Valentinian the elder who refused to be present and much more President in certaine conferences about religion betwene the Catholicke Bishops the Arrians vpon consideration of these two distinct Orders of Clergie and lay-men though he were inuited therunto by Catholicke Bishops themselues Mihi quidem saith he cum vnus de populo sim fas non est talia perscrutari verum sacerdotes qui bus haec cura est apud semetipsos congregentur vbi voluerint Vnto me that am but one of the lay people it is not lawfull to examine such things as appertayne vnto religion but let priests to whome this care is committed meet togeather amoÌ„g themselues to discusle the matter where they will So much was this distinction between lay-men and priests esteemed by this auncient Christian Emperour 11. Secondly I demaund of M Attorney concerning his distinction of Courtes and causes to be handled therin Temporll Spirituall how it commeth to passe that the Conusaunce of such causes as here he calleth Spirituall belong not as he saith to the Common-lawes of England No nor as presently after he affirmeth could not belong For that they are not within the conusaunce of the sayd common-Common-laws And why is this I praye you For if the temporall Prince be equallie head in both causes and in both Iurisdictions and that the power to knowe discerne iudge in both sortes doe descend only from the temporall Prince as before out of the Statute of King Edward the 6. you haue heard by the Statute-makers determined and M. Attorney confirmeth euery where in these Reportes then should the common-Lawes of our Realme which are the temporall Princes law be coÌ„mon indeed according to their name to all causes aswel Spirituall as Temporall for that their author and origen which is the King hath equall Power Iurisdiction in both for that it is a maxime vncontrollable that according to the Iurisdiction of the Lâ—w maker vertue and power of the law doth extend it selfe And then doth M. Attorney affirme that the conusaunce of so many Ecclesiasticall causes as he setteth downe is not within the compasse of our Common-lawes or what compasse will he assigne or lymitt to that Princes lawes that according to this assertion hath power in all Is not this to contradict himself and to ouerthrow with the one hand that which he goeth about to establish with the other For if the Kings power be common to both causes aswell Ecclesiasticall as Temporall then must the Kings Common-lawes be common to both Courtes and matters therin handled 12. But let vs see a certaine sleight or euasion of his worth the noting As in temporall causes saith he the King by the mouth of the Iudges in his Courtes of Iustice doth iudge and determyne the same by the temporall lawes of England so in causes Ecclesiasticall as Blasphemy Apostacy Heresyes Ordering Institutions of Clerkes c. the same are to be determined and decyded by Ecclesiasticall Iudges according to the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes of this Realme Marke here gentle reader how M. Atnorney playeth wyly beguyly For according to the proportion of his coÌ„parison he should haue coÌ„cluded thus So the King by the â—outh of his Ecclesiasticall Iudges doth iudge and determine the said Spirituall Ecclesiastical causes by his owne Ecclesiasticall lawes But this he foresaw would include this great inconuenience among others that if he said that the King did iudge determine by the mouthes of his spirituall Iudges the aforesaid spirituall causes as he doth the temporall then might he doe the same yea and exercise them also immediatly by himself if need were aswell as by others for in all temporall iudgments and affayres the King may sit himself in courte and performe in person whatsoeuer his Officers by his authority doe or may doe which yet M. Attorney saw would be somwhat absurde to graunt in the spirituall causes proponed by him of Blasphemy Ordering of Priests or giuing holy Orders Institutions of Clerkes Celebration of diuine seruice and the like to witt that the King should performe them immediately in his owne person for who would not say it were absurde for example that the King should sing or say the common seruice to the people or administer the Sacrament of Absolution or Marriage or giue holy Orders and the like which yet the Bishop of Rome and all other Bishops or Prelates neuer so great doe may doe without inconuenience And in truthe it followeth euidently that he who can giue authority or power for another to doe a thing as from himself and in his name may performe the same in person also if he list at least wise it cannot be vnlawfull for him so to doe And therfore coming to the application of his comparison he changeth his phrase and saith that the same are to be determined and decyded by Ecclesiasticall Iudges according to the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes of this Realme 13. Wherin you must note another shifte more poore and silly then the former for that hauing declared vnto vs before that there are two generall partes and members of the Realme to witt the Clergy and the Laity and that these two haue two seuerall Tribunalls in their affaires gouerned by two sortes of different lawes Temporall and Ecâ—lesiasticall Common and Canon and these deriued from two different Authors and origens the Common-law from the temporall Prince and Commonweath Ecclesiasticall from others saith M. Atorney but specifieth not from whom or whence though all the world knowe that they come originally from the Church Sea Apostolique all which inferreth distinct originall Iurisdictions M. Attorney by his great witt hath deuised a newe sleight neuer perhaps yet heard of in the world before which is to make these Ecclesiasticall lawes though deriued from others to be the Kings owne lawes for that he approueth and alloweth them within the Realme and consequently that all lawes both Temporall and Spirituall doe come from the King as their Author which is a token that he hath full Supreame power And this singular deuise pleaseth him so well as he repeateth the same sundrie tymes in this Treatise You shall heare the same in his owne words in this place how dangerous and preiudicyall a Conclusion he buildeth vpon the same against Catholiques 14. For as the Romans saith he fetching diuers lawes from Athens yet being approued and allowed by the State there called them notwithstanding Ius Ciuile Romanum And as the Normans borrowing all or most of their lawes from England yet baptized them by the name of the lawes or customes of Normandy so albeit the Kings of England deriued their Ecclesiasticall lawes from others yet so many as were approued and allowed here by and with a generall consent are aptly rightly called the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes of England which whosoeuer shall deny he denyeth that the King hath full and plenary power c. And consequently that he is no coÌ„plete Monarch nor head
tryall of all OF THE SECOND SORT OF PROOFES NAMED DE FACTO VVherto M. Attorney betaketh himselfe alleadging certaine Instances therin And first out of our Kings before the Conquest CHAP. V. THE whole bulke of M. Attorneyes booke such as it is consisteth as before hath byn noted in the recitall of certayne lawes or peeces of lawes and therfore called by him Reports or Relations of clauses found in his Commonlawes or Statutes that may seeme somwhat to sound against the absolute IurisdictioÌ„ Ecclesiasticall of the Bishops and Sea of Rome or to the restraint therof vnder certayne Kings and in certaine occasions and to ascribe vnto the said Kings some Ecclesiasticall power in those cases as afterwards shal be seene Wherin first is to be considered that which before hath been obserued that he abandoning as it were the first head of proofes De Iure flyeth only to the other De facto which alwayes holdeth not for that all factes doe not infer necessarily the right of equity and Iustice as before hath been shewed And secondly if all the examples De facto were graunted in the sense as by him they are set downe yet are they farr of from prouing his principall as often afterwards vpon many particular occasions shal be declared For that his said principall Conclusion is as yow may knowe that Queene Elizabeth by the ancient Common lawes of England had as full and absolute power and Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction as by any spirituall or Ecclesiasticall person had euer byn at might lawfully be exercised within the Realme And these Instances by him alleadged doe concerne but certaine peeces and parcells of Iurisdiction in some particular cases and causes as by examination wil be found Wherfore to drawe neere to this examination we must vnderstand that M. Attorney rightly deuideth the tymes of our Kings into before and after the Conquest and I shall willinglie follow him in this diuision and search out what Ecclesiastical lawes or Ordinances there were made in those dayes by our Kings of those ages for his or our purpose 2. And first before the Conquest when our best English Kings were most eminent if we respect pietie and religion as liuing neerer to the origen fountaine of their first conuersion fernour of Christian spirit out of this tyme I say and ranke of our Christian Kings froÌ„ Ethelbert the first to K. Edward the last before the Conquest for of K. Harold we make little accompt he being an intruder and raigning so small time and with so many troubles as he did they being otherwise aboue a hundred in number within the space of almost fiue hundred yeares two only inferences he produceth and these of very small moment as presently will appeare yet let vs heare how he beginneth and what Preface he maketh to his proofes in these words To confirme saith he those that hold the truth and to satisfye such as being not instructed know not the ancient and moderne lawes and customes of England euery man being perswaded as he is taught these few demonstratiue proofes out of the lawes of England in steed of many in order serie temporum are here added This is his Preface wherin he promiseth as yow see demonstratiue Proofes which are the strongest most cleer euident and forcible that logicke doth prescribe in any science but we shal be enforced afterward to admitt proofes of a lower degree then demonstrations as by experience you will find Wherefore to the matter 3. His first instance is taken out of the words of a certaine Charter giuen by King Kenulfus of the VVestsaxons some two hundred and fifty yeares after the conuersion of K. Ethelbert of Kent confirmed afterward by K. Edwin Monarch of all England which Charter beginneth thus Kenulfus Rex c. per literas suas patentes consilio consensu Episcoporum Senatorum gentis suae largitus fuit monasterio de Abindon in Comitatu Bark euidam Ruchino tunc Abbati monasterij c. quandam ruris sui portionem id est quindecim mansias in loco qui à ruriculis tunc nuncupabatur Culnam cum omnibus vtilitatibus tam in magnis quam in modicis rebus Et quod praedictus Ruchinus 〈◊〉 ab omni Episcopali iure in sempiternum esset quietus vt habitatores â—iuâ— nullius episcopi aut suorum officialium iugo inde deprimantur sed in cunctis rerum euentibus discussionibus causarum abbatis monasterij praedicti decretis subijciantur itae quod c. Thus goeth the Charter which though M. Attorney thought not good to put in English but to set downe both his pages in Latin yet wee shall translate the same for the better vnderstanding of all sortes of Readers K. Kenulfus c. by his letters parents with the Counsell and consent of the Bishops and Councellours of his nation did giue to the monasterie of Abindon in Barkshire and to one Ruchinus Abbot of that monastery a certaine portion of his land to witt fifteen mansians in a place called by the countreymen Culnam with all profittes and commodities both great and small appertaining therevnto And that the foresaid Ruchinus c. should bee quiet from all right of the Bishop for euer so as the inhabitants of that place shall not be depressed for the time to come by the yoke of any Bishop or his officers but that in all euents of thinges and controuersies of causes they shall be subiect to the decree of the Abbot of the said monasterie so as c. 4. Thus goeth the Charter which if it were all graunted by vs as it lyeth yet is it far of as you see from inferring M. Attorneys conclusion that K. Kenulfus was head of the Church or had supreame power Ecclesiasticall It might make it probable that hee had some Iurisdiction in some particular case but what or how much that was or whence hee had it either of himself or by delegation of another to wit of the Popes or Cleargie that is not euident by the Charter But let vs see what M. Attorney can make of these words for that lawyers commonly can make the most of matters to their aduauntage First he will needs inforce out of his Charter that this K. Kenulfus tooke vpon him Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction for thus hee writeth By this it appeareth that the King by this Charter made in Parlament for it appeareth to be made by the Councell and consent of his Bishops and Senatours of his kingdome which were assembled in Parlament did discharge and exempt the said Abbot from the Iurisdiction of the Bishop c. And by the same Charter did graunt to the same Abbot Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction vvithin his said Abbey VVhich Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction being deriued from the Crowne continued vntill the dissolution of the said Abbey in the raigne of K. Henry the 8. So hee 5. In which words three things are affirmed by him wherof I hould neuer a one to be
tyme but the quite contrary CHAP. VI. THov hast seene and considered I doubt not gentle and iudicious Reader how M. Attorney in the former Chapter hath byn grauelled in prouing his affirmatiue proposition that our Kings before the Conquest tooke supreme Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction vpon them and acknowledged it not in the Pope or Sea of Rome For proofe wherof he brought forth two such poore and petite instances as they being besides their weaknes impertinent and vntrue and not subsisting in their owne grounds they were no more for perfourmance of his promise of cleere and demonstratiue proofes then if a man being bound to pay ten thousand pounds in pure and current gold should bring forth two mites of brasse for discharge of his band And surely if M. Attorney should haue failed soe some yeares gone before he was so wealthie as that taking vpon him with so great an ostentation to proue an affirmatiue assertion of so mayne importance and consequence as this is he should haue performed no more then he hath here done he would neuer haue attained by law to the preferment he hath But now◠perhaps he persuadeth himself that by his only credit already gotten he may say what he will and proue as little as he list because by only saying he shall be beleeued 2. But on the contrary side we require proofes offer proofes gentle Reader for that the matter is of singular great weight euen for thy soule we rest not in ostentation of wordes only but in probation of deedes And though we might remaine sufficiently with the victorie for that our aduersarie resteth with so apparent a foyle in the proofe of his forsayd affirmatiue yet that you may see and behold as in a glasse the difference of our cause and confidence therin I haue thought conuenient out of the great aboundance and variety of proofes that our truth hath in this controuersie as well as in all others betwene vs and Protestants to take vpon me to proue the negatiue against M. Attorney which of it self is euer more hard as you know than to proue an affirmatiue except euidence of truth doe facilitate the matter as in our case and to proue and make euident by sundry sortes of cleere and perspicuous demonstrations nyne or ten at the least that during the tyme before the Conquest no one of all our Christian English Kings exceeding the number of an hundred as before hath been said did take vpon them either to be heads of the Church or to be supreme gouernours in Ecclesiasticall causes or to haue any spirituall Iurisdiction al deriued from the right of their Crownes or denyed this to be in the Pope Bishops only or did make any Ecclesiastical lawes concerning spirituall matters and consequently that this Treatise of M. Attorney Of the Kings Ecclesiasticall law doth apperteine no more vnto them in realitie of truth than to the man in the Moone to gouerne the heauens For that they neuer so much a◠dreamed of any such thing nor of any one of the forsaid clauses of spirituall power Iurisdiction to belong vnto them which heere shall brefely be proued with such variety of demonstrations taken out of their owne words dedes decrees actions as I doubt not but will make more then morall euidence The first Demonstration 3. The first Demonstration may be taken from the consideration of all the auncient lawes made by Christian Kings in our Countrey before the Conquest euery one in his seuerall State and Dominion according to the tymes and places they raigned in and gouerned their Commonwealthes both Britanes Saxons and Danes and among the Saxons againe their Kings and Princes in euery of their seuerall Kingdoms about which point Malmesbury writeth thus of the noble King Inas Porrò quantus in Dei rebus fuerit indicio sunt leges ad corrigendos mores in populo latae in quibus viuum ad hoc tempus puritatis suae resultat speculum How great a King Inas was in Gods affaires the lawes which he made to correct the manners of his people doe sufficiently declare in which vntill this day there is seen as in a liuely glasse the said Kings purity of mynde And the like lawes no doubt other Kings also made in their Dominions all which remained afterwards to their posterity vnder the names of Mulmutian lawes For the lawes of the Britans as also the lawes of the Mercians called in their tongue Mercen laga and of the West-Saxons called VVest-saxen laga and of the Danes named Dan laga stood in force vntill England came to be a Monarchie when the first authour of the said Monarchie King Egbert began first to drawe them into one body of conformity But after him againe K. Edgar surnamed the peaceable and wise King confirmed the same and sett them forth but by the warrs and confusion of the Danes which after his death ensued they were for the most part put out of vse againe vntill K. Edward the confessor recalled them encreased and made them perfect and by the counsaile of his Peeres and Realme did frame a new ordination of the same lawes which remained afterwards vnder the name of K. Edward his lawes and were so much approued and loued by the people as Iohn Fox also out of Mathew Paris doth affirme that the common people of England would not doe obedience to VVilliam Conquerour but that first he did sweare to keepe these lawes which oath notwithstāding saith he the Conquerour did afterward breake and in most points brought in his owne lawes So Fox which if it be true yet is it to be vnderstood principally of his lawes appertayninge vnto secular men for that in the rest which concerned the Church her priuiledges he followed absolutely the lawes of K. Edward as in the next Chapter shall appeare where we shall sett downe the said Conquerour his lawes in this behalfe which are as fauourable and respectiue vnto Ecclesiasticall power and persons as of any one King eyther before or after him 4. Wherevpon it followeth that M. Attorney who so often iterateth this worde of auncient and most auncient common-lawes of England which as he saith but cannot proue did authorize Q. Elizabeth her spirituall Iurisdiction ouer the Church speaketh but in the ayre and at randome beating vs still with the empty sound of these words without substance For in reall dealing he should haue alleadged some one law at least to that purpuse out of all these before the Conquest if he had meant to be as good as his word 5. But this he cannot doe as already you haue seen by his two poore instances and we doe shew on the contrary side that all these and other lawes of these dayes were for vs in the fauour of Catholike Religion and particularly for the liberties franquizes priuiledges exemptions and immunities of the Church and Clergie according to the Canons and Decrees of the Popes Ecclesiasticall law
