and the childe after the sixth yeare of his gouernement beyng deade God placed a woman ouer the kingdome of Englande who also ought to haue bene furder from gouerning the Church than a childe for euen the kinde whiche at the laste displeased not in a childe so displeased the holy Ghost in a woman so farre as pertaineth to the gouernment of the Church that he in whom Christ spake doubted not to write I permitte not a woman to teach in the Church If you recken the yeares of King Edwardes raigne to inferre by the taking of him awaye so soone Gods misliking of his gouernement as you still shewe your malicious and ouer saucie constructions of gods iudgementes so ye bewray withall the foudnesse of your argumentes Did not Quéene Marie raigne a shorter while than hée and why note ye not the yeares of hir raigne also but this you ouerpasse in sylence and turne your argumente to hir kynde in that shee was a woman to argue Gods displeasure for the Princes gouernemente of the Churche but ye alleage nothyng that ye alledged not before oute of Sainte Paule I permitte not a vvoman to teache in the Churche neyther to vsurpe authoritie ouer the man but to bee in sylence Trow you Maister Saunders this is to bée stretched to gouernemente that no woman maye haue anye authoritie to gouerne a man if ye construe it thus howe will ye make your former saying good that the ryghte of a kingdome pertayneth no lesse to vvomen than to men alledging the examples of Debora Athalia and Alexandra and the lawe Num. 27. ye muste néedes therefore confesse that he speaketh there no otherwyse than â—…ée dothe 1. Corinthians 14. of women not simply but of suche women as are wiues Neyther of all authoritie but of authoritie ouer the husbande Neyther of all speaking exhorting or commaunding but of the publique ministerie of preaching And thus doth your owne Cardinall Caietane expounde it Docere supple publice c. neque dominari directe hoc respicit vxores to teach to wite publikly c. neither to rule this is directly spokeÌ„ of vviues And so Catharinus hic locus manifeste de coniugata intelligitur c. This place manifestlye is vnderstoode of a vvife in the same sence vvherein it is read in another place let vvomen holde their peace in the Churches for it is not permitted to them to speake but to bee subiecte euen as the lavve saith But by the vvaye vvee muste bevvare that iniurie be done to none Although by no meanes it be the office of anye vvoman to teache notvvythstanding if anye vvoman bee endued vvith singular grace of God for God is free from all lavve that coulde bee able to doe these thyngs vvhen it shoulde bee thought meete shee vvere not to be hindred chiefelye hauing the gifte of prophecie but it vvere lavvfull for hir to speake freelye As is read of Olda and Debora that iudged the people of Israell as is apparant in the booke of the iudges Doth not the Apostle also warne that the former holde his peace if it be reuealed to another For we know that that glorious and one of the most deere spoâ—…ses of Christ Saint Katherine of Senes taught in times paâ—…e and hath made sermons yea euen in the publique consistoâ—…e of the Pope although she toke not vpon hir these things but with good leaue of Christs owne vicaâ—… who best knewe in 〈◊〉 to be the true spirite of God and the feruencie of charitie to be giuen hir to edifie the Churche in those troublous tymes when the scisme raigned c. Thus farre and furder saith this Popishe Bishop whereby it appereth that the Papists theÌ„ selues vnderstande not this sentence of Saint Paule for a simple debarre to all women no not to preache in the open Churche if neede so required so that she haue the Popes leaue And can the Pope giue leaue in a time of scisme to maintaine his factioÌ„ when two or thrée Popes striue for the triple diademe and to Saint hir for hir labour And shall it not be lawfull for a Christian Quéene not attempting hir selfe to preache to set forth by the authoritie due to all princes suche lawes whereby gods truth maye be preached by those that are lawfully called therevnto may not a Quéenâ—… by vertue of hir royall office in the open assemblye of hir owne subiects speake exhort persuade and commaunde hir people being also the Church of Christ to abolish al errors and receiue the onely truth of God was it lawfull for the Empresse Irene to publishe hir decrees in the Churche for the erecting of Images against the worde of God and is it not lawfull for the Quéenes Maiestie by publique decrées to pull them downe and forbid the worship of them according to gods worde this sentence therefore euen by theyr owne witnesse is but wrested to debarre a womans gouernment of the Church But Maister Saunders procéeding on his argument for Quéene Marie saith To the same purpose it came that the greate goodnesse of God called such a Queene to the rule of the kingdome that both sawe this selfe same thing and confessed it For Queene Marie not onely toke not this proude title of the head of the Church but also when she was admonished of others â–ª that she would be like hir father she brought forth most weightie reasons why she ought not to do it VVhervpon she chiefely exhorting therto that title was omitted and the proper honour restored to the successors of Peter If the title as ye saye M. Saunders be proude Quéene Marie had done wel to leaue it but your Pope not ouer wel to take it howbeit this title as King Henry and King Edwarde before toke it was no proude title but a title of their charge and duetie And therefore she ought to haue retained it nor did well in leauing it and rendring it to a foraigne prelate that had nought to do therwith And in whoÌ„ in deede it is both a proude and an Antichristian title both spoyling Christian Princes of their principall office in their particular estates and also bereauing Christ of his glory ouer his vniuersall Churche Neither can he claime it as successor of Peter Peter neuer hauing the possessioÌ„ of it And what waightie reasons soeuer she persuaded hir selfe withall to shake it off she taking the kingdome on hir the waight and burden lay still on hir charge before god And if your reason be ought of the effect and sequele of this hir refusall into what extréeme miserie was this Realme broughte in so shorte a time by the Legates spoyling by the Prelats burning by the Italians pilling by the FrenchmeÌ„s winning by the Spaniardes oppressing and by gods diuine Iustice scourging the Realme with strange diseases droughts waters dearthes to conclude the Quéene hir selfe and crowne impouerished all the Realme in daunger of perpetuall thraldome and vtter vndoyng if God of his infinite mercie
of Ozias whose yeres remayning are 27. And so he raygned as the text sayth 52. yeres But whether this computation be true or no it playnly appeareth that he continued king still and was buried as a king and his sonne began not to raygne til his father were dead Which argueth that for all this haynous facte which God so maruellously and dreadfully reuenged insomuche that Iosephus CoÌ„mestor the Glosse Lyra and diuers other say that the terrible earthquake mentioned in Amos 1. and in Zacharie 14. was done at that present instant when God stroke the king for attempting this deede not withstanding he retayned stil his estate though he could not for his sicknesse 〈◊〉 himselfe the office So little did God suffer the Priests or any other to depose hâ—…m howsoeuer the king deserued it or rather a worsse punishment Thus this exaÌ„ple of Ozias that is so often alleaged so much triuÌ„phed vpon as it is meerâ—… slanderous so maketh it nothing for the Papists but cleane coÌ„fuâ—…es them playnâ—…g argueth that howe feruently soeuer the Ministers of Christe may reproue and rebuke a wicked Prince for his offences yet be his offences neuer so great the Bishop hathe no suche authoritie that he may depose his Prince but muste commit the punishment vnto god But nowe of this example of Ozias leprie we shall haue another argument And as Lepers should be discerned of the Priests whether they be whole or infected so the iudging of heresie pertayneth to the onely Priests of god Therefore by the manifest testimonie of diuine scripture it is euicted that an heretike king both may be and ought to be deposed least he infect all his subiects with that kinde of disease For he can not seeme to haue his common senses that will thinke this to be yelded to the infection of the minde that he graunteth is to be denied to the infection of the body Of the corporall leprie it is thus written whosoeuer shall be infected with any leprie is seuered at the will of the Priest all the time that he is a leper and vncleane he shall dwell alone without the tentes All which things sithe they hapned to the Iewes in a figure but are written to vs for our learning the matter must thus be taken that the cohabitation of them with the faithfull must be denied to be permitted that bring strange doctrine straked as it were with spottes of leprie into the Church Nowe if neyther priuate men alone but also kings were bounde by thys lawe as the holy scripture testifieth of king Ozias truely kings also beeing spotted with hereticall wickednesse are by the iudgement of the Priests to be driuen bothe from the vse and administration of the kingly power The former argument of example is now drawn to another of a similitude the leprie béeing compared vnto heresie To this argument first I answer that although I denie not the proportioÌ„ of the similitude béeing rightly applied as S. Augustine vseth it comparing heresie to a leprie in respecte of the filthe and contagion of it notwithstanding where we haue not the expresse vse of the scripture for it I denie that any argument of a similitude made of man is 〈◊〉 sufficient force to euicte a controuersie in the schoole of God And therefore this is a manyfest vntruthe that by the manyfest testimonie of diuine scripture it is euicted that an heretike king may and ought to be deposed Name that manyfest testimonie for as yet you haue not and héere you make but an argument of a similitude But neither a similitude much lesse a collection of your self to frame an argument from a similitude theron is a manyfest testimonie of diuine scripture therfore this is a manyfest false assertion Secondly I answere This similitude as you here apply it is of lesse force in that you wrest the same similitude to other things as to auricular confession and to assoyling froÌ„ sinnes and therfore it serues not properly but is wrested to deposing of Princes Thirdly I answere if this similitude were admitted of the Priests desceâ—… the leprie then and the Priests discerning heresie nowe yet commeth it not home inough to depose the Prince to exclude him froÌ„ his kingdome For the Priest had no such authoritie giuen him â—…uer a leper to disâ—… him of his goods inheritance Only the Priest fouÌ„d out whether it were a leprie or no pronounced him a Leper if he were founde so to be Whiche done the lawe tooke place of such a person to be excluded from coÌ„panie The execution of which law was not done by the Priest but by the Magistrates and the people as appeareth Num. 5 And the Lorde spake vnto Moses saying Commaund the children of Israel that they put out of the Host euery leper and euery one that hath on issue whosoeuer is defiled by the dead c. So that the 〈◊〉 of lepers was not by the authoritie of the priest but by the princes authoritie or coÌ„maÌ„demâ—…t the peoples executioÌ„ only the priest discerned declared who was who was not a 〈◊〉 And therefore this law reacheth not so farre as to the iudgemeÌ„t of deposition much lesse to the taking away of any maâ—… 〈◊〉 â—…heritance least of all of the Princes Fourthly I answers to the words that you cite for the Priests authoritie herein out of Leuit 3. VVhosoeuer shal 〈◊〉 spotted with a Leprie is seuered at the will of the Priest all the time that he is a Leper and vncleane he shall dwell alone without the tents This sentence as you haue set it downe in distinct letters is not in all that Chapter nor any other that I finde so that except you quote some other place I doubte it will proue a lie and a shamefull abusing of the holy scripture If you thinke it be holy as ye call it how dare you thus hacke and peruerte it and where finde you these wordes separatus est ad arbitrium Sacerdotis He is separated at the will of the Priest as though it were at his wiâ—… or arbitrement wheras he did but as the law commaunded him and was prescribed in euery thing what he should do therin Fiftly I answere this lawe was pertaining to the Iudiciall law of the Israelâ—…ts But the Iudicials in the olde lawe touch not vs nor be any figures of our Iudiciall lawes and therefore this is wrested herevnto â–ª Sixtly â–ª I answerâ—… the application of S. Paules sentence â—… Coâ—… 〈◊〉 is no lesse manifestly wrested â–ª For S. Paule speaketh nothing there of this matter but of other matters â—…ther but Haec autem omnia Al these things â–ª Haec autem omnia superius 〈◊〉 sayth Haâ—…o â–ª All 〈◊〉 things aforesayde And therefore â–ª 〈◊〉 do â—…ll to applye this in generall I denie 〈◊〉 but as â—…or ouâ—… 〈◊〉 or instruction But not for our descanting or construction â–ª to make 〈◊〉 as 〈◊〉 liste vpon them For
Princes that they mislyke and is in déede to be vtterly mislyked of all Christians But as this is a plaine description of your Popes supremacie that playeth in all these poynts Heraclius part so it nothing toucheth that supremacie that the Quéenes maiestie claymeth It is but your wicked malice to slaunder hir with such tyrannicall vsurpation of Heraclius as they condemne Whie doe ye not rather take theyr other comparison from Constantinus Pogonotus to al other godly Princes and referre that to hir regiment With what care and singuler diligence trauaile and godlinesse when the Churches were horibly deformed and torne by the sect of the Monothelites He summoned the sixt generall Councell he ouerwhelmed not the debating of the controuersie of doctrine by might or preiudice He willed the Ministers of the Churche and preachers of the worde of God to searche out which opinion was and which was not agreable to holye writte He regarded not the ensamples of hys auncesters who by publike Edictes had approued the doctrine of the Monothelites which was harde for him to abolishe Neyther did the authoritie of the Patriarches and Bishoppes in Constantinople and all ouer the East that stifly helde that opinion any thing moue him Nor he suffred himselfe to be made afrayde although he heard that the pryde of the Byshop of Rome was incredible as one that wickedly chalenged a dignitie and authoritie aboue other Bishops and teachers But sent his letters to him exhorting him to come or sende some other in his place Neyther gaue he him any prerogatiue nor craueth licence of hym to call the Councell but of hys owne duetie he defineth him selfe for the appoynting of the Councell He louingly biddeth the Romaine and other Bishoppes not to bee absent at so necessarie matters and concerning the Churches publike weale The Emperour himselfe is present at the Synode not as a dumbe or deafe person like a cifer in Algorisme or receyuing the decrees without iudging of them or placing the B. of Romes Legates in the chiefest place and receyuing them without all contradiction as oracles from them as it were from Apollos triuet but modestly reuerently and godly as much as became his calling he gouerned the Synode propounding to them the state or scope of the cause and enquiring on a rowe gathered their sentences togither least ought should be done rashly or confusedly He commaunded not the one partie but the contrarie partie also plainly and without subtilties to declare their opinions and what groundes they had of their sentences out of the holye scriptures and what autenticall witnesse of the approued fathers And so forth they declare howe indifferently he dealt with either partie knowing that he must not condemne any before he knewe the full matter And when it was euidently found out that the Monothelites could not defend their opinion by the clere testimonies of the scripture nor any sentences of the doctours allowed yea when it was founde out they hacked of purpose certaine of the Doctours sayings and in place of them cited certeyne sayings falsly fathered in the Doctors names theÌ„ the Emperor subscribed to the iudgemeÌ„t of al those that thought aright and earnestly and stoutly executed the condemnation made in the name of them all Here these wryters commend this Emperor the more for that he had about him no doubt say they such parasites as woulde tickle in his eare that these thinges were vnsitting foâ—… his maiestie to intermeddle him selfe with the brawles of the Churches pelting Doctours It were a blemish to him to condemne his ancesters to cal into doubt or retract things already decreed This were not the safest way Let the bishops alone with the matter for euen they are able to make lawes agaynst the Emperors estate and abase it The Emperour by his authoritie may do no more than commaund silence sende into exile or punish with other violence those that make clamors or disobey the councels decree But the Emperor not regarding these fancies thought it honorable to him to be present in the midst of the teachers of gods worde assisting not a little the triall and iudgement of the coÌ„trouersie This ensample these wryters thus set out for a princes gouernmeÌ„t dealing ouersight in the chiefest ecclesiastical causes And thus before they determined in generall that God or deined not Princes to spoile their subiects and make themselues â—…at Neither onely to attende to outward discipline and that men may liue in honest tranquilitie for say they seing that magistrates are in the scriptures called Gods this ought to bee their first and chiefest care that their subiects serue God after such a sorte that his kingdome in their dominions may bee knowne encreased and conserued that is to were sincere doctrine c. may be deliuered remaine passe froÌ„ theÌ„ to their posteritie To this end tendeth all politike administration all defence of peace and neighborhod that laborsome care of getting the liuing gathering goodes that these spirituall euerlasting goodes both of the body of the mind should be gotten Thus do they stretch out further than doth M. St. the bounds of a princes gouernment to al ecclesiastical canses And all that they write on the other part is against such a popish supremacie as establisheth maketh a new religioÌ„ quicquid imperitaâ—…erit reâ—… And yet sée howe spitefully and falsly M. St. wresteth it as writteÌ„ against the Q. maiestie When as he confesseth himselfe they coÌ„mend hir euen by the ensample of Constantine they allow that supreme gouernment that she doth take vpon hir Now M. St. after his maner presupposing we will reiect these writers as though they spake against the supreme gouernmeÌ„t of the Quéene In case ye thinke sayth he theyr testimonie not to haue weight ynough then herken to your their Apostle Luther who writeth that it is not the office of kings princes to coÌ„firm no not the true doctrine but to be subiect and serue the same The effect of this argument is this princes must not take on them so to confirme the true doctrine that they be not subiect therevnto nor serue but rule the same Ergo Princes may not set forth the true doctrine nor be supreme gouernors in their dominions ouer all ecclesiastical persons and causes This argument is like to his fellowe aboue And as ye wrested the former writers so wrest ye Luthers saying also whose seÌ„tence as it is nothing against the godly gouernment of our most noble soueraigne subiect to the principall authoritie of Gods word that it might be of chiefest authoritie subduing thereto the authoritie of all other writers remouing those superstitions that exalted them selues in authoritie equall or aboue Gods worde so this sentence is eftsones as the other agaynst such vsurpation as is euident that your Pope taketh vpon him But M. Stapleton dreaming that he hath so sore pressed vs and this is so harde and straunge a case that
