before he would attempt any thing he caused to come vnto him into the house of the Lord and made a couenant with thē and tooke an oth of them in the house of the Lord shewed them the kinges sonne After which consent and couenant accorded amongst them hauing disposed an order for the proclaiming and establishing of Ioash the young rightfull king whom he had so saued from the massacre hee brought him forth as the text saith and put the Crowne vpon him and gaue him the testimonie and têhy made him king And when Athalia hearing the noise of the running of the people came in and cryed treason treason the text saith thêy layd handes on her and she went by the way by which the horses go to the house of the king and there was shee slaine So it appeareth by the very text itselfe that Athalia was neither deposed nor slaine by Ioiada nor by his authority but by the Nobles whole state of the countrey and by the authoritye of the rightfull king whom they firstcrowned annointed and proclaimed neither did Ioiada any thing in the matter more then duety nature and conscience moued him vnto to present vnto the nobles and fathers of Israell the kinges sonne whom he had saued and to further the restoring of him to his right being the king his maisters sonne and neerest allyed vnto him and especially right heire to the kingdome None authoritie did hee take vpon himselfe therein especially in respect of his priesthood Thus you see how little this example of of the vsurping Queene Athalia serueth D. Allens turne to proue the Popes authority to depose Princes And for the other of Ahab Iesabell they proue euen as much For if D. Allen meane Ahab himselfe touching his owne person he was neither depriued of his kingdome nor slaine by any priest or prophet but died king of Israell and was slaine in the field fighting against the king of Aram about Ramoth Gilead But if he meane the sonnes and whole house of Ahab which were destroyed by Iehu D. Allen abuseth both himselfe and you very much to tell you that they were deposed and destroyed either by Priest or Prophet for it was Iehu the king of Israell that slue Iehoram and smote the house of Ahab and caused Iesabell to be cast out of the window But saith D. Allen Iehu receiued authority and commission so to do from Eliseus the prophet therefore the Pope may giue and consequently hath himselfe authoritie to depose and kill Princes I deny your antecedent M. Doctor For it is most false that Iehu receiued authority from Eliseus as you seeme to intend he did from Elias mistaking either the man or the matter in your defense of the English Catholike to put downe the sonne and whole house of Ahab for the Prophet which was sent by Eliseus vnto Iehu to annoynt him neuer spake word of Eliseus to him much lesse deliuered him any authority from Eliseus but deliuered his message expressely from God beginning with Thus saith the Lord God of Israell c not Thus saith Eliseus So was it the authority of God and not of a Prophet wherby the house of Ahab and Iesabel were put downe slaine neither was priest or prophet the doer but Iehu the king of Israell whom God had by speciall commandement appointed to depose and smite them being himself before annoynted king in their place by the same commandement Now if D. Allen will hereupon gather any argument to mainteine the same authority in the Pope to depose destroy princes he nust needs make him equall in authority with God which neither Christian Iew nor Pagan will in reason allow vnto any mortall creature Now for his other example of k. Saul wherby he goeth about to inferre that as Samuel deposed Saul so the Pope may depose Princes it doth not onely make nothing at all for his purpose but is also most forcible against himselfe as shall bee most plainely declared vnto you For whereas first he assumeth it as a thing most true and certeine that Samuel deposed Saul he vtterlye mistaketh or rather most wickedly belyeth the holy historie in this as he hath done in the others For the Scripture saith that God rebuked Samuel for mourning for Saul that God had reiected him from reigning ouer Israel Whereby it appeareth manifestly that although Samuel in this place as the rest of the prophets in other places did by Gods expresse commaundement denounce the sentence of deposition yet was it not Samuel but God himselfe that deposed Saule from his kingdome to the great griefe of Samuel So is D. Allens argument cleane ouerthrowne in this example aswell as in the former vnlesse he will conclude that the Pope hath in himselfe as much authority as God himselfe which I thinke he would not greatly sticke to affirme if he thought he might be belieued for he maketh it not dainty to dubbe that which is as false in saying that the prophets deposed Princes So little regard hath he either of God or man so that he may bring his purpose to effect But let vs look further into this example and we shall see how farre it setteth him beside the saddle Albeit Saule was