Selected quad for the lemma: kingdom_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
kingdom_n	begin_v	king_n	saxon_n	2,101	5	11.5638	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A07192	Of the consecration of the bishops in the Church of England with their succession, iurisdiction, and other things incident to their calling: as also of the ordination of priests and deacons. Fiue bookes: wherein they are cleared from the slanders and odious imputations of Bellarmine, Sanders, Bristow, Harding, Allen, Stapleton, Parsons, Kellison, Eudemon, Becanus, and other romanists: and iustified to containe nothing contrary to the Scriptures, councels, Fathers, or approued examples of primitiue antiquitie. By Francis Mason, Batchelour of Diuinitie, and sometimes fellow of Merton Colledge in Oxeford.	Mason, Francis, 1566?-1621.	1613 (1613)	STC 17597; ESTC S114294	344,300	282

to the Emperours by 3. Popes with 3. Roman Councels practised commonly and anciently by all kings through the whole Christian world yeelded to his predecessours in the time of the Saxons vsed by his own father and brother and neuer denied in England before Anselmus began to broach the Hildebrandicall Doctrine PHIL. This cause was handled at Rome where the kings Proctour boldly affirmed that his master the king would not loose inuestitures for the losse of his kingdome to whom Pope Paschall answered if as thou saiest thy king will not indure to lose the donations of Churches for the losse of his kingdome knowe thou precisely I speake it before God that I would not suffer him to obtaine them without punishment for the redemption of my head Thus the cause was determined against the King ORTH. No maruell for the Pope was Iudge in his owne cause such a cause as was not a litle both for his pride and profit such a Pope as within 8. yeeres after periured himselfe in the like matter But notwithstanding the Popes determination the king disdaining to bee so deluded sent to Anselmus forbidding him to enter the land vnlesse he would obserue the customes of William the Conquerour and William Rufus so he was absent three yeeres PHIL. Yet at his returne he got a glorious victory for Edinerus writeth thus rex antecessorum suorum vsu relicto nec personas quae in regimen Ecclesiae sumebantur per se elegit nec eas per dationem virgae pastoralis Ecclesijs quibus praeficiebantur inuestiuit the king leauing the vse of his predecessours did neither himselfe elect such persons as were assumed to the gouernment of the Church nor inuested them to the Churches ouer which they were set by the deliuering of the pastorall staffe ORTHOD. Here is a cleare confession that inuestitures belonged to the king by the vse of his predecessours yet such was the violence and fury both of the Pope and the Archbishop that he thought good to redeeme his quiet by releasing of his ancient right PHIL. If he had any right he did yeeld it vp for Malmsbury saith Venit Rex sublimi trophaeo splendidus triumphali gloria Angliam inuectus inuestiturasque Ecclesiarum Anselmo in perpetuum in manum remisit The king came out of France glistering with a stately trophee entred England with triumphall glory and released the inuestitures of Churches to Anselmus into his hands for euer ORTHOD. True to Anselmus here was a finall and perpetuall end betweene them two neither did the king intermeddle any more in the matter while Anselmus liued but after his death Anno 1113. hee gaue the Archbishopricke to Rodolph Bishop of London and inuested him with a Ring and a Staffe and Anno 1123. he gaue the said Archbishopricke to William Corboll he gaue also the Bishopricke of Lincolne to Alexander the Bishopricke of Bath to Godfrid the Bishopricke of Worcester to Simon the Bishopricke of Cicester to Sifrid After the raigne of Henry the first though the Popes were still busie especially when the state was troubled or the king out of the Realme yet the succeeding Princes would not suffer themselues to bee robbed of this right and royaltie but from time to time put it in practise and maintained their prerogatiue King Edward the third told Pope Clement the fift That his progenitors and other noble and faithfull men had founded and indowed Churches and placed Ministers in them euer since the first planting of religion in the Realme of England and that the kings did of ancient time freely conferre Cathedrall Churches iure suo Regio by their Princely right so oft as they were vacant he doth not say by the Popes permission but by their princely right so the collation of Bishopricks is the ancient right of the kings of England Moreouer he told him that whereas now Deanes and Chapters elect this proceeded from the graunt of the kings at the request and instance of the Pope he doth not say from the graunt of the Pope but from the grant of the kings at the request of the Pope with which concordeth that famous act of Parliament made in the 25. of Edw. the third Our Soueraigne Lord the king and his heires shall haue and inioy for the time the collations to the Archbishoprickes and other dignities electiue which be of his aduowry such as his progenitors had before free election was granted Sith that the first elections were granted by the Kings progenitors vpon a certaine forme and condition as namely to demaund license of the King to chuse and after choice made to haue his royall assent And in the dayes of Richard the second statutum est saith Thomas Walsingam in eodem insuper Parliamento vt de caetero nullus transfre●aret ad obtinendum prouisiones in Ecclesijs vel Ecclesiam si quis contrarium faceret si posset apprehendi caperetur vt Regi rebellis incarceraretur A statute was made in the same Parliament that from henceforth none should passe the seas to obtaine prouisions in Churches or to obtaine any Church and if any should do contrary if he could be catched he should be apprehended as a rebell to the king and cast in