this is as Bellarmine saith the cheife point of the Catholike faith and the cheife foundation of all religion Then Saturnine you doe too much restraine saith § 140 he Scripture alone hurtfull to the Romish Church Calander the Catholike faith if you keep it within the compasse of the Scripture For if you admit of Scripture onely it doth goe ill with the Catholike Church as Paul the fift did wisely answer the Venetian Ambassadour Yet I will doe as you will haue mee and I will comprehend these three together the primacy of Peter the succession and power of the Pope For the Church could not long stand without a Primate and Prince nor a Prince without a successour nor a successour without a supreme power I will giue you the keies Matth. 16. Whatsoeuer you binde or whatsoeuer you loose Feede my sheepe feede my Lambes Ioh. 21. What they meant by Popish keies What by feeding When Christ therefore promised the keies of the Kingdome of heauen to Peter alone that is to the Church hee promiseth the principallity When hee committed the power of binding and loosing to Peter alone hee committed the power of the keyes When hee gaue the charge to Peter alone to feede the whole flocke hee gaue him the principallity Therefore the primacy was there promised heere it was giuen For as he that receiues the keies of a city receiues the gouernment of the city so he that hath receiued the keyes of the Church hath receiued the gouernment of the Church And because to feede is the same which to gouerne and onely Peter is commanded to feede not some but all therefore onely Peter receiued the promise first in those words to gouerne the whole Church Wherein there is ioyned to the threefold confession of his loue What to loose bind a twofold confirmation of honour but those words of Christ ioyned to the primacie do prooue the power of excommunicating which was directed to Peter alone whatsoeuer you shall binde and whatsoeuer you shall loose And that twofold one of binding Kings the other of loosing subiects not onely from sinnes but from vowes lawes and oathes For in those words whose sinnes ye remit or the power of order is giuen to all Io. 20. limited ouer sinne But in those words whatsoeuer you shall binde and whatsoeuer you shall loose there is a power not limited and vniuersall giuen to Peter alone not restreyned to sinnes not to persons because he doth not say whomsoeuer but whatsoeuer Whence it followeth that Iames the King of Great Britanie doth either not belong at all to the sheepfold of Christ or that he is subiect to Peter and to his successor the Bishop of Rome the chiefe Pastor as well as the King of France and Spaine that as Kings catholike Kings very sawcily resembled to Rams and Wolues but euill as vnruly Rammes so hereticall Princes as rauening wolues are iustly to be driuen by him out of the fould depriued of all gouernment the Lords being bound that they rule no longer the subiects are loose that they obey no longer Here Patriot An egge saith he is not so like an § 141 egge as Saturnine to Bellarmine who as if he had distrusted that the primacie and principalitie of Peter could be proued out of one place huddled three together whereby he boasted in Tortus that it was most plainly founded Here before I weigh Saturnines argument I purpose to marke the popish Doctors wrangling among themselues by what Text of Scripture the supremacie of Peter is said to be giuen vnto him Cardinall Contarenus saith it was giuen Contar de Sacra Christ. leg l. 3. p. 203. Bellar de Rom. Pont. lib. 1. cap. 12. Câ—nterane and Bellarmine 2. Cardinals at a farre when Christ said to Peter I will giue thee the keyes Cardinall Bellarmine contradicteth Contarene and denieth that the keyes were then giuen but promised and that the gift of supremacie was graunted with the keyes Ioh 21. when Christ said to him Feed my sheepe as Saturnine obserued more subtilly than truly saith Contarene But there is no more promised to Peter Matt 16 than was giuen to all the Apostles Ioh 10 as Christ the best interpreter expounded that his whatsoeuer you shall loose spoken to Peter in those words whose sinnes soeuer you remit speaking to all his Apostle And taught that all this power of the keyes was both common to all the Apostles and directly restrained to sinnes as Ambrose Austin Theophylact and Bernard thought Therefore the supremacie of Peter was not founded vpon the keyes § 142 But marke I pray you the singular subtlety of Bellarmine in this place which Saturnine also vsed In the first words is vnderstood the vnlimited power of iurisdiction giuen to Peter alone not restreyned to sinnes or to persons because he saith not whomsoeuer but whatsoeuer in the second words the power of order limited ouer sinne communicated to all O admirable witty interpretation The Bishop therefore may set open any prison resolue any hard doubt for that generall word Whatsoeuer you shall loose doth plainly conteyne all these things vnder it The right interpretation of the keies Those things are knowne and common which the Fathers both old and new both the popish and our owne haue left written in their Commentaries of the proper and true sense of the keyes all of them did comprehend the right of the keyes and the power of binding and loosing within the remitting and reteyning of sinnes the key wherewith heauen is opened or shut they make to be the interpretation of the Law as Tertullian the knowledge of the Scriptures as Chrysostome appointed for sinnes not Seignories as Bernard giuen to all Ministers that they may binde and loose that they may reteyne or remit sinnes as out of Christ Ambrose Austin Theophylact that they might rightly out and diuide the word of wrath and the word of grace as St Paul that to the obstinate this to the penitent The key of knowledge doth direct the key of power .i. the force of doctrine the execution of discipline whereby the obstinate are shut out and the penitent are reconciled Two keyes of order and iurisdiction This is the force this is the vse of the keyes whereof the Fathers made two the one of Order the other of Iurisdiction The key of order the power of the Ministerie whereby they preach the Gospell administer the Sacraments and by the preaching of the Gospell remit or reteyne sinnes The key of Iurisdiction the power of restreyning sinners by excommunication that is by expelling the obstinate out of the Church and receiuing the penitent Concil Colo sub Herman Sacra confess Concil Colon. sub Adulpho as Gropper in his booke of the Councell of Coleyne vnder Hermannus and Adulphus who said that ech key did not belong to Peter alone but was transferd to all the Apostles and their successors And Cusanus long before that Nothing said he is spoken to
that he commanded warre to be raised wherein hee might be slaine he answeres in Tortus How the Papists may kill a King how not that Bellarmine spake not of murther which may happen in battaile but of that murther which may be committed by a royster A very honest distinction As though hee bee not as well a murtherer who at the command of the Pope doth kill the King by open force Cardinall Comensis incited Parry to kill Q. Elizabeth as he that shall doe it by secret treacherie That this Cardinall threatning warres armes is no honester then Cardinall Comensis whose letters are extant wherein he encouraged Parry with promise of reward and pardon from the Pope that hee should bring to good effect the purpose of his good spirit those were his wordes that is that he should murther Queene Elizabeth with his dagger Bellarmine proued no better to our excellent King Iames but somewhat the closer Did Peter feede the Church after this manner This is not foode but poyson Did he so guide the flock of his Master as if the chiefe belweather of the flocke went astray he would take care that he should either closly or openly be slaine Giue a Shipheards crooke to a Shepheard What hath a Shipheard to doe with a sword Yes forsooth saith he when Christ made Peter a Pastor hee made him a Prince For when hee commanded him to feed he commanded him to rule And he gaue him not only a ministery but a magistracy But good Sir the inward and spirituall gouernment is one thing which Peter exercised ouer soules by the worde the Sacraments and the keies the earthly and outward gouernment is another thing which Paul the 5 doth practise by fraude and force against crownes I pray you tell mee Calander what difference you make betweene these two and the Commentaries of the Fathers and their owne popish writers Marke the consequencies depending on this interpretation partly foolish partly wicked Peter is commanded to feede the flocke of Christ § 150 Therefore none but Peter Vpon Peter is laide the charge of feeding and teaching Therefore the honour of ruling and reigning is bestowed on him Peters dutie is to teach Kings Therefore to depose Kings To instruct Kings therefore to destroy Kings To Peter is granted a spirituall regiment therefore an earthly gouernment Whether doth hee that knits together such consequences and these are necessarily gathered out of Bellarmines interpretation seeme to be sent to the schooles or to the Anticira for a purge Charge is laid Calander vpon all true Pastors in Peter to feede and rule the flocke of Christ committed to their charge but so that they feede them with the spirituall foode of wholesome doctrine and rule them with the staffe of wholesome discipline But if Paul the 5. doe not feede the flocke but feede vpon it and doe not order the steppes of his sheepe but breake their legges and their heades truly he doth giue food and vse his shepheardes staffe otherwise then Christ appointed Wherefore I thinke King Iames would rather fast then bee fed by such a Shepheard who feedeth to that end that hee may kill and eat What other Kings doe let themselues looke to it let them laugh in their sleeues as they please when they read these foolish quiddities of Schollers but let them take heede of such wicked baites of rebellion which lurke in Bellarmines new Dictionarie Wherein To feede and to rule are 〈◊〉 To teach a King and to depose a King all one The excommunication of a King and depriuation The absoluing of sinners from sâ—â—e is the absoluing subiects from their duty § 151 Doe they not perceiue that this is the Grammer of that proud and bloody Antichrist Therefore King Iames doth willingly forsake the popish flocke that hee may betake himselfe to Gods flocke which is knowne of Christ and followeth him and flieth from a stranger For he doth not regard these carnall Cardinalls so leaden-pated in their arguing Peter is the Porter of heauen Therefore the Lord of the world Peter is a Pastor therefore a Prince Peter is a Fisher of men therefore of kingdomes A net was giuen him wherewith he may take fishes as well great as little Therefore he hath gouernment aswell ouer Kings as subiects Peter is charged to feede the sheepe therefore he is charged to feede the rest of the Apostles He is twise charged to feede Lambes therefore the Iewes and Gentiles and by consequent all Christians Do not these hange together as a sickmans dreames Doth not Bellarmine seeme to expose the Scripture to mockery when he reasoneth after this fashion against Aquinas rule who doth plainely deny that symbolicall diuinitie Bellarmine buildeth his Church gouernment vppon tropes hath any force to argue whereon for all that hee hath built the whole supremacy and doth pronounce it to be a doctrine of the Catholicke faith most plainly founded vpon the Scriptures The Philosophers doe laugh at Epicure for making the world of moates And will not Diuines hisse out Bellarmine that frameth the ecclesiasticall gouernment of tropes For truely you shall assoone finde Moores Vtopia in the world as Peters Monarchy in the text Which Article notwithstanding is fained to bee the cheefe article of the Popes Creede wherein are contained many articles aswell of superstition and Idolatrie as of conspiracie and rebellion So that Poperie is nothing else but a plaine catechisme of false faith toward God and the King For that double power ecclesiasticall and temporall § 152 which you faine to bee so inwardly ioyned to the supremacy that it cannot be separated from it you haue erected as a double engine to ouerthrow the truth of diuinity and the Kings dignity For you haue translated each of them as it were from Peter to the Pope and the Popes successour which you assume and proue not Ecclesiasticall whereby by excommunication he may binde Kings and absolue subiects not only from sinnes but from vowes lawes and oathes So by excommunication the Pope stealeth away crownes from Kings and soules from subiects while he taketh away authority from the one and obedience from the other In both he breaketh Gods will wherby the ciuill power of the Prince though he be euill and the obedience of the subiect is soundly established as I haue fully and at large satisfied you in the former Dialogue and I haue no lesse infringed the Popes temporall iurisdiction where you alleadged it In the meane while there was no reason this insolent Cardinall should tearme Kings Catholike in the faith if once they began to bee wicked vnruly râ—mmes Bellarmines sawcinesse iustly reprooued and Protestant Kings and Princes rauenous wolues himselfe being a goate and a foxe he durst not I say call them so but that hee thinketh Kings to be very patient Who if they remembred themselues to bee Kings would teach this sawcy and busie Cardinall to follow his holy studie and not to trouble himselfe with Kings affaires Neither would they
it not by an immediate execution and committeth that to the Emperour by an vniuersall iurisdiction That the Romane Bishop is the cheefe father and man in the world and that all hang on him as on the cheife workeman he should haue sayd foundation otherwise if any should appoint an Emperour by himselfe I thinke he should say a substantiue in respect of his temporalties should make two principles which heresie that he might auoyd he makes the Emperour an adiectiue Isodor Mos pa. 22. de maiest mil. Eccles As another saith that the holie writer in the olde Law made the Priest-hood an adiectiue to the kingdome but that S. Peter made the kingdome an adiectiue to the Priesthood g Tho Boz de iure sta lib. 1. cap. 6. fol. 137. That kings are not immediately from God but by the interposing of the Church and the cheefe Preist thereof That there is a warlike and compulsiue power giuen to the Church aboue Kings and Princes that Constantine gaue nothing that was his owne but restored what was vniustly and tyrannously taken from the Bishops § 79 That Christ committed to Peter the key-keeper of eternall life Isido Mos de maiest pag. 27. the right of earthly and heauenly gouernment and that in his place the Pope is the vniuersall Iudge the King of Kings and Lord of Lords and therefore that hee is consecrated as a cheefe Bishop and crowned as a King Because hee hath each power that hee vseth that power either absolutely or ordinarily absolutely when he doth abrogate such lawes as he please ordinarily when hee vseth lawes When he will liue vnder lawes to vse the counsel of Cardinals when he will not to rule without counsell because his power is from God not from the Colledge of Cardinals I thinke not onely Asses but Lyons also That all the faithfull and the vnfaithfull and euery naturall creature for so he speaketh is subiect to the Popes gouernment and that therefore the Pope doth all men to worship him prostrate themselues before him and kisse his feete that the adoration of Dulia seruice is giuen to him as to Images and Saints in respect of his kingdome hee hath a crowne of his Preisthood a myter That Emperours and Kings may bee compelled to obserue their oathes taken at their coronations and confirmations because by the vertue of their oath they bee made the Popes vassals That by the Law of God and nature the Preâ—sthood is more eminent then the Empire That secular powers are not necessarie but that Princes should performe that by the terrour of discipline August triump apud Carer p. 130. 132. which a Preist cannot doe by vertue of his doctrine And if the Church could punish offenders the Imperiall and Kingly gouernment should not be necessary because potentially it is included in the Apostolicall gouernment Celsus Mancinê° ib 3. cap. 1. Et Care p. 133. That it may bee auowed of Christs Vicar by a certaine similitude which Plato in Time us spake of God for being demanded what God was answered he is not man he is not heauen nor good but somewhat that is better if a man shall demand whether the cheefe Bishop be a Duke a King or an Emperour Isodor Mosc pag. 80. hee shall answer warily if he shall affirme by denying that the Pope is something more excellent something more eminent That all temporall Iurisdiction is to bee exercised Fâ—e vpon flattery not at the Popes commandement but at his becke Princes will and command God the Lord doth all things with his becke agreeable to that He spake and with his becke made all Olympus quake And that Christ had all plenarie iurisdiction aboue all the § 80 world and all creatures and that therefore the Pope Christs Vicar hath it To what end I pray you to what end As they make Christ Leli Zeâ—h tract Theol. pag. 81. Franc. Bozius lib. 2 cap. 14. so they make the Pope the absolute Lord of the world out of those wordes Behold two swordes which signifie the power spirituall and temporall and from them I will giue you the keies The keyes of heauen are giuen therefore of the whole earth And from those wordes all power is giuen to me in heauen and in earth therefore the right both of the heauenly and earthly Empire is committed to the Pope who is Christs Vice gerent vpon earth To what end say I But that Christian Kings and Emperours should acknowledge that they hold their kingdomes and Empires of him forsooth and that as oft as they doe any great hurt to the Church they may be depriued by the Pope and the right of their kingdome may rightly be conueied ouer to others or if they doe not acknowledge it they may be constrained by armes either of their owne subiects or of outward Catholicke Princes if the Pope will haue it so to part with their kingdome and life § 81 Here Patriotta I beleeue truly said hee that your Doctours did striue among themselues by aduancing the dignitie of the Popes and suppressing Emperours and Kings whether of them with a more grosse or with a more spruisse kinde of flatterie might set foorth the pride of the Popes court But the very naked recitall of these toyes seemes to bee a sound refutation of them Then Velbacellus I doe said hee and haue much greiued that the withered and decayed opinion of the Canonists disproued long since and reiected of good Catholickes should bee now taken vp againe and brought in as a thing forlorne by so many excellent wittes the chiefe whereof both for place and learning was Cardinall Baronius who did very stubbornly and obstinately defend the direct ordinarie and inherent authoritie of the Pope whereby as a Lord of the world in temporall matters hee may at his pleasure depose Emperours and Princes Is it not necessarie to adde his many other reasons They are extant in his bookes that are in many mens hands there they may fetch them that will haue them There is sprung vp on the other side Cardinall Bellarmine § 82 a man of no lesse credite with our men Bellarmine and as well deseruing of the Church who did ouerthrow that ordinarie direct and inherent gouernment of the Pope in temporalties as left by Christ with so sound arguments of scripture that in my minde neither the aduersaries nor himselfe afterward could with his most exquisite skill of distinctions dissolue them But that hee may seeme somewhat to gratifie the Pope although saith he he be not the Lord of all temporalties directly neither hath inherent and ordinarie authoritie as hee is Pope to disthronize temporall Princes yet bee is Lord of the temporalties indirectly in order to the spiritualles as hee vsually speaketh and hath an extraordinarie and a borrowed authoritie as he is chiefe spirituall Prince to alter kingdomes to take them from one and giue them to another if it be necessarie to the saluation of soules i. in order
King against the Pope that theâ— would maintaine to the houre of death against the papall citations suspensions excommunications and censures the crowne of England which they held as alway free subiect to no common-weale but immediately subiect to God and not subiect by name to the Byshoppe of Rome that they would vnite theÌ„seâ—ues to the King against the Pope in all causes vndertaken by the Pope against the King his crowne and dignitie and wouâ—d liue and die with the King This was the loue and the ancient faithfulnesse of the whole English people toward their King namely against the Pope they were so far from suffering the King to be deposed by the Pope Now the Spaniards with what earnestnes they haue § 122 detested the treacherie of subiects against their king couered with anie pretence or colour of religion whatsoeuer Concil Teleta 4 Cano. 75. their manie Councels of Toled doe declare in that booke which is intitled the Apologie for the Oath of Allegeance The practice of Spaniards against Popes wherein they seeme to checke your equiuocation which they obserued in many things when as they made profession of their oath with their tongue and retained in their minde perfidious treachery Doe you not see how in the thicke darknesse of Poperie these noble Nations the Iâ—â—lians Germanes French English and Spanish did retaine this light and heat of obedience toward their Kings against the Popes and that in this businesse neither the Bishops dissented from the Nobles nor the Nobles from the Bishops but the Laickes with the Clearkes and the Clearkes with the Laickes Councels with Parliaments did fully agree to maintaine the dignitie of the King and the obedience and concord of subiects against the popish censures what is becom of this ancient nobility and this vertue of the people where is that magnanimity of the Italians French Germanes and Spanish when shall wee euer see a second Fredericke or another Philip the faire who will suppresse the Popes insolency in Germany and France when will these noble Kingdomes bring foorth such Catholike Bishops which will keepe the Kings crownes and the peoples consciences free from the Popes tyrannie They haue England Scotland and other famous countries going before them in this businesse But you call these schismaticall the Italian Germane French English and Spanish who with common consent resisted the Pope But marke if you beleeue Sigebert your Abbot if it bee not a harder matter for you to wipe away the note of heresie from the Pope who carries himselfe so proudly against Kings then to take away the aspersion of schism from those Catholike people who did maintaine their Kings against the popes § 123 But from these things which we haue spoken it doth sufficiently appeare Saturnine how that is very false which you alleadged erewhile that the Councels and nationall Parliaments did euer approoue the deposing of Kings by Popish censures when as they did publikely condemne their insolencie cruelty treacherie toward their Kings as you see For so the matter stands grace did neuer destroy nature or diuinitie ciuility faith did neuer ouerthrow ciuill iustice but made it better nor euer took away the affection of man but made it more humane And when men ought to behaue themselues reuerently toward the parents of their bodies much more reuerently ought they to carrie themselues toward their countrie and the father thereof for this loue of our countrie and reuerend respect of our Kings is not taught vs by a master but in bred and grafted by nature which whosoeuer doth vnder pretence of religion either weaken or blot out he opposing himselfe to God the author of nature is to bee accompted not a Pastour but an impostor not a holy father but a cruell tormentour of soules and bodies But you as if the Popish religion put all ciuill honestie out of the minde of men and as if Popish zeale did blot out all naturall affection you thinke that the glorie of your Pope must be builded vp with the blood of our Princes and the greatnesse of your Kingdome with the ruines and desolations of our Countrey And if Catholike Kings did retaine those Princely spirits of their ancestours proud Popes would not more boldly desire to rule without the commandement of God then they to forbid them being armed with the sword of God And by the exaÌ„ple of most excellent Protestant Kings they would not onely prune and cut off these hurtfull sprigges of this vniust and poisonfull power but they would vtterly cut vp and plucke vp that poisoned tree from the verie roots out of their Kingdoms But the beginning of all this mischeife is the Popes spirituall supremacie whereby hee claimes to be the head of the visible Church the Vicar of Christ the Iudge and Father of Kings the vniuersall Bishop of Bishops to whom the originall of all spirituall iurisdiction doth forsooth immediately descend from Christ to be deriued mediately to others from him which whether it be done with greater wrong to Kings or to Bishops I cannot iustly set downe But all this spirituall supremacie from whence all the force and nature of that excommunication doth depend whereof so many things haue beene spoken and of the deposing of Kings and of releasing of subiects from the oath of obedience Patriott shall plucke it in peeces in the Creede wherein first he shall flie at the head of Popery after hee shall wound the bodie Thus wee haue seene Pragmaticall Antichrist vpon the stage now wee shall heare him disputing out of his chaire DOGMATICAL ANTICHRIST OR The Popes Creede OR The Pastor raigning The second booke of the Dialogue AFter that the most renowned Iames § 124 King of Great Bâ—itaine had made answer to the Popes two buls Bellarmines Epistle for the Oath of Allegeance One Matthew Tortus vnder whose visard Bellarmine lay hid vttred both elswhere diuers articles blasphemous against God and those two reproachfull against Princes full of insolencie and crueltie one of the supreme dignitie the other of the depriuing power of the Pope and set them out being taken foorth of the Popes new creede with all the skill hee could This creede was composed of twelue new articles of the Romish-Catholike faith The diuision of the Popes creede taken in Councell of Trent as it it propounded in the bull of Pius the fourth about the oath of the profession of the Christian faith It may bee diuided into two parts one wherein the faith of Christians the other wherein their faithfulnesse toward Princes is corrupted From that spring out the articles of superstition and idolatrie from this of treason and sedition By them they are made euill Christians by these euill subiects that it is hard to say whether they haue more troubled the Church or this the common-wealth Hence Lionell Sharpe an English Diuine tooke vpon him to lay open the popes whole creede and to illustrate it in a Dialogue For when as the most learned Bishop of Chichester had
may be sayd of the secular tyrannicall power as of Tyberius and Nero which may be said of the Popish tyrannicall power as of Gregorie the 7. or Paul the 5. true in respect of the abuse But the ordination of the secular power is of God the abuse of the Diuell Therefore Pilates power which condemned Christ is not sayd to bee tolerated from aboue but giuen from aboue It was therefore a wicked power not a vsurped power as Austin thought wicked in respect of tyranny not vsurped in respect of the ordination but the power of this Prelate I may say this Pilate as Bernard spake it is not onely wicked but vsurped I conclude therfore out of the Apostles principle for the secular power against Bellarmine All power ordained is immediately from God by the witnesse of Paul All secular power whether it bee by the people by the Princes or by the King is a power ordained For reason which is a glimmering of the diuine light doth suggest that all societies must be subiect to one of these whether it bee simple or mixt for the good of common safety Therefore all secular power is immediatly from God § 171 But the title of the power is not diuine but humane therefore the secular Prince hath mediately power and gouernment to rule ouer these or those subiects Bellarmine in his answer to a booke entituled an answer of a Doctor of Diuity to an Epistle written to him by a reuerend freind of the monition of the censures from the Pope denounced against the Venetians either election comming betweene as the Emperour or succession as the Kings of France Spaine and England or grant as the free Princes as the Popes in their own Dominion for so he might haue sayd or by iust war as Godfrey heretofore c. Very ignorantly He doth not distinguish between the title of the power and the power it selfe The title is the condition without the which the power is not obtained to this or that King ouer those or these subiects The power is that authority and iurisdiction which God doth giue immediately to a Prince as Paul teacheth The Cardinall therfore vniesuited as I may so say did abuse that most renowned French King If any man said he should demand of the most Christian King by what right hee holdeth France or maketh Lawes hee shall not answer by the Law of God but by the title of hereditarie succession Yea truely the noble King might haue answered otherwise according to that wit wherewith hee was endued being demanded why he bare rule ouer his subiects or made lawes That hee did it not by the right of hereditarie succession but by the ordinance of that power which hee receiued immediately from God Inheritance doth not giue that power but it is a property necessarie in that man to whom God doth immediately giue that power That subiects may giue reuerence to their Kings not for blouds sake but for Gods sake Goe to and what if one should demand of Paul the fift by what right hee holdeth his Popedome he will answer as he is taught not by the title of mans election but by the Law forsooth of God Therfore the Popes power is by Gods Law as it seemeth although his election bee by the Cardinals Why then may not the Kings power be by the Law of God thogh his succession be from his ancestours for whose condition seemes to be like why should their iurisdiction be dislike The Cardinall therefore deales very vniustly who denieth that to the King which he granteth to the Pope § 172 But the malapert Cardinall did trie the patience of the most Christian King The cruell dealing of the Iesuites with the French King as another of his order a bloody nouist strucke out his tooth when he meant to cut his throat But now the Iesuites doe blesse the King but the King as oft as he cheweth his meate its maruell he doe not curse the Iesuites who while the controuersie depended about the expulsion of the Iesuites receiued a wound from Iohn Chastile and the bloud issued out of his mouth spake pleasantly as his vse was Now at the last the Iesuites being conuicted by my mouth must bee cast out That his friends may greeue that they were brought backe againe by that mouth as innocent and cleered who were the authours of so cruell a murther whose scholler did thrust that valiant King to the heart After the same manner Tom. 11. Baronius that testie olde man did entertaine the Catholike King Philip the second the Champion of their Church for with-holding Sicilie and Naples from the Church Whom will they spare if they spare not the Spaniard What may the Defender of the Faith expect of these fellowes who doe thus entertaine the Christian and Catholike Kings But although there be no truth yet there is some equitie in Bellarmine Bellarmines lewde dealing with all Princes Hee spareth no Princes not those of his owne side Hee holdeth that those who bee Catholike in faith if they beginne to be wicked are to be driuen by the cheife Pastour from the flocke and depriued of their kingdome as well as heretickes Those as giddie headed rammes that they hurt not with their hornes these as rauenous wolues that they deuoure not the flocke So scornfully doth this Braggadochian Cardinall terme the Excellencies and Maiesties of the Christian world The world doth not maruel that Preists be so sawcy but it wonders that Kings bee so patient that they will suffer Princely crownes to be tumbled vp and down by them as foot-bals and the prerogatiues of kingdomes to be so weakned diminished by schoole distinctions For this Cardinall like a bad archer doth strike his confederate next neighbour-neighbour-kings while he doth directly leuell and aime but in vaine against Iames the King of Great Britaine whom God still defend from his treacherie But to the argument Hee denieth all secular Princes to haue any power immediately giuen from God to rule ouer subiects But it is well that hee doth affirme euen in the same § 173 chapter in as manie words that secular Princes haue power immediately from God to rule their subiects as they are superiors and he alleageth a good reason because the commandement of obedience is immediately from God and this is true For he cannot bee superiour and aboue other if he doe not rule neither can he be a subiect that is not bound to obey And yet againe in the end If secular Princes saith he haue no power immediately from God ouer the Laity much lesse ouer the Cleargie therefore ouer none Which hee granted before Is it so indeede will some say yea truely looke vpon the place Hee is both vnconstant vnlearned you shall see Bellarmine affirming and denying the same predicate of the same subiect and that in respect of the same and that in one and the same chapter Let this great Logician be packing who sends his aduersaries to turne ouer Aristotles
with their decrees The popish levvd dealing Here the Popes side haue brought in so many voluntarie corruptions forgeries impostures wherewith they might foyste in false Canons and blot out true that they who haue dealt so deceitfully are rightly deemed to haue a bad cause Lastly wee brought into open view not only the doctrine and practise of Christ and Peter that the literall sense hath reproued this supremacie which the allegoricall sense of the Scripture did not proue and that literall sense is confirmed not only by the testimonie of the ancient Fathers and Doctors of our owne side but by the testimonie of the very Papists themselues So that this tower of Babylon being not only bereft of her rotten weake vpholders but being also thrust at by our strongest engines that is by the decrees of the Church and oracles of scripture must needs be shaken in peeces and fall to the groud Therefore the supremacie of Peter that in Bellarmines iudgement is a transcendent thing aboue all by the censure of the Scripture is nothing at all and the succession of the Pope is not from the institution of Christ as they say but from the fact of Peter and this fact is proued not by any certaine reuelation but by an vncertaine vision Behold why the primacie of Bellarmine in Tortus did vaunt that this article of the catholike faith had a sure ground in the Scriptures And now marke Calander to what passe all Bellarmines deuises are brought The deposing of a King hangeth on the excommunication of the Pope the power of excommunication is vnited to the supremacie the supremacie hath the beginning from a Primate but the Primate though hee be narrowly fought for yet cannot possibly be found in the text Where is then the supremacie where is the power of excommunicating Kings where is the right of deposing them Truly your Primate hath either a bad title or a bad Patron But the Patron is said to be very good therefore the title is very bad But the Papists will accept any thing at his hands as he hopeth with whom if hee preuaile in this cause it is more for the credulitie of the Readers than the wisdome of the Writer Then Regius The supremacie being ouer-turned that double power which is so annexed to the supremacie must needs be ouer-turned the spirituall and the temporall The spirituall whereby as a Bishop by excommunication hee thinks hee may driue from their kingdomes Kings that are in opposition whether Heretikes or Roman-Catholikes The temporall whether it be direct or indirect whereby hee may as the chiefe spirituall Prince take the Crowne from one and bestow it at his pleasure vpon another But of the temporall we shall see afterward Excōmunication the mother of rebellion Now let vs consider of the spirituall This great Sophister when the Pope of Rome purposed to shoot his venemous arrow at the head of the Prince he bent the Popes bowe with this double power as it were with a double stringe that if the temporall did faile the spirituall should hit him home Which if I should not accompt holy as the desire of gold is holy I should lye For this tricke of popish excommunication wherewith he bindeth Kings that they cannot raigne or absolue subiects that they doe not obey the world hath felt long since that it is but a diuelish arte as Vrshergensis saith which hath brought in treacherie and rebellion vnder the cloake of faith and religion dreadfull to Kings damnable to subiects to whose bodies it hath brought destruction and damnation to their soules as appeareth manifestly by the former Dialogue § 222 Then Saturnine We saith he for our parts do not greatly care what Heretikes say what the Church ordeynes that we regard neither are we bound to their conceits but to hir decrees And wee retayne the supremacie by a double right by claime and by possession About the claime the Heretikes haue often moued many brawles from the possession they shall neuer remoue vs. Then Regius you say that you regard the constitutions of the Church as you call them I wish rather you should regard the oracles of Scripture You say that you hold the supremacie by a double right by clayming and by possessing The Pope is falne from the right of a great claymer as Patriott hath plainly won Now at the last you vrge another right of a great possessor which what is it else than the right of a strong theefe For what other law belongs to theeues than to brag that that which they possesse is their owne howsoeuer they haue got it Now seing the supremacie is not grounded vpon Gods institution but mans ambition which you see to be clearely ouerthrowne by the oracles of the scripture and decrees of the Councells it followeth now that the serpents head being broken we breake in peeces likewise the rest of his members Then Calander Saturnine seemes to bee driuen to straites when as being beaten from the right of clayming he flyeth to possession That therfore you may haue a breathing time let vs put of the conference about the other Articles till another day for now it is more than time that you refresh your minds being tyred with the labor of this discourse A Table of the principall matters conteyned in this Treatise A. ABomination of desolation what is ment thereby 82. 90 Absurdities 78. 108. 133 An admonition to popish Princes 156. Adrian against Fredericke choakt with a flye 253. Agathus obedience to Constantine 249 The oath of Allegeance and Supremacie confounded 240 Ambrose did obey Valentinian an Arrian 248 Alexander the 3. in a Cooks attyre 374 Alexander and his foure Princes 99 Alexander trod vpon the Emperors necke 254 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof it is a note 6. Antichrists type in Daniel himselfe in Iohn 2. The reasons 98. Hee began to worke in Pauls time 2. He must decay by the preaching of the word and perish at Christs last comming 793. Epiphanes described in Daniel not Antichrist 3. Hee shall worke wonders 3. Hee is held for one single man 5. The reasons ib but is a succession 9. Antichrist hath two hornes like a lambe speaketh like a dragon 5. 40. Antichrist is Christs Vicar in apparance in truth his aduersarie 6. Antichrist not a beast of three yeares and a halfes continuance 8. Heresies makes the great Antich 8. 28. Antichrist is the Land beast 9. As many Marij in one Caesar so many Antichrists in one Antichrist 11. He is that man of sinne and sonne of perdition 11. Antichrist in many ages yet but one 11 The popish description of Antich 12 a bearer 39 Antichrist a falling starre an Apostata a Renegate from the Lord. 13 He is not a Iew but an Apostaticall Christian 15. He sitteth in the temple of God or against the temple 17 He doth not openly deny Christ 19 Antichrist denieth Christs two natures three offices and the benefits therof 20. 21. 26. 27 His kingdome darke and smoakie
