rake ouer al histories for examples of rebellion and then argue a facto ad ius that euerie thing is lawful which you finde to haue bin done Iustinian sayth Non exemplis sed legibus iudicandum We must iudge facts by lawe and not lawe by facts or by examples which Alciate and Deciane do terme a golden lawe because there is no action either so impious or absurd which may not bee paralleled by examples Will you prooue it lawful to vse fleshlie familiaritie with the sister with the mother in law with the natural mother You haue the example of Cambyses for the first Caracalla for the second Dionysius and Nero for the third The Iewes vppon whom God had setled his choise did at times beside many other enormities erect male stewes Of the two nations whose examples you vse the Romans and the Lacedaemonians the first did the like vnder diuers emperours as Lampridius writeth and in more auncient times allowed also parricide of children the other would sort themselues by fifteene and twentie families together and hold both wiues and goods in common I omit the vnnatural customes of diuers other nations and will now declare how in straining a fewe examples to countenance your conceit you are constrained to beare your selfe no lesse cunning in concealing truthes then bold in auouching things which are not only vncertaine but plainely false It is true which you write that the kings of Sparta by the institution of Lycurgus were obedient to the officers called Ephori but these were titular kings hauing no other power but a single voice among the Senators and because all affaires were caried by consent of the people the estate was then esteemed popular Afterwards Theopompus by pretence of an Oracle drew this authoritie from the people to a Senate of thirtie whereby the gouernment did change into an Aristocracie yet the naked name of kings was retained By this shuffling of rule the Lacedaemonians were continually tossed with tempests of sedition ceasing not to wade in their owne bloud as before you haue acknowledged vntill in the end they were brought into subiection first by the Macedonians afterward by the Achaeans and lastly by the Romans I will not say now what reason haue we but what a shame is it for vs to open our cares to these Vtopicall state-writers who being mellowed in idlenesse hauing neither knowledge nor interest in matters of gouernment make new models vpon disproportioned ioints borrowed from nations most different in rule You affirme by the testimonie of Liuie that for offence taken against Romulus because hee raigned at pleasure and not by law the Senators did cut him in peeces in which short assertion many base vntruths are included beneath the degree of anie vile word Liuie writeth that he sorted the people into order and gouerned them by lawes and that hee was also both aduised and valiant in the field euen such a one as Homer describeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Both a good king and couragious commander Concerning his end Liuie writeth that in taking muster of his armie a thicke tempest did arise after which he was neuer seene wherein he is seconded by Solinus Eutropius and the rest only Liuie addeth that there was a rumor but verie obscure without any certaine either authour or ground I will adde also without probabilitie that he was torne in peeces For howe probable is it that such a fact in the open view of his armie could bee verie obscure how probable is it also that the people would first teare him in peeces for his iniustice and then worship him for a God Further with what either confidence or conceit doe you alleage this report of Liuie for his opinioÌ„ I find your fetch you apprehend euerie thing which may if not confirm yet countenance that doctrine which lately you haue drawne out of Cerberus denne That it is lawfull to contriue the death of kings That the people were grieued against Seruius Tullius for raigning without election it is a meere fantasie a dreame a deuise Liuie faith that hee was declared king with such a consent as no man had bin before him That Tarquinius neglected the lawes of gouernment prescribed to him by the common wealth it is an ougly vntruth Liuie saith that he brake the auncient manner of kings before him but for lawes Pomponius affirmeth that at that time the Romans had no lawes but from their kings and that Sextus Papirius reduced them into one volume which was called the ciuill law of Papirius and that when the people expelled their kings they abrogated their lawes also and remained twentie yeares without any law Lastly you adde that the Romans did expell their kings and erect Consuls in their steed but you suppresse that which followed which I hold for a common consequence of the like disorder First that for this cause they were presently almost ouerwhelmed with warres secondly that in this state they neuer enjoyed long time free from sedition lastly that as Tacitus saith there was no meanes to appease these tumults but by returning to a monarchie againe All this I write rather to manifest the maner of your dealing then that I hold it much regardable what Romans did Your examples of our present age I will wrap vp in these few words All nations very few excepted do consent in this forme of gouernment first to bee vnder one Prince secondly to accept him by succession according to propinquitie of bloud in other circumstances either for in augurating their prince or for the maner of managing and executing his gouernment not two nations in the world in all points do agree And yet is not this diuersitie raised by any lawes which the people doe prescribe vnto their Prince as you doe most grossely yea peeuishly yea maliciously affirme but by the particular lawes and customes of euerie nation in which the consent of the Prince either secret or expresse sometimes onely is sufficient alwayes principally doth concur Vpon this diuersitie of customes you conclude that it sufficeth not to alleage bare propinquitie of bloud What not where that custom is established as I haue declared it to bee in most nations of the world doth difference of customes make all custom void doth diuersitie of custome in some circumstances take away the principall custome of succession by bloud This cleaueth together no surer then sand you loose both labour and credit in obtruding vnto vs these weake and loose arguments without either force of reason or forme of Art Your instance of the lawe Salicke in France doth offer occasion to enter into a large fielde wherein I could plainlie prooue that there was neuer anie such lawe made to bind the discent of the crowne of Fraunce and that it hath bin the custome in most parts of the world not to exclude women from succession in state in so much as Beda and before him Eusebius and Plinie doâ—
