yet may your Dolman haue an Infanta or your Catesby and his Complices an Elizabetha to match and to ouermatch also at their pleasure making her but as a garland of flowers in a May-game to flourish for a day or two and then to wither and perish And before him your Watson saw no metaphysicall he or she to succeed But though there be no such heire apparant yet a man by troubling the water may thinke peraduenture to catch an Eele and The little Flie hath power enough to set the Eagles nest on fire I leaue the confirmation of my Discouerie and come to the confutation of those denyed duties It is written Owe nothing to any man but loue one another And therefore that debt of Tithes which Ioseph as due vnto them payed to the Aegyptian Priests of Debtes and due beneuolence which was neuer denied to Infidels of Allegeiance and Homage which Saint Ambrose did performe to an Apostate may not be denied to any though in case of heresie much lesse then to Protestants But to conclude with your owne words Those duties are not to be denied vnto Protestants It were well if either you writ as you thought or that your Doctors did thinke as you write and so should we haue lesse cause of scruples to feare either you or them Let vs proceed to the second Reason CHAP. X. The Discouerie in the second Reason MAior. Whosoeuer do professe any ciuill power soueraigne whether directly or indirectly are to be accounted seditious Minor But all Popish Priests do professe a double prerogatiue ouer Kings Democraticall and Monarchical namely both of people and Pope Both which are proued by the Positions The moderate Answerer To the Maior I would wish him to except the Emperor of Germanie and such as be subiect to the Empire and such cases I say Transeat Maior for Christendome The Reply Why Transeat Do you then make all Kings in Christendome subiect to the Emperor I know you dare not proclaime this in France or Spaine Dare you who thus insinuate your selfe into grace with his Maiestie I one of your Highnesse obedient subiects subiect your Soueraigne to a forreine State as namely to the Emperor so farre from Imperiall that as one Iesuite confesseth It is almost ruinate Yea considered as it is called Romane Empire It is as another Iesuite acknowledgeth long ago an vnfallible note of the prophecied time of Antichrist vtterly extinct Whereunto saith your Costerus scarce the Germans whom you obiect do obey Which is very true for in the tenor and forme of Election and Coronation of the Emperor you may find as I remember this power ascribed to the Prince Palatine Elector that he as being Steward rather to the Empire then Emperor may cite the Emperor to the diet of the State and constraine him in some case to yeeld satisfaction And therefore my Maior may still recide in Christendome To the Minor Proposition The moderate Answer is of two kinds 1. Recriminatiō against Protestants 2. Apology and defence for his owne Priests 1. Recrimination or Accusation And thus I frame my Minor But all Protestant Writers do ordinarily teach and practise this doctrine as I shall proue The Reply This kind of Answer of retorting which you call returning the Argument vpon Protestants you vse in euery Answer if truly you shall proue your sinne to haue bene more common which cannot iustifie your selues If vniustly you shall but slander them and multiply your wickednesse Which will be proued when we come to giue the Iustification of Protestants in answering your blindfold exceptions The moderate Answerer in Apologizing for his fellowes His second Proposition is this But all Popish Priests do professe a double prerogatiue ouer Kings Democraticall or Monarchicall namely both people or Pope Ergo This his conceit fighteth with his owne Assertion and present Position of the Popes Monarchicall prerogatiue ouer Kings for where there is a Monarchicall power and gouernment in one there is an vnpossibilitie of a Democracie and Democratical power and regencie in the people and yet this simple Disputer doth thus argue The Reply Simple I confesse professing also that simplicitie in Christ as neuer either in word or writing to aequiuocate Notwithstanding your simple Disputer wisheth that he had met with so subtill an Answerer as could haue distinguished betwixt mentiri and mendacium dicere to lye and to report a lye Say this proposition The Pope is taught to haue a Monarchicall power ouer Kings and people Democraticall doth it imply contradiction Seeing then I onely shew in this present reason that your Iesuites defend both it is an vnreasonable modestie to fauor the Autors and inueigh against me the reporter which I haue done iustly in both as will appeare in due order Be not idle but conforme your selfe to the lawes of dispute The Discouerie First of the peoples power Parsons The Common-wealth hath authoritie to chuse a King and to limit him lawes at their pleasure The French Iesuite sheweth a Reason For Maiestie saith he is rather seated in the Kingdome then in the King Like to Stapleton his Glosse People are not ordained for the Prince but the Prince for the people But more finely Reinalds A King is but a creature of mans creation The moderate Answerer People were in the beginning without Kings and made Election of diuers kinds of Regiments as they thought meete and most secure for their defence for as I haue made demonstration and his Maiesties words in the Parliament do conclude Although a Kingdome and people be relata yet can he be no King if he want people and subiects The Reply This Position People as subiects were before their Gouernor doth tast too much of Machiauellisme for in nature the birth is called prodigious which is deliuered with heeles forward from whence some haue receiued their names to be called Agrippa such is this politike curse which you fancie but remember that though as you trulie affirme King and subiect be relatiues euen as Father and Sonne yet consider them in the nature in the reall foundation as things and not of accidentall relation and then I hope you will suffer the Father to goe before the Sonne And so Adam as an Oecumenicall King was before his familie after his decease alwayes the right of gouernement was inuested in the first-borne as a birth-right so God did signifie to Caine And thou Caine shalt rule meaning Abel ouer him And that Kingdomes haue bene successiue by lawe of nations in the first-borne is confirmed by a grand inquest of your owne 〈◊〉 Lawyers not that wee denie Election of people to haue bene vpon necessitie vsuall but so to magnifie the power of a people electing as to continue still Soueraigne ouer the Prince elected this is that which we call a position rebellious the very intent of your forenamed Authors making regall power to be from the common-wealth but