the Empire renewed in the West to vphold the Pope 70. the Rom Empire not dissolued but diuided 68. Two degrees of the Empires fal 71. how when the Empire was translated from the Greekes to the Germaines 258. An exhortation to Ministers 136. to Princes 152 to come out of Babylon 141 Excommunication the mother of rebellion 390 F COrruption of Fathers after their death 316 To Feede and teach all one 297. Not to rule 299. The Colliars Faith 288. Implicite Faith a blinde Idoll 287. What ment by Feeding 290. Saint Fâ—â—â—cis â—ypicall Christ 146 His conformities brought to light 24 Fredâ—ricke the 2. had good successe against the Pope 254. after murthered 255. Forgiuenesse of sinnes is free perfect eternall 148. How Fire came down from heauen the three sorts thereof 47. Forgery reiected 363. A desirâ— that France and Spaine would forsake the Pope 63 G GArnet and three other Iesuites Authours of the Gunpowder treason 172. 33. The Germaines condemne Hildebrand 257. Gregorie the great obeyed Mauritius 248. Alleaged to depose Kings before they were borne 259. Gregorie the 3. vaunted himselfe aboue the Emperour Gregorie the 3. spoiled him 72. Gregorie the 7. ouerthrew all 73. stroke fire out of his bosome 48. Cast out of his popedome 251. First excommunicated and cursed Emperors 251. The name of GOD in Scripture giuen to Angells and Kings 18. God the obiect of spirituall obedience 340. The enemie of God called Gog Magog 95. 139. Gods help beginnes whenas mans help doth faile 137. Grosâ—heads definition of heresie 186. The Gospâ—ll hath been preached in all Lands 88. 91. Hindered by Mahomet in the East Antichrist in the west 93. The Gunpowder treason found out by a letter 173. H TO make the Pope Head is blasphemie 321. Three witnesses of happines Henry the 4. French King compared to Caesar 38. Henry the 3. and 4. French Kings murthered 33. Henry the 2. and King Iohn gaue not their kingdomes to the Pope 241. Henries treachery against his father 233 Henry the 4. Emperor slandered by popish writers 234. Hermannus ruine 252. Paules not salute an Hereticke how applied 187. How Heretickes are to be dealt withall 188. Seruants and children ought to obey Heretickes 188. Heretickes not to be saluted 222. Hildebrands false prayses 257. Hildebrand no fit example against kings his reuelation 232. Three condemned and for what 260. What is meant by the lambes 2. hornes 6. What is meant by the last houre 133. I IDolatrie to worship the image for the Creator with the Creator 22. compared to fornication 22. The Iesuits violence taxed 198. The practise of Iesuits 32. 220. 336. The Iesuits doctrine hath troubled the Papists 170. Rebellion among Iesuites is an article of faith 171. The false report of Iesuits made Pius the 5. excommunicate Q. Elizab. 169. Iesuits Authours and Actors of rebellion 171. Iehcida had Gods law and mans law to approue his action 200. Iehu not the Prophet deposed Ahab 225. 4. degrees of the Iewes deliuerance 102. Ierusalem in the Apoc alwaies taken for the holy ciâ—y 81 Ierusalem the figure of the Christian Church 82. The destruction of Ierusalem taken for the end of the world 88. Ieremy and Paul exhorted to pray for bad Princes 216. Forged Ignatius brought to crosse Salomon 178. If any one had the supremacie it was Iohn that suruiued 385. Ieroboam not deposed by the Priest 196. His Priests types of poperie 196. An image is an Idoll when it is worshipped 22. Immortalitie not ouercome by death 117. A great impossibility foolish interpretations and worse consequences 387. Inheritance not loft for leprosie 197. Ierome misalleaged 314. A counterfeit Iulius 364. K KIngs by Papists iudgements may be killed by force or craft 32. Saucily compared to rammes wolues 32. 291. Discord of Kings haue encreased the Popes power 155. Kings dutie 156. Kingly maiestie and Popelike maiestie cannot agree 164. The King an humane creature 178 A King excommunicated no King with Papists 182. Kings wherin heads of the Church 199. Kings not immediately from God but from the Church say they 233 A King not to be resisted with swordes but wordes 224. A King may aswell depriue a Pope as a Pope a King 242. No bad King of 33. deposed by a priest 207. Whence Kings haue their gouernment as Papists say Jbid. Kings deposed Priests 306. What is meant by the keies by binding and loosing 290. The right interpretation of the keies 292. Peters key no greater then the rest 368. Two keyes of order iurisdiction 292. All the Apostles receiued keyes All fiery tongues 294. How the Papists may kill a King how not 300. L 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the name of the beast 51. Lambart and Rabirius 2. Popes Legates scoft at 261. Leo the Pope obeyed the Emperours Theodosius and Martian 247. Leo the 4. obedient to Kings 249. Leo the Emperour how deposed by the Pope 258. The legacies of the sonnes of God are in question 147. A learner must beleeue and aske 285. The parts forme and legacies of the new testament 148. A Leper neuer lost his inheritance 224. The thundering Legion of the Christians 86. Licurgus deuise to make his common-weale last 117. The number diuision and power of Locusts 34. The Locusts hurt and afflict men but kill not 34. Resembled to Horses and why 36. Their Craft pride and crueltie 36. Lombardes foolish interpretation of a place in Iob. 33. Luthar not that falling starre nor Protestants those Locusts 37. A counterfeit Lynus 386 M The Martyrdome of the King and kingdome 172. Marcion destroyed Christs humanitie 28. Marcus receiued an Epistle after he was dead 362. Martials Ca liodore and tâ—â— Iesuits â—â—e Canibaâ—s 54. Martials Cobler 38. The Masse confirmed by a blacke horse 48. Gouernment left by Christ not Monarchicall but Aristocraticall 308. Mathew the 24. expounded The Monkes cloake resembled to charitie 319. How Moses Salomon and Iude vsed Princes 215. Number doth oppresse the memory waite doth beget knowledge 289. N Nostorius diuided Christ his natures 28. O THe Priest to be Obeyed so long as he preserues knowledge 175. Two foundations of Christian obedience 176. A double obedience due to Kings actiue and passiue 179. Odo brother to W. the Conqueror 174. Primacie of order granted to Rome of power denied 367. What 3 things obedience requireth 180 What obedience is due to Princes 180. Austius words corrupted 354. Ozias leprosie no type of excommunication 167. P PEter would beare no rule ouer the Clergie 370. What Peter did to Princes 213. How Peters next successors vsed Princes 214. How Paul vsed Princes 215. Priests haue bin deposed by Kings 226. How Priests ought to oppose princes 207. Peter infâ—riour to the rest 368. Peter commanded obedience to Kings Peter of Rome now otherwise 177. Paul nothing inferiour to Peter 369. Councells deposed Popes 383. Subiect to the Emperour and his Vicegerent 72. 242. 2â—â— The Pope a persecutor 118. An hypocrite 114. Bisely accompted of 135. Iniurious to God and man 147. dangerous to hold peace with 162. His bull hanged the Iesuits 169. He forbiddeth that whiâ—h God coÌ„mandeth 174. Power from God not from the Pope or people 181. His power pretended greater then the former Priests to depose Princes 192. Inferior to the Councell 383. His practise toward Princes 244. He had primacie of order 245. The Popes power pretended from Christs priesthood 209. His charge to feede sheepe 209. How he feedeth 298. His supremacie cause of much mischiefe 269. He can no way depose Princes 236. The Popes Creede 281. Spaine and France haue taken great wrong from Popes 158. Two meanes how hee ouerthroweth Princes 230. 253. Popish Writers traduce Princes 261. Poperie begetteth dangerous effects to Kings and Subiects 239. God vsed Prophets tongues to reproue Princes not their handes to depose them 205. Phâ—cas a murtherer the vniuersall Byshoppe and Mahomet of one birth 71. The difference of gouernment between Byshoppes and Princes 343. How Christ stood before Pylate 376. R. REasons not to appeale to Rome 358. A Recapitulation of the former discourse 74. 75. Rome spiritually Sodom Egypt 81. Two stages erected for crueltie one at Constantinop another at Rome 122. Old Rome doteth for age 286. This Rome not ancient Rome 316. The Popes of Rome do erre by the Papists iudgement 286. How Christ a rocke 339. How the teÌ„porall rule descends vpon the Pope 372. S. SAmuel did not excommunicate Saul 194. Places of Scripture obscured by Popish interpretations 31. No doctrine necessarie but grounded on Scripture 28â— The office of the Scripture 278 Scripture alone hurtfull to the Romane Church 290 An admonition to popish Kings to beware of Sirene and Erinnis 156. T. Foure Popes acknowledged Theodosius supreme Lord. 246 Tiberius at Rome killed Christ in Ierusalem 80. Christ obeyed Tiberius a Pagan the Papists will not obey King Iames a Christian 177. The councell of Trent reiected by their owne side 287. Bellarmine buildeth his church gouernment vpon Tropes 302 W. The two witnesses Apoc 11. not agreed on 85. The vncerteyne certaintie of the end of the world 91. Z. ZAcharie supposed to depose Childericke but did not 256. FJNIS
the foundations of mans saluation laid by the Apostle as it shall plainly appeare by the discourse vpon the popish Creede Antonie Marinarius did withstand that wicked decree euen in the Councell it selfe who taught the perseuerance of the faithfull was secure and their securitie to be perseuered in Ambrose Catharinus did likewise resist who maintayned that a sonne of God by the certaintie of faith doth know that he is in the state of grace as any man may be sure that there is Rome yea and that without doubting or feare so that he openly did resist the Councell Albertus Pighius did afterward oppose himselfe who of set purpose doth defend that our righteousnesse is imputed to vs by faith alone vnto life The Councell of Colen may thee ioyned to these wherein many learned Diuines True it is say they and it is required to the iustification of a man that he certainely beleeue not only in generall that they who do truly repent shall obtaine mercy by Christ but that the man that beleeueth shall obtaine forgiuenesse of his sinnes by faith in Christ which they learned out of the Apostle by the interpretation of Bernard Thou hast Gentle Reader the Glasse of Christ the summe of the Apostolike doctrine to be set before the doctrine of the Trent Councell who doth strike vs with a curse for the same more fully hereafter to be propounded and maintayned The power whereof is such that it doth clip the winge of humane pride that it doth aduance the glory of Gods grace that it doth stirre vp an earnest desire of godlines and doth fasten a sure anchor of saluation that the sonnes of God may be made lowly in sinne thankefull in blessing holy in life and cheerefull in death This doctrine Trent Councell doth ouerthrow from whence those twelue articles of faith proceeded which Pius the 4. brought into the forme of a Creede enioyned to be publikely professed of his by his Bull vnder an oath which though they had their birth and beginning from heretikes yet they carry the name of the true faith and counterfeit the Apostles to be their parents that the greater store of Christians may be induced to receiue them As wee heretofore haue heard that Lambert counterfeting the name and kindred of the Earle of Warwicke had many followers when in truth he was the bastard of a villanous Priest So if any shall compare these twelue bastardly and false articles of the Popes creede with the true and right articles of the Apostles creede hee shall finde them to be as like the Apostles as the bastard of Simon the Priest was like the soone of the Duke of Clarence The schoolemen and the Canonists haue had great adoe between them whether the Pope could make any new articles of the faith Bellarmine as a worshipfull moderator takes vp the matter in Tortus He diuides the articles into two sorts He writes that some are of immediat reuelatiō others drawn fetch from them which notwithstanding are to be receiued with a catholike beleefe How foolishly I shall shew hereafter now only I shew what they hold Articles of the first sort Bellarmine denieth may be made of the Pope As much as if he should deny the sunne could be made by the Pope so many ages fastned to his globe by the hand of God The articles of the second stampe hee doth plainly affirme may be made by the Pope as if he should say that he professeth himselfe to be the author and maker of that booke whereof he is the expounder and interpreter Now the Iesuites haue diuided those that were drawne from the first into two other kindes which are so cunningly coucht together that they can hardly be distinguished Some of them consist in practise whereby treason is nourished other consist in doctrine wherby superstition is cherished Those they scatter mystically and closely these plainly and openly Those I call practicall and mysticall which concerne the Popes power in deposing of Kings by the sentence of excommunication and absoluing subiects from the oath of fealtie and conspiracies and rebellions to be concealed vnder the seale of confession and Clerkes to bee exempted from the iudgement of a secular Prince and the power of the Pope aboue the Councell and other wicked conclusions of the same kinde with the schoole of Paris hath lately condemned And a certaine Priest termed a more moderate answerer that hee may more couertly and freely teach the professed articles of superstition doth ouerthrow those mysticall articles of rebellion for which cause he complayneth that their salary is denyed him and the Priests of his order by the Pope Whom I thinke good hee should answer as the Asse answered Balaam Am not I thine Asse whereon thou wert wont to ride euen till this day Tell me if euer I did the like before and now I haue once offended in telling the truth why wilt thou beate mee and take my prouender from me If such Priests will giue eare to me let them forsake so vnthankfull and vniust a master and come ouer to our side For I feare lest while they secretly sow their open articles of superstition among our Country-men that they will draw them from the faith of Christ and beget schollers for Iesuites whom they will infect with their hidden articles of rebellion and bring them from their allegeance and obedience to the King These are fetcht from the first bastards borne of bastards vipers bred of vipers the last more wicked than the former shortly bringing forth an of spring more vilanous Those that are fetcht from immediate revelations as they bee supposed make truth the way for heresie as the authors thereof pretend iustice for wickednesse But this is the disposition of all heretikes that out of a generall truth propounded they alway assume and draw out heresie which as a witch doth cast in a sacred furie into their deceiued mindes The Pelagians from the generall allegation of Gods grace and helpe do gather a speciall rule of their heresie which as poyson they distill more easily into the mindes of their simple Auditors The Papists holding those articles of Christ generally do infuse hereticall poyson deepe into their mindes being seasoned with the sweet of those generals I will giue you one example which doth farther spread it selfe They beleeue in generall that Christ is ascended vp into heauen and sits at the right hand of God and shall come from thence to iudge both the quicke and the dead Yet the Priest doth daily bring Christ from thence to wit out of heauen into the sacrament so that he is corporally present in the sacrament when it is manifest that hee is conteyned in heauen till all things be fulfilled But here they distinguish that Christ shall come once from heauen visibly to iudgement but commeth invisibly euery day into the sacrament O notable deduction that ouerturneth the principle from whence it is drawne O notable distinction which doth by distinguishing vtterly ouerthrow the
such trifling toyes of the same kinde In the meane time the crafty teachers and the vnhappy hearers being vtterly voyd of true faith and repentance when they haue done all they can doe for all that inwardly feele inwardly I say feele the horror of Gods diuine iudgement and the most greeuous torment of the afflicted conscience and this falleth out after those scorpions haue strucken them with their stings whereupon their greefe is like the greefe of a scorpion when it hath stung a man For as when a Scorpion stings a man with the sting of his taile the wound is not presently felt but the deadly poison doth afterward spred it selfe abroad So those that be hurt by these Loyolane Scorpions doe not presently feele the hurt but doe by little and little perish without sense assoone as they sucke in the venome of their poysonfull doctrine So these Locusts doe hurt men with their number venome and sting CHAP. XIII Other properties of Locusts 11. THese be strange Locusts that are resembled to horses prepared for battell What comparison can there be betweene a base Locust and a warre-like Horse Thus notwithstanding the strength of this vild Locust is expressed 12. The Locusts doe likewise weare crownes vpon their heads heere hee setteth downe the cunning and the craft It is worth the noting that the heads of those Locusts are sayd to be crowned when the hornes of the Sea-beast afterward are sayd to bee crowned why so Because the Priests haue more preuailed with their subtilty and craft then the Ethnicke Emperours with their power and force 13. But the crownes the Locusts weare are not of golde but like to gold Heere hee sets out their pride true and golden crownes are fit for Kings false and couterfet for Priests and therefore are sayd not to bee golden but as it were golden Whereat as if they were true and their owne they waxe very proud for by the sufferance of Princes they are growen to that power that they haue often cast off their golden crownes 14. The faces of the Locusts are as the faces of men wherewith they deceiue men 15. They haue womens lockes which signifie the diuerse enticements and deceipts of false doctrine where againe their cunning is described 16. Teeth as it were of Lyons wherewith like their Master that roaring Lyon they rend asunder tear in peeces those with their iawes whom they caught with their guile Heere you haue their fiercenesse and their cruelty 17. They had habergions like habergions of iron These noble Locusts very warlike with crownes vpon their heades mens faces womens haire Lyons teeth armed at all points are elegantly and liuely described by the holy Ghost Some will happily obiect that all this place is not to be vnderstood of Antichrist and his Ministers but of the Turkes I answere that cannot bee For whereas at the sound of the 4. Trumpet Cap. 9. v. 1. the Angell had foreshewed the Arch heretikes the forerunners of Antichrist at the sound of the 5. Trumpet the Angell bringes in the King of the Arch-heretikes before which the Angell beginneth with that dreadful Proem in the 8. chap about the end crying with a loud voice wo wo wo vpon the inhabitants of the earth By the first wo signifying the darke kingdome of Antichrist by the second wo the violent tyrannie of the Turke which cannot be one and the same because he saith in the 12. vers one wo is past and behold two woes follow after This is not therefore the same but an other wo. By the third wo the terrible appearance of the last iudgement But Bellarmine saith but proues it not Bellarmines lewde dealing with the King of England Bellarmine Christana vic Pacenius Becanus Personius Cidonius Garnettus Gerardus Grenwellus Creswellus Reynaldus and infinite other That Luther is that falling starre and that Lutheranes and Protestants are those Locusts Hauing forgotten that Paul the fift that Prince is the Captaine Generall of those warlike Locusts Who after hee had compared the most renowned King IAMES to Iulian the Apostata doth secretly signifie that hee is denounced excommunicate and may be slaine by his Subiects in bataile but not by cutthroates Bloody Cardinall fitly painted out by a Pasquill a Lyon in the caue with this Motto well appllied Open the caue and you shall see his disposition This iest is too bitter will some say to bestow vpon that great learned Cardinall Is it so he that allowes the murther of a King in fighting doth not he deserue a sharpe reproofe in writing Hee doth not deale with our most worthy IAMES as a King and wee doe not meane to deale with him as a Cardinall Hee was learned heretofore now he is malitious heretofore he was a cheife man in disputation now in rebellion Heretofore a close enemie now an open Heretofore the scorpions venome was not wanting in him but lurckt in him Cardinall Comensis set on Parry that Cutthroate to murther Queene ELIZABETH with his dagger Cardinall Bellarmine nothing the honester but the cunninger denieth that the King may bee dispatcht by a murtherer but by a Souldier he denieth not As if there were any difference in the case of murther whether one kill a King in a Campe or vnder a canopie by open warre or secret treacherie That may be rightly spoken of Bellarmine that Cicero spake of a great Lawyer hee must kill a King that will vse his helpe Therefore that may be well said to this slippery Sophister this armed and bloody Locust which Martiall said to a certaine Cobler Good Tortus be not angrie with my iest I taxe thy craft I meane thy life none ill Indure it man from mirth I will not rest When thou dost thinke that others thou maist kill The cruell dealing of the Papists with Hen 4. the French King How ready a Scholler Mariana this mans Auditor found of Rauiliake the death of that illustrious French King Henry the 4. neuer sufficiently to bee lamented neuer of kings sufficiently to be reuenged doth too too well declare The first of his Schollers strooke out his tooth the second tooke away his life themselues buried his heart A magnanimous and valiant King murthered of a base rascally parricide like to Caesar in his life like in his death for so hee is bemonde of a Christian Poet. Caesar and Heâ— 4. compared Caesar in valour I was like to thee In kinde of death we likewise do agree The knife before thee tooke away thy breath The knife behinde me brought me to my death Thou by the handes of Senators didst fall I by a base and Sauage Caniball But this Rouge you will say was not Marians scholler no more then Catsby Percy Write and Faux were schollers to Garnet Parsons Gerard and Grenwell 18. But let vs returne to Saint Iohn Vers 16. who giueth the Locusts stings in their tailes and a short time to hurt 19. Whose King being the Angell of the bottomlesse pit he brings in
at the last The description of Antichrist whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is destroying The very Romane Antichrist himselfe destroying soules ouerthrowing common weales casting downe crownes dissipating Churches being armed with so many bloudy lawes so many conspiring Councells so many warlike Legions fetters halters gallowses rackes fires inuironed with so many Inquisitors so many cursatiue Iesuits some of them dogmaticall some pragmaticall King-killers that hee may be rightly called Abaddon and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You see Paul the fift the disposition of the Romane Antichrist by the starre that fell from heauen by the key of the bottomlesse pit which hee receiued by the pit which he opened by the smoake of the pit which he brought forth by the kingdome of smoake which hee built vp by the stinch of the smoake that he thrust out by the Locusts and Scorpions which do very liuely resemble the Monkes new and olde by their infinite swarmes whereby they do hurt their double venome which they instill their deadly sting wherewith they strike their power pride cunning cruelty which they practise very worthy subiects of their King Abaddon whom they obey CHAP. XIV Wherein is set downe actions of the Beast OF what kinde Antichrist is wee haue expounded now wee must shew whereabout hee is occupied The starre which fell from heauen doth shew his disposition The beast that rose out of the earth shall expresse his action Saint Iohn describeth two beasts one ascending out of the sea another out of the earth The first doth resemble the Romane Empire the other Antichrist properly so called Saint Iohns Sea-beast The Romane Monarchy rose out of the sea that is out of a turbulent state out of the factions and disorders of nations as out of a troublesome sea who is called a beast not in respect of his ciuill authoritie which he hath from God but of his beastly vices which hee tooke from the Dragon Saint Iohns land-beast The Prophet brings in another beast rising out of the earth not the same but diuers from it like in many things yet not the same For I saw saith Saint Iohn another beast rising out of the earth which is both the seuenth head of the Romane beast and yet a beast in it selfe for her different beginning and nature The actions of Antichrist the land-beast 1 Ascending out of the earth therefore Antichrist is the sonne of the earth Therefore from the earth being borne of earthly and sensuall concupiscence and diuelish counsell as Iames the Apostle doth ioyne these 3. Ia. cap. 3.15 signifying all one thing earthly sensuall diuelish To speake like the Dragon 2 She is said to speake as a Dragon although shee dissembles the 2. hornes of a lambe whereof I spake before And herein Bellarmine doth almost agree with vs. That by the Dragon the Deuill is vnderstood by the first beast the great number of sinners but vnder the Romane Empire as we haue set downe by the consent of all Interpreters neither doth Bellarmine greatly denie it By the later Beast Antichrist as elsewhere as also the Preachers and Apostles of Antichrist being the head of the first beast cut off and liuing againe hee doth acknowledge with vs to be the true image of that Beast 3 She is said to worke all her power in his sight She worketh in the sight of the first beast First it is certaine that one and the same seat the citie with seauen hills belongeth to them both which hath ruled ouer Kings and Princes which can bee no other then that great Lady Rome In which seate the land-beast did succeede the sea-beast and deriued all the power of the Romane Empire to herselfe so that by her owne men it is called the Kingdome of Priests shee doth shew all the power of the first beast in his sight that is at Rome 4 She doth constraine the earth and the inhabitants thereof to worship the beast how will some say when the Pope doth enforce the inhabitants of the earth not to worshippe the Emperour but himselfe So you are to vnderstand the beasts not to be the person that did raigne either in the Empire or in the Popedome but those tyrannicall powers which those beastly persons did put in practise Againe you are to consider the Papall power to bee truely imperiall and although it commend it selfe vailed with the name of Christ yet that it was brought in by the Dragon as well as the other that it might worship the Dragon and be an expresse image of the Imperial power which contained in it the Papall The actions of Pagan Emperors For the Emperor was the cheife Bishoppe Now the Emperours did belch out blasphemies against God condemne the true worshippe of God oppresse the true worshippers of God maintaine the worshippe of Deuills and did openly serue the Dragon from whom they receiued their tyrannicall power And what did the Popes The action of the Antichristian Popes Did they not with a blasphemous mouth challenge to themselues the diuine name and godhead with Domitian did they not scoffe at the grace of Christ with Iulian did they not persecute the seruants of Christ with Dioclesian did they not bring in the worship and doctrine of Deuills and while they did openly professe the name of Christ did they not closly and secretly serue the Dragon So the difference betweene the Emperours and the Popes about the manner of worshipping the Dragon was somewhat but in plaine truth nothing at all But heere is a necessarie distinction to be vsed There was in the Emperours a blinde ignorance of Christ in the first Bishoppes a true confession of Christ in their successors a fained who did in word condemne the olde Romane Idolatrie and tyrannie What popery is but did call it backe againe in deede For what is poperie indeede if you doe truely weigh many of the parts of it but refined paganisme The Authors whereof were so bewitched of the Deuill that they intended one thing and did another in intention they worshipped God in very deede the Dragon as deceiuers so deceiued the principall Authours of the Deuills worship as Saint Iohn saith of the doctrine of Deuells as Saint Paul saith What is popery else therefore whether you consider the worshippe or the doctrine but secret Draconisme 1. They thinke that they do gaily well when they call vpon other Mediators either Angells or Saints when they adore the Pictures of Saints yeelding worshippe to the Image as they say which is due to the example whenas the contrary is fit to giue no worshippe to the Image when none is due to the substance They thinke they do passing holily but indeede they worshippe the Deuill when they worshippe the Image as Iohn teacheth whence Lactantius concludeth there is no religion there where there is an Image Hence it followeth that the Romane Synagogue is voide of religion which is full of
Babylon whose wares are mens soules whose Marchants are the Monkes which make men value their saluation at a high rate Not without cause Martial a pleasant Poet thought hee might iest with one Calliodore who had put ouer his seruant tor 2000. peeces of siluer that out of his mans price hee might suppe daintily and feede vpon Mullet and other kindes of delicate fish I may well cry ô wreth that fish is not thy meat It is a man a man thou Calliodore doest eat The same may bee truely sayd of Bellarmine Becan and such like Iesuites who sell mens soules to feede their bellies It is not fish ye Iesuites whereon you doe so feed O they be men ye Canibals ô they be men indeed Whom if I cannot yet satisfie for I know their wrangling and obstinate wits I will send them to the Angell the Interpreter of the Mysterie who doth conuict that Rome in name onely Christian and Popish to be that whore of Babylon First the seuen heads of the Beast whereof he spake mystically before are seuen hils saith the Angell and seuen Kings The hils are the heads of the city the seuen Kings the heads of the gouernment by them the situation of Rome by these the seuen kindes of gouernment are noted whereof I spake before Fiue went before Iohns time the sixt was then that is the Empire which the first Beast shadoweth out the seuenth was not yet come that was the Popedome which the latter Beast doth represent The Rhemists obiection But the 7. hills and the 7. Kings say the Rhemists are not taken literally and properly but mystically and indefinitly so that they signifie all the Kingdomes of persecutors Why therefore doth the Angell adde of the seauen Kings 5. are falne one is and the other is not yet come which place the Rhemists do so expound afterward but vnwittingly they confesse fiue went before Christ one then was the other was to follow whereby they ouerthrow their former idle interpretation Whose peeuishnesse I pray behold how great it is In all other places almost Their mistaking where the sense is altogether mysticall they imagine a literall sense of their owne Heere where the Angell sets downe a plaine literall sense they imagine a mysticall Against sense which seeth the 7. hills of the city whereupon Rome is called the seuen hild-city Against the history which mentioneth 7. Kings that is the 7. kingly formes of gouernment of that City Neither doth the Angell say as they dreame the seauen heades are 7. hills and the 7. hills are seauen Kings but the 7. heades are 7. hills and those seauen heades are seauen Kings as Bellarmine acknowledgeth The Rhemists exposition is very foolish For the Kings being the heads do shaddow out the heades of the politicke body very fitly the hills very vnfitly Besides that it is very false for if the hills be Kings the City which is the woman vers 18. sitteth vpon 7. Kings For shee is said to sit on the hills vers 9. The light of which place did so strike and dasell the English Rhemists Anglo-Rhemen in Apoc cap. 17.5 as it had done Sanders before that they confesse Rome to be that Whore of Babilon and that it may fall out not inconueniently that great Antichrist may haue his seat at Rome Out of this exposition of the Angell and the confession of the Aduersarie ariseth this proposition That great City placed vpon seauen hills and subiect to the 7. kingly formes of gouernment is the seat of Antichrist hence I dispute both negatiuely and affirmatiuely Negatiuely But Ierusalem although a great City Antichrists seat not at Ierusalem yet was not situated on seauen hills nor euer subiect to seauen such kingly formes of gouernment Ierusalem therefore is not the seat of Antichrist Affirmatiuely but of all cities this scituation and gouernment is proper to Rome Rome therefore properly is the head-city of Antichrist Now sith Antichrist sits only at Rome as the Angell interprets in Iohn and the Aduersary confesseth and sitteth in the temple of God as Paul sets it downe that is in Gods Church as the fathers expound it out of the Scriptures it followeth both waies necessarily that not that Ethnicke but that Ecclesiasticall Rome is the head-city of Antichrist Sibilla did foretell both the scituation of the place Sibilla did foretell Antichrist and the state of Antichrist And she foretould there would bee great terror and furie of the Empire neere the bankes of Tyber and that the king would be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and gaue him the name like to a bridge and should be a Bishop adorned with a white that is a siluer Myter glistering with pretious stones as Ireneus likewise foretould Therefore he was a Latine Bishop that did hold Peters chaire as Bernard who shall bee called most holy Lord and most holy Bishoppe as Ioachim the Abbot said Could Saint Iohn could Saint Paul could Sibilla Irenaeus Barnard Ioachim the Abbot touch him neerer then they touch him Or more plainly shew the scituation of the seate the kinde of gouernment the state of the King the bank of Tyber the name of the chaire of Antichrist so that one of the Papists called him most holy Pope But let vs returne to the Angell by whom the beast which carried the whore is thus described which was that is a flourishing Empire but is not in truth the Empire of Rome for his strength and power but his shadow rather vers 3. and yet is the Romane Empire for name and title and is called the eight beast for 5. are already falne Vers 10. as the Angell saith One King was then that is the Empire in Saint Iohns time and another was not as yet come Vers 11. that is the Papacie which drew to it selfe the strength and power of the olde Empire without the name and is called the seuenth head of the beast The eight beast although of it owne selfe it be a beast But the beast which was and is not is the eight that is a new Empire for the name and title and is one of the seuen that is of the Emperours Therefore although the old Empire may seeme to be described by the Angell by the name of the beast yet a new is chiefly set out which the second beast did renew that the Whoore might sit vpon it and be vpholden by it What is more perspicuous then this Angelicall interpretation which euent it selfe hath prooued true for the whore sitteth vpon this heast and is vpheld by it For therefore the Romaine in name but the Germaine Emperour in deed is called as I said the Defendor Procurator and Protectour of the Apostolicke sea Out of the premisses I shortly dispute 6 The beast whereon the Whore sitteth is a new Empire for it is not the sixt head but the eight therefore not Ethnick Rome vnder the Pagans but in name only Christian vnder the Christian Emperours is that Whore described by Saint
Iohn 7 Now those ten hornes saith the Angell are tenne Kings vers 12. which as yet haue not receiued the Kingdome They be not then those tenne hornes whereof Daniel did prophecie whose kingdomes are at an end But they shall haue kingly power together with the beast that is with Antichrist which cannot be vnderstood but of the Proconsuls or Propraetors who were vicegerents to the Emperours in the Prouinces who together after the dissolution of the Easterne Empire had at that time absolute kingly authoritie with the Pope For while the Empire stood and flourished neither the Pope at Rome nor the Kings in the Prouinces did rule absolutely after it decaied both hee enioyed Rome and a great part of Italie and they enioyed the Prouinces And these tenne hornes together with the beast as Bellarmine confesseth it euent proues it Lib. 3. de Rom. Pont. cap. 13. diuided the Romane Empire betweene them Hence I inferre this At that time whenas Rome was accounted the Whore of Babilon by the Angell then the tenne hornes tooke absolute power with Antichrist But before Rome was Christian and Popish the ten hornes had not absolute power with Antichrist It followeth therefore that Rome not before it was Christian and Popish was accounted the Whore of Babylon by the Angell CAHP. XX. Wherein the qualities of the Whore of Babylon are described WHose glorious profession is fitly resembled to the golden cuppe of fornication It is said that Edward the 4. King of England had three Concubines the first very deuout the second very subtill the third very plesant The whore of Babylon alone doth expresse these three dispositions For what is more deuout what is more ioconde what is more wily shee hath a face none of her owne as her Husband Antichrist hath not For he doth alwaies weare a visard and therefore is a counterfeit Antichrist A whore not only for her carnall filthinesse but for her spirituall Idolatrie whereto she hath entised the nations with her allurements such as had to do with her She is therefore a blasphemous and filthy Whore more then that a proud couetous cruell whore And therefore she is said to bee decked with purple and golden attire inriched with the spoiles of all sorts and drunke with the innocent bloud of the Saints Note For what extremities soeuer impietie could effect by blasphemie or lust by laciuiousnesse or couetousnesse by rapine or pride by delicacie or crueltie by torture the same the Angell so long before foretould that the Church should endure by that whore of Babylon Neither if we grant that Ethnicke Rome from her cradell was Babylon because the beast is said to haue 7. heades any inconuenience will follow thereby Neither if wee shall say that the purple whore began then The Pope compared to Romulus when Romulus first founded Rome will it ouerthrowe the exposition of the Angell For it remained to bee that which she was in the beginning Yea a great deale worse when it was falsly Christian vnder Antichrist then heathenish vnder Romulus It is reported that Romulus was a notable theife a Deflowrer of Virgins a truce breaker a brother-killer and that hee founded Rome at the first by these sinnes But he was not so notorious for his theifts as this for his sacriledge Nor he so filthy for the forcing of Virgins as this for the worshipping of Images Nor he for his breaking his league with men as this with God Nor he such a spiller of his brothers blood as this of Christian blood What an one thinke we him to be who doth surpasse a theefe in robberie a deflowrer of Virgins in lechery a truce breaker in treacherie and a brother-killer in crueltie Therefore the Angell called the Bishop of Rome Babylon and the purple whore by a super excellencie The descripti of the Whore of Babylon For she was proude by the spoiles of Prouinces this by the spoiles of all Churches She was composed or carnall this of spirituall adulteries and whoredomes She brak her faith with men this with God Shee was enraged against the bodies of the Saints this against the soules of the Saints She dealt with the lambes of Christ by open force as a Lyons Whelpe this as a Foxe with her cunning did sauagely teare them in peeces and deuour them Wherefore let Rome if you will bee that whore of Babylon from the beginning certainely she could not make drunke 10. kings with the golden cuppe of her fornication before there were tenne Kings For while Ethnicke Rome did stand they were the Emperours subiects they were no kings They were kings vnder the Pope of Rome therefore by popish Rome made drunke to whom by an excellencie the name of that whore is giuen by the Angell Neither yet will I euer accuse that Bishoply Rome which suffred for Christ vnder the ethnicke Emperours For not Rome regenerated and suffering but degenerating and persecuting can properly be called that whore of Babylon Neither doe I wholy excuse the imperiall Rome Imperiall Rome not to be excused which vnder Constantine Theodosius and other holy Emperours professed Christ because Rome which was Babylon from the beginning did retaine in her bosome diuers reliques of the former paganisme and diuers seedes of the future Antichristianisme Because it is not necessarie that all that were of the same succession should be of the same affection No I would not exclude Paul the 5. himselfe from the hope of saluation if the wretched sinner would repent and returne vnto his God Hence certaine dispute against vs. Antichrist cannot be saued for he is the sonne of perdition as the Apostle teacheth The Pope may be saued by your owne confession The Pope therefore is not Antichrist Or thus It is not lawfull to pray for Antichrist It is for the Pope The Pope therefore is not Antichrist This obiection is a fallacie called the begging of the question For it doth presuppose Antichrist to be one singular man We contrary as by many reasons wee haue proued it If therefore they keepe them to the point and take the Pope collectiuely the assumption is false if they take him for this or that single man the assumption is true if the Pope repent But then there be foure tearms in the syllogisme For the Pope is otherwise taken in the assumption then in the conclusion For there it is taken for singular Popes heere for a succession of Pope But of this sophisme I haue spoken enough before CHAP. XXI How the Church of Rome may be said to be the Church of GOD. BVt heere is another doubt to bee resolued how the seate of Antichrist can be called that purple whore as Saint Iohn saith and temple and Church of God as Saint Paul saith For if Antichrist sit in the Church of God as I taught before and popish Rome be the seat of Antichrist as in many wordes I haue declared it seemeth that popish Rome is the Church of God I answere and
