and with diffinct letter which he doth not here but Paraphrastically expoundeth the texte Wherein if he doe wreste the meaning of saint Paule ye shoulde hardly note that for an vntruthe â–ª S. Paule there nameth not religion that is true but that this worde godlynesse which saint Paule nameth comprehendeth not religion as the Byshop saythe that is your owne vntruthe But this matter is debated more at large in the answere to your Counterblast chap. 18. diuis â–ª 22. where is shewed bothe by the Fathers and by your owne chiefe writers that sainte Paule by this word godlynesse meant true religion Here ye set another blasing starre vpon these words that the Byshop sayth This woulde be noted with good aduisement that Sainte Paule himselfe sheweth playnely prosperitie amongste Gods people and true religion to be the benefites and fruites in generall that by Gods ordinance springeth from the rule and gouernement of Kings and Magistrats vnto the weale of the people This would be noted say you howe ye racke saint Paule he nameth not religion at all he dothe not attribute religion to the rule and gouernment of the ciuill Magistrat but peace and tranquillitie only in godlynesse Ye durst not note this for an vntruth M. Stapleton but for a racking or wresting althoughe this is but your peeuish difference If he racke saint Paules meaning he telleth an vntruth of saint Paule although this dothe cleare the B. of racking also that ye durste not playnely note and score it vp for an vntruth yet as the B. saying is most true so it nothing swarueth from the meaning of sainte Paule For aâ—… the B. proueth by Chrysostome that by this worde godlynesse is meant religion and the inwarde peace of the mynde and conscience and not only the outward peace of the body So Saint Paule maketh these to bee the benefites fruites and endes that by Gods ordinaunce wee receyue from the rule and gouernement of kings and magistrates in whiche saying S. Paule is not racked but it is you M. Stapleton that racke Saint Paule â–ª for he sayth not tranquillitie and peace only in godlinesse yâ—… may put your only in your pursse Saint Paule sayth in godlinesse and purenesse The whiche knot and fastening togither of religion and prosperitie incoÌ„mon weales the most Christian and godly Emperours Theodosius Ualentinianus did wisely foresee The. 68. vntruthe They sawe no suche confounding of the two functions spirituall and temporall as you imagine This vntruth is directed against the Byshops imagination ye go verie neare the B. M. Stapleton that where hée sayth no suche wordes as you chalenge ye will créepe into his heart and fetche iâ—… from thence ye haue a goodeye sighte that can see what the B. imagineth But wisdome wil think this to bée a fonde toy of your own idle imagination for the Byshops words import no such confusion as ye talke of hée telleth howe godlynesse and prosperiâ—…e are lincked togither in common weales so that the one cannot be well without the other that the Prince is the knitting togither of both these and this he saythe the Emperours sawe and that they sawâ—… it he bringeth good proufe theire own manifest words set downe at large eyther proue this an vntruth M. Sta. or else the B. hath made nene it is but your vntrue sclaunder fonde imagination I haue proued c. That such like gouernment in Churche causes as the Queenes Maiestie taketh vpon hir dothe of duetie belong vnto ciuill magistrates The. 69. vntruth Such like gouernement you haue not nor euer shall be able to proue The B. saith that in this first booke he hath hitherto proued it by the scriptures the Doctours and some Emperoures This you denie that he hath done and set him a long day to proue it Nowe the truth or vntruth of this the reader must hang in suspence til be haue read the prâ—…s ouer what they bee and then in the name of God lette himiudge whether the vntruthe lyghte on the Byshoppe or on Master Stapleton In the meane season â—…ytherto the Reader maye haue a taste what shame is in this impudent mannes â—…ace what truthe in his cause and what folly in hâ—…s heade thus to the wide worlde to score and sette out suche thinges for vntruthes as beeing neuer so little rypped vp are moste apparante truthes and to make suche a tryumphante gambolde and pyping vp of a round as hee doth thereon But leâ—…te hym daunce his â—…yll and nicke vp still on the score in the ende hée will runne so farre in the lashe that no man will credite a worde of his mouthe MeÌ„daci non crâ—…ditur ne iurato quidem A lyer is not beleeued no thoughe he svveare ⧠To Master Stapletons first Preface OR euer Master Stap â–ª enter into his counterblast he prefixeth two Prefaces the first to the B. the second to the Reader The first bicause it is only a packet trussed vp of all such accusations as he layeth to the Bishops charge through out his whole counterblast and so is to be aunswered in their proper places I minde not therefore to follow Master Stapletons vaine that saith Decies repeâ—…ta placebunt to spende the time and trouble the Reader more than néedes in answering to them here that are to be answered in their places seuerally and are already many of them noted before in his Common places The effect and conclusion of this preface in the ende is this That the Bishop must néedes make a full reioynder A full reioynder I say saith he and perfect to all and euery parte of this reply and put in Master Stapletonâ—… whole answere not omitting any one line or sentence either of the text or of the margine or els the truth is not on the Bishops side or els he waÌ„teth learnyng or els he buildeth on no good fundation nor the cause he groundeth on is sure or els all men vvill laugh him to scorne for his faire piece of vvorke so shamefully broken of or els M. Feckenhams scruples are most learned and inuincible reasons or els the othe can not be takeÌ„ with out manifest periurie or els Master Horne must retract his most haighnouse heresies or els which I should haue set before all that the B. hath saide is but vvoordes of course to saue his poore honestie and but waltham talke or els as he obiecteth foolishnesse to the B. so M. Stapleton may proue as wise as walthams calfe and thus as he saith to the B. for this time I take my leaue of you Vale resipisce so may I for this your first Preface take my leaue of you Master Stapleton Uale sape ⧠To Master Stapletons seconde Preface THe seconde Preface is directed to the Reader and is coÌ„triued in thrée partes The first sheweth the reasons why he tooke vppon him to answere the Bishop The second how by what order he procéedeth in his answere The thirde is an earnest admonition
gouernment in Church causes as the Queenes Maiestie taketh vpon hir of dutie to belong to ciuill magistrates he concludeth ther vpoÌ„ by these two parts of the request so satisfied that they may and ought to take the same vpon them Which done he promiseth to enter into the other twaine to proue the same by the continuall practise of like gouernment in some one part of Christendome and by the generall Councels To this answereth M St. Hitherto ye haue not brought any one thing to the substaÌ„tial proufe of your purpose worth a good straw neither Scripture nor Doctor nor Emperour This is a short aunswere indéede as if Iacke Strawe had made it and not a student of diuinitie All is not worthe a strawe with you Such was the iudgement of Esops dunghill Cocke when he found the precious stone Haue ye done nothing master Stapleton but scraped strawes though you estéeme better of your owne doings wherevpon as it were an other Chaunticlere ye crâ—…we and crake so often yet set not so little by the doings of other men and thâ—…se that are farre your betters But what are the Bishops proues the lesse worth for this your strawish iudgement Your bolt M. St. is soone shotte but a raylers tongue is they say no slaunder Let others iudge that haue more iudgement what the Bishops proues amount vnto And let them iudge euen by this your Counterblast that ye haue blowne out agaynst these proues to ouerturne them Which had they bene as light as a strawe ye might haue easily done and neuer haue puffed vp such a stormie Counterblast But let them iudge what your Counterblast hath done and whether ye haue blown away so much as one straw bredth from the matter one proufe of al the Bishops proufes But least I should also be like to you I remit the iudgement of the whole to other yea in Gods name to any of your owne side that with any indifferencie will examine both Ye quarell further at the least to blemish the Bishop with suspition of heresie saying Among your foure Emperors by you named ye haue iugled in one that was a starke Heretike but as subtilly as yee thought ye had handled the matter ye haue not so crastily conueyde your galles but that you are espied Ye haue told vs of this often inough master Stapleton if that would helpe you though ye tolde it not so Iuglerlike as now although with as much bitternesse of gall as euer y Iugler or sorcerer SimoÌ„ Magus had With Heretike starke Heretike wretched Heretike c. But ye neuer tell how the Bishop cited him For were he Heretike or were he not as it is a question by Saint Augustines definition of an Heretike yet in that point that the Bishop cited him ye can proue him no Heretike But whatsoeuer he were the B. is clearely discharged to your owne shame and to all your doctors of Louaine where ye learne your good diuinitie And this is al that ye haue to say to the Bishops proues hitherto Now to that he promiseth to enter into the residue there is yet one thing that after all your raylings ye coÌ„mend him for Yet for one thing say you are ye here to be commended that now you woulde seeme to frame vs a certaine fixed state of the matter to be debated vpoÌ„ and to the which you would seeme to direct your proufes that ye will bring And therein you deale with vs better than hitherto ye haue done seeming to seke by dark generalities as it were corners to lusk lurk in Neither yet here walk ye so plainly and truly as you would seeme but in great darknesse with a sconce of dimme light that the readers should not haue the clere view sight of the right way ye should walk in whoÌ„ with this your darke sconce ye lead far awry For thus you frame vs the state of the questioÌ„ These are but wordes M. Stap. to spend time and fil paper Ye know best your owne practises Ye tell vs before hand the Bishop will do so Tell vs so when ye come to it It séemeth he mindeth it not euen by your owne confession prefixing a state of the matter to be debated vpoÌ„ to direct his proues vnto This is not the way of one that would luâ—…ke or lurke with darke sconces in corners nor the B hitherto hath gone thus to work it is one of your ordinarie slaunders his proues are euident name one that is not directed to the issue set betwene him M. Feck that fully proueth it not but that sconce of your own hath left no corner vnsought to â—…usk and lurke in and to lead the Reader about the bush as besides this your common place of impertinent matters will for the most part declare The. 27. Diuision THe B. hauing proued his issue by the two forsaid parts the scriptures the Doctors being entred into the other twaine the Councels the practise since the issue requireth the proofe of Any such gouernement as the Q maiestie now taketh vpon hir the B. first expresseth hir Maiesties gouernment theron according to the issue maketh his generall state to leuell his proues vnto the B. words are these The gouernement that the Q. Maiestie most iustly taketh vpon hir in ecclesiasticall causes is the guiding caring prouiding ordering and ayding the ecclesiasticall state within hir dominions to the furtherance maintenance and setting foorth of true religion vnitie and quietnesse of Christes Church ouerseeing visiting refourming restrayning amending and correcting all maner persons with all maner errors superstitions heresies schismes abuses offences contemptes and enormities in or about Christes religion whatsoeuer This same authoritie rule and gouernement was practised in the catholyke Church by the most Christian kings and Emperours approued confirmed commended by the best Councels both generall and Nationall The effect of M. Stapletons aunswere to this is all against the state of the question that the Bishop here setteth downe and is diuided chiefly into thrée pointes In the first he chalengeth the bishop to alter the state of the question in hande and setteth himselfe downe another state to the which he woulde haue the Bishop direct his prooues Secondly he trauayleth to show that the Bishop concealed two clauses of the statute that should chiefly haue expressed the state and what inconuenience may insue thereby Thirdly he alleageth the excuses of the Papists for refusing the othe In his first part being deducted into these two members to quarell at the Bishops state and to set vp his own for the former thus sayth M. Stapleton Here is a state framed of you M. Horne but fane square from the question in hande For the question is not nowe betwene M. Feckenham and you whether the Prince may visit reforme and correct all maner of persons for all maner of heresies and schismes and offences in Christian religion which perchance in some sense might somwhat be borne withall
