their conuersion subuert the worship of idols ouerthrow their tēples edifie the maners of your subiects by exhorting threatning faire intreating correcting shewing examples of wel doing that you may find him a rewarder in heauen whose name knowlege you haue dilated in earth For so Constantine a most religious Emperor reuoking the Romane Empire from the peruerse seruice of idols subdued the same with himself to the almighty God our Lord Iesus Christ turned him self together with the people vnder him to God with al his heart And nowe let your excellency labor to poure the knowledge of one God the father the son the holy Ghost into the Princes people that are subiect to you that he may make you partaker of his kingdom whose faith you cause to be receiued and obserued in your kingdom This the kings of England before since the cōquest were taught to be their duty sworn to execute faithfully as the lawes of king Edward the good make proofe which William the Conquerer receiued confirmed where the office charge of a king are thus expressed A king because he is the Lieutenant of the most high king was appointed to this end that he should regard gouerne the earthly kingdom and the people of God and aboue all thinges his holie Church and defend her from wronges and roote out male factors from her yea scatter and destroy them Which except he do he can not iustly be called a king A king ought to feare God and aboue all thinges to loue him and to establish his commaundementes throughout his kingdom He ought also to keepe nourish maintaine and gouerne the holie Church of his kingdome with all integritie and libertie according to the constitutions of his fathers and predecessours and to defende it against enemies so as God may be honoured aboue all and euer had in minde He ought to establish good lawes and approued customes and abolish euill lawes and customes and remoue them all out of his Realme Hee ought to doe right iudgement in his kingdom and execute iustice by the counsell of his Nobles All these thinges ought the king to sweare in his owne person before he be crowned The verie Heathen perceiued confessed this to be true Aristotle a prophane Philosopher writing of the first institution of kings sheweth how many things they were by office to medle with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A king in olde time was the leader in warres pronouncer in iudgements and ouerseer of religion And againe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Diuine things were committed to Princes as part of their charge Al Monarchies kingdomes and common-wealthes Assyrians Persians Medes Graecians Romanes Iewes Gentiles Pagans Christians haue euer kept this for a generall rule that religion shoulde bee setled and establissed by publike lawes and maintained by the Magistrates sword So that if you take the defence of pietie the reward of honestie and balance of equitie from the Princes charge you run headlong against God and man to feede your owne appetites and see not that which reason and nature taught the heathen to confesse that as euery priuate man is bound to seeke and serue God aboue all thinges so euerie societie of men be it familie citie or countrie is likewise bound to haue a speciall and principall care of his seruice which can not be done vnlesse it be planted preserued by publike lawes of these lawes as of all other amongst men onely Magistrates be the makers keepers and reuengers Phi. Princes be charged after a sort with godlines and honestie Theo Your delaies do not answere our proofes We shew the chiefest part of their charge to be godlines and honestie which be thinges spiritual not temporall Phi. What if that be granted Theo. If their duty stretch so far their authoritie must stretch as far Their charge ceaseth where their power endeth God neuer requireth princes to do that which he permitteth thē not to do but rather his commanding them to care for those thinges is a full authorizing of them to medle with those thinges If then godlines and honestie bee the chiefest part of their charge ergo they be likewise the chiefest end of their power and consequently Princes beare the sword chiefly for spiritual thinges and causes not as you defend onely for temporall Phi. You put all thinges temporall spirituall and ecclesiasticall into their handes Theo. In all these thinges and other things whatsoeuer we say they beare the sword and why should that displease you God hath giuen them the sworde euen in those thinges which himselfe commaundeth and prescribeth as namely faith and good manners which be the chiefe contentes of his lawe and respectes of our life and do you think it much that they beare the sword in those indifferent matters which Bishops haue agreed on for seemelinesse and good order to be kept in the church no way comparable to those thinges which God hath put them in trust with and made them defenders and auengers of And if Princes shall not beare the sworde in thinges and causes ecclesiasticall you must tell vs who shall The Priest or the Prince of force must do it and since by Gods law the Priest may not medle with the sword the consequēt is ineuitable that Princes alone are Gods ministers bearing the sword to reward and reuenge good and euill in all thinges and causes bee they temporal spirituall or ecclesiasticall vnlesse you thinke that disorders and abuses ecclesiasticall should be freely permitted and neither preuented nor punished by publike authoritie which in these froward ages would breede a plain contempt of all ecclesiasticall order and discipline and hasten the subuersion of those kingdomes and common-wealthes where such confusion is suffered Phi. The Rites and Ceremonies of the Church are not in the Princes power Theo. To deuise new Rites and Ceremonies for the Church is not the Princes vocation but to receiue and allow such as the Scriptures and Canons commend and such as the Bishops and Pastours of the place shall aduise not infringing the Scriptures or Canons And so for all other ecclesiasticall thinges and causes Princes be neither the deuisers nor directors of them but the confirmers and establishers of that which is good and displacers and reuengers of that which is euill which power we say they haue in all thinges causes be they spirituall ecclesiasticall or temporall Phi. And what for excommunications and absolutions be they in the Princes power also Theo. The abuse of excommunication in the Priest contempt of it in the people Princes may punish excommunicate they may not for so much as the keies are no part of their charge But these particulars if we seuerally discusse we shall neuer end the generall rules on which our assertion is grounded may be sooner proposed and resolued First to whom hath God committed the sword to the Priest or the Prince Phi. To whom say you
not carnal hir delights are not outward in flesh but inward in grace the prophet good mā had no leasure to thinke on your farms demeans reuenues This promise must be common to the faithfull not priuat to your cloisterers which in earthly things plied the bottle so fast that they suckt their nurces dry No remedy you must needs yeeld vs that christiā princes in respect of their office not of their riches haue receiued an expresse commandemēt from God to shew thēselues nurces to his church Now nurces by nature must prouide food for their infants defend them from dāger ergo kings queenes in the new testamēt are boūd to tēder the church of Christ by their princely power publik lawes to defend the same from infection of heresies inuasion of schisms all other apparent corruptions of faith good maners Who saith S. Aug. being in his right wits wil say to christiā kings take you no care who defēdeth or impugneth in your realms the church of christ your master Let it not pertain to you who lift to be religious or sacrilegious within your kingdōs And left he should seem skāt resolued in this opinion he biddeth opē defiāce to the Donatists in these words Cry thus if you dare let murders be punished let adulteries be punished let other degrees of lust sinne be punished only sacrileges that is cōtēpt of God his truth or his church we wil not haue punished by princes lawes And againe Will the Donatists though they were cōuinced of a sacrilegious schisme say that it belongeth not to the