excommunicate then Caesar who by Gods law should haue honour subiection and tribute by your law shal haue neither land libertie nor life Is not this worse than despising or resisting gouernment to depriue and bereaue the gouernour of imperie safety and life if you list Phi. Wee take no such thing on vs but Christ hath giuen that power and authoritie to his Uicar generall that he may doe it if Princes deserue it Theo. Christ neuer gaue any man power to breake the preceptes which he bounde his Disciples vnto but rather he plainly professed If yee continue in my word ye are verily my Disciples If Christ commaunde subiection to Magistrates and your holy father licence the people to rebel against their Gouernours is hee a Uicar or an aduersarie vnto Christ Phi. Hee first deposeth the Prince and then the subiectes are no longer bound to those that be no Gouernours Theo. That is hee displaceth them whom God hath annoynted and wresteth the sworde out of their handes to whom God committed it and then hee saith you may resist them by reason hee first deposed them but how proue you that he may depose Princes or what warrant can you shew for his so doing Phi. That is the point which I am comming to Theo. And that is the thing which we haue all this while looked for Phi. Saul the first temporall king that euer the Iewes being then Gods peculiar had though chosen and inspired by God was for all that led and directed by Samuel so long as he was in order But afterward for aspiring to spirituall function and other disobedience was by Gods appointment and sentence pronounced by the said Samuel deposed of his kingdom and an other named Dauid annointed by him Which Saul now after his depriuation or after as it were his excommunication by Samuel was inuaded by an euill spirit that prouoked him to kill not onely Dauid that was now made the rightfull owner of his crowne but also to seeke for Samuels death yea and to commaund all the holy Priestes of Nobe fourescore and fiue in number as holie Scripture recounteth to be slaine and murdered in most pitifull wise as traitours to him and fauorers of Dauid the competitor of his kingdom And so it was done at last though at the beginning his garde refused to execute so vile and horrible an act and in this sort he remained enemie many yeares against God and Samuell and kept the kingdom by tyrannicall force notwithstanding his deposition Theo. What needeth this long repetition of matters impertinent A short conclusion and more direct to the question were farre better Phi. That you shall haue Samuel deposed Saul ergo the Priest may depose the Prince Theo. The Prophetes were chosen by God to denounce to the wicked both his temporall and eternall iudgementes will you thence conclude the Prophets were the workers or authours of Gods iudgements Noah denounced the floud did Noah therefore drowne the worlde Ieremie denounced the bondage of Babylon did Ieremie therefore deliuer the whole kingdome into captiuitie Daniel denounced Nabucadnezers fall did Daniel therfore take Nabuchadnezers hart and vnderstanding from him or make him â—ate grasse like an oxe Phi. They were the denouncers of these things from Gods mouth but not the doers Theo. Keepe that rule and you haue answered your owne examples of Samuel of the man of Iudah that threatned Ieroboam of Elias Elizeus Peter and Paul in which the strength of your discourse consisteth Samuel annointed Dauid whiles Saul liued Elias called for fire from heauen to consume the kinges messengers Elizeus annointed Iehu to execute the wrath of God on Achabs house Peter strake Ananias and his wife dead with a word for lying vnto God Paul by the same power of the holy Ghost strake Elimas the Sorcerer blind Doth this proue that Bishops and Preachers may pick out mens eyes or kil whom they can or appoint kingdomes at their pleasures Phi. No but that these things are not vnlawful for Prophetes preachers when God commaundeth Theo. If God commaund the case is cleare not onely for Popes but also for the poorest Priest meanest creature that is Phi. We aske no more Theo. And so much wee grant but hath your holy father any reuelation from heauen to depose the Queene of England Phi. A commission he hath though no reuelation to depose Princes Theo. The Popes commission to depose Princes is the thing which we striue for which you seeke to deduce by the Scriptures and now we come to the purpose you vainely suppose that without proofe which wee required to see and you promised to shew by the very word of God himselfe Phi. Wee proue by the Scriptures that Prophetes haue deposed Princes Theo. Belie not the Scriptures You shew where God reiected kinges for their wickednesse and sent his Prophetes to tell them so much and annoint others in their places But in this case the Prophetes were messengers not iudges denouncers not deposers that which they did they did not in the right of their Propheticall vocation but by peculiar and special direction from God which was priuate to them not common to others that were Prophetes as well as they Nowe what consequent is this Samuel annointed Dauid Elias Hazaell Eliseus Iehu when God expreslie willed them ergo Prophetes may dispose kingdoms at their pleasures and Popes may depose Princes though God expresly will them not Phi. Yes God willeth them so to doe Theo. Proue that and weare the crowne Phi. He willed others before them Theo. And therefore they might lawfully doe that which God commaunded them and you may not doe the like till you haue that speciall precept from God which they had So that in these cases which you pretend first God was the doer and not the Prophetes they were but seruauntes to doe their message Next they tooke no such thing vppon them by their generall calling as Prophetes nor in their owne names as superiours to kinges but onely then when they were precisely charged by God himselfe and the person that shoulde succeede likewise named vnto them by Gods owne mouth What is this to the Pope Or how doth this inferre that he may iudicially conuent Princes and depriue them of their crownes when he thinketh good Yea rather if you were not more than blinde you would perceiue this illation of yours is not erronious onely but also blasphemous in that you chaleÌ„ge for the pope the same right to depose kings which God hath specially reserued to himself It is he that deposeth the mighty from their seat and exalteth the base it is he that putteth downe kinges and setteth vp kinges and giueth the kingdome to whomsoeuer hee will This power I saie you can not attribute to the Pope without apparant blasphemie Phi. We giue him no such power but onely to remoue such from the kingdom as be vnworthy of it Theo. And think you that God remoueth
such as be worthie Phi. No. Theo. Then do you giue the same power to the Pope which God claimeth to him-selfe to displace the wicked from their thrones Phi. But vnder God Theo. If your holy father do this without a particular and precise warrant from God hee doth it not vnder God but as well as God that which is in this case done without God is against God But on with your example of Samuel Saul was deposed of his kingdome by Gods appointment and sentence which Samuel pronounced vnto Saul from the mouth of God Ergo what Phi. Ergo king Saul was deposed Theo. Grant he were by whom was it done by God or by Samuel Phi. God prescribed the sentence but Samuel pronounced it Theo. In whose name did Samuel speake in Gods or his own Phi. In Gods Theo. Said he more than God commaunded him Phi. I thinke not Theo. Then God spake the worde and God gaue the iudgement against Saul only Samuel was sent to tell Saul so much that was sore against Samuels will as appeareth by his mourning for Saul which God reproued in him And now to turn your own exāple on your own head I trust God hath as much right to depose Princes as the Pope Phi. What then The. Did all Israel Iudah sinne in obeying Saul so many yeares after hee was deposed by God and an other annointed in his place Phi. They did it for feare because Saul kept the kingdom by tyrannical force notwithstanding his deposition Theo. Did Dauid sinne in seruing Saul long after himselfe was annointed Phi. He durst not doe otherwise Theo. When Dauid had Saul alone in the caue and might haue slain him did he well to spare him Phi. He might lawfully haue killed him as S. Augustine deduceth but he would not Theo. Of that anon in the meane time was it a lie in Dauid to call him his master and the Lords annointed after his deposition Phi. He called him so in respect he had bin so though presently he were not so Theo. Nay Dauid affirmed y◠at that present he was so The Lord saith Dauid keepe me from laying mine hand on him For he is the Lords annointed And after shewing that this was his dutie and not his curtesie when he founde him asleepe one of his Captaines would haue slain him he said Destroy him not for who can lay his hand on the Lords annointed be giltles Where Dauid maketh it no fauor to spare him but a sin to touch him And to the messenger that brought him news of Sauls death How wast thou not afraide saith Dauid to put foorth thine hand to destroy the annointed of the Lord And commaunding the fellow to bee thrust through Thy blood saith hee bee vpon thine owne head for thine own mouth hath witnessed against thee saying I haue slaine the Lords annointed If all Israel obeyed Saul notwithstanding the sentence of God pronounced against him if Dauid himselfe after his annointing serued honored Saul as his master called counted him the Lords annointed to the houre of his death abhorring it as a sinne in himselfe to lay hands on him seuerely punishing it in an other that did it How can you warrant rebellion against Princes or make it a meritorious act to murder them whom the Pope without all authoritie frō God presumeth to displace Phi. Dauid might lawfully haue killed Saul as S. Austen sheweth against Adamātius but he would not The. The words of Dauid are plain to the cōtrary speaking of Saul himselfe Who can lay his hand saith he on the Lordes annointed be guiltles He could not be guilty but of a sinne it had bin therfore no lawful but a sinful deed for any man Dauid himselfe not excepted to haue killed Saul in respect he then was so continued till he died The Lordes annointed Phi. S. Augustine saith Dauid might haue killed Saul without feare His words be Dauid had his enemie persecutour king Saul in his power to do with him what hee woulde and hee chose rather to spare him than to kill him Hee was not commaunded to kill him neither was hee prohibited Imo etiam diuinitus audierat se impunè facere quicquid vellet inimico Yea rather hee had hearde at Gods mouth that hee might freelie handle an enemie how he would and yet so great authoritie hee conuerted to curtesie Theo. Adimantus helde opinion that the olde Testament was contrarie to the newe because the Lawe as hee thought permitted reuenge and allowed men to kill their enimies where the Gospell commaundeth vs to praie for our enimies and to loue them as the wordes of our Sauiour doe witnesse This obiection Sainct Augustine refelleth by shewing that the killing of the Nations which God commaunded proceeded of loue not of hatred and that the iust of the olde Testament loued and fauoured their enimies when it was expedient for them so to do as namely Dauid that spared king Saul his enimie and persecutour though he might easilie haue slaine him Philand Sainct Augustines worde is impunè hee might freely haue doone what hee woulde to him Theoph. Whether that were Sainct Augustines perswasion or an aduauntage taken vppon Adimantus assertion the place it selfe doeth not expresse of the twaine I thinke the later to bee the truer For this was Adimantus erronious position that the Lawe licenced the Iewes to kill their enimies and you may not well charge Sainct Augustine there-with least you bring him againe within the compasse of the Manichees errour Sure it is Sainct Augustine doeth not grounde his speech on this that Saul was deposed and therefore might haue iustly beene destroyed which is our case but on the permission of reuenge which the Lawe of Moses seemed to graunt Dauid towarde his enimie as well as all others towardes their enimies marie that was no right exposition but a misconstruction of the Lawe sufficient to refute Adimantus because it was his owne but not rashly to bee fathered on Sainct Augustine in respect of his learning and credit otherwise in the church of God For the lawe of God gaue no man leaue to kill his enimie but that precept was to bee referred to the Magistrate to whome God gaue the sworde lawfully to kill such as were by his Lawe adiudged to die which our Sauiour doth not prohibite in the new Testament but reproueth the Iewes for hauing this false conceit of Gods lawe that euery priuate person might hate his enimies and loue his neighbours they corruptly expounding neighbours for friendes and acquaintance and assureth them that to loue their enimies and pray for their persecutors which hee then prescribed them was no new addition but the ancient and true intention of Gods law These wordes then Dauid had heard by the Lawe of God for speciall reuelation from God to Dauid Sainct Augustine knewe none that hee might doe freely what hee would to an enimie are assumed
