doctrine Where the thing you treate of is not in controuersie betwene you and vs and where you speake not with affection to ouercome Strange manner of vttering the faith we graunt some tymes ye vtter truth But the manner of vtterance of your Faith is straunge to Christen eares who haue bene accustomed to heare Credo in Deum Credo in Iesum Christum Credo in spiritum Sanctum I beleeue in God I beleeue in Iesus Christe I beleeue in the holy Ghoste That other forme of wordes whiche you vse soundeth not so Christianlike I beleeue there is a God I beleeue that Iesus Christ is the Sonne of the Father I beleeue that the holy Ghoste is God Although this forme of wordes doo expresse a right Faith yet being suche as maie be vttered by Deuilles and hath bene alwaies vttered by Heretikes their ministers the auncient and holy Fathers haue liked better the olde fourme and manner after whiche euerie Christen man saith I beleeue in God I beleeue in Iesus Christe I beleeue in the holy Ghoste For this importeth a signification of Faith with Hope and Charitie that other of Faith only which the deuilles haue and tremble as S. Iames saith wherein as in many other thinges Iacob 2. these Defenders resemble them S. Augustine in sundry places putting a difference betwen these two formes of wordes vpon S. Iohn alleging S. Paules wordes To one that beleeueth in him who iustifieth the wicked his Faith is imputed to righteousnes Rom. 3. In Iohan. Tract 29. To beleue in God what is it demaundeth what is it to beleeue in him It is by his aunswer Credendo amare credendo diligere credendo in eum ire eius membris incorporari with beleeuing to loue him with beleeuing to goe into him and to be incorporate in his members that is to be made a member of his body In an other place he saith speaking of Christe De verbis Domini Serm. 61 it It forceth muche whether a man beleeue that he is Christ and whether he beleeue in Christ. For the Deuilles beleeued that he was Christ neither for al that beleeued the Deuilles in Christ For he beleeueth in Christe who both trusteth in Christe and loueth Christe For if he haue Faith without Hope and Loue he beleeueth that Christe is he beleeueth not in Christe So he that beleeueth in Christe with beleeuing into him shal Christe come and by some meane he is vnited vnto him and is made a member in his body Whiche can not be done excepte there come also both Hope and Charitie Thus S. Augustine The same doctrine he vttereth writing vpon the 77. Psalme By this thou seest â—â—â—â—ed I blâ—me not their 〈◊〉 dâ—sâ—â—â— the Trinitie not their Profâ—sâ—ion of the CoÌ„mon Creede as M. Iewell calleth it but only I seeme beâ—ter to allowâ— the auncient and vsual manner of vttering the Beleefe whiche for good reason hath euer seemed to the learned Fathers more commendable Reason and consideration of duetie would that a Minister of Gods worde should be a fraide to vtter so great and so manifest vntruthes vnto his liege Soueraine But of like some wil saie he wil amende that faulte in other partes of his Epistle to her Maiestie specially sith that he allegeth nothing but directeth the Reader vnto the place where it is to be founde by his quotation noted in the margent whiche hath at least some colour of vpright dealing and being founde false declareth an impudent falshod I would wish that for truthes sake al would reade and conferre and iudge of the oddes betwen vs bothe First thus he writeth Iewel The maine grounde of his vvhole Plea is this that the Bishop of Rome vvhaâ— so 〈◊〉 it â—â—al like him to determine in iudgemeÌ„t can neuer â—rrâ— Fâ—â— directioÌ„ of the Râ—â—der he quoteth thus Câ—sus fo 334. b Harding What he meaneth by his terme Plea I wote not ne care not I pleade not for right of any temporal thing Neither am I a lawier as he knoweth 〈◊〉 emploie my studie of Diuinitie to defendâ— the. Catholique Faâ—th and to detecte his falshod that Godâ— people be not by him and his felowes dangerously seduced The thing whereat he scoffeth for these wordes what so euer it shal like him to determine be scorneful wordes is not so vttered by me as he reporteth Who liste to see what I saie for so muche as the booke of my Confutation is not alwaies at handâ— thus it is The Pope succedeth Peter in auctoritie and power Confut. Fol. 334. b For whereas the shepe of Christe continewe to the worldes ende he is not wise that thinketh Christe to haue made a shepeherd teÌ„porarie for a time ouer his perpetual flocke Then what shepeherdly endoument our Lorde gaue to the first shepeherde at the institution of the shepeherdly office of the Churche that is he vnderstanded to haue geuen ordinarily to euery successour To Peter he gaue that he obteined by his praier made to the Father that his Faith should not faile Againe to him he gaue grace Luca. 22. that to performe the performance whereof at him he required to wit that he confirmed and strengthened his brethren Wherefore the grace of stedfastnes of faith and of confirming the wauering Hovv aÌ„d vvherin the Pope erreth not â—e neuer erred and doubteful in the Faith euery Pope obteineth of the holy Ghoste for the benefite of the Churche And so the Pope although he maie erre by personal errour in his owne priuate iudgement as a man and as a particular doctour in his owne opinion yet as he is Pope the successour of Peter the Vicare of Christe in earth the shepeherd of the vniuersal Churche in publike iudgement in deliberation and definitiue sentence he neuer erreth nor neuer erred For when so euer he ordeineth or determineth any thing by his high bishoply auctoritie intending to binde Christen menne to performe or beleeue the same he is alwaies gouerned and holpen with the grace and fauour of the holy Ghoste Answer M. Iewel to this if ye can Certainely hitherto ye haue not answered As for that you bring against it in your pretensed Defence there is no graue or learned man of your side that is not ashamed of it In that game of scoffing I doo gladly yelde you the garlande Your greatest Doctours there are Alphonsus de Castro and Erasmus menne of our age As for Erasmus it were easie to Answer him but here I thinke his tale not worthe the Answering Mary Alphonsus saith somewhat to your purpose if the tale whiche you make him to tel were his owne Certainely if he once wrote it when he beganne first to write afterwards with better aduise he reuoked it For in the bookes of the later printes those woordes whiche you reherse are not founde Thus you saie Defence pag. â—â—5 AlphoÌ„sus de haeresiae buâ— li. 1. cap. 4. Alphonsus de Castro one of M. Hardinges owne special Doctours saith Non dubitamus an Haereticum
any others Reade the olde Fathers in suche sorte that you may vnderstande them without mistaking their right and purposed meaning then maie you cite them both to your owne honestie and to the commoditie of others The errour of one Falcidius One Falcidius a foolishe man vtterly deceiued went aboute to preferre as S. Hierome of him to Euagrius seemeth to reporte or to matche in one equalitie as S. Augustine saith the order of Deacons with the order of Priesthood For suppression of whiche errour the rather to abbase the Deacons vanitie August in Quaest veter no. Testam Quest 101 S. Hierome disputeth that in diuers places of the Scripture in certaine respectes Priestes are taken for Bishoppes and Bishoppes for Priestes so that if the Deacons be aboute the Priestes sith the Scripture doth cal Priestes by the name of Bishoppes it wil folowe that Deacons should also be aboue Bishoppes Which absurditie is so euident as no man maie graunt it Therefore for the auoiding of this absurditie whiche would followe vpon Falcidius false assertion it behoued him and suche as helde with him vtterly to reuoke that errour that Deacons are either aboue Priestes That a Priest is aboue a Deacon or equal with them A Priest maie doo al that a Bishop doth saue that he can not geue Orders A Deacon can not doo al thinges that a Bishop doth saue onely the geuing of Orders for he can not consecrate the body and bloude of Christ in the blessed Sacrament Ergo the Priest that hath more power then the Deacon must be aboue the Deacon This is S. Hieromes very drifte in that Epistle to Euagrius with the whiche meaning of S. Hieromes your authour Erasmus doth wel agree Erasmus in Antidoto post Scholiam in epist ad Euagriū where he writeth thus vpon the same Epistle Itaque quòd hic aequat humilium vrbium Episcopos cum alijs ad Diaconos est referendum qui nonnullis locis praeferebantur presbyteris quos propemodum aquat Episcopis Where as he doth here equally matche the Bisshoppes of the meaner Cities with other that are Bisshopps of great Cities it is spoken for the Deacons sake who in certaine places were preferred before the priestes whom almost he maketh Bisshoppes felowes And againe In hoc igitur aequales sunt Episcopi presbyteri quòd vbicunquesunt Diaconis sunt praeferendi Touching this pointe Bishoppes and Priestes are equal for that they are to be preferred before Deacons where so euer they be But that there is greate difference in authoritie of gouernement betwixte Bishoppes ' Priestes and Deacons S. Hierome is plaine in the laste sentence of that Epistle where he writeth thus Et vt sciamus traditiones Apostolicas sumptas de veteri Testamento quod Aaron filij eius atque Leuitae in Templo fuerunt hoc sibi Episcopi Presbyteri Diaconi vendicent in Ecclesia And that we maie knowe the Apostles Traditions were taken out of the olde Testament what Aaron and his Sonnes and the Leuites were in the Temple Bisshoppes Priestes and Deacons maie chalenge to them selfe the same in the Churche But Aaron being the high Priest and Bisshop was in auctoritie farre aboue al the rest Ergo if Priestes be named in Scripture Bisshoppes as S. Hierome reasoneth against their folie that preferred Deacons aboue Priestes There is one Bisshoppe founde out that ought to haue special rule ouer al the reste and that by a consequent of the very Scripture Whereas S. Hierome condemned the lewde disorder of the Citie of Rome not of the Churche of Rome as M. Iewel vntruly interpreteth which he saith is one with the Churche of the whole worlde keeping one rule of truth with the rest for hauing Deacons in more honour then Priestes and putteth the mater to be tried by authoritie saying that the authoritie of the vniuersal Church of the whole worlde with the which the Church of Rome is one is rather to be folowed then the corrupte manner and custome of that one Citie there is no reason why he should seeme in that place to haue vsed the word Merite Merite for Preeminence after M. Ievvelles iudgement for this worde Preeminence as M. Iewel ful vainely iangleth and can not prooue His seely argumentes stande thus The authoritie of the worlde that is to saie of the vniuersal Churche of the whole worlde and therefore of the Churche of Rome also being One Churche with the reste is greater then the authoritie of the Citie of Rome Ergo the worde Merite in the nexte sentence folowing must signifie Preeminence Againe the power of riches and the basenesse of pouertie maketh not a Bishop either higher or lower Ergo the worde Merite in the sentence before muste signifie Preeminence This is strange Logique by vse whereof euery foole maie seeme to reason wisely if it were once allowed in open schooles The vvorld is more thē the Citie expounded Whereas S. Hierome to Euagrius speaking against the euil custome of Rome where a Deacon was preferred before a Prieste saieth Si authoritas quaeritur Orbis maior est vrbe If wee seeke for Authoritie the worlde is more then the Citie he meaneth not as the circumstance of that Epistle geueth that authoritie there should signifie authoritie in gouernement as M. Iewel hath interpreted making S. Hierome to saie that in Authoritie of gouernement the whole worlde is greater then the Citie of Roome whereby he thinketh to displace the Pope and to depriue him of his authoritie in gouernement and to bestowe it confusely abroade in al the worlde whereof in deede the Confusion whiche they may beste holde and stande by might be procured The truthe is S. Hierome there is not to be vnderstanded to speake of the Churches authoritie in gouernement but of common and publique authoritie to be folowed for auoiding of that errour that made a Deacon better then a Prieste or at least equal with a Priest In Controuersies we folowe authoritie Now saith S. Hierome If we seeke for authoritie the worlde is greater then the Citie As who should saie let no man defende the errour by the authoritie of the Citie of Rome bicause there a Deacon is preferred before a Prieste for what shal we esteme the custome of one Citie the whole world holding the contrarie And the authoritie of no one Citie can be cōparable to the authoritie of the whole worlde Therefore pretending one to obiecte vnto him that the manner was at Rome for a Priest to be ordered at the testimonie of a Deacon he saieth Quid mihi profers vnius vrbis consuetudinem what bringest me foorth the custom of one Citie As who should say Neither at Rome vvas more honour geuen to Deacons then to Priestes it were not to be regarded in cōparison of the custom of the whole world Nowe that the Churche of Rome gaue not greater honour to Deacons then to Priestes by S. Hierome him selfe it seemeth to be euident for so
before you teache your doctrine It is most certaine they did not B. Shaxton and B. Capon repented Leaft out by M. Ievvel How so euer those two first named only in some part of their life taught amisse how afterward they repeÌ„ted abhorred your heresies and dyed catholikes it is wel knowen Now besides these whom elles can you name M. Iuel can shew no laufull successioÌ„ in the bishoprike of Salisbury If you can not shewe your bishoply Petigree if you can proue no Succession then whereby holde you Wil you shew vs the letters patentes of the prince Wel may they stand you in some stede before men before God who shal cal you to accompte for presuming to take the highest office in his Churche not duely called thereto they shal serue you to no purpose I cast out by M. Ievvel Here if you alleage an interruption of this Succession of doctrine as it hath ben alleaged by some of your side then must you tel vs when and where the same beganne which you can neuer do In prascis ptionibus aduersus haereticos These be TertulliaÌ„s vvordes You know what Tertullian saith of suche as ye be Edant origines ecclesiarum suarum c. We saye likewise to you M. Iewel and that we say to you we saye to eche one of your companions Tel vs the original and first spring of your Church Shewe vs the register of your Bishops continually succeding one another from the beginning so as that first Bishop haue some one of the Apostles or of the Apostolike men for his author and predecessour For by this waye the Apostolike churches shewe what reputation they be of As the Church of Smyrna telleth vs of Polycarpe by Iohn the Apostle placed there The Church of the Romaines telleth vs of Clement ordeined by Peter S. Augustine hauing reckened vp in order the Bisshops of Rome to Anastasius successor to Siricius who was the eight and thirteth after Peter saieth that in al that nuÌ„ber and rolle of Bishops there is not found one that was a Donatiste Epist 165. and thereof he concludeth Ergo the Donatistes be not catholikes So after that we haue reckened al the Bishops of Sarisburie from Bishop Capon vpward we shal come at length in respect of doctrine and orders to S. Augustin the Apostle of the English who was made bishop by S. Gregorie and from S. Gregorie vpward to S. Peter And in al that rewe of Bishops we shal finde neuer a one that beleeueth as M. Iewel beleeueth ergo your Zuinglian and CaluiniaÌ„ beleefe M. Iewel and of the rest of your felowes is not catholike Leaft out by M. Ievvel But what speake we of succession to them who haue no orderly succession as no secte of heretikes euer had Hard queâ—â—ionâ— proponed to M. Iuel Therefore to go from your Succession which ye can not proue and to come to your Vocation how say you Sir you beare your selfe as though you were Bishop of Sarisbury But how can you proue your Vocation By what auctoritie vsurpe you the administration of Doctrine and Sacramentes What can you alleage for the right and proufe of your Ministerie Who hath called you Who hath layd handes on you By what example hath he done it How and by whom are you consecrated Who hath sent you Who hath committed to you the office you take vpon you Be you a Priest or be you not If you be not how dare you vsurp the name and office of a bishop If you be tel vs who gaue you Orders The institution of a Priest was neuer yet but in the power of a Bishop Bishops haue alwayes after the Apostles tyme according to the Ecclesiastical Canons ben consecrated by three other Bishops with the consent of the Metropolitane and confirmation of the B. of Rome Leaft out by M. Ievvel Thus Vnitie hath hitherto ben kept thus Schismes haue ben stayd And this S. Cyprian calleth legitimam ordinationem For lacke of which he denyed Nouatian to be a bishop or to haue any autoritie or power in the Church Hereto neither you nor your felowes who haue vnlaufully inuaded the administration of the Sacramentes can make any iust and right answer I am sure Athanas in Apologia 2. What do not you remember what iudgement Athanasius and the Bishops of Egypte Thebais Lybia and Pentapoli were of concerning Ischyras the Arian And why may not al good Catholique men iudge the like of you Ischyras and M Iuel compared together Macarius a Priest of Athanasius as it was layd to his charge by his accusers pulled Ischyras from the aulter as he was at Masse ouerthrewe the holy table brake the chalice The matter brought to iudgement Athanasius and those bishoppes both denied the fact and also though it were graunted yet defended the same as wel done because Ischyras was not a lauful minister of the Church And why so Because he was not lawfully made Priest nor with churchly laying on of handes consecrated Leaft out by M. Ievvel Colluthus HuÌ„c presbyteri Diaconi Mareotici vocant noÌ„ verum sed imaginarium episcopum Epist. ad Curiosum Phylagrium Apolog. 