Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	judge_n	king_n	law_n	5,155	5	5.2571	4	true

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A02637	A detection of sundrie foule errours, lies, sclaunders, corruptions, and other false dealinges, touching doctrine, and other matters vttered and practized by M.Iewel, in a booke lately by him set foorth entituled, a defence of the apologie. &c. By Thomas Harding doctor of diuinitie.	Harding, Thomas, 1516-1572.	1568 (1568)	STC 12763; ESTC S112480	542,777	903

debet esse iudex in causa propria The Pope maie not be iudge in his ovvne cause Harding The Pope maie be iudge in the cause of the Churche Though Leos Authoritie be not greate in his ovvne cause The .29 Chapt. yet in the cause of the Churche being so auncient so holy so learned a Father by your owne graunt it must be very great The wordes you bring are of your owne forging Wherefore as ye haue hitherto benne a forger of Doctours Scriptures the Canon lawe and Gloses so now you are become a forger of the Ciuile lawe With what wordes the lawe is written here anonne you shal see But be it true that Vlpian said for so you should haue said The Emperour alleged for Vlpian and not the Emperour as your skil in the lawe vnskilfully telleth vs no man maie minister lawe vnto himselfe Yet neither he not the Emperour euer forbad but that a man maie truely reporte of his owne matters Now Pope Leo that holy man and great learned Clerke in the place by me alleged doth not minister lawe vnto him selfe in his owne cause but for the better gouernement of the Churche and that peace and good order maie the better be kepte in the Churche reporteth a difference or diuersitie of power to be emong Bishoppes with likenesse of Order and honour as S. Hierome in his epistle to Euagrius coÌ„fesseth them to be of one merite and of one Priestehood In declaring whereof he speaketh of the right that the Bishoppes of the See Apostolique S. Peters successours ought to haue in the gouernment of the vniuersal Church through out the whole worlde This M. Iewel was not his owne priuate cause but the cause of the whole Churche in whiche he might geue iudgement But M. Iewel guilfully seemeth to put the case as though there had ben many Catholiques that called Pope Leo to lawe for vsurping the authoritie not dewe vnto him and as thoughe he had ben defendant against them al yea as thoughe he had stepte vp into his iudgement seate and there sitting as a Iudge in his owne mater had pronunced sentence for him selfe Whiche thing he did not nor euer was there any catholique man that laid any suche kinde of vsurpation to his charge he neuer stoode as defendant nor sate as Iudge in his owne cause but discretely and truely as occasion serued signified vnto the worlde his lawful authoritie and his â—uccessours as Kinges vse to doo in their titles of honour and stiles If M. Iewel wil calle his double wiued lawier vnto him and with him peruse the lawe that beginneth Qui Iurisdictioni praeest neque sibi ius dicere debet â— Qui iu risdiccioni ff de iurisdict omn. iudic neque vxori vel liberis suis c. whiche is the true lawe that he should haue alleged and wil consider that Princes Kinges and Emperours vse to doo in their owne causes by very order of lawe and if he wil therewith searche out the right meaning of the lawe L. in priuatis ff de inoffic testamen In priuatis iudicus pater filium vel filius patrem iudicem habere potest he shal finde both that he hath fondely vainely and rashly alleged a lawe that he vnderstoode not nor made any thing to his purpose but onely to fil vp paper with wordes and also that it is one thing to saie Nemo debet sibi ius dicere as he falsely allegeth the Lawe and that it is a farre other thing to saie Qui iurisdictioni praeest neque sibi ius dicere debet neque vxori vel liberis suis neque libertis vel caeteris quos secum habet For so is the lawe vttered by Vlpianus As for your marginal note out of the Decrees you shew how barrein and poore your mater is that for defence of it you are faine to runne for helpe to notes put in the margent of the Glose a very poore shifte God wote To your marginal note I answere The Pope as there the Glosse saith if there be a mater in lawe betwen him and an other man about a temporal thing ought not him selfe to be iudge in that case and to take the thing into his owne possession before it be tried whose it is but to choose Vmpeeres to sitte vpon it Now marke what followeth good Reader 16. q. 6. Consuetudo tamen si vult esse Iudex in causa Ecclesiae potest esse yet if he list to be a iudge in a mater concerning the Churche he maie be Certainely no one thing more concerneth the wealth tranquillitie and good order of the Churche then that whiche Leo intreateth of in the epistle 84. to Anastasius the Bishop of Thessalonica whiche in my Confutation to good purpose I alleged Iewel Pag. 111. Concil Aphricanum cap. 105. Superbum seculi typhuÌ„ It is vvel knovven that the Pope hath sought for and claimed this vniuersal authoritie these many hundred yeres Pope Innocentius vvas therefore reproued of pride and vvorldely lordelinesse by the vvhole Councel of Aphrica Harding The Aphrican Councel vntruly reported by M. Iewel The 30. Chapt. The Pope hath not sought for that whiche our Lorde gaue vnto S. Peter no more then S. Peter sought for it at Christes graunt The fame he maie iustely claime for so muche as it perteineth to the feeding and gouernement of Christes flocke and to the strengthning of the faithful as being the Successour of S. Peter That you saie of Innocentius is vtterly false He was not so reproued of pride and worldely Lordelinesse as more like a proud worldely Lordeling then an humble plaine handler of Goddes Truthe you saie Neither be those wordes superbum seculi typhum which you laie forth in your Margent to be founde in any Epistle of the Aphrican Councel to Innocentius nor be they spoken or written at al against Innocentius as you beare vs in hande Neither was Innocentius then a liue when the Aphrican Councel was holden but departed this life long before I graunt there is extant an epistle of the Aphrican Councel to the learned Pope Coelestinus in whiche Epistle Innocentius that blessed man is not once touched Neither was the charitie of that whole Councel so smal as to speake so il of a holy Bishop so long before departed The manner of those Fathers was to praie for suche specially for the Bishoppes of Rome deceassed rehearsing their names in their Masses and in no wise to reporte so il of them How be it in that whole epistle Pope Innocentius is not so muche as once named nor spoken of There we finde these three wordes fumosum typhum seculi that is to saie the smoky pride of the worlde or the vaine stoutenesse of the temporaltie but in a farre other sense and to an other purpose then M. Iewel pretendeth Whether he rightly vnderstode the place or no I haue good cause to doubte It seemeth that the Bishop of Rome in the cause of Appiarius whom

authoritie to any heresie or errour I denie vtterly neither shal M. Iewel or any of his felowes what so euer be hable to proue the contrarie That any where I haue tolde them sadly and in good earnest that the bishop of Rome is a king if he meane the expresse name of a King I tel him here eftsones sadly and in good earnest and without Saulue la vostre that it is a starke lye Confut. fol. 280. a. The pope hath kingly power yet is he no king In the first place of my Confutation by him coted I say The pope hath a kingly power ouer his owne subiectes euen in temporal thinges and now I tel you here for example he hath it as Moyses had yet he taketh not vpon him to be a King nor chalengeth vnto him that title Neither doth he in his owne person bicause he acknowlegeth him selfe to be no King exercise the function and office of a King but committeth such charge vnto other Laye persons If ye enuie the Pope his kingly power and possessions whiche he holdeth by right beware you be not at length thought vnworthy and remoued from the landes of a Baron and the Earledom of S. Osmunde whiche you holde vnduely If that happen to come to passe where then shal we finde your good Lordship In the other place of the Confutation vpon occasion geuen by wordes of the Apologie I say that the Pope maie rule temporally Confut. fol. 305. b. and more there say I not touching this matter Item there Iewel That vnto him belongeth the right of bothe Svvordes as vvel Temporal as spiritual Confut. fol. 247. b. Harding What so euer I bring in my Confutation concerning both Swordes committed vnto the Successour of S. Peter it is S. Bernardes it is not myne Wheras the Apologie maker were it M. Iewel or who so euer it was by the multitude of the light scoffes it appeareth that he was the Penneman of it mary the stuffe I heare say was gathered by the whole Brotherhead whereas I say he steppeth forth very peartly and saith thus Confut. fo 247. a. I haue a special fansie to common a worde or two with the Popes good Holinesse and to say these thinges vnto his owne face Tel vs I praie you good holy Father c. Which of the Fathers euer said that bothe the Swordes were committed vnto you To this question the answere I make in the Popes behalfe is this Confut. fo 247. b. L. Si quis C. d. test Of the Popes teÌ„poral Svvorde De Considerat li. 4 Math. 26. Let S. Bernard writing to a Pope answer for the Pope He is a sufficient witnesse Where your selfe doo allege him much against the Pope you can not by the lawe iustly refuse him speaking for the Pope The spiritual sworde you denie not I trowe Of the temporal sworde belonging also to the Pope thus saith S. Bernarde to Eugenius He that denieth this sworde to be thine seemeth to me not to consider sufficiently the worde of our Lorde saying thus to Peter thy predecessour put vp thy sworde in the scaberd The very same then is also thine to be drawen forth perhappes at thy becke though not with thy hande Elles if the same belonged in no wise vnto thee where as the Apostles said Lucae 22. The Churche hath both svvordes by S. Bernard beholde there be two swordes here Our Lorde would not haue answered it is yenough but it is to muche So bothe be the Churches the spiritual sworde and the material But this to be exercised for the Churche and that of the Churche That by the hande of the Priest this of the souldier but verely at the becke of the Priest and commaundement of the Emperour Thus touching the Popes bothe swordes you are fully answered by S. Bernarde I trust you wil not be so vncourteous as to put him beside nor so parcial as to allow him when he seemeth to make some shewe for you and to refuse him when he is found plaine contrarie to your false assertions Vpon this place of S. Bernarde M. Iewel in the Defence sitting forsooth M. Iewels graue sentence pronounced against S. Bernarde Defence pag. 528. Ibidem as it were vpon the Benche like a Iudge hauing power to geue sentence either of life or of death saith ful grauely and Iudgelike and pronounceth this sentence S. Bernarde saith The Pope hath bothe swordes But S. Bernardes authoritie in this case is but simple But why I praie you Sir Iudge Marke the cause and profounde reason of this Iudge He liued saith he eleuen hundred yeeres after Christes Ascension in the time of King Henry the first the King of England in the middes of the Popes route and tyrannie And shal we for this cause shake of S. Bernarde Then why maie we not as wel sitte in Iudgement vpon M. Iewel and in like sorte but with more reason pronounce this sentence M. Iewel saith the bodie of Christe is not in the Euchariste the bodie and bloude of Christe are not to be adored in the Sacrament The Churche hath no externall Sacrifice no external Priesthod Praier made for the dead is vaine and superstitious There be not seuen Sacramentes but onely two and by the same grace is not conferred or geuen but onely signified The Pope is Antichriste and al that holde the olde Faith of the Churche who are Papistes perteine to the Kingdome of Antichriste c. But M. Iewels authoritie in these cases is but simple He liued almost sixteen hundred yeeres after Christe and is yet aliue in the time of Quene Elizabeth the Quene of England in the middes of the Caluinistes route and tyrannie The same sentence with a smal change of wordes maie with like reason be pronounced vppon Luther Zuinglius Peter Martyr Bucer Caluine Beza Baudie Bale Hooper Cranmare and the rest of that wicked route It were a thing worthy to be knowen why S. Bernarde should be condemned in respecte of his age and of the route whiche this man telleth vs the Popes then bare and these Apostates should be beleeued and honoured with al mennes assent yelded to their sayinges and teachinges their age being foure hundred yeeres later the tyranny crueltie vilanie and outrage whiche in sundry places by them of that side is vsed farre surmounting any what so euer seueritie of gouernement whiche the Popes vsed in that time their learning not equal with the learning of S. Bernarde their witte muche inferiour to his of eithers vertue and good life what shal I speake To compare theirs with his it were a kinde of blasphemie so holy a Father was he so dissolute Apostates are these Item there Iewel That all kinges and Emperours receiue their vvhole povver at his hande and ought to svveare obedience and Fealtie to the Pope For these be his vvordes euen in this bâ—rke so boldly dedicated vnto your Maiestie It is a great eye soare saith M. Harding to the ministers of Antichriste to see the

