Selected quad for the lemma: authority_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
authority_n	bishop_n	king_n	year_n	2,398	5	4.9162	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A01004	God and the king. Or a dialogue wherein is treated of allegiance due to our most gracious Lord, King Iames, within his dominions Which (by remouing all controuersies, and causes of dissentions and suspitions) bindeth subiects, by an inuiolable band of loue and duty, to their soueraigne. Translated out of Latin into English.; Deus et rex. English	Floyd, John, 1572-1649.; More, Thomas, 1565-1625, attributed name.	1620 (1620)	STC 11110.7; ESTC S107002	53,200	142

whome they were bound vnder payne of g●uions sinne to expel as you heard this forsaid Father affirme Philanax I see the old Testament specially according to S. Chrysostomes exposition doth not very plausibly proue regall independency of Priest-hood hath not Theodidact better arguments out of the new Aristobulus He alleageth diuers testimonies that euery soule is to be subiect to the higher powers and of Fathers auerring that there is no state nor man in the world equall to the Emperour Which particulerly to relate were to wast paper seeing these testimonies proue no more then what P●pists commonly graunt That K●ngs are Soueraigne and supreme in temporall affaires within their Dominions That all men whatsoeuer Prophets● Euangelists Apostles Priests Monks that liue within their states are subiect to their Gouernment and to the lawes which they make for the good o● the Common wealth They proue that primitiue Ch●●stiās both laymen Priests were bound to pay tribute to the Emperour were in criminall causes answerable before the tēporall Magistrate For the dignity of Priestly state and the speciall ordinance of Christ exempting them was not then sufficiently promulgated nor accepted of by Princes as afterward it was in gratitude for the benefit of their conuersion to Christianity by the preaching and labours of Priesthood The places then of Scriptures and Fathers shew that Priests euen Apostles were subiect to the Emperour in causes temporall but can any man with reason thinke that their testimonies import that vnbelee●ing Emp●rours were in all spirituall occurrēces the soueraign● Gouernours of the Christian Church That the supreme Pastorship to decide doubtes of faith gather Councels or excommunicate disobedient Christiās was committed to them I thinke Protestants will hardely graunt this Whence Papists inferre that had Kings byn ordeyned by Christ supreme Gouernours next himself in the Ec●●esiastical hierarchy he would haue prouided Christian Kings to furnish that place in the first erecting of his Church Which seeing he did not they fu●ther deduce that Kings cannot challenge by Christs institution any place of gouernment in Church-affayres that the keyes of his Church signifying supreme authority were by him deliuered not to Kings but to Peter by which gift he made him high steward of his house Whosoeuer will be of Christs family must yield themselues their swordes their Crownes● subiect to Peters keyes Their soules you will say but not their bodies not their swords not their Crownes But agaynst this they vrge that accessorium sequitur principale What is accessory and consequent still followes and waits vpon the principall The King submitting his person to the Church must needs likewise submit togeather with his person his Crowne and sword that not only as men sed in quantum Reges seruiant Christo euē as Kings they be seruants to Christ. In acknowledgm●●t of which superiority Constantine as S. Augustin writeth eminentissimum culmen Romani Imperij diadema suum piscatori Petro subiecit being the most eminēt Soueraigne of the Romain Empire submitted not only his soule but his scepter and diademe to the fisherman Peter to the end that Peters keyes might direct temporall power towardes the consecution of eternall life and to restra●ne the same if at any time the owner therof should vse it to the ouerthrow of Christianity They bring an history to this purpose out of Suidas ● concerning Constantius the Arian who seemeth the first that challenged this Supremacy in Church affayres As he was sa●th Suidas ●nce sitting in Councell in the midst o● many Prelates Iudge of their Controuersies Leontius the most holy Bishop of Tripolis reproued him openly that being a secular lay man he wold meddle with Church-affaires which saying made that prophane Emperour to conceaue the vndecency of the practise that out of band for very shame be desisted If to the fauorits of Kinges ancient Fathers seeme ouer playne and bitter who call them that will gouerne in the Church Antichrists so in my opinion wee ought to take heed that our Church disgrace not herselfe by being base and seruile in this poynt laying her Keyes vnder the feete of Kings which i● another extreme What may we think of Theodidact who writes that the Kinge saileth