power soueraigne ouer Kings challenged by Popes against which he so much inueigheth The Reply The summe of your Answere is that the generall doctrine of Papists is to denie all temporall and ciuill power absolutely ouer Kings and that no Pope did euer challenge it And yet behold before your eyes in this Reason to which you now would answere your owne Doctor Bozius produced against you who in his booke inscribed Of the temporall monarchie of the Church and dedicated to the last Pope Clement the 8. is so absolute for this absolute temporall iurisdiction of the Pope aboue all estates whatsoeuer that he extendeth it throughout the vniuersall world euen Ouer all Infidels to punish them for some causes with corporall punishments And he challengeth herein the consent of Andraeas Syluester Antoninus and other Doctors Canonists yea also which you denied that it can be showen Pope Innocentius doth challenge it A doctrine so common that Bellarmine doth confesse that Aluarez Syluester and many others do affirme it Furthermore because you say Your Discouerer cannot show c. I must yet discouer a greater and grosser consent amongst your Schoole in this point Alexander Carerius Patauinus of late hath writ the title of his booke is this Concerning the power of the Pope of Rome against all wicked Polititians and heretikes of this time This sure will be something to the purpose say on This opinion namely that the Pope by the lawe of God hath most full power throughout the world euen in all temporall or ciuill causes I defend and hereunto the common Schooles of Diuines do subscribe He numbreth two and twentie Authors and among others one called The illuminated Doctor and an other called Celsus by interpretation High or Aloft and therfore insignes him with Verè Celsus as truly so named and so truly he may be if we iudge him by the loftinesse of his style and coÌ„clusion which only this Carerius doth therfore expresse as being more eminent then any other Such and so great is the spirituall and ciuill power of the Pope saith Celsus that as Plato to one asking what God was answered he is not man not heauen not good but what more excellent so if any shall demaund what the Pope is by a kind of resemblance one may warily answere he is no Duke no King nor Emperour but more excellent What can this be else seeing God only is for excellencie called King of Kings and Lord of Lords but an other God Warily answered but wickedly Next he assumeth for autoritie of his defence The common iudgement of Canonists all building this opinion vpon the Decrees of Popes As if they should say if we be deceiued in our opinion coÌ„cerning the Popes iurisdiction then the Popes haue deceiued vs. What is that which Pope Innocentius decreed That God created two great lights the Sunne to rule the day and the Moone to gouerne the night signifying two dignities the spirituall which is the Papall and the temporall belonging to to the Emperour like the Moone Yet so that there is as great difference of excellencie betwixt the Emperour and the Pope as betwixt the Moone and the Sunne What can you inferre from hence That as the Moone hath no light but that it borroweth of the Sunne so the Emperour hath no power which is not depending of the Pope Thus Pope and popish by too much gazing on the Moone are become lunatike who by a spirit of pride carnally peruert the literall sence of the holie Ghost as it is Proued And the whole doctrine will be plainely confuted in the Confutation Wherefore seeing that this temporall vniuersall iurisdiction of the Pope some Papists with great consent euen from Popes haue proclaimed all which you haue vnlearnedlie denied which will yet be further confirmed in the next Chapter learne henceforth a necessarie point of modestie not to auouch a negatiue No one Papist saith so till you haue read sufficiently what they say Thus much of the temporall power popish considered directly Now must we enquire how it may concerne him indirectly CHAP. XII The discouerie of the common doctrine of the Iesuitically opinionated THat the Pope hath power in temporall causes This is true saith Bellarmine vnderstood vndirectly as it may auaile for the spirituall good In briefe This supremacie of the Pope saith Stapleton is a doctrine to be holden of all Christians vpon paine of damnation and separation from the Church of God The moderate Answerer But Catholikes defend only a spirituall as that is which they claime in temporals in ordine ad Deum that is for Gods cause and is not to vse the Disputers words A ciuill power Soueraigne ouer Kings directly but only a spirituall preheminence The Reply Vse my words but abuse not my meaning to make the Reader thinke I only intreated of the power temporall ouer Kings directly whereas in the Discouerie there is expresse mention of the temporall iurisdiction challenged of Papists both directly and also indirectly both which are hereafter confuted Here only we are to explaine them and to shew how both of them challenge a power in the Pope at his discretion to depose Kings This hath bene manifested in the former now it will appeare in the second which you forsooth His Maiesties most loyall Subiect do now mainteine namely A power spirituall say you in temporall causes as it may be behoofull for Gods cause And how that is meant your Bellarmine doth interpret Protestants denie saith he that the Pope hath any temporall or politike iurisdiction and power ouer Kings by the law of God as to be able to command Kings much lesse to depose them from their thrones and dispose of their Kingdomes But the common consent of Catholike Diuines is that indirectly and mediatly that is so farre as it may concerne the spirituall good of the Church the Pope hath a supreme power euen in temporall causes to put downe Kings and bestow their Kingdomes And yet you denie That he hath directly any temporall gouernment by the lawe of God A spirituall cosenage as is proued by arguments in the Consutation only in this place to be exemplified You may peradueÌ„ture remember that King whose name I haue forgot who being desirous to decree something coÌ„trary to that lawe whereunto he was sworne required counsell in this case Sir saith his counseller the Lawe directly forbids you this yet there is another law which permits the King to do what he list A dangerous State where the Kings lust is his law Now how is it in this your controuersie to say the Pope can directly iudge and depose Kings O no you will not For say you we denie This opinion saith Bellar. is the first extremitie as though you would acknowledge that to be directly a ground of treason yet you hold it lawfull When the Pope shall thinke it beâ—oofull for the spirituall good then