prison The next yeere the same king set out a Proclamation that all such as were resident in the Court of Rome and had benefices in England should returne by the feast of S. Nicholas vnder paine of forfeiting all their benefices When the Pope heard all this thundering he sent a Nuncio with great complaints for answere wherof the king referred him to the Parliament following which would by no meanes consent that Rome-runners should get their benefices as in former time In the dayes of Henry the fift when the Pope by his bulles translated Richard of Lincolne to Yorke the Deane and Chapter standing vpon the lawes of the land refused to admit him as hereafter shall be declared Shall wee now say that the kings of England conferre spiritual promotions by the Popes indulgence let king Edward the first be witnesse let the Parliament in the raigne of Edward the third be witnesse let the like Parliament in the time of Richard the second be witnesse let the Deane and Chapter of Yorke be witnesse all which were of the Popish religion and yet referred this to the king and not to the Pope Hitherto that the kings of England vsed Inuestitures NOw I will prooue that they vsed them lawfully by a double right as Princes as Patrons As Princes for many reasons First if we looke into the old Testament we find that Salomon set Sadock in the roume of Abiathar by what authoritie Verely by the same by which he cast out Abiathar Which I haue already prooued to be done by the lawful and ordinary power of a Prince If this be a perpetuall patterne for all posteritie then the collation of spirituall dignities is the Princes right Secondly it was prophesied of

Salomon may rightly be called Prophets PHIL. I say that Salomon deposed Abiathar not as a king but as a Prophet and executer of diuine iustice ORTHOD. As though the King as a King were not an executer of diuine iustice yes Philodox it is the King as King which beareth not the sword in vaine it is the king as king which is The minister of God and a r●uenger of wrath to him that doth euill therefore the King as King is the executer of diuine iustice And so when you say not as a king but as an executer of diuine iustice you put those things asunder which the Lord hath put together againe when you say that hee did it As a Prophet and an executer of diuine iustice you put those things together which the Lord hath put a sunder for a Prophet as a Prophet is the mouth of the Lord the executer of diuine iustice is not the mouth but the hand of the Lord the hand and the mouth must be distinguished PHIL. I will proue that Salomon did it as a Prophet For in the same place it is sayd that Salomon put out Abiathar that hee might fulfill the words of the Lord which he spake against the house of Eli in Shilo ORTHOD. Doe you thinke that such like speeches import the finall cause and the intents of the Agents The souldiours seeing the coate of Christ to be without seame wouen from the top throughout said one to another Let vs not diuide it but cast lots for it whose it shal be that the Scripture might bee fulfilled which saith they parted my garments among them and on my coate did they cast lots doe you imagine that the soldiours had any intent hereby to fulfill the Scripture Euen iust as much as Iudas had when hee sold his master for thirty peeces of siluer or Herod when hee slue the infants or the Iewes when they gaue him vineger to drinke They had no purpose in so doing to fulfill the Scripture yet God so disposed that by their action the Scripture was fulfilled Likewise your owne Bishop Tostatus may teach you that in this place the particle vt doth not signifie the finall cause but the consecution But what if Salomon had done it to that very end and purpose that the word of the Lord concerning the house of Eli might be fulfilled would this prooue that he did it as a Prophet Iehu when he had slaine Iehoram said to Bidkar a Captaine Take him and cast him in some place of the field of Naboth the Iezrelite for I remember that when ● and thou rode together after Ahab his father the Lord laide this burthen vpon him surely I haue seene yesterday the bloud of Naboth and the bloud of his sonnes sayd the Lord and I will render it thee in this field saith the Lord now therefore take and cast him into the field according to the word of the Lord The casting of him into the field was not onely a fulfilling of the prophesie but it was also commaunded to bee done euen directly to that end that the prophesie might bee fulfilled yet I thinke you will not say that Iehu was a Prophet so farre are you from prouing that Salomon did it as a Prophet PHIL. Either as a King or as a Prophet not as a King and therefore as a Prophet ORTHOD. NOt as a King why so the Lord had promised that Salomon should sit vpon the Throne of Dauid his father so Salomon was heire apparant to the crowne by Gods owne appointment yet for all this Adonias exalted himselfe and sayd I wil be king and Ioab and Abiathar helped him forward they said God saue King Adonias Whereupon all three were guilty of high treason against the king and all three were punished by the king PHIL. True by the king but not by kingly power ORTHO Yes by kingly power the king did it as a king And to beginne with Adonias the king granted him a conditionall pardon that If hee shewed himselfe a worthy man there should not a haire of him fall to the earth but if wickednesse were found in him hee should die and therefore when hee desired Abisha to wife the wisdome of the King reaching into the profoundnesse of the policie did interpret it as a meanes of aspiring to the kingdome So King Salomon sent by the hand of Benaiah the sonne of Iehoiada and hee smote him that hee died Who did this the spirit of God saith that King Salomon did it so it is ascribed to the King yea it is cleare that the King did it as a King for who could pardon treason but a King as a King Or who should draw