depriue Princes of their Crownes and take their Scepters from them because the Apostle willed the christians to be tried rather by their brethreÌ„ than by their enemies which were Infidels Phi. In all which there is no difference betwixt kinges that bee faithfull and other Christian men who all in that they haue submitted themselues and their Scepters to the sweete yoke of Christ are subiect to discipline and to their Pastors authority no lesse than other sheepe of his fold Theo. In beleeuing the word receiuing the Sacraments and obeying the Lawes of God there is no difference betweene the Ruler and the Subiect but the temporall states and possessions of priuate men you may not meddle with by no color of ecclesiastical power or discipline much lesse may you touch the bodies or take the Crownes of Princes into your handes by your accidentall indirect authoritie which is nothing else but a sillie shift of yours to crosse the commaundements of God Phi. Though the state regiment policie and power temporall be in it selfe alwaies of distinct nature qualitie and condition from the gouernment ecclesiasticall and spirituall common wealth called the church or bodie mysticall of Christ and the Magistrate spirituall and ciuill diuerse and distinct and sometimes so farre that the one hath no dependance of the other nor subalteration to the other in respect of themselues as it is in the Churches of God residing in heathen kingdoms and was in the Apostles times vnder the Pagan Emperours yet now where the lawes of Christ are receiued and the bodies politike and mysticall the Church and ciuill state the Mâ—gistrate Ecclesiasticall and Temporall concurre in their kinds togither though euer of distinct regimentes natures and endes there is such a concurrence and subalternation betwixt both that the inferiour of the two which is the ciuill state must needs in matters pertayning any way either directly or indirectly to the honor of God and benefit of the soule be subiect to the spirituall and take direction from the same Theo. This is tossing of termes as men doe tenez-balles to make pastime with The state regiment policie and power temporall is in it selfe you saie alwaies of distinct nature qualitie and condition from the gouernment ecclesiasticall and spirituall Common-wealth called the Church or bodie mysticall of Christ. You seeke to confound that which you would seeme to distinguish and when you haue spent much breath to no ende you conclude that though the church and the Common-wealth be distinct states as you can not denie yet you will rule both by reason the Common-wealth as the inferiour of the two dependeth on the Church and hath subalternation to the church as to the superiour But Sir in plaine termes and more trueth to the Sonne of God ruling in his Church by the might of his worde and spirite all kingdomes and Princes must be subiect their swordes Scepters soules and bodies mary to the Pope attyring himselfe with the spoiles of Christ and his church no such thing is due The watch-men and sheepeheardes that serue Christ in his church haue their kinde of regiment distinct from the temporall power and state but that regiment of theirs is by counsell and perswasion not by terrour or compulsion and reacheth neither to the goods nor to the bodies of any men much lesse to the crownes and liues of Princes and therefore your shifting of wordes and shrinking from the Popes Consistorie to the Church the spirituall Common wealth the mysticall bodie of Christ and such like houering and vncertaine speaches is but a trade that you haue gotten to make the Reader beleeue wee derogate from Christ and would haue Princes superiours to the worde and Sacramentes which Christ hath left to gather and gouerne the church withall Howbeit this course is so common with you that now it doth but shame you A christian king must take direction not from the Popes person or pleasure but from the Lawes and commaundementes of Christ to whome alone hee oweth subiection And as for the Bishoppes and Pastours of his Realme whome you falsly call the spirituall Common-wealth and the mysticall bodie of Christ because they bee but partes thereof and not so much except withall they bee teachers of truth those he must and should consult in respect they be Gods messengers sent to him and his people but with great care to trie them and free libertie to refuse them if they be found not faithfull And when the Prince learning by their instruction what is acceptable to God in doctrine and discipline shall receiue and publish the same the Bishoppes themselues are bounde to obey and if they will not the Magistrate may lawfully see the rigour of his lawes executed vpon them On the other side if the Prince wil not submit himselfe to the rules and preceptes of Christ but wilfully maintaine heresie and open impietie the Bishops are without flatterie to reproue and admonish the Prince of the daunger that is imminent from God and if he persist they must cease to communicate with him in diuine prayers and mysteries but still they must serue him honour him and pray for him teaching the people to doe the like and with meekenesse induring what the wrath of the Prince shal lay on them without annoying his person resisting his power discharging his subiectes or remouing him from his throne which is your maner of censuring Princes Phi. The ciuill Gouernour is SVBIECT to the spirituall amongest christians Theo. I haue often tolde you howe The ciuill Gouernour must heare beleeue and obey the meanest seruaunt that God sendeth if hee speake no more than his Masters will That subiection Princes owe to the sender and not to the speaker But were they simplie subiect to the messengers of God as they are not will you reason thus Princes should obey the Preachers of God ergo if they doe not they may bee deposed This is the argument which wee so often haue denied why then labour you so much about the antecedent when we denie the consequent That Princes shoulde obey God and his worde is a clearer case than that they shoulde obey the Pope For of that no man doubteth and this wee not onely doubt but denie Take therefore that which is confessed on both sides and set your conclusion to it that the force of your reason may the better appeare Princes without all question are bounde to obey God ergo if they doe not their dueties to God they may be deposed by Priestes This is the sequele which we alwaies denied and this is the point which you first assumed to proue Phi. The condition of these two powers as S. Gregorie Nazianzen most excellently resâ—mbleth it is like vnto the distinct state of the same spirit and body or flesh in a man where either of them hauing their proper and peculiar operations endes and obiectes which in other natures may be seuered as in Brutes where flesh is not spirit in Angels
and shunne the wicked when as yet there were no Christian Magistrates to represse them or punish them may not rashly be stretched to the Magistrates person or function neither must you so force generall and indirect speeches of the Scripture that they shall euert the speciall and expresse commaundements of God But God hath expressely prescribed subiection and tribute to vitious tyrannous and Idolatrous Princes for such they were of whom Christ and his Apostles spake as no man can denie Therefore no consequent of Scripture may be wrested against it least you make the wil of God changeable or repugnant to it selfe which is heinous impietie to perswade or beleeue Phi. To tyrants and idolaters we must he subiect but not to heretikes although they bee Princes Theo. Confessing the former which you can not chose but admit by what meanes auoide you the later Heretiks may be Princes as well as idolaters and to Princes in respect of their power not of their vertues God will haue vs subiect S. Paul doeth not say Let euerie soule bee subiect to christian and vertuous powers but vnto supreme powers euen whē they were worshippers of diuels and spillers of christian blood Let vs therefore heare what ground you haue out of Gods law why this precept you must be subiect shall hold in blasphemous and Idoolatrous Princes but not in hereticall or excommunicate persons Phi. I told you before S. Iohn saith If any man bring not this doctrine salute him not Theo. Did those Tyrants and idolaters that were Prnces whiles S. Iohn liued bring the doctrine of Christ with them Phi. No but this is ment of heretikes Theo. It was spoken of all as well impugners as betraiers of the faith and why then do you restraine it to heretikes Phi. Christians might eate with Infidels but not with heretikes Theo. They might with those that were ignorant of the faith with purpose no winne them but not with those that impugned the faith for that could haue none other intent but feare or flatterie And with such S. Paul forbiddeth the christians all concord communion and fellowship Draw not the yoke with infidels For what fellowship hath righteousnes with vnrighteousnesse what communion hath light with darknesse what concord hath Christ with Belial or what part hath the beleeuer with the infidel Wherefore come out from among them and separate your selues saith the Lord. Separate your selues from them is as much as salute them not or eate not with them and yet were Christians bound to obey such with all submission if they were Magistrates Againe they might not eate with adulterers raylers drunkards extorsioners nor with any couetous persons might they therefore disobey the magistrate that was spotted with any of these or the like vices Phi. Not except hee were excommunicated for those vices Theo. Then neither Apostasie nor heresie depriue Princes of their authoritie but excommunication only which you may inflict as well for any disorder as for heresie Phi. What fault finde you with that Theo. You make excommunication but a limetwigge to intangle the persons and indaunger the states of Princes by maintaining rebellion against them vnder the name of religion when they wil