one only head to one body The Church is one body Except you imagine her to be a spread Eagle or a triple Geryon who hath as many heades as there be Crowns in the Popes myter Christ therfore alone is Head of the Church and not the Pope 24. But if it be so as heere you would beare vs in hand that it is why do you otherwhere affirme not a little forgetting your selfe that the King is Head of the Church Do you not feare least the Church should be double headed if not Christ alone but your King also be head thereof For thus you say pag. 338. Iam verò vt nomen capitis ad Regem reuocetur arte mirabili non est opus Praeiuit nobis voce Spiritus Sanctus 1. Reg. 15. 17. Nonne cùm peruulus esses in oculis tuis caput in tribubus Israel factus es Inter tribus verò Israel tribus Leui. Caput ergo Rex vel tribus Leuiticae qua in tributum Pontifex Achimelech sub Rege capite suo Chrysostomus camdem hanc vocem Capitis reuocauit ad Theodosium eumque dixit non solum caput sed quod in ipso capite maximè sublime est capitis verticem idque omnium in terris hominum Now that the Name of Head may be giuen to the King there shall need no great art The holy Ghost hath gone before vs in this word 1. Reg. 15. 17. saying When thou wast a little one in thine owne eyes wast thou not made head in the Tribes of Israel Amongst the tribes of Israel is the tribe of Leui. Therfore the King is head at least of the Leuiticall tribe in which Tribe was then the chiefe Priest Achimelech vnder the King his Head Chrysostome in like manner attributed this Name of Head vnto Theodosius and called him not only Head but which is most high in the head it selfe the top or crowne of the Head and that of all men on earth c. 25. I wonder at your inconstancy A little before you said that only Christ was head of the Church And why so That you might exclude the Pope whom you hate Now you will also haue the King to be head and not only head but the top or crowne of the head also Why so Because yow seeke to please and flatter the King And so it cōmeth to passe that you will easily endure a two-headed Church if the King may be one but in no wise if the Pope should be any And when you haue placed Christ and the King of England as two Heads of this Church then it seemes to you a faire and comely Church but if Christ and the Pope be placed togeather then is it deformed monstrous Get you hence with this your Head wherin the Church hath one while one head another while two It seemes that that of Ecclesiasticus 27. 12. may be fittly applied vnto you Stultus vt luna mutatur A foole is changed like the moone And that also of S. Iames 1. 8. Vir duplex animo inconstans est in omnibus vijs suis. A double dealing fellow is inconstant in all his wayes The seauenth Paradoxe 26. YOv say that if the Pope should haue power to depose Kinges Ethnickes or Infidels were better in condition then Christian Princes to witt for that these may be deposed by the Pope the other may not For thus you write pag. 36. of your booke Hac doctrina semel promulgata non multa pòst sceptra credo Christo subijcientur Quid enim Rex Ethnicus non potest deponi à Papa Christianus potest Meliori ergo iure regnatur apud Ethnicos Quis non dehin◠iem sic vt est manebit Ethnicus Subditi qui Ethnicisunt officio suo in Reges laxari nequeunt at Christiani queunt Quis non subditos suos malit Ethnicos quà m Christianos Quis Christianus Rex esse velit This Doctrine to wit of deposing Princes being once set abroach I beleeue few Scepters will hereafter be subiected to Christ. For why An Ethnicke King cannot be deposed by the Pope a Christian King may be therefore it is better to be a King amongst Ethnickes Who will not hēceforward now if he be so remayne still an Ethnicke Subiects if they be Ethnickes cannot be absolued frō their obedience to their Kinges but Christian Subiects may Who would not then haue his subiects Ethnickes rather then Christians Who would be a Christian King 27. You neyther speake warily nor Christianlike Not warily for first what you haue sayd may be thus retorted vpon you Yf the King of England should haue power to depose Bishops which you affirme then were the Bishop in Spayne France and Poland better in condition then the Bishops of England For that heere they may be deposed at the Kings pleasure and there not Secondly for as we say that Christian Princes may be deposed by the Pope if they offend not Ethnicks so do you likewise confesse that Christian Princes may be excommunicated and not Ethnicks Yet is it not wel inferred of this your Doctrine that Ethnickes are