were permitted to the people by the Apostles themselues for their comforte and encouragement but that the parties so chosen had receiued their authority spiritual iurisdiction from the Apostles themselues And the like is answered for the times ensuing wherin the Bishops did oftentimes permit the said electios to the people for their greater cōtentment consolation in those daies of persecutiō to choose nominate for their Bishop Pastor the man whom they best liked who afterward was inuested cōsecrated by the said Bishops notwithstāding tooke his iurisdiction and spirituall power from them to whom properly that power and authoritie belonged to ordaine both Bishops and Priests as we see the Apostles themselues did euerie where and gaue the like authoritie to others ordained by them As we read that S. Paul hauing made Titus Bishop of Creta gaue him order also to ordaine vt cōstituas per ciuitates presbyteros sicut ego disposui tibi That thou ordaine Priests for Citties as I haue appointed thee 9. The Catholickes for their groūd haue this That Bishops only Priests were made spirituall gouernous of Christs Church by Christ himself and so continued vader Infidel Emperours for three hundered yeares togeather vntill the time of Constantine the great that was first conuerted as afterward more largely will be shewed in due place and that this authoritie is to continue in lawfull succession of Bishops by ordination and imposition of hands vntill the worlds end And that neither temporall Prince can haue this except he be also Priest and receiued it by the same ordinary way of ordination and succession whereof Q. Elizabeth was not capable and much lesse the common people except only by permission to elect and nominate as hath byn said wherof ensueth that if they haue not this spirituall authority in themselues much lesse can they giue it to others And thus according to the Catholickes iudgment doe faile the grounds both of the Protestant and Puritan in this great affaire and failing in this doe faile in all the rest for that of this dependeth all as before hath byn said 10. For if in their Religions there be no true authoritie spirituall or iurisdiction deriued by ordinarie means and succession from Christ then are they awry in all nor haue they any true authority to preach administer Sacraments absolue or bind from sinnes iudge of doctrine determine or decree of any spirituall action whatsoeuer nor are they within the compasse of Christs Church or state of saluation as by necessarie consequence doth ensue and the like of the Catholickes if they in this point be amisse 11. And herby we may see the importance now of this controuersie between M. Attorney and me as also their shallow vnderstāding if they speake as they thinke or rather malicious folly if they doe not who affirme euery where in their bookes against Catholickes that Protestants and Puritanes are but onlie iarring-brethren and reconcilable between themselues and that their differences are not in principall points of Religion but in certaine lesser things and ceremonies For that this being indeed not onlie so substantiall a point of doctrine as before you haue heard but containing also the whole second part of Religion before mentioned to wit all that belongeth to power authoritie gouernement and iurisdiction by which Religion hath her life vertue force and efficacy It is easily seen how vaine and false or rather ridiculous and pernicious the other assertion is and if we well enter into the examination of particulars we shall easilie see the same 12. For suppose for examples sake that the Protestants ground be true that all spirituall iurisdiction force and efficacie therof came vnto their Church in Queene Elizabeths time by her and from her out of the Right of her Crowne that the Puritanes ground be false who pretend the same from the people I meane from their owne Congregations Classes Presbyteries for no other gaue it them what followeth of all this No doubt it must needs follow by manifest consequence of truth that the Puritanes haue no authoritie or spirituall iurisdiction in the Church of God at all nor are lawfull Pastors but vsurpers and intruders and that they entred not by the doore as Christ saith but by other means that is to saie not by the ordinarie doore of lawfull vocation ordination and succession of Priesthood Of which doore the Apostle S. Paul made such high accompt as hauing set downe that vninersal proposition to the Hebrews Nec quisquam sumit sibi honorem sed qui vocatur a Deo tanquam Aâron That no man taketh vnto him the honour of being a Bishop or Priest but he that is called by God therevnto as Aâron was in the old law After this I saie he passeth on to proue that Christ himself the sonne of God tooke not this honour of high Priesthood vpon him but by the publike testimonie of his said Fathers vocation set downe by the Prophet Dauid manie hundred years before he was borne Tu es sacerdos in aeternum secūdum ordinem Melchisedech Thou art a Priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech and not of Aâron And according to this high order of Melchisedech that was both King and Priest and whose sacrifice was not of beasts and birds as those of Aâron but of bread and wyne onlie to prefigurate the most pure and holie sacrifice that Christian Priests were to offer afterward to the worldes end of the body and bloud of Christ in like formes of bread and wyne as all ancient Fathers doe expound it Of this order I say Christ being high Priest made all his Apostles Priests and they others after them and they others againe by the ordinarie way of ordination imposition of hands and succession which hath endured from their time to ours and shall from ours vntill the day of iudgement 13. And this ordinarie doore so called by Christ our Sauiour of entring into spirituall authoritie and iurisdiction ouer his flocke is of such high esteeme and importance that as the first generall doore wherby a man must enter to be a sheep in the said flocke to wit Baptisme is a Sacrament not reiterable and so absolutelie necessarie as no man can enter by any other way so likwise this other particuler doore of entring into Prelacie or Pastor-shipp ouer Christs flocke was ordayned a Sacrament by our Sauiour no lesse necessarie for distinguishing theeues robbers and intruders from true and lawfull Pastors to vse our Sauiours similitude then the other of Baptisme to distinguish sheep from wolues and Christs flocke from Infidells and others of the Synagoge of Satan 14. And now in all this which we haue spoken by occasion of the Puritanes pretence to enter into spirituall gouerment ouer Christs flocke by voice and choise of their owne people we doe not much differ from their Maister and Doctor Iohn Caluin who confesseth that this
And as for Ecclesiasticall Constitutions to this effect made as well by generall Councells as particular Popes euen downe from the primitiue Church sufficient testimonies or rather aboundant are extant and may be seen collected togeather by Gratian and others in the sixt Booke of Decretalls especially out of two Lateran Generall Councells and manie other particular decrees Laws and Ordinances Ecclesiasticall tending to this purpose And many ages before this the same exemptions be recorded especially for the immunitie of their persons from secular power and tribunals as in the Councel of Calcedon and 9. Canon The Councel Agathense and 32. Canon and the third Councel of Carthage wherin S. Augustine himself was present and diuerse other Councels 37. And there doe not want many learned deuines who are of opinion that this exemption of Ecclesiastical persons and their goods is not onlie Iuris humani Ecclesiastici by positiue and humane Ecclesiasticall laws But Iuris diuini also that is to saie by right of diuine law in a certaine sorte which is thus to bee vnderstood That albeit God hath not expreslie commaunded it in the written law of Scripture yet is it conforme both to the law of nature which is also Gods law as likewise it may be deduced inferred from exaÌ„ples recorded in Scripture vnder the old TestameÌ„t that God would haue this honour of exemption and immunitie in temporall things to be exhibited to his Cleargy And therfore we doe reade in Genesis that Ioseph the Patriarch in the law of Nature did exempt the Priests of the Egyptians from all temporall tributes And in the bookes of Esdras we read that Artaxerxes King of the Persians out of the same law of Nature did make free also the Priests of Israell And that the very Gentiles did the same to their Priests out of the same law and instinct of Nature is euident out of Aristotle in his second booke Oeconomicorum And of Caesar in his sixt booke De bello Gallico And out of Plutarch in the life of Camillus and other Pagan writers And in the written law we read as well in Exodus as in the booke of Numbers That God did often affirme that he would haue the order of Leuites to be his and to be freelie giuen and made subiect onlie to Aaron their high Priest and to paye no tribute Out of which is inferred that if God in the law of Nature and of Moyses would haue Priests and Leuites to be free in their persons goods from temporall exactions much more may it be presumed that he will haue it so in the new Law of the Ghospel where to vse the words of S. Leo. Et Ordo clarior Leuitarum dignit as amplior seniorum sacratior vnctio sacerdotum c. The order of Leuites is more eminent and the dignitie of elders more excellent and the annointing of Priests more sacred and holy among Christians then they were among the Iewes And thus much of Ecclesiasticall Laws for exemption of the Cleargie 38. But now vpon the very self same Considerations temporall Princes also comming to be Christians did voluntarily consume establish by their politicall laws the same exemptions as first of all our first Christian Emperour Constantine the Greate as soone as he came to receiue that Grace and light of the ghospell did vpon his singular deuotion make al the Ecclesiastical persons immunes à communibus Reipublicae oneribus Free from al publicke charges and burthens of the Common-wealth which laye men did vnder goe as by his epistle sett downe by Eusebius is cleere And the same example did other Christian Emperours follow after him as may appeere by diuers laws as well in the Code of Theedosius as also of Iustinian And the same doth S. Hiâ—rome signifie to haue been in vse in his daies and S. Ambrose also in his so much as appertaineth to the freedome of their persons though for their lands and possessions he saith Agri Ecclesiae solnâ—nt tributum That the lands of the Church did paie a certaine tribute at that tyme which may be vnderstood in the respect of the Emperours publicke necessitie through warrs vpon which or like due coÌ„siderations Clergie men haue all waies been ready and ought to be to contribute willinglie and gratefully according to their abilities towards the publike charges of their temporall Princes affaires notwithstanding their exemptions by law and iustice 39. Particular Kings and Princes in like manner vpon their deuotions and to the imitation of their foresaid good Emperours haue by their particular lawes in euery Christian countrey confirmed the franquises freedomes and immunities of the Church and Cleargie and perhaps in no one nation morâ— throughout Christendome than in our English Realme whether we consider times either before the Conquest or after And before the Conquest it may be seen by the collectioÌ„ of old English lawes of euery Kingdome sett forth by K. Edgar and K. Edward the Confessor and after the Conquest by the Coâ—querour himseâ— as after shall be shewed And after him againe by the very first Statutes that are extant in Print namelie from the great Charter made by K. Henry the third in the 9. yeare of his Raigne and the articles of the Cleargie established in the 9. yeare of K. Edward the second in the fauour of the said Cleargie the said great Charter being reiterated and ratified in most of the insuing Parlaments for authorizing and establishinge the foresaid exemptions and priuiledges of Clergie-men which were from time to time by al our Kings confirmed as afterward shall more largely and perticularly be proued vntill the later times of K. Henry the eight 40. Now then matters standing thus and the Church in euery countrey throughout Christendome being in possession of these liberties freedomes and immunities for their persons and goods and acknowledging for their supreame superiour in Spirituall Power and Iurisdiction the Bishop of Rome and their temporall Kings in Ciuill and temporall matters there grew in processe of time many difficulties and entanglements about the execution and subordination of these two Iurisdictions Temporall and Spiritual the one to th' other sometimes by abuse passioÌ„ or indiscretioÌ„ of some vnder-officers of these two supreame powers tribunals within our land ech side seeking to incroach vpon the other or at leastwise not to be content with their owne limits For as between the spirit and flesh in this life to vse againe S. Gregorie Nazianzens similitude there is some continuall strife and struglinge so hath it been allwayes in a certaine sorte between these two powers of Spirituall and Temporall Iurisdiction or at leastwise in the exercise therof especially as riches temporalityes grew more in the Clergie and therby gaue matter of enuy and emulation and lesse deuotion to the laytie towards them in so much that at length for auoidinge worse inconueniences limitations conditions concordates and transactions were made
and brought into vse how far the execution of ech parties authoritie should be extēded in certaine inferiour things that might seeme either mixt or doubtful as by many examples both in France Spaine Sicily Naples Flaunders England and other countreys may be declared Whervpon notwithstanding daylie wee see sundry difficulties sutes and controuersies to arise 41. Some States also and Catholike Kingdomes haue made certaine Decrees or Restraints at sometimes de facto whether rightfully or noe I will not now dispute for preuentinge and remedyinge some pretended inconueniences in the exercise of certaine points of the Popes Authority within their said Realmes Some other also pretend to haue done the same with indult consent transaction or conuiuency of the Pope himself But none of all these which is the mayne pointe did euer deny or call in question the said Authoritie it self as after shall appeare but rather did many wayes acknowledge and confesse the same and of this kind of Restrictions or Interpretations are the most part of these few peeces of Decrees and Statutes Customes Laws or Ordinances that M. Attorney doth alleadge which make nothing at all for the proofe of his mayne question that our English Kings before and after the Conquest did take vpon themselues supreame Spirituall Authoritie as deriued from the Right of their Crowne nay rather they make fully against him for that the very manner of making these restraintes first by way of supplication to the Popes themselues as after shall be shewed and then by domesticall ordinances doth well declare what opinion the said Princes had of that power to be in the said Popes not in themselues And this is so much as needeth to be said in this place for a generall light to the whole matter Now shall we passe ouer to treat of the particular occasion wherevpon M. Attorney thought good to ground his whole discourse of Q. Elizabethes Ecclesiasticall Authoritie as presently shall be declared THE PARTICVLAR STATE OF THE CONTROVERSY VVith M. Attorney concerning the late Queens Ecclesiasticall Povver by the auncient laws of England deduced out of the case of one Robert Caudery Clerke CHAP. III. MAister Attorney for preamble or entrance to his designed Argument against recusant Catholicks for that to be his purpose the end of his booke declareth he setteth down a pittifull case of one Robert Caudery Clerke depriued of his benefice or parsonage of North-looffennam in Ruland-shire by the Bishop of London as high Commissioner with consent of some of his associates authorized in Causes Ecclesiastical by a Commission of the late Queene graunted by her letters Patents the nynth day of December in the 26. yeare of her Raigne I doe call the case pittifull not so much in respect of the poore man depriued and vexed as after shall appeare but much more of the publike partiality appearing to haue been vsed against him by sway of the tyme and by such men as occupied the place of Iustice. You shall heare how the Case passed and iudge therof your selues 2. This Caudery in the Terme of S. Hilary saith M. Attorney in the 33. yeare of the raigne of Q. Elizabeth brought an action of trespasse against one George Atton for breaking of his cloase in North-looffennam aforesaide vpon the 7. day of August in the 31. yeare of the said Q. But Atton pleaded not guyltie and the Iurie found that the said Cauderie had been depriued of that benefice in parte wherof the Cloase was broken by a sentence of the said Bishop of London Cum assensu A. B. C. D. c. Collegerum suorum For that he had preached against the Booke of Common-praier and refused to celebrate diuine seruice according to the same 3. Heerupon it came in question how and by what Authoritie the said Bishop of London had giuen his sentence either rightfully or wrongfully And first it was alleadged by Cauderyes Coūsell that the Authoritie of commission giuen to him to witt to the forenamed Bishop of London and certaine others his Colleags by the foresaid Q. Elizabeths letters Patents was only founded vpon a Statute made in the first yeare of her Raigne by which it was enacted That such Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall as by anie spirituall or Ecclesiasticall power hath heertofore been or may lawfully be exercised for the visitation of the Ecclesiasticall estate and persons and for the reformation order and correction of the same and of all manner of errours heresies schismes abuses offences contempts and enormities within this Realme should for euer be vnited and annexed to the Imperiall Crowne of this Realme And that her highnes her heyrs and Successors should haue full power and Authoritie by vertue of that Act by letters Patents vnder the great Seale of England to assigne nominate and authorize such persons being natural borne subiects as her Highnes her heirs or Successours should thinke meet to exercise and execute vnder her highnes her heyrs and successours all and all manner of Iurisdiction Priuiledges and Preheminences in anie wise touching or concerning anie spirituall or Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction within this Realme of England and Ireland And to visite reforme redresse order correct and amend all such errours heresies schismes abuses offenses contempts and enormities whatsoeuer which by anie manner of spirituall or Ecclesiasticall Power Authoritie or Iurisdiction can or may lawfully be reformed ordered corrected and amended c. 4. This was the ground wherby both the Queene was indued as you see with all manner of Ecclesiasticall power and Iurisdiction and had authoritie also giuen her to bestow the same vpon others without anie other condition heere expressed but onlie that they should be naturall borne subiects So as if it had pleased her Maiestie to haue bestowed a Commission vpon so many Ladies of the Courte to visit some parte of the Cleargie or Laitie to redresse their errours heresies abuses or other enormities or insteed of the Bishops named by her she had thought good to nominate their wiues for high commissioners ouer them to reforme order redresse correct or amend abuses I see not by the words of the Statute why it had not been lawfull For so much as there is no exception of sex therin And as well might the Queene haue made women her substitutes in this point as this Statute gaue all the power in capite to her self being a woman I would aske moreouer that wheras K. Henry the eight when he was made head of the Church appointed for his Vicar-Generall in Spiritualibus the Lord Cromwell that was a meere lay man and caused him to sit aboue all the Bishops in Synods and Councels about Ecclesiasticall affaires why his daughter Q. Elizabeth that had the same authoritie that he had might not haue appointed my Lady Cromwell or anie such other Ladie of that sex wherof there were diuerse that professed good skill in diuinitie at the beginning of her Reigne for her Vicaresse-Generall in Ecclesiasticall affaires Nay why the feminne sex
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
