c. before you so all you stande nowe with vs stifely at this baye that they are euen as necessarie to saluation as the word of god And if ye let goe this tackling all come downe on anheape Whiche Alfonsus foreâ—…éeing or euer he woulde make his booke as he termes it agaynst heresies Iaciendum est solidissimum fundamentum c. VVe muste laye saythe he a moste sounde foundation wherewith we muste hereafter moste often defende our selues agaynst heretikes as with a moste sure bulwarck that the traditions and difinitions of the vniuersal church in those thinges that pertayne to faythe althoughe the euident scripture fayle for the proofe of them are of no lesse authoritie than the holy Scripture it selfe And agayne Mihi horum per tot seecula c. The authoritie of these most approued men by so many ages should suffice to me although I had by no former reason conuicted it Let vs therfore say that the Churche muste be obeyed in all things that are to be beleeued or to be done although the authoritie of scripture want Thus do you estéeme and stoutly stande to the defence of your ceremonies quite contrarie to all the foresaide auÌ„cient fathers that giue as we do all especiall prerogatiue to the only scriptures You were best therfore to call them heretikes UigilantiaÌ„s with vs for so your Sorbonists played with Erasmus Though he allowed many of your popishe ceremonies and durst not speake open mouthed agaynst any of them for it had beene to hotte for him since he dyd but touche them ful softly and yet they cried out vpon him a Uigilantian an Aerian an heretike as héere you doe A sore â—…adde ye knowe is soone broken and they are tender ware and dayntie to be delte withall the least worde in the worlde agaynst them will make a maruellous heretike Erasmus had but sayde Quo magis haeremus c. Howe muche more we cleaue to bodily ceremonies so muche the more wee encline to Iudaisme And dyd but wyshe on thys wyse Opto omnes esse tales c. I wishe that all men were suche that they mighte not muche neede bodily ceremonies or not giue so much vnto them And that Christ said Discipulis nihil istarum reruÌ„ prascribo I prescribe to my Disciples nought of these things eate this meate abstayne from that now rest now labour be clad thus touch not this handle not that if I were their master they shoulde not once learne to trust in these bodily thinges least they shoulde remayne weake alwayes He sayde but thus and lesse he coulde not well say and say any thing but Lorde what sturre the Sorbonistes made at the matter and howe they all to be heretiked hym Aerian Aetian Iouinian Uigilantian c. So that he was fayne for feare so muche as he mighte to sette a good collour on these your ceremonies and when he had salued the matter as well as he coulde what sayde he then in this retractation for them Iudaismun appello â—…on Iudaicam impietatem I call them Iudaisme not Iudaicall impietie And yet for al his excuses and commendations he was fayne to say Quanquam si Ecclesia tribuitur c. Although if that be attributed to the Church what so euer is prescribed of the Bishops or is done in the churches there are many coÌ„stitutions of Bishops of the which not with out cause all men make a publike complainte There are many ceremonies in certaine Churches the which ye may call either to no purpose or els foolish or else superstitious for commonly either some idle Deane or els some other meane man like him hath deuised them Oft times some old wife giuing monie therefore obteyneth that this or that be done now than certaine creepe in or if not so they breake in euen by the violence of the coÌ„mon peoples custome He should therefore not speake wickedly that should say the libertie of the Christian people is burdened with such constitutions and ceremonies especially when among them there are not a fewe that do no good at all to godlinesse but either to lucre or ambition Thus was Erasmus euen where he defendeth your ceremonies constrained to confesse Yea where he speaketh euen the best of them In his obseruandis c. In obseruing these saith he although they were ordayned to godlinesse the minde of many Christians is Iewishe either while they rest there neglecting those things that are of the spirit or els while with a preposterous Iudgement they attribute more to those outwarde things then to true godlinesse which is settled in the affections But euen as the hardnesse of the Iewes was to be kept in with so many prescriptions as it were with boundes so charitie waxing colde in Christians caused that the Bishops prescribed many things not vnlike the Iewishe prescriptions although to be kept with an vnlike minde For they are as it were certaine wagons wherein the infancie of little children is brought vnto the spirite As he sheweth after an example Exemplicausa c. For ensample the people is bid to bow their knees or their heads to god By this ceremonie the people is warned to submit their soule to God this helpe he that is perfect neede not who submitteth his minde to God in what state soeuer his bodie be And although that such as this the bodies comely gesture of knéeling which is not a ceremonie inueÌ„ted of your Bishops but taught vs in Gods word by Christ and his Apostles manner of prayer we not onely vse but also diuerse of your Churches Ceremonies be not refused of vs but kept yet are they vsed farre otherwise than your prelates vrged them or your people kept them reposing in them as Erasmus saith Proram puppim Sanctimoniae The whole stay of Religion Tali hominuÌ„ genere quoniam c. Bicause saith he I saw the worlde full of such kinde of men I now and then call them backe to the studies of true godlinesse from the admiration of ceremonies But to admonish to trust to ceremonies I neither thought it necessary nor safe Of the worde of trusting let other looke to it vnto me to whom this worde to trust soundeth to leane principally vnto it soundeth hardly to trust to the workes of men and to trust to Ceremonies Neither finde I these voices either in the diuine writings or in the writings of godly men Thus hardly was Erasmus driueÌ„ to his defence about your Ceremonies by the Facultie of the Diuines of Paris that vrged the necessitie vertue and confidence in them In the ende of all which conflictes as he saith to them so say I to you M. Stap. Quid autem his tot c. Of all these so many propositions what is done that shoareth vp Christian Religion that the people should beleeue a Monkes cowle was auailable to heale diseases that passing ouer Christe we should with petitions sollicite the Saincts That
facit hypocritam For the sinnes of the people God maketh the hypocrite to reigne â–ª So that nothing is impossible Our sinnes are such as may deserue or Gods trial may be suche as he may proue vs with affliction vnder a Turke or heretike or any other tyrant or vsurper But what is all this to the purpose Shal not lawfull and godlie Christian Princes as Gods blessed name be praysed therefore he hath so blessed Englande presently with suche a moste happie Princesse for all his moste gracious and rare gifts shyning in hir that we maye iustly saye Non talâ—…er fecâ—… omni nationi he hath doone the lyke in our dayes to no christian nation I speak it not to flatter hir or to blemish any other estate but to glorifie God for hir to confirme vs iâ—… our allegiance and to confounde your disobedience to hiâ—… highnesse shal not I say such Godly princes vnite maâ—… sure to them and their heires all such lawfull authoritie as belongeth vnto their estate bicause it may be abused by other Princes hereafter If ye saye it is not their lawfull authoritie nor belongeth vnto them of ryghte That woulde beproued fyrst Maister Stapleton for otherwyse thys youre presupposall toucheth as well their authoritie ouer temporall matters as ouer spirituall If the one may be vnited bycause it is ryghte why maye not the other béeyng ryghte alsâ—… be lykewyse vnited withoute thys vayne castyng beyonde the Mâ—…Wue to let goe a certentie of present righte for feare of an vncertayne daunger of some inconuenience to come And yet if any suche chauÌ„ce should come ye should alwaies consider a difference betwéene a Princes authoritie and a Princes tyrannie betwéene his duetie and hys doing whether he be Turke Iewe Heretike Heathen or whatsoeuer he be or whatsoeuer he do he oughte to be a faithfull Christian Prince and he ought to do nothing but that a christian Prince may lawfully do Neither do any godly lawes giue the Prince that nowe is or euer shall be any other authoritie than lawfull authoritie And as for this clause of the statute euen your selfe do confesse that it giueth none other superioritie to be vnited to the crowne of the Prince whatsoeuer the Prince be or shall be or may be but to do that that is lawfull and that that he oughte to do For the words which ye cite are these That all maner superiorities that haue or may lawfully be exercised for the visitation of persons ecclesiasticall And correcting all maner of errours heresies and offences shall be foreuer vnited to the Crowne of the Realme of Englande These wordes ye sée vnite no other authoritie but suche as may lawfully be exercised and so lawfully it vniteth to the Crowne the correction of errours heresies and offences not the maintenaunce of errours heresies and offences Nowe if ye thinke the Turke would thus do ye thinke better of him than I can conceiue and make me to thinke worsse of you than I thought If ye thinke the Turke as is moste likely would not do these things that the statute yéeldeth to the Prince that is to say he would vsurpe that superioritie that may not be lawfully â–ª exercised he woulde mainteine errours heresies and offences he would set out the Alcaron and worship of Mahomet and suppresse and beate downe the Testament and worship of Iesu Christ thâ—… the statute toucheth him not nor he the statute noâ—… any othe is héere required and your inconuenient presupposall is put foorth in vayne For the statute yéeldeth not all correction simply but correction of errours heresies and off ences that he exercise it lawfully which the Turke will not do nor can do béeing an opeÌ„ enimie to Christes true religioÌ„ And therfore where ye say on this clause of the statute wherin is implied that if a Turke or any heretike whatsoeuer should come to the Crowne of Englande by vertue of this statute and of the othe all maner superioritie in visiting and correcting eccl. persons in all maner matters shoulde be vnited vnto him This is your excéeding falshod to the truthe and too much iniurie to the statute and playne trechery to the crowne to say that the statute implieth this doing of the Turke or this swearing and beleeuing so in him For the statute implieth nothing but that belongeth to a very christian Prince The statute implyeth no suche absolute superioritie of correcting ecclesiastical persons in al maner matters This is to borrowe a worde of your owne rhethorike too too Turkishly and spitefully put in of you to make it appeare â—… great inconuenience Where the wordes that ye cite of the statute speake of correcting all maner of errours heresies and offences And is there no differeÌ„ce trow you betwéene the correcting of all maner of errours heresies and offences the correcting al maner matters The one no maÌ„ wil denie to be godly to punish the euil The other is so large in deede that if a Turk or an heretike had the doing therof he might punish vertues in stéede of vices truth in place of falshood and say that he punished some maner matters except truth and vertue be no matter with you as it appeareth by this your presuppesall and your false implying on the statute that ye make it no great matter either what become of Gods true religion or of the Crowne of Englande It séemeth ye care not greatle whether a Turke or any heretike whatsoeuer had the Crowne of Englande or the Crowne of any other Realme so that your Pope might kéepe his triple Crowne and you the dignitie of your shauen Crowne Which to mainteine in honor what daunger heretofore ye haue brought the Realme in other can tell and Englande hath felt the popish practises to bring this Realme in bondage the crowne therof to strangers And on condition that this clause of superioritie were annexed not to the Prince but to the pope M. St. could like it wel and would spende to haue it so the best peny in his pouch Although a more perilous enimie to Christ and Christes church than is the pope is neither Turke or any other heretike or arch-heretike whatsoeuer that would not care if the moâ—…t royal crowne of Englande and most christian Realme were on a fishpoole bicause it hath reiected his superioritie and to shew his good will thertâ—… he hath abandoned it with his great curse to any that will come Christian Heathen Turke Iewe heretike or whatsoeuer he be that will either destroy it or reduce it to his captiuitie farre more dangerous to the soule than is the Grecians bodily slauery to the Turke But all this M. Stap. will vtterly denie that there were any suche boâ—…dage if that this clause were vnited to the Popes triple Crowne Go to M. St. were this also graunted you will not your owne deuised inconuenience as well come to passe the pope hauing it for euâ—…r vnited vnto him as if the
Prince had it What if there were an heretike Pope what if there were a Pope not only by his natiue countrey a Turke but also one that practiseth priuie conspiracies leagues yea â—…reasons with the Turke against christian Princes in all mischiefe of life yea and errours of fayth also were worsse than the Turke and that the Turkes erroneous Alkaron speaketh yet more reuerently of Iesus Christ than doth the pope that pretendes to be his vicar What if there were a Iew pope or one that would cause Christians to receiue Iudaisâ—…e yea to cruâ—…e Christ agayne What if there were a heathen Pope or one that caused as grosse Idolatrie to be vsed as dyd the Paynims and beléeued as much of heauen or hell of God or the diuell of the bodies resurrection or of the soules immortalitie as the Epicures or the Saduces dyd What if there were a whoremaster Pope yea a whore Pope a Sodomiticall Pope a Iudas Pope a Neronian Pope an Antichrist Pope and suche a Pope as hath done more for the diuels kingdome than eueÌ„ the deuill him selfe could haue done If this clause were for euer vnited vnto the Pope how should we do then master St I pray you helpe vs héere at a pinche out of the briers If ye shall denie there can come any suche Popes shewe why there may not come suche hereafter as well as there hath gone suche heretofore If ye denie there hath bene any such Popes heretofore and put me to my profes wel then I must proue it and God willing so will I when ye shall bid me But if beforehand ye thinke I shal be able to do it and you wil preuent me with a shift of descant that though they were such ill Popes yet in respect they were popes they were none of al these things but in respect they were meÌ„ for so ye afterward excuse y matter to which distinctioÌ„ there you shall be answered God willing yet here admitting also this distinction why may not I replie that what soeuer the person shall be that shall haue hereafter the crowne of this realme the statute and the lawe respecteth not the man that shall haue it but the estate and authoritie that â—…e shall haue and entendeth not that he is a man but that he is a king and so medling not with his vices and affections setteth out his duetie and office what he oughte to do what maner of man he ought to be in this respect he hath this authoritie And so euery way your wicked and malicious presupposall is answered simply but truely I trust howsoeuer other woulde answere it better or as iâ—… better deserueth giue it no answere at all Nowe hauing cast foorth your presupposition as a snaring bayte to bréede a scruple of some marueylous inconuenience and after your false maner of concluding hauing inferred that of the statute that it implyeth not ye begin to buskle vp your feathers and crow saying This kinde of regiment therefore so large and ample I am right well assured