what Quacksaluers be you to offer a salue which cannot possibly cure the sore I haue digressed a little but I hope not transgressed for this point was you see pertinent I returne to you our moderate Answerer and we will now ioyne issue in the next Reason CHAP. XV. The Discouerie in the fourth Reason WHen the King is established in his throne by the common consent of the Kingdome whosoeuer shall manackle the hands of his subiects detracting all obedience may iustly by order of lawe be challenged and condemned for a disordred and rebellious person But all popish priests do dissolue the oath of obedience to all Protestant Gouernors Ergo. The Minor proued by Their Positions First one of their Bishops resolueth that As soone as a Christian King becomes hereticall forthwith people are freed from subiection Secondly their Cardinall As long as the Prince continueth excommunicate the subiect is freed from the oath of subiection By whom are they freed By the Pope saith the lesuit who vpon iust cause hath iust power to absolue from oathes both himselfe and all others Sometime the Prince is personallie excommunicate what then Then saith their Lawyer Subiects are freed from their allegiance and all his hereticall Assistants to be rooted out and their land to be exposed to be possessed of Strangers Catholikes But how if he be not excommunicate by name yea what though not excommunicate If saith an other his heresie be publikely knowne there needeth no pronunciation of the sentence of Excommunication So that saith the Iesuite Subiects may lawfullie denie him obedience How so For the euidence of the crime saith their whole schoole doth inferre a sentence of condemnation because as the more common opinion defineth there must we vnderstand the Pope his will is to haue him excommunicate whom vpon the knowledâ—e of his fault he would excommunicate Say Father Creswell is this true It is certaine and of faith auouched by the vniuersall voice of Schooles Satisfie vs yet in one question more Suppose that the Protestant Prince haue a iust quarrell what then No warre can be lawfullie denounced or waged by the Queene being excommunicate by name though otherwise in it seâ—fe it were most iust because her power is vnlawfull The very moderate Answerer This is the first Proposition I grant vnto but how false and standerous his Assumption is I haue proued before Secondly all his Autorities he bringeth are priuate men not able to make a dogmaticall principle or publike position againe they intreate of such as be nominatim excommunicate of which sort there is no Protestant Prince neither can there be any iust feare of the Popes generall proceeding herein except any Protestant Prince should be incited by some such vnchristian spirits as this Discouerer seemeth to be possessed with to exceede all others in persecuting Catholikes and offering indignities to the Church of God The Reply It seemeth you were now in your naturall choller because in this one Answere you do vilifie your friends threaten your Soueraigne traduce your Aduersarie and in conclusion condemne your owne ghostlie fathers Your friends to call these your Doctors Cardinall Tollet Reinolds Symancha Creswell Stapleton Azorius Panormitan Greg of Valentia Bannes and such like and the most of them most publike and eminent Doctors your late Romish Church did glorie in and autorized with the common consent of Ordinaries priuileges of Collegies and your vniuersall schoole to call I say such like priuate men and not be able to oppose one priuate man of that sect against them doth argue a spirit of rare modestie and singular insufficiencie Your Soueraigne If he shall offer as you misconster it to persecute and to cut off the most capitall enemies to his state and gangrenes of their countrey then The Pope c. O sir â—emember your selfe One of his Maiesties loyall Subiects c. This is not modestie but hypocrisie Your Aduersarie The Discouerer forsooth an vnchristian spirit who doth discouer only the hooke of treason whereby sillie soules are catched and herein not chargeable with misieporting his Autors desirous to recall you to the ancient truth of Christian subiection and if it be possible to sauing health And yet is thus censured as an inciter of his Maiestie against Romish Priests whom their owne positions and practises do proclaime publikely to be persons seditious Your Fathers for this proposition Whosoeuer shall manacle the hands of Subiects denying obedience to their established Kings must be iudged a rebellious person you say you Grant now it hath bene proued that not only these aboue named Iesuites but also your Popes haue bene principals in these kinds of Treasons both against the Emperour Henry the fourth and also the mirror of all princely wisedome Elizabeth our late Soueraigne And therefore in your conclusion you infold your Popes in the roote of these rebellions These Popes we haue discouered by their practises as for example CHAP. XVI The Discouerer in the Practise FIrst Pope Gregorie the seauenth alias Hildebrand beginneth his pageant We by Apostolicall autoritie do absolâ—e all from their oathes which they haue giuen to persons excommunicate And another Gregorie vseth the like tenor We absolue c. in the same case Lastly Pius Quintus their successor in place but superior in malice We command all Subiects saith he c. and absolue them from the faith they haue plight with Elizabeth their Queene The moderate Answerer First to Gregorie the seauenth who as this man vrgeth absolued all from obedience to Excommunicates I answere for all Catholikes in generall that this nothing concerned Protestants neither any heretikes but only such as he had other quarrels and contentions against The Reply True the histories of those times shew that the Popes were after some 600. yeares after Christ alwayes quarrellous and according to that proper name of Gregory the seauenth now mentioned called Hildebrand the very firebrands of Christendome But how do you satisfie for Hildebrand I grant say you that he that dissolueth the obedience of Subiects to their Soueraignes is iustlie accompted seditious Here you cannot denie but that Pope Gregorie the seauenth absolued all from obedience to excommunicates You know what followeth Ergo the Pope is condemned as one guiltie of high treason This is commendable modestie which is voide of partialitie To the second example you answere The moderate Answere But he vrgeth the Glosse of Gregorie the ninth and citeth the Decret where there is no such matter or any thing like vnto it I commend your diligence and wish you were as modest to acknowledge all my other truths as I am to confesse this my only escape which the importunitie of the time and not the exigence of examples did occasion For besides other examples I might haue insisted vpon that Bull of Paulus the 3. against King Henry the 8. which differeth not from the tenor of the decree alledged Wee