better in condition then Christians seing that it is a greater euill to be depriued of the spirituall goods of the Church by excommunication thē of a temporall Kingdome by deposition And therefore can that be much lesse inferred out of our opinion 28. You speake not Christianlike For it is not a Christian mans part thus to dispute The offences of Kinges are punnished amongst Christians but not amongst Ethnickes Ergo I had rather be an Ethnick Prince where I may not be punnished if I offend then a Christian Prince where I shall be punnished if I doe offend Thus truly you dispute If say you Christian Kinges when they deserue it may be deposed and Ethnicks although they do offend cannot be deposed I had rather be an Ethnicke King then a Christian. And so truly you playnly shew that you more esteeme a temporall Kingdome which you would not loose then a heauenly Kingdome which you doe not greatly care for The eight Paradoxe 29. YF the Pope say you will haue a Temporal Kingdome it were to be perswaded that he went to the Diuell for it seing that he hath power to dispose of the Kingdomes of this world For thus yow write pag. 36. Quod si Pontifici animus est ad regna mundi est in Euangelio memini mentio de quodam qui regna mundi penes se esse eaue disponendi ius habere se dixit Eum adeat censeo cum illo transigat And if the Pope haue a mynd to a temporall kingdome there is mention in the Ghospel I remember of a certayne fellow to wit the Diuell who sayd that all the kingdomes of the world were in his power that he had right to dispose of them I thinke it best he go vnto him and couenant with him c. 30. Say my friend speake you this in iest or in earnest In whether manner you doe it you eyther become iniurious to your own
King or els contumelious to the Pope neyther whereof doth well beseeme you The iniury you offer to your King yow cannot deny For durst you without iniury haue answered your king eyther in iest or earnest when as after the death of Queene Elizabeth he demaunded the Crowne of England with these words If you will raigne in England go to the Diuell and couenant with him who is the distributer of all Kingdomes I thinke you durst not For if you had then farewell Chaplaineship Wherfore then dare you be so saucy to speake thus to the Pope but for that you list to raile vpon him 31. But you will say the Pope seekes a temporall Kingdome which is not due vnto him Let him cōtent himselfe with a spirituall Kingdome But what if in like manner I should say of your King He seeks a spirituall Kingdome Let him content himselfe with a temporall Moreouer I adde that the Pope hath far more right to temporal Kingdomes then you King hath to the Church which thing I am to declare more largely in another place The ninth Paradoxe 32. YOv say that power to excommunicate was not giuē vnto S. Peter but vnto the Church to wit by those wordes Dic Ecclesiae c. Tell the Church and if he will not heare the Church let him be to thee as an Ethnicke As also by those other wordes Quaecumque solueris c. Whatsoeuer you shall loose vpon earth shall be loosed in heauen and whatsoeuer you bynd vpon earth shal be bound in heauen c. And yet notwithstanding you adde that the Church may transferre this power to whome she please For thus you write pag. 14. of your booke Potestas haec ibi cui data Non Apostolo Petro. This power there to whome was it giuen Not to Peter the Apostle And againe Vt autem Petro potestas ibi non data censuram hanc vsurpandi ita nec Petro si vsurparet ratihabitio promissa Dicitur enim Quoscumque ligaueritis Non Petro igitur vel Papae sed Ecclesiae And as power was not there giuen to Peter to vse this censure so neyther if he had vsed it was the ratihabition or approuing thereof promised to Peter For it is said Whomesoeuer ye shall bind therfore it was not giuen to Peter or to the Pope but to the Church And yet againe pag. 42. Res ipsa rei ipsius promissio ratihabitio vsus denique Ecclesiae datur ab Ecclesia habetur transfertur in vnum siue plures qui eius pòst vel exercendae vel denunciandae facultatem habeant The thing it selfe the promise of the thing it selfe the approuing of it yea the vse therof is giuen to the Church From the Church it is both had and transferred to one or more who shall afterward haue the faculty to exercise or denounce the same 33. Out of this your Doctrine it followeth first that in the time of the Apostles power to excommunicate was immediatly giuen to the Church of the Corinthians and from thence transferred to S. Paul the Apostle that he might exercise and publikely