2. apud AthanasiuÌ„ For proufe thereof they alleaged that neither he was of the number of those whom Alexander bishop of Alexandria before Athanasius receiued into the Church made Priestes by Meletius the heretique neither that he was by the sayd Alexander created Then how is Ischyras a priest say they or of whom hath he receiued his orders Hath he receiued them of Colluthus For this shift onely remaineth Colluthus was an Arian who bare him selfe for a bishop and gaue Orders being but a priest Now Colluthus say they in their reply could not make him a priest for that he died in degree of priesthod himselfe and neuer was consecrated bishop and that al imposition of handes or geuing of orders was compted of no force and that al they whom he had consecrated were brought downe againe to the order of the laitie and vnder the name and in order of lay men receiued the coÌ„munion Hereof they conclude that Ischyras could be no priest And therefore it was denied that there was the mysterie of the body and bloude of our Lorde VVhat may be iudged of the nevv communion By which example besides other points we are taught what to iudge of your pretensed Communion Againe what say you to Epiphanius who writeth against one Zacchaeus of his tyme for that being but a laye man with wicked presumption tooke vpon him to handle the holy mysteries and rashly to do the office of a Priest CoÌ„tra haereses lib. 2 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Least out by M. Ievvel Likewise where he findeth great fault with two other of which the one dwelt at a monasterie in the wildernes of Egypt the other at Sinaeum for that they feared not to execute the thinges that belong to Bishops not hauing receiued the imposition of handes The doiÌ„g
esse Papam esse coire in vnum possent c. Non enim credo aliquem esse adeo Impudentem Papae Assentatorem vt ei tribuere hoc velit vt nec errare nec in Interpretatione Sacrarum literarum hâ—llucinâ—ri possit We doubte not whether one man maie be a Pope and an Heretique both together For I beleeue there is none so shamelesse a flatterer of the Pope that wil saie * I saie it not read my wordes again as you saie M. Harding The Pope can neuer erre nor be deceiued in the exposition of the Scriptures This very saying M. Iewel bringeth in likewise against the Popes in the Defence pag 615. vnder the name of Alphonsus with the same Cotation And after that he hath rehersed the wordes thus he pipeth him selfe vp the triumphe against Hosius in despite of the Popes as if he had gotten of me a worthy and glorious conqueste Here M. Harding your owne principal Doctour Alphonsus calleth al them that mainteine your Doctrine and saie as you saie the shamelesse flatterers of the Pope But I saie on the other side here M. Iewel It pitieth me to see you so vaine a man and it is some paine also with litle profite for me stil to tel you one tale that al standeth vpon false grownde that you builde I had neede to be wel seene in Copia Verborum to be furnished with diuersitie of termes that I might by some change of speache ease the griefe of the Readers eares who must alwaies heare this muche at my hande that M. Iewel lyeth Looke Reader and peruse my woordes aboue rehersed and thou shalt see I saie not that the Pope can not erre nor be deceiued in the exposition of the Scriptures I saie he maie erre by personal errour in his owne priuate iudgement as a man and as a particular Doctor in his owne opinion But that he erreth or euer erred in publique iudgement in definitiue sentence and determinations touching matters of Faith that I vtterly denie VVho be they whoÌ„ AlphoÌ„sus in this case calleth Flatterers Alphonsus would them to be accompted flatterers who wil needes saie that the Pope can not erre or be deceiued in any case whiche neither I nor any learned Catholique man euer said You doo vs wrong therefore with your vncourteous language M. Iewel and belie Alphonsus faining him to call vs shamelesse Flatterers whiche he neuer meant It had benne your part to shewe where or when any Pope euer defined any false and erroneous doctrine to be receiued and beleeued of the Church Excepte ye shew vs this whiche we are sure ye can neuer shew ye maie spare such idle talke whereof ye haue great stoare whereby in many places of your bookes ye go about to proue that sundrie Popes haue erred Item in the place aforesaid Iewel That he is alvvaies vndoubtedly possessed of Gods holy Spiritâ— Confut. Fol. 285. a. Harding Not alwaies M. Iewel I saie it not I know and denie not but it maie wel be proued that some Popes haue in sundrie their Actes and Deedes lacked the direction of the Spirite of God as MeÌ„ne but not in Publique Decrees touching the necessarie doctrine of Faith In the place noted by your Cotation thus I saie Confut. 285. a. Sapient 8. Gods wisedom as the scripture faith disposeth al thinges sweetly and in one instant forseeth the ende and meanes that be necessary to the ende If he promise any man life euerlasting withal he geueth him grace also to doo good deedes whereby to obteine the same Whom he hath glorified saith S. Paule them he hath iustified Rom. 8. and called Matth. 16 Luc. 22. So whereas he hath by force of his praier made to the Father promised to Peter and for the saftie of the Church to euery Peters Successour that his faith shal not faile and therefore hath willed him to confirme his brethren that is to remoue al doubtes and errours froÌ„ them we are assured he wil geue him such witte diligence learning and vnderstanding as this Firmnesse and Infallibilitie of Faith and Confirming of Brethren requireth See further Reader what I saie in that place To this and to the rest said in that place M. Iewels chiefe maÌ„ner of answering Defence pag. 612. M. Iewel maketh answer in his pretensed Defence after his common manner with these graue and learned notes Sadly and Sagely and muche to the purpose Item Vntruthe fonde and childish c. Item O worthy graue reasons Neither answereth he the matter only by such marginal notes but also otherwise at ful where he furnisheth vs out two long leaues ful of trumperies pretended to be piked out of obscure and late writers Alphonsus de Castro M. Iewels doctours and the same for the more parte vtterly belied Beatus Rhenanus Legenda aurea Fasciculus rerum sciendarum Iohannes Stella Hulderikes forged Epistle Erasmus Annotations the disallowed Councel of Basil the Appendix or lable of the Councel of Constance whiche he fowly falsifieth reporting that of Iohn 22. whiche was said of Iohn 23. the vsurper also out of Vesellus the Glose vpon Gratian one Iohn of Paris Heruaeus Gerson Hostiensis the Canoniste Aeneas Syluius in that booke whiche he him selfe reuoked and recanted Petrarkes Rymes Lyra â—aldas Pâ—aâ—ina Iouerius Hermannus Gigas Iohannes Camoâ—ensis alleged by Cornelius Agrippa Iohn of Sarisburie Hermannus Rid an Heretique Cornelius Agrippa litle better in his booke of vanitie and of such litle worth late petie Doctours When he coÌ„meth to answer the pointe it selfe which standeth in the force of Christes praier made vnto the Father for the Firmnesse of S. Peters and his successours Faith thus he frameth his answer ful sadly I warrant you and like a godly Minister If the Pope should erre Defence pag. 614. saith he â—r be in heresie M. Ievv feareth not to vse his floutes speaking of Christ him selfe he might 〈…〉 in an Action of Couenant and require him to performe his promise Suche Flowtes and Scoffes becomme the Ennemies of Christes Churche and thereof this felowe serueth him selfe when learning faileth One great aduantage he hath ouer me he wil be sure to make moe lyes then I shall haue liste or thinke it labour worth to answere God be thanked he can not shewe any Pope that euer lacked the spirite of God in setting foorth any publike Decree touching any pointe of Faith to be holden of Christian people Item in the place aforesaid Iewel That at the Popes only hand vve must learne to knovv the vvil of God Confut. 324. Harding I saie not that we must learne to know the will of God at his hande onely That were a fonde doctrine For we may and doo learne our faith and what is the wil of God at the handes of others as of our Parentes our Frendes our Pastours our Curates our Ghostely Fathers our Preachers and our Bishoppes In the place by M. Iewel reprehended vpon occasion of the Apologie where the