thus deposed by God himselfe and Dauid annointed king in his place by Gods owne precise commandement yet did Samuell thereupon euer go about to depriue him of his kingdome or encourage the people to reuolt from him and disobey him Or did the people themselues stir against him so long as he liued Or did Dauid which was the annointed king in his place euer offer to thrust him out of the kingdome or seeke his life No Saul reigned many yeares after that and the people both obeyed and serued him Yea and Dauid himselfe when he might haue slaine him in the Caue and so haue gotten also the present possession of the kingdom to himselfe yet he would not nay he thought it a sinne for him to haue done it For who said he can laye his hand on the Lordes annointed and be guiltlesse Yea percusso corde trepidauit saith S. Augustine he was stroken and trembled at the heart because hee had cut but the lappe of Saules coate And in th'end when word was brought him of Saules death how rewarded he the messenger I pray you for his tydings and for the Crowne and Bracelet of Saule◠which hee brought him Forsooth he caused him to bee slaine forthwith in his presence saying How wast thou not afraid to put forth thine hand to destroye the Lords annointed Thy bloud be vpō thine own head for thine own mouth hath witnessed against thee saying I haue slaine the Lords annointed Thus you see Saul a wicked King deposed not by a Pope nor by a Priest nor by a Prophet but by God himselfe and Dauid chosen and appointed by God and anointed in his place and yet
Ergo he hath no authoritie from God d If any place of Scripture had warranted the Pope to depose Princes it is likely D. Allen would haue alledged it but he alledgeth none e Exod. 22. 28. Ecclesiastes 10. 20. f God forbiddeth all men to speake euil of Princes so much as in thought Ergo much more to hurt them in deed and to depriue them of their kingdomes and liues too which the Pope seeketh to doe and D Allen mainteineth may lawfully be done What God commandeth in one place of Scripture he doth not countermand in another neither are the Scriptures coÌ„trarie one to another Luke 1. Dan. 2. 20. cap. 4. 14. 22. God not the Pope putteth downe and setteth vp Kings The ancient Fathers and Doctors of the Church confirme the supreme authoritie of Princes next immediatly vnder God Tertul. ad Scapulam Idem in Apologetico Optat. contra Parmenian lib. 3. Chrysostom ad populum Antioch hom 2. Greg. epist lib. 3. cap. 100. cap. 103. The Pope must necessarily presume himselfe to be God els can he not be aboue Princes The Pope must either acknowledge himselfe to be no man and not to bee at all or els must he necessarily be inferior to Princes * The Pope whatsoeuer he be Ecclesiasticall or temporall person must needes be subiect to the power of Princes The power to set vp and put downe Princes peculiar to God alone D. Allen more deuoted to the Pope then to God A notable impiety added to sacrilege What D. Allen cannot proue directly by sentence of Scripture he endeuoureth indirectly to induce by example Athalia Ahab Iesabell An argumeÌ„t sauouring more of malice then of substance D. Allens cankred mind D. Allens argument drawne from the example of Athalia The consequent denyed The reason why The Demonstration shewing the difference betweene both the persons and cases The Queenes Maiestie knowne to be a lawfull prince no vsurper D. Allens Antecedent also false 2. Kings 11. Ioash was restored not by Ioiada alone but by the whole Nobility and State Athalia deposed and slaine by the Nobles and State not by Ioiada alone nor by his authority Ahab and Iesabell Ahab himself was neuer deposed 1. King 22. Neither priest nor prophet but Iehu king of Israell deposed and smote the whole house of Ahab 2. Kings 9. 2. Kings 9. 6. The house of Ahab and Iesabell deposed and slaine by the authority and expresse commandement of God not of a priest or prophet D. Allens example of k. Saul deposed Saul not deposed by Samuel 1. Sam. 16. Saule deposed by God himselfe to the great griefe of Samuel D. Allens argumeÌ„t ouerthrowne vnlesse he will conclude that the Popes authority is equall to Gods This example further prosecuted against D. Allen. 1 Though Saul were deposed by God himselfe yet neither did Samuell encourage the people to reuolte from him neither did Dauid the annnointed king secke to put him out of the kingdome neither did the people disobey him so long as he liued which was many yeares after 2 Dauid when he might haue slaine Saule would not nay he thought it sinne to haue done it and calleth him the Lords annointed after his deposition a 1. Sam. 26. Aug. contradit Petihan lib. 2. cap. 48. 3 Dauid caused him that brought newes of Saules death to be forthwith slaine 2. Sam. 1. Marke how direct this example is against D. Allen a Howsoeuer D. Allen inteÌ„deth Saul to haue been deposed by Samuel yet the learneder Diuines take the sentence of God pronouÌ„ced by Samuel touching his reiecting of Saul not to extend to the present deposing of Saul himselfe No example in the whole scripture more directly against D. Allens doctrine and purpose then this The Conclusion As much conscience in D. Allens holie thiefe whom hee mentioneth in his Pamphlet as in himselfe Matth. 