about the Pope to whom or time when this regality was first graunted Marke good reader him selfe before affirmed that King Pipin gaue vp the gouernement pag. 12. 13. of Italie into Pope Steeuens hands and that this truth is apparant by the testemony of many renowmed Bel denieth vvhat him selfe saieth cannot be denied Onuphr in chron Nauclerus general 25. An. 750. Claudius Parad. des alliances Genealogiques Ado Regino Sigebert in chron Blond Dec. 1 l. 10. Mag deburgens cent 8. c. 10. Leo Ostien lib. 1. chron c. 9. Onuph sup Cronographes and can not be denied and now in the next page denieth both the fact and contestation of historiographers What wil he not deny who denieth that which him selfe saith can not be denied 15. The truth is that Pipin gaue not the exarchate to Greg. 3 who died in the yeare 741 or as other write 740 fourteene yeares before Pipins entrance into Italie neither was Pipin then a King but made afterward by Zachary successor to Gregory as Bel testifieth page 19. but to Pope Steeuen 2. as is apparant to vse Bels words by the testimony of many renowmed Cronographers though some cal him Steeuen 3. because they reckon his predecessour whom others omit because he liued but foure daies likewise al writers agree that Lewes pius confirmed the donation of his grandfather Pipin Apud Gratian dist 63. can ego Ludouicus Leo Ostien lib. 3. chron c. 48. vnto Paschal 1. and his name is in the donation as also that Countesse Maud gaue Liguria and Tuscia vnto Gregory the seauenth 16. And Bels prouing the historiographers Bel pag. 13. to disagree because Blondus and Platina saith he write that Pipin gaue the exarchate to Gregory the third Regino referreth it to Steeuen and Sigebert saith Pipin had Italy in his owne possession in the yeare 801. is like the rest of his proceedings For that of Platina is a manifest vntruth for he saith Platina in Stephan 2. Naucler general 26. Palmerius in chronic Claud. Paradi in Pepin paragr 6. 7. 8. 9. Pipin gaue the exarchate in Pope Steeuen the second his time and Sigebert meaneth not of King Pipin the giuer of the exarchate who died 768 but of his grandchild sonne to Carolus Magnus and how his possession of Italy doth not preiudicate the Pope is before explicated Regino saith that which is truth for best authors agree that Pipin gaue the exarchate in the yeare 755. at What time Steeuen 2. al. 3. was Pope 17. But suppose writers did not agree about the Pope to whome and time when Pipin made his guift of the exarchate must we therefore needs deny the guift in which they al agree So wee might deny that Christ Was borne because writers agree not about the time is it not vsual for historiographers to agree in the substance of the narration and yet differ in some circumstance of the person or time 18. Last of al least we should thinke the Grecian Emperors acknowledged Charles made by the Pope to be true Emperour Bel pag. 14. Sigebert An. 805. he telleth vs out of Sigebert that they had indignation against Charles and therefore he with often Embassages procured their friendshipes yea Blandus and Platina saith he affirme constantlie that Charles agreed with Irene and afterward with Niccphoras that with their fauors the might rule ouer the west Behould the drift of Bel to make vs thinke that Charles became Emperour not by creation of the Pope but by graunt of Grecian Emperors so loath he is to confesse the Pope had so great authority aboue 800. years agoe Wherein the silly foole ouerthroweth what he before said For if the Pope did not translate the Empire then was it no steppe to his tiranny as he imagineth 19. But let vs heare how he proueth that the Grecian Emperours did not achnowledge Charles the great for true Emperour first forsooth because Sigebert saith they had indignation against Charles what then are neuer Emperours offended for any thing lawfullie done especiallie if they thinke it preiudice their estate dignity and albeit Sigebert affirme that some Grecian Emperours who them selues came vnlawfullie and by tiranny to the Empire and that after Charles was crowned Emperour had indignation against Charles yet none write that Irene who was the only lawful Empresse at that time when Charles was created was offended with his creation but rather content as may be gathered by hir purpose which as Zonoras and Cedrenus write she had to marry him Yea Nauclerus saith she was deposed for Naucler general 28. the fauor she bore to Charles besides the indignation of those Emperours vz. Nicephorus Michael and Leo was not so much for the Imperial dignity taken by Charles as because as writeth Eginhart Charles Eginhart in vita Caroli his secretary they greatlie suspected least he should take the Empire from them which they might iustlie feare because by tirany and deposition of their predecessors they had gotten it and yet notwithstanding their indignation of their owne accord they sent Embassadours to Charles and made league and friendshippe with him as the same Eginhart Ado and others testifie Yea the Magdeburgians adde that the Grecians in a manner consented to Charles his Empire 20. His other proofe out of Platina containeth an vntruth for Platina writeth that Platina in Ieone 3. Charles being made Emperour Irene sent Embassadours to make peace and league with him to deuide Italie betwixt them which league Nicephorus renued but he hath no word of Charles his ruling the west with their fouours more then of their ruling the East with his And the like saith Blondus Blond Dec. 2. l. 1. Bel pag. 14. 21. The seauenth steppe saith Bel was the constitution of the seauen Princes electors of the future Emperour by Pope Gregory 5. by the fauour and free graunt af Otho then Emperour But this was rather an act of superiority in the Pope ouer Emperours then a steppe vntil it And seing this constitution hath euer since bene inuiolablie obserued and the Emperours so elected accompted as true Emperours throughout al Christendome a signe it is that Christians thinke the Pope hath authority to appoint Electors who may choose what Emperour they please by the authority giuen them from the Pope Wherfore I would Bel answered me this dilemma The seauen Electors haue authority to choose an Emperour or not If they haue then the Pope who gaue them that authority had the same because none can giue what he hath not him selfe if not Bel deposeth at once more Emperours and Princes then al Popes haue done 22. The eight and highest steppe of this ladder Bel pag. 15. saith Bel dâ—d reach vp euen to the highest heauen and to the verie throne of our lord Iesus here is a great cry now let vs see quid dignum tanto fert hic promissor hiatâ— because saiâ—h he Extrauag Bonif. 8. vtiam sanctam de maioritate obedientia vntruth
Controuersies handled in this booke 1. Of the Popes supremacie Article 1. through out 2. Of the real presence of Christ in the Sacrament of the Alter Article 2. chap. 1. 2. 3. Of the Sacrifice of Masse Art 2. chap. 3. 4. 5. 6. 4. Of the Popes dispensations Article 3. through out 5. Of Original sinne concupiscence Article 4. through out 6. Of merit of good workes Art 8. through out 7. Of the distinction of mortal and venial sinns Art 6. through out 8. Of the sufficiencie of the holy Scripture Art 7. cap. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 9. Of the difficultie of Scripture Ibid. chap. 6. 10. Of the vulgar peoples reading of scripture in vulgar tonges Ibid. c. 7. 11. Of the translating of holy Scripture into vulgar tonges Ibid. c. 8. 12. Of Traditions Art 7. chap. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Of the authority of late general counsayles ibid. chap. 13. 14. Of the oathes of Bishops Ibid. chap. 14. 15. Of the possibility of keeping Gods commandments Art 8. through out TO THE MOST HIGHE AND MIGHTIE PRINCE IAMES By the grace of God King of great Britanie France and Ireland Defendor of the Faith YF S. Paul Most Gratious Soueraigne being accused of the whole Synagog of the Iewes by their Orator Tertullus of diuers heynous crimes both against Gods and the Princes lawes found notwithstanding such equitie in the heathen President Festus as that he answered his aduersaries that it was not the Romans custome to coÌ„demne Act. 2â— any man before he haue his accusers present and place to make his answer and also such fauour at the The like reporteth Plutarch of K. Alexan. the great Act. 26. Iewish King Agrippa his hands as he both licenced him to speake for him selfe afforded him fauorable audience Much more cause haue your Maiesties Catholique Subiects being accused of the ministers by a hyred spokesman Bel to expect the like yea greater fauor equitie at your Graces handes For if the Romans though Heathens thought it iniustice to condemne any particular man at the clamors of a whole nation before his accusers were present and his defence were heard And if King Agrippa albeit He killed S. Iames and emprisoned S. Peter Act. 12. a Iew persecutor of Christians deemed it notwithstanding a Princes part to geueÌ„ audience to one accused of that Religion which he both hated and persecuted How much more wil a Christian Prince forbeare to condemne the vniuersal cause of his Catholique subiects at the slaunders and outcries of ministers one hyred Proctor before their accusers be brought face to face and they haue time and place graunted to answer for them selues wherein we shal account our selues more happy then S. Paul because we shal plead our cause not before a Iewish but a Christian King such a one as better knowerh the questions and customes of the Christians then King Agrippa did of the Iewes VVherfore seeing that of late Thomas Bel a fugitiue once from Protestants religion as he is now from Catholiques hath not only accused but also malitiously slaÌ„dered the vniuersal Catholique cause in a booke which he hath dedicated to your Maiestie termed it the Dovvnefall of Poperie and withal challengeth dareth yea adiureth in which case our B. Sauiour Matth. 