al the Christian worlde specially for condemning of the Pope bicause his supreme Authoritie can not beare with sundry your errours and Heresies as against any man in the worlde besides The force of your argument is this Wee maie not beleeue Paule him selfe if he speake any thing of his owne Head thereby to condemne Priestes for their liuing Ergo Peter hath no more authoritie ne no more power to rule then the other Apostles O M. Iewel cal in these argumentes for shame of the worlde why suffered you them to escape your penne That S. Paule said somevvhat of his ovvn 1. Cor. 7. But how saie you Sir Shal you not finde where S. Paule spake of his owne some thing Haue you forgotten who said Nā caeteris ego dico non Dominus For to the reste I saie not our Lorde and yet you must beleeue him if you denie not the Scripture Againe saith he not some thing of worldly reason as you haue translated humanum Rom. 6. where he writeth to the Romaines Humanum dico propter infirmitatem carnis vestrae I speake as one that foloweth the trade of mannes reason for the infirmities sake of your fleshe I trust you wil be intreated to beleeue him Thus how discretely you bring in the Fathers to speake for you I neede not to declare Your owne bad stuffe sheweth it at large The Apologie Cap. 3. Diuis 5. pag. 108. And as Hierome saithe Al Bishoppes vvhere so euer they be be they at Rome Ad Euagrium De Simplicitate praelator be they at Eugubium be they at Constantinople be they at Rhegium be al of like preeminence and of like priesthood And as S. Cyprian saithe There is but one Bishoprike and a peece thereof is perfitely and vvholy holden of euery particular Bishop Confutation My lady the Interpreter not without the wil and aduise of this Defender hath altered the sense of the latine as the author of the Latine hathe altered the wordes of S. Hierome For neither speaketh S. Hierome of Bishoppes in the plural number neither saith the Latine Apologie that the Bishoppes be al of like preeminence whiche this translation hath but of the same merite and of the same Priesthood c. Iewel Pag. 109. Here to dissemble these childish Cauillations of the altering of Numbers the Singulare into the Plural and of the changing of this vvorde Merite into this vvorde Preeminence vvhiche great faulte if it vvere any by M. Harlinges ovvne Confession proceeded only from the Interpreter and not from the Authour c. Harding Dissemble hardely M. Iewel what ye liste so that with al ye confesse the truth that you are not hable honestly to discharge your selfe of that whiche you passe ouer by dissimulation Suche dissembling shiftes serue your turne not seldome as the which you cā sooner vse then against the truth shape a reasonable answere But leauing aside your dissimulation Tel me I praie you where finde you that euer I confessed that the faulte of chaunging this worde Merite into this worde This vvorde Merite changed by M Ievvel into this vvorde Preeminence Preeminence proceded only from your good lady the Interpreter and not from the Authour Haue not I in plaine wordes tolde you the contrarie Haue I not laid the fault as much vpon the Authour that allowed the Interpretation as your good Maistresse M. C. saith in her epistle as vpon the Lady Interpreter How then can you deliuer the Authour from al blame by myne owne Confession Looke better M. Iewel vpon the booke againe where if you shal finde no suche Confession of myne but the plaine contrarie remember who is not ashamed openly to auouche Vntruthe But it wil not be otherwise you haue by long practise gotten a ful perfite habite thereof Iewel Pag. 109. VVhat S. Hierome meant hereby Erasmus a man of great learning and iudgement expoundeth thus Hieronymus aequare videtur omnes Episcopos inter se c. Harding Erasmus answered Difference founde betwen Deacon and Priest in Order and betwen Bisshop and Bisshop in power of gouernment And is Erasmus in deede a man of suche learning and iudgement The .28 Chapt. as you say If he be howe happeth it that you condemne those articles of religion which he confesseth true He agnised the real presence of Christes body and bloud in the blessed Sacrament of the Aulter whiche you denie Erasmus against the false Gospellers Aduersus Pseudeuāgelicos fratres inferioris Germaniae Howe happeth it if he be a man of great learning that he wrote so earnest an epistle against the false Gospellers so he calleth them of your side of which number you are How happeth it that he wrote that vehemēt and long Epistle to the Brothers of the Inferiour Germanie cōmonly called the Lowe countrie to beware of al such heresies whiche you and your felowes do now professe If Erasmus be not such a one as you say why do you allege his autoritie whose iudgemēt in sundry articles ye contemne But what hath Erasmus to helpe you in this matter Truely when al is searched nothing at al. Yet by the waie it is to be marked that you would binde vs with Erasmus authoritie a man of our time whom your selfe in diuers Articles as in the approbation of the Masse of the real presence free wil and of such other do greatly dislike yet you wil not sticke to denie vtterly not only the autorities of the Fathers within these last nine hundred yeres but also of them sometimes that wrote within the first six hundred yeres For so do you deale afterward with that holy and great learned Father S. Leo whom you labour to discredit being pressed with the witnesse he geueth of the prerogatiue of the See Apostolike of Rome as though his desire were Pag. 111. as your false surmise is to enioie as great honour as he could for his owne time Haue you no better meane to auoide that Fathers authoritie M. Iewel but by charging him with ambition Where Erasmus saith Erasmus in Antidoto post Scholia in epist Hieronym ad Euagriū that S. Hierome seemeth to put in equal matche al Bishoppes together as if they were al equally the Apostles Successours that parte of his saying you could wel remember but where he saith within fiue lines folowing that the Metropolitane hath a certaine dignitie and Iurisdiction aboue other Bishops whiche taketh awaie the equalitie that you dreamed of your eyes without being called on that parte of the sentence were very loth to see Take the one with the other M. Iewel then is the equalitie of Bishoppes in regiment quite gonne though they remaine equal in the order of Priesthood and in that that the highest Archebisshop in the worlde yea the Pope him selfe is no more a Prieste nor Bishop then is the poore Bishop of Eugubium or who so euer is the lowest Bishop in the worlde though his authoritie to rule and to gouerne be more ample and large then
debet esse iudex in causa propria The Pope maie not be iudge in his ovvne cause Harding The Pope maie be iudge in the cause of the Churche Though Leos Authoritie be not greate in his ovvne cause The .29 Chapt. yet in the cause of the Churche being so auncient so holy so learned a Father by your owne graunt it must be very great The wordes you bring are of your owne forging Wherefore as ye haue hitherto benne a forger of Doctours Scriptures the Canon lawe and Gloses so now you are become a forger of the Ciuile lawe With what wordes the lawe is written here anonne you shal see But be it true that Vlpian said for so you should haue said The Emperour alleged for Vlpian and not the Emperour as your skil in the lawe vnskilfully telleth vs no man maie minister lawe vnto himselfe Yet neither he not the Emperour euer forbad but that a man maie truely reporte of his owne matters Now Pope Leo that holy man and great learned Clerke in the place by me alleged doth not minister lawe vnto him selfe in his owne cause but for the better gouernement of the Churche and that peace and good order maie the better be kepte in the Churche reporteth a difference or diuersitie of power to be emong Bishoppes with likenesse of Order and honour as S. Hierome in his epistle to Euagrius coÌ„fesseth them to be of one merite and of one Priestehood In declaring whereof he speaketh of the right that the Bishoppes of the See Apostolique S. Peters successours ought to haue in the gouernment of the vniuersal Church through out the whole worlde This M. Iewel was not his owne priuate cause but the cause of the whole Churche in whiche he might geue iudgement But M. Iewel guilfully seemeth to put the case as though there had ben many Catholiques that called Pope Leo to lawe for vsurping the authoritie not dewe vnto him and as thoughe he had ben defendant against them al yea as thoughe he had stepte vp into his iudgement seate and there sitting as a Iudge in his owne mater had pronunced sentence for him selfe Whiche thing he did not nor euer was there any catholique man that laid any suche kinde of vsurpation to his charge he neuer stoode as defendant nor sate as Iudge in his owne cause but discretely and truely as occasion serued signified vnto the worlde his lawful authoritie and his â—uccessours as Kinges vse to doo in their titles of honour and stiles If M. Iewel wil calle his double wiued lawier vnto him and with him peruse the lawe that beginneth Qui Iurisdictioni praeest neque sibi ius dicere debet â— Qui iu risdiccioni ff de iurisdict omn. iudic neque vxori vel liberis suis c. whiche is the true lawe that he should haue alleged and wil consider that Princes Kinges and Emperours vse to doo in their owne causes by very order of lawe and if he wil therewith searche out the right meaning of the lawe L. in priuatis ff de inoffic testamen In priuatis iudicus pater filium vel filius patrem iudicem habere potest he shal finde both that he hath fondely vainely and rashly alleged a lawe that he vnderstoode not nor made any thing to his purpose but onely to fil vp paper with wordes and also that it is one thing to saie Nemo debet sibi ius dicere as he falsely allegeth the Lawe and that it is a farre other thing to saie Qui iurisdictioni praeest neque sibi ius dicere