let it then be burned with the fire of faith But these men albeit they have many neighbours dwelling near unto them yet for very pride they will not call any man unto them chusing rather to continue still ignorant then to ask any question And if they do know any man to enquire for his neighbour in such case by and by they cry out upon him as an heretick presuming more upon their own heads than having confidence in their wisdom But I exhort you to give no credit unto their outward appearance for already it is verefied in them which the Satyrical Poet saith No credit is to be given unto the outward shew for which of them all is it that doth not abound with most shamefull and detestable vices And in another place he saith They are very dainty of their speech and have great desire to keep silence And thus much hath Mr. Wilhelmus Let all such hear whom this parable doth touch for I with the rest of the Masters Bachelors and Students of our University considering how hard a matter the condemnation of the forty five Articles of Wickliff without reason is and how grievous a thing it were if we should thereunto consent doe call together my neighbours the Doctors of this Universitie and all others which would object any thing against the same that we might presently finde out the reason of the condemnation of this article concernning the taking away the temporalties from the Clergie Notwithstanding I doe professe that it is not my intent like as it is not the meaning of the Universitie to perswade that Princes or secular Lords should take away the goods from the clergie when they would or how they would and convert them to what use they list But our whole intent is diligently to search out whether this Article as touching the taking away of temporalties from the Clergie may have in it any true sense whereby it may be defended without reproof Wherefore this Article being the seventeenth in the number of the forty five is propounded under this form The Lords temporal may at their own will and pleasure take away the temporal goods from the Clergie if they doe offend and therein continue It is thus proved The Kings of the Old Testament took away the temporal goods at Gods commandement from the Clergie that is to say from the Priests offending Therefore the Kings of the New Testament at Gods commandment may do the like when as the Priests of the new law do offend The consequence dependeth upon a similitude And the antecedent is evident First it is proved by Solomon in the 3. of the Kings 2. chapter which Solomon deposed Abiathar the high Priest because he had taken part with Adonias the brother of Solomon to make him King without the advice either of David or of Solomon himself which ought to reign and set up Sadoc the Priest in the place of Abiathar because he had not consented with Abiathar unto Adonias as it is written in the 3. book of Kings 1. chapter where it is said Adonias the son of Agithe exalted himself and said I will reign and made unto himself chariots and horsemen and forty men which should 〈◊〉 before him neither did his father rebuke him at any time saying Wherefore hast thou done this For he was very comely being second son next to A solon and his talk was with Iâ—â—b the son of Saâ—via and Abiathar the Priest which took part with Adonias But Sadoc the Priest and Benatas the son of Ioiada and Nathan the Prophet and Semei and Serethi and Felethi and all the power of Davids host were not on Adonias part This was the cause of the deposing of Abiathar because he took part with Adonias that he should be King against Solomon the eldest Son of King David wherefore it is written in the third book and second chapter of the Kings The King said unto Abiathar the Priest Goe your wayes unto Anathoth thine own field for thou art a man of death but this day I will not slay thee because thou hast carried the Ark of the Lord before my father David and didst labour in all things wherein my father laboured Then did Solomom cast out Abiathar that he should be no more the Priest of the Lord that the word of the Lord might be fulfilled which he spake upon the â— use of Hâ—li in Silo. Behold the most prudent King Solomon according to the wisdom which was given him of God did exercise his power upon the said Priest putting him out of his priesthood and setting in his place Sadoc the Priest This was a greater matter than to take away the temporalties If then in the Law of Christ which now raigneth over us a Bishop should likewise rebell against the true heir of the kingdom willing to set up another for King why should not the King or his heir have power in like case to take away the temporalties from him so offending Item it is also evident by the King Nabuchodonozor which had power given him of God to lead away the children of Israel with their Priests and Levites into the captivity of Babylon as it is written 4 book of the Kings 25 chapter Item it is read in the 4. book of Kings and 12. chapt how that Ioas the most godly King of Iuda according to the wisdom which God had granted him took away all the consecrate vessels which Iosaphat Ioram and Ochosias his fore-fathers Kings of Iuda had consecrated and those which he himself had offered and all the treasure that could be found in the temple of the Lord and in the Kings Palace and sent it unto Azthel King of Syria and he departed from Ierusalem Mark how this most holy King exercised his power not only in taking away the temporalities of the Priests but also those things which were consecrate in the Temple of the Lord to procure unto the Commonwealth the benefit of peace Item in the 4. book and 18. chapter of the Kings it is written how that the holy King Ezechias took all the treasure that was found in the house of the Lord and in the Kings treasury and brake down the Pillars of the Temple of the Lord and all the plates of gold which he himself had fastned thereupon and gave them unto the King of the Assyrians yet was he not rebuked of the Lord therefore as he was for his other sins as it appeareth in the 2d book of Kings 18. chapter Forsomuch then as in time of necessity all things ought to be in common unto Christians it followeth that the secular Lords in case of necessity and in many other common cases may lawfully take away the moveable goods from the Clergy when they do offend Item it is also read in the 12. of St. Matthew that the Disciples of Jesus to slak their hunger upon the Sabbath day pulled the ears of corn and did eat them and the Pharisees rebuked them therefore unto
whom Christ answered Have ye not read what David did when he was hungry and â—â—ose that were with him how he entred into the house of the Lord and did eat the shew bread which it was not lawfull for him neither for them that were with him to eat but only for the Priests This story is written in the first Book of the Kings and 21. chapter And the commandement in the 12. chapter of Deuteronomy Whereby it appeareth that it is lawfull in time of necessity to use any thing be it never so much consecrate Otherwise children by giving their moveables to the consecration of any Temple should not be bound to help their parents which is contrary and against the Gospel of St. Matthew in the 16. chapt whereas our Saviour sharply rebuked the Pharisees that for their own traditions they did transgresse the commandement of God Item Titus and Vespasian secular Princes had power given them of God twenty four years after the Lords ascension to take away the Temporalities from the Priests which had offended against the Lords holy one and thereby also bereft them of their lives and it seemeth unto many they did and might worthily do the same according to Gods good will and pleasure Then forsomuch as our Priests in these daies may transgresse and offend as much and rather more against the Lords anointed it followeth that by the pleasure of God the secular Lords may likewise punish them for their offence Our Saviour being King of kings and high Bishop with his Disciples did give tribute unto Caesar as it appeareth in the 17. chapt of St. Matthews Gospel and commanded the Scribes and Pharisees to give the like unto Caesar St. Matthew 22. Whereby he gave example unto all Priests that would come after him to render tribute unto their Kings whereupon blessed St. Ambrose in his 4. book upon these words in the 5. of St. Luke Cast cuâ— your nets writeth thus There is another kind of fishing amongst the Apostles after which manner the Lord commanded Peter only to fish saying Cast out thy hook and that fish which cometh first up take him And then unto the purpose he saith It is truly a great and spiritual document whereby all Christian men are taught that they ought to be subject unto the higher powers and that no man ought to think that the Lawe of a King here on earth are to be broken For if the Son of God did pay tribute who art thou so great a man that thinkest thou oughtest not to pay tribute He payed tribute which had no possessions and thou which daily seekest after the lucre of the world why doest thou not acknowledge the obedience and duty of the world Why doest thou through the arrogancy of thy mind exalt thy self above the world when at through thine own miserable covetousnesse thou art subject unto the world Thus writeth St. Ambrose and it is put in the 11. caus qu. 1. Magnum quidem He also writeth upon these words in Luke 20. Shew me a penny whose Image hath it if Christ had not the Image of Caesar why did he pay any tribute He gave it not of his own but rendred unto the world that which was the worlds and if thou wilt not be in danger of Caesar possesse not those things which are the worlds for if thou hast riches thou art in danger of Caesar. Wherefore if thou wilt owe nothing unto any earthly King forsake all those things and follow Christ. If then all Ecclesiastical Ministers having riches ought to be under the subjection of Kings and give unto them tribute it followeth that Kings may lawfully by the authority which is given them take away their temporalities from them Hereupon St. Paul acknowledging himself to be under the Jurisdiction of the Emperor appealed unto Caesar as it appeareth Acts 25. I stand saith he at Caesars Judgement seat there I ought to be judged Whereupon in the 8. Distinction chapter Quo jure St. Ambrose allegeth that all things are lawfull unto the Emperor and all things under his power For the Confirmation whereof it is said Daniel 2. chapter The God of heaven hath given unto thee a Kingdom Strength Empire and Glory and all places wherein the children of men do dwell and hath given into thy power the beasts of the field and fowles of the air and set all things under thy subjection Also in the 11. question and 1 he saith if the Emperor require tribute we do not deny that the Lands of the Church shall pay tribute if the Emperor have need of our lands he hath power to challenge them let him take them if he will I do not give them unto the Emperor neither do I deny them This writeth St. Ambrose expresly declaring that the secular Lord hath power at his pleasure to take away the Lands of the Church and so consequently the secular Lords have power at their own pleasures to take away the Temporal goods from the Ecclesiastical Ministers when they do offend Item St. Augustine writeth If thou saiest what have we to do with the Emperor But now as I said we speak of mans Law The Apostles would be obedient unto Kings and honour them saying Reverence your Kings and do not say what have I to do with the King What hast thou then to do with possessions By the Kings Law thy possessions are possessed Thou hast said what have I to do with the King but do not say what have thy possessions to do with the King For then hast thou renounced the Laws of men whereby thou diddest possesse thy Lands Thus writeth St. Augustine in his 8. distinction by whose words it is manifest that the King hath power over the Church goods and consequently may take them away from the Clergy transgressing or offending Item in his three and thirtieth Epistle unto Boniface he saith What sober man will say unto our Kings Care not you in your Kingdom by whom the Church of the Lord is maintained or by whom it is oppressed it pertaineth not unto you who will be either a religious man or who will be a Church robber Unto whom it may be thus answered Doth it not pertain unto us in our Kingdom who will either live a chast life or who will be an unchast whoremonger Behold this holy man sheweth here how that it is the duty of Kings to punish such as are robbers of Churches and consequently the proud Clergy when as they do offend Item he writeth in the 33. caus quest 7. Si de Rebus The secular Lords may lawfully take away the Temporal goods from hereticks and forsomuch it is a case greatly possible that many of the Clergy are users of Simony and thereby hereticks therefore the secular Lords may very lawfully take away their temporalities from them For what unworthy thing is it saith St. Augustine if the Catholicks do possesse according unto the will of the Lord