22. D. Allen prefixeth before his Pamphlet the sentence of Christ which notwithstanding in the same Pamphlet he doth wholy courtermand in his doctrine The Pope and his followers will be both parties iudges and executioners of their owne doome in their owne cause Princes whether they be Heretikes Turkes or Heathens yet is there subiection due vnto them Rom. 13. The Pope claimeth his authoritie from Christ as his Vicar The greatest Prince liuing subiect to the admonition and reproofe of the meanest Minister but not to his correction Matth. 10. The punishment for disobedience of Gods word and contempt of the Minister is reserued vnto God Peter from whom the Pope claimeth authoritie as his successor was commaÌ„ded by Christ to feede his sheepe but expresly forbidden to vse the sword a Ioh. 21. b Matth. 26. 53. Ioh. 18. 11. Matth. 20. * Christ from whom the Pope deriueth his authoritie neuer tooke vpon him the authothoritie to depose Princes But the Pope doeth 1 Christ not only commanded others to obey but did himselfe also obey Princes The Pope not only refuseth himselfe but also forbiddeth others to obey Princes 2 Christ professed himselfe not to be a king of this world but a subiect to kings and a seruant a Ioh. 18. 36. Matth. 20. â—â— The Pope presâ—â—neth himselfe not to be a subiect to Kings but a superiour and Lord ouer all Kings of this world 3 The Scholler aboue his Maister 4 The Vicars authoritie greater then his from whom he taketh all his authoritie 5 Phe Pope in all points opposite to Christ 6 What is this but Antichrist a D. Allen a wrester peruerter belier of the Scriptures b M. Bilson Warden of Winchester in a booke published Anno. 1586. whereof it seemes D. Allen will take no knowledge All this hath bene directly proued both by expresse authority of Scripture and by arguments drawn from D. AlleÌ„s owne examples D. Allen respecteth the cunning conueiance of his purpose not the sound teaching of the truth An entrance into th'examination of D. Allens perswasions The end of his perswasions already declared To what persons his perswasions are intended Not to Protestants Nor likely by any great reason to Newters or men indifferent He slaunderously reporteth our whole countrey to be fallen into Atheisme Why should men indifferent be lead rather by D. Allens lurking perswasions to a blind and supersticious religion then by our publike and continuall preaching to a cleare and perspicuous religion It resteth that D. Allens persuasions must needes be chiefly or wholly intended to the papists The papists in England not so many as D. Allen presumeth There are none so blind but will see when a man giueth them counsell against themselues The D. of G. and those of the holy league in France though they pretend the patronage of the popish Religion they spare no papist more theÌ„ protestant from the spoile and sword The very quarrell and intent of the D. of G. Some of the greatest and best affected papists hane abandoned that party What danger the English papists runne into if they should but offer to stirre against
neither the Prophet euer counselled or mooued the people to disobey Saul being so deposed nor the people euer offered to reuolt or to deny him their obedience seruice nor Dauid the true and rightfull king appointed by God in his place euer sought or cōsēted to depriue him of the kingdome though due vnto himselfe but notwithstanding he knew him to be his deadly enemy and to hunt after his life yet hauing him twice in his hands where he might safely haue slaine him and therby inuested himselfe of the kingdom neuerthelesse wold he neither touch him himselfe nor suffer any other to touch him calling him the Lords annointed and esteeming it a high sin to laie his hand on him though hee were deposed by God himselfe and which is yet most notable caused the messenger that brought him the first newes of his death to be forthwith slaine for his labour And all this notwithstanding yet is not D. Allen ashamed to wrest this example quite contrarie to the trueth for a president to prooue that the Pope hath authoritie to depose and depriue Princes both of their kingdomes and liues and to release discharge the subiects of their allegeance and further that it is lawfull for subiects to reuolt from their Souereignes to yeeld vp their holdes trecherously vnto their enemies and to beare armes against them To which doctrine hee could not haue found in all the whole Scriptures though all bee flat against it anie one example more directlie contrarie then this the iudgement whereof I referre to the reason consideration and conscience of all men that haue anie sparke of Christianitie morall vertue or naturall reason in them Now then if none of