princes power to correct or punish such things Is it because such powers do not stretch to corrupt false religiō But christiā emperors persecute the Pagās doth that displease thē The works of the flesh Paul nūbreth these fornicatiō vncleanes strife dissentiō heresie drunkēnes such other What thinke these mē may the crime of idolatry be iustly reuēged by the magistrate wel if that like them not why cōfesse they that witches be rightly punished by the rigor of princes lawes will not agnise that heretikes schismatikes may bee repressed by the same seeing Paul doth rehearse them togither with other fruites of iniquity Will they reply that earthly powers are not to medle with such matters of religion To what end then beareth he the sword which is called Gods minister seruing to punish malefactors Certainly Princes c. If this learned father can not fray you from reuiuing the frantick error of the Donatists against the Princes power in matters of religion I trust you will somwhat reuerence the precept which our Sauior in his Gospell gaue the magistrate when he had the first sort of ghestes to be brought to the great supper the second to be forced Go sayth he forth into the wayes and hedges Compell thē to come in that mine house may be filled Wee take wayes sayth Austen for heresies hedges for schismes because wayes in this place signifie the diuersenes and hedges the peruersenes of opinions House God hath none but his house of prayer neither table beside the Lords table So that this seruant is expressely charged to Compel them from heresies and schismes to the confession of truth consent of prayer and communion of the Lordes table To performe this Christ hath left no seruant but the minister or the magistrat no meanes saue the word or the sword To compell heretiks and schismatiks neither is it possible for the preacher if he would nor lawful if he could he lacketh both meanes and leaue to constraine them His calling is with patience to teach not with violence to force to feede not to stryke to reproue with tongue not to subdue with hand Only the Prince beareth the sword which can and may compell recusants and therefore Bishops since they be flatly forbidden to Rayne must not meddle with the material sword being the chiefest part strength of an earthly kingdom neither ought any to draw the sword but he that holdeth it in Gods stead to reward and reuenge Ergo these wordes Compell them to come in that mine house may be filled were spoken to Christian Princes and are to them both a warrant and a charge to represse schismes and heresies with their Princely power which they receiued from aboue cheefly to maintaine Gods glorie by causing the bands of vnitie to be preserued in the Church and the rules of fayth obserued To the same purpose S. Austen in many places alleageth this parable The Lord himself sayth he willed the ghests first to be brought then to be forced What meaneth he by this Compell them to come when as he sayd of the first bring them If he ment they should be compelled by terror of miracles then might the first sort of ghests which saw many diuine wonders be rather thought to be forced but if by the power which the Church receaued at Gods hand in due time through the religion faith of kings those that are found in high wayes hedges that is in heresies schismes must be compelled to come let them not mislike that they be forced This cōmaunding by Princely power occasioneth many to be saued which though they be violently brought to the feast of the great householder and compelled to come yet being within they find cause to reioyce that they did enter for both sorts of commers as well violently forced as willingly brought the Lord fortold hath fulfilled Therfore let earthly princes serue Christ in making Lawes for Christ wherby mē may be forced to come to the great holy banquet yea by banishments other losses let their subiects begin to weigh with themselues what why they suffer learne to prefer the Scriptures which they read before the reportes and cauils of mē I thinke it superfluous to staie longer in confirming so manifest a truth He that is of God heareth the words of God he that impugneth them quarreleth not with Princes which yet is no small offence but with him by whom Princes raigne whose wisedom may not easily be neglected nor will resisted If you deny that this is the Princes charge to see the law of God fully executed his Sonne rightly serued his spouse safely nourced his house timely filled his enemies duely punished you must counteruaile that which Moses prescribed Dauid required Esay prophesied Paul witnessed Christ commaunded with some better sounder authority than theirs is If you grant so much we wil aske no more the Princes duety to God once cōfessed the rest shal quickly be concluded Phi. In a sense it is true that you say Theo. It is simply true that I say for in your owne iudgement may the Christian faith be freely permitted publikely receiued in kingdoms common wealthes Phi. No doubt Theo. May godly discipline be likewise planted and preserued amongest men and the disturbers and neglecters of it repressed and ordered
breath ergo the Prince conferreth life and breath to thē Or the Prince permitteth her Subiectes to beleeue in God and relieue ech others ergo the Prince conferreth faith and charitie to them Phi. It giueth her to do that which is more euen to prescribe by her selfe or her deputies or lawes authorised onely by her selfe which waie to worship and serue God how and in what forme to minister the Sacramentes to punish and depriue teach and correct them and generally to prescribe and appoint which waie she will be gouerned in soule Theo. That Princes may prescribe what faith they list what seruice of God they please what forme of administring the Sacraments they thinke best is no part of our thought nor point of our doctrine And yet that Princes may by their lawes prescribe the christian faith to be preached the right seruice of God in spirit and truth to be vsed the Sacraments to be ministred according to the Lords institution this is no absurditie in vs to defend but impietie rather in you to withstande And that Princes may punish both Bishoppes and others for heresie dissention and all kinde of iniquitie by banishing and commaunding them to bee remoued from their Churches which you call depriuing cā not now be coūted absurd vnlesse you reiect the stories of the church and lawes of christian Princes which I before cited as absurd For there shall you finde that Emperours by their Lawes and Edictes haue commaunded Bishops to be iudicially depriued by other bishops actually displaced by their temporal Magistrates as well for erronious teaching as vicious liuing Phi. When you giue princes supreme power in matters of religion you giue thē leaue to do what they lift The. If you affirm that of vs your report is vtterly vntrue if you infer it vpon vs your reason is very ridiculous For what a fond illation is this Princes be supreme that is not subiect to the Popes iurisdictiō ergo princes may lawfully do what they wil. Phi. We say not lawfully but if there be none to cōtrole thē none can let thē to do what they list The. The dreadful iudgements of God not the leud practises of Popes must bridle Princes frō doing euill If they feare not a reuenger in heauen whom they can not escape they will neuer regard a conspirator in earth whom they may soone preuent yet we dispute not what tyrāts de facto wil do but what godly Princes of dutie should of right may do This is it that we seek for therfore you must conclude this or nothing Phi. You giue thē authority to make lawes punish for religion without anie mētion of truth or error The. The oth expresseth not their duty to God but ours to thē as they must be obeied whē they ioin with truth so must they be endured whē they fal into error which side soeuer they take either obediēce to their wils or submissiō to their swords is their due by Gods law that is al which our oth exacteth And yet when we professe thē to be gouernors that word restraineeh thē from their own lusts referreth thē to Gods ordināce For they which resist God impugn the truth oppresse the righteous assist error fauor impietie be no gouernors vnder God as all princes oughtto bee but tyrantes against God not bearers but wilful abusers of the sword