contrarie Thus saith the king the priest and the Bishop shal haue the gouernment of such things as appertaine to God. Ergo the Prince that thus appointeth him thereto hath an other supreme gouernment of appointing and ouerseing euen the priests gouernment Doth not the King appoint the one to his office so well as he appointed the other are not both gouerned in their offices vnder him Yet say you ouer gods matters is the priest not as the kings commissioner but as the priests were after the example of Moses The Bishop refuseth not the example of Moses but alleaged euen the same and your selfe then refused that example saying he had such prerogatiues that he of all other could not be alleaged for exaÌ„ple bicause of his especial priuilege And now contrary to your former sayings you say the priests were not as the Kings coÌ„missioners but were alwaies after the example of Moses But go to be it so how doth this helpe your matter or not rather quite confute it In Moses time Aaron and after him Eleazar were the chiefe priestes ouer gods matters vnder whome were the other Priestes and Leuites But all of them yea Aaron and Eleazar so wel as the rest were vnder the supreme gouernement in ecclesiasticall causes so well as temporall of their Prince and ruler Moses Ergo If Moses be an example how the priestes should alwayes gouerne vnder Gods matters then muste their gouernment be alwayes vnder the princes supreme gouernment to ouersée order and direct them as Moses did And where ye say the Priest here was not the Princes commissioner in these matters the very text is most playn to the contrarie I stande not on the worde least I should minister to you occasion of wrangling with me as ye do with the byshop but goe to the matter What call ye him that the Prince sendeth foorth in a commission committing a charge vnto him call ye him not a commissioner and his commissioner that so sendeth him in commission did not Iosaphat so sende about his priestes and Leuites on this commission that they shoulde teache and set foorth euery where the worde of God Tertio annâ—… regni sui misit c. in the thirde yere of his raigne he sent out certayne of hys princes Benail and Obdias and Zacharias and Nathaniel and Micheas that they should teache in the cities of Iuda and with them the Leuites Semeiah Nethamah Zebediah and Asahel and Semiramoth and Ionathas and Adonias and Thobias and Tob Adoniah Leuites and with them Elizama and Ioram Priests And they taught the people in Iuda hauing with them the booke of the lawe of the Lord and they went about throughout all the cities of Iuda and taught the people Were they not héere sent in this commission thus to do froÌ„ the king Their doctrine was not the kings but Gods commission the Lords booke but this their maner of traueling in setting it foorth was the kings commission And they so wel the Priests and Leuites as the Princes were bothe of them the kings commissioners In lyke case the Quéenes maiesty sendeth out hir godly learned commissioners sendeth by them the worde of God Gods booke and truthe to be set foorth The truth thus set foorth hath not his authoritie from hir coÌ„mission nor the preachers to preach only by hir outward commission but they haue another inward coÌ„mission from God and are Gods commissioners by the calling ministerie of their office Howbeit in this outward maner of visitation setting it foorth in this sorte of traueling about hir highnesse townes and cities reforming abuses directing all eccl. causes they are therin euen aswell the Quéenes coÌ„missioners as those priests Leuites in al their reformatioÌ„ of religion were coÌ„missioners from king Iosaphat And thus euery thing in the ende is moste euident agaynst you But yet ye blunder still on in your owne conceite and thinke ye haue héere gotten a wonderfull strong argument And marke well M. Horne this poynt say you Zabadias is set ouer suche workes as belong to the kinges office But suche workes are no maner thing perteyning to the seruice of God for ouer them Amarias the Priest is President Ergo the kinges office consisteth not about thinges perteyning to God but is a distinct function concerning the common weale Ergo if the king intermeddle in Gods matters especially if he take vpon him the supreme gouernement thereof euen ouer the priests theÌ„ selues to whom the charge is committed he passeth the bouÌ„des of his office he breaketh the order appoynted by God and is become an open enemie to Gods holy ordinance Your crakes and reuilings that ye powder your argument with I remitte to their proper common places to the argument I aunswere If it be marked well as ye would haue it saying Marke well this poynte M. Horne First the marker shall finde it neither in any moode nor figure Secondly the marker shall finde an Equiuocation in these words workes kinges office pertayning to Gods seruice Which words béeing diuerfly vnderstoode in either proposition Thirdly make a paralogisme of foure termes Fourthly in these words ye make a Fallation a secundum quid ad simpliciter Lyra liuiteth theâ—…e words super ea operaerit quae ad regis officium pertinent He shall be ouer those workes that perteyne to the kings office onely to the ayding and strengthening the Priests and the Leuites by the temporall sworde to punishe the disobediente But is there no other works of the Kings office besides this Uatablus vnder standeth it that as the priest medled with the weightie causes at Ierusalem so also the Leuites shoulde be ouer the lesser causes Causae CiutuÌ„ cognoscebontur à Leuitis causaeauteÌ„ Regtae à Zabaudiâ—… The causes or controuersies perteyning to the citizens should be herd of the Leuites and the causes and controuersies perteyning to the King should be herd of Zabaudias Neither of these vnderstande these words so generally of al the doings belonging in any wise to the office of a king In lyke case for the priestes gouernment in suche thinges as belong to God Id est sayth Uatablus quod pertinet ad rem diuinam To wite so farre as perteyneth to the diuine seruice or the dyuine administration And you wrest it to be vnderstoode simply for all ecclesiasticall matters and all causes of religion Besides that Fifthly ye reason styll after youre wonted fashion from the distinction of the thynges and vvorkes of eithers perticuler functions to the taking away of the Princes supreme gouernement ouer those distincte workes and functions Howe dothe this argument followe The king appoyntes one ouer Gods workes and another distinct from him ouer his owne workes Ergo the king hath not a supreme gouernement ouer them both to ouersée theÌ„ to do those works Your conclusions therfore last of all are faultie neither directly following vpon your premisses and comprehending much more then they inferre This part of your conclusion that
vvith all eloquence and learning he set foorth against Horne the false Bishop of VVinchester So stornfully this rayling Papiste speaketh of the Bishop and so he braggeth of his fellowes lerning and eloquence All whiche considered I thought it necessarie and more than high tyme to answer these proude Phariseis least the goodnesse of the cause should become distrusted the truth suspected the Prince slaundered the Bishop defaced the enimie encouraged the godlie offended the simple abused and the whole estate euill spoken of by too muche vnfrutefull silence and ouerlong suffrance of such false and glorious pratlers And although for these causes I was the willinger to sette it foorth yet was I the more emboldned on the request of diuerse that hearing I had trauailed in it by their godlie persuasions vrged me the more thereto The chiefe of the Argument consisteth on the Supreme gouernement of Christian Princes in causes Ecclesiasticall The occasion sprang of a controuersie betweene the Bishop of Winchester and master FeckenhaÌ„ about the Oth of the Supremacie All which is extant abroade in a learned and pithie booke of the Bishops answering to maister Feckenhams scruples The issue they draue the matter vnto was this that maister Feckenham must be resolued for the Princes Supreme Gouernement in Ecclesiasticall causes by any of these foure meanes the Scripture the Doctours the Councels or the Practise The Bishop accepteth the offer and maketh proofe of the Princes Supreme gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes not onely by any one but by euery one of all these forsayd poyntes as the Bishops booke is euident to testifie Maister Feckenham that had made his promise to take the Oth vponany of these proues and seing them all beyond his cunning and expectation proued but neither mynding to keepe touche nor able to answere suborneth a chapman from beyond the seas to wit this Louanist maister Stapleton if he may be called Maister for order of schole degree that is suche a renegate from God and runnagate from his Prince who to saue maister Feckenhams honestie if he woulde aduenture to relieue his cause master Feckenham should to saue his credite vouchesafe to relieue his neede Master Stapleton hauing better furniture of sale eloquence than store of grounded learning and yet more learning than grace well to imploy it in acknowledging the manyfest truth taketh vpon him to aunswere the Bishop and deuides all the matter into foure Bookes whereof this is the fyrst that here is answered This doone he conceiueth suche apride of this his exquisite piece of worke that we must needes haue some fyne new name for this fyne newe booke singular heads ye know must haue singular inuentions and bicause the Bishops name is M. Horne he entitleth his worke forsooth a Counterblast And yet somwhat truer than he himselfe wist beeing in deed a blast scarce worth a Counter if the reader well examine it And that ye maye the better perceiue this volume deserues so rare a name for these two rare gifts eloquence and learning for which maister Sanders so highly extolleth him Mulus mulum scabit And sith these two champions beare now the bell for eloquence among the Papists the one for English the other for Latine I haue sorted maister Stapletons eloquence by it self consisting on certain CoÌ„mon places folowing that we may the easier iudge of the substance of his learning whiche otherwise we should not so well discerne it is so poudred with his eloquence His eloquence I confesse I haue sayde but little vnto nor can say muche nor would say ought vnto it as one that neuer was trained vp in the scholes and arte therof As for maister Stapleton goeth beyond maister Saunders and withoute all comparison is an A perse Doctor in it and therfore I set it asyde the better to viewe the learning to the whiche I had more especiall regarde for when all is done the Eloquence settes it out but the Learning proues the matter And though it be not replyed vpon with suche learning as many other better coulde that rather shoulde haue doone it yet haue I endeuored truly simply and playnely to answere it and I hope to the coÌ„tentation of the modest Reader that rather respecteth the boulâ—…ing out of the truthe the staye of his conscience and the glorie of God than either the estimation of learning or the shewe of eloquence Nowe although the Supremacie be the principall matter yet the importunitie of maister Stapleton hath once or twice caried me perforce away with him to purge our selues of certain auncient Herekes that he layeth to our charge and crieth so faste vpon vs for answere and sayeth we styll slinke from it as though we hearde it not and therefore I haue here at large made aunswere to it which makes the volume aryse the bigger In somuche that I thought for all maister Stapletons exclamations to haue lefte it out or put it in one of his Common places But that Maister Saunders commeth rufflyng in wyth the like argument and therefore I lette it stande as it did And I truste I haue cleerely disburdened vs and iustly burdened them therewyth tyll they shall be hable to discharge themselues therof I desyre good Reader but euen indifferencie in thy iudgement Last of all since Master Sanders hath compiled his great volume of the Popes Uisible Monarchie in the secoÌ„d book wherof he entreth into this argumeÌ„t of the Princes Supremacie I haue chosen out of the second booke 4. chapters of the state of the Ciuil and Ecclesiastical power in the Original in the Use and End of both of the Interest and superioritie of either state chiefly of that he would not only defeate the Prince of all gouernment in matters Ecclesiasticall but also clean dispossesse hir Maiestie of hir Crowne For maister Saunders to mayntein the trecherous fact of Pâ—…us the fift the last Pope if Cardinal Bon Compagnion Pope Good fellowe as the talke wente be not deade woulde proue that Bishops may depose their Princes and assoyle their subiectes from their allegeance Whiche poyntes as they draw nerest to the present argument and in deed are for learning suche learning as it is the principall pointes of all his volume I thought good to ioyâ—… them vnto Stapleton and so in one answer answere both though both be answered seuerally as they drawe neere or farre in resemblance or varietie of Argument example or similitude aboute this matter Wherein what is doone I committe vnto thee good Christian Reader to iudge as God shall moue thy heart and besecche thou him to moue it to the best That the truth may appeare that the falshode may be detected that thou mayst be edified that the Prince may be obeyed that the Gospel maye be prospered and that God aboue al things may be glorified nowe and for euer Amen Master Stapletons common places THat all master Stapletons whole volume as well therein himselfe termeth it a Counterblast is indéede but a verie blast blowne out to encounter the
Princes that they mislyke and is in déede to be vtterly mislyked of all Christians But as this is a plaine description of your Popes supremacie that playeth in all these poynts Heraclius part so it nothing toucheth that supremacie that the Quéenes maiestie claymeth It is but your wicked malice to slaunder hir with such tyrannicall vsurpation of Heraclius as they condemne Whie doe ye not rather take theyr other comparison from Constantinus Pogonotus to al other godly Princes and referre that to hir regiment With what care and singuler diligence trauaile and godlinesse when the Churches were horibly deformed and torne by the sect of the Monothelites He summoned the sixt generall Councell he ouerwhelmed not the debating of the controuersie of doctrine by might or preiudice He willed the Ministers of the Churche and preachers of the worde of God to searche out which opinion was and which was not agreable to holye writte He regarded not the ensamples of hys auncesters who by publike Edictes had approued the doctrine of the Monothelites which was harde for him to abolishe Neyther did the authoritie of the Patriarches and Bishoppes in Constantinople and all ouer the East that stifly helde that opinion any thing moue him Nor he suffred himselfe to be made afrayde although he heard that the pryde of the Byshop of Rome was incredible as one that wickedly chalenged a dignitie and authoritie aboue other Bishops and teachers But sent his letters to him exhorting him to come or sende some other in his place Neyther gaue he him any prerogatiue nor craueth licence of hym to call the Councell but of hys owne duetie he defineth him selfe for the appoynting of the Councell He louingly biddeth the Romaine and other Bishoppes not to bee absent at so necessarie matters and concerning the Churches publike weale The Emperour himselfe is present at the Synode not as a dumbe or deafe person like a cifer in Algorisme or receyuing the decrees without iudging of them or placing the B. of Romes Legates in the chiefest place and receyuing them without all contradiction as oracles from them as it were from Apollos triuet but modestly reuerently and godly as much as became his calling he gouerned the Synode propounding to them the state or scope of the cause and enquiring on a rowe gathered their sentences togither least ought should be done rashly or confusedly He commaunded not the one partie but the contrarie partie also plainly and without subtilties to declare their opinions and what groundes they had of their sentences out of the holye scriptures and what autenticall witnesse of the approued fathers And so forth they declare howe indifferently he dealt with either partie knowing that he must not condemne any before he knewe the full matter And when it was euidently found out that the Monothelites could not defend their opinion by the clere testimonies of the scripture nor any sentences of the doctours allowed yea when it was founde out they hacked of purpose certaine of the Doctours sayings and in place of them cited certeyne sayings falsly fathered in the Doctors names theÌ„ the Emperor subscribed to the iudgemeÌ„t of al those that thought aright and earnestly and stoutly executed the condemnation made in the name of them all Here these wryters commend this Emperor the more for that he had about him no doubt say they such parasites as woulde tickle in his eare that these thinges were vnsitting foâ—… his maiestie to intermeddle him selfe with the brawles of the Churches pelting Doctours It were a blemish to him to condemne his ancesters to cal into doubt or retract things already decreed This were not the safest way Let the bishops alone with the matter for euen they are able to make lawes agaynst the Emperors estate and abase it The Emperour by his authoritie may do no more than commaund silence sende into exile or punish with other violence those that make clamors or disobey the councels decree But the Emperor not regarding these fancies thought it honorable to him to be present in the midst of the teachers of gods worde assisting not a little the triall and iudgement of the coÌ„trouersie This ensample these wryters thus set out for a princes gouernmeÌ„t dealing ouersight in the chiefest ecclesiastical causes And thus before they determined in generall that God or deined not Princes to spoile their subiects and make themselues â—…at Neither onely to attende to outward discipline and that men may liue in honest tranquilitie for say they seing that magistrates are in the scriptures called Gods this ought to bee their first and chiefest care that their subiects serue God after such a sorte that his kingdome in their dominions may bee knowne encreased and conserued that is to were sincere doctrine c. may be deliuered remaine passe froÌ„ theÌ„ to their posteritie To this end tendeth all politike administration all defence of peace and neighborhod that laborsome care of getting the liuing gathering goodes that these spirituall euerlasting goodes both of the body of the mind should be gotten Thus do they stretch out further than doth M. St. the bounds of a princes gouernment to al ecclesiastical canses And all that they write on the other part is against such a popish supremacie as establisheth maketh a new religioÌ„ quicquid imperitaâ—…erit reâ—… And yet sée howe spitefully and falsly M. St. wresteth it as writteÌ„ against the Q. maiestie When as he confesseth himselfe they coÌ„mend hir euen by the ensample of Constantine they allow that supreme gouernment that she doth take vpon hir Now M. St. after his maner presupposing we will reiect these writers as though they spake against the supreme gouernmeÌ„t of the Quéene In case ye thinke sayth he theyr testimonie not to haue weight ynough then herken to your their Apostle Luther who writeth that it is not the office of kings princes to coÌ„firm no not the true doctrine but to be subiect and serue the same The effect of this argument is this princes must not take on them so to confirme the true doctrine that they be not subiect therevnto nor serue but rule the same Ergo Princes may not set forth the true doctrine nor be supreme gouernors in their dominions ouer all ecclesiastical persons and causes This argument is like to his fellowe aboue And as ye wrested the former writers so wrest ye Luthers saying also whose seÌ„tence as it is nothing against the godly gouernment of our most noble soueraigne subiect to the principall authoritie of Gods word that it might be of chiefest authoritie subduing thereto the authoritie of all other writers remouing those superstitions that exalted them selues in authoritie equall or aboue Gods worde so this sentence is eftsones as the other agaynst such vsurpation as is euident that your Pope taketh vpon him But M. Stapleton dreaming that he hath so sore pressed vs and this is so harde and straunge a case that
be moued from them And neuer so little a motion for M. Feckenham went not ouer farre I warrant you coulde not be made of mercy and consideration without great displeasure taken Ye haue well described the state of your Popes raigne M. Stap. so vnmercyfull an estate and inconsiderate that for description thereof ye doe best as dyd Timantes when he paynted the mourners at the sacrifice of Iphigenia setting out one wéeping another with this another with that heauie visage when he could not deuise a more dolâ—…rous couÌ„tenance he paynted Agamemnon hiding his face with a kerchiefe so you wheÌ„ ye can not sufficiently set foorth those dolefull tymes ye do wisely in that ye omit to expresse them and therein ye expresse them most of all And woulde ye haue lyke mercy and consideration sheshed nowe to the Papistes as the Papistes shewed then to the Protestantes Alas master Stap. if but halfe a quarter of suche extremitie were shewed nowe as was shewed then it woulde goe harder with master Feckenham and other his complices than it dothe No no M. Stap. their chambers their walkes their libertie their ease their fare is nothing like your doÌ„geoÌ„s your stockes your colehouses your famine your racks your gaggs your whipping there rostmeate at a stake that ye gaue the protestants I warrant ye M Fe. lookes not like a ghost nor like a poore scholler of Cambridge or Oxford perchaunce fares better than some studeÌ„ts of diuinitie in Louayne It is easy to discernâ—… M. St. what spirite either religion is of the protestants and the papists euen by this your own note of vnmercifulnesse and mercy and now saith M. St. let vs proceede on to the residue of your booke The fifth Diuision THe Bishop of Winchester after he hath shewed on M. Feckenhams wordes the entent of the Othe and the entent of M. Feckenh booke to be contrarie and therefore what soeuer he offreth in wordes he denieth the same in déedes and in the beginning for ensample dalieth with the Oth about dominions persons thinking therby he escapeth the principall ende of the Othe in this diuision sheweth first how doublie he dealeth in pretending as though the Bishop had forced him to sweare but there was no such Othe offred or required betwéene them â—…rgo A man might well marâ—…aile that he shamed not to pretende such a lie Secondly the Bishop sheweth how M. Feckenham is taken in his owne daliaâ—…ce The Bishops reason is this In that ye graunt to her Highnesse the onely supreme rule ouer the Laye and Ecclesiasticall persons you haue all ready proued withall the causes also euenby a supreme gouernors definition A supreme gouernour or ruler is one who hath to ouerseâ—… guide care prouide order and directe the thinges vnder his gouernment rule to that ende and in those actions which are appointed properly belong to the subiect or thing gouerned But the Queenes Highnesse is by your own coÌ„fession the only supreme gouernour ouer al manner persons Ecclesiasticall c. Ergo Hir highnes hath to ouersee guide care prouide order and direct to that ende and in those actions which are appointed do properly belong to persons Ecclesiasticall And thus concludeth that M. Feckenham grauÌ„ting thus much for fashion sake in generall speache is but a dissembler and in déede denieth the obedience of the person also or els he péeuishly standeth on the distinction of the cause which in full effect he hath graunted alreadie To the first parte M. Stapleton answereth Here is first a worshipfull reason and cause to meruaile at M. Feckenham that he should by writing presently offer him selfe to receyue an Othe bicause he neuer made mention of any suche othe before neither any suche was at any time of him required surely this is as great a cause to wonder as to see a goose go barefoote Ye plainly falsifie the Bishops woordes M. Stapl â–ª he said not that M. Feckenham neuer made mencion of any suche othe before but he saide that he neuer made any motion of such an offer to him So that this declareth both a double dealing of him also a wresting of you But this in eyther of you muste not be wondered at as a rare dealing that in lying and wresting ye be shamelesse bicause it is as common to you as to sée a goose go barefoote and as rare as to heare a barefoote Foxe preach to shod géese in Louaine Secondly to the Bishops argument he saithe But now will he play the worthy Logitian and M. Feckenham will he nill he shal be driuen by fine force of a Logicall definition to graunt the Queene to be supreme head in all causes Ecclesiasticall for that he graunteth hir to be supreme head of all persons both Ecclesiastical and Temporal Bicause saith he the supreme gouernour or ruler is he that ordereth and directeth all actioÌ„s belonging and appointed to the subiectes and thereby enferreth that the Queenes Maiestie is supreme and onely gouernour eueÌ„ in those actions that belong to Ecclesiasticall persons which are causes Ecclesiasticall But as good skill as this man hath in Logike which is correspondent to his diuinitie he hath brought vs forth a faultie and a vitiouse definition For a supreme gouernour is he that hath the chiefe gouernment of the thing gouerned not in those actions that may any way properly belong to the subiect or thing gouerned as M. Horne saithe but in those actions that belong to the ende whereunto the gouernour tendeth VVhich may well be although he haue not the chiefe gouernment in all the actions of the thing gouerned but in such actions as properly appertaine to him as a subiect to that gouernour Although M. Stapl. arguments hitherto haue shewed some tast of his owne great skill in Logike and what a worthie student of Diuinitie he is him selfe the want of which two he vpbraydeth to the Bishop after his prowde scornefull manner yet in this his couÌ„terblast to the Bishops only reason of a supreme gouernours definition he wil further shew what a passing subtile Logitian déepe Deuine he is But alas the mans ill lucke for while he clerkly laboreth striues to bring M. Feckâ—…ham out of the briers he not only wrappeth him the faster in them but so snarleth entangleth him selfe withall that as one all amased he speaketh he wottes not what And goyng about the Bushe wonderfully to worke when he hath all done he hath not onely left the matter where it was against M. Feckenham but hath made it more playne against him selfe also First he reprehendeth the Bishops definition of a gouernour as faultie but his guiltie conscience was so striken that he durst not or he well wist not how to report the definition as it laie but saith that the Bishop defined A supreme gouernour to be one that ordreth and directeth all actions belonging and appoynted to the subiecte Which the B. said not but M. St. who hath altered hacked and
other I build this argument euen according to your owne definition of a supreme gouernour and master Feckenhams offer A supreme gouernour is he say you that hath the chiefe gouernment of the thing gouerned in those actions that belong to the ende wherevnto the gouernor tendeth But the actions of Ecclesiasticall persons ouer whome the Prince is supreme gouernour as master Feckenham hath graunted doe belong properly to the ende wherevnto the Prince tendeth to wete not onelye to mainteyne the common peace and tranquilitie but also to sée that Gods religion and seruice be purely and syncerely had and kept amongst the subiects Ergo In these actions the prince is supreme gouernour and so by consequence in all causes and actions ecclesiasticall To proue the minor first that all the trauayle of all godly Preachers in the worlde is to this ende is playne and manifest That this is also the chiefe ende of the Princes gouernement both your selfe master Stapleten at length haue confessed centrarie to your former heathen limitation and also the verye heathen and prophane wryters themselues so well as Christian haue acknowledged Wherein master Stapleton both sheweth his great follie in reasoning that heathen Princes did not regarde religion Ergo they ought not especially to haue regarded it and also bewrayed his ignorance in the antecedent of this his vaine reason for the heathen though they erred in mistaking religion yet they knewe and taught that it was an especiall care and ende of the Princes gouernment I speake not howe Plato in his bookes de rep legib reckoneth the care of Religion to be a chiefe ende of theyr authoritie And yet will I note two sentences out of Aristotle whome to denie your Sorbonistes make more than petit heresie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sayth he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the other Cityes the sacryfices are left onely to the Kinges And agayne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the Capitaine was â—…oth King and Iudge and Lorde of the deuine matters And to proue this by the storyes of heathen Princes Numa Pompilius hath his chiefest commendation not so muche for making ciuill lawes and pollicies to the Romaynes as for his lawes about theyr religion theyr Priestes theyr Nunnes theyr Sacrifices The Magistrates of Athens did sitte in iudgement and condemned Socrates when Anitus and Melitus accused him for false religion The Romaine Princes them selues woulde labour principally for the office of the chiefe Bishoppe whiche terme Pontifex Maximâ—… the Bishoppe of Rome nowe chalengeth Tiberius promoted to the Senate of Rome as to those that had the care and gouernement of theyr religion that Christ might be accounted among theyr Gods. Yea in the Scripture is declared that Nabuchaâ—…nezar the King of Babylon an Heathen Prince and vtterly destitute of the truthe before God gaue him some sparâ—…kes thereof yet made hée a lawe of worshipping hys owne Image And King Darius of Persia made a decrée that none shoulde worship God in certayne dayes In all which matters although these heathen Princes crred from the truth yet they thought that religion which they mistooke for truth to be a principall part belonging to their gouernment Although therefore master Stapleton ye doe great iniurie to Christian Princes to make their state common with the Paganes yet do you more iniurie herein to them than the heathen did to their heathen princes Was it lawfull for them in their heathen gouernment to haue so especiall a care aboute their heathen and false religion and is it not lawfull for godly Christian Princes to haue the like or more aboute Chrystes true Religion Is the ende of their gouernment common to both alyke as ye say and yet the Heathens stretched further than doeth the Christian Princes Iohannes de Parisus affirmeth that this is a false supposition of yours Master Stapleton Quod potest as regalâ—… c. That the kingly power is corporall and not spirituall That the Kingly power hath the cure of the bodie and and not of the soules Sithe it was ordeyned to the common profite of the Citizens not euery profite but that profite which is to liue according to vertue Herevpon sayth the Philosopher in the Ethikes that the intention of the lawmaker is to make men good and to enduce them to vertue And also in the Politykes he sayth that as the soule is better than the bodie so a lawmaker is better than a Physition bicause the lawmaker hath care for the soules and a Physition for the bodie Nowe as the Philosophers ascribed this ende in the Heathens false religion in vertues of lyfe and care of the soule to the gouernement of Heathen Princes Doth not Saint Paule shewe as muche and more trowe you for the ende of Christian Princes gouernement in these thinges Ut 〈◊〉 tranquillam vitam degamus in omni pietate honestate That we may leade sayth he a quiet and peaceable life in al godlinesse and honestie Was this no further master Stapleton than safetie quietnesse worldly wealth aboundance and prosperous maintenance Did the great Constantine stretche the ende of his gouernment no further when he sayde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 debere ante omnta scopum esse â—…udicaus c. I iudged that this oughte before all other thinges to be my scope that among the most holye multitudes of the Catholike Churche one fayth and syncere charitie and godlinesse agreeing togither towardes almightie God might be conserued Did the whole assemblye of Byshoppes in the first generall Councell at Constantinople limitte no further the endes of Theodosius gouernment when they confessed that God instituit imperiuâ—… Theodosâ—… ad communempacem ecclesiarum sanae fidâ—… confirmationem God did orday ne the gouernement of Theodosius for the common peace of the Churches and the confirmation of the sounde fayth Did Saint Augustine beléeue that Princes gouernement reached no further when he sayde Reges in terris seruiunt Christo faciendo legeâ—… pro Christo Kinges in the earth doe serue Christe in making lawes for Christe Did Iustinian suppose hys authoritie tended no further when he wrote Legum Authoritas diuinas humanas res bene disposuit The authoritie of the lawes hath well disposed both the deuine and humaine matters Did the mâ—…ste Christian King of Spaine Richaredus thinke that the ende of hys gouernement stretched no further when he sayde openly in the thirde Councell at Tolet before all the Bishoppes there assembled Quanto subditorum gloria Regali extolliâ—…r tanto prouidi esse debemus in his quae ad Deum sunt c Howe muche more we bee exalted in royall glorie ouer our subieâ—…es so muche more ought wee to bee carefull in those matters that appertayne to God eyther to augment our owne hope or else to looke to the profite of the people committed to vs of god And as ye see me in verie deede inslamed wyth the feruencie of fayth God hath styrred mee vp to this ende that the obstinacie of
Where this place ioyneth togither as colleages the prince with the priest or rather ascribeth the skil in suche doubtes to be defined by the learned and faythfull priest and the full authoritie to giue iudgement and to ratifie the Priestes sentence in condemning the refusers to death and in approuing the receyuers to consist not in the high Priest but in the Iudge or Prince And thus this place that he would so fayne wrest euery way agaynst Christian Princes and for his Pope and popelings béeing well wayed and considered according to his owne request maketh nothing for his matter nor for his shauelings but cleane agaynst them And béeing better wayed and considered maketh nothing against the Bishops cause nor against christian Princes supreme gouernment in ouerséeing correcting such false priests but very muche for their duetie and chiefe authoritie therin M. St. hauing thus shamefully counterblasted the Byshops allegatioÌ„ to set a good face on an euilfauorde matter biddes the byshop go on and crieth out that he hath goâ—…ten the victorie that the bishop is at his first encouÌ„tring ouerblowne and discomfited euen with his owne blast And that it is not likely hereafter that he shall bring any thing to resolue his aduersarie But as God would haue it all these wordes are no blowes nor arguments but vayne triuÌ„phes before he haue gotten the victorie of the which he reckoneth him selfe so sure that he graunteth the Byshops other allegation Deut. 13. For as for the next place sayth he it enforceth no supremacie we freely graunt you that princes may sharply punish teachers of false and superstitious religion and Idolatrie beeing therof by the Priests instructed whiche is the matter of your texte This parenthesis M. St. beeing therof by the priests instructed is the levvde lying glose of your owne forge The text hath no such matter of the priests instruction but what thinke you doth enstruction more enforce an authoritie in the priest than powre to punish correct doth enforce an authoritie in the prince or doth this follow that bicause the prince by the priests enstruction doth punish false teachers Ergo he punisheth theÌ„ by the priests authoritie but as you fréely graunt that the prince may punish noughtie false and idolatrous priests so that the priests instructioÌ„ is any matter of the byshops text or that his instruction should more enforce authoritie ouer the prince than the princes punishment doth ouer false teachers is both euident false this we as flatly deny as you do fréely graunt the other Howbeit presupposing that we would also grauÌ„t him this that all things must still be done by the priests instruction But then sayth master Stap. take heede to your selfe master Horne and as though he him selfe were this instructour for I say to you sayth he that ye and your fellowes teache false and superstitious religion many and detestable heresies and so withall playne idolatrie In déede sir so ye say that full stoutly braying out with I say to you but thanks be to God ye do but say it to vs ye do not proue it to vs but and it were put to a double post might it not proue a worde of course and then take heede to your selfe master Stapl. for we not onely say to you but by the worde of God proue it to you that you and your felowes teach false and superstitious religion many and detestable heresies so withal plaine idolatrie c. and so haue ye giuen sentence agaynst your selfe haue told the magistrate his office to punishe you as false teachers that care not how ye falsifie wrest the scriptures to deface your aduersarie the vnskilfulnesse and vnfaythfulnesse wherwith ye falsly charge him euer double or treble redounding vppon your selfe The residue of your proces on these two chalenges of vnskilfulnesse vnfaythfulnesse I referre to your common places of rayling scoffes and slaunders and will answere to the thirde great faulte that ye finde in this diuision Nowe that ye bring out of Glossa ordinaria say you that the Prince is commanded by his princely authoritie to cause his subiectes to become Israelites it may perhaps be in some ordinarie glose of Geneua his notes Bales or some such like but as for the olde ordinary Latin glose I am right sure M. Horne it hath no suche thing Are ye right sure therof M. Stap and hath it no suche thing in déede will ye venter your poore honestie thereon I dare say ye would haue vs thinke that ye haue looked on the ordinarie glose whether any suche thing were there or no else would ye neuer for shame so boldly affirme it But what speake I of shame in so shamelesse a face that boldly dare auouche he is right sure there is no suche thing when if he had looked in the ordinary glose except he would of purpose looke from it he could scantly misse it euen at the first viewe The wordes of the glose vpon super Israel are these Benedictio est regnare super Israel 1. regnando facere Israel s. deum videntes It is a blessing to raigne ouer Israell that is to saye by raigning which the Byshop Englished by his Princely authoritie to make or cause to become Israelites that is to wete folkes seeing God. The Bishop Englished the sentence playnly by his Princely authoritie to cause his subiectes to become Israelites And what is here that is not onely in summe of sentence but in the very emphasis or force of the bare wordes all one with the glose and yet this moste impudent what should I call him vnskilfull or vnfaythfull lyer or both chalengeth the Bishop of vntruth and sayth he is right sure there is no such thing In what thing wil this man stick to outface the simple vnlearned that dare thus deale with such a lerned father and coÌ„mit it to print to be examined of any lerned reader and crake of such assurance as though he had poared ouer al the booke for it euen at the first chop he is found an open lyer But I doubt whether euer he looked on the booke at all but trusted some retchelesse superuisor For if he had looked but ouer the head of the verie texte Ut longo tempore regnet That he might long time reigne hée shoulde haue founde noted on this worde Regnet corporaliter spiritualiter That hee shoulde reigne or exercise his Princely authoritie a long tyme Bodily and spiritually not onely to haue a regiment in lay temporall and ciuile matters as M. St. affirmeth but euen in spirituall matters also And had he but looked a little higher on these wordes Legetque illud omnibus diebus vitae suâ—… He should read it all the days of his life He should haue found Vsus reddit magistrum the vse of reading the worde of God makes the king a maister in Gods worde that is to say a setter forth or teacher thereof as it were Upon whiche the
tâ—…cet consentire videtur for he that holdeth his peace seemeth to consent Howbeit I crie you mercie the case is altered For there ye defend your client here ye oppugne your aduersarie And belike ye haue some priuiledge from Rome euer to turne the matter so as may best serue your turne But and it were not for this your priuiledge surely I woulde further aske ye howe chaunce so soone ye haue forgotten your late vaunt and euen in this leafe wherin ye crake that ye walke not in generall wordes but restrayne your selfe to particulars now stande quarrelling about the generall words of the statute and mocke the B. for particulars if ye shalâ—… laye forth your priuiledge to doe this when ye thinke ye may get some aduauntage thereby yet I thinke your priuiledge stretcheth not both to wrest the state of the question in hande and of the issue to the statute and to wrest and belâ—…e the statute as ye please and thereof to gather what false conclusion ye lyst For first ye do the Bishop wrong â—…th Maister Feckenham hath set vp his issue to be prooued Anye suche gouernement in Ecclesiasticall causes to driue the bishop from thence to the wordes of the statute that expresse it in all ecclesiasticall causes Herein ye offer the bishop wrong For by this issue betwéene them though the Bishop in euery Prince continually alleage not ensamples in euery Ecclesiasticall cause but nowe and then in all nowe and then in some for your Popes daily encroched on Princes and at length got the mâ—…st of all yet hath the Bishop proued and satisfied the vertue of this issue Any such gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes Howbeit ye do him further wrong to chalenge him here for leauing out any poynt of gouernment in any Ecclesiasticall cause that euen the statute giueth hir maiestie that is to say A supreme gouernement in all things and causes Doth not the bishop set downe this M. St hath he not specified euen the same wordes oftentimes already and doth not his particular specifications coÌ„teine as much here also Nâ—… say you he leaueth out the principall cause ecclesiasticall and most necessarie meete and conuenient for a supreme gouernor Ecclesiasticall Soft M. St. stay here or euer we demaund what this cause should be I demaunde only now why ye say supreme gouernour Ecclesiasticall is this your honestie in handling the statute doth the Quéene take vpon hir to be a supreme gouernor Ecclesiasticall or doth the statute giue this title to hir maiestie A supreme gouernor Ecclesiasticall the statute saith A supreme gouernor in all Ecclesiastical causes â–ª And is there no differeÌ„ce betwene an ecclesiastical gouernor a gouernor in eccles causes but you vse this your false captious speach to make that people beleue the slaÌ„der that ye raise on hir Maiesty as though she toke vpon hir to bean ecclesiasticall person to be a B. and a minister of the worde sacraments and by hir chiefe gouernmeÌ„t ouer bishops chalenged to be a chief or head bishop of Bishops like vnto your Pope And so hauing raised vp this slauÌ„der on the Quenes maiestie the statute ye chalenge the Bishop for omitting a principall ecclesiastical cause But what is that you aske forsooth iudgement say you determining and approuing of doctrine which is true and good and which is otherwise Here againe M. Stapl. ye speake as captiously for if by this iudgement ye meane an authoritie aboue the doctrine of Gods worde as all your side maintaineth that the word of God receyueth his authoritie of the Churches iudgement â–ª which Church ye call the Priestes and is authenticall bicause they haue ratified it so to be otherwise it were not true nor good then in déede as the Bishop hath set downe no such iudgement determining or approuing of doctrine neyther so coulde he haue done for the Quéenes Maiestie â—…keth no such supreme gouernement vpon hir nor such supreme gouernement is due to any other than to God alone who hath by Iesus Christ his sonne already fully determined in his holy worde what doctrine is good and true â–ª And what doctrine soeuer is besides that is neyther true nor good whosoeuer take vpon him to iudge determine and approue the same be it eyther your Pope or your Church neuer so much yea were it an angell from heauen â—…e must 〈◊〉 helde accursed But if ye meane by iudging determining and approuing of doctrine such authority as only acknowledgeth giueth testimonie admitteth alloweth setteth forth and strengthneth the doctrine of Christes onely worde not aâ—… ruler ouer it but as seruant vnto it and the reiecting or abolishing of all other doctrine against or besides that wordâ—… then hath the bishop not left out this ecclesiasticall cause in the statute though not iudging in that maner that the ecclesiasticall gouernour Bishop or Minister doth in his sermons or debating thereon but for so much as belongeth to a supreme gouernour And so sayth the bishop The gouernment that the Queenes Maiestie most iustly taketh on hir in ecclesiasticall causes is the guiding caring prouiding ordering directing and ayding the eccl. state within hir dominions to the furtherance maintenance and setting foorth of true religion buitie and quietnesse of Christes Church visiting reforming restrayning amending and correcting all maner persons with all maner errours superstitions heresies schisâ—…es abuses offences contempts and enormities in or about Christes religion whatsoeuer Marke these words a little better M. Stap. and I trust you shall sée it was you that ouershot your selfe and lefte out good attention béeing caried away in a cocke brayne â—…ume with too hastie a preiudice And that the bishop left out héere no part of such iudgement determination and approuing of doctrine which is true and good which is otherwise as belongeth to suche a supreme gouernour as groundeth himselfe on Gods iudgement â–ª determining and approbation What do ye thinke is true religion no good doctrine with you If it be the bishop hath not omitted it Can he care and prouide for it direct and set it foorth without iudgement without the determining of it to be good and true without the approbation of it On the other side are errours and heresies no false nor naughtie doctrine with you if they be then the bishop named them and thinke ye the visiting reforming restrayning amending and correcting can be without a iudgement and determination agaynst them Then sithe he in playne spéeche ascribeth all this to the Prince which fully answereth all this that ye call for if as I sayd ye vnderstande this iudgement determining and approuing a right ye shewe what a very continuall wrangler ye be where no cause at all is giuen But incontinent ye declare what ye meane by this iudgement of doctrine For what say you is more necessarie in the Churche than that the supreme gouernour therof shoulde haue power in all doubtes and controuersies to decide the truthe and