ye haue not proued nor neuer shall be able to proue in the auncient Church while ye liue In déede for that kinde of regiment master Stapleton that you inferre and would as a maâ—…e set vp it is a Papal or Turkish regiment and that the Bishop shall neuer be able to proue it I bolde well with you nor be goeth about to proue it but to improue it But that kinde of regiment that he here setteth downe of the Quéenes Maiestie that will he proue and hath alreadie proued it for al this your Thrasonicall crake which I commit to muster in your common place thereon And let this his fellowe go with it for companie VVhen I say say you this kinde of regiment I walke not in confuse and generall wordes as ye doe but I restrayne my selfe to the foresayde perticulers nowe rehersed and to that platforme that I haue alreadie drawne to your hande and vnto the which master Feckenham must pray you to referre and applie your euidences otherwise as he hath so may he or any man else the chiefe poynts of all being as yet on your side improued still refuse the othe For the which doings neither you nor any man else can iustly be grieued with him You maye saye like a lustie Gentleman what ye please master Stapleton I say this kinde of regiment and that kinde of regiment and tell vs of your walkes of your restrayntes of your platformes that ye haue drawne but these are but néedelesse vauntes Tell vs of that regiment that is in question walke there a Gods name restraine your selfe to that be contente with the platforme that is alreadie drawne to your handes otherwise master Feckenham and all other will sée that ye doe but brabble And as ye would drawe the Bishop to driue his proues thither whether he is not bounde to referre them so ye doe not onely deceyue the Reader but offer wrong also euen to master Feckenham whome ye take in hande to defende and here ye make him such a childe that he knewe not how to frame his issue nor wherein he would be resolued But M. Feckenham if ye defende him thus may biâ—… you meddle with your Fortresses and let him alone with his cause And if the Bishop haue not in these two meanes satisfied the demaund of his issue then tell master Feckenham that he may still refuse the othe But if the Bishop haue proued by any of these two poynts the Scriptures or the Doctours master Feckenhams issue that he desired to be proued that is any such gouernment as the Queenes Maiestietaketh on hir in ecclesiasticall causes then can not maister Fecken iustly refuse the othe but must vvith heartie thanks yelde therevnto as he hath promised by wryting to the Bishop or else he shall be holden as an vniust man and as obstinate a wrangling Papist as you shewe your selfe to be Which wilfull refusall though it be a griefe to all the godly affected that beholde your frowarde blindnesse yet shall it be the lesse griefe vnto them when they sée that neyther truth nor honestie will reclaime you Here after the vaunts of your selfe and the excusing of master Feckenham ye enter into your thirde part of excusing all the Papists calling it in your margine A reasonable defence of the Catholikes for refusing the othe This reasonable defence hath two partes the one the excuse of the Papists the other the accusing of the Bishop For the former sayth master Stapleton As neither with vs master Horne ought you or any man else be grieued for declaring the truth in this poynt as if we were discontented subiects or repining against the obedience we owe to our gracious Prince and countrey No man is grieued with you master Stapleton as ye pretende for declaring the truth in this poynt or any other but onely for your not declaring the truth but concealing the truth and outfacing the matter with false countenances of
made a King Quéene alone Now to this he addeth out of Esai saying Esai foretolde that kings shoulde bee the nourishers of the Church of Christe and casting dovvne their countenance to the earth shall vvorship hir and streight he adioyneth thou shalt knovv that I am the Lord for this verely is the signe that the Lord raigneth in vs if vve yelde so much vnto his church that the Ministers of Christe are greater than any King or Queene As this sentence is placed both withoute all order and coherencie so the reason is very sclender and standes on this that the Priests are the Churche that Esai here speakes on which as it is apparaÌ„t false so it is not to this purpose For the supreme gouernment of a godly Prince giueth not onely an honour to the Churche but to the Priests also and yet his supremacie safe But sée how this sentence hits him as the rest For if kings and Quéenes be likened to Nourses and Nourses haue charge not onely of féeding but also of gouerning then do Kings Quéenes both féede the Church although not by teching yet by causing the truth to be taught and gouerne the Church also And if by the Church is chiefly ment the priestes then the same kind of Princes feeding and gouerning like to Nourses stretcheth to priestes also and so the similitude makes against him His other argument of dispensing Gods mysteries and Sacramentes to the king is diuers times alreadie aunswered vnto and therefore as superfluous I passe it ouer And thus farre for his argumentes of his Priestes superioritie Nowe secondly to the reasons he sheweth why he thinkes vs deceyued But thus in this case deceiueth many that they see the king is a Christian and gouerneth Christians For they knowe not or at least will not know what difference it is whether a man goueren a Christian bycause hee is a man or bycause hee is a Christian. The king indeed gouerneth Christian men but not bycause they are Christians but bycause they are men And bycause the Byshoppes also themselues are men the kings also in part are aboue Byshops The which hereby goeth cleare away if wee consâ—…ider Christian kings not onely to gouerne Christian men but euen alike oftentimes Iewes now and then Moores and Tartars for this onely that they are kings But Byshops gouerne Christians so as they can gouerne no other as they are Byshoppes Sith therefore the gouernement of the king pertaineth to all men alike but Byshops principalitie is reached to onely Christians and sith the state of our Christianitie excelleth the humaine nature that is in vs with what sence is he endued that preâ—…erreth the gouernoure of our bodily and fleshely nature before the prieste that watcheth for our soules and that either loseth our sinnes if wee make worthie fruites of repentance or bindeth them if we beare about an impenitent heart For the Ministers binding and loosing is an other question Let vs nowe kepe vs to this of the Princes supreme gouernment We are deceyued you say for lacke of considering this difference that the king gouerneth Christians not as Christians but as men and we thinke you arâ—… deceyued your selfe M. Saunders and would 〈◊〉 others for not considering this difference in the king him selfe in whoÌ„ we ought to consider not onely that he is a king but also a Christian king In that he is a king he geuerneth aâ—… his subjects as ye say a like so farre as the likenesse or 〈◊〉 of their sâ—…ates will permit whether they be Christian Iewes Turkes Mores â—…aitars Ethniks or whatsoeuer religioÌ„ they be of not in respecte of their religions nor in the they are 〈◊〉 neither but in respect they are his 〈◊〉 For ther are other men also that are none of his subjectes â—…ra euery man in that he is a man is no subiect to another man but frée Neither in that he is a christian to speake preperly of the abstracte he is vnder any other than Christe in whom there is no difference of countrey state degrée or person as your selfe afterwarde coÌ„fesse in the 4. chapter How â–ª beit as the king himselfe is of the Christianâ—… religion and a Christian king of a christian kingdome as al kings kingdomes ought to be although they be not so hath he an other charge and gouernement of his christian subiectes farre aboue that they be naturall men or this or that cruÌ„trey meÌ„ euen that they be christians committed to his gouernment And therefore this charge was giuen the king of Gods people in his institution Dâ—…ute 17. That he should haue Gods worde alwayes with him and make religion the chiefe end of his gouernement And this your selfe haue graunted alreadie pag. 80 excepte ye will contrary your selfe as ye often doe But this case is too apparant that a christian Prince regardeth further than the body or than the naturall or polytike man For being a christian Prince he regardeth them as christian subiectes and not alike to such subiectes as are Heathen Turkes and Tartars which is a shameful sclander For as the christian Prince hath a speciall regarde to his christian subiectes before his Infidell subiects so they being subiects of vnlike condition he gouerns them nothing a like The one being out of the houshold of fayth although in the housholde of his kingdome The other being of bothe the housholdes and therefore the faythfull Prince hath fuller authoritie ouer them as wel for the religion of their soules as for their goodes and bodies But saye you the Byshoppe bath respecte only to the soule I say still would to God your Byshops had so But doth this hinder the Princes superioriue that hath respect to soule and bodie too The argumentes of Constantine Theodosius and Constantius are somewhat touched alreadie and I reserue the further handling of theÌ„ to the practise and treatise of the stories The 3. part of this chapter is a dissuasioÌ„ from the Princes supreme gouernment by the successe thereof Wherin first he begins with the most famous Prince King Henrie the. 8 the Queenes Matesties father the noblest and moste fortunate king that euer bare crowne in England now when his soule is crouned in the kingdome of heauen with eternal glorie his body with honor interred in his Sepulcher his immortal fame yet fresh liuing in the memorie mouthes of al nations sée these spitefull Papistes will leaue off with more than villanous reproches moste traiterously to rayle vpoÌ„ him Saying that he first called himself the Chief head of the Church of England Ireland immediately vnder Christ Besides that he was neuer the happier but much more vnhappie Upbrayding his wiues vnto him The couÌ„terfeting of the money and the pilling of his subiects â—… wicked Papistes past all shame and grace Howe truely dyd the Apostle Iude prophecie of you that 〈◊〉 â—…ulers and blaspheme â—…hem that 〈◊〉 authoritie Was King Henrie the
lawe of Christ is and what it commaundeth can no where better be knowne than oute of their mouth to whom the sauiour said Go teache you all nations and he that hereth you hereth me he that dispiseth you dispiseth me For there neuer want in the Churche those that eâ—…oy the legacie for Christ God exhorting as it were by them For euen as other men so well as earthly kings are reconciled to Christ by his ministers and by Christ to God so they ought not onely to be vnder God as they were before but also to Christ yea and now to his ministers too for in vaine doth doth he subiect himselfe to Christ that refuseth to obey Christs ministers This is true M. Saunders in the true ministers of Christ that the Prince ought to obey them in their ministerie euen as dispensers of the mysteries of Christ and as representers of Christ also And true it is they can or oughte best to tell what is the lawe of God. But yet are they not so to be heard or obeyed as they do not represent Christ or tell their owne â—…awe for the law of Christ. Wherein the Christian Prince â—…ath an ouersight euer them and is againe the chiefe miniâ—…ter and representer of Christ And as he obeyed them in the â—…ne so muste they obey him in the other or else they teache â—…ot the law of Christ aright Moreouer saith M. Saunders it is not inough for a Chriâ—…tian king to do those things that priuate men are wont to do â—…xcept also he doe those things that properly belong to the â—…ffice and digâ—…e of a Prince Euery man ought to serue the â—…ord and walke worthily in that vocation wherin he is called â—…rte thou called in the state of Matrimonie serue God not onely as a man but also as an husband Art thou called in the state of a king thou must serue as thou art a king and not onely as thou art a man But the offices of kings are other and the offices of priuate meÌ„ are other VVhervpoÌ„ saith Augustin elegaÌ„tly The king serueth otherwise bicause he is a maÌ„ otherwise bicause he is a king Bicause he is a man he serueth him in liuing faithfully But bicause he is a king he serueth with making by conuenient force lawes commauÌ„ding iust things forbidding the contrarie Euen as Ezechias serued destroying the Temples of Idols the high places that were builded contrarie to the coÌ„maundementes of god Euen as Iosias serued he also doing the like things Euen as the king of the Niniuites serued compelling all the citie to appease the Lorde Euen as Darius serued giuing the Idol to the power of Daniel to breake it and casting his enemies to the Lions Euen as Nabuchodonozor serued in forbidding by a terrible lawe all men placed in his kingdome from blaspheming god In this therfore kings do serue the Lord in so much as they be kings whe they do those things to serue him which none can do but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this we grauÌ„t you M. Saunders kings haue another more excellent peculiar seruice of God in that they be kings than haue other priuate men But as this maketh nothing against our assertioÌ„ or the kings estate but more commendeth it so it both ouerturneth your principall questioÌ„ for the kings authoritie in ecâ—…l matters coÌ„futeth that you haue said before in defacing the kings estate also cleane beateth you froÌ„ that which you driue your present drift vnto of deposing kings First you said before that kings in that they are kings gouerne all meÌ„ alike so well Iewes Mores Tartars as Christians haue as equall gouernment ouer the one as the other Here you confesse that kings in that they are kings haue 〈◊〉 especiall seruice of God and you specifie this their seruice 〈◊〉 such examples as declare a farre more excellent seruice 〈◊〉 is the gouernment of Turkes of Mores and Tartars Secondly this especiall seruice consisting in such thinges as these examples containe it argueth the Princes seruice not onely to intermeddle in eccl. matters but to haue the supreme gouernmeÌ„t of them and to haue authoritie to reforme eccl. abuses and to make Lawes to prohibite things contrarie to the Lawe of God and to commaunde thinges commaunded in Gods lawe whiche before you ascribed to Byshops and toke from kings Thirdly if none can do these things but kings howe dare you take them from kings and kings from them how dare you giue them to Priestes howe dare you giue Priestes authoritie to depose kings when rather hereby kings haue authoritie to depose priestes and none can do these thinges but kings by this your sentence cited out of Augustine These things say you thus ordered it shal novv be made plaine vvith hovve great equitie vve defende that Christian kings vvhiche gouerne Christian people ought to be vnder the ministers of Christ at the least in those things that appertain to faith and religion Yea vnder the paine of losing their kingdome if fyrst vve shall propounde this one thing Hytherto then by your plaine confession this is not plaine for it but rather plaine againste it that kings muste loose their kingdomes if they be not vnder the Priestes in thinges pertaining to faithe and religion that is to saye to make it â—…plaine excepte they beléeue and do as you will haue them you will plainely turne them out of their kingdomes Indaede this is a plaine waye if you can doe it as you haue attempted it But it is an vnnaturall and a traytorous waye and of all other farthest from such ways as those should vse that professe themselues to be Christes Uiâ—…ars and Gods Ministers Christe neuer vsed it nor Peter nor Paule nor any of the Apostles and yet were they vnder Princes that were not vnder them in things that pertaine to faith and religion But you will proue this with great equitie if first you shall propounde one thing Goe to propounde it M. Saunders and let vs sée the greatnesse of your equitie First say you both the lavve Diuine and naturall equitie teacheth manifestly that no other king ought of Christians of their ovvne accorde to be called to administer the right of a kingdome than he vvhich is himself a Christian. â—…or this is that vvhich the Lord saide by Moses to the Israelites VVhen thou shalt saye I vvill place a king ouer me as haue all other nations round about thou shalt ordeine him vvhom the lord thy God shall choose among the number of thy brethren neither mayste thou make a King of an other nation that is not thy brother But by brother vve vnderstande him that iâ—… a faithfull one and a Christian. And although Christians in times past vvere compelled to obey Ethnike Emperours yet vvoulde they neuer haue committed this to haue voluntarily called any such men to the administration of the Empire For vvho could suffer it that the members of