which God hath appointed for the punishment of euill doers and for the praise of them that do well And this though it be not expressed yet is it euer imploied in the very scepters swords thrones of princes For dominiō power maiesty belōg of right to god alone are by him imparted to Princes with this condition to this end that they shold raign vnder him not ouer him cōmand for him not against him be honored obeied after him not before him therefore this quarrell sauoreth not of ignorance but of malice when you say we giue Princes power to do what they wil in matters pertaining to God his seruice We reiect detest that sinful assertion more than you do In deede we say that the Pope may not pull Princes crownes frō their heads nor seeke to master them with contriuing rebellions treasons against them whiles hee pretendeth to depose them In this onely sense wee defende them to bee supreme that is not at libertie to do what they lift without regard of truth or right but without superiour on earth to represse them with violent meanes and to take their kingdomes from them Phi. It maketh the bodie aboue the soule the temporall regiment aboue the spirituall the earthly kingdom aboue Christes mysticall bodie It maketh the sheepe aboue the Pastour it giueth her power to commaund them whom wherein she is bound to obey It giueth power to the subiect to be iudge of the iudges yea of God himselfe as S. Cyprian speaketh Theo. I am loth to bring you out of loue with your owne conceits otherwise I neuer saw more boldnes lesse soundnes in any man If we did preferre earthly things before heauenly you might iustly charge vs that we set the body aboue the soule but betweene Princes Priests that comparison is foolish except you thinke Priests to be without bodies Princes without soules which were a mery deuise The spirituall regiment which Christ hath ouer the faithfull in his Church is infinitely before the temporal regiment of Princes ouer their subiects But if by this you would inferre that good Princes may not punish euill Priestes you deface godlinesse and trueth in Princes as temporall and exact wickednesse and error in Priestes as spirituall which is more than absurde As for the right functions of Preachers and Princes if that bee the matter you speake of for you speake so doubtfully that wee can gather no certaintie what you meane know you that as in spiritual perfection and consolation the Preacher excelleth the Prince by many decrees God hauing appointed Preachers not Princes to bee the sowers of his seede messenges of his grace stewardes of his mysteries so for externall power and authoritie to compell punish which is the point that we stande on God hath preferred the Prince before the Priest so long as the Prince commaundeth that which God alloweth And in this case wee make not temporall aboue spirituall as you tricke it with termes but auouch that the same God who teacheth the simple and leadeth the willing by the Preachers mouth driueth the negligent and forceth the froward by the Princes sword which himselfe that is a spirit and the father of spirites hath ordained to that end The mystical bodie of Christ which is his church containeth not only Prists bishops but all the faithfull in heauenly graces inward vertues far exceedeth all earthly kingdomes and yet hath God himselfe authorized the sword on earth in Princes handes to be keepers
neither can you of a promise which is common to all establish a priuate Tribunall for one man from the which the spirit of trueth shal not depart as you professe of the Popes Consistorie Phi. If he may erre how can he be iudge of al others Theo. You say wel since by the consent and confession of your own church foureteene hundred yeres after Christ he may erre we conclude he can not bee supreme iudge of faith nor Soueraigne directer of Princes in those cases Phi. Was our whole Church of that opinion so lately Theo. Shew euer any learned man of your side that sayde or helde otherwise Phi. Nay shewe you they held so Theo. I haue already shewed so much Phi. You haue named some priuate men that wrate so Theo. The strongest pillours of your Church Phi. But you say this opinion was generall Theo. If you consider how earnestly and openly this was asserted by the best and neuer contradicted by any no not by those that tooke vpon them to bee the chiefe Proctours and Patrones for the Pope your selfe will say it was generall and confessed on all sides Your owne Decrees that will not haue the Pope reprooued for any fault adde this exception Nisi deprehendatur a fide deuius vnlesse hee bee founde to swarue from the fayth The Bishoppes of Fraunce and Germanie gathered at Brixia and Mogunce against Gregorie the seuenth condemned him as The auncient disciple of the heretike Berengarius a vera fide exorbitantem and swaruing from the true fayth His owne Cardinals and Bishoppes that were at Rome made this profession against him Ad destruendas haereses nouiter ab Hildebrando inuentas consedimus We assembled to destroy the heresies lately deuised by Pope Hildebrand And in special wordes Hoc est decretum Hildebrandi in quo a Doctrina fide Catholica aberrauit This is Hildebrands decree in which hee erred from the Catholike doctrine and fayth Robert Grosseteste Bishoppe of Lincolne reuerenced of your Church for a Saint lying on his death proued the Pope not onely might bee but was an heretike by sundry reasons and by the very definition of heresie and for the possibilitie of the matter alleageth the Popes owne testimonie Item dicit Decretalis quod super tali vitio videlicet haeresi potest debet Papa accusari The Decretall sayth that for heresie the Pope may and ought to be accused But what speake I of one Bishop Six hundred Prelates an hundred foure and twentie Diuines and almost three hundred Lawyers with the whole Colledge of Cardinals in your generall Councell of Pisa deposed two Popes Gregorie the twelfth and Benedict the thirteenth as schismatikes and heretikes Your Councell of Constance where as you say were 4. Patriarkes 29. Cardinals 47. Archbishoppes 270. Bishops 564. Abbats and Doctours in all aboue nine hundred deposed the same Benedict persisting in his Popedom notwithstanding the former sentence as being schismaticum haereticum ac a fide deuium articuli fidei Vnam sanctam Catholicam Ecclesiam violatorem pertinacem notorium manifestum a schismatike and an heretike swaruing from the faith and a wilfull notorious manifest subuerter of the Article of our faith one holy Catholike Church And in the same Councel it was obiected to Iohn the 23. Quod dictus Iohannes Papa 23. saepe saepius coram diuersis Prelatis alijs honestis probis viris pertinaciter Diabolo suadente dixit asseruit dogmatizauit astruxit vitam eternam non esse quin imo dixit pertinaciter credidit animam hominis cum corpore humano mori extingui ad instar animalium brutorum dixÃt que mortuum semel esse in nouissimo die minimè resurrecturum contra articulum de resurrectione mortuorum That often and very often before diuers Prelates and other honest and approoued men hee sayd auouched vttered as his iudgement egerly defended that there is no life euerlasting yea moreouer hee sayde and resolutely beleeued that the soule of man dieth and perisheth with the bodie after the maner of other beasts and that hee which was once dead should not rise in the last day contrarie to the article of the resurrection of the dead Your generall councell of Basil which Germanie Fraunce Englande the Dukedome of Millan and many other Countries so greatly esteemed gaue the like iudgement not yet seuen skore seuen yeres agoe against Eugenius the 4. and iudicially pronounced him to bee schismaticum a fide deuium pertinacem haereticum a schismatike erring from the fayth and a stubburne heretike Lastly your diuines of Paris but last day resolued that Peter erred in faith when Paul reprooued him and if Peter did there can bee no question but his successours may since they claime from him and not before him If this bee not the generall consent of your owne Church I knowe not what is If it bee then by the full and cleare confession of your selues for 1400. yeeres the Pope might stray from the faith and become an heretike Phi. There is not one of your examples but may be replied to Theo. Graunt they might yet this is most sure which I