not be extended to these practises What can be denied heere For neither can they denie but that the censures of the Church should bee of greatest power there where they were first instituted neither can they denie that excommunication was first instituted in that Church of the Iewes neither can they shew vs that any King of that Nation was at any time deposed for pretended heresie or for knowne and professed idolatry though the Kings there were often great idolaters though the Priests were bolde and couragious in Gods cause yet we neuer finde that any Priest did by excommunication depose the King or destroy the bond of allegeance This thing then being neither practised by the Iewes where these censures were in first and chiefe force nor by Christ and his Apostles nor by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church nor known in the Church for the space of almost a thousand yeares as hereafter wee shall declare wee haue great reason to conclude that excommunication as it is an Ecclesiasticall censure hath no power coactine to alter any temporall authority to depose Kings to destroy and dissolue allegeance or to trouble any lawfull authority established in this world 18 This will no lesse appeare if wee consider the power which the Church hath alwaies practised for coactiue power was a thing which the Chnrch yeelded alwayes to the â—…iuill Magistrate And if the Bishops of Rome did sometimes breake out beyond their bounds yet were they in those ancient times alwayes repressed by the authority of the Church For that we may take a short suruay of the Iurisdiction of the Church during the first three hundred yeres so long as the Apostles liued no man doubteth but that they ruled all and that the greatest Iurisdiction of the Church was in them if we speake of spirituall Iurisdiction And if any one Apostle liued after the rest there was more power acknowledged to be in him then in any one that liued in the Church in his time Now it is for an assured historicall truth recorded by Eusebius and before him by Irenaeus whom the full consent of the auncients follow heerein that S. Iohn liued after all the other Apostles were dead that he continued in the gouernment of the Church vntill the times of Traian Emperour In which time the Bishops of Rome after Peter are recorded to be these Linus Anacletus Clemens Eâ—…aristus Alexander If the Bishop of Rome had then been the head of the Church the chiefe Pastor the Monarch the fountaine of all Iurisdiction as his flatterers now make him it must be confessed that Alexander in his time and Euaristus before him was S. Iohns head and before him Clemens and before him Anaclet and before him Linus Did these rule and gouerne S. Iohn or S. Iohn them shall we say that they had Iurisdiction ouer S. Iohn or S. Iohn ouer them If these Bishops each in his time had Iurisdiction ouer S. Iohn then there was an authority in the Church aboue the authority of the Apostles If they were gouerned by him then the Bishop of Rome was not the head of the Church There is no sober spirit that can doubt of these things or can thinke that in those dayes any liued in the Church who was not vnder the Iurisdiction of an Apostle 19 After Saint Iohns death who was liuing in the yeare of Christ 100. and after in the Church of Rome were Sixtus Telesphorus Hyginus Pius Anicetus Soter Eleutherius Victor These gouerned the Church of Rome in succession by the space of one hundred yeares together In which times they seemed willing to put to their helping hands to aduance the Church of Rome For Sathan hauing a purpose thence to raise Antichrist began betime to worke and to abuse those good men as it was not hard for him to beguile better men then they were though we admit them to be good men and holy Martyres Then were they drawne into a loue to aduance their seate and Iurisdiction yet so as neither in them is proued pernicious neither was it thought by the church to be very dangerous seeing they yeelded and submitted themselues in the end to the graue and godly aduise of the Church 20 The things wherein the Bishops of Rome sought first to aduance their power was by imposing ceremonies vpon other Churches Thus did Anicet contend for the celebration of Easter but was quieted by Polycarp who for the peace of the Church made a iourney to Rome and pacified Anicetus And was so much honoured of Anicetus that there he practised the function of a Bishop as Eusebius reporteth taking the storie from Irenaeus Thus was peace and loue then maintained on all sides whilest the Bishops of Rome were content to be ruled by others 21 A little after Victor grewe more violent in the fame quarrell and excommunicated the Easterne Churches which did not obserue Easter after the maner of the Church of Rome But Uictor was resisted and sharply reproued by Polycrates Bishop of Ephesus and the rost of the Easterne Bishops as also by Irenaeus Bishop of Lions in Fraunce These did freely reproue Victor for that he regarded not the peace of the Church they declare that in ceremonies there was great difference of olde and yet the Bishops liued in loue and peace together that the differences in ceremonies did not breake the consent in faith that these differences were before the time of Victor and that hee was therein to followe the examples of his auncients who preserued loue and peace and the doctrines of faith sincere with some diuersity in outward ceremonies This was all that the Bishops of Rome attempted in those dayes wherein there appeareth no Iurisdiction ouer others but rather the contrary For the godly Bishops of Asia reproued them and made them see and acknowledge their owne rashnesse and caused them to desist therefore the Church did not then acknowledge the Popes Iurisdiction 22 Betweene Victor and Syluester the first succeeded 18. Bishops of Rome in the space of 100 yeares next In which time there was no great attempt made for superiority or Iurisdiction onely the Bishops of other Churches did honour the Bishop of Rome following the Apostles rule In giuing honor goe one before another Which honour if they could haue remembred as well to giue to others as they did to receiue from others there could haue risen no question of Iurisdiction but that which began in loue and courtesie was afterward drawne to Iurisdiction We denie not but some of the auncients haue yeelded to S. Peter a Priority among the rest of the Apostles because of his great zeale and loue to Christ and to his trueth and for his excellent vertâ—…es and to the Bishops of Rome wee finde likewise that the auncients yeelded great and honourable titles but this was in respect of their vertue learning and integrity For the auncients knewe no other rule of fauouring men but vertue he was in the Church most honourable and