the spirituall Kingdome fol. 29. b. 30. a. The seruice of the Prince is common as wel to the heathen as Christian gouernment 29. b. Christian Princes are faythfull aduocates in ayding and assisting the spirituall power 30. a. which the heathen are not fol. 30. b. He flatly confesseth that M. Feck helped to spoyle Queene Marie of a principall part of hir royall power right and dignitie in spoyling hir of this supremacie thought sayth he he so did but not as an vnfaythfull subiect But so to spoyle hiâ—… â–ª and not therein to be an vnfaythfull subiect are flatte contradictorie Againe he sayth he did it as a repentant Catholike but to spoyle any bodie of their right and to do it repentantly are also flat contradictorie ibid. Againe he sayth afterward it was no part at all of hiâ—… royall power but to confesse first that he spoyled hir of a principall part of hir royall power and after to say it was no part of hir royall power are likewise contradictorie As also to say he spoyled hir and yet it was no part belonging to that of which he spoyled 〈◊〉 What are all these but an heape of wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contradictions And all this he vttereth within lesse than fortie wordes togither Fol. 40. b TheÌ„ Bishop 〈◊〉 that the Prince shall haue by him the lawe of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…ly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the 〈◊〉 sâ—…yth not so â–ª 〈◊〉 yet within fire lynes before he confesseth that â—…he 〈◊〉 â—…yeth so and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of infidelitie for leauing out woordes that wente immediately before the Texte that the Bishop alleaged And so while hee stryueth to chalenge the Bishop he cleareth the Bishop and ouerth 〈◊〉 himselfe Againe in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 On the one side of the leafe he graunteth freely that by the. 13. of Deuterenomie Princes may punishe teachers of false and superstitious religion and Idolatrie On 〈◊〉 â—…ther 〈◊〉 of the leafe he eateth his free graunt 〈◊〉 and sayth that in all 〈◊〉 chapter or in all that booke â–ª there is no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…ounde cares not what Where the Bishop allengeth the 〈◊〉 of â—…osue M. St. 〈◊〉 the ensample bicause sayth he Iosue did sacrifice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 himselfe 46. b. that Princes cannot now do And yet after fol. 49. speaking of Iosue he confesseth that he did them not him selfe but by appoynting them to bee done by the priestes ministerie He chalengeth the Bishop for not prouing his matters by any testimonies of the newe Testament after he hath handled the olde And by and by he confesseth that he alleageth two testimonies of the newe Testament to proue his matters by 59. a. He confesseth that master Feckenham refused of settâ—… purpose like â—… wise man the testimonies of the olde Testament And yet all his long treatise of eight leanes togither in the â–ª â—…6 Chapter is chiefly to this purpose to proue that he refuseth them not 62. a. He confesseth that he omitted them bicause they made agaynst him and yet he sayth he includeth them and affirmeth them as all making with him ibid. Fol. 65. a. b. He graunteth by Saint Augustines wordes that Princes may make lawes and constitutions for the furtherance of Christes Religion And in the next side he denieth Saint Augustines wordes to enforce any thing else but lawes to punishe Heretikes which is no Ecclesiasticall matter at all Fol. 66. a. He sayth we denie that Princes may punish Heretikes by death And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â–ª he sayth we hold with Caluin that sayth Princes may â–ª pot â–ª Heretikes vnto death When the Bishop presseth him with the ensamples of Moses 〈◊〉 Dauid 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 denieth as doth master Dorman that the ensamples of the old are figures of the new Testament and yet in the â–ª 17. Chapter he graunteth that all the examples 〈◊〉 â–ª 〈◊〉 that the 〈◊〉 of the olde Testament herein be figures of the newe fol. 68. â—… He confesseth there is some regiment that Princes may take vpon them in causes ecclesiasticall And in the next side he 〈◊〉 the Princes regiment to â—…e but an ouer â—…r in ciuill matters But forthwith againe contrarie to this he graunteth the Prince may haue the procurations and executions of Church matters fol. 68. â—… And thus in Docke out Nettie he so graunteth and denieth that there is no holde of his worde 68. a. b. He graunteth Christ destroyed not the rule of Princes in Church causes figured in the olde lawe and that Christs sentence giue to Caesar that that is Caesars confirmeth the figure of Princes rule in Church causes in the olde lawe And yet streightway he sayth it maketh nothing for it 69. a. He sayth this sentence giue vnto Cesar that belongeth vnto Cesar destroyeth not the figure where the subiects in the olde lawe were bounde to giue all duties to their Princes that belonged vnto them And yet anon after by this sentence sayth he men be not bounde to pay any thing yea not so much as tribute to their Princes 70. a. And so this sentence confirmeth not but loâ—…eth and destroyeth the figure by the which subiects were bounde before to their Princes He sayth that this sentence of Christ determineth something And by and by he sayth it determineth nothing Againe he sayth it determineth paying tribute onely And yet he sayd before it determined not that neither He sayde also before that this sentence onely licensed that we might pay tribute if we woulde but we ought not And yet after he sayth Christ willed that to be giuen to Caesar that is his which is â—…oth a determination and commaundement also 70. a. He sayth the Bishops admonition hereon is without anie cause or grounde And anon he sayth it serueth him and his brethren for many and necessarie purposes fol. 70. a. He graunteth that Princes haue authoritie both to further the obseruation and to punishe the breach aswell in the first table as in the seconde that is aswell in such actions as concerne our dutie to God him selfe as in the dutie of one man to another 71. b. But in the next side he flatly denieth this againe saying these are the workes of the first table the punishing correcting or iudging of these appertaine nothing to the authoritie of the Prince or to anye hys lawes 72. a. He sayth we make the Princes supreme gouernours without any limitation And yet withall he alleageth Master Nowell to say it is not without limitation but that Godly ministers may iudge of the synceritie of doctrine according to Gods worde fol. 73. a. As also he shewed in the diuision before howe the Bishop limitted the Princes gouernment by the boundes of the worde of God. He sayeth that Saint Paule 1. Tim. 2. speaketh there of no authoritie at all in Princes Where the wordes are euident for all those that bee put in authoritie And yet himselfe by and by sayth hee speaketh of theyr gouernment And anon after will ye knowe sayth he whie the Apostles both Saint
and vnder the B. name to deface the ministers of the Church that therfore he could not but of dutie shape M. Fec an answere To this M. St. omitting the B. motiues laboureth like a clearkly proctour for his client to purge M. Feck for the setting forth of his booke and accuseth the B. of false surmising laying to the B. charge his first two vntruthes which are answered in their proper Kalender The clearing of Master Feckenham he deuideth into thrée partes First whie M. Feckenham made this booke or as he calleth it a Shedule or little treatise Secondly why he deliuered the same to the Bishoppe Thirdlye whye hée afterwardes caused the same to bée publyshed and deliuered to some of the councell But first whatsoeuer he wil set downe for master Feckenham whom he calleth the reuerent father my lord Abbot of VVestminster bicause him selfe hath no knowledge hereof but by hearesay all that he declareth he buildeth on this grouÌ„d as I assuredly vnderstand Now who gaue him thus assuredly to vnderstande a man may easily deuine euen forsooth this reuerent father who as we must vnderstande with all would tell M. Stap â–ª nothing that should be partiall to himselfe in his owne case We must therefore beléeue that all is true that Master St. telleth of Master Feckenham for assuredly master Feck his own self no worse man hath let him so to vnderstand The drift of all this first deuision is to chalenge the B. of vntruthes which is answered into the boderoll as before and therefore is but superfluous to repeate it The second deuision draweth nerer to the matter The second Deuision THe B. in the seconde deuision of his Preface declareth by what maner of proufes in this answere he satisfieth maister â–ª Feckenhams demaunde by the scriptures by the Doctors by the couÌ„cels and by the Churches practise And that euen by some such authors as themselues are papists and in this matter partiall to the Pope To this M. St. replieth in three partes The first part is nothing else but an heape onely of slaunders and bragges The seconde is a setting vp of markes before his counterblast for the reader to direct himselfe vnto wherby to sée who swarueth from who kéepeth him niest to the question in controuersie The thirde is a quarrelling with the B. for saying that he brought foorth proufes euen of the papists them selues The first part is set out in hys common places thereon whereto howbeit his slaunders and bragges be very lauishe there néede no furder answere In the seconde remembring at the length himselfe that he hath hitherto spoken nothing materiall to the question after his facinges he saith VVherfore as it is meeâ—…e in all matters so is it here also conuenient and necessarie to haue before thine eyes good Reader the state and principall question controuersed betvvene the parties standing in variance and then diligently to see hovv the proofes are of eche partie applied for the confirming of their assertions This is very good and necessarie councell that here ye giue the Reader M. Stap. and it had bene to be wished your selfe had eyther in time remembred it or not forgot it so soone againe But ye would not remember it of purpose for had ye set this rule alwayes before your eyes and as ye should haue followed your owne precept ye well foresawe what a leane carrion Pamphlet your puft vp Counterblast should haue ben lookyng with a thinner payre of chéekes by thrée deales and more than it dothe Neuerthelesse I wishe as you do the Reader still to marke this rule and he shall sée it is no good fatte nor sounde fleshe but foggy winde that this whole Counterblast is bolne and swolne vp with all Now hauing this warning of his owne mouth to haue still before our eyes the state and principall question of the booke and thereby to sée hovveche parties proues are applied let vs see how here he sets it downe before his owne eyes and applies his proues thereto What the state and principall question is betvveene the parties M. Feckenham and the B. of Winchester standing in variance Looke M. Feckenhams owne woordes desiring therein to be resolued VVhether any such gouernment in Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall causes as the Queenes Maiestie claymeth may be proued by any of these foure meanes the Scripture the Doctours the Councels or the continuall practise of any one Church of Christendome On this state being demaunded to be proued or improued standeth the principall point in variance betvveene these twaine This M. Feckenham earnestly calleth vpon and offereth readily to sweare if this by any of these foure partes can be proued This the B. of Winchester laboreth directly to proue and fully hath proued euen by all foure partes vnlesse you can disprooue his proues And this now is your principall parte M. St. alwayes while ye labour to