution of established authoritie by him for this was Pilats feare So that if wee admit that Christ did aunswere to the purpose and that Pilats feares and suspitions were remooued by his aunswere it must be confessed that by that aunswere the State was secured that Christs gouernement would not raise any trouble to it or procure the dissolution thereof And it must be well obserued that Christ thus securing the present State doth not speake of his owne person onely but vndertaketh for all that belong to him and his kingdome Therefore he saith not I am not or my person is not of this world but my kingdome is not of this world Then as hee secureth this State from any trouble that they might feare from his person so he secureth all States of the world during the time of this world from all troubles that they might feare from his members and from his kingdome which is his Church Wherby it followeth by strong euidence of reason that they who put States in feare of troubles or work the dissolutiō of Ciuill gouernment as the Pope doth by excommunication are not the members of Christ nor belonging to his kingdom 15. This is further declared in the same place by the words following If my kingdome were of this world then would my seruants surely fight that I should not be deliuered to thee In which words wee finde that Christes seruants may not fight not stirre vp tumults vproares and warres for the maintaining of their kingdome Therefore that Kingdome for which they raise so much warre is not the kingdome of Christ not Christs Church nor they that raise vp such warres Christs seruaunts Christ forbiddeth his seruaunts to fight for him and his kingdome the Pope commandeth his seruants to fight for him and his kingdome Can you haue two kingdomes more opposite two Kings more contrary 16. This doctrine that the Church may not stirre vp any vproares or warr◅s against the Magistrate hath beene alwayes maintained by the auncient Fathers For we finde that in the greatest persecutions the auncient Bishops taught Christians alwayes to liue in peace and to pray for the Emperours and gouernours though they were persecutors according to the commaundement of Christ Loue your enemies and pray for them that persecute you Iustin Martyr saith We pray that you speaking of the Emperour may be found to haue a good and sound mind with your imperiall power Plinie writing to Traian of the auncient manner of Christians saith they assembled to worfhip Christ and bound themseluer in a Bond not to set vppon any wicked practise Sed ne furta ne latrocinia ne adulteria committerent ne sidem fallerent Contrary to which practise the Pope by his excommunication deposing of Princes and discharging subiects from their oath and Allegeance bindeth men to raise warres and tumults to breake and violat◅ their faith and to commit many disorders Tertullian saith Cramus pro Imperatoribus c. That is We pray for Emperours for their deputies for powers for the State of this world for the quiet and peaceable gouernment of things Contrarie to which the Popes raise warres make the gouernment of States tumultuous and take away peace from the earth Optatus saith For good cause doth Paul teach that we must obey Kings and powers yea though an Emperour were such an one as liued after the manner of the Gentiles Augustine saith we are not to yeeld this power to any but onely to God the power I say to giue kingdomes c. Who giueth earthly kingdomes both to godly and vngodly And in another place hee prooueth that euill Kings and Tyrants are to be obeyed wherof he giueth a reason because saith hee Men consist of two parts a bodie and a soule as long as wee are in this life and neede the helpes of this life we must by that part which belongeth to this life be subiect to the powers of this world but by that part whereby we beleeue in God we owe no subiection to man but onely to God Ambrose saith If the Emperour should commaund any thing vnlawfull hee would not obey neither durst he resist by force but onely beare with patience Arma enim nosta sunt preces lachrymae Gregorie the first was so farre from this tumultuous disposition of his successours that hee held himselfe bound to obey the Emperour in the promulgation of that law which he thought the Emperour should not haue made Ego quidem iussioni tuae subiectus saith he to the Emperour Maurice eandem legem per diuersas terrarum partes transmitti feci quia lex ipsa omnipotenti deo minime concordat ecce per suggestionis meae paginam serenissimis dominis nunciaui vtrobique ergo quae debui exsolui quia Imperatori obedientiam praebui pro deo quod sensi minime tacui So farre were these auncient Fathers from the newe and strange practises of disobedience and rebellion against Magistrates which is nowe so stiffely taught and vnmercifully executed by the Popes vassals vnder pretence of Religion 17. But they tell vs that the Pope vseth onely his spirituall censures hee excommunicateth Kings for heresie or schisme and thereby deposeth them and dissolueth the obedience of Subiects I answer excōmunication as it is a censure of Christs Church containeth no coactiue power that is no such power as to depose Princes or to dissolue the faith and alleageance of Subiects Which thing is proued both by the vse of excommunication and by the power of the Church First if we consider the vse of excommunication we finde it was vsed in the Church of the Iewes and from them taken by the Church of Christians Then excommunication being found among the Iewes in his full vse and force all the kindes there of being distinctly obserued by the learned Iewes namely by Elias Leuita who obserueth out of the writings of the auncient Rabbines three diuers kindes of excommunication in vse in the Iewish Church it followeth that this censure of the Church can be no farther extended in the Church of Christians then it was in the Church of Israel where it was first instituted and established But in the Church of Israel it was neuer extended to deposing Kings and destroying obedience of Subiects therefore in the Church of Christians it may