against Adimantus as part of his owne confession and former obiection and conclude that either Adimantus mistooke the meaning of the law as in deede hee did or that Dauid perfourming the precept of Christ when hee spared his enimie gaue example that others vnder the Lawe shoulde doe the like and so the Law neither waie repugnant to the Gospell as his conclusion imported And if any thinke it much Sainct Augustine should pitch himselfe on other mens wordes as they were apparant truethes hee must remember hee dealt with the Manichees that receiued no Scriptures but such as they listed and therefore to presse them with their owne position was a neerer waie to confounde them than to loade them with Scriptures which they regarded not and that maketh Sainct Augustine giue sometimes not the soundest solution hee coulde but the readiest to stoppe their mouthes with their owne assertions Otherwise Sainct Augustine was plainely resolued that Dauid so much esteemed in Saul the holinesse of his regall inunction euen vnto his death that hee trembled at heart for cutting the lappe of Sauls garment Quaero si non habebat Saul sacramenti sanctitatem quid in eo Dauid venerabatur nam eum propter sacrosanctam vnctionem honorauit viuum vindicauit occisum Et quia vel panniculum ex eius veste praescidit percusso corde trepidauit Ecce Saul non habebat innocentiam tamen habebat sanctitatem non vitae sed vnctionis If Saul had not the holinesse of the sacrament I demand what it was that Dauid reuerenced in him For the sacred and holy vnction of a king hee honoured Saul liuing and reuenged his death on him that saide hee slue him And because himselfe had cut but the lap of Saules coate hee was strooken and trembled at heart for the fact Behold Saul was not innocent yet had hee the holinesse not of life but of his annointing Phi. If Dauid might not lawfully haue slaine Saul Dauid might not beare armes against Saul for the putting himselfe in armes proueth hee was either lawfull king or a manifest rebel against the king which I thinke you will not affirme Theo. Dauid was neither king as yet when hee did this nor rebell against the king Hee put him-selfe in armes not to seeke the kingdome nor to subdue the vsurper as you vainly suppose hee fledde to saue his life as euery subiect may by your doctrine doinges yea though life be not sought Phi. Howe coulde Dauid bee annointed if Saul were not first deposed Theoph. You misconster Samuels wordes For by them the Scepter was not taken out of Saules handes but his seede reiected from inheriting the kingdome Philand Nay Samuel sayde vnto him God hath cast thee awaie from being king And againe The Lord hath rent the kingdome of Israel from thee this day hath giuen it to thy neighbor What can this import but he was personallie deposed from the gouernment Theophi The present possession of the kingdome was not denyed him but the inheritaunce of it to him and his issue By a king Samuel ment not one that shoulde gouerne during his life for so did the Iudges of Israel before Saul that were no kinges but one that should haue the kingdome to him and his after him by waye of inheritaunce For that was it which the children of Israel respected when they required a King which was not a Gouernour for the time but a setled succession in the regiment as other Nations had This was it that Samuell saide vnto Saul when he first reproued him Thou hast doone foolishly thou hast not kept the commaundement of the Lord for haddest thou kept it the Lord had now established thy kingdom vpon Israell for euer But now thy kingdom shal not continue This was it that Samuel ment the seconde time when he more sharpely rebuked Sauls disobedience Because thou hast cast awaye the worde of the Lord therefore hath he cast away thee from being king And againe The Lord hath rent the kingdome of Israel from thee this daie and hath giuen it to thy neighbour not meaning his person shoulde bee degraded but the kingdom remoued both from his line and from his tribe Phi. This is your priuate sense for the wordes sound that he should not bee king ouer Israell Theo. Sainct Augustine him-selfe expoundeth these verie wordes as I do Iste cui dicitur spernit te Dominus ne sis Rex super Israel dirupit Dominus Regnum ab Israel de manu tua hodie quadraginta annos regnauit super Israell tanto scilicet spacio temporis quanto ipse Dauid audiuit hoc primo tempore regni sui vt intelligamus ideo dictum quia nullus de stirpe eius fuerat regnaturus Saul to whome it was sayde the Lorde will cast thee away that thou shalt not bee king ouer Israell and the Lorde hath rent the kingdome from Israell out of thine hand this daie euen hee raigned fourtie yeares as long as Dauid him-selfe and this hee hearde in the verie beginning of his raigne that wee shoulde vnderstand it therefore to be spoken because none of his stocke should raigne after him And hadde not Sainct Augustine goone cleare with vs the circumstaunces of the Scriptures doe thus lymitte the wordes of Samuel For Dauid was then a verie young boie or as the text sayeth a little one keeping sheepe when hee was annointed hauing neither age experience nor strength fit for the present vndertaking of the kingdome Next Dauid neither claymed nor pretended any right to the Crowne during Saules life but serued and obeyed Saul as his liege Lorde and Master whiles hee lyued and so confessed him to bee Thirdly Saul him-selfe neuer obiected this vnto Dauid that he sought the kingdome from him but from his sonnes for so he said to Ionathan As long as the sonne of Ishai liueth vpon the earth thou shalt not be established nor thy kingdō And the priests that were charged with treason for helping Dauid did not answere as you do that Saul was an vsurper Dauid the right king but Who is so faithful among all thy seruants as Dauid goeth at thy commandement witnessing for Dauid that he behaued himselfe as a faithfull subiect vnto Saul not as a claimer of the crown from Saul Thus al the Tribes of Israel conceiued constred the wordes of Samuel For when they came to make Dauid king after Sauls death they said In time past when Saul was our king thou leddest Israel in out the Lorde saide vnto thee thou shalt feed my people Israel and thou shalt be captaine ouer my people Israel So came all the elders of Israel and annoynted Dauid king ouer Israel according to the word of the Lord by the hand of Samuel The text it self alleadgeth Gods own words Samuels act not for the present possession but for the rightfull succession of the crowne that after Sauls death it did belong to Dauid Phi. The annointing of a second king is
followeth after sheweth in what sense he tooke the word supreme At this day sayth he where Poperie continueth howe many are there which lode the king with all the right and power they can that there should be no disputing of religion but this authoritie should rest in the king alone to appoint at his pleasure what hee list and that to stande good without contradiction They that first so highly aduanced king Henry of England were inconsiderate they gaue him supreme power of all thinges and that was it which alway wounded me Then succeede your wordes and withall a particular exemplication howe Steuen Gardiner alleaged and constred the Kings stile in Germanie That Iuggler which after was Chauncelour I meane the Bishop of Winchester when hee was at Rentzburge neither would stande to reason the matter nor greatly cared for any testimonies of the scriptures but said it was at the kinges discretion to abrogate that which was in vse appoint new He said the king might forbid priests mariage the king might barre the people from the cup in the Lordes supper the king might determine this or that in his kingdome And why Forsooth the king had supreme power This sacrilege hath taken hold on vs in Germanie whiles Princes think they cannot raign except they abolish al the authoritie of the church be thēselues supreme Iudges as wel in doctrin as in al spirituall regiment This was the sense which Caluin affirmed to bee sacrilegious and blasphemous for Princes to professe them-selues supreme Iudges of Doctrine and discipline and in deede it is the blasphemie which all godly heartes reiect and abomine in the Bishoppe of Rome Neither did King Henry take any such thing on him for ought that wee can learne But this was Gardiners Stratageme to conuey the reproche and shame of the sixe articles from himselfe and his fellowes that were the authors of them and to cast it on the kings supreme power Had Caluin been told that supreme was first receiued to declare the Prince to be superior to the Prelats which exempted themselues from the Kings authoritie by their Church liberties and immunities as well as to the Lay men of this realme and not to bee subiect to the Pope who claymed a iurisdiction ouer all Princes and Countries the woorde woulde neuer haue offended him but as this wylye foxe framed his answere when the Germanes communed with him about the matter wee blame not Caluin for mistaking but the Bishop of Winchester for peruerting the kings stile wresting it to that sense which all good men abhorre Phi. Do not you at this day make the Queene supreme Gouernour of al ecclesiasticall doctrine and discipline And what discrepance I pray you between Iudge and Gouernour Theo. You may be Steuen Gardiners scholer you bee so wel trained in his methode and maximes Wee told you long since and often enough if that will serue the prince by her stile doth not chalenge neither do we by our othe giue her highnes power to debate decide or determine any point of fayth or matter of religion much lesse to bee supreme iudge or gouernour of all doctrine and discipline But if in her realme you will haue the assistance of the magistrates swoord to settle the trueth and prohibite error and by wholesome punishments to preuent the disorders of all degrees that authoritie lieth neither in Prelate nor Pope but onely in the Prince and therefore in her Dominions you can neither establish doctrine nor discipline by publike Lawes without her consent This neither Caluin nor the compilers of the Centuries nor any other of sound religion euer did or iustly can mislike onely Iesuites their adherents would faine reserue this power to the Pope in al Christian realmes because they be sure he will allowe and suffer no religion but his owne and so long their profession shall not miscarie Phi. The Centurists say Princes may not bee heads of the Church that primacie is not fit for them Theo. That word if they mislike wee stand not for it The holy Ghost hath inuested the sonne of God with it and therefore reason princes euen for reuerence to him should forbeare the stile which hee first vsed most esteemeth And though some defence might be brought for the word as that which Samuel said to Saul When thou wast litle in thine own sight wast thou not made HEAD of the tribes of Israel For the Lorde annoynted thee king ouer Israel and that which Dauid sayth of himself Thou hast made me HEAD of the heathen and that which Esai saith of the king of Syria THE HEAD of Aram is Damascus and the HEAD of Damascus is Rezni and again the honorable mā he is the HEAD as also S. Paul the man is the womans HEAD Chrysostom not sticking to call certaine women that laboured in the Gospel HEAD OF THE CHVRCH at Philippi and saying of Theodosius the Emperor Summitas caput omnium super terram hominum SVPREME AND HEAD of all mortall men Though these and many like places might bee brought to auouche the worde HEAD yet because that title HEAD OF THE CHVRCH rightly and properly belongeth onely to Christ not to Princes without many mitigations and cautions and head as it is applied to Princes is al one with Supreme for it importeth but the chiefest or highest person of the Church on earth and with the regiment of the Church whereof Christ is head I meane his mysticall bodie Princes haue nothing to doe yea many times they be scant members of it and the Church in each countrie may stand without Princes as in persecution it doth and yet they not headlesse we thinke not good to contend with our brethren for wordes and to greeue their eares with titles first abused by the pope and first reproued in him so long as in matter and meaning there is no discord betwixt vs. Phi. Will you make vs beleeue they mislike nothing but the wordes head of the Church Theo. Yeas they mislike that Princes should mingle trueth with falsehood and temper religion with corruption as their priuate fancies lead them which we mislike no lesse than they This is the scope of our speach say they that it is not lawful for ciuill Magistrates to deuise formes of religion in destruction of the truth and so to reconcile truth and error that they may both be lulled asleepe They may not prescribe religions alone they must not ingender new articles of the faith they must not strangle the trueth with errors and shackle it when it is reueiled that they may let loose the bridle to corruption These be the points which they dislike and we be as farre from approuing any such thing in Princes as you or they Phi. If the Prince establish any religion whatsoeuer it be you must by your oth obey it Theo. We must not rebel and take armes against the prince
the great learned and generall councell of Laterane Cap. 3. de haeret This was the next way to make all safe on their side Platin. in Innocent 3.800 Hungrie friers brought into the councell to ouerrule the Bishops A fine stratageme of the Pope to set out thinges consulted as if they had bin concluded Platina in vita Innocentij 3. Nothing concluded in the Councel of Lateran THE DEFENCE OF ENGLISH CATHOLIKES Cap. 4. Matth. 19. By Gods lawe you may not resist much lesse displace the Prince The woord of God binding you to obedience neither Pope nor couÌ„cel can assoile you from it This is it which Master Allen professeth to prooue in the 5. chap. of his DefeÌ„ce What subiection honor God alloweth vnto Princes 1. Peter 2. Rom. 13. Prouerb 8. * Wisdom 6. * Rom. 13. 1. Peter 2. Prouer. 24. We may not dishonor princes in word deede or thought Exod. 22. * Eccle. 10. Rom. 13. 1. Pet. 2. Iudgement threatned chiefly to theÌ„ that despise Magistrates 2. Pet. 2. Iude. Rom. 13. Luk. 20. Honor subiection tribute by Gods law due to Princes By the Iesuits doctrine Caesar shal haue that which God alloweth him so long as pleaseth the Pope You may not resist them or despise them ergo much lesse displace them Iohn 8. Deposition is an authentike rebellion vnder the Popes scale The defence of English catholikes cap. 5. 1. Reg. 10.15.16 Saul deposed for vsurping spirituall function 1. Reg. 22. The Prophets denounced both the temporall eternall iudgementes of God but they inflicted neither By these exaÌ„ples Priestes may kill men set their houses on fire or pull out their eyes as wel as displace Princes if the Iesuites collections bee good The Popes commission to depose Princes they promised to proue by scripture nowe vainly suppose it without Scripture Samuel Elias and Elizeus had speciall extraordinary commaundement from God to doe as they did The Pope may not doe that which the Prophetes did till hee haue the same precept which they had To put down kings is an honour specially reserued vnto God him selfe Luc. 1. Dan. 2. Dan. 4. The Pope will depose Princes as well as God The example of Saul God prescribed Samuel what he shuld say to Saul ful sore for against the will of Samuel 1. Kings 16. All Israell and Dauid obeied and honoured Saul as the Lords annointed to his dying day The defence Cap. 5. Aug. contra Adamant 1. Kings 24. 1. Kings 24. 1. Kings 26. 2. Kings 1. Ibidem Cap. 17. 1. Kings 26. Dauid confesseth he might not kill Saul without sinne Contra Adimantum ca. 17. The words be grounded rather on Adimantus assertion than S. Austens perswasion S. Aug. speaketh not of Sauls deposition but of reuenge permitted by Moses law which the Maniches did obiect Adimantus antecedent returned on his own head Aug. Centra lit Petilian lib. 2. cap. 48. S. Aug. holdeth that Saul had the holinesse of his princely inunction to the houre of his death Dauid put himselfe in armes to saue his life not to seeke the Crowne Saul reiected from hauing the kingdome to him his seede * 1. Kings 15. The children of Israell required a king after the maner of other Nations that is a setled succession in the kingdom 1. Reg. 13. * To thee and thine for euer 1. Kings 15. Aug. de ciuit Dei li. 17. ca. 7. S. Augustine expoundeth Saules reiection as we do * The Scripture is cleare for the same sense 1. Kings 16. Dauid aduanced when hee was but a boy keeping sheep Dauid neuer claimed the Crowne from Saul 1. Kinges 20. The Priestes protested that Dauid was a faithfull seruant to Saul 1. King 22. All Israel alleadged Samuels fact that Dauid ought to succeede 2. Kings 5. 