to a Colledge to visit the same for certaine defects with particular order how to proceed and punish the said offences though in many things he haue greater Authoritie by his extraordinarie commission then is the ordinarie of the President and fellows and other ordinarie officers yet cannot hee either tacitè or à fortiore by vertue of this Maximè take vnto him all the power and manner of proceeding which the said President and fellowes haue by their ordinarie Authoritie of Statutes in admitting and reiecting schollers giuing and changing offices setting and letting of lands and the like except it be epresslie in his Commission Noe not in punishments neither concerning those defects which he hath to visit may he exceed his prescript order they being things as I say stricti Iuris which both law reason and conscience doe forbid to be enlarged beyond his commission And so doth M. Attorney seeme to graunt that it should be so in any iudgement giuen by Commissioners of Oyer and Terminer or other Commissioners or Iudges of the common law insinuating belike that the Canon or Ecclesiasticall law now vsed in England is abritrary to be applied as they please that sit in Authoritie 10. And this seemeth greatlie to be confirmed by another Resolution of his Iudges made to another argument of Caudery wherein his Counsell vrged for him that according to the commission sentence should haue been giuen against him by three at least of the Commissioners ioyntlie concurring which was not obserued but giuen onlie by the Bishop though he pretendeth that it was also by the consent of some of his Colleage It was resolued saith M. Attorney by the whole Courte that the sentence giuen by the Bishop with Consent of his Colleags was such as the Iudges of the Common Law ought to allow to be giuen according to the Ecclesiasticall laws Consider I praie you this Resolution that they out of the Common-law doe allow it to be well done according to the Ecclesiasticall laws but heare the reason for it importeth much to se therby the manner of proceeding for seeing saith hee that their authoritie is to proceed and giue sentence in Ecclesiasticall causes according to the Ecclesiasticall law and they haue giuen a sentence in a cause Ecclesiasticall vpon their proceedings by sorce of that law the Iudges of the common law ought to giue faith and credit to their sentence and to allow it to be done according to the Ecclesiasticall law For Cuilibet in sua arte perito est credendum VVee must beleeue euery skillfull man in his arte c. So hee And is not this a strange Reason of a iudiciall sentence thinke you that for so much as the Bishop of London had depriued Caudery by pretence of an Ecclesiasticall law his fact must be allowed by vertue of this maxime That euery skillfull man is to be credited in his art And was not the poore plainteife well holpen vp who after foure years trauell and cost as it appeereth wherin he followed the suite at the Common-law against the said Bishop he was now answered That euerie skillfull man must be beleeued in his art without further inquiring 11. And yet M. Attorney heere auerreth that it is a common receiued opinion of all bookes and citeth diuerse booke-cases for the same And albeit I haue not by me the bookes themselues nor doe professe my self skillfull therin yet must I needs ascribe so much equitie prudence reason vnto the Common law as to presume that it will not admit this Maxime without some distinction or reasonable restriction As for example that this Peritus or skillfull man that must be so beleeued be eminent in his art and be not interessed nor passionate in the Case proposed For other-wise absurde effects would insue as for example If a surgeon hyred to cure a wound should be suspected to haue intoxicated the same and that the Plainteife should haue this answere that euery skillfull man is to be beleiued in his arte it were iniustice For that he might either of ignorance haue erred therin if he be not knowne to be very well learned in his arte or of malice if he might be presumed to hope or expect gaine by the wounded mans death And howsoeuer it be the matter in right conscience were not to be shuffled ouer with such an answere of the appointed Iudges but the Case were to be examined other surgeons to be consulted them ans skill honestie and reputation to be inquired of and other such diligence to be vsed as might content and satisfie the afflicted partie wherof none was done as it seemeth in the behalfe of Caudery 12. For wheras in this case the Bishop of London was interessed in his honour to defend that which he had done not perhaps the greatest Canoinst or Ciuilian Lawyer in the world for his skill and this poore plainteife as I saie hauinge followed the Common Lawyers to iudge the case for so many years it seemeth a sleight shifting off for the Iudges to tell him now in fauour of the said Bishop and his Colleags Cuilibet in sua arte perito est credendum We must beleeue euery man skilfull in his science which is as much as if they had said he hath depriued you and he is skilfull in depriuing and therfore you must thinke that he hath done it very well And this is all the remedy you are like to haue 31. And by this the reader may also perceiue how much is to be ascribed to M. Attorneyes words before recited when he saith of those Iudges of the Common law from whome he citeth some certaine little peeces of Interpretations Ordinances Statutes or decrees in proofe as he would haue it seeme of the Queens Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction persuading vs that they could not bee daunted vvith any feare moued by any affection nor corrupted vvith any reward which as I beleiue in some so the experience of these our daies and of these our fornamed Iudges and moderne Sages may teach vs to suspect the same in others also of those auncienter times who may be presumed to haue followed the current of their dayes and to haue been no lesse ready to run after their Princes humours than we see many lawyers and Deuines also in our dayes to doe But now to the last argument of Caudery finall Resolution against him 14. After that he had declared the three defects before mentioned of the Bishop of Londons sentence against him First that he was depriued vpon the first accusation Secondlie that hee was conuicted by no Iury wittnesses or confession but vpon not appearance Thirdlie that the sentence was not giuen by three or more Commissioners ioyntlie All which are expresse clauses of their commission sleightly euacuated as before you haue heard he came to the fourth point which is that the Statute wherby this supreame Ecclesiastcall power was giuen to the Queene herself by the Parlament hath a clause
Valentinian the elder who refused to be present and much more President in certaine conferences about religion betwene the Catholicke Bishops the Arrians vpon consideration of these two distinct Orders of Clergie and lay-men though he were inuited therunto by Catholicke Bishops themselues Mihi quidem saith he cum vnus de populo sim fas non est talia perscrutari verum sacerdotes qui bus haec cura est apud semetipsos congregentur vbi voluerint Vnto me that am but one of the lay people it is not lawfull to examine such things as appertayne vnto religion but let priests to whome this care is committed meet togeather amoÌ„g themselues to discusle the matter where they will So much was this distinction between lay-men and priests esteemed by this auncient Christian Emperour 11. Secondly I demaund of M Attorney concerning his distinction of Courtes and causes to be handled therin Temporll Spirituall how it commeth to passe that the Conusaunce of such causes as here he calleth Spirituall belong not as he saith to the Common-lawes of England No nor as presently after he affirmeth could not belong For that they are not within the conusaunce of the sayd Common-laws And why is this I praye you For if the temporall Prince be equallie head in both causes and in both Iurisdictions and that the power to knowe discerne iudge in both sortes doe descend only from the temporall Prince as before out of the Statute of King Edward the 6. you haue heard by the Statute-makers determined and M. Attorney confirmeth euery where in these Reportes then should the common-Lawes of our Realme which are the temporall Princes law be coÌ„mon indeed according to their name to all causes aswel Spirituall as Temporall for that their author and origen which is the King hath equall Power Iurisdiction in both for that it is a maxime vncontrollable that according to the Iurisdiction of the Lâ—w maker vertue and power of the law doth extend it selfe And then doth M. Attorney affirme that the conusaunce of so many Ecclesiasticall causes as he setteth downe is not within the compasse of our Common-lawes or what compasse will he assigne or lymitt to that Princes lawes that according to this assertion hath power in all Is not this to contradict himself and to ouerthrow with the one hand that which he goeth about to establish with the other For if the Kings power be common to both causes aswell Ecclesiasticall as Temporall then must the Kings Common-lawes be common to both Courtes and matters therin handled 12. But let vs see a certaine sleight or euasion of his worth the noting As in temporall causes saith he the King by the mouth of the Iudges in his Courtes of Iustice doth iudge and determyne the same by the temporall lawes of England so in causes Ecclesiasticall as Blasphemy Apostacy Heresyes Ordering Institutions of Clerkes c. the same are to be determined and decyded by Ecclesiasticall Iudges according to the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes of this Realme Marke here gentle reader how M. Atnorney playeth wyly beguyly For according to the proportion of his coÌ„parison he should haue coÌ„cluded thus So the King by the â—outh of his Ecclesiasticall Iudges doth iudge and determine the said Spirituall Ecclesiastical causes by his owne Ecclesiasticall lawes But this he foresaw would include this great inconuenience among others that if he said that the King did iudge determine by the mouthes of his spirituall Iudges the aforesaid spirituall causes as he doth the temporall then might he doe the same yea and exercise them also immediatly by himself if need were aswell as by others for in all temporall iudgments and affayres the King may sit himself in courte and performe in person whatsoeuer his Officers by his authority doe or may doe which yet M. Attorney saw would be somwhat absurde to graunt in the spirituall causes proponed by him of Blasphemy Ordering of Priests or giuing holy Orders Institutions of Clerkes Celebration of diuine seruice and the like to witt that the King should performe them immediately in his owne person for who would not say it were absurde for example that the King should sing or say the common seruice to the people or administer the Sacrament of Absolution or Marriage or giue holy Orders and the like which yet the Bishop of Rome and all other Bishops or Prelates neuer so great doe may doe without inconuenience And in truthe it followeth euidently that he who can giue authority or power for another to doe a thing as from himself and in his name may performe the same in person also if he list at least wise it cannot be vnlawfull for him so to doe And therfore coming to the application of his comparison he changeth his phrase and saith that the same are to be determined and decyded by Ecclesiasticall Iudges according to the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes of this Realme 13. Wherin you must note another shifte more poore and silly then the former for that hauing declared vnto vs before that there are two generall partes and members of the Realme to witt the Clergy and the Laity and that these two haue two seuerall Tribunalls in their affaires gouerned by two sortes of different lawes Temporall and Ecâ—lesiasticall Common and Canon and these deriued from two different Authors and origens the common-Common-law from the temporall Prince and Commonweath Ecclesiasticall from others saith M. Atorney but specifieth not from whom or whence though all the world knowe that they come originally from the Church Sea Apostolique all which inferreth distinct originall Iurisdictions M. Attorney by his great witt hath deuised a newe sleight neuer perhaps yet heard of in the world before which is to make these Ecclesiasticall lawes though deriued from others to be the Kings owne lawes for that he approueth and alloweth them within the Realme and consequently that all lawes both Temporall and Spirituall doe come from the King as their Author which is a token that he hath full Supreame power And this singular deuise pleaseth him so well as he repeateth the same sundrie tymes in this Treatise You shall heare the same in his owne words in this place how dangerous and preiudicyall a Conclusion he buildeth vpon the same against Catholiques 14. For as the Romans saith he fetching diuers lawes from Athens yet being approued and allowed by the State there called them notwithstanding Ius Ciuile Romanum And as the Normans borrowing all or most of their lawes from England yet baptized them by the name of the lawes or customes of Normandy so albeit the Kings of England deriued their Ecclesiasticall lawes from others yet so many as were approued and allowed here by and with a generall consent are aptly rightly called the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes of England which whosoeuer shall deny he denyeth that the King hath full and plenary power c. And consequently that he is no coÌ„plete Monarch nor head
of heresie being high treason against the allmighty but by the Archbishop and all the Clergy of that prouince and after abiured therevpon and after that newly conuicted and condemned by the Clergy of that prouince in their generall Councell of Conuocation But the Statute of 2. H. 4. cap. 15. doth giue the Bishop in his Diocesse power to condemne an hereticke and that before that Statute he could not be committed to the secular power to be burnt vntill he had once abiured and was againe relapsed to that or some other heresie Wherby it appeareth that the King by consent of Parlament directed the proceedings in the Ecclesiasticall Courte in case of heresie and other matters more spirituall The Pope cannot alter the lawes of England The Catholicke Deuine Why doth not M. Attorney set dovâ—ne those auncient laws Ecclesiasticall of this Realme Will he say that they were any other then the Common Canon laws of the Roman Church in those daies He cannot with any probability And as for the matter heere touched that no man could be conuicted of heresie but by the Archbishop and all the Clergie of that Prouince and after abiured and then newly conuicted and condemned againe by a generall Councell of Conuocation c In some points he hitteth right but in other not For when any new heresie is discouered it must be iudged and condemned by some such Synod or Councell as heer is mentioned if the head of the Church haue not condemned it before But when the heresie is condemned it was neuer necessary to call such Synods or Councell for conuicting of euery particular man that shall be accused of that heresie and much lesse was it needfull that there should be two seuerall conuictions the one before abiuration the other after except in such as were relapsed for what if the hereticke should stand stiffely to it vpon his first conuiction and would not abiure but defend his heresie did the anncient laws Ecclesiasticall of England thinke you forbid him in this case to be punished I thinke not 10. But M. Attorney hath a note in the margent wherat I cannot but maruaile for that he hearing in this place out of the old sense of our ancient lawes heresie to be held for high treason against God and that as he supposeth it must be twise conuicted which is only true in relapse saith in the margent This had a resemblance to an Attainder of treason wherin there must be first an indictment by one Iury and a conuiction by another But I deny this resemblance to be of any moment for the forme of proceeding though for the thing I graunt that heresie is truly treason against God but this double conuiction heer mentioned by two Iuries hath little or no similitude with the other of relapsed heresie where the party is first permitted to abiure his first fault and not punished except he offend the second time in the same Which yet I persuade my self M. Attorney will not allow in humane treasons against the Prince that he must twise iterate his fault before he can be punished and so the parity or similitude holdeth not 11. But now to the principall point where the Attorney saieth that the Statute of K. Henry the 4. doth giue the Bishop in his Diocesse power to condemne an hereticke and that before that Statute he could not be committed to the secular power to be punished vntill he had once abiured and was againe relapsed c. and that heerby it appeareth that the King directed Ecclesiasticall proceedings c. Diuerse errors are heere couched togeather and then if ignorance be the inseperable twynne of euery error as M. Attorney in his Preface holdeth you know what will ensue 12. First then it is presumed in this assertion that no hereticke could be put to death in old tyme except he were relapsed that is to say had once at least abiured his heresie and fallen vnto it againe which is false For that albeit such people were most of all to be punished for their periury and inconstancy yet other also that neuer abiured if they stood obstinate might by ancient laws as well Ciuill as Canonicall be punished by death as in the Ciuill is auerred by the particular laws and ordinations of Theodosius Valentinian Martian Iustinian and other Christian Emperours extant in the Code And in the Canon law in like manner is determined by diuers definitions there to be seen that incorrigible hereticks are to be deliuered ouer to the secular power to be punished by them whether they be relapsed or not relapsed though more the relapsed And all this was before the Statute of K. Henry the 4. which did nothing els but allow and confirme the vse and exercise of the said laws For so it appertained vnto him as King of the Realme to consider whether the exercise of these Ecclesiasticall laws haue any incoÌ„uenience against the State or no. 13. And moreouer where it is heer said that the Statute of K. Henry giueth the Bishop power in his Diocesse to condemne an hereticke as though before he had it not by Canon-law is another grosse error For that this fact of K. Henry was nothing els but an approbation of a more auncient decree made before by Pope Gregory the 9. extant in the Decretals of the Canon-law in these words Quoniam Episcoporum numerus c. For that the number of Bishops appointed by auncient Canons for the degradation of Clergy-men cannot alwayes so easily come togeather we graunt vnto you Archbishop of Rhemes that when any Priest or Clerke being within holy Orders is either to be giuen ouer to the secular Courte to be punished for heresie or perpetually to be walled vp you calling togeather the Abbots and other Prelates and religious persons and learned men of your Diocesse which you shall thinke good may alone degrade him in their presence you being his Bishop c. 14. This was the Decree of Pope Gregory aboue two hundred yeares before King Henryes Statute for giuing licence to euery Bishop within his Diocesse alone with the help of his learned counsell and other assistance heer mentioned to condemne degrade and deliuer ouer to secular power any obstinate hereticke relapsed or not relapsed though such as were not relapsed and acknowledged their faultes might be dealt withall more mildly as by walling or shutting them vp as heer is mentioned And that this Decree of Pope Gregory was an exception or priuiledged forme of proceeding from the auncient Canons that appointed a certaine precise number of Bishops to be called togeather for the deposition of Deacons Priests and Bishops appeareth by the words thereof that doe mention the said Canons which you may see in the body of the Canon-law cited out of the Councell of Carthage aboue twelue hundred years past So as M. Attorneys inference that heerby K. Henry tooke vpon him to direct the proceedings of the Ecclesiasticall Courte in
cases of heresie hath no substance in it at all for so much as you see it was directed by the Canon law long before K. Henry was borne 15. Wherefore to his last instance that the Pope cannot alter the laws of England I answere it is true touching temporall laws for they are to be made or altered by the English Prince and Parlament but Ecclesiasticall laws of the Church if they be positiue not deuine he might in all those auncient times vpon iust causes alter as I thinke M. Attorney will not deny and then by good consequence if it be true which euery where he striueth to proue that Ecclesiasticall laws though made by the Pope are laws also of England and may be called English lawes when they are admitted in England it followeth I say against himself in this assertion that the Pope might alter the lawes of England in that he might alter those Canon-lawes that were admitted in England thereby made English lawes The Attorney 1. The Iudges say that the Statutes which restraine the Popes prouisions to the benefices of the aduowsons of spirituall men were made for that the spiritualty durst not in their iust cause say against the Popes prouisions so as those Statutes were made but in affirmance of the common laws 2. Excommunication made by the Pope is of no force in England and the same being certified by the Pope into any Courte in England ought not to be allowed neither is any certificate of any excommunication auailable in law but that is made by some Bishop in England for the Bishops are by the common laws the immediate officers ministers of iustice to the Kings Courts in causes Ecclesiasticall 3. If any Bishop doe excommunicate any person for a cause that belongeth not vnto him the King may write vnto the Bishop and commaund him to assoile and absolue the party 4. If any person of religion obtaine of the Bishop of Rome to be exempt from obedience regular or ordinary he is in case of Premunire which is an offence as hath byn said contra Regem Coronam Dignitatem suam The Catholicke Deuine 16. I haue conioyned three or foure obiections togeather for that indeed all make not the due waight of one Wherfore to the first I answere that little it importeth to our controuersie what those Iudges said why the Statutes were made against the Popes prouisions in affirmance of the Common-laws for this may be said of euery new Statute whatsoeuer that it is made in affirmance of ancient Common-law albeit the said law supposed to be common no where appeare nor any reason proofe or probability be alleadged why it should be common-Common-law before that fact or Statute appeared So as this Common-law is now by M. Attorney made so common as it cometh to be Ens transcendens embracing all that is or can be deuised by any of his Iudges or Reuerend Sages or rather he maketh it Ens rationis or a meere Chymera that as Logitians hold hath no essence or being at all à parte rei but only in imagination For seing that the Popes prouisions had endured in England for so many ages before as all doe and must graunt how may the common law be presumed all that while to haue byn against the same yet no mention euer made therof These are morall impossibilityes to say no more 17. The second point doth answere it self and we haue touched the same before that by agreement in England the Popes Buls of Excommunication when they were sent should not be admitted ordinarily but by the certificate of some Bishop of England for preuenting the fraudes or false suggestions which particular men might vse therein And wheras M. Attorney heere againe saith that the Bishops are by the Common lawes the immediate officers and ministers to the Kings Courtes in causes Ecclesiasticall he runneth againe to his old Chymera of imaginary Common lawes For where is this common-Common-law that maketh Bishops to be officers and ministers to the Kings Courts in causes Ecclesiasticall For if the common-Common-law or Iudges thereof cannot so much as heare or take conusaunce of any spiritual causes belonging to Bishops Courts as often M. Attorney affirmeth in this his booke how much lesse can it or they by vertue therof appoint Iudges or make them officers in those spirituall Courts which haue their authority from the Canon and not Common lawes 18. To the third obiection little answere is needfull For who seeth not but that euery King in his Kingdome may commaund all â—â—â—es of people to doe their duty to surcease from wrong And so if a Bishop for a cause not belonging vnto him should excommunicate any the Prince may commaund him to absolue 〈◊〉 party whome vniustly he hath excommunicated if the iniustice bee so apparant as heere is presumed But M. Attorney should haue proued that the King himself might haue absolued him as in truth he might if he had Superiour authority to the Bishop in Ecclesiasticall causes as he may absolue immediately by himself all that are censured or sentenced adiudged or condemned by his Chauncellour lay Iudges or temporall officers and ministers nor hath he need to send the party to be assoiled by them or to will them to doe it as heer he doth the Bishop but might doe it himself or by some other giuing him authority thervnto which yet neuer King of England did attempt before King Henry the 8. 19. To the 4. braunch is answered that by good reason it was agreed that no religious man hauing made his vow of obedieÌ„ce in England should seeke to Rome for exemption therof without proposing his causes first in England it self for that otherwise vpon false informations suggestions of the party against his Superiours many troubles and inconueniences might follow by such exemptions and this is that which is touched in the Statute it self here alleadged affirming that no man shall goe to Rome for that which may be determined in England c. And now consider I pray you what all these foure instances laid togeather doe weigh in poyse of good reason But let vs see further 20. A fourth instance of M. Attorneys is taken out of a Statute of the 6. yeare of K. Henry the 4. where the commons doe againe make complaint of other new aggreiuances by the Courte of Rome to wit that such as are to be preferred to Bishopricks Archbishopricks and other Prelacyes cannot be admitted vntill they haue compounded with the Popes Chamber for paying of the first fruites of the said benefices and other dutyes required vvhervpon the King saith the Statute by the aduise and assent of the Great men of his Realme in Parlament and note that he nameth not heer the spirituall Lords did ordaine that whosoeuer should pay heerafter to the said Chamber or otherwise for such fruites and seruices greater summes of money then had byn accustomed in time past