debet neque vxori vel liberis suis neque libertis vel caeteris quos secum habet For so is the lawe vttered by Vlpianus As for your marginal note out of the Decrees you shew how barrein and poore your mater is that for defence of it you are faine to runne for helpe to notes put in the margent of the Glose a very poore shifte God wote To your marginal note I answere The Pope as there the Glosse saith if there be a mater in lawe betwen him and an other man about a temporal thing ought not him selfe to be iudge in that case and to take the thing into his owne possession before it be tried whose it is but to choose Vmpeeres to sitte vpon it Now marke what followeth good Reader 16. q. 6. Consuetudo tamen si vult esse Iudex in causa Ecclesiae potest esse yet if he list to be a iudge in a mater concerning the Churche he maie be Certainely no one thing more concerneth the wealth tranquillitie and good order of the Churche then that whiche Leo intreateth of in the epistle 84. to Anastasius the Bishop of Thessalonica whiche in my Confutation to good purpose I alleged Iewel Pag. 111. Concil Aphricanum cap. 105. Superbum seculi typhuÌ„ It is vvel knovven that the Pope hath sought for and claimed this vniuersal authoritie these many hundred yeres Pope Innocentius vvas therefore reproued of pride and vvorldely lordelinesse by the vvhole Councel of Aphrica Harding The Aphrican Councel vntruly reported by M. Iewel The 30. Chapt. The Pope hath not sought for that whiche our Lorde gaue vnto S. Peter no more then S. Peter sought for it at Christes graunt The fame he maie iustely claime for so muche as it perteineth to the feeding and gouernement of Christes flocke and to the strengthning of the faithful as being the Successour of S. Peter That you saie of Innocentius is vtterly false He was not so reproued of pride and worldely Lordelinesse as more like a proud worldely Lordeling then an humble plaine handler of Goddes Truthe you saie Neither be those wordes superbum seculi typhum which you laie forth in your Margent to be founde in any Epistle of the Aphrican Councel to Innocentius nor be they spoken or written at al against Innocentius as you beare vs in hande Neither was Innocentius then a liue when the Aphrican Councel was holden but departed this life long before I graunt there is extant an epistle of the Aphrican Councel to the learned Pope Coelestinus in whiche Epistle Innocentius that blessed man is not once touched Neither was the charitie of that whole Councel so smal as to speake so il of a holy Bishop so long before departed The manner of those Fathers was to praie for suche specially for the Bishoppes of Rome deceassed rehearsing their names in their Masses and in no wise to reporte so il of them How be it in that whole epistle Pope Innocentius is not so muche as once named nor spoken of There we finde these three wordes fumosum typhum seculi that is to saie the smoky pride of the worlde or the vaine stoutenesse of the temporaltie but in a farre other sense and to an other purpose then M. Iewel pretendeth Whether he rightly vnderstode the place or no I haue good cause to doubte It seemeth that the Bishop of Rome in the cause of Appiarius whom
the Aphrican Bishoppes had deposed and remoued from his Bishprike for crimes not sufficiently proued sent his Clerkes that were his Agentes in Aphrica vnto certaine noble menne of the Countrie bearing offices vnder the Emperour to require their assistence if neede should so require whiche is as muche to saie as now we vse to speake as implorare brachium seculare to cal vpon the temporal power for helpe that iustice maie be executed With this the Aphrican Bishoppes did muche mislike and therefore besought Pope Coelestine that it should no more be donne but that maters might be ended by them being Bishoppes of that prouince without al intermedling of the laie power The wordes of the epistle are these Concil Aphâ—ican cap. 105. Executores etiam clericos vestros quibusque potentibus nolite mittere nolite concedereâ—ne fumosum typhum seculi in Ecclesiam Christi quae lucem simplicitatis humilitatis diem Deum videre cupientibus praefert videamur inducere Furthermore we beseche you that you sende no more your Clerkes that be your Agentes vnto any of the great menne and that you graunt to no suche thing hereafter leste we should seeme to bringe the smoky or vaine stoutenesse of the worlde into the Churche of Christe whiche to them that couete to see God sheweth forth the light of simplicitie and humilitie This is the Vntruthe you make vpon the Aphrican Councel in reprouing Pope Innocentius of pride and worldely Lordelinesse fully answered Now as vow haue brought an vntruth against the Pope out of the Aphrican Councel as you pretend so maie it please you to consider of the contrarie reported in the behofe of the Popes supreme authoritie in gouernment out of a Councel of Aphrica where we finde the same autoritie with these wordes auouched and acknowleged Maximè tustè debent Episcoporum iudicia negotia ecclesiastica ab ipso praesulum examinari vertice Apostolico Epist Stephani trium CoÌ„ciliorum Aphrica ad Damasum PapaÌ„ Con. 10. 1. cuius vetusta solicitudo est tam mala damnare quà m releuare laudanda Antiquis enim regulis censitum est vt quicquid horum quamuis in remotis vel in longinquo positis ageretur prouincijs non prius tractandum vel accipiendum sit nisi ad notitiam almae sedis vestrae fuisset deductum vt eius authoritate iuxta quod fuisset pronunciatum firmaretur The iudgementes of Bishops and ecclesiastical maters ought most iustely to be examined of him that is the Apostolike toppe or the crowne of the head of the Prelates whose care it is of olde as wel to condemne il thinges as to releeue good thinges For it hath ben decreed by the olde Canons that what so euer matter of the Bishoppes were in sute though it were in prouinces that be farre of from Rome it should not be ended before it were brought to the notice of that your See that it might be assured by the authoritie of the same right so as the sentence in iudgement should be pronounced By these wordes and by the whole Epistle of the Fathers of that Aphrican Councel assembled together vnder the Archebishop Stephanus it appeareth euidently how reuerently they submitted them selues and the determination of their causes and controuersies vnto the Pope and how farre of they were from the outragious sprite as to charge Innocentius or any other Pope with pride and wordely lordelinesse as M. Iewel hath fained Iewel Pope Bonifacius 2. condemned S. Augustine and al the said Councel of Aphrica and called them al heretiques and Schismatiques Inter decreta Bonifacij 2. Instigante diabolo for the same and said they vvere al * leade by the Deuil Pope Zosimus to maintaine this claime corrupted the holy Councel of Nice Harding Bonifacius 2. Fowly be lyed The .31 Chapt. It is pitie this man hath not a good mater For where he maketh so muche of nothing what would he doo had he somewhat But it is easie to saie muche in a naughty cause for one that is not a shamed to lie It can not be founde among the Decrees of Pope Boniface the .2 vnto whiche M. Iewel referreth vs nor any where els that he euer condemned that blessed and learned Father S. Augustine by name nor the Councel of Aphrica by any solemne sentence pronounced against them Verely that he called them al Heretiques and Schismatiques for the same that is to saie for the Popes vniuersal authoritie or for any thing and that they were lead by the Deuil it is an impudent lie The most greuous wordes he vttereth against them are these in an Epistle that he writeth to Eulalius the Patriarch of Alexandria exhorting him to reioise and to geue warning to other Bishoppes neare vnto him to reioise also and to geue God thankes for that the Churche of Aphrica was reconciled and returned to the obedience of the Churche of Rome from whence they had seuered them selues for the space of a hundred yeres vpon some stomake as it appeareth for that they would not admitte any Appellations of the Bishoppes of Aphrica to be made vnto the Pope whiche authoritie the Pope claimed by a Canon of the Nicene Councel CoÌ„cil Sardicen ca. 7 Bonifac. 2. Epist ad EulabiuÌ„ CoÌ„cil to 1. pag. 1057. and likewise by a Canon of the Councel of Sardica Aurelius Carthaginensis Ecclesiae olim Episcopus cum collegis suis instigante Diabolo superbire temporibus praedecessorum nostroruÌ„ Bonifacij atque Coelestini contra Romanam Ecclesiam coepit Aurelius some time Bishop of the Churche of Carthage beganne with his felowe Bishops the Deuil intising them to be proude against the Churche of Rome in the daies of Boniface and Coelestine my predecessours c. Of Heretiques and Schismatiques here is not a worde And though he said the Deuil intised them yet wil it not folowe that al they were leadde by the Deuil The Deuil intiseth many yea whom doth he not intise to euil Yet al be not leadde by the Deuil To be intised of the Deuil is one thing to be leadde is an other Touching Pope Zosimus saie what ye can folowing your Maister Caluine and when ye haue said al that ye can saie it is wel knowen ye shal neuer clearely proue Caluine Institut Cap. 1. that he corrupted the Councel of Nice For this I referre the Reader to M. Stapleton in his Returne of Vntruthes vpon M. Iewel Articulo 4. fol. 30. sequentib Peruse the place Reader and thou shalt finde thy selfe wel satisfied touching this pointe That whiche there is said in defence of Zosimus against their sclaunderous reportes M. Iewel should first haue disproued if he had minded in that mater to trie out the truthe and then haue laied it againe in our waie But he ful craftily dissembleth al and maketh as though he had not seene any such thing therby bothe to encomber vs with ofte repeating of one thing and the reader with hearing that whiche hath ben