other I build this argument euen according to your owne definition of a supreme gouernour and master Feckenhams offer A supreme gouernour is he say you that hath the chiefe gouernment of the thing gouerned in those actions that belong to the ende wherevnto the gouernor tendeth But the actions of Ecclesiasticall persons ouer whome the Prince is supreme gouernour as master Feckenham hath graunted doe belong properly to the ende wherevnto the Prince tendeth to wete not onelye to mainteyne the common peace and tranquilitie but also to sée that Gods religion and seruice be purely and syncerely had and kept amongst the subiects Ergo In these actions the prince is supreme gouernour and so by consequence in all causes and actions ecclesiasticall To proue the minor first that all the trauayle of all godly Preachers in the worlde is to this ende is playne and manifest That this is also the chiefe ende of the Princes gouernement both your selfe master Stapleten at length haue confessed centrarie to your former heathen limitation and also the verye heathen and prophane wryters themselues so well as Christian haue acknowledged Wherein master Stapleton both sheweth his great follie in reasoning that heathen Princes did not regarde religion Ergo they ought not especially to haue regarded it and also bewrayed his ignorance in the antecedent of this his vaine reason for the heathen though they erred in mistaking religion yet they knewe and taught that it was an especiall care and ende of the Princes gouernment I speake not howe Plato in his bookes de rep legib reckoneth the care of Religion to be a chiefe ende of theyr authoritie And yet will I note two sentences out of Aristotle whome to denie your Sorbonistes make more than petit heresie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sayth he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the other Cityes the sacryfices are left onely to the Kinges And agayne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For the Capitaine was â—…oth King and Iudge and Lorde of the deuine matters And to proue this by the storyes of heathen Princes Numa Pompilius hath his chiefest commendation not so muche for making ciuill lawes and pollicies to the Romaynes as for his lawes about theyr religion theyr Priestes theyr Nunnes theyr Sacrifices The Magistrates of Athens did sitte in iudgement and condemned Socrates when Anitus and Melitus accused him for false religion The Romaine Princes them selues woulde labour principally for the office of the chiefe Bishoppe whiche terme Pontifex Maximâ—… the Bishoppe of Rome nowe chalengeth Tiberius promoted to the Senate of Rome as to those that had the care and gouernement of theyr religion that Christ might be accounted among theyr Gods. Yea in the Scripture is declared that Nabuchaâ—…nezar the King of Babylon an Heathen Prince and vtterly destitute of the truthe before God gaue him some sparâ—…kes thereof yet made hée a lawe of worshipping hys owne Image And King Darius of Persia made a decrée that none shoulde worship God in certayne dayes In all which matters although these heathen Princes crred from the truth yet they thought that religion which they mistooke for truth to be a principall part belonging to their gouernment Although therefore master Stapleton ye doe great iniurie to Christian Princes to make their state common with the Paganes yet do you more iniurie herein to them than the heathen did to their heathen princes Was it lawfull for them in their heathen gouernment to haue so especiall a care aboute their heathen and false religion and is it not lawfull for godly Christian Princes to haue the like or more aboute Chrystes true Religion Is the ende of their gouernment common to both alyke as ye say and yet the Heathens stretched further than doeth the Christian Princes Iohannes de Parisus affirmeth that this is a false supposition of yours Master Stapleton Quod potest as regalâ—… c. That the kingly power is corporall and not spirituall That the Kingly power hath the cure of the bodie and and not of the soules Sithe it was ordeyned to the common profite of the Citizens not euery profite but that profite which is to liue according to vertue Herevpon sayth the Philosopher in the Ethikes that the intention of the lawmaker is to make men good and to enduce them to vertue And also in the Politykes he sayth that as the soule is better than the bodie so a lawmaker is better than a Physition bicause the lawmaker hath care for the soules and a Physition for the bodie Nowe as the Philosophers ascribed this ende in the Heathens false religion in vertues of lyfe and care of the soule to the gouernement of Heathen Princes Doth not Saint Paule shewe as muche and more trowe you for the ende of Christian Princes gouernement in these thinges Ut 〈◊〉 tranquillam vitam degamus in omni pietate honestate That we may leade sayth he a quiet and peaceable life in al godlinesse and honestie Was this no further master Stapleton than safetie quietnesse worldly wealth aboundance and prosperous maintenance Did the great Constantine stretche the ende of his gouernment no further when he sayde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 debere ante omnta scopum esse â—…udicaus c. I iudged that this oughte before all other thinges to be my scope that among the most holye multitudes of the Catholike Churche one fayth and syncere charitie and godlinesse agreeing togither towardes almightie God might be conserued Did the whole assemblye of Byshoppes in the first generall Councell at Constantinople limitte no further the endes of Theodosius gouernment when they confessed that God instituit imperiuâ—… Theodosâ—… ad communempacem ecclesiarum sanae fidâ—… confirmationem God did orday ne the gouernement of Theodosius for the common peace of the Churches and the confirmation of the sounde fayth Did Saint Augustine beléeue that Princes gouernement reached no further when he sayde Reges in terris seruiunt Christo faciendo legeâ—… pro Christo Kinges in the earth doe serue Christe in making lawes for Christe Did Iustinian suppose hys authoritie tended no further when he wrote Legum Authoritas diuinas humanas res bene disposuit The authoritie of the lawes hath well disposed both the deuine and humaine matters Did the mâ—…ste Christian King of Spaine Richaredus thinke that the ende of hys gouernement stretched no further when he sayde openly in the thirde Councell at Tolet before all the Bishoppes there assembled Quanto subditorum gloria Regali extolliâ—…r tanto prouidi esse debemus in his quae ad Deum sunt c Howe muche more we bee exalted in royall glorie ouer our subieâ—…es so muche more ought wee to bee carefull in those matters that appertayne to God eyther to augment our owne hope or else to looke to the profite of the people committed to vs of god And as ye see me in verie deede inslamed wyth the feruencie of fayth God hath styrred mee vp to this ende that the obstinacie of
name of person ecclesiasticall hath no other respect but to the causes ecclesiasticall and being gouerned or subiect as M. Feckenham hath graunted in respecte of eyther parte of this diuision temporall or ecclesiasticall if fellowes that in all respectes what soeuer of causes or persons ecclesiasticall or temporall the Prince is supreme gouernour Nor all M. Stapl. crooked shiftes and crabbed respects to hinder the sequele of this argumeÌ„t are any more to be respected than â—…ere trifles and toyes to delude the Readers withall But M. St. will not giue ouer the matter thus but will bring his darke respects to the aspect and light of all mens eyes by a familiar though somwhat an homely simâ—… As if master Robert Horne were a lay man and a paynter sayth he the Queene properly hath not to do with him as a paynter vnlesse it were for some lavve or order concerning paynters but as Robert Horne hir highnesse subiect and borne vnder hir obeysance Sée how enuye hath blynded this man that whereas for very spite he likeneth the reuerent and godly learned father in Christ to a paynter this his paynted similitude maketh also flat agaynst him For as he confesseth the Prince hath to doe vvith a paynter not onely in that he is simply hir highnesse subiecte borne vnder hir obeysance but also in respect he is suche a subiecte in whiche regarde he saythe she maketh lavves and orders also concerning paynters thoughe she entermeddle not with the Paynters pencell in drawing lynes and laying colours and other their perticuler actions euen so hath hir highnesse to do with all ecclesiasticall persons not onely in that they be simply subiectes borne vnder hir obeysance but also euen in that they be suche manner of ecclesiasticall subiects in which respect she may also make lawes and orders concerning ecclesiastical persons though she entermeddle not with preaching ministring the sacramentes and other their particuler actions Thus as God would haue it doth your owne similitude M. Stap. which of pure enuye ye bring foorth to deface the byshop withall so liuely in euery poynt make agaynst you as any similitude can do At length ye discende from your similitude to your playne purpose saying So shoulde the Queene haue also to doe with you yea in case ye were the true Byshop of VVinchester but not properly as Byshop or for your byshoply function for the whiche ye are immediatly vnder your Archbyshop and the Pope but considering you as a subiecte othervvyse or as Byshop either touching your temporalties and no further For the which the true Byshops also to their Prince do their homage With muche adoe for it sticketh in your throte lyke a boane ye admitte at length this case that the Bishop were the true Byshop of VVinchester but without any stay at the matter ye could compare him to a paynter but now beeing a Bishop he is as you say vnder his Archbishop and the Pope and vnder the Queene onely for his temporalties Here is no argument M. Stapleton but your bare assertions as though the matter were cleare and all out of question I ye had still reasoned from the similitude of the paynter and paynted it out in his true meaning ye had concluded another maner of tale that as the Prince mighte meddle euen with lawes and orders for paynters so she hath to do with Byshops not onely concerning their temporalties but euen coÌ„cerning that they be Byshops And so agayn your similitude excludeth your Pope And where ye say in that he is byshop he is immediatly vnder his Archbyshop and the Pope what if his Archbishop be not vnder the Pope neither is he not then also béeing immediatly vnder him exempted likewise from your Pope and thus ye stammer euen in your owne false principles Now when ye haue thus without any reasoning determined the Byshop to be vnder the Pope and that he dothe homage to the Quéene onely for his temporalties and no farther ye conclude the matter saying But what should I further reason with this man vvhiche as I haue sayde hathe remoued the Prince from all superioritie concerning the meere Byshoply or Priestly function and so with a notable contradiction hathe full vvorshipfully concluded agaynst hym selfe and eased hys aduersarie of any other proofe and eased master Feckenham also for taking any othe that the Queene is supreme head in all causes temporall and spirituall This notable contradiction is so sore a matter that you muste néedes haue a fling at it once agayne the contradiction is this The Prince hath not the iurisdiction of the meere Priestly or Byshoply functions The Prince hath the superioritie ouer the priestly or Byshoply functions Is not héere a notable contradiction and worthy to make thys finall conclusion thereon The Prince hathe not the iurisdiction of the meere Priestly or Byshoply functions Ergo He is remoued from all superioritie ouer the same functions Full vvorshipfully concluded to vse your owne termes master Stapleton What should ye reason further with this man but in steade of reasoning fall to making principles or sit downe and ease you with master Feckenham without any further proofe But mighte it please you to starte vp agayne and looke better aboute ye ye shoulde sée that betwéene euen that superioritie which worde notwithstanding the Byshop sayde not but power or iurisdiction of the meere byshoply or priestly function that is to saye his office and the proper actions of his office preaching binding and losing the ministring of the Sacramentes and betwéene the superioritie that is the ouersight and supreme gouernement in caring for directing and prouiding that all those functions and actions be duetifully done on their partes to whome they properly belong there is a great difference as all your similitudes hitherto haue proued and concluded agaynst you And that betwéene the dooing of the one and the not dooing of the other is no contradiction or opposition at all And therefore ye be not so eased yet but that ye muste take a little more paynes or else where ye had thought to haue wonne the spurres ye may happe to lose the saddle The eight Diuision MAster Feckenham standeth on foure poyntes whereby he thinketh he should periure himselfe if he should sweare to this laste parte of the othe in eccl. causes The first point is that he muste testifie it on a booke othe But to testifie any thing on a booke othe and not to knovve the same is periurie Then for him selfe he pleadeth ignoraunce that he neither knovveth it nor knovves any meanes hovv to come to the knovvledge of it Whervpon he ioyneth an issue with the Byshoppe which issue is this If the Byshop make proofe to him that any Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may clay me or take vpon them any suche gouernement in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes then he will yéelde and receiue the othe The meanes whereby he will haue this issue proued are these foure Either by suche order of gouernement
whiche commeth after also and yet your selfe so flatly belye the Scripture for malice to the byshop in saying suche wordes that the byshop lefte out do followe which neither followe at all and your selfe before confessed they went immediatly before Sée see howe enuie hath blinded this mans sighte Lesse maruell it is that ye sawe not the period for although those wordes whiche ye cite as lefte oute taking a copie of the Priest and the Leuiticall tribe â—…e wordes going before the bishops sentence and he shall haue by him c. yet is there a ful period betweene them which you saw not or would not sée so that those former words are no materiall part of the sentence following cited by the byshop but a material part of the senteÌ„ce going before which the byshop cited not But M. St. citeth falsly threapeth that the bishop did cite it and in citing it lefte out a materiall parte thereof charging the byshop in these wordes after suche order as your owne text appoynteth â–ª saying VVhen he is set vpon the seate of hys kingdome he shal write him out this second law in a booke taking a copie of the Priestes of the Leuiticall tribe VVhich latter wordes ye haue bicause they make directly agaynst you quite lefte out Why M. Stap. he left out bothe the latter middle first wordes and all of this sentence he mentioned it not at all ye doe but threapen kindnesse on him to fasten withall vpon him your chalenge of infidelitie Onely he alleaged the nexte sentence and that expounding it so fully that he leaueth oute neither former latter or any materiall poynte at all thereof .. And thus muche doth your selfe also witnesse agaynst your selfe saying that he lefte oâ—…t vvordes that immediatly goe before the vvordes vvhich he alleadged And what were those he shall haue by him c. This then was the texte that he alleaged by your owne confession And therfore when ye vrge him with the former texte that he alleaged not to proue infidelitie in him ye contrarie your selfe ye cleare him ye shewe your owne excéeding vnfaythfull dealing bothe to the scripture and to him also But wherefore should the Byshop haue left out as ye charge him any materiall parte of his texte bycause say you it maketh directly agaynst him In déede that were a shrewde cause and would iolily cloke M. St. infidelitie and cause men to suspect infidelitie in the bishop if he had concealed any thing in his text that directly made against him Which infidelitie who vseth and who approueth it for the poynt of a wise man to conceale that that maketh agaynst him shal after wel appeare But now although it be plainly proued that the byshop in his text left out no part therof Yet for further tryall of this also let vs take not onely the latter wordes of the next period going before which words he complayneth are lefte out but euery worde also of the same sentence concluding two or thrée periodes vnder one bicause we would haue nothing left out and ioyne them to the sentence following cited by the byshop and then behold what maner of conclusion either directly or indirectly they make agaynst him Wherin shall appeare that M. St. hath so besotted himselfe in diuinitie that he had quite forget the logike that so ofte he crakes vpon These textes are these VVhen he is set on the seate of his kingdome he shall write for him selfe out of this seconde law in a booke taking a copy of the Priests of the Leuiticall tribe And he shall haue it with him and he shall reade of it all the dayes of his life that he may learne to feare the Lorde his God and keepe all the wordes and ceremonies that are written in the lawe Upon these words M. St. frameth his argument The king shal write out this second law in a booke taking a copy of the Priestes of the Leuiticall tribe Ergo a king ought not to take vpon him suche gouernement in ecclesiasticall causes as the Quéenes maiestie doth chalenge and take vpon hir For this is the conclusion that directly maketh agaynst the bishop but as herein his logike is altogither vnskilfull so is his diuinitie yet more vnfaithfull For hauing chalenged the bishop for leauing out these words taking a copie of the priests of the Leuiticall trybe as directly against him and theÌ„ immediately foloweth sayth he how he shall busily reade the sayde booke and so foorth In which words he maketh another toto manifest lie falsifying the text yet once againe For these words Et habebit secâ—… he shal haue with him which word he leaueth quite out go betwéene therfore followe not as he sayth immediatly But sée héere whether it be of malice to the byshop or to the Scripture that all this while in quarelling with this little poore text habebit secum he shall haue with him he findeth fault with translating he accuseth the byshop of infidelitie and vnskilfulnesse he complaineth of leauing out wordes going immediatly before of curtalling the texte and leauing out latter wordes of leauing out a material part of words following immediatly he citeth and reciteth these and those wordes in Latin and Englishe he scanneth and descanteth on translations and all this while those onely three wordes habebit secum which the byshop alleaged wrinching and wresting he euer glaunceth by them he will not once name them but leaueth them quite out which was the materiall thing that the byshop alleaged And yet all the while he whineth of leauing oute and leaueth oute him selfe that he should chiefly answere What shall we thinke is the cause that he dothe thus surely there is some force in those wordes that he sawe were more directly against him or else he would neuer do so for very shame But I remember a tale that he hath patched vp into his counterblast of the Simoniacall Priest that béeing commaunded to say In nomine patris filij spiritus sanctâ—… could rehearse all well inough till he came to spiritus sancti as for that he could not pronounce it in any maner of wise But sée your chance M. Stap. that ye there fabled howe here your selfe haue playde the like part The byshop vrgeth you with thrée wordes habebit secum â–ª ye will not onely answere nothing thereto but ye will not in any wise whyle ye repeate the sentences so muche as name those wordes and yet ye goe rounde about them On the other side those wordes that the bishop cited not as no parte of his sentence alleaged Lorde what a doe ye make of curtalling of leauing out of infidelitie vnskilfulnesse peruersitie malice and I can not tell what Onely bicause ye thinke those wordes séeme to make for your massing Priests authoritie bicause they name Priests and yet God wot they make nothing for you nor agaynst the byshop directly or indirectly But you thinke this sentence maketh thus much for your priestes that if the
