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
therof so let this by the way be noted that he giueth Princes most free Principaliue 〈◊〉 thoâ—…e causes that 〈◊〉 not the faith and Religion of Christ. But to place good Bishops and pastors in gods Churche to remoue euill Bishops and pastors from gods Church â—…o puâ—… Idolatrie out of gods Gods Church to set forth suâ—…h 〈◊〉 seruice as is to edifie gods church to coÌ„mand the word of God to be read in the vulgar tongue to reforme Ecclesiasticall abuses to punishe whordoms to allow as honorable matrimonie in all men to call councels to commaund the Sacraments to be vsed as Christ ordeined theÌ„ to ouersée al estates degrées of persons in gods Church to do in al things to the glory of God to the publique preseruation of the Church to the faithful administratioÌ„ of their particular callings doth not diminishe the faith and ReligioÌ„ of Christ Therfore Christian Princes haue most free principalitie that is to say supreme gouernment in al these eccl. so wel as in ciuil causes Now that he hath granted to Princes thus much which coÌ„prehendeth all the question he declareth on the other side what he exempteth from the Bishops but so subtily that vnder pretence of debarring them from hauing authoritie in those things that he ascribeth to the Princes principalitie he both reuoketh his former graunt to Princes and conueyeth all those things vnto the Bishops Neither Pastors of the Church saith he doe intermeddle their authoritie in those things saue nowe and then to admonishe them and giue theÌ„ faithfull counsell neither doe we defend all dominions and kingdomes to be giuen by gods lawe euery where and in all things to be subiect to the pastors of the Church but in those causes onely which would hinder the faith and Christian saluation except they were partly forbidden as diuorces vsuries and such other sinnes which the natioÌ„s committe without punishment partly commaunded as giuing of almes the defence of neighbours and chiefly of the poore the fortifying of the Church of Christ and Christian Religion and to conclude all other things which the lawe of God commandeth and prescribeth as necessarie to saluation In these wordes Maister Saunders speaketh cleane contraries the Princes haue the moste frée principalitie in all causes that diminishe not the faith and Religion of Christe and the Bishops doe onely admonishe and giue councel and yet he ascribeth all to the Bishops both to punishe all that would hinder the faith and Christian saluation and to fortifie all that would furder it What is not here againe giuen to the Bishoppes and what is not here againe taken from the Princes yea their Kingdomes and all in some places and nothing left for Princes for what else meaneth he by this we defend not all dominions and kingdomes to be giuen by gods lawe euery where and in all things to be subiecte to the pastors of the Church As who should say some are subiect to them by the law of God where the lawe of God is flat to the contrarie that no kingdomes are subiect vnto them But as Maister Saunders contrarie to gods law maketh some kingdomes subiect in all things vnto Bishops so maketh he all kingdomes subiect vnto them in matters of diuorces vsuries and such other sinnes saith he as the nations commit without punishment Which as it is a sclaunder to Christian Princes as mainteining such sinnes which rather they punishe and Popishe Prelates both permit and commit without punishment of them so he ascribeth these punishmentes to the Popishe Prelates for nothing but for aduauntage as also the gyuing of Almes defence of neighbours and chiefely of the poore As thoughe that Princes did not or could not doe these things but the Priestes who by suche fetches gat all things into their clutches Maister SauÌ„ders hauing thus séemed at the first to yelde vnto Princes great authoritie and streight to take away all againe from them and giue it vnto themselues least Princes might worthily thinke themselues abused he mitigateth the matter with this reason Neither ought it seeme strange to anye man that kings in these matters should obey Christ for this standeth theÌ„ chiefly vpon sith otherwise they cannot get eternall life As thoughe your Pope Maister Stapleton and you hys â—…riests were christ Good reason it is they shuld obey Christ otherwise as you say most truely therein they cannot get eternall life But sith you are not Christ this reason holdeth not But you will say you be Christs and represent christ Woâ—…ld to God you were M. Saunders and not rather â—…tichristes For if you were Chrittes you woulde oâ—…ey your Prince And not haue the Prince in authoritie of gouernement obey you whom you ought to obey since a Christian Prince is Christs also and in authoritie â—…f gouernment immediatly to Christians representeth Christ. Thinke you that Princes can not get eternall life excepte they obey your Pope so you tel them in dede make manâ—…e Princes afraid therof by which meanes you haue gotteÌ„ their gouernement from theÌ„ And thus prâ—…tending the name of Christ you saye VVâ—…en therefore we say that earthly kings ought to be vnder Christes ministers we say onely this that they no otherwise can be saued neither receiued of Christian people to a kingdome or oughte to be suffred in the administration of a kingdome than iâ—… they both doe and pretermit those things that the lawe of Christ commaundeth to be done and pretermitted If you meane the obedience to the ministers of Christ no furder than this to doe and 〈◊〉 those things that â—…he law of Christ commaundeth to be done and pretermitted theÌ„ were the controuersie at an end for this obedience was never denied But before you went furâ—…er and would hauâ—… the Prince to doe and preteâ—… those things that the lawe of the Pope and his Priests would haue done and pretermitted 〈◊〉 you repâ—…e they be 〈◊〉 of Christ their 〈◊〉 is the 〈◊〉 of Christ this would be proued M. Saunders for it is 〈◊〉 of the chiefest pointes in controuâ—…sie As for Christs lawe we graunt that excepte the Prince obey it he can not be saued But that he which in any one poynt doth any thing which Christs lawe commaundeth nâ—…t or 〈◊〉 any thing that Christs lawe commaundeth is not to be receiued 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 people to a kingdome or bâ—…ing receiued ought not to be â—…tred in the administration of a kingdome is a perilouâ—… doctrine For who should thâ—… be a king or who shoulde noâ—… be turned oute of his kingdome For who offendeth not herein chiefely expounding the law of Christ as your selues â—…ed in what daunger and thraloâ—…me to you should kings become so that it were better be a begger and beg his bread than be a Christian king and rule and be ruled on this wise if these your rules were true But now to helpe the matter you will expound what ye meane by the â—…aw of Christ. But what the
lawe of Christ is and what it commaundeth can no where better be knowne than oute of their mouth to whom the sauiour said Go teache you all nations and he that hereth you hereth me he that dispiseth you dispiseth me For there neuer want in the Churche those that eâ—…oy the legacie for Christ God exhorting as it were by them For euen as other men so well as earthly kings are reconciled to Christ by his ministers and by Christ to God so they ought not onely to be vnder God as they were before but also to Christ yea and now to his ministers too for in vaine doth doth he subiect himselfe to Christ that refuseth to obey Christs ministers This is true M. Saunders in the true ministers of Christ that the Prince ought to obey them in their ministerie euen as dispensers of the mysteries of Christ and as representers of Christ also And true it is they can or oughte best to tell what is the lawe of God. But yet are they not so to be heard or obeyed as they do not represent Christ or tell their owne â—…awe for the law of Christ. Wherein the Christian Prince â—…ath an ouersight euer them and is againe the chiefe miniâ—…ter and representer of Christ And as he obeyed them in the â—…ne so muste they obey him in the other or else they teache â—…ot the law of Christ aright Moreouer saith M. Saunders it is not inough for a Chriâ—…tian king to do those things that priuate men are wont to do â—…xcept also he doe those things that properly belong to the â—…ffice and digâ—…e of a Prince Euery man ought to serue the â—…ord and walke worthily in that vocation wherin he is called â—…rte thou called in the state of Matrimonie serue God not onely as a man but also as an husband Art thou called in the state of a king thou must serue as thou art a king and not onely as thou art a man But the offices of kings are other and the offices of priuate meÌ„ are other VVhervpoÌ„ saith Augustin elegaÌ„tly The king serueth otherwise bicause he is a maÌ„ otherwise bicause he is a king Bicause he is a man he serueth him in liuing faithfully But bicause he is a king he serueth with making by conuenient force lawes commauÌ„ding iust things forbidding the contrarie Euen as Ezechias serued destroying the Temples of Idols the high places that were builded contrarie to the coÌ„maundementes of god Euen as Iosias serued he also doing the like things Euen as the king of the Niniuites serued compelling all the citie to appease the Lorde Euen as Darius serued giuing the Idol to the power of Daniel to breake it and casting his enemies to the Lions Euen as Nabuchodonozor serued in forbidding by a terrible lawe all men placed in his kingdome from blaspheming god In this therfore kings do serue the Lord in so much as they be kings whe they do those things to serue him which none can do but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this we grauÌ„t you M. Saunders kings haue another more excellent peculiar seruice of God in that they be kings than haue other priuate men But as this maketh nothing against our assertioÌ„ or the kings estate but more commendeth it so it both ouerturneth your principall questioÌ„ for the kings authoritie in ecâ—…l matters coÌ„futeth that you haue said before in defacing the kings estate also cleane beateth you froÌ„ that which you driue your present drift vnto of deposing kings First you said before that kings in that they are kings gouerne all meÌ„ alike so well Iewes Mores Tartars as Christians haue as equall gouernment ouer the one as the other Here you confesse that kings in that they are kings haue 〈◊〉 especiall seruice of God and you specifie this their seruice 〈◊〉 such examples as declare a farre more excellent seruice 〈◊〉 is the gouernment of Turkes of Mores and Tartars Secondly this especiall seruice consisting in such thinges as these examples containe it argueth the Princes seruice not onely to intermeddle in eccl. matters but to haue the supreme gouernmeÌ„t of them and to haue authoritie to reforme eccl. abuses and to make Lawes to prohibite things contrarie to the Lawe of God and to commaunde thinges commaunded in Gods lawe whiche before you ascribed to Byshops and toke from kings Thirdly if none can do these things but kings howe dare you take them from kings and kings from them how dare you giue them to Priestes howe dare you giue Priestes authoritie to depose kings when rather hereby kings haue authoritie to depose priestes and none can do these thinges but kings by this your sentence cited out of Augustine These things say you thus ordered it shal novv be made plaine vvith hovve great equitie vve defende that Christian kings vvhiche gouerne Christian people ought to be vnder the ministers of Christ at the least in those things that appertain to faith and religion Yea vnder the paine of losing their kingdome if fyrst vve shall propounde this one thing Hytherto then by your plaine confession this is not plaine for it but rather plaine againste it that kings muste loose their kingdomes if they be not vnder the Priestes in thinges pertaining to faithe and religion that is to saye to make it â—…plaine excepte they beléeue and do as you will haue them you will plainely turne them out of their kingdomes Indaede this is a plaine waye if you can doe it as you haue attempted it But it is an vnnaturall and a traytorous waye and of all other farthest from such ways as those should vse that professe themselues to be Christes Uiâ—…ars and Gods Ministers Christe neuer vsed it nor Peter nor Paule nor any of the Apostles and yet were they vnder Princes that were not vnder them in things that pertaine to faith and religion But you will proue this with great equitie if first you shall propounde one thing Goe to propounde it M. Saunders and let vs sée the greatnesse of your equitie First say you both the lavve Diuine and naturall equitie teacheth manifestly that no other king ought of Christians of their ovvne accorde to be called to administer the right of a kingdome than he vvhich is himself a Christian. â—…or this is that vvhich the Lord saide by Moses to the Israelites VVhen thou shalt saye I vvill place a king ouer me as haue all other nations round about thou shalt ordeine him vvhom the lord thy God shall choose among the number of thy brethren neither mayste thou make a King of an other nation that is not thy brother But by brother vve vnderstande him that iâ—… a faithfull one and a Christian. And although Christians in times past vvere compelled to obey Ethnike Emperours yet vvoulde they neuer haue committed this to haue voluntarily called any such men to the administration of the Empire For vvho could suffer it that the members of
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
intreaties rather thaÌ„ with terrors The condition pleaseth a publike calling forth of the people is made by the Kings coÌ„maundement to whom the King maketh an oratioÌ„ persuadeth the people to receiue the faith of Christ moueth them to submit their neckes to Christ the priest reioyceth that the King not yet baptized is becoÌ„e an Apostle of his owne natioÌ„ so the King is baptised What condition is here made by the Bishoppe vnto the King of giuing ouer his realme deposing himselfe which might haue done more hart thaÌ„ good In what couâ—…nant did the people here binde themselues to looâ—…e the libertiâ—… of chosing their King or promise to forsake their King if their King forsake the faith here was no such bondage â—…red â—…ther to the King by the Bishop and the King thought good to offer none such to the people but with gentle persuasions to allâ—…re them So that these presupposals of these Bishops speaches vnto these Princes are vtterly false and forged onely to driue in the readers heads a surmise of seme suche conditionall admission to the Christian faith in these elde Princes dayes whiche was nothing so nor so And yet by these colourable presupposals he enforceth his matter with a question aying Can the Bishop to this man thus affected minister the sacrament of Baptisme and giue the sacrament of thanksgiuing Why M. SauÌ„ders here was no such condition moued yet Remigius gaue Clodoneus the sacrament of Baptisme â–ª In deede the sacrament of that kâ—…giuing he gaue not then vnto hym neyther was it necessarie till he were instructed in the mysterie of it And therefore this is as fondly added in this case to the Sacrament of Baptisme as your case of Baptisme is craftily and malicioâ—…sly deuised to bring Princes in bondage vnto Bishoppes But this King thoughe he and his people submitted their neckes to Christe yet did he not thus submit himselfe and his people to the Bishoppe The long promiseth to 〈◊〉 one God but not to 〈◊〉 eyther the Bishop of Remes or the Bishop of Rome â–ª These knackes and conditions of bondage for Princes to promise and â—…weare obedience to the Pope and to his Bishops yea to sweare to depose themselues and become pâ—…uate men if they forscke this consâ—…rained obedience is of later times as the Popes power and tirannie hath growne and hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Christian Princes great huâ—…lie but lâ—…s in manye Christian kingdomes But yet it neuer went thus for as it now should do â–ª if M. Saunders might haue hie minde for it was neuer vrged in their Christâ—…dome before This pasieth the slauerie of the Spanish InquisitioÌ„ that no Prince nor people shuld be christened except they swere to these exceptioÌ„s In the olde time when the Prophetes anoynted kinges they tolde them of the blessings of God to come vpon them and their posteritie to sitte in their seate after them and that God woulde buylde them an house to continue if they serued him and walked faythfully in his wayes And if they should do the contrarie howe God woulde rende the kingdome from them and giue it to another Of suche promises and threates that the Prophetes tolde the kinges we reade and of the promises that the kinges made agayne to God we reade but that any Prophet compounded with the king before that he shoulde renounce his kingdome or that any king tooke either their circumcision or their kingdome on suche condition or that the king reuolting from his promise either voluntarily or by compulsion deposed him selfe or was deposed of the Bishop Priest or Prophet of God these thinges yâ—… can not shewe vs but these thinges ye shoulde shewe vs if ye will make good your sayings and directly proue your purpose You tell vs heere a tale of a tubbe in the name of these kinges Bishops that they neuer dyd nor I thinke dyd euer thinke of any such deuises But go too let vs nowe presuppose with M. Saunders euen as he imagineth A King would be baptised The Bishop sayth VVe are glad most deare sonne that thou desirest to be made a citizen of the kingdome of heauen but this thou oughtest to knowe for certayntie that the case is not like in the kingdome of heauen as it is in the worlde for in the Churche thou muste liue so that thou make captine thy vnderstanding to the obedience of fayth But thou how greater thou art in the worlde mayest so muche the more hurte the Churche of God if thou shalte abuse the righte of thy sworde to the defence of heretikes contrarie to the Catholike fayth No otherwise therefore thou mayest haue entrie into the Churche than if thou shalt promise that thou wilte persist in that fayth and defende that Churche with all thy force which beeing receiued from the Apostles is continued by the successioÌ„ of Bishops vntil this day dispersed through out all the world But if it shall chaunce thou doest otherwise thou shalt not refuse but shalte go from the right of thy kingdome and promise to leade a priuate life M. Saunders nowe presupposeth that the king hearing the Bishop thus beginne to indent with him will beginne his answere to the Bishop thus I am ready to acknowledge the Christian fayth Why M. sand is not this inough if the Bishop séeke something else besides the acknowledging of the Christian fayth Surely he neither séeketh the glory of God nor the Princes saluation nor the encrease of Christendome but his owne sucre authoritie Well the Bishop will haue him graunt to all the residue of his conditions or else he will not baptise him Heere agayne he presupposeth the king to say further But I neither promise that I will with my sworde defende the Catholike fayth neither will I for whatsoeuer I shall do giue ouer the right of my kingdome Ye tel the kings tale parcially M. San â–ª you should make it flatly to denie that whiche the Bishop exacted of him to do Which was to promise to defend not the faith but that faith that Church c. Which the king denieth to make promise vnto the Bishop on suche condition Yea saith M. sand saucely steppeth in for the B. can the B. to this man thus affected minister the sacrament of baptisme c. And why not M. San. if the bishop be not worse affected him selfe than this man is for you graunt your selfe that he is wel affected towards the christiaÌ„ faith would acknowledge it which is al one with defending it And if the bishop be not content with this promise hath not the king good cause to suspect him he telleth him of bondes conditions to be made to renounce the right of his kingdome if he perâ—…e not in that faith with al his force if he defeÌ„d not that church that was receiued from the Apostles continued by successioÌ„ of B. till this day and iâ—… dispersed throughout all the world May not here the king
as it is likely by M. sand tale he hath witte wisedome inough begin to smel a rat think with him selfe what should he meane to put this differâ—…ce I freely offered to receiue the Christian fayth and he wyll not take this offer but wyll haue me receiue that faith and that Churche that he sayth was from the Apostles and is continued by succession of Bishops till this day and is dispersed throughout all the worlde Why and is not this the christian fayth and the christian Churche If it be I offered my selfe to it before but he refaseth my offer Then surely this is not that fayth and Church that he meaneth And why should he rather haue me bounde to the Apostles if they were Christes Apostles than to Iesus Christ him selfe shal I be baptised in their names why should I binde my selfe to Bishops succestors which what they haue ben how ill or how welsome of them haue succeeded their predecessors I knowe not nor I will sweare for theÌ„ And why shoulde I then sweare vnto them rather than vnto the fayth of Christ who is the chiefe Bishop of our soules And why should I binde my selfe to â–ª Church dispersed throughout all the worlde What meaneth he by this the greatest and mightiest multitude or the lyttle flocke of Christ scattered in euery Nation or be it greate or little why should he bind me more to men than vnto Iesus Christ And why requireth he to these things as if it were euen to Christe him selfe and to the fayth of him the defence of all my force and what meaneth he by this force that I shall for all these thinges gather all my power and make sharpe warre where and when he coÌ„maundes me and that I shal oblige my selfe to al these conditions on the forfeyture of my kingdome and depose my selfe from my â—…ght become a priuate man and leaue the office charge that God hath called me vnto for leauing of these things Yea that if I should not wilfully do otherwise but if I should chaunce to do otherwise And what if he would threape vpon me that I chaunced to do otherwise Surely surely this is not playne dealing with me nor any good meaning to me He seekes not my saluation but my kingdome that thus would snarle me and is not content that I fréely offer to acknowledge the Christian fayth What if the King would cast all these coniectures master Saunders trow you he hathe not good occasion ministred yea what if the King héere vpon béeing thus refused of the Bishop examined these thinges throughly shoulde he not finde foule holes in your coate I tell you it would touche you to the quicke And perhaps it had béene better for the Bishop to haue taken the kinges frée offer and without suche conditions to haue giuen him his baptisme for else he might haue it of some other Bishops hands that had learned of Christ not to breake the broosed reede nor to quenche the smoking flaxe nor to caste off by suche indentinges this godly disposed Prince but with all humilitie and diligence to receiue instruct baptise him yea and bewray all your Popishe iuglinges And what had ye gotten then by these your proude conditions hathe not your pride and couetousnesse made you make a faire market and loose so riche a pray But nowe let vs yet admitte your presupposall further The king would be baptized The Bishop refuseth except on these conditions to admitte him The king séeth there is no remedie he receyueth these conditions What is his dutie nowe to do but with all his force to persist and defende them â–ª What is that for sooth that fayth and Church which beeing receyued from the Apostles is continued by the succession of Bishops vntill this day and dispersed throughout all the worlde Nowe sithe this is his charge and he is bounde to obserue it with all his force on forfeyture of his kingdome is it not gâ—… reason that he examine and boulte out which this fayth and Churche is Especially since he heareth that there is great coÌ„trouersie about these matters and that there are both wise learned famous men of both sides Yea sayth he if the case be not cleare that I am so strayghtly bounde in it standes me vpon to looke to this geare better and to heare bothe parties say what they can that I may know and be sure that I keepe my promise and not to forfayt my bonde What now for his better assurance shal the prince do must he not here call bothe the parties before him say to the Bishop that tooke thiâ—… promise of him â—…y Lorde you remember what promise you made me make vnto you or euer you would baptise me And nowe I heare say the â—…oyntes that you made me promise to defende with all my force and to persist therein are litigious You holde them one way and your aduerfaries another way you say your fayth and Church is that faith and Church that was receiued of the Apostles for howesoeuer the succession of Bishops haue helde it and whersoeuer it hath bene dispersed the receipte of the Apostles from Christ himselfe I perceiue is the first and principal condition that I promised to persist in and to defende withall my force The other twayne must both depende on this I chiefly minde therfore to kâ—…pe this the other as they shal agrée hereto But here your aduersaries on the other pâ—…t 〈◊〉 and offer to proue it that your faith and Church is not that faith and Church that the Apostles receiued and deliuered but iâ—… a faith and Church â—…egenerate and swarnedfromit And therefore if you will not be youre selues the cause tâ—… make me breake the promise that ye made me take ye muste cléere your selues of that â–ª your aduersaries obiect against you and confute them And you she Bishops aduersaries on the other side mustâ—… bring foorthe youre prooues and defences of youre faythe and Churche and shewe good reason why I should not impugne your fayth and churche and defende theirs agaynst you And héere for equall dealing betweene you bothe béeing parties playntife or defendaunt neither of you your selues shall be your owne or your aduersaries Iudge for the one were partialitie the other iniurie neither I whom the matter bothe for my office and for my promise and forfeyture toucheth nearest will be your Iudge but an indifferent hearer of bothe parties And bicause you bothe admitte the Scriptures to be Gods worde and both the Apostles fayth and the Apostles Church is manifestly recorded in the Scriptures and Christ also willeth vs to search the Scriptures for they beare recorde of him the matter shall be determined by the Scriptures Both of your faiâ—…hes and Churches shall be leueled by that platforme that shall be there apparantly expressed And as the Scripture shall strike the stroke betwéene you I will minister 〈◊〉 rightly to saue my promise And will deâ—…ende wâ—…th
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 Christe to haue so mightie a Realme as Englande or Fraunce to become Christian by this offer why is not this offer taken for sooth the B. refuseth it Is not here a great iniurie offered to Christs Church by this B but whie doth the B. thus bycause the Prince will not promise obedience to the Prelates and to renounce his kingdome if he swarue from his obedience to them Is this a sufficient cause for want of obedience to the Prieste to defeate Chryste of his obedience Nay say you he made an exception that he vvoulde not submit his Diademe to Christ. By your leaue M. Saunders there you say not true Loke on your own presupposall once again yea on the words you made the Prince to speake whiche althoughe they were of your owne deuising for you neuer I suppose heard or read of Prince desirous to be baptized that spake on that fashion you do but tell the Princes tale to your aduantage yet finde you no such wordes in the wordes that you speake for him yea he speaketh the contrarie in offering to acknowledge the faith of Christ. But say you he would not submit his Diademe make his kingdome subiecte in the cause of faithe to the Ministers of Christ and that is all one vvyth denying to submit his Diademe to Christ. Yea Master Sanders were it admitted ye were ministers of Christ is Christ you al one the submissioÌ„ to Christ to his ministers al one Backare M. Saâ—… there is a great difference And yet Chryst requireth no submission of Diademes or subiection of kingdoms in such sort vnto him that he wold haue kings resigne them vp to him and he woulde take them no he neuer vsed that practise He might haue had such kingdomes if he had list but he refused them as your selfe before haue confessed Althoughe your Pope will haue kings resigne their kingdomes vnto him and he will take them and ruffle in greater pompe than any king vseth to doe Whiche argueth playnely that he is not Christes minister And therefore the king hardyly may refuse his vnlawfull demaunde that he woulde in the name of Christ extort as Christes officer which his master Christe both refused himselfe and forbad in his ministers And therefore the Prince dothe Chryste no iniurie bycause he will not bring his kingdome thrall to a false Prieste pretending to be Christes Minister béeing indéede the Minister of the tempter that offereth worldly kingdomes But say you hee muste make his kingdome subiecte to them in the cause of faith As though the cause of faith were hindered if the King made not his kingdome subiecte to the Priestes where as this were the reddiest way bothe to destroye the kingdome and the faith No Master Saunders the faithe of Chryste was neuer more sincere than when the Ministers of Chryst were obedient subiectes to their kings And the cause of faythe was neuer more weakened and corrupted than sithe Priestes haue wrong themselues out of their kings subiections and that the Popes haue made the Kings sweare obedience vnto them But Maister Saunders whines at this crying out vvhere is the obedience of faith that Christ sent his Apostles to procure in all the vvorlde You do well Master Saunders to aske vvhere it is for surely it is not with you nor in all your Popishe kingdome except here and there lurking and dare not shewe hir head for feare your Popishe Inquisitors woulde gette hir by the polle The obedience of fayth was frée when Priests were subiectes and since Priestes became Princes they haue taken hir captiue and exiled hir and done all that they coulde to haue killed hir But she is escaped your hands and requicouereth that libertie that the Apostles procured in all nations for hir And she doth so much the better bicause she rereth not worldly subiection of Princes but letteth Princes kéepe the estate of their kingdomes and requireth not onely obedience to hir in a more spirituall submission Whiche the more Princes yelde vnto hir they bring not their kindomes into more slauerie but into more libertie renowne and honour So that I truste shortely they will bring the Pope and his proude Prelates to their olde obedience againe Whie saye you this is to arme Princes agaynste the Church Nay Master Saunders it is rather to strengthen the Church to let Princes haue that armor that is due vnto them What say you to lette them doe vvhat they vvill and for nothing they shall doe to saye they vvill not leaue their Empire No bodie Master Saunders giueth Princes authoritie to do what they will. The authoritie that is giuen them is onely to doe good Their vvill must not be what they will but what Lawe vvill It is not with them as it is wyth your Pope Sic volo sic Iubeo stet pro ratione voluntas Thus I vvill and thus I commaunde my vvyll shall stande in steade of reason The Law is not wyth them in scrinio pectoris in the cofer of the brest as your Pope sayth it is in his I graunt there are Princes that doe thus but that is not their dutie Neither do Princes make a profession as you say that for nothing they will giue ouer their authoritie nor it is required of them nor presupposed But their duetie in their officâ—… is required and it is presupposed they will continue therein Which if they do not but breake promise shall the subiectes depose them or the Byshops depriue them by whiche rule they may quickly set vpon the Prince for any enormitie in ciuil matters too for he promised to minister iustice to al meÌ„ but he promised to none to giue vp his crowne if he did not Yea though he had made them some suche expresse promise also and brake it yet coulde no Byshop nor any other priuate person attempte to depose him for the breach thereof but commit the vengeance to god But this Prince that here is presupposed offereth inough vnto the Bishop which if he refuse not the Prince but the Byshop endamageth the Church of Christ. Nowe Master Saunders presupposing in this supposall that he hath clearely euicted the case where the Byshop by expresse wordes maketh this condition with the king he will pursue his victorie that he thinketh he hath gotten and proue that the king hath promised and is bounde euen as muche where the Byshoppe at his baptisme saithe no suche wordes vnto him But if so be saith he all men vvill confesse that no Byshop can giue baptisme vvithout great sinne to that king vvhom he seeth so proude then truely although the Byshop by negligence or forgetfulnesse shall say nothing hereof vnto the king notvvithstanding suche is the obedience that the king himselfe giueth vnto the Gospell of Christe vvhen he maketh himselfe a member of him and desireth of him to be saued that vvill hee nill hee this promise is contained in that facte that he shall minister vnto Christ and to the
Church of Christe either in making lavves for it or in taking armes for it or in giuing his life for his brethren and much more in yelding or giuing vp his kingdome for his saluation If any man come to me saith Christ and hate not his father and mother and vvife and children and brethren and sisters yea and his life also he can not be my disciple But any kingdome ought not be deerer to a king than his ovvn life Therfore sith euery Christian ought to giue his life for Christe hovve muche more ought any king rather to hate his kingdome than that he shoulde forsake christ But and if any man that commeth to Christ thinke vvith himselfe otherwise than thus he doth nothing but deceiue himselfe For in that that Christ hath set this lavve in his Gospell that no man shoulde come to him that is to say enter into his Church but he that should be readie rather to forsake al the goods of this vvorld thā leaue the faith of Christ then in that that any Christian king is made a Christian he promiseth not only to fosake his kingdome but his life also rather than hee shoulde bring offence to his brethren If therefore the same king shall so sinne against the Christian faithe that by no meanes he vvill be amended he may by the ministers of Christ be depriued of his kingdome Not that all temporall kingdomes are vnder the ministers of Christe but bycause the kingdomes of all Christian Princes by the nature of the thing that is done are made subiecte to them so ofte as it is expedient for the saluation of the people that the kingdomes should either this vvay or that vvay be translated Here is a faire tale M. Saunders but a foule conclusion The drift of all is this Byshops maye translate kingdomes either this vvaye or that vvaye as they shall thinke expedient for the peoples saluation Howe say you M. Saunders is not this your conclusion you make exception that all kingdoms be not vnder you ▪ as though some were as indéede you haue gotten too many vnder you Where Christe saith you shall haue none vnder you but you will néedes haue some Yea by this rule you wil haue al christian kingdomes vnder you For howe are they not vnder you if they maye be translated this vvay or that vvay and giuen to this man or to that man as ofte as you shall thinke it expedient are not you then the Kings of Kings when you may depose and sette vp Kings and alter cleane topsie turuie which you call translating the state of euery kingdome at your pleasures Indéede Master Saunders the Byshop sayde not thus muche before to the King that woulde be baptized Well say you it was but his negligence or forgetfulnesse And what if he sayde nothing heereof yet he ment it yea and the Kyng himselfe promised it Where finde you that Master Saunders Yes say you he promysed that and more too vvhen he made himselfe a member of Chryste and desired of Chryste to be saued For in that doing vvill he nill he this promise is contained that hee shall minister to Christe and to the Churche of Chryste eyther in making Lavves for it or in taking Armes for it or in giuing his life for his brethren and muche more giuing vp his kingdome for their saluation You iumble many thinges togyther Master Saunders And yet goe to we graunte you all this the King promised thus muche but not vvill he nill he in spite of his bearde he did it vvillingly in offering to acknovvledge the faythe of Chryste wherein he promised to minister to Chryste and to the Church of Christ as you say But whether you be Christ or no I thinke the King will make no question But perhaps he may moue the questiō whether you be the Church yea any parte of the Churche of Christ or no. And if he finde you to be whiche I doubte me will be an harde matter to persuade the king if it be wel examined well then the King shall minister vnto you But howe shal he minister as your slaue and be at commaundemente I thinke Maister Saunders you can not picke that out of his promise Nay your selfe expounde the contrarie saying that he shall make Lavves for the Churche If you then bée the Churche as ye pretende to be he muste make Lavves for you But the Lavve maker to any body by your owne saying and by good reason is aboue the parties for whome he maketh Lavves and therefore the king not onely in the ruling of you but euen in his ministring vnto you is aboue you Nowe if he finde you not to be of the Churche then muste he make lavves and minister iustice againste you for vsurping that title and deceiuing of his people But say you he must giue his life for his brethren much more his kingdome for their saluation You say well Master Sanders he ought to doe so if the forsaking his kingdome or his life woulde be his brethrens saluation But you put a hard case and not commonly séene for I thinke the peoples getting of saluation lyeth not vpon the kings losing his life or kingdome but onely vpon Iesus Chryste If you speake of other accidentes and occasions twentie to one the people are oftener in more danger by the kings death or deposition than by his life or gouernemente excepte he be a very tyrant and indéede his life and gouernement may doe much hurte and it were better he were fayre buried or did resigne than he should gouerne Gods people But God knoweth best what he hath to doe and can take him awaye when he will or can suffer him to scourge and exercise his people wyth affliction The chaffe and stubble wyll burne with fyre but the Golde is purifyed the electe are tryed and are not damned by his tyrannie nor they consent vnto his wickednesse nor yet they reuolt from his obedience nor rebell and depose him but possesse their soules in pacience and crye to God to succor them Nowe as it falleth out thus in the worste case that you can put that no Byshop nor other subiecte may depose his Soueraign so in a good Prince no such thing is to be feared And since it is to men vncertaine how the king will proue they iudge and hope the best bycause they knowe not the worst and extorte no such promise of him Much lesse ought they to make a rule that he shall resigne or suffer death whē the people will haue him and say his life or gouernmente hinders their saluation or when the Byshops shall say it is hurtfull to them then at the Byshops so saying the king must either lose his kingdome or his life this is a hard case M. Saunders for poore kings and trowe you this is contained in their promise Well say you Christ saide if any man come to me and hate not his father his mother his vvife his children yea his
life for me he can not be my Disciple much more then must he hate his kingdome and be readie to leaue his kingdome and all the good in the vvorlde for Christe or else hee is no Christian. You say true M. Sanders he must forsake and hate al for Christes sake But that he must do this for your Byshoppes sakes when they will say it is expedient he should so do that I finde not in the words of Christe and yet muste you beware howe you expounde that saying For he is bound also to loue and to kéepe to the vttermost all these thinges in their kindes not to renounce nor hate theÌ„ except they hinder him from Christ whom he must prefer before al things But this loue to Christe in principall maye stande togither with these loues wel inough Neither is he any more bounde to resigne his kingdome than to resigne his vvife into the Priestes hands Nor if he abuse his kingdome the Prieste can no more turne him out of it than he can if he abuse his goods and his vvife turne him not of his dores and take his goodes and his vvife from him and kéepe hir himself or giue hir vnto an other This can not the Byshop do although the Prince and euerie man be bounde to lose al for Christes cause Yea the Byshop is bounde hereto as well as any other And God knowes how some of them kepe this bonde and yet wil not they léese one halfpennie for Christes sake howsoeuer they breake it But the kingdome is a â—…oule moate in their eye and therefore the King poore soule must lose all and they must take it from him But now to Master Saunders other arguments Moreouer the kingdomes of faithfull Princes whose people feare God are not altogether earthly or worldlye For in that part that they haue beleued in Christ they haue as it were lefte to be of this worlde and haue begonne to be members of the eternall kingdome for although the outwarde face of things which is founde in kingdomes meere secular be in a Christian kingdome yet sith the spirite of man is farre the more excellent parte of hym and the whole spirite acknowledgeth Christ his King and onely Lorde I see nothing why Christian kingdomes ought not rather to be Iudged spirituall according to their better part than earthly And this is the cause why nowe long since those which gouerned the people of God were wont to be annoynted of his Ministers no otherwise than were the Prophetes and Priestes For euen the Kings them selues also are after a sort partakers of the spirituall Ministerie when they are annoynted not that they should do those things that are committed to the onely Priestes herevnto orderly consecrated but that those things which other Kings referre to a prophane and worldly ende these Kings should now remember that they oughte to directe to an holye ende For when they themselues are made spirituall it is fitte they should will that all their things should be counted as it were spirituall But nowe are spirituall things so vnder the Church of Christ that the Church may freely dispose and decree of them to the profite of the whole mysticall body Syth therefore the people of Israell woulde needes desire a King to be giuen them Samuel by the commaundement of God toke a cruse of oyle and powred it vpon the heade of Saule and kissed him and sayd beholde God annoynteth thee to be the Prince ouer his inheritaunce VVhich to me seemeth to signifie euen as though it had bene sayde except the Lord annoynted thee to be the Prince thou couldest not rightly and orderly be the Prince ouer hys people whiche hee hathe chosen and reserued out of all the worlde to be as it were peculiar to hymselfe For in that that is gods no man can take power to him selfe without Gods permission But God anoynted Saul to be the Prince not by himselfe but by Samuel his minister wherfore whosoeuer ruleth ouer the Christian people which is no lesse acceptable to God than was the people of the Iewes hee besides the right which he receyueth of God by the consent of the people ought also to acknowledge his power to be of Christe by his Ministers if so be that he be suche an one that worshippeth the Fayth of Christe VVherevpon to thys day all Christian kingdomes are annoynted of some Christian Bishop or some other Minister of God referring therein their principalitie not onely to the people and so vnto God but that moreouer by the Priests of Christ they referre it vnto Christ whose Ministers they are For Pope Leo wrote elegantly vnto Leo the Emperour Thou oughtest to marke stedfastly the Kingly power not onely to bee giuen to thee to the gouernement of the worlde but to be giuen thee chiefly for the succour of the Churche that in suppressing naughtie attemptes thou shouldest bothe defende those things that are well decreed and restore the true peace to those things that are troubled If Maister Saunders woulde goe plainely to woorke and make his argumentes shorte and formall and woulde rather shewe his Logike than his Rethorike the truth or falsehoode woulde appéere the sooner the reader perhappes mighte be the lesse delyghted but withoute perhappes hee shoulde be lesse beguyled and the aunswere mighte bée the clearer and the shorter â—…ll this long argument in effect is this All spirituall things are so vnder the Church of Christ that the Church may freely dispose and decree of them to the prosite of the whole mysticall body All Christian Kings and kingdomes are spirituall things Ergo all Christian Kings and Kingdomes are so vnder the Church of Christ that she maye freely dispose and decree of them to the prosite of the whole mysticall body And firste Maister Saunders trauels in the Minor. To proue Christian Kyngs and Kyngdomes spirituall that bycause the better parte of them is spirituall therefore hée seeth nothyng why they oughte not to bee rather iudged spirituall Yea Kings were woâ—…e to bee annoynted no otherwyse than Prophetes and Priestes not to doe theyr actions but to referre all theyr affayres to holy and spirituall dedes And can you sée this Maister Sanders Now how chance you coulde not seeit before when you made the Christian Princes ciuill power to be no better than the Turkes or Tartars to stretch no furder thaÌ„ to the body a quiet lyfe haue you now espied not onely the endes wherevnto they rule but the estate also itselfe by reason of the better parte to be spirituall what hath made you see so cléerely nowe forsooth now is now and then was then You were pleading then that the Christian Princes ciuill estate was so farre different and vnlike that Princes might not meddle in spirituall matters and therfore then was fitte oportunitie to denie that Christian Princes Ciuill power had any spirituall thing in it But nowe we are in another argument that Priestes maye order and dispose
and Sathan neyther of a kingdome in the sense of a Polycie gouerned by a king but in the sense of the spirituall giftes of christ In whiche sense euery faythfull man woman and childe is not onely a member of his kingdome but is a king Howbeit he is not a king in that sense that Christ denied his kingdome to be of the worlde that is to be a Magistrate and gouernour of Gods people which estate is onely graunted vnâ—… Princes and as flatly â—…ebarred from any ecclesiasticall person as from any other priuate man. Siâ—…he therefore we say not that other kingdomes oughte to be vnder the Ministers of the Church of Christ than those that already beleeue in Christe or at any time haue beleeued truely this is most foolishly obiected to vs that Bishops haue no power ouer Christian kings and their kingdomes bicause it is written the kingdome of Christ which is committed to his Ministers for the parte whereby he worketh heere is not of this world For we seeke it not of those kingdomes that are of this worlde but of those which althoughe they be in this worlde yet by fayth in Christe they haue lefte to be of this worlde M. Sand â–ª still wrestes of purpose this worde the worlde to sinne and to the state of the vnfaythful As though Christ onely ment My kingdome is not a kingdome of sinne and such as are the kingdomes of those Princes ouer whome the Prince of darknesse raygnes Whereas the wordes of Christe are playne that his kingdome is not suche a kingdome as ruleth in worldly glorie whether it were of the faithfull kinges or the vnfaythfull For the Iewes that would haue made him a king dyd not doubte of this that he would become a tyrant or an vnfaythfull Prince they hoped he would be a better Prince vnto them â–ª than he was that then oppressed them they trusted he woulde gouerne them as Dauid Salomon and other godly princes had done they reckoned that their Messias shoulde rule in all worldly glorie as a moste mightie king But this opinion Christe denieth in his fléeing from their offer And so he sayde to Pilate If my kingdome were of this worlde my ministers would fighte for me that is I could not by tyrannie but by worldly and lawfull power and force maynteine my kingdome Neyther did his Disciples when they desired suche preheminence in his kingdome thinke his kingdome was a kingdome of sinne or a rule of vnfaithfulnesse but thought of a very worldly gouernment shining in all might and glory which they tooke to be good and lawfull and him to be most worthy of it And this is that that Christ reproueth in them affirming that neither he nor they shoulde raigne in suche sorte as worldly Princes do whether they were faithfull or vnfaithfull Princes Not that Christ gouerneth not the faythfull Princes For they obediently submit their earthly kingdomes to his spirituall kingdome yea and to the ministers of his kingdome too in thinges belonging to the ministerie of his spirituall kingdome But that the Ministers of the spirituall kingdome of Christ haue suche power ouer any Christian Prince that beléeueth in Christ that they may take his estate from him that they theÌ„ selues may rule in his estate that they may make him holde his estate of them that they oughte not to be subiect to his estate this is the thing that M. San. laboreth in and would bring all kings and their kingdomes vnto that either haue the faithe of Christe already or at any tyme haue had it as Ierusalem Syria Gréece Asia Egypte Africa and diuers other countreys so well vnder the Turke and Saracens as all Christian kingdomes in the worlde to be subiecte to the Popes authoritie to receyue or forsake their kingdomes at his pleasure But this and suche other worldly glory of rulâ—…g kingdomes is flatly debarred by Christes saying My kingdome is not of this worlde neither all the wisdome of the worlde can coâ—…nteruayle this sentence how foolishly soeuer we seeme to M. Sanders to obiect it But this is his olde song all are rooles and doltes with him that obiecte any thing agaynst the Popes worldly wyse Dominion But this foolishnesse we néede not be ashamed of that is the decrée of Christ who is the fathers wisedome If therefore wee see suche a kingdome as is dedicated to Christe thus gouerned that the King by abuse of the sworde whiche he carrieth carrie away the Christian Citizens into moste greeuous sinnes yea into schismes and heresie if he say Christe is but a creature if euery where he permitte diuorces if he affirme vsuries to be lawfull shall it be a wicked deede first after one or two admonitions to remoue this King from the felowship of the faythfull and then if he yet amende not him selfe by the helpe of other Princes to expel him vtterly from the gouernment of his kingdome If a Christian King were suche an other wicked King as héere you imagine you aske if it were a wicked deede thus to order him I answere you it were a wicked deede For and he were ten times more wicked that excuseth not the Bishops treason to incite other to expell him None of the auncient godly Bishops did euer attempt that treâ—…heris agaynst such wicked Princes were they Arians Tyrants or whatsoeuer they were til the later Popes did set abroche this trayterous practise For a Bishop beeing but a subiect althoughe he is not bounde to obey the Princes vices yea he is bounde bothe to disobey the vices and to reproue the Prince for them and to terrifie him with the threates of Gods wrathe althoughe it coste him his life for his labor yet is he not bounde to rebell or cause other to rebell or to practise conspiracies with other agaynst his Prince wherby effusion of Christian bloud ensueth Yea he is bounde to the contrarie to obey his ciuill gouernment and not he to abuse his estate also bicause the Prince abuseth his estate but to vse all lawfull meanes he can to reforme him committing the rest to God who placed him and whom he representeth in his calling thoughe he swarue from him in his ruling As for the Bishops haue no suche calling to depose him nor any suche ruling as worldly Princes good or ill do exercise And therfore if they take this vsurpation vpon them thoughe they oughte not to depose Princes yet ought Princes to depose them especially béeing infected with those vices that M. San. suâ—…niseth are in these Princes Haue not Popes made schismes when two or thrée or foure at once striued for the Papacie haue not Popes maynteined Christ is a creature â–ª as Liberius that was an Arian and a sinfull creature yea alyer as Leo the tenthe obiected to Bembus Quidmibi narras de Christo fabulas VVhat tellest thou me the fables of Christ Hath not the Pope not onely permitted diuorces for many other causes