and Kings by their office must call Councâ—…ls Secondly that their office is likewise by coactiue power to see the things maintained and obserued which are defined in general Councels 12. Hitherto then haue we found the Soueraigne Iurisdiction alwayes in Christian Magistrates and neuer in the Bishop of Rome How then commeth the Bishop of Rome to this practise of Iurisdiction which now he claimeth Let vs here consider one Pageant of theirs which will declare the first claime and beginning of Iurisdiction which they haue so much increased since The first attempt was to winne Iurisdiction ouer Bishops the second was to get the same power ouer Kings and by that meanes ouer all These we meane to open with as much breuitie as we can and the matter will beare First then to bring Bishops of other Nations vnder their power a shamelesse deuise was plotted by the Bishop of Rome discried and reiected by the auncient Fathers that then liued but yet so closely followed afterward by the Popes that in the end it preuailed I will declare the storie as it is deliuered by their owne writers who haue collected the tomes of the Councels 13. The sixt Councell of Carthage was gathered in the yeere of our Lord foure hundred and twentie against the heresie of Pelagius it lasted sixe yeeres and more In it were gathered two hundred and seuenteene Bishops among whom was that worthy Father Saint Augustine and others of famous note as Prosper Orosius and diuers other of great vertue and learning Aurelius Bishop of Carthage Metropolitan of Affrica was chiefe In the time of this Councell three Bishops of Rome succeeding one another mooued great contention and quarell with the Fathers of this Councell for Iurisdiction which the Popes then began to claime affirming that they had Iurisdiction ouer the Church of Affrica which thing these Fathers of this Councell vtterly denied the contention began vpon this occasion 14. Apiarius a Priest of the Church of Sicca in Affrica was for his infamous and scandalous life excommunicated not onely by Vrbanus Bishop of Sicca but by a whole Synode of Bishops met together This fellow thus censured in Affrica fled to Zozimus Bishop of Rome to him he complained of wrong that the Bishops of Affrica had done him as he said Zozâ—…mus without examination of the cause vndertooke to maintaine him and admitted him to the Communion After this vnderstanding that the Bishops of Affrica were gathered in their Synode he sendeth to them Faustinus Bishop of Potentia and with him two Priests Philip and Asellus Them hee chargeth to defend the cause of Apiarius to cause the Synode of Affrica to recciue him to their Communion to excoÌ„municate Vrbanus Bishop of Sicca or else to call him to Rome vnlesse hee will reforme that is vndoe all that he had done against Apiarius Further he commaundeth them to draw the Councell to yeeld to the Iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome and to acknowledge it lawfull for any Bishop or Priest to appeale from the sentence of their Metropolitan to Rome he commaundeth them also to signifie that he sent his Legate into Affrica who might vnderstand the causes of appellants that were grieued To effect this thing the better he chargeth them to declare that the Nicen Councell hath giuen this Iurisdiction to the Bishops of Rome for proofe hereof he deliuereth vnto them in writing a counterfeited Canon of the Nicen Councell 15. Faustinus comming to Affrica with these instructions and being admitted into the Councell declared that he had from Zozimus a Commission which he called Commonitorium and withall he declared the Iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome confirmed by a Canon of the Nicen Councell Aurelius Prosident of the Councel answered let this Commission first be read which our brethren haue brought hereupon Daniel the notary reade and recited the Commission thus Zozimus Bishop of Rome to our brother Faustinus Bishop to our fons Philip Asellus Priests this businesse you know you are to doe all things as if our presence were with you nay because it is with you and the rather seeing you haue both our expresse commaund and the words of the Canons which for more full assurance we haue added to this Commission For thus most beloued brethren it is decreed in the Councell of Nice concerning the appellation of Bishops And then forsooth the forged Canon os the Councell of Nice followeth thus Placuit autem vt si Episcopus accusatus fuerit iudicauerint congregati Episcopi regionis ipsius de gradu suo deiecerint eum appellasse Episcopus videatur confugerit ad beatissimum Ecclesiae Romanae Episcopum valuerit audiri iustum putauerit vt reuocetur examen sâ—…ribere his Episcopis dignetur qui infinitima propinqua prouincia sunt vt ipsi diligentur omnia requirant iuxta fideÌ„ veritatis definiant Quoâ—… si is qui râ—…gat causam suam iterum audiri deprecatione sua mouerit Episcopum Romaâ—…uÌ„ vt è Latere suo presbyterum mittat erit in potestate Episcopi Romani quid velit quid existimet si decreuerit mittendos esse qui presentes cum Episcopis iudicent habentes authoritatem eius à quo destinati sunt erit in suo arbitrio Si vero crediderit sufficere Episcopos vt neggtio terminum imponant faciot quod sapientissimo consilio suo iudicauerit That is We thought good that if a Bishop be accused and the Bishops of that Prouince haue giuen sentence and deposed him if this Bishop seeme to appeale and flie to the most blessed Bishop of Rome and desire to be heard â—…f he thinke good to reuoke the sentence it may please him to write to those Bishops which are in that Prouince that they may diligently search the matter and iudge it truely But if he that moueth his cause may be heard againe shall by his petition intreat the Bishop of Rome to send a Legat from his side it shall be in the power of the Bishop of Rome to doe what hee thinketh best And if he decree to send some who with the Bishops of the Prouince may be present to iudge hauing authoritie from him from whom they are sent it shall be in his pleasure And if he thinke that the Bishops of that Prouince may suffice to end the businesse let him doe whatsoeuer in his most wise Councell he iudgeth best Before I proceed in this narration let some things of note bee obserued First the Bishops of Rome were now growen from the honest and godly conuersation of their Auncestours to admirable impudency that durst suborne a Canon of the Nicen Councell and publish their owne shame in the sight of the Church then and leaue an eternall monument thereof to the world for euer extant in publike Councels Secondly the ground of the Iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome is forgerie famously attempted and famously conâ—…icted at that present time And yet this practise