novv But then is it most euident that the Popishe Churche is not the true Churche nor was figured hereby at all For first the popishe Prestes deliuered not a coppie of the lawe of God to wete of the Old and New testament vp into their Kings Queenes and Princes handes to write it out and haue it alwaies by them to studie vppon but rather do the contrary as did the Pharisies keping the key of knowledge away from them of purpose telling them it appertaineth not to their estates but that they may go play them or employ them selues in other foreigne matters onely the worde of God they must in no case meddle withall which belongeth alonely to the Priests Nor they will be bounde to deliuer vp to their Princes any coppie thereof at all But thus much yet they will do for their Princes to giue them a péece here and there and that either must be the bare letter as M. Stapleton calleth it or els such expositions as it shall please them to leauen the dough withall And is this now the perfect bodie of that shadow the veritie of that figure set forth in Moses order or not rather the full accomplishing of the Scribes and Pharisies doings whom they haue so followed in not giuing vp a coppie to their Princes in wresting defacing and taking away Gods worde that theirs may better be said to be a very shadow and figure of the Popish priests dealings herein And that we rather expresse the veritie of that figure and shadow of Moses order rendring vp to our Princes a full perfect and sincere coppie of Gods lawe that they may write it out set it forth haue it by them and meditate therein day and night as King Dauid counsayleth to learne thereby to be wise and feare the Lord their God and by them all their subiects And thus his importune vrging of this place hath so properly helpt his matter forwarde that where he saith the Bishop left it quite out as making directry against him what soeuer the Bishop did it had bene better for M. Stapl. to haue left it quite out also or not to haue triumphed so much on that which at the better view thereof so directly maketh against all his popishe Priestes But for all this M. Stapleton will proue that the popish priestes must not onely haue the handling of Gods worde but also that they can not be deceyued nor erre in the sense thereof And this will he proue euen by the Protestants them selues For sayth he as the Protestants them selues are forced by plaine wordes to confesse that they knowe not the true worde or booke of God but by the Churche whiche from time to time deliuered these bookes euen so by all reason and learning they shoulde also confesse that the Churche can no more be deceyued in deliuering the sense of the sayde worde than in deliuering the worde it selfe VVhich seeing they will not confesse for then we were forthwith at a point and ende with all their errours and heresies they must nedes continue in the same The argument is this The Protestants confesse that they know not the worde of God but by the Churche of Christ that kéepeth witnesseth and agnizeth the same from time to time Ergo the Protestants must néedes confesse that the Church he meaneth the Popishe priestes in deliuering of the worde can not be deceyued in the sense thereof In stéede of aunswere hereto master Stapleton him selfe maketh a preoccupation for perceyuing the falsenesse and follie thereof woulde soone be reiected VVhich seeing sayth he they will not confesse for then we were at a point with all their errours and heresies they must needes continue in the same Do we not confesse master Stapleton that ye woulde haue vs confesse why then haue ye reasoned all this while thus fondly taking that for confessed which your selfe now are forced by plain wordes to confesse that we confesse not but vtterly denie that you be the Catholike Church that you haue deliuered these bookes from time to time which you haue rather hid away that you can not erre in the sense â—…f the scripture and such like wrong principles Which in déede if we shoulde falsely confesse with you then all the matter were at a poynt and ende as ye saye But since we denie it and reiect your fonde reasoning à petitione principij it is tyme that ye séeke out other arguments more substantiall or else as your cause is at a poynte or not worth a poynt so in conclusion ye stande on this poynt to slaunder vs as following euery man his owne heade and that we shal neuer haue done and errours will neuer cease more and more to encrease and multiplie vnlesse we take forth say you the lesson I haue shewed you And what lesson is that Forsooth that we must graunt and confesse to be most true all these your false principles And then we shall be your white sonnes and good scholers I dare say if once we would conne that lesson Ye would giue vs a fat remedie and leaue to play the fooles truands all day long if we would learne that lesson of yours But such scholemasters as yâ—… are such schollers ye desire to haue and suche lessons ye take them forth Caecus autem si caeco ducatum prestet ambo in foueam cadunt If the blinde leade the blinde both of them fall into the ditch Thus ye deceyued the princes and people in tymes past But God be praysed both Princes and people haue now taken forth that lesson out of Gods holy word that ye could not or neuer would teach read or expound vnto them Nowe when ye haue redde this lesson vnto vs with so false a glosse and commentarie vpon the text as ye complaine left out ye determine that the best remedie were the exact obseruation of this place that ye haue say you so wilyly and sleightly slipt ouer This is but a poynt of your apparant impudencie master Stapleton to set a beâ—…de face on the matter for God knoweth ye would nothing lesse than that the diligent reader shoulde exactly obserue this place Whiche if he did this place alone were there no more woulde sufficiently shewe howe ye haue haled and racked it and all the lawe of God besides That this place therefore if the exact obseruation thereof be the best remedie to your cause as ye say might remedie your cause the better I haue somewhat the more exactly obserued it and if your cause haue founde any remedie thereby muche good doe it you ye shall haue more of it So that I trust yée shall not néede to complaine of ouerslipping any thing materiall Which least ye should doe the Chapter shall be yet more exactly obserued than perchaunce ye would haue it to be And to begin with that ye quarrell at next as wilily and sleightly slipt ouer But most of all say you another sentence in the verie said Chapter And euen the next to this
vse it throughout all your counterblast to make your continuall outrodes and vagaries quite from the matter No Flie is busier in buzzing on entrye dish than your Counterblast is blowing on euery flim â—…am tale If ye thinke ye maye be borne withall for the enlarging of your volume yet ye make your Readers loosely and altogither vnfruitfully to employ their labours carying them at roauers as ye say and at randon to â—…s ye had woont to do the people after all Hallowes from the very state of the question in controuersie For shame therefore vpbrayde not this to the Bishop of straying from the marke excepte you kéepe your selfe better to the marke or else shewe your Dispensation that yée may styll babble all besides the question of what impertinent tryfles yée please to descante vppon and will not suffer your aduersary once to wincke awrye nor to alleage anye thing thoughe it neuer so muche appertayne to the purpose if it doe not directly conclude the very state of the question This dealing master Stapleton is very vneuen If ye will deale vprightly call vpon the Bishop hardly so oft as ye will but then stande you for shame to your tackling to least an other come and call as fast on you to marke and regarde better the matter ye meddle withall But perhappes ye will say admitte that I ranne astray from the matter my selfe yet doth my faulte excuse the Byshoppes In déede it doth not Master Stapleton if hée bée faultie therein but it lesseneth hys and it maketh yours the greater and the more to your shame except yée be a verye impudent man for your fault herein is manifest and therefore deciphered oute vnto you in one of your common places If ye be belied there purge your selfe whiche tâ—…ll ye doe the more ye call vppon the Bishop to kéepe him to his marke he that shall marke your dealing shall wish you had either lesse impudencie or more remembrance of your selfe Neuerthelesse since ye so sharply chalenge the Bishop that all his examples draw nothing neare the mark but runne at randon and shoote all at Rouers I pray you sir call to your remembraunce what was the marke and issue in question betwene them was it not this that if the Bishop by any of the foure abouesayde meanes coulde make proofe to master Feckenham that any Emperor or Empresle King or Queene may clay me or take vpon them any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes that then he would yéelde Was not this the state of their question accorded they not on this issue and ought not the Bishop to direct all his examples to proue this And if he proue this whether he shotte at Buttes or Rouers hath he not hytte the marke and what woulde ye haue more Nowe that he hath done this is plainely proued by euery of these examples and that not onely as the wordes of the issue inforce that they tooke vpon them some suche gouernement in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes which being prooued is ynough to discharge the Bishop of straying from his matter but also that they daymed and tooke vppon them suche supreme gouernement in all spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes And you haue counterblasted nothing to the contrary that were able to remoue these prooues from this marke and issue sauing your facing and bracing of the matter and a number of blynde pelting and foreworne shiftes except ye haue any better behinde to come For all these shiftes hitherto notwithstanding the Bishoppes examples are both directly directed to the issue and directly and fully prooue the same And wher 's ye findâ—… faulte with straggling from it ye touch not him but wring your selfe by the nose For ensample whereof I remitte the Reader to your common place thereon or to spare his paynes and go no further than euen here to marke the markes that your selfe set vp and conferre them with the issue betwéene the Bishoppe and master Feckenham and the Reader shall soone discerne howe farre of purpose ye stray from it yea from those false markes also that your selfe set vp before And yet ye crie the Bishop strayes from the marke and will the Reader to fixe his eye thereon But herein ye play as the common people say the Lapwing or Pewet doeth who when they seeke hir Neast draweth them still further and further from it wyth hir noyse and flittering about them crying as the simple people imagine here is it here is it when it is nothing neare it And euen as they conceyue of the Pewet so do you with vs with great noyse and earnestnesse bidding vs regarde and set before our eyes the very state of the question and busily pretende to tell vs wherein lyeth all the chiefe question when vnder the cloake and credite of this your earnestnesse ye carie the reader quite away from the question and issue in controuersie to runne vp and downe after such newe and so many questions that the Reader dared as a man in a maze shoulde neyther perceyue the true question in déede nor finde out the weakenesse and falsehoode of your cause nor well knowe where himselfe is become But that he maye winde himselfe the better oute of this your Laberinthe let him as is sayde before directe his eye euer on the issue betweene the parties and then shall hée still see whereaboutes hée is and howe farre or neare not onely the Bishop is but you also are to or from the matter The issue as is before sayde is this That any Emperor or Empresle King or Queene claymed or tooke vpon them any such gouernment By this issue in all his examples hath the Byshoppe directed him selfe that Moses Iosue Dauid Salomon Iosaphat Ezechias and Iosias did take vpon them suche gouernment But all these were Kings and Princes of Gods people commended of God for their godly gouernance Therfore Emperours and Empresses Kings Quenes may and ought to take such gouernment vpon them This being alwayes the Bishops conclusion wherein strayed he from the issue But nowe come you ruffling in with Nine newe issues for aduauntage not one of them all béeing the verie issue and state of the question in controuersie and yet you crie the Bishop draweth nothing nigh the marke True in déede master Stapleton he draweth nothing neare the markes that you haue set vp for the nigher hee shoulde drawe to them he shoulde drawe the further from the question betwéene master Feckenham and him as you doe of purpose in all these your markes to deceyue and beguâ—…le the simple Reader that thinkes ye meane good truth when ye â—…rte so often on the question and runne so farre from the same For ensample was this I pray you good master Stapleton to vse your owne phâ—…ase the issue and question betwéene them whether these Kings acknowledged or not acknowledged the highe Priest â—…t is true and the Byshoppe demeth not that they did agnise the highe Priest euerie one of them
immunities the priuileges of the heatheÌ„ priests they are so like vnto your popish priesthoode but I spare the reader Neuerthelesse what cause soeuer moueth you to write so fauorably for the Egiptian Priests none of these causes or any other maintenance of Idolaters moued Ioseph nor that any other suche lyke priesthoode to come shoulde take hereat any suche prerogatiue of béeing exempt from all fines to their princes The reason that moued Ioseph is apparant in the text He tooke the fift part of the peoples fruites bicause before they helde theÌ„ not of their king but the priests liuing was altogither of the kings gift finding And therfore they payed no portion to the king but the king allowed theÌ„ al the portioÌ„ they had But this that al that they had to liue vpoÌ„ was of the kings gift you quite forgat which argueth their subiectioÌ„ to him ye reasoÌ„ vpoÌ„ their priuiledge Where ye shâ—…ld note withal that al those other their priuiledges liuings came froÌ„ depeÌ„ded on the king And theÌ„ sée how fit a marke therby ye caÌ„ set vp against the Princes gouernmeÌ„t ouer priests Your Ninth and last marke is yet more fond and confused than all the rest besides wherin ye demaund of the Bishop saying Are ye able suppose ye to name any one king that wrote him selfe supreme head of the Iewishe Churche and that in all causes aswell spiritual as temporall and that caused an othe to the priestes and people the nobilitie onely exempted to be tendred that they in conscience did so beleeue and that in a woman prince to yea and that vnder payne of premunire and playne treason too Me thinkes ye play huddle now in the latter end M. St. sixe or seuen markes togither in one For the title of supreme head for receyuing the othe for the persons receyuing it the persons exempted the maner of receyuing it the Princes person and the penaltie of the refusall All these matters on a plumpe for haste come in one liuerie with the cognisance of your Ninth marke how neere the issue betwéene the Bishop and M. Feckenham I remit to the view of others To all these demaundes bicause ye are in hast and therfore thrust them out on an heape togither that the one might be a cloake to the other I will briefly answere them as they lye To your first demaunde for the Title thinke ye this a good argument No king of the Iewes wrote this title of supreme head or gouernour Ergo No king of the Iewes was so By the same argument no king of Englande before king Henrie wrote him selfe Defender of the faythe neither any king of the Iewes wrote that tytle Ergo None of them were defenders of the faythe And by the same argument your holy Father myghte léese a ioly Uicarige that he claymeth from Christ and Peter for neither of them wrote suche titles as he doth nor the highe Priest in the olde Testament wrote any suche stile as he dothe Ergo he claymeth his supremacie from them in vaine But this is a vaine argument if you can proue not the title so muche an the matter the thing and effecte of the title to come from them to him no man will stande with you in the stile but graunt your Pope his clayme This can you not do and therfore your Popeâ—…tytle is but vaine But this for the Princes supreme gouernment the Bishop hath named the Princes in the olde Testament and fully proued it that in matter thing and effect they tooke vppon them this supreme gouernance that the Quéenes Maiestie iustly claymeth now And this béeing proued as before till ye can improue this what babble ye of the title and yet since ye can bring no sufficient proofe of your Popes title neither why maketh this argument more agaynst the Prince than it doth agaynst the Pope Your second quarell is at the othe but the content therof as is proued béeing true why ought they not to sweare therto yea thoughe there were in the olde Testament no such ensample of an othe ministred by the Prince to hys subiects And yet we read how Iosias swore al his subiects to the lord But ye wil say this othe is not for the Prince to sweare them to Gods religion but to his estate If his estate be dutiful by gods religioÌ„ is he not therby also sworn thervnto And why then may not the Prince for his more assurance make an especiall othe thereof so well as a generall But was it lawfull for your Pope to sweare them to his vndue supremacie and is it not lawfull for the prince in a matter so due vnto him If you stil vrge a playne manyfest ensample to be shewed you where in expresse wordes suche an othe was then required I pray you and you will not deale partially M. Stap â–ª shewe you another example where the highe Priest of the Iewes required such an othe of the Clergie as your Pope dyd minister to those vnder him To that ye stande on the tendring the othe to the Priestes and the people and to aggrauate the matter as partiall say the Nobilitie be exempted partely is fonde and partely false For the Nobilitie or any other in certayne offices are not exempted But see the proude orgulous harte of this Priest howe he picketh quarels agaynst the Noibilitie bicause heerein they haue any prerogatiue ouer his priestly order But he maketh a matter in that the othe is that they in conscience did so beleeue as thoughe they coulde sweare therto and can not beleeue it in their consciences Belike master Stapleton your popishe Priestes make good otheâ—… and haue good consciences and beléefes that can sweare to a thing and haue no conscience or can haue conscience and not beléeue it so to be as ye sweare It is to be feared that some of your order haue so done Whether you haue done so or no I will not say for I knowe not your dealing nor am ouer curious to search out your olde reckonings But I thinke some of your good masters are not all in cleane life thereof Your outcrie at a womans Prince to haue thys Tytle yea and that say you in a woman Prince to sheweth your impudent spite agaynst your most gracious soueraigne and withall your impudent follie A woman Prince to say you If a Prince Master Stap. and why not a woman Prince to Will ye graunt hir to be a Prince and take from hir the duty that these ensamples shew doth belong vnto a prince Therefore eyther ye muste denie that a woman may be a prince or else graunt this authoritie yea to a woman prince to And doth not the Scripture commende yea a woman Prince to to suppresse Idolaters and tyraunts to gouerne and iudge Gods people And why may not now a woman Prince to deliuer vs as the Quéenes Maiestie hath done from the yoke of a greater tyrant and all his Idolaters to and
Pu and the Image of Christ embraced the boye and saide Pu pu pe noli flere post triduâ—…m mecum papabis Whine not and three daies hence thou shalt eat pappe with me Another time how the Image of Christ came down out his mothers armes playde with an abbots childe Another time when the arme of his Image of stone was broken how bloud gushed out and the stone Image of his Mother seing the bloud rent hir garmentes and ornamentes of stone about hir rente the Iuels about hir necke and made naked hir brest vnto the pappes for the reproch and iniurie that was done to hir babie Another time when Auinion was besieged they got hir Image vpon the gate putting their confidence in hir and when one standing behind hir was shot at Imago genu erexit c. The Image lift vp hir knee and receyued the stroke of the arrow c. and it sticketh yet in hir thigh Ye tell vs how on a time Quidam pictor Diabolum cum cornibus c. A certaine painter painted the diuel with hornes and other members so vgglie as he could but the Image of the Virgin Marie he painted so faire as he could whereat the Diuell being angrie brake the scaffold while he was painting hir Image Mox Imago pussimae virginis pictori manuuÌ„ porrexit eum ne caderet firmiter retinuit sicque eum à daemone custodiuit VVith that the Image of the most godly Virgin caught the painter by the hande and helde him fast from falling and so it saued him from the Diuell Ye tell vs of a Churche set on fyre by lightning but when it came néere to the Image Quasi expauescens omnino intactam reliquit c. The fyre as afrayde of it lefte it vntouched yea a bunche of Pecocks fethers leaning to the Image of wood escaped vnburnt also And this miracle sayth he was done to shewe quòd sibi seruâ—…entes ab igne aeterno liberare faciliter possit That she can easily deliuer from hell fyre those that serue hir Howebeit at Wilsdean hir picture escaped not the fyre so scotte free but that the one halfe was burned euen with the negligeÌ„ce of the candles that were set about hir But to salue thys blemishe the remnaunt of the blocke wrought as greate miracles as any of the other For when the Priest had sent to London the residue of the Image that was saued from the fire to be peeced out by the Caruer after he coulde not make the olde and the newe to frame well togither he cast the olde picture behinde the stall and made another lyke it The Priest when he came to sée the picture where is my wife quothe he to whome the Paynter shewed the picture that he had newe made lyke the other No quothe the Priest thou lyest this is an other this is not my wife That it is quoth the Paynter No no husbande quoth the olde Image that is not I I am héere hidden and caste behinde the stall This was a famous miracle and his wife deserued to be caried home agayne with solemne processioÌ„ It were infinite to tell the tales of your Roodes that spake that nodded that sweatte that bledde that embraced and kissed those that came to them with a number of such like forgeries to make the people beléeue not onely the Saincts but euen the very pictures of them had a force and influence of grace and helpe in them And so the Roode of grace our Lady of grace our Lady of pitie c. had their names I omitte your other Saincts pictures yea some of those whome ye worshipped that God knowes were séely Sainctes and your selues doubte whether euer they were honest men and women or no. Yea of those that were neither men nor women I meane not Angels whom ye honored in pictures of winged and fethered men but of S. Sunday of S. Sauiour of S. Crosses c. Neither God nor Angell nor man nor woman of whome ye might say as the Priest sayde when he byd his beades on Sunday Good friends ye shall haue this wéeke the feast of S. Epiphanie but whether it be hee Sainct or shée sainct I can not tell Of these Saincts you had pictures you had Churches ye had Pilgrimages ye had offringes and yet were there no suche persons at all but as the heathen had the pictures of Iustice other vertues worshipping them also as Lactantius vpbraydeth to them Quid nobis inaâ—…em Iustitiam depingiâ—… VVhy paynte ye out vnto vs bare Iustice can ye excuse this also of manyfest Idolatrie Thinke you that your seconde Nicen councell woulde not lykewyse haue condemned you euen for very shame as tootoo grosse Idolaters What sayth Alfonsus your owne champion writing of purpose in the defence of Images in handling the fact of king Ezechias for destroying the Brasen Serpent â—…f the Christian people sayth he were nowe as prone to Idolatrie as the people of Israell were then nor coulde be called otherwise from theyr errour Then if Images were broken in peeces I would beleeue that they ought wo thily to be broken This is the iudgement of Alfonsus vpon all your Alhallowes Images and Christes too But heereto adioyning this false assumption But the Christian people are not nowe so prone to Idolatrie as were the Iewes he concludeth there is no suche vrgent cause why Images oughte to be broken as there was then But if he had acknowledged the manyfest truth and had looked no further than in his owne countrey of S. Iames picture of Compostella that as they say can moue and stirre his head by frowning or looking cheerefully and other proper knackes and had he séene the great Idolatrie committed therto and how the people flocked troÌ„ al parts thither he should then haue seene as great if not a great deale greater idolatrie among those that professe the name of christianitie than euer was to the Brasen Serpent among the Iewes and that as he would excuse the Popishe idolatrie it was not one or two deceyued by a certayne simplicitie but that it was more than an hundreth yea than an huÌ„dreth thousand that were so deceyued by a certayne fraude of your priestes that no preaching or teaching coulde serue to remoue their Idolatrie so long as ye let the Images stande Which not onely ye did but teached and preached suche fables as more encreased your gaynes and the simple peoples Idolatrie And therfore euen by AlphoÌ„sus reason your Alhallowes Images are worthy to be defaced broken in fitters by Christian Princes as by Ezechias the Brasen Serpent was Nowe to the further improofe of Alphonsus his false assumption that Christians are not so prone to Idolatrie as the Iewes I wil not presse ye with Erasmus testimonies nor yet with Sir Thomas More but euen as I did before with your owne councell of Colleyns complaynts of the wickednesse vsed about your Images Verum cum multus