to heauen in his owne ship guided by his owne subiects ouer whome he is Iudge and may punishe them with death if he find them in his opinion to deliuer their owne errors in steed of diuine truth S. Paul were he aliue would preach that the Church the ship to conuay passengers to heauen is not the Kings but Christs which he bought with his pretious bloud and the gouernment therof he committed not to Kings● but to Bishops The two Orthodoxe Saints and Bishops Hosius and Ambrose did they now liue would say Pallaces belonge to Emperors Churches to Priests The great Gregorie of Nazianzum were he now liuing his doctrine would be that Kings are subiect to the tribunall of Bishops that Priests are the more eminent Gouernours n●t Kings subiects in Church affayres but as another Gregorye sayth their Fathers Maisters and Iudges yea that it is miserable madnes ●or Kings to goe about with their wicked lawes to make them be at their command to whom they know that Christ together with the Keyes gaue power to bind in heauen and in earth These and the like authorities of Fathers Papists heap together which I haue brought not that I desire that any thing be detracted from royall authority but to the end that you may see that it is not wisdome to ground Royall Soueraignty vpon this Kingly Church-primacy which Pro●estants allow Puritans detest Papists with the saying of Fathers shake and batter Philanax Herein I agree with you yet that the Roman Bishop hath not this supremacy to depose Kings I am moued to beleeue by that which Theodidact writeth that none of them exercised it before the time of Gregory the VII otherwise tearmed Hildebrand who excommunicated and deposed Henry the Fo●●th Emperour about the yeare 1073● more then a thousand yeares from Christs ascension as Otho Frisingensis liui●g neere those times saith I read and read againe the gestes of the Romane Kings and Emperors and no where I find any of them till this man Henry the Fourth excommunicated or deposed by the Bishop of Rome Aristobulus I do not desire to proue that authority of the Pope my drift is to shew that Kings Church-primacy is not aduisely brought and placed as the pillar of their ragall Soueraignty For to that which moueth you so much behold the Papists how easily and how many things they answere First deposition being an extraordinary remedy against the persecution of hereticall Princes not to be vsed but in cases of ext●emity what wonder that practises therof vpon Romane Emperours haue not been many Moreouer for the first 300. yeares after Christ there was no Christian Emperour on whom that power might be vsed In the other two hundred the

themselues or whose auncestors come to the Crowne vniustly be made Lawfull Princs when they are freely admitted by the state without debatable contradiction though perchaunce some may suruiue that in the sight of God hath better right of bloud And no doubt can be made but Athalia was admitted with generall consent for six yeeres when Ioas lay hidden none standing in open competency against her That this co●sent was not free but inforced can neither be proued nor cleerly confuted So Theodidacts solution is grounded vpon vncertanity But his answere to the second instance about Ozias that the high-Priest did not cast him out of the Temple by force but caused him to depart by word and admonition only is much more insufficient and hardly can it agree with the text of Scripture which sayth that to hinder Ozias from burning incense there entred into the Temple togeather with Azarias fourescore Priests viri fortissimi stout and valiant men signifying they went with resolution to vse force and to cast him out sayth S. Chrysostom ● not as King but as a fugitue and vngratious seruant They warned him to desist and to depart whose admonition when he contemned God incontinently strook him with Leprosy His Leprosy the Priests perceaued shining in his forehead before he felt it himselfe and vpon sight therof began out of hand hastily to ●hrust him out though when he ●elt Gods miraculous chastisement vpon him he was as willing to go as they to carry him away So that in the beginning he was drawne in the end lead out of the Temple Ducunt volentem fata nolentem trahunt Philanax How might Papists cast him out by force seeing Chrisostome cited by Theodidact saith The office of a Priest is only to reproue and only to admonish not to moue arme● not vse buckelers not to shake a lance but only to argue and freely to admonish Aristobulus The saying of Chrysostome which Theodidact doth so much magnify is properly verified not in the Leuiticall Priests who were warriers as other Tribes and were chosen to Priestly dignity for their consecrating their hands to God in the bloud of synners But the saying is true of Christian Priesthood whereof they were figures which abhorreth bloudy proceedings But this makes not against what hath been said that Ozia● was cast out by force because the same