1. Chron. 11. God annointed such as should succeede The Defence cap. 5. 3. Reg. 13.14 The example of Ieroboam a wicked schismatik denouÌ„ced by a priest Prophets may threaten wicked Princes in Gods name but not depriue them of their crownes The Prophet that cried out against Ieroboams Altar spake not a worde of his schisme It is easie for any side to applie figures as thy list Reuel 17. Reuel 19. Gods threatning IeroboaÌ„ is nothing to the doposing of Princes by priestes * 3. Kinges 14. The Defence cap. 5. The example of proud Ozias that would take vnto him the authoritie of priests Vzziah strikeÌ„ with a leprosie but not deposed The high Priest withstood the king with wordes not with weapons The Iesuites delight in martial terms * 2. Chron. 26. De verbis Esai Vidi DominuÌ„ The Iesuits gather coÌ„clusioÌ„s cleane against the Scriptures and their own canons * Caus. 23. quaest 8. ¶ 1. * Ibidem ¶ 2. * Ibidem ¶ 3. * Ibidem ¶ Clerici * Ibidem ¶ quicunque Ibidem dict ¶ quicunque § hijs ita * 1. Tim. 3. 2. Tim. 2. Tit. 1. * 2. Cor. 10. * Mat. 24. The Princes person no Priest may violate or so much as touch Psal. 105. 1. Kings 24. They might not vse violence what needed any when the King hastned of himselfe to goe forth * 2. Chro. 26. * 2. Chro. 26. 4. Kings 15. 2. Chron. 26. 4. King 15. Oziah was king of Iudah to the day of his death The Priestes were to discerne lepers but the Magistrate to see them kept apart from others Numb 5. The leprosie of the soule no cause of depriuation vnto Princes In Luc. lib. 5. de leproso mundato Chrysost. in Mat hom 16. oper imperfect hom 10. To beare the sword in matters of religioÌ„ is the Princes and not the priests charge The defence cap. 5. 4. Reg. 11. The example of the deposition death of Queene Athalia by Ioida the hie-Priest Athalia an vsurper and slaine by the Kings authoritie Ioidaes warrant to commaund Athalia to be put to death in the Kings name 2. Chrâ— 23. 4. Kings 11. The defence cap. 5. 3. Reg. 18.19 The executioÌ„ done by Elias the Prophet vpon many with deposition of Princes 4. Reg. 1. 3. Reg. 19. 4. Reg. 9. Elias zeale 3. Kings 18. Elias caused the Prophets of Baal to be slaine by the publike authoritie of the King and his people Elias was a Prophet and not an executioner How Elias gate Achab the whole Realm to decree the slaughter of Baals prophets * 3. Kings 17. Vers. 1. * 3. Kings 18. Vers. 23. Vers. 24. Vers. 1. Vers. 24. Vers. 39. Vers. 40. Vers. 24. The King and the people consented to Elias offer Vers. 20. Vers. 24. 3. Kings 19. Elias is said in the Scripture to haue doon the deede because he was the procurer and author of it Acts. 7. Iosu. 10. 3. Kings 14. God sent â—er from heauen not Elias Luke 9. * Exod. 12. * Iudges 16. * 4. Kings 2. THE DEFENCE OF ENGLISH CATHOLIKES The annointing of Hazael 4. Kings 8. Iehu willed by God to take the sword and root out Achabs house 4. Kings 9. Ibidem vers
you not answere Amen and saying so with a loud voice do you not signe your selues in the holie solemnitie at the kinges edict What Moses Iosua Dauid Salomon Asa Iehosaphat Ezechias Manasses Iosias Nehemias did for the planting preseruing and purging of true religion and how they commaunded reproued and punished as well Priestes as others for spirituall crimes and causes the places are infinite and witnessed in no worse recordes than the Scriptures themselues I will not touch them all but onely shew that euery one of these in their times raignes medled with Ecclesiasticall men and matters which is the point that you would impugne by your allegations Moses the ciuill Magistrate reproued Aaron the high Priest for making the golden calfe and stamping it to powder cast it into the water that Israell might drinke it and in one daie put three thowsand of them for that idolatrie to the sworde And after the rebellion of Corah when the residue were plagued for murmuring against Moses and Aaron Moses commaunded Aarō to take the censer and stand betweene the liuing and the dead to make attonement for the people And as during life Moses guided ruled them in al things both spiritual and temporal so readie to depart he carefully warned and finally blessed the twelue tribes of Israell Iosua that succeeded him a Prince not a Priest was charged by God to meditate in the booke of the law day night that thou maiest obserue saith God and do according to all that is written therein and the people receiued him with this submission As we obeied Moses in all things so will we obey thee Whosoeuer shall rebell against thy commaundement and will not obey thy wordes in all that thou commandest him let him be put to death And least you should thinke that he commaunded in nothing but temporall matters he circumcised the sonnes of Israell erected an Altar of stone for their offerings read the whole law to them there was not a word of all that Moses commaunded which Iosua read not before all the congregation searched and punished the concealer of thinges dedicated to idols not long before he died in his owne person renewed the couenant betweene God and the people caused them to put away the strange Gods that were among them insomuch that by his diligent care and good regiment Israell serued the Lord all the dayes of Iosua How far king Dauid medled with matters of religion if the Psalmes which he made for Asaph and his brethren to sing in assemblies and order which hee set for the whole seruice of the Temple appointing the Priestes Leuites Singers and other Seruitours of the church their dignities courses and offices did not declare the charge which he gaue to king Salomon his sonne and the praise which he gate at Gods handes for the faithfull execution and religious obseruation of his law giuen by Moses in all thinges and causes both spirituall and temporall are sufficient euidence Take heede to the charge of the Lord thy God saith Dauid to Salomon to walke in his waies and keepe his statutes his commaundementes and his iudgementes and his testimonies as it is written in the law of Moses This God himselfe repeated to Salomō proposing Dauid his father for a paterne vnto him If thou wilt walke before me as Dauid thy father walked in purenesse of heart and vprightnes to doe according to all that I haue commaunded thee and keepe my statutes and my iudgementes I will establish the throne of thy kingdom vpon Israell for euer Phi. Do these wordes proue that Dauid did or Salomon might medle with Ecclesiasticall matters Theo. These places and such like doe fully proue that the Kinges and Gouernours of Israell and Iudah were appointed by God himselfe to haue the custodie charge and ouersight of all thinges mentioned and expressed in Moses law Here you see the wordes are to do according to all that I haue commaunded thee and keepe my statutes and iudgementes To Iosua God saide that thou maiest obserue and doe according to all that is written in the booke of the Law and likewise of the king in generall The booke of the Law shall be with him and he shal read therein all the daies of his life that he may learne to keepe all the wordes of this Law and these ordinances to fulfill them The king was charged with all the wordes and ordinances of Moses Law the law of Moses contained al thinges which God required of Priestes or people both spirituall and temporall ergo the king was charged by God himselfe as well with all Ecclesiasticall thinges and causes as with Temporall And consequently Dauid and all other kinges that discharged their duties to God in such sort as hee inioyned them medled with all thinges and causes Ecclesiasticall and Temporall Phi. Frame your argument shorter Theo. They were charged with all ergo they should medle with all and some discharged their dueties to God for example such as were commended and fauored by God whom I before named ergo some did medle with al the preceptes of God both Ecclesiastical and Temporall Phi. They were charged to obserue the whole Law as all other men were Theo. They were charged for their owne persons as all priuate men were but as kinges they were charged for others in such manner as no subiect coulde be charged namely to see the lawe of God to be publikely receiued fully obserued within their Realmes and all other sortes of Religion and policie to bee cleane forbidden and banished Phi. This is your surmise Theo. It is S. Augustines maine collection in sundrie places fet from the verie Principles of reason and nature and confirmed by the warrant of the sacred Scriptures The king serueth God saith Saint Augustine As a man one waie as a king an other way As a man by liuing faithfully as a king by makeing Lawes with conuenient vigor to commaund that which is right forbid the contrarie And againe Kinges euen in that they be kinges haue to serue the Lord in such sort as none can do which are not kinges For kings in respect as they be kinges serue the Lord if in their kingdomes they cōmaund that which is good and forbid that which is euill How then saith he do kinges serue the Lord but by forbidding and punishing with a religious seueritie those thinges that are done against the commaundementes of the Lord And thus much the verie deriuation of the name doth inferre Rex à regendo dicitur a king is he that ruleth others and the relation of the worde doth teach vs there can be no king but in respect of his subiectes and his duetie towardes them is to direct and correct that is to commaund and punish in all thinges needefull Phi. What conclude you of all this Theo. That where God chargeth the king to keepe and obserue
molten Images And they brake downe in his sight the Altars of Baalim and hee caused to cut downe the images that were on them he brake also the groues and the karued molten images and stampt them to powder and strewed it vpō the graues of them that had sacrificed on them Also hee burnt the bones of the Priestes vpon their Altars and purged Iudah and Ierusalem And when hee had destroyed the Altars and cut downe all the idols throughout the lande of Israell he returned to Ierusalem Then the king sent and gathered all the Elders of Iudah and Ierusalem And the king went vp to the house of the Lord and all the men of Iudah and inhabitantes of Ierusalem and the Priestes and the Leuites and all the people from the greatest to the smallest and hee read in their eares all the wordes of the booke of the couenant that was found in the house of the Lord. And the king stood by his Piller and made a couenant before the Lord to walke after the Lord and to keepe his commandementes and his statutes with all his heart with all his soule that hee would accomplish the wordes of the couenant written in that booke And hee caused al that were found in Ierusalem and Beniamin to stand to the couenant So Iosias tooke awaie all the abominations out of all the countries that pertained to the children of Israell and compelled all that were founde in Israell to serue the Lord their God al his dayes they turned not backe from the Lord God of their fathers Moreouer Iosiah kept a Passouer vnto the Lord in Ierusalem and hee appointed the Priestes to their charges and said to the Leuites Serue now the Lord your God and his people Israell prepare your selues by the houses of your fathers according to your courses as Dauid the king of Israell hath written and according to the writing of Salomon his sonne And stand in the sanctuarie according to the diuision of the families of your brethren Kill the Passouer and sanctifie your selues and prepare your brethren that they may doe according to the word of the Lord by the hande of Moses Thus the seruice was prepared and the Priestes stood in their places also the Leuites in their orders according to the kinges commaundement So all the seruice of the Lord was prepared the same day to keepe the Passouer to offer burnt offeringes vpon the Altar of the Lord according to the commaundement of king Iosiah Nehemias though he were no king but a captaine sent frō king Artaxerxes yet he discerned resisted the Prophetes that would haue put him in feare was the first that sealed the couenant between God the people with an oth to walke in the law of God and to obserue all the commaundementes of the Lord. And he displaced Tobiah an Ammonite whom Eliashib the high Priest had receiued and lodged within the court of the house of God and cast out all the vessels of the house of Tobiah and commaunded them to clense the chambers for the vessels of the house of God And reproued the rulers for that the house of God was forsaken the Sabbaoth day broken assembling the Leuites singers setting them their places charging the Leuites to clense themselues and to sanctifie the Sabbaoth daie And when he saw Iewes that maried strange wiues he rebuked them and cursed them and smote certain of them tooke an oth of them by God that they should not mary with strangers And one of the sonnes of Ioiadah the sonne of Eliashib the high Priest maried the daughter of Sanballat the Horonite but Nehemiah chased him awaie and clensed the Priestes and Leuites from all strangers and appointed them their courses euerie one in his office There needeth no great skill to set this togither To remoue idols all abominations out of the land to enter a couenāt with God to walke in his waies to proclaime fastes an d make publike praiers to sanctifie the Temple and celebrate the Passouer to seeke and serue God according to his law bee matters ecclesiasticall not temporall and yet in the same cases the godly kinges of Iudah commaunded and compelled all that were found in Iudah Priest and Prophet man and woman to stand to that order which they tooke for the better accomplishing of those their interprises Acknowledge that right and power in Christian Princes at this day to medle with matters of Religion which the Scriptures report and commend in kinges of religious and famous memorie we presse you no farther If you sticke to graunt so much others will not stick to distrust the soundnesse of your doctrine notwithstanding the smoothnesse of your tongues and loftynesse of your spirites wherewith you thinke to compasse and quaile kingdomes Phi. The kinges of Iudah did that which they did at the motion of the Prophetes and direction of the Priestes Theo. You shun that which you shal not auoide Wee reason not who moued and aduised but who decreed and commaunded these thinges to be done Priestes or Princes The Scriptures in plaine termes saie that Princes DECREED APPOINTED COMMANDED them to be done Contradict the wordes if you dare Take from Asa Iehosaphat Ezechias Iosias the king of Niniueth and others the Princely power which they shewed due praise which they merited in medling with these matters impugne the words whereby God expresseth approueth their doings see whether the consciēces of all good men will not detest abhor your wilfull impietie Phi. The Scripture saith in deede they commaunded appointed decreed these thinges but no doubt they were directed by Prophetes and other spirituall Pastours what they should do Theo. What if they were Doth that hinder their authoritie Princes in ciuill affaires are guided and directed by learned and wise Counsellers doe they therefore not commaund in temporall matters neither Or finde you no difference betweene counselling and commaunding Phi. Againe these Princes were before the comming of Christ when as yet there was no supreme Pastour ouer the whole Church Theo. There was an high Priest ouer the twelue Tribes with surer and better authoritie than your holy father can shewe for him-selfe All Israell by Gods owne mouth were referred to the iudgement of the Priestes and Leuites and not to decline from the thing which they speake The man saith God that will do presumptuouslie not harkning vnto the Priest that standeth before the Lord to minister that man shall die This was their commission yet this notwithstanding the kings of Iudah commaunded both Prist and people for matters of religion And so did the Christian Emperours after the comming of Christ for eight hundred yeares that wee shewe commaund both Bishoppes and others yea the Bishoppe of Rome no lesse than others in causes as well Ecclesiasticall as Temporall The particulars I noted before The Lawes were publike