maintained the lawes and customes of his father against the Pope and Henry the first the lawes and customes of his brother and father and Henry the second the lawes and customes of the Kingdome vsed by his Grandfather Henry the first or any other afterward referring themselues to the same lawes the lawes and customes of which they speake are the auncient lawes and priuiledges of this land confirmed by the Conquerour receiued from King Edward proceeding from King Edgar and before him from King Alphred And are therefore of much greater antiquity then the Popish Religion lately concluded in the Councell of Trent as many parts of that Religion were Then it appeareth that the auncient lawes of this land did forbid an appeale to Rome neither is that to be much maruelled for why should it be thought strange that an appeale to Rome was vtterly forbidden by the Church and State of England feeing long before that time we finde the same thing forbidden by the Church of Africa After this time wherein Appeales to Rome were forbidden in England we finde that in Fraunce the same thing was prohibited by the law which the French call the pragmaticall Sanction for in the yeare one thousand two hundred threescore and eight Lewes the ninth French King called S. Lewes ordeined the pragmatical Sanction wherein all the oppressions of the Church of Rome are vtterly forbidden that none of those things be practised in Fraunce vnlesse it be by the expresse and free consent of the King and Church of that Kingdome Thus haue Kings alwaies prescribed against the Pope in matters of Iurisdiction as the Church in like sort hath prescribed against the Pope in matters of faith and Religion as hereafter in the last Chapter shall be declared §. VIII Of deposing and depriuing Kings and dissoluing the Oath of Alleageance wherein consisted the highest pitch of this pretended Iurisdiction 96. THE last and greatest point of this Iurisdiction wherein the strings of this authority were stretched vp to the highest was that their practise of Deposing Kings and discharging Subiects from their Alleageance By which practise the Church was confounded the States of the world ouerturned Kings robbed of their right subiects of their faith and truth euery nation scourged with warres and blood-shed and in the common vexation of all Christendome onely the Popes state and worldly glory increased who could not otherwise rise but with the ruine of the Church and States In this place therefore I will as breefely as I can passe through by way of short History the practise of the Popes in deposing of Kings That it may be apparant to the world that we are so farre from being afraid to confesse this power which they so much boast of that we are rather readie to publish it to the world For hereby all men which haue any vnderstanding of that power which Iesus Christ left to his Church may know the Tyrannie vsurpation pride vaine-glory ambition and madnesse of him who exalteth himselfe in the Church against God and against them that are called Gods Wherein we may learne to be armed with patience to suffer for a time whatsoeuer the lust of proud and bloud-sucking Popes haue leaue to do for the sinnes of our Princes and people and Churches For their time is set and drawing to an end and nothing hath beene done but that which is fore-warned in the Scripture So that by these ambitious and bloudy practises wee shall finde how the Scriptures are fulfilled 97. For one Scripture saith that a starre must fall from heauen who must be a King of the Locusts which is called also the Angell of the bottomlesse pit whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon and in Greeke Apollyon that is a destroyer Which Prophesie of his destroying power is verified most apparantly in this practise of excommunicating Kings and loosing the knot of obedience Whereby confusion and destruction is brought vpon all Kingdomes of Christendome Hereby he is proued to be a destroyer an exterminator an excommunicator Therefore the vulgar translation addeth significantly Latine habens nomen exterminans Another Scripture saith The tenne Kings shall giue their power and authority to the beast Though the Kings of Christendome did neuer directly yeeld to the Pope this authority ouer their owne Kingdomes and ouer themselues that the Popes might depose and displace them at his pleasure yet this they gaue him in effect and by consequence For they gaue him so much that he might vpon their owne graunt challenge this and they who had graunted him so much had no reason to except against his challenge For though the King which was to be depriued denied the Pope this power yet such Princes did yeeld it to him to whom the Pope had giuen the Kingdom of the deposed Prince he did yeeld it who should vse the benefit of the Popes vsurped power For example though the late Kings of France haue alwaies denied that the Pope had any Authority to depose the French Kings yet the Kings of France haue giuen him this power For the former Kings yeelded it as Pipin and Charles For they had no other title to the Kingdome then from this power of the Pope Therefore they