those things which the hereticks held Forsomuch as this is the word of the Lord unto all wicked men Mat. 21. The Kingdom of God shall be taken away from you and given unto a nation which shall do the righteousnesse thereof is it in vain which is written in the 17. chapter of the book of wisdom The just shall eat the labours of the wicked And whereas it may be objected as touching the desire of other mens goods St. Augustine answereth That by that Evidence the seven Nations which did abuse the Land of Promise and were driven out from thence by the power of God may object the same unto the people of God which inhabit the same And the Jews themselves from whom according unto the Word of the Lord the Kingdom is taken away and given unto a people which shall do the works of righteousnesse may object the same unto the Church of Christ as touching the desire of other mens goods but St. Augustines answer is thus We saith he do not desire another mans goods forsomuch as they are ours by the commandement of him by whom all things were made By like evidence the Clergy having offended their temporal goods are made the goods of others for the profit of the Church To this purpose also according to St. Augustine serveth the 14. question 4. Unto a mis-believer it is not a half-penny matter but unto the faithfull is a whole world of riches shall we not then convince all such to possesse another mans goods which seemed to have gathered great riches together and know not how to use them for that truly is not anothers which is possessed by right and that is lawfully possessed which is justly possessed and that is justly possessed which is well possessed Ergo all that which is evil possessed is another mans and he doth ill possesse it which doth evil use it If then any of the Clergy do abuse the temporal goods the temporal Lords may at their own pleasure according unto the rule of charity take away the said temporal goâ—dâ— from the Clergy so transgressing For then according to the allegation aforesaid the Clergy doth not jâ—â—lâ— pâ—ssesse those temporal goods but the temporal Lordâ— proceeding according to the rule of charity do justly possesse those temporalities for somuch as all things are the just mans 1 Cor. 3. chapter All things saith the Apostle are yours whether it be Paul or Apollo or Câ—â—â—â— either the world either life or death or things 〈◊〉 or things to come for all things be yours you be Christs and Christ is Gods Also in the 23. question 7. Quiâ—â—â—qâ—e it is written Iure divino omnia sunt justâ—â—â—â— The words of St. Augustine in that place ad Vinâ—â—â—â—um be these Whosoever saith he upon the occasion of this Law or Ordinance of the Emperor doth molest or persecute you not for love of any charitable correction but only for hatred and malice to do you displeasure I hold not with him in so doing And although there is nothing here in this earth that any man may possesse assuredly but either he must hold it by Gods law by which cuncta justorum esse dicuntur that is all things be said to pertain to the possession of the just or else by mans law which standeth in the Kings power to set and to ordain c. Here by the words of St. Augustine alleaged ye see all things belong to the possession of the just by Gods law Item forsomuch as the Clergy by means of their possessions are in danger of the Emperor and King it followeth that if they do offend the Emperor or King may lawfully take away their possessions from them The consequence dependeth on this point forsomuch as otherwise they were not in subjection under the Emperor or King and the antecedent is manifest by the 11. question and first Parag. His ita respondetur Whereas it is specified in Latine thus His ita respondetur Clerici ex officio Episcopo sunt suppositi ex possessionibus praediorum Imperatori sunt obnoxii ab Episcopo unctronem decimas primitias accipiunt ab Imperatore verò praediorum possessiones nanciscuntur that is to say The Clergy by meanes of their office are under the Bishop but by reason of their possessions they be subject unto the Emperor Of the Bishop they receive unction tithes and first fruits of the Emperor they receive possessions Thus then it is decreed by the Emperial law that livelihoods should be possessed whereby it appeareth that the Clergy by the possession of their livelihoods are in danger of the Emperor for him to take away from them or to correct them according to their deservings and to have the controulment of them as it shall seem good unto him Item The temporal Lords may take away the temporalities from such as use Simony because they are hereticks Ergo this Article is true The antecedent is manifest forsomuch as the secular Lords may refuse such as use Simony and punish them except they do repent For by the decree of Pope Paschasius in the first and last question it appeareth that all such as used Simony were to be refused of all faithfull people as chief and principal hereticks and if they do not repent after they be warned they are also to be punished by the extreme power For all other faults and crimes in comparison of Simoney be counted but light and seem small offences Whereupon the glosse expounding the same text saith that by this word externe is understood the laity which have power over the Clergy besides the Church as in the 17. distinct Non licuit 23. question 5. principes Whereby it is evident that the temporal Lords may take away the temporal goods from the Clergy when as they do offend Item St. Gregory in the Register upon his seventh Book and ninth Chapter writeth thus unto the French Queen Forsomuch as it is written that righteousnesse helpeth the people and sin maketh them miserable then is that Kingdom counted stable when as the offence which is known is soon amended Therefore forsomuch as wicked Priests are the cause of the ruine of the people for who shall take upon him to be intercessor for the sins of the people if the Priest which ought to intreat for the same have committed greater offences and under your dominions the Priest do live wickedly and unchastly therefore that the offence of a few might not turn to the destruction of many we ought earnestly to seek the punishment of the same And it followeth if we do command any person we do send him forth with the consent of your authority who together with other Priests shall diligently seek out and according unto Gods word correct and amend the same Neither are these things to be dissembled the which we have spoken of for he that may correct any thing and doth neglect the same without all doubt he maketh himself
of the means according as shall be convenient or meet for the measure to be made For so much then as the secular Lords ought by their power to provide for the necessary sustentation of the Christian Clergy by the reasonable measuring of their temporalities which they are bound to bestow upon the Christian Clergy it followeth that they may lawfully by their power use the taking away or putting unto of those temporalities according as shall be convenient for the performance of that reasonable matter Item it is lawfull for the Clergy by their power to take away the Sacraments of the Church from the laity customably offending for so much as it doth pertain to the office of the Christian Ministers by their power to minister the same unto the Lay people Wherefore for so much as it doth pertain unto the office of the Laity according unto their power to minister and give temporalities to the Clergy of Christ as the Apostle saith 1 Cor. 9. It followeth that it is also lawfull for them by their power to take away the temporalities from the Clergy when they do customably sin and offend Item by like power may he which giveth a stipend or exhibition withdraw and take away the same from the unworthy labourers as he hath power to give the same unto the worthy labourers for so much then as temporalities of the Clergy are the stipends of the Laity it followeth that the Lay people may by as good authority take away again the same from the Clergy which will not worthily labour as they might by their power bestow the same upon those which would worthily labour according to the saying of the Gospel Mat. 21. The Kingdom shall be taken away from you and given unto a people which shall bring forth the fruits thereof Item it is also lawfull for the secular Lords by their power to chastise and punish the Lay people when they do offend by taking away of their temporalities according to the exigent of their offence for so much as the Lay people are subject under the dominion of the secular Lords as appeareth Romans 13. and many other places it is evident that it is lawfull by their power to punish the Clergy by taking away of their temporalities if their offence do so deserve Item the true and easie direction of the Clergy unto the life of Christ and the Apostles and most profitable unto the Laity that the Clergy should not live contrary unto Christs institution seemeth to be the taking away of their almes and those things which they had bestowed upon them And it is thus proved That medicine is most apt to be laid unto the sore whereby the infirmity might soonest be holpen and were most agreeable unto the patients Such is the taking away of the temporalities Ergo this article is true The minor is thus proved for so much as by the abundance of temporalities the worm or serpent of pride is sprung up whereupon unsatiable desire and lust is inflamed and therefrom proceedeth all kind of gluttony and leachery It is evident in this point for so much as the temporalities being once taken away every one of those sins is either utterly taken away or at the least diminished by the contrary vertue induced and brought inâ— It seemeth also most pertinent unto the Laity for so much as they ought not to lay violent hands upon their Ministers or to abject the Priestly dignity neither to judge any of the Clergy in their open Courts It seemeth also by the Law of Conscience to pertain unto the lay people for so much as every man which worketh any work of mercy ought deliâ—ently to have respect unto the ability of them that he bestoweth his almes upon lest that by nourishing or helping loyterers he be made partaker of his offence Whereupon if Priests do not minister of their temporalities as Hostiensis teacheth in his 3d. book of their Tither First-fruits and Oblations the people ought to take away the almes of their Tithes from them Item it is confirmed by the last chapter of the sevententh question out of the decree of rents appropriate unto the Church Quicunque Whereas the case is put thus That a certain man having no children neither hoping to have any gave all his goods unto the Church reserving unto himself the only use and profits thereof it happened afterward that he had children and the Bishop restored again his goods unto him not hoping for it The Bishop had it in his power whether to render again or no those things which were given him but that was by the law of Man and not by the law of Conscience If then by the decree of the holy Doctor St. Augustine in his Sermon of the life of the Clergy Aurelius the Bishop of Carthage had no power by Gods law to withhold that which is bestowed upon the Church for the necessity of children by the which law the wanton proud and unstable Clergy being more then sufficiently possessed and enriched do detain and keep back the temporalities to the detriment and hurt of their own state and of the whole militant Church the secular patrons being thereby so impoverished that they are compelled by penury to rob and steal to oppresse their tenants to spoil and undo others and oftentimes by very necessity are driven to beggery Item suppose that a Priest and Minister how grievously soever he do offend by what kind or sign of offence soever it be as it was in the case of Bishop Iudas Iscarioth of the religious Monk Sergius of Pope Leo the heretick and many other Priests of whom the Scripture and Chronicles make mention and daily experience doth teach us the same it is evident that as it is supposed the Priests in the Kingdom of Boheme grievously offending it is the Kings part for so much as he is supreme head next under God and Lord of the Kingdom of Boheme to correct and punish those Priests And for so much as the gentlest correction and punishment of such as be indurate in their malice is the taking away of their temporal goods it followeth that it is lawfull for the King to take away temporalities Wherefore it should seem very marvellous and strange if that Priests riding about should spoil Virgins violently corrupt and defile honest Matrons if in such case it were not lawfull for them to take away their Armours Weapons Horses Guns and Swords from them The like reason were it also if they had unlawfully conspired the death of the King or that they would betray the King unto his enemies Item whatsoever any of the Clergy doth require or desire of the secular power according unto the Law and Ordinance of Christ the secular power ought to perform and grant the same But the Clergy being letted by riches ought to require help of the secular power for the dispensation of the said riches Ergo the secular power ought in such case by the law of Christ to take