a. Stap. 48. The papistes shiftes from Priestes to Peophets and from Prophets to Priests for the Popes primacie How highely Popâ—…sh priests esteeme of theÌ„ solues Deut. 13. 3. Reg. 22. 3. Reg. 18. Math. 7. 1. Pap. 25. 1. Par. 23. 1. Par. 24. 1. Par. 25. 1. Par. 26. Both the chiefe prophets and cheife priestes vnder the appoyntment of the king 2. Par. 29. Stap. 48. a. Carolus Magnus an vnlike match to Dauid Stap. 48 â–ª The lawe of King â—…uo Priuileges of Princes to the clergie well or yll vsed The Pope and his prelates like the Iuy Stap. 48. b. Stap. 49. a. The Queenes Ma estie by the Papists shamefully 〈◊〉 Win. Pag. 9. a. Cap. 12. Stap. 48. b. The example of the supreme gouernment of K. Salomon Salomons dedeposing the high priest Stap. 48. b Salomons example deposing Abâ—…athar applied by the papists to Queene Mâ—…rie deposing the archbishop Cran. Fol. 44. b 45 b. 47. a. 48. b The difference betwene Q. Maries and king SalomoÌ„s doings Stap. 49. â—… Stap. 49. â—… Stap. 49. a. Master Stap. question and dilemma Stap. 49. a. The difference of the phrase for the princes sacrificing and the princes de posing Abiathat The question and the dilemma returned on the papists Sup. fol. 217. a Stap. 4 9. â—… The highest priest a traytor A traytor The Bishop of Rome a traytor to the â—…mperor of Rome Stap. 4 9. a. 3. Reg. 2. Stap. 4 9 a. The ministerie and executing of Gods sentence debarreth not the princes supremacie Stap. 49. â—… The issue 〈◊〉 question Master Stap. graunteth the Pâ—…ince to be chiefe ruler in some ecclesiasticall causes What the authoâ—…tie of depâ—…sing the Pope implieth A difference betweene the chiefe â–ª ruler of ecclesiasticall causes and the chiefe doer of them The example of king Iosaphats supreme gouernment Cap 13. Sta. 50. a. Sta. 50. a. Wherein christian Princes must go beyondâ—… kâ—…ng 〈◊〉 hat 2. Par. 20. Sâ—…a 50 a. Iosaphat direc ted ecclâ—…siastical matters not by the commandement but by the aduise of the prests Sta. 50. a. Sta 50. a. Sta. 50. a. Sta. 50. a. Psalm 2. Sta. 50 a. In cle si Rom. N 22. de prebendis Supra 205. a. Stap. 50. a. b. Sta. 50. b. Stap. 50. b. How contemp tuously the papistes esteeme of the examples of the scriptures 2. Par. 17. Preachers sent of the prince Lyra in 2. patal 17. The princes progresse about religion Lyra in 2. paral 19. Vatablus Lyra. Iustices of the peace Lyra. Stap. 50. b. Sâ—…apl 51. â—… The princes forme and order in proceeding Stapl. 51. â—… Stap. 51. â—… Religion only proceedeth froÌ„ God the preaching proceedeth from the ministers the direction and ordering from the Prince Stapl. 50. b. The Papistes denie not only the Princes go uernment of ecclesiasticall matters but also of ecclesiastical persons Supra pa 47. â—… Stapl. 5â—…â—… King Iosaphat did not deale sclenderly in ecclesiasticall matters but as his chiefest charge 2. Paral. 19. Lyra in 2. Paral 19. Nothing ecclesiasticall or temporal exeÌ„pted from the chief ouersight of the Prince no not of the cases Deut. 17. that the Papists chiefly boast vppon Stap. 51. â—… The iniuÌ„ctioÌ„â—… of princes for the obseruatioÌ„ of ecclesiastical matters and threates of displeasure for the breache of them Lyra in 2. Paâ—…al 19. The king iudged ecclesiasticall causes in that his debiâ—â—e iudged them 2. Paral. 19. Stap 51. b. Diuine matters not excluded from the kings office The priest the princes commissioner 2. Paral. 17. Stap. 51. a. Lyra in 2. Paral. 19. Vatablus Sta. 50. a. The prince commandeth the Priest. Fol. 52. a. The example of king â—…zechias supreme gouernment in ecclesiastical causes 4. Reg. 18. 2. Pat. 29. Stapletoa Caput 14. Fol. 52. b. Lyra. Ecclesiasticall matters by K. Izechias newly established To be readie and seruiceable to fulfill Gods determination debarreth not the Princes supreme gouernment Ezechias executed Gods commaundement and the clergie the coÌ„maundement of Ezechias Lyra in 2. Par. 29. 2. Par. 29. Lyra in 2. Par. 29. Lyra. Iniunxiâ—… 〈◊〉 Praecepit renouationem diuini cultus Imagines Idololatriae multas The popishe fond destinction of â—…mage and Idoll 4. Reg. 18. The Princes predecessors disposing debarreth not his supreme gouernment The subiection to Gods commaundement embarreth not the Princes supreme gouernment The doing it by the handes of the prophets or any other embarreth not the Princes supreme gouernment Stap 53. â—… The asking counsell of others debarieth not the Princes supreme authoritie in the doing 2. paâ—…al 30. Lyra in 2. Par 30. Sâ—…ap 53. â—… Ezechias did many things neuer so done before â—… Paâ—… 30. Lyra in 2. Paral. 30. Lyra in â—… Paral. 3â—… 2. paral 31. The commendation and application of K. Ezechias Stap 59. a. A proper shifting answere muche vsed by M. St in these examples Supra 50. b. Stap. 53. a. Daniel 7. Apoc. 12. Gal. 1. The name of ministers 1. Cor. 4. 3. Reg. 18. Daniel 14. Stapl. 53. a. The popish priestes now not like the true prophetes The Papistes shifte from Priests to Prophetes Fol 53. a. The example of King Iosias his supreme gouernmeÌ„t in ecclesiasticall causes Sta. Caput 15. Stapl. 53. a. b. 4. Reg. 23. 2. Par. 34. 35. Lyrâ—… Iosias trauaile by his kingly authoritie Stap. 53. a. b. The trauailes of good catholike princes Whether we or the Papists let vp Idols Sta. 50 a. How the popish prelaâ—…s vsed christian Princes Howe the Q. Highnes follo with the ensample of Iosias 4. Reg. 23. Monkes and Nunnes celles pulled downe Sta. 53 b. Stap. 53. b. Master Stap. stragleth from the marke and calleth on the Bishop to kepe him to the marke The issue in question betvvene the Bishop and master Fecknam Sup. â—…ol 136. a M. Stap. settes vp ix â–ª nevve markes both differing from M. Feck and the Bâ—…shops issue and also from his ovvne former marks and yet cryes oâ—…t on the B. for straying from the question The Papistes play like the Lapvving The issue Stapl. 53. b. M. Stapletons first falâ—… marke The kings agnising the high Priest in the old testament inferreth not that they agnised him their â—…npreme gouernour St. fol. 53. b. St. fol. 53. b. M. St. second false marke The conferring of the Q Maiesties doing with these auncient and godly kings The Papistes vaunt of 1000 yeares antiquitie The Papistes dare not stretch their crake of antiquitie to Christe or to 1500. yeareâ—… and vpvvarde Galat. 1. Stap. 54. a. M. Stap. thirde false marke In the proofe of the supreme gouernment the proofe of euery particuler fact is not necessarie The issue betweene the B. and M. Feck The taking an othe The othe to the Pope The high priest in the olde law did not as the pope doth novv The kingâ—… in the olde lawe charged their clergy on their priesthood for eccl. matters Sta. 54 â—… Stap. 54. â—… M. St. fourth false marke The Prince abandoneth not godly bishops though he abaÌ„ don the Pope The abandoning of the
But sith none hath aduentured on it I thought it my dutie to yeelde to the godlie and vrgent requestes of those personages that vnderstanding I had priuately delte therin required the publishing of my labours to the vvhich I condescended a great deale the vvillinger partly bicause it touched vvithall the defence of that Reuerende fathers innocencie and learning the Bishop of VVinchester vvho had although briefly yet most orderly and exactly handled this questioÌ„ before and vvas oppugned by this aduersarie neither vvas it for diuers causes thought so coÌ„uenient for the Bishop himselfe to ansvvere and I for my part was bounde in so iust a cause to defend him But chiefly for that it spared not most opprobriously to slaunder your most excelleÌ„t Maiestie your title your state your gouernment your most honorable and godlie CouÌ„saile your nobilitie your Bishops your clergie your magistrats your iustices your people and all estates of your dominions your doctrine your faith your religion yea the truth and glorie of God vvhich your Highnesse defendes to all vvhich I and all other are bounde in principall I thought not good therefore to stay it any longer and suffer these vncircumcised Philistines blaspheming the truth of God reproching the Lords anoynted and rayling on the hoste of Israel to stand thus and vaunt vnansvvered but lette this ansvvere that I had thus farforth made in priuate â–ª come abrode to others Promising god vvilling by your Maiesties fauourable protection to deale further vvith them and to shevvethe continuall practise hereof hovve in all ages since Christendome began to flourishe vnder the Great Constantine that christian Emperors Kings and Princes haue dealte as doth your Maiestie in the ouersight of Ecclesiastical matters till the Pope by little and little encroching on them not onely spoyled them of this their chief authoritie but of their temporal estates and vvorldly kingdoms yea of their goodes liues also In the meane season for this that is here alreadie ansvvered vnto I most humbly craue your Highnesse acceptation vvhose right is here defended by truth from sclanders that by iustice defendeth our right from iniuries Most hartily beseeching almightie God as he hitherto hath vouchsafed so to blesse preserue continue and prosper your Royal Maiestie to the loÌ„g establishing of your Highnes Throne to the vtter vanquishing of all your spirituall and bodily priuie and open enimies to the godlie comforte and quiet gouernment of all your faithful subiects and to the prosperous aduancement of Gods euerlasting glorie thorough Iesus Christe AMEN Youre Maiesties humble and obedient subiect IOHN BRIDGES The Preface to the Reader IT is nowe a good while since deare Christian Reader that this maister Stapletons Counterblast was blowne ouer the seas from Louaine against the Reuerende father in Christe the Bishop of Winchester or rather against the Quenes Maiestie and hir Supremacie was thus farre answered vnto as here is nowe set foorth Which may easily be perceiued by the reading for there is little or nothing altered except a sentence or two here there added as things haue falne out since I speake this that thou shouldest not here loke for any great or exquisite penning thinking that after so loÌ„g a leysure some more notable and exacter answere should come forth Our aduersaries vaunt much of their wittes herein and chieâ—…y this my matefellow master Stapleton to be verie fresh pregnant in readinesse of answering for he is his mothers sonne and hath it on his fingers ends Howbeit I may say to these as Apelles sayd to one who when he had drawne a picture Lo quoth he I did this apace Some thinkes quoth Apelles it is so ruÌ„ningly done And thus it falleth often out with our Loâ—…anists writings but Sat cito si sat bene It is soone ynough if it be well inough say I when all is done The reasâ—… why this answere came forth no soner are these First I kept it priuate to my self abyding if either the Bishop against whome it was made or any other woulde aunswere to it Secondly I heard at the length that Maister Nowell the Deane of Poules trauayled in it whose learning and wisedome being suche as all the aduersaries could neuer withstand I surceased to proceede any further Thirdly when I perceiued he set not out his answere neither I thought it best to lay myne asyde also Thinking that either he was stayed vpoÌ„ som weightier consideration than I did know or else that he did thinke the boke not worth the answering at al as in very deed to the lerned marker it is not M. Nowel had answered Dorman in muche like matter before which were the occasioÌ„s why it slept so loÌ„g But since that time as many haue mused and talked much on the matter so they haue not a little marueiled why nothing was said vnto it The argument was great and waightie not so muche whether nowe the Supremacie belonged to the Pope as whether it pertained to the ciuil Magistrate and whether the Queenes Maiestie did claime and hold it by right or no The parties in controuersie were of note as wel master Feckenham among the Papistes as the Bishop of Winchester whose estimation among vs is not more for his authoritie than his name amoÌ„g other nations for his learning Nowe when Master Stapleton stept in lyke a lustie yoncker and blewe vp this Counterblast betwene these twain so hotly hallowing for answer out of hande to be made by the Bishop therto al this while had none some did interprete it that he was a very vnfit matche for so graue a Bishop as to say the truth the match was nothing euen And therefore I wite not the Bishop if he vouchsafed not to answer him especially seing home his booke was so pestred with scoldes and scorners Rhetorike Neither will the horse of noble corage strike at euery brauling curre that barks at his heeles But when others missecoÌ„strued this to the worst said the Counterblast was so notably blown that the Bishop durst not nor was able he nor any other to answer it wheÌ„ vpon the head of all this M. Saunders Latine volume coÌ„mes forth although chiefly on the Popes visible Monarchie yet once again entring into this questioÌ„ of the Princes Supremacie with fresh matter as he bosteth with such inuincible arguments against it that all are but vnlearned starke fooles and cleane madde that do defend it and not thus content so depresseth the Princes estate that he will now proue the Pope hath interest to depose al Christian Princes and release their sâ—…biects of their sworn obedience which valiant champion vauÌ„teth also of his felow Stapletons noble peece of woorke againste the Princes Supreme Gouernment saying in his prayse Quod argumentum â–ª Thomas Stapletonus omnium copiosissimè tractaâ—…it in â—…o Libro quenâ—… 〈◊〉 eloquentia doctrina refertum contra Hornum Psâ—…udoepiscopum Wintoniensâ—… edidiâ—… vvhiche argument Thomas Stapleton hathe moste copiously handeled in that booke vvhiche beeing replenished
meanes was deliuered as also M. Crispine shuld haue ben but that death preuented him only M. Moreman stubbornly persisting in his errours remained still in the Tower. In this conference M. Feckenham promised to preache as the Bishop truly charged him Of which conference and promise there be yet many on lyue both worshipfull and honeste men to witnesse the same and proue you a lyer M. Stapleton so impudently to denie it You had nothing to say to the contrarie The. 32. vntruth more slaunderous as may wel appeare by this your booke It appéereth thereby right well in déede and shall further appéere that you also had not any greate thyng else to to saye to the contrarie neyther excepting these and suche lyke your brabbling common places For answere I say they ought to take vppon them such gouernment as doth the Quéens maiestie The. 23. vntruth employing a contradiction to youre former aunswere made to Mayster Feckenham as shall appeare The answere is here cited for an vntruthe but for triall it is referred to appeere in an other place on the other side of the leafe in the counterblast and there being cited also bicause nothing is proued but by M. Stapletons hearesay of an other contrarie answere the matter is there againe further deferred to be hearde an other daye when Maister Stapleton shall be occasioned to entreate more at large hereafter vpon the matter wher at the Calends of Gréece it shal be proued both an vntruth and to implie a contradiction The contradiction that he would enforce is betwéen a suborned answer forged to be made in the bishops name which he neuer made and this present answere which the B. maketh so that in déede there is no contradiction at al in his answere bicause the one of them is of their owne making not of his As for the vntruth of the Bishops answere standeth only on M. Stapletons bare saying that it is false and deceyuable And ye must wel weâ—…e that M. Stapl is of suche indifferencie and credence that he would not saye it on his worde if it were not so and therefore in any case ye must beléeue him or else ye marre his reckoning The. 34. 35. 36. 37. vntruths bicause they are the whole matter throughout the eight chapter wherwith he chargeth the Bishop in the answere to the chapter they are at â–ª large answered Besides a number of Master Stapletons vntruthes detected Moyses was not the chief priest or bishop The. 38. vntruth for Moyses was the chiefe Priest as shall be proued Howe this promise shall be proued or the Bishops saying improued to auoyde anticipations repetitons thou must resort to M. Stapletons proues and the answer thervnto The charge of chiefe gouernment ouer Gods people bothe in causes temporall and ecclesiasticall was committed to Iosue The 39. vntruth Iosue had not the supreme gouernement in Ecclesiasticall causes but Eleazarus had it Whether he had it that commaunded Eleazarus in ecclesiasticall matters or Eleazarus that obeyed his commaundement is easie to iudge And notwithstanding any thing that M. Stapleton bringeth beside his bare allegatioÌ„ Iosue had the supreme gouernement therin To Eleazar only belonged the administration of things belonging to the Priests office The. 40. vntruth For beside in all thinges to be doone of Iosue Eleazar should instruct him If this were beside the administration of things belonging to the Priestes office then to administer instruction in any thing vnto the Prince was not the Priests office For if it were belonging to his office why saye you it was beside being conteyned in it But sée your fonde reason the Bishop saith he had not the supreme gouernement but the administration of things belonging to his office yes say you he should instruct the Prince Ergo he had the supreme gouernment of him Neither had he say you that supreme gouernment as his office or belonging to him but besides and not belonging thervnto whyle the questioÌ„ is whether this supreme gouernement belong to the Priests office or to the â–ª Princes office but your self withal exclude it from the Priestes office And thus to nick vp on the score apace ye speak it séemeth ye can not wel tell what Dauid c. the supreme gouernour ouer all estates both of the laitie and of the clergie in all maneâ—… of causes The. 41. vntruth Dauid was not suprme gouernour in all maner causes but suffered the Leuites in Church matters to liue vnder the rule of their high Priest. As though these two might not bothe agrée verie wel togither except it were in such an vsurper as is your Pope As for the Quéenes Maiestie hir hyghnesse claymeth no suche Papaliâ—…ie but suffreth the inferiour ministers to liue vnder the rules of their superior Bishops yet hir supreme gouernment to ouersée that all of them obserue their rules in their vocations is no whit empaired Salomon deposed Abiathar The 42. vntruth for Salomon of his owne authoritie as your argument runneth deposed not Abiathar but executed only the sentence pronounced before by Samuel Gods minister Your selfe confesse the Bishops wordes M. Stapleton nor ye can for shame denie them the Scripture is plaine for them and therfore ye runne from them to the Bishops sense and say not his wordes but his meaning and argument is vntrue therein for he dyd it but not by his owne authoritie but executed Gods sentence as thoughe these were contradictorie to execute Gods sentence in doing it and to doo it by his owne authoritie when all authoritie of any Prince commeth likewyse from God and he is Gods minister and executer thereof and yet withall it is hys owne authoritie bicause the authoritie is giuen him of God thereto Althoughe herein chalenging the B. of one vntruthe ye vtter two vntruthe your self together on a clap First ye say he executed only the sentence pronounced before by Samuel Gods minister Where the texte that afterwarde ye cite fayth not so but to fulfill the wordes of the Lorde whiche he spake ouer the house of Hely in Silo which wordes of the Lorde we fynde out in thâ—… 2. and. 3. chapters of the first booke of the Kinges where the whole story is at large set out and deteâ—…s your falshoode The wordes that doe threaten Hely and his posteritie in the. 2. chapter were pronounced by a Prophet in déede but he is not named the text only sayth Venit auteÌ„ vir dei ad Hely ait ad eum haec dicit Dominus And there came a man of God to Hely and sayd vnto him thus sayth the Lorde c. This Prophet pronounced and was Gods minister therein among other things euen this deposition of Abiathar But this man of God was not Samuell who was at that time as yet but a childe The seconde time was in the next chapter by God him selfe that called Samuell thrée times and the
Gods name let it there appeare where it is also answered folzâ—… For his 48. and. 49. vntruthes he alleageth no reason nor cause onely he sayth the former is boldely auouched but no way proued and the other somewhat more impudent Since therefore he hath nothing wherein to conuince them I may wel returne his boldnesse and impudencie to him selfe and remitte the tryall of the truthe or vntruthe to the discussing of Iosias ensample Nowe haue you shewed your selfe playnely herein to be a Donatist also The. 50. vntruthe most slaunderous M. Horne and his fellowes are in many poyntes Donatistes as shall appeare The triall of this vntruthe is discoursed at large in the proper place where M. Stapleton citeth it to appeare there shall be heard inough for triall of this chalenge pro contra and as the Reader on the viewe of bothe shall there finde it so on Gods name let him estéeme of it The Donatistes sayde they were of the Catholike fayth of the Catholike Church-which shifte for their defence agaynst Gods truthe the Popishe sectaries do vse in this our time beeing no more of the one or of the other than were the Donatistes and suche like The. 51. vntruthe Answere the Fortresse M. Horne annexed to sainct Bede if ye dare to defende this most sensible and grosse lye Howe happie are you M. Stapleton that euer ye buylt suche a Fortresse that ye thus can crake of so lustily bidde vs come and assayle crying aunswere the Fortresse and come if yee dare and if he come not then he dare not come if he set not on your Fortresse then this must néedes be a lye Muste it nowe truely then youre Fortresse is but a weake Fortresse if the prouing this a lye doe aunswere and ouerturne your Fortresse We néede neuer goe thither for the matter to proue your Church noâ—… the catholike Church nor to haue the catholike fayth this wil be proued in this booke well inough I warrant ye or euer it be ended ye shal sée your self more than once or twice confesse it And diuers other haue at large proued it what néede we then runne to your Fortresse In the next diuision which is the. 19. M. St. gathereth an other vntruthe but before it he setteth downe two marginall notes The first where the Bishop sayd All the sectes of the Donatistes whether they be Gaudentians Petilians Rogatists Papistes or any other sect c. Upon this word Papistes master Stapleton maketh a starre saying You should haue sayd Protestantes who in so many points as hath bene shewed resembled the Donatistes It is well inough M. Sta. and ye can let it stand til time be ye haue vntrussed all those poyntes euen from your own sloppes then ye may go perhaps like Baily hosegodowne The. 2 â–ª note is this Where the Bishop hauing alleaged a long sentence of S. Augustine agaynst M. Feckenham Thus farre S. Augustine sayth he by whose iudgement of the catholike Church c. Note sayth M. Stap. that nowe S. Augustines iudgement is also the iudgement of the catholike Churche To the which note I also adde this note withall M. Stapleton that your Church is not then the Catholiks Church whose iudgement herein agréeth not with Sainct Augustines iudgement Loe M. Stapleton howe pretily yourself begin to aunswere your last vntruth if ye holde on thus we shall not greatly néed to scale your fortresse euen this your CouÌ„terblast will encounter and ouerblowe it After these two notes he setteth downe his vntruth Your errontous opinion The. 52 vntruth M. Feckenham holdeth no such opinion The opinion there mencioned and confuted by S. Augustine is this of the Donatists that the order rule and gouernment practised be the Kinges of the olde Testament in ecclesiasticall causes ar not figures and prophecies of the like gouernment to bee in the kings vnder the newe Testament nor the order that Christ lefte behinde him in his Gospell newe Testament This was the opinion of the Donatistes in Saint Augustines time and this is yours Master Fecknams and Master Dormans opinion nowe that they are not such figures and prophecies and therfore ye confesse your selfe fol. 62. that M. Feckenham omitted the proufes of the olde Testament bycause they made against him Nowe whether this be an erroniouse opinion or no I commit you and Saint Augustine togither to scamble about it The. 53 vntruth Whither S. Augustine haue witnessed no such large and supreame gouernment as we attribute now to Princes yea whither Master Stapleton haue graunted so much or no is proued at large in the. 19. 20. Diuisions Your wilfulnesse is such that you delight only in wrangling against the truth The. 54. vntruth â—…claunderous Then are your selfe this â—…claunderer M. Stapleton that confesse Folio 62. he omitted to shewe forthe the truths of purpose bicause it made agaynst him what is this but wiâ—…full wrangling agaynst the truthe Constantine made many holesome lawes and godly constitutions wherewith he restrayned the people with threates forbidding the sacrificing to Idols to seeke after the diuelishe and superstitious soothsaying to set vp Images The. 55. vntâ—…uthe They were Idols not Images that Constantine forbad his subiects to set vp And in his Counterblast fol. 68. he sayth to say that Constantine forbad to â—…et vp Images is an open and a shamelesse lye What shamelesse outfacing is this The very words euen in the same place and many other of the booke are playne agaynst Images and nameth bothe Idols and Images also as the Bishop dothe Which withal confuteth his subtile distinction betwéene Image and Idoll as though an Image might not be an Idoll also Neither can the distinction serue your turne For Constantine forbiddeth bothe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your selfe confesse he forbad whether he forbad Images or no these are Eusebius owne wordes in Gréeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lib. 2. Euen so Christe our Sauiour confirmed this their authoritie commaunding all men to attribute and giue vnto Cesar that which belongeth vnto him The. 56. vntruthe This place of S. Mathew maketh nothing for the Princes supreme gouernement in ecclesiasticall things It maketh as the Bishop alleaged it to confirme al that authoritie by Christes Gospell that was due before in the time of the olde Testament Which your selfe graunt â–ª but that Princes had supreme authoritie in ecclesiastical things in the time of the olde Testament the Bishop proued before and your selfe also graunted it though ye denied such supreme gouernement as we attribute Therefore this place maketh some thing for Princes supreme gouernment in ecclesiasticall things so bewrayeth your owne vntruth and the truth of the Bishop This to be Christes order and meaning that the kings of the nations should be the supreme gouernours ouer their people not onely in temporall but also in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes the blessed
Apostles Peter and Paule doe playnely declare The. 57. vntruthe The Apostles neuer declared any such matter So saye you in déede â—… Stapleton but the Bishops proofes out of Chrisostome and sainct Augustine do playnly declare they did The. 58. vntruth Of misunderstanding sainct Augustine bicause besides this bederoll he also chargeth the Bishop therewith at large in the Counterblast it is answered seuerally in the answere of the. 18. chapter Not meaning only the transgressors of the seconde table in teÌ„porall matters but also agaynst the offendours of the first table in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes or matters The. 59. vntruthe Sainct Augustine meaneth not to teach suche gouernement of Princes in ecclesiasticall matters as you teache but onely to punishe Heretikes and by the same to mayntayne the Catholike fayth decreed by the Clergie not by the ciuill Magistrate Belike ye can tell better what sainct Augustine meant than be could him selfe But S. Augustine is playne he néedeth no suche interpreter Remember your owne note maledicta glossa quae corrumpit textum Cursed be that glose that corrupteth the text S. Aug. interpreting the mynd of the Apostle to be that the authoritie power of Princes hath to deale in ecclesiastical causes so wel as in teÌ„poral The. 60. vntruth Saint Augustine neuer wrote so Ye shoulde haue tolde out the sentence of S. Augustine that the B. citeth which fully proueth it and then haue improued it as an vntruth if ye coulde whiche although ye do not yet in the margine of that sentence ye crye out lustily and say where is there in all this master Horne that the Princes haue to deale in ecclesiastical causes so well as in temporall For sooth master Stapleton euen here at your hand in this present sentence wherein S. Augustine proueth and your selfe also graunt so muche that the Princes authoritie punishethe so well abuses in eccl. causes and faultes againste religion as it doth ciuill or temporall causes but it punisheth all external faultes and abuses in al ciuil and temporal causes that by his supreme authoritie therein not as an others executioner Ergo it punisheth al external abuses and faults in all ecclesiasticall causes and religion and that by his supreme authoritie therein and not as the clergies executioner Eusebius c. vnderstanding the ministerie of the ciuill Magistrate to be about Gods religion and eccle causes so well as temporall The. 61. vntruth Eusebius neuer vnderstoode any such ministerie of the ciuill Magistrate In what things Eusebius vnderstoode the ciuil Magistrats ministerie to consist the B. set downe Eusebius his owne wordes to proue that he vnderstood it so you say he neuer vnderstoode it so but ye set downe neuer a worde neyther here nor in your Counterblaste to proue the contrarie which tyll ye shall be able to do the Byshoppes vnderstanding of Eusebius by his owne wordes is no vntruthe Eusebius saythe that in preaching by hys decrees true godlynesse in setting foorthe the religion of the moste holy lawe and the most blessed faythe the Princes ministerie consisteth in these things so wel as any other or before al other as his best ministerie But these things are not ciuill matters but spirituall and ecclesiasticall Ergo his ministerie by Eusebius vnderstanding consisteth so well in ecclesiasticall or spirituall matters as ciuill or temporall This moste Christian Emperoure did rightly consider as he hadde bene truely taughte of the moste Christian Byshoppes of that tyme that as the Princes haue in charge the mynisterie and gouernement in all manner causes eyther temporall or spirituall The. 62. vntruth impudent and shamelesse concluded but no whit proued And in his Counterblast I say it is a starke and most impudent lye that ye say without any profe Constantine was taught of the Byshoppes that Princes haue the gouernement in all manner causes eyther temporall or spirituall ye conclude after your manner facingly and desperately vvithout any proufe or halfe proufe in the worlde Here are wonderfull boysterous wordes Master Stapleton but greate boast and small roaste as they say For all this hyghe chalenge standeth on I saye and so in déede it appéereth to be your saying but hadde it not béene your saying Master Stapleton I woulde haue thought it hadde béene some cotqueanes cryaleyson and I woulde haue answered a wispe a wispe for setting aside your foule language what vntruthe is here concluded or what concluded that is not proued The Prince hath the setting foorthe of true religion of Gods moste holy lawe and the moste blessed faythe but these thinges are not ciuill but ecclesiasticall and spirituall the Prince hath to puâ—…te awaye and ouerthrowe all euilles that presse the vvoorlde but none presse the worlde more daungerously than superstition Idolatrie erroures heresies scismes sectes and false religion all whiche are no ciuill but ecclesiasticall and spirituall matters The Prince dothe these thinges not as an executioner of an others ministerie but all the dooing hereof is the ministery properly beloÌ„ging to his owne office yea it is his best ministerie Ergo he dothe all these thinges with as muche or more full and proper authoritie of his office â–ª as he dothe any other ciuill thing But his ministerie in ciuill things is by his supreme authoritie vnder God therin whose minister S. Paule calleth him This is the Bishops conclusion moste playne and true all your blackemouthed Rhethorike to the contrarie notwithstanding For this cause also Nicephorus c. compareth Emanuell Paleologus the Emperoure to Constantine For this cause the. 63. vntruthe as shall appeare There is no doubt some great cause that moued you M. Stapleton to put this in your bederoll of vntruthes that the Bishop sayd for this cause And if you were asked for what cause ye doe so it séemeth it would be harde for you to render any and therefore ye take a wise and a short way to tell vs it shall appeare But here ye shewe none nor any at all here appeareth And where it shoulde appeare there appeareth none also except this be sufficient reason onely to denie it and say it is no cause at all For these wordes onely appeare there VVhere ye say for this cause also c. this is no cause at all but is vntrue as of the other Emperour Constantine and muche more vntrue as ye shall good reader straight way vnderstande What cause I pray you is here alleaged and yet this is all that ye say vnto it sauing that as ye sayde before it shoulde appeare referring vs there hither here ye saye as the reader shall straightway vnderstande it And yet neyther straight way nor crooked way ye speake one worde more of the matter but goe about the bushe medling with other matters and not with the truthe or vntruthe hereof any more And so it appeareth nusquam and the reader shall vnderstande it nunquam Neyther is it any maruell if ye can not lette the reader to
and with diffinct letter which he doth not here but Paraphrastically expoundeth the texte Wherein if he doe wreste the meaning of saint Paule ye shoulde hardly note that for an vntruthe â–ª S. Paule there nameth not religion that is true but that this worde godlynesse which saint Paule nameth comprehendeth not religion as the Byshop saythe that is your owne vntruthe But this matter is debated more at large in the answere to your Counterblast chap. 18. diuis â–ª 22. where is shewed bothe by the Fathers and by your owne chiefe writers that sainte Paule by this word godlynesse meant true religion Here ye set another blasing starre vpon these words that the Byshop sayth This woulde be noted with good aduisement that Sainte Paule himselfe sheweth playnely prosperitie amongste Gods people and true religion to be the benefites and fruites in generall that by Gods ordinance springeth from the rule and gouernement of Kings and Magistrats vnto the weale of the people This would be noted say you howe ye racke saint Paule he nameth not religion at all he dothe not attribute religion to the rule and gouernment of the ciuill Magistrat but peace and tranquillitie only in godlynesse Ye durst not note this for an vntruth M. Stapleton but for a racking or wresting althoughe this is but your peeuish difference If he racke saint Paules meaning he telleth an vntruth of saint Paule although this dothe cleare the B. of racking also that ye durste not playnely note and score it vp for an vntruth yet as the B. saying is most true so it nothing swarueth from the meaning of sainte Paule For aâ—… the B. proueth by Chrysostome that by this worde godlynesse is meant religion and the inwarde peace of the mynde and conscience and not only the outward peace of the body So Saint Paule maketh these to bee the benefites fruites and endes that by Gods ordinaunce wee receyue from the rule and gouernement of kings and magistrates in whiche saying S. Paule is not racked but it is you M. Stapleton that racke Saint Paule â–ª for he sayth not tranquillitie and peace only in godlinesse yâ—… may put your only in your pursse Saint Paule sayth in godlinesse and purenesse The whiche knot and fastening togither of religion and prosperitie incoÌ„mon weales the most Christian and godly Emperours Theodosius Ualentinianus did wisely foresee The. 68. vntruthe They sawe no suche confounding of the two functions spirituall and temporall as you imagine This vntruth is directed against the Byshops imagination ye go verie neare the B. M. Stapleton that where hée sayth no suche wordes as you chalenge ye will créepe into his heart and fetche iâ—… from thence ye haue a goodeye sighte that can see what the B. imagineth But wisdome wil think this to bée a fonde toy of your own idle imagination for the Byshops words import no such confusion as ye talke of hée telleth howe godlynesse and prosperiâ—…e are lincked togither in common weales so that the one cannot be well without the other that the Prince is the knitting togither of both these and this he saythe the Emperours sawe and that they sawâ—… it he bringeth good proufe theire own manifest words set downe at large eyther proue this an vntruth M. Sta. or else the B. hath made nene it is but your vntrue sclaunder fonde imagination I haue proued c. That such like gouernment in Churche causes as the Queenes Maiestie taketh vpon hir dothe of duetie belong vnto ciuill magistrates The. 69. vntruth Such like gouernement you haue not nor euer shall be able to proue The B. saith that in this first booke he hath hitherto proued it by the scriptures the Doctours and some Emperoures This you denie that he hath done and set him a long day to proue it Nowe the truth or vntruth of this the reader must hang in suspence til be haue read the prâ—…s ouer what they bee and then in the name of God lette himiudge whether the vntruthe lyghte on the Byshoppe or on Master Stapleton In the meane season â—…ytherto the Reader maye haue a taste what shame is in this impudent mannes â—…ace what truthe in his cause and what folly in hâ—…s heade thus to the wide worlde to score and sette out suche thinges for vntruthes as beeing neuer so little rypped vp are moste apparante truthes and to make suche a tryumphante gambolde and pyping vp of a round as hee doth thereon But leâ—…te hym daunce his â—…yll and nicke vp still on the score in the ende hée will runne so farre in the lashe that no man will credite a worde of his mouthe MeÌ„daci non crâ—…ditur ne iurato quidem A lyer is not beleeued no thoughe he svveare ⧠To Master Stapletons first Preface OR euer Master Stap â–ª enter into his counterblast he prefixeth two Prefaces the first to the B. the second to the Reader The first bicause it is only a packet trussed vp of all such accusations as he layeth to the Bishops charge through out his whole counterblast and so is to be aunswered in their proper places I minde not therefore to follow Master Stapletons vaine that saith Decies repeâ—…ta placebunt to spende the time and trouble the Reader more than néedes in answering to them here that are to be answered in their places seuerally and are already many of them noted before in his Common places The effect and conclusion of this preface in the ende is this That the Bishop must néedes make a full reioynder A full reioynder I say saith he and perfect to all and euery parte of this reply and put in Master Stapletonâ—… whole answere not omitting any one line or sentence either of the text or of the margine or els the truth is not on the Bishops side or els he waÌ„teth learnyng or els he buildeth on no good fundation nor the cause he groundeth on is sure or els all men vvill laugh him to scorne for his faire piece of vvorke so shamefully broken of or els M. Feckenhams scruples are most learned and inuincible reasons or els the othe can not be takeÌ„ with out manifest periurie or els Master Horne must retract his most haighnouse heresies or els which I should haue set before all that the B. hath saide is but vvoordes of course to saue his poore honestie and but waltham talke or els as he obiecteth foolishnesse to the B. so M. Stapleton may proue as wise as walthams calfe and thus as he saith to the B. for this time I take my leaue of you Vale resipisce so may I for this your first Preface take my leaue of you Master Stapleton Uale sape ⧠To Master Stapletons seconde Preface THe seconde Preface is directed to the Reader and is coÌ„triued in thrée partes The first sheweth the reasons why he tooke vppon him to answere the Bishop The second how by what order he procéedeth in his answere The thirde is an earnest admonition
turne ye are to gredie man remember that qui cupit totum perdit totum But let vs sée your sixe demaundes whether they be reasonable and to be graunted yea or no. There are therefore say you many thinges to be considered first that Christ lefte one to rule his vvhole Churche in his steade from time to time vnto the ende of the vvorlde Is this your first request to be considered and graunted M. Stapleton now surely a reasonable demaund to be considered vpon And woorthie to haue that Salomon graunted to Adonias for asking of Abisaâ—…g to wife Wise king Salomon saw he might aswell haue asked the crowne from his head yea his head from his shoulders and who so vnwise that seeth not ye might aswell aske the whole controuersie to be graunted you and graunt ye this what néede ye propounde your other principles following How be it let vs sée what they be also Secondly we muste consider ye say that this one vvas S. Peter the Apostle and novv are the Bishops of Rome his successours Out of doubt ye had on some great considering câ—…ppe M. Stapleton when you considered that the Bishop should haue considered this He was much to blame he considered it not but M. Stapl. and ye were as wise as God might haue made you ye would haue better coÌ„sidered with your selfe than to thinke others haue so litle consideration as to graunt ye this your false and foolishe principle Thirdly say you that albeit the Bishop of Rome had no such vniuersall gouernment ouer the vvhole yet that he is and euer vvas the Patriarche of Englande and of the vvhole VVest Church and so hath as much to do here as any other Patriarche in his Patriarchshippe It is a signe M. Stap â–ª ye shrewdly doubte the former twains woulde neuer be graunted that so soone would be content to become a Patriarche of a piece from a Pope of the whole which though it sheweth lesse haughtinesse in you that would play small game rather than sit out yet perchance your Pope is of Alexanders spirite to whome Darius hauing offred halfe his dominions if I were Alexander ê™ Parmenio I would take it so would I ê™ Alexander if I were Parmenio And so perchance your Pope will say to you if I were Master Stapleton I would be content at least to be a Patriarche and perchance a worse rowme woulde serue But beyng the Bishop of Rome he will say Aut Papa aut nihil And therefore least ye get his curse before ye aske our consent the surest way were to know how he will like of this your limitation and when he shal be content then propose it to vs to consider thereon But I see ye like not greatly to stande hereon for fourthly say you Then all vvere it that he had nothing to intermedle vvith vs nor as Pope nor as Patriarche yet can not this supremacie of a ciuill Prince be iustified VVhereof he is not capable especially a vvoman but it must remayne in some spirituall man. Your must is very mustie M. Stapl. and smelleth of the pumpe of Romes ship Your Sequence is as badde the B. of Rome neyther as Pope nor as Patriarche is supreme gouernour in Ecclesiasticall causes in England Ergo No ciuill Prince man or woman is capable of it Againe There must be one spirituall man that must haue an vniuersall gouernment ouer the whole Churche Ergo â–ª A ciuill Prince may haue no particuler gouernement in his particuler Churche The antecedents in déede are true of bothe For neither hath the Pope as Pope or Patriarche or any otherwise any supreme gouernement ouer Englande as you presuppose he had none and yet the Prince both may haue and hath some supreme gouernement ouer vs For in déede all supreme gouernement suche as the Pope vsurped she neither hath nor may haue nor requireth nor belongs to any creature but is due to Christ alone He is that spirituall man that your other antecedent speaketh of if ye meane him it is true if you meane any other it is but your false presupposall though the consequentes whereon we stande followeth neither way neither doe ye laboure once to proue them But is here all things we muste consider no say you for fiftly Besides this the Catholikes say that as there vvas neuer any such president heretofore in the catholike Church so at this present there is no suche excepte in Englande neither among the Lutherans the Suinglians the Suenkfeldians or Anabaptists or any other secte that at this day raygneth or rageth in the vvorlde None of these I say agnyse their ciuill Prince as supreme gouernour in al causes spirituall and temporall Let goe these raging termes of sectes M. Sta. to their common places and I pray ye tell vs once agayne who sayth thus Who euen the Catholikes say so But whome meane you by the Catholiks The Papists Then gentle M. Stap. haue me commended to those your Papisticall Catholikes that ye say say so and aske them agayne if all be Gospell that they do say or no. Tushe man will M Stap. replie will ye not beléeue the Catholikes Why then sixtly and Laste of all I saye and M. Feck vvill also say that euen M. Horne him selfe in this his aunsvvere retreateth so farre back from his assertion of supreme gouernement in all causes spirituall and temporall vvhiche is the state and keye of the vvhole question that he plucketh from the Prince the chiefe and principall matters and causes ecclesiasticall as vve shall hereafter playnely shevve by his ovvne vvordes This geare goeth harde indéede The B. is nowe driuen to asore straight But syr might a man be so bolde to aske your mastership what are you and M. Feck are ye not Catholikes that when ye haue saide the catholikes say so ye come rushing in say Last of all I say and M. Feck vvill also say you make vs doubte least ye be no Catholikes and withall to suspect when ye cal your selfe and your client M. Feck to witnesse some partialitie in your sayings least the sole will holde with the shoe and that as two false witnesses came in agaynst our sauiour Christ with I say so and he vvill say so also so woulde you compact togither to slander the B. herein with I say so and M. Feck vvil say so also But by both your leaues may I be so bolde as to set your I say so and his I say so also asyde and desire ye to proue your so saying Why say you doubt ye of that we shall here after plainly shevve it by hys owne vvordes These are but vvords M. Stap. and ioly promises if ye can shevve it so playnly why shevve ye it not playnly here where ye say it so playnly or else haue shevved at the least where the B. doth thus which till ye shall playnely shewe this your â–ª bolde and playne saying may be suspected for a playne lye But M. Stap. shaking of the further