OF THE CONTROVERSY Discussed throughout this vvorks WHat is in the 〈…〉 in the 〈◊〉 yeare of 〈…〉 there is giuen 〈…〉 power and 〈…〉 as by any 〈…〉 hath 〈…〉 may lavvfully bee 〈…〉 did assigne 〈…〉 great Seale of England 〈…〉 diction whatsoeuer vvhich â—â— any manner â—pirituall 〈…〉 Authority or Iurisdiction can or may lavvfully be vsed to correct and 〈◊〉 errors heresies schismes abuses c. The question is Whether this authority and spirituall 〈…〉 to the ancient lawes of England in former times 〈…〉 were a Statute not introductory 〈…〉 lavv 〈…〉 only of an old so as if the said Act had neuer 〈◊〉 made yet the 〈…〉 that authority and might haue giuen it to others as 〈…〉 holdeth the affirmatiue part and the Catholicke 〈…〉 TO THE RIGHT VVORSHIPFVLL SYR EDVVARD COOKE KNIGHT His Maiesties Attorney generall SYR I had no sooner taken a sight of your last Booke entituled The fifth Part of Reportes vvhich vvas some number of monethes after the publication therof in England but there entred vvith the reading a certaine appetite of ansvvering the same and this vpon different motiues as vvell in regarde of your person and place abilitie and other circumstances depending theron as also of the subiect and argument it selfe vvhich yovv handled and manner held in handling therof to â—he greatest preiudice vvrong and disgrace of Catholickes and Catholicke religion that you could deuise And first in your person and place I considered your facultie and profession of the common lavves of our Realme your long standing and speciall preferment therin your experience and iudgemeÌ„t gathered thereby your estimation and credit in the Common-vvealth and your authority honour and riches ensuing thervpon all vvhich drevv me to the greater consideration of your Booke but principally your said profession of our Common temporall Municipall lawes vvhich science aboue all other next to Diuinitie it selfe doth confirme and conuince vnto the vnderstanding of an English-man the truth of the Catholicke Roman religion For so much as from our very first Christian Kings Queenes vvhich must nedes be the origen and beginning of all Christian common lavves in England vnto the raigne of King Henry the eight for the space of more then nyne hundred yeares all our Princes and people being of one and the selfe same Catholicke Roman religioÌ„ their lavves must needes be presumed to haue byn conforme to their sense and iudgment in that behalfe and our lavvyers to the lavves so as novv to see an English temporall lavvyer to come forth and impugne the said Catholicke religion by the antiquity of his Common-lavves throughout the tymes and raignes of the said Kings in fauour of ProtestaÌ„ts Lutheranes Caluinistes or other professors not knovvne in those dayes is as great a nouelty and vvonder as to see a Philosopher brought vp in Aristotles schole to impugne Aristotle by Aristotles learning in fauour of Petrus Ramus or any other such nevv aduersary or lately borne Antagonist Or as to behold an ancient Phisitian trayned vp in Galens tents to fight against Galen and Galenistes out of their ovvne bul-vvarkes or fortresses yea and this in ayde of Paracelsians or any other fresh crevv of Alchimian doctors vvhatsoeuer 3. This first consideration then of your person place and profession did inuyte me strongly to come and see vvhat you said in this behalfe but no lesse did the argumeÌ„t or subiect of your booke togeather vvith your maÌ„ner of treating the same of vvhich tvvo points I shall speake seuerally for that they haue seuerall ponderations all in my opinion both important rare and singular For vvhat more important matter can be thought of among ChristiaÌ„s then to treat of Spirituall Power Ecclesiasticall Authority being the kinges bench of Christ on earth the table of his scepter the tribunall of his dominion iurisdiction vvhereof dependeth the vvhole direction of soules the remission of our sinnes the efficacy of his Sacraments the lavvfulnes of all priesthoode and ministery the gouernment of the vvhole Church and finally the vigour frute effect of all Christian religion This is the importance of your argument M. Attorney and consider I pray you vvhether it standeth vs not much in hand to be attentiue vvhat you say and hovv substantially you pleade in this matter 4. And as for the other tvvo circumstances of rarenes and singularity vvhere may they more be seene then in this so vveighty a case conteyning the vvhole povver of the sonne of God both in heauen and earth for so much as belongeth to remission of sinnes and gouernement of his earthly inheritance vvhich is heere handled and ouer-ruled by a temporall lavvyer and by him giuen to a temporall Lady and Queene and this not only by force of a temporall Statute made in ParlameÌ„t to that effect the first yeare of her raigne vvhereby Ecclesiasticall Supremacy vvas ascribed vnto her but by the very vigour of her temporall crovvne it self vvithout any such Statute and by vertue of the ancient pretended Common-lavves of our Realme vvhich Common-lavves being made receaued introduced and established by Catholicke Kings and Queenes as hath byn said maketh the matter so strange and rare the vvonder admiration so great as neuer paradox perhaps in the vvorld seemed more rare singular in the eyes of Philosophers then this in the iudgement of learned Deuines And vvho then vvould not be allured vvith this singular nouelty to search somvvhat after the depth of so nevv deuised a mystery 5. After this ensueth as considerable your methode manner of handling this subiect vvhich to me seemeth nothing vulgar and consequently to you and 〈…〉 particularitâ—es 〈…〉 ‑ cero That yo◠〈…〉 uersies and 〈…〉 forth All that 〈…〉 grâ—â—e repâ—â—â—â—◠〈…〉 your side 〈…〉 vse your 〈…〉 the truth for 〈…〉 modesty and 〈…〉 7. All thâ—â—â—â—hin 〈…〉 encourage 〈…〉 reuievv o◠〈…〉 hope to my 〈…〉 modesty and 〈…〉 so much comm 〈…〉 ued and intenâ—â—◠〈…〉 cleere face 〈…〉 in your 〈…〉 you vvill doe 〈…〉 ‑ cile cedes 〈…〉 your self â—â— the 〈…〉 animo digâ—â—â—â—◠〈…〉 se sua spoâ—te 〈…〉 in deed to confessâ—◠〈…〉 fortitude but 〈…〉 ner goeth grea◠〈…〉 soules neuer-dying 〈…〉 â—e accompted our highest interest for that the â—uestion novv in hand betvveene you and me â—oÌ„cerneth the same most neerly as in the sequent â—reface vvill more largelie appeare â— Novv only I am to say promise also on my â—ehalfe that I meane to proceed in the prosecuâ—ion of this vvorke according to your foresaid â—rescriptions of truth temperance modesty and vrâ—anity and this both in center and circumference â—s neere as I can and if necessity at anie time or â—pon anie occasion shall enforce me to be more earnest it shall be rather in the matter it self then against the man I meane your self vvhose person and place I shall alvvaies haue in devv regard though I may not omit to tell you that in some partes of your booke especially tovvardes the end
this shall suffice to this point Now will M. Attorney passe to another of the commendation of Truth as though that were with him and his And wee shall follow him to examine that point also as wee haue done this other about Ignorance The Attorney On the other side Truth cannot be supported or defended by any thing but by Truth herselfe and is of that constitution and constancy that she cannot at any time or in any part or point be disagreable to her self She hateth all bumbasting and sophistication and bringeth with her certainty vnity simplicity and peace at the last Putida salsamenta amant origanum veritas pèr se placet honesta per se decent falsa fucis turpia phaleris indigent Ignorance is so far from excusing or extenuating the error of him that had power to finde out the truth which necessarily he ought to know wanted only will to seeke it as she will be a iust cause of his great punishment Quod scire debes non vis non pro ignorantia sed pro contemptu habers debet Error and falshood are of that condition as without any resistance they will in tyme of themselues fade and fall away But such is the state of Truth that though many doe impugne her yet will she of her self euer preuaile in the end and flourish like the palme-tree she may peraduenture by force for a tyme be troden downe but neuer by any meanes whatsoeuer can she be troden out The Catholike Deuine 16. None do more willinglie heare the commendation of Truth then we who say with S. Paul VVee can do nothing against truth but for truth And therfore do I willinglie ioyne with M. Attorney in this point of praisinge Truth Wee do mislike also no lesse then he all bumbasting and sophistication neither are we delighted with stinkinge salt-fish that had need of Orygon to giue it a good sauour Wee allow in like manner of his other latin phrases and do confesse that Truth herselfe may be troden downe for a tyme by force but neuer troden out But what is all this to the purpose we haue in hand of findinge out the Truth in this our controuersie Let vs suppose for the present that both partes do like well of her but what meanes is giuen heere or may be giuen to discouer where she lyeth In all other controuersies lightly our aduersaries are wont to remit vs only to scriptures for tryall which was an old tryck in like manner of their foresaid forernuners as the auncient Fathers testify for that scriptures being subiect to more cauillation many times both for the interpretation and sense then the controuersie it selfe gaue them commodity to make their contentions immortall 17. But the same Fathers vrging them with a shorter way asked them still Quid prius quid posterius What was first and what after for that heresie is nouelty and commeth in after the Catholike Truth first planted And for that euery hereticke pretendeth his heresie to be ancient and from the Apostles the said Fathers do vrge further that this Truth of our Religion must not only be eldest but must haue continued also from tyme to tyme at least with the greater part of Christians Quia proprium est hareticorum omnium saith old Tertullian pauca aduersus plâ—â—a posteriora aduersus priora defendere It is the property of all hereticks and their peculiar spirit to defend the lesser number against the greater and those things that are later against the more auncient Which agreeth with another saying of Tertullian Quod apud multos vnum inuenitur non est erratum sed traditum That which is found one and the self-same with many to witt the greater parte in the Christian Church is no error but commeth downe by tradition So hee But S. Augustine deliuereth another direction much conformable to this in sense though different in words Consider saith he what is KATH'HOLON Id est secundum totum non secundum partem According to the whole and not only to a part and this is the truth And another of his tyme saith Teneamus quod ab omnibus creditum est hoc enim verè Catholicum Let vs hold that which hath byn beleeued by all for this is truly Catholike and consequently Truth it self And another Father before them both Catholicum est quod vbique vnum That is Catholike vndoubtedly trew which euery where is one and the same And this both in tyme place and substance 18 These are the ancient Fathers directions now let vs apply them to our present question which is so much the easier to discusse for that albeit it comprehend some part of doctrine in controuersie concerninge the Right of temporall Princes to spirituall Iurisdiction yet is it principally and properly a question of fact to witt whether by the ancient common laws of England and practice of our Princes according to the same spiritual Iurisdiction they were exercised by them in former ages by force and vertue of their Imperiall crownes as Queene Elizabeth did or might do by the authority giuen her by an Act of Parlament in the first yeare of her raigne wherby she was made head of the Church and supreme gouernesse as well in all causes Ecclesiasticall as temporall In discussion wherof if we wil vse the directions of the forsaid Fathers for cleere and infallible tryall we shall easily find out where the Truth lyeth which is the but we ought to shoore at and not to contend in vayne for that our assertion quite contrary to that of M. Atourneys is That if we consider the whole ranke of our Christian English Kings from the very first that was conuerted to our Christian faith to witt King Ethelbert of Kent vnto the reigne of King Henry the eight for the space of more then nine hundered years and King Henry himself for the greater and best part of his reigne did all and euery one of them confesse acknowledg the spirituall power and Iurisdiction of the Sea of Rome and did neuer contradict the same in any one substantiall point either by word law or deed but did infinite wayes confirme the said authority ech one in their ages reignes And this is that KATH'HOLON or secundum totum which S. Augustine requireth and vbique vnam which the other Fathers do mention which is a Catholike proofe in a Catholike cause and M. Attorney must needs fly ad partem to a parte only to witt to two or three later Kings of aboue halfe a hundered that went before which is a schismaticall proofe as S. Augustine sheweth Contra partem Donati Against the parte of the heretick Donatus And before him Opratus Mileuitanus and diuers other Fathers who alwayes call Sectaries a Part For that they follow indeed but a part and Catholiks the whole and therof saith S. Augustine their name is deriued And thus much shall serue for our
and if they bee good and equall it is a publike benefit but much more if they be well executed by a iust Prince which importeth more than writen lavves For that he as M. Attorney confesseth is the soule of the law that giueth life who also without writen lawes either municipall or Imperiall may administer iustice by law of nature and nations if he will What speciall or singular commodity then is here shewed to issue out of the municipall lawes of England aboue others that they should be called our ancient best inheritance Yea as he addeth after in matters of greatest Importance meaning therby our soule saluation Is not this an ouerlashing is not this an egregious hyperbole Do not subiects in Scotland France Italy Spaine and other places enioy their goods in peace and quietnes and their liues and deare countreyes in safty as wel by their lawes Imperial as we do by our municipall Yes and much more if we will beleeue them and their learnedest this vpon some attent consideration of euents which dayly they heare and reade of many men both great and small to haue bin ouerthrowne and condemned in our countrey both in liues liuinges which they thinke by their Imperiall lawes were impossible And one only circumstance of English tryall in life and death to omit the rest doth leaue them astonished to witt that be he neuer so great a man yet for his life and landes honour posterity he may not haue that allowed him which in an action of fiue poundes renr or lesse he should obteyne which is a learned lawyer or aduocate to speake for him at the barre but that all the Princes officers and learned Counsell shall plead against him exaggerating matters to the vttermost and he only suffered to speake for himself and that in measure who for lack of skill or memory or tyme to consider or boldnes to speake or talent to vtter well his meaninge may there betray and ouerthrow both himself his whole posterity in his owne defence 24. And finally the last vpshot being of that dreadfull action to commit the matter to a iury of vnlearned men that must giue their verdicts openly and by consequence vpon the same causes before mentioned of error feare hope or other passion the Prince being alwayes on part interessed may easily be led finistrously to the prisoners condemnation All which inconueniences being carefully prouided for by course of other lawes do make forreine learned men to thinke that ours are more defectiue than we persuade our selues and that it may easily be beleeued that they were made indeed by a Conquerour And I could haue byn glad that M. Attorney in this place had alleaged some singular thing in their extraordinary commendation for that the enioying of our goods liues lands and contrey by them which he mencioneth are very ordinary and vulgar commendations and common to all lawes in generall that euer were made by reasonable men And yet do we not deny but that our English lawes for the whole corpes and dryft therof are very commendable especially where the spirit and meaninge of the first founders is obserued by the followers yet want there not by graue mens iudgments many considerable points that might be better rectified and namely concerning the imperious and dominant maner of proceeding of many lawyers and their exorbitant gaines which yet perhaps M. Attorney will place among the cheife commendations of our said common lawes 25. In the other point also of remitting men for the knowledg of their euidence ancient birth-right in some pointes of greatest importance to faithful Counseloures that will resolue them fully without feare affection or corruption if he meane by these Counseloures as he doth those Iudges and Sages of the Common-law from whom he hath taken these peeces against Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction which after he hath set downe I must needs saie that it is litle to the purpose For albeit now they be dead he may well saie as he doth that they cannot be daunted with any feare moued by any affection or corrupted with any reward yet when they were aliue gaue their resolutions which he saith they did it is hardly credible that they were soe deuoide of those passions as he would make them they being no Saintes but wordlie men that sought their aduauncement vnder their Princes by pleasing their humours as lawyers of our tymes do wherof I could alleadg many examples and some perhaps we may touch after in their due places Now it shal be sufficient to remember that in diuerse Kings daies after the Conquest the cheife cōplaints of the people were against their cheife Iusticers would God wee had not the like cause now who in those times most gouerned the state or abused rather the same as the examples of Hubert de Borgo and Robert Tresilian cheif Iustices vnder K. Henry the third and Richard the second and both of then punished publiklie for their wickednes doe testifie And in the begining of K. Edward the third his raigne I read of a complaint made by the King and the whole Parliament that his father K. Edward 2. had byn induced by euil Counsellours which in that case may iustlie be presumed to haue byn his Iudges and lawyers to sease into his hands the temporaltie of diuerse Bishopricks c. Which for the time to come he promised not to doe And finallie after that againe when the contention and controuersie between the two potent houses of Lancaster and Yorke began and endured for almost 100. years I find few Iudges or great Sages of the common-law to haue lost their liues therin for anie side or partie as manie Dukes Earls Barons knights yea and some Bishops also religious did Which is a signe that those Sages were to wise to oppose themselues to anie sorte of Princes whatsoeuer but could accommodate themselues to all and draw the birth-right of laws to the establishing of any Kings right that by his sword could get the possession 26. But to prosequute these matters no further in this place I am only to adde for conclusion of all that the true ancien◠birth-right aud best inheritance of English subiects indeed i◠their right to Catholique religion which was first planted amonge them from the Sea of Rome by the singular zeale of holy Pope Gregory the first a thousand years gone and continued without interruption to our dayes as afterwards shall be shewed and that for seeking out and cleering the euidence of this right they ought to be diligent and to spare no labour paine or industrie for that therof dependeth their eternall saluation or damnation which doth not of the knowledge or not knowledg of the common law and that for certifyinge themselues in this point they ought to repaire to faithful Counsellers indeed who are the ancient Fathers and writers of Gods Church in euery age who being not only wise and learned but holy also may securely be
Iurisdiction be of Gods institution also and duelie to be honoured in his Church and Christian common wealth as before wee haue shewed yet doe they teach the same to be far otherwise deriued and receiued from God then is Spirituall Power that is to saie not immediatlie by Gods owne deliuerie therof but mediatlie rather to witt by meditation of the law of nature and nations For by the law of nature God â—ath ordeined that there should be politicall gouernment for that otherwise no multitude could be preserued which the law of nations assuming hath transferred that gouernment vnto one or more according to the particular formes therof as Monarchie Aristocracy or Democracy or mixt wherin is to be noted that the ordination of God by the law of nature doth giue politicall Power vnto the multitude immediately and by them mediately to one or more as hath been said But Spirituall Power Christ gaue immediatly and by himself to the Apostles and their Successors by these words whatsoeuer you shall bind vpon earth the same sâ—all be bound in heauen And whatsoeuer you shall loose one earth shall be loosed in heauen Wherby you se a generall large commission graunted to them of binding loosing Quaecunque whatsoeuer without exception And the like to S. Peter as head and chiefe by speciall power and commission of those words Pasce oues meas Pasce agnos meos Feed my sheep feed my lambs thryse repeated signifying therby the Preheminence and Primacy of his Pastorall Authoritie in Gods Church as the auncient Fathers haue allwayes vnderstood the same For that to the office of Supreame feedinge is required also all other authoritie necessarie to gouerne direct commaund restraine and punish in like manner when need requireth 8. About which point is to be obserued and considered attentâ—uelie say Catholike Deuines and most learned lawyers that when God almightie giueth any office he giueth also sufficient Power and Authoritie euery way to execute that office as when he giueth the office of a King or temporal Magistrate for good of the Common-wealth he giueth Authoritie therwith not onlie to direct command and instruct but to punish and compell also yea and to extirpate and cut of those when need is that are rebellions or otherwise deserue that punishment And the like is to be obserued in Spirituall Power and Iurisdiction according to which the Ciuil law saith Cui Iurisdictio data est ea quoque concessa esse intelliguntur sine quibus Iurisdictio expleri non potuit To whosoeuer iurisdiction is giuen to him also must we vnderstand to be graunted all those thinges without which his Iurisdiction cannot be fulfilled And the Canon law to the same effect Iurisdictio nullius videretur esse momenti si coërcionem aliquam non haberet Iurisdiction would seeme to be of no moment if it had not some power to compell And finally it is a general rule giuen in the said Canon law that when anie cause is committed to anie man he is vnderstood to receiue also ful authoritie in al matters belonging to that cause 9. Out of all which is deduced that for so much as Christ our Sauiour God and Man hauing purchased to him felfe by the price of his owne blood a most deerlie beloued Church and committed the same as S. Paul saith to be gouerned by his Apostles and Bishops their successours vnto the worlds end it must needs follow that he hath indowed the same Church with sufficient spirituall Authoritie both directiue and coactiue to that end for gouerning our soules no lesse than he hath done the temporal CoÌ„monwealth for affaires of the body Nay much more by how much greater the importance is of the one than of the other as before hath been said 10. If you aske me yet more particularlie where and how by what commission and to whom Christ our Sauiour left this high Spiritual Power in his Church what it is and wherin it consisteth I answere first to the last that it consisteth as often hath been said in guiding our soules in this world to euerlasting saluation in the next Which thinge for that principallie it dependeth of this that we auoide sinnes in this life or if we committ them that they be pardoned vs or corrected by this Power Christ our Sauiour doth most aptlie giue and describe the same Power by the words of binding or loosing sinnes And therefore in the foresaid place alleadged out of S. Matthew his Ghospel he giueth the said commission as you haue heard VVhatsoeuer you shal binde or loose vpon earth shal be bound or loosed in heauen Wherby the Church of God hath allwaies vnderstood full authoritie of Iudicature to haue been giuen to the Apostles and their successors to discerne iudge binde or loose in all things belonging to this end of directing soules 11. Truth it is that diuers learned deuines are of opinion that in these places Christ did but promise to his Apostles to giue them this high iudiciall authoritie in his Church when by his death and resurrection it should be founded And that the actuall performance of this promise was made vnto them in the 20. if S. Iohns ghospell where Christ said vnto them Sicut misit me pater ego mitto vos As my father sent me so I doe send you and then presentlie breathing vpon then he addeth Receiue the Holie-ghost whose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen vnto them and whose you shal retaine they are retained Where we se that Christ speaketh now in the present tense they are forgiuen and they are retained and not in the future as before in the place of S. Matthew his ghospell And we must note that those words of our Sauiour As my father sent mee so I doe send you are vnderstood by auncient Doctors of Authoritie as though he had said that with the same power authoritie that my father sent mee into this world to gather gouerne my Church I doe also send you that is to saie withall spirituall power necessarie to your office and charge both on earth and in heanen And therfore he saith in S. Matthew his Ghospell That whatsoeuer they shall binde or loose vpon earth which are the Acts of high iudges shall be loosed or bound in heauen 12. And to S. Peter in like manner as Cheif of the rest the promise of his Supreame and singular power besides the other which out of the former general commission he receiued with the rest of the Apostles was made vnto him first in S. Matthews ghospell when Christ said Thou art Peter which signifieth a stone or rocke and vpon this rock will I build my Church and will giue vnto thee the keies of the Kingdome of heauen c. Which he perfourmed afterward in the 21. chapter of S. Iohn after his resurrection when asking him three times of his loue towards him he as manie times gaue him coÌ„mission of high-pastor ouer
that such as should be named for commissioners must be naturally borne subiects Which his counsell said did not appeere by the special verdict of the Iury to haue been obserued consequentlie that the sentence was not good and auailable in law Heervnto saith M. Attorney a threefold answere vvas giuen and resolued by the vvhole courte First that they which were Commissioners and had places of iudicature should be intended to be subiects borne and not aliens c. Quia stabitur praesumptioni donec probetur in contrarium The common presumption must bee followed vntill the contrarie be proued Heer you see how much this answere weigheth It seemeth to me that this matter might easilie in foure years haue been verefied if the Iudges had listed whether these Commissioners were aliens or borne Subiects not to reiect the Plainteife now with this shaddow of common presumption that they might be presumed or supposed to be naturally borne 15. Secondlie saith M. Attorney the Iurors haue found that the Queene by her said letters Patents did authorize them secundum formam Statuti praedicti according to the forme of the said Statute that authorized her and therfore it doth by a necessarie consequence amount to as much as if they had found that they had been subiects borne For if they were not subiects borne saith he they could not be so authorized secundum formam Statuti praedicti This is the second answere somewhat weaker as to mee it seemeth than the former of presumption and common intendement For heere insteed of prouing that the Commissioners were borne subiects and consequentlie well anthorized he subsumeth and inferreth the contrary to witt that they were authorized by the Queene secundum formam Statuti praedicti ergo they were borne subiects as who would saie the Queen or those that counselled her could not be deceiued or euill informed or negligent in this point about the obseruing of that clause and yet this is all that was answered by the Court to this matter Which themselues belike considering fell to deuise a third answere more absurde and paradoxicall than all the rest which haue giuen the ground or argument of this Sage fable or Comedy which M. Attorney hath heere partlie reported and partlie exhibited vnto vs in this his booke to the laughter of such as reade it and doe consider the exorbitant vanitie therof I shall set it downe in very few words 16. When the forenamed Sages did perceiue that the former two answers to Cauderyes fourth exception against the Queens commission made out vpon vertue of the statute in the first yeare of her raigne that gaue her all kinde of Spirituall power and Iurisdiction did not satisfie they fell vpon this third that albeit the said Queene had not obserued the clauses and conditions specified in the said Statute for authorizing others in the like Iurisdiction yet had she authority otherwise to make out such a Commission in that she was Queene and this by the vertue of her Crowne according to the auncient Common laws of England You shall heare M. Attorneys owne words in this resolution This Act saith he of the first yere of the late Queene concerning Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction was not an act introductorie of a new law but declaratorie of the olde which appeereth as well by the Title of the said Act videlicet An Act restoring to the Crowne the auncient Iurisdiction ouer the State Ecclesiasticall spirituall c. As also by the body of the Act in diuerse partes therof for that this Act doth not annex anie Iurisdiction to the Crowne but that which in truth was or of right ought to be by the auncient laws of the Realme parcell of the Kings Iurisdiction and vnited to his Imperiall Crowne c. so as if the said Act of the first yeare of the late Queene had neuer been made it was resolued by all the Iudges that the King or Queene of England for the time being may make such an Ecclesiasticall commission by the auncient prerogatiue or law of England Thus hee 17. And trulie I am sorye that he affirmeth this strange Paradox to haue been the resolution of all the Iudges there present But to the end that all may not seeme to haue entred into this solemne folly it were good that their particular names were knowne that resolued the same For certainlie it will bee the most notorious iest vnto forraine lawyers of all sortes vnto other graue learned men when it shall come abroad in other countryes as shortelie it will for that M. Attorney hath caused it also to be published in Latin which hath happened in many years if not ages much laughter it will cause will celebrate solemnlie M. Attorneys name that is the Reporter therof For this matter toucheth not onlie England and English-laws but all other Countryes besides who haue runne ioyntlie with England for many hundered years in the self same conformity of Catholicke Religiou and of temporall lawes confirming the same in ech Countrey and particularlie in this point of the Popes Spirituall Authoritie vniuersally receiued So as for so much as their kingdomes being entyre Empires and Monarchies as ours is they must needs be said to haue had this Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction also in the highest degree included in their Kinglie right as parcell of their Imperiall Crowne wherof insueth that either they and their learned Counselours Lawyers and Sages did not see or know the same which had been great Ignorance or esteemed it not which had been great negligence or which is most likely that our lawyers now will be thought by them ridiculous to set forth such a strange Paradox to the worlde contrary to that which so many thousand Sages of former tymes both in generall Councells and otherwise haue resolued decreed and determined vpon better deliberation and more searche both of diuinity history and lawe than these temporall Iudges could doe vpon the suddaine in Cauderyes case howsoeuer M. Attorney doth magnifye the same whoe as I heare by some that will seeme to reporte it from his owne mouth he that is the Reporter is in great parte also the author or at least wise affecteth to be thought so as of a new witty inuention hauing often and vnto many promised to proue it and now hath begun to sett vpon it We shall see with what euent THE SECOND PART OF THIS CHAPTER Vvith a more cleere explication of the Question §. I. 18. But before wee come to treate of proofes we must consider of one circumstance of the matter more which is of no small importance for iudging of the whole and this is the circuite of words and multitude of darke and dazeling phrases which the foresaid Statute vseth in deliuering and setting downe the Ecclesiasticall power Iurisdiction giuen to Q. Elizabeth to wit that all such Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall as by anie spirituall or Ecclesiasticall power hath heertofore been or may lawfully be exercised for the