not be ruled as you would haue them or not suffer their Realmes to ly open to the pray and pride of the Bishop of Rome For then hee must take vppon him to be the whole church which he is not excommunicate them whom hee should not and after that excommunication denounced you teach the people to refuse subiection to beare armes against their lawfull Magistrates vppon this pretence that you haue deposed them and disinherited them of their kingdoms which is a wicked and false presumption of yours resistant to the lawes of God and man For graunt hee might excommunicate them which yet is not proued the vttermost perill of excommunication before men is that which our Sauiour expresseth in Sainct Matthewes Gospel If he neglect to heare the church let him bee to thee as an Ethnike and a Publicane But Ethnikes by your confession may not bee depriued of their kingdomes ergo neither persons excommunicate Againe your owne lawe graunteth that excommunication dischargeth neither seruauntes children nor wiues from the duetie which they owe to the father of the familie and shall it set free subiectes from a stronger and higher bonde of duetie which God hath more straitly prescribed and inioyned them to the father of their Countrie What wilfull and obstinate blindnesse is this in you that where excommunication is a meere spirituall punishment and reacheth no farther by Gods Lawe than to take from offenders the remission of their sinnes by wanting the worde and Sacramentes vntill they repent you to gratifie the founder of your Rhemish and Romish hospitales stretch it vnto the states Crownes lymmes and liues of Princes and deriue thence not onely the deposing but also the murdering of Christian kinges and Queenes and that by their owne subiectes if hee saie the worde And this you assaie to perswade by corrupting and maintaining the Scriptures bolstering the conspiracies and impieties of your holy father against Princes with an vnshamefast prophaning and adulterating of the worde of truth which is not the least of your irreligious attemptes Resist your places and shewe vs but one halfe worde out of the holie Scripture that Princes may be iudicially deposed by Priestes or that you haue authoritie from Christ to punish such as you excommunicate with externall and temporal paines and losses which is it that you now would faine inferre and for the rest though wee neede not you shall haue our assents Phi. Least any man should thinke this power to bee so meerely spirituall that it might not in any wise be extended to temporall or corporall domage or chastisement of the faithfull in their goods liues possessions or bodies being meere secular thinges and therefore not subiect to their Pastours spirituall or Priestly function it is to bee marked in the holy Apostles first execution of their commissions authority that though their spirituall power immediatly directly concerneth not our temporall affaires yet indirectly and as by accident it doth not only concerne our soules but our bodies goods so farre as is requisite to our soules health and expedient for the good regiment thereof and the churches vtility being subiect to their spirituall Gouernours Theo. It is to be marked that if you may be suffered you will soone chalenge not only spirituall things as your peculiar but euen the goods liues possessions and bodies of the faithfull and as well of Princes as others to be subiect to your tribunals if not directly yet indirectly that is if not by one means yet by an other so far as you thinke it expedient for the regiment health of the soule vtility of the church that shall be far enough I dare vndertake If you affirme this vpon your own credite we little esteeme it your
coÌ„prised their politik obseruations as they be for the most part fals passing slaÌ„derous so to their defeÌ„ce are they idle altogether superfluous and argue rather mindes loaden with malice and tongues fraighted with poyson against the present state euen for very temporall and ciuill affaires than anie religious or dutifull respect of authoritie and submission to the Magistrate But such is the doctrine and education of their Romish seminaries they fell first to flattering and because that tooke no place in a rage they be now run to leude and open slaundering An example whereof to him that hath the booke and may read it appeareth as through the the whole so in fewe lines pag. 177. more spitefull wordes than which the rankest caterpiller in Rome could not haue vttered against the state and kingdom where wee liue not touching the persecution which they suffer but obiecting in plaine wordes to the whole body of her Maiesties most honorable most christian Counsel ignominious practises plaguie iniustice yea euen piracies proditions spiâ—ries soule artes to afflict and coosen the world round about vs with many such disloyall vnnaturall vntrue and vnhonest both surmises and reproches whereof that fardle is full This is one of the reasons why I neither might nor would at large refell their Iesuiticall Defence of English Catholikes as they terme it in deede an artificiall inuectiue defacing and slaundering the publike Gouernment of this realme to the vttermost of their powers The other is for that the summe and effect of those chapters which I haue omitted and might not without offence to the state be published are wholy reduced to those principal questions which I haue handled In their first second and fourth chapters their chiefe scopes are these that Manie Priests catholike in England haue bin condemned executed for meere matter of religion that Campian the rest of the Priests condemned executed vpon pretence of treason were neuer yet guiltie of any such crimes but behaued themselues verie discreetly and nothing seditiously in their answeres to the questions of the Bull of Pius Quintus In these the wise Reader soone perceiueth the whole contention toucheth the Popes iurisdiction and claime denied him by the Lawes of this Realme and his power to depriue the Prince of her crowne and scepter which was the sole respect the Bull of Pius Quintus had The iustifying then of these two foundations with cleare and pregnant proofes had beene requisite for the Iesuites if they had purposed to manifest the innocencie of their brethren where nowe by their rhetoricall vagaries inucighing at the partes and circumstances of their inditementes conuictions and executions they storme at the course which the Iudges obserued but saie nothing to the crime wherewith the guiltie were burdened The Popes power to depriue Princes they will say they haue fully proued and so their brethren in trueth and equitie to be cleared If that were so they sayde somewhat but as I haue shewed they profferre it often they neuer proue it And therefore on the contrarie part as I neede not strengthen the publike iudgements of this Realme with the particular reportes behauiors hopes and enterprises of the Iesuites hauing their triall in Courtes of Recorde and places of vsuall and open iustice neither is that incident to my calling or requisite in these cases so for the maine and generall ground of the crime there fastned on them and after punished in theÌ„ which was that to aide assist persuade or defend the Popes Bull depriuing the Prince of her crowne and throne to incourage her Subiectes or enimies on that pretence to rebellion or inuasion was high and hainous treason the trueth I say of this illation is euident by the third part of this my booke where that point of their Defence is refuted So for the rest which would needes venter their liues in the like quarell I meane for inuesting the Pope with the princes sworde the Iesuites should haue brought sound and sufficient proofe that the Pope by Gods lawe hath a Soueraigne and supreme power ouer this Realme to make Lawes to appoint penalties to dispose the goods landes and bodies of Clerkes and others for such causes and crimes as they count spirituall For this is the power which the Pope lately vsurped in this Realme and from which hee is now rightly and orderly repelled by the Lawes of the same It is no treason with vs to make him chiefe Pastour of your soules nor to giue him an Episcopall or Apostolicall authoritie ouer the whole Church though that also bee a wicked and frantike Heresie but to giue him an externall dominion and coerciue iurisdiction ouer this Realme aboue and against the Prince which the Apostles of Christ neither had nor could haue without apparent iniurie to the Magistrate this is it the Execution of iustice doeth duelie respect and this is farre from any matter of faith or religion Right to commaunde and power to compell belong properly to the sworde by the Lawe of God which they can not attribute to the Pope but they must make him a Superiour Magistrate to the prince in guiding and prescribing the vse of the sworde and consequently the prince to holde her sword and scepter at his pleasure and if she refuse to be streightway displaced This wilie conueiaunce to tie Princes swordes fast to the Popes side and to spoyle them of their Crownes if they doe not execute his rage is the chiefest plotte that Iesuites haue at this instant to resettle the kingdome of Antichrist for which they haue not so much as the paring of anie Scripture or Councell or Father in the Church of Christ for a thowsande yeares and yet in our dayes it must bee a meere matter of Religion and the forefront of their brethrens defence But no maruell if they which make open rebellion a point of their faith so soone consent to haue the Popes presumption holden as the surest key of their Religion To their thirde chapter that they haue great cause to complaine of iniust persecution intollerable seueritie and crueltie towardes Catholikes in Englande and wee no reason to doe the like for the iustice as thy call it doone on vs in Queene Maries and other Princes dayes I neede not replie To this conceite of the Iesuites that they may consume whome they will with fire and faggotte and no man must stoppe them of their passage or hinder their pastimes without iniustice and crueltie what shoulde I saie but that I thinâ—e the Scribe was skant waking whiles hee was penning this drowsie Diuinitie What learning I will not aske what witte was in this to make such definitiue resolutions that no Prince may amerce or imprison their adherentes without intollerable seueritie and crueltie forsooth they might hang and burne olde and young men and women for doubting of their Decretalles and all this with prayse though it neuer pleased anie good man in the Catholike Church
