which is intituled De temporibus diabus pacis Domini Regis Of the times and daies of peace and freedome of our Lord the King he doth explicate that it belongeth to the King and his officers to see these liberties of Ecclesiasticall peace franquises and freedome be exactlie obserued to Ecclesiasticall persons especiallie to punish them double which refuse to put in execution the Bishops sentence of iustice Quod si aliquis â—i foris fecerit saith he Episcopus inde iustitiam faciat veruâ—tamen si quis arrogans pro Episcopali iustitia emendare noluerit Episcopâ—â— Regi notum faciat Rex autem constringet malefactorem vt emendet cui foris facturum fecit scilicet primum Episcopo deinde Regi sic erunt ibi due gladij gladius iuuabit If anie man shall doe anie hurt to him that hath the peace of the Church let the Bishop doe him Iustice but if anie man will bee arrogant not make amends according to the sentence of iustice giuen by the Bishop let the Bishop make it knowne to the King or his Courts and the King shall constraine the malefactor to make amends to him vnto whom hee did the hurte to wit first vnto the Bishop and then to the King and so there shall bee two swords against malefactors and the one sword shall help the other And heere let be considered what he saith of two swords one in the Bishops hand and the other in the Kings and that this must assist that of the Bishops as the principall superiour which is conforme to the speach of K. Edgar if you remember whereof we made mention in the former Chapter and last demonstration therof Wherby is made euident that these auncient Kings beleeued not to any haue spirituall sword or authoritie by right of their Crowns but onlie the temporall to command punish in temporall affaires and to help and assist the others in causes belonging vnto them 18. The third law hath this Title De Iustitia Sanctae Ecclesiae Of the iustice of the holy Church and prerogatiue therof which she is to receiue in temporall tribunals In which law is determined in these words Vbicunque Regis iustitia vel cuiuscunque sit placita tenuerit si vllus Episcopus venerit illuc aperuerit causam Sanctae Ecclesiae ipsa prius terminetur Iustitia enim est vt Deus vbique prae caeteris honoretur Whâ—rsoeuer the Kings Iustice or the Iustice of what other Lord soeuer shall hold pleas or keep courts if any Bishop come thither and open a cause of the holy Church let that cause of all other be first determined for it is iust that God be honoured euery where before all other Marke his reason why the expedition of the Bishops cause is to be preferred before that of the King for that he holdeth the place of God and thereafter must be respected 19. The fourth law hath this Title De vniuersis tenentibus de Ecclesia Of the priuiledges of all those that are any way tenants of the Church And then it followeth in the law Quicunque de Ecclesia aliquid tenuerit vel in fundo Ecclesiae mansionem habuerit extra curiam Ecclesiasticam coactus non placitabit quamuis foris fecerit nisi quod absit in Curia Ecclesiastica rectum defecerit Whosoeuer doth hold any thing of the Church or hath his mansion-house within the land of the Church shall not be constrained to plead any matter of his though he bee a malefactor out of the spirituall courte except which God forbid iustice could not be had in the said Ecclesiasticall court 20. These are the first lawes of all that were made by King VVilliam and after these doe ensue fiue more to the same effect of Churches priuiledges wherof the first hath this Title De reis ad Ecclesiam fugientibus Of malefactors that fly to the Church how they are to haue Sanctuary and protection The second De fractione pacis Ecclesiae Of breaking the peace of the Church that is to say of her priuiledges the breakers wherof are appointed to be sharply punished first by the Bishop then by the King if he be arrogant The third De decimis Ecclesiae maioribus Of the greater tythes belonging to the Church The fourth De minut is decimis Of lesser tythes all which are commaunded to be payed exactly And finally the fifth law which is the tenth in order hath this Title De denario S. Petri qui Anglicè dicitur Rome-scot Of Peter-pence called in old English Rome-scot wherin is appointed the order how the said Peter-pence shall be gathered and made ready against the feast of S. Peter and S. Paul or at the furthest against the feast of S. Peters Chaines as we haue seen also before ordeined by the law of K. Kanutus By all which is vnderstood and much to be considered that neither K. VVilliam nor any of his auncestors tooke vpon them to make any Ecclesiasticall law at all of spirituall matters as of their owne but only did second and strenthen and confirme the lawes of the Church by their temporall lawes by defending the same and punishing the breakers therof Which is a far different thing from the Ecclesiasticall power which M. Attorney will needs haue vs beleeue to haue byn in the auncient Kings of England according to the meaning of the auncient Common-lawes therof but produceth none And I persuade my self he will hardly alleadge me any so auncient as these though he haue studied them as he saith 35. years but fiue hundred more were necessary to find out that which he affirmeth And thus much of lawes for the present 21. There remaineth only one argument more concerning K. VVilliam which is the time of his death and of what sense and iudgment he was in this point at that time when commonly men doe se more cleerly the truth of matters especially Princes then before in their life health and prosperity when passion honour or interest may oftentimes either blind or byasse them And albeit of K. VVilliam diuers ancient writers doe recorde that notwithstanding in his anger vnto secular men he was fierce terrible yet vnto Ecclesiasticall persons he bare still great respect wherof among others this example is recorded by Nubergensis that when at a certaine time Archbishop Aldred of Yorke that had crowned him and was much reuerenced by him while he liued intreating him for a certaine pious worke and not preuailing turned his back and went away with shew of displeasure the Conquerour tooke hold of him and fell downe at his feet promising to doe what he would haue him and when the Nobles that stood round about began to cry to the Arch-bishop that he should take vp the King quickly from his knees he answered let him alone he doth but honour the feet of S. Peter in kneeling at myne Which well declareth saith Nubergensis both what great reuerence
this shall suffice to this point Now will M. Attorney passe to another of the commendation of Truth as though that were with him and his And wee shall follow him to examine that point also as wee haue done this other about Ignorance The Attorney On the other side Truth cannot be supported or defended by any thing but by Truth herselfe and is of that constitution and constancy that she cannot at any time or in any part or point be disagreable to her self She hateth all bumbasting and sophistication and bringeth with her certainty vnity simplicity and peace at the last Putida salsamenta amant origanum veritas pèr se placet honesta per se decent falsa fucis turpia phaleris indigent Ignorance is so far from excusing or extenuating the error of him that had power to finde out the truth which necessarily he ought to know wanted only will to seeke it as she will be a iust cause of his great punishment Quod scire debes non vis non pro ignorantia sed pro contemptu habers debet Error and falshood are of that condition as without any resistance they will in tyme of themselues fade and fall away But such is the state of Truth that though many doe impugne her yet will she of her self euer preuaile in the end and flourish like the palme-tree she may peraduenture by force for a tyme be troden downe but neuer by any meanes whatsoeuer can she be troden out The Catholike Deuine 16. None do more willinglie heare the commendation of Truth then we who say with S. Paul VVee can do nothing against truth but for truth And therfore do I willinglie ioyne with M. Attorney in this point of praisinge Truth Wee do mislike also no lesse then he all bumbasting and sophistication neither are we delighted with stinkinge salt-fish that had need of Orygon to giue it a good sauour Wee allow in like manner of his other latin phrases and do confesse that Truth herselfe may be troden downe for a tyme by force but neuer troden out But what is all this to the purpose we haue in hand of findinge out the Truth in this our controuersie Let vs suppose for the present that both partes do like well of her but what meanes is giuen heere or may be giuen to discouer where she lyeth In all other controuersies lightly our aduersaries are wont to remit vs only to scriptures for tryall which was an old tryck in like manner of their foresaid forernuners as the auncient Fathers testify for that scriptures being subiect to more cauillation many times both for the interpretation and sense then the controuersie it selfe gaue them commodity to make their contentions immortall 17. But the same Fathers vrging them with a shorter way asked them still Quid prius quid posterius What was first and what after for that heresie is nouelty and commeth in after the Catholike Truth first planted And for that euery hereticke pretendeth his heresie to be ancient and from the Apostles the said Fathers do vrge further that this Truth of our Religion must not only be eldest but must haue continued also from tyme to tyme at least with the greater part of Christians Quia proprium est hareticorum omnium saith old Tertullian pauca aduersus plâ—â—a posteriora aduersus priora defendere It is the property of all hereticks and their peculiar spirit to defend the lesser number against the greater and those things that are later against the more auncient Which agreeth with another saying of Tertullian Quod apud multos vnum inuenitur non est erratum sed traditum That which is found one and the self-same with many to witt the greater parte in the Christian Church is no error but commeth downe by tradition So hee But S. Augustine deliuereth another direction much conformable to this in sense though different in words Consider saith he what is KATH'HOLON Id est secundum totum non secundum partem According to the whole and not only to a part and this is the truth And another of his tyme saith Teneamus quod ab omnibus creditum est hoc enim verè Catholicum Let vs hold that which hath byn beleeued by all for this is truly Catholike and consequently Truth it self And another Father before them both Catholicum est quod vbique vnum That is Catholike vndoubtedly trew which euery where is one and the same And this both in tyme place and substance 18 These are the ancient Fathers directions now let vs apply them to our present question which is so much the easier to discusse for that albeit it comprehend some part of doctrine in controuersie concerninge the Right of temporall Princes to spirituall Iurisdiction yet is it principally and properly a question of fact to witt whether by the ancient common laws of England and practice of our Princes according to the same spiritual Iurisdiction they were exercised by them in former ages by force and vertue of their Imperiall crownes as Queene Elizabeth did or might do by the authority giuen her by an Act of Parlament in the first yeare of her raigne wherby she was made head of the Church and supreme gouernesse as well in all causes Ecclesiasticall as temporall In discussion wherof if we wil vse the directions of the forsaid Fathers for cleere and infallible tryall we shall easily find out where the Truth lyeth which is the but we ought to shoore at and not to contend in vayne for that our assertion quite contrary to that of M. Atourneys is That if we consider the whole ranke of our Christian English Kings from the very first that was conuerted to our Christian faith to witt King Ethelbert of Kent vnto the reigne of King Henry the eight for the space of more then nine hundered years and King Henry himself for the greater and best part of his reigne did all and euery one of them confesse acknowledg the spirituall power and Iurisdiction of the Sea of Rome and did neuer contradict the same in any one substantiall point either by word law or deed but did infinite wayes confirme the said authority ech one in their ages reignes And this is that KATH'HOLON or secundum totum which S. Augustine requireth and vbique vnam which the other Fathers do mention which is a Catholike proofe in a Catholike cause and M. Attorney must needs fly ad partem to a parte only to witt to two or three later Kings of aboue halfe a hundered that went before which is a schismaticall proofe as S. Augustine sheweth Contra partem Donati Against the parte of the heretick Donatus And before him Opratus Mileuitanus and diuers other Fathers who alwayes call Sectaries a Part For that they follow indeed but a part and Catholiks the whole and therof saith S. Augustine their name is deriued And thus much shall serue for our