denounce the same vpon the incestuous person But this very point you openly deny in the same place in these wordes Paulus congregatis Corinthijs potestatem censurae denunciandae facit Paul hauing gathered togeather the Corinthians giues power to denounce the Censure Certes if S. Paul giue power to the Congregation or Church of Corinth to denounce the Censure vpon the incestuous person as heere you affirme how had he then receaued the selfe same power from the same Church Or what necessity was there I pray yow to giue that power to the Church if the Church had receaued it before from Christ by those words Dic Ecclesiae tell the Church These things do not agree togeather 34. Secondly it followeth that now at this present in England the power to excommunicate is immediately in the English Church and not in the Bishops and from the Church the same may be transferred to Bishops But if it be so why doth not the Church of England giue this power to the King her Head and Primate Why doth she rather giue it to the Bishopes then to the King when as the Bishops are subordinate vnto the King in spirituall Iurisdiction as you will needs haue it And is it not an absurd thing that you to wit the Church of England should giue power to the Bishops to excommunicate and cast out of the Church their King their Head their Pastor and their Primate and yet would not giue the same power to the King to inflict the same Censures vpon his subiects to wit the Bishops Surely you are eyther very cruell towardes your King or els you do not seriously and in good earnest giue him the Supremacy One of the two must needs follow Therfore looke well with what spirit you wrote these wordes following in the 151. pag. of your booke Nos Principi Censurae potestatem non facimus We do not giue power to our King to exercise Censures vpon vs. And wherfore do ye not if you truly acknowledg him for your Pastour Primate But let vs go forward The tenth Paradoxe 35. YOv say that the Prophesy of the reuelation of Antichrist is already fulfilled and therefore it is so cleere that it may be seene with the eyes For thus you write pag. 186. Minimè verò mirum si ista quae dixi tam vel claram vel certam in scripturis Patrum interpretationem non habeant signatus adhuc liber huius Prophetiae erat It is no meruayle if these things which I haue sayd be neyther cleere nor certayne in the writinges of the Fathers For as yet the booke of this Prophesy was not vnsealed c. And a little after say you Mirari tamen non debeat quis si non illis tam adeo explicita omnia fuerint quà m Nobis per Dei gratiam iam sunt qui consummatam iam Prophetiam illam quotidie oculis vsurpamus But yet let no man meruayle if all thinges were not then so vnfoulded vnto them as now by Gods grace they be to vs who dayly see with our eyes that prophesy to wit of Antichrist to be already fulfilled c. 36. And is it so indeed But your King thinketh the contrary For that in his Premonition he playnely auerreth that That Prophesy of Antichrist is yet obscure and intricate and that by only coniectures it may be disputed of His wordes are these Sanè quod ad definitionem Antichristi nolo rem tam obscuram inuolutam tamquam omnibus Christianis ad credendum necessariam vrgere As for the definition of Antichrist I will not vrge so obscure a point as a matter of faith to be necessarily beleeued of all Christians c. And shall we thinke that that which is obscure and intricate to your King is dayly manifest to you No It followeth in the Kings words Id autem maximè mihi in votis est vt si cui
your cerimonies or the publike vse therof who when he was first Crowned in Scotland and after in England did most solemnely sweare to God in both places to mantaine in his Dominions that forme of Religion and no other which was then receaued publikely in his Kingdomes and established by the lawes of both Realmes c 42. Truly I perceaue you threaten your King that he shall be accompted periured if he permit the Catholicke Religion in his Kingdome or forsake his owne imbrace another What do you not thinke it lawfull for him to change his Religion if he haue sworne he will not do it So it seemes belike But how if the Religion be false which he hath sworne to mantaine What shall he then do Shall he persist rather in his false Religion then breake his oath Take heed what you say An oath say the Lawiers is no band of iniquity and I may adde nor of falsity And therfore notwithstanding an oath neuer so often made a man may change his Religion if it be false he may annull his pact or couenant if it