the Archbishops and bishops seals of office for testisying of this the Kings Highnes armes be decentlie sett with Characters vnder the said Armes for the knowledge of the diocesse that they shall vse noe other seale of Iurisdiction but wherin his Maiestyes armes be engraued c. 23. Lo heere not onlie the name and Authoritie of head of the Church giuen to K. Edward the Child and taken from the Pope but all Iurisdiction also and signe of Iurisdiction spirituall taken from the Archbishops and Bishops of England excepting onlie so far forth as it was imparted vnto them by the said Child K. Which importeth much if you consider it well For this is not onlie to haue power to visitt and gouerne Ecclesiasticall persons and to reforme abuses Set downe in the Queenes graunt by parlament but to haue all Ecclesiasticall and spirituall power and iurisdiction originallie included in his owne person and so to be able from him self as from the first fountaine and highest origen on earth to deriue the partes parcells thereof to others which you may consider how different it is from that which here the Statute would seeme to ascribe to the Queene and opposite and contrarye to all that which the ancient Fathers in the precedent chapter did affirme protest not to be in their Kings and Emperours at all but in Bishops and Preists onlie as deliuered immediatlie to them by Christ our Sauiour and by them and from them onlie to be administred to others for their saluation But by this new order of the English Parlament the contrarie course is established to witt that it must come to Bishops and Preists from a laie man yea a Child and from a lay-woman also as the other Parlament determineth and then must it needs follow also as after more larglie shall bee proued that both the one and the other I meane K. Edward and Queen Elizabeth had power not onlie to giue this Ecclesiasticall iurisdictiō vnto others but much more to vse and exercise the same in like manner in their owne persons if they would as namelie to giue holie orders create consecrate Bishops confirme Children absolue sinnes administer Sacraments teach and preach iudge and determine in points of faith and beleife sitt in iudgement vpon errors and heresies and the like And this for K. Edward 24. Now then if it may be presumed as I thinke it may that Queene Elizabeths meaning was to haue no lesse Authoritie Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall giuen vnto her and acknowledged in her then her said Father and Brother had vsed before why did not the makers of this Statute set it downe in plaine words as the other did but disguised the matter by such māner of speach as they might seeme to giue but little wheras they gaue all and more then all The Cause was that which I haue said before for which they laboured not to be vnderstood of all men but to speake as it were in mysterye not to offend so publikelie the Caluinists and yet to include matter inough to ouerthrow Catholikes But the said exacter parte and purer Caluinists quicklie found out the matter and so they began verie shortly after to mutter and write against this and diuers other points of the Statute and so haue continued euer since and the Controuersie betweene them is indeterminable 25. Well then for so much as now we haue laid open the true state of the Question and that M. Attorney is bound to proue his proposition in this sense and explication that heere is sett downe out of K. Henry and K. Edwards Statutes to witt that Q. Elizabeth had all plenarie power of Spirituall Iurisdiction in her self to deriue vnto others at her pleasure as from the head and fountaine thereof And that no Bishop Archbishop or other Ecclesiasticall person within the Realme had or could haue anie spirituall power or iurisdiction but from the wellspring and supreame sourge thereof And this not onlie by vertue of the foresaid Statute of the first yeare of her raigne but before without this also by the verie force of her Princely Crowne according to the meaning of the old and most auncient cōmon laws of England It will be time now to passe on to the veiw of his proofes which for so new strange and weightie an assertion that toucheth if wee beleiue the former alleadged Fathers the very quicke and one of the neerest means of our eternal saluation or damnation ought to bee very cleere sound and substantiall We shall see in the sequent Chapter what they are VVHERAS IN THE CASE PROPOSED THERE MAY BE TVVO KINDES OF PROOFES The one DE IVRE the other DE FACTO M. Attorney is shewed to haue fayled in both and that we doe euidently demonstrate in the one and in the other And first in that DE IVRE CHAP. IIII. THat the late Queene of England had such plenary Ecclesiasticall Power as before had byn said this by the intent meaninge of the old ancient Common-lawes of Englād though vnto me to many others it seeme a most improbable Paradox and doe meane afterwardes by Gods assistance to prooue and euidently demonstrate the same and shew that from our first Christiā Kings vnto K. Henry the eight the Common-lawes of our Land were euer conforme and subordinate to the Canō Ecclesiasticall lawes of the Roman Church in all spirituall affayres yet for so much as M. Attorney hath taken vpon him to prooue the contrary two heades of proofe he may follow therin The first De Iure the second De facto And albeit he entitle his Booke according to the first to witt De Iure Regis Ecclesiastico yet doth he nothing lesse then prosecute that kind of proofe but rather flippeth to the second which is De Facto endeauoring to prooue that certaine Kings made certaine lawes or attempted certaine factes somtimes and vpon some occasions that might seeeme somwhat to smel or taste of Ecclesiasticall power assumed to themselues in derogation or restraint of that of the Bishops Popes or Sea of Rome 2. Now albeit this were so and graunted as after it will be reproued yet well knoweth M. Attorney that an argument De facto inferreth not a proofe De Iure For if all the factes of our Kings among others should be sufficient to iustifie all matters done by them then would for example fornication be proued lawfull for that some of them are knowne to haue had vnlawfull children and left bastardes behinde them And the like we might exemplify in other things Neither doe I alleadge this instance without peculiar cause or similitude For as in that vnlawfull act of the flesh they yelded rather to passion and lust then to their owne reason iudgment knowing well inough that they did amisse when they were voyd of the same passion so in some of these actions of contention about Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction some of them were byassed with interest somtymes by indignation
drawing vnto thee those things that appertayne vnto the Church thou doe inuolue thy selfe in a hainous synne Giue vnto Cesar those things which are of Cesar saith the Scripture and to God those things that are of God therfore as yt is not lawfull for vs to meddle with thy earthly Empire so hast not thou power ô Emperour ouer sacred things which I write vnto thee for the care I haue of thy saluation c. 8. And doe you see here this liberty of speech in Ecclesiasticall Prelates of the primitiue Church towards their Kings aud Emperours doe you see what difference and distinction they make betwene Ecclesiastical temporal power yet we read not that any Attorney or Aduocate of these Emperours did euer accuse these Bishops of treasoÌ„ for speaking as they did or once obiected that they meant hereby to take away any parte or parcell of their entire and absolute Monarchies No though S. Athanasius for his parte went yet further for when he saw that all these admonitions and reprehensions would not preuaile but that the said Constantius went forward to intermeddle more and more in Ecclesiasticall affayres he wrote thus in the same Epistle I am dâ—nuò in locum Ecclesiasticae cognitionis suum palatium Tribunal constituit c. Now againe hath the Emperour Constantius made his pallace a Tribunall of Ecclesiasticall causes in place of an Ecclesiasticall Courte and hath made himself the chiefe Prince and Author of spirituall pleas c. These things are grieuous and more then grieuous but yet are such as may well agree to him that hath taken vpon him the image of Anti-christ for who is there that seing him to beare himself as Prince in the determyning of Bishops causes and to sitt as Arbiter in Ecclesinsticall iudgemeÌ„t will not worthily say the AbhominatioÌ„ foretold by Daniel to be now come c. So he And there were no end if I would prosecute all that might be said out of the sense and iudgement of the ancient Fathers against this first argument of M. Attorney That teÌ„porall Princes are not absolute Monarches except you giue them spirituall iurisdiction also But we must be myndfull of breuity and so this for the first shall suffice remiâ—ting you to that which hath bin spoken more largly hereof in the second chapter before 9. An other Argument yt seemeth M. Attorney would insinuate for vrge it he doth not by the consideration of two Tribunalls or Courtes of the King of England the one Temporall the other Ecclesiasticall and seuerall causes belonging vnto them You shall heare it out of his owne speach and then iudge if it make for him or against him The kingly head sayth he of this politike bodie is instituted and surnished with plenary and entire power prerogative and Iurisdiction to render iustice and right to euery parte and member of this bodie both Clergie and Laytie of what state degree or calling soeuer in all causes c. and as in temporall causes the King by the mouth of the Iudges in his Courtes of Iustice doth iudge and determine the same by the temporall lawes of England so in causes Ecclesiasticall spirituall as namely blasphemy â—â—stâ—â—y from Christianity Heresies Schismes Ordering Admissions Institutions of Clerkes Rites of matrimony Diuorces otherlike the conusaunce wherof belong not to the Common-lawes of England the same are to be determined and decyded by Ecclesiasticall Iudges according to the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes of this Realme So M. Attorney making this note in the margent VVhat causes belonge to the Ecclesiasticall Courtes see Circumspecte agatis 13. yeare of Edward the first c. And VVest 2. and 13. Edward â— Cap. 5. art Cleri Edward 2. 9. Wherunto though I might oppose the Authority and speaches of all the auncient Fathers before mencioned that in this matter of diuinitie ought to weigh more with vs then any particular Ordination of secular lawes though they were against vs yet in this case I dare ioyne yssue with M. Attorney vpon this very Argument which he hath alleadge for that truly I doe not see what could be produced more effectually either against himself or for vs then here is sett downe For as we willingly graunt the former part of his speach to witt that the kingly head of the politicke body is instituted and furnished with plenarie power to render iustice and right in all causes that belong to his â—â—â—â—ticke and temporall gouernment endes and obiects therof â—o all persons of his Realme as before hath bene declared So heere the very naming of two generall partes of the kingdome which M. Attorney graunteh that the ancient law of England deuideth into Clergy and Laytie and the mencioning of two seuerall Courtes and distinct causes to be handled therin by distinct Iudges in such manner as the one cannot haue conusaunce of the other inferreth plainly two distinct powers desceÌ„ding from two distinct origens the one Temporali the other Ecclesiasticall and so doe the places quoted by him of Circumspectè agatis westm the second and Articul Cleri vnder K. Edward the first and second most euidently declare 10. And first I would aske M. Attorney what the distinction of Clergie and Laity doth meane not made or brought in first by our Common-lawes as he would insynuate when he saith that the lawe deuideth our Politicall body into two generall partes the Clergie the Laity but rather instituted by the Apostles themselues and admitted only by our CoÌ„mon-lawes and continued from that tyme to ours as before hath bene shewed This distinction I say of Clergie and Layty wherof the former signifyeth the portion of God that is to say those persons that be peculyarly appropriated to the seruice of Almighty-God the other of Laity taking their name of from the common people I would aske of M. Attorney what it importeth especially in this case of Queene Elizabethes supreme primacy doth it not argue a distinct order of men gouerned by distinct lawes distinct Iudges and distinct power Iurisdiction But you will say the Queene was head of them both and we grannt it as they are members of one Common-wealth but in their seuerall distinction and seperation as they are Clergie and lay people she could not be of both but of one only to witt of the Laity For that no man will say that she was also a Clerke or of the Clergie And yet in this partition no man will deny but that the Clergie is the worthier parte and member and so is placed first in all our lawes wherof is inferred that the said Clergie as Clergie is of a higher degree according to our Common-lawes then the temporall Prince which is of the laitie only and not Clerke as in Q. Elizabeth is confessed and consequently she could not be head of the Clergie as Clergie that is in Ecclesiasticall Clergie matters belonging to Religion Wherof we may take a notable example from the great Emperour
of the whole entire body of the Realme 15 You see whervnto this deuise tendeth to make yt a matter of treason to deny this fancy of M. Attorney that for so much as the Canons and Ecclesiasticall lawes of the Church made by Popes and by Generall Councells from tyme to tyme and receued vniuersally for spirituall and Ecclesiasticall matters throughout the Christian world were receued also and allowed by the Kings Comnn wealth of England which was an euident argument of their acknowledging of the said Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction of the Church and spirituall gouernours therof of this approbation and allowance he would inferr that these lawes were the Kings lawes though deriued as he sayth from others that is to say from Popes and Bishopps At which inference I doubt not but that his fellow-lawyers will smile And truly I am sory that he being accoumpted so great a man in that faculty which is wont to reason well hath giuen so manifest occasion of laugther For that euery puney young student of law will see by common reason that the admitting of an other mans lawe doth not make it his lawe or that he had power to make that lawe of himself but rather to the contrary it sheweth that the admitter acknowledgeth the other for his Superiour in all matters contained vnder that law For the power of making lawes is the highest power that principally proueth dominion in any Prince and the admitting and obeying therof by another Prince is an euident argument of inferiority and subiection and so here the admitting of the Popes Ecclesiasticall and Canon-lawes was an argument that the admitters acknowledged his supreme authority in Ecclesiasticall affayres 16. Neyther is M. Attorneys example of the Romans or Normans any thinge to the purpose all For that the Romans did not take from the Athenians any formall lawes made by them for the gouernment of the Romans for that had been to acknowledg superiority as before hath bene said but rather they taking a suruey of all the Grecian lawes aswell of Athens as other Common-wealthes or States they tooke parcells therof here and there and applied the same to their Common-wealth which was properly to make lawes of them selues And the like may be sayd of the Normans if they borrowed any of their lawes from England which yet I neuer read in any Author besides M. Attorney but rather that the Normans gaue lawes to England 17. But nowe in the Canon-lawes receiued in England for almost a thousand yeares together after our first Conuersion the matter is farr different for that these were receiued wholy and formally as lawes made by another superior power in a different Tribunall different causes sent expresly to England and to all other Christian Kingdomes to be receiued and obserued and some also out of the same Ecclesiasticall power made within the land by Synodes and Prelates therof and promulgated to be obserued both by Prince and people formally and punctually as they lay and so were receiued admitted allowed and put in execution by the said Prince and his Officers except perhaps some tymes some clause or parte therof might seeme to bring some inconuenience to the temporall State for which exception was made against it and the matter remedied by common consent And this was another manner of admitting lawes then the Romans admitted some peeces of there lawes from Athens or rather translated some pointes of the Athenian lawes into theyrs which was to make them selues Maisters of thus lawes and not receiuers or admitters And finally wee see by this to what poore and pittifull plight M. Attorney hath brought the title of his booke De Iure Regis Ecclesiastico Of the Kings Ecclesiasticall law to witt that it is the Popes Ecclesiasticall law◠in deed made and promulgated by him and his but receiued and obeyed by the King and consequently not the Kings law but the Popes 18. Wherfore to conclude the first part of this Chapter for so much as M. Attorney by these two arguments De Iure which are the only he mentioneth hath proued no right at all of supreme spirituall Iurisdiction to haue accrewed to Q. Elizabeth by the title and interest of her temporall Crowne but rather the contrary to witt that both his Arguments haue proued against himself we see therby how vnable he is to proue his said affirmatiue proposition by this first head and sorte of proofe De Iure I shall now in the second part of this chapter endeuour to prooue the negatiue by as many sortes of rightes and lawes as any thing may be proued that is to say not only by Canonicall Ciuill lawes but by law of Nature also of Nations Mosaycall Euangelicall and by our ancient Common-lawes of England all which doe concu◠in this that Q. Elizabeth being a woman could not haue any supreame spirituall power or Iurisdictiō in Ecclesiasticall matter◠THE SECOND PART OF THIS CHAPTER VVherin is shevved that Q. Elizabeth in regard of her sex could not haue supreame Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction §. I. 19. First then being to performe this we are professe in this place that we meane not to imitate the proceeding of some Protestants in this behalf who following no certayne rule of doctrine no◠moderation in their doings or writings doe passe to extreames therfore feeling themselues greiued vnder Q. Maryes raigne with the course of Catholike religion then held tooke vpon them to publishe that women were not capable of any gouerment at all Temporall or Spirituall nor to be further obeyed than they would make Reformation in Religion for so they called it comforme to their willes and prescriptions as appeareth by the bookes writings and actions both of Goodman VVhitingham Gilbye Knockes others who taking their fire of fury from Geneua sought first to kindle the same in England and being repulsed thence brake into open flames of combustion in Scotland and neuer coassed vntill it brought two Noble Queens mother and daughter to their ruyne and afterward put their heire and successor into such plunges by those and other heades of like doctrine and desperate attemptes answerable therunto as Gods right hand did only preserue him from like ruyne 20. But we are not of this spirit to seeke reuenge by such new brayn-sicke doctrine we graunt that Queens may lawfully raigne inherite that Successiō which euery Countrey by their peculiar lawes doth allow them The great Kingdome of France doth excude them so doe many lesser States in Italie and Germany and other Countryes yet doth Spaine England Scotland and Flanders admitt them for preuenting other inconueniences when Male-sucessors doe fayle So as for this point of Q. Elizabeths temporall gouerment we haue no controuersie in this place If any fell out betweene her and the Bishop of Rome whose authority she tooke from him and applyed it to her self and many otherwayes exasperated him that fact appertayneth not to vs that are priuate men to iudge
spirituall gouernment to women but placeth it where it ought to bee in S. Peter his Successors aboue all others I shall alleadge the place somewhat more at large which containeth a graue ponderation of those words of our Sauiour vnto S. Peter in S. Iohns ghospell Petre amas me c. Peter dost thou loue mee more then the rest and he answearing that he did Christ replied if thou loue mee feed my sheep Wherof S. Chrysostome doth inferre that Christ in these words did first of al specially commit the supreme charge of his said sheep to S. Peter and his Successors Pecudâ—â— curam saith he quas sanguine suo acquisierat tum Petro tum Petri Successoribus committebat He committed to Peter and to Peters Successours the care of his sheep which he had purchased with his owne bloud And againe Petrum Christus authoritate hac praeditum esse voluit reliquos item Apostolos longe praecellere Christ would haue Peter to bee indued with this supreme authority ouer his sheep and therein far to excell all the rest of the Apostles c. 37. Secondlie S. Chrysostome maketh a deep ponderation vpon these words of our Sauiour of the singular loue which he would haue Pastors to beare vnto his sheep and which hee bare himself giuing his bloud for them and what hee exacted at this high Pastors hands for gouerning and feeding of them in this his demaund or interrogation concerning his loue Atque illi quidem licebat saith he verbis huiusmodi Petrum affari Si me amas Petre Ieiuniae exerce super nudam humum dormi c. Our sauiour Christ might haue spoken to Peter in this sorte vpon his answeare of loue if thou loue me Peter exercise fasting sleep on the bare ground watch continuallie releiue them that bee oppressed shew thy self a Father to orphans and bee vnto widdowes insteed of their husbands But now Christ pretermitting all these other good works what saith hee vnto him Pasce oues meas c. Feed and gouerne my sheep for that all the rest of those good works before meÌ„tioned may bee perfourmed by many subiects not only men but also women At cum de ecclesiae Praefectura de credenda huic vel illi tam multarum animarum cura agitur vniuersa quidem mulieris natura functionis istius moli ac magnitudini caedat oportet itemque bona virorum pars But when the Question is of any gouernmeÌ„t ouer the Church or about committing to this or that person the charge of so many soules then must all women kind yeeld and giue place to the weight and greatnes of this function and so must also a good parte of men to witt all such as are of the lay sorte and haue not Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction laid vpon them by the ordinarie means before mentioned of ordination succession in the Church of God descending originally from this first fountaine of all ecclesiasticall power vpon earth committed by the sonne of God to S. Peter and his Successours to endure to the worlds end 38. And thus haue wee cleerlie the sentence beleife iudgement of S. Chrysostome concerning spirituall authority for gouerning our soules that it was giuen eminently to S. Peter and his Successors aboue the rest of the Apostles but so as only men and those not all but Priests alone and Cleargie-men doe or may succeed therein and that all kinde of women are excluded in respect of their sex from any superiority or prefecture ouer the Church And what-soeuer S. Chrysostome held preached or left written in this behalfe be being so great a Doctor and piller of Christs Church in his dayes the thing it self neuer contradicted or reprehended by any other may assuredly be held for the common doctrine iudgement sense faith and beleife of the vniuersall Catholike Church in that age and consequently also both of the former and following ages vntill our time And how much this consideration ought to preuaile with a prudent man that followeth not passion but reason and hath care of his owne soule is easy to see And so much of this matter 39. And now further I remember that I promised to proue my negatiue also by the ancient common municipall lawes of England of which though I might say as before I said of the Fathers and Doctors of former tymes that they ordayned nothing expresly of this particular case for that they neuer imagined that any such matter would fall out yet doe they determine that expresly which includeth this which is that they confirme euery-where the libertyes preheminencyes and prerogatiues of of the Church and Church-men of England which doe principally consist in this that only Ecclesiasticall men haue Power and Iurisdiction in Ecclesiasticall affayres and that no lay person and much lesse a woman can meddle therin and that there be two distinct swords in a Christian Common-wealth the one temporall in the hands of the Prince the other Ecclesiasticall in the hands of the Bishop and that the Ecclesiasticall is greater and more soueraigne then the temporall that this later must help be subordinate to the former All which yow shall see decreed as well in the lawes of K. Edgar and K. Edward before the Conquest as also of the Conquerour himself which after in due places we shal set downe 40. And to all this now may we ad certaine manifest reasons which besides the foundations before laid or rather out of them all our Deuines doe alleadge whie a woman may not be head of the Church or haue spirituall Iurisdiction in Ecclesiasticall affayres Wherof the first is that Christ our Sauiour being a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech and refusing to be a temporall King as out of the ghospell is euident he left in his place Priests to gouerne his Church as before hath bene declared both out of Scriptures and ancient Fathers but a woman cannot be a Priest as both we and Caluinists doe hold though Luther taught otherwise for a tyme as hath bene said and is refuted at lardge by K. Henry the 8. Q. Elizabeths Father in his booke against him and therefore the said Q. Elizabeth could not hold the place of Christ in spirituall Iurisdiction in the Church of England 41. A second reason is founded vpon the maxime before alleadged by M. Attorney Cui licet quod maius est licet quod minus He that can doe the greater can doe the lesse But it is more to be able to giue authority to others to exercise spirituall functions and Iurisdiction than to doe the same in his owne person ergo if Q. Elizabeth could giue authority to Bishops and Pastors to make Ministers administer the Sacraments preach and teach with the like which belongeth to the head of the Church than could she doe them also her self Which conclusion notwithstanding all English Protestants commonly doe deny yet is the Consequence euident and the Minor proposition is