conclude that they were al of this opinion the Pope coulde erre Phi. What if that opinion were not true Theo. That must you proue It is enough for mee to shewe that not onely the church of Christ in former ages but your owne Church euen vntil our age held this opinion of Popes that they could erre What reason you haue or can haue to impugne their opinion let the world iudge We thinke you within the compasse of Alfonsus censure if ye be not worse Phi. What if wee should graunt the Pope may erre as al men may That doeth not diminish his power Theo. A iudge must haue two thinges before hee bee competent namely skill to discerne that hee misse not the trueth and power to commaund that his iudgement may take place If he want either hee is no fit iudge Phi. You say right and both these the Pope hath in most ample maner Theo. He hath neither Erre he may and therefore no man is bound to his iudgement farther than it standeth with the word of truth and so farre the greatest Princes in the world are bound to the meanest man that God doth send For God is truth they that resist the truth resist God and the end of them al that resist is damnation which Princes shal not auoyde vnlesse they submit themselues to the hearing embracing and obeying of the truth And as hee may erre so hath hee no power to commaund Princes or others but only to propose the commandements of God vnto them as euery Bishop must may by vertue of his vocation Farther authority by violence to compel or by corporal and external meanes to punish no Prelate nor Pope hath by the lawe of God since that belongeth to the
and eloquence hee seeketh to proue and perswade to the people of this Realme as the chiefest Bulwark of their Defence that were condemned he saith for religion we say for treason and in deed the very ground of all their actions I thought needefull to examine and to let the simple see on what a sandy slime they haue built as well their consciences as their Colleges and in how wretched and vnrighteous a quarell they haue hazarded their liues in this world and their soules in the next to inlarge the power and make vp the purse of their Rhemish founder Taking that therefore in hande I haue worde by worde refelled the fifth chapter of their Defence which purposely treateth of this matter and inserted so much of the fourth as tended to this ende the rest being a voluntarie pang of their vnbridled eloquencc as also I haue ripped vp the shamefull attemptes and tumults of Popes these last fiue hundred yeares for before that time Antichrist neither was nor durst be so bold presuming to displace depose their Lord Maister the Romane Emperor incountering him other Princes with treasons poysons battayles bloodsheds periuries treacheries such as Christendom neuer before tasted of euer since rued Where I haue not only opened the facts noted the meeknes of their martial spirits but haue vnfoulded the causes quarels for which those Princes were thus pursued with such excommunications and depriuations from Rome shewing as I go the Italian stories in fauour of their countrieman and foreman the Pope to bee exceeding partiall The like order I would haue followed in their Apologie but that as I first protested I found nothing in it worthy to bee refuted vnlesse I should haue banded their idle and emptie termes backe againe to them with others of the same making and so brought the cause of Christ and trueth of Religion to a warfare of woordes which I neither ought nor would If any man thinke me no indifferent iudge of their paines it may please him to cast his eye on the second sheete and hee shall find all the proofes and places of their Apologie aunswered in three leanes and of those fewe and weake quotations to haue made a conquest in open writing had beene incke and paper ill imployed I would therefore not take that course which seemed to me neither needeful nor profitable but to benefite the poore deceiued subiectes of this Realme and bring the Iesuites cause to the touch-stone in deede I haue chosen the principall intentes of their Apologie on which their whole foundation standeth and after mine owne course debated them more exactly and largely than the confutation of their Apology would haue suffered me For where they pretend they departed for lacke of the Catholike Sacrifice Sacramentes and Seruice which want in this Realme and because they were forced by oth to confesse an vnnaturall and impossible power in the Prince to be supreme Gouernour of all persons and causes as well ecclesiasticall as temporall and in their absence they resort for reliefe to none but to him that is the head of their catholike communion the chiefe Pastour and Bishoppe of their soules in earth and the vicar generall of Christ to whose predecessors all the famous Fathers called for aide comfort and counsell in their like distresses and traine vppe such as come vnto them in obedience to the churches Lawes Apostolike Traditions both written and vnwritten and to the precepts of Ancients Superiours who haue the promised spirit of trueth and are sent backe againe into this Land to execute spirituall offices and to absolue in foro conscientiae the penitent people from their sinnes of what sort soeuer schisme and heresie not excepted who seeth not that these assertions being the seueral braÌ„ches of their Apologie depend either on religion that is in strife betwixt vs or on the Princes power which they impugne or on the Popes claime to bee head of the church which we deny And therefore the proofe or disproofe of their particular actions must be fet and deriued from those chiefe and capitall springs The consideration whereof first induced mee to neglect the rouing discourses and vaunting florishes of their Apologie no lesse voide of trueth than of proofe and to betake my selfe to a stricter and directer kinde of examining the most materiall pointes on which the rest did hang as first their running to Rome siding themselues with the Pope as Christs Vicar generall against their Prince for which they haue no president in the primatiue Church The next is the princes power to commaund for trueth and right to beare the sword within her owne Realme ouer all persons for thinges and causes as well Ecclesiasticall as Temporall without any subiection or relation to the Popes tribunall which I prooue is agreeable to the Lawes of God and practise of Christes church and therefore the oth importing the same to be good and godlie Thirdly the Popes censuring and depriuing princes of their crownes I shew to be nothing else but a wicked vnchristian pride contumelie not long since deuised by Antichrist to frustrate the word and ordinance of almighty God and to make himselfe great and so of force the subiects which be partakers with him in that hainous conspiracie by perswading assisting executing or defending the same in worde or deede against their princes to bee traytours and not martyrs if they die for that quarell Lastly the publique reformation of diuine Sacramentes and Seruice made by her Maiestie I declare to be Christian and Catholike and the partes of poperie repealed and abolished by the lawes of this Realme to be repugnant I speak for the substance of theÌ„ and not for certain indifferent ceremonies in them to the sacred scriptures and ancient fathers Other incident and adiacent matters I haue handled and those not a fewe as the generall and speciall contentes before and after will better insinuate but these foure bee the pointes that beare the burden both of their first Apologie for their Seminaries and last Defence of English Catholikes By these shal we soone discerne the truth or falshood of their pretences clamors against the Princes Lawes and such as are authorized by her highnesse therefore from the sober sad discussing hereof if they get them as they haue done to outragious and tragicall exclamations we must leaue them as men wilfully diuerting from the right way crying as loude as they can for life to drowne the voices of such as woulde recall them If they looke that all the parts of their Defence should haue bin answered in like sort as the fifth chapter is that labour I say for a man of my calling wold haue bin as fruitles as it is needles the proofs that are not here discussed may â—afely be despised the rest of their rolling rhetorik a diuine neither need regard nor should repeate As much as is inforcing to their purpose is here