the sword of iustice against malefactors but he that beareth not the sword in vaine that is the King by the power and authoritie of a King Concerning Ioab it was tolde Salomon that he was fled to the Tabernacle of the Lord and Benaiah sayd thus saith the King come out and hee sayd nay but I will die here and Benaiah brought the King word againe and the King said doe as hee hath said and smite him in all which there was nothing but the execution of iustice which belongeth to a King as a King Now to come to Abiathar his offence against the King was the same and the Scripture ascribeth the punishment in the same tenour of wordes vnto the king Then the King said vnto Abiathar the Priest euen the king who in the former verse commaunded Adonias to bee slaine that is the King as a King which may appeare further by that which hee said Goe to Anathoth to thy owne fields in which words hee confineth him which is the action of a King And againe thou art worthy of death but I will not this day kill thee because thou barest the Arke of the Lord God before Dauid my Father and because thou hast suffered in all things wherein my Father hath beene afflicted In which wordes hee granteth life to one that had deserued death and who could doe this but a King So Salomon cast out Abiathar from being high Priest vnto the Lord Where wee see death changed into depriuation All which doe argue the power of a King yea it is said that the King put Benaiah the sonne of Iehoiada in the roume of Ioab ouer the hoast which vndoubtedly belonged vnto the King as hee was King and it followeth immediately in the same verse and the King set Sadok the Priest in the roume of Abiathar Thus you see that the whole course of Scripture ascribeth it to the King as a King and why should you thinke otherwise PHIL. BEcause in the old Testament the Leuites were free by the law of God from the power of secular Princes For in the third of Numbers God doth not once but often repeate that the Leuites are properly his owne and that he hath chosen them

whole Ecclesiasticall order the 2. a desolation of their country the 3. the impouerishing of the kingdome by wasting their treasure the 4. the ruine and subuersion of Churches The consideration of which things so preuailed with the King that Pope Pius was disapointed of his purpose PHIL. That which Pius could not performe in the daies of Lewis videlicet that the pragmaticall Sanction should be taken cleane away was afterward effected by Leo the 10. in the reigne of King Francis the first therefore in the councell of Lateran the pragmaticall Sanction was abrogated by a publique Decree ORTH. King Francis to vse the words of Duarenus made choice rather to serue the stage and the time with his owne profit as hee himselfe confesseth and remit somewhat of the publique right then to striue so oft with the Popes about this Helena especially seeing he perceiued that some danger from them did hang ouer his head Yet for al this the Sanction cannot be said to bee cleane taken away For the vniuersity of Paris did interpose an appeale to the next general councell which appeale stood with iustice equity for 3. reasons first because the fact of the king was not voluntary but by compulsion Secondly because the Parisians whom it must concerned were neither called nor heard Thirdly because there is no reason that the councell of Lateran and constitution of Leo should derogate from the authority of the councel of Basil. And if we should suppose that it did not onelie derogate from it but also abrogate it yet the verie constitution of Pope Leo yeeldeth to the King the power of nomination in these wordes VVhen a Cathedrall or Metropoliticall Church is vacant let not the Bishoppe bee chosen by the Colledge of Canons but let the King within sixe monethes offer and nominate a graue and fit man to the Pope Thus it is euident that the French Kings retained their right and authoritie in making of Bishoppes euer since their first embracing of the Christian faith And had they this by the indulgence of the Pope Let the Councell of Basill be witnesse let Charles the seuenth bee witnesse let the Court of Paris bee witnesse yea let King Francis himselfe who confessed that when hee went against the sanction hee remitted of the publique right be witnesse And thus much for France CHAP. XII Of the Election of the Bishops of England PHILOD COncerning England King Henry the first did pretend to challenge Inuestitures as vsed by his father and brother before him whereof yet notwithstanding wee finde no expresse proofe or example in any of our histories that they vsed them much lesse that they were lawfully granted vnto them ORTHOD. I will prooue both that they vsed them and that they vsed them lawfully That his brother William Rufus vsed them may appeare by William of Malmesbury who declareth that the King being sicke made mention of the Archbishopricke of Canterbury which was then voide and willed the Bishops to consider of it who answered that whom the King should thinke worthy they all would accept willingly Itaille cubito se attollens hunc ait sanctum virum Anselmum eligo ingenti subsecuto fragore fauentium so he raising himselfe vp vpon his elbowe saide I elect this holy man Anselmus whereupon followed a great applause Now that Bishoprickes in those dayes were giuen by deliuering of a ring and a staffe may appeare by Rafe Bishop of the South Saxons who being threatened by the same King baculum protendit annulum exuit vt si vellet acciperet held out his Crosier put off his ring that the King might take them if hee would intending thereby to resigne his Bishoprick That William the Conquerour vsed the like authoritie is also manifest by the same authour saying Nondum ille efflauerat cum a Gulielmo Rege Lanfrancus Cadomensis Abbas ad Archiepiscopatum electus est Stigandus had not yet breathed out his Ghost when Lanfranck Abbot of Saint Steuens in Cane