proued For that he that giueth a power to an other is presupposed to haue it first in himself for that no man can giue that which himself hath not so as if Q. Elizabeth did giue any spirituall Iurisdiction to her Bishops to teach preach make Ministers absolute loose sinnes and the like who otherwise could haue no such authoritie at all she might no doubt haue exercised the same in her owne person as in all temporall Iurisdiction we see that whatsoeuer power the King giueth to any Gouernour Iudge or Magistrate to exercise in his name he may exercise the same also him self if he wil. And the same holdeth in the Pope for any spirituall Iurisdiction or function that he committeth to any Bishop Priest or Clerk whatsoeuer 42. A third reason is taken ab inconueniente to wit from this inconuenience that if a Queene could be spirituall head of the Church and should marry without making hir husband King she should be his spirituall head also to loose and bind his sinnes and to exercise Ecclesiasticall Censures of Iurisdiction Suspension or Excommunication against him at her pleasure and he for his part should be bound in conscience vnder payne of sinne to heare and follow her doctrine if at any time she list to preach vnto him or to prescribe what he must beleeue or not beleeue in matters of faith which besides that it should be contrary to that we haue alleadged before out of S. Paul and Christ his Institution for the subiection of women in these causes it would be very absurd and ridiculous also as you see and vnworthie of the excellent gouerment of Christ his Church instituted and framed by the highest wisdome of almighty God 43. Wherfore lastly to shutt vp this matter after all these proofes alleadged we shall adioyne one only more which howsoeuer it be esteemed of vs yet ought it to be of singular great moment with M. Attorney and this is the vniuersall agreement of all Protestants both of Caluin Luthers sect commonly throughout the world except only in England And as for Caluinists the matter is cleere if we respect France Germany Holland Zeland Scotland and other places who all agree in this point following therin their first Author Iohn Caluin who not only in the place by me alleadged vpoÌ„ Amos the prophet but in diuers other places also of his workes doth earnestly impugne not only this Ecclesiasticall power of a woman but of any temporall Magistrate whatsoeuer affirming further in a certayne epistle of his to his freind Myconius that those who defend the same are prophane spirits and mad-men and that the Lord with the breath of his mouth shall destroy them and that both he and his would encounter and fight against them with a valiant and inuincible Zeale c. Of the same opinion and spirit was Theodore Beza the cheife scholer and successour of Caluin in his chayre of Geneua as appeareth by his writings and another chiefe scoller and companion of them both named Viretus in his dialogue intituled Of white Diuells calling them false Christians and dissembled diuells that defend this false position of Princes Ecclesiasticall Supremacy though they couer them selues saith he with the cloake of the Ghospell and then setteth he downe foure or fiue arguments to proue the position to be false which I pretermitt to recite in this place for breuities sake remitting the Reader to the booke it self for that it is exstant in English And I doe passe ouer the writings of many other principall men of that profession both in England and abroad who in this point are no lesse opposite and earnest against M. Attorney that we and are knowne in England by the name of Puritanes or precise Caluinists who being the farre greater parte if we respect all Countreyes about vs must needs in this point be confessed to haue more reason the thing being affirmed so earnestly as you haue heard by Caluin himself than the other of that sect who for pleasing of teÌ„porall princes are accused by them to hold the contrary For that if Iohn Caluin be to be followed in all the rest as they confesse why not also in this And if the holy-ghost fayled him in this so important a point as comprehendeth the whole gouerment of their Church and the lawfull or vnlawfull vocation and function of their whole Ministerie what certaintie can they haue in any other thinge or point of his doctrine 44. But now not only those of the Caluinian sect but others also of the Lutheranes doe laugh at our English Protestants for holding this position of M. Attorney about Queene Elizabeths Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall Supremacie wherin not to weary the Reader which enumeration of many witnesses I shall alleadg only one for all but yet such a one as may well stand for all For that he is the most eminent and principall man of them all to vvitt Martâ—nus Keronitius an ancient publike Reader of diuinity among the Lutherane Sect in Saxony that hath written many volumes for defence of the said sect in our dayes 45. This man then being consulted and demaunded his opinion by the Prince Elector of Brandeburg what was to be done in certaine points concerning those of the Caluinian sect he answereth him in a large epistle extant in print allowing first and greatly praysing the Princes iudgment Quod consultum non esse iudicat vt cum Caluinistis Generalis Synodus habeatur That his Highnes thought it not expedient to hold any generall Synode with the Caluinists as they desired for composing of Controuersyes betweene Lutherans and them 46. Secondly he addeth his owne iudgment vnto that of the Prince Elector about punishing the said Caluinists within his State affirming Non expedire vt punitionis officium contrae Caluinistas intereà temporis penitus quiescat It was not expedient that the office of punishing Caluinists should cease in the meane space vntill the said generall Synode were held as they demaunded 47. Thirdly and lastly hauing resolued these two points he passeth ouer to giue his iudgment in like manner to the said Elector about the Religion held in England and of Q. Elizabeth her self and her title of supremacy saying first that no good thing in Religion was further to be expected from her that she had vsed hardly the Protestants of Germany that she saw and felt noâ— a third sect risen vp in her Realme of Puritanes that hated both her and the other Caluinians that followed her who were enimies in like manner to Lutherans So he And then passing yet further he scoffeth merily that she being a woman had taken vpon her to make Ecclesiasticall lawes Et quòd faemineo à saeculis inaudito fastu se Papissam caput Ecclesia fecit That with a womanly pride neuer heard of in former ages she had made herself a She-pope head of the Church Thus Kemnitius And marke that he saith à saeculu inaudito
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
certaine and the last euidently false For neither doth it appeare by the words of the Charter that the King did exempt the said Abbot from all Iurisdiction spirituall of the Bishop but rather of some temporall interest or pretense that the Bishop of that Diocesse might haue or pretend to haue in those daies Nor doth he seeme to haue giuen Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction to the Abbot but rather temporall concerning controuersies that might arise about the lands of the lordship of Culnam wherof he had made donation to the said monastery And thirdly howsoeuer this might bee the third point and cheife conclusion is false that he either gaue or tooke away Iurisdiction by his owne power deriued from his temporall crowne for this was impossible as before in the second Chapter of this answere hath been shewed but rather by some spirituall Iurisdiction cōmitted vnto him by some other higher Ecclesiasticall power either of his Bishops gathered togeather in Parlament or Synod or of the Bishop of Rome himself all which three points wee shall breiflie here shew and therby conclude that M. Attorney his inference sett out with a Nota in the margent is worth no note at all but onlie of weaknes and impertinencie 6. For first to begin with the second it doth not appeare by the words of this Charter that the King did graunte to the same Abbot Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction within his said Abbey but only that in all euents and discussions of causes or controuersies arising about the foresaid Lordship of Culnam giuen vnto the said monasterie the Tenants therof should stande to the Decree of the said Abbot and not haue recourse to the Bishop of the Diocesse who before perhaps pretended temporall Iurisdiction ouer them or at least-wise ouer that Lordship of Culnam And this coniecture is greatlie confirmed by a Canon of a Nationall Synod held in Hereford almost a hundered yeares before this vnder Theodorus Archbishop of Canterbury the 24. of September Anno Christi 670. and related by S. Bede where the third Canon of the Councell decreeth thus Vt Quacunque monasteria c. That all monasteries consecrated to God noe Bishop hath authoritie to inquiet them nor violentlie to take from them any thing of their goods c. wherby appeareth that some Bishops in those daies did pretend also temporall Iurisdiction ouer monasteries and their goodes which heer K. Kenulfus would preuent in this his monasterie to which he gaue his Lordshipp 7. And by this also the other point is confirmed that it doth not appeare by the force of these words that the Abbot was exempted from all spirituall Iurisdiction of the Bishop by this Charter of the King though otherwise by some priuiledge of the Pope I doubt not but he was it being a thing common lightly to all Abbots for he saith only Abomni Episcopali Iure from all right of the Bishop and not Iurisdiction which might be meant as hath been said of some temporall right pretended ouer that Lordship and was found now not to be iust or for that the said Bishop in Parlamēt or otherwise for M. Attorney holdeth that all this was done in Parlament had renounced his temporall right therin which before hee pretended to haue or that the King made this declaration of the monasteries exemption for he seemeth rather to haue declared what was done or graunted then to ordaine it himself by force of the foresaid Synodicall Decree of the Ecclesiasticall Councell before mentioned 8. And truly that the words of this Charter doe seeme rather to meane temporall then spirituall Iurisdiction in this place though I doubt not as I said but that they were exempted in the one and in the other by the priuiledges of the Sea Apostolike accustomed in such cases that which ensueth in the said Charter doth much confirme to witt that the Abbot should be quiet from the Bishops right and that the inhabitants from thence-forward should not be depressed by the Yoke of the Bishops officers Which importeth as much as that they had byn vniustly disquietted depressed before the same noe way seeming fittly to agree to be spoken of Bishops Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction and consequently it is not improbable that only temporall Iurisdiction is heere talked of and so neither spirituall Iurisdiction taken from the Bishop nor giuen to the Abbot by the King in his Charter 9. But howsoeuer this were or may bee most certaine it is that M. Attorney his inference and conclusion is manifestly false to witt that it vvas deriued from his Crowne For albeit it were euident that the meaning heere were of spirituall Iurisdiction yet might the King haue that power to giue the exemption which he did to the monastery either from the Bishops gathered togeather now in the Parlament or before in Synod as hath been said renouncing all their Iurisdictiō therin or he might haue it from the Pope which is most likely for that all such priuiledges and exemptions were demaunded in those dayes at his hands by Princes and founders of pious workes And the said Popes made ordinary graunts therof as in our dayes also they doe and this is different sorte and manners For that sometimes they graunted the same immediatly as from themselues sometimes they gaue comission to Princes to giue it in their names and some other times they confirmed that which Princes had done before in this kinde vnder ratihabition or future allowance or ratification by the Sea Apostolike 10. And of all these three sorts many examples might be alleadged but that I shall haue occasion againe in the next Chapter to treate more largly of these points where I shall shew that in this very time when Kenulfus liued his neighbour King Ossa of the Mercians demaunding the Canonization of S. Alban the Protomartyr of England at the hands of Adrian the Pope as also that he might build a Monastery in the place where he was martyred and this as Parisiensis saith Ab omni Episcoporum subiectione emancipandum To be free and exempted from all subiection of Bishops the Pope graunted both his demaunds answering him thus as the same author recordeth VVe doe most willingly giue our cōsent to your petition for building of a monastery and doe priuiledge the same and vvhen you haue made your Charter or priuiledge vvee shall afterwards confirme strengthen your Originall vvith ours and exempt that monastery from all iurisdiction both of Bishops and Archbishops subiecting it immediatly vnto our Apostolike Sea So hee Wherby we see that a temporall King and founder of a monastery or other pious worke might giue priuiledges either by commission or vnder ratihabition as before hath been said 11. The like examples we finde in the liues of King Edgar and S. Edward the Confessor and many others that demaunded obteined confirmation and exemptions for pious works erected by them of the Popes of their times But for that these examples will be more fittly produced in the sequent
reliques to witt of S. Peter and of S. Paul S. Laurence S. Iohn S. Pancratius and S. Gregory and vnto your Queene our spirituall daughter we haue sent a crosse and golden key hauing in it some parcells of the sacred chaines wherwith the Apostlds S. Peter and S. Paul were bound 25. Thus wrote the Pope at that tyme not being able to giue them an Archbishop fitt for the present but afterwards saith Bede he being very carefull therof and enquiring amongst learned men whome he might choose he first cast his eye vpon one Adrian an Abbott of a monastery neere vnto Naples which Adrian was by natioÌ„ an African but very skillfull in the Latin Greeke tongue well instructed as well in Monasticall as in Ecclesiasticall functions But this man flying the dignity of Archbishop named vnto the Pope one Theodorus a Monke borne in Tharsus of Cilicia as S. Paul th'Apostle also was a man of excelleÌ„t learnâ—â—â— and vertue whome Pope Vitalianus commaunded to take the charge vpon him of being Archbishop of Canterbury and Metropolitan of the English Church which thinge he refusinge for a tyme yet at length accepted it with condition that the forsaid Adrian should goe thither with him and so he was consecrated and sent with authority to create other Bishops thorough-out England as he did He arriued there vpon the yeare 669. and waâ— ioyfully receaued by the foresaid Kings and Christian people liued twenty yeares in that sea Neither were there euer saith Bede after the English-mens arryuall into Britany more happy tymes then these when our nation had most valiant Christian Kings that were a terrour to barbarous nations and when all men desires were enflamed with the loue of Christes heauenly ioyes lately reuealed vnto them so as whosoeuer had desire to be instructed in sacred doctrine had maisters ready to instruct them by the diligence of this new Archbishop and not only this but all English Churches also began now by the industry of the Abbot Adrian to learne the tune of singing in the Church throughout the realme which before was only in Kent c. Theodorus also visiting the whole Realme ordeined Bishops in all opportune places and whersoeuer he found any thing not perfect he by their helpes did correct the same Hitherto are the words of S. Bede of this our Christian primitiue Church 26. And all this now is within the first hundred yeres therof when it was most happy feruent and deuoute by S. Bedes iudgement but much more remaineth to be said of the same if I would consider euery particuler Kingdome and what passed therin this first age But if I should passe downe with like search through the other foure hundred yeares that doe ensue befoâ—e the Conquest I should not be able to conteyne my self within the compasse of this booke and much lesse of one Chapter and of one only argument or Demonstration therof For that euery where during this tyme we shall find that all our Christian Kings in all spiritual matters appertaining to Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction made their recourse to Rome or to the Archbishopâ— or Bishops of England as subordinate or authorized from thâ—â— Sea nor euer did they by act worde deed or decree signifie that they thought to haue Ecclesiasticall power or iurisdiction to dispose of those affaires themselues except perhaps some tymes and of some things by commission from the other 27. Let amongst others the wise and renowned King Edgar the first publicke author of English lawes be an example who hauing in hand a most important consultation how to reforme the liues of Clergie men of this realme but especially of certaine secular Priests in those daies procured first that S. Dunstan the Archbishop of Canterbury should call a Synode about the same who resoluing that the best meanes would be to put in religious men to witt Monkes into euery Cathedrall Church in place of the other that liued disorderly the King tooke not vpon him to doe it himself by his owne kingly authority or to giue commission to any of the said Bishops to doe the same but made his recourse to Rome to Pope Iohn the 13. praying him to authorize the two holy Bishops of VVinchester VVorcester to wit S. Ethelwold and Oswald to make this reformation which he would neuer haue done if he had thought that by his owne Kinglie power descending from his Crowne it had belonged to himself or that his Parlament might haue giuen him the said authority of visiting and reforming altering and disposing as it did to Q. Elizabeth 28. And this may be shewed from one to one in all this time throughout the raignes of aboue an hundred Christian Kings before the Conquest as hath byn sayd if the breuity of this place did permitt me to prosecute the same And my aduersary is not able to shew me one instance out of all this time truly sincerly alleadged to the contrary in this I chalenge him if he thinke himself able to answere me And so shall I passe to the fourth argument if first I recite one example more out of the second age after our conuersion for it is of eminent circumstance and declareth fully what was the sense of our Kings and their nobilitie and Clergie in those dayes 29. Next after K. Ethelbald who was the fifth Christian King of the Mercians and to whome S. Bonifacius called VVinfred before martyr Apostle of Germany wrote so sharpely to amend his life as in all our English histories is to be seene there succeded K. Offa who did great matters in his dayes and as Malmesbury writeth had both great vices and great vertues and among other things he bearing a grudge to the people of Canterbury and to their Archbishop Lambert he pretended to seperate from the obedience of that Sea all the Bishops and Bishoprickes that were within the Kingdome of Mercia which were the greaâ—er 〈◊〉 of the Suffraganes of that Sea and to procure them by the consent and authority of Pope Adrian to be subiect to the bishop oâ— LICHFIELD as to the chief Metropolitan of his dominionâ— and so many reasons he alleadged and vrged for the same togeather with his might and power that the said Pope Adrian as after you shall heare began to yeld somewhat to his demaund notwithstanding the often appellations of the said Archbishop Lambert but Pope Adrian dying Leo the third being chosen in his place Offa dyed in like manner soone after as also the Archbishop Lambert in Offa his place succeded Kenulphus a most noble King and to the Sea of Canterbury for Lambert was chosâ—â— Athelardus that had byn Bishop of VVinchester before one of the rarest men if we beleeue famous Alcuine maister to Charles the Great that euer our nation bred 30. This Archbishop then hauing made his appeale also to Rome as his predecessour had done for recouering the ancient honours and
like togeather Relictis vxoribus agris cognatis patria propter Christum c. ad limina Apostolorum in precibus ieiunijs elecmosynis vsque ad diem vltimum permanserunt They leauing their wyues their possessions their kynred their countrey for Christ went to Rome and there neere vnto the Apostles bodyes they perseuered in praying fasting and giuing almes vnto the end of their liues 78. But S. Bede setteth forth this famous fact in other words describing also the persons of these two noble Kings Kenredus saith he who for a tyme had most nobly gouerned the Kingdome of the Mercians did much more nobly leaue the same giuing ouer his scepter willingly to his nephew Celred and went to Rome where he liued in prayer fasting and almes vntill the last day of his life And with him went Offa the sonne of Sigard King of the East-saxons Iuuenis amantissima aetatis venustatis c. a young man of a most louely age and beauty and most singularly desired by all his nation that he would stay amongst them enioy his Kigdome but he being led with the deuotion of his mynd left his wife his possessions his kynred and countrey for Christ and his ghospell that he might receaue a hundred fold in this life and in the world to come life euerlasting Thus S. Bede who was of a far different mynd from M. Attorney as you see 79. And Florentius addeth further to this history that with these two Kings went to Rome as ghostly father and spirituall directour of their iourney the famous holy man S. Egwyn before mentioned third Bishop of VVorcester and founder of the Monastery of Euesham for which he obteyned priuiledges and exemptions of Pope Constantine then Bishops of Rome and carried them home with him as before hath byn declared And Platina in the life of the same Constantine maketh mention also of the coming to Rome of these two Kings and what a rare spoctacle of vertue and deuotion it was to the whole Christian world to see two such excellent Princes in their youth and beginnings of their raignes to take such a rare resolution of leauing the world and following Christ in the strait and narrow path of perfection 80. As it was in like manner some twenty yeres after according to the forsaid Florentius to see the great and potent King Inas of the VVest-saxons to come thither with like resolution of mind who hauing byn a famous warrier for the space of seuen and thirty yeres in the end leauing his Empyre saith Florentius and commending the same to noble Athelard that was of the line of Cerdicus first King of VVest-saxons he resolued to goe to the Churches of the Apostles in Rome vnder Gregory the Pope and there to end his life and this worldly peregrination on earth neere to their bodyes to the end that he might the more familiarly in heauen be receaued into their companyes So he 81. But Malmesbury expresseth the same in more pregnant effectuall words after his sort Post triumphales bellorum manubias post multarum virtutum gradus summum culmen perfâ—ctionis meditans Romam abijt Ibi ne pompam suae conuersionis faceret non publicis vultibus expositus crimen sed deposuit vt solius Domini oculis placeret amictu plebeio tectus clà m consenuit After triumphant victoryes and spoyles of warre after the degrees of many vertues obteyned King Inas proposing to himself the highest toppe of perfection went to Rome and there least his conuersion might be glorious vnto him he did his penaunce or layd downe his synnes not in the pâ—â—blike eyes of the world but rather desiring to please only the eyes of almighty God he put himself into a vulgar habit and â—â— that he ended his life So Malmesbury 82. All which in effect was set downe before by S. Bede who calleth this Inas by the name of Hun that succeeded King Ceadwalla in the Kingdome of VVest-saxons who after thirty seuen yeres raigne Relicto regno ad limina Beatorum Apostolorum Gregorio Pontificatum tenente profectus est cupiens in vicinia locorum sanctorum c. He leauing his Kingdome went to Rome vnder the Popedome of Gregory desiring to liue and dy vpon earth neere to the Apostles Churches to the end he might enioy the better afterward their familiarity in heauen 83. And a little before this man againe his said predecessour Ceadwâ—lla tooke the like iourney to Rome for deuotion of the place being vet vnbaptized as S. Bede writeth the story in these words Ceadwalla King of the VVest saxons when he had gouerned his people with great fortitude for two yeres leauing his scepter for Christ and his euerlasting Kingdome went to Rome desiring to obteyne this singular glory to be baptized in the Church of the blessed Apostles in which baptisme he had learned that the only entraunce to heauen for mankind did consist hoping most certeinly that being once baptized he should soone after dye and be receaued into euerlasting glory both which points by the help of our Lord were perfourmed vnto him as in his mynd he had conceaued and so comming thither vpon the yere of Christ 689. Sergius being Pope he was baptized on Easter eue and soone after being yet in his white attyre according to the custome of holy Church he died vpon the 19. of Aprill immediattly ensuing and was buried in S. Peters Church whose name in baptisme he had taken and from thence his soule passed to the ioyes of heauen Thus S. Bede and touching this recourse pilgrimage to Rome he addeth in the same place Quod his temporibâ—s hoc idem plures de gente Anglorum nobiles ignobilesque laici clerici viri faeminae certatim facere consueuerunt that in these times many of the English nation both noble vulgar lay men Ecclesiasticall men and women were accustomed to doe the same with great feruour 84. Wherfore out of all these considerations and the like it seemeth we may deduce that for so much as our English Kings and people in those dayes were so singularly deuoted vnto the Sea of Rome and Bishops therof as they gaue themselues their goods their honours their whole life therunto it is not likely that they had that conceit of Rome then as we haue now or that they liued in iealosie or competency of Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction with the same or thought themselues iniured by the spirituall power which the said Sea did vse and practise ouer England and other Kingdomes of the world in those times And much lesse can it be presumed that they challenged to themselues or made lawes in those dayes in fauour of their owne Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in restraint of that of the Popes and consequently M. Attorney I trow will hardly proue by the most ancient lawes of those times that Q. Elizabeth could iustify the supreme Ecclesiasticall authority which she