be done It lieth not in our will that we may if we liste giue God that that is Gods but we must and ought so to doe bicause it is Gods will. And so likewise for the Princes duetie he hath willed that he shoulde haue that belongeth to him yea your selfe say it is moste true and therein ye say truely and it is most iust and reason by all lawes except your Popishe lawes that euery man haue that is his and then muche more the Prince to haue that that is his no body ought to take away anothers right and due muche lesse his Princes then if it be most true most reasonable and iust and Christes will was not this most true iust and reasonable will of Christ a sufficient determination that the Prince shoulde haue all that belonged to him but that he might haue it if it pleased his subiectes to giue it him Nay it was not so muche say you no not for so much as his owne money yea he determined nothing at all What a straunge answere of Christ had this béene to the Iewes demaunde or rather a daliance to haue determined nothing at all but this is your moste false and fantasticall imagination M. St. For vpon their particuler demaunde Christ giueth a determinate and generall doctrine that all Princes shoulde haue not onely money or tribute as they moued their question but all things else that belong vnto theÌ„ as likewise God to haue althings belonging to God and yet their demauÌ„de mentioned not God at all But Christes answere determined that and more than they demaunded And therfore he answered then not agayne that it was lawfull to giue tribute to Cesar but gaue them flat commaundement for all things not only belonging to Cesar but to Good also bicause they pretended to be exempted from the Emperours subiection and taxes béeing Gods peculier people as the Popish prelats claymâ—… to be exempted from the gouernement and tribute of their Princes bicause they be as they pretende the spiritualtie The residue of M. St. answere is nothing but wordes of course and slaunderous bye quarels First that this admonition of the bishop serueth him and his brethren for many and necessarie purposes to rule and master their Princes by at their pleasure That as often as their doings lyke them not they may freely disobey and say it is not Gods worde wherof the interpretation they referre to them selues Héerein M. St. you measure vs by your selues none séeketh another in the ouen they say that hath not hidde him selfe in the Ouen before This that ye clatter agaynst vs is the common practise of the Pope and his Prelates so they vse Princes and so they vse the worde of god So long as the Gréeke Emperours enriched the Popes and suffred them to set vp Idolatrie your Popes lyked well of them but when they beganne to pull downe Images then your Popes rebelled agaynst them add stirred vp Pepia and Charles the great to inuade the Empire So long as the Frenche Emperours endowed and defended the Popes seigniories they were the Popes chiefe and white sonnes But so soone as they beganne to chalenge their righte in Italie then your Popes fearing the Frenche power berefte agayne the Frenche Emperoures of it and gaue it to the Germane Princes But euen in Germanie as any Princes woulde clayme their righte and interest of his estate to be Emperoure in déede of Rome as he is called in name then the Popes did excommunicate him and stirred his people to rebellion agaynst him And thus likewyse in Englande so long as king Iohn withstoode the Pope and his Byshops practises he was excommunicated and his kingdome giuen to the Frenche kings sonne and the Dolphin willed to inâ—…ade Englande But when king Iohn had made him selfe the Popes vassalle and to holde the kingdome in Capite of the Pope he was absolued and the Dolphin forbidden and accursed So long as king Henry the eight wrote agaynst Luther he had a golden Rose sent him and was entituled Defendour of the faythe But when he in déede began to defende the fayth â–ª and abolish the corrupter of the fayth and his corrupte Idolatrie then he was excommunicate with booke bel candle and al Princes that the Pope might moue were set against him And this practise he vsed with other christian Princes calling one his eldest sonne another the most Christian king another the Catholike king â–ª c. With suche clawes to master and rule Princes by at his pleasure But as often as any Princes doings like him not then to cause their subiectes to disobey them and renounce their othes of allegeance And wherto else serueth all this your present wrangling and wresting of this text Reddite Caesars quae sunt Caesaris but to this purpose that béeing not necessarily bounde by force of any wordes to pay yea any tribute to our Prince and that it standeth onely on a case of licence or possibility we may if we please it is lawfull if we do it but we oughâ—… not we be not bounde it is not a precise necessitie of subiectes What is a gappe to all disobedience and rebellion if this be not and yet he obiecteth this to vs No M. Stap. it is your owne we acknowledge it to be a commaunde ment due and necessarie that the Prince haue all thinges that belongeth to him and what belongeth in this controuersie is proued out of the olde Testament which Christ héere confirmeth and limiteth it by the duetie giuen also to God putting no meane of Pope nor Prelate betwéene God and the Prince as you do And this limitation ye can not denie to be good and godly for all your scoffing at it to limitte the Princes authoritie by Gods worde Which we do not to disobey our Prince but rather to giue to our Prince hir owne knowing which is hirs which is Gods least we should with you intermingle these dueties that Christ hath seuered as your Pope vsurpeth bothe Cesars and Gods also bicause he will not haue his power measured by Gods worde but will rule the worde of God and referreth the interpretation thereof to him selfe It is manyfest in him that he doth so To lay it to vs is but a manyfest slaunder And this is a greater matter of all on your side than the refusall of a cappe or a surplesse wherat ye quarell in some Protestantes on the other side which dothe nothing abase but rather in comparison shew the more your stubborne disobedience in all poyntes to your Princes authoritie besides your abusing of Gods worde wherof ye say we make a very welshmans hose Or but yet do you M. St. and a great deale worsse too but ye were best to crie stoppe the théefe by another for feare ye be espied to be the théefe your selfe But I pray you how do ye proue that we or the Byshop so vse Gods worde For say you we playnely say that this kinde of supremacie is directly
he was a good king in ouerséeing the Priestes do their dueties and not him selfe intruding into the doing of their duties But of this exaÌ„ple we haue heard somwhat already in answering master Stapleton and we shal haue more agayne in M. Saunders fourth Chapter and therfore I reserue my selfe to the larger answere of it To this he addeth an Item of Iosaphat saying Itemque c. And also Iosaphat the king of Iuda distinguishing both powers sayde to the Leuites and the Priests Amarias the Priest and your Bishop stil gouerne in those things that perteine to god Moreouer Zabadias the sonne of Ismaell who is the captayne in the house of Iuda shal be ouer those workes that perteyne to the office of the king Beholde other thinges perteyne to the office of the Bishop and other to the the kinges office This we haue beholden alreadie in Master Stapletons obiection of the same and there may you M. Saunders beholde the answere And thus muche agayne for the vse of both these powers Now thirdly for the end therof saith M. Saunders Of the ende of both powers not the last but the middle ende that the ciuill power toucheth nought but this lyfe Christ saith Feare not theÌ„ that kil the body but they can not kill the soule And agayne the Apostle willeth vs to pray for kings those that are in authoritie that we may hue a quiet and peaceable life A quiet life therefore is the last ende of the ciuill power dwelling without the Churche But of that which is in the Church it is not the last but yet the proper ende it is VVhyle in the meane time the eccl. power belongeth to the lyfe to come as Christ hath sayde whatsoeuer ye lose on earth shall be loosed in heauen To this distinction of the endes of these powers I answere it is false not only the laste ende as he graunteth but the meaner endes also of the ciuill power in the church of Christ stretche further than this lyfe I appeale to the Princes institution and office Deuter. 17. I appeale to all the doings of the godly Kings Iudges and ciuill magistrates described in the scripture I appeale to Constantine the great that thought religion to be the chiefe ende of hys gouernment Yea I appeale to the places that euen héere M. Sanders citeth for his purpose â–ª manifestly wresting â—… mayming that of S. Paule to Timothie For he sayth not onely Ut quietam tranquillam vitam agaâ—…us That we may leade a quiet and peaceable life and there endeth but he addeth further withall in omni pietate honestate in all godlynesse honestie In which two words chiefly al godlinesse what is included is at large declared against master Stapleton But before this place M. Sanders citeth the testimonie of Christ that the prince can do no more but kill the body I answere Christe makes not the proper ende of the Princes power to kill the body but rather as you said before out of S. Paule to saue it To kill it is an accidentall tude of his power yet Iwisse Christ spake not there onlye of ciuil Princes but as muche agaynst the tyrannie of the highe Priests or any other that woulde persecute the ministers of Christ to death as your Pope you his chaplaynes do But I pray you M. sand may not an ill Prince wrest his authoritie to destroy the soule also with maynteyning Idolatrie false religion In déede he can not kill the soule for properly it can not be killed But that kind of killing that the soule may suffer which is sinne and damnation the rewarde of sinne with the one striken of the deuil by malice and wounded of him selfe by errour with theother striken of God by Iustice and deserued of him selfe by sinne may not the ill Prince make his power be a meane therto and may not an ill priest on this wise kill the soule as wel and sooner than he I wot what your pope Pius 2. was wont to say Malâ—… medâ—…ci corpus imperiti sacerdotes animam oâ—…cîdunt Ill Phisitions kil the body but vnskilfull Priests kill the soule You say your power stretcheth to the life to come In déede M sand the true eccl. power stretcheth to the life to come I feare me yours doth stretch to life as ye say but not to come but onely to the present life of the body but to death of body and soule both nowe and to come for euer Besides al this I appeale euen to your owne selfe M. sand that affirme the ciuil power in the church of Christ to stretch to farre further more proper endes thaÌ„ this life for in your fourth chapter folowing ye haue this quotation Christianâ—…rum regna leâ—…ularia non sunt Christian kingdomes are not worldly Wheron ye haue these words Moreouer the kingdomes of the faythfâ—…ll Princes whose people feare â–ª God are not altogither earthly or worldly for in that parte that they haue beleeued in Chryst they haue as it were lefte to be of the worlde and haue begonne to be members of the eternall kingdome For although the outwarde face of thinges which is founde in kingdomes meere secular be in a Christian kingdome Yet sithe the spirite of man is farre the moste excellent parte of him and the whole spirite acknowledgeth Christ his king and onely Lorde I see nothing why Christian kingdomes ought not to be rather iudged spirituall according to their better parte than earthly And this is the cause why now so long since those which gouerned the people of God were wont to be anointed of his ministers no otherwise than were the Prophetes and Priests For euen the kings them selues also are after a sort â–ª partakers of the spiritual ministerie wheÌ„ they are anoynted Not that they shoulde do those thinges that are committed to the onely priestes hereto orderly consecrated but that those thinges whiche other kinges referre to a prophane and worldly ende these kinges shoulde nowe remember that they ought to directe to an holy ende For when they them selues are meere spirituall it is fitte that they shoulde wyll that all their thinges shoulde also be accounted as it were spirituall Loe M. Saunders in these wordes ye confesse farre other proper endes and farre other estates also in the ciuill power of Christian Princes than this lyfe of the body and the quiet tranquillitie therof And therfore what néede further witnesse when your selfe are not onely contrarie to your selfe but also beare witnesse agaynst your selfe Now wheÌ„ M. Sanders hath thus prosecuted these three differences of these two estates he collecteth his conclusion saying But if the ecclesiasticall power differ from the ciuill in the originall in the vse and in the ende and so well the beginning of the ecclesiasticall power as the vse and ende is farre the more worthy shall they not of wise men be iudged mad which either confounde these powers
doo Will ye haue a woman weare a mans apparell it is flat forbidden by Gods worde Will ye haue a Quéene fight hir self in a battaile and breake a speare as a king may do In déed some mannish women as the Quéene of Amazons Thomyris Semiramis and other haue so doone but it is not sitting And by your owne reason the imbecillitie of theyr kynde doth cléere them And a number of such other things may be reckoned vp Shall we now saye the Quéene is not supreme gouernour ouer these persons and causes bicause hir selfe can not doe them Likewyse for a king that is a chylde you know he can not fight in battell himselfe neyther can he himselfe sit in iudgement and debate rights and wrongs in ciuil doubtes manie mo things can he himselfe not doe euen bicause as ye say he hath a defect in iudgemeÌ„t Hath he therfore in these ciuill and temporall thyngs no supreme gouernment Thus ye sée still your examples faile yea they make cleane agaynst you for as a supreme gouernor may wel be a supreme gouernor in those things that he himself can not do so a christeÌ„ princes supreme gouernmeÌ„t ouer al ecclesiastical persons in al ecclesiastical causes is nowhit hindred although the prince he or she yong or old can not do the functions ecclesiastical nor be an ecclesiast person The second argument is that he so often and al the Papists vse of the excellencie of the minister in his ministration aboue the Prince To this he citeth the saying of Saint Paule Let men â—…o esteeme vs as ministers of Christ and dispensers of his mysteries To whiche ministerie kings are not called And here is againe alledged the storie of â—…ziae that presumed to offer incense and was punished with â—…eaprie The effect of all the argument he knitteth vp thus Siergo minister c. If therfore the minister of the Church of Christ exercise a greater and more diuine ministerie than the king or any other prince howe is the king the Supreme heade of that churche wherein he seeth certaine ministers greater than himselfe I answere this is a fallation secundum quid ad simpliciter We graunt in the respect of his ministerie the minister is aboue all Princes But this pertayneth to the actions and function of the minister and not to the ouersight and direction that all those actions and functions be orderly done Nowe this béeing but a common argument Master Saunders vrgeth it further by comparison of eyther estate the Prince and the Priest from the olde Testament to the newe saying Ac nimirum illud c. And thys namely I seeme to take by my right the authoritie of any Christian king in his christian kingdom is not greater than was in tymes paste the authoritie of any Iewishe kyng among the people of the Iewes for if the Citie of God to whyche Chryste of his owne name hathe giuen a newe name maye verily bee the more woorthie but can not be inferiour to the Churche of the Iewes â–ª Surely then it followeth that a christian king ouer his christian kingdome can not obtaine more power than a kyng of the Hebrue nation did obteyne among the Hebrâ—…wes For howe muche the more any Common weale is subiecte too their earthly Kyng the authoritie of that common weaâ—…e is so muche the lesse But the authoritie of the Churche of Christe is not lesse than the authoritie of the Synagoge of the Iewes bycause in the churche of Christe those thinges were fulfilled to the verie image of the things whiche in the Synagoge of the Iewes were scarce figured by the naked shadowes As the truthe in deede in greater than the image so againe the image is greater than the shadowe but this is euident that the authoritie in times past of the only king is lesser than the authoritie of his christian kingdome or of hys Bishops But if it be so then the christian king which is both lesse than the church and the bishops of his kingdom cannot be immediatly vnder Christ the head of the churche This argument is intricate and full of many inuersed cringle crangles to shewe a face of déepe and subtill knowledge beyonde the simple mans capacitie whyche kynd of reasonyng is more suspicious than to edifying The effecte of the argument standeth all on this The greater authoritie is giuen to a christian king the lesser haue the Priestes and the churche But the priestes and the churche haue not lesse authoritie but aboue a christian king Ergo the king hath not supreme authoritie To the Maior that the greater authoritie is giuen to a christian king the lesser haue the priests and the churche he sayeth nothing And yet some what is to be sayde thereto it is not so cléere as he makes it For sith eyther of these thrée haue their authorities in dyuers considerations the Priests authoritie may be greater than the kings authoritie in one respecte that is of his diuine actions and ministerie and yet in an other of the gouernement and publike direction the kinges authoritie is greater than his And so althoughe the Churches authoritie in one respecte be greater than bothe the Kings and the Priestes as they are bothe but membres and children of the Churche yet in regarde that the one is a Pastour and the other a gouernour and both of them Fathers and guyders as it were vnto the church their authorities againe are greater than the Churches And this also sheweth the falshood of the Minor that the Priestes and the Churche haue not lesse authoritie but are aboue the prince Which is not true but in suche respectes as nothing hinder the supreme gouernement that we giue the prince But Maister Saunders to confirme this to bée simply true the prince to be inferior to the Priests and people will proue it by his comparison of the state of the olde and newe Testament And first he will haue the state of the olde Testament in the Churches gouernement to be a figure of the newe But in the estate of the old Testament the Prince was vnder the priest and the people Ergo it must be so in the new To the maior we graunte him the gouernment of the Church in the old testament to be a figure of the churches gouernment in the new testameÌ„t And remember this well that here M. Saunders buyldes vpon For if he himselfe shal be found to swarue from it afterwarde when he findeth it shall make agaynst hym then let him blame himselfe and let vs note bothe inconstancie and cantradiction in him who playeth the snayle puttyng in and out his hornes and will say and eate his worde as he thinketh best to his aduantage And this is the fashions of them all in the examples of the old testament as we haue séene the practise of M. Feckenham M. Stapleton which is a subtile false and vnstedfast kind of dealing But go to we denie the minor that in the state of the
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
Kingdomes and depose Kings as they shall thinke expedient and to proue this â–ª we must saye they be in the Churches power and to proue that wee must saye they are spirituall â–ª and so spirituall men may deale with spirituall thyngs And for this reason we can sée no cause nowe but that Christian Kingdomes are spirituall that we spirituall men which are the Church might haue the disposing of them Well then I see also Maister Saunders that for aduantage you can and you can not see And play seest me and seest me not But who seeth not that hath any indifferent eyes that this is but legerdemain and that you speake flat contraries in one thing although you turne your tale to other purposes But let go that you saw not before let vs loke what you see in Princes now Nowe you see that they are spirituall And why so not bicause they doe the spirituall actions of the Priests but bicause of their better part that is of the spirite of God and bicause of the end wherto they driue al their things to become as it were spirituall Why then M. Saunders your eyes mighte serue you if your hart could serue you to see this withall that although the Prince can not do the spirituall actions of spirituall persons yet this hindreth not that he may notwithstanding be a gouernor ouer ecclesiasticall persons in causes ecclesiasticall and maye ouersee them both And if you can see the one and not the other surely your sight is partiall But newe M. Saunders loking another way will haue Princes no furder spirituall than in that they are vnder the Church And here making the Maior the Minor the former the later by a figure called Hysteron proteron the carte before the horse he will proue that all spirituall things are so much vnder the Churche of Christ that the Church may freely dispose and decree of them to the profite of the whole mysticall body and so Kings and Kingdomes as is sayde before beyng spirituall things are so muche vnder the Churche of Christ that she may freely to the profit of the whole mysticall body dispose and decree of Kings and kingdomes But first Maister SauÌ„ders we denie your Maior For although in certaine things it be true to wit in such things as are left to the disposition of the Church that is to order and dispose such things as of their nature are indifferent to the profite of the whole mysticall body or any part thereof for these things are called spirituall things not properly in their owne nature but as in spirituall causes the spirituall persons vse them and yet all this is not so freely lefte to the Churches disposition that some principall persons in the Church as the Prince or the Pastors haue not the chiefest stroke in the disposition of them For if they were so free that euery member in the Churche shoulde haue his nay or yea in disposing of theÌ„ when would they be disposed And if at length they were it would peraduenture fall out in the end so little to the profite of the whole mysticall body that it woulde be rather the hinderaunce and disquieting of it But besides these spiritual thinges there are a great many other of whiche some in déede are méere spirituall as the worde of God the Sacramentes of Christ the Articles of fayth the Commaundementes of life and all suche thinges as God hathe either expressed in his worde or is necessarily conteyued in it These thinges béeing spiritual are not so vnder the churche of Christ that the churche may freely dispose and decree of them But they statly dispose and decree of the churche and the churche can not alter nor swarue one iote from them Whiche if she shoulde she shoulde not profite hir selfe for she is the whole mysticall body but destroy hir selfe and dissolue the whole body and euery part therof And such as these things are is the estate of a King and kingdome whiche althoughe it be not so méere a spirituall thing but so farre foorthe spirituall as your selfe confesse yet bicause it is the ordinaunce of God and God hath in his worde set foorthe the office of a King and declareth that the setting vp and pulling downe of Kinges and the alterations of kingdomes belongeth to him selfe and neuer gaue that authoritie to his Churche muche lesse to his Ministers to set vp and depose Kinges and alter kingdomes Kinges therefore and their kingdomes no more than other spirituall thinges are not so vnder the churche of Christe that she maye freely dispose and decree of them to the profite of the whole mysticall body Neither hathe the whole mysticall body any more thraldome or lesse fredome that Kings and kingdomes are not so vnder hir or that she maye not freely dispose and decree of them as she shall thinke moste profitable to the whole mysticall body than she hathe more thraldome or lesse freedome bicause she can not alter nor dispose the other spirituall things Yea in this case the Churche léeseth lesse libertie than in the other for the freedome of the Churche â–ª béeing a mysticall body is cleane another matter pertayning to the conscience and is a mysticall freedome from the tyrannie of Sathan from the cursse of the lawe from the bondage of sinne from ceremonies and humayne constitutions and not from obedience to kinges and to haue superioritie ouer them and libertie to depose them and to translate their kingdomes Whiche freedome and superioritie is not spirituall but carnall and worldly And if the Churche had it she woulde not onely bring kinges and kingdomes but euen hir selfe in bondage and therefore Christe hathe barred it Whiche freedome bicause the Popishe Churche aspireth vnto and claymeth and holdeth ouer â–ª kinges and kingdomes she is not the true Church of Christ that they boast of but rather a Iewishe Synagoge dreaming vpon an earthly Messias or rather a Persian or Turkishe Temple that measureth the freedome and dignitie of Gods Church by the pompe and mighte of the worlde to depose kings and dispose of their kingdomes at their pleasures But to proue that kings and kingdomes pertayne not to the free disposition of the Church but of God I will desire no better prooues nor example than euen M. Saunders heere brings foorthe Sithe therefore sayth he the â–ª people of Israell would needes desire a king to be giuen theÌ„ Samuel by the commaundement of God tooke a cruse of oyle and powred it vpon the head of Saule and kissed him â–ª and sayde beholde God anoyâ—…teth thee to be the Prince ouer his Inheritaunce which to me seemeth to signifie as though it had bene sayde except the Lorde anoynted thee to be the Prince thou couldest not rightly and orderly be the Prince ouer his people whiche he hathe chosen and reserued out of all the worlde to be as it were peculiar to him selfe For in that that is Gods no man can take power
that the Kyng should be obedient to the disposition of the humaine minister of Christ which is the question nowe in hande And yet whether it signifie this mysterie that you say it onely doth or no may be called into question For if it hath such a significatiō it is a very darke mysterie And me thinks it might more easilye signifie other things For oyle sometimes signifieth mercie sometimes plentie sometimes remedie against poyson sometimes it is referred to the Priesthoode sometimes to the kingdome of Christ somtimes to the mysticall members of Christ as they are Kings Priests with him so that the anoynting with oyle which espetially was vsed to Priests and Kings who therefore are called the sons of oyle is applyed to sundry significations and not onely to the incarnation and humaine nature of Christe And yet is there no suche necessitie of anoynting Christian Kings as was of the Iewishe Kings For they had commaundement so to doe and it was a ceremoniall figure of diuerse things in christ Which commaundement and ceremonies Christian Princes are not bound vnto It is cropen vp of a custome I cānot tel how to imitate the Iewes herein But as for the nature of a Kings estate he is neuer a whit the lesse King if he wante the anoynting with oyle and as the Papistes superstitiouslie doe vse it it were muche better away But the Papistes make a great matter of anoynting Kings with oyle yea sayth Maister Saunders they were wont to be annoynted no otherwise than were the Prophetes and Priestes as thoughe they shoulde be so anoynted still And true it is in one sense that they shoulde no other wise be so annoynted still that is to say neyther of them shoulde be anoynted No say you should not the Priestes be annoynted ▪ We are In deede you be Maister Saunders and all your order But the Apostles and Disciples of Christe were not and therefore your order is differing from theirs and all godly ministers should differ from yours be ye shorne or be ye anoynted But if it be true that you say kings should be no otherwise anoynted than you howe chaunce then ye are anoynted otherwise than kings as your glosse doth reason that vpon the King is powred oile but vpon the Bishop is powred Chrisme Kings are anoynted on the righte shoulder but Byshops and Priestes are annoynted vpon their heads but the heade is better than the shoulder and Chrisme is better than oyle Ergo Bishops and Priests are superior vnto Kings Were not they which anoynted their pamphlets with such greasie argumentes to perch vp their balde crownes aboue the imperiall crownes of their natural Soueraignes worthy by the Princes commaundemente to be well anoynted with vnguentum baculinum to make them acknowledge their due subiection if they rather deserue not sharper instice but let vs procéede vnto M. Saunders other arguments Let vs put the case that Christ himselfe is at this day conuersant in the earth as he was conuersant in times paste Can any man doubt but in that he is man al Christian kings ought to be vnder his gouernment both in all eccl. and in those secular causes that may promote the cause of the Chruche for he shall raigne in the house of Iacob for euer and there shal be no ende of his kingdomes If therefore earthly Kings are parte of the house of Iacob Christ shall raigne ouer them and shall subdue their Kingdomes to hys spirituall Kingdome But whatsoeuer power was necessarye vnto Christe to eternall saluation he transformed the externall and and visible ministerie thereof vnto the Apostles when he said as my father hath sent me so I send you The Apostles therefore and their successors doe no lesse rule in spiritual causes ouer Christian Kings so far as the visible Ministerie than Christ himselfe is in truth ouer them so farre as the holy power of his humaine nature VVherevpon sayth Epiphanius Christ hath giuen a kingdome to those that are placed vnder him that it should not be sayde he proceedeth from little things to greater The throne of Christ abideth and of his kingdome there is no ende and he sitteth vpon the throne of Dauid so that he hath translated the kingdome of Dauid together with the Bishoprike and hath giuen it vnto his seruaunts that is to the Bishops of the Catholike Church Beholde so well the priestly as the Kingly power is communicated to the pastors of the Churche of Christe that by that meanes Christ shoulde be declared to raigne for euer yea euen as a spirituall and heauenly man And this truelye dothe that annoynting testifie that the Kings receyue of Priests The argument is thus If Christ himselfe were conuersant in earth in his humaine nature as he hath bene he shoulde haue ouer all Christian kings all eccl. and secular power in those things that might promote the Church But Christ hath giuen to his ministers in the visible ministerie all the power necessarie to saluation ouer Christian kings that belongeth to himselfe in his humaine nature Ergo he hath giuen his Ministers in the visible ministerie all ecclesiasticall and secular power in those things that maye promote the Church First this argument standeth vpon another presupposal which as it is no lesse false than the other so is it more impossible being flat contrarie to the worte of God and to the will of christ He puttes a case that Christ woulde come againe and in his humaine nature be conuersant vpon the earth as he was from his natiuitie till his death Good Lord M. Saūders is your cause so bad and false that you are still driuen to these shiftes to put the cases of false and forged presupposals if your cause were good it woulde stand of it selfe you might go plainely to worke and neuer reason vpon suche deuised cases as you knowe and beleue shall neuer be true except you be a Millenarie indéede as you gaue before a shrewde suspition of that heresie to think Christ shall come againe and here for a thousand yeares in all worldly might and glorie raigne in the earth and then go dwell in heauen But perhaps you wil say what wil you let me to put what case I lyft when the sky falles they say we shal haue Larkes True M. Saunders we can not let you to put what case you lyst be it neuer so absurde and repugnant to the truth But is this the rediest way to boult out the truth to put the case of an euident vntruth and to imagine that to come that neuer shall be to inferre that vsurpation of your Priestes that is and ought not to be But sée howe sone your argument is ouerturned For if your case be not admitted then is all your labour loste and you haue wonne nothing for your Priestes But the Scripture is manifest that this shall neuer come to passe And that the heauens containe Christ til the day of Iudgement he is neither here
Pastors are placed in the Churche to this purpose that they shoulde vvatche for our soules teach baptise dispence the mysteries of Christe giue open sinners vnto Sathan and in the person of Christe to forgiue them that are sorie for their sinnes according to the Lorde To conclude that they by their keys should bring so vvel earthly kings as other meÌ„ into the kingdome of heauen Sithe therefore as Christe the Lorde of all worthily gouerneth so wel the spiritual as the earthly power and sith the spirituall power floweth not from Christe but as he is redeemer of mankinde and that power is properly ordeined and prouided for the getting of eternall life neither by any meanes can it be saide or thought of a vviseman that Christe vvoulde haue the earthly povver aboue the spirituall in his Church vvhich is all led by the spirite and ought to be lifted aboue all earthly things Truely it is necessarie that in the Churche of Christe vvhiche is one the onely spirituall povver shoulde rule and that the povver of the father the husbande the Lorde yea and of the King himselfe shoulde be altogither vnder the povver of the Pastors appointed of Christ vvhen the matters of the life to come are handled Except Master Saunders of vaine glorie did either delight to much to heare himself or of subtletie went about to tyre and wrappe his Readers he woulde neuer vse so many wordes to so litle purpose Muche of this is nothing but that he hath spoken before and is here in vaine repeated much of it is cleane besides the matter The summe is this that all estates as touching spirituall matters are altogyther vnder the spirituall Pastors The effecte of all this long drift standeth on these two reasons the one of the difference of the two powers to proue the spiritual to be the better the other of the vnion of bothe powers to proue the Priestes alone to rule them both What he hath tolde vs heretofore of the difference concerning the original the vse and the end of bothe we haue hearde alreadie and it is néedelesse to repeat And likewise that all ciuill and kingly povver is as well out of the Church of God as in the Church of God the spirituall power only in the Church is alredy answered vnto And in al these actioÌ„s that he reckoneth vp the King is likewise graunted the inferior Howbeit here is nothing that the King is inferior in things belonging to his kingdome But what is al this to the present purpose that the Priest may depole the King he reasoneth of the â—…mon of these powers that they are all one in Christ that Christ hath both in him and ruleth both so well the secular as the spirituall â–ª and this is likewise answered last vnto Put that here vpon the power of all estates is altogether vnder the pastors power that is not hetherto proued And yet we denie not but that the power of all these estates Father Husband Lorde and King is vnder the pastors power but not altogether vnder it And so we say that all these powers yea the pastors and all are vnder the Kings power but not altogether vnder it All estates are vnder the pastors power bycause hée teacheth all estates of men how to liue in their vocations All estates are vnder the Kings power bycause he ouerséeth in al estates the maintenance of the same So that as Master Saunders rightly saith there is no difference and there is a difference and there is a mixture of these powers There is no difference in respect that all are partakers of the vnitie in Christ in regarde wherof neither Priest nor Prince are better the one than the other or the people worse than both sith all are one in christ There is a difference in respecte of the order and gouernment of the Church which is so distinguished in difference of degrées and callings that as the wife maye not take vpon hir the husbandes office nor the sonne the fathers nor the seruant the maisters so neither the past or maye take vpon him the office of the King nor the King the office of the pastour And there is a mixture in respect that the pastor directeth by teaching of all estates and spareth not the Prince and that the Prince directeth by gouerning of all estates and spareth not the pastor But this mixte power of entermedling confoundeth not the one power with the other neither maye the Prince vsurpe the authoritie due to the pastor nor the pastor vsurpe the authoritie due to the Prince As the one therefore is not confounded and yet medled with the other so the one hath both inferiorship and superioritie ouer the other and yet is neither altogether inferior or altogether superior to the other as here M. Saunders on the vnion and mixture difference no difference of these two powers concludes to exalt the pastor to such an absolute superioritie ouer the Princes that at their liking misliking they mighto depose theÌ„ But now M. sand to confirme this that the pastor is altogether in spirituall matters aboue the Prince procéedeth saying For as the fleshely man perceiueth not the things that are of the spirit of God so neither the fleshly power gouerneth those things that are of the spirite of god For althoughe Kings gouerne the members of Christe yet notwithstanding they gouerne them not in respect that they are the ineÌ„bers of Christ but in that they are yet occupied in secular businesse For the members of Christ may want a King as in times past almost for three thousand yeares eueÌ„ froÌ„ the beginning of the world vntill the kingdome of Saul they wanted an earthly king But yet the members of Christ neuer wanted some pastor bicause faith is by hearing hearing by the word of god But those that preached the word of Christ they were the pastors of the flocke The argument is this That which hath no perceuerance of things that are of the spirit of God ought to haue no superioritie in things that are of the spirit of God. But the Princes power hath no perceuerance of things that are of the spirit of God How proue you this M. Saunders The fleshly power hath no perceuerance But the Princes power is but a fleshly power Proue this better M. Saunders Such as the man is such is the power But the Prince is but a fleshly man Proue this tâ—… M. Saunders He which hath only respect to secular busines is but a fleshly man But kings haue onely respect to secular businesse Proue me this also M. Saunders Although Kings gouerne the members of Christ yet they gouerne them not in respect that they are members of Christ Ergo they gouerne them onely in secular businesse Proue this too M. Saunders If Kings gouerne theÌ„ as meÌ„bers of Christ then would they neuer haue wanted the gouernement of kings but almost for 3000. yeares they waÌ„ted
time done 〈◊〉 to the Prince trow you ye neuer did it Did your Pope neuer iniurie to the Emperour did your bishops neuer iniurie to kings did your spiritualtie neuer iniurie to the laytie I thinke for shame you will not denie it If you do you shall haue witnesses inow of your owne side against you Agayne did your Pope neuer suffer iniurie to be done to Princes and might haue helped it and did not denie it you can for shame Moreouer did your Pope his Clergy neuer saynt from iustice and truth you dare not séeke to couer it it is so open and confessed What remedie now to amend these things the gouernors of the Church say you must admonish theÌ„ to decline from euill and do good Who are these gouernors of the Churche that ye speake of our selues say you Why then you must admonish your selues Would to God you had that grace M. San. that you would enter into iudgement with your selues and admonishe your selues But now running headlong in your faults and wil not heare them tolde of any other but thinke you do well he that shal tel you the contrarie you wil tell him he is an heretike if he come in your clawes you will burne him although he were some of your owne companie for so you haue serued diuers that haue rebuked your faults errors yea you are so sotted on your selues that you maintein you can not erre O how roughly wil you admonish your selues how soone shall all the worlde looke for your amendment Is not this a plaine mockerie with the world world is it not more than time for Christian princes that are in déede the gouernors of the Churche to admonishe you I denie not but you may yea ought to admonish the Prince also if he be suche an offender as you imagine But that you oughte to be the onely admonishers of them and not your selues of them to be admonished â–ª you sée the inconuenience And yet there is a difference betwéene admonishing and gouerning and a greater difference betwéene admonishing deposing But by little and little you drawe to wards it But what and if the Prince say you will not amend him selfe And what say I if the Priestes wil not amend theÌ„ selues we must make hast say you to other remedies Yea but not suche haste M. Sâ—… that you break your sâ—…nnes and much lesse such hast that you breake the ordinaunce of god For in such haste is more waste than spéede the end of it neuer wanteth â—…o We graunt you there are remedies in the Church of God for such inconueniences but no such remedies as for the subiect to attempt to depose his Soueraigne and stirre the people to rebellion But if any say you beeing admonished amende not him selfe we are bidden to denounce him to the Church VVho if if he will not heare the Church is to be accounted as an Ethnike or a publicane Are you bidden M. Sanders if he be your Prince to renounce your ciuil polytike obedience that you ought him yea although he were in déede an Ethnike if you find this you come somwhat néerer to the purpose else you do not only wrest this place which is not spoken of Princes but also straggle cleane from the matter in question But now say you if any King not hearing the Church be permitted to holde and administer his kingdome ouer Christians who seeth not all the people ouer whome that King ruleth to come into most certaine danger of losing the faith for that saying is no lesse true than auncient After the example of the king the whole world is framed So while only Ieroboam as I sayd before worshipped two Calues the one in Bethel the other in Dan and appoynted Priestes not of the sonnes of Leui but of the basest of the people This thyng became an offence to tenne Tribes and for the greatest parte of Israell the faythe peryshed The danger and offence is great we graunt of Princes thus offending But for subiects to depose their Princes for these dangers or offences the danger and offence were not remedied but augmeÌ„ted For what Prince were not then in danger if you would lay these offences to his charge were he neuer so giltlesse of them if he neuer so little offended you ye mightâ—… say he did you iniurie or he suffered other to do it he helped you not he foughte not in your quarell agaynst those Princes on whome you woulde haue set him If he swarued at any time from iustice or but spoke a worde awrie yea if he but saynted from those things you woulde haue him do would not acknowledge that he so dyd who you reproued him for it when you tolde it one to another for you call your selues the Church then in all poste haste the prince must be couÌ„ted as an Ethnike or a publicane be deposed froÌ„ his kingdome the people muste rebell In what danger by this doctrine both the Prince the people stand your selues also the teach this dangerous doctrine is apparaÌ„t The exaÌ„ple of Ieroboam is a greater case but as great as it was neither the priests nor the prophets atteÌ„pted to depose IeroboaÌ„ nor the people rebelled agaynst him no nor the tribe of Iuda nor RoboaÌ„ were permitted to war against him for all this great losse danger that the people receiued by him Sithe therefore say you the wisdome of God hathe not lefte the Churche of God whiche is a citie excellently founded and defenced without a medicine which it may giue to suche a disease neither is there any other medicine can helpe than that which taketh away so euill a king from among the people and giueth the kingdome to a better man we muste beleeue that suche power is graunted at the least to the chiefe Pastor of the Churche in these wordes feede my sheepe and whatsoeuer thou bindest in earth shall be bounde also in heauen So that the chiefe Pastor can not onely excommunicate a wicked king but also set his subiectes free from al obedience of him The wisedome of God as you say M. Sanders hathe not lefte the Church of God without medicines for suche diseases Gods worde is euen a storehouse of plaisters as well CoÌ„solidatiues as Corrosiâ—…es for the Ministers of Christs to apply them to any infected members But these medicines that are taken out of the worde of God you despise and reiecte as too base simples vaunt of your owne compoundes There is a medicine in gods word called In patientia vestra possidebitis animas vestras yâ—… shall possesse your soules in patience when a wicked Prince â—…oth vexe them There is another called In fide fundati stabiles beyng founded in faith and stable Another called Ad te leuaui oculos meos I haue lifted vp mine eyes to thee c. Another In Domino confido non
timebo quid mihi faciat homâ—… I put my confidence in the Lorde I will not feare what man can doe vnto me Another called beati qui persecutionem patiuntur propter iustitiam Blessed are they that suffer persecution for righteousnesse And a number of such excellent medicineâ—… there are And in déede there is such a medicine too as you sâ—…y vt auferatur de medio populi that he should be taken from among the people But there is but one Phisition that knoweth the right confection of the strong purgation and that is God himselfe Ministers of diuerse sortes he hath by whom he giueth this medicine but I neuer read that any godly Bishop or Prieste or faithfull subiecte did euer minister it to his Soueraigne The texte that you cite hereto is not as you cite it auferat regem adeo maluÌ„ de medio populi that may take away so euil a king from among the people but auferte malum ex vobis ipsis take awaye the euill from among you not the Prince from among the people For that were to take away one euill with another And how should this euill be taken awaâ—… Ne commisceamiâ—…i fomicarijs c. be you not mingled together or kepe no familiaritie with fornicators He saith not depriue him of hys life or liuing but be not defiled with his wickednesse And the greatest censure that s. Paule speaketh of is excoÌ„munication pertaining properly not to the goods and bodies but to the soules of men Neither speaketh he there at all of Princes but of priuate men and equals in the Church of Christ whoÌ„â—…e calleth brethren For the Kings and Princes at that time were 〈◊〉 Christened And he speaketh of such as they might lawâ—…y sâ—…un their companie such as Lyra calleth Ribaldes or verlets drunkards whorehunters Idolaters but not such as in the Ciuill polycie they muste néedes obey nor those that were out of the Church of Christ. I haue written to you saith he by an epistle that you should not intermingle your selues with fornicators not vtterly from fornicators of this world or couetous persons or rauenous or worshippers of Images else should ye go out of this world But nowe I haue written to you that ye intermingle not your selues If any which is called a brother be a whoremaister or couetous person or a worshipper of Images or a sclaunderer or a drunkerd or a rauener with suche an one we shoulde not eate meate For what haue I to do to iudge them that are without do not you iudge of them that are within as for those that are without God iudgeth Take away the euill from among you Nowe saith M. Saunders that S. Paule speaketh of taking away so euill a King from among the people and this he setteth downe in distinct letters as though S. Paule had ment the Priests should depose an euill King from gouerning the people Where he speaketh not to the Priestes but to the people and would haue them shunne the company of suche false brethren as were among them But M. Saunders will say doth not this stretch to a king so well as to any other if he be a brother in the faith of Christ I graunt it doth in that he is a brother And if he be infected with such vices hée also is so farre forth to be shunned But not to be shunned in that he is a Prince and gouernor of the people muche lesse the people to forsake their obedience to his authoritie bycause they must forsake their obedience to his vices He maye be so shunned priuately as the publique gouernement be not shunned he may be iudged of the faithfull in their courte of conscience concerning his crime but he maye not be iudged in their Courte of Consistorie concerning his worldly power he maye be taken héede of but not taken awaye he maye be euen excommunicated also by the ministers but not by them deposed bicause howsoeuer he deserueth it yet haue they no authoritie that stretcheth so farre That remedie belongeth not to them but vnto God. But now sir what and if the Prince be not onely no such malefactor but goeth about to resorme these malefactours where as other priuate men can but shunne their companie and the ministers of Christ can but excommunicate them which though it be neuer so great a censure yet they estéeme it not and that the Prince will punishe suche malefactors in their goods and bodies yea and take them awaye from among the people by death banishmente prisonment or otherwise as his office requireth he should do to whom the sworde is giuen against the malefactor what now if it fall oute that the Popishe Priestes be the greatest malefactors in these notorious crimes what if they be not only priuate whore maisters but also publike maynteiners of bankes and stewes for whores and dispisers and restrainers of honorable matrimonie what if the Popish Priests be so couetous and rauenous that they haue gotten almoste the wealth of all Christian kingdomes into their fingrings and are neuer satisfied with deuising naughtie meanes to picke mens money out of their purses what if the Popishe Priests be worshippers of Images and causers of them to be worshipped what if manye of them be common drunkardes and all of them drunken with spirituall drunkennesse which is a great deale worse what if the Popishe Priestes be sclaunderers of those that be in authoritie and woulde take the Kings sworde and Scepter oute of his hande and pull his Diademe off his heade and plucke his roabe from his backe and turne hym quite oute of hys throne and Kingdome and byd hym goe shake hys eares and styrre all hys subiectes to rebellion what if all these and an infinite sorte of other horrible crymes were founde in the Popishe priests themselues oughte not this rule of Sainte Paule to take place on them and all Christians to abhorre and shunne them and all Princes to depose and punishe them Nowe whether the Popishe Priestes be culpable in these crimes or no I thinke the crie of Sodome and Gomorre did not more astende vp to heauen than the crie of the Popishe Priests abhomination resoundeth in all the earth And thus this sentence that Maister Saunders thought to wrest against Princes if it be well examined falleth more out against the Priests themselues As for the other two sentences Iohn 21. Math. 16. are no lesse wrested herevnto VVe must beleue sayth he that this power to take away the Prince and giue his Kingdome to a better â–ª is grauÌ„ted at the least to the chief pastor of the Church in these wordes feede my sheepe and whatsoeuer thou bindest in earth shall be bound in heauen also In so muche that the chiefe pastor maye not onely excommunicate a wicked King but also set free his subiectes from all obedience of him And finde you this in these two sentences Maister Saunders we must beleeue it say you that this
of Christe for Ieremie is interpreted the highe one of the Lorde who destroyed the kingdomes of the Diuell whiche he shewed vnto him on the toppe of the Mountayne hee destroyed the aduersarie powers blotting out the handewriting of errour in his Crosse. Of whome nexte to the hystoricall truthe it is sayde in a figure VVherefore did the Nations frette and the people imagine vayne thinges the Kinges of the earthe stoode vp and the Princes came togither in one In the place of all these beeing destroyed loste and pulled downe into hell the Churche of God is builded vp and planted Thus saith your owne Glosse in applying this sentence from Ieremie to Christe concerning Christes pulling downe and setting vp of kingdomes And on this wyse oughte the Ministers of Christe to pull downe and set vp kingdomes that is with the sworde of Gods worde to beate down â–ª the power of Sathan the kingdome of errour the buylding on the sandes the workes of sinne to roote vp vices and to beate downe as S. Paule termeth them all strong holdes resisting the truthe of God and to set vp the kingdome of Christ to edifie his Church to builde vpon the rocke to plante vertues and by doctrine and ensample enstruct the faythfull people And so dothe youre owne Glosse interprete it Vt euellas mala destruas regna Diaboli That thou shouldest pull vp euils and destroy the Kingdomes of the Diuell c. and shouldest edifie the Churche Wherevpon saythe the Glosse To foure heauie thinges two ioyfull thynges succeede for neyther can good thinges be buylded except the euill thinges be destroyed neither can the best thinges be planted excepte the worste thinges be rooted vp For euery plante that my heauenly father hathe not planted shall be pulled vp by the rootes and that buylding whiche is not buylded on the rocke but vpon the sandes is digged vp and destroyed with the worde of god But that which the Lorde shall consume with the spirite of his mouthe that is all sacrilegious and peruerse doctrine he shall destroy it for euer and those things that lifte vp them selues agaynst the kingdome of God and truste in their wisedome VVhiche before God is foolishnesse he shall scatter and put them downe that for these the humble thinges mighte be edified And in place of the former thinges that are destroyed and pulled vp those things may be buylded and planted that are conuenient to the ecclesiastical truth of whom it is saide you are the buylding of God you are the tilth of God. Héere M. sand euen by your owne glosse is described what this building and pulling downe is that belongeth to the ministers of Christ so farre vnlike your Popishe buylding that it sheweth the ouerthrowe and rooting vp of your plantes and buylding and howe your kingdome shall vtterly be destroyed In the ouerthrowing of whiche munitions and buylding the truth of God the ministers of Christ muste so set themselues agaynst all worldly kingdomes that fearing not their mighte and tyrannie agaynst the truthe they ouercome them As God sayde to Ieremie Girde vp thy loynes and arise and speake vnto them all those thinges that I commaunde thee Feare not their faces for I wil make thee not to feare their faces For I haue made thee this day a strong citie and an yron piller and a brasen wall ouer al the lande to the Kings of Iuda and to the Princes therof and to the Priests and to the people thereof and they shall not preuaile for I am with thee saithe the Lorde and wil deliuer thee If the kinges of Iuda sayth the Glosse whiche is interpreted confession and the Princes and Priestes and people of it to witte the Bishops the Priestes and Deacons and the vile and vnnoble vulgar people will arise agaynst an holy man let him haue a strong faithe and feare not let him trust in God and he shall conquere them Héere is the conquest of these kingdomes whereby the true Ministers of God shall ouercome all Kings and Princes all Bishops Priestes and Deacons and all the people that resist them But this is as farre from deposing kings from their estates from ruling possessing and translating earthly kingdomes as you that séeke after all these things are farre from Ieremies from Christes and from his Ministers conquests But sayth M. Saunders the Protestantes who can not suffer that the fleshe giue place vnto the spirite or the temporall kingdome to the spirituall for euery where they fauour too muche the fleshe and the worlde before all thinges they alleage agaynst vs the saying of Christe my kingdome is not of this worlde we muste see therefore what Christe in those wordes woulde haue vnderstoode For the Protestantes wrest them hitherto as thoughe the Ministers of the Church of Christ which is the kingdom of God may haue at any time no power ouer Christian Princes or ouer their earthly kingdomes and causes subiect to them bicause the kingdome of Christ himselfe is not of this worlde But in this thing they are too fouly deceyued For it is another thing â–ª not to be of this worlde and farre another thing that the Christian kingdome that is in this world shoulde not be subiect to Christ and to the Ministers of christ VVhen Christ denieth his kingdome to be of this worlde either by the name of this world is vnderstoode sinne and the tyrannie of sinne and the masse of the reprobate as the Lorde otherwhere faithe you are not of the worlde if you were of the worlde the world would loue his owne but I haue chosen you out of the worlde or else by the name of the worlde is vnderstoode all this visible creature whereof the faythfull also are parte so long as they liue heere If therefore by the worlde we vnderstand darknesse and sinne and the reprobates of this world certaine it is the kingdome of Christ is by no meanes of this world bicause all the kingdome of Christe is lighte and darknesse is not in his kingdome who lightneth euery man comming into this worlde But if by the worlde we meane the visible creatures and among them compreheÌ„d the Churche of God verily â—…e denieth not that those creatures are subiect vnto him or that these temporal kingdomes that beleeue in him are comprehended vnder his eternall kingdome But he denieth that his kingdome is from hence that is to say taketh his originall of this world as other kingdomes are wonte to do For the kingdome of Christe sâ—…rang not from the law of nations as other kingdomes do but from the diuine and naturall yea and from the supernatural lawe VVherevpon Augustine marked that Christe saide not my kingdome is not heere but it is not from hence for in the worlde it is but of the â—…orlde it is not but of heauen Héere M. sand hauing as he thinketh confirmed his opinion will now assay to confute our obiection agaynst it And to this purpose