and prescribeth in particular what is to be done as lawfull Iudge in these matters And to that of the French Bishops he giueth such answeres as therby he testifyeth that he wel knew himself to haue supreme authoritie and iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall as well ouer all Bishopps of France as of England and all countryes besides throughout all Christendome For thus he wrote as S. Bede relateth For as much as concerneth the Bishopps of France I gaue you no authoritie ouer them and from the ancient tymes of my precedessors the Bishop of Arles hath receaued his pall from the Sea of Rome whome we ought not to depriue os that authoritie which from them he hath receaued c. 12. And the same Pope Gregorie sending the pall which is the proper signe of Archi-episcopal authority vnto the same S. Augustine of England he appointeth him his limitts of power and iurisdiction and what he shall doe and giue to others and this without any reference vnto K. Ethelbert any way to depend of him in his said authority or execution therof For thus he writeth vnto him Reuerendissimo Sanctissimo Fratri Augustino Coepiscopo Gregorius seruus seruorum Dei. Quia noua Anglorum Ecclesia c. For that a new Church of the English nation by Gods gyft and your labour is now brought to participate of the grace of our Sauiour Christ we doe graunt vnto you the vse of the pall in the sayd Church only to be vsed in the solemne celebration of Masses we graunt you also authority to ordeine twelue Bishops vnder you which shal be subiect to your iurisdiction but yet sâ— as the Bishop which shal be ordeyned for the citty of London shall euer afterward be consecrated by a Synod and shall receaue also a pall of honour from this holy and Apostolike Sea of Rome â— wherin by Gods appointment I doe serue at this tyme. We doe will you also to send a Bishop to the Citty of Yorke whome your self shall thinke good to ordeyne but yet with this condition that if that Citty with other places neere about doe receaue the worde of God he may ordayne twelue Bishops also and so remaine with the honour of a metropolitan for that we doe intend God willing if we liue to giue him also the pall whome yet notwithstanding we will haue to be subiect to your disposition though after your death he shall so be ouer these Bishops whome he hath ordeyned as he be no way subiect to the iurisdiction of the Bishop of London c. But your Brotherhod shall not only be Superiour and haue authority ouer those Bishops which your self haue ordeined but ouer those also which shal be ordeined by the said Bishop of Yorke And so in the authority of Iesus Christ our God Sauiour you shall haue subiect vnto you all the Priests of Brittany to the end that from your mouth and holines of life they may receaue a true forme both of right belief and vertuous life and therby performing their dutyes of good Christians both in faith and manners they may come at length by Gods holy grace to enioye his heauenly Kingdome who keepe and defend you euer most reuerend Brother The tenth day before the Calends of Iuly Mauritius being Emperour c. the 4. indiction anno Domini 601. 13. By this epistle and commission of Pope Gregory we may see what authority he tooke himself to haue for all matters spiritual and Ecclesiasticall in our Countrey neither did he thinke herby to doe any iniury to King Ethelbert neither did the King take it soe or imagine that himself had any spirituall Iurisdiction or Ecclesiasticall authority to gouerne the Church by vertue of his temporall crowne more now by being a Christian then he had before when he was a Gentile but only that now he was to gouerne Ecclesiasticall persons also in ciuill and temporall matters and therby might rightly be called King of them both in the sense which befoâ—e in the second Chapter of this answere we haue declared 14. Nay good King Ethelbert was so far of from thinking himself to receaue any preiudice against the power and authority of his temporall Crowne by the spirituall iurisdiction ouer him and all others instituted by Pope Gregory as he infinitely reioyced therat and presently made temporall lawes to confirme the same hauing speciall care to prouide for the fafety and immunity of the Clergie as S. Bede doth signifie And moreouer that he reduced the forme of his secular iudgements and Tribunalls to the likenes of those of Rome Among other good things and benefits saith he which King Ethelbert with his wisdome did bring into his nation one was that he appointed by the counsaile of wise men the decrees of iudgements to be made according to the example of the Romanes which decrees being written in the English tongue doe remaine in vse and force vnto this day So Bede Who liued an hundred fifty yeeres after And this may suffice for example of the first Kingdome conuerted to Christian religion which was of Kent and the countreyes round about euen vnto the riuer of Humber 15. But if I would passe to the consideration of other Kingdoms also conuerted after this of their Christian CoÌ„mon-wealthes instituted and ordeyned according to the forme of this first there would be much to say For first some foure yeares after the conuersion of the sayd K. Ethelbert of Kent by S. Augustine was conuerted by the preaching of S. Mellitus Sebert or as S. Bede calleth him Sabered King of the East-saxons and some fiue yeares after that againe King Sigebert of the East-angles by the preaching of S. Felix Bishopp and some seuenteene yeares after that againe K. Edwyn of the Northumbers by the preaching of S. Paulinus And then further some nyne yeares after thatâ— K. Kinegilsus of the VVest-saxons by the preaching of S. Berinus and about the same time Prince Peda of the Mercians or Middle-iland people by the persuasion of the good K. Oswyn of Northumberland And finally about some 27. yeres after all this K. Ethelwâ—ld or Ethelwalch as S. Bede calleth him of the Southsaxons was conuerted by the preaching of S. VVilfride 16. All these Pagan Kingdomes as they receaued the faith and Kingdome of Christ by the industrye and labours of spirituall and Ecclesiasticall men that preached and instructed them and were subordinate the one to the other but all to the Sea os Rome so did those Kings now made Christians subiect themselues vnto them not only in matters of faith and beliefe but in discipline also and Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction as sheep to their Pastors according to that which before you haue heard S. Cregâ—â—â— Nazianzen tell the Emperour of his tyme and herby it came to passe that albeit these different Kingdomes had different teâ—porall lawes for secular affayres before their conuersion and reteyned the same afterward vntill England became one sole Monarchie
indeed for if they were and had but so much as primam tonsuram they could not bee held nor iudged by that Court as often before hath byn shewed it is euident where the eminencie of authoritie laie in those daies to wit in the spiritualtie aboue the temporaltie vayne it is to stand vpon other trifling circumstances whether the Bishops deputie sent to demaund the liberty of those felons by law did giue attendance vpon the Kings Courts or no or whether he or the Iudges that were lay-men must iudge of this sufficieÌ„cy or insufficiency whether the fellon did read as a Clarke or not For if the temporall Iudges must discerne therof as M. Attorney auerreth then in vaine was the Bishops Deputy called thither without whom it might haue byn done by the Iudges alone But if he were of necessity to be called thither and vpon his oath to pronounce si legit vt Clericus and that vpon his verdict the Iudge must giue sentence to admit the fellon to the benefit of Clergy and thervpon to haue pardon of his life and to be deliuered vnto the Bishops prison as of higher authority then is it manifest that this instance impugneth rather then helpeth M. Attorneys assertion as commonly doe all the rest when they are well examined The Attorney The Popes excommunication is of no force within the Realme of England In the raigne of King Edward the 4. a Legat from the Pope came to Calles to haue come into England but the King and his Counsell would not suffer him to come within England vntill he had taken an oath that he should attempt nothing against the King or his Crowne and so the like was done in his raigne to another of the Popes Legats this is so reported in 1. H. 7. fol. 10. The Catholicke Deuyne 14. The first parte of this instance about the validitie of the Popes excoÌ„munication hath oftentimes been answered before what circumstance and conditions were agreed vpon to bee obserued in the execution thereof for auoiding inconueniences that came by false suggestions of some troublesome people and among other that it should allwaies bee directed to some Bâ—sâ—op whose certificate should bee required for the lawfvllnes therof as before hath been shewed out of the 3. yeare of K. Edward the 3. hath appeared also before out of King Richards Statute where all the Bishops expounded themselues that it was not meant to derogate by that Statute from the Popes authoritie to excoÌ„municate c. And in this very place and next words after this present instance hath M. Attorney another instance out of King Richard the 3. in these words It is resolued by the Iudges that the iudgment of excommunication in the Courte of Rome should not bind or preiudice anie man within England at the Common-law Wherby is cleerly declared the meaning of the former cause to wit that the popes excommunication which is a spirituall sentence or punishement for spirituall affaires may not preiudice temporall all suites at the common-Common-law in temporall matters and it is not much sinceritie in M. Attorney to alleadg these parcells of his Iudges determinations so nakedly as he doth without distinction or explication to the end his simple Reader may be put in error therby 15. The other instance of the Popes Legate staied at Calles and not suffered to come into England vntill he had taken an oath to attempt nothing against the King or his Crowne sheweth that King Edward rather doubted and feared his authoritie then contemned or denied the same especially he being in that controuersy about the Crowne as then hee was and the Pope interposing his spirituall authoritie between K. Henry the 6. and him And as well he might alleadge the example of the Popes messenger detained in Calles by commaundement of King Phillip and Q. Marie when he brought the Cardinals hat from Paulus 4. to Friar Peto for that the said Princes would not suffer him to come into the Realme vntill they had otherwise informed the said Pope by their Embassadours in Rome that the same was not expedient And yet did not this proue that they either contemned the Popes authoritie or thought this soueraigntie of spirituall iurisdiction to bee in themselues And it is a case that often falleth out in the affaires of Catholicke Princes with Popes when they doubt anie thing will proceed against them from the said Sea Apostolicke to keep off the execution or notification therof by what means they can vntill matters bee compounded And we haue had many examples therof before namely in the raignes of K. Henry the 2. K. Iohn K. Henry the 3. and two King Edwards following him who fearing excommunication were vigilant in prohibiting that no messenger from Rome should enter the Realme without their licence which was an argument rather of their esteeme then disesteeme of that place and power Out of the raigne of K. Henry the seauenth who was the nyntenth King after the Conquest §. II. In the raigne of K. Henry the 7. the pope had excommunicated all such persons whatsoeuer as had bought alume of the Florentines and it was resolued by all the Iudges of England that the Popes excommunication ought not to bee obaied or to bee put in execution within the Realme of England In a parlament holden in the first yeare of King Henry the 7. for the more sure like reformation of Priests Clerks religious men culpable or by their demerits openly noised of incontinent liuing in their bodies contrarie to their order it was enacted ordained and established by the aduise and assent of the Lords spiritual and temporall and the Commons in the said Parlament assembled and by authoritie of the same that it bee lawfull to all Archbishops and Bishops and other Ordinaries hauing Episcopall iurisdiction to punish and chastise Priests Clercks and religious men being within the bounds of their iurisdiction as shall bee conuicted afore them by examination and lawfull proofe requisite by the law of the Church of aduowtry fornication incest or anie other fleshly incontinency by committing them to ward prison there to abide for such time as shall bee thought to their discretions conuenient for the qualitie and quantitie of their trespasse And that none of the said Archbishops Bishops or Ordinaries aforesaid bee therof chargeable of to or vpon anie action of false or wrongfull imprisonment but that they be vtterly therof discharged in anie of the Cases aforesaid by vertue of this Act. Rex est persona mixta because hee hath both Ecclesiasticall and temporall iurisdiction By the Ecclesiasticall laws allowed within this Realme a Priest cannot haue two benefices or a bastard can bee a Priest but the King may by his Ecclesiasticall power and iurisdiction dispense with both of these because they be Mala prohibita and not Mala per se. The Catholicke Deuyne 16. Heere are three or foure instances for breuityes sake layed
word or two concerning the Title whose inscription is Reports of diuers Resolutions and Iudgements giuen vpon great deliberation in matters of great Importance and Consequence by the Reuerend Iudges Sages of the law togeather with the Reasons Causes â—f their Resolutions and Iudgments published c. By which words of â—reat Deliberation great Importance and Consequence Reuerend Sages the like M. Attorney like a studious Rhetorician procureth to purchase credit and estimation to this his worke of Reports Alâ—eit I be confident to the contrary that vpon the ensuing search â—hese Reports directed by hym to the impugning of Catholike reâ—â—gion being only bare and naked Reports indeed without profe or reason alleaged at all will neither proue so graue Resolutions â—udgemeÌ„ts nor to haue byn giuen alwayes vpoÌ„ so great deliberation â—or of so great importance Consequence as he pretendeth and that when the reasons and causes therof shall bee examined they â—ill rather ouerthrow than establish his principal conclusion wherin I remitt my self to the euent â— There followeth the same title to knitt vp the page this pleaâ—â—ng sentence of Cicero in his Tusculane questions Quid enim laeâ—ro nisi vt veritas in omni quaestione explicetur verum dicentibus facilè ceâ—â—m What doe I endeuour but that the truth should be laied open in euery question with resolution to yeld to them that shall speake the truth This sentence I say giueth mee great comforte yf M. Attorney will doe as he insinuateth and follow the indifferencie of his Author alleaged who in the matters he handled which were of philosophye is knowne to haue byn so equall as he was not well resolued what part to take Yet doe I not exact so much equality in this our controuersie of diuinitie presuming my aduersary to be preoccupated with the preiudice of one parte but shall rest well satisfied with his desire to haue the truth examined in euery point and much more with his readines to yeeld vnto her whersoeuer she shall be founde 3. And with this I shall passe to his Preface notinge only one point or two more by the way wherof I shall haue occasion to speake againe afterward The first is that wheras this booke of Reports is set forth with two distinct Columnes in euery page the one in Latin the other in English the Title or superscription of the one runneth thus De iure Regis Ecclesiastico The other hath this interpretation Of the Kings Ecclesiasticall law As though the word Ius which signifieth Right were alwayes well translated by the word Law Wherof afterward he seeketh to make his aduantage But the error or fraude is euident for that the word Ius hath a much larger signification then Lex which may be proued as well out of auncient Lawyers as Deuines For that Paulus Iurisconsultuâ— doth affirme the word Ius to be extended ad omne quod quouis modo bonum aequum est to whatsoeuer is any waye good or right And then in another signification the same Paulus doth say that it signifieth Sententiam iudicis The sentence of the Iudge And in another signification Vlpian and Celsus two auncient Lawyers take it for the science skill of law And Aristotle in his Ethicks pro omni eo quod est legitimum for all that which is any way lawfull And so S. Thomas and other School-deuines doe affirme Ius to be obiectum Iustitiae the obiect of Iustice that is to say about which all iustice is exercised And finaly Isidorus sayth Lex est species Iuris Law is a braunch or kind of right and consequently M. Attorney doth not so properly throughout his whole booke interprete Ius by the word Law which I would not haue noted so largly but that he being so great a lawyer had obligation to speake more exactly though noe man deny but that Ius and Lex may sometimes be taken for the same but not euer nor properly in this case For that the question is not nor was not of Q. Elizabeths Ecclesiasticall lawes but of the right shee had to make such lawes 4. The second point worth the noting is that wheras both the title and subiect of all this booke is of the Kings Ecclesiasticall law M. Attorney in the whole Course therof from the begining of our Christian Kings vnto K. Henry the eight who were aboue an hundered twenty in number neuer citeth so much as one Ecclesiasticall law made by anie of them For that they being Catholikes made not but receiued Ecclesiasticall lawes from such as had authoritie to make them in the Catholique Church And such later Statutes Decrees and Ordinances as were made by some later Kings from K. Edward the first downward for restraint of some execution of the Popes ecclesiasticall power in certaine externall points were not made by them as ecclesiasticall but as temporall laws in respect of the common wealth for auoiding certaine pretended hurtes and incommodities therof And M. Attorney is driuen to such pouerty straights in this case as not being able to alleadge anie one instance to the contrary out of all the foresaid ages hee runneth euery where to this shift that the Popes Ecclesiasticall and Canon laws being admitted in England mâ—y bee called the Kings ecclesiasticall laws for that they are admitted and allowed by him and his realme In which sense the Euangelicall law may bee called also the Kings law for that he admitteth the Bible But of this wee shall haue occasioÌ„ to speake more often afterward For that M. Attorney doth often run to this refuge Now then to the Preface in his owne words The Attorney to the Reader It is truly saide good Reader that Error Ignorance being her inseparable twynne doth in her proceeding so infinitely multiplie herselfe produceth such monstrous and strange chimeraes floateth in such and so many incertainties and sucketh downe such poison from the contagious breath of Ignorance as all such into whom shee infuseth any of her poisoned breath shee dangerously infects or intoxicates and that which is wonderfull before shee can come to any end she bringeth all things if shee be not preuented by confusion to a miserable and vntimely end Naturalia veâ—é artificialia sunt finita Nulius terminus false Error immensus The Catholik Deuine 5. To this so vehement accusation of Error and Ignorance I could 10. Moreouer our Deuines doe handle this matter of Ignorance so exactly in al their writings as by treating of Ignorance they proue themselues not ignorant but most learned For first defininge IgnoraÌ„ce in generall to be want or lake of knowledge they distinguish the same into two sortes The one Negatiue the other Priuatiue And as for the Negatiue which importeth only a simple pure want of science it is not reprehensible of it self for that it might be in man euen before his fall in the state of innocency is now in