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
out of King Henry which shall goe in this owne words as before we haue accustomed The Attorney In all the time of K. Henry the third and his progenitours Kings of England and ouer sithence if any man doe sue afore any Iudge Ecclesiasticall within this Realme for any thing wherof that court by allowance and custome had not lawfull Conusaunce the King did euer by his writ vnder the great seale prohibite them to proceed And if the suggestion made to the King whervpon the prohibition was grounded were after found vntrue then the King by his writ of consultation vnder his great seale did allow and permit them to proceed Also in all the raigne of Henry the third and his progenitours Kings of England and euer sithence if any issue were ioyned vpon the loyalty of marriage generall bastardy or such like the King did euer write to the Bishop of that Diocesse as mediate officer minister to his courte to certifie the loyalty of marriage bastardy or such like all which doe apparantly proue that those Ecclesiasticall Courts were vnder the Kings iurisdiction and commaundement and that one of the Courts were so necessarily incident to the other as the one without the other could not deliuer iustice to the parties as well in these particular cases as in a number of cases before specified wherof the Kings Ecclesiasticall Courte hath iurisdiction Now to commaund and to be obayed belonge to soueraigne and supreme gouernment c. The Catholike Deuine 28. The conclusion or inference vpon this narration must be noted by the Reader to be M. Attorneys owne and not to be taken out of any other lawyers booke as the former parte of the narratiō is that telleth vs how the King appointeth that ech Court both spirituall and temporall shall handle matters and causes proper and peculiar vnto them and the one not to intrude it self into the affaires of the other and to this effect are his vvrits appointed of prohibition where matters are assumed which ought not in that Courte to be treated and of consultation to will them to proceed when their right is knowne All which maketh for vs shewing that the King would haue the subordination between these two Courts to be obserued and the spirituall to direct the temporall where any one thing might belonge vnto them both As for example if any man were impeached of bastardy thervpon his inheritance were claimed by another the Ecclesiasticall Court was first to giue sentence of the marriage whether it were lawfull or no then according to that sentēce was the tēporal Court to giue possession or not of the inheritāce 29. And that this was the true sincere meaning of the law at that time intending therby to shew the excellency and prerogatiue of the Bishops spirituall Courts aboue the Kings temporall is plaine and euident by an other Statute of this maner which M. Attorney would not see made in the 9. yeare of King Henry the 6. where it is ordained in explication of the former that when any such Plea of bastardie is held in any Courte of the Kings the Iudges therof shall make proclamation once in their Courte the Chauncelour of England certified therof by them shall cause to be made 3. seuerall proclamatiōs in 3. seuerall moneths in the Chaūcery That al persons pretending any interest to obiect against the party shall sue to the Ordinary or Bishop to whom the writ of certificate from the said Iudge or Iudges is or shall be directed to make their allegations and obiections against the party as the law of Holy Church requireth And that without this forme obserued al other processe shal be voide c. 30. And by this we may see how carefull the auncient lawes were to haue the spirituall Courte as the superiour well informed according to the law of Holy Church and how not only ordinary Iudges but the Chauncellour of England himself his highest Court of Chauncery was appointed to serue vnto this for that of the spirituall Courts iudgement depended in all such causes the iudgement of the temporall Courts And by this you will se also the vaine sleight of M. Attorney in telling vs that the King did euer write vnto the Bishop of that Diocesse as mediate officer and minister to his Courte to certifie the loyaltie of marriage c. For where doth he find in any ancient law at all those words as mediate officer and minister to his Courte in the latine himself leaueth out the words to his Courte though in calling the Bishop mediate officer or minister which is as much to say as superior officer for that in mediation and subordination of officers and ministers that gouerne the mediate hath the higher roome in respect of the people and Court wherof he is officer he includeth a contradiction against himselfe for then is the said Bishop also aboue all immediate temporall Iudges that must giue him certificate wherof the Chauncellour we se is one euen in the Kings temporall Courts themselues 31. But the inference is much more subtile when M. Attorney saith All which doe apparantly proue that those Ecclesiasticall Courts were vnder the Kings iurisdiction and cōmaundement But M. Attorney must not so huddle vp iurisdiction and commaundement for that no man will deny but that all sortes of persons as before hath byn said are vnder the cōmaundement gouernement of the temporall Prince whom he may commaund ech one to doe their office duty in the Cōmon-wealth And so may he appoint Ecclesiastical Courts to notifie their sentences iudgements proceedings to his Courts his Courts to informe the Ecclesiastical Courts for good mutuall correspondence between them both which we graunt also to be necessary in euery Common-wealth 32. But iurisdiction which M. Attorney craftely confoundeth heer and shuffleth vp with commaundement is a far different thing importing a higher authority in the same kinde as if the temporall Prince haue iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall vpon Bishops and their spirituall Courtes then doth it follow that all their power in spirituall matters is subordinate to him and deriued from him and so were there no necessity of this distinction and subordination of spirituall and temporall Courts For that the Prince hauing both powers in himself might giue the same vnto any temporal Iudge to decide Ecclesiastical matters also in his Court which yet M. Attorney doth often deny that the Common-lawes can take conusaunce of such affaires And surely it is worth no lesse then laughter to heare him repeat so often The Kings Ecclesiasticall Courte as though this were sufficient to proue the Kings Ecclesiasticall authority in those Courts for that all Courts are the Kings Courts in that they are vnder his protection gouernement and direction and to the vse and profit of his people And so were also the Ecclesiasticall Courts of King Henry the third in this sense who yet chalenged no spirituall authority therin as by
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
indeed for if they were and had but so much as primam tonsuram they could not bee held nor iudged by that Court as often before hath byn shewed it is euident where the eminencie of authoritie laie in those daies to wit in the spiritualtie aboue the temporaltie vayne it is to stand vpon other trifling circumstances whether the Bishops deputie sent to demaund the liberty of those felons by law did giue attendance vpon the Kings Courts or no or whether he or the Iudges that were lay-men must iudge of this sufficieÌ„cy or insufficiency whether the fellon did read as a Clarke or not For if the temporall Iudges must discerne therof as M. Attorney auerreth then in vaine was the Bishops Deputy called thither without whom it might haue byn done by the Iudges alone But if he were of necessity to be called thither and vpon his oath to pronounce si legit vt Clericus and that vpon his verdict the Iudge must giue sentence to admit the fellon to the benefit of Clergy and thervpon to haue pardon of his life and to be deliuered vnto the Bishops prison as of higher authority then is it manifest that this instance impugneth rather then helpeth M. Attorneys assertion as commonly doe all the rest when they are well examined The Attorney The Popes excommunication is of no force within the Realme of England In the raigne of King Edward the 4. a Legat from the Pope came to Calles to haue come into England but the King and his Counsell would not suffer him to come within England vntill he had taken an oath that he should attempt nothing against the King or his Crowne and so the like was done in his raigne to another of the Popes Legats this is so reported in 1. H. 7. fol. 10. The Catholicke Deuyne 14. The first parte of this instance about the validitie of the Popes excoÌ„munication hath oftentimes been answered before what circumstance and conditions were agreed vpon to bee obserued in the execution thereof for auoiding inconueniences that came by false suggestions of some troublesome people and among other that it should allwaies bee directed to some Bâ—sâ—op whose certificate should bee required for the lawfvllnes therof as before hath been shewed out of the 3. yeare of K. Edward the 3. hath appeared also before out of King Richards Statute where all the Bishops expounded themselues that it was not meant to derogate by that Statute from the Popes authoritie to excoÌ„municate c. And in this very place and next words after this present instance hath M. Attorney another instance out of King Richard the 3. in these words It is resolued by the Iudges that the iudgment of excommunication in the Courte of Rome should not bind or preiudice anie man within England at the Common-law Wherby is cleerly declared the meaning of the former cause to wit that the popes excommunication which is a spirituall sentence or punishement for spirituall affaires may not preiudice temporall all suites at the Common-law in temporall matters and it is not much sinceritie in M. Attorney to alleadg these parcells of his Iudges determinations so nakedly as he doth without distinction or explication to the end his simple Reader may be put in error therby 15. The other instance of the Popes Legate staied at Calles and not suffered to come into England vntill he had taken an oath to attempt nothing against the King or his Crowne sheweth that King Edward rather doubted and feared his authoritie then contemned or denied the same especially he being in that controuersy about the Crowne as then hee was and the Pope interposing his spirituall authoritie between K. Henry the 6. and him And as well he might alleadge the example of the Popes messenger detained in Calles by commaundement of King Phillip and Q. Marie when he brought the Cardinals hat from Paulus 4. to Friar Peto for that the said Princes would not suffer him to come into the Realme vntill they had otherwise informed the said Pope by their Embassadours in Rome that the same was not expedient And yet did not this proue that they either contemned the Popes authoritie or thought this soueraigntie of spirituall iurisdiction to bee in themselues And it is a case that often falleth out in the affaires of Catholicke Princes with Popes when they doubt anie thing will proceed against them from the said Sea Apostolicke to keep off the execution or notification therof by what means they can vntill matters bee compounded And we haue had many examples therof before namely in the raignes of K. Henry the 2. K. Iohn K. Henry the 3. and two King Edwards following him who fearing excommunication were vigilant in prohibiting that no messenger from Rome should enter the Realme without their licence which was an argument rather of their esteeme then disesteeme of that place and power Out of the raigne of K. Henry the seauenth who was the nyntenth King after the Conquest §. II. In the raigne of K. Henry the 7. the pope had excommunicated all such persons whatsoeuer as had bought alume of the Florentines and it was resolued by all the Iudges of England that the Popes excommunication ought not to bee obaied or to bee put in execution within the Realme of England In a parlament holden in the first yeare of King Henry the 7. for the more sure like reformation of Priests Clerks religious men culpable or by their demerits openly noised of incontinent liuing in their bodies contrarie to their order it was enacted ordained and established by the aduise and assent of the Lords spiritual and temporall and the Commons in the said Parlament assembled and by authoritie of the same that it bee lawfull to all Archbishops and Bishops and other Ordinaries hauing Episcopall iurisdiction to punish and chastise Priests Clercks and religious men being within the bounds of their iurisdiction as shall bee conuicted afore them by examination and lawfull proofe requisite by the law of the Church of aduowtry fornication incest or anie other fleshly incontinency by committing them to ward prison there to abide for such time as shall bee thought to their discretions conuenient for the qualitie and quantitie of their trespasse And that none of the said Archbishops Bishops or Ordinaries aforesaid bee therof chargeable of to or vpon anie action of false or wrongfull imprisonment but that they be vtterly therof discharged in anie of the Cases aforesaid by vertue of this Act. Rex est persona mixta because hee hath both Ecclesiasticall and temporall iurisdiction By the Ecclesiasticall laws allowed within this Realme a Priest cannot haue two benefices or a bastard can bee a Priest but the King may by his Ecclesiasticall power and iurisdiction dispense with both of these because they be Mala prohibita and not Mala per se. The Catholicke Deuyne 16. Heere are three or foure instances for breuityes sake layed
by the Emperour required to haue certaine Church-vessels deliuered vnto them S. Ambrose writeth thus Cum esset propositum vt Ecclesiae vasa iam traderenpius hoc responsi reddidi c. when it was proposed vnto me by the Emperours officers that we should presently deliuer vp the vessels of the Church behold Church-vessels of price in those daies I gaue this answere that if anie things of mine were demaunded either land or house or gold or syluer or anie other things that lay in my power to giue I would willinglie offer the same but from the Church of God I could take nothing away nor deliuer that which I had receiued to be kept And that in this point I did respect the health principally of the Emperours soule for that it was not expedient for me to deliuer the said Vessels nor for him to receiue them And that he should take in good parte the speach of a free Priest If the Emperour did loue himself he should doe well to cease from offeringe iniurie to Christ. So he And what would he haue said thinke you or answered if he had been in our English Parliament when K. Henry the 8. both demaunded and obtained not onlie the Vessels of many hundred Churches but the lands liuings houses and Churches also themselues which he pulled downe equalled with the ground or from sacred translated them to prophane vses 28. But let vs heare the same Doctor and Father handling this subiect more cleerly in another place to witt in a publike sermon to the people wherin he instructeth them of the true nature and subordination of these two Powers Spirituall and Temporall Ecclesiasticall and Imperiall Soluimus saith he quae sunt Caesaris Caesari quae sunt Dei Deo c. we doe pay vnto Caesar those things that belong to Caesar and we giue vnto God the things that appertaine vnto him Is it Caesars tribute that is demaunded we deny it not Is it the Church of God It ought not to be giuen vp to Caesar. For that the Temple of God cannot be the right of Caesar which we speake to the Emperours honour for what is more honorable vnto him then that he being an Emperour be called a child of the Church which when it is said it is spoken without sinne and to his grace for that a good Emperour is within the Church but not aboue the Church and he seeketh rather help of the Church than refuseth the same this as we speake in humilitie so with constancie wee freelie affirme it And albeit some doe heere threaten vs fire sword and exile yet we being Christs seruaunts haue learned not to feare such things and him that feareth not no threats can daunt 29. And finallie not to be longer in this matter the same good Bishop some few years after hauing occasion to reprehend and correct by his Ecclesiasticall Power and Iurisdiction the famous Emperour Theodosius the Great he failed not to vse the same and therby shewed the eminency of his iurisdiction aboue the other The occasion was for that the said good Emperour had suffered himself by the incitation of certaine of his courte about him to permit the sackage or spoile of the Citty of Thessolonica for certaine howers to his souldiars in reuenge or chastisement of a certaine disorder committed by them but the said sackage and massacre proceedinge further vpon furie of souldiars then the Emperours meaninge was and many thousands of innocent people slaine S. Ambrose wrote first an earnest epistle to the said Emperour laying before him the grieuousnes of his sinne and exhortinge him to doe pennance Wherin he when the Emperour performed not so much as hee desired proceeded further And when the Emperour came one day to the Church the foresaid Bishop went forth and met him without the Church dore forbidding him to enter therin as vnworthy the communion of Christian faithfull people vntill he had done sufficient pennance for his sinne which the good Emperour meeklie obaied as he did afterward also when he comminge to the Church to be reconciled and hauing made his offring he remained within the chauncell amonge the Priests But S. Ambrose sending vnto him his Deacon signified that that place was only for Priests and Clergie men and therfore he should departe forth into the body of the Church amonst lay men adding this sentence Purpurae Imperatores non sacerdotes efficit Purple robes make Emperours but not Priests Which admonition saith Theodorete the most faithfull Emperour tooke in good parte and said that he did not stay vvithin the chauncell vpon any presumption but for that he had learned that custome in Constantinople and therefore gaue him thankes also for this wholsome admonition So he 30 But all which is seene what eminency of Spirituall Authoritie was ascribed by these holy Fathers and Doctors to Bishops Priests and Clergie-men aboue Kings and Emperours and I might adde much more out of them to the same effect for confutation of M. Attorneys Paradox but that I am to reserue diuers things to the fourth chapter of this booke where I must answere his principall argument That vvhosoeuer ascribeth not all supreame power to Princes as well in Ecclesiasticall as Temporall matters maketh them no complete monarches But these holy Fathers of the auncient primitiue Church were of another iudgement as you see 31. Wherfore this being so that in the Church Common-wealth of Christ though Kings and Emperours be Supreame in temporall Authoritie and both honour obedience and tribute due vnto them in their degree as Christ and his Apostles doe teach yet that in spirituall and Ecclesiasticall matters concerning the soule Priests and Bishops are more eminent in Authoritie Hence it was deduced that for combininge these two Powers and Authoritie togeather in peace and vnion and due subordination in the Christian Common wealth the one hauinge need of the other for that neither the temporall partie can saue their soules without the spirituall function neither the Ecclesiasticall State be defended without the temporal sword hence I say it proceeded that presentlie after the entrance of Constantine the Emperour into the Church wherby Temporall Spirituall Power were to be conioyned togeather and exercised in one body though in different tribunalls distinct affaires seuerall laws and ordinances were set downe and agreed vpon how they should liue togeather in peace and concord and dutifull respect the one to the other the Ecclesiasticall partie by an auncient name euen from the Apostles time downwards being called the Cleargie which signifieth the Lott or peculiar in heritance of God himself and the temporall partie named the Laity which importeth as much as the rest of the people besides the Cleargie 32. These two parties I say are directed by most anncient laws both diuine and humane how to liue togeather in vnion due subordination giuing to each power and gouernment that which is due to each