quarrell I purpose to handle and discusse in the next Chapter in his proper place Theodoricus de Niem writing of this councell and of the end and purpose of those that held it saith that this Synod was gathered purposely to search out the auncient vses lawes and customes of the Empire and Church that each power knowing their owne limits the one might not encroach vpon the other Celebrata est saith he ab 153. viris religiosis Episcopis Abbatibus c. ab vniuersis regionibus et oramibus almae vrbis à cuncto etiâ—…m Clero huius sanctae Rom. Ecclesiae ex quirentibus vsus leges mores eiusdem Ecclesiae et imperij That is It was celebrated by one hundred and fifty three religious men Bishops Abbots c. by all the regions and degrees of the City of Rome by all the Clergy of this holy Church of Rome making search and inquisition for the vses lawes and customes both of this Church and of the Empire Then we see that Charles recouered some part of the auncient Iurisdiction of the Empire Which notwithstanding since his time the Popes by inuincible contentions wrested from the Emperours chalenging it to be a part of their owne Iurisdiction and charging the Emperours with Heresie and Schisme for practising that right which other Popes before them acknowledged to bee the auncient right of the Empire 14 And because to the Iurisdiction of Princes it belonged of olde both to call councels and to confirme them therefore Charles did not omit this part of Iurisdiction though as the euent declared it was much against the Popes pleasure He called a Synod at Frankford wherein was condemned the doctrine of worshipping of images which doctrine the Pope had late before confirmed The occasion hereof grew thus Leo Isaurus Emperour being much offended that the Saracines had that great and iust exception against Christians that they worshipped images called a Synod at Constantinople wherein the worship of images was condemned and the images burned He sent also to the Bishop of Rome as then Gregory the second commaunding him to doe the like if he would haue his fauour saith Paulus Diaconus Gregory the second tooke this in suâ—…h indignation that he rebelled against the Emperour and raised all Italy into a rebellion by which meanes the Emperour lost all that then was left in Italy Gregory the second in the middes of these stirres died and Gregory the third succeeded who prosecuting the purpose of his predecessour called a Synod at Rome in the yeare seuen hundred thirty three by Sigebert seuen hundred thirty nine by Palmerius In this Synod the doctrine of worshipping images was confirmed Leo the Emperor was excommunicated and depriued Thus began the Pope to practise a new Iurisdiction in deposing Emperours After this Constantine sirnamed or rather nick-named Copronimus in the yeare of Christ saith Sigebert seuen hundred fifty fiue called a Synod at CoÌ„stantinople wherein the worship of images was againe condemned But another Synod was held at Rome by Pope Stephen the third in the yeare of Christ seuen hundred threescore and eight wherein the worshipping of images was againe approued Which was more famously confirmed in the yeare of Christ seuen hundred foure score and eight by another Constanstine and his mother Irene who called the second Nycen Synod wherein Imagerie preuailed much by the helpe of Pope Hadrian 15. Vpon these stirres Charles the great was moued to call a Synod at Franckford Thither sent Pope Hadrian the acts of the second Nicen Synod to be approued there and to direct this Synod at Frankford if they would take any direction from the Pope But the Fathers of this Synode not regarding the Popes direction tooke a meane course betweene the Greekes who destroyed and defaced images and the Church of Rome which maintained the worship thereof For they decreed that it was not impious to set vp images but to giue any worship to them this they held to be vtterly against Christian faith and to be a thing receiued from the superstition of the Gentiles This Synod was called and confirmed by Charles the great Then belike the Pope had not gotten all Iurisdiction ouer Kings which now he claimeth For the Emperour called Synods not the Pope Neither as then had hee gotten Iurisdiction ouer all Bishops because we see many Bishops were found in Germany France Aquitany and England for all these Nations Charles nameth in his letter to Elepandus Metropolitane of Tolet as fauouring and maintaining the trueth against the worship of images which resisted the Pope in this matter so that his great and soueraigne Iurisdiction was not then established 16. About this time that most worthy most religious and learned King Alfred raigned in England Aser Meneuensis writing his life entituleth him Omnium Britanniae insulae Christianorum rectorem Which title doth not much differ from that which is now in part giuen to the King supreame Gouernour of all persons Ecclesiasticall For whereas at this day the discipline of the Court of Rome exempteth Clerkes from the Kings Courts and consequently from the Kings gouernment it appeareth that in King Alfreds time this thing was vtterly vnknowne to the world therefore this King is called and acknowledged to bee the Gouernour of all Christians within his dominions Now because Bishops and Clerks were Christians he was hereby questionlesse vnderstood the gouernour of Clerkes aswell as of others As then all forraine gouernement and Iurisdiction was excluded by that title so nowe there is no other thing sought but in like sort to exclude all forraine power and Iurisdiction whether the Popes or any other At this time whe n King Alsred liued and raigned the sense iudgement and vnderstanding of the world was no other but that Kings were supreme gouernours of all persons and caufes Ecclesiasticall and Temporall within their owne Dominions Ivnderstand gouernment here as throughout this question I haue often admonished gouernment or power coactiue for this exemption of criminous Clarkes from their Kings Courts was a thing vnknowen in the world in those dayes And therfore whereas it is commonly taken by our aduersaries who vse to begge such principles as they cannot prooue that the religion sense and iudgement of the world ranne wholly for the Iurisdiction which now is practised in the Court of Rome this wee vtterly denie For we are able to shew when the sense iudgement and religion of the Church was against them in euery part of their pretended Iurisdiction For first whereas the Pope claimeth Iurisdiction ouer Bishops this is one part of his Iurisdiction and is now the sense and iudgement of the Court of Rome but in the times of the sixt and seuenth Carthaginian Councels of the Affrican and Mileuitan Synodes at this time I say and alwayes before the religion sense and iudgement of the whole world ran contrary If any obiect that these were not generall Councels but prouinciall I