he chooseth out the saying of Christ is Pilate My kingdome is not of this world This he saith we alleage before all things I omit his sclanders that we can not suffer â–ª that the flesh should giue place to the spirit that the spiritual Kingdome should rule the temporal and that we fauour to much the fleshe and the worlde All whiche are but méere sclanders and do fitter serue to reâ—…urne vpon the Papists But let vs come to his answere of this obiectioÌ„ which I graunt is one of our obiections vnto them althoughe not as he saythe the chiefe obiection but suche an one as master Sanders with all his shiftes is not able directly to answer to it First what a worldly kingdome the Pope séeketh and possesseth is apparant in so muche that fewe worldly Kingdomes in worldly mighte and glorie are comparable vnto it Although God be praysed it decayeth dayly notwithstanding al his practises to repayre and vndershore the ruines therof Against this his worldly kingdome we obiect that sithe he pretendes to be the Uicar of Christ and Christ statly denieth his kingdome to be such a worldly kingdome if the Pope he his Minister he can not clayme nor enioy suche a worldly kingdome What fetche now can M. Sand. findâ—… or any in all the worlde to elude this playne argument we must sayth he distinguish of this worde the worlde â–ª which somtime signifieth sâ—…ne darknesse and the reprobate In this sense Christes Kingdome is not of the world Sometimes the worlde signifieth all visible creatures and in this sense it is in the worlde though it be not of the world that is it hathe not his originall of the world but from god But this hindreth not but that beeing in the world worldly kingdomes may be subiect to it And so we sor not marking these distinctions are fâ—…ly deceiued Whether we be deceyued or you M. Sanders or whether we or you would deceiue others all the worlde easily may perceiue We admitte your distinction of beeing in the 〈◊〉 but not of the worlde Neyther disallowe we your significations of the worlde althoughe subtilly you conceale those significations thereof that it oughte to haue béene further distinguished into For the worlde signifieth often times the glorie mighte riches power and pleasures of worldly thinges especially when this worde Kingdome is ioyned to it And this is the very natural sense of a worldly kingdome that is to say a state in or of the worlde excelliâ—… in these worldly thinges Nowe this which is the very naturall sense you â—…yde and runne about the 〈◊〉 with this and that signification to carrie the readers 〈◊〉 awâ—… â–ª from the proper signification of it We denie not that the kyngdome of Christe is in this worlde neyther denie wée that Christian kinges oughte to submitte them selues vnto it But we denie that thys kingdome stretcheth to the worldly gouernment and possession of kingdomes or Realmes to the deposing of Kings and translating the states of Polycies whiche is the proper question now in hande And to shewe that this sentence of Christe without all shifting or shuffling is simply and playnely thus to be vnderstoode I will desire none other besides S. Augustine whome you cite and the auncient Fathers than euen the Papists own iudgements and interpretations on this sentence My kingdome is not of this worlde whiche the Glosse expoundeth thus Quasi decepti estis c. As though he should say ye are deceiued for I hinder not your gouernment in the worlde And so sayth Lyra Non quaerit c. He seeketh not the temporall gouernment of this worlde c. My kingdome is not from hence that is to say so farre as appertaineth to gette these temporall things But agaynst this seemeth that which is sayd in the Psalme 46. God is the King of all the earth but he is very God as he is very man therefore his kingdome is of this worlde VVe must say that according to the veritie of his diuinitie all thinges are subiect vnto Christe notwithstanding so farre as appertayneth to his humanitie he came not in his first comming to gouerne temporally but rather to serue suffer And so it appeareth that he sufficiently excludeth that that was laide to his charge of vsurping the kingdome of Iewry bicause there was no question of him but in that that he was man and for the present state that he was in whiche appertayned to his first comming Ferus expounding this saying My kingdome is not of this worlde Quasi diceret c â–ª As though sayth he he shoulde say I graunt O Pilate and acknowledge my selfe to be a King this is euen that that I haue done this is that crime that is laide vnto me Howbeit vnderstand this thing aright I am in deede a king but so that I neither vsurpe not diminish the power of thy Keysar nor expell any of the Kings or Princes froÌ„ their power or dominioÌ„s And that thou mayst vnderstande the matter it selfe I am not a worldly king but an heauenly in whose handes are the hartes of all Kings although it seeme not so to thee My kingdome that is my principalitie or administration or my kingdome that is my lawes and rightes or my kingdome that is my ministers and subiects is not of this worlde that is not of man but of god I saith he am of him made King ouer his holy mount To conclude it is not of this worlde that is it is not temporall but eternall for the world and the lust therof doth passe away Besides this it is not of this world bycause it is not corporall but spirituall and is administred after another sorte than is a worldly kingdome For this is administred with a materiall sword but my kingdome hath no neede of this sword for the sword therof is the word of god The kingdome of the worlde hath Cities Towers Townes Villages Armies Armor my kingdome requireth onely the harts of men The world ruleth the goods and the bodyes but I rule the hartes and the consciences The world ruleth with a carnall power but it yeeldeth to the spirituall but I rule spiritually against sinne death and hell Thou seest how beautifully Christ describeth his kingdom After the same maner almost doth Zacharias speake of the kingdome of Christe Beholde thy King commeth vnto thee meeke and poore c. Howbeit we must marke that he saith not my kingdome is not in this world For Christ also is the Lorde of the world for all things were made by him all power is giuen to him in heauen and earth now if the kingdome of Christ be not of this world then it followeth that there is yet another worlde And therfore although thou seest not the promises of Christ fulfilled in this world yet despaire not for there is another world in the which is fulfilled whatsoeuer here is not fulfilled Againe bicause the kingdome of Christ is not of this world
we are bidden to pray let thy kingdome come In this first word therefore Christ deliuereth Pilate from all feare moreouer by this example proueth himselfe to wit that he is cleare from desiring the Imperiall or kingly power If saith he my kingdom were of this world â–ª I would not lead vnarmed Disciples about with me but armed yea I would haue counsellours souldiors armies c. who in this my necessitie should with swerdâ—… defende me as their Lord yea offring themselues to death for me Or if I coueted a worldly Kingdome eyther the Angels should defend me from the violence of the Iewes or rather I would haue nede neither of Angels nor of men for my right hand should be able to helpe me c. Of these things therefore Christ concludeth but nowe my kingdome is not from hence Out of which argument persuade thy selfe moste certainly that my kingdom is not of this world VVhatsoeuer thou or thy Emperor hath it shall for me remaine whole vnto you I desire none of your things I regarde not the glorye and riches of the worlde that you esteeme for the greatest goods These things truely were spoken to Pilate but they pertaine to vs For if the kingdome of Christ be not from hence what dost thou ChristiaÌ„ seke for riches and honors of this world if the kingdome of Christ be not of this world Christians therfore ought to haue tribulatioÌ„ in this world while in Christ they haue the peace of conscience maruell not therfore froÌ„ whence so many troubles happen to the godly in the world And with this word the godly man ought to comfort himselfe in aduersitie and say my kingdome is not from hence Besides this if the kingdome of Christe be not from hence then erre they that set the kingdome of Christe in outwarde things and elementes of the world â–ª c. Thus doth your owne frier Ferus expound this sentence that the kingdome of Christ is not in such power royaltie as worldly kingdomes are nor diminisheth deposeth nor taketh away from kings their kingdomes And thus doth Ludolphus gather out of Chrisostome and other auncient fathers Nihil denique monstrauit tale c. To conclude he neuer shewed any suche thing He neither had souldiers nor Princes nor horses nor burden of mules â–ª nor anye suche thing about him But he led this lyfe humble and poore carying aboute with him 12. base men Accordyng to his diuinitie all things were subiect to Christ howbeit as touching his humanitie in his first comming he came not to rule temporally to raigne but rather to serue and suffer VVherevpon he denieth not that he is a King but rather graunteth it Bicause according to the truth he was the King of Kingâ—… but yet to take awaye occasion of escaping he tempereth his aunswere saying that he seeketh not the temporall dominion of this worlde bycause his Kingdome is not of this world so farre as toucheth the seeking and hauing these temporal things and therfore his kingdome was neither against the Iewes nor the Romaines nor hindred their authoritie bycause they only regarded an earthly Kingdome that is of this worlde As thoughe he saide to them ye are deceyued I hinder not your Empyre in this world least vainly ye should feare and rage but come ye to the heauenly kingdome by beleuing that is not of this worlde to the which by preaching I inuite you Christe saide my Kingdome is not of this world but yet notwithstanding many Prelates which are his vicars seme in their doyng to say the contrarie in pompes making themselues equall to Princes or rather exceeding them Thus saith agayne your Monke Ludolphus and withall hitteth your Pope for his more than worldly kingdome For whereto else tendeth all this drift but that the Pope ruling all Christian Kingdomes pretending a spirituall Kingdome of Christ might get a carnall kingdome to himselfe As for Saint Augustine who you saye marked that Christe saide not â–ª my Kingdome is not here but it is not froÌ„ hence if you Maister Stapleton also had marked this in Saint Augustines exposition on thys sentence Audite Iudei c. Heare O ye Iewe and Gentiles heare O thou Circumcised heare O thou vncircumcised heare O ye earthly kingdomes I hinder not your rule in this world you might haue marked with all that althoughe his kingdome be here in this worlde yet is it not onely not of the world â–ª but also not a worldly kingdome nor hindreth their gouernment which it shuld do if it might depose and alter them Thus we sée S. Augustines minde was not that the kingdome of Christe dispossesseth Kings or any estates of men of their possessions and temporall goods wherto M. Saunders applieth him and also that by S. Augustines and by his owne Friers Iudgementes this sentence is aptly obiected of vs against that kingdome that the Pope claimeth vsurpeth in the name of the Kingdome of Christ. Neither can all M. Saunders elusions shift off the force of our obiection Neither doth this auaile that he saith by the world is ment darknesse sinne and the reprobate True it is the worlde many times signifieth all these things But what helpeth this when euen the Popish kingdome as an euident token of reprobation not onely committeth but maintaineth most abhominable sinnes and the darknesse of ignorance is their chiefest couer Howbeit the pride and tyrannie of the Popes earthly kingdome was so apparant that euen themselues crie out vpon it But nowe to M. Saunders And although Christe be borne of the Virgin beyonde the course of nature yet notwithstanding he is both verie man was verily borne and by nature he ought to be the King and Prince of all who in things of that kinde is the first and onely I like their sentence very well who teach that Christ in that he is man is the true King and Monarch of all mankinde although his kingdome be not such an one that he euer mingled himselfe in earthly things except whereas they might be profitable to a spirituall ende As you like verie well of these mens sentence so you haue heard the iudgement of your owne side to the contrarie that Christ as he is man by his first comming toke no Monarchie nor Kingdome vpon him but a spirituall kingdome belonging to his diuinitie Althoughe I doe not mislike theyr sentence neither that referre also the kingdome of Christe vnto his humanitie so that they referre not as you do an humaine kingdome to it He is very man we graunt althoughe you in the doctrine of transubstantiation to confound the veritie of his manhoode he was also verily borne and is the only chiefe of al that are borne and he was borne of the stem of vvorldly Kings also and he was truely called euen by his parentage the King of the Ievves but bycause his kingdome consisted not in that he was not borne to be suche a king And this appeareth euen
of Christe in that he is man for they haue not receiued the vvhole povver of Christe to administer it but that part that properly belongeth to beleeuers For it vvas sayde vnto the first Pastor feede not all men but my sheepe and to thee I giue the keyes not of all the vvorlde but of the kingdome of heauen Sithe therefore Christe hath receiued a certaine celestiall kingdome vvhich kingdome vseth also earthly things vnto the glorie of God and sith out of the things of the vvorld he hath chosen a certaine societie of men vvhiche in a certain especial sort vvorshippeth God in faith and loue in this onely seconde kynde of things Christe hath ordeined Pastors to be his Vicars You say that ye say not these things to shevve that herevpon povver is giuen to Byshops ouer al the vniuersal world But what soeuer you say your Pope saith contrarie applying this saying of Christe to himselfe and his successors all povver is giuen to me in heauen and in earth You say that Byshops haue onely that povver that properly belongeth to the beleeuers bycause Christe sayde vnto the firste Pastor feede not all men but my sheepe That Peter was the firste Pastor is another question Master Saunders But that the the Apostles had not in charge to go and preach to those that were not beleeuers yea to all men so farre as they could besides the feeding of them that were beleeuers and so were become alreadie the shéepe of the folde of Christe is a manifest vntruth For the Apostles had this generall charge goe ye into all the vvorlde and preach the Gospell to euery creature So that they fedde besides the faithfull the Infidels dispersed through out the whole world for those Christe also calleth his bycause they shoulde be his shéepe alias oues babeo c. I haue also other sheepe that are not of this folde those must I bring also c. But whereto run you to this so euident falshood forsooth to proue that the Byshops haue ful power ouer al the beleeuers in a their earthly possessions so might haue power to depose Kings to occupie their king doms sease vpoÌ„ al mens goods that are Christians bycause they are their Pastors And to this purpose is it that you say Christe hath receiued a certaine celestiall kingdome vvhiche vseth also all earthly things vnto the glorie of God. Whiche saying in this sense may well be graunted the kingdome of Christe vseth all earthly thinges that it vseth to the glorie of God but this woulde be proued that the Kingdome of Christe vseth by the administration of the spirituall ministers thereof a vvorldly or earthly kingdome which vse is so far from the glorie of God that it is contrarie to his celestial kingdome Whiche consisteth as you say in feeding the sheepe of Christe in the keyes of Gods worde and in that especiall sort of vvorshipping God in faith and loue and not in deposing kings or gouerning of earthly kingdomes wherin they can not be as you terme them Vicars or deputies of Christ sith Christ the King neither tooke himselfe such vse of power vpoÌ„ him flatly forbad the same vnto his Ministers Therefore the vvhole kingdome of Christe came from heauen that is from the dignitie vvhich is giuen vnto his humaine nature for the vnion of the Diuine nature Neither by any meanes the kingdome of him drue his originall from the lavve of nations or the ciuile For hee refused to be created King or to deuide the inheritance betwene the brethren saying vvho hath made me a Iudge or deuider ouer you As though he shoulde say neither the common vveale neither the Emperor hath made me a Iudge yet notwithstanding these brethren thought of such a Iudge But in that part that Christe vvas appointed of God to be Iudge by his incarnation concerning that he saide vnto those brethren bevvare of all couetousnesse For he savv that they draue not their inheritance to a spirituall ende that they might beare the heauenly iudgement of Christe This is a shamefull wresting of the Scripture and inuerting of the manifest doings of our Sauiour Here are two other plaine examples of Christ against Master Saunders the one of his refusall to be a vvorldly King the other to be a'vvorldly Iudge The former he shifteth off in this sortâ—… Christ would not receiue an earthly kingdom into his hands not bycause he would none of it but bycause he woulde not take it of their gifte least it shoulde séeme to come of them For his kingdome is of heauen and notin the originall from the lavv of nations or of the ciuile As though our disputatioÌ„ were so much of the originall as of the vse and hauing of it as though Christe respected nothing but the originall or as though if he woulde haue had such a kingdome he could not haue had it if they had not giuen it him or as thoughe euen the first original of earthly kingdomes came not from God also But to confute you with your owne mouthes I will cite once againe Frier Ferus againste you that alledgeth not onely this cause of the originall but many other causes directly to this purpose Christe fled saithe he bycause he receiued not a kingdome of men but gaue a kingdome vnto men He fled bycause his kingdome is not of this vvorld it is not carnall it consisteth not in externall riches povver pompe c. Yea he rather came that he might teach to contemne these things But his kingdom is a kingdome of truth iustice peace and eternall life For although he gouerne in all the vvorlde yet hee gouerneth not after the manner of the vvorlde nor he affecteth suche a kingdome He sâ—…edde therefore not bycause he vvoulde not raigne ouer the faithfull but bycause he deferreth the expresse tokens of reigning for the time to come Hee sledde bycause hee came to minister not that it shoulde be ministred vnto hym Hee fledde for hee came not to kill Kings but to preach to Kings the knovvledge of raigning iustly not to presse the kingdomes of the world vvith tributes and taxes but that vvhich Kings so vvell as the people vvanted to giue them giftes of life eternall out of the treasure of the kingdome of heauen going about to vanquishe in vvarre a farre other manner of ennimie than Tiberius Caesar and to take an other manner of beaste than Rome vvhyche at that tyme vvas Ladie of the Ievves Besides this hee fledde that he vvoulde not giue to the people an occasion of sedition against Caesar and so vvithall an occasion of sinne and perdition For hee that moueth sedition againste the povver as héere in your writing you M. Sand â–ª do and your Pope doth in his Bulles against Christian Princes sinneth and iustly perisheth for it VVhich Christe himselfe hath spoken he that taketh the svvorde shall perishe vvith the svvorde To conclude he fled least hee should
he woulde then haue broken his No M. Saund â–ª that was not the cause why Christ refused to iudge y matter but bicause he counted it no part of his office neither was he appointed of God therto but it belongeth to the Ciuill Magistrate As for suche iudgement as vydding the brethren to beware of couetousnesse was in dede appointed of God to Christ of him to al his Ministers to iudge of vices in such sort as by preaching to them their â—…ties to iudge of all estates of all things also Neither is all â—…on of Ciuil controuersiâ—…s or iudging temporal matters â—…ply debarred from the spiritual Minister nor the vse of temporall things But that the kingdome of Christ confisâ—…es in these things or that the ministers of Christ be in such Ciâ—…ill iudgements aboue Kings or may iudge â–ª Kings giue their inheritance from them or if they haue any authoritie too in Ciuil matters that it is properly by their office or beloÌ„ging properly to Christes kingdome and that they haue it not froÌ„ the Prince â–ª is cleane confuted by this example Neither can all these shiftes defeate it much lesse that that followeth in M. Saunders saying Declaring therefore to what ende all things that are in the worlde ought to be reâ—…rred seke saith he the kingdome of God al these things shal be cast vnto you VVhere he denyeth not that euen worlldy things pertaine to the kingdome of God but he would not haue those sought for themselues but onely for the kingdome of god But the kingdome that beleueth in Christ it hath left in that parte to be of the worlde in which part Christ denied his kingdome to be of this worlde VVhatsoeuer saith S. Augustine is from henceforth regenerate in Christ is made a kingdome not now of the world That all things oughte to be referred to the kingdome of God we graunt but that the kingdome of God consisteâ—… in all things we denie Meate drinke ought to be referred to the kingdom of God whether ye eate or drink saith S. Paule oâ—… whatsoeuer ye do â–ª do it all to the praise glory of God but the kingdome of God is not meate and drinke Yoâ—… say worldly things pertaine to the Kingdome of God. Which although it is much better said than that the kingdome shoulde appertaine to worldly things as the Papists here would drine it to the state of a worldly kingdome yet is it but an improper saying that worldly things belong to the kingdome of God. In dede the faithfull which are the kingdome of God haue them and they belong vnto them and they are necessarie and conuenient for them as meate drinke cloath house fire water proprietie and possession of temporall worldly goods to each faithfull man in his degree and also to the ministers of the Church of Christ that to haue these worldly things belonging to them according as their giftes and trauailes require with dubble honor yet do they not belong vnto them nor to any of the faithfull as he is a member of this kingdome but as he is a man and subiect to infirmities and these giftes of God are made for his vse so well the ministers as anye others But yet there is a difference in the hauing of these worldly things and the being a Prince in the hauing of theÌ„ for such Princely hauing of them is expresly forbidden vnto the spirituall minister of Christe and permitted onely vnto the Ciuill Magistrate The Pope and his Prelates will not onely haue them but they will be kings and excell kings in the hauing of them and will haue them in the name of the Church and of the kingdome of Christe and not as from the Prince to whose authoritie properly although not to whose proprietie they belong for the minister may haue the proprietie of those worldly things so well as another and perhaps better than many another more abundance of them too with which he may do more goodsundry wayes than diuers other in Gods Church But there is a difference betwene starke â—…aring â–ª and starke blind Therâ—… are some cormorants that hunt for the spoiâ—…e and wold haue the ministers earthly things cleane taken from them as though they were onely spirituall The Papistes on the other side were not only contâ—…t to haue them but they would besides their to muche excesse of them be exempted with priuileges from the Princes authoritie in the hauing of them and the Pope did clayme not onely a kingdome of them but that al kinges helde their kingdomes of him And this is the thing that we denie the Papistes For Christe hathe playne debarred it and denied his kingdome to be a worldly kingdome Yea but sayth M. Sanders in that parte that a kingdome beleeueth in Christ it hath left off to be of this world â–ª We graunt you M. Sanders in respecte of the beleefe in Christe and the soule that beleeueth but yet hathe it not left off to be of this world in respect of the body in respect of the ciuill gouernment in respect of hauing and vsing orderly Gods creatures in respecte of maynteining our liues our goodes our families our countreys all which earthly thinges the kingdome of God that is the faythfullâ—… may enioy and haue farre better vse of them than any other referring them to spirituall endes howbeit euery man in his degrée suche earthly thinges as are competent to his estate and are not debarred from his vse as the hauing of an earthly kingdome is from the spirituall Minister As for the sentence of S. Augustine is not to this purpose but wrested therto for he speaketh not there of a kingdome as we héere do that is to say of a ciuill power gouerning a Realme or of a Realme and Polycie gouerned by a King as thoughe bicause it receiued the fayth oâ—… Christ it were not of the worlde that is it were not gouerned after a worldly maner In whiche sense as we haue shewed Christe denied his kingdome to be of the worlde For although it be become a faythfull kingdome â–ª yet maynteyneth it still the former state which is noâ—… dissâ—…lued by the kingdome of Christ but rather bettered and confirmed Of whiâ—…he estate S. Augustine there speaketh not His words are these Therefore they were of the world when they were not of his kingdome but pertayned to the prince of the worlde That therfore is of the worlde whatsoeuer is in deede created of the true God but is borne of the corrupted and damned stocke of Adam But that which is regenerate in Christe is made a kingdome now not of the worlde for so God hathe pulled vs out of the power of darknesse and translated vs into the kingdome of the sonne of his brightnesse By whiche sentence it appeareth he speaketh not of the worlde in the sense of the mighte and glorie thereof but in the sense of the power of sinne
than God permitteth but also by force and agaynst the consent of bothe the parties seuered those that God hathe ioyned and ioyned those that God hath forbidden to be ioyned Dothe not the Pope maynteine the greatest vsuries that be to wit the Iewes to pill and poll the Christians and al for his own lucre besides his most filthy and vnlawfull gayne by fornication Doth not the Pope by the abuse of the sword keyes that he saith he carrieth carrie away the Christian citizens into most greeuous sinnes yea and say he may carrie away with him at the world to the diuel no maÌ„ must be so hardie as to say sir why do you thus Shal it now be a wicked deede to remoue the Pope from the felowship of the faithful after one or two admonitions then if he amend not him selfe that all Christian Princes helpe to expell him vtterly froÌ„ the vsurpation of this his worldly kingdome But M. Sa. not séeing these vices in his holy father surmising the worst in Princes supposeth we will answere his obiection thus But one wil say no power is giueÌ„ vnto the Church of punishing or of remouing the kings froÌ„ their office therfore if the kings wil not of their own accord be ameÌ„ded they are altogither to be born withal neither caÌ„ any other thing be lawfully attempted agaynst them This truely do many preache Who they be that preach this I know not I think it but your slaunder Ill will neuer sayde well And yet whosoeso preacheth this preacheth farre better than you do whose sermon is all of treason rebellion As for vs we preache this that the preacher or spirituall pastor may in suche extremities vse a spirituall punishment of denouncing the sentence of Gods wrath agaynst him But to punishe him with bodily punishment or with expelling him from his kingdome is no more belonging to the Bishop than to put him to death The state of some kingdomes are such I grauÌ„t that the Princes regiment is but conditional and he so wel bounde to the electors of him other péeres or estates in his Signiorie as they to him and either parties sworne in his Coronation not onely to obserue those conditions but to persecute or remoue the violater of them In suche cases what those Electors Péeres Estates may do howe they may or may not do it is an other matter But that eueÌ„ in these estates the Bishops caÌ„ do it do it in that they are Bishops this we denie M. Sand and as yet you haue not proued it But I doubte not but that euery necessarie and profitable power is giuen to the Pastor ouer his sheepe whether they be lambes or lambes dammes or rammes and that to this purpose that he shoulde strengthen that that is weake that he should heale that that is sicke that he shoulde binde vp that that is broken that he should bring againe that that is caste away that he should seeke that that is loste so that he rule not with austeritie and power You doubt not M. sand but I doubt of this that euery necessarie and profitable power is giuen to the Pastor ouer his sheepe The eccl. power is both necessarie and profitable But the Prince is a pastor and the people are his sheepe And yet by your owne confession the ecclesiasticall power is not giuen to the Prince Had you marked this you mighte haue doubted that euery necessarie and profitable power is giuen to the pastor ouer his sheepe Agayne the power of the sworde and putting to death malefactors is a necessarie and profitable power But the Bishop is a pastor and the people are his sheepe And yet by your own confession the power of the sworde and putting to death is not giuen to the Bishop Had you séene this also you might haue doubted that euery necessarie and profitable power is giuen to the Pastor ouer his sheepe This lacke of doubting made you toâ—… rashe of déeming and to pronounce your sentence ouer general And as you sée in these two cases a flatte exception that you wil gladly reuoke so we muste driue you to graunte the other powers also pertayning to a King whiche notwithstanding they are necessarie and profitable are yet not giuen vnto a Bishop although he be a Pastor I pray you remember Vos autem non sic if it will not make you sicke to remember it The duties of good pastors that you cite out of Ezech. 34. God we graunt hath giuen them power thereto But the Popish pastors are as farre froÌ„ all these points much farther than the Iewishe pastors were of whome the Lorde coÌ„playneth saying VVo be to the pastors of Israel that feed theÌ„selues are not â—…he sheepe fed of the shepherds ye did eate the milk were clad with the wol â–ª that that was fat ye killed but my flock ye fed not â–ª that that was weak ye streÌ„gthned not that that was sick ye healed not that that was brokeÌ„ ye bouÌ„d not vp that that was cast away ye brought not in that that was lost ye sought not but ye ruled them with bitternesse with power how this directly toucheth the Pope and his Prelates euen the popish enterlined Glosse doth testifie Hoc proprie c. This properly is spoken of the pride of Bishops which shame with their works the dignitie of their name for humilitie taking pride who thinke they haue gotten heauen and not a burthen Whose loytring idlenesse whose vaine glorious pride whose bitter tyrannie more than kingly power was so intollerable that it was maruell that euer you durst for shame recite this place But you thought it serued to your purpose that you might vnder the name of sheepe punishe driue out Princes at your pleasures But this place giueth not Pastors power to weaken them that be strong to make them sicke that be hole to breake that that is bound vp to caste out that that is brought in to leese that that was sought for to kil deuour both the fat the leane both the Prince the people to rule with biâ—…ternesse with power al which by your popes practise is don by your exposition is defended For is not that to rule with bitternesse if ye expel your Princes froÌ„ their kingdomes can ye be any bitterer to them what earthly power can ye clayme higher than to seaze vpoÌ„ rule their kingdomes or to haue theÌ„ rule them after your rules whom you will appoynt to â—…olde them in chiefe froÌ„ you This place of Ezechiell giueth you not suche power but condemneth in Pastors the vsurpation of it But what will not impudencie wrest to serue his turne Moreouer to the minde and to reason power is giuen ouer all the members of the body insomuche that it biddeth that rotten member to be â—…ut from the body of the which it may be feared least it should infect the other members
also and the spirituall power to be greater than the earthly power and that the spirituall power may spiritually punish the resisters of it But that the ordinary spirituall power of the Priests or Prophets may depose the ordinary secular power of Kings Princes that the pastors spiritual sword may strike the secular sworde out of the Magistrates hande to whome it is of God committed that the spiritual power may of his own nature punish Princes with bodily punishment and take their state and kingdomes from them and cause their subiects to rebel agaynst them This we vtterly denie and this is the very question Now héerto is alleahed the facte of Elias sitting in the mount who prayed to God that fire might consume the wicked kings messangers that derided the Prophets and would by force haue setched him to the king To this I answere first for this king he resembleth no protestant Prince but rather the popish Princes who not onely beeing sicke as Ochozias was but also in healthe as thoughe there were no God in Israell séeke not to the onely liuing Lorde to Christ the onely sauiour and mediatour but to Idols as Ochozias did to Eeelzebub and woulde murther the Prophets of God that reproue them for it as Elias did Secondly for Elias he sat not on the toppe of the mountaine to signifie the chiefest place of the church which chiefest place he tooke not vpon him And do not your selfe ascribe the chiefest place of the Church to the highe Priest or Bishop Or was the Prophet theÌ„ aboue the chiefe Priest or intruded he into the high Priests place or were both in the chiefest place and so your Pope claymes the chiefest place of the church from both of them True it is that in his time Elias was the chiefest instrument that God vsed in the râ—…formation of the Church yet neither tooke he vpon him the chiefest place of the Churche nor exalted him selfe aboue the king nor deposed him or his father or any other prince howe wicked soeuer they were nor incited other to rebell agaynst them And this you should proue that Elias did or else ye stray from your question Thirdly for this facte of Elias I answere as before It is no ensample for vs to followe the like Neither did Elias vse it ordinarily in his defence but vpon especiall occasion God by his iustice defended thus his Prophet and reuenged the contumelie wherwith they scorned not onely him but God in destroying those wicked deriders after suche a terrible miraculous sorte Not for that they were the kings ministers but for that they assented to the kinges crueltie and besides béeing Idolaters they scorned the power of God in him in calling him in derision The man of God. For so sayth Lyra Cognouit autem c. Elias knewe by reuelation that in mockage he called him the man of God and was consenting to the king in the sinne of Idolatry and in the punishment of Elias and likewise they that were with him and that herevpon by the sentence of God they were to be punished for the which cause he pronounced the diuine sentence So that the striker héere was God Elias onely pronounced the sentence of Gods iustice Neither dyd he any thing héerein but by the especiall motion of god He woulde not come downe as master Saunders therein saythe true no not at the moste humble entreatie of the thirde Captayne tyll the Angell of GOD badde hym not feare but goe downe Wherevpon saythe Caietane Vide actiones Eliae c. See the actions of Elias are gouerned by the Angels direction in euery poynt that is to saye so well his outwarde as his inwarde motions Wherby we may sée that he did not this facte by any ordinarie iurisdiction of his Propheticall office but by the especiall direction of God whiche can not nor oughte to be drawne into example for other to do or wishe the like Fourthly this example to follow Elias héerein is of all other flatly forbidden to the Disciples of christ For when the Samaritanes would not receiue Christ into their Citie Iames and Ioâ—…n sayde Lorde wilâ—…e thou that we commaunde that fire come downe from heauen and consume them euen as Elias did But Iesus turned about aâ—…d rebuked them and sayde ye knowe not of what spirite you are For the sonne of man is not come to destroy mens liues but to saue them Nowe this example of the seuere iustice of God thus desired of them and they reproued by Christ for desiring the lyke M. Sanders resumeth for his Bishops authoritie Wherby it appeareth he knoweth not of what spirite Christian Bishops ought to be and that Popishe Bishops are of another spirite than Christ is of For Christ came not to kill Princes to fire their townes to burne their people and depose Kinges from their kingdomes to whiche drifte all this is spoken Lastly I denie this drift consequence of the example Elias prayed that fire might consume them from heauen Ergo Christian Bishops ought to take away the corporall goodes of Hereticall and Schismatical Princes If the conclusion had béene thus Ergo they mighte pray that God would take their corporal goods away it had béene a more likely and a more tollerable conclusion Howbeit this also is forbidden to pray to haue their corporal goodes taken away It were their dutie rather to pray the they might better vse them that God woulde either conuert them or otherwise at his good pleasure stoppe their tyrannie They ought not to pray for the taking away of any mans goodes much lesse their Soueraignes goods to whoÌ„ your selfâ—… confesse that they them selues are subiect â—…o farre as their goods and bodies And then be they not ouer the goodes and bodies of their Princes béeing their subiectes least of all ought they either by theÌ„selues or by any other to take their Princes goods and bodies from them For that is not a subiects but a traitors and a rebels part But saith M. Saunders they may take his bodily goods from their King so they doe it debito modo ordine after a due maner and order He told vs thus before but it is cleane beyond all good maâ—…er against al due order to take away any mannes goods chiefely the Princes yea and that the Bishops or priests to do it The example of S. Ambrose complaining that the Emperor misâ—…sed him is cleane against M. Saund that alleageth it for him For S. Ambrose tooke not the Emperors goods away nor deposed him nor caused other to rebell against him but for all the Emperors missusage of him he continued stil in his obedience to the Emperor Howbeit he told the Emperor of his dutie and so should al godly Bishops do and not attempte to depose their Princes nor to stirre vp other to depose them Let vs now put the case saith M. SauÌ„ders that some man which was a Prince was present with Elias
apply it saying How much more shall there not want at this day that will not suffer him to liue whom they shall perceiue will not obey the commaundement of the highest Priest. And as you put this in distinct letters so you quote for it Deut. 17. This place is often alleaged and answered alreadie vnto in M. Stapleton and is so shamefully wrested here by you that if there were no other argument euen the wresting of this propheâ—…ie would argue you to be one of these lying prophetes that should be runne through for abusing the worde of god As thoughe that lawe tooke yet place among vs that was appointed for that time to the Iewes or as though those matters betwéene blood and blood plea and plea plague and plague in causes of controuersie among the Iewes were matters of ReligioÌ„ then or are to be stretched to all matters of faith now or as though those matters were determined by the onely high priest then and not by the iudge and Ciuil Magistrate asking counsel of the Priests and giuing iudgement by his owne authoritie make not rather for the obedience to the Ciuill Magistrates than to the obedience of the Priests or as though Zacharie prophecying of the state after the comming of Christ did meane there should be one chief B. besides Christ whose commaundement all Princes all Bishops al people in Christendome should obey or else they should be thrust through and killed In déede M. Saunders Zacharie speaketh a little before of a pastor that shuld come which liuelie discribeth your Pope And the Lord saith Zacharie said vnto me take yet vnto thee the instrument of a foolishe shepherd For loe I will rayse vp a shepherd in the lande which shall not looke for the thing that is lost nor seke the teÌ„der laÌ„bes nor heale that that is hurt nor feed that that standeth But he shall eate the flesh of the fat and teare their clawes â–ª in pieces O Idoll shepherde that leaueth the flocke the sworde shall be vpon his arme and vpon his right eye his arme shal be cleane dried vp and his right eye shal be vtterly darkned Who exerciseth this tirannie ouer all the people and the Princes too eating them to the bones yea bones and all deposing them destroying them and pilling their kingdomes with insatiable extorsions but the Pope â–ª the Popishe glosses ascribe it to Antichrist but they describe the Popes practises A pastor in the land saith Lyra â–ª that is Antichrist to rule therein that shall not visite the forsaken that is he shall do no worke of Godlynesse but shal be of greatest crueltie towarde the iust and therefore he saith and shall eate the fleshe of the faâ—…e that is by spoyling of their goods and teare their clawes by afflicting and killing them Againe what Pastor may better be called in Idol than this Antichrist the Pope That is called an Idol saith Lyra that is worshipped for God and is not god And so shall it be of Antichrist that shall sitte in the Temple of God as though he were God. 2. Thes 2. O Pastor and Idol saith the Glosse thou arte so wicked that thou shalt not be called a worshipper of Idols but shalt be called an Idol while thou wilt be worshipped of men VVho leauest the flock to be denoured of beastes that the Lorde had alwayes kepte This pastor shall therfore arise in Israel bicause the true pastor had said I will not feede you This pastor by another name is called the abhominatioÌ„ of desolation that shall sit in the teÌ„ple of God as though he were god Therefore the sworde of the Lord shal be vpoÌ„ his right arme and vpoÌ„ his right eye that the force of him al the boasting of his might might be dried vp withered away the knowledge that vnder a false name he promised to himself shal be obsenred with eternall darkenesse Here it is apparant that Zacharie ment your high B. the Pope but he so little threatneth theÌ„ that obey him not that he curseth him all theÌ„ that obey him threatneth the vengeance of God vpon him to pull downe his tirannie and to blind him But I thinke M. sand that your right eye was blinded also that sawe not this or else you blinked at it and would not sée it For this would haue tolde you another maner of matter than that be should be killed that obeyed not the Popes commanding and would hauâ—… made you afrayd least this killing should light both vpon him and you But you go on and tell vs that the authoritie of the ministers of Christe is so muche greater than the Priestes of the Leuiticall kinde howe muche iustice peace and life that we do minister is better than damnation the letter and deathe that the Leuiticall Priests ministred by occasion That the authoritie of Christes ministers is greater we graunte in suche things as belonge to their ministerie that are Christes ministers But whether it be greater in outwarde glorie is another matter But be it great or lesse where you thrust your selfe in the number and say that we do minister you are but an intruder M. sand For neither you nor any popishe Priestes are any of Christes ministers as is already proued euen by your owne laste allegation out of Zacharie And if the ministration of iustice the spirite and life be the triall your contentioÌ„n is héere for sedition and rebellion contrarie to iustice for a worldly glory and earthly kingdome contrarie to the spirite for deposing killing and thrusting throughe of all those that wil not obey your Pope contrarie to life And so is your ministration worsse than the ministration of the Leuiticall Priestes who you say ministred these thinge not of purpose but by occasion but you séeke of purpose all occasion thut you can finde or snatche at and wrest to minister matter for the deposing of Princes for the rebellion of subiects â—… the murther of all estates onely to mayntayne the pride and tyrannie of your Pope aboue all Christian kings kingdomes Nowe that none of all these examples and testimonies will fadge no better we shall haue once agayne the example of Ozias And yet sayth M. sand in the Leuiticall Priesthood such heigth of the Ecclesiasticall power is figured that euen then also we may see that kings were compelled of Priests wherby they gaue vp their Magistracie For when Ozias was waxen strong his heart was lifte vp to his destruction and he neglected the Lorde his God and entring into the temple of the Lord he would burne incense vpon the altar of Incense TheÌ„ Azarias the Bishop and other Priests that were strong men entring after him resisted the king And when he notwithstanding holding the Censor in â–ª his hande threatned the Priests straightway a leprie sprang in his forehead whiche the Priests beholding they quickly expelled him VVhat followed therfore Ozias dwelte in a house aparte beeing full of leprie
vsurpation is first described And the text is plaine that she had no right The right Kyng was Ioas when his brethren were slâ—…ine Therefore here was no deposing of hir Neyther durst you say that Ioiada deposed hir but he comaunded hir both to be deposed and killed Although for commaundement of deposing hir you finde no suche thing for she was not their lawfull gouernour this therfore serueth not to the purpose of deposing a lawfull Prince and that for heresie which was not layde to hir charge neither was she killed for that cause but as a traytresse to the Crowne as a murderer of hir owne bloode and as a mere vsurper of the kingdome that belonged nothing to hir And therfore Ioiada did but as a good and faithfull subiect should do to his liege Lord and to his heyres after him and not as one that by his Priestly office had power ouer the royall estate Secondly I aunswere that the doyngs of Ioiada herein were vpon such especiall occasions necessities that it is euill drawne of you to an ordinarie example For none of the Priests either did the like or coulde claime to doe the like to their kings as Ioiada had done muche lesse to be drawne to an example for y ministers of Christ to follow First Io ada was the vncle by affinitie vnto Ioas for Ioiada the highe Priests wife was sister vnto King Dehozias whose childreÌ„ Athalia being their Grandmother did murther saue that Ioas being a new borne babe was priuily conueyed away by his Aunt Iosaba the highe Priestes wife where he was closely norished in the Temple till he was sixe or seauen yeares olde Good reason had Ioiada to kéepe the yong King his Cousin and more righte thereto than any other not by vertue of his Priestly office but being thus of God sent vnto him by his wines industrie for the childes close and safer preseruing in the Temple And yet this nourishing a childe and his nourse in the Temple coulde so litle be drawne to any ordinarie example that if necessitie had not enforced it it had not béene allowable As euen Lyra noteth out of Rabbi Solomon Quod puer nutrix sua c. That the Childe and his Nourse vvere kept in the loft of the Temple of the Lord vvhere nobodie durst approche but the Priestes and the Leuites that kept the holy vessels there layde vp to the entent they might there the better be hidden And althoughe it vvas othervvise vnlavvfull for a vvoman and a childe to be there yet in such a necessitie it vvas lavvfull As Dauid and his men did eate the Priestly breade being driuen in necessitie vvhich notvvithstanding othervvise had bene vnlavvfull for him Thus can not this déede of Ioiada for the nourishment of Ioas be drawne to any ordinarie example Neyther durst Ioiada be knowne of this déede that no doubt had cost him his life had it bene but suspected Whiche argueth he had no ordinarie authoritie to put downe the Princes no not this very vsurper being also a murtherer and an Idolater In al whiche cases if he had had any ordinarie power and right thereto be woulde no doubt haue openly professed and auouched his doing and not haue kept it so long close and priuilie watched his oportunitie But nowe the childe being thus by the highe Priest and his wife preserued and nourished which childe had the onely to the crowne lay it not him vpon was it not his dutie yea his obedience too bothe that he ought before to his brother in lawe deceassed and to this his yong nephewe extant that the childe should haue his right inheritance and to whome belonged the procurement hereof rather than to him that had the childe in custodie besides that he was his vncle sith no man of any countenance knewe hereof but he howe should the childe haue gotten his right but by him But did he make the child King by his priestly authoritie as though the Priestes had had the interest to appoint and make such Kings as they pleased No but it was the duetie of the one to procure it and the right of the other to haue it And yet that he did not this of himselfe the text saith plaine he toke and brought Centurions and Souldiors to him into the TeÌ„ple Here consequently saith Lyra is discribed the InstitutioÌ„ of the true heire by the carefulnesse of loiada the high priest seking to this the assent of the Princes nobles of the kingdome So that he sought their assent help or euer he would detect the Childe vnto them And for this present necessitie he brake the order also of the priests courses that King Dauid had appointed for the sonnes of Aaron Leui to minister wéekely then to giue place to other These he stayed for the more number strength to establish the yong King in his right so by these extraordinarie meanes he crowned him king caused the murtherer and vsurper to be killed This fact therfore of Ioiada can not be drawne to an ordinarie example except in these points that euery good subiect so much as in him lyeth shoulde preserue the lawfull Kings childreÌ„ and heires not suffer any other to whom the inheritance belongeth not to vsurp the crown but the right and lawful heire thereof to enioy it to expell al intruders vsurpers chiefly such ty ants as séeke their vsurpation by execrable murthering especially suche as against nature destroy their own bloud and al such as by any other trayterous meanes aspire to the kingdome and so far forth as they conueniently can to helpe to restore the lawfull heire therto as to whom only they owe their homage and are sworn This is al godly subiects and so all godly Bishops priests duties in euery Christian kingdome Thus may this doing of Ioiada be drawne to an ordinary example which we denie not But what is this for Bishops to giue kingdomes from the right heire to him that hath no clayme therto but by the Bishops gifte who giues a large thong of another mans leather as doth the Pope giue kingdomes froÌ„ one to another hauing no more right to giue them than the other to take them Which is not to expel an vsurper but for one vsurper to set vp an other vsurper whiche is no more lyke this example than an apple is like an â—…yster Thirdly I answerâ—… for Ioiadaes knowledge of the kings causes he had them not in respect he was the high Priest but in respecte he was the vncle the guardian the norisher and protector of the 〈◊〉 person béeing a childe and yet this is spoken by M. 〈◊〉 without the booke that after the coronation he had the knowledge of the kings causes Neither yet if he had the knowledge of theÌ„ the king béeing in such estate somuch beholding to his vncle a general rule could be made there or was made among the Iewes or
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