all these examples of Scripture which D. Allen hath cited to prooue the Popes authoritie to depose Princes doe shew that anie of those Princes whom he mencioneth was deposed either by Priest or Prophet as hee falslie assumeth but by God himselfe how can hee then inferre vpon these examples that the Pope hath anie such authoritie vnlesse hee attribute as I said before as much authoritie vnto him as to God himselfe And if Saul being deposed by God himselfe yet neither the Prophet did thereupon disswade the people from obeying him nor the people once offered to reuolt from him but continued in all duetie and obedience towardes him as long as he liued which was manie yeeres after his deposition and if Dauid beeing the lawfull annointed King in his place yet neither sought to put him out of the kingdome but yeelded him obedience and seruice calling him Lord maister during his life thought it sin to laie his hand on him notwithstanding he was deposed lastly in token of the misliking and displeasure he tooke at the death of Saul caused the messenger that brought him the tidings thereof to be slaine how can D. Allen by this example induce men of anie reason or sense to beleeue that either the Pope maie lawfully authorise encourage or exhort subiects to disobey or to laie hands on the Lords annointed or that anie subiect may lawfully renounce his allegeance reuolt from and beare armes against his Souereigne beeing a lawfull Prince onelie vpon a colourable warrant of deposition by a man a Priest a stranger who hath no authoritie in the worlde to depose anie Prince from his kingdome no though hee were an Infidel but is himselfe euen by Gods ordinance a subiect to Princes With what face can hee vtter such manifest vntruthes with what confidence can hee persuade himselfe to bee beleeued when his lies are so monstrous and his impostures so euident But most of all with what conscience can hee presume to force the word of God to his purpose which is so directly against him But hereby may all men plainely perceiue how small regard that sect hath vnto religion but onlie to serue their turnes which are not ashamed to make such impudent and vngodly shiftes to maintein their vsurped authoritie Call you this holines M. D. to abuse the people with false doctrine to belie the scriptures to peruert the most sacred word of God to rob him of his own peculiar authoritie and prerogatiue for the defence and furtherance of your owne rebellious practises In trueth it resembleth much the holines of your holie thiefe whom it pleaseth you somewhat merrily in your Pamphlet to compare vnto vs but in truth a righter patterne of your own profession which to speake truely what I thinke in my conscience is much discredited by your owne double dealing You your selfe to further your owne purpose as you supposed could prefixe before your Pamphlet euen in the first page as a sentence vnder the title thereof the resolution giuen by Christ vpon the tempting demand of the Pharisees Reddite quae sunt Caesaris Caesari wherein Christ himselfe commandeth all men to giue vnto Caesar that is to the King and Ciuill Magistrate whatsoeuer is due vnto him that is feare honor subiection and tribute And how dare you then euen in the same Pamphlet countermaund this commandement of our Sauiour bending all your forces craft and cunning to persuade the subiect to resist his Souereigne and thereby to break this high and peremptorie commandement But you saie the Pope hath authoritie to discharge the subiect of this duetie and obedience which is here commanded Shew me then I praie you some Text of Scripture that giueth the Pope so large Commission as you speake of nay shew me anie dispensation out of Gods word that may exempt you or the Pope himselfe out of the compasse of this commandement For the precept is generall and therefore extendeth to all men and besides was expresly giuen by Christ vnto his Disciples to whom hee spake in presence And if the Pope and you bee the Disciples of Christ as you would seeme to bee then must you also as well or rather then others yeeld obedience and subiection to your Ciuill gouernours or els fall into the breach of Christs commandement And if you bee subiect to the ciuill Magistrate as you are by this rule of Christ how can you take that authoritie from them which Christ hath giuen them ouer you If you saie there is no subiection due vnto them longer then they continue in the truth of Religion I pray you tell mee first how prooue you them to be heretikes vnlesse you your selues may be Iudges Will you then both condemne and punish them before they bee conuicted of crime and will you that are parties bee both iudges and executors of your owne will and pleasure Secondly suppose they were as you vniustly condemne them to be heretikes yea suppose they were Iewes Turkes Heathens yet is there neuertheles obedience and subiection due vnto them For what was Caesar himselfe but a Heathen what were the Princes in the Aposties times of whom it is said Let euerie soule be subiect vnto them and whosoeuer resisteth them resisteth the ordinance of God what