make a sower face at this it will go very much against your stomackes but there is no remedie you must take it down they are your good lords they may dispossesse you Prophane Bellarmine is Christian Religion a meere policie doth it applie it selfe onlie to the present Doth it turne alwaies with the time May the principal professors thereof say as an infidel Moore did wheÌ„ he violated the faith which he had giuen vnto christians We haue no bone in our tongues that we cannot turne them which way we please Wee seee plainlie that you say so and it is as plaine that it was far from the true meaning of the Apostles S. Iude writeth sharpelie against those who had mens perâ—ons in admiration because of aduvntage S. Paul also saith Goe I about to please men If I should please men I were not then the seruant of Christ. I wil giue you an example of another time Nabuchadnezzar king of Assyria wasted al Palestina tooke Hierusalem slew the king burnt the Temple tooke away the holy vessels and treasure the residue he permitted to the crueltie and spoile of his vnmerciful soldiers who defiled al places with rape ruine and bloud After the glut of this butcherie the people which remained he led captiue into Chaldaea and there commaunded that whosoeuer refused to worship his golden image should be cast into a firie furnace What crueltie what impietie is comparable to this and yet the Prophets Ieremiah and Baruch did write to those captiue Iewes to praie for the prosperitie and life of him and of Baltazar his sonne that their daies might be vpon earth as the daies of heauen and Ezechiel both blameth and threatneth Zedechia for his disloialtie in reuolting from Nabuchadnezzar whose homager and tributarie he was What answere wil you make to this example I am wiselie busied to cast forth this question what answere can you make which your owne knowledg will not conuince Many other places there are in holy Scripture whereby not onely our actions are tied to obedience He that doth presumptuously against the ruler of the people shal die but also our words Thou shalt not speake euill against the ruler of the people yea our secret thoughts Detract not from the king no not in thy thought for the foules of the aire shall carie thy voice The reason hereof is not obscure Because princes are the immediat ministers of God therefore he called Nabuchadnezzar his seruant promised him also hire wages for the seruice which he did And the Prophet Esay calleth Cyrus a prophane heathen king the Lords annointed For as Salomon saith The harts of kings are in the hands of the Lord he stirreth vp the spirit euen of wicked Princes to do his wil as Iehoshaphat said to his rulers they execute not the will of man but of the Lord. In regard hereof Dauid calleth theÌ„ gods whereof Plato also had some sense when he said A king is in steed of god And if they do abuse their power they are not to be iudged by their subiects as being both inferiour and naked of authoritie because all iurisdiction within their realme is deriued from theÌ„ which their presence only doth silence suspend but God reserueth them to the â—orest trial Horribly and sodainly saith the wise man will the Lord appeare vnto theÌ„ and a hard iudgment shal they haue You Iesuits do yeeld a blindfold obedieÌ„ce to your superiours not once examining either what hee is or what he doth commaÌ„d although the Pope should swarue froÌ„ iustice yet by the canons men are bound to performe obedience vnto him and God only may iudge his doings and may a king the Lords Lieutenant the Lords annointed in the view of his subiects nay by the hands of his subiects bee cast out of state May he as was Actaeon be chased and wooried by his own hounds Wil you make him of worse conditioÌ„ then the Lord of a Manor then a parish priest then a poore schoolemaster who cannot be remoued by those that are vnder their authoritie and charge The law of God coÌ„mandeth that the child should die for anie contumely done vnto the Parents But what if the father be a robber if a murtherer if for all excesse of villanies odious execrable both to God and man Surely hee deserueth the highest degree of punishment yet must not the son lift vp his hand against him for as Quintilian saith No offence is so great as to be punished by parricide But our country is dearer to vs then our selues the Prince is the father of our country whose authoritie as Baldus noteth is greater then of parents and therfore he must not be violated how impious how imperious soeuer he be If hee commaundeth those things that are lawfull we must manifest our obedience by readie performing If he inioine vs those actions that are euill we must shew our subiection by patient enduring It is God only who seateth kings in their state it is he only who may remoue them The Lord wil set a wise king ouer the people which he loueth as himselfe doth testifie And againe For the sins of the land the kings are changed As therefore wee endure with patience vnseasonable weather vnfruitful yeares other like punishments of God so must wee tolerate the imperfections of Princes and quietly expect either reformation or els a change This was the doctrine of the ancient Christians euen against their most mortall persecuters Tertullian saith For what warre are we not both seruiceable and readie although vnequall in number who doe so willingly endure to be slaine neither want we strength of number but God forbid that religion should be maintained with humane fire From him also Saint Cyprian a most studious reader of Tertullian as Saint Hierome noteth in like maner writeth Although our people bee exceeding copious yet it doth not reuenge it selfe against violence it suffreth Saint Augustin saith It is a generall paction of humane societie to obey kings Which sentence is assumed into the body of the canon law In a word the current of the ancient fathers is in this point concurrent insomuch as among theÌ„ all there is not one found not anie one one is a small number and yet I say confidently againe there is not anie one who hath let fall so loose a speech as may be strained to a contrarie sense How then are you of late become both so actiue resolute to cut in sunder the reines of obedience the verie sinewes of gouernment order Whence had Benedetto Palmto a Iesuite his warrant to incite William Parrie to vndertake the parricide of our Queene whence did Annibal Codretto another Iesuite assure him that the true Church made no question but that the fact was lawfull Whence did Guignard a Iesuite terme the