confute him to haue set and fixed your eyes on this point being the issue the state and principall question betvveene these tvvaine in variance And to shew wherein the Bishop swarues from this or makes any defect herein And not to looke vpon other so many impertinent matters as your CoÌ„mon place thereon declares your vagaries nor to stande so long on them nor to prie and poare out new starting holes nor direct the eye of your reader to a wrong marke point out a new butte to the which wheÌ„ your aduersarie directly shooteth not but to the issue couenanted betweene them twaine desired of the one to be shotte vnto shotte vnto fully hitte of the other and then you like a bootie ayme giuer to crie out as ye do that he shooteth vvide and shorte coÌ„meth not nere the marke by a 1000. miles Ye are a false ayme giuer M. Stap. all the world may sée withall how when ye sée the marke is hit at the full euery time ye haue no other shifte but this to denie that to be the marke set vp But now let vs sée how properly your selfe shoote at the marke and set before your eyes the state of the question in variance betvveene them twayne If ye starte away therefroÌ„ hauing now saide thus much ye quite shame your selfe and your cause Looke to it therfore play the good archer shoote you néerer hit the marke to winne the B. shotte ye can But â—…o howe ye beginne to wrangle euen at the first entrie and swarue from your owne principle to set before your eyes the principall state in variance betvveene them whiche saye you is conuenient and necessarie If it be so M. St. then followit Nay say you ye shall first graunt me sixe thinges and when ye haue graunted them then will I enter into this matche with you and shew how ye euer shot amisse and so beate you out of the fâ—…elde Is this euen dealing M. St. to demaunde sixe things at once to be graunted What will not one two or thrée serue your
worshipped ye then and that with such high worship to your solemne Saint Thomas Becket that dyed for no matter of Religion at all But eyther for his obstinacie agaynste his liege Lorde and agaynst all the Barons Spirituall and Temporall of the Realme or if ye colour it neuer so fayre yet was it but in mainteyning his honour and the priuileges of the Clergie and that contrarie to the auncient custome of the Realme except yée will graunt that the Popishe Religion doeth consiste herein Whiche if ye bée ashamed to confesse vpbrayde not then for shame false Martyrs vnto vs nor yet the Canonising of wicked Sainctes We vse no such Canonization at all It redoundeth on your selfe on your Legende on your Popes and on your Pope holy Saincts Whome by this rule you make both Donatists Montanists Manicheans or what soeuer Heretikes ye can obiect besides As for all these Comparisons hitherto betwéene the Protestantes and the Donatists wherein ye thinke ye haue be stowed great cunning there is not 〈◊〉 poyâ—… that is not violently wrested to make it séeme to touch vs and not one poynt that being returned on your selues doeth not rightly and fully hitte you home againe And therefore I for my part am content as you concluding say you be To ende this talke with the whole conference leauing it to the indifferent Reader to consider whether the Popishe Catholikes or the Protestants drawe nearer to the Donatists To come newe at length to the sixt and last parte of this Chapter which consistes in remâ—…ing such motiues as the Bishop alleageth to burtheâ—… Master Feckenham with the practise of the Donatists First master Stapleton deuideth these motiues in twaine Let vs then sayth master Stapleton proceede foorth and consider vpon what good motiues ye charge master Feckenham to be a Donatist whiche are to say truth none other but falsehoode and follie But as ye surmise the one is bicause hee craftily and by a subtile shifte refuseth the prooues of the olde Testament as the Donatists did The other bicause hee with the sayde Donatists should auouch that secuâ—…er Princeâ—… haue not to meddle in matters of Religion or causes ecclesiasticall nor to punishe any man for such causes These two motiues ye say Master Stapleton are to say the truth none other but falsehoode and follie In déede they are the worsâ—… by comming through so false a marchantes handes as yours For shame either tell the wordes as they â—…e at least the true and full effect of them or neuer sette them out in a distinct letter syâ—… you so often but euer falsly vpbrayde the Bishop hereof Else all the follie and falsehoode will proue to be in your selfe and not in the Bishops motiues The Bishop spâ—…ke not of Princes medling or punishing for Ecclesiasticall 〈◊〉 as though the Donatists simpliâ—… denied that anâ—… yâ—… graunted Princes yet so much as to meddle or punishe for your Ecclesiasticall causes that is to say to be your executioners therin as though the Emperors other Christian Princes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more vpon them at that time But the Bishop tolde how the godly fathers craued aide assistance of the magistrats and rulers to reforme them to reduce them to the vâ—…itie of the church to represse their heresies with their au thoritie godly lawes made for that purpose to whome it belonged of duetie and whose especiall seruice of Christ is to see care and prouide that their subiects be gouerned defended and mainteyned in the true and syncere religion of Christ without all errours superstitions and heresies This is that the Bishop wrote and to proue this he alleageth Saint Augustine Thus did Christian Princes gouerne in Ecclesiasticall causes then This did the Donatists then denie vnto them and this do now the Papists denie and ye come sneaking in and tell vs the Bishoppes motiue was this In charging Master Feckenham to followe the Donatists by cause hee with the Donatistes shoulde auouche that seculer Princes haue not to meddle in matters of Religion or causes Ecclesiasticall nor to punishe anie man for suche causes As though the controuersie had bâ—…ne for anie kinde of medling or punishing whiche you sâ—…ming to graunt to Princes to bée your seruaunts and droyles in suche ecclesiasticall causes and so farre as you assigne them might therefore séeme not to play the Donatists when ye play their partes so liuely as can bée and so subtilly that the Donatistes were but Babes vnto you in séeming to giue them some medling or punishing in Ecclesiasticall causes but if they meddle with or punishe you or anie other otherwise than ye commaunde and restrayne them you so little then suffer them to meddle in Ecclesiasticall matters that with solemne curses ye debarre them from medling in anie temporall and ciuill matters too so farre ye passe the Donatists For shame master Stapleton tell your tale plainely that we may sée whether M. Feckenham played the Donatistes part or no or else your doubling wyll declare your selfe to be a Donatist also for companie But let vs sée how ye aunswere these motiues euen as your selfe propounde them The one is say you bicause he craftily and by a subtile shifte refuseth the proues of the old Testament as the Donatistes did Your Stale Iestes M. Stapleton of a fine blast of a horne â–ª of a â—…oule slawe of a blinde betell blunte shifte I ouer passe them When M. Feckenham ye say offereth to yelde if ye can proue this regiment either by the order that Christ left behinde him in the new Testament either by the Doctours either by Councels or els by the continuall practise of any one Churche thinke you M. Horne that this is not a large and an ample offer The largenesse of this offer is not here in questioÌ„ M. St. the offer is large and ample inough â–ª taken of the Bishop at his handes and proued vnto him at his owne demaunde It remaineth then that he stande to his promise and yelde to the truth or else he sheweth that he minded to offer more than he purposed to perfourme Onely now it is examined why here he specifieth the new Testament and quite leaueth out the old Testament â–ª This doing in this pointe saith the B. smelleth of a Donatist Nay say you There is not so much as any coÌ„iecture to gather this vppon yea the old Testament is not by this offer excluded but verely included For if the new Testament which rehearseth many things out of the old haue any thing out of the old Testament that make for this regiment if any Doctour old or new if any Councell haue any thing out of the old Testament that serue for this regiment then is Master Feckenham concluded yea by his owne graunt For so the Doctour or Councell hath it he is satisfied according to his demaunde VVhereby it followeth he doth not refuse but rather allowe and affirme the proufes of the old Testament It might
Augustine that is their accuser who saith they did refuse the proufes of the old Testament And you say ye haue not redde it had ye redde S. Augustine or so much as the wordes taken out of him that the Bishop citeth and you take vppon you to answere vnto for Master Feckenhams defence how could ye not haue redde it but ye would slippe off the matter vnder the colour of the Manicheans refusall bicause the Donatistes did not refuse it as they did therefore they did not refuse it at all whereas the Manichées did simplie and vtterly refuse the old Testament which the Donatistes did not but refused it like such wise men as the Papistes when they thinke it maketh against them â–ª and admit vrge it when they thinke it maketh for them thus did they and thus do you and therfore for this handling of the old Testament ye be like the Donatistes But for your handling of the newe Testament ye be like the Manichées of whome S. Augustine saith Ipsiâ—…sque nouâ—… Testaments c. And they so reade the sentences of the new Testament as though they had bene falsified that what they lust they take from thence and what they like not they reiect and as though they contained not all the truth they preferred many bookes that were Apocrypha And saide that in their Archemanichee the promise of the Lorde Iesus Christ was fulfilled wherevppon in his letters he called him selfe the Apostle of Iesus Christe bicause Iesus Christe promised to sende him and sente in him Iesus Christe Whiche how nere it toucheth your Popes practise looke you to it and cléere him of it M. Stapleton els ye will not onely proue Donatistes I am afrayde but also Manicheans Thus muche then for the former motiue that the B. had to charge M. Feckenham with the Donatistes And if this suffise as you say for this branche to purge M. Feckenham content is pleased and so am I let it suffise in Gods blessed name I commit it to the readers iudgement Now to the other motiue Concerning the other say you besides your falshood your great follie doth also shew it selfe too aswell as in the other to imagine him to be a Donatiste And to thinke or say as you say they did that Ciuill Magistrates haue not to do with Religion nor may not punishe the transgressours of the same Master Feckenham saith no such thing and I suppose he thinketh no such thing And furder I dare be bold to say that there is not so much as a light coniecture to be grounded thereof by any of M. Feckenhams words vnlesse M. Horne become suddenly so subtile that he thinketh no difference to say the Prince should not punishe an honest true man in steede of a theefe and to say he should not punishe a theefe or to say there is no difference betwixt all thinges and nothing For though M. Feckenham and all other Catholikes do denie the ciuill Princes supreme gouernment in all causes Ecclesiasticall yet doth not M. Feckenham nor any Catholike denie but that ciuill Princes may deale in some matters Ecclesiasticall as Aduocates and Defenders of the Churche namely in punishing of Heretikes by sharpe lawes Vnto the whiche lawes Heretikes are by the Church first giuen vp and deliuered by open excommunication and condemnation Here first as ye did in the other motiue so againe ye charge the Bishop with falshood and folly but take héede M. Stapleton the falshood and follie light not on your owne pate as it did in the other Whether it be follie in you or crafte let other déeme certainely falshood it is that when ye come to the setting downe of the Bishops wordes in a distincte letter ye dare not for both eares on your head set downe the full wordes of the Bishop nor of S. Augustine nor yet of the Donatistes whereby it might haue bene knowne what the Donatistes attributed or denied to Princes and how néere or how farre ye had come vnto or diffred from them Thus durst ye not do and thus should ye haue done which argueth your owne falsehood But