loosed in heauen and what she did bind in earth shoulde bee bound in heauen to witte that whosoeuer would not beleeue his sinnes might bee forgiuen in the Church should not haue them forgiuen and whosoeuer would beleeue it and depart from his sinnes by amending his life in the bosome of the same Church shoulde by that faith and conuersion be healed And neuer writer since Christs time did euer extend the power of the keyes vnto any thing saue vnto the forgiuing and retayning of sinnes Phi. No more doe wee this onely we adde that when Princes are bounde in earth for their sinnes they loose that interest which they had in their kingdomes Theo. That position you vndertooke to proue by the holy Scriptures but as yet you be wide you still suppose it and doe not proue it Phi. Now in the newe Testament all Christes sheepe without exception bee they Princes be they poore if they be Christian men are put to Peters feeding gouernement Now the keyes of heauen be deliuered to Christs Vicar in earth to let in to locke out to bind to loose to punish to pardon Now we be coÌ„manded euery one be we kings be we Caesars to obey our Prelats and Pastors and to bee subiect to them as to those that must make accompt to God for our soules wherein what Christian Prince may except himselfe Theo. You role from text to text abusing the woordes and peruerting the sense as you goe and when all is saide you bee euen as neere as you were at first before you began For what if al these places do concerne Princes as well as others wil you thence inferre that princes may be deposed Then these must be your argumentes Princes must bee taught ergo Princes may bee deposed Prieâ—tes may exclude them from the kingdom of heauen ergo likewise from their kingdomes on earth Princes must obey sounde doctrine comming from their Pastours mouthes ergo if they refuse they may be deposed Surely such reasons set not them besides their seates but you rather besides your wittes for what apparance of trueth haue these ridiculous and impious mockeries Feede my sheepe that is depose Princes I will giue thee the keyes of the kingdom of heauen that is I will giue thee the thrones of earthly kinges Be aduised by your leaders and yeeld to their good perswasions for they watch ouer your soules that is obey the Pope when he thrusteth you from your goods landes and liues Had you but one dramme of shame or sense in you you woulde neuer sende vs such sottish and vnsauorie sequeles Phi. They be of your framing we sent them not Theo. We annexe the conclusion which you must and would infer to the places which you alleadge and in so doing we can not abuse you Out of the 21. of S. Iohn what woulde you cite but this charge to Peter feed my sheepe In the 16. of S. Matthew what finde you there but the promise of our Sauiour I wil giue thee the keies of the kingdom of heaueÌ„ whatsoeuer thou bindest or losest in earth shal be bound and losed in heauen All the wordes which the 13. to the Hebrewes hath for your purpose are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yâ— is be perswaded by their words and giue place to their admonitions which watch ouer your soules Nowe what your conclusion is and must be neither can any man doubt nor do your selues dissemble For the fift chapter of your immodest and vntrue defence of English Catholikes as you call them proposeth purposely handleth the depriuation of Princes for heresie and falling from the faith So that helpe the matter how you can with your glozes and phrases these be your antecedeÌ„ts and this is your consequent Phi. Well if Peter must feede Princes why may not Peter depose Princes Theo. Taking their Crownes from them is not preaching the Gospell vnto them which Christ ment by feeding Phi. But Peter may correct them as well as feede them and depriuation is but correction Theo. Any Pastor may reproue them if they withstand the trueth that bindeth them in earth shutteth heauen against them But other correction on the goodes landes or bodies of priuate men preachers may not exercise much lesse intermeddle with the Seates and Scepters of Princes Phi. Be we kinges be we Caesars we are commaunded to obey our Prelates and Pastours and to be subiect to them Theo. Princes and all other christians must be reuerent and obedient to the word and Sacramentes which God hath put in the mouthes and handes of his messengers other subiection to Prelates or Pastors is none due Phi. And if they refuse to be subiect to the word or Sacramentes shall not Pastors punish them though they be Princes Theo. Let them sinke in their sinnes and leaue them to God that is punishment enough Phi. Shal they goe no farther Theo. Externall or corporall meanes by losse of life landes or goodes God hath not allowed any Pastour to compell or punish his sheepe withall Phi. Then may Princes freely despise both the word and the Preacher Theo. If you call that freedome to fall into the handes of the liuing God which S. Paul saith is a fearefull thing Whosoeuer shall not receiue you nor heare your wordes when you depart out of that house or that citie shake off the dust of your feete Truely I say vnto you it shall bee easier for them of the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of iudgement than for that citie Is not this reuenge sufficient for Princes that turne from the truth vnlesse you also must be fingering of their crownes and treadding on their necks Phi. That would terrifie them more than the threatning of helfire Theo. It may be that contenteth your appetites better but God hath reserued the punishment of Princes to himselfe and not assigned it ouer vnto you Howbeit why doe you wander thus from the question You should proue by the worde of God that Princes may be deposed Why then doe you linger and make so many profers before you come to your purpose Phi. Will you haue a plaine proofe out of the new Testament that Princes may be deposed Theo. That is it wee looked for all this while Phi. Pastours haue full authoritie to forbid vs the companie of heretikes blasphemers and idolaters and such like and not so much as to salute them much more not to obey them Theo. Is this your best discretion We must not be companions with idolaters ergo we must not be subiects to Princes Phi. If they be conuicted of heresie or idolatrie Theo. Put you no difference betwixt familiars and subiectes Phi. If we may not be familiar with them much lesse subiect vnder them Theo. Are you not low drawen when you come with such dregges Phi. Iest not at it but answere it Theo. Be earnest in any case It is a very profound and substantiall reason Phi. Substantial or
flesh in so much that the flesh is heere called the soule Such a man when the church casteth from her shee keepeth the spirit safe to wit the holie spirite of God which is the guider of the church For if they suffer any such one to bee amongest them hee defileth all and the holie spirite departeth Phi. S. Hierom taketh it otherwise To deliuer him vnto Satan for the destruction of the flesh saith he vt arripiendi illum corporaliter habeat potestatem that the diuell may haue power corporally to possesse him so Saint Chrysostom For the destruction of the flesh that the diuell may strike him with some grieuous sore or other disease Theo. This I told you before was a doubtfull speech and therefore woulde yeelde you no certaine conclusion For besides Sainct Augustine and Sainct Ambrose Sainct Hierom in those bookes which are assuredly his vseth these wordes To deliuer vnto Satan to the destruction of the fleshe for a perpetuall consequent to excommunication in all ages and not for corporall vexation permitted onely to the Apostles Illi si peccauero licet tradere me Satanae in interitum carnis vt spiritus saluus sit A clergie man sayth hee may deliuer mee to Satan if I sinne for the destruction of the fleshe that the spirite may bee safe And inueighing against Vigilantius I maruaile sayth hee the Bishop vnder whome hee is doeth not crush this vnprofitable vessell with the Apostolike rodde euen a rodde of yron and deliuer him into the destruction of the fleshe that the spirite may bee safe Noting by these wordes the right force of excommunication which doeth and shall indure to the ende not any corporall punishment or plague wherewith God sometimes touched such as would not otherwise be reformed A thirde interpretation of these wordes you shall finde in Sainct Augustine writing against Parmenian What did the Apostle sayth hee but prouide for the health of the soule by the destruction of the fleshe whether it were by some corporall punishment or death as in Ananias and his wife which fell down at Peters feete or else that the partie by repentance because he was giuen ouer vnto Satan should kil in himself the wicked concupiscence of the fleshe This later exposition cutteth off cleane your bodilie punishmentes and sheweth the ende of Apostolike excommunication to be this that the offendour by repentaunce should destroy the lustes of his flesh and not that an euill spirit should corporally correct and molest him which you conclude out of these wordes with as great confidence as if it were some maine principle of faith Phi. S. Augustine repeateth both expositions disliketh neither Theo. His accepting of both dischargeth your illation which is wholy grounded on the first But admit that also which Chrysostom seemeth to follow what shall your conclusion be Phi. That the Apostles punished the bodies of such