the manner of the Power deliuered to them both and you shall see the Priests tribunall much higher then that of the King who hath receiued onlie the administration of earthly things Nequè vltra potestatem hanc quicquam habet pratereà authoritatis Neither hath he any authoritie beyond this earthlie Power But the Priests tribunall is placed in heauen and hath authoritie to pronounce sentence in heauenlie affaires And who affirmeth this The King of heauen himself who saith vvhatsoeuer you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heauen and vvhatsoeuer you shal loose shall bee loosed Heer you see heauen to take principall authority of iudging from earth for that the Iudge sitteth on earth and our Lord followeth his feruant so as whatsoeuer the said seruant shall iudge heere beneath that will his maister allow in heauen So S. Chrysostome 24. And consider heere good Reader that this holie Father and Doctor wrote all this in Constantinople where the Emperour was present and many Courtyers togeather with the Empresse herself auerted from him for his seueritie of discipline and ready to note and take aduauntage against any thinge that he should say And yet was this doctrine neuer obiected against him as iniurious to the Emperour or to his Emperiall crowne notwithstanding as you see he speaketh plainlie both about the Subordination of temporall and spirituall Povver the one to the other as also that the Emperour had the one and not the other And if the same Father should preach this doctrine at Paules Crosse in these our daies he would be hissed out and be called into question of treason by the tenor of M. Attorneyes booke so far are our tymes differeÌ„t from these But God his truth are alwayes one 25. And to this very same effect might I alleadg heere the sayings and doings of diuers other auncient Fathers and Bishops for all were of one spirit opinion and faith in this behalfe but it would bee ouerlonge yet S. Ambrose I cannot omitt who in two or three occasioÌ„s with the Christian Emperours of his time did expresse most manifestly the iudgement of the Catholike Church in those daies The first wherof was with Valentinian the the younger who being induced by the Empresse Iustina to commaund S. Ambrose Bishop of Millaine to dispute with AuxentiuS the Arrian Bishop and other of his Sect before the Emperour and his Counsellours and whole courte in his pallace he refused the same and gaue his reasons to the said Emperour in a seuerall booke which beginneth thus Clementissimo Imperatori Beatissimo Augusto Valentiniario Ambrosius Episcopus c. and then he setteth downe how the Tribune Dalmatius with a publike Notarie did cite him in the Emperours name to come to that conference or disputation and what he answered vnto him which was in these words I answered saith he that which your Father of glorious memorie Vaelentinian the elder not only answered in speach vpon like occasion but confirmed also by his lawes that in causes belonging to faith Priests only should iudge of Priests Yea further also that if a Bishop should bee called in question for his manners this iudgment likewise should appertaine vnto Bishops And who then of vs doe answere more peruerslie wee that would haue you like your Father or they that would haue you vnlike him c. Quando audisti Clementissime Imperator laicos in causa fidei de Episcopo iudicasse When haue you euer heard most Clement Emperour that lay men did iudge Bishops in matters of faith Certè si vel scripturaerum seriem diuinarum vel vetera tempora retractemus quis est qui abnuat in causa fidei in causa inquam fidei Episcopos solere de Imperatoribus Christianis non Imperatores de Episcopis indicare Truly if we will consider either the whole course of diuine scriptures or the vse of auncient times no man can deny but that in matrers of faith I say in matters of faith Bishops were wont to iudge of Christian Emperours and not Emperours of Bishops Eris Deo sauente etiam senectutis maturitate prouectior tunc de hoc censebis qualis ille Episcopus sit qui laicu ius sacerdotale substernit Pater nunc vir maturioris aeui dicebat Non est meum iudicare inter Episcopos Tua nunc dicet Clementia Ego debeo iudicare You shall be by Gods fauour by the maturitie of old age you being now in your youth better informed and then you will be able to iudge better of this point what manner of Bishop he is to be accounted that subiecteth the right of Priestdome to laie men your Father being a man of riper yeares said It belongeth not to me to be Iudge amongst Bishops And will your Clemencie say now that you ought to be their Iudge so S. Ambrose in this occasion 27. The next yeare after with the same Valentinian who by instigation of the said Arrians fauoured by Iustina the Empresse decreed that a Church in Millaine should be giuen vnto them S. Ambrose resistinge the same had a notable combat which besides other Authors himself setteth downe at large in a certaine epistle to his sister Marcellina where shewing the solemne denuntiation of the Emperours Decree vnto him with his answere he saith Conuenerunt me primò viri comites Consistoriani c. First there came vnto me certaine Earles of the Court to commaund me to deliuer the Church c. I answered that which belongeth to a man of my order that the Church could not be giuen vp by a Priest c. Ego mansi in munere missam faecere caepi dum â—ffero raptum cognout c. I continued on in my Priestlie function I began to say masse and whilest I was offering I vnderstood that one of the aduersarie parte was taken by the people I began bitterlie to weep and beseech God in my oblation that he would help that no bloud might be shed in this cause of the Church but that my bloud only if it were his holie will might bee shed not only for saftie of the people but also for the wicked sorte themselues c. The Emperours Earles and Tribunes vrged me againe that I should deliuer the Church sayinge Imperatorem iure suo vti eò quòd in potestate eius essent omnia Respondi quae diuina sunt Imperatoriae popotestaeti non esse subiectae c. They said that the Emperour did but vse this owne right and due authoritie for that all was in his power I answered that those things that were diuine beloÌ„ged to God are not subiect to the Emperours power So S. Ambrose for defence of this his particular Church against the Emperours commaundement which notwithstanding was but a materiall Church as you see and yet he said the cause vvas diuine and not subiect to the Emperors power but to a higher authoritie of the clergie 27. And yet further when the said Tribunes sent
it must needs bee that he was gouernour vnder the Pope to whome he professeth as you haue heard obedience and subiection 16. But what proofe think you hath M. Attorney out of this King to shew that he exercised spirituall iurisdiction by vertue of his temporall crowne You shall heare it all as it lyeth in his booke for the whole narration is but of 3. or 4. lines taken out of K. Edward his lawes The words are these in Latin Rex autem qui vicarius summi regis est ad hoc constitutus est vt regnum populum Domini super omnia Sanctam Ecclesiam regat defendat ab iniuriosis malefices autem destruat Which M. Attorney Englisheth thus The King who is the vicar of the highest King is ordeined to this end that he should rule and gouerne the Kingdome people of the land and aboue all things the holy Church that he defend the same from wrong-doers and destroy and roote out workers of mischeif Which words supposing them to be truly alleadged as they lye haue a plaine and easy interpretation which is that the King as Gods minister for so S. Paul called also the hea-Magistrate must gouerne the Church and Cleargie of his land in temporal matters for that they are members also of the Common-wealth as before we shewed In which respect they are subiect to the sayd temporall Magistrate and in that sense to be gouerned by him though not in spirituall things 17. And if M. Attorney will inferre that because the King is cal-called Gods Vicar he hath spirituall Iurisdiction then may he as well inferre that the heathen Magistrate had spirituall Iurisdiction ouer Christians for that S. Paul calleth him the minister of God which is as much in effect as Vicar for that the minister supplieth the maisters place And thus you see that albeit we admit these words as heere they ly alleadged by M. Attorney noe aduantage can be rightly inferred against vs by them But I am forced to suspect some little fraud or shuffling to be vsed in the citation of this peece of law and therfore I intreate the Iudicious Reader who is learned and hath the commodity to see the Originals that he will examine both this and the former instance of K. Kenulfus in the authors whence they are taken for I haue them not by mee 18. The reasons of suspicion are first for that I see M. Attorney his translation in these few lines not to be very exact as it will appeare to him that examineth the same and secondly for that I find this clause of S. Edwards law differently alleaged heare by M. Attorney from that which is cited by Roger Houeden in the life of K. Henry the second as also from another allegation therof by Iohn Fox in his Acts and Monuments by all which may be gathered that the verbe regat is wrongly placed in M. Attorneys allegation which being amended and the said verbe placed before in his dew place the sense is perfect to witt vt Rex regnum terrenum populum Domini regat sanctam eius veneretur ecclesiam ab iniuriosis defendat c. that the King rule his earthly Kingdome and the people of God and reuerence and defend the holy Church Thus I say ought the words to stand to make good and congruons sense and not as they are transposed both by M. Attorney and Iohn Fox to make a blind sense who yet agree not in their allegations therof as in the places cited you may see 19. And this our assertion concerning the true sense meaning of the former clause is confirmed yet further by the words of K. Edward immediatly following in the same law omitted heere by M. Attorney but sett downe by Fox which are these Quod nisi secerit nomen regis in eo non constabit verum Papa Ioanne testante nomen Regis perdet If