ye turne the catte into the panne and say that the Donatistes saide Ciuill magistrates haue not to do with religion nor may not punishe the transgressours of the same but say you M. FeckeÌ„ham saith no such thing and you suppose he thinketh no such thing and furder ye dare be bolde to say there is not so much as a light coniecture to be grounded thereof by any of M. Feckenhams wordes and hereon you conclude him to be no Donatiste Now since ye will be thus bolde for M. Feckenham as to enter into his thought ye should not haue bene afrayde with the Byshop to haue set downe his playne written wordes or so muche as the full content therof Did ye feare they would bite ye in déede they woulde haue shewed you to haue bene a Donatist they would haue shewed howe ye haue altered the Donatistes refusall and S. Augustines complaynt on them to make it séeme you were none Ye saye M. Feckenham and you graunt Princes may deale with matters ecclesiasticall Why M. Stapl. so diâ—… the Donatistes too Haue not your selfe confessed that they ranne for succour to Iulianus the Apostata and highly commended him And ye knowe in Cecilians controuersie that they refused not the Emperours dealing till he delte still agaynst them and therfore as you say you do not no more did they simply denie that princes might deale in matters of religion Ye should therfore haue adioyned the wordes that the Byshop reciteth out of S. Augustine howe and after what manner they denied their dealing in matters of religion and punishment of heretikes Whether they denyed it as you dâ—… that they should not dealing as supreme gouernours as punishers by their owne authoritie yea or no for this you denie Now that Princes had and tâ—…ke vpon them and oughte to haue this kinde of dealing the Bishop proued out of S. Augâ—…stine that magistrates and rulers â—…ught to reforme theÌ„ to reduce them to the vnitie of the Church and to represse their heresies with their authoritie and godly lawes made for that purpose to whoÌ„ it belonged of duetie and whose speciall seruice to Christ is to see care and prouide that their subiectes be gouerned and maynteined in the true and sincere religion of Christ without all errors superstitions and heresies This was the maner of the Princes dealing then with religion and this you now denie to Princes to deale on this wise â–ª And on this fashion saide the Donatistes The seculer Princes haue not to deale in matters of religion or causes eccl. That God committeth not the teaching of his people to kings but to Prophets Christ sent not souldiors but fishers to bring in and further his religion Pretending the ordering and disposing of all eccl. causes to be in the Clergie and by the Clergie they ment them selues As you do likewise when ye say heretikes
which later clause I am assured doth muche more take away a supreme regiment in all causes ecclesiasticall than necessarily by force of any wordes binde vs to pay yea any tribute to our Prince This quarell M. St. is an euident vntruthe for the Byshop hath not left out the other part of the senteÌ„ce but mentioned it in the next words immediatly following Admonishing notwithstanding al princes and people that Cesars authoritie is not infinite or without limits for such authoritie belongeth only to the king of al kings but bounded and circumscribed within the boundes assigned in Gods worde Which words of the bishop not only make playn relation vnto but also comprehende the sentence folowing quae dei deo and giuing vnto God that perteineth to God. And this limitation youre selfe anon afterwarde confesse that the Byshop specifieth though héere ye denie it according to the maner of your quarelling disposition But whereto M. Stap. moue ye this quarell This latter clause I am assured say you dothe muche more take away a supreme regiment in causes ecclesiasticall than necessarily by force of any words binde vs to pay yea any tribute to our Prince Are ye so well assured héereof M. Stap but by your leaue for all ye be so well assured if this sentence muste be vnderstoode of may and not of ought then perchance it may neither take away that supremacie that belongeth to the Prince nor that supremacie may hinder our duetie to god Yea what if this same may or might and ought not may become an argument for all popish traytors agaynst their Princes teaching subiectes that they may giue them their dueties but they ought not For I am assured on the other side that the Priestes and Byshops to their Princes yea the Byshop of Rome him selfe to the Emperoures as you vnderstande Cesar haue yéeded their seruice obedieÌ„ce yea and their tributes also ere this howe soeuer since they haue wrong them selues from that olde obedience that they ought to Cesar. And if to subtracte this ye may thus dally on the former clause why may not all Papistes for the later clause of the sentence to vpholde their honour of Images their inuocation of Saincts their owne traditions and vnwritten verities against Gods expresse worde and commandement alleage for them that they may giue to God that that belongeth to God but not that they ought as bounde thereto necessarily by force of any wordes For this I am sure of also that these wordes of Christ do make no more mencion of dutie toward the one parte of the sentence than to the other the one comprehendeth not may and the other ought but though the dutie to God be greater and more excellent than the dutie towarde the Prince yea and boundeth it as the Bishop saide yet dutie belongeth vnto hothe and both ought to haue it And we be not here licenced but flatly coÌ„maunded to giue that that is dutie to eyther partie The wordes are manifest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Reddite Render you that vnto Caesar that is Caesars and that that is Gods to God. So that if reddite Caesari quae sunt Caesaris be no more but this ye may giue vnto Cesar those things that are Cesar then may reddite Deo quâ—… sunt Dei be also by as good Latine ye may giue to God those things that are Gods. What figuratiue diuinitie yea what figuratiue Grammer call ye this wherof ye crake so much and finde such fault in others and can not sée in your selfe how your Diuinitie either marres your Grammer or your GraÌ„mer your Diuinitie And yet both must go for excellent good for why you are assured of the matter that the imperatine mode is in the one clause no more than the potentiall commanding to do is no more but to say ye may do though in the other clause it retaineth still his force Besides this good Diuinitie that we be not necessarily by force of any wordes bounde to pay yea any tribute to our Princes and so may denie them both that and all duties else as do the Papists when they be disposed to refuse their lawfull obedience to their soueraignes as you your Louanistes do This is a holy diuinitie Did euer any of the ancient Diuines giue this libertie to subiects against their Princes or thus expounde these wordes and not rather al with one coÌ„sent yea your popish writers hereoÌ„ also so many as I haue read gather here vpoÌ„ a necessary dutie of al subiects obedieÌ„ce tributes honor al other prehemineÌ„ces beloÌ„ging to Princes chieâ—…y on this senteÌ„ce write of purpose vpon this coÌ„mon place of subiects dutiful obedience to their magistrates you make so light a matter of it that ye say it bindeth vs not so much as to pay any tribute at al vnto theÌ„ But that all the world may sée how falsely ye wrest the wordes of Christ ye shal sée some of the fathers iudgments on these words giue vnto Cesar that that is Cesars that they inferre not that they may giue but that they ought to giue them Tertullian an ancient Father saith Alius est denarius queÌ„ Câ—…sari debeo c. It is an other penie that I owe to Cesar that pertaineth to him wherof it was theÌ„ moued that is to say a tributarie penie due to be paide of tributarie not of free meÌ„ I pray ye M. St. what is that English of Debeo of debitus Origen likewise an auÌ„cieÌ„t Father saith In teÌ„pore ergo Christi c. In the time therefore of Christ when they were commanded to giue tribute to the Romaines there was a thought couÌ„sel amoÌ„g the Iewes UtruÌ„ deberent whether they ought that were Gods people his portion to giue Princes tribute or rather take armes for their libertie except they were suffred to liue as they lusted And the story telleth that one Iudas a Galilean of whom Luke mencioneth in the Actes of the Apostles drawing away the multitude of the Iewes taught NoÌ„ oportere they ought not to giue tribute to Cesar call Cesar lord But he that was at that time the tetrarch hastned to perswade the people that they should regard the present state not wilfully take armes against the stronger But be coÌ„tent to giue tribute And truly the worde of this present gospel not in deede manifestly yet it shewes these things But he that diligently coÌ„sidereth the sense of the present wordes shal finde this yea eueÌ„ in this place For the Phariseis had not had occasion being willing to take Christ in his speach sending their disciples with the HerodiaÌ„s to aske him whether it were lawfull to giue Cesar tribute or no if it had bene manifest amoÌ„gst them that they ought not to giue it that there had bene an agreement of all their willes that they should not giue it c. Thus we sée that the question they moued to Christ was whether
the prince caÌ„ not iudge much lesse are by him punishable As are all such crimes which properly belong to the court of conscience to weâ—…e misbelefe in God mistrust in his mercie contempt of his coÌ„mandements presumption of our selues incredulitie and such like VVhich all are offences against the first table that is against the loue that we owe to god Contrarywise true beleefe confidence in God the feare of God and such like are the vertues of the first table and of these Melancthon truly saith Haec sunt opera prime tabulae These are the vertues of the first table All this M. St. that ye speake is beside the question concerning such crimes or vertues of the first table properly belonging to the courte of Conscience What néede ye stande so long descanting on the first table as though in the secoÌ„d table many such vices were not lurking in the hartâ—… of maÌ„ for which the Prince also can make no lawe For he can not compel his subiects to beare no hate nor wrath in their hartes nor to lust or desire in their harts vnlawfully their neighboures wife and goodes nor to loue another as them selues All which are of the second table properly also belonging to the court of conscience You might as well haue added these of the second as the other of the first table but then had your falshood bene espied going aboute by this meanes to reuoke all your graunt for the first table that because the Prince cannot punish such inwarde and peculiar breaches therefore he can not iudge vpon the doctrine and open causes and so ye simply conclude The punishing correcting or iudging of these appertaine nothing to the auctoritie of the Prince or to any his lawes but onely are iudged corrected and punished by the speciall sworde of excommunicatioÌ„ of binding of sinnes and enbarring the vse of holy Sacramentes by the order and auctoritie of the Priest onely and spirituall Magistrate Ye might M. St. as well conclude this of the second table also and quite debar the Prince of all dealing in either table bicause the inwarde action of either table the Prince can not punish so defeate all your graunt which before ye confessed that the furthering or punishing for both the tables as well of the first as of the second belongeth to the Princes aucthoritie Quod ad externam disciplinam mores attinet So far as belongeth to outwarde discipline and manners And now ye say the quite contrary he can not punishe nor Iudge the offences of the first table if ye meane â–ª the open offences thereof he can do it by your own limitacion Quod ad externam disciplinam mores attinet And so you make a fallacion à secundum quid ad simpliciter except ye meane as your reason pretendeth properly as yet belonging to the courte of conscience betwene God him Then whether it be in the first or in the second table the Prince in déede can not iudge or punish the secrete offence no nor properly the minister but so God alone The minister doth but pronouÌ„ce Gods sentence and the Magistrate punisheth it be it in the first or secoÌ„d table come it once to the breach of external â—…tes discipline as your selfe do limite their aucthoritie there in haue promised to agrée with Caluin and Melancthon But as in this your first parte