distinguish of the proposition and that out of Gods booke which considereth the Church after 2. sorts 1. After the inward truth and the outward profession 2. After the outward profession only As blessed Iohn calleth the Church of Sardis the Church of Christ although it had greeuously fallen from the doctrine of Christ Why so Because as yet it professed the name of Christ and retained the sacrament of Baptisme and because certain lay hid among them who had not polluted themselues So the Church of Rome may bee called the Church of God and of Christ because it professeth the name of Christ because it retaineth certaine footsteps and outward markes of a visible Church as Baptisme the Decalogue the creed The Papists haue the truth as the Philistines had the Arke the Lords Prayer but notes miserably corrupted as the Philistines who retained among them the Arke of Gods presence but they felt it to bee to them the Arke of pestilence as the Cutthites the bastard Israelites who had Moses bookes and would at once feare God and worship Idoles As the Samaritanes their successors who brag'd that they had Iacobs well among them when they had infected the well of the water of life Therefore the Delegates did iustly complaine of the Church of Rome in the Councell of Trent That that was true which God complained by Ieremie This people haue committed two euills one they haue forsaken me the fountaine of liuing water The other they haue digged to themselues cesternes which can hold no water Although I cannot denie that certaine relikes of the inuisible Church doe lie hidden in the same who haue not bended their knee to Baal But as it is said to the Church of Sardis You haue a name that you liue but you are dead that may deseruedly be spoken of the Romish Church in respect of the inward faith the soule of the Church you are starke dead although in outward profession you are said to liue You are called the Temple of God because you reteyne the name of Christ but you are the whore of Babylon because you haue forsaken the faith The temple of God equiuocally not vniuocally for an equiuocall Church is good enough for aequiuocating Christians Now the ten hornes that is the ten Kings haue one purpose as the Angell speaketh to giue ouer his virtue and his power to the beast Her they will serue they will loue and seeke after her her they will susteyne with their forces at her booke they will draw the sword and being confederaed in holy leagues both with the beast and within themselues will fight with the Lambe but after that the Lambe shall by litle and litle begin to weaken and consume Antichrist by the preaching of his word then the ten hornes which before had to doe with the whore shall begin to hate her and leaue her forsaken and naked CHAP. XXII An aduise to Princes to ioyne against the Pope 8 WHich cannot bee said of old but of new Rome whereof a great part of the prophecie is now fulfilled For the Pope hath lost as Bellarmine bemoaneth a great part of Germanie Suetia Gothia Noruegia all Denmarke a good part of England France Heluetia Polonia Bohemia and Pannonia He might better haue said all England and ioyn'd Scotland and Ireland thereto but that he would shew he hath a litle vaine hope in certaine secret and broken relicks of Antichrist among vs. I would to God that as the Kings of Great Britannie with many other great Princes haue cast of the whore A desire that France and Spaine would forsake the Pope so the Kings of France and Spaine would forsake her Rome is more to be feared of them then of our Britaine King whose Crowne is more free whose succession more certaine whose subiects more loyall whose kingdome is more remote and shut vp from popish assaults I would that so mighty Princes this Princes confederates would follow his valour and holines in this point whereby they might wholy fulfill the prophecie It is not for men of meane condition to giue counsell but to make prayers while they expound this so holy and waightie prophecie If not to aduise yet to wish first that those two potent Kings would ioyne with the King of Great Britaine and others those worthy Kings and Princes of the Reformed Church against Antichrist Next that if they doe make a secret league with Antichrist and within themselues against the Kings and Princes of the Reformed Church that all our side would make a holy League with all possible haste and take heed that our neighbours and brethren the Protestants of France and Flanders be not vnawares opprest by them whiles ours neglect them But wee may not make warres with our neighbour Kings But we ought to take heed lest they bring in a very dangerous warre vpon vs. But we must be addicted to peace True which hath no treacherie nor deceipt otherwise an holy warre is to be preferred before a trecherous peace whereto the Holy Ghost doth exhort Kings that with vnited forces they destroy and ouerthrow the whore of Babylon that is Rome as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth CHAP. XXIII The ouerthrow of Rome AS the Angell doth continue his prophecie to the last ouerthrow of the whore which cannot agree with heathenish and imperiall Rome for this ouerthrow doth follow the dissolution of the old Empire and the diuision thereof into ten kingdomes which according to the prophecie would that the whore should first perish afterward themselues should consume and destroy it Therefore this ouerthrow belongeth to Rome that is popish but christian in name as the Angell did notably expound it for whereas shee is said to sit vpon many waters that is many people and many nations as the Angell expounds it ver 15. and whereas the woman is called the great Citie which beareth rule ouer the Kings of the earth ver 18. nothing doth hinder but that it may be popish Rome But that popish Rome is not rightly said to haue gouerment first it is sufficient that Rome then Imperiall is described to be the seate wherein the whore of Babylon shall beare rule afterward Againe they which call her the kingdome of the Romanes Turrianus the kingdome of Priests doe confesse that shee beareth rule who haue very cunningly changed the secular kingdome into a spirituall that which Aquinas the Angelicall Doctor doth obserue Aquinas But so excellent a prophecie did not onely looke into the age then present but foresaw the age long after to follow And therefore the description of the whore is first set out in all her parts as you see and after her destruction which cannot be vnderstood of the burning of Ethnicke Rome by the Gothes and Vandales 10 but by a finall and sodaine destruction as it were a myllstone cast by great force into the sea For it shall not saith the Angell be found againe any more which cannot agree to Ethnicke Rome for after it had receiued
I conclude both out of the Scripture and out of the fathers that Antichrist was to sit in the Temple of God that was in the Church And therefore that Antichrist was not to sit in the temple of Ierusalem Hierome with many other Fathers haue determined And yet this Pythagoras who thinks that his he said so will satisfie fooles doth boldly affirme that he shall sit in the Temple of Ierusalem to be builded againe by him Bellarmine fighteth with himselfe Wherein see I pray you how hee fighteth with himselfe The temple reedified of Antichrist is the Temple of the Deuill But Antichrist shall fit saith he in a Temple reedified by himselfe Therefore he shall sit in the Temple of the deuill not therefore in the Temple of God Vnlesse happily he will change the temple of God into the temple of the Deuill Besides that Antichrist shall sit at Rome as the Rhemists themselues confesse Not therefore at Ierusalem vnlesse peraduenture Ierusalem moued out of her place shall passe ouer to Rome Which perchance they can bring to passe who change the three wisemen of the east into 3. The Papists alter east from weast Kings of Sheba in the west For Sheba stands west from the citie Ierusalem and Chaldee whence they came stands east I cannot see therefore but by the same power they may as well carry Ierusalem to Rome as turne the east into the west I haue euicted before euen by the confession of the Aduersarie That Rome is the seat and citie of Antichrist and yet they proue by a strang kinde of Logicke that Ierusalem is the seat of Antichrist For where Gods two witnesses saith he are killed of Antichrist there is the seat of Antichrist But those two witnesses shall be killed by Antichrist at Ierusalem Apoc. 11.7 Therefore Antichrist his seat is at Ierusalem He takes the proposition for granted which for all that standes in great neede of proffe For wheresoeuer Antichrist shall kill 2. witnesses of God that there he shall haue his seat No more then if some great Prince such an one as they would haue Antichrist to be should there be said to haue the seat of his Empire wheresoeuer his authoritie was of power to kill his enemies Do you not know that Kings haue stretcht-out hands Tiberius hand stretcht out it selfe as farre as Ierusalem to crucifie Christ though he sate at Rome Antichrist hath a long hand whose hand reacheth farther to kill Gods two witnesses then where he sits not euer where Antichrist rageth there he sitteth The proposition then generally taken is false particularly vnderstood is a paralogisme The assumption also is very false for the holy Ghost doth call not Ierusalem but Rome or rather the Rom Empire that great Citie in whose streets the bodies of those two witnesses shall lye slaine and that great Citie is called spiritually Sodome and Egipt where our Lord was crucified Hierusalem aboue is called the holy Citie after Christ his passion how then here is it spiritually called Sodome and Egipt Apoc 11.8 Ierusalem in the Apocalyps taken for the holy Citie alwaies as Hierom writes to Marcella Ierusalem is alway taken in the Apocalyps for the holy Citie Rome for the great Citie which hath the gouernment ouer the Kings of the earth which cannot agree with Ierusalem Besides the word spiritually toucheth Rome very neere for as Rome is mystically Babylon so it is spiritually Sodome and Egipt Sodome for her pride and vncleannesse Rome compared to Babylon Sodom and Egypt ☜ Egipt for her idolatrie and crueltie against the Saints for who is so blinde that can not see that Rome is the chappell of Idolls the stewes of lust the queene of pride the shambles of Saints and the den of King-killers and therefore shee is truly spirituall Sodom and Egipt But where our Lord was crucified there Gods two witnesses were murthered by Antichrist Christ how crucified at Rome But not at Rome but at Ierusalem he was crucified Therefore not at Rome but at Ierusalem those two witnesses shall be killed We denie the assumption At Rome in that great Citie that is in the Romane Empire our Lord was crucified First because by the commandement and authoritie of the Rom Empire Christ himselfe was crucified Apoc. 17.18 as the Rhemists doe confesse Secondly because Christ in his members is often crucified at Rome Thirdly he was not crucified within Ierusalem but without as S. Paul witnesseth to the Heb cap 13. v. 12. Lastly because Ierusalem before the Apocalyps which was extant about the end of Domitian being vtterly ouerthrowne together with their Temple was neuer to be built againe as we haue formerly euicted out of the prophecie of Daniel who saith that the desolation of the Temple and Citie shall continue vntill the end of the world as Hierom expounds out of the words of Christ Neither doe the friuolous answers of Bellarmine much trouble me wherewith he presumes as he writeth that Daniel would haue said something that he doth not say as if hee could not say what he would and therefore he faines that the Prophet spake thus Either that the Temple should not be reedified till a litle before the end of the world or else as it was desolated before it was reedified so the abomination of desolation i. Antichrist should remaine in the same re-edified to the end of the world or else that it should neuer be fully built againe Ierusalem the figure of the Christian Church but that Antichrist should sit in the Temple begun and not finished Ierusalem is wholy the figure of the Christian Church which after it was built vp by the preaching of the Gospell among the Gentiles there was an end both of the Citie and Temple of Ierusalem Matth 24.14 as Christ prophecied Daniels best Interpreter who foretold the abomination of desolation that is the abominable and desolate winges What is ment by the abomination of desolation vnderstanding the Eagles and the Legions of the Romanes as Luke expoundeth should bring a finall destruction to the Citie and Temple so that the desolation of them both should continue to the end of the world as Christ explaineth foreshewing that Ierusalem being ouerthrowne of the Romanes Luc 21.22 23 24. shall be troden vnder foote of the Gentiles till the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled i. till hee shall come to iudgement which is described in the next words So that the bounds of the Christian Church being enlarged the Citie and Temple should haue their last end by the testimonie of Christ for the truth appearing the type faded away So that the primitiue Church beleeued that Ierusalem was turned into eternall ashes Ad Marcel and Hierom calleth the opinion of some who thought the Temple should be restored a meere Iewish fable Therefore Bellarmine in Hieroms iudgement who dreames of the restoring of the Temple is not a Christian Doctor but a Iewish Babler Vnlesse hee be worse to be
Seleucus Callinicus to reuenge his sisters death v 8. and vanquished him and being crowned King of Siria returned into Egipt with his spoiles and prisoners and hauing greater power then Callinicus enioyed Siria many yeeres and Iurie therein v 9. Wherefore the two sonnes of Callinicus Seleucus Ceraunus and Antiochus the Great inuaded Siria and raised a cruell warre Ceraunus against Ptolomie Euergetes v 10. who being dead Antiochus the Great gathered great forces against Ptolomie Philopater the the sonne of Euergetes Of this Antiochus the great the Angell prophecieth from the 10. v 11. 12. verse to the 20. first of his warres with Ptolomie Philopater and those first prosperous wherein he recouered Siria then vnfortunate 7. Ptolomie Philopator wherein he lost it againe Here Ptolomie Philopator lifted vp into pride by this good successe was the seuenth horne and slew many thousands of the Iewes and therefore shall not alway preuaile v 12 13 14 15 16. After of the warres and victories of Antiochus the Great which hee got of Ptolomeus Epiphanes the sonne of Philopater and of the depopulation of the Iewes whence Antiochus the Great is the eight horne 8. Antiochus the Great He gaue his daughter Cleopatra in mariage to Ptolomie Epiphanes that hee might againe mingle the yron and the clay together but all in vaine according to the prophecie cap 2. when as hee pretended peace and friendship by that mariage but intended destruction to Ptolomie but all in vaine because Cleopatra tooke part with her husband against her Father Lastly v 17. of Antiochus the Great his inuading the Isles of Greece which he subdued v 18. and of the warres he made with the Romanes wherein hee gat great disgrace and of his ignominious death inflicted vpon him in a mutinie by sauage people for his sacrilege v 19. Into his roome succeeded Seleucus Philopator his sonne the ninth horne 9. Seleucus Philopator who did impouerish the people with greeuous impositions and emptied the treasurie and the Temple of Ierusalem and perished not by warre but by treacherie for Heliodore being suborned by Antiochus Epiphanes tooke him away by poyson Now into his place shall step vp saith the Angell a most contemptible fellow .i. there shall succeed Seleucus Philopator in the kingdome of Siria one very base in manners not in his Ancestors Antiochus Epiphanes the third sonne of Antiochus the Great the brother of Seleucus Philopator Demetrius Vnkle the tenth horne 10. Antiochus Epiphanes that litle horne so fully described by Daniel in the rest of the 7. and 11. chap for the Angell doth prophecie of his entrance deeds and end in the rest of the chapter of his entrance to note that he came not to the kingdom of Siria by any lawfull right of succession or election for Demetrius his Nephew was right heire of the kingdome but crept in by cunning and flatterie as a tutor and a gardian of the young Prince and a protector of the Kingdome in the nonage and absence of Demetrius sent to Rome for an hostage in his steed You haue the historie agreeing with the prophecie described both by others and especially by Iosephus Antiq. lib. 12. cap 1. Therefore Antiochus Epiphanes the tenth and litle horne out of small and weake beginnings vsurped the kingdome of Siria a man for his wickednes vile and contemptible who did breake off and cast away by his craft three of the former hornes in the Kingdom of Syria the father the brother and the nephew that he might attaine to the Kingdome And vttered speeches against the Almighty and so oft trampled vpon the Saints of God so that the times of persecuting the people of God Daniels country-men assigned to the little horne do precisely agree with the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes Foure degrees of deliuerance which are diuersly reckoned vp in respect of the beginning and ending for there are foure degrees noted of the deliuerance from the tyranny of Antiothus procured at foure seuerall times The first cap. 7. vers 25. when the worship of God was renewed and the Temple restored by Iudas Machabaeus for from the prophanation of the Temple which beganne the fifteenth of Casleu anno 145. to this reformation made the 25. of Casleu anno 148. three yeeres and ten dayes came betweene which space Daniel cals a time times a peece of time cap. 7. v. 25. The second degree when the Iewes hauing vanquished Antiochus draue his forces out of Iury and re-established the new reformation P◠Bell. I. de lib. 1. cap. 1. which happened 3. yeeres and an halfe as Iosephus obserues from the time when the daily sacrifice did cease which space Daniel cals a time times and halfe a time cap. 12. vers 7. The third degree is from the prophanation of the Temple to the deadly sicknesse of Antiochus which is contained by Daniel in 1290. dayes cap. 12. vers 11. The last degree is from the profanation to his death which happened 45. daye after and these daies are exactly cast vp by Daniel to be 1335. By all which it appeareth that Daniel did shadow out by the fourth beast not the Romane Empire but the kingdome of the Seleucides and the Lagides The disagreement of Bellarmine Daniel and that he described by the tenth and little horne not Antichrist properly but Antiochus Epiphanes And I pray you marke how ill Bellarmine agreeth with Daniel Daniel describeth a beast with a tenth horne Bellarmines beast hath an eleuenth Daniel speaks of ten Kings who successiuely did afflict the Iewes Daniels country-men Bellarmine speakes of ten Kings who together with an eleuenth at the same time did altogether beare rule in the world but in diuers places Daniel sets downe ten kings whereof the three latter were rooted out in the sight and procurement of the tenth the other sixe either all of them or most of them being dead before he was borne Bellarmine faines that three of them were slaine by him and seuen others subdued at such time as they were not in the world Lastly Daniel saith that his horne or king was broken off being infamous for his cowardly flight and being infected with a filthy disease after hee had tormented the Iewes the time appointed did miserably consume away and perish Bellarmine imagines his horne the Aegyptians Lybians and Aethiopians being vanquished and seuen other Kings subdued should get the monarchie of the whole world for three yeeres and a halfe O admirable Conquerour more renowned then the Antiochi Alexanders and Caesars ☜ Therefore we looke that Bellarmine shall play the Orator for Antichrist who may excellently set foorth these warres and victories as Cicero did Caesars No man hath so flowinng a wit so copious and eloquent tongue and stile who I will not say can paint and set out but point at and reckon vp thy worthy Acts Most Mighty Antichrist Neither could any man so soone passe thorow remote Kingdomes by
bare name and title to the Emperour that the Emperour might be like him The power of the Empire in the Pope the name in the Emperour A Bishoppe in name and an Emperour in name Indeed the Bishop infringeth the faith of Christ professeth his name and seemes his Vicegerent A substitute in name but a reall Aduersarie So the maiestie of the Emperour resides in the Pope the title in the Emperour Then the titulare Emperour is the Popes reall vassall Let him be called and you will the King of the Romanes to whom the Pope hath not left one foote of land in all Italie So that the old Romane Empire in substance and power is so diuided betweene the Kings and the beast that it is extinguished vnlesse happily you would haue the Empire consist not in the number of landes but of sillables I retort therefore the argument that I may ouerthrow the assumption of the first syllogisme which he tooke for granted that the Romane Empire was not yet subuerted The prophecie of Saint Iohn hath taught vs that the Romane Empire is to be diuided and determined as Bellarmine saith and then that Antichrist shall come Euent proueth that the Empire is a good while since ouerthrowne Therefore Antichristi come CHAP. XXXI Wherein the third demonstration is refuted BEllarmines two former demonstrations as 2. reedes we haue broken in peeces let vs if you please breifely scatter the rest being fully refuted by others Any man will see how weake they be being seuered I haue vnited them that they might bee the stronger two of the signes accompanying and two other following being as notably concluded whereby he prooueth that Antichrist is not as yet come The first signe that doth accompanie the comming of Antichrist is not only the preaching of Enoch and Elias but their combate with Antichrist Wherein Bellarmine doth greatly doat not vnlike a franticke woman among vs who imagined shee had such inward acquaintance with the Angell Gabriel that she receiued many letters from him to be deliuered to many others about diuers businesses I thinke Elias was the Carrier And wee haue such an other mad fellow sent to giue light vnto the world These seeme not to be so mad as Bellarmine who as if he had conferred with Enoch and Elias three daies since in Paradise The fable of Enoch Elias or at least had receiued letters from them doth hold so fast and tell so confidently that Iewish fable receiued from others that he seemes to beleeue it it is this that both of them being reserued so many ages in a certaine aëreall paradise liuing in their mortall bodies shall returne into the world to fight with Antichrist and shall be slaine by him and both of them shall rise againe the third day before the generall resurrection and by that miracle conuert the Iewes and enforce them to kill Antichrist their Messias as they thought in the mount of Oliues and to embrace Christ at the last their true Messias To proue the truth of all these passages Bellarmine hath misreported diuers testimonies out of the Scripture and fathers all which the most excellent and learned King of great Britaine hath so wrested out of the hands of the silly weake Doctour that in the iudgement of all learned men hee seemes to haue wonne the cause It is not needfull then to discusse those testimonies againe that I may not doe that which is done alreadie all which are restored by the King to their naturall and proper sense so that from thence I may fetch arguments to pursue the beast being wounded with the Kings weapon All godly learned men will grant that these two holy Prophets for their singulare holinesse had an especiall priuiledge from God when one of them Heb. 11. that is Enoch was translated that he should not see death the other was taken vp in a fiery chariot into Heauen Let me therefore aske Bellarmine certaine questions for my learning that I may search out the truth of this busines not only for the refuting of the fable but for comforting of the Church The first question First therefore I demand where Enoch and Elias be at this present Bellarmine answeres and that confidently in Paradise What are they in that Paradise A discourse of Paradise wherein Adam was placed at the first which Moses describes to be planted by God in the region of Eden a place so full of delights watered with a great riuer from whence foure other great and noble riuers did flow Out of which he makes mention that Adam was expelled a dreadfull Cherubine being set to stoppe the entrance that none of Adams posterity may euer reenter where the Armenians condemned afterward for Hereticke in the Florentine counsell did say that the soules of the Saints did abide after death to the day of iudgement yea saith Bellarmine in the very same Paradise Enoch and Elias are reserued aliue Enoch Elias haue a losse by being in Paradise and loosing heauen A great priuiledge forsooth that when other Saints the citizens of heauen doe liue with God these for so many ages bee kept out of heauen by God That wee may grant that Paradise is as well planted and delightsome a place as euer it was wherein with the smell of flowers and fruit the sweetnesse of fountaines the greenesse of the fields the chanting of birds the melodie in the woodes the shadow of trees they might delight themselues so many ages Yet for all that Paradise could not be so pleasing vnto them that it could content them for the losse of one day wherein they were depriued of heauen Ecclesiasticus corrupted For whereas Bellarmine proues out of the Apocryphal scripture of Ecclesiasticus that Enoch was translated into Paradise he had said somewhat if Paradise had not beene foisted into the Apocryphall text for though it bee in the Latine vulgare translation yet it is not in the Greek originall But what will hee answere for Elias whom the canonicall Scripture doth plainly set downe to bee taken vp into heauen not as it were into heauen but into heauen it selfe He cannot denie that which many sober Papists do grant that God in the Scripture did pubblish his decree concerning Elias in uery plaine wordes vnlesse happily in Bellarmines opinion when God had determined to take Elias vp into heauen he suddainly changed his minde and cast him into Paradise Elias therefore doth so much the more greeuously take the losse of heauen as he was neere enioying of it Paradise taken away and mist it But if Paradise which was sometime a most pleasant and delightsome place hath beene a long time since taken away what comfort then is left to Enoch and Elias wherewith they might comfort themselues for the want of heauen Now to let passe other Papists Pererius the Iesuite doth in many wordes proue that Paradise was ouerflowne with the flood and grew so wilde and vnwholesome that although it was a place yet it
and tell you must bee necessarily made against my Church for you are like to haue Christ himselfe against you in the field I know full well that lately at Rome as often before a cōuenticle of Priests haue bin gathered together by the Pope of Rome and Sathans command to deface and diminish my glory That they tooke counsell wherein the Popish Kings and Princes were in a league confederated among themselues against the Protestant Kings and Princes chiefely against IAMES the King of Great Britanny who concluded the Pope to be Antichrist and as hee rightly inferred Popish Kings and Princes were the members of Antichrist that the common cause were to be maintained by common forces that he sent in his Priests who might prouoke his sons as hee calles them to wage warre against my seruants The Kings therefore of the Reformed Religion haue more neede imposed by Antichrist to fulfill the prophesie and to fight Gods warre and vnite their forces and powers against that double horned Beast the Pope For I thinke that popish Kings haue learnt more wit at the last then to put in execution the bloody and cruell counsell of the Beast They know that the first Beast bore it not scot free whose ten hornes were sayd to bee crowned because it spilt the innocent blood of my seruants For the very same power of the Empire which did condemne mee being borne into the world the Prince of your saluation and fasten mee vpon the crosse the same did endeauour to ouerthrow the Primitiue Church with ten persecutions How I did reuenge the death of my Saints vpon the authors thereof how I did cut off some of the Emperors by mutuall fights how did I comsume the people with continuall plagues how I did deuoure the cities with floodes and earth-quakes how I strucke and dispersed whole armies with thundrings and lightnings cast from heauen their stories doe well declare As many creatures as I had so manie viols I had of my raging wrath which I powred out vpon mine and my seruants enemies But some of you will saie Those were Pagans that did kill and Christians that were killed wee are Catholikes which doe punish they are heretickes which are punished They are as certainly hereticks as you are Catholiks You Catholiks I wold you were Christians they be not words but deeds must make this good You carrie the name of Christ I confesse but you plaie the Pagans vnder the name of Christ Are they heretickes True as I am an hereticke that call all things to the rule of the Word But Antichrist doth alleadge Scripture also true as the Diuell did alleadge them misvnderstood Who as he enticed the Iewes to kill me shadowed out and promised in the Propheticall Scriptures to bee the Messias so he hath moued manie Catholikes in name in truth most hereticall heretickes the bond slaues of Antichrist to burne both my seruants and their books and they blot out as much as lay in them by their cunning and their power the faith and the Church whose quarrell I often reuenged with a high hand stretched from heauen I will giue you one notable example After that the Counsell of Constance had condemned to the fire those two my seruants Hu◠and Hierome the Pope sent two Erinnes into Germanie the Cardinall of Winchester and the Cardinall of Saint Angelo who when they had called backe Sigismund the Emperour from making warre against the Turkes they incited him to beare armes against the Bohemians the new professours of my Gospell and brought into the field three other great Germane Princes with all their forces will you heare the issue of their whole fight passage The Bohemians leuy an armie come into the fielde strike vp the alarum they had scarce come to handy gripes but the King and the Princes being stroke with a causlesse suddaine feare in their rage crying out to their souldiers to stand to it and fight did cowardly and beastly flie away fiue times they made inrodes into Bohemia and fiue times they were discomfited And so not long after three seuerall Popes the Authors of this tragedy and those two diuilish Cardinalls not without great shame and sorrow came to a fearefull end In all which occurrences hee that doth not behold the hand of God is blinde he that doth not feare it is wicked I passe ouer that inuincible Spanish Armado which being gathered together by the instigation of Priests was dispersed by the windes swallowed vp by the seas and brought to confusion by the hand of God What do you thinke that Gods hand is shortened or doe you thinke that God hath left off to defend his seruants Infinite be the examples of Gods power which God hath shewed both in former ages and often in this present age in the defence of the Church against her mightiest enemies Let thinges to come be taught by things past And if those former tyrants or those that followed had gone vnpunished for their wickednesse there had beene cause for Antichrist with all his faction to haue reioyced in their sinne there had beene some reason that the Kings of the earth had promised to themselues impunitie who had bestowed all their might in building vp and enlarging the Kingdome of the two horned beast Now that I haue first crackt and broken to peeces the ten crowned and bloody hornes and after haue scattered both by land and sea the smokie slaues of the second beast what at last shall become of Antichrist is declared in the sixt seale But what in the mean time may Antichrists souldiers hope for who being set on fire by these fire brandes did turne all their forces to do mischiefe I doe aduise you therefore yee popish Kings and Princes that ye depart out of Babylon as fast as you can then that being conuerted to me you make warre with vnited forces in the quarrell of the Church against Antichrist at least that you giue no eare to these Syrenes or Erinnes which will bring destruction both to your soules and bodies On my word the Byshoppe of Rome and the great Antichrist are termes conuertible The decree of God standes fast for euer that the Byshoppe shall be consumed by those Kings by whom he was adored You cannot serue mee and the Pope with whom peace being made by you see if it be not to be called peace rather then a compact of slauerie From whence if I cannot drawe the popish Kings and Princes I will for all that warne you yee Kings and Princes Protestants that you preferre a holy warre before a wicked league with the Pope and think those armes to be holy when there is no hope left but in armes And take heede that being deceiued with an opinion of a false peace you bee not on a suddaine brought to ruine I wish you may bee at peace with neighbour Kings and neighbour Kings with you but at no hand haue peace with the Romane Antichrist Why so it is wicked it is dangerous it cannot hold
It is wicked what peace what consent what agreement can be with the holy scriptures and mans traditions with free will and Gods grace with inherent iustice and imputed righteousnesse with mans satisfactions and my blood procuring their saluation what holy society and vnity can there bee with the inuocation of dead Saints and the prayers to the liuing God with the popish Masse and the Lords supper with Christian faith and Antichristian distrust You see it is wicked now marke how dangerous Sweete is the name of peace the opinion of vnitie is delightsome But what true Christian doth doubt that that bond of peace is most sure which is knit together with the truth and vnitie of the Spirit Whence it followeth that sweete destruction is included in that peace which is made with falsehood I adde that there cannot possibly bee peace between the seede of the woman and the seede of the serpent betweene the lambe and Antichrist betweene those where God hath set euerlasting hatreds Fire and water will better agree then Christ and Antichrist wherefore I aduise Protestant Kings and Princes that they make perfect that reformation of the Church by my helpe which by my helpe they haue begunne First that they compose all home differences chiefly in the Articles of the doctrine of the Gospell with quiet and Christian conference for it is to bee feared that inward dissention will bring backe againe the outward enemy Secondly that they resist the common Aduersarie with common helpe and counsell for there is danger that if euery one resist not all will be surprised Thirdly that they may the better defend their Christ let them at once set vpon Antichrist for hee hath more courage that doth inuade then he that doth defend Lastly if they cānot in all points fulfil the prophecy yet let them banish the beast out of their Dominions For it is impossible that Christ and Antichrist should dwell together In the end I aduise both sides that in the deliberation of this great businesse they preferre not worldly wisedome before heauenly wisedome secondly that the euill custome of men bee not preiudiciall to the eternall truth of God Thirdly that sluggish doubtfulnesse do not put of and procrastinate this so noble and so worthy an enterprise Lastly that the deceitfull condition of peace with Antichrist doe not crosse the desire of recouering libertie So that euery one of you being content with his own kingdome and territories shall not busie himselfe about inuading others but will cast about how he may preuaile and ouerthrow the Deuill and his eldest sonne the Romane Antichrist i. not one wicked man but all the Kingdome of vnrighteousnesse Euery one of you haue a iust cause of his owne and now you haue a faire offer made you The truce made betweene Caesar and the Turke offers a fit occasion to represse the insolencie of this Bishoppe after you will more easily repell the Turke And seeing you haue both a iust quarrell and fit oportunitie against the beast let there not be wanting a will in you If Christ the Sauiour ô ye renowmed Kings and Princes do speake thus secretly vnto you and inwardly warne you shall he not perswade you though he were not of power to punish you The rather seeing he hath shewed that the Pope is a Capitall enemie to Gods testament and kingly gouernment The Pope hath cast such proiects and Rome takes such counsells that kingly Maiestie and popelike Maiestie cannot long stand together Our sinnes makes the Bishoppe great who if he rise to that greatnesse which hee aimeth at in his minde Kings of necessitie must fall to the ground My Dialogue shall make it plaine if it please you to vouchsafe to read it wherein pragmaticall Antichrist first enters the stage Glory to God PRAGMATICALL ANTICHRIST OR HJLDEBRAND BROVGHT TO LIFE OR The first Dialogue of Christian obedience due to Kings against Antichristian rebellion couered vnder the shew of Catholike RELIGION The Speakers be sixe 1. MICHAEL CALANDER 2. William Argentine two noble Romane Catholikes Laickes as they be termed one more gentle the other more fierce 3. George Velbacel an old Priest Calanders Confessor 4. Robert Saturnine a Iesuite Argentines Guest one more milde and moderate the other more violent and bitter 5. Antonius Patriotta a Professor of the reformed Diuinitie 6. Carolus Regius a common Lawyer either of them a Maintainer of our Religion Countrie and King AFter that Paule the fift had sent two bulles into England wherein hee § 1 had forbidden his Catholike sons as he stiles them to take the Oath of Allegeance and obedience I remember there was speech after the end of Easter Tearm that two Lay noble Romane-Catholickes Michael Calander and William Argentine went aside out of the city into their country-house to aduise about their affaires It was said that old George Velbacell the Archpriest whom age and custome had made more milde and gentle went with them together with his keeper that he might ease the trouble of his long imprisonment with some country delight There followed not long after a wandring Iesuite younger in yeares a man of a fiery spirit his name was Robert Saturnine He that he might conceale his Priesthood couered his bald pate with a Gregorian or periwigge and seemed by his attire to be a Courtier There happened at that time to arriue to Calander a man full of curtesie and hospitalitie Antonius Patriotta and Charolus Regius one of them a Doctor in Diuinity the other a great Councellour at Law both of them an aduersarie to Poperie yet so that they could finde in their hearts to loue the person of a Papist if they thought him an honest man and a faithfull subiect to their King and Countrey They came of purpose to perswade Calander their olde acquaintance to take the Oath of supremacie if it might be if not at least the oath of Allegeance lest if he did refuse it hee might giue iust occasion to our worthy King to be alienated in minde from him and so might bring some trouble to that Noble and auntient Familie § 2 Here Calander vpon a scruple of conscience which the Popes two bulles did seeme to inflict to the superstitious old man Patriotta said that hee tooke a pause for a while and to haue answered at the last with teares in his eyes Let vs lay aside for a time these sad discourses Antonie and Charles and let me lead you being weary of your iournie into your chamber where you may repose and refresh your selues before supper And that you may not be ignorant what guests you are like to finde in my house I dare be bold to tell you whom euer I haue found my trusty and faithful friends to haue beene earnest Disputants not dangerous informers and to haue gauled the Papists not with your accusations but your arguments my old familiar friend Argentine shall be with you at Supper and Velbace◠my Confessor who hath taken the oath of Allegeance himselfe