as were christians Theo. Did they lay violent handes on them or vse any externall meanes Phi. They needed not the diuell did it at their word Theo. And because the diuell will not doe the like for you you will supplie the diuels roome and intermedle with his office Are you not wise Diuines that to chalenge the correction of other mens bodies make your selues the Diuels substitutes Phi. Wee make our selues the Apostles substitutes Theo. Then deliuer them to the Diuell as they did and offer them no farther violence nor torment with your owne handes and see what power you haue to chastise the bodies of such as you reiect from the church for so did the Apostles Mary if you content not your selues with speaking the word as they did but because the Diuell fayleth you you take helpe of your handes to punish the bodies of men beware least you be now not Pauls associats in deliuering but Satans in tormenting the carkasses of offendors Phi. Is euerie one that punisheth the bodie Satans associate Theo. They that beare the sworde with lawfull power from God to represse the wicked if cause require to kill the bodie they bee Gods ministers seruing for that intent but they that without this sworde claime to bee the correctors and punishers of mens bodies by violent meanes are the Diuels vicegerentes and not Gods For they bee murderers and the right members of Satan Phi. But wee appoint the Magistrate to doe it Theo. Doe you appoint Magistrates to lay violent handes on themselues Phi. No but on others Theo. And we be disputing of Princes whether they may bee defeated of their crowns and chastised in their bodies vpon your excommunications Phi. Excommunicate persons may bee corporally chastised whosoeuer bee the deede doer and that S. Chrysostoms exposition fully proueth For if it were lawfull then whiles the Apostles did excommunicate why not as well after and in other ages Theo. But if you relent from this that your selues may bee the deed doers then you misse the marke which you shot at The Magistrate wee knowe may corporally punish these and all other offendours but what is that to your position which hold that spirituall Pastors may punish the bodies of the faithful And therfore look to your footing least you faile in your leaping and backe with this legge that a meere spirituall officer may touch the liues and take the goods of heretiks and other excommunicate persons It is a wicked intrusion of Antichrist seeking indirectly and as you call it by accident that is by hooke or by crooke to bring the world and worldly things in subiection to his appetite The Apostles did nothing but separate sinners from the church and house of God because in those dayes there were no christian Princes with ordinarie power to reuenge the disorders committed in and against the church of Christ it pleased God that whom the Apostles and their after-commers for a season cast out of the church as intangled with great and haynous offences the Diuell shoulde afflict them vnto death or otherwise with some grieuous disease as the fault deserued that the rest might feare and not bee bolde to sinne because there was no magistrate to punish them yea many times God visited the sinnes of hypocrites and such as remained in the church in like maner as Paul himselfe testifieth to those of Corinth For this cause many amongest you are stroken with infirmities and diseases and many are dead For if we would iudge our selues we should not bee iudged but when wee are iudged we are chastened of the Lord that wee should not bee condemned with the world And Chrysostom alleadging this place Many such things fall out in the church at this day Because the priest knoweth them not that loden with sinne receiue the reuerend mysteries vnworthily therefore God himselfe often times culleth them out and deliuereth them to Satan And that the Apostles did nothing but cast them out of the church when they deliuered anie to Satan the same Father will teach
you Marke howe Paul deliuered the man of Corinth to Satan Eijciebatur nempe a communi fidelium caetu hee was cast out of the congregation of the faythfull hee was cutte off from the flocke of Christ and left naked and being so destitute of Gods helpe hee lay open to the Wolfe and subiect to euerie assault So sayth Theodorete By this place where Paul deliuered the incestuous Corinthian to Satan we are taught that the diuell inuadeth them which are seuered cut off from the bodie of the church finding them destitute of Gods grace Keepe your selues therefore within your limites Pastors haue their charge which is as S. Paul noteth to watch ouer soules they haue not to doe with the goods or bodies of the faithfull Their goods are Caesars by the plaine resolution of our Sauiour Giue vnto Caesar the thinges which are Caesars Which God willed Samuel to aduertise the people of when they first demaunded a king Shew them the right or law of the king that shall raigne ouer them And so Samuel did saying This shall be the law of your king He shall take your sonnes and appoint them for his charets and to be his horsemen shal make theÌ„ captaines ouer thowsandes captaines ouer fiftyes set them to eare his grounds to reape his haruest to make his instruments of war things to serue for his charets And he wil take your fields vines best olyues giue them to his seruants And he wil take the tenth of your corn wine giue it to his Princes seruitors And he wil take your men seruaÌ„ts maideseruants the choice of your yong meÌ„ your asses vse theÌ„ to his work The tenth of your sheep wil he take ye shal be his seruaÌ„ts Phi. Make you the king Lord of al without exception Theo. Though God neuer ment that Princes inordinate priuate pleasures should wast consume the wealth of their Realmes yet may they iustly commaunde the goods and bodies of all their Subiects in time both of warre and peace for any publike necessitie or vtilitie Whereby God declareth Princes and not Pastours to bee the right ouerseers of temporall and earthlie matters and consequentlie that the power of the keyes extendeth not to those thinges which are committed to the Princes charge I meane neither to the goods nor to the bodies of christian men To a king sayth Chrysostom are the bodies of men committed to the Priest their soules The king pardoneth corporall offences the Priest remitteth the guiltinesse of sinne The king compelleth the Priest exhorteth the one with force the other with aduise the kings weapons are sensible the Priâ—stes are Ghostly The like distinction betweene them doth S. Hierom make Rex nolentibus praest Episcopus volentibus ille timore subijcit hic seruituti donatur ille corpora custodit ad mortem hic animas seruat ad vitam The king ruleth men vnwilling the Priest none saue the willing the king hath his in subiection with terrour the Priest is appointed for the seruice of his the king mastereth their bodies with death but the Priest preserueth their soules to life This power of the sword our Sauiour precisely prohibited his Apostles as I haue shewed and therefore you may not indirectly nor by accident chalenge it Phi. Why then did Paul saie Knowe you not that wee shall iudge the Angels howe much more secular matters Theo. If this bee the best hold you haue in the new Testament for secular matters you must take the paynes to light from your horse and goe on your feete as well as your neighbours For the Apostle speaketh that of all Christians which you restraine to Priests and moueth the parties striuing rather to make their brethren arbiters of their quarrelles than to persue one an other before Infidels What grant is this to you in your owne right to bee iudges ouer your brethren in all secular affaires and not onely without their consents to determine their griefes but also to bereaue them of their goods and lands and afflict their bodies yea to pull the sword out of Princes handes take their Crownes from their heades when the rulers are beleeuers as well as the Preachers Do you not know saith S. Paul that the Saincts not onely Priests shal iudge the world If the world then shal be iudged by you speaking to all that were of the church at Corinth are ye vnworthy to iudge the smalest matters He saith not it was their right to iudge secular matters but they were worthy to bee trusted with them whom God would trust with greater and shewing that hee spake this of the people not of the Priests he saith If then you haue any iudgementes concerning the thinges of this life make euen the contemptible in the church your iudges Hee saith not God hath made them your iudges but rather thaÌ„ your contending brabling about earthly things which you professe to contemn should be knowen to Ethniks such as hate deride both Christ you your selues make the meanest of your brethren whom you will your iudges Nowe ioyne your conclusion ergo the Pope hath authority to dispose the goods lands and liues of all the faithâ—ul euen of Princes theÌ„selues be they neuer so iust or religious Magistrates and see what a non sequitur you conclude out of S. Pauls wordes Phi. The Primatiue church vnderstood this place of Priests and Bishops as appeareth by Sainct Augustine complaining of the tumultuous perplexities of other mens causes in secular matters to the which troubles sayth he the Apostle hath fastened vs. 1. Corinth 5. The like hee witnesseth of S. Ambrose at Millan And S. Gregory reporteth the same of himselfe at Rome Theo. Trueth it is the Bishoppes of the Primatiue church were greatly troubled with those matters not as ordinarie iudges of those causes but as arbiters elected by the consent of both parties And I coulde requite you with Gregories owne wordes of the same matter in the same place Quod certum est nos non debere which it is certaine we ought not to do but yet I thinke so long as it did not hinder their vocation function though it were troublesome vnto them they might neither in charitie nor in dutie refuse it because it tended to the preseruing of peace loue amongest meÌ„ And the Apostle had licenced all men to choose whom they woulde in the church for their iudges no doubt meaning that they which were chosen shoulde take the paynes to heare the cause and make an ende of the strife But it is one thing to make peace between brethren as they did by heaping their griefes with consent of both sides and an other thing to claime a iudiciall interest in those causes in spite of mens heartes Which wrong you shoulde not offer the least of your brethren much lesse may you