ye haue graunted so much as suffiseth all the matter besides the referring your selfe to Caluins and Melancthons iudgement so in your second parte ye wrest and wrangle about your graunt and labour to proue contradiction in theÌ„ though in déede you can finde none and yet would ye looke on your selfe ye should finde an heape of fowle manifest contradictions besides those foresaide euen in this present chapter Againe say you whereas the chiefe vertue of the first table is to beleeue in God to know him and to haue the true faith of him and in him in Externall regiment as to punish open blasphemie to make lawes against Heretikes to honour and maintayne the true seruice of God Princes especially Christians ought to furder aide and mayntaine the same but to iudge of it and to determine which is the true faith in God how and after what manner he ought to be serued what doctrine ought to be published in that behalfe the Prince hath no aucthoritie or power at all Sée how ye first pinche and wrest your former graunt M. Stapl. and inconclusion take it quite away Before ye saide Christian Princes had the regiment in externall matters now ye come in with externall regiment Right now the Prince had authoritie to further and punish ouer the one table as well as the other and now he cannot determine so much as which table is which Right now he had authoritie Quoad externos mores as much as belongeth to externall manners now he must not iudge how or after what manner God ought to be serued Right now he had Externam disciplinam the outward discipline now to know what doctrine or discipline ought to be published he hath no authoritie or power at all This géere hangeth trimly togither and haue we not gotten a faire graunt we thought as the Papistes had wont to say we had God in the Ambry but the Diuell I see was in the Horologe Now after he hath renoked his graunt he beginneth to quarrell with the Protestants with whome before he said he and all his felowship would agrée and first he beginneth to proue contradiction in Melancthon His argument is thus Melancthon saith that Princes ought to looke vnto true doctrine to correct the Churches when the Bishops falle of their dutie yea and to consider the doctrine it selfe Againe the same Melancthon saith they must make no newe doctrines in the Churche neither institute any worships Ergo Melancthon either recanteth as better aduised or writeth playne contraries to him selfe How hath malice blinded you M St can ye sée no lesser difference than contrarie betwéene looking to the olde and coynyng newe betwéene considering and instituting worships Surely then can ye neuer consider nor well looke vnto not the truth but euen your owne follie that dreame of recanting and contradictions in other hauing your selfe scarse written a line before wherein so plainly ye contraried your owne wordes in recanting your former graunt Thus as in vaine ye séeke for coÌ„tradiction in MelaÌ„cthoÌ„s wordes so as fondly do ye conclude thereon your purpose MelaÌ„cthon would not haue Princes make new doctrines and worships of God nor haue the functions of both Magistrates spirituall and temporall to be confounded Ergo he taketh away all auctoritie from Princes in iudging and determining of doctrine But what dealing call ye this M. St that in translating Melancthons sentences ye both falsely wrest them addâ—… of your own vnto them Where Melancthon saith Nec instituant cultus Neither let them institute or appoynt of new any worshipping
that be in authoritie no authoritie at all What a saying is this and yet sée how your selfe confute your selfe Going about to embarre their authority ye say he meÌ„â—…ioned their peaceable gouernmeÌ„t â–ª He did so in déede M. St. But what gouernment or what peaceable estate of gouernment had they if they had no authoritie at all It sée meth that while ye 〈◊〉 to saye somewhat against their authoritie ye neytâ—… oâ—… regarde nor can tell what ye say of them nor of the Apostles â—…eyther to maintayne your false quarrell Now as ye further procéede so still ye bring your selfe more in the briers But will yee knowe say you M. Hoâ—…ne why thapostles both Saint Peter and Saint Paule so earnestly taught at that time obedience to Princes Ha go to then M. St. belike they tauâ—…ht obedience to Princes more earnestly than your Popishe Prelates haue taught or pract sed since that time or than your selfe haue herâ—… taught vs not ouer earnestly but God wote full sâ—…enderly or rather by all shifts and fetches of your wits haue sought to deface and impuâ—…nt their authoritie But how agréeth this with S. Paule earnest teaching Yea â–ª howe woulde ye make Saint Paule agrée to himselfe To say that he speaketh there of no authoritie at all in Princes and yet that here he taught obedience to Princes so earnestlye What obedience taught he if he taught not their authoritie at all What earnestnesse vsed he then therein but let vs sée as ye would haue vs what was the cause of the Apostles earnestnesse This was the cause In the beginning of the Church some Christians were of this opinion that for that they were Christian men they were exempted from the lawes of the Infidell Princes and were not bounde to pay them any tribute or otherwise to obey them To represse and reforme this wrong iudgemeÌ„t of theirs the Apostles Peter and Paule by you named diligently employed themselues And was this a wrong opinion and iudgement M. Stapleton and with such earnestnesse and diligence employed of the Apostles Peter and Paule to be repressed and reformed that Christians for that they were Christian men were exempted from the lawes of the Infidell Princes and were not bound to pay them any tribute or otherwise to obey them What a right opinion and iudgement then was this of him that affirmed not only the same of Infidell Princes but of Christian Princes to that we be not bounde by force of anye wordes of Christes sentence which as â—…latly commaundeth vs as any of these the Apostles sentences doe to obey or paye so much as tribute to our Christian Princes Doe ye not knowe who this was that helde this wrong opinion M. Stapleton Well who soeuer it was I thinke be must with shame saye that of him selfe which he spake of another that eyther hee recanteth as better aduised or else writeth playne contrary to himselfe But nowe sayth M. St. for the Apostles sentences VVhose sayings can not implye your pretensed gouernment vnlesse ye will say that Nero the wicked and heathenishe Emperour was in his time the supreme head of all the Church of Christ throughout the Empire as well in causes spirituall as temporall As before M. Stapleton you captiously restrained Christes generall commaundement of obedience to Princes only to the Emperour so doe ye here againe besides that ye sticke also in the person abusing his office and let the dutie of his office go Whereas S. Paule writeth generally not only for those then present but for all kinges or any other in authoritie both then and from thenceforth for euer And so doe all the Expositours gather a generall rule for all Christians towards their christian Princes although Nero and other princes then were wicked and Heathenishe infidels Yet in the duetie of their estate to the which God had called them they ought neither to haue bene wicked nor Heathenish Infidels but godly and faithfâ—…ll defenders and setters forth of Christ his true religioÌ„ To reason therfore from such persons abuses therevpon to denie from all princes the dutie of their lawfull authoritie is as naughtie an argument as Nero himselfe was naughtie And Chrysostome flatly confuteth this cauill of the Princes person Neque enin de quouis c. For neyther I speake now sayth he of any one of the Princes but of the matter itselfe And againe Propterea non dicit non enim princeps est c. VVherefore hee sayth not there is no Prince but of God but he disputeth of the matter it selfe saying there is no power but of god The powers that are they are from God â–ª As when any wise man sayth that the woman is knit of God vnto the man he sayth no other thing thaÌ„ that God hath ordeyned mariage not that euery man how so euer he dwelleth togither with a woman is ioyned vnto him of God for we see many dwelling togither in euill not according to the lawes of mariage which yet notwithstanding we impute not vnto God. This cauillation therefore how naughtie soeuer the Prince were restraineth not the Apostles meaning which tendeth to the office and not to the person least of all to those present persons then liuing For were they neuer so wicked other were good that knew the dutie of their estate gouernment exercising it both in the direction of vertues punishment of vices as well of the first as of the seconde table this your self haue confessed to be the dutie of Princes and why had it not bene Neroes duetie to And I praye you what lacketh this of all ecclesiasticall causes the vertues and vices of the first and seconde table But ye thinke to escape with this your common exception saying And yet in temporall and ciuill matters I graunt we ought to be subiect not only to Christians but euen to infidels also being our Princes without anye exception of Apostle Euangelist Prophete Priest or Monke as ye alleage out of Chrysostome And doe you thinke thus in déede M. St. as ye saye and shall we haue any better holde of you in your graunt once again be it euen but for temporall ciuil matters And yet this fayleth much of that ye graunted before of the first as well as of the second table Be Princes the Clergies superiors now Before ye sayds that Princes should take to much vpon them to thinke themselues ecclesiasticall persons superiors speaking simply of superiours without your distinction of ciuill and temporall or spirituall and ecclesiasticall matters But sée M. St. what ye haue grauÌ„ted here It is not vnknown to you that the Pope in no case can abide no not for ciuill and temporall matters to be subiect to any Christian Prince or Emperour but contendeth euen therein also to be the farre superiour and weareth thrée crownes where the Emperour weareth but one and that one he hath set on turned off with his foote and made him kisse his foote and troad
the kings'gouernmeÌ„t vntil Saul came Ergo kings gouerne theÌ„ not in that they are meÌ„bers of Christ. Is all your drift come to this M. Saunders to run from the matter to the name of kings what if neither the name nor estate of kings were before the time of Saul was not the people of God alwayes gouerned euen froÌ„ the beginning with a ciuil or politike Magistrate cal him King or Prince or Patriark or Duke or Iudge or what you will do you inueygh here onely againste Kings is it the name of King that you beare such spite vnto to call it but a fleshly power as though Sathan hadeuen fleshed you against kings For what more grosse or bestiall name can you giue the gouernment of the Turkes infidels than here you terme the power persons of ChristiaÌ„ kings but al these argumeÌ„ts are false M. Saund. the Church of Christ neuer wanted magistrats the magistrates were not only themselues if they were good the members of Christ although they had a fleshly part the old man in theÌ„ as euen the pastors haue also but they had a speciall charge and regard to their subiects eueÌ„ in that they were meÌ„bers of Christ. Not that they toke vpon them the office of spirituall pastors to preach gods word vnto theÌ„ administer the sacraments except som of them were such persons as might not only ouersée it done of others but might or ought theÌ„selues to do it as all the Patriarches ordinarilye till Aarons time and some of the Priests and Prophets extraordinarily and very seldome afterwardes chosen therevnto but this was the duetie of all the Magistrates which all the good Princes did principallie looke vnto howsoeuer other did neglecte or abuse the same This therefore Maister Saunders is a foule sclaunder to speake so lewdly on Christian Princes and also a contradiction to your former saying that theyr estate was spirituall Yea howe doth this agree with your words next following VVherefore say you sith Kings and pastours do now come together into one body of the Church and the powers of theÌ„ before distinguished oughte nowe to serue one Christe to wit eyther of them in their place and order but most certaine it is that the spirituall power which is instituted for the church is knit more nerer with Christe than the power of earthlye Kings which is appoynted to defende men in earthly peace not onely within but also without the Churche of Christe I