And herein hath the Quéenes highnes followed as ye say both her Fathers and Brothers faith also But ye wring al to that faith wherein he was before beguiled as though she should follow him in that he was deceiued not wherein he founde out forsoke the deceyuers that you with your painted wordes might likewise deceyue her Highnes now as they deceâ—…ued her Maiest father then But sée how God turned their deceyt agaynst them selues That where your Pope to flatter K. Henrie withall ascribed to him this title as it were the prophecie of another Caiphas Defender of the faith the King espying the falshood of the Pope became the very defender of the true faith in déede abolishing the Pope the very impugner peruerâ—…er therof and so as you say truer than ye wist M. Stap. atchieued to him and his and transported as by hereditarie succession the worthy title and stile yet remaining in her Highnesse of the defendour of the faith Neither as you faintly say this title onely remayneth in her Highnes but the thing that the title doth entende her highnesse is in very déede not in a â—…aked name the defender thereof And hath defended her subiects not from foreyne power of straungers onely brought in by the Papistes and from all bodily iniurie and oppression of Popish firebrandes or any other tirannie but defendeth euen our faith from all errours heresies superstitions and Idolatries And this it is for a Prince to be a defender of the faith in déede which argueth a plaine supremacie Now after M. Stapl. hath thus flattred and on his knees humbled him selfe to obtayne a placard of their disobedience vp he starteth once againe and geueth another fling at vs to reuerse this crime of disobedience on vs thinking so to excuse this disobedience of the Papistes thereby And first he setteth on those whome he calleth round cap Ministers howbeit if he remembred that within this hundreth yeres and vpward the popish priestes themselues did weare round cappes he would not be so hastie to giue that nick name He asketh who are those that haue preached with a chaine of golde about their neckes in steade of a tippet Assoyle your question your selfe M. Stapl. I know no such protestant What slaunderous reporte you haue heard of any singuler person I know not no such order is alowed Although it be common among your popish Cardinals Bishops Abbottes Deanes Canons and other beyonde the Seas so to ruffle as ye speake not onely with a chayne of golde but with hatte and feather cappe and agglets rapier and cloke hawke and houndes ruffians fooles wayting on them and oftentimes in complete harneys on a great courser or on a palfrey with a courtisane behinde them thus go the chiefest of your fleshly spiritualtie belike they learned it of that royster Pope Iohn 13. howbeit no Pope doeth amende this disorder Upbrayd not therefore such petit and perticular things to vs which is so great and so common a fault with you But Master Stapleton will go more certainely to worke and charge the Protestantes ex scripto wyth their owne writings VVho are those I pray you sayth he that write sint sanè ipsi Magictratuâ—… membra paries ciues ecclesiâ—…dei imo vt ex toto corde sint omnes precari decet Flagrent quoque ipsi zelo pietatis sed non sint capita Ecclesiâ—… quia ipsis non competit iste 〈◊〉 Let the Magistrates also be members and partes and citizens of the Church of God yea and that they maye bee so it behoueth vs all wyth all our heart to praye Let them bee feruent in the godly zeale of Religion but they may not be heades of the Churche in no case for thys supremacie doth not appertaine to them These are no Papists I trow M. Horne but your owne dere brethren of Magdeburge in their new storie ecclesiasticall by the which they would haue all the worlde directed Yea in that storie wherof one percell Illiricus and his fellowes haue dedicated to the Queenes maiestie that beare the worlde in hande they are the true and zelous schollers of Luther Thus triumpheth M. Stapleton against the wryters of the storie of Magdeburge The effect of his argument is this These wryters do say that Princes may not be heades of the Church Ergâ—… no prince ouer all Ecclesiasticall persons causes in his owne dominions may be supreme gouernour Howe euill this argument followeth is easie to perceyue and the better in behâ—…lding howe impudently master Stapleton wresteth these wryters But he forceth not thereof bicause they be his aduersaries For that which they write not simplie agaynst the supremacie of princes in Ecclesiasticall causes but agaynst suche supremacie of princes as the Pope vsurped that wresteth he as spoken agaynst such supreme gouernment as the Quéenes maiestie claymeth and vseth The writers hereof hauing set forth two â—…nsamples of that age the one of a godly princes gouernmet by Constantinus Pogonotus the other of a wicked tyrant by â—…eraclius to declare what kinde of supremacie they disalow Thâ—…y she we that this is the scope of the matter iste est scopuâ—…res ê™ magistratibuâ—… politicis non sit licitum cudere formaâ—… religionuÌ„ in perniciem veritatis ita vel coÌ„cilietur veritaâ—… meÌ„daâ—…ium vel vtraque simul sopiant id quod tandem â—…um habet exitum vt regnent errores veritas crucifigatur sepeliatur This is the â—…cope of the matter that it is not lawfull for politike magistrates to coyne formes of religion to the destruction of the truth so that thereby truth and falsehoode should be reconciled togither or both of them togither quayled VVhich at the length commeth to this ende that errors raigne the truth is crucified buried And so followeth the sentence that M. St. citeth let the magistrates also be mebers c. but let them not be heades of the Church Whereby appeareth plainly what maner of heades they meane And this they do not once nor twise setting forth the doings of the wicked â—…yrant Heraclius for ensample that was altogither led by affection and not indifferent to heare â—…ither party nor called in counsell lerned and faithfull men nor called any synode to trie the matter nor serched the truth diligently but being puffed vppe with pride and deuising oâ—…ely with a flattring Monke that after set vp the false fayth of Mahomet determineth in a corner of a moste weightie controuersie and afterwardes will haue the matter neuer called into question This Emperour they call Architectum religionis and demaund what man well in his wittes woulde alowe such attempts processe and executions concluding it is not lawfull form as religionum conflare c. To make newe formes of religions and obtrude them to the Church without all kind of godly honest modest and comely gainsaying refuting therof All this and much more say they of that kinde of supreme gouernement in
spirituall Churche so on thys principle you gather a moste false assumption That the heads of this spiritual or mystical body the church of Christ are vicars parsons byshops archbyshops patriarkes and ouer them all the Pope In which assumption ye take for true grauÌ„ted sundry manyfest errors flatly of vs denied chiefly foure The first about the spirituall and mysticall body of christ Wherin ye shew great vnskill not knowing what is ment by the spiritual mystical body For in that respect as there are no ciuil princes emperours kings or quéenes so there ar no Bishops neither no not Greke nor Scythian Gentile nor Iew neither male nor female but all the elect that haue bene are or shall be either in heauen aboue or here dispersed in any parte of the earth without any respect of person are al members and Christ the only head And so M. St. your selfe also call it the kingdome of the faythfull so that if any bishop be vnfaithful he is so far from beeing a head in this misticall corporation that he is no member or any part therof And your selfe confessed before that now theÌ„ your Pope was no good maÌ„ neither therfore vnfaithful hauing not the true liuely effectual faith in Christ as they only haue that be meÌ„bers of this body wherby he is quite excluded froÌ„ it Your first error therfore is in not discerning betwéene the inuisible and visible estate of the Church Secondly taking it as after contrarie to your former sayings ye seeme to expounde it to be the visible estate of the church saying coÌ„moÌ„ly called Christes catholike church then erre ye in that ye say vicars parsons bishops archbyshops and popes be rulers and heades of it For excepting parsons taking them for pastors Bishops the scripture knoweth none of thâ—…se rulers The other titles haue come in since with deanes archâ—…eacoÌ„s abbots priors cardinals patriarches c. although I speake not against the names of theÌ„ no not of the name of Pope neither which béeing well vsed I reueriÌ„ce admit but against the Popish hierarchie proud abuse of them And therfore thirdly where ye say the Pope is ouer them all that he is so ouer all those degrées in your Churche I graunte ye but that he is so ouer those or any other degrées in the true visible Churche of Christ it is but your facing maner to take that for confessed that is chiefly denyed Fourthly that ye affirme the Pope and his Prelates gouernemente chiefly to serue for the furtheraunce and encrease of the Spirituall kyngdome of Chryst where it is euident to the contrarie what hauocke and decrease so muche as they can these Rulers make of the members of Christes Churche to maynteine infidelitie and exautorate the worde and kingdome of Christ thereby M. Stap. now presupposing that the christian Princes gouernement is only outward and for the body and coÌ„mon with the heathen and stretcheth no further and that on the other parte the Pope ouer al and his fleshly chaplens vnder him are the heades and meÌ„bers of the spiritual and mysticall body of Christ nowe he will proue and God before that this gouernement of the pope his chaplaines is far aboue the kings gouernement and that kings he subiect therto Now sayth he as the soule of man incomparably passeth the body so doth this kingdome the other and the rulers of these the rulers of the other And as the body is subiecte to the soule so is the ciuill kingdome to the spirituall His reason is thus The soule or spirite incomparably passeth the body The kings gouernement is onely for the body and the Priests gouernement onely is for the soule and spirite Ergo the Priestes gouernement incomparably passeth the Kinges As this argument is noughte so the conclusion béeing rightly vnderstoode dothe noughte infirme the Princes supreme gouernement ouer all ecclesi causes For thoughe the maior be true the minor is moste false that the kinges gouernement is onely for the body Yea though the spirituall gouernement be onely the Priestes yet the gouernement ouer spirituall matters and matters apperteyning to the soule may still for all that and dothe belong euen ouer the Priests to the Prince Neither dothe M. St. proue the coÌ„trarie or alledge ought for his minor than as we haue heard the foresaide principles of limiting the Princes gouernement to be all one with the Turkes But you might haue done well M. Stap. to haue eâ—…sed your paynes euen here and haue troubled your selfe no further to proue your matter if these your vaine presupposals be such true and vndoubted principles But as though we had alredy graunted them M. St. still goeth on To the which kingdome sayth he as well Princes as other are engrafted by baptisme and become subiects to the same by spirituall generation as we become subiectes to our princes by course and order of natiuitie which is a terrestrial generation The argument is thus As the childe that is borne by a terrestriall generation in the earthly Princes kingdome is subiect to the earthly Prince so euen the Prince being borne againe by spirituall generation is become subiect to the spirituall kingdome But the rulers of the spirituall kingdom are the pope c. Ergo the Prince is become subiect to them Thus fondly still ye reason on your principle in so much that we can say nothing agaynst you But nowe while ye thinke ye may say what ye will sodenly see how ye haue ouerturned these your mightie principles with a trippe of your owne contrarie sayings euen in the same place Furthermore say you as euery man is naturally bounde to defende mainteyne encrease adorne â–ª and amplifie his naturall countrey so is euery man bounde and much more to employ himselfe to his possibilitie towarde the mition and defence furtheranee and amplification of this spiritual kingdome and most of all the princes themselues As such which haue receyued of God more large helpe and facultie toward the same by reason of their great authoritie and temporall sworde to ioyne the same as case requireth with the spirituall sworde Thinke ye this to be true indéede M. St. may we trust you on your wordes then is religion an ende of the Princes gouernment which a little before ye not onely most vntruly denyed but buylded as ye thought iolye arguments therevpon All whiche come nowe downe of themselues with an heaue and hee your selfe pulling awaye the soundation wherevppon they were buylt And nowe ye make an other platforme contrarie to the former which is that Princes moste of all are bounde as those that haue receyued of God more large helpe and facultie towarde the same to employ them selues to their possibilities to these endes to defende mainteyne encrease adorne and amplifie not onely the ciuill peace and prosperitie but much more the spirituall kingdome And ioyne the temporall sworde with the spirituall sworde as the case requireth Upon this as a better platforme than the
infidelitie beeing expelled and the furie of discorde remooued I shoulde reuoke the people to the knoweledge of faythe and to the â—…eloweshippe of the Catholyke Churche who serued errour vnder the name of Religion Lo master Stapleton here ye sée farre other endes of the ciuile gouernment of Christian Princes than as you most falsely and iniuriouslye alleage to preserue them from all outwarde iniuryes oppressions and enemyes and further to preserue them for theyr safetie and quietnesse for theyr wealth abundaunce and prosperous maintenaunce and that it tendeth and reacheth no further And that thys is common as well to the heathenishe as the Christian gouernement Fye for shame master Stapleton that euer suche heathenishe woordes shoulde procéede out of your catholyke lips But ye are halfe ashamed I sée and woulde mollifie the matter so muche as ye can with a proper qualification that those thinges which these godly Princes did although they did them yet therein were they no more but Aduocates and so saye you All good Princes doe and haue done ayding and assisting the Churche decrees made for the repression of vice and errors for the maintenance of vertue true religion Not as supreme gouernors themselues in all causes spirituall and temporall but as faythfull Aduocates in ayding and assisting the spirituall power that it may the sooner and more effectually take place As ye bring this shifting distinction of Aduocate to late M. Stap. hauing before quite debarred the Princes Ciuill gouernement of goyng anye iote further than ye there did bounde it to meddle no further wyth ayding and assisting the spirituall power than a Saracene doeth ayde and assist it gyuing Princes no more leaue to be Aduocates thereof than ye make the Turke or Souldan saying this theyr so limitted gouernement is common as well to both Heathen as Christian euen so this your office of Aduocateshippe came to late into the Churche by manye yeares to debarre anye of these forenamed Princes in theyr owne supreme gouernement aboute 〈◊〉 matters to make it sownde as though they onely had béene the ayders assisters or Aduocates vnto others and not them selues the doers Whereas on the contrarie they were the verye doers thoughe not of those actions that appertâ—…yned to the Ministers offices yet of the gouerning and directing bothe the Ministers and their actions yea and the principall ouerséers and supreme rulers of them as euen their déedes and wordes before rehearsed plainly declare As for thys shyft of Aduocation was long sithence after theyr tymes deuysed Whiche office of Aduocateshippe séemeth to bée deâ—…yued from this fonde errour of the Papistes that the seculer power is immediately and primarelye as they terme it in the Pope but he hath not also immediatelye the exercise or execution of it but gyueth that to the Prince and so the Prince becommeth the Popes Aduocate or rather his executioner And thus was first say they Carolus Magnus Pope Adrians Aduocate executing the Byshoppe of Romes will agaynste Desiderius King of Lumbardie Wherevpon Charles was made Emperour by the Pope notwithstanding Michaell the Emperour was then lyuing at Constantinople Propter hoc dicunt sayeth Dante 's Aligherius quòd omnes qui fuerunt Romanorum imperatores post ipsum ipse Aduocatâ—… Ecclesiae sunt debent ab Ecclesia aduocari For thys thyng all that were Emperours of Rome after hym and hee hym selfe are Aduocates of the Churche and oughte of the Churche to be called vpon Lupolous de Babenberge also telleth that Pope Zacharie declarauit c. declared or pronounced that Childericus Pepins master shoulde be deposed and Pepine be made the King of Fraunce whome when Pope Steuen the seconde annoynted with his sonnes Carolus and Carolomanus French Kings Ipsos specialiter elegit sayth Lupoldus ad sedem Apostolicam defendendam Ex hac electione putoque reges imperatores Romanorum sint vsque in hodiernum diem ecclesia Romanae aduocati de qua Aduocatia loquuntur iura canonica He chose them especially to defende the Apostolicall Sea. Of this election I thinke it commeth that Kinges and Emperours of the Romaynes are euen to this daye the Aduocates of the Romayne Churche of whiche Aduocacie speake the Canonicall lawes Thus you sée the originall of your deuised Aduocateship commeth nothing neare the examples of the sayde godly Princes béeing themselues supreme gouernours in Ecclesiasticall matters before your Aduocateshippe was first hatched No reason therefore the Punie shoulde debarre the Seniour And yet it is but a sielie shift of your Canonistes descant rather detecting the vnlawfull encroching of the Pope than defeating anye parte of the Princes authoritie in this hys supreme gouernement As for those Princes Carolus Magnus his sonnes and other Emperours since theyr tymes were nothing suche Aduocates as your Pope and you woulde nowe pretende that is to say to be your onelye executioners But as these stories testifie euen these Aduocates also were the chiefe directours and supreme gouernours of all those things they did Yea the Pope hym selfe so well as anye other Byshoppe in theyr territoryes was subiecte to them They ayded and assisted the Byshoppe of Rome I graunt when he humblie aduocated then he called vppon them for ayde and assystance agaynst the wrongers of him But the Pope by commaundement called them not and they obeyed his calling and so became his aduocates which is cleane contrarie to an aduocates office And therefore once agayne your argument is nought They were aiders and aduocates Ergo not supreme gouernours But M. St. will further proue by his former ensamples why this supreme gouernement can not appertayne to the Prince For this supreme gouernement sayth he can he not haue vnlesse he were him selfe a spirituall man no more than can a man be master of a shippe that neuer was a mariner A maior that neuer was a citizen Hys principal gouernement resting in ciuill matters and in that respecte as I haue sayde he is supreme gouernour of all persons in his Realme but not of all their actions but in suche sense as I haue specified and least of all the actions of spirituall men especially of those which are most appropriate to them which can not be vnlesse he were him selfe a spirituall man. You frame your similitude very vnproportionably M. Stap â–ª from the master of a shippe or the maior of a citie to a Prince or supreme gouernour Either of these béeing particuler offices vnder a supreme gouernour that maketh lawes euen both for maiors in cities and masters of shippes also â–ª And albeit no argumeÌ„t builded on similitudes is firme to proue or improue any controuersie though rightly applied they may lighteÌ„ the matter to him that assenteth but not enforce it to him that denieth notwithstanding your similitudes as they proue nothing so they nothing lighten but more obscure the matter yet if these your similitudes were admitted froÌ„ maior and pilot to supreme gouernour what true conclusion can ye inferre vpon
name of person ecclesiasticall hath no other respect but to the causes ecclesiasticall and being gouerned or subiect as M. Feckenham hath graunted in respecte of eyther parte of this diuision temporall or ecclesiasticall if fellowes that in all respectes what soeuer of causes or persons ecclesiasticall or temporall the Prince is supreme gouernour Nor all M. Stapl. crooked shiftes and crabbed respects to hinder the sequele of this argumeÌ„t are any more to be respected than â—…ere trifles and toyes to delude the Readers withall But M. St. will not giue ouer the matter thus but will bring his darke respects to the aspect and light of all mens eyes by a familiar though somwhat an homely simâ—… As if master Robert Horne were a lay man and a paynter sayth he the Queene properly hath not to do with him as a paynter vnlesse it were for some lavve or order concerning paynters but as Robert Horne hir highnesse subiect and borne vnder hir obeysance Sée how enuye hath blynded this man that whereas for very spite he likeneth the reuerent and godly learned father in Christ to a paynter this his paynted similitude maketh also flat agaynst him For as he confesseth the Prince hath to doe vvith a paynter not onely in that he is simply hir highnesse subiecte borne vnder hir obeysance but also in respect he is suche a subiecte in whiche regarde he saythe she maketh lavves and orders also concerning paynters thoughe she entermeddle not with the Paynters pencell in drawing lynes and laying colours and other their perticuler actions euen so hath hir highnesse to do with all ecclesiasticall persons not onely in that they be simply subiectes borne vnder hir obeysance but also euen in that they be suche manner of ecclesiasticall subiects in which respect she may also make lawes and orders concerning ecclesiastical persons though she entermeddle not with preaching ministring the sacramentes and other their particuler actions Thus as God would haue it doth your owne similitude M. Stap. which of pure enuye ye bring foorth to deface the byshop withall so liuely in euery poynt make agaynst you as any similitude can do At length ye discende from your similitude to your playne purpose saying So shoulde the Queene haue also to doe with you yea in case ye were the true Byshop of VVinchester but not properly as Byshop or for your byshoply function for the whiche ye are immediatly vnder your Archbyshop and the Pope but considering you as a subiecte othervvyse or as Byshop either touching your temporalties and no further For the which the true Byshops also to their Prince do their homage With muche adoe for it sticketh in your throte lyke a boane ye admitte at length this case that the Bishop were the true Byshop of VVinchester but without any stay at the matter ye could compare him to a paynter but now beeing a Bishop he is as you say vnder his Archbishop and the Pope and vnder the Queene onely for his temporalties Here is no argument M. Stapleton but your bare assertions as though the matter were cleare and all out of question I ye had still reasoned from the similitude of the paynter and paynted it out in his true meaning ye had concluded another maner of tale that as the Prince mighte meddle euen with lawes and orders for paynters so she hath to do with Byshops not onely concerning their temporalties but euen coÌ„cerning that they be Byshops And so agayn your similitude excludeth your Pope And where ye say in that he is byshop he is immediatly vnder his Archbyshop and the Pope what if his Archbishop be not vnder the Pope neither is he not then also béeing immediatly vnder him exempted likewise from your Pope and thus ye stammer euen in your owne false principles Now when ye haue thus without any reasoning determined the Byshop to be vnder the Pope and that he dothe homage to the Quéene onely for his temporalties and no farther ye conclude the matter saying But what should I further reason with this man vvhiche as I haue sayde hathe remoued the Prince from all superioritie concerning the meere Byshoply or Priestly function and so with a notable contradiction hathe full vvorshipfully concluded agaynst hym selfe and eased hys aduersarie of any other proofe and eased master Feckenham also for taking any othe that the Queene is supreme head in all causes temporall and spirituall This notable contradiction is so sore a matter that you muste néedes haue a fling at it once agayne the contradiction is this The Prince hath not the iurisdiction of the meere Priestly or Byshoply functions The Prince hath the superioritie ouer the priestly or Byshoply functions Is not héere a notable contradiction and worthy to make thys finall conclusion thereon The Prince hathe not the iurisdiction of the meere Priestly or Byshoply functions Ergo He is remoued from all superioritie ouer the same functions Full vvorshipfully concluded to vse your owne termes master Stapleton What should ye reason further with this man but in steade of reasoning fall to making principles or sit downe and ease you with master Feckenham without any further proofe But mighte it please you to starte vp agayne and looke better aboute ye ye shoulde sée that betwéene euen that superioritie which worde notwithstanding the Byshop sayde not but power or iurisdiction of the meere byshoply or priestly function that is to saye his office and the proper actions of his office preaching binding and losing the ministring of the Sacramentes and betwéene the superioritie that is the ouersight and supreme gouernement in caring for directing and prouiding that all those functions and actions be duetifully done on their partes to whome they properly belong there is a great difference as all your similitudes hitherto haue proued and concluded agaynst you And that betwéene the dooing of the one and the not dooing of the other is no contradiction or opposition at all And therefore ye be not so eased yet but that ye muste take a little more paynes or else where ye had thought to haue wonne the spurres ye may happe to lose the saddle The eight Diuision MAster Feckenham standeth on foure poyntes whereby he thinketh he should periure himselfe if he should sweare to this laste parte of the othe in eccl. causes The first point is that he muste testifie it on a booke othe But to testifie any thing on a booke othe and not to knovve the same is periurie Then for him selfe he pleadeth ignoraunce that he neither knovveth it nor knovves any meanes hovv to come to the knovvledge of it Whervpon he ioyneth an issue with the Byshoppe which issue is this If the Byshop make proofe to him that any Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may clay me or take vpon them any suche gouernement in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes then he will yéelde and receiue the othe The meanes whereby he will haue this issue proued are these foure Either by suche order of gouernement
as our sauiour Christ hath lefte behinde him in his Gospell and nevve Testament Either by the vvritinges of suche learned doctors bothe olde and nevve vvhich haue from age to age vvitnessed the order of eeclesiasticall gouernement in Christes Church Either by the generall councels vvherin the right order of ecclesiasticall gouernement in Christes Churche hath bene moste faythfully declared and shevved from time to time Or else by the continuall practise of the like ecclesiasticall gouernement in some one Church or parte of all Christendome By these foure meanes this issue aforesaide as the state of the controuersie betwéene bothe parties must be tryed That by any of these foure meanes proofe be made to him That anie Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may claime or take vpō them anie such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes This requireth master Feckenham to be prored The satisfaction whereof to be proued by the Bishop is this That by some of these foure meanes proufe may be made to him that some Emperour Empresse King or Queene may clayme or take vppon them some such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes If the B. shall be founde to haue proued thus much to M. Feck he hath fully satisfyed his request and M. Feckenham according to his promise ought to sweare with humble thankes notwithstanding master Sapletons quarelling Counterblast The Bishop reducing M. Feckenhams first poynt to a forme of argument repeateth it No man may restifie any thing by a booke oth whereof he is ignorant and knoweth nothing without committing manifest periurie But you neyther knowe that the Queenes highnesse is the onely supreme gouernour of this Realme as well in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall things or causes as temporall neither yet know ye anye waye or meane whereby to haue anye knowledge thereof Ergo ye cannot testifie the same on a boke oth without manifest periurie To this the B. replieth that although he might flatly denie the minor that M. Feck is not without all knowledge and vtterly ignorant of the matter nor destitute of al meanes to attaine therto yet he sayth he wil answere by distinction of ignorance to shew how M. Feck is ignorāt how he is not He alleageth a thréefold deuision of ignorance out of Thomas of Aquine the chiefe of the Popish scholemen ▪ Ignorance of simplicitie Ignorāce of wilfulnes and ignorance of malice Prouing that he is not ignorant of the first sort hauing in king Henries and king Edwards reignes continually knowne acknowledged confessed it and therfore his ignorance is either of wilfulnesse or of malice or of both of them M. St. Counterblast standeth chiefly on thrée matters first his answere to Thom. distinction with an obiecting againe to the B. the opinion of Tho. in this cōtrouersie Secondly a quarrelling chalenging of the B. for vntruthes Thirdly an excuse of master Feckenham for setting forth this supremacie With a quarell ioyned thereto that the B. citing a sentence out of the booke of wisdome called it a sentence of the holy ghost concluding thereon a discorde of our doctrine But or euer he enter into his first part he noteth this for a generall warning before Now are maister Feckenham and master Horne come to couple and ioyne togither in the principall matter If this forewarning be true M. St. that this their coupling and ioyning togither on this issue to wete whether any princes haue takē any such gouernmēt on them be nowe by your confession the principall matter controuersed betweene the partyes standing in variaunce whiche as ye sayde before is conuenient and necessarie to haue before our eyes and then deligently to see howe the proufes are of eche partie applied for the confirming of their assertions Then all those sixe principles whiche ye sette vp before your Counterblast as markes to fixe the eye of the Reader vppon were but false markes and not the principall matter wherein the parties coupled them selues togither to proue or improue the same Then were almost all that hitherto M. Stap. hath sayde as the Reader marking this well shall sée and the most of that which he hath to say in this great Counterblast nothing else but a running about the Bushe and wresting of euerye thing from the principall matter in which they ioyned to some other matters wherein they coupled not Whiche is plaine to beguile and abuse not rightly to direct the eye of the Reader as the Reader fixing his eye on thys issue shall soone espie your falsehoode This issue then being the principall matter as ye say and the Bishop coupling and ioyning herein togither with master Feckenham as ye also say and the Bishop hauing proued that which he endeuoured himselfe to proue which ye likewise haue confessed what remayneth by your owne tale telling but that the Bishop hath fully proued the principall matter in question Neither will you as you say nor any other Catholikes greatly contend with him for that he hath proued and he hath proued that that he laboured in he laboured in that he coupled he coupled in this issue thys issue is the principall matter betwéene them whie then do ye so fiersely contende but that ye woulde shewe your selfe a vaine sophisticall and brabling quarrellour that haue no great cause to contende nor anye cause at all and yet will so greatly contende onely of wylfull malice confessing your selfe the thing to be proued that is the principall matter Master Stap. hauing giuen this forewarning commeth to his first part which he deuideth thréefold First he iesteth out the matter with scoffes which I referre to his common place thereon Secondly he denieth master Feckenham to haue any ignorance in this poynt except it were inuincible ignorance by no study or diligence able to be put away and therfore pardonable Since ye admit the distinction M. Stap. ye bring out of time your other inuincible ignorance How pardonable it is is another question But sée how ignorantly while ye would defende M. Fec you ouerthwart him he pleadeth ignorance for his defence and you say he is not ignorant and woulde put the B. to proue that he should be ignorant of wilfulnesse and malice which the B. hath done alreadie and so ye debarre M. Feckēham of his refuge and make him to haue knowledge of this poynt Which not only he himself denieth but which your selfe afterwards denie also yea that he could not haue knowledge of this poynt But you thinke to escape cleare with helping the matter by a newe pertition of ignorance adding a fourth part of inuincible ignorance Surely say you if there were any ignorance in this point it were such as S. Tho. and other call inuincible ignorance Except M. St. ye confound this fourth ignorance with one of the thrée before named ye quite exclude M. Fec from the whole distinction of Thomas and yet ye say the distinction may be true ye will not stick with him for that distinction So that eyther ye
as to receyue it what soeuer hath not his authoritie out of the Scriptures And what so-euer wee finde not in the Scriptures we may vse them euen as we list our selues Why may we not say as S. Augustine saide Quia Canonicum non â—…st non me astringit Bicause it is not the Canonicall Scripture it bindeth me not to beleue or receyue it but of this matter furder as ye giue furder occasion Thirdly your argument of proportion from a Parliament to London fayleth standing on your olde and vayue presupposals that we haue graunted or must graunt you that your Popish Church is the true Churche That Christian realmes haue the same respect to your Popish church that a Citie in any Realme hath to the whole estate of the same Realme and againe that your Popes violent Councels are as frée lawfull and generall and enact onely as Godly decrées and constitutions to the directing of the true Churche as the Parliaments of a realme be frée lawfull and generall and enact godly lawes and constitutions for their policies and estates All these things beyng nothing proportionable we must graunt you to be true and fitte or else this your argument and your former crake neyther barell better herring may go togither a Gods name The rest of your counter blast to this diuision as it is nothing materiall so it is eyther altogither wordes of course or else a petit quarell that ye lappe vp all the matter withall bicause the Bishop called this sentence a sentence of the Holy Ghost In maleâ—…lam animam non 〈◊〉 sapientia VVisedome shall not enter into a frowarde soule which bicause it is mere impertiuent and friuolous I haue reiected it to your common places Discorde on our doctrine can ye gather none thereon but you would faine sowe discorde where none is and yet ye boast of vnitie But if ye remembered setting all other discordes aside how well as is afore sayd your Sorbonists and your Louanists and you Thomas Stapleton agrée euen with your owne swéete S. Thomas of Aquine and how your tale agreeth with it selfe how it excuseth and accuseth M. Feckenham ye should then sée who they be that as ye say in place of vniforme tuning ruffle vs vp a blacke Sanctus who they be that chaunging their shapes like Proteus haue so often altred their religion and whether they touch M. Feckenham and you or any of your chiefe Masters yea or no. The ninth Diuision THe Bishop hauing by Thomas his distinction of ignorance answered M. Feckenhams argument descendeth to cope with M. Feckenham in his issue and to proue the same by all the sayd meanes that he requireth And first to the issue whiche was That any Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may claime or take vpoÌ„ them any suche gouernment in spirituall or Ecclesiasticall causes The Bishop answereth that they ought to take such gouernment Ergo they may lawfully do it For his antecedeÌ„t that they ought he referreth to the foure meanes of the issue that M. Feckenham would haue it tried by M. Stapl. picking by quarels of other pretended answers made by the Bishop before falsely surmising that he then denied or mollified the woordes of the othe and that now he answereth without any molliâ—…iyng or restiaint that the Queene ought to take vpon hir such kinde of regiment these answeres he calleth so â—…arring variable diuerse and so contrary the one to the other that if the one be true the other must be false and so concludes they be false and deceiueable both of them But M. St. this is a false and a deceiuable point of your owne deuising from the which I perceyue by the tenour of your whole counterblast ye will neuer iarre nor varie one iote except God sende you hereafter better grace and iudgement than thus still to ground your self and your writings on manifest lies and forgeries and then presuppose them in your nodâ—…le for manifest principles and truthes Thus do ye all your booke ouer so ye play here First ye ground your selfe on a forged answere that the Bishop should before haue made imagining it must néedes be true bicause you say ye certainly vnderstande that M. Feckenham hath so reported to some of his friendes that the Bishop made then another resolute answere This is all that ye all age for proofe of it ye haue it but by heare say at the hande of some partiall tale bearer some tolde you that M. Feckenham told some that the Bishop tolde him that this was his resolute answere and you beleue it for a certentie and write it solemnly in your booke to deface the Bishop as it were with doubble and contrary answering your selfe in the meane season answering nothing to the argument nor to the Bishops present and printed answere And therfore I neede returne no other answere to you than that one tolde me that another told him that he told you that ye were to light of credence to beleue euery flimme flamme tale and to rash of Iudgement to clap downe such tales in your booke of whiche ye had no better proufe than that all the worlde should see claw me claw thee two false marchants néede no broker they say The tenth Diuision THe Bishop entring into his proufes of the issue that Princes ought to take vpoÌ„ them such gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes as the Queenes Maiestie doth chalenge and take vppon hit among other properties belonging to the Princely office to beginne with all auoucheth out of Deut. the 17. and the 13. with some expositoures vpon the same that the Prince is commaunded to haue by him the booke of the lawe to reade in it diligently to this ende that he himselfe may learne the feare of God and cause his subiects to become Israelites by his princely authoritie redressing the peruersnesse of such aâ—… swerue from the ordinances and ceremonies appointed of god The which beyng true the conclusion consequently followeth thereuppon M. St. answere to this argument resteth on foure faults that he findeth with the Antecedent which he calleth vntruthes so reckoneth them vp also in his score but bicause they are the principall materiall pointes whereon his answere dependes I thought it more fitte to note them here But first after his scoffing craking maner he saith to the Bishop Go on I saie in Gods name M. Horne and prosecute your plea stoutly God sende you good speede And so he doth eueÌ„ such as ye the honestie of your cause deserue c. But all these his fromps and vaunts I ouerpasse and referre them to his common places and will onely answere to that which he chargeth the Bishop withall which is no lesse than infidelitie and vnskilfulnesse And to beginne with the later bicause he saith it is the least matter and noteâ—…h it for the former vntruth Your vnskilfulnesse saith he whiche is the least matter standeth in that ye say the King is commaunded to haue by him
religion Secondly that they ought to doe this with an especiall regards and care Thirdely they perceyue and rightly vnderstande that it is Gods will they shoulde so doe Now since that this by master Stapletons déepe silence is agréed vpon betwixt the Bishop and him I make hereon this argument To order and set forth Gods true religion with especiall regarde and care is the Princes duetie But the only sort of gouernment that the Quéenes Maiestie doth chalenge and take vpon hiâ—… in ecclesiasticall causes is to order and set forth Gods true Religion with an especiall regarde and care Ergo Prinâ—… ought to take vpon them such gouernment as the Quéenes Maiestie doth claime and take vpon hir in ecclesiasticall causes And thus is the Bishops antecedent directly proued and so consequently the principall matter of M. Feck issue Nowe as the former part being the generall assertion to all the ensamples following is no whitte impeached by any aunswere of master Stap. to it but by silence whiche with him is an argument of confession graunted so like a very Counterblaster in déed he blusâ—…reth and puffeth at the seconde part as though he would all to blast it Moses sayth the Bishop was supreme gouernour ouer Gods people and was not chief priest or Bishop for that was Aaron Here master Stapleton denyeth not Moses to be the supreme gouernour but that he was not chiefe priest or Bishop he vtterly gainsayeth it It is an vntruth sayth he in his score for Moses was the chiefe priest as shall be prooued Here is a flat promise of proufe but I feare me it wil neuer be perfourmed neyther doth master Stapleton here go about the perfourmance of it And therefore the Bishops denial of Moses to be the chiefe Priest must stand for a truth till by prouing Moses to be the chiefe Priest he haue proued it to be an vntruth And in the meane time his promise must stande but for a crake as also his prowde entraâ—…nte into his Chapter That the Scripture by the Bishop alleaged reacheth nothing home but rather infringeth and plainely marreth the Bishoppes purpose and fullye standeth on our syde sayeth this student so greatly hath arrogancie sotted him He fareth as did the Souldiour who when his aduersarie had manye tymes in wrastling hurled him downe in the sighte of euerie stander by yet woulde hée neuer confesse that hée had anye fall yea most arrogantlye â–ª he styll affyrmed that hée had â—…ast the other And euen so playeth this student for this of wrastling is one of his common similitudes he contendeth to wrastle with the Bishoppe whiche is in verys déede as hée sayeth in this Chapter Impar congressus Achâ—…lls Troilus An vneuen matche betweene Troylus and Achilles What a number of â—…oule falles hée hath had yea howe hée hath béene ouerturned in hys â—…wne trippes is apparaunt to euery Readers eyes and goe no further but euen to hys last Chapter And yet sée howe hée craketh that all the Byshoppes allegations marre hys owne cause and fully stande on hys syde Where contraryewyse they haue drie beaten him backe bellie side and all And as hée thus fondely maketh vaunt of his former victorie â—…o I doubt nothing sayth he it will fare with his examples Well sayd of a student like an other Gawin he doubteth nothing But sée a sodaine qualme of hys inconstancie for euen streyght wayes after he hath cryed out all comes to shorâ—… he sayth but here am I shrewedly â—…ncombred and in a great doubt what to doe Whie master Stapleton are ye now so soone in a great doubt and right nowe as doeth bolde Bayarde doubted nothing and haue before alreadie without any stammering thereat clapped downe your marginall note for a full resolute aunswere that Moyses was the chiefe Priest and nowe doubt ye what to answere But master Stapleton hath so many weapons that he is shrewdly encombred with them as it were another armed Golias and yet one smal poebble stone will soone ease him of this encombrance He telles vs he hath so many aunsweres that he doubteth with which he should beginne for I could sayth he make a short but a true aunswere that these ensamples are fully aunswered alreadie by master D. Harding and master Dorman In déede master Stapleton this were a short aunswers but I sée your selfe feare as ye sayde before it woulde come to short and not reache home to the matter Yet say you if ye shoulde referre the Reader thither to his and your great ease it should be to the sparing not only of penne ynke and paper but of the time also which of all thinges is most precious It séemeth master Stapleton ye are a man of déepe casting these are good considerations of penne ynke paper and tyme. But whie followe ye not your owne councell whiche if ye had obserued and left out so many impertinent vagaries and other your trifling common places ye had saued more paper penne ynke and tyme by thrée halues than ye haue done And here as séeming full resolued to follow this aduise ye clappe downe another marginall note All master Hornes examples out of the olde Testament aunswered alreadie by master Doctour Harding and master Dorman Here sayth he is a shorte but a true aunswere To this shorte aunswere I aunswere againe All M. Doctor Hardings and M. Dormans answeres confuted alreadie by the B of Sarum and M. Nowell Here is another as short an answere as yours M. Stap. and a great deale truer whiche I remitte to the indifferent viewers of both their answeres Nowe might we both rest and breath vs from further answering of these ensamples and spare penue ynke paper and time also that he séemeth to accompt most precious But another thing was more precious vnto him and that was master Feckenhams hyre and his friendes largesse for so much Paper penne ynke and time spent about his booke and the gaine of the printed copies which the bigger volume it came vnto for he woulde not séeme a thréehalfepennie student the fatter exhibition it should yéelde and he séeme the greater clerke yea to go beyonde his masters And therefore there is no remedie he will spare neyther penne ynke paper time nor paynes also but that his Counterblast shall be blowne vp to so large and full a volume that it may encounter euen the best of theirs To whose answeres if he shoulde referre himselfe and saye no more thereto Then I feare me sayth he woulde steppe forth if not master Horne a good simple plaine man in his dealings yet some other ioly fine freshe pregnant wittie fellowe yea and bring me to the streightes which way so euer I did treade You are loath I perceiue master Stapleton to be brought into the streight way to treade aright therein for then your wrie treading woulde soone be espied But ye séeke crookes and shifting answeres for the nonce And lyke the vayne talkatiue Arrian Philosopher ye dispise the right reuerende and learned father calling
and so I feare in the ende ye must be fayne to do Nay say you it frameth not so smoothely and closely to youre purpose as ye vvene Well Master Stapleton it hath hitherto so framed that ye are fayne to gyue ouer youre tackelyng and forsake the perfourmaunce of youre promyse and to séeke oute other shiftes of descante so that althoughe ye woulde beare vs in hande it frameth not so smoothelie and closelie for the Bishoppe as hée thinkes yet you graunt thereby that it frameth to his purpose But as for your purpose for all youre olde or newe stuffe it neyther frameth wyde nor close smoothe nor roughe but bringes it out of frame For what an argument call ye this Though Moyses was no prieste yet Moyses was a prophete so well as a Prince Ergo Princes in that respect Moyses was a Prince may not followe his princely steppes Was not Saule also for the while a Prophet Num Saul inter prophetas Was not Debora a Prophetesse and yet a Princesse too or Iudge ouer Israel Was not Dauid a Prophete and is commonly called Regius propheta the Kingly Prophete Neuerthelesse all Christian Princes maye and oughte to folowe his princely supreme gouernement And yet you cry Giue me now M. Horne princes prophetes giue me princes and lawemakers by especiall order and appoyntmente ordeined of GOD. Doe ye not sée howe fondly ye reason and howe ye confute your selfe â–ª Yée reason as thoughe there were no difference to be putte betwéene those especiall giftes and appointmentes and the ordinarie gifte of their Princely authoritie bycause one Prince had bothe and that after an extraordinarie and especiall sorte but if those commaundementes lawes and giftes of prophecies were suche specialties as you saye ordeined of God then do your self seuer them from the prince ly authoritie And why do ye then demaund suche prerogatiues in euery Prince whiche they had not in respâ—… â–ª they were Princes but in other especiall respects But by this your fonde rule if bycause they had suche especiall priuileges commaundementes or giftes therfore they are not to be broughte in for an example of the authoritie then you must not alleage them for the Priestes or bishops authoritie in Ecclesiast causes neyther except your Priests Bishops haue the lyke prerogatiues and that God wold haue as great authoritie giuen to them as he would and commanded to be giuen to Moyses And thus your argument maketh directly againste your selfe Yea you may hereby exclude al Princes from al ciuil gouernement too whiche if we proued they might haue bicause Moyses ordered and directed all the Iudiciall lawes of Gods people may ye not replie on this fashion and say Giue me Princes and lawmakers by special order appointment ordeined of God For you knowe wée can giue you none in these lawes neyther that are equall to Moyses May not therfore Moyses ensample herein be alleaged for the Princes authoritie in makyng ciuill lawes bicause the Prince maketh them not with suche speciall order and appointment ordeined of God as Moses did Yes M. Stap. Moyses authoritie may well be alleaged for al Princes authoritie although they haue not the like gifts that Moyses Iosue or Dauid had Yea those singular ornamentes of God in them ioyned to their princely authoritie make so 〈◊〉 an argument to feare Princes from doing the like things bicause they haue not the like excellent giftes that they be rather encouragementes to set such singular Princes gouernement as patternes to folow euermore before their eyes and the better those Princes were the better theyr ensamples be Where as you reason contrarywise such a Prince was more excelleÌ„t than princes be now Ergo our Princes now may not take example of him but ye shoulde conclude that they oughte to take example of him the rather And euen for these causes such Princes are examples to all other bicause they so excell all other So men set their children in writing to the best and most cunning penman at the least to haue them come the nearer to him so muche as they can though they caÌ„not fully attain to his perfectioÌ„ not to say tushe he writes too fine for them and therfore they must not take ensamples of him Yea if a learned Schoolemaister were also an excellent diuine myght not the same man be reckoned for a schoolemaister yea rather for a paterne and ensample for other schoolemaisters to follow bicause of his singular gift to traine the children vp in the feare knowledge of God so well as in the rudimentes of Grammer And will ye then debarre Moyses from being an example to other Princes bicause he was not only a Prince but a Prophete also bicause he had more excellente giftes and prerogatiues than other Princes haue But here thynking thereby the more to abase and dashe Christian Princes oute of countenaunce from taking example of this excellente Prince Moyses ye mounte so highe into the prayse of him that lyke to the Fryer which in the prayse of saincte Frauncis extolling him aboue all the Sainctes aboue Seraphin and Cherubyn yea aboue Christe coulde fynde no place in Heauen to sette him in so where in the prayse of Moyses ye shoulde referre him vnto Christe ye ouershoote your selfe and referre Christe vnto him making Christe to be terminum à quo and Moses terminum ad quem â–ª Moyses sayeth saye you The Lorde thy God will rayse thee vp a prophete from among thyne owne nation and of thy brethren suche a one as my selfe him shalte thou heare Ergo Châ—…ist is so to be hearde of vs as Moyses was of the â—…wes Hereuppon preposterously ye inuerte the reason backewarde not from Moyses to Christe of whome Moyses knowledged hym selfe but a fygure but from Christe agayne to Moyses as though Christe also were a fygure of him saying As Christe is a kyng a Prophet a Prieste and a Bishoppe to vs so was Moyses to them a Prince â–ª a Prophete a Priest and a Bishop As Christe is of vs to be hearde and obeyed â—…s vvell in all matters Ecclesiasticall as temporall so was Moyses to be hearde and obeyed of the Iewes in matters and causes as well temporall as spirituall What a manifest writhing of Scripture is this Who playeth Cacus parte here that drewe Hercules â—…en by the tayles backwarde and so stole them into his theeuishâ—… denne Doe not you so hale this testimonie of Scripture backwarde lyke the witche that sayde hir Pater noster backewarde to make hir payle goe forewarde saying As Christe is King Prophete Prieste and Bishop so was Moyses As Christe is to be hearde and obeyed so was Moyses Where by the testimonie alleaged ye shold rather haue reasoned forwarde thus As Moyses was Prince Prophet priest bishop to theÌ„ so should Christ be to vs As Moyses was hearde and obeyed of them so shoulde Christe be of vs This had bene the right and orderly reason but you sawe that then youre wresting the Text woulde