his Prince whensoeuer it should please his holines forsooth vpon any displeasure or priuate occasion vnder pretence of some hainous crime to Excommunicate him What if we should deny that these Popes or any other Pope euer had or hath any authoritie to Excommunicate a forrein Prince no way subiect to his charge D. Allen hath not prooued it in his Pamphlet nor anie where els neither is hee able to prooue it with the helpe of all the Cardinals in Rome yea and of the Pope himselfe too while he liueth But such as are Romanists are of another minde and will happely beleeue D. Allens bare affirmation in this behalfe and so may be persuaded not onely that the Pope hath authoritie to Excommunicate and depose Princes at his pleasure but also that the subiects of Princes so Excommunicate and deposed by the Pope may lawfully and ought in duetie to disobey and reuolt from their seruice How they may bee seduced by erroneous doctrine I know not but for other men that are either of sounder Religion or men indifferent or not so throughly and obstinately as vpon a meere selfewill addicted to that faction I doubt not but they will be better aduised then to giue credit vnto the affirmation of anie man or the authoritie of anie Pope though hee make himselfe more then a man beeing directly contradictorie to the expresse word and will of God as hath been shewed by the places of Scripture aboue rehearsed and by manie more may be But because they also shall not haue anie colour of defense left them whereby to excuse themselues so much as vpon ignorance in this behalfe I will since I am entred into it laie before them in as few words as I can the abuses of D. Allen whereby hee goeth about to deceiue them in this point and prooue directly and manifestly vnto them that neither the Pope hath any authoritie to depose Princes from their thrones which is the ground whereon he buildeth his warrant of reuolt and further that it is vtterly vnlawfull for the Subiect for any such occasion to deny the Prince the obedience subiection and seruice due vnto him much more in traitorous manner to rebell against him which D. Allen so alloweth and commendeth First therefore as concerning the Popes authoritie to depose Princes I demand from whom hee hath that authoritie whether of himselfe or from God Of himselfe I know he will not say for that were as great arrogancie as absurditie in him to saie And if he would as perhaps he could be content to take it vpon himselfe if hee thought it might go for currant yet can hee not yeeld any colour or shew of reason to mainteine it being contrarie to the expresse word of God For There is no power saith the Apostle but of God and the powers that be are ordeined of God Then can the Pope haue no power or authoritie of himselfe vnlesse he will affirme himselfe to be God And the Prince being a power and consequently ordeined of God it were great presumption in him to affirm and greater blindnes in men to beleeue that the authoritie of man can frustrate or take away the ordinance of God It resteth therefore that the Pope if he haue anie authoritie to depose Princes he must haue it from God And if he haue it from God thē is there some warrant in his word to authorise the Pope thereunto But there is not anie place of Scripture that giueth the Pope any expresse power to depose Princes and therfore hath he no such authoritie from God For the proofe of my Minor First it is likely that if there were any such place of Scripture as giueth the Pope expresse power to depose Princes D. Allen would vndoubtedly haue alledged it for the more credit of the cause and not haue passed it ouer with a bare affirmation beeing a matter heretofore by many and manifest arguments and proofes of Scripture cleerly disprooued and conuinced against him Secondly for further confirmation thereof I reason thus Besides the obedience and subiection which God hath commanded in the Scripture to be done vnto Princes hee hath further forbidden all men to speake euill of the ruler of the people or to curse the King yea so much as in thought Whereupon I frame this argument God forbiddeth all men to curse the King yea so much as in thought Ergo he forbiddeth the Pope to curse the King so much as in thought And he that forbiddeth to doe the lesse much more forbiddeth to doe the greater But it is far greater to curse the K. indeed openly and to depriue him of his kingdome then to curse him in thought only or to speake euill of him Ergo God forbidding the Pope to speake euill of the King or to curse him in his thought much more forbiddeth him to curse the King openly or to depriue him of his kingdome wherupon it followeth by good consequence that God doth not in any place of Scripture authorise the Pope to depose Princes for so should he allow and warrant that in one place which he hath forbidden in another