wordes be simply beleeued let my Confutation of the Apologie be vewed and there I shal be founde touching these odious pointes of these princes Variance with the Popes of their time to haue vttered these woordes farre otherwise then he here reporteth Confut. fol. 339. b. Concerning the case between these three Kinges of England and the Bishoppes of Rome for the tyme being I say litle If they did wel and the Bishoppes euil they haue their rewarde the other their punishment If otherwise or how so euer ech one at Gods iudgement shal haue his deserued measure But be it graunted al were true ye say though we know the more parte to be false Henrie the secoÌ„d S. Thomas Arch bishop of Canturbury King Iohn What though king Henrie the Second were euil entreated of Pope Alexander about the murthering of S. Thomas the Archebishop of Canturburie and King Iohn likewise of that zelous and learned Pope Innocentius the thirde about the stirre he made against the Church for cause of Steuen Lankton Archebishop of Canturburie Henrie the .8 This is no iust cause to forsake the Churche King Henrie the eigth likewise of the Popes in our time about matters yet fresh bleeding Is this a good cause why ye who haue nothing to doo with Princes matters now ended and buried should forsake the Churche change your Faith change the whole order of Religion and condemne al before your time for a thousand yeres Bicause the Bishoppes of Rome haue done euil wil ye geue ouer the Faith of the Churche of Rome Bicause the Popes did wronge to Princes wil ye doo wrong to your selues Bicause the Popes were at Variance with these three Kinges wil ye be at Variance with God Bicause they excommunicated them wil ye excommunicate your selues I haue heard of a foole that being striken of one standing a looffe of would eftsones strike an other that stood next him But I neuer heard of any so foolish that seeing an other striken would therefore kill him selfe Verely your Apostasie and departing from the Catholique Churche is to weightie a matter to be defended with so light a reason Thou maist see good Reader that here I take not vpon me in Defence of those Popes to answere vnto these matters nor shortely as M. Iewel saith nor at length nor in light manner nor in sad manner which matters he calleth Tyrannical iniuries and iuste causes of griefe The more cleerely to shewe how litle good matter our new Vsurping Clergie haue to bring for the excuse and Defence of the Alteration they haue made in Religion and of their Schisme and departing from the Catholike Churche bicause in their Apologie they alleged these Practises of the Popes only I demaunde their tale for their better aduantage being graunted to be true whiche yet I saied expressely was knowen to be false for the more parte what reliefe their cause could haue thereby and how the euil doinges of the Bishoppes of Rome if it were graunted they did euil therein could be drawen to Defence of their owne worse doing To whiche demaunde M. Iewel by his silence in his pretensed Defence maketh al the worlde witnesse Defence Pag. 733. how vnhable he is to answere Howbeit in that place he vseth his common sleight by cutting awaie the chiefe parte of my tale wherein lyeth the weighte and so dischargeth him selfe of the paines of answering Any booke may so sone be answered Touching these Popes and these Kinges when M. Iewel or any of his felow Ministers shal truely and with sufficient reason proue vnto vs that Henrie the Second did wel when he gaue occasion that the blessed Martyr S. Thomas Archebishop of Canturburie was murdered that al King Iohns attemptes against the Churche for cause of Steuen Lankton Archebishop and primate of the same prouince were iuste and right and that King Henrie the eight did wel and according either to the holy Scriptures or doctrine of the auncient and learned Fathers when he tooke vpon him to be Supreme Head in earth of the Churche of England immediatly vnder Christe whiche no temporal prince euer tooke vpon him before and likewise when for maintenance of the same title he hanged headded and quartered so many holy and learned men of al degrees now blessed Sainctes and crowned Martyrs in heauen when I say either he or they or any of them shal proue this much vnto vs in such sorte as I said before then wil we say with them Ã´ worthy Kinges Ã´ naughty Popes yea then wil we saie too Ã´ the crowe is white Neuerthelesse I doo not here iustifie al the deedes of the Popes But what so euer they did that is no sufficient cause why these menne should forsake their Faith and departe from the felowship of the Churche Item there Iewel But concerning the Maiestie and right of Kinges and Emperours M. Harding telleth vs they haue their first authoritie by the positiue Lavve of Nations and can haue no more povver then the people hath of vvhom they take their temporal iurisdiction Confutat Fol. 318. b. Harding If I haue herein spoken euil geue witnesse against me of euil Ye would faine finde a faulte I perceiue if ye wiste wherein You seeme not wel to vnderstand what you saie nor whereof you affirme But you allege the Scriptures Per me Reges regnant Prouer. 8. By me Kinges doo reigne And there is no power but from God very learnedly forsooth As though the auctoritie Rom. 13. that Princes haue by the positiue lawe of Nations and the power whiche they haue of the people were not of God as who vseth that meane to conueie that power vnto them Item there Iewel M. Harding euen in the selfe same booke vnder certaine general threates chargeth your Maiestie vvith disordered presumption by the example of Ozias the vvicked King vpon vvhom as he vntruly saith God sent his vengeance for the like Confut. fol. 298. a. Harding You would faine the Queenes Maiestie should conceiue hatred against me I perceiue M. Iewel and thereto you applie al your skil and cunning But Sir who deserueth more thankes at God and the Princes for the time being he that telleth them the Truthe and in time geueth warning to beware of Goddes Vengeance before it be to late or he that for his owne wordly interest holdeth his peace and leadeth them into a wrong way from the whiche if they returne not backe they are sure at length to feele either the temporal smarte of Goddes Vengeance in this life or the euerlasting smarte in the life to come Ye flatter ye flatter your Princes M. Iewel ye deceiue them ye blinde them ye worke al meanes possible that the Truthe be not brought to their vnderstanding least were it knowen and of them perceiued ye should be turned out of your welthy roumes and driuen againe to Geneua I had almost said Gehenna from whence ye came Certainely ye shutte vp the kingdome of Heauen from Princes and others so

of Christes flesh the onely meane of Resurrection to life And therefore your long talke is to no purpose which you vtter in this place They shal liue by the spirite of Christe who gaue them Faith and Charitie But doth not therefore S. Iohn speake also of real eating as though one effecte may not be wrought by diuers meanes concurring thereunto Ego saith Cyrillus id est Cyrill in IohaÌ„ li. 4. cap. 15. corpus meuÌ„ quod comedetur resuscitabo euÌ„ I wil raise him that is to say my body which shal be eaten shal raise him Thus you see plainely that touching this point no lesse Clerke then Cyrillus teacheth the same that I said which you haue vniustly and rashly controlled as you haue done the reste of the Catholike Doctrine That matters of faithe and ecclesiastical causes are not to be iudged by the Ciuile Magistrate The. 14. Chapter Iewel Pag. 637. That a Prince or magistrate maie not lavvfully calae Prieste before him to his ovvne seate of Iudgement or that many Catholique and godly Princes haue not so done and done it lavvfully it is most vntrue Harding I haue tolde you M. Iewel Confut. Fol. 299. ae that the duetie of Ciuil Princes consisteth in Ciuil maters and euer said that Bishoppes ought to be obedient to Princes in suche cases whither so euer they cal them And if they make any temporal Decree the Bishoppe who hath temporal goodes vnder the Prince must obey without grudge Confut. Fol. 302. ae or gaine saying so farre as the Decree standeth with the honour of God But that in Ecclesiastical causes and maters of Faith mere temporal Princes haue any authoritie of them selues to cal Bishoppes and Priestes to their Seates of Iudgement or euer did it lawfully we vtterly denie Ambrosius lib. 5. Epist 32. Priestes only ought to be iudges ouer Priestes by Theosius S. Ambrose said to the Emperour Valentinian Nec quisquÃ m contumacem iudicare me debet quum hoc asseram quod augustae memoriae patertuus non solÃ¹m sermone respondit sed etiam legibus suis sanxit in causa fidei vel ecclesiastici alicuius ordinis eum iudicare debere qui nec munere impar sit nec iure dissimilis Haec enim verba Rescripti sunt Hoc est Sacerdotes de Sacerdotibus voluit iudicare Quinetiam si aliÃ¢s quoque arguerelar Episcopus morum esset examinanda causa etiam hanc voluit ad Episcopule iudicium pertinere Neither any man ought to iudge me as stubborne seing I affirme that whiche your father of most renoumed memorie not onely answered in worde but also established by his lawes that in a case of faith or any ecclesiastical order he ought to be iudge that is neither vnequal in office nor vnlike in right or authoritie For these are the wordes of the Rescripte That is he would Priestes to be iudges of Priestes And also if otherwise a Bishop were reproued and a cause concerning behauiour and manners were to be examined he would this cause of manners also to apperteine to the Bishoppes iudgement Vpon these wordes of Theodosius alleged and allowed by S. Ambrose An argument prouing that a Ciuile Magistrat maie not be iudge oner Priestes in causes ecclesiastical and matters of Faith thus I reason with you M. Iewel He can not be iudge of Bishoppes and Priestes nor cal them to his seate of Iudgement in Ecclesiastical causes and maters of Faithe that is vnequal in office or vnlike in right and authoritie But the Prince is vnequal to the Bishop in office and vnlike vnto him in right and authoritie For he hath no right nor authoritie to sacrifice to preache to binde to loose to excommunicate and minister Sacramentes Therefore the Prince can not be iudge of Bishoppes and Priestes nor cal them to his seate of Iudgement in any ecclesiastical cause or mater of Faith Againe no man hath authoritie ouer his superiour But the Bishop in maters of Faithe and Ecclesiastical causes is superiour to euery Prince Therefore in those causes the Prince hath no authoritie ouer the Bishop And if he haue no authoritie ouer him he can not cal him to his seate of iudgement Furthermore were it true that the Prince were equal with the Bishop in Ecclesiastical causes and matters of faith yet could he not cal him to his seate of iudgement ff ad S. Trebel L. ille Â§ TeÌ„pestiuum quia par in parem non habet potestatem bicause the equal hath no authoritie or power ouer his equal But to see M. Iewels arte in facing out this mater let vs consider the authorities that he bringeth to proue his purpose And bicause he blaseth this saying in the toppe of his margent with great letters VVhat it is to be conueÌ„ted before a Magistrate Spiegelius in verbo conuenire A Bishop conuented before the Magistrate let vs first define what it is to be conuented before a Magistrate The lawiers saie Conuenire est aliquem in ius vocare To conuent a man is to cal him into the lawe and so Conueniri coram magistratu est in ius vocari Ã magistratu to be conuented before a magistrate is to be called into the lawe by the magistrate To cal a man into the lawe is a iudicial acte proceding of superiour authoritie in him that is iudge both of the partie so called and also of the cause wherefore he is called As if the Maior of London would conuent any of the Citizens he must both haue iurisdiction ouer that Citizen and also authoritie to iudge in that cause for whiche the Citizen shal be conuented But no ciuil magistrate hath authoritie by vertue of his temporal office to be iudge our Bishoppes in ecclesiastical causes as it is before proued and shal hereafter appeare Therefore no temporal magistrate can conuent any Bishoppe or Priest before him in any Ecclesiastical cause But let vs heare M. Iewel Cod. de Episcopis et clericis L. Nullus Iewel Pag. 637. Iustinian the Emperour him selfe vvho of al others most enlarged the Churches priuileges saith thus Nullus Episcopus inuitus ad ciuilem vel militarem iudicem in qualibet causa producatum vel exhibeatur nisi princeps iubeat Let no Bishop be brought or presented against his vvil before the captaine or Ciuil Iudge vvhat so euer the cause be onlesse the Prince shal so commaunde it Harding Seing Iustinian as you saie of al others did most enlarge the Churches Priuileges is it likely that he would most of al others breake them And whereas he made a lawe Authent 83. Coll. 6. vt Clerici apud proprios Episcopos that Clerici apud proprios Episcopos conueniantur primÃ¹m Clerkes shoulde be conuented first before their owne Bishoppes in causa pecuniaria in a money mater and afterwarde before the Ciuil Magistrate if either for the nature of the cause or for some other difficultie the Bishop could not ende it yet he