of Iohn King first Bishop there was kept vacant ten years An. 1568. after Henry Curwin the second Bishop it was kept void twenty one years together An. 1592. after Iohn Vnderhill the third Bishop it continued void 11. years so little want was there of a Bishop in that poor See An. 1559. the new created Bishoprick of Gloucester after Iames Brooks the third Bishop his death was kept vacant three years An. 1578. as long after Edmond Cheyney An. 1538. the new erected Bishoprick of Bristoll after Paul Bresh the first Bishop was kept vacant four years An. 1578. three years after Richard Cheyney which See continued void otherwise than by Commendam thirty one years together An. 1593. it continued vacant ten years together So little need was there of a Bishop in this See An. 1397. the Bishoprick of St. Davids after Iohn Gilberts death was vacant four years An. 1592. after Marmaduke Middleton almost two years An. 1133. the Bishoprick of Landaffe upon Vrbans decease was kept void six years An. 1183. after Nicholas ap Georgant five years An. 1240. after Elias de Raynor above four years An. 1287 after VVilliam de Brews nine years An. 1213. the Bishoprick of Bangor after Robert of Shrewstury was kept vacant two years An. 1374. as long after Iohn Gilbert An. 1378. after Iohn Swassham twenty years An. 1266. after Amanus the first Bishop of Rangor that See was vacant two years An. 1313. after Lewâ—lin six years An. 1406 after Iohn Trevour five years An. 1439. after Robert five years An. 1017. after Aldbanus of Durham that See continued void above three years An. 1096. as long after VVilliam Carlapho An. 1140. after Geoffry Rusus above five years An. 1207. after Philip of Poytiers above ten years An. 1226. above two years the King threatning the Covent that they should have no Bishop in seven years An. 1237. after Richard Pâ—ore two years till Ethelmate his half Brother whom he commended to the Monks election should be of age An 1505. after William Severus two years An. 1587. after Richard Barnes almost two years An. 1577. the Bishoprick of Chester was kept vacant two years If then all our Bishopricks in several ages to omit the long vacancies of later times have been thus kept void 2,3,4,5 6,7,8,10,15,20 30. years or more together at divers times to omit all annual vacancies without any prejudice to the Church or State and with very great benefit to the Kings of England who enjoyed the Temporalties in the mean time then certainly Diocaesan Bishops are no such necessary Creatures of divine institution in the Church of Christ as some esteem them but that they may be spared and their Lands Temporalties sold or leased as well as thus seised by our Kings without Sacriledge or Injustice when as no Parish Churches can spare or want their Parochial Ministers who are of Gods institution above six months at most After which if the Patron present not in the interim an able and sufficient Clerk the Ordinary by the Canon Common-law may collate and sequester the profits in the mean time only to defray the officiating of the Cure which must be at no time intermitted or neglected because of Divine institution and so absolutely necessary both for the Peoples instruction and salvation which these long vacancies prove Diocaesan Bishops are not 4ly That as our Bishops Abbots Priors did originally for some hundreds of years receive their actual Investitures into their Churches Temporalties from the King alone per Annulum Baculum by a Ring and Pastoral staff delivered to them in nature of a Livery and seilin extorted from our Kings by the violence and tyranny of Pope Vrban and Pascal the 2. and Treason of Archbishop Anselme against the Right of the Crown and Custom of the Realm so they did likewise hold all their Baronies and Temporalties from swear Fealty and do Liege Homage to our Kings for the same as their Supream Liege Lords like other Barons and were as far forth responsible for them to the Kings Iustices and Ministers as Lay-Barons and Tenants were which they all acknowledged in their Recognition to King Henry the second in the Council of Clarindon as our Histories assure us and were lyable to forfeit them for their Treasons Rebellions Disloyalties and Contempts against the King and his Crown as well as Lay-men our Kings being alike Soveraign Lords and Kings to them as well as other Subjects and Tenauts and that Iure Domini as their Supreme Landlords and Patrons from by and under whom alone they held their Temporalties 5ly That the Kings of England as Supream Heads and Governours under Christ of the Church of England have in all ages enjoyed and exercised a Soveraign Power and Jurisdiction over all Archbishops Bishops Deans Chapters Abbots Priors and other Ecclesiastical Persons in all Causes whatsoever as well as over their Temporal Subjects to visit reform order correct restrain amend punish all their Errors Heresies Offences Contempts Enormities Treasons Rebellions against their Persons Crowns Dignities and Royal Authority punishable by any Spiritual Ecclesiastical or Temporal Authority or Iurisdiction and to punish their Persons by imprisonments banishments death scisure sequestration confiscation of their Temporalties Bishoppricks real and personal Goods and Estates as is enacted by the several Statutes against Provisors and the express Statutes of 25 H. 8. c. 19 21. 26 H. 8. c. 1 3. 27 H. 8. c. 10. 28 H. 6. c. 7. 10. 31 H. 8. c. 14. 32 H. 8. c. 22 24 26. 33 H. 8. c. 29. 34 35 H. 8. c. 17 19. 37 H. 8. c. 17. 1 Ed. 6. c. 2. 1 Eliz. c. 1. 5 Eliz. c. 1. 8 Eliz. c. 1. 13 Eliz. c. 12. and other Acts The several Writs De Excommunicato capiendo De Excommunicato deliberando De Cautions admittenda Quare impedit Quare incumbravit Quare non admisit Quod Episcopus admittat Ne admittas Ne exeas Reguum Vi Iacca removenda and especially by the several Writs of Prohibition and ad Iura Regia and Capias pro contemptu wherewith our Records and Law-books are full fraught I shall only recite some memorable Presidents of our Kings and Parliaments proceedings against our Archbps. Bishops in seising their temporalties confiscating their Estates banishing them the Realm suspending from and depriving them of their Bishopricks yea in imprisoning executing their Persons for their rebellions Treasons Conspiracies Contempts against them and their Royal Prerogatives in former ages worthy their and our most serious consideration and remembrance To begin with our Archbishops about the year of Christ 765. Offa King of Mercians being highly offended with Iambertus or Lambert as some stile him Archbishop of Canterbury for his oppositions against him seised and took away all his Temporalties within his Kingdom detaining some of them to himself and giving the rest of them to his Souldiers and Courtiers and moreover by the Popes consent erected a new
partaker of the sin or offence Therefore foresee unto your own soul provide for your nephews and for such as you do desire to reign after you provide for your country and with diligence provide for the correction and punishment of that sin before our Creator do stretch out his hand to strike And in his next Chapter he writeth unto the French King Whatsoever you do understand to pertain either unto the honour and glory of our God to the reverence of the Church or to the honour of the Priests that do you diligently cause to be decreed and in all points to be observed Wherefore once again we do move you that you command a Synod to be congregate and as we wrote lately unto you to cause all the carnal vices which raign amongst your Priests and all the wickednesse and Simony of your Bishops which is most hard to be condemned and reproved utterly to be banished out of your Kingdom and that you will not suffer them to possesse any more substance under your dominion then Gods commandement doth allow Behold how carefully blessed Gregory doth exhort the Queen and the King to punish the vices of the Clergy lest through their negligence they should be partakers of the same and how they ought to correct their Subjects For as it is convenient to be circumspect and carefull against the outward enemies even so likewise ought they to be against the inward enemies of the soul. And like as in just war against the outward enemies it is lawfull to take away their goods so long as they continue in their malice so also is it lawfull to take away the goods of the Clergy being the inward enemy The consequence is proved thus for so much as the domestical enemies are most hurtfull Item it is thus argued if God be the temporal Lords may meritoriously and lawfully take away the temporal goods from the Clergy if they do offend For this point let us suppose that we speak of power as the true authentike Scripture doth speak Mat 3. 9. God is able even of these stones to raise up Children unto Abraham Whereupon it is thus argued for if God be he is omnipotent and if he so be he may give like power unto the secular Lords And so consequently they may meritoriously and lawfully use the same power But lest that any man may object that a proof made by a strange thing is not sufficient it is therefore declared how that the temporal Lords have power to take away their almes bestowed upon the Church the Church abusing the same as it shall be proved hereafter And first thus It is lawfull for Kings in cases limited by the Law to take away the movables from the Clergy when they do offend it is thus proved For the temporal Lords are most bound unto the works of greatest mercy most easie for them but in case possible it should be greater almes and easier temporal dominion to take away their almes from such as build therewithall unto eternal damnation through the abuse thereof than to give the said almes for any bodily relief Ergo the assumption is true Whereupon first this sentence of the Law of Christ in the second Epistle to the Thessalonians the third Chapter is noted whereas the Apostle writeth thus When we were amongst you we declared this unto you that he that would not work should not eat Wherefore the law of nature doth license all such as have the governance of Kingdoms to correct the abuse of the temporalities which would be the chief cause of the destruction of their Kingdoms whether the temporal Lords or any other had endowed the Church with those temporalities or not It is lawfull for them in some case to take away the temporalities as it were by way of Physick to withstand sin notwithstanding any excommunication or other Ecclesiastical censures forsomuch as they are not endowed but only with condition thereunto annexed Hereby it appeareth that the condition annexed to the endowing or enriching of any Church is that God should be honored the which condition if it once fail the contrary taking place the title of the gift is lost and consequently the Lord which gave the almes ought to correct the offence Excommunication ought not to let the fulfilling of justice Secondly according to the Canon Law 16 question 7. this sentence is noted where it is thus spoken as touching the Children Nephews and the most honest of the kindred of him which hath builded or endowed the Church That it is lawfull for them to be thus circumspect that if they perceive the Priest do defraud any part of that which is bestowed they should either gently admonish or warn him or else complain of him to the Bishop that he may be corrected But if the Bishop himself attempt to do the like let them complain of him to his Metropolitane and if the Metropolitane do the like let them not defer the time to report it in the ears of the King For so saith the Canon Let them not defer to report it in the ears of the King To what end I pray you but that he should do correction neither is it to be doubted but that correction doth more appertain unto the King in this point for their goods whereof he is chief Lord by a substraction proportional according to the fault or offence Item is thus proved It is lawfull for the secular Lords by their power to do correction upon the Clergy by some kind of fearfull discipline appertaining to their secular power Ergo by like reason it is lawfull for them by their power to do such correction by all kind of fearfull discipline pertaining unto their secular power For so much then as the taking of their temporalities is a kind of fearfull discipline pertaining unto the secular power it followeth that it is lawfull for them thereby to do such correction And consequently it followeth that the truth is thus to be proved The consequence is evident and the antecedent is proved by Isidore 23. quest 5. Principes where it is thus written There should be no secular powers within the Church but only for this purpose that whatsoever thing the Priests or Ministers cannot bring to passe by preachings or teachings the secular powers may command the same by the terrour and fear of discipline For oftentimes the heavenly Kingdom is profited and bolden by the earthly Kingdom that they which are in the Church and do any thing contrary unto faith and discipline by the rigour of the Princes may be troden down and that the power of the rulers may lay that discipline upon the necks of the proud and stif-necked which the utility and profit of the Church cannot exercise or use Item all things that by power ought to work or bring to any perfect end by the reasonable measuring of the mean thereto may lawfully use by power the substraction or taking away of the excesse and the addition of the want