is the full effect of your whole answere which how effectuall it is to infringe the Bishops assertion let all the worlde be indge And yet ye so triumphe hereon that as it were some instie freshe Champion hauing beaten all downe before him ye crie out for another aduersarie Here I wish say you to encounter with master Nowell Ye are all heart to the hard héeles I sée M. St. and were it not herein that ye resemble the wise captayne that in the beginning you mentioned out of Luke 14 I woulde haue sayde this chalenge had procéeded of a noble and hawte â—…orage but bicause it wanteth that naturall wisdoâ—…e and foresight so rashly to runne vpon one aduersarie hauing more than bothe your handfuls with him yet more fondly to chalenge another on your toppe your caâ—…se beeinâ—… so badde and your selfe so weake and vnskilfull a souldiour withall all wise men will iudge it in you neither pollicie nor manhoode but that in your foole hardie presumption ye play but the desperate Dicke if not a Thom of Lâ—…dlem The. 12. Diuision NExt to Moses the Bishop adioyneth the ensample of Iosue prouing by diuers testimonies and doings of Iosue that the supreme gouernement in all ecclesiasâ—…i also well as temporall causes was committed to him â—…ot to Eleazar the high priest who onely had the ministration of things belonging to the priestly office M. Stap. in al the residue of the examples â—…auing before promised to be as briefe as he may yet to amplifie his answere least it should be too briefe or his counterbâ—…ast too small in the beginning and so throughout his answers picketh bye quarels at the Apologie at master Nowell at the Conuocation and other thinges not to the present purpose but for any materiall or directe answere to any of Iosues doinges he vseth nothing but méere shiftes or very childishe arguments First to Iosue his example generally M. D. Harding sayth he sheweth that allegation to importe no chiefe rule in spirituall matters as in deede it doth not As though the whole matter M Stap. muste be determined by â—…hat so euer your M. D. Harding hath sayde and you with it is learned proofe in deede it dothe not haue confirmed your masters saying Now as though this were betwéene his allegation and your coÌ„firmation a sufficient and ful prooâ—…e ye set downe theron your marginall note as a cleare case Iosue no supreme gouernour in all ecclesiasticall causes What kinde of arguing call ye this M. Stapl but sée howe soone at the first ye confounde your selfe and 〈◊〉 that Iosue had the gouernement in eccleuasticall matters For where ye picke by quarels already answered agaynst the Apologie and master Nowell about this phrase to goe foorth and come in and will not haue it vnderstoode onely of going and comming to and fro the warres as M. Nowell hath fully proued it dothe as also Ruvi 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 Aben â—…zra do expounde it and Lyra expresseth the meaning of the phrase do a quod noâ—… siâ—… 〈◊〉 ad labores sed priâ—…us so that he be not the last but the first to labour But say yau Immediatly before it is generally vvritten prohoc si quid agendum crit Eleazar sacerdos consulet dominum For him meaning Iosue Eleazar 〈◊〉 aske counsell of God when any thing is to be done In which words we see euidentâ—…y that Iosue whatsoeuer he did touching the gouerning of the people in ecclesiasticall matters he did nothing of him selfe but was in all suche matters instructed of Eleazarus the high Priest. Doe ye not see withal euidently master Stapleton that admitting this to be vnderstood so generally as you preteÌ„d howe your selfe doe piaynly graunte that the gouernement in ecclesiasticall matters appertayned to Iosue in saying VVhat soeuer he did touching the gouerning of the people in ecclesiasticall matters and what now will ye make Iosue a Priest no say you but in all such thinges he was instructed of Eleazarus the highe priest VVhos 's parte therfore it was alwayes to aske counsell of God when Iosuâ—… had anything to doe Why what then M. Stap. the question is not asked heere of asking counsell who asked it of God or whether Iosue asked it of Eleazar but by whose gouernment it was done We graunt the Princes shoulde aske counsell in all ecclesiasticall matters of their godlye learned clergie and they shoulde aske it of God that is to say of his holy worde wherein he hath reuealed his will. But what letteth this asking counsell the ordering doing setting forth and gouerning of those ecclesiasticall matters to be in the Prince What hindreth this that the Prince ought to aske counsell also in euery weightie ciuill affayre the chiefe gouernment thereof to be in the Prince Though he follow in all points the aduice of his counsellers yet haue not they the chiefe authoritie This exception therefore of asking counsell taketh not away your graunt that Iosue had the doing of those things that touched the gouerning of the people in ecclesiasticall matters And so is this a fit ensample euen by your owne flatconfession And with all ye haue graunted the full issue that godly Princes haue and may take vpon them such gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes as the Q. maiestie now doth Here if ye would flée touch and say ye graunt Iosue had the gouernement in causes ecclesiasticall but not the supreme gouernment although this be but a shifting toy so long as he did not those things by any others gouernance and yet is it much more than your fellowes or your selfe otherwhiles will confesse that he was any gouernour at all in ecclesiasticall matters so contrarie ye are to your fellowes and your selfe yet what can ye shew why as ye grauÌ„t Iosue to be gouernour so he should not be supreme gouernour also but be subiect to another If ye stand on this argument Iosue must in all things aske counsell of the Priest Ergo Iosue in all things is subiect to the Priestes iudgement By this argument you will make the kinges counsell to be the kings supreme gouernours to But they for all theyr good counsell giuen to the king be he neuer so much bâ—…und to take it are but his subiectes still therein and he their soueraigne Lord for by him when al their couÌ„sell is done the thing must be set forth established through his authoritie As therfore you haue grauÌ„ted Iosue had the gouerning of the people in ecclesiastical matters so this exceptioÌ„ doth nothing embarre his supreme gouernment therein but rather establish it that in all his doings were they neuer so generall the priest was but the counsellour first learning of God and then instructing his Prince but the gouerning and setting forth thereof belonged vnto Iosue And to reason on the contrarie from asking or giuing counsel and instruction to a chiefe authoritie or from following good counsell to obedience and subiection is but an homely argument and fitte for
haue for warrant the expresse commaundement of God. So that by your wicked principle no good nor godly princes ought to be drawne into example for any other Princes to follow but naughtie and wicked Princes such as had so little any part or sparke of Moses glorie that they had not the spirit of God in them or at the least it is vncertaine whose spirite they had such as the people were not commaunded to heare them suche as had not Gods expresse commaundement for their doinges these are fitte examples with you for Princes to followe Thus do ye shew how ye haue heretofore yet still would abuse Princes making them so drunken with that cuppe of abhominations of the whore of Babilon that they might take ensample of no good nor godly Prince But let vs sée howe substantially ye proue your maior You reason by admitting the contrary thereto ab absurdo from a foule inconuenience that we should fall into by taking such Princes for example or else fall into a â—…oule contradiction agaynst our selues Else if ye will haue your examples say you to proue and confirme then as Iosue circumcided so let the Prince baptise and as Iosue sacrificed vpon an altare so let the Prince in Cope Surplesse celebrate your holy coÌ„munion But these two things as peculier offices of Bishops and Priests M Nowell excludeth flatly all Princes from yea and sayth they ought to be vntouched of Prince or other person Ergo thus agayne either ye iumble and iarre one from another or else your argument to bring Iosue for example to proue and confirme falleth downe righte choose whiche of bothe ye will. Héere is as M. Stap. thinketh a marueilous Dilemma and yet the absurditie therof moste easily anoyded and the contradiction as playnly turned vpon him selfe To the maior I answere that as the one did these things so dothe the other and therfore the one is a fit example of the other As Iosue then did circumcise so the Prince nowe baptiseth As Iosue did then sacrifice on an altare so the Prince doth now celebrate not ours as he scornefully termes it but the Lordes holy communion Neither of them by executing them selues the fact but by commaunding appoynting and ouerséeing the facte to be rightly executed by the ministers to whom the doing apperteineth And that this was Iosue his doing and not otherwise Lyra vpon these wordes Et primum quidem benedixit populo doth witnesse And first of all he blessed the people c. Non est intelligenduÌ„ quòd Iosue proprie loquendo benedixit populum quòd hoc pertinet ad sacerdotum officium sed imprecatus est bona populo tanquà m princeps populi post immolationeÌ„ praedictaÌ„ quam similiter fecit non per se sed per sacerdotes VVee must not vnderstand these words he blessed the people that Iosue in speaking him selfe did blesse them for this apperteyned to the Priestes office But Iosue as the Prince of the people wished well vnto them after the offring afore sayde whiche likewyse he did not by himselfe but by the Priestes And againe Posthac legit omnia verba c. Then afterwarde he reade all the wordes of the lawe the blessinges and cursings according to all that is written in the booke of the law there was not a worde that Moses had commaunded whiche Iosue read not before all the congregation of Israell as well before the women and the children as the straunger c. Non per se sed per sacerdotes vt praedictum est coram omni multitudinem Israel c. Not by him selfe but by the priestes as is before sayde afore all the multitude of Israell And euen as he thus read and blessed by his commaundement and their ministerie so saith Lyra fecit immolationem similiter he did offer sacrifice in like sort not by him selfe but by commaunding the minister to do it And do ye thinke that he circumcised all the whole people of Israell with his owne handes because the wordes are circuncidit filios Israel Do ye thinke bicause the bare wordes are Igitur Iosue de nocte consurgens mouit castra that he remooued all their tents with his owne handes and of the stones in Iordan alios quoque duodcim lapides posuit in medio Iordanis alueo that he set them in the riuer with his owne fingers Do ye thinke of the Citie and the King of Hai succendit vrbem fecit eam tumulum sempiternum regem quoque eius suspendit in patibulo he burnt the Citie and hee made it an heape for euer and the King thereof he hanged on a gallowes and of the other Kinges Iosue smote them and slewe them and hanged them on fiue trees all these thinges and a number of such other as well seruile as other deedes as well temporall as ecclesiasticall thinke you bycause still all runneth vnder his name and his doing that he did them hym selfe Or rather gather thereon that syth he did not these things himselfe and yet so well in ecclesiasticall as other matters all beareth the name alone of him it importeth his supreme gouerment and direction of them So little is there any absurditie in the comparison of these doings but your owne absurde mistaking and reasoning so absurdly on them not distinguishing betwene the doing of these things and the maner of doing them To the minor likewise I answere there is no contradiction iumbling or iarring betwene the Bishop and master Nowell therein For of the same minde that the one is is the other also as the Bishop hath declared many times in his answere euer obseruing this destinction betwéene the doing of the fact and the ouersight in appoynting the fact to be done But this of a peuish selfe will ye will not vnderstande And so here bicause the wordes are simplie spoken that Iosue did such things ye vnderstande it that personally he executed the doing of them But what now if you doe contrarie your owne selfe and talking after of this same partie confesse that the doing of these and such like things â–ª must be vnderstoode by this sayde maner of anothers ministerie May ye not then most worthely here your owne wordes returned on your selfe that your argument falleth downe right if euer it stoode vpright your selfe in playne spéeche hurling it downe and that eyther here or there yée speake agaynst your owne conscience your owne sayings iumbling and iarring one from another and so ye encurre eyther the absurditie or the contradiction choose which of both you will. The. 13. Diuision The next ensample of the Byshop is of Dauid how God appoynted him king not onely for the people to liue in ciulâ—… peace and honesâ—…ie but chiefly that by Dauids gouernment care and zeale therein they mighte be fosâ—… red vp in Gods true religion decayed among them by the negligent reigne of king Saule This the Eyshop proued by king Dauids Actes in ordering disposing reforming the
ye bryng hym foorthe to better purpose or else whyle yee thynke by clawyng hym thus to wynne hys good fauour yee gette hys heauy displeasure and that he answere ye flatly non hercule veniam tertio he will not come at your cal Howbeit ye will once agayne in hope of better lucke bring him foorth and alleage his authoritie better than ye haue done hitherto Besides that say you it is to be considered as M. D. Harding toucheth that he passed other Princes herein bicause he had the gifte of prophecie So that neither those thinges that the Apologie sheweth of Dauid or those that ye and master Nowell adde therevnto for the fortification of the sayde superioritie can by any meanes induce it This friuolous argument he was a Prophet also aswell as a Prince Ergo his superioritie in that he was a Prince can not be alleaged for other Princes to followe ye vsed before as your owne freshe stuffe to shifte off Moses ensample but as it nothing helped your cause then no more dothe it nowe Onely it detecteth héere your vayne crake there of vnspent stuffe where in déede it was olde rotten stuffe spent before by D. Harding on king Dauid as héere your selfe coÌ„fesse yet there ye brought it as a notable fresh surplusage beyonde all that had bene sayde But as you thus of D. Hardings olde scroppes héere would haue made vs there newe fresh stuffe of your owne wherby the alleaging of him agayne this third time openeth your shame so yet once agayne ye make your M. D. Harding and your selfe for companie confounde your owne tales and speake contrarie to your selues Right now ye sayde and alleaged your masters authoritie for it that king Dauids doings were no more than Queene Maries doings to employ a supremacie Nowe ye say agayne and like wise alleage your master for it that king Dauid passed other princes heerein bicause he had the gifte of prophecie If he passed other princes héerein then he passed Quéene Mary whome many other Princes haue also héerein passed and so his doings were more than were Quéene Maries doings héerein For who knowe not that she was no Prophete and thus the oftner ye alleage your master ye take your master tardie in one lie or another and make him still contrarie both himselfe and his cause also Againe it King Dauid were a Prophete as I graunt he was a Prophete ye wote might and did determine doctrine but your selfe sayde before Dauid in all his doings determined no doctrine and thus ye lie on your owne head and make your master witnesse thereto Well leaue at the length to cite your masters authorities for shame master Stapleton since ye can bring them out no handsomer or howe well so euer ye haue brought them out to your aduantage since they be no better proues than that He affirmeth he noteth he toucheth as though all were gospell that master Doctor Harding affirmeth noteth or toucheth Are ye so fond to thinke any man would yéelde so soone vnto them vnlesse he were as wise as your selfe But since none of all these reasons will serue we shall now haue other stuffe of your owne though not very fresh but such stale refuse as your masters haue refused but to you all is fishe that commes to nette ye do wisely to let go nothing that maye any waye be wrested to helpe so yll a cause And first ye reason from the authoritie of the scripture In déede this is a better way than to reason from D. Hardings authoritie The Scripture say you in the sayde place by you and master Nowell alleaged sayth that Dauid did worke iuxta omnia quae scripta sunt in lege dominâ—… according to all things written in the lawe of God. What conclusion can ye inferre hereon agaynst the Bishops allegation of Dauid Ergo he had not an especiall care and regard in ordring and setting forth Gods true religion if ye make the quite contrarie conclusion He did worke according to all things written in the lawe of God Ergo as the B. sayth he had an especiall care and regard in ordring directing Gods true religion then should ye make a most true conclusion where otherwise rightly applied it can no ways serue your turn Thus bring ye out that which once again ouerturnes your cause and proues K. Dauids supreme gouernmeÌ„t And euen so the Q. Maiestie by this ensample of K. Dauid is taught to do the like as praysed be to god for hir therfore she foloweth wel herein the steps of K. Dauid doing iuxta omnia quae scripta suÌ„t in lege domini according to all things written in gods law And where the papists in al their errors this amoÌ„g other of the supremacie do praeter coÌ„tra omnia quae scripta sunt in lege domini besides against all things writteÌ„ in gods law As Dauid redressed eccl. disorders crept in before his time so the Q. highnes now hath redressed such disorders as she fouÌ„d before hir time crept in Thus the more ye reason the more stil ye make against your selfe Ye had néed adde some better stuffe thaÌ„ this or els if ye thus hold on your friends wold wish M. Fec had hired ye to hold your peace when he first moued you to plead for him Master Stap. séeing it now more than high time to adde some notable thing to better his cause VVherevnto I adde sayth he a notable saying of the scripture in the sayd booke by you alleaged concerning Dauids doings by you brought foorth touching the Priestes and Leuits Vt ingrediantur domum dei iuxta ritum suum sub manu Aaron patris corum sicut prâ—…ceperat dominus deus Israel King Dauids appoyntment was that the Leuits and Priestes should enter into the house of God there to serue vnder the gouernment of whome I pray you not of King Dauid but vnder the spirituall gouernment of their spirituall father Aaron and his successours The gouernour of them was Eleazarus Upon this notable sentence for your purpose as ye thinke you gather thrée notes And bicause ye would go orderly ye begin first with the last note VVhere we haue to note first say you that Dauid appoynted hereto the Leuits nothing of himself But sicut praeceperat dominus deus Israel as the Lorde God of Israel had before appoynted VVe haue here againe to note first in you M. Stap. no plaine dealing that begin with the last part of the sentence first And wherefore I pray you but that that which is spoken here of this matter in especiall ye woulde make it séeme to serue for all Dauids doings in generall VVe haue to note againe your hacking and wresting of this sentence which sheweth a playne destination betweene theyr turnes of comming in and their ordinarie ministerie in theyr turnes in attending on the highe priest The text is thus â—…ae vices eorum secundum ministeria sua vt ingrediantur domum domini iuxta ritum
suum sub manu Aaron patris eorum sicut praeceperat dominus deus Israel These are theyr courses after their ministeries to enter into the house of the Lorde and according to theyr manner be vnder the hande of Aaron their father as the Lorde God of Israel hath commaunded Which last wordes ye beginne withall and ioyne them to the first parte as thoughe the Lordes commaundement had béene of Dauids appoyntment where it was onely of the obedience of all the Tribe of Leuie to be vnder Aaron and his successors in the ministerie which in deede was Gods statte commaundement But the appoynting of the courses to those mencioned in that place was Dauids commaundement euen as your selfe doe say it was King Dauids appoyntment And the Chapter before of the lyke argument playnlye sayeth Iuxta pracepta quoquè Dauid 〈◊〉 c. And according to the last commaundements of Dauid the Leuites were numbered from twentie yeare and vpwarde to wayte vnder the hande of the sonnes of Aaron in the seruice of the house of the Lorde But admit that these wordes Sicut praeceperat c. as god had commaunded be to be ment as you pretend of a speciall coÌ„maundement to Dauid so to dispose those courses as ye expound it he did nothing without gods coÌ„maundement Is this again I pray you any argumeÌ„t to improue his supreme authority next vnder god bicause he did al things sicut praeceperat dominus as the lord had coÌ„maundéd then by this same rule yourpriest should not haue the supremacie neither for I am sure he had no further priuiledge to do against or beyond Gods coÌ„maundement no more than Dauid had It is your Pope that thus stretcheth his claime to do beyonde all Gods forvoade and contrarie to Gods commaundement but little or nothing sicut praeceperat dominus deuâ—… Israel as the Lord God of Israel hath coÌ„maunded As for the Quéenes Maiestie hath not done or doth any thing more than Dauid did which is sicut praeceperat c. as God hath commaunded hir to do And syth Gods commaundement vnto Dauid stretcheth to the placing appointing both aboue vnder in their orders of sacrifices eueÌ„ of all the leuiticall priesâ—…es it strengthneth hir cause the more that she hath not onely the bare example of King Dauid but also the warrant of Gods commaundement for the supreme gouernement of all hir clergie to place them in their seuerall functions Secondly ye say ye haue to note that king Dauid did make appoyntment vnto them of no straunge or new order to be taken in religion but that they should serue God in the temple iuxta ritum suum after their owne vsage custome or maner before time vsed Secondly we note to you againe M. St. that you interprete his sayings ambiguously and applie it maliciously Ambiguously bicause thoughe Dauid neyther made any straunge or newe order to be taken in Religion nor yet in their vsage custom or maner of their ceremonies commaunded of god and so vsed before his time but saw euery thing dutifully obserued both sicut praeceperat dominus iuxta ritum suum as the Lord had coÌ„manded after their owne order yet in their courses and in other circumstances diuers of his orders were new and strange vnto them and of his owne appoyntment And diuers ceremonies that were iuxta ritum suum according to their own order hauing been neglected by the priests and become straunge vnto them those he redressed iuxta ritum suum according to their own order and sicut praeceperat dominus as the Lorde had commaunded But what serueth this howe soeuer ye expounde it to infringe any supreme gouernement in king Dauid bicause the Prince is bounde not to alter the Priestes rites and ceremonies béeing appoynted of God Ergo he is not supreme gouernour in séeing them kéept accordingly might ye not rather argue contrarywise The prince is bound not to alter religion nor those orders that God hath ordeyned bringing in straunge and new Ergo he is bound to ouersée care and prouide that those orders be onely kept and none other brought in And if princes had alwayes looked to this their duetie more narrowly than they haue done then had not your Pope and popishe Prelates broughte in so many vayne traditions false doctrines and superstitious ceremonies as they haue neither iuxta ordinem suum according to their owne order nor sicut praceperat dominus as the Lord commaunded On the other part this your application is a malicious slaunder to the Q. highnesse For she hath not made or appointed to be receiued any strange or new order in religion but reuoked the olde primatiue order of religion ordeined of Christ and hath appoynted the ministers of God to do their dueties secundum ritum suum according to their owne order sicut praeceperat dominus as our sauiour Christ by him selfe and his Apostles hath prescribed to them It is your Pope and Papall Church that offreth strange fire to God that hath appoynted erected those strange and newe orders in religion and therfore hir maiestie hath worthily abolished all those false priests with their strange and new orders and all their false worship of God and in that hir highnesse thus doth she sheweth hir selfe to follow Dauids eâ—…sample like a godly supreme gouernour Thirdly and lastly say you king Dauids appoyntment was that they should serue in the house of God sub manu Aaron patris corum as vnder the spirituall gouernement of their father Aaron and his successors the high Priests Héere agayne to the shew of some aduauntage ye translate sub manu which is vnder the hande importing attendant at hande in their ministerie to the high Priest vnder the spirituall gouernement as thoughe they were exempted from the kings gouernement and so you make your conclusion saying The which words of the Scripture do so well and clearely expresse that king Dauid did not take vpon him any spirituall gouernment in the house of god c. This conclusion is captious and yet not to the purpose There is a difference betwéene spirituall gouernment and gouernment ouer spirituall â—…cclesiasticall matters This ye should conclude not that if ye will confute the bishop And this gouernment ouer spirituall matters tooke Dauid on him the other that is the spirituall gouernment he left entier vnto the Priests without any preiudice to their ecclesiasticall authoritie as ye graunted before And as Dauid therin did so doth the Quéenes Maiestie nowe But what maketh this agaynst king Dauids supreme gouernment that the inferior priests Leuites in their ministeries offices were by the kings appoyntment vnder the hande or spirituall gouernment of their spirituall father Aaron and his successors the high priests as you translate the text Is it not also the Q. Maiesties appoyntment that the inferiour Ministers should serue in their functions vnder the spiritual gouernment of their bishops and bicause it is hir
the marke many tymes than from it But séeing ye deale so vneuenly with the Bishops other shottes for all your bellowing short shorte it hittes not the Butte it commes not home ye giue all standers by suspition of falâ—…e ayme in this shotte and therefore let vs measure it once againe The deposing of Abiathar saye you doth not employ that Salomon was chiefe ruler in all ecclesiasticall causes I pray you who was then chiefe ruler in all ecclesiasticall causes Abiather say you And wherefore he bicause he was the highest Priest or Byshoppe therefore the chiefe rule of them was in him Doth it not then followe if he depose him in whome is all the rule that all this rule is yet restrayned vnder hys higher rule that deposeth him For the more manâ—…fest ensample of our time If I aske in whom the chiefe rule of all ecclesiastical causes is now in the Pope say you wherfore say I bâ—…cause say you he is the hiest Priest or Bishop and therefore he hath the â—…yest rule of all ecclesiasticall causes Well say I if the Emperouâ—… nowe woulde go aboute to cite the Pope to iudge him and tell him he is the childe of death for not acknowledging his olde obedience to him and so deposing hym bydde him departe and meddle no more with that Byshoprike the Emperour can not doe this say you for then the Pope in all ecclesiasticall causes shoulde be the Emperours inferiour if the Emperour might depose 〈◊〉 bicause when he is deposed by the Emperour from all his chiefe rule all his chiefe rule is translated from him and so were hée vnder the Emperour and all his chiefe rule at the Emperours disposition to giue to another But thys saye you were suche a fowle inconuenience as the lyke can not bée And therefore the Emperour can not depose the Pope but the Pope the Emperour This is your common reasoning Wherein doe ye not sée howe the graunting of the deposition of the chiefe Priest inferreth a hyer rule and authoritie in the deposer ouer the deposed in euerie prerogatiue that the partie deposed had before he was deposed But then will ye say the Prince that deposed the highest Priest may not he doe all those matters that the priest might haue done if hée bée the chiefe ruler of them It is one thing master Stapleton to be the chiefe ruler in and ouer all those ecclesiasticall causes that the partie deposed myghte haue done and to bée the chiefe doer or executioner of them For example the Prince maketh an Admirall or chiefe ruler ouer hys Seas a President or Deputie ouer hys Marches a chiefe Iustice or Chauncellour ouer hys lawes c. These Officers agayne the king deposeth the deposition of them is an argument that in all those thinges the King is the chiefe ruler And although the King can not doe anye of those thinges that belong to their Offices yet is that no impayring of hys chiefe rule ouer them and all thinges in theyr offices And therefore hée transferreth the doing to them that better can or wyll doe those offices And so likewyse in the chiefe office of priesthood admitting there were such an one now in all ecclesiasticall causes though the prince can not do all those ecclesiasticall actioÌ„s nor any one of them yet grant the prince that he may depose that chiefe priest to whome the doing of them appertaineth ye graunt with all that he is the chiefe ruler of all those ecclesiasticall things so farre forth as the rule of ouersight gouernance and directing stretcheth vnto which is aboue the ministeriall executing Nowe as youre selfe haue confessed the prince is the causer and the prieste the executor and doer which likewise his name importeth and therefore is called minister whiche name though the prince haue also yet he hath it as your selfe haue likewise confessed in a higher respecte bicause he is Gods especiall minister to ouersée directe dispose and depose all other ministers And thus graunting the ensample euen but of this one facte of Salomon for our princes to followe to depose in their realmes any one whatsoeuer highest or lowest priest it not only hitteth home the butte yea and the pricke to set vp by master FeckeÌ„ham but this one facte of Salomon and the like of christian princes now employeth a chiefe rule of ouer sight and direction though not of executing in al ecclesiasticall causes besides whatsoeuer appertayneth to the parties office that may be so deposed as Abiathar was by Salomon The vntruth that ye note in the end of this ensample is orderly aunswered in your beadrolle The. 15. Diuision TThe Bishop in this diuision alleadging the example of king Iosaphat chiefly of two visitatioÌ„s set forth by him 2. Paral. 17. and. 19. how he reformed religion through out all his dominions appointed preachers and setters foorth of Gods lawe and Iudges in all causes aswell ecclesiasticall as temporal coÌ„cludeth his supreme gouernment herevpon To this Master Stap. counterblasâ—…eth As M. Doctour Harding and M. Dorman haue written so say I that yee are they which frequent priuate hilles aulters and darke groues that the scripture speaketh of VVherein you haue set vp your Idols that is your abhominable heresies In that ye say master Stapleton As they say so say I ye shewe howe well ye haue learned your lessons thus one of another to say what soeuer your master sayd before you and take your bare so saying for proufe good inough But as ye fondly flatter your selues with your owne sayings so more fondly ye obtrude them as principles to your aduersaries that will by and by bid ye either proue them or else will they still estéeme them as they are for mere lying sayings of a knot of thrée false confederates the master his two schollers to outface delude the manifest truth withal And if these your masters sayings and yours hap to become wordes of course then beware you on whose side they are lykest to light that haue mainteyned so open Idolatrie and diuerse false worships of God that he did neuer institute After this master Stapleton drawing néerer to the matter admitâ—…eth this example of King Iosaphat VVee also confesse sayeth he that there is nothing written in the holye Scripture of Iosaphat touching his care and diligence about the directing of ecclesiasticall matters but that godly Princes may at this day do the same doing it in such sort as Iosaphat did Holde ye here master Stapleton and we aske no more of you Ye haue here frankly confessed two things First the care and diligence that Iosaphat had aboute the directing ecclesiasticall matters Which care and diligence was the Bishoppes first proposition nowe twise alreadie graunted by you what followed thereon ye haue heard before alreadie Secondly that godly Princes may at this day doe the same doyng it in such sort as Iosaphat did Herevpon I conclude this argument As Iosaphat did in directing ecclesiasticall matters so doth the Queenes maiestie
farre forth as pertaineth to the ten commaÌ„dements of the tables If it be of the commaundement so farre forth as pertaineth to the other moral points if it be of the precepts of the ten commandements as it were certaine conclusions piked out if it be of the ceremonies so farre forth as pertayneth to ceremoniall matters of iustifications that is to say of iudiciall matters whereby iustice is to be conserued among men Thus is there no parte ecclesiasticall or temporall exempted from the ouersight care directioÌ„ appointment of the king No not the iudgement that ye haue so often alleaged and craked vppon out of the Deut. 17. vnder the which as a generall rule for all examples to be ruled by ye would subdue the Prince vpon paine of death to obey the absolute determination of the priest Euen this same office and all other with all causes to them belonging so farre as stretcheth to the ouersight and supreme gouernment do belong to the Prince to appoint and ordeyne fitte parties to displace and remoue vnfitte parties to sée al these offices so well as any other temporall obserued kept and executed dutifully Which is not so much for the persons as for the persons offices And therefore Iosaphat not only appointed them by his authoritie or regiment as Lyra saith their offices but also he told theÌ„ how they should do their offices Nay say you to each your matter yet with an other shift He doth it not with threates of his highe displeasure or by force of his owne iniunctions but onely saith so then doing you shall not sinne or offende The which very manner of speache christian Emperours and Kinges haue eftâ—…ones vsed in the like case as we shall hereafter in the thirde booke by examples declare Euen in the examples that ye shall there declare M. St. ye shall finde both threates of high displeasures and the iniâ—…nctions also of many godly princes And therefore seing that ye coÌ„pare their doings alike why say you these doings of Iehosophat haue no threates nor iniunctions what call ye this did he not threate them trowe you when he saide Ne veniat tra super vos super fratres vestros Least wrath come vppon you and vppon your bretheren Whiche woordes ye ouerhipped He denouÌ„ced vnto them the wrath of God which declared his great zeale and care of Gods matters as the Bishop saide And thinke you that the high displeasure of God conteyned not this godly Princes high displeasure also do ye suppose that they drad not the Princes high displeasure in the breache of their dueties bicause he threateth them with Gods moste high displeasure Or thinke ye it was not so forcible as any iniuÌ„ctioÌ„ of his vnto them in that as your selfe say he charged them and as the text saithe Praecepit eis he commaunded them which is most plaine and euident to signifie that he enioygned them by his supreme gouernment ouer them And to shew that besides his charge his commaundement his threate of Gods most high displeasure they should incurre his high displeasure also if they or any other disobeyed Lyra saithe on his former visitation Hic oftenditur qualiter c. Here is declared after what sorte he instructed his people to wite by the Priestes and Leuites whom he sent to this purpose and with them certaine of his Princes to bring the people to obedience and to punish the rebelles if they should finde any And of this visitation also saith Lyra He appointed Zabadias to be ouer those workes that belong to the Kinges office that if any rebelles were found they should by him be chastized with due punishmeÌ„t Doth not this import the Kinges highe displeasure in the breach of these his appointments charge coÌ„maundment when he adioyned those that should punish the disobedient Now whereas the Bishop briefly noted all this how King Iosaphat appointed the Priestes to decide and iudge controuersies you snatch thereat and clappe downe thereon a marginall note Yea the Priestes iudged not the king say you ouerskipping that the King appointed them thereto which argueth his supreme gouernment And yet the King iudged also by his deputie not the Priest alone And so saith plaine the texte In Hierusalem quoque constituit c. And Iosaphat appointed also Leuites and Priestes and the Princes of the families of Israel Here M. St. he appointed as well the lay Princes as the Priests And wherto vt Iudicium causam domini iudicarent that they should iudge the iudgement and cause of the Lorde Sée how plaine this is against you but what is there not that ye will spare to wrest to make it sée me to serue your turne For eueÌ„ of the last sentence ye thinke in the ende ye haue gotten so notable a proufe for your matter that greatly ye vrge it and wonderfully triumph therevppon Thus saith say you King Iosaphat Amarias the priest and your Bishop shall haue the gouernment of such things as appertaine to god And Zabadias shal be ouer such workes as appertaine to the kinges office Lo say you the kings office and diuine matters are of distinct functions Lo say I how sone ye would coÌ„clude a lie Your text saith not the kings office and diuine matters are of distinct functions Nor maketh any opposition or distinction betwene the kings office and diuine matters as though it appertained not to the kings office to haue any thing to do with diuine matters Contrary to the which your own coÌ„fession euen in this kings doings witnesseth against you that he reformed religion and had a care and diligence about the directing ecclesiasticall matters And trow you he did this beyond the bouÌ„des of his office How can then his example as ye say fitte well christian princes if it be not a parcell belonging to their office the text is plaine that the king appointeth as wel the Bishop Amarias his gouernmeÌ„t as Zabadias his gouernmeÌ„t to the one to haue the gouernmeÌ„t of such things as appertaine to God to the other to be ouer such workes as appertaine to the king Here in these two such things on the one partie and such workes on the other partie is the distinction made and not betwene the kings office and diuine matters as you falsely conclude And yet I pray you what argument can ye gather herevppon The kings office diuine matters are of distinct functioÌ„s Ergo the King hath no supreme gouernment ouer all ecclesiasticall causes By the like reason he hath no supreme gouernment ouer temporall causes neither For the kingeâ—… office his temporall subiects matters are not they also distinct functione Ergo the king hath no supreme gouernmeÌ„t ouer his temporall subiects matters Againe ye reason thus Thus saith the king the priest shall gouerne in those things that belong to God. Ergo to ouersee the Priests gouerne them rightly appertayneth not to the kinges gouernment Where in deede you should rather reason the quite
euen the name of Ministers as euen your selfe do M. St. other where how soeuer here it came vppon you to pretende to bestow a reuerent speach thereon But the Apostles thought not scorne of the name but willed men so to estéeme them as the ministers of God and the dispensers of his mysteries but as your papall Bishops and Priestes be nothing like Gods ministers so least of all are they like the Prophets that were then except ye meane the prophets of Baal that maintayned idolatrie and pleasant leasings to maintayne them selues at Achabs table and fill their paunches with the chéere of Beel and the Dragon The Lords prophets they be not like neither in preaching propheciyng or ought els And yet saith M. Stapl. they be the onely ministers of God now in spirituall matters as prophets were then in the like Why M. Stapl. were the prophets then onely gods ministers in spirituall matters if ye say no how doth your tale hang togither why say ye they are onely Gods ministers now as Prophets were then in the like since the Prophetes were not onely Gods ministers then as ye pretende for your Bishops and Priestes to be onely now If they were not onely then no more be yours only now admitting they were in the like If ye say yea they were onely then Gods ministers as the Bishops and Priests be now what were the Bishops Priestes and Leuites then that were no prophetes were not they Gods ministers in spirituall matters also if yea then were not the Prophets in the like to your Bishops and Priestes that are as ye say only gods ministers now Make your tale for shame hang better togither and withall tell what you meane by this dubble shuffling Ye tolde vs before that your Bishops and Priestes now are like the Bishops and Priestes then and that not the Prophets but the Priestes had that prerogatiue which ye haue so often craked vpon your generall rule of iudgemeÌ„t whereby ye vrged then a supremacie not in the Prophets but in the Bishops Priests And now seing that ye caÌ„ not proue it in these examples where the Bishops Priests obey the Princes ordinance as his inferiours ye shift of the matter to the Prophetes say now your priests prelates succéede are like the Prophetes let go the former claime of priests But these are but your shifts for if the Prophets had this supreme gouernment then the priests had it not If it appertained to the hie priestes chayre so long as the priesthoode of Moses continued then it belonged not to the Prophetes and thus ye contrary your selfe But in very déede neither of theÌ„ both had it but the Prince vnder god They were both Gods ministers in their diuerse functioÌ„s and yet subiecte to their Princes as for the popish Bishops and priestes are like to neither of both The. 17. Diuision THe Bishop with the like example of Iosias concludeth his collection of the Princes in the Old Testament and herevppon maketh in effect this reason All these doinges of these kinges are commended as acceptable seruice and right in the sight of God But the clayming taking vppon them the supreme gouernment ouer the ecclesiasticall persons of all degrees the ruling gouerning and directing them in all their functions in al manner causes belonging to religion were the doings of all these kinges Ergo For Princes to clayme and take vppon them the like supreme gouernment is their right and acceptable seruice in the sight of God. The counterblast of master Stapleton to this diuision is thrée folde First to the example of Iosias Secondly to the argument Thirdly by setting vp newe issues and markes to improue all that the Bishop hath hitherto exemplified as vnsufficient to proue the issue To the first part sayth Master Stapleton King Iosias traueled full godly in suppressing Idolatrie by his kingly authoritie VVhat then so doe good catholike Princes also to plucke downe the Idolles that yee and your brethren haue of late set vp and yet none of them take them selues for supreme heades in all causes spirituall This is all that he aunswereth to the example of Iosias First where the Bishop sayd Iosias had the like care to the foresayde Princes for religion and vsed in the same sorte his Princely authoritie in reforming all abuses in al maner causes ecclesiastical To this aunswereth master Stapleton He traueled full godly in suppressing Idolatrie by his kingly authoritie As though this were a full aunswere denying or graunting the Bishops assertion or as thoughe besides the suppressing of Idolatrie he did nothing else Where as the scripture is plaine how hee also redde the lawe before all his subiects how he made the couenant with God that all hys subiectes shoulde walke after the Lorde and obserue all hys commaundements testimonies and ceremonies Howe hée sware them all to kéepe this couenant Howe he commaunded them to kéepe suche a solemne passeouer as was neuer kept by any of all the kings before him How the Priestes appoynted not themselues but he appoynted them in their offices Howe they exhorted not him but howe he exhorted them to prepare themselues sayth Lyra dutifully to celebrate with deuotion the solemnitie of the passeouer Howe he commaunded the arke to be set vp in the Sanctuarie and to beare it no more on their shoulders Howe he commaunded theÌ„ to minister to the Lord and to his people Israel How he commaunded theÌ„ to prepare them selues according to the houses of their auÌ„cesters in their orders aâ—… Dauid had appointed them How he coÌ„maunded them to minister in the sanctuary by their families and Leuiticall courses How he commaunded them to be sanctified and then to offer the passeouer How he commauÌ„ded them also to prepare or sanctifie the residue of their brethren And when al things were prepared how the Priestes kept their stations and the Leuites were in their orders according as the king had commaunded them And so saith the text after it hath reckened vp the manner of the Priests Leuites singers and porters ministeries all the seruice or worship was orderly accomplished in that day to keepe the passeouer and offer their burnt offrings vppon the aultare of the Lorde according to the commaundement of Iosias the King. All these things M. Stapl. were done by his authoritie and commaundement But all these thinges are matters and causes ecclesiasticall Ergo his authoritie and commaundement stretched furder than in suppressing Idolatrie yea â—…uen ouer the chiefest matters ecclesiasticall But all this had M. Stap. quite forgotten and therefore we must beare with him though he answere the Bishop only with this Iosias traueled full godly in suppressing Idolatrie by his kingly authoritie Wherein we sée also how doubtfully he speaketh for when he perceyued it could not be denied but that which he did he did by his kingly authoritie yet would he not say that he suppressed Idolatrie by