that from the beginning of the world there was neuer any such thing heard of either among Christians Iewes or Gentiles 48. Wherfore we hauing now proued this our negatiue â—e Iure against M. Attorney by so many different sortes of proofe as you haue heard aswell out of the Canon Ciuill lawes as of Nature Nations Mosaicall and Euangelicall and of all the partes and members therof as Scriptures Fathers Doctors of all sortes yea and by the testimony of our Common Municipall ancient lawes of England and the concurrence and consequence of reason it self and lastly by the consent and asseueration of the best-learned Protestants of ech sorte both Lutherans and Caluinians I doe not see what M. Attorney wil be able to bring to the contrary to proue his affirmatiue propositions De Iure with any shew of probability Wherfore I shall conclude this whole Chapter noting only to the Reader two considerations for his better memory out of all the premisses The one worthie of laughter the other of teares 49. The former is the euill lucke that M. Attorney had in making choyse of Q. Elizabeth for an example of Ecclesiasticall supremacy in a temporall Prince For wheras three Princes only of our Nation from the beginning of the world had taken vpon them this title to witt K. Henry the 8. K. Edward the 6. and Q. Elizabeth M. Attorney chose the worst and weakest of all the three to be defended For as for K. Henry though by the Canon-law he were incapable of Priesthood or holy orders wherof dependeth spirituall Iurisdiction for that he was marryed when he tooke the same vpon him and not only marryed but many times marryed which is another Canonicall impediment for he was not only Bigamus and Trigamus but twice also Trigamus hauing bene marryed the sixth tyme yet was all this in rigour of Ecclesiasticall power dispensable by the Church being but only Iuris humani impedimenta non diuini Impediments of humane not diuine lawe and so K. Henry either by dispensation or by occasion that this last wife had dyed might haue been made Priest and capable of spirituall Iurisdiction 50. But K. Edward being a child of 9. yeares old and consequently vnder the vse of reason when this supreame spirituall Iurisdiction was giuen vnto him he was so vncapable therof as by no dispensation it might be made lawfull vntill he came to the years of perfect reason and so doe proue both Canonists Ciuilians for that Iurisdiction cannot be giuen nor admitted but where perfect vse of reason is for that otherwise it should be no humane act But yet this impediment though not dispensable for the present would haue come afterwards to be remoued without dispensation by tract of tyme it self which would haue brought the perfect vse of reason 51. But in Q. Elizabeth in regard of her sex no tyme no dispensation no authority humane nor other circumstance could remoue the impediment or incapacity of her sex which God and nature had layd vpon her so as in this point M. Attorney his choyse was very erroneous but whether the Twynne of Ignorance were also conioyned which before he said to be inseparable from error I leaue to himself to consider And thus much of this former consideration 52. The other which I said to be worthie of greife and teares consisteth in this that the former position of the said Queenes Ecclesiasticall Supremacy being a thing vnpossible in it self for so many respects and causes as before hath byn shewed humane and diuine and that the very Protestants themselues of the more learned sort doe laugh at it and condemne the same as a new inuention neuer heard of in the world before yet notwithstanding that the same in our countrey should passe by Parlament as a matter of faith and to Religion and be prest vpon men by corporall oathes vnder paine of extreame punishments must needes be a matter of great compassion to euery pious mynd that considereth the infinite danger of soules therby Euery Archbishop and Bishop saith the Statute and euery Ecclesiasticall person of vvhat estate dignitie preheminence or degree soeuer he or they be and all and euery temporall Iudge Iusâ—icer Mayor and other lay or temporall officer c. And all that sâ—all suc out the liuery of their lands and inheritances when they come to lawfull age All that shall take any order office benefice promotion dignity or degree in the vniuersity c. shall make and take and receiue a corporall oath vpon the Euangelist according to the tenour and effect following I A.B. doe vtterly testifie and declare in my conscience that the Queenes highnes is the only Supreame Gouernour c. aswell in all spirituall or Ecclesiasticall things or causes as in temporall c. So goeth the oath And by the last words that giue her as much spirituall Iurisdiction in all things and causes Ecclesiasticall as she had or could haue in temporall you may see how farr they extended the meaning of this power though they left out the word Supreame head for the causes before mentioned 53. Now then pious and godly Reader consider with thy self out of thy Christian compassion Quae strages animarum What a slaughter of soules ensued vpon this new deuise And first how many thousands were forced or allured by feare and terror or desire of preferment to take this oath against their consciences the far greater parte of the Realme being then Catholike and condemning the said oath in their iudgments and beleefe And when afterward God styrred vp another generation that had more care of their said consciences and therupon refused so wilfully to damne themselues as to take such oathes with repugnant consciences what troubles what afflictions haue ensued therof in all the time of that Queene And among many others aboue an hundred learned preests that in conscience were most free and innocent in all matters meant against the State gaue their bloud for preseruation of their said consciences in that case and now both they and shee are gone to plead their cause before the high and euerlasting Iudge And if this matter of her spirituall supremacy were but a iest and fancy and new deuise for for the tyme as you haue heard the best sorte of forreine Protestants to affirme and as her self would sometimes merily but seriously say then was the same both deerly bought and sold in this life by some and will cost more deere in the other where now the matter is in handling 54. And this shall suffice for this chapter and for the first head of profe De Iure wherin you may haue seene how sparinge M. Attorney hath carryed himself we shall now passe to the other sorte of his proofes De facto wherin consisteth the whole corpes of his booke and shall examine whether any better substance may be found in that then hath byn in this The proofe wil be the
tryall of all OF THE SECOND SORT OF PROOFES NAMED DE FACTO VVherto M. Attorney betaketh himselfe alleadging certaine Instances therin And first out of our Kings before the Conquest CHAP. V. THE whole bulke of M. Attorneyes booke such as it is consisteth as before hath byn noted in the recitall of certayne lawes or peeces of lawes and therfore called by him Reports or Relations of clauses found in his Commonlawes or Statutes that may seeme somwhat to sound against the absolute IurisdictioÌ„ Ecclesiasticall of the Bishops and Sea of Rome or to the restraint therof vnder certayne Kings and in certaine occasions and to ascribe vnto the said Kings some Ecclesiasticall power in those cases as afterwards shal be seene Wherin first is to be considered that which before hath been obserued that he abandoning as it were the first head of proofes De Iure flyeth only to the other De facto which alwayes holdeth not for that all factes doe not infer necessarily the right of equity and Iustice as before hath been shewed And secondly if all the examples De facto were graunted in the sense as by him they are set downe yet are they farr of from prouing his principall as often afterwards vpon many particular occasions shal be declared For that his said principall Conclusion is as yow may knowe that Queene Elizabeth by the ancient Common lawes of England had as full and absolute power and Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction as by any spirituall or Ecclesiasticall person had euer byn at might lawfully be exercised within the Realme And these Instances by him alleadged doe concerne but certaine peeces and parcells of Iurisdiction in some particular cases and causes as by examination wil be found Wherfore to drawe neere to this examination we must vnderstand that M. Attorney rightly deuideth the tymes of our Kings into before and after the Conquest and I shall willinglie follow him in this diuision and search out what Ecclesiastical lawes or Ordinances there were made in those dayes by our Kings of those ages for his or our purpose 2. And first before the Conquest when our best English Kings were most eminent if we respect pietie and religion as liuing neerer to the origen fountaine of their first conuersion fernour of Christian spirit out of this tyme I say and ranke of our Christian Kings froÌ„ Ethelbert the first to K. Edward the last before the Conquest for of K. Harold we make little accompt he being an intruder and raigning so small time and with so many troubles as he did they being otherwise aboue a hundred in number within the space of almost fiue hundred yeares two only inferences he produceth and these of very small moment as presently will appeare yet let vs heare how he beginneth and what Preface he maketh to his proofes in these words To confirme saith he those that hold the truth and to satisfye such as being not instructed know not the ancient and moderne lawes and customes of England euery man being perswaded as he is taught these few demonstratiue proofes out of the lawes of England in steed of many in order serie temporum are here added This is his Preface wherin he promiseth as yow see demonstratiue Proofes which are the strongest most cleer euident and forcible that logicke doth prescribe in any science but we shal be enforced afterward to admitt proofes of a lower degree then demonstrations as by experience you will find Wherefore to the matter 3. His first instance is taken out of the words of a certaine Charter giuen by King Kenulfus of the VVestsaxons some two hundred and fifty yeares after the conuersion of K. Ethelbert of Kent confirmed afterward by K. Edwin Monarch of all England which Charter beginneth thus Kenulfus Rex c. per literas suas patentes consilio consensu Episcoporum Senatorum gentis suae largitus fuit monasterio de Abindon in Comitatu Bark euidam Ruchino tunc Abbati monasterij c. quandam ruris sui portionem id est quindecim mansias in loco qui à ruriculis tunc nuncupabatur Culnam cum omnibus vtilitatibus tam in magnis quam in modicis rebus Et quod praedictus Ruchinus 〈◊〉 ab omni Episcopali iure in sempiternum esset quietus vt habitatores â—iuâ— nullius episcopi aut suorum officialium iugo inde deprimantur sed in cunctis rerum euentibus discussionibus causarum abbatis monasterij praedicti decretis subijciantur itae quod c. Thus goeth the Charter which though M. Attorney thought not good to put in English but to set downe both his pages in Latin yet wee shall translate the same for the better vnderstanding of all sortes of Readers K. Kenulfus c. by his letters parents with the Counsell and consent of the Bishops and Councellours of his nation did giue to the monasterie of Abindon in Barkshire and to one Ruchinus Abbot of that monastery a certaine portion of his land to witt fifteen mansians in a place called by the countreymen Culnam with all profittes and commodities both great and small appertaining therevnto And that the foresaid Ruchinus c. should bee quiet from all right of the Bishop for euer so as the inhabitants of that place shall not be depressed for the time to come by the yoke of any Bishop or his officers but that in all euents of thinges and controuersies of causes they shall be subiect to the decree of the Abbot of the said monasterie so as c. 4. Thus goeth the Charter which if it were all graunted by vs as it lyeth yet is it far of as you see from inferring M. Attorneys conclusion that K. Kenulfus was head of the Church or had supreame power Ecclesiasticall It might make it probable that hee had some Iurisdiction in some particular case but what or how much that was or whence hee had it either of himself or by delegation of another to wit of the Popes or Cleargie that is not euident by the Charter But let vs see what M. Attorney can make of these words for that lawyers commonly can make the most of matters to their aduauntage First he will needs inforce out of his Charter that this K. Kenulfus tooke vpon him Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction for thus hee writeth By this it appeareth that the King by this Charter made in Parlament for it appeareth to be made by the Councell and consent of his Bishops and Senatours of his kingdome which were assembled in Parlament did discharge and exempt the said Abbot from the Iurisdiction of the Bishop c. And by the same Charter did graunt to the same Abbot Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction vvithin his said Abbey VVhich Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction being deriued from the Crowne continued vntill the dissolution of the said Abbey in the raigne of K. Henry the 8. So hee 5. In which words three things are affirmed by him wherof I hould neuer a one to be
tyme but the quite contrary CHAP. VI. THov hast seene and considered I doubt not gentle and iudicious Reader how M. Attorney in the former Chapter hath byn grauelled in prouing his affirmatiue proposition that our Kings before the Conquest tooke supreme Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction vpon them and acknowledged it not in the Pope or Sea of Rome For proofe wherof he brought forth two such poore and petite instances as they being besides their weaknes impertinent and vntrue and not subsisting in their owne grounds they were no more for perfourmance of his promise of cleere and demonstratiue proofes then if a man being bound to pay ten thousand pounds in pure and current gold should bring forth two mites of brasse for discharge of his band And surely if M. Attorney should haue failed soe some yeares gone before he was so wealthie as that taking vpon him with so great an ostentation to proue an affirmatiue assertion of so mayne importance and consequence as this is he should haue performed no more then he hath here done he would neuer haue attained by law to the preferment he hath But now◠perhaps he persuadeth himself that by his only credit already gotten he may say what he will and proue as little as he list because by only saying he shall be beleeued 2. But on the contrary side we require proofes offer proofes gentle Reader for that the matter is of singular great weight euen for thy soule we rest not in ostentation of wordes only but in probation of deedes And though we might remaine sufficiently with the victorie for that our aduersarie resteth with so apparent a foyle in the proofe of his forsayd affirmatiue yet that you may see and behold as in a glasse the difference of our cause and confidence therin I haue thought conuenient out of the great aboundance and variety of proofes that our truth hath in this controuersie as well as in all others betwene vs and Protestants to take vpon me to proue the negatiue against M. Attorney which of it self is euer more hard as you know than to proue an affirmatiue except euidence of truth doe facilitate the matter as in our case and to proue and make euident by sundry sortes of cleere and perspicuous demonstrations nyne or ten at the least that during the tyme before the Conquest no one of all our Christian English Kings exceeding the number of an hundred as before hath been said did take vpon them either to be heads of the Church or to be supreme gouernours in Ecclesiasticall causes or to haue any spirituall Iurisdiction al deriued from the right of their Crownes or denyed this to be in the Pope Bishops only or did make any Ecclesiastical lawes concerning spirituall matters and consequently that this Treatise of M. Attorney Of the Kings Ecclesiasticall law doth apperteine no more vnto them in realitie of truth than to the man in the Moone to gouerne the heauens For that they neuer so much a◠dreamed of any such thing nor of any one of the forsaid clauses of spirituall power Iurisdiction to belong vnto them which heere shall brefely be proued with such variety of demonstrations taken out of their owne words dedes decrees actions as I doubt not but will make more then morall euidence The first Demonstration 3. The first Demonstration may be taken from the consideration of all the auncient lawes made by Christian Kings in our Countrey before the Conquest euery one in his seuerall State and Dominion according to the tymes and places they raigned in and gouerned their Commonwealthes both Britanes Saxons and Danes and among the Saxons againe their Kings and Princes in euery of their seuerall Kingdoms about which point Malmesbury writeth thus of the noble King Inas Porrò quantus in Dei rebus fuerit indicio sunt leges ad corrigendos mores in populo latae in quibus viuum ad hoc tempus puritatis suae resultat speculum How great a King Inas was in Gods affaires the lawes which he made to correct the manners of his people doe sufficiently declare in which vntill this day there is seen as in a liuely glasse the said Kings purity of mynde And the like lawes no doubt other Kings also made in their Dominions all which remained afterwards to their posterity vnder the names of Mulmutian lawes For the lawes of the Britans as also the lawes of the Mercians called in their tongue Mercen laga and of the West-Saxons called VVest-saxen laga and of the Danes named Dan laga stood in force vntill England came to be a Monarchie when the first authour of the said Monarchie King Egbert began first to drawe them into one body of conformity But after him againe K. Edgar surnamed the peaceable and wise King confirmed the same and sett them forth but by the warrs and confusion of the Danes which after his death ensued they were for the most part put out of vse againe vntill K. Edward the confessor recalled them encreased and made them perfect and by the counsaile of his Peeres and Realme did frame a new ordination of the same lawes which remained afterwards vnder the name of K. Edward his lawes and were so much approued and loued by the people as Iohn Fox also out of Mathew Paris doth affirme that the common people of England would not doe obedience to VVilliam Conquerour but that first he did sweare to keepe these lawes which oath notwithstāding saith he the Conquerour did afterward breake and in most points brought in his owne lawes So Fox which if it be true yet is it to be vnderstood principally of his lawes appertayninge vnto secular men for that in the rest which concerned the Church her priuiledges he followed absolutely the lawes of K. Edward as in the next Chapter shall appeare where we shall sett downe the said Conquerour his lawes in this behalfe which are as fauourable and respectiue vnto Ecclesiasticall power and persons as of any one King eyther before or after him 4. Wherevpon it followeth that M. Attorney who so often iterateth this worde of auncient and most auncient common-lawes of England which as he saith but cannot proue did authorize Q. Elizabeth her spirituall Iurisdiction ouer the Church speaketh but in the ayre and at randome beating vs still with the empty sound of these words without substance For in reall dealing he should haue alleadged some one law at least to that purpuse out of all these before the Conquest if he had meant to be as good as his word 5. But this he cannot doe as already you haue seen by his two poore instances and we doe shew on the contrary side that all these and other lawes of these dayes were for vs in the fauour of Catholike Religion and particularly for the liberties franquizes priuiledges exemptions and immunities of the Church and Clergie according to the Canons and Decrees of the Popes Ecclesiasticall law
Catholike that were repugnant or contrary to the Canonicall lawes of the vniuersall Church and Sea of Rome in those ages wherof againe ensueth that M. Attorney that telleth vs so often of the ancient and most ancient CoÌ„mon-lawes of England cannot presume to haue any law for him and his assertion within this compasse of 466. yeres before the Conquest for that those that should make or leaue vnto vs these lawes were all of a contrary iudgement and religion vnto him in the very point which he treateth of spiritual Iurisdiction As for example 63. There raigned in Kent in the first age of our primitiue Church successiuely these Kings to witt Ethelbert Eadbald Ircombert Egbert Lotharius Edrycus and VVithredus and their Archbishops of Canterbury by whome they gouerned themselues in spirituall matters were Augustine Laurence Mellitus Iustus Homrius Deusdedit Theodorus and Britwaldus And in London Mellitus Ceddus VVyna Erkenwald VValdherus and Ingualdus And in the sea of Rochester Iustus Romanus Paulinus Thamarus Damianus Putta Qâ—â—chelmus Germundus and Tobias All these kings with all these Bishops were of one and the self same religion and of one iudgement and sense in Ecclesiasticall matters and so were all the rest of the Christian Kings togeather with their Bishopps in other Kingdomes of the land And the like I might shew throughout all the other foure ages that ensue after this first before the Conquest And how then is it possible that these Princes with these Bishops and Counsaylours and with their people conforme to them in the same religion should make or admit lawes contrary to the common sense of the Catholike vniuersall Church in those daies concerning Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction And this is a demonstration which morally conuinceth and cannot by any reasonable man be denyed Whervnto I may adioyne that if they had made any such law coÌ„trary to the common sense of the generall Church in Church-matters they would haue byn noted and reprehended for it or at leastwise some memory would haue byn left therof by historiographers tradition register or some other monument which is not found nor euer will be And this shal be sufficient for this demonstration wherby occasion is giuen to the ingenious reader to prosecute the same and discourse further of himself and to consider how metaphysicall an imagination that of M. Attorney is of auncient lawes made in the ayre and no where extant contrary to the sense and iudgement both of Prince and people in those tymes The seuenth Demonstration 64. An other Demonstration not much vnlike vnto this may be taken from the view of externall Kingdomes in this tyme before our English Conquest to wit what they taught what they beleeued and what they practized in this point concerning Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction whether they deriued it or acknowledged the same in or from their temporall Kings or from their Bishops and Sea Apostolike of Rome For if they did the later then is it most certaine that all the Kings Kingdomes and people of England did the like for that otherwise they should haue byn noted and taxed as hath byn said for some discrepance diuision disagreement sedition schisme or singularity in this behalfe which is not read of Nor can M. Attorney or any Attorney else whomesoeuer he can take vnto him for his helpe in this matter euer shew me any one word of auncient testimony for proofe therof and thervpon may we confidently conclude that there was neuer any such thing 65. But now what was the doctrine vse and practise of all the rest of Christendome besides concerning Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction deriued from the Sea Apostolike of Rome as the head fountaine therof throughout all this tyme wherof we speake before our Conquest it shall be inough to cast our eyes only vpon the vniuersality of all writers in those dayes whose volumes are full of narrations apperteyning to this effect as namely of Bishops made throughout all Kingdomes by ordinaunce and authority of the Bishop of Rome Of Churches Abbyes Monasteryes Hospitalls confirmed and priuiledged by the said authority Of Kings and Emperours also annoynted by them and their authority for the spirituall temporall good of Christendome And in this very tyme wherof we talke happened the mutation of the Kingdome of France from Chilpericus to Pipinus and Charles his sonne and of the Roman Empire from the Grecians vnto the said Charles of the said Empire from the French to the Germanes by the authority of the Pope of Rome and infinite other publike testimonyes of supreme spirituall iurisdiction exercised 〈◊〉 where by that Sea with the approbation of all the worlde And no one example can be alleadged of any such power or iurisdiction pretended or exercised by any Prince temporall whatsoeuer throughout all the Christian world in this tyme by vs prescribed 66. And for so much as by this argument we presume that our English Kings and Princes ran vnitedly in all points of religion with others abroade for that they were neuer noted of any difference or opposition as hath byn said it followeth by good deduction and inference that no such Common-law as M. Attorney imagineth could haue place among them deriuing spirituall and Ecclesiastical iurisdiction from the right of Princes temporall Crownes and excluding that of the Sea Apostolike For in case that any such law had byn made it would haue byn extant either by writing or tradition and if it had byn Common as often here it is called it would haue byn knowne by some one at least besides M. Attorney for that community importeth participation with many how then could there be any such Common-lawes in those dayes which no man knew no man recorded no man euer thought or dreamed of as by all circumstances of those tymes and men and state of things may be presumed And if any such thing had byn deuised in those dayes it must needs haue byn reiected and impugned as singular schismaticall or hereticall for that it would haue byn contrary and contradictory to the common sense iudgement whole current of that time And let this suffice for this consideration The eight Demonstration 67. The eight Demonstration in this matter may be the extraordinary deuotion of our auncient Kings before the Conquest towardes the Sea of Rome in making their Kingdomes tributary thervnto euen in temporall things also which is a signe that they meant not to deny vnto that Sea her spirituall iurisdiction which from the beginning had byn exercised by the same in our countrey seeing voluntarily likewise they gaue her teÌ„porall iurisdiction in gathering and axacting this tribute of euery house throughout the Realme which beginning from K. Inas as all our Authors doe agree aboue 900. yeres gone hath byn continued euer since vnder the name of Peter-pence for that they were first giuen to S. Peter and to his Successours the Bishops of Rome vntill the later part of K. Henry the eight his raigne euen in the