26. though with danger of his life made answer al English Iesuits Seminary Priests and as he speaketh Iesuited Papists to answer him I haue presumed vpon your Gratious fauour to accept his chaleng and am ready to performe it hand to hand if your Maiestie graunt licence and in the meane time to dedicate to your Name this my confutation of his arguments and slaunders VVherin I speake not for my selfe as S. Paul did before King Agrippa but for the religion of your owne Progenitors and Predecessors for the faith of our Forefathers for the cause of al Catholiques and for the good I dare say of your Maiesties owne person kingdoms For though Bel calumniate Christian Kinges and pag. 17. Emperors with opening the window to al Antichristian tyranny and Catholiques generally with thinking p. 1. 22. Christ to be killed a thousand times a day and the like yet especially he slandereth the Popes with vsurping power proper to God and to depose Princes and dispose of their kingdomes at his pleasure therby to alienate your mind from the Sea Apostolike wherin he not onely abuseth your patieÌ„ce with telling you vntruths but greatly harmeth and endamageth your selfe and Realme by endeuoring through Vir Apostata prauo corde machinatur maluÌ„ omni tempore iurgia Seminat â—ouer c. 6. his false slanders to auert your minde from the Popes who haue bene the most ancient most assured and most beneficial frends which the Kinges Realme of England euer had VVhich thing that I may make manifest vnto your Grace I humbly beseech you geue me leaue to set downe some praticular examples of the mutual amitie kind offices benifites which haue euer bene betwixt the Popes and the Princes of this land VVherein if I be somewhat longer then men in Epistles The loue benefits of Popes to England and Kings therof S. Peter P. vse to be I hope that the varietie and profit of the matter wil make requital Not long after the Apostolike Seat was settled in Rome S. Peter the first Pope about the 63. yeare of Christ came hither as not only Gretians but Metaphrast tract de Pet. Paul apud Lippoman Cambden in descrip Britanâ—â— p. 52. And Nicephor as he saieth Protestants also confesse stayed here a long time conuerted many Nations to Christs faith erected Churches ordered Bishops and Priests and being admonished of an Angel returned from hence to Rome to suffer Martyrdome Neither was this loue to our Countrie extinguished by death but as he promised to some so he had it 2. Pet. 1. also in mind after his death and miraculously assisted it in the greatest distresses So that truly wrote S. Sergius Malmesbur lib. 1. Pont. Angl. p. 209. 1. Pope vnto our Kings of England almost a thousand yeares agoe that S. Peter was mindful of them Pope Alexander 3. to King Henry 2. â—ugubin de donat CoÌ„st that England was vnder S. Peters protection euer since Christs name was glorified there For when our country about the yeare 611. began to Apostatate from the faith of Christ and the Bishops were determined to forsake the land S. Perer appearing to Sainct Laurence Arch-bishop of Canturbury did seuerly rebuke and scourge him because he would abandon the flocke which I said S. Peter coÌ„mitted vnto thee This miracle is so certaine as some ProtestaÌ„ts confesse it though Gadvvin in the life of S. Laurence some others wil not beleue it because they haue neither seene nor put their singers into S. Laurence his wounds yet it may suffice any indifferent man that it was auouched by S. Laurence beleeued by King Edbald his people lib. 2. hist
c. 6. Malmesb. lib. 1. Reg. lib. 2. Pont. Huntingt l. 3. Marian. A. 693. al. 617. VVestman 616. who thereupon returned to the Chaistian faith recorded by S. Beda aboue eight huÌ„dred yeares agoe who wrote nothing but what he knew him selfe or receaued from credible men whose history was approued by the King of his dayes by the Protestants Godvvin in life of Tatvvin Cambd. in Britania p. 12. now and finallie it is contested deliuered by our best Chroniclers Not long before when the King had built a Monasterie and Church in honor of S. Peter where now westminster standeth S. Peter came from heauen and consecrated as by miracle he confirmed the same church promising that there he would heare the prayers of the faithful VVherupoÌ„ King Edward Conss reedified that church of new chose it for the place of his sepulture whom the most of his successors haue imitated and bene there also crowned Authors of this are Abbat Ealred Malmesburiensis In vit S. Eduardi Malmesbur l. 1. de Pont. See Sauil ep ad Reg. Elizab ante Malmesbur Epist ad Eduard R. apud Sur. Baron An. 610. a man highlie esteemed of Protestants P. Nicolas 2. and others In like maner when England was sore oppressed by the Danes S. Peter was seene of Brithwald a holie B of winchester in a vision to anoint S. Edward Conss King of England and to foretel the yeares of his raigne and the end of the Danish fury adding withal these most comfortable words The kingdome of England is the kingdome of Loc. cit Malmesb lib. 2. reg cap. 13. p. 91. lib. 8. histor Angl. God This testifie the foresaid Ealred Malmesbury Polidor and others If ProtestaÌ„ts obiect against my Authors that they were Papists I must confesse but to their shame that I finde no protestaÌ„t writer before K. Henry 8. his time yet such papists they are as protestants account some of them the singular Cambden in Britan. p. 12. in Durham Stovv A-726 Bel in dovvnefal p. 54. of S Beda Sauil of Masmesbur Hunting and Hoveden epist. ante Malmesbur ornameÌ„ts of England especial friends of truth and renowmed through Christendom for vertue and learning and others they cal faithful recorders of things done good and diligent Authors and most true guides of the times past Such also they are as wrote long before protestants were therefore not vpon any splene against them and finallie such they are as vpon their authority principallie dependeth al the credit of our English Chronicles Others perhaps wil say that the foresaid histories are not in scripture True nor almost any thing els in al our Chronicles Shal we therefote beleue nothing but what God reporteth I request no more but that the foresaid matters be as wel credited as other things are which the same Authors report This affection and loue towards England was not proper to S. Peter alone but descended vnto his successors For when the sweet sound of the Ghospel first preached here by him had so increased as it came to the eares of Lucius then King of this land he sending to Rome for preachers P. Eleutherius about the yeare 156. sent P. Eleutherius A. 156. S. Beda lib. 1. c. 4. Martyr Rom. 26. Ado Marian in chronic VVestmon A. 188. Stovv 179. hither S. Fugatius and S. Damian who baptized the King Queene and almost al his people VVhereby our Country became the first that publikely professed the faith of Christ and there vpon is called Primogenita Ecclesiae The like charitable office performed also P. Victor vnto Scotland P. Victor 203. Boet. lib. 6. histor Scot. Genebr chron in Victore about the yeare 203. sending thither his legates at the request of King Donaldus who conuerted the King together with the Q. and nobility And about the yeare 324. Pope Siluester P. Siluester 324. Constant in edicto Menolag Graecor cal Ion. Huntingt l. 1. hist p. 306. Acta liberij vita Siluestri hauing perfectlie instructed our great Emperor Constantin baptized him and miraculouslie cured him of his leprosie as the said Emp. and many others testifie Afterward when the Christian faith in Britany began to be infected with heresie P. Celestin about P. Celestin A. 432. Prosper in chron An. 432. Baron 429. Prosper An. 434. Beda l. 1. c. 13. Plat. in Celestino Baron Ann. 429. Cambden in Hibernia Marian. in chron Cambd. in Hibern the yeare 432. sent hither S. S. German and Lupus for to expel and confute the heresies which they accoÌ„plished And the same P. in the yeare 434. consecrated Palladius a Bishop and sent him to Scotland where as yet was no B not forgetful of Ireland sent thither S. Patrick who with miracles coÌ„uerted the Iland deserued saith Cambdin the title of Apostle thereof Thus coÌ„tinued the loue of the Sea Apostolicke towards our CouÌ„trey al the time that the BritoÌ„s possessed it But towards our English nation after they had conquered this Iland Beda lib. 1. â— 22. it was far greater For whereas not only the Britons refused but the French also and other Christian nations Gregor lib. 5. epist 58. 59. Gadvvin us life of S. Austin neglected to preach vnto our English aunciters who euer vntil that time had bene Pagans bondslaues saith S. Beda of Idols only Rome lib. 2. c. 1. put forth hir helping hand to draw theÌ„ out of that darcknes miserie of Infidelity For no sooner that blessed holie father S. Gregory as Gadwin P. Gregory An. 596. loc cit calleth him vnderstood that the Angles or English whom for their bewtie and his tender affection he called Angels were Pagans but forthwith he Beda lib. 2. c. 1. Malmesb. l. 1. Reg. went to the P being him selfe yet a monke and desired him to send Preachers into England and offering him selfe to be one And obtaining Ioan. Diâ—â— in vit Gregor licence came on his voyadge towards England three daies Iourney but was recalled at the importunity of the Romanes who were vnwilling to forgoe soe worthie a man neuertheles he forgot not his holie enterprise For as soone saith S. Beda l. 1. cap. 1. as he was high Bishop ouer the vvhole vvorlde he made our nation the Church of Christ vvhich had bene euer vntil that time the bondslaue of Idols And in the yeare 596. Beda sup Stovv An. 596. Godvvin sup sent hither S. Augustin with almost forty Moncks more to preach who being receaued of K Ethelbert in short time conuerted both him his CouÌ„try And that they preached the true faith and religion of Christ appeared by the miracles they wrought in testimony thereof which were so great and many as it seemed saith S. Gregory lib. 7. epist 30. that they imitated the vertues of the Apostles by the miracles they wrought and are withal so certaine as they are not only testified by the said S. Gregory lib. 9. ep 56.