say that the Oath of obedience cannot be kept their faith and saluation reserued which Christ the Authour of faith and saluation did both command and performe I am not ignorant that both the Pope and Bellarmine doe take it for proued and granted that the King is an Hereticke But if the King might argue both cases with them face to face before learned and equall iudges I durst paune my life that the King in their presence would conuince more strongly and more peremptorily that the Pope were Antichrist then that the Pope with the helpe of his Champion should proue the King to be an Heritike But grant to them for a time that which they miserably begge would Christ thinke good that faithfull obedience should be giuen to an Infidell i. to an Emperour that was altogether a stranger from the faith and would he iudge the same to be denied to an Hereticke i. to a King deceiued in the faith hee would not hee would not If Christ then did right then doth this supposed Vicare of Christ amisse And if fealty and obedience cannot be performed to a King as you thinke with reseruation of the Catholike faith why did Saint Peter when he had set downe Catholike faith in the 1. Chap command obedience due to the King in the 2. Chapter 1. Pet. 2.13 Bee subiect to the King as to the most eminent euen to Nero that monster of men wherein he taught that the impietie of the person ordained of God to gouern ought not to ouer throw the obedience of subiects nor the authoritie of the Prince If Peter speakes well then Peters successor speakes ill If Peter speake by the spirit of Christ then Peters successour speaketh by the spirit of Antichrist But Peter did binde all by a bond of a religious commandement both Clarkes and Laickes when he presentlie added 1. Pet. 2.17 feare God honour the King As if he had said they be cleane voide of Gods feare whosoeuer deny honour to the King And therefore Salomon Prouerbes 21. doth comprehend both duties vnder one word My sonne feare God and the King § 13 Here Saturnine But auncient Ignatius saith he in his Epistle to the Church of Smyrna speaketh after this manner Forged Ignatius brought in to crosse Salomon worship God next the Byshoppe and last of all the King This is a hard case Saturnine said Patriotta to make Ignatius Salomons corrector as if hee had forgotten his dutie toward the chiefe Priest Pro. 21. Salomon saith honor God and the King but I say honour God first the Byshop next and the King last Certainely true Ignatius would neuer haue spoken so saucily Salomon saith but I say and so preferre a Priest before a Prince But it is no hard matter for you to place the Byshop in the middle betwixt God and the King For you do nothing more willingly then make your Pope the controuler of all Kings and to that purpose bring in a counterfet and a bastardly Ignatius to patronize your ambition § 14 But Peter saith Saturnine calleth the Prince a humane creature True answered Patriotta in respect of his nature but in respect of his ordination he is of as heauenly a creation as a Priest For kings rule by God as priests preach by God From man they haue their nature from God their power For there is no power but from God as the Apostle teacheth As they are men they are immediately from their Parents as they are Princes from God Therefore a Magistrate is called a Minister and ordination of God Yea which is more Kings are called Gods They as Gods vicegerents vpon earth are vouchsafed the honour of Gods name Priests are called men of God Angels of God but kings are called Gods Therefore the King is not called a humane creature by Peter because he hath his beginning from man A double obedience due to kings actiue passiue in things lawfull vnlawfull but because the gouernment is administred by man and for man Be subiect to him saith Peter for the Lord the text hath it sometime as to the Lord i. as to Christs Vicare in his owne kingdome as Eleutherius Pope of Rome called King Lucius sometime in the Lord i. in all things lawfull although in things vnlawfull there is a certain kind of obedience due but an actiue obedience in things lawfull to do that which is commanded a passiue in things vnlawfull to suffer that which is inflicted But for the Lord saith Peter that Kings although they bee tyrants as then Nero was bearing the rule and image of God vpon earth though they bee Gods scourges yet they must be honoured with the fealtie and obedience of all for Gods sake As an heathen man could say Good Emperors are to be desired of vs but any are to be endured The Apostle addeth for the praise of the good and the punishment of the wicked Hence a certaine Master of the Presbyterie gathered a false a dangerous consequence cosen germane to yours A leude collection of a Schismaticke That because the king is a power ordained by God to the praise of the good and the punishment of the wicked if he gouerne to punish the good and praise the wicked that hee is not a power ordained by God and if hee bee not of God no more to be obeyed but to be resisted O wicked consequence vnknowne to Peter Paul who although they did see and feele the tyrannie and crueltie of the Lyon as Paul calles Nero that they thought not that the abuse of the power did take away the power it selfe but did lay necessitie of obedience vpon all Christians teaching that it would come to passe that if they did resist Nero they did resist God himselfe the Author and ordainer of so great power With what face therefore can the Pope deny that the Oath of Allegeance and obedience is to be kept with a Christian moderate King though an Hereticke as you thinke as a matter in it selfe vnlawfull and contrarie to faith and saluation whereas Peter commanded faithfull obedience as holy and performed it as dutie to Nero a Pagan and most bloody tyrant § 15 And if fealtie and obedience cannot be performed of Catholickes to an Hereticall King retaining their Catholicke religion why did Saint Paul whenas formerly he had in plentifull maner deliuered the Catholike religion of Rome in his 13. Chapter drawe from thence this precept Rom. 13.1 that euery soule should submit himselfe to the higher power he that speakes of all excludes none as Chrysostome obserues And Bernard to the Archbyshop of Sene euery soule is subiect therefore yours Who hath exempted you from this generall commandement The exception is a meere illusion Subiection requireth these three 1. Reuerence in their soules 2. Honour in their wordes 3. Obedience in their deedes And marke that he requireth subiection of the soule in a subiect Rom. 12. In the beginning of the 12. Chapter speaking of the obedience due to
God he exacteth subiection of the body Rom. 13. In the beginning of the 13. Chapter speaking of the obedience due to a Prince he requireth the subiection of the soule What obedience is due to Princes Hath hee not likewise submitted the soule to God and the body to the Prince yes verily But to that end he hath distinguished these because men doe for the most part thus excuse themselues that they vowe their soule to God when they prostitute their body to the Deuill and yeeld their body to the magistrate when they deny him the reuerence of the soule Therefore let the soule be subiect to the higher power saith the Apostle Hence two other parts of subiection doe necessarily follow Paul the Apostle doth adde the reasons with a commandement which Paul the Byshoppe doth not adde with his prohibition For all power saith he is of God He speaketh not so much of the Prince as of the gouernment nor so much of the person as of the power To shew that hee rather respecteth the right of gouerning then the qualitie of the gouernour Againe if the power of a King be from God Power from God not the Pope or people then it is not from the Pope as diuers of the Popes flatterers would haue it Neither is it from the people as diuers flatterers of the people doe at this day striue for it I beleeue they leaue the power of destroying a gouernment to him whom they dreame to haue a power giuen to build it vp They that yeeld so much to the Pope subiect a King vnder a sober tyrant they that yeeld so much to the people subiect him vnder a furious tyrant and as the Poet said very wittily and truely to a beast of many heads And therefore the King is not bound to giue accompt either to Pope or people but to God from whom hee receiued all his power immediately Hence the Apostle presently inferreth these two conclusions 1. He that resisteth Gods power resisteth the ordinance of God and draweth to himselfe damnation The 2. that the King is Gods Minister and beareth the sword wherewith he doth defend the good and punish the wicked and that all must bee subiect not for wroth but for conscience That no man may thinke that Peter and Paul thought that obedience was due for the times sake and that they wanted force rather to resist Nero then a minde I will shut vp all in a word The Catholicke faith of the auncient Romane Church as it was deliuered by Paul the Apostle did inferre loyall subiection to a Pagan cruell King The Catholicke faith of the vpstart Church of Rome as it is deliuered by Paul the Byshop doth take away and ouerthrow Allegeance and all obedience as it were vnnaturall from a Christian King and such a King that euen by the confession of his Aduersaries is very mercifull Whom then shall we beleeue Paul the Apostle or Paul the Byshop an holy decree or an vnholy prohibition Neither were these commandements of Christ Peter and Paul of ciuill obedience to be shewed to Emperours Kings and ciuill Magistrates mutable according to times but are to be accounted perpetuall and eternall I haue laid the first foundation of our loyaltie the expresse and euerlasting commandement of Christ the second followes which is the practise of Christians § 16 Heere Saturnine before you go further saith he I yeeld that subiection reuerence honour fealty obedience is to be performed to a King A King excommunicated no King in poperie so long as a King is a king but if he leaue off to be a king then it ought no longer to be performed But he leaueth off to bee a King assoone as he is denounced to bee rightly excommunicated by the Vicar of Christ whereby he is presently accounted by law to bee deposed of his Kingdome and his subiects absolued from the Oath of obedience And although you laie very heynous and greiuous crimes of treason vpon our most holy Father and vpon many holy Priests and chiefly vpon the Iesuits yet if you would thinke of the matter a little better all this smoak of words would vanish to nothing For first I affimre that the Pope of right hath had and now hath this power then I affirme that assoone as he had it hee did put it in practise And yet it followeth not that he that defendes this as you conclude is a Traytor Thomas Aquinas obiected Vnlesse perhaps you dare account Thomas Aquinas that most glorious Saint and Angelicall Doctour to be a Traytor who writeth thus After that the Prince is denounced an Apostata all inferiours and subiects are to bee absolued from the Oath they had taken and from their obedience due vnto him And you may if you please ioyne with him Francis Toletanus obiected as a fellow in the like treason Francis Toletan a worthy Professor in our time who doth thus comment vpon Thomas Note saith hee that there is the same reason of one that is excommunicated because that assoone as one is denounced excommunicate all his subiects are freed from the fealtie The Laterane Councell obiected and that most famous Oecomenicall Lateran Councell held about 300. yeares since of 70. Pattiarches and Archbyshops and 400. and 12. Bishops and 800 other choice Prelates because it decreed that the Pope had the power we speake of do you thinke it was a conuenticle of Traytors Then Patriotta what Thomas Aquinas saith he what § 17 Toletane what Laterane Councell doe you speake of Thomas Aquinas writ 1200 yeeres after Christ was ouertaken with the error of his time and was the Popes vassall neither did hee alledge any Prophet Apostle or Doctor only he rested vpon the only example of Gregorie the seuenth who was the first that a 1000 yeeres after Christ did attempt by excommunication to cast Henry the 4. out of his Kingdom Pope Hildebrand no fit example against Kings A very weighty authoritie forsooth against a Kings sword which Christ ordeyned and to whom the Church of Christ as it shall appeare afterward obeyed for a 1000 yeeres of an vpstart Canonist dreaming in the darke night of Poperie that the subiects might be absolued by the Pope from the oath of obedience wherewith God had bound them and alleaging no other Author but Pope Hildebrand a turbulent and furious monster as he was accounted by his owne Cardinalls And yet Aquinas was somewhat more reasonable then Toletane Aquinas answered he thought that no mans subiects were to be absolued from their oath of obedience but his that was denounced an Apostata that for euer had fallen from all christianitie But Toletan forsooth Toletane answered the worthy professor of our age the Popes hireling with lesse learning and greater boldnesse as if he were some worshipfull Vmpire giues his sentence without all reason Note saith he that the case is all one of a Prince excommunicated by the Pope vpon any cause whatsoeuer Do you not
thinke that these be notable demonstrations in a controuersie of this weight which Antichrists hyred slaues haue vttered as Oracles vpon their bare authoritie against the perpetuall and manifest commandements of Christ and practises of the Apostles In the meane while the Apostles shall be silent the Fathers shall be mute while Kings shall be censured by two of the Popes young and sworne Chapleynes professed and sworne enemies of Kings § 18 But that famous Lateran Councell both for antiquitie and number must fight in the quarrell The Laterane Councell answered We seeke not what euill associates but what good authors you can alledge in this businesse neither must you striue with number but with reason It was no hard matter at that time for Innocent the third to call together 800 Couent Priors and their Vicars his creatures the hungry Friers and drousie pated Monkes for whom it was not lawfull to sit in Councels who might preuaile against 400 Bishops not in weight of reason but in number of voices and coine any decree against Princes at the becke of the Pope their great God and maker But what if at that time nothing at all was decreed but only propounded and deliberaetd on as Platina testifieth that many things were offred to consultation but that nothing could be determined because the Pope suddenly departing to quiet a sedition lately stirred vp died in his iourney And yet will you call the meeting of a number of hunger-starued Fryers onely consulting how the Pope might depose a King out of his kingdome but concluding nothing because the Popes sodaine death preuented it will you call it the most famous generall Laterane Councell And that power which Kings haue receiued from God and that obedience which subiects are bound to performe both by a charge from Christ and rules from the Apostles shall a few of the later proud Bishops 1000 yeeres after Christ and mercenarie schoolemen and begging Monkes take the same power from Princes by the decrees of men Shall God ordeyne Kings and shall men ouerthrow them Hath Gods word bound vs to obedience and shall mans word release vs of the same But that I may doe no wrong to Gods word I will oppose men to men Catholikes to Catholikes as they be called and ancient to younger ones Otho Frisingensis writes after hee had read ouer and § 19 ouer the acts of the Romane Kings and Emperors Lib 6. cap. 35. that he found none before Henry the 4th Emperor excommunicated by the Bishop of Rome or set beside his kingdom which was first assayed by Gregorie the seuenth in the yeere after Christ 1066. I haue found out Vrsbergensis Vrsbergens in anno 1085. who speaking of the Sinode of Mentz wherein the Popes Legates being present the Bishops that had taken armes with Gregorie the seuenth against the Emperor were deposed and cast out of their Bishoprickes said that there by common consent and counsell was setled the peace of God whence he concludeth that Gregorie was the author of that diuelish garboyle against the Emperor Sigebertus the Abbot speaketh playner Sigibertus in anno 1088. and goeth further if good men will giue me leaue to say so This only noueltie saith he that I may not say heresie did not as yet appeare in the world that his Priests who saith to a King thou Apostata and that causeth an hypocrite to beare rule for the sinnes of the people should teach the people that they ought to shew no obedience to wicked Kings and though they haue taken an oath of Allegeance yet owe no fealtie neither are to be called Periurs if they haue such mindes against Kings yea that hee is accounted for an excommunicant that doth obey the King that hee doth against the King is freed from the fault of iniustice and periurie This was counted noueltie this was counted heresie of your Sigebert about 500 yeares since which doctrine you thrust vpon vs as catholike out of Aquinas Toletane and the Laterane Councell And because Baronius the Cardinall Vincent in Spec. hist lib. 15. cap 84. doth denie Sigebert the Abbot a Schismatike I adde Vincentius the Bishop aboue 300 and fiftie yeeres agoe by whom this very heresie is condemned in the same words wherewith they are taxed by Sigebert And if either Sigebert or your Vincentius haue lost their authoritie because as Schismatikes they were said to take part with Kings against the Pope see that your credits be not crackt by these late writers because the fauourers of this nouell heresie as rebells flatter the Pope against Kings For it is plaine that there were very excellent and sincere Catholikes not a few as they were accounted in those times whom Gregories fact did mightily displease and who did plainely denie that the Apostolike See had any authoritie to depose Henry the 4. Emperor as he did and to absolue his subiects from their oath of fealtie as the Bishop of Mentz who was in great fauour with Gregorie the seuenth Gregor 7. epist 21. lib. 8. apud Sâ—uer ad Conc. writ to him and intreated him to furnish him with those reasons whereby he was moued to depose the Emperor that hee might be the better prouided to answer them that did gainesay him And Gerochus Gregories great champion was constreyned to say Auent lib. 5. fol. 563. as it is in Auentine that the Romanes tooke diuine honor to themselues neither would giue any accompt of their doings neither would endure that any should say to them why doe you so who answer as the Poet writes So I will so I command my will stand for a reason I did first vse heauenly weapons against you Saturnine you made resistance with humane Now I oppose humane against humane yours against yours and I will proue it with a necessarie argument that it was a new heresie which Sigebert so called If that be taken for a good definition of heresie which Robert Grosthead that holy and learned Bishop of Lincolne vnder King Henry the third fetcht out of S. Austen The definition of heresie Heresie in Greeke saith he is an election or choice in Latine wherein an opinion chosen by a humane sense contrarie to the holy Scripture is openly taught and obstinately maintayned By which argument as Matth Parisiensis reports he proued Innocent the Pope to be an Heretike because he thought it in his power to bestow a benefice vpon a childe with the same argument shall Paul the fift be convicted who thinkes it in his power to depriue a King of his Kingdome For this opinion was first chosen by humane sense by Hildebrand to get vaine-glory and enlarge the boundes of the Churches dominion with all humane policies and powers And it is against the holy Scriptures which hath submitted Bishops to Kings not Kings to Bishops as before I concluded And it is openly taught being set out in two Bulles by Paul the fift and it is obstinately defended by the Bishop who forbids vnder the paine
of excommunication that the Catholikes shall not take the Oath of Allegeance or else retract it being taken And it is to be doubted that to whom the definition of heresie doth agree whether heresie the thing defined doth agree That Grosthead being dead seemeth with his definition as with his Crosier-staffe to strike the Pope vpon his brest Then Saturnine What Schismatikes saith he what § 21 Sigebert what Vincentius what Grosthead with his Crosiers staffe do you reckon vp As if they were not all condemned by the Church because they were at contention with the head of the Church But that wee may not seeme rather to contend with the authorities of men then of God Paul the Apostle forbad to salute an Heretike yea he warneth that after the first or second admonition we should auoide him If it be not lawfull to salute an Heretike is it lawfull to serue and obey an Heretike Paul teacheth that we sacrifice an heretike as hatefull to God as a great sacrifice to him and tha◠we flie from him as from a gangrene And shall it not be lawfull to cut of the gangrene and cast it away lest it doe infect vs when as we are bidden to cut off our owne flesh if it be affected with a gangrene Now saith Patriotta you shew your selfe a right Iesuite § 22 when as Paul did forbid that we should salute an Heretike How heretikes are to be delt withall but auoide him after the first or second admonition in one word he did forbid voluntarie societie not necessarie dutie familiar salutations which curtesie affords not reuerent obseruance which pietie imposeth priuate acquaintance whereby soules are infected not publike obedience whereby gouernment is maintained It is not lawfull to salute an Heretike will you not therefore pay an Heretike the money that is owing him yes that I would say you I demand againe whether the debt of obedience be not more iust then the debt of money which is of greater force a debt contracted in your owne consent or that which is imposed vpon you by the commandement of God § 23 Here Saturnine We owe nothing saith he to Heretikes Nothing said Patriotta Doth not the seruant owe faithful seruice to his Master being an Heretike he oweth it you say to an Infidell not to an Heretike You trifle If you owe it to an Infidell which doth oppugne the faith doe you not owe it to an Heretike who only doth erre in the faith Doth not the wife owe faithfull obedience to her husband though he be an heretike yes when nothing may be the cause of diuorce but adulterie as Christ teacheth no not infidelitie it selfe as Paul saith Lastly children are bound to obey their Parents in the Lord although they be Heretikes Therefore shall not subiects much more obey the Prince Lord of the familie the husband of the common weale the publike father of the country although he be an heretike for heresie doth not dissolue the bond of dutie but breaketh of the knot of acquaintance But heresie is a gangrene as the Apostle faith But although we are commanded to cut of all heresie as a gangrene yet are we not commanded to roote out euery heretike It were wrong with the Papists if this your opinion were setled in our mens mindes But we leaue these parts of cruell Surgeons to your selues who presently betake your selues to lanching and fearing and alwaies vse the cutting knife and fire and look not for easier and gentler remedies But seeing in this quarrell you seeme to buckle with vs with weapons out of the Scripture which you doe seldom handle whereby you proue that Kings in right may be and in fact haue been depriued that subiects may by a word be absolued as by a word they were bound with an oath of obedience Goe to let vs see before you come to the second foundation the practise of Christians what you can say against vs in the former Then Saturnine I will freely speake saith he what I § 24 verily thinke God had not securely prouided for his Church if he had not sent some holy stout Prophets and Preists who might with their Church discipline correct and keep vnder such Kings as were wicked and tyrannous when they grew desperate Examples out of the old Testament 1. Saul and might remooue them being the hatred of God and men the shame to religion and the burthen to the people Therefore we read the first King ouer Gods people because he seemed to take vpon him the spirituall function was excommunicated by Samuel at Gods commandement and put from the possession of his Kingdome although after Dauids annointing and his owne deposing he held it by tyrannicall force many yeeres and did often attempt to murther both Dauid the competitour of the kingdome and Samuel the executioner of Gods decree as he had slaine foure-score and fiue of the holy Preists the Nobites Who knoweth not that a speciall Prophet was sent § 25 of God to Ieroboam King of Israel 2. Ieroboam who did denounce the iudgement of God against the King and the Kings race because he had separated the people by a wicked schisme from the ancient and true worship of God begunne at Ierusalem and had erected a new altar in Bethel whereby the schisme and diuision from the Apostolike See is properly prefigured and ordained a new Cleargy a hunger-starued and contemptible out of Aarons order such an one as yours is The sinne was afterward so seuerely punished according to the censure of the Prophet that there was none left of the Kings stocke to make water against the wall The King did very fondly lay hold vpon the man of God to kill him because hee thought the denouncing of Gods iudgement was treason against the Kings crowne and dignity § 26 3. Ozia We read likewise that Ozia the King of Iuda beeing puft vp with intolerable pride not content with the honour of a King did insolently presume to vsurpe the spirituall and Priestly office being stoutly withstood by Azaria and 80. other Priests and violently expelled out of the Temple and that because he threatned and resisted the Priests he was strucken with a filthy leprosie and therefore not onely cast out of the Temple but by their authority separated from the company of men which was a speciall figure of the Priestly authority vnder the new Law which may excommunicate Kings as well as others for heresie which is a spirituall leprosie and committed the gouernment of the Kingdome to Iotham his sonne An apparant example that it is lawfull for Priests to take armes and by force to bring vnder the wickednesse of Kings when as they deeme it is auailable for the preseruation of religion and the honour of God § 27 The zeale of the good Priests in the depriuing of that wicked Queen Athalia is worthily commended 4. Athalia whom Iehoida the cheefe Priest with a power of the Priests and Commons did command to be
put beside her throne and put to death and did annoynt and crowne the true heire § 28 Who is ignorant how couragiously Elias answered being designed to death by Achab and Iezabel 5. Ahab who had cast downe the holy altars and had slaine the true worshippers of God That it was not hee and other men of God but Achab and his house that had troubled Israel and with what zeale hee slew Iezabels false Prophets restored the holy altars called for fire from heauen wherewith he did destroy Ochozias captaines and messengers and annointed Iehu king ouer Israel and cast Achab with all his posterity out of the Kingdome of whom it is sayd That he put downe and ouerthrew Kings and cast the mighty out of their seats Eccles 48. as God appointed Ieremy ouer kingdoms that he should plant and roote them vp build them vp and plucke them downe Which power of Christs Preisthood vnder the new Testament doth appeare to bee farre larger and more ample and is giuen to the chiefe Preist the Bishop of Rome that he may in the name of Christ break in peeces and beat to powder with his iron rod as if they were earthen vessels such kings as lift vp themselues against Christ his Church which is his spouse his kingdome For by those examples it is euident that Kings annointed and iustly created may of right bee deposed Secondly for what causes they may in fact bee depriued Lastly that in the inauguration and consecration of kings as also in their depriuation God did vse the ministery of Priests and Prophets either ordinarie or extraordinarie to that purpose that they might be not onely Iudges but correctours of kings For whereas kings doe holde their dignity and supreame authority from God and haue bound themselues with all their might to promote the true religion and worship of God and the honour of their highest King and Lord and to gouerne the people in the faith and fear of God the Priests and Prophets to whom the cheefe and principall care of religion and soules is committed and who haue beene set aboue Princes in spirituall matters did of right oppose themselues against them in those passages which brought dishonour to God ruine to the religion and damnation to the soules of subiects and did exercise iustice and iudgement against their Princes in the name of God who abused their gouernment to ouerthrow the true worship of God brought in and established idolatry heresie and other abominations § 29 For there was betweene God and the King a certaine compact as it were which had force euer after either openly or at lest secretly that none should draw away their subiects either by force or by any other meanes from the faith of their Ancestours and from the religion holy ceremonies of God deliuered receiued by the hands of Preists whereby God did insinuate that if they did obserue these precepts and conditions they should long raigne with their posterity otherwise it should come to passe as we taught before that as the Prophets and Preists did annoint kings on that condition onely that they should defend and maintaine the worship and honour of God so likewise they should depose kings when they broke the couenant of God and fell to strange gods and draue their people to Apostasie And thus it appeareth it was vnder the olde Testament And if God did furnish the Priests and Prophets of the olde Testament with such power of excommunication whereby they might depriue wicked and tyrannous kings cast out of their thrones and driuen from the companie of men not onely of life if they could and this common light that they might bring no damage to the Synagogue with how much greater authority hath he strengthned the high priest of the new testamēt the vicar of Christ that he might cast out expell from the Communion of the Church beeing so cast out depose from their kingdomes such Kings as are Infidels Apostataes Heretickes and Tyrants and that not onely but release their peoples oathes giuen to such kings who haue broken their owne oath made to the Priest in the name of God at their coronation vnlesse we thinke that God had lesse care of his Church then of his Synagogue or doth more beare with Kings in these dayes who be heads of Apostasie from God then he did with Kings of former times Both which bee it farre from Gods Iustice and prouidence Truely he had left a miserable and a wretched Church as desolate and forsaken if he had exposed it being bereft of the helpe of holy Preists to the lust of cruell Tyrants that they might tosse and turne it at their pleasure and alter the state of religion euery yeere For whereas heeretofore Christian Bishops did not depose Nero Dioclesian Iulian the Apostata Valens and the like it was because Christians wanted temporall strength for otherwise they might haue done it by right I say by right the Bishops might haue depriued the Pagan-Emperours Apostataes and Hereticks if the Church had had that force to resist as before and after getting force it did resist Then Patriotta while in your malice Saturnine you § 30 suffer your selfe to bee thus carried against Kings you belch out notable blasphemy against God for what is blasphemy if this bee not to accuse Gods prouidence against the Church vnles he giue power to holy Preists to depose wicked Kings you haue very vnaduisedly founded the depth of Gods counsell with the plummet of your shallow iudgement who hath neuer the lesse I cannot tell whether much the more prouided for his Church as well by trying her patience with aduersity as seeking after thankfulnesse with prosperity aswell when he consumed the sinnes of the Saints by the persecution of Princes as when hee satisfied their desires with the mercy of pious Princes aswell by spoiling his sonnes of earthly pleasures recompencing them with the rewards of the blessed as continuing them hee delighted them with the comforts of such as were miserable Which I doe not speake to that end that I may excuse the cruelty of Tyrants but that I may set foorth the mercy of God because those things which they intend to the Saints for their euill God turneth to their good But you went about to daily with the expresse commandements of Christ and the Apostles with a few examples of the Priests and the Prophets ill vnderstood and farre worse applyed to the Pope How did that vnbeseeme a Diuine let vs therefore if you please waigh them seuerally § 31 Samuel you say did excommunicate Saul and being excommunicate cast him out of his kingdome Samuel did not excommunicate or depose Saul therefore the Pope hath power to cast a Prince out of his Kingdome I denie first the Antecedent It was not the Prophet but God himselfe that cast off Saul for his wickednesse for it is Gods onely prerogatiue to depose the mighty out of their thrones to raise vp those that are
sense whereby the Prophets doctrine doth vnderstand that the kingdome of sinne should be rooted out and destroyed and the kingdome of vertue should bee planted and aduanced in the conscience § 44 We haue examined your examples whence you inferre a conclusion that ill hangs together first that Kings rightly created and annointed may rightly be put downe I answer that one of the Kings you named was put downe and that was Ahab not by Elias not by Elizeus but by Iehu whom God by his owne mouth raised vp by name The deposing therefore of the King was not effected by the Prophet but by a Prince by name appointed to that purpose What doth this helpe your cause Saul was not deposed it is manifest that his posteritie was cut of from the succession of the kingdome and not his person from the present possession Ierobâ—am was by the Prophet sharpely reproued not violently expelled Ozias as a Leper was remoued from the gouernment not the right of his kingdome Athalia was neuer rightly created and for the cruell murthering of the Kings of-spring was put to death not by the Priests but the Kings authoritie The second conclusion is very idle for what causes the Kings in fact are to be secluded What shall you neede to enquire for what causes they be deposed when you doe not proue they should bee deposed Athalia was taken away neither for apostacie nor heresie but because shee vsurpt the Crowne against the lawfull heyre apparant God commended the acts of Ozias but detested his pride Ieroboam both an Apostata and an Idolater and yet neuer set beside the cushion Achab the Idolater was cast of with all his race but by the Magistrate not by the Priest The causes therefore which you alledge helpe your cause no whit at all The last conclusion which concernes the persons of § 45 the deposers is very lame You say that God vsed the ministerie of the Prophets and the Priests to that purpose either ordinarie or extraordinarie as iudges and executors of Gods will God did vse the tongues as I said of the Prophets and Priests to foretell and denounce those plagues which God decreed to bring vpon those Kings and sometimes hee vsed their hands to annoint those whom by name he appointed to be the successors of the kingdome but hee neuer vsed them either ordinarie or extraordinarie either iudges or executioners of his will in deposing them He vsed them as messengers who with their liuely voice did deliuer Gods decrees to Kings either deposed or appointed by God other execution or authoritie they had none which is very farre from that power of the Pope whom you challenge to be the ordinarie Iudge Tutor and Corrector of Kings And doe you endure his ferula ô yee Kings will you kisse the rodd that hath so often paid you and by this your patience make your Tutor more curst and whip you the more But I come now to you Saturaine § 46 You haue not of my word you haue not one Priest or Prophet vnder the old Testament that deposed a King Kings deposed Priests but I haue a King that deposed a Priest Whom you will say Abimilech I speake not of Saul who slew Abimelech for taking part with Dauid I passe ouer Ioash the King who commanded Zachariah Zacharia Iehoidas sonne to be stoned to death forgetting his fathers virtue and dutie What say you to Salomon who displaced Abiathar the high Priest from his primacie and dignitie Abiathar because he followed Adoniahs faction being the elder brother When it would haue followed by your conclusion that Salomon was rather to be deposed because the High Priest thought Adoniahs right to the kingdome to be better then Salomons § 47 But whereas you added that Princes hold their soueraigne dignitie and authoritie receiued from God because truth drew that speech from you which falls out very seldom I accept it willingly and thence conclude that God alone hath the power of putting downe Kings who alone set them vp and that Kings are bound to giue accompt to God alone from whom they receiued that honour But whereas you make the end of supreme princely maiestie receiued of God to be the promoting of the true worship and honor of God and the reteyning of the people in the faith and feare of the Lord I maruell what it ment that when alwaies you denie that a King should meddle with spirituall affaires and busines now as if you were forgetfull of your owne minde Alanus you direct the chiefe end and scope of the Kings dignitie to set forward the worship of God to stirre vp others to honor his high Lord and to preserue the people in the faith and feare of God We accept of your grant but that which you adde that Priests and Prophets haue opposed them-selues against Kings in all those matters How Priests ought to oppose Princes which may bring either dishonor to God or ouerthrow to religion or damnation to soules I am affraid vnlesse you expound your selfe more plainly wee may not grant it vnto you For if you say they opposed themselues as men of God and did earnestly admonish them by word and counsell or else did sharply reproue such Princes we doe willingly acknowledge the freedome of their holy vocation but to take vpon them to be Iudges ouer Kings by their rule and authoritie and do either iudicially depriue them or violently inuade them we detest the pride of such a turbulent spirit But betweene God and the King there is a certaine § 48 couenant which alwaies is of force either openly or secretly Be it so The couenant between God and the King And what if the King do breake some article of the league who shall accuse him before what iudgement seate before what Iudge shall hee be endighted shall it be in the Court of the common people who for fashion sake haue made choice and accepted of the King or in the consistorie of a Bishop who hath annointed and consecrated him I see what you meane to answer a Bishop who hath conditionally annoynted him if he breake the condition and couenant made with God hath againe depriued him and hath shewed iustice against him in the name of God who hath abused his supreme authoritie The Scripture recites nineteene Kings of Israel and § 49 fourteene of Iuda No bad King of 33 deposed by a Priest who brake the couenant made with the Lord and worshipped strange gods and draue the people to apostasie shew me any one of them to be depriued by a Priest or a Prophet because they had broken their first couenant and take the cause if you cannot leaue of to tell an vntruth and to crosse your own speech whom wee euen now heard confessing that Kings doe hold their supreme authoritie receiued from God not then from a Priest not from the people and that therefore they are not bound if they breake their couenant to giue
accompt either to a Priest or to the people but to God For he holds his Crowne by the right of blood and inheritance not by the virtue of invnction or consecration or of election and acceptation as you were wont to say that you may giue some authoritie of deposing and depriuing to a Priest whom you make to be the first mouer and some to the people whom you make the remouer So you make Kings hypotheticall and the people conditionall but Priest absolute and categoricall being herein very simple because that power which you say they haue receiued of God to depose Kings that was neuer brought into practise vnder the whole old Testament Your argument therefore from the stronger falls to ground and comes to nothing that if the priestly excommunication vnder the old Testament was of such force of how greater and larger force is it vnder the new But we haue euicted it that there was none at all vnder the old Popish blasphemie At last you returne backe againe and repeat that former blasphemous argument of yours that God was not prouident enough but left the Church in a miserable case like a widdow cleane forsaken if hee had not giuen the chiefe Priest to hir either as a Tutor forsooth or a Husband That is like as if the father husband of the Church were not aliue or tooke care of another daughter and wife or else would appoint in his place such a one to be a Tutor for his daughter whom he foretold to bee an aduersarie or prouide such an husband for his daughter who would proue an adulterer Lastly as if Peter and Paul had dissembled and had commanded obedience to bee shewed to Nero so long till Christians could make head and other Christian Bishops had so many ages consented to the like dissimulation you doe not blush to affirme that Bishops could of right excommunicate their Princes and depose them being excommunicate if the Church had then power to resist True sayd Saturnine for Christ his Preistly prerogatiue § 51 wherewith he was able to breake in peeces such kings as earthen vessels beeing granted by large and precise charter to the Bishop of Rome the chiefe Preist which reason brought by vs you past by as a man vnknowen gaue power to the first Bishops and right to the thing it selfe as the Lawyers speake to depose Kings excommunicate being infidels apostataes heretickes and tyrants but the Church did neuer practise that authority till she gathered strength in processe of time For that commandement of Christ alleadged by you Giue to Caesar the things that are Caesars and to God the things that are Gods doth he not submit Caesar to be kept vnder by the Vicar of God when hee denieth to God those those things which belong to God And whereas Christ did thâ—â—ce speake to Peter Feede my Lambes feede my sheepe feede my sheepe did he not commit all Christians little and great lambes and sheepe subiects and princes to be fed and ruled without exception to Peter and Peters successour And when as he had committed the keyes of heauen to Peter and Peters successour to let in and shut out doth he not shew that diuine and admirable power of excommunication which you forfooth would haue so weake and feeble for whereas you sayd that Prelates and Bishops ought to be subiect and obedient to Kings Heb. 13.17 I did much maruell that you were so forgetfull of another commandement no lesse Apostolicall whereby hee bound Kings as well as subiects to obey their Prelates and their Pastors and to submit themselues as to them by whom accompt is to be giuen to God for their soules wherein what Christian Prince can exempt himselfe if hee doe thinke that he haue a soule § 52 Then Patriotta I past by that your reason Saturuine of the prerogatiue of Christ communicated with the Bishop Christ ouer-ruling Kings not as a preist but as a king not as vnknowen but as very idle For that prerogatiue whereby Christ doth bruise and breake in peeces kings and kingdomes the Prophet shewes not to bee his Preistly but his Princely power I haue set my king saith God not therefore as a Preist but as a King he hath broken and beat in peeces wicked Kings with his iron Scepter As a Priest he beares the Crosse as a King he bears the Scepter as a Preist he offred vp himselfe vpon the crosse and suffered his blood to bee shed for the remission of sinnes as a King hee vanquished his enemies shed their blood weakned and ouercame their power with the sight of this so great glorie that resides in him so you went about to blind our eies while you did closely subiect the scepter of a King to be trampled on by the Popes feet § 53 For you say that this prerogatiue of Christ is communicated with the Pope What else And that with large and precise charter where be those words point at the place shew the charter where Christ imparted this his prerogatiue with the Bishop of Rome Heb. 7. v. 23.24.25.26 For there bee many others appointed Preists saith S. Paul who by reason of death cannot continue but this because hee abides for euer hath an immutable Preisthood whence he can perfectly saue those who come vnto God by him alwaies liuing to make intercession for vs. For such a Preist was fit for vs holy innocent immaculate separated from sinners made higher then the heauens who hath no neede euery day as the Preists of Leui to offer sacrifices first for their owne sinnes then for the sinnes of the people for that he did once when he offered vp himselfe the onely sacrifice for sinne that hee might obtaine for vs eternall redemption The Bishop of Rome let him packe and bee gone and let him bragge of Christs Preistly prerogatiues granted to him by a large charter that all men may spit in the blasphemous face of this impure wretch But if hee haue not all yet hee hath imparted with § 54 him some of his prerogatiues at the least Which I pray you the keyes of the kingdome of heauen to open shut heauen the power of binding and loosing the power of feeding and ruling by all which you doe more then insinuate that the Bishop can rightly by the power of excommunication wrest from Caesar his scepter his crowne sword subiects kingdome and life For these belong to Caesar Therfore when Christ spake to Peter feed my sheep he meant this depose Princes I will giue you the keies of the Kingdome of heauen that is I will giue you the thrones of earthly kings that you may let into the kingdome whom you will and whom you will exclude that you may loose subiects whom you please and whom you please binde that you may punish whom you will and may forgiue whom you will We must I thinke learne not onely a new Diuinity but a new Grammer and a Logicke also To feede Christs sheepe The popish