With you but not with the Church of God Phi. The church we say beleeueth many things which shee receiued by tradition and not by writing Theo. Your Church I know doth but the Church of Christ I say neuer did not doth Phi. Had the Church of Christ no traditions that were not written Theo. Rites and ceremonies she had but no points of fayth that were not written Phi. This is the ground of all your errors vppon this pretence you reiect the vnwritten verities of the church Theo. If this bee an error S. Paul himselfe was the first author of it and all the fathers of Christes Church with one consent auouch the same Phi. Neuer tell vs that tale Theo. Yeas we will tell it and proue it to you Phi. You can not Theo. We can and will S. Paul is short but sure Faith is by hearing and hearing by the word of God Whence wee collect ergo faith is by the word of God and not without it nor besâ—des it You heard S. Basils opinion before It is an euident slyding from the faith a point of the greatest pride that may be either to depart from that which is written or to receiue that which is not written To that you may ioyne this conclusion of his If euery thing that is not of fayth be sinne as S. Paul affirmeth and fayth come by hearing and hearing by the woorde of God ergo whatsoeuer is without or besides the diuine Scriptures because it is not of fayth it is sinne Seekest thou for faith Emperour sayth Hilarie to Constantius Heare it not out of the late scroles but out of Gods bookes Heare I beseech thee that which is written of Christ lest vnder preteÌ„ce therof of things not written bee preached And in an other place pressing his aduersarie Thou sayth he which denyest things written what remaineth but that thou beleeue things vnwritten counting that for a passing absurditie which you now would establish as the surest way to discerne the trueth Euen so doth Hierom against Heluidius As wee denie not those thinges that are written so wee reiect vtterly those thinges which are not written For Our Lord sauiour speaketh to vs in the Scriptures of his Princes that is of his Apostles and Euangelists which were not which are in the church to this end that his Apostles excepted whatsoeuer thing besides should afterward bee sayd might bee cut off and not haue authoritie Tertullian speaking in the person of all christians We neede no farther search after the Gospel When once we beleeue wee desire nothing else to beleeue for this wee first beleeue that there is nothing besides the Gospel which wee ought to beleeue And refelling the heretike Hermogenes I adore saith he the fulnes of the scriptures Let Hermogenes shew me where this that he teacheth is written If it be not writteÌ„ let him feare the curse prouided for adders diminishers Yea saith Ambrose We iustly coÌ„demn al new things which Christ did not teach because to the faithful Christ is the way So then if Christ did not teach that which we teach eueÌ„ we our selues do iudge it to be detestable The rest are of the same mind The disposition of our saluation sayth Irineus we knew by none other than by those by whom the Gospel came vnto vs the which at first they preached by mouth but afterward by Gods appointmeÌ„t they did deliuer it to vs in writing that it should be the foundatioÌ„ and pillour of our faith It is necessary for vs saith Cyril to folow the diuine Scriptures in nothing to go from their prescription The mountaines of Israel whereon God promised to feede his flocke are saith Augustine the writers of the diuine Scriptures Feeding there you feede safely whatsoeuer you learne thence count it sauorie whatsoeuer is besides theÌ„ refuse it Therefore whether it be touching Christ or his Church or any matters els which concerneth our faith life I say not if we but as followeth in Paul if an angel from heauen teach any thing besides that which you haue receiued in the Scriptures of the Law and the Gospel hold him accursed Isidorus as your owne Lawe produceth him saith A Prelate if he teach or bid any thing besides that which is euidently commaunded in the holy scriptures let him be taken for a false witnes to God a coÌ„mitter of sacrilege Neither Prelate Pope Councel nor Angel may be receiued or trusted in matters of fayth I say not against the Scriptures but not without or besides the scriptures If therefore you seeke to leade Princes vnto trueth you must guyde them thereto by the word of trueth otherwise you doe but deceiue them you doe not direct them King Dauid will teach you by what meanes himself was and all other godly Princes ought to be directed Thy word is a lanterne to my feete a light vnto my paths I haue sworne and wil performe it that I wil keepe thy righteous iudgements And God by Moses appointing his law to be the directioÌ„ of Princes coÌ„maundeth a copie thereof to be deliuered vnto the king sitting on his throne that he should reade therein all the daies of his life and learne to feare the Lord his God to keepe al the words of that lawe This charge which God giueth bindeth princes as well as others Whatsoeuer I commaund that shal you do thou shalt put nothing thereto nor take ought there from And Esay speaketh not of priuate persons only but of common-wealths also when he saith Shoulde not a people consult their God And shewing immediatly which way they might consult and aske counsell of God from the liuing sayth he to the dead to the law rather and the testimonie if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them They haue Moses and the Prophets let them heare them is the surest way to saue Prince people froÌ„ the place of torment consequently the best direction for theÌ„ both Phi. The word of God is we doubt not the best direction for Princes priuate men if it be rightly vnderstood but Al heresies patch thence the pillowes which they lay vnder the elbowes of all flesh as S. Hierom sayth and They talke of scriptures perswade by Scriptures as Tertullian noteth And therefore the Scriptures being but dumble recordes that may be diuersly construed and easily wrested there must needes bee some iudge on earth that may bee personally pronounce which is the true meaning and right sense of the Scriptures before Princes may trust that direction Otherwise men may brech what blasphemies they will and pretend Scripture when they haue done as the Arrians Sabellians Macedonians and al other heretikes did and do Theo. That heretikes couet a shew of scriptures is a case so cleare that it needeth no words For howe coulde they treate of matters of faith
tēporall 249 The Prince charged to plant the faith and rule the church 250 The King of Englands charge 250 The Prince charged with Godlinesse 251 Their power is equall with their charge 252 The sword prohibited vnto Bishops 253 Only princes beare the sworde 254 The words of the oth 254 Supreme concluded out of saint Paul 255 The Apostles subiect vnto Princes 255 Suffering is a sign of subiection 256. The direction of the sword 257 Who shall direct the sword 257 No man Iudge of trueth 258 Discerners of trueth 259 The people are charged to discern the truth 260 The people must discerne teachers and try spirits 261 We be not bound to the Bishops pleasure 262 Wherein Bishops are superiour to Princes 263 The function not the person 264 The priests person subiect to the Prince 264 The right direction vnto trueth 265. The best direction for Princes 266. Who shall direct Princes 267. Successiō is no sure directiō 268 Bishops may erre 26◠Councels may erre 270 276 Number no warrant for trueth 270 Councels haue erred 272 Consent without staggering due only to the Scriptures 276 The Pope may erre 277.304.311 Christ praied for Peter 278 Peter failed in faith 279 Christ praied for all 280 No one set ouer the Church 281 The Romane Church may faile in faith 283 Cyprians place discussed 283 The misconstering of Non potest 284 Cyprians opinion of the Romanes 286 S. Pauls warning to them 286 S. Ierome misconstered 287 The Romanes may erre 288 Moses chaire might erre 289 The high Priests did erre 290 Christs promise to his Church 291 The godly may erre 292 S. Iohns words abused 293 The whole Church erreth not 294. The Iesuites condemned for flatterers by their owne fellowes 294 What Popes haue erred 296 Liberius an heretike 297 Honorius an heretike 299 Vigilius an heretike 301 Anastasius an heretike 302 Shiftes to saue the Popes from erring 303 Caiphas free from error 305 Caiphas as free from error as the Pope 305 The Popes tribunall hath erred 306 Vaine mockeries of the Iesuites to saue the Popes error 309 Their owne Church confesseth the Pope may erre 310 The iudge of faith must not erre 312 The contents of the third part The Pope hath no power to depriue the Prince 314 What God hath allowed to Princes the Pope cannot take from them 317 Princes not depriuable by the Pope 318 The Prophets deposed no Princes 319 Saul reiected by God not deposed by Samuell 320 Saul depriued of the succession not of the possession of the Crowne 321 Dauid annointed to succeed 325 Ieroboam plagued not deposed 325 Prophets may threaten 326 Vzziah stricken with the leprosie not assaulted with violence 327 Lepers seuered from mens cōpany but not disherited 328 Vzziahs pride 329 Athalia slaine 329. Achab reprooued not deposed 330. Elias induced the King and the people to kill Baals prophets 331 Elias no executioner 332 Fier frō heauen at Elias word 332. Iehu willed by God to take the sworde 333 Elizeus deposed no King 333 No Scripture confirmeth the deposition of princes 334 Kinges holde their dignities of God not of priests 335 The priest no Iudge of the princes crowne 336 The priest to direct the Iudge to decide 338 Princes not subiect to priestes 339. Princes depriued priests 340 Princes brake couenaunts with God and yet were not deposed 341 No prince deposed in the olde testament 341 Christ is King of Kinges but not the pope 342 Christ haue many prerogatiues which the pope may not haue 343 Binding of sinnes not of Scepters 344 Depriuing is not feeding 345 Temporall reuenge not lawfull for priests 445 Heretikes must not be saluted yet princes must be obeyed 346. Heretiks must haue their du 347 Society not duty prohibited 348 Wee must shunne the wicked but not disobeie the magistrate 348 Excommunication inferreth no deposition 350 The Iesuites claime temporall and externall power for the pope 350.351 God not Paul stroke Elima◠blinde 352 What is ment in S. Paul by deliuering vnto Sathan 353 The Apostles laid violēt hands on no man 354 The goods and bodies of men are Cesars right 355 Priests no Iudges of temporall thinges but makers of peace betweene brethren 357 The temporall and spiritual distinct regiments 358 The Ciuill state directed not punished by the spiritual 359 Princes committed to the preachers charge not subiected to the popes court 360 Princes may be put in mind of their duties 361 Nazianzene subiect to the prince 361 Howe the preacher correcteth 362 Howe manie degrees the pope will be aboue the prince 363 If he heare not the Church let him be to thee as an Ethnick 364 Ethnicks must not be deposed 364 The Church cannot depose the prince 365 The Church submitted herselfe to Princes 366 The Church hath no commissiō to depose Princes 367 The church with thē is the Pope 367 Neuer king obayed the Popes Censure 368 The Church neuer decreed that Popes should depose Princes 368 Impertinent examples 369 Excommunication is not deposition 370 The fact of Babylas 371 Babylas died vnder Decius 371 The Prince penitent for his sins 372 S. Ambrose and Theodosius 373 Anastasius excommunicatiō vncertaine 374 Michaels excommunication vnproued 374 Lotharius mistaken 375 Of seuen examples but one proued 375 S. Austens opinion of such excommunications 376 The end of excommunication ceaseth in Princes 376 The Church praied for tyrants 377 The Church praied for the welfare of hereticall Princes 378 The Church praied for Constantius 378 A lustie leape from the keyes to the sword 379 Rebellion against Princes defended to be iust and honourable warres 380 Graund theeues murtherers 381 The Popes warrant to rebels 381 The Pope cānot warrant Rebellion 382 Scriptures abused to serue Rebellion 383 Asa remoued his mother from her dignitie 383 The Iudiciall part of Moses Law is ceased 384 The execution of Moses Law cōmitted to none but to the magistrate 384 No reuenger but the Magistrate 384 Phinees fact had Moses warrant 385 Moses a magistrate and no priest after Aarons order 386 Moses a Leuite but no priest 387 Moses a Prophet no sacrificing Priest 388 And so was Samuel 389 Many offred that wer no priests 389 Sauls sin was infidelitie 389 The Priest did not appoint the wars 390 The warres of Abiah 391 Edome Libnah reuolting 391. Ten tribes might fight with two 392 The Church of Christ neuer alowed rebellion 392 S. Basil alowed not the people to rebel for his defence 393 S. Ambrose alowed no tumult at Millan in fauour of him 394. Athanasius did not stirre Constance against Constantius 396 Athanasius neuer spake euill of Constantius 396 Athanasius neuer disobaied Cōstantius 397 Athanasius would not haue the people rebel for his cause 398 The tumult at Alexandria for Peter against Lucius 399 Atticus harboured strangers but not armed subiects against their Princes 400 The Persian war was lawful 400 What Leo requested of the Emperour 401 The Christians were subiect to Iulian though he were an