In the yeare 1160. P. Adrian 4. gaue vnto King P. Adrian 4. 1160. Stovv An. 1160. Henrie 2. the dominion and regiment of Ireland and sent vnto him the Bul of his graunt with a ring of golde in VVestmon token of the inuestiture which grauÌ„t at the request of the said K. P. Alexander 3. P. Alexander 3. An. 1171. Houeden p. 1. Annal. p. 528. Polid. lib. 13. P. Lucius 3. 1185. Houed p. 2. p. 628. coÌ„firmed to him his heyres And as for P. Lucius 3. successor to the said Alexander his good wil appeareth by the great praise which he giueth to our English kings whom he writeth to haue far exceeded the rest of ChristiaÌ„ Princes in warlike prowes and noblenes of minde VVhich affection continued also in his successor P. Vrban 3. of whom as Houeden P. Vrban 3. An. 1185. part 2. p. 631. writeth K Henry 2. obtained many things whereof one was that he might crowne which of his sonnes he would of the kingdome of Ireland which he Stovv Ann. 1185. confirmed by a bul and in token of his good wil confirmation sent to him a crowne And lastlie P. Clement the P. Clement 3. An. 1189. Hovved p. 2. pag. 652. VVestmonast A. 1189. third in the yeare 1189. when not only the French king but also his sonnes and Nobles had conspired against the said K inuaded his dominions with a far greater power then he was able to resist sent a Cardinal to exhort them to peace who excommunicated the hinderers of the peace and threatned to interdict the French kings countrey vnles he made peace with England Likewise in the yeare 1193. when K Richard Ceur de lyon was taken prisoner as he came from the holie land by the Duke of Austria P. Celestin 3. P. Celestin 3. A. 1193. VVestmon Ann. 1193. Stovv 1195. Polid. l. 14. at the K request excommunicated the D and enioyned him to release the couenants which he had constrayned the K to make and to send home the pledges who not obeying the Pope he soone after died miserablie and was left vnburied vntil his sonne had sent home the pledges and sworne to stand to the iudgemeÌ„t of the Church And in the yeare 1207. P. Innocent 3. P. Innocent 3. An. 1207. Stovv Ann. 1207. sent to K Iohn an eloquent Epistle and diuers pretious Iewels And in the yeare 1215. when the Barons had extorted from the said king certaine charters and liberties the P. at the Kings request disanulled them and Stovv 1195. 1296. 1297. Gadvvin in vit Steph. Langton Polid. lib. 15. 16. excoÌ„municated the Barons which had rebelled against him when the said Barons had called in Lewis the Prince of France chosen him their King and yeelded the chiefest Citties holdes into his hands soe that England was in euident danger to be lost the P. sent his Legate to assist kinge Iohn and to forbid the French vpon paine of excoÌ„munication to enter into England which he stoutlie performed Also in the yeare 1253. P. Innocent 4. P. Innocent 4. An. 1253. Comin ventura nella relat de Napoli Polid. lib. 16. Stovv A. 1254. bestowed the Royal title and right of the kingdomes of Naples and Sicily vpon Edmond sonne to K Henry 3 and sent by a Cardinal the inuestiture thereof And 1257. P. Alexander 4. P. Alexander 4. Ann. 1257. VVestmon An. 1259. sent Messengers vnto Richard brother to the said king for to assure him of the Imperial dignity and to exhorte him to goe into Germany to receaue it which he did and was crowned king of Romans at Aquisgran And in the yeare 1292. when the Barons had wrested out of the said K. hands certaine liberties P. Vrban 4. at the P. Vrban A. 1262. Stovv Ann. 1262. 1264. kings suite sent a Legate to accurse the Barons that had rebelled in defence of the said liberties Againe in the yeare 1272. at the request of king Edward 1. P. Gregory P. Gregory 10. An. 1272. VVestmon An. 1272. Polid lib. 17. 10. excommunicated Guy of Monfort for killing the kings Coosin German in a church at Viterbo and condemned him of wilful and priuy murder of Sacriledge and treason declared him to be infamous and incapable of any office in the commonwealth and disherited his posterity vnto the fourth generation and excommunicated al those that intertained him and interdicted their dominions And in the same kings time was Cambridge of a Cambden in descript Cantabrig p. 435. ex Remington p. Clement 5. 1311. Clement â—it de Magâ—st c. 1. schoole made an vniuersity by the P. soone after in the yeare 1311. vnder king Edward the second P. Clement 5. appointed that in Oxford should be read two lectures of the Hebrew Arabick and Caldaick tongue and authorized it for one of the famousest vniuersities in Christendome Also in P. Ihon. 22. An. 1316. Polid. lib. 17. Stovv An. 2316. the yeare 1316. P. Iohn 22. at K Edward 2. his request sent two Legates to make peace betwixt England and Scotland and to reconcile Thomas Earle of Lancaster to the King who excommunicated the Scots because they would not agree to peace And in the same yeare at the kings petitioÌ„ the P. confirmed al the ancient priuiledges of the vniuersity of Cambridge which of long time they had enioyed by the benefit writeth Stow of the Stovv 1317. Popes predecessors Moreouer in the yeare 1489. Pope P. Innocent 8. A. 1489. Stovv Ann. 1486. Innocent the eight sent a Nuntio to take vp the variance betwixt the King of Scotland and his people but before his arriual the King was slaine And about the yeare 1504. When there arose a contention betwene K Henry 7. Ferdinand King of Spaine about the precedence P. Iulius 2. hauing P. Iulio 2. A. 1504. Valaterran Comin ventura Stovv ib. heard both their Embassadors gaue sentence for the King of England And in the yeare 1505. sent to the said King a sword Cap of maintenance as to a defendor of the Church But as no King of EnglaÌ„d deserued better of the Sea Apostolick then K Henry 8. did for a long time so none receaued more honor from thence then he did For he receaued not only from P. Iulius 2. in the yeare 1514. a sword and Stovv 1514. Cap of maintenance for defending him against the French king But also of Pope Leo 10. in the yeare 1521. P. Leo 10. A. 1521. Stovv A. 1521 Onuphr chron 1520. the most honourable title of Defendor of the faith for defendig by writing the Catholique faith against Luther VVhich title as it is more honorable then the titles of most Christian or Catholique giuen likewise by Popes to the French K and K. of Spaine so was it euer highlie estiemed of K. Henry and by him caused to be engrauen Stovv did see it An. 1547. on his tombe where he left the title out of his Supremacie And
can set vp and pul downe Kings at his pleasure and that they are grand maisters and Architects of seditions rebellious and bloudie treasons which are but false slaunders of his owne Et quis innocens erit si accusasse sufficiat And aduiseth Christian Princes pag. 11. that if the Pope send any into their dominions vvith his Buls and excommunications they deale vvith them as Phillip the faire dealt vvith Boniface the eights Nuncio vvhom he imprisoned and burned their buls and as Charles the sixt vvho gaue sentence that the buls of Benedic 13. should be rent in pieces the bearer set on the pillarie and traduced in the pulpit But withal he forgot to tel what befel to Phillip for his euil dealing with Boniface vz. That he him selfe was Genelrard in chron Antonin 3. part art 20. paragr 20. killed with a fal of his horse his three sonnes vntimelie died their wiues shamefullie taken in adultery and the crowne translated from his Issue to an other line Of Benedic 13. no meruaile if he and his messenger were so handled because he was no true but a false Pope and thus much of Bels first oure steppes now let vs se the rest CHAP. IX The rest of Bels false steps and slaunderous vntruths in this article disproued THE first steppe saith Bel vvas the decaie Bel pag. 11. of the Empire in the East about the yeare 756 at vvhat time Pipin being called into Italie by Pope Steeuen 2. to deliuer Rome from the siedge of Lombards and ouercomming them gaue vp the gouernement 19 vntruth of Italie into the Popes handes Here Bel hudleth vp store of vntruths That the empire decaied in the East about the yeare 756. For it decaied long before about the yeare 635. vnder Onuphr in chron Platin. in Honorio 1. art 623. Balmerin in chron 639. Onuphr in chron the heretical Emperour Heraclius when the Sarazens conquered Palestin Siria and Egipt and about the yeare 697. al Affrick went more more decaying according as it reuolted from the faith and obedience of the Romane Sea vntil in the yeare 1452. it was vtterly extinguished Constantinople being taken by Turks and the Emperour slaine And about 756. whereof Bel speaketh the Easterne Empire lost litle or nothing except a verie smal piece of Italie called the exarchate which the Lombards had conquered in the yeare 751. 