reportes wee may hardly trust since your speciall instaunces be so corrupted and wrested And could you shewe that which you speake of as you can not you must also proue it well done or at leâ—t to haue beene liked and allowed of the Church of Christ before we can receiue it The Apostles rule is strong against it You must bee subiect not onely for wrath but for conscience sake Many thousand Martyrs Bishoppes others submitted themselues and endured the vilest torments that coulde bee deuised against them as the ten persecutions of Christes Church vnder heathen Princes most clearly witnesse that euer any of their subiects rebelled against those bloody persecutors in respect of religion must be your care to shewe Wee reading all the monumentes of those tymes verily find none and by your silence it should appeare your selues know none otherwise we do not thinke you woulde disfurnish your cause and trouble the reader with impertinent matters That the Citizens of Antioch defended their Church with armes against the Emperour Galerius his officers I find it writteÌ„ in no good Author neither do you quote the place that Storie you may put in your Legende as taken thence by most likelyhood The temples of their bodies which were farre more precious they did not defend from the furious and insatiable rage of Diocletian Maximinus but as well at Antioche as in all other places subiect to the Romane Empire the christian men women mildly gladly suffered those torments deaths and shames which in our eyes neither flesh could beare nor nature brooke so that wee haue cause rather to maruaile at their patience than to mistrust their disobedience Phi. S. Basil and S. Ambrose people defended them against the inuasions of Heretikes Theo. After Valens the Emperour had twise decreed to banish S. Basil and was the first tyme stopped of his course by the suddaine sicknes of his sonne and terror of his wife and the second time by a straunge trembling of hande and heart as he was subscribing the sentence of deportation against him hee neuer after offered to meddle with Saint Basill but suffered him quietly to enioy his Bishopricke Yet fell there out after this a contention betweene the Lieutenaunt of Pontus and Saint Basill about the liberties of the sanctuarie for a Noble woman that had taken the Church for her refuge to saue her selfe from one that woulde haue forced her to mariage against her will The Deputie required the woman to bee deliuered the Bishoppe replied that hee might not violate the Lawes of GOD and man The Deputie stomacking Saint Basill and the more for his stout defence otherwise of the Christian faith sent for the Bishoppe to his Tribunall and commaunding him to bee stript threatned to whippe him and to teare his flesh with Iron hookes This indignitie the people could no longer abide but seeing their Pastor thus shamefully handled without the Emperours commandemeÌ„t or knowledge vpon the priuate displeasure of a Deputie for the liberties of the Church established by the Romane Lawes the whole citie men and women fell to an vprore and were like enough to haue done the Deputie some mischiefe but that Saint Basil with much adoe repressing the people deliuered his persecutor from that perill This is the true report of Saint Basils case euen out of the same author which you auouche Gregorie Nazianzene Their griefe you see was not against the Emperours power or fact but against the malice of a Lieutenant presuming vpon a priuate grudge without any warrant from the Prince not onely to doe that which the Emperour in his owne person had refrained but in most spitefull and seruile manner to abuse their Bishop against all order of Lawe And this tumult S. Basil neither procured nor praised but asswaged with his presence and offered himselfe to the Deputies pleasure Of S. Ambrose wee spake before by occasion and thither we send you It is most vntrue that the people of Millan either did or might take armes against the Emperour though hee were then but a child and therefore might make no Lawes for Religion or otherwise without Theodosius ioynt Emperour with him in possession of the scepter before him Which exception neither S. Ambrose nor other godly bishops vsed against him but submitted themselues with al meekenes when in reason they might haue taken this aduantage Of the people S. Ambrose himselfe giueth this testimonie In singulis vobis Iob reuixit in singulis sancti illius patientia virtus refulsit Quid enim praesentis dici potuit a viris Christianis quà m quod â—odie in vobis locutus est Spiritus sanctus Rogamus Auguste non pugnamus non timemus sed rogamus Hoc Christianos decet In euery one of you Iob is aliue againe in eche of you his patience and vertue shined What coulde bee sayde fitter by Christian men than that which the holy Ghost this day spake in you We beseech O Emperour we offer not armes Wee feare not to die but we intreate thy clemencie This beseemeth Christians to desire tranquillitie of peace faith but to bee constant in the truth euen vnto death And for his part when hee heard that his Church was taken vp by the Emperours souldiers he fet only somewhat the deeper sighes sayd to such as exhorted him to goe thither deliuer vp my Church I may not but sight I ought not Phi. But the people were in a commotion which appeareth by that S. Ambrose answered when they willed him to asswage their furie It lay in him not to incite them but hee had no meanes to represse them Theo. Truth it is that the people flocked to their Churches and chose rather to bee slaine in the place than to leaue them vnto Arians But that they offered armes or attempted any force either for S. Ambrose or against Valentinian is a manifest vntrueth The merchaunts were amerced and emprisoned the Nobles were hardly threatned and S. Ambrose himselfe charged as with a sedition and yet all the violence that was offered was this The people passing from one Church to an other met a Chapleine of the Arrians and some vnruly persons as in such heates it can not otherwise be chosen beganne to illude and abuse the man but the Bishop presently sent his Priestes and Deacons and rescued him from that iniurie which yet the Emperour tooke so grieuously that hee layd a number of them in Irons and imposed a great mulet vpon the whole Citie to bee paide within three dayes Farther force was none offered by the people of Millan and yet of that small disorder Saint Ambrose saith If they thought him to bee the inciter or stirrer of the people they should straightway reuenge it on him or banish him into what wildernesse they would And to that end he departed home to bed to his owne house that if any man woulde haue him into exile
not onely their kingdomes from them but also their liues Phi. That wee meane when they will not otherwise obey Theo. By your construction meaning the world is well amended with you For where the holy Ghost commandeth Prelates Popes and all others to bee subiect to Princes you with the cunning of your keyes giue the Spirit of God the plaine â—lip and chalenge not onely right to rule them but power to depriue them at your pleasures And this haynous impietie lest the simple should distrust it you ouer-spred with a couer of the Catholike fayth as if the Popes ambition and your sedition were lately become parts of Christes doctrine Phi. In obedience to the keyes wee put no difference betweene princes and priuate persons Theo. Proue that of priuate persons which you presume touching Princes and we will agnise the rest though wee neede not Philand What shall wee proue Theo. That the Popes keyes by Gods Lawe reach vnto the goods or landes of the meanest subiect in this Realme Phi. I proued that before by the dealing of Peter with Ananias and of Paul with Elimas Theo. And I answered you before that from Gods miraculous woorking by their mouthes to your ordinarie calling and attempting the like with your handes is no good argument And therefore they might pronounce the woord and not bee murderers because the fact was Gods and not theirs you can not execute the Popes censures without actuall conspiring and rebelling against your Prince which God hath prohibited If then you may not offer the poorest crafts-man that is that wrong by the word of God what grouÌ„d of christian religion can this be that the Pope may take the sword and Scepter from the Prince and commaund you to bee his helpers and coadiutours in that wicked enterprise whom the Apostle chargeth to giue tribute custome feare and honour to superiour powers that haue the swoorde in Gods steede to rewarde good and reuenge euill Phi. May not the shepheard reclaime the sheepe if they will not bee ruled Theo. But no good sheepheard lameth or killeth his sheepe though they will not bee folded and yet similitudes bee no syllogismes I trust you will not claime that same dominion ouer Princes which owners haue ouer their sheepe and oxen Phi. No but I shewe you by this example that correction is permitted where direction is refused Theo. Pastours haue their kind of correction euen ouer Princes but such as by Gods law may stand with the Pastors vocation and tend to the Princes saluation and that exceedeth not the worde and Sacraments other correction ouer any priuate man Pastours haue none much lesse ouer Princes Phi. Yeas they may force them to repentance if they can not perswade them Theo. Princes may force their subiects by the temporall sworde which they beare bishoppes may not force their flocke with any corporall or externall violence Chrysostome largely