haue thought they had done God good seruice too so that he would haue maintayned them And do not you euen so what els maketh ye crie vpon the Princes beyond the seas with all kinde of torments to destroy the Protestants If Princes would aduise them selues or euer they beléeued you so lightly and would not destroy their subiects till they had sit in iudgmâ—…t heard discussed both parties causes throughly ye would not be halfe so hastie Ye would then crie to the contrarie that you must only be iudges they must onely beleue you strike onely them whom you shall bidde them strike Contrarywise where the Princes espying your falshood forsake your errours and sette out euen very milde lawes against you then ye change your coppie and crie out euery thing is extreme crueltie ye are too too sore handled and oppressed then ye extoll beyonde the moone lenitie and sufferance and winche like a gald horse at the least thing that toucheth you And thus euery way do you still shew your selues to be the very Donatistes Now that ye haue as you conceyue with your selfe giuen vs so great a foyle ye enter into your thirde parte saying VVe may now proceede to the remnant of your booke sauing that this in no wise must be ouerhipped that euen by your owne wordes here ye purge M. Feckenham from this crime ye laide vnto him euen now for refusing the proufeâ—… taken out of the old Testament Now for God M. St. since hitherto ye haue cléered him so sclenderly that ye haue more bewrapped him and your selfe also in this crime let nothing in any case be forgotten or ouerhipped that any wayes may helpe the matter forwarde for hitherto it rather hath gone backward but now there is good hope M. Feckenham shall take a good purgation euen of the Bishops owne making that you M. Stap. will minister to him which wil so worke vpon him make him haue so good a stoole that he shal be clerely purged of this crime of Donatistes â—…o to then M. Stapl and let vs sée how apothecarylike you can minister the same For if as ye say say you the order gouernment that Christ left behind in the Gospell new Testament is the order rule gouernment in ecclesiastical causes practised by the Kings of the old Testament then will it follow that M. Feckenham yelding to the gouernment of the new doth not exclude but â—…ather comprehende the gouernment of the old Testament also both being especially as ye say all one Is this the purgation M. St. that ye will minister to M. Feckenham would to God ye could make him receyue anâ—… brooke this sentence if you would take it also I warrent ye it would so purge you of your old leuen sowre dough that ye should no more be Donatists nor Papistes neither if ye receyue and well digest this little sentence The order and gouernment that Christ left behinde in the new Testament is the order rule and gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes practised by the kinges of the old Testament For then giue ye Princes that that ye haue all this while denied theÌ„ But do ye thinke M. Feckenham will wittingly and willingly receiue this sentence that which in déede followeth necessarily thereon The sentence is true but M. Feck for all that may be a lier and you another For I warrant you M. Feck granteth this no â—…urder than as the Donatists he may temper it to make it seeme to serue his turne Why say you if he grant the onâ—… he doth not exclude but rather comprehende the other Nay M. St. M. Feck coÌ„preheÌ„des it not but shoonnes it as agaynst him by your owne confession But the olde being comprehended by the newe Master Feckenham is contrarie wise by force of argument graunting the newe enforced by the olde Not that he comprehendeth it but is comprehended of it and driuen to yeelde thereto of his aduersarie by conclusion of reasoning the one including the other But rather than he will do this voluntarily he will rather exclude them both the olde and the newe testament also and as he hath done burne them both togither The. 20. Diuision THe Bishop in this diuision first gathereth his full conclusion of all these testimonies into this argument What gouernment order and dutifulnesse so euer belonging to any God hath prefigured and promised before hande by his Prophetes in the holy scriptures of the olde Testament to be performed by Christ those of his Kingdom that is the gouernment order and dutifulnesse set forth and required in the Gospell or new testament But that faythfull Emperours Kinges and Rulers ought of dutie as belonging to their office to claime and take vpon them the gouernment authoritie power care and seruice of God the Lorde in matters of Religion or causes Ecclesiasticall was an order and dutifulnesse for them prefigured and forepromised of God by his Prophetes in the Scriptures of the olde Testament as Saint Augustine hath sufficiently witnessed Ergo Christian Emperors Kings and Rulers owe of dutie as belonging to their office to clayme and take vpon them the gouernment authoritie power care and seruice of God their Lorde in matters of Religion or spirituall ecclesiasticall causes is the gouernment order and dutifulnesse setforth and required in the Gospell or new Testament The Bishop hauing thusfully concluded these Testimonies he yet confirmeth them further with more authorities of the Prophete Esay with Lyra his exposition therevpon and the example of Constantine for proufe of the same At this master Stapleton first carpeth by certaine marginall notes or euer he blowe vp the Chapter of his Counterblast thereto The minor of the Bishops conclusion for the Princes gouernment authoritie power care c. he grauÌ„teth but not such supreme gouernment sayth he as the othe prescribeth He graunteth also Saint Augustine to witnesse this the Princes gouernment but no such large and supreme gouernment as we attribute now to them Againe he graunteth this supreme gouernment is in causes ecclesiasticall â–ª but not in all causes ecclesiasticall And so graunting that the Bishop concludeth well in some such thing you conclude not sayth he in all things and causes and therefore you conclude nothing agaynst vs. Lastly he graunteth all the Bishops testimonies concerning Constantine but he denieth that it maketh any thing for vs. Nowe after these marginall notes prefixed he entreth into his Chapter pretending to open the weakenesse of the Bishops conclusion and of other his proues oute of holie Scripture And first his aunswere to this diuision he deuideth in thrée partes First he graunteth all that the Bishop hath sayde but denieth that it is sufficient Secondly he quarrelleth about this that the Bishop calleth the Emperour Constantine a Bishop as Eusebius nameth him Thirdly he chalengeth him for calling Idoll Image Now to the first parte to sée whether all these grauntes make sufficiently for vs and conclude against him yea
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
if ye meane by this visitation the outward execution of the Church lawes and decrees confirmed by the ciuill magistrate roborated with hisedicts and executed with his sword For in such sort many Emperors Princes haue fortified streÌ„gthned the decrees of Bishops made in Councels both general National as we shall in the processe see And this in christian Princes is not denied but coÌ„mended What the state of the question in hande is the reader hath often hearde How be it such is your importunitie that ye will neuer leaue your olde warbling But for the full satisfying of the Reader berein let him once againe resort to the issue that M. Feck requireth of the bishop to direct all hys foure meanes vnto wherin he would be satisfied And that is conteyned in these flat wordes VVhen your L. shall be able by any of these foure meanes to make proofe vnto me that any Emperour or Empresse King or Queene may claime or take vpon them any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes I shall herein yeelde c. This then is the state of the question betwéen theÌ„ whether any Prince may take vpon him any such gouernment in spirituall or ecclesiasticall causes as the Queenes Maiestie doth Now wheresoeuer the B. proueth anything by the foure fore said meanes that any Prince hath taken vpon him any such gouernement as doth the Queenes Maiestie in causes ecclesiasticall there the bishop kéepeth himselfe to the state of the question in hande and satisfieth M. Fecknams issue What the bishop hath done in the two foresaide meanes is euident by that that is past let others iudge thereon Here the B. entring into the other two meanes prefixeth this issue againe before him to leuell his proues by The issue is now that by any of these two meanes remayning he shall proue that anye Prince may claime or take vpon him any such gouernment as the Queenes Maiestie in Ecclesiasticall matters doth And where the B. by any of these two meanes shall proue that any Princes haue taken â—…pon them any such gouernment in ecclesiasticall matters as the Q. Maiestie doth there the B. digresseth nothing from his question also satisfieth M. Feck â–ª demaunde This then being the state of the question betwéene them the proofe of any such gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes the B. first setteth here down the particulars that plainly declare what gouernment this is that the Q. Maiestie taketh on hir wherto he must direct his proues So that now that question in hande is this What is that gouernment in what particulars consisteth it that the Q. maiestie taketh on hir Which when here the B. doth specifie in the last Chapter M. Stapl. himselfe commended the bishop for his orderly going to worke therein and now crieth out here is a state framed farre square from the question in had whether it be so or no whether it be not plain dealing of the B. and plain warbling of M. St. let any man be indifferent iudge betwéene them But M. Stapl. sayth the question is not nowe betweene M. Feck and you whether the Prince may visite reforme and correct all maner of persons for all maner of schismes heresies and offences in Christian religion True in déede M. St. the question is not nowe whether the Prince may doe these things that you rehearse or no but the question that is nowe in hand being deducted out of the words of the issue any such gouernment demaundeth first what kinde of gouernment that is that the Q. maiestie doth claime and take vpon hir to the which question the B. aunswereth the gouernment that hir highnesse taketh on hir is such and such c. And so the state of the question is knowne what kinde of gouernment the B. must proue And looke where he proueth any such gouernment there M. Feckenhams request is aunswered And if he can not prooue any such then M. Feckenham may complaine that he is not satisfied And as he is bounde to performe his promise of thankfull yéelding so haue you no cause to warble at this the B. diligent enumeration of those particularities of the principal question least both ye should wander in an obscure generalitie also coÌ„trarie your late vaunt that ye go to worke plainly truly and particularly But sée your falshoode how chaunce ye set not downe the Bishops wordes as he spake them but abridge them 〈◊〉 of thrée parts of them and more crying Here is a state framed farre square from the question in hande Here is a false subtiltie of you M. St. farre square from any truth in hand or out of hande The Bishops wordes are these The gouernment that the Q. Maiestie moste iustly taketh vpon hir in eccles causes is the guiding caring prouiding ordering directing and ayding the ecclesiasticall state within hir dominions to the furtherance maintenance and setting forth of true religion vnitie and quietnesse of Christes Church ouerseeing visiting refourming restrayning amending and correcting all maner persons with all maner errours superstitions heresies schismes abuses offences contemptes and enormities in or about Christes religion whatsoeuer In place of all these wordes euery one béeing materiall to shewe the particular things wherein hir gouernment consisteth that she claymeth you onely for all these set downe these wordes The Prince may visite reforme and correcte all maner of persons for all maner of heresies schisines and offences in Christian religion As though the Bishops particular words specifying the poynts of hir gouernmeÌ„t conteined no more but this Neuerthelesse had the bishop specified no more but these words that ye thus contracte yet had he not swarued from the issue betweene them Any suche gouernment nor from the directâ—… answering to the question declaring any suche gouernment chiefly the chiefe poynts therof that the Quéenes maiestie claymeth and you refuse to yéelde vnto hir For euen these particularities that you set out ye will not graunte without an exception and that is in effecte vtterly to denie them althoughe in daliaunce of spéeche saying in some sense ye would onely séeme to mollifie them For what else meane these your words VVhich perchaunce in some sense might somewhat be borne withall if ye meane by this visitation and reformation the outwarde execution of the Churche lawes and decrees confirmed by the ciuill magistrate roborated with his edicts and executed with his sworde for in suche sorte many Emperours and Princes haue fortified and strengthened the decrees of Byshops made in Councels bothe generall and nationall as we shall in the processe see And this in Christian Princes is not denied but commended Christian Princes haue héere gotten afaire catche by this your graunt and commendation to become your seruants your souldiours your slaughtermen only executing with their swords that you with your authoritie decrée and appoint vnto them Now forsooth a fayre supreme authoritiâ—… But let vs sée how this doth hang togither Ye graunt theÌ„ to visite reforme
viewe what either partie brought to offering The Priest brings vitulum a calfe or yong bullocke the king brings taurum a bull I praye ye nowe which of these twaine haue brought the weaker and lesse worthie beast is a calfe in your iudgement stronger than a bull or a bull weaker than a calfe surely then ye haue a weake iudgement If ye say a bull is not so muche worthe as a calfe althoughe then our butchers woulde rather bye bulles of you than calues yet woulde they deme you but for a calfe in so selling them and for so telling them So that by this rule the king bringing to offering the stronger and more worthie beast should be of greater authoritie than the Priest yea the priuate man also shoulde bée of greater authoritie than the high priest For a cowe althoughe it be not so strong as a bull yet is she stronger than a calfe and féedes the calfe and is the calues damme If ye say this is a grosse reasoning for diuine matters it is so in déede Maister Saunders and I am ashamed suche reasons shoulde be vsed but are they not your owne And doe ye not as grossely apply Christs parable of a shepherd and his shéepe truely I knowe not your person Maister Saunders whether ye be such another forepined ghost as Bishop Boner was or no that reasoning of the mysteries of the Lordes supper compared the sacrament to a good fat Capon But these your reasons for your Popes superioritie of a bull and a bullocke of a cow and a calfe of a strong stalfed and iustie beast of a leane and weake vnworthie beast of the first the second and the third place are not onely more grosse and homely stuffe than Bishop Boners Capon but a great deale more fonde reason than was his Yet will not Maister Saunders giue ouer this reason thus but alledgeth more authors for it Theodoretus and Procopius saying But Theodoretus vpon the same matter vseth these words He teacheth how great the dignitie of the Priesthode is which he maketh equall to the people But the Prince that shall haue transgressed any lawe he commaundeth him to offer not a calfe but an he goate or a goate of a yeare olde so farre off is he from the Priestly dignitie to whom the bodily gouernment is coÌ„mitted Last of all Procopius Gazeus on the same place writeth thus Herevpon we may gather â–ª that the Priest is more honorable than the Prince yea the people to shine in greater dignitie than the Prince VVherfore in the olde time certayne Kings adorned themselues with the Priestly dignitie If therfore the Prince be as wel inferior to the people as to the Priest as he that after eyther of them is reckoned vp in the laste place and offers the weake and lesse worthye beast howe can he be esteemed the head of the Church immediatly vnder Christ who hath as well the Christian people as the Byshoppes Christes Ministers betweene him and Christ How this superioritie eyther of all the Churche or of the Ministers of Christ may well consist and yet hinder not the supremacie of the Prince beyng in other respectes both ouer the Ministers and the people is diuers tymes before declared and therefore néedlesse to bée repeated excepte we should followe this vayne of Maister Saunders in repeating so often one thing and that so meane an argument that he might rather be ashamed once to haue penned than thus with these fathers sclender senteÌ„ces to haue bolsterâ—… it And yet he caÌ„ not driue it to his purpose for still the priest is made but equall at the moste vnto the people for which M. Saunders shooke of Philo before as a Iew and no Christian and here he citeth Christians yet make they no better for him than Philo did But sith the people are again vnder the prince and the Priest at the most is but equall to the people thow so euer his ministration be the more honorable yet it argueth that he is vnder the Princes supreme gouernment so well as are the people And therefore for all these argumentes nothing yet is brought to the contrarie out of the olde testament that the Bishops notwithstanding al the excellencie of their diuine ministerie were not still vnder the supreme gouernement of their Princes Let vs now sée and ye haue any better argument Besides this without al contradiction the Apostle saith That which is lesse is blessed of the better But Aaron stretching out his hand to the people blessed the people therfore Aaron was greater then the people This argumente M. Saunders is yet more handsome and truer than you other grosse and wrested argument was Neither denie we anye partes or the conclusion of it For first it concludeth nothing with or against the Prince but against the people Secondly it is altogether drawne from the action of the ministers functioÌ„ which we confesse belongeth not to the Prince But to conclude simply a superioritie in the person thervpon were a presumptuous conclusion both against S. Paules meaning and against God himselfe to make our selues better thaÌ„ god bicause we blesse him For we saye to God Benedicimus tibi we blesse thee we praise c. O all ye workes of the Lord blesse ye the lord c. Ye muste make therfore your distinction of blessing and shew in what solemne action and signification the high priest blessed them This done we grauÌ„t you that the high priest was therin the better whiche nothing hindreth the Princes supreme gouernement But now M. Saunders hauing espied where a king likewise blesseth the people hath a shift also for this saying But if thou saist Salomon blessed the Synagog of Israel and therfore was greater than the synagog Salomon was greater than the synagog without al contradictioÌ„ for the scripture can not be broken that saith the lesser is blessed of the better But Salomon sustayned a dubble personage the one of a king the other of a Prophete But as he was a Prophet he was the more notable minister of Christ than for his kingly dignitie and by this reason was greater than they to whom he prophecied and so he blessed the people not by his royall but by his propheticall office But the priests not by an other office but by the priestly office blessed both all the people and much more the king that is inferior to all the people Here first let vs note that M. SauÌ„ders himselfe twise placeth the king and his office before the prophet his office Salomon saith he sustained a duble personage the one of a king the other of a prophete and againe he saith and so he blessed the people not by the kingly office but by the propheticall office If then his former reason be good the king is to be preferred before the Prophet But now to his answere to the obiection of SalomoÌ„ which is in déede but a very shift and the commoÌ„ shift of M. Harding DormaÌ„