tyme of the Danes as before I noted King Canutus the Dane as Ingulphus testifyeth which liued presently after him was so carefull to haue this duly payed with other dutyes belonging to the Church as being in his iourney towardes Rome he wrote backe to his Bishops and other officers in these words Nunc igitur obtestor c. Now then I doe beseech all you my Bishops other officers and all gouernours of the Kingdome by the faith which you doe owe vnto God me that you will so prouide that before my arriuall at Rome all debts be payed which according to auncient lawes are due That is to say the accustomed almes for euery plough the tythes of beastes borne euery yeare the Pence which you owe to S. Peter at Rome whether they be due out of the cittyes or the Countrey that by the middest of August you pay the tythes of your corne that at the feast of S. Martine you pay the first frutes of your seed to the Church and parish in which euery man liueth which payment is called Kâ—ke-seet And if these things be not performed by you before I retourne assure your selues that my Kingly authority shall punish ech man according to the lawes most seuerely without pardoning any Fare you well Vpon the yere of Christ 1032. So he And marke good Reader that he saith he will punish according to the lawes yea and in his former words that there are auncient lawes for these Dutyes to Rome which M. Attorney cannot bring for his assertion against the Pope so as in auncient common lawes we are now before him But let vs goe forward end this Demonstration 73. About thirty yeres after this againe King Edward the Confessor wrote to Pope Nicolas the second in these wordes Ego quâ— que pro modulo meo augeo c confirmo c. I also for some small gifte of myne doe encrease and confirme the donations of paying such money as S. Peter hath in England and doe send vnto you at this time the said money collected togeather with some Princely gyfts of our owne to the end that you may pray for me and for the peace of my Kingdome and that you doe institute some continuall and solemne memory before the bodyes of the Blessed Apostles for all the English-nation c. So good S. Edward 74. And when not long after him King VVilliam of Normandy obteyned the crowne he forgott not this law among the rest as afterward when we come to talke of him and his raigne in particuler we shall more at large declare For his tenth law in order hath this title De denario Sancti Petri qui Anglicè dicitur Rome-scotâ— of the Penny of S. Peter called Rome-scot in the English tongue And then he beginneth his law thus Omnis qui habuerit triginta denaâ—â— vinae pecuniae in domo sua de proprio suo Anglorum lege dabit denarium Sancti Petri lege DanoruÌ„ dimidiam marcam c. Euery man that shal hâ—uâ— the worth of thirty-pence of liuely money of his owne in his house shall by the law of English-men pay the penny of S. 〈◊〉 and by the law of the Danes shall pay halfe a marke And this penny of S. Peter shall be summoned or called for vpon the solemnity and feast of S. Peter and Paul and gathered vpon the feast of the Chaines os S. Peter so as it shall not be deteyned beyond that day c. thus the Conquerour in confirmation of that which other English Kings had done before him appointing also in the same place that his Iustice should punish them that refused to pay the said money or paid it not at the due day appointed 75. And to conclude this matter this tribute was continually paid from the first institution therof not only before the Conquest as now you haue heard but afterwards also by all the Norman Kings their Successours vnto King Henry the 8. as out of Polidor we haue seene And the same King Henry himself duely paid the same in like manner for more then twenty yeres togeather vntill he brake from the Pope and Sea of Rome vpon the causes which all men know Wherevpon this our Demonstration inferreth that all this while it is not likely they paying so willingly and deuourly this temporall tribute vnto the Popes of Rome that they denyed his spirituall iurisdiction or held him in that iealosie of competency for vsurping therby vpon their Crownes as now we doe And lastly that the supreme spirituall authority of Queene Elizabeth without any Act of Parlament was warrantable by these Kings lawes which is the mayne paradoxicall conclusion of M. Attorneys whole discourse against which we haue yet a Demonstration or two more so an end The nynth Demonstration 76. The nynth Demonstration then about this matter shall be the consideration of our English Kings their singular and extraordinary deuotion before the Conquest to the Sea of Rome which was such as diuers of them left their Crownes and Kingdomes after many yeres that they had raigned and ruled most gloriously at home and went to liue and dye in that citty some in religions habit and profession of Monasticall life as Kenredus King of the Mercians and Offa King of the East angles some in secular weed but of most religious deuout and exemplar conuersation as Inas and Ceadwalla Kings of the VVest-saxons some others went thither of deuotion with intention to retourne againe as the other great Offa King of the Mercians Adelnulph alfred and Canutus Monarches of all England and lastly good King Edward the Confessor had determined vowed a iourney thither in pilgrimage but that his Kingdome greatly repyninge therat in respect of the daungerous tymes two Popes â—â— and Nicolas decreed that he should not come as before we haue touched but rather bestow the charges of that voyage vpon some other good worke namely the encrease of the Monastery of VVestminster 77. And here I might enlarge my self much in the declaration of these particulers which we haue named and of many others that we haue omitted in this kind I meane of English Kings that leauing their temporall Crownes haue submitted themselues to the sweet yoke of Christ in religious life Iohn Fox in his Actes and Monuments doth recount nyne crowned Kings that became Monkes within the first two hundred yeres after Englands conuersion to Christian faith though all of them went not to Rome and some eighteene or twenty Queenes or daughters to Kings or Queenes that tooke the same course contemning whatsoeuer pleasures or preferments the world could giue them But of such Kings as went to Rome and made themselues religious there the foresaid Kenredus of the Mercians and Offa of the Eastangles were the most famous who agreeing togeather vpon the yere 708. as Florentins after S. Bede doth recount the history lest both their Kingdomes wiues children honours goods and the
exercised in her dayes if the statute of the first Parlament had not giuen the same vnto her which had as good authority to giue it her as she to vse the same according to that which you haue seene declared in the former Chapters whereunto we referre our selues for the proofes laid downe The tenth Demonstration 85. And now to drawe to an end and to ioyne issue with M. Attorney in more plaine wordes and assertion my tenth and last demonstration shall be out of two of the most noble wise and famous Kings of our land and Monarches of the same before the Conquest Alfred to wit and Edgar who doe expresly sett downe the contrary proposition to that of M. Attorney about spirituall iurisdiction belonging to Kings and temporall Princes so as where the former demonstrations are but deductions and inferrences though clere and euident as you haue seene this last is a plaine and perspicuous asseueration of two such renowned Kings as were most eminent for wisdome learning religion and valour of all the ranke of those tymes Of King Alfred is recorded this speach of his Germanam genuinam esse Regis dignitatem dictitare solebat si in Regne Christi quae est Ecclesia se non Regem sed ciuem agnosceret si non supra sacerdotum leges se elatè efferres sed legibus Christi per sacerdotes promulgatis submisso se atque humili animo subderet He was wont to say that the true and proper dignity of a King consisted principally in this that in the Kingdome of Christ which is his Church he bare himself not as a King but as a citizen and that he should not arrogantly lift vp himself abouâ— the lawes of Priests but rather with a lowly and humble minde subiect himself to the lawes of Christ promulgated by Priests So he 86. But now touching King Edgar about a hundred yeares after him of whome Florentius Marianus and others doe write these wordes That he was the Monarch of the English world the flower ornament of all his predecessours the peaceable King no lesse memorable to English-men then Romulus to the Romanes Tyrus to the Persians Alexander to the Macedonians Arsaces to the Parthians and Charles the great vnto the French Of this man I say we haue extant a certaine oration of his made in the third yeare of his raigne vnto the Bishops of his land gathered togeather for reformation of the Clergie wherof S. Dunstane Archbishop of Canterbury was the chief and with him was S. Ethelwâ—ld B. of VVincester His oration is somewhat long and beginneth thus Quoniam magnificauit Dominus misericordiam suam facere nobiscum dignum est Patres Reuerendissimi vt innumeris illius beneficijs dignis responde amus operibus Neque enim in gladio nostro c. 87. For so much as our Lord hath exalted his mercy towardes vs it is conuenient most Reuerend Fathers that we endeauour to answere his innumerable benefitts with dew workes on our behalfe for that as the prophet saith we doe not possesse this land by our owne sword nor shall the strength of our arme saue vs but the right hand and holy arme of him that hath vouchsafed to take vs to his fauour And therfore it is iust and right that for so much as he hath subiected all vnder our feete that we subiect our soules vnto him in such sort as that we endeauour to bring them that he hath put vnder vs to be subiect also vnto his lawes and as for me my part is to gouerne lay men by the law of equity to doe iust iudgement betweene euery man and his neighbour to punishe sacrilegious men to represse rebells to take the poore man out of the hand of his stronger and deliuer the needy and impotent from such as oppresse and spoile them It belongeth also to my solicitude to prouide necessaries for Ministers of Gods Churches couents of Monkes cloysters of virgins to procure them peace and quietnes to serue Godâ— But vnto you it apperteyneth to make inquiry examination of their manners if they liue continently if they behaue themselues decently and with edification towards them that be in the world if they be solicitous in seruing God vigilant in teaching the people sober in diet moderate in habit and the like So he 88. And then after a long complaint of many disorders in those dayes crept into diuers of the Clergie the good zealous King hath these words These scandalous things are proclaimed euery where by souldiers muttered by the people sung by players and will you reuerend Fathers neglect dissemble spare them that so offend where is the sword of Leui where the zeale of Simeon where is the spirit of Moyses where the sword of Phinees the Priest Yea where is the spirit and feruour of S. Peter wherby he so dreadfully punished both auarice and heresie follow him follow him ô you Priests tempus faciendi contra eos qui dissipauerunt legem Dei it is high tyme to punish those that haue dissipated the law of God by their euill life Ego Constantini vos Petri gladium habetis in membus iungamus dexteras gladium gladio copulemus I haue the sword of Constantine you the sword of S. Peter in your hands let vs ioyne our forces and couple sword to sword vt eijciantur extra castra leprosi that leaprous and infectious people be cast out of the tents of God c. Thus this noble pious K. pronouÌ„ced in the presence of his Prelates and people with much more which for breuity I doe omitt 89. And now M. Attorney will see heere what accompt these two auncient Kings made of these two powers and swordes spirituall and temporall and of their distinction and subordination the one to the other And it seemeth that this speach of King Edgar was so memorable and famous to all his posterity that VVilliam Conquerour also did imitate the very same when in certaine lawes of his ordeyning that such lay men as were disobedient to the Bishops sentence should be punished by his temporall officers he vseth this phrase of Edgar saying Rex constringit malefactorem vt emendet primùm Episcopo deinde Regi sic erunt ibi duo gladij gladius gladium iâ—uabit The King shall compell the malefactor to make amends first to the Bishop and then to the King and so shall there be two swordes and the one sword shall assist the other Where we see that he did subordinate his owne sword to that of the Bishops and Ecclesiasticall power of the Church And the self same manner of speach and forme of beliefe as common to the whole world did Queene Eleanor wife to King 〈◊〉 the second vse in her epistle to Celestâ—nus the Pope when she â—â— treated him to excommunicate the Emperour and Duke of â—â—stria for deteining her sonne K. Richard the first prisoner which letter was written by Petrus Blesensis
this fierce and warlike Prince did beare vnto this Prelate as also how singular authority and confidence the good Archbishop had with him 22. But as we haue said his true sense meaning will best be sene by owne his words behauiour at his death when finding himself in great affliction and perplexity of mynd with the â—â—ror therof as before hath byn touched and of Gods iudgemenâ— ensuing theron for that to vse his owne words he saw himself â—â—den with many and greiuous sinnes and greatly polluted with the effuâ—â—â—â— much bloud and ready to be taken by and by vnto the terrible examination 〈◊〉 God c. In this plight I say which Stow and others 〈◊〉 downe out of auncient authors his greatest comfort◠〈…〉 he had byn euer obedient to the Church whervnto by 〈…〉 he assigned the most parte of his treasure adding this 〈◊〉 therof that those things that had byn heaped vp by wicked deeds might be disposed to holy vses of Saincts And then turning his speach to Ecclesiasticall men he said You remember how sweetly I haue euer loued you and how strongly against all emulations defended you The Church of God which is our mother I neuer violated but in euery place where reason required did willingly honour I haue not sold Ecclesiasticall dignityes and Symony I allwayes detested in the election of Pastors I euer searched out the merits of his life his learning and wisdome and so neer as I could committed the gouernment of the Church vnto the most worthy this may be seen in Lanfranke Archbishop of Canterbury and in Anselme Abbot of Becke and others c. This course haue I followed from my first years this I leaue vnto my heirs to be kept in all tymes In this doe you my Children euer follow me to the end that heerby you may please both God and man c. 23. And this was the last speach of the Conquerour to his children and others standing by at the day of his death which doth sufficiently declare what his sense iudgement was concerning this point of spirituall iurisdiction And to impugne and ouerthrow all this our aduersary the Attorney had need to bring many and strong batterings as you see Let vs passe then to examine what they are The first Instance taken out of the raigne of this K. VVilliam the Conquerour §. III. 24. One instance only doth M. Attorney find to be alleadged during the raigne of this Prince which we shall alleadge in his owne words as they ly in his booke and this shall we obserue commonly through all his instances Thus then he saith The Attorney It is agreed that no man only can make any appropriation of any Church hauing cure of soules being a thing Ecclesiasticall and to be made to some person Ecclesiasticall but he that hath Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction But William the first of himself without any other as king of England made appropriâ—tâ—â—â— of Churches vvith Cure to Ecclesiasticall persons vvherefore it followeth that he had Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction The Catholike Deuine 25. This is the only one argument or instance as hath bene said which M. Attorney hath found in all the life of K. VVilliam the first wherby to proue his principall Conclusion which is that K. VVilliam had as much Ecclesiasticall power and iurisdiction by the auncient common lawes of England as euer had Queene Elizabeth and she as much as euer anie Ecclesiasticall person had or might haue in EnglaÌ„d And yet you se that if al were grauÌ„ted which heere is set downe it amounteth to no more but that K. VVilliam did bestow a benefice with Cure vpon an Ecclesiasticall person which he might doe either by nominating or presenting as patrone of the benefice or by some indult from the Pope or Bishop of the diocesse in that behalfe or vnder ratihabition as before in Charters hath been declared or finallie he might doe it De facto and not De Iure as oftentimes it falleth out in such actions of Princes And in all these senses though we graunt whatsoeuer M. Attorney saith setteth downe in this place it commeth so far short to proue supreame Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in K. VVilliam as it proueth not anie spirituall iurisdiction at all for that all he saith may be grauuted in any lay-man whatsoeuer which wee shall endeauour to make cleere by explication and distinction of those things which heere are set downe confusedly by M. Attorney 26. First then this instance consisteth of a Syllogisme as you see the Maior wherof is related out of the collection of some law booke as may appeere by his quotation in the margent though I haue not the booke by me and we graunt the proposition to be true in his due sense to wit that no man can appropriate a Church or benefice with Cure to an Ecclesiasticall man but he that hath Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction And then we deny the Minor proposition which â—â— of M. Attorneys owne addition to wit that K. VVilliam did so appropriate or bestow any benefice with Cure vpon an Ecclesiasticall person except it were in one of the fower manners before specified And M. Attorney ought to haue proued his said Minor if he had delt substantially 27. And moreouer I find that he faltereth somewhat also 〈◊〉 setting downe the very words of his Maior proposition though much more in the true sense as presently shall be declared For wheras he beginneth It is agreed that no man can make any appropriation c. the latin words of this Report cited by himself are Inter omnes conuenit quod nemo possit appropriare c. which haue this sense that it is a common receiued opinion to wit from the canon-Canon-law that no man can appropriate or bestow a Church with Cure except he haue Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction But M. Attorney by shutting out the word inter omnes and translating the rest it is agreed would make his reader thinke that it was an agreement or resolution only of the temporall Iudges in this case in K. Edward the 3. his raigne and that they first founded this Maxime about Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction wheras they related it only as an auncient Maxime receaued in the Canon and Ciuill law in this sense which presently we shall declare 28. And wheras he translateth the word appropriare Ecclesiam Ecclesiasticae personae To make appropriation of any Church to an Ecclesiasticall person this may haue two senses be meant either of appropriations or collations of benefices wherin there is little difference in respect of our controuersie for that neither appropriation nor collation can be truly and properly made without spirituall iurisdiction either ordinary or delegate And as for appropriations which consisted coÌ„monly in this that the gleab-lands and the better tithes were vnited to some religious houses or Parsons leauing the lesser tithes vnto their Vicars they could not be made nor graunted but by the licence of the Sea Apostolicke as neither in our
office for that saith Florentius from the time he was made Archbishop which was no lesse then two years it was not permitted vnto him either to hold any Synod or to correct the vices which were sprung vp through England Wherevnto Malmesbury and Edmerus that 〈◊〉 with him doe add that the King would not suffer him to goe to Rome to take his pall of the Pope as all Archbishops of Canterbury were accustomed to doe and the other greatly vrged to haue licence But after a long combat which he had had with the King diuers other Bishops that followed the Kings fauour in a Synod at London vpō the third weeke in lent Anno Domini 1095. and eight yeare of King VVilliam his raigne the said Archbishop being extreamly baited by the King his followers stood constant in his appeale to Rome 4. Which thing Rufus perceiuing saith Malmesbury he sent secretly certaine messengers to Rome to intreat the Pope which then was Vrban the second to send the Pall of Canterbury vnto the King to be giuen to whom he would Whervnto though the Pope would not yeeld yet he sent back with his messengers for Legate the Bishop of Albanum named VValta with the said Pall who shewed vnto the King so many reasons why the Pope could not yeeld to his demaund and intreated him so forceably to be content that he might giue the said Pall from the Pope to Anselme with accustomed ceremonyes in the Church of Canterbury as at length he obteyned the same and made them freinds 5. But this frendship lasted not longe for that the very next yeare after the King continued his old manner of oppressing the Church S. Anselme went vnto him to VVinchester and there first by intercessors desired the King that he might haue licence to goe to Rome to conferr diuers difficultyes of his with Vrban the Pope The King answered that he would not giue him licence for that he knew him to haue no such great sinnes that it was needfull for him to goe to Rome for absolution nor yet to be lesse learned then Pope Vrban whose counsaile direction he would aske Whervpon the Archbishop entring the Kings chamber sate downe by his side saith the Story and disputed the matter with him affirming him to deny Christ himself that denyed recourse vnto his Vicar vpon earth And thervpon he concluded that this licence could not be denyed him by a Christian King and consequently he would goe The King said he should carry out nothing with him The Archbishop answered he would goe naked and bare-foote Which firme resolution the King perceiuing to be in him vsed by messengers vnto him diuers intreatyes saith VValsingham and offered large promises of fauours if he would stay But the other would not but departed the Realme though he were searched and rifled by the Kings Officers at the port 6. By all which story it most euidently appeareth that albeit this young disorderly and passionate King were as well in this as in other matters headstronge and violent in pursuing his appetites desires as well in Ecclesiasticall as Temporall affaires yet did he neuer deny the Popes spirituall iurisdiction in England but rather acknowledged the same in sending to Rome to intreat that the pall might be sent to him as also in going about to diuert S. Anselms recourse thither But alas there passed not many years but God punished seuerely these greiuous sinnes against his Church For as both the foresaid Malmesbury Edmerus that liued with him doe write S. Anselms going to Rome frō thence with Pope Vrban to a Councell of Bishops gathered togeather at Bary in Apulia wherin among other things all lay-men were excommunicated that presumed to giue Ecclesiasticall Inuestitures as also those that receiued them at lay-mens hands which was thought principally to haue byn done in respect of King VVilliam he returned againe some years after into France and there passing his banishment with great quietnes of mind he being one day with S. Hugh Abbot of Cluniaecke famous in those dayes for holines the said Abbot told him in the hearing of diuers others that the night before he had seen King VVilliam called before God and receiued the sorrowfull sentence of damnation wherat all the hearers marueyling the next newes they heard from England was that the said King was strangely slaine by an erring arrow of his familiar seruant Tyrrell while he hunted in the New-forrest and that being stroken he fell downe dead without speaking any one word And the same authors doe recount diuers other the like presages and prognostications that happened as well to the King himself as to other friends of his in England portending this euent but neglected by him 7. And this shall suffice for King VVilliam Rufus who raigned thirteen years And though he was naught to all kind of men saith Malmesbury and pernicious in his actions as well to secular as Clergy men yet had he no other iudgement in matters of religion then his father or auncestors nor euer was he noted of any least difference therin Nor doth Maister Attorney bring any instance at all out of this Kings Raigne and therfore shall wee passe to his younger brother that ensued him in the Kingdome OF KING HENRY THE FIRST VVhich was the third King after the Conquest §. I. 8. This was the third sonne of VVilliam the great surnamed the Conquerour who finding the commodity by absence of his eldest brother Robert Duke of Normandy tooke the Kingdome of England vpon him hauing gained by faire promises the good-wills of all or most of the Realme and so was crowned by Maurice Bishop of London for that S. Anselm Archbishop of Canterbury was yet in exile as before vnder Rufus you haue heard 9. What the said Henry did sweare and promise and what he began euen from the very day of his Coronation to put in practice Florentius that then liued declareth in these words Consecrationis suae die Sanctam Dei Ecclesiam c. From the very day of his consecration he set free the holy Church of God which in his brothers dayes had byn sold and let to farme he tooke away all euill customes and remoued all vniust exactions wherby the Kingdome had byn wrongfully oppressed before commaunded that peace and freedome should be holden throughout the whole Realme He restored the law of S. Edward to all men in common with those additions or corrections which his Father had added thervnto c. So Florentius And what his Fathers additions were and how greatly in fauour of the Church and of Ecclesiasticall power authority and libertyes you haue heard before in his life and lawes Wherby we may easily ghesse with what mind and iudgement this man entered vnto his crowne 10. And albeit in this point he neuer altered yet there passed not two years of his gouernment but partely vpon Kingly appetite to haue power in all things and