yeelded that the Pope had power and authority to giue Kingdomes and in that sense gaue their power and authority to the beast So that when these first French Kings honoured the Pope with this vndue honour though then they seemed to receiue Kingdomes from him yet the Scripture looketh farther into these practises then they did which practised them For they respected onely themselues their owne present greatnesse but in receiuing such power from the Popes they gaue in trueth their power and authority to the Popes For how could they in iustice denie but that the same power which deposed other Kings to raise them might as well haue deposed them to raise other Thus most of the Kings of Christendome gaue their kingdomes to the Popes That this new and strange power of Antichrist may better appeare I will open the beginning and continuance of the Popes practise herein Leo Iconomachus 98. THe first Prince vpon whom the Pope began this practise was Leo the Emperour whom Platina calleth Leo the third he was called Iconomachus for defacing of Images This Prince was deposed by Gregory the third who was Pope in the yeare seuen hundred ninety sixe Pope Gregory the second prepared the way thus When Leo the Emperour being much offended at the superstitious and foule abuse of Images which he saw daily then growing in the Church did vtterly deface Images in Churches and commaunded Pope Gregory the second then Bishop of Rome to doe the like the Pope tooke his aduise in such indignation that he raised all Italy in rebellion against him So the Emperour lost his holde in Italy and a number of little States were raised in Italy euery City striuing to make it selfe a free State Gregory the second hauing done thus much died and left the
liued 30. But was not Bishoppe Grosthead of the same faith and Religion with the Church of Rome Yes verily and so will I be if you grant me his conditions exceptions for he putteth two clauses very memorable by which he will condition with the Church of Rome or any other particular Church whatsoeuer First That the doctrines of that Church be the doctrines of Christ and his Apostles Secondly That so wee may regard the Church of Rome that wee be sure to hold vnity with the true Church the body of Christ. These excellent and famous men that haue heretofore liued in the vnity of the Church of Rome haue beene willing wee confesse to yeelde so much to the Pope and that particular Church as they might doe holding vnity with the true body of Christ. But if the vnity with the Romane Church doe draw them away from the vnity with Christs body then haue they alwaies beene resolued to giue ouer the vnity with that particular Church This confirmeth that which before I obserued in the Distinction betweene the Church of Rome and the Court of Rome because we see many learned and worthy men of our forefathers were of the Church of Rome that is held the bond of vnity with it who were professed enemies to the Court of Rome Now the Pope and his flatterers haue forsaken that vnity with the Church of Rome which stood in Apostolicall doctrines and vnity with the true body of Christ howsoeuer they boast of the name and haue nothing now to shew for themselues but the pride and faction of the Court of Rome 31. Now come we to the time wherein liued Iohn Wiclif another of the worthies of Merton Colledge in Oxford his aduersaries would blot him with the name of an Hereticke some things are vntrue wherewith they iniuriously charge him some things are true which they vniustly call Heresie In this question of Iurisdiction as he receiued the truth from Occham his Senior in Merton Colledge so he deliuered the same faithfully Speaking of the Kings Iurisdiction as well ouer the Clergie as Laity he saith The chiefe Lordshippe in this land of all temporalties both of secular men and religious pertaine to the King of his generall Gouernement for else hee were not King of all England but of a little part thereof Therefore the men that busien them to take away this Lordshippe from the King as don Friars and their sautors in this point beene snarper enemies and Traytors then Frenchmen and all other nations Wiclif labored worthily to descry refute the errors concerning Iurisdiction that in his time came creeping in introduced by Friars For he witnesseth that the Friars taught thus Rex Angliae non est rex totius Angliae sed regulus paruae partis super residiâ—…um vero mortificatum est Papa Dominus Veruntamen non est disp utandum inquiunt de hac materia quousque fuerit in effectu potentius stabilita sed tolerandae sunt iniuriae dominorum saeculâ—…rium quousque arriserit opportunit as temporis That is The King of England is not King of all England but Lord of a little part ouer the residue in a dead hand the Pope is Lord but say they there is no disputing of this matter vntill it be powerfully brought in effect In the meane time they say the iniuries of temporall Lords must be borne vntill an opportunity fauo ur them This is plaine dealing The Friars declare what is that thing at which they haue long aimed For what other meaning haue their pretended exemptions then by making a reuolt from the obedience of their soueraigns to become wholly the Popes seruants and creatures 32. But this late generation of Friars I meane the Iesuites exceeding these olde Friars in admirable practises in the blood and destruction of Princes and states are yet so confident in their wit and eloquence that they thinke themselues able to perswade the Kings of the earth to account them among good and loyall subiects The old Friars dealt more plainely they professed not obedience to Princes these professe more and would colour their deepe deuises in destruction of Princes with impudency and dissimulation as if they meant not the same things which daily they practise Now that which Wiclif taught against these wicked and prophane opinions of these olde Friars was no other thing then the iudgement of the learned Diuines