be vniust This is most certaine What would you do if your King should say that the Religiō is false which he now professeth Would you vrge him vpon his oath That in an euill act is annulled What Would you persuade him to forsake his false Religion imbrace the true I thinke you would Why do you then dissemble Why do you so much vrge the King vpon his oath as though vpon no occasion or euent soeuer it were lawfull to chang a Religion that is once confirmed by an oath although it be impious and false Go too gather your wittes togeather a little better and then speake 43. One thing I would yet demaund of you and that is this Your King in his booke of Premonition doth exhort Catholicke Kings and Princes that they should forsake the faith and Religion which hitherto they haue professed vnder the Pope and imbrace the English Religion which the King professeth Now it is well knowne that most of these Princes in their Coronation do sweare that they will neuer do it to wit change their Religion Heere I demaund I say whether your King hath lawfully and prudently exhorted them to do it or no If he hath done it lawfully and prudently why do you accuse the Catholickes who do but the like in a better cause If he did it vnlawfully and imprudently why did you not admonish him to surcease from such an Exhortation seeing yow are his Chaplaine and perhaps in this matter his Secretary Thus you stumble at euery blocke The thirtenth Paradoxe 44. YOv say that Cardinall Bellarmine is a Vow-breaker because of a Iesuite he is become a Cardinall For thus you write pag. 56. At votum non video cur à Mattheaeo Torto nominari debuit nisi si interposita voti mentione Domino suo Bellarmino gratificari voluit quo olim Iesuita factus voti se reum fecit hoc votum iam fregit postquam ostrum induit But I do not see how it can be called a vow by Matthew Tortus vnlesse in mentioning of the same he would needes gratify his Maister Bellarmine who being somtime a vowed Iesuite hath now broken that vow by putting on purple c. 45. It seemes you vnderstand aswell what it is to be a Vow-breaker as a periured person And euen as a little before you did pronounce your King to be forsworne if he should admit Catholicke Religion in his Kingdome So now you pronounce Cardinall Bellarmine to be a Vow-breaker because against his will he admitted the Dignity of a Cardinal Truly you are very ready to vpbraid and taunt And why I pray you doe you not call Luther a Vow-breaker who of a Monke became a married man if he may be called a married man and not rather a sacrilegious fornicator and adulterer Why not also a periured person that reiecting the ancient faith which he had receyued from Christ the Apostles and his Ancestours most holy and learned men and sealed with an oath did imbrace a new Religion repugnant to Christ and the truth 46. That you may therefore vnderstand the matter heare then what followeth It is one thing to vow or promise to God any thing absolutely and simply and another thing to doe it with a certayne limitation He that voweth after the first manner is bound to performe that which he promiseth he that voweth after the second māner may be quit of his band when the limitation therof doth suffer the same Exāples herof we haue in the old Testamēt For the Daughters Wiues did vse to vow with this limitation to wit if their Parents and Husbāds did consent therto Numb 30. The Nazaraeans in like manner vowed with this limitation to wit they bound themselues for a certaine time only not for their whole life Numb 6. So likewise doe we in our SOCIETY He that bindeth himself by a simple vow is not thought to be otherwise obliged thē at the arbitrement of his Superiours So as if he should be by them for a iust cause dismissed out of the SOCIETY the band or obligation ceaseth But he that bindeth himselfe by a solemne vow dependeth on the arbitrement of the Pope who may take him from the SOCIETY and place him in any other Degree or Dignity And what new thing is this now I pray you The like is dayly exercised amongst you You promise your King Allegiance and Obedience but with this double limitatiō First as long as you remaine in England Secondly as long as the King doth not chang his Religion For if it be otherwise you thinke you are not bound thereunto The fourteenth Paradoxe 47. YOV say the Catholickes teach fidelity not to be kept and falshood to be lawfull For thus you write pag. 156. of your booke Vos qui fidem non seruandam id est perfidiam licitam legitimamque docetis etiámne vos quicquam de perfidia audetis hiscere in