better and acknowledge your error Phi. When you proue that we may do this which will neuer be Theo. Marke first what we reath and next what we proue that you be not deceaued Wee teach that God in deliuering the sworde to Princes hath giuen them this direct charge to prouide that as well true religion be maintayned in their Realmes as ciuil iustice ministred and hath to this end allowed Princes ful power to forbid preuent and punish in all their subiects be they laymen Clercks or Bishops not only murders thefts adulteries periuries and such like breaches of the seconde table but also schismes heresies Idolatries and all other offences against the first table pertayning onely to the seruice of God and matters of religion Wee doe not imagine this of our owne heades we find it annexed to the crowne by God himself who when he first gaue the children of Israel leaue to choose them a king withall appointed that the Law truely copied out of the Leuites original which was kept in the tabernacle should be deliuered the king sitting on his royal seate with this charge That booke shall remaine with the king he shall reade in it all the dayes of his life that he may learne to feare the Lord his God obserue all the wordes of the law there written and these statutes to do them This was not doone till he was placed in his throne so sayth the text therefore this touched not the kings priuate conuersation as a man but his Princely function as a magistrate which will you nill you stood in cōmaūding others not in guiding his own person For no man is a king in respect of himself but in ruling his subiects As a man he serued God one way sayth Austen as a king an other way As a mā by faythful lyuing as a king in setting forth lawes to cōmaund that which is good and remoue the contrarie So that kings as kings serue God in doing that for his seruice which none but kings can do Then if the whole Law were cōmitted to the king as a king at his coronation that is to cōmaund it others which none but kings could doe within their Realmes ergo the publishing preseruing and executing of the first table touching the sincere worship of God was the chiefest part of the Princes charge To make my cōclusion the stronger let vs see what the godly kings of Israell Iudah did in matters of religiō hauing no farther nor other cōmission frō God than this which I last repeated The diligēt executiō of their office wil serue for an euidēt expositiō what God required at their hānds We cā look for no plainer declaratiō of Gods meaning in this point thā Gods own cōmendatiō of their acts in this case The lawmaker is the best interpreter if they by their princly power remoued idols razed hilalters slue false prophets purged the land frō al abominations not sparing the brasen serpent made by Moses whē they saw it abused if again by the same power they caused the tēple to be clensed the law to be read the couenant to be renued with God the passouer to be kept the Leuits to minister in their courses inuēted by Dauid if to conclude the prince deposed the chiefe bishop placing a fitter in his steed forced al prophets priests people that were found in Israel sincerely to serue the Lord their God if I say they did al this as the scripture beareth record they did their zealous proceedings in these cases were liked accepted praised by Gods own mouth who besides Iesuits is either so blind that he seeth not or so froward that he confesseth not that princes were charged by God himselfe to plant establish his true seruice in their dominions with their Princely power to prohibite punish all offences abuses be they temporal or spiritual against the second or first part of this heauenly law Phi. This charge concerned none but the kings of Israell Iudah The. That refuge doth rather manifest your folly thā satisfie my reason did I pray you Sir the cōming of Christ abolish the vocatiō of princes I tro not Thē their office remaining as before per cōsequent both the same precept of God to them stil dureth also the like power to force their subiects to serue God Christ his son standeth in as ful strēgth vnder the gospel as euer it did vnder the law For princes in the new testamēt be Gods ministers to reuēge malefactors as they were in the old the greater the wickednes y◠rather to be punished ergo the greatest as heresies idolatries blasphemies are sonest of al other vices to be repressed by christiā magistrates whose zeal for Christs glory must not decrease Christs care for their scepters being increased and those monuments of former kinges left written for their instructiō Were not this sufficient as in truth it is to refute your euasion yet king Dauid forseeing in spirit the heathē kings would bād thēselues assemble togither against the Lord his Christ extēdeth the same charge to the gētiles which the kings of Iurie receiued before warneth thē al at once Be wife ye kings vnderstād ye iudges of the world serue the Lord. Upon which words S. Aug. inferreth thus Al men ought to serue God in one sort by cōmon cōdition as mē in an other sort by seueral gifts offices by the which som do this some that No priuat person could cōmand idols to be banished clean frō among men which was so long before prophesied Therfore kings besides their duty to serue God common with al other men haue in that they be kings how to serue the Lord in such sort as none can do which are not kings For in this kings in respect they be kings serue the Lord as God by Dauid enioyneth them if in their kingdoms they cōmand that which is good prohibite that which is il not in ciuile affaires only but in matters also concerning diuine religion With this indeuor of christian princes God cōforteth his church by the mouth of Esay Thou shalt suck the brests of princes kings shal be thy foster fathers and Queenes thy nurcing mothers What Esay saith princes shal do that I cōclude princes must do because God would not promise they should vsurp an other mās office but discharge their own Thē if you frō Rhemes or your brethrē frō Rome tel vs y◠the nurcing of christs church is no part of the princes duty we detest your insolēt negatiue God is truth who saith it you be liars If you take the milke of princes for tēporal honors lāds goods which your church in deed hath greedily swallowed the very children wil laugh you to skorne The church of Christ is no wāton she lusteth for no worldly wealth which is rather hurtful poison than holsom food Gods prouision for hir is spiritual
Theo. S. Paul expressely writeth of the Prince that He beareth the sword not without cause and is Gods minister to reuenge him that doth euil And our Sauiour seuerely forbiddeth Peter the rest of his Apostles to medle with the sword All that take the sword shall perish by the sworde and to them all You know that kinges of Nations raigne ouer theÌ„ and they that be great exercise authoritie with you it shall not be so The sword is but the signe of publike and Princely power and where the thing is not lawfull the signe is vnlawfull Since then the Lord interdicteth his Apostles and messengers all princely power it is euident the sword which is but a signe thereof is likewise interdicted them Thus much Bernard sticketh not to tell Pope Eugenius to his face It is the Lordes voice in the Gospell Kinges of Nations are Lordes ouer them and they that haue power on them are called gracious and the Lord inferreth you shall not be so It is a cleare case the Apostles are forbidden dominion Go thou then saith Bernard to the Pope and vsurpe if thou dare either an Apostleship if thou be a Prince or dominion if thou be Apostolik Thou art expressely forbidden one of them If thou wilt haue both thou shalt loose both The paterne of an Apostle is this dominion is interdicted seruice is inioyned Gird thy selfe with thy sworde the sworde of the spirit which is the word of God And this Pope Nicholas fairely confesseth The church of God hath no sword but the spirituall wherewith she quickeneth she killeth not Your owne law saith It is easily proued of Bishops and other clergimen whatsoeuer that they may not either by their owne authoritie or by the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome take weapon in hand exercise the materiall sworde addeth this reason