Father alloweth that euen Christian Priests thru●t wicked Kings ou● of the Church with their hands or keep them out forcibly by the interposition of their body So did he resist Endoxia Empresse and S. Ambrose was ready to haue vsed the lik● force against Theodosius yea the same S. Chrysostome highly commendeth the famous Patriarch of Antioch and Martyr Babilas for keeping a blo●dy Emperour out of the Church impacta in pectus dextera giuing him a thrust on the brest wherby saith this Father he taught the world in what degree Priest●ood excelleth Royalty he taught Kings to keep their power within their ●ounds prescribed by God he taught Priests in what sort they were to rule and vse authority ouer Kings Philanax I see it can hardly be denyed but the Priests cast the King by force out of the Temple but him sayth Theodidact they did not depriue of his Kingly authority which he held to his death for he ●eigned 52. years which ca●not be true excep● the years of his leprosy be recko●ed as part of his reigne Aristobulus To this obiection of Theodidact S. Chrysostome his ●hosen Patron makes answere euen in that very homily by him cited saying that Ozias was depriued of Royall au●hority yet he stil retayned the execution therof because the people out of respect to his Diademe and Royall dignity did not execute the sen●ence vpon him so that he still remayned in his house and sate in the Throne transgressing the Law And that the people did greeuously offend in not casting the King by force from gouernment the same Father ●estifieth in these words This their negligence saith he prouoked God to anger stopped the course of prophesy that I say saw not the Lord till Ozias was dead And consider the mercy of God that did not for this ouerthrow the Citty nor destroy the inhabitants but as one frend expostulates with another so did God with his people deseruing greater punishment My ●eople do you feare to expell this impure Kinge Do you so reuerence his dignity as to transgresse my law VVill you not reuenge my quarrell Nor will I speake with you I could my selfe haue cast him out of the Citty but what remayned I le●t to be finished by you I cast him out of my ●emple he being a King you haue not put him out of your Citty I bound him fast in Leprosy as in a chayne and of a King made him a priuate man● he being now a priuate man you haue not set vpon him VVhom I condemned you had not courage to cast out Thus S. Chrysostome most cleerly teaching the lawfull deposition of Princes and that subiects not only may but are bound to vse force and execute that sentence vpon them when they are leprous that is hereticall and for such declared by the Church And this is peculiar to ●eresy which specially being ioyned with persecution is a leaprous and infectio●s synne that when the Prince is namely denounced and cast out of the Church for it the Law of God and 〈◊〉 bindes the Subiects if they be 〈◊〉 to sep●rate themselues from him in respect of the daunger Which seemes a doctrine so receaued anciently amongest Christians that euen the Popes who still stood vpon the priuiledge that they might be iudged by no man haue euer yeelded themselues subiect to the Church and deposeable in this case neither did Henry the fourth Emperour in his contention with Hidelbrand or Gregory the seauenth deny but for heresy he might be deposed He ple●ded he was no hereticke and that for other crimes the Pope could not depose him The tradition of Fathers saith he is that I am to be iudged by God alone except I haue declined from the Catholike faith which God forbid This doctrine of the Papists seemes to answere what Theodidact els where obiects that euen the Romanists themselues teach that excommunicatiō not doth free the seruant frō obedience to his maister For though this be true in excomunication for other crymes yet heresy is a cryme that ha●h peculiar force by Christian institution to separate seruants and sonnes from their hereticall Lords and Fathers One of the Apostolicall ordinations related by S. Clement is that Bishops ought to cast impenitent hereticks out of the Church and commaund the faithfull not to haue any manner of conuersation with them So out of S. Chrysostome they conclude that Christians may no more endure a Prince declared heretike by their supreme Pastour then ●he Iewes might suffer a King declared Leaper by their high Priest