an Oath to stand to the Popes iudgement that at the pleasure of the Pope before the triall of his cause he should be ready either to leaue or to retaine his Kingdom that he should vse no Princely habite or ornament in the meane time that hee should not vndertake any part of gouernement that he should not exact an Oath of Allegeance of his owne subiects that hee should neuer reuenge this wrong vpon the Pope When he had thus hampered the Emperour with an Oath and with such strange and mercilesse conditions such is the Popes mercy where he is Master behold a stratagem a president of humility godlinesse patience mildenesse of a Pope he set vp Rodolph Duke of Sueuia against him in battell 40. The Popes hauing once extorted an Oath of the Emperour were desirous vpon such presidents to make lawes for they had no other meanes to build vp their Iurisdiction therefore when as first by force they extorted some Oathes afterward they set such examples in their Canons and last of all they expounded those Oathes which sometimes Emperours tooke to be Oathes of Allegeance to the Popes For this purpose there is a Canon in the Clementines Clement the first confesseth that Henry the seuenth Emperour refused the Oath which he would haue imposed vpon him and so doe other stories witnesse that the Emperour refused to take that Oath But if we will beleeue Clement in his Canon Henry afterward yeelded to that Oath but would not acknwledge that it was an Oath of Allegeance because the Emperours neuer sweare Allegeance to Popes but Popes to Emperours therefore Clement in that Canon declareth that these which some Emperours yeelded to some Popes were Oathes of Allegeance Declaramns saith he iuramenta praedicta fidelitatis existere censeri debere That is We declare that the foresaid Oathes are and must be accounted to be Oathes of Allegeance 41. By this we see how highly they would aduance the hornes of this Iurisdiction And still we finde this confirmed that the Oath which is giuen to the Pope is vnderstood an Oath of Allegeance And to certifie vs yet more fully of their meaning it is set downe not onely as a law in their Decretals but published as an ordinarie Ceremony which al must take knowledge of In the booke of their Ceremonies it is said that an Oath is to be ministred to all Emperours before their Coronation and before they enter the territories of the Romane Church The Oath is there thus set downe I will exalt the Pope secundum meum posse vitam hee shall neither loose member nor honour by my will councell consent or exhortation In Rome I will make no Decree or ordination of any thing that belongeth to his Holinesse without his councell In the same booke and place before cited it is said that Fredericke the third Emperour tooke that Oath 42. In this Mysterie of Oathes they haue proceeded so far as to exhibite an Oath not onely to the Clergie but to the temporall subiects of other Princes whom they may poyson and peruert by reconciling them to the Pope which as it is a practise most dangerous to them that are so taken and insnared as Birds in the net of their owne destruction so is it no lesse pernitious for such Princes from whose obedience these are drawen whereby the Pope seemeth to bring the question of Iurisdiction to an issue with the Princes of Christendome whether he shall ouerthrow them or they him for it is not possible that both should stand vp together for what is left to Princes if their Crownes and the hearts of their subiects be taken from them Or what is it that Princes can haue a more tender feeling of then of their Crownes and of the hearts of their subiects And what is more forcible to steale away the hearts of subiects from their Prince then to binde them with an Oath of Allegeance to another Prince Then these men that haue bound themselues by an Oath to the Pope how is it possible they should performe true Allegeance to the King For that the Oath which is exhibited to the Pope is an Oath of Allegeance and fidelity the Popes themselues by their Decretals haue assured vs. And if you will seeke it out this you shall finde to be the true reason why Pope Paulus the fift in his late Breues hath forbidden the Recusants of this land to take the Oath of Allegeance to the King because they haue taken an Oath of Allegeance to the Pope Now it is not possible that a man should performe Allegeance to two Soueraignes if one be vassal to the other happily one may hold Allegeance to two as for example a Tenant may sweare homage to his Land-lord and to his Prince also but this cannot be done to two Soueraignes And if one shall take an Oath of Allegeance to diuers Lordes it is concluded that if the Pope be one of those Lords he must be obeyed before all other whatsoeuer Then it is not a Fatherhood in the Church that the Pope striueth for but a power ouer Princes by weakning and vndermining their authority withdrawing the hearts of subiects exacting an Oath of Allegeance of all whom they can reconcile and not permitting their Conuerts to take an Oath of Allegeance to their owne Soueraigne Princes And because we find that moderate and conscionable Papists as Master Hart in the conference with Doctor Reynolds and such like being driuen to vnderstand the cause aright cannot chuse but iustifie our cause and will not yeeld to the Pope a Princehood ouer the world but onely a Fatherhood of the Church not graunting to him a power to depose Princes confessing also that the power which we giue to Princes is not vnderstood of themselues for they before they will vnderstand our cause thinke that wee meane to giue as much to the Prince as they doe to the Pope therefore we haue reason to rest herein assured that if the Iesuites entred not into the Popes battels with a Pontificall furie the Pope would vtterly be forsaken in this wherein all moderate spirits haue already forsaken him or if hee would relinquish this part of the quarrell which hee maintaineth against temporall Princes happily he might make himselfe much more stronger then he is or possibly can be by following this coâ—…rse But as the end is not Religion but a worldly Principality that they shoot at so the meanes which they vse are not the courses of moderation conscience and religion but of force and furie they will haue all or loose all Wherein the wisedome of the Iesuites will be called into great question for setting the Pope vpon such desperate courses at least for being the onely instruments of these new and furious practises which doubtlesse will in the end make an end of his Kingdome §. IIII. Of Inuestitures 43. HAuing spoken somewhat of the meanes whereby this Iurisdiction was sought wee are now to speake of the