may content vs to know that euen such Kiâ—gs beare in their office the image of God in whom God hath stamped andingrauen an inuiolable Maiestie not to be contemned Thus farre Master Caluin neither doth he euer restrain the outward power of any King except in those States where there is customably ordained for that purpose the Magistracie of those who are called Ephori and Tribuni plebis But when when they shall commaund any thing against the lawe of God then Caluin embraceth the doctrine of Saint Peter Act. 15. 29. We rather obey God then man but how not to obey man as actiuely to resist that is to rebell against him God forbid but onely passiuely which is not to do that which shall be wickedly commaunded Perpeti potiùs quà m à veritate discedere auâ— Ã pietate deslectere Rather suffer saith he then to betray the truth of God or to accord to iniquitie But reade and examine all the lines which euer Caluin penned and you shall not find one syllable that can preiudice his loyaltie Wherof more hereafter The moderate Answerer Beza also and the rest of that holy Synod defend the same The Reply Belike then this rebellious doctrine will be proued a Synodicall Decree among Protestants but if you should vow faithfully not to eate till you proue this I could easily prognosticate what death you should die But Beza as he succeeded Caluine a Doctor so in doctrine likewise Heare Bezas owne confession and it will proue him innocent you a slaunderer and your Popes the capitall delinquents in this kind 1 His innocencie Priuate men among whom I account inferior Magistrates in respect of their King haue no other remedie against Tyrants to whom they be subiect then amendment of their liues prayers and teares which God in his good time will not despise They alwaies prouided not to do but onely to suffer euil as Christ by his owne example hath taught vs. And if it shall so happen that we cannot obey the commaund of the King but that we must offend God the King of Kings then must we rather obey God then man But how so as likewise to remember that it is one thing not to obey another thing to resist and betake our selues to armes This kind of violent disobedience we may not vse Can any moderate spirit call this doctrine rebellious Secondly Your slaunder What our opinion is concerning subiection vnto Magistrates saith Beza a man may better be instructed by our writings then by the slaunders of such as number vs among the companie of intoxicate Anabaptists who renounce the authoritie of Magistrates which doctrine how much we abhorre none can be ignorant which doth not obstinately refuse to see the light Of which kind you must needes be seeing you had rather beleeue any libels against Beza then see his owne writings Thirdly your Popes capitall Offendors The impudencie of our Accusers saith Beza herein is most notorious that they who contrarie to the word of God haue openly subiected Kings and Kingdomes to their authoritie being themselues the most rebellious Sect vnder heauen in contemning Magistrates dare notwithstanding obiect the guilt of that crime vnto vs which they thinke to be a vertue in themselues and wherein they glorie and vaunt Which is most true as we haue proued out of your Bellarmine and others glorying in the acts of such Popes who haue deposed Emperors CHAP. VI. The Practises of Caluin and other Protestants of France obiected by this Accuser in diuers particular instances The first instance The moderate Answerer THese were instruments of all Rebellions and oppressions in the Monarchie of France wherein they tooke all authoritie from the King and Magistrate against King Francis whom they rebelliously persecuted The Reply For your proofes against Protestants in this your Answer you produce Genebrard Claudius de Sanct. Petrus Frar Coclaeus and such like all professed Aduersaries to the Religion of Protestants How moderate dealing this may be accounted will appeare when I shall oppose your owne Historians to condemne you and acquit the Protestants Two witnesses shall suffice who how farre they were from fauouring the Protestants you may iudge by their complexions for the first greedily relateth a Discourse wherein he calleth our Religion new and a plaine imposture The second is dedicated to Charles the then French King and to the Queene mother in which Historie he calleth the doctrine of M. Luther A multitude of absurd heresies Therefore you may not think these men partiall in our behalfe Both prouing 1. The pronenesse of Papists to slaunder the Religion of Protestants 2. That this accusation is a slaunder which is now obiected For the 1. I will alledge of many but one story published by them both False witnesses were brought against Protestants them of the Religion affirming that in a place at Maubert at a Councellors house great numbers of them had eaten a pigge instead of a pascall Lambe before Easter and after the candles being put out euery man tooke his woman and had his pleasure of her The Cardinall vpon these informations moued the Court the Queene mother tooke occasion hereby to reuile some of her Gentlewomen who were of the Religion but they desired and obtained means that the principall witnesses might be examined it was done two young boyes come foorth and affirme that then and many other times they had had the vse of your Councellors daughters but in the end the witnesses began to stagger and couertly to denie it The Councellor sought after for his Religion vnderstanding this shameful slander went with his wife and his two daughters yeelding himselfe prisoner for his Religion desiring that the cause of his daughters might be examined They were diligently searched by Physitions and women and found to be virgins and the young men did thus iustifie themselues that they did it in deuotion being perswaded that such an accusation against such Heretikes was good whether it were true or false But the virgins were cleared and yet their father remained in prison and the witnesses were not punished The second Concerning the present Accusation thus it standeth The Guizes who were no naturall Frenchmen not able to accuse the Prince of Condie of Treason Daniels case called him in question to be condemned of heresie for his Religion But what was the right cause of tumults There was deliuered an exact declaration to proue that those of the Guizes had decreed to put all the Princes of the bloud Royall to death as soone as they had cut off them of the Religion and they were euidently proued to be guiltie of his treason And the King could not otherwise iudge but that great wrong was offered to his bloud Then not the Protestants but the Spanish faction of the Guizes were guiltie of those broyles in the daies of King Francis Notwithstanding Though the Prince of Condie did acquit himselfe of Treason and boldly stood