2. That Pipin gaue vp Italy into the Popes hands Whereas Pipin subdued only that part of Italie which the Lombards held that in Pipins conquest ended the vvhole povver of the Emperours 21 vntruth Lieutenants in Italy This is doubly vntrue First because Pipin conquered nothing from the Emperour but from the Lombards who foure or fiue years before had taken the exarchate of Reuenna from the Empire Secondly because besides that which Pipin then conquered or the Lombards had before taken from the Empire the Emperours had both then and long Naucler general 27. Platin. in Leone 3. Bland Dec. 2. lib. 1. after great dominion in Italy vz almost al the kingedome of Naples which he gouerned by Lieutenants 3. But what was the end of this vntruth forsooth that we should Imagine that in Pipins time the Pope became Antechrist For novv saith Bel vvas he taken avvay vvho pag. 12. 2. Thess 2. as the Apostle teacheth vs hindred the comming of Antechrist meaninge the Emperours dominion in Italie Marke good reader in the yeare 476. or as Bel saith 471. not only al Baron annal Onuphr in chron Italie was taken from the Emperour by the Herules but he also deposed and the weasterne Empire vtterlie dissolued And albeit in the yeare 553. the Grecian Emperours recouered Italy againe yet soone after in the yeare 568. they lost a great parte therof to the Lombards which they neuer Onuphr in chron Palmer in chron 572. recouered And in neither of these times Bel thinketh the hinderance of Antichrists comming whereof S. Paul spake to haue bene taken away because then he findeth no coulour to make the Pope a new Antechrist 4. But when the Grecian Emperours lost to the Lōbards the exarchate of Reuenna a Naucler general 26. petit dominion of fiue Citties one shire called Emilia though they helde stil a good part of Italie then the hindrance of Antechriste was taken away because forsooth soone after that exarchate being taken by Pipin from the Lombards it was by him giuen to the Pope who therby became Antechrist as if Bishops become Antechrists by temporal liuings a reason smelling ranckely of a puritan spirit which would pul downe Bishopricks but if temporal dominion made the Pope Antechrist he was long before Pipin for in the yeare 699. Aripert King of Lombardy gaue to him the Coctian Alpes where Geneua is which Ado in chronic Bland Dec. 1. lib. 10. Magdeburg cent 8. c. 10. Regino Ado Sigebert in chron Magdeburg supra donation confirmed King Luithprand in the yeare 714. as the Magdeburgians confesse and King Pipin in the yeare 755. added the exarchate and a good piece of Italy which he had conquered from the Lombards 5. As for the hindrance of Antechrists comming whereof S. Paule speaketh it was not the petit dominion which the Emperours had in the exarchate of Reuenna but the Romane Empire it selfe as testifie S. Chrisostome and others vpon that place S. Chrisost S. Ciril S. Hierom. S. August tom 5. S. Ciril Catech. 15. S. Hierom q. 11. ad Algasiam S. Augustin lib. 20. de ciuit c. 19. and other fathers who out of that place affirme that Antechrist shal not come vntil the Romane Empire be quite taken away which is not yet I let passe a contradiction of Bel saying p. 8. that Barbarians possessed al Contradict Italy vnto Carolus Magnus and pag. 11. that in Pipins time vvhoe vvas Carolus his father ended the power of the Emperours Lieutenants in Italy For how could the Emperours haue Lieutenants in Italy vntil Pipin if Barbarians possessed al Italy vnto his sonnes time 6. But the quicke sight of this fellowe whoe before called so many Kings Emperours blinde I can not let passe He writeth pag. 11. that Pipin gaue vppe the gouernment of Italy into the Popes hands a thing saith he so apparant as it can not be denied and yet pag. 14. confesseth that he can not see how the Pope vvas King in Pipins time So blinde he is that he can not see that to giue vp the gouernment of a Kingdome into ones hands is to make him King Againe he can not see pag. 14. His brother vvillet controuers 4. q. 10. p. 7. pag. 178. saith that the imperial authority is in the Pope Naucler general 26. Palmerius in chronic Paradin des alliances Genealogiques hovv if Pipin as Sigebert vvriteth had Italie in his possession in the yeare 801. and Bernard made King thereof by Carolus Magnus 812. that the Pope vvas either then or novv any King at al. Surelie Bel is either
auoucheth That ordinarily he can not depose Princes euen for iust causes 7. But let vs heare Bel disproue him self Anatomy of Popish tyrany in the Caueat to the Reader and lib. 2. cap. 4. §. 10. c. 9. 1. Contradiction Secular Priests saith he write plainly and resolutly that the Pope hath no power to depriue Kings of their royal Scepters and regalities nor to giue away their Kingdomes to an other In which opiniō likewise the French Papists do concurre iump with them Item The Seculars although they acknowledge the Popes power supereminent in Spiritualibus yet do they disclaime from it in temporalibus when he taketh vpon him to depose Kinges from their empires and translate their Kingdomes And least we should thinke these few Priests who wrote so were no Papists Bel him self testifieth that they are the Popes deare Vassals and professe the selfe same religion with Epistle to the King other Catholiques 8. The third vntruth conteined in the proposition is that we teach the doctrine of his proposition as a pointe of our faith wherevpon he inferreth in his conclusion our religion and faith to be false Because we teach no such doctrine at al and much lesse as a point of our religion or faith And the grauest best learned amongst Catholiques attribute to rhe Pope onely spiritual superiority ouer Princes and power to depose them in that case wherin our Sauiour said Math. 18. that it were better for a man to be cast into the sea then to liue to wit when they so scandalize others as their deposition is necessary for the saluation of soules as I haue already shewed out af Bellarmin Bel. parag 29. whose testimony in this matter Bel can not refuse seing he calleth him the mouth of Papists and auoucheth his doctrin to be the Popes owne doctrin And this doctrin good Christiā Princes account no more preiudicial or iniurious to their estates then they do the like doctrin of S. Paul 2. Cor. 10. where he professeth him self to haue power to destroy al loftines extolling it self against the knowledge of God to be ready to punish al disobedience 9. Wherfore to requite Bel with a syllogisme like vnto his owne I argue thus you Bel tel vs that we Papists saie the Pope is aboue al powers and potentates on earth that he can depose Kings and Emperours and translate their empiers at his good wil and pleasure But this your tale is a very tale false absurd and nothing else but a mere fable and consequently your late chalenge consisteth of mere falsehoods fables flat leasings The proposition is your owne wordes the truth of the assumption appeereth by my answer to your argument And thus much touching Bels vntruthes vttered in his proposition and proofe therof now let vs come to his dissemblinge CHAP. II. The opinion of protestants touching Princes Supremacie set dovvne LVTHER an Euangelist as he termeth him selfe or as other accompte him Luther lib. cont stat eccles in prologo in glossa cont decreta Caesar Ex Sur. An. 1531. 1539. Pope of Recusamy p. 31. 32. Magdeburg praefat Centur 7. Caluin in c. 7. Amos. an Apostle a prophet a third Elias a beginner of protestantisme in his booke of secular power condemneth those Princes who prescribe laws to their subiects in matter belonging to faith and the Church Magdeburgians his first and cheefest childeren write thus Let not Magistrats be heads of the Church because this Supremacy agreeth not to them Caluin saith they were blasphemers who attributed the supremacy to King Henry 8. And lest we shold think that only forayne Protestāts are of this opinion Antony Gilby in his admonition to England and Scotland Gilby calleth King Henry a monstrous bore for taking the supremacy that he displaced Christ was no better then the Romish Antichrist made him selfe a God And lately VVillet cōtract 791. part 1. and 3. p. 269. 