partes of this Iurisdiction as wee finde the same practised at this time when it was at his height The partes of this Iurisdiction so much pursued by Popes we gather to be these power ouer Bishops power ouer generall Councels Inuestitures exemption of criminous Clerkes the Popes power in giuing lawes appellation and last of all a power to depose and depriue Kings In all which the Pope hath proceeded dâ—… facto to practise that power whereunto hee neuer had right The two first we purpose not to speake of here because of the first we haue spoken already Chapt. 5. Of the second we purpose to speake in the last Chapter the rest are here to be handled in Order and first of Inuestitures 44. The first Pope that claimed Inuestitures was Hildebrand William Malmsbury saith Hic Hildebranduâ—… quod alij iâ—…usitauerant palam eâ—…tulit excommunicans electos qui Inuestituras 〈◊〉 de manu Laici per annulum bacuâ—…m accipereâ—… That is He openly by excommunication thrust out them that had taken Inuestitures of Churches from a Lay hand by a Ring and a Staffe which thing before Hildâ—…bi and other Popes had not done Whereunto all the Histories of this time giue consent declaring that the first claime that the Popes made for Inuestitures was begunne by Hildebrand And because that the Popes were so peremptorie herein raising and continuing so great and so long a contention about this thing therefore it is thought by many that this right of Inuestitures was the Churches right and consequently the Popes And that Emperours and Kings did vsurpe it by inuasion and intrusion first priuately and then more publiquely We are therfore to seeke out this point to whose right Inuestitures did auncieâ—…tly belong whether to Kings or to Popes Now that they were a part of the auncient right of Emperours and Kings it is witnessed by Gratian for he bringeth an ancient testimonie which doth witnesse That Pope Hadrian did intreat Charles the great to come to Rome and defend the affaires of the Church and that there the Emperour held a Synode in which this auncient right was confirmed to him by Pope Hadrian Hâ—…drianus autem Papa cum vniuersa Synodo Carolo ius potâ—…statem eligendi pontificem ordinandi Apostolicam sedem dignitatem quoque patritiatus ei concesserunt Et Episcopos per singulas prouinciaâ—… ab eo Inuestituram accipere defiâ—…iuit vt nisi à rege laudetâ—…r Iâ—…uestiatur Episcopus à nemine consecretur That is Pope Hadrian with the whole Synode graunted to Charles the right and power of choosing the Pope and ordaining the Sea Apostolike and the priuiledge of the Romane Nobility and defined that Bishoppes through all Prouinces should take Inuestitures from him that a Bishoppe should be consecrated by none vnlesse he were first inuested by the Emperour Thus much is also testified by Sigebert and many moe The same is confirmed by Pope Leo who graunteth this to be the right of Otho the first as Hadrian did to Charles for thus saith Leo Othoni primo Teâ—…tonicorum Regi eiusque sâ—…ccessoribus c. perpetuam facultatem â—…ligendi successorem summae sedis Apostolicae Pontificem ac per hoc Archiepisâ—…opos seâ—… Episcopos vt ipsi ab eo Inuestituram accipiant To Otho the first Germane Emperour and to his Successours c. We grant the chusing our successour the Bishop of the chiefe Apostolicke Sea and by this to chuse Archbishoppes and Bishoppes that they may receiue Inuestitures from him 45. In both these Decrees as wel of Hadrian as of Leo there is Anathema denounced to the violators thereof Now Hildebrand was the first violator of them The things which the Popes decree in their Consistory in a full Synode vnder Anathema are things which must be vnchangeably kept or els there may be errours and vncertainty in the Decrees of his Holines which the Iesuites will not confesse But some of late presume that the Popes first graunted these Inuestitures to temporall Princes and that they haue no greater right or Title to them then from the Popes gift and the same authority say they which gaue them may reuoke this gift We answere this was yeelded to Charles when he was first made Emperour as the auncient right of the Empire This is proued first because in the same Distinction of Grâ—…tian this is often called antiqua consuetudo and prisca conâ—…uetudo and cap. 18. Pope Stephen answereth that he deferred the consecration of a Bishoppe Quod imperialem nobis vt mos est absolutionis minimè detulit Epistolam And a little after Uestrâ—… solertia imperialâ—… vt prisca dictat consuetudo percepta licentia nobis quem â—…dmodum vos scire credmus imperiali directa Epistola tunc voluntati vâ—…strae de hoc parebimuâ—… And againe Non debet ordinari qui electus fuerit nisi prius deâ—…retum generale introducatur in regiam vrbem secundum antiquam consuetudinem vt cum â—…ius scientiâ iussionâ—… debeat ordinaâ—…io prouenire Then the Bishops of Rome themselues graunt that this was the auncient vse and custome of the Empire The same is also confirmed from the reason that drew Charles then from the siege of Ticinum to that Synod it was to haue the auncient rights of the Empire confirmed to him Which thing is declared by diuers Histories especially by Theodoricus de Niem who testifieth that the reason which drew Charles to Rome at that time was to haue the right and auncient vses of the Empire clearely knowne There was saith he a Synod holden by Pope Hadrian and one hundred fifty three Bishops Abbats exquirentibâ—…s vsus leges mores eiusdem Ecclesiâ—… Imperij That is Making search of the vses lawes and customes of the same Church and of the Empire For all that could bee proued to be the auncient priuiledges of the Empire was Charles to haue then to be confirmed to him but then were Inuestitures confirmed to him therefore they were part of the auncient priuiledges of the Empire 46. Hincmâ—…rus Archbishop of Rhemes liued and wrote about the yeare eight hundred sixtie At what time without any question the auncient practise was continued of choosing Bishops by the consent of the King For he writing to the Bishops of France saith of the manner of choosing Bishops Consensu principis terrae qui res Ecclesiasticas diuino iudicio ad 〈◊〉 defendendas suscepit electione cleri atque plebis quisque ad Ecelesiasticum regimeâ—… absque vlla venalitate â—…rouehi debet That is By the consent of the Prince of the land who by the Diuine ordinance hath vndertaken the defence and preseruation of Ecclesiasticall causes and by the election of the Clergy and people ought euery one to be promoted to the Ecclesiasticall gouernment without Simony This then is the auncient right of euery Prince within his owne dominions As the same Hincmarus saith afterward Principi terrae