vvere in times past the Leuitical priests yea rather sith the Apostle treating of the Ministers of the nevve Testament conferring them with the olde Leuites sayth that they ministred death and the letter that killed but these minister the spirit which quickneth and righteousnesse and therfore the ministers of the nevve Testament are more vvorthie than the olde Leuites vvhat maner of king shal vve thinke him to bee vvhiche contemning the ministers of the nevve Testamente calleth himselfe the supreme head of his Christian kingdome and that immediatly vnder Christ This comparison Maister Saunders of the ministers of the olde and nevve Testament rightly vnderstood wée acknowledge The nevve is more vvorthy than the olde but the vvorthinesse and glory of the nevv ministration that saint Paule speakes on is spirituall and not outvvard glory For although the ministers of the olde Testament had outwarde glory and some of them by especiall calling had the visible supreme and ciuill gouernement although seldome yet the ministers of the nue testament are by Christ as your owne selfe haue confessed flatly forbidden it Vos autem non sic but you shall not be so And therefore where ye woulde haue them of no lesse dignitie meaning of outvvard glory and gouernment or else your example holdes not they are of farre lesse dignitie therein notwithstanding in a spirituall and invvarde glory they are againe of a farre greater dignitie than the olde Which spirituall dignitie if any King shoulde contemne you might then well demaunde vvhat maner of king he were and we woulde answere you hée were a wicked King but as these are two distinct dignities the spirituall dignitie of the minister and the visible supremacie of the King so may they be and are with vs well and godly vsed both of them Where both the Prince hath the outward dignitie of supreme head or gouernour vnder Christ and yet the ministers spirituall dignitie is not onely no whit contemned but hath his honor yelded due vnto him And therefore we denie not that which followeth For if he acknowledge not the Ministers of Christe ouer him he can not be blessed of them VVherevpon neither can he be pertaker of the sanctifying spirite whose ministers they are We graunt Maister Saunders that the Prince humbly receiueth their blessing and is partaker of the holy spirite of God whose ministers they are in these actions Wherein the Prince acknowledgeth them to represent God and is vnder them But what hindreth this that in other respectes they againe are vnder him and he their supreme gouernour but Maister Saunders procéedeth saying Dauid cryeth and nowe ye kings vnderstande and be ye learned ye that iudge the earth apprehend discipline least the Lorde waxe wroth and ye perishe oute of the right waye But if kings must be learned then so farre forth they must be vnder For he that is learned is learned of some maister and is scholler to him of whome he is learned the disciple is not aboue his maister but in that thing that he learneth of his maister of necessitie he is inferior That kings ought to be learned we gladly confesse and are glad that you confesse it althoughe againste your wylls for ye would rather haue them altogither vnlearned whom ye haue so long detained in blindnesse But why woulde ye haue them nowe learned forsothe bicause you would onely be their maisters and so they shoulde be still your vnderlings not onely in learning suche ill lessons as you woulde teache them but vnder pretence of teachers to be their gouernours too True it is in that the teacher teacheth he is aboue and in that the learner learneth he is vnder â—…ut the teacher is not aboue nor the learner vnder in other things Thoughe Moyses learned of Iethro yet in gouernement Moyses was aboue him Thoughe Dauid learned of Nathan yet in gouernement he was aboue him Thoughe Ozias learned of Iudith yet in gouernement he was aboue hir And so all princes that are taughte of their schole maisters their scholemaister maye be the better in learning but he is the worser in authoritie And thoughe he be the maister in knowledge yet he makes euen his knowledge wherby he is maister to serue the Prince also Yea although the Prince be not his maister in learning yet in all causes of learning the Prince hath a generall supreme gouernement to sée by his lawes euery kinde of learning maintayned in his order to forbid naughtie artes to be learned to appoint such suche an order methode to be taught or learned as learned men enforme him is good and easie to the attaining of learning to appaynt scholes and learned scholemaisters for learning and to giue them lawes statutes and stipendes for the maintenance of learning all this may the Prince doe by his supreme authoritie ouer all learned persons and in all causes of learning althoughe he himselfe be altogether vnlearned and can not one letter on the booke Althoughe woulde to God all Princes were learned not as the Papistes woulde haue them but as Dauid was and exhorteth all Princes to bée And thus as thys sentence makes nothing in the worlde for him so hys example thereon makes verye muche againste him But for all thys argumente be thus simple he wyll loâ—…de vs with further proues saying Sithe therefore it is sayde to the Apostles Go teache ye all nations and sith vnder the names of nations the kings of them are comprehended and Byshops and Priests haue succeeded the Apostles in the office of teaching truely in the offyce of teachyng the Byshoppe is greater than his king so farre is it off that the king can be the Bishops hed in all things causes VVhich title notwithstanding is not onely of these men giuen to a king but also by publique decree of late in Englande giuâ—…n vnto a Queene To reason froÌ„ teaching to gouerning is no good teaching M. SauÌ„ders If ye teach this doctrine theÌ„ your Pope should haue little gouernment for God wot he teacheth little being often times vnlearned and alwayes to proud to teache If ye say he teacheth by others so caÌ„ a prince too And though he could himselfe teache and would also teach the truth and not suppresse it yet sith ye say he succedes the Apostles but in the office of teaching he is no furder superior than he teacheth by your owne reckoning Neither would this superioritie be denyed him of any that he ought to teache if he in dâ—…de succeded the Apostles But if the succession of the Apostles consist in teaching as here ye confesse then hath not the Pope to crake muche of succeeding Peter and Paule that teacheth not as Peter and Paule did as woulde to God he did and all priests or Bishops else Whiche if they did and taught truely this woulde augment and not diminishe the Princes supreme authoritie yea and the Quéenes too Maister Saunders for in gouernement before ye
made a King Quéene alone Now to this he addeth out of Esai saying Esai foretolde that kings shoulde bee the nourishers of the Church of Christe and casting dovvne their countenance to the earth shall vvorship hir and streight he adioyneth thou shalt knovv that I am the Lord for this verely is the signe that the Lord raigneth in vs if vve yelde so much vnto his church that the Ministers of Christe are greater than any King or Queene As this sentence is placed both withoute all order and coherencie so the reason is very sclender and standes on this that the Priests are the Churche that Esai here speakes on which as it is apparaÌ„t false so it is not to this purpose For the supreme gouernment of a godly Prince giueth not onely an honour to the Churche but to the Priests also and yet his supremacie safe But sée how this sentence hits him as the rest For if kings and Quéenes be likened to Nourses and Nourses haue charge not onely of féeding but also of gouerning then do Kings Quéenes both féede the Church although not by teching yet by causing the truth to be taught and gouerne the Church also And if by the Church is chiefly ment the priestes then the same kind of Princes feeding and gouerning like to Nourses stretcheth to priestes also and so the similitude makes against him His other argument of dispensing Gods mysteries and Sacramentes to the king is diuers times alreadie aunswered vnto and therefore as superfluous I passe it ouer And thus farre for his argumentes of his Priestes superioritie Nowe secondly to the reasons he sheweth why he thinkes vs deceyued But thus in this case deceiueth many that they see the king is a Christian and gouerneth Christians For they knowe not or at least will not know what difference it is whether a man goueren a Christian bycause hee is a man or bycause hee is a Christian. The king indeed gouerneth Christian men but not bycause they are Christians but bycause they are men And bycause the Byshoppes also themselues are men the kings also in part are aboue Byshops The which hereby goeth cleare away if wee consâ—…ider Christian kings not onely to gouerne Christian men but euen alike oftentimes Iewes now and then Moores and Tartars for this onely that they are kings But Byshops gouerne Christians so as they can gouerne no other as they are Byshoppes Sith therefore the gouernement of the king pertaineth to all men alike but Byshops principalitie is reached to onely Christians and sith the state of our Christianitie excelleth the humaine nature that is in vs with what sence is he endued that preâ—…erreth the gouernoure of our bodily and fleshely nature before the prieste that watcheth for our soules and that either loseth our sinnes if wee make worthie fruites of repentance or bindeth them if we beare about an impenitent heart For the Ministers binding and loosing is an other question Let vs nowe kepe vs to this of the Princes supreme gouernment We are deceyued you say for lacke of considering this difference that the king gouerneth Christians not as Christians but as men and we thinke you arâ—… deceyued your selfe M. Saunders and would 〈◊〉 others for not considering this difference in the king him selfe in whoÌ„ we ought to consider not onely that he is a king but also a Christian king In that he is a king he geuerneth aâ—… his subjects as ye say a like so farre as the likenesse or 〈◊〉 of their sâ—…ates will permit whether they be Christian Iewes Turkes Mores â—…aitars Ethniks or whatsoeuer religioÌ„ they be of not in respecte of their religions nor in the they are 〈◊〉 neither but in respect they are his 〈◊〉 For ther are other men also that are none of his subjectes â—…ra euery man in that he is a man is no subiect to another man but frée Neither in that he is a christian to speake preperly of the abstracte he is vnder any other than Christe in whom there is no difference of countrey state degrée or person as your selfe afterwarde coÌ„fesse in the 4. chapter How â–ª beit as the king himselfe is of the Christianâ—… religion and a Christian king of a christian kingdome as al kings kingdomes ought to be although they be not so hath he an other charge and gouernement of his christian subiectes farre aboue that they be naturall men or this or that cruÌ„trey meÌ„ euen that they be christians committed to his gouernment And therefore this charge was giuen the king of Gods people in his institution Dâ—…ute 17. That he should haue Gods worde alwayes with him and make religion the chiefe end of his gouernement And this your selfe haue graunted alreadie pag. 80 excepte ye will contrary your selfe as ye often doe But this case is too apparant that a christian Prince regardeth further than the body or than the naturall or polytike man For being a christian Prince he regardeth them as christian subiectes and not alike to such subiectes as are Heathen Turkes and Tartars which is a shameful sclander For as the christian Prince hath a speciall regarde to his christian subiectes before his Infidell subiects so they being subiects of vnlike condition he gouerns them nothing a like The one being out of the houshold of fayth although in the housholde of his kingdome The other being of bothe the housholdes and therefore the faythfull Prince hath fuller authoritie ouer them as wel for the religion of their soules as for their goodes and bodies But saye you the Byshoppe bath respecte only to the soule I say still would to God your Byshops had so But doth this hinder the Princes superioriue that hath respect to soule and bodie too The argumentes of Constantine Theodosius and Constantius are somewhat touched alreadie and I reserue the further handling of theÌ„ to the practise and treatise of the stories The 3. part of this chapter is a dissuasioÌ„ from the Princes supreme gouernment by the successe thereof Wherin first he begins with the most famous Prince King Henrie the. 8 the Queenes Matesties father the noblest and moste fortunate king that euer bare crowne in England now when his soule is crouned in the kingdome of heauen with eternal glorie his body with honor interred in his Sepulcher his immortal fame yet fresh liuing in the memorie mouthes of al nations sée these spitefull Papistes will leaue off with more than villanous reproches moste traiterously to rayle vpoÌ„ him Saying that he first called himself the Chief head of the Church of England Ireland immediately vnder Christ Besides that he was neuer the happier but much more vnhappie Upbrayding his wiues vnto him The couÌ„terfeting of the money and the pilling of his subiects â—… wicked Papistes past all shame and grace Howe truely dyd the Apostle Iude prophecie of you that 〈◊〉 â—…ulers and blaspheme â—…hem that 〈◊〉 authoritie Was King Henrie the
had not deliuered vs from it and yet sée if these Papistes that can so narrowly spie and proll at euery note in king Henry and kings Edwards dayes can in Quéene Maries dayes espie anye one of these great beames that were such apparante tokens of gods wrath that all men sawe and felt what euents succeeded the refusall of this title and the yéelding it to the Pope nerehand the cleane subuersion of this Realme if we may iudge by sequels Now after Quéene Marie he comes to the Quéenes Maiestie that now God be praised most prosperously raigneth ouer vs. But vvhen very many giuen to heresies vvere offended at this notable modestie of the Queene neither vvould they yet vnderstande his Counsell in gouerning his Churche God brought to passe that Marie of happie memorie being dead the kingdome of England should deuolue to such a vvoman as novve vvriteth hir selfe The supreme gouernesse in all matters and causes asvvell ecclesiasticall as secular That yet so at the length by the successe it selfe men of hard harte and obstinate necke mighte marke hovv euill king Henry tooke this office vpon him the vvhiche of his heire and successour could not duely and orderly be fulfilled For to whom it is not permitted to teach vvhich is the most necessarie office of an ecclesiasticall Head hovv shal she performe those greater offices that are occupied in the chastisement and correction of them that ought to teache the people or shall she vvhich is vnvvorthie that she should hir selfe teache publiquely in the lovvest degree moderate and reprehend vvith lavvful authoritie other publique teachers in the highest degree or if she can not lavvfully reprehend them shall she yet be lavvfully supreme gouernesse of the Church I omit here the things that in these yeares vvhich are last passed haue bene I knovv not hovv vncomely done and preached in Englande vnder such supreme heads of the Church I spare the dignitie of theÌ„ that gouerne Another time if God vvill I vvill handle them particularly hovve greatly both from the lavve of God and from the sentence of the auncient Churche and from righte reason that state of a common vveale is farre in vvhiche any king arrogateth to himselfe the office and name of the supreme head of the Church Is your part so false and weake of proues Maister Saunders that it can win no credite but by discrediting of ours with sclaunders and yet we woulde pardon this in you ascribing it either to some passion of choler against your aduersaries or to blinde affection of your selues that ye call verie manie of vs giuen to heresies hard harted and obstinate necked which are termes fitter to muster in M. Stapletons coÌ„mon places than to stuffe vp M. doctor Saunders volumes howe they redownde vpon your selues let other iudge â–ª that will reade and view of both But if we forgiue you this for our parts shal we stil suffer you to raile vpoÌ„ sclander the Lordes annoynted saying she arrogateth to hir selfe the office and name of the supreme Head of the Church speaking at randon withoute limitation of the Churche as the Pope doth arrogate to himselfe and taketh on hir to be an ecclesiasticall head and publique teacher of other that should teach hir these are too too infamous sclauÌ„ders of hir Maiestie that claimeth no such title nor attempteth any such thing What supreme gouernement is ascribed to hir highnesse we haue tolde you a thousand times but I sée ye will not vnderstand it bicause ye would of set purpose sclander it But to knit vp your argument of the euent and sequele of the Quéenes Maiesties raigne ye say many things haue bin done and preached in England ye cannot tell hovv vnsemely â—… thinke euen the same M. Saunders ye can not tell howe â—…ndede But howe vnseemely a thing is this for one of your â—…rofession to chalenge ye cannot tell what nor howe ye set owne nothing but vnder a pretence of sparing vs to bréede â—…et a furder sclaunderous suspition ye threat vs that ye will â—…serue theÌ„ til a furder leisure that is to say ad Kalendas graecas til â—…e shall first know them and then be able to proue them in the meane seasoÌ„ ye take the wisest way to say such ther are but what they are ye cannot now tell ye wil learne theÌ„ out and tell vs another time but tell the worste ye canne ye shal neuer be able to tell of any fals doctrine preached and by the Prince approued to be preached nor of anye wicked facte allowed by publike authoritie to be done No Maister Saunders in all the Quéenes Maiesties raigne ye can neuer be able to proue any suche things but in the raigne of your Popes we can proue many such things as whordome committed and maintained murder done and maintained Idolatry vsed and maintained and infinite errors preached and maintained by publique authoritie among the Papists As for the Quéenes maiesties raigne that now is if the euent and sequele may make an argument God hath so blessed it maugre all your spites and practises that no Realme christian hath florished like nor Englande more at anye tyme The Lord be praised for it and for his mercie sake long continue it that hath giuen so goodly a token of his well liking hir Maiesties supreme gouernment The thirde Chapter The argument is that Princes can not iudge nor define in causes Ecclesiasticall OF those errors that are about the povver of kings and magistrats the secoÌ„d error is of theÌ„ that thinke kings are not in dede the chief heads of the Churches in vvhich they raigne but in certaine causes Ecclesiastiall to bee euen as vvorthie members as Bishops â–ª for although in one certaine thing as in the office of teaching they preferre Bishops before kings yet partly in another Ecclesiasticall matter as in deposing a Byshop from his seat or in moderating any synode they preferre kings before Bishops partly they vvill haue it free for kings that almoste in euery ecclesiasticall matter they may knowe and decerne as Iudges Of the confutation of whiche errour this is the reason that I should shewe in euery cause of the ecclesiastical lawe that is to be knowne and iudged Kinges to be so muche in the place of priuate men that this trial can not of the ecclesiasticall Iudges be committed vnto them Although I denie not but that of some facte that perteyneth to the eccl. lawe the knowledge may be committed to Kinges and Magistrates But before the eccl. cause be known the king may orderly intermeddle his authoritie to that ende that a quiet place may be graunted where the Bishops should iudge And also that the Bishops may be called at a certayne day to that place And that in the meane season whyle the ecclesiasticall cause is knowne the publique peace yea euen in the assembly of Priestes may be conserued To conclude after the cause knowne and iudged of the Pristes the king either by the sworde that he