a King doe not perfourme the points before mentioned of gouerninge his people and defending the Church the name of a King agreeth not to him but he must leese that name as testifieth Pope Iohn So he And the same K. Edward in the end of this speach doth cite the authority of the said Pope Iohn againe saying that the wrote to Pipinus and his sonne Charles beâ—ore they came to be Kings of France that no man was worthy to be called a King except he did vigilantly defend and gouerne the Church and people of God So as now this gouernment of the Church which M. Attorney hitherto hath vrged so much against the Popes authority must be vnderstood according to the meaning and sense only of Pope Iohn who I suppose notwithstanding will not meane that temporall Princes shall be heads of the Church and to haue supreme spirituall Iurisdiction in causes Ecclesiasticall deriued from their Crownes as M. Attorneys meaning is And so you see vnto what good issue he hath brought this argument out of S. Edwards lawes which is that Kings haue so much gouernmeÌ„t ouer the Church as Pope Iohn allowed them and no more 20. And finally let vs heare the words of Pope Nicolas the second to this verie K. Edward concernining the gouernment he had ouer the Church for thus he writeth to him Vobis verò posteris vestris Regibus committimus aduocationem eiusdem loci omnium totius Angliae Ecclesiarum vt vite nostrae cum Consilio Episcoporum Abbalum constituatis vbique quae iusta sunt c. We doe coÌ„mitte vnto you and to the Kings of England your Successours the aduocation and protection of the same place or monastery of VVestminster and of all the Churches throughout England to the end that in our name and authoritie you may by the counsell of your Bishops and Abbots appoint euery-where those thinges that are iust c. By which words is easie to see what gouernment and iurisdiction K. Edward had ouer the Church of England to witt by commission of the Pope noe otherwise By which coÌ„mission also diuers other Catholike Princes haue had in sundrie cases coÌ„mitted vnto them haue at this day spirituall Iurisdiction as namely the Kings of Sicily doe pretend to haue had to haue supreme spirituall authority in that Kingdome as legati à latere by concession of Pope Vrbanus the 2. graunted vnto Roger the Norman Earle of Sicily aboue fiue hundered years past to witt from the yeare of Christ 1097. And yet will none of those that defend this spirituall monarchy at this day for by that name it is called say that it descendeth by right of their Crownes but by concession and delegation of Popes And so much of this matter HOW THE ATTORNEY NOT BEING ABLE TO PROVE HIS AFFIRMATIVE PROPOSITION Of English Kings Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall before the Conquest VVe doe ex abundanti proue the negatiue by ten seuerall sortes of most euident demonstrations that there was no such thing in that
tyme but the quite contrary CHAP. VI. THov hast seene and considered I doubt not gentle and iudicious Reader how M. Attorney in the former Chapter hath byn grauelled in prouing his affirmatiue proposition that our Kings before the Conquest tooke supreme Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction vpon them and acknowledged it not in the Pope or Sea of Rome For proofe wherof he brought forth two such poore and petite instances as they being besides their weaknes impertinent and vntrue and not subsisting in their owne grounds they were no more for perfourmance of his promise of cleere and demonstratiue proofes then if a man being bound to pay ten thousand pounds in pure and current gold should bring forth two mites of brasse for discharge of his band And surely if M. Attorney should haue failed soe some yeares gone before he was so wealthie as that taking vpon him with so great an ostentation to proue an affirmatiue assertion of so mayne importance and consequence as this is he should haue performed no more then he hath here done he would neuer haue attained by law to the preferment he hath But now◠perhaps he persuadeth himself that by his only credit already gotten he may say what he will and proue as little as he list because by only saying he shall be beleeued 2. But on the contrary side we require proofes offer proofes gentle Reader for that the matter is of singular great weight euen for thy soule we rest not in ostentation of wordes only but in probation of deedes And though we might remaine sufficiently with the victorie for that our aduersarie resteth with so apparent a foyle in the proofe of his forsayd affirmatiue yet that you may see and behold as in a glasse the difference of our cause and confidence therin I haue thought conuenient out of the great aboundance and variety of proofes that our truth hath in this controuersie as well as in all others betwene vs and Protestants to take vpon me to proue the negatiue against M. Attorney which of it self is euer more hard as you know than to proue an affirmatiue except euidence of truth doe facilitate the matter as in our case and to proue and make euident by sundry sortes of cleere and perspicuous demonstrations nyne or ten at the least that during the tyme before the Conquest no one of all our Christian English Kings exceeding the number of an hundred as before hath been said did take vpon them either to be heads of the Church or to be supreme gouernours in Ecclesiasticall causes or to haue any spirituall Iurisdiction al deriued from the right of their Crownes or denyed this to be in the Pope Bishops only or did make any Ecclesiastical lawes concerning spirituall matters and consequently that this Treatise of M. Attorney Of the Kings Ecclesiasticall law doth apperteine no more vnto them in realitie of truth than to the man in the Moone to gouerne the heauens For that they neuer so much a◠dreamed of any such thing nor of any one of the forsaid clauses of spirituall power Iurisdiction to belong vnto them which heere shall brefely be proued with such variety of demonstrations taken out of their owne words dedes decrees actions as I doubt not but will make more then morall euidence The first Demonstration 3. The first Demonstration may be taken from the consideration of all the auncient lawes made by Christian Kings in our Countrey before the Conquest euery one in his seuerall State and Dominion according to the tymes and places they raigned in and gouerned their Commonwealthes both Britanes Saxons and Danes and among the Saxons againe their Kings and Princes in euery of their seuerall Kingdoms about which point Malmesbury writeth thus of the noble King Inas Porrò quantus in Dei rebus fuerit indicio sunt leges ad corrigendos mores in populo latae in quibus viuum ad hoc tempus puritatis suae resultat speculum How great a King Inas was in Gods affaires the lawes which he made to correct the manners of his people doe sufficiently declare in which vntill this day there is seen as in a liuely glasse the said Kings purity of mynde And the like lawes no doubt other Kings also made in their Dominions all which remained afterwards to their posterity vnder the names of Mulmutian lawes For the lawes of the Britans as also the lawes of the Mercians called in their tongue Mercen laga and of the West-Saxons called VVest-saxen laga and of the Danes named Dan laga stood in force vntill England came to be a Monarchie when the first authour of the said Monarchie King Egbert began first to drawe them into one body of conformity But after him againe K. Edgar surnamed the peaceable and wise King confirmed the same and sett them forth but by the warrs and confusion of the Danes which after his death ensued they were for the most part put out of vse againe vntill K. Edward the confessor recalled them encreased and made them perfect and by the counsaile of his Peeres and Realme did frame a new ordination of the same lawes which remained afterwards vnder the name of K. Edward his lawes and were so much approued and loued by the people as Iohn Fox also out of Mathew Paris doth affirme that the common people of England would not doe obedience to VVilliam Conquerour but that first he did sweare to keepe these lawes which oath notwithstāding saith he the Conquerour did afterward breake and in most points brought in his owne lawes So Fox which if it be true yet is it to be vnderstood principally of his lawes appertayninge vnto secular men for that in the rest which concerned the Church her priuiledges he followed absolutely the lawes of K. Edward as in the next Chapter shall appeare where we shall sett downe the said Conquerour his lawes in this behalfe which are as fauourable and respectiue vnto Ecclesiasticall power and persons as of any one King eyther before or after him 4. Wherevpon it followeth that M. Attorney who so often iterateth this worde of auncient and most auncient common-lawes of England which as he saith but cannot proue did authorize Q. Elizabeth her spirituall Iurisdiction ouer the Church speaketh but in the ayre and at randome beating vs still with the empty sound of these words without substance For in reall dealing he should haue alleadged some one law at least to that purpuse out of all these before the Conquest if he had meant to be as good as his word 5. But this he cannot doe as already you haue seen by his two poore instances and we doe shew on the contrary side that all these and other lawes of these dayes were for vs in the fauour of Catholike Religion and particularly for the liberties franquizes priuiledges exemptions and immunities of the Church and Clergie according to the Canons and Decrees of the Popes Ecclesiasticall law
out of King Henry which shall goe in this owne words as before we haue accustomed The Attorney In all the time of K. Henry the third and his progenitours Kings of England and ouer sithence if any man doe sue afore any Iudge Ecclesiasticall within this Realme for any thing wherof that court by allowance and custome had not lawfull Conusaunce the King did euer by his writ vnder the great seale prohibite them to proceed And if the suggestion made to the King whervpon the prohibition was grounded were after found vntrue then the King by his writ of consultation vnder his great seale did allow and permit them to proceed Also in all the raigne of Henry the third and his progenitours Kings of England and euer sithence if any issue were ioyned vpon the loyalty of marriage generall bastardy or such like the King did euer write to the Bishop of that Diocesse as mediate officer minister to his courte to certifie the loyalty of marriage bastardy or such like all which doe apparantly proue that those Ecclesiasticall Courts were vnder the Kings iurisdiction and commaundement and that one of the Courts were so necessarily incident to the other as the one without the other could not deliuer iustice to the parties as well in these particular cases as in a number of cases before specified wherof the Kings Ecclesiasticall Courte hath iurisdiction Now to commaund and to be obayed belonge to soueraigne and supreme gouernment c. The Catholike Deuine 28. The conclusion or inference vpon this narration must be noted by the Reader to be M. Attorneys owne and not to be taken out of any other lawyers booke as the former parte of the narratiō is that telleth vs how the King appointeth that ech Court both spirituall and temporall shall handle matters and causes proper and peculiar vnto them and the one not to intrude it self into the affaires of the other and to this effect are his vvrits appointed of prohibition where matters are assumed which ought not in that Courte to be treated and of consultation to