their conclusion which is this In the Old Testament the Kings authority was aboue the Priests And therefore they can not prooue the souerainty of the Pope ouer Kings by the state of the Olde Testament Albeit this is infallible yet are not the Romish ashamed to argue from thence both by typicall Analogy and by examples Their Analogie CHAP. II. The second Obiection The Romish Pretence THe Olde Testament was a figure of the New in Christ. And Therefore in the New the Spirituall as Popedome is the Substantiue the Kingdome is but the Adiectiue The Answer In this Obiection there is more childhood than manhood babish Grammar than sound Diuinitie The Olde Testament indeed in his earthly elements was a figure of the spirituall and heauenly but of the truely heauenly the day of that eternall Sabbath and the celestiall Hierusalem the mother citie of the Saints of God And the Argument may be retorted The Argument returned vpon the Romish Christ being King and Priest was shadowed by the types of the Olde Testament but in Christ his kingdome had the preheminence of Priesthood because he is Priest only for vs but he is King ouer vs secondly as Priest he is suppliant to the Father as King he is predominant ouer all powers and principalities equally with the Father Ergo this order inherent in Christ ought to holde as conuenient among Christians An argument Demonstratiue CHAP. III. Obiect 3. from 14. examples The Romish Pretence IN the old Testament we finde Saul deposed by the Prophet Samuel Rehoboam by the Prophet Achia Athalia by Iehoiada the Priest Mattathias lift vp his sword against Antiochus and did remooue him Elias also and Elizeus both Prophets did kill the false Prophets and other Ministers of the King Iudith did kill Holophernes Ahod Aeglon Iabel Sisera Saul was dispossessed of his kingdome by Dauid Ahab by Iehu Amon by the people and the Mâ—ccaâ—ees sought against Kings for defence of Godâ— worship Lâ—stly king Ozias for exercising the Priests office was by the high Priest depriued of his kingdome The Answer to six kinds of these examples Heere we heare of nothing but fighting dispossessing killing of Kings and those chieflie by Priests and Prophets of God in the old Testament propounded to the Prelates of the new to teach them to erect their miters aboue crowns But first our question is of the obedience of Subiects to their lawfull Kings not of forâ—aine inuadors oâ— false vsurpers But Manie examples of the old Testament saith your Doctor we reade of such as haue borne armes and vsed hostilitie against Kings who being not their naturall Princes either did or would inuade their kingdomes to bring them into thraldome Such both by the law of nature and ordinance of God may be resisted And this was the case of Ahod against Aeglon Iabel against Siserâ—… Iudith against Holophernes the Macchabees against Antiochâ—… Therefore our aduersaries haue roaued at a wrong marke for by this your Cunerus confession your 3. example of â—ehoâ—d your 4. of Mattathias your 7. of Iudith your 8. of Ahod your 9. of Iabell and your 13. of Macchabees Who onely resisted vniust inuadors and not naturall kings pertaine nothing to the purpose The Answer to two other examples Secondly we dispute of lawfull examples of deposing kings but behold your 1 Saul was killed of an Amalachite whoÌ„ therfore Dauid commanded to be slaine Your 12 Ammon also was slaine of his owne seruants who were therefore pursued and slaine of the people because of thâ—ir conspiracie against the king Thus your 1. and 12. examples which you propound for your imitation rather shew what you would then what you should be yet so it is that wicked acts are the best examples you can alledge to proportionate your godlesse conclusions The Answer to fiue other examples Thirdly extraordinarie acts can be no presidents for ordinary or generall axioms But your selues cannot deny many of your examples were specially priuiledged functions by Prophets and others extraordinarily and immediately from God appointed to those offices and therefore cannot inferre any ordinarie power of altering States and kingdomes Of this kind was 1. Samuel the Prophet who dissolued the succession of Saul 2. Achia the Prophet who diuided Ieroboam from Rehoboam 5. Elias the Prophet who slew these Baalites and destroyed the messengers of the King 6. Elizeus the Prophet who raised vp Iehu against Ahab and his family and Nathan and Dauid Prophets who preferred Salomon in succession Therefore your 2. 5. 6. examples be satisfied For in them that will holde which Bellarmine acknowledgeth in one Elias To haue beene done by zeale and not by Pontisicall authoritie like that act of Phinâ—es in destroying those fornicators of Israel The last two examples obiected In the 2. Chron. 26. The high Priest deposed Oziah or Vziah from his kingdome And in the 2. Chron. 23. Iehoida the Priest put downe Athalia and commanded her to be slaine The answer to the former example King Ozias was strucke by the hand of God with leprosie and therefore by the law of God might not come into the common societie of men for feare of contagion He was not therefore deposed from his soueraigntie but only as a sicke King disabled and debarred the ordinarie execution A thing so manifest that your owne Doctor calleth this your assertion Most false and contrarie to the direct historie of the Bible and ancient Interpretors because it is manifest saith he that he died a King and his Sonne during his leprosie was only Rector c. It falleth out oftentimes that some Noble-man is ordained Regent to moderate matters during the minoritie of the King is therefore the right and reall King bereaued of his crowne The Answer to the example of 3 Athalia This example is satisfied already only now I will adde a confirmation of that which hath beene said Athalia 2. King 11. put to death all the Kings seed excepting onely Ioash who by good meanes was hidde from her after he was come to age produced and according to his right of succession proclaimed lawfull King commanding Athalia as an vsurper to be slaine So plaine that the fore-cited Doctor doth yeeld vnto it She was deposed saith he for destroying the Princes of the blood royall and vsurping the kingdome Now what maner of disputation call you this when to the defenders of the soueraigntie of lawfull Kings you oppose only the examples of intolerable vsurpers The last Answer to all the former examples in generall Fourthly example without law is as a bodie without a soule for though God be a law to himselfe yet his reuealed commandement is a law to man As Gen. 4. vers 7. His desire shal be subiect vnto