which liued before and in his time for he brought in no nouelties but the Friars introduced the nouelties in Religion and Iurisdiction And that Distinction which before we obserued betweene the Church of Rome and the Court of Rome he confirmeth as a thing notoriâ—…usly marked in his time for of the Church of Rome he saith thus Protestor publice quod amando venerando Romanam Ecclesiam matrem meam desidero procuro defensionem omnium priuilegiorum suorum That is I protest publiquely that louing and honouring the Church of Rome Ireuerence my mother and procure the defence of all her priuiledges But of the Court of Rome or that particular Church of Rome which was gouerned by the Pope hee saith much otherwise not doubting but that the iudgement of the particular Church of England might in many things be preferred before that particular Church of Rome guided by the Pope Fieripotest saith he quod Dominus Papa foret ignarus legis scripturae quod Anglicana Ecclesia foret longe praestantior in iudicio veritatis Catholica quam tota ista Romana Ecclesia collecta de istis Papa Cardinalibus That is It may come to passe that the Lord Pope may be ignorant of the law of Scripture and that the Church of England may be more excellent in the iudgment of the Catholicke truth then all this Romane Church collected of the Pope and Cardinals Then in those dayes there was not much attributed to the Popes not erring iudgement or to the authority of that Church which was wholly gouerned by the Pope seeing the Pope might be ignorant of the lawe of God and the Church of England might haue a more excellent iudgement in the truth then that particular Church of Rome That which Wiclif saith might come to passe the world seeth and acknowledgeth that since that time it is come to passe That Friars were the introducers of Nouelties we haue already shewed out of Iohn Wiclifes obseruations In this sorte things stood vntill the time of the Councell of Pisa which was helde some twentie yeares after Iohn Wiclifes death §. IIII. The Popes Iurisdiction ouerthrowne by Councels 33. THus haue we heard the iudgement of learned men against the Popes Iurisdiction after that the same Iurisdiction began to be practised these haue refuted especially that part of his claime which was in temporalibus Now we will consider another part of his pretended Iurisdiction which was in spiritualibus in this we finde his feathers as well pulled as in the former so that when both temporall and spirituall Iurisdiction is
consecration of Aaron and his sonnes is done altogether by Moses These things though they make faire shew for the Princes Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall ouer Priests yet wee purpose not to stand vpon them 3. But when the Priest was once consecrated and ordained and all things fully perfected concerning his function and two seuerall and distinct functions set vp then will appeare without faile in Moses his successors the right of Princes in Aaron his successors the right of Priests After all things thus perfected we finde that all the lawes which in truth proceeded originally from God were established by the authoritie of Moses and this we finde true not onely in Iudiciall and Ciuill Lawes which were to rule that state but euen in ceremoniall and Morall Lawes which were to rule the Church There is not so much as one ceremoniall law established by the authoritie of Aaron but in all the name and authoritie of Moses is expressed only we finde concerning Aaron that if any doubt in the lawes ceremoniall did arise for the interpretation of those lawes and of such doubts the high Priest must sit as iudge For the people are charged in matters that are hard to consult with the Priest and ciuill iudge Deut. 17. 8. c. Which the learned interpreters vnderstand thus that if the cause be mixt partly Ciuill partly Ceremoniall or doubâ—…full that then both the Ciuill Magistrate and the Priest must iointly determine it but if the people haue distinct causes some Ciuill other Ceremoniall the Ciuill Magistrate must iudge the causes Ciuill and the Priest must iudge the causes Ceremoniall from the consideration of which place we may drawe certaine inferences 4. First all Lawes euen Ceremoniall that is Lawes whereunto Spirituall or Canon Lawes are answerable are established by the authoritie of the Ciuill Magistrate This taketh away all authoritie of the Popes Canon law in all Christian kingdomes where it is not established by the authoritie of Kings in their kingdomes For it is against all reaâ—…on and rules whether we looke vpon the light of nature or vpon the Scriptures or the lawfull practife of authoritie since the Scriptures were written that any Lawes should be imposed vpon a Prince against or without his consent as the Popes haue indeuoured to impose the Canon Lawes vpon Princes And this appeareth in the practise of Christian Magistrates so long as lawfull authoritie stood up without confusion in the world But heere we consider the fountaine of that practise which was from Gods Law wherein we see all Lawes confirmed and established by the authoritie of the Ciuill Magistrate And if it could bee prooued that in some Lawes Ceremoniall the authoritie of Aaron was requisite yet this helpeth them nothing that plead for the Popes Canons For these men would impose these Canons vpon Princes without their consent but in all these Lawes of Moses wherein is a perfect patterne for all law-makers they cannot shew one Law though neuer so nearely concerning the Church which is established without the authoritie of Moses the Ciuill Magistrate If they obiect these things were all done by an especiall commaundement of God I aunswere this doth more establish the authoritie of Princes and confirme our purpose for let them aunswere why God would haue all these things established by the Ciuill Magistrate and not by the Priest This then maketh a greater and clearer confirmation of the Princes right Then the Church may