will them to proceed when their right is knowne All which maketh for vs shewing that the King would haue the subordination between these two Courts to be obserued and the spirituall to direct the temporall where any one thing might belonge vnto them both As for example if any man were impeached of bastardy thervpon his inheritance were claimed by another the Ecclesiasticall Court was first to giue sentence of the marriage whether it were lawfull or no then according to that sentēce was the tēporal Court to giue possession or not of the inheritāce 29. And that this was the true sincere meaning of the law at that time intending therby to shew the excellency and prerogatiue of the Bishops spirituall Courts aboue the Kings temporall is plaine and euident by an other Statute of this maner which M. Attorney would not see made in the 9. yeare of King Henry the 6. where it is ordained in explication of the former that when any such Plea of bastardie is held in any Courte of the Kings the Iudges therof shall make proclamation once in their Courte the Chauncelour of England certified therof by them shall cause to be made 3. seuerall proclamatiōs in 3. seuerall moneths in the Chaūcery That al persons pretending any interest to obiect against the party shall sue to the Ordinary or Bishop to whom the writ of certificate from the said Iudge or Iudges is or shall be directed to make their allegations and obiections against the party as the law of Holy Church requireth And that without this forme obserued al other processe shal be voide c. 30. And by this we may see how carefull the auncient lawes were to haue the spirituall Courte as the superiour well informed according to the law of Holy Church and how not only ordinary Iudges but the Chauncellour of England himself his highest Court of Chauncery was appointed to serue vnto this for that of the spirituall Courts iudgement depended in all such causes the iudgement of the temporall Courts And by this you will se also the vaine sleight of M. Attorney in telling vs that the King did euer write vnto the Bishop of that Diocesse as mediate officer and minister to his Courte to certifie the loyaltie of marriage c. For where doth he find in any ancient law at all those words as mediate officer and minister to his Courte in the latine himself leaueth out the words to his Courte though in calling the Bishop mediate officer or minister which is as much to say as superior officer for that in mediation and subordination of officers and ministers that gouerne the mediate hath the higher roome in respect of the people and Court wherof he is officer he includeth a contradiction against himselfe for then is the said Bishop also aboue all immediate temporall Iudges that must giue him certificate wherof the Chauncellour we se is one euen in the Kings temporall Courts themselues 31. But the inference is much more subtile when M. Attorney saith All which doe apparantly proue that those Ecclesiasticall Courts were vnder the Kings iurisdiction and cōmaundement But M. Attorney must not so huddle vp iurisdiction and commaundement for that no man will deny but that all sortes of persons as before hath byn said are vnder the cōmaundement gouernement of the temporall Prince whom he may commaund ech one to doe their office duty in the Cōmon-wealth And so may he appoint Ecclesiastical Courts to notifie their sentences iudgements proceedings to his Courts his Courts to informe the Ecclesiastical Courts for good mutuall correspondence between them both which we graunt also to be necessary in euery Common-wealth 32. But iurisdiction which M. Attorney craftely confoundeth heer and shuffleth vp with commaundement is a far different thing importing a higher authority in the same kinde as if the temporall Prince haue iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall vpon Bishops and their spirituall Courtes then doth it follow that all their power in spirituall matters is subordinate to him and deriued from him and so were there no necessity of this distinction and subordination of spirituall and temporall Courts For that the Prince hauing both powers in himself might giue the same vnto any temporal Iudge to decide Ecclesiastical matters also in his Court which yet M. Attorney doth often deny that the Common-lawes can take conusaunce of such affaires And surely it is worth no lesse then laughter to heare him repeat so often The Kings Ecclesiasticall Courte as though this were sufficient to proue the Kings Ecclesiasticall authority in those Courts for that all Courts are the Kings Courts in that they are vnder his protection gouernement and direction and to the vse and profit of his people And so were also the Ecclesiasticall Courts of King Henry the third in this sense who yet chalenged no spirituall authority therin as by
excluded the Clergy that refused to pay from his protection and from the protection of the lawes whereby they being abandoned and exposed to all iniuryes the most of them fell to composition with the King so bought out and purchased their protection againe more deerer then they might haue continued the same by their contribution 13. And as for the Archbishop of Canterbury that stood constant amongst the rest in that denyall Omnia bona eius saith Mathew of VVestminster mobilia immobilia capta sunt in manu Regis All his goods both moueable vnmoueable were taken into the Kings hands And the same Authour doth recount infinite other intollerable vexations laid vpon them that would not agree to the Kings demaunds in those affaires which were accompanyed with such threates and terrors as the Deane of Paules in London named VVilliam Mont-fort comming one day before the King to speake for his Chanons was so terrifyed as he became mute and fell downe dead before him which yet saith out Author moued little the King but that he persisted in his demaundes And one day sending a knight named Syr George Hauering to the Monastery of VVestminster when all the Monkes were there gathered togeather in their Refectory or dyning-place the said knight proposed in the Kings name that they would graunt him halfe their reuenewes for his warrs and if any wil deny this demaund saith he let him stand vp shew himself that he may be handled as one guilty of breaking the Kings peace Whervpon all yeelded saith Mathew of VVestminster and no man would after with so great daunger contradicte the Kings will And thus much of his violent maÌ„ner of proceeding with the Church and Clergy wherevnto I might adioyne many other things as his dryuing out of the Realme the forsaid Robert Archbishop of Canterbury his Statutes made in the last Parlament at Carleile the same yeare he dyed in preiudice of Holy Churches liberty which were the first that are read to haue bin made in that kind and consequently are thought to haue byn a great cause of all the miseryes and calamityes that fell vpon his posterity as after you shall heare 14. But yet all this doth not proue that King Edward denyed or doubted of the Popes spirituall power or tooke the same vpon himself which is M. Attorneys case and conclusion Nay rather they doe shew and proue his acknowledgement of the said authority if we consider them well though in certayne points that seemed to extend themselues to temporall affaires and might be preiudiciall vnto him he sought to decline and auoyde the execution therof But in things meerely spirituall he neuer shewed difficulty As for example that his Bishops and Archbishops went to Rome to receaue their confirmation and inuestitures there and sometymes were chosen also immediatly from thence as when in the yeare 1278. Robert Kilwarby Archbishop of Canterbury was made Cardinall by Pope Nicholas the third and the Monkes of Canterbury by request of the King had chosen his Chancellour the Pope would not admitt him but appointed an other to witt Iohn Peckam Prouinciall of the Franciscan friers in England who being admitted held the said Archbishopricke for 13. yeres vntill he dyed But as for confirmation and inuestitures no doubt can be made but all was to be had from Rome as expresly you may reade of the admission and consecration of VVilliam Archbishop of Yorke In Romana Curia coÌ„secratus saith VValsingam who was consecrated in the Court of Rome in this same yeare of 1278. by Pope Martyn the fourth that succeeded to Nicolas And the same Author affirmeth that the foresaid Iohn Peckam Archbishop of Canterbury being also consecrated in Rome did some two yeares after call a Councell at Reading commaunding all his Suffragan Bishopps to obserue exactly the decrees of the late generall Councell held at Lyons by Pope Gregory the tenth nor did King Edward mislike or repine any thing at this as neither he did at another Councell called by the same Archbishop Peckam in the yeare 1281. wherin he endeauored to force all Abbots and other exempted persons to come to the said Councell but saith Mathew VVestminster the Abbotts of VVestminsters S. Edmonds-Bury S. Albanes and of VValtham appealed from him to the Pope without any mention of the King which had beene iniurious vnto him if he had taken himself to haue had authority and that supreme in Ecclesiasticall affaires 15. Furthermore in the yeare of Christ 1295. being the 22. of King Edwardes raigne when the foresaid Robert VVinchelsey was first chosen Archbishop of Canterbury the sayd King sent him to Rome to be confirmed and consecrated by Pope Celestinus the fifth which soone after gaue ouer the popedome to Bonifacius the eight And three yeares after that againe to wit 1298. the Bishopricke of Ely being voyde and the greater parte of the Monkes hauing chosen the Prior of their Couent for Bishop the other party chose Iohn Langhton the Kings Chancellour who going to Rome by the Kings fauour coÌ„mendatioÌ„ to pleade his cause before Pope Boniface could not preuaile nor yet the Prior but that the said Pope gaue the Bishopricke of Ely to the Bishop of Norwich and the Bishopricke of Norwich to the Prior and the Arch-deaconry of Canterbury to the Kings Chancellour 16. Moreouer in the yeare 1305. when Pope Clement the fifth a French-man borne in the Diocese of Burdeaux was made Pope and came into France in person first of all others translating the Sea of Rome to Auinion where it continued seauenty yeares King Edward sent Embassadours vnto him the Bishops of Lichfield and VVorcester togeather with the Earle of Lincolne presenting vnto him Singula vtensiliae saith Mathew of VVestminster quibus ministraretur ei in Camera in mensa omnia ex auro purissimo All necessary plate for the seruice of his chamber and table of most pure gold And at the same time he sent two new Bishops elected for Yorke and London to be confirmed by him Quos dimisit ad propria consâ—â—â—â—â—tos saith our Authour whome the said Pope Clement sent home againe with their confirmation And finally when not long after the King fell out with the forsaid Archbishop of Canterbury Robert VVinchelsey for that he had shewed himself againe not so forward to follow his will in all things Dictum Robertum Cantuariensem saith VValsingham apud Dominum Papam accusauit Rex Anglia The King of England did accuse the said Robert Archbishop of Canterbury vnto Pope Clement the fifth that he was combyned with his enemyes c. for the which the said Archbishop was cited to appeare before the Pope and suspended from the execution of his office quousque de sibi impositis legitimè se purgaret vntill he should lawfully purge himselfe of the imputations layd against him by the King Whereby we see what authority this King did acknowledge to be in the Pope and Sea of Rome 17.