For euery man besides him and his authoritie which hath lawfull power and which as the Apostle saith beareth the sworde not without cause to whom euerie soule ought to bee subiect euery man I say that without this authoritie taketh the sword shall perish with the sword He that beareth the sword may lawfully put malefactors to death and wage warre with his enimies when neede so requireth which Bishops may not doe The weapons of our warfare are not carnall saith S. Paul Quid Episcopis cum bello What haue Bishops to do with batle saith Athanasius Ambrose Pugnare non debeo I ought not to fight If they may not fight much lesse kil if they may do neither they can not beare the sword which is appointed by God receiued of men to doe both The words of our Sauior are cleare with vs for the negatiue My kingdom saith he is not of this world If then your Priests Prelats Popes wil be the seruants of Christ they must chaleÌ„ge no worldly kingdom as froÌ„ him or in his name The seruant is not aboue his master If the master with his own mouth haue denied it the seruaÌ„ts may not affirm it or vsurp it The souldiers of Christ must not intangle them-selues with secular affaires much lesse make themselues Lords and iudges of earthly matters which office properly belongeth to the sworde and must be sustained of all those that beare the sword The Popes themselues before their power and pride grew so great were of this opinion with vs. When the truth which is Christ was once come after that saith Pope Nicolas neither did the Emperour take vppon him the Bishops right nor the Bishop vsurpe the Emperours name because the same mediatour of God and man the man Christ Iesus distinguisheth the offices of ech power with proper actions and different dignities to this end that the Bishop which is a souldier vnto God shoulde not intangle and snare himselfe with wordly affaires and againe the Prince which is occupied in earthly matters should not be Ruler of diuine things The very same text word for word your Decrees make Cyprian write to Iulian the Emperour if those be Cyprians wordes and not rather an impudent forgerie in his name For how could Cyprian that died vnder Valerian 260. after Christ write to Iulian that began his raigne 360. after Christ But such proppes are fittest to bolster vp your kingdom of darkenesse and error Sure it is which the wordes of our Sauiour apparantly proue that all the Disciples and Apostles of Christ are straitly charged not to medle with princely Scepters and swordes and therefore out of all question only Princes beare the sworde within their owne Realmes and dominions for so much as that honour and power is expressely prohibited and interdicted by the Lord himselfe to all Preachers and Bishops Phi. This wee woulde haue graunted you with halfe these wordes Theo. And this wee woulde haue depende not on your grant which is fickle but on such proofes as we might make iust accouÌ„t of Phi. How then Theo. As the first is apparant that onely Princes haue the sword committed to their charge by Gods appointmeÌ„t so the next is as euident that the sword I meane the publike authoritie of Magistrats in Christian common-wealthes hath been may be and should be vsed for the receiuing establishing and deâ—ending of that which is good and prohibiting abolishing and punishing of that which is euill in all spirituall and ecclesiasticall thinges and causes as well as in temporall which the sacred Scriptures the auncient Fathers the Church Stories the lawes and examples of al ages and countries do sufficiently proue as you saw before Phi. This is not it that we stand on Theo. This is that we affirme stand you on what you lift Phi. If this be granted what will you conclude Theo. If this be proued you shall see what we conclude If it bee not shew where the defect is Phi. That onely Princes beare the sword within their own realms which may be and should bee vsed for the receiuing establishing and defending of the faith Cannons of the church all thinges incident or pertinent to the same and for prohibiting and punishing whatsoeuer is repugnant to either in this we finde no defect Let vs therefore see what you will infer The. First then the words of our oth that Her Highnes is the only gouernor of this realm bearing the sword as wel in al spiritual or ecclesiastical things causes as teÌ„poral be not only tolerable resonable but such by your own coÌ„fessioÌ„ as we may truly defend you can not iustly confute Next the absurdities which you bring against vs as if we deriued the spirituall power of preaching baptizing binding loosing imposing handes and offering prayers to God from the Princes Soueraigne right and title which we doe not all these absurdities I say bee mere follies grounded vpon the carelesse mistaking if not spitefull peruerting of our wordes Thirdly your defacing and imâ—â—ouing the Princes sworde and aduauncing and defending against
Priesthoode who with his Iron rodde bruseth the pride of Princes that rebell against his Spouse and kingdome in earth like a potters poâ—shard and hath right in his Church ouer all kingdomes to plant and plucke vp to buyld and destroy afore whom al kings shall fall downe and all Nations do him seruice Theo. That the Sonne of God will bruse the pride of those Princes with an Iron rodde which rebell against his Spouse and kingdome in earth like a potters shard and that he hath right both within and without his Church ouer all kingdomes to plant and plucke vp to buyld and destroy afore whom all kings on earth and Angels in heauen shall fall downe and doe him seruice these thinges are vndoubted with vs and brought in by you but onely for a windlace to make the reader cast his eyes on Christ and his kingdome while you closely conuey the Princes Scepter vnder the Popes feete Accursed bee hee that doeth not confesse the supereminent power which the Sonne of God hath ouer all kingdomes ouer all creatures ouer the States and liues bodies and soules of all men Wil you thence inferre the Pope hath the like In sooth masters you must make hard shift before these reasons will bee good Phi. Christs Priestly prerogatiue passing his owne regall dignitie much more excelling all other humane power of the worlde in most ample and exact termes is coÌ„municated to the chiefe Priest and Pastor of our soules and secondarily to the rest of the gouernours of the Church in other manner of clauses than any earthly Princes can shewe for their pretensed spirituall regiment Fie on that secular pride wilfull blind heresie so repugning against Gods expresse ordinaunce and yet is of wicked Sect-masters and flatterers vpholden to the eternall calamitie of themselues and of millions of others Theo. This is stale Rhetorike to come with an outcrie when you should make your conclusion Conclude first and rayle after otherwise you shewe your selues to trust more to the slippernes of your tongues than to the soundnes of your cause Phi. Our illation is euident Christ as a Priest bruseth the pride of Princes with his Iron rodde and hath right ouer all kingdomes to plant and plucke vppe buyld and destroy But Christs Priestly prerogatiue in most ample and exact termes is communicated to the chiefe Priest and Pastor of our soules The chiefe Pastor therefore hath the like right ouer all kingdomes to plant plucke vp buyld and destroy Theo. The power which you mention in your first proposition is attributed to Christ not as a Priest but as a king The wordes of the Psalme are very plaine to that end I haue set my king vpon my holy hill of Sion Aske of mee and I will giue thee the heathen for thine inheritaunce and the endes of the earth for a possession to thee Thou shalt crush them with a scepter of Iron and breake them in pieces like a potters vessell S. Iohn applieth the same place to the royal and not to the Priestly power of Christ. I saw the heauen open and beholde a white horse and hee that sate vpon him was called faithful and true and hee iudgeth and fighteth in righteousnes On his head were many Crownes and out of his mouth went a sharpe sword that with it he should smite the heathen and hee shal rule them with a rod of Iron And hee hath on his garment and on his thigh a name written the King of Kings and Lord of Lordes Howe thinke you His horse his Crowne his robe his traine his sworde his stile