make shew of care to preâ—erue the state but you are like the Iuy which â—eemeth outwardly both to imbrace and adorne the wall whereinto inwardly it doth both eate vndermine For what meanes either more readie or forceable to ouerthrow a state then faction and intestine quarels and what other milke doe you yeelde what are your opinions what your exhortations but either to set or to holde vp sedition and bloodshead Saint Paule teacheth vs not to resist higher powers although both cruel and prophane you teach vs to resist them what we can the Apostle is followed of al the auntient Fathers of the church you are followed of those only who follow the Anabaptists For my part I had rather erre with the Apostle in this opposition then holde truth with you But I will speake more moderately in a subiect of such nature I wil not say theÌ„ that I had rather erre but that I shall lesse feare to erre in not resisting with the Apostle theÌ„ in resisting with you New councels are alwaies more plausible then safe After you haue plaide the Suffenus with your selfe in setting the garland vpon your owne head and making your imaginarie audience to applaude your opinion as worshipfully wise you proceede to declare what ought chiefly â—o be regarded in furthering or hindering any Prince towards the Crowne Three points you say are to bee required in euerie Prince religion chiualrie and iustice and putting aside the two last as both handled by others and of least importance you assume onely to treate of religion wherein eyther errour or want doth bring inestimable damage to any state You drawe along discourse that the highest end of euery Common-wealth is the seruice worship of God and consequently that the care of religion is the principall charge which pertaineth to a King And therfore you conclude that whatsoeuer prince doth not assist his subiects to attaine this ende omitteth the chief part of his charge committeth high treason against his Lord and is not fit to holde that dignitie though he performe the other two partes neuer so well And that no cause can to iustly cleare the conscience whether of the people or of particular men in resisting the entrance of any Prince as if they iudge him faultie in religion This is neither nothing nor all which you say In electiue states the people ought not to admit any man for King who is eyther colde or corrupt in religion but if they haue admitted such a one with soueraigne authoritie they haue no power at pleasure to remoue him In successiue kingdomes wherein the people haue no right of election it is not lawfull for priuate men vpon this cause to offer to impeach either the entraÌ„ce or coÌ„tinuance of that king which the lawes of the State do present vnto them not only because it is forbidden of God for that is the least part of your regard but because disorderly disturbance of a setled forme in gouernment traineth after it more both impieties and dangers then hath euer ensued the imperfections of a king I will come more close to the point in controuersie and dispell these foggie reasons which stand betweene your eye and the truth There are two principall parts of the lawe of God the one morall or natural which containeth three points sobrietie in our selues iustice towards others and generally also reuerence and pietie towards God the other is supernaturall which containeth the true faith of the mysteries of our saluation and the speciall kind of worship that God doth require The first God hath deliuered by the ministrie of nature to all men the second he doth partly reueale partly enspire to whoÌ„ he please and therefore although most nations haue in some sort obserued the one yet haue they not only erred but failed in the other During the time of the lawe this peculiar worship of God was appropriate only to the people of Israel in a corner kingdome of the world the flourishing Empires of the Assirians Medes Persians AegyptiaÌ„s Graecians Syrians and Romans eyther knew it not or held it in contempt The Israelites were almost alwaies in subiection vnder these both Heathen tyrannicall gouernments yet God by his Prophets enioyned them obedience affirming that the hearts of kings were in his hands that they were the officers of his iustice the executioners of his decrees In the time of grace the true mysteries both of worship and beliefe were imparted also to other nations but the ordinarie meanes to propagate the same was neither by policie nor by power When S. Peter offered prouident counsell as hee thought vnto Christ aduising him to haue care of himselfe and not to go to Hierusalem where the Iewes sought to put him to death Christ did sharply reproue him for it when he did drawe his sword and therwith also drew bloud in defence of Christ hee heard this sentence They that take the sworde shall perish with the sworde Christ armed his Apostles onely with firie tongues by force whereof they maintained the fielde against all the stratagems and strength in the world And when Princes did not onely reiect but persecute their doctrine they taught their subiects obedience vnto them they did both encounter and ouercome them not by resisting but by persisting and enduring This course seemeth straunge to the discourse of of reason to plant religion vnder the obedience of kings not only carelesse therof but cruell against it but when we consider that the Iewes did commonly forsake God in prosperitie and seeke him in distresse that the Church of Christ was more pure more zealous more entire I might also say more populous when shee trauelled with the storme in her face then when the winde was eyther prosperous or calme that as S. Augustine saith Want or weakenesse of faith is vsually chastised with the scourges of tribulatioÌ„s We may learne thereby no further to examine but to admire and embrace the vnsearchable wisedome and will of God Seeing therefore that this is appointed the ordinarie meanes both to establish and encrease religioÌ„ may we aduenture to exchange it with humane deuices Is it the seruants dutie eyther to contradict or dispute the maisters commaundement is there any more readie way to proue an heretike then in being a curious questionist with God is hee bounde to yeelde to any man a reason of his will It is more then presumption it is plaine rebellioÌ„ to oppose our reason against his order against his decree It standeth also vpon common rules That which is contrary to the nature of a thing doth not helpe to strengthen but to destroy it It is foolish to adde externall stay to that which is sufficient to support it selfe It is sencelesse to attempt that by force which no force is able to effect That which hath a proper rule must not be directed by any other And this was both the profession and practise of the auntient Fathers of the