as ye sayde before disposing otherwyse than Christ hath done your Priestes do so but they ought not to do so The Prince can not do it nor he dothe it nor claymes to doe it nor it is ascribed vnto him Yea thoughe you meane by disposing no alteration yet is this an harde phrase to say that Princes or priestes either dispose of the Churche of Christe but rather dispose of matters in the Church of Christ. And this as the Priest may doe in his vocation so may the Prince in his estate Which though it be not expressed by name but comprehended in the newe Testament yet is it euen by name expressed in the olde Testament in diuers places of the disposing of Church matters by Moyses Iosue Dauid Salomon Iosaphat Ezechias c. And since your selfe confesse the one gouernment is a figure of the other And that the gouernment before Christ he neither brake it nor diminished it it followeth that theÌ„ he left it entire and confirmed it And therfore although the Princes disposing of Churche matters be not by name expressed yet is it by your reasoÌ„ necessarilie comprehended and so you answere your selfe Now after he hath thus as he supposeth debarred Princes from all warrant oute of the law of God and the newe Testament he examineth the other lawes saying Except therefore by the lawe of nature the law of nations or the lawe ciuill such power be permitted too the king it is cleare that he hath no power at all ouer these things But certaine it is that those lawes cannot giue to the king any power ouer things that are not subiect to those lawes For no law can establishe ought either of other things or persons or actions than those things that fall vnder the compasse of it But Ecclesiasticall matters do infinitly excede the power of the lawe of Nature of nations and the ciuill For of these three the law of nature is the first and greatest But neither that sith it begaÌ„ in the earth can decree ought vpon the mysteries of Christe which draw their originall from heauen onely For that I may speake nothing of the force of nature being yet entire truely after that the nature of all mankynd by the sinne of Adam was corrupted and death entring by one man passed into al it can not be that from that infected originall any good thing shoulde come forth For an ill tree can not bring forth good fruites neither doth the fleshely man such as we all be by nature perceiue those things that are of the spirite of God. All this labor is a néede not M. Saunders to run for confirmation of a Christian doctrine from the law of God to the lawe of nature and the lawe of man we vse not so to doe Neither desire we anye doctrine to be admitted that is not proued by the lawe of God reuealed in his worde vnto vs it is you the Papists that stand on such proues and grounds not we Howbeit you do iniurie to the law of nature to measure it altogether by the corruption of our nature For howsoeuer we be degenerate from it the law of nature remaineth in it selfe both good and perfect and is called likewise the law of God. Neither can I thinke that euery ecclesiasticall thing as ecclesiasticall things are commonly vnderstoode is infinitely aboue the power of the law of nature By which reason many petit matters would be farre aboue great principles Yea many great Ecclesiasticall matters doe fall within the compasse of the lawe of nature It is true that you say of the corruption of our nature that by the fall of Adam sin hath infected the Masse of all mankinde Death by one man hath entred into all men No goodnesse can come of such a corrupted originall An ill tree can not bring forth good fruite and that the fleshely man perceiueth not the things that are of the spirit of God. All this is true but is it not as much against a Priest as a Prince for the Priest in that he is a man is borne in sinne and dyeth by death the reward of sinne nor caÌ„ bring forth any good fruites nor perceiue the things of the spirit of God. And the prince in that he is a ChristiaÌ„ is washed from his sinne The sting of death hath no power ouer him but is a passage to eternall life He is regenerate by a newe originall from aboue He is a good tree and bringeth good fruits and is become a spirituall man perceiuing and working the things that are of the spirite of God and that perchaunce a great deale better than many a good Priest and without all doubt farre more spirituall than any Popishe priest And therefore that ye speake of the corruption of nature is nothing to the purpose excepte it be to confute your errors of pura naturalia fréewill preparatiue workes c. But Maister Saunders drist is this that onely the Priests are spirituall men and so may onely Iudge of spiritual things and Princes are but naturall fleshely and sinnefull men and so can giue no Iudgement of spirituall matters But howe vntrue this is how presumptuous on his partie and iniurions to all Christian Princes and how contrary to his owne selfe that faith else where Christian Princes are spirituall I thinke anye that haue but meane Iudgement may easily Iudge it But Maister Saunders procéedeth saying But to Iudge of Ecclesiasticall matters is no small good thyng but one of the chiefest that Christe hath gyuen vnto his Church bycause he hath gyuen the power of feeding of losyng and bynding to his Apostles that is to the chiefest Magistrates of hys Churche euen as the greatest gifte VVhich gifte they coulde neuer well exercise but wyth Iudgement eyther goyng before or goyng with it For he that shall binde nothing but that that shoulde be bounde and shall lose nothing but that that shoulde be losed must of necessitie before hande deliberate and decree that this is to bee bounde and that is to bee losed But to decree suche a thing to bee done or not to be done in Christian Religion this is euen that that we call to Iudge in matters of Faith. Syth therfore a power so heauenly and notable can not spring oute of the beginnings of our corrupte nature it followeth that it commeth onely of the free mercie of god But that mercie of God is made manifest vnder the time of the new Testament partlye by the lawe written partly not written but neyther waye anye povver is gyuen to Kyngs in Ecclesiasticall causes This argumeÌ„t M. SauÌ„ders is like the hopping of a reuÌ„d that from the law of the new Testament went about to infirme it by the lawe of nature and so fetching a circumquaque commeth in again with this conclusion that it is not by the law of the newe Testament So that where we thought we had procéeded â—…urder wée are nowe where wée were before But to let goe the
naughtinesse of the argument We graunt that to iudge aright of Ecclesiasticall matters is a great gift of God but that the iudgemeÌ„t of ecclesiasticall matters is onelie to be restrained to binding and losing as you here define what you meane by iudging in matters of faith this is a manifest falsehood True it is that binding and losing can not rightly be withoute iudgement nor withoute right iudgement and therefore your Pope and you doe erre so often herein both binding that that should be losed and losing that that should be bound errante claue as ye terme it your key erring and erring also not onely in things to be bounde or losed but in the power it selfe of binding losing too Yet notwithstanding binding and losing and the iudgement requisite in binding and losing are two distinct and seueral things and iudgement reacheth furder to other things also euen in the Priest himselfe besides the Princes iudgement And therefore as this definition of iudgement in matters of faith is preposterously brought in for ye oughte before to haue defined what ye ment by iudgemente so is it false for other matters of faithe require iudgement besides binding and losing Now where you say this power commeth not of the principles of our corrupt nature but of the free mercie of God you say truth But that ye adde the mercie of God is made manifest vnder the time of the newe testament partlye by the law written partly not written is spoken ambiguously For that Princes iudged in matters of faith was also made manifest in the olde Testament but that Princes haue power to binde and lose we graunt is neither manifest nor couert neither in the olde or newe As for the newe lawe to be deuided into written and not written is another error and impertinent to this question Your vnwritten lawe of the new Testament we stand not vpon But to affirme that by neither way written or vnwritten no power is giuen to kings in Ecclesiasticall matters that we denie and your self haue rather confuted it thaÌ„ hither to confirmed it But to confirme it ye bring out this reason Neither were thene at the beginning any Christian Kings to whom Christ shoulde haue committed any power nor the Apostles gaue any rule according where vnto the kings should iudge of Ecclesiasticall causes That there were no Christian kings then is not materiall For by this rule they should be no defenders of the faith neither bicause Princes were not theÌ„ defenders of it But that the Apostles gaue no rule whereby they should iudge is false For whosoeuer should iudge shuld iudge by gods word and this rule Christ and his Apostles gaue in generall But that Princes mighte iudge is both proued from the olde Testament and by the text that M. Saunders himselfe citeth out of the new yea by that he saith immediatly For if any man say kings are appointed iudges in a cause of the faith only bicause by Baptisme they are made spiritual meÌ„ who iudge all things and the spirites do trie those things that are of God this in dede I graunt to be true in the kynde and maner of the priuate but not of the publique iudgement For it is another thing when thou art a member of the Catholike Church nor preferrest thy selfe before thy pastours what is necessarie for thee priuately to Iudge and this the vnction teacheth and another thing to take vpon thee power to teache others and to prescribe to thy Pastors what they ought to do or teache when thou art not called to the publique ministerie of the Church as Aaron was We know there is a difference betwéen priuate and publique Iudgement But that this place of S. Paule The spirituall man Iudgeth all things is only to be vnderstoode of prinate Iudgement is but the priuate iudgement of M. Saunders But it is well that he graunteth priuate iudgement to euery Christian man Neither is it any reason then it shuld be debarred irom any Christian Princes neither is it anye reason that the Prince although in his priuate Iudgement â–ª rightly iudging a matter of faithe to be true shoulde not approue set forth the same publiquely by his princely authoritie And so his priuate Iudgement directs his publique Iudgement For a Prince is not only a priuate man but a publique man also not that he may doe all things of his owne priuate or publique Iudgement nor take vpon him the publique ministerie of the pastour in teaching being not called as Aaron was for this is not ascribed to the Prince bicause he giueth a publique Iudgement in respect he is a publique person but his Iudgement is a publique approbation and establishing of that that is alreadie by others Iudgement â–ª iudged to whome the discussing appertaineth In which discussing althoughe the godly learned clergie being called as Aaron was haue the greatest skill and charge of Iudgement yet the lay men suche as are also learned and godly haue a publique Iudgement too Or else why saith Panormitane we shoulde more beleue a lay man alleaging scripture than the whole councell besides but nowe the truth being once founde out by these learned Iudgements the Princes publique Iudgement as it called them together as it gaue them their charge so it prescribeth what the pastors ought to doe and teache therin without any preiudice to the spirituall pastors Iudgement in the function of his doing and teaching Now hauing thus set downe his owne assertions he will enter on the other part to confute our obiections And first he alleageth this reason of the protestantes In all the olde Testamente we sée gouernors and Kings both to haue prescribed to the priests what they ought to doe in ecclesiasticall matters and also to haue remoued them froÌ„ the ministerie that haue negligently done their dutie To this obiecton M. Saunders answere is this that this reason holdes not from the olde Testament to the new If this came so to passe in the olde Testament saith he yet no reason shuld compell that the same shuld be so in the new Testament sith the reason of the eccl. gouernment is changed And are you changed too M. Saunders that saide before after say make all your booke of it that the ecclesiastical kind of gouernment hath bene alwayes one and that is a viâ—…ble Monarchie euen from Adam to Pope Pius â–ª 5. and said that if the gouernement be changed the Churche must needes be changed tâ—…o and made the gouernement of the olde Testament to be a figure of the new But now that you are beaten with your owne arguments you say they hold not by reason the ecclesiasticall gouernment is changed But I see Maister SauÌ„ders you woulde deale with vs as the riche man dealt with his poore neighbor When the poore maÌ„ complained saying I beseeche your worship be good vnto me for my Cowe hath goared your Bull. What hath he quoth the riche maÌ„
earthly in this respect as M. Saunders him selfe confesseth neither bathe he the gouernement of the Churche which is dispersed in many kingdomes but is a gouernour of a parte therof or of some particular Churche Nowe when M. Saunders hath thus proued as he thinketh the imperfection of the olde lawe saying And thuâ—… should these thinges be if in the olde time the kinges of the Iewes had exercised any chiefe power in ecclesiasticall matters and ouer the Bishops He turneth him selfe on the other side to the flat deniall of this which in the answere to our first obiection he flatly graunted and fled then to thyâ—… shifte that the case was altered But nowe sayth he neither is it true that the Kinges of the Iewes were counted greater than the Priestes of the Leuiticall kinde in administring those thinges that pertayned to ecclesiasticall matters whiche by peece meale I will not be greeâ—…ed to shewe It will not greeue you to tell a lye M. Saunders but to tell the truthe it woulde be a greefe vnto you Where dyd we say that the Kings of the Iewes were counted greater than the Priests in administring those thinges that pertayned to ecclesiasticall matters But go too let vs sée what peecemeale proues you bring And firste saye you Moyses commaunded that after the King was sette in the seate of hys kingdome hee shoulde wryte oute for him selfe in a volume another copâ—…e of this lawe â–ª taking the copie of the Priestes of the â—…euiticall Tribe But if not onely other but the king also him selfe muste go to the Priests for writing out of the lawe how was the king the prince in interpreting the lawe the copie whereof he was compelled to craue of other was he not herein admonished that he should remember that the priests were his superiours in those things that pertayned to the law for as euery Magistrate crauing the sworde of the king receiuing it doth in so doing declare the king in the right of the sword to be greater than him selfe after the same sorte is it when the king receyueth of the Pristes the copie of the diuine law Is this the copie of your piece meale proues M. Sand he that should take a copie of your argumentes might per haps haue néede but God wot shoulde finde full slender stuffe in them This argument is copied out of Stapleton and your other collectors and is already answered Which if it were good bycause the Prince taketh the copie of the lawe from the Priest therefore in the gouernment of matters pertayning to the lawe the Priest is aboue the Prince then is the Register aboue the Chauncelor the Bishop then is the Clarke aboue the Stewarde and the Prince bicause he hath the kéeping of the recordes And this is a more like example than that you bring in of a Magistrate crauing and receyuing the sworde of the king for in this example the King hath not onely the kéeping of the sworde but al the authoritie of and lawfull exercise of the sworde vnder God dependeth on him and suche as he will giue it vnto Wherfore he acknowleageth rightly the King to be his greater But in the lawe of God where the kinges gouernement is appoynted to him and by that appoyntment of God he hath interest in matters of the lawe of God by his kingly office and therefore must haue the lawe of God about him to directe his giuerment and hath not this interest authorie giuen him of the Priest as the subiect hathe the authoritie and exercise of the sworde giuen him of the king doth this argue a like that the Priest is superiour bicause he muste haue the kéeping of the lawe and the king that he may be sure he hath a true copie of Gods lawe muste haue it of the Priest Dothe the keeping argue the greater authoritie â–ª The king must haue the crowne of the kéeper of the crowne and the seale of the keeper of the seale is the keeper therefore the greater Nay it rather argueth althoughe in looking too that those thinges be well kepte and truely declared they haue a more especiall charge in their offices yet are they rather inferiours in that they haue for the kings behoofe the kéeping and deliuery of them And so the priest hathe an especiall charge of keeping and deliuering to the Prince the lawe of God bicause of his especiall vocation in the studie profession and administration of it Whiche argueth more cunning and learning of duetie to be looked for at his handes than at the Princes And therefore we ascribe not as you saye greater principalitie to Princes in the interpreting of the lawe of God. Princes commit that to the interpreters But to the Prince is committed a superiour charge of gouerning all persons to ouersee that the lawe of God be rightly interpreted and administred And for this cause the Prince oughte to haue the copie of the lawe not him selfe to interprete it and whereto then to lye idly by him no to gouerne him selfe and all his subiectes by the prescription of it After this he alleageth the examples of Moyses Samuell Iosue Dauid Salomon Constantius and Theodosius In Moyses and Samuell he hathe nothing that is not common To Iosue Dauid and Salomon he vseth Stapletons answeres and there is answered The examples of Constantius and Theodosius are somewhat already answered and shall be further God willing when we come to the practise And likewise to the Councels that he citeth The argument of the fourth Chapter That Christian Princes may be deposed from their estates by the Bishops and their kingdomes giuen to other when their gouernment hurteth the truth of the faith and the soules health whereto they are ordayned IN this 4 Chapter M. SauÌ„ders kepeth no perfect method and therfore we must follow him as he procéedeth First he maketh two kinds of men the earthly man and the heauenly man and so likewise two kingdoms the one earthly the other heauenly The earthly kingdome choseth their king by humaine consent as Nimrod c. Of the heauenly kingdom that Christ hath in the earth Christ is the king Who although by the worthinesse of his nature he be king of all men yet is he called onely the king of the faithfull Who comming into the world as he hath not taken away the former nature of maÌ„ but renued it so hath he not destroyed the earthly kingdome but amended it Here vpon he concludeth that earthly kings may be made Citizens of gods Church and vse all their olde right and most free gouernement in all those causes that diâ—…ishe not the faith and Religion of christ They may make whome they will fit Ciuil magistrates They maye appoint at their pleasure lawfull punishments for malefactors and freely do al other thing that by the law Naturall Nationall Ciuil or Mâ—…nicipall shall be allowed To all this as we agree with M. Saunders and therfore I gather bâ—…t a briefe coÌ„tâ—…ct