see not but that he hath loste his common sense in iudging gods matters if any man contende that the spirituall power of the Church is not aboue the earthly power of Kings â–ª What soeuer you see or see not M. Saunders I see you haue a great conceite of your selfe that thus in your conclusion almost of euery argumente you make all men fooles doltes and madde and out of their wits and to want reason common sense and to be no better than beasts if they denie that that you affirme Whether it come of the contempte of others or of the pride of your selfe that makes you to vse these speaches so often let other wiser Iudge for we are fooles and madde men in your opinion But if you be not blinde in your owne conceite doe you not see what contraries still you vtter to make the Princes power â—…oth fleshely and spirituall to stretch to furder endes than bodily peace yet to stretch no furder but these are your olde contradictions You tell vs of a superioritie and a superioritie we haue graunted Neither haue we so loste our common sense but that we see your false packing in charging vs to contende that the spirituall power of the Churche is not aboue the earthly power of Princes For neither do we denie the superioritie of the spirituall power of the Churche neither do we graunt the power of Christian Princes to be onely an earthly power But what is this for the priest to depose the Prince God be thanked we haue not so loste our common sense but that we see you straggle from the question But let vs sée if you come any néerer to it For if neither parte be ouer the other howe in one body of the Churche do bothe powers abide beeing not vnited or howe are they vnited if they yet abide so distinguished that one can not gouerne the other or who euer sawe in one body of a liuing creature two members vtterly distinguished placed in one place and honor who hathe seene except in a monstruous body the foote made equall to the arme the thighe to the necke the legge to the fide But and if the kingly and spirituall power are not altogither equall members distinguished onely in number as two handes two feete and two eyes for those that differ in originall in vse and in ende can neuer be equall or else they be also thinges vtterly seuered bicause they be vnited and filled togither in one body of the Churche we must needes confesse that they differ in the placing of them and yet they are continued in the compasse of one body Héere is Sim Suttle M. Saunders of all that euer I sée A man had néede haue more than common sense that shall vnderstande this geare althoughe he studie for it you couet to speake so darkely We go playnely to worke we graunt that the ecclesiastical power and the polytical power are two distinct powers We graunt that they are ioyned togither in one body of the Churche of Christ. We graunt also that the one hathe in some respects a superioritie and in other respectes an inferioritie to the other We do not confounde them béeing thus ioyned and yet distinguished the one in the same or like place with the other It is your selues that woulde thus confound them giuing bothe the powers vnto one person and confounde one member wyth another and make a monstrous body We attribute not both powers to the Prince as you do to your Pope We affirme that the Prince differeth from the Bishop the Bishop from the Prince We affirme that bothe are members of the mysticall body of the Church of Christ and bothe rule the other members and that as meÌ„bers too We affirme the Bishops power in respect of his ministerie in exhorting and rebuking is aboue the Princes and the Princes in respect of his gouernment in maynteyning punishing is aboue the Bishops So that héere is not one or the like place and honor geuen to bothe but bothe haue suche places as are fitte for either And thus as the head is superior in one respect coÌ„cerning iudgement inuention and memorie and the harte is superior in another respect concerning lyfe and will so the Bishop may be graunted a superior member in the body of the Church in one respect and the Prince superior in another What monstrous body is héere or what confusion or rather not in your owne darke spéeches instling confounding these things
he woulde then haue broken his No M. Saund â–ª that was not the cause why Christ refused to iudge y matter but bicause he counted it no part of his office neither was he appointed of God therto but it belongeth to the Ciuill Magistrate As for suche iudgement as vydding the brethren to beware of couetousnesse was in dede appointed of God to Christ of him to al his Ministers to iudge of vices in such sort as by preaching to them their â—…ties to iudge of all estates of all things also Neither is all â—…on of Ciuil controuersiâ—…s or iudging temporal matters â—…ply debarred from the spiritual Minister nor the vse of temporall things But that the kingdome of Christ confisâ—…es in these things or that the ministers of Christ be in such Ciâ—…ill iudgements aboue Kings or may iudge â–ª Kings giue their inheritance from them or if they haue any authoritie too in Ciuil matters that it is properly by their office or beloÌ„ging properly to Christes kingdome and that they haue it not froÌ„ the Prince â–ª is cleane confuted by this example Neither can all these shiftes defeate it much lesse that that followeth in M. Saunders saying Declaring therefore to what ende all things that are in the worlde ought to be reâ—…rred seke saith he the kingdome of God al these things shal be cast vnto you VVhere he denyeth not that euen worlldy things pertaine to the kingdome of God but he would not haue those sought for themselues but onely for the kingdome of god But the kingdome that beleueth in Christ it hath left in that parte to be of the worlde in which part Christ denied his kingdome to be of this worlde VVhatsoeuer saith S. Augustine is from henceforth regenerate in Christ is made a kingdome not now of the world That all things oughte to be referred to the kingdome of God we graunt but that the kingdome of God consisteâ—… in all things we denie Meate drinke ought to be referred to the kingdom of God whether ye eate or drink saith S. Paule oâ—… whatsoeuer ye do â–ª do it all to the praise glory of God but the kingdome of God is not meate and drinke Yoâ—… say worldly things pertaine to the Kingdome of God. Which although it is much better said than that the kingdome shoulde appertaine to worldly things as the Papists here would drine it to the state of a worldly kingdome yet is it but an improper saying that worldly things belong to the kingdome of God. In dede the faithfull which are the kingdome of God haue them and they belong vnto them and they are necessarie and conuenient for them as meate drinke cloath house fire water proprietie and possession of temporall worldly goods to each faithfull man in his degree and also to the ministers of the Church of Christ that to haue these worldly things belonging to them according as their giftes and trauailes require with dubble honor yet do they not belong vnto them nor to any of the faithfull as he is a member of this kingdome but as he is a man and subiect to infirmities and these giftes of God are made for his vse so well the ministers as anye others But yet there is a difference in the hauing of these worldly things and the being a Prince in the hauing of theÌ„ for such Princely hauing of them is expresly forbidden vnto the spirituall minister of Christe and permitted onely vnto the Ciuill Magistrate The Pope and his Prelates will not onely haue them but they will be kings and excell kings in the hauing of them and will haue them in the name of the Church and of the kingdome of Christe and not as from the Prince to whose authoritie properly although not to whose proprietie they belong for the minister may haue the proprietie of those worldly things so well as another and perhaps better than many another more abundance of them too with which he may do more goodsundry wayes than diuers other in Gods Church But there is a difference betwene starke â—…aring â–ª and starke blind Therâ—… are some cormorants that hunt for the spoiâ—…e and wold haue the ministers earthly things cleane taken from them as though they were onely spirituall The Papistes on the other side were not only contâ—…t to haue them but they would besides their to muche excesse of them be exempted with priuileges from the Princes authoritie in the hauing of them and the Pope did clayme not onely a kingdome of them but that al kinges helde their kingdomes of him And this is the thing that we denie the Papistes For Christe hathe playne debarred it and denied his kingdome to be a worldly kingdome Yea but sayth M. Sanders in that parte that a kingdome beleeueth in Christ it hath left off to be of this world â–ª We graunt you M. Sanders in respecte of the beleefe in Christe and the soule that beleeueth but yet hathe it not left off to be of this world in respect of the body in respect of the ciuill gouernment in respect of hauing and vsing orderly Gods creatures in respecte of maynteining our liues our goodes our families our countreys all which earthly thinges the kingdome of God that is the faythfullâ—… may enioy and haue farre better vse of them than any other referring them to spirituall endes howbeit euery man in his degrée suche earthly thinges as are competent to his estate and are not debarred from his vse as the hauing of an earthly kingdome is from the spirituall Minister As for the sentence of S. Augustine is not to this purpose but wrested therto for he speaketh not there of a kingdome as we héere do that is to say of a ciuill power gouerning a Realme or of a Realme and Polycie gouerned by a King as thoughe bicause it receiued the fayth oâ—… Christ it were not of the worlde that is it were not gouerned after a worldly maner In whiche sense as we haue shewed Christe denied his kingdome to be of the worlde For although it be become a faythfull kingdome â–ª yet maynteyneth it still the former state which is noâ—… dissâ—…lued by the kingdome of Christ but rather bettered and confirmed Of whiâ—…he estate S. Augustine there speaketh not His words are these Therefore they were of the world when they were not of his kingdome but pertayned to the prince of the worlde That therfore is of the worlde whatsoeuer is in deede created of the true God but is borne of the corrupted and damned stocke of Adam But that which is regenerate in Christe is made a kingdome now not of the worlde for so God hathe pulled vs out of the power of darknesse and translated vs into the kingdome of the sonne of his brightnesse By whiche sentence it appeareth he speaketh not of the worlde in the sense of the mighte and glorie thereof but in the sense of the power of sinne