stakes with the Arrians IbideÌ„ epist. 33. He submitted himselfe to the punishment for that he could not with a good conscience obey the coÌ„maundement IbideÌ„ epist. 32. Ambrose ment to obey the Prince but not to flie for feare thereby to saue his life Ibidem oratio contra Auxentium IbideÌ„ epist. 33. Ibidem oratio Contra Auxen Ibidem orat contra Auxent Ibidem epist. 33. Ibidem epist. 32. Why Valentinian would not iudge betweene the Bishops of diuers faiths Sozom. lib. 6. Cap. 7. Valentinian distrusting his iudgement suffered the Arrians to doe what they would Sozom. lib. 6. cap. 6. Socrat. lib. 4. Cap. 1. Sozom. lib. 6. Cap. 21. Theodoret. li. 4. Cap. 5. Sozom. lib. 6. Cap. 6. Valentinian maried two wiues gaue al men leaue to doe the like Socrat. lib. 4. cap. 31. Socra lib. 4. Cap 29. Ambros. lib. 5. epist. 32. Theodosius discerned betweene the Bishops though ValeÌ„tinian would not or could not Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 10. Codic li. 1. tit 1. de summa trinitate side Catholica § Cunctos The trewe faith in Theodosius time was kept at Rome that was the same which we professe at this day Princes commaunded such as were hereâ—â—â—es to be 〈…〉 of theâ— Churches Sozom. lib. 7. Cap. 9. Codic lib. 1. tit 1. § nulius Theodoret. li. 5. Cap. 2. Euagrius lib. 1. Cap. 12. So did Iustinian appoint depriuation for the breach almost of euery of his ecclesiasticall lawes Apolog. Cap. 4. sect 28. Epist. ad solitar vitam degentes Apolog. Cap. 4. sect 29. Cited of S. Athanas. in the epistle aforesaid Suidas in verbo Leontius Lib. imperfect 2. ad Constant. Constantius reproued for his tyrannous and iniurious oppressing the Church Apolog. cap. 4. Athanasius wordes discussed Apolog. Cap. 4. Athanas. epist. ad solitar vitaÌ„ agentes The Iesuitical madnes of citing the fathers to beare out that which should expound the rest Hilar. de trinit lib. 4. How Princes may rule Bishops and how not Comment sub nomine Athanas in 13. Rom. Disputa Atha cum Arrio Laodicee habitae Sorat lib. 1. Cap. 33. Idem li. 1. ca. 33. Princes may not rule Bishops that is not force them nor frame them to their fansies Vide Athanas. epist. ad solitar vitam agentes 〈◊〉 may play the tiraÌ„ts in temporal things much more in spiritual if they passe christiaÌ„ moderation and sobriety Ibidem Ibidem Constantius would haue his will to be the Canon of the church * Hilar. de trin lib. 9. The wordes of 〈◊〉 〈…〉 â—o thâ—t which â—s antecedent consequent in the same epistle Fiue things misliked in Constantius as tyrannical Hilar. lib. 3. ad Constant. OfteÌ„ chainging his faith Ibidem Hilar. lib. 1. contra Constantium defunct Ibidem Constantius was dead and so no Prince when Hilarie was so bould with him in his termes Hilar. lib. 1. contra Constan. Forcing Synods to his fansie Athanaes ad Solitar vitam agentes Athans Apolo 2. in epis Synod Alexand. Athanas. ad Solitar vitam agentes Suidas in Leontio Tripolis Episco Apud Suidam ibidem Admitting false accusations against Bishops and not suffering them to speak for theÌ„selues Athan. ad Solit. vitam agentes This was plaine tyranny repugnant to the lawes of God and man Athan. ad solis vitam agentes Athan. in eadâ— Epist. Disordered electing of Bishops Athan. ibidem Tyrannous persecuting Hilar. lib. 1. contra Constan. defunct Athan. ad soâ—it vitam agentes These fathers reproued CoÌ„stantius for that he did Now what he did their own wordes doe witnesse Osius wordes examined Athan. ad solit vitam agentes It is neither lawfull for a Bishop to hold a kingdoÌ„ nor for a Prince to take a Bishops functioÌ„ on him The Priest shall not excuse the Prince before God and therefore the the Prince can not bee bound to the Priests mouth The limiting of Osius words Aug. epist. 50. The words of Osius must be limited the limitation whatsoeuer it be cannot hurt vs. Suidas in Leon. Tripolis Episâ— Princes may not do what they list in the church of God Leontius wilfullie corrupted by the Iesuites This was aboue ConstaÌ„tius â—each and without his vocation to teach bishops in his owne person Suidas a late writer Suidas in eodeÌ„ Leont Leontius a man of no great iudgement Hilarie would not haue men forced to religion with tortures Hilar. lib. 2. ad Constant. Temporall Iudges had their charge by the Remane lawes limited vnto temporall 〈◊〉 Niceph. lib. 7. cap. 46. Ambros. lib. 5. Epist. 32. Nouel Constit. 83. Clergiemen exempted froÌ„ temporall lawes but not froÌ„ the Princes lawes Ibidem Princes haue euer medled with ecclesiastical matters Nabuchodonosor Daniel 3. Aug. Epist. 50. Darius Daniel 6. Ionas 3. The king of Niniueth Ionas 3. August Epi. 50. S. Austen proposeth their examples to be followed of christiaÌ„ kings Aug. Epist. 166. The commandementes of kinges may lawfully reach to the publish Kinges and rulers commaÌ„ded by the holy Ghost for medling with religion ing of religioÌ„ Moses Exod. 32. Numbers 16. Deut. 32.33 Iosua Iosua 1. Iosua 1. Iosua 5â— 8. Iosua 8. Iosua 7. Iosua 24. Iosua 24. Dauid 1. Chron. 16.1 Chron. 23.24 25.26 3. King 2. 3. King 9. The Magistrate charged with all the wordes of Moses law 3. Kinges 9. Iosua 1. Deut. 17. They which discharged their duties to God medled with all things as well Ecclesiasticall as ciuill Kinges be charged with Gods law in respect of coÌ„maunding it to others August Epi. 50. Idem contra lit Petiliani lib. 2. cap. 92. Idem contra Cres. lib. 3. cap. 51. Idem Epist. 50. Idem in Psalm 44. No man is a king in respect of himselfe but of his people Keeping and obseruing referred to magistrats is nothing else but to commaund see the law of God kept obserued by others Aug. Epist. 50. Salomon 3. Kings 8. 3. Kinges 2. 3. Kings 11. Asa. 2. Chron. 14. 2. Chro. 15. Iehosaphat 2. Chro. 17. Vers. 3. Vers. 4. Vers. 5. Vers. 7. Vers. 8. 2. Chro. 19. Vers. 4. Vers. 8. Vers. 9. Vers. 10. Vers. 11. Vers. 10. Vers. 11. 2. Chron. 20. Vers. 3. Vers. 5. Vers. 6. Ezechiah 2. Chron. 29. Vers. 2. Vers. 3.4 Vers. 5. Vers. 10. Vers. 15. Vers. 20. Vers. 21. Vers. 27. Vers. 21. Vers. 29. Vers. 30. 2. Chron. 30. Vers. 1. Vers. 6. Vers. 12. 2. Chron. 31. Vers. 2. Vers. 21. 4. Kings 18. Manasses 2. Chron. 33. Vers. 3. Vers. 11. Vers. 12. Vers. 13. Vers. 15. Vers. 16. Iosiah 2. Chron. 34. vers 3. Vers. 4. Vers. 5. Vers. 7. Vers. 29. Vers. 30. Vers. 31. Vers. 32. Vers 33. 2. Chron. 35. vers 1. Vers. 2. Vers. 3. Vers. 4. Vers. 5. Vers. 6. Vers. 10. Vers. 16. Nehemias Nehem. 6. Nehe. 10. vers 1. Vers. 29. Nehem. 13. Vers. 7. Vers. 8. Vers. 9. Vers. 11. Vers. 17. Vers. 10. 11. Vers. 22. Vers. 23. Vers. 25. Vers. 28. Ver. 30. The illation vpon the former examples The kinges decreed and commaunded those
of his truth and clensers of his Church that is with lawfull force to remoue such as impugne the faith and with publik authorit◠to punish those that defile the Church of God with their shamelesse manners be they Priestes or People and this doth not place earthly kingdomes aboue the Church but prepare them as aydes and defences for the Church which is the right end of all earthly States was the first cause why God erected them Though the sheepe may not rule their sheepeheards yet giue them leaue to discerne strangers and flie from theeues and murderers and giue the great and Archpastor that is in heauen leaue to gard his flock not only with watchmen but also with armed men that if the greedinesse and hardinesse of the wolues bee such that they feare not the clamours of Preachers at least they may shrinke for the terrours of Princes And this is no such absurditie as you make it that Princes should serue the true sheepeheard Christ Iesus by turning their swords against those raueners and spoylers which vnder the colour shew of feeding would kill the fattest and gorge themselues with the fairest of Christes flocke Yea Princes in their sort be sheepeheardes as well as Bishops in that they beare the sword vnder God to compell and punish such as the gentle perswasion of the Preacher can not moue and for that cause God said to Dauid Thou shalt feede my people Israell and Dauid maketh this report of himselfe So he fed them according to the simplicitie of his hart and guided them by the discretion of his handes As Princes are bound to heare preachers directing them vnto truth because the wordes of God are in their mouthes and hee that despiseth those thinges despiseth not mā but God so likewise are Preachers bound to obey Princes commanding for truth who so neglecteth that commandement of theirs shall haue no part with God for not doing that which trueth by the kinges hart commanded him And the Princes obedience to be due not to Preachers persons or pleasures but their message deliuered them by God the Lord Ruler of all Princes appeareth by this that Princes may lawfully punish the preachers if they falsifie the word of truth or shame their calling with their disordered liuing That Princes be iudges of Religion we neuer said it nor thought it much lesse that they be iudges of God himselfe this argueth rather your impudencie in reporting than our ignorance in not affirming it Gods name be blessed we know what difference there is and ought to be betweene God and man as well as you but such is the badnesse of your cause and blindnesse of your harts that you must and will rather childishly quarrell and wittingly belie the truth than come to a faire and euen triall S. Cyprian hath some such wordes but no such meaning as you alleage He saith when a Bishop is orderly chosen in any Church he that After the diuine allowance or iudgement after the suffrages of the people after the consent and liking of other Bishops erecteth a second in the same Church against him maketh himselfe now the Controler and Iudge not of the Bishop but of God which wee beleeue to be verie true but how doth this proue that Christiā magistrates may not displace wicked and vnworthy Bishops for their iustes desertes which is our question And as Cyprian in his sense is not againste vs so Cyprian in our case is cleare against you For when as yet there were no Princes Christened that with publike authoritie might remoue vngodly Bishoppes Cyprian assureth vs that the people might lawfully seuer them-selues from a wicked Bishoppe and elect an other His words bee these Therefore the flocke or people obeying the Lordes preceptes and fearing God ought to separate themselues from a sinfull Bishop and not to participate with the sacrifices of a sacrilegious Priest whereas they chiefly haue power to chose worthy Bishops and to reiect vnworthie perswading and incouraging the people to goe forwarde in that their attempt notwithstanding the Bishop of Rome tooke stitch with the partie deposed and wrote letters for his restitution of the which Cyprian maketh no great account as you may see by his words that follow Neither is the Bishop of Rome so much to be blamed that was deceiued through negligence as this man to be detested that fraudulently deceiued him And though Basilides coulde circumuent men yet can he not beguile God Phi. It maketh her free from Ecclesiasticall discipline from which no true childe of Gods familie is exempted Theo. It maketh her free from the Popes Buls and decretals but not from the Lawes and Precepts of Christ which is the true discipline of Gods children Touching the regiment of their owne persons and liues Princes owe the verie same reuerence and obedience to the word and Sacraments that euerie priuate man doth and if any Prince would be baptised or approach to the Lords table with manifest shew of vnbeliefe or irrepentance the minister is bound freely to speake and rather to lay downe his life at the Princes feete than to let the king of Kings be prouoked the mysteries defiled his owne soule and the Princes indangered for lacke of often and earnest admonition Phi. I am glad you graunt that Princes may be excommunicated for that proueth Priestes to be their superiours and ouerthroweth quite their supremacie Theo. You reason very profoundly The seruants of God may not receiue any mortall man to the diuine mysteries except he bring with him a right faith in God an inwarde sorrowe for his former sinnes ergo the Pope may depose Princes set their subiectes in open fielde against them to thrust them from their thrones Phi. We reason not so but we say Priestes may excommunicate Princes ergo they be superiours to Princes Theo. I speake of not admitting Princes to the Sacramentes but with those conditions that God requireth of all Christian men without respect of States or persons and you by and by leape to excommunication which word you egerly sease on not for any meaning you haue to guide Princes right lest they prouoke the wrath of God to their euerlasting destruction by the contempt of his graces but for a cunning to defeate them of their crownes by your indirect and vngodly deuises For first you wil excōmunicate them that is you wil haue no cōmunion with them in anie thing spiritual or tēporal next you descend from not cōmunicating with thē to not obeying them lastly from not obeying to open rebelling against them placing others in their steedes And thus when Princes displease you you neuer leaue them till with this wreath of excommunication you wring their Scepters out of their handes But if you looke better about you you shall finde great difference between not deliuering them the sacred mysteries of God except they repent and beleeue the Gospell and your diuelish conspiracie to deny