upon them the office or duty of getting keeping and distributing all such manner of riches The minor is hereby proved that no man ought to have riches but to that end that they be helps preferring and helping unto the office which is appointed of God Therefore in case that secular possessions do hinder the Clergy from their duty the secular power ought to take it away for so did the Apostles Acts 6. saying It is not lawfull for us to leave the Word of God untaught and to minister unto tables It is confirmed Every good Christian is bound to be helpfull to his neighbour in those things especially which do concern the publick good But it will be a great help to a Clergy man to be deprived of his temporal possessions it being granted they do retard him from his duty due unto God Therefore the person more sufficient is bound in such a case by the Law of Christ to deprive him of temporal possessions But Kings and Lords temporal are the most sufficient for this being truly said to be Lords and Possessors of temporal estates and undoubtedly this would especially concern the publick good to make such a de-generation of temporals which in their nature are but a burden to a Clergy man retarding him in his spiritual duties and so many thorns as our Saviour speaks it in the 8. of St. Luke Choaking the Word of God Moreover Kings and secular Princes are the chief or capital Lords of goods temporal having a care over the Church and a special power for the inferring of such a Coaction as it is manifest 2â— quest 5. Principes where by the authority of Isiodore 30. Etymol 53. It is thus written Let secular Princes know that they must render an account to God for the Church which they are to maintain for Christ. And in the same question it followeth It is proper to Kings to execute Iustice and Righteousnesse and to deliver from the hand of the gain sayers and slanderers those who are orpressed by force and to assist the Stranger Orphan and Widow who more easily are oppressed by the powerfull And in the same question it followeth The King ought to prohibit thesis punish adulteries destroy the wicâ—ed from the earth not suffer paricide and perjured persons to live nor their own sons to live wickedly And by declaring where a Bishop abuseth the goods of the Church Blessed Gregory writes thus as it is recited in the Decretals 16. quest 7. Decret where having taught that the goods of the Church are common he subjoyneth We have received a bad report that some Bishops confer not the Tithes belonging to their Diocesse and the Oblations of charitable Christians on the Priests or â—oor but on Lay persons viz. Souldiers or their own Servants or which is worse on their Kindred If therefore any Bishop shall be found to be a transgressor of this Precept he is to be ranked amongst the greatest Hereticks and Anti-christs And as the Nycen Council censured of persons guilty of Simony both the Bishop who giveth and the Lay men who receive are without ransome price or benefit to be condemned to the punishment of everlasting fire Therefore what faithfull King Prince or Lord would not resist such contagious persons who infect their own mother Whence 3. quest 2. Si Episcopus The Canon speaketh in these words If a Bishop by his ill life shall wast the goods of the Church he is to be removed from his Patrimony untill full knowledge be had of the dilapidation he hath made after the Example of Tutors and Curats who being suspected are removed from their Cure or Tutelage untill a more full knowledge he had of the suspected person But the Doctors say that the dilapidation ought first to be proved which being done an assistant ought to be given to him to the end of the Trial but the Correction would then be taken from the secular Prince It seemeth therefore the correction of the Prelate being wanting It belongeth to the King to dispose of his goods according to the Civil Law Every Member of the Church ought to help one another but temporal Lords are Members of the Church with Priests beneficed But the case so may be that the chiefest help they can afford them is to deprive them of their temporal goods therefore in such a case they ought to do it And the Power or the Sword of which the Apostle maketh mention Rom. 13 being sufficient for this And by consequent it being superfluous to appoint another it seems they have a power whether some case doth extend it self to the correction of the Clergy For if I ought to help even the beast of my enemy being out of the way or lying down Exod. 21. How much more in the new Testament having the opportunity and power so to do ought I to free from the jaws of the Devil the Soul of my Curate insnared with the Mammon of Inquity There being a power of Fact and a power of Right It is granted that the King de facto may take away the Temporals from a Clergy-man being a Delinquent and it is granted withall that the taking away of the said Goods may be an occasion to that Ecclesiastick person for the abandoning of all wordly affairs and devoting himself more peculiarly to the worship of God This Case will not be denyed by any faithfull Christian not over-blinded with the dross of Temporal things For as St. Augustin saith It is expedient for many to fall into manifest sins that knowing their own frailty they may live more humbly and by grieving for their sins they may be more cautious how they sin again It is therefore much more expedient that many be poor and to be without the civil Dominion The Case admitted it is manifest that the King doth a good work in the General now every such work may be well done therefore he may well take away the Goods from an Ecclesiastical person for if the greater part of evil works may in the generality of them be well done much more may every good work in the generality of it For it is not repugnant to Grace or Almes that this good work proceedeth from it neither is it to be doubted but that God in such a Case doth give a power to the King which he eternally ordaineth to the performance of his pleasure It being granted then that the King and the said Ecclesiastick may reign together in Heaven there would be both notice and joy for the taking away of such a Temporal estate although by our Childish blindness it appeareth to men of a grosse understanding to be disadvantageous Again if this be an error that Temporal Lords may at their pleasure take away temporal things from Ecclesiastical persons being habitually Delinquent then it is false also against the true way of the Church and so Heresie because that All truth is in the holy Scripture as Saint Augustine often affirmeth and
by consequent since this way should be a falshood it followeth that it would be contrary to the holy Scripture And certain it is that it is pertinaciously and strongly defended because Kings and Princes believe that it pertaineth to their Soveraignty to have this powers for grant the contrary it will follow that Ecclesiastical persons seeing they are great Trangressors may destroy both Kingdoms and their People to prevent which it may be lawfull for the King to resist the Clergy or to impugn his Charity by the ablation of his proper Almes and those Temporal goods which are the Fire exciting hereunto Now the King could not lawfully punish the bodies of such Traytors if he could not lawfully take from them and alienate their Temporal estates over which he hath a special Dominion And since this power is the chiefest Royalty of the King it would be the same thing to infringe this power and subtilly to overthrow the Government of the Kingdom Again seeing many Kings and Nobles being Catholicks have oftentimes exercised that power it were the same according to such a form to assert the assumption and afterwards to condemn the Lives and Souls of those Hereticks which the Heirs of Kings and especially their Sons have stoutly opposed for thus according to the Priests and Pharises accusing Christ of Heresie they would impose a manifest Error and Heresie on the King of whom they have so great a Temporal assistance But God when he pleaseth will move the heart of the King to overthrow their madness Again Ecclesiastical persons are either the Chief Lords of those Revenues and Temporal estates which the King hath given to them or they are not if they are it truly followeth that for the greatest part those Ecclesiastical men are the chief Lords of our Kingdoms and so as to their Temporals not subject to the King which it seemeth they themselves do conceive The first consequence is manifest by this because the Clergy-men of our Kingdom have the fourth or third part of the Revenues of it And from hence it is that they will not be called Presbyters but Lord Prelates L. Praepositors L. Canonicals L. Prebends L. Presbyters And if any man shall call them Presbyters they are presently angry as if you had called them Common-cryers or Tormentors But if the Clergy-men are not the chief Lords of those Revenues and Temporal estates which the King hath given them as holy men are of opinion who say That Ecclesiastical Persons are not Lords but Attornies or Procurers only for poor men it then followeth That the King is the Soveraign Lord of their Goods and Estates and by consequent can take them away from those Ecclesiastical persons who are Delinquents and bestow them on the poor of Christ. And from hence it is the Canon affirmeth that in the time of necessity to provide for the poors relief the Goods of the Church may be sold by the Priests 12. quest 2. cap. Sicut Ecclesiast Parag. Secundo On which St. Ambrose limiteth the cases in which they may break and sell the Vessels consecrated to the Church as it is manifest Dist. 96. Whatsoever in Gold Pearls or Iewels or in Silver or in Vestments shall appear to be less usefull which cannot long be kept or continue for the service of the Church let them be sold according to their full value and the profit thereof be given to the poor Saint Ambrose doth insist also at large upon this particular in his fifth book of Offices Again many Kings have oftentimes wholly taken away the Temporal estate from the Clergy as it is manifest by the destruction of the Templers and many other private ablations but they never did or could do so lawfully as is manifest by the Adversaries Therefore in this they did that which lawfully they could not do And moreover in this they did that which they could not do meritoriously or according to the law of God And seeing that every work of man proceeding from deliberation is either lawfull or unlawfull meritorious or demeritorious it followeth that they did it unlawfully or demeritoriously and it followeth moreover that inso doing they fell into a dangerous error and as destructive to the Soul as to the Body and that this error is directly contrary to the Catholick truth it doth appear by a threefold consideration First That Kings by so doing did that which neither was nor could be lawfull Secondly Because they took away the Goods of other men against a commandement of the second Table And thirdly Because they did it not in Almes which is against the Catholick truth Let all things what you do be done in Almes All the Antecedent is granted by the Adversaries and this error being in Fact iâ— Kings pertinaciously shall defend it resolving by their power as if a lawfull one to take away from Ecclesiastical persons though Delinquents their Temporal Goods they are in a Heresie From which it further followeth that Kings persisting in so doing are Hereticks and if they shall defend what they have done unto death it followeth that they are Hereticks and damned and from this again it farther followeth that Clergy-men benesiced who do believe what here is said should not pray for the said Kings deceased Again the Emperour or a King not only oughteth but it becommeth him so to indow the Church that he may lawfully take from it his gifts of Almes in case that the abuse thereof doth tend to the detriment of his Kingdom and the hinderance of the preaching of the Gospel Suppose therefore that under such a condition he hath endowed such a Church it may thereupon be thus argued If according unto that form the Emperour or the King had endowed the Church of Prague he might lawfully in the case of the Detriment of his Kingdom or in the contempt of his own person or in the case of the not preaching of the Gospel take away his gifts of Almes But the Emperour or the King could under such a condition have endowed the Church of Prague Therefore for the contempt of the Clergy he could lawfully take away the said gifts of Almes he had given The condition therefore being lawfull and honest and the custom both of the King and kingdom do show that condition in facto to be added It seemeth to be too presumptuous an assertion that our Princes cannot take from them their gifts of Alms be the faults they have commited never so enormous yea when it was properly in their power to adde such a condition And again when as those who received those gifts of Almes could commit never so grievous offences as already I have said It is manifest that our Princes have a simple and an absolute power to withdraw their gifts of Almes a possible danger being imminent and by the same rule it followeth that on the like poâ—sible emergencies they may do it for the time to come Again the King of Bohemia or the