strange diuinity and to abandon Christian Princes are Synonamaes or all one with the Papists To binde Kings and to binde Scepters is all one To exclude a King out of the Temple and take from him his kingdome and life be Synonomaes with you O diuine and admirable power of excommunication which brought in not onely a new Grammer but a new Logicke also into Diuinity All Princes ought to bee taught of the high Preist therefore deposed They may be shut out of the kingdome of heauen therefore out of their earthly domimions Princes ought to obey the wholesome doctrine â—aught by their Pastors therefore if they refuse it they may rightly bee cast off by them The condition of Princes is very hard But what shall they doe excommunication can do thus much if we beleeue Saturnine But you haue other Catholike Doctors as I heare honester men a great deale who weaken and take away the edge of excommunication for bringing foorth such monstrous effects § 55 For that I may say nothing of Austin who thought that excommunication was very sparingly to bee vsed against Princes August cont Epist Parmen lib. 3. cap. 2. and when it were it was not to roote them vp but to correct them that we may omit Bernard De consid ad Eugen. lib. 2. who was not afraid to tell Pope Eugenius Therfore your power is ouer sinnes not ouer possessions because for them not for these you haue receiued the keyes of the Kingdome of Heauen Thomas Aquinas your Angelicall Doctor sayd that excommunication is one thing and rotting out is another which we finde written in an Epistle of Pope Vrbane recorded in the canon Law whereof hee alleadgeth a reason out of the Apostle who sayth that one excommunicate is to that end so dealt withall Decret 2. part caus 4 qu. 3. cap. 37. that his soule may be saued in the day of the Lord. It is vsed then for correction not for destruction for excommunication is discipline saith Pope Vrbane not a rooting vp Either of them both a Canonist and a Preist seemed to borrow the distinction out of Austin So hee writeth that excommunication is not the taking away anie mans priuate goods which the transgressour of the Law did formerly possesse but it was the taking away of the publike goods which he was to receiue from the Church and the receiuing of the Sacraments The force of excommunication Therefore excommunication is of force if you may beleeue your owne men to shut a King out of the Church not out of his Kingdome to depriue him of the Sacrament not his Scepter to seuer him from the Communion of the faithfull not from the obedience of his subiects to saue his soule not to destroy his body to remooue him from the confines of the Kingdome of Heauen till he repent not to driue him out of his territories or to loose the raines of obedience from subiects or free them from their sworne fealty As Ludonicus Richeomus hath it in his Apologeticke These agree with the canon Render saith Christ to Caesar the things that are Caesars and to God the things that are Gods Which bee Caesars his scepter crowne and sword which be Gods our faith worship inuocation and all our spirituall obedience Matth. 22. Christ therefore saith render to Caesar his scepter his crowne his sword what say you Saturnine let him take away from Caesar being excommunicate his scepter his crowne his sword bee these your Synonimaes to render and to take away Christ if he had pleased could thus haue excommucate Tiberius and obtained of his father an army of Angels to haue cast him out of his throne He would not for he came to giue an heauenly crowne not to take away an earthly crowne When a certaine man sayd to him Luc. 12. Master command my brother to diuide the inheritance with me the Lord answered who hath made mee a Iudge betweene you Christ thought that the power of diuiding a priuate inheritance belonged not to his vocation who therefore could appoint the Pope to be a Iudge Distributer of kings crownes Christ being demanded of Pilate what kingdome he layd claime to answered my kingdome is not of this world but you Saturnine with the turn of a key which others receiued as well as Peter haue deliuered all that belongs to Caesar to the Vicar of Christs disposition forsooth Therefore what Christ could not doe can the Vicar of Christ do That which the Lord himselfe would not vndertake shall a seruant take vpon him Peter was a simple scholler to Christ belike whom § 56 you doe make to be your founder What Peter did to Princes for hee did not cast Nero out of his throne with a thunder bolt of excommunication he did not forbid Christians from taking the Oath of Allegeance or free them when they had taken it he did not dispose of his kingdomes and dominions hee did not arme the seruants against their master or stirre vp other Princes against the Emperor Hee taught that the glory of Martyrdome was to bee sought after by suffering not the infamie of rebellion by resisting cheefely by Bishops to whom hee hath committed the power of perswading not enforcing the duties of teaching not of fighting the vse of prayers not of weapons Shall it bee lawfull for the Popes successour which was not lawfull for his founder did not Peter vnderstand what it was to feede sheepe did he not learne what it was to binde and to loose did he not know the power of the keyes Belike hee had not met with your dictionary He could with his word as well haue strucken Nero as he strucke Ananias but he following his masters steps yeelded simple obedience to Nero as he had yeelded to Tiberius § 57 Whose successours they were so farre from resisting the Emperours How Peters successorus vsed Princes the seruants their masters that for 300. yeers euen to Syluester they did patiently submit themselues to Pagans as Martyrs and for 300. yeeres to Boniface they did humbly obey both Christian Catholike and Hereticke Princes as beads-men and for 400. yeeres to Gregorie the 7. they did obey them euen in their absence somewhat tolerably as free-men For the times of the Empire were diuers as the times of the Church were as the qualities of Emperors were diuers so of Bishops while the Emperour was but one and present the Bishop was of small reputation but when hee was absent and diuided hee grew great the Imperiall spoiles being left in Italy whereby the master being somewhat weakned and cast off the seruant began to grow lustie and stout and I wish he would leaue off to continue so still Lest happily the King of birds doe come And take his feathers from this ietting Iay Whereat the rest may doe naught else but laugh To see stolne feathers taken thus away For surely it was not thus from the beginning that the staffe should resist the sword the crosier
other sprung vp a man of a more fierie spirit De iustae abdica Hen. 3. Gal. Re. William Reynolds and another Saturnine or Gracchus William Reynolds who said that Henry the third French King was ipso factâ— excommunicated because hee fauoured Heretickes Who after a long disputation concludes that hee was lawfully put to death before the excommunication published For saith hee publicke greife doth not attend for legale formes And though in a hidden crime no man ought to be condemned his cause not being heard or the partie not being cited yet in publick and notorious crimes the euident knowledge of the fact is in stead of the sentence What would this man doe to an Hereticke Prince who thought a Catholicke not to be spared § 63 Symancha proceedes farther and he affirmes that by the law a secret Hereticke is to be eâ—communicate Symancha and not he alone but his sonne also because Heresie is a leprosie and that leprous sonnes are begotten by leprous Parents and therfore to be put from the succession of the kingdome O dambd Rascall that cuts vp the roote with the branches Aquinas Toletane and Caietane were more temperate these goe to the quicke neither speake they so mildely and schollerlike but they speake to the purpose I could name you some Priests that beare armes and that you held Saturnine to be lawfull Very odious said Saturnine are these your calumniations § 64 wherewith you load our Priests as if they had carried armes they vse spirituall not temporall swordes But your spirituall sworde must command the temporall if the Pope command said Patriotta And you perswade that other should take armes as Alanus did The practise of Papists But what difference is there betweene the Author of a mischiefe and the Actor Whether you counsell others to beare armes against the Prince or beare them your selfe you doe not arme the hand of a Subiect but you enflame his minde You doe not drawe forth the sword but you whet on the spirit with absolutions promises praises rewards not onely in this life but in the life to come Is this your Catholike faith Doth this make for the saluation of soules Christ and his Apostles did instruct both by their doctrine and example their disciples to humilitie patience faith and obedience You stirre vp your disciples to insolencie furie treacherie and sedition Good God how farre doth your new Diuinitie differ from the ancient You haue seene alreadie what Christ and his Apostles taught now marke what they did Christ for the redemption of the Church suffered his blood to be shed Christs Vicare as he is cold for the enlarging of his Empire is euer shedding other mens blood Peter and Paul for the confirmation of their faith did with quiet mindes endure martyrdome inflicted by the Prince And many Romane Byshoppes did afterward tread in the same steps But you their degenerated and bastardly ofspring for the sealing vp of your treacherie did go about with most bloody mindes to bring the most barbarous martyrdome vpon our whole Nation that euer was deuised since man was created O vnworthy attempt Therefore the spirituall Father of Kings as hee is stiled shall he tread vnder foote the maiestie of a King And the vniuersall Pastor of the flock feed himselfe fat not with the milke but with the blood of the flocke And shall hee breake in peeces Scepters with his crosiars staffe And stall he stirre vp the people being quiet whom hee should haue quieted being stird vp And shall he set together by the eares Princes being at peace whom being at a iarre hee should haue appeased And shall hee set forth with the holiest title of religion those two wicked policies the discord of Kings and the rebellion of Subiects As if when he fild all places with garboiles and murthers he shall thinke hee hath deserued Gods fauour by the bloody sacrificing of innocents § 65 God hath hitherto disclosed the Popes deuises against the English Church and God hath taken vengeance on you and that stone which you tost vp and downe is ô ye seditious Priests rould down vpon your own heads For what Do you not thinke that your daily conspiracies are not as clearely apparant as the noone day and all your deuises with many proiects made knowne and euident that you as subtile Sinons lurke closely among vs professing loue to your Catholickes worse then any hatred perswading them to violate their faith sworne to the King and hayle in that Troiane horse full of deceit pernitious aswell to them as to vs That haue your Cursitors as Pegasus who runne about hither and thither quickly taking vp all reports that may inueigle mens mindes and watch for all occasions That haue your boy-priests gadding vp and downe who may increase your number and forces and as Gracchus striplings may stir vp such as be offended already and prouoke them to an vprore That set the olde and greater Foxes ouer these cubbes who first open the schoole of deceites to them and a shoppe of craftie deuises teaching that the Pope hath plenarie power to depose a King and absolue their subiects from the Oath of fealtie and that the King though hee bee not by name excommunicated doth yet stand excommunicated by diuers buls because he hath infringed the authoritie of the Popes supremacie c. and therefore that the subiects may if fit oportunitie be offred attempt any mischiefe against his sacred person perswading them in the meane while to dissemble their faith and shew an outward obedience to the King while they reserue their heart to the Pope You cherish closely your Catelines who when the conspiracie waxeth ripe may be your Captaines and standerd-bearers to execute your wicked deuises with actions and armes Lay aside therefore that visard of religion which you haue worne so long cast away that habit of grauitie plucke of that cloke of sanctitie appeare such as you are confesse your selues to be the trumpets of warre not of the word that you feed not soules but seeke for blood that the Magistrate may distinguish between a deuout and a quiet and between a Machiuilian and a turbulent Papist But you Calander and you the rest of English Papists § 66 that be Laickes I beseech you by Iesus Christ I doe exhort you by your owne saluation that you repell these Sirens musicke not onely vnprofitable but hurtfull to the hearers from your eares and your mindes lest you bring a most iust reproch vpon the true Catholike Religion an incurable wound to the conscience a lamentable ruine to your familie and an extreme plague to your country This I had to say of the fealtie and obedience of subiects to bee performed to Kings and Magistrates ordeyned by the perpetuall commandement of Christ and the Apostles against the inhibition of the Pope and the sophismes of the Iesuites it followeth that I pursue the second foundation of our obedience the examples of ancient Christians and chiefly of the Roman
Bishops vnlesse happily any other course seeme better to you Then Calander I promise you said he that nothing § 67 is more acceptable to vs that I may make answer for Argentine my friend I neuer doubted of ciuill obedience to be rightly performed to good Kings by Catholikes I thought to confesse the truth I was absolued from the oath of obedience to Heretikes and Tyrants after once they were denounced excommunicated by the Pope and now lawfully deposed from their kingdome Now seeing I perceiue that Christ Peter and Paul not only taught but shewed ciuill obedience to Tiberij and Neroes and to be so farre from taking from them with their diuine power as they might their scepter sword and Crowne that vnder them they laid downe their life to confirme their faith and obedience You haue said that which makes me begin to doubt of such force of excommunication and such power of the Pope For when I did diligently obserue euery passage of your disputation Patriotta out of that perspicuous and short exposition as it were consisting of those three texts I must needes confesse that the sparkes of this vnknowne and vnhard of truth did first cast them selues into mine eyes wherewith the authoritie of Aquinas Toletane and Laterane Councell for their power of excommunication and the authoritie of the Pope alleaged by Saturnine presently brought a mvst ouer them But light was brought out of the myst by Fristugensis Vrshergensis Sigebert and Vincentius and all the ancient and sincere Catholikes and graue witnesses of those times as I heare my Velbacellus affirme at what time Gregorie the 7. did first attempt to driue Henry the 4. Emperor by his excommunication out of his kingdome Here Saturnine being driuen from humane authorities betooke himselfe to diuine But whatsoeuer he tooke Patriotta straight-way caught it out of his hands where hee said that the Apostle forbad wee should not salute an heretike and commanded to auoide him after one or two admonitions Patriotta made answer that hee forbad voluntarie societie not necessarie subiection priuate familiaritie not publike obedience And when he prest that a gangrene was to be cut of he instantly replyed that it was not an heretike but heresie was compared to a gangrene and with a religious kinde of charitie as it seemde sparing the heretike thought good the heresie should be rooted out And from thence in my iudgement concluded not amisse when no heretike was to loose his inheritance or his life that a King much lesse was to be depriued either of his life or inheritance by reason of heresie Here Saturnine bent all the force of his wit and betaking himselfe into the fortifications of the old Testament from euery place gathering the forces of examples with arguments drawne from thence fought very valiantly so that when I heard him alone he made me consent almost vnto him But this heretike Patriott shrunke not a foote but presently buckled hand to hand He had said that Saul was deposed Patriot as the truth was distinguished that the person of Saul was not remoued from the possession of the kingdome but his of-spring from the succession But by whom euen from GOD not from Samuel whom hee proued to be not a Iudge but a messenger nor to haue inflicted the punishment of deposing but to haue published the decree and that not by the right of his generall vocation but by speciall instinct and reuelation from God not as Prophet but as a Prophet appointed to that end to annoint Dauid for the succession of the kingdome whom God had named with his owne mouth So that nothing can accrue to the Pope from hence vnlesse he can proue he haue receiued a reuelation to depose a Prince When hee contended that Ieroboam was cast aside § 68 by the Prophet he againe denied it confessing hee was greeuously reproued by the Prophet not violently remoued Saturnine assaults againe that Ozias a Leper was by force driuen out of the Temple by Azaria and 80. Priests and that he was separated from the societie of men and the gouernment committed to Iothan his Sonne Here Patriott a better Text-man as it seemeth denied that the King was put out of the Church forceably but being strooke with a leprosie was enforced by his owne accord to depart out of the Sanctuarie not out of the kingdome the right whereof hee reserued to himselfe to his dying day and put ouer the gouernment to his sonne as to his Vicegerent And that a Leper neuer lost his priuate inheritance much lesse his publike And when as heresie is a leprosie nor euer any was depriued of his kingdome for leprosie and therefore for heresie none was to be depriued Which reason must needs satisfie me in this businesse vnlesse it can be proued that the leprous Iewes lost their inheritance And when Saturnine affirmed that the lepers were separated from the company of men by the Priests Patriotta excepted against it that it was their duty to discerne the leprosie but the Magistrates were to put them apart So that the iudgement of the businesse belonged to the Preists the parting of the person to the Magistrate Whence he concluded and retorted it vpon Saturnine who sayd that heresie was a spirituall leprosie that it followed from this figure that the King ought rather to separate an hereticall Pope then the Pope an hereticall king So that this figure was more hurtfull to the Pope then to the King § 69 One thing there was which both Patriott did shrewdly re-enforce against you Saturnine and did likewise mightily offend vs all when you concluded out of Azarias example that it was lawfull for Preists to take armes to represse the wickednesse of Kings for the Preist resisted the King not with arms but with words vnlesse perhaps you will take a greeuous admonition reproofe and reprehension for armes Azarias did not cast the king out of the temple much lesse out of the kingdome And doe you thinke of corslets swords and lawnces wherewith a warlike Preist may remooue a King from his throne fie vpon this proud vanitie A Bishop ought not to bee a striker much lesse a warriour It was not lawfull for Dauid to build vp Gods materiall Temple because he was a man of bloud and will you build vp Gods spirituall Temple with bloudy hands But I referre you to the canons and goe forward For where you sayd that Athalia was lawfully deposed § 70 by Iehoida the Preist it was first answered that shee was neuer rightly created and crowned Againe that she was deposed by Iehoida not as hee was high Preist but cheife Prince of his tribe and next allie to the king nor by himselfe alone but ioyned with all the Nobles of the kingdome not with the authority of the Preist but by the authority of Ioash being first annoynted and crowned by him that whatsoeuer he did he seemed to doe by the power of the king with the common consent of the Peeres and Nobles against the wicked
the order to the spiritualties as very learned and holy Catholicke fathers haue deliuered I am not ignorant what was attempted lately by George Blackwell the Archpriest with certaine answeres of his to weaken and cut in sunder all the sinewes of ecclesiasticall excommunication Neither that onely Blackwell accompted an Apostata but hath broken and cut off as it were the ioyntes of the Popes two armes not that of his supreame authoritie spirituall and ecclesiasticall but of his ciuill and imperiall power which the Romane Byshop hath receiued from Christ and hath exercised vpon the earth vnder Christ But the timerous old man and wretched Apostata did not so much hurt by his fact as by his example which gaue occasion of a very foule schisme to you the Catholicke laickes whose constancie the Christian world did much commend Heere Calander you are too testie said he Saturnine § 75 who strait-way call me a Renegate when I neuer fell from the Catholicke faith onely because I refused and reiected certaine false Catholicke errors brought in by a companie of factious fellowes certaine claubackes of the Pope But because your heate hath carried you so farre to accuse the reuerend old man George Blackwell as a wretched Apostata and a Captaine of schisme I will intreat Velbacellus that hee answere somewhat not for mee only but much more for our Archpriest his antient friend Then Velbacellus Truly said hee when I am vnwilling § 76 at any time to dissent from my brethren then neuer more vnwilling then at this time when ill happe hath made our aduersaries beholders of our disorders But because I thinke it not fit Calander to neglect your authoritie and withall haue purposed to satisfie both your conscience and mine in this worthy businesse of religion I will doe as you aduise me Two popish meanes to ouerthrow Princes These are as you say Saturnine the two ingines the Romane Byshoppes haue vsed to ouerthrow Princes the one ecclesiasticall excommunication the other ciuill and imperiall authoritie What was the force and nature of excommunication they were not Ignorant they knew it was giuen to binde sinnes not scepters as Patriotta did truely dispute out of our own men Which first when Gregorie the 7. was Pope as he did rightly obserue out of Frisingensis Sigebert and Vincentius all ours brought foorth those monstrous effectes the deposing of Kings the absoluing of subiectes and the styrring of them vp to take armes against their Prince with which this present Oath of allegeance doth meete Whose successours fearing that ecclesiasticall excommunication in processe of time would loose not that natiue and inherent power but that vnnaturall and borrowed in the opinion of men they assumed that ciuill as you call it and imperiall power giuen by the Canonists for the increase of their owne authoritie as if it had beene bestowed by Christ himselfe § 77 For the old Canonists did first make them Lords of all the temporalties and sayd that the supreame iurisdiction not in spirituall things onely but in temporall things also did belong to Peters successours whose worme eaten assertions and such as long agoe were hist out by the more sober Papists certaine men not vnlearned haue lately renued and haue set them out publikely in printed bookes for found and Catholike doctrine and haue very stoutly defended them Whereof some a Franci Bozius de temp eccles monarch lib. 1. cap. 3. fol. 98. as you say defend the Bishop of Rome to bee directly Lord of things temporall one and the same to bee the Ruler and Monarch of the world That b Baron annal tom 1. ann 57. pag. 423. 433. Christ as hee receiued all Iudiciall power from the Father and vnited it with his Preist-hood when he meant to settle a Kingly Preist-hood in the Church put it ouer to Peter and his successours and that as Christ was King of Kings and Lord of Lords so the Church ought to be Queene and Lady of all and if the husband must be Lord of all the temporalties the spouse must be Ladie of all likewise that all temporall Princely power did first reside in the soule of Christ then in the Church the Queene of the world and from thence it did flow to others that were faithfull or vnfaithfull as from a fountaine c Thom. Bozi de iure statu praefat ad Aldobran That this spouse of Christ Queene of the world as often as the order of the vniuersall doth require it can transferre the proper right of one to another as a secular Prince for the adorning of a city may plucke downe priuate mens houses and may doe it by Law although hee haue not erred by whom such rights were translated to others So the Pope gaue the Indies to the Spaniards d Isodor Mosco de maiest mili Eccles pag. 670 All dominion do hold of the Church and of the Pope the head of the Church And that authority is to be considered in the Pope power in Emperours and Kings for power doth depend of authority that true e Care de potest Rom. Pont. pag. 9. Difference betweene power and authority Idem pag. 111. iust and ordinate from God and meere dominion as well in spirituall things as in temporall is fetcht by Christ and the same is committed to S. Peter and his successours that Christ was Lord of all these inferiour things not onely as hee was God but also as he was man hauing at that time dominion in the earth and therefore as the dominion of the world both diuine and humane was then in Christ as man so now it is in the Pope the Vicar of Christ As God may be called by a secondary meanes the temporall Gouernour and Monarch of the world though in himselfe principally hee bee neither temporall nor of the world Idem pag. 112. so the Pope may bee sayd to bee the temporall Lord and Monarch although his power be a certaine spirituall thing That Christ when hee had performed the mysterie of our redemption as a King gaue Peter the gouernment of his kingdome and that holy Peter did vse that power against Ananias and Sapphira That Christ as he is directly the Lord of the world in temporall things and therefore that the Pope Christs Vicar is the like that hee set out an immutable truth by the sole comming of Peter to Christ vpon the water Pag. 151. and that the vniuersall gouernment which is signified by the sea was committed to Peter and his successors that diuers powers and authorities were giuen of God but that all did depend vpon the supreme authority of the Pope and that they take their light from thence as the starres doe from the Sunne § 78 And as God is the supreme Monarch of the world productiuely and gubernatiuely Pag. 145. although of himselfe he be neither of the world nor temporall so the Pope although originally and from himselfe hee haue dominion ouer all things temporall yet he hath
to the spirituals Carerius a Doctour of Padua Carerius against Bellarmine a sharpe witted and earnest fellow hee is of a contrarie opinion and doth not only striue with argument but laies a curse vpon the aduersaries sparing none no not Bellarmine himselfe whom he taking in hand of purpose to refell in a whole booke written as the Preface importes against the wicked Polititians and Heretickes of our time did a little too plainely touch the Cardinall So farre are they from agreeing in the manner of diriuing so great authoritie to the Pope from Christ Here Patriotta your Doctours saith hee § 83 seeme praeposterously to wrangle among themselues of the manner to deriue such authoritie from Christ when as yet it appeareth not that he hath any at all and in vaine do they argue whether the Pope receiued directly or indirectly such gouernment when it is doubtfull whether he receiued any or no. But I easily grant them by their dissenting about the manner to ouerthrow the thing it selfe that the confusion of tongues may againe seeme to happen in building their tower of Babel § 84 Then Velbacellus somewhat more gently I pray Patriotta Although that I ingenuously confesse while they thus egerly striue among themselues about the manner and ouerthrow their owne opinions with mutuall contradictions they seeme to leaue the Pope very small or no authoritie at all in temporalties For Carerius saith the Pope hath either ordinarie and direct authoritie to depose Kings as he is Pope or he hath no authority at all But he hath none direct and ordinarie as he is Pope by Bellarmines assumption Therefore hee hath none at all by Carerius conclusion It were long to set downe all the reasons drawne from Scripture whereby Bellarmine hath vtterly ouerthrowne the direct and ordinarie authoritie of the Byshoppe neither were it necessarie because they may bee had in his fift booke he set out so that men may thinke hee spake one thing and thought another Which when he might not touch openly for offending the Pope he did with sleights and deuises impugne that he might by any meanes deliuer the truth For he seemeth indirectly that I may vse his owne aduerbe to take away all power of the Pope of depriuing Princes For if the Pope as hee is Pope cannot directly and ordinarily depose Princes though the cause bee iust as Bellarmine saith and yet as hee is the chiefe spirituall Prince may dispose of kingdomes taking them from one and giuing them to another if it be necessarie for the sauing of soules that is indirectly in order to spiritualls as hee affirmeth what other thing did he closly insinuate but that the Pope had no power at all to displace Princes For Saint Peter neither did or could transfer any power but ordinarie Besides it is plaine that the Pope is no otherwise the chiefe spirituall Prince but as he is Pope so that what he cannot do as Pope he cannot do as he is the chiefe spirituall Prince Which Carerius concludeth against Bellarmine and doth vrge it with this grant that the Pope is properly called Gods Vicar Either he is not saith he the Vicar of Christ or else he deposeth inferiour powers as Pope But he deposeth them not as Pope by the witnesse of Bellarmine He is not therefore the Vicar of Christ by the conclusion of Carerius So Bellarmine gaue Christs Vicar so greiuous a wound if we beleeue Carerius that he could neuer cure with all the remedies of his distinctions And Carerius while he deckes him with strange fethers spoiled him of those were his owne Whom while hee ordeined Lord of the temporalties hardly left him Lord of the spiritualties In the mean time when neither the direct nor indirect power bee a matter of faith formally determined by the publicke sentence of the Church as Alanus and Couarruvias confesse there was no reason why Saturnine should call my friend Blackwell wretched Apostata who neuer swarued from the Catholick faith vnlesse by inueighing so bitterly against Blackewell he vaunt himselfe to be of the contrarie faction Then Patriotta I willingly behold Bellarmine and § 85 Carerius as Cadmeyes brethren or the Madianites cutting one anothers throate But I could more willingly behold the Pope as a iacke-daw dispoiled of his Egles and Doues feathers which he hath stolne which is of all his regall and Byshoply ornaments wherewith hee hath so long ietted so proudly and terribly vp down but I leaue this cause to God to be mended by him at his due time But truely Baronius and Carerius with all their faction doe flatter the Pope more grosly but Bellarmine with his cunning opposition flatters him more smoothly being the more dangerous enemie to Kings because the more cloase But that I often obserued the witty old fellow crossing of himselfe with his owne trickes and coyning those distinctions whereby hee vnweaued those things which he had weaued before O Penelopean skill of disputing But while he doth touch kings crownes indirectly and tels vs that it is all in the Pope so that he thinkes it meete to belong to a spirituall end he bewraieth lesse malice but greater craft Here Argentine who had kept silence from the beginning looking earnestly first on Saturnine then on Velbacellus Saturnine saith he seemes to me to bee more strickt in this matter then is requisite and Velbacel more loose and remisse because he gaue too much authority this none at all to our most holy father to suppresse Kings when neede requires This great Doctour of the Church therefore Bellarmine tooke a middle course who first ouerthrew that infinite power of ordinarie and inherent gouernment then retained that extraordinarie and borrowed authority in the Pope least Kings like vntamed coultes as it were not hauing bitte and bridle should waxe too lustie whom the most holy Pope might bring againe into the circle of religion and iustice if once they began to start out first with his counsell and after if that were relected with some other moderate chastisement Which would be the most safe course for Kings and very auaileable for subiectes § 87 Then Carolus Regius this moderate chastisement of Kings Argentine as you call it is their vtter ruine and rooting out if you vnderstand Bellarmine aright For there lurkes vnder those Aduerbes certaine deceites which subiectes haue found to be as damnable to them as Kings haue For he bringeth in your Pope whom one doth well tearme Satans Asse with this his extraordinarie and borrowed power which he bestowed vpon him curbing of Kings with a bridle when the raynes lay on his owne necke turning and ouerturning kingdomes at his pleasure taking them from one and giuing them to another Meanes of the Popes greatnesse when he thinketh good that it is for the order tending to spirituall good And by what counsells he alwaies vsed to take from Kings both their kingdomes and their liues all histories do shew them to haue beene by the emulation of
neighbour Princes the faction of subiectes the treason of the nobles and the superstition of the people And doe you call this a moderate chastisement And safe for kings and good for subiects Wherein as there are many thinges very vniust and vnworthy so those are most of all that hee tearmeth these wicked treacheries holy counsells and pretendes that they tend in order to a spirituall end And doe in that manner sowe the scruples of conscience mingled with the seedes of treacherie in the harts of men as if the graines of religion and rebellion had sprung out of one and the same blade So it comes to passe that the Romane faith at this day doth beget and nourish most dangerous faction both to Kings and subiectes which so long is very demure and humble till as a wise man obserues it hath found the keye of power and authoritie For as all faction which springs out of the heate of desire is dangerous so that is most dangerous which riseth out of the scruple of conscience For when it riseth from desire it is like fire that taketh hold of stubble which though presently it rise vp into a great flame yet soone being consumed is extinguished But when it ariseth from the conscience it is like fire that heates iron which getting his strength but slowly keepes it surely as a very worthy and a wise Senator left it in writing Wherefore that which Bellarmine said of the Oath of § 88 allegeance that it was not therefore lawfull because it was offered someway tempred and qualified that may more iustly be said of the Popes temporall dominion as it is qualified and tempered by Bellarmine knowe therefore Argentine that such qualifications are nothing else but Satans sleights and deceits wherewith the maiesty of Kings is either openly or closely assailed which Christ hath fortified plainely with his commandements That these vaine pretences of Aduerbes are Sathans ginnes and stratagems whereby vnder the colour of religion he bringeth vtter destruction both to your soules and bodies But because you will not giue as good credite to vs as to your owne men and I think it not meete to take vpon mee Velbacellus part I pray you Calander entreat your Confessour that hee would lay open and vnfold the subtill and hurtfull fleights deuises of this working braine Yeelde so much saith Calander to the Catholikes your friends Velbacellus yeelde it to the Catholike religion which is necessary to bee discerned from these false Catholike opinions as you call them lest the consciences of Catholikes be corrupted § 89 Then Velbacell I will doe saith hee as you require me in respect of my duty to the King not vnwillingly but against the Popes inhibition not so willingly howsoeuer it bee I answer for the satisfying of the conscience sincerely and for the Catholike religion not vnfitly The Oath of Allegeance and Supremacy confounded by Bellarmine And I maruell much that Bellarmine beeing a learned man and of great wit did confound the Oath of Allegeance with the Oath of Supremacy but I am greeued at the heart that the supremacy of the Pope which he doth of right enioy in spirituall and ecclesiasticall causes is so enfolded with the worldly gouernment which is in temporall and ciuill causes that hee brings his lawfull authority in hazard to be lost Adde thereto that when he had ouerthrowen the direct dominion of the Pope in all temporall matters with sound reasons hee did maintaine the indirect gouernment in order to the spirituall as hee speaketh with such slight flaggy arguments that with this his playing fast loose hee seemes to haue left him no authority at all Although other thinke otherwise and thinke that hee doth aswell submit Kings crownes to the Popes feete as Baronius doth But let it bee as euery man takes it Hee cannot directly take away the crownes from Kings What then but he can indirectly hee cannot as Pope ordinarily depose Kings but extraordinarily he can as hee is the cheife spirituall Prince Hee hath not inherent authority but that is fetcht else where much forsooth what matter is it with what authoritie Kings be cast off if they may be cast off by the Pope But they be worse then mad who subiect the crownes of Kings to schoole-distinctions Heere Saturnine But although sayd hee it please § 90 you to scoffe at the distinctions of Catholike Doctors yet I hope you will not deny that the Pope is Lord of all the temporaltyes which doth belong to the Bishopricke of Rome But that England Ireland are portions of Peters patrimony and the Bishop of Romes temporalties it is plaine by the articles of agreement betweene Alexander the third Pope of Rome and Henry the second King of England agreed on in the yeere of the Lord 1171. who when he was absolued by the Pope for the death of Thomas of Becket did couenant that none should afterward accept that Crowne of right or should be acknowledged for King till hee had his confirmation from the cheefe pastour of our soules Which couenant was renewed in the yeere 1210. by Iohn King of England who had confirmed the same by oath to Pandulphus the Popes Legate at the request of the Barons and Commons as a matter of great importance to preserue the common-weale to keepe it from the vniust vsurpation of Tyrants and to auoyd other mischeefes whereby before they had smarted and to preuent that they fall not into the like againe by the default of any wicked King thereafter Wherefore if it bee honourable and pious for the Bishop to dispose of the kingdome being made tributary why may hee not likewise depose a refractory and a disobedient Prince § 91 Then Velbacellus you alleadge saith hee a worme eaten and ridiculous charter whereby you make the King of England Tributarie to the Pope England not tributarie to the Pope neither can bee which was neuer done and if it were it neither could or ought binde the successours Kings of England For Rome neither can nor euer could at any time shew such a grāt as Thomas Moore that great Catholike doth argue and if it could it was to no great purpose for no King of England might at any time giue away England to the Pope or make his kingdome tributary though he were so disposed Therefore let vs passe by that counterfet compact and that friuolous deuise and let vs returne to the matter in hand The question is not Saturnine of the true temporalties of the patrimonie of Peter but of the true temporalties of the patrimony of Kings the soueraignty whereof either directly or indirectly is giuen to the Pope and it is giuen either by Law diuine or positiue and therefore the temporalties of Kings doe no more belong to the Pope then the temporalties of Peter belong to Kings And euery King may as well depriue a Pope as any Pope may depriue a King And an Emperour may aswell he called Lord of all the spiritualties as