it must be before his Bishoppe if he will accuse the Bishoppe it must be in a prouinciall Synode if he will draw a Metropolitane to answer for some things which he hath done it must be either before the Primate or before the Bishoppe of Constantinople All this we graunt to be orderly established the things intended are matters of Ecclesiasticall Cognisance which are to bee heard in such Courts but our question is of Clerks that are conuinced to be murtherers or Traytors c. Whether such are to bee exempt from triall at Common Law Of which exemptions these auncient Bishops neuer dreamed 76. It is moreouer to be noted that diuers of these places which he citeth as that from Sulpitius of S. Martin and from Ambrose c. are vnderstoode of another thing and not of exemption of Clarkes at all For the auncient Bishops as before I haue declared thought it not lawfull that matters of faith and doctrine should be determined in ciuill Courts by ciuill Magistrates This is true and this is that which those testimonies speake of but what is this to criminous Clarks that Robbers Traytors murtherers of the Clergy should be protected by reason of their Order from triall in Kings Courts this is a doctrine neuer knowne to the auncients It was first knowne in England in the dayes of Henry the second stirred seditiously by Thomas Becket Archbishop of Canterbury when as before that time it was neuer heard of in this land The manner heereof I will briefly recite out of Roger Houeden 77. In the yeare of Christ 1163. the contention concerning exemption of Clerkes grew famous betweene King Henry the second and Thomas Becket Archbishop Rex volebat saith Houeden Presbyteros Diaconos Subdiaconos alios Ecclesiae rectores si comprehensi fuissent in latrocinio vel murdra vel felonia vel iniqua combustione vel in his similibus ducere ad saecularia examina punire sicâ—…t laicum Contra quod Archiepiscopus dicebat quod si Clericus in sacris ordinibus constitutus vel quilibet alius rector Ecclesiae calumniatus fuerit de aliqua re per viros Ecclesiasticos in curia Ecclesiastica debet iudicari Et si conusctus fuerit ordines suos amittere sic alâ—…enatus ab officio beneficio Ecclesiastico si postea forisfecerit secundum voluntatem Regis baliuorum suorum iudicetur That is The King required that Priests Deacons Subdeacons and other Rectors of Churches if they were taken in murther robbery felony burning of houses or such like should be brought to secular Courts and there punished as Lay-men were Against this the Archbishop affirmed that if a Clerke being within holy Orders or any other Parson of a Church were accused of any thing he must be iudged by Ecclesiasticall Iudges in the Ecclesiasticall Court and if he were conuict he should loose his orders And so being excluded from office and benefice Ecclesiasticall if after this he incurred the like fault then might he be iudged at the pleasure of the King and his Officers Thus farre Houeden 78. This manner of degrading and afterward deliuering criminous Clarkes to the Secular power crept in about the time of the Conquest Bellarmine pretending greater antiquity for it can neither bring reason nor testimony for his opinion For whereas he saith Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia was first deposed by the Nicen Councell and afterward banished by Constantine by this offering to proue that they must first be deliuered to the Secular power before the Magistrate may punish and reproueth Caluin for not considering thus much We answere Bellarmine sheweth his skill in shifting and hiding the truth to deceiue the simple For Caluin in that place which he citeth against this Romish immunitie proueth two things First that coactiue power is in the hand of the Prince and not of the Church Ecclesia cogendi non habet potestatem de ciuili coactione loquor saith he Secondly that criminous Clarkes had no immunities from the ciuill Courts of Princes Now that Bellarmine saith Eusebius was first deposed by the Councell and then banished is nothing against Caluin but for him For the Church did not inflict the coactiue punishment of banishment but the Emperour And Caluin proueth at large in the same place that Kings and Emperours haue no authority to iudge in causes of faith Producing the example of Ambrose who in such a cause resisted the Emperour Valentinian Such a cause was that of Eusebius the Emperour knew not whether he was in fault or not before the Church had iudged the cause But Caluines iudgement and our question standeth in two thinges against which Bellarmine doth not so much as speake one word First that coactiue power was not then in the Church but in the Emperour Secondly that criminous Clerkes were then punished by the Magistrate Eusebius is not there proposed as a criminous Clerke but as an example wherein the coactiue power of the Magistrate appeared But now they say if a Clerke bee proued to be a felon murderer traytor c. the Kings Courts may not censure this man before he be degraded Against these immunities wee speake for which Bellarmine offereth not any proofe Let the manner of Bellarmines answering bee considered for it is easie for him thus to answere Caluin and all Protestants when he toucheth not the point in question but singling out of some peece from the whole wresteth that also from the true intent that he may shape a mis-shapen answere to it Then we say that before those desperate times wherein Iohn Wiclife saith and often affirmeth that Satan was loosed no man claymed such a beastly priuiledge as to be exempt from the Kings Lawes for murder treason and such like Godlinesse reason and the light of Nature seemeth to be extinguished in these men that being contented to take the benefite of Lawes will not be contented to bee ordered by Lawes This hath forced some Princes and States to ordaine Lawes that such should be out of the Kings protection Thus did that noble Prince Edward the third King of England Wherein the King seemed to open the true way to his successors to deale with these men for seeing as then they did so now they doe denie themselues to be the Kings subiects and affirme that neither by Diuine nor humane right they are bound to obey the King with his coactiue Lawes and that they are onely vnder the subiection of the Pope that for no crimes they are to bee examined in the Kings Courts is it not great reason that the protection of the King and of his Lawes should bee denyed to them that reiect both 79. Houeden declareth also that in the yeare one thousand one hundred sixtie foure the King called a Synod and required the Bishops vpon their allegeance to receiue his Graundfathers Lawes to vse and obserue them Thomas Becket answered for him and the rest they would keepe all the Lawes