Pope Ihon 22. vvas reproued by Gerson and by the schoole of Paris for an Heretike Harding Of Pope Iohn 22. his errour see my Ansvvere to M. Iewels Vievv of his vntruthes before fol. 64. He was reproued for an opinion M. Iewel which he helde before he was Pope many yeres what the opinion was I haue declared before at large to whiche place I referre the reader for a ful answer But when being Pope he would haue confirmed that his wrong opinion that the soules of the iuste lacked the sight of God face to face vntil the daye of Iudgement God tooke him out of this life that al the world might know come who shal to sit in Peters chaier he shal neuer decree any Heresie to be mainteined as the Faith How be it it was not to be accoumpted heresie at that time as yet not being determined by the Church and semed to haue ben holden of certaine olde doctours of the Church as is before said The miracle of God in staying that man from confirming that errour by authentike decree in open Synode ought more to moue you if you were a man whom Gods workes could moue then his priuate erroneous opinion which hurteth no man but him selfe Iewel 132. Petrarcha saith Rome is a sanctuarie of al heresies Harding I neither beleue you nor him I am sure that men of greater authoritie then euer that ryming Poet was of hath said the contrarie But it may be right wel that your sclaunderous penne belieth Petrarcha Ambrosius in Epist ad papam Siricium Cyprian Lib. 1. Epist 3. In Math. cap. 16. Once you name not where he saith it But what so euer Petracha saie S. Ambrose whom we more regarde said that the Church of Rome kepeth alwaies the Apostolike beleefe whole and vndiminished And S. Cyprian saith that infidelitie can not haue accesse vnto the Romaines Iewel Lyra saith that many Popes haue fallen into heresies Harding He saith many as wel princes as chiefe priestes haue falleÌ„ from the faith but not that many haue decreed heresies as to be followed and embraced of others But how truly he saith that many haue fallen from the faith let him answer to it For I find not those many nor yet M. Iew. him selfe as diligeÌ„t as he is about it Wherin Lyra maie helpe vs for opening the text of holy Scriptures we gladly vse him as for his auctoritie specially touching antiquitie being so late a writer you know how litle weight his worde beareth in the iudgement of the learned And how is it come to passe that Nicolaus de Lyra is now so good an author with you M. Iewel who being a professed Frier in his life time followed the faith of the Romaine Church and beleued the Bishoppe of Rome to be the chiefe Bishop of Christendom and the Romaine Churche to be the head of al Churches Iewel 132. You knovv that Pope Hildebrand as he vvas charged by the Councel of Brixta vvas an aduouterer a Chuâ—che robber a periuâ—ed man a mankiller a Sorcerer and a renegate of the faith Harding I know that you lye I may saie it sauing my charitie rather then your worship For Pope Gregorie the seueÌ„th otherwise before he was Pope called Hildebrandus was a very holy man as Marianus Scotus doth witnesse who liued in the same time Marianus Srotus in Chronicis Pope HildebraÌ„dus persecuted and accused by HeÌ„rie the Emperour Marianus Scotus of Pohe Hildebrand and knew that Henrie the Emperour being enemie to Pope Hildebrand bicause the good Pope warned him of his faultes did procure a false conuenticle at Brixia and caused false accusations there to be laid in against him as he did the like also in Rome it selfe whence the Pope was constrained to flee Videns autem saith Marianus Scotus Henricus papam aufugisse congregatis 30. Episcopis fautoribuss suis in ipsa Romanae vrbis obsidione iussit haberisynoduÌ„ in qua Gregorius papafalsis inauditis criminationibus à fautoribus Henrici fictè compositis absens accusatur Denique dicebant cum prophanum scelestum amatorem discordiae virum sanguinuÌ„ sedem Apostolicam vsurpare per necromantiam Conspirantes ergo qui coÌ„uenerunt in vnum aduersus DominuÌ„ aduersus Vicarium eius Papam Gregorium daÌ„nauerunt eum But Henrie seing that the Pope was fled assembling together 30. Bishops who fauoured his part commaunded a synode to be kept euen as he was at the fiege of the citie of Rome in which Synode Gregorie the Pope being absent is accused of false crimes and such as were neuer heard of the which Henries fautours had purposely forged To be shorte they said he was a prophane man a wicked man a louer of discorde a bloudy man and that he had vsurped the See Apostolike by Necromancie They therefore who had thus assembled them selues together conspiring against our Lorde and against his Vicare Pope Gregorie condemned him If you were but a ciuil honest man M. Iewel you would not take that for a Truth which one enemie saith of an other Hildebrand acquitted by true and indiffereÌ„t historiographers It maie please you to read those Historiographers which wrote without partialitie as Marianus Scotus Platina Lambertus SchafnaburgeÌ„sis and Nauclerus with such like By perusing them you shal finde yourselfe a Lyer and Pope Hildebrand a vertuouse man and one that was zelously bent to correcte such faultes as were in the clergie at that time specially Simonie But though he had ben otherwise it hindereth not oure cause as long as he kepte the same Faith whiche he receiued of his forefathers Iewel Pag. 132. Platina calleth the Popes sometimes in scorne Pontificulos Platina in Romano 2 litle petite Popes sometimes monstra portenta monsters and vnnatural and ilshapen creatures Harding If Platina speake so of some Popes it is the more signe that he either hated the Popes or els that he spake as he thought and that he wrote not for flatterie as sometimes you saye of him I praye you what cause had Platina to flatter with them as with Hildebrand who were so long dead before he was borne And as for those with whom he liued he flattered them neuer a whit as maye appeare by the life of Pope Paulus the second Platina caÌ„not seme to haue flattered the Popes in vvritiÌ„g their liues Wel were then some Popes monsters Verely I thinke so with Platina concerning some few of their liues But euen those that were worste made no breache in the rule of the faith God so prouided alwaies that although Hel gates to wit al vices and al the power of the Deuil were bent against the Popes and the Churche of Rome yet al should not preuaile against the Rocke and true Confession of the Faith which euer hath ben and shal be in the Succession of Peters Chaire Whereupon S. Hierome doubted not to saye Hieron epist ad DamasuÌ„ Cathedrae Petri Communione consocior super illam petram aedificatam Ecclesiamscio I
of Christes flesh the onely meane of Resurrection to life And therefore your long talke is to no purpose which you vtter in this place They shal liue by the spirite of Christe who gaue them Faith and Charitie But doth not therefore S. Iohn speake also of real eating as though one effecte may not be wrought by diuers meanes concurring thereunto Ego saith Cyrillus id est Cyrill in Iohā li. 4. cap. 15. corpus meū quod comedetur resuscitabo eū I wil raise him that is to say my body which shal be eaten shal raise him Thus you see plainely that touching this point no lesse Clerke then Cyrillus teacheth the same that I said which you haue vniustly and rashly controlled as you haue done the reste of the Catholike Doctrine That matters of faithe and ecclesiastical causes are not to be iudged by the Ciuile Magistrate The. 14. Chapter Iewel Pag. 637. That a Prince or magistrate maie not lavvfully calae Prieste before him to his ovvne seate of Iudgement or that many Catholique and godly Princes haue not so done and done it lavvfully it is most vntrue Harding I haue tolde you M. Iewel Confut. Fol. 299. ae that the duetie of Ciuil Princes consisteth in Ciuil maters and euer said that Bishoppes ought to be obedient to Princes in suche cases whither so euer they cal them And if they make any temporal Decree the Bishoppe who hath temporal goodes vnder the Prince must obey without grudge Confut. Fol. 302. ae or gaine saying so farre as the Decree standeth with the honour of God But that in Ecclesiastical causes and maters of Faith mere temporal Princes haue any authoritie of them selues to cal Bishoppes and Priestes to their Seates of Iudgement or euer did it lawfully we vtterly denie Ambrosius lib. 5. Epist 32. Priestes only ought to be