all their actions of their offices or vocations Ye conclude not a like M. Stapl. but subtilly and falsely ye alter the state of the conclusion if ye made your argument aright ye should make it thus as the Prince intermedleth not in the seuerall actions of his temporall subiects offices or vocations so he intermedleth not in the seuerall actions of his Ecclesiasticall subiectes offices or vocations This is the right illation of the sâ—…militude and thus it maketh nothing against vs Which you espying in the place of intermedling thrust in gouerning concluding â—…alsely bicause he is no intermedler in the one that therefore he is no gouernour of the other But the â—…urder ye wade in this similitude the more ye labour against the streame For as although the Prince intermedle not with the Fathers the Masters the Schoolemasters the Pilotes seuerall actions in their offices or vocations yet he ought to ouersée that euery one of these and all other his subiects do their owne proper actions belonging to their vocations and offices dutifully yea not onely to make lawes for them all as subiectes but also for their seuerall estates and degrées besides not for him selfe to exercise but for them to worke in their vocations so the Prince beyng likewise gouernour of Ecclesiasticall persons so well as of any other aforesaide although he intermedle not with the seuerall actions of their vocations yet ought he to ouersée them that euery Ecclesiasticall estate do their proper actions dutifully and also to make Lawes and Orders not for him selfe but for them in their degrées and vocations to exercise and obserue the same And thus your similitude euery way maketh quite against you M. Stapl. how be it you will proue it better ye say For the better vnderstanding whereof it is to be knowne that before the comming of Christe Kings were there many but Christian Kings none Many coÌ„mon wealths were there but no Christian common welth nor yet godly coÌ„mon welth properly to speake sauing among the Iewes but cluill and politike The ende and finall respect of the which ciuill common wealth was and is vnder the regiment of some one or moe persons to whome the multitude committed them selfe to be ordered and ruled by to preserue themselues from all inwarde and outwarde iniuries oppressions and enemies and furder to prouide not onely for their safetie and quietnes but for their wealth and abundance and prosperous maintenance also To this ende tendeth and reacheth and no furder the ciuill gouernment And to the preseruation tuition and furderance of this ende chiefly serueth the Prince as the principall and most honorable person of the whole estate whiche thing is common as well to the Heathenishe as to the Christian gouernment Is this all that ye will aforde christian Princes M. Stap. what a heathenish doctrine is this to make Christen princes and Heathen princes gouernment all one What if Christen princes as they haue right good cause beginne to startle at this that ye make their estate no better before God than is the great Turkes And what if one should answere that ye not onely sclaundered reprochfully all the estates of Christendome nowe liuing or that shal be or haue bene since Christes comming but also wickedly deface all the godly Kings and rulers before Christes comming Melchisedeck Dauid Salomon c. beléeuing in Christ to come as Christen Princes now beare the title of Christ already come And yet dare you saie that before the comming of Christ Kinges were there many but Christian kinges none Doâ—… ye dallie on the tytle and name of Christian or meane ye the tytle and effecte of christianitie if ye meane so as ye must néedes meane if ye meane any thing materiall to the purpose ye are very iniurious not onely to those Kings but to their subiects yea to their common weale also And yet ye say further their common wealth was but ciuill and politike and vvente no further than outwarde peace tranquillitie welthe and prosperous maynteinance which is the onely ende of their gouernement and that it reacheth not any iote further What if one should bidde you looke further in the scripture and so ye should finde it stretche somewhat further than to be common with the great Turkes gouernement What if a man should presse you with your owne wordes afterwarde that yet catche it more than one inche further for assisting of the Churche vvith the temporall svvorde which the great Turke the great Chan the Persian Sophie doth not but drawe their swordes agaynst it What if a man should referre this among your contradictions What if he should ioyne another withall that where yet ye confesse the Iewes common vvealth was godly before Christes comming and other common wealthes were not godly and yet the ciuill gouernement of Christian princes reacheth no further than the ciuill gouernement of heathen princes and one finall ende is common to bothe and so eyther the Heathens common vveales were godly also or else the Iewes were vngodly too yea what if the heathens coÌ„mon vveale and heathen Princes fell out to be in better estate of the twayne if only quietnesse vvealth abundance and prosperitie were the onely and finall ende of bothe if ye were well vrged in all these thinges thinke ye M. Stap. these your principles would be able to defende you yea lastly if one woulde denie these your Heathen and Turkishe maximies bring ye any thing to proue them than your owne bare saying that it is to be knovvne But no true Christian knovveth it M Stap. nor will euer acknowledge this which with suche bolde impudencie ye grounde vppon that christian Princes gouernement reacheth no further than ciuill and outvvarde safetie vvealth abundaunce and prosperitie and is common asvvell to heathen as to Christian princes Neuerthelesse M. Stap. taking it for a rolled case and out of question rolleth vp the matter as graunted And as he hath thus determined the boundes of Christian Princes gouernement so as it were by commission from his holy father he descrybeth the Popes kingdome But ouer and besides sayth he yea and aboue this is there an other gouernment instituted and ordeyned by Christ in a spirituall and a mysticall body of such as he graciously calleth to be of his kingdome â–ª which is the kingdome of the faythfull and so consequently of heauen wherevnto christian fayth dothe conduct vs In whiche spirituall body commonly called Christes catholike Church there are other heades and rulers than ciuill Princes as Vicars Parsons Byshops Archbyshops Patriarkes and ouer them al the Pope VVhose gouernement chiefly serueth for the furtherance and encrease of this spirituall kingdome as the ciuill Princes doe for the temporall That there is another mysticall body the kingdome of the faythful directed by an other spiritual gouernement this is a true principle M. Stap. and truer than you wéene or would haue it But as you are deceiued and would deceiue others with the title of that
master Stapleton here is no small boast I trowe We had nowe néede to beware betymes for feare the Bishoppe be here quite ouerthrowne since that master Stapleton maketh so prowde a chalenge Let vs therefore take héede to hys argument on thys place VVhiche place sayeth he well weighed and considered serueth to declare that I haue sayde that the King and others shoulde receyue not onelye the letter whiche as Saint Paule sayeth doeth kyll but the true and syncere meaning withall wherein standeth the lyfe of the letter as the lyfe of man wythin hys bodie yea the eternall lyfe whereof by following lewde lying expositions of holye wâ—…itte wee are spoyled at the Priestes handes Is this the conclusion of all this great crake M. St. that the B. should be quite ouerthrowne by this sentence what one word is here not only of this sentence but euen of your owne well weighed and considered conclusion theron which hath come nere vnto much lesse ouerthrowne the Bishops assertion Which if ye would haue ouerthrowne ye should haue concluded agaynst it and thus haue reasoned Moses sayde to the people of Israell if any hard or doubtfull thing in iudgement rise vp with thee betwixt bloud and bloud plea and plea plague and plague in matters of strife within the Citie c. Go to the Priestes and vnto the Iudge that shall be in those dayes c. Ergo a Christian king ought not to chalenge or take vpon him any such supreme gouernment in ecclesiasticall matters as doth the Queenes maiestie This conclusion in déede quite ouerthroweth the Bishops assertion But who séeth not that this sentence is to farre fetched to inferre any such conclusion And therfore master Stapleton thoughe this was his buttâ—… on whiche his eyâ—… shoulde haue béene fixed and brought his proues to haue improued this yet durst he not once touche or come nighe it for very shame for if he had he sawe that euery boye in the scholes would haue hissed out his argument And therefore wilyly weighing and considering howe he might make it séeme to serue to some purpose that he had craked on so much This place sayth he well weighed and considered serueth to declare that I haue sayd that Kings and others should receyue not onely the bare letter but the true and sincere meaning withall c. at the priestes handes And is this all that this place serueth to M. Stapleton for I dare say you haue well weighed and considered the matter that from so great a boast are so sodenly fallen into so déepe a consideration of the bare letter killing and the true quickening sense therof Wheras that text if ye would but meanely weigh and consider it once againe neyther talketh of any killing letter or liuing sense at all but of certaine doubtfull cases of strife nor can serue to confirme those sayings of Christ and Saint Paule without manifest wresting of it But to what purpose doe ye so well weigh and consider that whiche is nothing in question and that which is in question denyed and you should proue without any weighing or considering ye take it for confessed Who doubteth of this that Princes should not onely receyue the bare letter but the true sense and meaning withall at the priestes handes This Princes in déede should do which if they had alwayes done they shoulde not haue receyued so many of their lewde lying expositions as they haue done here to fore at the priestes hands who herein deceyued princes and gaue them not the true meaning and sense togither with the copie of Gods worde but debarred Princes of copie thereof of letter sense and all féeding them wyth the vayne fables and lewde lying expositions of theyr owne deuisings Wherefore Lyra noteth here vppon the Hebrue glosse Hic dicit glossa Hebraica c. Here sayth the Hebrue glosse if the priest shall say vnto thee that thy right hande is thy left hande or thy left hande is thy right hande this saying must be vpholden which thing is manifest false For the sentence of no maner of man of what authoritie so euer he be is to be vpholden if it conteyne a manifest falsehoode or errour And this appeareth by this which is set before in the text They shall iudge vnto thee the truth of Iudgement and afterward is set vnder And they shall teach thee according to his lawe whereby it appeareth that if the Priestes speake that which is false or swarue from the law of God they are not to be heard Thus sayth Lyra in confuting the Hebrue glosars of their hye Priests that sayde they could not erre and therefore what soeuer they taught must be beléeued And do not your Papistes say the same of the Pope and your selfe holde the same of your Priestes expositions that theirs alwayes muste be taken for the true sense else wherto bring ye out this conclusion In doubtfull cases of bloud and ciuill actions of strife the highe Priest and the chiefe Iudge muste determine a finall sentence Ergo Princes muste receiue not the letter of the scripture but suche sense as the Popish priestes and the Pope shall determine for the true sense in all controuersies of religion For this is the ful drift of your reason though ye dare not for shame speake so playne But this argument the more it is wayed wayeth lyke a fether in the winde and therefore ye turne the conclusion into generall words and say Ergo Princes and others muste receiue at the Priestes hands not onely the bare letter that killeth but the true and sincere meaning therof withall Which coÌ„clusion is not in controuersie but on both parts graunted they oughtso to do the Priests to deliuer to their Princes and others the worde of God and the true sense therof and the Prince and others oughte so to receiue of them the same word of God and the true sense thereof and not the priests owne deuises and expositions But since that none haue euer done more coÌ„trarie to this rule sythe it was first giuen by Moyses then haue the Popishe priestes had not Christian princes great néede to beware of Popishe Priests gloses and follow the councell of Lyra in reiecting them as other good Princes haue done to displace those false glosing priestes and place faythfull disyensers of Gods mysteries in their roomes and ouersée that their people be not deceiued in receiuing at the priests handes quid pro quo And for this cause the priest shoulde deliuer to his prince a perfect copy of the law which M. St. wickedly termeth the bare letter that killeth and thereto wresteth S. Paule wresteth this sentence of the iudiciall law among the Iewes for their time in the foresaide ciuill controuersies to be a simple rule for all christian common weales in all ecclesiastical causes excluding quite al iudgement from the prince including it in his Pope Priests alone iumbling the Prince and the people togither vnder the priests absolute determination