base things of the worlde thatis by the pouertie of the Apostles and the tormentes of the Martyrs he ouercame the mightie things the same God within a while after did so ioin togither his heauenly kingdome with the earthly kingdome that there also he might shewe no lesse both power and mercie while some kings voluntarily made themselues subiect to the pore Ministers of Christ But other refusing at the first to be made subiects vnto theÌ„ yet by the spirituall power of theÌ„ were either afterwarde conuerted to repentance or else vvere hurled downe from the high degree of the Empire they possessed that euery waye it should be true that God reuealed to Daniel In the dayes of those kingdomes the God of heauen shall rayse vp a kingdome which shall neuer be destroyed his kingdome shall not be giuen to an other people but it shall frush and consume al kingdomes and it shall stande for euer This truely is the kingdome of heauen or the power of the Church of God. It is euen so M. Sand â–ª and therefore not suche a worldly kingdome as your Pope vsurpeth you proule for him to mainteine but the heauenly kingdome of Christe and the power of God which is his Gospell shall frush and consume your kingdome with the other Nay say you they did indéed once iarre but now they agrée the heauenly and the earthly kingdome are conioyned togither Agréement is a good hearing M. Sand â–ª but what meane you by this coniunctioÌ„â—… that the one is become the other and not still distinguished from it or that your Pope may be king and his Byshoppes Princes of bothe nay M. sand you finde not that agréement and coniunction For Christ hath put such a barre betwene them that his spiritual Ministers can not haue earthly kingdomes nor that earthly kings shoulde in the estate of their earthly kingdomes becoÌ„me subiecte in such wise to his spirituall Ministers otherwise than to yelde their obedience to their spirituall ministerie representing the power mercie of God vnto them But not to resigne their crownes vnto them not to be troden vnder their feete not to be deposed of them and driuen out of their earthly kingdomes The spirituall kingdome of Christ it selfe much lesse the spirituall ministers of that kingdome dealeth not with earthly kings in such a fashion which is not to agrée or ioyne wyth them but to conspice against them You tel vs of some kings that haue voluntarily yeelded theÌ„ selues subiectes some that were compelled and driuen out of their kingdomes but was this done as you saye by the pouertie of the Apostles and the tormentes of the Martyrs True it is that by these base things God ouercame the mightie things of the world But trow you that they by their pouertie deposed kings by their suffering tormeÌ„ts draue theÌ„ out of their realme that were a harde matter But name the Apostle name the martyr name the king name the kingdome you can No you can not â–ª But you shal finde the centrarie for if they were in pouertie then were they not rycher than kings if they suffered tormentes theÌ„ they put not meÌ„ to tormeÌ„ts they were tormeÌ„ted not tormeÌ„ters sufferers not doers of theÌ„ Neither suffered they as malefactors for coÌ„spiring against kings for going about to haue deposed kings froÌ„ their kingdomes Are you not ashamed your Popes being rycher thaÌ„ kings crueller than tirante to tel how God ouercame the mighte of the worlde and increased his spirituall kingdome this was Gods doing not mans and by cleane contrarie meanes to your doings and to cleane contrarie purposes not to storish in an earthly kingdome or to dispossesse kings as al your drifte doth tende But you haue examples hereof howe you broughte kings to this thraldome but for shame ye durst not name theÌ„ the stories were so tragical But now this being coÌ„trarie to Christes prohibition he propouÌ„neth an obiection himselfe in our behalfe answereth it Thou vvilt say do therefore By â–ª hoppes and Pastors of the shepe of Christ rule temporal kingdomes properly indeed and of it selfe in no vvise But thus do Byshops rule temporal kingdomes if so be such kingdomes do submit themselues to the Christian faith For euen in this that Christian kings and nations do desire the faith Sacraments of Christ they promise heerein that they vvill neither gouerne nor obey any earthly gouernment further than the Christian faith and religion may suffer If therefore either the gouernement of the king or the peoples obedience begin to svvarue othervvayes either they may be deposed from their gouernment or most iustly excluded from the povver of choosing a king by the force of the couert or expressed couenaÌ„t which at the beginning they made vvith the Church of Christe For vvhat soeuer is so much of the nature of the thing that is done that if by chaunce mention vvas made thereof at the beginning it can not othervvise agree than by that one vvaye vvhich although it were not expressed betvvene the bargain makers yet is it holden for expressed bicause it was necessarily contained in the nature of that that was done For ensample A man saith to a vvoman I take thee to my vvise she againe making answere I take thee to my husbande But that they shall liue togither euen till death although this expresly is not vttered in the couenant notwithstanding it is so contained in the nature of the thing that it is necessarily vnder stood After the same maner it is when either the king or any priuat man is made a member of the church by faith baptisme For euen in that that he renounceth the worlde the pomps thereof verily he promiseth that he will neuer abuse the power of his earthly kingdome againste the faithe and church of christ And if so be he shall do it he wil not refuse but that he may be depriued of the right of his kingdome For I aske if this namely should come in question Softe M. Sand â–ª we must interrupt you or els we caÌ„not so coÌ„ueniently answere you To your question anon now to your argument and your 〈◊〉 thereâ—…n The obrection you made was this whether Bishops and Pastors of the sheepe of Christ may rule temporall kingdomes You answere properly and of it selfe in no wise But as those kingdomes do subiect them selues to the Christian sayth This is a proper elusion M. Saunders thinke you to escape thus is it all one to subiecte their kingdomes toâ—…e Christian fayth and to subiect their kingdomes to the Bishops Good 〈◊〉 it is that the fayth should beare the â—…héefe rule But the obiection was whether the Bishops should or no and therfore this â—…inction serueth not For Christ simply without this or y respect debarâ—…eth al his spi ritual ministers froÌ„ ruling of teÌ„poral kingdomes Who knoweth not that properly and of their owne nature temporall kingdomes should not be ruled of spirituall pastors but
they may be â—…conciled and continue together â—…ut you 〈◊〉 in this case of swaruing from the 〈◊〉 the subiect and the Prince may not continue together â–ª 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the man and the womaÌ„ are by their contract in mariage knit inseparably togither especially as the Papists maâ—…e the contract that it is neuer vndone for any vice no not for whordome although they graunt there may be in nâ—…ne but 〈◊〉 déede a separation so the Prince and the â—…ubiect being contracted togither in the polycie of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the one 〈◊〉 faithfull gouernement the 〈◊〉 promising faithfull obedience notwithstanding all their vices that fall out afterwards betwene them may not be â—…ieane parted a sunder the Prince from his authoritio the suâ—…iect from his obediencâ—… but till their liues endes most 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 together â–ª and as the priest â—…an not 〈◊〉 but by your owne 〈◊〉 makes 〈◊〉 againste you But now â—…ay â—…n and moue your question M. Saunders I aske say you if this by name should come in questioÌ„ whether this shoulde not necessarily be aunswered to that King which would become a Christian Let it be that King Lucius come to Blessed Eleutherius the Pope yea or else king Clodoueus to Blessed Remigius and desire them selues to be admitted into the societie of the Christian people But let vs suppose that the Blessed Eleutherius or Remigius answere to eyther of them we are glad most deere Sonne that thou desirest to be made a Citizen of the kingdome of heauen but this thou oughtest to knowe for certaintie that the case is not â—…ke in the kingdome of heauen as it is in the worlde For in the Church thou must liue so that thou make captiue thy vnderstanding to the obedience of â—…aith But thou how greater thou arte in the world maist so much the more hurt the Churche of God â—…f thou shalt abuse the right of thy sworde to the defence of heretikes contrarie to the Catholike faithe No otherwise therfore maist thou haue entrie into the Church than if thou shalte promise that thou wilt persist in that saâ—…h and defende that Church with all thy force which being receiued from the Apostles is continued by the succession of Bishops vntill this daye and dispersed throughe oute all the world But if it shall chance thou doest otherwise thou shalt not refuse but shalt go from the right of thy kingdome and promise to lead a priuate life here if the King Lucius make answere I am ready to acknowledge the ChristiaÌ„ faith but I neither promise that I will defend with my sword the Catholike faith neither will I for whatsoeuer I shall do giue ouer the righte of my kingdome Can the Bishop to this man thus affected minister the Sacrament of Baptisme and deliuer the sacrament of thanksgiuing can he therfore be a member of Christ that will not submit his Scepter vnto Christ and refuseth to serue him Your example and your question hang not together M. Saunders to your last question I answere that he can not be a member of Christe that will not submit his Scepter vnto Christ and refuseth to serue him But what is this question to your former question of submitting himselfe to the Byshop to depose him there is greater difference betwixte Christs Scepter and the Bishops Crosier than betwéene the Kings Crowne and the Bishops Miter But to come to your examples which drawe somewhat nerer to your purpose First trow you that these two examples of King Lucius and Clodoueâ—… will answere al thâ—…se and serue for all Kings I suppose they will not â–ª For these kings receiued Baptisme being of lawfull yeares and â—…ight haue made a voluntarie graunt to all that you prâ—…suppose your Bishops would haue demauÌ„â—…ed of theÌ„ so might haue snarled themselues in their briers and bondage But yeutaÌ„ not presuppose the like of infants especially of those infantes whose parents were Christâ—… Princes before who are baptized long before they are kings And althoughe they might order y child as ill as they ordered y other that â—…o rawly came to ChristeÌ„dome yet would not the parentes being alreadâ—…e Christened bring their Children in such bondage Neither could they demand it of a childe which was not a king nor perchaunce borne to a kingdome but gat it afterwarde by prowesse Secondly these be but vaine presupposals false For although Clodouenâ—… was Baptized by Remigius yet was not Lucius baptized by Eleutherius but either by the two preachers which Eleutherius sent or as it rather appéereth by the content of Eleutherius letters King Lucius was himselfe a Christian before therfore Eleutherius sent them not as Legates nor sent any such conditions by them nor any lawes or ceremonies of the Church of Rome but referreth y King to the word of God and was so farre from taking vpon him to be gods Uiâ—…ar ouer the King his kingdome that in plain words be yeldeth that authoritie title to King Lucius And as for Clodoueus though he call Remigius his patrone author of the discipline and ReligioÌ„ bicause he baptized him in structed him therin yet as for any such couenant or condition not to admit him to the faith of Christ except he woulde sweare before hand that if he would not defend the Bishops their faith he shoulde forsake his kingdome and promise to leade a priuate life Remigius conditioned no such thing no more than Elentherins before had done to Lucius For when Clodoneus being an infidel and yet hauing a Christian wise which made him somâ—…hat more enclinable being in battaile against the Almaines making his vowe to Christ in his distresse to receiue the ChristiaÌ„ faith if he should get the victorie which being obtained and he returned home with triumph willing to receiue the faith of Christ his wise made hast to Remigius the Bishop of Remes Lxhorting him saith â—…onius forthwith to come to the Court that while he wauered yet in suspence he would open to him the way of truth that leadeth to God for she said she feared least his minde puffed vp with prosperitie while he knoweth not the giuer of these things he should contemne him For things that fall oute as we would haue them fall out of our minde likewise in continuance of ryme more easilie than those things that fall out otherwise than we would The Bishop hasteneth to obey the admonishing of the Religious woman He presenteth himself to the sight of the King that nowe a prettie while had aboade his coÌ„ming The faith is declared by the Bishop the meanes of beleuing is taught The King also acknowledging the faith deuoutly promiseth that he wâ—…l serue one god As for the peeres of his Realme armie he will proue his opinion which what it is of this matter he affirmeth that so muche more denoutly they wold submit their neckes to Christ how much more they should see theÌ„selues to be prouoked with
all my force that fayth and Churche that I finde in déede receyued from the Apostles and will extirpate with all my force that faith and Churche that is degenerate from it What if the King saye thus master Saunders trowe you the Bishop hearing this whiche notwithstanding is but righte and reason and the King euen of the Bishop enforced thereto will he accepte the offer No master Saundess the Bishoppe will crie oute and so will you that the matter shall not goe thus and that the King may not doe this howsoeuer it stande him vpon But you will appeale from him vnto your selues as Iudges Whiche when the King shall heare will 〈◊〉 not iudge this a madde appeale and suspecte your cause the worsse and thinke that you playnely woulde abuse him And so to kéepe his promise made vnto you turne his force iustly agaynst you Haue you not heere made a rodde for your owne tayle if the Prince be but indifferent and not too muche either of simplicitie or dastardie abused by you And thus by the righteous iudgement of God your owne tyrannie is the cause of your owne plague and that by the seife 〈◊〉 meanes whereby you woulde vniustly haue hampered the Prince he hathe iustly hampered you I pray God all Christian Princes woulde once take these iuste occasions to examine well but euen those dueties and tyties that you put vnto them and woulde but minister iustice to you euen as you haâ—… forced them thereto And thus muche M. Saunders for your presupposed examples betwéene these Kings and Bishops â–ª Let vs nowe beholde howe you procéede vpon them How therfore said the Lord in Daniel kingdome and power and the mighte of kingdome that is vnder all the heauen shall be giuen to the people of the Saincts of the Hyest VVhose kingdome is an euerlasting kingdome and all Kings or powers shal serue and obey him Howe saide the Lorde as it is in Esay vnto his Churche The sonnes of straungers shall buylde thy walles and the Kinges of them shal minister vnto thee and their sonnes that haue broughte thee lowe shal come and bowe them selues to thee and all those that spake euill of thee shall worshippe the steppes of thy feete Howe shall the worde of Christe be true wherein hee sayde too â–ª his Disciples hee that despyseth you despyseth mee or that that hee sayde too Peter Thou arte Peter and vppon thys Rocke wyll I buylde â–ª my Churche and the gaâ—… of Hell shall not preuayle agaynst it You are a waster Master Saunders to make suche lauishe of youre prooues so impertinently or rather you are wrester too applye them so falsely For the Kyng that héere refuseth the Bishoppes conditions offereth hym selfe moste freely too all obedience that is héere mentioned in offering himselfe to acknowledge the Christian saythe As for the Lordes sentence in Daniel â–ª prophecying of the immortal glorie that after the iudgemeÌ„t of Christ shal be giuen to the Saintes of the most highest and of the obedieÌ„ce to Christes euerlasting kingdome these are other matters are so wrested of you to the state of this lyfe that it will breede you some suspition of being a Millenarie heretike except you say you ment it spiritually But then it toucheth not the kings polytike estate But howsoeuer you meane it you doe great iniurie to kings and shew no lesse arrogancie in your selues to applie that vnto you that is spoken of the Saincts of the highest This kingdom and power that he speaketh of is theirs yea kings so well as any other be partakers of it and you claime it allonly to your Priestly and Bishoply power whereas it is rather to be doubted that ye shall haue no parts at all therof But your portion in the kingdome of proude Lucifer that not onely apply this to your selues but also the glorie and kingdome due to Christe of the obedience to whiche Daniell playnely speaketh and you wrest it to the obedience of your Bishoppes As for this obedience to Christe the king did offer to yelde it in offering to acknowledge the Christian fayth But your Bishop was not content therewith And you to helpe your bishop and to dismay the king make the bishops demaunde suche a necessarie thing that you aske howe dyd the Lorde speake in Daniell except kinges should offer to renounce their kingdomes vnto priestes What master Saunders waxe you so sawcie with God to argue him of a lye but the saying of God is true and you are lyers and the king may still keepe his kingdome from your Clutches Your seconde texte is a couple of textes out of Esay but no lesse wrested than the other to make Princes stoupe to Prelates and kisse the grounde they goe vpon to giue Bishops Kings treâ—…ures and dominions and make kings to waite on Priestes In déeâ—…e on this wife your Pope did proudly wrest the Scripture when he troad on the Emperors necke when he turned downe hiâ—… Disdeme with his foote when he made him daunce attendance and blowe his nailes at his gate when he made him hold his â—…lurrop wheÌ„ he made him leade his horse when he made him kisse hys gowtie I should say his golden toa But this was more than Neroes pride is most farre from gods liking from Christs humilitie from the Apostles steppes and cleane from the Prophetes meaning The Prophet speaketh of much honor and riches to be giuen but to whom tibi o thee Who was this the Priest or Bishope haue you any moe shée Bishops or Pope Ioanes yet M. Saunders for the wordes of the Prophet begin thus Surge splendida esto I trow you will not saye this was a Bishop No M. Saunders it was euen the wife of Christ the Church of God whome he calleth Sion that the Prophet speaketh vnto These texts therfore being spoken to the Churche that is to all the faithfull people of whom kings themselues are part so well as any other it is malapartly dâ—…ne of you Maister Saunders to ascribe it only to your Bishops Howbeit this arrogating the name of the Church to your selues is not so saâ—…cis but your missunderstanding of this description in a literall sense being spoken of a mysticall estate is no lesse grosse than full of errors The whole chapter hath many suche proâ—…ises of shyning of glory of glittering of riches of waters of Camels of coltes of golde of frank insence of shepe of ramines of doâ—…es of ships of buildings of walles of gates of beeches of Pines of boxe of sucking of milke of brasse of stones of Iron of light of the Sunne of the Moone of plantes of trées such other worldly things whereby be discribeth the beautie and florishing estate of the Charche according to the manner of the Hebrewes phrases and the capacitie of the Iewes that were moued by suche worldly things Nowe commeth Maister Saunders and picketh me out two sentences and sets them togither being in the text a sunder That
of his humaine nature but trowe you he gaue this prerogatiue to his Apostles you alledge Iohn 20. As my father hath sent me so sende I you But trowe you this is to be stretched to the visible ministerie of al things belonging to his humaine nature His mediation belongeth to the ministerie of his humanitie so wel as to his Diuinitie hath he giuen theÌ„ the office of his mediatioÌ„ The propiciatorie sacrifice of his owne bodie belonged to the visible ministerie of his humaine nature gaue he this power to the Disciples that their bodies also in suffering deathe shoulde be propiciatoris sacrifices The ordeining of Sacraments was in the visible ministerie belonging not only to Christes Diuinitie but also to his humanitie gaue he this power to his Disciples to make Sacramentes Christe therefore gaue not his Ministers all the povver in the visible ministerie necessarie to saluation that belonged to him in his humaine nature but reserued many things peculiar to himselfe Althoughe all the power they haue he gaue it theÌ„ yet all the power he hath â–ª he gaue them not He gaue them power in preaching the worde in binding and losing in administring the Sacramentes And yet is there a great difference betwéene that power that is proper of ones owne and that whiche is legantine and representeth but an others betwéene that that is simple and absolute and that that is bounded and conditionall betwéene that that is principall that that is but ministeriall All whiche distinctions are your owne Scholemens and therefore these powers are nothing like and yet are they so farre vnlike from such princely power of earthly honor as you imagine that they are rather cleane against it both in Christ and in his ministers too And this your own glosse out of your own Pope Gregorie might haue taught you Sicut misit me paâ—…er Idest ad passiones c As my father sent me that is to say to troubles and afflictioÌ„s so send I you to suffer persecution not to raigne like Kings rule kingdomes And therfore sith this sentence of Christ is true that he sent them as he was sent he was not sente in his humaine nature to depose kings nor to dispose of their kingdomes nor to gouerne them therefore his Disciples were not sent thereto But the Pope saith he is sent therto and takes it vpon him therefore he is neither minister of Christ nor successor of his Disciples but his Disciple that hath offered him worldly kingdomes if he would fal downe and worship him as he hath done and so hath gotten his kingdomes As for the sentence of Epiphaniâ—… writing againste the Nazarei although as he hath culled it out it séemeth to giue the Priestes the power of Kings yet this is neither the meaning nor the wordes of Epiphanius Epiphanius whole sentence is this Our Lorde Iesus Christe is therefore a Prieste for euer according to the order of Melchizedech and also a King according to the order from aboue that hee mighte translate the Priesthoode togither vvith the lavve He is of the seede of Dauid bycause he came of Marie sitting in the throne for euer and of his kingdome thereis no ende For novve it behoued him to translate the order bothe of the Priesthoode and of the kingdome For his kingdome is not of the vvorld as hee saide in the Gospell to Pontius Pilate my kingdome is not of this vvorld For sith Christe by hidde speaches fulfilleth all things â–ª the matters declared of him came to a certaine full measure For he vvhich alvvays raigneth came not to receiue the encrease of a kingdome but he gaue a kingdome to those that he hath appointed vnder him that it should not be said he proceeded from smal things to greater For his throne abideth and thereis no ende of his kingdome And hee sitteth vpon the throne of Dauid So that he hath translated the kingdome of Dauid togither vvith the Priesthoode and giuen it to his seruantes that is to the Bishops of the Church Wherby it appeareth playn Epiphanius meaneth not that Christ hath giuen them an earthly kingdome which he toke not vpon himselfe and he flat debarreth from them nor he euer gaue to his Disciples nor they euer exercised But he meaneth of a spirituall kingdome which he himself kéepeth euer and yet he euer communicateth to all his faithfull but in especiall to the Ministers of the Church that set forth the mysteries of this heauenly and not of an earthly kingdome This sentence therefore of Epiphanius maketh nothing for Byshops to be depesers of Kings or disposers and rulers of earthly kingdomes which is the present question VVherefore saithâ—… Saunders sithe there is a double povver in the Churche the one spirituall of vvhich â—…orte is that of the ministers of Christ to whom is commaunded that they should teach baptise all nations but the other is mixt that is to say by the beginning thereof secular howebeit to be now referred to a spirituall end although in the originall in the vse in a certaine middle end they differ as is before declared yet doe they bothe concurre in one bodie of the Church and are caryed to one ende of eternall saluation for the vvhich thinges they are to be counted one certaine vnder povver ordeined For as in Christe there is neither Ievve nor Greeke neither bonde nor free neither male nor female but they ar al one in christ So in the kingdoÌ„e of god the powers are not as it were altogither distinguished either of the father ouer the sonne or of the husbande ouer the vvife or of the master ouer the seruaÌ„t or of the Prince ouer his subiect or of the Pastor ouer his sheepe but al these powers are one in the Church of god And among all men I take this to be agreed vpon that all these povvers shall besvvallovved vp of that infinite glorie that in the life to come shall be poured on the sonnes of adoption in so much that there shall be no secular thing in the kingdoÌ„e of god And sith the Church of Christ is a certaine liuely Image of the life to come although there remaine by reason of the mixte condition of this life certain differences of these povvers yet notvvithstanding they are so among themselues disposed and placed in their orders that euen as euery one of them dravveth neare vnto the life to come so it ought more and moreto gouerne all the residue But it is manifest that euerie kingly or ciuill povver is also among them that are not the meÌ„bers of christ Neither any vvhit lesse appeareth it that the povver of the Pastors and teachers is placed and appointed in the only Church of God for the edifying thereof in Iesu Christe VVherevpon it is euicted that the spiritual power of the pastors of the church dravveth nearer to the state of the life to come than any other povver or familie or earthly coÌ„mon wealth For