vnderstande this present exhortation to haue the libertie or power to forsake the heathen Magistrates obedience and iudgements and to erecte a nevv Magistrate and Iudge to rule among them For this had bene the readie pathe to all Rebellion And to proue that this is the readiest way to Rebellion sée howe Master Saūders gathereth hereon that nevve Kings are to be made of the Churche rather than vve shoulde be compelled to pleade our causes before hereticall and scismaticall Kings So that if the Prieste shall say the King is an heretike or a scismatike not only the people must so account him but they muste account him no longer to be their King they muste not be compelled to appeare in his Courtes and Consistories they must pleade no cause at all before him or his Iustices but must forthwith choose a nevv King to be their gouernour Howe far this is differing from Saint Paules doctrine from this sentence from subiectes obedience and howe neare to set all the world in an vprore I dout not but if this Nota that M. sand sets it out withal be wel noted it wil not only bréede in the Readers mindes a note of suspicion of priuie conspiracies trayterous packing but openly shew a manifest proclamatiō of plain rebelliō Now to proue that the subiects should thus rebel he sheweth the dangers that should ensue if they should remaine in their obedience For certaine it is that there is more danger of heretical Kings thā is of vnfaithful Iudges For vnfaithful Iudges do not iudge but of matters of this world and that according to the law either of nature which is alwayes right or ciuil vvhiche is seldome vvrong Moreouer vvhat if I suffered vvrong at the tribunall of a Pagane Iudge the losse is small to suffer the spoyle of tēporal goods vvhich good men beare vvith ioye But heretical Kings compel their subiects casting away the catholike faith to embrace their heresie the whiche can not be done vvithout the detriment of eternall saluation It is altogither lavvfull to the Churche of Christe to remoue from his gouernement an heretical a scismatical a symoniacal King and to conclude to remoue him that vvill not amende himselfe and to place another among the Christians in his rome This argument is drawne from the danger of suffering the king is alreadie answered diuers times The lawiers woulde briefly say to this better suffer a mischiefe than an inconuenience but were this an inconuenience too we may not take away one inconuenience with an other greater inconuenience for ther are conuenient remedies of pacience constancie against these inconueniences and not rebellion althoughe the inconuenience were muche greater than M. Sād makes it And yet to aggrauate the same he makes cōparison of a King and a Iudge as though the Iudge represented not the king He compareth the daunger of the losse by the one and by the other as thoughe the heathen Iudges and Princes dealt not also in cases of Religion Who although they were deceiued herein yet they conuented people before them for Religion to driue them from the worship of God to the worship of their Idols and laboured by all persuasions and meanes they coulde to bring them to their Religiō And verie many they brought to their Idolatrie which was more thā the losse of temporal goods euē the detriment of eternal saluatiō Neither did they vse their iudgemēts always according to the lavv of nature or the ciuil neyther doth the one iudge alvvayes right considering the great corruption of nature chiefly in the heathen neyther did the other sildome wrong but often wrong among them neither medled the ciuill Lawe of the Pagans onely with matters of temporall goodes and of this vvorlde but also with matters of the worlde to come and therefore there was further daunger of the iudgementes of those heathen Princes and vnfaythefull Iudges than here Maister Saunders woulde séeme to acknowledge there was mitigating all that he can the daunger ensuing from them to aggrauate the greater daūgers from naughtie Christian Princes But he nede not run to these vntruthes to aggrauate his comparison For we denie not but that if the Prince were such a wicked Prince as he speaketh of it were in dede very daungerous to the faithfull subiects vnder him and so muche the more daungerous that he pretendeth to the faithfull to be a faithfull Prince and is not But what a daungerous doctrine is this that the people should therfore rebell and reuolt vnto another Might the Christiā people in the primitue Church for all the daūger of eternall life that they and all the faithfull were in when the heathen Princes would haue them worship Idols which is as ill as heresie when the heretical scismaticall Emperors being Arians Monothelites c. in the ancient time compelled their subiectes casting away the Catholike faith to embrace their heresies might they remoue thē from their gouernment and place another in his roome ouer the Christians and that that shoulde streight be heresie which the B ▪ of Rome should say were heresie he should be a scismatike that should not consent to him Yea he must be deposed for symonie too ▪ by symonie forsooth we must vnderstand that if the Prince do appoint and inuest a Bishop then streight he is a simoniake and must out of hande be depesed What a greater daūger is here not onely to Christiā Princes but to all the Church of Christ whose sauegarde is here pretended But if we reason of daūgers the greatest daūger of all is of the Pope himselfe his prelates the more daunger that Princes people be thus beguiled by them and yet the king may not meddle with them although his duetie neuer so much require he hath good warrant in the scripture 〈◊〉 remoue them so haue not they of him were they neuer 〈◊〉 good and were he a great deale worse than M. Saunders makes him But Maister Saunders will nowe proue that the Bishops haue warrant out of the scripture for them and once againe he alleageth the example of King Saul and Samuel For if the kingdome of Saul stoode not euen for this that he obserued not the precept of Samuel in wayting for him seuen dayes before he sacrificed Yea if the Lord cast off Saul that he shuld not be the king bicause he fulfilled not also another precept of the Lorde declared by the Ministerie of Samuel in killing Agag if for this disobedience of Saul while he yet raigned Samuel was bidden to anoynt Dauid to be the King of the Iewes and Samuel did it priuily in Bethleem Neither after the holy Ghost sent downe from heauen the spirituall power of the Church can now be lesse than in times past was in the Synagog we must now also confesse that that King which shall dispise to heare the Lord speaking by the mouth of the highest Bishop maye
that he had authoritie ouer the Priestes Firste in that he cyted them to come before him Secondly in that they obeyed his citation and came before the king Thirdly in that the high Priest calleth the King his Lord saying here I am my Lord. Fourthly when the King layde treason to his charge he replyeth not that he could be no traitor to the King beyng his superior but as inferior pleadeth he was no traytor Fiftly he acknowledgeth both Dauid to be Saules seruaunt himselfe also saying be it farre from mee let not the King impute any thing vnto his seruaunt nor to all the house of my father for thy seruaunt knew nothing of all this lesse or more Wherby it appeareth that the high Priest and all his familie were vnder the Kings obedience and so still continued after that Samuel had declared how that the Lord had rent his kingdome from him As for that the Prince abused his authoritie to the cruell murdering of innocentes we graunt it was so detestable that his souldiors did well in refusing to execute his wicked commaundement We defend no suche authoritie in Princes nor such obedience in subiectes as murdereth innocents without all lawe and Iustice and that after suche a cruell sort as did the doggishe Doeg being not content to murder the innocent ministers of God but besides to put to the edge of thes worde all the men and women in their Citie yea the Children sucking babes also You can finde no protestant Prince M. Saunders that euer did the like déede But Popishe Princes haue not onely done the like but farre surmounted both Saul and Doeg and all other cruel Princes in such vnnaturall Tragedies So fitte all Maister Saunders ensamples serue his purpose that euerye one maketh cleane against him But now saith he least any man should thinke at the least the power of those Kings that sprang from Dauid to be greater than the spirituall power of the Synagog let him besides this consider that Ahias the Silonite while Salomon was yet aliue foretolde that Ieroboam should gouerne the ten tribes VVhervpon is vnderstood that either the whole kingdome or some part therof may be taken away from a wicked King by the spirituall power of the Churche For what power was in times past in the Priests and Prophets the same is now in the pastors and teachers whose duetie it is so to consulte for the soules health that they suffer not by the disobedience and tyrannie of a wicked King the people of an infinite multitude to be compelled and drawne to scisme and heresie The argument is still as before from the spirituall power in Priests Prophets then in the Synagog to the spiritual power of popishe pastors teachers in the Church now To this besides the former answere I answere againe first the popishe pastors teachers being false pastors false teachers except it be from such Priestes Prophetes as were of Baal Balaam Bel. c. can frame no good conclusion Secondly admit they were which they pretend true pastors teachers yet the argument is not true from any particular especial charge giueÌ„ vnto some one or two of them by gods expresse commaundement to foretell this or that thing to come to conclude therevpon an ordinarie spirituall power in all the priests prophets then and the like to succéede in the pastors teachers now Thirdly neither any such thing is described or ment by S. Paulâ—… Epâ—…e 4. in the office of pastors teachers now neither this example of the old testament 2 Reg. 11. inferreth any such thing done by the priests or prophets then The example of 〈◊〉 he alleaged before but he thinketh here to frame it better to his purpose His argument is thus The prophet Ahias while King Salomon liued foretold Ieroboam that he should raigne ouer ten Tribes Ergo either the whole kingdome or a part therof may be taken from a wicked King by the spiritull power that is by the pastors and teachers of the Church I denie the argument M. sand from foretelling the taking away thereof to the taking away thereof in déede The foretelling belonged to that Prophet to whoÌ„ God not onely reuealed it but commaunded to foretell it The taking away therof either in part or in whole beloÌ„ged only to God working by his secrete or open Iustice and to those as instruments of his wrath whom he ordained to do it that is by Ieroboam and such as rebelled with him And howbeit this fact when â–ª it was done was such a specialtie as can not be drawne to an example no more than can the attempt of Abraham to kill his sonne yet was not this facte done in Salomons dayes Who all his life long raigned King of the whole kingdome notwithstanding all this Prophecie In dede Ieroboam which was a wicked man lifte vp his hand and rebelled against Salomon not tarying the Lords oportunitie as Dauid did but following his owne ambition he abused the prophetes message Who although he tolde him that God woulde giue him ten tribes yet he tolde him that Salomon shoulde raigne all his life time But I will take the kingdome saythe God by the Prophete vnto Ieroboam oute of his sonnes hande and will giue tenne Tribes to thee c. so that this serueth not Maister Saunders purpose to dispossesse the presente estate of the Prince lyuing Neyther sayth the Prophet he will doe it neyther byddeth he Ieroboam to rebel eyther against Salomon or his sonne but he sayth God him selfe would doe it To the which sentence and worke of God Ieroboam ought to haue obeyed Which in so much as he did not he disobeyed God and was a traytor to his Prince and deserued death Althoughe God by his secrete iustice so punished Salomons séede that he confirmed the Kingdome in Ieroboams handes and made him a lawfull king But in all these things here was nothyng done by the Prophete but the foretelling of Gods purpose Which notwithstanding was enioyned hym by Gods especiall commaundemente For otherwyse had he presumed thus of his owne heade by reason of the authoritie of hys Propheticall office whatsoeuer Salomen had deserued he had for his parte béene but a â—…rayterous Prophete and so are all those Popishe Pastors and teachers that teache subiectes to rebell against their Soueraignes on pretence of these examples True Pastors and teachers by thys particular example maye learne thus muche in generall to teache Princes to feare God and dreade his Iustice to beware of Idolatrie and of ioyning themseluâ—…s in mariage or in other leagâ—…es of friendship wyth the enimyes of gods truth As Salomon â—…ell to Idolatrie by marying of Infidels Achab for ioyning in friendshippe with Benadab was punished and marying the wicked Iesabell did euen â—…ell him selfe to wickednesse Yea the good King Iosaphat for ioyning in league with the wicked King Ochozias Achabs sonne was reproued sharpely and his ships perished These