monastery of Clare-vallis vnder the said S. Bernard was promoted vnto the dignity and proued a notable good Archbishop though at the beginning he being contradicted by the King had great difficulty to enter the people also being against him as well for feare of the said King as for fauour and loue of the other good man deposed and the Kings sonne Eustachius going to Yorke vpon that occasion vsed great violence and insolency and some not to be named against such as had opposed themselues against the election of the said deposed But finally the sentence and iudgement of Pope Eugenius tooke place and K. Stephen after a time permitted the other to liue quietly in his Bishopricke whereby we may see what power and iurisdiction the Pope had for such matters in England at that time And that neither K. Stephen nor his sonne Eustachius nor any of his Counsell went euer about to say for their pretence or excuse that these things belonged to the Kings authority-Royall not to the Popes tribunall 36. All which points being laid togeather and many other that for breuity I doe pretermit it commeth to be manifest that whatsoeuer actions this King in those infinite troubles fears and suspicious of his might sometymes vse for his gaine or interest or vpon persuasion of others against the Church or libertyes therof yet was his will and iudgement truly Catholike in this point nor was he euer noted for the contrary nor doth M. Attorney alleadge any one instance out of him or his tyme to that purpose And therfore shall we passe to other Kings after him OF THE RAIGNE OF KING HENRY THE SECOND Great Grand-child to the Conquerour And of his two sonnes K. Richard and K. Iohn and their conformityes in this controuersie CHAP. IX AS in the former Chapter for breuityes sake we ioyned three Kings togeather so shall we doe the like in this especially for so much as M. Attorney hath no one instance out of any of them whose raignes iudured for the space of aboue threescore years and thereby sufficiently testifieth that in this point of the Popes Ecclesiasticall authority their beleife iudgements and actions were correspondent and vniforme to those of their progenitors and predecessors as also were their lawes consequently which allwayes is to be borne in mind the common lawes of their dayes could not be contrary to that iurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome which they themselues euerywhere did acknowledge professe and practise For better declaration notwithstanding wherof we shall not omit to set downe some particular and seuerall notes as well of these Kings and their successors as we haue done of the former OF KING HENRY THE SECOND The fifth King after the Conquest §. I. 2. This King then was a French-man borne as well as K. Stephen of the English-bloud only by Maude the Empresse daughter to K. Henry the first neece to the Conquerour He was sonne and heire to Geffrey Duke of Anioy and Poytoù and a little before his inheritance of England he had the rare fortune as then it was thought to marry with the young Queene Eleanor lately diuorced from K. Lewes the seauenth of France vpon their falling out after their returne from Ierusalem which Queene was daughter and heire to the Duke of Aquitaine so as all those States of Gascoyne Gwyan Poytoù Anioy and Normandy were vnited togeather in this K. Henry and by him conioyned to England The Dukedome of Brittany also falling in his tyme to the inheritance of an only daughter of Duke Canon King Henry procured to marry the same to his third sonne Geffrey for he had foure by his said Queen that liued togeather besides a fifth that died young It was his chaunce also to haue an English Pope named Adryan in his daies by whose fauour and concession he got interest to Ireland so as if we respect the greatnes and multitude of his dominions he was the most puissant King of all that euer had dominion ouer our nation vntill that day 3. But if we respect his manners you may besides others writers read a whole Chapter in Nubergensis of the conflict combat betweene vices and vertues in him though he conclude that his vertues were the more and his vices were sore punished in him by almighty God in this life to the end that his soule might be saued in the next as the same Author writeth And to this effect was he punished and afflicted most in those things wherin he had taken most delight and for which he had most perhaps offended God as first in the alluring of the said Q. Eleanor to make the foresaid diuorce from the King of France to marry him who afterward was a great affliction vnto him for that haâ—â—â—â— borne him many faire children she set the same against him â—â— thervpon the former ardent loue waxing cold between them he was the more induced to liue lasciuiously with others and â—â— the end committed her to prison and held her so for neere a dozen years togeather before his death 4. His children also he couered exceedingly to aduauÌ„ce crowning the elder of them King in his owne daies by the name of K. Henry the third and giuing him in possession the States of Gascoyne and Gwyan the second being Richard he made Earle of Poitoù the third which was Geffrey he inuested as hath byn said in the Dukedome of Brittany and the fourth named Iohn for that he had no seuerall State as yet to giue him he called in iest sâ—â—â— terre or lack-land signifying therby the great desire he had to prouide some State for him And for effectuating this saith Nubergensiâ— which liued in that age that is to say for aduauncing his children he offered iniuries to many wherby it came to passe by Gods iust iudgement that they all at different times conspired against him For first about the middest of his raigne both the mother and the children banded themselues against him with Lewes the K. of France that had byn her former husband wherof Petrus Blesensis that was his latin Secretary maketh mention in diuers epistles that are extant as namely in one written by two Archbishops that had byn his Embassadours to the said K. Lewes to make peace but could not who discouered that both his Queene and children had all conspired against him Quid amabilius â—ilijs say they quid vxore familiarius recessit tamon vxor à latere vestro filij insurgunt in patrem What is more delectable them children what is more neere or familiar then the wife And yet is your wife departed from your side and your children are risen against their father c. And in the same epistle they counsaile him to looke well to his person for that they sought his destruction 5. And the same is testified in another epistle written by the Archbishop of Roane in Normandy vnto Q. Eleanor her self wherin he persuadeth her vehemently by manie reasons
sonne Prince Lâ—wes and the Barons of England that made warre against him All whom he first coÌ„maunded to surcease their said warrs and emnities against the said K. Iohn and then for that they obaied not he threatned and â—enounced excommunication against them and besides this he sent his Legat named VVaellâ— to be with K. Iohn and assist him in person in all his needs and necessities which was no small help and comforte vnto him in those distresses And finall in after his death he was a principall cause why his young sonne Henrie the â— was admitted for King notwithstanding the Barons firme resolution promise and oath to the contrarie and that Prince Lawes was forsaken and forced to 〈◊〉 of England the said Legaâ— being made generall Gouernour both of the King and Kingdome for that present togeather with the Earle of 〈◊〉 Lord Marshall of the land 64. And as for the said Barons that so resolutely stoods 〈◊〉 K. Iohn and his succession their cause was about the priuiledged and laws of the Realme as well concerning the Glergie as lay men which were the same priuiledges as they affirmed that were graunted and set downe in King Edwards daies the Confessor confirmed by the Conquerour allowed published againe by K. Henry the first and not disallowed by this mans Father K. Henry the 2. in witnes wherof they produced a Charter of the said K. Henry the first All which liberties laws and ordinances K. Iohn promising them at his first recoÌ„ciliation to giue grâ—inâ— and ratifie was vrged afterward by them to publish the same â—â— writing vnder the great seale of England as he did at Oxford in the presence of al his nobility in the 17. yeare of the said Kingâ— raigne which was the next before his death syaing in the 〈◊〉 writing Ex mera spontanea a voluntate nostra concessimu Charâ—aâ—â—stra coÌ„firmauimus eam obtinuimus à Domino Papa Innocencia confirmâ—n quaÌ„ nos obseruabimus ab haredibus nostris in perpetuuÌ„ bona fide 〈◊〉 obseruari We haue graunted out of our owne meere free good will haue confirmed the same by our Charter and haue contained of Pope Innocentius that he confirme the same also with his assent which Charter both we shall obserue our selues and will haue to bee obserued faithfullie by our heirs for euen behold that K. Iohn doth not onlie confirme these liberties himself but procured the same to be confirmed also by Pope Innocentius for more stabilitie And the beginning of the said liberties it thus set downe Quod Anglicana Ecclesia libera sit habeat iurasâ—â— integra suas libertates illasas maximè libertatem electionum qâ—â— maximae magis necessaria reputatur Ecclesia Anglicunae That the English Church be free and haue all her rights whole and all hâ—â— liberties inuiolate and especiallie her liberties of elections 〈◊〉 choosing her Prelates which is held to bee the greatest and most necessarie to the English Church And then follow the othâ—â— liberties of Barons noble-men and the common people 65. And for that it was vnderstood that notwithstanâ—â—â—â— these two graunts and confirmations of these laws and priuileâ—ges K. Iohn by the counsaile of certaine strangers that weeâ—â—bout him of his Countreyes in France was perswaded to 〈◊〉 the same againe and to informe the Pope wrong fullâ—e 〈◊〉 intentions of the said Barons as though they meane not so 〈◊〉 the conseruation of these priuiledges indeed aâ—â—â—soâ—◠〈◊〉 Kingdome to the King of Fâ—â—nce and the Pope inclining to beâ—â—uâ—e him the said Barons were so much exasperated therby as they made the vow before mentioned neuer to obey him or his anymore And thervpon calling ouer the said Prince Lewes of France gaue him London and all the South-parts of England and would haue gained him the rest in like manner if the Popes resistanes had not byn so great and K. Iohn had not died at that very instant in the heat of all the warre not poisoned by a monke as foolish Iohn Fox doth affirme and set forth in many printed and painted pageants of his booke but vpon greife of mind trauaile and disorder of diet as all auncient authors by vniforme consent doe agree And Iohn Stow citeth foure that liued in K. Iohns dayes to wit Mathew Paris Roger VVyndouer Raph Niger and Raph Gogshall in their histories of that tyme. 66. Wherfore to conclude this Chapter of K. Henry the second and of his two sonnes wee see how firme they were all three in this beleife and acknowledgement of the Popes spirituall authority ouer all the world and no lesse ouer England in those dayes and how fully the same was in practise among them And that albeit in some cases causes wherin they receiued some distast they strugled sometimes about the particular execution therof indeauoring to mak some restraint especially when it seemed to strech indirectly also to temporall affaires yet did they neuer so much as once deny the said Ecclesiasticall supremacy to be in the Sea of Rome and much lesse did euer ascribe it to themselues which so cleerly ouerthroweth M. Attorneys position as I maruaile what he will say to these and like demonstrations 67. And for that his often repeated ground is that Queen Elizabeth had her supreame authority in cases Ecclesiasticall according to the auncient common lawes of England hitherto he graunteth that there was no Statute-lawes at all by Parlament vntill the ensuing King K. Henry the third And for other lawes we see heere what they were by the testimony of the Bishops Barons of England vnder the Charters both of 〈◊〉 K. Henry the first and other Kings vpward vnto K. Edward the Confessor to wit all in fauour of the Church her liberties â—â—nquises and priuiledges which liberties as other where I have noted and must often heerafter doe the same doe infer our conclusion of Ecclesiasticall and spirituall iurisdiction subordinate to the Sea of Rome and wholy distinct from temporall power and doe ouerthrow M. Attorneys assertion for the said spirituall 〈…〉 those liberties were as they were that 〈…〉 should haue iurisdiction in 〈…〉 ctions choise of Prelates of the 〈…〉 liberties are mentioned cited allowed◠〈…〉 by any King as you shall see they were by 〈…〉 them vnto K. Henry the 8. so often receiueâ—◠〈…〉 tion and his whole new books an open out 〈…〉 field And thus much of K. Iohn OF KING HENRY THE THIRD That vvas the eight King after the Conquestâ—â—â— And the first that left Statutes vvritten And vvhaâ— instances and arguments M. Attorney alleadgeth out of him for his purpose CHAP. X. HITHERTO haue we passed ouer six hundred 〈◊〉 since our first English king receâ—ued and therby put themselues vnder the of 〈…〉 Bishops depending therof for 〈◊〉 of their 〈◊〉 Which Spirituall 〈…〉 haue byn euer beleeued 〈…〉 both Kings and Subiect from the 〈…〉 their lawes and continued by su 〈…〉 Which as it hath byn
bestowing of Ecclesiasticall benefices 〈◊〉 inuiolate and that such as are Patrons of benefices may present fit men of your nation when they shall fall void c. 23. But yet the next yeare after the King calling a generall Parlament at London and the former greiuances not seeming to be sufficiently remedied by the said recourse to the Councell answers and promises of the Pope the same complaints were renewed againe with greater exasperation then before and the said greiuances put downe in writing All which being considered and weighed by the Parlament Vnanimiter consenserâ—â—t omnes saith Mathew Paris vt adhuc ob reuerentiam Sediâ— Apostolicae Domino Papae humiliter deuotè tam per Epistolas quam per solennes Nunciâ—s supplicarent vt tam intollerabilia grauamina iugum subtraheret importabile The whole Parlament did agree that yet once more for reuerence of the Sea Apostolike humble and deuout supplication should be made to the Pope both by their letters and solemne messengers that he would take from them the intollerable greiuances and importable yoke which by the foresaid abuses they felt to ly vpon them And so presently were written letters seuerally to be sent by the said messengers Frist by the Archbishops and Bishops Secondly by the Abbots Priors religious men Thirdly by the Earls Barons and communitie of the Parlament Fourthly by the King himself who wrote not only to the Pope as the rest did but a seueral letter also to the Cardinals to further the suite which letters are set downe by Mathew Paris at length and are to long for this place 24 Yet one thing I cannot omit that wheras the King wrote most deuoutly humbly both to the Pope Cardinals saying that he did make recourse in these complaints of his nobility and subiects to the Church of Rome Vt filius ad matrem quem suis lactavit vberibus as a sonne to his mother whome she hath nourished with her teates of mylke The said Barons though oftentimes repeating the words implorantes humiliter ac deuotè we beseeching you humbly and deuoutly vt dignemini miscricorditer exaudire that you wil vouchsafe mercifully to heare vs Yet adioyned they also this threat in the end that except they were eased of these burthens laid vpon them the Realme and their King they should be forced to put themselues as a wall for defence of the liberties of the said Kingdome which hitherto for reuerence of the Sea Apostolike they had differred to doe nor could expect any longer then the returne of their Embassadours So they 25. And by this we may se where the beginning was of those restraints which afterward in the dayes of other ensuing Kings were made against prouisions from Rome and benefices to be giuen to strangers as also against appeals in certaine cases other such like ordinances which seeme to containe some restraint of the execution of the Popes Ecclesiasticall authority in England Which did not rise as you see vpon any change of former faith or iudgement in religion or calling in question the said Popes spirituall iurisdiction ouer soules but only vpon temporall respects reasons of state and the like which concerned nothing at all faith or beleife or substance of religion And this one only consideration ouerthroweth all the poore obiections which M. Attorney hath picked out vnder the raigne of this other Kings that follow which now we shall take in hand to examine and discusse euery one as they come in their place Two instances alleadged out of the Raigne of this King Henry the third and of what weight they be §. I. 26. And first what doe you thinke M. Attorney bringeth out of this Kings raigne or can bring to ouerthrow all that we haue alleadged before in the same Kings life beleife gouernment and actions Doth he alleadge any one Law or Statute of his for that he was the father and founder of our Statute-lawes as he confesseth doth he produce any one decree wherby he declared that he thought himself to haue supreme spirituall authority or denyed or called in question that of the Sea Apostolike notwithstanding all the greiuances which before haue byn mentioned No truly no one word is alleadged therof though otherwise as I said this K. Henry made many Statutes at sundry Parlaments as for example vpon the 9. yeare of his raigne he made the famous Charter wherof we haue spoken before called Magna Charta containing 37. Chapters which may in effect be called so many different Statutes The first wherof beginneth thus VVe haue graunted to God and by this our present Charter haue confirmed for vs and for our heirs for euermore that the Church of England shall be free and shall haue all her holy rites and libertyes inuiolable So 〈◊〉 first and most ancient Statute and the cheifest liberty of the Church of England is vnderstood to haue byn their free dependance of the Sea Apostolike and their recourse therevnto without interruption or intermedling of any secular power in their Ecclesiasticall affaires 27. Besides this there was made by him in the same 9. yeare of his raigne the other notorious Charter named Charta de Foresta coÌ„taining 16. Chapters or brauÌ„ches as also the other named Merton vpon the 20. yeare of the said Kings raigne that hath six seuerall braunches or Statutes as diuers others also made vpon the 51. year of the said Kings raigne intituled vnder diuers particular titles as Dies communes in Banco Dies communes in dote Districtâ—â—â— Scaeccariae Iudicium Collistrigij de compositione mensurarum and the like And finally the other booke of Statutes made vpon 52. yeare called Marle-bridge containing 16. braunches or statutes In all which no one thing is found in fauour of M. Attorney or his assertion but many for vs if we would examine the partes and clauses of euery one For that the religion of England in that tyme being perfectly Catholike and agreeing in all things with it self with other Kingdomes of the world in one manner of beliefe and acknowledgement of the dependance of Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall power from the Sea Apostolike they could not make lawes for ordering their temporall affaires but must needs enterlace many things that did testifie the conformitie and subordination therof to the spirituall And if any temporall lawyer in England at this day though of far inferiour account and place to M. Attorney would take vpon him to write a booke alleadge all the lawes both common and statute and braunches therof that doe confirme allow or strengthen the Catholike Religion from most auncient tymes wherin any memory is of our lawes he might so far ouerbeare M. Attorney both in bulke and substance and truth of his allegations as S. Augustines volumes for example doe exceed in all these points Esops fables And this will you see in parte by that which we are now first to examine in this place I meane his first obiection set downe
Chancellour and Treasurer he was only abiured the Realme for euer The Catholicke Deuine 22. This case related out of Brookes Reporte if so it be there for I haue not the booke is but a particular case and shewed only de facto and not de iure whereas M. Attorneys booke notwithstanding is intituled De iure as often I haue and must still put him in mynd True it is that he noteth here in the margent that this was done by the Common-law of England before any Statute made But what reason can he bring or any man imagine why we should beleeue this to wit that this fact of bringing in a Bull of excommunication from Rome against a subiect in those dayes should be adiudged treason by the auncient Common-law of England For a man may demaund what is that CoÌ„mon-law or auncient CoÌ„mon-law not made by Statute nor introduced by any common custome that can be proued How was it made By whome where at what time vpon what occasion For to auouch a common-Common-law and auncient common-law without beginning author cause occasion or recorde of the introduction therof is a strange Metaphysicall contemplation for that lawes doe not growe vp without beginning but must needs be made or admitted by some Prince or people And whereas we haue shewed from time to time that all our English Princes people haue byn Catholicks from their first conuersion vnto this Kings time and vniforme also in this point of acknowledging the spirituall iurisdiction of the Sea of Rome and nothing more ordinary among them then censures and excommunications from Rome when necessity seemed to require how could this auncient common-law come in vre among them yea and be auncient in K. Edward the first his tyme contrary to the grounds and practise of the religion then in vse and euer before and no mention euer made therof in all antiquity till â—ow by M. Attorney and that only in the ayre as you see 23. Moreouer we read in Mathew of VVestminster that when this King Edward was in his most heat against the Clergy for denying him the halfe of their rents and goods as before hath byn said which they did vpon the prohibition of Pope Bonifacius he fearing least some men might bring in an excoÌ„munication against himself and them of the Clergy that yelded to pay the same and therby had bought his protection againe he only forbad Subpaena incarcerationis ne quis contra ipsum Regem ces qui iampridem suam protectionem quaesiêrant excommunicationis sententiam promulgaret prouocatione sacta pro se ad Romanam Curiam pro ipsis He prohibited vnder paine of imprisonment that no man should publish my sentence of excommunication against the King himself or those that had newly sought his protection yea his Maiesty made a prouocation or appeale also as well for himselfe as for them that stood on his side to the Courte of Rome So as if the King by speciall decree of his owne appointed only the paine of imprisonment for such as should publish any sentence of excommunication against himself for himself also appealed to Rome it is not likely that the auncient Common-lawes of England had made it treason before against the King his crowne and dignity to publish an excommunication against a subiect that was a thing most vsuall in those dayes 24. Well it may be that for repressing the vnquiet spiritts of some particular subiects that vpon light occasions and false suggestions would procure Bulls of excommunication from Rome some order might be taken at that tyme for seuere punishment of them that rashly without shewing the same to Iudges appointed for that purpose should publish the said Bulls in England as we see also at this dâ—y to be obserued in Spaine Naples Sicily France and other Catholike Realmes where no man may publish such things without a view and Placet of the Magistrate appointed to that effect and this not for denying or restrayning the said authority of the Sea Apostolicke but for keeping peace and orderly proceeding among subiects as is pretended and for better enforming his Holines if false suggestions haue byn giuen And that some like order might be at this time in England may appeere in parte by another obiection which M. Attorney hath afterward in the life of K. Edward the 3. saying that in an attachement vpon a prohibitioÌ„ the defendant pleading the Popes Bull of excoÌ„munication of the plaintiffe the Iudges demaunded of the defendaÌ„t if he had not the certificate of some Bishop within the realme testifying the excoÌ„municatioÌ„ c. Wherby it may appeare that priuate men were obliged to shew their Bulls vnto some Bishop before they published the same 25. But howsoeuer this be it is euident by this very Reporte of M. Attorneys text of Common-law cited by himself out of the one and thirtith yeare of King Edward the third which was many yeares after this other case that the bringing in or seruing of a Bull of excommunication against a particular subiect was not held for treason in those dayes Neither did the iudges make any such inference which is like they would haue done if it had byn treason against the King his Crowne and dignity by the ancient Common-lawes of England in the tyme of K. Edward the first aboue fifty yeares before the later case fell out And thus much for law though it might be that de facto in those dayes of suspition when K. Edward feared excommunication as you haue heard some man ad terrorem might be so sentenced by some chief Iusticer or Iudge as would be ready to pleasure the King in all things as most of them were though yet the party were not executed as here is confessed or else that there was some other particular aggrauant circumstance in this facte which here is not set downe though it may be also that the Reader shall find somewhat therof in M. Brookes booke if he looke it ouer out of whome this obiection without all circumstance is so barely cited And thus much of this first instance Now let vs contemplate the second as wise no doubt as the former The Attorney The said King Edward the first presented his Clerke to a benefice within the prouince of Yorke who was refused by the Archbishop for that the Pope by way of prouision had conferred it on another The King thervpon brought a Quare non admisit The Archbishop pleaded that the Bishop of Rome had long time before prouided to the same Church as one hauing supreme authority in that case and that he durst not nor had power to put him out which was by the Popes Bull in possession For which his high contempt against the King his Crowne and dignity in refusing to execute his Soueraignes commaundement fearing to doe it against the Popes prouision by iudgement of the Common-law the lands of his whole Bishopricke were seased into the Kings handes and
should be first if he were supreme in that sorte of authority and that the matter went by rigour of law not by composition agreemeÌ„t And finally for that the Prince in this case cannot put in a Pastor immediatly from himself giuing him spiritual iurisdiction ouer soules but must present him to the Bishop or Metropolitan to be induced by him indued with that iurisdiction which he should not doe if his owne authority spirituall were greater then the said Bishops or Archbishops And so we see that M. Attorney proueth nothing by this allegation against vs but rather against himself The Attorney The King may not only exempt any Ecclesiasticall person froâ—â—â— the iurisdiction of the Ordinary but may graunt vnto him Episcopall iurisdiction as thus it appeareth there the King had done of auncient tyme to the Archdeacon of Rick-mond All religious or Ecclesiasticall houses wherof the King was founder are by the King exempt from ordinary iurisdiction and only visitable and corrigible by the Kings Ecclesiasticall commission The Abbot of Bury in Suffolke was exempted from Episcopall iurisdiction by the Kings Charter The King presented to a benefice and his presented was disturbed by one that had obtained Bulles from Rome for which offence he was condemned to perpetuall imprisonment Tithes arising in places out of any parish the King shall hâ—â—e for that he hauing the supreme Ecclesiasticall iurisdictioâ— is bound to prouide a sufficient Pastor that shall haue the Cure of soules of that place which is not within any Parish And by the common lawes of England it is euident that no man vnlesse he be Ecclesiasticall or haue Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction can haue inheritance of tithes The King shall present to his free Chappels in default of the Deane by lapse in respect of his supreme Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction And Fitz-herbers saith that the King in that case doth present by lapse as Ordinary The Catholicke Deuine 20 Heere be diuers particulars breifly touched which I shall answere with like breuity especially for so much as they are but notes and obseruations out of particular collections of Law-writers and not Laws nor Statutes themselues First then it is denied that in the time of this K. Edward the 3. his raigne either he or any other Prince temporall could exempt any Ecclesiasticall person from the iurisdiction of his Ordinary Bishop and much lesse graunt vnto him Episcopall iurisdiction as of himself and by his owne power only he might procure it by his suite to the Sea Apostolicke as before hath byn shewed vnder K. Edward the Confessor and other Kings before the Conquest and diuers after also namely K. Henry the third and his children And whatsoeuer is said heer to the contrary for those dayes is either â—ror or mistaking for that it was common Catholicke doctrine â—â— that time as it is now that Episcopall iurisdiction cannot be giuen by 〈◊〉 but by him that hath it eminently with superiority in himself which must be by ordination commission descent from th'Apostles to whom it was giuen in Capite as before we haue declared to descend downe by succession and the said ordination and imposition of hands to the worlds end vpon Bishops Prelates and Pastores by lawful subordination the one vnto the other which cannot fall vpon any lay Princes that haue not this ordination Ecclesiasticall as euery man of iudgement and void of passion will easily see and discerne And the example before alleadged of the great Christian Emperour Valentinian the elder that professed himself to be vnum de populo non de Clero one of the lay people and not of the Clergy and consequently not to haue authority to iudge among them and much lesse to giue or exercise spirituall iurisdiction doth shew what the faith and practice of the Catholicke Church was in this point aboue twelue huÌ„dred years gone 21. Heerby then it is euident how those religious houses wherof King Edward was founder namely the Abbey of Bury which is the 3. obiection were exempted by the Kings Charter from Episcopall iurisdiction to wit the King procured the same first from the Sea Apostolicke then confirmed it by his Charter as by many examples you haue seen diuers precedent Chapters of this Booke and namely vnder King Edward the Confessor King Edgar King Kenulph and King Inas before the Conquest 22. If one was condemned to perpetuall imprisonment for disturbing the Kings presentation by the Popes Bulles it is a question de facto as you see not de iure and such might the Kings anger or offence be as he might also be put to death for it some Iudges neuer wanting to be ready to satisfie Princes pleasures in such affaires yet this doth not proue the lawfulnes of the fact And we haue seen before that this King Edward the 3. vpon the 48. yeare of his raigne promised the Pope that he would neuer vse more that manner of proceeding by his writts of Quare impedit wherby it is like this man was so greiuously punished 23. The instance of tithes allotted to the King for maintenance of a Pastor in places without the compasse of any parish is a very poore and triflying instance First for that those places that are out of all Parishes are to be presumed to be very few and secondly what great matter is it if so small a thing be left in depossto with the King for vse of the incumbent that is to ensue We haue seen in our dayes that tithes and rents of the Archbishopricke of Toledo for example in Spaine being valued at three hundred thousand Crownes by the yeare were depositated many years togeather in the Kings hands that last dyed whiles the Archbishop Carança was called to Rome imprisoned there vpon accusations of heresie and other crimes laid against him and in the end sentence being giuen a great parte of that money was graunted to the said King by the Sea Apostolicke for his wars against Infidels And yet doth not this proue that the King of Spaine had this by any spirituall iurisdiction of his owne but by concession of the Sea Apostolicke 24. And wheras M. Attorney saith heere that by the common laws of England it is euident that no man vnlesse he be Ecclesiasticall or haue Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction can haue inheritance of tithes I would aske him first how he proueth that the King of England had these tithes by inheritance and not by ordination agreement or conuention And secondly how his Common law can determine that no man may enioy tithes but he that hath Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction wheras before in the 9. leafe of his booke he maketh tithes to be an Ecclesiasticall cause and out of the Conusaunce of the said Common-law 25. And finally his last inference that for so much as the King is to present to his free Chappels in default of the Deane by lapse that this is done in