other especiallie in these points following which Catholike deuines and Canon-lawyers doe larglie handle But I shall breiflie touch the sunne onlie in this place so far is it may appertaine to better decision of this our controuersie Noting first by the way for the Reader his better aduertisement that these two Powers of Spirituall and Temporall Iurisdiction being different as hath been said and hauing so different ends and obiects and proceeding so differentlie from God by different means and manners and that they may be separated and remaine seuerally and alone in different subiects as they did for diuers ages togeather in the primitiue Church All this I saie being so it followeth that it is no good argument but rather a manifest fallacie to inferre the one of the other as to saie he hath spiritual Iurisdiction ouer me and therfore also temporall which followeth not and much lesse the contrarie he hath temporall Authoritie ouer any ergo spiritual also And least of all as M. Atorney argueth euery-where A Prince or Monarch hath supreame authoritie temporal ergo also spirituall for that the one may be without the other as comming downe from one origen by different means and to different ends as before hath been declared Now then let vs passe to the decisions aboue mencioned for due Subordination in these two Powers THE THIRD PART OF THIS CHAPTER Shewing how these two Povvers and Iurisdictions may stand well togeather in agreement peace and vnion 4. II. 33. The first affertion both of Deuines and Canonists is that notwithstanding the former Prerogatiues of Spirituall Power aboue Temporall yet when they are conioyned in one Common-wealth as they haue been in the Catholike Church for these thirteene hundred years at least since the Conuersion of Constantine the Emperour the Cleargie and Ecclesiasticall persons of euerie Realme as members of that Common-wealth are subiect vnto the Emperour King or other head of that Ciuill and politicke body or Common-wealth in al temporall laws and ordinances not contrary to Gods law nor the Cannons of holie Church and are punishable for the same though not in temporall courts but spirituall as after ward in the third assertion shall be declared As for example when the Ciuill magistrate appointeth things to be solde at such or such price that no man goe by night with armes or carry out cōmodities of the Realme without licence and the like cleargie men as Cittizens of the Common-wealth are subiect also vnto these laws which are made for direction of of the Common-wealth to peace aboundance and prosperitie and consequentlie are to be obserued also by Bishops Priests and Cleargie-men 34. And in this sense are to be vnderstood the words both of our Sauiour and his Apostles when they ordaine all obedience to be exhibited by all Christians to their temporall Princes without exception of anie yea though they were euill men or infidells AS namely where S. Paul saith Omnia anima potestatibus sublimioribus subdita sit Let euery soule be subiect to higher powers which S. Peter expoundeth siuè Regi siuè Ducibus c. Whether it be to Kings Dukes and the like Vpon which place to S. Paul the holie Doctor S. Chrysostome inferreth that politicall and temporall laws are not abrogated by the ghospell but that both Priests and monkes are bound to obey the same in temporall affairs And Valentinian the good Christian Emperour in a certaine Epistle of his to the Bishops of Asia aboue 12. hundred years gone said◠that good Bishops doe obey not only the laws of God but of Kings likewise Which Pope Nicolas the first writing to Michaell the Emperour doth proue when he saith that Christian Emperours doe need Bishops for the attaining of euerlasting life But that Bishops doe need Kings and Emperours onlie to vse their laws for their direction in temporall affaires And finally the matter is cleer not onlie by the testimonie and practise of the primitiue Church say our Deuines but also by reason it selfe For that if any sorte of people should liue in a Common-wealth and not obserue the laws therof it would be a perturbation to the whole And for that these Ciuill laws albeit their immediate end be temporall good yet may the obseruation therof be referred also to a higher spirituall end by good men and therfore are all good subiects bound to obey them And this for the first point 35. The second is that in causes meere Ecclesiasticall and Spirituall which appertaine to Religion Faith Sacraments holie Orders and the like and are to be determined out of the ghospell Councells Canons and Doctors of the Church In all these affaires Catholike deuines holde that Ecclesiasticall persons are no way subiect to temporall Princes for the reasons before alleadged of preheminēcy of Spiritual Power aboue Temporal in these affaires In respect wherof the holie auncient Bishops did stand with Christian Emperours and auerre their Authoritie to be aboue the others as before out of S. Gregorie Nazianzen S. Ambrose S. Chrisostome and others you haue heard declared So as heere you se a mutuall Subordination of Preists to Princes in Ciuill and temporall matters and of Princes to Preists and Bishops in spirituall affaires which according to S. Gregorie Nazianzen his comparison before mencioned may thus be expressed that the soule in matters of this life though with some griefe and regreate of spirit in good men is bound to follow the direction and law of the body for health strength and other such corporall commodities and the body in matters of life euerlasting must be content to follow the soule and direction of spirit and so is bound to doe though with repugnance oftentimes of the flesh as in fasting praying pennance other such like exercise And wheresoeuer these two mutuall subordinations be wel obserued there the Common wealth goeth forward wel and prosperouslie and contrarywise where the said subordination is neglected or perturbed there all goeth out of order and ioynt 36. But now there remaineth a third point of further moderation between these two Powers which is accordinge to our deuines and Canon-lawyers That albeit Ecclesiastical men be subiect to the obseruation of temporall laws as before is said yet are as well their persons as their goods free and exempted from the temporall magistrate and his tribunalls euen in those causes also in so much that if Cleargie men doe offend against the laws of the Common-wealth they are to be iudged and condemned by Ecclesiasticall iudges in the Courts and tribunals of their prelats and afterward to be deliuered to secular power to inflict the decreed punishmēt vpon them which they shall be found worthie of Their goods also both Ecclesiasticall and temporall are exempted from all secular power and their impositions or exactions by auncient Decrees and Constitutions as well of the Church as of old Christian Emperours in honorem Cleri in honour of the Cleargy to vse the auncient word
drawing vnto thee those things that appertayne vnto the Church thou doe inuolue thy selfe in a hainous synne Giue vnto Cesar those things which are of Cesar saith the Scripture and to God those things that are of God therfore as yt is not lawfull for vs to meddle with thy earthly Empire so hast not thou power ô Emperour ouer sacred things which I write vnto thee for the care I haue of thy saluation c. 8. And doe you see here this liberty of speech in Ecclesiasticall Prelates of the primitiue Church towards their Kings aud Emperours doe you see what difference and distinction they make betwene Ecclesiastical temporal power yet we read not that any Attorney or Aduocate of these Emperours did euer accuse these Bishops of treasoÌ„ for speaking as they did or once obiected that they meant hereby to take away any parte or parcell of their entire and absolute Monarchies No though S. Athanasius for his parte went yet further for when he saw that all these admonitions and reprehensions would not preuaile but that the said Constantius went forward to intermeddle more and more in Ecclesiasticall affayres he wrote thus in the same Epistle I am dâ—nuò in locum Ecclesiasticae cognitionis suum palatium Tribunal constituit c. Now againe hath the Emperour Constantius made his pallace a Tribunall of Ecclesiasticall causes in place of an Ecclesiasticall Courte and hath made himself the chiefe Prince and Author of spirituall pleas c. These things are grieuous and more then grieuous but yet are such as may well agree to him that hath taken vpon him the image of Anti-christ for who is there that seing him to beare himself as Prince in the determyning of Bishops causes and to sitt as Arbiter in Ecclesinsticall iudgemeÌ„t will not worthily say the AbhominatioÌ„ foretold by Daniel to be now come c. So he And there were no end if I would prosecute all that might be said out of the sense and iudgement of the ancient Fathers against this first argument of M. Attorney That teÌ„porall Princes are not absolute Monarches except you giue them spirituall iurisdiction also But we must be myndfull of breuity and so this for the first shall suffice remiâ—ting you to that which hath bin spoken more largly hereof in the second chapter before 9. An other Argument yt seemeth M. Attorney would insinuate for vrge it he doth not by the consideration of two Tribunalls or Courtes of the King of England the one Temporall the other Ecclesiasticall and seuerall causes belonging vnto them You shall heare it out of his owne speach and then iudge if it make for him or against him The kingly head sayth he of this politike bodie is instituted and surnished with plenary and entire power prerogative and Iurisdiction to render iustice and right to euery parte and member of this bodie both Clergie and Laytie of what state degree or calling soeuer in all causes c. and as in temporall causes the King by the mouth of the Iudges in his Courtes of Iustice doth iudge and determine the same by the temporall lawes of England so in causes Ecclesiasticall spirituall as namely blasphemy â—â—stâ—â—y from Christianity Heresies Schismes Ordering Admissions Institutions of Clerkes Rites of matrimony Diuorces otherlike the conusaunce wherof belong not to the Common-lawes of England the same are to be determined and decyded by Ecclesiasticall Iudges according to the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes of this Realme So M. Attorney making this note in the margent VVhat causes belonge to the Ecclesiasticall Courtes see Circumspecte agatis 13. yeare of Edward the first c. And VVest 2. and 13. Edward â— Cap. 5. art Cleri Edward 2. 9. Wherunto though I might oppose the Authority and speaches of all the auncient Fathers before mencioned that in this matter of diuinitie ought to weigh more with vs then any particular Ordination of secular lawes though they were against vs yet in this case I dare ioyne yssue with M. Attorney vpon this very Argument which he hath alleadge for that truly I doe not see what could be produced more effectually either against himself or for vs then here is sett downe For as we willingly graunt the former part of his speach to witt that the kingly head of the politicke body is instituted and furnished with plenarie power to render iustice and right in all causes that belong to his â—â—â—â—ticke and temporall gouernment endes and obiects therof â—o all persons of his Realme as before hath bene declared So heere the very naming of two generall partes of the kingdome which M. Attorney graunteh that the ancient law of England deuideth into Clergy and Laytie and the mencioning of two seuerall Courtes and distinct causes to be handled therin by distinct Iudges in such manner as the one cannot haue conusaunce of the other inferreth plainly two distinct powers desceÌ„ding from two distinct origens the one Temporali the other Ecclesiasticall and so doe the places quoted by him of Circumspectè agatis westm the second and Articul Cleri vnder K. Edward the first and second most euidently declare 10. And first I would aske M. Attorney what the distinction of Clergie and Laity doth meane not made or brought in first by our Common-lawes as he would insynuate when he saith that the lawe deuideth our Politicall body into two generall partes the Clergie the Laity but rather instituted by the Apostles themselues and admitted only by our CoÌ„mon-lawes and continued from that tyme to ours as before hath bene shewed This distinction I say of Clergie and Layty wherof the former signifyeth the portion of God that is to say those persons that be peculyarly appropriated to the seruice of Almighty-God the other of Laity taking their name of from the common people I would aske of M. Attorney what it importeth especially in this case of Queene Elizabethes supreme primacy doth it not argue a distinct order of men gouerned by distinct lawes distinct Iudges and distinct power Iurisdiction But you will say the Queene was head of them both and we grannt it as they are members of one Common-wealth but in their seuerall distinction and seperation as they are Clergie and lay people she could not be of both but of one only to witt of the Laity For that no man will say that she was also a Clerke or of the Clergie And yet in this partition no man will deny but that the Clergie is the worthier parte and member and so is placed first in all our lawes wherof is inferred that the said Clergie as Clergie is of a higher degree according to our Common-lawes then the temporall Prince which is of the laitie only and not Clerke as in Q. Elizabeth is confessed and consequently she could not be head of the Clergie as Clergie that is in Ecclesiasticall Clergie matters belonging to Religion Wherof we may take a notable example from the great Emperour
tyme of the Danes as before I noted King Canutus the Dane as Ingulphus testifyeth which liued presently after him was so carefull to haue this duly payed with other dutyes belonging to the Church as being in his iourney towardes Rome he wrote backe to his Bishops and other officers in these words Nunc igitur obtestor c. Now then I doe beseech all you my Bishops other officers and all gouernours of the Kingdome by the faith which you doe owe vnto God me that you will so prouide that before my arriuall at Rome all debts be payed which according to auncient lawes are due That is to say the accustomed almes for euery plough the tythes of beastes borne euery yeare the Pence which you owe to S. Peter at Rome whether they be due out of the cittyes or the Countrey that by the middest of August you pay the tythes of your corne that at the feast of S. Martine you pay the first frutes of your seed to the Church and parish in which euery man liueth which payment is called Kâ—ke-seet And if these things be not performed by you before I retourne assure your selues that my Kingly authority shall punish ech man according to the lawes most seuerely without pardoning any Fare you well Vpon the yere of Christ 1032. So he And marke good Reader that he saith he will punish according to the lawes yea and in his former words that there are auncient lawes for these Dutyes to Rome which M. Attorney cannot bring for his assertion against the Pope so as in auncient common lawes we are now before him But let vs goe forward end this Demonstration 73. About thirty yeres after this againe King Edward the Confessor wrote to Pope Nicolas the second in these wordes Ego quâ— que pro modulo meo augeo c confirmo c. I also for some small gifte of myne doe encrease and confirme the donations of paying such money as S. Peter hath in England and doe send vnto you at this time the said money collected togeather with some Princely gyfts of our owne to the end that you may pray for me and for the peace of my Kingdome and that you doe institute some continuall and solemne memory before the bodyes of the Blessed Apostles for all the English-nation c. So good S. Edward 74. And when not long after him King VVilliam of Normandy obteyned the crowne he forgott not this law among the rest as afterward when we come to talke of him and his raigne in particuler we shall more at large declare For his tenth law in order hath this title De denario Sancti Petri qui Anglicè dicitur Rome-scotâ— of the Penny of S. Peter called Rome-scot in the English tongue And then he beginneth his law thus Omnis qui habuerit triginta denaâ—â— vinae pecuniae in domo sua de proprio suo Anglorum lege dabit denarium Sancti Petri lege DanoruÌ„ dimidiam marcam c. Euery man that shal hâ—uâ— the worth of thirty-pence of liuely money of his owne in his house shall by the law of English-men pay the penny of S. 〈◊〉 and by the law of the Danes shall pay halfe a marke And this penny of S. Peter shall be summoned or called for vpon the solemnity and feast of S. Peter and Paul and gathered vpon the feast of the Chaines os S. Peter so as it shall not be deteyned beyond that day c. thus the Conquerour in confirmation of that which other English Kings had done before him appointing also in the same place that his Iustice should punish them that refused to pay the said money or paid it not at the due day appointed 75. And to conclude this matter this tribute was continually paid from the first institution therof not only before the Conquest as now you haue heard but afterwards also by all the Norman Kings their Successours vnto King Henry the 8. as out of Polidor we haue seene And the same King Henry himself duely paid the same in like manner for more then twenty yeres togeather vntill he brake from the Pope and Sea of Rome vpon the causes which all men know Wherevpon this our Demonstration inferreth that all this while it is not likely they paying so willingly and deuourly this temporall tribute vnto the Popes of Rome that they denyed his spirituall iurisdiction or held him in that iealosie of competency for vsurping therby vpon their Crownes as now we doe And lastly that the supreme spirituall authority of Queene Elizabeth without any Act of Parlament was warrantable by these Kings lawes which is the mayne paradoxicall conclusion of M. Attorneys whole discourse against which we haue yet a Demonstration or two more so an end The nynth Demonstration 76. The nynth Demonstration then about this matter shall be the consideration of our English Kings their singular and extraordinary deuotion before the Conquest to the Sea of Rome which was such as diuers of them left their Crownes and Kingdomes after many yeres that they had raigned and ruled most gloriously at home and went to liue and dye in that citty some in religions habit and profession of Monasticall life as Kenredus King of the Mercians and Offa King of the East angles some in secular weed but of most religious deuout and exemplar conuersation as Inas and Ceadwalla Kings of the VVest-saxons some others went thither of deuotion with intention to retourne againe as the other great Offa King of the Mercians Adelnulph alfred and Canutus Monarches of all England and lastly good King Edward the Confessor had determined vowed a iourney thither in pilgrimage but that his Kingdome greatly repyninge therat in respect of the daungerous tymes two Popes â—â— and Nicolas decreed that he should not come as before we haue touched but rather bestow the charges of that voyage vpon some other good worke namely the encrease of the Monastery of VVestminster 77. And here I might enlarge my self much in the declaration of these particulers which we haue named and of many others that we haue omitted in this kind I meane of English Kings that leauing their temporall Crownes haue submitted themselues to the sweet yoke of Christ in religious life Iohn Fox in his Actes and Monuments doth recount nyne crowned Kings that became Monkes within the first two hundred yeres after Englands conuersion to Christian faith though all of them went not to Rome and some eighteene or twenty Queenes or daughters to Kings or Queenes that tooke the same course contemning whatsoeuer pleasures or preferments the world could giue them But of such Kings as went to Rome and made themselues religious there the foresaid Kenredus of the Mercians and Offa of the Eastangles were the most famous who agreeing togeather vpon the yere 708. as Florentins after S. Bede doth recount the history lest both their Kingdomes wiues children honours goods and the
the same Archbishops returning the yeare following to England againe the said Pope Alexander wrote to K. VVilliam by them Alexander Episcopus Seruus Seruorum Dei Charissimo filio Gulielnio glorioso Regi Anglorum c. Wherein after he had tolde him Inter mundi Principes Rectores egregiam vestrae religionis fanâ—am intelligimus that among all the Princes gouernours of the world wee haue heard the singular fame of your religion exhorting him to goe forward in the same for that perseuerance only to the end is the thing which bringeth the Crowne of euerlasting reward he toucheth also diuers points of defending Ecclesiasticall persons and libertyes of the Church of releeuing oppressed people vnder his dominion telling him that God will exact a seuere accoÌ„pt therof at his hands which no doubt was meant principally of the oppressed English nation by him wherof Lanfranke secretly had informed the said Pope After all this I say he telleth him of certaine busines that he had committed to Lanfranke to be handled in England in a Synod to be gathered there as namely about the preheminence of the two Archbishopricks Canterbury and Yorke And also to heare againe and define the cause of the Bishop of Chichester deposed before by his legats And finally he concludeth that he should beleiue Lanfranke Vt nostrae dilectionis affectum plenius cognoscatis reliqua nostrae legationis verba attentius audiatis that by him you may more fully vnderstand the affection of our loue towards you as also heare more attentiuely the rest of our legation committed vnto him c. Where he speaketh to the King as you see like a Superiour And Iohn Stow reciting the history of the said Synod gathered about these matters in England the yeare following at VVindesor hath these words taken out of auncient historiographers This yeare by the commaundement of Pope Alexander and consent of King VVilliam the Conquerour in the presence of the said King his Bishops Prelates and Nobility the primacy which Lanfranke Archbishop of Canterbury claymed ouer the Church and Archbishop of Yorke was examined and tryâ—d out c. Heere then was no repining of King VVilliam at the Popes authority in those dayes but all conformity rather with the same 13. I might alleadge many other examples to this effect as that which Stow writeth in the 17. yeare of the raigne of K. VVilliam and yeare of Christ 1083. that VVilliam Bishop of Durham by leaue of the King and nobles of the Realme went to Rome and obtained of Pope Gregory the 7. to bring the Monks from Tarrow and Yarmouth into the Cathedrall Church of Durham where he gaue to them lands Churches ornaments c. all which saith he K. VVilliam the Conqueror confirmed by his charter in confirmation no doubt of the Popes Charter which to procure he went to Rome and he had licence thervnto from the King and nobles that were sounders of that Church which licence they would neuer haue graunted if they had thought that the matter had appertained only to the King at home in his owne countrey and not to the Pope 14. And in the very same yeare K. VVilliam as before we haue touched being entred into great iealosie of the ambition and aspiring mynd of his halfe-brother Otho Bishop of Baion Earle of Kent least with his Councell and riches he might assist his sonne Roâ—â—rt and others that did rise in Normandy against him or as some thinke