greatest reasons M. St. for your ceremonies Here if ye say for all this proportion betwéene your doings and theirs yet are not we so straightly bounde from the fathers traditions as they bicause the Iewes otherwise had ynowe commaunded them and verie fewe in the newe Testament are left to vs Christians Chriso stome telleth you that Christes Disciples ought to keepe the doctrine of God not of men For otherwise Christ blaming the Pharisers for kéeping the doctrine of men if he had suffered his Disciples to kéepe any doctrine of men they woulde haue replyed that wherein he reprehended them hée himselfe was culpable If nowe the Disciples bée bounde to this rule are not your Priestes also Yea are not all Christians bound thereto not to worship God with doctrines of men As for the doctrine of Christ to be euen as full yea and much fuller than was theirs for all it hath not your ceremonies Chrisostome sayth Omnia enim Euangelium continet c. For the Gospell conteyneth all things both present and to come the honor of God godlinesse faith yea al things are shutte vp togither in the worde of Preaching c. For euen as the cryer proclaymeth to all that be at the assemblie euen so sayeth hée doe wee publikely preache After this sorte that we adde nothing but preach onely those things whiche wee haue hearde for that is the vertue of the cryer to prosecute all things truely that he is trusted with not to put to nor alter nor take away anie thing Whiche is so haynous a faulte that from hence as Saint Ambrose sayeth the Deuill gat the first holde when our first mother Eue did but a little alter in telling the wordes of God to the serpent Whervpon we learne sayth he that we ought to ioyne nothing to the commaundement no not to make vs the more warie For if thou puttest too or drawest away any thing it appeareth to be a kinde of transgression of the commaundement And that the pure and simple forme of the commaundement is to be kepte vve muste followe the fashion of witnesse bearing Commonly a witnesse while he putteth too some thing of his owne de uising to the manner of the deedes doing he stayneth with a peece of a lie the whole credite of the witnesse For heere at the first shewe what offence hath it that the woman added Nor ye shall touche any whitte of it for God had not sayde ye shall not touche but ye shall not eate But for all that heereon came the beginning of the fall For the wordes that shee added eyther shee added them as superfluous or adding them of hir owne shee thought that the commandement of God was but halfe perfecte as you speake of Gods worde and the infancie of Christes Churche in the primitiue state therof while it was yet without your additions The treatise therfore of this present lecture teacheth vs that we ought not to withdraw any thing from the commaundements of God nor adde thereto For if Iohn gaue iudgement on this writing If any sayth he shal adde to these things God shall adde to him the plagues that are written in this booke and if any man shall minishe of the wordes of this booke of this prophesie God shall take away his parte out of the booke of life howe muche more muste no man withdrawe from Gods commaundements This sayth S. Ambrose to all your vnwritten verities and loades of ceremonies all beyonde and many agaynst the worde and commaundement of god Therefore I may safely for al doctrine say with S. Aug. if it be his senteÌ„ce VVhatsoeuer ye heere alleaged out of the scriptures let that sauour well vnto you whatsoeuer is besides the scripture flye it least ye wander in a cloude Lâ—…t vs not make saythe he religion of oure owne fantasies for what truth soeuer it be it is better than all that we can deuise after our will who soeuer be the deuyser howe wyse howe holye howe greate soeuer he were We muste despise him as S. Augustine saythe on this versicle Effusus est contemptus super principes c. VVhye were they contemned bicause they declared an other thing who are contemned those that are accursed For whosoeuer shall declare any other thing than that ye haue receyued let him be accursed c. Are they Princes are they learned are they great are they precious stones VVhat wilte thou call them more are they Angels and yet if it were an Angel from heauen that should declare ought vnto you besides that ye haue receyued let hym be accursed And are your Priests or Pope more priuileged héerein than are the heauenly Angels if he be a Prince as he pretendeth by his crownes if he be learned as he sayth his brest is the closet of all learning thoughe indéede many Popes haue béene as simple Clerkes as euen the simplest minister in all Englande whose lacke of learning so often ye rayle vpoÌ„ if he were neuer so great as he calleth him selfe Pontificem maximum the greatest Byshop were he a precious stone him selfe as in his Pontificalibâ—…s he is all to be dashte with precious stones Yea were he an angell that came from heauen as he is but a man that came from earth yet for all this if your Pope make ceremonies and establish them for necessary doctrine of religion besides the word of God then is euen he all you that so maynteyne them before God accursed and so to be counted as accursed howe faste soeuer wyth Booke Bell and Candle he curse other that forsake him and his accursed ceremonies And haue not we then good cause to refuse them séeme they ueuer so plausible But as S. Augustine sayth of mans doctrine The saying of man seemeth to haue reason for it as the Papistes alleage many goodly reasons for them tyll it be layde to the diuine knowledge but when the lye that is mans doctrine omnis homâ—… mendax euery man is alyer shall approche to the truthe it is deuoured and perisheth euen as towe layde to the fyre And all the opinions of falshoode which now are called Idols bycause they be feigned and forged shall be vtterly wasted away And this is their verye destruction that as Gamaliell sayde they be not of God Demaunde of them this question for their doctrines An ex Deo sint an ex hominibus whether they be of God or of men and ye shall pose them as Chryst posed the Phariseis For euen as Ise melteth at the rayes of the cleare sunne so these ceremonies waste away and léese their estimation whersoeuer the word of God beginneth to take place and are maynteyned onely where the worde of God is kepte in hucker mucker and the people in ignoraunce beléeuing these ceremonies to be of as muche yea of muche more force than the worde of god And therfore as Eckius Piggiâ—…s Câ—…ingius Peresâ—…us Canus Fisher Petruâ—… a Sâ—… Cocleuâ—… Catharinus Hosius Alphonsus
the Lutherans in Germanie and Englande at their beginning was not this your Apostles Luthers opinion that no man should be compelled to the faith and as there are many dissentions diuisions Scismes betwixte you the Sacramentaries and the Lutherans so are you deuided also in this point For your Master Caluine writeth that a maÌ„ may lawfully and by Gods lawe be put to death for heresie as he practised him selfe also burning Seâ—…etus the Arian at Geneua Sée how your selfe beyng blinded with pure enuie M. Stapleton while ye studie with all bitternesse of termes to deface vs to the simple to all wise meÌ„ ye cléere acquite vs of the crime ye obiect against vs Ye say we are Sacramentaries and that Caluine is our Maister Ye say furder that our Maister Caluine writeth that a man may lawfully and by Gods lawe be put to death for Heresie I aske ye here if this were the opinion of the Donatistes if they then saide the contrarie to vs and we to them then haue your selfe discharged vs of this crime that euen contrarie to your conscience and wittingly ye sclaunder vs with Which is so euident a matter that euery man hereafter may iustly take you for a common lying sclaunderer Do not your selfe also complaine in many places euen of this counterblast that we would haue the Prince execute more seueritie towardes you and that we séeke your bloud and such other thinges wherein although in that matter ye sclaunder vs yet euen your sclaundering purgeth vs in this matter And do ye not say here present we are deuided in this pointe and so againe ye cléere vs of this crime But say you all Luthers schollers in Germanie are not so forewarde I know not all Luthers schollers for my parte M. Stapleton â–ª and I ghesse you know them not all neither But suppose as ye say all be not so forwarde yet if they be forwarde they are againe discharged of this your lying crime Yet say you this was Luthers opinion and their common song in the beginning If slaundering were not your common song M. Stapleton ye would neuer sing thus purposely out of tune It is well knowne the reuerence and obedience that Luther teacheth subiects to yeld to their Princes euen to the death But wilfully ye peruert and wrest his wordes he spake not of fayth simply among professed Christians but of some doubtes of faith He saide they should not be onely forced without outwarde violence but rather with persuasion and argumentes if it might be if not then the Magistrate might lawfully punishe the obstinate for his errour or Heresie So he declared of Muncer and other Heretikes séeing their peruersenesse that the Magistrate might lawfully punish him and his adherents yea that he ought so to do and thereto he vehemently excited them This was Luthers opinion and what fault finde you therewith In déede agaynst those that are Infidels Turkes Iewes Heathen or any any other not professed Christians he sayd Christians ought not béeing not prouoked by them to set on their realmes and prouoke them onely of purpose by force of armes to make them become Christians And in this behalfe he spake muche agaynst the foule abuses of the Pope in his Croyses and practises aboute the Turkish warres But what is this to this purpose in hande yea what is all this either of Luther or Caluine if there were suche diuision in this poynte betweene them as you like a makebate would set where none is to the matter in question The question is whether the Prince may punishe heretikes and that by death Which bothe Luther and Caluine graunt ye may But the Donatistes denied this bicause they beeing apparant heretikes perceiued it made against them you shoulde likewise haue proued that Luther and Caluine and that we were heretikes or else it toucheth vs not at all For would ye haue the Prince put to death the faythful Christian Luther Caluine might wel ye know and ought to speake agaynst that They sawe the violent practises of you Papistes in murthering and deuouring the poore shéepe of Christ and can ye wite them if they coÌ„playned therof Ye shoulde haue first proued vs to be the heretikes But you will say that I haue done already Ye haue done so in deede M. St. after the Popish maner that is to say ye haue called vs heretikes and starke heretikes and condemned heretikes ofte inoughe and if that will do it And ye haue tolde euen right now that ye say we be heretikes al to nought with we say and we say on the head of it These sayings we haue hearde as ye bad vs harken but we haue hearde neuer a proofe Nowe what muste the Prince héere do 〈◊〉 he not examine and searche out bothe our proofes and punish not the faythfull be léeuer but whome he findeth to be the heretike And thus if ye wil néedes haue death the punishment in Gods name euen death be it But then M. St. I thinke ye will not be halfe so hastie no ye had rather I dare say kéepe ye still at Louayne Héere entreth M. St. agayne into an inuectiue agaynst M. Foxes booke For that booke and the bishop of Sarisburies are his chiefest eyesores so that I blame him the lesse that he startleth so often at them as all his companions and masters do besides For the one for their practises and the other for their errours haue almost marde all their estimation with their friends But his by matters I will not answere only to the question now in argument Yea sayth he some of your holy martyres auouche that the King can make no lawe to punishe any maner of crime by death and that al suche lawes are contrarie to the Gospel This was the opinion of sir Thomas Hitton priest Where finde ye this master Stapleton this is you will saye an article layde vnto him that he defended Yea but are you sure master Stapleton that he in déede defended this as it is héere set out and that it is not rather altogither deuised for malice or peruerted misconstrued as many other haue béene the false witnesses wrested the sayings of Christ that he should denie tribute to Cesar that he went about to destroy the temple c. Yea the title let on his crosse if the Priestes might haue had their will should not haue béene writteÌ„ as it was The like wresting of his sayings vsed the Iewes with S. Steuen And in the primitiue Churche were many articles obiected to the poore Martyres of refusing obedience to magistrates of licencious lyfe of vnnaturall commixtures of murdring and eating children And euen suche malicious misconstrued articles the Papistes deuise on the Protestants that in the meane while are gagged nor suffred once to speake and declare their innocencie But blessed are you sayth Christ when men reuile you and speake all euill on you for my name sake But you say this is no slaunder
for the visitation of persons ecclesiasticall and correcting all maner of errours heresies and offences shall be for euer vnited to the crowne of the realme of England wherin is employed that if which God forbid a Turke or any heretike whatsoeuer shoulde come to the Crowne of Englande by vertue of this statute and of the othe all maner superioritie in visiting and correcting ecclesiasticall persons in all maner matters shoulde be vnited vnto him Yea and euery subiecte should sweare that in his conscience he beleeueth so Is this a part also M. Sta. of the question in hand for the omission of a part wherof ye haue so sharply reuiled the Bishop for a false dissembler Is there no difference betwéene the kind of gouernment it self or the particulars therof the perpetual vniting of that gouernment â–ª and the same particulars to the crowne or any other suche clauses for the preferâ—…ing of it If the Bishop concealed any parte of that gouernmeÌ„t that the Quenes maiestie taketh on hir then might ye haue sée ned to haue had some cause to haue thus quarelled at the B. but then ye shuld haue set down what clauses of any point of gouernmeÌ„t in ecclesiast matters that the Quéene claimeth the Bish. omitted But this neither ye do nor ye can do but run about the bushe picking quarels that he let not downe other clauses also that be no parcel of the question in hande The question is not nowe aboute the vniting to the crowne the supremacie that hir highnesse claimeth but what that supremacie is and what are the pointes wherin it consisteth that are to be vnited The thing it selfe is one thing the vniting of the thing is an other thing The B. hath 〈◊〉 to set down the thing it self for his leuel for so the question of the issue demauÌ„deth to proue any such gouernment as the Queene taketh on hir If now the B. tell what kinde of gouernmeÌ„t it is â—…o enter into his proues to leuel theÌ„ therto doth not the B. deale playnly and truly and do you any other thaÌ„ kéepe your wonted wrnggling which way soeuer the B had goâ—… to worke For if when he vniteth himselfe only to his matter he caÌ„not satisfie your brabbling quarels but euen there suche is your impudencie ye chyde bycause he straggleth not from his question If he had vnited any thing else vnto it and spokeÌ„ of this vniting also as now ye would haue him do then woulde ye as faste haue cryed out on the other side that he shot wyde and set vp new states of the question in hande And thus woulde nothing stop your mouth ye loue of lyfe to wrangle But all these quarels are but your starting holes pretending to fynde fault with the Bishop where indéed your quarell is at an other matter to caste for a farewell at the ende of this your booke a boane for the reader to gnawe vpon to breede a suspition in his head of a greate inconuenience and so to bring him in a misliking of the state At least to leaue him striken in the head with a doubtfull scruple of the sâ—…qurle therof As who should say cracke me this nuttâ—… and there an end answere me to this inconuenience that may followe hereon If a Turke say you or any heretike whatsoeuer shoulde come to the Crown of England by vertue of this statute and of the Othe all manner superioritie in visiting and correcting Ecclesiasticall persons in all maner matters shoulde be vnited to him You haue a mischeuous meaning M. St. al the world may sée but that ye dare not vtter it without an if But thanks be to God they be no Turks nor any heretikes whatsoeuer that ye shoot at and refuse to obey God graunte all be 〈◊〉 whome ye wish in place as for your Pope whom ye would giue this supremacie vnto as he is no whit better than any heretike whatsoeuer so is he a more perillous enimie than the Turke A worsse than he can not be feared excepte yâ—… will put your case of the Diuell himselfe And shall we leaue the certayntie of a present good state for doubt of an ill to come or for feare of a worse runne to the worste of all Thankes be to God the Quéenes Maiestie whome God of his mercifull fauour hath placed to reigne ouer vs and to enioye this supremacie is neyther Turke nor heretike but a moste excellent and blessed christian Quéene a moste syncere defender of the true faith of Christe a most godlye nourse and mother of Gods people God for his mercyes sake vouchesafe to blesse and long continue hir ouer vs maugre all your spites But go to will ye say I stande not â—…n the state present It is good for hereafter to forecast the worsâ—…e â–ª What if this should happen as God forbid that a Turke or an heretike should come to the crowne of England Since there is no remedie with you M. Stapleton but we must néedes answer this your wicked presupposall for myne owne parte I will answere you thus First there is a great difference betwene a Turke and an heretike of both whome confusedly ye put your case â–ª A Turke is an open enimie to Christes religion professing Mahomet that seducers lawe An heretike pretendeth to be a christian but agréeth not with the truth of Christes doctrine so that there might be a more lykelyhod of the one than of the other For this realme being Christian and withall God 〈◊〉 thanked therefore so farre from any danger of the Turke betwene whome and vs bothe by lande and water lie many Nations that yet of the twayne the heretikes of whiche there be many and subtile â—…ortes and all pretending to be membres of the Catholike Churche of Christ were more liâ—…ly to obtaine that whiche you presuppose Nowe if a Turke aâ—… God forbad shoulde come to the crowne most lykely he coulde not get it but by tyramicall vsurpation as he doth other Countreys and then your question is aunswered for him that of right neither this authoritie nor any other vnited to the Crowne it selfe is due vnto him Neyther wil he if he be a Turke in religion althoughe â—…e woulde take the Crowne neyther coulor be if he woulde take withall this Christian kynde of Supremacie vpon hym whiche is the subuersion of his false and 〈◊〉 Religion No M. Stapl. he would not take any suâ—…e kynde of Regiment as you your selfe allow to Christian Princes and vnite vnto their crownes As for an heretike might easilyer crepe in to the obtayning the crowne of England which also God forbid for no throne chaire or citie place or people haue any warrant against this presupposall â–ª The holie temple of Hierusalem became a denne of théeues and their priests moste wicked murderers of Iesu Christ. And in the seate of Dauid sat many idolaters yea farre mo bad than good Besides that no natioÌ„ is exempted froÌ„ this threat Propter peccata populi regnare