described in this place expresse they his Priestly or Princely prerogatiue As a Priest hee sacrificed himselfe on the crosse and had his owne blood shed for the remission of sinnes As a King hee subdueth his enemies and maketh them like dust vnder his feete bee they Princes or others Your Maior is therefore false that to bruse kings with an Iron rod and to breake them in pieces like a potters shard is a priuilege of Christs Priesthoode and not of his Princehoode Your Minor that Christs Priestly prerogatiue is communicated in most ample exact termes to the chiefe Priest and Pastor of the Church hath farre lesse trueth in it than your Maior For al the prerogatiue of Christs Priesthood is not communicated to any other Such an high Priest saith S. Paul it became vs to haue which shoulde be holy vndefiled separated from sinners made higher than the heauens who in the end of the world appeared once to put away sinne by the offering vp of himselfe and after that one sacrifice for sinne is set down for euer at the right hand of God hauing obtained eternal redeÌ„ption for vs and being able perfectly to saue them that come to God by him seeing he euer lyueth to make intercession for them These and many such prerogatiues of his Priesthood I hope you will not empart to the Pope lest wee crie fie on your blasphemous hearts and mouthes which set the man of sinne equall with the sonne of God If you restraine your Minor by confessing that not all but some of the prerogatiues of Christes Priesthoode are communicated to others then your conclusion hath no force both your premisses being meere particulars For though Christ gaue some part of his power honour to his Apostles yet this hee gaue not and therefore his gift to them can doe you no good vnlesse you prooue that hee gaue them this prerogatiue amongst the rest which he bestowed on them Phi. Hee sayd to Peter and his successours Whatsoeuer thou bindest on earth shall be bound in heauen and whatsoeuer thou losest in earth shall bee loosed in heauen Can you require a more ample graunt Theo. Peter and the rest were to bind and lose the sinnes and soules of men by the woord and sacraments not the Scepters and swords of Princes And so Christ himselfe expoundeth his graunt vnto them Whose sinnes soeuer you remit they are remitted vnto them and whose sinnes soeuer yee retaine they are retayned And in this place you leaue out the first part of the graunt which should direct the whole I will giue thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen not of the kingdomes on earth Bernard though he were but of late yeeres yet was he not afraid to tel Pope Eugenius ergo in criminibus non in possessionibus potestas vestra quoniam propter illa non propter has accepistis claues regni caelorum Your power concerneth sinnes and not possessions because yee receiued the keyes of the kingdome of heauen for those thinges and not for these And so Theophilact Vnderstand the keyes which bind and lose to bee the pardoning or punishing of sinnes And so S. Ambrose The right of the holy Ghost consisteth in bynding and losing of sinnes As also Saint Augustine The keyes Christ gaue to his Church that what she loosed in earth should be
depriue Princes of their Crownes and take their Scepters from them because the Apostle willed the christians to be tried rather by their brethreÌ„ than by their enemies which were Infidels Phi. In all which there is no difference betwixt kinges that bee faithfull and other Christian men who all in that they haue submitted themselues and their Scepters to the sweete yoke of Christ are subiect to discipline and to their Pastors authority no lesse than other sheepe of his fold Theo. In beleeuing the word receiuing the Sacraments and obeying the Lawes of God there is no difference betweene the Ruler and the Subiect but the temporall states and possessions of priuate men you may not meddle with by no color of ecclesiastical power or discipline much lesse may you touch the bodies or take the Crownes of Princes into your handes by your accidentall indirect authoritie which is nothing else but a sillie shift of yours to crosse the commaundements of God Phi. Though the state regiment policie and power temporall be in it selfe alwaies of distinct nature qualitie and condition from the gouernment ecclesiasticall and spirituall common wealth called the church or bodie mysticall of Christ and the Magistrate spirituall and ciuill diuerse and distinct and sometimes so farre that the one hath no dependance of the other nor subalteration to the other in respect of themselues as it is in the Churches of God residing in heathen kingdoms and was in the Apostles times vnder the Pagan Emperours yet now where the lawes of Christ are receiued and the bodies politike and mysticall the Church and ciuill state the Mâ—gistrate Ecclesiasticall and Temporall concurre in their kinds togither though euer of distinct regimentes natures and endes there is such a concurrence and subalternation betwixt both that the inferiour of the two which is the ciuill state must needs in matters pertayning any way either directly or indirectly to the honor of God and benefit of the soule be subiect to the spirituall and take direction from the same Theo. This is tossing of termes as men doe tenez-balles to make pastime with The state regiment policie and power temporall is in it selfe you saie alwaies of distinct nature qualitie and condition from the gouernment ecclesiasticall and spirituall Common-wealth called the Church or bodie mysticall of Christ. You seeke to confound that which you would seeme to distinguish and when you haue spent much breath to no ende you conclude that though the church and the Common-wealth be distinct states as you can not denie yet you will rule both by reason the Common-wealth as the inferiour of the two dependeth on the Church and hath subalternation to the church as to the superiour But Sir in plaine termes and more trueth to the Sonne of God ruling in his Church by the might of his worde and spirite all kingdomes and Princes must be subiect their swordes Scepters soules and bodies mary to the Pope attyring himselfe with the spoiles of Christ and his church no such thing is due The watch-men and sheepeheardes that serue Christ in his church haue their kinde of regiment distinct from the temporall power and state but that regiment of theirs is by counsell and perswasion not by terrour or compulsion and reacheth neither to the goods nor to the bodies of any men much lesse to the crownes and liues of Princes and therefore your shifting of wordes and shrinking from the Popes Consistorie to the Church the spirituall Common wealth the mysticall bodie of Christ and such like houering and vncertaine speaches is but a trade that you haue gotten to make the Reader beleeue wee derogate from Christ and would haue Princes superiours to the worde and Sacramentes which Christ hath left to gather and gouerne the church withall Howbeit this course is so common with you that now it doth but shame you A christian king must take direction not from the Popes person or pleasure but from the Lawes and commaundementes of Christ to whome alone hee oweth subiection And as for the Bishoppes and Pastours of his Realme whome you falsly call the spirituall Common-wealth and the mysticall bodie of Christ because they bee but partes thereof and not so much except withall they bee teachers of truth those he must and should consult in respect they be Gods messengers sent to him and his people but with great care to trie them and free libertie to refuse them if they be found not faithfull And when the Prince learning by their instruction what is acceptable to God in doctrine and discipline shall receiue and publish the same the Bishoppes themselues are bounde to obey and if they will not the Magistrate may lawfully see the rigour of his lawes executed vpon them On the other side if the Prince wil not submit himselfe to the rules and preceptes of Christ but wilfully maintaine heresie and open impietie the Bishops are without flatterie to reproue and admonish the Prince of the daunger that is imminent from God and if he persist they must cease to communicate with him in diuine prayers and mysteries but still they must serue him honour him and pray for him teaching the people to