desirous to sease vpon his great riches and wealth which he gathered togeather he suddenlie returned from Normandy to the I le of VVight where he vnderstood the said Otho to be in great pompe pretending to goe to Rome and at vnawares apprehended him but yet for excuse of that violent fact upon a Bishop he made first a long speach vnto his nobles there present shewing that he did it not so much in respect of his owne temporall security as in defence of the Church which this man oppressed My brother saith he hath greatly oppressed England in my absence spoyled the Churches of their lands and rents made them naked of the ornaments giuen by our predecessours the Christian Kings that haue raigned before me in England and loued the Church of God endowing it with honours and gifts of many kindes VVherefore now as we beleeue they rest reioycing with a happy retribution Ethelbert and Edward S. Oswald Athulse Alfred Edward the elder Edgar and my cosen and most deare lord Edward the Confessor haue giuen riches vnto the holy Church the spouse of God my brother to whom I committed the gouernment of the whole Kingdome violently plucketh away their goods c. 15. This was one excuse vsed by the Conqueror Another was as Stow recordeth that he said that wheras his brother was both Bishops of Baion and Earle of Kent he apprehended him as Earle of Kent and not as Bishop of Baion that is to say as a lay-person and not as an Ecclesiasticall And yet further when he was vrged about that matter by his owne Prelates he was wont to say as Stow and others doe also note that he did it by particular licence of the Pope and not only by licence but also by his decree and commaundement and so he protested at his death Wherby we see how little opinioÌ„ he had of his owne spirituall iurisdiction in this behalfe Of King VVilliam the Conquerour his lawes in fauour of the Church and Church-men §. II. 16. But no one thing doth more exactly declare the sense and iudgement of King VVilliam in these things then his particular lawes which are recorded by Roger Houeden an author of good antiquity who shewing that King VVilliam in the 4. yeare of his raigne calling togeather all his Barons Gouernours of Prouinces twelue expert men out of euery shyre did reveiw the auncient lawes both of the English and Danes approuing those that were thought expedient and adding others of his owne beginning with those that appertained to the libertyes exaltation of the Church Taking our beginning saith he from the lawes of our holy mother the Church by which both King and Kingdome haue their sound fundament of subsisting c. And then followeth the first law with this title De clericis possessionibus corum Of Clergie-men their possessions the law it self is writen in these few words but containing much substance Omnis Clericus etiam omnes Scholares omnes res possessiones corum vbicunque fuerint pacem Dei Sanctae Ecclesiae habeant Let euery Clergie-man and all schollers and all their goods and possessions whersoeuer they be haue the peace of God and of holy Church And afterwards he declareth what this peace of the Church is to wit that neither their persons nor their goods can be arested molested or made to pay tribute or otherwise troubled by any secular iudge whatsoeuer 17. And in the second law
which is intituled De temporibus diabus pacis Domini Regis Of the times and daies of peace and freedome of our Lord the King he doth explicate that it belongeth to the King and his officers to see these liberties of Ecclesiasticall peace franquises and freedome be exactlie obserued to Ecclesiasticall persons especiallie to punish them double which refuse to put in execution the Bishops sentence of iustice Quod si aliquis â—i foris fecerit saith he Episcopus inde iustitiam faciat veruâ—tamen si quis arrogans pro Episcopali iustitia emendare noluerit Episcopâ—â— Regi notum faciat Rex autem constringet malefactorem vt emendet cui foris facturum fecit scilicet primum Episcopo deinde Regi sic erunt ibi due gladij gladius iuuabit If anie man shall doe anie hurt to him that hath the peace of the Church let the Bishop doe him Iustice but if anie man will bee arrogant not make amends according to the sentence of iustice giuen by the Bishop let the Bishop make it knowne to the King or his Courts and the King shall constraine the malefactor to make amends to him vnto whom hee did the hurte to wit first vnto the Bishop and then to the King and so there shall bee two swords against malefactors and the one sword shall help the other And heere let be considered what he saith of two swords one in the Bishops hand and the other in the Kings and that this must assist that of the Bishops as the principall superiour which is conforme to the speach of K. Edgar if you remember whereof we made mention in the former Chapter and last demonstration therof Wherby is made euident that these auncient Kings beleeued not to any haue spirituall sword or authoritie by right of their Crowns but onlie the temporall to command punish in temporall affaires and to help and assist the others in causes belonging vnto them 18. The third law hath this Title De Iustitia Sanctae Ecclesiae Of the iustice of the holy Church and prerogatiue therof which she is to receiue in temporall tribunals In which law is determined in these words Vbicunque Regis iustitia vel cuiuscunque sit placita tenuerit si vllus Episcopus venerit illuc aperuerit causam Sanctae Ecclesiae ipsa prius terminetur Iustitia enim est vt Deus vbique prae caeteris honoretur Whâ—rsoeuer the Kings Iustice or the Iustice of what other Lord soeuer shall hold pleas or keep courts if any Bishop come thither and open a cause of the holy Church let that cause of all other be first determined for it is iust that God be honoured euery where before all other Marke his reason why the expedition of the Bishops cause is to be preferred before that of the King for that he holdeth the place of God and thereafter must be respected 19. The fourth law hath this Title De vniuersis tenentibus de Ecclesia Of the priuiledges of all those that are any way tenants of the Church And then it followeth in the law Quicunque de Ecclesia aliquid tenuerit vel in fundo Ecclesiae mansionem habuerit extra curiam Ecclesiasticam coactus non placitabit quamuis foris fecerit nisi quod absit in Curia Ecclesiastica rectum defecerit Whosoeuer doth hold any thing of the Church or hath his mansion-house within the land of the Church shall not be constrained to plead any matter of his though he bee a malefactor out of the spirituall courte except which God forbid iustice could not be had in the said Ecclesiasticall court 20. These are the first lawes of all that were made by King VVilliam and after these doe ensue fiue more to the same effect of Churches priuiledges wherof the first hath this Title De reis ad Ecclesiam fugientibus Of malefactors that fly to the Church how they are to haue Sanctuary and protection The second De fractione pacis Ecclesiae Of breaking the peace of the Church that is to say of her priuiledges the breakers wherof are appointed to be sharply punished first by the Bishop then by the King if he be arrogant The third De decimis Ecclesiae maioribus Of the greater tythes belonging to the Church The fourth De minut is decimis Of lesser tythes all which are commaunded to be payed exactly And finally the fifth law which is the tenth in order hath this Title De denario S. Petri qui Anglicè dicitur Rome-scot Of Peter-pence called in old English Rome-scot wherin is appointed the order how the said Peter-pence shall be gathered and made ready against the feast of S. Peter and S. Paul or at the furthest against the feast of S. Peters Chaines as we haue seen also before ordeined by the law of K. Kanutus By all which is vnderstood and much to be considered that neither K. VVilliam nor any of his auncestors tooke vpon them to make any Ecclesiasticall law at all of spirituall matters as of their owne but only did second and strenthen and confirme the lawes of the Church by their temporall lawes by defending the same and punishing the breakers therof Which is a far different thing from the Ecclesiasticall power which M. Attorney will needs haue vs beleeue to haue byn in the auncient Kings of England according to the meaning of the auncient Common-lawes therof but produceth none And I persuade my self he will hardly alleadge me any so auncient as these though he haue studied them as he saith 35. years but fiue hundred more were necessary to find out that which he affirmeth And thus much of lawes for the present 21. There remaineth only one argument more concerning K. VVilliam which is the time of his death and of what sense and iudgment he was in this point at that time when commonly men doe se more cleerly the truth of matters especially Princes then before in their life health and prosperity when passion honour or interest may oftentimes either blind or byasse them And albeit of K. VVilliam diuers ancient writers doe recorde that notwithstanding in his anger vnto secular men he was fierce terrible yet vnto Ecclesiasticall persons he bare still great respect wherof among others this example is recorded by Nubergensis that when at a certaine time Archbishop Aldred of Yorke that had crowned him and was much reuerenced by him while he liued intreating him for a certaine pious worke and not preuailing turned his back and went away with shew of displeasure the Conquerour tooke hold of him and fell downe at his feet promising to doe what he would haue him and when the Nobles that stood round about began to cry to the Arch-bishop that he should take vp the King quickly from his knees he answered let him alone he doth but honour the feet of S. Peter in kneeling at myne Which well declareth saith Nubergensis both what great reuerence
daies they can in Catholike countries vpoÌ„ this pretence of a greater good to ensue therby vnto the Church and Countrey where they are graunted and consequently if K. VVilliam in his dayes did make any such appropriatioÌ„s in this sense it is to be vnderstood that the same was first allowed by the Sea Apostolicke as before we haue shewed in the examples of Charters for buylding establishing of Churches monasteryes and other pious workes And the same may be gathered also out of the Ordinances made about the said appropriations afterward in the 15. yeare of K. Richard the second and 4. of K. Henry the fourth by Parlament wherin the Bishops did fit as cheife in these affaires 29. Collations also of benefices require spirituall power and iurisdiction in him that doth giue or confer the same though in this there may be diuers degrees which are declared 〈…〉 canon-Canon-law And M. Attorney being so eminent in the common-law ought not alltogeather to haue omitted them For first wheras the word Benefice or Church with Cure or Parish for all these are vsed oftentimes for the same doth comprehend as well a Bishopricke as a lower benefice if M. Attorney will vnderstand it heere of the former that is to say that no man can appropriate or bestow a Bishoprick vpon any person but he that hath Ecclesiastical iurisdiction he must remember if before he knew it that three things doe concurre in making of a Bishop by diuine and Canon-law to wit Election Confirmation and Consecration as may be seen by the places therof heere quoted in the margent not to trouble the text therewith to vnskillfull Readers 30. And albeit the first to wit Election when it is iustly made doe giue right to the elected to pretend the second and third that is confirmation and consecration nor can they be denyed vnto him without iniury except vpon iust cause as the same law saith yet can he not vpon his only Election exercise any part of his office of a Bishop either in iurisdiction or order But when he hath the second parte which is confirmation and induction to the benefice which is properly called inuestiture then hath he iurisdiction vpon those people and may exercise the Acts therof by visiting punishing or the like but not the Acts of Order vntill he haue consecration also that is to say he cannot make Priests nor administer the sacrament of confirmation nor doe other such actions as are peculiar to Episcopall Order 31. Now for these three things the first which is election or nomination may be perfourmed by any Prince or lay-man that hath lawfull authority therevnto which diuers wayes he may haue as after shall be shewed either by Ius patronatus of the benefice or prerogatiue graunted him by the Church The second which is confirmation and giuing of iurisdiction must only proceed from him that is the fountaine of all spirituall iurisdiction vnder Christ which is the Bishop of Rome or some Metropolitan or Bishop vnder him that hath authority and commission from him The third which is consecration must be done according to the Canon-law by three Bishops at the least And by this also may wee vnderstand what is necessary for the appropriating or conferring of any lower Benefice with Cure to an ordinary Priest to wit the two first election or presentation which may be done by a secular man and confirmation or inuestiture which allwayes must come as hath byn said either from the Sea Apostolicke or some Bishop authorized vnder him for that it giueth spirituall power and iurisdiction ouer soules which no man can doe but he that hath it in himself no man can haue it but he that receaued it from those that had it immediatly from Christ to wit S. Peter the rest of the Apostles and their Successors Gouernours of the Church as before in the second Chapter of this Answere we haue declared 32. And yet further it is to be noted for more cleernes and distinction that the first of these three to wit Election is of foure distinct sortes in the canon-Canon-law The one called election properly or choise by suffrages and voyces of such as haue to choose The second is termed Postulation when one is offred that is not altogeather capable of the benefice but hath need of dispensation The third is called presentation when he that is patron or hath the aduouson of any benefice presenteth one by right of that Ius patronatus the right of patronage The fourth is called nomination which hath diuers curious differences noted in the law ouer long heer to be discussed But this is sufficient for our purpose that all these foure wayes doe comprehend but only the first degree of appropriating a benefice to any incumbent And albeit originally they doe all foure appertaine to Ecclesiasticall power for that they concerne an Ecclesiasticall thinge yet for many ages haue they byn imparted also by authority and commissioÌ„ of the Sea Apostolicke or by right of patronage to secular lay-men both Princes and others I meane to choose postulate present and nominate fit persons both for Bishops and Pastors And this we see in vse now for many ages in all Catholike Countreys throughout Christendome especially concerning Bishopricks and greatest dignityes Ecclesiasticall But yet no Prince taketh that authority as descending from his Crowne but as by commission graunt or indult of the Sea Apostolicke which they hold to be the fountaine of all spirituall authority and iurisdiction 33. All which being well vnderstood it is easy to distinguish and therby euacuate the argument of M. Attorney in this place which is a plaine Sophisme and deceitfull Syllogisme hauing one sense in the Maior another in the minor For if in the maior proposition wherin he saith out of the Reporte of his law that no man can appropriate an ecclesiasticall benefice with Cure but he that hath spâ—rituall iurisdiction If he vnderstand I say the first degree only which is to choose postulate present or nominate then the said maior is false for that lay-men may doe it also by commission as before we haue said and then doe we graunt his minor proposition that K. VVilliam did or might so appropriate But if he vnderstand in the second or third degree of confirmation and consecration of Bishops then is the maior true the minor false And so M. Attorneys syllogisme euery way is found faulty and guylfull nor worthy of his place and credit 34. And yet will I add one thing more for conclusion of this matter which is that as diuers secular Princes in former ages and in ours also haue had the first degree of approprition as hath been declared to wit to nominate fit persons so haue diuerse pretended as well in our Countries as elswhere to haue in a certaine manner the second from the Sea Apostolicke that is to say to giue the inuestitures in Bishopricks Abbyes and other chiefe
lost during his life which iudgement was before any Statute or Act of Parlament was made in that case And there it is said that for the like offence the Archbishop of Canterbury had byn in worse case by the iudgement of the Sages of the law then to be punished for a contempt if the King had not extended grace and fauour to him The Catholicke Deuine 26. Here againe is another case or two de facto wherof M. Attorney wil needs inferre de iure The Archbishop of Yorke his lands saith he were seased by the King and lost during his life for that he admitted not to a benefice within his Diocesse a Clerke presented by the King whereas the same benefice had an incumbent before put in by the Popes prouision according to the custome of those dayes which incumbent the said Archbishop pleaded that he could not put out and for this high contempt against the King his crowne and dignity in refusing to execute his soueraignes commaundement saith M. Attorney by iudgement of the common-Common-law he lost the landes of his whole Bishopricke But here I would aske M. Attorney what high contempt could this be against the King his crowne and dignity if the Archbishop pleaded that he could not doe it eyther in right or in power Not in right for that nothing was more receaued at that tyme in England then for the Bishop of Rome to prouide certayne benefices in England and not only benefices but also Bishopricks and Archbishopricks as before in the life of this King and his ancestours hath byn declared And as for power no maruaile if the Archbishop durst not vse violence in those dayes against the Popes prouisions wherby he might incurre excommunication for so much as the King himself so greatly respected the same and made such diligent premunition least my such excommunication should come against him as in the answere to the former instance hath byn declared 17. And besides this if the Archbishop did put the matter in plea to be trayed and to the Kings writt of Quare non admisit did yeelde so reasonable a cause as is here touched that the King himself had admitted diuers Bishops and Archbishops by like prouision of Popes how and with what reason can M. Attorney call this answere of the Archbishop so high a contempt against the King his crowne and dignitie Or how could the Common-law condemne the same with so great a punishment And still I must demaund what is this Common-law by whome was it made how came it in where is it founded either in reason vse consent of the people or authority of law-giuers For if it consist in none of these but only in the particular will and iudgement of the Prince himself neuer so passionate and in the approbation execution of these Sages which here M. Attorney mentioneth then any thing that displeased the said Prince may be called high contempt against his person crowne and dignity And so may be iustified all the most passionate actions not only of this King Edward before recited but of all other Kings whosoeuer And by the same meanes M. Attorney maketh his auncient Cōmon-law which often he calleth our birth-right and best birth-right to be nothing else in effect but the Princes pleasure frō time to time and the execution of his Sages which commonly in those auncient times for I will speake nothing of our dayes were to wise and Sage to withstand the Princes will in any thing 28. Sure I am that in this particular fact of seasing Bishops lands and temporalityes vpon any offence or displeasure taken by the King as it hath byn vsed by some English Princes in their anger so hath it bin condemned also in diuers Parlaments lawes and Statutes as in the first yeare of King Edward the third where it is thus expressed Because before this time in the time of King Edward Father to the King that now is he by euill Counsellours caused to be seased into his handes the temporalty of diuers Bishoppes with their goods and cattell c. The King willeth and graunteth that from hence forth it be not done c. And againe in the 14. yeare of the same raigne VVe will and graunt for vs and for our heires that from henceforth we shall not take nor doe to be taken into our handes the temporalities of Archbishops Bishops Abbot c. without a true and iust cause according to the law of the land c. 29. And to the end that M. Attorney may not say that this case of his is excepted it followeth in an other Statute in the 25. yeare of the same King saying VVhereas the temporalities of Archbishops and Bishops haue beene oftentimes taken into the Kings hand for contempt done to him vpon writts of Quare non admisit and for diuers other causes c. The King willeth and graunteth in the said Parlament that all Iustices shall from henceforth receaue for the contempt so iudged reasonable fyne of the party so condemned according to the quantity of the trespasse and after the quality of the contempt c. Which last words may be thought to be added for that the King had right to present to diuers benefices at that tyme as particular patrone therof ex iure patronatus for that the said benefices were fouuded or erected by himself or his auncestors and in those cases the Bishops not admitting such Clerkes as he presented might doe some iniury or trespasse against him and therin shew contempt worthy some fyne or for-faite which the law doth here appoint especially for so much as it is be ore recorded that Pope Innocentius the 4. presently vpon the first Councell of Lyons wrote as you haue heard in the life of K. Henry the third that he would not let by his prouision the right of any patrone in presenting to any benefice wherof he had the aduowson or Ius patronatus 30. And as for the other example alleadged heere by M. Attorney for strengthning his instance of the Archbishop of Canterbury saying that for the like offence the Archbishop of Canterbury had byn in worse case by the iudgement of the Sages of the law then to be punished for a contempte if the King had not extended grace and fauour to him If he vnderstand the displeasure taken against Archbishop VVinchelsey before mentioned by K. Edward for resisting his demaund of the one halfe of all Ecclesiasticall rents for which before we haue heard out of Mathew of VVestminster that all his lands and goods were seased into the Kings hands you haue heard also how the same King afterward repented both that and other like facts of his and asked pardon publikly with teares But if he meane the other offence againe after this when he accused the said Archbishop VVinchelsey to the Pope and caused him to be called to Rome and to be suspended from his office as before we haue declared then doth this