vp another Robins hoods lawe How readie popishe priests are to stuâ—…e vp rebellion sand pag. 79. The Princes throne called the chaire of pestilence The Popishe Priests professe to remoue the Prince by whatsoeuer meanes they can A pestilent doctrine Sand. 78. Hebrs 13. What the Popishe Priestes watch for 2. Pet. 5. sand pag. 79. sand pag. 7â—… The danger of euil Princes commoditie of godly Princes to their people Iob. 34. Sand. 79. 3. Reg. 12 The example of Ieroboam that M. sand alledgeth maketh cleane against him 3. Reg. 13. 14 3. Reg. 12. He that will not become a traytor is not worthy with M sand the name of a maÌ„ sand pag. 79. Act. 20 Tit. 3. No good argument from the Priestes iudging of the Prin ces doctrine to his iudging of the Princes diademe Act 20. Priestes corrupt and blind iudgements Matth. 23. M. sand fallation a secunduÌ„ quid ad simpli citer Hovv far the Papistes make kings inferior to Byshops The fable of the Lyon and Fox sand pag 79 Psalm 2. 1. Cor. 2. Dani. 2. 7. The heauenly and earthly kingdome are not so ioyned that the Byshops may be earthly kings The Apostles and Martyrs deposed no kings Sand pag. 79. To this purpose saith PoÌ„ponius â—… â–ª Cum quid mutuum de reb creditis M. Saunders obiection and answere Whether a Bishop may take a kingdome vpon him pro perly or vnproperly The Princes promise The breach of the Popes and of his Prelates promises The Princes breach of promise authoriseâ—…h not Bishops to depose him The example of Saule and Dauid What bishops may do or not do to princes hauing broken their promises Howe Princâ—… haue bene deposed What rule may be gathered by suche deposingâ—… of Princes Deposing of Princes by the Prelates practises Heb. 10. What subiects may do when the Prince breakes his promise Rom. 1. The right meanes that the B may vse when the prince breaketh his promise The combate betwene the Cardinall of Columne and the Pope The princes promise in theâ—… baptisme The Bishops promise in Paptisme is the same that the princes is The papistes shift to kâ—…pe their liuings for all their promise broken The priestes partialitie The contracte made to christ in Baptisme The king promised not to renounce his kingdome when he was Baptised The subiect promised not to renounce his Prince at Baptisme D. Stories error in defending that subiects misliking their princes may forsake them What we all promised in Baptisme The example of a contracte in mariage Math. 14. Promise brech in mariage As the priest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the man the woman so the B. caÌ„not separate the prince the subiect sand pag. 79. 80. 1. Cor 10. Math. 19. M. Sâ—…ers examples of King Lucius King Clodoueâ—…s The state of infants not like these Princes M. Saund presupposals of these two princes are false King Lucius his baptisme Aimonius li. 1 de gestis Francorum ca. 16. The order how King Clodoueâ—…s was baptiâ—…ed Here was no sech conditioÌ„s of deposing exacted of the Bishop in the Princes baptisme The sâ—…uerie that M. Saund. woulde bring Princes into pasieth the Spa nishe â—…quisition The promises and threates of God that the auncient prophets declared vnto kinges M. Saunders presuppose admitted The Popishe Bishops seeke more than the Christian fauh The kings examination of the Bishops condition M. Saunders presupposall admitted once agayne The kings diligent trauell to discharge his charge performe the condition The kingâ—…â—…ration Sand pag 80. Daniel 7. Esai 60. Luc. 10. Math. 16. Daniels prophecie wrested M sand to be suspected of beeing a Milenarie here â—…ke â—…say wrested The Prophete speaketh of the Church the Papists applie it to the priests The glory that the prophet vnderstandeth mystically the Papists vnderstand it literally The Papistes the Iewes sored in one error of dreaming after worldly glory â–ª Christs senteÌ„cs wrested Luc. 10. Iude. epist. Christes sentencâ—… wrested Math. 16. The gates of hell sand pag 80. Rom. 1. Domesticall forain enimies What a perillous enimie the Pope is Whether the king or the B. in M. sand presupposal be more enimie to the Church â—…pe can Christes â—…er â—…tth 4. he cause of â—…aith â—…edience of What thepâ—…inces will ought to be Sand. 80. 〈◊〉 14. Byshops translatioÌ„s of king domes this way or that way Whether the kings promise in baptisme stretch to suffering the Bishop to depose him The kings mi nistration to Christ and his Churche Hovv the king oughte to forsake his life or his kingdom 1. Cor. 3. Lucae 21. Luke 14. sand pag 80. Christian king domes are not mere seculer 1. Reg. 15. 2. Paral. 26. 1. Reg. 15. Leo in epist. 2â—… alias 75. Supra pag. M. Saunders contradiction and legerdemayâ—… M. Saunders seeth now that ChristiaÌ„ Princes are spirituall The Churches disposition of things indifferent To whome in the church the disposition of indifferent things belongeth Things meere spirituall and things spirituall in some respect Meere spiritual thinges may not be otherwise disposed What kinde of thing the state of a King or kingdome is The Churches freedome mysticall The Popishe Churche 1. Reg. 15. The example of Samuels anoynting of Saule M Saunders confutes him selfe The Churche coulde not depose Saule though he were a tyrante and an Apostata Prouerb 8. Dan. 2. Sand. 81. M. Saunders bious conclusion The Bishops ministerie in the making of the king Samuel Pope Leo his sentencâ—… sand pag. â—… Chrysost. Homil 4. in verba Esaiae The kingeâ—… anoynting In Extrauag de Maiorit obed Vnam sanctam The Bishops consecratioÌ„ of a king The diuerse significations of oyle in the scriptures No necessitie of anoynting Kings In Extanag de Maiorit c sand pag. 81. 〈◊〉 1. Ioh. 20. Epiphanius in Hares 29. 1. Cor. 15. M. sand case if Christ were here bodily conuersant in the earth M. Saunderâ—… case vnrtue Act. 3. Math. 24. Christes humaine nature not in the Sacrament If Christ vvere in hiâ—… humaâ—…n nature in the earth vvhat superioritie shoulde be giuen him What kingdoÌ„e Christ vvoulde take vpon him he vvere here in earth How the pope vvould order him 2. Thess. 2. 2. Thess. 2 The Churches promotion Math 20. What povver the ministers haue Math. 28. Iohn 20. Difference of povver Glossa in Lyra super Ioh. Epiphanius in Haeres 29. Sand. 81. 82. Math. 20. Gal. 5. Hebr. 10. Ephes. 4. Hebr. 13. Math. 28. 1. Cor. 4. 1. Cor. 5. 2. Cor. 2 7 Math. 16. Rom. 8. The difference and vnion of both povvers temporall and spirituall Supra pag. 791. Supra pag. Hovv the povver of all estates are vnder the pastors povver and hovv not Hovv they are all vnder the kings povver hovv not How â—…ere is no difference in these povvers Hovv there is a difference in these povvers The mixture of these povvers sand pag. 82. 1. Cor. 2. Rom. 10. Ciuil gouernors from the beginning as auncient as spirituall pastors M. sand malice against the name of
¶ The Supremacie of Christian Princes ouer all persons throughout their dominions in all causes so wel Ecclesiastical as temporall both against the Counterblast of Thomas Stapleton replying on the Reuerend father in Christe Robert Bishop of VVinchester and also Against Nicolas Sanders his Uisible Monarchie of the Romaine Church touching this controuersie of the Princes Supremacie Ansvvered by Iohn Bridges The Princes charge in his institution to ouersee the direction of Gods lawe DEVTER 17. After he shall be settled in the throne of his kingdom he shal write out for himself in a volume the copie of this Law taking the same of the Priests of the Leuitical tribe and he shal haue it with him reade it al the days of his life that he may learn to fear the Lord his God and keepe the wordes and ceremonies of him which are written in this law c. ¶ PRINTED AT LONDON by Henrie Bynneman for Humfrey Toye 1573. · HONI · SOIT · QVI · MAL · Y · PENSE · E. R ¶ To the moste high and moste excellent Princesse Elizabeth by the grace of God Queene of Englande France and Ireland defender of the Faith of Christ and in earth next vnder God of the Church of England and Ireland in all Ecclesiastical and temporall causes the supreme Head Gouernor ALbeit most Gracious Soueraigne I might be vvoorthily noted of presumption in dedicating these my trauailes to your Maiestie as vvel for the basenesse of my skill calling as for the vnreuerent demeanour of the aduersaries that here I ansvvere vnvvorthie vvhom your Highnesse should deigne to loke vpon yet bothe bicause the matter entreateth moste of a Princes estate and that vpon the chiefest point therof belonging in general to al Christian Princes but in especiall to your Maiestie against vvhom they chiefly direct their malice and in maintenaunce vvhereof your Maiestie direct your gouernement and herein haue giuen a mirror to al christian Princes to folovv and be partakers in their common vveales of the lyke blessings wherwith God hath beautified your Highnesse and established youre authoritie I thought it therfore not vnfit setting my self and them aside with all such by matters as incidently fal out in disputation betvvixt the Bishop and master Feckenham of me these my aduersaries â–ª to conâ—…ecrate this argumente of Supremacie to youre moste excellent Maiestie as to vvhom chiefly in your dominions next vnder Christ it dothe pertaine VVhich your Highnesse so nobly maintaines by practise of godlie gouernment hovve euer we by the vvord and argument do defend it There is no controuersie at this day betvvixt vs and the enimies of the gospel more impughed thaÌ„ this one of the Supremacie nor more bookes compiled more libels scattered more vaunts made of truth on their partie more sclaunders deuised of oure doctrine and your Maiesties Title more secrete conspiracies and open treasons against your Royal person and state of the Realme than our aduersaries make only for this Supremacie Shall Sathan then vse al this double diligence in promoting the pride tyrannie of his Antichrist the man of sinne the foreigne vsurper of all Christian kingdoms and shall the children of god be negligent in defence of the kingdom of Christ of the Lordes anoynted of the dutifull office and lavvfull authoritie of their naturall Soueraigne â–ª Other meanes I graunt may be had to suppresse their furious dealing And God bee blessed therefore that hath furnished your Maiestie vvith povver couÌ„sell authoritie lavv vvisedome learning vertue courage and al other Princely habilities â–ª suffiâ—…iet to maintein your Highnesse Title protect that portion of Christes Church vvhich he hath committed to your most Gracious gouernment in peace and truth prosperously 〈◊〉 your enemies VVherein as your Maiestie hath euer most zâ—…lously sought and set forth the glorie of god â—…e hath so glorified you again as he hath promised 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 glorificabo that your highnesse may say as king Dauid sayd â–ª he hath deliuered you out of your enimies hands and defeated all their purposes he hath established you a kingdom here on earth in peace and righteousnesse and hath prepared in heauen a Kingdom for you in glorie and eternitie Novv although this be so cleeâ—…e that euen the enimies themselues coÌ„fesse God vvorks vvith you God fights for you God hath takeÌ„ your hart into his handes that haue taken his quarel into yours yet sith the 〈◊〉 do mutteâ—… sclander your Highnesse to take suche kind of GouernmeÌ„t on you as vvere not coÌ„petent as the Pope had vvont to do your Highnes is furthest from if this your claime be not proued to be grouÌ„dedon Gods vvord if those enuious be not coÌ„â—…inced by euident argumeÌ„ts of the seripture al the foresaid prosperitie is couÌ„ted but earthly blessings and such as other vvorldly Princes haue All the due authoritie is 〈◊〉 but extorted violence neither is the mouth of the adoersarie stopped neyther is the mind of the subiect satisfied And therfore vvhen al is don â–ª there is no better meanâ—… to may 〈◊〉 this Title than euen by learning 〈◊〉 for to me it to the vttermost and to fight vvitâ—… the vveapon of Gods vvord for it vvhicheâ—…s sharpeâ—… to vvoâ—…nde the aduersaries heart and conscience than any tvvo edged svvord But some vvil say this is sufficiently done by otherâ—… learned labours vvhen both in the dayes of your Maiesties Father of most renoumed memorie euen the best learned of our aduersaries did not only confesse it but vvrote so effectually in defence therof that shamefully aftervvard reuolting their guiltie conscieÌ„cebore vvitnesse against themselues nor they coulde euer ansvvere their ovvne vvritings And also after that in the godlie gouernment of youre Highnesse blessed Brother many other more excellent fathers in vvriting did confirme it And novv lastly in this your Maiesties happie Reigne diuers famous and lerned men to the further confirming of the godlie and confounding the enimie therein haue vvritten vppon this argument Yet sith oure aduersaries haue neuer doone thervvith but sette on a freshe lyke to him that vvhen in vvrastling he was euer cast of pride and vainglorie vvoulde neuer acknovvledge that he had any fall I thought good to make euident to all your Maiesties subiects euen to the enimies themselues the places vvhere they shamefully fel and lie stil in their errour rather than to vvrastle vvith such vvarblers And yet if they start vp again to trie a further pluck vvith them and by the strength of Gods inuincible truth so to ouerthrovv them that as fast as they boast cauill and sclaunder the truth of our cause and the goodnesse of your Maiesties quarell shall shevve it selfe the cleerer although the simplier handled A number of other vvhom I knovve coulde haue done it farre better vvho may also at their discretions further trauaile in it And in deede vvhere the most of this vvas done a good vvhile sith it vvas layde aside thus long expecting if any other vvould attempte it
him agayne making the king become vassall feodatarie to the Pope and to holde the crowne and realme of him in fee farme and pay 700. marks a yere for England and. 300. for Irelande And hath not the Pope chalenged other kingdomes also yea doth he not clayme to be the chiefe Lorde and Prince of all kingdomes and to set vp and depose what king or prince he pleased And he that beléeued not this was not counted a noddie but an heretike And yet sayth M. St. was there euer any so much a noddie to say and beleeue the Pope raigned here but all Papistes muste be noddies with him yea his owne Pope in steade of a triple crowne muste weare a cockes combe and him selfe for companie will beare the bell But here he leapeth backe agayne to M. Gilbie not for the matter of supremacie but for his misliking of certayne orders of religion in king Edwards dayes and here vpon pleadeth that the Papistes are nowe more to be borne withal if they can not beare the seruice and the title set foorth I answere first M. St. another mans faults excuse not yours Neither Anthonie Gilbies and yours are alike For were his greater or any of those Protestants that ye vpbrayde vnto vs afterwards yet are they lesse in that they obstinately maynteyned not the same nor persisted therin nor attempted any conspiracies nor would haue a foraigne supreme nor suche an other as your Pope the father of errors and so on their submission or repentaunce their fault is pardoned or made lesse But you obstinately maynteine a playne refusall of obedience would haue a foraigne vsurper be your supreme and not onely subdue the realme and our bodies to his tyrannie but our soules to his errors neither do ye repente therof but perseuer in it and by wicked Libels priuie conspiracies and all other meanes that ye can deface Gods worde your natural prince natiue countrey your fault therfore is much greater thā his or theirs And therfore your wilful obstinacie is not to be borne withal especially since after so long and gentle tollerance of the Quéenes moste gracious lenitie towards you ye encrease your malice and harden your hearts with Pharao abusing hir highnesse lenitie Now where the Bishop sayd these dealings were a preparation to rebellion agaynst the Queenes person M. Stap. sayth that it nothing toucheth hir person nor hir crowne And that without the ecclesiasticall authoritie the crovvne hath continued and flourished moste honorably many hundreth yeres ▪ and shall by Gods grace continue full well and full long agayne when it shall please God. Why M. Stap. what meane ye by this dothe not the crovvne flourishe and continue euen nowe also God be praysed for it why say you then it hath flourished and shal agayne when it shall please God as though it dyd not now And the state of the Crovvne were nowe no estate or a very ill estate in the reigne of the Quéenes maiestie If this be not a preparation to rebellion to make the Subiectes mislike the estate of the Crovvne is it not then euen a rebellious Proclamation it selfe but let vs sée your argument that ye make hereon to excuse your selues Diuers Princes haue continued and flourished honorably of long time without the ecclesiasticall authoritie Ergo it is nowe no preparation to rebellion agaynst the Quéenes person to refuse hir authoritie ouer all causes ecclesiasticall and to defende that it apperteyneth not to hir person or Crowne I answere First the worde ecclesiasticall authoritie is very subtilly and doubtfully spokē as though hir highnesse went about to play the minister If ye meane so the antecedent is then true The ecclesiasticall authoritie nothing toucheth hir person or crowne ▪ without the whiche it hath most honorably continued and flourished many hundreth yeres and shall by Gods grace continue ful wel and ful long agayne when it shal please God. But then is this your most spitefull slaunder to say that the Quéene now taketh vpon hir eccl. authoritie and that it is now vnited to hir person or crowne which is most euident false And therefore the crowne flourisheth for any suche matter so well as euer it did And God graunt it neuer to flourish worsse than it doth vnder hir Maiestie now But the antecedent béeing so farre foorth true as is declared then the consequent followeth not that it is now no preparation to rebelliō to refuse hir authoritie ouer all eccl. causes and to defende that it perteyneth not to hir person or crowne But if in the antecedent by ecclesi authoritie ye meane authoritie ouer ecclesiasticall matters then the antecedent is false and so to be proued by the issue of the practise in this Realme Neither is it any good argument Bicause many tooke it not on them Ergo none may Bicause they did not vse it Ergo they ought not Bicause they had worldly prosperitie without it Ergo it was not necessarie to them Bicause the denial was no preparation to rebellion then Ergo it is none nowe None of these causes are sufficient M. St. and therefore your subtile and false reason fayleth Now when ye sée nothing will fadge this way eyther to defende you or to accuse vs ye will set vpon vs for other matters that we are those that make this preparation to rebellion Let this title and eccl. iurisdiction goe say you which all good princes haue euer forgone as nothing to them apperteyning let vs come to the very temporall authoritie and let vs consider who make any preparation of rebellion the Catholikes or the Protestants In letting that go M. Stap. that appertayneth to this title and ecclesiasticall iurisdiction ye let go your matter and after your maner make so many impertinent discourses contrarie to that ye called vpon before neuer to swerue from the question in hande and nowe your selfe swerue of purpose from it Howebeit shall we let you go so rounde away with suche a heape of notorious lyes that all good Princes haue euer forgone this title and ecclesiasticall iurisdiction as nothing to them appertayning that not some or many but all good Princes haue forgone and euer forgone both this title and also ecclesiasticall iurisdiction and so euer forgone it as nothing pertayning to them If ye coulde haue shewed this ye should haue well spent your time and kept ye nearer your matter ye néeded not haue fisked about so many by quarels But this could ye not proue and therfore it was necessarie ye should runne to them picking quarels at vs not marking your owne wicked defacing of your Prince whome otherwhiles so fauningly ye flatter For whereto else tendeth this saying all good princes haue euer forgone this tytle and ecclesiasticall iurisdiction as nothing perteyning to them but to inferre that all those princes that take on them or will at any time not forgoe thys title eccl. iurisdiction as apperteyning to them are ill and wicked Princes What else can be made of
all their actions of their offices or vocations Ye conclude not a like M. Stapl. but subtilly and falsely ye alter the state of the conclusion if ye made your argument aright ye should make it thus as the Prince intermedleth not in the seuerall actions of his temporall subiects offices or vocations so he intermedleth not in the seuerall actions of his Ecclesiasticall subiectes offices or vocations This is the right illation of the sâ—…militude and thus it maketh nothing against vs Which you espying in the place of intermedling thrust in gouerning concluding â—…alsely bicause he is no intermedler in the one that therefore he is no gouernour of the other But the â—…urder ye wade in this similitude the more ye labour against the streame For as although the Prince intermedle not with the Fathers the Masters the Schoolemasters the Pilotes seuerall actions in their offices or vocations yet he ought to ouersée that euery one of these and all other his subiects do their owne proper actions belonging to their vocations and offices dutifully yea not onely to make lawes for them all as subiectes but also for their seuerall estates and degrées besides not for him selfe to exercise but for them to worke in their vocations so the Prince beyng likewise gouernour of Ecclesiasticall persons so well as of any other aforesaide although he intermedle not with the seuerall actions of their vocations yet ought he to ouersée them that euery Ecclesiasticall estate do their proper actions dutifully and also to make Lawes and Orders not for him selfe but for them in their degrées and vocations to exercise and obserue the same And thus your similitude euery way maketh quite against you M. Stapl. how be it you will proue it better ye say For the better vnderstanding whereof it is to be knowne that before the comming of Christe Kings were there many but Christian Kings none Many coÌ„mon wealths were there but no Christian common welth nor yet godly coÌ„mon welth properly to speake sauing among the Iewes but cluill and politike The ende and finall respect of the which ciuill common wealth was and is vnder the regiment of some one or moe persons to whome the multitude committed them selfe to be ordered and ruled by to preserue themselues from all inwarde and outwarde iniuries oppressions and enemies and furder to prouide not onely for their safetie and quietnes but for their wealth and abundance and prosperous maintenance also To this ende tendeth and reacheth and no furder the ciuill gouernment And to the preseruation tuition and furderance of this ende chiefly serueth the Prince as the principall and most honorable person of the whole estate whiche thing is common as well to the Heathenishe as to the Christian gouernment Is this all that ye will aforde christian Princes M. Stap. what a heathenish doctrine is this to make Christen princes and Heathen princes gouernment all one What if Christen princes as they haue right good cause beginne to startle at this that ye make their estate no better before God than is the great Turkes And what if one should answere that ye not onely sclaundered reprochfully all the estates of Christendome nowe liuing or that shal be or haue bene since Christes comming but also wickedly deface all the godly Kings and rulers before Christes comming Melchisedeck Dauid Salomon c. beléeuing in Christ to come as Christen Princes now beare the title of Christ already come And yet dare you saie that before the comming of Christ Kinges were there many but Christian kinges none Doâ—… ye dallie on the tytle and name of Christian or meane ye the tytle and effecte of christianitie if ye meane so as ye must néedes meane if ye meane any thing materiall to the purpose ye are very iniurious not onely to those Kings but to their subiects yea to their common weale also And yet ye say further their common wealth was but ciuill and politike and vvente no further than outwarde peace tranquillitie welthe and prosperous maynteinance which is the onely ende of their gouernement and that it reacheth not any iote further What if one should bidde you looke further in the scripture and so ye should finde it stretche somewhat further than to be common with the great Turkes gouernement What if a man should presse you with your owne wordes afterwarde that yet catche it more than one inche further for assisting of the Churche vvith the temporall svvorde which the great Turke the great Chan the Persian Sophie doth not but drawe their swordes agaynst it What if a man should referre this among your contradictions What if he should ioyne another withall that where yet ye confesse the Iewes common vvealth was godly before Christes comming and other common wealthes were not godly and yet the ciuill gouernement of Christian princes reacheth no further than the ciuill gouernement of heathen princes and one finall ende is common to bothe and so eyther the Heathens common vveales were godly also or else the Iewes were vngodly too yea what if the heathens coÌ„mon vveale and heathen Princes fell out to be in better estate of the twayne if only quietnesse vvealth abundance and prosperitie were the onely and finall ende of bothe if ye were well vrged in all these thinges thinke ye M. Stap. these your principles would be able to defende you yea lastly if one woulde denie these your Heathen and Turkishe maximies bring ye any thing to proue them than your owne bare saying that it is to be knovvne But no true Christian knovveth it M Stap. nor will euer acknowledge this which with suche bolde impudencie ye grounde vppon that christian Princes gouernement reacheth no further than ciuill and outvvarde safetie vvealth abundaunce and prosperitie and is common asvvell to heathen as to Christian princes Neuerthelesse M. Stap. taking it for a rolled case and out of question rolleth vp the matter as graunted And as he hath thus determined the boundes of Christian Princes gouernement so as it were by commission from his holy father he descrybeth the Popes kingdome But ouer and besides sayth he yea and aboue this is there an other gouernment instituted and ordeyned by Christ in a spirituall and a mysticall body of such as he graciously calleth to be of his kingdome â–ª which is the kingdome of the faythfull and so consequently of heauen wherevnto christian fayth dothe conduct vs In whiche spirituall body commonly called Christes catholike Church there are other heades and rulers than ciuill Princes as Vicars Parsons Byshops Archbyshops Patriarkes and ouer them al the Pope VVhose gouernement chiefly serueth for the furtherance and encrease of this spirituall kingdome as the ciuill Princes doe for the temporall That there is another mysticall body the kingdome of the faythful directed by an other spiritual gouernement this is a true principle M. Stap. and truer than you wéene or would haue it But as you are deceiued and would deceiue others with the title of that
spirituall Churche so on thys principle you gather a moste false assumption That the heads of this spiritual or mystical body the church of Christ are vicars parsons byshops archbyshops patriarkes and ouer them all the Pope In which assumption ye take for true grauÌ„ted sundry manyfest errors flatly of vs denied chiefly foure The first about the spirituall and mysticall body of christ Wherin ye shew great vnskill not knowing what is ment by the spiritual mystical body For in that respect as there are no ciuil princes emperours kings or quéenes so there ar no Bishops neither no not Greke nor Scythian Gentile nor Iew neither male nor female but all the elect that haue bene are or shall be either in heauen aboue or here dispersed in any parte of the earth without any respect of person are al members and Christ the only head And so M. St. your selfe also call it the kingdome of the faythfull so that if any bishop be vnfaithful he is so far from beeing a head in this misticall corporation that he is no member or any part therof And your selfe confessed before that now theÌ„ your Pope was no good maÌ„ neither therfore vnfaithful hauing not the true liuely effectual faith in Christ as they only haue that be meÌ„bers of this body wherby he is quite excluded froÌ„ it Your first error therfore is in not discerning betwéene the inuisible and visible estate of the Church Secondly taking it as after contrarie to your former sayings ye seeme to expounde it to be the visible estate of the church saying coÌ„moÌ„ly called Christes catholike church then erre ye in that ye say vicars parsons bishops archbyshops and popes be rulers and heades of it For excepting parsons taking them for pastors Bishops the scripture knoweth none of thâ—…se rulers The other titles haue come in since with deanes archâ—…eacoÌ„s abbots priors cardinals patriarches c. although I speake not against the names of theÌ„ no not of the name of Pope neither which béeing well vsed I reueriÌ„ce admit but against the Popish hierarchie proud abuse of them And therfore thirdly where ye say the Pope is ouer them all that he is so ouer all those degrées in your Churche I graunte ye but that he is so ouer those or any other degrées in the true visible Churche of Christ it is but your facing maner to take that for confessed that is chiefly denyed Fourthly that ye affirme the Pope and his Prelates gouernemente chiefly to serue for the furtheraunce and encrease of the Spirituall kyngdome of Chryst where it is euident to the contrarie what hauocke and decrease so muche as they can these Rulers make of the members of Christes Churche to maynteine infidelitie and exautorate the worde and kingdome of Christ thereby M. Stap. now presupposing that the christian Princes gouernement is only outward and for the body and coÌ„mon with the heathen and stretcheth no further and that on the other parte the Pope ouer al and his fleshly chaplens vnder him are the heades and meÌ„bers of the spiritual and mysticall body of Christ nowe he will proue and God before that this gouernement of the pope his chaplaines is far aboue the kings gouernement and that kings he subiect therto Now sayth he as the soule of man incomparably passeth the body so doth this kingdome the other and the rulers of these the rulers of the other And as the body is subiecte to the soule so is the ciuill kingdome to the spirituall His reason is thus The soule or spirite incomparably passeth the body The kings gouernement is onely for the body and the Priests gouernement onely is for the soule and spirite Ergo the Priestes gouernement incomparably passeth the Kinges As this argument is noughte so the conclusion béeing rightly vnderstoode dothe noughte infirme the Princes supreme gouernement ouer all ecclesi causes For thoughe the maior be true the minor is moste false that the kinges gouernement is onely for the body Yea though the spirituall gouernement be onely the Priestes yet the gouernement ouer spirituall matters and matters apperteyning to the soule may still for all that and dothe belong euen ouer the Priests to the Prince Neither dothe M. St. proue the coÌ„trarie or alledge ought for his minor than as we haue heard the foresaide principles of limiting the Princes gouernement to be all one with the Turkes But you might haue done well M. Stap. to haue eâ—…sed your paynes euen here and haue troubled your selfe no further to proue your matter if these your vaine presupposals be such true and vndoubted principles But as though we had alredy graunted them M. St. still goeth on To the which kingdome sayth he as well Princes as other are engrafted by baptisme and become subiects to the same by spirituall generation as we become subiectes to our princes by course and order of natiuitie which is a terrestrial generation The argument is thus As the childe that is borne by a terrestriall generation in the earthly Princes kingdome is subiect to the earthly Prince so euen the Prince being borne againe by spirituall generation is become subiect to the spirituall kingdome But the rulers of the spirituall kingdom are the pope c. Ergo the Prince is become subiect to them Thus fondly still ye reason on your principle in so much that we can say nothing agaynst you But nowe while ye thinke ye may say what ye will sodenly see how ye haue ouerturned these your mightie principles with a trippe of your owne contrarie sayings euen in the same place Furthermore say you as euery man is naturally bounde to defende mainteyne encrease adorne â–ª and amplifie his naturall countrey so is euery man bounde and much more to employ himselfe to his possibilitie towarde the mition and defence furtheranee and amplification of this spiritual kingdome and most of all the princes themselues As such which haue receyued of God more large helpe and facultie toward the same by reason of their great authoritie and temporall sworde to ioyne the same as case requireth with the spirituall sworde Thinke ye this to be true indéede M. St. may we trust you on your wordes then is religion an ende of the Princes gouernment which a little before ye not onely most vntruly denyed but buylded as ye thought iolye arguments therevpon All whiche come nowe downe of themselues with an heaue and hee your selfe pulling awaye the soundation wherevppon they were buylt And nowe ye make an other platforme contrarie to the former which is that Princes moste of all are bounde as those that haue receyued of God more large helpe and facultie towarde the same to employ them selues to their possibilities to these endes to defende mainteyne encrease adorne and amplifie not onely the ciuill peace and prosperitie but much more the spirituall kingdome And ioyne the temporall sworde with the spirituall sworde as the case requireth Upon this as a better platforme than the
then shall ye finde the sort and manner of the doings of the one Prince and the other alike and so I conclude with your owne conclusion Thus the example of Iosaphat fitteth well Christian Princes he vsing the same supreme gouernment then that the Quéenes Maiestie now doth nor ye can alleage any thing to the contrary but certaine manifest slaunders Whervpon it followeth that the Q. taketh none other authoritie vpoÌ„ hir than Iosaphat did and all godly Christian Princes ought to doe the like the one ensample fitting the other euen as your selfe confesse Now that M. St. by this most cleare confession graunt hath yelded so farre in this example that he hath contraried not only M. Dor that denied it to be a fit example froÌ„ Kings in the old law to kings in the new but contrary also to himself that denied before any example at al to be fit telling vs that legibuâ—… non exemplis iudâ—… atur Men must iudge by lawes and not by examples And here he sayth that this example fits well christian princes thereon hath concluded already the full matter in question neither â—…e can find any thing in the Q. maiestyes doings swaruing from Iosaphats but certain of his owne mere slauÌ„ders he startleth and besturreth himself with euery tristing quarrell picking fault at traÌ„slations at the print of the letter such like things to occupie the readers head withall least he should perceiue marke how the weight pith of the matter is alredy graunted and concluded by his owne mouth confession And here he chalengeth the B. with wretched shameful bandling of the holy scriptures This is a sore fault indéed if it were true but how proueth he this First promising verye sadly in his preface sayth he to cause his authors sentences for the part to be printed in latine letters here coursing ouer three seuerall chapters of the 2. of Paralip he setteth not downe any one part or worde of the whole text in any latine or distinct letter but handleth the scriptures as pleaseth himselfe translating mangling and belying them beyond all shame For the translation we shall sée afterward M St. what you chalenge therin in the mean season we may well sée how hard it goeth with you in that ye are faine to séeke such brabling matters as this which is but a petit quarel and that false also The Bishop euen as your selfe confesse did but course ouer that is did but touche the summe effect of those matters not set out word by word the text as he hath not chauÌ„ged the letter hitherto in the like doing ye find no fault there with Neither did the B. bind him selfe in translating to euery worde but so to set out their minds seÌ„teÌ„ces which word minds ye haue left out also for these words for the most part ye haue put in for the part Thus do ye order the Bishops sentence in setting it foorth in a distincte letter as though he had so said which in déede is the part of wretched and shamefull handling and belying beyond all shame especially to vpbrayde it to another to shewe the more impudeÌ„cie of your selfe therin As for the Bishop only shewing the effect of the matter and not the words nor going about there to translate at al it was lawfull for him to vse his common print his promise still obserued when he translated any thing You youre selfe vse this commonly in translating not onely to kéepe your ordinarie forme of letter but therby to haÌ„dle the scrip ture as it pleaseth you But now in this the Bishops summarie draught out of all those three aforesayde chapters let vs sée what it is that ye chalenge him for so sore He telleth vs say you of the kings visitours of a progresse made in his owne person through out all his countrey and of Iustices of the peace whereas the texts alleaged haue no such words at all It is easie to sée howe enuy or proud follie blindeth thys maÌ„ that reprehendeth the Bishop as missetelling the effect of a sentence and him selfe in distincte letter going about to set out the Bishops words as he did before cannot or will not repeate the same aright were these the bishops words kings visitors Iustices of the peace â–ª the bishops words wer these He seÌ„t forth through his kingdom visitors again he appointed in euery towne through out his kingdome as it were Iustices of the peace Why will ye say thys is al one it is so in effecte master Stapl. and so they were the kings visitours But yet should you here tell the bare wordes that the Bishoppe alleaged and if you may be blamelesse in saying you tell the effect summe of the sentence may not then the same saying bishop also and a gret deale more bicause as ye say he did but course ouer three chapters briefly and therefore coulde not easily expresse the bare texts But you might easily noting but two or thrée little sentences haue set them downe playne I speake this the rather for that that followeth Ye say the bishop telleth of Iustices of the peace The bishop only said as it were iustices of the peace as who should say suche officers then as a man might liken to our petit iudges or iustices of the peace now But thus ye euer loue to wrest the Byshops words that ye may make the feater entrance into one of your common places saying Verily suche a tale he telleth vs that his ridiculous dealing herein were it not in Gods cause where the indignitie of his demeanour is to be detested were worthily to be laughed at Are the stories of the Scripture become tales to this Louanist are the visitations and progresse of this godly king that right nowe was with him a fitte ensample for christian princes become now ridiculous dealing and worthily to be laughed at or indignities to be detested suche were in déede the Popishe visitations As for that the byshop citeth is manyfest in the scripture The king sent out his Princes and preachers as the summe of the chapter in your olde translation sayth mittit praedicatores per vniuersam Iudeam he sendeth on t preachers throughout all Iewry Whervpon Lyra noteth hic ostenditur qualiter populum suum instruxit scilicet per sacerdotes Leuitas quos ad hoc misit cum eis aliquot de principibus suis vt populum inducerent ad obedientiam punirent rebelles si quos inuenirent Heere is declared how he instructed his people to wite by the Priests and Leuites whom he sent to this purpose and with theÌ„ certaine of his Princes to moue the people to obedience and to punish the rebellious if they should finde any Is it ridiculous or detestable dealing herein to name these parties visitours sent from the king were they not sent to him to visite the people reforme theÌ„ in religion Againe the bishop said he made a progresse
therfore he was neyther the Priestes nor the Prophets executioner in them If ye say God had determined that they should so be done ye say true and we denie not but that the Princes power and authoritie did execute Gods determination yea it was readie and seruiceable as ye say thereto And so it ought to be in all princes But what conclude you herevppon Bicause the princes power and authoritie is ready and seruiceable to execute Gods determinate purpose yea or his open commaundement either and that by the mouth of any Priest or Prophete Ergo he is not supreme gouernour vnder God therein In déede ye might well conclude he is not an absolute supreme gouernour ouer God whose determination he doth execute so seruiceably but this ye might conclude agaynst your Pope that exalteth him selfe aboue all that is called God and despiseth to execute seruiceably Gods open determination and maketh all Princes to bee seruiceable executioners of his own determinations Thus doth not the Quéenes Maiestie nor any Godly Prince but obeyeth and executeth Gods determination with all hir power and authoritie most readie and seruiceable therevnto and yet is neyther hir supreme power nor authoritie vnder God any whitte empayred thereby And if this be an argument to abase the Princes supreme power and authoritie how shall it not also abase the Priests ought they to doe any other things then execute Gods determinations ought not their power authoritie be ready and seruiceable herevnto Ergo â–ª they can be no supreme gouernors neyther But ye will say the Prince is yet inferiour to them bycause they executed Gods commaundement immediately and the Prince theirs What now if it fall out quite contrary that Ezechias executed seruiceably Gods commaundement they againe executed although their seruice was not ouer readie such was their corruption yet tandem at the length they executed the Princes commaundement doth it not then followe that they were therein inferiour to the Prince But that he commaunded and appointed them and that they executed in these spirituall things his commaundement and appoyntment the scripture is most apparant He brought in the Priestes and gathered them togither in atrium sacerdotum sayth Lyra into the porche of the priests The Priests called not him and his nobilitie togither And therefore sayth Lyra vnder him was made Primo expiatio legalis c. First the clensing of the lawes sacrifice Secondly the celebration of the benefite of the passeouer Thirdly the repayring of the Priestly ministerie He as a commaunder sayde vnto the Priestes séeing them sâ—…owly deâ—…ed Audite me Leuitae sanctificamint c. Heare me O you Leuites and be ye sanctified clense the house of the God of your fathers and take away all vnciennesse from the sanctuarie Which are not wordes of entreatie but flatte commaundements as Lyra sayth Ezechias cupiens renouare foedâ—… cum domino primo pracepit c. Ezechias desirous to renew the couenant with the Lorde First did commaund the Leuites to be sanctified Secondly by them being sanctified the temple to be clensed Thirdly by those which were clensed sacrifice to be made for the offence of the people Fourthly by sacrificing God to be praysed Fiftly by clensing the holy burnt-offrings to be offred vp Thus were all these thinges done by his commaundement by his constitution and at his pleasure Nunc igitur placet mihi vt 〈◊〉 foedus cum domino It is now therefore my pleasure sayth he that we enter into a couenant with the Lorde And in this doing euen in the place where he putteth them in minde of their high office he calleth them not his fathers which worde hereafter ye stande much vpon but calleth them being the Priestes Leuites his sonnes Filij meâ—… sayth he nolite negligere O my sonnes be not negligent being him selfe in yeares but a childe in respect of them of the age of xx yeares sauing that in respect of hys royall power and estate he considered he was the father of all Gods people so well the clergie as the laitie and so the clergie tooke him and obeyed him Et ingressi sunt iuxta mandatum regis imperiâ—… domini And they entred in according to the Kings commaundement and the commaundement of the Lorde Iuxta mandatum regis sayth Lyra ad purgandum templum domini To clense the temple of the Lorde according to the Kings commaundement And Lyra praysing all these doings sayth Et sic Ezechias in dâ—… coronationis c. And so Ezechias in the day of his coronation opened the doores of the temple of the Lorde and euen there gathering the Priestes and the Leuites togither he enioyned vnto them the sayde purging Lo here is againe the kings owne iniunction whereat ye quarreled in the former Chapter And on the morrow after they began it and in this appeareth the great prayse of Ezechias that euen foorthwyth from the first day of his coronation he commaunded the renuing of the diuine worship that was destroied by his father Lyra shewing further of the pollution of the temple telleth out of the Hebrue glosse that there were many Images of Idolatrie fastened in the walles of the Temple with such strong and great nailes that they were hardly pulled away A liuely patterne of your popish Temples Master Stapleton decked vp euen so with Images in the walles and withall it confuteth your fonde distinction of Image and Idoll since as well ye may haue Idolatrie of Images as of Idolles If ye thinke to escape by distinguishing of the Images of holy Saintes and the Images of the wicked heathen that they onely be Idolles not the other I pray you what was the brasen serpent was it the Image of any prophane thing or not rather a representer of Christ and yet it became an Idoll and this godly King not the Priestes destroyed it and called it in contempt a péece of brasse as a man might call your Images or Idolles whether ye will a stocke or stone Thus did this notable Prince which I tell by the way not onely to shewe his supreme authoritie in the doing but besides to aunswere your ordinarie cauillation in defence of your manifest Idolatrie The Temple being clensed from these Images the Priestes offered first for the King Pro Regno for the Kingdome that is sayth Lyra pro Rege Principibus for the King and the Princes and after for themselues the people The King â—…ad them offer on the aultar of the Lord and they obeyed offred sayth Lyra pro peccatis Regis Principum Sacerdotum Leuitarum communis populi For the sinnes of the King of the Princes and of the Priestes and of the Leuites and of the common people Thus in their degrée reckoning euery sort Hée appoynted also the singers Againe he commaunded the Priestes to offer the burnt offrings and he and his Princes commaunded them to sing Psalmes When they had
their swordes villes bowes and gunnes to lay on and strike onely when the Priests bid them and those onely whome the Priestes appoint to be slaine Now forsoth and forsoth M. St. this is a proper dealing of Princes in Ecclesiasticall causes and a goodly kinde of making lawes and constitutions for the furtherance of Christes religion Well whatsoeuer it be this is all they are like to haue of you and yet will ye kéepe touche with them in your graunt to But thinke ye M. St. was this all that princes ought to do and nothing else but to punish heretikes on this fashion nothing else say you for that was in deede the very occasion why S. Aug. wrote all this A â—…a M. St. then I perceyue S. Aug â–ª wrote something more than ye would perticulerly answere vnto Well say you what soeuer he wrote this was the very occasion whie he wrote it to make lawes for punishing Heretikes and nothing else How M. St to make the Emperor that then was none other dealer in their punishment than your Pope maketh the Emperour now or than your Prelates made Q. Marie of late your executioner and the Nobilitie your droyles whome soeuer ye determine to prick by your excoÌ„munication condemnation what fooles were the Donatists then to crie out vpon the Emperour This were like the furie of the angrie Dogge that being bitte with a stone wreaketh his anger vpon the stone and not on him that hurled it What fellon is offended with the executioner or layeth his death to the beheaders charge when the Prince commaundeth to behead him but to the Prince But in this case you are the Princes that are the Priests and the Prince is but as it were the stone in your bande is but the executioner of your sentence Why should the Donatists then haue blamed the Prince except the Prince then had beene not the Priestes instrument but euen the principall in making lawes of punishment for them And so did Saint August acknowledge the Prince He decréed not lawes for the Emperour to put in execution but desired the Emperour to reforms them by suche sharpe lawes as séemed best to himselfe And although this were the verie occasion as ye say why Saint Augustine wrote all this Yea though it were the onely occasion to of writing all that he wrote what is that to this purpose For whatsoeuer the occasion were the occasion is not vrged but the wordes that he wrote A particuler occasion maye haue generall prooues The occasion of Saint Augustines wryting ye saye was the punishing of the Donatists And yet woulde Saint Augustine so haue written thoughe they had béene other Heretikes And it serueth agaynst all Heretykes Whie bycause hys prooues are generall whatsoeuer were the occasion And yet his occasion was not onely aboute the punishing of the Donatists for the Donatists denyed more than hys authoritie in punishing them they denyed hys authoritie to â—…ette foorth the true Religion and to ouersee that it bee in all estates duely preserued This sayde they was committed to Fishers not to Souldiours to Prophets not to Kinges as you nowe saye the lyke it was committed to the Apostles and Priestes not to Kings This was another verie occasion also and many other besydes might be whie Saint Augustine wrote all this But what is this All this that ye speake vppon I pray ye tell vs at least the summe of all this that saint Augustine wrote And then shall we sée if it be all none other but lawes of punishment for Heretikes that he layde and ment or no. And whether you haue hitherto truly sayde and ment or no all your falsehoode will then appeare Let vs here therefore resume some of those Testimonies of Saint Augustine God dothe inspire sayth he into Kinges that they shoulde procure the commaundement of the Lorde to be performed or kept in their Kingdoms Is this onely master Stapleton for punishing of Heretikes Againe In that hee is also a King hee serueth in making lawes of conuenient force for to commaunde iust things and to forbidde the contrarie Is this onely ment of lawes to punishe Heretikes Againe The Ensample of the King of Niniue that it apperteyned to the Kinges charge that the Niniuites shoulde pacifie Gods wrath Was thys onely mente of making lawes for punishing Heretikes What Heretikes were in Niniue Heathen Idolaters there were store but of Heretikes we read none And who made the decree of their fasting and repentance not the Prophete he onely denounced the wrath and iustice of God nor highe Priest of Aarons order was there any among them that the Scripture mencioneth Idolatrous Priestes no doubt they had more than ynowe but the lawe of that Ecclesiasticall discipline was not set out by them but by the King. Generally to conclude Saint Augustine sayth that the auncient actes of the godly Kinges mencioned in the Propheticall Bookes were figures of the lyke factes to bee done by the godlye Princes in the tyme of the newe Testament Were nowe these theyr doynges and auncient actes nothing else but lawes and constitutions for punishing Hereâ—…ykes and false teachers Were all the constitutions and doyngs of Moyses Iosue Dauid Salomon Iosaphat Ezechias Iosias and others nothing else Master Stapleton but this O good GOD that euer any that shoulde professe the studie of diuinitie shoulde be founde so false and shamelesse not onely thus to dallie with Princes but also to delude the fathers and the Scriptures and all to enfringe and takeaway the Princes interest and authoritie Nowe that ye haue thus in your first part brought the matter about giuing a graunt in wordes and expounding the wordes haue taken away the graunt againe ye enter into your seconde part to set a fresh on vs as ye did in your former Chapter would make these testimonies of S. Aug. to serue against vs which ye go about two maner of ways First hauing nowe abridged the princes authoritie to nothing else but to make lawes to punish Heretikes ye crie out vpon vs that we be the heretikes and that they must punish vs â–ª Secondly ye woulde proue that we be the Heretikes to be punished for denying euen this title to Princes of punishing Heretikes And for the first part ye say But nowe that master Horne may not vtterly leese all his labour herein let vs see howe these matters do truely and trimly serue agaynst his deare brethren and master Foxes holy Martyrs Here is all made sure on euery side euery way preuented least the poore â—…elie Protestants shoulde escape your violence by any starting hole First you your selues our enemies will onely haue the making of the decrées and lawes what shall be true religion what shall be false Secondly the Prince shall haue nothing to doe in examining the matter betwéene vs who haue in déede the true religion who haue the false but they must beléeue before hand that that which you shall say against vs is
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