gouernment of a King is the most excelleÌ„t benefit that God hath giuen vnto men Callimachus saith that Kings proceede from god Homer affirmeth that they are cherished by god Your selfe doe shew out of Aristotle Seneca Plutarch S. Hierome S. Chrysostâ—me and S. Peter that monarchie is the most excellent and perfect gouernement most resembling the gouernement of god and most agreeable vnto nature But what doe you meane to acknowledge all this and yet to denie that monarchie is naturall doe you take it to be aboue nature or how els is it most excellent and perfect how is it most agreeable to nature and yet not naturall can any action be most agreeable to iustice and yet not iust I know not by what strategeme or cunning cranck of the schools you can be made agreeable to your selfe But now if we consider the generall custome of al people we shall find that all the ancient nations in whom the laws of nature were least corrupt had no other gouernment as the Assyrians Medes Persians Parthians Indians Scythians Sirians PhoeniciaÌ„s ArabiaÌ„s Aegyptians Africans NumidiaÌ„s MauritaniaÌ„s BritaÌ„s Celtes Gaules Latines Hetruscanes SiciliaÌ„s AtheniaÌ„s LacaedemoniaÌ„s CorinthiaÌ„s AchaeaÌ„s Sicyonians CandiaÌ„s in one word all Tullie saith it is certaine that al ancieÌ„t nations were vnder kings with which opinion Salust consenteth Iustine also where he saith the eÌ„pire of natioÌ„s at the first was in the hands of kings And wheÌ„ the people of Israel desired a king they alleged that al other nations were gouerned by kings The Athenians were the first as Plinie affirmeth who set vp the gouernment of many whose exaÌ„ple certaine other towns of Greece did follow rather blinded by aÌ„bitioÌ„ theÌ„ led by iudgemeÌ„t AmoÌ„g these if the highest authority were in the least part of the citisens it was called aristocracy if in the most or in all it was termed democracy wherin you confesse that neither they did nor could any long time continue but after many tumults seditions mutinies outrages iniusticies banding of factions and inundations of bloud they were in the end either dissolued or vanquished and reduced againe vnder gouernement of one The state of Rome began vnder kings it atteined the highest pitch both of glory and greatnes vnder emperors in the middle time wherin it neuer inioyed x. yeeres together free froÌ„ sedition Polybius saith that is was mixed the consulls represeÌ„ting a monarchie the senate an aristocracie the coÌ„mon people a democracy which opinion was likewise embraced by Dionysius Halicarnasseus Cicero Cantarine and others But many do hold that the state of Rome at that time was populare which seemeth to be confirmed by the famous lawier couÌ„sailer Vlpian where he saith that the people did graÌ„t al their power authority to the prince Whatsoeuer it was in shew in very deede it was alwayes gouerned by some one principall man Liuie wrighteth of Scipio that vnder his shadow the city was protected that his looks were in stead of lawes likewise of Papirius cursor that he sustained the Romane affaires So said Thucidides that Athens was in appearance populare but Aristides was the true monarch thereof Plutarch also affirmeth that Pelopidas and Epaminondas were no lesse then lords of the populare state of Thebes but after the death of these meÌ„ both the states of Athens and Thebes floated in tumults as the same authour obserueth like a ship in a tempest without a pilot So did Peter Sodarine Gonsalonier of Florence giue forth that the title of popularity was vsed as a maske to shadow the tyraÌ„ny of Laurence Medices but Florence did neuer so florish both in honor wealth and quiet as vnder that tyranny Also in actions of weight in great dangers and necessities the Romans had recourse to one absolute and supreme commaÌ„der which Liuie calleth the highest refuge whose authority as the Romans did most reuereÌ„tly respect so was it many times fearefull to their enemies Of the first Liuie saith the Dictators edict was alwayes obserued as an oracle of the second so soone as a dictator was created such a terror came vpon the enemies that they departed presently from the walles Likewise in cases of extremity the Lacedaemonians had their high gouernour whom they called Harmostes the Thessalonians had their Archos and the Mytilenians also their great Aezymnetes Lastly Tacitus reporteth that certaine wise men discoursing of the life of Augustus after his death affirmed rightly that ther was no other meane to appease the discordes of the state but by reducing it vnder the gouernement of one Let vs now take a view of our present age In al Asia from whence Tullie saith ciuility did first spread into other parts of the world no gouernment is in vse but by a monarch as appeareth by the Tartarians Turks Persians Indians Chinans Cataians no other gouernmeÌ„t is found to be fouÌ„ded in al the cuntries of Affrick in America also and all the west parts of the world no other is yet discouered in Europe only vpoÌ„ eyther declining or chaÌ„g of the empire a few towns in Germany Italy did reuiue againe the gouernment of many som are alredy returned to a monarchy and the residue in their time will do the like euen as all others haue done which haue bene before them What then shal we say of this so ancient so continuall so generall consent of all nations what can we say but coÌ„clude with Tertullian these testimonies the more true the more simple the more simple the more common the more common the more natuâ—all the more naturall the more deuine But because ambition is a most firy affection and carieth men blindfold into headlong hopes wherby many do aspire to beare rule neither they good nor with any good either means or end the custome or lawe of nations hath by two reines endeauored to keep in this raging desire by succession by election And yet againe because election is most often if not alwaies entangled with many inconueniences as first for that the outragies during the vacancy are many great euery one that is either grieued or in waÌ„t assuming free power both for reueÌ„ge spoile Secondly for that the bouldest winneth the garlaÌ„d more often then the best because the fauour of the people doth alwayes tast more of affection then of iudgement Thirdly for that they who do not leaue their state to their posterity wil dissipate the domain and worke out of it either profit or friends for so we see that the empire of Germanie is pluckt bare of her fairest feathers Fourthly for that occasions of war are hereby ministred that either wheÌ„ one taketh his repulse for indignity vpoÌ„ which ground Frauncis the first king of FrauÌ„ce could neuer be driueÌ„ out of practise against Charles the 5. emperor or els wheÌ„ by means of factioÌ„s many are elected as it happened in Almaine when Lewes of Bauier