respect of his supreme Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction is altogeather childish For that first to present includeth no Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction at all and much lesse supreme and may be exercised by meer lay-men as before hath byn declared at large vnder King VVilliam the Conquerour Secondly for the King to present to his free Chappels was as much to say in those dayes as that those Chappels being made free and exempted by priuiledges and franquises frō the Sea Apostolicke for otherwise they could not be freed from iurisdiction of their Ordinary the King presented vnto them by vertue of the Canon-law and commission of the said Sea Apostolicke as founder therof 26. And thirdly that he presented after the Deane and by lapse only and not in the first place signifieth plainely that his iurisdiction in that point if presentation may be called iurisdiction as in some sense it may was lesse then that of the Deane And so Fitzherberts words are to be vnderstood that in that particular case the King presēted by lapse as ordinary that is to say wheras in other benefices when the patron or partie to whom the election nomination or presentation first cheifly appertaineth presenteth not within such a tyme the Ordinary may present as hauing by composition the second right or power in that case and after him the Metropolitan and last of all the King Heer in the case of Free Chappels wherof the King is presumed to be founder after the Deane which hath the first right and this by no other meanes then by cōcession of the Sea Apostolicke in those dayes the King by priuiledge of the same Sea had right to enter in the second place insteed of the Bishop which proueth the quite contrary to M. Attorneys conclusion for it sheweth that the King had not supreme Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in the case proposed but secondary and subordinate to that of the Deane But let vs see further The Attorney An excommunication vnder the Popes Bul is of no force to disable any man within England and the Iudges said that he that pleadeth such Buls though they concerne the excommunication of a subiect were in a hard case if the King would extend his iustice against him If excommunication being the extreme and finall end of any suite in the Court at Rome be not to be allowed within England it consequently followeth that by the ancient Common-laws of England no suite for any cause though it be spirituall rising within this Realme ought to be determined in the Court of Rome Quia frustra expectatur euentus cuis effectus nullus sequitur and that the Bishops of England are the immediate officers and ministers to the Kings Courts In an attachment vpon a prohibition the defendant pleaded the Popes Bull of excommunication of the Plaintife the Iudges demaunded of the defendāt if he had not the certificate of some Bishop within the Realme testifying this excommunication to whom the Counsell of the defendant answered that he had not neither was it as he supposed necessary for that the Buls of the Pope vnder lead were notorious inough but it was adiudged that they were not sufficient for that the Courte ought not to haue regard to any excommunication out of the Realme and therefore by the rule of the Courte the 〈◊〉 was thereby disabled Reges sacro oleo vncti sunt spiritualis iurisdictionis capaces The Catholicke Deuine 27. All that is heere said against the acceptance or admittance of the Popes Bulls for excommunication in England for of this only as speach in this place if it be meant of this K. Edwards time only as according to the argument it must and we haue seen that vnder former Kings the contrary was allwayes in practice how then doth M. Attorney talke heere againe of his auncient Common-lawes For if it began first vnder this King then was it a new law and not auncient and if further wee find no Decree or Statute therof at all in this Kings life as hitherto we haue not nor doth M. Attorney cite or quote any then might it be a matter only de facto of some Iudges who according to the current of that time and as they should see the King affected pleased or displeased with the Popes of those dayes would reiect or admit their Buls at their discretion And then doe you see vpon what goodly ground M. Attorney inferreth his conclusion that if the Popes Buls of excōmunication were not respected in those dayes it consequently followeth that by the auncient common laws of England no suite for any cause though it be spirituall rising within this Realme might be determined in the Courte of Rome And why so For that the Popes excommunication was not obayed in England 28. But I would aske him whether no sentence could be giuen without excommunication Or whether to such as beleeued the Popes authority in those dayes it were sufficient in conscience that the said excommunications were not admitted by some Iudges in their tribunals Or at least-wise no iudiciall notice taken of them except they came notified also from some Bishop as the second Case heer set downe doth touch therby insinuateth the solution of the whole riddle to wit that Iudges were not bound vnder this K. Edward to take publicke and Iudiciall notice of anie Bull of excommunication come from abroad and presented by any priuate person except the same came notified from some Bishop in authoritie within the Realme Which caution is vsed also at this day in diuers other Catholicke Countreys round about vs for auoiding trouble deceit and confusion to wit that Bulls and other authenticall writings from Rome must be seen and certified by some persons of authority within the Realme before they can be pleaded in Courte or admitted generally 29. To the last instance that Kings annointed with sacred oyle are capable of spirituall iurisdiction we denie it not but graunt with the great Ciuill-lawyer Baldus before mentioned and all Canonists that diuers cases of spirituall iurisdiction may be graunted by the Sea Apostolicke vnto annoynted Kings and so often it hath been done especially to Kings of England as former examples haue declared namelie of K. Edward the Confessor But this assertion of capacitie abilitie to receiue some sorte of spirituall iurisdiction if it be committed vnto them doth not proue that they had the said iurisdiction in themselues or of themselues by vertue of their Crownes or annoynting as M. Attorney would haue men beleeue But let vs heare further The Attorney Where a Prior is the Kings debitor and ought to haue tithes of another spirituall person he may choose either to sue for subtraction of his tithes in the Ecclesiasticall Courte or in the Exchequer and yet the persons and matter also was Ecclesiasticall For seing the matter by a meane concerneth the King hee may sue for them in the Exchequer as well as in the Ecclesiasticall Courte and there shall the
as you haue heard And some cause might be also of this speciall commission for Iudges and Iustices to assist Bishops and so no doubt it was for that the said Lollards and VVickcliffians had not onlie been troublesome and daungerous to the State vnder the raignes of King Richard the secoÌ„d and Henry the 4. but vnto the person and life of this man also some moneths before this Statute by conspiring his death and raising a daungerous rebellion in S. Giles field by London as both VValsingham and other authoâ—s doe reporte and therefore no maruaile though authoritie be giuen as heer is said that the Sheriffes and other Officers maie aâ—â—est apprehend them and what maketh this for M. Attorneys purpose 25. But further I cannot but maruaile at his note in the margent Lollardy saith he is of lolio which signifieth Cockle for as Clockle is the destruction of the corne so is heresie of true religion and then doth he bring in two seuerall verses the one of Virgil and the other of Ouid about lolium shewing himself thereby a good grammarian though yet in the thing it self he was much deceiued For that Lollards and Lollardy being a particular sect of hereticks are not deriued from the latin word Lolium signifying cockle or darnel as the verie deriuation it self might easily shew but of the first author therof named Gualter Lolhard a German about the yeare of Christ 1315. as Tritemius in his Cronicle declareth and is larglie shewed in a booke some yeares past set forth in our English tongue by a Catholike writer which if M. Attorney had read he might easilie haue auoided this grosse mistaking From which also I maruaile that his affectioÌ„ to the men had not somewhat with-held him for that they were of his religion not cockle but good corne if wee beleiue his great historiographer and deuine Iohn Fox who setteth them out not onlie for good Christians but for Saints and martyrs in his bookes of Martyrologe Acts and Monuments But thus these men agree togeather Out of the raigne of King Henry the sixt the fiftenth King after the Conquest §. III. 26. Out of this Kings raigne which endured most Catholiklie for neere 40. yeares though vnfortunately through wars sedition and broiles of the Realme M. Attorney findeth onlie these three poore instances ensuing The Attorney Excommunication made and certified by the Pope is of no force to disable any man within England and this is by the auncient Common laws before anie Statute was made concerning forraine iurisdiction The King only may graunt or licence to found a spiritual incorporation In the raigne of K. Henry the 6. the Pope wrote letters in derogation of the King and his regalty and the Church-men durst not speake against them but Humfrey Duke of Glocester for their safe-keeping put them into the sier The Catholicke Deuyne 27. To the first hath been answered diuers times before that it appeareth to haue been an agreement at that tyme in England that the Popes Bulls of excommunication should not bee published by particular men but with the certificate of some Bishop for more authoritie c. as it is now also vsed in diuers Catholicke CouÌ„tries for auoiding the fraudes and practice of particular inquiet people that by false suggestions get Buls c. But that this was by the auncient CommoÌ„ laws before anie Statute made hath no probabilitie at all as by the whole Course of our auncient Catholicke Kings hath been declared And it groweth now somewhat loathsome and ridiculous to see M. Attorney runne so often to this common Chymera of auncient Common-lawes without shewing any or any likeli-hood that any such were or could bee in auncient tymes amongst our auncestors for that their religion deuotion sense and iudgement ran wholy to the contrary in those dayes Whervpon it followeth as often we haue said that if a Common-law could not be made admitted or authorized without some common consent of Prince and people it is vnpossible that such common laws should then bee as M. Attorney doth frame heer to his fansie vpon euery occasion that pleaseth him 28. That the King onlie maie graunt licence to found a spirituall incorporatioÌ„ maie bee vnderstood in two sortes First that the said incorporation cannot bee made or erected within his dominions or founded with lands goods or rents without his leaue and licence and this wee denie not Secondlie that the said spiritual incorporation should haue her spiritualtie from the King that is to saie her spirituall and ecclesiasticall priuiledges of being such an incorporation belonging to the Church And this wee haue seen by the practice of all times in England both before and after the Conquest to haue been euer sought and receiued from the Sea Apostolicke wherof wee haue a particuler demonstration set downe before in the 6. Chapter of this our Answere 29. The last which he obiecteth of the fact of Humfrey Duke of Glocester that cast as he saith the Popes letters into the fire for their safe-Keeping is rather a iest than an argument And I maruaile M. Attorney a man of his degree would bring it forth and print it also for an argument whether the thing be true or false For if it fell out as heer is noted in the margent vpon the first yeare of King Henry the 6. his raigne when the King was but eight moneths old and the said Duke his vncle Gouernour of the Land and in his cheifest ruffe who afterward came thereby to soe pittifull a ruine both of himself his freinds and the Realme euerie man maie see what force this iest maie haue which yet I haue not read in anie other author besydes M. Attorney and so to him I leaue it OF THE RAIGNE OF FOVRE ENSVING KINGS TO VVIT Edward the fourth Edward the fifth Richard the third and Henry the seauenth And how conforme they were vnto their auncestours in this point of controuersie which we haue in hand CHAP. XIIII THe line of Lancaster being put downe and remoued from the Crowne by the depriuation and death of K. Henry the 6. and his sonne as before you haue heard there entred the howse of Yorke with no lesse violeÌ„ce of armes and effusion of bloud but rather more then the other familie had done before by taking to it self the Crowne from the head of K. Richard the 2. For that Edward Duke of Yorke by dint of sword inuesting himself of the scepter by the same maintained it though with much trouble feares iealousies for the space of 22. yeares and then thinking to leaue it quietlie to his sonne Edward the 5. though with protestation and oath at his death as Syr Thomas More recordeth that if he could as well haue forseene the vanitie of that ambition as now with his more paine then pleasure he had proued he would neuer haue wonne the curtesie of mens knees with the losse of so manie heads
is a lawyer and delighteth in the word that hath byn so beneficiall vnto him but yet alleadgeth here no law at all nor can he doe For what law is that by iugment wherof the Sanctuarie of S. Iohns Church in London grauÌ„ted by the Pope was disalowed for so much as all other Sanctuaries had and haue from that Sea their franquises and liberties Was it Common-law or Canon and Ecclesiasticall Not Ecclesiasticall For that all such law dependeth from thence and consequently cannot be supposed to haue disanulled the Popes authority in graunting Sanctuary Common law if it were it must appeare how it came in by whom it was admitted by what right it came to haue conusauÌ„ce of this Ecclesiasticall cause which M. Attorney so often hath denyed before to apperteyne to his Common-law wherof ensueth that eyther those temporall Iudges exceeded their limites in handling this cause or that there was some temporall circumstance therein that brought it into that Courte 10. And surely it may bee that this Sanctuarie pretended by the Prior of the Knights of S. Iohns in London might not onlie bee the ordinary Sanctuarie of their Church and appurtenances thereunto which all Churches haue by Canon law more or lesse but also of some greater circuite round about their said Church and habitatioÌ„ which they being Knights and souldiars might importe some inconueniences to the common wealth by occasion of contentions fights brawles that might there fall out the temporall officers hauing no accesse by reason of the said pretended Sanctuary And so this case not being meere spirituall but mixt also with temporall interest of the Common-wealth the common Iudges vntill the matter were better discussed and resolued in ecclesiasticall right might put difficultie about the admission or execution of the said priuiledges without the Kings expresse consent And this is answered according to M. Attorneys allegation supposing it to bee sincere not hauing by me the bookes as before I haue said out of which he hath taken the same the view whereof no doubt would discouer more therfore I recommend the examination to the Reader that may haue commoditie to see and read the places But let vs see another Instance of two more of his out of this Kinges raigne The Attorney There it appeareth that the opinion of the Kings-bench had been oftentimes that if one spirituall person sue another spirituall man in the Courte of Rome for a matter spirituall where he might haue remedy before his Ordinary that is the Bishop of that Diocesse within the Realme Quia trabit ipsum in placitum extraregnum incurreth the dauÌ„ger of a Premunire a hainons offence being contra legiantiae suae debitum in contemptum Domini Regis contra â—oronam dignitatem suas By which it appeareth how greiuous an offence it was against the King his Crowne and dignity if any subiect although both the persons cause were spirituall did seeke for iustice out of the Realme as though either there wanted iurisdiction or iustice was not executed in the Ecclesiastical Courts within the same which as it hath byn said was an high offence contra Regem Coronam dignitatem suas The Catholicke Deuine By this instance a man may greatly suspect that M. Attorney dealeth not sincerely but amplifieth and exaggerateth matters to his purpose But howsoeuer this bee cleere it is that he dealeth not substantially For heere only the note alleadged saith that the opinion of the Kings-bench had byn oftentymes that if one spirituall or Ecclesiasticall person should sue another in the Courte of Rome when he might haue remedy before his Ordinary at home he incurreth the daunger of a Premunire for that he draweth a Plea out of the Kingdome without necessity Well then this is but the opinion of some temporall lawyers of the Kings-bench that a man that should doe this should be in daunger of a Premunire for that he draweth a Plea out of the Kingdome when he might haue sufficient remedy by his spirituall Iudge at home And this is according to the Statutes before made vnder King Edward the third and Richard the second as you haue heard that matters may not be carryed to Rome at the first instance but by way of appellation when they cannot haue iustice at home And this taketh not away the Popes authority as you see but rather confirmeth the same and punisheth only disorderly people that will vex and trouble men with citing them to Rome without necessitie 12. Which being so you will see how friuolous M Attorneys exaggeration is heer in painting out vnto vs with so great an hyperbole of words this haynons offence against the duty of loyalty in contempt of the King our Lord and contrary to his crowne and dignity c. And why is all this adoe For that saith he a subiect of the realme doth seeke for iustice out of the Realme in spirituall causes as though there wanted iurisdiction or iustice within the Realme which is an high offence contra Regem coronam dignitatem suas Whereto I aunswere that what high offence it may be against suas here twise repeated in the English but corrected by the Latyn Interpreter I know not but sure I am that against King Crowne or Royall dignity it can be none no more in England then in other Catholicke Kingdomes round about vs. And the reason here alleadged by M. Attorney excludeth all appellations betwene subordinate Courts as wel within the Realme as without if it should be admitted and taken for good Wherefore when he writeth in the margent Note as though some great argument were alleadged for his purpose It is a note that he hath small store of substance to note when he standeth so much vpon such a toy The Attorney In the Kings Courts of Record where felonies are determined the Bishop or his deputy ought to giue his attendance to the end that yf any that is indicted and arraigned for felony doe demaund the benefit of his Clergy that the Ordinary may informe the Court of his sufficiency or insufficiency that is whether he can read as a Clarke or not wherof notwithstanding the Ordinary is not to Iudge but is a minister to the Kings Court the Iudges of that Court are to Iudge of the sufficiency or insufficiency of the party whatsoeuer the Ordinary doe informe them and vpon due examination of the party may giue iudgement against the Ordinaryes information For the Kings Iudges are Iudges of the cause The Catholicke Deuine 13. I am content to admitt anie iudges in this cause whether it be not impertinent to M. Attorneys purpose to bring in this instance For howsoeuer he goeth about in words to dazel this case yet is it euident that for so much as the Church by her priuiledge of Superioritie taketh out of the hands of temporall iustice men condemned to dy for felony onlie for that they can read like Clerkes though they bee no Clarkes
togeather in one as also for that they are of so small substance as they deserue not to be handled a part For as to the first concerning the buying of alume of the Florentines who doth not see but that it is a temporall case wherin the Realme of England or Marchants therof being interessed the State might pretend iust cause to differre the admission or execution of the Popes sentence of excommunication touching that affaire vntill they had better informed him of the truth or iustice of the cause in their behalfe For this is vsed ordinarily by all Catholicke Princes and States euen at this day 17. The second obiection about the punishment of Priests and Clergy-men by their Bishops and Archbishops hath nothing in it at all that may make for M. Attorneys purpose For that heere is not giuen by Parlament any new spirituall iurisdiction to Bishops Archbishops but some temporall enlargement is graunted to the same As for example that they may not only suspend and excommunicate and punish by their spirituall censures such licentious persons of life but may corporally punish them also by imprisonment and other wayes as heere is set downe And least any in such cases might make recourse vnto the temporall magistrate saying that they were imprisoned wrongfully and contrary to the common secular laws of the Realme this refuge is cut of by this Statute and absolute power giuen to Bishops Archbishops to punish in such cases as well corporally as spiritually wherby also appeareth that such delicts of Clergy-men were in those dayes to be inquired of and punished only in the Bishops Courts and not in the temporall which was a dignity and no small preheminence of the Prelates of England aboue many other Countreys who neither then nor now haue the like absolute preheminence in all things as before hath byn shewed For that diuers cases and causes doe appertaine only to spirituall Courts in England which are handled also by secular magistrates in sundry other countreys as namely that of Testaments and the like And this is to be ascribed to the speciall piety deuotion of our Catholicke Kings and Countrey 18. As for the third point wherin M. Attorney saith Rex est persona mixta adding this reason because he hath Ecclesiasticall and temporall iurisdiction Whosoeuer maketh this instance either M. Attorney or some other author of his he little seemeth to vnderstand what is needfull to induce Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction wherof he may need more at large in the second Chapter of this booke And as for the person of a King it may be named mixt in some other respects as namely for that a King is annointed and therby hath somewhat of a Clergy-man also though absolutely he be a lay-man as you haue heard before the great Christian Emperour Valentinian professe of him self Quod erat vnus de populo that he was a lay-man and not a Clergie-man He is likewise head of the whole Common-wealth wherin are members both Clergy and lay-men as before hath byn said and in that respect is he head of both partes and consequently mixt or common to them both But all this induceth not necessity of spirituall iurisdiction except it be committed vnto him from the Church and Prelates therof in whome originally it is as in the forenamed place we haue abundantly declared 19. And the like wee answere finally to the fourth and last obiection wherin it is said that the King maie dispense with a bastard to bee made Priest and with a Priest to haue two benefices and this by his Ecclesiasticall power and iurisdiction The matter must bee distinguished that the King maie dispense or giue his consent in these cases for so much as toucheth the Common wealth or maie bee hurtfull vnto it and no otherwise which is to say so far forth as it maie importe or preiudice the Commō-wealth that bastards not inheritable should be Priests or one Priest hold manie benefices But then this dispensation is not by anie iurisdiction spirituall as M. Attorney would inferre but temporall onlie of the Prince as hee is head of the Common wealth For as concerning spirituall dispensation appertaining to conscience for so much as the prohibition that Bastards shall not bee ordained Priests was not made first by temporall Princes but by the auncient Canons of the Church none can dispence properly therin but he that is spirituall head of the whole Church or some other by his commission 20. And by the same reason for that spirituall iurisdiction ouer soules which is the iurisdiction of him that hath a benefice cannot bee truely giuen or deliuered to anie man but by him that hath it in himself to wit some Prelate of the Church that hath it from the fountaine of succession from the Apostles as before hath been declared it followeth that none which hath not this iurisdiction by this means in himself can giue anie benefice to anie man and much lesse two or manie benefices that is to saie spirituall iurisdiction ouer manie flocks to one man except hee onlie that hath superior and mediate spirituall iurisdiction ouer the said flocks and their soules And heerby wee see that standing in the principles and grownds before set downe and manifestly proued M. Attorneys instance is to no purpose at all to the effect and sense wherin hee would haue it vnderstood 21. And this shall suffice for this place and for the raignes and liues of all Christian Princes of our Realme that liued in vnion and conformitie of one religion and acknowledgment of one supreme authoritie spiritual of the Sea Apostolicke of Rome from the first to the last that is to saie from King Ethelbert that receiued the first grace of our conuersion to the Christian Catholicke Roman religion vnto King Henry the 7. inclusiuè who being the last and neerest English auncestour to his Maiesty that now is and succeeding after aboue a hundred and twenty English Kings of the same religion ended happely also his life raigne therein without any change or alteration And if this sonne had followed the same course and held it out to the end as he did for two partes of three of his raigne he had byn thrice happy but Gods prouidence for his and our sinnes permitted otherwise We shall therfore see breifly the manner means occasions motiues and euents therof in the ensuing Chapter OF THE RAIGNE OF K. HENRY THE EIGHT And of his three children King Edward Queene Mary and Queene Elizabeth And how the first innovation about Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction was made and continued in their dayes CHAP. XV. NOVV are we come vnto the time wherin great change indeed and alteration was made in our Countrey by particular Statutes and Nationall laws so far forth as a perpetuall and vniuersall receiued truth by nationall and temporall decrees could be altered in the foresaid point of spirituall and Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction For that K. Henry