vpon him with his foote and as his page to holde his stirrop to his foote and claimes to giue or take awaye his estate And you say here for all estates of the clergie VVe ought to be subiect not onely to Christians but euen to Infidels also being our Princes without any exception of Apostle Euangelist Prophete Priest or Monke What and is your Pope none of these Maister Stapleton an Apostle he is not without a pseudo nor he calles himselfe an Apostle but Apostolicall Much lesse he is an Euangelist and least a Prophete except a lying Prophete Sometimes in déede he hath bene a Monke but is there any Pope not a priest If he be a Priest then ought he by your owne confession to be subiect to the Emperour and in refusing this subiection what can ye make of him but as your selfe to your Prince so he to his Prince a very rebell and vsurper against his prince If ye say the Emperour is not his prince why is he then named the Emperor of Rome is not the name of an Emperor the name of the chiefest Principalitie And then if he be Emperor or king of the Romaines howe ought not the Pope being a Romaine or dwelling at Rome within this Princes kingdome or Empyre be subiect to this king or Emperour at the least as ye say in temporall and ciuill matters Doe ye thinke to escape in saying VVe ought to be subiect to our Princes without exception but he ought not I had thought ye had spoken of all Christiana and had simply mâ—…nt as Chrysostome did to whome ye referre your selfe who speaketh in generall of euery man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fuerâ—… or whosoeuer thou art which wordes ye dissemble and omit So that if your Pope be of 〈◊〉 calling and he be no more a Priest than Pope Ioane 〈◊〉 he a soule be he a bodye he ought by your owne graunt to 〈◊〉 subiect to the Emperour of Rome in these matters 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 the Emperour to be subiect vnto him Whiche 〈◊〉 the Pope shall vnderstande â—…owe for his 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 and for all his ciuill and temporall matters you woulde bring him to hys olde obedience 〈◊〉 the Emperour as he hath bene I thinke he will 〈◊〉 sâ—…all thanke Maister Stapleton for your labour But all this subiection saye you is but graunted in temporall and ciuill matters Doth Saint Paule Maister Stapleton alleage this distinction or Chrysostome to whoÌ„ ye reforro your selfe no M. St. they make no such restraint but stretch this obedience as to al ecclesiastical persons so principally to all ecâ—…l â–ª matters to the setting forth Gods religon â–ª And so Pauledoth call the Prince Gods minister â–ª And Chrysostome sayth Neque enim ista subiectio piâ—…tatem subuertit for neyther this subiectioÌ„ ouerturneth godynesse And vpon these words He is the minister of God a reuenger to him that doth euil He saith Againe least thou shouldst start back hearing of punishment correction and the sword he mentioneth againe that the Prince fulfilleth the lawe of God for what though the Prince himselfe know it not yet God hath so formed and ordeined it If therfore either he punish or aduance he is the minister of God maintaining vertue abolishing wickednesse euen bicause God would haue it so By what reason repugnest thou in striuing against him that bringeth such good things and goeth before thee and prepareth a way for thy affaires for many there are which at the first exercised vertue for respect of the magistrate but at the length they cleaued thervnto euen for the feare of god For things to come do not so moue the grosser sort as present things He therfore that prepareth the minds of many both with feare and honor that they may be made fitter for the worde of doctrine is worthily called the minister of God. In which words he plainly sheweth that the Princes ministery wherby he is called Gods minister consisteth in making vs fit apt receiuers of the wordâ—… of doctrine which the minister teacheth the Prince by punishing or rewarding goeth before prepareth a waye and bringeth to vs making vs apt to receyue either for feare 〈◊〉 loue this benefit by his ministâ—…rie In which work as the Apostles Preachers for the vtteraÌ„ce of the word of doctrine are called the workers togither with God so the Prince in preparing this way to the worde making vs apt to it is likewise said of Chrysostom that he worketh togither with the will of God. Wherin as we must not repâ—…gne against the prince so this obedience that we owe vnto him is not only in temporall and ciuill matters but in making vs apt for the worde of doctrine in which all eccl. matters are comprehended Now after M. St. hath thus stoode quarrelling in vain with the B. allegations he fourthly entreth into a reply vpon the B. with other allegations collected out of the same father Chrysost theroÌ„ frameth an argument against the Princes superiority In the forhed wherof he prefixeth this marginal note the Priesthode is aboue a kingdom which note as it is true in the sense that Chrysost. vnderstandeth it so maketh it nothing that he is abouâ—… him in the supreme gouernment directioÌ„ of all eccl. causes which is the present questioÌ„ the thing that M. 〈◊〉 â–ª calleth so osteÌ„ at other times vpoÌ„ But now saith M. St. As contrariwise the Prince himselfe is for ecclesiasticall spirituall causes subiect to his spiritual ruler VVhich Chrysostome himselfe of all men doth best declare Alij sunt termini c. The boundes of a Kingdome and of Priesthoode sayth Chrysostome are not all one this Kingdome passeth the other this King is not knowne by visible things neither hath his estimation for precious stones he glistreth withall or for his gay golden glistring apparel The other King hath the ordring of those worldly things the authoritie of Priesthood commeth from heauen VVhatsoeuer thou shalt binde vpon earth shall be bounde in heaueâ—… To the King those things that are here in the worlde are committed but to me celestiall things are committed VVhen I say to mee I vnderstande to a priest Andanon after he sayth Regi corpora c. The bodies are coÌ„mitted to the King the soules to the priest The King pardoneth the faultes of the bodie the Priest pardoneth the faultes of the soule The King forceth the Priest exhorteth the one by necessitie the other by giuing councel the one hath visible armour the other spirituall He warreth agaynst the barbarous I warre agaynst the deuill This principalitie is the greater and therefore the King doth put his heade vnder the Priestes handes And euery where in the olde scripture Priestes did annoynt the Kings Among all other bookes of the said Chrysostome his booke de sacerdotio is freighted with a number of like and more notable sentences for the Priestes superioritie aboue the Prince For the other sentences in Chrysostome I can not directly aunswere
them master Stapleton till ye set them downe I thinke they will all come in the ende to the effect of this sentence here so often by all yourside alleaged Ye cite Chrysostome as though it were at the full Where in déede ye cut off both the heade the middle and taile of his sentence whereby considering the occasion and purpose of his wordes we might sée that they shoulde not be wrested from his meaning Chrysostome vpon these wordes of the Prophet Esay Factum est anno quo mortuâ—…s est Ozias rex It came to passe in the yere that king Ozias died after a Preface made of Priestes mariage taking occasion of the Prophet Esays wife telleth of Ozias presumption Uerum hic Ozias c. but this Ozias when he was a crowned King bicause he was iust waxed hawtie in minde and conceyuing a greater courage than was for his estate entred into the temple And what sayth Esay He entred into the holy of holies and sayde I will offer incense He being a King vsurpeth the principalitie of the priesthood I will sayth he offer incense bicause I am iust But abide within thy bounds And so Chrysostome procéedeth in the sentence cited by you Alij sunt termini The boundes of a kingdome of a priesthood are not al one c. Which sentence ye truly cite til ye come to these wordes VVhen I say to me I vnderstand a priest And there ye strike of mâ—… words of Chrysostam than ye cited Which belike ye do for two purposes Partly for that ye could not abide to heare of any vices or discommendation in priests therfore ye cull out only that which soundeth to their praise dignitie Partly for that this would haue made the purpose of Chrysost playner reprouing them that disâ—…erne not betwene the office the persoÌ„ At which fault your self so late did stuÌ„ble in princes not discerning between Neroes vices a princes office As in Chrysostoms time same despised the office of a priest bicause of the faults of diuerse priests The wordes of Chrysostome folowing those you cite are these Therefore when thou seest an vnworthie priest slaunder not the priesthod For thou oughtest not to coÌ„demne the things but him that euill vseth a good thing Syth Iudas also was a traytor howbeit for this the order Apostolical is not accused but the mind of him Neither is it the fault of the priesthood but of the euill mind And thou therfore blame not the priesthod but the priest that vseth euill a good thing For if one dispute with thee and say seest thou yonder Christianâ—… answere thou but I speak not to thee of the persons but of the things or else how many phisitions haue bene made slaughtermen haue giuen poisons for remedies And yet I dispise not the arte but him that euill vseth the arte How many shipmeÌ„ haue guided euill their ships yet is not the arte of sayling euill but the mind of them If the Christian man be wicked accuse not thou the profession the priesthood but him that euill vseth a good thing These are Chrysostomes wordes which you omit and then followeth as you recite Regâ—… corpora c. The bodies are coÌ„mitted to the king and so forth as ye say til ye come to the knitting vp of the sentence with Ozias which again you omit VeruÌ„ rex c. But that king going beyond his bounds and passing the measure of the kingdom atteÌ„pted to adde somwhat more and entred into the temple willing with authoritie to offer incense VVhat therfore sayth the priest It is not lawfull for thee Ozias to offer incense Behold libertie behold a mind that knoweth not boÌ„dage behold a tong touching the heauens behold liberty that cannot be restrained behold the body of a maÌ„ the mind of an angel behold one that goeth on the grouÌ„d is coÌ„uersant in heaueÌ„ Thou sawest a king thou sawest not a diademe Tel not me it is a kingdom where is the transgression of lawes It is not lawful for thee O king to offer inceÌ„se It is not lawful for thee to come into the holy of holies Thou passest thy bouÌ„ds thou sekest things not grauÌ„ted to thee therfore shalt leese the things thou hast receiued It is not lawful for thee to offer inceÌ„se but this is giuen vnto the priests This is not thine but this is mine haue I vsurped on me thy purple vsurpe not thou my priesthod It is not lawful for thee to offer inceÌ„sâ—… but only for the sons of AaroÌ„ By this it plainly appeareth wherevpon Chrysost. speaketh to wete of the seuerall functions of the spirituall pastor and the prince and that it is not lawfull for the prince to intrude himself into the office of the diuine minister He may not more take vpoÌ„ him to administer the diuine sacraments of christ his church now although he be the prince to the which not with standing you admitted womeÌ„ thaÌ„ might Ozias sacrifice then For as then God had appoynted who should sacrifice so hath he apointed who should now minister his sacrameÌ„ts Now if ye had shewed that the supreme gouernment ouer ecclesiasticall causes the ouersight and direction of the setting forth of Gods true religion the abolishing of false religion and the deposing of Idolatrous Priestes that obsâ—…inately mainteyne errours agaynst the expresse worde of God be the like doing to this fact of Ozias if ye had proued that the Prince hath euer done or doth or claymeth to do the like fact to this of Ozias in ministring the sacrament then had you alleaged this sentence to some purpose else maketh it nothing to the purpose but maketh agaynst your popish mid wiues they rather play the part of Ozias It maketh not agaynst the Q. Maiestie but most of all against your Pope himselfe that thinketh he playth the high priests part and is so farre therfrom that none is more like than he to this vsurper entring into the holyest place and vsurping the priesthood the sacrifice the power and the honour that belongeth onely to Iesus Christe himselfe As for the office of the true minister of God which neyther your Pope nor you his shaâ—…elings arâ—… is in déede as Chrysostom sayth both a distinct function from the princes and hath other boundes and also we graunt surmounteth farre the boundes of the Princes office in respect of his spirituall ministerie of administring the sacraments of preaching the glad tydings of saluation of denouncing to the obstinate sinners the threates of Gods wrath and vengeance to the penitent the most comfortable promises of Gods mercie fauour whose sentence being rightly applyed in earth God hath promised to ratifie the same in heauen And for this cause doth Chrysost â–ª so highly extoll this priesthood referring all his prayses to the dignitie of his ministerie in respect whereof the Princes ministeris is but outwarde and earthly medling nothing with the administration of this high function but onely with the
to make an ende of questioning This in the statute by master Hornes silence is not comprised True in déede M. Stapl. this kinde of iudgement is not mentioned by the Bishop â–ª but it is moste falsly mentioned by you For where ye say this in the statute moste maliciously ye slaunder the statute for this in the statute is neither named comprised or can be gathered thereon Neither the Quéenes Maiestie claymeth or taketh on hir this kinde of iudgement It is due onely to Gods worde and your Pope and popishe Churche violently snatcheth it from Gods worde chalenging it to them selues euen aboue Gods worde it selfe although they agrée not héerein togither For the popishe Churche will be aboue the Pope in thys poynt of iudgement maugre his bearde and yet they graunt the Pope to be their supreme gouernour ecclesiasticall Though they will not relent to him this supreme iudgement but giue it to the Churches iudgement And therefore they be of a contrarie iudgement to you that say this poynt is moste necessarie meete and conuenient for a supreme gouernour ecclesiastical By which poynt you wil make your Pope either no supreme gouernour eccl ouer you or spoyle him of a most necessarie meete and couenient poynt of the supreme gouernment that ye giue him but these are your iarres agrée as ye wil like cats in a glitter about theÌ„ This popish churches or papall iudgement the Q. Maiestie taketh not vpon hir nor the statute ascribeth it vnto hir and therefore the B. had nought to do therewith Yet haue we one thing more which after a couple of your slauÌ„ders that I answere not but referre to your common place thereon ye charge the Bishop once more for this omission Agayne say you preaching the worde administration of the sacraments bynding and loosing â–ª are they not things and causes eccl How then are they heere omitted by you master Horne or how make you the supreme gouernment in all causes to rest vpon the Queenes Maiestie if these causes haue no place there What should a man vse many words with suche a brabler who though he haue nought to say yet will neuer lâ—…e saying of that which is nought to purpose Ye have beene often inough and fully inoughe answered to this master St. if the Quéenes Maiestie taketh not these thinges vpon hir then the B. omitteth not any thing that hir highnesse taketh on hir in omitting these things Neither doth the â–ª sratute yéelde vnto hir the doing of them It is but your slaunderous obtruding of the statute It giueth a supreme gouernmeÌ„t in al these things to the Q. Maiestie And so these causes haue place there so farre as is néedful to a supreme gouernour But from a supreme gouernour which consisteth in caring for ordering directing prouiding guyding maynteining setting foorth to the executing doing preaching and administring of those things is as farre from any good conclusion as you your matter are farre from truthe and honestie Neuerthelesse such is your great coÌ„fidence in this your Counterblast as though ye had so puft vp the falshood therof that no man could espie it ye lustely blowe vp the last blast of this your first booke saying VVhich is nowe better I appeale to all good consciences playnly to maynteine the truthe than dissemblingly to vphold a falsshod playnly to refuse the othe so generally conceiued than generally to sweare to it beeing not generally meaned â–ª But nowe let vs see how M. Horne wyll direct his proufes to the scope appoynted Why may not you appeale to all good consciences M. Stap. as well as that mayden Priest of yours that mighte bidde his maydenhead Goodmorrowe and haue as good a conscience for your owne parte as he for his parte had a maydenhead And to shew your good conscience for a farewell while ye shake handes at the very parting ye lash â–ª out a couple of slaunderous vntruthes togither Ye haue not many words to speake and therfore ye huddle them vp You say the othe is conceiued so generally that it giueth to the Prince your foresayde absolute power of determining all doubts and controuersies of preaching the worde administration of the sacraments bynding and loosing This lie to lappe vp all in the ende was worthe a whetstone M. Stapl. and his fellowe that iutteth with him chéeke by chéeke is as good as he That the othe generally conceyued is not generally meaned But set aside your malitious meaning to wrest the othe and the othe is playne and all one bothe in wordes and meaning But howe soeuer the othe were not so generally conceiued your meaning is playnely to refuse the othe And therefore héere in the ende for a remembraunce to all the rest you must néedes strike vp the stroke with ala lia and desperatly without al dissembling for the matter vpholde a falshoode with falshoodes euen to the laste breathe Et fiunt nouissima illius hominis peiora prioris And the latter ende of that man is worsse than the beginning ¶ The answere to foure Chapters in Doctor Saunders seconde booke of the visible Monarchie of the Churche concerning the question here in hande of a Christian Princes supreme gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes First of the difference of both povvers the ciuill and Ecclesiastical in the original in the vse and in the end of eyther Secondly vvhether the Prince be the Supreme gouernour immediatly vnder Christ. Thirdly vvhether the Prince may iudge and define of ecclesiasticall matters Fourthly whether Bishops maye depose Princes from their estate and take from the realme their povver of electing their Prince if they differ in religion from their Bishops VVhich foure chapters I thought good here to answere vnto both bicause he is the last writer and chiefest novve of accompte among the aduersaries And these chapters aboue al other in his volume both draw neerest to the question of the Princes estate and shew vvithall the full drift of the Papists not only striuing agaynst the Princes supremacie but into vvhat extreme slauerie they vvould reduce all Christian Kinges and kingdomes The argument of the fyrst Chapter of the difference betweene the Ciuile and Ecclesiasticall Magistrate in the originall in the vse and in the ende of bothe MAster Saunders firste beginning with the original lconfesseth that both powers are of God but not both immediatly from God the ciuile power he granteth to be of God but by the lawe of Nations or the consent of people and other meanes of mans wit put betweene But streight he correcteth himselfe that some thing in the ciuill authoritie was reuealed immediatly from God yea Per multa in lege Mosaica diuinitus instituta suerunt verie manie things pertaining to the ciuill power were in Moses law ordeyned of God. And thus at the fyrst he speaketh contraries Herevpon he concludeth thus I thinke therfore it is agreed vpon among all men that the royal imperial power which at this day is exercised in
the church in euery cause wherof it is not otherwise disposed in the new testament is to be holden of the law of nations or of lawe ciuil To this I answer First this in part is true but in part so false that himself confutes himself making exceptioÌ„ of diuers things in the ciuill power that sproong immediatly froÌ„ God neither were those things as he falsly saithe Circa res terrenas about earthly matters but about ecclesiasticall matters in the law of Moyses And although their ceremonial causes and iudicials pertayning to ecclesiasticall matters in the ciuil power be taken away with the ceremoniall and indiciall lawe of the Iewes yet the ciuil power hath like authoritie in the like causes ecclesiastical of the new testameÌ„t as is shewed out of S. Aug. against M. St. the Donatistes Secondly where he sayeth all the ciuil power nowe of christian kings and Emperors is all of the law of nations or ciuil except in cases otherwise disposed in the new testament I answer this may well be graunted and yet the ciuil power hath authoritie ouer ecclesiasticall persons in causes ecclesiastical for so not only in the old testament but also in the newe Testament it is playnly disposed Thirdly to this diuision of the original of both these estates that the ecclesiastical is from God immediatly the ciuil by other meanes I answere this distinction faileth both by his own tale saying Ciuilis à deo plerunque est per media quaedam the ciuil power is oftentimes from God by certain meanes If it be oftentimes by certaine meanes then it is not alwayes and but accidentall not of the nature of the estate for so it is also immediatly from God. And the like accident falleth out likewise of the ecclesiastical estate that although the power be immediatly from God yet many causes in it called Ecclesiastical be also Per media quadam humani ingenij interposita by certain meanes of mans wit put betwene For this cause sayth M. sand the ciuil power among the heathen that know not god is found to be the same that is extant with faithful kings although Christ wold not haue such power in the ministers of his kingdom for he said the Princes of the nations rule ouer them and they that are iuniors exercise power ouer them so shall it not be among you I answere first Maister Saunders this is a like slander to M. Stapletons fo 29. a. b. The ciuil power is not found to be the same in heathen Princes that knowe not God and in Christian Princes that know God there is a very great difference betwene these so different estates wherin the one acknowledgeth all his power to be of God and hath it described and limited by Gods word the other takes it al for hu main naturall not so much as knowing God by your own confession from whome the originall of it springeth Secondly to that you saye suche power is debarred by Christe from his ministers If yée meane by suche power suche power as is among the Heathen suche is not onely debarred from them but from christian Princes too If ye meane suche power as Christian Princes haue is debarred from the ministers of Christ then say ye true But howe then dothe youre Pope chalenge and vsurpe bothe suche and the same also Yea your selfe afterwarde reason moste earnestly thoroughout all the fourth chapter following that the ministers of Christe may haue it Wherin ye speak cleane contrary both to Christ and to your self Thirdly I note this eyther youre grosse ignoraunce or your impudent falshood in altering the wordes of Christe He sayth not they that are iuniors or yongers the Texte is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they that are great whiche are cleane contrarie If M. Stapleton were your aduersarie he would rattle ye vp Master Saunders for so foule a scape Nowe to fortifie a difference betwéene the Ecclesiastical power and the Ciuill he vrgeth that the spiritual kingdom of Christ is in this worlde but not of this worlde as for the earthly kingdome is bothe in and of this world but the ecclesiasticall power is the spirituall kingdome of Christ therfore there is a difference but the spirituall kingdom of Christ excelleth all worldlyâ—… kingdomes therfore they are stark fooles that in any ecclesiasticall thing to be administred preferre the earthly kings before the pastors of the Churche I answere all these conclusions are impertinent If there be any follie it is to striue for that that is not in controuersie We graunt a difference betwixt both powers and kingdomes althoughe a question is to be moued what he meaneth here by ecclesiasticall power If he take it as the Papistes do we denie that ecclesiasticall power to be the spiritual kingdome of Christ. For their ecclesiasticall power is ouermuch not in the worlde but of the worlde also If he meane by ecclesiasticall power the spirituall kingdome of Christ as he in his word hath ordeyned the fame although there be a difference betwene the power in the kingdom and the kingdome in the which the power is yet we graunt this gladly that no wise man will preferre the earthly kings in any spiritual thing to be administred before the pastors of the churche But this is nothing againste the earthly kings preferment ouer the spirituall pastor to ouersée him rightly and spiritually to administer his spirituall things in the ministration whereof all earthly kings oughte to giue place vnto him which we did neuer denie And sith there is no comparison betwene Christ the sonne of God who is also God himself and a creature of the law natural or ciuill neither is there any comparison betwixt the power ecclesiastical which is wholly giue vnto vs by only Christ the mediator the power royall which either altogether or almost altogether is not ordeined of God but by the lawe of nations or ciuill for although God hath reuealed froÌ„ heauen that belongeth to the power royall if notwithstandyng that pertained not to eternall saluation which is hid in Christ but to contein peace among men that is to be reckned to be reuealed no otherwise than to be a certain declaration which he had grafted in vs by Nature or else euen necessitie ought to haue wroong out of vs or profite according to the seedes of nature ought to haue brought to light I answere first we graunt that the ecclesiastical power not as the Papists stretche it but as it is giuen vnto vs by only Christ the mediator is farre superior without all comparison than the royal power of Princes Howbeit this hindreth not but as the ministers are mediators thereof to vs the royall power of Princes hath againe an other superior gouernment to ouersée that there be no other ecclesiasticall power exercised by the mediation of the Minister than Christ the only mediator hath ordeyned And to remoue all popish â—…oysting in giuing vs quid pro quo whiche when
or else woulde haue the royall that is to say the ciuill power to be superiour to the ecclesiasticall Howe madly for so wise a man ye haue proued these differences let wise men iudge M. Saunders and howe badly if not madly ye make your conclusions agaynst vs let wise men also iudge For we neither confounde these powers nor giue bothe to the Prince nor make the Ciuill power simply superiour to the ecclesiastical power although we giue the prince a superiour power in respect of the ouerséeing that the eccl. power whiche in the administration therof is higher although not in the direction and maynteining therof be not abused by the ecclesiasticall person Nowe M. Saunders hauing sayde thus muche of these three differeÌ„ces setteth downe a long sentence out of Chrisostome wherein he extolleth the Priestly power aboue the Kinges power which notwithstanding is nothing agaynst this superioritie that we attribute to Princes although the office and administration of the ecclesiasticall power be graunted to be neuer so muche superiour and this is answered vnto sufficiently already in M. St. Yet bicause we haue hereafter to deale at large with M. Stapleton on the same sentence of Chrysostome I referre it to the proper and more fitter consideration of it And thus much hath M. Sanders for these thrée differences which he sayth he speaketh agaynst thrée errours The first errour is of them that say the royall power in a christian Prince is higher than any ecclesiasticall power which opinion the Englishe Protestantes defende The seconde errour is of them that extende the power royall to certayne causes ecclesiasticall to be knowne and iudged by the kings law To conclude the thirde is of them that thinke a christian Prince at the least in all ciuill businesse and in his owne realme alwayes and without all exception to be greater thaÌ„ any ecclesiastical Magistrate nor that for any sin that he shall commit in the Church of God he can be remoued from the administration of the kingdome I answere neither these conclusions are sufficiently proued on these foresayd proues hitherto nor some of them at all before mentioned As the deposing of the Prince which is another question and héere as madly thrust in as maliciously and trayterously ment Neither any of these conclusions touche the English Protestants for they defend none suche as you haue héere set downe Name the parties and their assertions Else in steade of M. Saunders ye deserue to be rather called M. Slaunders The seconde Chapter The argument vvherof is this No Christian king in his kingdome is the supreme gouernour in ecclesiasticall causes immediatly vnder Christ. IN this Chapter as commonly else where M. Saunders rhethorically dothe hide his methode howbeit for perspicuitie sake I will deuide this Chapter into three partes â–ª The first is his arguments why he thinketh the Prince can not be this gouernour The seconde is the reasons why he thinketh vs heerein deceyued The thirde is the meâ—…nes to dissuade vs from the acknowledging of it by the euent and euill successe that hath ensued thereon And first for the first parte his argumentes are of two sortes the one à definitione from the definition of a gouernour the other à dignitate from the greater dignitie of Priesthood bring the argument by comparing the dignitie of bothe these estates from the olde testament to the Newe His first argument beginneth thus He that may be called a supreme head or chief gouernour hath of necessitie the power of doing all those things which can be wrought by the inferiours to the magistrates of that congregatioÌ„ by their office or by any charge beloÌ„ging properly to the same coÌ„gregation This shal be made playner by putting of example He that iâ—… chieftayne in an armie hath not only the Imperial power ouer al Tribunes and Centurions but besides may lawfully chaleÌ„ge to himself to occupie the Tribunes place â–ª or to be captayne ouer an hundreth if at any tyme he shall thinke it meete for him selfe to do it He that can gouerne a whole common weale can if he will knowe of euery meane man and not onely sustayne the turne and fulfill the offices of the Prince of them all but also of his Maior or of the inferiour Iudges He that is a Bishoppe hathe power of baptising and of shutting the Churche dores and of distributing the Churches treasure although those thinges are wonte to be done of the inferiour ministers To this definition and these examples I answere the definition is false the examples are insufficient Fyrste for the definitioÌ„ it is not true of euery supreme gouernour that he can or oughte to worke and execute all those things and duties that euery one of his inferiours can or ought to worke and execute For the gouernment of thinges is one thing and the execution of thinges gouerned is another thing Yea these two are relatiua and can not be confounded the one with the other although they haue respecte the one to the other for so the gouernour shoulde become the person gouerned Secondly these thrée examples are insufficient For although we admitte these thrée yet we may obiecte a great many moe examples in which this difinition holdes not Set aside the doing of all dyle and vnséemely offices for a farre more meane estate than a Prince to doe of which he hath neither knowledge nor it were tollerable he should â—…o them I pray ye M. sand howe could a king ruling in his own realme be his own ligire Embassadour in another realme Wil ye say he might make a deputie at home and be Embassadour to his deputie abroade and so the deputie to the king shall be the king and the king the deputie to the king that is the kings deputie But perchaunce ye will admitte this absurditie bicause ye will not go from your worde and say well the king may be so and he wil. Here what if one should do with you as I heard once M. Feckenham tel the tale of a gentlemaÌ„ that defended mustard was good with all meate One sayd nay it was nought with this meate another with that but looke what any coulde recken vp he still affirmed his saying that mustard was good with euery meate were it neuer so vnsauery a sauce therto Nowe when euery man had reckoned what he liste at length quoth his owne man that wayted on him I pray you master and is a messe oâ—… mustard good with a messe of milke Ha quoth his master â–ª thou haste marde all thou shouldest haue heldae thy peace This was master Feckenhams tale Nowe if master Feckenham that tolde this tale shoulde deale thus with you M. Sanders that as lustily affirme the king may lawfully do any thing that any of his subiectes may lawfully dâ—… as the Gentleman sayd mustard was good with al meate â–ª If M. Feckenham would say sir and can the king do all that euen his owne
wife or any other mans wife daughter or mayde in things perteyning to their duties and offices can and ought to doe Especially sithe your selfe in prosecuting this argument vrge the example of a woman All the women in his kingdome are his subiects so well as the men He hath a supreme gouernment ouer all persons in all causes can he therfore do their duties and yet he can haue the supreme gouernment to maynteine all lawes of matrimonie and to punishe all whordomes and yet not like euery somoner or other executioner of their punishements If ye say a woman may be no inferiour gouernour That is false a wife hath inferiour gouernment in hir housholde and many women haue had inferiour gouernments vnder kings in common weales as the Lady regentes in Flaunders c. But what if she were not an vndergouernour yet if she be a subiect gouerned the words of your definition coÌ„prehend hir saying A chiefe gouernour hath of necessitie the power of doing all those thinges which may be wrought of the inferiours to the magistrates of that congregation by their office or by any charge belonging properly to the same congregation But you will say perhaps that women are of an other kinde so that the king can not do al their offices As likewise for the ecclesiastical gouernment the Apostles might not lawfully do all those things that the widdowes chosen to serue in the congregation mighte and ought to do nor the ciuill magistrate of those congregations might or ought to do them Then will M. Feckenham presse you that your definition is false a gouernour can not do all things that belongeth to a subiect If ye say a woman is not a subiecte that is false If ye say she is not a subiect in respect she is a woman that is false also for both men and women are subiectes to their gouernours If ye say she is not a subiecte in respect she is a wife although I graunt the worde wife hath an other relation than to the king to wife vnto hir husbande yet what auayleth this sithe many offices haue many other relations also the sonne to his father the seruant to his master the scholler to his scholemaster and yet all these be subiects to the Prince although the Prince can not deale in all their seuerall offices But you thinke to salue all the matter with this exception I say not that he which is endowed with chiefest power should straight wayes haue the knowledge of euery lesser office for this perteyneth to the fact and not to the right Neither say I it is alwayes comely that he should execute the inferiour offyce by him selfe but I say there is no lawe to let him no power wants whereby the chiefe magistrate shoulde not do those things which the inferiours in the same common weale are wonte to doe Go to go to M. Saunders ye will still be like the gentleman that would fayne haue eaten his worde if he durst for shame Ye come in pretily and beginne to make some exceptions already you admitte he may wante knowledge of many things perteyning not to his office yea and that it is vncomely he should do them And in déede M. Saunders if you be thinke ye of euery subiectes doings ye shall finde many vncomely and vnreuerent things for so highe an estate to do and many things that he knowes no more howe to do them him selfe than that Cooke that would put mustarde into his milke to season it What and may the Prince do those things him self that are so vile and wherof he hath no knowledge He may say you and he will what righte or lawe may let him If ye talke M. Saunders of a wilfull foole that will caste him selfe and his kingdome away if ye talke of a tyraunt whose will is lawe that sayth as the Pope doth Sic volo sic iubeo stet pro ratione voluntas that is another matter But if ye talke of a king and of a lawfull power then I say his will and power oughte to be restrayned by lawe to do nothing vnskilfully nor vncomely for his estate I graunt he may abase him selfe to some inferiour kinde of offices to do them but not to all no not by the right of his royall estate And yet by his gouernment all those thinges are done that are orderly done Although he him selfe may not do them though he would Do ye not remember S. Paules similitude so ofteÌ„ vsed by your selfe M. Saunders of a coÌ„mon weale resembled to our body The head ye say often gouerneth all the parts and meÌ„bers but the head it selfe doth not nor can not do al that al the parts members do We stande not we go not we sit not on our heads our head reacheth not nor caÌ„ reach euery thing that our hande can reache doth Nor the head doth or can do the office of the shouloers back or belly yet ye graunt the head hath supreme gouernment ouer al these parts deuiseth lawes orders diets prouisioÌ„s helpes for all the parts and actions in the parts of all the body Thus ye sée not only by similitudes examples in which I might be infinite agaynst your thâ—… exaÌ„ples but also by good reason your definition of a supreme gouernour faileth he may be a lawful supreme gouernour yet can not do al the offices of his inferiours Yea it were vnlawful for him to attempt many such things and yet his lawfull supreme gouernmeÌ„t euen ouer all those things that he him selfe can not do nor ought to do is no whit therby empayred And therfore this is a false principle to builde as ye do thereon Nowe this béeing thus playnly proued a false groundeworke let vs sée howe ye procéede to frame your argument on it VVhich things beeing thus foretouched I adde vnto them that the supreme head or gouernour of any Church is the supreme magistrate of that coÌ„mon weale which no man hauing his right minde will denie Therfore if the king may rightly and worthily be named the supreme head or gouernour of that Churche as nowe this good whyle is done in Englande the same king shall also necessarily haue the facultie of working all those things which of that magistrate of that Churche may be wrought otherwyse he is not the gouernour of that Church in respecte it is a Church But in euery christian kingdome there are and ought to be many that shoulde preache the worde of God to the faythfull that shoulde baptise in the name of the father and of the sonne of the holy ghost the nations coÌ„uerted that should remitte sinnes that shoulde make the sacrament of thanksgiuing distribute it therfore he that is the supreme gouernour of any Church ought to be endowed with such power that no law should let wherby he might the lesse fulfil do al these things But a secular king although he be a christian can not do these things by the
force of his royall power oâ—… else a woman also might bothe teache in the Churche and also remitte sinnes and baptise orderly and solemnly and minister the sacrament of thankesgiuing For sithe bothe by the lawe of nations it is receyued that a woman may be admitted to the gouernment of a kingdome and in Moses lawe it is written when a man shall dye without a sonne the enheritance shall passe to the daughter but a kingdome commeth among many nations in the name of enheritaÌ„ce And sithe Debora the Prophetesse iudged the people of Israell and also Athalia and Alexandra haue reigned in Iurie it appeareth playnly that the kingly right appertayneth no lesse to women than to men VVhich also is to be sayde of children bicause according to the Apostle the heire though he be a childe is Lorde of all And Ioas began to raygne when he was seuen yere olde and Iosias reigned at the eight yere of his age But a childe for the defecte of iudgement a woman for the imbecillitie of hir kinde is not admitted to the preaching of Gods worde or to the solemne administration of the Sacraments I permit not sayth the Apostle a woman to teache For it is a shame for a woman to speake in the Churche and the same Apostle sayth that the heire being a childe diffreth nothing from a seruant But it is not the ecclesiasticall custome that he which remayneth yet a seruaunt shoulde be a minister of the Churche Sith therefore in the right of a kingdome the cause is all one of a man of a woman and of a childe but of like causes there is like and all one iudgement but neither childe nor woman and therevpon neither man also that is nothing else but king can do those things in his kingdome which of other ministers of the churche of God are necessarily to be done therfore it commeth to passe that neither the same king can rightly be called the supreme gouernour and head of the Church wherin he liueth All this long argument standeth stil on the foresayd principle that a supreme head or gouernour must be such a person as may do all the actions of all the offices belonging to all the parties gouerned But this is a false principle as alredy is manifestly declared therfore al this long driuen argument is to no purpose The Prince for all this may stil be the supreme head or gouernour ouer all Ecclesiastical persons so well as temporall in all their ecclesiasticall causes so well as in temporall although he himselfe can not exercise all ecclesiasticall functions nor doe himselfe all the ecclesiasticall actions of all ecclesiastical persons For else he might also be debarred of all supremacie ouer all ciuill and temporall persons in all their ciuill and temporall causes bicause he can not himselfe exercise all the ciuil and temporall offices nor do himselfe all the ciuill and temporall actions of all the ciuill and temporall persons neyther And so shoulde â—…e cleane be debarred from supremacie in either power nor haue any supreme gouernment at all Nowe taking this your false principle pro confesso â–ª after your wonted maner ye would driue vs to an absurditie as ye suppose by bringing in more examples of a woman and a chyld reasoning thus A pari from the like A woman and a child may be as well a supreme gouernor as may a man and hath as good right thereto But a woman or a childe can not be a supreme gouernour in causes Ecclesiasticall Ergo A man can not be a supreme gouernour neither in causes Ecclesiasticall For to this conclusion the force of bothe the promisses naturally driueth the argument I know ye clap in a paire of parenthesis saying in your coÌ„clusion neither a man also that is nothing else but a king But sith these wâ—…r des ar neither in the maior nor the minor the coÌ„clusion is plain â–ª that a man can not be a Supreme gouernor in causes Ecclesiasticall And I pray ye then tell me who shall be the supreme gouernour in ecclesiasticall causes if neyther man woman nor chyld may be wherby are not only excluded ciuill Princes but youre Popes are debarred from it Pope Ioane and Pope Iohn also For if they vse that order in the election to haue a Cardinall féele that all be safe yf the Uersicle be sayde Testiculos habet howe can the quyre meryly syng in the responce Deo gratias If hée be founde to bée a man he can not be supreme gouernoure Maister Saunders therefore muste néedes mende thys argumente or else the Popes for whome he writes this boke wyl con him small thanks except that they be Eunuches But Master Saunders not marking the sequele of hys conclusion fortifieth the parts of his argument To confirme the maior A woman and a childe may be as wel a supreme gouernour as a man he citeth the lawe Num. 27. he citeth ensamples Debora Athalia and Alexandra for women For children he citeth the Apostle Gal. 4. and the ensamples of Ioas and Iosias But these proues are superfluous sith the controuersie is not on the maior but on the minor Which minor is the point in controuersie and denied of vs that a woman or a childe can not be a supreme gouernour in causes ecclesiastical To confirme this minor for a woman he alleageth that she can not be admitted to preache the woorde of God remit sinnes nor baptize orderly and solemnely nor administer the Lordes Supper bothe for the imbecillitie of hir kinde and for Saint Paules prohibition of teaching in the Church For a chyld he lykewise can not do the same things as well for defect of iudgement in his nonage as for Sainte Paules witnesse that he differs not from a seruant But the Churches vse is not for seruantes to doe these things and so not for children to do them Here for confirmation of his minor master Sanders rusâ—…s to his false former principle that if the woman the chyld be supreme gouernors in these things then muste they be able themselues to do these things But they cannot do these thinges themselues Ergo they can haue no supreme gouernmeÌ„t in them But this reason is alreadie taken away and therfore al this argumeÌ„t falles We graunt it is true that neither women nor children can do these things And therfore the Papistes are to blame that suffer women to bapatize and to saye or sing in theyr quyres theyr ordinarie seruice and reade the Lessons Wee graunte them also that no men neyther but suche as bée lawfully called therevnto maye themselues exercise and do these things but doth this fellow they may not therfore haue a gouernment ouer those that doo them in their orderly doing of them if this were true then take away all their gouernement ouer all lay persons and all ciuil causes too For neyther women can nor ought them selues to do all that men béeing their subiects can and ought to
estate being higher and so high that God reserued it to himselfe they distrusted the former estate as inferior and desired a visible king among them So that this which you wold draw to the dispraise maketh in deede more to the praise of a kings estate Neither do we denie Gregories sentence in respect of the spirituall prelacie but the question nowe is of the outwarde gouernment of Priests or Princes Which Gregorie not onely acknowledged with most humble obedience calling the Emperour and kings of Italy his Lords soueraignes and lowly bowed himselfe vnto them but also that more is so much detested the claime that the Pope makes now that he calleth the vser of it a fore runner of Antichrist And where ye haue this shift that he condemnes such titles of vniuersal Prelacie in the sea of other Bishoppes but not of his owne this is a false shifte he condemnes it in hys owne Bishopricke of Rome so well as in anye other For where Eulogius the Patriarke of Alexandria had saluted him with suche stiles he answereth Ecce in praefatione c. Beholde in the preface of the Epistle the which you directed vnto me who forbad it ye thought to set in the word of a proud calling naming me vniuersall Pope the which I beseeche you that your most curteous holinesse wil no more do so Bicause that which is giueÌ„ to another more thaÌ„ reaâ—…oÌ„ requireth is subtracted from your selues I seeke not to be aduaunced in titles but in maners Neither counte I that honour wherein I know my brethren leese their honour For my honour is the honour of the vniuersall Churche My honour is the sounde force of my brethren TheÌ„ am I honored wheÌ„ to euery particular person the honor that is due vnto him is not denyed For if your holynesse call me vniuersall Pope he denyeth himselfe to be in that he calleth me vniuersall but God forbid this Let those wordes goe that puffe vp truth and wounde charitie Thus sayth Gregorie and this is cited euen in your owne decrées not onely about the word Vniuersall Pope but vpon these titles Princeps SacerdotuÌ„ vel summus sacerdos the chief of the priests or the chiefe or high priest or any other such titles So farre was this Pope Gregorie then from the pride of the late Pope Gregories that haue bene since for he both acknowledged himselfe to be but equall to other Bishoppes and him selfe and all other Byshops to be vnder their naturall Princes The testimonie therefore of Pope Gregorie is but wrested to vrge suche superioritie of Byshoppes as shoulde deâ—… their Princes supreme gouernmente Now M. Saunders hauing thus as he thinketh fully confyrmed his proues for the superioritie of Priests in the olde Testamente abouâ—… Kings gathereth altogether and knites vp hys conclusion saying VVherefore sithe the institution of Priests proceeded from the good wyll of God and from his free mercie but God graunted not the dignitie of a king but in his anger at the peoples petition lesser consideration is worthily had of the king than of the people both bicause he is made king onely for the peoples cause and also onely at the peoples petition But the Priests although they be made for the peoples cause yet neither onely for the peoples cause but muche more for the honour of Christe Neither onelye at the petition of the people were they made but rather of the free mercie of God and that for that eternall predestination of God whiche was ordayned aboute oure saluation in the tyme appoynted to be brought to effect Ye make your comparison and your conclusion hang illâ—…oredly together Maister Saunders your comparison is of the Princes and the Priests estate and ye conclude that therefore lesse consideration is worthily to be had of the king than of the people How chaunce ye say not of the king than of the Priests but belike ye thoughte that that was oute of controuersie the Priests were so farre aboue the people that much lesse consideration is to be had of the people than of the priests But maister Saunders your beast sacrificed said not so nor your authors Philo and Iosephus but sayde he was made equall to the people But say you the king was made for the peoples cause I graunt ye maister Saunders and was not the priest so too yea doe not your selfe sayâ—… he was made for the peoples cause also if this then argue an inferiorship as in déede it doth in respecte of the ende doth it not argue the priest to be inferior too and lesser consideration to be had of him than of the people that is to say of the Church of God But saye you the King vvas made onely for the peoples cause and the priest was made for the honor of Christ also for the eternall predestination of God vvhich vvas ordained about saluation in time appoynted to be broughte to effect And I pray ye Maister Saunders was not this another cause of making the King also dyd not his estate make to the honour of Christe and represent Christ so well as the Priestes estate was not he called Christus Domini The Lordes annoynted so well as the Priest yea and better to then by your leaue For Christ was not onely figured in the kings estate so well as in the Priests but also toke his humanitie of the race of the kings and not of the Priests and so is called the sonne of Dauid not the sonne of Aaron the king of the Ievves not the priest of the Ievves And though in respect of his priesthoode he was the onely sacrifice of our redemption whereby our sinnes are taken away Christus mortuus est pro peccatis nostris Christ dyed for our sinnes yet notwithstanding resurrexit pro iustificatione nostra he rose for ouâ—…â—…ustification by his kingdome by his power by his victorie by his resurrection by his ascention by his sitting at the right hand of his father in al which his kingdome is contained so that it comprehendeth both our PredestinatioÌ„ and our saluation too And therefore we are taught by Christ to saye let thy kingdome come and not let thy priesthoode come And not onely all our estate in this life and the life to come but all the grace and mercie and iustice and power and glory of God is attributed not so muche to the priesthoode as to the kingdome of Christ. But ye saye God was angrie with the peoples request when he made the kings estate I graunt you Maister Saunders and tolde ye the reason before out of Lyra and the texte is plaine bicause God him selfe was king vnto them which doth not abase but so much the more aduaunce it But now when Maister Saunders hath thus extolled the Priests gouernmeÌ„t of the old TestameÌ„t he abaseth theÌ„ again by comparison of Bishops of the newe Testament saying Sith therefore the Bishops of the Churche of Christ are of no lesse dignitie than
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
eight a pyller of his subiecte â–ª vnder whom his subiectes lyued in suche prosperitie and abundance in 〈◊〉 renoune and glorie when all their 〈◊〉 â—…o dradde them for theâ—…oble conduct gouernment of such a Prince as all things considered we finde not the like in all the ancient histories Did he pill them that delyuered theÌ„ from the greatest piller and spoiler of them froÌ„ al his insatiable Caterpillers that had pilled the Prince the Sâ—… biectes and all the Realme and had gotten almoste all the goodes and lâ—…ndes into their clutches yea their bodies and soules also Did he pill the realme that brought the greatest ryches into the Realme the Gospell of Chryste and Christian libertie that euer the Realme could haue Ye quarel at the basenesse of the money Hath ther not bin worsse money in times past in Englande They saye that we had money of lether haue not the most of other Princes brasen coyne But I sée you haue a brasen face and a fonde malicious head Is the Princes coine counterfet with you and if it had bene a great deale worsse than it was can ye call it adulterate or forged No Saunders for here I must néedes leaue out Master such Traytors as you be are counterfeiters of money howbeit you are farre worsse traytors and forge a naughtie coine in the steade of Gods word to giue the people trifling traditions of your owne stampe and take good money for them You obiecte his wiâ—…es vnto him What meane ye by this ye wiuelesse and shamelesse generation ye dispisers and defilers of Matrimonie wold ye haue had him haue liued like you ye caused him in deede vnwittingly while hée ignorantly obeyed your Pope to liue wyth his brothers wife Whiche when he knewe he adhorred and forsoke as flatte againste Gods worde Thou shalte not vncouer the secretes oâ—… thy brothers wife And yet the Pope contrarie to Gods expresse lawe and the lawe of nature dispensed with it and you Papistes maynteine it tooth and nayle as a lawful maryage This in déede was his greatest misfortune to haue taken hir so long through too much credite of false Papistes to be his lawfull wife whiche was not his wife at all and yet both the parties ignorantly offended Aâ—… for his firste true and lawfull wife we maye saye indéede he had misfortune in hir too that he so muche credited the sclanderous vndermining Papists that neuer stinted to procure hir dâ—…ath for the hatred of the gospel that she professed And so at length most subtilly wrought it made hir a sweet sacrifice to God and a most holy martyr No misfortune but mosie happiâ—… hap to hir to sustaine so sclaunderdus a death in so innocent a cause the misfortune was the king hir husbandes to be so beguiled by such false Papistes And yet to vs this maryage was most fortunate which God so blessed with such a fruit as neuer the like did spring in Englande As for all King Heuries other wiues saue one were as as vertuous chast godly Quéenes as any Christian kyng coulde haue And yet the default of that one is not to be imputed vnto him which to die is more than cankred malice Lest of al ought it to be ascribed to the euent of his supreme gouernment Shoulde M. colsfolly be ascribed to Dauid yea shoulde a mans owne faults be accounted for the euent of his vertues should misfortunes following be déemed the effectes of godlynesse going before But you denie all this that this was godly to become this supreme gouernour and say king Henrie tooke it first vpon him But stay your haste Master Saunders When we come to the practise of christian Kings before king Henrie ye shall finde it contrarie and ye shall finde by that that is alreadie sayde to Master Stapleton that in the olde Testament Dauid Salomon Iosaphat c. toke vpon them this supreme gouernement in their kindomes that king Henrie dyd Ye say he was neuer the happier but the more vnhappier after he tooke it on him Whereas he neuer prospered better than after he had expelled the Popes vsurped authoritie For euen then began he indéed to raigne and rule other where before he bore the name of a king and was ruled by other the Pope his Prelates and Priestes hearing all the 〈◊〉 Besides the happiest happe of all the knowledge of God that by his supreme gouernement then beganne to florishe Nowe after his rayling on king Henrie he descendeth to king Edward the sixte saying And he beeing deade God by a maruellous manner shewed vnto all the world how litle this Ecclesiasticall Primacie and high calling was agreeable to kings For Henrie the eight being deade Edwarde his sonne a childe almost nine yere old succeeded in his kingdome If wee loke to the right that this childe had in the kingdome hee was no lesse king than his father was But if we turne our eyes vnto the state of the church verily there is a great difference whether it be gouerned of a childe or of a man of perfecte age Sée the insaciable malice of these Papistes not onely against the lyuing but the deade and that against their late most gratious soueraignes It suffiseth not to haue thus coÌ„tumeliously railed on the Quéenes Maiesties father of blessed memorie but also to deface hir Maiesties brother that most vertuous Prince king Edwarde saying he toke vpon him this Ecclesiasticall Primacie as though he or his father toke vpon him any ecclesiastical primacie bicause they toke vpon them a supreme gouernement in all ecclesiasticall matters But will he spare for spite to sclaunder them that presumeth to wrest and misconster Gods heauenly prouidence in calling king Edward to the kingdome while he was yet a child He graunteth he was as ful king as his father was Then say I he had al the right and authoritie that his father had But sayth he there is a great difference betwéene the right of a kingdome and the state of the Church whether it be gouerned of a child or of a man of perfect age As though we talked not M. SauÌ„ders of such a kingdome as were the Churche also or as though a kingdome consider it howe ye will require not likewise to be gouerned of one of perfecte age Or as though ther be not also a great differeÌ„ce betwene the right of authoritie belonging to the person be he child or maÌ„ and the personal gouerning of him But let vs heare M. Saunders arguments against a child He maketh exception against a child for two reasons first the example of Christe secondly the saying of S. Paule Cal. 4. Of the first he saith For if euen Christ toke not on him the gouernment of the Church before he attained to thirtie yeres of age how much lesse would he that the Church should be gouerned of a child I answere First the gouernment that Christ tooke at 30. yeares of age was