ijs iustitia sicut de Laicis M. Attorney to aggrauate the Kings accorde and declaration ouer that of the generall Councell putterh it downe thus It is agreed and declared before the King and his Counsell that the same constitution shal be vnderstood in this wise Whereas the Latin speaketh in the present tense It is to be vnderstood nor hath it the words in this wise And where M. Attorney saith They shall not from hence forth be deliuered but iustice shall be executed vpon them as vpon other lay men those shalls b◠not in the Latin but rather that they may or must not be deliuered vnto Prelates but that iustice be done vpon them as vpon lay men So that herby you see the labour that M. Attorney taketh to draw a little water to his mill and yet that nothing commeth but puddle that driueth not but choaketh the same Let vs see his fourth instance whether it be of any more weight or moment than the rest The Attorney In an acte made at the Parlament holden at Carleile in the 25. yeare of the said King Edward the first It is declared that the holy Church of England was founded in the state of Prelacy within the Realme of England by the King and his progenitors c. For them to informe the people in the law of God and to keepe hospitality giue almes and doe other workes of charity c. And the said Kings in tymes past were wont to haue their aduise counsaile for the safe-guarde of the Realme when they had need of such Prelates and Clerkes so aduaunced The Bishop of Rome vsurping the signories of such benefices did giue graunt the same benefices to Aliens which did neuer dwell in England and to Cardinalls which might not dwell here c. in adnullation of the state of the holy Church of England desherison of the King Earles Barons and other nobles of the Realme and in offence and destruction of the lawes rights of this Realme and against the good disposition and will of the first founders It was enacted by the King by assent of all the Lords Communalty in full Parlament that the said oppressions grieuances and dammage in this Realme from thence forth should not be suffered as more at large appeareth by this Act. The Catholike Deuine 36. This Parlament of Carliele which M. Attorney ascribeth to the 25. yeare of King Edwardes raigne both in his latin and English columns I doe imagine to be an error in place of the 35. for that I fynde no Parlament held vpon the fiue and twentith in which yeare King Edward was partely in Scotland and partely in Flanders and there kept his Christmasse in the City of Gaunt But vpon the 35. yeare which was the last of King Edwardes raigne there was a Parlament helde at Carliel vpon the Octaues of S. Hilary In which Parlament there was such a declaration and complaint made as here it set downe that the Bishopricks and benefices being often giuen to strangers by the Popes prouisions who residing not in England nor keeping hospitality nor being able to preach or teach for that they wanted the English language the Church of England and poore people therof did suffer much inconuenience therby and for that the Bishopricks and Prelacyes of the said Church were founded ordinarily by Kings and Princes of the said land they said it was reason that they as Patrones should present English men to the same 37. And these complaints which now we haue heard began in diuerse former Kings dayes especially vnder King Henry the third and were continued vnder this man and his Successours but most of all vrged vnder King Edward the third and King Richard the second by whome greater restraints were made vntill the Sea Apostolicke and our Kings came to a certaine forme of agreement as in other countreys and Kingdomes also they did though in different sortes how benefices should be prouided to wit by election of the Deane Chapter in some and by Kings and Princes nominations in others as also by prouisions of Bishops in lesser preferments Wherein notwithstanding the said Sea Apostolicke retained diuers gifts to it self as in sundry countryes is seene at this day by vse and practice 38. Well then the States of England at this time said decreed that the abuses of bestowing English benefices vpon strangers were not to be suffered especially such as had byn newly brought in by one VVilliam Testaw sent thither out of France by Pope Clement the fifth for so testifyeth Mathew VVestminster that was then liuing whose words are these The King held a Parlament at Carliele wherein greater complains then euer before were made of the oppression of Churches and Monasteries and many extorsions vsed by one Maister VVilliam Testaw the Popes Clerke to whome commaundement was giuen by the assent of the Earles and Barons that he should not vse like extorsion for the tyme to come And moreouer it was ordeyned that for obteyning remedy certaine messengers there assigned should be sent to the Pope And the very self-same thing writeth Thomas VValsingam And this is all the remedy mentioned by these men to haue byn taken at that tyme to wit supplication to the Pope himself that he would put thervnto conuenient redresse which well declareth the respect borne to that Sea 39. And albeit this Statute here mentioned by M. Attorney may be supposed also to haue passed at that tyme yet may it appeare by the words of other Statutes after in the tyme of King Edward the third that the same was not put in vre vntill his dayes as in his life we shall shew more particularly And what maketh all this now for M. Attorney or what rather doth it not make against him For here the whole Parlament of Carliele acknowledginge the Popes spirituall authority as appeareth by their manner of writing vnto him complained of certaine abuses or excesses streching themselues in a certaine sorte as they pretended to temporall commodityes and sought remedy therof from himself And can any thing be more cleere against M. Attorney then this Surely at the barre he durst not for his credits sake pleade in this manner much lesse should he doe it in a booke wherin the speaches remaine longer to the view of the reader then doe fleeting words to the hearer at the barre But inough of this M. Attorney pleadeth well where he hath truth and substance for him in this cause both doe faile him and what then can he doe but cast shaddowes as here you see that he doth OF KING EDVVARD THE SECOND VVhich vvas the tenth King after the Conquest §. 11. 40. Much lesse is needfull to be said of this King then of the former both for that his raigne was shorter and much more troublesome in temporall affaires which gaue lesse place to spirituall and now also our Authors that were wonte to
made vnder all three Edwards for remedying of this abuse as for example vnder Edward the first the foresaid Statute hath this determination That the 〈◊〉 or chief Iustice of the King for the tyme being if they see that the case 〈◊〉 be redressed by any writ out of the Chauncery but that the spirituall 〈◊〉 ought to determine the matters that then they shall write to the Ecclesiasticall Iudges before whome the case was first moued to proceed therin notwithstanding the Kings prohibition vnto them before 49. And to like effect is this other ordination here mentioned by M. Attorney of Circumspectè agatis wherby is ordeyned that temporall Iudges shall vse themselues circumspectly in medling with causes that belong to spirituall courtes And to the same effect is this Statute here alleadged vnder King Edward the second as also this other set downe in these words They that purchase prohibition and attachement against the Ordinaryes of a thing that belongeth not to the lay Court shall yeeld damages to the Ordinaryes by the award of the Iustices And yet further to the same effect it was decreed by King Edward the third after this manner That no prohibition goe out of the Chauncery but in case where we haue the conusaunce and of right ought to haue 50. And finally to passe no further in this the Statute made in the 9. yeare of this King intituled Articuli Cleri Articles of the Clergy conteyning sixteene braunches doe apperteyne to this affaire to shew and declare what causes doe belong to the spirituall courte and what to the temporall and wherof both the one and the other may take conusaunce and consequently in what matters the Kings prohibition may goe forth or not all which is cleerly against M. Attorney his purpose For if the temporall Prince were properly head of the one and the other courte and fountaine both of the one and other lawe and iurisdiction this adoe needed not but that the King might indifferently dispose of all 51. But consider I pray you M. Attorneys note or commentary in the margent wherby he would seeme to answere our former demaund why he bringeth in this instance By these statutes saith he the iurisdiction of the Ecclesiasticall Courtes is allowed and warranted by consent of Parlament in all cases wherein they haue iurisdiction so as these lawes may be iustly called the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes or the Ecclesiastical lawes of England So he And you will easily see herby how much he delighteth himself in this new witty inuention of his owne so often repeated by him wherby he would make the Popes Canon-lawes to be the King of Englands lawes for that they are admitted and obeyed in England â— of which sylly consequence I haue oftentymes made mention before shewing the weakenes and incongruity therof For that by this reason the self same Canon-lawes receaued admitted by all particular states of Christendome may be said to be the peculiar lawes of euery particular state And if this be a superiority as M. Attorney would inferre to admit and allow another Princes lawes then is euery particular state of Christendome aboue the Pope Generall Councells which made these lawes Wherfore as well in this as in all the rest we see the weakenes of M. Attorneys cause and so we shall passe to other Princes that doe follow leauing this disasterous K. Edward the second who soone after fell into a pitifull plight of calamity being depriued both of his Crowne and life for his ill gouernment and his young sonne placed in his roome as our historyes at large doe declare OF K. EDWARD THE THIRD And K. Richard the second his Nephevv and Successour And vvhat instances or arguments M. Attorney draweth from their two raignes which continued betweene them for seauenty yeares CHAP. XII THESE two are the Kings aboue all the rest from the beginning vnto K. Henry the 8. vnder whose gouernment M. Attorney gathereth and layeth togeather most obiections to proue the small respect they had or vsed in certaine cases and occasions and at some times towards the Sea Apostolicke and Ecclesiasticall power therof for that they made most restrictions by penall lawes and punishments against the practice and vse therof in certaine cases mixt as they presumed and conioyned with temporalityes or affaires of the State and so not meerly Ecclesiasticall 2. For albeit before this there had byn great murmurings and complaints as you haue seen from the tyme of K. Henry the 3. and his father King Iohn against some parte of the exercise of the Popes authority in bestowing benefices and Bishopricks vpon straÌ„gers as also of the often reseruing the collations of the cheife to himself and his Court of demaunding and graunting tithes contributions vpon the English Clergy as well for his owne as other publike necessityes yet find we not hitherto any expresse penall law put in vre and practice though mention be found of one made at Carleile vnder K. Edward the first the 2. yeare of his raigne to this effect for restrayning prouisions and other ordinances from the Court of Rome and the execution thereof by English subiects vntill vnder these two Kings Edward the 3. and Richard the 2. and not by the former vntill after many yeares of his raigne when by his continuall warrs with France and Scotland his temporall necessityes and other respects drew him therevnto And some men doe note that the lamentable ends of both these Kings wherof the worst seemed to some to be that of King Edward though he died in his bed togeather with infinite bloudshed afterward by their successours deuided in their owne bowells vpon the controuersie of Lancaster and Yorke did easily shew how vngratefull to all mighty God this breach of theirs and violence vsed with their Mother the holy Church was though it might seeme to them and some others also that it was either in temporall matters or in Ecclesiasticall conioyned as hath byn said with temporalities and that besides they were vrged therevnto by important clamours of their people partly vpon emulation against the Clergy and partly vpon some abuses and aggreiuances as they pretended in their supplications and declarations to the Popes themselues about these affaires pretending to hold still as no doubt they did their inward faith beliefe deuotion and obedience to the Sea Apostolicke though outwardly they were forced to take the way of redresse against some excesses which they did 3. And now wee haue already heard the foresaid complaints oftentymes iterated in the liues of the former Kings but especially vnder Henry the third and the two precedent Edwards that â—â—sued him which being continued vnder this third of the same name he being a warriour hauing therby all wayes commonly great need of money was induced at length for increasing his owne temporall wealth to lay hands vpon the spiritual especially such as was wont to goe out of the Realme to the Court of Rome or accrew to
and little pertinent as you will see to the manie conclusion which he should proue that this King did take supreme spirituall authority and iurisdiction vpon him And for that the grounds of all that is heer obiected haue byn discussed and answered in that wee haue set downe before and this booke groweth to more length then was purposed at the beginning and finally for that the law-bookâ—◠〈◊〉 cited of collections and obseruations by later authors which bookes I haue not by mee are of small authority to our purpose I shall passe ouer the said obiections with the greatest breuity that I can remitting mee for the most part to that which before hath byn said and answered The Attorney An excommunication by the Archbishop albeit it be disanulled by the Pope or his Legats is to be allowed neither ought the Iudges giue any allowance of any such sentence of the Pope or his Legate The Catholicke Deuine 15. This assertion I doe not see how it can be admitted for true as it lieth for so much as no author maketh mention that K. Edward did euer deny absolutely the Popes authority to excommunicate by himself or by his Legats in England especially vpon the 16. yeare of his raigne as heere it is noted in the margent when he was most deuout to the Sea Apostolicke wrote the humble letter before mentioned the next yeare after according to the date of the said letter as you haue heard only there might be this accorde between them for more authority of the said Archbishop and peace of the Realme that when he had giuen forth any excommunication no annullation therof from the Pope which might perhaps be procured by false suggestion should be admitted or executed vntill the Pope were informed of the truth this is vsed also in other Catholicke Kingdomes at this day 16. And it were to much simplicity to imagine that English men in those dayes admitting the Archbishops excommunication as heer they doe and for confirmation therof we doe read in VValsingham that vpon the yeare 1340. and 14. of King Edwards raigne Iohn Stratford Archbishop of Canterbury threatned the said King to excommunicate all his counsell if he amended not certaine points wherin they offered iniury to Clergy men it were simplicity I say to thinke that the said Archbishops excommunication could not be controlled by that of the Pope from whom they acknowledged the said Archbishop at that time to haue his spirituall authority if he had any at all For froÌ„ whence should they imagine him to haue it for that the Kings as we haue seen had not so much as the nomination or presentation of Archbishops in that season but only the Popes much lesse their induction confirmation or inuestiture Whervpon it must needs follow that he which gaue them spirituall iurisdiction had greater higher iurisdiction himself though in some cases by agreement not to be vsed as before hath byn said The Attorney It is often resolued that all the Bishopricks within England were founded by the Kings progenitours and therfore the aduowsons of them all belong to the King and at the first they were donatiue and that if an incumbent of any Church with Cure dy if the Patron present not within six moneths the Bishop of that Diocesse ought to collate to the end the Cure may not be destitute of a Pastor If he be negligent by the space of six moneths the Metropolitan of that Diocesse shall confer one to that Church and if he also leaue the Church destitute by the space of six moneths then the common-Common-law giueth to the King as to the supreme within his owne Kingdome and not to the Bishop of Rome power to prouide a competent pastor for that Church The Catholicke Deuine 17. Is it be true which M. Attorney hath so often repeated before that the Conusaunce and deciding of Ecclesiasticall causes doe not appertaine to the Common-law and that the prouision or induction of Clerks to benefices and giuing them spirituall iurisdiction ouer the soules of those that be within the compasse of that benefice be of the number of those causes which I take to be set downe in like manner by M. Attorneys owne pen before vnder the names of admissions and institutions of Clerks then how can it be true which heere is said that the Common-law giueth to the King as to the supreme to prouide competent Pastors for that or those Churches that within the space of a yeare and halfe are not prouided by the particular patron Diocesian or metropolitan Or where is this Common-law How or when did it begin as often elswhere I haue demaunded Either by vse or statute or common agreement between the Prince and people For none of these haue we heard of hitherto vnder former Kings though for presenting and nomination to benefices we haue oftentymes said that there is no difficulty but that the temporall Prince may present in such benefices or Bishopricks as he is patron of either founding the said benefices or by particular concession of the Sea Apostolicke vnto him as we haue shewed more largly before in the life of K. VVilliam the Conquerour and before him againe vnder K. Edward the Confessor to whom the Sea of Rome in those dayes gaue spirituall iurisdiction also in some cases ouer the Abbey of VVestminster some other places of his Realme 18. But that the Common-law should dispose of these things and especially giue spiritual iurisdiction to the King ouer benefices for so must the meaning of M. Attorney be if he delude not his Reader with equiuocation of words this I say is both contrary to his owne rule before set downe and much more to reason For that to giue Ecclesiasticall iurisdictiom is much more then to haue the conusaunce of Ecclesiasticall causes which he denying to his Common-law in diuers places of his booke as before we haue seen caÌ„not in reasoÌ„ ascribe to th' other 19. Wherefore though we graunt this graduation heer set dovvne as good and conueuient that if the particular patron doe not present within six moneths nor the Ordinary or Metropolitan within their tymes prescribed the Prince as supreme gouernour of the Common-wealth to see all things done in due order may present as if he were patron to the said benefice yet first this cannot come originally from the common-Common-law for the reasons alleadged Secondly this proueth no spirituall iurisdiction at all in any presentor but only power of presentation which may be in any man that hath Ius patronatus allowed by the Church and head therof as before hath byn said Thirdly much lesse doth this proue supreme authority spirituall in the Prince as M. Attorney would inferre which is euident among other reasons by this For that the Prince when he doth present in this manner by lapse of tyme or omission of others is the last in power of presentation after the Metropolitans and Bishops which yet