a Pope Lord of all the temporalties But God hath distinguisht these giuing the spirituall swords to Popes and the temporall to Kings as Bellarmine himselfe seemeth formerly to confesse who if hee had beene still the same man hee would neuer haue placed Popes to be Lords of temporalties indirectly for order to the spirituals and haue rooted and cast them out as Kings and haue attempted any euill against them by their agents either subiects or strangers when place and occasion was offered if they thought it auailable to spirituall good So it is a spirituall action but a diabolicall as if he thought the murther of Kings to be a spirituall action which after some sort may bee sayd with a distinction that the spirit of God doth not direct and gouerne such bloudy counsels but the spirit of Sathan Who if hee goe forward as he beginnes and vse the pen of such a man as Bellarmine is it is to bee feared I will speake plainely what I thinke truely it is I say to be feared that blood will ouertake blood and that Kings will imitate Charles the fift who when Clement the seuenth beganne to grow proud belegred Rome with his armie Bellar. de Rom. Pont. tit lib. 5. cap. 6. and battered the castle of Saint Angelo not with arguments but with cannon-shot But why added the Cardinall to his aduerbe indirectly § 92 other of the like force Bellarmines dangerous ad uerbes incidently and casually seene as if he should say although the Pope as hee is Pope cannot ordinarily no not vpon iust cause depose a Prince yet as hee is Lord of the temporalties incidently and casually he may change kingdoms and take them from one and giue them to another if not as the politicke Prince of the Church yet as the cheefe spirituall Prince whether I say hee doe not lay trappes for Kings whereby they may more certainely of a sudden be surprized Theeues haue not an ordinary power to breake vp houses well fenced or to robbe trauellers by the high-way-side being well accompanied but they haue power casually to do both when they light vpon houses that be but sorrily defended or trauellers that be ill appointed So hee denieth that the Pope hath ordinary power to depose Kings and to cast them off but grants that hee hath a power accidentary and casuall whereby he may either with his owne or others forces or with the secret deuices of his part by any meanes ouerthrow king when they least suspect it and finde them most weake and feeble looking for no such matter What is this else but to make the Pope Machiauils scholler sometime playing the Lyon sometime the Foxe attempting the destruction of Kings with whom he is displeased either by force or fraud as hee can casually bring his purposes to passe and swallow vp Kings as it were their prey which without doubt is farre from the holy fathers minde but so it sometimes fals out that wicked men being deceiued by such distinctions do abuse the opinions of learned men against the Popes will to the ruine of Princes § 93 Therefore Calander and Argentine if you will bee aduised by mee put out of your mindes and consciences this bewitching and ouerthrowing diuinity you may doe better to goe the plaine and the Kings high-way directed by Christ and his Apostles and shewed vnto you erewhile by Patriott and auoyd these by-pathes and dangerous downfals that you may liue and die with the honor of your families and safties of your consciences Then Patriott I wish it I wish it sayd hee with all my heart Velbacell The second foundation of obedience the practise of Christians chiefly of the Ro. Bishops that you vnderstood all the mystery of iniquity aswell as you vnderstand this part in controuersie I will cleare your eye-sight with an oyntment as olde Tobies was And being warned by you I will shew you the right way of obedience prescribed by Christ and trod foorth by the footsteps of the ancient Christians and cheifely of the Bishops of Rome that I may finish that I promised that it may appeare what predecessours the Bishop of Rome had in the better ages and what in the worse who were so far off from hauing power in the tēporalties that they had it not in the spirituals they who vaunt themselues now to be Lords ouer kings acknowledged thēselus to be their seruants as I will make it plain out of your own histories § 94 And when I often thinke of the former times it is doubtfull to mee whether the Bishop of Rome grew greater by the pietie and obedience of his ancestors How the Pope grew great or by their impietie and rebellion or whether he attained greater power and wealth by the munificence of former Caesars or by the ouermuch patience of such as succeeded for when as the ancient noblenesse of that Imperiall citie and the great estimation of the Apostolike See and the inuincible holinesse of thirty Martyrs had first made him famous then the great fauour of Christian Emperours Popes for their excellency first had primacy of order and the syncere faithfulnesse of the Bishops and their dutifull obedience did so highly promote and aduance him that hee did easily obtaine the primacy of order among all the other Bishops And you might perceiue for the first sixe hundred yeeres at the least vertues in the Bishops contending with vertues patience with obedience and constancy with learning and you could hardly know whether they were more famous for the glory of their zeale and martyrdom or for the commendation of their knowledge and obedience So great was the fauour of Emperors so deadly the hatred of Pagans so exceeding the loue of Christians was toward the Bishops that you may well doubt whether their crueltie did more purge and refine the Bishops holinesse or this ouer lauish bounty did infect and corrupt it Whence came that notable speech of Tertullian The bloud of the Martyrs is the seed of the Church aswell as that of Augustines Religion brought foorth riches and the daughter eat vp the mother Which I thinke was not spoken to that end as though the subsequent peace had cleane extinguished that primatiue zeale which persecution had raised vp but rather cooled abated it for as the Bishops for 300. yeeres to Syluester performed passiue obedience to the Heathenish Emperours so before and after Boniface for 500. yeeres they performed actiue obedience to Christian Emperours And when as either an Hereticke or an Apostata or a Tyrant possest the seate of the Empire yet by the doctrine of Christ when they might not doe that the Emperour commanded they would suffer that the Emperour inflicted The histories are extant which shew that the Emperors § 95 were acknowledged supreme Lords Popes subiect to Emperors euen in things spirituall by the Rom. Bishops that they were reuerenced obeyed not with a constrained but voluntarie obseruancie not with a counterfet but
Ecbertus ruine Eebertus flying out of his throne into a sincke-hole to saue his life lost it Conradus the elder sonne being rightly disinherited of his fathers kingdome which hee had betrayed died miserably Conradus ruine Henry the younger sonne being instructed by the Popes lesson to breake his oath wherewith hee bound himselfe to his Father Henries treacherie against his father first leuied an armie against his Father And when by the intercession of diuers of the nobilitie who regarded the sunne rising more then the sunne setting the quarrell seemed to be ended between the Father and the Sonne the sonne allured the Father with promises teares and Oathes to enter into a castle whom he receiued as an Emperour but detained as a prisoner and made him this offer that either he should resigne his crowne or his head O most periurde and vilanous parricide O most wicked scholler of a wicked master That stone which Gregorie the 7. first moued against § 104 Henry the 4. Emperour with his ouerthrow as it appeareth the same other Popes afterward haue not left off to cast downe vpon other Emperours and Kinges sometime with no better successe alwaies with no lesse disgrace to the Church As Adrian the 4. and Alexander the third against Fredericke the first Honorius and Gregorie the 9. and Innocent the 4. against Fredericke the 2. two very wise deuoute and valiant Emperours that we name no others For Adrian the 4. Adrian against Fredericke an agreement being made with the Cardinalls and William King of Sicely and other peeres and cities of Italy that they should expell Fredericke the first out of Italie first cast out his bolt of excommunication And when a flie shortly after had choakt Adrian as he was a drinking Choakt with a flie Alexander the third persecuted the Emperour in the same footsteppes hee sent out his Cursitors out of his owne bosome who should sollicite Crema Placentia Vâ—rona Mylaine Brixia to rebellion he did more incense William the King of Sicely his aduersarie to assault Fredericke He did corrupt Henry Duke of Saxonie and made him forsake his soueraigne in the field hee raised vp the French the English the Spanish and the Venetian to molest and vexe him with these deuises and engines he endeauored to strippe the Emperour of his kingdome and his life But God did so blesse and assist his seruant Fredericke that he tooke the cities of Italy and ouerthrew them droue the treacherous Duke out of his dukedome and the Pope from his Popedome and made him flie to Saint Marke at Venice vnder the habite of a Cooke Although hee afterward being mooued by naturall affection to release his sonne out of captiuity suffred himselfe to be there trod vpon by Alexanders feete Alexander trod vpon the Emperours necke Which base indignity was not so reproachfull for the Emperour to suffer as for the Pope to commit § 105 It is not requisite to touch the causes why the Popes thought meete that Henry the 4. As Cardinall Wolsie deâ—lt with King Henrie the 8. Emperour and Fredericke the first should bee deposed whenas there was no lawfull power or iust reason for any Popes at any time to depose Emperours Adrian the Pope that followed was displeased with Fredericke the first because the Emperour had set his name in his letters before the Popes name because he forbad the Cardinalls vnder the colour of visiting the Churches to robbe and to spoile them i. because hee withstood the Byshops ambition and auarice As Gregorie the seuenth set vpon Henry the fourth that hee might transferre the donation of byshoprickes taken from the Emperour to himselfe so Adrian to exempt the persons of Byshops whereby neither in respect of their benefice or duty they might adheare to Princes Fredericke the second had good successe against the Pope Pla. in Greg. 9 The like causes did incense Honorius and Gregorie the 9. and Innocent the 4. against Fredericke the second his Nephew whom God did assist being so vnworthily abused that hee handled the treacherous Cardinalls according to their deserts plagued the Popes and his Priests shut vp Gregorie the ninth and brought him to that miserie that he died in great anguish of minde Let the Pope take heede lest if hee Gregorize with Princes Princes Henrize and Frederize with Popes Neither is Innocent the 4. Conuina Theobaldus Franciscus Gulielm de San. Seuerino Pandulphus therefore the more happy § 106 man that by the name of the Church the power of the keyes the discord of princes the negligence of Byshoppes the superstition of the people he droue Fredericke the second out of his Empire and prouided two other to bee chosen in his roome For if they had not preuailed more with conspiracies and poysonnings then elections Caspini in Freder 2. Fredericke murthered they could neuer haue surprized Fredericke that noble Prince But at last hee was taken away by poyson as he returned into Apulia Whereof when he seemed to haue recouered hee was choaked with a pillow by Manfred his bastard sonne as hee lay in his bed These bee the actes of Popes whereby they ruinate Princes and so highly aduance their Popedome The popish engines against Princes Excommunications wherewith as with hookes they catch after kingdomes and as with whippes to scourge kings open rebellion whereby they tosse Princes vp down as balles with their feete and secret conspiracies wherby as with ginnes they lay for and entangle Princes and take them vnawares that they may more couertly take them out of the way by poyson That there is a great doubt as I said left whether the Byshoppe of Rome grew more by the vertue and obedience of his predecessors or by their treacherie and wickednes whether by the beneficence of former Emperors or patience of the later he is come to that height and toppe of greatnesse that the world wonders at I haue now laid the two foundations of obedience toward a King whatsoeuer he bee and of the fealtie of their subiectes One in the perpetuall and vnchangeable decree of Christ the other in the perpetuall practise of the ancient Christians and chiefly of the Byshops of Rome for eight hundred yeares at the least till worldly ambition had cleane put out all pietie and religion § 107 Here Saturnine that I may omit saith he other things least our disputation be ouerlonge which you haue collected out of histories concerning the Byshoppes of Rome that one I cannot passe ouer that you said that Gregorie the 7. whom you defaced as much as you could was the first Authour that excommunicated and deposed Kings For both Leo the 3. Emperour was excommunicated by Gregorie the 2. and plainely depriued of all his temporalties he held in Italy and the Greeke Emperors were remoued from the Empire by Leo the third Byshoppe of Rome for defect in religion and forsaking the defence of the Church and the Empire translated to the Germaines The defence
I demand what King he deposed you take exception that he farre before is deposed by him whosoeuer for time to come doth breake the priuiledge of that house so long as the world endured And thefore hee deposed Kings not onely before they were crowned but before they were borne But the proposition that you defend is as false as the reason you alleadge is friuolous What King soeuer doth infringe the priuiledge of the monasterie of Medard let him be depriued of his honour Whether is this rather a depriuation of a King or an imprecation Adde which you omitted and let him be damn'd in the lowest pit of hell with Iudas the traytour If the Pope haue power out of this place to depose a King he hath likewise power to damn him But he hath not power to damne him therfore he hath not power to depose him Are you well in your wits who take a vow for a censure and the forme of imprecation for a sentence of depriuation a former curse for a reuenge following § 113 And you neuer can sufficientlie adorne and set out Gregorie the seuenth your sweet delight and that worthily for that he shewed himselfe not onely a traytour as you are your selues and desire to make others like your selues but also a captaine and ring-leader of all treason to promote the glorie of Preists with diminishing the credit of the people For those praises which you laie vpon Gregorie and those reproaches you cast vpon Henrie doe nothing either helpe your cause or hurt ours but I wonder that this good Arch-deacon as you call him prooued so bad a Bishop Gregorie condemned and for what that all the Germaine Bishops almost did condemne him in the Councell of Wormes of monstrous periuries strange mis-behauiours and diuers outrages in his life But the Italians did acquit him Not so neither For thirtie of them beeing assembled at Brixia after they had receiued Ambassadours and letter from nineteene Bishops who had consulted at Mentz with the Nobles of Italy and Germanie did publikely testifie that Gregorie did most impudentlie inâ—rude himselfe into the See Apostolike by deceit and briberie did peruert all Church gouernment did trouble all gouernment in the Christian Empire did attempt the destruction both of bodie and soule of a Catholike and peaceable King and maintained a periured rebell against him Nor being therewith content at last adiudged Hildebrand a most shamelesse person committing sacriledge and robberie defending periuries and murthers calling into questiun the Catholicke and Apostolicke faith about the body and bloud of Christ being an ancient scholler of Berengarius the hereticke an euident obseruer of dreames and diuinations And therefore to be canonically deposed for his backsliding from the true faith Lambert in an 1077. and to bee thrust out of his Popedome But these factious fellowes fauoured the Emperour against the Pope What they that fauoured the Pope against the Byshoppe But Lambert Schafnaburgensis doth praise the man But the same very Lambert whenas he was the Popes Legate and had shewed that the Emperour had reconciled and submitted himselfe at Canufium yea by his owne report all of them the Italians began to chafe to hisse and clappe their handes and to scoffe at his apostolicall Legacie with flowting outcries and to cast out bitter and railing curses in their madde moode that they nothing regarded his excommunication whom all the Italian Byshoppes had excommunicated a goodwhile since vpon iust causes him who had climbd vp into the Apostolicke seat with simonicall heresie imbrued it with murthers defiled it with adulteries and capitall enormities that the King had done otherwise then became him and had much staind his honour for submitting the maiesty of a King to an Hereticall Pope most infamous for all villanies For all this wee excuse not the faults of the Prince but defend his right neither do we accuse the life of the Pope condemned by his own side but we weigh his fact we obserue this one thing that a Simoniacall and an adulterous Emperour as Marianus Scotus writeth was ill remooued by a Simoniacall and adulterous Pope as the Germaines and Italians call him I am not ignorant that Fredericke the first and second § 114 are after the same manner as bitterly traduced and disgraced by the Popes Flatterers as Henry the fourth was Princes traduced by popist writers as Ludâ—uicke the fourth Emperour by Iohn the 22. and Philippe the fourth surnamed the faire the French King by Boniface the 8. and Henry the 2. King of England by Alexander the 3. and Iohn King of England by Innocent all of them being once excommunicated were by the flattering stile of the Romane writers abused and slandered That it is no great matter to wonder at that the Princes of our time being taken for Heretickes by you though falsly Henry the 8. Edward the 6. Elizabeth and Iames the first be so vnworthily dealt withall who did euen then in the midst of popish darknesse so cruelly vexe their owne Princes But that not only the English whose faithfulnesse toward their Princes certaine hyred vassales of the Pope haue endeauored to corrupt in their bookes set out in English but that the Germaines the French the Spaniard the Italian may see out of their owne monuments the fidelitie of their ancesters toward their owne Emperours and Princes euen then when the Popes did most terribly thunder against them that they may acknowledge it with me and the rather imitate and expresse it in so cleare a light of the Gospell hearken I pray you hearken not what a few Lutheranes and Caluenistes but what the Catholickes of these nations almost without number haue often decreed in their Sinodes and Parliaments for their Kings against the Popes tyrannie which writers shall with authoritie easily ouercome the rest either old or new being few in number and corrupted by bribes § 115 You heard before what the Germanes Italians both Byshoppes and Nobles did decree publickely for their Emperour Henry the 4. against Gregorie the 7. Now heare what the Germanes did publickly first for Fredericke the second against Innocent the 4. then for Lewes against Iohn the 22. and after of the rest The Pope resisted by the popish clergy The Germane Byshoppes first whenas they had receiued a charge from Albert Pope Innocents Legate to publish the bull of excommunication against Frederick all of them refused it The Abbotes being commanded to curse the Byshoppes that refused neglected it The Clergie receiuing a new charge that they should choose new Byshoppes and the Monkes other Abbotes being greatly agast at the nouelty of the example began to disdaine and chafe and detest the rashnesse of the Popes Legate and greeuously to accuse euen the Pope himselfe for vndertaking so strange and shamefull an action against all equitie and right and filling all Germanie with troubles How did they entertaine Raberius a French man being another Legate sent from Innocent in the same businesse hauing his associate the
Byshoppe of Rentzburge when he deliuered the bull against the prince All of them scoft at the mans impudency and disdainefully askt what that light headed and superstitious French man what the Rome-pope himselfe did in Germanie without the consent of the Germaine-byshops his colleagues They disdaine that discordes should be sowne that the libertie of Christians should bee opprest that the flocke of Christ redeemed by his blood should bee brought into slauerie by false Teachers And when the Legate would not giue ouer the Germane Byshoppes did not onely dispise his commandements but denounced a curse against him in all their Churches as an enemie to Christian peace and an Arch hereticke and pronounced him to be worse then any Turke Saracene Tartar or Iew. They did publickly likewise accuse the Byshoppe of Rome for attempting such matters among Christians which were against reason and the law of nations against the doctrine of Christ and which were not at any time done among the most sauage Tartars And as the Byshops so the nobles of Germanie did take in foule scorne so great a wrong offered by the § 116 Pope to the Emperour their Master to repell it conuented all the States wherein Eberhardus the Archbyshoppe of Salisburge a godly olde man when hee had knowne ten Romane-byshoppes and had diligently markt their practizes and dispositions vnder Fredericke the first Henry the sixt his sonne and Fredericke the second his Nephew for fifty yeares together that the chiefe byshoppe was wholy compounded of auarice luxurie contention warres discordes and desire of rule and so did decipher him for a rauenous wolfe in each part vnder a Shepheards weede and so liuely paint him out that although in other matters he were not a Lutherane in this one you would haue said he had beene almost Luther himselfe The old Catholicke fathers Oration is extant in Auentine a Catholicke Writer Auenti annal lib. 7. fol. 683. there you may haue it if you will read it § 117 That which the Byshoppes and Nobles of Germanie with the whole commons did with common consent against Innocent the fourth in the quarrell of Fredericke the Emperour the very same they did in the like quarrell of Lewes the fourth Emperour against Iohn the 22. that although they were released from the Oath of Obedience they did notwithstanding take the Oath of obedience to be faithfull to Lewes though hee were remooued and that they did by the iudgement of all the Doctours in both lawes Philip the faire the French King in a councell with full consent of the Nobles and Byshoppes did not only set at nought and despise the iniust sentence of the Popes depriuation sent out against him but brought all the kingdome from the Popes obedience and that hee might the better tame his pride he laid hold of the Pope kept him in durance so that within sixe weekes after in great anguish of soule hee gaue vp the Ghost Popes crossed by the French The pragmaticall sanction is well knowne which did of old infringe the Popes authoritie and all the canons of the Church of France that part which maintaineth the popish religion and all the decrees of the Kings parliament do so disanull the Popes power in excommunicating Kings and releasing their Subiectes from the Oath of obedience Tract inscript le Franc. Discours an 1600. that the very body of Sorbone and the whole Vniuersitie of Paris doe condemne the doctrine of the Iesuites as schismaticall and pernicious Neither Henrie the 8. onely Edward the 6. and § 119 Queene Elizabeth English practise against Popes whom you tearme Caluinists and Heretickes did by their lawes expell this vsurped authoritie of the Pope and punished by death the Abetters thereof but other Kings of England who raigned in the midst of poperie thought good to contemne the Popes censures and to suppresse the Actors therein by your Lawes The law of Edward the 3. 25 Edwar 3. doth it not seeme to bee made by a Caluinist which makes it treason to attempt and go about the death of the King to mooue warre in his Kingdome against the King or to ioyne with the Kings enemies in his kingdome or to giue them aide and comfort either within the Kingdome or without Doe you not see how that two hundred yeares before Queene Elizabeth was borne the Priests treason couered with the habite of religion by the Statute of Edward the third in euery branch of it as it were with lime twigges is met with and suppressed If to attempt the death of the King be treason therefore Greenway and other Iesuites who tooke counsell to destroy the King and kingdome had beene Traytors by Edward the thirds Law although Queene Elizabeth had made no such law If to raise warre against the King in his kingdome were then treason the priests were Traytors who stirred vp papists to take armes and to ioyne themselues with Catsby and Persie in the rebellion If to ioyne with the Kings enemie in his kingdome were then treason how can you then ye Iesuits auoide the sharpenesse of King Edwards law who being the instruments of sedition doe adheare to the Pope the Kings deadly enemie vnder the colour of religion If to aide and animaâ—e the Kings enemies either within his kingdome or without was treason at that time truly whosoeuer at this day vnder pretense of religion whatsoeuer do either solicite foraine Kings to inuade this Kingdome as Garnet Creswell Baldwine and others haue done or perswade the people to take armes to depose their King as Greenwell Hall and others haue vndertaken were Traytors although Elizabeth with her Caluinists had neuer made any law against them § 120 But King Edwardes law you will say doth not touch the people by name True But when the noble King remembred that the French King was stirred vp against Iohn King of England who had contemned the Popes censures that the Subiectes were incensed against their King the Barons and Byshops fell from him and were the Ministers of the Popes wrong that thereby hee might the better confirme his subiects in their obedience against the French the Spanish and the Romane and all others whatsoeuer froâ— whom he foresaw danger might come to himselfe and his kingdome and that he might decline the enuy of naming the Pope particularly made a generall Statute with the consent of the Byshoppes Baron and Commons without any exception of person or cause whatsoeuer wherein hee made him a Traytor whosoeuer did adhere to the Kings enemy in his kingdome or did aide or animate any either within his dominions or without who should moue warre against the King including by his generall word aswell the Pope as the Popes factours as if hee had expressely named them § 121 But in the 26. of Richard the second the Prelates Dukes Earle Barons and aâ—l the Commons of England the Clarkes and Lay people named the Pope when they all ioyned in a couenant of association with the
plainely shewed against Tortus or rather counterfet Bellarmine that the Apostles Creede was set foorth whereto Iames the Apostle before his martyrdom had added the Article of Christ before the departure of the Apostles from Ierusalem and therefore before S. Peter came to Rome by the testimonie of Baronius himselfe Anno 44. and had concluded necessarily from thence that the Catholike faith was fully finished before the Apostolike See was begunne hence it is said there arose a doubt in that right honourable Calanders conscience a Papist but very moderate and honest not onely of the supremacie of Peter and of that depriuing power annexed to the supremacy but of all the whole Romish Catholike faith which he saw was contained in the popish not Apostolicall Nycene or Constantinopolitane Creede § 125 Therefore when those former learned men together with William Argentine came againe to visite him It is very well sayd Calander that you are met againe to discusse before vs a verie difficult controuersie of the popes new creede which Pius the fouth had formerly compiled Paul the 5. comanded it lately to be printed my good freind Argentine hath lately recited it and I hope by and by he will recite the same to you This being prescribed by the Church vtterly to reiect it I doe as yet to speake truely make a conscience and to admit it wholly vnlesse it bee ratified by the testimonies of the holy Scripture I cannot admit without scruple of conscience For I haue lately learned to giue attendance to the holy Scripture which holy S. Peter doth directly affirme to bee as a candle lightned in this life to vs wandring in darknesse 2. Pet. 1. Which holy Paul doth likewise make the foundation of the Church Ephes 2.20 1. Tim. 3.15 and yet I cannot depart rashly from the Catholike Church whereto I haue beene accustomed which the same S. Paul calles the piller and ground of truth by which there is a creede of faith set out for me So I hang doubtfull betweene the Scripture the Church which God hath giuen vnto vs as the Sunne and Moone the two great lights to giue vs light to life Then Patriott you say right Calander said he in the § 126 generall that as the Sunne and Moone so the Scripture and the Church as two lights shew light vnto vs The Scripture and Church compared to the Sun Moon but that you erre in the speciall as after it shall better appeare But the holy Scripture hath light in it selfe as the Sunne the Church is a light but borrowed from the Scripture as the Moone from the Sun these two I confesse are giuen vs of God to direct vs vnto eternall life But the Scripture directs vs with masterly authority the Church with her ministery for the holy Scripture is the wisdome of God in Christ inspired from aboue into holy men for the eternall saluation and perfection of the Church as the Apostle hath defined it God hath commended the Scripture to the Church The office of the Church as an heauenly charge that it may discerne expound keep and publish it to men the Scripture is therefore mens master but the Church is Gods minister Therefore the Apostle calles the truth the foundation of the Church and the Church the piller of truth as Salomon made his chariot to haue a golden axtree and pillers of siluer vnderstanding by the axetree the sound doctrin of the Messias by the pillers the faithfull teachers of the same § 127 It is a wicked thing therefore to detract from the maiestie of the holy Scripture and it is vniust to derogate from the ministery of the true Church for the Scripture is the truth of God The office of the Scripture and the Church is the house of God the truth is the golden foundation of this house and this house is the siluer piller of this truth that is cut out of the truth as out of the rocke as Chrysostome obserueth So if the Scripture be the base of the Church then the Church is the piller of the word as he spake very wittily Now reason teacheth that the foundation is not sustained by the house but the house by the foundation And religion concludes from thence that truth makes the Church not the Church the truth For the approbation of the truth is the working cause of the Church For before it do approue the written word of God it is but a company of Infidels and Idolaters after it hath approoued it it beginneth to be the familie of the faithful worshippers of God that is a Church Further although the Church by the Spirit doe discerne the true Scripture from the false yet the Scripture being once knowen and acknowledged as before it made so after it sheweth the Church For what more certain note can there be of shewing a thing then the working cause of the thing Againe what priuiledge soeuer the Church doth rightly challenge to it selfe it receiued from the Scripture as that which calleth the Church the piller of truth Therefore the truth of the Scripture is more ancient in time more perspicuous for the light and greater for authority then the Church which when it once receiueth her essence light and power from the Scripture then at last as a piller it vpholdeth with her ministery the truth in respect of men and reueales it to the inhabitants of the earth and it is that ground whereon men both may and ought to leane and rest Lawes vpon pillers so the Scriptures on the Church Whereupon the Propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine is said to bee the foundation of the Church the Church is the strength of doctrine not the foundation It is euident therfore that the Church is founded and sustained by the truth and that the truth is sustained and reuealed by the Church once founded as it were a watch-tower for trauellers to direct them into heauen The Heathens were wont to write their lawes in tables and hang them vp vpon pillers to bee read of the people The Apostle describing the Church compareth it to such a piller the vse wherof was to shew the Law when it selfe was not the Law So the true Orthodoxe and Catholike faith being written in the tables of the Scripture is fastned to the Church as it wereto a most beautifull piller as a most strong prop which resteth vpon it not with its owne but a borrowed strength Wherefore the Apostle in the second to the Ephesians defines the Church when in the second to Timothie hee describes it For there hee argueth from the causes heere from the effects in each place he vnderstandeth the Church of Ephesus that is a particular Church In the first place he teacheth what made that in the second what that did nor so much what it alway doth for of necessitie the foundation being taken away the Church must fall as it happened first to the Church of Ephesus and afterward to the Church
of Rome as what it ought to doe For this is rather an admonition then a commendation and with a praise giueth warning of duty Wherefore you shall doe well Calander as S. Peter warnes you if you alwaies giue attention to the holy Scripture as to the candle to the Church as to the candle-sticke so long as it containeth and vpholdeth that candle giuing light to all the house For if it bee bereft of the light of her sunne and being blinde endeauours to make others blinde also while it makes new Articles of the faith and conceales the old it doth retain the name of a Church but it hath altogether lost the nature that which may very truely be spoken of the Church of Rome § 128 You doe very vnaduisedly traduce the Church of Rome saith Saturnine by whom you thinke that new Articles of the faith were made for the Articles of the faith which it propoundes are diuided into two sortes One are of immediate Reuelation Others are drawne and fetcht from thence What articles of faith the Church maketh The Church doth not make new Articles of the faith of the first sort But the Church maketh Articles of the second sort which ought to bee beleeued with the Catholicke faith as the case requireth if it thinke them necessary Therefore Vincentius Lyrinensis thinketh that the life of propheticall and euangelicall doctrine must be directed by the rule of Ecclesiasticall and Catholike sense so that he doth in vaine brag of the text of scripture who reiecteth the sense of the Church § 129 Then Patriott how absurdly is it said saith he that the Church doth not make immediate reuelations of God Vnlesse that be more absurd to thinke that to fetch and draw from is the same which to make for an Article must first be made before a doctrine can be drawne or fetcht from the same Therefore that is said to bee an Article of the faith which is drawne from an Article Foolishly Articles are principles deductions are conclusions An article is one thing a conclusion drawne from the article is another which often is so contrarie that it vtterly ouerthroweth the article As it shall bee made cleare in the explication of your creede For I confesse with Vincentius Lyrinensis that the line of propheticall and Apostolicall doctrine is to be directed by the rule of the ecclesiasticall and catholicke sense For the ecclesiasticall and catholicke sense must alway agree with the Propheticall and apostolicall text For where the text doth faile vs the glosse cannot helpe vs. Whence I conclude that nothing can bee Catholicke and Ecclesiasticall which is not Propheticall or Apostolicall Now because Vincentius doth restraine the propheticall and apostolicall line to the cannon of the Scripture which he confesseth to be more then sufficient for faith it followeth that nothing contrarie to the canonicall Scripture can be Ca holicke though it bee so determined by the Church Wherefore Calander if the Church of Rome haue cast any article of faith into the Creede of the second sort which is contrarie to an Article of the first sort and haue added an ecclesiasticall glosse disagreeing from the definition of canonicall Scripture that Church shall sooner leaue off to be the Catholicke Church then that Article shall beginne to be Catholicke Let vs come therefore to the Creede and let vs intreat Argentine if hee please to open it vnto vs. Then Argentine I will doe it and very willingly and § 130 I will so professe it as it is propounded by the Bull of Pius the 4. to be a forme of an Oath of the profession of the orthodoxall faith 1 I William Argentine doe firmely admit and hold the Apostolicall and Ecclesiasticall traditions and other ordinances and constitutions of the Church of Rome The Popes creede Traditions Scriptures according to the Romane sense 2 I doe firmely hold and admit the holy Scriptures according to that sense which the mother Church hath and doth hold whose right it is to iudge of the true sense and interpretation of the Scripture neither will I euer admit it or expound it but according to the ioynt consent of the fathers 3 I professe that there be seauen Sacraments truely and properly of the new Law 7 Sacraments ordained by our Lord Iesus necessarie for the saluation of mankind Baptisme Confirmation the Eucharist Penance Extream vnction Orders Matrimony I admit the receiued and approoued rites of the Catholicke Church Originall sin and iustification 4 I admit and hold all and euery those points concerning originall sinne and iustification which were determined in the holy Councell of Trent The Masse 5 I professe that there is offered vp in the Masse vnto God a true proper propitiatorie sacrifice for the quicke and the dead Transsubstantiation 6 I beleeue that in the holy Eucharist the body and blood of Christ is truely and really and substantially and that there is made a change of the whole substance of bread into his body and of the whole substance of wine into his blood which change or conuersion the Catholicke Church calleth transsubstantiation I confesse also that vnder one kinde onely whole Christ is receiued and a true sacrament Purgatorie 7 I constantly hold that there is a purgatorie and that the soules there deteined are holpe with the praiers of the faithfull Adoration of Saints 8 I hold that the Saints raigning with Christ are to be worshipped and to be called vpon and that they offer vp their prayers to God for vs and that their reliques are to be worshipped The worshipping of Images 9 I firmely hold that the Images of Christ and the euer blessed Virgin and of other Saintes are to bee had and to be adored with due worshippe Indulgences 10 That the power of indulgences was left by Christ and that the vse of them is very auaileable for saluation The supremacie of the Pope 11 I acknowledge the Catholicke and Apostolicke Romaine Church to be the mother and mistris of all Churches and I vowe and sweare true obedience to the Byshoppe of Rome the successour of blessed Peter the Prince of the Apostles and the Vicar of Iesus Christ The authority of the Councell of Trent 12 I vndoubtedly likewise receiue all other thinges defined and determined by the holy Canons and Occumenicall Councells chiefly of the holy Councell of Trent and I reiect and accurse all things contrarie and all heresies reiected by the Church This true Catholicke faith without which none can § 130 be saued at this present I voluntarily professe I will procure as farre as lyeth in me to be wholy vncorruptly and constantly kept and taught by Gods assistance to my liues end I the same William promise vow and sweare so help me God and these his holy Euangelist And I stand in feare of that which the most holy Father added It shall not bee lawfull for any man to infringe this authoritie of our ordination inhibition