in his personal exercise of the ecclesiasticall functioÌ„ wherto a mature age is requisite But the kings Supremacie requireth no such personall exercise of ecclesiasticall function but is cleane another matter therfore this example of Christes age is impertinent Secondly we grauÌ„t the Churche shoulde not be gouerned of a childe in that respecte he is a childe in which consideration he is no king as you distinguished before betwene a man and a christiaÌ„ maÌ„ and ye must so againe distinguishe betwéene his nature and his person or his person and his office Nowe in regarde of his office the defecte of his nature is supplyed by those that represent him in his office and they béeing men of graue yeares and knowledge you can not iustly say the gouernement is committed to a childe The second argument is taken from S. Paule 4. Gal. Moreouer a childe so long as hee is a little one liueth vnder Tutors and gouernours and so the Supreme Heade of the Churche needeth another superior Head to gouerne and rule him and that not so muche by chaunce or fortune as by imbecillitie of his proper nature and the necessitie of the thing it selfe Howe can he therefore be the Supreme Head of the Church that liueth vnder an other head Ercept M. Saunders were bent pienishly to warble he would not reason thus knowing well inough that those of riâ—…er yeres which gouerne the kings person in his nonage be not his head and he a member or subiecte vnder them but they representing him he and they are but one in office and their gouernemente is not properly theirs but is the kings owne gouernemente And so the head hath no head ouer him but onely Iesus Christ. But M. Saunders foreseeing that by this reason he might make the childe no king at all of his kingdome which he before confessed that king Edwarde was as full king as his father he preuenteth the obiection and séeketh a scape to shifte it For if ye say by the same reason he is not king of his kingdome neither bicause he is compelled to gouerne that also by others the answere is easie it is no maruell if the lawe of man which placeth children ouer kingdomes by force of succession be founde imperfecte But it were greatly to be marueled if the lawe of Christ also whereby he placeth pastors ouer his Church coulde be accused in anie parte of imperfection For as Moses lawe brought nothing to perfection so on the contrarie the lawe of Christ lefte nothing vnperfect as whome it became to fulfill all righteousnesse Therefore there shall bee none much lesse anie chiefe head in the Churche of Christe the which by nature can not doe the office of an ecclesiastical head But a childe can neither teach nor baptize nor by anie meanes assoile the harder questions of the Gospell The answere M. Saunders as ye say is easie but is it a good answere it were an easie matter to answere if such easie answeres may serue that ye may say what ye will and contrarie your selfe too when ye finde an inconuenience And such an inconuenience as wipes away all your former reasons Neither can ye sufficiently aunswere it that if your reason hold of the defecte of the kings nonage while he is a chylde he may then be no gouernor at all no not in Temporall matters neither bycause therein he is gouerned of others also in that he is but yet a chylde and so in his kingdome shoulde become no gouernour at all But for an easie answere to this ye saye this is a defecte in the lawe of man. Why M. Saunders do ye nowe make this the lawe of man that a chylde myght be a King sayde ye not before and that more truely it was gods lawe Numeri 27. and Gal. 4. and cited for examples Ioas and Iosias and againe doe ye saye this is an imperfection in the lawe that is an imperfection in the person nay Maister Saunders the lawe of succession was good and perfecte Neither your sentence that ye cite of S. Paule the lawe brought nothing to perfection serues to this purpose Neither was the fault in the law but in the defecte of the obseruer But saint Paule speakes there of the morall law and of iustification which the lawe of God giuen by Moyses could not bring to perfection confuting an other error which the Phariseis the Pelagians and the Papistes holde But what is this to the present purpose Saint Paule complaineth not of the imperfection of the politike lâ—…w of the Iewes therfore this is manifestly wrested Ye obiect that Christs law is perfect as though S. Paules law Gal. 4. cited by your selfe for the kingdome of a child be not also the law of Christ and as for Christs law for the pastors of his Church â–ª we accuse it not to be imperfecte and yet in the pastors themselues there is no perfection althoughe Christes law for them be most perfect But what answereth this the purpose The Prince takes not the pastorall office on him nor to doe the office of an ecclesiasticall head as ye terme it nor to teache or baptise or astoyle the hard questions of the Gospell either in his noneage or in his full age either childe or man These are but your surmised sclaunders on the Prince But to deuise sclaunders is with you an easie answere Nowe vpon these argumentes against the supremacie of king Edward he knits vp his conclusion of the euent saying therefore sith God after not the best man calling him selfe the heade of the Churche did substitute a childe euen by the things themselues he admonished vs that that honour did not rightly agree to the father that was so euill applied to his sonne The more ye dâ—… still vnreuerently carpe at king Henry calling him not the best maÌ„ the more ye shew your cankred stomak M. Saunders that your selfe are one of the worst kind of meÌ„ whose malice no not death caÌ„ satiate But the more it redoundeth to the praise of that moste noble and vertuous king being holdeÌ„ for so much the better man of all good men how much the worse man such wicked men as you esteeme him ab illaudatis vituperari laudabile est it is commendable to be dscommended of discommendable men Your interpretatioÌ„ of a child succéeding him hath neither charitie nor truth neither can you frame anye good argumente on it but rather on the contrarie Where God so blessed the raigne of the childe that in so shorte a time so long rooted superstitions Idolatries were abolished and the word of God so truely and fréely set forth it argueth that God not onely liked the title of the father but also confirmed it in the sonne shewed well that the childhood of his person was no impediment to the authoritie of his office as you maliciously woulde wrest it After Kyng Edwarde ye come to Queene Marie saying Moreouer when men neither thus awaked
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
I tell thée plaine thou shalt pay for him then I cry you mercy sir quoth the poore maÌ„ I should haue said your bull hath goared my cowe tushe quoth the rich maÌ„ the case is altered that it is another matter And so I perceiue M. SauÌ„ders it is with you when the Priest is said to haue any authoritie in the olde Testament marke that say you that maketh for vs and why so bicause the olde Testament is a figure of the new the gouernement ye marke it was for the priest but the gouernment must not alter the states must be a like and all this geare But now sir it is proued the kings gouernement was aboue the priests Is it so say you that is another maner of matter tush theÌ„ the case is altered If this came to passe in the olde Testament yet no reason shoulde compell that the same should be so in the new Testament fith the reason of the ecclesiasticall gouernement is changed But as the prouerbe sayth the case is altered but the matter is where it was What a mockerie is this in so waightie and plaine a matter But let vs heare your reasons Maister Saunders Nor without cause say you for the Synagog of the Iewes although it coÌ„tained in it som true Israelits iust meÌ„ yet both it was was called a earthly rather thaÌ„ a heueÌ„ly kingdoÌ„e in so much that Augustine doubteth whether in the olde Testament the kingdome of heauen be euer named or no much lesse that it is promised for rewarde For those things that were done did signifie in dede diuine things and so the lawe it selfe was also spirituall but the things themselues were not in themselues so diuine as our things are in so much that the Apostle teacheth that the glorie of the Synagoge was no glory at all in respect of the excellente glorye of that Ministerie whiche nowe is exercised in the Church by the Ministers of the newe Testament not in the letter but in the spirite Therfore sith the people of God consisteth of a bodie and a soule or spirite the carnall part obtained the principalitie in the olde people and was ordained to signifie spirituall things VVhervpoÌ„ as mount Synai the kindled fire the whirlewind the darknesse the storme and sounde of the trumpet and voyce of the words was onely of the earth and carnall so nowe all things are spirituall and internall There raigned the seruile feare of God and the bodily sworde but here is moste deare loue and the spirituall sworde they abuse therfore the holy Scriptures that for those things that were done of the Kings in the olde Testamente thinke now also that the kingdome of heauen which is the Church should be subiect to earthly kings This answere why the gouernement is changed is a depressing of their estate in comparisoÌ„ of ours that theirs was more earthly ours more spirituall which as in part we denie not yet repute not theirs so grossely as here he makes it yet is this comparison plainely wrested to inferre alteration of gouernement thervpon from the Princes ouer the Priests then to the Priests ouer the Princes nowe For this alteration maketh the olde not to prefigure the newe but to destroy it as no comparison but a cleane contrarietie But the true comparison being such as the one estate prefigured the other the excellencie is in the difference of this aboue that retaining still the same estate of gouernment so that if those godly Princes did so well order their gouernement in those causes that in comparison were but earthly and not so deuine as ours then muche more shoulde our Christian Princes order their gouernment better in much more excellent ecclesiasticall matters And thus both the figure and the comparison holdeth But M. Saunders turneth all as though the King and the Prieste were compared togither that the kings gouernement was but earthly then and the priestes gouernement now is spiritual Wheras the coÌ„parison is of the things gouerned and not of the gouernors And yet to compare those with these gouernors those earthly Princes were not so litle spirituall then but these spirituall Priestes are ten times more earthly grosse and carnall nowe What S. Augustine douteth I remember not but we without doubting know now that the kingdome of heauen was promised then to them so well as nowe to vs and they without doubting hoped for it and vndoubtedly did receiue it and do enioy it The comparison of glorie that Saint Paule maketh that theirs was nothing to ours is true But he speaketh not thereof comparing visible glories the one with the other such as the ministerie of the Popishe Church settes for the it selfe withall For in such outwarde glorie the olde Lawe passed the new the Pharisies passed Christe the Heatheus passed the Christians both in the Apostles time and long while after till the glorious ministerie of the Pope hath far excelled them all The examples of the glorie and terror in Mount Synai of the seruile feare of the bodily sword are iumbled togither disorderly and are compared to spirituall resemblances or contraries in the Gospell But as they take not away the Christian Magistrates bodily sword nor glorie so meddle they not with alteration of Princes gouernement ouer Ministers in causes ecclesiasticall therefore are méere impertinent But if all these shiftes will not serue then saith M. Saunders sée the inconueniences Othervvise if the state of the olde kings shall be drawne to the time of the newe Testament shall not the state of the Byshops of the Leuiticall tribe by the same reason be drawne to our time also lette there be therefore one tribe appointed to the outwarde Priesthoode let there be one Temple in the world let there be but one Byshop and let bloud sacrifices be restored But if thou confesâ—…est these things are made voyde wherefore grauntest thou not also that those things are voide that kings haue done about diuine matters â–ª are only the doings of kings eternal nor could they be changed so farre as pertained to the disposing of holy things What could or what could not be done M. Saunders we stande not vpon but what is or what is not done is the question And that the state of the ciuill gouernement is not altered your selâ—… haue often graunted that the gouernment still was one that the one was a figure of the other that Christe toke not away nor diminished the Princes authoritie As for the Leuiticall Law of the Priests the scripture is plaine in many places that it is cleane dissolued you cannot therefore make these alike except you wil become a iewe And so it seemeth by this your wicked reason you had rather renounce the Priesthoode sacrifice of Christe bring in againe the priesthoode sacrifice of the olde law than you woulde giue Princes authoritie ouer Priestes in the newe lawe But now that M. Sanders hath thus answered the
more auncient If you your selfe Maister Saunders had béene auncient many woulde haue thoughte you had doated but nowe they will thinke you were to yong a diuine when you made this reason of antiquitie But let goe your reason is your matter true is Priesthoode of more antiquitie you say it is euen from the beginning vnder the lawe of nature Were it so M. Saunders said you not in the first Chap. of this seconde booke that the Ciuil power sprang euen of the law of nature also wherby the father is superior to his sonne the vncle to the cosin the senior to the Iunior is not this as auncient as Priesthode yea we read of no creation of Priesthoode so auncient But you saye there were no Kings as thoughe we contended on the name were he called king Prince Duke c â–ª so he were a gouernor As for the gouernors for certaine ages after Moyses before the kings trow you they were al priests Nay you shall finde but one priest among them all â–ª And yet you carie awaye the matter so smooth as thoughe they were all priests and saye the creation of priesthood according to the law of Moyses You meane I know the common cited place for the Iudges determination in litigious doubts Deut. 17. referring it onely to the priest But Moyses there expressely nameth the Iudge besides the high priest And to make you see how ye confute your owne error in taking this iudge to haue onely or chiefely béen the high priest marke your owne saying that the state of gouernement from Moyses to the kings was according to Moyses lawe But all that while of so many Iudges there was but one priest therefore eyther it was not according to Moyses lawe or else Moyses law ment not onely nor chiefely the Priests And trow you Moyses law was broken of discerning difficulties all this while and after the kings beganne to gouerne I thinke you dare not say it was nor accuse for the breach of Moyses law so many godly Princes If not then the discerning of those difficulties is impertinently alleaged against the Princes superioritie And thus not onely your reason from Antiquitie â—…ut also your matter for antiquitie against the state of Princes faileth Now to your other reasons Moreouer saye you the Priesthoode was altogether necessarie that the fygure shoulde at no time fayle VVhereby we shoulde be admonished of Christs eternall priesthood VVhen notwithstandyng the same people of God myght so haue waÌ„ted a king that God complayned that he himself was cast off when Samuel his Leuite beyng neglected an earthly king was demaunded Priesthood you say at no time could be spared so well as a kings estate And why so bicause it prefigured and admonished Christes eternall priesthoode True in déede Maister Saunders so it did But was there nothing to be prefigured and admonished concerning Christe but his eternall Priesthood hath he not an eternall kingdome too or was not it 〈◊〉 necessarie to be prefigured admonished as his priesthood So that by this rule Kings or that is all one in effect wiâ—…e kings Princes ouer gods people were euen as necessarie as priests But say you gods people might so well haue wanted kings that God complained he was cast off when Samuel his leuite neglected an earthly king was demanded Here is nothing left out the may seme to make for the defacing of the state of kings And yet that which he bringeth against it as is alreadie shewed doth the more commend the state therof and although they might haue wanted the state of a king yet could they neuer want the state of a Ciuil gouernor no more than they coulde haue wanted priesthoode Howbeit we say not they might haue wanted priesthood or did want it For they alwayes had priests among them good or bad But they alwayes had not priests their gouernors but very seldome and that extraordinarily till the Priest Hircanus was king and priest together Besides this saith M. Saunders the king was graunted of God at the peoples petition to goe out before the people to warre but not to administer ecclesiasticall matters for God had prouided for them alreadie by his leuites and priests Is there nothing maye be reckoned vp M. Saunders besides these twaine goyng out to warre before the people and administring ecclesiasticall matters in déede these two are not very agréeable although your Popes Prelats iumble them together As for the administring eccl. matters was and is the Priests office not the Princes But besides this there are manie moe things appointed to the Prince than to go out before the people to warre For if there were no more what should he do at home in time of peace breake peace and still go out to warre Ha M. Saunders there are other things than warfare for a Prince in peace to loke vnto and ye could hit them Moreouer saith he the Iewes might ascribe to the power of the king the diuision of the people the Apostacie of the kingdome of Samaria and the Captiuitie of Babilon VVhervpon they beyng returned from the captiuitie did not againe chose vnto them a king that shoulde be counted greater than the Bishoppe but a Captaine that shoulde rule no lesse in prophane matters than in holy things the Bishop shoulde be are the principalitie To ascribe the diuision of the people the Apostacie of Samaria and the Captiuitie of Babilon to the kingly power if it be not of wilfull malice is of great lacke eyther of skill or consideration and is a fallacion ab accidenti By the like reason we might accuse the Iewes priesthood bicause some of them were loyterers some of them Idolaters some of them ambitious yea the most of them in Christs time and his Apostles the extremest enemies of the Gospell What shall we ascribe all this to the priesthood No nor to any parte therof but to the naughtinesse of the Priests that abused their priesthood euen as much if not muche more than did those kings abuse their kingly power The kingdome was lightly neuer worse gouerned thaÌ„ wheÌ„ Helie being a Priest had the gouernance of it And although Samuel himselfe were good and holy yet his sonnes were wicked whome he made gouernours But in the stocke of the Machabées when the priests ruled all or the moste till the approching of Iesus Christ and so till the dissolution of that state what a number of wicked Imps were there you can scarce fet the lyke paterns excepte you rake hell or serche the Popes bedroll and his Cardinals for wicked gouernment But saith M. Saunders the Iewes after their retâ—…re from Captiuitie did no more chose a king that shuld be counted greater than the Bishop Ha go to then M. SauÌ„ders the king was counted greater than the Byshop before their Captiuitie Yea but say you they chose no more kings ofter their returne As thoughe M. Saunders after their returne the matter
lay in them to haue a king or no and not rather in these kings that had subdued them who althoughe they appointed or suffered petit rulers ouer them yet woulde they not suffer them to haue a king But whyle they had kings we reason of those kinges authoritie But what reason haue you else for this is a very slender one But this say you in this kinde I will make my principall reason that Christ when he was in this worlde and fulfilled the whole law and all righteousnesse yet notwithstanding he would in thinges ecclesiasticall onely that the Priest and by no meanes that the earthly king should gouerne This were a principall reason in déede if you could proue this M. Saunders but as yet you haue not proued it and I thinke it will be harder than you wéene for you to doe Now to proue it you reason thus For he openly refused to administer an earthly kingdome and therfore fled when he sawe the people go about to make him a king And he denied that he was ordeyned to be a deuider betweene the brethren But if so be that after the perfecte reason and minde of Moses lawe it had at least beene comely either the Churche or the Bishop to be gouerned of an earthly King Christ would not haue left that thing vnfulfilled For it was no harde matter for him to haue administred a earthly kingdome for some very little time the which when he did not neither yet omitted he any thing that can iustly be desired to the perfect gouernement of his Churche It hath neuer beene at any time or yet is of any perfection that an earthly king shoulde arrogate to him selfe any power in ecclesiasticall matters besides this that with his sworde he shoulde defende and fight for that whiche is defined by the Prieste â–ª sentences And is this necessarie in the Churche M. Saunders that the Prince may do thus much with his sworde But I pray you where dyd Christ thus muche as to fight for the Priests decrees with a sworde If your reason be good you muste shewe this or else why reason you from the factes of Christe whyle he was héere on earth if you can shewe as you promised that Christe woulde that the Priest and by no meanes the prince shuld gouerne in eccl. matters this were to the purpose But this you shew not but would windelace it in with a bought that if Christ would haue had Princes gouerne in ecclesiasticall matters he woulde haue bene a Prince him selfe but he would neuer be a Prince and yet if he had would he might therefore he woulde not haue Princes meddle in matters of his Church sithe he woulde not meâ—…le in matters pertayning to their gouernement If this were a good reason I might reuerse it thus that sithe be medled in their matters when he had tribute to be paide to Cesar when he bad his Disciples not feare them that kill the body when he called Herode Foxe when he tolde Pilate he had no power but that was giuen him from aboue therefore they agayne might meddle in his matters bicause he medled in theirs This is as good a reason as yours But ye say Christ tooke not a kingdome vpon him nor woulde deuide lands yet he tooke vpon him all things necessarie for his Churches gouernment what shoulde you conclude hereon Ergo the Princes gouernment is not necessarie in Church causes is this the direct coÌ„clusion Nay M. Saund. either the coÌ„clusion takes away the Princes gouernmeÌ„t froÌ„ the Church of Christ or else which it doth in déed it hitteth your Pope if you marke it well who pretending to follow Christ taketh an earthly kingdome vpon him and deuideth landes which Christ refused to do The argument is thus Christ did al that was necessary but Christ did not take vpoÌ„ him a kingdome Ergo he thought it not necessary This is flat agaynst the Pope but nothing agaynst christian Princes The coÌ„clusioÌ„ is good for it was not necessary for Christ in his person yet for christian Princes it might wel be necessarie It is necessarie for christian Princes as your selfe coÌ„fesse to vse the teÌ„poral sword in the churches defence and yet Christ him selfe did neuer vse it Except you wil say he vsed it after a sort when with a materiall whip outwarde violeÌ„ce he draue the byers sellers out of the temple But then I replie that herein he exercised for the while eueÌ„ the office of a Magistrate shewed not onely his owne zeale power of his kingdome but also a paterne to al Magistrates Princes with what zeale power they shâ—…ld exercise their authoritie in reforming abuses in the church of god Although Christ him self did not personally handle the sworde as they personally may do Neither yet did Christ all those thinges that his ministers did ought to do It is necessarie for the ministers to baptise yet Christ him selfe that we read of did neuer baptise any he could haue don it if he had thought it necessarie What shal we say with M. Sand he did al that was necessary but he did not baptise Ergo to baptise is not necessarie This therefore is a wrong principle that Christe must haue done euery thing personally him selfe that is necessarie to be done in his Church True it is that if Christe neither did it nor taught it to be done by him self nor by his Apostles but would the contrarie as M. Sand sayth then the argument were good so it confuteth a nuÌ„ber of Popish traditions that were neither done nor taught by Christ nor his Apostles but rather that contrary But as for this gouernment of Princes as M. Sanders him selfe confesseth was practised in the olde lawe whiche lawe gaue the Prince his charge therin And Christ testiâ—…eth that he came not to breake the lawe but to fulfill it And althoughe he became not a Prince him self which might haue seemed to haue made â—…or the Popes purpose but rather condemneth it in his ministers yet both he him self his Apostles obeyed the Prince then ruling which now the Pope denieth statly to do But ye say Christ his Apostles obeyed them not in eccl. matters Neither was it reason M. San. both bicause Christ him selfe was the law maker his Apostles were the first teachers of it Princes then were Infidels But to reason now from the like state in the princes that now are christiaÌ„â—… to giue in all things like authoritie to Bishops paâ—…ors with Christ and his Apostles is as farre from reason on the other side Neither yet do we debarre from Bishops and Pastors that superioritie ouer Princes that is giuen by Christe and his Apostles to them and their successours of the administration of spirituall and ecclesiastical things neither do we as M. Saunders sayth giue the gouernement of the Churche of Christe to an earthly Prince For bothe the Prince is Christian and not
Christ should place ouer them a limme of the Deuil Verily Iouianus vvhen after the death of Iulianus he was saluted Augustus and Caesar I can not quoth he sithe I am a Christian gouerne the armie of Iulian that is infected with the precepts of the pestiferous doctrine TheÌ„ the souldiors answered that they wer not straÌ„gers from the Christian religion But if there ought to be so great a likenesse coherencie betwene the head the members that a christian Emperor wold gouerne no souldiors but christians how much more vnequal vncomly is it that the Christian souldiors of their owne voluntarie should call vnto gouernment an heathen or heretical man For what is this else but to cast themselues in danger of losing their faith Al this againe we graunt you M. sand so long as you restrain your self to voluntarie election And sée that in al your proues examples you kepe your selfe thereto for else you straggle froÌ„ your own demauÌ„des But how many Princes in Christendome haue you that be chosen in that sort of so frâ—… voluntarie choice as you speake of or not rather their kingdomes belong vnto them by claime of right succession or otherwise And shall these be debarred the right of their enheritance for pretence of religion Well goe to then what if we say such such a Prince is a papist a mainteiner of false religion differing froÌ„ Gods truth our profession therefore we wil not haue him to be our king although by law he haue good title to it yea be in reall possession of it Wil you allowe this our refusall M. sand I trowe you wil not If you wil not then you breake this your own rule that you would so faine haue graunted to you Notwithstanding where free election is tâ—… be had ther your rule is most true Let Protestants there choose Protestants Papistes there choâ—…se Papists hardyly so the one shal the lesse encomber the other But where men can not do as they would there they must do as they may so nere as theyâ—…aÌ„ choose whom they think fittest But if it lie not in them thus voluÌ„tarily to chose they must take their lot perchance of the worsse praye to God to amend that is amisse receiue their duetiful Prince with good loyal hearts yea though he be an enimie to the Gospel beséeching God to conuert him or to mollifie him to becoÌ„me enclinable at the least to be no persecuter of the truth so praying for his successe in goodnesse obey him in truth dissent from him in â—…ull but rebel against him in nothing coÌ„mit the rest to God that sente him And this me thinketh is a better rule of the twaine than that he hauing right should wrongfully be refused The example that you bring of Iouianus is not alike Who refused the gouernmeÌ„t ouer Iulianus souldiors For there is a difference betwéene Princes refusing to be gouernors and the peoples refusing to be subiectes If you can shâ—…we that the Christian souldiors of Iulianus as this Iouianus one of Iulians chiefest Captaines and the Christian souldiors vnder his band renounced their obedience to Iulâ—…an or woulde not goe to warre against the Persians and fight vnder his conduct but reuolt from him bycause hee was reuolted from God then you shoulde shew something to the purpose But this you can not shew yea we can shewe the â—…t contrarie that so long as Iulian raigned Iouian woulde neuer rebell nor forsake his obedience althoughe his Prince were an Apostata and renied the faithe of Christe If you replye that Iouian â—…id forsake his souldiorship in Iulians time True it is that â—…eing a Captaine â—…uer a thousande when Iulian made a lâ—…w for Souldiors that either they shoulde sacrifice or for sake their Souldiorship Iouian chose rather to lâ—…se his girdle which was the ornan â—…nt of his knighthoode than to obey the wicked prâ—…cepts of the Emperor Howbeit herein â—…e renouÌ„ced not his obedience to his Princes estate but rather expressed his obedience in obeying the penaltie of his lawe And when the Emperour for necessitie of the warre chose him againe he refused not to become againe his soulviour Your example therefore of Iouian maketh cleane against your purpose This one petition being thus demaunded whiche we graunt vnto you in frée elections although you aske but one demaunde yet nowe on this you will encroch an other and set downe the figure of 2. in your margine as a seconde demaunde saying But the lavve of God vvhich commaundeth none should be placed ouer Christians but a Christian the same lavve commaundeth that none other should of Catholike people be receiued to the gouernement of a kingdome but a Catholike For he that is a Catholike althoughe in vvorde he call himselfe notvvithstanding he hath lefte of to be a liuely meÌ„ber of the Church of Christ. You aske but one petition M. Saunders and we haue graunted it but will you therevpon aske more nay then it is time to stop you You spake before of a Christian and now you demaunde the same of a Catholike What do you mean hereby do you make a difference betwéene a Christian and a Catholike But howe chaunce you saye not as you sayde before a Papist For I thinke by Catholike you meane a Papist but this we haue gramited you alreadie Lette a Papist in free election if he will needes chose a Papist Qui â—…descit sordescat adhuc He that is filthie let him be filthie stil and let a Turke choose a Tuâ—…ke sithe he will choose no better Yet then let a Protestant choose a Protestant by your own rule But that he that is no Catholike that is to saye as you expounde it no Papist is no liuely member of the Church of Christ This is an other question M. Saunders and you desired to propounde but one and will you now haue so many You sayde it shoulde appeare vvith hovve great equitie you woulde defende your cause and will you nowe offer â—…o greate iniurie to so many Christian Princes bothe in the East Church in the Weast in the South and in the North that are no such Cathoâ—…kes that is to say no Papistes and therefore be no liuely members of Christes Church Nay M. Saunders this must not be graunted there is no equitie in it excepte you be able to proue it For you knowe that the title of Catholike is not onely called in question whether it belong to you or no but also in your sense thereof for a Papist it is so sore battered that it will rather fal out that the Catholike is no liuely member of Christes Church thaÌ„ that the Protestante or Gospeller as you call vs is none But let vs sée howe you procéede VVhiche thinges sithe they are thus this is moreouer to be added Although that any vvhen he vvas first made king was a Christian and a Catholike if
soule admit also he finde the soule of the king infected with spiritual Leprie must be therefore pronounce him to be no king nay I trow the priest serued not Ozias so Must the Priest depose him must be assoile his subiectes froÌ„ their sworne obedience â–ª must he bid theÌ„ chose another â–ª where find you this M. Saund â–ª in what law in Robin Hoodes lawe or Iack strawes law surely it is some rebels lawe for in gods law you can not shew it that Priests should do such things No say you It is a matter of faith who should deale therein but the Priests Is this a matter of faith M. Saunders to sturre the people to violate their Faith cannot the Faith be kept to God except we breake our Faith to the Prince you aske who should do it rather thaÌ„ the Bishop where of all other he should least do it to say truth none should do it But if any will attempt rebellion Popish Priests I sée are readiest and here M. Saunders offereth himselfe and his fellowes A méete office for such officers But in gods word we finde no such office for Priests or for any other we sée there no such example saue of Corah Dathan and Abiron of Absolon Ioab Achitophel and Abiathar and suche other traytors whom God punished accordingly Godly Priests rebuked euil Princes but they neuer offred them this iniurie But if the subiects saith M. Saunders loke not in this matter to their duetie then it belongeth to the pastors by what meanes so euer they can to prouide that he that sittes in the chaire of pestilence should not raigne in the Church of God â–ª Yea there M. Saunders there lo if neuer a Captaine for traitors can be found among subiectes the Priestes will be their Captaines and will rebell alone if none other will besides Do the Prince but once displease the Priests then his royall throne wherin God hath set him is the Chaire of pestilence and the Priests will prouide another king and that by all whatsoeuer meanes they caÌ„ they wil attempt al wayeâ—… possible by practises conspiracies whisperings murmurings railings blind prophecies curses treacheries seditions treasons rebellions murders sorceries pâ—…ysonings 〈◊〉 to conclude by what meanes soeuer they can for these be his owne words to depose the Lords annoynted and to set 〈◊〉 another of their confederacie for all these meanes they 〈◊〉 practise haue practised do practise and therfore now they may pleade practise for theÌ„ If this doctrine be not the chaiâ—… of pestilence then out of doubt it is eueÌ„ the pestilence itselâ—… All the deinls in hell can not deuise to the sclauerie and confusion of al â–ª kings and to the maintenance of the Popes 〈◊〉 ranie sitting in y very chaire of pestilence a more 〈◊〉 pestilent doctrin thaÌ„ this is Now as though this werâ—… so clâ—…re a case that it were not to be so much as once spokeâ—… against What saith he is not the matter thus what do not pastors vvatch for soules as vvell of kings as of theÌ„ that obey kings Yes that they do M. Saunders as it appeareth by youre tale they vvatch for soules and bodies and goods also chiefly of kings The Deuill vvatcheth not as Peter saithe more narrowly seeking vvhome he maye deuoure than doe your Pastors kepe bothe vvatche and warde to deuoure bothe kings and subiectes and to rule all wordly kingdomes Then say yeu it is their duetie to let slip naught of those things that they knowe are profitable for the soule health This indéede is their duetie M. Saunders whiche consisteth in preaching Gods worde But this they can let slip well inough howbeit the matter now in hand is a worldly kingdome and that they will not let slippe in any wise least they should let slip those thinges that they knovve are profitable to the bodies health But vvho seeth not say you that it abhorreth altogither from the soules health that he should be suffered to raigne ouer the faithfull that is himselfe vnfaithfull must not then also of necessitie the people become vnfaithfull There is no necessitie M. Saunders but it is a shrewde likelyhoode But firmum fundamentum Dei stat c. the foundation of God standeth sure hauing this seale God knovveth vvho are his and God will preserue those that are his from assenting to such Princes vnfaithfulnesse Howeâ—…eit the swaye of the people turne to much after the swaye of the Prince whiche is a perilous case as we sée where po â—…pishe Princes raigne and it is a iust plague of God propter â—…eccata populi c. God maketh the Hypocrite to raigne for the peoples offences But againe where the Prince doth fauour and set forth the Gospell of Iesus Christ there redoundeth â—…s much commoditie to the people by the Godly Princes gouernment But vvhen saith M. Saunders Ieroboam the king of Saâ—…aria erected tvvo Idols in Dan and Bethel vve knovve that herevpon almost ten whole Tribes fell into Idolatrie and by litle and litle cast off the faith of one god Shal he therfore be worthy the name of a man that shall affirme a wicked king ought not to be compelled to depose himselfe from his Magistracie Can you make this conclusion on this example M. Sand then are you worthy the name not of a man but of a cunning man I wil not say of a traytor But what can not you make quodlibet ex quolibet what you please of what you liste to serue your turne withall Ieroboam we graunt did make the people fal to Idolatrie But did any Priest or Prophete taking occasion herevpon rebell or prouoke other to rebell against him or did any of them depose him or sought to set vp an other if you finde this you finde somewhat for your purpose if not the example maketh cleane against you The Prophets indéed rebuked the king and that sharply spake against his Idolatrie and tolde him how God would cut off his kingdome Yet they themselues attempted not to cut it off but peaceably obediently liued vnder his gouernment Yea this deposing of a Prince whome God set vp was so far from any subiectes authoritie that it was not lawful for Roboam to whom the kingdome before appertained to attempt to recouer it by law of Armes but he and his people by Gods especial commaundement were bidden go home againe So much this example maketh against you and yet you are so impudent to alleadge it And that herevpon the king muste not onely be deposed of other but by other be compelled to depose himselfe and that he which shal not affirme this and that on this example of Ieroboam is not vvorthy the name of a man. But he that will not play the rancke traytor and wrest the examples of the scripture for him that make cleane against him hath no maÌ„hood in him nor is worthy the name of a maÌ„ with
M. sand And now as though he had brought an inuincible proofe he procéedeth saying But if he must needs be deposed at least for heresie hovv shall that controuersie be iudged without the knowledge of the doctors of the Church who only of their office haue the ordinarie lawful power to loke to the flocke in the whiche the holy Ghost hath placed theÌ„ to guide the Church of God. But the pastors doctors of the church could not be Iudges of any king except the king in that thing were lesse inferior to theÌ„ For neither the equal hath power ouer the equal neither the inferior ouer the superior VVorthily therfore we affirme that al christiaÌ„ kings in those things that appertaine to matters of faith are so vnder bishops priests â–ª that when offending obstinately against the christiaÌ„ religion â–ª they shall perseuer after one two rebukings bothe they maye and they ought for that cause to be by the Byshops sentence deposed from the gouernement that they holde ouer the Christians You conclude ful worthily M. San. your argument is this if the Prince must needes be deposed he must be deposed by the Bishops priestes This reason hangeth all on this presupposall that he hath so fully proued this that the Prince nowe in all post hast must nedes be deposed â–ª And yet we haue hitherto heard no such proues that should enforce any suche necessitie but rather necessarie for the bishops priests or any other subiects behalfe to let him remaine still vndeposed for them although he were an heretike So that we may rather reuerse the argument If nedes he must not be deposed the must not the bishops priests attempt to depose him Howbeit ther is no necessitie in the coÌ„sequence that if he must nedes be deposed that for heresie that the bishops priests must depose hi. Yes saith M. SaÌ„ for how shal that coÌ„trouersie be iudged without theÌ„ what thogh that coÌ„trouersie could not be iudged without theÌ„ M. sand must they therefore be deposers of him froÌ„ his estate bicause they iudge of the doctrine he professeth must they iudge of his Diademe bicause they iudge of his religioÌ„ but what if they theÌ„selues haue corrupt iudgements therein trow you priests bishops haue not had so ere now yes eueÌ„ this sentence of s. Paule that here you cite for the Bishops and Priestes authoritie giueth a plaine warning of it I knowe saithe he that after my departure shall come among you rauening VVolues not sparing the flocke there shall rise vp men from among your selues speaking peruerse thinges to dravve Disciples after them But say you saint Paule saith they must looke to the flocke so much the more in vvhiche the holy ghost hath placed them to guide the church of God. True in déed they must so do But what if they be blind theÌ„selues how loke they to it then And did Christ neuer talke of blind guides you post off that to the Phariseis Iewish Bishops But if you were not more blind thaÌ„ they you would sée a great difference betwéene loking to the flocke guiding the Church of God by teaching true doctrine taking heede vnto and discerning of false doctrines and teachers preching the worde of God with learned iudgement and betwéene the clayming of authoritie to depose Kings and Princes froÌ„ their royal estates Whie say you if they be Iudges they are aboue them and neither equall nor inferior They may be equal and aboue them too in learned Iudgement and also in the dispensation of their misteries yet in publike authoritie far inferior And therfore your conclusion A secuÌ„dum quid ad simpliciter faileth that bicause they are inferior in one thing to Bishops they be in al thinges or in this thing inferior Yea say you they are so vnder Bishops and Priestes that when offending obstinately againste the Christian religion they shall perfeuer after one or two rebukings the Bishoppes may and ought to depose them from their gouernment ouer Christians This is a great inferiorship M. sand to be so much vnder them For by this rule if a Prince as coÌ„monly Popishe Princes doe shoulde kepe a Paramour â–ª a Popishe Byshop may depose him But they wil not be ouer hastie to reproue the Prince for that which they vse themselues neither couÌ„t they it an offence against christiaÌ„ religion yet in the christiaÌ„ religion iâ—… is forbidden so is against it especially to defend it mainteing it as the Papistes do But if he do wrong to any of his subiectes wil not amende his wrong after a B. hath once or twise giueÌ„ him warning of it then by this rule the B. maye straighte depose him And in déede so they haue done would do if the wrong touch them if their lands and goods were diminished then by by it is against the ChristiaÌ„ religion it is plaine heresie except by the seconde admonition it be restored with a recumbentibus the king must be in al the hast deposed there is no remedie nor further respit for not only the Bishops may but plat plaine they ought to doe it Is not here a kingdome brought to a goodly state But he wil say he meaneth by offences against the Christian religion matters of faith But what helpeth this for as wheÌ„ the Lion proclaimed that al horned beasts shuld auoyd out of the wood although the Foxes pricked eares were no horns neyther néeded he haue gone ye he wisely foresaw that this was but a drifte to picke a quarel therefore he hied him out of the wood For since al lay in the Lions interpretatioÌ„ what if the Lion had said his prick eares had bin horns or as sharp as hornes surely then the Fox had dronke for it And if the Byshops may haue the like authoritie to bid the Prince be packing out of his realme if he offend the christian religion what will it boote the Prince if the Bishops be disposed to picke a quarel against him to saye he offendeth not againste the Christian religion but rather defendeth the true religion of Christ against the corruptions of it and in déede so he doth but what auayleth eyther his excuse or the truth of the matter if the Bishops shall say it is heresie and against the christian faith the Bishops that so say shal be the Iudges whether it be so or no were not the king as good get him out of his kingdome at the first or else they will depose him set him out with a heaue ho But that Bishops may thus hamper Princes as they list where find we authoritie or example in the scripture yes saith M. Saunders For God which at the firste so seuered the heauenly kingdome from the earthly kingdome that he suffered the kings of the earth to come togither against the Lorde and againste his anoynted and thereby notably declared his power while by the
of teÌ„poral kingâ—… None is so simple to moue such a fond obiectioÌ„ But the obiection is whether the one be coincident to the other Whether a Bishop to whoÌ„ properly by his Bishoply office 〈◊〉 kingdome belongeth not may take vpon him the gouernment of a kingdome that properly by his kingly office beloÌ„geth to a king This iâ—… the question And you say properly he can not I say muche 〈◊〉 vnproperly But properly or vnproperly Christ hath cleaâ—… debarred it Vos autem non 〈◊〉 But you shall not do so These words strike dead master Sand â–ª therfore your vnproper distinctioÌ„ may go pike him But say you when they subiected them to the Christian fayth the kings promised no longer to raygne the people promised to obey no power further than the christian fayth wil suffer therefore if the kings power or the peoples obedience swarue from this promise â–ª the king may be deposed and the people can choose no otherâ—… â—…ll good promises so 〈◊〉 as we may are to be kept inâ—…iolate master Saunders especially the promise made to Christ to kéepe his fayth and religion incorrupted And would to God all men did kéepe it chiefly the Popishe Byshops that haue in so many poyntes swarued from the fayth and corrupted Christes religion yet haue made their promise to keepe it so well as others And if they shoulde be deposed for breaking their promise your Pope should be deposed first to begin withal and all his Prelates Priestes should followe And althoughe it were to be wyshed they were in déede all deposed and those onely that repent them admitted and reformed to the true ministerie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet can not the like be wished for in Princes that they likewise breaking their promises shoulde be deposed by their Bishops For althoughe we haue in Gods worde an euident example for the Prince to depose the Bishoppe vpon his demerites as Salomon deposed Abiathar yet haue we not the like example for the Bishop to depose the Prince For in the authoritie of deposing the Prince is higher than the Bishop Although it is not to be wished the Princes should attempt without great and euident proofe to depose any As for the Bishop to take vpon him to depose his Prince béeing his sworne subiecte is bothe agaynst his owne fayth and homageâ—… and further than his authoritie reacheth The Bishops and Priests had great iniurie offred them of king Saule yet they neuer cursed him nor attempted to depose him No Dauid although he were him selfe also the Lords anoynted would neuer oppugne Saule or rebel agaynst him but only stode at his defence and when he had Saule in his daunger he would neither kill him nor take him nor depose him but let him go and committed his quarell to the Lorde bicause Saule was not onely likewise the Lordes annoynted but then in lawfull possession of the crowne And therefoâ—…e Dauid woulde neuer take it from him althoughe he had good title to it Muche lesse may the Bishops that haue no title to it attempte to pull downe their Prince They may yea they oughte to exhorte their Prince hauing broken his promise and rebukâ—… him and lay before him the terrible threates of God they may pray for him â–ª but they can not lay handes vpon him nor curse him nor reuile him nor take armes agaynst him nor inâ—…ite other to rebellion to forsake him and to set vpon him beeing their Liege and Soueraigne I am not ignoraunt that Princes haue bene deposed of their subiects in diuers couÌ„treys and diuers times in Englande And the like casualtie may chaunce in euery age and kingdome vnto princes But for those things by what title they were done God knoweth I will not descant nowe but this I affirme in generall that in respect of the people those things were more defâ—…cto than de â—…ure â–ª although in respecte of Gods iustice or of the Princes chastisement that â—…ad deserued before God so muche and more it was de â—…ure too But the subiects can neuer iustifie such deedes to be done howe euer they be borne out when they be done nor such extraordinary deedes past may be drawne to ordinarie examples of deedes to come but be spectacles for princes in beholding suche tragedies past to learne for the present to â—…umble them selues and to leuell their life to come the better And althâ—…gh many of these deposings of princes haue â—…ot come so 〈◊〉 by the vâ—…ce of their vnnatural subiects as by the practises of the Popish bishops as the ensamples of king Iohn in Englande of Childerike in Fraunce the Henries and other in Germanie and in other countreys do testifie yet were these dealings of thâ—…se Bishops not allowable but detestable yeâ—… though it were graunted that those princeâ—… haâ—… deserued them brokeÌ„ their faith and promise â–ª Which if it were a good faith promise was no doubt an euill breacâ—…e of it anâ—… God will take the vengeance of it it belongeth not is the people nor to the Bishops Vengeance is mine sayth God and I will render it He sayth not my Bishops shall but I will render it Yea but saytâ—… M. 〈◊〉 the Prince himselfe hathe made a promise to raigne no longer than the fayth and religion of Christ alloweth I aunswere if he maâ—… this prâ—…yse it is a good promyse and he is bouâ—… in conscience to stand therâ—… But what if â—…e wickedly breake his promise shall the Bishope rebell â–ª and breake their promise too is there no remedie but 〈◊〉 pellere to driue out one mischiefe with another â–ª Nay saith S. Paule â–ª Non faciamus malum vt inde eueniatbâ—…nuÌ„ Let vs not do euill that good may come of iâ—… â–ª Let vs notâ—…bell against the Prince that the Prince may be reformed Quorum damnatio iusta est If the Bishops do so they heape Iâ—…st damnation vpoÌ„ themselues Were the Prince in déede such a one as the Bishops pretend if it be not rather their malicious pretence as God hath giuen them no such violent meanes to reforme him which were to make him rather worse than better and to bring all in a broyle and themselues besides their sin in daunger â–ª so God hath giuen theÌ„ another meane if they could see it of preaching his word vnto the Prince which is another maner of sword and more fitte for them to fight withall than to pull the temporall sworde oute of the Princes hands In dede so did Cardinall Columne when the Pope said he woulde pull of his Cardinals hatte he soul the Pope word if he pulled off his Cardinals hatto he would put on a helmet and pull downe his triple Crowne These Prelates haue little skill of the spirituall swâ—…rde although they crake of it and of S. Petâ—…rs keyes but they neither know how to vse them nor what they be that thinke they consist in deposing Princes and fighting against them But M.