interpret Scripture determine controuersies of faith but cannot establish a Law the reason is because for the establishing of Lawes coactiue power is requisite which is in the Ciuil Magistrate not in the Church And therefore the Canon Lawes can haue no force of lawes but as they are receiued and established by Princes in their seuerall kingdomes For neither can the law haue the force of a law without coactiue power neither hath the Pope any coactiue power in the kingdomes of other Princes but onely in such places where himselfe is a Temporall Prince 5. Secondly we obserue that the high Priest is appointed by God a iudge for interpretation of those lawes that concerne the Church in questions of conscience in causes mixt or doubtfull This might moderate the humours of some who in loue to innouation would leaue no place of iudicature to Ecclesiasticall persons for these things are insert into Moses lawe taken from the law of Nature and not as things Ceremoniall which thing is apparant from the end vse and necessitie thereof for the things which had a necessary vse before the written law and must haue a necessary vse after the abrogation of that law must be acknowledged to be taken from a perpetuall law because there must be a perpetuall rule for a perpetuall necessity This then being perpetuall and necessary matters of question and of Ecclesiasticall audience still arising the hearing and iudging of such things belong to such as are most skilfull in those affaires And hence is the iudicature of fuch things assigned to the Priest which right of Ecclesiasticall iudgements and courts standeth no lesse now due to them in the time of grace then it was under the law because this office in iugdeing hearing and determining is not heere giuen to Priests as a thing Ceremoniall but as I haue declared deriued from the law of Nature as a perpetuall seruice for a perpetuall vse 6. Thirdly we consider that the lawes Ecclesiastical are established by the authoritie of the Ciuill Magistrate but for interpretation of them the Priest is appointed to iudge Hence riseth the ground of Iurisdiction both Temporall and Spirituall wee consider Iurisdiction here as our question importeth authority coactiue in externall iudicature in the execution of lawes The fountaine of this authoritie is in him principally by whose authoritie the law is established and without whose authoritie it is not The execution of this authoritie is in them that are appointed iudges And heerein there is no difference betweene Temporall and Ecclesiasticall authoritie I speake not nowe of Spirituall gouernment by the lawes of God executed within the court of Conscience but of Ecclesiasticall gouernment in the execution of lawes Ecclesiasticall wherin there is vse of coactiue power These two things being in themselues and in nature so distinct if this one distinction might be remembred it is ynough to aunswere all the confused collections of that Catholike Diuine who wrote of late against the fift part of Reports of the Lord Cooke For all that hee writeth there resting vpon no other ground then vpon the confounding of Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall power is answered in one word by this one poore distinction betweene these two powers Now the distinction is apparant because in Spirituall gouernment there is no coactiue power but in Ecclesiasticall iudicature there is coactiue power which maketh an euident and famous difference in Iurisdiction because this is most certaine that all that Iurisdiction wherin coactiue power is vsed is from the Ciuill Magistrate Then if these two
this power coactiue though they had vsurped many parts thereof 18. A third reason to prooue this authoritie to bee in the Ciuill Magistrate is as I teached before confirmed by the right of Appellations For in matters of coactiue Iurisdiction a man might appeale from the high Priest to the King as Saint Paul did to Caesar which was vtterly vnlawfull for him to doe vnlesse he might as lawfully haue appealed to a King if that state of Israel had then beene ruled by a King as at other times it was For that right which Saint Paul giueth to Nero to heare Appellations he would vndoubtedly yeeld to Dauid or Ezekâ—…as or any other godly King in his owne Dominions Wherefore it followeth that either Saint Paul must be condemned for yeelding an vnlawful power to Emperors or Kings must haue the same priuiledge which thing being admitted in matters Ecclesiasticall doth inuincibly prooue the Kings Iurisdiction in such matters The same thing is also confirmed from those words of the Apostle he is the minister of God and he beareth the sword If the Magistrate be the minister of God then he hath full authoritie and Iurisdiction from God whose minister and vicegerent he is if he beare the sword hee hath all power coactiue for coactiue power doth alwayes follow tâ—… sword which God hath giuen to the Ciuill Magistrate to beare Therefore Ioh. Chrysostoâ—… saith Regi corpâ—…ra commissa sunt sacerdoti animâ—… reâ—… maculas corporum remittit sacerdos maculas peccatorum illâ—… cogit hic exhâ—…rtatur ille habet arma sensibilia hic arma spiritualia Hâ—…m 4. de verb. Esa. vidi dom Then the true difference betweene the Magistrate and the Priest concerning this point is Ille cogit hic exhâ—…rtatur so that coactiue power is left wholy to the Magistrate Ambrosâ—… likewise speaking of the authoritie of the Church and of Bishops saith Coactus 〈◊〉 nâ—…n noui arma enim nostra preces sunt 〈◊〉 â—…at iâ—… Auxâ—…t where he declareth the difference betweene these two powers leauing nothing to the Church but preces 〈◊〉 wherin there is no coaction In which sense Thomas Aquinâ—…s faith vindicta quae fit authâ—…ritate publicae potestatâ—… sâ—…cundum 〈◊〉 iudicis pertieet ad iusticiam commutatiuam 2. 