ielousy other like motiues to doe or attempt that especially in these later ages which reason and Religion did not allwayes approue nor themselues nether vpon more mature deliberation And yet doe I not graunt that M. Attorney bringeth any thing of moment in this kind of proofe de facto also as after shall appeare though all his pretences of proofes be in this kind only 3. For as for the first though he entitle his booke De Iure as you haue heard yet little or nothing doth he alleadge therin worthie to be repeated Only he hath one Argument mencioned and refuted by vs before in the second Chapter of this Answere which is that the Kingdome of England being an absolute Empire and Monarchie consisting of one head which is the King and of a body politicke deuided into two generall partes the Clergie and the Layty both of them next vnder God must be subiect obedieÌ„t to the same head in all causes for that otherwise he should be no perfect Monarch or head of the whole bodye c. 4. But to this the answere is playne by the groundes we haue laid downe in the same Chapter of the different origen of spirituall and temporal power and that it is sufficient to any temporall Monarch and to the perfection of his Monarchie that all sortes of people throughout his dominions as well Clergie as Layty be subiect vnto him in all temporall affayres and that with this perfection of Monarchie were content both Constantyne the first christian Emperour also Valentinian Gratian Theodosius Arcadius Honorius Iustinian and other Emperours that eusued after him as also Charles the Great in France with his Successours all our English Kings before K. Henry the eight who esteemed themselues for greate perfect Monarches ouer their people as in deed they were without this chalenge of Spirituall Iurisdiction in Ecclesiasticall matters And therfore the said greatest Emperours were content also to beare patiently and christianly the denyall therof in diuers occasions by their good Bishops Prelates S. Basil S. Gregory Nazienzen S. Ambrose S. Chrysostome yea and checkes also for vsurping somtymes either by themselues or their officers vpon Ecclesiasticall power that belonged not to them wherof many examples might be alleadged and some haue bene touched before in the place mencioned For to this end was that admonishment of S. Gregory Nazienzen to the Emperour Valentinian that he should vnderstand that he being a Bishop had greater Authority than the said Emperour To the same effect likwise was the resolute speech of S. Ambrose vnto the same Valentinian Nolite grauare Imperator c. Trouble not your self Emperour in coÌ„maÌ„ding me to deliuer the Church nor doe you perswade your self that you haue any Imperiall right ouer those things that are spirituall or diuine exalt not your self but be subiect to God if you will raigne be content with those things that belong to Cesar and leaue those which are of God vnto God Pallaces appertaine to the Emperour and Churches vnto the Priest You haue right ouer the walles of the Cyttie but not vpon sacred howses So he And the same S. Ambrose some 3. or .4 yeares after vsed the like speech of superiority in spirituall matters to the good Emperour Theodosius checking him greiuously yea keeping him out of the Church and holding him vnder excommunication for eight monethes togeather And when the said good Emperour came humbly on foote unto him saying Ora vt mihi soluas vincula ne mihi occludas ianuam I beseech you loose my bandes and shutt not the Church doore against me The other answered what pennance can you shew me that you haue done since the committing of your greiuous sinne c. 5. And the like libertie of speech might I alleadge out of S. Chrisostome where speaking of the presumption of King Ozias that would meddle in Spirituall matters vsed this Apostrophe vnto him Mane intra terminos tuos aly sunt termini Regni alij termini Sacerdoty hoc Regnum illo maius Stay king within thy bounds and limitts for different are the boundes of a Kingdome and the limitts of Priest-hood and this Kingdome of Priest-hood is greater then the other wherof he yeldeth this reason a little after Regi corpora commissa sunt sacerdoti animae The bodyes be committed to the Kinge the soules to the Priest And in the next homily following he inferreth this conclusion Ideoque Deus c. Therfore hath God subiected the head of the King to the handes of the Priest instructing vs therby that the Priest is a greater Prince then the king for that according to S. Paul the lesser allwayes receaueth blessing from the greater and more eminent Other Fathers sayings to the same effect I purposely omitt for breuityes sake but by these few M. Attorney may see how he is deceiued in placing the perfection of a temporall Monarchie in hauing spirituall Iurisdiction ouer Priestes in Ecclesiasticall affayres 6. We read that when Constantius the Emperour some to Constantyne the Great tooke vpon him to fauour the Arrian heresye he called vnto him diuers Catholike Bishopps as S. Athanasius doth relate and setteth downe their names willing them to subscribe to that which he had appoynted for the bannishment of the said S. Athanasius and communion with the Arrians Quibus admirantibâ—â— c. Who marueling saith he at this commandement as a new thing and telling him that this was not according to the Ecclesiasticall Canons the Emperour replyed I will haue that held for Canon which I doe appoint either obey or goe into banishment wherat they more wondering and holding vp their hands to heauen did with libertie propose their reasons vnto him telling him that his Kingdome was not his but from God who had giuen it vnto him and that it was to be feared least he would take it againe from him and finally denounced vnto him the last daie of iudgement persuading him that he should not peruert the course of Ecclesiasticall affayres nor intermeddle his Roman Empire in dealing with Ecclesiasticall Constitutions c. So Athanasius of these good Bishops 7. And vnto the same Emperour a little after that great and famous Confessor Osius who among the rest had sitten as Iudge in the Nicene Councell vpon like occasion wrote this graue and important admonition Define quaeso memineriste mortalem esse resormida diem iudicij c. Leaue of I beseech thee ô Emperour and remember that thou art mortall feare the day of iudgement and keep they self pure from this kind of synne and doe not intermeddle with Ecclesiasticall causes Do not vse commandements to vs in this kinde but rather learne of vs God hath committed the Empire vnto thee but vnto vs the things that appertaine to his Church and as those that malignantly doe carpe at thy Empire doe contradict the ordinance of God so beware thou least by
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-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
in matters belonging to their soules for in this case all this law of Nature would be broken and the women should be head ouer men in the highest degree and so should not be the glory of the man as S. Paul saith that is subordinate to his glory as he is to the glory of Christ and Christ to the glory of God but the man should be her glory that is to say subordinate to her In iis quae sunt ad Deum In those things that appertaine to God yea she should be mediatrix betweene him and God in place of him that is chiefe priest And so all this first naturall institution of God should be wholy peruerted broken and turned vpside-downe 28. Neyther is it of any force to obiect as some doe that a woman may be head of men in temporall affaires as Queenes are for that God hath left this free to mâ—n to dispense in the vse of their naturall priuiledge of superiority for temporall gouernment and to appoynâ— women to gouerne them for auoyding worse inconueniences when there are no heyres-male to succeed as before hath been said But the matter is farr different in spirituall gouernment which dependeth immediatly of God himself and was deliuered by him to men not to women and so hath been continued throughout all ages from Adam to our dayes and vnder all lawes both of Nature Moyses and Christ. For in the law of Nature the first borne-male among the Patriarches was alwayes head of the family both in temporall and spirituall matters and consequently also Priest And in the law of Moyses the said priesthood and presidency in spirituall matters was annexed vnto a tribe of men and no woman admitted therunto And much more in the law of the ghospell as presently we shall declare and so we may conclude that from Eue to Elizabeth there was neuer woman that was supreame head concerning matters of Religion before her self so singular was she and her case in this point 29. Now then for the Euangelicall law meaning and sense of our Sauiour Iesus Christ in founding of his Christian Church that it was not to leaue any part or parcell of the spirituall gouerment and Iurisdiction therof vnto any woman and much lesse the supreme in any Kingdome or Countrey besides that which before hath been cyted and pondered out of S. Paul that women may not teach or speake in the Church which yet is a necessary part to be able to doe if need require and that which the Canon-law putteth in coÌ„sideration that Christ left no part of Ecclesiasticall gouerment either to his mother or to any other of his women-disciples besides all this I say it is not hard to shew out of the very Institution of Gods Church from the beginning and the establishment and perfection therof when Christ came in flesh he excluded cleerly women from all dominion therin 30. Foâ— proofe wherof first we are to suppose according to the vnderstanding of all ancient Fathers and declaration of scripture it self in many particulars that concerning the worke of our first creation and all ordinanâ—â—â— depending theron as also the Miracles and highest actions that fell out afterwards from that creation to the tyme of our redemption when any thing is ascribed peculiarly to Gods hand saying that God did this or God did that we must vnderstand it princypally of the second person in Trinity sonne of God himself who as he was to come downe to take our flesh and redeeme vs and to make vs his Church his Kingdome his body his price his glory so to that end did he create vs also according to that saying of S. Sohn Omnia per ipsum facta sunt All things were made and created by him and S. Paul speaking of those myraculous assistances giuen to the people of Israell going forth of Egipt doth ascribe the same euery where to Christ. As doth S. Iude also saying I would haue you to knowe brethren that Iesus â—â— first he saued the people of Israell that he brought out of Egipt so afterwards those that beleeued not he destroyed 31. This being supposed we are to note further that as Christ created Adam as the first head of his Church heere on earth vnder himself and made him Lord of all both temporall and spirituall and as Priest to offer Sacrifice and Eue out of him afterwardâ— subiecting her therby vnto him and to his perpetuall Dominion as before you haue heard S. Paul to collect out of this first institution so the diuell taking vpon him presently to contradict and ouerthrow this worke of Christ followed a quite contrary order and went first to Eue persuading her to goe preach to Adam the sermon that he had taught her as she did because his Doctor and Mistresse in this Ecclesiasticall function therby turned vpside-downe to both their tuynes and to the ruyne of vs all the whole order of subordination which Christ had appoynted before Wherby she should haue bene taught by Adam and not he by her But Christ comming afterward to visit them againe and to take accoumpt of this disorder albeit he knew then that the woman had bene the author therof yet would he not speake first to her but according to the order appointed by himself asked first for Adam Our Lord called for Adam saith the text dixit ei vbi es and said vnto him where art thou And when afterwards the whole cause being examined he gaue sentence vpon ech part for this disorder he specially confirmed againe his first Institution for the Dominion of manâ— and the subiection of woman saying vnto her Sub viri potestate eris ipso dominabitur tui Thou shalt be vnder the power of man thy husband and he shall haue Dominion ouer thee Which law and ordination is to be vnderstood in all kind of subiection aswell domesticall and politicall as Ecclesiasticall or diuine so as in all these three kinds of affayres man is made head and gouernour both at home in the common-wealth and in the Church by this first institution of Christ though in the former two it is permitted vnto man as hath been said vpon some occasions to yeld vp his right when he will though more in the second then in the first for that the things are more arbitrary and tollerable to witt that a woman should be head ouer all in the Common-wealth then at home ouer her husband But in the third which is in the Church and Church-matters no dispensation is permitted but that womans subiection must be perpetual And therfore when S. Paul as before hath been touched coÌ„meth to talke of Church-matters he suppresseth women presently by this law of Christ Mulieres saith he in Ecclesia tace ant non enim permittitur eis loqui sod subditas esse sicut lex dicit Let women hold their peace in the Church for it is not perâ—ittâ—d into them to speake but to
done against the priuiledges of their Crownes 21. After S. Mellitus who dyed Bishop of Canterbury there succeeded in that Sea by the appointment of Pope Boniface the fifth the holy man Iustus Bishop of Rochester before who by his doctrine and holie life had holpen greatly to the reduction of Eadbald King of Kent who after the death of his good Father K. Ethelbert by dissolute life had fallen backe againe to Paganisme and renounced the Christian faith But afterward returned againe and became a good Christian King and presently therupon he wrote his humble letters of submission to the said Pope Boniface the fifth as appereth by the Popes answere vnto the said Archbishop Iustus vpon the yeare of Christ 618. related by S. Bede where Boniface writeth Susceptis namque apicibus filij nostri Eadbaldi Regis c. We hauing receaued the letters of our sonne K. Eadbald we doe fynd therby with how great learning of Gods worde you haue moued his mind to true coÌ„uersion vndoubted faith And in the same letter he signifyeth that togeather therwith he sent him to wit to S. Iustus the pall with authority of Archbishop of Canterbury and further concedentes etiam tibi ordinationes episcoporum exigente opportunitate we doe also graunte vnto you power to ordeyne Bishops wheresoeuer opportunity for Gods glory is offered Neither did Pope Boniface thinke to displease or iniure K. Eadbald by writing in this sorte or by giuing to this Archbishop S. Iustus such authority to make Bishopps ouer all England as herby he did without respect of his kingly power as you see 22. And not many yeares after this againe to witt vpon the yeare of Christ 621. K. Edwyn of the Northumbers Regum potentissimus inter Anglo-saxones saith Malmesbury the most potent of all other Kings amongest the English-Saxons was conuerted to the Christian faith by the preaching of S. Paulinus sent thither from Kent by the foresayd Iustus Archbishop of Canterbury as to accompany the most Christian Lady Ethelburga daughter of K. Ethelbert who was married to the said K. Edwyn vpon hope of his conuersion to ensue therby as after it did This man then some dozen yeres after his said conuersion desiring to haue an Archbishopricke erected in his Kingdome in the Citty of Yorke and to haue Paulinus that was there with him to be made Archbishop therof not esteeming it to be in his owne power to doe the same of himself or by his Parlament though he were a Christian King whither thinke you or to whome did he make recourse and sute to haue the same effected S. Bede saith that he sent an â—â—bassadge to Rome to Pope Honorius to demaund this benefit at 〈◊〉 hand as also for so much as the foresaid S. Iustus Archbishop of Canterbury was now dead he would appoint some other in 〈◊〉 place and namely a holy Reuerend man called Honorius and that for auoyding of so often recourse to Rome in those troublsome dayes full of warrs and daungers he would vouchsafe to appoint that whosoeuer should dye first of these two Archbishops of his district Honorius and Paulinus for now the gouernment of Kent apperteyned also to Edwyn the suruiuer of the two should appoint and consecrate a successour vnto him that dyed All which demaunds Honorius the Pope graunted vnto K. Edwyn as appereth by his answere recorded by S. Bede in these worâ—â— Eae verò quae à nobis pro vestris sacerdotibus ordinanda sperastis c. As fâ—â— the things which you hope I will ordeyne for your two priests Paulinus Honorius we doe willingly with a gratefull minde and without all delay goe about to performe in respect of the syncerity of your faith which by the faithfull relation of the bearers of your letters was much to your praise insinuated vnto vs. And therfore we haue sent vnto Honorius and Paulinus two palls of Metropolitanes and haue ordeyned that whosoeuer of them two shall first be called out of this world vnto his maâ—â—â— the other that remaineth may ex hac nostra auctoritate by this our authoritie giuen him subrogate another in his place Which priledge we are induced to graunt as well for the speciall affection of loue which we beare towards you as also in regard of so long distance of Countryes that lie betweene you and vs c. 23. Thus wrote Honorius the Pope to K. Edwyn in these dayâ—â— and thus he thought of his Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction ouer England as well as other Countreys Neither did K. Edwyn thiâ—â—e himself iniured therby but much honoured and obliged And the same Pope Honorius writing at this very time to the forsaid Honorius whome he had made Archbishop of Canterbury by sending him the pall as you haue heard beginneth his letter thus Dilectissimo Fratri Honorio Honorius and then shewing him what authority he had sent to him and to Paulinus Archbishop of Yorke he hath these words Quae pro vestrarum Ecclesiarum priuilegijs coÌ„grâ—â—râ— posse conspicimus non desistimus impertire we doe not ceasse to graunt vnto you those things which we see to be coÌ„uenient for the priuiledges of your Churches c. Consider of this superiority 24. And after this againe about some thirty yeares the sixth Archbishops of Canterbury being dead whose name was Adeodatus the two Kings of Northumbers and Kent to witt Oswy and Egbert being very solicitous saith S. Bede to haue a good Archbishop giuen them that might appoint good Bishops throughout the Realme resolued to send a common embassadge to Rome to Pope Vitalianus to obteyne the same And the more to facilitate the matter they caused an English priest named VVighard cum electione consensu Sancta Ecclesia gentis Anglorum saith the same author by the election and consent of the holy Church of the English-nation to be sent to Rome and presented for this effect And togeather with him they sent certaine religions oblations almes to the vse of S. Peters chappell but the said Priest dying so soone as he arriued could not satisfie their desires Whervpon the Pope wrote backe seuerall letters wherof that to King Oswy began thus Domino excellentissimo filio Oswie Regi Saxonâ— Vitalianus Episcopus seruus seruorum Dei c. Wherin after congratulation for his zeale and feruour and the presents gifts and offerings sent to S. Peters chappell he answereth to the busines proposed thus We could not find out at this present a fitt man to be made Archbishop and sent vnto you according to the tenour of your letters but as soone as any such person shall be found as is apt we shall direct him to your countrey with our instructions c. He that brought your tokens hither so soone as he had visited the Churches of the holy Apostles was taken away out of this life to our great griefe But to the bearers of these our letters we haue deliuered for you certaine sacred