270. Willet auoucheth That Bishops and Pastors haue a spiritual charge ouer Kings that Kings ought to yeeld obedience to those that haue ouersight of their soules That Heathen Princes had the same power and authority in the Church which Christian Princes haue and yet soone after affirmeth That heathen Princes cold not be heads of the Church that is to haue the Souereingty of external gouernment Againe That the King is nether mistical nor ministerial head of the Church that the name of head is vnproperly giuen to the Prince and if any think it to great Kings not so much is ministerial heads of the Church by vvillet a name for any mortal man we wil not saith he greatly contend about it So we see he denyeth both name and authority of the head of the Church to Kings 2. And his Maiesty perceaued that Reanolds and his fellows aymed at a Scottish Presbitry which agreeth with a Monarch Conference p. 82 83. as wel as God and the diuel page 79. and acknowledged his supremacy only to make their partes good with Bishops as Knox his fellow ministers in Scotland made his grandmother head of the Church therby to pul downe the Catholique Bishops Yea that the whole English Clergy is in their harts of the same opiniō appeareth by their open profession to agree in religion with forayne Protestants who plainly deny the supremicy of Princes by their writing and Apologia pag. 28. teaching that Christ alone can behead of the Church by their condemning Catholiques for attributing such authority to man and finally by their Synodical explication of the article of supremacy which they expound thus That Princes should rule al estates Lib. 39. Artic. art 37. and degrees committed to their charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or temporal and restrayne with the ciuil sword the stubborne and euil doers wherein we see no power in Ecclesiastical causes granted to Princes but only ouer Ecclesiastical persons And we deny not that Princes haue any power ouer Ecclesiastical persons yea in the very canon of the Masse as priests pray for Papa nostro N. and Antistite nostro N. for our Pope and Byshop so they pray for Rege nostro N. acknowledging the one to be their King as the others to be their Prelates and consequently both to haue power ouer them For as S. Augustin said and it is euident Rex à Augustin in Psalm 44. 67. regendo dicitur a King is so called of power to gouerne And as ecclesiastical persons be ciuil or politique members of the common wealth wherein they liue so haue they See Stapelton relectione Controuersiae 2. q. 1. a. 1. ad 2. Victoria relectione de potesta ecclesiastica sect 7. the same politique or ciuil head which that commonwealth hath for otherwise either ciuil members should haue no ciuil head at al which were monstrous or not be vnder the head of that body whereof they be members but onely vnder a ciuil head of an other body which is
is the first P. whome we find to haue made a flat decree touching the deposition of Princes in these words If any King Prelat Iudge or seculer person lib. 12. epist vlt. lib. 11. epist 10. of what degree or highnes soeuer do violate the priuileges of S. Medards monastery let him be deposed And vpon the 4. al 5. poenit psalme he writeth that no reason alloweth him to be King who alienateth men from Christ and enthralleth his Church and sharply inueigheth against the Emp for vsurping right of earthly power ouer the Church of Rome which he calleth the head of al Churches and Lady of Nations and telleth him that it were better for him to acknowledge her his Lady and submit him selfe to her according to the example of godly Princes 3. And as for the place which Bel citeth he speaketh not there of the subiection duty or obedieÌ„ce of a subiect to his Prince but of a seruant to his Maister as he had bene to Mauritius whiles they were both priuat men which him selfe plainly professeth in the beginning of his letter in these words In this suggestion I speake not as Bishop nor as subiect by reason of the common wealth but by priuat right of my owne because you haue bene my Lord since that time when as yet you were not Lord of al. And therfore by the forsayd words he meaneth no otherwise then a louing seruant doth when vpon curtesie to his old Maister though he haue left him yet he stil calleth him Maister and offereth him selfe and his seruice at his command His second error was in inferring vpon the bare words of one P. speaking of him selfe alone not onely his dutiful obedience but also of al his Predecessors for 600. years together He would espie his error if I should infer the same oâ— al. S. Greg his successors for 600. years after him And though euery English Priest do cal his Maiesty Soueraigne Lord professe them selues subiect to his commande and to owe him obedience as far as Bel can shew that euer S. Gregory did to the Emp yet wil he not suffer me to infer that they liue in al dutiful obedience to their Prince but wil condemne them al of high treason For with him as of old with Donatists Quod volumus Sanctum est 4. His 3. error is in granting that Popes Contradict Gelas epist ad Anastas Theodoret. lib. 5. cap. 18. Sozom. l. 7. c. 24. Paulin. in vit Ambros Lib. cont Gentil Euseb lib. 6. c. 26. Niceph. lib. 13. c 39. Gelas d. 96. con Duo sunt Georg. Patriarcha in vit Chrysost Symach ep ad Anastas Stapleto de Eccl. Rom. Platina iâ— Gelasio for 600. years after Christ liued in al dutiful obedience to Emperors wherein he quite ouerthroweth what he ment to proue in this Article For if that be true he can not thinke that to excommunicate or depose Princes vpon great causes is against the duty of Popes Because to omit S. Ambrose his excoÌ„municating of the Emperors Theodosius Maximus S. Babilas his excoÌ„municating an other Emp whom he droue saith S. Chrisost out of the Church as if he had bene a base slaue of no account no fewer then fiue or six Popes haue excoÌ„municated their Emperors in that time As S. Fabian excoÌ„municated Phillip the first Christian Emperor S. Innocent 1. the Emperours Arcadius and Eudoxia P. Symachus P. Anastasius and as some say P. Gelasius excommunicated the Emperor Anastasius and P. Vigil Baron An. â—84 Contradict the Empresse Theodora And S. Gregory him selfe proceeded further as you heard euen to depose Princes Moreouer Bel Writeth p 8. that Barbarians possessed al Italy from the yeare 471. vntil Charles the great 801. How then saieth he here that Popes liued vnder Emperors vntil 603. 5. His fourth error is in coÌ„fessing S. Gregory the great to be ours that is a Papist wherupon follow many things to his vtter confusion First that the old Rom religion for I hope what is aboue a 1000. yeares old is old which him selfe p 83. confesseth to be Catholique sound pure is Papistical 2. That the first Christian religion which our English Anceitours hauing bene euer before bondslaues saith S. Bedal 2. c. 1. of Idols receaued from S. Gregory by his legat S. Austin was Papistical 3. That al Christendome was in S. Gregories time Papistical because it communicated with him in faith and religion as is euident by his Epistles written to al partes of Christendome Thus we see this mans smal wit in prouing his vntruthes Now let vs see his good wil. 6. Very loth he is to graunt the Pope the Bel pag. 3. S. Ignat. ep ad Mariam Cassab name of Pope which Saints Councels Princes Catholiques Schismatiks haue euer giuen him Bishops of Rome saith he S. Iustin ep ad zenam seren S. Aug. epist 92. 95. 261. S. Hiero. ep ad Damas Amb. ep 81 VinceÌ„t cont haeres liberatus in breuiar cap. 22. Concil Calcedon as 16. Carthag Mileuil apud August ep 90. 92. Epirot ep ad Hermis Constantin in edicto Galli Placidici epist ad Pulcheriam Choniatas Vide epist trium Concil Africon ad Damas to 1. Camil. Protestants cal vs Papists of the Pope yet vvil not cal him Pope Victor de persecut vaÌ„dalica lib. 1. Bel p. 3. Gregor Turon de glor mart cap. 25. 30. 79. now called Popes And when not Syr did not S. Ignatius who liued in the Apostles tyme cal S. Anaclerus Pope did not also S. Iustin euen as the Magdeburgians confesse did not S. Austin S. Hierome S. Ambrose Vincent Lirin others aboue a thousand yeares a goe did not the Councel of Calcedon of Carthage of Mileui of Epirus do not the Gretians cal the Bishop of Rome Pope Was he not alwaies called Pope as wel in England as in al Christendome els vntil the 26. yeare of Henry 8. when hauinge reuoulted from the Popes obedience he commanded this name to be razed out of al writings calendaties Holy Doctors whatsoeuer 7. And a maruailous thing it is to consider the contradictious spirit of Protestants They wil cal vs nothing but Papists as Arians called Catholique Romans and our religion Popish which are bynames inuented of them selues and deriued from the name of Pope and yet wil they not cal him Pope which hath bene his name euer since the Apostles time And thus much touching Bels proofe of his Assumption out of S. Gregory 8. Next he alleadgeth S. Ambrose saying Dauid being King was subiect to no human law But besids that the word human is not in that place S. Ambrose freeth Kings onely Bonus impetator intra non supra ecclesiaÌ„ est Ambr. epist 32. Theodoret. lib. 5. cap. 18. Sozomen l. 7. c. 24. Paulin. in vita Ambros Ruffin lib. 1. c. 2. Theodoret. lib. 4. cap. 5. from penalty of ciuil or temporal lawes For how subiect he thought them to be to Ecclesiastical lawes