his kingly authoritie but he traueled full godly in suppressing Idolatrie by his kingly authoritie as though his kingly authoritie stretched no furder than to trauell in the execution of seruing the priestly authoritie But the Scripture is most euident that his kingly authoritie and godly trauell was not in executing the Priestes commaundement but the priestly authoritie traueled in the seruice and executing of the Princes commandement For as he destroyed all their Idols and places of Idolatry and abolished or depriued as Uatablus expoundeth it the false priestes of their priestly dignitie so he commaunded by this his kingly authoritie all the true priestes both the high priest Helchias and vnder him the inferiour priestes and porters to trauell likewise in bringing out to him all the Idolatrous vessels and he summoned or gathered togither all the Priestes And all that there is done is named to be done by him that is to say eyther by him selfe or by his appoyntment and commaundement through his kingly authoritie both in abolishing the false worship and in establishing and directing the true worship of God not onely in generall but also in perticuler yea in the chiefest spirituall matters ouer all the Clergie and the high Priest so well as all his other subiectes and all this was done of him by his kingly authoritie But what then saith M. Stapleton to all this as it were with a phillip to ouerturne al the matter with his Masters what then Forsooth M. St. then it was not his godly trauell in a seruiceable execution of the priestes commaundements but his godly trauell in commaunding them their godly trauel in a seruiceable execution of the kinges commaundements And then it was not onely in suppressing Idolatrie as you limite it but in refourming establishing directing appointing the whole true worship of God besides And then was this his kingly authoritie by the which he did all these things though many of them were Moses Dauids yea the Prophetes former ordinances and Gods commaundement long before yet were they done here by the kinges owne authoritie which in the last example of Ezechias concerning Dauid ye would not admitte bicause it was Gods appoyntment by the hande of his Prophetes Such as were many of these things like wise and yet now ye graunt they were done also euen by Iosias his kingly authoritie And then I pray you what so great a difference finde ye betwéene these twaine the King doth it by his kingly authoritie that here ye confesse and the King doth it by his owne authoritie that there ye denied is not the kinges kingly authoritie the Kinges owne authoritie and yet is all his authoritie from god It followeth then to your what then by your owne confession and the manifest Scripture that this his owne kingly authoritie of Iosias was next vnder God the chiefe and supreme ouer all the Priestes Leuites Singers Porters or any other so well as the people in all abolishing of false religion and in all commaunding and directing the true worship and religion of God which are the principall causes ecclesiasticall And what then say you to this M. Stapleton doth it not cléerely proue the Bishops assertion against M. FeckenhaÌ„ for al your counterblasting it with your bigge what then Thinke ye it proues he did no more then than you will suffer Princes to do now abusing them with the title of good catholike Princes and bereauing them of their good catholike and princely authoritie that by the examples of these good catholike princes they ought to take vpon them and your Pope vsurpes it from them And yet you say to abase the doings of Iosias so do good catholike Princes also to plucke downe the Idolles that ye and your brethren haue of late set vp and yet none of them tooke them selues for supreme heades in all causes spirituall The question is not nowe Master Stapleton what those your good catholike Princes as ye call them take them selues to be whome you haue spoyled and make beléeue what it pleaseth you to tell them that their kingly authoritie reacheth no furder but to be seruiceable trauelers and executioners of your commaundements But the question is here what these Princes mencioned in the holy Scriptures tooke them selues to be which appereth by their appointinges and coÌ„maundinges of their Clergie in their functions that they tooke them selues for their Clergies supreme gouernours in these matters And so ought al good catholike princes by their examples to estéeme of them selues and of their high calling and charge in ecclesiasticall causes and trauayle by their godly supreme gouernment to discharge the same Where ye say therefore so do good catholike princes meaning those that submitte themselues with all the gouernment of religion and all ecclesiasticall matters to your Pope and his prelates not medling them selues therewith as did Iosias and these other godly Kinges whome we sée to haue medled with the gouernment and direction thereof it is apparant false and their doinges herein are no more alike than blacke is like to white than to commaunde directe and appoint others is like to be of the same parties in the same matters commaunded directed and appointed themselues than gouerning is like seruing than one contrarie is like to another And yet you say for ye care not what ye saie as did king Iosias so do your good catholike princes now But what is that they do plucke down the Idols say you that you and your brethern haue set vp Whether we our bretheren or you and your bretheren haue set vp Idols let it fal out betwene vs as it shall hereafter we shall come to the reckening onely stande you to this M. Stapleton that the plucking downe of Idols belongeth to Princes by their kingly authoritie and that so they ought to account of them selues their authoritie which if they had done and diligently executed this their kingly authoritie your shifte of Images and Idols had not auayled you for euen to your moste famous Images shrines and pilgrimages hath foule idolatrie bene committed as the chiefe of your brethren them selues are fayne to confesse and crye out vpon and yet durst your princes neuer pull them downe nor you would euer haue suffred thâ—… so to do for your lucre lay muche therein but caused the Princes to mainteine and enriche suche Images as you dayly did set vp As for the Idols that we should haue set vp who séeth not we haue so little set vp any that we reiecte for Idols those which ye call your Images and professe that neither they nor any other thing besides God nor God in them or by them is to be worshipped but God alone and that in spirite and truthe and so receiue his playne simple worde and sacraments But if as ye sayde before those Princes pull downe our heresies and those are the Idols that we set vp except this presupposall should be graunted you that those be heresies which we mainteine
vse it throughout all your counterblast to make your continuall outrodes and vagaries quite from the matter No Flie is busier in buzzing on entrye dish than your Counterblast is blowing on euery flim â—…am tale If ye thinke ye maye be borne withall for the enlarging of your volume yet ye make your Readers loosely and altogither vnfruitfully to employ their labours carying them at roauers as ye say and at randon to â—…s ye had woont to do the people after all Hallowes from the very state of the question in controuersie For shame therefore vpbrayde not this to the Bishop of straying from the marke excepte you kéepe your selfe better to the marke or else shewe your Dispensation that yée may styll babble all besides the question of what impertinent tryfles yée please to descante vppon and will not suffer your aduersary once to wincke awrye nor to alleage anye thing thoughe it neuer so muche appertayne to the purpose if it doe not directly conclude the very state of the question This dealing master Stapleton is very vneuen If ye will deale vprightly call vpon the Bishop hardly so oft as ye will but then stande you for shame to your tackling to least an other come and call as fast on you to marke and regarde better the matter ye meddle withall But perhappes ye will say admitte that I ranne astray from the matter my selfe yet doth my faulte excuse the Byshoppes In déede it doth not Master Stapleton if hée bée faultie therein but it lesseneth hys and it maketh yours the greater and the more to your shame except yée be a verye impudent man for your fault herein is manifest and therefore deciphered oute vnto you in one of your common places If ye be belied there purge your selfe whiche tâ—…ll ye doe the more ye call vppon the Bishop to kéepe him to his marke he that shall marke your dealing shall wish you had either lesse impudencie or more remembrance of your selfe Neuerthelesse since ye so sharply chalenge the Bishop that all his examples draw nothing neare the mark but runne at randon and shoote all at Rouers I pray you sir call to your remembraunce what was the marke and issue in question betwene them was it not this that if the Bishop by any of the foure abouesayde meanes coulde make proofe to master Feckenham that any Emperor or Empresle King or Queene may clay me or take vpon them any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes that then he would yéelde Was not this the state of their question accorded they not on this issue and ought not the Bishop to direct all his examples to proue this And if he proue this whether he shotte at Buttes or Rouers hath he not hytte the marke and what woulde ye haue more Nowe that he hath done this is plainely proued by euery of these examples and that not onely as the wordes of the issue inforce that they tooke vpon them some suche gouernement in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes which being prooued is ynough to discharge the Bishop of straying from his matter but also that they daymed and tooke vppon them suche supreme gouernement in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes And you haue counterblasted nothing to the contrary that were able to remoue these prooues from this marke and issue sauing your facing and bracing of the matter and a number of blynde pelting and foreworne shiftes except ye haue any better behinde to come For all these shiftes hitherto notwithstanding the Bishoppes examples are both directly directed to the issue and directly and fully prooue the same And wher 's ye findâ—… faulte with straggling from it ye touch not him but wring your selfe by the nose For ensample whereof I remitte the Reader to your common place thereon or to spare his paynes and go no further than euen here to marke the markes that your selfe set vp and conferre them with the issue betwéene the Bishoppe and master Feckenham and the Reader shall soone discerne howe farre of purpose ye stray from it yea from those false markes also that your selfe set vp before And yet ye crie the Bishop strayes from the marke and will the Reader to fixe his eye thereon But herein ye play as the common people say the Lapwing or Pewet doeth who when they seeke hir Neast draweth them still further and further from it wyth hir noyse and flittering about them crying as the simple people imagine here is it here is it when it is nothing neare it And euen as they conceyue of the Pewet so do you with vs with great noyse and earnestnesse bidding vs regarde and set before our eyes the very state of the question and busily pretende to tell vs wherein lyeth all the chiefe question when vnder the cloake and credite of this your earnestnesse ye carie the reader quite away from the question and issue in controuersie to runne vp and downe after such newe and so many questions that the Reader dared as a man in a maze shoulde neyther perceyue the true question in déede nor finde out the weakenesse and falsehoode of your cause nor well knowe where himselfe is become But that he maye winde himselfe the better oute of this your Laberinthe let him as is sayde before directe his eye euer on the issue betweene the parties and then shall hée still see whereaboutes hée is and howe farre or neare not onely the Bishop is but you also are to or from the matter The issue as is before sayde is this That any Emperor or Empresle King or Queene claymed or tooke vpon them any such gouernment By this issue in all his examples hath the Byshoppe directed him selfe that Moses Iosue Dauid Salomon Iosaphat Ezechias and Iosias did take vpon them suche gouernment But all these were Kings and Princes of Gods people commended of God for their godly gouernance Therfore Emperours and Empresses Kings Quenes may and ought to take such gouernment vpon them This being alwayes the Bishops conclusion wherein strayed he from the issue But nowe come you ruffling in with Nine newe issues for aduauntage not one of them all béeing the verie issue and state of the question in controuersie and yet you crie the Bishop draweth nothing nigh the marke True in déede master Stapleton he draweth nothing neare the markes that you haue set vp for the nigher hee shoulde drawe to them he shoulde drawe the further from the question betwéene master Feckenham and him as you doe of purpose in all these your markes to deceyue and beguâ—…le the simple Reader that thinkes ye meane good truth when ye â—…rte so often on the question and runne so farre from the same For ensample was this I pray you good master Stapleton to vse your owne phâ—…ase the issue and question betwéene them whether these Kings acknowledged or not acknowledged the highe Priest â—…t is true and the Byshoppe demeth not that they did agnise the highe Priest euerie one of them
and therfore good reason that yours giue place to his senior the popish later base born religion of your Romish church to thâ—… first most auncient true religion of that Alpha Omega Iesus Christ himself Master Stap. hauing now set vp these two false markes like to one being out of his way that after he is once ouer his shooes in the myre careth not howe he benâ—…yre himselfe but running deeper through thicke and thinne cryeth this is the way to haue other to followe him so rusheth on master Stapleton still further from the issue and yet taketh euerye thing in his way to bée hys marke and directorie Setting vp the perticuler factes of those Princes that chalenge and take vppon them this supreme gouernement that the selfe same factes must be founde in the ensamples of the olde testament or else hée sayth the Bishop strayeth from the marke VVhat euidence haue ye brought forth sayth he to shew that in the olde lawe anye King exacted of the Clergie In verbo Sacerdotiâ—… that they shoulde make none Ecclesiasticall lawe without his consent as King Henrie did of the clergie of Englande Is this the marke master Stap. betwene the Bishop and master Feckenham to proue in their supreme gouerments euerye selfe same perticuler fact yea the circumstances about or concerning the fact to be all one in them that clayme this gouernment nowe and those that claymed it then since bothe the states the times yea all the ceremonies of religion of the Iewes then and ours nowe are nothing like and trow ye then the princes perticuler doings must be like and euen the same and euidence must be giuen out of the one for euery fact of the other or else their supreme authorities be not alike The issue betweene them is not so straight laced but requireth onely any such gouernment some such gouernment yea he it al suche gouernment to I meane not all suche actions in the gouernment but the supreme directing gouernance authoritie or powre are proued both alike in either princes estate so well ouer eccl. persons in all their functions then or now as ouer the temporall in theirs For by this rule wheras that most famous prince king Henry the eight did sweare also to his obedience all his temporall subiects in ciuill causes as other Princes likewise haue done and do it would be harde to alleâ—…ge an euidence thereof out of the old Testament and yet their supreme gouernments therin were not therefore vnlike As for the ministring of the othe is but a circumstance to confirme the matter and not the matter itselfe And if king Henry were by the obstinate and craftie malice of his popishe clergiâ—… then constrayned for his more assurance to take an othe or promise of them on the honestie of their priesthoode which God wâ—…t was but a small holde as it went then in the moste of them and that no king of those ancient yeres mentioned in the olde testament béeing not moued by the wickednesse or mistrust of his clergy tooke the like othe or promise of their priestes honestie or fayth of their priesthoodâ—… then what is this to or from the matter why their supreme authorities shoulde not be alike in bothe Do not you also say for your side that the highe Priest had suche supreme gouernment then as your Pope â—…othe chalenge now ouâ—…r all eccl. causes â—…nd dothe â—…ot your Pope nowe exacte of all his clergie in verbo â—…acerdotij by the worde of their priesthoode that they shall make no eccl. law without his consent May we not then returne your owne words on your selfe VVhat euidence can you bring foorth to shew that in the olde lawe any highe Priest exacted this of the clergie vnder him And if ye can not as ye can not dothe not then this your wyle reason and newe marke ouerturne the false clayme that your Pope claymeth of such supreme gouernment now as the high Priest had then But his clayme is false his gouernment nothing like For the high priest then tooke not vpon him to make eccl. lawes as doth now your Pope but only obserued such eccl. lawes as God had made to his hande till time of the Pharisies corruption who not content with Gods lawes had deuised besides many fond lawes of their own inuentions when there wanted amoÌ„g them this kingly authoritie To the which so long as it continued the high priest al other obeyed receyuing and obseruing such eccl. constitutions as their godly princes made vnto them So did Aaron first receiue the eccl. coÌ„stitutions of Moses So after him did alâ—…re residue admit the eccl. constitutions of Dauid the rest of the foresaid princes their priests made none of theÌ„ selues without the Princes consent But the princes ordâ—…ined diuers eccl. orders partly with the aduise and consent partly without yea agaynst the wil coÌ„sent of their clergy now then and yet those godly princes exacted of them euen as they were true priests as the stories of Iosaphat and Ezechias mention how they charged their priests euen in that they were the Lords priests which is all one with that you alleage in verbo sacerdotij that they should do suche things as they appoynted them to do And is not this good and authenticall euidence for king Henries doings but that the priests appoynted any suche ordinance without their princes consents will be harde for you to bring the like or any â—…uidence at all for your Popes exacting And if as ye conclude herevpon this exacting to make no eccl. law without his consent be to make the ciuil magistrate the supreme iudge for the final determinatioÌ„ of causes ecclesiasticall then your Pope hauing no such euidence for him by this your marke is no supreme iudge for suche finall determination but it â—…latly proueth agaynst you that the Princes should be the supreme iudges therein And if the exacting of consent importe suche supreme authoritie as héere ye confesse then whereas not onely these ancient kings but also the ancient christian Emperors in the confirming of your Pope exacted that none shoulde be a lawfull Pope to whome they gaue not their consent it argueth that those Emperours were the supreme Iudges for the finall determination of the Popes ecclesiasticall election Which afterwarde when ye come to the handling therof ye renie affirming that although his consent was necessarie to be required yet it argued no suche supreme iudgement in the matter And thus you care not may ye for the time shuffle out an answere howe falsly or how contrary ye counterblast your false The nexte marke is yet further wyde from the issue and more fonde than any of the other for abandoning his Pope and generall Councels VVhat can ye bring foorthe sayth he out of the olde Testament to aide and relieue your doings who haue abandoned not onely the Pope but generall Councels also and that by playne acte of Parliament And
haue thought they had done God good seruice too so that he would haue maintayned them And do not you euen so what els maketh ye crie vpon the Princes beyond the seas with all kinde of torments to destroy the Protestants If Princes would aduise them selues or euer they beléeued you so lightly and would not destroy their subiects till they had sit in iudgmâ—…t heard discussed both parties causes throughly ye would not be halfe so hastie Ye would then crie to the contrarie that you must only be iudges they must onely beleue you strike onely them whom you shall bidde them strike Contrarywise where the Princes espying your falshood forsake your errours and sette out euen very milde lawes against you then ye change your coppie and crie out euery thing is extreme crueltie ye are too too sore handled and oppressed then ye extoll beyonde the moone lenitie and sufferance and winche like a gald horse at the least thing that toucheth you And thus euery way do you still shew your selues to be the very Donatistes Now that ye haue as you conceyue with your selfe giuen vs so great a foyle ye enter into your thirde parte saying VVe may now proceede to the remnant of your booke sauing that this in no wise must be ouerhipped that euen by your owne wordes here ye purge M. Feckenham from this crime ye laide vnto him euen now for refusing the proufeâ—… taken out of the old Testament Now for God M. St. since hitherto ye haue cléered him so sclenderly that ye haue more bewrapped him and your selfe also in this crime let nothing in any case be forgotten or ouerhipped that any wayes may helpe the matter forwarde for hitherto it rather hath gone backward but now there is good hope M. Feckenham shall take a good purgation euen of the Bishops owne making that you M. Stap. will minister to him which wil so worke vpon him make him haue so good a stoole that he shal be clerely purged of this crime of Donatistes â—…o to then M. Stapl and let vs sée how apothecarylike you can minister the same For if as ye say say you the order gouernment that Christ left behind in the Gospell new Testament is the order rule gouernment in ecclesiastical causes practised by the Kings of the old Testament then will it follow that M. Feckenham yelding to the gouernment of the new doth not exclude but â—…ather comprehende the gouernment of the old Testament also both being especially as ye say all one Is this the purgation M. St. that ye will minister to M. Feckenham would to God ye could make him receyue anâ—… brooke this sentence if you would take it also I warrent ye it would so purge you of your old leuen sowre dough that ye should no more be Donatists nor Papistes neither if ye receyue and well digest this little sentence The order and gouernment that Christ left behinde in the new Testament is the order rule and gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes practised by the kinges of the old Testament For then giue ye Princes that that ye haue all this while denied theÌ„ But do ye thinke M. Feckenham will wittingly and willingly receiue this sentence that which in déede followeth necessarily thereon The sentence is true but M. Feck for all that may be a lier and you another For I warrant you M. Feck granteth this no â—…urder than as the Donatists he may temper it to make it seeme to serue his turne Why say you if he grant the onâ—… he doth not exclude but rather comprehende the other Nay M. St. M. Feck coÌ„preheÌ„des it not but shoonnes it as agaynst him by your owne confession But the olde being comprehended by the newe Master Feckenham is contrarie wise by force of argument graunting the newe enforced by the olde Not that he comprehendeth it but is comprehended of it and driuen to yeelde thereto of his aduersarie by conclusion of reasoning the one including the other But rather than he will do this voluntarily he will rather exclude them both the olde and the newe testament also and as he hath done burne them both togither The. 20. Diuision THe Bishop in this diuision first gathereth his full conclusion of all these testimonies into this argument What gouernment order and dutifulnesse so euer belonging to any God hath prefigured and promised before hande by his Prophetes in the holy scriptures of the olde Testament to be performed by Christ those of his Kingdom that is the gouernment order and dutifulnesse set forth and required in the Gospell or new testament But that faythfull Emperours Kinges and Rulers ought of dutie as belonging to their office to claime and take vpon them the gouernment authoritie power care and seruice of God the Lorde in matters of Religion or causes Ecclesiasticall was an order and dutifulnesse for them prefigured and forepromised of God by his Prophetes in the Scriptures of the olde Testament as Saint Augustine hath sufficiently witnessed Ergo Christian Emperors Kings and Rulers owe of dutie as belonging to their office to clayme and take vpon them the gouernment authoritie power care and seruice of God their Lorde in matters of Religion or spirituall ecclesiasticall causes is the gouernment order and dutifulnesse setforth and required in the Gospell or new Testament The Bishop hauing thusfully concluded these Testimonies he yet confirmeth them further with more authorities of the Prophete Esay with Lyra his exposition therevpon and the example of Constantine for proufe of the same At this master Stapleton first carpeth by certaine marginall notes or euer he blowe vp the Chapter of his Counterblast thereto The minor of the Bishops conclusion for the Princes gouernment authoritie power care c. he grauÌ„teth but not such supreme gouernment sayth he as the othe prescribeth He graunteth also Saint Augustine to witnesse this the Princes gouernment but no such large and supreme gouernment as we attribute now to them Againe he graunteth this supreme gouernment is in causes ecclesiasticall â–ª but not in all causes ecclesiasticall And so graunting that the Bishop concludeth well in some such thing you conclude not sayth he in all things and causes and therefore you conclude nothing agaynst vs. Lastly he graunteth all the Bishops testimonies concerning Constantine but he denieth that it maketh any thing for vs. Nowe after these marginall notes prefixed he entreth into his Chapter pretending to open the weakenesse of the Bishops conclusion and of other his proues oute of holie Scripture And first his aunswere to this diuision he deuideth in thrée partes First he graunteth all that the Bishop hath sayde but denieth that it is sufficient Secondly he quarrelleth about this that the Bishop calleth the Emperour Constantine a Bishop as Eusebius nameth him Thirdly he chalengeth him for calling Idoll Image Now to the first parte to sée whether all these grauntes make sufficiently for vs and conclude against him yea
or no. Now ye may conclude sayth master Stapleton that there is some regiment that Princes may take vpon them in causes Ecclesiasticall Thankes be giuen to God master Stapleton that yet now at the length contrary to all your felowes to all your owne wranglings hitherto the force of the truth hath enforced you to yelde thus much to the B. ye graunt Now that Princes haue some regiment in ecclesiasticall causes which hitherto except the making a law of burning or punishing be an eccl. cause ye haue altogither denied vnto Princes But what is this some regiment that ye graunt theÌ„ now for neither we graunt them al regiment but some regiment also that is to say a supreme regiment And you also denie not in your marginall note that they may take vpon theÌ„ in ecclesiastical matters supreme gouernmeÌ„t authority power care but not say you such supreme gouernment as the othe prescribeth so that here we both agrée of supreme gouernment but the kinde of supreme gouernment is denied And to specifie your meaning herein how large a kind ye graunt or denie ye adde he should haue concluded in all things and causes else he concludeth not agaynst you signifying that you deny to them a supreme gouernment in all things causes ecclesiastical but ye graunt them a supreme gouernment authoritie power and care in things and causes ecclesiasticall First M. Stap. this is but a iangling and shifting quarell in wordes about things and causes ecclesiasticall and all things and causes ecclesiasticall For not onely the Bishop when he speaketh so indefinitely vnderstandeth all but also it is an ordinarie speach allowed in Logike in all things that be naturall or necessarie where the indefinite is counted as much as the vniuersall As to say a man is a reasonable creature or man is mortall is as much as precisely to say all men and euery man is reasonable and mortall And the saying in the next diuision he came to fulfill the lawe and the Prophetes is all one with this he came to fulfill all the lawe and all the Prophetes And likewise this giue vnto God that belongeth to God and to Caesar that belongeth to Caesar is as much to say as this giue vnto God all that belongeth to God c. and euen your selfe doe commonly speake thus indefinitely ecclesiasticall matters when ye meane all ecclesiasticall matters though now when ye be thus â—…iuen to graunt the effect of the matter yet would ye find some shift of descant to frustrate all the matter and say If ye meane of such regiment as ye preteÌ„d where ye know well ynough none other is ment ye make your reckoning without your host as a man may say and conclude before ye haue brought any proufe that they ought or may take vpon them such gouernment Whether this some regiment be such regimeÌ„t or such gouernment for thus M. St. ye loue in termes to dally though the Bishop hath proued it sufficiently and you haue graunted it standing onely like a daintie Nicie besetter on this quaint poynt in things not in all things yea whether this Nice restraint defeate the full proufe of the question in controuersie betwene master Feckenham and the Bishop shal appeare M. St. by calling them â—…ath coram to recken better with their host that is as you haue like a thriftie tapster called vpon so oft before though still ye brought in false reckonings to set before them and mark the issue that they condiscended vpon that is to weâ—…e Any such gouernmeÌ„t in ecclesiastical causes Lo here the demaund of the hoste himselfe be requireth but any such gouernmeÌ„t and that without putting in all in the reckoning Where therfore ye grauÌ„t the B. hath proued it in some eccl. causes which satisfieth the demaund of any ecclesiast causes euen according to your owne wrangling ye confesse the Bishop hath concluded the very issue that was concluded vpon Thus master St. euen by your owne reckoning the B reckoned with his host at the full and hath payed and satisfied that he promised and M. Feckenham required But nowe looke you what reckoning you will make to your friendes that haue here brought your selfe so farre in the lashe that taking vpon you to impugne the Princes gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes ye haue graunted and yelded to it How will your credite holde with your friends yea how will your reckoning hold with it self here ye haue grauÌ„ted some regimeÌ„t yea supreme gouernment though not such supreme gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes In the last Chap. ye would graunt theÌ„ nothing but punishment of those whom you had condemned which is no ecclesiastical matter at all to hang or burne a man And yet ye gaue them no regiment much lesse supreme regiment therein neyther For you would haue al the appointing whoÌ„ he shal punish the prince hath nothing else to do but to execute him whom you deliuer vp vnto him which agréeth nothing with this that now ye haue grauÌ„ted least of all with that ye further grauÌ„t saying For though I graunt you all your examples ye haue alleaged and that the doings of the olde Testament were figures of the new and the saying of Esay that kings should be nourishing fathers to the Church and all things else that ye here alleage yet all will not reach home no not Constantine the great his example How agréeth this graunt master Stap. with all that ye haue done all this while Why haue ye denied the Bishops ensamples heretofore of Moyses Iosue Dauid c. and made such a long and earnest a do in the matter to be grauÌ„ted at length Did ye stand in it then to dilate your booke or do ye graunt it now to bragge of your skill or did ye resist the truth then contrary to your conscience repent ye now or be ye forced to grauÌ„t with some colour that ye cannot for shame in plaine speach denie howsoeuer it be many odde reckonings will fall out in your account against your selfe although you neuer â—…ecken with your host for the matter Ye graunt the saying of Esay also that Kings shoulde be nourishing fathers to the Church and all things else that the Bishop here alleageth yet will not all reach home no not Constantine the great his example VVill not all this reach home Master Stap. to proue the issue that euen your selfe do confesse the Bishop hath alreadie proued For that is the home that it ought tâ—… reach vnto by master Feckenhams demaund But go to measure it with a true yerde master Stap. and ye shall see it fayre and easily without any stretching at al reach euen as full home as you besides can require euen for the supreme gouernment of all maner ecclesiasticall causes looke what ye recken most vppon and that is euen the féeding with the worde vnder which the Sacraments also are comprehended not that he is the Minister of the worde and Sacraments as
of God you translate it neither appoint any worshipping of God. As though they might not appoint that true worship of God that God hath appointed him selfe to be worshipped by Where Melancthon speaketh only of appointing other new deuised worships such as the Popish worships are Likewise speaking of the functions ye clappe in of your owne these wordes of bothe Magistrates calling the ministers magistrates whiche wordes Melancthon hath not And thus ye loue alâ—…e to tell your fale falsly And as you thus deale with Melancthon so froÌ„ him ye runne to M. Nowell and say Yea M. Nowell him selfe with a great stomacke biddeth vs shew where they denie that godly and learned Priestes might iudge according to the sinceritie of doctrine As though wheÌ„ the Prince and his successours are made supreme gouernours without any limitacion it fall not often out that the Bishop be he neuer so learned or godly shall not once be admitted to iudge of true doctrine except the doctrine please the Prince Ye will neuer leaue your falsehood M. Stap. wâ—… sayth that Princes made supreme gouernours without any limitation Who saith the Bishop be he neuer so godly or learned shall not once be admitted to iudge of true doctrine except the doctrine please the Prince Iâ—… there any that saith so or doth so except your Popâ—…e He in déed chalengeth a supreme gouernaunce without limits in as large and â—…ple 〈◊〉 as belongeth vnto christ He will suffer no doctrine but that which pleaseth him and he will be the onely chiefe Iudge thereof This is not the gouernance that we ascribe to Princes but such as is limitted by Gods worde such as stretcheth not further thaâ—… the 〈◊〉 of their dominions suche as suffreth godly and learned Priestes according to Gods worde to iudge of the synceritie of doctrine for this you confesse that master Nowell sayth and therefore ye confesse your selfe to be a 〈◊〉 lyer and to speake contrariâ—… when ye bring in thâ—… the Protestants to acknowledge a limitation and â—…t 〈◊〉 say we make a gouernement without any lymitation Neither is 〈◊〉 any contradiction in master Nowels saying to be anie more gathered than of Melancthonâ—… wordes Princes are supreme gouernours Ergo Prelates may not iudge of true doctrine Which is as wiâ—…e a sequele as the other agaynst Melancthon Ye might wel conclude it against your Pope that chalengeth such as absolute 〈◊〉 that all the iudgement of doctrine shoulde 〈◊〉 to him to iudge according as he please botâ—… quite besides and quite contrarie to Gods worde As though say you there had not bene a statute made declaring and enacting the Queenes maiestie yea hir highnesse successours without exception or limitation of godly and vngâ—…dly and yet I trowe no Bishops to be the supreme gouernour in all things and causes as well spirituall as temporall As though M. St. this were a good argument The statute declareth hir highnesse supreme gouernment â–ª without limiting it vnder the Bishops gouernment Ergo the Bishops can not iudge of true doctrine and the Princes gouernment is without all limitation As though their were no difference betwéene supreme gouernment and euery other gouernment or betwéene gouernment and iudgement And as though the statute ex 〈…〉 not it selfe what kinde of supreme gouernment is yâ—â—lded in all things and causes Ecclesiasticall nothing debarring the Bishops and ministers of their iudgement and ministerie but rather ouerséeing them to giue their iudgement and administration rightly As though you master Horne say you had not written that in both tables the Prince hath authoritie to erect â–ª and correct to farther and restraine to allow and punish the vertue and vices thereto apperteyning As though your selfe M. Stapl. had not written also and graunted the same euen right now and that not for your selfe onely but for all your followes besides to agree with Melancthon and Caluin therein Or as though say you the gouernour in all causes is not also a iudge in all causes â–ª Or as though M. St. his gouernment or iudgment were any preiudice to the gouernment or iudgement that belongeth to the Pastours office Or as though say you it were not commonly so taken and vnderstanded of a thousand in England which haue taken the othe to their great domnaâ—…ion but if they repent Or as though not rather on the contrarie it were not your so wilfull and malitious mistaking of it with a peuish obstinacie to withstande the manifest truth that refuse the othe of your dutifull obedience to your great damnation in deede but if yee repent betymes And thus still aunswering your As though with another as though ye can finde no contradiction nor absurditie neyther in Melancthon Caluin Master Nowell nor the Bishops sayings herein As though â–ª your selfe iâ—… the meane time were clere aboorde and not in euery one of your quarels either mâ—…st fonde and absurde or quite contrarie to your owne sayings and graunts made so late before The conclusion of this your second part is this You therefore master Horne â–ª which talke so confusely and generally of the Princes authoritie in both tables do yet say nothing nor proue nothing this generall and absolute authoritie in all things and causes as lustily without exception the othe expresseth and therefore ye bring indeed nothing to proue your principall purpose to the which all your proues shoulde be directed For generall and confuse talke of the princes authoritie you belie the Bishop master Stap. he made so plaine and flatte a limitation that you coulde not abide it â–ª it is your Pope that chalengeth such a general and absolute authoritie and your selfe that talke of the Princes authoritie confusely to deface Princes as confounding and intermedling â–ª in the office and authoritie pâ—…rteyning to the clergie whiche the othe requireth not further than such supreme authoritie as ouerseâ—…th careth prouideth for directeth and gouerneth all matter persons Ecclesiasticall and temporal so well in matters of the first table as in the seconde that is to say so well in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall matters as temporall Quod ad externam disciplinam Quod externoâ—… mores attinet So farre as perteynes to externall discipline and belongs to externall behauiour And this is not onely the issue in question but also as is proued compreheÌ„deth the othe and principall purpose whervpon ye call so fast to haue all the proues directed therto as the Bishop here hath done and your selfe hath graunted the same Your third part is a quarelling at the sentence of s. Paule cited by the B. Tim. 2. that kings and rulers are ordeyned of God for these two purposes that their people mighte liue a peaceable lyfe throughe their gouernment both in godlinesse and in honestie comprehending in these two wordes whatsoeuer is commaunded in the first or second table Here as ye sée hath the Bishop cited once againe another sentence oute of the new testament how fitly to the matter how
vpon thē selues to whō they properly appertayne who in deede denie both Chryst the head and Christ the body that is his catholike Church And that as the Donatistes secte was condemned by Constantine Honorius and other Emperours the highe kings of Christendome So haue they withall condemned you master Stapl. that followe the Donatistes and so may and ought all christian Princes the Emperour nowe whose highe kingdomes besides a bare name in any matter of Christianitie ye make nothing to pull downe suche vsurpers of their highe kingdomes and set vp true and godly ministers in their places to whome they might and ought to submitte their heades vnder their spirituall ministerie To the whiche sorte as is shewed playnely out of Chrisostome your Popishe Priesthoode is cleane contrarie And therefore to returne your wordes vpon your selfe Ye are they that cutte in sunder the vnitie and peace of Christes Churche and rebell agaynst the promises of his Gospell Which Gospell ye can not abyde should come to light and therefore the highe kinges of Christendome should remoue and condemne you Whiche is a better argumente than yours M. Stap. and is sufficient to inferre the supremacie of these highe Kings and Princes The. 23. Diuision THe Bishop in his diuision prosecuting still the wordes of S. Paule Rom. 13. proueth further out of Chrysostome and Eusebius that as the Prince is Gods minister so this ministerie consisteth not onely in ciuill and temporall but also in the well ordering of the Church matters and their diligent rule and care therein The effecte of his argument is this The Prince as Chrysostome sayth prepareth the mindes of many to be made more appliable to the doctrine of the worde and is the great lighte and true preacher and setter foorth of true godlynesse as Eusebius sayth Ergo His ministerie consisteth as well in ecclesiasticall as ciuill causes The antecedent Eusebius proueth by the example of Constantine that his ministerie stretched to the setting foorth of godlynesse to al countreyes and that he preached God and not onely ciuil lawes by his Imperiall decrees and Proclamations And this he confirmeth by Constantines own confession that he taughte by his ministerie the religion and lawe of God that therby he caused the encrease of the true fayth And by the same put away and euerthrewe all the euils that pressed the worlde But the world in Constantines time was pressed with diuers schismes errours heresies false religions and many ecclesiasticall abuses and superstitions besides the heathen Idolatrie Ergo His ministerie stretched not onely ouer temporall causes but also ecclesiasticall Yea he counteth this his best ministerie Ergo. It belongeth to the Prince as well if not more than the other And so the Bishops argument followeth héerevpon that the Apostles sentence the Prince is Gods minister argueth the Princes charge and gouernement in all maner causes ecclesiasticall so well as temporall These proues of the Byshop béeing so euident M. Stap. answereth they are all insufficient saying I see ye not master Horne come as yet neere the matter I answere who is so blinde as he that seeth and will not see Were ye not of the number of those of whome Chryst sayth I came to iudgemēt into this worlde that those that see not shoulde see and those that see shoulde be made blind Ye might then both clearely see that he both cōmeth neere the matter and satisfieth it at large Excepte ye be as blinde of the matter also as ye pretende to be of these the Byshops proufes But if ye woulde haue followed your owne counsell euer to haue set before your eyes the state of the question in issue betwéene them ye shoulde well by this time haue seene that the Byshop digressed nothing frō it And that your selfe of self will or malice will not looke aright theron but cleane awrie stil starting aside and swaruing frō the marke for the nonce to picke occasions wheron to wrangle For wherfore I pray you do ye not see that the Bishop commeth not neere the matter I see not say you that Constantine changed religion plucked downe Altares deposed Byshops c. But that he was diligent in defending the olde and former faythe of the Christians Whatsoeuer you see or see not in Constantine master Stapl. all the world may see false dealing in you and how lyke an vnnaturall subiecte to your naturall Prince ye be As thoughe ye sawe that the Quéenes highnesse had changed religion excepte ye meane false religion and that ye might haue seene in Constantine also He changed the heathen religion of the Paynims and abolished it with all their Altares Byshops Priestes and temples and set foorth the true religion of Iesus Christe He chaunged likewise and abolished suche superstitions Idolatries schismes errours and heresies as troubled the Churche of Christe in his time Which you might easily haue seene in Constantines owne wordes by the Byshop cited That he put away and ouerthre we all the euils that pressed the worlde If you say ye can not yet see that he ment all spirituall and ecclesiasticall euils so well as temporall put on a payre of spectacles master Stapl that are not dymmed with affection and then shall ye see that of suche kinde as the good thinges were whiche he set foorth of suche kinde were the contrarie euils that he put away and ouerthrew but the good things that he set foorthe were true godlynesse decrees of God the religion of the moste holy law the most blessed fayth c. All whiche are matters moste spirituall and ecclesiasticall Ergo all the euils that he abolished were so well spirituall and ecclesiasticall as ciuill and temporall matters If ye say yet ye see nothing but that he was diligent in defending the olde and former fayth of the Christians True in deede neither can ye see any other thing in the Quéenes Maiestie nor any authoritie is giuen héereby to Princes than as Constantine was to bee diligente in defending the olde and former fayth of the Christians founded by Christ and taught by his Apostles And if any other since that time haue brought in any things besides that old and former fayth to remoue the same and reduce vs to the olde and former fayth of the Christians For as Tertullian sayth That is of the Lorde and that is truthe that was before deliuered but that which afterward was thrust in is bothe strange and false And so sayth Constantine I bothe called agayne mankind taught by my ministerie to the religion of the most holy lawe and also caused the moste blessed fayth should encrease grow vnder a better gouernor Nowe séeing that many poynts of the Popish fayth and doctrine haue cropen in since that time and manie of later yeres besides and contrarie to the olde and former fayth of the Cheistians taught by Christ and left vs written by the finger of the holy ghost sealed and confirmed by so many myracles to endure to the