addeth priuilegijs omnibus custodit is quae reuerend issimis Clericis sacrae praestant coÌ„stitutiones al Priuileges kepte whiche the Emperours lawes doo graunt vnto the reuerend Clerkes And saith farther Si verÃ² Ecclesiasticum sit delictum egens castigatione ecclesiastica mulcta Deo amabilis Episcopus hoc discernat nihil communicantibus clarissimis prouinciae Iudicibus Neque enim volumus talia negotia omnino scire ciuiles iudices quum oporteat talia ecclesiasticÃ¨ examinari emendari animas delinquentium per Ecclesiasticam mulctam secundÃ¹m sacras diuinas regulas quas etiam sequi nostra non dedignantur leges If the faulte be ecclesiastical and neede ecclesiastical pounishment and discipline let the wel beloued Bishop of God iudge and discerne it and let not the honorable Iudges of the Prouince intermedle with it at al. For it is not our pleasure that Ciuil Magistrates haue at al the examination of suche matters seing suche matters must be examined ecclesiastically after the order of the Canons and the offenders must be punished by Ecclesiastical discipline according to the holy and diuine Canons whiche our lawes doo not disdaine to folow Seing Iustinian hath so ordeined no wise man that hath read his Lawes wil saie that either he in fringed those Priuileges or as one contrarie to him selfe made a lawe against the Liberties of the Churche without any mention of the former that he him selfe had made Wherefore Iustinian in the Law that you reherse M. Iewel is to be vnderstanded to speake of ciuil and teÌ„poral cases and that in those cases no Bishop should be brought before the Lieutenant and Ciuil Magistrate except the Prince so commaunded it Now whereas you vpon those wordes say that a Bisshop maie be conuented before a Ciuil Magistrate we graunt and euer so said that in Ciuil causes and temporal maters of which Iustinian speaketh Bishops may be coÌ„uented before a temporal Magistrate But that is not our question But this is that which we say The very point of this Question that it is not lawful for a Prince to cal a Priest to his seate of iudgemeÌ„t in Ecclesiastical causes And in this your owne authour Iustinian condemneth you He saith as you heard before Autent 83. col 6. vt Clerici Si ecclesiasticuÌ„ sit delictuÌ„ c. If the faulte be ecclesiastical let the welbeloued Bisshop of God iudge and discerne it Let the honorable Iudges of the Prouince intermedle nothing at al with it For we wil not that Ciuil Magistrates haue the examination of suche matters And againe Cod. de Episco clericis L. Clericus Si verÃ² crimen sit Ecclesiasticum episcopalis erit examinatio castigatio If the faulte be Ecclesiastical the examination and pounishing of it shal apperteine vnto the Bisshoppe But peraduenture you wil replie to this and saie that Iustinian in the lawe by you rehersed speaketh not onely of Ciuil but also of ecclesiastical causes and willeth a Bishop in qualibet causa in any cause to be conuented before the temporal magistrate if the Prince do so commaunde If you or your lawier make this obiection we answer that it can not be shewed out of al Iustinians lawes Anthent 83. col 6. vt Clerici that he willed a Bishop or Prieste to be conuented before a temporal Magistrate in an Ecclesiastical cause or to be pounished for any hainous offence before he were degraded of his Bishop And hereof if you had but a meane smattering in the Ciuil Lawe you could not be ignorant Besides that already alleged you find in the Code this Lawe Cod. de Episco Clericis L. Statuimus Statuimus vt nullus EcclesiasticaÌ„ personam in criminali quaestione vel ciuili trahere ad iudicium seculare praesumat contrae coÌ„stitutiones imperiales canonicas sanctiones We ordeine and decree that no man presume to bring any Ecclesiastical person to the seate of iudgement of any seculare Magistrate in a criminal or ciuil cause contrarie to the Imperial Constitutions and canonical Decrees By this you see that it is against both the Emperours constitutions and Canons of the Churche that a Bishop should be conuented before a Magistrate in an Ecclesiastical cause As for the vantage which you seeke in those wordes In qualibet causa in any cause it is none at al. Had not you benne blinded with malice and your lawier with ignorance you might haue learned A Maxima amoÌ„g the lavviers that it is a Maxima and a Principle with the lawiers that Leges tales indefinitÃ¨ loquentes intelligendae sunt secundÃ¹m aliam legem speciatim loquentem Such lawes speaking indefinitely must be vnderstanded by an other lawe that speaketh specially and particularly Wherefore seing the lawe Clericus in the Code and the Antentike vt Clerici in the new Constitutions make special mention that Bishops and Priestes should not be conuented before Ciuil Magistrates in Ecclesiastical causes and permitte no temporal Iudge to meddle with Ecclesiastical personnes excepte it be in Ciuil matters and that with a Limitation and a Prouiso also it had ben your parte and your blinde Lawiers also to haue vnderstanded those wordes In qualibet causa in any cause spoken there indefinitely by the other Lawes that speake more specially But then had you lost a peeuish sophistical Argument and menne had not knowen your worthy skil in the Lawe which no doubte wil appeare great by your practise Iewel pag. 637. 638. The Emperour Martianus coÌ„maundeth if the cause be criminal that the Bisshop be conuented before the Lieutenant vt coram Praeside conueniatur Harding For your credite touching Martianus commaundement you referre vs to the Code of Iustinian L. Si qui ex consensu de Episco Audient L. Cum Clericis de Episco Clericis As for the first you may tel your lawier that he hath fouly deceiued you and therefore is not worthy to haue his fee. That lawe Si qui ex consensu Cod. de Episcop Audient was neuer made by Martianus the Emperour but by Arcadius and Honorius and requireth neither Bishop nor Prieste nor Clerke to be conuented before the Lieutenant but declareth that if any by mutual consent wil haue their matter debated before the Bishop as an arbiter it shal be lawful for them so to do as euery man that either considereth the law or readeth the Summe set before it may easily see M. Ievv forgeth As for the other lawe Cum Clericis although it be Martianus decree yet hath it not those wordes vt coram Praeside conueniatur that the Bishop be conuented before the Lieutenant nor any clause or sentence sounding to that pupose For trial whereof I referre me to the booke and to any indifferent man that can reade and vnderstande it But suppose it to be true that the Emperour Martianus had geuen suche a commaundement what could it aduantage your cause M. Iewel You should proue

Gods minister to see iustice ministred and the Violences and iniuries of his Lieutenantes and Officers pounished and these ciuil causes of Felonie Murder and Rape to be truely and thoroughly examined ad vindictam malorum to the reuenge of malefactours wrote his letters to al them that had ben at the foresaid conuenticle at Tyrus and required them to appeare before him as before the syncere minister of God and to render accompte of their dealing against Athanasius in those Ciuil cases Of this mater See the Returne Art 4. Item the Countreblast lib. 2 Cap. 2. 3 For he might wel doo it and nothing further M. Iewel in proufe of his desperate cause that a Bishoppe was conuented in maters of Faith and ecclesiastical causes before the Ciuil Magistrate as his lawful and ordinarie Iudge Iewel Pag. 638. Iustinian the Emperour in the lavve that he maketh touching the publique praiers of the Churche saith thus we commaunde al Bishoppes and Priestes to minister the holy oblation Authentica constit 123. and the prayer at the holy Baptisme not vnder silence but with suche voice as maie be heard of the faithful people to thintente the hartes of the hearers maie be stirred to more Deuotion c. Aftervvarde he addeth further And let the holy Priestes vnderstand that if they neglecte any of these thinges they shal make answere therefore at the dreadful iudgement of the great God and our Sauiour Iesus Christe And yet neuerthelesse we our selues vnderstanding the same wil not passe it ouer nor leaue it vnpounished Hereby vve see that Godly princes maie summone Bishoppes to appeare before them euen in causes Ecclesiastical to receiue such pounischement as they haue deserued Harding For answere to this or any thinge that you can bring out of Iustinian for breuities sake I referre you to Iustinian him selfe By whose constitutions and Godly lawes it maie easily appeare how farre he was from claiming superioritie ouer Bishoppes or gouernment as supreme iudge in causes Ecclesiastical as he who decreed according to the definitions of the 4. general Councelles that in Spiritual causes the Pope of the elder Rome should be taken for the chiefe of al Priestes and aduertised Pope Iohn that there should be nothing moued perteining to the state of the Churche but that he would signifie it to his Holinesse being Heade of al Churches and declared that in all his Lawes and dooinges for matters Ecclesiastical he gaue place to the holy Canons made by the Fathers and willed that when any Ecclesiastical matter were moued his Laie officers should not intermelde but suffer the Bishoppes to ende it according to the Canons In this very Constitution whiche you haue alleged with these special wordes he committeth the Iudgement and pounishment of al sortes of offences committed by them of the Clergie to such as the Canons haue put in authoritie Authentica constit 123. Thus he decreeth Quotiescunque aliquis vel Sacerdotum vel Clericorum vel Praesulum vel Monachorum vel de fide vel de turpi vita vel quÃ²d contra sacros aliquid Canones peregerit accusatus fuerit si quidem is qui accusatus Episcopus fuerit huius Metropolitanus ea quae proferentur examinato Si verÃ² Metropolitanus beatissimus Archiepiscopus sub quo censetur si Presbyter aut Diaconus aut alius Clericus aut Praesul Monasterij aut Monachus Religiosissimus Episcopus sub quo hi censentur delata in accusationem examinato veritate coÌ„probata vnusquisque pro modo delicti Canonicis censuris subijcitor iudicio eius qui causae examinationem accommodat As often as any either of the Priestes or of the Clerkes or of the Prelates or of the Monkes is accused either of faith or of filthy life or that he hath done ought against the holy Canons in case he that is accused be a Bishop let his Metropolitane examine the thinges that shal be laid to his charge if he be a Metropolitan let the Archebishop vnder whom he is haue the examination If he be a Priest or a Deacon or some other Clerke or a Prelate of a Monasterie or some Monke let the Bishop vnder whose iurisdiction they are examine the thinges that be laid in accusation And when the truth is tried out let euery one abide the Censures of the Canons for the rate of the faulte by the iudgement of him that sitteth vpon the examination of the matter Againe how farre he was from the minde and wil that Bishops or any other whatsouer Ecclesiastical personnes should be summoned to appeare before him or his temporal officers in iudgement for any Ecclesiastical cause this expresse Decree which there also ye might haue founde sufficiently witnesseth Si Ecclesiasticum negotium sit nullam Communionem habento Ciuiles Magistratus cum ea disceptatione sed Religiosissimi Episcopi secundÃ¹m sacros Canones negotio finem imponunto If the matter be Ecclesiastical that is to be iudged let the Ciuile Magistrates haue nothing to doo with it But let the most Religious Bishoppes make an ende of it according to the holy Canons By these as also by the purporte of sundrie other Iustinians constitutions ordinances and decrees al menne maie see that he neither chalenged any supreme dominion ouer Bishops and Priestes in Ecclesiastical causes nor enacted this nor any other lawe as chiefe Gouernour of the Churche but followed the holy Councels and willed the Canons to take place and confirmed that which was decreed by them For special answer then to this special obiection made out of the 123 constitution I saie that Iustinian threatned to pounishe them with the seueritie of temporal lawes who would not be conteined in their duetie by Ecclesiastical discipline and order of the Canons that feare might force where loue and conscience could not binde Which policie we doo not mislike seing Duo vincula fortius ligant two bondes binde faster then one To be shorte Iustinian leaueth the correction of Clerkes offending in any thing against the Canons to the ceÌ„sures of the Canons And if any refuse to abide the order appointed by the Canons and vtterly shake of the yoke of the Canons then that is to say in the case of extreme stubbornesse and contempte of the Canons like a Godly prince he threateneth reuenge and pounishment In which case the Church doth now cal and alwaies hath called for the aide of the Seculare Arme against those that vtterly refuse to be corrected by the censures of the Church and seeme incorrigible So neither by the lawes of Iustinian neither by the example of Brunichildis neither by the Gloses that you so solemnely allege it can not be seene that Godly Princes might euer summone Bishops to appeare before them to receiue any pounishment at their handes as their superiours and supreme gouernours in ecclesiastical causes Peraduenture if we put on eyes of better sighte we maie see it hereafter if wee diligently attende what you saie Foorth therefore M. Iewel Iewel Pag. 638.