the church in euery cause wherof it is not otherwise disposed in the new testament is to be holden of the law of nations or of lawe ciuil To this I answer First this in part is true but in part so false that himself confutes himself making exceptioÌ„ of diuers things in the ciuill power that sproong immediatly froÌ„ God neither were those things as he falsly saithe Circa res terrenas about earthly matters but about ecclesiasticall matters in the law of Moyses And although their ceremonial causes and iudicials pertayning to ecclesiasticall matters in the ciuil power be taken away with the ceremoniall and indiciall lawe of the Iewes yet the ciuil power hath like authoritie in the like causes ecclesiastical of the new testameÌ„t as is shewed out of S. Aug. against M. St. the Donatistes Secondly where he sayeth all the ciuil power nowe of christian kings and Emperors is all of the law of nations or ciuil except in cases otherwise disposed in the new testament I answer this may well be graunted and yet the ciuil power hath authoritie ouer ecclesiasticall persons in causes ecclesiastical for so not only in the old testament but also in the newe Testament it is playnly disposed Thirdly to this diuision of the original of both these estates that the ecclesiastical is from God immediatly the ciuil by other meanes I answere this distinction faileth both by his own tale saying Ciuilis à deo plerunque est per media quaedam the ciuil power is oftentimes from God by certain meanes If it be oftentimes by certaine meanes then it is not alwayes and but accidentall not of the nature of the estate for so it is also immediatly from God. And the like accident falleth out likewise of the ecclesiastical estate that although the power be immediatly from God yet many causes in it called Ecclesiastical be also Per media quadam humani ingenij interposita by certain meanes of mans wit put betwene For this cause sayth M. sand the ciuil power among the heathen that know not god is found to be the same that is extant with faithful kings although Christ wold not haue such power in the ministers of his kingdom for he said the Princes of the nations rule ouer them and they that are iuniors exercise power ouer them so shall it not be among you I answere first Maister Saunders this is a like slander to M. Stapletons fo 29. a. b. The ciuil power is not found to be the same in heathen Princes that knowe not God and in Christian Princes that know God there is a very great difference betwene these so different estates wherin the one acknowledgeth all his power to be of God and hath it described and limited by Gods word the other takes it al for hu main naturall not so much as knowing God by your own confession from whome the originall of it springeth Secondly to that you saye suche power is debarred by Christe from his ministers If yée meane by suche power suche power as is among the Heathen suche is not onely debarred from them but from christian Princes too If ye meane suche power as Christian Princes haue is debarred from the ministers of Christ then say ye true But howe then dothe youre Pope chalenge and vsurpe bothe suche and the same also Yea your selfe afterwarde reason moste earnestly thoroughout all the fourth chapter following that the ministers of Christe may haue it Wherin ye speak cleane contrary both to Christ and to your self Thirdly I note this eyther youre grosse ignoraunce or your impudent falshood in altering the wordes of Christe He sayth not they that are iuniors or yongers the Texte is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they that are great whiche are cleane contrarie If M. Stapleton were your aduersarie he would rattle ye vp Master Saunders for so foule a scape Nowe to fortifie a difference betwéene the Ecclesiastical power and the Ciuill he vrgeth that the spiritual kingdom of Christ is in this worlde but not of this worlde as for the earthly kingdome is bothe in and of this world but the ecclesiasticall power is the spirituall kingdome of Christ therfore there is a difference but the spirituall kingdom of Christ excelleth all worldlyâ—… kingdomes therfore they are stark fooles that in any ecclesiasticall thing to be administred preferre the earthly kings before the pastors of the Churche I answere all these conclusions are impertinent If there be any follie it is to striue for that that is not in controuersie We graunt a difference betwixt both powers and kingdomes althoughe a question is to be moued what he meaneth here by ecclesiasticall power If he take it as the Papistes do we denie that ecclesiasticall power to be the spiritual kingdome of Christ. For their ecclesiasticall power is ouermuch not in the worlde but of the worlde also If he meane by ecclesiasticall power the spirituall kingdome of Christ as he in his word hath ordeyned the fame although there be a difference betwene the power in the kingdom and the kingdome in the which the power is yet we graunt this gladly that no wise man will preferre the earthly kings in any spiritual thing to be administred before the pastors of the churche But this is nothing againste the earthly kings preferment ouer the spirituall pastor to ouersée him rightly and spiritually to administer his spirituall things in the ministration whereof all earthly kings oughte to giue place vnto him which we did neuer denie And sith there is no comparison betwene Christ the sonne of God who is also God himself and a creature of the law natural or ciuill neither is there any comparison betwixt the power ecclesiastical which is wholly giue vnto vs by only Christ the mediator the power royall which either altogether or almost altogether is not ordeined of God but by the lawe of nations or ciuill for although God hath reuealed froÌ„ heauen that belongeth to the power royall if notwithstandyng that pertained not to eternall saluation which is hid in Christ but to contein peace among men that is to be reckned to be reuealed no otherwise than to be a certain declaration which he had grafted in vs by Nature or else euen necessitie ought to haue wroong out of vs or profite according to the seedes of nature ought to haue brought to light I answere first we graunt that the ecclesiastical power not as the Papists stretche it but as it is giuen vnto vs by only Christ the mediator is farre superior without all comparison than the royal power of Princes Howbeit this hindreth not but as the ministers are mediators thereof to vs the royall power of Princes hath againe an other superior gouernment to ouersée that there be no other ecclesiasticall power exercised by the mediation of the Minister than Christ the only mediator hath ordeyned And to remoue all popish â—…oysting in giuing vs quid pro quo whiche when
doo Will ye haue a woman weare a mans apparell it is flat forbidden by Gods worde Will ye haue a Quéene fight hir self in a battaile and breake a speare as a king may do In déed some mannish women as the Quéene of Amazons Thomyris Semiramis and other haue so doone but it is not sitting And by your owne reason the imbecillitie of theyr kynde doth cléere them And a number of such other things may be reckoned vp Shall we now saye the Quéene is not supreme gouernour ouer these persons and causes bicause hir selfe can not doe them Likewyse for a king that is a chylde you know he can not fight in battell himselfe neyther can he himselfe sit in iudgement and debate rights and wrongs in ciuil doubtes manie mo things can he himselfe not doe euen bicause as ye say he hath a defect in iudgemeÌ„t Hath he therfore in these ciuill and temporall thyngs no supreme gouernment Thus ye sée still your examples faile yea they make cleane agaynst you for as a supreme gouernor may wel be a supreme gouernor in those things that he himself can not do so a christeÌ„ princes supreme gouernmeÌ„t ouer al ecclesiastical persons in al ecclesiastical causes is nowhit hindred although the prince he or she yong or old can not do the functions ecclesiastical nor be an ecclesiast person The second argument is that he so often and al the Papists vse of the excellencie of the minister in his ministration aboue the Prince To this he citeth the saying of Saint Paule Let men â—…o esteeme vs as ministers of Christ and dispensers of his mysteries To whiche ministerie kings are not called And here is againe alledged the storie of â—…ziae that presumed to offer incense and was punished with â—…eaprie The effect of all the argument he knitteth vp thus Siergo minister c. If therfore the minister of the Church of Christ exercise a greater and more diuine ministerie than the king or any other prince howe is the king the Supreme heade of that churche wherein he seeth certaine ministers greater than himselfe I answere this is a fallation secundum quid ad simpliciter We graunt in the respect of his ministerie the minister is aboue all Princes But this pertayneth to the actions and function of the minister and not to the ouersight and direction that all those actions and functions be orderly done Nowe this béeing but a common argument Master Saunders vrgeth it further by comparison of eyther estate the Prince and the Priest from the olde Testament to the newe saying Ac nimirum illud c. And thys namely I seeme to take by my right the authoritie of any Christian king in his christian kingdom is not greater than was in tymes paste the authoritie of any Iewishe kyng among the people of the Iewes for if the Citie of God to whyche Chryste of his owne name hathe giuen a newe name maye verily bee the more woorthie but can not be inferiour to the Churche of the Iewes â–ª Surely then it followeth that a christian king ouer his christian kingdome can not obtaine more power than a kyng of the Hebrue nation did obteyne among the Hebrâ—…wes For howe muche the more any Common weale is subiecte too their earthly Kyng the authoritie of that common weaâ—…e is so muche the lesse But the authoritie of the Churche of Christe is not lesse than the authoritie of the Synagoge of the Iewes bycause in the churche of Christe those thinges were fulfilled to the verie image of the things whiche in the Synagoge of the Iewes were scarce figured by the naked shadowes As the truthe in deede in greater than the image so againe the image is greater than the shadowe but this is euident that the authoritie in times past of the only king is lesser than the authoritie of his christian kingdome or of hys Bishops But if it be so then the christian king which is both lesse than the church and the bishops of his kingdom cannot be immediatly vnder Christ the head of the churche This argument is intricate and full of many inuersed cringle crangles to shewe a face of déepe and subtill knowledge beyonde the simple mans capacitie whyche kynd of reasonyng is more suspicious than to edifying The effecte of the argument standeth all on this The greater authoritie is giuen to a christian king the lesser haue the Priestes and the churche But the priestes and the churche haue not lesse authoritie but aboue a christian king Ergo the king hath not supreme authoritie To the Maior that the greater authoritie is giuen to a christian king the lesser haue the priests and the churche he sayeth nothing And yet some what is to be sayde thereto it is not so cléere as he makes it For sith eyther of these thrée haue their authorities in dyuers considerations the Priests authoritie may be greater than the kings authoritie in one respecte that is of his diuine actions and ministerie and yet in an other of the gouernement and publike direction the kinges authoritie is greater than his And so althoughe the Churches authoritie in one respecte be greater than bothe the Kings and the Priestes as they are bothe but membres and children of the Churche yet in regarde that the one is a Pastour and the other a gouernour and both of them Fathers and guyders as it were vnto the church their authorities againe are greater than the Churches And this also sheweth the falshood of the Minor that the Priestes and the Churche haue not lesse authoritie but are aboue the prince Which is not true but in suche respectes as nothing hinder the supreme gouernement that we giue the prince But Maister Saunders to confirme this to bée simply true the prince to be inferior to the Priests and people will proue it by his comparison of the state of the olde and newe Testament And first he will haue the state of the olde Testament in the Churches gouernement to be a figure of the newe But in the estate of the old Testament the Prince was vnder the priest and the people Ergo it must be so in the new To the maior we graunte him the gouernment of the Church in the old testament to be a figure of the churches gouernment in the new testameÌ„t And remember this well that here M. Saunders buyldes vpon For if he himselfe shal be found to swarue from it afterwarde when he findeth it shall make agaynst hym then let him blame himselfe and let vs note bothe inconstancie and cantradiction in him who playeth the snayle puttyng in and out his hornes and will say and eate his worde as he thinketh best to his aduantage And this is the fashions of them all in the examples of the old testament as we haue séene the practise of M. Feckenham M. Stapleton which is a subtile false and vnstedfast kind of dealing But go to we denie the minor that in the state of the