vsing at his death these words Because I haue loued Iustice and hated wickednesse I now dy in banishment Vrbane that succeded Gregory both in office and in zeale against the Emperour being driuē out of Italy into France hauing so great need of the Kings assistance yet was he so voide of humane respects that at that very time he excommunicated Philip King of France for putting away his true wife and liuing in open incest The Kinge saith an vnpartiall Historian threatned that except Vrbane would restore him to the Church Crowne he wold depart with his whole Kingdome from his obedience the obedience of the Roman Sea yet this moued not that most holy Bishop to relent In fine Philip was faine to yeeld not being able to extort otherwise releasment from excommunication and so religion conscience preuailed ouer th● Scepter and the Diademe the inuincible Maiesty and Name of King So admirable for constancy were those Popes that vsed their authority to depose wicked Emperors so free from loue of the world that we may ius●ly thinke God fauoured their cause H●●soeuer their perpetuall good successe for so many ages against all aduersaries though the reason therof be hidden may giue iust cause in my opinion for Kings to be wary how they aduenture their Crownes vpon preuailing against them and how they deuise new oathes of Allegiance that wage warre against the authority of their Sea And this is the last thing which I desire to leaue to be seriously pondered by you that loue the King so I cōclude praying the Lord hartily that as hitherto he hath defended Kingly authority in our great Britany frō open enemies so now he will defend the same from secret plots and trayterous Treatises which by shew of friendship seek the ouerthrow thereof Philanax I am glad Aristobulus that wee fell into this discourse in which you haue cleerly discryed Theodidacts fraudulent vndermining of Royall Authority The publishers of that booke besides their secret plotting agaynst 〈◊〉 ●oueraignty of Princes seeme like●●●● to haue had an eye to their owne ●uere in the di●ulging therof For there being a commaund that this Booke both in publicke and priuate schooles be read to Children of both sexes ech booke sold for six pence which is hardly worth two pence you must needs see a great summe of money that hēce is yearely made a summe I say so great as doth farre surpasse the custome of the Peter-pence which in old time euery house payed to the Pope Notwithstanding at this their enriching themselues by this deuise I do not so much grieue but I am hartily sory that so many odious vngrounded positions cōcernin● Royall Authority that may raise vp horror rather thē loue of Kinges be instilled into the tender mindes of Childrē which afterward when any occasion is giuen may soone turne into hatred But thereof yo● haue spoken inough Wherfore I likewise will end with your harty good wishes towardes his Maiesty and our most gracious Prince Charles beseching the Almighty to defend them both and to giue them the spirit of wised 〈◊〉 wherby they may discouer these ●●●●sons hidden with a shew of friendshipp The Printer to the Reader THIS Treatise gentle Reader may seeme written by some English Protestant agaynst some Puritans enemies of Kingly Soueraignity which by them in former times openly impugned they now seeke to ouerthrow by groūding the same vpon odious and ●aungerous Positiōs touching the immunity of Tyrants The Authour disputeth the questiō of this weighty subiect in such moderate stile and manner bringing 〈…〉 ns both solide and not reg 〈…〉 ing with Catholike doctrine that he may be thought to be in opinion Catholike though for modesties sake to the end that this truth might be more pleasingly accepted of Protestants in this worke he discourseth as if he were Protestant And for this reason some Catholike arguments he doth pretermit others he doth not vrge to the vttermost partly for breuityes sake but cheefly because his intēt is no more then to shew that the new Protestants principles from which they deduce R●yall Authority be at the least doubtfull and vncertayne And this he doth cleerly demonstrate and thence concludes that it is against the rules euen of humane policy to forsake the most sure grounds of Soueraigne Power in Kinges whereon Christian Kingdomes relying haue hitherto stood firme and florished vnd 〈…〉 Catholike discipline iust l 〈…〉 and to build the sacred authority of Princes whereon their peoples safety dependes vpon the new vngrounded Doctrines Paralogismes of Scriptures which seemes to haue byn the drift of the former Dialogue For this cause I thought it would not be amisse nor lost labour to put the same in print renewed before hand corrected The title God and the King I would not alter because i● two wordes it doth fully put down● the Catholike opinion concerning Princes Authority their subiects Allegiance For as this trea●ise doth i●sinuate three opinions in this poynt now are in Englād The first of Puritās who wil haue God without King or else such a King that must depend on the peoples beck 〈◊〉 their Consistoriā Preachers 〈…〉 ose perfidious audacity his ●●●esty hath had sufficient experience The second is of Politicians who haue no more Christianity then Parlamentary decrees breath into them These will haue King without God or at least King and God that is God so longe and no longer then the King shall please whome they will haue still obeyed though he go openly about to extinguish the light of Christian Religion The third opinion is of Catholik●s whose ●ote is God and the King● in the first place they worship God in the second the King to whome they giue all Allegiance and subiection as farre as Religion and conscience will permit And this is to giue what is Caesars to Caesar and what is Gods to God Farewell FINIS Dial. God and the Kinge pag. 2. Dial. p. 33. 