whereof you see what inconuenience should follow that God should command contraries and the Scriptures should bee repugnant to themselues which were plaine Atheisme to affirm Whereby it maie be cleare and manifest vnto euerie man that hath any sense of Christianitie in him that God hauing in these former places of Scripture expresly forbidden all men to curse in thought or to speake euill of the King much more to curse him openly or to bereaue him of his kingdome doeth not therefore in anie place of Scripture admit or authorise anie man contrarie to this inhibition to curse excommunicate and depose Princes out of their kingdomes For that were to countermand his owne commandements and to shew himselfe variable inconstant repugnant to himselfe which were high impietie for anie man to imagine Thus you see beside the presumption which is to be gathered out of D. Allens own dealing in that hee alledgeth no place of Scripture to warrant the Popes depriuing of Princes that it is therfore likely that no place of Scripture doth authorise him thervnto you see it I say directly proued by sound and substantiall argumēt as by many more also might be verie aboundantly if either the cause required proofe or if it were my purpose to stand vpon the confirmation of that which is of itselfe so manifest that the Pope neither hath nor can haue anie expresse authoritie giuen him directly by the word of God to depose Princes which is the thing that God reserueth wholy to himselfe for it is he not the Pope that deposeth the mighty from their seat exalteth them that are low it is he not the Pope that putteth downe kings setteth vp kings and giueth kingdomes to whomsoeuer he will For God hath ordeined Princes to rule his people and to represent his own Maiestie
amongst them which cannot be subiect to any earthly creature as he hath put all men in subiection vnder them as his own Vicegerents on Earth so hath he subiected thē vnto none but onely and immediatly to himselfe Which supreme authoritie of Princes next vnder God howsoeuer D. Allen doth maliciously and wickedly impugne yet the Church of Christ hath euer confessed confirmed it as appeareth by the sentences of the holie Fathers and Doctors of the Church touching that point Colimus imperatorem saith Tertullian vt hominē a Deo secundum solo Deo minorem we worship the Emperour as a man next vnto God inferiour to God only And againe Deum esse solum in cuius solius potestate sunt à quo sunt secundi post quem primi ante omnes super omnes Deos homines That it is God onely in whose power alone Princes are to whom they are second and after whom they are first before all and ouer all both Gods and men Optatus in like sort saith Super Imperatorem non est nisi solus Deus qui fecit Imperatorem There is none aboue the Emperour but onely God who made the Emperour And Chrysostome saith Parem vllum super terram non habet The Emperour hath no equall on earth And Gregory affirmeth further That power is giuen to Princes from heauen ouer all men not only soldiers but Priests If Princes then by the iudgement of the old learned Fathers and Doctors of the Church whose names D. Allen doeth more boast of then alledge their testimonies bee in authoritie next vnto God inferior to him only superiors to all men and if there be none aboue the Prince but onely God who made the Prince the Pope must of necessitie either presume himselfe to be God els can he not be aboue the Prince or at the least make himselfe no man but a monster otherwise must he needes be inferiour to the Prince And if the Prince haue no equall on earth the Pope must either acknowledge himselfe to bee vnder the Prince or els not to bee at all And if power be giuen vnto Princes from heauen ouer all men not only soldiers but Priestes also then cannot the Pope whether hee bee soldier or Priest or whatsoeuer hee be so hee be a man exempt himselfe frō that power which God hath giuen vnto the Prince ouer him much les can he take away from Princes that power which God hath giuen vnto them For the power of setting vp and putting downe Princes being in Maiestie the greatest on earth and proper to God himselfe alone hath he not imparted vnto anye earthly creature either absolutely from him-himselfe or iointly with himselfe but hath reserued it wholy to himselfe But because D. Allen is so much more deuoted vnto the Pope then to God as that he can bee content to pull out of Gods hand his peculiar authority and prerogatiue to draw the same wholy vnto the Pope by what meanes he careth not right or wrong and the more to augment the iniurie will needes make Gods own word a warrant to robbe himselfe of his honour and right hauing already shewed that he cannot by anye meanes directly drawe from God vnto the Pope the authoritie of deposing Princes I will lay before you also the indirect meanes he vseth in this pamphlet to accomplish his intent and how litle they also serue his turne What he cannot proue by sentence of Scripture he