argument of the authoritie of the offerer the better thing offered to argue the better authoritie in the offerer the worser thing the worser authoritie and why then not by the like reason the like thing to proue the like authoritie But ye wrests your author Philo. He saith not they are equall in re immolata in the thing offred for that the text saith plaine ynough but he saith the B. was made equall to them in the explation and obtaining forgiuenesse of sinnes Wherein he sheweth in déede the proper meaning of God in ordayning these things to be offered not to distiâ—…guishe thereby the difference of authorities in the persons offering but rather to shewe the difference of their sinnes and the obtaining pardon for theÌ„ Of which difference of sinnes and the difference of the offerings for them the. 1 â–ª 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. and the. 8. chapters of Leuiticus do entreate Now bicause the sinnes of the Priest although â—…one by ignoraÌ„ce which is a harder case in a Priest than any other bicause his title professeth skil and learning giue greater offence than the sinnes of other therefore the Priests sinnes are reckoned first as an original from whose offence other mens offences spring And so saith the texte if the annoynted Priest shall sinne making the people to offend for bycause sayth Lira your owne commentar the sinne of the Priest is occasion of sinning to the people Where to he alledgeth Gregorie when the pastor goeth by the brokeÌ„ châ—…es it fals oute that the flocke followeth to their hedâ—…ong downefall What is this firste place nowe Maister Saunders to argue the Priests authoritie and worthinesse or nâ—… rather his infirmitie and vnworthinesse Neither is the thing offred by the Priest appoynted to be a bullocke to declare anye authoritie in him but as Lyra saith a Bullocke or a Calfe in remembraunce of the molten calfe or bullock which Aaron erected Exod. 22. What is this againe for his authoritie but rather to lay his shame before him that as the beast was slaine so he deserued to be slaine for offending by the like beast And so referring the sacrifice of the beast to Christs sacrifice that as the innocent beaste was slaine so the innocent Messias should be slaine the Sacrifice wherof thus prefigured in the beast offered and beleued in the person offring should turne the deserued slaughter from him and be the propitiation for his sinnes And bicause all the peoples sinnes are great and the greater the greater multitude for the commonnesse of the error in an vniuersall ignorance as in the Popishe Church lesseneth not the error but makes it greater although they defende that the Churche can haue no vniuersall ignorance or common error contrarie to this manifest texte of scripture yet bicause it sprang of the Priests that coulde not pretend ignoraunce so well as the people mighte therefore the peoples sinne is placed nexte after the Priestes and is called a sinne of ignoraunce whiche was not sayde of the Priestes sinne Iâ—… all the people of the sonnes of Israell sayth the text shall be ignoraunt and for lacke of knowledge doe any thing that is contrarie to the coÌ„maundement of the Lord. On which words the glosse interlineth of ignorance not of knowledge as the Priestes wherevpon Peter saith I knowe ye did it by ignoraunce but the priestes sinned of knowledge seyng all things fore tolde in the scriptures and therefore sinned more heighnously But yet bicause the peoples offence was in the same thing that Aarons was therefore the people also offered a Calfe or Bullocke in remembrance sayth Lyra of the molten Calfe wherein the people sinned Exodus 22. and hereto he citeth Hesichius manifestum c. it is manifest that he meaneth the sinne of the people and the Priest to bee all one and therefore in bothe of them he ordayned the same sacrifice And here withall were to be noted if the order were note worthie that he placeth the people before the Priest euen where the text placeth the Priest before the people And therefore neither Lira Hesichius nor the Popishe Glosse were so precise in the order as Maister Saunders is But what makes it matter whether he name the Priest before the people or the people before the Priest what hath either Priest or people here to boast of dignitie but rather bée ashamed of their greater sinnes the more they are placed one before an other And these causes had Philo bene of necessitie so cunning in these matters as Maister Saunders sayth he was he woulde haue alledged Yea had hée béen no cunninger herein than euen the necessarie vnderstanding of the place enforceth he woulde not haue wrested it to superioritie Howbeit all Maister Saunders cunning can not make Philo to serue his purpose although he would neuer so faine wreste and wring him to it For althoughe Philo vncunningly wreste it vnto dignitie yet that dignitie that he maketh the Priest to haue is but equall to the peoples dignitie and yet not for his owne sake neyther but bicause he is the peoples minister Whiche Maister Saunders foreséeyng wée woulde obiecte hée preuenteth vs saying But thou wilt say that Philo addeth that that honour is yelded to the B. not for him selfe but bicause he is the Minister of the people I graunt it is so neither was Philo deceiued in that that he iudged the B. to be the peoples minister but that which was was not reuealed to Philo being a Iewe we Christians oughte not to be ignorant of it to wit that he was not onely the peoples minister but also gods minister and moreouer the figure of Christ. In graunting this M. Saunders ye graunt also contraries to your owne tale Before Philo was of necessitie most cunning in these matters while ye thought his cunning woulde make for the Priests aduancement Put now that his cunning makes against the Priests aduancement â–ª and maketh the B. but equall to the people nowe Philo is not cunning in these matters now Philo is a Iewe and no ChristiaÌ„ now it was not reuealed vnto him that the high Priest was gods minister or a figure of Christe Cunning is a faire thing I sée and surely you haue great cunning M. SauÌ„ders in these matters that can handle them so cunningly one priest for an other Priests preferment But will euery man maister Saunders count this cunning that is so broade before and so extreme on either parte that right nowe Philo was not onely cunning but most cunning in these matters and now on a sodaine he is so farre from cunning in them that he toke not the high Priest to be gods minister This was a verye grosse opinion for so learned a man and declareth that he is lepte from moste cunning to no cunning at all Thinke ye Philo knew not thus much Maister Saunders verely I thinke that he was a great deale cunninger theÌ„ so and that hée was fully persuaded
viewe what either partie brought to offering The Priest brings vitulum a calfe or yong bullocke the king brings taurum a bull I praye ye nowe which of these twaine haue brought the weaker and lesse worthie beast is a calfe in your iudgement stronger than a bull or a bull weaker than a calfe surely then ye haue a weake iudgement If ye say a bull is not so muche worthe as a calfe althoughe then our butchers woulde rather bye bulles of you than calues yet woulde they deme you but for a calfe in so selling them and for so telling them So that by this rule the king bringing to offering the stronger and more worthie beast should be of greater authoritie than the Priest yea the priuate man also shoulde bée of greater authoritie than the high priest For a cowe althoughe it be not so strong as a bull yet is she stronger than a calfe and féedes the calfe and is the calues damme If ye say this is a grosse reasoning for diuine matters it is so in déede Maister Saunders and I am ashamed suche reasons shoulde be vsed but are they not your owne And doe ye not as grossely apply Christs parable of a shepherd and his shéepe truely I knowe not your person Maister Saunders whether ye be such another forepined ghost as Bishop Boner was or no that reasoning of the mysteries of the Lordes supper compared the sacrament to a good fat Capon But these your reasons for your Popes superioritie of a bull and a bullocke of a cow and a calfe of a strong stalfed and iustie beast of a leane and weake vnworthie beast of the first the second and the third place are not onely more grosse and homely stuffe than Bishop Boners Capon but a great deale more fonde reason than was his Yet will not Maister Saunders giue ouer this reason thus but alledgeth more authors for it Theodoretus and Procopius saying But Theodoretus vpon the same matter vseth these words He teacheth how great the dignitie of the Priesthode is which he maketh equall to the people But the Prince that shall haue transgressed any lawe he commaundeth him to offer not a calfe but an he goate or a goate of a yeare olde so farre off is he from the Priestly dignitie to whom the bodily gouernment is coÌ„mitted Last of all Procopius Gazeus on the same place writeth thus Herevpon we may gather â–ª that the Priest is more honorable than the Prince yea the people to shine in greater dignitie than the Prince VVherfore in the olde time certayne Kings adorned themselues with the Priestly dignitie If therfore the Prince be as wel inferior to the people as to the Priest as he that after eyther of them is reckoned vp in the laste place and offers the weake and lesse worthye beast howe can he be esteemed the head of the Church immediatly vnder Christ who hath as well the Christian people as the Byshoppes Christes Ministers betweene him and Christ How this superioritie eyther of all the Churche or of the Ministers of Christ may well consist and yet hinder not the supremacie of the Prince beyng in other respectes both ouer the Ministers and the people is diuers tymes before declared and therefore néedlesse to bée repeated excepte we should followe this vayne of Maister Saunders in repeating so often one thing and that so meane an argument that he might rather be ashamed once to haue penned than thus with these fathers sclender senteÌ„ces to haue bolsterâ—… it And yet he caÌ„ not driue it to his purpose for still the priest is made but equall at the moste vnto the people for which M. Saunders shooke of Philo before as a Iew and no Christian and here he citeth Christians yet make they no better for him than Philo did But sith the people are again vnder the prince and the Priest at the most is but equall to the people thow so euer his ministration be the more honorable yet it argueth that he is vnder the Princes supreme gouernment so well as are the people And therefore for all these argumentes nothing yet is brought to the contrarie out of the olde testament that the Bishops notwithstanding al the excellencie of their diuine ministerie were not still vnder the supreme gouernement of their Princes Let vs now sée and ye haue any better argument Besides this without al contradiction the Apostle saith That which is lesse is blessed of the better But Aaron stretching out his hand to the people blessed the people therfore Aaron was greater then the people This argumente M. Saunders is yet more handsome and truer than you other grosse and wrested argument was Neither denie we anye partes or the conclusion of it For first it concludeth nothing with or against the Prince but against the people Secondly it is altogether drawne from the action of the ministers functioÌ„ which we confesse belongeth not to the Prince But to conclude simply a superioritie in the person thervpon were a presumptuous conclusion both against S. Paules meaning and against God himselfe to make our selues better thaÌ„ god bicause we blesse him For we saye to God Benedicimus tibi we blesse thee we praise c. O all ye workes of the Lord blesse ye the lord c. Ye muste make therfore your distinction of blessing and shew in what solemne action and signification the high priest blessed them This done we grauÌ„t you that the high priest was therin the better whiche nothing hindreth the Princes supreme gouernement But now M. Saunders hauing espied where a king likewise blesseth the people hath a shift also for this saying But if thou saist Salomon blessed the Synagog of Israel and therfore was greater than the synagog Salomon was greater than the synagog without al contradictioÌ„ for the scripture can not be broken that saith the lesser is blessed of the better But Salomon sustayned a dubble personage the one of a king the other of a Prophete But as he was a Prophet he was the more notable minister of Christ than for his kingly dignitie and by this reason was greater than they to whom he prophecied and so he blessed the people not by his royall but by his propheticall office But the priests not by an other office but by the priestly office blessed both all the people and much more the king that is inferior to all the people Here first let vs note that M. SauÌ„ders himselfe twise placeth the king and his office before the prophet his office Salomon saith he sustained a duble personage the one of a king the other of a prophete and againe he saith and so he blessed the people not by the kingly office but by the propheticall office If then his former reason be good the king is to be preferred before the Prophet But now to his answere to the obiection of SalomoÌ„ which is in déede but a very shift and the commoÌ„ shift of M. Harding DormaÌ„
to him selfe without Gods permission If this be true that héere you say M. Saunders as it is moste true if Samuels words do so sounde in your eares as though he had sayde Saule coulde not be king ouer Gods people except the Lorde anoynted him If the Lorde reserue this prerogatiue to him selfe to appoynt Princes and giue kingdomes where he onely pleaseth howe then is this true that kings and kingdomes are so vnder the Churche that she may freely dispose decree of theÌ„ as she pleaseth Although the Church be the Lordes spouse and wyfe yet is she not hir selfe the Lorde nor the Lorde is ruled by hir but she by the Lorde neither hathe he giuen hir this prerogatiue but as you héere confesse it is a thing belonging onely to him And therefore by your owne confession Kinges and kingdomes are not so vnder the Church that she may dispose and decree as she thinketh good of them And as your owne witnesse thus beateth your selfe in your owne example So to consider this example further Saule was appoynted King of God and thoughe at the firste he was a good King yet afterwarde he became bothe a tyrant in lyfe and an Apostata in doctrine by which occasion he was a great offence to the Churche of god What nowe did the Churche of God saye she had suche freedome ouer him and his kingdome that she might freely dispose and decree thereof as should be profitable for the whole â–ª mysticall body Surely to the Churches iudgement it appeared more profitable if this ill Kyng hadde béene deposed and some other godly man placed in hys steede muche more if Dauid hadde beene placed â–ª whom GOD likewyse had anoynted to be their king Dyd the Churche this No coulde they haue done this No they had no suche fréedome but they let Saule alone and committed the case to God who at his good oportunitie as he onely sent the king so he only tooke him away and sent them another For onely God transposeth kingdomes and not the Churche as he him selfe testifieth who is the best Iudge we can appeale vnto saying Per me Reges regnant Kinges rule by me and not by my Churche And so confesseth Daniel He chaungeth times and ages he translateth kingdomes and establisheth them His Church therefore hathe not the free disposition of them But sayth master Saunders God anoynted Saule to be the Prince not by him selfe but by his Minister wherefore whosoeuer ruleth ouer the Christian people whiche is no lesse acceptable to God than was the people of the Iewes he besides the right that he receyued by the consent of the people ought also to acknowledge his power to be of Christe by his Ministers if so be that he be suche an one as worshippeth the fayth of Christe VVherevpon to this day all christian Kinges are anoynted of some christian Bishop or some other minister of God referring therein their principalitie not onely to the people and so vnto God But referre it besides by the Ministers of Christe to Christe whose Ministers they are Your argument is this The King is anoynted of God. But this is done by the ministerie of Gods Prophetes or Ministers Ergo Not onelie God but his Ministers haue the free disposing and decreeing of Kings and kingdomes Your conclusion is not in so playne