Emperour indowing his Church neither ought or 〈◊〉 it to the weakning or the worsting of his kingdom For all power is from God which cannot give any power to this end But suppose it so should come to pass that a King or the Emperour had absolutely indowed a Church without such a condition to be understood yet such a condition ought to be understood and by consequent when such a condition of the Clergy doth fall out the King by taking the Temporals from them into his own hands doth do no injury to the Clergy the condition being dissolved and made null by his or their defect The minor of the Argument is thus proved If all those Goods with which our Church is indued did immediately and directly so pertain to the Pope that the King had no interest neither in the possessions nor the persons the fourth part of the kingdom and more being devolved to a Mortmayn it would follow that our King is not King of all Bohemia more than the fourth part thereof being fallen into a Mortmayn for the Clergy and the possessions of the Clergy every day increasing and the possessions of the Barons Knights and other Seculars every day decreasing it may easily come to pass that the whole possession of the Kingdom of Bohemia may be devolved to the Clergy as it hath come to passe in the Rhene If this comes to pass the Dominion of our King and of the Barons will be extinguished and by consequence all Soveraignty for it is not lawfull for the King as the Clergy do affirm to interpose in matters concerning themselves or their possession be their offences never so haynous neither is it lawfull for the King to meddle with their Temporals how great soever the abuse doth tend to the indangering of the kingdom because they say they are exempted from all Kingly jurisdiction both in Body and in Goods and immediately subject to the Pope And thereupon committing insolencies in the kingdom they will not be corrected by the King but are like good or evil Angels not subject to the King in his own kingdom Again according to the Decrees of Gregorie 2. quaest 3. He ought altogether to lose his privilege who abuseth the Power that is committed to him but every Clergy-man abusing the Kings gifts of Almes doth abuse the power committed to him That indowment therefore being a Privilege it directly followeth that he ought altogether to lose it And to whom but to the King who did impriviledge him for it is his priviledge to interpret and to defend or take away whose priviledge it is to make It is confirmed by that of Matthew Chap. 23. To every one that hath it shall be given and he shall abound and to him that hath not even that shall be taken which he hath When the King is obliged so to abound by the Title of his Justice it seemeth that the Ablation or the taking away from him whom he hath indowed with Church gifts ought to proceed from the King himselfe it being supposed it may so come to pass that he may seem to have those gifts of Almes which he hath not It is confirmed also by the law and due of these Spiritual gifts of Almes for the King is bound by the laws of God and of his Kingdom to preserve Justice for the safety of his Liege-people But the chief work of such a mercy which belongeth to a King is a coactive castigation to continue such works of Almes which he ought to see performed The Clergy-men therefore who take the greatest offence at the taking away of Temporals do yet challenge that the Seculars do defend the gifts of their Progenitors remaining in their strength which cannot be unlesse the Church hath the profit from such gifts of Almes in such a manner that being put together it may remain upon the account of Priviledge or of free gifts of Almes which is extinguished when the said Clergy-men do abuse their gifts according to the Decrees of Gregory alledged in the foregoing confirmation If therefore the Temporal Lords as the Clergy-men who enjoy these Gifts of Alms do challenge are bound to continue the charitable Donations of their Fathers whose Heirs they are they are then bound to conform themselves to that which followeth for otherwise they would be obliged to Contradictories against the possibility of the Divine law viz. both to continue the said Gifts of Almes and to defend their abuses in the several species of them according to which sense they do want the form and the very essence of a spiritual Gift of Alms. Therefore when Kings and Secular Lords are bound to continue the Almes of their Progenitors in the perpetuity of them they are obliged also by the law of Spiritual almes to chastise their Liege-people abusing them They are obliged also by that Obligation to do justice to their Subjects and to extinguish those injuries which most dangerously tend to the ruine of their Subjects It is manifest that in some case they are bound to restore their Goods to the Holy Church and to take them away from the Despisers of God and his Kingdom for this was the condition of the first and antient Donation Therefore if our King have not the power over these his Peers to correct the abuse of Almes in his Clergy he hath not the power of governing politickly over all his Kingdom But yet if we do well attend to the holy Scripture we shall know what is spoken of the priviledge of the King to wit that he hath a coercive power over the Clergy and the Clergy have a priviledge also that they have such a One set over them to whom deservedly they may submit themselves Again Kings and Princes and all Lords Temporal are bound to a Brotherly correction some circumstances concurring which require such a correction But it may well come to pass that a Clergy-man may transgresse with such a circumstance that a Brotherly correction of him may be most needfull and effectual by merely taking away from him those Temporals which he abuseth Therefore it may so come to pass the Temporal Lords by the Law of Christ are bound unto it neither doth it any thing avayl to say that the Dispensâ—cion of the Pope or any Priviledge or Exemption doth exclude it for God forbid that a Catholick should affirm that it is lawfull for Christs Vicar to do that by his Traditions which may hinder or derogate from the Practick law of Christ and impede Catholick Lords from an effectual and a profitable correction of the Church for it is not lawfull for a man so to exempt any as if he shall fall into a sin it shall not be in his Power to correct him Upon this account it is that St. Bernard in his third Book to Pope Eugenius calls a Dispensation which is not for the Publick good a Dissipation And hereupon he hath these words What Do you forbid to dispence No but to dissipate I
am not so silly as to be ignorant that you are made Dispencers but to edification not to destruction Amongst Dispensators or Dispensers it is required that a man be found faithfull when Necessity urgeth a Dispensation is excusable when Profit inviteth it the Dispensation is laudible but this Profit must be publick and common and not private and particular for where neither of these two are it is not a faithfull Dispensation but a cruel Dissipation From the words of this Saint it is manifest that priviledging or exempting is not a faithfull Dispensation but a cruel Dissipation If Clergy-men be exempted let their sin be never so enormous to from being corrected by any but the Pope only For what is the profit of the Church that Clergy-men should be wanton and rampant as Bulls and like untamed Horses neigh unto their Neighbours wives unless in such grievous exorbitancies some yoak or curb be imposed upon them by the Princes For Priviledging Dispensation or Exemption ought not to be an Authority to them for the committing of sin for St. Augustin in his fourth Book intituled Authority Quaest. 23. saith That he who sinneth sinneth not by the Authority but against the Authority of the Law Again the addition of temporal Goods is commonly not so near to the last necessity of salvation by corporal punishment as the taking away of the Abuse is near to the last necessity of the perpetual Salvation both of Soul and Body As it is a work of greater mercy to take away a Sword from a Mad-man that would kill himself than to give a Sword to a persecuted man to defend himself from one that doth endeavour to kill him for it is worse for a man to be killed by himself than by another for the first is damnable the second just or meritorious And to this sence is that of Saint Augustin 5. Quaest. 5. Not every one who spareth is a Friend nor every one who scourgeth is an Enemy for the wounds of a Friends are better than the fraudulent kisses of an enemy it is better to love with security than to deceive with lenity And to the same purpose is that which followeth It is safer to take Bread from a hungry man if having abundance of Bread he neglecteth Iustice than to give Bread to a hungry person that being seduced he may acquiesce in Injustice And again He who binds a Mad-man and he who awakens and rouzeth up a Lethargick-man is a friend to them both although he is troublesom to them Thus for Saint Augustine by whose example if Lords Temporal are bound to give charitable Gifts to the Clergy that they may be the better incouraged to the performance of their Duties they are also bound by the same law of Almes to take away the said Gifts from those that do abuse them least by suffering the abuse they destroy their own Souls And hence it is that amongst all the sins to which the Superiours of our Kingdom of Bohemia are most obnoxious the greatest are Blind zeal False mercy and a Consentanious omission either by negligence or which is above all most horrible when mony i received for giving consent unto a Crime and the Enemy of Christ is unjustly defended by the Almes given to the Clergy Whereupon St. Augustine in his 3. Epist. to Macedonia writeth We more mercifully do draw back than give to such Persons for he doth him no good who helpeth a man but rather doth pervert him and oppresse him Whereupon it is to be admired why a Clergy-man who hath a thorn in his foot will suffer a Lay-man to pull it out that he might walk the better and will not suffer him when Riches do choak his affections to take them away from him that so walking uprightly in the footsteps of Christ he might save his Soul unless peradventure he would show thereby that he loveth the soal of his Foot better than he doth his Soul For if he loved his Soul better he would then with joy sustain the plunder of his Temporals for so those Christians did to whom the Apostle writeth Heb. 10. you took joyfully the spoyling of your Goods knowing in your selves that you have in Heaven a more enduring substance And since our Saviour having no fault in himself did humbly and willingly endure the losse of his Garments and a most bitter and ignominious Death the example of our Saviour and the consciousness of his own Guilt should move every Clergy-man even patiently to endure the taking away of his Goods But if a Clergy man doth so grievously murmur against the taking away of the mammon of Iniquity how would he endure reproach and blows and spittle and martyrdom and Death it self for the Name of Christ Such a Clergy-man never thinketh of that in St. Ambrose concerning the contempt of the world In which he hath these words O most wretched man with what a fraud art thou circumvented with what a grief art thou deceived with what a snare art thou captivated who fearest that thy wordly possessions should be taken from thee and hast no fear in the mean time of losing of that most excellent Creature thy own Soul Again God permitteth Ecclesiastical persons so exorbitantly to offend that they may deserve to be plundered of their possessions neither doth he cause the plundering of them but by setting Temporal Lords on work to see such an Execution thorowly performed This Article therefore is true But peradventure it will be objected That by the addition of this Particle that it is in their lawfull Power so to do according to their own arbitration the whole strength of the Instance above-mentioned is taken away Nevertheless according to the five Rules of Logick and Metaphysicks it is manifest and plainly consequent that if the King and Temporal Lords cannot do so according to their own Arbitrement it must be so because that Arbitrement is either a Power Judicial or a Judicial Act of the same Power and grant what may be granted If the Temporal Lords could not act so according to that Power or such an Act it would follow that they have no power to act any thing at all For if they ought to expect the Arbitration of the Bishop of Rome or of the Archbishops and all the Clergy of this Kingdom the chief Power would reside in the Clerks only and the great Prelates and Bishops of the Kingdom and so our King should not be King of Bohemia neither any of the Peers of the Land or Lords Temporal should have any visible Power which must wholly and necessarily be reduced to the Clergy and by consequence the Clergy it self should be secularly over the King which is directly against the Law of Christ Luke 22. where our Saviour saith That the Kings of the Gentiles do exercise Lordship over them and they that exercise Authority upon them are called Benefactors But you shall not be so On which place Saint Bernard writing to the