certayne words in the charter of K. Kenulsus to the Monastery of Abindon would seeme to persuade himself others that our English Kings in those dayes did take vpon them spirituall iurisdiction to giue priuiledges exemptions from Episcopall authoritie vnto Monasteryes and consequently that they had all supreme iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall in as ample manner as Q. Elizabeth tooke vpon her or was giuen vnto her by Act of Parlament which is a most euident dreame as you see The fifth Demonstration 49. Now then to passe to the fifth argument which maketh matters yet more manifest the same is taken from the consideration of Appeales when any controuersie fell out either betwene the King and his Bishops or betwene any lay power and Ecclesiasticall or betwene Bishops and Churches themselues which Appeales shall neuer be read to haue byn made in these times before the Conquest either to the King or to his secular Courtes but rather to the Archbishop of Canterbury or to the Pope for the tyme being 50. And albeit in this time of religious feruour of our Engâ—â—â—â— Kings there were fewer occasions giuen of Appeales to the Sea Apostolicke then after the Conquest when Kings were lesse deuout and sometymes more violent as may appeare by the examples of S. Anselme S. Thomas S. Edmond all three Archbishops of Canterbury Thurstan S. VVilliam Gaufred Archbishops of Yorke S. Richard of Chichester Hugh of Durham to speake nothing of that notorious Appeale betwene Richard of Canterbury against King Henry the third and Hubert Earle of Kent and diuerse others as is euident by the histories of our Countrey in which we fynde that alwaies the Bishops for remedy of such aggrieuaunces as either by the Kings Nobility or others after the said Conquest were layd vpon them or their Churches made their recourse for succour to the Sea Apostolicke yet before the Conquest also though the occasions as I said were not so frequent sometimes they were driuen to vse the benefit of this remedy as we see in the two Archbishops of Canterbury Lambert and Athelard before mentioned vnder King Offa and Kenulfus of the Mercians and before that againe in the famous cause of S. VVilfryd Archbishop of Yorke who in the very first age after our conuersion was twice put out of his Bishopricke and forced to appeale to Rome first by Egfryd King of the Northumbers and then by Alfryd his successour with the concurrence against him of certaine Bishops And both times he appealed vnto Rome as S. Bede declareth and to follow his appeales went thither twice in person and was twice absolued first by Pope Agathâ— in a Synode of an hundred twenty and fiue Bishops vpon the yeare of Christ 679. and the second tyme by Pope Iohn the seuenth six and twenty yeares after to wit vpon the yeare 705. Of the first absolution S. Bede himself writeth that he was not only found innocent and thervpon cleered by the Pope and whole Synode as hath byn said but that they thought good likewise to giue him his place in the said Councell and to note his absolution and the speciall respect borne vnto him in the very acts of the sayd Councel holden against the Monothelites in these words VVilfryd the beloued of God Bishop of the Citty of Yorke hauing appealed to the Sea Apostolike in his cause and being absolued by the authority of this Councell in all things both certaine and vncertaine was placed in his seat of IudgemeÌ„t togeather with an hundred twenty fiue his fellow-Bishops in this Synod and hath confessed the true and Catholike faith and confirmed the same by his subscription for himselfe and all the north partes of Britanny and Ireland which are now inhabited by English-men Britanes Scotts and Picts 51. Thus relateth Bede of S. VVilfrids first appellation and most honourable absolution in Rome and that then retourning to his countrey he conuerted the kingdome of the South saxons and that afterward againe being inuyted by King Alfred that succeeded Egfryd to returne to his Bishopricke of Yorke heat length vpon persuasion of good men accepted therof But after fiue yeres he was expulsed againe by the said Alfred and appealed againe to the Sea Apostolike and went to Rome to Pope Iohn the seuenth as hath byn said who hearing his cause in the presence of his aduersaryes and accusers togeather with many Bishops that did sit in IudgemeÌ„t with him Omnium iudicio probatum est c. saith Bede It was proued by the iudgement of all that his accusers had deuised certaine calumniations against him whervpon he was absolued and letters were written saith Bede by the foresaid Pope Iohn vnto Alfred and Edelrede Kings of England that they should cause him againe to be receaued into his Bishopricke for that he had byn vniustly condemned This is the summe of the story breifly sett downe by S. Bede But VVilliam of Malmesbury writeth the same to witt both these appellatious of S. VVilfryd much more at large telling how the first persecution against this holy Bishop had beginning from the enuy of Queene Ermenburga second wife to King Egfryd of the Northumbers who vnderstanding that his first wife Ethelreda did loue reuerence much this good man she thought it a sufficient cause for her to hate him and so incensing first the King her husband against him by saying that he was rich and that many gaue their goods vnto him to build Monasteryes she drew by little little the King to mislike him as also she did by like meanes sleights incense the good Archbishop Theodorus of Canterbury to impugne and contradict him 52. The same Malmesbury also setteth downe the particulars that passed in that Councell wherin he was absolued at Rome and how at his retourne into England with the Popes letters the said Theodorus Archbishop of Canterbury repented himself much that he had byn drawne against him and wrote earnest letters vnto King Alfred that had succeeded Egfrid that he would admit him againe into his Archbishopricke of Yorke saying among other words Et ideo charissime te admoneo in Christi charitate pracipio tibi c. And therfore most deere King I doe warne you and in the loue of Christ doe commaund you Ego Theodorus humilis Episcopus decrepita aetate hoc tuae beatitudini suggero quia Apostolica hoc sicut scis commendat auctoritas vir ille sanctissimus in patientia sua possedit animam suam c. I Theodorus humble Bishop of Canterbury in this my broken old age doe suggest this vnto your Happines or Maiesty both for that the authority of the Sea Apostolike as you knowe doth commend it to be done and the holy man VVilfryd hath according to the saying of our Sauiour possessed his soule in his owne patience and most humbly and myldly forgetting the iniuries done vnto him hath followed the example of his head and maister Christ and hath expected the
remedy at his hand And if I haue found any grace in your sight although the way betweene you me be long yet I beseech you let my eyes once see your face againe to treat of this matter and that my soule may blesse you before I die Wherfore my dere sonne deale with this holy man VVilfryd as I haue besought you and if in this point you shew your selfe obedient to me your Father that am shortly to departe out of this world it will profit you much to your saluation Fare you well 53. Vpon this letter King Alfred being much moued permitted him to retourne to his Archbishopricke againe And S. VVylfryd by the persuasion of the said Theodorus and other Bishopps was induced to accept the same and so he did for some time but after fiue yeres the complaints of his emulatours growing strong against him he was forced to fly the second time vnto King Etheldred of the Mercians but after againe appealed to Rome and went thither being now full threescore and ten yeares old whence retourning absolued as hath byn sayd with letters of commendation from Pope Iohn the seauenth both to Britwald Archbishop of Canterbury that had succeeded Theodorus as also to Alfred King of the Northumbers and to Etheldred King of the Mercians he obteyned againe his Archbishopricke of Yorke and heldâ— it foure yeares before his death 54. The letters of Pope Iohn vnto the two foresaid Kings doe begin with a complaint of sedition raysed in England amongst the Clergie by opposition against S. VVilfride which he exhorteth the two said Kings to suppresse and then beginneth his narration thus Wheras of late vnder Pope Agatho of Apostolicke memory the Bishop VVilfryd had appealed to this holy Sea for the tryall of his cause c. The Bishops at that time gathered herein Rome from diuerse partes of the worlde hauing examined the same gaue the definition and sentence in his fauour which was approued both by Pope Agatho and his Successours our predecessours c. and then sheweth he how the same hauing succeeded in this his second appeale he doth appoint Britwald Archbishop of Canterbury to call a Synod and by all consents either restore him to his Archbishopricke or to come and follow the cause at Rome against him and whosoeuer did not soe should be depriued of his Bishopricke and then concluding with this speach to the King he saith Vestra proinde Regalis Sublimitas faciat concursum vt ea qua Christo aspirante perspeximus perueniant ad effectum Quicumque autem cuiustibet persona audaci temeritate contempserit non erit a Deo impunitus neque sine damno calitus alligatus euadet Wherefore doe your royall highnes concurre also to this our ordination to the end that those things which by the inspiration of Christ we haue iudged for conuenient may come to their effect And whosoeuer vpon the audacious temerity of any person whatsoeuer shall contemne to doe this shall not be vnpunished of God neither shall he escape that hurte which those incurre whose sinnes are bound from heauen So he 53. And I haue thought good to alleadge this notorious example somewhat more largely for that it expresseth euidently both the acknowledgement and exercise of the Popes authority in those dayes as also the deuoute and prompt obedience of our Christian Kings and Prelates therevnto in that holy time of our first primitiue Church For that of the two forenamed Kings Malmesbury wryteth that Ethelredus of the Mercians receaued the Popes letters vpon his knees on the ground And albeit that Alfryd of the Northumbers somwhat stomaked the matter for a time as done in his dishonour yet soone after being strooken with deadly sicknes sore repented the same and appointed in his testament that S. VVilfryd should be restored which testament the holy virgin Elfled his sister that stood by him when he dyed brought forth and shewed before the whole Synod of Bishops gathered togeather about that matter in Northumberland 57. And thus hauing byn longer than I purposed in this example of S. VVylfryds appeales I will passe ouer as before I haue said the other appeales aboue mentioned of Lambert and Athelard Archbishops of Canterbury vnder King Offa and Kenulfus Kings of the Mercians vnto the Popes Adrian the first Leo the third wâ—â— determined the great controuersie about the iurisdiction of the Sea of Canterbury at the humble sute of the said King Kenulsus of all his Clergie and nobilitie I will passe ouer in like mannerâ— the example of Egbert Archbishop of Yorke who by his appealing to Rome multa Apostolici throni appellatione saith Malmesbury that is by frequent appellation to the Apostolicall throne recouered againe the preheminence and dignity of his Archbishopricke and Pontificall pall vpon the yere 745. which had byn withdrawen from that Church for many yeares togeather after Panlinus his departure And I may add further to this argument and consideration not only that appellations were ordinarily made to the Sea of Rome concerning Ecclesiasticall affaires vpon any aggreiuances of particuler persons Churches or Societyes in those dayes as appeareth by the examples alleadged but also complaints of publicke defects negligences or abuses if they concerned the said Ecclesiasticall affaires were carried to Rome and to the Bishops of that Sea aswell against Bishops and Archbishops as against the Kings themselues where occasions were offered which Bishops of Rome tooke vpon them as lawfull iudges to haue power to heare determine and punish the same by acknowledgement also of the parties themselues whereof we might alleadge many examples But one only in this place shall serue for the present which fell out in the tyme of King Edward the elder vpon the yeare of Christ 894. though others differ in the number of yeares And the case fell out thus 57. The Bishop of Rome in those dayes named Formosus the first being aduertised that diuerse prouinces in England especially that of the VVestsaxons by the reason of Danish warrs were much neglected and voyde of Bishops for diuerse yeares the said Pope saith Malmesbury wrote sharpe letters into England Quibus dabat excommunicationem maledictionem Regi Edwardo omnibus subiectis eim à sede S. Petri pro benedictione quam deder at Beatus Gregorius genti Anglorum By which letters he sent excoÌ„munication and malediction to King Edward and all his subiects from the Sea of S. Peter in steed of the benediction which S. Gregory had giuen to the English-nation wherof Malmesbury addeth this reason that for full seauen yeares the whole region of the VVest-saxons had byn voyde of Bishops And that King Edward hauing heard of the sentence of the Pope presently caused a Synod of the Senatours of the English nation to be gathered in which sate as head Pleamâ—ndus Archbishop of Canterbury who interpreted vnto them strictly saith Malmesbury the wordes of this Apostolicall Legacy sent from Rome Wherupon 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
daies they can in Catholike countries vpoÌ„ this pretence of a greater good to ensue therby vnto the Church and Countrey where they are graunted and consequently if K. VVilliam in his dayes did make any such appropriatioÌ„s in this sense it is to be vnderstood that the same was first allowed by the Sea Apostolicke as before we haue shewed in the examples of Charters for buylding establishing of Churches monasteryes and other pious workes And the same may be gathered also out of the Ordinances made about the said appropriations afterward in the 15. yeare of K. Richard the second and 4. of K. Henry the fourth by Parlament wherin the Bishops did fit as cheife in these affaires 29. Collations also of benefices require spirituall power and iurisdiction in him that doth giue or confer the same though in this there may be diuers degrees which are declared 〈…〉 Canon-law And M. Attorney being so eminent in the common-law ought not alltogeather to haue omitted them For first wheras the word Benefice or Church with Cure or Parish for all these are vsed oftentimes for the same doth comprehend as well a Bishopricke as a lower benefice if M. Attorney will vnderstand it heere of the former that is to say that no man can appropriate or bestow a Bishoprick vpon any person but he that hath Ecclesiastical iurisdiction he must remember if before he knew it that three things doe concurre in making of a Bishop by diuine and Canon-law to wit Election Confirmation and Consecration as may be seen by the places therof heere quoted in the margent not to trouble the text therewith to vnskillfull Readers 30. And albeit the first to wit Election when it is iustly made doe giue right to the elected to pretend the second and third that is confirmation and consecration nor can they be denyed vnto him without iniury except vpon iust cause as the same law saith yet can he not vpon his only Election exercise any part of his office of a Bishop either in iurisdiction or order But when he hath the second parte which is confirmation and induction to the benefice which is properly called inuestiture then hath he iurisdiction vpon those people and may exercise the Acts therof by visiting punishing or the like but not the Acts of Order vntill he haue consecration also that is to say he cannot make Priests nor administer the sacrament of confirmation nor doe other such actions as are peculiar to Episcopall Order 31. Now for these three things the first which is election or nomination may be perfourmed by any Prince or lay-man that hath lawfull authority therevnto which diuers wayes he may haue as after shall be shewed either by Ius patronatus of the benefice or prerogatiue graunted him by the Church The second which is confirmation and giuing of iurisdiction must only proceed from him that is the fountaine of all spirituall iurisdiction vnder Christ which is the Bishop of Rome or some Metropolitan or Bishop vnder him that hath authority and commission from him The third which is consecration must be done according to the Canon-law by three Bishops at the least And by this also may wee vnderstand what is necessary for the appropriating or conferring of any lower Benefice with Cure to an ordinary Priest to wit the two first election or presentation which may be done by a secular man and confirmation or inuestiture which allwayes must come as hath byn said either from the Sea Apostolicke or some Bishop authorized vnder him for that it giueth spirituall power and iurisdiction ouer soules which no man can doe but he that hath it in himself no man can haue it but he that receaued it from those that had it immediatly from Christ to wit S. Peter the rest of the Apostles and their Successors Gouernours of the Church as before in the second Chapter of this Answere we haue declared 32. And yet further it is to be noted for more cleernes and distinction that the first of these three to wit Election is of foure distinct sortes in the Canon-law The one called election properly or choise by suffrages and voyces of such as haue to choose The second is termed Postulation when one is offred that is not altogeather capable of the benefice but hath need of dispensation The third is called presentation when he that is patron or hath the aduouson of any benefice presenteth one by right of that Ius patronatus the right of patronage The fourth is called nomination which hath diuers curious differences noted in the law ouer long heer to be discussed But this is sufficient for our purpose that all these foure wayes doe comprehend but only the first degree of appropriating a benefice to any incumbent And albeit originally they doe all foure appertaine to Ecclesiasticall power for that they concerne an Ecclesiasticall thinge yet for many ages haue they byn imparted also by authority and commissioÌ„ of the Sea Apostolicke or by right of patronage to secular lay-men both Princes and others I meane to choose postulate present and nominate fit persons both for Bishops and Pastors And this we see in vse now for many ages in all Catholike Countreys throughout Christendome especially concerning Bishopricks and greatest dignityes Ecclesiasticall But yet no Prince taketh that authority as descending from his Crowne but as by commission graunt or indult of the Sea Apostolicke which they hold to be the fountaine of all spirituall authority and iurisdiction 33. All which being well vnderstood it is easy to distinguish and therby euacuate the argument of M. Attorney in this place which is a plaine Sophisme and deceitfull Syllogisme hauing one sense in the Maior another in the minor For if in the maior proposition wherin he saith out of the Reporte of his law that no man can appropriate an ecclesiasticall benefice with Cure but he that hath spâ—rituall iurisdiction If he vnderstand I say the first degree only which is to choose postulate present or nominate then the said maior is false for that lay-men may doe it also by commission as before we haue said and then doe we graunt his minor proposition that K. VVilliam did or might so appropriate But if he vnderstand in the second or third degree of confirmation and consecration of Bishops then is the maior true the minor false And so M. Attorneys syllogisme euery way is found faulty and guylfull nor worthy of his place and credit 34. And yet will I add one thing more for conclusion of this matter which is that as diuers secular Princes in former ages and in ours also haue had the first degree of approprition as hath been declared to wit to nominate fit persons so haue diuerse pretended as well in our Countries as elswhere to haue in a certaine manner the second from the Sea Apostolicke that is to say to giue the inuestitures in Bishopricks Abbyes and other chiefe
speciall Embassadours the particular confidence that sundrie Popes had with him as may appeare by their letters vnto him his sending to Rome vpon the yeare 1123. VVilliam newlie elected Archbishop of Canterbury and Thurstyn of Yorke to receiue their confirmation and palls there for more honour and deuotion of the place and Sea though otherwise hee might haue procured the same to haue been sent to England as eight years before he did vnto Raphe Bishop of Canterbury as Florentius declareth 21. And two years after this againe to wit 1125. in which yeare the foresaid Emperour Henry died that had kept so much stir about inuestitures there was a Synod celebrated in the Church of VVestminster by order of Pope Honorius his legat Cardinall Iohannes de Crema being present President therof wherin diuers Canons were decreed and in the third That no Clergie man should receiue anie benefice at the hands of aelaie-man c. without the approbation of his Bishop and if bee did the donation should be void Which the King tooke not to bee against himself or anie way repined at that Councell gathered by the Popes authoritie neither at this Decree therof that might concerne both him his Which well declareth the pietie of his minde and what his iudgment was of his owne Ecclesiasticall authoritie deriued from his Crowne And now let vs see what M. Attorney hath obserued out of him and his raigne to the contrarie that is to say to proue his supreme iurisdiction It is but one sole and solitary instance and this nothing to the purpose as presentlie you shall see The Attorney Henry by the grace of God K. of England Duke of Normandy to all Archbishops Bishops Abbotts Earls Barons and to all Christians as well present as to come c. We doe ordaine as well in regard of Ecclesiasticall as royall power that whensoeuer the Abbot of Reading shall dy that all the possessions of the monasterie wheresoeuer it is doe remaine entire and free with all the rights and Customes therof in the hands and disposition of the Prior monkes of the Chapter of Reading We doe therfore ordaine establish this ordinaÌ„ce to bee obserued euer because the Abbot of Reading hath no reuenewes proper and peculiar to himself but coÌ„mon with his brethren whosoeuer by Gods wil shall be appointed Abbot in this place by Canonicall electioÌ„ may not dispeÌ„d the Almes of the Abbey by ill vsage with his secular kinsmen or anie other but in entertaining poore pilgrimes strauÌ„gers that hee haue a care not to giue out the rent-lands in fee neither that he make any seruitours or souldiars but in the sacred garment of Christ wherin let him be aduisedlie prouident that he entertaine not young-ones but that he entertaine men of ripe age or discreet as well Clarks as lay-men The Catholike Deuine 22. Heer I desire the prudent Reader to consider how weake and feeble a battery M. Attorney bringeth forth against so stronge and founded a bulwark as before we haue set downe to the contrary wherin hauing shewed and demonstrated by sundry sortes of euident proofe that King Kenry as in all other points of Catholicke doctrine vsage and practice so in this speciall point of the Popes Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction was a perfect Catholicke Prince acknowledging and yeelding vnto him his due spiritual superiority and eminency in euery occasion as you haue heard Now M. Attorney from whome we expected some substantiall proofe to the contrary to wit that he acknowledged not nor practised the same but held this supremacy to be in himself as deriued from his Crowne in as ample sorte as Q. Elizabeth had or might haue by the Statute of Parlament that gaue her all power that had byn or might be in any spirituall person whatsoeuer c. To proue all this I say he comâ—â—â—â— forth now with this one sole Charter which you haue heâ—â—â— whereby the said King as founder of the Abbey of Reading doth assure the lands and temporall possessions which he had giuen to the said Abbey that neither Ecclesiasticall nor Royall power shall take away or distract the same vpon any occasion after the Abbots death but that they shall remaine entyre and free with all their rights in the hands of the Couent Prior and Monks therof vntill a new Abbot be Canonically elected who shall haue no propriety in any parte therof but all common with his brethren in regard wherof he is willed to dispend the same religiously according to the founders meaning and intention as out of the words of the Charter it self you haue heard 23. And now what proueth all this against vs or for our aduersarie Or why is it brought forth think you For heer â— mention only of temporall matters for assuring the possession and due vse of the monasteries temporalityes Heer is no mention at all or meaning of spirituall iurisdiction And how then is this drawne in to M. Attorneys purpose We haue shewed before out of the examples of diuers Kings that founded sundry monasteryes before the Conquest namely K. Ethelbert that of Canterbury K. Offa that of S. Albans K. Edward that of VVestminster and others that besides the ordinary power and priuiledges which founders of pious works haue by the Canon-lawes which are many and great to dispose of their owne donations and to assure the same according to their perpetuall intention The Sea of Rome was wont also to graunt them authority oftentymes to dispose and ordaine spirituall priuiledges to be confirmed afterward by the same Sea as out of diuers like Charters and Graunts you haue heard which was much more then this which heer M. Attorney alleadgeth though nothing to his purpose to proue his maine proposition of supreame Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction deriued from Princes Crownes 24. Wherof it ensueth that this is lesse then nothing And if he will vrge those words of the Charter VVe doe ordaine as ru 〈…〉 regard of Ecclesiasticall as Royall power which in latin are Statâ—iâ—â— autem tam Ecclesiasticae quam Regia prospectu potestatis c. it is also lesse then nothing importing only that he both as King and founder forbiddeth all men both Ecclesiasticall and temporall to enter vpon the lands which he hath giuen to the said monastâ—â—â— either by spirituall or Royall authority euen as you haue heard K. Edgar before prohibite the like concerning the monastery of Medeshamsted founded by him Vt nullus Ecclesiasticorum vel laicorum super ipsum Dominium habeat That no Ecclesiasticall or lay-person haue dominion ouer it or ouer the Abbot thereof signifyinge in the same place that this priuiledge notwithstanding was confirmed by the Pope and Archbishop of England And the like we may presume of this other of K. Henry as also we may note the great respect that he bare euen in this Charter to the Church for that he putteth Ecclesiasticall before Royall in this affaire And finally all this auailing