of heresie being high treason against the allmighty but by the Archbishop and all the Clergy of that prouince and after abiured therevpon and after that newly conuicted and condemned by the Clergy of that prouince in their generall Councell of Conuocation But the Statute of 2. H. 4. cap. 15. doth giue the Bishop in his Diocesse power to condemne an hereticke and that before that Statute he could not be committed to the secular power to be burnt vntill he had once abiured and was againe relapsed to that or some other heresie Wherby it appeareth that the King by consent of Parlament directed the proceedings in the Ecclesiasticall Courte in case of heresie and other matters more spirituall The Pope cannot alter the lawes of England The Catholicke Deuine Why doth not M. Attorney set dovâ—ne those auncient laws Ecclesiasticall of this Realme Will he say that they were any other then the Common Canon laws of the Roman Church in those daies He cannot with any probability And as for the matter heere touched that no man could be conuicted of heresie but by the Archbishop and all the Clergie of that Prouince and after abiured and then newly conuicted and condemned againe by a generall Councell of Conuocation c In some points he hitteth right but in other not For when any new heresie is discouered it must be iudged and condemned by some such Synod or Councell as heer is mentioned if the head of the Church haue not condemned it before But when the heresie is condemned it was neuer necessary to call such Synods or Councell for conuicting of euery particular man that shall be accused of that heresie and much lesse was it needfull that there should be two seuerall conuictions the one before abiuration the other after except in such as were relapsed for what if the hereticke should stand stiffely to it vpon his first conuiction and would not abiure but defend his heresie did the anncient laws Ecclesiasticall of England thinke you forbid him in this case to be punished I thinke not 10. But M. Attorney hath a note in the margent wherat I cannot but maruaile for that he hearing in this place out of the old sense of our ancient lawes heresie to be held for high treason against God and that as he supposeth it must be twise conuicted which is only true in relapse saith in the margent This had a resemblance to an Attainder of treason wherin there must be first an indictment by one Iury and a conuiction by another But I deny this resemblance to be of any moment for the forme of proceeding though for the thing I graunt that heresie is truly treason against God but this double conuiction heer mentioned by two Iuries hath little or no similitude with the other of relapsed heresie where the party is first permitted to abiure his first fault and not punished except he offend the second time in the same Which yet I persuade my self M. Attorney will not allow in humane treasons against the Prince that he must twise iterate his fault before he can be punished and so the parity or similitude holdeth not 11. But now to the principall point where the Attorney saieth that the Statute of K. Henry the 4. doth giue the Bishop in his Diocesse power to condemne an hereticke and that before that Statute he could not be committed to the secular power to be punished vntill he had once abiured and was againe relapsed c. and that heerby it appeareth that the King directed Ecclesiasticall proceedings c. Diuerse errors are heere couched togeather and then if ignorance be the inseperable twynne of euery error as M. Attorney in his Preface holdeth you know what will ensue 12. First then it is presumed in this assertion that no hereticke could be put to death in old tyme except he were relapsed that is to say had once at least abiured his heresie and fallen vnto it againe which is false For that albeit such people were most of all to be punished for their periury and inconstancy yet other also that neuer abiured if they stood obstinate might by ancient laws as well Ciuill as Canonicall be punished by death as in the Ciuill is auerred by the particular laws and ordinations of Theodosius Valentinian Martian Iustinian and other Christian Emperours extant in the Code And in the Canon law in like manner is determined by diuers definitions there to be seen that incorrigible hereticks are to be deliuered ouer to the secular power to be punished by them whether they be relapsed or not relapsed though more the relapsed And all this was before the Statute of K. Henry the 4. which did nothing els but allow and confirme the vse and exercise of the said laws For so it appertained vnto him as King of the Realme to consider whether the exercise of these Ecclesiasticall laws haue any incoÌ„uenience against the State or no. 13. And moreouer where it is heer said that the Statute of K. Henry giueth the Bishop power in his Diocesse to condemne an hereticke as though before he had it not by Canon-law is another grosse error For that this fact of K. Henry was nothing els but an approbation of a more auncient decree made before by Pope Gregory the 9. extant in the Decretals of the Canon-law in these words Quoniam Episcoporum numerus c. For that the number of Bishops appointed by auncient Canons for the degradation of Clergy-men cannot alwayes so easily come togeather we graunt vnto you Archbishop of Rhemes that when any Priest or Clerke being within holy Orders is either to be giuen ouer to the secular Courte to be punished for heresie or perpetually to be walled vp you calling togeather the Abbots and other Prelates and religious persons and learned men of your Diocesse which you shall thinke good may alone degrade him in their presence you being his Bishop c. 14. This was the Decree of Pope Gregory aboue two hundred yeares before King Henryes Statute for giuing licence to euery Bishop within his Diocesse alone with the help of his learned counsell and other assistance heer mentioned to condemne degrade and deliuer ouer to secular power any obstinate hereticke relapsed or not relapsed though such as were not relapsed and acknowledged their faultes might be dealt withall more mildly as by walling or shutting them vp as heer is mentioned And that this Decree of Pope Gregory was an exception or priuiledged forme of proceeding from the auncient Canons that appointed a certaine precise number of Bishops to be called togeather for the deposition of Deacons Priests and Bishops appeareth by the words thereof that doe mention the said Canons which you may see in the body of the Canon-law cited out of the Councell of Carthage aboue twelue hundred years past So as M. Attorneys inference that heerby K. Henry tooke vpon him to direct the proceedings of the Ecclesiasticall Courte in
tribunals no one thing in all the libertyes and priuiledges of the Church and Church-men being more ordinary not vsuall nor generally receiued then this though M. Attorney presumeth to affirme heere that this Decree had neuer any force within England which seemeth to me so manifest an vntruth as I marueile he would affirme it so flattly For to let passe all that I haue said before in the second Chapter of this our confutation for the confirmation of the exemptions of Clerks their persons and goods out of the Decrees of auncient Christian Emperours that ratified the Church-Canons in that behalfe and the conformity therevnto of our Christian Kings before the Conquest handled in the 5. 6. Chapters of this booke besides this I say the assertion of M. Attorney may euidently be ouerthrowne by all the laws vse and custome since the said Conquest and namely and expressly by the laws of the Conquerour himself recited before by me in the 7. Chapter of this answere which were continued by all the said Conquerours posterity vntill the tyme of King Henry the 3. when written Statutes had first their beginning namely that of Magna Charta by which lawes and Statutes the said priuiledge and exemption was often and ordinarily ratified and confirmed 21. As for example in the third yeare of King Edward the first sonne to the said King Henry the Statute speaketh thus when a Clerke is taken for guylte of felony and is demaunded by the Ordinary he shall be deliuered to him according to the priuiledge of holy Church on such perill as belongeth to it after the custome aforetymes vsed c. Behold the contradictory words to M. Attorneys that said this decree had neuer any force nor was approued in England The instance also of Bigamyes alleadged before by M. Attorney and answered by vs in the 11. Chapter of this booke vnder the raigne of this King Edward the first doth euidently confirme that which we say and refuteth M. Attorney For that the Kings Counsell refusing there to deliuer certaine felons demaunded by the Prelates in respect only that they were Bigamyes or had byn twice marryed therby were excluded by the generall Councell of Lions from the priuiledge of Clergy-men this I say doth shew that before that Councell Bigamyes also had that priuiledge by the Latin words of the law wherin it is said Praelati tanquam Clericos exigâ—runt sibi liberandos These prelates or Bishops did exact or require those felons to be set free vnto them as Clerks doth manifestly declare that they demaunded it by the knowne law of the land generally receiued in those dayes 22. And conforme to this vnder King Edward the second sonne to the former Edward we find the law to speake in these words A Clerke flying to the Church for felony to obtaine the priuiledge of the Church if he affirme himself to be a Clerke shall not be compelled to abiure the Realme but yeelding himself to the law of the Realme shall enioy the priuiledges of the Church according to the laudable customes of the Realme heeretofore vsed So there where you see that this was no new thing in those dayes 23. And I might ad to this diuers other like Decrees of the succeeding Kings as namely of King Edward the third in the 18. and 25. yeares of his raigne and of King Henry the 4. in the 4. yeare of his raigne vnder whome it is written in the records of Canterbury Church that the Archbishop Arundel seeing this ancient priuiledge of the Clergy to haue byn somwhat weakned by former Kings he dealt with the said King Henry effectually and obtained saith the Register vt vetus Cleri praerogatiua per Regem renouaretur ne Clerici ad Regium tribunal raperentur That the auncient prerogatiue of Clergy-men might be renewed by the King that Clerks should not be drawne to the Kings tribunall And this was a point so notoriously knowne in England in those dayes as when vpon the yeare 1405. in the said King Henry the fourth his raigne the Archbishop of Yorke Richard Scroope togeather with some others of the nobility had risen in armes against him and the King in his choller would needs haue him condemned and executed as he was Gaston the cheife Iustice as Harpesfield noteth out of the said Bishops life and the addition of Poli-chronicon knowing that by the law he could not be condemned by a secular Iudge refused to sit vpon him and so he was condemned by Syr Raph Euers and Syr VVilliam Fulthrop knights authorized therevnto by the Kings armed commission wherof the Clergy greatly complaining Pope Innocentius the seauenth excommunicated the doers and denounced to K. Henry by the Archbishop of Canterbury that he would proceed in like manner against himself if he gaue not good satisfaction in that behalfe but he dying soone after and a great schisme thervpon ensuing in the Roman Church nothing was done 24. But much auncienter then this wee might alleadge diuers examples out of the raignes of King Henry the 3. and Edward the 3. wherof wee haue made mention also in parte before treating of their times as of one Peter Riâ—all who had been Treasurer to King Henry the 3. and being apprehended by the Kings commission and to bee sent to the Tower said to him thus as Matthew Paris writeth Domine Clericus sum nec debeo incarcerari vel sub Laicorum custodia deputari My leige I am a Clerke and therefore I ought not to bee imprisoned nor to bee kept vnder the custody of Laie-men The King answered Te vt laicum hactenûs gesâ—isti à te igitur vt à laico cui meum commisi thesaurum exigo Thou hast borne thy self hitherto as a laie-man and therefore as of a laie-man to whom I committed my treasure I exact an account of the same And for that he was found with armour vnder his Clergie attyre both for this because the Archbishop of Canterburie there present seemed not willing to answere for him he was sent to the Tower yet after two daies saith our author he was deliuered againe thence by the said Archbishop and carried to VVinchester and there left in the Cathedrall Church 25. And some fiue yeares after that againe one Raph Briton a Clerke and Chaâ—on of S. Pauls Church who likewise had been K. Henries Treasurer being accused to the said King of diuers crimes touching treason and by his commission to the Maior of London apprehended and sent to the Tower was by the instance of the Clergie vrging their said priuiledge dismissed Rex dictum Ranulsum saith Paris licet inuitus solui in pace dimitti praecepit the King though vnwilling commaunded the said Raph to bee let forth of prison and peaceably dismissed So as this exemption was no new thing at that time as M. Attorney would haue it seeme And of King Edward the third aboue a hundred yeares after that againe Thomas
VValsingham alleadgeth this confirmation of the said priuiledge in his time Quod nullus Clericus sit arrei ratuâ— coram Iustitiarijs suis siue ad sectam suam siue partes si Clericus suae Clerimoniae se submittat dicens se membrum Ecclesiae Sanctae non debere ipsis Iustitiarijs respoÌ„dere That no Clerk maie bee arraygned before the Kings Iustices at the suite of the said King or of anie other party yf the said Clerk doe submitt himself to his Clergie affirming that hee being a member of holy Church ought not to answere to the said Iustices So VValsingham And this shall bee sufficient to meete with the assertion of M. Attorney to the contrary and herewith shall we end our speach of King Henry the eight Of King Edvvard the sixt the one and twentith King after the Conquest §. III. 26. This younge Prince being but a child of 9. yeares old when his father King Henry died as often hath been said was by his Tutors and Gouernours especially his Vncle Earle of Hartford after made Duke of Somerset and some others that followed his appetite in the desire of innouation about matters of religion declared Head of the Church vnder the same stile as his father had been before and by that headship and pretence therof they took to theÌ„selues authoritie to make that change which after ensued partly to the opinions of Luther partly of Zuinglius for Caluin was not yet so famous or forward in credit for some years after and to ouerthrow and alter in effect all that King Henry by his headship had ordained and established before concerning religion as may appeare by the seuerall and particular repeals of the most parte of all his Statutes touching that affaire except only this of his departure from the Pope and obedience of the Sea Apostolicke 27. But yet one principall declaration and important constitution they added in this matter as before hath been touched aboue that of King Henry according to the saying facile est inuentis addere and this is that whereas the Father K. Henry taking from the Pope his accustomed iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall did transferre it vnto his Clergie of England and afterward declaring himself Spirituall head of that Clergie did consequentlie inferre he was head of the English Church also in spirituall matters yet did he not explaine from what origen properly this spirituall power did flow which point the said Gouernours of the child-King Edward did interprete and decide shewing that all spirituall iurisdiction power and authority ouer soules by loosing or binding of sinnes or other spirituall actions in Bishops Prelates and Priests proceeded and was deriued from this young child who yet notwithstanding as ech man may consider was not of yeares to haue perfect vse of reason for disposing so much as temporall matters and how much lesse in spirituall For so affirmeth plainly S. Paul to the Galathians Quanto tempore haeres parâ—ulus est nihil differt à seruo cum sit Dominus omnium sed sub tutoribus actoribus est vsque ad praefinitum tempus à Patre All the time that the heire is young or vnder age though he be Lord of all by inheritance yet doth he differ nothing from a seruant or bound-man in subiection but is vnder Tutors and Administrators vntill the tyme of his age appointed by his Father So the Apostle 28. And if then this young King had not yet authority as of himself to dispose of any temporall affaires which are of much lesse moment we may easily consider what may be thought of spirituall and Ecclesiasticall that require more the vse of reason and iudgement for exercising of iurisdiction therin then doth the other But you will say perhaps that the same Tutors and Administrators that gouerned him in secular Ciuill affaires might take vpon them also iurisdiction in the spirituall likewise and so the Duke of Somerset for example with his assistants might be secondary or Vicar-heads of the Church of England vnder him for the tyme to absolue or bind sinnes determine of heresies dispose of Sacraments and the like 29. But to this â—s easily answered according to the principles set downe in the secoÌ„d Chapter of this booke that for so much as all temporall power is giuen first of all by God in the law of Nature vnto the people or multitude who thereby haue authority to transferre the same to what manner of gouernement they like either Monarchie or other it followeth also that the Common-wealth that had authority to choose or appoint the state of Kings to raigne ouer them had and hath power to giue sufficient authority in like manner to Tutors and Administrators to gouerne the said Common-wealth in temporall affaires during the tyme of their Kings minority or non-age But that the origen of spirituall power comming not by this way of the people nor being giuen to them at all but immediatly by Christ our Sauiour to his Apostles and their Successours Bishops and Prelates by lawfull Ordination and Succession of Priesthood and imposition of hands to the end of the world no temporall Tutors or Administrators could rightly get into this authority except they were first made Priests and this also by Caluins opinion and assertion as well as ours as before hath byn declared 30. By this then wee see how and by what assurance this headship of the Church and supreme Ecclesiasticall authoritie therof passed from the Father to the sonne which was such as it liked not M. Attorney to alleadge anie one Statute of this mans time against vs though all in deed were made against vs and against the said Father as maie bee easily imagined considering the Current of that time And the very first of all was in fauour of Luthers opinioÌ„ about the Reall presence which afterward they changed into that of Zwinglius They changed also twyce their Communion booke and forme of seruice and Sacraments first vpon the second and third yeares of King Edwards raigne and secondly vpon the 5. and 6. as appeareth in the particular Statutes of those yeares They repealed a great number of K. Henries Statutes as by name concerning treasons and heresies They repealed his famous Statute for PrecoÌ„tracts in marriages as also dissolued diuers of his Courts that he had set vp And finally they respected nothing the said King Henries headship nor his prescription or direction therin but followâ—d their owne for the time that their power endured And yet all was published vnder the name of the Ghospell and New reformation established by negociation in Parlament as though the matter had proceeded from very sound and founded Ecclesiasticall authoritie And this for that time wherof M. Attorney alleadging no one example against vs I haue no further need to enlarge my self Of the raigne of Queene Mary the two and twentith Princesse after the Conquest §. IIII. 31. As M. Attorney doth preâ—ermitt