For it is not onlie lawfull but honourable for any people either to right or reuenge the breach of this lawe against them which contemne it as monsters against them who knowe it not as beasts Saint Augustine saith If a Citie vppon earth should decree some great mischiefes to be done by the decree of mankind it is to be destroied And as in the state of one countrey any man may accuse vpon a publicke crime so in the state of the world any people may prosecute a common offence for as there is a ciuill band among all the people of one nation so is there a natural knot among al men in the world You close your conclusion with this conceit that the word naturall Prince or naturall successor is to be vnderstood of one who is borne within the same Realme and that it is ridiculous to take it as though anie prince had natural interest to succeed But what construction wil you then make of that which Herodian deliuereth in the speech of Commodus the sonne of Marcus Now hath fortune giuen me vnto you for prince in his stead not drawen into the state such as they were who were before me nor as one that glorieth in the purchase of the Empire for I onlie am borne vnto you and brought vp in the court neuer swathed in priuate cloathes but so soone as I was borne the imperiall purpure did receiue me and the sun beheld me at once both a man and a prince Consider these things and honour your prince by right who is not giuen but borne vnto you Girard goeth further in writing of Charles the Simple that he was king before he was born Say therefore againe that it is ridiculous to take the word natural prince for one that hath right of succession inherent in him by birth and I wil say that this mirth wil better beseeine a natural indeede then any man that is wise But let vs now consider the further passage of your discourse both how you are able to fortifie this foundation and what building it is able to beare TO THE SECOND CHAPTER which is intituled Of the particular forme of Monarchies and kingdomes and the different lawes whereby they are to bee obtained holden and gouerned in diuers countries according as each common wealth hath chosen and established IN this chapter you spend much speech in praising a monarchie and preferring it before the gouernment of manie which you doe to no other end but to insinuate your selfe either into credit or aduantage to drawe it downe euen as Ioab presented Amasa with a kind kisse to winne thereby opportunitie to stab him For in the end you fetch about that because a Prince is subiect as other men not onely to errours in iudgement but also to passionate affections in his will it was necessarie that as the common wealth hath giuen that great power vnto him so it should assigne him helpes for managing the same And that a Prince receiueth his authoritie from the people you proue a little before for that Saint Peter tearmeth kings Humane creatures which you interpret to bee a thing created by man because by mans free choise both this forme of gouernment is erected and the same also laide vpon some particular person I know not in what sort to deale with you concerning this interpretation Shall I labour to impugne it by arguments Why there is no man that wanteth not either iudgement or sinceritie but vpon both the naturall and vsuall sense of the words hee will presently acknowledge it to bee false Shall I go about either to laugh or to raile you from your errour as Cicero in the like case perswaded to doe But this would bee agreeable neither to the stayednesse of our yeeres nor the grauitie of our professions I am now aduised what to doe I will appeale as Machetes did before Philip of Macedon from your selfe asleepe to your selfe awake from your selfe distempered by affection to your selfe returned to sobrietie of sense Do you thinke then in true earnest that a humane creature is a thing created by man or rather that euery man is a humane creature Is a brutish creature to be taken for a thing created by a beast Spirituall Angelicall or anie other adiunct vnto creature what reference hath it to the Authour of creation And if it were so then should al creatures be called diuine because they were created by God to whom onely it is proper to create and in this verie point Saint Paul saith that all authoritie is the ordinance and institution of God Neither needeth it to trouble vs that Saint Peter should so generally inioine vs to be obedient to all men no more then it troubled the Apostles when Christ commanded them to preach to all creatures according to which commission Saint Paul did testifie that the Gospell had beene preached to euerie creature vnder heauen but Saint Peter doth specifie his generall speech and restraine his meaning to kings and gouernours in which sense Saint Ambrose citeth this place as it followeth Bee subiect to your Lords vvhether it bee to the king as to the most excellent c. This interpretatiō not only not relieuing you but discouering very plainly either the weaknesse or corruption of your iudgement it resteth vpon your bare word that kings haue receiued their first authoritie from the people which although I could denie with as great both countenance facilitie as you affirme yet will I further charge vpon you with strength of proofe Presently after the inundation of the world we find no mention of politike gouernement but onely of oeconomical according as men were sorted in families for so Moses hath written that of the progenie of Iapheth the Iles of the Gentiles were deuided after their families The first who established gouernment ouer manie families was Nimrod the sonne of Cush accounted by Saint Chrysostome the first King which authoritie hee did not obtaine by fauour and election of anie people but by plaine purchase of his power Heereupon Moses calleth him a mightie Hunter which is a forme of speech among the Hebrues whereby they signifie a spoiler or oppresser And this doth also appeare by the etymologie of his name for Nimrod signifieth a rebell a transgressour and as some interpret it a terrible Lord and names were not imposed in auncient times by chance or at aduenture as Plato one of natures chiefe secretaries and among the Latin writers Aul. Gellius doe affirme Many hold opiniō that this Nimrod was the same whom the Grecians cal Ninus which seemeth to be confirmed by that which Moses saith that hee did build the Citie of Niniue Of this Ninus Iustine writeth that he was the first who held that which hee did subdue others satisfied with victorie aspired not to beare rule Nimrod foūded the empire of the Assyrians which continued by succession in his posterity