well by the words of the Statute which are these VVhere the Kings most excellent Maiesty is by gods law supreme head immediatly vnder him of his whole Church of England intending the conseruation of the same Church in a true sincere and vniforme doctrine of Christs religion calling also to his blessed and most gratious remembrance the innumerable commodities which ensue of concord and vnity in religion c. hath therfore commaunded this his most high Court of Parlament to be summoned as also a Synod of all the Archbishops Bishops and other learned men to bee assembled c. for a full and persect resolution of certaine Articles proposed which are the former six his Maiesty also most gratiously vouchsafing in his owne Princly person to descend and come into his said high Courte and Councell and there like a Prince of most high prudence and no lesse learning opened and declared manie thinges of high learning great knowledge touching the said Articles matters questions whervpon after great and longe deliberate disputation and consultation had and made it was finally resolued as before c. 17. Thus you see how maturely this matter was done and resolued by the new head of the English Church and his Counsell which resolution not withstanding I presume M. Attorney and those of his religion will not well allow à parte rei though for his authoritie they may not denie it according to their owne grounds in that he did contradict therin the Popes and so in this respect they seem to bee but in pittifull plight for that neither the one nor the other head serueth well their turnes And with this wee shall leaue King Henry the 8. who in all the rest of his raigne which as hath byn said was but the third parte after his spirituall headship of that he had raigned before in acknowledgment of the Popes Supremacie his Decrees Ordinances and actions though they were inconstant variable yet were they all except this only controuersie of the Popes authoritie against Protestants and their religion as appeareth both by his solemne condemning and burning of Iohn Lambert for denying the Reall presence the next yeare after this Statute was made as also of Anne Ascue and others vpon the last yeare of his life for the same heresie and of manie others for other Protestant-opinions so as I doe not see how M. Attorney can much glorie in this first headshipp of his Church of England especially that being true which Bishop Gardiner preached and protested publikely at Pauls Grosse in Queen Maries time that K. Henry dealt with him a little before his death for reconcyling himself to the Pope by restoring to him his authority againe if with his honour it might bee brought to passe but before this could bee treated he died and thereby was frustrated of his good purpose therin The answere to certaine Instances of M. Attorney out of this raigne of K. Henry the eight §. II. 18. And this might suffice for King Henries raigne but only that M. Attorney vpon the recitall of certeyne of the said Kings Statutes made by himself for his owne spirituall Supremacy which I hold not needfull for me to stand to answere he moueth a doubt and answereth the same in such sorte as is worthy of consideration His doubt is that for so much as K. Henry was now declared head of the Church and all Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction taken from the Pope in England and in English affaires what shal become of the Canons or Canon law togeather with the Constitutions and Ecclesiasticall Ordinances depending of the Church of Rome wherby the spirituall Courts of England were wont to bee gouerned you shall heare his answere in his owne words The Attorney If it bee demaunded saith hee what Canons Constitutions Ordinances and Synodals Prouinciall are still in force within this Realme I answere that it is resolued and enacted by authoritie of Parlament that such as haue been allowed by generall consent and custome within the Realme and are not contrariant or repugnant to the Laws Statutes and Customes of this Realme nor to the damage or hurte of the Kings prerogatiue Royall are still in force within this Realme as the Kings Ecclesiasticall laws of the same Now as Consent and Custome hath allowed those Canons so no doubt by generall consent of the whole Kealme anie of the same maie bee corrected enlarged explained or abrogated For example there is a decree that all Clerkes that haue receiued anie manner of Orders greater or smaller should bee exempt pro causis criminalibus before the temporall Iudges This decree had neuer anie force within England First for that it was neuer approued and allowed of by generall consent within the Realme Secondly it was against the laws of the Realme as it doth appeare by infinite presidents Thirdly it was against the prerogatiue and soueraigntie of the King that any subiect within this Realme should not bee subiect to the laws of this Realme The Catholicke Deuine 19. Heere you see two points touched in this answere First the resolution it self and then the confirmation therof by a speciall example The resolution is very ambiguous doubtfull and vncertaine if you consider it For he saith that such Canonicall laws are to bee still in force as were allowed by generall consent not contrariant to the laws statutes and customes of this Realme nor importe anie dammage to the Kings prerogatiue Royall And what are these thinke you And how vncertaine a rule is this prescribed for laws whereby matters of conscience must be determined Who may not say in his owne case or others this Canon or Constitution though it be of neuer so auncient Councels or Decrees of the Church for of such consisteth the Canon-law was neuer allowed by generall consent of England this is contrariant to some Statute or Custome this importeth dammage to the Kings prerogatiue Royall and so indeed by establishing this new headship the whole body of Ecclesiasticall regimēt was ouerthrowne though M. Attorney to salue the matter saith that the said Canonicall lawes should remaine still in force with the restrictiōs aforesaid as the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes which is as much to say as that these Canon-lawes that were made by generall Councels Nationall or Prouinciall Synods and by the Popes of Rome themselues shall not remaine as their lawes but as the Kings lawes for that he retaineth them of which poore refuge I haue spoken often before how weake and idle it is 20. But now for his particular example chosen out to proue that the generall Canonicall lawes of the whole Church receiued throughout Christendome may be corrected and enlarged explaned abrogated by a particular Countrey which is contrary to the common Maxime that no law can be abrogated but by the same authority by which it was made and allowed or greater I cannot but maruaile that he would insist vpō the exemption of Clerks from secular
places of differēt Religion Christians liuing there should of their owne curiosity goe sometimes to the Churches or Moscies of that Coūtrey to heare see only what is there done though not to pray or worship or which is lesse should carry or weare their Turbant or Mahometan habit it were not so great a matter of offence but if the King or Emperour should commaund the same to be done in attestation of their conformity of religion now this precept doth make it much more vnlawful though yet if he were not true King indeed nor true magistrate that should make such a precept but some priuate man of his owne authority euery man seeth that it would rather diminish then encrease the obligation of recusancy And so M. Attorney when he affirmeth that Catholickes first began their recusancy of going to Church vpon this persuasion that Queen Elizabeth was not lawfull Queene he alleadgeth circstumāce that might rather in some sort facilitate their going then encrease their obligation to the same recusancy For that her precept and commaundement binding them not at all as not Queene they were freed thereby of that obligation as before hath byn said springing of this head of Royall commaundement 10. This then is the first great iniury which M. Attorney offereth vnto Recusant Catholickes interpreting their recusancy to be of malice and treasonable hearts rather then of band of conscience which iniury he often iterateth in the current of his discourse saying after many other accusations heaped togeather in this sorte In all this tyme no law was either made or attempted against them for their recusancy though it were grounded vpon so disloyall a cause as hath byn said And againe a little after talking of the penall laws made against them for the same recusancy he saith That it was a milde aud mercifull law considering their former conformity and the cause of their reuolt But I hauing shewed now that there was no such generall conformity before and consequently no reuolt and much lesse any such cause of reuolt as he faineth to himself the vntruth of these charges and the wrong done therby to innocent men is made euident and manifest 11. Neither doth M. Attorneys exorbitant humour containe it self heer but being once entred into the field of insolent inuectiues and exaggerations against the said recusant Catholickes hee vaunteth and triumpheth as though he had them vnder him at the barre readie to bee condemned where no man must speake in their behalfe but himself onlie against them without replie or contradiction And therfore after a longe enumeration of matters both impertinent and little important to the cause in hand he writeth thus And there vpon Campian Sherwyn and manie other Romish Priests being apprehended and confessing that they came into England to make a partie for the Catholicke cause when need should require were in the 21. yeare of the said late Queens raigne by the auncient Common-laws of England indicted arraygned tried adiudged and executed for high treason c. And againe not longe after he maketh this conclusion By this and by all the Records of indictments it appeareth that these Iesuites and Priests are not condemned and executed for their Priest-hood and profession but for their treasonable and damnable persuasions and practices against the Crownes and dignities of Monarches and absolute Princes c. Thus hee 12. But heer I would aske may not a man of his calling bee ashamed to put in print so manifest vntruths euen then when there are so manie hundreds yet aliue that were at the said arraignments trials condemnations deaths of the said Blessed men Campian Sherwyn the rest who not only protested on their soules and euerlasting saluation at their last houre to bee guyltlesse in all accusations laid against them except only their Orders of Priest-hood and profession of faith but vpon racks also stood therevnto and defended the same so cleerly at the barre with manie reasons proofes and demonstrations as most of those that stood round about and heard their Pleas yea Protestants also by name did think certainly when the Iury went forth to consult and did offer likewise to lay wagers theron that at least Father Campian and his companie the first day should haue been quitted 13. And as for the auncient common laws of England wherby M. Attorney saith they were condemned wee haue shewed now often before that this is but a word of Course with him that there bee no such Commō-laws extant not euer were or could bee vnder Catholicke Princes against Priests before the breach of King Henry the 8. and that this is but an Idaea Platonica of the Attorneys inuention to couer and colour matters withall whose soule truly I doe loue so dearly as I would bee very sory hee should entangle the same with the bloud of those godly men that suffered before he came to age to vndergoe that daungerous burthen of pleading against them Hee maie leaue that charge to his Auncients especially to him that had his office at that time who being yet liuing as I suppose hath both that and many other such heauy reckonings to answere for at the time appointed by the common Iudge of all whome I beseech most humbly to facilitate that account vnto him and others interessed therin as this also of calumniating Recusant-Catholickes to M. Attorney they being the only people of that profession that most ought to be pittied and charitably delt withall for that they suffer only for not dissembling in their consciences which if they would doe as the sinne were damnable to themselues so were it nothing profitable or auailable to the State or Prince to haue externall conformity without inward consent iudgement will or loue And so much of the ground of this first expostulation pretermitting many other things which might be complained of in this boysterous streame and torrent of M. Attorneys accusations against them 14. And yet one thing more I may not pretermit which is to admonish his conscience if it haue aures audiendi hearing eares which by our Sauiours speach appeareth that diuers cōsciences haue not to looke to one speciall obligation aboue the rest which is that hauing ended and put in print this his Booke presented the same in person to his Maiesty shewed the principall drift and partes therof and therby made some stronge impressions against the said Recusant-Catholickes as well appeared by his said Maiesties speaches and discourse that day at dinner when the said booke was brought forth his obligation I say is and this both in conscience and honour that finding himself now mistaken ouershot or deceiued in some of his said principall Reportes and principally in this about Recusant-Catholicks he is boūd to present also this Answere to his said Maiesty for manifestation of the truth and releiuing the said Catholickes of the vniust accusations laid against them as he did present his owne booke of the said
Mat. 18. Rom. 1. Epist. 105 contra lit Petiliani The morall argument of impossibility for the vniuersall Church to fall or vanish away Application of this morall argument A most euident demonstration Stange and Chimericall imaginations The differeÌ„t vse of the touch-stone for finding out the Church The basenes contemptibility of M. Attorneyes Church M. T. F. in his Apologie an 1599. A manifest caluÌ„niation against M. Garnet â—rent â— Anâ—â—iâ— â— seely â—uenâ—â—n of â—ookes and treaâ—ons Cicero de Oratore A fond fayned blasphemy Ioh. 11. The meaning of Caiphas in speaking of the death of Christ. Luc. 13. 〈◊〉 4. â—n Ioanneâ—â— The meaning of M. Garnet in vsing the wordes of Caiphas Isa. 60. Psal. 109. Sundry calumniatioÌ„s M. Attorney in his vaunting vayne All ancient English lavves in fauour of Catholicke religioÌ„ The particulers brought in by M. Attorney refuted Paulus Quartus Câ—â—dinall â—oole The arraignment of M. Garnet Ioan. 19. The law misapplyed against Christ our Sauiour Leâ—â—t 24 The priuiledge of secrecy to be obserued in Confession Gods truth alwayes euerie where one Psal. 116. Sap. 5. Math. 7. Gregor 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 â—ngel â—oan The dangerous state of â—â—r Enâ—lish â—â—torneyes office The important weight of this controuersy Two partes of ReligioÌ„ August contra epist. FuÌ„â—â—menti cap. 5. Math. 18 See Magdebar Gen. 2. li. 2. cap. 3. col 41. 42. deinceps Magde ibid. Col. 53. 54. deinceps See Caluin l. 1. instit cap. 11. lib. 3. cap. 5. True power and spirituall iurisdiction the only â—â—e â—uide to saluatioÌ„ Math. â—â— 18. Chrysost. lib. 3. de â—acer 〈◊〉 4. 5. de verbâ—s 〈◊〉 D Hier. epist. ad Heliodor de vitaâ— solitaria Hilar. Can. 16 in Mat. alij alibi Three grounds of spirituall authoritie supposed by three different religioÌ„s * See Cartwright Iunius other of then alleadged in the Suruey of pretended discipline Cap. 16. Rom. 13. Math. 24 1. pet 2. The fouÌ„dation of the Protestants assertioÌ„ Acts 20. Puritane grouÌ„des Acts 1.23 Acts 6.5 1. Tit. 5. GrouÌ„des of the Catholicks for spiritual iurisdiction Important consequences Sir FraÌ„cis Hastings against the vvard-vvord M. Sutcliffe in his defence Puritan and Protestants grounds vncompatible Heb. 5. 2. paralip 10. Psal. 2. Psal. 1 * Cyprian l. 2. ep 3. August l. 16. de Ciuit. Des. cap. 22. l. 1. contra aduers. leg Proph. cap. 2. lib. 2. cont lit Petil. c. 37. Chrysost hom 35. in Gen. Clem. AlexaÌ„d lib. 4. strom Ambros. l. 4. de Sacram. c. 3. Hierom in cap. 1. ad Titum alij Ioan. 10. Caluin lib. 4. instit cap. 19. §. 31. 14. §. 31. * Infra cap. 2. The Protestant and Puritan yelde more in deed to the Catholicke then to ech other The Protestant and Puritan ministers not admitted the one by the other What the Puritan is to the Protestant by this grounde of spirituall power Mar. vlt. Luc. 10. 1. Tim. 3. Mat. 23. Mat. 7. Iohn 10. The Title examined Cicer â—ib 3. Tusâ—â—â— quaest The indifferency required in treating this controuersy The vvord Ius extendeth it self further then Lex a â—â—luâ—ss de Iustiâ—ia â—â—re b Ibidem â—â—lus c 〈◊〉 Celâ—us ibidem d 〈◊〉 5. capâ— â— e 2â— q. 57. art 1. f â—ib 5. Eâ—ymâ—l c. 3. That temporall Princes make not ecclesiasticall lavves but receaue them Of Error and Ignorance The definition diuiâ—â—on oâ— IgnoraÌ„ce See 2. dist q 42 D. The 2â— q. 76 art 1. 2. â— Ignorance negaâ—iâ—e Eccles. 5. Rom. 12. Iob. 9. Ignorance priuatiue Diuerse sortes of priuatiue Ignorace D. Thomâ—â— 1 pag. 101. â— 2. q. â— art â—â— q. â—â— art â— Strange speeches of imagined ignorance by the Attorney Iob. 9. Ecclesiastes 9. Rom. 12 Syr Francis Hastingâ— in his VVatch-vvorde No◠〈…〉 variety or depth of learninge VVhy euery Catholike hath more knovvledg than an hundred sectaâ—â— 2 Of truthâ— 2. Cor. 13. Truth vaynly coÌ„mended by Sectaries * Se Hilar. lib. 2. ad Constant. Von â—nt Liâ—â—â— lib cont prophâ—n haret noâ—tâ— August l 1. de 〈◊〉 c. 3. tract 18. in Ioan l. 7 de Gen. ad lib. cap. 9. The vvay hovv to finde out the Truth Tert. lib. aduersus Prax. cap. 20. Tert. lib. de Prescript cons. haret cap 2â— Aug. 〈◊〉 1. cont Gana Donat. c. 1. form 131 de tempt lib. de â—niâ— Eccles cont Petil. cap. 2. Vincent Laâ—in lib. cont proph haer 〈◊〉 Paâ—amus Epise Barâ—in cap. 1. Symph The application of the Fathers directions Vide etiam Psal. Aug. contra partem Donat. Oâ—tâ—tuÌ„ Mileuit contra Parmâ—n August de gâ—â—us ad â—â— imperfect cap. 1. 3 Birth-right of lavves The Attorneys maior admitted and his minor denyed Of the antiquity of our municipall lavves The commodities discommodities of our municipal lavves The birth-â—â—ghâ— of our common lavves The obiection of externe lavvyers against diuerse points of ours Se also Syr Thomas Moore Lib. 1. Viepia VVhether common lavvyers determine and deale vvithout passion Anno 1. Edvvards 3 â— 2. Instâ—â— 2. The Catholike religion the ancieÌ„t birth-right of â—nglishâ—â—n Math. 10. Marc. 10. Against bitter vvriâ—ing in controsies Matthevv 〈◊〉 Thomas â—el VVilleâ— and others 4 Of vvryting of coÌ„trouersies against coÌ„science Tit. 4. * Se S. Augustine 〈◊〉 de â—ut Dâ— cap 51. l. 7 de Geâ— ad lit c. â— nact 8 in Iuâ—â— lâ—b 〈…〉 VVhat is the commâ—n â—â—e vvnâ— truth in reâ—â— to and vvâ—â— impugneth it The difference of substaÌ„tâ—all proof betvvene M. Attorney and vs. VVhy Catholiks are not to be thought to vvrite against their conscience Tyme of 〈…〉 Mâ—â—cb 6. 〈◊〉 God the author of all lavvful povver Rom. 13. The different ends obiects of spirituall and temporall povver Spirituall teÌ„mporal povver as spirit and flesh in a man Temporal and spirituall authoritie separated in the Priâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 Act. 20. 2. Cor. 6.4 Anabaptists Rom. 13. 1. Pet. 2. Act. 10. Spirituall iurisdictioÌ„ independent of TeÌ„porall Tempoâ—al povver not immâ—diatâ—ly but mediately from God 〈◊〉 â—â— Matâ— 18. Ioan â—1 Leg. 2 ff de Iuâ—â—sd 〈◊〉 Iud. l. vlt. ff dâ—â—â— cui mand iurisdict In cap pastora â— in pâ—â—â—â—ip de offic delegati In câ—p praeterea â—odâ—â— tit VVhat is the spirituall povver of the church Pastors therof Math. 26. Ioan. 20. Se S. Cyril l 12. in Ioan. â— 55. and S. Cyprian lib. de â—nt Eâ—â—â—esâ— aâ—ist 73 ad 〈◊〉 Matth. 16. Chrysost. homil 5. de verbis Esa. Vidi Dominum Galat. 1. 1. Cor. 13. 2. Cor. 10. 2. Cor. 13. S. Paules esteeme of the high povver giuen vnto him to other Apostles their Successours 1. Cor. 5. 1. Tim. 1. Diuers excomunications by the Apostles Act. 8. Aug. lib. 1. contra Aduer 〈◊〉 Proph. c. 10. Chrysâ—st hom 4. ad Helr 〈◊〉 feâ—tur 11. quaest 3. cap. â—1 Aug. ibid. Cypr. lib. 1. epist. 1. ad 〈◊〉 Deut. 6. Math. 16. Tvvo points of Spirituall IurisdictioÌ„ internall and externall Matth. 6. 1. Cor.
the Kings Ecclesiasticall lavves or the Ecclesiasticall lavves of England Statut. de Consult editum an 24. E. 1. The explication true meaning of the former prouision 〈…〉 â—â—dâ—â—ations 〈◊〉 anno 5. Edouardi 2. 〈◊〉 18. 〈◊〉 â— cap. 5. Different Courtes shevv different origen of authorityes M. Attorneys common refuge refuted These 2. Kings made most restraints The punishment of these tvvo Princes and their posterity for their violence vsed tovvards the church Particular motiues of K. Edvvard 3. for proceeding as he had VValsingam in vit Ed. 1. anno â—341 The Kings letter to Pope Clement the sixt The complaint reasons against prouisions froÌ„ Rome * Sup. 35. â— â— VValsingam 〈◊〉 vita Edouards 3. The humble supplication of King Edvvard to the Pope before he made his restrictioÌ„s King Edvvardes great embassage vnto the Pope King Edvvards protestation of obedience for himself and his The continâ—ance of the Popes proâ—â—â—â—â— in England VValsing in vita Ed â— an 1366. Diuers other examples The lavve of premunire Polidor hist. Angl. lib. 19. A concordate betvvene the Pope and K. Edvv. for prouisions Supra cap. â— â— 4. 1. instance 16 â— 3. 〈◊〉 excom 4. 1. Ansvvere VValsing in vita Edou 3. anno 1340. â— instance In the Raigne of Ed. 3. â— Ansvvere Snprâ— fol 9. The common lavv cannot determine vvho shall giue cure of benefices vvith spirituall authority belonging therevnto This instance maketh against M. Attorney himselfe 3. Instance 17. â— 3. 23. 20. E 3. enâ—oâ—â—â— 9.16 E. 3 tit bâ—â—u 66. 21 E. 3.6 â— H. 7. 14. Fâ—â—z Na. br 2. Ed. 3. â—â—t excom 6. 21 E. 3. 4. fol. 4. 23. E 3. l. Ass pl. 75. 27. Ed. 3. fol 84. Fitz Na. Br. fol. 34. The Ansvvere to the first second 26. 〈◊〉 King Edâ—vard did not giue Episcopal iurisdictioÌ„ Supra cap. 2. 3. The saying of the Emp. Valentin Supra cap. 4. Supra cap. 6. To the 4. Trifling obiectioÌ„s To the 5. To the sixth Supra cap. 7. M. Attorneys case plaine against himself The 4. Instance 30. E. 3. l. ass pl. 19. 32. H. 4. 16 14 H. 4. 14. 8. H. 6. fol. 3. 35. H. 6. 42. 28 H 6. 1. 7. Ed. 36 14. 11. E. 4. 16 Fitz. Na. Br. fol. 64 E. vide 9. E. 4. fol. 3. hereafter fol. 11. It ought to be determined in the Ecclesiastical Courtes of EnglaÌ„d 21. E. 3. tit excoâ— 6. 31 â— 3. tit Ayde de Roy 103. The Ansvvere Bulls from Rome not admitted except they come certifyed froÌ„ some Prelate at home Sâ—â— Sup. cap. 7. Kings are capable of ecclesiasticall iurisdiction by commission The â— Instance 38. ass pl. 30. See the stat of 15. E. t. c. 4. 31. E. â— c. 11. 38. Ass. pl. 22. 46. E. â— tit pramunure 6. 49. E. 3. l. Ass. pl. 8. The Ansvvere Some things may beloÌ„g to differeÌ„t courtes in different respects Supra in 〈◊〉 â— VVhy the Abbot of VValtam vvas seuerely punished The â— Instance The summe of the first restraint about Prouisions Stat. 25. E. 3. de prouisoribus The Ansvvere AgreemeÌ„t betvvene the King and Pope about prouisioÌ„s VValsing in vita 〈◊〉 an 1371. See S. Bernard a◠〈◊〉 â—l 2. de Consideracione ad Eugeniâ—â— Of the reasons manner of coÌ„cluding these restraints by K. E. the 3. King Edvvards restraints diminished not his devv respect to the church An. 2â— E. 3. â—tat 3. Stat. â— cap. 1. 42. E. 3. â— 1. The disordinate life of K. Edvvard the third VValsing in vita Edouardi 3. an 1340. This King raigned 12 years froÌ„ 1377. to 1399. The causes of K. Richardes disorders King Richard often confirmed the libertyes of the church The practice of Church-libertyes by Clergy-men vnder K. Richard the second Respect borne by King Richard to the true Pope 2. Rich. 2. cap. 7. King Richard obeyed the Censures of the Church VValsing an 1379. M. Attorneys Instance out of this K. Raigne The crovvne of EnglaÌ„d not subiect to any in temporalityes In vvhat sense the Bishop yelded to the statute of Premunire K. Henr. 4. raigned 13. yeares from 1399. to 1412. Stovv in Kent 4. H. â— raigned ten years from 1412. to 1422. Richard Earle of Cambridg Henry lord Scroope treasurer Edmond Earle of March c. H. 6. raigned 18 yeres from 1422. to 146â— Polidor lib. 12. Hist. Augâ— in Hen. 6. VValsing in vita Henriei 4. an 1490. English Prelates sent to the Councell of CoÌ„stance Lavves for executing of Lollard and vvicklifists First Instance 2. H. 4. fol. 9. The Ansvvere Hovv Bishops may be called the Kings spirituall Iudges Supra cap. â— 2 Instance Fitz. Nat. 〈◊〉 269. This had a resemblance to an Attainder of treason â—herin there must be first an ind4ctment by one Iurie and a conuiction â—y anâ—ther 11. H. 4. 37. The Ansâ—â—re Tvvo condemnation not euer necessary in case of hâ—resy M. Attorneys marginal note reproued In Cod. l. Manicheos l. Arriani l. Quicunque apud Paul Diacon l. 14. 16. * See cap. ad abolendum cap. excoÌ„municamus extra de haeret in 6. de heret cap. Super co 6. Decâ—et l 5. 〈◊〉 2. de liçreticis An. 1227. Decree of Pope Gregory the nynth about proceeding against heretickes Causa 15. q. 7. c. Si quia tumidus ex con 1. Carthag Hovv the Pope in old time might alter English lavves 3 Instance 1. H. 4. fol. 69. 76. 14. H. 4. f. 14. vide 20. E. 3. l. ass pl. 19. before vide 13. E. 3. Certificat 6. vide 20. H. 6. 1. 35. H. 6. 42. 7. E. 14. Fitz. Na. Br. 46. ff 14. H. 4. 14. Statut. de 2. H. 4. cap. 3. Ansvvere to the first To the second VVhence Bishops courtes haue their authority * Râ—portes fol. 8. 9. To the third The King may commaund the Bishop to doe his duty 4 To the fourth 4 Instance Stat. 6. H. 4. 1. The Ansvvere Against brybing in Rome and other like abuses The first instaâ—ce of the Attorney Stat. de 3. H. 5 cap. 4. The Ansvvere This statute maketh nothing for M. Attorney Statut. de 2. H. 5. â— 7. Lâ—llardy a â—olio For as Cockâ—e is the 〈◊〉 of the Corne so is heresie the destruction of true religion Statut. de 2. H. 5. c. 1. The Ansvvere VVhy teÌ„porall Iustices medled vvith Lollards VValsing in vita Heâ—riâ—s 5. VVhence the name of Lollards vvas taken The three conuersions of EnglaÌ„d part 2. â—ap 9. nu 31. cap. 19. num 34. 35. c. For in his booke of Acts and monuments pag. 419. â— H. 6 fol. â— 9 H. 6. fol. 16. 1 H. 6. 1â— To the first Bullâ— could not be promulgated vvithout the certificate of a Bishop To the second See Supra cap. 6. 3 to the third K. Ed. 4. raigned .12 yeres from 1460. to 1483. Syr Thom. More in â—it Richards .2 〈◊〉 â— Richard 3. raigned from 14â—3 to 1485. K Henry the seueÌ„th raigned from 1485. to 1509. to vvit 24. yeres All fovver Princes agree in our