was elected by King William the Conquerour to the Archbishoprick The like may be shewed before the Conquest where by the way let me tell you that wee stand not so much vpon the ring and the staffe as vpon the thing it selfe that is the Princes power and authoritie for which I will produce some examples as it were a few clusters of a great vintage beginning with Edward the Confessour of whom Malmsbury faith Rex Robertum quem ex Monacho Gemiticensi Londoniae fecerat Episcopum Archiepiscopum creauit the King Edward the Confessour created Robert Archbishop whom before of a Monke he had made Bishop of London And before that King Alfred made Asserio Bishop of Shierburne and Denewulfus Bishop of Winchester and more then two hundred yeeres before that Edelwalke King of the South Saxons promoted Wilfrid to an Episcopall See Thus it is euident that as in other Kingdomes so in England Inuestitures were anciently practised by Princes Wherefore King Henrie the first might haue challenged them not onely as vsed by his father and brother but also as the ancient custome of the Kingdome in the time of the Saxons Wherein onely this was the difference that in ancient time Princes vsed them without contradiction but now the Popes perceiuing that if Princes should haue the bestowing of them after the olde custome it would abate that power to which they themselues aspired beganne to spurne excommunicating both the giuers and takers This was done in the fifth and seuenth Romane Councels vnder Gregory the seuenth but Pope Vrban went further decreeing that not onely the giuers and takers but also all such as consecrated any man so promoted should bee excommunicate At this Councell Anselmus was present by whose aduise and perswasion the decree was made Whereupon when after the death of William Rufus King Henry the first not knowing of this decree much lesse imagining that it was concluded by the meanes of Anselmus had called him home hee well rewarded the kindnesse of so gracious a Prince for first hee would not bee induced to doe his homage to his Lord and Soueraigne was not this a good subiect did hee not well deserue to be canonized for a Saint then he refused to consecrate those whom the King did inuest to Bishoprickes by a staffe and a ring so the King commanded Gerard Archbishop of Yorke to performe that office as Malmsbury Matthew Paris and Roger Houeden doe testifie PHIL. But what followeth in the same authours William Gifford Elect of Winchester refused to receiue Consecration from him and was therefore by the king banished the land Rinelmus Elect of Hereford resigned his Bishopricke into the kings hands being troubled in conscience because hee receiued inuestiture from a lay Prince by occasion of which broiles the rest to whom the king had giuen inuestitures remained vnconsecrated ORTHOD. Whose fault was that not the kings who required no more then was confirmed

or Saxons but in particular were of three nations English Saxons and Iutes Now to passe ouer the rest the Iutes which florished in the kingdome of Kent first receiued the water of life from Austin from whom also the golden streames were deriued vnto the Saxons ORTHOD. We acknowledge to Gods glory that he and his conuerted thousands yet dare we not say that they laid the first foundation in Kent For in Canterbury the regall citie euen when Austin arriued there was a Christian Church built in the time of the Romanes dedic●ed to the memorie of Saint Martin whither Berta the Queene descended from the blood royall of France with Lethardus a Bishoppe her Chaplaine vsually resorted to diuine seruice So it is most likely that Lethardus the french man had laid some stones in the foundation before the comming of Austin Therefore if he that first layeth the foundation of Religion in a kingdome bee called an Apostle then Austin was not the Apostle of Kent but rather Lethardus Notwithstanding for as much as Lethardus gathered but a few clusters and the maine vintage was reserued for Austin let vs inlarge the signification of the word Apostle and extend it to Austin and moreouer though improperly to Gregory and Eleutherius and I wish your Romanists would imitate these Apostles Eleutherius did not obtrude any vpon the kingdome but onely sent at the Kings request Austine comming from Gregorie did not steale in secretly but stayed in the Iland of Tennet till such time as hee knewe the Kings will and pleasure neither offered hee to Preach in Kent before the King gaue him and his fellowes licence They came not in disguised they lurked not in corners they brought no Bulles in their bosomes to discharge subiects or depose Princes But their proceedings towards the Prince were Christian honest and orderly They came to plant the faith of Christ you come to supplant it They to preach obedience you to teach rebellion Their Gospell was a Gospel of peace You arme the subiect against his Soueraigne They conuerted people You peruert them They sought to build the Church You seeke the ruine of Church and common wealth And I heartily wish you which are the Popes Emissaries to consider euen vpon your beds what great difference there is betweene you and Austin PHIL. I marueile to heare you so commend S. Austin and to propose him for a patterne It is the custome of your men to detract from him and to blemish his credit ORTHO Concerning patternes we are taught by S. Paul Follow me as I doe follow Christ. That which is good in Austin wee embrace and commend wishing to be decked with those garlands but that which is otherwise let it wither in the roote from whence it sprang His desire to conuert the Pagans and his duetifull respect to the Prince deserue to be written in letters of gold but his superfluitie of Ceremonies might well haue bene spared He was too forward to display the Popes banner and his behauiour towards the Britaines was full of pride and disdaine PHIL. I Thought for all your faire