appeareth by his excommunicating the Emperors Thodosius and Maximus beside that Constantin and Valentinian professed them selues to be vnder Bishops And doubtles the human lawes enacted by the Apostles Act 15. v. 18. and 1. Cor 7. v. 12. exempted no more Princes then priuat persons S Hierome Bel affirmeth to teach the same that S. Ambrose but neither alledgeth his wordes nor quoteth ether booke or chapter perhaps because he made lesse shew for him 9. Euthimius he citeth because he writeth Bel p. 3. Euthym. in Psalm 50. Glossa ordin lyra in Psalm 50. S. Thom. 2. â— q. 12. art 2. That Dauid as a King had God onely iudge ouer his sinnes But he meaneth of a temporal iudge as doe also the Glosse and lita cited by him And though S. Thomas proue of set purpose That the Pope may depose Princes yet is not Bel ashamed to cite him because he saith 1. 2. q. 96. art 5. That a King is not subiect to compulsion of his owne lavvs As if therfore he were subiect to no law Hereafter the Reader neede not maruail to see Bel citing Scriptures and Fathers for his purpose seing he abstayneth not from his professed aduersaries For with him al is fish that comes to net and as litle make the one for him as the other Lastly he citeth Hugo Card writing That God alone is aboue al Hugo Card. in psal 50. cap. 1. Kings But this is ment in temporalibus as before we cited out of Innocent 3. 10. After these proofs of his Assumption Bel p. 4. 5. Bel hudleth vp six vntruthes togeather saying The good Kings Iosue Dauid Salomon Vntruthes 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Iosaphat Ezechias and Iosias knew right wel they had authority aboue al Priests and therfore tooke vpon them not onely to command control them but also to depose euen the high Priests them selues For proofe of these vntruthes he referreth vs to his Golden Balance and I refer him for confutation of them to Doctor Stapletons Conterblast against Horns vaine blast his Relection con 2. q 5 ar 1. Onely I say that Iosue was no King nor the Scripture affordeth any colour of saying that any high Priest was deposed by any of the said Kings except Abiathar by SolomoÌ„ 3. reg c. 2 v. 35. et 27. And yet as it is gathered out of the 3. Reg. 4. v. 4. 4. chapter where he is accounted Priest in Salomons raigne Salomon deposed him not but onely for a time confyned him to his howse for his conspiracy with Adonias and so debarred him from executing his Priestly function And though he had deposed him he had not done it as King but as Prophet fulfilling as the Scripture testifyeth the Prophisy against the howse of 3. Reg. 2. v. 27. Hely from whence Abiathar descended And this is al which Bel obiecteth against the Popes superiority ouer Princes Now let vs see how he answereth one obiection of Catholique in answers whereof he spendeth the rest of this article CHAP. VI. Bels answer to an argument of Catholiques for the Popes authority confuted BEL for better satisfaction as he saith Bel p. 5. of the vulgar sorte propoundeth one obiection of Catholiques but yet so nakedly and without al forme or fashion of argument setting downe an Antecedent without any consequent that therby one may ghesse â—e meaneth nothing lesse then to frame as he promisseth a plaine and sincer solution vnto it And yet the obiection though so sillily propounded not onely much trobleth many vulgar people as he saith but pusleth him selfe so as after seuen leaues spent to diuert the Readers minde to make him forget as Heritiks The manner of Protestants in ansvvering Catholiks vse to do the argument which he can not answer he fyndeth no better solution then to graunt what the Antecendent contayneth and to say nothing to the consequent following therof 2. Wherfore because Bel was so trobled with the matter of this obiection as he forgot the forme I wil supply his default and argue thus in forme He by whose authority the Empire was translated the electors of the Emperor appointed and the elected is confirmed and whose superiority ouer them many Emperors haue willingly acknowledged hath some superiority ouer Emperors but the Pope is such as by his authority the Empire c. Ergo the Pope hath some superiority ouer Emperors The forme is syllogistical and good The Proposition is manifest for no power or dignity can be truly translated or confirmed by inferiors or equals but onely by superiors none especially willingly acknowledge as superior whome they thinke is not 3. The Assumption contayneth three parts expressed in the Proposition wherof the first vz. That the Empire was translated by the Popes authority Bellarm l. de transl Bellarmin Imper c. 4 proueth by the testimony of 33. writers c 5. by the confession of 11. Emperors and Princes and c. 6. by assertion of 7. Popes Yea Bel though with much a doe confesseth it page 12. saying That Charles the great to whome the Empire was first translated was made Emperor by Pope Leo 3. for restoring him to his place and dignity being driuen out by the Romans though soone p. 13. after he condemne the Pope of treason for this translation But differing the question of treason til a non which hindreth not the verity of the translation if the translator haue power to transfer as a souldier may by gift or sale truly and yet trayterously translate his armes and munition to the Enemies I ask of Bel whether the Pope did truly translate the Empire or no. If he did then hath the Pope power to translate Empires If he did not then was nether Charles the great nor any of his successors to this day true Emperors And if the Pope be Antichrist as Bel auoucheth for deposing some few Emperors for iust causes Bel may be wel accounted Lucifer for deposing at once and for no fault at al the Emperors of the west which haue bene these 800. yeares But Protestants haue great Protestants can make vnmake Emperors vvhen they list cunning in making and vnmaking Emperors according as it redoundeth in their opinion to the grace or disgrace of Popes For when the Pope deposeth them they be true Emperors but when he maketh them they haue onely as Willet writeth the name VVillet CoÌ„tract 4. q. 10. p. 178. title and image of Emperors But let them answer this dilemma These Emperors whom the Pope deposed since Carolus Magnus Likevvise vvhen vvillet list the imperial authority is in the Pope loc scit But vvhen he list not he is no temporal Prince ib. q. 8. p. 154 155. were true or false Emperors If false he did a good deed in deposing them If true then hath the Pope authority to make true Emperors and translate Empiers 4. The second parte included in my Assumption vz. That the Pope appointed the electors of the Emperor and
before he answered it to slander both Pope and Papists and to tel the Reader a long tale of steps deuised by him selfe in an imaginary ladder of his owne Many absurd things saith he haue pag. 5. bene affirmed by Popes parasits for aduancement of his primacy Iâ— one aske him what these absurd things are who were these parasits He nameth none For dolosus versatur in generalibus But let vs heare him proue his saying 11. vntruthe Victoria de potestate ecclesiae relect 1. sect 6. As Victoria doth testify in these words Sed glossatores iuris hoc dominion c. The glossors of the law haue giuen this dominion to the Pope they being poore in substance and learning 2. Here in steed of proofs I find an vntruth For nether doth Victoria in these words speâ—ke of many things but onely of this dominion meaning temporal ouer the world nether yet doth he cal it absurd This want therfore Bel thought to supply VVhen he spealeth a lye he speaketh of his ovvne Ioan. 8. v. 44. 12 vntruth of his owne store and therfore Englishing Victorias words he addeth and these lordly titles and then as hauing a sure foundation he rayseth his lie somewhat higher saying That Victoria affirmeth ignorance and pouerty were the beginning of al lordly Popery Wheras Victoria speaketh onely of temporal dominion ouer the whole world and Bel him selfe Bel p. 17. 4. Contradict herafter maketh Kings and Emperors authors of the Popes dominion Bel p. 7. 