Thus S. Cyril largely sheweth In the proposition of Caiphas there is contained a double sense one which Caiphas himselfe ment that it was expedient Christ should die by the hands of the Iewes lest the whole Nation should bee destroyed by the Romanes This was a false and wicked meaning comming from the lewd intention of Caiphas An other sense of the same proposition was intended by the holy Ghost that it was needfull that only Christ should die for the saluation of the whole world This Caiphas neither vnderstood nor ment yet his wordes were such as might fitly serue this sense of the holy Ghost For Caiphas himself as crueller readier to wickednes and bloodier than the rest encourageth others staggering at it by saying you perceaue nothing neither vnderstād you that it is expediēt the life of one man should be neglected for the whole coūtrie Phi. He spake this by the holy Ghost Theo. The diuell possessed his hart but the power of God restrained and ordered his speach Phi. Had he not the Spirit of Prophesie Theo. No more than Saul the bloudsucker had when he praied for Dauid whom hee sought to kill than Iudas the traytor had when he iustified his master and hanged himselfe yea than the Dyuell had when hee confessed and intreated the Sonne of God not to torment him before his time Phi. Why then doth S. Iohn giue this note of him that he was hie Priest for that yere Theo. S. Iohn noteth this that it pleased God so to temper the hie Priests wordes that where hee spake to hasten the death of our Sauiour his wordes sounded that the people should vtterly perish without the death of Christ which was most true but not his meaning Phi. His tongue spake trueth though his hart did erre Theo. Satan poisoned his hart but GOD bridled his mouth Phi. Can not God doe the like to the Bishop of Rome Theo. No doubt he can but you must proue that he will Phi. If he did so to Caiphas much more will hee do it to the head of his Church Theo. How hangeth this geare together Hee did once so to Caiphas ergo hee will always doe the like where you list to haue it Phi. Not where we list but where he will Theo. That helpeth you litle God can do the like where whē he wil. What is that to the Bishop of Rome We doubt not of Gods power but smile at your folly which conclude this to be ordinarie in the Pope which was extraordinarie in Caiphas Phi. It was ordinarie in Caiphas by reason of his office and so saith S. Iohn The. S. Iohn doth not say it was ordinarie either in al hie priests or in Caiphas for Caiphas himself the very same yere as S. Matt. witnesseth iudicially pronounced our Sauiour to be a blasphemer which I hope you will not say came from the direction of the holy Ghost The hie Priest therefore did erre and that most hainously in iudgement and if this be al your hold the Pope may doe the like Phi. What may be is hard to determine But this we know the Pope did neuer yet erre sitting in his Tribunal to giue iudgement Theo. As though the place and not the Pope had assurance of trueth annexed vnto it What holines hath the Consistorie to safegard the iudge from error The promise of Christ was made to the person and not to the place Phi. To the person but sitting in iudgement Theo. Did Peter sitte in iudgement at that time when he denied his master Phi. Wee say not so Theo But that night was the promise made vnto him and that night performed in him when Peter poore man stoode warming himselfe amongst the manye and durst not answer the first interrogatorie that a silly wenche proposed to him And therefore Christ neuer spake of your Courtes nor Consistories but promised Peter to pardon his fault and to strengthen his faith lest hee should perseuere in that his Apostasie Phi. Had we no warrant for the Bishop of Rome that his faith shall not faile yet experience proueth this which we say to be true that he neuer erred iudicially that is sitting in his Consistorie Theo. What need we care where he sate so long as we bee sure he did erre What wrangling is this to aske for the place where and the time when the Pope spake the wordes Hee that may erre at home may likewise erre abroade If the Pope bee an heretike in his chamber hee can be no Catholike in his Consistorie Phi. Definitiue sentence he neuer gaue any against the faith Theo. What are his decretals but definitiue sentences And in those he hath erred Phi. Neuer Theo. The Decretal of Clemens which I before alleaged is altogether erronious They were two Decretall Epistles for the which Honorius was condemned The decretal of Vigilius which Liberatus remembreth is expresly against the faith Celestinus erred iudicially as your owne friendes confesse but you haue pared that Decretall as you haue done many others and left out the later part lest we should spie the fault Phi. Who told you so Theo. They that had no cause to belie you Alfonsus a great Patrone of your side sayth It is a thing manifest to al men that Pope Celestinus erred touching the mariage of the faithful when either part falleth into heresie Neither was this error of Celestinus such as ought to be imputed only to negligence so that we may say he erred as a priuate person and not as Pope because this decision of Celestinus was in the auncient Decratals which I my selfe haue seene and read Innocentius the third when he decided the case confessed that one of his predecessours had decreed otherwise which saith the gloze was Celestinus whose resolution was in the olde Decretals and it was euil that Celestinus sayd Alexander the 3. in a matter of great importance said Quamuis aliter a quibusdam praedecessoribus nostris sit aliquando iudicatum though some of our predecessours haue heretofore otherwise giuen iudgement Phi. These were matters of mariage and not of faith Theo. As though the seuering of those whom God hath ioyned did not touch the faith and so did some of these Popes and that iudicially by their contrarie Decrees Againe Nicolas the fourth sayth in his Decretal that To renounce the proprietie of all thinges not in special only but in common also is meritorious and holy which Christ taught by word and confirmed by example and the first foūders of the militant church deriued to others by the paterne of their doctrine life Iohn the 22. sayth it is hereticall to affirme that Christ his Apostles had nothing in speciall nor in common Phi. The next extrauagant reconcileth them both Theo. The Pope laboureth for life to shift off the matter at last commeth with a very iest De sola abdicatione proprietatis non iuris alterius in praefata declaratione
a Marginall note Phi. There is no warre in the world so iust or honorable be it ciuill or forraigne as that which is waged for religion we say for the true auncient Catholike Romane religion which by the lawes of holy church and all christian Nations is adiudged to bee the only true worship of God and vnto the obedience of which all Princes people haue yeelded themselues either by oth vow or sacramentes or euerie of these waies For this it is goodly and honorable to fight in such order and times as wee bee warranted in conscience and law by our supreme Pastours and Priestes and not for wild condemned heresies against most lawfull christian catholikes kinges Priests as the rebellious Protestantes and Caluinistes of this time doe without all order law or warrant of God or man As the armes taken for defence of godlie honour and inheritāce in such sort difference from heretical tumults as is said are so much more commendable and glorious for that no crime in the world deserueth more sharpe and zealous pursuite of extreme reuenge whether it be in superiours or subiects than reuolting from the faith to strange religions Theo. Bee you not maruelous sharpe and sounde disputers which alwaies proue that you neede not and euer inferre that you should not Phi. Wee proue directly that which wee vndertooke Theo. What vndertooke you Phi. That Princes might be depriued Theo. By sentence meane you or by violence Phi. By sentence if that will serue but if they yeelde not thereto then by violence Theo. Your iudiciall power to giue sentence of depriuation against them you would faine haue established by the Scriptures and examples of the Primatiue church howe short you came of that reckoning I leaue the wise to consider You proceede nowe to the violent expelling them from their Princely seates wherein it is a world to see how idlely you hunt about or rather purposely pursue the wrong foote because in the right you finde no reliefe Warre for the Catholike Religion is both lawfull and honorable you saie you must adde of the subiectes against their Prince or else you range cleane besides our question Wee striue not what causes may leade christian Princes to make warre on their neighbors but whether it be lawfull or tolerable for the subiect to beare armes against his naturall and absolute Prince You proue which is nothing to your purpose that princes haue waged warres for religion when you come to make your conclusion you secretly conuey this vnder hand which is most in doubtt betwixt vs and in generall termes you proclaime that warres for religion are iust and honorable But Sir in this interprise the person must be respected as well as the cause Be the cause neuer so iust if the person be not authorized by God to draw the sworde they bee no iust nor lawfull warres but barbarous and theenish vprores For say your selfe when malefactours deserue to die may priuate men put them to death without the Magistrate Phi. No. Theo. And if they do be they not murderers though the crime which they reuenge be worthy of death Phi. They bee Theo. Then if in priuate punishmentes men may not presume without his authoritie that beareth the sworde much lesse may they venter on open warres which are wilfull and furious executions by plaine force without all order of iustice vnlesse they be directly warranted by him that hath the sword from God to take vengeance of the wicked Phi. We be warranted in conscience and law Theo. Wee talke nowe of your conclusion not of your commission If Princes who beare the sword may lawfully wage warre for religion is it consequent I aske you that priuate men which haue not the sword may doe the same Phi. Priuate men may not beare armes without authoritie Theo. And if they doe bee they not plaine theeues and murtherers Phi. If they be not warranted to fight Theo. To rifle and slea one is theft and murther by the lawes of God and man what then are they that spoile Realmes and kill thowsandes with armed violence but grand theeues and murtherers Phi. If they be not lawfully authorized thereto they be no better than robbers and slaughterers Theo. Then Princes may mage warre if the cause bee good because God hath giuen them the sworde to maintaine iustice and if that bee refused to offer force both at home and abroade priuate persons may not doe the like bee the cause neuer so iust for so much as they bee not licenced by God to beare or vse the sword Phi. I tolde you before that we bee warranted Theo. So had you neede Your warres else for religion bee no lawfull iust armes but desperate and wicked tumults But by whom are you warranted Phi. By our supreme Pastors and Priestes Theo. Doe Pastours and Priestes beare the sworde Phi. I say not so but they warrant vs to take the sworde Theo. Can they warrant you to take the sword that haue no autoritie to beare the sword Phi. They be superiour iudges to these that beare the sworde Theo. What In temporall causes Phi. No but in spirituall Theo. Fighting and killing are martiall not spirituall affaires Phi. Yet to be directed by spiritual Pastors Theo. We striue not for directing but for authorizing of armes Preachers may be consulted whether the quarrell be iust but onely the Magistrate that hath from heauen supreme power of goods lands life and death can warrant the subiect to vse the sword Phi. The cause maketh the warre lawfull or otherwise It is godly and honorable to fight for religion we say for the true ancient catholike Romane religion in such order and time as we be warranted in conscience and lawe by our supreme Pastours Priestes and not for vile condemned heresies against most lawfull christian catholike kinges and Priestes as the rebellious Protestants and Caluinistes of this time do without all order law warrant of God or man Theo. If Nabals sheepe be not all shorne I dare warrant you better intertainement there than euer Dauid had Spoiles massacres conspiracies and treasons euen to the destruction and murther of Princes by their own seruāts if a Priest say the word you count in your selues to be iust honorable and godlie warres If others doe but stand on their gard to keepe their liues and families from the bloodie rage of their enimies seeking to put whole townes and Prouinces of them to the sworde against all lawe and reason and to disturbe the kingdomes in the minoritie of the right Gouernours or if they defend their ancient and christian liberties couenanted and agreed on by those Princes to whō they first submitted themselues and euer since confirmed and allowed by the kinges that haue succeeded If in either of these two cases the godly require their right and offer no wrong impugne not their Princes but onely saue their owne liues you crie rebellious heretikes rebellious
slaughter of the people Theo. The Leuites were not all Priestes though they were to attend on the Arke and the rest of the seruice of God Aaron and his sonnes had the Priesthood and not the whole Tribe of Leui. The Scripture it selfe will giue you that distinction The Leuites were appointed vnto all the seruice of the Tabâ—rnacle of the house of God But Aaron and his sonnes burnt incense vpon the Altar of burnt offering And what shoulde let the Leuites to beare armes at Moses commaundement who afterward in defence of king Ioash at his coronation in the Temple did compasse him Euerie man with his weapon in his hand Against the Magistrate they did not bend their swords as you do but rather for obedience to the Magistrate and therefore their example wil not warrant your displaying of banners against your Prince Phi. Was Moses a Magistrate Theo. Howe thinke you was he not Phi. The Scripture sayeth hee was a Priest and a Prophet not a Prince Theo. Those bee no reasons to exclude him from bearing the sword Melchizedec was a Priest of the most high God and king of Salem Ely was a Priest and Samuel a Prophet and yet both were Soueraigne Rulers ouer Israell Moses might annoynt Aaron at the first erection of the Priesthoode and deliuer the lawe of God vnto the people and yet keepe the Ciuil regiment Phi. Why then doth Dauid number Moses and Aaron among the Priests of God Theo. The worde which Dauid vseth doeth signifie those that be chiefe in any seruice as well as Priestes as in the second of Samuel the eight chapter where it is saide that Zadoc and Abimelec the Sonnes of Phinees were the Priests it is presently added and the sonnes of Dauid câ—hanìm haìu were no Priestes but chiefe Princes or Rulers And yet the worde is the very same that was vsed before to Zadoc and Abimelec the sonnes of Aaron So in the 20. of the same booke Zadoc and Abiathar were Pristes and Ira the Iairite was cohen ledauid not a Priest to Dauid for that had beene wickednesse against the law of God to make a mere straÌ„ger that was no Leuite a priest but a chiefe Prince about Dauid And so Dauid ioyneth Moses and Aaron as the Principall seruitours about God and chiefe Rulers of the people Moses for regiment Aaron for sacrifices And did the worde exactly signifie Priestes the letter beth which goeth before it importeth either in the number of the Priests or togither with the Priests so that Moses and Aaron with the Priests called on the name of the Lorde But that Moses was a Priest after Aaron and his sonnes were annointed is a manifest vntrueth against the Scriptures God sayde to Moses Thou shalt put vppon Aaron the holie garmentes and shalt annoynt him And sanctifie him that hee may serue mee in the Priestes office Thou shalt also bring his sonnes and cloath them with garmentes And shalt annoynt them as thou diddest annoynt their Father that they may serue me in the Priests office so shall this their annoynting bee to them for an euerlasting Priest-hoode in their generations And againe Thou shalt appoynt Aaron and his sonnes to execute the Priestes office and the straunger that commeth neere shall die Which precept excluded not onelie the rest of the Tribes but euen the Leuites them-selues that were not the sonnes of Aaron from being Prestes or medling with the sacrifices that shoulde be offered vnto God To Aaron God sayde Thou and thy sonnes with thee shall beare the iniquitie or burden of the Priestes office Thy