no errors The Pope of Rome doth erre by the Papists iudgement Peter de Aliaco a Cardinall Adrianus Pope The three Legates of the Trent councel I wonder that Peter de Aliaco a very learned Cardinall granted that there were many things not only in manners but in faith had neede of reformation Why did Adrian the sixt ill touching the fountaine it selfe say that all mischiefe came from the cheife Byshoppe into the whole Church and promised reformation of all things by his Legate Cheregatus to the Germaines I wonder also why the three Legates in the Councell of Trent did apply that Prophesie of Ieremy to themselues and to the popish people This people haue committed two great euills They haue forsaken mee saith the Lord the fountaine of liuing water and haue digged to themselues cisternes that can hold no water And in the Councell it selfe Cornelius the Byshoppe of Bitont did openly acknowledge the Apostasie of the Church of Rome in the chiefe heades both of doctrine and life I would to God saith he that they had not falne wholy from religion to superstition from faith to infidelitie from Christ to Antichrist from God to Epicurisme saying out of a wicked heart and with an impure mouth There is no God Neither did any Shepheard or Pope care for these things For all of them sought their owne and not one of them all sought for those things that belong to Iesus Christ § 137 I wonder also why after that Councell many not onely priuate Doctours did plucke in peeces the decrees of that Councell as Sixtus Senensis Canus The councell of Trent reiected by their owne side Lindanus the Byshoppe Catharinus Pighius Ouander Ferus and many more but Pope Pius himselfe confest that the worshippe of the Church of Rome had much swarued by continuance of time from the ancient institution Therefore these reuerend Doctours Cardinalls and holy Byshoppes doe giue mee both cause and leaue greatly to doubt Neither doe I desire only that the chiefe Articles of immediate Reuelation be discust which I embrace with all faith and reuerence but these articles of the second sort which are supposed to be fetcht from the first and in truth doe altogether ouerthrow them For whereas by the aduice of Austen the simplicitie of beleeuing noâ— the quickenesse of vnderstanding is required not an humble desire of learning things necessarie but a curious desire to seeke after high mysteries is forbidden by him For the simplicitie of beleife Implicite faith blinde Idoll doth as well shut out brutish ignorance as presumptuous knowledge I can therefore no longer adore that blinde Idoll implicite faith whereby we are taught to receiue with all reuerence what the Church teacheth and to beleeue as the Church beleeueth though wee doe not well know what the Church beleeueth Bellarm de iustific lib. 1. cap. 7. Neither can I giue credit to Bellarmine saying that faith doth consist in the assent not in knowledge and may better be defined by ignorance then vnderstanding Whence our learned aduersaries do too truly conclude that as Cleargy poperie was before nothing else but a catechisme of treason so Laicke-popery was nothing else but meere idiotisme and as they worthily laugh at the fox-like craft of our Doctors so likewise the asse-headed ignorance of our schollers Such faith which the colliar had so commended by Staphilus A certaine colliar being at the poynt of death Apolâ—g Staphi pars 1. pag. 53. was tempted by the Diuell and demanded what faith he held the colliar answered I beleeue and die in the faith of the Church of Christ The Colliars faith And beeing againe demanded what was the faith of the Church answered as it § 138 were in a circle it is that faith that I holde and so the Diuell being vanquished by this answer fled away if we may beleeue Staphilus Therfore the faith of a Romish Catholike is the Colliars faith that is a circular faith I pray you Saturnine teach mee first before I giue my assent and write to that reuerend Bellarmine that hee will prouide that implicite faith which is nothing else but blinde and affected ignorance bee put out of the creede wherewith the grauity and wisdome of the Catholike religion is greatly defaced I haue learnt at last to distinguish between the fictions of mans braine and the doctrines of Christian faith the foundations wherof are not the opinions of men but the oracles of God and those which are committed to writing by the Prophets and Apostles by inspiration of God wherein all necessarie principles of faith and precepts of life are plentifully contained as I heare it affirmed by the fathers Let vs now come to the creed § 139 Wherein first I demand whether the supremacy of Peter with such things as depend thereon haue her foundation directly in the Scripture as the Cardinall writeth in Tortus For I hold no doctrin necessary to be beleeued vnlesse it bee founded on the Scripture as Pope Gregorie the first reacheth I am a bad Text-man and I reade the bookes of the Prophets and Apostles but seldome the reading whereof the Church hath forbidden to vs lay-men fearing lest by reading we should fall into heresies But I am both ashamed and repent of that my ignorance and negligence Yet I leaue not off to reuerence the fathers both olde and new whose sonne I professe my felfe to bee and not their seruant I account them for schollers in the Scripture not masters witnesses and interpreters thereof not arbitrators and iudges Neither am I so much mooued with their names as with their reasons I seeke not then what they bring out of themselues but what they prooue out of the Scripture in the cause of faith I will henceforth admit of no definition of the Church vnlesse it relie vpon a manifest testimonie of holy Scripture or at the least a necessarie conclusion drawen from thence I will not haue the matter ordered by bare authority but let thing with thing cause with cause and reason striue with reason neither am I led with the number of arguments but with the waight * Number doth oppresse the memory waight doth beget knowledge Neither am I delighted with circumstances I desire breuity And I will preferre one sound argument shortly and directly concluded out of the Scripture before all the quirkes of men brought for pompe and shew Neither will I suffer any of you to leape from this one poynt to another before I see this bee fully sifted and discussed among you Buckle vp your selfe therefore Saturnine to set the onset and confirme the supremacy of Peter and the succession of the Pope and that power which you say is annext to the supremacie out of the holy Scripture but that you may not swarue from the state of the question remember that you are to prooue the primacy not of order and distinction which is granted to Peter but the primacy of power and iurisdiction which is denied For
Peter that is not spoken to others for as it is said to Peter Cusan a Cardinall against Bellarmine whatsoeuer thou shalt binde so it is said to others whatsoeuer yee shall binde Here you haue Cusan opposite to Bellarmine a Cardinall to a Cardinall One Peter you will say receiued the keyes but he receiued them not as one man but as the vnitie of the Church as Pius the second said Pius 2. a Pope against Bellarmine Here you haue a Pope opposite to a Cardinall Peter receiued them not as in his owne person but as in the person of the Church For if this be said to Peter only I will giue thee the keyes the Church hath them not If the Church haue them Peter when he tooke the keyes signified the whole Church as Austin taught Tract 14. in Joh. Then Caietane the Cardinall when he could not rid himselfe out of these straites If we speake saith he formally and properly the keyes promised to Peter are aboue the keyes of order and iurisdiction But this saith Cardinall Bellarmine is not true for it was neuer heard of in the Church that there were more keyes in the Church then two which hee doth as well grant to all the Apostles as to Peter Whence I thus argue against Bellarmine Peter receiued no other power than that which was promised in the keyes as Bellarmine saith But the rest of the Apostles had all that power as the Fathers and the learneder Papists teach and Bellarmine whether he will or no doth confes Therefore Peter had no other power than the rest of the Apostles Yet Bellarmine hath a tricke how to scape hee saith § 143 that the keyes were giuen to Peter immediately to the rest mediately by Peter With hundred chaines binde fast the man And yet this flye ladd Proteus Will still escape doe what you can And yet he shall not escape for if the keyes were giuen mediately to the rest by Peter they should open and shut binde and loose not in Christs name but in Peters name Then how can that be true which Paul writeth of himselfe Paul the Apostle neither from men nor by man but by Iesus Christ For if we credit Bellarmine he came mediately either from the man Peter or by the man Peter How doth Paul affirme that he was not inferiour to the chiefe Apostles as who had receiued both his doctrine and his vocation immediately with them from Christ Will the Cardinall then father a lye vpon the Apostle and labour to proue that Paul did mediately receiue the keyes from Peter All the Apostles receiued the keyes from Christ the spirit descended vpon all the Apostles in fiery tongues All the Apostles receiued the keyes and fiery tongues from Christ All the Apostles are pillars All the Apostles are said to be the pillars of the Church as the Fathers obserued out of the Scripture What Did Bellarmine read that to Peter was giuen a greater and a better key than to the rest of the Apostles Hath he heard that a larger and a more shining fiery tongue than the rest sate vpon Paters head as the prince then vpon the other Apostles heads Hath he learn'd that of twelue pillars one was set more firme and surer than all the rest that the house might be more supported by that than by the rest which if Bellarmine knew not let him leaue of to play the foole and to tell vs that the power was giuen to Peter immediatly from Christ and to the rest mediately by Peter as it were by assignment Marke I beseech you Calander I cannot say whether more wicked or more ridiculous consequences follow necessarily out of this place of the keyes The keyes are promised to Peter § 144 Therefore to none but to Peter Wicked and ridiculous coÌ„clusions Two keyes were giuen as badges of the ministerie Therefore three Crownes as badges of the Empire For when Christ gaue the keyes he gaue principalitie as Bellarmine saith Peter receiued the keyes of the kingdom of heauen Therefore of earthly kingdomes Peter can exclude Kings hereticall out of heauen Therefore out of their thrones He can binde sinnes Therefore Scepters He can shew his power in offences Therefore in possessions He can release penitent men from their sinnes Therefore trayterous subiects from their oathes He hath a key wherewith he doth loose the sinnes of Kings Therefore he hath a club wherewith he may breake their heads So Bellarmine hath changed Peters key into Hercules club He can loose and binde any thing He can therefore as Oedipus loose any riddle he can binde Turkes and beares These consequences proue that a King is not to be depriued of his kingdom for heresie but that the Cardinall is depriued of his wit for phrensie Peters key is altogether the key of heauen whereby by the preaching of the eternall Gospell hee hath opened heauen to the faithfull and penitent and shut it to the vnfaithfull and impenitent which the Pope the counterfet successor of Peter doth vse otherwise as somtime an elegant Poet played vpon this princely porter I should not maruaile much Doctor Giles Fletcher If that the Popes good grace Did happily beare the key Of that darke stigian place For he enriched hath that place with many an elfe And opened wide hell gate And entred in himselfe But sith that heauen and hell Are set so far asunder That he should beare the key Of heauen it is a wonder But now t is none at all From heauen he all shuts out And â—pes the gate of hell And letteth in that rout As the falling starre in the prophecie of Iohn he hath changed the key of heauen into the key of the bottomles pit § 145 Bellarmine being driuen from the keyes must needs betake himselfe to that his hold Feede my sheepe Why then good Sir why do you vrge this place of the keyes any more for the supremacie whereby nothing was promised more to Peter than was granted to all the Apostles as the Fathers both old and new both strangers and your owne do apprarantly proue But in this place because to feed is the same with to rule and Peter alone is commanded to feed the sheep not some but all therefore to Peter alone is giuen the principalitie ouer the whole Church being armed with a double sword with a double power spirituall and temporall which the old man saw I beleeue as lunatike Pentheus by fitts saw Two seuerall Sunnes two seuerall Moones appeare which the Fathers both old and new being of a more setled wit Bellarmines pride in making a Cardinall equall to a King and sharper insight could neuer see But Bellarmine thinketh so gaily of the pastorall vocation that in respect thereof he preferreth a Bishop before a King as a sheepheard before a sheepe which perhaps he had well concluded if Christ had said to Peter Feed thy sheepe he said it not but feede my sheepe But he doth not only prefer a Bishop before
at all suffer either the truth of Gods Testament to be so corrupted by such wicked Impostors or the maiestie of kingly gouernment to bee so defaced For the dissolution of gouernment springeth out of the corruption of Gods Testament Wherefore if they would admit of wholesome counsail they would iudge these deceitfull Iuglers who make controuersies last for euer by the pernicious quirkes and trickes were to bee supprest by armes not to be refuted by arte for certainely these will neuer leaue off to offer dishonour to God and wrong to Kings § 153 Then Saturnine you are too hot and earnest sayd he Patriott against that most learned Cardinall and light of our age And you must leaue off said he to praise your Cardinall and prooue the supremacie For your Popish writers could neuer yet agree vpon a text whereon the supremacie was plainely grounded Then Saturnine what is more plaine and euident saith hee then that Peter is called the head of the Apostles Ephes 1. The Popish diuision of the head and the rocke whereon Christ promised he would build his Church Matth. 16. for although S. Paul do call Christ the principall and inuisible head of the Church which giueth life to the whole bodie of the Church yet it is euident that there is a ministeriall and a visible head appointed by Christ that may outwardly gouerne the whole Church Cor. 12. whereof hee maketh mention Corinth 12. The head cannot say to the feete I haue no neede of you which cannot be vnderstood of Christ the principall head For Christ the eternall word of God can say to vs It followeth not but might haue beene aswell spoken to Iohn or Iames. I haue no neede of you it followeth then that it is to bee vnderstood of a ministeriall head that is Peter and Peters successour the Bishop of Rome And although Paul doe affirme Christ to bee that one onely cheife foundation of the Church 1 Cor. 3 1◠yet when he saith in another place that the Church is builded vpon the foundation of the Apostles therfore vpon the person of Peter the Prince of the Apostles as Christ did first call him the Rocke and Esay when in the spirit of prophesie he spake in the person of God Behold I will lay in Sion a stone a tried stone a precious corner stone a sure foundation A text peculiarly proper to Christ blasphemously applied to Peter as hee vnderstandeth Christ the cheife foundation whereof the Apostle speaketh Another foundation 1. Cor. 3. so hee did foreshew Peter whom Christ called the rocke and the Pope that precious corner stone that surefoundation but a second foundation Bellarm in praefat de Rom. Pont. cap. 1. As was likewise prophesied of one head which the sonnes of Iuda and the sonnes of Israel being assembled should appoint to themselues Whereby it appeareth that there ought to be one vniuersall Bishop of the whole Church Saunders of the visib Monar l. 4. c. 5 and that Christ and his Vicar make one head one visible and ministeriall head whereon all the Church should depend for the remedy of schisme one rocke one secondarie foundation euen the person and chaire of Peter whereon the Church might rest for feare of slipping and falling Let vs aske after the fathers the sincere interpreters of § 154 the Scripture Optatus who thinketh that the word Cephas as it signifieth a head taken from the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore calleth Peter the head of the Apostles For the word stone in the Syriake signifieth head in the Greeke Ad Marcel tom Epist 2. each prerogatiue of Peter is described by that word Now that the person of Peter was both called and laid the rocke of the Church by Christ Ierome is a witnesse who doth plainely affirme that Peter was he vpon whom the the Lord founded the Church And to Damasus tom Epist 2. August in Psal contra part Donat. I am ioyned in communion with your blessednesse that is to the chaire of Peter I know that the Church is builded vpon that rocke And Austin when hee maketh mention of the seat of Peter saith that that is the rocke Cypria de vnica Ecces Cathol And Cyprian Whosoeuer doth forsake the chaire of Peter whereon the Church is builded doth hee trust to bee in the Church It would bee too long to reckon vp all the fathers who haue written that the person of Peter was called and placed the rocke by Christ whereon hee promised not only to build the Church at that time but would build it after And therefore I alleadged three who called it not the person of Peter only but called the chaire the rocke that I might note downe in the Bishop of Rome the perpetuall building of the Church according to the words of Christ Now bee packing Patriott and deny if you can this cheife article of the Catholike faith that the supremacie and principallity of Peter is plainly grounded vpon the Scriptures Whence a diuers beginning and excellency may bee gathered both of the Ecclesiasticall and secular gouernment that the Pope as spirituall Prince as Peter hath deriued his power immediately from Christ to gouerne his subiects But secular Princes haue receiued their power mediately to gouerne their subiects either by the means of election as the Emperour and King of Polonia or of hereditary succession as the Kings of Spaine France England or of grant and donation as the free Princes or of iust warre and conquest as Godfrey heeretofore and other Lords held the holy land Therefore to the Pope as to Peter ordained the cheife spirituall Prince immediately from Christ in the Church as to the head and rocke of the Church spiritual obedience for conscience sake is to be giuen of all Christians But to secular Kings ordained mediately by humane titles onely secular obedience for policies sake to preserue good order and manners is to bee performed obedience to the higher power alway being preserued which I would haue you know I speake to that end that I might call to your remembrance Calander that whereof you cannot bee ignorant that you doe so sweare fealty to the King that you abiure not your fealty to the Vicar of Christ The vse of which article I thought good shortly to set before all Catholikes in respect of their Princes § 155 Then Patriots you haue spoken much in few words sayd he Saturnine and almost all I am sure the cheifest points which your men doe alleadge out of the Scripture for the supremacy so that you seeme to haue placed them in the rereward as your best soulders at the push of the pike whom if I shall by Gods grace ouerthrow I trust I shall more easily defeat the rest of your broken and scattered forces And first wee must shortly see in what sense Christ the eternal sonne of God is said to be the head the rock and foundation of the Church and so it shall easily
with the fellowshippe of honour and power but the beginning from one This therefore is proper to the person of Peter that he be the first stone set vpon the foundation vpon which c. How is it then deriued to Peters chaire whereon the Church was to be builded Let Peter bee changed into chaire and the masculine gender into the feminine Do you thinke that that Father had so weak and childish a memorie that within the compasse of nine lines he would so apparantly contradict himselfe that he would remoue the person of Peter out of his place and place Peters chaire in the roome to displace the Predecessour out of the ranke to place the successours To cast out the first stone in the building out of his order to place those that followed hee would neuer haue done it he was neuer so madde It was not therefore Cyprians ill memorie but the falshood of certaine scribes who brought that new clause of a quite other nature into Cyprians text Many popish correctors in this age and those very § 163 learned One copie of Cyprian alleaged against many and many famous Printers haue taken great paines in setting forth and printing of Cyprian they sought for all the antientest and sincerest manuscripts out of the best libraries of all Christendome they could possibly get they did very diligently compare them betweene themselues and all of them agreed in this that that clause could not be found in any of their written copies Pamelius a Canon of Bryges onely excepted who being an obscure man and of small reckoning said hee found that clause lately written in an old coppy belonging to the Abby of Cambray and brought it into the Anwerp editions printed by Stelsius when that notwithstanding he confesseth he had eight other written coppies in his handes fetcht out of diuers libraries in all which he saith this clause could not be found but only in the copie of Cambray Now let vs giue credit if wee can that one written coppy of the Abby of Cambray was vncorrupt and that all the rest were corrupted Let vs preferre one blinde copie before so many excellent copies both printed and written And let vs preferre one Pamelius Cannon of Briges before so many notable Romane writers Remboltus Cauchius Coster Erasmus Grauius Manutius Morelius Shall we think one to be of more credit then all the rest Which we must needes doe before wee must admit of such a bastardly and new deuised clause Let Saturnine packe vp and be gone let him brag that Peters chaire is the rocke of the Catholicke Church And let mee as my manner is a little consider the consequencies of this peeterly argument Peter confessed Christ the sonne of the liuing God to bee the rocke and foundation of the Church against whom the gates of hell shall not preuaile Therefore Peter is the rock and foundation of the Church against whom they haue preuailed Or thus Peter in respect of doctrine is the foundation as the rest of the Apostles Therefore in respect of his person Or thus Peter the first stone in order set in the foundation is the rocke Therefore the Pope Peters successour as it is presumed is the rocke The person of Peter Therefore the chaire of Peter He is more dull then a stone that gathereth so In one word Peter in this place holdeth the primacie of degree only and order Therefore it giueth the Pope of Rome the supremacie of iurisdiction and power Is not this making of the supremacie out of the rock like the making of a roape of sand how foolishly are these argued but that one thing how blasphemously of Bellarmine who applieth the prophecie of Esay of Christ the chosen stone pretious cheife corner stone a sure foundation to his Master the Pope Christ is the cheife foundation the Pope forsooth is a second This argument is not fetcht from disparates as Tortus plaies vpon vs but from immediate contraries for heauen is no farther distant from hell then Christ from the Pope that is from Antichrist But my good Lordes the Popes doe alwaies lurke vnder Peters cloake as the Dominicans are said to lurke vnder our Ladies frocke Wittily said Erasmus as many things What is charity it is a Monkes cloake said he for it couers the multitude of sinnes In like manner I may call Peters vertue the Byshops cloake for it couereth many a wicked man They do willingly snatch at that speech of Optatus Bellarm lib. 1. de Rom. Pont. cap. 17. Vall. decla de dona Constant who thinking the name Cephas in Siriacke a stone to signifie in greeke a head is set vpon Peter by the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Bellarmine obserues and therefore calleth Peter the head of the Apostles Which learned Valla doth wonder could euer come into any mans minde Comment in Ioh. cap. 1. and Cardinall Catetane a notable writer among the Papists refutes it out of the Gospell For hee alleageth out of the Euangelist to meete with this error that the word Cephas is interpreted to be Peter not a head Ferus in hunc l c. Papists against Papists And Ferus doth flatly say that that interpretation of this word is very foolish and ridiculous The diriuation of this name is not so ridiculous as the proofe of that which out of that § 165 place of Paul the head cannot say to the feete I haue no neede of you Bellarmine being falsly collected Bellarmine mistaketh S. Paul doth violently vrge against the scope and minde of the Apostle who taketh the head by a metaphor for any excellent part which is endewed with great graces the eyes the eares Chrysost hom viges nou◠in 1. Cor. Corinth 12. expounded the hands the feete for inferiour partes which are furnished with meaner gifts as Chrysostome expoundes saying they did excell in gifts some greater some lesse cheifly in the knowledge of tongues They which receiued the greater gifts did contemne them who had receiued lesser giftes and these againe greiued at it and enuied their betters This difference in the mysticall body he went about to compound by the example of agreement of the parts in the naturall body where the head doth not say to the feete I haue no need of you c. But all the members haue mutuall neede one of another Out of this metaphore Bellarmine dreames that the visible and ministeriall head of the whole Church is appointed Now marke the foolish consequences necessarily depending vpon this interpretation If one ministeriall head of the whole Church bee taken out of this place therefore because Paul maketh mention of eyes eares handes feete whereof there are two members it is requisite that there bee two in the Church that must haue two eyes 2. that must haue two eares 2. that may be resembled to two feete then it will be a very beautifull Church that doth consist of nine members only § 166 But how doe they vrge the likenesse of the head
and the feete I would faine know whom they vnderstand to be the feete of the Church Some take them to bee Kings Inquitie after the inferiour members as Cardinall Poole some for learned men as Turriane most of all the Iesuits of his owne order Kinges who with their gouernment may sustaine this putrified head Iesuites who may doe the like with their wittes and may carrie it ouer among the Indies to domineer in the new found world To the which feete the Pope cannot truely say I haue no neede of you and therefore he giueth greater credit to the Iesuites then to those idle paunches the Monkes who in their howerly praiers spend their whole time in mumbling on their beads That that also may agree with the argument of your head which Paul hath in the same place that the greatest honor is put vpon the dishonestest members hence it may be other orders will conclude that the Iesuites are more dishonest then all the rest of the Monkes But I demand why there should not be many ministeriall heades when there be many ministeriall feete where be the two eyes wherby this metaphoricall head without braines may prye into the secrets of Kinges where be the two eares whereby they may listen after all reports where be the two hands whereby they may rake and gather in all mens monies if you answere that two are not necessarie for the head when the head hath many more we confesse that it is better for your head to encrease his treasure then to make good the argument For a duality of these members are more necessarie to make the vnitie of the head that a fit proportion may be reserued But this so honorable a title the head of the Church § 167 the head of faith being proper to Christ who liueth and raigneth in the heauens To make the Pope head is blasphemie so that hee bee present in earth with his Church with his maiestie and spirit yea that hee is within his Church to giue life and gouerne the same with his word to haue this communicable with a mortall man and a sinner cannot bee done without blasphemous contumelie Some thinges in Bellarmine are blasphemous some are friuolous these are both blasphemous and friuolous as this argument drawne from a metaphoricall head whereon the supremacy the cheifest foundation of their catholike religion doth depend And here see I pray you what discreet men may suspect who think the Cardinal to be learned they yeld so much to his wit that rather then they will thinke him to be a foolish disputer they take him as it seemes to be a secret betrayer of the cause He defends his head with so withered forces and ridiculous arguments that without any resistance of the Aduersarie hee will fall to the ground by his owne weaknesse That which the Oratour said to Mar. Callidius Cicer. in Bruto negligently and coldly defending the cause of his owne head and life Thou Mar. Callidius vnlesse thou dissemblest thou wouldst not thus plead This may more rightly bee spoken to this worthy patron of his head Thou Bellarmine if thou thoughtst as thou speakest wouldst thou handle a case of such importance so lazily so loosely For whereas out of the premisses Saturnine you gather a different beginning with Bellarmine of Ecclesiasticall and secular gouernment and from the diuers beginning of each power do draw a diuers nature of obedience due to each power and doe propound the twofold vse of this article to bee considered of all Catholikes because all this discourse doth so neerely touch the Kings crown dignity I leaue it to be discussed by Regius our Counseller wherefore Calander you are to entreat him that he would tell vs what he thinks in this matter and ease me of the labor of farther disputing § 168 Then Calander truely said hee when I diligently marke all the parts of your answer I perceiue little or nothing making for this our vniuersall Ecclesiasticall Prince to be in the text For if Christ gaue the key not a scepter as well to all the Apostles and Ministers as to Peter and gaue a Bishops staffe not a sword and ordained Peter not to bee the head but a member and not the foundation of the building but a worke man as not onely many ancient but Popish interpreters of the Scripture doe teach with one consent where I pray you shall I finde grounded plainely vpon the text that vniuersall Church gouernment as they call it vnlesse peraduenture we may call Peter the Prince of the Apostles as we call Homer the Prince of Poets Demosthenes the Prince of Oratours and Plato the Prince of Philosophers Wherefore my good friend Charles I entreat thee that as Patriott hath layd open the truth of God obscured by diuers sophismes so you would free the dignity of Princes being defaced by Popish vsurpation as it becommeth one that is of counsell with the King which I euer held more deere to mee then my life euen then when I was most nousled vp in popery Then Regius All power said he is from God it is Either Ordained And that two fold Ecclesiasticall § 169 Secular The diuision of power Tolerated The Ecclesiasticall 1. If you respect Christ it is Monarchicall or gouerned by one for all power is giuen to him alone by the father both in heauen and earth 2. If you respect men is is Aristocraticall or gouerned by many and those the cheifest as Patriott confirmed out of Paul Therefore this your spirituall Prince Saturnine chosen a Monarch by himselfe a King at his owne pleasure a supposed Vicar of Christ an vniuersall Bishop ordained not by Christ the maintainer of Kings but by Phocas the murtherer of kings at that very time when as Mahomet that false Prophet his brother came into the world successor not of Peter but of Romulus what power hee hath immediately to rule ouer Kings when Peter himselfe had none at all I vnderstand that it is but tolerated As the Dragon hath from whom the two horned beast tooke all his power as Iohn testifieth in the Apocalyps Therefore this power is not ordained but tolerated not for the comfort of the world but for the plague not an holy ordinance but to bee a scourge for the Saints But there is a certaine spirituall power immediately from God True but that which promotes the Kingdome of light not that which promotes the Kingdome of darknesse which is immediately from the Diuell such as the wofull experience of many ages hath proued you Popish power to be Therfore to your spirituall Prince holding the seate of the Dragon spirituall obedience is no more due to him then to the Dragon § 170 But secular power whether it consist in many in few or in one although it be in Nero yet it is immediately ordained of God as Paul hath taught and to that purpose is called by him the ordinance of God But that Secular power from God will some say
Analytickes and after he hath read them himselfe let him teach vs how two contradictions may be true at once Secular Princes haue no power immediately from Christ to beare rule ouer subiects And Secular Princes haue power immediatly from Christ to rule ouer subiects A manifest contradiction Hee speaketh in both places not of the title but of the power A manifest contradiction But how may Proteus fast be held Who changeth shape at euerie turne But the feeble old man doth often faile in memory and contradict himselfe as Father Paulus and Fulgentius and Marsilius and Chichester haue taken the man tardy and held him to it shrewdly As the mans great wit appeares in Tortus all whose disputation doth hang vpon the begging the thing in question § 174 For that he may proue that the Kings oath doth require not only ciuill obedience of Papists but deniall of the catholike faith Bellarmine continually beggeth the question he taketh the thing in controuersie for granted to wit that it is agreed among all Catholikes that the chiefe Bishop may rightly depose hereticall Kings and free their subiects from obedience And hee affirmeth that this is the catholike doctrine but proues it not which ought soundly to haue been proued if he would disproue the oath He addeth further that when the Kings of the earth haue admittance into the Church with this condition that they submit their scepters to Christ c. if they refuse it it is lawfull for him who hath the rule ouer all the Church vpon earth in Christ his steed to remoue them from the communion of the faithfull and to forbid their subiects to obey them How falsly the Bishop of Chichester teacheth now we obserue the mans wit we are very sorry that Bellarmine doth openly begge and that one thing twise which is in the very question For it is in question among vs whether the Pope haue the power to depose the Prince and to free his subiects from their obedience Here Bellarmine as if like Apollo Pythius he gaue his Oracle from his three-footed stoole pronounceth malapertly enough that hee who is Christ his Vicegerent in gouerning the Church hath that power For he saith that he hath power to excommunicate therefore to depose He proueth that excommunication is an inward thing fastned vpon the supremacie when hee should proue that this deposing is an inward thing belonging to excommunication otherwise hee disputeth not to the point So the state of the controuersie being either turned aside or altogether vnknowne he goeth from the point and fighteth with vs after the manner of the Andabata who fought blind-fold And because the power to depose Princes by excoÌ„munication § 175 is denied the Pope therfore he saith the power of excommunicating is wholy denyed It followeth not it is a fallacie from that which is in some sort to that which is simply and absolutely And when he had affirmed and repeated it againe and againe till a man might loath it that Christs Vicar had so great power he vsed no arguments or proofes to that purpose he desireth to be credited vpon his bare word without reason as if he were a Pope Bellarmine the Pope need not alledge reasoÌ„s of their actions who is not bound to bring arguments to refute the oath for then saith he he might be thought an vndiscreete Prince if he thought he might not forbid a wicked action except he added reasons to his inhibition and write a large treatise after the fashion of the Philosophers to that end They do very cunningly as they seeme excuse that vnreasonable creature who sets downe the articles of the catholike faith as the Mathematikes do their principles You must not therefore ô yee Kings in a matter of such importance as concerns your right so neerely looke for any reasons from Robert Bellarmine more than you expect from Paul the 5. He speaketh as a Prince not as a Philosopher He setteth out not arguments but edicts He disputes not but determines in the Popeâ— cause against the King and that against the opinion of infinite Papists both better learned and honester men than himselfe as appeareth in the answer of the Bishop of Chichester So that Bellarmine seemeth to many wise-men to haue attayned an opinion of learning rather than learning it selfe Foâ— in that whole dâ—sputation the begging sophisme of the thing in question The ground of Bellarmines argument is the begging of the questioÌ„ is the foundation of all Bellarmines answer so heauy headed and dull he seemes in Logick and so vnskilfull in Grammar as appeareth in that part wherein Saturâ—ine disputeth of the spirituall and temporall obedience Bellarmine the great learned man speakes false Latin and alleageth Bellarmines owne words out of Tortus luretur fidelitas Let fealtie saith he be sworne to the King but so ne abiuretur fidelitas that faith be not forsworne to Christ his Vicar § 176 He speaketh false Latin in disgrace of all Grammarians But that farre worse that hee thinketh so basely to the contempt of Kings and Emperors For we doe not so much blame his grammar as his diuinitie And we obserue this by the way he doth obiect incongruitie of speech to others when he himselfe is faultie in manifest barbarisme and calls other mens stiles dyrty when his owne is cast ouer with hell dust That which Robert Bellarmines mouth doth clearely shew the same doth Robert Saturnine who when hee had abased the power of secular Princes to aduance forsooth the power of that one spirituall Prince hath also so tyed the spirituall obedience of Christians to the will of one Bishop that by the pretence therof he may take from Princes at his pleasure the ciuill obedience of subiects God the obiect of spirituall obedience But as he erred in the originall of either power so he erreth in the obiect and end of either obedience We make the true obiect of spirituall obedience to be God himselfe the end Gods word hee makes a contrary obiect the Pope himselfe and the end the Popes will We make the true obiect of ciuill obedience Gods ordination of the ciuill Prince the end the spirituall obedience toward God therefore Paul saith we must obey him for conscience sake not for the busines sake that is enioyned by the Prince but for the authorities sake that is ordeyned by God Hee placeth the Bishop in Gods place enioyning spirituall obedience to vs for very conscience of those things that are enioyned and hee maketh ciuill obedience terminable at pleasure by the obseruation of good order and manners So that subiects obey the ciuill Magistrate not for conscience sake as Paul speaketh but for policies sake as Bellarmine speaketh and that Clergy men obey not for necssarie subiection but at voluntarie discretion and are held in Clergie exempted from obedience not by force of law but by force of reason as hee saith So to vs the obseruing the spirituall dutie is the direction and
limitation of the ciuill to him the bond of the spirituall obedience is the disioynting and loosing of the ciuill Is not Bellarmines deceit euident enough who vnder the pretence of spirituall obedience hath taken the ciuill cleane away So he playeth the iugler Ciuill obedience taken away to deceiue the Papists sight and that with a twofold tricke One whereby he perswadeth that for the shew of ciuill obedience they thinke the spirituall may bee abiured by them the other whereby vnder the shew of spirituall obedience he cleane taketh away the ciuill Hence ariseth those new and strange interpretations § 177 of Bellarmine in the schoole of Diuinitie Bellarmines new and strange interpretations Let not obedience be shewed to man contrary to the obedience of God that is let not obedience be shewed to the King contrary to the obedience of the Bishop And we must rather obey God than men that is we must rather obey the Pope than Kings I appeale to your owne consciences ye Papists whether you thinke this to be the Apostles commentarie that in respect of spirituall obedience which consisteth in faith deuotion loue and feare of God a sinfull mortall man should be aduanced into the seat of God What if the Pope command which God forbiddeth that wee take from Caesar the things that are Caesars by Gods owne gift his sword scepter crowne subiects and life is not this vnder the shew of spirituall obedience to forbid ciuill obedience And to command that obedience be giuen to the Pope commanding vniust things against Gods obedience who hath enioyned your subiection to the King Rom 13. This ought not to appeare spirituall obedience to you but spirituall cousenage whereby vnder the cloake of spirituall obedience which the Pope hath gotten by the gift of men he loose the bond of ciuill dutie which is due to the King by the gift of God § 178 I beseech you ô yee Christian Kings and Princes whether you thinke it be for your good A caue at for Kings that such positions as these be setled into your subiects mindes That such a catechisme as this not only lye close hidden in books but be openly taught in your Vniuersities Churches There be none so dangerous trecheries to Princes as those which are hid vnder the cloake of duty and coloured with the name of catholike religion Vnder the pretence whereof Bellarmine hath cherished rebellion in the subiects of the Venetian common-weale which professeth Popery as hee hath done at this time in the subiects belonging to the most excellent King of Great Britaine A Troiane or a Tirian to him are all alike Beware ô yee Kings lest the mischiefe intended to one fall vpon all the rest Saturnine is an ill egge of an euill bird as in the proofe of the article of supremacie he is a corrupter of Gods will so in the practise of it he is an enemy of princely gouernment And as you had him ere while a manifest forger so now you haue him an open traytor § 179 Here Calander both your discourses said he the one against the Pope the other for the King giue me iust occasion of two doubts one how the spirituall and ciuill obedience is distinguished in the word of God the other whether the former Councells did cast of this spirituall power which the Pope doth generally vsurpe Which two points being briefely and plainly discust will cleare the whole controuersie and satisfie any man that is not contentious Then Patriott You do wisely Calander saith he to call euery thing to her beginning for euery thing as it is first so it is true and that which is right sets out both â—â—lshood and it selfe First therefore I answer about the distinction of the double power the Spirituall and Ciuill Chrysost de verbis Esa Vidi Dâ—m hem both which Christ ordayned I call that Spirituall which concernes the soules and that Ciuill which rules the bodies That 4. Power distinguished Christ committed to his Minister this to his Magistrate somtime to more somtime to few often to one That is called Episcopall gouernment this Princely or that is spirituall this ciuill Each as I said is of God To whom it is committed and how performed The Holy Ghost hath appointed Bishops to rule the Church of God Act 20. and Wisdome saith By me Kings doe raigne and Law-makers appoint iust things Therefore Kings doe rule by God as Bishops do feede Gouernment belongs to them Ministerie to these But these you will say haue Gouernment also I confesse it Bernard de consid ad Eug But these haue an inward gouernment ouer mens soules they haue an outward ouer mens bodies Bishops haue the key of the word and sacraments to be exercised not in the name of the King Matth 16. but in the name of Christ nor the key only of knowledge The difference of gouernment between Princes and Bishops Rom 13. Chrysost ex Paul ibid. but of discipline and that not after their owne pleasure but after Gods will Kings haue the sword to be drawne in defence of godlines and iustice whereby they command those things that be true and good forbid such as be false and euill and punish the wicked of what calling soeuer and defend the righteous The weapons of Bishops are spirituall of Kings corporall Therefore Bishops ought to teach to admonish to reproue to depriue of the seales of grace and to driue from the communion of the faithfull those that grieuously and publikely offend till they repent Chrysost ibid. Kings ought to restreyne them according to the qualitie of the offence either of libertie or goods with losse of limmes or of life it selfe Therefore the gouernment of Bishops is by perswasion of Kings by compulsion of a Bishop directing of a King constreyning A King rules men a-against their will a Bishop with their wills Jerom. al Heliâ— in Epitap Nâ—potiani Hee doth gouerne by feare this bringeth to libertie He reserueth the bodies for death this keepeth the soules for life Either of them doth punish not only theeues murtherers adulterers periured men traytors but also blasphemers Idolators Heretickes Schismatickes whether they be of the Laity or Clergie but he with the corporall sword the byshoppe with the spirituall Either of them haue equally a care of holinesse and honesty the one that he may teach by precepts the other that hee may ordaine by lawes Either of them is practised about holy things but not vpon holy things For they are not subiect either to the wil of the Pastor or gouernment of the King The King is conuersant about holy and diuine things not in the administration and execution thereof as Vzias but in appointing and ordering them as Ezechias A byshoppe is conuersant about holy things in the doing and executing of them to preach the word to Minister the sacraments and vse the keies Good lawes are made to settle truth by the counsell and faithfulnesse of the