nothing to the point wherevnto M. Attorney should haue brought it he remaineth destitute of any instance out of this Kings raigne as well as out of his Predecessour Successour of which Successour we haue now also to say a word or two to end this Chapter withall OF THE RAIGNE OF KING STEPHEN The fourth King after the Conquest §. II. 25. After K. Henry raigned K. Stephen his Nephew that is to say the sonne of his sister eighteene years somewhat more wherin the misery and vncertainty of humaine designements is seene that K. Henry the first who had laboured so much to establish after him his owne succession in England by his sonnes the like in the Empire by marriage of his daughter Maude to Henry the 5. Emperour as you haue heard and to this effect was induced to cut of so many noble men and houses both in England and Normandy and to pull out his owne brothers eyes for more assurance therof holding him almost thirty years in perpetuall prison vntill his death hauing heaped togeather infinite riches and treasures saith Malmesbury to wit aboue a hundred thousand pounds in ready-money besides plate and Iewels to establish these his designements c. that now notwithstanding all was dashed vpon the suddaine his male children being drowned vpon sea and his daughter returning without issue from Germany 〈◊〉 dispossessed in like manner of her inheritance to England by 〈◊〉 neerest kinsman Stephen that first of all other had sworne â—â—mage vnto her in her Fathers dayes 26. This man then hauing gotten the possession of the Crowne albeit he had infinite troubles therewith and the Realme much more by this means and by his instability of nature who was wont saith Malmesbury to begin many things goe through with few to promise much and perfourme little yet held he out for more then 18. years togeather as I haue said And in all this time though he had little leasure to attend peculiarly to Ecclesiasticall matters and lesse will oftentymes being wholy intangled in matters of warre yet his whole course and race of life sheweth euidently that in this point either of beleife or practice concerning Ecclesiasticall power he did not differ or dissent from his auncestors or from other Christian Catholike Princes that liued round about him in those dayes Nay he was held for so religious in this behalfe before he was King as the opinion therof did greatly further him to gaine the Kingdome For that saith Malmesbury Henry Bishop of VVinchester which now was Legate of the Sea Apostolicke in England that principally was the cause of his preferment to the Crowne was induced therevnto by most certaine hope that Stephen would follow the manners of his grand-father the Conquerour in gouerning the Crowne but especially in preseruing the discipline of Ecclesiasticall vigour and vpon this hope did the said Bishop interpose himself as mediatour and pledge for Stephen with VVilliam Archbishop of Canterbury and the rest of the Bishops and nobility exacting of him a strict oath De libertare reddenda Ecclesia conseruanda For restoring and conseruing the liberty of the Church which VVilliam Rufus by his loose gouernment had much infringed 27. The same Malmesbury also that liued with him setteth downe the mutuall oathes both of him and his nobility the one to the other surauerunt Episcopi fidelitatem Regi saith he quamdiu ille libertatem Ecclesiae vigorem disciplina conseruaret The Bishops did swâ—â—â— homage and fidelity to the King as long as he maintained the liberty of the Church and vigour of discipline therin But the Kings oath was large concerning his election admission crowinge by the Archbishop of Canterbury as Legat Apostolicall that he was particularly confirmed by Pope Innocentius c. And then it followeth Ego Stephanus c. respectu amore Dei Sanctam Ecclesiam liberam esse c. I King Stephen doe graunt and confirme for the respect and loue I beare to allmighty God to maintaine the freedome of his Church doe promise that I will neither doe nor permit any symmoniacall act of selling or buying benefices within the same I doe testifie also and confirme that the persons and goods of all Clergy-men be in the hands power and iustice of their Bishops c. And I doe confirme by these presents and their dignityes priuiledges and auncient customes to be inuiolably obserued c. 28. This oatâ— made he at his first entrance as Rufus others had done before him wherby they testified not only their iudgment but also their obligation though afterward in obseruance therof many times they failed vpon particular interest or passion mouing them to the contrary For so writeth Malmesbury also of this King Penè omnia ita perperà m mutauit posteà quasi ad hoc tantum iurassâ—t vt preuaricatorem Sacramenti se Regno toti ostenderet He did afterward in his life so peruersly breake all that he had sworne as though his swearing had byn only to this effect to shew himself an Oath-breaker to the whole Kingdome But yet presently after he excuseth him againe Sed haec omnia non tam illi quam Confiliarijs eius ascribendae putâ— But I doe thinke all these things to be ascribed rather to euill Counsellours then to himself 29. One notable case fell out vpon the 4. yeare of his raigne to wit in the yeare of our Lord 1139. when holding his Courte in the Citty of Oxford and expecting dayly the comming out of Normandy of Robert Earle of Glocester in fauour of Maude the Empresse I meane that famous Robert base sonne of K. Henry the first most excellent in wisedome and feats of Armes and a great fauourer of learned men to whome both Malmesbury and Geffrey of Monmouth dedicated their books the King being persuaded I say by certaine il Counselours and souldiars about him to lay hands vpon the goods and Castles of two rich and potent Bishops the one Roger of Salisbury that had byn Chaplaine to King Henry and the other Alexander of Lincolne his nephew and the Kings Chauncelour he followed at length their counsaile and caused both Bishops to be apprehended and forced to deliuer vp the keyes of their Castles and treasures therein pretending feare and doubt least they would otherwise hape kept the same for the said Earle of Glocester and Maude the Empresse◠〈◊〉 30. And albeit these two Bishops power greatnes had 〈◊〉 much misliked also by the Cleargie it self yet seeing saith Malmesbury this violence to be vsed against the Canons they admonished the King therof by diuers waies especially by his brother Bishop of VVinchester now also Legate of the Sea Apostolicke a likewise by Theobald Archbishop of Canterbury that had succeeded William who went so far and were so earnest in this matter saith Malmesbury then liuing vt suppliciter pedibus Regis in cubiculâ— effusi orauerunt vt misereretur Ecclesiae
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-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
lost during his life which iudgement was before any Statute or Act of Parlament was made in that case And there it is said that for the like offence the Archbishop of Canterbury had byn in worse case by the iudgement of the Sages of the law then to be punished for a contempt if the King had not extended grace and fauour to him The Catholicke Deuine 26. Here againe is another case or two de facto wherof M. Attorney wil needs inferre de iure The Archbishop of Yorke his lands saith he were seased by the King and lost during his life for that he admitted not to a benefice within his Diocesse a Clerke presented by the King whereas the same benefice had an incumbent before put in by the Popes prouision according to the custome of those dayes which incumbent the said Archbishop pleaded that he could not put out and for this high contempt against the King his crowne and dignity in refusing to execute his soueraignes commaundement saith M. Attorney by iudgement of the Common-law he lost the landes of his whole Bishopricke But here I would aske M. Attorney what high contempt could this be against the King his crowne and dignity if the Archbishop pleaded that he could not doe it eyther in right or in power Not in right for that nothing was more receaued at that tyme in England then for the Bishop of Rome to prouide certayne benefices in England and not only benefices but also Bishopricks and Archbishopricks as before in the life of this King and his ancestours hath byn declared And as for power no maruaile if the Archbishop durst not vse violence in those dayes against the Popes prouisions wherby he might incurre excommunication for so much as the King himself so greatly respected the same and made such diligent premunition least my such excommunication should come against him as in the answere to the former instance hath byn declared 17. And besides this if the Archbishop did put the matter in plea to be trayed and to the Kings writt of Quare non admisit did yeelde so reasonable a cause as is here touched that the King himself had admitted diuers Bishops and Archbishops by like prouision of Popes how and with what reason can M. Attorney call this answere of the Archbishop so high a contempt against the King his crowne and dignitie Or how could the Common-law condemne the same with so great a punishment And still I must demaund what is this Common-law by whome was it made how came it in where is it founded either in reason vse consent of the people or authority of law-giuers For if it consist in none of these but only in the particular will and iudgement of the Prince himself neuer so passionate and in the approbation execution of these Sages which here M. Attorney mentioneth then any thing that displeased the said Prince may be called high contempt against his person crowne and dignity And so may be iustified all the most passionate actions not only of this King Edward before recited but of all other Kings whosoeuer And by the same meanes M. Attorney maketh his auncient Cōmon-law which often he calleth our birth-right and best birth-right to be nothing else in effect but the Princes pleasure frō time to time and the execution of his Sages which commonly in those auncient times for I will speake nothing of our dayes were to wise and Sage to withstand the Princes will in any thing 28. Sure I am that in this particular fact of seasing Bishops lands and temporalityes vpon any offence or displeasure taken by the King as it hath byn vsed by some English Princes in their anger so hath it bin condemned also in diuers Parlaments lawes and Statutes as in the first yeare of King Edward the third where it is thus expressed Because before this time in the time of King Edward Father to the King that now is he by euill Counsellours caused to be seased into his handes the temporalty of diuers Bishoppes with their goods and cattell c. The King willeth and graunteth that from hence forth it be not done c. And againe in the 14. yeare of the same raigne VVe will and graunt for vs and for our heires that from henceforth we shall not take nor doe to be taken into our handes the temporalities of Archbishops Bishops Abbot c. without a true and iust cause according to the law of the land c. 29. And to the end that M. Attorney may not say that this case of his is excepted it followeth in an other Statute in the 25. yeare of the same King saying VVhereas the temporalities of Archbishops and Bishops haue beene oftentimes taken into the Kings hand for contempt done to him vpon writts of Quare non admisit and for diuers other causes c. The King willeth and graunteth in the said Parlament that all Iustices shall from henceforth receaue for the contempt so iudged reasonable fyne of the party so condemned according to the quantity of the trespasse and after the quality of the contempt c. Which last words may be thought to be added for that the King had right to present to diuers benefices at that tyme as particular patrone therof ex iure patronatus for that the said benefices were fouuded or erected by himself or his auncestors and in those cases the Bishops not admitting such Clerkes as he presented might doe some iniury or trespasse against him and therin shew contempt worthy some fyne or for-faite which the law doth here appoint especially for so much as it is be ore recorded that Pope Innocentius the 4. presently vpon the first Councell of Lyons wrote as you haue heard in the life of K. Henry the third that he would not let by his prouision the right of any patrone in presenting to any benefice wherof he had the aduowson or Ius patronatus 30. And as for the other example alleadged heere by M. Attorney for strengthning his instance of the Archbishop of Canterbury saying that for the like offence the Archbishop of Canterbury had byn in worse case by the iudgement of the Sages of the law then to be punished for a contempte if the King had not extended grace and fauour to him If he vnderstand the displeasure taken against Archbishop VVinchelsey before mentioned by K. Edward for resisting his demaund of the one halfe of all Ecclesiasticall rents for which before we haue heard out of Mathew of VVestminster that all his lands and goods were seased into the Kings hands you haue heard also how the same King afterward repented both that and other like facts of his and asked pardon publikly with teares But if he meane the other offence againe after this when he accused the said Archbishop VVinchelsey to the Pope and caused him to be called to Rome and to be suspended from his office as before we haue declared then doth this
notorious and might be declared by infinite examples that â— remained now as before vnder all other Catholicke Princes For among other points we reade that when in the yeare of Christ 1312. Robert VVinchelsey Archbishop of Canterbury dyed the Monkes of that place according to the custome chose by the liking and procuration of the King one Thomas Cobham a man of eminent learning and vertue who going to Auinion in France where Pope Clement the fifth lay at that tyme to receaue his confirmation and inuestiture as the manner was in those dayes the said Pope told him that long before in the other Archbishops life he had reserued the collation of that Archbishopricke to himself for that tyme and therevpon pronounced that election to be voyde adding further this coÌ„sideration that England being â—â— that day in great troubles and disgust for that many Lords Barons had shewed their mislike against the King and the King against them it was needfull to haue in that place of Canterbury a man of great credit and experience in such affaires and therefore named one VVilliam Reynoldes Bishop of VVorcester and Chancellour of the Realme at that day and presently sent him both his inuestiture and pall wherewith the King and Queene being greatly contented were present at his consecration and so he liued and gouerned 19. yeares after in that Sea with great commendation So as we see that the restraint of Papall prouisions made at Carliele vnder this mans father was not yet put in practice 46. And the like reseruatioÌ„ we read that Pope Iohn the 22. made of the Bishopricke of VVinchester afterward in the yeare 1320. and therby did disanull the election made by the Monkes of that place with consent of the King and placed another of his owne choice which the King also after some time admitted So as this was very ordinary in those dayes We reade likewise that in the yeare 1324. a Parlament being called at London and King Edward growing now by euill counsaile of the Spencers and others into great disorder he caused one Adam Bishop of Hereford that fauoured not his proceedings to be arrested of treason brought forth publickely to be tryed laying to his charge that he had â—â—ceaued and fauoured diuerse of those Barons which had taken armes against him But the forsaid Archbishop of Canterbury and his brethren Bishops seeing this disorder made first humble supplication to the King that he might be tryed according to his place degree and that not preuayling they required the same by law according to the liberties and priuiledges of the Church confirmed by Magna charta other lawes of the Realme Whervpon he was deliuered to the custody of the said Archbishop of Canterbury but afterward he being called for againe by the instigation of such as were his enemyes and carryed to the barre the said Archbishop of Canterbury and the other of Yorke with ten other Bishops went thither in iudiciall maÌ„ner with their crosses borne before them commaunding vnder paine of excommunication that no man should stay him or lay hands on him and so tooke him away to the Archbishops custody againe Whereby we may see in what vigour Ecclesiasticall power was at this day in England And albeit the King being in passion did storme greatly thereat and seased presently vpon all the said Bishops goods and lands as he had done vpon those of the Bishop of Lincolne and of others before yet could he not deny but that this was law iustice which the Bishops did according to the Ecclesiasticall priuiledges of the Realme whervnto the King himself and all his ancestours in their coronations had solemnely sworne For breaking wherof it may be presumed that so great a punishment fell vpon him as soone after ensued to the horror of the whole world by depriuation both of his Kingdome and life And so much of him Now let vs see what instance M. Attorney can draw from him to his purpose It is but one and thus it runneth in his owne words The Attorney 47. Albeit by the ordinance of Circumspectè agatis made in the 18. yere of Edward the first and by generall allowance and vsage the Ecclesiasticall Courtes held plea of tythes obuentions oblations mortuaries redemptions of pennaunce laying of violent handâ— vpon a Clerke defamations c. yet did not the Clergy thinke themselues assured nor quiet from prohibitions purchased by subiectes vntill that King Edward the second by his letters parents vnder the great seale in by consent of Parlament vpon the petitions of the Clergy had graunted vnto them to haue iurisdiction in these cases The King in a Parlament holden in the â— yeare of his raigne after particular answers made to their petitions concerning the matter aboue said doth graunt and giue his Royall assent in these words We desiring as much as of right we may to prouide for the state of the Church of England the tranquillity and quiet of the Prelates of the said Clergy to the honour of God and the amendment of the State of the said Church and of the Prelates and Clergy ratifying and approuing all and singular the said answers which appeare in the said act and all and singular things in the said answeres conteyned we doe for vs and our heires graunt and commaund that the same be inuiolably kept for euer willing and graunting for vs and our heires that the said Prelates and Clergy and their Successours for euer doe exercise Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in the premisses according to the tenour of the said answere The Catholicke Deuine 48. If a man would aske M. Attorney in this place why he hath brought in this instance and what he would proue therby I thinke verily he would be much graueled in answering especially if we respecte his principall Conclusion that by this and like presidence Q. Elizabeth might take vpon her supreme authority Ecclesiasticall for that by this narration nothing else is declared but that a certaine abuse being crept in that when any externall matter seeming any way to belong to temporalityes was handled in Ecclesiasticall Courtes and by Ecclesiasticall Iudges the party that feared or suspected his owne cause would informe the Kings Courtes that the matter belonged to them and therevpon would get out a prohibition from the Chauncery to sursease in that cause vntill it were tryed to which Court it belonged By which deceytfull and malitions proceeding of some much trouble was procured and many causes rested indetermined both in the one and the other Courte for so saith the Statute it self made in the time of King Edward the first this mans Father in these words VVhereas Ecclesiasticall Iudges haue oftentymes surceased to proceed in cases moued before them by force of the Kings writ of prohibition c. to the great damage of many as the King hath byn aduertised by the grieuous complaints of his subiects c. For this cause many orders and Statutes were