iudges ouer Priestes by Theosius S. Ambrose said to the Emperour Valentinian Nec quisquà m contumacem iudicare me debet quum hoc asseram quod augustae memoriae patertuus non solùm sermone respondit sed etiam legibus suis sanxit in causa fidei vel ecclesiastici alicuius ordinis eum iudicare debere qui nec munere impar sit nec iure dissimilis Haec enim verba Rescripti sunt Hoc est Sacerdotes de Sacerdotibus voluit iudicare Quinetiam si aliâs quoque arguerelar Episcopus morum esset examinanda causa etiam hanc voluit ad Episcopule iudicium pertinere Neither any man ought to iudge me as stubborne seing I affirme that whiche your father of most renoumed memorie not onely answered in worde but also established by his lawes that in a case of faith or any ecclesiastical order he ought to be iudge that is neither vnequal in office nor vnlike in right or authoritie For these are the wordes of the Rescripte That is he would Priestes to be iudges of Priestes And also if otherwise a Bishop were reproued and a cause concerning behauiour and manners were to be examined he would this cause of manners also to apperteine to the Bishoppes iudgement Vpon these wordes of Theodosius alleged and allowed by S. Ambrose An argument prouing that a Ciuile Magistrat maie not be iudge oner Priestes in causes ecclesiastical and matters of Faith thus I reason with you M. Iewel He can not be iudge of Bishoppes and Priestes nor cal them to his seate of Iudgement in Ecclesiastical causes and maters of Faithe that is vnequal in office or vnlike in right and authoritie But the Prince is vnequal to the Bishop in office and vnlike vnto him in right and authoritie For he hath no right nor authoritie to sacrifice to preache to binde to loose to excommunicate and minister Sacramentes Therefore the Prince can not be iudge of Bishoppes and Priestes nor cal them to his seate of Iudgement in any ecclesiastical cause or mater of Faith Againe no man hath authoritie ouer his superiour But the Bishop in maters of Faithe and Ecclesiastical causes is superiour to euery Prince Therefore in those causes the Prince hath no authoritie ouer the Bishop And if he haue no authoritie ouer him he can not cal him to his seate of iudgement Furthermore were it true that the Prince were equal with the Bishop in Ecclesiastical causes and matters of faith yet could he not cal him to his seate of iudgement ff ad S. Trebel L. ille § Tēpestiuum quia par in parem non habet potestatem bicause the equal hath no authoritie or power ouer his equal But to see M. Iewels arte in facing out this mater let vs consider the authorities that he bringeth to proue his purpose And bicause he blaseth this saying in the toppe of his margent with great letters VVhat it is to be conuēted before a Magistrate Spiegelius in verbo conuenire A Bishop conuented before the Magistrate let vs first define what it is to be conuented before a Magistrate The lawiers saie Conuenire est aliquem in ius vocare To conuent a man is to cal him into the lawe and so Conueniri coram magistratu est in ius vocari à magistratu to be conuented before a magistrate is to be called into the lawe by the magistrate To cal a man into the lawe is a iudicial acte proceding of superiour authoritie in him that is iudge both of the partie so called and also of the cause wherefore he is called As if the Maior of London would conuent any of the Citizens he must both haue iurisdiction ouer that Citizen and also authoritie to iudge in that cause for whiche the Citizen shal be conuented But no ciuil magistrate hath authoritie by vertue of his temporal office to be iudge our Bishoppes in ecclesiastical causes as it is before proued and shal hereafter appeare Therefore no temporal magistrate can conuent any Bishoppe or Priest before him in any Ecclesiastical cause But let vs heare M. Iewel Cod. de Episcopis et clericis L. Nullus Iewel Pag. 637. Iustinian the Emperour him selfe vvho of al others most enlarged the Churches priuileges saith thus Nullus Episcopus inuitus ad ciuilem vel militarem iudicem in qualibet causa producatum vel exhibeatur nisi princeps iubeat Let no Bishop be brought or presented against his vvil before the captaine or Ciuil Iudge vvhat so euer the cause be onlesse the Prince shal so commaunde it Harding Seing Iustinian as you saie of al others did most enlarge the Churches Priuileges is it likely that he would most of al others breake them And whereas he made a lawe Authent 83. Coll. 6. vt Clerici apud proprios Episcopos that Clerici apud proprios Episcopos conueniantur primùm Clerkes shoulde be conuented first before their owne Bishoppes in causa pecuniaria in a money mater and afterwarde before the Ciuil Magistrate if either for the nature of the cause or for some other difficultie the Bishop could not ende it yet he
Gentilium fieri solet appellationem interposuerunt Oh see the desperate boldenesse of rage and furie As if it were in the suites of Heathens and Paganes so these menne haue put vp their Appeale Nowe sir if he had ben of the minde that you imagine or had thought it lawful for Constantine to heare and determine ecclesiastical causes or a right apperteining to his Emperial estate he woulde not haue tolde vs that he thought it a faulte to intermedle in suche matters and therefore asked pardone of the holy Bishoppes Neither would so wise an Emperour seing those Bishoppes appealing in that cause haue dâ—tâ—sted their doinges and cried O rabida furoris audacia oh the desperate boldnesse of rage and furie Wherefore M. Iewel neither this facte of Constantine nor that authoritie of S. Augustine can furder your pretended conuention of Bishoppes before Ciuil Magistrates Let vs see what foloweth Iewel Pag. 638. But vvhat speake vve of other Priestes and inferiour Bishoppes The Popes them selues notvvithstanding al their vniuersal povver haue submitted them selues and made their purgations before kinges and Emperours 2. q. 7. Nos si Gerson in Serm. Paschali Pope Liberius made his humble appearance before the Emperour Constantius Pope Sixtus before Valentinian Leo the thirde before Carolus Magnus Leo 4. before Levves the Emperour Iohn 22. vvas accused of heresie and forced to recant the same vnto Philippe the French king Harding The higher euery good man is the more humbly he behaueth him selfe If then the Popes hauing an vniuersal power ouer Christes Churche did submitte them selues to Princes and Emperours they shewed muche humilitie in their hartes and confidence in their causes and proue against you M. Iewel that if this submission had not ben made voluntarily by them nor King nor Caesar coulde haue had authoritie or power to haue benne iudges ouer them as you maie see by the example of that good Emperour Constantine refusing to be iudge ouer Bishoppes and saying Sozo lib. 1 cap. 17. Deus vos constituit sacerdotes potestatem vobis dedit de nobis iudicandi ideo à vobis rectè iudicamur vos autem non potestis ab hominibus iudicari God hath appointed you Priestes and geuen you power to iudge of vs and therefore we are rightly iudged of you but ye can not be iudged of menne that is of laie menne and menne as S. Ambrose reported of Theodosius whiche I declared before that are vnequal in office M. Ievvel failing of his purpose falleth from the Popes purgatioÌ„ before Emperours to their appearance before Emperours vvhiche no man denied Liberius appearing before Constantius Tâ—â—odorit Eccles Hist lib. 2 cap. 16. Pope Sixtus after vvhat forte he made his purgatioÌ„ and for vvhat cause and vnlike in authoritie and right Of suche Bishoppes maie not be iudged The Pope Liberius you saie made his humble appearance before Constantius It is true But appearance is not purgation M. Iewel You promised to tel vs of Popes that submitted them selues and made their purgations before kinges and Emperours and beginning with that good Pope you forgette your selfe and for making of a purgation you tel vs of making appearance Whereby we gather that either you passe not what you saie or remember not what ye promise Liberius dealing with Constantius the Arian Emperour at that appearance was suche as became a Bishoppe of the Apostolike See For in that cause he would neither be ouerborne by the authoritie of the Emperour nor yelde vnto his wickednesse against Athanasius for a longe time muche lesse acknowledge him for his superiour or iudge As for Pope Sixtus it is certaine that he made his purgation before the Emperour Valentinian But he did it M. Iewel in Concilio in a Councel of Bisshoppes and not in a courte of the Prince And he did it of humilitie to auoide the suspicion and malice of his aduersaries and not to geue any President to others to doo the like nor to preiudicate the authoritie of the Apostolique See These are his wordes in the place that your selfe allege Vnderstande ye 2. q. 4. MaÌ„dastis Nostra authoritate that I am falsely accused of one Bassus and vniustly persecuted Whiche the Emperour Valentinian hearing commaunded a Synode by vertue of our authoritie to be assembled When the Synode was assembled I satisfying al with great examination albeit I might otherwise haue