turpitudinem vestram etiam vel nomen nominare You that teach fidelity not to be kept that is to say falshood to lawfull dare you I say as much as once open your lippes against falshood or perfidiousnes or to name the thing to your owne shame 48. But stay my friend who be they with vs that teach this doctrine If your set purpose be nothing els but to deale falsely and to calūniate it is no great meruaile if you write thus For be it spoken with your good leaue this is a loudlye and a manifest calumniation But if you be desirous of truth as it becommed you to haue byn why did you not examine the matter first before you wrote it downe No doubt but you should haue found another kind of doctrine amongst Catholicks And if you yet please you may see what I haue formerly written of this argument in my Disputation Of keeping faith or promise to Heretickes and in my Sundry mixt Questions of the same matter
the other side that which you bring of Gentile and Idolatrous Kinges I do not see what force it may haue For that those three Kinges which you mention were by your owne confession eyther Primates of the Church of God or they were not I hope you will not say that they were because yow affirme the contrary more then once in your Tortura and that worthily to wit that they who be out of the Church of God cannot be Princes and Rulers in the same Church Yf they were not Primates of the Church as certes they were not how then will you proue by this their example that the King of England is head or Primate of the Church This only you may conclude that as the Iewes durst not go forth of Egypt to sacrifice to God without King Pharao his leaue who had brought them into cruell bondage vnder his yoke So in like manner the Catholickes that liue in England dare not go out to other Catholicke Countries where they may receiue the holy Eucharist after the Catholick manner without King Iames his leaue who will not suffer them so to do without his licence vnder payne of death or imprisonmēt And the like may be said of the other two Idolatrous Kings But what is this to the Primacy of the Church I should rather thinke it belonged to tyrāny or impiety The Conclusion to the Chaplayne 30. YOvv haue heere briefly what I haue thought concerning your Booke which you haue written in defence of your King You haue heere I say these three pointes First that you haue oftentimes handled the matter not so much in Argument as in raylings or exprobrations Secondly that you haue defyled euery thing with Paradoxes and false opinions Thirdly that you haue rather ouerthrowne then established the Kings Primacy which you sought to fortify and all these things haue you done through a certayne desire you haue to flatter the King Therefore if you shall represse this your desire and behould the onely truth of the thing it selfe it will be very easy for you to amend your former faultes which I altogeather counsell you to doe And if you set God before your eyes who is the first and principall verity you will doe it AN APPENDIX Of the Comparison betweene a King and a Bishop IN your booke you do so compare a King and a Bishop togeather that you manifestly depresse the Authority of the one and extoll the Dignity higher then is sitting of the other And therefore what others haue thought before you concerning this point I will briefly lay before your eyes that you may choose whether changing your opinion you will stand to their iudgmentes or els retayning it still persist in your errour Thus then haue others thought and taught before you Num. 27. 21. Pro Iosue si quid agendum erit c. Yf for Iosue any thing be to be done let Eleazar the Priest consult with the Lord. At his word to wit Eleazars shall he goe out and go in and with him all the sonns of Israel and the rest of the multitude c. So as heere the secular Prince is commanded to do his affaires at the descretion of the Priest Deuter. 17. 12. Qui superbierit c. He that shall be proud refusing to obay the commandement of the Priest who at that time ministreth to our Lord thy God c. that man shall dye and thou shalt take away the euill out of Israel c. 1. Reg. 22. 27. Ait Rex Saul Emissarijs c. King Saul said to his Seruants that stood about him Turne your selues and kill the Priests of the Lord c. And the Kings seruants would not extend their hands vpō the Priests of the Lord. So as they made greater esteeme of the Priests authority then of their Kings commandement 4. Reg. 11. 