Byshoppe and by the power and authoritie of the King § 180 There are some who foolishly compare these two together there are other who doe wickedly mingle them together so that one doth destroy the other which God hath most wisely ioyned together that one should helpe the other Now this spirituall power if you respect Christ Ephes 4. is monarchicall vnder him alone if men it is aristocraticall vnder many as wee shewed out of Paul The ciuill is of three sorts Either belonging to the People Princes or cheife King Which last when wee set foorth wee disgrace not the rest The duty of a Byshoppe It cannot be denied but that the byshoppe in his spirituall perfection and comfort doth excell the King for God doth not appoint the King but the byshoppe to bee the seedsman of his word the Messenger of his grace the disposer of the mysteries of his kingdome But in the outward authoritie and power of compelling the King doth excell the byshoppe while hee commandes that which God alloweth Neither do I so preferre the ciuill gouernment before the spirituall but do affirme that the same God who teacheth those that be simple and draw such as be willing by the mouth of the minister doth draw those that bee negligent and constraine such as be retractory by the sword of the magistrate whom the spirit and God of the spirits hath ordained to that purpose Yea truly they who set the ciuill gouernment behind the spirituall simply as the body behinde the soule and the flesh behinde the spirit do make a very fleshly comparison betweene Kings and Byshoppes vnlesse they imagine Byshoppes to be without bodies and Kinges without soules And who so inferre thereupon that a godly king cannot inflict a punishment vpon a wicked Priest doe deface holinesse in the King as a matter temporall and aduance wickednesse in a Priest as a matter spirituall And who thence conclude that a Christian King cannot promote holy rites by his lawes as well as a minister can by his doctrine and censure giue more without cause to the shauing of a Priest then to the character of Baptisme and do foolishly preferre priestly annointing before the Princely And they seeme not wel to vnderstand what those excellent lights of the world Constantine Iustinian Theodosius Valentinian Gratian Zeno Charles the great Lâ—wes his sonne and Lothary his nephew and many other Kings and Emperors did out of Gods word iustly commaund Byshoppes in causes ecclesiasticall and wherein they did obey Byshoppes as was made manifest before But the Byshoppe hath power from God to gouerne § 181 the Church as is before said therefore aboue the King in the gouernment of the Church I distinguish of the gouernment One was Inward Outward It is one thing to administer the inward another thing to order it In the administration of the inward gouernment a Byshoppe doth excell a King in the ordering of it a King doth excell a Byshop I confesse a Pastor is superiour in feeding so Carpenters in building and Mariners in sayling are aboue a Prince A Priest not aboue a Prince What then are they simply better It is a fallacy from that which is in part to that which is simply But the actions of a Byshoppe are more excellent then the workes of a King as the preaching of the word the administration of the Sacraments the remitting and retaining of sinnes Therefore a Byshoppe doth excell a King But the working and perfection of these things doth depend not vpon the arbitrement of the Byshop but the commandement of God August cont Cres lib. 4. c. 6. Ambros There is a double spirituall power 1 Ministeriall of men 2 Imperiall of God Therefore the credit of these actions must serue the glory of God not the honour of the Priest The spirituall worke is of God A Byshoppe great not in respect of his person but doctrine the bodily seruice is of the Minister Men in the remission of sinnes doe not exercise the right of power but doe exercise their Ministerie They pray God doth grant The ministerie is from men the gift from an heauenly power The reason therefore drawne from the perfection of heauenly graces in the Church to preferre the person of a Priest before the person of a Prince is very weake because the subiection due to the sword is annexed to the person of the Prince the worthinesse and power due to the key is not annexed to the person of the Byshoppe but to his doctrine § 182 By Gods law obedience is due to each For hee that saith keepe the commandement of the King saith likewise obey your Prelates who watch ouer your soules But we are to hold this that here are not to be vnderstood by Prelates Popes and Cardinalls who obtrude their owne inuentions vpon vs but holy and Christian Byshops and Pastors who deliuer the word of God vnto vs as the Apostle addeth for wee are not tyed to the decrees of Doctours but to the oracles of God Therefore the obedience required is not the outward subiection to the person of the Priest but an inward submission to the doctrin of Christ and an allowance and practise of the same For in respect of the person Byshoppes are called seruantes and their function is called a Ministery as I said Therefore the greatest King is bound to beleeue and obey the least seruant of God deliuering his Lords will And he oweth that subiection to the Lord not to his Messenger to his doctrine not to his person For hee commeth not in his own but in the Lords name which may be as truely said of the meanest Minister as of the greatest Byshoppe What a Byshop may do A Byshoppe therefore may teach a King that is ignorant may reproue him being an Hereticke as the Prophet did Ieroboam king of Iuda may admonish him being of a bad life as Iohn did Herod may correct him being a Tyrant as Elias did Ahab may reprehend him being otherwise good if hee doe openly and greeuously trangresse as Nathan did Dauid and depriue him of the sacrament of grace while he repent as Ambrose did Theodosius But whether he can remoue him from the companie of his faithfull subiects by excommunication it is a great question and diuersly discussed by the Fathers They who hold it may be done by the Byshop do denie for all that that the King by him may bee put from the obedience of his subiectes much lesse being excommunicated bee abandoned by his subiects and killed either by open force or secret treacherie as certaine of the popish sort doe hold I say certaine for the honester sort decree otherwise and commit the King to the Byshoppes cure submit him not to his Court. For the King is the Lords seruant and the Byshoppes Lord as I said before subiect to the Byshoppes pulpit not his consistorie that he may be directed by him not iudged by him A Byshoppe is appointed to perswade not compell not to gape
after crownes but to watch ouer their soules and when hee obeyeth the King then hee prescribeth the doctrine of obedience to others as Christ Paul and Peter went before them both in precept and practise § 183 Then Calander you haue satisfied me abundantly Patriot Primacie of order onely due to Peter in the distinction of these powers now if you please I desire the other about the largnes of that spirituall power which the Pope now vsurpes whether the former Councells did grant the same Then Patriot the Fathers saith he doe grant to Peter the primacie of order and to the Byshoppe of Rome as to his successour whom certaine doe call the Byshoppe of the first sea but they deny vnto him the primacie of power as I said either ouer Kings or ouer their fellow Byshoppes Ierusalem Anâ—ioch Alexandria Constantinople Rome There were either foure or fiue Patriarches among whom the gouernment of the whole Church was diuided That all the rest were equall to the Patriarch of Rome in all points of iurisdiction whose power was bounded within certaine limits out of which he might not passe doth appeare by that notable Cannon the sixt The Nicene Councell of 318. Byshops of the Nycene Councell Which was gathered together by the authoritie of Constantine the great in the yeare of Christ 325. wherein 318. Byshoppes met together and set out 20. true Cannons only as Ruffinus numbers them the true copies whereof remained in all the patriarchall Churches and are extant in many others at this day The sixt Cannon of the Councell doth make the gouernment of the Byshoppe of Rome the forme of gouernment of the Byshoppe of Alexandria as it is said before Where it doth appeare that the gouernment of the byshoppe of Rome was shut within the compasse of his owne Prouince For if it had reached into other Prouinces it had not beene the forme of the gouernment of Alexandria Rome no larger in iurisdiction then Alexandria which was contained in one Prouince Againe it appeareth by the Cannon that the byshoppe of Rome had the same fashion Therfore the gouernment of Alexandria was like vnto Rome How could there otherwise bee a likenesse For there could be no likenesse betweene an vniuersall byshoppe and a prouinciall The second generall Councell was the first Councell § 184 of Constantinople assembled by Theodosius the elder in the yeare of Christ 381. wherein 150. Constantinople Councell the first of 150. Byshoppes byshoppes met together who confirmed the decree of the Nicene Councell Then came the third generall Councell the first of Ephesus The Councel of â—phesus of 200. Byshops gathered together by Theodosius the younger in the yeare of Christ 4â—1 it consisted of 200. byshoppes in which two Councells the Prouinces of the Christian world were diuided and euery Prouince assigned to his owne Patriarch and the byshoppe of Constantinople by name made equall to the byshoppe of Rome without any difference of honour but that the byshop of Constantinople was next after the byshop of Rome in place had the second voice in all answers and subscriptions The 4. The Councel of Chalcedâ—ne of 630. Byshoppes generall Councell of Chalcedon gathered by Valentinian and Marcian in the yeare of Christ 451. which consisted of 630. byshoppes who decreed thus in the 28. Cannon we euery way following the decrees of the holy Fathers and acknowledging the Cannon of the 150. byshoppes we also decree the very same and ordaine the same about the priuiledges of the most holy Church of Constantinople which is new Rome For to the throne of old Rome because that Citie bare rule ouer all the Fathers by right giue the priuiledges Constantinople equall with Rome and the 150. Fathers being mooued with the same consideration doe giue equall priuiledges to the most holy throne of new Rome rightly iudging that citie which is honoured both with the Presence and Senate of the Empire and doth enioy equall priuiledges with Rome that ancient Lady should be aduanced in causes Ecclesiasticall aswell as she and be as much esteemed being the next vnto her § 185 But the fathers of the Councell of Chalcedone Acto 3. write thus to Leo the most holy and blessed vniuersall Archbishop and Patriarch of great Rome Note saith Binius that in these bookes Leo is called the vniuersall Archbishop Suri tom 2. Concil pag. 111. Bini tâ—m 2. Concil fol. 215. But note also that which Binius concealed that it is added to Leo the Archbishop of the Romanes Note heere the authority of the Bishop of Rome saith Surius but it may be that these words slipt out of the margent into the text though they bee most true saith Binius But we appeale from these two pararasites of the Romane Bishop to the very acts of the Councell themselues which we before alleadged But this canon is reiected say they by Leo the Bishop of Rome about the priuiledges and eminency of the Bishop of Constantinople because he presupposeth that the Roman seat was made the head of the Church not by Gods Law but by mans Law as Binius saith fol. 180. whom shall we beleeue Leo who out of his ambition reiected the canon or Gregorie who with all reuerence receiued the whole Councell as it is in Gratian distinct 15. cap. sicui But the Councell say they in their Epistle writ Leo the head of the vniuersall Church Because Leo so writeth Piniuâ—iâ— anno in hanc Synod 188. lib. 3. epist 3. to Eulogius the Bishop of Alexandria your holinesse knoweth that by the holy Synode of Chalcedon the name of vniuersality was giuen to the seat of the Bishop of Rome onely wherein now by Gods prouidence my selfe doe serue Why then is not the name of vniuersall prefixed before the Epistle of the fathers It was prefixed say they but by the craft of some Scribe it was taken out what a iest is this as if it were not more likely that the Popes Epistle admitted a fraudulent addition Whether one Leo or 600. Bishops are rather to bee beleeued then the Epistle of the generall Councell a subtraction But hee it so let Leo haue written so Whether is it more meete to giue credit to the Pope priuately in his owne cause or to 600 Bishops in the cause of the Church decreeing against it in a publike Councell especially when as Gregorie the great doth plainely write that none of his predecessours did euer vse the title of vniuersall Bishoppe Farther the fift generall Councell was the second of § 186 Constantinople assembled in the Empire of Iustinian 2. Constantinople Councell of 280. Bishops in the yeere of Christ 586. wherein were present 280. Bishops who repeating word for word the former decree of Chalcedon renewed in the 36. canon Whereby it is euident that Constantinople had no lesse authority in Ecclesiasticall causes then Rome had and that Rome had obtained the primacy of order because it was the cheife
iustification and of the saluation of the Elect by the grace of Christ before Peter gaue his sentence and that not sitting but arising and that very modestly and gently Afterward Iames did onely yeeld his opinion but pronounced and set downe in writing the decree it selfe which all the assembly of Apostles and Preists did follow It seemed good also not to Peter alone but to the Apostles and Preists with the whole Church to send certaine choice men to Antioch with the Apostle Paul and Barnabas and the Synodall Epistle did not beare the name of Peter but of all the Apostles Preists and Brethren And if Peter had receiued the primacy of iurisdiction from Christ the other Apostle had done him great wrong that suffered not Peter to bee President of the Councell that they sent Peter as inferior into Samaria that they took accompt of his doing that they met not together by his appointment that they suffered him not to sit aboue others to propound the decree to send Legates and to seale vp the Synodall Epistle in his owne name But the Apostles did no wrong to Peter It followeth then that Peter receiued no primacy of iurisdiction from Christ but was equall to the rest of the Apostles and inferiour to the whole Councell The Papists doe grant a double gouernment to Peter § 201 Peters double pretended gouernment Galat. 2. Paul nothing inferiour to Peter They make him Lord of the spirituals and temporals Therefore the Apostle Paul did ill bee it spoken with reuerence who made himselfe equall to Peter and gaue out that he was inferiour in nothing vnto Peter and which was more reprehended him sharpely to his face as his equall and fellow-seruant and that publikely when hee tooke him in a fault For the Gospell saith he was committed to me ouer the Gentiles as it was to Peter ouer the Iewes For hee that was powerfull through Peter in the Apostleship of the Iewes the same was powerfull in mee ouer the Gentiles And when as Iames Cephas and Iohn who seemed to bee pillers knew that grace was giuen me then they gaue the right hands of fellowship to me and Barnabas See Cephas doth acknowledge Paul his fellow hee had him not for a subiect neither did hee challenge to himselfe the highest top of gouernment but gaue the right hand of fellowship which was done by Peter not only in respect of humilitie of minde but for equalitie of office Farre be it from vs to thinke it was written by Paul for pride of minde but for the truth of the matter And if Christ had appointed Peter the vniuersall Bishop Prince of his Church how durst Peter and Paul couenant betweene them-selues in the 18. yeare after Christ his passion that Peter should exercise the Apostleship ouer the Iewes and Paul ouer the Gentiles not only but chiefly whereby Paul by the Antients is called the Prince of the Apostles as well as Peter But the equall hath no gouernment ouer his equall Peter would be are no rule ouer the clergie 1 Pet 5. Neither could Peter himselfe beare rule ouer the Clergie that he might not seem to permit that to other which he would not take to himselfe when hee called himselfe not a chiefe Priest but a fellow Priest Much lesse did he vse the sword and ciuill gouernment and iudge Caesar to be subiect vnto him but admonished himselfe with all other Christians to submit themselues to Caesar as to the most excellent and to other Magistrates as sent from him neither did at any time exercise ciuill gouernment He had it not therefore for that is not a power which is neuer brought into act Therefore Peter was no more ouer Kings than hee was ouer Apostles § 202 Nay Christ himselfe as a man was not aboue the Emperour Christ himselfe as man not aboue Emperors As he is God he is King of Kings and Lord of Lords as he was man he did not only submit himselfe to Tiberius but to Pilate Tiberius Deputie in Iurie You had no power said he ouer me if it were not giuen you from aboue Againe he saith that his kingdome was not of this world when he was demanded of Pilate what kingdome he laid claime vnto Whereby it appeareth that Christ was to haue not a temporall August in Psal 47. but a spirituall kingdome as Austin gathereth out of those words Harken to this ô yee Kings and enuy not Christ is a King after another fashion than you are who said my kingdome is not of this world Feare not therefore if the kingdome of this world be taken from you you shall haue another giuen vnto you and that a heauenly one whereof he is King If Christ had not a temporall kingdome was it for Peter to haue it what is this else but to make the seruant aboue his master and the embassador aboue him that sent him and if it did not belong neither to Christ nor to Peter do you thinke that not only the temporall kingdome but the chiefe gouernmēt ouer all temporal kingdoms was giuen to the Pope Christs supposed Vicar Peters counterfeit successor fie vpon such foolish pride fie vpon such loftie vanitie which Christ did reprehend in many places in the the Apostles when he said the Kings of the earth beare rule ouer them but you not so And as my father sent me so I send you And my kingdome is not of this world And yet Bellarmine dares to write Bellarmine contrary to Christ that the supreme temporall power was giuen to the chiefe Bishop which Christ himself by his owne confession did not exercise Christ saith the Kings of the earth beareth rule ouer them but you not so Bellarmine contrary but you so Christ as my Father sendeth me so I send you Bellarmine contrary not as my Father sendeth me do I send you The Father sent me in humilitie and ignominie I send you in pompe and maiestie Christ my kingdome is not of this world Bellarmine contrary yea it is of this world and of all this world So manifestly doth the Cardinall contradict Christ But although Christ as man did not exercise temporall § 203 power he might if he had so liked saith Bellarmine Here the question is not what Christ could haue done but what he did Neither is the authoritie of Peter to be grounded vpon that which Christ could haue done but vpon that which Christ did indeed Christ could if he had pleased haue made the world in an instant but he would not the Scripture witnesseth he would not because it is said that hee tooke to him six daies to bring forth that worke He could if he would haue redeemed the world with one drop of blood without death but he would not that hee would not the Scripture beareth witnes wherein it is said that he must die for vs. So he could if hee would as man exercise the dominion of temporall things but hee would not that hee would not truth it selfe
doth witnes which said my kingdom is not of this world From a possibilitie to a deed the argument is not of force in Christ much lesse in Peter O pleasant madnes of Bellarmine wherby he dreameth that the temporall power in possibilitie as hanging in the ayre is bestowed vpon his Bishop § 204 But marke the mans reason God hath appointed Christ to be heyre of all things How the temporall rule forsooth descendeth vpon the Pope Therfore if he would he could haue cast Tiberius out of his throne and Pilate out of his iudgement seate for he was the heyre of all things Peter could if hee would haue wrested Nero's scepter out of his hands for he was heyre to Christ And the Pope can if he will cast of the Crowne from the head of any King heretike or catholike if he begin to go astray for he is Peters heyre For all comes to this at last that the temporall dominion of the whole world descends from Christ to Peter from Peter to the Pope That the Pope forsooth might haue and exercise power ouer Kings which Christ had but vsed not but might haue vsed if hee had been so pleased A vant with all these foolish quiddities which inferre such dangerous consequences Austin and Maldonate against Bellarmine But if hee had consulted not only with Austin but also with Maldonat on of his owne side hee should haue vnderstood that that place was to be interpreted of the spirituall not temporall inheritance of the world granted to Christ by the Father For what he that refused the iudgement of diuiding a priuate inheritance would he take to him the publike inheritance of the whole world And he that willingly submitted himselfe to the authoritie of Pilate giuen from aboue euen to the death of the Crosse did hee shew himselfe a temporall Lord both ouer Tiberius and the whole world The power of Pilate saith Bellarmine was not ordeyned § 205 but permitted And this is the sense of the place that Pilate could do nothing against Christ if God had not permitted it As that place is also vnderstood this is your houre and power of darknesse Luc 22. but because S. Thomas saith he vpon the 13 to the Romanes vnderstandeth the place of the ordinarie power we do not disagree But that this power did extend it selfe to Christ we thinke that to be done out of Pilates ignorance who not knowing the worthines of Christ iudged him as some priuate Citizen of the country As if in our dayes a Clergie man were brought to the bar of a Secular Iudge vnder the name and habite of a Lay-man hee may be condemned by that power wherewith a Laicke may out of the ignorance of the Iudge yet it doth not follow thereby that Clarkes by law are subiect to the iudgement of Lay-men or that Christ was subiect to the iudgment of Pilate Thus far Bellarmine But Christ said that Pilates power was not permitted § 206 but giuen from aboue The permitted power was that power of darknes whereby God suffred that the Iewes should kill the Lord of Glory wherein they sinned most greiuously And therefore it is called the power of darknesse not giuen from aboue as was Pilates the Iudge which Austin called not an vsurped but an vniust power Which place saith he when I heard it to be expounded by S. Thomas of a lawfull power I do not withstand it Bellarmine contradicteth himselfe It is well that which before you did wickedly affirme being instructed by Thomas you honestly deny The man speakes out of a boate now enclining to this side now to that neither doth he somtime contradict others so much as himselfe But marke how by turning himselfe into all parts he hath found a starting hole to escape by Whereas Pilate did stretch out this power against Christ it was out of Pilates ignorance that knew not the worth of Christ As if a Clerke vnder the habite of a Lay man should bee brought before a lay-Iudge he might by the ignorance of the Iudge be condemned as a Lay-man which notwithstanding the Law doth not allow c. That which he imputes to the ignorance of Pilate Austin imputes it to his feare lest he should offend Caesar in loosing of Christ. But this may be ascribed to his ignorance that he beggeth the question Bellarmine begs the question For he takes it as granted which is in question that a Clerke may not by law be condemned by a secular Iudge though out of the Iudges ignorance he may being attired like a Layman As if he should say that Alexander the 3. being in his pontificalibus might not rightly be iudged by Fredericke the Emperor Alexander 3. but being in his cookes apparell he might by ignorance or that Bishop who bare armes against Richard the first King of England An English Bishop in K Richard the first dayes Odo brother to W. Conqueror could not be hanged in his Bishops attire but being found in a coat-armour hee might by ignorance Or that Odo the brother of William the first a very wicked traytor could not be committed to ward as Bishop of Bayon but as Earle of Kent Or that some trayterous Iesuite imagine some Garâ—et or Oldcorne could not bee hanged in his massing robes but might by ignorance being clad in a Courtiers attire I could wish rather that such Clerkes were vnknowne than knowne But he doth very vntowardly make Christ his innocencie a cloake for a harmefull Clerke that because Christ could not be rightly condemned by Pilate therefore euery Clerke is exempted from the iudgement of a secular Iudge It is as I said a manifest begging of the thing in question For I can better dispute after a contrary manner There was no exempting of the person of Christ from the iudgement of Pilate Therefore there is no exempting of Paul the fift from the iudgment of the Emperor For if Christ the chiefe Bishop was not exempted from the iudgment of the Emperor whose power was from aboue then certainely the Bishop of Rome ought not to be exempted from the iudgement of the Emperors power The actions of Christ are rules for the Pope the actions of Popes are not rules for Christ But whereas the Cardinall brings in his Clearke in § 207 a Lay-mans weede before a secular Iudge hee doth very ill apply it to his purpose For he hauing got this freedome or exemption as is taught he should not say to the Iudge that hee hath power from heauen against him but the contrary you haue no power against me froÌ„ aboue for I am a Clerke but when Christ said not this but the cleane contrary you haue power against me froÌ„ aboue he allowed not the exeÌ„pting of a Clerke vnles the prerogatiue of a Clerke be greater than the prerogatiue of Christ But you haue brought in a very dull-pated Clerke who being endowed with a priuiledge as you call it cannot vtter it that he may be safe from danger being
not preferre himselfe before the sea of Alexandria and Antioch but the sea of Constantinople tooke them both away and did not equall himselfe to the Romane but abolished the Romane for he was the vniuersall and onely Byshoppe and made the other not his fellow but his Vicar For other were not Byshoppes but his Vicars onely as hee imagineth Gregorie to haue thought Lib. 4. epist 36. Lib. 4. ep 34. For Gregorie thought by that title not to take away all Byshoppes but to diminish them or that other Patriarches had their honour abrogated but derogated nor that all other were put downe but that hee was set vp aboue all other neither did hee goe about that one thing that he alone should be but be alone in authoritie or that other should be no Byshoppes at all but that he should seeme a Byshoppe of better worth then the rest and that hee should ioyne them as parts to himselfe not cut them off and should bee among Byshoppes as Lucifer among the Angells who preferred himselfe before others tooke not others away So this vniuersall Byshoppe suffered other Byshoppes to bee but to be in subiection if wee beleeue Gregorie a better interpreter of his owne minde then Bellarmine And this did Boniface the third effect when Boniface tooke nothing to him by the grant of Phocas which Iohn did not claime by the grant of Mauritius That which Boniface tooke to himselfe Paul the 5. retaineth and that much more He doth retaine therefore a new prophane wicked § 111 blasphemous name c. as Gregorie thought while hee is called vniuersall Byshoppe It is well said and truely an euill head is a head of euills And euery euill as it is more generall is the worse And therefore an vniuersall euill is the greatest euill from whence all other euills are powred into the Church and Common-weale into the Church heresies into the Common-weale treasons while it vtterly lost the faith of Christ and trod vnderfoote the maiestie of the Emperour Lib. 4. Ep. 39. Gregorie foretould each of them For thus he said to Anianus to consent to this wicked name what is it else but to loose the faith And how much damage the faith hath sustained it shall appeare by those Articles of the faith which follow And to Mauritius he writ Epist 32. that who so delighteth in that name doth thereby set himselfe aboue the honour of the Emperour And how much damage the Empire hath sustained the lamentable endes of many emperours doth declare Regius our Councellor shall tell you who they were Gregorie as I said was a true alasse too true a Prophet And our learned interpreter of Gregorie the Byshoppe of Chicester said well that the vniuersall Byshop is for the Empire Lucifer for the Church Antichrist § 212 Yet Gregorie himselfe they say though hee liked not the vniuersall title he exercised the vniuersall iurisdiction Wherein they imagine Gregorie to be not truly holy but prophanely politicke like to Caesar who refused the name of a King as odious that hee might more cunningly exercise the authority of a King Therefore they counterfet a certaine Epistle of Gregorie thus indorst to Iohn Byshoppe of Siracuse To Iohn Byshoppe of Siracuse concerning the Byshoppe of Constantinople accused of a foule fault In the Epistle it selfe the Bizancen primate is said to haue beene accused of a certaine fault Gregor lib. 7. Epist 64. whom the most holy Emperour would haue iudged by vs according to the cononical decrees But the error of name Bizancene or Biazene deriued not from Bizantium the citie of Constantinople Glosse in Grati. edita à Greg 13 but from Bizatium a Prouince of Africa is amended in the glosse of the Cannon law which saith that Anselme and Gratian were deceiued in the inscription of the Epistle of Saint Gregorie An epistle suspected to be forged because Bizancene did not signifie the Patriarch of Constantinople but the Primate of Africa Which things giues vs iust cause to suspect that the Epistle is forged as another wherein they bring in Gregorie affirming that the Constantinopolitane Church is subiect to the Apostolick-sea Lib. 7. epi. 63. Lib. 2. de Rom. Pontific c. 14. as Eusebius the Byshoppe of the same sea doth confesse Which place Bellarmine citeth But in Gregories time none did sit in the sea of Constantinople but Iohn and Siricius who did vsurpe the title of vniuersall Byshoppe Nicephorus a witnesse in his tripartite historie Whereby it appeareth that a counterfeit Eusebius is brought in as a witnesse of the Romane prerogatiue A counterfet Eusebius and a bastardly Epistle deuised by some scribe who testified that Gregorie wrot that being dead which while he liued hee reprehended so earnestly not only in another but in himselfe When this deuise tooke no successe they tried another § 213 way Baronius Bellarmine That there were very many of Gregories Predecessors who did write themselues Byshoppes of the Catholicke Church that is of the vniuersall The vniuersall Byshoppe and Byshop of the vniuersall Church not all one And that it is all one to be called the vniuersall Byshoppe of the Church and Byshop of the vniuersall Church Wherein they haue not onely Costerus gaine-saying them in his Euchiridion and Lindane in his Panoplie in whose iudgement these differ the vniuersall Byshoppe and the Byshoppe of the vniuersall Church or that all ambiguitie may be taken away they deny it to bee one to be called the Byshoppe of the Catholicke Church that is vniuersall and Catholicke that is vniuersall Byshop of the Church And they will deny it Is it all one to say Tortus is a learned diuine of the schoole of Papia and a Diuine of the learned schoole of Papia Nothing lesse For in that proposition false praise is giuen to Tortus in this true to Papia So the Pope is the Catholicke Byshoppe of the Church is one thing and the Pope is the Byshoppe of the Catholike Church is another For in that proposition a counterfet title of the Pope in this the true name of the Church is expressed But Catholicke and Vniuersall are all one What then But these propositions be not all one The Pope of Rome is the Byshoppe of the catholicke Church i. of the vniuersall therefore the Byshoppe is vniuersall no more then these two propositions be all one The King of Spaine is the Catholike King therefore the vniuersall King Or thus The King of Spaine is the King of the Catholicke Church therfore he is King of the whole Christian world For the power ouer all Churches doth no no more belong to the Pope who is called Catholike then the power ouer all kingdomes belongeth to the King that is called Catholike § 214 Although this vniuersall Bishop challenge the cheife gouernment not onely ouer spirituall but ouer temporall causes also so that the power ouer all things is in the Pope the execution of that power is sayd to reside in Emperours and Kings which
he may take from one and giue to another as to his vassals at his owne will and pleasure as Gregrrie the seuenth did And if hee will to vnite each power both the Bishoply and Imperiall in himselfe by the force and right of his Popedome as Boniface the eighth did Whereof the diuine Apostle S. Peter did neither but being poore and lowly who thought that the care of feeding not the power of ruling was granted vnto him and that not the gouernment but the ministery was committed to him As Bernard said to Pope Eugenius Bern. de consid ad Euge. lib. 2. Gouernment is forbidden the Apostles Therefore darest thou vsurpe either gouerning the Apostle-ship or being an Apostle the gouernment The Apostolike forme is this gouernment is forbidden the ministery is enioyned What then will you say did he denie that Eugenius the Pope was the temporall Lord of his prouinces Not so But hee answereth be it that thou challenge them it must bee by some other claime not by the right of an Apostle Lib. 5. de Rom. Pont. cap. 20. For Peter could not giue that he had not Which answer the Cardinall doth well allow Whereby it appeareth that these two powers by the force and right of the Popedome either can or ought to be confounded in one person Nich. pa. in epist ad Micha Imp. As Nicholas the first himselfe taught when wee come to the truth speaking of Christ the Sauiour neither did he of his owne accord as Emperour take to him the right of the Bishopricke Lib. 5. de Rom. Pont. cap. 5. or being Bishop vsurped the name of the Emperour which place Bellarmine taking vpon him to expound Nicholas the first saith hee doth directly teach that Christ did distinguish the acts offices and dignities of the Bishop and the Emperour lest the Emperour should presume to enter vpon the right of the Bishop or the Bishop vpon the rights of the Emperour And yet Bellarmine doth maintain that these two powers are confounded in the Bishop of Rome Bellarmin contradicteth Christ the Pope and himselfe by the power and right of his Bishopricke which he confessed to be distinguished plainely by Christ and the Pope What will you doe with this good-fellow who contradicts both Christ the Pope and himselfe at his pleasure But I leaue Bellarmine in this point to be fully confuted and confounded by our Counseller Regius Heere only I make it plaine that the Pope doth vsurpe temporall dominion ouer the Emperour which neither Peter nor Christ had The Pope accounted inferiour to the Councell and either of them condemned in a Bishop Peter also was inferior to the Councell of Ierusalem § 215 and the Pope for a long time was accounted De elect electi potesta cap. significasti euen of his owne side inferiour to the generall Councell As Panormitane In matters of faith the Councell is aboue the Pope so that hee cannot decree any thing against the determination of the Councell Councels deposed Popes Hence it is that the Councell may condemne the Pope for heresie as the generall Councels of Pisa Constance and Basill did displace many Popes out of their Popedomes for heresie wherin it was decreed that the Councell was aboue the Pope Concord lib. 2. cap. 34. Hence Cusan shewing the custome of the Church writ that the generall Councell was of the cheifest power in all things euen aboue the Pope himselfe I might alleadge many other notable Papists to be of this minde but I holde it not cessarie in this place But now the Pope is lifted vp aboue the Councels and imagineth that the supremacy is cheifely placed in himselfe that Bishops being cast off and Emperours cut downe Is he Peters successor that is nothing like Peter and Councels supprest he may doe what hee please without controulment And may we thinke him to bee Peters successor that hath nothing in him like Peter which notwithstanding Bellarmine takes for granted when no thing is so much in controuersie As hee doth likewise euery where affirme that he is Christ his Vicar without proofe when as nothing is so necessarie for the Romish Catholike faith then that hee should confirme both these out of the Scriptures The successour of Peter is read in the fathers the Vicar of Christ is not read It is not therefore to be beleeued by Catholike faith but by historicall faith Of the Vicar of Christ I shall consider afterward now in few words of the successour of Peter § 216 Neither will I argue in this place those things which are much controuerted whether Peter were at Rome whether hee were euer Bishop or whether Bishop of Rome neither if he were will I dispute the case whether the personall dignitie of Peter could passe into a successour which is denied when it was granted by Christ in respect of his confession which he deliuered not of the seat which hee possessed Neither if it were in respect of the seat when it is reported that Peter had two seates one at Antioch the other at Rome I will not now enquire why Peters priuiledge should be tied to Rome rather then to Antioch Againe I will not discusse that in this place which shall be enquired after in more words in the whole explication of the Popes Creede whether the Pope haue succeeded Peter in the faith onely heere I will briefely enquire whether hee succeeded in the seat and whether the succession of the Pope whereon all Popery dependeth bee a diuine or humane constitution For if it be a humane constitution and confirmed only by humane testimonies sure it cannot be an article of the Catholike faith as Argentine auerred out of his Doctors If it be diuine let them tell vs in what place of Scripture they finde it written that the Bishop of Rome should succeede Peter or where Peter ordained the Pope or any other to bee his successour They answer for the most part as much as they can that Christ when hee said Feede my sheepe did vnderstand Peters successour in that place to whom together with Peter he gaue the cheife and perpetuall iurisdiction ouer the whole flocke But neither the successour there nor the Bishop of § 217 Rome is named the successour Grant that Peter the Apostle was superiour to the rest of the Apostles in this place doe they thinke that the Bishop of Rome successour to Peter being dead was made superiour to all the Apostles being aliue let them answer and let the Papists vnloose this knot if they can for their liues Baronius writeth that Peter died the yeere 69. and Iohn the yeere 101. so 32. yeeres came between the death of Peter and Iohn Now I demand whether Linus or Clemens succeeded Peter being dead If any should haue the supremacy it was Iohn that suruiued Peter for thereof there is a great controuersie among them whether Linus was aboue Iohn or Iohn aboue Linus if they say that Linus was aboue Iohn