mightie defences That which was pulled downe thou haste made vp agayne and haste made the same whole and sounde agayne with a conuenient knitting togither of all the partes and members To be shorte thou haste saythe Nicephorus to the Emperour established true religion and godlynesse with spirituall butresses namely the doctrine and rules of the auncient fathers These are the Bishops allegations out of Nicephorus for this Princes dealing in ecclesiastical matters Wherin are comprehended as eche man may sée all the chiefe ecclesiasticall causes The true religion the sincere fayth the diuine doctrine godlynesse making constitutions the fathers rules the catholike vniuersal church Neither ascribeth he to the Prince herein a power LegaÌ„tine froÌ„ Priest Byshop Patriarke or Pope muche lesse to be their onely executioner but vnder God he giueth him a supreme gouernement in calling him not onely the defender but the mightie supreme and very holy anchor and stay the guyde the restorer the clenser the establisher the entrencher and maker vp of all these things On the contrarie the puller downe and banisher of newe deuises counterfeit naughtie vnlawfull and impure doctrines of horrible errors and heretical deprauers And this his chief dealing herein to be most seemely for him and chiefly belonging to his princely office Dothe all this M. Stap. little or nothing further our cause if it doe not then it lyttle or nothing hindreth yours Why graunte ye not then vnto it if ye graunte but thus muche we wil vrge you little or nothing further for what is not héere conteined that is either conteined in the issue betwéene the Bishop and M. Feck or in the othe of the O. Maiesties supremacie that ye refuse to take But as light as yâ—… would séeme to make of this it pincheth you and ye dare not grauÌ„t nor answere any sentence therof Onely ye giue a snatche at a worde and bayte at the bishops marginal note vpoÌ„ these former allegatioÌ„s Wherin ye play like Alciates dogge at whom when one hurled a stone he let go him froÌ„ whom the stone came wreaked his anger on the stone So set you vpon the marginall note that in déede hitteth you a good souse but the allegations from wheÌ„ce the marginal note doth come ye let alone and fal to tugging of the note Only as I saide ye snatche at a word as though all the weight of the marginall note were setched only from thence and not from all these sentences But say you M. Home will not so leese his long allegation out of Nicephorus He hath placed a note in the margine sufficient â—… trow to conclude his principall purpose And that is this The Princes supremacie in repayring religion decayed This is indeede a ioly marginall note But where findeth M Horne the same in his text for soothe of this that Nicephorus calleth the Emperour the mightie supreme and very holy anchor and stay in so horrible wauering c. of the worde supreme anchor he concludeth a supremacie But O more than childishe follie Coulde that craftie Cooper of thys allegation informe you no better master Horne was he no better seene in Grammer or in the profession of a schole master than thus foully and fondely to misse the true interpretation of the Latine worde for what other is suprema anchora in good Englishe than the laste anchor the laste refuge the extreme holde and staye to rest vpon As suprema verba doe signifie the laste wordes of a man in hys laste wyll as summa dies the laste daye supremum iudicium the laste iudgement with a number of lyke Phrases So suprema anchora is the laste anchor signifying the laste holde and staye as in the perill of tempeste the laste refuge is to caste anchor In suche a sense Nicephorus calleth this Emperour the laste the mightie and the holy anchor or stay in so horrible wauering and errour Signifying that nowe by him they were stayed from the storme of schisme as from a storme in the sea by casting the anchor the shippe is stayed But by the metaphore of an anchor to conclude a supremacie is as wyse as by the Metaphore of a Cowe to conclude a Saddle For as well dothe a saddle fitte a Cowe as the qualitie of an anchor resemble a supremacie But by suche beggerly shiftes a barren cause muste be vpholded First all is saide by the way of amplification to extoll the Emperour as in the same sentence he calleth him the sixt element reaching aboue Aristotels fifte body ouer the foure elementes with suche lyke Then all is but a Metaphore which were it true proueth not nor concludeth but expresseth and lightneth a truth Thirdly the Metaphore is ill translated and last of all worsse applied A sirra M. St. héere is a whot sturre and highe wordes A man would thinke all is nowe answered to the full and yet when all coÌ„mes to all héere is nothing of all this a do agaynst any one sentence of the Byshops allegations But the poore marginall note and one poore séelie worde of all these long allegations shall abye for this geare First ye say M. Stapl. that M. Horne will not so leese his long allegation out of Nicephorus What ye meane by leesing I know not But it appeareth he may leâ—…e or finde them all for any thing ye wil answere to them Ye slinke for the nonce to the marginall note which is this The Princes supremacie in repayring religion decayed This is in deede say you a ioly marginal note but where findeth M. Horne the same in his texte forsoothe of this that Nicephorus calleth the Emperour the mightie supreme and very holy anchor and stay in so horrible wauering of the worde supreme anchor he concludeth a supremacie Is there nothing M. Stap. in all these allegations that ye coulde sée wherfore the Bishop set downe his marginal note of the Princes supremacie in repayring religion decayed but onely this sentence yea onely that worde do not all the other sentences importe as muche as this that he is the guyde of the profession of our fayth the restorer of the catholike and vniuersall Church the banisher from the Church of all vnlawful and impure doctrine the clenser of the temple with the worde of truth froÌ„ choppers and changers of the diuine doctrine and from hereticall deprauers thereof That he is the entrencher of true religion with mightie defences That he is the establisher of the doctrine and maker of constitutions for the same that he is the maker vp agayne the maker whole and sounde agayne of al that was pulled downe Might not all this to an indifferent reader be thought sufficient to answere the marginal note and comprehende in all poyntes as muche as the note yea though ye quite set aside the sentence and word wherat ye wrangle And yet with M. Stap. this one sentence must beare the weight of all that the bishop alleaged the mightie supreme and very holy anchor and stay in so
ordering directing publike peace and iustice but also as much or rather much more most of all godlinesse true religioÌ„ Ecclesiastical matters and Ecclesiastical persons to liue blamelesse in their spirituall vocations so well as the laytie to liue in peace and iustice And that in al these points the Prince is the knitting togither iointurâ—… of the one so well as of the other Which flatly argueth that the direction and preseruing of both causes persons next vnder God doth appertaine to his gouernment being both knit alike to his authoritie What false dealing what blearing of eyes hath the Bishop here vsed hauing faithfully set downe the Emperours owne wordes which as they fully shew Theodosius his minde so they fully proue the present question conclude the Princes supreme authoritie so well in Ecclesiasticall matters as in temporall To all this master Stap. thought best to answere not one worde but to let it goe telling vs that the Emperours sayings or doings serue nothing for our pretensed primacie and that this is wandring in an ob scure generalitie This may well be called a Counterblast M. Stap. If this be sufficient answere to the bishops allegation let others iudge Ye complayne it is obscure it may perchaunce so appeare to your eyes bleared with affection or rather blinded with wilfulnesse So is the Gospell obscure to those that would not sée and the sauour of death to those that perish Cleare light is noysome to dimme sights Euery body saue you and suche as are bleared by you may easily sée a farre off the playnnesse of these proues Nowe where ye say he wandreth in an obscure generalitie wherof can not be enforced any certayne particularitie of the principall question Otherwhiles M. St. ye coÌ„playne of particularities require the B. to proue generalities or else ye crie it commeth shorte Héere the Bishop hauing proued this generalitie by your owne confession nowe you quarell at generalities I perceiue nothing will content a froward brabbler but any other that liste not to quarell will soone perceiue that this generalitie that ye complayne of bothe comprehendeth the particulars also satisfieth that that ye call so often for to proue a supreme gouernemeÌ„t ouer all ecclesiastical matters in general which fully answereth euen to the othe likewise Neuerthelesse sith you would slip away by wandring about particulars This Epistle of the Emperour sheweth his supreme direction and gouernment euen in particulars and that principall particulars also This Epistle béeing directed from the foresaide Emperours to Cyrillus a chiefe ecclesiasticall Prelate and Patriarche of Alexandria after the Emperours as is before sayde haue declared this their generall care and gouernment â–ª so well ouer ecclesiasticall matters as temporall But when say they to Cyril we vnderstoode both by our loue to God and our mynd louing hys truthe that these thinges mighte bee obteyned in those that are godly wee haue nowe often thought it very necessarie by reason of those thinges that haue happened luckyly to haue a Synode moste deare vnto God of those moste holy Bishoppes whiche bee euery where c. And so shewing the cause of their delaye and the necessitie of the Ecclesiasticall matters they commaunde Cyrill with other Bishoppes not to fayle buâ—… be readie at Ephesus at Whytsontide nexte following For saye they the Copies of the same Synode are already sente out from oure Maiesties to the bishoppes beloued in GOD throughout all the Metropolitane Cities that thys beeing doone bothe the trouble whiche hathe happened on these controuersies be dislolued according to the ecclesiasticall rules and those thinges corrected that are vnseemely committed And that godlynesse maye be towardes God and profitable establishement to publique matters Neither let any thyng be seuerally innouate in any matter of any person before the holy Synode and the common sentence of it to come And we are fully persuaded that euery one of the Priestes moste deare to God both forbicause of the ecclesiasticall and publique matters beeing throughly moued by this our sanction or Edict will spedyly make haste towardes this councell with diligent endeuour and to their habilities consulte vpon these matters being so necessarie and apperteining to the good pleasure of god As for vs we hauing muche care of these things wil suffer no man lightly to be wanting neither shall he haue any excuse before God or before vs if any out of hande do not diligently appeare at the foresayde tyme in the place determined c. Thus euen in thys Epistle in particularities also doth Theodosius shewe his supreme authoritie But you will say these are not principall particulars the principall particulars are to dispute vpon the questions to resolue the doubtes to debate the matter and to indge and determine which parte is the truthe thereof These partes say you are the principall these partes belong not to the Prince but to the Priestes That these thinges master Sta belong to those that for their function haue the knowledge and profession of them no man denieth no more than that lawyers shoulde haue the lyke debating trying and determining the truthe of any doubte in the lawe But this nothing hindreth the Princes supreme authoritie and gouernement in his lawes no more dothe it in the debating trying and determining doubtes in any ecclesiasticall matters in the discussing wherof the Prince is ignoraunt debarre his supreme authoritie and gouernment in all suche cases debated or defined These doings therfore though they be the principall in respect of the examining of suche doubtes yet in respects of the ordering directing disposing setting them out and maynteyning them the Princes dooinges are farre more principall particulars As when a doubte in the lawe aryseth to call all the Lawyers togither highe and lowe what estate soeuer they bee off to appoynte them the place and tyme of meeting where and when to directe and order their assemblie and what they haue iudged to be the lawe therein to ratifie and allowe it to sette it foorthe and maynteyne it this dooing theweth the Prince to be the supreme gouernour in all Laive matters thoughe he neyther debate nor determine the truthe thereof Sithe therefore Theodosius dyd thus muche as this that is héere shewed and as that héereafter to whiche ye referre your selfe shall further declare this is inoughe to argue hys supreme gouernement in all Ecclesiasticall matters euen by these particulars If all this proue no supremacie why graunt ye not thus muche to Princes nowe that ye sée these Emperours had then howe chaunce your Pope wyll neither suffer the Emperours nowe to summon a Councell to cite and call the Bishops togither to assigne them a place whereto they shal resort and kéepe their Councell to appoynte the time to méete and begin their Councell in Howe chaunce your Pope will not suffer Princes in their seuerall dominions to haue the like synodes but will do all either generall or Prouinciall by him selfe or by
if ye meane by this visitation the outward execution of the Church lawes and decrees confirmed by the ciuill magistrate roborated with hisedicts and executed with his sword For in such sort many Emperors Princes haue fortified streÌ„gthned the decrees of Bishops made in Councels both general National as we shall in the processe see And this in christian Princes is not denied but coÌ„mended What the state of the question in hande is the reader hath often hearde How be it such is your importunitie that ye will neuer leaue your olde warbling But for the full satisfying of the Reader berein let him once againe resort to the issue that M. Feck requireth of the bishop to direct all hys foure meanes vnto wherin he would be satisfied And that is conteyned in these flat wordes VVhen your L. shall be able by any of these foure meanes to make proofe vnto me that any Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may claime or take vpon them any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes I shall herein yeelde c. This then is the state of the question betwéen theÌ„ whether any Prince may take vpon him any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes as the Queenes Maiestie doth Now wheresoeuer the B. proueth anything by the foure fore said meanes that any Prince hath taken vpon him any such gouernement as doth the Queenes Maiestie in causes ecclesiasticall there the bishop kéepeth himselfe to the state of the question in hande and satisfieth M. Fecknams issue What the bishop hath done in the two foresaide meanes is euident by that that is past let others iudge thereon Here the B. entring into the other two meanes prefixeth this issue againe before him to leuell his proues by The issue is now that by any of these two meanes remayning he shall proue that anye Prince may claime or take vpon him any such gouernment as the Queenes Maiestie in Ecclesiasticall matters doth And where the B. by any of these two meanes shall proue that any Princes haue taken â—…pon them any such gouernment in ecclesiasticall matters as the Q. Maiestie doth there the B. digresseth nothing from his question also satisfieth M. Feck â–ª demaunde This then being the state of the question betwéene them the proofe of any such gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes the B. first setteth here down the particulars that plainly declare what gouernment this is that the Q. Maiestie taketh on hir wherto he must direct his proues So that now that question in hande is this What is that gouernment in what particulars consisteth it that the Q. maiestie taketh on hir Which when here the B. doth specifie in the last Chapter M. Stapl. himselfe commended the bishop for his orderly going to worke therein and now crieth out here is a state framed farre square from the question in had whether it be so or no whether it be not plain dealing of the B. and plain warbling of M. St. let any man be indifferent iudge betwéene them But M. Stapl. sayth the question is not nowe betweene M. Feck and you whether the Prince may visite reforme and correct all maner of persons for all maner of schismes heresies and offences in Christian religion True in déede M. St. the question is not nowe whether the Prince may doe these things that you rehearse or no but the question that is nowe in hand being deducted out of the words of the issue any such gouernment demaundeth first what kinde of gouernment that is that the Q. maiestie doth claime and take vpon hir to the which question the B. aunswereth the gouernment that hir highnesse taketh on hir is such and such c. And so the state of the question is knowne what kinde of gouernment the B. must proue And looke where he proueth any such gouernment there M. Feckenhams request is aunswered And if he can not prooue any such then M. Feckenham may complaine that he is not satisfied And as he is bounde to performe his promise of thankfull yéelding so haue you no cause to warble at this the B. diligent enumeration of those particularities of the principal question least both ye should wander in an obscure generalitie also coÌ„trarie your late vaunt that ye go to worke plainly truly and particularly But sée your falshoode how chaunce ye set not downe the Bishops wordes as he spake them but abridge them 〈◊〉 of thrée parts of them and more crying Here is a state framed farre square from the question in hande Here is a false subtiltie of you M. St. farre square from any truth in hand or out of hande The Bishops wordes are these The gouernment that the Q. Maiestie moste iustly taketh vpon hir in eccles causes is the guiding caring prouiding ordering directing and ayding the ecclesiasticall state within hir dominions to the furtherance maintenance and setting forth of true religion vnitie and quietnesse of Christes Church ouerseeing visiting refourming restrayning amending and correcting all maner persons with all maner errours superstitions heresies schismes abuses offences contemptes and enormities in or about Christes religion whatsoeuer In place of all these wordes euery one béeing materiall to shewe the particular things wherein hir gouernment consisteth that she claymeth you onely for all these set downe these wordes The Prince may visite reforme and correcte all maner of persons for all maner of heresies schisines and offences in Christian religion As though the Bishops particular words specifying the poynts of hir gouernmeÌ„t conteined no more but this Neuerthelesse had the bishop specified no more but these words that ye thus contracte yet had he not swarued from the issue betweene them Any suche gouernment nor from the directâ—… answering to the question declaring any suche gouernment chiefly the chiefe poynts therof that the Quéenes maiestie claymeth and you refuse to yéelde vnto hir For euen these particularities that you set out ye will not graunte without an exception and that is in effecte vtterly to denie them althoughe in daliaunce of spéeche saying in some sense ye would onely séeme to mollifie them For what else meane these your words VVhich perchaunce in some sense might somewhat be borne withall if ye meane by this visitation and reformation the outwarde execution of the Churche lawes and decrees confirmed by the ciuill magistrate roborated with his edicts and executed with his sworde for in suche sorte many Emperours and Princes haue fortified and strengthened the decrees of Byshops made in Councels bothe generall and nationall as we shall in the processe see And this in Christian Princes is not denied but commended Christian Princes haue héere gotten afaire catche by this your graunt and commendation to become your seruants your souldiours your slaughtermen only executing with their swords that you with your authoritie decrée and appoint vnto them Now forsooth a fayre supreme authoritiâ—… But let vs sée how this doth hang togither Ye graunt theÌ„ to visite reforme
and correct all maner of persons for al maner of heresies schismes and offences in Christian religion This is inough M. St. for your part to grauÌ„t the Prince thus much Nay soft ye say you I graunt this but with a perchaunce What doth so waightie a matter hang by so rotten a thread Nay I graunt not this perchauÌ„ce neither say you but in some condition This goeth hard with Princes M. St. to stand at this smal reuersion But go to let vs see how many Princes visite reforme and correct all maner persons heresies schismes and offences What is the condition ye wil make Forsooth the condition is this looke what maner lawes and decrees the Priests will make the Prince shall only confirme them by outwarde execution of them Looke what maner persons the priests do say are heretikes â—…chismatikes and offenders the Prince shall execute them with the sworde and kill them Looke what maner religion doctrine and doings the Priests and Bishops shall in their Councels both generall and nationall decrâ—… to be heresie schisme and offence the Prince shal roborate fortifie and streÌ„gthen them And this is the only sense sayth M. St. that I meane that they should visite reforme and correct all maner persons heresies schismes and offences in Christian religion Why M. Stapl. this sense and this graunte are quite contrarie the one to the other The Prince shall visite reforme and correct all maner of persons heresies schismes and offences that is to say he shall not visite reforme nor correct any maner of person for any maner of all these things but the Priest shall do it and he shall onely be the Priestes slaue and executioner Well sayth M. Stap. be it as be may construe it as ye will this is the onely some sense that we may graunt it in and in none other sense And this in Christian Princes is not denied but commended Is not héere a proper graunt to Princes and is not master Stap. to be commended for this some sense of christian Princes gouernment But who is so senselesse that he seeth not in this sense that the Prince hath no gouernement at all but is made a very slaue to the Popish priests authoritie And in this some sense coulde master Stapl. finde in his heart to acknowledge a gouernement to the Queenes maiestie and yet not without a perchaunce neither But without perchaunce master Stap. your sense sheweth what good harte ye beare hir Maiestie and all other christian Princes Now that M. Stap. hath thus chalenged the state which the bishop framed and yet graunteth with a perchaunce thereto in some sense which sense is as you haue heard he taketh vpon him to set downe the true state of the question in hande and prefixeth these words in his margine The state of the question and so procéedeth saying But the question is here nowe whether the Prince or lay magistrate may of him selfe and of his own princely authoritie without any higher eccl. power in the Church within or without the Realme visite reforme and correct and haue all maner of gouernment and authoritie in all things causes eccl. or no. As whether the Prince may by his own supreme authoritie depose and set vp Bishops and priests make iniunctions of doctrine prescribe order of Gods seruice enact matters of religioÌ„ approue and disproue articles of the faith take order for administration of Sacraments commaund or put to silence Preachers determine doctrine excoÌ„municate and absolue with such like which al are causes eccl. and al apperteyning not to the inferiour ministerie which you grauÌ„t to Priests and Bishops only but to the supreme iurisdiction and gouernment which you do annexe to the Prince only This I say is the state of the question now present For the present question betweene you and M. Feck is grounded vpon the othe comprised in the statute which statute emplieth and concludeth all these particulars I had thought séeing your earnestnesse M. St. when ye came to meÌ„tioning the statute that we should haue herd all these things that ye haue thus as it were on your fingers endes particularly named expressed in the statute But wheÌ„ al coÌ„meth to al ye knit vp the matter with this which statute implyeth concludeth al these particulars But I sée you employ your selfe like your self stil to false coÌ„clusions And such as your coÌ„clusions are such are your proues You pretende here after ye haue controlled the B. to set down the true state of the questioÌ„ But as ye played in the beginning so ye holde out rubbers euen to the ending Ye are stil the same man that cried out of short wide shoting hauing set vp new markes of your owne making by this doing both to defeate the bishops profes also to deceiue the reader Ye would fayne driue all to the othe and make the othe the present question And why so bicause say you the present question is grounded on the othe True in déede bothe the present question and all other questions about this controuersie and the issue also agréed vpon betwéene these parties is grounded as ye say vpon the oth And bicause the present question is grounded theron it is a good argument against you that the oth is not theÌ„ the present questioÌ„ bicause the present questioÌ„ is grouÌ„ded theron a question is not grounded on it selfe Ye shoulde haue marked that though the originall be of the othe yet both the issue the present questioÌ„ in haÌ„d being by degrées deducted from thence make nowe an other state To the which to this issue if the bishop satisfie ye can not iustly chaleÌ„ge him any further As for that state of the question that you set downe and the particulars thereof that ye say are implyed and concluded in the statute that all those things are apperteining not to the inferiour but to the supreme iurisdiction and gouernment that ye say we annexe to the Prince only al these are your most manifest vntruthes slanders nor ye can finde them either specified emplyed concluded comprised or any wayes to be ment in the othe or in the statute or in any parte therof Neither the othe or the statute giue al maner of gouernment and authoritie in all things and causes ecclesiasticall to the Prince but ascribe to the Prince the supreme gouernment and authoritie in al things and causes ecclesiasticall True it is that supreme gouernement is aboue ouer them but yet the one is not the other supreme gouernment is not all maner of gouernment Neither bothe the othe or the statute either in wordes or effect of wordes ascribe to this the Princes supreme gouernment the making of Priests and Bishops the making iniunctions of doctrine the determining of doctrin the approuing or disprouing articles of the faith excommunicating and absoluing the preaching of the worde and the administration of Sacramentes Where fynde ye any of these things so muche as to be gathered out
for the visitation of persons ecclesiasticall and correcting all maner of errours heresies and offences shall be for euer vnited to the crowne of the realme of England wherin is employed that if which God forbid a Turke or any heretike whatsoeuer shoulde come to the Crowne of Englande by vertue of this statute and of the othe all maner superioritie in visiting and correcting ecclesiasticall persons in all maner matters shoulde be vnited vnto him Yea and euery subiecte should sweare that in his conscience he beleeueth so Is this a part also M. Sta. of the question in hand for the omission of a part wherof ye haue so sharply reuiled the Bishop for a false dissembler Is there no difference betwéene the kind of gouernment it self or the particulars therof the perpetual vniting of that gouernment â–ª and the same particulars to the crowne or any other suche clauses for the preferâ—…ing of it If the Bishop concealed any parte of that gouernmeÌ„t that the Quenes maiestie taketh on hir then might ye haue sée ned to haue had some cause to haue thus quarelled at the B. but then ye shuld haue set down what clauses of any point of gouernmeÌ„t in ecclesiast matters that the Quéene claimeth the Bish. omitted But this neither ye do nor ye can do but run about the bushe picking quarels that he let not downe other clauses also that be no parcel of the question in hande The question is not nowe aboute the vniting to the crowne the supremacie that hir highnesse claimeth but what that supremacie is and what are the pointes wherin it consisteth that are to be vnited The thing it selfe is one thing the vniting of the thing is an other thing The B. hath 〈◊〉 to set down the thing it self for his leuel for so the question of the issue demauÌ„deth to proue any such gouernment as the Queene taketh on hir If now the B. tell what kinde of gouernmeÌ„t it is â—…o enter into his proues to leuel theÌ„ therto doth not the B. deale playnly and truly and do you any other thaÌ„ kéepe your wonted wrnggling which way soeuer the B had goâ—… to worke For if when he vniteth himselfe only to his matter he caÌ„not satisfie your brabbling quarels but euen there suche is your impudencie ye chyde bycause he straggleth not from his question If he had vnited any thing else vnto it and spokeÌ„ of this vniting also as now ye would haue him do then woulde ye as faste haue cryed out on the other side that he shot wyde and set vp new states of the question in hande And thus woulde nothing stop your mouth ye loue of lyfe to wrangle But all these quarels are but your starting holes pretending to fynde fault with the Bishop where indéed your quarell is at an other matter to caste for a farewell at the ende of this your booke a boane for the reader to gnawe vpon to breede a suspition in his head of a greate inconuenience and so to bring him in a misliking of the state At least to leaue him striken in the head with a doubtfull scruple of the sâ—…qurle therof As who should say cracke me this nuttâ—… and there an end answere me to this inconuenience that may followe hereon If a Turke say you or any heretike whatsoeuer shoulde come to the Crown of England by vertue of this statute and of the Othe all manner superioritie in visiting and correcting Ecclesiasticall persons in all maner matters shoulde be vnited to him You haue a mischeuous meaning M. St. al the world may sée but that ye dare not vtter it without an if But thanks be to God they be no Turks nor any heretikes whatsoeuer that ye shoot at and refuse to obey God graunte all be 〈◊〉 whome ye wish in place as for your Pope whom ye would giue this supremacie vnto as he is no whit better than any heretike whatsoeuer so is he a more perillous enimie than the Turke A worsse than he can not be feared excepte yâ—… will put your case of the Diuell himselfe And shall we leaue the certayntie of a present good state for doubt of an ill to come or for feare of a worse runne to the worste of all Thankes be to God the Quéenes Maiestie whome God of his mercifull fauour hath placed to reigne ouer vs and to enioye this supremacie is neyther Turke nor heretike but a moste excellent and blessed christian Quéene a moste syncere defender of the true faith of Christe a most godlye nourse and mother of Gods people God for his mercyes sake vouchesafe to blesse and long continue hir ouer vs maugre all your spites But go to will ye say I stande not â—…n the state present It is good for hereafter to forecast the worsâ—…e â–ª What if this should happen as God forbid that a Turke or an heretike should come to the crowne of England Since there is no remedie with you M. Stapleton but we must néedes answer this your wicked presupposall for myne owne parte I will answere you thus First there is a great difference betwene a Turke and an heretike of both whome confusedly ye put your case â–ª A Turke is an open enimie to Christes religion professing Mahomet that seducers lawe An heretike pretendeth to be a christian but agréeth not with the truth of Christes doctrine so that there might be a more lykelyhod of the one than of the other For this realme being Christian and withall God 〈◊〉 thanked therefore so farre from any danger of the Turke betwene whome and vs bothe by lande and water lie many Nations that yet of the twayne the heretikes of whiche there be many and subtile â—…ortes and all pretending to be membres of the Catholike Churche of Christ were more liâ—…ly to obtaine that whiche you presuppose Nowe if a Turke aâ—… God forbad shoulde come to the crowne most lykely he coulde not get it but by tyramicall vsurpation as he doth other Countreys and then your question is aunswered for him that of right neither this authoritie nor any other vnited to the Crowne it selfe is due vnto him Neyther wil he if he be a Turke in religion althoughe â—…e woulde take the Crowne neyther coulor be if he woulde take withall this Christian kynde of Supremacie vpon hym whiche is the subuersion of his false and 〈◊〉 Religion No M. Stapl. he would not take any suâ—…e kynde of Regiment as you your selfe allow to Christian Princes and vnite vnto their crownes As for an heretike might easilyer crepe in to the obtayning the crowne of England which also God forbid for no throne chaire or citie place or people haue any warrant against this presupposall â–ª The holie temple of Hierusalem became a denne of théeues and their priests moste wicked murderers of Iesu Christ. And in the seate of Dauid sat many idolaters yea farre mo bad than good Besides that no natioÌ„ is exempted froÌ„ this threat Propter peccata populi regnare
to make an ende of questioning This in the statute by master Hornes silence is not comprised True in déede M. Stapl. this kinde of iudgement is not mentioned by the Bishop â–ª but it is moste falsly mentioned by you For where ye say this in the statute moste maliciously ye slaunder the statute for this in the statute is neither named comprised or can be gathered thereon Neither the Quéenes Maiestie claymeth or taketh on hir this kinde of iudgement It is due onely to Gods worde and your Pope and popishe Churche violently snatcheth it from Gods worde chalenging it to them selues euen aboue Gods worde it selfe although they agrée not héerein togither For the popishe Churche will be aboue the Pope in thys poynt of iudgement maugre his bearde and yet they graunt the Pope to be their supreme gouernour ecclesiasticall Though they will not relent to him this supreme iudgement but giue it to the Churches iudgement And therefore they be of a contrarie iudgement to you that say this poynt is moste necessarie meete and conuenient for a supreme gouernour ecclesiastical By which poynt you wil make your Pope either no supreme gouernour eccl ouer you or spoyle him of a most necessarie meete and couenient poynt of the supreme gouernment that ye giue him but these are your iarres agrée as ye wil like cats in a glitter about theÌ„ This popish churches or papall iudgement the Q. Maiestie taketh not vpon hir nor the statute ascribeth it vnto hir and therefore the B. had nought to do therewith Yet haue we one thing more which after a couple of your slauÌ„ders that I answere not but referre to your common place thereon ye charge the Bishop once more for this omission Agayne say you preaching the worde administration of the sacraments bynding and loosing â–ª are they not things and causes eccl How then are they heere omitted by you master Horne or how make you the supreme gouernment in all causes to rest vpon the Queenes Maiestie if these causes haue no place there What should a man vse many words with suche a brabler who though he haue nought to say yet will neuer lâ—…e saying of that which is nought to purpose Ye have beene often inough and fully inoughe answered to this master St. if the Quéenes Maiestie taketh not these thinges vpon hir then the B. omitteth not any thing that hir highnesse taketh on hir in omitting these things Neither doth the â–ª sratute yéelde vnto hir the doing of them It is but your slaunderous obtruding of the statute It giueth a supreme gouernmeÌ„t in al these things to the Q. Maiestie And so these causes haue place there so farre as is néedful to a supreme gouernour But from a supreme gouernour which consisteth in caring for ordering directing prouiding guyding maynteining setting foorth to the executing doing preaching and administring of those things is as farre from any good conclusion as you your matter are farre from truthe and honestie Neuerthelesse such is your great coÌ„fidence in this your Counterblast as though ye had so puft vp the falshood therof that no man could espie it ye lustely blowe vp the last blast of this your first booke saying VVhich is nowe better I appeale to all good consciences playnly to maynteine the truthe than dissemblingly to vphold a falsshod playnly to refuse the othe so generally conceiued than generally to sweare to it beeing not generally meaned â–ª But nowe let vs see how M. Horne wyll direct his proufes to the scope appoynted Why may not you appeale to all good consciences M. Stap. as well as that mayden Priest of yours that mighte bidde his maydenhead Goodmorrowe and haue as good a conscience for your owne parte as he for his parte had a maydenhead And to shew your good conscience for a farewell while ye shake handes at the very parting ye lash â–ª out a couple of slaunderous vntruthes togither Ye haue not many words to speake and therfore ye huddle them vp You say the othe is conceiued so generally that it giueth to the Prince your foresayde absolute power of determining all doubts and controuersies of preaching the worde administration of the sacraments bynding and loosing This lie to lappe vp all in the ende was worthe a whetstone M. Stapl. and his fellowe that iutteth with him chéeke by chéeke is as good as he That the othe generally conceyued is not generally meaned But set aside your malitious meaning to wrest the othe and the othe is playne and all one bothe in wordes and meaning But howe soeuer the othe were not so generally conceiued your meaning is playnely to refuse the othe And therefore héere in the ende for a remembraunce to all the rest you must néedes strike vp the stroke with ala lia and desperatly without al dissembling for the matter vpholde a falshoode with falshoodes euen to the laste breathe Et fiunt nouissima illius hominis peiora prioris And the latter ende of that man is worsse than the beginning ¶ The answere to foure Chapters in Doctor Saunders seconde booke of the visible Monarchie of the Churche concerning the question here in hande of a Christian Princes supreme gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes First of the difference of both povvers the ciuill and Ecclesiastical in the original in the vse and in the end of eyther Secondly vvhether the Prince be the Supreme gouernour immediatly vnder Christ. Thirdly vvhether the Prince may iudge and define of ecclesiasticall matters Fourthly whether Bishops maye depose Princes from their estate and take from the realme their povver of electing their Prince if they differ in religion from their Bishops VVhich foure chapters I thought good here to answere vnto both bicause he is the last writer and chiefest novve of accompte among the aduersaries And these chapters aboue al other in his volume both draw neerest to the question of the Princes estate and shew vvithall the full drift of the Papists not only striuing agaynst the Princes supremacie but into vvhat extreme slauerie they vvould reduce all Christian Kinges and kingdomes The argument of the fyrst Chapter of the difference betweene the Ciuile and Ecclesiasticall Magistrate in the originall in the vse and in the ende of bothe MAster Saunders firste beginning with the original lconfesseth that both powers are of God but not both immediatly from God the ciuile power he granteth to be of God but by the lawe of Nations or the consent of people and other meanes of mans wit put betweene But streight he correcteth himselfe that some thing in the ciuill authoritie was reuealed immediatly from God yea Per multa in lege Mosaica diuinitus instituta suerunt verie manie things pertaining to the ciuill power were in Moses law ordeyned of God. And thus at the fyrst he speaketh contraries Herevpon he concludeth thus I thinke therfore it is agreed vpon among all men that the royal imperial power which at this day is exercised in
wife or any other mans wife daughter or mayde in things perteyning to their duties and offices can and ought to doe Especially sithe your selfe in prosecuting this argument vrge the example of a woman All the women in his kingdome are his subiects so well as the men He hath a supreme gouernment ouer all persons in all causes can he therfore do their duties and yet he can haue the supreme gouernment to maynteine all lawes of matrimonie and to punishe all whordomes and yet not like euery somoner or other executioner of their punishements If ye say a woman may be no inferiour gouernour That is false a wife hath inferiour gouernment in hir housholde and many women haue had inferiour gouernments vnder kings in common weales as the Lady regentes in Flaunders c. But what if she were not an vndergouernour yet if she be a subiect gouerned the words of your definition coÌ„prehend hir saying A chiefe gouernour hath of necessitie the power of doing all those thinges which may be wrought of the inferiours to the magistrates of that congregation by their office or by any charge belonging properly to the same congregation But you will say perhaps that women are of an other kinde so that the king can not do al their offices As likewise for the ecclesiastical gouernment the Apostles might not lawfully do all those things that the widdowes chosen to serue in the congregation mighte and ought to do nor the ciuill magistrate of those congregations might or ought to do them Then will M. Feckenham presse you that your definition is false a gouernour can not do all things that belongeth to a subiect If ye say a woman is not a subiecte that is false If ye say she is not a subiect in respect she is a woman that is false also for both men and women are subiectes to their gouernours If ye say she is not a subiecte in respect she is a wife although I graunt the worde wife hath an other relation than to the king to wife vnto hir husbande yet what auayleth this sithe many offices haue many other relations also the sonne to his father the seruant to his master the scholler to his scholemaster and yet all these be subiects to the Prince although the Prince can not deale in all their seuerall offices But you thinke to salue all the matter with this exception I say not that he which is endowed with chiefest power should straight wayes haue the knowledge of euery lesser office for this perteyneth to the fact and not to the right Neither say I it is alwayes comely that he should execute the inferiour offyce by him selfe but I say there is no lawe to let him no power wants whereby the chiefe magistrate shoulde not do those things which the inferiours in the same common weale are wonte to doe Go to go to M. Saunders ye will still be like the gentleman that would fayne haue eaten his worde if he durst for shame Ye come in pretily and beginne to make some exceptions already you admitte he may wante knowledge of many things perteyning not to his office yea and that it is vncomely he should do them And in déede M. Saunders if you be thinke ye of euery subiectes doings ye shall finde many vncomely and vnreuerent things for so highe an estate to do and many things that he knowes no more howe to do them him selfe than that Cooke that would put mustarde into his milke to season it What and may the Prince do those things him self that are so vile and wherof he hath no knowledge He may say you and he will what righte or lawe may let him If ye talke M. Saunders of a wilfull foole that will caste him selfe and his kingdome away if ye talke of a tyraunt whose will is lawe that sayth as the Pope doth Sic volo sic iubeo stet pro ratione voluntas that is another matter But if ye talke of a king and of a lawfull power then I say his will and power oughte to be restrayned by lawe to do nothing vnskilfully nor vncomely for his estate I graunt he may abase him selfe to some inferiour kinde of offices to do them but not to all no not by the right of his royall estate And yet by his gouernment all those thinges are done that are orderly done Although he him selfe may not do them though he would Do ye not remember S. Paules similitude so ofteÌ„ vsed by your selfe M. Saunders of a coÌ„mon weale resembled to our body The head ye say often gouerneth all the parts and meÌ„bers but the head it selfe doth not nor can not do al that al the parts members do We stande not we go not we sit not on our heads our head reacheth not nor caÌ„ reach euery thing that our hande can reache doth Nor the head doth or can do the office of the shouloers back or belly yet ye graunt the head hath supreme gouernment ouer al these parts deuiseth lawes orders diets prouisioÌ„s helpes for all the parts and actions in the parts of all the body Thus ye sée not only by similitudes examples in which I might be infinite agaynst your thâ—… exaÌ„ples but also by good reason your definition of a supreme gouernour faileth he may be a lawful supreme gouernour yet can not do al the offices of his inferiours Yea it were vnlawful for him to attempt many such things and yet his lawfull supreme gouernmeÌ„t euen ouer all those things that he him selfe can not do nor ought to do is no whit therby empayred And therfore this is a false principle to builde as ye do thereon Nowe this béeing thus playnly proued a false groundeworke let vs sée howe ye procéede to frame your argument on it VVhich things beeing thus foretouched I adde vnto them that the supreme head or gouernour of any Church is the supreme magistrate of that coÌ„mon weale which no man hauing his right minde will denie Therfore if the king may rightly and worthily be named the supreme head or gouernour of that Churche as nowe this good whyle is done in Englande the same king shall also necessarily haue the facultie of working all those things which of that magistrate of that Churche may be wrought otherwyse he is not the gouernour of that Church in respecte it is a Church But in euery christian kingdome there are and ought to be many that shoulde preache the worde of God to the faythfull that shoulde baptise in the name of the father and of the sonne of the holy ghost the nations coÌ„uerted that should remitte sinnes that shoulde make the sacrament of thanksgiuing distribute it therfore he that is the supreme gouernour of any Church ought to be endowed with such power that no law should let wherby he might the lesse fulfil do al these things But a secular king although he be a christian can not do these things by the
force of his royall power oâ—… else a woman also might bothe teache in the Churche and also remitte sinnes and baptise orderly and solemnly and minister the sacrament of thankesgiuing For sithe bothe by the lawe of nations it is receyued that a woman may be admitted to the gouernment of a kingdome and in Moses lawe it is written when a man shall dye without a sonne the enheritance shall passe to the daughter but a kingdome commeth among many nations in the name of enheritaÌ„ce And sithe Debora the Prophetesse iudged the people of Israell and also Athalia and Alexandra haue reigned in Iurie it appeareth playnly that the kingly right appertayneth no lesse to women than to men VVhich also is to be sayde of children bicause according to the Apostle the heire though he be a childe is Lorde of all And Ioas began to raygne when he was seuen yere olde and Iosias reigned at the eight yere of his age But a childe for the defecte of iudgement a woman for the imbecillitie of hir kinde is not admitted to the preaching of Gods worde or to the solemne administration of the Sacraments I permit not sayth the Apostle a woman to teache For it is a shame for a woman to speake in the Churche and the same Apostle sayth that the heire being a childe diffreth nothing from a seruant But it is not the ecclesiasticall custome that he which remayneth yet a seruaunt shoulde be a minister of the Churche Sith therefore in the right of a kingdome the cause is all one of a man of a woman and of a childe but of like causes there is like and all one iudgement but neither childe nor woman and therevpon neither man also that is nothing else but king can do those things in his kingdome which of other ministers of the churche of God are necessarily to be done therfore it commeth to passe that neither the same king can rightly be called the supreme gouernour and head of the Church wherin he liueth All this long argument standeth stil on the foresayd principle that a supreme head or gouernour must be such a person as may do all the actions of all the offices belonging to all the parties gouerned But this is a false principle as alredy is manifestly declared therfore al this long driuen argument is to no purpose The Prince for all this may stil be the supreme head or gouernour ouer all Ecclesiastical persons so well as temporall in all their ecclesiasticall causes so well as in temporall although he himselfe can not exercise all ecclesiasticall functions nor doe himselfe all the ecclesiasticall actions of all ecclesiastical persons For else he might also be debarred of all supremacie ouer all ciuill and temporall persons in all their ciuill and temporall causes bicause he can not himselfe exercise all the ciuil and temporall offices nor do himselfe all the ciuill and temporall actions of all the ciuill and temporall persons neyther And so shoulde â—…e cleane be debarred from supremacie in either power nor haue any supreme gouernment at all Nowe taking this your false principle pro confesso â–ª after your wonted maner ye would driue vs to an absurditie as ye suppose by bringing in more examples of a woman and a chyld reasoning thus A pari from the like A woman and a child may be as well a supreme gouernor as may a man and hath as good right thereto But a woman or a childe can not be a supreme gouernour in causes Ecclesiasticall Ergo A man can not be a supreme gouernour neither in causes Ecclesiasticall For to this conclusion the force of bothe the promisses naturally driueth the argument I know ye clap in a paire of parenthesis saying in your coÌ„clusion neither a man also that is nothing else but a king But sith these wâ—…r des ar neither in the maior nor the minor the coÌ„clusion is plain â–ª that a man can not be a Supreme gouernor in causes Ecclesiasticall And I pray ye then tell me who shall be the supreme gouernour in ecclesiasticall causes if neyther man woman nor chyld may be wherby are not only excluded ciuill Princes but youre Popes are debarred from it Pope Ioane and Pope Iohn also For if they vse that order in the election to haue a Cardinall féele that all be safe yf the Uersicle be sayde Testiculos habet howe can the quyre meryly syng in the responce Deo gratias If hée be founde to bée a man he can not be supreme gouernoure Maister Saunders therefore muste néedes mende thys argumente or else the Popes for whome he writes this boke wyl con him small thanks except that they be Eunuches But Master Saunders not marking the sequele of hys conclusion fortifieth the parts of his argument To confirme the maior A woman and a childe may be as wel a supreme gouernour as a man he citeth the lawe Num. 27. he citeth ensamples Debora Athalia and Alexandra for women For children he citeth the Apostle Gal. 4. and the ensamples of Ioas and Iosias But these proues are superfluous sith the controuersie is not on the maior but on the minor Which minor is the point in controuersie and denied of vs that a woman or a childe can not be a supreme gouernour in causes ecclesiastical To confirme this minor for a woman he alleageth that she can not be admitted to preache the woorde of God remit sinnes nor baptize orderly and solemnely nor administer the Lordes Supper bothe for the imbecillitie of hir kinde and for Saint Paules prohibition of teaching in the Church For a chyld he lykewise can not do the same things as well for defect of iudgement in his nonage as for Sainte Paules witnesse that he differs not from a seruant But the Churches vse is not for seruantes to doe these things and so not for children to do them Here for confirmation of his minor master Sanders rusâ—…s to his false former principle that if the woman the chyld be supreme gouernors in these things then muste they be able themselues to do these things But they cannot do these thinges themselues Ergo they can haue no supreme gouernmeÌ„t in them But this reason is alreadie taken away and therfore al this argumeÌ„t falles We graunt it is true that neither women nor children can do these things And therfore the Papistes are to blame that suffer women to bapatize and to saye or sing in theyr quyres theyr ordinarie seruice and reade the Lessons Wee graunte them also that no men neyther but suche as bée lawfully called therevnto maye themselues exercise and do these things but doth this fellow they may not therfore haue a gouernment ouer those that doo them in their orderly doing of them if this were true then take away all their gouernement ouer all lay persons and all ciuil causes too For neyther women can nor ought them selues to do all that men béeing their subiects can and ought to