speeches you would come to this at last but you doe not well to reproch so great a Saint by whom your Countrey receiued so great a blessing ORTHO It is no reproch but a trueth let Bede be witnes who declareth that a Synod being appointed the Britaine Bishops came to a certaine holy Anchoret and asked his counsell Whether they should leaue their Traditions at the preaching of Austin Who answered If he be a man of God follow him They said how may we try this He answered The Lord saith Take vp my yoke vpon you and learne of mee for I am meeke and humble of heart Therefore if Austin bee meeke and humble in heart it is credible that both hee himselfe beareth the yoke of Christ and offereth it to be borne of others But if he be churlish and proud it is certaine that he is not of God neither are wee to regard his words Then they enquired of him againe how they might know whether he was proud or no. Pr●cure saith the Anchoret That he with his company may come first into the Synod And if when you approch neere hee ariseth vnto you then you knowing him to bee the seruant of Christ heare him obediently But if he despise you nor will vouchsafe to rise at your presence which are moe in number let him likewise be despised of you And truely as this Anchoret bad them so did they For it happened that when they came thither Austin was already there and sate in his Chaire Which when they saw straightway waxing wroth they noted him of pride and therefore indeuoured to ouerthwart and gaine say whatsoeuer he proposed His Oration was thus Although in many other points ye doe contrary to our custome or rather contrary to the custome of the Vniuersall Church of Christ Yet notwithstanding if you will in these three things obey me That is In celebrating Easter in due time In accomplishing the Ministerie of Baptisme by which wee are borne againe to God according to the maner of the holy Romane and Apostolicke Church And last of all in preaching with vs to this English Nation the word of our Lord All your other Ceremonies fashions and customes though they be contrary to ours yet wee will willingly suffer and bee content to beare with them But they answered That they would doe none of the things requested neither would accompt him for their Archbishop Saying with themselues Nay if hee would not so much as rise to vs truely the more we should now subiect our selues to him the more would he hereafter despise vs and set vs at nought PHIL. Truely they came to Austin as the Pharises came to Christ that they might tempt him with that signe ORTHOD. Doe you thinke they meant to intangle him Then belike as by his not rising they tooke occasion to reiect him so though he had risen they would haue found some cuasion and not haue yeelded vnto him But is not this an vncharitable iudgement Hee called a Synod of the neerest and greatest Prouince they came vnto it but withall wished that the matter might be debated in a greater Synod That also was agreed vpon and they appeared But before the appearance they asked aduise of him who was thought most godly and wise The aduise was this in effect If hee behaue himselfe humbly accept of him If hee shew himselfe disdainfull reiect him Now what reason is there to thinke but as they followed his counsell in reiecting him because the euent did shew him proud so they would haue accepted of him if in the euent they had found him courteous PHIL. The false prophet gaue a false signe ORTHOD. The signe which he gaue and they made vse of was by the proud and disdainfull gesture of the body to discouer the pride and disdaine of the heart How was this a false signe Vndoubtedly to deny

strangers a common courtesie is a token of arrogancie And a proud looke doeth argue a proud heart according to the saying A man may be knowen by his looke PHIL. It is the iudgement of S. Iohn the Apostle That we must vouchsafe such men as are diuided from the Catholicke Church no honour or office of courtesie in these words If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine receiue him not into house neither say vnto him God saue you ORTHO How can you apply this to the British-Bishops who confessed as Bede relateth That they vnderstood that to be the true way of righteousnes which Austin had preached Yea Parsons the Iesuite affirmeth That the faith which S. Austin brought and that which the Britaines had before must needs bee one and the selfe same in all materiall and substantiall points PHIL. They were all Schismaticks and guiltie of departing from the Church of Rome ORTHOD. How could they depart from it seeing they were neuer lincked to it by any bond of obedience For when should Rome haue any such iurisdiction ouer Britaine At the first planting of Religion You cannot proue it In the dayes of Eleutherius it doeth not appeare that euer he chalenged any such thing And euen their maner of Baptizing obseruing Easter and other Ecclesiasticall institutions contrary to the customes of the Church of Rome make more then probable proofe that Britaine was not vnder the iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome Wherefore though we cannot excuse the Britaines for refusing to ioyne with him in the conuersion of the Saxons yet wee must needs say they had iust reason to refuse to put their necks vnder his yoke And surely if Austin had not had a proud spirit hee would onely haue requested their helping hand for the Lords worke and not haue sought dominion ouer them for himselfe and for his lord the Pope Yet the pride of his spirit and his aspiring cogitations may further appeare in that he demaunded of Gregorie i How he should deale with the Bishops of Britaine and France thereby affecting not only to haue iurisdiction ouer the Britaines but ouer the French also Which Gregory well ynough perceiuing answered We gaue thee no authoritie ouer the Bishops of France for that of ancient time of my predecessours the Bishop of Arles