debateth and fully concludeth this matter with vs. If any sheepe sayth he goe out of the right way leauing the plentifull pastours graze on barren and steepe-places the sheephearde somewhat exalteth his voyce to reduce the dispersed and stragling sheepe and to compell them to the flocke But if any man wander from the right pathe of the christian fayth the Pastor must vse great paynes care and patience Neque enim vis illi inferenda neque terrore ille cogendus verùm suadendus tantum vt de integro ad veritatem redeat For hee may not be forced nor constrayned with terror but only perswaded to returne againe to the truth And again A Bishop can not cure men with such authoritie as a sheepheard doeth his sheep For a sheepeheard hath his choyce to bynde his sheepe to diet them to seare them and cut them but in the other case the facilitie of the cure consisteth not in him that giueth but onely in him that taketh the medicine This that admirable teacher perceiuing sayd to the Corinthians not that wee haue any dominion ouer you vnder the name of fayth but that wee are helpers of your ioy For of all men Christian Bishoppes may least correct the faults of men by force Iudges that are without the Church when they take any transgressing the Lawes they shewe them-selues to bee endued with great authoritie and power and compell them in spite of their heartes to chaunge their manners But here in the Church wee may not offer any violence but only perswade Wee haue not so great authoritie giuen vs by the Lawes as to represse offendours and if it were lawfull for vs so to doe wee haue no vse of any such violent power for that Christ crowneth them which abstaine from sinne not of a forced but of a willing minde and purpose Hilarie teacheth the same lesson If this violence were vsed for the true fayth the Doctrine of Bishoppes woulde bee against it God needeth no forced seruice hee requireth no constrained confession I can not receiue any man but him that is willing I cannot giue eare but to him that intreateth I cannot signe any but him that gladly professeth Origen agreeth with them both See the wisedome of the holy Ghost Because that other faults are iudged by the Lawes of Princes and it seemed superfluous nowe to prohibite those thinges by Gods Lawe which are sufficiently reuenged by mans he repeateth those and none else as fit for religion of which mans Lawe sayde nothing Whereby it appeareth that the Iudges of this world doe meddle with the greatest part of Gods lawe For all the crimes which God woulde haue reuenged hee would haue them reuenged not by the Bishoppes and rulers of the Church but by the Iudges of the worlde that Paul knowing rightly calleth the Prince Gods minister and iudge of him that doeth euill Phi. Bishoppes may not offer force with their owne handes but they may command others to doe it for them Theoph. A grosse shift As though temporall Princes or Iudges did execute malefactours with their owne handes Bishoppes by vertue of their vocation can not claime the swoorde and consequently they cannot commaunde or authorize any man to take the goodes or touche the bodies of Christians or Infidels Which being a cleare conclusion it is most euident they can much lesse licence you to take the Crownes and touch the liues of Princes to whome God hath deliuered the swoorde to iudge the earth and made them seruants only to himselfe since all other soules must bee subiect to them by the tenor of his own prescription and their first erection as the Scripture witnesseth Phi. Say what you will it is religion it is no treason to defende that the Pope may lawfully depose Princes for tyrannie and heresie Theoph. It is easie for you to multiplie woordes you haue stoare of them as appeareth by your Apologie and defence of English Catholikes which consist of nothing else but the Popes power to depriue princes is
forme of a seruaunt Doubtlesse the perfection of mans nature The forme of a seruaunt is out of question the nature of a seruaunt sayeth Chrysostome Therefore Augustine him-selfe addeth this reason why Christ must not bee thought to bee euerie where present ne veritatem corporis auferamus Least wee take from him the trueth of his bodie concluding that Christ is euerie where per id quod Deus est by that nature which is God in coelo autem per id quod homo in heauen by that nature which is man Where these wordes that which is man interprete what he meane by the former speech wheÌ„ hee saide according to this forme Christ is not euerie where present But let the worde bee taken in your sense yet doth it fully confirme our assertion For humane forme and shape is inseparably ioyned to the substaunce of Christes bodie and Christes humane forme by your confession can not bee present in many places at one time ergo neither his humane substance These â—waine shape and substaunce can not bee seuered hee is no man that hath not the shape of man Now choose whether that bodie which as you say your hosts containe shall keepe the forme and shape of man or loose the nature and substaunce of Christ. For the Lord Iesus as man must haue not onely the substaunce but also the shape of a man So shall hee come as you haue seene him go to heauen that is saith Austen in the very same shape and substance of his flesh Our vile bodie saith Paul shall he change to bee fashioned like to his glorious bodie but our bodies shall then haue distinction of partes proportion of shape circumscription of place ergo the glorified body of Christ hath and must haue these very proprieties of our nature So that if his bodily shape can be but in one place his bodily substance can be in no moe Therefore saith Fulgentius Quod siverum est corpus Christi loco potest vtique contineri if Christ haue a true bodie that no doubt may be concluded in a place And Theodoret Illud enim corpus habet priorem formam figuram circumscriptionem vt semel dicam corporis substantiam that bodie which Christ caried to heauen with him hath the same forme figure circumscription at one word the same substance of a bodie which it had before Phi. S. Chrysostome and S. Ambrose affirme the contrary Theo. What affirme they Phi. That one and the some bodie of Christ is euerie where present Their words are Quoniâ—m multis in locis offertur multi Christi sunt â—equaquaÌ„ sed vnus vbique est Christus hic plenus existens illic plenus vnum corpus Because we offer in many places are there many Christs no by no meanes but one Christ is euery where here whole and there whole one body And S. Chrysostom exceedingly wondring at so miraculous a presence crieth out O the strangenes of the thing O the goodnes of our God! He that sitteth aboue with his Father in heauen at the verie moment of time is handled with the fingers of all men Theo. Make you Chrysostom and Ambrose the disciples of Eutyches Phi. Make you no worse reckoning of them than I do and they shall haue their due honor Theo. I thinke them to be farre from Eutyches errour Phi. And so doe I. The. Why then alleadge you their words for that erronious position which was condemned in Eutyches Phi. I alleadge them for the reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament Theo. Your reall presence and vbiquitie if you will haue Christs humane substance dispersed in many places without shape or circumscription are the verie bowels and inwardes of Eutyches heresie Phi. No Sir S. Chrysostom and S. Ambrose were no heretikes Theo. In deede they were not and therefore you doe them the more wrong to wrest their speeches to make for his madnes Philand We produce them to confirme a trueth Theophil The very same trueth that the church of Christ abhorred in Eutyches Phi. What did the church abhorre Theo. Euen this which you would proue by the words of Ambrose Chrysostom â—hat the flesh of Christ after his ascension was not locall nor circumscribed within any certaine place Phi. We grant the manhood of Christ in heauen is locall and circumscribed with place that setteth vs free from Eutyches errour Theo. It doeth if you constantly keepe that point of faith and contradict it not by an other deuise Phi. We verilie beleeue and publikely professe that Christes humane nature in heauen hath quantity shape distinction of parts circumscription and all other conditions of a naturall and true body what would you more Theo. We would no more but if you fall from that are you not within the compasse of Eutyches furie Phi. We fal not from it The. Then how can Christs body in the sacrament waÌ„t all these which christiaÌ„ religion affirmeth to bee permanent perpetual in the maÌ„hood of Christ or why would you collect out of Amb. or Chry. against the very principles of faith that Christes humane fleshe is vncircumscribed and euerie where diffused Philand Wee meane that of Christes fleshe in the Sacrament not of his manhood in heauen Theophil Bee there many Christes Philand Who sayth there are you heard that euen now reproued by S. Chrysostom and S. Ambrose as a wicked absurditie to say that there were many Christes And therefore they concluded there was but one Christ euerie where Theo. That one Christ hath hee many naturall and substantiall bodies Philand Why aske you those questions of vs we bee not infected with any such frensie Theo. You may the sooner answere Hath Christ two reall and naturall bodies the one in heauen the other in the Sacrament Phi. No this is all one with that Theo. That by the rules of your creede is locall and circumscribed if this bee the same howe can this bee without quantitie shape and circumscription Phi. Beleeue you not Christ when hee sayde this is my bodie Theop. Yeas veryly but you so expound his words that you subuert the whole frame of his truth and our common faith with your reall and locall presence Phi. Do we subuert the common faith with our opinion Theo. Our Christian faith is this Wee must beleeue sayeth Augustine the Sonne of God according to the substance of his Deitie to be inuisible incorporall and vncircumscribed but according to his humane nature to be visible corporall and locall You heard Vigilius the martyr say For so much as the word is euery where and the fleshe of Christ not euery where it is cleare that one and the same Christ is of two natures eueriwhere according to the nature of his Diuinity and contained in a place according to the nature of his humanitie and this sayeth hee is the catholike fayth confession which the Apostles deliuered the Martyrs confirmed