34. ●peach in the Star-chamber 16.6 Bancroft in the Dangerous po●itiōs p. 33. Psal. 84. v. 16. 2. Thessal ● 2 v. 10. Hooker Ecclesiast pol. prefac p. 28. Hooker ibid. p. 29. Suruey of the holy ●iscipline p. 93. (a) Ba●il Dor. p 40. 41. (b) Knox. histor of the Church of Scot. p. 265. Dang po●it p. 11. (c) Sleydan l. 28. l. 22. O●ian Epist. cent 16. p. 566. (d) Cuspin of the Church of France p. 625 Ferres histor p. 588. (e) Osiand ibid. p. 94. (f) Chitr●eus in chron p. 71 (g) Fulk answere to the declam of P. ●rarines (h) Dang posit l ● c. ● 4● seq (i) Suruey of the disc p. 101. (k) Dang po●it Suruey and others by D. Bancroft (l) Principes sunt omnium quos terra ●ustinet s●ultis●imi deterrimi nebulones Tō 2. Ger. ●en de mag saecul fol. 200. (m) Cal. in Dan. cap. 6. v. 22. (n) Knox to Engl. Scotl. fol. 78. (o) Buchā de i●●e Reg.

the new oath For their standing with such daunger against an oath which they thinke vniust shewes they will not for humane respects sweare but what really they beleeue to be true● nor promise but what they truly meane to performe It may be iustly supposed that these men as they will rather dye then sweare Allegiance which they think not due so they wil loose their liues sooner then neglect the allegiance they haue once sworn And though they cannot frame their consciences to sweare the speculatiue denyall of th● Pop●s authority to depose Princes in some circumstances imagin●●le yet they are ready to sweare that in practise they will stand with the King against ●ll treasons and in al quarrells not openly and vnexcusably vniust Such as persuade his Maiesty to neglect such loyall offer of loue I pray God their trecherous flattery bring him not into occasions that he may need the helpe of such trusty subiects This we see that already the flaterers haue brought him to engage his Honor for the ouerthrow of the Popes authority in this poynt which is the fourth cōsideration that I made promise to present vnto you For I cannot thinke the successe wil be such as might become the enterprise of so great a Monarch Philanax The power to depose Kings at his pleasure which the Pope challenge●h so sauoureth of presumption is so odious that his Maiesty needs not feare the successe of so plausible a quarrell Aristobulus This authority hath ●yn now many yeares together impugned and the abiuration thereof vrged vnder gri●uous penalties What haue we gayned or rather could this doctrine haue more preuailed then by this opposition it hath done Before this stirre I know some learned Papists denyed that authority in the Pope many that held it thought it not a poynt of Faith but the more probable opinion and in France that opinion might scarce be spoken of Now find me a popish Priest that houlds it or thinks that doctrine tollerable in their Church When the matter was vrged in France to haue a like oath enacted did not both Clergy Nobility stand against it When Cardinall Per●ns speach for the Popes authority to depose K●nges was printed what Papist durst p●t his name to an answere We know that that doctrin forsaken of the Papists of France was forced to fly for succour to his Maiestie● pen. Some Papists complayne that we change the state of the question of purpose to make their doctrine odious Which is not that the Pope may depose Princes at his pleasure but in case of necessity But this change of the question to me seemes not so disgraceful to the Pope as to our ●hospell that after so great promises to burne Rome and ouerthrow Popery the heat of al our controuersies worketh vpon this poynt Whether Kings for their Crownes be the Popes tenants at will Would the Pope renounce his right in this point for the rest we would not greatly care to giue ouer When I co●sider the late quarrell begun by our King Henry the 8. against the Pope me thinks the successe thereof hath been much like that of the Carthaginians vnder Haniball against the auncient Common wealth of Rome At the first the Carthaginians so farre preuailed as they got most part of Italy from the Romans and fought with them about the walls of Rome Within a while fortune so changed that the Carthaginians were driuen backe into Africke warre w●s there maintained that much adoe they had to saue their own● Carthage Our Kings in the beginning stroue with the Pope for supremacy in spiri●ua●l things many Papists euen Bishops stood with the King that the Pope was in danger to loose his Miter The more that matters were searched into the more did the Popes cause daily preuaile so that not only Papists be now cleerly resolued in that point as in a most notorious truth but also Puritans mislike Princes