escaped yet auoiding suspicion I made my purgation before them al discharging thereby my selfe from suspicion and from emulation and enuie Sed non alijs qui hoc noluerint aut non sponte elegerint faciendi formam dans But not geuing a president to others to doo the like that either shal not be willing or wil not voluntarily choose this kinde of purgation Lo M. Iewel your owne authour condemneth you Pope Sixtus made his purgation not onely before Valentinian but coram omnibus before al Bishoppes and others assembled in the Synode And he did it not by compulsion of any superiour Authoritie but of humilitie to declare his innocencie and not to geue any other a president to doo the like And by this ye maie perceiue that the Emperour had of him selfe nor authoritie to cal that Councel nor power to summone the Pope to his Iudgement Seate nor any iurisdiction to force him to make his Purgation before his Maiestie For al was done by the submission of the Pope He consented to the Emperours calling of that Councel he gaue him licence to heare his purgation and to be iudge in that cause And he that geueth an other authoritie and commission is by natural reason higher and of greater power in that case then he that receiueth the authoritie and commission Wherefore Pope Sixtus making his purgation before the Emperour Valentinian can not be said to haue benne conuented before a laie Magistrate as his superiour and lawful iudge Leo 3. and Leo 4. Concerning Leo the thirde and Leo the fourth their case is like When they made their Purgation the one said euen in the place that you allege hoc faciens non legem prascribo caeteris 2. q. 4. Audite 2. q. 7. Nossi doing this I doo not prescribe a lawe to force other menne to doo the like The other gaue the Emperour licence to appointe Commissioners to heare his cause and submitted him selfe to their iudgement and therefore we saie the Emperour was not their iudge nor superiour by any princely authoritie but by these Popes permission and appointement As for Pope Iohn the 22. of whose errour you make muche a doo in so many places of your bookes I haue said sufficiently before in the Answer to your View of your Vntruthes Fol. 64. sequent Where I haue declared how falsly you belie him and wherein he erred touching the state of the Soules of the iust after this life And here I saie againe that it is most false that euer he recanted any heresie before Philippe the Frenche king In deede the
benne halfe in a phrenesie you might haue learned L. NaÌ„ ad ad ea ff de legibus ff de regu lis iuris that ex ijs quaeraro accidâ—nt lages non fiunt of those thinges that happen seldome lawes are not made And Quae propter necessitatem recepta sunt non debent in argumentum trahi those thinges that are receiued for necessitie ought not to be drawen to an argument or president to be followed Wherefore â—â—ither vpon the doinges of the Emperours in that great and lamentable schisme of the Church neither vpon Zabarella you can builde that Bishoppes may ordinarily be conuented before a ciuil Magistrate in ecclesiastical causes But sir seing you thought it conuenient for your purpose to vse the authoritie of Zabarella although you haue fowly falsified and misreported his wordes tel vs by what reason you maie refuse his authoritie if we can allege it against you He saith in the same treatie that you allege Papa est vniuersalis Episcopus Zabarella M. Ievvels ovvne doctor alleged agaiÌ„st M. Ievvel Papa non habet superiorem Papa habet iurisdictionem potestatem super omnes de iure Sedes Apostolica errare non potest The Pope is the vniuersal Bishop The Pope hath no superiour The Pope hath iurisdiction and power ouer al by lawe The Apostolique See can not erre Why admitte you not this Is it reason that you should admitte an authours saying the whiche he spake and allowed in a case of necessitie for auoiding of a greater danger and not admitte the same authours saying in the same treatie whiche he speaketh according to receiued and approued doctrine of the Catholique Church Aske your aduocate L. Si quis Cod. de testibus and he wil tel you that reason and lawe faith That si quis vsus fuerit testibus ijdemque testes producantur aduersus eum in alia lite non licebit personas eorum excipere If one vse witnesses in a cause and the same witnesses be brought against him in an other controuersie it is not lawful for him to make exception against their personnes And if either reason or lawe could preuaile where heresie hath entred you should not onely admitte this but also that whiche he saith in an other place â—â—â—â—stas 〈…〉 immediate pendat à Deo Ioan. 21. per illa verba Pasce 〈…〉 Papa habet potestatem supra omnes quic omnes sunt â—â—â—s Papae vicem Dei gerit in terris Zabarella in ClemeÌ„t de SenteÌ„t reiudicata cap. pastoralis Ibidem in Clement de magistris cap. Inter. de Sentent excommu cap. ex frequeÌ„tib The power of the Pope dependeth immediatly of God by those wordes feede my sheepe The Pope hath power ouer al bicause al be sheepe The Pope beareth the person of God in earth For he spake this with as good aduise as he spake the other And this is generally allowed and that but in a case Wherefore if his authoritie be good in the one ought it not to be good in the other Now therefore M. Iewel I reporte me to your indifferent iudgement how true it is that you saie that a Prince or a ciuil magistrate maie lawfully cal a Priest before him to his owne seate of iudgement and that a Bishop maie be conuented before the Magistrate as his lawful and superiour iudge in ecclesiastical causes No one example or sentence that ye haue yet alleged doth proue that vaine assertion of yours Neither could ye haue had any aduantage by them if ye had truely reported their wordes and declared the circumstances why and wherefore they were spoken But that liked you not Wherefore referring your corruption and false dealing in these matters of weight to the judgement of God and examination of the indifferent and wise I conclude against you with S. Augustine S. Ambrose S. Chrysostome and al other Catholique Fathers that it is not conuenient Extr. de Maiorit obed cap. 2. in marg nor lawful for a king to cal priestes before him to his owne seat of Iudgement as their superiour in ecclesiastical causes As for the note glosed in the Decretalles which ye bring to proue that priestes are exempted from the Emperours iurisdiction by the Popes policie and the princes consent and not by the worde of God we tel you that suche glosed notes declare you to be a very Gloser and argue that your stoare is farre spent when you rest vpon such marginal glosed notes Were it graunted which in no case we graunt that Bisshoppes and priestes were exempted from the Emperours iurisdiction in ecclesiastical causes onely by the Popes policie and consent of princes for confirmation whereof they haue made diuers lawes and geuen out large priuileges yet these lawes standing vnreapealed and priuileges vnauthorized they can not be conuented lawfully before the ciuil magistrate For it standeth not with the Maiestie of a prince to doo against his owne lawes and breake the priuileges by him selfe graunted to others before he hath with as mature aduise and consideration reuoked them as he did first graunte them That the Canonistes are wrongfully charged by the Apologie with teaching the people that Simple Fornication is no sinne The 15 Chapter The wordes of the Apologie Defence Pag. 357. They be the Popes ovvne Canonistâ—â— vvhiche haue taught the people that Fornication betvven single foâ—â—â— iâ— no sinne Harding A sclaunder vttered by the Apologie against the Canonistes not recanted in the Defence touching the thing but only touching the errour of the name IN my CoÌ„futation I saie that this is a greuous offence and worthy to be pounished in processe I saie to the makeâ—s of the Apologie How proue ye it They allege for it one Iohn de Magistris How be it M. Iewel hath recanted that errour and confesseth him selfe to haue ben deceiued For he graunteth it was Martinus de Magistris whom he meant or should haue meant He should doo wel to recant diuers other the like his errours For he hath not only ben deceiued by his note bookes or his Notegatherers in naming Iohn de Magistris for Martinus de Magistris but also in the names of sundrie other menne as it shal be declared in the nexte Chapter But touching the sclaunder of the Canonistes if Martinus de Magistrâ—â— had so taught yet the matter is not cleare for he wâ—â— no Canoniste but a Schoole Doctor of Diuinitie Againâ— he â—â—â—â—ht not the people as our Maisters of the Apologie â—â—e but onely wrote of that matter after the Scholastical manner from vnderstanding whereof the peoples simple capacitie is farre of Wel let these three errours Lyes or ouersightes be â—inâ—â—ed at Hitherto the Canonistes are not touched but sclaundered What shal we answer for Martinus de Magistris Certainely neither that Doctour taught either the people or any other person that vngodly and false Doctrine Certaine it is that in this Treatie De Temperantia quaestione 2. he taught the contrarie where