the faithfull stand in to this day This faith and confession if you infringe of violate you ioyne handes with Eutyches against the church of God and against the groundes of our common creede and this you must needes impugne if you defend the naturall body of Christ to be euery where present as you would gather out of Ambroses and Chrysostomes wordes Philand Wee say not euerie where but in the Sacrament Theoph. But their wordes are euerie where Vnus vbique est Christus one Christ is euerie where Philand That is in the Sacrament Theophil That is your additament They say generally one Christ is euerie where Phil. To say that his humane nature is euerie where without any restraint were in deede a braunch of Eutyches errour Theophil And since they say so you must either vnderstande it of his diuine nature which is rightly and truely sayde to bee euerie where present without addition or else of the spirituall and effectuall presence of his bodie which entereth the soules and strengthneth the hearts of all the faythfull by the power of his grace and trueth of his promise And either of these wayes their wordes are verie sound your locall presence no part of their speech Phi. S. Chrysostom saith Omnium manibus pertractatur he is eueÌ„ handled with al men fingers Theo. You do that father very much wrong to wrest his eloquent and figuratiue speeces to your carnall and grosse surmises The verie tenor of his wordes wil declare that hee meaneth nothing lesse than your corporal and locall touching With our bodily hands wee neither can nor doe touch Christ. S. Ambrose saith Non Corporali tactu ChristuÌ„ sed fide tangimus We touch not Christ with our fingers but with our faith And so S. Austen Ipsum iam in caelo sedentem manu contrectare non possimus sed fide contingere We cannot handle Christ with our fingers sitting now in heauen but with our faith we may In this sense Chrysostomes wordes are very true but nothing to your corporall vbiquitie of Christs flesh Phi. How shall wee know that this was his meaning finding no words of his to direct vs to that sense Theo. His speech is otherwise so false that none but Iesuits would make any doubt of it And yet the very next wordes before these are a plain admonition to the hearers what to conceiue of this such like places Annon euestigio in caelos transferris annon carnis cogitationem omnem abijâ—iens nudo animo mente pura circumspicis quae in caelo sunt Art thou not presently caried vppe to heauen Doest thou not casting all cogitation of thy fleshe aside with a pure mind and soul seuered from the bodie looke round on the things which are in heauen In this spirituall and yet hyperbolicall vehemencie he goeth on amplifieng euery poinct saying that Christ is handled with al their fingers and that in the open sight of all that stoode about concluding no corporall or locall comprehension of Christ in the Sacrament by any of these mysticall and figuratiue speaches whereof he is ful but only that grace flowing into the Sacrifice should inflame all their hearts and make them cleaner than siluer purged and tried in the fier This is the presence of Christ which Chrysostome auoucheth euen the influence of his heauenly grace that spiritual force and grace as Gregorie saith may very wel be constered to be the trueth of his bodie and bloud in the mysteries So that the same christ is euery where present not by local or corporal diffusion but by mysticall operation and one bodie is proposed to all not to â—ill their mouthes but to clense their hearts and to giue them assurance of eternall life Phi. May not the body of Christ in the sacrament bee such as wee defend though his bodie in heauen be not Theo. If the body of Christ in the sacrament be the very same that is in heauen how can it so much differ from it If it be an other how can it be his since he hath but one naturall bodie and that by no meanes capeable of such contrarieties as you imagine Phi. Is not Christ omnipotent Theo. Almightie hee is in working his will not in changing his nature Phi. Wil you limite his might Theo. The christian faith is not repugnant to his might but agreeable to his trueth which you may not subuert with a pretence of his power at your pleasures Tertullian saith very wel If in our owne presumption we abruptly vse this reasoâ— nothing is hard to God wee may faine what we list of God as though he had doone it because he could do it We must not because he can doe all things therefore beleeue he hath doone that which he hath not But we must search whether he hath doone it or no. For this respect some things may be hard vnto God himselfe to witte that which he hath not doone not because he could not doe it but because he would not Phi. Can not the power of Christ alter the nature of his manhoode Theo. Were it possible that the manhoode of Christ might be changed and altered in his essentiall proprieties which assertion the Church yet alwayes reiected as hereticall why stand you so much on this what Christ can doe when you plainly perceiue by your Creed what Christ will doe Shal his power ouerthwarte his will Or his arme disappoint his mouth We neede not dispute whether it be possible or no this sufficeth vs that the Lorde himselfe saith he will leaue the world and be no more in the worlde Whatsoeuer he can doe this we be sure he will doe his worde is trueth and his will knowen against that if you stand and oppose his power to make him a lyar assure your selues hee hath power enough to be reuenged on your obstinacie for vrging his power which is no part of your care against his wil which he hath commanded you to beleeue and obay Phi. It is you that neither beleeue his wil nor agnise his power we build our selues on both Theo. His wordes by which you gather his will you â—rame and inuert to your owne purposes and when we would reduce you from the misconstruction of his speach by the very tenor of the Christian faith you pleade his power to delude his trueth and ouerflorish a lewd heresie with a shew of his omnipotencie Phi. We do not pretend that power of God for any vntrueth Theo. If the Christian faith bee trueth you vrge his power against his trueth Phi. Go we against the Christian faith Theo. Confesse you the distinction of two natures in Christ after his ascension Phi. We do Theo. And the proprieties of either to remaine without confusion conuersion or alteration Philand What els Theophil This then is the Christian faith that hâ—th natures in Christ now doe and euer shall keepe and continue their seuerall and different proprieties without
The bread hauing the inuocation of God is nowe no common bread but an Eucharist or thankesgiuing consisting of two things a terrestriall a celestiall So Ambrose The Sacrament is not that which nature hath framed but that which blessing hath halowed They do not auouch the Sacrament to bee simply no bread they teach it to bee no naturall nor vsuall bread because the vertue power and force of Christes flesh is vnited to it and receiued with it though to sight and taâ—â— it keepe the shewe of nothing else but bread Phi. What is species panis which the Fathers speake of but the vtter appearance of bread when the substaunce is altered Theo. Doeth species signifie a â—hape without substaunce Philand It signifieth the shape and not the substaunce Theo. Euerie creature hath his substaunce ioyned with his sensible shape and forme and therefore though the one doe not signifie the other yet the one inferreth the other by the verie necessitie of nature neyther hath GOD giuen vs any perfecter triall of substaunce than by sight and sense which is sure enough because shewes without substaunce are no creatures Philand But this in the Sacrament is miraculous and that is the reason why species in the Fathers doeth signifie a shewe without substaunce or as our Schooles rather like to say for perspicuities sake accidentes without a subiect Theophil Your Schooles were perspicuous as the Lande of Aegypt was light-some when it was couered with palpable darkenesse but where doeth any Father speaking of the Saâ—rament take species for a shewe without substaunce Philand That is â—uerie where the meaning of the word when they applie it to the Sacrament Theo. How proue you that Phi. It needeth no proofe the very word doeth â—o signifie Theophil The worde species doeth no more exclude the subâ—taunce of breade and wine in the Sacrament than species humana the shew shape and forme of a man which you haue doth take from you the â—ubstance truth of mans nature Which if you thinke it doeth looke what answere you will make to him that shall aske what lieth vnder the shape of a man in you it must be the substance of a man or some worse thing And if you can keepe both the shape and substaunce of man why may not the bread and wine do the like for all the word species which is verified of men and other creatures aswel as of the bread and wine in the mysteries Phi. The comparison is not like For the bread is changed and so am not I. Theophil Doe you not often change both the inward and outward man I meane the state of body and soule Phi. I change as others doe Theo. You can be no christian if you be not changed from the state in which you were born You were born the child of Gods wrath and seruant of sinne if you be renewed and freed from that then are you wholy changed Phi. This is no substantiall change such as we affirme to be in the bread Theo. If you would proue that which you affirme you might happen to conclude that which now you can not Phi. That is soone prooued Theo. I maruell then you stay long before