given unto the Church of Christ by the devotion of the Faithfull the power and authority of the Secular power reserved lest there might happen any confusion Forsomuch as God himself cannot allow any disordered thing Whereupon oftentimes the worldly Princes do grant the bare use of the Church and oftentimes use and power to exercise Justice which the Clergy cannot exercise by any Ecclesiastical Minister or any other person of the Clergy Notwithstanding they may have certain Lay-persons Ministers unto that office But in such sort saith he that they do acknowledge the power which they have to come from the Secular Prince or Ruler and that they do understand thâ—ir Possessions can never be alienate away from the Kings power but if that necessity or reason do require the same Possessions in all such case of necessity do owe him obeysance and service For like as the Kings power ought not to turn away the defence or safegard which he oweth unto other so likewise the Possessions obtained and possessed by the Clergy according to the duty and homage which is due unto the Patronage of the Kings power cannot by right be denyed Thus much writes Hugo with whom Iohn Hus concludes his Disputation Mat. 5. 39 40. But I say unto you that you resist not evil And if any man will sue thee at the Law and take away thy Coat let him have thy Cloak also Phil 3. 8 17 18 19 20. Yea doubtless I count all things but lâ—sse for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Iesus my Lord for whom I have suffered the losse of all things and do count them but dung that I may win Christ. Brethren be followers together of me and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an example For many walk of whom I have told you often and now tell you weeping that they are the enemies of the Cross of Christ whose end is destruction whose God is their belly whose glory is their shame who mind earthly things But our conversation is in heaven Col. 3. 1 2 c. If ye then be risen with Christ seek those things which are above where Christ sits at the right hand of God Set your affection on things above not on things on the earth for ye are dead and your life is hid with Christ in God Mortifie therefore your members which are upon the earth inordinate affection evil concupiscence and covetousness which is idolatry for which things sake the wrath of God cometh upon the children of disobedience A supplemental Appendix to the premised Disputation of John Hus irrefragibly evidencing the Supream Iurisdiction of our Kings Lords and Parliaments not only over the Persons Liberties Lives of our Archbishops Bishops Abbots Priors Church-men in cases of High Treason Rebellion Disobedience Contumacy and Disloyalty but likewise over their Temporal Lands and Estates to seise and confiscate them without Sacriledge or Injustice HAving presented the Readers with the memorable Disputation of this famous learned Bohemian Marty Iohn Hus in justification of our English Apostle and prime Assertor of the Reformed Religion we now profess whose Doctrine spread it self into Bohemia Germany and other parts to the subversion of the Popes and Prelates usurped Authority over Kings Popery by degrees It will not be unseasonable by way of Appendix to subjoyn some memorable domestick Evidences Presidents in all Ages to justifie their opinions in point of practise Not with the least intention to deprive the faithfull painfull Ministers and Preachers of the Gospel or any true Evangelical Bishops of the antient Glebes Tithes Dues belonging to their respective Parochial Churches or of that liberal competent Maintenance or double Honor which belongs unto them by a divine right and common natural Justice for their labour in the work of the Ministry which I have publickly and largely asserted But only to vindicate the just Prerogative of our Kings and Jurisdiction of the Temporal Lords and Commons in Parliament over the Persons and superfluous large Temporal Mannors Lands and Possessions of delinquent Archbishops Bishops Abbots Priors Deans Chapters Monks and other religious Persons which are not of Divine or Apostolical but mere Humane institution and not absolutely necessary to the being of the Church of Christ as true Evangelical Bishops and Ministers are whose principle office and duty is frequently to preach the Gospel and administer the Sacraments not to domineer over their people or suspend them from the Lords supper Mat. 28. 19. 20. Mar. 16. 15. 1 Cor. 5. 7 18 21 c. 9. 14 to 19. 2 Tim. 4. 2 5. Rom. 10. 19 20. 1 Pet. 5. 2 3. To this end I shall desire our Archbps. Bps. and other Cathedralists to consider 1. That Gratian the Canonist Peter Lombard the School-man with most other Canonists and Scholmen in their Glosses or Commentaries on their Texts Matthew Parker Archbishop of Canterbury Mr. Iohn Fox William Harrison Richard Grafton Iohn Speed and no lesse than thirty more of our antient Historians and other Authors quoted by Archbishop Vsher for this purpose affirm That the antient Britains before their conversion to Christianity had 28. Flamines and 3. Archflamines in this our Island to whom the other Priests were subject having distinct Cities Sees Diocesses and Temples wherein they resided and exercised their Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions that King Lucius upon his conversion to Christianity about the year of our Lord 175. by Pope Elutherius his direction took away their Sees Lands and Temples from them and placed 28. Bishops and 3. Archbishops in their steads turning their Sees into Archbishopricks and Bishopricks and their Temples into Cathedral Churches Yea Gratian himself Distinctio 21. and the Glossers on him resolve That the distinction among Priests whence some are stiled Priests simply others Archpriests others Choral Bishops others Bishops others Archbishops or Metropolitans others Primates others Chief Priests WAS PRINCIPALLY INTRODVCED BY THE GENTILS not the Apostles or Primitive Christians who called their Flamines some simple Flamines others Arch-flamines others Proto-flamines If then these their Hierarchical orders were originally derived from they succeeded the Pagan Flamines Arch-flamins Proto-Flamins in their Sees Jurisdictions Temporalties and Cathedrals which King Lucius took from them without sacriledge or impietie then by the like reason and president our Kings or Temporal Lords and Commons in Parliament may devest our peccant Prelates of their Sees Temporalties Cathedrals convert them to other uses for the publik ease and benefit of the Kingdom when they see just cause being originally dedicated to these Flamines Arch-flamines Proto-flamines and their Pagan Gods 2ly That admit these former Authors relations touching Flamines Arch-flamines and King Lucius erecting Bishops and Arch-bishops in their Sees to be false and fabulous as Bishop Iewel Bishop Godwin Bishop Vsher Doctor Suteliffe and Sir Henry Spelman repute them yet it is agreed by all that the primitive
Archbishoprick at Litckfield took away six Bishopricks formerly subject to the See of Canterbury and detained the Lands above thirty years till at last restored by the judgement of two or three Parliamentary Great Councils after many Petitions and Complaints upon full hearing and examination Stigand Archbishop of Canterbury for refusing to Crown King William the Conqueror and holding the Bishoprick of Winchester in Commendam with his Archbishoprick together with many other Bishops and Abbots was deprived by the Kings procurement and kept Prisoner at VVinchester during his life receiving only a small allowance out of the Exchequer to support him dying in Prison his Bishoprick remained void two years space in the Kings hands no lesse than twenty five Manors being taken away from it till recovered by â— ansraue his Successor in a famous Council of the Noble and Elders of England held at Penindene King VVilliam Rufus banished Anselme Archbishop of Canterbury out of the Realm for Treason against him and his Soveraign Power and seised his Temporalties till his death after which King Henry the first recalling him he most trayterously and obstinately oppugned the Kings Prerogative of investing Bishops in their Bishopricks by a Ring and Pastoral-slast and refusing to do homage to the King or to consecrate any Bishops who received Investitures from him or did Homage to him for which he was banished for three years out of the Realm all his Temporalties and Goods moveable and immoveable seised into the Kings hands with the Temporalties Goods of those Bishops who renounced their Investistures by the Kings donation by Anselmes perswasion King Stephen seised all the Goods and Temporalties of Theobuld Archbishop of Canterbury and banished him the Realm for departing out of England to Rome upon the Popes summons contrary to his expresse royal Prohibition and for interdicting the King and whole Realm After which being restored to his Archbishoprick by the other Bishops mediation his Goods and Temporalties were again consiscated and seised into the Kings hands Anno 1152. for refusing to Crown Eustace King Stephens Son he forced to flye the Realm which he caused to be infested with fire sword and bloudy wars Thomas Bâ—cket Archbishop of Canterbury an infamous perjured Traytor to and Rebel against King Henry the second his advancer and indulgent Soveraign grand Oppugner of his Royal Prerogatives and of the Customs of the Realm contrary to the Oath and Recognition of himself and all the Bishops Clergy and Temporal Lords in the famous Great Council of Clarindon endeavouring totally to exempt the Clergy from all Temporal power jurisdiction and judicature for the most detestable Crimes and Murders had all his Goods and Moveables by judgment of the Bishops and Peers condemned and confiscated to the King his Temporalties seised into the hands all his Moneys Jewels Plate confiscated together with all the Clergy-men goods who adhered to him all his Kindred Man Woman and Child secured and afterwards banished the Realm together with himself for sundry years and was at last slain in the Cathedral Church at Canterbury for his manifold Treasons Rebellions against the King to the great disturbauce both of the Churches and Kingdoms peace King Iohn An. 1205. seised upon all Archbp. Huberts Lands and Possessions after his death for his manifold Contempts and Oppositions against his Royal authoritie and resolutions during his life Stephen Langhton his next Successor in the Archiepiscopal See of Canterbury for his manifold Treasons and Rebellions against King John had all his Temporalties and Goods seised by the King and was suspended from his Archbishoprick and threatned to be deprived of it by the Pope Archbishop Boniface being commanded by King Henry the third to relinquish his Archbishoprick and depart the Realm by reason of the grievous Complaints both of the Clergy and Commonalty against him thereupon selled his Woods leased out his Lands extorted what moneys he could from his Tenants and carried all with him in to Savoy where he dyed King Edward the first Anno 1301. put Robert Winchelsie Archbishop of Canterbury with all the other Bishops and Clergy out of his Protection and the Parliament House and seised the Archbishops Temporalties Goods Debts After which divers High Treasons and Rebellious Conspiracies were laid to his Charge by the King who thereupon the second time seised all his Temporalties and Goods moveable and immoveable appealed him to the Pope banished him the Realm forbidding any of his Subjects under grievous penalties to harbour him and seised all the Lands of the Monks of Canterbury and banished them the Realm for furnishing this Arch-traytor secretly with necessaries King Edward the second caused all the Goods of Iohn Stratford Archbishop of Canterbury to be seised and his Temporalties to be sequestred into his hands whiles Bishop of Winchester for taking that Bishoprick by Provision from the Pope against his Royal command After which being advanced to Canterbury by King Edward the third he was soon after accused of Treason Treachery and Conspiracy with the French and Pope against the King whose designs against them he crossed all he could whereupon the King resolved to commit him Prisoner to the Tower of London whither he sent the Bishop of Chichesier then Lord Chancellor and the Bishop of Lichfiâ—ld then L. Treasurer Prisoners for the like offences Wherupon this Archbp. flying to Canterbury and there standing on his Gard refused to render himself carrying himself very insolently and rebelliously against the King both in his Sermons and Excommunication saying That he had received no honor nor advancement from the King but ONLY FROM GOD and that he would give an account of his Actions in no. Court and to no Person but in Parliament Whereupon a Parliament was summoned and divers hainous Crimes charged against him by the King which the King after great suit and intreaty pardoned Simon Langham Archbishop of Canterbury Chancellor of England Anno 1371. was put from his Office his Temporalties seised and stripped of all his Archiepiscopal ensigns for receiving from Pope Vrban the Cardinalship of St. Sixtus without King Edward the third his privity who was highly offended with him for it Anno 1386. Simon Sudbury Archbishop of Canterbury in the insurrection of Iack Straw was beheaded on Tower-Hill his Head fixed on a Poll and set on London Bridge as a Traytor and Enemy to the King and People King Rich. the 2d highly offended with Will. Courtney Archbishop of Canterbury for receiving his Archbishoprick by provision from the Pope against the Law and his Prerogative Royal and for other Misdemeanours commanded all his Goods and Temporalties to be seised and forced the Archbishop himself to hide his Head for fear of imprisonment till he made his peace with him Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury was impeached and condemned of High Treason against the King in the Parliament of 21 Rich. 2. by judgement of Parliament for which he was