and little pertinent as you will see to the manie conclusion which he should proue that this King did take supreme spirituall authority and iurisdiction vpon him And for that the grounds of all that is heer obiected haue byn discussed and answered in that wee haue set downe before and this booke groweth to more length then was purposed at the beginning and finally for that the law-bookâ—◠〈◊〉 cited of collections and obseruations by later authors which bookes I haue not by mee are of small authority to our purpose I shall passe ouer the said obiections with the greatest breuity that I can remitting mee for the most part to that which before hath byn said and answered The Attorney An excommunication by the Archbishop albeit it be disanulled by the Pope or his Legats is to be allowed neither ought the Iudges giue any allowance of any such sentence of the Pope or his Legate The Catholicke Deuine 15. This assertion I doe not see how it can be admitted for true as it lieth for so much as no author maketh mention that K. Edward did euer deny absolutely the Popes authority to excommunicate by himself or by his Legats in England especially vpon the 16. yeare of his raigne as heere it is noted in the margent when he was most deuout to the Sea Apostolicke wrote the humble letter before mentioned the next yeare after according to the date of the said letter as you haue heard only there might be this accorde between them for more authority of the said Archbishop and peace of the Realme that when he had giuen forth any excommunication no annullation therof from the Pope which might perhaps be procured by false suggestion should be admitted or executed vntill the Pope were informed of the truth this is vsed also in other Catholicke Kingdomes at this day 16. And it were to much simplicity to imagine that English men in those dayes admitting the Archbishops excommunication as heer they doe and for confirmation therof we doe read in VValsingham that vpon the yeare 1340. and 14. of King Edwards raigne Iohn Stratford Archbishop of Canterbury threatned the said King to excommunicate all his counsell if he amended not certaine points wherin they offered iniury to Clergy men it were simplicity I say to thinke that the said Archbishops excommunication could not be controlled by that of the Pope from whom they acknowledged the said Archbishop at that time to haue his spirituall authority if he had any at all For froÌ„ whence should they imagine him to haue it for that the Kings as we haue seen had not so much as the nomination or presentation of Archbishops in that season but only the Popes much lesse their induction confirmation or inuestiture Whervpon it must needs follow that he which gaue them spirituall iurisdiction had greater higher iurisdiction himself though in some cases by agreement not to be vsed as before hath byn said The Attorney It is often resolued that all the Bishopricks within England were founded by the Kings progenitours and therfore the aduowsons of them all belong to the King and at the first they were donatiue and that if an incumbent of any Church with Cure dy if the Patron present not within six moneths the Bishop of that Diocesse ought to collate to the end the Cure may not be destitute of a Pastor If he be negligent by the space of six moneths the Metropolitan of that Diocesse shall confer one to that Church and if he also leaue the Church destitute by the space of six moneths then the Common-law giueth to the King as to the supreme within his owne Kingdome and not to the Bishop of Rome power to prouide a competent pastor for that Church The Catholicke Deuine 17. Is it be true which M. Attorney hath so often repeated before that the Conusaunce and deciding of Ecclesiasticall causes doe not appertaine to the Common-law and that the prouision or induction of Clerks to benefices and giuing them spirituall iurisdiction ouer the soules of those that be within the compasse of that benefice be of the number of those causes which I take to be set downe in like manner by M. Attorneys owne pen before vnder the names of admissions and institutions of Clerks then how can it be true which heere is said that the Common-law giueth to the King as to the supreme to prouide competent Pastors for that or those Churches that within the space of a yeare and halfe are not prouided by the particular patron Diocesian or metropolitan Or where is this Common-law How or when did it begin as often elswhere I haue demaunded Either by vse or statute or common agreement between the Prince and people For none of these haue we heard of hitherto vnder former Kings though for presenting and nomination to benefices we haue oftentymes said that there is no difficulty but that the temporall Prince may present in such benefices or Bishopricks as he is patron of either founding the said benefices or by particular concession of the Sea Apostolicke vnto him as we haue shewed more largly before in the life of K. VVilliam the Conquerour and before him againe vnder K. Edward the Confessor to whom the Sea of Rome in those dayes gaue spirituall iurisdiction also in some cases ouer the Abbey of VVestminster some other places of his Realme 18. But that the Common-law should dispose of these things and especially giue spiritual iurisdiction to the King ouer benefices for so must the meaning of M. Attorney be if he delude not his Reader with equiuocation of words this I say is both contrary to his owne rule before set downe and much more to reason For that to giue Ecclesiasticall iurisdictiom is much more then to haue the conusaunce of Ecclesiasticall causes which he denying to his Common-law in diuers places of his booke as before we haue seen caÌ„not in reasoÌ„ ascribe to th' other 19. Wherefore though we graunt this graduation heer set dovvne as good and conueuient that if the particular patron doe not present within six moneths nor the Ordinary or Metropolitan within their tymes prescribed the Prince as supreme gouernour of the Common-wealth to see all things done in due order may present as if he were patron to the said benefice yet first this cannot come originally from the Common-law for the reasons alleadged Secondly this proueth no spirituall iurisdiction at all in any presentor but only power of presentation which may be in any man that hath Ius patronatus allowed by the Church and head therof as before hath byn said Thirdly much lesse doth this proue supreme authority spirituall in the Prince as M. Attorney would inferre which is euident among other reasons by this For that the Prince when he doth present in this manner by lapse of tyme or omission of others is the last in power of presentation after the Metropolitans and Bishops which yet
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
should bee able to get authoritie ouer so manie other Bishops his equals throughout so manie and different nations so far off from him and so little fearing his temporall power or that so manie People Citties Kingdomes Common-wealths Prouinces and Nations would bee so prodigall of their owne libertie as to subiect themselues to a forraine Priest as now so manie ages they haue done or to giue him such authoritie ouer theÌ„selues if he had no right therevnto at all 7. But what shall I stand to dispute with Luther in this matter Or what importeth it what he saieth or beleeueth therin for so much as through anger and enuie he knoweth not himself what he thinketh or saith but declareth well the saying of the Apostle to be true in himself Cor ipsius insipiens obscuratum itaditumque in reprobum sensum That his foolish heart is darkned and deliuered ouer vnto a reprobate sense So King Henry pronouncing as you see a heauy iudgment against Luther now and himself afterwarde when he fell into the same darknes and not only obscuritie of vnderstanding but inconstancie also of proceeding which heer so eagerly hee obiecteth to Luther for this he writeth of him Quis non eius miretur inconstantiam c. who will not wonder at Luthers inconstancie for a little before he wrote in his bookes that the Papaltie though it were not by diuine right yet was it by humane to witt by humane consent for the publik good of the Church and therevpon condemned and detested the sect of the Hussites in Bohemia for that they had cut themselues off from the obedience of the Roman Sea affirming that they sinned damnably whosoeuer obaied not the Pope This he wrote verie lately since his fall from Catholicke religion but now he is run into that which then he so much detested And like inconstancy he hath shewed in another point also which is that hauing preached of late in a certaine Sermon to the people that the Popes excommunication was to bee obaied and patiently be borne as a medecine in a disease WheÌ„ himself afterwards was most worthily excommunicated he tooke that sentence of the Pope so impotently as seeming to be mad or fallen into rage he brake forth into such contumelious speaches and blasphemies as no Christian eares can abide to heare the same so as by his furie he hath made it euident Eos qui pelluntur gremio matris Ecclesia statim furijs corripi atque agitari daemonibus That those which are cast out from the lap of their mother the Church are taken presently with suries and vexed with diuells Thus far K. Henry and much more to this effect which for breuityes sake I pretermit 8. And now let vs with greife of mind some terror of conscience looke ouer and reflect vpon that which happened afterward vnto this King himself and into what extremes of passion and choller he fell in his writings and Statutes against this very Supremacy of the Pope when he was excommunicated by him which heere he defendeth against Luther though in other points of doctrine he remained still opposite to Luther euen vnto his dying day 9. It is worthy the noting also what mutability and inconstancy he vsed not only in the whole thing to wit in dâ—â—â—ing the Popes Supremacy but in the very manner also of falling into that extremity For first for many yeares after the writing of this his booke which was in the yeare of Christ 1521. he continued so deuout and obedient to the said Sea of Rome as no King in Christendome more as may appeare by the mutuall good offices of loue friendship that passed between them And when six yeares after this againe Rome was spoiled by the army of the Duke of Burbon Pope Clement the seauenth held as besieged in the Castle of S. Angelo no King or Prince of Christendome was more forward in the ayd of the said Pope then K. Henry of England as may appeare by his great and famous Embassadge sent that very yeare into France by Cardinall VVolsey about that matter in the yeare 1527. to draw the King of France into the association of that aid and help 10. And when againe the next yeare after King Henry began to moue his doubt or question about the lawfullnes of his marriage with Queene Catherine he referred the whole matter to Rome and procured Iudges to be sent from thence as namely Cardinall Campegius that was directed from Rome the selfsame yeare into England for Legat with like commission for Cardinall VVolsey to be ioyned with him as deputyes from Pope Clement to heare and iudge the matter before whome sitting in iudgment both K. Henry and Queen Catherine being cited personally to appeare they made their appearance in the Church of the Black-Friars in London in the moneth of Aprill anno Domini 1529. which was the one and twentith of King Henryes raigne And albeit King Henry being offended that by this means of these two Legats the Pope accepting of the Appeal of Queen Catherine recalling the matter to himself he could not haue his wil did put from his fauour soone after Cardinall VVolsey when the other was departed and brought him to the miserable end which is well knowne yea condemned for his sake the whole Clergy of England in a Premunire that is to say the losse of all their goods which afterward they redeemed with a submission and payment of a hundred thousand pounds for that they had acknowledged the said Cardinals Legantine authority which himself had procured from Rome yet did not he for this surcease to send other Embassadours to continue the solicitation of the same suite of diuorce in the said Court of Rome and namely among others Doctor Stephen Gardâ—â—â— the Kings chiefe Secretary soone after made Bishop of VVinchester who was sent thither as Stow and others doe testifie presently after the departure of Cardinall Campegius in the same yeare 1529. Neither did King Henry leaue of to hold his Embassadours Lawyers and Procurators there about this matter for two or three yeares after this againe vntill he saw there was no hope to get his diuorce by that means and on the otherside was resolued to marry the Lady Anne Bullen whatsoeuer came of it and so did in the yeare 1533. and 24. of his raigne 11. Thus then you see the beginning and progresse of the cause of King Henryes breach with the Sea Apostolicke which probably would neuer haue byn if he could haue obtained his will that way but falling into despaire therof tooke resolution to cut the knot which otherwise he could not vndoe But the manner of his proceeding may be best seen by two Acts of Parlament set downe heer by M. Attorney the one of the 24. the other of the 25. yeare of King Henryes raigne for that in the former which was in the yeare of his marriage with Lady Anne Bullen as hath byn said he prohibited
VValsingham alleadgeth this confirmation of the said priuiledge in his time Quod nullus Clericus sit arrei ratuâ— coram Iustitiarijs suis siue ad sectam suam siue partes si Clericus suae Clerimoniae se submittat dicens se membrum Ecclesiae Sanctae non debere ipsis Iustitiarijs respoÌ„dere That no Clerk maie bee arraygned before the Kings Iustices at the suite of the said King or of anie other party yf the said Clerk doe submitt himself to his Clergie affirming that hee being a member of holy Church ought not to answere to the said Iustices So VValsingham And this shall bee sufficient to meete with the assertion of M. Attorney to the contrary and herewith shall we end our speach of King Henry the eight Of King Edvvard the sixt the one and twentith King after the Conquest §. III. 26. This younge Prince being but a child of 9. yeares old when his father King Henry died as often hath been said was by his Tutors and Gouernours especially his Vncle Earle of Hartford after made Duke of Somerset and some others that followed his appetite in the desire of innouation about matters of religion declared Head of the Church vnder the same stile as his father had been before and by that headship and pretence therof they took to theÌ„selues authoritie to make that change which after ensued partly to the opinions of Luther partly of Zuinglius for Caluin was not yet so famous or forward in credit for some years after and to ouerthrow and alter in effect all that King Henry by his headship had ordained and established before concerning religion as may appeare by the seuerall and particular repeals of the most parte of all his Statutes touching that affaire except only this of his departure from the Pope and obedience of the Sea Apostolicke 27. But yet one principall declaration and important constitution they added in this matter as before hath been touched aboue that of King Henry according to the saying facile est inuentis addere and this is that whereas the Father K. Henry taking from the Pope his accustomed iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall did transferre it vnto his Clergie of England and afterward declaring himself Spirituall head of that Clergie did consequentlie inferre he was head of the English Church also in spirituall matters yet did he not explaine from what origen properly this spirituall power did flow which point the said Gouernours of the child-King Edward did interprete and decide shewing that all spirituall iurisdiction power and authority ouer soules by loosing or binding of sinnes or other spirituall actions in Bishops Prelates and Priests proceeded and was deriued from this young child who yet notwithstanding as ech man may consider was not of yeares to haue perfect vse of reason for disposing so much as temporall matters and how much lesse in spirituall For so affirmeth plainly S. Paul to the Galathians Quanto tempore haeres parâ—ulus est nihil differt à seruo cum sit Dominus omnium sed sub tutoribus actoribus est vsque ad praefinitum tempus à Patre All the time that the heire is young or vnder age though he be Lord of all by inheritance yet doth he differ nothing from a seruant or bound-man in subiection but is vnder Tutors and Administrators vntill the tyme of his age appointed by his Father So the Apostle 28. And if then this young King had not yet authority as of himself to dispose of any temporall affaires which are of much lesse moment we may easily consider what may be thought of spirituall and Ecclesiasticall that require more the vse of reason and iudgement for exercising of iurisdiction therin then doth the other But you will say perhaps that the same Tutors and Administrators that gouerned him in secular Ciuill affaires might take vpon them also iurisdiction in the spirituall likewise and so the Duke of Somerset for example with his assistants might be secondary or Vicar-heads of the Church of England vnder him for the tyme to absolue or bind sinnes determine of heresies dispose of Sacraments and the like 29. But to this â—s easily answered according to the principles set downe in the secoÌ„d Chapter of this booke that for so much as all temporall power is giuen first of all by God in the law of Nature vnto the people or multitude who thereby haue authority to transferre the same to what manner of gouernement they like either Monarchie or other it followeth also that the Common-wealth that had authority to choose or appoint the state of Kings to raigne ouer them had and hath power to giue sufficient authority in like manner to Tutors and Administrators to gouerne the said Common-wealth in temporall affaires during the tyme of their Kings minority or non-age But that the origen of spirituall power comming not by this way of the people nor being giuen to them at all but immediatly by Christ our Sauiour to his Apostles and their Successours Bishops and Prelates by lawfull Ordination and Succession of Priesthood and imposition of hands to the end of the world no temporall Tutors or Administrators could rightly get into this authority except they were first made Priests and this also by Caluins opinion and assertion as well as ours as before hath byn declared 30. By this then wee see how and by what assurance this headship of the Church and supreme Ecclesiasticall authoritie therof passed from the Father to the sonne which was such as it liked not M. Attorney to alleadge anie one Statute of this mans time against vs though all in deed were made against vs and against the said Father as maie bee easily imagined considering the Current of that time And the very first of all was in fauour of Luthers opinioÌ„ about the Reall presence which afterward they changed into that of Zwinglius They changed also twyce their Communion booke and forme of seruice and Sacraments first vpon the second and third yeares of King Edwards raigne and secondly vpon the 5. and 6. as appeareth in the particular Statutes of those yeares They repealed a great number of K. Henries Statutes as by name concerning treasons and heresies They repealed his famous Statute for PrecoÌ„tracts in marriages as also dissolued diuers of his Courts that he had set vp And finally they respected nothing the said King Henries headship nor his prescription or direction therin but followâ—d their owne for the time that their power endured And yet all was published vnder the name of the Ghospell and New reformation established by negociation in Parlament as though the matter had proceeded from very sound and founded Ecclesiasticall authoritie And this for that time wherof M. Attorney alleadging no one example against vs I haue no further need to enlarge my self Of the raigne of Queene Mary the two and twentith Princesse after the Conquest §. IIII. 31. As M. Attorney doth preâ—ermitt
Pope Clement the 7. and how the same began cap. 15. num 4.5.6 7. Bulles from Rome not admitted in England except they came certified from some Prelate at home and why cap. 12. num 28. cap. 13. num 27. C. Calixtus the Pope his meeting vvith Henry the first in Normandy cap. 8. n. 14. Campian his fellow-martyrs protestations at their death cap. 16. num 12. Canon-lawes how they vvere receyued in England cap. 14. num 17. Canutus K. of England his confirmation of Peter-pence to Rome cap. 6. n. 72. Catholicke Religion the birth-right of Englishmen cap. 1. num 26. Catholickes falsely charged by M. Attorney cap. 16. num 2.3 deinceps Catholicke-Recusants from the beginning of Q. Elizabeths raigne cap. 16. num 7. Catholickes falsely accused of inconstancy cap. 16. num 18. Caudrey the Clerke his case cap. 3. per totum Causes of K. Henry the 8. his falling out and breach vvith the Sea Apostolicke cap 15. num 1.2 3. Ceadwalla K. of the VVestsaxons his pilgrimage to Rome cap. 6. num 83. His baptisme there and death ibid. Celestine Pope his letters to the Realme of England in absence of K. Richard the first cap. 9. num 33. Charters for Church-priuiledges before the Conquest and after cap. 5. num 2. 3. 4. deinceps cap. 8. num 23. The beginning of the Great-charter vnder K. Henry the third cap. 10. num 6. Church-libertyes confirmed by K. Richard the second cap. 12. num 43. S. Chrysostomes iudgement of spirituall power cap. 2. num 21.22.23 24. Ciuill warres in England vnder King Henry the third cap. 10. num 12. Clergy-men subiect to the Ciuill Magistrate in temporal affaires cap. 2. num 33. 34. But not in spirituall ibid. num 35. Clergie-mens persons exempted from secular povver cap. 2. num 26. 37. Clerkes euer exempted from temporall Iudges cap. 15. num 20. Collations of benefices by lay-men cap. 7. num 26. 29. Comparison betweene Catholick sand Sectaryes cap. 1. num 13. 14. Commodityes or discommodityes of municipall lavves cap. 1. num 20. Comon-lawes birthright cap. 1. num 22. 23. Complaintes against strangers beneficed in England cap. 10. num 21.22 23. deinceps Remedyes sought to the Pope therfore ibid. num 23. Controuersy-wryters condemned by M. Attorney and vvhy cap. 1. num 26.27 28. 29. Controuersy-writers against their conscience cap. 1. nu 32. and vvho they be ibid. num 35. Constantius the Emperour reprehended by Bishops cap. 4. num 6.7 8. Confirmation of Church libertyes in England by diuers Kinges before and after the Conquest cap. 5. num 7. deinceps Cap. 8. n. 23. Conquest of VVales by K. Edward the first cap. 11. num 9. Conuersion of diuers Kingdomes in England one after the other cap. 6. num 15. Condemnation of Protestantes doctrine by K. Henry the eight cap. 15. n. 15. 16. Conscience the cause that Catholicks follow not M. Attorneys current cap. 16. num 19. 20. Constantius the Emperour his iudgement touching such as dissembled in Religion cap. 16. num 20. Councell of Constance in Germany cap. 13. num 6. English Prelates sent thither ibid. Courtes spirituall and temporall and their difference ca 4. nu 11. deinceps Courtes spirituall superiour to temporall ca. 10. num 30. Cranmer the first hereticall Archbishop of Canterbury ca. 15. nu 32. Burnt at Oxford for his heresies ibid. Crosses erected by K. Edward the first ca. 11. num 6. Crowne of EnglaÌ„d not subiect to any in temporalityes ca. 12. nu 48. D. Decrees and Ordinances of Pope Formosus for the Church of England ca. 6. num 59. Decree against Bigamy ca. 11. nu 31. Decree of Pope Gregory the ninth about proceeding against hereticks ca. 13. num 14. Decrees of K. Henry the eyght his breach with the Sea Apostolicke ca. 15. num 11. 12. Despaire causeth forgetfulnes of all reason and duty and vvhy ca. 16. n. â—2 Demonstrations before the Conquest against secular Princes Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction in England cap. 6. per totum Deposition of Stigand Archbishop of Canterbury ca. 7. num 9. Difference of Courtes and vvhat it proueth ca. 4. num 11. Difference of lawes and law-makers before the Conquest ca. 6. num â— Difference of Courtes shew differeÌ„ce of origen and authority ca. 11. nu 50. Directions of ancient Fathers hovv to find out Truth ca. 1. nu 17. 18. Dispensations of most importance procured alvvayes from Rome cap. 6. num â—4 35. Dissention betvveene Protestants and Puritans and vvhy Prefac n. 18. 19. Dissimulation in Religiou hovv daungerous cap. 16. num 20. Doubts raised in England concerning bygamy cap. 11. num 32. E. Ecclesiasticall lavves made to be the Kinges lavves by M. Attorney cap. 4. nu 13. 14. Ecclesiasticall vveighty matters allvvayes referred to Rome by our English Kinges cap. 6. num 19. Edgar K. of England his speach for the reformation of the Clergy cap. 6. num 87. 88. His piety and deuotion tovvards the Sea of Rome ibid. S. Edmund Archbishop of Canterbury threatneth K. Henry the third if he obayed not cap. 10. num 37. K Edward the Confessor his confirmation of Peter-pence to Rome cap. 6. num 73. K. Edward the first surnamed Long-shanke cap. 11. num 3. His deuotion ibid. num 4. His vvorkes of piety ibid. His Conquest of VVales ibid. num 9. His mutability in keeping Church-priuiledges ibid. num 11. His violent proceeding against the Clergy ibid. num 12. 13. His euer obedience to the Sea of Rome in meere spirituall things ibid. num 14. 17. His deuotion tovvards the first Pope in Auinion in France ibid. num 16. His accusation of the Archbishop of Canterbury to the Pope ibid. num 16. His lawes in preiudice of the Clergy ibid. num 21. K. Edward the second his euill successe of marriage in France cap. 11. n. 41. K. Edward the third his restraints against the Clergy of England cap. 12. num 1. 2. His punishment for the violence vsed towards the Church cap. 12. nu 2.3.39 40. Motiues that induced him therto ibid. num 3. His great embassage to the Pope ib. num 7. His protestation for obedience to the Sea of Rome for himselfe and his cap. 12. num 8. His disordinate life ibid. num 41. K. Edward the fourth his raigne ouer England cap. 14. num 1.2.3 deinceps K. Edward the sixth his raigne cap. 15. num 26. His Supremacy of the Church of England declared by the Protector his vncle ibid. S. Egwyn Bishop of VVorcester his monastery of Euesham cap. 6. num 42. His voyage to Rome ibid. nu 79. Elections of Bishops 4. kinds cap. 7. num 32. Eminency of spirituall power aboue temporall cap. 2. num 19. England made tributary to Rome cap 6. num 67. cap. 9. num 62.63 64. Entrance into England denyed to the Popes Legates and vvhy cap. 14. n. 13. 15. Error vvhat it is