you doe it and faint so often when you begin it You auouch that the word species in the Fathers signifieth your shewes without substance and accidents without subiect and when the very shew of men which you beare about you conuinceth that follie you presume a substantiall change to be in the bread to helpe foorth the vse of the word which you imagine against all learning reason was their meaning For the worde species though it bee diuersely vsed among the Fathers and often iterated in this matter of the Sacrament yet shall you neuer bring vs any one place where it is taken for a shew without substance and therefore by that worde you can hardly inferre the bread to be changed in substaunce and nothing to be left besides the accidentes Sainct Ambrose sayeth it importeth as much as an euident sight and trueth Speciem pro veritate accipiendam legimus Specie inuentus vt homo Wee read this word species to bee taken for the verie trueth of a thing As Christ was found not in shew but in trueth like a man And of the Lordes cuppe Perhaps thou wilt say speciem sanguinis non video sed habet similitudinem I see not the trueth of blood but it hath the resemblance Which obiection Ambrose repeateth shortly after in these words Similitudinem video non video sanguinis veritatem I see the resemblance I see not the truth of blood Where note that species is not onely contrary to the onely likenesse and appearance of any thing but equiualent with the trueth and nature of euery thing Then are shewes without substaunce your fansies without iudgement you neuer receiued any such doctrine from the Catholike Fathers your selues haue deuised it of late since barbarisme preuailed in your Schooles and Antichrist was exalted in your churches Philand So species is nowe and then vsed but doeth that inferre that this is the generall signification of the word wheresoeuer we finde it Theo. This sufficeth to exclude your shewes without substaunce vnlesse you can bring some better inforcement than the very word which you can not And yet Sainct Ambrose giueth an other vse of the worde and that treating of the Sacramentes which vtterly subuerteth your accidental shewes Creaturae non potest esse veritas sed species quae facile soluitur at que mutatur No creature can bee said to be a trueth but a shew or appearance which is soone dissolued and abolished In this sense species is all one with any creature or substaunce which soone decaieth as euerie mortall thing doth and the learned Fathers writing of the Sacrament continually vse the worde to signifie the nature and kinde of euerie creature and not the naked shewes or accidentes Sainct Ambrose Ante benedictionem alia species nominatur before it be blessed it is called an other not shewe but kinde Grauior est ferri species quam aquarum liquor The kinde or nature of Iron not the shewe of yron is weightier than the liquor of water If the word of Elias were able to fet fire from heauen non valebit Christi sermo vt species mutet elementorum shall not the word of Christ be of strength to change the kindes not the shapes of these elementes So doeth Augustine likewise Non sic habendam esse speciem benedictione consecratam quemadmodum habetur in vsu quolibet the kinde or element consecrated with blessing must not be so reckoned of as it is in common vse Idem cibus illorum qui noster sed significatione idem non specie the Fathers of the old Testament had the same food which we haue but the same in signification not in external kinde Aliud illi aliud nos sed
7. 8. 4. Kings 11. God might giue Iehu the kingdome appoint him to reueÌ„ge his masters sinnes Iehu authorised by God and not by Elizeus Eccle. 48. Eccle. 48. Elias Eliseus were no deposers Eccle. 48. The defence cap. 5. Iâ—larions and consequents vpon the former examples The former examples inferre no iudiciall deposition of Princes by Priests All sauing one were either not lawfully created or not els deposed Athalia slaine for vsurping Vzziah smitteÌ„ for his pride Iorams religioÌ„ no worse than his fathers 4. King 1.9 Verse 22. Verse 7. 3. Kings 21. God vsed the ministerie of the Prophets to declare his will but not their authoritie to depose Princes The defence cap. 5. The Iesuites giue a reason why Priests may depose Princes before they proue the fact to be lawfull The question is not whether the prophets might oppose them to reprooue wicked Kings but whether they might by their propheticall vocation depose them Til God spake no Priest may depose kingdomes The defence cap. 5. Deut. 17. The subiectioÌ„ of al men to the iudgemeÌ„t of Priests This place of Scripture is corrupted by the Papists Deut. 17. The Greeke and Hebrew are against the Latine Deut. 17. * Lib. 1. epist. 3.8.11 lib. 3. epist. 9. lib. 4. epist. 9. The Latine text of the Bible depraued That reading is yet found in sixe written Bibles in the new College in Oxford Nicol. de Lyrae in cap. 17. Deut cronomij The commoÌ„ wealth of the Iewes and the Scriptures themselues impugne the Iesuites sense of that place Exod. 18. Inferiour iudges which afterward heard smaller matters in the gates of ech Citie first apointed by the counsel of Iethro Numbers 11. The same order of inferiour and superiour iudges established by Gods law for euer among the Iewes Deut. 16. Deut. 17. The superiour iudgement consisted both of priests to direct and magistrates to correct The chiefe magistrates before kings were ordained in Israel nâ—uer called Iudges This Court was after assistant and subiect to the King Iehosaphat renued these two formes of iudgement 2. Chro. 19. The King coÌ„manded theÌ„ ergo they were not to command him All matters were not referred to the priest and the kings matters are namely excepted froÌ„ them How the Iesuites abuse the sense of this place in Deut The King not subiect to their Court. The magistrate cleane stroken out by the Iesuites al his interest conueighed to the Priest This Court limited to the law of God that speaketh nothing of deposing Princes Neuer high priest deposed Kings but Kings haue deposed high Priests 3. Kings 2. Adoniahs right to the Crowne was better than Salomons by the hie priests iudgement and yet the king remoued the hie Priest froÌ„ his office and put the competitor to death Neuer King of Israell or Iudah remoued from the Crown by any Priest yet the causes then as vrgeÌ„t as now How can you excuse the hie Priests of Iuda for not doing their dutie if by Gods law they had beene the Princes superiours The Priests Prophets lost their liues for reprouing Princes and more it could not cost to depose them The Defence cap. 5. A condition implied in the creation of al Princes God required many things in a Prince the breach of which is not deposition Deut. 17. Deut. 17. Princes brake couenants with God and yet were not deposed The defence cap. 5. The authority of Priesthood in the new Testament Lesse in the newe testament for the deposition of Princes than in the old * Rom. 13. The defence cap. 5. Psal. 2. Ieremi 1. Mat. 16. The supereminent power of Christs priesthoode is nothing to the Pope The defence cap. 5. Mat. 18. Psal. 2. Reuel 19. Christ bruseth his enimies as a king not as a Priest Hebr. 7. * Hebr. 9. * Hebr. 10. * Hebr. 9. * Hebr. 7. All Christes dignitie may not be imparted to the Pope Mat. 16. Iohn 20. Mat. 16. De considerat ad Eugen. lib. 2. Theophilact in 16. cap. Matth. Ambros. de poeniteÌ„t li. 1. ca. 2. August de doctrina christiana lib. 1. cap. 18. The defence cap. 5. Iohn 21. Mat. 16. Hebr. 13. 1. Cor. 4.5 2. Iohn Out of these places none other arguments can be made than these Iohn 21. Mat. 16. Heb. 13 Pastours may feede but not depriue Pastors may threaten but God must punish Princes Heb. 10. * Mat. 16. God is the reuenger of such as contemne his word The defence cap. 5. Ad Tit. 3. No companie with heretiks and idolaters Companie not duetie prohibited by S. Paul 1. Cor. 5. 2. Thes. 3. 2. Thes. 3. Tit. 3. 2. Iohn 10. Ech man must haue his due whether he be Turk heretike or Infidel Rom. 13. Seruauntes by gods law may not forsake their masters for heresie Cod. lib. 1. tit 5. de haeret § Man in fin * Colos. 3. * Tit. 2. The wife may not forsake her husband for idolatrie or heresie * Mat. 5. 19. * Decretal lib. 4. de diuortiis ¶ quanto * 1. Peter 3. Tit. 2. Ephes. 5. * Mark 7. * Ephes. 6. * Colos. 3. * 1. Cor. 5. * 2. Thes. 3. * 2. Iohn 10. What S. Paul and S. Iohn prohibite Least of all may the subiect forsake his Prince though he bee an idolater or an heretike Rom. 13. Mat. 22. * Rom. 13. * 1. Pet. 2. The flat and firm precepts of the Scripture must not be ouerthroweÌ„ by generall indirect collections Subiection is due as well to heretical as to idolatrous and tyrannicall Princes Rom. 13. 2 Iohn 10. 1. Cor. 10. ver 27 With what sort of Infidels Christians might be conuersant 2. Cor. 6. The Pope respecteth excoÌ„munication because hee would excommunicate whom he list The perill of excommunication by Gods law is not depositioÌ„ Mat. 18. Barthol sumus in verbo excommunicat numero 45 Margarita decret in eodem verbo Vâ—ile lex humile â—es ignorata necesse haec anathemâ— quidem faciunt ne possit obesse The defence cap. 5. Spirituall Pâ—stors haue power to punish corporally Pastouâ—s haue no power ouer the goods or bodies of christians The defence Cap. 5. Act. 13. 1. Cor. 4. 1. Cor 5. 1. Tim. 1. 2. Cor. 10. 1. Cor. 6. They shoulde proue that Priestes may iudicially torment the bodies of the wicked and they proue that God did miraculouslie reuenge impietie Peter slue Ananias not with his haÌ„ds but with his mouth which was the workâ— of God Act. 5. Act. 5. Act. 13. The hand of the Lord and not of Paul was vppon Elymas The defence cap. 5. The incestuous CorinthiaÌ„ deliuered vnto Satan 1. Corin 5. Ambros. in 1. Cor. cap. 5. Ibidem Ibidem 1. Cor. 5. In cap. 5. Epist. ad Cor. Aug. quaest vet noui Test. quaest 49. Hieron in 1. Cor. cap. 5. Chrysost. in 1. Cor. hom 15. Hieron ad Heliodorum Idem ad Riparium aduers. Vigilantium Aug. contra ep Parm. li. 3. ca. 2 The Diuell not the Apostles