in shew then in deede this shew began also to end when by the law Valeria L. Sylla was established dictator for foure and twentie yeares After this the empire did mightely encrease vntil the reigne of Traian◠at which time all authors agree that it was most large and yet far short of your wandring suruey not halfe fifteene thousand miles in compasse In your example of Caesar I neuer saw more vntruthes crowded together in fewer words you say he brake all lawes both humane and deuine that is one his greatest enemies did giue of him a most honorable testimonie You say he tooke all gouernment into his hands alone that is two the people by the law Seruia elected him perpetual dictator You make his death to be an act of the state that is three for they who slew him were both declared pursued by decree of the state for publicke enemies of whom not any one either died a naturall death or liued three yeeres after it was further decreed that the court where he was slaine should be stopped vp that the Ides of March should be called parricidium that the Senate should neuer be assembled vpon that day You say that Augustus was preferred in his place that is foure and all within the compasse of sixe lines Augustus was neuer chosen dictator Suetonius writeth that hee entreated the people vpon his knee not to charge him with that office But Augustus Antonius and Lepidus did first knit in armes by the name of Triumuiri to reuenge the death of Iulius Caesar whervpon a long cruell and doubtfull warre was set vp which continued the space of xx yeers first betweene these three and the murtherers of Caesar then betweene Lepidus and the other two lastly betweene Augustus Antonius and this was the sweet successe of the murther of Caesar. Augustus after his victorie was made perpetuall tribune as Suetonius hath written Dio. saith that he was freed from the power of the lawes as Pompeie also had beene before him Tacitus addeth that the people hauing their hearts broken with broiles permitted him to rise into rule and to draw by degrees the whole authoritie of the state into his handes And so it seemeth that the royall law was not yet established by which the people gaue ouer their power in gouernment wherevpon some make good the sentence which the Senate gaue against Nere because the soueraigntie was not then by any expresse act setled in the Emperour But where you bring the succession of Vespasian as a good successe of this sentence against Nero it is a vvilde and witlesse vntruth Galba succeeded next after Nero who was slaine in a sedition raised by Otho Otho againe was ouercome in field by Vitellius whervpon hee slue himselfe Lastly Vitellius was ouerthrowne and slaine by the Captaines of Vespasian who was the fourth Emperour after Nero. These intestine warres these open battailes fought to the full this slaughter of Emperours which you terme interludes vvere the immediate successe after the death of Nero. You furies of hell whose voices are lightening and thunder vvhose breathing is nothing but sword fire rages and rebellions the encountring of armies the butcherie of millions of men the massacre of princes you accompt enterludes These are your pleasures these your recreations I hope all christian common vvealthes vvill beare an eye ouer your inclination and keepe out both your persons and perswasions from turning their state into an open stage for the acting of these enterludes You continue your base bouldnesse in affirming that the senate procured the death of Domitian that they requested the soldiers to kil Heliogabalus that they inuited Constantine to come doe iustice vpon Maxentius this broken kinde of disguising is familiar vnto you to make such violencies as haue often preuailed against excellēt princes to seeme to be the act of the vvhole state And vvheras you bring the succession of Alexander Seuerus for a good successe of the murther of Heliogabalus being the rarest prince you say that euer the Romanes had you might haue alleaged any author in proofe thereof better then Herodian vvho vvriteth of him in this manner Alexander did beare the name and ensignes of the empire but the administration of affaires gouernment of the state did rest vpon wemen And further he vvriteth that by his slacknesse and cowardice the Romane Armie vvas defeated by the Persians finally that for his vvant of courage he vvas slaine by his owne soldiers By this vve may see that you goe blindfold being so far from caring that many times you scarce know vvhat you vvright Your markable example as you terme it of the change o◠the empire frō the west to the east frō Cōstantin the sixt to Charles king of France doth mark out nothing more vnto vs then your foūdred iudgemēt The questiō is not what one forren prince may do against another but what subiects may do against their soueraign this is the point of cōtrouersie heete you must cloase and not trauerse about in discourses impertinent The change of the kingdome of France from Childeric to Pepin your owne authour Girard affirmeth to be both an ambitious fraudulēt vsurpation wherin Pepin vsed the reuerēce of religiō as a mantle to couer his impietie rebelliō The matters which he obiected against Childeric were two first his insufficiēcie the ordinarie pretence of most rebellions but Girard saith that the auncient custome of the French was to loue honor their kings whether sufficient or vnable worthie or weake that the name of king vvas esteemed sacred by whomsoeuer it was borne Secondly he obiected that his subiects were condicionally sworne vnto him this also Girard writeth to be a forced and cautelous interpretation violently streining the words of their oath to his aduantage and in deede if the oath of the people had ben conditionall vvhat needed they to procure a dispensation for the same This vvas the first act saith he wherby the popes tooke occasion to set in their foot of authoritie for transporting of kingdoms from one race to another which growing to strength hath filled all christian countries with confusion and tumult Likewise the change of that kingdome from the line of Pepin to the line of Capet vvas a meere violence intrusion so vvas it acknowledged by Eudes earle of Paris the first of that family vvho did vsurp for that cause he was constreined after two yeares reigne to quit the crowne to giue place vnto Charles the lawfull heire And vvhen Robert brother vnto Eudes did enter into armes to recouer that vvhich his brother once held he vvas beaten downe and slaine by the faithfull subiects of king Charles Hugh the sonne of Robert nourished this ambition But Hugh Capet his sonne vvith better both opportunitie successe but no better right did accomplish the enterprise For Girard calleth him an vsurper Charles duke of Lorrane the