and little pertinent as you will see to the manie conclusion which he should proue that this King did take supreme spirituall authority and iurisdiction vpon him And for that the grounds of all that is heer obiected haue byn discussed and answered in that wee haue set downe before and this booke groweth to more length then was purposed at the beginning and finally for that the law-bookâ—◠〈◊〉 cited of collections and obseruations by later authors which bookes I haue not by mee are of small authority to our purpose I shall passe ouer the said obiections with the greatest breuity that I can remitting mee for the most part to that which before hath byn said and answered The Attorney An excommunication by the Archbishop albeit it be disanulled by the Pope or his Legats is to be allowed neither ought the Iudges giue any allowance of any such sentence of the Pope or his Legate The Catholicke Deuine 15. This assertion I doe not see how it can be admitted for true as it lieth for so much as no author maketh mention that K. Edward did euer deny absolutely the Popes authority to excommunicate by himself or by his Legats in England especially vpon the 16. yeare of his raigne as heere it is noted in the margent when he was most deuout to the Sea Apostolicke wrote the humble letter before mentioned the next yeare after according to the date of the said letter as you haue heard only there might be this accorde between them for more authority of the said Archbishop and peace of the Realme that when he had giuen forth any excommunication no annullation therof from the Pope which might perhaps be procured by false suggestion should be admitted or executed vntill the Pope were informed of the truth this is vsed also in other Catholicke Kingdomes at this day 16. And it were to much simplicity to imagine that English men in those dayes admitting the Archbishops excommunication as heer they doe and for confirmation therof we doe read in VValsingham that vpon the yeare 1340. and 14. of King Edwards raigne Iohn Stratford Archbishop of Canterbury threatned the said King to excommunicate all his counsell if he amended not certaine points wherin they offered iniury to Clergy men it were simplicity I say to thinke that the said Archbishops excommunication could not be controlled by that of the Pope from whom they acknowledged the said Archbishop at that time to haue his spirituall authority if he had any at all For froÌ„ whence should they imagine him to haue it for that the Kings as we haue seen had not so much as the nomination or presentation of Archbishops in that season but only the Popes much lesse their induction confirmation or inuestiture Whervpon it must needs follow that he which gaue them spirituall iurisdiction had greater higher iurisdiction himself though in some cases by agreement not to be vsed as before hath byn said The Attorney It is often resolued that all the Bishopricks within England were founded by the Kings progenitours and therfore the aduowsons of them all belong to the King and at the first they were donatiue and that if an incumbent of any Church with Cure dy if the Patron present not within six moneths the Bishop of that Diocesse ought to collate to the end the Cure may not be destitute of a Pastor If he be negligent by the space of six moneths the Metropolitan of that Diocesse shall confer one to that Church and if he also leaue the Church destitute by the space of six moneths then the Common-law giueth to the King as to the supreme within his owne Kingdome and not to the Bishop of Rome power to prouide a competent pastor for that Church The Catholicke Deuine 17. Is it be true which M. Attorney hath so often repeated before that the Conusaunce and deciding of Ecclesiasticall causes doe not appertaine to the Common-law and that the prouision or induction of Clerks to benefices and giuing them spirituall iurisdiction ouer the soules of those that be within the compasse of that benefice be of the number of those causes which I take to be set downe in like manner by M. Attorneys owne pen before vnder the names of admissions and institutions of Clerks then how can it be true which heere is said that the Common-law giueth to the King as to the supreme to prouide competent Pastors for that or those Churches that within the space of a yeare and halfe are not prouided by the particular patron Diocesian or metropolitan Or where is this Common-law How or when did it begin as often elswhere I haue demaunded Either by vse or statute or common agreement between the Prince and people For none of these haue we heard of hitherto vnder former Kings though for presenting and nomination to benefices we haue oftentymes said that there is no difficulty but that the temporall Prince may present in such benefices or Bishopricks as he is patron of either founding the said benefices or by particular concession of the Sea Apostolicke vnto him as we haue shewed more largly before in the life of K. VVilliam the Conquerour and before him againe vnder K. Edward the Confessor to whom the Sea of Rome in those dayes gaue spirituall iurisdiction also in some cases ouer the Abbey of VVestminster some other places of his Realme 18. But that the Common-law should dispose of these things and especially giue spiritual iurisdiction to the King ouer benefices for so must the meaning of M. Attorney be if he delude not his Reader with equiuocation of words this I say is both contrary to his owne rule before set downe and much more to reason For that to giue Ecclesiasticall iurisdictiom is much more then to haue the conusaunce of Ecclesiasticall causes which he denying to his Common-law in diuers places of his booke as before we haue seen caÌ„not in reasoÌ„ ascribe to th' other 19. Wherefore though we graunt this graduation heer set dovvne as good and conueuient that if the particular patron doe not present within six moneths nor the Ordinary or Metropolitan within their tymes prescribed the Prince as supreme gouernour of the Common-wealth to see all things done in due order may present as if he were patron to the said benefice yet first this cannot come originally from the Common-law for the reasons alleadged Secondly this proueth no spirituall iurisdiction at all in any presentor but only power of presentation which may be in any man that hath Ius patronatus allowed by the Church and head therof as before hath byn said Thirdly much lesse doth this proue supreme authority spirituall in the Prince as M. Attorney would inferre which is euident among other reasons by this For that the Prince when he doth present in this manner by lapse of tyme or omission of others is the last in power of presentation after the Metropolitans and Bishops which yet
the 42. yeare of his raigne by a particular Statute And finally vpon the 50. yeare which was the last before he died he made another Statute intituled thus â—he libertyes of the Church confirmed So as all the former restraints were pretended for particular cases only mixt with temporaltyes and for remedy of some excesses and inconueniences without detraction of any thinge from the acknowledged supreme power of the Pope and Sea Apostolicke in meere spirituall matters 41. And how far then is all this that is alleadged here by M. Attorney from prouing that K. Edward the 3. did hold himself for supreme head of the Church euen in spirituall and Ecclesiasticall matters Or that his restraints before made in the cases set downe might bee a president or warrant either de facto or de iure to Q. Elizabeth to K. Henrie the 8. or K. Edward that followed him to denie wholy the Popes authoritie and take it to themselues And so much of this K. Edward the 3. whose religion iudgmeÌ„t though it were euer Catholicke as hath been said yet was his life and actions manie times disordinate and violent as of a souldiar warrier and this not onlie against the liberties of the Church but against the precepts of good life and gouernmeÌ„t also The first appeareth by a longe reprehension written vnto him with threatning likewise of excommunication from Iohn Stratford Archbishop of Canterburie vpon the yeare 1340. wherin he doth sett downe the manie greiuances which he did laie vpon the Church vniustlie And for the second it maie bee vnderstood as wel by the same narration of the foresaid Archbishop wherin he said to the king admonishing him of his fathers miserable end Ferè corda populo terra amisistis You haue almost lost the hearts of all the people of the land As also the same is euideÌ„t by the generall testimonie of our historiographers who make the later parte of his raigne to haue been very much disordered thereby also vnfortunate miserable as maie appeer by these words of VValsingham who hauing much commended other graces in him saith Luxus tameÌ„ motus suae carnis lubricos etiam in aetate senili non cohibuit c. he did not euen in his old age restraine the luxurious and fraile motioÌ„s of his owne flesh being much allured hereunto as is said by the incitation of a certaine dishonest woman named Alice Pierce that was with him vnto the end of his life and was cause of hastening the same And it is greatlie to bee noted as in the former parte of his raigne all things went prosperously with him so towards the later end in his old age through the demerit of his synnes all fell out contrarie c. OF KING RICHARD THE SECOND The tweluth King after the Conquest § I. 42. Next after the death of K. Edward succeded his Nephew K. Richard the 2. for 22. years sonne of Prince Edward surnamed the Black Prince who died not long before his father The child was but an eleuen yeares old when he tooke the Crowne and of verie great expectation but that youth wealth and commaundrie in that age with adulation and peruerse counsaile of licencious people that are wont to accompanie that state and condition of Princes drew him aside to his owne pittifull ruine in the end and would God in his life conuersation gouernment he had as well held the stepps and wisedome of his auncestors as he did in the outward maintenance of their religion and obedieÌ„ce towards the Sea Apostolicke for that probably it would haue preserued him froÌ„ the miseries whereunto hee fell though it bee true also that dissolution of life doth commonlie bring with it conteÌ„pt or neglect or lesse estimation of religion whervnto this man and some that were about him had the more occasion giuen them by the prophane and wicked doctrine of VViâ—kâ—liffe his fellows that preuailed much in these daies and brought many of the Common people to such fury contempt of all religion as their strange tumults and raging rebellions vnder their Captaines wat Tyler Iack Straw and other like vnruly rulers doe well declare 43. But yet the externall face of religion and practice therof receiued and established from the times of all former Kings was continued also by him in particular it is to be noted that no one King did euer more often confirme and ratifie the liberties of the Church then he which is as much to say as to establish the opposite negatiue proposition against M. Attorney professing heerby that he had not supreme authority in causes Ecclesiasticall for so much as the libertyes of the English Church did expressly consist in this that Church-men and Church-matters and all spirituall and ecclesiasticall affaires were a distinct gouernment from the temporall and subordinate only among themselues the one degree to the other and all mediately to the Sea Apostolicke and Bishops therof 44. For proofe then of this that King Richard did confirme and maintaine all the dayes of his raigne these libertyes franquises and priuiledges of the Church and of Clergy-men appeareth by his owne Statutes As for example by the first Statute made in his first yeare with this title A confirmation of the libertyes of the Church and the second Statute made in his second yeare hath the same title and subiect as also hath the first Statute of his third yeare and first of his 5. and first of his 6. and first of his seauenth yeare And so in like manner shall we find the very first Statutes of his 12. and 21. years to containe the same confirmation 45. And if I should stand vpon the enumeration of particular examples of the practice of these libertyes in Clergy-men of those dayes it would be ouerlonge as namely how all Bishops Archbishops Abbots and other Prelates elected according to the agreement before taken repaired to the Bishop of Rome for their confirmations and could not exercise any parte of their offices vntill they had the same And albeit according to the former decrees of the 25. and 27. yeares of K. Edward the 3. confirmed also in the 13. and 16. yeares of the raigne of this King reseruations of benefices or prouisions immediately from the Court of Rome were not admitted which little importeth our controuersie with M. Attorney yet this which includeth the maine ground substantiall fouÌ„dation of all acknowledgement of supreme spirituall power remained still vntouched to wit that no Bishop Archbishop or other Prelate by whomsoeuer he was presented chosen or nominated could or can at this day haue spirituall iurisdiction but either mediaté or immediatè from the Pastor of the Sea Apostolicke And this point did K. Richard maintaine and defend all dayes of his life which is the principal point as hath byn said of acknowledging the soueraigne authority of the Sea Apostolicke in spirituall affaires for that other things are but dependance of this as