English Catholiks at this day what reason haue they to sinne so damnably as to write against their owne consciences seeing that by following their consciences they might follow also their commodities Wâ—at new opinions haue they inuented of their owne or taken vpon them to follow inuented by others for which they should be drawne to write against the knowne truâ—hâ— that is to saie as all Fathers do expounde it the Catholike truth For that is knowne receiued and acknowledged and hath byn from time to time throughout Christendome wheras new opinions are not knowne truthes but presumed truthes by a few in some particuler place or countrey and for some certaine time past and not publiklie continued from the beginning 31. As for example in the present controuersie to pretermit all others English Catholiks saie that they approue noe other Ecclesiastical power than that which all the Kings of England from the first that was conuerted vnto King Henry the eight togeather with their Counsellours lawyers and Sages both spirituall and temporall haue allowed receiued practised and confirmed by their owne municipal lawes M Attorney on the other side holdeth the contrary and bringeth only for his direct proofe the constitutioâ—s of two or three late Princes Q. Elizabeth a woman K. Edward a child and some parte of King Henries raigne distracted from the rest and deuided also from himselfe in all other points of Relâ—gion besides Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction but for indirect proose he cyteth certaine peeces and parcells of Ordinances Lawes and Decrees of some former Catholike Princes which seeme to restraine or suspend in some particular cases the execution of the said Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction in matters not meerly spirituall but mixt with temporalities as to them it seemed and not denying therby any parte of the spirituall power it self as after shall be shewed 32. Now then wheras he alleadgeth three Princes Decrees against the Popes authoritie interrupted by a fourth for that Queene Marie annulled the two that went before her and ioyned fully with her auncient progenitors wee one the contrary side for these three interrupted doe produce neere threescore by descent without interruption and for threescore yeares more or lesse wherin they made these lawes wee alleadge more then three times three hundered and for a part or parcell of tâ—e Sages of our Land which in these later dayes vpon art feare or industrious induction were drawne to consent vnto these new lawes against the old with vtter mislike of the sar greateâ—t part wee â—ay forth the whole vniforme consent of all sortes beginning with the first very planting of Christian Religion in our countrey continued for more than nine hundrâ—d years togeather so as we alleadg both antiquitie prioritie vniuersalitie continuance and succession without interruption which are all the markes of Catholike verity and consequently when we write for defence of this in euery controuersie of our dayes how can the Attorney saie or pretend to imagine that we write against our consciences and the knowne truth 33. And as for the imaginarie causes of discontentment which he deuiseth either for that men haue not atteined vnto their ambitious and vniust desires or for that in the eye of the State their vices and wickednes haue deserued punishment and disgrace and therfore doe oppose themselues against the current of the present These speculations I saie cannot fal any way vpon English Catholiks not doe subsist of themselues Not the later for that they are knowne to be temperate men so will the countrey commonlie where they liue beare them wittnes and the experience of their singuler patience vnder the pressures of the late Queene doth manifestly testifie the same Not the first for that if conscience did not retaine them they might gaine more and more aduaunce their ambitious desires if they haue any by following the Current of the time with M. Attorney and others than by standing against it to suffer themselues to be ouerflowne therwith And it is a great presumption in all reason that he hath a good conscience who standeth thervnto with his losse that might run downe the hill with the current to his gaine and preferment For that this later is easie and vulgar and common to the worst men as well as to good the other is hard and rare and needeth grâ—at vertue and fortitude of mind wherof I may chaunce to haue occasion to speake more largely afterward at the end of this booke in a speciall chapter to M. Attorney himselfe when our principall controuersie shal be tryed shewing what vrgent forcible and peremptorie reasons Catholike men haue though with neuer so great losse temporall to stand for the defence of their consciences not to runne downe the current with him and others that swymme with full sayle therin And so much of this 34. Some other few pointes of litle importance doe remaine in this passage of M. Attorneys Preface which might be touched and examined as where he saith that the particular and approued custome of euery nation is the most vsuall binding and assured law and for more authoritie of this asseueration as also of whatsoeuer he saith besides or pretendeth to say out of our lawes in his ensuing Treatise he addeth that he hath byn a student therof for these 35. yeares but I could bring forth lawyers of no lesse standinge and study though perhaps with lesse gaine that would contradict him in both these points First that custome is not allwayes the most vsuall binding law either in conscience or otherwise with these would run all the ministers of Englaud in the case of Catholike and Protestant Religion wherin custome by their owne confession is against them And in the second point concerning the peeces parcelles heere alleadged out of our Common-lawes against the Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction as M. Attorney would haue it seeme these men would alleadge twenty for one not shredes or liberts of lawes but intyre lawes themselues authorizinge and confirminge with full vniformity and vniuersality of our English nations consente the said Iurisdiction from time to time and the vse and practise therof But of this afterward 35. Now to conclude with M. Attorney in this his Preface if his end and desire be as he saith that such as are desirous to se to know may be instructed and such as haue byn taught amisse may se and satisfie themselues with the truth and such as know and hold the truth may be comforted and confirmed I shall gladlie ioyne with him in this end and desire pâ—aying almightie God that himself also and many more with him may bee in the first two members for that in the third none can be but true Catholiks And this shall suffice for this place For as for the Latin sentence out of Macrobius that our ignorance in many things proceedeth of that we reade not diligently the work of ancient authors I haue touched in parte before and doe allow of the sense now againe
though more fitlie the same might haue byn shewed out of many Christian authors of more authoritie that this heathen Yet let M. Attorney ioyne issue with me vpon antiquitie in this our controuersie which he ought to doe as well in regard of this sentence as also for that euery where he iterateth the name and sound of the ancient and most ancient Common-lawes of England and then will the matter be quicklie decided as the proofe will afterward declare whervnto I remit me and doe end my answere to M. Attorneys Preface returning him his freindlie Farewell as also to the Reader OF THE STATE OF THE QVESTION IN GENERALL Concerning Spirituall and Temporall Povver and Iurisdiction their origen and subordination one to the other And how they stand togeather in a Christian Common-wealth CHAP. II. TO the end that the prosecution and issue of the particular controuersie we haue in hand about the Spirituall authoritie of Q. Elizabeth may be more cleere it shall not be a misse perhapes in this very beginning to set downe breiflie what Catholike Deuines and other learned men doe write and holde of Power and Iurisdiction in generall and of the origen ofspring author diuision and partes therof wherin M. Attorney is wholie silent vsing no explication or distinction at all and consequently giueth occasion therby to some confusion 2. First then our Deuines affirme that almighty God is author of all lawfull Power whatsoeuer both spirituall and temporall according to that generall proposition of S. Paul Non est potestas nisi à Deo There is no power but from God For that as it pleased his diuine maiestie to imparte with man other sparkes of his excellencyes as wisdome reason knowledge prouidence and the like so vouchsafed he also to make man partaker of his power and authoritie not only to gouerne all other creatures of his in the worlde but mankynde also and this both in body and soule temporall and eternall things vnder him in this world as his liestennant and substitute 3. The differences which are betweene these two Powers Iurisdictions Spirituall and Temporall Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill are diuers and sundry taken from the diuersitie of their ends obiect The end of Spirituall Power being to direct vs to euerlasting saluation both by instruction discipline and correction and of the Temporall or Ciuill by like meanes and helps to gouerne well tâ—e Common-wealth in peace aboundance order iustice and prosperitie And accordinge to these ends are also their obiects matter and meanes As for example the former hath for her obiect spirituall things belonginge to the soule as matters of faith Doctrine Sacraments and such other and thy latter handleth the Ciuill affaires of the Realme and Common-wealth as they appertaine to the temporall good and prosperitie thereof 4. The ancient learned Father S. Gregorie Nazianzen in a certaine Oration of his doth expresse the nature and conditions of these two Powers Spirituall and Temporall Ecclesiasticall and Ciuill by the similitude of spirit and flesh soule and sense which he saith may be considered either as two distinct Common-wealths seperated the one from the other or conioyned togeather in one Common-wealth only An example of the former wherin they are seperated may be in Beasts Angells the one hauing their Common-wealth of Sense onlie without soule or spirit and their end and obiects conforme thervnto which are the nourishment and preseruation of the body And the other Common wealth of Angells being of spirit only without flesh or body but in man are conioyned both the one and the other And euen so in the Common wealth of the Gentiles was onlie authoritie politicall earthlie and humane giuen by God to gouerne worldlie and humaine things but not spirituall for the soule wheras contrarywise in the Primitiue Christian Church for almost 300. yeare togeather none or few Kings being yet conuerted onlie spiritual authoritie was exercised by the Apostle and Christians Bishopps their successours for gouerninge the Church in Ecclesiasticall affaires without temporall accordinge to the saying of S. Paul in the Acts of the Apostles speaking to Bishops Vos posuit Spiritus Sanctus Episcopos regere ecclesiam Dei The holy-ghost hath appointed you that are Bishops to gouerne his Church 5. And this Spirituall Iurisdiction in respect of the high end and obiect therof aboue the temporall did the same Apostles by instructioÌ„ of the same Holie Ghost so highlie esteeme as the same S. Paul writinge to the Corinthians and reprehendinge them for going to law about temporall things before the heathen magistrate said that in secular matters they should appoint for iudges such as were contemptible in the Church that is to say men of meane account which was spoken by him not for that he contemned temporall Power as the heretical Anabaptists out of this place would proue for so he should be contrarie to himselfe who a litle before as you haue heard auowed that all power is from God and in other places that the King and temporall magistrate is to be honoured and obeyed as Gods minister and the like but onlie he saith this in comparison the one of the other and of their ends and obiects so different in dignitie worthines as you haue heard And this continued in the Primitiue Church to witt Spirituall Iurisdiction without Temporall vntill Constantine the Great and other Emperours and Kings after him being conuerted to the Christian faith entred into the said Church retaininge their Temporall States and Temporall Power which before they had but submitting themselues in spirituall and Ecclesiasticall matters vnto the spirituall gouernment and gouernours which they found to haue been in the same Church before their conuersion 6. Furthermore besides these differences of the end and obiects of these two Powers the forsaid Deuines doe shew another no lesse considerable then the former which is that albeit both of them be of God and doe proceed from him as the Author origen as hath been said yet far differentlie for that Ecclesiasticall authoritie is immediatlie from God and was giuen by Christ immediatlie to his Apostles and Bishops as before you haue heard out of S. Paul who addeth in the same place that Christ gaue them this Spirituall Iurisdiction ouer that Church quam acqui fiuit sanguine suo which he had bought and purchased with his bloud to make them and others in respect of this dreadfull circumstance to esteeme and respect the more this Spirituall Iurisdiction ouer soules which Iurisdiction Christ also himself God and man did exercise in person vpon earth wholie seperated from the vse of all Temporall Iurisdiction notwithstanding he was Lord of all as the same Deuines out of the Ghospell doe proue Sâ—ewing therby and by the long continuance of his Church without the said Temporall Authoritie that Spirituall Iurisdiction is wholy independent therof and vtterlie distinct by her owne nature 7. And albeit Ciuill Power and
Iurisdiction be of Gods institution also and duelie to be honoured in his Church and Christian common wealth as before wee haue shewed yet doe they teach the same to be far otherwise deriued and receiued from God then is Spirituall Power that is to saie not immediatlie by Gods owne deliuerie therof but mediatlie rather to witt by meditation of the law of nature and nations For by the law of nature God â—ath ordeined that there should be politicall gouernment for that otherwise no multitude could be preserued which the law of nations assuming hath transferred that gouernment vnto one or more according to the particular formes therof as Monarchie Aristocracy or Democracy or mixt wherin is to be noted that the ordination of God by the law of nature doth giue politicall Power vnto the multitude immediately and by them mediately to one or more as hath been said But Spirituall Power Christ gaue immediatly and by himself to the Apostles and their Successors by these words whatsoeuer you shall bind vpon earth the same sâ—all be bound in heauen And whatsoeuer you shall loose one earth shall be loosed in heauen Wherby you se a generall large commission graunted to them of binding loosing Quaecunque whatsoeuer without exception And the like to S. Peter as head and chiefe by speciall power and commission of those words Pasce oues meas Pasce agnos meos Feed my sheep feed my lambs thryse repeated signifying therby the Preheminence and Primacy of his Pastorall Authoritie in Gods Church as the auncient Fathers haue allwayes vnderstood the same For that to the office of Supreame feedinge is required also all other authoritie necessarie to gouerne direct commaund restraine and punish in like manner when need requireth 8. About which point is to be obserued and considered attentâ—uelie say Catholike Deuines and most learned lawyers that when God almightie giueth any office he giueth also sufficient Power and Authoritie euery way to execute that office as when he giueth the office of a King or temporal Magistrate for good of the Common-wealth he giueth Authoritie therwith not onlie to direct command and instruct but to punish and compell also yea and to extirpate and cut of those when need is that are rebellions or otherwise deserue that punishment And the like is to be obserued in Spirituall Power and Iurisdiction according to which the Ciuil law saith Cui Iurisdictio data est ea quoque concessa esse intelliguntur sine quibus Iurisdictio expleri non potuit To whosoeuer iurisdiction is giuen to him also must we vnderstand to be graunted all those thinges without which his Iurisdiction cannot be fulfilled And the Canon law to the same effect Iurisdictio nullius videretur esse momenti si coërcionem aliquam non haberet Iurisdiction would seeme to be of no moment if it had not some power to compell And finally it is a general rule giuen in the said Canon law that when anie cause is committed to anie man he is vnderstood to receiue also ful authoritie in al matters belonging to that cause 9. Out of all which is deduced that for so much as Christ our Sauiour God and Man hauing purchased to him felfe by the price of his owne blood a most deerlie beloued Church and committed the same as S. Paul saith to be gouerned by his Apostles and Bishops their successours vnto the worlds end it must needs follow that he hath indowed the same Church with sufficient spirituall Authoritie both directiue and coactiue to that end for gouerning our soules no lesse than he hath done the temporal CoÌ„monwealth for affaires of the body Nay much more by how much greater the importance is of the one than of the other as before hath been said 10. If you aske me yet more particularlie where and how by what commission and to whom Christ our Sauiour left this high Spiritual Power in his Church what it is and wherin it consisteth I answere first to the last that it consisteth as often hath been said in guiding our soules in this world to euerlasting saluation in the next Which thinge for that principallie it dependeth of this that we auoide sinnes in this life or if we committ them that they be pardoned vs or corrected by this Power Christ our Sauiour doth most aptlie giue and describe the same Power by the words of binding or loosing sinnes And therefore in the foresaid place alleadged out of S. Matthew his Ghospel he giueth the said commission as you haue heard VVhatsoeuer you shal binde or loose vpon earth shal be bound or loosed in heauen Wherby the Church of God hath allwaies vnderstood full authoritie of Iudicature to haue been giuen to the Apostles and their successors to discerne iudge binde or loose in all things belonging to this end of directing soules 11. Truth it is that diuers learned deuines are of opinion that in these places Christ did but promise to his Apostles to giue them this high iudiciall authoritie in his Church when by his death and resurrection it should be founded And that the actuall performance of this promise was made vnto them in the 20. if S. Iohns ghospell where Christ said vnto them Sicut misit me pater ego mitto vos As my father sent me so I doe send you and then presentlie breathing vpon then he addeth Receiue the Holie-ghost whose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen vnto them and whose you shal retaine they are retained Where we se that Christ speaketh now in the present tense they are forgiuen and they are retained and not in the future as before in the place of S. Matthew his ghospell And we must note that those words of our Sauiour As my father sent mee so I doe send you are vnderstood by auncient Doctors of Authoritie as though he had said that with the same power authoritie that my father sent mee into this world to gather gouerne my Church I doe also send you that is to saie withall spirituall power necessarie to your office and charge both on earth and in heanen And therfore he saith in S. Matthew his Ghospell That whatsoeuer they shall binde or loose vpon earth which are the Acts of high iudges shall be loosed or bound in heauen 12. And to S. Peter in like manner as Cheif of the rest the promise of his Supreame and singular power besides the other which out of the former general commission he receiued with the rest of the Apostles was made vnto him first in S. Matthews ghospell when Christ said Thou art Peter which signifieth a stone or rocke and vpon this rock will I build my Church and will giue vnto thee the keies of the Kingdome of heauen c. Which he perfourmed afterward in the 21. chapter of S. Iohn after his resurrection when asking him three times of his loue towards him he as manie times gaue him coÌ„mission of high-pastor ouer