StapletoÌ„ and al the residue But howsoeuer they dodge out with it it wil not serue M. SauÌ„ders at this time For although it be true that Salomon had also the gift of prophesie yet Salomon did not this as Prophet but as king And in his blessing expressely prayeth for the raigne of his posteritie Neither neede M. Saunders run to this shift for euen Lyra saith et Benedixit c. and he blessed al the congregation not with that blessing that pertained to the priestly office but by wishing good things vnto the people and rendring thanks to God for his good gifts receaued saying blessed be the Lord god c. And in the ende of the Chapter the people blesse him also but this declareth not their superioritie although the kings solemne action declares him their better in his royall office for the establishing whereof he prayeth The like shifte ye make for Moyses and Dauid that they were also prophetes But what say ye to Saule that blessed Dauid 1. Reg. 26. he was in dede Dauids superior and he had béen among the prophetes too whereof the prouerbe arose num et Saul inter Prophetas is Saule also among the Prophetes But trow ye he blessed him as a Prophete and yet in blessing him although he himselfe were accursed he foretold the truth that Dauid shoulde doe great things What saye ye to Iosue that blessed Caleb Iosue 14. yea he blessed two tribes and a halfe of RubeÌ„ Gad and Manasses If ye except that he was a prophete too what say ye to Iehu that blessed Iehonadab and yet no prophet to Raguel that blessed Tobias and yet no prophete to Ozias the gouernour of Lethulia and Achior the Ammanite that blessed Iudith and yet no Prophetes nor all of them superiors and therefore this argumente serueth not to inferre gouernement neither alwayes to inferre superioritie neither is this shifte alwayes true that all the blesse are priests or prophetes Althoughe in priests whome Saint Paule speaketh of it argue a superioritie of their function as before is graunted But Maister Saunders hauing gotten hold on this word blessing as though he had founde a newe vaine procéedeth saying And truely when God had rather haue had his people to haue bene blessed of the priests of the Leuiticall kinde and of the prophetes than to haue bene gouerned of a king yet the people asked a King against the will of God which petition God in dede permitted to be fulfilled howbeit he sawe it dyd tend to the contempt of his name whervpoÌ„ he said to Samuel they haue not cast thee away but me that I should not raigne ouer them For although God raigned ouer his people euen when the kings gouerned them yet he had seemed to raigne in better signification and plainer if the people had obeyed any prophet or priest or Leuite Now that Maister Saunders former proues will fadge no better he séeketh oute all the wayes he can to deface the royall estate of a Kyngs authoritie in comparison of his Priests gouernment He sayth God had rather haue had his people ben blessed of the priests and the prophets thaÌ„ gouerned of kings dispitefully making these two to be meÌ„braopposita contraries the one to other The gouernment of kings â–ª and the blessing of Priestes and Prophets As though the people were berefte of the Priestes and Prophetes blessings bicause not they but kings did gouerne them But if the people had still the Priestes and Prophets blessings when Kings gouerned them so well as before then is this opposition no lesse false than malicious And that they had stil the Priests and Prophets blessing is apparant But what meanes M. Saunders to name onely their blessings â–ª did the Priestes and Prophetes nought but blesse would he by so swéete a name reuoke vs to the Popes blessings but he telleth vs else where that the Pope hath cur â–ª sed vs and no maruell for the chiefest parte of his power lyeth in cursing But he loueth cursing and his cursing shall light vpon himselfe and God dothe turne his cursings into blessings But troweth he the Priests Prophets then did curse and ban as the Pope dothe nowe by cause the kings were the supreme gouernours â–ª or that the supreme gouernment belonged first to them and from them was translated to the Kings Howbeit M. Saunders sayth not so but the the priestes and prophets blessed the people But what is that to gouernement the controuersie is of the priestes gouernement and the question here is driuen to this whether God had rather haue hadde the priestes and the prophetes to gouerne the Israelites than the kings Nowe M. Saunders although this be his onely meaning dothe not put nor dare put the question thus as in plain speach he ought to do For knowing that the state then of the Churches gouernement was not so much of the priestes and prophetes as of other ciuil Magistrates called the Iudges it had theÌ„ appeared he had said little to his purpose But as though all the state before of the kings had ben of the priestes and prophets he couereth his falsehoode with this fairâ—… mantell of the priests and prophets Blessinges and mentioneth not their gouernemente whyche is the thing hee shooteth at â–ª Whereas all that time from Iosue the firste Iudge to Saule the fyrste King among so many Iudges we reade but of one Prieste whiche was Helie of one Prophete which was Samuel that gouerned the Church of God And yet these neither gouerned it in respect of priesthood or prophecying or blessing but in respecte of that ciuill authoritie whereby they were called Iudges Thus that estate that he pretendes maketh the more for him maketh as much against him as the state of Kings that followed For whether God had rather haue had the one or the other it still proueth God had rather haue had the ciuil Magistrate were he iudge or king to be the supreme gouernor although at that time the supreme gouernment hapned whiche it seldome dyd to a person ecclesiasticall But God altered this estate and brought it to Kings Neyther dare I saye as Master Saunders very boldly saythe that God had rather haue had the other estate For if he wold he myght haue kepte it still Voluntati eius quis resistit who resisteth his will but it pleased God the state should bée altered and so it was Master Saunders vrgeth this that God was muche offended I graunt he was vnderstanding it not so grossely as Master Saunders séemes to doe but like a Diuine so as we admit in God no perturbation nor change of mynde for God had purposed the chaunge before and liked well of his forepurpose But his displeasure was agaynste the sinne of the people who distrusting of Gods sufficient helpe in the former estate inordinately dyd craue a King and not that hée eyther mislyked the estate of a King or thoughte it the worsser
vvere in times past the Leuitical priests yea rather sith the Apostle treating of the Ministers of the nevve Testament conferring them with the olde Leuites sayth that they ministred death and the letter that killed but these minister the spirit which quickneth and righteousnesse and therfore the ministers of the nevve Testament are more vvorthie than the olde Leuites vvhat maner of king shal vve thinke him to bee vvhiche contemning the ministers of the nevve Testamente calleth himselfe the supreme head of his Christian kingdome and that immediatly vnder Christ This comparison Maister Saunders of the ministers of the olde and nevve Testament rightly vnderstood wée acknowledge The nevve is more vvorthy than the olde but the vvorthinesse and glory of the nevv ministration that saint Paule speakes on is spirituall and not outvvard glory For although the ministers of the olde Testament had outwarde glory and some of them by especiall calling had the visible supreme and ciuill gouernement although seldome yet the ministers of the nue testament are by Christ as your owne selfe haue confessed flatly forbidden it Vos autem non sic but you shall not be so And therefore where ye woulde haue them of no lesse dignitie meaning of outvvard glory and gouernment or else your example holdes not they are of farre lesse dignitie therein notwithstanding in a spirituall and invvarde glory they are againe of a farre greater dignitie than the olde Which spirituall dignitie if any King shoulde contemne you might then well demaunde vvhat maner of king he were and we woulde answere you hée were a wicked King but as these are two distinct dignities the spirituall dignitie of the minister and the visible supremacie of the King so may they be and are with vs well and godly vsed both of them Where both the Prince hath the outward dignitie of supreme head or gouernour vnder Christ and yet the ministers spirituall dignitie is not onely no whit contemned but hath his honor yelded due vnto him And therefore we denie not that which followeth For if he acknowledge not the Ministers of Christe ouer him he can not be blessed of them VVherevpon neither can he be pertaker of the sanctifying spirite whose ministers they are We graunt Maister Saunders that the Prince humbly receiueth their blessing and is partaker of the holy spirite of God whose ministers they are in these actions Wherein the Prince acknowledgeth them to represent God and is vnder them But what hindreth this that in other respectes they againe are vnder him and he their supreme gouernour but Maister Saunders procéedeth saying Dauid cryeth and nowe ye kings vnderstande and be ye learned ye that iudge the earth apprehend discipline least the Lorde waxe wroth and ye perishe oute of the right waye But if kings must be learned then so farre forth they must be vnder For he that is learned is learned of some maister and is scholler to him of whome he is learned the disciple is not aboue his maister but in that thing that he learneth of his maister of necessitie he is inferior That kings ought to be learned we gladly confesse and are glad that you confesse it althoughe againste your wylls for ye would rather haue them altogither vnlearned whom ye haue so long detained in blindnesse But why woulde ye haue them nowe learned forsothe bicause you would onely be their maisters and so they shoulde be still your vnderlings not onely in learning suche ill lessons as you woulde teache them but vnder pretence of teachers to be their gouernours too True it is in that the teacher teacheth he is aboue and in that the learner learneth he is vnder â—…ut the teacher is not aboue nor the learner vnder in other things Thoughe Moyses learned of Iethro yet in gouernement Moyses was aboue him Thoughe Dauid learned of Nathan yet in gouernement he was aboue him Thoughe Ozias learned of Iudith yet in gouernement he was aboue hir And so all princes that are taughte of their schole maisters their scholemaister maye be the better in learning but he is the worser in authoritie And thoughe he be the maister in knowledge yet he makes euen his knowledge wherby he is maister to serue the Prince also Yea although the Prince be not his maister in learning yet in all causes of learning the Prince hath a generall supreme gouernement to sée by his lawes euery kinde of learning maintayned in his order to forbid naughtie artes to be learned to appoint such suche an order methode to be taught or learned as learned men enforme him is good and easie to the attaining of learning to appaynt scholes and learned scholemaisters for learning and to giue them lawes statutes and stipendes for the maintenance of learning all this may the Prince doe by his supreme authoritie ouer all learned persons and in all causes of learning althoughe he himselfe be altogether vnlearned and can not one letter on the booke Althoughe woulde to God all Princes were learned not as the Papistes woulde haue them but as Dauid was and exhorteth all Princes to bée And thus as thys sentence makes nothing in the worlde for him so hys example thereon makes verye muche againste him But for all thys argumente be thus simple he wyll loâ—…de vs with further proues saying Sithe therefore it is sayde to the Apostles Go teache ye all nations and sith vnder the names of nations the kings of them are comprehended and Byshops and Priests haue succeeded the Apostles in the office of teaching truely in the offyce of teachyng the Byshoppe is greater than his king so farre is it off that the king can be the Bishops hed in all things causes VVhich title notwithstanding is not onely of these men giuen to a king but also by publique decree of late in Englande giuâ—…n vnto a Queene To reason froÌ„ teaching to gouerning is no good teaching M. SauÌ„ders If ye teach this doctrine theÌ„ your Pope should haue little gouernment for God wot he teacheth little being often times vnlearned and alwayes to proud to teache If ye say he teacheth by others so caÌ„ a prince too And though he could himselfe teache and would also teach the truth and not suppresse it yet sith ye say he succedes the Apostles but in the office of teaching he is no furder superior than he teacheth by your owne reckoning Neither would this superioritie be denyed him of any that he ought to teache if he in dâ—…de succeded the Apostles But if the succession of the Apostles consist in teaching as here ye confesse then hath not the Pope to crake muche of succeeding Peter and Paule that teacheth not as Peter and Paule did as woulde to God he did and all priests or Bishops else Whiche if they did and taught truely this woulde augment and not diminishe the Princes supreme authoritie yea and the Quéenes too Maister Saunders for in gouernement before ye
I tell thée plaine thou shalt pay for him then I cry you mercy sir quoth the poore maÌ„ I should haue said your bull hath goared my cowe tushe quoth the rich maÌ„ the case is altered that it is another matter And so I perceiue M. SauÌ„ders it is with you when the Priest is said to haue any authoritie in the olde Testament marke that say you that maketh for vs and why so bicause the olde Testament is a figure of the new the gouernement ye marke it was for the priest but the gouernment must not alter the states must be a like and all this geare But now sir it is proued the kings gouernement was aboue the priests Is it so say you that is another maner of matter tush theÌ„ the case is altered If this came to passe in the olde Testament yet no reason shoulde compell that the same should be so in the new Testament fith the reason of the ecclesiasticall gouernement is changed But as the prouerbe sayth the case is altered but the matter is where it was What a mockerie is this in so waightie and plaine a matter But let vs heare your reasons Maister Saunders Nor without cause say you for the Synagog of the Iewes although it coÌ„tained in it som true Israelits iust meÌ„ yet both it was was called a earthly rather thaÌ„ a heueÌ„ly kingdoÌ„e in so much that Augustine doubteth whether in the olde Testament the kingdome of heauen be euer named or no much lesse that it is promised for rewarde For those things that were done did signifie in dede diuine things and so the lawe it selfe was also spirituall but the things themselues were not in themselues so diuine as our things are in so much that the Apostle teacheth that the glorie of the Synagoge was no glory at all in respect of the excellente glorye of that Ministerie whiche nowe is exercised in the Church by the Ministers of the newe Testament not in the letter but in the spirite Therfore sith the people of God consisteth of a bodie and a soule or spirite the carnall part obtained the principalitie in the olde people and was ordained to signifie spirituall things VVhervpoÌ„ as mount Synai the kindled fire the whirlewind the darknesse the storme and sounde of the trumpet and voyce of the words was onely of the earth and carnall so nowe all things are spirituall and internall There raigned the seruile feare of God and the bodily sworde but here is moste deare loue and the spirituall sworde they abuse therfore the holy Scriptures that for those things that were done of the Kings in the olde Testamente thinke now also that the kingdome of heauen which is the Church should be subiect to earthly kings This answere why the gouernement is changed is a depressing of their estate in comparisoÌ„ of ours that theirs was more earthly ours more spirituall which as in part we denie not yet repute not theirs so grossely as here he makes it yet is this comparison plainely wrested to inferre alteration of gouernement thervpon from the Princes ouer the Priests then to the Priests ouer the Princes nowe For this alteration maketh the olde not to prefigure the newe but to destroy it as no comparison but a cleane contrarietie But the true comparison being such as the one estate prefigured the other the excellencie is in the difference of this aboue that retaining still the same estate of gouernment so that if those godly Princes did so well order their gouernement in those causes that in comparison were but earthly and not so deuine as ours then muche more shoulde our Christian Princes order their gouernment better in much more excellent ecclesiasticall matters And thus both the figure and the comparison holdeth But M. Saunders turneth all as though the King and the Prieste were compared togither that the kings gouernement was but earthly then and the priestes gouernement now is spiritual Wheras the coÌ„parison is of the things gouerned and not of the gouernors And yet to compare those with these gouernors those earthly Princes were not so litle spirituall then but these spirituall Priestes are ten times more earthly grosse and carnall nowe What S. Augustine douteth I remember not but we without doubting know now that the kingdome of heauen was promised then to them so well as nowe to vs and they without doubting hoped for it and vndoubtedly did receiue it and do enioy it The comparison of glorie that Saint Paule maketh that theirs was nothing to ours is true But he speaketh not thereof comparing visible glories the one with the other such as the ministerie of the Popishe Church settes for the it selfe withall For in such outwarde glorie the olde Lawe passed the new the Pharisies passed Christe the Heatheus passed the Christians both in the Apostles time and long while after till the glorious ministerie of the Pope hath far excelled them all The examples of the glorie and terror in Mount Synai of the seruile feare of the bodily sword are iumbled togither disorderly and are compared to spirituall resemblances or contraries in the Gospell But as they take not away the Christian Magistrates bodily sword nor glorie so meddle they not with alteration of Princes gouernement ouer Ministers in causes ecclesiasticall therefore are méere impertinent But if all these shiftes will not serue then saith M. Saunders sée the inconueniences Othervvise if the state of the olde kings shall be drawne to the time of the newe Testament shall not the state of the Byshops of the Leuiticall tribe by the same reason be drawne to our time also lette there be therefore one tribe appointed to the outwarde Priesthoode let there be one Temple in the world let there be but one Byshop and let bloud sacrifices be restored But if thou confesâ—…est these things are made voyde wherefore grauntest thou not also that those things are voide that kings haue done about diuine matters â–ª are only the doings of kings eternal nor could they be changed so farre as pertained to the disposing of holy things What could or what could not be done M. Saunders we stande not vpon but what is or what is not done is the question And that the state of the ciuill gouernement is not altered your selâ—… haue often graunted that the gouernment still was one that the one was a figure of the other that Christe toke not away nor diminished the Princes authoritie As for the Leuiticall Law of the Priests the scripture is plaine in many places that it is cleane dissolued you cannot therefore make these alike except you wil become a iewe And so it seemeth by this your wicked reason you had rather renounce the Priesthoode sacrifice of Christe bring in againe the priesthoode sacrifice of the olde law than you woulde giue Princes authoritie ouer Priestes in the newe lawe But now that M. Sanders hath thus answered the
lay in them to haue a king or no and not rather in these kings that had subdued them who althoughe they appointed or suffered petit rulers ouer them yet woulde they not suffer them to haue a king But whyle they had kings we reason of those kinges authoritie But what reason haue you else for this is a very slender one But this say you in this kinde I will make my principall reason that Christ when he was in this worlde and fulfilled the whole law and all righteousnesse yet notwithstanding he would in thinges ecclesiasticall onely that the Priest and by no meanes that the earthly king should gouerne This were a principall reason in déede if you could proue this M. Saunders but as yet you haue not proued it and I thinke it will be harder than you wéene for you to doe Now to proue it you reason thus For he openly refused to administer an earthly kingdome and therfore fled when he sawe the people go about to make him a king And he denied that he was ordeyned to be a deuider betweene the brethren But if so be that after the perfecte reason and minde of Moses lawe it had at least beene comely either the Churche or the Bishop to be gouerned of an earthly King Christ would not haue left that thing vnfulfilled For it was no harde matter for him to haue administred a earthly kingdome for some very little time the which when he did not neither yet omitted he any thing that can iustly be desired to the perfect gouernement of his Churche It hath neuer beene at any time or yet is of any perfection that an earthly king shoulde arrogate to him selfe any power in ecclesiasticall matters besides this that with his sworde he shoulde defende and fight for that whiche is defined by the Prieste â–ª sentences And is this necessarie in the Churche M. Saunders that the Prince may do thus much with his sworde But I pray you where dyd Christ thus muche as to fight for the Priests decrees with a sworde If your reason be good you muste shewe this or else why reason you from the factes of Christe whyle he was héere on earth if you can shewe as you promised that Christe woulde that the Priest and by no meanes the prince shuld gouerne in eccl. matters this were to the purpose But this you shew not but would windelace it in with a bought that if Christ would haue had Princes gouerne in ecclesiasticall matters he woulde haue bene a Prince him selfe but he would neuer be a Prince and yet if he had would he might therefore he woulde not haue Princes meddle in matters of his Church sithe he woulde not meâ—…le in matters pertayning to their gouernement If this were a good reason I might reuerse it thus that sithe be medled in their matters when he had tribute to be paide to Cesar when he bad his Disciples not feare them that kill the body when he called Herode Foxe when he tolde Pilate he had no power but that was giuen him from aboue therefore they agayne might meddle in his matters bicause he medled in theirs This is as good a reason as yours But ye say Christ tooke not a kingdome vpon him nor woulde deuide lands yet he tooke vpon him all things necessarie for his Churches gouernment what shoulde you conclude hereon Ergo the Princes gouernment is not necessarie in Church causes is this the direct coÌ„clusion Nay M. Saund. either the coÌ„clusion takes away the Princes gouernmeÌ„t froÌ„ the Church of Christ or else which it doth in déed it hitteth your Pope if you marke it well who pretending to follow Christ taketh an earthly kingdome vpon him and deuideth landes which Christ refused to do The argument is thus Christ did al that was necessary but Christ did not take vpoÌ„ him a kingdome Ergo he thought it not necessary This is flat agaynst the Pope but nothing agaynst christian Princes The coÌ„clusioÌ„ is good for it was not necessary for Christ in his person yet for christian Princes it might wel be necessarie It is necessarie for christian Princes as your selfe coÌ„fesse to vse the teÌ„poral sword in the churches defence and yet Christ him selfe did neuer vse it Except you wil say he vsed it after a sort when with a materiall whip outwarde violeÌ„ce he draue the byers sellers out of the temple But then I replie that herein he exercised for the while eueÌ„ the office of a Magistrate shewed not onely his owne zeale power of his kingdome but also a paterne to al Magistrates Princes with what zeale power they shâ—…ld exercise their authoritie in reforming abuses in the church of god Although Christ him self did not personally handle the sworde as they personally may do Neither yet did Christ all those thinges that his ministers did ought to do It is necessarie for the ministers to baptise yet Christ him selfe that we read of did neuer baptise any he could haue don it if he had thought it necessarie What shal we say with M. Sand he did al that was necessary but he did not baptise Ergo to baptise is not necessarie This therefore is a wrong principle that Christe must haue done euery thing personally him selfe that is necessarie to be done in his Church True it is that if Christe neither did it nor taught it to be done by him self nor by his Apostles but would the contrarie as M. Sand sayth then the argument were good so it confuteth a nuÌ„ber of Popish traditions that were neither done nor taught by Christ nor his Apostles but rather that contrary But as for this gouernment of Princes as M. Sanders him selfe confesseth was practised in the olde lawe whiche lawe gaue the Prince his charge therin And Christ testiâ—…eth that he came not to breake the lawe but to fulfill it And althoughe he became not a Prince him self which might haue seemed to haue made â—…or the Popes purpose but rather condemneth it in his ministers yet both he him self his Apostles obeyed the Prince then ruling which now the Pope denieth statly to do But ye say Christ his Apostles obeyed them not in eccl. matters Neither was it reason M. San. both bicause Christ him selfe was the law maker his Apostles were the first teachers of it Princes then were Infidels But to reason now from the like state in the princes that now are christiaÌ„â—… to giue in all things like authoritie to Bishops paâ—…ors with Christ and his Apostles is as farre from reason on the other side Neither yet do we debarre from Bishops and Pastors that superioritie ouer Princes that is giuen by Christe and his Apostles to them and their successours of the administration of spirituall and ecclesiastical things neither do we as M. Saunders sayth giue the gouernement of the Churche of Christe to an earthly Prince For bothe the Prince is Christian and not
M. sand And now as though he had brought an inuincible proofe he procéedeth saying But if he must needs be deposed at least for heresie hovv shall that controuersie be iudged without the knowledge of the doctors of the Church who only of their office haue the ordinarie lawful power to loke to the flocke in the whiche the holy Ghost hath placed theÌ„ to guide the Church of God. But the pastors doctors of the church could not be Iudges of any king except the king in that thing were lesse inferior to theÌ„ For neither the equal hath power ouer the equal neither the inferior ouer the superior VVorthily therfore we affirme that al christiaÌ„ kings in those things that appertaine to matters of faith are so vnder bishops priests â–ª that when offending obstinately against the christiaÌ„ religion â–ª they shall perseuer after one two rebukings bothe they maye and they ought for that cause to be by the Byshops sentence deposed from the gouernement that they holde ouer the Christians You conclude ful worthily M. San. your argument is this if the Prince must needes be deposed he must be deposed by the Bishops priestes This reason hangeth all on this presupposall that he hath so fully proued this that the Prince nowe in all post hast must nedes be deposed â–ª And yet we haue hitherto heard no such proues that should enforce any suche necessitie but rather necessarie for the bishops priests or any other subiects behalfe to let him remaine still vndeposed for them although he were an heretike So that we may rather reuerse the argument If nedes he must not be deposed the must not the bishops priests attempt to depose him Howbeit ther is no necessitie in the coÌ„sequence that if he must nedes be deposed that for heresie that the bishops priests must depose hi. Yes saith M. SaÌ„ for how shal that coÌ„trouersie be iudged without theÌ„ what thogh that coÌ„trouersie could not be iudged without theÌ„ M. sand must they therefore be deposers of him froÌ„ his estate bicause they iudge of the doctrine he professeth must they iudge of his Diademe bicause they iudge of his religioÌ„ but what if they theÌ„selues haue corrupt iudgements therein trow you priests bishops haue not had so ere now yes eueÌ„ this sentence of s. Paule that here you cite for the Bishops and Priestes authoritie giueth a plaine warning of it I knowe saithe he that after my departure shall come among you rauening VVolues not sparing the flocke there shall rise vp men from among your selues speaking peruerse thinges to dravve Disciples after them But say you saint Paule saith they must looke to the flocke so much the more in vvhiche the holy ghost hath placed them to guide the church of God. True in déed they must so do But what if they be blind theÌ„selues how loke they to it then And did Christ neuer talke of blind guides you post off that to the Phariseis Iewish Bishops But if you were not more blind thaÌ„ they you would sée a great difference betwéene loking to the flocke guiding the Church of God by teaching true doctrine taking heede vnto and discerning of false doctrines and teachers preching the worde of God with learned iudgement and betwéene the clayming of authoritie to depose Kings and Princes froÌ„ their royal estates Whie say you if they be Iudges they are aboue them and neither equall nor inferior They may be equal and aboue them too in learned Iudgement and also in the dispensation of their misteries yet in publike authoritie far inferior And therfore your conclusion A secuÌ„dum quid ad simpliciter faileth that bicause they are inferior in one thing to Bishops they be in al thinges or in this thing inferior Yea say you they are so vnder Bishops and Priestes that when offending obstinately againste the Christian religion they shall perfeuer after one or two rebukings the Bishoppes may and ought to depose them from their gouernment ouer Christians This is a great inferiorship M. sand to be so much vnder them For by this rule if a Prince as coÌ„monly Popishe Princes doe shoulde kepe a Paramour â–ª a Popishe Byshop may depose him But they wil not be ouer hastie to reproue the Prince for that which they vse themselues neither couÌ„t they it an offence against christiaÌ„ religion yet in the christiaÌ„ religion iâ—… is forbidden so is against it especially to defend it mainteing it as the Papistes do But if he do wrong to any of his subiectes wil not amende his wrong after a B. hath once or twise giueÌ„ him warning of it then by this rule the B. maye straighte depose him And in déede so they haue done would do if the wrong touch them if their lands and goods were diminished then by by it is against the ChristiaÌ„ religion it is plaine heresie except by the seconde admonition it be restored with a recumbentibus the king must be in al the hast deposed there is no remedie nor further respit for not only the Bishops may but plat plaine they ought to doe it Is not here a kingdome brought to a goodly state But he wil say he meaneth by offences against the Christian religion matters of faith But what helpeth this for as wheÌ„ the Lion proclaimed that al horned beasts shuld auoyd out of the wood although the Foxes pricked eares were no horns neyther néeded he haue gone ye he wisely foresaw that this was but a drifte to picke a quarel therefore he hied him out of the wood For since al lay in the Lions interpretatioÌ„ what if the Lion had said his prick eares had bin horns or as sharp as hornes surely then the Fox had dronke for it And if the Byshops may haue the like authoritie to bid the Prince be packing out of his realme if he offend the christian religion what will it boote the Prince if the Bishops be disposed to picke a quarel against him to saye he offendeth not againste the Christian religion but rather defendeth the true religion of Christ against the corruptions of it and in déede so he doth but what auayleth eyther his excuse or the truth of the matter if the Bishops shall say it is heresie and against the christian faith the Bishops that so say shal be the Iudges whether it be so or no were not the king as good get him out of his kingdome at the first or else they will depose him set him out with a heaue ho But that Bishops may thus hamper Princes as they list where find we authoritie or example in the scripture yes saith M. Saunders For God which at the firste so seuered the heauenly kingdome from the earthly kingdome that he suffered the kings of the earth to come togither against the Lorde and againste his anoynted and thereby notably declared his power while by the
can be made among ChristiaÌ„s that either the bishops of any kingdom much lesse the B. of Rome for al kingdomes ought to know the causes of kings Emperors whether they be iust or vniust This generalitie can not iustly be inferred on such a specialtie For neither al kings estates 〈◊〉 like to this kings estate nor all Bishops estates like to this Bishops estate as by the causes aforesayd appeareth Fourthly I answer that as here is inferred no ordinary rule for Bishops to haue knowledge in kings Emperors cau ses froÌ„ the coÌ„trarie here is inferred an ordinary rule for kings Emperors to haue knowledge of B. causes For eueÌ„ at the kings 〈◊〉 althogh he wer an infaÌ„t had no more skil of religioÌ„ thaÌ„ of gouernmeÌ„t the text saith they put the crowneâ—… vpon him and gaue him the lawe in his hande And so saythe Lyra the testimonie that is the law wherein he was ordeined ought to studie and meditate and keepe it and cause it to be kept True it is that the high Prieste did teach him and the King did well so long as he was taught of so godly a father And therevpon maye well be inferred that Byshops maye teach Kings that vvhich is right before the Lorde But this teaching of the King inferreth no publike gouernement of the King which the Pope claimeth and M. Saunders pleadeth for The authoritie of teaching the King and the authoritie of gouerning the King are â—…arre different authorities That of teaching we graunt to Ioiada and to al Godly Byshops not to teach what they will but that vvhiche is right before the Lord. And to sée that they do this the Prince hath the lavve of God giuen into his handes so well as the crowne set on his head to shewe that although the Byshops mustâ—… teach true doctrine and Godly exhortatioÌ„ yet must the King haue knowledge to ouersée that it be taught â–ª as well much more than any other matters of his kingdoms What shall we say then to the popishe Byshops which will not giue the lavve of God into the Princes handes but wring it out of his handes that he should not knowe it but blindly followe such false doctrine and naughtie examples as they woulde teache him are these Byshops like to the Byshop Ioiada And if this king fel to Idolatrie when he wanted this good teacher how shall that King doe that neuer had suche a teacher and yet for all this teaching of Ioiada that was as it were a father to the King the King notwithstanding while he continued good bothe commaunded all the Priestes and taught them how they should deale in their oblations collections reparations and other thinges belonging to the Temple And Ioas saide to the Priestes all the siluer of thinges dedicated that be brought to the house of the Lorde c. Let the Priestes take it vnto them euery one of his acquaintance and they shall repayre the broken places of the house vvheresoeuer any decaye is founde And in the 23. yeare of King Ioas the Priestes had not amended that vvhich vvas decayed in the Temple Then King Ioas called for Ioiada the Priest and the other Priests and saide vnto them VVhy repaire ye not the ruines of the Temple Novv therefore receiue no more money of your acquaintance except ye deliuer it to repaire the ruines of the Temple Thus did the King not only knovv of the Priestes causes but called them before him yea euen his vncle Ioiada the high Priest also appointed an order vnto them how to bestow their offerings And when they were negligent therein he rebuked theÌ„ reuoked his former ordinance except on their amendement Neither did the Priests no nor his vncle Ioiada the highe Prieste grudge or grumble hereat nor sayde that the offerings were theirs not his to dispose nor told him they were his superiors but as his inferiors most humbly obeyed his ordinances Al vvhich things fithe they vvere vvell done is not novve true according to the sense of the diuine Scripture that we may make a better ordinarie rule herâ—…on for Kings and Emperors to knovve of Byshops causes than for Byshops to knovve of Kings and Emperors causes If you replye this was but a money matter I answere yet was this money oblations and offerings But will you graunt Princes thus much to make ordinances howe all your money offerings shall be vsed when ye shall gather them and when not of whom ye shal take them and howe ye shall bestowe them â—…ay 〈◊〉 will neuer doe this for money is the chiefest thing ye shoote at no penie no pater noster all your eâ—…cl causes depende so on money offerings that as good ye gaue the prince authoritie in al ecclesiastical matters as let him deale thus with your money offerings as Ioas did with theirs But doth your own glosse expound this no further than to money matters Ioas saithe your glosse both in this name and in this vvorke signifieth Christ for it is interpreted the strength of the Lorde He commaundeth the teachers that they should take all the money that is offered into the Lordes house of the passers by to vvit whatsoeuer spirituall knovvledge or good vvorke is brought into the Lords treasorie that by the offices of the preachers it may be bestovved on the repayring of the spirituall Temple that vvhatsoeuer he shall finde torne by errour or hurte by Vices they should repaire least the multitude of hearers should perishe by the doctors negligence â–ª Here this facte of the King is compared to the representation of Christe and to the ouersight of all eccl. matters So that if Kings will account the studie of the Lawe of God as well to belong vnto them as their crowne if they will looke vnto know and examine the causes of the Byshops and their reuenues and appoint them orders to repair the ruines of the Lords temple and sée that the preachers lay out their talents of spirituall knowledge good workes towards the building then should kings truely represent Christe and be indéede the strength of the Lorde bycause they haue the Lords power authoritie thervnto And thus this example better considered maketh more for the Kings authoritie ouer the Byshops than for the Byshops ouer the Kings authoritie Fiftly I answere that althoughe a Godly Byshop be a sequester betwéen God the Prince betwéene the Prince and the people in prayer in the Sacramentes and in preaching yet â–ª is he not a sequester betwéen God and the Prince or betwene the Prince the people in matters of the kingdome least of all he may sequester him from his kingdome And though he be the Angell of the Lord in his message if he be a Godly byshop for otherwise he is the Angell of SathaÌ„ yet is the King the Lordes anoynted or the Lordes Christe in authoritie but the Lords Christ in authoritie is aboue the lordes Angels in message therefore the King
a. Stap. fol. 13. b. Stap. fol. 13. b. Fol. 14. a. Cap. 3. fol. 14. b. Stap. fol. 14. b Matth. 5. 2. Cor. 11. 1. Reg. 2. ◅ Reg. 3. Psalm 112. Stapl. 14. b. Stapl. 14. b. Act. 5. A Papists cō◅cience Act. 5. Stap. 15. a. Num. 13. Iob. 8. Stap. 15. ◅ Stap. 15 16. Stap. 16. ◅ Fol. 16. 17. 18 19. 20. 21. Stap. 21. ◅ Stap. 21. ◅ Put to these the late treasons and rebellions of the Papists in ◅ng land their horrible murders and cruelties in Fraunce and Flaunders Stap. 21. ◅ Stap. 21. a. We abandon not the fayth we were baptised in bicause we abandon the Pope Stapl. 21. a. b. The booke of K. Henrie the eyght The title of Defender of the Faith. The title defender of the Faith inferreth supremacie The Papistes obiection of apparell St. fol. 21. b. Stap. 22. ◅ Magdeb. p◅ef cent 7. The Magde burgen◅es wrested Histo. Magde pref cent 7. The tyrannie of Heraclius The godly supreme gouernment of Constanti◅us Pogonotus St. Fol. 22. a Contra a◅tic Louani tom 2 Luther wrested Stap. fol. 22. a Andr Modre de Eccl. li. 1. ca. 10. St. fol. 22. b. Stap. 23. a. b. Stap. 24. a. The Popes goodnesse Stap. fol. 24. The Pope called god Extrau Ioh. 22 cum inter in glosia Cardinalis Zirabella Stap. 24. 2 The Popes patent The Vnitie that the Pope maketh Stapl. 24. ◅ Stapl. 24. a. Hallus in vita Edvv. 4. Apoc. 7. How the Pope can in deede make sainctes and martyrs Stap. 24. a. Stapl. 24. a. Stapl. 24. a. The Popes reigne in Englande Stap. 24. b. Stap. 24. b. Ecclesiasticall authoritie and authoritie ouer eccl. matters are not all one Stap. 24. b. St. 24. b. 25. a The commoditie that we haue of Papists Stap. 25. a. b. 26. a. b. How farre the Papists are frō mercy and cōsideration A difference betweene a Pap◅st and a Protestant A supreme gouernour Stapl. 2◅ b. Stapl. 28. b. Stapl. 23. b. Stapl. 28. b. Stapl. 28. b. 29. a. Fol. 29. a. b. The Papists make the gouernment of christian princes no better than the Turkes gouernment Deut. 13. 17. Rom. 13. 1. Tim. 3. Stap. 29. b. Gal. 3. Stap. 29. b. Stap. 22. b. Stap. 29. b. Heathen princes care and gouernment tended to religion Aristot. Polye 3. ca. 10. Cap. 11. Daniel 1. Daniel 6. The Papistes more iniurious to Christ an Princes than to Heathen Iohannes de Parisi◅s de po◅estate reg p◅ ca. 18. 1. Tim. 1. ◅useb lib. ◅ de vit Const. Concil Constantin 1. Aug. epist. 48. Concil Tola 3 Stap. 30. a. The papistes shift that princes are the clergies aduocates Dante 's Alegherius li. 3. Lupold de Babenb ca. 15. Stap 30. a. Though the Prince be not an eccl. person yet hath he supremacie in eccl. causes Stap. 30. b. Winchester fol. 96. 97. Stapl. 30. b. Fol. 30. b. Stap. fol. 30. b. Sta. fol. 30. b. Supra Diuis 4. fol. 65. Supra fol. 80. Fol. 31. ◅ Winchester Fol. 31. b. 32. a Cap. 5. fol. 32. a. b. Stapl. 32. Fol 32. b. Stapl. 32. b. Stap. 32. b. Stap. 32. b. Stap. 32. b. Fol. 34. ◅ The issue and state of the question betvveene the B. and M. Feck Fol. 34. b. Three kindes of ignorance ▪ Stap. 35. ◅ Supr ▪ ◅o 3. a. b Supra fol. 4. Stap. 36. a. Stap. 36. a. Stap. 36. a In erroribus Parisi◅ condemna◅s Ibidem Ibidem Tho. Aquin. super Tit. ca. 3 Sola fide Executiones manifestationes Stap. 36. a Fol. 36. a. Stap. 36. a. Contra errores Grecorum Apoc. 18. Stap. 37. b. Stap. 35. b. Stap 37. b. Stap. 38. a. Stap. 38. b. The Louanists bost they haue now foūd out the Popes title to be lure diuino Stapl. 38. b. Iohn 10. Gal. 1. Hieronimus super Mat. Ambrosius li. 1 de officijs Aug. contra Faustum li. 23 Sap. 1. Stapl. 39. ◅ Stapl. Cap. 7. fo 39. b. 40. a Stapl. ca. 8. Stapl. 40. b. Stap. 40. b. Deut. 17. Stapl. 40. b. Stapl. 40. b. Stap. 41. ◅ Deut. 17. Stap. 40. b. How subtilly the Papistes graunt princes to studie in Gods word Deut. 17. Vatablus in Deut. 17. Stapl. 41. a. In what sense the popishe Church may be graunted Catholicke Stapl. 41. a. Psalm 1. 2. Stap. 41. ◅ Stapl. 41. b. Math. 13. Stap. 41 b. Stap. 41. b. Deut. 17. Lyra in Deut. 17. 1. Reg. 4. The highe priest and the chiefe iudge mentioned Deut. 17. were two distinct persons Iohn 18. Stap. 41. b Stapl. 41. b. Deut. 17. Lyra in Deut. ◅7 Stap. 42. a. Fol. 42. a. Stap. 42. a. Stap. 42. b. Deut. 17. St. fol. 42. b Fol. 42. a Lyra in Deute 17. Sta. 42. b Supra 40. b ◅ol 42. b Chap. 9. Fol. 43. b Stap. 42. b 43. a Stap. 43. a. Stap. 43. a. Stap. 43. a. Stapl. 43. ◅ Stap. 43. a. 2. Pet. ◅ Stap. 43. a. 2. Pet. ◅ Stap. 43. a. Stap. 43. a. b Wherein master Stapleton excelleth al the Lou◅in write◅ ▪ Stap. 43. ◅ Stap. 43. b. The example of Moses and the Papistes shift◅ about it Stap. 43. b. Stap. 43. b. Stap. 43. b. Deut. 34. Sta. 44. a Deuter. 18. Act. 3. 7. Act. 7. 1. Reg. 19. Iudic. 4. A difference in excellēt Princ◅ betweene their extraord◅ giftes and ordinarie authoritie Moyses a figure of Christ ▪ not Christe a figure of Moses Deut. 17. Sta. 44. b. How the Papistes order the examples of the Scripture 1. Cor. 10. Stap. 44. b. Stap. 44. b. The rule Deu. 17. that the Papists would haue all the question ruled by and how farre it stretched Ioh. 19. Stap. 45. ◅ 45. ◅ The example of Iosue his supreme gouernment Cap. 10. Fol. 46. b. Stap. 46. b. Num. 27. Lyra in Num. 27. Stap. 46. b. Stap. 46. b. The Princes asking councel of the clergie embarres not his authoritie ouer them Stap 45. b. Deut. 17. Sta. 45. b. Stap. 46. a. Stap. 46. ◅ Stap. 46. ◅ Stap. 46. b. Lyra. Losue 8. Iosue 5. Iosue 3. Iosue 4. Cap. 8. Cap. 10. The example of King Dauids supreme gouernment in eccl. causes Cap. 11. Fol. 47. a. Stap. 47. a. The Princes supreme gouernment in ecel matters not preiudicial to the eccle authoritie Stap. 47. a. An vneuen cōparison betweene the doings of king Dauid and Q. Mary Howe the Popish priestes abused queene Mary Stap. 47. a. The Papistes shift agaynst the example of king Dauids supremacie bicause he was a Prophet Stap. 47. ◅ Stap. 47. a. 1. Par. 24. Stap. 47. a. 1. Par. 24. 1. Par. 23. It abaseth not the princes supreme gouernment to do all things accorto Gods commaundement Stap. 47. b. The keeping of the rites orders appoyn ted is not agaynst but cōfirmeth the princes supremacie The Queene appoynteth no new or st◅āge order in religion Stap. 47. b. Stap. 47. b It deba◅reth not the princes supremacie that the inferiour ministers be vnder their bishops Stap. 48.