though he should do something contrary to the vniuersall state of the Church As for example saith your Azorius though hee should neglect the Canons of the Church spare offenders oppresse Innocents make a pray of the goods of the Church and violate the lawes of Kings yet is he not to be iudged of any but God Not though saith your Pope himselfe one placed in the Calends of your Martyrs hee should cary many people with himselfe to hell yet no mortall creature may presume to say why do you so Heere is a desperate disease wherein you will not suffer so much as practise of Phlebotomy much lesse an incision or exustion And yet in like case against the secular state obiect Gods prouidence said I like O no farre different The difference of Kings and Popes in this point The Papall power will be thought spirituall and thus being euill may be the baine of soules the power of Princes is but corporall Therefore â—â—are them not because they can goe no further then the body Now the bodilie tyrannie worketh in the godly patience patience supports martyrdome martyrdome gaineth a crowne of life Therefore this euill with patience may happily be indured but the spirituall tyranny doth captiuate the inward soule the souâ—…c commands the senses these practise sinne and the stipend of sinne is death euen the euerliuing death of hell Therefore heere is need according to Gods prouidence of power to depose so desperate a spirituall euill whereof it is written If the salt want his salinesse it is good for nothing but to to be cast vpon the Dunghill Marke then concerning the spirituall that God hath ordeined Eijciatur foras cast out concerning the temporall Resist not the powers CHAP. XV. The Arguments of Protestants against the pretended Papall power ouer Kings from 1. Scripture 2. Fathers 3. Reasons 1. Scriptures In the Old Testament IT is granted vs for the old Testament that Priests were subiect to their Kings and the necessity of due subiection to wicked Kings we haue exemplified in Dauid the mirror of all perfect loyalty which case is made more liuely by the Answer to the example of Eliah Scriptures In the New Testament Of many one shall suffice Rom. 13. Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers If you doubt what power this is to whom subiection is due looke what he hath in his hand He beareth not the sword for naught It is a sword therefore power temporall if from whom this is due it appeareth Euery soule be subiect all other conditions of reasonable men If why this is expressed For the power is ordained of God The point in question is concerning the Subiect The Romish seeke two enasions to free their Pope from subiection The Romish pretence From this place the Protestants conclude that therefore the Pope ought to be subiect But I deny their consequent for the Apòstle writeth of subiection to Heathen Emperours to whom euery Christian was to submit themselues But now that Emperours be Christians they ought to acknowledge a superiour power in the spirituall Pastor the Pope The Replie This your solution doth destroy a generall maxime confessed of all diuines to wit that as your Acosta confesseth Insidels conuerted to Christian faith do not therefore lose their former temporall right Which we haue already prooued by your owne confessions and more then ten circles of Antiquity We argue further now from this knowen principle Princes by conuersion to the Gospell lose no temporall right which they had before their conuersion But in the state of Infidelitie we neuer reade that they could be deposed by their Pagan Priests Ergo this their prerogatiue may not be impaired by their obedience vnto the Gospell nay it is rather confirmed thereby euen in this text especially in three degrees First it teacheth greater Christian reuerence because in the Prince a Christian man doth not behold only man but the hand of God He is the Minister of God Secondly from Christian feare For Pagans as hirelings onely performed obedience propteriram for feare of the temporall Sword which man because it is in the hand of man might auoid by many meanes But Christians He that resisteth purchaseth damnation are dutifull for feare of the eternall wrath of the iust omnipotent God Thirdly from Christian confidence For Pagans assoone as the King doth tyrannize do rebel as though freedome corporall were their speciall good but Christians Wil t thou not feare the power doe good and thou shalt haue praise of God in suffering outward euill for well doing are confirmed in the hope of an euerlasting good Fourthly from the bond of Christian loue for Pagans by their Princes commands are naturally inclined to discontent and hate but Christians Loue is the fulfilling of the law are by the law of Loue made perfect to obey the iust lawes of men If therefore Christians would as they ought be subiect to the law of Christ I suppose there is no Pagan Prince if perswaded of this doctrine of Christ but would more easily be a Christian Their second Euasion The Romish Pretence The Apostle doth not restraine his speech to any kind of superiour power but speaketh generally of powers that be signifying aswell the spirituall power as the temporall Therefore Protestants may not conclude heereupon that the Pope ought to be subiect vnto temporall Kings The Answer If we suffer the spirit of God to be our Iudge the cause is plaine He beareth not the sword in vaine he meaneth the temporall Gouernour If we require witnesse of this truth from all antiquity behold S. Chrysostome saith your own Bishop and that truly doth vnderstand by euery soule that euery Apostle euery Prophet and euery Bishop ought to be subiect To whom doe other ancient Fathers as Euthym. Theod. Theoph. Oecumen and all the Greeke Doctors agree Yea Gregory surnamed the Great Bishop of Rome doth so likewise expound it and S. Bernard in his Epistle to a Bishop said thâ—… Euery soule saith the Apostle then must you also speaking the bishop of Senona be subiect he that shall offer to exempt you shall but offer to tempt and delude you CHAP. XVI Arguments of Protestants from Antiquitie HE that is Alpha and Omega first for Antiquity and last for Eternity Christ our Sauiour by the confession of your grand Iesuite as he was man and the Messias had no power temporall on this earth Secondly S. Peter and the other Apostles as is also confessed by your most vehement Aduocates in their plea for Papall hierarchie were all subiect to the temporall States Thirdly all ancient holy Popes Martyrs Fathers as is commonly granted yea when they had force to resist the violence of Tyrants Heretickes and Apostates did performe subiection to temporall gouernment as the ordinance of God Tertullian saying If we would be reuenged we could not want force S. Cyprian We