cases of heresie hath no substance in it at all for so much as you see it was directed by the Canon law long before K. Henry was borne 15. Wherefore to his last instance that the Pope cannot alter the laws of England I answere it is true touching temporall laws for they are to be made or altered by the English Prince and Parlament but Ecclesiasticall laws of the Church if they be positiue not deuine he might in all those auncient times vpon iust causes alter as I thinke M. Attorney will not deny and then by good consequence if it be true which euery where he striueth to proue that Ecclesiasticall laws though made by the Pope are laws also of England and may be called English lawes when they are admitted in England it followeth I say against himself in this assertion that the Pope might alter the lawes of England in that he might alter those Canon-lawes that were admitted in England thereby made English lawes The Attorney 1. The Iudges say that the Statutes which restraine the Popes prouisions to the benefices of the aduowsons of spirituall men were made for that the spiritualty durst not in their iust cause say against the Popes prouisions so as those Statutes were made but in affirmance of the common laws 2. Excommunication made by the Pope is of no force in England and the same being certified by the Pope into any Courte in England ought not to be allowed neither is any certificate of any excommunication auailable in law but that is made by some Bishop in England for the Bishops are by the common laws the immediate officers ministers of iustice to the Kings Courts in causes Ecclesiasticall 3. If any Bishop doe excommunicate any person for a cause that belongeth not vnto him the King may write vnto the Bishop and commaund him to assoile and absolue the party 4. If any person of religion obtaine of the Bishop of Rome to be exempt from obedience regular or ordinary he is in case of Premunire which is an offence as hath byn said contra Regem Coronam Dignitatem suam The Catholicke Deuine 16. I haue conioyned three or foure obiections togeather for that indeed all make not the due waight of one Wherfore to the first I answere that little it importeth to our controuersie what those Iudges said why the Statutes were made against the Popes prouisions in affirmance of the Common-laws for this may be said of euery new Statute whatsoeuer that it is made in affirmance of ancient Common-law albeit the said law supposed to be common no where appeare nor any reason proofe or probability be alleadged why it should be Common-law before that fact or Statute appeared So as this Common-law is now by M. Attorney made so common as it cometh to be Ens transcendens embracing all that is or can be deuised by any of his Iudges or Reuerend Sages or rather he maketh it Ens rationis or a meere Chymera that as Logitians hold hath no essence or being at all à parte rei but only in imagination For seing that the Popes prouisions had endured in England for so many ages before as all doe and must graunt how may the common law be presumed all that while to haue byn against the same yet no mention euer made therof These are morall impossibilityes to say no more 17. The second point doth answere it self and we haue touched the same before that by agreement in England the Popes Buls of Excommunication when they were sent should not be admitted ordinarily but by the certificate of some Bishop of England for preuenting the fraudes or false suggestions which particular men might vse therein And wheras M. Attorney heere againe saith that the Bishops are by the Common lawes the immediate officers and ministers to the Kings Courtes in causes Ecclesiasticall he runneth againe to his old Chymera of imaginary Common lawes For where is this Common-law that maketh Bishops to be officers and ministers to the Kings Courts in causes Ecclesiasticall For if the Common-law or Iudges thereof cannot so much as heare or take conusaunce of any spiritual causes belonging to Bishops Courts as often M. Attorney affirmeth in this his booke how much lesse can it or they by vertue therof appoint Iudges or make them officers in those spirituall Courts which haue their authority from the Canon and not Common lawes 18. To the third obiection little answere is needfull For who seeth not but that euery King in his Kingdome may commaund all â—â—â—es of people to doe their duty to surcease from wrong And so if a Bishop for a cause not belonging vnto him should excommunicate any the Prince may commaund him to absolue 〈◊〉 party whome vniustly he hath excommunicated if the iniustice bee so apparant as heere is presumed But M. Attorney should haue proued that the King himself might haue absolued him as in truth he might if he had Superiour authority to the Bishop in Ecclesiasticall causes as he may absolue immediately by himself all that are censured or sentenced adiudged or condemned by his Chauncellour lay Iudges or temporall officers and ministers nor hath he need to send the party to be assoiled by them or to will them to doe it as heer he doth the Bishop but might doe it himself or by some other giuing him authority thervnto which yet neuer King of England did attempt before King Henry the 8. 19. To the 4. braunch is answered that by good reason it was agreed that no religious man hauing made his vow of obedieÌ„ce in England should seeke to Rome for exemption therof without proposing his causes first in England it self for that otherwise vpon false informations suggestions of the party against his Superiours many troubles and inconueniences might follow by such exemptions and this is that which is touched in the Statute it self here alleadged affirming that no man shall goe to Rome for that which may be determined in England c. And now consider I pray you what all these foure instances laid togeather doe weigh in poyse of good reason But let vs see further 20. A fourth instance of M. Attorneys is taken out of a Statute of the 6. yeare of K. Henry the 4. where the commons doe againe make complaint of other new aggreiuances by the Courte of Rome to wit that such as are to be preferred to Bishopricks Archbishopricks and other Prelacyes cannot be admitted vntill they haue compounded with the Popes Chamber for paying of the first fruites of the said benefices and other dutyes required vvhervpon the King saith the Statute by the aduise and assent of the Great men of his Realme in Parlament and note that he nameth not heer the spirituall Lords did ordaine that whosoeuer should pay heerafter to the said Chamber or otherwise for such fruites and seruices greater summes of money then had byn accustomed in time past
all appeals in causes Ecclesiasticall to the Court of Rome reducing all spirituall authority of determining the same vnto the body spirituall of the English Clergy for so the words of the statute are The body spirituall of the English Church saith he hauing power when any cause of the law diuine happened to come in question or of spirituall learning c. to declare and determine all such doubts to administer al such offices duties as to their roomes spiritual did appertaine without the intermedling of any exteriour person or persons c. Wherby it appeareth that by this Statute he reduceth all spirituall power to a certaine community of the Ecclesiasticall body of England but in the second Statute that followed in the yeare after against suing for licences dispensations facultyes graunts rescripts or delegacyes to Rome he seemeth to establish all authority in the Archbishop of Canterbury that was then Thomas Cranmer newly made by himself for allowing of his marriage with Lady Anne Bullen for so he saith in the statute That the Archbishop of Canterbury for the tyme being and his successours shall haue power and authority from tyme to tyme by their discretions to giue graunt and dispose by an instrument vnder the seale of the said Archbishop vnto the King and vnto his heirs successours Kings of this Realme as well all maÌ„ner of such licences dispensations compositions facultyes graunts rescrips delegacyes instruments and other writings for causes not being contrary or repugnant to the holy scriptures and lawes of God as heertofore had byn vsed and accustomed to be had and obtained by the King or any his most noble progenitors or any of his or their subiects at the Sea of Rome or any person or persons by authority of the same c. 12. Lo heer King Henry giueth authority to the Archbishop of Canterbury to giue vnto him to wit to King Henry himself and his successors Kings of England and their subiects all dispensations which they were wont to â—â—ke and obtaine at the Popes hand so as heer he acknowledgeth that in former times that authority belonged to the Pope and that his auncestors and progenitors were of that opinion but that now he being offended with him he would take it from him and bestow it vpon the Archbishop of Canterbury subiecting himself and his inheritours to aske and obtaine the said dispensations at his hands and his successours which was as you see to make Archbishop Cranmer Pope and not himself for this yeare as the whole body of the English Clergy was for the yeare past 13. And wheras it is euident that King Henry gaue this authority to Cranmer for dispensing c. to the end he should dispense with him for marrying of the said Lady Anne Bullen it seemeth strange that he would vse this so ridiculous circuyt as first to giue authority by Parlament to Cranmer to be able to dispense with him to wit with King Henry the giuer and would not take immediatly either by himself or by Parlament authority to himself to dispense with himself But it is well seen that he had some remorse or shame-fastnes therin at the first beginning though the very next yeare after he amended the matter or rather made it worse by assuming it to himself For calling another Parlament vpon the 26. of his raigne he made the first Statute of all with this Title An act concerning the Kings Highnes to be Supreme head of the Church of England and to haue authority to reforme and redresse all errors heresies and abuses in the same Wherby you may see what gradation was vsed in this matter or rather mistery giuing this power first to the Community of the English Clergy secondly to the Archbishop of Canterbury and thirdly to himself and all this in three distinct yeares immediately following one the other 14. And now if mens euerlasting saluation must depend vpon these mutations of spirituall iurisdiction as no doubt they did in thousands of our Countrey at that tyme and if the eternall wisdome of our Sauiour Christ hath left no more certainty for direction of our soules by spirituall gouernement and authority then this of our English Parlament which changeth so often and easely as you haue heard vpon euery Princes particuler inclination then are we doubtlesse in a pittifull plight for that as hath byn declared before of the certainty of this spirituall power for binding or loosing of our sinnes for SacrameÌ„ts instructions directions and all other spirituall helps and assistance in this life dependeth the surety of our euerlasting saluation or damnation in the life to come 15. But to goe forward a little further in this matter now we haue King Henry head of the Church and M. Attorney no doubt is glad therof for helping of his cause though it help it but little or nothing at all it being the first example that euer could be giuen therof in England or elswhere throughout the Christian world and so much the more to be misliked if we beleiue Iohn Caluin in his sharp reproofe of this attempt which he calleth Tyrannicall Anti-Christian But M. Attorney perhaps will not care for Caluin or Beza or any of their followers in this point for that it maketh not to his purpose Well then he must notwithstanding graunt this in all reason that if this supreme authoritie spirituall was wel and rightly and by gods direction spirit and allowance taken vpon himself by King Henry then is it likely that he was guided also by the same spirit afterward in making his decrees laws and ordinances for directing and gouerning the English Church by that authority and especially for reforming and redressing of all errors heresies and abuses therin according to the speciall title of his said authority before set down wherof it followeth that when vpon the 31. yeare of his raigne which was fiue after the said authoritie giuen him hee calling a Parlament determined six mayne and principall articles of protestant religion to bee heresies to witt The deniall of the reall presence of the communion vnder one kind only That Priests may marrie That vowes of chastitie may bee broken That priuate masses are not lawfull That sacramentall or auricular confession is not necessarie appointing them that should hould any of these heresies so coÌ„deÌ„ned by him to be burned as notorious hereticks it followeth I say that this was decreed by him out of the same spirit and direction of god for that otherwise his Ecclesiasticall supremacy had byn to small purpose if there were no certainty in his determinations or that God would permit him to erre so grosly in so importaÌ„t a busines as this was for the whole Church of England so soone after he had ginen him his said supreme authoritie Ecclesiasticall 16. And that this was done by him against the Protestants with great deliberation consultation aduise maturity in the fullnes of his power Ecclesiasticall appeareth