receiued his Pall whom we must not bereaue of his authoritie Thus much of his pride NOw whether he were the cause of the massacre following I will not define You shall heare the opinion of Amandus Xierixensis a Frier Minorite When the Brittans saith hee were Catholiks the Saxons were Gentiles for the conuersion of whom blessed Gregory sent Austin and Mellitus which conuerted the Saxons but when Austin would haue brought the Bishops and Abbots of the Brittans by Apostolicke authority that they should receiue him as Legate and preach with him to the English discord was mooued for their disobedience to Saint Austin and so warre was raised betweene the Kings of the Brittans and of the Saxons which now beeing conuerted would haue subdued the Brittans to Austin Bede himselfe testifieth how Austin threatfully prophesied that if they would not take peace and bee at concord with their brethren they should receiue warre from their enemies and if they would not preach to the Englishmen the way of life they should suffer at their hand and by their power the vengcance of death Now because the euent did answere to the speech it is called a prophesie For what followed Edilbert King of Kent moued Edelfride King of Northumberland to ioyne with him against the Brittans and there was made a bloudy massacre the narration whereof is thus set downe by Galfridus Monemutensis In a part of the Brittans Christianity yet flourished the which beginning in the daies of Eleutherius neuer failed among them When Austin came hee found seuen Bishopricks and an Archbishopricke supplied with very godly Gouerners and Abbies a great number in which the flocke of Christ was kept in good order Besides other Cities in the Citie of Bangor there was a most noble Church of 21. hundred monks all liuing with the labour of their hands Their Abbot was named Dinooch a man marueilously well learned who by diuerse arguments made it appeare when Austin required the Bishops to bee subiect vnto him that they ought him no subiection Edilbert therefore the King of Kent as soone as hee saw them refuse to yeeld obedience to Austin and despise his preaching stirred vp Edelfride and other Princes of the Saxons to gather a great army and goe to Bangor to destroy Dinooch and his Clergie Who taking the City commaunded the swords of his men to bee turned first vpon the monkes so twelue hundred of them the same day decked with martyrdome entred the kingdome of Heauen If they were martyrs what were they that made them Martyrs If the Saxons were persecutors and did persecute them to that end that they might make them subiect to Austn what then is to bee thought of Austin It had beene the dutie of Austin saith Lelandus to haue admonished the Saxons that perfidious nation that if they would admit Christianity sincerely they should restore to the iust Lords and possessours the Empire of Brittaine which contrarie to the oath of warfare they had occupied by tyranny If Austin sought by any sinister meanes to enlarge his owne iurisdiction hee was farre vnlike to Palladius Bishop of Scotland who as Polydor witnesseth besought Constantine their king with many prayers that hee would not assist with armes the idolatrous nation of the Saxons against the Christian Brittans PHIL. Saint Bede saith that Saint Austin long before that time was taken out of this life to the kingdome of Heauen ORT. That is not Saint Bedes but some false finger hath foysted it in For a learned antiquary skilfull in the Saxon language affirmeth that it is not found in the Saxon copie Hitherto of circumstances incident to his person Now at last let vs come to his ordination and I hope you will confesse him to be a canonicall Bishop PHIL. HEe was most canonicall For as Doctor Stapleton declareth out of Saint Bede hee was sent from the Bishop of Rome the successor of Peter and consecrated by the Bishops of France ORTHOD. Pope Gregory saith hee was consecrated by the Bishops of Germany PHIL. That is the fault of the copie for it should not bee Germaniarum but Galliarum as Baronius thinketh ORT. When did the French Bishops ordaine him PHIL. After he had bin a while in Brittaine and had conuerted diuers ORTHO Baronius is perswaded by a place of Gregory that it was before the conuersion of the English but by whom was hee ordained PHIL. Saint Bede saith that it was performed by Aetherius Archbishop of Arles ORTHOD. Baronius saith that Aetherius was Bishop of Lyons not of Arles and that Virgilius was then Bishop

meanes of the brasen serpent yet the vertue of healing proceeded not from the brasen serpent but immediatly from himselfe For ●e that turned towards it was not healed by the thing that he saw but by thee O Sautour of all Euen so though God in giuing this Spirituall power vse the ministerie of man yet the power it selfe is immediatly from God For whereas S. Paul among the gifts of God to the Church nameth gouernments And S. Peter saith If any man minister let him doe it as of the abilitie which God ministreth Your Iesuit Salmeron though striuing to deriue it from the Pope as it is actuall yet considering it in it selfe being conuicted with the euidence of trueth saith thus Ministrationes quoque Domino ascribuntur sicut gubernationes à Paulo quia quicquid est supernaturale in ministerio gubernatione Deus per se fecit id autem ad quod creatura potest concurrere sinit eam agere etsi ipse praecipuè id operetur Gratia igitur gratis data administrandi gubernandi à Deo est immediatè i. Ministrations are ascribed to the Lord by S. Paul as also gouernments because whatsoeuer is supernaturall in minister●● and gouernment God hath wrought that by himselfe but he suffereth the creature to worke that vnto which it can concurre although himselfe in that bee the 〈…〉 pall agent Therefore the freely giuen grace of administring and gouerning is 〈…〉 tly from God And againe ● Si s●matur pro gratia gratis data gubernandi vel administrandi