doe the like and with meekenesse induring what the wrath of the Prince shal lay on them without annoying his person resisting his power discharging his subiectes or remouing him from his throne which is your maner of censuring Princes Phi. The ciuill Gouernour is SVBIECT to the spirituall amongest christians Theo. I haue often tolde you howe The ciuill Gouernour must heare beleeue and obey the meanest seruaunt that God sendeth if hee speake no more than his Masters will That subiection Princes owe to the sender and not to the speaker But were they simplie subiect to the messengers of God as they are not will you reason thus Princes should obey the Preachers of God ergo if they doe not they may bee deposed This is the argument which wee so often haue denied why then labour you so much about the antecedent when we denie the consequent That Princes shoulde obey God and his worde is a clearer case than that they shoulde obey the Pope For of that no man doubteth and this wee not onely doubt but denie Take therefore that which is confessed on both sides and set your conclusion to it that the force of your reason may the better appeare Princes without all question are bounde to obey God ergo if they doe not their dueties to God they may be deposed by Priestes This is the sequele which we alwaies denied and this is the point which you first assumed to proue Phi. The condition of these two powers as S. Gregorie Nazianzen most excellently resâ—mbleth it is like vnto the distinct state of the same spirit and body or flesh in a man where either of them hauing their proper and peculiar operations endes and obiectes which in other natures may be seuered as in Brutes where flesh is not spirit in Angels
the priest is Gods minister to reuēge male factors Peter himself was sharply rebuked by Christ for vsing the sword in Peter all Pastors Bishops are straitly charged not to meddle with it Al that take the sword shall perish with the sword And of al men a Bishop must be no striker For if he that should feede his masters houshold fal to striking he shall haue his portion with hypocrites The seruants of God must be gentle towards all instructing those that resist with mildnes not cōpelling any with sharpnes Their function is limited to the preaching of the word dispensing the sacraments which haue no kinde of cōpulsion in thē but inuite men only by sober perswasions to beleeue imbrace the promises of God To conclude pastors may teach exhort reproue not force cōmand or reuenge only princes be gouernors that is publik magistrates to prescribe by their lawes and punish with the sword such as resist them within their dominions which Bishops may not do speake we truth or no Phi. We grant Bishops be no magistrates neither haue they to do with the bodies or goods of mē which god hath permitted to the princes power but yet they be gouernors of soules which princes be not Theo. No better reason to warrāt our opinion The Bishops charge concerneth the souls of mē but the soule of mā can neither be forced nor punished by man ergo Bishops be no commanders nor punishers but only directors instructors of the flocke of Christ. Phi. That we know The. Thē since by gouernors we mean rulers such as God hath authorized to bear the sword why do you fondly cauil that the princes power to cōmand punish excludeth the Bishops vocation to teach exhort which is nothing so Phi. You say princes may command and punish as well Bishops as others Theo. If they bee subiectes no lesse than others why should they not obey the prince or abide the sword as wel as others Phi. Do you make them meere subiects Theo. Not I but he that said You must be subiect not only for feare of wrath but also for conscience sake Phi. Doth he speake that of clergymē Theo. He y◠speaketh of al exempteth none Let euery soule bee subiect to the higher powers c. In these words clergymen be not excepted ergo cōprised Out of this place Bernard reasoneth thus with an archbishop of Frāce Let euery soul be subiect If euery thē yours Who doth except you y◠be bishops frō this general speech He that bringeth an exceptiō vseth but a delusion For these things saith Chrysostom are commanded to all as well Priestes and Monks as secular men which appeareth by the first sentence Let euery soule bee subiect to the superiour powers yea though thou be an Apostle an Euangelist a Prophet or what soeuer thou be So Theodorete Whether he be Priest Bishop or Monk let them be subiect to Magistrates This doctrine dured in the Church a thousand yeares before your exemption of Clerkes from secular powers as you call them was knowen Paul teacheth euerie soule saith Theophilact whether he be Priest Monk or Apostle to be subiect and obey Princes He teacheth euery soule saith Oecumenius whether he be Priest Monk or Apostle to submit themselues to Magistrates Gregorie the first perceiued and yeelded this exposition to be true Power saith he ouer all men is giuen to my Lord the Emperour from heauen And least you should thinke priests exempted in the person of Christ he speaketh thus to Mauritius the Emperour Sacerdotes meos tuae manui commisi I haue put my Priestes into thy handes and dost thou withhold thy souldiers from my seruice And elsewhere writing of the same prince Christ hath granted him to be ruler not ouer souldiers only but ouer Priestes also This is euident by the whole course of the Scripture Whom did our Sauiour charge to giue to Caesar that which was Caesars Not Scribes and high Priests as well as others Christ himselfe was a priest and a prophet and yet he not onely submitted himselfe to the Romane Magistrate but confessed the presidēts power ouer him to be from heauen S. Paul appealed vnto Caesar appeared before Caesar as his lawful gouernor S. Iude detested thē for false prophetes that despised gouernment or spake euil of rulers It is no Religion it is rebellion against God his word for clergie men to exempt themselues from the princes power The commandement is general Let euery soule be subiect◠the punishment is eternall Whosoeuer resisteth power resisteth the ordināce of God and they that resist shall receiue to themselues damnation Phi. Yet reason the clergie be fauoured aboue the Laitie Theo. Tush we talke not what fauour princes may do well to shew but whether Clergie men by Gods law may chalenge an exemption from earthly powers or no Phi. Not except princes commaund against God And if they do so whom must lay men obey God or man Phi. No doubt God Theo. Then the prince cōmaunding against God all men are bound be they lay men or clerkes to prefer the will of God before the princes lawes but when the prince ioyneth with God and commaundeth for truth may the clergie resist the prince more than the people may Phi. They may not Theo. You say well Of the twaine they must rather obey that they may be teachers of obedience not in wordes onely but in deedes also For if they must admonish others to be subiect to principalities and obedient to Magistrates then must they not hinder their doctrine by their doings nor leade the rest by their example to contemn or resist powers which they should reuerence and obey Phi. By no meanes Theo. And in case the prince be repugnant to God may priestes or people be violent withstanders or must they rather be patient indurers of the sword Phi. They must not resist but in patience possesse their soules They that resist shal receiue iudgemēt Theo. Ergo whether princes be with God or against God Priests Bishops must with gladnes obey or with meekenes abide the sword Phi. They must Theo. And he that suffereth is a subiect as wel as he that obeyeth For if they be rulers that commaund punish certainely they be subiects that must obey the commandement or abide the punishment Phi. I think so Theo. Then monks Prists Bishops by Gods law be subiects as well as others and consequently Princes be Gouernours of all persons within their dominions bee they Prelates Prophetes Apostles or whatsoeuer they be Phi. In temporal things we graunt but not in spiritual Theo. Where Princes may lawfully commaund all subiects of dewtie must obey Phi. True but in Ecclesiastical causes Princes may not meddle Theo. So say you but if I proue that the Princes power and charge by Gods law reacheth as well vnto matters of religion as other things will you bethink your selues