also calumnious what shall wee saie of M. Attorney in this behalfe that presumeth so confidentlie to put such open vntruths in print 4. First then for the former point not onlie many Catholicks in the first eleuen yeares by him prescribed did refuse publikely to come to the Protestants Church but many Puritans also from the verie first entrance of Queen Elizabeth to her Crowne and so is it testified by publike authoritie of diuers books set forth by order and approbation of the Bishops of England themselues these years past against the said Puritans recounting the beginning ofspring and progresse of that Sect and faction one of them wriâ—â—ng thus Vpon the returne of Goodman VVhittingham Gylby with â—he rest of their associates from Geneua to England although it greiued them at the heart that they might not beare as great a â—way heer in their seuerall Consistories as Caluyn did it Geneua c. yet medled not they much in shew with matters of this discipline but rather busied themselues about the apparrell of ministers ceremonies prescribed and in picking of quarrells against the Communion booke c. Thus writeth hee of the first Geneâ—ian English preachers that returned from thence to England after the Queens raigne and that for these quarrels against the Common and Communion-booke they refused to come to the Protestants Church in those daies as much as Catholikes it is euident But yet you shall heare it affirmed plainly and distinctly out of the same Author quite opposite to M. Attorneys asseveration though hee bee of his religion if yet he haue made his choise 5. For the first ten or eleuen yeares of her Maiestyes raigne saith hee through the peeuish frowardnes the outcries exclamations of those that came home from Geneua against the garments prescribed to ministers and other such like matters no man of anie experience is ignorant what great contentioâ— and strife was raised in so much as their Sectaries deuided themselues from their ordinarie coÌ„gregations meeting togeather in priuate howses in woods and fields had and kept there their disorderly and vnlawfull Conuenticles which assemblees notwithstanding the absurdnes of them in a Church reformed M. Cart-wright within a while after tooke vpon him in a sorte to defend c. So hee And thus much for Puritanes whome if M. Attorney will graunt to bee of anie perswasion what soeuer in Christian religion he then must needs graunt also that hee was much oâ—ershott in this his first so generall a Proposition affirming that none of what persuasion soeuer did at anie time refuse within that compasse to goe to Church But lett vs see how wee can ouerthrow the same in like manner concerning Catholickes of whom principally hee meant it 6. Hee that shall but cast backe the eye of his memorie vpon the beginning of Queen Elizabeths raigne and shall consider how many Archbishops Bishops Deans Archdeacons Heads of Colledges Chanons Priests Schollers Religious persons of diuers sortes and sexes Gentle-men Gentle-weomen and others did refufe openly to conforme themselues to that new change of Religion then made and published by authority of the said Queen at the beginning of her raigne will maruaile how and in what sense and whether in iest or earnest sleeping or waking M. Attorney set downe in writing so generall a negatiue assertion For that he shall see so many conuictions therof as there be particular witnesses of credit against him in that behalfe And truly it seemeth that either he was an infant or vnborne at that time and hath vnderstood little of those affaires since or els forgot himself much now in affirming so resolutely a proposition refutable by so infinite testimonyes 7. For if he looke but vpon Doctor Sanders Monarchy in latin in his 7. booke where he handleth the matters that fell out vpon the first change of religion in Queen Elizabeths dayes he shall find 14. Bishops at least of England only besides ten more of Ireland and Scotland togeather with Doctor Fecknam Abbot of VVestminster Father Maurice Chasey and VVilson Priors of the Carthusians 13. Deans of Cathedrall churches 14. Archdeacons 15. heads of Colledges almost 50. Chanons of Cathedrall churches aboue eightscore other Priests wherof diuers were Doctors or Bachlers of diuinity Ciuill and Canon-law depriued from their liuings and offering themselues either to voluntary banishment abroad or to imprisonment and disgrace at home for maintenance of Catholicke religion to omit all the rest of the lay sort both of the Nobility Gentry and others that stood openly to the defence of the same Religion All which did refuse to goe to the Protestant-seruice euen in those first dayes which is testimony inough to conuince the open and notorious falsity of M. Attorneys assertion that no person of what persuasion soeuer in Christian religion did at any time refuse to goe to Church though I deny not but that many other besides these throughout the Realme though otherwise Catholickes in heart as most then were did at that tyme and after as also now either vpon feare or lacke of better instruction or both repaire to Protestant-Churches the case being then not so fully discussed by learned men as after it was whether a man with good conscience may goe to the Church and seruice of a different Religion from his owne which releiueth little M. Attorneys affirmation And so this shall suffice for the first point 8. In the second point being no lesse notoriously vntrue then the first he offereth the said Catholickes much more iniury in affirming that vpon this occasion of the Bul of Pius quintus against Q. Elizabeth they first refused to goe to the Church as not holding her for true and lawfull Queene insinuating therby another consequence also much more false and malicious then this to wit that the same may be said and vnderstood of Recusant Catholickes at this day in respect of his Maiesty that now is But the vntruth of this assertion is most manifest both by that we haue shewed before that great multitudes of Catholickes refused euen from the beginning to goe to Protestant-Churches though then the matter was not much vrged against them as also by this other reason for that their holding the Queene for true or vnlawfull was and is impertinent to the matter of going to Church Nay their holding her for not Queen if any so did did rather disoblige then oblige them to this recusancy 9. The reason heerof is for that one principall cause binding them in conscience not to goe to the seruice of a different or opposite religion to their owne was the precept and commaundement giuen by the said Queene that all should repaire to the said seruice to shew their conformity c. For that the obeying of this precept in matters of religioÌ„ they offering themselues otherwise to goe to any Church for temporall matters was a kind of publike denying their owne faith As for example if in Persia at this day or other
and thereupon he reiected the one and fauoured the other as more sincere people and more to bee trusted by him that were so trustie and faithfull to their God and his religion yf this I saie were a good censure and iudgment I doe not see how this other of M. Attorney can stand vpon anie ground of reason or Christian charitie that qualifieth so greiuously or rather calumniateth so egregiously the religious standing of Catholicke people in the moderate defence and excuse of their said consciences 22. But heere perhaps hee may demaund or some body for him what great reasons wee haue for this obstacle of our iudgment for not conforming it to his and others in this behalfe Wherunto though sufficientlie hath been alleadged before in the Answere to his Preface yet now may some two or three points or considerations bee further added in confirmation therof among almost infinite that might bee produced And the first may bee that which hitherto wee haue treated in this book with M. Attorney concerning the continuance of that religion for which wee stand throughout the whole race and course of our Christian English-Princes State and Realme from the beginning of our first conuersion vnto our time All which Kings and Queens Counsellors Nobilitie Archbishops Bishops Doctors Vniuersities Lawyers and Sages of all sortes were for so manie ages by one and the self-same religion profession and beleife directed and saued if anie were saued that is to say by the selfsame means doctrine and Sacraments of our auncient Catholicke English Church continuing vntill K. Henry 8. tyme which Church professed the very same faith and beliefe in like maner as in another special booke hath been declared wherby all other Christian nations had been directed and saued for those other ages which went before our English conuersion after Christs assension 23. New then this being so I would aske anie reasonable indifferent English-man whether wee haue iust cause to stand in and for this religion or not and whether if himself were now readie to die for that is the time when men doe iudge with lesse passion and had laid before his eyes the euerlasting ioyes of heauen on the one side and the eternall paines of hell on the other to bee lost or gayned by his election whether I saie hee would aduenture rather to goe in companie and ioyne himself with this large and venerable bodie of old English Catholickes among whome there are recorded by histories to haue been so manie admirable men both for learning wisdome and sanctitye of life or leauing these to take parte and receiue his portion with such later people of the same nation as haue deuided themselues from the other And when M. Attorney in good probabilitie of reason shall substantiallie answere mee this demaund it may doubtlesse bee a great motiue vnto mee and others to draw vs to the current of this present time but in the meane space wee must stand fast least wee fall into the torrent of brimstone if wee goe against our consciences by which wee must bee iudged and euery man damned or saued thereby as out of the Apostles testimonie before hath been declared 24. And thus much for standing in our old religion Now for passing to a new there is another obstacle also that greatlie withholdeth vs and this is that when wee shall haue left this old religion so begun so established so confirmed so promised by God to endure to the worlds end so generallie receiued so vniuersalli-continued as hath been declared wee cannot tell to what otheâ— sorte sect or parte of religion to passe with anie probable securitie or certeynty at all why wee should rather adhere to one sect then to another For when once wee leaâ—â— the said Catholicke religion so grouÌ„ded as you haue seen there is no one substantiall reason à parte rei that can bee assigned by anie man liuing neuer so learned why hee should more or rather follow one parte profession sect or new opinion then another As for example if to a man that vpon anie offence disgust scandall error anger interest leuity or the like for these are the ordinary motiues of changes breaketh from the auncient Catholicke Romain religion there should represent themselues vnto him fiue or six of the principall newest sects and sortes that professe different religions in our time all vnder the name of the Ghospell as namelie of Lutheranes either ridged or soft of Anabaptists Trinitarians new Arrians Zwinglians Calâ—â—nists of both sortes to witt Puritans and other all which haue their different positions professions articles faiths Churches conuenticles in these our daies and if he should demaund of fiue or six distinct Doctors of these new-ghospellers what substantiall reason or infallible grouÌ„d they can alleadge wherewith to persuade him that he ought to take their particular partes or bee of their seueral sects the one aboue the other or why themselues and ech one of them is rather of the one sect then of the other seeing all professe ghospell and scriptures In this case I say they can yeeld him no other reason but this that ech man assureth himself that hee and his parte doe alleadge and vnderstand the scriptures better then the rest which depending onlie as you see vpon the priuate iudgment and persuasion of ech one in particular for other proofes hee caÌ„ bring none except the stand vpon assurance of his particular spirit which euerie one of the other sects will doe in like manner it bringeth no assurance at all being onlie founded vpon ech mans opinion choice and election which properlie is heresie for that hereticks as auncient Fathers doe define are nothing els but choosers who leauing the vniuersall rule of faith deliuered vnto them by tradition of the common Church do chuse vnto themselues seuerall paths and opinions to follow 25. Wheras then no ground at all can bee yeelded by anie reason witt or learning of man why wee should bee rather of one new profession then another after wee haue left the old receiued throughout Christendome and that in the old wee stand not ech-man vpon his particular iudgment to beleiue this or that but vpon the generall testimonie tradition voice vse and authoritie of the vniuersall Christian Church called Catholicke as S. Augustine and others say not onlie by her freinds and followers but also by her enemies this being so I saie wee haue great cause to looke before wee leape as the prouerb is and to consider well where wee shall land or how we shall come to shore before wee leaue the shipp wherin wee are or doe aduenture into M. Attorneys new Current or anie other that hath no staie but maie carry vs further with the streame then wee can staie our selues afterward when wee would And thus much of this consideration 26. A third is which also shall bee the last in this place that terrifieth vs no lesse then anie of the former two and this is