supremacy and euen Protestants as far as they da●e go paring away peeces from it And now the Pope secure of supremacy in spirituall things pretends right to dispose of Crownes when the necessity of Religion shall require it And who seeth not that euen in this controuersy they dayly winne ground Had not we s●t our s●lues to impugne this authority had not so many books fr●ught with weak arguments which Papists conf●te with great shew of truth on their side beene written against it had not Priests lost their liues lay Papists their liuings for it I am perswaded it might haue beene buried in obliuio● or at least within their schooles haue beene kept from common peoples ●ares Now persecutiō hath made the question so famous as it will hardly be forgotten the bloud shed for the affirmatiue part thereof hath printed the same deepe in many m●ns conceipts yea the death of men so graue learned and pious hath made some Protestants that hated it before cast vpon it a more fauourable looke Per arma per caedes abipso Sumit opes animumque serro And this is a very remarkable proceeding of Popery different from the course of our Ghospell The light of our Ghospell shined exceeding bright at the first there was no diuision amongest our Ghospellers it stirred vp in mens harts wonderfull zeale● that as one noteth out of pure light they did not consider what they did and i● their zeale their goods lands children wiues and liues were not greatly deere vnto them With time this light waxed dymmer and dymmer the doctrine lesse certaine they grew into factions and sects and therupon their zeale b●came could that now the greatest feare is as oftentimes from one extreme men are prone to fall into the cleane opposite least the supposed cleere shining of truth make men vncerten and not greatly zealous of any Religion at all The Papists contrarywise when controuersies are first raised are very wary and circumspect their censures be not absolute there are commonly diuers opinions amongest them the more that Scriptures Fathers Councells testimonies of antiquity and reasons are examined the more they grow into consent the more resolute and immoueable they become in their doctrine m●re z●alous one day then another to giue their liues for it This course they hold in the doctrine of the Popes power which in the beginning was taught neither so certainly nor vniuersally nor zealously as now it is and wil be euery day more and more except these controuersies be remoued from vulgar examination which cannot be so long as the oath is vrged seeing such as are to sweare must least they be forsworne search into the certainty of this Truth and read bookes that treat of that argument And when no other inconuenience should ensue of this course this alone might moue the prudent frends of Kings to labour the silencing of this controuersy that the wordes of deposing and murthering Gods annointed which should be buried in the depth of amazement horror come by vulgar disputation to sound familiarly in euery eare

And without doubt by this their familiar acquaintance with the word part of the horror against the action is lost Which may be the cause that where speach against the Pops authority for deposing of Kings hath been rifest most vulgar those Countries for practise against the life of their Kinges haue been most vnfortunate Whereas Spayne hath seene no such tragicall practise nor any attempt thereo● but hath enioyed a longe happy peace where the questions how to proceede with Tyrants are freely permitted to the schooles without any popular declamations agaynst Scholastical● opiniōs in this poynt Philanax I must confesse that I haue been my selfe much deceaued in my expectation about the suc●esse of Papists in this controuersy When I considered the circumstances of the contention the doctrine impugned not gratefull to Princes not so cleerly decided in their Church by some of their writers denied the person impugning by sword and penne a Monarch mighty learned beloued euen of Popish Potentates and this at a tyme of great aduantage vpon the gunpowder treason which was vrged as a sequell of this doctrine that euen the greatest fauorers therof seemed fearfull These circumstances made me think that P●pery would receaue a great blow and that his Maiesty would draw the whole Church to be of his opinion What the successe hath been we see you haue shewed I could wish the Controuersy might not haue further progresse be now buried in silence that posterity may not say that Rome grew by his Maiesties opposition against it that this point of her authority was made renowned by victory ouer him what the Papists before did doubtfully defend the bloud of their Martyrs suffering vnder King Iames made certaine knowne illustrious And peace concluded about the silencing of this controuersy might be the beginning of an vniuersall agreement with that Sea seeing other doctrinall controuersies by discussion be brought to that yssue