benne halfe in a phrenesie you might haue learned L. NaÌ„ ad ad ea ff de legibus ff de regu lis iuris that ex ijs quaeraro accidâ—nt lages non fiunt of those thinges that happen seldome lawes are not made And Quae propter necessitatem recepta sunt non debent in argumentum trahi those thinges that are receiued for necessitie ought not to be drawen to an argument or president to be followed Wherefore â—â—ither vpon the doinges of the Emperours in that great and lamentable schisme of the Church neither vpon Zabarella you can builde that Bishoppes may ordinarily be conuented before a ciuil Magistrate in ecclesiastical causes But sir seing you thought it conuenient for your purpose to vse the authoritie of Zabarella although you haue fowly falsified and misreported his wordes tel vs by what reason you maie refuse his authoritie if we can allege it against you He saith in the same treatie that you allege Papa est vniuersalis Episcopus Zabarella M. Ievvels ovvne doctor alleged agaiÌ„st M. Ievvel Papa non habet superiorem Papa habet iurisdictionem potestatem super omnes de iure Sedes Apostolica errare non potest The Pope is the vniuersal Bishop The Pope hath no superiour The Pope hath iurisdiction and power ouer al by lawe The Apostolique See can not erre Why admitte you not this Is it reason that you should admitte an authours saying the whiche he spake and allowed in a case of necessitie for auoiding of a greater danger and not admitte the same authours saying in the same treatie whiche he speaketh according to receiued and approued doctrine of the Catholique Church Aske your aduocate L. Si quis Cod. de testibus and he wil tel you that reason and lawe faith That si quis vsus fuerit testibus ijdemque testes producantur aduersus eum in alia lite non licebit personas eorum excipere If one vse witnesses in a cause and the same witnesses be brought against him in an other controuersie it is not lawful for him to make exception against their personnes And if either reason or lawe could preuaile where heresie hath entred you should not onely admitte this but also that whiche he saith in an other place â—â—â—â—stas ã€ˆâ€¦ã€‰ immediate pendat Ã Deo Ioan. 21. per illa verba Pasce ã€ˆâ€¦ã€‰ Papa habet potestatem supra omnes quic omnes sunt â—â—â—s Papae vicem Dei gerit in terris Zabarella in ClemeÌ„t de SenteÌ„t reiudicata cap. pastoralis Ibidem in Clement de magistris cap. Inter. de Sentent excommu cap. ex frequeÌ„tib The power of the Pope dependeth immediatly of God by those wordes feede my sheepe The Pope hath power ouer al bicause al be sheepe The Pope beareth the person of God in earth For he spake this with as good aduise as he spake the other And this is generally allowed and that but in a case Wherefore if his authoritie be good in the one ought it not to be good in the other Now therefore M. Iewel I reporte me to your indifferent iudgement how true it is that you saie that a Prince or a ciuil magistrate maie lawfully cal a Priest before him to his owne seate of iudgement and that a Bishop maie be conuented before the Magistrate as his lawful and superiour iudge in ecclesiastical causes No one example or sentence that ye haue yet alleged doth proue that vaine assertion of yours Neither could ye haue had any aduantage by them if ye had truely reported their wordes and declared the circumstances why and wherefore they were spoken But that liked you not Wherefore referring your corruption and false dealing in these matters of weight to the judgement of God and examination of the indifferent and wise I conclude against you with S. Augustine S. Ambrose S. Chrysostome and al other Catholique Fathers that it is not conuenient Extr. de Maiorit obed cap. 2. in marg nor lawful for a king to cal priestes before him to his owne seat of Iudgement as their superiour in ecclesiastical causes As for the note glosed in the Decretalles which ye bring to proue that priestes are exempted from the Emperours iurisdiction by the Popes policie and the princes consent and not by the worde of God we tel you that suche glosed notes declare you to be a very Gloser and argue that your stoare is farre spent when you rest vpon such marginal glosed notes Were it graunted which in no case we graunt that Bisshoppes and priestes were exempted from the Emperours iurisdiction in ecclesiastical causes onely by the Popes policie and consent of princes for confirmation whereof they haue made diuers lawes and geuen out large priuileges yet these lawes standing vnreapealed and priuileges vnauthorized they can not be conuented lawfully before the ciuil magistrate For it standeth not with the Maiestie of a prince to doo against his owne lawes and breake the priuileges by him selfe graunted to others before he hath with as mature aduise and consideration reuoked them as he did first graunte them That the Canonistes are wrongfully charged by the Apologie with teaching the people that Simple Fornication is no sinne The 15 Chapter The wordes of the Apologie Defence Pag. 357. They be the Popes ovvne Canonistâ—â— vvhiche haue taught the people that Fornication betvven single foâ—â—â— iâ— no sinne Harding A sclaunder vttered by the Apologie against the Canonistes not recanted in the Defence touching the thing but only touching the errour of the name IN my CoÌ„futation I saie that this is a greuous offence and worthy to be pounished in processe I saie to the makeâ—s of the Apologie How proue ye it They allege for it one Iohn de Magistris How be it M. Iewel hath recanted that errour and confesseth him selfe to haue ben deceiued For he graunteth it was Martinus de Magistris whom he meant or should haue meant He should doo wel to recant diuers other the like his errours For he hath not only ben deceiued by his note bookes or his Notegatherers in naming Iohn de Magistris for Martinus de Magistris but also in the names of sundrie other menne as it shal be declared in the nexte Chapter But touching the sclaunder of the Canonistes if Martinus de Magistrâ—â— had so taught yet the matter is not cleare for he wâ—â— no Canoniste but a Schoole Doctor of Diuinitie Againâ— he â—â—â—â—ht not the people as our Maisters of the Apologie â—â—e but onely wrote of that matter after the Scholastical manner from vnderstanding whereof the peoples simple capacitie is farre of Wel let these three errours Lyes or ouersightes be â—inâ—â—ed at Hitherto the Canonistes are not touched but sclaundered What shal we answer for Martinus de Magistris Certainely neither that Doctour taught either the people or any other person that vngodly and false Doctrine Certaine it is that in this Treatie De Temperantia quaestione 2. he taught the contrarie where