sayings Stapl. 62. b 63. a M. Sta. vnlyke similitude to disburthen M. Fecknham Howe falsely M. Sta. chalengeth vs for heretikes for leauing oute an article of the common crede in the Apologie How cunning M. Stap. himselfe â—…s in the coÌ„mon creede M. Stap. notes the Bishop and other for graÌ„mar and â—…o what a Grammarian he shewes himselfe to be Contr. Valent. lib. 1. cap. 2. lib. 3. cap. 4. De praescript haereticorum Fol. 423. li. â—… Diuis 159. cap. 4. M. Stap. taketh on him to teache the bishop his Catechisme Stap. fol. 423. M Sta. in saying the Common crede leaueth out these words And in Iesus Christe our Lorde Stapl. 423. a M. Sta. leaueth out againe in saying the coÌ„mon Creede these wordes crucified dead and buryed Stapl. 423. a Aâ—… other article left oute by M. Sta. in saying the common creede That he sitteth at the right haÌ„d of God the father almighty Whether Cardinall Hosi ' be iustly chalenged to maintain the SweÌ„k feldians heresiâ—… or no. Stap. 63. 2. Stap. 63. â—… The Dâ—…natists did not simply refuse the oldâ—… â–ª testamente as the Manichees did but subâ—…ly as the Papistes do Aug. de haereâ—… Ad quod vult Stapl. 63. a. b The seconde motiue that moued the Bishop to chalenge M Feck to followe the Donatisteâ—… Supra pag. Diuis 18. pag. 11. How the Donatists and Papistes denie the Princes gouernement in Ecclesiasticall cau ses and refâ—…rie it onely to the clergie What the Papistes meane by the Church M. Sta. reâ—…oketh his grauÌ„t The Donatists exclaming on the Princes for Ecclesiasticall causes argueth that the supreme gouernemente of them was in the Princes Stap. 63. b Stapl. 63. b M. Stapl. example of the Princis punishing an honest man for a theefe A theefe in christen religion Iohn 10. M. Sta. simili tude returned vpon himself M. Stapl. letteth go the testimonies of S Aug. alleaged by the Bishop Stapl. 63. b Winton pag. 12. b. The speciall 〈◊〉 oâ—… christian princis Further examples of the old Testament alledged by S. Aug. for princes dealing in ecclesiasticall matters Stapletons order to this di uision Stap. 65. a Number of testimonies Whereto the former testimonies of S. Aug. were alleaged Wherto serue the authorities present Here M. Stapl. confesseth that Princes ought to make lâ—…wes for the â—…rance of Christes religion The Papistes denying the Queene to make lawes and say no catholike denyeth it denye them selues to be catholikes The Papistes subtill meaning in theyr plaine speaches The holde of a Papists worde and the holde of a weat Eele by the tayle Howe trimly the Papists and we do here agree in words See a subtill â–ª Papist At a dead life well fare a papists shift M. Stapl. renueth an olde knacke of Arrius Howe finely M. Stapl. can turne his tale Stapl. 65. a. 65. b Belyke M. Sta. wantes good neighbours Stapl. 65. b Here M. Stapl. bewrayeth all the â—…etche of his former graunte Howe craâ—…tyly M. Stap. limited the Princes making of lawes All M. Stapletons ioly grauÌ„t to Princes is nowe come to nothing but to make them the clergies slaughtermen and droyles M. Stapletons fayâ—…e texte and foule glose Stapl. 65. b. How S Augustine acknowledged the Prince M. Stap. telleth of all this that August wrote but what this all this is he duist not vtter August contr Gaudent epist. 2 li. 2. câ—… 26. Epist. 50. The testimonies of S. Aug. to proue the princes dealing in ecclesiastical causes to reach further than making lawes for punishing heretâ—…kes Epist. 48. M. Stapl. wold returne S. Augustines words vppon vs. Stapl 65 b. How sure the Papistes make all pointes againste the Protestantes Stap. 65. b Howe Princes punished deprauers of religion in saint August tyme. Stapl. 65 b. The Princes lawes for blasphemers The Princes carefull prouiding Stap. 65. b M. Stapletons strong proues Stapl. 65. b. Contempte of Sacraments Popish Sophistâ—…e can make 7. of 2. Stapl 65 b. Councels Matth. 26. Ioho 11. The Papistes maynteyn coÌ„demned doctrines 1. Tim. 4. Stap. 65. b Howe the Bishop called the Papists Donatistes Howe darke and subtilly M. Stapl. speaketh How farre the examples of the olde Testament stretche to directe christian princes M. Stapl. will proue that we denie that whi che we affirm What it is that we affirme of the Princes authoritie Stapl. 66. â—… Stap. 65. a Who bee the true Donatistâ—… for saying Princes maye not punishe in causes of Godâ—… religion M. Stapl. himself cleereth vs of that he falsly burdeneth vs. Stapl. 66. a Howe Luther sayd Faith can not be forced Croyses and Turkishe warres The question whether Princes maye punishe heretikes by death How the Papistes proue vs to be heretikes The Princes dutie where any are chalenged to be heretikes An inuectiue gainst M. Fox M. Foxes boke and B. Iewels great eyesores to the Papists Stap. 66. a. Sir Thomas Hitton priest False slaunders and malicious misseconstructions of the faithfull Luc. 23. Matth. 26. Iohn 19. Act. 6. Hewe the Papistes deale with the Protestantes and their articles Math. 5. The vneuen dealing of the Papistes Sir Thomas Hitton priest no Donatist Sir Iohn Oldcastell Stap. 66. b. â—… Stap. 66. b. M. Stapletons weake argument Maister Foxes synceritie in the Papistes falshoodes Sir Iohn Oldcastle proued no Donatist Sir Thomas More himselfe mislyked the punishment of manslaughter in many offen ceâ—… The aunciente punishment of of heretikes Declar. Erasmi tit de puniendis her 76. 77. The myld spirit of popishe Bishoppes and Abbots S. August opinion of the pu nishement of heretikes The Circumcelions Punishement by the purse Banishment The popishe crueltie The difference herein betwen Erasmus and the Popishe Bishops S. Hieroms opinioÌ„ herein and the resons mouing him thereto The Papistes in crueltie come neerest the Donatistes Eras. decla tit de pun hâ—… The mercie of the Gospell Though the Gospell taketh not awaye politike lawes or punishmentes yet is there a 〈◊〉 betweene them and the Gospell The Sorbonistes coÌ„fession In declar bras tit de pun haer Howe the Papistes yet neerer resemble the Donatistes Stap. 66. b. 67. a Stap. 67. a How M. Feck yeldes not to the examples of the olde testament and yet yelding to the new Testa ment is comprehended by it though he comprehended it not Pag. 14. a. M. Stapleton cap. 7. fol. 68. a M. Stapl. order in this diuision Stapl. 68. a. M. Sta. now at the length is driuen to graâ—…t Princes some regiment in Ecclesiasticall causes M. Stapleton graunteth also to Princes supreme gouernement in all ecclesiasticall causes In natural and ordinarie propositions the indefinite betokens the vniuersall Stap. 68. â—… â–ª M. Stap â–ª confesseth that the Bishop hath proued the full issue in question betweene M. Fecknham and him Stap. 68. a M. Sâ—…apl grant of all that the Bishop hathe hitherto alleaged Esai 49. Whether the Bishops examples and allegations beeing granted of M. Stapl. reache home or no. The prince supreme gouernour of all and
euery ecclesiasticall cause What this supreme gouernement is Why kings Queenes are called Nourishers and Nurses of Gods Churche Stâ—…p 67. â—… M. Stâ—…p grantes to CoÌ„stantine this supreme gouerment and denieth it to the Queenes Maiestie M. Stap. goeth now about by wrangling to defeate all his former graunt The princebeing called Metaphorically as it were a Bish. maketh no breach into the offico of a Bishop What these vvordes Bishop and nourse betokeÌ„ although in deede the Prince be neyther nourse nor Bishop Stap. 68. a. Stapl. 68 b M. Stapl. false translation of Constantineâ—… wordes The sentence of Constantine and the true meaning therof Euseb. de vita Const. li. 4. Hovv M. Stap. vnderstandeth invvard things and outvvarde things hovv vve vnderstand them in Constantines sentence The matter maner of eyther Bishoprik Stapl. 29. b. As M. StapletoÌ„ vnderstandes this sentence the Turke is as good a bishop as a Christian â–ª Prince Procuration execution of Churche matters The Papistes vvould haue Princes to bee bâ—…t the Priests proctours and executioners â–ª at the moste Fol. 69. a. The Bishops allegatioÌ„s ouâ—… of the nevve Testament 62. b. Stap. 69. a â—… Sta. graunteth the Bish. argument Stap. 69. a M. Stapletons diuinitie Stap. 69. â—… M. Stapletoâ—… vp braydyng the Bishops diuinitie see what good diuinitie he hym selfe maketh M. Stapl. Logike Matth. 22. The nevv Testament confirmeth the figure of the old Testament That subiectes may paye tribute â–ª but they ought not All humanitie iâ—… destroied by by M. Stapletons good diuinitie Stap. 69. a The captious questions of the Iewes The flatte and generall aunswer of christ M. Stapl. dea leâ—…h as captiously as the Iewes An externall Prince An infidell Prince Luc. 2. Stap. 69. a. b By the name of Cesar Christe compreheÌ„deth all princes Christes aunswere a general commaundement Stapl. 69. b. M. Sea. manyfest vntruâ—… Stap. 69. B By M. Stapletons exposition of Christes Sentence not all obediencâ—… to Princes 〈◊〉 seâ—…e at libertie but all obedience to God. The one parte of the sentence bindeth asmuche as the other Matth. 22. M. Stapletons Grammer The iudgemeÌ„t of the writers of this sentence cleane contrarie to maister Stapleton Lib. de fug in persecution In Matth. 22. tract 21. The same saith M. Stapl. Orig. ibid. In. 20. Luc. homil 38. In Mat. câ—… 23. In regula Monachorum In Matth. 22. homil 71. In Luc. lib. 9. cap. 20. Contr. FaustuÌ„ Manichaeuâ—… lib. 22. ca. 74. In. 22. Math. Lyra in Matth. 22. M. Stapletons contradictions Stapl. 69. b. Stap. 70. â—… This admonition godly and necessarie Stap. fol. 70. What a proper determination M. Sta. maketh of Christes sentence Stapl. 70. a M. Stapleton measureth our doings by his owne The practise of the Popes with christian princes Sta pag. 70. â—… The Bishoppes further testimonies of the newe Testament with the fathers iudgementes theron The order of M. Stapletons ansvvere Stap. pag. 71. b M. Stapletons maner at firste to graunte aooÌ„ after by some wrangling distinction to reuoke his graunt M. Sta. graunteth the Prince hath the ouersight as well of the first as the second table Stapl. pag. 72. Stap. pag. 72. M. Stapletons shifte of the court of conscience Melancth v â–ª supra The Prince dealeth neither with the fyrst nor secoÌ„d table in respect of the court of conscience but of the outwarde facte Stap. pag. 7â—… Stapl. 7â—… b. M. Stapl. after his pinching taketh cleane away his own graunt M. Stapleton woulde proue contradiction to MelancthoÌ„ Stap. fol. 72. b M. Stapl. subtile and false translating Stap. fol. 73. a. M. Stapletons cauill agayoste Mast. Nowell Christian Prin ces clayme not supreme goâ—…ement without limitation but the Pope clamyeth it Stapl. 73. â—… The acte of parliament Sta. pag. 73. â—… Stap. pag. 73. a Stap. pag. 73. a What maner of authoritie the othe of the supremacie requireth M. Stapletons quarell at the Bishops interpretation of this word godlynesse lib. 1. de trin cap. 14. S. Augustines exposition The exposition of other fathers Chrysost. in 1. Tim. 2. bomil 7 Ambâ—…osius in 1. Tim. 2. Hâ—…ymo in 1. Tim 2. Glossa interlineata â—…ytanus Hugo Card. Stapl. 73. b. Stap. fol. 73. b Stap. fol. 73. b. Sta. 73. b. The cause why the Apostles taughte obedience so earnestly Stap. fol. 72. b Stapl. fol. 73 b A distinction betweene the the Princes person or vices and his estate or office Chrysost. in Rom. Stapl. 73. b. The Pope claimeth superioritie in ciuile and temporall matters The Pope oughte to bee the Emperours subiect by M. Staplet owne graunt Chrysosto in Rom. 13. homil 23. Why the Prince is called gods minister Stap. fol. 73. b. Chrysost. homil 4. de eo ê™ scripsit Esa. Howe M. Sta â–ª citeth Chrysostome The facte of Czias whâ—…me the Papists alleage maketh agaynst themselues not against vs. Wherein the Pastor being the ministâ—…r of God surmouÌ„teth the Prince being also the ministâ—…s of God. Wherin againe the Princes ministerie surmounteâ—…h the pastours ministerie The sentence that the Papistes cite out of Chrysostome for their priestes maketh cleane against them Priestes mariage Chrysosto dâ—… verbis Esa. homil â—… Stap. fol. 74. a M. Stapletons argument The answere to the argument Stapl. 75. a. Stap. pag. 75. a Stap. 74. b. Fol. 75. a. Stapl. cap. 19. fol. 75. b Iohn 9. Constantine chaunged religion Tertull. The Queenes highnesse hath not altered but restored the olde and former faith What Bishops the Queenes Maiestie hathe deposed Stap. foll 7â—… b Why the prince is called the minister of God. The worde of doctrine Stapl. 75. b The Princes best ministeris and seruice Stap. fol. 75. b M. Stapletons shifting ansvvere Stap. 75. b. Stap. 75. b. Nicephorus iudgement of the Princes supremacie Stap. fol 76. b M. Stapletons Miste M. Stapletons inâ—…ect â—…e agaâ—…nst the homilie of images Matth. 23. Anthropol lib. 23. Lascaris The contention betweene the greeke and Latine churche for images Stap. 76. b. In the homilie against idolatrie Baruch 6. Stapl. 77. b. The Bishop of Sarum and the author of the homilie discharged of M. Stapl. chalenge Petrus Crinit l b. 9 cap. 9. de honest diâ—…c Te Papistes offended at our Homelies Bedes Homelies Sta. 79. a. b Mistaking the name of an Emperour Langus in prâ—…fa Niceph. Anthropolog lib. 23. The Papisteâ—… themselues call this Emperour as the Bishop did Stapl. 77. a. What a bragger M. Stapl. is Nicephorus selaundered â–ª lib. 4. cap. 8. fol. 468. b How M. Stap. reuileth the Emperour Praefat Langi in Eccl. histor Niceph. Stap. 77. b. Whereon wee buyld the Prin ces supremacie and whereon the Papistes buyld the Popes supromacie Langi Epist. ad Ferdin M Stapletoâ—…s order Stapl. 77. b M. Sta. burdeneth the Greke priests to farre The supremecie of the Greeke Emperours The Grecians opinion in the holie Ghostes proceeding Math. 7. Stapl. 77. b. 〈◊〉 77. b Stapl. 77. b. Stapl. 77. b. Stapl. 77. b â–ª Stapl. 78â—… Pag. 17. b. The Bishops proues
Popes cru 〈◊〉 to his cap tiueâ—… vnlike the cuâ—…sie of Elizeus Elizeus caused the kings messanger to be kept out of the 〈◊〉 4. Reg. 6. Elizeus resisted not the King in keeping out his Mesâ—…anger Lyra in 4. Reg. 6. Caleâ—…anus in 4 Reg. 6. Elizeus cursed the children that mocked him and the Beares deuoured them 4. Reg. 2. Glossa cum 〈◊〉 â—…a in 4. Reg. â—… Sâ—…nd 87. Zacha. 13. Deut 17. 2. Cor. 3. Where faithful princes wanted 〈◊〉 Prophet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mâ—…nt to â—…od The obedience to the 〈◊〉 oâ—… nee 〈◊〉 to Christianitie by M sand ar gument No neede of myracles Zacha. 13. Zacha. 13. The prophecie for punishing of false Prophetes The punishment of false Prophetes belongeth to the Prince The popishe clergie be such false prophetes as Zacharie prophecied of The fountaine of grace Idolatrie Teaching of lyes Ignorance Hipocrisâ—… of rough garmâ—… The detection and punishmeÌ„t of popery prophecied by Zacharie The wresting of the comâ—…oÌ„ alleaged place Deut. 17. Zacharie 11. Zacharies prophecie of the Pope Lyra in Za. 11. The Pope an Idol Glossa cum Lyra. sand pag. 87. Deut. 17. 1. Cor. 3. The ministration of the popish ministerie sand pag. 87. 2. Paraâ—… 26. Aug. Quest. lib. 2. q. 40. The example of king Ozias attempting to offer incence The pope readier to casâ—…e Princes out of heauen than to bring the into heauen In what case a Bishop maye excommunicate a â—…icked Prince The Priestes withstoode the king but not with any bodily violence â–ª 2. Paâ—…al 26. Caietanus in 2 Paâ—…al 26. The Pope dealeth not with Princes as Azarias did 1. Tim. 3. Gal. 2. This king was neuer deposed for all this offence sand pag. 87. Leuit â–ª 13. 1. Cor. 10. 2. Paral. 26. The similitude of leprie compared to heresie Aug. â—… Quest. 2. Q. 40. A similitude of man is no manifest testimonie of the vvorde of God. This similitude is applied of the Papistes to other things The Priest did but discerne of the disease and not dispossesse men of their goods The excluding of the Leper from coÌ„panie belongeth not to the priest Num. 5. The texâ—… of scripture 〈◊〉 alleagâ—…d This law was Iudicial and so vve are not bounde to it nor it is any figure to vs. S. Paule vvrested Haymo in 1. Cor. 10. Rom. 15. Math. 13. 1. Cor. 7. The morall or mysticall signification of separating the leper separareth not the â—…king from his kingdome The example of king Ozâ—…s confuâ—…es M. sand figure This figure maketh agaiÌ„st popish priests not against protestant Princes sand pag. 87. 3. Reg. 11 â–ª 3. Reg. 12. Malach. 2. The example of Ioiada the high priest that caused Athalia to be killed Ioas to be made king M. sand confuse citing of the scripture No king is here deposed but an vsurper killed Lyra in 4. Reg. 11. The doings of Ioiada were vpon such occasioÌ„n that they can not be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 example The close nou rishment of so as by the high priest his vncle in the Temple was extraordinarie Lyra in 3. Reg. 11. The close doing of Ioiada argueth he had no ordinarie authoritie In what respect this doing belonged chiefly to the high Priest. Lyra in 3. Reg. 11. That which Ioiada did he did it not by his owne authoritie but by consent of the prin ces nobilitie Wherein Ioiadaes facte may be drawne to an example In what respect ioiada had knowledge of the Kings causes The King might haue knowledge in the Byshops causes 2. Paral. 23. 4. Reg. 12 How the king delt with the priests for their â—…blations Glossâ—… in Lyra. Ioas gouernement ouer the priestes stretched fâ—…ther than to money matters Howe the B. is a sequester betweene God the Prince The B the Lords Angell or Messanger and the Prinâ—…es the Lordes Christe or annoynted The euent of 〈◊〉 off al wâ—…rres and â—…umults if the Pope might de pose and set vp all Princes The hurlie burlies that the Pope haâ—…h made The popes wiâ—… kâ—…d peace if it were admitted M. Sand arguments out of the new Testament Mar. 5. Iohn 2. 1. Cor. 5 â–ª 1. Tim 1. Act. 5. Faultes escaped in the prince Faultes Corrections good ministers good ministers 232. 〈◊〉 24. the summâ—… the 〈◊〉 316. 〈◊〉 23. the reasâ—… the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 377. 〈◊〉 8. secundâ—… secundâ—…m 386. lin 12. tamen 〈◊〉 tamen â–ª 391. lin 14. also â—…ll 〈◊〉 403. lin 21. renouned 〈◊〉 408. lin 16 â–ª that is that it is â–ª 408. lin 34. in the in 〈◊〉 410. in the 〈◊〉 treaâ—…ise 〈◊〉 432. lin 24. peccatum peccati 469. lin 10. together thether 512. lin 10. godly 〈◊〉 541. lin 32. let hiâ—… to let him 577. lin 12. dealing deale 581. lin 20. whom against whome 593. lin 14 â–ª yuo you 599. lin 2. et despetto de diâ—… in dispetto di dio 599. lin 9. yemay he may 605. lin 19. causes is causes as 617. lin 5. as who though B. as though the B. 625. lin 31. though follow though it follow 632. lin 28. giuing giuâ—… 636. lin 9. reddit reddite 641. lin 10. not not onely 636. in the margine but yet â—…r elsâ—… 649. lin 1. so long so farre 652. lin 22. Emperors the Emperors 674. lin 11. about about it 705. lâ—…n 12. as are 717. lin 2. that that that yet 721. lin 8. is simply â—…s simply 731. lin 19. grautned graunted 732. lin 19. or if the or if in the. 767. lin 30. prioris prioribus â–ª 788. lin 22. which was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was not 824. lin 5. you youâ—… 83â—… lin 16. â—…ereth 〈◊〉 955. lin 10. not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lin 12. the breast their breast 〈◊〉 lin 34. can do more câ—… do no more 865. lin 22. qualle equally 866. 〈◊〉 15. thereof thâ—… of 881. lin 21. authoritie of 〈◊〉 authoritie and. 897. lin â—…4 is a Cathoâ—… 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 â—…08 lin 26. inconuenâ—…t incompetent 915. lin 14. ye the yet he 925. lin 16. that 〈◊〉 that it is 928. lin 25. and in deede and then in deede 959. lin 20. or couetousnesse our couetousnesse 1024. lin 2. or ambition our ambition ibidem lin 2. or dainteâ—…es our dainteynes ibidem lin â—… sprake speake 1042. lin 17. that that that 1045. lin 2. the that 1056. lin 1. there thereon 1107. lin 22. from so from ibidem lin 32. Manie other faultes are escaped in the printing by reason the author vvas not alvvayes present but they are such as thou maist gentle reader thy selfe correct them
surmile vppon my silence any suche distrust ▪ I will compendiously as the matter shall require abbridge their aunsweres and that master Horne shall thinke that our stuffe is not all spent ▪ I shall on the other syde for a surplussage adioyne some other things to our opponent accomodate An Almonde for Parate so finely our student begins to speake that a good plaine simple man can scarce vnderstande his 〈◊〉 termes But this is the effect of it we shall now haue new stuffe of some olde store good stuffe and God will for all their stuffe as he crakes is not yet spent but I perceyue it goeth harde with them in their store house and that this stuffe is some of the last cast God sende it be not such stale stuffe when it comes to the view as Cardinall Campeius moiles did bring into Englande and vttered in Cheape side But such as it is we must take it in good worth it is the best he hath to answere the Bishops ensample withall The first ensample is of Moses in whome the Byshop noteth thrée things First that he was the supreme gouernour of Gods people Secondly that hée ordred and set forth Gods true Religion wyth great regarde and care prescribing aswell to Aaron and the Leuites as to the people Thirdly that he was not the chiefe priest therfore could not do them in suche respect but as he was supreme gouernour The first and the seconde propositions that Moses was the supreme gouernour and that he did order and direct all things M. St. graunteth The thirde parte he denieth and affirmeth that Moses was the chiefe priest and in that respecte dyd all these foresayde thinges This assertion he sayth he will proue bothe by his masters olde and by his owne surplusage of newe stuffe also His argument of both these stuffes is this I say with M. D. Harding and S. Augustine that Moses was a Priest aswell as a Prince I say the same with M. Dorman ▪ with Philo Iudeus with S. Hierome and with S. Hieroms master Gregorie Nazianzene Ergo Moses was the chiefe Priest. By the like reason if M. St. be a priest he might proue him selfe to be the Pope of Rome He is a Romish priest Ergo he is the chiefe Romish priest which is the pope The one reason is as good as the other But here he will cry out and say I do him wrong to change his conclusion for he inferreth no such words but these And so consequently Moses ensample serueth not your turne but quite ouerturneth your assertion True it is in déed this is your cōclusion M. St. but what was the bishops assertion which this ye say quite ouerturnes was not this his assertion that Moses was not the chiefe priest and did not you denie this assertion affirme it to be an vntruth saying for Moses was the chiefe priest as shal be proued did ye not héere make promise to proue it did ye not say that to answere this example ye had other freshe stuffe not yet spent must not then this stuffe be directed to this ende conclusion to fulfill your promise ouerturne the bishops assertion which was that Moses was not the chiefe priest but Aaron and you should proue as ye haue freshly promised that Moses was the chiefe priest And therfore if this be not your conclusion ye subtilly falsly swerue frō the cōclusion that ye ought to haue cōcluded ye performe not your promise to proue Moses the chiefe priest nor your conclusion as ye crake ouerturnes the byshops assertion which was that Moyses was not the chief priest but Aaron And therfore either this is your argument Moses was a Priest Ergo he was chiefe Priest or else ye conclude not agaynst the bishops assertion If ye say ye conclude this al the world séeth what a fonde conclusion it is And if ye haue a poleshorne priests crowne of your owne as I doubt not but ye haue a faire one ye may aswell conclude to your self the Popes triple crowne And if ye cōclude it not ye conclude not agaynst the bishop nor fulfill your promise for all your proues stande on this profe that Moses was a priest Nowe the question was not whether Moses was a priest or no which is another question in controuersie But the question is whether he or Aaron were the chiefe priest Yet will ye peraduenture say though I haue herein as ye haue proued swarued from the directe conclusion in hande that Moses was not the chiefe priest nor kepte my promise yea and made a scape in saying that I ouerturned the bishops assertion when I did not or if I went about it yet mine argument proued but a fonde reason from priest to chiefe priest yet in the ende I haue proued Moses a priest and so consequently it serueth not your turne vnlesse ye will king Henry the eight and his sonne king Edwarde yea our gratious Queene to be a priest to but rather quite ouerturneth your assertion and think you M. Horne that the Queenes authoritie doth iumpe agree with the authoritie of Moses in causes ecclesiasticall then may she preache to the people as Moses did then may she offer sacrifices as Moses did then may she consecrate priests as Moses did consecrate Aaron and others then may it be sayde of the imposition of handes as was sayde of Moyses Iosua the sonne of Nun was full of the spirite of wisdome for Moses had put his hande vpon him It must needes therefore followe that Moses was a priest and that a high priest whiche ye heere full peeuishly denie Where ye aske M. Stap. of the Byshop And thinke ye M. Horne that the Queenes authoritie do the iumpe agree with th' authoritie of Moses might not the byshop demaund agayne the like of you and thinke you ▪ M. Stap. that euen your Popes authoritie admitting it were not the vsurped tyrannie which it is dothe iumpe agree with the authoritie of Moyses yea admitting also that question that he was a Priest and so consequently agayne it serueth not your turne nor master D. Hardings nor master Dormans neither I am sure as ye confesse he was a priest so ye will admit a difference betwéene your Pope and him and euen so since ye reason thus precisely of differences in the persons ye ought also to haue made a difference betwéene Moyses his diuerse offices and to haue giuen either office his proper actions and so to haue applied them and not to haue confounded them admitting that he one person were both a Prince and a Priest also which hangs in controuersie for all your cited authors But you reason confusedly à secundum quid ad simpliciter Moyses by an especiall priuiledge was a Prieste as well as a Prince and thereby did preache offer sacrifice consecrate Aaron lay imposition of handes and did other offices of Priests and many extraordinary things besides Ergo Moses in that he was a Prince not a Priest in
that he exercised ordinary gouernment ouer priests and all ecclesiastical persons and causes as other Princes did after him â–ª is not to be broughte for example for our christian princes to follow This is the plaine full effect of your tale And what an ilfauorde argument is this I pray you but to hide this sequele after your fashion ye would inserre another yet more darke conclusion saying It must needes therfore follow that Moses was a priest that a high priest which ye heere full peenishly denie Doth this conclusion M. Stap. if it were admitted improue the Byshops assertion and yet this your conclusion standing on thrée partes as it is not to the purpose so is euery parte starke false and like the maker thereof For Moses by his prerogatiue hauing especiall coÌ„maundement of God therto might well do all those things and yet it followeth not of any necessitie that as you say he must néedes therfore haue bene a priest Or if he had bene a priest he must néedes therefore be a high priest or if he had bene a high priest that he must néedes be the highest priest Neither did the byshop denie peeuishly that he denied as you full peeuishly rashely and like your selfe do iudge nor yet denied or graunted or spoke vpon one way or other whether Moses were priest or a high priest yea or no. But denied and that truely that Moses was not the highest or chiefe priest Which words ye durst not alleage nor yet generally terme him the high priest but ye say a priest and that a high priest your selfe séeming euen by your spéeche to graunt that the high priest or highest priest he was not Nor ye can not cauill about your owne phrase vnlesse ye will say it is all one a Lorde and the Lorde a high priest and the high priest so say ye ment the chiefe priest when ye sayd a high priest for all the worlde séeth a great difference betwéene these termes and that your self did subtilly sée to make the reader beléeue ye had performed your promise in prouing him to be the chiefe priest And yet ye bring no profe but onely say a priest and that a high priest â—…go the highest priest So that if the reader more narroâ—…ly viewing your grosse sleight shoulde chalenge ye that you haue not proued him the highest priest simply no will ye say to saue your honestie I onely sayde a priest and a high Priest and no more But why do ye then belie the byshop saying he denied that that he medled not with and proue not your matter in hande nor kéepe touch with your reader in perfourming your promise that Moses was the chiefe Priest Haue ye learned so wel this subtill shift that Omne promissum est aut debitum aut dubium Euery promise is eyther due or doubtfull But howsoeuer ye will discharge your promise this your doutfull conclusion neither dischargeth your falshood nor impugneth the Bishoppes assertion muche lesse ouerturnes it that he was not the chiefe priest but the chiefe Prince or gouernoure and thereby did order and direct Gods true religion bothe to all the Priestes and people as the Bishop affirmed Nowe seeing he can by no meanes neyther olde stuffe nor newe stuffe bring it about as he wold haue it nor proue him to be the highest Priest he will leaue his promise and lyke to the Fore that would eate no Grapes when he could not come by them with all the leapes he coulde make so M. Sta. will nowe euen renounce his solemne marginall crake that he promised to proue Moyses the chiefe prieste and leaping at it but euer leaping shorte that he was a Priest and a little higher that he was a highe Priest but he can not leape so high to obtaine his purpose that he was the highest Priest he will now let him goe for béeing any Priest at all and since he can not get the grape he wil none of it but will hunt after an other praie I say now further with master Dorman sayth he that put the case Moses were no priest yet this exaÌ„ple frameth not so smoothly and closely to your purpose as ye weene for Moses was a prophet and that such a prophetas the like was not againe Giue me now M. Horne Princes prophetes giue mee Pâ—…nces and lawmakers by especiall order and appointement ordeined of God to whose wordes God certainly wold haue giuen as great authoritie as he would and commaunded to be giuen to Moses and then perchaunce I will saye that ye saye somewhat well to the purpose Againe Moyses was suche a speciall Prophete and so singularly chosen of God to bee hearde and obeyed in all thinges that he is in the holy Scripture euidently compared to Christe himselfe compared I saye in the office of teachyng and instructing Moyses in the Deuteronom foretelling the Iewes of a Messias to come sayeth The Lorde thy God will rayse thee vp a Prophete from among thyne owne nation and of thy brethren suche an one as my selfe him thou shalt heare And this so spoken of Moyses in the olde Lawe is in the nevve Testament auouched and repeated firste by S. Peter the chiefe apostle and nexte by Saint Stephan the firste martyr and applyed to Chryste If then Christe must be so heard and obeyed of vs as was Moyses of the Ievves no doubte as Christe is a king a Prince a Prophete a Prieste and a Bishoppe to vs so vvas Moyses to them a Prince a Prophete a Priest and a Bishoppe As Christe is of vs to bee hearde and obeyed as well in all matters Ecclesiasticall as temporall for no temporall lawe can haue force agaynste the lawe of Christe among Christian men so vvas Moyses to be hearde and obeyed of the Ievves in matters and causes as vvell temporall as spirituall For vvhy the Scripture is playne Tanquam meipsum audietis You shall heare that Prophete euen as my selfe Shevve vs Master Horne any prince in the nevve Testamente so conditioned and endevved and then make your argumente on Gods name Verely any prince that novve is namely in Ecclesiasticall gouernement compared vvyth Moyses is as the Poete sayth Impar congressus Achilli Troilus Yea forsoothe novve yee saye somethyng further Maister Stapleton as ye boaste howbeâ—…it nothyng further in substaunce than youre fellowes before but in flourish of Copia verborum yee saye novve further in déede And I maye saye to you it was high tyme to saye something furtherâ—… for hytherto all that ye haue sayde is nothyng Well saye you nowe Put the case Moyses were no Prieste I conclude then he was not hyghe Prieste and so putting this case yée put youre selfe in an yll case that before ye made a false lying crake and nowe with shame are fayne to giue it ouer But if ye put the case as ye say like Master Dorman then dare ye not abide by this case neither lyke Wylliam Sommer for so playde Master Dorman in putting this case
you captiously gybe and cauill for that belongeth not to supreme gouernment But that he is so the supreme gouernour in ouerséeing the consecration and deliuerie of the true foode wherewith the people of God ought to be fedde that euen he ouerséeth the féeder himselfe And for this cause the King is called of the Prophete the nourishing father and Quéenes are named Nourses that although the ministerie of féeding pertaine to the ministers yet the prouision for the foode the ouersight that the children of God be duely fedde with the right milke with the true bread and water of lyfe belongeth to the Princes And therefore haue they the name of nourses not to nourishe them in ciuill matters and corporall fâ—…de onely but as in ciuil so in â—…acte verbi in the milke of the worde of God also Is this only the cherishing of the good childe by giuing landes reuenewes maintenaunce and lyuing to the Churche Is this onely the displing of the frowarde childâ—… or as ye call it the punishing of the heretike No M. Stapleton Lyra his exposition and yours doe not agrée He sayth they are nourses what to doe to feede whom the faithfull ones wherewith with the milke of the worde whose worde euen the worde and sacraments of God. Wherof sith the ministery and execution belongeth not vnto them but to the ministers it followeth necessarily thervpon that the prouision direction appointment care and ouersight which is the supreme gouernement belongeth to them And this is that which Lyrâ—… confesseth the B. vrgeth of Constantine that he was such another nourse as did kepe defend maintaine vpholde and feede the pore faithfull ones of Christ yea caried them in his bosome as it were and procured them to be fedde did set forth proclamations not only against false religion but also to set forth to exhort and allure vnto the Christian faith caused not only the Idolatrous religion to bee suppressed but caused also on the other parte the true knowledge and religion of Christ to bee brought in and planted among his people and did not only make lawes for punishing heretikes and Idolaters but also reformed all manner abuses about Gods seruice Thus sayth the Bishop out of Eusebius did Constantine play the nourses part Nowe what saye you to all this M. Stapleton All this of Constantine say you is graunted and maketh nothing for you Whether it maketh for vs or no we will not contende But it maketh for the matter and being graunted it maketh vp the matter For and ye will graunt thus much from your heart inwarde which ye nowe graunt from the téeth outwarde by compulsion of the manifest truth ye might come home well ynough with a wannion and bestow your wit and trauell better than thus to graunt vnto and yet with pieuishnesse to wythstande the manifest truth of the matter The Quéenes Maiesties othe requireth no more of you to giue to hir than here ye graunt to giue to Constantine to set foorth Christes religion to make lawes and constitutions not only of punishment but of reformation of all maner abuses about Gods seruice to prouide that the Church be fed with Gods worde and in all pointes aboue sayde shewe her selfe a very nource of the Church committed to hir gouernement as the childe is to the nourse What one thing ecclesiasticall is not here comprehended or can ye shewe cause why she ought not to haue the same authoritie in hir dominions as well as Constantine to whome ye graunt it had in his if ye saye she doth not this but the contrarie this is but your wicked slaunder M. Stapleton But graunt hir hir interest and then trie that Hir right is one thing and whether she dischargeth well the same or no is another thing Graunt hir hir right as you doe to Constantine and then spare not to improue what ye can proue amisse Nowe hauing graunted thus much which in dede concludeth vp all the matter least he shoulde vtterly be discrâ—…dited of all his friendes he goeth about so much as he can in wrangling of wordes to defeate once againe all his former graunt according to his practise in the Chapter before For where the Bishop by the example of Constantyne proueth the Prince to be herein not only a nourse to the people but also to bee appoynted vnto them of God as it were the common or vniuersall Byshop as Eusebius testifieth of Constantine and Constantine to other Byshops calleth himselfe a Byshop signifying his carefull ouersight ouer all his people in setting forth Gods true religion Maister Stapleton first snappeth at thys worde Byshoppe secondlye hée challengeth the Byshoppe for curtalling Eusebius sentence And when Eusebius sayeth he calleth hym as it were a common or vniuersall Byshoppe I suppose yee meane not that hee was a Byshop in deede For your selfe confesse that Princes Bishops offices are farre distincted and disseuered that the one ought not to break into the office of the other The Bishops meaning is euident master Stap. and so are his words But your meaning is to brabble to tickle in the Readers heade a suspition that he confounded these offices Is there no difference betwéene these sayings he was as it were a Bishop and he was a Bishop in dede Yes M. St. and ye were not a very wrangler in dede ye might perceyue by these wordes as it were he plainly ment and as it were spake it that he was no B. in deede And what though he were no Bishop in dede in the function and office of a Bishops ministerie no more was he also a nourse in deede nor the people were suckling babes in deede nor the worde of God is milke in deede yet as these things be not falsly spoken but being borowed speaches in their senses import not onely a true but a more excellent vnderstanding than the bare wordes vsually betoken so the Emperour being named to be as it were a common or vniuersall Bishop and yet in deede being no Bishop it argueth that he had this name bicause of his common and vniuersall gouernment ouersight and care ouer all Bishops and causes Ecclesiasticall This shift therefore to slinke away from the manifest meaning of the wordes by threaping on the Bishop this kindnesse that he shoulde meane to proue him a very Bishop in dede is a very meane shift though it haue in dede a shrewde meaning Master Stapleton And if you did so meane say you Eusebius himself would soone confounde you if you reherse Constantines whole sentence that he spake to the Bishops What a good year meane ye M. St. ye vrge this meaning further than néedes that the B. should meane to make the Emperor a Bishop in the Bishoply ministerie therfore curtalled as ye call it Eusebius sentences If Eusebius sentence set it downe as whole as ye list confound them that meane to confound these offices it will neuer soone or late confound the B. the popish Bishops
them master Stapleton till ye set them downe I thinke they will all come in the ende to the effect of this sentence here so often by all yourside alleaged Ye cite Chrysostome as though it were at the full Where in déede ye cut off both the heade the middle and taile of his sentence whereby considering the occasion and purpose of his wordes we might sée that they shoulde not be wrested from his meaning Chrysostome vpon these wordes of the Prophet Esay Factum est anno quo mortuâ—…s est Ozias rex It came to passe in the yere that king Ozias died after a Preface made of Priestes mariage taking occasion of the Prophet Esays wife telleth of Ozias presumption Uerum hic Ozias c. but this Ozias when he was a crowned King bicause he was iust waxed hawtie in minde and conceyuing a greater courage than was for his estate entred into the temple And what sayth Esay He entred into the holy of holies and sayde I will offer incense He being a King vsurpeth the principalitie of the priesthood I will sayth he offer incense bicause I am iust But abide within thy bounds And so Chrysostome procéedeth in the sentence cited by you Alij sunt termini The boundes of a kingdome of a priesthood are not al one c. Which sentence ye truly cite til ye come to these wordes VVhen I say to me I vnderstand a priest And there ye strike of mâ—… words of Chrysostam than ye cited Which belike ye do for two purposes Partly for that ye could not abide to heare of any vices or discommendation in priests therfore ye cull out only that which soundeth to their praise dignitie Partly for that this would haue made the purpose of Chrysost playner reprouing them that disâ—…erne not betwene the office the persoÌ„ At which fault your self so late did stuÌ„ble in princes not discerning between Neroes vices a princes office As in Chrysostoms time same despised the office of a priest bicause of the faults of diuerse priests The wordes of Chrysostome folowing those you cite are these Therefore when thou seest an vnworthie priest slaunder not the priesthod For thou oughtest not to coÌ„demne the things but him that euill vseth a good thing Syth Iudas also was a traytor howbeit for this the order Apostolical is not accused but the mind of him Neither is it the fault of the priesthood but of the euill mind And thou therfore blame not the priesthod but the priest that vseth euill a good thing For if one dispute with thee and say seest thou yonder Christianâ—… answere thou but I speak not to thee of the persons but of the things or else how many phisitions haue bene made slaughtermen haue giuen poisons for remedies And yet I dispise not the arte but him that euill vseth the arte How many shipmeÌ„ haue guided euill their ships yet is not the arte of sayling euill but the mind of them If the Christian man be wicked accuse not thou the profession the priesthood but him that euill vseth a good thing These are Chrysostomes wordes which you omit and then followeth as you recite Regâ—… corpora c. The bodies are coÌ„mitted to the king and so forth as ye say til ye come to the knitting vp of the sentence with Ozias which again you omit VeruÌ„ rex c. But that king going beyond his bounds and passing the measure of the kingdom atteÌ„pted to adde somwhat more and entred into the temple willing with authoritie to offer incense VVhat therfore sayth the priest It is not lawfull for thee Ozias to offer incense Behold libertie behold a mind that knoweth not boÌ„dage behold a tong touching the heauens behold liberty that cannot be restrained behold the body of a maÌ„ the mind of an angel behold one that goeth on the grouÌ„d is coÌ„uersant in heaueÌ„ Thou sawest a king thou sawest not a diademe Tel not me it is a kingdom where is the transgression of lawes It is not lawful for thee O king to offer inceÌ„se It is not lawful for thee to come into the holy of holies Thou passest thy bouÌ„ds thou sekest things not grauÌ„ted to thee therfore shalt leese the things thou hast receiued It is not lawful for thee to offer inceÌ„se but this is giuen vnto the priests This is not thine but this is mine haue I vsurped on me thy purple vsurpe not thou my priesthod It is not lawful for thee to offer inceÌ„sâ—… but only for the sons of AaroÌ„ By this it plainly appeareth wherevpon Chrysost. speaketh to wete of the seuerall functions of the spirituall pastor and the prince and that it is not lawfull for the prince to intrude himself into the office of the diuine minister He may not more take vpoÌ„ him to administer the diuine sacraments of christ his church now although he be the prince to the which not with standing you admitted womeÌ„ thaÌ„ might Ozias sacrifice then For as then God had appoynted who should sacrifice so hath he apointed who should now minister his sacrameÌ„ts Now if ye had shewed that the supreme gouernment ouer ecclesiasticall causes the ouersight and direction of the setting forth of Gods true religion the abolishing of false religion and the deposing of Idolatrous Priestes that obsâ—…inately mainteyne errours agaynst the expresse worde of God be the like doing to this fact of Ozias if ye had proued that the Prince hath euer done or doth or claymeth to do the like fact to this of Ozias in ministring the sacrament then had you alleaged this sentence to some purpose else maketh it nothing to the purpose but maketh agaynst your popish mid wiues they rather play the part of Ozias It maketh not agaynst the Q. Maiestie but most of all against your Pope himselfe that thinketh he playth the high priests part and is so farre therfrom that none is more like than he to this vsurper entring into the holyest place and vsurping the priesthood the sacrifice the power and the honour that belongeth onely to Iesus Christe himselfe As for the office of the true minister of God which neyther your Pope nor you his shaâ—…elings arâ—… is in déede as Chrysostom sayth both a distinct function from the princes and hath other boundes and also we graunt surmounteth farre the boundes of the Princes office in respect of his spirituall ministerie of administring the sacraments of preaching the glad tydings of saluation of denouncing to the obstinate sinners the threates of Gods wrath and vengeance to the penitent the most comfortable promises of Gods mercie fauour whose sentence being rightly applyed in earth God hath promised to ratifie the same in heauen And for this cause doth Chrysost â–ª so highly extoll this priesthood referring all his prayses to the dignitie of his ministerie in respect whereof the Princes ministeris is but outwarde and earthly medling nothing with the administration of this high function but onely with the
supreme charge ouersight and gouernment to sée that the Priest do not abuse this so excellent and spiritual ministerie but exercise rightly the same according to Gods worde Who so doing the Prince so well as any other Christian obeyeth his preaching ministerie submitteth his head as Chrysosâ—…ome saith vnder the ministers handes as to Gods messenger steward and dispenser of his heauenly mysteries But if the Priest be not such an one as Chrysostome describeth if he do not denounce Gods promises threaâ—…es nor his worde at all but as Christ saith of the naughtie seruant striketh his fellow seruants and subtracâ—…eth their spirituall foode of Gods worde from them would poyson theÌ„ with such erroniouse foode as he would giue them besides and contrarie to the worde of God if he will not be centent with his owne boundes but will vsurpe also the dignitie that is not due vnto him but belongeth to the Prince shall the Prince suffer this at his handes him selfe to be spoyled of his authoritie and royall estate and his subiectes pilled of their goods yea both he and al his subiects by such a false vsurper tirant Priest to be robbed and spoiled of their soules foode saluation Here hath the Prince authoritie to suppresse such wicked Balamites such counterfaites such Antichrists what soeuer they be and to place in their places true and godly ministers such as Chrysostome here speakes of FroÌ„ which kinde of ministerie your Pope M. St who is your great high Priest all the inferiour rable of Priests that depende on him are so farre different that Chrysostoms senteÌ„ce not only maketh nothing for you but is cleane against you For first take your owne words that you cite out of Chrysostome lay them to your Pope Prelates and sée how they agrée togither This king saith Chrysâ—…stome of the minister or Priest is not knowne by visible things neither hath his estimatioÌ„ for preciouse stones he glistereth with all or for his gay golden ghstering apparell Contrarywise your Pope and his prelates to get the more estimation thereby of the people are not onely knowen by visible things but set out them selues and all their ceremonies to the vttermost in gay golden glistering apparell with most gorgeous ouches of siluer of golde of pearles and precious stones Againe this Prieste saith to the King I haue not vsurped thy purple contrarywise the Pope hath vsurped Emperours purple the Emperours Diademe the Emperours throne the Emperours Empire and all Againe ye tell vs out of Chrysostome that the bodies are committed to the King the soules to the Priest the King pardoneth the faultes of the bodie the Priest pardoneth the faultes of the soule the King forceth the Priest exhorteth the one by necessitie the other by giuing counsell the one hath visible armour the other spirituall he warreth against the barbarous I warre against the Diuell Contrarywise the Pope warreth against Christ and with the Diuell as his generall vicar and Licuetenant and taketh not onely vppon him the Emperours parte by warring against the barbarous Turkes and Saracens but also the Diuels parte by warring against the Saincts truth of God and that with more horrible treasons murders and villanies than euer was practised among the barbarous And entermedleth with faultes of the bodie as whoredome and fornication not onely bodily to punish them but also beastly for filthie lucre to maintaine them and condemneth in Gods ministers godly and honorable wedlocke which besides the other is a manifest argument that he is a Priest of no such kinde as Chrysostome here coÌ„mendeth For had you M. St. looked better euen in the same Homelie but the leafe before ye should haue seene what a notable commendation he maketh of the mariage of Priestes vppon the prophetes wordes Vidi dominum c. I saw the Lorde sitting in an high I hrone c. Quis hac loquitur c. VVho saith he spake these thinges Esay that beholdet of the celestiall Scraphins which had to deale with mariage and yet extinguished not grace You haue harkened to the Prophet and you haue heard the Prophet this day Go thou out and lasuph thy sonne neyther must we ouerpasse these thinges Go thou out and thy sonne Yea had the Prophet a sonne if he had a sonne he had a wife also that thou mayst vnderstande that mariages are not euill but whooredome is euill But so often as we talke with any of the vulgare people saying why liuest thou not well wherefore expressest thou not perfect manners how can I say they except I should go from my wife except I should bid my children farewell except I should bidde my businesse adieu VVherfore canst thou not doth matrimonie hinder thee a wife is giuen thee for an helper not to lay a snare for thee Had not the Prophet a wife neither did wedlocke hinder the grace of the spirite and yet he kepte companie togither with his wife and was a Prophet neuerthelesse Had not Moses a wife and yet he brake the rocke he changed the ayre he talked with God he stayde the diuine wrathe Had not Abraham a wife and yet he was made a father of Nations and of the Churche for he got his sonne Isaac and he was to him a matter of notable affayres Did he not offer his Sonne the fruit of his mariage was he not a father and withall a louer of God might not he see him selfe a sacrificer to be made of his owne bowels a sacrificer I say and a father withall nature to be ouercome godlinesse to ouercome his bowels to be troden downe his godly deedes to surmount the father to be cast downe and the louer of God to be crowned hast thou not seene the whole maÌ„ both a louer of his son and of God was matrimonie here an hindraÌ„ce but what saist thou to the mother of the Machabees Was she not a wife added she not seuen sonnes to the felowship of the saincts did she not see them crowned with martyrdom â–ª did she not stand by as a looker vppon and not â—…aint in hir minde stoode she not by exhorting euery one of them and being the mother of the martyrs suffred hâ—… selfe seuen martirdoms for while they were tormented she receyued the stroke Neither yet without affections beheld she â—…he things that were done She was the mother and the violence done to nature declared hir proper vertue But she was not ouercome c. But what say we to Peter the maine piller of the Church that vehemeÌ„t louer of Christ he that in speach was vnlearned conquerour of RhethoritiaÌ„s he that was vnskilfull stopped the philosophers mouthes he that dissolued the Greeke wisdome no otherwise thaÌ„ the webbe of spiders he that trauailed through the world cast the net into the sea and fished the world but what saith the Gospell Iesus entred vnto Peters wiues mother being sicke of a feuer VVhere a wiues mother is there is a wife and