9. Fecerunt Centuriones iuxta omnia c. And the Centurions did according to all things that Ioida the Priest had commaūded them and euery one taking their men c. came to Ioida the Priest c. And he brought forth the Kings sonne and put vpon him the diademe and the couenant c. And Ioida commanded the Centurions and said to them Bring forth Athalia the Queene without the precincts of the Temple and whosoeuer shall follow her let him be stroken with the sword c. 2. Paralip 19. 11. Amarias Sacerdos Pontifex vester c. Amarias the Priest and your Bishop shall be chiefe in those things which pertayne to God Moreouer Zabadias the sonne of Ismael who is the Prince of the house of Iuda shal be ouer those works which pertaine to the Kings office c. 2. Paralip 26. 16. Cùm rob oratus esset c. When Ozias the King was strengthened his hart was eleuated to his destruction c. and entring into the temple of our Lord he would burne incense vpon the altar of incense And presently Azarias the Priest entring in after him and with him the Priests of our Lord c. they resisted the King and said It is not thy office Ozias to burne incense to our Lord but the Priests c. Get thee out of the Sanctuary contemne not because this thing shall not be reputed vnto thee for the glory of our Lord God And Ozias being angry c. threatned the Priests And forthwith there arose a leprosy in his forehead before the Priests c. and in hast they thrust him out c. Ioan. 21. 32. Feede my sheepe c. Matth. 16. 19. To thee will I giue the Keyes of the Kingdome of heauen c. Act. 20. 28. The holy Ghost hath placed Bishops not secular Kings to gouerne the Church of God c. 1. Cor. 4. 1. So let a man esteeme vs as the ministers of Christ and the dispensers of the mysteries of God c. 2. Cor. 5. 20. We are Legates for Christ c. S. Gregory Nazianzen writing to the Emperours of Constantinople apud Gratian. dist 10. can 7. saith Libenter accipitis c. You do willingly heare that the law of Christ doth subiect you to Priestly power For he hath giuen vs that power yea he hath giuen vs a Principality much more perfect then that of yours c. S. Gregory the Pope writing to Hermannus Bishop of Metz dist 96. can 6. saith Quis dubitat c. Who doubteth but that the Priests of Christ are to be accompted the Fathers and maisters of Kinges and princes Ioan. Papa dist 96. can 11. Si Imperator Catholicus est c. If the Emperour be a Catholike he is a Sonne and not a Prelate of the Church What belongeth to Religion he ought to learne and not to teach And then againe afterwards Imperatores c. Christian Emperours and Kings ought to submit their imployments vnto Ecclesiasticall Prelates and not preferre them Innocentius 3. in decret de maior obed can 6. Non negamus c. We deny not but that the Emperour doth excell in temporall things but the Pope excelleth in spirituall which are so much the more worthy then temporall by how much the soule is preferred before the body c. Hosius Bishop of Corduba in Spaine to the Emperour Constantius sayth Desine quaeso Imperator c. Giue ouer I beseech you o Emperour do not busy your selfe in Ecclesiasticall affaires nor in such things do not teach vs but rather learne of vs. To yow hath God committed the rule of the Kingdome but vnto vs hath he deliuered the affaires of his Church c. S. Ambrose in his 33. Epistle to his Sister Marcellina writeth that he had sayd to the Emperour Valentinian Noli te grauare Imperator c. Do not trouble your selfe o Emperour to thinke that you haue any Imperiall right in those thinges which are diuine To the Emperour do pallaces belong but Churches pertaine vnto Priests c. Valentinianus the Emperour said Mihi qui vnus è numero laicorum c. It is not lawfull for me that am but one of the number of laymen to interpose my self in such businesses to wit Ecclesiasticall Let Priests and Bishops meet about these things wheresoeuer it shall please them to whome the care of such affaires belong c. This is related by Zozomenus lib 6. hist. c. 7. and by Nicephorus lib. 11. cap. 33. by Ruffinus lib 1. cap. 2. Eleanor Queene of Englād in an Epistle she wrote to Pope Celestine hath these wordes Non Rex non Imperator à iugo vestrae Iurisdictionis eximitur Neyther King nor Emperour is exempted from the yoke of your Iurisdiction or power More of this matter in another place FINIS Faultes escaped in the Printing Pag. 7. lin vlt. in some copies dele is 17. lin 7. shall read shalt 19. lin 21. to write read to wit 36. lin 4. in some copies Mattheaeo read Matthaeo 38. lin 8. to lawfull read to be lawfull 40. lin 7. in some copies you read yours 57. lin 15. in some copies the read he 58. lin 1◠in some copies this read his LAVS DEO