Now this is the crueltie of our Lord the King that is so much spoken of through the world against the Church this is that persecution that he raiseth Then it is an auncient complaint of these Romish Catholickes to call the iust lawfull godly and necessary execution of iustice crueltie and persecution this complaint hath beene euer since continued by them and most of all where there is least cause euen in the milde and mercifull gouernement of the late Queene of famous memory What crueltie did they impute to her What persecution to her Gouernement When they are not able to proue that one man was executed for Religion but for treason Which was so much the more dangerous because it was masked with the visard of Religion but Religion is not nor euer was the cause why our Kings punished the Popes Clerkes but onely Iurisdiction For when the Pope will stretch his Iurisdiction so farre as to include coactiue power and to exclude Kings from the gouernement of their Subiects drawing the Clergie from the obedience of their Kings to the obedience and subiection of the Pope drawing the subiects of other Kings vnder his subiection by an Oath of Allegiance and hereupon perswading al that will hearken to him that they may not yeelde an Oath of Alleageance to their owne Princes the Popes Iurisdiction being drawne to these points as now by the confession of themselues they are the question betweene the Pope and Christian Princes is not of Religion but of Iurisdiction of ciuill and coactiue Iurisdiction and the summe of all is this Whether the Princes of Christendome shall be free Princes or the Popes Vassals 82. By this which we haue declared we see the cause of our Kings iustified against the Archbishoppe and the exemption of Clerkes for which the Archbishoppe stroue and which since that time is claimed to be an especiall priuilege of that Church to be condemned by the chiefe of the Clergy by all the Bishops of that Prouince and that euen to the Pope himselfe Which thing the Bishoppes of the English Church would neuer haue done vnlesse they had beene well assured that the Kings cause was good and that the contrary opinion was a pernicious nouelty a late vpstart deuice in the Church But howsoeuer the Popes Clerkes pretended their new forged priuiledges yet the Kings of this land held still their olde course in the auncient manner of execution of iustice against them that offended And therefore Henry the second by law commaunded as Houeden saith that the Bishoppes of London and Norwich should be summoned that they might be before the Kings Iustices to answere for that they against the statutes of the kingdome did interdict the land of the Earle Hugh 83. This exemption of Clarks was a new practise in the time of Marsilius of Padua and not so new as pestiferous occasioning the ruine of States and being as a furie sent abroad from hell to disorder all gouernment For thus he complaineth of it Quibus non contenti sed saecularium contra Christi Apostolorum praeceptum appetentes fastigia in legum Lationes seorsum ab ijs quae Ciuium vniuersitatis sunt proruperuut Omnem clerum ab his decernentes exemptum ciuile sâ—…hisma principatuum supremoruÌ„ pluralitatâ—…m inducentes ex ipsis c. Haec pestilentiae Italici regni radix est origo ex qua cuncta scandala germinauerunt prodeunt qua stante nunquaÌ„ ciuiles ibidem cessabunt discordiae c. That is Not content herewith they the Popes seeking the honour of secular gouernement against the commandement of Christ and his Apostles haue taken vpon them the ordaining of Lawes and Canons other then such as serue for the common good They decree that all the Clergie are exempt from temporall Princes heereby inducing a pluralitie of Soueraignties c. This is the roote and spring of the pestilence of the Empire from whence all scandals grow and which standing ciuill discord shall neuer haue an end c. Thus were these exemptions then found and acknowledged to be the pestilence and ruine of all states especially of the Empire And his reason is well to be obserued because saith he it bringeth in Pluralitatem supremorum principatuum quam velut impossibilem humanae quieti demonstrauimus he proueth the plurality of Soueraignty a thing impossible to stand with the quiet and peaceable Gouernement of the world Now this exemption must eyther induce a plurality of Soueraignties when the Pope is one Soueraigne and the Prince another which is impossible in nature saith Marsilius or else it denieth the Kings Soueraignty to establish the Popes which thing can neuer bee indured by any Prince §. VI. Of the Popes power in giuing lawes 84. ANother thing whereby this new Iurisdiction of the Pope was so highly aduanced was giuing of Lawes to Princes and their subiects whereas before Princes had giuen lawes to him Marsilius in the wordes last cyted in the end of the last Paragraffe speaking of these laws saith They now break out into a practise of Iurisdiction taking vpon them to make lawes separat and distinct from such lawes as are for the common and publique good of all meaning the Canon lawes which because they intend onely the priuate aduancement of the Pope and not the publique good of the Church being also made onely by the authority of the Pope and not by the publique consent of the Church therefore he doth not account them lawes but Oligarchicall and tyrannicall Decrees these lawes are to be considered because they make so great a shew of the Popes Iurisdiction 85. The Church before was gouerned by Bishoppes and Metropolitanes in such order that the affaires of euery particular Diocesse were ordered by the Bishoppe or by a Synode of his calling the affaires of the Prouince were determined by the Metropolitane or by a Prouinciall Synode of his calling from an Episcopall Synode a man might appeale to a prouinciall Synode and from a Prouinciall Synode to a nationall but from a prouinciall or from a nationall Synode none might appeale to the Bishoppe of Rome for which thing diuers Decrees were made in prouinciall Synodes as we haue before declared As the Bishoppes were Gouernours so the lawes whereby they did then gouerne the Church were the Canons of auncient Councels especially of those foure most famous Councels of Nice Constantinople Ephesus and Chalcedon For that the Canons of these Councels were held for the lawes of the Church it appeareth by a Constitution of Iustinian extant in the fift Synode held at Constantinople wherein Iustinian the Emperour declareth that Aâ—…thimus was deposed from the Bishoprike of Constantinople by Pope Agapetus and a whole Synode with him consenting for that he had departed from the doctrines of those foure holy Synodes the Nicen the Constantinopolitan the Ephesian and the Chalcedonian The Emperor also declareth that he being deposed by the Church should be banished by him ioyning his