ipsum regem sententiam serret excommunicationis He would out of hand with all the Bishops there present pronounce the sentence of excommunication against the King himself Rex autem peris audicas humiliter respondit quod consilijs corum in omnibus obtemperaret c. And the pious King hearing this did answere humbly that he would in all things obay their counsailes And so he did and within few dayes after he sent away Peter Bishop of VVinchester from the Courte which was the cheife of the said strangers that most defended them and cast into prison another Peter surnamed De Rhicuallis that had byn Treasurer and diuers others So as heere also we see the spirituall authority of Clergie-men aboue the King not only in the Pope himself but also in the Bishops of England which otherwise were subiects to the said King in temporall affaires 38. Yea not only Bishops but other Prelates also of lesser degree haue exercised the same authority spirituall in England euen against the King when occasion was offered As for example when this K. Henry had vsed very familiarly intrinsecally one Raph Briton that had byn his Treasurer he after falling out with him banished him the Courte and soone after that againe the said Raph being a Clerke and liuing at his Chanonry of S. Pauls the Maior of London had commission to apprehend him and send him to the Tower as he did which Doctor Lusey Deane of Pauls vnderstāding called his Chanons togeather the Bishops of London being absent seeing the violence vsed to a Clergy-man did put the Church of S. Paul vnder Interdict pronoūced sentence of excommunication against the doers maintainers and fauourers of this vnlawfull act The King stood stiffe for a time saith our Author but at length Rex dictum Ranulphum licet inuitus solui in pace dimitti praecepit The King though against his will did commaund the said Raph to be remitted peaceably vnto the place whence he was taken 39. Now then these examples and many more which for breuityes sake I pretermit doe make another manner of proofe of Ecclesiastical soueraignty in Clergie-men then doth M. Attorneys poore inferēce about the sending for a certificate to the Bishops Court concerning matters to be tried therin as before you haue heard And by this also you may see and consider the difference of substance and substantiall dealing between vs. And so much to this first instance Now let vs examine the second The Attorney By the aūcient Canōs decrees of the Church of Rome the issue borne before solemnization of marriage is as lawfull inheritable marriage following as the issue borne after marriage But this was neuer allowed or appointed in England and therfore was neuer of any force heere And this appeareth by the Statute of Merton made in the 20. yeare of Henry the 3. where it is said to the Kings writ of bastardy Whether one being borne afore matrimony may inherit in like manner as he that is borne after matrimony All the Bishops answered that they would not nor could not answere to it because it was directly against the common order of the Church and all the Bishops instanted the Lords that they would consent that all such as were borne before matrimony should be legitimate as wel as they that be borne within matrimony to the succession of inheritance for so much as the Church accepteth such to be legitimate And all the Earles and Barons with one voice answered we will not change the lawes of England which hitherto haue byn vsed and approued The Catholike Deuine 40. This is the second instance of M. Attorney taken out of this raigne of K. Henry and we must imagine that proofes goe hard with him when to seeme to say somwhat he is driuen to bring forth such silly ware as this is For if all be graunted as it may be which heere is said what can he inferre therof but only that the Lords and Barons of the Parlament did not thinke good to alter or change the auncient laws or customes of the Realme about succession of their children by legitimation after matrimony contracted notwithstanding the Church of Rome in certaine cases did allow them for legitimate and lawfull in respect of taking holy orders enioying benefices and other like commodityes what I say doth this import M. Attorneys conclusion that K. Henry tooke vpon him supreme Ecclesiastical gouernmēt For that this was free for the Realme to admitt or not admit the said legitimation to the effect of lawfull succession and inheritance And so the Canons themselues doe expresly set downe 41. For better vnderstanding wherof wee must note that wheras by the auncient Ciuill-law great respect was had euer to children borne out of wedlocke if marriage afterward did ensue notwithstanding they held marriage but only for a Ciuill cōtract so afterward when Christian Emperours came to beare sway more indulgence and fauour was shewed therin as may appeer by the Constitutions both of Constantine the first Christian Emperour and Zeno that ensued him and more yet by Iustinian which do most fully in diuers places both of the Code and Nouell Constitutions explicate the same In conformity wherof the Canon-law also decreeth in this sorte Tanta est vis matrimonij vt qui anteà sunt geniti post contractum matrimonium legitimi habeantur So great is the force of matrimony held for a Sacrament among Christians as it maketh such to be legitimate after it is cōtracted who were illegitimate before But yet this is with some restrictions as for example that they must be borne ex soluto soluta that is to say both the father mother must be vnmarried at the time when the said children are begotten For if either of them were married at that time then this priuiledge holdeth not as appeareth in the same law 42. Secondly this legitimation by ensuing marriage is to bee vnderstood principallie as before hath said In spiritualibus To enable men to Ecclesiasticall promotions though in the Popes temporall dominions it may enable them also to temporall succession but not in the States and dominions of other Princes And this verie distinction or caution is set downe in like manner by the law it self and heervpon is resolued also in a case touching the King of England by Pope Alexander the 3. that albeit the Ecclesiasticall Iudge must determine of the lawfulnes of marriage it self yet the question of temporall succession or inheritance therevpon depending must bee decided by the Iudges of the temporall Courte Nos attendentes saith Pope Alexander to the Bishops of London and VVorcester quod ad Regem pertinet non ad Ecclesiam de talibus possessionibus iudicare Fraternitati vestrae mandamus quatenus Regi possessionis iudicium relinquentes de causa principali cognoscatis eamque terminetis Wee considering that it belongeth to the King of England and not to the Church to
iudge of such possessions as depend of legitimation we commaund your brotherhoods that leauing the iudgment of the said possessions to the King and his Courts you examine onlie the principall cause concerning the loialtie of the marriage it self and determine the same 43. Heerby then wee see first that M. Attorney alleadging this instance hath alleadged nothing at all against vs or for himself For that when the Earls and Barons refused to change the laws of England concerning inheritance vpon legitimation they said no more then is allowed them by the Canon-law it self as you haue heard And how will M. Attorney inferre of this that K. Henry the third held himself to haue supreme authority ecclesiasticall for that this must be his conclusion out of his instance or els he saith nothing 44. And it shall not be amisse to note by the way how these men doe vse to ouer-lash in their asseueratioÌ„s to help their feeble cause thereby By the auncient Canons and Decrees of the Church of Rome saith he the issue borne before solemnization of marriage is as lawfull and inheritable marriage following as the issue borne after marriage But this is not sincerely related For the Canon-law as you haue heard putteth diuers restrictions both in the persons to be legitimated and in the ends and effects whervnto they are legitimated as also concerning the Countries Kingdomes wherin they are legitimated Of all which variety of circumstances and considerations M. Attorney saying nothing his intention therin may easily be ghessed at And so much for this matter OF THE LIVES AND RAIGNES OF KING EDVVARD The first and second Father and sonne And what arguments M. Attorney draweth from them towards the prouing of his purpose CHAP. XI HAVING now come downe by orderly descent of seauen hundred yeares more of the raignes of our Christian English Kings shewed them all to haue byn of one and the self same Catholicke Roman religion comforme also in the point of this our controuersie about the acknowledgement and practise of the spirituall power and authoritie of the Sea Apostolicke in England concerning ecclesiasticall affaires And hauing declared the same so largely as you haue heard in three Henries since the Conquest of famous memory and authoritie aboue the rest and the last of them author also and parent of all Statute-law in our Realme we are to examine now in order three Edwardes lineally succeeding the one to the other and all three proceeding from this last named Henry Vnder which Edwardes and their ofspring M. Attorney preteÌ„deth more restraint to haue byn made in some points of the Popes externall iurisdiction then vnder former Kings which though it be graunted vpon some such occasions as after shal be shewed yet will you fynd the matter far shorte of that conclusion which he pretendeth to maintayne that hereby they tooke vpon them spirituall soueraingty in causes Ecclesiasticall You shall see it by the triall OF KING EDVVARD THE FIRST VVhich vvas the nynth King after the Conquest §. I. 2. When King Henry the third dyed his eldest sonne Prince Edward was occupied in the wars of the Holy land being then of the age of thirty three yeares who hearing of his Fathers death retourned presently homeward and passing by the Citty of Rome found there newly made Pope Gregory the tenth called before Theobald with whome in tymes past he had familiarly byn acquainted whiles he was Legate for his predecessor Vrbane the fourth in the said warrs of the Holy-land who receaued him with all honour and loue and graunted vnto him saith Stow the tenth of all Ecclesiasticall benefices in England as well temporall as spirituall for one yeare the like to his brother Edmund for an other in recompence of their expences made in the Holy-land Whervpon when the next yeare after the said Gregory called a generall Councell at Lions in France which was the second held in that place of aboue fiue hundred Bishops and a thousand other Prelates King Edward sent also a most honourable embassage thither both of Bishops and Noble-men 3. This King Edward beginning his raigne in the yeare of Christ 1272. continued the same for almost 35. yeares with variable euents For as he was a tall and goodly Prince in person high in stature and thereof surnamed Long-shanke so was he in mynd also no lesse war-like haughty earnest and much giuen to haue his owne will by any meanes whatsoeuer when once he set himself theron though yet when he was in calme out of passion he shewed himself a most religious and pious Prince 4. Of the later may be example among other things his speciall deuotion to the Blessed Virgin mother of our Sauiour which both Mathew VVestminster and VValsingham doe recount from the very beginning of his raigne doe coÌ„tinue the same throughout his life by occasion of many strange and miraculous 〈◊〉 from imminent dangers which himself ascribed to the said dâ—uotion and to our Blessed Ladies speciall protection Wherevnto may be referred in like maÌ„ner the piety of the said King shewed in diuers other occasions As first of all when in the first yeare of his raigne he voluntarily set forth published and confirmed the Great Charter made by his Father in fauour of the Church saying as in the said Charter is to be read Pro salute animae nostrae animarum antecessorum successorum nostroruus Regum Angliae ad exaltationem Sanctae Ecclesiae emendationem Regni nostri spontanea bona reluntate nostra dedimus concessinius c. We haue giuen and graunted freely of our owne good will this Charter for the health of our soule and of the soules as well of our predecessours as successours Kings of England to the exaltation of holy Church and amendment of our Kidgdome c. 5. And the like piety he shewed in many other occasions in like manner as namely when he being in his iourney with a great army towards Scotland and his wife Q. Eleanor daughter to King Ferdinand the third of Spaine surnamed the Saint a most vertuous religious Lady falling sicke dying neere the borders therof he leauing his course retourned backe with her dead body to London Cunctis diebus vitae suae eam plangebat saith Walsingham Iesum benignum iugis precibus pro ea interpellabat eleemosynarum largitiones Missarum celebrationes pro ea diuersis Regni locis ordinans in perpetuum procurans The King did bewayle this Queenes death all the dayes of his life and did by continual prayers call vpon mercifull Iesus to vse mercy towards her ordeyning great store of almes to be giuen for her as also procuring Masses to be said for her soule in diuers partes of the Kingdome 6. And moreouer in all the places where the said body rested as it came to London he erected great goodly crosses in her memory Vt à transeuntibus saith VValsingham