3. Hauing thus dealt with Victoria he falleth to slander the late Popes saying That they haue challenged more then human and royal power euen that povver vvhich is due proper to God alone True it is that both late ancient 13 vntruth Popes haue challeÌ„ged more then human royal power For such is al spiritual power as shal hereafter be proued But most false it is that any Pope auncieÌ„t or late challengeth any power proper to God or that any Catholique attributeth such power vnto him As his brother willet telleth him in these VVillet coÌ„trad 544. prel 3. p. 210. Caluin 4. instit c. 20. parag 4. Magistratus praediti sunt diuina authoritate Melancthon apud Sur. 1501. Bel p. 6. Gerson de potest eccl confid 12. p. 3. words The Pope by their owne confession can not do al that Christ did But what say you Sir to Caluin attributing duine power to Magistrats And to Protestants arrogating greater more intolerable and les excusable authority and power then euer the Pope did as Melanthon writeth or to other calling Princes Gods as you shal heare a none Now let vs see what proofs he bringeth of his slander Gerson saith he reporteth that some Popish parasits say that Christ hath giuen al that power in heauen and earth to S. Peter and his successors which was giuen to him selfe and that he hath writen in the Popes thighe King of Kings and Lord of Lords And that there is no power Ecclesiastical or temporal but from the Pope 4. Behould good Reader Bels euil dealing with Popes He chargeth al late Popes with challenging power proper to God which is a most heinous and Luciferian crime and for proofe therof bringeth not one word or deede of any one of them but ones report of speeches of some nameles fellows without proouing that any Pope ether allowed or liked yea heard of such speeches were such dealing with any priuat man tolerable And how much les with so great Princes as Popes at least are Suppose parasits had attributed to Popes power Protestants cal Princes Goddes proper to God doth it therfore follow that they challeng it Doe al Princes challeng what their flatterers impose vpon them Did Q Elizabeth challeÌ„g to be a Goddesse because Case Cambden and other Protestants Case in ep suop Policorum Cambden in Berqueria in Natis ad lectorem in Cantic Epist Bel in his epistles to the King to B. of Durhom Act. 14. v. 10. 11. 12. called her a Goddesse She saieth Cambden is the onely Goddesse of Britans Sheâ— shal be my Goddesse the grouÌ„d wher she was borne is rather to be adored then adorned she is Numen to be worshiped of the whole word Or doth his Maiesty challeng to be head of the Church of France or Toby Mathew to be the ornament of learning and religion because Bel so tearmeth them did S. Paul and Barnaby challeÌ„g to be Gods because the Licaonians did so account them doth not the Pope professe him self to be Christs Vicar and seruant of his seruants How standeth this with the challeng of equality 5. But I deny that euer any Catholique attributed to the Pope power proper to God let vs therfore consider Gersons report The first point is that Christ hath giuen al the power in heauen and earth to S. Peter and Bels slander toucheth as vvel S. Peter and the auncient Popes as the late his successors which was giuen to him self But beside that these words concerne no les the Ancient then the late Popes namely S. Peter him self though Bel be ashamed to charg them with this staunder are these woords of Popish parasits doe they giue to men power proper to God alone Then was S. Chrisostome a Popish parasite and S. Chrysost lib. 3. de sacerdot gaue to Priests power proper to God when he said Priests haue al power of heauenly things and the very self same al kind of power which Christ had of his Father S. Basil sayth S. Basil homil de poenitent S. Leo serm 2. de Natali Pet. Pauli that Christ gaue this authority to others S. Leo writeth that S. Peter had those things by participation which Christ had proper by power or doth Bel think that our King in creating a deputy in Ireland and giuing him authority to gouerne that Kingdome giueth him power proper to Kings Are deputies Kings are they no more subiects True it is that the power which Popes haue came from God alone as the authority of deputies cometh from Kings but such power by commission is no more proper to God then the like in deputies is proper to Kings 6. The second point in Gersons report is that the forsaid nameles persons cal the Pope Lord of Lords and King of Kings If these be parasits words and make men equal to God then was Daniel a parasite he made Nabuchodonozor equal to God in calling him King of Kings Vnles Bel allow this Daniel 2. v. 37. title in a heathen Prince and account it blasphemy in a Christian Besyds the Scripture Exod. 7. psal 81. Io. 10. psal 104. Esaiae 45. S. Bernard l. 2. 4. de coÌ„siderat Caluin lib. 4. instit c. 7. paragr 22. it self doth apply the very names of Christ and God vnto men And S. Bernard no parasite but a holy writer in Caluins opinion calleth the Pope Prince of Bishops leader of Christians hammer of tyrants father of Kings
not rather to fal 5. Euident it is out of histories of those times that Popes in that vacancy were sometime vnder Barbares sometime vnder Emperours of the East according as the one preuailed against the other for false it is that Barbares possessed al Italy vntil Carolus Magnus yea Bel before said that Popes liued vnder Emperours vntil the yeare 603. and pag. 2. ◠betwixt both liued in great daunger subiection and misery Three of them died in Siluerius Iohannes 1. Martinus 1. Leo 3. Sergius Gregorius 2. vid. Platinam in vit Pont. banishment or prison one pitifullie mangled and beaten others should haue bene imprisoned and murdered and diuers were straictlie besieged of their enimies And for a long time none could be freelie elected without consent of the Barbares or Emperours And can we thinke that this was a time for Popes to climbe to greater authority I omit that before Bel said Popes liued in duetiful obedience vnder Emperours vntil the 5. Contradict yeare 603. how doth he now saie that they climbe to tiranny from the yeare 471. 6. The 3. steppe saith Bel vvas the volūtarie pag. 8. 9. Charter vvhich Constantin the Emperour of Constantinople made to Pope Benedict 2. vz. that vvhosoeuer the Cleargie people and Romane souldires should choose to be Bishoppe al men should beleeue him to be the true vicar of Christ vvithout any tarying for any authority of the Emperour of Constantinople or the deputy of Italie as 16. vntruth the custome and manner vvas euer before that day Thus saith he writeth Platina And the Platina in Benedict 2. Popes almost for the space of 700. yeares could haue no iurisdiction nor be reputed true Bishoppes of Rome vvithout the letter pattēts of the Vbicunque est impudentia ibi est vltio Chrisosto hom 4. in illud Esai vidi Dominū Emperour 7. Behould the impudencie of this fellow Platina saith vt antea fieri consueuerat Bel affirmeth him to say it vvas the custome euer before that daie where is in Platina the worde euer where til that daie Nay doth not Platina saie that Pelagius the second Platin. in pelagio in Siluerio Nauclerus general 18. Bland De◠1. l. 3. was created iniussu principis without commaund of the Prince that Siluerius was made Pope iubente Theodohato at the commaund of Theodate a Gothishe King Did not Bel him selfe tel vs that Barbarians ruled pag. 8. in Rome and possessed al Italie for 330 yeares vntil Charles the great How then could it be that before Benet the second neuer Popes could haue iurisdiction and be accompted true Bishops of Rome without letter patents of Emperours who were professed enimies and made warre vpon most of these Barbarians or is Bel so mad euen to imagine that Pope Anaclete to omit S. Peters want of Neroes letter patents could haue no iurisdiction or be reputed true Bishoppe of Rome without letter patents of Domitian the Emperour Clement without Traianus Cornelius without Decius Caius without Diocletian or the other holie Popes that were martyred vnder heathen Emperours without their letter patents 8. What therefore Platina saieth had bene wont to be done before about expecting the confirmation of the Emperour or his deputie in Italy he vnderstood of the time since Pope Vigilius excepting Pelagius 2. vntil Benedict the second for Iustinian the Emperour hauing in the yeare 553. quite subdued the Gothes and recouered Rome and Italie which had bene lost to the Barbares in the yeare 475. or 476. Bel wronglie saith 471. imitating the tiranny pag. 8. of the Gothish Kings who being Arians much oppressed the Popes appointed that they after their election should expect the Emperour or his deputies confirmation before they were consecrated or vsed their function And this order endured from Pope Vigilius his time vntil Benedicte the second for more then one hundred years at what time Constantine the fifth in the Platin. sup yeare 684. moued saie the writers at the holines of Benedicte 2. abrogated the said order permitting as wel the consecration as the election of Popes vnto the Romane Cleargie and people 9. Hereby wee see that the creation of Popes without Emperours consent was no new thing begun first in Benedict 2. but an auncient libertie begun euen with the Popedome it selfe and continued vnder Papistry aboue a thovvsand years ould yet nevv vvith Bel. pag. 2. Constantine the great and other Christian Emperours vntil the time of the barbarous Gothish Kings restored againe by Constantine the fifth but marke good reader how Bel before confessed Gregory the great who died about the yeare 604. to haue The same declared Iustinian about the year 532. epist ad Ioā P. and Valentinian ep ad Theodosium lōg before pag. 83. 