iurisdictionem vt sumunt Petrus Paulus procul dubio donumest quod ab homine procedere non potest i. If Iurisdiction or gouernment be taken for the freely giuen grace of gouerning or administring Iurisdiction as Peter and Paul take it without doubt it is a gift which cannot proceed from man Wherefore when S. Paul willeth Timothie To stirre vp the grace which is giuen him it is to be expounded not onely of the grace of Order but of all Episcopall grace And S. Ambrose when hee saith God giueth the grace doeth vndoubtedly meane all Episcopall grace For who can giue any grace to the Pastours of the Church but onely the God of all grace which giueth Pastours to the Church and appointeth them to be rulers ouer his family To Salmeron we may adde Henr. Gandauensis affirming that Bishops haue their power both of Order and Iurisdiction immediatly from Christ As also Gottifredus de Fontibus and Iohannes de Poliaco all alleadged by Salmeron Whose opinions he controuleth without reason seeing before in effect he affirmed the same I will conclude this point with the Vniuersitie of Paris which ratified this position with a Decree and caused one Iohannes Sarazim a Frier to recant the contrary PHIL. If Iurisdiction be giuen in Consecration then it should be equall in all Bishops ORTHOD. The power it selfe is equall in all though the determination of the power which is from the Church be vnequall When a Bishop is translated to another See hee doeth not lose his former habituall power no more then the Sunne doeth lose his light when hee passeth to the other Hemisphere When a Bishop of a smaller Circuit is aduanced to a greater he getteth not a greater power but a larger subiect whereupon he may exercise his power And when a Bishop is deposed hee is not absolutely depriued of his power but the matter is taken away vpon which his power should worke This is confessed by Vargas to be the opinion of Alphonsus and others If it happen that a Bishop for any crime bee depriued of his Bishopricke then he shall bee depriued of his subiects vpon whom hee ought to exercise his power of Iurisdiction but hee shall not be depriued of the power of Iurisdiction it selfe receiued in his Consecration CHAP. II. Whether S. Peter were the onely fountaine vnder Christ of all Spirituall Iurisdiction PHIL. THe giuing of Iurisdiction must onely proceed from him that is the fountaine of all Spirituall Iurisdiction vnder Christ which is the Bishop of Rome or some Metropolitane or Bishop vnder him that hath authoritie and commission from him For the Church of God is like vnto a Citie which hath one onely fountaine from whence there issue diuers great floods which are branched out againe into sundry goodly streames whence the water is conueyed by pipes and conduits to serue the whole Citie This fountaine is the Bishop of Rome the great floods are the Patriarches Archbishops and Metropolitanes the streames are the rest of the Bishops the pipes and conduits are all those which deriue their Iurisdiction from the Bishops Now the Church of England was sometimes flourishing like the Paradice of God but since it was cut off from the liuely spring alas for woe it is like to a barren and forsaken wildernesse ORTHOD. The Church of England God be thanked is in such a case that all her friends haue cause to reioyce and all her enemies to gnash their teeth And as for the fountaine you speake of it is not a well of liuing water made by the King of heauen but a puddle or pit of poyson digged by the Prince of darkenesse The Bishop of Rome wee graunt hath of ancient time beene reuerently regarded and had though not a generall iurisdiction yet a large extent yea hee had precedencie of dignity and place before all other Bishops but this was onely by law humane because he was the Bishop of the Imperiall Citie but now hee is like a furious floud which ouerfloweth the bankes he will be no more confined with bounds and limits hee chalengeth a generallity of iurisdiction ouer the Christian world and that by law diuine PHIL. I Will proue That he is the fountaine of al spirituall iurisdiction by law diuine for Saint Peter was so and the Pope succeeded him in this right ORTHOD. There is more required to inferre this conclusion then al the Seminaries Iesuites in the world are able to performe but first how proue you that Peter was inuested in this right by law diuine PHIL. The Scripture is full of testimonies declaring both his lawfull authority and his due execution thereof his authority might appeare by many arguments but I will make choice of two which proue the point in question most directly the promise of the keyes the cōmission of feeding the sheep To begin with the first Christ said to Peter I wil giue thee the keyes of the kingdom of heauen Christ gaue him not one keye only but 2. the key of knowledge the key of power by the key of knowledge he was able to open all Scriptures controuersies of religion The key of power is of order or of iurisdiction by the key of order he was able to ordaine Bishops and Pastours of the Church and againe to lock them out of the ministery by deposing degrading as occasion required by the key of iurisdiction hee might open and shut