ordered to be banished the Realm his Temporalties seised his Lands and Goods forfeited Thomas Cranmer Archbishop of Canterbury was committed Prisoner and impeached convicted of High Treason against Queen Mary for aiding the Usurper Queen Iane against her and his Goods and Temporalties seised Edmond Grindon Archbishop of Canterbury falling into Queen Elizabeths displeasure was suspended from his Archiepiscopacy by her order till his death Archbishop Abbot for killing his Keeper by Chance-medly in shooting at a Back was suspended from his Archiepiscopal Jurisdiction by King Charles the first for sundry years and his Archiepiscopal Jurisdiction power delegated to others And Will. Laud the last Archbishop of that See in the Parliament of 16 Caroli was impeached of sundry High Treasons and high Misdemeanours against the King and Kingdom by the Commons of England and Scots Commissioners for which he was upon full Tryal and Hearing imprisoned atttainted condemned and beheaded on Tower-hill his Goods and Temporalties sequestred seised sold by Judgment and Ordinances of both Houses of Parliament To these numerous Presidents of the Archbishops of Canterbury I shall annex some paralel ones of the Archbishops of York VVilfred Archbishop of York for his Treason in favouring and aiding the rebellious Danes and perswading Queen Ermenburga to desert her Husband the King was by King Egfreds prosecution twice condemned and deprived of his Archbishoprick in two several Councils his Temporalties and Goods seised his Person imprisoned his Archbishoprick divided into two or three more Bishopricks and himself exiled some write for ten others for eight years together till at last with much importunity many Letters from the Pope others he was restored to his See Wolstan Archbp. of York for his hamous Treason in deserting his natural Christian King Edgar against his Oath Allegiance Piety Function Christianity and adhering to the invading heathen Danes who wasted the Country and endeavoured to rout out the Christian Religion and for murdering divers Citizens of Hertford was deprived of his Bishoprick and imprisoned by the King for a year and at last murdered himself Turstan Archbishop of York for receiving his consecration from the Pope at the Council of Rhemes against King Henry the first his expresse command and his own Oath and Faith to the King was banish'd the Realm his Temporalties seised by the King for five years space and he hardly permitted to return into England after many mediations and menaces of the Pope in his behalf Geoffry Plantaginet Archbishop of York for breaking his Oath with King Richard the first was kept from his Temporalties and imprisoned by William Longchamp After this Anno 1194. upon several complaints against him in Parliament for hindering the Kings Officers to gather a Tax in his Diocesse and sundry contempts against King Iohn his Lands and Goods were seised and returned into the Kings Exchequer by the Sherift of York-shire by the Kings command for which he excommuniting the Sheriff was suspended his Bishoprick and forced to pay a Fine of 1000 l. for his restitution After which for excommunicating those who collected a Tax for the King he was banished the Realm and his Temporalties seised for above five years time the See being kept void above ten years space in the Kings hand when he was first made Archbishop Thomas Corbrig Archbishop of York for obeying and preferring the Popes commands before the Kings in admitting the Popes Clerk to the Chapel of St. Sepulchres in York and rejecting the Kings about the year 1300. had for this his contempt three Baronies antiently belonging and annexed to his Archbishoprick taken away and kept from him by King Edward the first during the Archbishops life without restitution Alexander Nevil Archbishop of York was attainted of High Treason in the Parliament of XI King Richard the second his Temporalties and Estate seised and his Person adjudged to perpetual imprisonment in Rochester Castle who flying the Realm Pope Vrban made him Archbishop of St. Andrews in Scotland but the Scots refusing to own his Papal Authority he was stripped of both Archbishopricks and forced to live a poor Parish-Priest in Lovain till his death Richard Scroop Archbishop of York was condemned and beheaded for High Treason against King Henry the fourth and all his Temporalties Monies Goods seised and consiscated to the King An. 1405. George Nevil Archbp. of York Brother to Henry Nevil the Great Earl of Warwick a perfideous Traytor both to King Edward the 6th and Edward the 4th in the year 1472. was arrested of High Treason at VVindsor by King Edward the 4th all his Plate Money and other movable Goods to the value of 20000 l. seised for the King together with a Miter of inestimable value by reason of the many rich stones adorning it which the King broke and made a Crown thereof for himself the profits temporalties of hi-Bishoprick were taken into the Kings hands for above 4. years space and himself long imprisoned at Calis Guisnes for his Treason against the King Cardinal Thomas Wolsie Archbishop of York a most insolent proud ambitious covetous Prelate for his manifold misdemeanours Oppressions and high crimes against the King kingdom people and Kings royal Prerogative was first attainted in a Praemunire An. 21 H. 8. whereupon the K. seised all his Goods and took away the Great Seal from him After which the Lords and Parliament exhibited sundry Articles of High Treason and other Misdemenours against him Upon which by the Kings command he was arrested at Cawood of High Treason by the Earl of Northumberland in November 1536. his Plate Goods and Temporalties seised himself caried Prisoner towards London with intent to bring him to the Tower to be further proceeded against to a void which infamy he poysoned himself with a strong Purgation whereof he died at Leycester Abby after which the King seised all his Lands and Manors though a Cardinal and Archbishop To these Presidents of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York I shall annex the like of some other inferiour Bishops William de sancta Maria Bishop of London for interdicting the whole Realm and excommunicating King Iohn together with Edward Bishop of Ely and Maugerus Bishop of VVorcester who concurred with him in this interdict and excommunication to gratifie the Pope had all their Goods and Temporalties seised upon by the King Anno 1201. their Castles demolished and themselves banished the Realm for five years space Fulco Basset Bishop of London a great Stickler for the Pope against King Henry the third whom he oft affronted â—â—â—â—essed the King and Pope might take away his Bishoprick his Miter and Crosier but not his Helmet and Sword wherein he most gloried and consided Henry Sandwich Bishop of London against his corporal Oath of Fealty and Homage to King Henry the third was a prime Stickler in the Barons wars against this King and Promoter of the Articles of Oxford in the forty
second year of his Reign which took away his just Regal Power and Government of the Realm and delegated it to twelve Commissioners which Articles all the Bishops consented unto and sealed with their Seals and this Bishop amongst the rest for which in a Council held at VVestminster he was suspended both from his Episcopal Office and Bishoprick which were sequestred into the Kings hands Edmond Bonner Bishop of London a grand Persecuter and Burner of Gods true Saints yea a bitter Enemy to King Edw. the 6th and Queen Elizabeth was twice deprived of his Bishoprick for his Contempts and Misdemeanours once in King Edward the 6th his Reign and again in the first year of Queen Elizabeth for refusing the Oath of Supremacy and Allegiance and murthering so many Protestants under Queen Mary and by Authority of the Queen and Parliament committed Prisoner to the Marshalsee among Rogues where he died amongst Rogues and Murderers and was buried at midnight in obscurity Wina Bishop of VVinchester so highly offended Kenewalchus King of the West Saxons who advanced him that in the year 666. he drave him out of his Country and deprived him of his Bishoprick About the year of Christ 1107. King Henry the first was so far incensed against VVilliam Gifford whom he had formerly invested in the Bishoprick of Winchester by the delivery of a Ring and Crosier for renouncing thâ—◠〈◊〉 Investiture and refusing his Consecration out of fear to displease Archbishop Anselm that he seised his Temporalties and banished him the Realm Henry de Bloys Bishop of VVinchester against his Oath of Fealty and Allegiance to Qâ— Maud dis-inherited her of the Crown and set up K. Stephen in her stead who not long after falling out with this Bishop seised all his Castles whereupon he revolted to Maude and procured a Pall from the Pope to be made Archbishop of VVinchester and to have seven Bishopricks annexed to his Province VVilliam Raley Bishop of VVinchester for excommunicating the Maior Citizens and Monks of VVinchester for obeying King Henry the third his Edict not to give him or his any victuals or lodging and interdicting the Cathedral there was forced to fly the Realm and relinquish his Bishoprick till by Archbishop Bonifaces and the Popes mediations which cost him a gratuity of 6000 l. he made his peace with the King Ethelmar Bishop of VVinchester caused the Barons assembled in a Parliamentary Council at Oxford to take up Armes against him for his intollerable Insolencies Tyrannies Exorbitancies Oppressions and to drive him out of the Realm who seising on all his Goods and Treasure they could meet with writ Letters and sent Agents to Rome to stop his return into England which neither the King Lords nor Commons would permit upon any Letters or sollicitations from the Pope on his behalf to King Henry the third and the Lords Iohn Gernsey Bishop of VVinchester was excommunicated by the Popes Legat his Temporalties seised and he forced to fly to Rome for an absolution for taking part with the Barons against King Henry the third subscribing and ratifying with an Oath the Antimonarchical Provisions of Oxford in derogation of the Kings Royal Power and Government against his Oath and Allegiance to the King Henry VVoodlock Bishop of VVinchester interceeding to King Edward the first for Robert VVinchessie Archbishop of Canterbury banished for Treason and calling him his good Lord had his Temporalties seised Goods confiscated and was put out of the Kings protection VVilliam VVickham Bishop of VVinchester for wasting and embesselling the Kings Treasure to a great value wherein he was condemned had all his Goods seised his Temporalties bestowed on the young Prince of VVales and was likewise banished above twenty miles from the Court Stephen Gardiner Bishop of VVinchester for a seditious Sermon preached before King Edward the sixth and disobeying the Kings Injunctions was committed Prisoner to the Fleet and afterwards to the Tower of London for two years space and an half after which he was deprived of his Bishoprick seised into the Kings hands and sent to Prison again being an implacable enemy to King Edward the sixth and the Lady Elizabeth afterwards Queen of England whose death he oft contrived and had well-nigh accomplished Iohn White Bishop of VVinchester to obtain this fat Bishoprick promised to give the Pope 1600 pounds a year out of it during his life which Sin the Pope seemingly detesting he was forced to pay much dearer ere he could obtain it he threatned to excommunicate Queen Elizabeth in the first year of her reign for which he was committed to Prison After that for refusing 〈◊〉 take the Oath of Supremacy and Allegiâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 the Queen he and thirteen more Bishops were deprived of their Bishopricks and others placed in their roomes Kenulph the tenth Bishop of Durham in the year of Christ 750. was apprehended and committed Prisoner of the Castle of Bebba and his Church besieged by Egbert King of Northumberland for misdemeanours against him Fgelrick 16. Bishop of Durham charged with Treason and Conspiracy against VVilliam the Conqueror Pyracy on the Sea and disturbing the peace of the Kingdom was for these offences commited perpetual Prisoner to VVestminster Abby where he lamented his misdemeanours and dyed very penitently Egelwyn the 17. Bishop of Durham for raising two Rebellions against King William the Conqueror and excommâ—â— the King with all his Followers as Invadors and Robbers of the Church was banished the Realm deprived of his Bishoprick and at last invading the Realm was taken Prisoner in the Isle of Fly by the King and committed close Prisoner to Abyngdon Anno 1071. wherâ— refusing to take any sustenance he died of anger grief and hunger Not mention the tragedy of VVaâ—cher Bishop of Durham created Bishop and likewise Earl of Northumberland by VViliam the Conqueror the first Spiritual and Temporal Lords of this See who turning a very great Oppressor of the People so far incensed them by the murther of Leulsus by Leoswin and Gilbert his Chaplain and Kinsman that they assaulted him and his Followers in the Cathedral Church where they fortified themselves slew the Bishop himself and all his retinue to the number of one hundred Persons and set the Church on fire VVilliam Kairlipho his next Successor in the See of Durham though advanced to that Office by King VVilliam Rufus and made one of his Privy Counsel yet he most treacherously and ungratefully conspired with Odo Bishop of Bayon and other Great men Anno 1088. to deprive him of his Crown which the King who most trusted and favoured him of any other took very grievously at his hands whereupon he marched to Durham in person with his Army which this Bishop by strong hand held out against him till at last he was enforced to surrender the City and himself to the Kings mercy who thereupon banished him the Realm for three years taking the profits of his Temporalties