2. qu. 8. art 1. Therefore vindicatiue power or coaction belonges not to the Church but the Magistrate that exerciseth coâ—…utatiue iustice 19. In regard of which high power Princes are called Gods I haue said you are Gods And because an aduersarie of late hath told vs that this name is giuen aswell to Ecclesiasticall gouernours as to Kings we reply that it cannot be shewed that this name is giuen to Ecclesiasticall gouernours but either where such gouernours haue receiued authoritie from the Ciuill Magistrate or where themselues are the chiefe Magistrates so that it is a name giuen in respect of Soueraigne power For to manifest the Soueraigne emmency of the Prince compare the Prince and Priest togâ—…ther and by this comparison wee shall euidently know the truth for we find the Prince called a God not onely in respect of the people but in respect of the Priest also Where the Lord himselfe speaketh to Moses of Aaron comparing their power and offices together he saith thus He shall be thy spokesman vnto the people and he shall be as thy mouth and thou shalt be to him in stead of God In this comparing of these two great offices Moses is the directour Aaron the interpretour and preacher Where the Prince or Soueraign Magistrate is called a God not onely in respect of the people as in diuers other Scriptures but in respect of the Priest thou shalt be to him euen to Aaron as a God We find then that the Prince is called a God in respect of the Priest but we can neuer find that the Priest is called a God in respect of the Prince This declareth a Soueraigne authoritie of the Prince in matters of God and of Gods true Religion For he who by his office is to establish true Religion in his dominions doth heerein represent a liuely exâ—…mple both of the goodnesse and power of God and therefore Magistrates are called Gods as being Gods Vicegerents for establishing of true Religion 20. And this our Sauiour Christ confirmeth for whereas Psal. 82. They are called Gods I haue said you are Gods Our Lord expoundeth that place declaring in what sense they are so called For he saith If he called them Gods vnto whom the word of God was giuen and the Scripture cannot be broken c. Then the Magistrates who are here called Gods are such to whom the word of God is giuen For further declaration of the truth let this question be demaunded to whom is the word of God principally giuen to whose Soueraigne custodie is the word of God committed The words of our Sauiour Christ containe an aunswere to the Ciuill Magistrate For it is certaine that all that Psalme whence Christ taketh those words is wholly and intirely vnderstood of the Ciuill Magistrates and not of Priests or Ecclesiasticall gouernours Why then and is not the word of God giuen to Ecclesiasticall gouernours aswell as to Kings Yes verily but diuersly for to Ecclesiasticall gouernours the knowledge of the word is giuen to publish by preaching For the Priests lippes shall preserue knowledge and they shall seeke the law at his mouth for hee is the messenger of the Lord of hostes Then if the question be asked to whom is the word giuen by the way of knowledge to preach and publish it The answere is to the Priest but Christ speaketh not here of that manner of giuing the word but he toucheth that Commission which is giuen to Magistrates For to Magistrates it is not giuen by way of especiall knowledge to preach it but by way of an especiall commission to keepe it to establih it by authoritie to command obedience vnto it and to punish the violatours of it This is the authority of a Christian Prince for he hath called them Gods to whom the word was giuen Whom hath hee called Gods Ciuill Princes for of such onely of such that Psalme speaketh Why are they called Gods Because they are Gods vicegerents by their authority to establish Gods word Therefore they are acknowledged to bee custodes vtâ—…insque tabulae for which cause it was an ancient ceremony in the Church of Israel that at the Kings Coronation the Booke of God should be giuen into the hand of the King as we read in the Coronation of Ioash Which thing is confirmed by a commaundemant in the Law why was this thing so solemnly commanded so religiously preached but to shew that God hath committed the care of Religion principally to the King that by the vtmost of his power and authority it might be established in his Dominions 21. This doth proue that Moses was a Prince and not a Priest and Aaron a Priest but not a Prince because Moses
Catholike 10. If this kinde of proofe please them to prooue the Popes Soueraigne supreame authoritie â—…hey may haue ynough thereof For as Pope Zaâ—…harie dispensed with the oath of Pipin and all the French Barons and subiects so doe the Popes since practise this part of Iurisdiction with great feruency or rather surie they dispense with the oathes of subiects they raise vp rebellions against true natural and lawfull Kings they aduance vsurpers This Iurisdiction wee graunt Popes haue practised but with shame ynough heere is the difference betweene them and vs betweene an euill cause and a good betweene impudencie and confidence in the truth both they and we bring the same examples but to contrary ends they bring these examples of the Popes practises to prooue Iurisdiction wee vrge the same examples to shame the Pope with his Iurisdiction Let the indifferent and ingenuous reader iudge whether applie them to the true right and proper end For let them aunswere vs if they can whence the Popes haue authoritie to execute such a Iurisdiction as they haue neither from Christ nor from the Princes of this world For certaine it is that to dispense with oathes to stirre vp subiects against their naturall Princes to mooue rebellions is a power which the Pope hath not receiued from Christ nor from the Princes of this world From whence then hath he it let them tell vs who make it a part of his Iurisdiction 11. After this Charles the great sonne to Pipin was made Emperour by Leo the third Pope At this time it appeareth that the Iurisdiction which by the Emperour before this was vsually practised vpon the Bishop of Rome and other