that as I haue heard some learned intelligent persons auerre a calme consultation void of priuate interest and animosity might soone end them Aristobulus This peace were much to be wished nor is it safe to mantaine strife with that Sea but vpon vnauoidable occasions And this is the fifth and last thinge which I wish you would seriously ponder and not wonder that this counsell should be suggested by mee that am no Pa●●st The knowne bad successe that Kings and Princes haue still had in their opposicions against the Romane Church may mooue sufficiently all faithfull Counsailors though not of the Popes Religion neuer if they may choose to engage their So●craignes in such quarrelles Arioch the Ammonite Prince could tell Holosernes out of experience that his power and force would not be able to subdue the Iewes that in the end he would be repelled with disgrace yet he was not a Iew in Religiō The like aduise Amon● Counsailors that were heathens gaue● him to desist in his quarrell against Mardochaus the Iew Thou canst not say they resist him he being of the stock of the Iewes but shalt fall be●ore him It was noted that when Octau●a● and Antony were youthes still in their games Octauian had the best wherupon a prudēt frend gaue Antony warning in ciuill controuersies neuer to encounter him Thou art said he more noble then he more eloquen● and better qualified yet I see cleerly his Genins is stronger thē thine if thou try the for●une of warre with him he will doubtles be Conquerour What the cause may be why it shold be so who knows but experiēce now a thousand and six hundred years old● shewes that this is the● fate and felicity of that Sea to conquer with their patience and bring vnd●● subiection into nothing all the opponents against their doctrine or their authority The Roman Emperors for 300● yeares together bloudily oppugned Christian R●lig●on but principally the Roman Sea in so much as thirty Bishops therof were martyred and the persecuting Emperors as S. Cy●rian saith were more greeued that a new high Priest was placed in that Sea then that a new Prince was chosen set vp against them What was the successe For those three Centuries of yeares scarce any Emperour that persecuted them can be named that deriued the Empire to a third heire or dyed not an vnfortunate death and in the end Constantine their Successor submitted the Empire to the obedience of the Roman Bishop wherin the Empe●ors that followed him contynued Afterward so●e Christian Emperors begā to quarrell with the Church about the priuiledge● and immunities of the Clergy specially Valentinian the third and the succeeding Emperors of the West Did they preuaile In their daies the westerne Empire began to decay The Franks tooke to thē France the Saxons Britanny and VVandalls Asrick the Visigothes Spaine the Gothes Italy ● which ●oone after were made Chri●●●ans and submitted their Kingdomes to the Pope and their Kings professed to receaue their Crownes authority from him Who knoweth not how pittifully the Easterne Emperors and the Patriarches of Constantinople vexed th● Pope for many ages which their quarrell they neuer would giue ouer till finally they fell into the miserable bondage sl●uery of the Tu●ke wherin at this present without hope of remedy they grone What successe to omit many other experiences had the German Caesars that stroue with the Pope for the inuestiture of Bishops by staffe ringe Henry the 4. excommunicated and deposed by Gregory the 7. vpon that cause prospered for a while which this treatiser sets downe to encourage Princes to follow his example but he concealeth how in the end in punishment of his rebellion against his spirituall Father as Papists thinke he was deposed by his owne Sonne put in prison whence escaping he gathered forces was defeated brought to such want as he sued to be Sexton in a Churc●● and serue Priests Masse who had most cruelly vexed the high Priest of Christians many yeares together Not admitted to that office he turned himself to begge of laymen in lamentable manner crying Haue mercy on me at least you my friendes for the hand of the Lord hath touched mee and so full of misery repentance and anguish of mind he pined away to death The newes whereof was receaued with generall ioy of all Christians And his Sonne though for a while he trode the steps of his Fathers disobedience yet finally he yielded vp his right in possession whereof the Roman Bishop is at thi● day Wherein not only the successe which Popes had against so potent Aduersaries as was Henry the 4. who fought more battaile● then euer did Iulius Caesar but their courage and confidence also was admirable Neither ought any discreete Protestant trust Theodidacts relatiō of Hidelbrāds fainting in the quarrell taken out of Sigebert a partiall Monke seeing Papists bring 50. Historians that contradict him These whose fidelity can with no rea 〈…〉 called in question relate that he ended his life full of cōstancy