Priestes marriages Lib. 5. Cap. 1. Fol. 302. Speaking against the number of the seuen Sacramentes of the Churche Defence 213. Apocal. 5.8.7.1 to bring the Catholique Doctrine in contempte thus he saith As for the reasons that they of M. Hardinges side haue brought vs for proufe hereof they are too childish to be remembred For thus they saie The Booke in the Apocalyps hath seuen seales The seuen Angels there haue seuen Trumpettes Christ hath in his right hande seuen starres Christe walketh in the middes of seuen golden Candlestickes Zacha. 3. Exod. 37. Zacharie saw seuen eies vpon a stone There were seuen Candelstickes in the Tabernacle Ergo saie they there must needes be iuste seuen Sacramentes in the Churche of God If this were true In Compendio Theologiae wee might be somewhat ashamed of our Doctours I graunte Neither can this Reason seeme but weake and feeble But what if al this be false Then are our Doctours not touched then maie their reasons be thought substantial and M. Iewel a vaine Iangler that thus stuffeth his greate Booke with Lies Peruse the place Reader In CoÌ„pendio Theologia lib. 6. cap. 5. that by his quotation he directeth thee vnto and thou shalt finde him like him selfe as he is euery where a false Minister For Compendium Theologiae whiche he allegeth hath farre otherwise It saith not there muste needes be iuste seuen Sacramentes in the Churche bicause seuen Seales seuen Trumpettes seuen Starres seuen Candlestickes seuen Eies be thus spoken of in the Scripture but it saith expressely Sacramenta figurata sunt in septem Signaculis The Sacramentes were figured or foresignified in the seuen Seales in the seuen Starres c. That the number of those thinges is made a reason or cause of the number of the Sacramentes it is M. Iewels Lie it is not the saying of him that wrote Compendium Defence 361. 8 Augustine fouly and dangerously falfied by M. Ievvel Hauing taken vpon him to proue that the Doctours of the Canon Lawe haue taught the people that Fornication betwen Singlefolke is no sinne among a huge heape of sayinges taken out of writers of sundrie sortes whereof not so much as one affirmeth it he bringeth in this saying pretending it to be S. Augustine in Quaestion in Exod. quaest 20. Illa Fornicatio quam faciunt qui vxores non habent cum foeminis quae viros non habent an prohibita inueniri possit ignoro That kinde of Fornication which Single menne commit with single womenne whether it be forbidden or no I can not tel By this sentence as it is here set forth S. Augustine is set to schoole and made to confesse whiche he would neuer haue confessed whiles he liued that he could not tel whether Fornication that is committed betwene single folcke were forbidden or no whereby he should seeme to geue great libertie to single personnes to folow the filthy lustes of their flesh And here which is to be noted whereas the reste of the sentence is printed in the smal letter in which the Doctours testimonies be coÌ„monly set out these wordes in Latine Fornicatio an prohibita inueniri possit ignoro and these English wordes Fornication whether it be forbidden or no I can not tel are printed in a farre greater letter that they should readily appeare to the eie and be readde of al menne as if he were desirous as the Deuil him selfe is that al were persuaded that Fornication among single persons were no sinne Which doctrine there and in certaine other places of that Booke by sundrie colourable sayinges of Writers he seemeth to labour to persuade But the true saying of S. Augustine and the meaning of the same is farre otherwise For thus he saith not in Quaest in Exod. quaest 20. as the place by M. Iewel is falsly quoted but in Quaestionum super Exodum lib. 2. quaest 71. Sed si non omnis Fornicatio etiam Moechia dici potest vbi sit in Decalogo prohibita illa fornicatio quam faciunt viri qui vxores non habent cum foeminis quae maritos non habent vtrum inueniri possit ignoro As muche to saie But if it be so that al Fornication maie not be called also Moechia Aduouterie where that Fornication which menne commit that haue no wiues with womenne that haue no husbandes is forbidden in the Table of the ten Commaundementes whether it maie be founde or no I can not tel S. Augustine saith not simply he knew not whether simple Fornication were forbidden or no he knewe wel it was forbidden But if it were once denied that al Fornication were signified by the woorde and name of Moechia whiche properly is Aduouterie which worde is expressed in the ten Commaundementes the contrarie whereof he prooueth in that place very learnedly in this case and not otherwise he acknowlegeth him selfe not to knowe where the Fornication that is committed betwen single personnes maie be found forbidden where not generally but in Decalogo in the ten Commaundementes And this is the only point wherein S. Augustine confesseth his ignorance Howbeit in the same place he sheweth that vnder the name of Moechia al manner Fornication is comprised and that therefore in the tenne Commaundementes it is forbidden no lesse then Aduoutâ—riâ— as I haue at large declared in this Treatie Lib. 5. Cap. 15. where M. Iewels falsehood is further detected But what meane I to laie foorth places by M. Iewel falsified and corrupted If I woulde make profession thereof I ought to laie foorth his whole booke new printed For of such stuffe the whole consisteth One place bicause therein he thought to touche mine honestie I can not let passe Thus it is Consider Reader hovv far suche a false forger is to be trusted Hauing in my Confutation reprooued the Lady A.B. for turning these wordes out of Fulgentius formam serui and formam Dei asmuch to say the fourme of a feruaunt and the fourme of God into Manhed and Godhed wherby a false meaning is conueighed in against the true presence of Christes bodie in the most blessed Sacrament of the Aulter least I should haue seemed ouer sharpe in rebuking a woman whereas in deede for a Doctor of Diuinitie to confute a woman I thought it no great Conquest after certaine other wordes of reprouse Confutation Fol. 41.2 thus I say Whether I maie without breache of courtesie charge her with so heinous a crime or no I doubte Perhappes as shee passeth the bondes of womanlie state in presuming to medle so farre in these perillouse matters c so maie I seeme to forgete courtesie thus roughly to blame so softe a creature Defence fol. 89. Nowe commeth me in this Master of Defence and for the loue of his good Ladie laieth busily about him driueth very fiercely at me though his strokes light not on me and like a kinde harted Louer saieth very much in her praise and not a litle to my dispraise that shee forsooth is a Ladie of

might receiue the blessed SacrameÌ„t of the body of Christe except they were stubborne and would not obey the sentence But sometimes in the Canons to be deposed signifieth Dicto Can. Apost 25. to be depriued of Ecclesiastical liuinges or to be suspended from execution of holy orders for a time Howbeit it is not oft so takeÌ„ but in the two significations aforesaid for depositioÌ„ froÌ„ holy Orders by senteÌ„ce or for DegradatioÌ„ And no marueile though the old CanoÌ„s of the Apostles and decrees of auncient Fathers did so greuously pounish the Clergie for fornicatioÌ„ theaft periurie and other mortal sins For in the primitiue Church wheÌ„ the SuÌ„ne of Iustice was vp at mid day and deuotioÌ„ hote sin was so much abhorred and pounished that to the very laie people that were Christians seuen yeres penance was wonte to be enioined and decreed by the lawe for euery mortal sinne C. hoc ipsuÌ„ 33. q. 2. c. praedicaÌ„dum in Glosa 22. q. 1. Distin 34. C. fraternitatis Ita decretum est in Concilio LaodiceÌ„si Item in Carthaginensi 3. in 8. synodo vt in Gratiano .c. his qui cum 4. ca. ibi sequeÌ„t 26. q. 7. c. mensuraÌ„ de poeniteÌ„ dist 1. C. prasbyter 82. dis But in processe of time as the Deuotion and heate of Christian zeale decreased and the multitude of sinnes and sinners increased so these streight pounishementes and penances were mitigated For as Pope Pelagius saith Quamuis multa sint quae obseruari Canonicae iubet sublimitatis authoritas tamen defectus nostri temporis quo non solÃ¹m merita sed corpora ipsa hominum defecerunt districtionis illius non patitur manere censuram Although there be many thinges whiche the high authoritie of the Canons commaundeth to be obserued yet the defecte of our time is suche in whiche not onely the merites but also the very bodies of men be decaied that it wil not beare the censure of that olde streightnes to continue in force Therefore al penance in secrete Confession was at length referred to the arbitriment and iudgement of the glostly Father who should consider the contrite harte of the sinner and his weaknes and other circunstances and so enioine him suche penance as he thought sufficient And also withal this open pounishement of deposition for the open sinne of fornication in a Clerke was in Concilio Grangrensi changed into ten yeres penance to be performed after a very streight and austere maÌ„ner and forme as that Councel prescribeth Which is so streight that if it were obserued now adaies M. Iewel should haue no cause to coÌ„plaine that the Canons did fauourably or to gently pounish fornication in the Clergie But though euery man ought to doo the best he can to doo satisfaction and to repente of his sinnes before God yet in the open gouernement and publike rule and policie of the world the lawe must be such and appoint such thinges as may be obteined and obserued of men and as the people and time beareth els it wil be quite conteÌ„ned and trodden doune and be neuer a whit obserued The Ciuil lawe doth pounish adulterie with death L. Gracchus C. de adult but we see the coÌ„trarie now euery where Yea it can not be established now in many Countries such is the state of the time and people Toto tit de cohab cler et mulier extra Therfore if the later Canons doo not so seuerely pounish fornication in the Clergie as the old Canons did we must rather beare it and lament it then be offended with it and reprehend it For such is the state of the time and the worlde that you maie rather wishe then establish to any good effect the rigour of the olde lawes and statutes both in ciuil and ecclesiastical rule But you shal neuer proue that the Churche winked at fornication in the clergie or that it did not the best it could at al times and now doth to extirpate this vice in euery sorte and degree of menne and especially in the Clergie as farre as possiblie it maie be and no farther For suche gouernement as can not take place in common weales we wil leaue to M. Iewel and his companions who go about with double brasen Canons and not by ecclesiastical CanoÌ„s to reforme the world as now in Fraunce it appeareth Looke and consider Concil TrideÌ„t Sessio 25. c. 14. in decret reformat what the Councel of Trent lately decreed against vicious and lewde Priestes that defile them selues with wemen and keepe concubines and you shal wel perceiue the Church doth al that maie be as the time now serueth to pounish and extirpate that foule faulte out of the Clergie which your Bishoppes and ministers in England maintaine openly keping in the face of the worlde their strompettes vnder the name of wiues contrarie to their othes vowes and solemne professions made to God and to the world and yet are they not ashamed to laie the mainteinance of this vice to the Catholiques charge Yea some of them be openly knowen that wil not sticke to come from vnlawful beddes yea from other mennes wiues and like sad prophetes steppe into the pulpites and there raile at the vnchaste life of Priestes and Votaries as they cal them M. Ievvel The Apologie parte 6. cap. 14. Diuis 1. The 10. vntruthe In the Councel of Chalcedon the Ciuile Magistrate condeÌ„ned by sentence of his owne mouth three Bishoppes Dioscerus Iuuenalis and Thalassius for heretiques and gaue iudgement that they should be deposed That al these three saie I were condemned in that Councel we finde not Much lesse that they were condemned by any Ciuile Magistrate for Heresie doo we finde Confut. 315. b. Reade what foloweth in my Confutation To this M. Iewel maketh his Replie saying Concilij ChalcedoÌ„ Actione 1. pag. 831. These be the wordes pronounced openly in the Councel Videtur nobis iustum esse eidem poenae Dioscorum ReuerenduÌ„ Episcopum Alexandriae Iuuenalem reuerendum episcopum Hierosolymorum Thalassium reuerendum episcopum Caesariae Cappadociae subiacere a sancto Concilio secundÃ¹m regulas See the Defence pag. 683. ab episcopali dignitate fieri alienos That Dioscorus onely vvas condemned in the Councel of Chalcedon and that not by the Ciuile Magistrate but by the Bisshoppes This testimonie M. Iewel helpeth you nothing at al. Nay let it be truly englished and duely considered with the circumstance and it shal appeare to be quite against you and al together with vs. And therefore craftily in this place ye forbare to put it in English It semeth you sawe not the place in the Original but that you trusted your note booke For they were not only these three Bishops of whom it was thought iuste that they should be condeÌ„ned but also three others for sixe there be spoken of by name For breuities sake Concil ChalcedoÌ„ Actio 1. pag. 831. colum 2. certaine wordes of lesse weight without altering of