conclusion to make the sequele more dreadfull that after diuerse reconciliations with the Romaine Sea they fell into the Turkish captiuitie Why may it not as well be noted thereon that they neuer came into this extreme flanery of the Turke but their Empire continued aboue 1000. yeares till after those their reconciliatioâ—… made with the Pope then within 14. yeares they fell in the Turks captiuitie But of this more hereafter From the Gréek and â—…ast Church he procéedeth to the Affricanes making the like argument on them But to answere him briefly To reason thus from the vnitie of the Romaine Sea in fayth then to the obedience of the Romaine Sea in the supremacie nowe euery scholer will some say is a very good non seqâ—…tur The like common fallace à non causâ—… vt causâ—… he maketh of Hungarie and Lifelande fallen into the handes of the Turkes and Moscouites Bicause sayth he they forsooke the Pope and fell to Luther But if this argument be good demaunde of him how 〈◊〉 the â—…hodes Belgradum Buda and other cities and parts in Austria which likewise the Turk hath gotten be cleane forgetten here of him and not reckened vp in this number was it bicause they acknowledged none more than the Rhodians the Popes supremacie and yet fell into the Turkishe captiuitie so well as the other At the length he 〈◊〉 home to Englande and when he should here make the full conclusion of all these lamentable sequeles of reâ—…olt from the Romaine Sea in other Countreyes that the lyke shoulde lyghte on vs séeyng that his argumente contrarie to hys long and wycked hope doeth fayle in the conclusion least eyther hée shoulde shewe the follie of hys impertinent argumentes or vtter the vnnaturall malice that for his Pope and popishe religion he hath fostred long in his cankred breast agaynst his naturall prince and Countrey he turneth the Catte into the Panne not by concluding hys argument on the lyke issue to Englande but rawly and generally knitteth vp the matter thus But vvhat vvas the issue all the vvorlde knovveth and Englande the more pitie greeuously feeleth To this M. Stap I answere Thanks be giuen to God no suche isâ—…ue as you would conclude of other Countreys from errors and the Turke to vs It is you that abhorring the Gospell more than Turkerie feele this gréefe ye speake of for that your sequele holdeth no better in Englande Englande neither feareth the Turkes nor these your byous threates and would to God no parte of Christendome euen of those that you accounte moste Popishe catholike were no more subiecte to the inuasion and daunger of the Turkishe barbarous and Saraâ—…ins irruptions and tyrannie than Englande is and yet if God shoulde punishe any parte of Christendome by them though he vse by his secret Iustice their furie as a rodde to scourge their offences yet will not we nor may iustly make suche tragicall sequeles reasons to argue pro or contra on Religion as here you doe by these peoples to conclude agaynst vs But prayses be to God you can conclude nothing Englande euer since that through the Quéenes most excellent maiestie it hath enioyed the libertie of Gods moste holy worde hath maâ—…ger all your spites reioyced withall bothe tranquillitie wealth peace fréedome and aboue all things the fauour of God in Christ euen for that it hath escaped the spirituall bondage of your Pope farre worse than the bodily captinitie of the Turke God continue his mercy to vs and make vs thankfull for it Nowe since ye can not fasten any such sequele as ye wishe on Englande ye gather petite quarels and like a poâ—…her seeke corners to finde out some inconueniences not worthy answere And yet bicause ye resume them often times after and make muche ado about them as reading the Byble and other bookâ—…s suppressing Abbeys marriage of Priests oirginitie vovves no Church Byshops but Parliament Byshops the sacrament of the altare c. they are answered where ye handle them at large and not here whereye snatch at them Onely this your grosse lie I will note here about king Henries lawes Bicause ye cite it not that I remember any more Ye say that after his death and in the minoritie of his sonne king Edvvarde all the lavves that he had made touching matters of religion sauing against the supremacie vvere repelled and abolished What a manifest and impudent lie is this King Henrie besides the supremacie made lawes for the abolishing of shrines and pilgrimages of pulling downe Images of depressing popish sectaries Monks Friers Numies Heremits Anachores c. Were these lawes repelled and abolished after his death in the minoritie of king Edwarde Shewe it or else wipe your lippes for a foule lie hath beslabbered them Master Stap. All these former arguments and these extrauagant discourses consist on a wrong principle All this haue I spoken sayeth he to shevve it is most true that I haue sayde that there vvill neuer be redresse of error and heresie or any stay vvhere men are once gone from the vnitie of the Sea Apostolike vvhich is the vvell spring and fountaine of all vnitie in the Catholike fayth This false principle if we denie it him then all his arguments of absurdities and euents theron are not worth a rush But had he put in but one letter more and for vnitie had sayd vanitie it had bene a most true principle nor we woulde or coulde haue euer denyed the same The last reason of his Preface to leaue a pricke of discredite agaynst the Protestants in the readers minde is of our discorde and inconstancie in this question the assumption whereof being in déede nothing but slaunders of the prince the Realme and diuerse Godly learned men is partly sette out in his common place of slaunders and partlye shall be further particulerly aunswered as they come to hande in the booke where he discourseth on them Thus much for the pithe of all his argumentes conteyned in hys Preface to the Reader to winne hys minde to hys cause before hande and alienate it from ours but the wyse Reader wyll first reade or euer he giue his iudgement The answere to M. St. Counterblast on the Bishops Preface The first Deuision IN his answere to the B. Preface whereas the Bishop in the first Deuision for so M. Stapleton termeth euery seuerall portion that he answereth vnto sheweth the necessarie reasons that moued him to answere Master Feckenhams booke and the couert meaning of master Feckenham in secretly scatering his booke abroade that therein he shewed a further meaning than he durst plainely vtter and that the intent of the booke as might iustly be gathered was to engraft in the mindes of the subiects a misliking of the Q. maiestie as though she vsurped a power and authoritie in ecclesiasticall matters whereto she had no right to slaunder the whole realme as though it were estraunged and directly agaynst the Catholike Church tenouncing and refusing to haue communion therewith
giue the aduersaries occasion of sclaundering him For if they yea eueÌ„ vvithout this perfecuted him as a seditious person how much more would they haue persecuted him if he had accepted the kingdome offered of the people Thus euen til this day fleeth he froÌ„ those that only seeke carnall things in him bycause no parte of his spiritual giftes loketh on theÌ„ he despiseth them that are occupied about vile bags â–ª to vvit being giuen to their belly filthinesse He only giueth himselfe to them that seeke spirituall things in him that can say our coÌ„uersation is in heauen Not without cause therfore Christ here fled being sought for vnto a kingdome vvho being sought for vnto deathe offered himselfe freely For first by this he condemned our pryde or coueteousnesse or ambition or deintinesse Secondly he taught to contemne the glorie of the vvorlde than the vvhiche nothing is more vaine and not to feare the aduersitie of the vvorlde than the vvhiche nothing is more shorte Thirdly he taught heerein that those things are but small that in the worlde seeme to be mostegreat They thought they had offered Christe a great thing but he despised it as a litle thing VVe are far of an other iudgement Whom he meaneth by this vve loke a litle before concerning theÌ„ that offered the kingdome to christ This fact saith he declareth what the flesh seeketh in Christ euen his ovvn Cosins that is to say fleshly humaine things Christe is set forth before vs that in him we should seeke the forgiuenesse of sinnes righteousnesse eternal life But the carnall man seeketh nothing in him but licence carnall libertie and the filling of the paunche For hee that is of the earth speaketh and thinketh of earthly thinges yea suche is the nature of the fleshe that it abuseth all the giftes of God and seeketh farre other things in them than God woulde So the fleshely man in the creatures that are giuen to our vse and to this that God might be knowne and feared seeketh no other thing than pleasure And when by theÌ„ he ought to be caried vnto the creator he sticketh in theÌ„ and worshippeth theÌ„ So in the lawe which was giuen of God for the knowledge of sinne the carnall Iewes sought righteoushesse euen as the Papistes doe and so nowe also all those carnall men that in the power of the sworde seeke not that that God wil but only ambition pryde c. yea and that in these thinges that appertaine to the spirituall gouernement those carnall Pastors seeke onely honor ryches idlenesse delightes when as Christ ordeined them to be teachers guides Apostles c. For no other cause than for the edifying of his bodie Thus saith Frier Ferus againste his owne fleshely spiritualtie séeking in Christes spirituall kingdome a worldly kingdome which for these causes abouesaide and not onely for the originall that Maister Saunders here onely mentioneth he refused to be made a King. The like shift Maister Saunders vseth to the other place Luc. 12. of Christs refusall to be a iudge betwene the brethreÌ„ for the diuision of their inheritance saying who made me a iudge or deuider ouer you as though he shoulde say neither the common weale hath made me a iudge neither the Emperor hath made me a iudge As thoughe Christ refused to be their iudge not for that he would not be such a iudge â—…ut for that he was not made such a iudge by humaine authoritie For of such a iudge saith he these brethren thought whether they thought him to be such a iudge or no iâ—… not apparant Maister Saunders and if we may go by coniectures probabilities it rather séemeth the contrarie For neicher could they sée any such tokens in him to haue bin authorised from those that were â—…hen the Magistrats his words going before do argue they could not conueniently so thinke of him both ratling vp the Phariseis that had the humaine authoritie bidding his Disciples not to mistrust what to answere when they shoulde come before the powers Magistrates which these brethren hearing might easily conceiue that Christ himselfe was no such earthly Magistrate But to the causes wherfore Christ refused it that as before euen of the Papists mouthes themselues Hofmeister one of your sloutest champions hath these words Truely those things that haue bin spokeÌ„ and heard from the beginning of this Gospel do ynough declare the kingdom of Christ not to be of this world neither that he would raigne temporally in the world sith he taketh not souldiors that caÌ„ oppugne others but fishermeÌ„ readier to suffer thaÌ„ to strike And so in this place with most manifest wordes Christ declareth that he came not for this purpose to take vpon him the office of a Magistrate but rather that he might raigne in our harts so that it might be our hap to come to the eternal goods whatsoeuer hapned of our tem porall goods Therfore when he was interrupted of a certaine Iewe that he would helpe him in recouering his inheritance he aunswered Man who hath made me a ludge or deuider ouer you As though he shoulde say hath not this worlde iudges that may decide so base controuersies it is not appointed vnto me that this or that man shoulde waxe rich by inheritance but that all men should come to the inheritance of life immortall But in these words Christ woulde betoken many things to wit that he which hath an Apostolicall office ought not to be wrapped with prophane and silthie affaires For so the Apostle saith otherwhere No maÌ„ going to warfare vnder God entangleth himselfe with worldly businesse And the Apostles say all at once it is not meete foÌ„r vs to leaue the word of God and attend on the tables Christ also by this reprouing woulde declare that his doctrine taketh not away the Magistrates offices but rather confirmeth theÌ„ VVhervpon he saith also else where render to Cesar that that is Cesars And wheÌ„ his Disciples striued for prehemineÌ„ce he said â–ª the kings of the nations gouerne them so forth VVhereby he declared that neither he himself nor his ought as they call theÌ„ to be secular iudges neither did he by this refusing abolishe the order of the Magistrate but much more as we haue said confirmed it Thus far your owne Doctor Hofmeister againste you that the entent of Christe refusing to be a iudge herein was chiefely against such vsurpation of worldly Magistracie as the Pope and his Prelates do exercise But say you Christ in that he was appoynted of God to be iudge by his incarnation concerning that parte he saide vnto them that they should beware of couetousnes for he saw that they draue not as yet their inheritance to a spirituall ende that they might beare the iudgement of Christ. As who should say if they had béen Christians he would then haue béen a temporall iudge ouer them that is to say if they had done their duetie