he doth not condition or restraine himselfe but maketh an honorable promise of indeuour to discharge his dutie being tyed thereby to no sâ—anter scope then he was before The reason hereof is Quia expressio eius quod tacitè inest nihil operatur The expressing of that which is secretly vnderstood worketh nothing Againe when the promise is not annexed to the authoritie but voluntarily and freely made by the Prince his estate is not thereby made conditionall For the interpreters of the Ciuill lawe do consent in this rule Pacta conuenta quae contractibus non insunt non formant actionem Couenants which are not inherent in contracts do not forme an action And therefore although by all lawes both of conscience and state a Prince is bound to performe his promise because as the Maister of sentences saith God himself will stand obliged to his word yet is not the authoritie but the person of the Prince hereby affected the person is both tyed and touched in honour the authoritie ceasseth not if performances do faile Of this sort was that which you report of Traian who in deliuering the sword to his gouernors would say If I raigne iustly then vse it for me if otherwise then vse it against me but where you adde that these are the very same words in effect which Princes do vse at their coronations pardon me for it is fit I should be mooued you will find it to bee a very base 〈◊〉 lye Of this nature was that also which the same Traian did to encourage his subiects to do the like in taking an oath to obserue the lawes which Pliny the younger did account so strange as the like before had not bene seene But afterward Theodoric did follow that fact whereupon Cassiodorus saith Ecce Traiani nostri clarum seculis reparamus exemplum iurat vobis per quem iuratis We repaire the famous example of Traian he sweareth to you by whome you sweare So when king Henry the fifth was accepted for successour to the crowne of Fraunce he made promise to maintaine the Parliament in the liberties thereof And likewise diuers Princes do giue their faith to mainetaine the priuiledges of the Church and not to change the lawes of the Realme which oath is interpreted by Baldus Panormitane and Alexander to extend no further then when the lawes shall be both profitable and iust because Iustice and the common benefit of subiects is the principal point both of the oath and dutie of a Prince whereto all other clauses must be referred And now to your examples First because in all the ranke of the Hebrew kings you cannot find either condition or oath not in the auncient Empires and kingdomes of the world not vsually in the â—lourishing time of the Romaine state both vnder heathen and christian Emperors because these times are too pure for your purpose you fumble foorth a dull coniecture That forsomuch as the first kings were elected by the people it is like that they did it vpon conditions and assurances for themselues That the first kings receiued not their authoritie from the people I haue manifested before and yet your inference hereupon is no other then if you should sue in some Court for a legacie alleadging nothing for your intent but that it is like the Testator shold leaue you something in which case it is like I suppose that your plea wold be answered with a silent scorne After a few loose speeches which no man would stoupe to gather together you bring in the example of Anastasius the first Emperour of Constantinople of whom the Patriarch Euphemius required before his coronation a confessioÌ„ of the faith in writing wherin he should promise to innouate nothing And further he promised to take away certaine oppressions and to giue offices without mony Let vs take things as they are and not speake vpon idle imagination but agreeable to sence what either condition or restraint do you find in these words Condition they do not forme because in case of failance they do not make the authoritie void neither do they make restraint because they containe no point whereunto the lawe of God did not restraine him All this he was bound to performe without an oath and if he were a thousand times sworne he was no more but bound to perform it eueÌ„ as if a father should giue his word to cloath and feede his child or the husband to loue his wife or any man to discharge that dutie which God and Nature doth require It is true that Anastasius was both a wicked man and iustly punished by God for the breach of his faith but his subiects did neuer challenge to be free therefore from their alleageance The same aunswere may be giuen to the promise which Michael the first gaue to Nicephorus the Patriarch That he would not violate the Ordinances of the Church nor embrue his hands with innocent bloud especially if you take the word Ordinances for matters necessarie to be beleeued but if you take it in a larger sence then haue I also declared in the beginning of this chapter how farre the promise doth extend Your next example is of the Empire of Almaine from whence all that you obiect doth fall within this circle After the death of Charles the Great the empire was held by right of succession vntill his line was determined in Conrade the first After whose death it became came electiue first in Henry duke of Saxony then in Otho his son and afterwards in the rest from whom notwithstanding no other promise was wrested but the discharge of that dutie which they were enformed or rather threatned that God wold seuerely exact at their hands But as in all electiue States it vsually hapneth at euery new change and choise the Emperor was deplumed of some of his feathers vntill in the end he was made naked of authoritie the Princes hauing drawne all power to themselues So by degrees the Empire was changed from a Monarchie to a pure aristocracie the Emperour bearing the title thereof but the maiestie and puissance remaining in the States During which weaknesse of the Emperour some points were added to his oath which seemed to derogate from the soueraigntie of his estate But what is this to those Princes who haue retained their dignitie without any diminution either of authoritie or of honour The like may be said of Polonia which not many hundred yeares since was erected into a kingdome and although the States did challenge therein a right of election yet did it alwaies passe according to propinquitie of bloud and was esteemed a soueraigne Monarchie vntill after the death of Casimire the Great when Lodonicus his Nephew King of Hungarie rather greedie then desirous to be king also of Polonia did much abase the Maiestie thereof Yet falling aâ—terward into the line of Iagello who maried one of the daughters of Lodowicke it recouered the auncient both dignitie and strength But when