English but colourably you fetche the matter about the bushe saying therefore they muste referre their principalitie not onely to the people and so to God but referre it besides by the ministers of Christ to Christ whose ministers they are What néede this nice daliaunce and circumquaques M. Saunders that almoste men can scarse tell what you meane but that you meane some fal shode If you meane they shoulde referre it to the Ministers of Christ that is an vntruth If you meane they must refeâ—…e it so to Christe by his Ministers that it takes the authoritie of the Ministers that is another vntruthe If you meane it muste be referred to Christe that worketh it by the ministerie of his Ministers howbeit there is no suche necessitie neither in the making of Kinges althoughe it be orderly and ordinarily done by their ministerie yet what serueth this to the purpose Speake playnely man and say the king is made king by the Bishops Ergo the Bishops may dispose and decree of him and his kingdome and may depose him and giue the kingdome to another as they shall thinke good â–ª For this is your playne drifte But we denie your argument for by the like you mighte make euery mans baptisme and sayth to hang of the free disposition decreeing and alteration of the Minister sithe these things are receyued by the Minister but the force of them dependes not on the minister And much lesse that bicause suche a Bishop crowned the King therefore he may rule the King and haue free disposition to decree what the King shall doe and whether he shall continue King or no. No M. Saund. and if he had the authoritie to make the King yet the King beeing made it followeth not that he may marre him too But the moste that you can make of the Minister in the Kings Coronation â–ª is but Causa sine qua non that he can not well be made without him and yet in very déede it is not so muche and therefore this is but a slender argument But sée how you runne héere craftily from the Church to the Bishop your argument was of the Church and your conclusion is of the Bishop Wherby you meane that your Prelates only are of the church â–ª Which as it is most false so is it rather to be examined whether you be any ministers or parts of the churche at al if you speake of the churche of Christ. For as was shewed before neither the church â–ª nor the spirituall Ministers of Christ â–ª did euer take vpon them this deposing of kings and disposing of kingdomes that you chalenge Samuel whome you cite had béene a gouernour by an extraordinary calling béeing the laste Iudge before the Kings but after he had â–ª anoynted and declared Saule to be king he neuer tooke vpon him the publike gouernment of the kingdome And though God sent him to tell Saule how God would cast him off and though also God had him anoynt another yet would he not medâ—…e in the gouernmeÌ„t nor depose Saule nor incite Dauid or the people to depose him althoughe God had caste him cleane off but onely mourned for him If you can shewe any example of the contrarie I am sure we shall heare it but as yet we heare of none You tell vs of an elegante sentence of Pope Leo to the Emperour Leo. But as there is no greate elegancie in it so it maketh nothing to this purpose and the purpose that it maketh for is rather for the Princes gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes than agaynst it Howbeit to alleage a Pope for the vsurpation of the Pope is
than God permitteth but also by force and agaynst the consent of bothe the parties seuered those that God hathe ioyned and ioyned those that God hath forbidden to be ioyned Dothe not the Pope maynteine the greatest vsuries that be to wit the Iewes to pill and poll the Christians and al for his own lucre besides his most filthy and vnlawfull gayne by fornication Doth not the Pope by the abuse of the sword keyes that he saith he carrieth carrie away the Christian citizens into most greeuous sinnes yea and say he may carrie away with him at the world to the diuel no maÌ„ must be so hardie as to say sir why do you thus Shal it now be a wicked deede to remoue the Pope from the felowship of the faithful after one or two admonitions then if he amend not him selfe that all Christian Princes helpe to expell him vtterly froÌ„ the vsurpation of this his worldly kingdome But M. Sa. not séeing these vices in his holy father surmising the worst in Princes supposeth we will answere his obiection thus But one wil say no power is giueÌ„ vnto the Church of punishing or of remouing the kings froÌ„ their office therfore if the kings wil not of their own accord be ameÌ„ded they are altogither to be born withal neither caÌ„ any other thing be lawfully attempted agaynst them This truely do many preache Who they be that preach this I know not I think it but your slaunder Ill will neuer sayde well And yet whosoeso preacheth this preacheth farre better than you do whose sermon is all of treason rebellion As for vs we preache this that the preacher or spirituall pastor may in suche extremities vse a spirituall punishment of denouncing the sentence of Gods wrath agaynst him But to punishe him with bodily punishment or with expelling him from his kingdome is no more belonging to the Bishop than to put him to death The state of some kingdomes are such I grauÌ„t that the Princes regiment is but conditional and he so wel bounde to the electors of him other péeres or estates in his Signiorie as they to him and either parties sworne in his Coronation not onely to obserue those conditions but to persecute or remoue the violater of them In suche cases what those Electors Péeres Estates may do howe they may or may not do it is an other matter But that eueÌ„ in these estates the Bishops caÌ„ do it do it in that they are Bishops this we denie M. Sand and as yet you haue not proued it But I doubte not but that euery necessarie and profitable power is giuen to the Pastor ouer his sheepe whether they be lambes or lambes dammes or rammes and that to this purpose that he shoulde strengthen that that is weake that he should heale that that is sicke that he shoulde binde vp that that is broken that he should bring againe that that is caste away that he should seeke that that is loste so that he rule not with austeritie and power You doubt not M. sand but I doubt of this that euery necessarie and profitable power is giuen to the Pastor ouer his sheepe The eccl. power is both necessarie and profitable But the Prince is a pastor and the people are his sheepe And yet by your owne confession the ecclesiasticall power is not giuen to the Prince Had you marked this you mighte haue doubted that euery necessarie and profitable power is giuen to the pastor ouer his sheepe Agayne the power of the sworde and putting to death malefactors is a necessarie and profitable power But the Bishop is a pastor and the people are his sheepe And yet by your own confession the power of the sworde and putting to death is not giuen to the Bishop Had you séene this also you might haue doubted that euery necessarie and profitable power is giuen to the Pastor ouer his sheepe This lacke of doubting made you toâ—… rashe of déeming and to pronounce your sentence ouer general And as you sée in these two cases a flatte exception that you wil gladly reuoke so we muste driue you to graunte the other powers also pertayning to a King whiche notwithstanding they are necessarie and profitable are yet not giuen vnto a Bishop although he be a Pastor I pray you remember Vos autem non sic if it will not make you sicke to remember it The duties of good pastors that you cite out of Ezech. 34. God we graunt hath giuen them power thereto But the Popish pastors are as farre froÌ„ all these points much farther than the Iewishe pastors were of whome the Lorde coÌ„playneth saying VVo be to the pastors of Israel that feed theÌ„selues are not â—…he sheepe fed of the shepherds ye did eate the milk were clad with the wol â–ª that that was fat ye killed but my flock ye fed not â–ª that that was weak ye streÌ„gthned not that that was sick ye healed not that that was brokeÌ„ ye bouÌ„d not vp that that was cast away ye brought not in that that was lost ye sought not but ye ruled them with bitternesse with power how this directly toucheth the Pope and his Prelates euen the popish enterlined Glosse doth testifie Hoc proprie c. This properly is spoken of the pride of Bishops which shame with their works the dignitie of their name for humilitie taking pride who thinke they haue gotten heauen and not a burthen Whose loytring idlenesse whose vaine glorious pride whose bitter tyrannie more than kingly power was so intollerable that it was maruell that euer you durst for shame recite this place But you thought it serued to your purpose that you might vnder the name of sheepe punishe driue out Princes at your pleasures But this place giueth not Pastors power to weaken them that be strong to make them sicke that be hole to breake that that is bound vp to caste out that that is brought in to leese that that was sought for to kil deuour both the fat the leane both the Prince the people to rule with biâ—…ternesse with power al which by your popes practise is don by your exposition is defended For is not that to rule with bitternesse if ye expel your Princes froÌ„ their kingdomes can ye be any bitterer to them what earthly power can ye clayme higher than to seaze vpoÌ„ rule their kingdomes or to haue theÌ„ rule them after your rules whom you will appoynt to â—…olde them in chiefe froÌ„ you This place of Ezechiell giueth you not suche power but condemneth in Pastors the vsurpation of it But what will not impudencie wrest to serue his turne Moreouer to the minde and to reason power is giuen ouer all the members of the body insomuche that it biddeth that rotten member to be â—…ut from the body of the which it may be feared least it should infect the other members
a. Stap. fol. 13. b. Stap. fol. 13. b. Fol. 14. a. Cap. 3. fol. 14. b. Stap. fol. 14. b Matth. 5. 2. Cor. 11. 1. Reg. 2. ◅ Reg. 3. Psalm 112. Stapl. 14. b. Stapl. 14. b. Act. 5. A Papists cō◅cience Act. 5. Stap. 15. a. Num. 13. Iob. 8. Stap. 15. ◅ Stap. 15 16. Stap. 16. ◅ Fol. 16. 17. 18 19. 20. 21. Stap. 21. ◅ Stap. 21. ◅ Put to these the late treasons and rebellions of the Papists in ◅ng land their horrible murders and cruelties in Fraunce and Flaunders Stap. 21. ◅ Stap. 21. a. We abandon not the fayth we were baptised in bicause we abandon the Pope Stapl. 21. a. b. The booke of K. Henrie the eyght The title of Defender of the Faith. The title defender of the Faith inferreth supremacie The Papistes obiection of apparell St. fol. 21. b. Stap. 22. ◅ Magdeb. p◅ef cent 7. The Magde burgen◅es wrested Histo. Magde pref cent 7. The tyrannie of Heraclius The godly supreme gouernment of Constanti◅us Pogonotus St. Fol. 22. a Contra a◅tic Louani tom 2 Luther wrested Stap. fol. 22. a Andr Modre de Eccl. li. 1. ca. 10. St. fol. 22. b. Stap. 23. a. b. Stap. 24. a. The Popes goodnesse Stap. fol. 24. The Pope called god Extrau Ioh. 22 cum inter in glosia Cardinalis Zirabella Stap. 24. 2 The Popes patent The Vnitie that the Pope maketh Stapl. 24. ◅ Stapl. 24. a. Hallus in vita Edvv. 4. Apoc. 7. How the Pope can in deede make sainctes and martyrs Stap. 24. a. Stapl. 24. a. Stapl. 24. a. The Popes reigne in Englande Stap. 24. b. Stap. 24. b. Ecclesiasticall authoritie and authoritie ouer eccl. matters are not all one Stap. 24. b. St. 24. b. 25. a The commoditie that we haue of Papists Stap. 25. a. b. 26. a. b. How farre the Papists are frō mercy and cōsideration A difference betweene a Pap◅st and a Protestant A supreme gouernour Stapl. 2◅ b. Stapl. 28. b. Stapl. 23. b. Stapl. 28. b. Stapl. 28. b. 29. a. Fol. 29. a. b. The Papists make the gouernment of christian princes no better than the Turkes gouernment Deut. 13. 17. Rom. 13. 1. Tim. 3. Stap. 29. b. Gal. 3. Stap. 29. b. Stap. 22. b. Stap. 29. b. Heathen princes care and gouernment tended to religion Aristot. Polye 3. ca. 10. Cap. 11. Daniel 1. Daniel 6. The Papistes more iniurious to Christ an Princes than to Heathen Iohannes de Parisi◅s de po◅estate reg p◅ ca. 18. 1. Tim. 1. ◅useb lib. ◅ de vit Const. Concil Constantin 1. Aug. epist. 48. Concil Tola 3 Stap. 30. a. The papistes shift that princes are the clergies aduocates Dante 's Alegherius li. 3. Lupold de Babenb ca. 15. Stap 30. a. Though the Prince be not an eccl. person yet hath he supremacie in eccl. causes Stap. 30. b. Winchester fol. 96. 97. Stapl. 30. b. Fol. 30. b. Stap. fol. 30. b. Sta. fol. 30. b. Supra Diuis 4. fol. 65. Supra fol. 80. Fol. 31. ◅ Winchester Fol. 31. b. 32. a Cap. 5. fol. 32. a. b. Stapl. 32. Fol 32. b. Stapl. 32. b. Stap. 32. b. Stap. 32. b. Stap. 32. b. Fol. 34. ◅ The issue and state of the question betvveene the B. and M. Feck Fol. 34. b. Three kindes of ignorance ▪ Stap. 35. ◅ Supr ▪ ◅o 3. a. b Supra fol. 4. Stap. 36. a. Stap. 36. a. Stap. 36. a In erroribus Parisi◅ condemna◅s Ibidem Ibidem Tho. Aquin. super Tit. ca. 3 Sola fide Executiones manifestationes Stap. 36. a Fol. 36. a. Stap. 36. a. Contra errores Grecorum Apoc. 18. Stap. 37. b. Stap. 35. b. Stap 37. b. Stap. 38. a. Stap. 38. b. The Louanists bost they haue now foūd out the Popes title to be lure diuino Stapl. 38. b. Iohn 10. Gal. 1. Hieronimus super Mat. Ambrosius li. 1 de officijs Aug. contra Faustum li. 23 Sap. 1. Stapl. 39. ◅ Stapl. Cap. 7. fo 39. b. 40. a Stapl. ca. 8. Stapl. 40. b. Stap. 40. b. Deut. 17. Stapl. 40. b. Stapl. 40. b. Stap. 41. ◅ Deut. 17. Stap. 40. b. How subtilly the Papistes graunt princes to studie in Gods word Deut. 17. Vatablus in Deut. 17. Stapl. 41. a. In what sense the popishe Church may be graunted Catholicke Stapl. 41. a. Psalm 1. 2. Stap. 41. ◅ Stapl. 41. b. Math. 13. Stap. 41 b. Stap. 41. b. Deut. 17. Lyra in Deut. 17. 1. Reg. 4. The highe priest and the chiefe iudge mentioned Deut. 17. were two distinct persons Iohn 18. Stap. 41. b Stapl. 41. b. Deut. 17. Lyra in Deut. ◅7 Stap. 42. a. Fol. 42. a. Stap. 42. a. Stap. 42. b. Deut. 17. St. fol. 42. b Fol. 42. a Lyra in Deute 17. Sta. 42. b Supra 40. b ◅ol 42. b Chap. 9. Fol. 43. b Stap. 42. b 43. a Stap. 43. a. Stap. 43. a. Stap. 43. a. Stapl. 43. ◅ Stap. 43. a. 2. Pet. ◅ Stap. 43. a. 2. Pet. ◅ Stap. 43. a. Stap. 43. a. b Wherein master Stapleton excelleth al the Lou◅in write◅ ▪ Stap. 43. ◅ Stap. 43. b. The example of Moses and the Papistes shift◅ about it Stap. 43. b. Stap. 43. b. Stap. 43. b. Deut. 34. Sta. 44. a Deuter. 18. Act. 3. 7. Act. 7. 1. Reg. 19. Iudic. 4. A difference in excellēt Princ◅ betweene their extraord◅ giftes and ordinarie authoritie Moyses a figure of Christ ▪ not Christe a figure of Moses Deut. 17. Sta. 44. b. How the Papistes order the examples of the Scripture 1. Cor. 10. Stap. 44. b. Stap. 44. b. The rule Deu. 17. that the Papists would haue all the question ruled by and how farre it stretched Ioh. 19. Stap. 45. ◅ 45. ◅ The example of Iosue his supreme gouernment Cap. 10. Fol. 46. b. Stap. 46. b. Num. 27. Lyra in Num. 27. Stap. 46. b. Stap. 46. b. The Princes asking councel of the clergie embarres not his authoritie ouer them Stap 45. b. Deut. 17. Sta. 45. b. Stap. 46. a. Stap. 46. ◅ Stap. 46. ◅ Stap. 46. b. Lyra. Losue 8. Iosue 5. Iosue 3. Iosue 4. Cap. 8. Cap. 10. The example of King Dauids supreme gouernment in eccl. causes Cap. 11. Fol. 47. a. Stap. 47. a. The Princes supreme gouernment in ecel matters not preiudicial to the eccle authoritie Stap. 47. a. An vneuen cōparison betweene the doings of king Dauid and Q. Mary Howe the Popish priestes abused queene Mary Stap. 47. a. The Papistes shift agaynst the example of king Dauids supremacie bicause he was a Prophet Stap. 47. ◅ Stap. 47. a. 1. Par. 24. Stap. 47. a. 1. Par. 24. 1. Par. 23. It abaseth not the princes supreme gouernment to do all things accorto Gods commaundement Stap. 47. b. The keeping of the rites orders appoyn ted is not agaynst but cōfirmeth the princes supremacie The Queene appoynteth no new or st◅āge order in religion Stap. 47. b. Stap. 47. b It deba◅reth not the princes supremacie that the inferiour ministers be vnder their bishops Stap. 48.