who hauing receiued the power of the sword would haue offred himself to vse it for Elias Or else let vs put the case that it is said of Elias vnto him bycause these souldiors contemne me and in me God whose prophete I am rushe thou on them and kill them Had now that Prince sinned if at the word of Elias he had killed the Kings subiectes eyther else coulde not an earthly sword haue performed the same thing that the ministerie of fire did yelde from heauen Truly with wyse men it makes no matter what is done of those things that are of the same waight and moment If fire be the more noble element than earthe yea or those metals that are digged oute of the earth I see not but that he who called fyre downe from heauen which shoulde satisfie his commaundement muche more coulde haue spoken to a Magistrate bearing the sword that he should pull out and drawe that sword for him against any King. Whatsoeuer you see not Maister Saunders you make all the world to see that you be of a viperous generation and adders broode that cannot créepe forward by lying straight but wynding and crooking in and oute hether and thether Sée howe you sâ—…ill séeke shiftes whereby to procéede when by the directe Scripture your cause will not goe forward You fall to putting of cases once agayne Put case the scripture had sayde thus Put case Elias had done this Put case another had done that What a warbling is this If you will alleage the Scripture take the Scripture directly as it lyes Put no more cases to the Scripture than the Scripture puttes Are you wyser than God or not as false as the olde Serpent that in tempting Eue altered the wordes of God But this argueth that the Scripture it self fitteth not your turne except you may turne and alter it as you will. You pretende it is no matter wyth wise men what is done of those things that are of the same waight and moment As whether these men were kylled by the fire or by the sword sith they were killed But are these punishmentes all one Maister Saunders to haue bene striken with the sworde of a man and to be consumed with fire from God in déede as you saye here is death in both which is the same thing but are their kindes of death and punishmentes of the same waight and moment When the foure Kings slewe the Sodomites and when God raigned downe â—…ire and brimstone from heauen to sâ—…ay the Sodomites when Saul as Maister Saunders sayde before killed the Priests and when God kylled the Priests with fire from heauen is here nothing in these deathes but the difference of the more noble element Surely it séemeth Maister Saunders you haue bene so long in Rome that you are become Inglese Italia nato so worldly wyse that you haue no feare of Gods vengeance that thus measure it by mannes punishment There is a great difference Maister Saunders in the waight and moment of these punishmentes not onely to shewe the heauier wrathe of God but also to shewe that althoughe Elias desired it on suche specialties as is aforesayde yet the punishment was onely from God not from Elias he had not the fire at his commaundemente but God sento the fire vpon them which maketh another greater difference of the case besides other sundry differences that cleane do alter it For it is not likely that Elias woulde euer haue set another Prince vpon his owne Princes subiectes or styrre anye rebellion against his Prince howe sharpely soeuer he rebuked him for hys sinnes He neither spared King Achab nor Quéene Iesabell nor their sonne Qchozias but boldly reproued them But as for deposing them or mouing other Princes to depose them or to kill either them or their people he neuer dyd it nor euer shewed anye tâ—…ken of lyking suche doyng and therefore we oughte not to presuppose any such thing of him These things he did he killed the Priesâ—…s of Baal eyther by his bydding them to be killed or as Lyra sayth propriamanu he kylled some of them with his owne hande And here he besoughte God take this vengeance on these wicked souldiers and this he dyd by the â—…stincte of god The other that you put the case for we finde no suche dede nor haue any such warrant and without such warrant from God they should sauor of treason to the Prince and so make a great alteration of the case to serue your purpose and wreste the Scripture and therefore are not to be admitted But although saith M. sand Princes of this world see not the power of this spirituall sworde notwithstanding if at the prayer of Elizeus God vouchsafe to open their eyes â–ª they shal see moe armies with the B. thaÌ„ with any Emperor For behold the mountaine full of horses of firie charets round aboute Elizeus But when the King of Israel seeyng the greatnesse of the faâ—…ine sware that the heade of Elizeus shoulde not stande vpon him that daye Elizeus that knewe this othe of the King to be vnlawfull foreseyng in the spirite the messenger to be at hande that shoulde execute the Kings commaundement he sayde vnto the elders that were with him knowe ye not how this murtherers sonne hath sent to take away mine heade take heâ—…de therfore when the messenger coÌ„meth shut the dore and set him not enter Yea Sanctes Pagninus so expoundes these later woordes oppresse him in the dore By which wordes not onely the shutting out of the Kings messenger is signified but also a certayne violence done vnto him All which I haue broughte to this ende that I mighte shewe that the pastors of the Churche haue power not onely ouer the soules of the faythfull but also ouer their bodyes and goods so often as the soules health maye be promoted thereby For we know also that two beares comming out of the woode dyd â—…eare in peeces â—…ortie and two of those Children that mocked Elizeus VVhereby also is declared that all the creatures of God aryse to reuenge their iniuries whome God hath adorned with spirituall power And truely when good Kings wanted that woulde reuenge the contumely done to the pastors of the Churche the element of fire and the wilde beasts toke that care on them We had before the example of Elias and then of Elizeus and then againe of Elias and nowe agayne of Elizeus Of whom three things are here alleaged The first that Elizeus had greater power to defende hym than the Kyng of Syria to oppugne hym The seconde when the Kyng of Israell sente to kill him he caused the messenger violentlye to be kept oute of the dore The thirde when the children of Bethel mocked him he cursed them and straight wild beares destroyed them To the first I answere it is impertinent to the purpose of deposing Princes or seazing on their teÌ„porall goods kingdomes or causing
is yet aboue the Byshops And although the King so well as the priuate man ought to require the lavve of the Lord out of the priestes lippes yet if the Priest instâ—…ade of the Lords lavve will giue his owne lavv the king ought to rebuke or punish him For if the King ought to require it of the B. then as it is the Byshops duetie to yelde it so is it the Princes duetie and ofâ—…ce to call vpon him to sée to it that the B. faithfully giue it to him to all the priuate men in his kingdome Whiche againe proueth so litle the Byshops authoritie ouer the King that it playnely proueth the Kings authoritie ouer the B. in requiring of theÌ„ to preach the lavv of God which is their proper office calling and not to gouerne Kings and translate kingdomes Sixtly and lastly I answere that if this were graunted to the Pope which M. sand woulde so faine conclude that one Iudge in the Church should be ordeined betvvene Kings themselues and them and their peoples that this one Iudge shoulde be the Pope where he pretendeth it woulde cut off infinite occasions of warres and tumults as this conclusioÌ„ can not be gathered on this example so this effecte of peace to ensue by this meanes is but an imagination in M. sand opinion we should finde another manner of effecte thereof that would be the very welspring of infinite warres and tumults And least he shoulde thinke that I speake partially against the Pope as he doth for the Pope I report me to the experience of it and not to vaine imaginations what tragedies hath the Pope raysed betwene the Gréeke Germaine Emperors chiefly to the Henries the 4. the â—… â–ª to Frederike the 2. to Lewis the 4. to the tumults of King Iohn in EnglaÌ„d to the Popes practises betwene Germanie FrauÌ„ce Spaine for the kingdomes of Cicil Naples for the Duchie of Apulia Millaine to the maintenance of the factions in Italy betwene the Guelphes and Gebellines the white sect and the blacke secte the French Imperials the Uenetians and the Genowaies the Florentines and the Pisans al the states of Italy Al which and infinite moe warres and tumults in Christendom haue ben raysed nourished abetted chiefly by this one Iudge the Pope and yet would M. sand haue him to be the onely Iudge and definer whether any King should be deposed or be placed Were not this the readiest way to set al Princes by the eares chiefly if he wold change his mynd vpon displeasure or his successor should fauour an other or there were two or thrée Popes at once theÌ„ should al Christendome be in a broyle by the eares togither and the Pope would clap them on the backe and win by the spoyle of all countries and no countrie shoulde haue their lawfull and naturall Prince but either foraine or periured vsurpers nor any Prince haue his royall authoritie but be the Popes Tenants at will. If the world were come to this passe as it appeareth the Papistes would haue it were not this a goodly quiet world trow you But then it were a goldeÌ„ world for the Priests when all men else shoulde finde it a bloudie world and euery man werâ—…â—…eadie to cut an others throate and all things runne to hauocke But were it admitted that none of these mischieues should ensue but that al occasions of vvarre and tumults vvould be cut off yet sith this calling to rule all Christian Kings and kingdomes is vnlawfull for any Byshop besides Christe to haue what were this peace but as the wicked say Pax pax vbi non est pax peace peace where God saith there is no peace what were this peace but the worldes peace yea the Diuels peace where the strong man helde all things in his house in peace where Antichriste ruled in quiet prosperâ—…tie till Christe a stronger than he woulde come and breake his peace Rather than tumults shoulde be cut off with suche a shamefull peace and peace bought with suche a wicked condition it were far better for Princes to striue to the death for the truth against such peace and to cut off suche an arbiters head who to maintaine his pryde for worldly peace would make open warre with Christe And thus we sée the effecte would be naught and yet as naughtie as this peace woulde be we shoulde not haue it peaceably neyther if the Pope might set in his foote take vpon him to depose kings and translate kingdomes But this example of Ioiada giueth him no such authoritie M. Saund. hauing now gathered together all the proues examples that he coulde wrest with any colour to his purpose leaueth the olâ—…e Testament falleth to the like proues and wrestings of the newe Testament Howe Christe for the saluation of one man let the deuils drowne two thousande hogges How Christ draue the buyers and sellers out of the Temple How S. Paule gaue the incestâ—…ous fornicator at Corinth and Hymeneâ—… and Alexander to Sathan How Peter reproued Ananias and his wife for lying to the holy Ghost they fell downe dead But how al these things are wrested is appâ—…ant For in all this here is no king deposed and therfore they serue not to this question But how euery one of them serueth to confute the Papistes bicause the volume is risen too large alreadie in these answeres and chiefly in the answere to Maister Stapleton I am constraâ—…ned here to breake off stay As for that which followeth of the Fathers of the Histories and how those also are wrested as â—…oulie as these I purpose to reserue God willing to another volume In the meane time let vs coniecture the residue by these arguments the rest of al the Papists by these two M. Stapleton and M. Saunders who are nowe their principall writers Whereby as we may easily weighe the peise of their stuffe so we mayâ—… euidently sée the driâ—…te of their malice Thirsting blood breathing treasons practising conspiracies procuring seditions blowing out as it were a trumpet to open rebellion against the Queenes Maiestiâ—… their Natural Soueraigne and our most Gracious Gouernour against all the states of the Realme and to make haâ—…e of the whole congregation of Christ and all to maintaine the pride the tyrannie the errors and superstitions of the Pope But with what weake and selender reasons how impudently wrested how shamefully applyed how vnfitly concluded All the world may sée and themselues be ashamed if they be not past shame All the children of God may cléerely beholde and not be afraide but the fullier confirmed in the truth thereby All Christian Princes may the better perceiue and the more abhorre the Popishe practises with all their power represse them as the vtter ruinâ—… of their sstates and considering their high calling may zealously loke to the dutie of their authoritie and as their Titles put them in minde be in déede most Christian
64. M. Saunders aâ—…g vicious Distinction of iudging Sand. 64. Sand. 64. Ephe. 4. Saun. 64. Iudgement of Pastors The similitude of a Pastor and shepe â—…irted too narrow The iudgemeâ—…t of priuate men much more of Princes 1. Cor. 2. Math. 7. Iudgement of the pastor and power of the pastor are two seueral things Some spiritual sheepe haue â—…ounder iudgment than their spirituall shepheards How euen the pastors are sheepe Iohn 10. How the prince is a pastor Saund. 6 5. Math. 22. 1. Timoth. 2. 1. Peter 2. Rom. 13. Princes haue pastorall authoritie giuen them of God. Num 27. 2. Reg. 5. Psal. 78. 2. Reg. 7. 1. Paral. 11. 3. Reg. vlt. Arrogating Disposing Saunders 65 Rom. 5. 1. Cor. 1. The lawe of nature The corruptioÌ„ of nature as much in a priest as in a Prince Saun. 65. Math. 18. Iudgemente in ecclesiasticall matters power of binding and losing are two things Princes iudged in matters of faith Law writteÌ„ vnwritten Saunders 65. The Papistes obiection theâ—… were no Christian kings in the Apostles time Saunders 65. 1. Cor. 2. 1. Cor. 2. The Papistes graunt Princes priuate iudgement How the clergie and how the prince doc puqlikly iudge The protestaÌ„ts obiection The answer of the Papistes M. Saunders answeres as the rich man did to the poore maÌ„ the case is altered sand pag 66. 2. Cor. 3. Exo. 19. 20 Hebre. 12. The comparison betweene the state of gouernment in the old Testament and the newe The earthly Princes in the old law were more spiritual than the spiritu al priests now The godly Princes then hoped for the kingdome of heauen so wel as any prieste nowe S. Paules comparison betweene their outward glory and ouâ—… inward glory 1. pag 66. Num. 3. M. Saunders obâ—…ction â—…f the ceremonial lawe be alteâ—…ed whye coulde not the ciuil gouernment be alteâ—…ed also M. Saunders had rather renounce the Priesthoode death of Christ than acknowledge the Prin ces supremacie The Protestantes obiectioÌ„ sand pag. 66. M Saunders termeth himselfe and his side Papistes M. Saunders reporteth our obiection amisse The Papistes answere Sand. 66. The continuance of perfect things Saâ—…d pag. 65. The outwarde sacrifices in the olde lawe no perfect thing The goueâ—…aÌ„ce of one B in the old law no per sect thing How the morall lawe remaineth How one B. one sacrifice stil remaâ—…eth Hebr. 9. Sand. 66. The election of the Pope Shedding bloud in safices Iohn 8. Vnbloudie sâ—… câ—…fice Remembrance and substâ—… oâ—… the blâ—… of the â—…be Christ madâ—… not two sacrifices of himselfe The perfectioÌ„ and imperfecti on of the Pâ—…n ces estate The state of the Prince in the olde lawe better than the state of the Priesthoode sand pag. 67. The validitie and inualiditie of the argumâ—…t drawne from antiquitie sand pag. 56. Whether priest hood or the Ciuil power be more ancient Deut. 17. Sand pag. 67. The state of a king as necessarie as the state of a priest Kingdom pre figured in Christ so well as priesthoode sand pag. 67. A Ciuil gouernor neuer wanted no more than â—… priest Sand pag. 67. 1. Reg. 8. The kings office stretcheth furder than in going out to warre sand pag. 67. The euents of euil kings are not to be ascribed to the estate of the kingly power There haue been as euill priests as kings and done as much mischef sand pag. 67. The king greter thaÌ„ the Bishop before the captiuity of BabiloÌ„ by M. Sau. 〈◊〉 Why the 〈◊〉 hâ—…d no kings after their captiuitie sand pag. 67. sand pag. 67. M. Saund. reason from the personall facte of Christ that he neuer tooke vpon him to be a temporall king Math. 22. Math. 10. Luc 13. Iohn 19. Iohn â—… Math. â—… Christe brake not the lavv of obedience too Princes but fulfilled it thoughe he him self vvold bâ—…â—…o external Prince We giue not the gouernement of the Churche to an earthly prince sand pag. 80. Saâ—…d pag. 67. sand pag. 67. Sand pag. 67. The taking of the copie of Gods lavvâ—…â—…oÌ„ the Priests inferreth not the Priests to bee greater in gouernment Supra pa. 161. sand pag. 77. Two kind of kings kingdomes How fâ—…rre M. 〈◊〉 giueth 〈◊〉 most free principaâ—… sand pag. 77. Math. 5. Luke 6. Math. 25. Esai 60. Psalm 2. M. sand spceketh contraries M. sand maketh som king domes subiect to Bishops in all things Diuorces and vsuries sand pag. 77. Obedience to Christ. sand pag. 77. The doâ—…ng of euery offence is not the losse of the kings kingâ—…me sand pag. 77. Math. 28. Luke 10. 2. Cor. 5. How Christs ministers are to be heâ—…d and obeyed sand pag. 78. 1. Cor. 7. Ephe. 4. In Epist. 50. 4. Reg. 18. 4. Reg. 22. â—…ouae 3. Dan. 14. Dan. 3. The peculiar seruice of kings sand pag. 62. M. Saund. examples cleane ouerthrow him selâ—…e Sand. 7â—… sand pag. 78. Deut. 17. Theod. lib. 4. cap. 1. In voluntarie elections Chri stians shoulde chose no Prince but a Christian. Whether prereâ—…ce of religion may dispossesse or debarre the Princes â—…nheritance How Christian subiectes shoulde behaue theâ—…eleus where electioÌ„ is not The example of â—…ouianus râ—… fusing to gouerne is not like the example of subiects rufâ—…sing to be gouerned Iouianuâ—…â—…e uâ—…r rebelled against 〈◊〉 the Apostata Hist. 〈◊〉 lib. 7 ca. â—… Socrates sand pag. 78. 2 M. Saunders asketh but one demaunde and â—…ncrocheth â—…o A Catholike Apocal. 22. Many ChristiaÌ„ Priâ—…ces no popish catholikes Sand. 68. 3. M. Saunders further encâ—…oching M. sand will first haue the matter granâ—…ed him and then he wil proue it What subiects may and may not do in the case of the pâ—… ces heresie or Apostacie Extraordinarie cases The Papistes trumpet to rebellion Sand. 7â—… We muste not only consider â–ª what ought to be â–ª but how it ought to be It is an other matter not to chose the vnfaithful and to disobey him that becometh vnfaithfull In what case I thinke the sub iectes might better refuse obedience Esopes Fable of the horsse before and after he commit 〈◊〉 himselfe to â—…en of the man. 1. Reg. 8. sand pag. 7â—… Howe dangers may and may not be cut off Gordias knot sand pag. 78. 1. Cor. 6. 2. Ioh. Epl. Why S. Paule rebuketh the Corinthians for pleadyng in law before heathen Iudges S. Paule bothe appealed vnto and appeared in iudgement before heathen Magistrates Act. 2â—… Rom. 13. 1. Tim. â—… Math. 10. Lyra in 1. Cor. 6. Catharinus in 1. Cor. 6. 2. Epi. Ioh. Princes although Heathen may be saluted and honored with ciuill honor Gen. 20. 21 Gen. 41. Hester 2. 4. Reg. 5. Daniel 14. Act. 25. False teachers are not to be wished well vnto 2. Ioh epist. Who are the false teachers A â—…ueat agaiÌ„st bearing to much with Papistes â—…ccl 13. The Papistes call vs 〈◊〉 but they are nuâ—…fidiaus sand pag. 78. Sand pag. 78. Leuit. 10. Malach. 2. The Prists keping and vttering the law of God licenceth him not to depose his Prince and set