to disswade the separation producing that out of Augustine Nullam posse causam dari ob quam necessarium sit ad schisma perâ—…enire That is That no cause can bee giuen for which it may bee necessary to come to a schisme But after much dispute at last hee resolueth that the case may be such that the Church may well depart from the Pope Quando sacer Princeps saith he contra sanctorum patrum statuta aliquid praesumit vbi non constat eum ex causa 〈◊〉 aut necessitatis moueri sed ex aliqua particulari indigâ—…a causa time ipse in priora Petri mandata offendit exiens vires potestatis suae Quapropter non esset inconâ—…eniens si pertinaciter in hoc persisteret Ab eo recedi posse per Ecclesiaâ—… That is When the holy Prince presumeth against the lawes of holy Fathers where it appeareth that he is not moued thereto because of the publike good or necessitie but from some particular of his owne and an vnworthy cause then hath he first offended against the former precepts of Peter going beyond the limits and strength of his power Therfore if hee persist therein incorrigibly it is nothing inconuenient for the Church to depart from him 58. Then if a Pope make a departure first from the Mandates Doctrines and faith of Saint Peter thus going out of the bounds of his power in this case it is the iudgement of the graue Cardinals of Rome who liued and wrote long before M. Luther was borne that the Church might make a separation from the Pope Iohn Gerson saith as before we heard that this separation may be for a time or for euer Now then whereas this separation is made from the Pope by the reformed Churches there is nothing done but that which the Church had in consultation to doe long before in case the Pope should persist in his pride and transgressions and shew himselfe incorrigible So that it is no maruaile if the Church which hath so long before thought of this departure being thereunto so much prouoked by the intollerable ambition of the Pope hath once performed that thing which was so long in consultation especially seeing the Church hath for the same both the warrant of holy Scriptures which doth fully not only prophesie of this departure which the Pope hath made from the truth and consequently which the Church was to make from the Pope but also giueth expresse commaundement to the people of God to depart from thence Go out of her my people And besides this warrant of holy Scriptures they had also the iudgement of the Church before them which Church whether we consider it in particular members as the learned men principall instructours and preseruers of doctrine or in generall Councels hath as we see oftentimes declared herselfe to bee wearied with bearing the Popes proud and ambitious Iurisdiction and hath beene in great consultation to cast off the yoake of this Aegyptian bondage 59. Now from that booke which this Cardinall Cusanus wrote De 〈◊〉 Catholicâ—… we will obserue some things wherein he declareth his iudgement against this Papall Iurisdiction And first he disputeth against them that thinke the Pope hath more power then other Bishops Oportet primum si hoc verum foret Petrum aliqâ—…d à Christo singularitatis recepisse Papam in hoc successorem esse sed scimus quod Petrus nihil plus potestatis à Christâ—… accepit alijs Apostolis 21. d. in nouo 24. q. loquitur That is First if this be true it must bee graunted that Peter receiued some singular power from Christ and that herein the Pope is his successor but wee know that Peter receiued no more power from Christ then the other Apostles 21. d. in nouâ—… 24. q. loquitur And of this spirituall Iurisdiction he saith thus Cum potestas ligandi soluendi in qua fundatur omnis Ecclesiastica Iurisâ—…ictio sit immediate à Christo quia ab illa potestate ligandâ—… soluendi sit diuiâ—…a Iurisdictionis potestas patet omnes Episcopos forte etiam presbyteros aequales esse quoad Iurisdictionem That is Seeing the power of binding and loosing in which all Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction is founded is immediately from Christ and because the power of diuine Iurisdiction is from this power of binding and loosing it is euident that all Bishops perhaps also all Priests are equall in respect of this Iurisdiction And againe hee saith Quod vniuersale concilium propriè captuÌ„ scilicet quod vniuersam EcclesiaÌ„ representat sit supra Patriarchas Roman Pontificem credo â—…ubium esse non debere That is I hold it a truth not to bee doubted that a generall Councell properly taken that is as it representeth the vniuersall Church is aboue Patriarches and the Bishop of Rome And againe Papa per Synodum in criminibus etiam alijs quam hâ—…resi iâ—…dicari potest That is The Pope may be iudged by a Synod for other crimes also besides heresie Now for the Iurisdiction of the ciuill Magistrate the same Author speaketh thus Imperator Christianorum in sua praesidentia est Christi vicarius That is A Christian Emperour in his office is Christs Vicar And againe Omnis rex Imperator habet officium Publicum ad Publicam vtilitatem or diâ—…atum Publica vtilitas est paâ—…ad quam ordinantur iusticia iusta praelia principium autem pacis est ad â—…inem 〈◊〉 â—…rigere subditâ—…s media illum 〈◊〉 sunt sacra institâ—…ta religionum quare prima cura Imperialis in 〈◊〉 obseruandis verâ—…ur That is Euery King and Emperour hath a publike office ordinate to the publike good the publike good is peace whereunto iustice and iust warres are ordinated the fountaine of peace to direct subiects to an eternall end the meanes to obtaine that end the holy ordinances of religion wherefore the first and chiefe care Imperiall consisteth in the obseruation of those ordinances And therefore he saith Imperator curam custodiae gerit And againe isto modo imperator dicitur aduocatus vniuerâ—…alis Ecclesiae custos sides orthodoxae Which thing he proueth by the ancient practise of the Church because in the Chalcedon Councell the Emperour Martiaâ—…us is called custos fidei and the Emperour Basilius in the beginning of the eight Councell saith that the gouernement of the Church was by the prouidence of God committed to his hands 60. The same Author speaking further of the office of Kings and of their Iurisdiction in Church affaires and in Councels saith Debent râ—…ges principes Synodos congregare iuxta admonitionem sancts Gregorij ad Theodoricum regem Francorum ex registro 273. Iterata vos per vestram mercedem adhortatione pulsamus vt congregari Synodum iubeatis That is Kings and Princes ought to gather Synodes according to the admonition of Gregory writing to Theodoricus the French King ex registro 273. We moue you with our redoubled petition that euen for that