laboureth by the way to induce by example as namely by the mention of the vsurping Queene Athalia the wicked King Ahab and cursed Iesabell who were all as he seemeth to intend deposed from their kingdomes and slaine because the Priestes and Prophets of God did therein giue assistance counsell or direction he woulde hereupon faine inferre that the Pope may by these examples take away both the crownes and liues of princes An argument farre fet in truth and sauouring more of malice then of substance For the comparison of her Maiestie vnto an vsurper or to wicked Idolaters is as odious and vnproper as the resemblance of the Pope to the holy Prophets is vnfitte and vnequall Wherin I must note vnto you by the way an euill spirite in D. Allen that seeketh or rather snatcheth all opportunities to spit forth his venim against so gratious a princesse But let vs leaue his vice vpon himselfe and looke in to the vertue of his argument Athalia was lawfully deposed from the kingdom and slaine by the authoritie of Ioiada the high priest Ergo the Pope hath authority both to depose and procure the death of the Queenes Maiestie For that is it that D. Allen doth as earnestly labour to iustify as the Pope doth diligently endeuour to atchieue but I trust the Pope shall faile asmuch of his wicked intent as the Doctor faileth in his weake argument Whereof to speake first of the whole I doe vtterly deny his consequent For neither is it to be graunted him that the Popes authority is as great against the Queenes Maiestie as Ioiadaes was against Athalia neither is her Maiesties case like to Athaliaes of both which I will make plaine demonstration First concerning Ioiada as he was high priest so was he also the Priace of his tribe and thereby had more authoritie to deale in the state of that kingdome then the Pope can haue to deale in a forreine kingdome And for Athalia she was an vsurper who came to the crowne by killing the kinges children all sauing one whom Ioiada kept secret and saued from her furie vntill he had the meanes to restore him to his kingdome by suppressing the vsurper But it is very well knowne that the Queenes Maiestie is no vsurper but a lawfull Prince neither came to the crowne by any such wicked meanes but by due right of inheritaunce So is there as great oddes betwixt her case and Athaliaes as betweene the authority of Ioiada and of the Pope And the cases being vnlike the consequent cannot be good For though an vsurper may lawfully be deposed and slaine yet it followeth not therefore that a rightfull Prince may and though the chiefe Princes and States of a countrey vnited together may aide and assist the lawfull King to place him in his throne and to put downe the vsurper yet doth it not follow that a priest which is a meere straunger to the countrie may therefore thrust a lawfull Prince out of his kingdome And as little reason as there is in his consequent so litle truth is there in the antecedent For neither was Athalia deposed and slaine by Ioiada himselfe neither by his authority much lesse by the authority of his priesthood For he did not in any sort take the matter or the authority vpon himselfe but what he did he did by the common consent of the Nobles and Capteines whom as the text saith
were they all but Heathens If Christ himselfe then hath confirmed the authoritie and power euen of Heathen Princes how can the Pope dissolue and take away the authoritie power kingdom yea life too of Christian Princes And yet he claimeth his authoritie from Christ as his Disciple and Vicar here on earth by which title he maketh all Princes subiect vnto his authoritie In truth so is the greatest Prince liuing subiect vnto the meanest Preacher and Minister of God to obey the doctrine and word which hee deliuereth out of the Scriptures and to receiue his instruction exhortation admonition and reproofe yet is hee not though he should reiect his instructions to be therefore deposed from his kingdome or resisted and disobeyed by him And greater authoritie hath not the Pope himselfe ouer anie Prince then the meanest Minister and messenger of God I finde not in all the Scripture that euer Christ gaue vnto his Disciples anie Commission to depose Princes although they should disobey his word but I finde that he gaue them Commission to Preach And whosoeuer shuld not receiue them nor heare their words he bad them that when they should depart out of that house or Citie they should shake the dust of their feete reseruing the punishment of them vnto God As for the superioritie which the Pope challengeth ouer Princes as the Successor of Peter disciple of Christ I finde no such Commission giuen vnto Peter himselfe to authorise him in such sort ouer Princes but I finde that Christ said vnto him three times Feede my sheepe As for the swoord wherby is signified the Ciuil Authoritie Christ expresly forbad Peter to vse it commanding him to put it vp into the sheath To the same effect also spake he not only to Peter but