ratas haberet donationes quas fecerat Rex in Eboracensi Ecclesia Dominus Rex redderet ei Archiepiscopatum suum cum omni integritate c. These Bishops were to demaund in the spirit of humulity on the Kings behalfe that the said Archbishop would ratifie and make good all the donations or gifts which the King had bestowed in the Church of Yorke during the time he had with-held his Archbishopricke that there vpon the King would restore vnto him his Archbishopricke with all integrity But the Archbishop demaunded first of these Bishops sent vnto him whether they would vnder their hands and writings assure him that he might doe it in conscience but they refusing he refused also to graunt the Kings request and therevpon appealed againe to Rome and went thither in person and the King on his side sent Proctors and Aduocats thither to plead for him as Houeden at large declareth And moreouer to bridle him the more he besought the Pope to make Hubert then Archbishop of Canterbury Legat of the Sea Apostolike ouer all England 47. And agayne both this Author and Nubergensis doe declare how the foresaid VValter Archbishop of Roane that had byn so great a friend of K. Richard euer since the beginning of his raigne and had gone with him to Sicily and returned againe to England for pacifying of matters between the Bishop of Ely that was Gouernour the Earle Iohn and moreouer had also byn Gouernour of England himself after King Richards Captiuitie had not onlie laboured for him as you haue heard by his letter to the Pope but went also in person to assist him in Germanie and remained there in pledg for him this man I say receiuing disgust at length from the said King for vsurping vpon certaine lands and liberties of his in Normandy he brake with him appealed to the Pope went to Rome against him and the King was forced to send Embassadours to plead for himself there against the other who pleaded so well saith Nubergensis alleadging the Kings necessitie for doing the same as the Pope tooke the Kings parte and tolde the Bishop openlie in publike Consistorie that he ought to beare with the King in such a necessitie of warre which being once past matters might easilie be remedied And thus much for the Popes authoritie acknowledged and practised during the raigne of this King Richard the first out of which M. Attorney found no probable instance at all to be alleadged to the contrarie and therfore made not so much as mention of any OF THE RAIGNE OF KING IOHN VVho was the seauenth King after the Conquest §. III. 48. Of this King being the last sonne of K. Henry the second we haue heard much before vnder the name of Earle of Morâ—â—â— which may declare vnto vs the quality of his nature and condition to wit mutable and inconstant but yet vehement for the while in whatsoeuer he tooke in hand indiscreet also rash and without feare to offend either God or man when he was in his passion oâ— rage This appeareth well by his many most vnnaturall and treasonable actions against his kind and louing Father whilest he liued wherby he shortened his said Fathers life as before hath byn related And the same appeareth yet more in a certaine manner by his like attempts against his owne brother both when and after he was in captiuity which brother notwithstanding had so greatly aduaunced him and giuen him so many rich States in England as he seemed to haue made him a Tetrarch with him say our English authors that is to say to haue giuen him the fourth parte of his Kingdome which notwithstanding was not sufficient to make him faithfull vnto him 49. This man then succeeding his brother Richard with whom he was beyond the seas when he died laid hands presently on the Treasure and fortresses of his said brother and by the help of two Archbishops especially to wit VValter of Roane in Normandy and Hubert of Canterbury in England he drew the people and nobility to fauour him and was crowned first Duke of Normandy by the one and then King of England by the other when he was 34. yeares old and held out in the said gouernmeÌ„t with great variety of state and fortune for 18. yeares old togeather The first six with contentment good liking of most men the second six in continuall turmoile vexation and with mislike of all and the thiâ—d six did participate of them both to wit good and euill though more of the euill especially the later parte therof when his nobility and people almost wholy forsakinge him did call in and crowne in his place Lewes the Dolphin Prince of France pretended to be next heire by his wife the Lady Blanche daughter to the said K. Iohns sister Queene of Castile which brought K. Iohn to those straites as he died with much affliction of mind as after you shall heare 50. To say then somewhat of ech of these three distinctions of tyme noting some points out of them all that appertaine to this our controuersie with M. Attorney you haue heard in the end of K. Richards life how VValter Archbishop of Roane appealed to Pope Innocentius against the said King for seasing vpon certaine lands of his and namely the Towne of Deepe which Innocentius commaunding to be restored K. Iohn obayed and made composition with the said Archbishop vpon the yeare of Christ 1200. which was the second yeare of his raigne as Houeden reporteth restoring him Villam de Depa cum pertinentijs suis The Towne of Deepe with the appurtenances and diuers other things which the said author setteth downe shewing therby the obedience of K. Iohn to the Popes ordination 51. Moreouer there falling out a great controuersie between Geffrey Arcbishop of Yorke K. Iohns brother and the Deane and Chapter of the said Church and both parties appealing to Rome Pope Innocentius appointed the Bishop of Salisbury and Abbot of Tewxbury to call them before them in Church of VVestminster and determine the matter so they did made them freinds the King not intermedling in any part therof though the matter touched his brother and concerned his owne Ecclesiasticall supremacy if he had persuaded himself that he had had any And the verie same yeare the Bishop of Ely and the Abbot of S. Edmunds-bury were appointed Iudges by the said Pope in a great cause between the Archbishop and monks of Canterbury which they determined publikelie Vt Iudices à Domino Papa constituti saith Houeden as iudges appointed from the Pope without any dependance of the King at all though their cheife controuersie was about the priuiledges and proprieties of lands lordships and officers of theirs to wit of the said Archbishop and Monkes 52. And wheras the foresaid Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury with the rest of the Bishops summoned a generall Synod in England for ordaining many thinges according to the neede or
necessitie of the English Church and the King by euill 〈◊〉 saile of some went about to let the said Synod forbidding the same by his supreame Iusticer which was the highest power at that time vnder the King the said Archbishop admitted not the prohibition Archiepiscopus saith Houeden generale celebrauit Concilium Londonys apud VVestmonasterium coÌ„tra prohibitionem Gaufredi filij Petri Comitis de Essexia tunc temporis Summi Iusticiarij Anglia The Archbishop did celebrate a general Councell at VVestminster in London against the prohibition of Geffrey the sonne of Peter Earle of Essex which at that time had the office of the cheife Iusticer of England So as we see that they followed not the Kings inclination in this spirituall affaire but held their Councell and finished the same notwithstanding the former secular prohibition of the supreme Iusticer And Houeden that was then liuing setteth downe all the Canons and Ordinances at large of the said Councell which had these words in the end of euery one seuerally repeated Saluo in omnibus Sacrosanctae Romanae Ecclesiae honore priuilegio sauing in all points the honour and priuiledge of the holy Church of Rome Which was the sooner added for that the general Councell of Lateran in Rome was shortely after to ensue which might adde take away or alter whatsoeuer should seeme best to the Decrees of this Nationall Councell 53. Neither is there read any thing to haue byn done or said against this by the King though it is like that some of his Counsell did egge him against it as may appeare by the said prohibition of his Iusticer before mentioned Nay not only was K. Iohn obedient to the Church her authority at this time but otherwise also shewed himself very deuout pious by many wayes to which purpose among other things it is recorded by this author that when S. Hugh Bishop of Lincolne who was held for a great Saint all dayes of his life lay on his death-bed at London King Iohn went vnto him to visit him with great deuotion and confirmed his testament which he had made of his goods in fauour of the poore and promised moreouer to God in his presence that during his life he would alwayes confirme and ratifie the testaments of English Bishops and Prelates made to that effect 54. And the same author recounteth furthermore that nâ—â— longe after this the King being at Lincolne twelue Abbots of the Order named Cistercienses comming vnto him fell downe at his 〈…〉 of his 〈…〉 ence all their cattle 〈◊〉 in the same 〈…〉 whom the King said that they should rise vp 〈…〉 saith our author diuina inspi 〈…〉 cecidit 〈…〉 omiam postulant c. And then the King himself by the inspiration of Gods holy 〈◊〉 fell downe vpon 〈◊〉 on the ground before their feete making them pardon for the iniury done to them by his officers And from that day forvvard he graunted them that all their 〈◊〉 should feed freely in his forrest And moreouer he willed them to seeke out a fit place in the Kingdome where he might buyld them a monastery for his deuotion and so he did founding both that and 〈◊〉 others as the monasteryes of Farendon â—â—â—â—ayles 〈◊〉 and VVâ—â—x-hallâ— so as if he had continued in the course of piety and moderation in life he had byn a notable King towards which he had many good partes 55. But about the 7. or 8. yeare of his raigne he began greatly to change his coÌ„ditions to the worser partâ— which some ascribe 〈◊〉 to the death of Queene Eleanor his mother vpon the sixth yeare of his raigne to whom he bare respect as long as she liued and her death was thought to be hastened by the affliction she tooke of K. Iohns cruelty towards Arthure Earle of Brittany her Nephew who being a goodly young Prince of 17. yeares old was made away in the Castle of Roane in the yeare 1203. by poison as some men thinke but as the King of France maintained before Pope Innocentius he was slaine by K. Iohns owne hands and his younger sister carried prisoner into England kept in Bristoâ— Castle where she pined away though both these pretended to be neerer the Crowne of England then K. Iohn himself for that they were the children of his elder Brother Geffrey by marriage Earle of Brittany 56. From this beginning then of domesticall bloud K. Iohn fell into his other rages of disâ—reâ—â—â—â— life and namely against the Church and Church-men 〈◊〉 wherof this particular occassion fell ouâ—â— that the foresaid 〈◊〉 Archbishop of Canterbury being dead vpon the youâ—◠〈…〉 the King desiring to prefer to that 〈◊〉 one Iohn Gray Bishop of 〈◊〉 whom he greatâ—â—◠〈…〉 principall monkes of the 〈…〉 election appertained to 〈…〉 for that 〈…〉 Canterbury to further that election by his owne presence And the monkes 〈…〉 cretly they had chosen another before whose name was 〈◊〉 Sub-prior of the house and with the same secresie had 〈…〉 away towards Rome for his confirmation with oath 〈◊〉 should not disclose himself vntill he came thither yet 〈◊〉 ly vpon offence taken with him for discouering himself 〈…〉 election in Flaunders and partly vpon the instance and 〈…〉 the King present they chose the said Bishop of Norwich 〈◊〉 him his letters of election in like manner with which the King presently sent him away to Rome adioyning speciall messengers of his owne to commend him to Pope Innocentius by all meâ—â—es possible for his admittance 57. But the Pope seeing two elections made by the monkâ—â—◠〈◊〉 two seuerall men and that the Couent was deuided vpon the matter he persuaded them for concordes sake to choose a 〈◊〉 and to leaue the former two and so at last they did and tookeâ— certaine English Cardinall then in Rome named Stephen Longâ—â—â— a man of great learning and most commendable life but not knowne or liked by the King both for that he had byn brought vp in the vniuersityes of France and not of England and for that the King could not brooke that the election which he had â—â—â—cured with so great diligence of the Bishop of Norwich should be reiected whervpon he fell into so great distemper of passion as was lamentable For first hauing made proclamation that the said Cardinall elected Archbishop and confirmed by the Pope and sent into France should not come into England 〈◊〉 receiued by any man vnder paine of death he sent his officers to CaÌ„terbury to sease both on the laÌ„ds of the Archbishopricke â—â— also of the monkes and to driue them out of the Realme with all the shame and vexation that might be and so they did And the said expulsed monkes were forced to fly ouer the sea to 〈◊〉 and liued for the time in the monastery of S. Berlin in that Ciâ—â—â— and the King commaunded to be put into that Couent 〈◊〉 religious men of the order of S. Angustine and more then this 〈◊〉 to that exasperation
the eight after two partes of three of his raigne wherin he had not only acknowledged and practised according to the vse of all his predecessours but singularly also defended and propugned by publicke writing the Catholicke consent of all Christendome concerning the Soueraignty of the Sea of Rome therin did at length vpon certaine occasions of particular distast anger and exasperation falling out betweene Pope Clement the 7. and him about the diuorce of his wife Queen Catherine daughter of Spaine and the marriage of Lady Anne Bullen in in her place to neither of which the said Pope would consent make strange innouations by little little as first threatning and the said Pope then substracting some of his authority and giuing it to others and finally taking all vnto himself Which deuise being once begun was continued after his death by the gouernours of his young sonne King Edward though with lesse probability and apparance of truth as before hath byn noted then reiected againe by his daughter Queene Mary who restored the same whence it was taken but reassumed though in a different deuise of words by his second daughter Q. Elizabeth that least of all was capable of it as in precedent chapters hath byn declared So as heere though M. Attorney doth euery where talke of auncient laws and common consent there is neither anquity vnity conformity consent or continuance of anie moment to bee found which will better appeare by that wee haue briefly to touch of ech one of these Princes raignes in particular Of King Henry the eyght who was the twentith King after the Conquest §. I. 2. This Prince succeeding his father King Henry the 7. in the flower of his youth when he was but 18. yeares of age but adorned with many rare graces both of mind and body tooke the scepter in hand with as great expectation of his people neighbours round about him as euer did Prince of our land before or after him and for the space of more then 20. yeares performed the same in all points of an excellent Prince both in peace and warre vntill he fell into that vnfortunate fatall breach with his wife and Queene and disordinate appetite of the other that succeeded her whervpon ensued all those strange and vnexpected mutations which afterward were seene one thing giuing occasion and making way to the other as the euents declared 3. But among all other points of Catholicke doctrine no one was more obserued by this King while he remained in his auncient peace of mind then that of his due acknowledgment subordination and respectiue correspondence with the Sea Apostolicke which being in his dayes begun to be impugned togeather with many other points of Christian religion by Martyn Luther an Apostata Friar of Germany and his followers King Henry out of his great zeale and feruour towards the said religion and Sea Apostolicke tooke vpoÌ„ him to write a special learned booke in defence therof against the said Luther which booke he sent to Rome presenting it to Pope Leo the tenth subscribed by his owne â—and which I haue seen by a speciall Embassadour for that purpose Doctor Clerke Bishop of Bath and VVells that made an earnest speach and eloquent oration at the deliuery therof in protestation and commendation of his Kings high and resolute zeale in this behalfe all which being extant in print I remit the Reader thervnto for his better satisfaction 4. Only I cannot pretermit to recite in this place some of his words which he vseth in that booke in defence of the Popes Ecclesiasticall Supremacy which himself afterward vpon new passions rising so greatly impugned Thus then he wrote against Luther in those dayes Non tam iniurius ero Pontifici vt anxiè sollicitè de eius Iure disceptem tanquam res haberetur pro dubia c. I will not offer so much iniury vnto the Pope as earnestly and carefully to dispute heere of his right as though the matter might be held in doubt it is sufficient for that which now we haue in hand that his enemy Luther sheweth himself so much to be carried away with passion and fury as he taketh all faith and credit from his owne sayings cleerly declaring his malice to be such as it suffereth him neither to agree with himself nor to consider what he saith So be 5. And then after a large confutation of Luthers fond opinion and furious assertion that the pope neither by diuine or humane law but onlie by vsurpation and Tyrannie had gotten the headshipp of the Church K. Henry vseth two stong reasons and arguments against him among other to represse his maddnes therein The first of generall consent from antiquitie saying Negare non potest c. Luther cannot deny but that all the faithfull Christian Churches at this daie doe acknowledge and reuerence the holie Sea of Rome as their mother and Primate c. And if this acknowledgment is grounded neither in diuine nor humane right how hath it taken so great and generall roote How was it admitted so vniuersally by all Christendome When began it how grew it to bee so great And wheras humane consent is sufficient to giue humane right at least how can Luther saie that heer is neither diuine nor humane right where there is and hath been for time out of minde so vniuersall humane consent c. Certe si quis rerum gestarum monumenta reuoluat inueniet iam olim protinùs post pacatum orbâ—m plerasque omnes Christiani Orbis Ecclesias obtemperasse Romana c. Truly if a man will looke ouer the monuments of things and times past he shall find that prefently after the world was pacified from persecution the most parte of Christian Churches did obay the Roman yea and the Greeke Church also though the Empire were passed to that parte wee shall find that shee acknowledged the Primacy of the same Romane Church but only wheÌ„ shee was in Schisme And as for S. Hierome though he were no Roman yet did hee in his daies ascribe so much authoritie and preheminence to the Roman Church as he affirmed that in matters of great doubt it was sufficient for his faith to bee allowed and approued by the Pope of Rome c. This is the first argument vrged by King Henry of antiquitie and consent 6. Another hee alleadgeth of impossibilitie for the Pope to haue attained by force and Tyrannie to so great authoritie as he had according to Luthers calumniation the effect is this Cum Lutherus tam impudenter pronunciet c. Whereas Luther so impudeÌ„tly doth affirme that the Pope hath his Primacie by no right neither diuine nor humane but onlie by force and Tyrannie I doe wonder how the mad fellow could hope to find his Readers so simple or blockish as to beleiue that the Bishop of Rome being a Priest vnarmed alone without temporall force or right either diuine or humane as he supposed