the sonnes of strangers shall build vp thy walles Kings shall serue thee And to this he addeth the other sentence in the same Chap. And the sonnes of them that afflicted thee shall come to thee humbly and shall bowe themselues euen to the plantes of thy feete eueÌ„ all they that dispised thee and call thee the citie of the Lorde Sion of the holy Israell Had you set the sentence downe thus farre you had marred al Maister Saunders â–ª For then you had bewrayed your wresting of this vnto the Bishops And had you set downe all the chapter you had shewed suche inconueniences in vnderstanding this glory of the Church and seruice of Princes in the literall sense and after a worldly fashion that you must néedes haue confessed all these things to haue other spirituall meanings Which the Iewes not marking in these and such like prophecies of the kingdome of the Messias and the glory of Sion but taking the same in the bare sense of the words as you doe were so sotted on a worldly glory kingdome that they quite dispised the pouertie of Christ and to this day dispise it looking for a Messias that as they sansie shall raigne in al worldly pompe and subdue all kingdomes and people to him and therefore they scrape vp money so fast to helpe him And so you Papists in these prophecies of the kingdom of Christ and the glory of his Church haue as grosse vnderstanding as the Iewes and dispising the simplicitie of the Gospell nor beholdyng the spirituall ornamentes of the spouse of Christ thinke the worship of God lyeth in suche outwarde glory And hearing of obedience seruice of Kings to Christ and to his Church thinke it consistes in this that Kings muste sweare to you to renounce their kingdomes and holde them of the Pope and be obedient to him and he his Prelats must florishe in all worldly pompe and ryches Is not this the Iewes error vp and downe howbeit in oppressing of Kings you are worse than the Iewes and in seâ—…ing 〈◊〉 honor here verie CerinthiaÌ„s and shall neuer haue it else where excepte you forsake your errors Your third sentence Luk. 10. he that dispiseth you dispiseth me as it maketh nothing for you being nothing suche as those were whoÌ„ Christ did sende so being vnderstood of those that are in deede sent of Christe is nothing to this purpose We graunt that no godly ministers ought to be dispised And if they be Christ their sender is dispised But as they ought not in their calling to be dispised of the Prince so no more ought the Prince to be dispised of them much lesse to be troden vnder their féete and their kingdomes to be taken from them as your Popes haue vsed them and you woulde haue theÌ„ here be spoiled Wherby it appéereth that you are not such as Christ doth sende but are of Sathans sending to bréede contempts seditioÌ„s treasons against Princes to maintain your pride and carnall pleasures of whome Saint Iude did prophecie that defiling your fleshe you despise authoritie râ—…yle on the Maiestie of your Soueraignes Your fourth sentence Mat. 16. of Christ saying to Peter Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my Churche and the gates of hell shall not preuaile againste it is altogether besides the matter It is your chiefe place wrested for your Popes vsurpatioÌ„ but I sée not how it is brought in here against the Princes authoritie except you will make a kings estate to be the gates of hell But as the Princes estate is the ordinaunce of God so I rather thinke the attempte to depose the Prince to be if not the gates of hell â–ª yet one of the readiest wayes to hell as we haue example of Core Dathan and Abiron that went not by the gate nor by the posterne but were swallowed vp and toombled in quicke to hell And although the rebellious Papists go not downe that wayes yet shall they be sure to come to hell and I thinke rebellion be one of the broadest gates that hell hath for Papists on a plompe to enter Nowe that M. Samders hath as he thinketh with thesâ—… texts confirmed the Bishops refusall of Baptising the king he will admitte the Bishop will Baptise him and see what inconuenience shall ensue For saith he if the Bishop will baptise him whom he heareth by name saying that he will not submit his Diademe to Christ or that is all one he not will make his kingdom subiect to the ministers of Christ euen in the cause of faith where is that obedience of faith which the Apostles were sent to procure in all nations is it meete that he which denounceth that he will not want his empire for no fault at all should notwithstanding be armed with the name of a Christian and with the sacramentes of Christ to lay the greater ambushments against his Church for who doubteth that there is greater daunger of the domesticall than of the foraigne enemie Surely M. Saunders I am of your opinioÌ„ in this last senteÌ„ce Out of doubt there is greater dauÌ„ger of the domesticall than of the foraigne enimie We sée the apparaÌ„t experience in your Pope that is so much the more perilous enimie to the ChristiaÌ„ faith as he preteÌ„deth to be the Uicar of Christ the seruant of the seruaÌ„ts of God a father of fathers in Christes Church for so his name Papa signifieth is in dede a robber of Christs glory a hider of Christs Gospell a setter vp of his owne decrees a spoyler of all kings and kingdomes a begniler of the people vnder a shew of holinesse an Angel of darknesse shyning like an Angell of light a rauening wolfe in a shéepes clothing a child of perdition himself and pretending to saue other from perdition the man of sin calling himself a god There is greater dauÌ„ger of such a puppet of the deuill thus disguised like a God than is of the heathen thaÌ„ is of the Iewes than is of Mahomet than is of the greate Turke than is of the Deuill hymselfe And the like greater daunger is of all dissemblyng Papistes in the Courtes and Realmes of protestant Princes than is of open Papists apparant enemies I beseech God they may be loked vnto remoued froÌ„ such places that there may be lesse danger of theÌ„ As for this Prince and Byshop that M. Saunders maketh his presupposals vpon there is farre greater daunger to the Church of God in this Byshop than in this Prince For first the Prince not of compulsion but of his owne voluntarie not of crafte or malice or any other sinister affection but of good hearte and méere deuotion for so king Lucius and Clodoueus did commeth to the Byshop to be baptized and humbly offereth to acknowledge the faithe of Christe What danger is here towarde the Church of Christ by this good Princes offer or not rather gret benefite to the Church
to him selfe without Gods permission If this be true that héere you say M. Saunders as it is moste true if Samuels words do so sounde in your eares as though he had sayde Saule coulde not be king ouer Gods people except the Lorde anoynted him If the Lorde reserue this prerogatiue to him selfe to appoynt Princes and giue kingdomes where he onely pleaseth howe then is this true that kings and kingdomes are so vnder the Churche that she may freely dispose decree of theÌ„ as she pleaseth Although the Church be the Lordes spouse and wyfe yet is she not hir selfe the Lorde nor the Lorde is ruled by hir but she by the Lorde neither hathe he giuen hir this prerogatiue but as you héere confesse it is a thing belonging onely to him And therefore by your owne confession Kinges and kingdomes are not so vnder the Church that she may dispose and decree as she thinketh good of them And as your owne witnesse thus beateth your selfe in your owne example So to consider this example further Saule was appoynted King of God and thoughe at the firste he was a good King yet afterwarde he became bothe a tyrant in lyfe and an Apostata in doctrine by which occasion he was a great offence to the Churche of god What nowe did the Churche of God saye she had suche freedome ouer him and his kingdome that she might freely dispose and decree thereof as should be profitable for the whole â–ª mysticall body Surely to the Churches iudgement it appeared more profitable if this ill Kyng hadde béene deposed and some other godly man placed in hys steede muche more if Dauid hadde beene placed â–ª whom GOD likewyse had anoynted to be their king Dyd the Churche this No coulde they haue done this No they had no suche fréedome but they let Saule alone and committed the case to God who at his good oportunitie as he onely sent the king so he only tooke him away and sent them another For onely God transposeth kingdomes and not the Churche as he him selfe testifieth who is the best Iudge we can appeale vnto saying Per me Reges regnant Kinges rule by me and not by my Churche And so confesseth Daniel He chaungeth times and ages he translateth kingdomes and establisheth them His Church therefore hathe not the free disposition of them But sayth master Saunders God anoynted Saule to be the Prince not by him selfe but by his Minister wherefore whosoeuer ruleth ouer the Christian people whiche is no lesse acceptable to God than was the people of the Iewes he besides the right that he receyued by the consent of the people ought also to acknowledge his power to be of Christe by his Ministers if so be that he be suche an one as worshippeth the fayth of Christe VVherevpon to this day all christian Kinges are anoynted of some christian Bishop or some other minister of God referring therein their principalitie not onely to the people and so vnto God But referre it besides by the Ministers of Christe to Christe whose Ministers they are Your argument is this The King is anoynted of God. But this is done by the ministerie of Gods Prophetes or Ministers Ergo Not onelie God but his Ministers haue the free disposing and decreeing of Kings and kingdomes Your conclusion is not in so playne English but colourably you fetche the matter about the bushe saying therefore they muste referre their principalitie not onely to the people and so to God but referre it besides by the ministers of Christ to Christ whose ministers they are What néede this nice daliaunce and circumquaques M. Saunders that almoste men can scarse tell what you meane but that you meane some fal shode If you meane they shoulde referre it to the Ministers of Christ that is an vntruth If you meane they must refeâ—…e it so to Christe by his Ministers that it takes the authoritie of the Ministers that is another vntruthe If you meane it muste be referred to Christe that worketh it by the ministerie of his Ministers howbeit there is no suche necessitie neither in the making of Kinges althoughe it be orderly and ordinarily done by their ministerie yet what serueth this to the purpose Speake playnely man and say the king is made king by the Bishops Ergo the Bishops may dispose and decree of him and his kingdome and may depose him and giue the kingdome to another as they shall thinke good â–ª For this is your playne drifte But we denie your argument for by the like you mighte make euery mans baptisme and sayth to hang of the free disposition decreeing and alteration of the Minister sithe these things are receyued by the Minister but the force of them dependes not on the minister And much lesse that bicause suche a Bishop crowned the King therefore he may rule the King and haue free disposition to decree what the King shall doe and whether he shall continue King or no. No M. Saund. and if he had the authoritie to make the King yet the King beeing made it followeth not that he may marre him too But the moste that you can make of the Minister in the Kings Coronation â–ª is but Causa sine qua non that he can not well be made without him and yet in very déede it is not so muche and therefore this is but a slender argument But sée how you runne héere craftily from the Church to the Bishop your argument was of the Church and your conclusion is of the Bishop Wherby you meane that your Prelates only are of the church â–ª Which as it is most false so is it rather to be examined whether you be any ministers or parts of the churche at al if you speake of the churche of Christ. For as was shewed before neither the church â–ª nor the spirituall Ministers of Christ â–ª did euer take vpon them this deposing of kings and disposing of kingdomes that you chalenge Samuel whome you cite had béene a gouernour by an extraordinary calling béeing the laste Iudge before the Kings but after he had â–ª anoynted and declared Saule to be king he neuer tooke vpon him the publike gouernment of the kingdome And though God sent him to tell Saule how God would cast him off and though also God had him anoynt another yet would he not medâ—…e in the gouernmeÌ„t nor depose Saule nor incite Dauid or the people to depose him althoughe God had caste him cleane off but onely mourned for him If you can shewe any example of the contrarie I am sure we shall heare it but as yet we heare of none You tell vs of an elegante sentence of Pope Leo to the Emperour Leo. But as there is no greate elegancie in it so it maketh nothing to this purpose and the purpose that it maketh for is rather for the Princes gouernment in ecclesiasticall causes than agaynst it Howbeit to alleage a Pope for the vsurpation of the Pope is
to muche partialitie besides that Leo is to be burdened with â—…oule crimes in this matter for his practises agaynst the Emperour as we shall God willing see hereafter But M. Sanders to proue that the ministerie of the minister argueth he hathe authoritie to dispose of the King and his kingdome procéedeth thus But that the gouernment of a christian king oughte to be referred to Christ it hathe flowed from nothing but from the mysterie of the incarnation of Christe that all Christian kinges shoulde acknowledge the humayne nature of Christe to be aboue their principalitie and therefore should vnderstande that they are inferiour to the Ministers of Christe in those thinges that pertayne to the fayth of Christ or to eternall lyfe To what purpose otherwyse belongeth that solemne anoynting and consecrating of Kings which is wonte to be done by the Priestes of Christ Greater saythe Chrysostome is the principalitie of the Priest than of the king Therefore the King submitteth his head to the hande of the priest And euery where in the olde Testamente the Priestes anoynted the Kinges And truely if the people of God differ from all people by the gifte of fayth and as the Priestes are the Ministers of setting foorthe the faythe so the blessing and consecration of the Priestes that they giue to the Kinges is an especiâ—…ll token whereby the mysterie of the Incarnation of Christe and the principalitie of his Ministers in dispensing that mysterie is acknowledged M. Saunders still beates vpon his former argumente and driues his reason thus If the anoynting of the king hath a mysterie of his obedience to the Incarnation and humanitie of Christ then the King must vnderstande that he is inferior to the Ministers of Christ in those things that pertayne to the faith of Christ or to eternall life bicause they are the Ministers in dispensing that mysterie But the solemne anoynting consecrating of kings which is wont to be done by the Priests of Christe serueth to no other purpose than to declare the obedience of Kinges to the Incarnation and humanitie of Christ Ergo The King must vnderstand that he is inferior to the Ministers of Christ in those things that pertayne to the fayth of Christ or to eternall life bicause they are the Ministers in dispensing that mysterie First in this conclusion héere is nothing pertaining to the present purpose that the Ministers of Christ may depose Kings and dispose their kingdomes â–ª which is the thing that should be concluded There is a great differeÌ„te betwéene those things that â—…ayne to the faythe of Christe to eternall life to the dispensatiâ—… of the mysterie of Christes Incarnation and humayne nature and the gouerning of a kingdome In the dispensation â–ª of the one we graunt the king to be inferiour to the Ministers of Christ. But in the dispensation of the other the Ministers of Christ are inferiour to the king So that this conclusion is not to the purpose â–ª And although this answere is sufficient to this argument yet let vs sée his handling the partes thereof And first we denâ—…e the sequele of the maior that if the kinges annoynting hath a mysterie of his obedience to the incarnation and humaine nature of Christe that then the king is inferiour to the minister of Christe in those things that pertaine to the faithe of Christe and to eternall life bicause he is the minister in dispensing that mysterie For this is no good reason he is the Minister wherby the thing is done Ergo he is the superior in the thing that is done â–ª We mighte better reason on the contrarie he is the Minister Ergo â–ª in that respecte he is the inferiour for ministration is a seruice Howebeit we denie not the superioritie of his ministerie but the noughtinesse of this argument For by this reason sée howe hys argument beates him selfe and his Pope The Pope is ordinarily consecrated of a Cardinall or a Bishop Ergo the Pope is inferiour â–ª to the Cardinals and Bishops in mâ—…tters of faithe and eternall life â–ª bicause the Cardinals or Bishops are the Ministers in dispeÌ„sing that mysterie Will the Pope allowe of this and yet this is master Saunders reason yea it is the Popes owne reason For Bonifacius the eyghte of whome the Prouerbe wente He came in lyke a Foxe and ruled lyke a Lyon and dyed lyke a dagge vsed this selfe same arguments from whom master â–ª Sanders borroweth it that the Pope dothe consecrate the Emperour Ergo the Pope is 〈◊〉 to the Emperour that Bishops do consecrate Kings Ergo Bishops are superior to kings Which argumeÌ„t as it is nought so eueÌ„ the antecedent may be called in question For it is not long that Popes haue consecrated Emperors neither alwayes haue Kings bene consecrated of Priests and Bishops so that it is not simply so necessary a thing that a King is not â—… king if he be not consecrated of them But as in Matrimonie it is a godly and comely order that althoughe the mariage be made in their betrouthing as you said before when the maÌ„ sayd to the woman I take thee to my wife and the woman to the man I take thee to my husbande yet for the auoyding of offence for the more reuerence and estimatioÌ„ of the estate for the better calling vpoÌ„ God to blesse it it is done solemnoly the in temple in the presence of the congregation by the ministerie prayers and blessing of the minister The like and greater solemnitie is in a Princes consecration for the auoyding of offences for the greater reuereÌ„ce and estimation and for the more effectuall calling vpon God for his blessing of the Kings royall estate althoughe he were full and lawfull King before And so the King giueth the date of hys reigne not from his Coronation but from the beginning of his calling to his regimeÌ„t And at his coronation as the Bishop hathe his peculiar office so diuerse other peeres haue theirs likewise requisite to the celebration thereof But none of them do therevpon claime to be the Princes superior althoughe one giue him his sworde another giue him his Scepter another giue him the Ball another giue him the Crowne to whome the kéeping of thâ—…se things belong And why shoulde the Bishop more than all these claime to be his superior bicause he doth consecrate the King but the ensample is euident to the contrarie For euen at the Kings coronation the Bishops so well as any other subiectes doe their homage receiue their temporalâ—…ies from the Prince for all their consecration of him and therefore they can no more dispose of the Kings temporalities and depose him froÌ„ them than any of the other subiects can And thus much M. Saunders to the Maior of your argument To the Minor I answere that whether the annoynting of the King signifie any other thing besides the Kings obedience to the incarnation and humaine nature of Christe it makes no matter For this it signifieth not
nor there in his humaine nature as Christe himselfe hath testified Which as it dasheth this your case yée put so it confuteth an other chiefe errour of yours that affirme yée haue the humaine nature of Christe closed vp in a boxe and that yée eate him vp or kéepe him vp till he waxe mouldie and then you burne him vp Is this the best honor you can affoorde to Christe being conuersant heere in earth in his humaine nature If it be true that you say he is present how chance yée serue him thus is it bycause he appeareth not in his likenesse but looketh rather like a wafer if it were Christe indéede howsoeuer he loked can you finde in your hearts thus to order him But you will saye that is an other matter answere to this presupposal We speake nowe of Christ appearing in his owne likenesse How say you if he were conuersant in earth as he was shoulde hee not ouer Christian Kings haue superioritie in temporall causes so vvell as in ecclesiasticall that might promote his Churche I answere if this were admitted to be true that Christ againe were conuersant on the earth Christian Kings ought no doubt to giue him all superioritie and be vnder him in all ecclesiasticall and temporall causes that might promote his Churche acknowledging all the power they haue to procéede from him But that Christ if he were againe on the earth woulde raigne ouer Kings and in his humaine nature rule Kings in their secular causes or that he woulde thinke this a way to promote the Church or that he would depose Princes and make their subiectes reuolt from their obedience or that he woulde cease their kingdomes into his handes and make Kings to kisse his féete to leade his Horsse to holde his sturrops or that he would weare thrée Crownes and Princely roabes of gold frette with perle and stone or that he would kepe suche a princely porte and pompe as passed all other Princes which things your Pope pretending to be his Uicar in the absence of his humaine nature doth this would be harde for you to proue M. Saunders although your case were graunted that Christ personally in his humaine nature vvere conuersant in earth againe For if he would haue had any of these thinges he might haue had them when he was here on earth as your selfe confessed in the Chapter going before saying This in this kinde I vvill speake as the chiefest argument that Christe vvhile he vvas here in earth and fulfilled all the lavve and all righteousnesse notwithstanding he would gouern eccl. matters only as a Priest and by no means as an earthly king For he openly refused to administer an earthly kingdome therfore fled when he saw the people go about to do this thing that they might make him a king he denied that he was appointed a deuider betwene the brethreÌ„ Are not these your own wordes M. Sand I knowe you wrest them to an other purpose whiche there is answered vnto But howe serue they not here against your selfe â–ª trow you Christe is now become of an other mynde than he was when he was here on earth if he be still of the same mind then would he not take vpon him if he were here againe on earth the estate of an earthly King nor gouerne in secular causes But trowe you your Pope pretending to be his Uicar would suffer this seese the temporalties he possesseth the kingdomes he hath gotten the honor that is giuen him or any thing else that in eccl. secular causes vnder pretence of the Churches promotion he vsurpeth ouer all kings Christian no he would rather handle Christ worsse if he could lay hands vpon him then euer did the Iewes he wold not onely crucifie Christe againe but burne him cleane to ashes for an hereâ—…ike rather then he would lose this honor or any iote thereof But and if Christe were here againe conuersant on earth in his humaine nature woulde he suffer the Popes intollerable pride and errours would he allowe him to abuse his name as thoughe he were his deputie and Uicar generall I trow not Not that I thinke he séeth it not or suffers it not or hath not by his prouident iustice ordeined that Sathan should set vp such an Antichrist to delude strongly the Children of vnbeleefe and to exercise vnder the Crosse of Christ his litle elected flocke But that if Christe should so come as he here supposeth surely I woulde thinke the cause of his coÌ„ming to be euen to destroy spiritu oris eius with the breath of his mouth this man of sin not to mainteine him in his pompe muche lesse himselfe to take the like vpon him Not that Christe is not a king ouer the house of Iacob not that his kingdome is not eternal as the Angel said to Marie not that he should not subdue al earthly kingdoms to his spiritual kingdome but that his kingdome is spiritual not earthly the subduing of earthly kingdomes is with a sword that conquereth the soule of man that is the word of God with a force from aboue subduing the will of man that is the spirite grace of God and not such a subduing of their kingdomes that it dissolueth their polycies estates or deposeth their kings maketh the people take Armes and exerciseth â–ª in secular causes an earthly Kings authoritie M. Saunders pretendeth this is to promote the Churche of Christ but suche promotion confoundes deuotion and hath poysoned the Church of God as they say a voyce was heard what time Constantine although falsly is supposed to haue endowed the Church with such royall honor Hodie venenum intrauit in ecclesâ—…n This day entered poyson into the Church But Christ hath flatly forbidden it and tolde his Disciples when they asked such promotion that they knewe not what they asked But afterwarde they knewe and founde the saying of Christ to be true that their promotion lay in their affliction and not in their kingly honor And thus we sée the falsehood of the maior forged vpon this fained presupposall whiche is not to be graunted and yet if it were graunted it would fall out to the vtter ruine of the Pope all his Prelates Such ill lucke hath M. Sand stil to light on such examples as he coÌ„ceineth to make for him but being a litle better examined make most of al against him Now to the minor that Christ hath giuen to his Ministers in the visible ministerie all the povver necessarie to saluation that he should haue himselfe in his humaine nature Where find you this M. Sand I thinke it will be ouer hard a matter for you to proue that all the povver necessarie to saluatioÌ„ that he shoulde haue himselfe in his humaine nature in the visible ministerie he hath giueÌ„ it al to his ministers Al power saith Christe is giuen to me in heauen and in earth this is spoken in respecte
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
power is giuen at the least to the chiefe pastor in these wordes Howe shall we beleeue it Maister Saunders sith these wordes neither say nor import any such matter that Peter to whom they were spoken is the chief pastor of the Church neither at the least nor at the most least of all that in these wordes these things are contained Christ saith to Peter feede my shepe â–ª you expounde these wordes that he gaue him power to take away Kings from their kingdomes and to set the people at libertie from their sworne obedience This is a proper feeding M. Saunders to giue them pappe with an hatchet as they say to spoyle Kings and sâ—…t their kingdomes in the vprores of rebellion â–ª Christ 〈◊〉 not his shepe on thâ—… fashion nor we reade that euer Peter 〈◊〉 them so but with the worde of God and with exhortatioÌ„ of obedience vnto Princes Peter fead the shéepe of Christ on this wise Be ye subiect to euery humaine creature for the Lordes sake whether to the King as excelling or to his rulers as those that are sent of him to the punishment of malefactors and to the prayse of them that do well for so is the will of god For doyng well you stoppe the mouthes of foolishe and ignorant men As free and yet not hauing libertie for a cloake of malice but as seruantes of god Honor all men loue brotherhood feare God honor the king Let seruants be subiect to the Lord with feare not only if they be good and gentle but if they be froward c. And so he entreth into an exhortation of pacience vnder wicked gouernors This is the féeding that Peter fead the shéepe of Christ withall neither did hâ—…uer depose any Magistrate or set at libertie any subiects or vsurpe any kingly dominion but dissuadeth the clergie from it As for the other sentence of authorizing Peter to bynde and lose is so farre from giuing him authoritie to bynde Princes in bondage and captiuitie making theÌ„ to lose their kingdomes and losing their subiectes from their bondage of subiection setting them at libertie to rebell and chose another that if Maister Saunders were not too too shamelesse he would neuer thus apply it And yet he saith we must beleue it â–ª that in this sentence also Peter hath this power gyuen him which neither Christ nor Peter vsed at any time but both of them flat denie it But why shoulde we beleeue this M. Saunders For say you if whatsoeuer Peter or Peters successor loseth in earth is also losed in heauen then verily when he loseth orderly the faithfull subiects from the obedience of a wicked King in earth the subiects are in heauen losed from the obedience of that king Besides if whatsoeuer Peters successor bindeth in earth be bound also in heauen then when soeuer the successor of Peter rightly and well commaundeth anye King to go from his Magistracie which being thus affected he vniustly holdeth or coÌ„mauÌ„deth him by whatsoeuer meanes he can to hinder another King that hindreth the faithful people from eternal life that he should not perishe in doyng wickedly that King is bounde also in heauen that is to saye before God and his Angels to obey the decree of the chiefe Bishop except he will haue his owne sinnes before God to be retained and not remitted Here is your Sampsons poste M. SauÌ„ders that you and your Pope builde vpon for his supremacie that he hath the keyes of heauen and hell vnder his belte but howe grossely and shamefully this spirituall power of bynding and losing consisting in preaching the word of God and pertaining only to the soule of the faithfull beleuer or the vnfaithfull refuser is applied to the body goods of men to be taken from them is wrested to coÌ„maunding of Kings to get theÌ„ packing from their kingdomes to bydding of subiectes take armes against their Princes to bidding of one King by whatsoeuer meanes he can by defying fighting and making warre by shéeding ChristiaÌ„ blood by violating peace by breaking leagues by wasting one anothers couÌ„tries to molest and persecute one another that all Princes nations are bound before God and his Angels to obey his bidding yea althoughe he were such a chiefe B. or the successor of Peter as he craketh is not is so horrible shameful a wresting of Christs saying so euident a contradiction to all other sayings in the scripture so open a gappe to the dissolution of all estates to bring all tumult confusion into the world yea this binding and losing were such a binding vp of all godlynesse and the verie losing of the deuill himself that it is maruaile that euer any Papist professing learning would be so grosse in this age of greater learning thus to expounde it Which exposition was neuer heard of by any godly father till Pope Gregorie 7. set it a broach and Pope Boniface 8. following him set all Christendome by the eares about it And nowe that all the worlde séeth the follie and wickednesse of it M. Saunders so unpudently would renue it But he hathe a shifting restrainte in this exposition to salue the matter When the Pope sayth he duely and orderly loseth the people from their obedience and when he well and rightly biddeth the king giue ouer his authoritie theÌ„ either of them are bound to obey his bidding True Maister Saunders when he doth these things duly and orderly well and rightly theÌ„ it shall be graunted you But how can he do that well and rightly duely and orderly that is most euil and against all dutie right and order can a théefe steale well and rightly can such extreme wickednesse that passeth all priuate thefte and is the open breach of all due order be dulie and orderly done But belike M. SauÌ„ders thinketh if the Pope do it in his consistorie if he haue on his Cope and do it in his Pontificalibus if the belles be roong the candels put out then it is well and rightly duely and orderly done Such toyishe orders vseth the Pope to bleare the simple as though when it is done with booke bell candle it is done well and rightly duely and orderly but before God and his Angels in heauen and before all wise and godly learned meÌ„ in earth as these orders are mere ridiculous so these doyngs are most abhominable But nowe let vs heare his reason for this doyng For if whatsoeuer power any king hath he ought to conuert and applie that wholly to the honor of Christ then he that otherwise doth shall in the day of doome render an account of sin wheÌ„ euen that sword it selfe which in times paste he hath either draweÌ„ out against Christ or else he would not draw for Christ shall accuse him of disobedience If therfore we shall follow reasoÌ„ aright as the Minister of Christ ought not to coÌ„secrate him for Prince whom he seeth not to be a ChristiaÌ„ or a Catholike so neither ought
he to suffer him to beare gouernmēt any long while ouer Christiās whō by any lawful meanes he cā remoue For the Lord hath subdued to his minister Ieremie as wel the kingly persons as their kingdomes saying Behold I haue put my words in thy mouth behold I haue this day set thee ouer nations and ouer kingdomes to roote vp to destroy to leese to scatter to build and plant VVhich wordes fall oute moste aptly on the person of Christe But no Catholike doubteth but from him they are dayly fulfilled in his Church by his ministers That the Prince ought to conuert and apply all his power to the honor of Christ we graunt And if he abuse his sword in drawing it againste Christe or not defending the sayth of Christ thereby we graunt likewise at the day of doome the Prince shall answere for it And therefore Princes had nede to be wise and learned to looke the better vnto it Which if they did they must néedes draw it out against your Pope and you in principall But if their sworde that God gaue vnto them and they haue missused shall accuse them what shall the rust of the gold and riches do that the Pope hath ill gotten and worse spent what shall his triple crowne and vsurped title doe what shal the Crosse keyes do that he pretends he hath from Peter and the sworde from Paule embrued with so much blood of the Saintes of God shall not these things muche more accuse the Pope at that greate daye of reckoning But how holdeth this conclusion here vpon If the Prince abuse his sword shall the Pope wring it from him surely then the Princes sworde that the Pope hath thus extorted and he was forbidden to meddle withall shall accuse him also But Maister Saunders saith he may take it from him so that he take it by lawfull meanes as though a man may doe another wrong by lawful meanes as though he may vsurpe by lawfull meanes that that by no meanes he oughte to doe as though there can be any meanes lawfull to doe that that is not lawfull to be done But that it is lawfull he citeth the saying of God to Ieremie cap. 1. This sentence is also cited in the Extrauagant of Pope Boniface and applyed as here Maister Saunders doth that the Ministers of God may order kingdomes as the wordes seme to specifie according to the letter But where did Ieremie rule any nations and kingdomes roote vp houses destroy Cities pull downe buildings builde and plante newe in their places I thinke M. Saunders you can not shewe that euer Ieremie did this neither can you in suche sense applie it to Christe on whose person you say aptly it falleth out sithe Christ in his person literally did not these thinges neither And then can it not serue your turnes to gouerne Nations kingdomes to roote vp houses to destroy kinges and depopulate their Countreys Townes and Cities and to translate at your pleasures the whole estate of Christendome Ieremie did neuer thus nor Christe did euer thus nor his Ministers did euer thus and therefore you doing thus can not bolster your doings from them And if you will do this as Ieremie did and as Christe hath taught and as his Ministers did good leaue haue you But how dyd they it God sayth to Ieremie Behold I haue put my words in thy mouthe wherevpon sayth Lyra Bicause Ieremie not onely prophecied agaynst the King of Iuda but also agaynst many other kingdomes as shall appeare Therefore it followeth Beholde I haue set thee c. that thou shouldest roote vp that is thou shouldest declare in rooting vp and translating from thence the Inhabiters c. And shouldest buylde and plante that is thou shouldest declare the Iewes to be reedified and planted in their owne Countrey VVhich was fulfilled in the time of Cyrus that gaue licence to the people to returne into their owne Countrey and reedifie the Temple And in the time of Artaxerxes who gaue licence to Nehemias to reedifie the Temple of Ierusalem So that this rooting vp was not done by Ieremie nor this buylding agayne was done in his time but was long after done by God and by suche Ministers as God appoynted therevnto whiche were no Priestes but Princes Howbeit sithe it was Gods ordinaunce he sayth Ieremie shoulde do it bicause Ieremie shoulde foretell it And therefore the learned Uatablus expoundes these wordes on this wise I put my worde in thy mouthe that is I appoynt thee to be a Prophet beholde that is marke those thinges that I shall tell thee that thou shalt threaten my enimies whome I haue planted placed confirmed and buylded in their nations that I will pull them out by captiuities excepte they repent and contrarywise I wil builde againe and plante them whome before I destroyed and pulled vp ▪ if they shall acknowledge their sinnes And for confirmation héereof that this whiche he ascribeth to Ieremie was Gods dooing and Ieremie but the foreteller of it he referreth vs first to the. 45. chapter where God sayth to Ieremie concerning Baruch Thou shalte say thus vnto him Thus saithe the Lorde Beholde those things that I haue edified I wil pul downe and the thinges that I haue planted I wil roote vp yea al this lande And in the. 42. chapter If you abide and inhabite in this lande I wil builde you and wil not pul you downe I wil plante you and wil not pul you vp bicause it repēteth me of the euil that I haue brought vpon you Thus we sée that Ieremie was not the doer of any of these thinges he neuer deposed kinges nor translated kingdomes in all his lyfe but onely declared to them Gods iudgementes to come vpon them and destroy them if they repented not Gods mercifull promises to comforte them if they repented Nowe on this fashion if he will followe Ieremies fashion shoulde the Pope and his Prelates pull downe and set vp kinges and kingdomes not by deposing them from their estates not by seazing kingdoms into their handes not by translating the gouernementes thereof not by making subiects rebell agaynst their Soueraignes not by setting Princes by the eares togither not by putting all to fyre sworde and famine but by declaring to them the wrathe and plagues of God but by exhorting them to repentaunce but by recomforting them with Gods moste mercifull promises but by preaching and teaching them the worde of God and thus onely to pull downe and sette vp Kinges and kingdomes And further than this the doing of Ieremie stretched not nor the Ministers of Christ may do Now if you applye this sentence spiritually to Christe and from him to his Ministers we admitte also your application But where dyd Christe thus order worldely kingdomes Nowe can you then from Christe father these youre dooinges Youre Glosse ioyned wyth Lyra hathe these wordes Multi bunc locum c Many expounde this place on the person
in these wordes following vnto Pilate after he had denied his kingdome to be of this world when Pilate replyed Arte thou then a King he answered thou saist that I am a king Ne tamen c. vvhiche notvvithstanding saithe Ferus least Pilate should be more offended vvith the name of a King Christe proceedeth to declare his kingdome more plainely as thoughe he shoulde say Pilate vnderstande thou this for troth and cast out of thy mynde all suspition of a vvorldly kingdome or of tyrannie This is the case I vvill not at al denie my spiritual kingdome vvhether it be before thee or before Caesar. Onely knovve thou this thing that it is not my purpose to inuade any man vvith Armes or after the manner of other Kings to raigne pompously but to erecte and establishe in earth the Diuine truth To this purpose vvas I born â–ª and to this purpose came I into the vvorlde that I might beare vvitnesse to the truth Therfore I say came I therfore was I borne not to fight with the svvorde but that I might teach and declare the truth and the Gospell vvhiche is the povver of God to saluation to all that beleeue And as I declare the Gospell so I rule by the Gospell in the heartes of the beleeuers ouer sinne death and the Deuill and for sinne vvill I giue righteousnesse for death life for the Crosse ioye for hell I vvill giue heauen these are feofments of my kingdome Of these things none can be pertaker excepte he heare my voyce and beleeue in his heart I enrich not mine vvith ryches vvith cities and other feofmeÌ„ts but by my vvords I communicate vnto them ioye life peace and to conclude heauen it selfe The Gospell therefore is the Scepter of my kingdome But what are these things against the Emperor of Rome Thus againe we sée that Christe is not such a King nor his kingdome suche as you dreame of Whiche in the ende your selfe contrarie to your selfe confesse that his kingdome is not suche an one that he euer mingled himselfe in earthly things Then Master Saunders those thinges belonged not to his Kingly office nor to his kingdome For in suche things euery King ought not onely to mingle but chiefly to occupie himselfe But strait you haue an exception at hand that he mingled not himself in earthly things except whereas they might be profitable to a spirituall ende and this your selfe before confessed was the finall ende of all the ciuill power and that all faythfull Kings ought to directe all those thinges in their kingdomes vnto spirituall endes bicause they themselues are spirituall And so what letteth but that Christe should haue raigned as a worldly King and gouerned an earthly kingdome But say you This kingdome of Christ therfore both came from heauen tendeth vnto heauen For both al povver is giueÌ„ vnto â–ª him as he vvas man and died and rose againe that he shoulde rule ouer the lyuing and the deade and that he should be set ouer the vvorkes of the handes of God and that all things should be cast vnder his feete sheepe and Oxen and moreouer the beastes of the fielde And also Saint Cyrill saith that euen the wicked in the laste daye shall arise to their punishement for Christe vvho rose firste and contained as man al men in him self Sith therefore earthly Kings administer those things that pertain to sheepe and Oxen and beasts of the fielde although they remaine Eâ—…hnikes and Infidels yet are they truely vnder Christe the King as the most vvorthy man â–ª that hath receiued the principalitie ouer all thinges of this vvorlde not from the earth but from heauen and for the same shall giue an accouÌ„t to him of their common vveale euil ordered bycause they referred not their kingdomes to a spirituall ende that is to the glorie of one god But Christ so far as appertineth to his humaine â—…atuÌ„re being lesse than Angels seemeth to me to haue receiued that kingdome that Adam first should haue administred among all creatures to the glorie of one God if he had not falne from grace and to haue renued it in himselfe and to haue directed it to a spiritual end that vvhen all things should be subiect to the Sonne of man then should the Sonne also be subiecte vnto him that hath subdued all thinges to him that God might be all in all Sith therefore Christ by his humaine nature is the King of all he truely directeth al things to a spiritual end that is to the glorie of God for God deserueâ—…h glorie yea euen in those that are damned bothe for his povver and for his iustice The effecte hereof is this that God hath giuen to the humain nature of Christ as to the principal of al his creatures al povver iudgement to direct them to a spiritual end that is to his glorie But what is this to the purpose that Christes kingdome is after the fashion of a vvorldly kingdome he gouerneth all creatures we graunt with his power and prouidence yea the sheepe Oxen and cattail that he speaketh on But dothe the kingdome of Christe consiste in these things Numquid Deo cura de bobus hath God saith Sainte Paule care of Oxen in the coÌ„sideration of his heauenly kingdome He telleth vs howe all Kings shall answere for the â—…busing of their kingdomes vnto Christ at the day of dome bycause they referre them not to a spirituall ende But he telleth not howe muche more the Pope shall aunswere for â—…surping kingdomes and abusing the spirituall kingdome of Christe to vvorldly endes But shall this iudgemente of Christ be in a vvorldly coÌ„sistorie He telleth vs how he thinketh that Christe receiued that kingdome that Adam should haue had had he not falne But thinketh he that Christe should haue ruled in an earthly Paradise or that Christ came to restore vs to no better kingdome than Adam was in before he sinned He telleth vs Al things shal be made subiect to Christe and Christe to God and God shall be all in all But thinketh he this kingdome shall be in this worlde and militant Church while the euimies striue and are not yet al subdued he telleth vs the glorie and iustice of Christ shineth in the condemnation of them that are damned But dothe he thinke this is a vvorldly glorie and humaine iustice it is true that the glorie and iustice of Christe shal shine ouer theÌ„ And so shal it in the righteouse condemnation of the Popish Church that séeketh such a vvorldly kingdome and calleth it the spiritual kingdome of Christe to cloake their pryde withall But what can Master Saunders conclude hereon for Byshops to possesse kingdoms to rule Kings to sette vp or to depose them Neither say I these thinges saithe he to shevve herevpon that povver is ouer the vniuersal vvorld giuen to the Bishops of the Chnrch as though they in all things are the Ministers and Vicars
vnderstande this present exhortation to haue the libertie or power to forsake the heathen Magistrates obedience and iudgements and to erecte a nevv Magistrate and Iudge to rule among them For this had bene the readie pathe to all Rebellion And to proue that this is the readiest way to Rebellion sée howe Master Saūders gathereth hereon that nevve Kings are to be made of the Churche rather than vve shoulde be compelled to pleade our causes before hereticall and scismaticall Kings So that if the Prieste shall say the King is an heretike or a scismatike not only the people must so account him but they muste account him no longer to be their King they muste not be compelled to appeare in his Courtes and Consistories they must pleade no cause at all before him or his Iustices but must forthwith choose a nevv King to be their gouernour Howe far this is differing from Saint Paules doctrine from this sentence from subiectes obedience and howe neare to set all the world in an vprore I dout not but if this Nota that M. sand sets it out withal be wel noted it wil not only bréede in the Readers mindes a note of suspicion of priuie conspiracies trayterous packing but openly shew a manifest proclamatiō of plain rebelliō Now to proue that the subiects should thus rebel he sheweth the dangers that should ensue if they should remaine in their obedience For certaine it is that there is more danger of heretical Kings thā is of vnfaithful Iudges For vnfaithful Iudges do not iudge but of matters of this world and that according to the law either of nature which is alwayes right or ciuil vvhiche is seldome vvrong Moreouer vvhat if I suffered vvrong at the tribunall of a Pagane Iudge the losse is small to suffer the spoyle of tēporal goods vvhich good men beare vvith ioye But heretical Kings compel their subiects casting away the catholike faith to embrace their heresie the whiche can not be done vvithout the detriment of eternall saluation It is altogither lavvfull to the Churche of Christe to remoue from his gouernement an heretical a scismatical a symoniacal King and to conclude to remoue him that vvill not amende himselfe and to place another among the Christians in his rome This argument is drawne from the danger of suffering the king is alreadie answered diuers times The lawiers woulde briefly say to this better suffer a mischiefe than an inconuenience but were this an inconuenience too we may not take away one inconuenience with an other greater inconuenience for ther are conuenient remedies of pacience constancie against these inconueniences and not rebellion althoughe the inconuenience were muche greater than M. Sād makes it And yet to aggrauate the same he makes cōparison of a King and a Iudge as though the Iudge represented not the king He compareth the daunger of the losse by the one and by the other as thoughe the heathen Iudges and Princes dealt not also in cases of Religion Who although they were deceiued herein yet they conuented people before them for Religion to driue them from the worship of God to the worship of their Idols and laboured by all persuasions and meanes they coulde to bring them to their Religiō And verie many they brought to their Idolatrie which was more thā the losse of temporal goods euē the detriment of eternal saluatiō Neither did they vse their iudgemēts always according to the lavv of nature or the ciuil neyther doth the one iudge alvvayes right considering the great corruption of nature chiefly in the heathen neyther did the other sildome wrong but often wrong among them neither medled the ciuill Lawe of the Pagans onely with matters of temporall goodes and of this vvorlde but also with matters of the worlde to come and therefore there was further daunger of the iudgementes of those heathen Princes and vnfaythefull Iudges than here Maister Saunders woulde séeme to acknowledge there was mitigating all that he can the daunger ensuing from them to aggrauate the greater daūgers from naughtie Christian Princes But he nede not run to these vntruthes to aggrauate his comparison For we denie not but that if the Prince were such a wicked Prince as he speaketh of it were in dede very daungerous to the faithfull subiects vnder him and so muche the more daungerous that he pretendeth to the faithfull to be a faithfull Prince and is not But what a daungerous doctrine is this that the people should therfore rebell and reuolt vnto another Might the Christiā people in the primitue Church for all the daūger of eternall life that they and all the faithfull were in when the heathen Princes would haue them worship Idols which is as ill as heresie when the heretical scismaticall Emperors being Arians Monothelites c. in the ancient time compelled their subiectes casting away the Catholike faith to embrace their heresies might they remoue thē from their gouernment and place another in his roome ouer the Christians and that that shoulde streight be heresie which the B ▪ of Rome should say were heresie he should be a scismatike that should not consent to him Yea he must be deposed for symonie too ▪ by symonie forsooth we must vnderstand that if the Prince do appoint and inuest a Bishop then streight he is a simoniake and must out of hande be depesed What a greater daūger is here not onely to Christiā Princes but to all the Church of Christ whose sauegarde is here pretended But if we reason of daūgers the greatest daūger of all is of the Pope himselfe his prelates the more daunger that Princes people be thus beguiled by them and yet the king may not meddle with them although his duetie neuer so much require he hath good warrant in the scripture 〈◊〉 remoue them so haue not they of him were they neuer 〈◊〉 good and were he a great deale worse than M. Saunders makes him But Maister Saunders will nowe proue that the Bishops haue warrant out of the scripture for them and once againe he alleageth the example of King Saul and Samuel For if the kingdome of Saul stoode not euen for this that he obserued not the precept of Samuel in wayting for him seuen dayes before he sacrificed Yea if the Lord cast off Saul that he shuld not be the king bicause he fulfilled not also another precept of the Lorde declared by the Ministerie of Samuel in killing Agag if for this disobedience of Saul while he yet raigned Samuel was bidden to anoynt Dauid to be the King of the Iewes and Samuel did it priuily in Bethleem Neither after the holy Ghost sent downe from heauen the spirituall power of the Church can now be lesse than in times past was in the Synagog we must now also confesse that that King which shall dispise to heare the Lord speaking by the mouth of the highest Bishop maye
so be depriued of the right of his kingdome that another may in the meane season be of the same Byshop anoynted for King and that from that day forwarde he truely shal be the King whome the Bishop orderly anoynted or other wise did consecrate and not he that being armed with a bande of souldiers occupieth the seate For of such the Prophet saith they haue reigned and not by me the which thing is so true that loâ—…athas the sonne of Saul acknowledged that the Kingdome shoulde fall vnto Dauid after the death of his Father And al that were in nede sled vnto Dauid and he became their Prince and there were with him as it were foure hundreth men and when Achimelech the Priest asked Counsell of the Lorde for Dauid and Saul hauing intelligence thereof commaunded his seruaunts to fall vpon the Priests of the Lorde no man durst execute so cruel a commaundement besides onely Doeg the Idumean The effecte of this reason is thréefolde Firste that the Pope maye depose a King and set vp another Secondly that the King so deposed by the Pope is no longer lawfull King nor to be obeyed but the subiectes ought to go to the other whomâ—… the Pope sets vp Thirdly that althoughe the Pope maye depofe a King yet no King maye depofe or touch the Pope or his Priests For the first point are alle aged these arguments The spirituall power is as greate nowe in the Church since the holy Ghost was sent from heauen as it was before in the Synagog But Kings were then deposed and other set vp by the spirituall power Ergo Kings may now likewise be deposed by the spirituall power and other set vp But the spirituall power belongeth to the highest Bishop The Bishop of Rome is the highest Bishop Ergo the Bishop of Rome maye depose Kings and set vp other The later argument which we vtterly denie and here he proueth not but taketh for confessed that there is in earth a highest Bishop ouer all other and that the Pope is he is belonging to another controuersie To the former argument we graunt the Maior The spirituall power is as great nowe after the holy Ghost was senâ—…e from heauen as it was before in the Synagog But we denie the Minor. That the deposing of Kings and sitting vp of other in their steede was not done then in the Synagog by the spirituall power that is by the spirituall authoritie of the spirituall pastor For proofe hereof M. Saunders inferreth an instance of Saul and Samuel Saul loste his Kingdome bycause he obserued not the precepte of Samuel And therefore Samuel ordayned another King. I aunswere First this facte was not a matter ordinarily belonging to the spirituall power of Samuel but an especialtie of gods singular appointing It was not a thing beloÌ„ging to the Byshops office to depose Kings and set other in their places it was but a particular acte done by gods especiall coÌ„maundement so that it could not nor was euer drawne into any ordinarie rule of their spirituall power then and much lesse is any thing belonging to the Bishops spirituall power nowe which is an ordinarie power and consisteth in setting forth the word of God in administring the sacraments of God and in bynding or losing the conscience of the obstinate or repentant sinner Which things sith none of them pertaine to the deposing of a Prince or any other man from his temporall possessions and worldly estate it is apparant that this extraordinarie doing of Samuel was neither theÌ„ nor now ordinarily pertaining to the spirituall power of pastors Secondly it is false that Saul lost his kingdome for not obseruing the precepte of Samuel For althoughe Samuel pronouÌ„ced it yet it was the Lords precept as like wise the other precepts of which M. Saunders confesseth that he fulfilled not the precept of the Lorde declared by the ministerie of Samuel So that Samuel was but the Minister of declaring it But say you then muste not the King dispise to heare the Lord speaking by the mouth of the highest Bishop We grauÌ„t you M. Sanders the King must not dispise to heare the Lorde speaking by the mouth of any Bishop As for any highest B. besides Iesus Christ we denie And the King ought to dispise to here him which claimeth that highest roome For it is an euident argument that the Lord speaketh not by such a blasphemous month as exalteth it selfe into Christes Bishopprike As for Samuel tooke not vpon him to be the highest Priest or Bishop nor was any B. or Priest at al nor spake any thing at all that he had not the especiall and expresse commandement of God therto Let your Pope and his Bishops shewe the expresse commaundement of God either especiall or ordinary that they be bidden to depose Kings and set vp other or else you wrest this example and doe no lesse abuse God than you would abuse Princes by it Thirdly this is false also that Samuell either deposed Saule or â—…et vp Dauid Concerning Saule he declared to him howe his kingdome should not continue but he deposed him not The wordes of Samuell are these Thou haste doâ—… foolishly that thou haste not obserued the commaundementes of the Lorde thy God that he commaunded thee If thou haddest not done this thing the Lorde had euen nowe established thy kingdome ouer Israell for euer But thy kingdome shall arise no further The Lorde hathe soughte him a man according to his heart and hathe commaunded him that he shoulde be captayne ouer his people bicause thou haste not kepte the thinges the Lorde commaunded thee First héere Samuell referreth all to the Lords commaundement Aâ—…d as Caietanus a Papist noteth thereon This commaundement of the Lorde violated by Saule was not a commaundement of the lawe but a particular commaundement declared to Saule by Samuel An especiall commaundement saith he for that turne Secondly he referreth the punishment not to his remouing of him but to the dooing of god Thirdly he dothe not neither in his owne name nor in Gods depose him at all from his estate but telleth him howe his kingdome shall not continue Vltrate saythe he It shall continue no further after thee Bicause his sonne Isboseth raygned not ouer all Israell neither yet ouer that peaceably and that for a small time And this purpose of God as Lyra nateth although it were then declared by reason of the present demerite of Saule yet was it the Lordes euerlasting purpose The purpose of God saith he is certain infallible It was before ordeined of God that the kingdome should be giuen to the tribe of Iuda as appeareth Gene. 49. The Scepter shal not be taken from Iuda But the Pope can not shew the like purpose of God that suche or such a Prince should nowe be deposed or placed therefore he dothe but wrest this example As for the placing of Dauid Although sayth Lyra this was yet to come he speaketh notwithstanding as