my Confutation with these wordes It was not the Pope that armed Henrie the sonne against Henrie the fourth For it had ben absurde in reason and nature to make Henrie the seconde sonne to Henrie the fourth There needed not so great a Tragedie to be made for reproufe hereof Touching the pretensed leauing out of the worde Quodammodo out of S. Augustines saying Iudge reader of M. Iewels truthe by the truth in this pointe thus he aggrauateth the matter That in alleging of Liberatus I leafte out this worde quodammodo it was onely an errour For why I should of purpose doo it there was no cause specially that worde bearing in that place * Ye as siâ— in that place the vvorde beareth great vveight and could not be leafte out but vvith foule corruption no greater weight But M. Harding alleging these wordes of S. Augustine Christus quodammodo ferebatur in manibus suis not of errour but as it maie be thought of set purpose leafte out Quodammodo as knowing that in that one worde rested the meaning of the whole How iustly M. Iewel excuseth him selfe and accuseth me for leauing out this worde Quodammodo To this I aunswere M. Ievvel in the Replie pag. 287. That you for your parte haue falsified Liberatus Maister Iewell you can not choose but Confesse That ye didde it by onely errour and ouersight and not of set purpose he that knoweth you as we knowe that be now acquainted with your humour can neuer beleeue it And whereas ye saie Liberatus cap. 13. that the worde quodammodo beareth smal weight in that place of Liberatus the Circumstance of the place and the storie of the time must needes conuince you See the Returne Fol. 155. a. in sequent Which thing hath benne already tolde you largely plainely and truly by M. Stapleton in his Returne of Vntruthes whiche you dissemble as if you went inuisible and were not espied for an Author of suche fowle Vntruthes Ye shal neuer be hable to scoure suche spottes out of your cote M. Ievvel most impudently belieth bothe S. Augustine and me touching this vvorde Quodammodo Wel yet ye thought to excuse this your falsehed by obiecting the like vnto me But Sir what if whiles ye go about to excuse your selfe you shewe your selfe worthy to be accused bothe of me and of S. Augustine too If S. Augustines wordes be as I alleged them then who hath belied me who hath belied S. Augustine Go to S. Augustine good reader and thou shalt finde the wordes truly by me alleged and quodammodo not by any falshed leafte out at al for in that place from whence I tooke his testimonie the worde is not nor in any parte of that Sermon which I quoted See the first Concion vpon the. 33. August in Psal 33. Concione 1. sub fineÌ„ psalme There he saith thus Et ferebatur in manibus suis Hoc verÃ² fratres quomodo posset fieri in homine quis intelligat Quis enim portatur in manibus suis Manibus aliorum potest portari homo manibus suis nemo portatur Quomodo intelligatur in ipso Dauid secundÃ¹m literam non inuenimus in Christo auteÌ„ inuenimus Ferebatur enim Christus in manibus suis quando commendans ipsum corpus suum Math. 26. ait Hoc est corpus meum Ferebat enim illud corpus in manibus suis c. And he was carried in his handes This brethern how it might be done in man who can vnderstande For who is borne in his owne handes With the handes of others a man may be borne with his owne handes no man is borne Christe at his supper vvas carried and borne in his ovvn handes How it maie be vnderstanded in Dauid him selfe according to the letter we finde it not but in Christe we finde it For Christe was carried in his owne handes at what time commending his owne body it selfe vnto his disciples he said This is my body For he bore that body in his owne handes c. This testimonie M. Iewel doth directly ouerthrow your doctrine of the Sacramentaries A cleare testimonie for the Real presence and teacheth vs Christes body to be really and in deede present in the most blessed Sacrament For if that substance which is in the Sacrament after consecration were but a signe a token or a figure of Christes body as they of your secte and you doo teache what cause is there why S. Augustine should make so great so straunge and so wonderful a thing of it For if it were but the figure of Christes body that he helde in his hande when he said this is my bodie what wonder was it Dauid of whom there he speaketh could haue done that yea what is that man that can not beare the figure of his bodie in his handes But S. Augustine saith that Christe did beare his owne body in his handes when at the Supper he commended it vnto his disciples sayng this is my bodie Which thing neither Dauid nor any man could euer doo And here consider Reader how S. Augustine speaketh as if it were of purpose to take awaie al occasion of cauil from suche heretiques as should denie the real presence whiche M. Iewel doth The bodie that Christ commended and gaue vnto his disciples was saith S. Augustin ipsum corpus suum his owne bodie it selfe with which vehemeÌ„cie of expresse speache he excludeth al such Tropes Figures Significations Remembrances and Energies as do derogate from the real presence And that bodie illud corpus saith he Christ did beare in his handes Which was miraculous and aboue the power of Dauid or any other man Thus we see clearely that where S. Augustine speaketh of the truth and real presence of Christes bodie borne of Christ in his owne handes he speaketh plainely and precisely without this worde Quodammodo But in an other Sermon where he speaketh not specially of his bodie being verily borne in his handes but how and after what manner it was borne in his handes there to signifie the secretnes of the Diuine Mysterie he vseth this word Quodammodo August in Psalm 33. Concio 2. For hauing demaunded this question Quomodo ferebatur Christus in manibus suis How was Christ borne in his owne handes touching the manner thus he answereth Quia quum commendaret ipsum corpus suum sanguinem suum accepit in manus suas quod norunt fideles ipse se portabat quodammodo cum diceret hoc est corpus meum For when he commended and gaue vnto his disciples his owne bodie it selfe and his owne bloude he tooke into his handes that which the Faithful do know and he him selfe did beare him selfe after a certaine manner when he said this is my bodie In which saying the worde quodammodo asmuche to saie after a certaine manner doth not withdrawe our minde from beleefe of the true presence of the bodie borne in Christes handes but from conceiuing a carnal coÌ„mon

God M. Harding is not hable to shevve vs one Harding The gouernment of the whole Churche exercised by the Popes actually If the Popes manner had benne to bring menne in subiection by the Sworde and force of Armes The 20. Chapt. as it is not whiche thing Kinges haue vsed to doo then had ye as wel knowen the Popes Vniuersal Gouernment whiche you had rather cal Dominion by practise as you doo nowe knowe the Kinges Or were it so that ye fealte so sensibily the paine of Excommunication as ye doo the tormentes that Kinges vse against Rebelles when they once drawe their sworde of correction you would muche more feare to offende the Pope then ye doo now the force of Princes But your manner is alwaies to feare him that hath the sensible rodde in his hande ready at a worde to geue the stroke the Pope bicause he vseth long patience before he striketh and when he striketh his stroke bringeth no bodily paine but causeth a spiritual separation of mannes soule for his contumacie from the vnitie of the Church and from God whiche is not sensibly fealte therefore ye feare to offende Princes and vtterly set nought by the Popes autoritie But what if none of the Popes hitherto euer exercised their vniuersal gouernment ouer the whole Churche of God whiche in deede is not true is theâ—â— right therefore any thing the lesse Not at al. The Duke of Sauoie you know hath in right the Dominion and rule of Geneua yet they of the towne suche is the spirite that your holy Gospel breatheth into the people like errant Rebelles haue kept him out of his right many yeres And what if this be not true that you saie What if diuers Popes maie be named that haue ruled the whole Churche both the East and the Weast as farre as any Christian Emperour extended his Dominion Maie you not then reuoke your stoute assertion You haue read I suppose of the great councel of Chalcedon vnder Pope Leo and of the great Councel of Lateran vnder Innocentius tertius and the Councelles of Florence and of Lions How saie you I praie you finde ye not there that the Greeke Churche as wel as the Latine Churche agnised the Popes Supremacie I denie not but that a fewe Heretiques or Schismatiques perhappes might disobeie him at certaine time and in certaine places But what then So doo rebelles oftetimes disobeye their Princes His authoritie notwithstanding tooke place through the whole Churche emong obedient Christians Iewel Pag. 104. But God be thanked it appeareth already to al them that haue eyes to see that vve haue not departed from the seruile obedience of that See But vpon iust cause and good aâ—ise Harding The 21. Chapt. Yea God wote vpon as iuste causes as they of Germanie rebelled against Charles the fift that noble Prince theire lawful Emperour or if ye list vpon as iust causes as they of Geneua departed from the Duke of Sauoie their lawful Prince or if ye wil wade farther vpon as iust causes as the Huguenotes of Fraunce haue to remoue their lawful king from the godly and accustomed gouernment of his realme by open rebellion now the second time What you accompte seruile obedience Seruile obedience I know not but of this I am wel assured that such gouernment as ye and they of your spirite vse in some places when the worlde serueth your turne for the establishing of your Gospel to worke your policies maie wel be called a yoke made of harde yron whereas the Popes yoke if it must needes be called a yoke Yoke of iron yoke oâ— wood bicause ye speake of seruile obedience is but of softe wood that is to saie light and easie As al theeues would gladly departe from the obedience of their lawful Iudge and cal it Seruile if that might be allowed euen so al suche aduersaries of the Catholique Churche can thinke euery smal cause yea being no iust cause at al sufficient to departe from the obedience of the Pope the chiefe Pastour whose office is to condemne al their Heresies as al your Heresies at this daie are condemned in the Councel of Trent by the Popes authoritie Touching the argument you make Ã contrario sensu Pag. 104. out of the wordes of Calixtus Epistle in Gratian if you had foreseene the folie of it I dare saie Distinct 12. Non decet M Iewelâ— ArgumeÌ„â— you would neuer haue printed it for very shame The argument is this What so euer is done without discretion of Iustice against the order of the Churche of Rome it maie not by any meanes be allowed Ergo what soeuer is done by discretion of Iustice notwithstanding it be againâ—â— the Order of the Churche of Rome yet ought it to be wel allowed First your duetie had benne to haue laied the causes of your departure from the Churche of Rome before some lawful Iudge and haue proued the causes so alleged both true and iuste and not to make your selues iudges both of the sufficiencie of the causes and of your departure Nexte your duetie had benne to haue weighed wel this Argument whether it receiueth any deceitful sophistication The folie of M. Ievvelles argument shevved by the like either in it selfe or in his like Is this argument trowe ye good M. Iewel What so euer thing is donne without discretion of Iustice against the order of Goddes lawe it maie not by any meanes be allowed Ergo what so euer is donne by discretion of Iustice notwithstanding it be against the Order of Goddes lawe yet ought it to be wel allowed And yet is this argument in al pointes like yours Suche Diuinitie suche Logique Wel maie this Logique be allowed in your new schoole at Geneua in any learned Vniuersitie of Christendome certainely it wil not be allowed Looke what faulte ye can finde in the later Argument the same maie ye finde in your owne This later maie be a glasse vnto you to beholde your folio in the first The Glose expressely founde contrarie to M. Iew. Verely where you founde these wordes in Gratian euen there in your owne Glose vpon GratiaÌ„ you found your Argument disproued with these very wordes Hic vacat argumentum Ã contrario sensu Here the argument deduced of the contrarie sense is voide and holdeth not This you saw or your gatherer for you Yet you would it should out be it taken wel or otherwise Thus you delight to be striking though we can soone heale your woundes For so you thinke to persuade the simple that ye haue muche matter against vs. The places of S. Augustine and of Pius that you allege Pag. 104. make nothing against the Pope therefore I marueile why you allege them seruing you to so litle purpose Perhaps this may be your manner of reasoning S. Augustine would not haue vs to geue ouer to any Bishops be they neuer so Catholique if they happely be deceiued and be of a contrarie iudgement to Scripture Ergo