in the words following Turne away from such You should haue had this Reply two moneths ago but that I was to adde another discourse of greater importance which is contained in the third part You see Beloued how vpon all occasions as I am exhorted by the Spirit of God I cease not to instruct you though contrarie minded trying if at anie time God will grant you repentance that you may acknowledge his truth And now the God of truth and life illuminate and sanctifie your hearts in knowledge and obedience of his will to the glorie of his sauing grace in Christ In whom Yours T. M. The first Part of this Reply conteining the Confirmation of the former Discouerie against the friuolous Cauils of the immoderate Answerer CHAP. I. The Discouerie of Romish Positions and Practises rebellious The first Reason THeir generall Assumption whereupon all their rebellious Positions are founded is this that All Protestants are Heretikes and Excommunicate The Answerer A moderate Answer to an iniurious and slanderous Discouerie I answer that this Position of the Discouerer All Protestants in the censure of Catholikes are Heretikes and Excommunicate is no generall assumption in Catholike Religion from whence it will follow that none of our Positions are to be iudged rebellious because he telleth vs that all these are builded vpon this Assumption A faithfull Reply By which answer I am chalenged to a double imployment first to confirme this my former Assumption All Protestants in the common censure of Papists superarrogantly called Catholikes are esteemed as Heretikes and Excommunicate the second to improue this your illation and consequent If we iudge not Protestants Heretikes and excommunicate it will follow that our Positions cannot be proued rebellious Our Assumption you impugne both by ample asseueration and also in your opinion by learned proofes aâ—d demonstrations Your Asseueration followeth The moderate Answerer I suppose that not one particular learned Catholike in this Kingdome yet such can best iudge of our country cause doth or will defend this opinion that Protestants are Heretikes and excommunicate for there is not one Protestant esteemed with vs to be in that case within the dominions of our Soueraigne of condition whatsoeuer in my knowledge The Reply What is this No Papist doth iudge any Protestant an Heretike or excommunicate to your knowledge As though you could instruct vs how to know when you speake from your knowledge knowing that you professe your selfe to be one of that sect who cannot possibly be knowne of vs so long as you lurke in the hole of that Foxe which you call Aequiuocation And surely this your minsing Suppose giueth vs cause to suspect in you some such prodigious conceit whereof hereafter In the instant we may demand why you who fetch all practises and positions as it were Dagges and their cases from beyond the sea shold now stand only to the iudgment of the Papists of This kingdome in this your Countrie case Is the cause of vs Protestants the same and shall we be subiect to contrarie Tribunals Haue you One God in Dan and another in Bethel Not but that we wish that the same sea which seuereth our country Region from Rome might likewise distinguish your Religion But to leaue your Suppose we will examine your proofe CHAP. II. Containing fiue of the Arguments of The moderate Answerer NO man doubting in faith But onely such as be obstinate No ignorant beleeuer or deceiued of Heretikes but he to whom the truth hath bene made knowne None onely internally infected but he that is a manifest professor is subiect to the censure of Excommunication for Heresie But Protestants in our opinion are of these conditions implying that they be doubting and not resolute ignorant of the contrarie Romish faith and not vnderstanding internally infected and not outward Professors of their faith Therefore in our opinion no Heretikes The Reply We may not be ignorant first that seeing the nature of Heresie is such that It is a vice proper to the mind it may denominate the subiect whatsoeuer an Heretike without obstinacie which is onely a peruerse obliquitie of the will and therefore man may be an Heretike though he be not obstinate Secondly because The Church consisting of men doth only iudge of outward actions of men we must consider that there is difference of the iudgement of an Heretike Fori poli namely of man iudging the outward act of God who discerneth the inward thought And may hereupon conclude that There may be an internall Heretike though not manifest vnto the Church But because you do onely vnderstand outward Heretikes subiect to the censure of men I approach to the Question to disable both your Propositions by the generall and ordinarie but in some points new and vnreasonable determinations of your owne schoole By a threefold euidence from a Popish 1. Definition of an Heretike 2. Explication of a person excommunicate 3. Application of Romish censures to them both CHAP. III. Popish definition of an Heretike THat is onely true Religion say your Romish Doctors which is taught in the Romish Church And therefore Whosoeuer maintaineth any doctrine condemned in that Church must be accounted an obstinate Heretike What obstinate It may be some do but doubtingly defend it what will you iudge of these If he doubt thereof willingly he is certainely an Heretike But it may be he is ignorant will no ignorance excuse him Affected ignorance doth argue him an obstinate Heretike Yet it may be he is no principal one to professe the supposed hereticall doctrine but onely to fauour the Doctors or professors thereof Yet then doth the Bull of Excommunication called Bulla Coenae thunder against them and not only them but also all wilfull defenders and fauourers Of which kind all such as Wish to die in their faith Harbour their persons Commend their behauiours Or do either publikely preach or professe their doctrine are to be accounted manifest Heretikes In briefe our countriman vpon this case of conscience An obstinate Heretike is as well he that is presumed so to be as he that is manifest Now let me be beholden vnto you for an Answer whether that all Protestants of all conditions do not renounce your Romish Religion Do not Ministers preach publikely and people also professe the contrarie Doth not the King and whole state enact lawes and Magistrates execute them to ruinate your Babel What sort of people is there in England Recusants excepted which doth not either beleeue the doctrine of Protestants or defend their persons or reade their bookes c. Seeing therfore That as your great Casuist hath said euery one presumed to be an Heretike is taken for an obstinate What one is there among all these kinds who can be free from your censures against Heretikes For when your Leo Pope as Taking eares to be hornes shall iudge