Bishops began to be taken out of the hand of the Magistrate For when Charles hearing many complaints against this Leo concerning his life and conuersation called him to an examination in a great meeting of Bishops it was aunswered by a great acclamation Sedem Apostolicam omnium Ecclesiarum caput à nemine laico praesertim iudicari debere That is It is not meet that the Apostolicke Sea the head of all Churches should be iudged of any man especiall a Lay-man This moued Châ—…rles to omit the matter so soone had they learned to turne this power against the Emperor which they had some two hundred yeres before receiued from the Emperor This Iurisdiction then by this time had receiued a great change for in former times as the inquisition of false doctrines belonged to the care of Bishops so the examination of the life and manners of Bishops belonged alwayes to the Magistrate So Solomon deposed Abiathar So Constantine banished diuers Bishops and reformed the Clergie The godly Popes and Bishops in former times yeelded this power to the Magistrate which God hath giuen him knowing that euery soule is subiect to them euen Bishops euen Popes yea Apostles themselues But now by the fall of the Empire Papacy rising and a newe straunge image of the Empire rising vp in the Papacy this Iurisdiction was then in hatching which afterward was brought foorth by a monstrous birth 12. My purpose is to note the occasions of alteration of Iurisdiction in the Church of Rome and how the Popes hauing cast off the Iurisdiction of the Ciuill Magistrate did in time draw to themselues a new forme of Iurisdiction increasing the same by degrees For wheras at the beginning as we haue shewed the Bishops of Rome with others were vnder the coactiue Iurisdiction of the Ciuill Magistrate the absence and fall of the Empire gaue opportunity to the Bishops of Rome to raise theÌ„selues The first beginning of their Iurisdiction was by getting appeales to be made to them the enlarging aduancing of it was by obtaining the title of caput Ecclesiae vniuersall B. The Pope was not called caput Ecclesiae but the Church of Rome got that title vnder Phocas the Pope got it by his flatterers long after And in the time of Charles the great they had gotten in one foote farther into this Iurisdiction for then they began to refuse the coactiue Iurisdiction of the ciuill Magistrate All this while they were not come to the height and top of thei Iurisdiction to practise coactiue power ouer and against the ciuill Magistrate to depose Princes to raise vp rebellions to absolue subiects from their faith and alleageance though some of these things were a new founding yet they were not come to their perfection till after this time as we purpose in order to declare And as we note their practises so we must no lesse haue an eye to the men and meanes which withstood them in these ambitious courses 13 These attempts of Iurisdiction were then most famously withstood when they were brought to their full hight For after that the Popes had begun to stretch their Iurisdiction to the preiudice of Kings and Princes then began the opposition most to appeare learned men being stirred vp to write and throughly to examine this question Whereof my purpose is to speake farther in the last Chapter of this Treatise Here we will onely note what resistance it found at the beginning before it was growne vp to that hight whereunto it came in time First wee finde that both Charles the great himselfe and other Princes and Bishops haue withstood the Bishop of Rome heerein and seeking to giue euery one his right haue giuen many parts of that Iurisdiction which now the Pope claimeth to the ciuill Magistrate For after that Charles had subdued the Lumbards as his father Pipin had done before him and besieging Desiderius King of the Lumbards came to Rome from the siege to know what hee should haue for his trauaile for recouering S. Peters Patrimonie as the late Patrimonie of the Emperour faling to the Pope then began to be called for the Pope had promised to Charles for oppressing the Lumbards and recouering this new Patrimonie so much desired so hotely pursued so dearely bought that hee should be made Emperour of the West and the auncient authority and Iurisdiction of the Empire should be restored to him For the better effecting of these affaires Charles hauing set a strong siege about Pauy and taken order with his Captaines for that seruice left the siege came to Rome bringing with him a great number of Bishops Abbots to holde a Synod with Pope Hadrian and therein by all their industry and knowledge to finde out what were the true and auncient priuiledges of the Empire and what was the Emperours Iurisdiction confessed Pope Hadrian receiued Charles honourably and at his pleasure called a councell Wherein questionlesse some parts of the auncient Iurisdiction were restored to Charles For that Synod gaue him power to choose the Bishop of Rome and in all Prouinces of his gouernment to inuest all Archbishops and Bishops Thus much is acknowledged by as many witnesses in a manner as are Writers of the Story of this time But of late some haue quarrelled against this Story denying it to be true which