Priests Monks overmuch freequented of late and former times as well in England as in forein parts Now all these Sacrileges as they have no real ground or foundation in Gods word tending only to secure the persons goods of Prelates Church men and other Ecclesiastical persons and all kinds of Traytors Malefactors Debtors Bankrupts Cheates flying unto them and their Churches for Sanctuary and hiding their Goods within their precincts to protect them from the Kings and Civil Magistrates power Laws Officers Executions as our own Histories Statutes and Law-books resolve in the several cases of Thomas Bâ—cket Archbishop of Canterbury Hubert de Burgo Earl of Kent Iohn Saâ—age and sundry others See 50 E. 3. c. 6. 2 R. 2. c. 3. 21 H. 8. c. 2 7.4 H 8. c. 2. 26 H 8. c. 13. 28 H. 8. c. 7 13. 32 H. 8. c. 12 15. 2 E. 6 c. 2 13. 1 and 2 Philip and Mary c. 4. 1 Mary c. 6. 5 Eliz. c. 10 14 19 20. 13 Eliz. c. 7. 14 Eliz. c. 5. 18â— Eliz. c. 3. Kelway f. 91 188 190 1 H. 7 10 23 29. Stamford l. 2. c. 38 39. Brook and Ash Title Sanctuary So the bare alienation or ablation of Bishops Abbots and Cathedral mens Lands by our Kings Parliaments or Clergy men themselves fall neither within the words nor intention of any of these Sacrileges extending only to sacred persons Goods and Chattels not to the sale of Mannors Landâ— Tenements Rents Temporalties of Church-men which is no Sacrilege either within the Canonists or Scholemens definition or division of Sacrilege 4ly That Hostiensis and other Canonists cited by him inform us That whoever doth any injury to Ecclesiastical persons commits Sacrilege and not only so but that it is Sacrilege for any man to question or dispute the Judgement or Decrees of the Pâ—pe or to transgresse dis-respect any publick Laws not to yield due reverence to the Popes or Bishops Canons to violate an Holy-day to imploy a Jew in any Office or to oppresse any pious Place or Hospital under the Patronage or Protection of the Church But these things I presume our Bishops and Cathedral men themselves will ingenuously confesse to be no Sacrilege at all notwithstanding the Popish Canonists and Schole mens resolutions And by like reason the Kings or Parliaments alienation or ablation of their supefluous or abused Church-Land Temporalties must prove no real Sacrilege though some Popes Popish Canonists and Scholemen have concluded it to be so 5ly That Alexander Alensis and others resolve That it is Sacrilege for any Lay-Men with their Families Cattle and Goods to be received or enter into Churches Chaples or Churchyards or to eat drink and lodge in them in times of Peace But if they do it in times of War and Necessity to preserve themselves against the Enemies in cases of eminent danger as they did frequently during the Danish and Norman Invasions and during our Civil Wars then it is no Sacrilege at all Vbi est hujusmodi necessitas non est Sacrilegium If then the case of eminent danger necessity and War will make that to be no Sacrilege in this case which otherwise would have been Sacrilege Then by the self-same reason the Kings or Parliaments ablations sales of the Lands of Bishops Deanes Chapters Abbots Priors in times of War and publick Necessity to defray the vast debts and expences of the Kingdom will prove to be no Sacrilege at all by the definition of Popish Scholemen of old yea of some late Iesuits both in Germany and Spain as well as of Iohn Wickliff Iohn Hus and other fore-cited Protestant Divines and Martyrs concurring in Judgement with them FINIS ERRATA at the Pâ—esâ—e P. 3. l. 3.25 r. 43. p. 26. l. 6. Almes â— Charâ—â— p. 33. l. â—◠〈◊〉 r. praises p. 36. l. 9. r. this is p. 4â— l. 28. Successors 〈◊〉 l. 19. Plancta p. 49. l. 19. dominii p. 50. l. 7. â—aica p. 62. l. 31. excommunicate p. 63. l. 5. Lord. p. 65. l. 11. Monks p. 84. l. 4. Officers r affairs p 91. l. 9. most r. just p. 93. l. 16. iuherent p. 94. l. 15. impated p. 100. l. 2. praesenti l. 26. relaxandi p. 101. l. 16. minus l. 29. consentientes r. 101. l. spiritualis p. 57. l. 38. Edward 6. r. Henry p. 63. l 1. r. Nâ—â—â— Margin p. 48. l. 19. r. l. â— l 20. r. Anselm Glessarum Hunagium * Quem dabis mihi de numero EpiscoporuÌ„ qui non plus invigilet subdâ—â—orum evacuandis marsupiis quam vitus extirpandis Ubi est qui orando flectat iram Ubi est qui praedicet annum acceptibilem Domino Pauci admodum sunt qui non quae sua sunt quaerunt Diligunt munera nec possint pariter deligere Christum qui a manus dederunt mammonae Bernard Sermo 77. super Cantica ‖ See Grotius de Jure Bell. l. 3. c. 10. a Acts 5. 42. c. 20 21 28 1 Cor. 9. 14 to 24. 2 Tim. 4. 1. 2. Rom. 15. 18. 19 20. Mar. 16. 16. a Eccles Hist Gentis Auglorum l. 3. c. 4. 28. l. 4. c. 3. b Actus Pontisicum Cant. col 1636 1637. c Beda Eccles. Hist. l. 1. c. 27. Spelman Concil p. 96. Surius Concil Tom. 1. p. 359. d Spalato de Repub. Eccl. l. 9 c. 7. 2. 36. Bernard super Cantica Sermo 77. Goncio ad clerum in concilio Rhemensi e Gervasius Dorob actus Pontif. Cant. col 1636 1637. Beda f Lu. 22 24 25 26. Vidos omnem ecclesiasticum zelum fervere sola pro dignitate tuenda Honori totum datur sanctitati nihil aut parum Bern. de consid ad Eugenium l. 4. c. 2. g 1 Tim. 2. 1 2 3. h Deut 33. 26 27. [a] Iohn Fox Acts Monuments London 1641. Vol. 1. p. 563 564. 565 566 587. * Fox Acts Monuments Vol. 1. p. 595. c An allegory upon the Paschal lamb A Protestation whereby he giveth light unto the Reader how the proposition aforesaid is to be understood and addeth that the goods of the clergy are not utterly to be taken away but in case they doe abuse the same Nabuchodonozor Ioas. Ezechias David Case of necessity Titus and Vespasian The example of Christ paying of tribute St. Ambrose his mind Christ commanded tribute to be paid unto the Emperor Paul appealed to the Emperor St. Ambrose there in the 8. distinct Daniel 2. St. Augustine Magistrates keepers of both Laws The duty of Kings to punish the Clergy Matthew 21. Wisedom 11. An objection of the desire of other mens goods St. Augustine 14. quest 4. 1 Cor. 3. The clergy subject unto the Emperor and King by means of their possessions Paschasius in 〈…〉 cap. 〈◊〉 The 〈…〉 the Clergy Gregory writeth to the French Queen Wicked Priests the destruction of the people St. Gregory to the French King * Beneficium propter affictum When and how the title of any gift is lâ—st It
is lawfull for the civil rulers to correct the Clergy * Who were very poor and had no Lands nor Temporalities Mat. 8. 20. c. 19.27 Luke 8. 3. c. 9. 58 Acts 3.3,5,6 1 Cor. 4.9 to 15. 2 Cor. 6. 4 10. c 8.9 Phil. 2. 25. c. 4. 11 to 20. * By the Law of that age * 2 Tim 2. 4. Mat. 10. 9 10. Phil 3 Id. 19. 20. 2 Tim. 4 1â— Luke 8. 7 14. The duty of Kings * As most do now Bishops conferred â—thes â—n unworthy persons Mark 10. 21. to 31. c. 28. 34 2 Tim 2.4 A Sin committed and acknowledge doth render us more carefull The Lord Prelates have the fourth or third part of the Revenues of this Kingdom Note Note St. Ambrose The selling of Gold and Silver Vessels and Vestments The Templers * This argument is by way of retorsion These Lands being taken from the Templers by the Pope and Clergies consents solicitations A 〈◊〉 endâ—wed 〈◊〉 Rom. 13. Note The fear least the whole possession of the Kingdom of Bohemia be devâ—lved to the Clergy as in the Rhene The Clergy unwilling to be subjected to the King The abuse of gifts Dispensation The wounds of a Friend are better than the deceitfull kisses of an Enemy In the Superiours of the Kingdom Blind zeal False mercy and a consentaneous Omission Note Note Obj. Ans. Note The Dominion of the Clergy over the Power Politick An excellent Reason Leo the Pope subjected himself to Ludovick the Emperor The pride and tyranny of the Clergy Hildegardis Prophecy Hugo de Saâ—am part 2. Note (a) Mr. Fox Acts and Monuments vol. 1. The Preface to John Hus his work Bishop Jewel Dr. Jo. White Bishop Vsher Dr. Fearly Illâ—riâ— Catalogus Testium Veritatis and others (b) 1 Tim. 5. 17 18. Mat. 10. 10 1 Cor. 9 4 to 16. Gal. 6.6 Hâ—b 7. 2 to 11. (c) In the first second part of A Gospel Plea for the Tithes and setled Maintenance of the Ministers of the Gospel London 1656. (d) Distinctio 80. (e) Sentent l. 4. Dist 14. (f) Antiq. Eccl. Brit. p. 7. (g) Acts and Monuments Lond. 1641. vol. 1. p. 138 139. (h) Description of England l. 2. c. 1 2. (i) Chron. part 7. p. 83. (k) History of Great Britain p. 132. (l) De Brit. Eccl. Primordiis c. 5. p. 56 57 58 59 1â—â— 101. (m) 〈…〉 a Genâ—â—b is maximè introducta est c Gratian 〈◊〉 21. (n) Defence of the Apâ—lâ—g part 2. Ch 4. divis 2. (o) A discourse of the conversion of Britain p. 26 27. 28. (p) De Brit. Eccl 〈◊〉 p. 57 58 92 92 99 100 (q) Subveâ—siâ—n of Father Paâ—sâ—ns â— câ—nversions (r) 1 Conâ—il Tâ—m 1. p 13 14. (s) â—â—â—â—es Histâ—â— An. â—19 p. 33. (t) De donatione Constantinâ— (u) His defence of Constantine (x) De utra â—ue potestate c. 21. (y) Peliâ—hâ—â—â—â—n l. 4. c. 26. (z) Dialog l 4. â— 15 16 17 26. (a) Fox Acts and Monuments p. â—17 â—â— (b) Answer to the Preâ—â—â—â— of Mr. Moore p 116. (c) Chron in vita Sylvest (d) Sermon in Hag. 1. â— 1 â—â—â—sence of the 〈◊〉 part â— c. 9. divis 3. (e) Reports of certain men vol. 3. p 341. (g) The Antipathy of the English Lordly Prelaâ—y to Monarchy and Vnity ch 8 9. A Breviate of the Prelates intollerable Usurpations upon the Kings Prerogative Royal and Subjects Liberties An. 1637. (h) Surius Concil Tâ—m 1. p. 513. Gratian Distinct. 41. Vt Episcopus non longè ab Ecclesia Hospitiolum habeat Vt Episcopus vilem supellactilem mensam ac Victum pauperem habeat dignitatis suae authoritatem fide vitae meritis quaerat (i) Spelâ—â—anni Concil Tâ—m 1. p 261. (k) Surius Tâ—m 1. p. 525. Gratian caus 2. qu. 7. caus 13 qu. 1. (k) Fox Acts and Monuments vol. 1. p. 529. 530 532. (l) Fox Acts and Monuments â—â—nd 1610 p 46 463. (a) See my Supplementum ad Flagellum Pontisicâ— c. And my Antipathy of the English Lordâ—y Pâ—â—laâ—y c. ch 8. where most of their words are quoted at large (b) Fox Acts and Monuments vol. 1. p. 609 to 618 622 642 653. 711 514 to 522. vol. 2. p. 609 610. * Cum vocave rit Arichiepiscopatus Episcopatus vel Abbatia vel Pâ—â—natus in Dâ—m Regis esse 〈…〉 mâ—nes â—â—â—â—iâ—us Scut Dominicos â—eâ—ditus â—uos Mat. Paris p. 9â— 9◠〈…〉 col 〈◊〉 86. 〈…〉 An. 11â—4 a Gâ—dwiâ—s Cataâ—â—gue of Bishâ—ps p. 52 53 55 56,57,58 59 76 81 83. 84 111 112 114 119 See Malmesbury de Gesâ—â— Pâ—tisiâ—â—◠〈◊〉 Raduâ—s de Diâ—eto Chron. Iohan. Brompt Gerv. Dorobeâ—n Actus Pontif. Cant. Huntindon Hoved. Antiq. Eccl. Brit. Mat. Westm. Mat. Paris Walsing and others accordingly b Godwin p. 559 587 598 599 607 608 623. Tho. Stubs Actus Pontif. Ebor. Sâ—â—â— Dunelm Radulph de Dâ—ceto Malmesb. de Gest. Pontif. l. 3. Flor. Wigâ—rn [a] Godwin p. 1â—3 184. 189 190 191 19â— 202 224,21â— 220 230,24â— 245 24â— [b] Godwin p. 255 256,261 262 264,265 266,275,277 279 281. [c] Godwin p. 294 295 297 308 3â—9 [d] Godwin p. 317 3â—8 319 321 322,343 347 348. [e] Godwin p. 33â— 338.344 345 355,356 [f] Godwin p. 3â—4 3â—5,368 3â—0 383,385 3â—â— [g] Godwin p. 396 398,420 421 429. [h] Godwin p. 439. 440,444 445 446 449. [i] Godwin 453 454 455,456 5â—1 [a] Godwin 484 485 486,487 488,452 496 501 502. [b] Godwin p. 512 514,530 536,558,547 549 531. [g] Ma West An. 1020. p. 403. Godw. p 931 643 647,65â— 652 663,656 â—â—â— 671 â—85 â—â—â— [h] Rastal Advowsâ—n 1 2 Concil 5. Late ranense 2 Can. 29. Summa Angelica Benefictum sect 31. Summa Resella Beneficiam 1. * Ingulphi Hist. p. 896 908 Eadmerus Hict l. 2 3 4. Malmesbury De Gestis Pontificum c. 1. Antiqu. Eccles Godwin in Auseb Spelman Glossariâ—m T it Fidelitas Homagia Ligeum Investitura and the first part of my Brief Register and Survey of Parliâ—mentary writs p. 195 to 207. where it is largely proved Chron. Iohannis Brompton p. 1038 1039. Coâ—ks 1. Instit. p. 64,65 * Mat. Paris p. 96 97. * See Rastals Abridgement Title Provision and Praemunire Rome * Register of wâ—its pars 2. p. 20 to 70. Fitz. Nat. Brev. and in the Clause â—â—lls [a] Will. Malmesburiensis de Gestis Pontif l. 1. c. 4. Mat. Westm. An 765 766 767,797 Evidentiae Ecclesiae Cantuar. col 1212 1213 1214. Spelmanni Concil Tom. 1. p. 318 to 334. Antiq. Eccles. Brit. p. 26 27 28. Godwin in the life of Iambert Chron. Will. Thom col 1774. [b] Eadmerus Hist. Novor l. 1. 2. Malmesbur de Gestis Regum l. 4. De Gestis Pontif. l. 1. p. 204 205. Chron. Iohan Brompton col 962 968. Gervasius Dorob Actus Pontif. Cant. col 1652 16â—5 Radulsus de Diceto Abbreviationes Chron. col 412,490 Henr. de Knighton de Event Angliae l. 2. c. 2. Polychronicon l. 7. Mat Paris p. 13 14. Mat. Westm. An. 1070 1083 1089. Hoviden Annal. pars prior p. 453.