brethren of the Tribe of Leui shalt thou take to minister vnto thee but thou and thy sonnes with thee shall minister before the Tabernacle of the Testimonie They shall keepe the charge of all the Tabernacle but they shall not come neere the instrumentes of the Sanctuarie nor to the Altar least they die both they you Where you see the Priestes office so tied vnto Aaron and his sonnes that the Leuites his brethren and of his fathers familie might watch and ward about the Tabernacle and minister vnto him and his sonnes that were priests but not come neere the Altar nor any instruments of the Sanctuarie How then could Moses be a Priest after Aaron was annointed when the Priesthood was deliuered and confirmed to Aaron onely and his sonnes Phi. Moses was a Leuite Theo. Hee was Aarons brother but the Priesthood was giuen to Aaron and his sonnes Phi. He annointed Aaron and his sonnes Theo. Not by his ordinarie function as a Priest but by speciall direction from God as a Prophet For Aaron was called to that office not by Moses but by God himselfe as the Apostle testifieth though hee were annointed by Moses handes Phi. Moses might bee a Priest before Aaron was called Theo. If Moses were a Priest what needed an other to bee chosen Why shoulde Moses bee depriued of his Priesthoode hee no way displeasing nor offending God Reason you shewe both his calling and his annoynting before you chalenge the Priesthood for him Phi. Dauid sayeth hee was Theo. What Dauid sayeth wee sawe before The worde by Sainct Hieroms owne obseruation signifieth a Master or Ruler Ira Iairites erat sacerdos Dauid id est magister sicut alibi scriptum est filij autem Dauid erant sacerdotes id est magistri fratrum suorum Ira the Iairite was a Priest of Dauids that is a Ruler as it is elswhere written the sonnes of Dauid were Priestes that is Rulers of their brethren Phi. Sainct Hierom and Sainct Augustine writing vppon this Psalme of Dauid affirme that Moses was a Priest Theo. All that Sainct Hierom sayth is this that Moses had the rule of the Lawe and Aaron of the Priest-hoode and that either of them did fore-shewe the comming of Christ with a Priestlie kinde of proclamation Moses with the sounde of the lawe and Aaron with the belles of his garmentes Where S. Hierom calleth the Propheticall function of Moses to teach the people the Lawes of God a Priestly kinde of proclaiming and foreshewing that the Sonne of God should come in flesh to teach vs the will of his Father Saint Augustine vseth the worde in like sense for that sacred seruice which Moses yeelded vnto God in reporting his Lawes and preceptes to the people And therefore in the same place hee sayeth of Samuel hee was made high Priest which is expreslie against the Scriptures if you take the worde Priest for him that was annoynted to offer sacrifices vnto God For Samuel was but a Leuite and no Priest much lesse high Priest The sonnes of Samuel are reckened in the Scripture it selfe among the Leuites apart from the Priestes office and linage and the high Priesthoode was long before giuen to Phinees and his house by couenant from Gods owne mouth and in the dayes of Samuel was helde by Abiah the sonne of Abicub who was directly of the
Saint Hierom of when hee sayde Quocunque te verteris whither soeuer thou turne thy selfe Philand Of other Countries Theoph. Of what other Countries Philand Of all other Countries and specially of the West partes where the latin seruice was Theoph. So you woulde enforce his woordes but you doe him the more wrong Philand Are not his woordes plaine Quocunque te verteris turne whither thou wilt the husbandman holding his plough singeth Allelu ia Theoph. In deede his woordes are plainely peruerted by you For Hierom speaketh not of the West but of the East not of Countries but of a poore village not of Latinists but of such as were borne and bred in Iurie where the natural speach of the place was Hebrewe Phi. Proue that to bee S. Hieroms meaning Theoph. They bee his woordes both before and after and those so plaine that I maruaile you could misse them In Christi vero vt supra diximus villula tota rusticitas extra Psalmos silentium est Quocunque te veteris arator stiuam tenens decantat Aallelu ia Sudans messor Psalmis se auocat curua attondens vite falce vinitor aliquid Dauidicum canit Haec sunt in hac prouincia carmina In the village of Christ as we haue said before there is nothing but rusticitie silence except it be in singing of psalmes Turne whither you wil in this village the husbandman holding his plough continually singeth Allelu ia The mower when he sweateth and is wearie refresheth himselfe with psalmes The Gardiner as he dresseth his vine with his hooke hath some peece of Dauid in his mouth These are the songes of this prouince or place What word or title is here for the seruice in the latine toung except you thinke that as the Pope claimeth to bee Lord of the whole worlde so euery Countrie throughout the worlde spake then nothing but Latine which were a merrie conceite to make sporte with if there were nothing looked for at your handes but laughter Phi. In sifting our authorities you take hold of euery nice and curious point which with good conscience we did and may despise Theo. Call you that a good conscience to muster out eleuen authorities as ancient and flat testimonies for defence of your errour against the woordr of God and the church of Christ and not one of them any way respecting that which you should would seeme to proue That no Nation in the Primatiue church East West North nor South had their diuine seruice in a tongue not vnderstood of themselues is our assertion You shew that in Italie and Africa where the people perfectly vnderstood the Romane tongue they had their seruice in Latine and that the barbarous of this Realme and husbandmen of Bethleem sang Allelu ia which S. Augustine saith all nations did yea the Barbarians as well as the Romanes without translating that or Amen into their barbarous languages Hence you collect the seruice alwaies in Latine throughout the West church and paint that note by the side of your booke to make the simple beleeue those places which are found in your text to proue it to be true though not one of theÌ„ whom you cite affirm or mention any such thing Whether this be to vse your owne wordes great ignorance of Iesuites or greater guilefulnes so vntruly and peruersly to wrest the fathers and whether you can be catholikes that haue no better ground for your Latine and vnknowen seruice within this Reame let the Reader iudge Phi. Augustine our Apostle brought into this Realme the seruice in the Latine tongue and there are well neere a thowsand yeares past since he came And therefore S. Bede saith lib. 1. hist. Ang. cap. 1. that being foure diuerse vulgar languages in our Countrie the Latine was made common to them all Theo. You thought it long belike before you made vp the ful dozen of peruerted and misconstered authorities You abuse Bede as you doe the rest and no maruell to see you so bold with him when you haue ventered on so many Phi. Doth he not say this Iland had foure diuerse languages of their owne and the Latine which was the fift was made common to them all Theo. Not by hauing their seruice in Latine but by meditating and searching the Scriptures a number in euery of those foure Nations had gotten the knowledge of the Latine tongue Phi. Then the Scriptures were not in any of those languages and consequently neither the Psalmes nor Lessons which are necessary partes of the Church Seruice Theo. Reason better or hold your peace you doe but wast time about trifles Bedes wordes are Haec in praesenti quinque gentium linguis vnam eandemque summae verâ—tatis verae sublimitatis scientiam scrutatur confitetur Anglorum videlicet Britonum Scotorum Pictorum Latinorum quae meditatione Scripturarum caeteris omnibus est facta communis This Iland at this present searcheth and confesseth one and the verie same knowledge of the hiest veritie and truest sublimitie with the tongues of fiue Nations to wit the Saxons Britons Scots Picts and Latines whose tongue by the meditation of the scriptures is become common to all the rest Meditation of the scriptures in all mens eares saue yours is the diligent and often perusing of them to get the right vnderstanding of them and not the Church Seruice as you would secretly inferre neither doth Bede deny that the Scriptures were hearde or reade in the other foure tongues which were proper to the foure Nations of this Iland but rather affirmeth it when he saith this Countrie searched and confessed one and the very same knowledge of the highest truth with the tongues of fiue Nations foure of them being the British Saxon Scottish and Piâ—tish tongue in which also they searched confessed the knowledge of the true God though the deeper and better learned of them in euery of those Nations for an exacter kinde of meditating and studying the Scriptures gate them some skill in the Latine tongue wherein the Scriptures were more sincerely written and more substantially handled than they coulde bee in any of the other tongues amongest the Saxons Scots or Britons in that raw and rude worlde so soone vppon their conuersion to the faith and long desolation before of learning religion and good manners Phi. The Latine tongue was common to them all Theo. Not to euery particular man amongest them but to some speciall men in those foure Nations that were willing and able to meditate the Scriptures And had it beene common to them al that is to euery one of them as you would presse it that construction helpeth you nothing at al. For then the people of this land being able to meditate the Scriptures in the latine toung might verie well haue their sâ—ruice in the latine tongue because it was a knowen tongue and such as they readily vnderstood but I thinke the other of the twaine the more likely
be occupied and therefore howsoeuer the simple people be deluded by the rehearsall of the same words which Christ vsed yet consecration benediction or sanctification of bread and wine you professe you make none at all Theoph. Christ you say tooke bread into his hands and did blesse the very element What meane you by blessing Philand He vsed power and actiue words vpon it as he did ouer the bread and fishes which he multiplied Theoph. Why walke you thus in cloudes Blessing with vs is the giuing of thanks vnto God with you it is the making of a crosse in the aire with your two forefingers Which of these twaine do you meane Philand That Christ blessed the bread we be very sure that he gaue thanks to the bread you dare not say Theo. Thanks he gaue to God and not to the bread Phil. But he blessed the bread and therefore blessing is not taken in Christes institution for thankes-giuing as you misconster it Theoph. If a man should put you to the new Testament in Gréeke can you spell it Philand Yea Sir and conster it as well as you Theoph. Then I trust your cunning will serue you to know 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which word the holy Ghost vseth to expresse the Lords action and benediction at his last Supper doth inferre that our Sauiour gaue thanks to God and made no crosse with his hand ouer the bread Philand But S. Marke saith that our Lord brake the bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hauing first blessed it and Saint Paul doeth not sticke to referre that word to the cup it selfe and not to God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the chalice of benediction which we blesse is it not the communication of the blood of Christ Theo. Do you think S. Marke reproueth S. Luke S. Matthew or that S. Paul is contrarie to himselfe Phil. No I thinke the one expoundeth the other and all their reportes méete full in one congruence Theoph. And otherwise to say or thinke is apparent blasphemie against the spirit of God who neuer halteth in his tale nor dissenteth from him-selfe in any thing much lesse in a matter of so weightie moment as this is Philand He can be no Christian that doubteth thereof Theop. Then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 since children in Grammer schooles do know that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to giue thanks with words and not to crosse with fingers we conclude that this is a childish error of yours to thinke that Christ gaue not thanks to God but blessed the very element Yea no word plainer conuinceth your puerilitie than that which you haue brought to relieue your selfe For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth more euidently refell your crossing with fingers than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as being compounded of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in Gréeke importeth speach vttered by month and by no meanes drawing or crossing the fingers Phil. Let the word signifie what you will that which Christ did were it with hand or mouth he did it ouer the bread and vpon the bread and so do not you but let the bread and cup stand aloofe and occupie Christs words by way of report and narration applying them not at all to the matter proposed to be occupied Theop. This is the right behauiour of your Rhemish translatours to wrangle and trifle about phrases and ambiguities as if they were the precepts and commandements of God Our Sauiour you affirme blessed the very element that is vsed power and actiue words vpon it or ouer it Blessing is a word that is diuersly vsed in the scriptures To blesse God is to praise him and to giue honor to his name and for that cause you shall find both those words ioyned together as words of like force as wheÌ„ S. Luke saith the disciples continued in the temple praising and blessing God To blesse men if it be done by men for of their blessings we speake and not of Gods is to pray for them and to beséech God that he will blesse them that is defend them prosper them and be mercifull vnto them So Isaac blessed Iacob and Iacob the sonnes of Ioseph and so were the Priests appointed by God himselfe to blesse the children of Israel and a forme of praier for that purpose prescribed them We may also blesse the time place and meanes in which or by which God sheweth his fauour towards vs that is we may pronounce them blessed for our sakes and our selues bound to blesse God for them So Dauid sayd to Abigail Blessed be God that sent thee this day to meete me Blessed be thy speach or counsell and blessed be thou which hast kept me this day from going to shed blood where he blesseth God as the author the woman as the meanes her words as the perswasions and occasions that kept him from vsing the bloody reuenge which he determined against Nabal and his familie And so said Salomon blessed is the tree whereby righteousnes commeth So on the contrary Iob and Ieremie cursed the dayes wherein they were borne would not haue them to be blessed We must likewise blesse the meates which we eate the things which we vse for the maintenance of this mortall life that is praier must be made vnto God that they may be healthfull for vs we thankfull for them by which meanes our food al other succors of this life are sanctified to his pleasure our comfort Since then the Scriptures not onely permit but also command that we should blesse one another and so the creatures which nourish our bodies we make no doubt but it is both lawfull néedfull for vs to blesse the sacraments which are the seales of Gods euerlasting promises therfore we readily receiue S. Pauls adiection when he saith the cup of blessing WHICH WE BLESSE is it not the coÌ„munion of Christs blood Mary blessing in that place we take not for crossing or charming the cup with a set number order of signs profers as you vse at your masse but for the making of our ernest huÌ„ble praiers to God that our vnworthines do not hinder the working of his sacraments but that by his goodnes mercy they may take their due effects in vs according â—o his sonnes institutioÌ„ for the pardoning of our sins the incresing of his grace our faith the quikning of our inward man preseruing both body soul to eternal life And this the force of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the maner of blessing all other things persons directed by the scriptures the very principles of praier pietie do approue coÌ„firm wheras your houering blowing ouer the Chalice your crossing hiding it your rubbing of fingers for feare of crums your first thwarting and then lifting of armes your ioining and vnioining of thumbe and