a Canon in some Church notwithstanding the priuiledges of that Church the customes to the contrary or statutes confirmed either by Oath or by Apostolicall confirmation or by any other strength c. By this Lawe as by many other it appeareth that the Popes Canons allowe that men should goe against their owne Oathes when the Popes letters doe commaund them so to doe Which is a forbidding of things honest iust and godly and commanding thinges euill and vnlawfull Therefore these Lawes forbid vertue and commaund vice and are consequently no iust Lawes in the iudgement of Bellarmine 89. The last condition that in Bellarmines opinion is required to make a Law iust is drawne from the forme Because saith hee the Law must keepe that proportion in distributing honours which the Subiects haue in the Common-wealth For example saith he if the Pope should make a Law that onely rich and noble men should be made Bishoppes and not poore and meane men otherwise more learned and more worthy this Law were simply vniust but it is certaine that the Popes Lawes are such I speake not here of their corrupt practise which since the Canon lawes came in was neuer found without strong and strange Simonie but I speake of their Lawes which command it For who made that Law which saith Pallium non datur nisi fortiter postulaâ—…i The Pall is not giuen to any man vnlesse he make a strong suit What is meant by a strong suit they know best that haue purchased Palls at the Popes hand But it is certaine that a poore man did neuer purchase a Pall therefore poore men though more learned then the rich purchaser are excluded from this honour by the Law that alloweth none to make suit but such as can make strong suit then the Law is vniust by Bellarmines confession It is also an vniust and an vngodly Law which saith Though the Pope should draw innumerable soules with himselfe downe into hell yet no mortall man may presume to say to him Sir why do you so It is an vncleane Law which so strictly denying the mariage of Priests yet doth allow them to haue Concubines Many other Lawes there be of this forme So that by all those conditions which Bellarmine will haue to be requisite in all Lawes that bee iust the Popes Lawâ—…s are found to be vniust By all which is euinced that the Pope commeth in his owne name maketh Lawes to rule those Subiects ouer whom he hath no authority respecteth therein his owne ends taketh vp a new Iurisdiction which hath beene denied by the auncient Bishops and which was vnknowne in the world all the while that the Popes liued vnder the obedience of the Emperours as other Bishoppes did vnder seuerall Princes § 7. Of Appellation 90. ANother part of this pretended Iurisdiction stoode in appellation to the Pope This they haue chalenged but it hath alwayes beene denied by the Kings of this land as being a thing preiudiciall to the auncient Lawes and customes of the Kingdome The first question about appeales in this land that I can finde began by Anselme Archbishop of Canterburie in the time of William Rufus For after that some breach was made betweene the King and the Archbishop the Archbishoppe Anselme desired leaue to depart the land to goe to Rome for his Pall. The King perceiuing that hee had a purpose to appeale to the Pope Aunswered That if hee should appeale to Pope Vrban or any other for at that time two stroue for the Papacy without his leaue then should he falsifie his alleageance The King reasoned thus saith Malmsbury Consuetudo Regâ—…imes est à Patre meo instituta vt nullus praeter licentiam Regis appelletur Papa Qui consuetuâ—…ines Regnitollit potestatem quoque toronam Regni violat qui coronam mihi aufert inimicitias infidelitatem in me agit For there was contention betweene the King the Archbishop First because the Archbishop would nominate a Pope without the Kings leaue Secondly because he would appeale to the Pope Concerning this matter of appeale the same Author a little after declareth that there grew an hot contention betweene them Anselme his answere was Tues Petrus super hanc Petram c. And therfore quoth he to the King the obedience which I offer to S. Peters Vicar is not against mine alleageance to the King Thus had the Popes with a strong kind of poyson as it were so enchaunted those words of holy Scripture as to make them serue for a cloake of disobedience and breach of alleageance to temporall Princes Anselme being further vrged by the King that he had promised to keepe all the customes of his kingdome and hee was bound to performe alleageance aunswereth thus What doe you tell me that I breake mine alleageance to the King by appealing to the Sea Apostolique I grant I promised but conditionally that I would keepe those customes which are agreeable to the lawes of God and honesty And therfore where you tell me that I haue broken mine alleageance by preuaricating your laws in appealing to the Sea Apostolique sauing your honour it is not true if another had spoken it For the faith which Iowe to the King I haue it from the faith of God whose Vicar is S. Peter to whose Sea I appeale with much stirre and strife to this effect Anselme held his resolution stiffely 91. Nowe let the Reader bee entreated to compare these times with the times of the Affrican Councell and Anselme Archbishop of Canterburie with Augustine Bishop of Hippo. S. Augustine with the rest of the Affrican Councell condemned appellations to Rome as standing against godlinesse order the freedome of the Church as quenching the light of simplicitie as inducing darkenesse pride and ambition into the Church Now that which in Saint Augustines time was vngodly can it be made godly and lawfull in Anselmes time Yet Anselme we see maketh this thing the cause of God Augustine condemned appellations to Rome simply without consideration of disobedience to Princes What then would he haue done if thereunto had beene added the commaundement of his Prince against such Appellations Anselme standing for Appellation to Rome which Augustine denied and withstanding the iust and 〈◊〉 commaundement of his Soueraigne hath no other coâ—… to cast ouer the matter then the pretence of God and Saint Peters Vicar If this obedience had beene required of God to Saint Peters Vicar in Anselmes time Why was not the same required and yeelded in Saint Augustines time This is the difference betweene the opinions brought in by men and the truths of God that the one standeth alwayes the same in the Church without chaunge the other hath his times of rising and falling as this opinion of Appellation to the Pope which was so strongly reiected by Augustine found a time to rise vp betweene the pride of the Popes and the seruile flattery of some Bishoppes And what greater signe of pride in the Pope and