this forsooth is the Catholick faith the profession whereof is now required to bee made of all Bishops Thirdly the Popes of latter times will haue Metropolitanes sworne to their obedience yea and Pius the fourth did cunningly conuey this oth into his new coyned creed but we find no such thing exacted in the time of Pelagius PHIL. There is yet extant an Epistle of a Bishop which tooke the oth to Saint Gregory who liued not long after Pelagius Vnde iurans dico per Deum omnipotentem per haec quatuor Euangelia quae in manibus teneo per salutē gentium atque illustrium dominorum nostrorum remp gubernantium me in vnitate sicut dixi Ecclesiae Catholicae communione Rom pontificis sēper sine dubio permanere i. Whereupon I affirme swearing by God Almighty and by the 4. Gospels which I hould in my hands and by the saluation of the Gentiles of our glorious Lords which gouerne the commonwealth that I will remaine alwaies and without doubt as I haue said in the unity of the Catholike Church in the communion of the Bishop of Rome ORTHOD. You intend to proue that Metropolitanes should sweare to the Pope before their confirmation or receiuing of the palle the example you bring concernes no such matter For first he was only a Bishop not a Metropolitan Secondly this oth was voluntary not exacted Thirdly it was not vpon a confirmation or receiuing of a palle but vpon an abiuration of his heresie Neither doth it appeare that this oth was in the time of Gregory though some haue gone about to ascribe it to the time of Pope Pelagius wherein behold and you shal see the cunning of Popish proctors For whereas Pelagius reproued some Metropolitanes because they did delay fidem suam exponere and thereupon made this decree that those which did not send within three monthes ad fidem suam exponendam should be depriued Remundus Rufus a Popish Lawier of Paris writing for the honor of the Pope doth change these words ad exponendam fidem i. To make profession of their faith into dandae fidei causa i. To make a faithfull promise or oth so the profession of the faith of Iesus Christ was by a strange Metamorphosis transformed into an oth of the Popes supremacy Now least the Spanish Lawiers should come short of the French in shewing their zeale for their Lord the Pope Franciscus Vargas king Philips Councellor and Ambassador to Pope Pius the fourth affirmeth that Pelagius declared the Popes supremacy by this decree in that he would haue all Metropolitanes sworne vnto him Marke what he saith sworne vnto him whether deceiued by Rufus or purposing to make an officious lie for his holy Fathers aduantage I cannot tell Howsoeuer this oth cannot bee referred to Pope Pelagius but rather to Pope Paschall the second who would haue forced Archbishop Panormitane to take it and vpon his refusal set out the decret all Epistle recorded by Gregory the ninth in the Canon-law the title whereof is this Electo in Archiepiscopum sedes Apostolica Pallium non tradet nisi Prius Praestet fidelitatis obedientiae iuramentum 1. The Apostolicall See shall not deliuer the Pall to an Archbishop Elect before he performe the oath of Allegeance and obedience PHIL. Though Pope Paschall made this decree yet it followeth not that he was the author of the oath it might be more anciēt though he renewed it ORTHOD. It appeareth by the Contents of the Decree that he was the authour For first he declareth that Panormitane had signified vnto him that Kings and Nobles were striken with admiration that the Pall should be offered vnder the condition of an oath and the same Pope did write in the same wordes vpon the like occasion to an Archbishop of Polonia who had signified vnto him the like admiration of the King and Nobles of Polonia This deniall of the Archbishops admiration of Princes states doth argue a noueltie 2. Whereas some did obiect that it was not decreed in the councels he reiecteth all Councels with scorn disdaine Aiunt in Concilijs statutū non inueniri quasi Romanae Ecclesiaelegē cōctlia vlla prefixerint cum omnia concilia per Romanae Ecclesiae auctoritatē facta sint robur acceperint in eorū Statutis Romani Pontificis patenter excipiatur auctoritas i. They say that it was not found decreed in Councels as though any Councels could prefix a law to the Church of Rome seeing al Councels are both made and receiue strength by the authoritie of the Church of Rome and the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome is manifestly excepted in their constitutions Thus he doth not refer the oath to former Popes and Councels but relyeth onely vpon his owne authoritie So it seemeth that this weede did spring 1100. yeeres after Christ. Neither did they stay in Metropolitanes but Innocent the third in the Councell of Lateran imposed the like oath of allegeance and obedience vpon the foure Patriarches Yea all Bishops are bound by solemne oath to promise obedience and faith to Saint Peter the Church of Rome and their Lord the Pope and to put to their helping hand which is an essentiall point of their obedience to defend and maintaine the Papacy By which pollicie it came to passe that the soueraign was defeated of his subiect the bramble did mount aloft aboue the cedars of Libanus So he which was first admitted among vs of curtesie continued by custome that is by right humane began now to challenge of dutie and by lawe diuine And not content with the honour of a Patriarch he tooke vpon him to domineer through the Christian world as Pope Parramount flashing out his excommunications like lightning interdicting kingdomes trampling Princes and Emperours vnder his feete yea and dispensing with vowes oaths and the euerlasting Commandements of God himselfe Is not this to sit in the Temple of God as though he were God Wherefore by all right reason equitie and law of God and man he was to be banished I will conclude this point with the saying of a reuerend Bishop As for his Patriarchship by Gods law he hath none In this realme for 600. yeeres after Christ he had none for the last six hundred as looking to greater matters he would haue none aboue or against the sword which God hath ordained he can haue none to the subuersion of the faith and oppression of his brethren in reason right and equitie he should haue none you must seeke further for subiection to his tribunall this landoweth him none THE FIFTH BOOKE OF THE SECOND AND third controuersie concerning Priests and Deacons CHAP. I. Wherein the second controuersie is proposed diuided into two questions the former about Sacrificing the latter about Absolution the state of the former is set downe and the methode of proceeding PHIL. WHatsoeuer you haue as