2. Pet. 3. v. 8. bene a Papist and here acknowledgeth the Emperour Phocas in the yeare 607. to haue declared Rome to be the head of al Churches likewise Constantine the fifth in the yeare 984. to haue declared the Pope to bee Christs true vicar yet neuertheles wil haue Papistrie and Popes supremacie to be new things So to him a thowsand yeares are as one daie 10. The fourth steppe Bel maketh the deposition of Childrick King of France by Pope Zacharie which he saith the Pope did for hope of aduauncemēt But as for the deposition it was most iust for it was done not only with the consent of the whole This Childrick vvas surnamed the Idiot or sensles Claud. Paradin Annal. Frāc Naucler general 25. Platin. in Gregor 3. realme of France no man reclaiming but at their request as testifieth Sabellius aeneid 8. Blandus Dec 1. lib 10. out of Alcuin Paule and others at what time the Sarazins possessing al Egipt Siria Affrick Spaine had not long before inuaded France with many hundred thousands of men Childrick being extreamlie slouthful careles of the commonwealth not only France but al Christendome was in great daunger to be ouerrunne with those Sarazins 11. And that Pope Zacharies intention was iuste appeareth by his great holines of life who as Anastasius and others write was so good as he would not requite euil with euil and much lesse for his owne aduauncement wrongfullie depose a King as Bel vpon meare malice without al proofe doth calumniate him taking vpon him to know the secrets of harts and Iudge an others seruant 2. Paralip 6. Roman 14. Besides that neither was he any way aduaunced by Pipin nor can it be iustlie presumed that he expected to be But for what end soeuer it had bene done it could be no steppe to the Popes superiority ouer Princes but an act of such authority already gotten 12. Whereupon Bellarmin out of this so Bellarm. lib. 5. de Rom. Pontif. c. 8. auncient example aboue eight hundred yeares agoe proueth Popes to haue such authority whereat Bel so stormeth that he pag 10. 17 vntruth 18 vntruth saith Iesuits teach that the Pope
to haue celestial arbitremēt what wil he say to S. Chrisostome Chrisosto hom 5. in illud Esaiae vidi Dominum homil 4. item hom 60. ad populum worthely in his own iudgment Sirnamed the gouldē mouthed doctor auouching that the Priests throne is in heauen that he hath authority to iudge of celestial busines and that God hath put the verie Princes head vnder the hands of the priest to teach vs that the priest is a Prince greater then he And in an other place affirmeth hom 83. in Matth. Hom. 2. in 2. in Timoth Gregor lib. 4. epist 31. S. Ciprian lib. 3. epist 9. noteth that the beginning of Schismes Heresies is by contempt of Priests and Bishops Themistius in l. consul apud Socratem l. 3. c. 25. Arian Bishops more for the palace then for the Church Hilar. l. cōt Constant a Deacon to haue greater power then an Emperour and aduiseth vs that vvho dispiseth the Priest at length falleth to contemne God and S. Gregory writing to the Emperour him selfe saith priests are certaine Gods amongst men and therefore to be honoured of al euen of Kings But Bel in debasing priesthood and too too much exalting Princes sheweth him selfe to be a right Apostata from priesthood and a right heretike who as Themistius said honour not God but Princes And thus much of Bels eight steppes 32. Thus thou seest Christian reader that of these eight steps which Bel imagined the Pope had to climbe to his superiority ouer Princes two of them to wit the first and secōd were steps rather to fal then to climbe by three vz. the fourth sixth and seauenth were euident acts of such authority alreadie enioyed acknowledged by Princes the third was but a recouery of his auntient libertie the fieft is no more a step for the Pope to climbe then temporal liuings are to other bishops And the eight and last is a manifest vntruth But the true step he Matth. 16. v. 18. Ioan. 21. v. 17. omitted which is Christs promise to S. Peter to build his Chruch vpon him and his commission to feed his sheepe by vertue whereof al S. Peters successours challendge to be spiritual superiour to al that are in Christs church or be his sheepe be they Princes or subiects as is euident out of the Bonif 8. extrauag vnā sanctam de maioritate obedientia Sed epist Ioan. 2. ad Iustinianum Imper. Gregor lib. 1. epist 24. Bel pag. 17. Bel slandereth Princes foresaid decree of Boniface 8. 33. Bel hauing thus as you haue heard slandred Popes thought not to let ether Kings or Emperors passe free but saith that some of them haue opened the windovv to al Antichristian tyrany Greater iniury he could not do to Christian Princes then to accuse them of such horrible impiety of opening the window not to some but to al Antichristian tirany No maruel if he spare nether Pope nor Priest who thus handleth Princes If one ask proofe of his slander he bringeth none but it suffizeth that he hath said it his word alone is sufficient to condemne many Kings Emperors This is the respect Protestants beare euen to the greatest Monarches when they are against their proceedings So Luther said Princes for Luther lib. de saecular potest edit 1523. lib. cont duo edicta Caesaris 1524. Lib. cont Henric. Regem Angl. the most parte were ether the veriest fooles or arrantest knaues And againe The Turk is ten tymes better and wiser then the Emperor and other Princes whome he cals idiots doults madde furious and frantik fooles and namely King Henry 8. he reuileth with such shameful such spitful and scurrilous tearmes as I am ashamed to write And amongst Protestants nothing more vsual then to cal Princes Antichrists and slaues of Antichrist 34. Bel not yet satisfied with iniuring pag. 17. vntruthe 26. the Pope addeth that he hath made it sacriledge to dispute of his povver which is a manifest vntruth disproued by him selfe art 2. p 26 where he affirmeth that the Pope alloweth Bellarmins works who at large disputeth of his power And because Sigebert whome Bel vntruly calleth the Popes deare fryer vntruthe 27. Trithem in Sigebert for he was his vtter enemy and to his power fauored the schismatical and Excommunicated Emperor Henry 3 in whose behalfe he fained diuers things as Baron proueth Baronius tom 9. An. 774. reprehendeth them who taught the people that they owe no obediēce to euil Kings Bel inueyeth against Catholiques Whereas Catholiques vtterly Art 15. damnat in Concil Constantien defie such Doctrin condēned it lōg since in the Protestants great grandfather wiclife and haue learned of the first Pope S. Peter to be subiect in al feare not onely to good and modest 1. Pet. c. 2. v. 18. Cap. 3. parag 4. 5. 6. maisters but also to way ward But Protestants teach that and worse Doctrin as appeareth by what hath bene sayd before and by Godman who as Couel writerh published to the world that it was lawful to kil Couel of Church gouernment c 4. p 35. vvicked Kings and whitingham a deane of no smal account in his preface before Godmans booke of firmed it to be the doctrin of the best learned meaning Protestants think it lavvful to kil euil Kings Bel pag. 18. 28 vnttuth 29 vntruth 30 vntruth as Couel thinketh Caluin and the rest 35. Finally because the end of this article should not be vnlike the beginning he concludeth it with three vntruthes as he began it saying That the Popish religion hath bene alwaies condemned of great learned Papists If he had named the men and points of religion as he told the tyme the three vntruthes wold haue appeared in their likenes As I guesse he meaneth of the Popes power for deposing Princes which I confesse some Papists haue denyed but nether were they the greatest learned men nor alwayes were there any such nor hath he proued it to be a point of Popish religion And thus much of Bels first Article VVherfore remember Bel from whence thou art fallen and doe pennance Apoc 2. THE SECOND ARTICLE TOVCHING THE MASSE PREFACE Bel deuideth this Article into foure members in the first wherof he impugneth the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist in the second the sacrifice of the Masse in the third he inueigheth against the recantation which Berengarius made when he adiured Bels heresie and in the fourth he treateth of apparent contradictions which saith he are in the Masse And the like method we wil keepe in our answer CHAP. I. Bels reason against the Real Presence of Christ in the B. Sacrament answered his vntruth and dissimulation therin discouered S Paul prophetied That in the 1. Timoth. 4. v. 1. last tymes some shal depart from the faith attending to the spirits of errors and doctrin of diuils Which prophecy is most manifestly fulfilled in these heretiks who impugne the Catholique doctrin of the B Sacrament For