muche as Priestes there sate in the Church where Deacons vsed to stande and the Deacons neuer durste to sitte emonge the Priestes Hiero. in eadeÌ„ epistol ad eÌ„uagriuÌ„ whiles the Bisshop was present Although he confesseth that once in the Bishoppes absence he sawe a Deacon when disorder tooke place sitting emong the Priestes and at priuate Feastes in priuate houses geuing the benediction to Priestes Whereby it is manifest that the preferring of Deacons aboue Priestes rose not of any ordinarie custome of the Churche of Rome where al states best keept due order in the Bisshoppes presence but of the priuate pride of some Deacons and of the simplicitie of the people of that Citie Therefore S. Hierome saith not Quid mihi profers Romanae Ecclesiae consuetudinem why bringest me forth the custome of the Romaine Churche but Quid mihi profers vnius vrbis consuetudinem Why bringest me the custome of one Citie The ignorant people made more of the Deacons Euseb lib. 6. Eccles histor ca. 33. bicause they were but fewe in number to wit but only seuen at one time as Eusebius maketh mention whereas at that time there were six and fortie Priestes in that Churche whom the people as S. Hierome saith for the number had in contempte Vbicunque fuerit Episcopus siue Romae siue Eugubij siue CoÌ„stantinopoli siue Rhegij siue Alexandriae siue Tanis eiusdem meriti eiusdem est sacerdotij Beholde Reader how M. Iewel hath translated this sentence Where so euer there be a Bisshop be it at Eugubium be it at Rome be it at Constantinople be it at Rhegium be it at Alexandria be it at Tanis they are al of one worthinesse they are al of one Bisshoprike Where the nominatiue case Episcopus Bishop being of the singulare number so placed by S. Hierome with the verbe Est also of the singular number bicause it serued not M. Iewels turne guilfully in translation a change is made into the plural and thereby the meaning of the sentence cleane altered to thintent the sentence might so the rather sounde to his purpose whiche is to make al Bishoppes equal in authoritie of rule and gouernment Now S. Hieromes wordes doo signifie that a Bishop is of the same Merite and of the same Priesthood whether he be Bishop of a great Citie or of a litle And here is to be noted that M. Iewel can not yet brooke this worde Merite and whereas before he vsed the worde Preeminence being by me admonished of it now he translateth eiusdem est meriti they are al of one worthinesse Likewise he termeth eiusdem sacerdotij of one Bishoprike for of one Priesthood How so euer you bring in S. Hierome for the equalitie of Priestes with Bishoppes it forceth not It is wel knowen S. Hierome neuer dreamed of suche an equalitie as you would haue when he wrote this sentence Ecclesiae salus in summi sacerdotis dignitate pendet Hieron aduersus Luciferainos cui si non exors quaedam ab omnibus eminens detur potestas tot in Eccesia efficientur schismata quot sacerdotes The sauegarde of the Churche dependeth vpon the dignitie of the highest Bishop vnto whom if a peerelesse and supreme power be not yelded there shal arise so many Schismes in the Churche as there be Priestes If God haue a special regarde to the safetie of the Churche and if the Churche can not be safe without there be a peerelesse and a supreme power yeelded vnto the highest Priest whiche is a Bishop as S. Hierome saith what so euer M. Iewel saie to the contrarie God must needes allowe the hauing of suche Bishoppes as shal haue power peerelesse to rule their flockes not onely their lambes but also their sheepe to witte the Clergie the Priestes and the Deacons vnder them Hieron Lib. 1. aduersus IouinianuÌ„ He saith also Propterea inter duodecim vnus eligitur vt capite constituto schismatis tollatur occasio Therefore is there one chosen emong the twelue saith S. Hierome who should be made Head that the occasion of Schisme might be taken away And that we should be put out of doubte who chose that one to be Head aboue al the reste and why Peter was rather chosen then Iohn that was so deerely beloued S. Hierome saith delatum est aetati partly in consideration of his age and partly bicause he would deliuer Iohn from the enuie that he should haue incurred if he had benne placed in that roome being so yong a man M. Iewel had neede to looke better vpon his booke and to learne by these places better to tempre the other sayinges of S. Hierome S. Hierome saith vnitie can not be kepte the Churche can not be in sauegarde Schismes can not be suppressed by equalitie of Priestes with Bishoppes Ergo there must be Bishoppes that shal haue power to rule the Priestes and the reste Thus M. Iewels equalitie wil not stande with the doctrine of S. Hierome Although saith S. Augustine after the names of honours now vsed in the Church the state of a Bishop be greater August Epist 19. then the state of a Prieste yet in many thinges Augustine is lesse then Hierome Notwithstanding we ought not to refuse and disdaine to be corrected of any man though he be our inferiour Vpon these wordes of S. Augustine M. Iewel reasoneth that the difference of power and authoritie betwixte Bishoppes and Priestes had no allowance from Scripture but by the custome of the Churche As though one thing could not be allowed both in Scripture and also by the common custome of the Churche The common custome of the Churche teacheth vs to feare God daily doth not the Scripture allowe the same To honour our Father and mother And doth not the Scripture commaunde the same But M. Iewel would faine make debate betwixt the custome of the Churche and the holy Scripture and therefore ful prouidently he hath interlaced a Parenthesis of his owne politike deuise in this manner The office of a Bisshop is aboue the office of a Prieste not by authoritie of the Scriptures but after the names of honour whiche the custome of the Churche hath now obteined I haue here before declared that there was a secte of Heretiques calles Aerians as S. Augustine reporteth who denied that there was any difference at al betwen the state of a Bisshop and the state of a Prieste August de Haresib ad Quoduult deuÌ„ Haeres 53. whiche opinion being accompted for heresie by S. Augustine ought to stop any reasonable mans mouth and to persuade him that S. Augustines opinion is quite contrarie to that which M. Iewel holdeth Iewel Pag. 1â—1 As for Pope Leo his ovvne authoritie in his ovvne cause can not be great The Emperour saithe Nemo debet sibi ius dicere ff Li. 2. de Iurisdict omniuÌ„ Iudicum 16. q. 6. Consuetudo in margine No man maie minister lavve vnto him selfe And it is noted thus in the Decrees Papa non

stuffe in some of your Germaine gatherers or elles it was ministred to you by some of your CoÌ„ministers if not by your blind lawier whose help you haue bought with a pece of an Archdeaconrie For you beganne not I suppose to studie the Canonistes and the gloses of the Law before you occupied the place of a Bishop if then at the least you did But how soeuer that be your memory might haue ben better bestowed theÌ„ in keping in stoare such a toie The Canonistes meane that the Pope as being the highest iudge is not bound to the obseruation of any thing in the law whiche is only Ceremonial so that he may dispense with those maters when he seeth cause and may with his only worde promote a man to the authoritie of a Bishop the omission of any Ceremonie notwithstanding But they speake only of rites and Ceremonies such as I suppose you your selfe would not or should not sticke vpon when either necessitie or vniuersal profite should require a thing to be spedily donne As for any point necessary to the Sacrament of holy Orders the Pope may not omit in any wise Iewel Pag. 129. Panor de coÌ„stitutioÌ„ translato And Abbate Panormitane moueth a doubte vvhether the Pope by the fulnesse of his povver may depriue al the Bishoppes of the vvorlde at one time But thus they say that care not greatly vvhat they say Harding When you had only said that Panormitane moued the doubte you conclude with thus they say as though he had said that in deede the Pope might depriue al the Bishoppes in the worlde at once Certainely the mouing of the doubt sheweth him not to say it For many doubtes be moued you know pardy not to the ende men should thinke that al may be donne whereof by learned men a question is moued but that they may the better carie away the answer So question is moued emong the Scholemen An Deus sit whether God be not that any man at al doubteth thereof but to see how the doubte might be resolued if any man were so mad as to moue it Once it is certaine that the Pope can not depriue al Bishoppes For although they be vnder him specially if they do amisse or nede any helpe yet they are as truly Bishops as he is and are the Successours of the Apostles who knowing the Primacie to belong vnto S. Peter did yet make Bishops by Gods ordinance where so euer they thought it expedient Aaron was the chiefe emong al the Priestes and Leuites yet he could not therfore depriue al the Leuites and Priestes And euen so your owne Panormitane whom you make to doubte concludeth with these wordes Quod si papa vellet c. Translato ex de Constitut non posset remouere omnes Episcopos cum repraesentent omnes Apostolos If the Pope would he could not remoue al Bishops for as muche as they represent al the Apostles Cal you this a doubting when he so plainely determineth against that for which you alleage his doubting Iewel Verely Nilus a greeke vvriter saith thus Nilus dâ— primatu Rom. Pontificie The Bishop of Constantinople doth order the Bishop of Cesarea and Other Bishops vnder him But the Bishop of Rome doth neither Order the Bishop of Constantinople nor any other Metropolitane Harding It neither much skilleth what Nilus doth say Nilus a late vvriter and mainteiner of the Greekes Schisme whose authoritie is so litle worth being a late mainteiner of the Schisme of the Grecians and yet though his saying were true it skilleth also as litle bicause it speaketh of a matter of facte and not of power For he sayth not that the Bishop of Rome is not hable or hath not power to order some Metropolitane but only that he doth not so meaning that he vseth not so to doo And if the not doing proue any impotencie or vnablenes to doo it then it maie be said Christe is not hable to ordeine a Deacon bicause we read not that euer he did so by his owne mouth Actor 6. or handes For Deacons were ordeined by his Apostles after his Ascension But albeit the Pope vseth not to Order Metropolitanes with his owne handes yet Nilus I trow meant not but that he was of power to doo it or if he was so folish as to thinke so yet you M. Iewel should not in that behalfe beare the bable with him as who confesse that he was euer as great a Patriarke and much more auncient then the Bishop of Constantinople was so that the Bishop of Constantinople can not be able to doo that which the Pope also can not doo To be short you that can cal so many gloses to your remembrance could you not remember that as Liberatus Liberatus in breuiariâ— ca. 21. recordeth Anthenius the Bishop of Constantinople being yet aliue but deposed for heresie Agapetus that good Bishop of Rome consecrated and ordered with his owne handes Mennas who professed the Catholike faith making him Bishop of Constantinople in stede of the other heretical Bishop Are you then so farre to seeke in your Logike as not to know that if the Bishop of Rome did lawfully once order the Bishop of Constantinople that stil he were of authoritie and power so to doo if nede were Iewel But hereof I haue spoken more at large in my former Replie to M. Harding Harding But thereof you are confuted more at large by M. Stapleton in his Returne of Vntruthes vpon you and yet could you dissemble the matter as though your fourth Article and namely that part whereof here you speake were not founde as ful of Vntruthes as of Allegations Iewel Pag. 129. Certainely S. Cyprian vvilleth that Sabinus being lavvfully elected Cyprian Lib. 1. Epist 4. and consecrate Bishop in Spaine should continevve Bishop stil yea although Cornelius being then Bishop of Rome vvould not confirme him Harding By this a man may know what a Dodger you are and whence your great bookes procede Verely from certaine heretical Notebookes made by some GraÌ„marians or Scholemasters of Germanie For alwaies your allegations and reportes come out after the same sorte If once they conteined an open lye being neuer so often repeated they shal stil conteine it and reason For they were alwayes written out of one lying fountaine In the Returne Artic. 4. Fol. 127. M. Stapleton had told you of this very matter before He shewed that your note booke is false It was not Pope Cornelius but Pope Steuen who would haue restored Basilides to his bishoprike against Sabinus who was newly elected in Spaine But the staye why Pope Steuens Decree stoode not was only for lacke of true information in Basilides appeale made to Rome Now reason and lawe sheweth that when a thing is not done only vpon a certaine cause that cause ceasing the thing should be right wel done Sabinus might continue Bishop not withstanding that Pope Steuen wrote against him onely bicause Basilides for whom the Pope wrote