peoples heartes and voyces Philand Those be your shyftes Theoph. Goe to you shifters is it not enough for you to beguile the simple with emptie soundes shewes and names but you will resist a manifest trueth when you are sure to haue it prooued to your faces Cyprian in his 63. epistle meddleth not with Malachies wordes but if you woulde in deede learne what hee thought or wrate of that prophesie and what hee counted to bee the Sacrifice that Malachie foretolde turne to his instructions giuen to Quirinus against the Iewest he first booke and 16. chapter where he proueth that the old sacrifice should bee abolished and a newe succeede and there you shal find him expound it to bee Sacrificium laudis iustitiae the Sacrifice of praise and righteousnes and that by no worse mans authoritie than Dauids Iustinus I grant alleadgeth the wordes and saith God in that speech doth witnes that all the sacrifices which Christ Iesus appointed to be done in his name at the Eucharist of bread and wine are acceptable to him But what Sacrifices they were which Christ deliuered and prescribed in the Eucharist for his to do the wordes of Iustinus that presently follow do perfectly open Preces quidem gratiarū actiones bonorum perfectas solas esse Deo gratas hostias ego quoque concedo Haec enim sola facienda acceperunt Christiani in aridi humidique sui cibi commemoratione in quo mortis quam per se perpessus◠est Deus Dei filius memoria re colitur That the prayers and thankes of the good are the only perfect sacrifices and pleasant to God I confesse For these onely sacrifices haue the christians receiued to be done in the celebration of that their Eucharistical food liquor in which the memory of the death of the son of God who himselfe was God is renewed You should haue spared the very quoting of this place by mine aduise for if all the Preachers in England would haue laide their heades together in wordes to crosse your actuall corporall sacryficing the flesh of Christ they could not haue done it in quicker and smarter speech Ireneus maketh euen as much for you as Iustinus did for he not onely subuerteth your reall sacrificing of Christ when hee teacheth that the church offereth the creatures of bread and wine in token of her thankefulnesse vnto God but the very wordes of Malachie he expoundeth by S. Iohns authority for the praiers of the Sainctes Benè ait in omni loco incensum offertur nomini meo sacrificium purum Incensa autem Iohan. in Apocalypsi orationes ait esse Sanctorum Et ideo nos quoque offerre vult munus ad altare frequenter sine intermissione Est ergo altare in coelis Illuc enim preces nostrae oblationes nostrae diriguntur Well saith God by Malachie In euery place incense is offered to my name and a pure sacrifice Now incense Iohn in his Apocalypse calleth the prayers of the Sainctes And therefore God will haue vs offer a gift at his altar cōtinually without intermission The altar is in heauen Thither are our praiers and oblations directed Phi. Yet S. Irenens applyeth the wordes of Malachie to the Eucharist Theo. He doth but that sacrifice he saith is the offering vnto God the first fruits of his creatures for a thankesgiuing and with that restriction hee limiteth the word offerimus which he often vseth Offerre igitur oportet Deo primitias eius creaturae Offerimus einon quasi indigenti sed gratias agentes donationi eius sanctificantes creaturam Wee must offer to God but the first fruites of his creatures Wee offer to him not that he wanteth but giuing him thankes for his bountifulnesse and sanctifieng the creature Here is a sacrifice of thanksgiuing for his mercies not Christ but the creatures of bread and wine offered vnto God with prayer and other christian duties which hee nameth as cleane thoughtes faith without hypocrisie firme hope feruent dilection these are the sacrifices of the new Testament of the Lords table not proper to the priest but common to the people nor finished with the hāds but perfourmed with the spirite of man which is the true seruice of the second couenant Phi. You turne and winde the Scriptures as you please but sure the Prophet Malachie directly toucheth our Sacrifice Theo. You dreame so earnestly of it that all the Fathers in Christes church can not pull you from it What Cyprian Iustine and Ireneus write of this prophesie you do or may vnderstand by that which is saide if the number bee too smal you may haue moe to assure you that the Prophet neuer thought of your reall and corporall sacrificing of Christes fleshe to God the Father by the Priestes fingers Tertullian alleadging the very wordes Et in omni loco offerentur munda Sacrificia nomini meo In euery place shall there bee brought cleane Sacrifices vnto my name addeth Indubitatè quod in omni terra exire habebat praedicatio Apostolorum Vndoubtedly the Prophet Malachie meaneth that the preaching of the Apostles was to bee spredde ouer all the earth Against Marcion hee sayeth Et in omni loco Sacrificium nomine meo offeretur sacrificium mundum scilicet simplex oratio de conscientia pura In euerie place shall there bee offered in my name a sacrifice and that a cleane sacrifice to witte sincere praier from a pure conscience So Eusebius Where Malachie doeth say that incense and sacrifice are offered to God in euerie place what else meaneth hee but that it is done in euery Countrie and in all Nations which in deede were to offer to the most high God the incense of prayer and sacrifice which is called cleane no longer by blood but by godly workes Nowe what those workes were Cyrill will teach you Wee vse sacrifices but of the spirite and minde For wee haue a precept that leauing the grosse seruice of the Iewes wee shoulde yeelde a subtile fine and spirituall sacrifice And therefore wee offer vnto God for a sweete smell all sortes of vertues faith hope charitie iustice continence obedience mildnesse perpetuall prayses and other such vertues So Hierom. Incense is offered to the name of the Lord in euerie place and a cleane sacrifice not in the oblations of the olde Testament but in the holynesse of Euangelicall puritie of which incense wee reade in other places as when Dauid sayeth Let my praier bee directed as incense in thy sight and the lifting vppe of mine handes as an Euening sacrifice So Augustine Heare yee Donatistes the Lorde saying thus by his Prophet In euerie place shall incense bee yeelded to my name and a pure sacrifice With this sacrifice of your brethren which God most respecteth you shew your selues by your cauilling to bee grieued and if at any time you heare the name of the Lord to bee praysed from East to West which
is God and hath a speciall kinde of operation by the power and grace of his flesh and blood in the sacred mysteries as hee is man vnited in the same person with God And yet these wordes doe not import him to bee in the sacrament Certainely Christs diuine and humane nature were most woonderfull mysteries before this Sacrament was ordayned and all the wordes that your author vseth if they were as you cite them are onely these Thou diuine and most holy mysterie which agree to Christ without any respect of the Sacrament more properly and truly than to your host or chalice Philand Yet they may bee taken as spoken to the sacrament and therefore wee did not peruert them we did but preferre that construction before the other Theo. That is where diuine honour was giuen to christ you deriue it from him to the host Phi. Not from him but finding him truely and corporally present in the sacrament there we honor him where we find him Theo. Your doings we know but Dionysius words haue no such sense Philand They may haue and that sufficeth vs. Theo. But if by them you will prooue so great a matter as this is which we nowe haue in hand they must necessarily enforce your exposition and not indifferently beare an other as well as yours or rather better This answere might suffice if Dionysius had vsed the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as you suppose he did but now his text is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But O most diuine and holy expiation or Sacrifice reueiling the enigmaticall couerings which are figuratiuely adiacent vnto thee bee opened clearly vnto vs Or if any man like rather to haue it an Apostrophe to a thing lacking life such as the learned are well acquainted with and the Scriptures often vse he may interprete it neerer to the right signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and say but O most diuine and sacred rite or institution referring it to that manner and order of celebrating the Lords supper which Christ first ordayned and may properly be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Howsoeuer it is euident hee maketh no inuocation of the host or chalice nor speaketh to them but calleth them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aenigmaticall vayles or integuments figuratiuely adherent or annexed to the perfection of the mysteries Phi. Runne you for refuge to the Rhetoritians Theo. As though the scriptures were not full of the like speaches Ioshua sayd Thou sunne stand stil in Gibeon and thou moone in the valley of Aialon And so the man of Iudah O Altar Altar thus sayth the Lord behold And Esai him-selfe beganne his prophesie with Heare O heauens and hearken O earth Phi. Those were speaches not prayers as this is Theoph. They bee all imperatiue moodes as well as this and so is that saying of Dauid Lyft vp your heades ye gates and bee yee lift vp you euerlasting doores and the king of glory shall come in which yet is no prayer to the doores The moode of it selfe is not precatiue except the person bee such as wee must not commaunde but onely intreate and beeing vsed to thinges without life it sheweth the desire of our heart touching them not any supplication vnto them And therefore you doe not onely the diuines but also the Grammarians wrong when you conclude an inuocation of the Sacrament out of Dionysius woordes because the verbes bee imperatiue For the woord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contayneth the whole action institution and celebration of the Lordes Supper yea the inwarde grace as well as the outwarde elements and Dionysius might say to Christes ordinance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bee opened vnto vs without inuocation of the host or Chalice as well as Dauid sayde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be you lifted vp to the gates and yet made them no Gods Phi. Yet by this place you see Christ is couered with the formes of bread and wyne as with garments and that is woorde for worde our opinion Theo. Adde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 figuratiuely as your author doeth and then both your reall presence is ouerthrowen and the doctrine which wee teach clearely established For wee confesse that Christ worketh in vs and presenteth himselfe vnto vs in these mysteries as it were in certaine vayles and couerings Which mystically by way of signification and spiritual operation containe and clothe his grace and truth but not really nor by material or corporall inclusion as you affirme and so himselfe expresseth his mynd in this very chapter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The reuerent or venerable signes by which Christ IS SIGNIFIED and emparted vnto vs being set on the Altar Christ is signified and receiued by these signes and figures and to him not to the sacrament spake Dionysius if that were his worke but that Christ is locally or substancially closed within the formes of breade and wine or that hee prayed to the host and Chalice Dionysius hath no such sense nor wordes Phi. To Christ hee spake we doubt it not mary when he was couered with signes and figures of bread and wyne Theo. Signes and figures the auncient fathers doe not take for shewes and accidents as you doe but for substantial and vsuall creatures such as you may not adore Phi. We say no. Theo. Of that anon in the meane tyme well you may thinke that had you beene in Dionysius place you would haue prayed to the Sacrament but his woords import no such matter Philand Why shoulde not hee as well as the rest of the godly The whole Church crieth vpon it Domine non sum dignus Deus propitius esto mihi peccatori Lambe of God that takest away the sinnes of the world haue mercie on vs. Theo. Whome meane you by the whole Church your selues or all the Godly since Christ Philand Neuer aske that question they did as wee doe and wee doe as they did Theo. If you speake of your selues then here is the witnes of your owne mouth that you CRY VPON IT I meane on your host which in substance is a base and corruptible creature O Lorde O God O Lambe of God that takest away the sinnes of the worlde haue mercie on vs. What greater sinne did they commit which sayde to a stocke thou art my Father and to a stone thou hast begotten mee whom the holy Ghost hath traduced for a memorable and yet detestable crewe of Idolaters Whether it is greater to bee a father or to be a God to beget or to take away the sinnes of the world They sayd the one you say the other who can forbid the banes but that you shoulde be coupled with them if not preferred before them as more outragious in dishonoring God than they were Phi. Doe wee not this to Christ and is hee not woorthie of it Theoph. Why then doe you cry on it and not on him Philand Wee be perswaded that when wee call on it wee call on him Theo. So were they that