that line also failed in Sigismond Augustus the last male of that Familie the States elected Henry Duke of Anjowe for their King with this clause irritant That if hee did violate any point of his oath the people should owe him no alleageance But whereas you report this as the vsuall oath of the Kinges of Polonia you deserue to heare the plainest tearme of vntruth In the kingdome of Spaine you distinguish two times one before the conquest thereof by the Moores the other after it was recouered againe by the Christians I acknowledge a difference in these two times for that in the one the right of the kingdome was electiue in the other it hath alwaies remained successiue insomuch as Peter Belluga a diligent writer of the rights of Arragon doth affirme that the people haue no power in election of the king except in case the line should faile Concerning the matter in controuersie you affirme that the kings did sweare the same points in effect which before haue bene mentioned This wee must take vpon your forfeited faith for you alleadge no forme of oath onely you write that the fourth nationall Councell of Toledo with all humilitie conuenient did require that the present king and all other that should follow would be meeke and moderate towardes their subiects and gouerne them with iustice and not giue sentence in causes capitall without assistance declaring further that if any of them should exercise cruell and proude authoritie 〈◊〉 they were condemned by Christ with the sentence of Excommunication and separated to euerlasting iudgement But what pang hath possessed your dreaming braines to tearme this by a marginall note Conditions of raigning in Spaine being no other then a reuerent and graue admonition of the dutie of a king with a feareful declaration of the iudgment of God against wicked Princes And that which was afterward decreed in the sixt Councell of Toledo That the king should sweare not to suffer any man to breake the Catholike faith because it is a principall point of his dutie his estate was not thereby made conditionall The rest of this passage you fill vppe with froath of the antiquated lawe of Don Pelayo prescribing a forme of inaugurating the Kinges of Spaine whereof there is not one point either now in vse or pertaining to the purpose So miserable is your case that you can write nothing therein but that which is either impertinent or vntrue For Fraunce your first example is taken from the coronation of Philip the first wherein you note that king Henrie his father requested the people to sweare obedience to his sonne inferring thereby that a coronation requireth a new consent which includeth a certaine election of the subiects But this is so light that the least breath is sufficient to disperse it Philip was crowned king during the life of his father which action as it was not ordinarie so was it of such both difficultie and weight that it could not be effected without assemblie and consent of the States The oath which he made is in this forme extant in the Librarie of Rheimes I do promise before God and his Saints that I will conserue to euery one committed vnto me canonicall priuiledge due Law Iustice and wil defend thē by the helpe of God so much as shall lye in my power as a king by right ought to do within his Realme to euery Bishop and to the Church cōmitted to him and further to the people cōmitted to my charge I wil grant by my authority the dispensatiō of laws according to right Ad to this a more anciēt form of the oth of those kings which it seemeth you haue not seene I sweare in the name of God Almighty promise to gouerne well duly the subiects cōmitted to my charge to do with all my power iudgement iustice and mercy Ad also the oath which you alleage of Philip the 2. surnamed Augustus To maintaine all canonicall priuileges law Iustice due to euery mā to the vttermost of his power to defēd his subiects as a good king is bound to do to procure that they be kept in the vniō of the Church to defend thē frō al excesse rapine extortion iniquity to take order that Iustice be kept with equity mercy to endeuor to expell heretiks What doth all this rise vnto but a princely promise to discharge honorably and truly those points of duty which the laws of God did lay vpō thē What other cōditions or restraints are imposed what other cōtract is hereby made where are the protestations which in the end of the last chap. you promised to shew that if the Prince do faile in his promise the subiects are free frō their allegeāce what clause do you find sounding to that sense But you litle regard any thing that you say you easily remēber to forget your word Wel thē we must put these your vaine speeches into the reckning of mony accōpted but not receiued and seeing you cannot shew vs that the kings of France and of Spaine are tied to any condition whereto the law of God doth not bind thē I will not vary frō the iudgemēt of Ordradus in affirming thē to be absolute kings I haue pressed this point the rather in this place because you write that most neighbour nations haue takē the forme of annointing crowning their kings from the anciēt custome of France although the substāce be deduced from the first kings of the Hebrews as appeareth by the annointing of king Saule whereof Dauid you say made great accompt notwithstanding that Saule had bene reiected by God and that himselfe had lawfully borne armes against him Out Atheist you would be dawbed with dung haue the most vile filth of your stewes cast in your face Did Dauid beare armes against his annointed king did he euer lift vp his eye-lids against him did he euer so much as defend himselfe otherwise then by flight It is certaine that Shemei did not halfe so cruelly either curse or reuile this holy man who did so much both by speech and action detest this fact that he would rather haue endured ten thousand deaths then to haue defiled his soule with so damnable a thought What then shall we say vnto you who to set vp sedition and tumult abuse all diuine humane wrightings in whatsoeuer you beleeue will aduance your purpose who spend some speech of respect vnto kings for allurement onely to draw vs more deepe into your deceit Shall we giue any further eare to your doctrine both blasphemous and bloudy We will heare you to the end and I deceiue my selfe but your owne tale shall in any moderate iudgement condemne the authoritie of your opinions for euer Let vs come then to your last example which is neither the last nor the least whereat you leuell And that is of England which of all other kingdomes you say hath most particularly taken this ceremony of Sacring and