The Emperour Constantinus in his letters to the people of Nicomodia Theodorit li. 1. c. 19. speaking of the vvilful errours and heresies of Priestes and Bishoppes saith thus Illorum temeraria praesumptio mea hoc est ministri Christi manu coercebitur Their rashe attemptes shal be repressed by my hande that is to saie by the hande of Christes seruant August coÌ„tra epist Parme. li. 1. cap. 7. So likevvise S. Augustine saith to the Donatistes An fortÃ¨ de religione fas non est vt dicat Imperator vel quos miserit Imperator Cur ergo ad Imperatorem legati vestri venerant Is it not lavvful that the Emperour or the Emperours deputie shoulde pronounce in a case of Religion VVherefore then vvent your ovvne Ambassadours to the Emperour Harding If you had said M. Iewel that Constantinus in his epistle to the Nicomedians had threatned to pounishe Bishoppes and Priestes that were Arians that is cursed and abominable heretiques you had in some parte said the truthe But where you saie that he spake of the wilful errours and heresies of Priestes and Bishoppes and adde not Arian Priestes and Arian Bishoppes you conceele parte of the true Storie and declare your malicious hart against Priestes and Bishoppes But to leaue that cankred spite of yours to the iudgement of God why doo ye not report the Emperours wordes as they are in your authour Theodoritus M. Ievvels corruptioÌ„ Wil you neuer leaue this your accustomed vile corruption Theodoritus saith not as you reporte but thus Theodorit lib. 1. cap. 19. QuÃ²d si quis audacter inconsultÃ©que ad memoriam laudeÌ„ pestium illaruÌ„ exarserit illius statim audacia ministri Dei hoc est mea executione coercebitur If any man be inflamed boldely and incircumspectly at the remembrance and coÌ„mendation of those wicked and pestilent heretiques his boldenes shal be repressed straightwaie by execution done by me that am the minister of God And these threatning wordes of the Emperour are to be referred to the people of Nicodemia for to them the epistle was directed And hauing teÌ„poral iurisdiction as power of life and death ouer them he put that terrour into their hartes that they should be neither in loue nor in admiration of those accursed Bishoppes whom he had bannished for the Arian heresie Or if M. Iewel wil haue those wordes of the Emperour to be referred as wel to the Bishoppes and Priestes as to the laie people Let him vnderstand that as it is lawful for any Prince to pounish heretiques that are excommunicate by the Churche and deliuered to the secular power be they Bishoppes or priestes So it was lawful for Constantine to pounishe these wicked Arian Bishoppes excommunicated and accused by the. 318. Bishoppes in the Councel of Nice And as the prince that now as an executour of Iustice pounisheth heretikes by death is not for that coÌ„sideration neither iudge in causes of heresie nor supreme gouernour of the Churche So Constantine at that time had no iurisdiction ouer Bishoppes in ecclesiastical causes albeit he bannished them and threatned them other pounishmeÌ„t if they fel in loue of those cursed Arians For the princes threatning of pounishment for heresie is no argument to build a superioritie in ecclesiastical causes As for the place whiche you bring out of S. Augustine you brought it before in your Replie to proue that Emperours might receiue Appeales in ecclesiastical causes Art 4. fol. 104. 105 106. And a sufficient answere was made vnto it in the Returne of Vntruthes vpon you Why conceele you that If you had ben studious of the truthe for Goddes sake you should haue yelded vnto it or if you had iudged it false haue confuted it and not let it passe in silence and now trouble the Reader with the same stuffe againe But peraduenture you wil saie that you neuer sawe that booke and therefore that you dissemble not the answer If it were credible that you would not see a booke written directely against you and one that toucheth you so neare this excuse were tolerable But seing it hath no colour of truthe there can be litle pretended to saue you from the gilte of dissimulation and hypocrisie in this case I answere you therefore as he did S. Augustine spake in that place against the stubborne Donatistes of whom Parmenianus was one whiche complained that the Emperour Constantine eos ad campum id est ad supplicium duci iussit commaunded them to be brought foorth into the fielde that is to pounishement And in reasoning against him he tooke aduantage of his owne doinges not as allowing the Appeale to the Emperour but as prouing him vnreasonable who for aduantage would appeale to the Emperour and when the Emperour had pronounced sentence against him would striue and repine at the sentence and saie that he being a temporal prince ought not to pounishe Bishoppes Like as if you M. Iewel hauing made the Queene supreme gouernour of your Churche should saie in case you were condemned of heresie or of Simonie by the Prince Her grace ought not to condemne me in these cases a Catholique that flattereth her not with that title would reason against you and saie No sir Is it not laweful for the Queene to condemne you in a case of heresie and Simonie Why then made you the Queene supreme gouernour of your Churche Euen so did S. Augustine reason against the Donatistes And bicause by their appeale to his Maiestie they had chosen him iudge in their cause and after said he could not condemne them S. Augustine vsed their owne weapon against them to coÌ„uince their folie and said as you saie Is it not lawful that the Emperour or the Emperours deputie should pronounce in a case of Religion Wherefore then went your owne Ambassadours to the Emperour c. But as the Catholique reasoning in suche wise against you can not be said by that to allowe the Queenes supremacie So S. Augustine in this talke against the Donatistes can not be said to allowe the Emperours authoritie in condemning of Bishoppes and other ecclesiastical causes For he answering an other Donatiste that said Augustinus epist 162. Non debuit episcopus proconsulari iudicio purgari a Bishop ought not to make his purgation before a temporal magistrate said If he be worthy to be blamed whom the temporal iudge hath absolued whereas he him selfe did not require it how much more are they to be blamed whiche would haue a temporal prince to be iudge in their cause By this it appeareth that he thought that Princes could not be iudges ouer Bishoppes Ibidem Moreouer he reporteth that Constantine who appointed iudges to heare their cause did it Ã sanctis Antistitibus veniam petiturus as minding to aske pardon of the holy Bishoppes for his facte And the same Emperour seing their importunitie in repairing to him as iudge said Optatus li. 1. coÌ„tra Parmen O rabida furoris audacia Sicut in causis

Gentilium fieri solet appellationem interposuerunt Oh see the desperate boldenesse of rage and furie As if it were in the suites of Heathens and Paganes so these menne haue put vp their Appeale Nowe sir if he had ben of the minde that you imagine or had thought it lawful for Constantine to heare and determine ecclesiastical causes or a right apperteining to his Emperial estate he woulde not haue tolde vs that he thought it a faulte to intermedle in suche matters and therefore asked pardone of the holy Bishoppes Neither would so wise an Emperour seing those Bishoppes appealing in that cause haue dâ—tâ—sted their doinges and cried O rabida furoris audacia oh the desperate boldnesse of rage and furie Wherefore M. Iewel neither this facte of Constantine nor that authoritie of S. Augustine can furder your pretended conuention of Bishoppes before Ciuil Magistrates Let vs see what foloweth Iewel Pag. 638. But vvhat speake vve of other Priestes and inferiour Bishoppes The Popes them selues notvvithstanding al their vniuersal povver haue submitted them selues and made their purgations before kinges and Emperours 2. q. 7. Nos si Gerson in Serm. Paschali Pope Liberius made his humble appearance before the Emperour Constantius Pope Sixtus before Valentinian Leo the thirde before Carolus Magnus Leo 4. before Levves the Emperour Iohn 22. vvas accused of heresie and forced to recant the same vnto Philippe the French king Harding The higher euery good man is the more humbly he behaueth him selfe If then the Popes hauing an vniuersal power ouer Christes Churche did submitte them selues to Princes and Emperours they shewed muche humilitie in their hartes and confidence in their causes and proue against you M. Iewel that if this submission had not ben made voluntarily by them nor King nor Caesar coulde haue had authoritie or power to haue benne iudges ouer them as you maie see by the example of that good Emperour Constantine refusing to be iudge ouer Bishoppes and saying Sozo lib. 1 cap. 17. Deus vos constituit sacerdotes potestatem vobis dedit de nobis iudicandi ideo Ã vobis rectÃ¨ iudicamur vos autem non potestis ab hominibus iudicari God hath appointed you Priestes and geuen you power to iudge of vs and therefore we are rightly iudged of you but ye can not be iudged of menne that is of laie menne and menne as S. Ambrose reported of Theodosius whiche I declared before that are vnequal in office M. Ievvel failing of his purpose falleth from the Popes purgatioÌ„ before Emperours to their appearance before Emperours vvhiche no man denied Liberius appearing before Constantius Tâ—â—odorit Eccles Hist lib. 2 cap. 16. Pope Sixtus after vvhat forte he made his purgatioÌ„ and for vvhat cause and vnlike in authoritie and right Of suche Bishoppes maie not be iudged The Pope Liberius you saie made his humble appearance before Constantius It is true But appearance is not purgation M. Iewel You promised to tel vs of Popes that submitted them selues and made their purgations before kinges and Emperours and beginning with that good Pope you forgette your selfe and for making of a purgation you tel vs of making appearance Whereby we gather that either you passe not what you saie or remember not what ye promise Liberius dealing with Constantius the Arian Emperour at that appearance was suche as became a Bishoppe of the Apostolike See For in that cause he would neither be ouerborne by the authoritie of the Emperour nor yelde vnto his wickednesse against Athanasius for a longe time muche lesse acknowledge him for his superiour or iudge As for Pope Sixtus it is certaine that he made his purgation before the Emperour Valentinian But he did it M. Iewel in Concilio in a Councel of Bisshoppes and not in a courte of the Prince And he did it of humilitie to auoide the suspicion and malice of his aduersaries and not to geue any President to others to doo the like nor to preiudicate the authoritie of the Apostolique See These are his wordes in the place that your selfe allege Vnderstande ye 2. q. 4. MaÌ„dastis Nostra authoritate that I am falsely accused of one Bassus and vniustly persecuted Whiche the Emperour Valentinian hearing commaunded a Synode by vertue of our authoritie to be assembled When the Synode was assembled I satisfying al with great examination albeit I might otherwise haue escaped yet auoiding suspicion I made my purgation before them al discharging thereby my selfe from suspicion and from emulation and enuie Sed non alijs qui hoc noluerint aut non sponte elegerint faciendi formam dans But not geuing a president to others to doo the like that either shal not be willing or wil not voluntarily choose this kinde of purgation Lo M. Iewel your owne authour condemneth you Pope Sixtus made his purgation not onely before Valentinian but coram omnibus before al Bishoppes and others assembled in the Synode And he did it not by compulsion of any superiour Authoritie but of humilitie to declare his innocencie and not to geue any other a president to doo the like And by this ye maie perceiue that the Emperour had of him selfe nor authoritie to cal that Councel nor power to summone the Pope to his Iudgement Seate nor any iurisdiction to force him to make his Purgation before his Maiestie For al was done by the submission of the Pope He consented to the Emperours calling of that Councel he gaue him licence to heare his purgation and to be iudge in that cause And he that geueth an other authoritie and commission is by natural reason higher and of greater power in that case then he that receiueth the authoritie and commission Wherefore Pope Sixtus making his purgation before the Emperour Valentinian can not be said to haue benne conuented before a laie Magistrate as his superiour and lawful iudge Leo 3. and Leo 4. Concerning Leo the thirde and Leo the fourth their case is like When they made their Purgation the one said euen in the place that you allege hoc faciens non legem prascribo caeteris 2. q. 4. Audite 2. q. 7. Nossi doing this I doo not prescribe a lawe to force other menne to doo the like The other gaue the Emperour licence to appointe Commissioners to heare his cause and submitted him selfe to their iudgement and therefore we saie the Emperour was not their iudge nor superiour by any princely authoritie but by these Popes permission and appointement As for Pope Iohn the 22. of whose errour you make muche a doo in so many places of your bookes I haue said sufficiently before in the Answer to your View of your Vntruthes Fol. 64. sequent Where I haue declared how falsly you belie him and wherein he erred touching the state of the Soules of the iust after this life And here I saie againe that it is most false that euer he recanted any heresie before Philippe the Frenche king In deede the

Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Text snippets containing the quad