vsurpation is first described And the text is plaine that she had no right The right Kyng was Ioas when his brethren were slâ—…ine Therefore here was no deposing of hir Neyther durst you say that Ioiada deposed hir but he comaunded hir both to be deposed and killed Although for commaundement of deposing hir you finde no suche thing for she was not their lawfull gouernour this therfore serueth not to the purpose of deposing a lawfull Prince and that for heresie which was not layde to hir charge neither was she killed for that cause but as a traytresse to the Crowne as a murderer of hir owne bloode and as a mere vsurper of the kingdome that belonged nothing to hir And therfore Ioiada did but as a good and faithfull subiect should do to his liege Lord and to his heyres after him and not as one that by his Priestly office had power ouer the royall estate Secondly I aunswere that the doyngs of Ioiada herein were vpon such especiall occasions necessities that it is euill drawne of you to an ordinarie example For none of the Priests either did the like or coulde claime to doe the like to their kings as Ioiada had done muche lesse to be drawne to an example for y ministers of Christ to follow First Io ada was the vncle by affinitie vnto Ioas for Ioiada the highe Priests wife was sister vnto King Dehozias whose childreÌ„ Athalia being their Grandmother did murther saue that Ioas being a new borne babe was priuily conueyed away by his Aunt Iosaba the highe Priestes wife where he was closely norished in the Temple till he was sixe or seauen yeares olde Good reason had Ioiada to kéepe the yong King his Cousin and more righte thereto than any other not by vertue of his Priestly office but being thus of God sent vnto him by his wines industrie for the childes close and safer preseruing in the Temple And yet this nourishing a childe and his nourse in the Temple coulde so litle be drawne to any ordinarie example that if necessitie had not enforced it it had not béene allowable As euen Lyra noteth out of Rabbi Solomon Quod puer nutrix sua c. That the Childe and his Nourse vvere kept in the loft of the Temple of the Lord vvhere nobodie durst approche but the Priestes and the Leuites that kept the holy vessels there layde vp to the entent they might there the better be hidden And althoughe it vvas othervvise vnlavvfull for a vvoman and a childe to be there yet in such a necessitie it vvas lavvfull As Dauid and his men did eate the Priestly breade being driuen in necessitie vvhich notvvithstanding othervvise had bene vnlavvfull for him Thus can not this déede of Ioiada for the nourishment of Ioas be drawne to any ordinarie example Neyther durst Ioiada be knowne of this déede that no doubt had cost him his life had it bene but suspected Whiche argueth he had no ordinarie authoritie to put downe the Princes no not this very vsurper being also a murtherer and an Idolater In al whiche cases if he had had any ordinarie power and right thereto be woulde no doubt haue openly professed and auouched his doing and not haue kept it so long close and priuilie watched his oportunitie But nowe the childe being thus by the highe Priest and his wife preserued and nourished which childe had the onely to the crowne lay it not him vpon was it not his dutie yea his obedience too bothe that he ought before to his brother in lawe deceassed and to this his yong nephewe extant that the childe should haue his right inheritance and to whome belonged the procurement hereof rather than to him that had the childe in custodie besides that he was his vncle sith no man of any countenance knewe hereof but he howe should the childe haue gotten his right but by him But did he make the child King by his priestly authoritie as though the Priestes had had the interest to appoint and make such Kings as they pleased No but it was the duetie of the one to procure it and the right of the other to haue it And yet that he did not this of himselfe the text saith plaine he toke and brought Centurions and Souldiors to him into the TeÌ„ple Here consequently saith Lyra is discribed the InstitutioÌ„ of the true heire by the carefulnesse of loiada the high priest seking to this the assent of the Princes nobles of the kingdome So that he sought their assent help or euer he would detect the Childe vnto them And for this present necessitie he brake the order also of the priests courses that King Dauid had appointed for the sonnes of Aaron Leui to minister wéekely then to giue place to other These he stayed for the more number strength to establish the yong King in his right so by these extraordinarie meanes he crowned him king caused the murtherer and vsurper to be killed This fact therfore of Ioiada can not be drawne to an ordinarie example except in these points that euery good subiect so much as in him lyeth shoulde preserue the lawfull Kings childreÌ„ and heires not suffer any other to whom the inheritance belongeth not to vsurp the crown but the right and lawful heire thereof to enioy it to expell al intruders vsurpers chiefly such ty ants as séeke their vsurpation by execrable murthering especially suche as against nature destroy their own bloud and al such as by any other trayterous meanes aspire to the kingdome and so far forth as they conueniently can to helpe to restore the lawfull heire therto as to whom only they owe their homage and are sworn This is al godly subiects and so all godly Bishops priests duties in euery Christian kingdome Thus may this doing of Ioiada be drawne to an ordinary example which we denie not But what is this for Bishops to giue kingdomes from the right heire to him that hath no clayme therto but by the Bishops gifte who giues a large thong of another mans leather as doth the Pope giue kingdomes froÌ„ one to another hauing no more right to giue them than the other to take them Which is not to expel an vsurper but for one vsurper to set vp an other vsurper whiche is no more lyke this example than an apple is like an â—…yster Thirdly I answerâ—… for Ioiadaes knowledge of the kings causes he had them not in respect he was the high Priest but in respecte he was the vncle the guardian the norisher and protector of the 〈◊〉 person béeing a childe and yet this is spoken by M. 〈◊〉 without the booke that after the coronation he had the knowledge of the kings causes Neither yet if he had the knowledge of theÌ„ the king béeing in such estate somuch beholding to his vncle a general rule could be made there or was made among the Iewes or
can be made among ChristiaÌ„s that either the bishops of any kingdom much lesse the B. of Rome for al kingdomes ought to know the causes of kings Emperors whether they be iust or vniust This generalitie can not iustly be inferred on such a specialtie For neither al kings estates 〈◊〉 like to this kings estate nor all Bishops estates like to this Bishops estate as by the causes aforesayd appeareth Fourthly I answer that as here is inferred no ordinary rule for Bishops to haue knowledge in kings Emperors cau ses froÌ„ the coÌ„trarie here is inferred an ordinary rule for kings Emperors to haue knowledge of B. causes For eueÌ„ at the kings 〈◊〉 althogh he wer an infaÌ„t had no more skil of religioÌ„ thaÌ„ of gouernmeÌ„t the text saith they put the crowneâ—… vpon him and gaue him the lawe in his hande And so saythe Lyra the testimonie that is the law wherein he was ordeined ought to studie and meditate and keepe it and cause it to be kept True it is that the high Prieste did teach him and the King did well so long as he was taught of so godly a father And therevpon maye well be inferred that Byshops maye teach Kings that vvhich is right before the Lorde But this teaching of the King inferreth no publike gouernement of the King which the Pope claimeth and M. Saunders pleadeth for The authoritie of teaching the King and the authoritie of gouerning the King are â—…arre different authorities That of teaching we graunt to Ioiada and to al Godly Byshops not to teach what they will but that vvhiche is right before the Lord. And to sée that they do this the Prince hath the lavve of God giuen into his handes so well as the crowne set on his head to shewe that although the Byshops mustâ—… teach true doctrine and Godly exhortatioÌ„ yet must the King haue knowledge to ouersée that it be taught â–ª as well much more than any other matters of his kingdoms What shall we say then to the popishe Byshops which will not giue the lavve of God into the Princes handes but wring it out of his handes that he should not knowe it but blindly followe such false doctrine and naughtie examples as they woulde teache him are these Byshops like to the Byshop Ioiada And if this king fel to Idolatrie when he wanted this good teacher how shall that King doe that neuer had suche a teacher and yet for all this teaching of Ioiada that was as it were a father to the King the King notwithstanding while he continued good bothe commaunded all the Priestes and taught them how they should deale in their oblations collections reparations and other thinges belonging to the Temple And Ioas saide to the Priestes all the siluer of thinges dedicated that be brought to the house of the Lorde c. Let the Priestes take it vnto them euery one of his acquaintance and they shall repayre the broken places of the house vvheresoeuer any decaye is founde And in the 23. yeare of King Ioas the Priestes had not amended that vvhich vvas decayed in the Temple Then King Ioas called for Ioiada the Priest and the other Priests and saide vnto them VVhy repaire ye not the ruines of the Temple Novv therefore receiue no more money of your acquaintance except ye deliuer it to repaire the ruines of the Temple Thus did the King not only knovv of the Priestes causes but called them before him yea euen his vncle Ioiada the high Priest also appointed an order vnto them how to bestow their offerings And when they were negligent therein he rebuked theÌ„ reuoked his former ordinance except on their amendement Neither did the Priests no nor his vncle Ioiada the highe Prieste grudge or grumble hereat nor sayde that the offerings were theirs not his to dispose nor told him they were his superiors but as his inferiors most humbly obeyed his ordinances Al vvhich things fithe they vvere vvell done is not novve true according to the sense of the diuine Scripture that we may make a better ordinarie rule herâ—…on for Kings and Emperors to knovve of Byshops causes than for Byshops to knovve of Kings and Emperors causes If you replye this was but a money matter I answere yet was this money oblations and offerings But will you graunt Princes thus much to make ordinances howe all your money offerings shall be vsed when ye shall gather them and when not of whom ye shal take them and howe ye shall bestowe them â—…ay 〈◊〉 will neuer doe this for money is the chiefest thing ye shoote at no penie no pater noster all your eâ—…cl causes depende so on money offerings that as good ye gaue the prince authoritie in al ecclesiastical matters as let him deale thus with your money offerings as Ioas did with theirs But doth your own glosse expound this no further than to money matters Ioas saithe your glosse both in this name and in this vvorke signifieth Christ for it is interpreted the strength of the Lorde He commaundeth the teachers that they should take all the money that is offered into the Lordes house of the passers by to vvit whatsoeuer spirituall knovvledge or good vvorke is brought into the Lords treasorie that by the offices of the preachers it may be bestovved on the repayring of the spirituall Temple that vvhatsoeuer he shall finde torne by errour or hurte by Vices they should repaire least the multitude of hearers should perishe by the doctors negligence â–ª Here this facte of the King is compared to the representation of Christe and to the ouersight of all eccl. matters So that if Kings will account the studie of the Lawe of God as well to belong vnto them as their crowne if they will looke vnto know and examine the causes of the Byshops and their reuenues and appoint them orders to repair the ruines of the Lords temple and sée that the preachers lay out their talents of spirituall knowledge good workes towards the building then should kings truely represent Christe and be indéede the strength of the Lorde bycause they haue the Lords power authoritie thervnto And thus this example better considered maketh more for the Kings authoritie ouer the Byshops than for the Byshops ouer the Kings authoritie Fiftly I answere that althoughe a Godly Byshop be a sequester betwéen God the Prince betwéene the Prince and the people in prayer in the Sacramentes and in preaching yet â–ª is he not a sequester betwéen God and the Prince or betwene the Prince the people in matters of the kingdome least of all he may sequester him from his kingdome And though he be the Angell of the Lord in his message if he be a Godly byshop for otherwise he is the Angell of SathaÌ„ yet is the King the Lordes anoynted or the Lordes Christe in authoritie but the Lords Christ in authoritie is aboue the lordes Angels in message therefore the King