the Hebrewes of old what nation could haue resisted thew force Although these glorious Martyrs of the mother Church in their death whereby they haue anouched that good and glorious profession of Christian faith haue thereby also sealed the infallible truth of Christian obedience due to earthly Potentates yet will we not be content with these two hundred yeares but challenge the currant and successiue practise of 4000. more We therefore come to CHAP. IX The same duty of Subiection proued in the next 400. yeares FIrst Tertullian in his Apologie in defence of Christian loyalty God forbid saith he that Christian professours should reuenge themselues with humane power or feare that touch of persecution whereby they are tried for if we would either seeke secret reuenge or vse open hostility can you imagine we could want sufficient force we are visibly knowen vnto you and are interested in all your affaires your Cities Iles Forts Borrowes Tents Tribes Decuries Senate Maâ—kets are all full of Christians except only your temples Now what warre are not we ready and sit for who being in power moe yet do willingly suffer death if by this profession it were not more lawfull to be killed than to kill Heerein you who boast often of yours as great multitudes in England as there were locusts in Aegypt able to do mischiefe if you would and professing also to be willing as soone as you are able Compare but your God speed with Tertullian his God forbid and then you shall see that God cannot be said to be otherwise in your Popes Buls to kings than he was in Aarons calfe for in both there is a sinne of rebellion against Gods ordinance The second is Cyprian he likewise penneth an Apology and directeth it to Demetrianus the Officer of the persecuting Emperour answering in behalfe of all the Christians of his time None of vâ—when he is apprehended doth resist or reuenge himselfe of your vniust violence although the number of our people be maruellous great for our certaine confidence we haue in him that will take vengeance of all transgressours doth confirme our patience Whereby you are taught not to glory of patience who if you had force would banish obedience The third is Athanasius writing an Apologie for himselfe to Constantius an Arian Emperor and therfore hereticall to free himselfe of a slanderous imputation which was that he had suggested some matter to the Emperour Constance a Catholicke thereby to kindle coales of dissention betwixt Brethren therefore he saith I call God to record vpon my soule and your Brother Constance could witnesse that I neuer spake word of you in euill part I was not so madde as to forget the commandement of God who saith Thou shall not speake euill of thy King no not in thy hart but did obey your command when I had charge to depart from Alexandria The summe is this When he had power to stirre the Emperour Constance a true professor against his brother Constantius an hereticke yet he made conscience not to raise rebellion but rather submitted himselfe to the violence of persecution If your Pope had beene truly catechized in this Creed of Athanasius belonging to the truth of faithfull allegeance he would not so oft haue raised King against King as your selues confessed And why then may not hee be that man prophecied of Sitting on a red horse and hauing power permissiuely giuen vnto him to take peace from the earth and that they should kill one another The fourth is Gregory Nazianzene in his Oration against the Emperour Iulian who the very hinge of this cause had beene a Christian and did after Apostate and proue an Infidell saith Against whom of you did wee euer raise any insurrection or sedition among your people though otherwise of themselues prone to rebellion or whose death did wee euer conspire But you lately whose deaths haue you not conspired The fifth is Ambrose When the Emperour infected with the heresie of Arius had sent magistrates to remoue Ambrose from his Bishopricke and the people thronged to rescew him In such power saith Ambrose that the Officers could not resist their force I quieted the people and yet could not auoid their malice Then sure he did abhorre by raising sedition among the people to prouoke magistrates to malice The same Father vpon that penitentiall dumpe of holy Dauid to thee only haue I sinned proueth that some Kings are not subiect to any penall law of man And for S. Ambrose his actiue profession in this kind it is confessed by your owne Doctor saying that Saint Ambrose when he was sufficiently armed both by power of people and souldiers strengthened with the might of Christ yet would not defend his Church with violence against the fury of the hereticall Emperor The sixth is Basill Who by reason of the strength of the forts wherein he was needed not to feare any danger yet suppliantly offered himselfe to Iulian the Apostate and caused the gates of the city to be opened vnto him thereby to appease his wrath against Christians The seuenth is S. Augustine who in his expositioÌ„s of some proposition doth concerning this point giue this instruction Whereas the Apostle saith he exhorteth that we should not resist gouernors in temporall matters he saith It is necessary that we be subiect and lest any might not performe this in loue but as from constraint and necessity he addeth Not for feare of wrath but for conscience sake that is not dissemblingly but dutifully in good conscience and loue to him God who commandeth subiection and as in another place he exhorteth Seruants Obey your hard and iniurious masters but not with ey-seruice as only pleasing men but God Therefore you must not plead Your most humble subiect aboue ground and from the concaue and vautes of the earth seeke how to humble your soueraigne Forey seruice and hart-seruice do distinguish a Christian from a Pagan according to that of Arnobius You Pagans do feare onely the outward sight of men we only the inward conscience of our mind The eight is Pope Leo writing to a true Catholicke Emperour You may not be ignorant saith he that your Princely power is giuen vnto you not only in worldly regiment but also Spirituall for the preseruation of the Church As if hee had said Not only in causes temporall but also inspirituall so far as it belongeth to outward preseruation not to the personall administration of them And this is the substance of our English oath and further neither do our Kings of England challenge nor subiects condiscend vnto We are not yet passed the lists of 500. yeares The last is Pope Gregory in his Epistle to Mauritius a right Christian Emperour To this end saith he is power ouer all persons giuen from heauen vnto my Lord that good men may be helped in the way to the kingdome of heauen And again In those gratious commands of your