to all the rest of his fellowes the Apostles when there was some contention risen amongst them about superioritie Ye know saith hee that the Lords of the Gentiles haue domination ouer them and they that are great exercise authoritie ouer them But it shall not be so among you But whosoeuer will be great among you let him be your seruant And if the Pope bee Christs Disciple hee must learne this lesson of his Maister to be a seruant to his fellows not a Commander of Kings Christ himselfe from whom the Pope deriueth his supreme authoritie as his Vicar on Earth neuer tooke vpon him the authoritie to depriue Princes of their kingdoms nor to discharge the subiects of their dutie obedience but contrariwise confirmed the power of Princes both by his doctrine teaching that Feare Honor Obedience Subiection is due euen to Heathen Princes and also by his owne example yeelding tribute with all duetie and obedience vnto them and submitting himselfe his bodie and life to their authoritie iudgement correctiō And for himself professed that his king dō was not of this world that he came not to be serued but to serue And if Christ acknowledged himselfe not to haue any kingly authoritie in this world but to be a subiect vnto kings to their inferior officers and a seruant how can the Pope deriue vnto himself from Christ not onlie a kingly authoritie but a predominant authoritie ouer all kings Can the scholler bee greater then his Maister will the Vicar take vpon him more authoritie then hee from whom he taketh all his authoritie Nay will he of himselfe presume to giue warrant directly cōtrarie to the commandement of Christ Let euerie man then iudge both what he is that so opposeth him self against Christ what D. Allen is that iustifieth his so doing for iustification thereof pretendeth warrant of Scriptures against God himselfe which how shamefully he hath therin wrested peruerted and belied hath been I hope alreadie sufficiently declared vnto you so far forth as his pamphlet gaue occasion and farther should haue been but that this question is handled at large and all that D. Allen can say therein abundantly confuted by a learned Diuine a man of as great sufficiencie and of more sinceritie then himselfe in the answere to his Defense of English Catholikes Now to come to the matter and to the prosecuting of D. Allens purpose you see that hee hath not onlie failed in the proofe of the Popes authoritie to depose Princes and consequently of his warrant for the subiects reuolt but also his own examples and arguments retorted against himselfe and the contrarie part prooued both by them and by diuers other reasons and authorities of Scriptures out of which Doctor Allen bringeth not so much as one Text in trueth I must confesse because he cannot vnlesse hee should coyne it himselfe to proue directly his prophane assertions So that no man can be so blind but he must needes perceiue and acknowledge that the Pope hath neither power of himselfe nor authority from God to depose Princes from their kingdomes neither can giue to the subiect any commissiō or licence sauing only that licence which he hath himselfe that is that licence qua sumus omnes deteriores so much as to disobey their Souereignes much lesse to reuolte from them to their enimies to lay handes on them to beare armes against them Whereby it cannot but bee most apparant that D. Allen respected wholye herein the subtilty of his drifte not the soundnes of his doctrine and for the obteinment of credit and attainment of his purpose thereby affied him selfe altogither vpon the smoothnes of his perswasions and the affectionate mindes and inclinations of his adherents ANd sithens we haue alreadie discouered the foundation of his perswasions to bee weake false and rotten it shall not be amisse to bestowe a little labour to trie if a small wind will not ouerthrow the building it selfe which I doubt not but we shall find to be patched togither of as rotten stuffe and of as slender substance as the foundation is and to haue nothing in it to withstand the weather but onely the bare outside and colour of religion The ende whereunto this perswasion of disobedience and reuolte from her Maiestie tendeth hath bene alreadie declared namely the furtherance of all trayterous and rebellious designementes that may be by any person or in any wise attempted against her Maiestie and particularly the assistance of the k. of Spaine and the other forreine forces inuasion nowe presently intended and prepared against our countrey Let vs then next see to what persons D. Allen principally purposeth and addresseth his persuasions First for Protestants and such as are of sound Religion as I trust the greatest parte of England by great ods is D. Allen cannot be so madde as to hope that his perswasions can haue any authoritie or worke any effect with them but to confirme them rather in her Maiesties seruice and obedience for the better mayntenaunce of their Religion and defence of themselues