thoughe it were paste for the certeintie of the diuine prouidence So that yet no acte was â—…ast agaynst Saul or vnto Dauid but onely a declaration of Gods purpose to come Héere was therefore no deposing of the one nor placing of the other As for Samuels other sentence 1. Reg. 15. is more destnite when he saythe For that thou hast caste off the worde of the Lorde the Lorde hath caste off thee that thou shouldest not be king And yet he sayth not héere I depose thee â–ª or the Lorde deposeth thée from thine estate and froÌ„ hencefoorth thou shalte neither be king nor be reputed and taken of the Churche of God for king any longer Samuell sayth not thus nor ment thus nor Saule vnderstoode him thus but desired Samuel to returne with him and worship the Lorde And Samuell repeating his words sayd I wil not returne with thee bicause thou hast cast of the comandement of the Lord the Lorde hath cast off thee And Samuell turned to go away but he caught holde of the skirte of his cloake and it rent And Samuell sayde to him the Lorde hath rent the kingdome of Israell this day froÌ„ thee and hath giuen it to thy neighbour a better than thou And yet in all these so effectuall words Samuell sayth not héere In Dei nomine Amen c â–ª In the name of God Amen I do héere presenly depose thée and so foorth as the Pope vseth to do No all this was but a declaration of the time to come as Lyra saythe Dicunt autem Hebraei c. Some Hebrnes say that Samuel then gaue a signe vnto Saule that he shoulde raigne for him that shoulde cutte off the hemme of his garment VVhiche Dauid did as is conteyned 1. Reg. 24. VVherevpon Saule seeing the hemme of his garment in Dauids hande sayde nowe I knowe for certayne that thou shalte raygne And so the Glosse titeth Sainct Augustine Iste cui dixit c. This man to whome the Lorde sayde the Lorde despiseth thee that thou shouldest not be King of Israell and the Lorde hathe rent this day the kingdome out of thy hand ruled fortie yeres to wite euen as long as Dauid raigned And yet this thing he hearde the first time of his raigne Therefore wee vnderstande â–ª it to be spoken to this ende that none of the stocke of him shoulde raigne He rente it saythe the Glosse althoughe he reygned fortie yeres afterwarde But as then he desâ—…rued that the kingdome shoulde be rente from him and giuen to a better â–ª c. Thus these sayinges and doinges of Samuell were not the reall deposing of Saule from his Royall throne For bothe he tooke him selfe still as King and desired Samuel to honor him before the Elders of his people and before Israell But nowe sayth he honor me Sinon c. Although sayth 〈◊〉 not for my persons sake yet do this thing for the honor of my royall dignitie And so Samuell assented to him willing sayth Lyra to giue it vnto Saule so long as he was of God suffred in the kingdome Nowe as for Dauid Samuell in déede anoynted him and that as you saye priuilie Whiche argueth agaynst you that it was no publike acte of making him king but as it were a preparatiue vnto it and a priuie forewarning of Gods purpose to come Secondly it was a thing of Gods especiall appoynting or else Samuell would not nor coulde haue euer done it Thirdly saythe â—…yra Aduertendum est c â–ª VVe muste marke that Dauid was anoynted to be king not to this purpose that he shoulde streighte possesse the kingdome But when the acceptable wyll of God shoulde come But God did suffer Saule in the possession of the kingdome euen vntill his death And thus we sée vpon this acte of the Lorde by Samuell as well to Saule as to Dauid â–ª héere was yet no suche deposing of the one nor setting vp the other as Master Sanders claymeth héere reasoning from the example of Samuels dooing to Saule and Dauid for the Pope to 〈◊〉 Christian Princes offending and to set vp others in the â—…places The second thing that he gathereth héerevpon is this that the king by the Pope béeing deposed is now no longer true lawful king â–ª but a playne vsurper and a wrongful occupier of the kings seaâ—…e beeing armed with a bande of souldiers but the other that is annoynted or otherwise consecrated by the Bishop in his place shall truely from this day forward be the king and the people ought to go to him and not obey the other And for this he alleageth three reasons First the saying of God by the Prophet Osée Secondly the acknowledging of Ionathas Saules sonne Thirdly the gathering of diuers persons vnto Dauid First for the wordes of the Prophet whiche are these They haue raygned and not by me They were Princes I know them not I answere First these worâ—… are Gods complaynt agaynst the wickednesse of those kinges of Israel â–ª that directed not their gouernment by Gods law not that they were not kings but that they were wicked kings Not that they were by no meanes ordeyned of God for 〈◊〉 potestas est à Deo all power is of God and God sayth in generall per mâ—… reges regnant Kings rule by me so well heathen as faythfull kinges â–ª Pilates power was from aboue These kinges of Israell Ieroboam Achab Iehu c. were of Gods ordeyning Yeà Iehu whose house héere God complayned vpon and sayde he and his ofspring raigned not by him â–ª were yet notwithstanding made kinges and raygned by him In respecte of their ambition and priuate affections their raigne was not of him In respecte of Gods ordinaunce of his iustice of his prouidence it was not only permitted but also especially appoynted of him As bothe the â–ª texte is 〈◊〉 and your owne glosse confesseth for Hieroboam the elder that it was done by Gods will althoughe it were done also by the peoples sinne that regarded not the will of God but â—…llowed their owne selfewil And so in some respecte it was not the worke of God and yet in other respects it â—…as the worke of god And so héere 〈◊〉 himselfe and sayth I know them not Not that he was ignorant of them but he acknowledged not their doings Secondly neither the prophet Osee nor any other prophet tooke vpon them to depose any of those wicked kinges but to declare the wrath and vengeance of God to come vpon them After which declarations they did not subtract froÌ„ them their ciuill obedience count them from that day forward no longer to be their kings or exhorted the Church of God to forsake their polytike gouernment but hauing declared their message from God they let them alone till eyther God him selfe did strike theÌ„ or stirred vp by some especiall and extraordinarie meanes some forren or domestical persecuâ—… of them Thirdly this maketh nothing to proue that those kings
〈◊〉 the Pope taketh vpon him to pronouÌ„ce they be no Kings are no longer Kings except he will make him selfe God yea and aboue God too For althoughe God say They â—…gne not by me â–ª yet he calleth them kinges But the Pope calleth them vâ—…urpers that raygne not by him Secondly he alleageth the acknowledging of Ionathas Saules sonne the peoples gathering vnto Dauid For Io nathas it is true that he acknowledged the kingdome shold be deuolued vnto Dauid after his fathers deathe â–ª And so he saith Tu regnabis super Israel Thou shalt raigne ouer Israell I shall be next to thee and this my father knoweth But this inferreth not that he tooke Dauid then presently to be king and his faâ—…her from that day forwarde no longer to be king neither reuolted he from the obedience of his father to Dauids obedience neither could his father lay this treason to his charge that he forsooke his due subiection although most bitterly 〈◊〉 rated him and sayde Thou sonne of the wicked rebellious woman do not I knowe that thou haste chosen the sonne of Isai to thy confusion to the confusion and shame of thy mother For as long as the sonne of Isai liueth vpon the earth thou shalt not be established nor thy kingdome Whereon sayth Caietane the cause is made manyfest bicause he was an impediment to the succession of the kingdome and verily Saule had a true iudgement as the euent of the matter proued And thus the acknowledging of Ionathas proued not Dauids kingdome to be in esse as they say but in futuro not that he was King but that he should be King. Nor the confederacie betwéene Dauid and Ionathas was any conspiracie to depose Saule or to set vp Dauid but a confirming of the loue betwéene them and their houses when God should make him king Nowe for the peoples gathering vnto Dauid about the number of 400. this was not to assemble a rebellious multitude to inuade king Saule to depose him froÌ„ the crowne to set vp him selfe For neither they came for any such purpose but for their succor béeing in debt trouble or otherwise vexed neither did Dauid send for them nor incite any to take his part not proclaimed him selfe to be king or published the Lords anoynting of him or euer vsed that multitude that came vnto him for any suche purposes And yet the question is moued bothe by Caietanus and Lyranus héerevpon The question saythe Caietanus atiseth whether it were lawfull for Dauid to receiue these debters in the preiudice of the creditors that had lent them The solution is that if these men had house field or vineyard they are vnderstoode to haue lefte their goodes vnto them But if they were vtterly vnable to pay their debts they were excused for their vnhabilitie vntill their better habilitie For that Dauid excellently instructed all them that came vnto him while he â—…aried in that caue the Psalme restifieth I will prayse the Lorde at all time Conteyning according to the letter a doctrine giuen there of Dauid vnto the souldiors Therfore Dauid receiued not these men in preiudice of their creditors And thus as he did not receiue them to the preiudice of any priuate man so he receiued them not to the preiudice of the king and publike state Wheron Lyra moneth the other questioÌ„ saying In that he became their captain it seemeth he sinned in receiuing suche as Abimelech receiued the needie and vagabounds assembling theÌ„ vnto him as is contayned Iud. 9. VVe muste say that he gathered them not to slay the innocent as did Abimelech to slay his brethren neither to spoyle the faythfull For we reade not that he spoyled the people of Israell But rather kepte their goodes as is contayned afterwarde 1. Keg 25. of Naball But he gathered them to persecute the Infidels as is contayned afterwarde in many cases And to keepe his owne body from the ambushementes of Saule The which he mighte do in suche a necessitie chiefly when he was nowe anoynted king By reason whereof in suche a case he might prolong the payment of the debtes and in many the forfeyture is released in the case aforesayde Thus sée it was not for that the people tooke Dauid actually to be king but for their owne refuge that they fled to him But whatsoeuer their intent was good or ill Dauid assembled them not to hinder or hurte any priuate or publike person And althoughe he receiued them and vsed them for his defence whiche he mighte do béeing in the state he was yet woulde he neuer suffer them to enter medle in the quarell of his righte to the kingdome nor yet he him selfe woulde euer take it vpon him and impugne king Saule no not when he had him in hys daunger vntyll the Lorde by other meanes tooke Saule away and gaue the kingdome in reall possession vnto Dauid Before whiche time Dauid neuer called him selfe king nor the time of his raygne is reckoned but Saule counted and called and his raigne reckoned as king till his death and neuer shortned disturbed nor once gayne sayd by Dauid for all these folkes assemblies For example When God sent king Saule as it were of purpose euen into Dauids handes and the souldiers moued Dauid to kill him he would neither him selfe hurt him nor suffer any other to do it nor yet take him prisoner so depose him or cause him to resigne But only cut off priuily a flap of his garment for a testimonie howe he spared him yet his heart throbbed that he had done so muche agaynst him His conscience reproued him sayth Lyra in that he had done vnreuerently to Saule who was to be honored so long as he was of God suffred in the kingdome A certaine remorce of conscience sayth Caietane is described in Dauid in that he had cutoff the skirte of Saules cloake For it is the propertie of good mindes euen there to feare a fault where faulte is not found The reason of his remorce was bicause the cutting of the cloake was in his proper kinde iniurious Howbeit it was without fault both bicause it was giuen vnto him by Gods authoritie to do with Saule that whiche seemed good in Dauids owne eies and also good reason moued that Dauid mighte shewe a signe of his beneuolence towardes Saule by a most euident testimonie conuicting Saule that yet at the least Saule might leaue off from so wicked persecution But a better testimony he could not shewe than the skirte of his garment there cut off the action therfore naturally iniurious was not done in the forme of an iniurie but of a necessarie signe to witnesse the truthe of Dauids right mind to Saule â–ª And this good minde Dauid him selfe expresseth The Lorde keepe me from doing this thing vnto my Lorde the Lords anoynted to lay mine hande on him for he is the Lords anoynted And héere Caietanus giueth this note
that he had authoritie ouer the Priestes Firste in that he cyted them to come before him Secondly in that they obeyed his citation and came before the king Thirdly in that the high Priest calleth the King his Lord saying here I am my Lord. Fourthly when the King layde treason to his charge he replyeth not that he could be no traitor to the King beyng his superior but as inferior pleadeth he was no traytor Fiftly he acknowledgeth both Dauid to be Saules seruaunt himselfe also saying be it farre from mee let not the King impute any thing vnto his seruaunt nor to all the house of my father for thy seruaunt knew nothing of all this lesse or more Wherby it appeareth that the high Priest and all his familie were vnder the Kings obedience and so still continued after that Samuel had declared how that the Lord had rent his kingdome from him As for that the Prince abused his authoritie to the cruell murdering of innocentes we graunt it was so detestable that his souldiors did well in refusing to execute his wicked commaundement We defend no suche authoritie in Princes nor such obedience in subiectes as murdereth innocents without all lawe and Iustice and that after suche a cruell sort as did the doggishe Doeg being not content to murder the innocent ministers of God but besides to put to the edge of thes worde all the men and women in their Citie yea the Children sucking babes also You can finde no protestant Prince M. Saunders that euer did the like déede But Popishe Princes haue not onely done the like but farre surmounted both Saul and Doeg and all other cruel Princes in such vnnaturall Tragedies So fitte all Maister Saunders ensamples serue his purpose that euerye one maketh cleane against him But now saith he least any man should thinke at the least the power of those Kings that sprang from Dauid to be greater than the spirituall power of the Synagog let him besides this consider that Ahias the Silonite while Salomon was yet aliue foretolde that Ieroboam should gouerne the ten tribes VVhervpon is vnderstood that either the whole kingdome or some part therof may be taken away from a wicked King by the spirituall power of the Churche For what power was in times past in the Priests and Prophets the same is now in the pastors and teachers whose duetie it is so to consulte for the soules health that they suffer not by the disobedience and tyrannie of a wicked King the people of an infinite multitude to be compelled and drawne to scisme and heresie The argument is still as before from the spirituall power in Priests Prophets then in the Synagog to the spiritual power of popishe pastors teachers in the Church now To this besides the former answere I answere againe first the popishe pastors teachers being false pastors false teachers except it be from such Priestes Prophetes as were of Baal Balaam Bel. c. can frame no good conclusion Secondly admit they were which they pretend true pastors teachers yet the argument is not true from any particular especial charge giueÌ„ vnto some one or two of them by gods expresse commaundement to foretell this or that thing to come to conclude therevpon an ordinarie spirituall power in all the priests prophets then and the like to succéede in the pastors teachers now Thirdly neither any such thing is described or ment by S. Paulâ—… Epâ—…e 4. in the office of pastors teachers now neither this example of the old testament 2 Reg. 11. inferreth any such thing done by the priests or prophets then The example of 〈◊〉 he alleaged before but he thinketh here to frame it better to his purpose His argument is thus The prophet Ahias while King Salomon liued foretold Ieroboam that he should raigne ouer ten Tribes Ergo either the whole kingdome or a part therof may be taken from a wicked King by the spiritull power that is by the pastors and teachers of the Church I denie the argument M. sand from foretelling the taking away thereof to the taking away thereof in déede The foretelling belonged to that Prophet to whoÌ„ God not onely reuealed it but commaunded to foretell it The taking away therof either in part or in whole beloÌ„ged only to God working by his secrete or open Iustice and to those as instruments of his wrath whom he ordained to do it that is by Ieroboam and such as rebelled with him And howbeit this fact when â–ª it was done was such a specialtie as can not be drawne to an example no more than can the attempt of Abraham to kill his sonne yet was not this facte done in Salomons dayes Who all his life long raigned King of the whole kingdome notwithstanding all this Prophecie In dede Ieroboam which was a wicked man lifte vp his hand and rebelled against Salomon not tarying the Lords oportunitie as Dauid did but following his owne ambition he abused the prophetes message Who although he tolde him that God woulde giue him ten tribes yet he tolde him that Salomon shoulde raigne all his life time But I will take the kingdome saythe God by the Prophete vnto Ieroboam oute of his sonnes hande and will giue tenne Tribes to thee c. so that this serueth not Maister Saunders purpose to dispossesse the presente estate of the Prince lyuing Neyther sayth the Prophet he will doe it neyther byddeth he Ieroboam to rebel eyther against Salomon or his sonne but he sayth God him selfe would doe it To the which sentence and worke of God Ieroboam ought to haue obeyed Which in so much as he did not he disobeyed God and was a traytor to his Prince and deserued death Althoughe God by his secrete iustice so punished Salomons séede that he confirmed the Kingdome in Ieroboams handes and made him a lawfull king But in all these things here was nothyng done by the Prophete but the foretelling of Gods purpose Which notwithstanding was enioyned hym by Gods especiall commaundemente For otherwyse had he presumed thus of his owne heade by reason of the authoritie of hys Propheticall office whatsoeuer Salomen had deserued he had for his parte béene but a â—…rayterous Prophete and so are all those Popishe Pastors and teachers that teache subiectes to rebell against their Soueraignes on pretence of these examples True Pastors and teachers by thys particular example maye learne thus muche in generall to teache Princes to feare God and dreade his Iustice to beware of Idolatrie and of ioyning themseluâ—…s in mariage or in other leagâ—…es of friendship wyth the enimyes of gods truth As Salomon â—…ell to Idolatrie by marying of Infidels Achab for ioyning in friendshippe with Benadab was punished and marying the wicked Iesabell did euen â—…ell him selfe to wickednesse Yea the good King Iosaphat for ioyning in league with the wicked King Ochozias Achabs sonne was reproued sharpely and his ships perished These
examples and suche other ought good pastors and reachers to teach their Princes and to set the wrathe of God before them howe he will roote vp their houses and destroye their kingdomes if they feare not hym Thus oughte good teachers by these examples to doe but not they themselues to depose theyr Princes or to sette vp other and stirre the people to rebellion But Maister Saunders hath yet more examples To the same purpose pertayneth that Elias anoynted Asael King ouer Syria and Iehu King ouer Israel and Elizeus to be Prophet for himself on that condition that if any escaped the handes of Asahel him should Iehu kill But if any escaped the hands of Iehu him should Elizeus kill If thys ensample pertayne to the same purpose that doe the other of Samuels anoynting Dauid and of Ahias foretellyng Ieroboam that he shoulde raygne then pertayneth it not to your purpose Maister Saunders for Byshoppes to depose Christian Princes and to make their subiectes rebell againste them For the other as we haue alreadye playnely séene are but manifestly and shamefully wrested therevnto But nowe let vs sée if thys example of Elias wyll serue your turne any better The argument is driuen to both these purposes the one for the anoynting of a new king the other for punishing of the former king For the anointing of a new king is alleaged that Elias anoynted Asael King ouer Syria and Iehu King ouer Israel and Elizeus to be the prophet for himselfe First I answere as before these are againe the expresse particular coÌ„maÌ„demeÌ„ts of the Lord vnto Elias giuing him a particular charge that he should anoyut all these three To stretch therfore the Lords particular charge to him vnto a generall rule without any expresse coÌ„mandement of y Lord thervnto is a daungerous presumptuous abusing of Gods coÌ„mandement For without this especiall charge of God Elias had no ordinarie authoritie by vertue of his prophetical office to haue done any thing herein as the popish Bishops without any particular commandement of God take vpon them to do by vertue of their Bishoply office Secondly I answere that this anointing of these Kyngs was not the real inuesting of them in their royall estate neither yet done by Elias him selfe as euen your owne glosse noteth theron Vnges Asahel c. Thou shalt anoynt Azahel no otherwise but that he foretold him that he shoulde be king in time to come He anoynted Elizeus no otherwise than by casting his cloake on him The two Kings neither he by him self neithor Elizeus his disciple anoynted them but one of the Prophets was sent to anoynt Iehu And this Prophet in déede powred oyle on Iehu his head and said Thus saith the Lorde God of Israel I haue anoynted thee King ouer the people of the Lord of Israel c. Which fact and saying as the Popish Bishops can not imitate hauing no suche commission so the other anoynting of Asael was but a forewarning like as the former facte of Ahias was to Ieroboam and therefore serueth not this purpose least of all the anoynting of Elizeus who was no King but a Prophete and therefore is alleaged cleane oute of place to inferre the present purpose of anoynting Kings But M. Sanders hathe a further fetche in naming Elizeus For thereby as in Elias he thinkes to proue the setting vp of kings so in Elizeus he would inferre their pulling downe For sayth he Elias annoynted Asael Iehu and Elizeus on that condition that if one escaped the handes of Asael him shoulde Iehu kill but if any escape the handes of Iehu him shoulde Elizeus kill You falsefie the Scripture M. Sanders the words are not that they shoulde be anoynted on that condition that they should do these things but the Lord statly foretelleth that they shall do these things Et erit quicunque fugerit c. And it shall be that whosoeuer escapeth from the sworde of Asael him shall Iehu kill and he that escapeth the sworde of Iehu him shall Elizeus kill Wherevpon sayth Lyra that Asaell and Iehu killed many Idolaters of Israell is inough expressed after in the fourth booke But that Elizeus killed any is not read but of two and fortie whome he cursed wherevpon the Beares did teare them But sayth Caietane notwithstanding nothing letteth but that these thinges were fulfilled euen as the letter foundeth althoughe the execution be not written So that if this slaughter of Elizeus be ment spiritually then it serueth not for bodily punishment whiche is nowe the question If it be ment bodily as was the slaughter made by the Leuites when they slewe aboue 20000. for Idolatrie and as Phinees stabbing with his dagger Zambri and Cozbi for their whoredome then either of these béeing particular charges and especiall commaundementes can not be stretched to the like example of bodily slaughter to be committed by the Clergie nowe Neyther the popishe Priestes althoughe they be the chéefest authors of it will prâ—…tende that they will medle therein but saye with the Priestes that put Christ to death It is not lawfull for vs to kill any man. And to this purpose of a figuratiue killing M. Sand driueth this example By which figure sayth he what else is signified than that many powers are set vp and erected in the Churche of God that that which is not done by one of them may be done by another Of whiche powers the laste and chiefest is that whiche belongeth to the Prophets that is towards them that are the Pastors and teachers of the Churche of god For as the sworde of Elizeus is reckoned in the laste place as whiche no man can escape althoughe he escape the sworde of Asaell or of Iehu so the censure of the spirituall power can by no meanes be auoyded althoughe any escape the sworde of the secular power For the spirituall power vseth not the bodily or visible sworde whiche by certayne meanes may be let but vseth the sworde of the spirite that passeth throughe all places and pierceth euen to the soule of him whome it reacheth First M. Sanders you do more than you can well iustifie to wring this facte to this figuratiue signification of this spirituall sworde For if Elizeus did strike or cause to be striken the remnaÌ„t of those Idolaters with a bodily sword as dyd Asael and Iehu hauing for warrant Gods especiall commaundement therevnto then is your figure dashed But whether he did this or no you sée the iudgement of Cardinall Caietane and we sée the examples of the Leuites of Phinees and the killing of Agag by Samuel And the like of Elias in killing the Priests of Baal euen in the Chapter going before He brought them to the brooke â—…ison and killed them there Elias sayth Lyra killed them by the people that to this purpose assisted him or perhaps he killed some of them with his owne hande by the zeale of Gods
â–ª for the which he was cast out of the house of the lord Moreouer Ioatham his sonne gouerned the house of the king and iudged the people of the Lorde VVho seeth not the bodily casting foorthe of the king oute of the house of the Lorde clerely to expresse that ecclesiasticall power whereby kings taking vpon them the offices of Priests maye be caste out of the kingdome of heauen by the excommunication of the highest Bishop Moreouer if bicause the king was made a Leper the administration of the kings house and the gouernment of all the people was deuolued vnto the kinges sonne howe muche more the infection of heresie which as S. Augustine saythe is signified by the leprie ought to bring to passe that a Prince beeing driuen to the state of a priuate life maye be compelled to leaue his house voyde vnto hys successor This storie of king Ozias as it is already cited by M. Stapleton and was not before forgotten of M. Sanders so héere and in diuers other places it is recited Neither is there any one Popishe writer on this question of Supremacie but he alleageth this exaÌ„ple And as they thus often alleage it so is it often by vs answered and in déede it is casie to be answered for it is not to the purpose and but their malicious slaunder to burden the Protestant Princes with it who take not vpon them to do the offices belonging to the Bishops and Ministers of Gods word and Sacramentes as héere Ozias attempted to do If you can name any suche Prince and such things name them hardly M. Sand but proue it withal else you are but a slaunderer of those that be in authoritie But here M. sand applies this exaÌ„ple to this that the highest Bishop may excommunicate such a Prince and cast him out of heauen Whether your Pope be the highest Bishop or no is still another question But this is out of questioÌ„ M. sand that he is alwayes more ready to cast a Prince oâ—…t of heauen thaÌ„ to bring him into heauen and to caste him out of his kingdome too than to let him enioy it especially if he deale with him although he do not as Ozias did but do the dutie of a godly Christian king But who denieth this M. sand that a godly Bishop may vpon great vrgent occasion if it shall be necessarie to edifie Gods Church and there be no other remedie to flée to this last censure of excoÌ„municatioÌ„ against a wicked king although you can not inferre any suche necessarie conclusion vpon the allegorie of this example But what is this for the expelling him out of his kingdome â–ª and for deposing him from his estate Can you proue that Azarias and his Priests did handle Ozias thus For this is the present question but this you can not finde they dyd and therfore this example serueth not your purpose Well say you they vsed a bodily casting out of the king out of the house of the Lorde Trow you M. sand they tooke him by the héeles cast him out or by the head and the shoulders â–ª thrust him out I trow not that they layde any violent hands vpon him They withstoode him but it followeth how they saide vnto him It pertayneth not to thee to burne inceÌ„se vnto the Lord but to the priests the sons of Aaron that are coÌ„secrated to offer incense Go foorth of the SaÌ„ctuary for thou hast traÌ„sgressed thou shalt haue no honor of the Lord God. This was no resistaÌ„ce M. San. to blam him for his wickednesse wheÌ„ he regarded not their sayings but was wroth with theÌ„ was eueÌ„ ready to offer the incense God stroke him with the leprie So that it appeareth they laid no violeÌ„t hands on him but rebuked him yet in his fury he had done it had not God him self with his sodayn vengeance stopped him If they had béene so disposed béeing forty valiant men besides the highe Priest they might haue wroong the Censor out of his hande and might haue pulled off the Priestly garments from his backe for so Iosephus telleth how he came into the Temple howbeit they resisted him not in suche violent â—…rte But say you when they espied God had once striken him with the leprie then quickly they thrust him out But not with violence M. Sanders Non explicatur expulsio c. saythe your Cardinall of Caieta thrusting him out is not expressed but the Priests when they sawe the Leprie warned the leprous king to go foorth Neither néeded he then any great warning Sed ipse c. For the king himselfe beeing terrified made haste to get out bicause he felte foorth with the stroke of the Lorde so that he was not only moued of the priests but also moued of him selfe féeling the 〈◊〉 of God to go out of the Temple What great violence was here done of the Priests to the King except their rebuking or warning of him either before his presumptuous attempt or after Did they strike him No God stroke him M. Sanders and not the Priests for all they were so many tall fellowes and had mighte inough to haue striken him If your Pope therefore and his Prelates will take this Bishop and his Priests for their example they muste be as S. Paule sayth no strikers nor fighters chiefly not not agaynst their Princes they must be mightie but not in blowes but potentes sermone mightie in the word to reproue the wickednesse of Princes and so resist them as S. Paule sayth he resisted Peter to his face not that he buffeted or pâ—…meld him with his fiste aboute the face as Bishop Boner did his prisoners But he resisted him in spéeche reprehending him and with such resistance these Priests resisted the king â–ª and all Bishops may and ought to resist all wycked princes but this is farre from deposing them or sollicitâ—…ng other Princes to make warre vpon them or mouing their subiects to rebell agaynst them But master Sanders brgeth further what followed The king beeing a â—…eper dwelt in a house apart til the day of his death and his sonne gouerned the kings house and iudged the people of the lande What is this M. Sand to the Priests deposing of him that he dwelt aparte For beeing a Leper God in his lawe had so appoynted Leuit. 13. Neyther dyd the contagion of his disease suffer the administration of his office Howbeit neither for his offence nor for his punishmeÌ„t therof was he deposed froÌ„ his kingdom his sonne made king but the sonne as his fathers deputie â–ª administred the affaires of his fathers kingdome so for al this Ozias continued king euen til the day of his naturall deathe whiche was a longer time if your Glosse be true after this fact than he had beene king before this fact coÌ„mitted â–ª For saith your owne glosse Volunt Hebraei c. The Hebrues will haue it that this hapâ—…ed in the 25. yere
can be made among ChristiaÌ„s that either the bishops of any kingdom much lesse the B. of Rome for al kingdomes ought to know the causes of kings Emperors whether they be iust or vniust This generalitie can not iustly be inferred on such a specialtie For neither al kings estates 〈◊〉 like to this kings estate nor all Bishops estates like to this Bishops estate as by the causes aforesayd appeareth Fourthly I answer that as here is inferred no ordinary rule for Bishops to haue knowledge in kings Emperors cau ses froÌ„ the coÌ„trarie here is inferred an ordinary rule for kings Emperors to haue knowledge of B. causes For eueÌ„ at the kings 〈◊〉 althogh he wer an infaÌ„t had no more skil of religioÌ„ thaÌ„ of gouernmeÌ„t the text saith they put the crowneâ—… vpon him and gaue him the lawe in his hande And so saythe Lyra the testimonie that is the law wherein he was ordeined ought to studie and meditate and keepe it and cause it to be kept True it is that the high Prieste did teach him and the King did well so long as he was taught of so godly a father And therevpon maye well be inferred that Byshops maye teach Kings that vvhich is right before the Lorde But this teaching of the King inferreth no publike gouernement of the King which the Pope claimeth and M. Saunders pleadeth for The authoritie of teaching the King and the authoritie of gouerning the King are â—…arre different authorities That of teaching we graunt to Ioiada and to al Godly Byshops not to teach what they will but that vvhiche is right before the Lord. And to sée that they do this the Prince hath the lavve of God giuen into his handes so well as the crowne set on his head to shewe that although the Byshops mustâ—… teach true doctrine and Godly exhortatioÌ„ yet must the King haue knowledge to ouersée that it be taught â–ª as well much more than any other matters of his kingdoms What shall we say then to the popishe Byshops which will not giue the lavve of God into the Princes handes but wring it out of his handes that he should not knowe it but blindly followe such false doctrine and naughtie examples as they woulde teache him are these Byshops like to the Byshop Ioiada And if this king fel to Idolatrie when he wanted this good teacher how shall that King doe that neuer had suche a teacher and yet for all this teaching of Ioiada that was as it were a father to the King the King notwithstanding while he continued good bothe commaunded all the Priestes and taught them how they should deale in their oblations collections reparations and other thinges belonging to the Temple And Ioas saide to the Priestes all the siluer of thinges dedicated that be brought to the house of the Lorde c. Let the Priestes take it vnto them euery one of his acquaintance and they shall repayre the broken places of the house vvheresoeuer any decaye is founde And in the 23. yeare of King Ioas the Priestes had not amended that vvhich vvas decayed in the Temple Then King Ioas called for Ioiada the Priest and the other Priests and saide vnto them VVhy repaire ye not the ruines of the Temple Novv therefore receiue no more money of your acquaintance except ye deliuer it to repaire the ruines of the Temple Thus did the King not only knovv of the Priestes causes but called them before him yea euen his vncle Ioiada the high Priest also appointed an order vnto them how to bestow their offerings And when they were negligent therein he rebuked theÌ„ reuoked his former ordinance except on their amendement Neither did the Priests no nor his vncle Ioiada the highe Prieste grudge or grumble hereat nor sayde that the offerings were theirs not his to dispose nor told him they were his superiors but as his inferiors most humbly obeyed his ordinances Al vvhich things fithe they vvere vvell done is not novve true according to the sense of the diuine Scripture that we may make a better ordinarie rule herâ—…on for Kings and Emperors to knovve of Byshops causes than for Byshops to knovve of Kings and Emperors causes If you replye this was but a money matter I answere yet was this money oblations and offerings But will you graunt Princes thus much to make ordinances howe all your money offerings shall be vsed when ye shall gather them and when not of whom ye shal take them and howe ye shall bestowe them â—…ay 〈◊〉 will neuer doe this for money is the chiefest thing ye shoote at no penie no pater noster all your eâ—…cl causes depende so on money offerings that as good ye gaue the prince authoritie in al ecclesiastical matters as let him deale thus with your money offerings as Ioas did with theirs But doth your own glosse expound this no further than to money matters Ioas saithe your glosse both in this name and in this vvorke signifieth Christ for it is interpreted the strength of the Lorde He commaundeth the teachers that they should take all the money that is offered into the Lordes house of the passers by to vvit whatsoeuer spirituall knovvledge or good vvorke is brought into the Lords treasorie that by the offices of the preachers it may be bestovved on the repayring of the spirituall Temple that vvhatsoeuer he shall finde torne by errour or hurte by Vices they should repaire least the multitude of hearers should perishe by the doctors negligence â–ª Here this facte of the King is compared to the representation of Christe and to the ouersight of all eccl. matters So that if Kings will account the studie of the Lawe of God as well to belong vnto them as their crowne if they will looke vnto know and examine the causes of the Byshops and their reuenues and appoint them orders to repair the ruines of the Lords temple and sée that the preachers lay out their talents of spirituall knowledge good workes towards the building then should kings truely represent Christe and be indéede the strength of the Lorde bycause they haue the Lords power authoritie thervnto And thus this example better considered maketh more for the Kings authoritie ouer the Byshops than for the Byshops ouer the Kings authoritie Fiftly I answere that althoughe a Godly Byshop be a sequester betwéen God the Prince betwéene the Prince and the people in prayer in the Sacramentes and in preaching yet â–ª is he not a sequester betwéen God and the Prince or betwene the Prince the people in matters of the kingdome least of all he may sequester him from his kingdome And though he be the Angell of the Lord in his message if he be a Godly byshop for otherwise he is the Angell of SathaÌ„ yet is the King the Lordes anoynted or the Lordes Christe in authoritie but the Lords Christ in authoritie is aboue the lordes Angels in message therefore the King
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
kings Supra 799. sand pag. 82. How M. sand esteemes of al other men that denie that which he affirmes M. sand contradictions Christion prin ces power is not onely an earthly power sand pag. 82. Not we but the Papistes confound both powers sand pag. 82. 2. Cor. 3. 1. Reg. 8. The due and true spiritual Power The Popishe spiritual power How the princes power is earthly howe heauenly Supra 791. The Princes power came from christ Prouerb 8. Christ a sauior as well in that he is a king as in that he is a Priest. How both the Princes the Bishops pouer pertayne to heauen and minister life sand pag. 82. Rom. 12. 1. Cor. 12. Ephes. 4. The Popishe Churches iurisdictions sand pag. 82. 83. M. Sand presupposall of the Princes doing iniurie to the Church or suffering it The Pastors admonition to Princes doing euil The Prince not the Priests onely gouerneth the churche of God. M. Saund. presupposall retorned on the Priestes doing iniurie to the Prince or suffering it The Popishe Priestes will only admonishe them selues How roughly the Popishe Priestes will admonishe them selues Difference betweene admonishing gouerning deposing The Priestes ouer hastie remedie to ameÌ„d the Prince â–ª sand pag. 83. Math. 18. sand pag. 8â—… 3. Reg. 1â—… Remedie agaynst offences and dangers The inconueniences of the Popish remedies The danger of the Popishe doctrine sand pag. 83. Psal. 86. Math. 16. 1. Cor. 5. Iohn 21. Math. 16. The Churche of God not left destitute of medicines for suche diseases Luc. 2â—… Collos. 1. Psalm 12â—… Psalm 56. Math. 5. M. Saund. corruption of the text against Princes Excommunication Who should be auoyded and how by Saint Paules meaning 1. Cor. 5. How a vitious king is to be shunned and iudged The testimony of S. Paule returned on the Popish Priests Rom. 13. Gene. 18. Peter not the chiefe pastor of the Church How M. sand ex o â—…deth these wordes fede my shepe How Peter fed the shepe of Christ. 1. Peter 2. How M. sand applies binding losing of Princes sand pag. 83. A shameful abusing of Christs saying M. Saunders shift sand pag. 8â—… Ieremie 1. The Princes charge for misusing his sworde Psalm 2. If the Prince abuse his sword the spirituall minister maye not take it froÌ„ him The Papistes wresting the senteÌ„ce of god to Ieremie How Ieremie pulled downe and set vp kinges and kingdomes Lyra in Ierem. 1. These thinges were done loÌ„g after Ieremies time Ieremie is said to doe them bicause he fortolde them The doer of them was only God such instruments as he vsed which were no Priestes not Prophets Ierem. 45. Ierem. 42. How the Pope shoulde set vp and pul down kings kingdomes if he will followe Ieremie The sentence spoken to Ieremie applyed to Christe Glossa in Lyra in Ierem. 1. How the Ministers of Christ oughte to pull downe let vp kingdomes Lyra. Ierem 1. Glossa in Lyra What maner of conquest of kingdomes this is sand pag. 83. Iohn 18. Math. 13. Iohn 15. Iohn 1. In ca. 18. Ioh. M. sand answere to this obiection My kingdome is not of thys worlde Iohn 18. The Popes kingdome worldly M. Sand 〈◊〉 by distinction of this wordr the worlde The naturall sense of world ly kingdome Glossa in Lyra Lyra. in Ioh. 18. Ferus in Iohn 18. Christes kingdom expelleth no temporall Princes from their Dominions The significations of the kingdome of Christ. The difference of these kingdomes The error of the Papists Ludolphus de vita Christi parte 2. cap. 61 The Pope and his Prelates kingdom confuted by the Papists them selues August in cap. 18. Ioan. S. Augustine thought not that the kingdome of Christ hindreth vvorldly kingdomes sand pag. â—…4 Christ a king as he is God man. The Papistes confound the veritie of his manhoode Ioan. 18. Ferus in â—…o 1â—… The manner of Christes kingdome Hovv Christ ruleth The feoftmeÌ„ts of Christes kingdome Supra 797. Sand. 84. Math. 28. Rom. 14. Psal. 8. In Ioan. li. 4. ca. 12. Psal. â—… 1. Cor. 15. Rom. 9. The gouernement of Christ 1. Cor. â—… Adams kingdome Sand. 84. Ioâ—… 21. Math. 16. Math. 28. Peter not tâ—… first Pastor Marci 16. Ioan. 10. Christe vseth not a vvorldly kingdome by the Administration of the spirituall misters Sand. 84. Ioâ—…n 6. Luke 1â—… M. sand shifting off the examples of Christes fleeing from being a vvorldly King and refusing to be a â—…vorldly Iudge The cause of Christes refusal vvas not on ly in the originall least it should seeme to come of theÌ„ Ferus in 10. 6. The causes vvhy Christe fled from a vvorldly king dome Christe vvould not giue any occasion of sedition The Popishe Prelates of an other iudgement than Christe The Papistes compared to the carnall Ievves Carnal pastors M. Saunders shift to Christs refusall to be a iudge Luc. 12. What the man thought of Christ â—…hat vvould haue him a iudge Hofmeister in Lucâ—… 12. Why Christ tooke not on him the 〈◊〉 of a Magistrate Christ abolished not the Magistrats office though he himselfe refused it All iudgement of all temporal matters not vtteâ—…ly debarred from the spiritual Ministers â–ª What kind of iudging is debarred sand pag. 84. Lucâ—… 12. Though all things all to be referred to gods kingdom yet the kingdoÌ„ câ—…nsists not in all things 1. Coâ—… 10. Rom. â—…4 How worldly things belong to the kingdome of God. How the spirituall ministers of Christ may haue a bâ—…ance of worldly things In what respect they belong to theÌ„ to al the faithfull in what respect they belong not vnto them How the Popishâ—…â—…relates would haue worldly thiÌ„gs The Papistes haue no measure in hauing the cormorants no measure in pulling away In what parte and respect the beleeuer in Christ hathe left off to be of the world S. Aug. wrested by master Sanders How faithfull kingdomes leaâ—…e off and how not to be of the world Aug â–ª in tractatu â—…n loa 11â—… Howe euery faythfull is a king in a mysticall sense but not in a literall sense sand pag. 84. M. sand styll vvrestes thys vvorde the vvorldâ—… The simple literall meaning of Christ in â—…aying â–ª Hys kingdome is not of thys vvorlde The opinion oâ—… the Ievves that offred him the kingdome His Disciples opinion in cra â—…ng preâ—…erment in hys kingdome Math. 20. Hovve Christe ruleth Christian Princes Hovv M. sand vvould haue al Christendome and a greate parte of Heathenesse subiecte to the Pope Iohn 18. sand pag. 84. Tit. 3. Whether it vvere a vvicked deede for Bishops to depose a vvicked king Thoughe the subiect be not bound to obey the vices yet he is bounde to obey the state Thoughe Bishops can not depose Princes yet Princes can depose Bishops The vices that he surmiseth on Princes are apparante in the Pope and his Prelates sand pag. 85. What the prea cher may do agaynst a vvic ked Prince No bodily punishment of the King belongeth to the Bishop What may be
Popes cru 〈◊〉 to his cap tiueâ—… vnlike the cuâ—…sie of Elizeus Elizeus caused the kings messanger to be kept out of the 〈◊〉 4. Reg. 6. Elizeus resisted not the King in keeping out his Mesâ—…anger Lyra in 4. Reg. 6. Caleâ—…anus in 4 Reg. 6. Elizeus cursed the children that mocked him and the Beares deuoured them 4. Reg. 2. Glossa cum 〈◊〉 â—…a in 4. Reg. â—… Sâ—…nd 87. Zacha. 13. Deut 17. 2. Cor. 3. Where faithful princes wanted 〈◊〉 Prophet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mâ—…nt to â—…od The obedience to the 〈◊〉 oâ—… nee 〈◊〉 to Christianitie by M sand ar gument No neede of myracles Zacha. 13. Zacha. 13. The prophecie for punishing of false Prophetes The punishment of false Prophetes belongeth to the Prince The popishe clergie be such false prophetes as Zacharie prophecied of The fountaine of grace Idolatrie Teaching of lyes Ignorance Hipocrisâ—… of rough garmâ—… The detection and punishmeÌ„t of popery prophecied by Zacharie The wresting of the comâ—…oÌ„ alleaged place Deut. 17. Zacharie 11. Zacharies prophecie of the Pope Lyra in Za. 11. The Pope an Idol Glossa cum Lyra. sand pag. 87. Deut. 17. 1. Cor. 3. The ministration of the popish ministerie sand pag. 87. 2. Paraâ—… 26. Aug. Quest. lib. 2. q. 40. The example of king Ozias attempting to offer incence The pope readier to casâ—…e Princes out of heauen than to bring the into heauen In what case a Bishop maye excommunicate a â—…icked Prince The Priestes withstoode the king but not with any bodily violence â–ª 2. Paâ—…al 26. Caietanus in 2 Paâ—…al 26. The Pope dealeth not with Princes as Azarias did 1. Tim. 3. Gal. 2. This king was neuer deposed for all this offence sand pag. 87. Leuit â–ª 13. 1. Cor. 10. 2. Paral. 26. The similitude of leprie compared to heresie Aug. â—… Quest. 2. Q. 40. A similitude of man is no manifest testimonie of the vvorde of God. This similitude is applied of the Papistes to other things The Priest did but discerne of the disease and not dispossesse men of their goods The excluding of the Leper from coÌ„panie belongeth not to the priest Num. 5. The texâ—… of scripture 〈◊〉 alleagâ—…d This law was Iudicial and so vve are not bounde to it nor it is any figure to vs. S. Paule vvrested Haymo in 1. Cor. 10. Rom. 15. Math. 13. 1. Cor. 7. The morall or mysticall signification of separating the leper separareth not the â—…king from his kingdome The example of king Ozâ—…s confuâ—…es M. sand figure This figure maketh agaiÌ„st popish priests not against protestant Princes sand pag. 87. 3. Reg. 11 â–ª 3. Reg. 12. Malach. 2. The example of Ioiada the high priest that caused Athalia to be killed Ioas to be made king M. sand confuse citing of the scripture No king is here deposed but an vsurper killed Lyra in 4. Reg. 11. The doings of Ioiada were vpon such occasioÌ„n that they can not be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 example The close nou rishment of so as by the high priest his vncle in the Temple was extraordinarie Lyra in 3. Reg. 11. The close doing of Ioiada argueth he had no ordinarie authoritie In what respect this doing belonged chiefly to the high Priest. Lyra in 3. Reg. 11. That which Ioiada did he did it not by his owne authoritie but by consent of the prin ces nobilitie Wherein Ioiadaes facte may be drawne to an example In what respect ioiada had knowledge of the Kings causes The King might haue knowledge in the Byshops causes 2. Paral. 23. 4. Reg. 12 How the king delt with the priests for their â—…blations Glossâ—… in Lyra. Ioas gouernement ouer the priestes stretched fâ—…ther than to money matters Howe the B. is a sequester betweene God the Prince The B the Lords Angell or Messanger and the Prinâ—…es the Lordes Christe or annoynted The euent of 〈◊〉 off al wâ—…rres and â—…umults if the Pope might de pose and set vp all Princes The hurlie burlies that the Pope haâ—…h made The popes wiâ—… kâ—…d peace if it were admitted M. Sand arguments out of the new Testament Mar. 5. Iohn 2. 1. Cor. 5 â–ª 1. Tim 1. Act. 5. Faultes escaped in the prince Faultes Corrections good ministers good ministers 232. 〈◊〉 24. the summâ—… the 〈◊〉 316. 〈◊〉 23. the reasâ—… the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 377. 〈◊〉 8. secundâ—… secundâ—…m 386. lin 12. tamen 〈◊〉 tamen â–ª 391. lin 14. also â—…ll 〈◊〉 403. lin 21. renouned 〈◊〉 408. lin 16 â–ª that is that it is â–ª 408. lin 34. in the in 〈◊〉 410. in the 〈◊〉 treaâ—…ise 〈◊〉 432. lin 24. peccatum peccati 469. lin 10. together thether 512. lin 10. godly 〈◊〉 541. lin 32. let hiâ—… to let him 577. lin 12. dealing deale 581. lin 20. whom against whome 593. lin 14 â–ª yuo you 599. lin 2. et despetto de diâ—… in dispetto di dio 599. lin 9. yemay he may 605. lin 19. causes is causes as 617. lin 5. as who though B. as though the B. 625. lin 31. though follow though it follow 632. lin 28. giuing giuâ—… 636. lin 9. reddit reddite 641. lin 10. not not onely 636. in the margine but yet â—…r elsâ—… 649. lin 1. so long so farre 652. lin 22. Emperors the Emperors 674. lin 11. about about it 705. lâ—…n 12. as are 717. lin 2. that that that yet 721. lin 8. is simply â—…s simply 731. lin 19. grautned graunted 732. lin 19. or if the or if in the. 767. lin 30. prioris prioribus â–ª 788. lin 22. which was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was not 824. lin 5. you youâ—… 83â—… lin 16. â—…ereth 〈◊〉 955. lin 10. not onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lin 12. the breast their breast 〈◊〉 lin 34. can do more câ—… do no more 865. lin 22. qualle equally 866. 〈◊〉 15. thereof thâ—… of 881. lin 21. authoritie of 〈◊〉 authoritie and. 897. lin â—…4 is a Cathoâ—… 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 â—…08 lin 26. inconuenâ—…t incompetent 915. lin 14. ye the yet he 925. lin 16. that 〈◊〉 that it is 928. lin 25. and in deede and then in deede 959. lin 20. or couetousnesse our couetousnesse 1024. lin 2. or ambition our ambition ibidem lin 2. or dainteâ—…es our dainteynes ibidem lin â—… sprake speake 1042. lin 17. that that that 1045. lin 2. the that 1056. lin 1. there thereon 1107. lin 22. from so from ibidem lin 32. Manie other faultes are escaped in the printing by reason the author vvas not alvvayes present but they are such as thou maist gentle reader thy selfe correct them
notvvithstanding aftervvarde he become an Apostata or an Heretike good reason requireth that he shoulde be remoued from the administration of a kingdome among the Catholike people They saye the Deuill M. Saunders if we giue him an inche will take an ell and so playe you You demaunde one thing and woulde take a number yea and snatch at all If you were not impudent you would not still encroch Firste you desired that you might propounde one thing of greate equitie and you woulde make all plaine that Princes mighte be deposed This one thing is graunted Then you desire a seconde thing for this second clap downe two togither That the same lavve shoulde be also for the Catholikes that vvas for the Christians This also is graunted to the whiche you adde that he that is no Catholike is no liuely member of the Church of Christ. And although this in the true sense of Catholike is likewise granted yet in your sense of a Catholike it is starke false and denyed Then you adde your figure of 3. and say moreouer this must be added that a Christian king being become an Apostata or an heretike shoulde be deposed And this you will haue graunted you also and al vnder the name of one thing and this that you adde laste of all is in déede the thing it selfe that you should proue But you worke a wise waye first demaunde it maye be grauÌ„ted you and then promise that you wil proue it What M. Sanders haue you gone to Rome to learne that knacke that the Proctour taught his client in the chancellors court who when a Maiden in sute of contract came to him for couÌ„sell he being before hande féed on the otherpartis graunte quoth be to her thou madest him such a promisse but aske him who is his witnesse Nowe when the simple Mayden was thus enstructed I graunt quothe she to the Iudge I made him such a promisse but who is his witnesse And eueÌ„ thus woulde you dodge vs M. Saunders The question is whether a Prince erring in fayth shoulde be deposed We denie it You will proue it but on this condition that we wil graunt you this that he should be deposed and then you will proue it that he should be deposed But and if we will graunt you this you may easily proue it or rather you néed not proue it at all for we do proue it for you Either Maister Saunders you thinke â–ª great follie in vs or this is greate follie in you to make such propositions to proue the matter that are the matter it selfe This is beyonde the fallation called petitio principij it is petitio totius the request not of a principle but of altogither There is no equitie at all in these proues for all the great equitie that you promised Not that the Apostacie or heresie of the king shoulde be bolstered or allowed but earnestly improued and rebuked if it be Apostacie and heresie indéede and not as you call heresie and Apostacie the forsaking of your heresies and receiuing the Gospell of Christe But in this your case of Apostacie howe euer the Prince be worthie to be deposed the deposition lyeth not in any subiect or any foreyne but in God that placed that Prince and in suche meanes as he séeth good to chastice suche Apostataes withall eyther of the whole bodie of the Realme or otherwise but those are extraordinarie cases there can be no ordinarie rule of all Princes deposition as you woulde here haue graunted excepte the state of the Princes be thereafter as it is in some Countries of which sort ours is not And therefore to coyne such rules for vs although our Prince God be praysed be not in this case of heresie and Apostacie saue in your malicious and erroneous conceyte is euen the Trumpet and warning piece to your trayterous confederates to pull downe the Prince and sette vp all Rebellion And a means to kéepe all Princes at the becke of the Priestes for feare they charge them with Apostacie and heresie and so straight wayes depose them But what reason haue you for this hampering of them For say you a faithfull Prince and a godly is a matter of such momeÌ„t that neither an vnfaithful should be placed ouer the faithfull neither an Apostata shoulde remaine the Prince of the faithfull What ought to be how it ought to be brought about to be are two things M. Saunders â–ª A Prince ought to be faithfull and Godly and so to be is as you say a matter of great moment Neither ought an vnfaithfull Prince to be voluntarily placed of the faithfull ouer theÌ„ Neither ought a Prince to be a renegate neither ought such a renegate Prince in the demerite of his facte to remaine a Prince ouer the faithfull But howesoeuer these things ought or ought not to be in him that the Byshops ought depose him that God hath set vp that the faithfull people ought to renounce their allegeance and rebell againste him that God hath placed ouer them they haue orderly sworne their homage vnto him I think M. sand you can not proue that these things ought to be Neither are these cases alike that you â—…umble togither of an vnfaithful man not to be chosen Prince and of a faithful man being chosen Prince by the faithful bicause he becoÌ„mes vnfaithful â–ª not to be obeyed For in the one case the faithful are free froÌ„ the vnfaithful if they are bound it is not to him but rather to kéepe them fre from him In the other case the faithfull haue bounde themselues before hande to the king that was faithfull who afterwarde becommeth vnfaithfull Whiche bonde if it were conditionall and the Prince of his own voluntarie so bounde expressely to them and they interchangeablie bound of their voluntaries expresly to renounce him becomming vnfaithfull Then I thinke they might so it were with one consent of those that chose him refuse him with better reason But where as it is commonly the Prince being a faithfull hath his claime by some kinde of right whome the people electe without such indenting on good hope of continuance in his faithfulnesse or rather being moued with his right yelde â–ª him obedience and binde themselues by othe to become his subiectes there althoughe their soules and consciences be still free to God in religion yet are their bodies their goods yea and their consciences to in respect of his estate and their duties so firmely bounde to remaine loyall and faithfull to the Princes authoritie that though he become vnfaithfull in the faith of his religion yet may not they become vnfaithfull in the faythe of their allegeance The Fable of Esopes â—…orse when he straue with the Hart can tell you that there was a difference in the horsses estate before he gaue the maÌ„ an enterest to ride vpon him and after that the man had bridled and sadled him and was set on his
that 〈◊〉 both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the literal sense you would â–ª thus â–ª must straked If the matter of Christes parable of the Cockle growing togither with the wheate I graunt that we ought to auoyde such cohabitation as may conueniently be auoyded But such cohabitatioÌ„ as cannot be auoyded without the incurring of another greater sinne must not be denyed As the husband to denie câ—…habitation with his wife though he be faithfull and she an Iâ—…fidell yet if she will tarie and dwell with him he can not put hir away for â—…ir infidelitâ—…e Nor likewise can the faithful â–ª woman forsake the man thoughe he be an Infidell neyther can the childe denie his naturall obedience to his parentes cohabitation with theÌ„ though he be faithfull and they be Infidels Neither can the faithfull seruaunt denie his ciuill obedience and cohabitation with his Maister although his maister be an Infidell as were the most in S. Paules time and yet he would haue none denie cohabitation with their maisters no thoughe they were rough and cruell besides their infidelitie And shal the subiect then denie his politike cohabitation â–ª and ciâ—…ill obedience to his liege Soueraigne and lawfull Prince for pretence of diuersitie in religion Eightly â–ª I answere if you will néedes apply this separation of the Leper to a morall or mysticall signification yet serueth it not to the deposing of the person from his Câ—…ill estate or to his exelâ—…sion from a common weale but to hys exclusion of morall vertue or to his expulsion â—…ute of the 〈◊〉 of grace from beeing a â—…ber of the mysticall comâ—… weale whiche letteth not but that he maye remayne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nâ—…thly I answere your conclusion that you make for kingâ—… so well â—…s oâ—…h 〈◊〉 men fayleth â—…n this example of king Ozâ—…s â—…or neither was he deposed by y Priest or by any other man but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 king â–ª so long as he is of king Ozias â—…thly I answeâ—…e that al this 〈◊〉 â—…ere admitted maketh nothing against protestant Princes but it maketh much agaiÌ„st popish priests For if vnto all that bring into the Church straunge doctrine straked as it were with the spots of Lepry cohabitation must be denied Then the Pope and all your popish Priests being founde to bring into the Church other doctrine than God hath taught in his holy Scripture are to lie thrust out of Gods Churche if worse should not happen vnto you by the figure if you will go to figures of Nadab Abiu that offred straunge fire before the Lorde and were consumed with fire from heauen but beware you of a fire in hell And thus much to your figure of the Leprie for deposing Princes which if we denie you say as is your common saying we haue not our common senses But had you had your priuate senses when you made this argument you woulde haue béen better aduised ere euer you had made it common and had Printed it but you did but as other had done before for the argument before was common But what doe I reason sayth Maister Saunders Athalia the Mother of Ochozias murdered all the Kyngly seede excepte Ioas whome Iosaba had hidde in the house of the lord Moreouer Athalia raigned ouer the lande seuen yeares But in the seuenth yeare Ioiada the Byshop taking to him Centurions Captaynes and souldiors made a couenant with them and swore them in the house of the Lorde and shewed vnto them the kings sonne and gaue theÌ„ in charge what they should doe and brought out the son of the King and set the Crowne vpon him and the testimonie and made him King anoynted hym But Athalia when she sawe the King standing vpon the Tribunall according to the maner she cryed out treason treason But Ioiada the high Priest commaunded the Centurions and saide carie hir out without the boundes of the Temple And whosoeuer followeth hiâ—… let him be striken with the sworde And Athalia was killed in the Kyngs house Ioiada therefore made a couenant betweene the Lorde and the King and betweene the people And Ioas dyd that which was right before the Lorde all the dayes wherein Ioiada the Priest dyd teache hym Doe we not here playnely see the whole knowledge of the Kyngs cause to haue bene belonging towardes one high priest He calleth the souldiors Iudgeth the Queene that had ruled seuen yeares to haue raignedvniustly and commaunded hir both to be deposed and killed and in hir place dyd substitute Ioas to be King and subiected hym vnder the Lorde and placed hym aboue the people All which things sithe they were well done is it not nowe true according to the sentence of the diuine Scripture that the Byshop oughte to knowe of the causes of Kings and Emperours whether they be iuste or vniust For what so euer the Byshop in thys kynde doth whether he define the King to be deposed or to be placed he is no other than the Angell of the Lord out of whose lyppes as well Kyngs as priuate men oughte to requyre the lawe of the Lorde The hygh Priest is as it were a sequester as betweene the Lorde and the Kyng so betweene the Kyng and the People So whyle one Iudge in the Churche is ordayned bothe betweene Kings themselues sturred vp wyth mutuall contentions and also betweene them and theyr People infinite occasions of warres and tumults are cutte off Maister Saunders here firste asketh what he doth reason If he can not tell what he doth reason surely I know not But this I knowe that it was but a very weake reason and therefore belyke he was wearie of it and wyll returne agayne to vrge vs wyth example And here to knit vp the olde Testament he alleageth the example of Ioiada the high Priest for the kylling of Athalia and the substitutyng of Ioas to bée king But this example whiche beareth yet a face to come farre nerer to the purpose than any thyng spoken hetherto notwythstandyng if it be well considered is as farre from the purpose and as muche wrested vnto it as the other I omit that he still kepeth his old practise in iumbling together diuerse pieces of the scripture and not to set downe the text as it lyeth and yet he maketh a distinction of letter as though it were all the text Which and it were not his common vâ—…age of the scripture were the better to be borne withall and might be imputed to the â—…ters negligence as it often falleth out but in so often handling thus of the scripture it is not tollerable But to the example First I answere this pertayneth nothing to the questioÌ„ in hand for the deposing of a King. Here is no King deposed Here is an vsurper that had no righ so the kingdome killed And to your owne expositor Lyra saith vsurpauit sibi regnum Iuda prius describitur â—…uiusonodi vsurpatio She vsurped to hir selfe the kingdome of Iurie and this kinde of