his flocke Pasce oues meas pasce agnos meos c. 13. This Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall Power then which Christ hath left for gouerning his Church though it be to be exercised heere vpon earth and by men yet is it iustlie called by holie fathers not humane Power but diuine and heauenlie both for that it was giuen immediatelie and exercised also by Christ himself that came from heauen and for that it tendeth to heauen and is approued in heauen yea to vse the Phrase of S. Chrisostome and other Fathers directeth and commaundeth the verie Tribunall of heauen which heauenlie Power on earth S. Paul as an Apostle extraordinary hauing extraordinarilie also receiued not by man but by Iesus Christ as himself doth signifie did so much glorie of as he wrote to the Corinthians If I should glorie some what of our Power which Christ hath giuen vs to edification and not to destruction I would not blush at it And a litle before in the same Chapter he saith Nam arma militiae nostrae non carnalia sunt sed potentia Deo c. For the armour of our warrfare are not carnall or wordlie armes but are power from God In promptu habentes vlcisci omnem inobedientiam c. hauing speedy means to reuenge all inobedience And yet further to the said Corinthians within two Chapters after Quoniam si venero iterum non parcam If I come vnto you againe I will not spare to punish And a little after in the same place Ideo absens scribo vt non durius agam secundum potestatem quam Dominus dedit mihi I doe write vnto you absent to the end that when I shall come and be present with you I be not forced to deale more roughly according to the Power which our Lord hath giuen me 14. Beholde the dreadfull Spirituall Power which S. Paul affirmeth to be giuen to him by Christ as well to punish as to instruct and direct and according to this Power he writeth againe to the said Corinthians Quid vultis in virga veniam ad vos an in charitate spiritu mansuetudinis what will you haue mee doe shall I come vnto you in the power of the rodd or in loue and spirit of mildnes As who would saie choose which you will And note that heer the Power of correction giuen to the Apostles their successours is called the rodd in respect of strikinge as before in the words of Christ it was called the key of the kingdome of heauen and the power of binding and loosing sinnes in regard of the dreadfull shutting or opening heauen or hell gates vnto vs. And accordinge to this power S. Paul afterward exercised iudgment gaue sentence in a certaine grieuous case of Incest among the said Corinthians in these words Ego autem absens corpore praesens autem spiritu iam iudicani vt praesens eum qui sic operatus est I though absent in body yet present with you in spirit haue giuen iudgment vpon him that hath committed this sinne as though I were present in body And the same Apostle writinge to his scholler Timothie doth tell of another sentence and iudgment pronounced by him vpon Hymenaeus and Alexander two seditions and hereticall men quos tradidi Sathanae saith he whome I haue deliuered ouer to Sathan which is as much to saie as I haue excommunicated cut them of from the Church of God wherby they come to be no more in the protection of Christ but in the power and protection of Sathan 15. And the like Spirituall Iudgment was exercised by S. Peter vpon Simon Magus when he said vnto him Non est tibi pars neque sors in sermone isto Thou hast no parte nor participation with vs in this word of God which we preach By which words of S. Peter the 30. Canon of the Apostles doth affime Simon Magus to haue bene excommunicated and cut of from the number of Christians and from all spirituall benefit belonging thervnto Which if we beleue S. Augustine was a more greiuous and dreadfull punishment than if he had been sentenced to be burned vvith fire drowned vvith vvater or pearced through vvith a temporall sworde In consideration wherof holie S. Chrysostome cryed out in his time Nemo contemnat vinculae Ecclesiastica non enim homo est qui ligat sed Christus qui nobis hant potestatem dedit Oh let no man contemne the chaines which ecclesiasticall power laieth vpon him in bindinge or loosinge his sinnes for it is not man that bindeth but Christ which hath giuen vnto vs that are Gouernours of his Church this power And S. Augustine againe Alligatur bomo amarius infaelicius Ecclesia clauibus quam quibuslibet grauissimis durissimis ferreis vel adamantini◠nexibus A man is bound more bitterlie miserably by the keyes of the Church than by any most greiuous sharpe iron or adamāt bounds Wherof the holy Martyr and Bishop S. Cyprian gaue the reason before them both sayinge That in the old law vvhich vvas Carnall God gaue cōmaundement that such as were rebellious to their Priests and Iudges should be slaine vvith the sword But now in the lavv of Christ that is Spirituall proude and disobedient men are commaunded to be slaine eternallie vvith the spirituall svvord vvhich is their castinge out from the Church out of vvhich they cannot haue life 16. This then is the Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall dreadfull Power which Christ hath planted in his Church by his owne immediate commission for gouerninge the same in the affaires of our soules vnto the worlds end And heere we may note also that the same is double or of two sortes The one internall concerning mans conscience onlie by loosinge or bindinge sinnes by means of Sacraments The other is external Iurisdiction in hearing iudging and determining causes in publicke affaires that doe fall out in the Church tending to the same end and this distinction is founded in the words of Christ himself as well for binding and loosing of sinnes in respect of our conscience as also in that he addeth Si ecclesiam non audierit sit tibi tanquam Ethnicus Publicanus If he heare not the Church let him be to thee as a Heathen or Publican that is to say as holy Fathers expound let him be excomunicated cast out from the Church and then fled and auoided as one seperated by the authoritie of the said Church from all communion and fruite of Christian religion as much as if he were an Infidell or Publican Which meaning of our Sauiour S. Paul well vnderstandinge said of like men Auferte malum ex vobisipsis Take away and seperate the euill from among your selues which words S. Augustine expoundinge saith to be as much as if he had said Hominem malum pernicipsum à vobis seperate per excommunicationem Doe you seperate from your selues an
euill and pernicious man by excommunication which is an act of externall Iurisdiction called by Canon lawyers Actus sori contentiosi As to absolue or retaine sinnes in the Sacrament are acts of Internall Iurisdiction appertaininge to sorum conscientiae the tribunall of conscience 17. So that as the temporall magistrate for furnishinge of his authoritie hath Power also to punish temporallie when occasion is offered and this either in goods body or life so haue Spirituall Magistrates also by Christ his appointment Ecclesiasticall Power not onlie to teach exhorte instruct and direct as hath been said but to punish in like maner by Spirituall Censures much more greiuous and dreadfull in respect of the life to come than are the fore named punishments of the ciuill magistrate for this life Which Censures are three in number answeringe after a certaine manner to the former three of the temporall magistrate and these are accordinge to Catholike diuinitie and Canons of the Church Suspension Interdict and Excommunication which I leaue further to discusse in this place THE SECOND PART OF THIS CHAPTER About the Subordination of these two Povvers the one to the other and different Greatnes of them both §. I. 18. Vpon these and other like considerations then and premisses Catholike deuines doe deduce that these two Povvers of Spirituall and Temporall Iurisdiction whensoeuer they meet togeather as in the Christian Common-wealth they doe they are subordinate the one to the other according to the rule of Aristotle in Philosophie which holdeth also in this case of diuinitie that whensoeuer the ends of anie faculties be subordinate and doe serue the one to the other there also the faculties themselues are subordinate And so wheras the end of Spirituall Authoritie is to direct men to euerlastinge Saluation of their soules and the end Temporall Gouernment to procure their temporall prosperitie but yet with referment and subordination to the attainment also of life euerlasting in the next world it followeth by most certaine consequence that Temporall Gouernment is subordinate to the spirituall which is so much the more excellent and eminent as is an euerlastinge end aboue a temporall our immortall soule before our corruptible bodyes and the Kingdome of heauen before worldlie prosperitie 19. Out of which considerations no doubt did proceed those speeches of ancient and holie Fathers about the comparison of these two Povvers Ecclesiasticall and Temporall which are founde euery where in their workes highly preferringe the one before the other and subiecting the one vnto the other An me liberè loquentem aequo animo feretis saith S. Gregorie Nazianzen to the Emperour Nam ves quoque c. will you heare me with patience to speake my minde freely vnto you Which truelie you ought to doe for so much as the law of Christ hath made you subiect to my Power and to my tribunall For wee Bishops haue an Empyre also and that more excellent and perfect then yours except you will saie that spirit is inferiour to flesh and heauenly things to earthly But I doubt not but that you will take in good parte this my freedome of speach you being a sacred sheepe of my holie flocke and a disciple of the great Pastor rightly instructed by the Holy-ghost euen from your young years c. So Gregorie Nazianzen to the Emperour 20. And heere we see what difference this greate Doctor and Father S. Gregorie Nazianzen almost 1300. yeares gone did put between these two Powers of Kings and Bishops Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall dignitie euen as much as between flesh and spirit heauen and earth And the same difference doth S. Chrysostome set downe in his bookes of Priesthood and elswere I shall alleadge some place or two out of him as breifly as I may that you may see his sense and iudgement therin though I would wish the Reader to peruse the places themselues heere cited for that they will fullie satisfie him in this matter 21. First then in his third booke of Priesthood comparinge the Power of a King with the Power of a Priest he hath these words Habent quidem terrestres Principes vinculi potestatem verum corporum solum c. It is true that earthlie Princes haue power to binde but our bodyes onlie But the bands which Priests can lay vpon vs doe touch the soule it self and reach euen vnto the heauens so far forth as whatsoeuer Priests shall determine heere beneath that doth God ratifie aboue in heauen and confirmeth the sentence of his seruants vpon earth And what is this I pray you but that God hath giuen all heauenlie Power vnto them according to those words of his VVhose sinnes soeuer you shall retaine they are retained And what Power I beseech you can there be greater then this I read that God the Father gaue all manner of Power vnto his Sonne And I see againe that God the Sonne hath giuen ouer the self same Power vnto Priests c. what a manifest madnes then is it for any man to despise this Princedome of Priests without which we cannot possibly be made partakers either of eternall saluation or of the good promises of our Sauiour c. Quo nomine sacerdotes non modo plus vereri debemus quam vel Principes vel Reges verum etiam maiori honore quam parentes proprios honorare In which respect wee ought to reuerence feare Priests more not only then Princes and Kings but honour them also more then our owne parents c. All these are S. Chrysostomn wordes 22. And the same Saint in his Homilies vpon Esay the Prophet writeth thus Rex quidem ea quae sunt in terris sortitu◠est administranda c. The King hath receiued the administration and gouernment of those things that are on the earth But the Priests authoritie commeth from heauen whatsoeuer you shall binde saith Christ vpon earth that shall be bound in heauen To my King are committed earthlie things but to me heauenlie and when I say to me I vnderstand a Priest c. To the King are committed the bodies to the Priest the soules the King can remitt bodily spotts but the Priest can take away the spotts of sinne Maior hic principatus This principallitie of Priests is greater then that of Kings 23. Aud yet further in another Homilie vpon the same Prophet Sacerdotium principatus est ipso etiam regno venerabilius maiu◠Ne mihi narres purpuram c. Priesthood is a Princedome yea more venerable and great then is a Kingdome Doe not tell mee of the purple or diademe or scepter or golden apparrell of Kings for these are but shaddowes and more vaine then flowers at the spring time Si vis videre descrimen quantum absit Rex à sacerdote expende modum potestatis vtrique traditae If you will see indeed the true difference between them and how much the King is inferiour to a Priest consider
by the Emperour required to haue certaine Church-vessels deliuered vnto them S. Ambrose writeth thus Cum esset propositum vt Ecclesiae vasa iam traderenpius hoc responsi reddidi c. when it was proposed vnto me by the Emperours officers that we should presently deliuer vp the vessels of the Church behold Church-vessels of price in those daies I gaue this answere that if anie things of mine were demaunded either land or house or gold or syluer or anie other things that lay in my power to giue I would willinglie offer the same but from the Church of God I could take nothing away nor deliuer that which I had receiued to be kept And that in this point I did respect the health principally of the Emperours soule for that it was not expedient for me to deliuer the said Vessels nor for him to receiue them And that he should take in good parte the speach of a free Priest If the Emperour did loue himself he should doe well to cease from offeringe iniurie to Christ. So he And what would he haue said thinke you or answered if he had been in our English Parliament when K. Henry the 8. both demaunded and obtained not onlie the Vessels of many hundred Churches but the lands liuings houses and Churches also themselues which he pulled downe equalled with the ground or from sacred translated them to prophane vses 28. But let vs heare the same Doctor and Father handling this subiect more cleerly in another place to witt in a publike sermon to the people wherin he instructeth them of the true nature and subordination of these two Powers Spirituall and Temporall Ecclesiasticall and Imperiall Soluimus saith he quae sunt Caesaris Caesari quae sunt Dei Deo c. we doe pay vnto Caesar those things that belong to Caesar and we giue vnto God the things that appertaine vnto him Is it Caesars tribute that is demaunded we deny it not Is it the Church of God It ought not to be giuen vp to Caesar. For that the Temple of God cannot be the right of Caesar which we speake to the Emperours honour for what is more honorable vnto him then that he being an Emperour be called a child of the Church which when it is said it is spoken without sinne and to his grace for that a good Emperour is within the Church but not aboue the Church and he seeketh rather help of the Church than refuseth the same this as we speake in humilitie so with constancie wee freelie affirme it And albeit some doe heere threaten vs fire sword and exile yet we being Christs seruaunts haue learned not to feare such things and him that feareth not no threats can daunt 29. And finallie not to be longer in this matter the same good Bishop some few years after hauing occasion to reprehend and correct by his Ecclesiasticall Power and Iurisdiction the famous Emperour Theodosius the Great he failed not to vse the same and therby shewed the eminency of his iurisdiction aboue the other The occasion was for that the said good Emperour had suffered himself by the incitation of certaine of his courte about him to permit the sackage or spoile of the Citty of Thessolonica for certaine howers to his souldiars in reuenge or chastisement of a certaine disorder committed by them but the said sackage and massacre proceedinge further vpon furie of souldiars then the Emperours meaninge was and many thousands of innocent people slaine S. Ambrose wrote first an earnest epistle to the said Emperour laying before him the grieuousnes of his sinne and exhortinge him to doe pennance Wherin he when the Emperour performed not so much as hee desired proceeded further And when the Emperour came one day to the Church the foresaid Bishop went forth and met him without the Church dore forbidding him to enter therin as vnworthy the communion of Christian faithfull people vntill he had done sufficient pennance for his sinne which the good Emperour meeklie obaied as he did afterward also when he comminge to the Church to be reconciled and hauing made his offring he remained within the chauncell amonge the Priests But S. Ambrose sending vnto him his Deacon signified that that place was only for Priests and Clergie men and therfore he should departe forth into the body of the Church amonst lay men adding this sentence Purpurae Imperatores non sacerdotes efficit Purple robes make Emperours but not Priests Which admonition saith Theodorete the most faithfull Emperour tooke in good parte and said that he did not stay vvithin the chauncell vpon any presumption but for that he had learned that custome in Constantinople and therefore gaue him thankes also for this wholsome admonition So he 30 But all which is seene what eminency of Spirituall Authoritie was ascribed by these holy Fathers and Doctors to Bishops Priests and Clergie-men aboue Kings and Emperours and I might adde much more out of them to the same effect for confutation of M. Attorneys Paradox but that I am to reserue diuers things to the fourth chapter of this booke where I must answere his principall argument That vvhosoeuer ascribeth not all supreame power to Princes as well in Ecclesiasticall as Temporall matters maketh them no complete monarches But these holy Fathers of the auncient primitiue Church were of another iudgement as you see 31. Wherfore this being so that in the Church Common-wealth of Christ though Kings and Emperours be Supreame in temporall Authoritie and both honour obedience and tribute due vnto them in their degree as Christ and his Apostles doe teach yet that in spirituall and Ecclesiasticall matters concerning the soule Priests and Bishops are more eminent in Authoritie Hence it was deduced that for combininge these two Powers and Authoritie togeather in peace and vnion and due subordination in the Christian Common wealth the one hauinge need of the other for that neither the temporall partie can saue their soules without the spirituall function neither the Ecclesiasticall State be defended without the temporal sword hence I say it proceeded that presentlie after the entrance of Constantine the Emperour into the Church wherby Temporall Spirituall Power were to be conioyned togeather and exercised in one body though in different tribunalls distinct affaires seuerall laws and ordinances were set downe and agreed vpon how they should liue togeather in peace and concord and dutifull respect the one to the other the Ecclesiasticall partie by an auncient name euen from the Apostles time downwards being called the Cleargie which signifieth the Lott or peculiar in heritance of God himself and the temporall partie named the Laity which importeth as much as the rest of the people besides the Cleargie 32. These two parties I say are directed by most anncient laws both diuine and humane how to liue togeather in vnion due subordination giuing to each power and gouernment that which is due to each
And as for Ecclesiasticall Constitutions to this effect made as well by generall Councells as particular Popes euen downe from the primitiue Church sufficient testimonies or rather aboundant are extant and may be seen collected togeather by Gratian and others in the sixt Booke of Decretalls especially out of two Lateran Generall Councells and manie other particular decrees Laws and Ordinances Ecclesiasticall tending to this purpose And many ages before this the same exemptions be recorded especially for the immunitie of their persons from secular power and tribunals as in the Councel of Calcedon and 9. Canon The Councel Agathense and 32. Canon and the third Councel of Carthage wherin S. Augustine himself was present and diuerse other Councels 37. And there doe not want many learned deuines who are of opinion that this exemption of Ecclesiastical persons and their goods is not onlie Iuris humani Ecclesiastici by positiue and humane Ecclesiasticall laws But Iuris diuini also that is to saie by right of diuine law in a certaine sorte which is thus to bee vnderstood That albeit God hath not expreslie commaunded it in the written law of Scripture yet is it conforme both to the law of nature which is also Gods law as likewise it may be deduced inferred from exaÌ„ples recorded in Scripture vnder the old TestameÌ„t that God would haue this honour of exemption and immunitie in temporall things to be exhibited to his Cleargy And therfore we doe reade in Genesis that Ioseph the Patriarch in the law of Nature did exempt the Priests of the Egyptians from all temporall tributes And in the bookes of Esdras we read that Artaxerxes King of the Persians out of the same law of Nature did make free also the Priests of Israell And that the very Gentiles did the same to their Priests out of the same law and instinct of Nature is euident out of Aristotle in his second booke Oeconomicorum And of Caesar in his sixt booke De bello Gallico And out of Plutarch in the life of Camillus and other Pagan writers And in the written law we read as well in Exodus as in the booke of Numbers That God did often affirme that he would haue the order of Leuites to be his and to be freelie giuen and made subiect onlie to Aaron their high Priest and to paye no tribute Out of which is inferred that if God in the law of Nature and of Moyses would haue Priests and Leuites to be free in their persons goods from temporall exactions much more may it be presumed that he will haue it so in the new Law of the Ghospel where to vse the words of S. Leo. Et Ordo clarior Leuitarum dignit as amplior seniorum sacratior vnctio sacerdotum c. The order of Leuites is more eminent and the dignitie of elders more excellent and the annointing of Priests more sacred and holy among Christians then they were among the Iewes And thus much of Ecclesiasticall Laws for exemption of the Cleargie 38. But now vpon the very self same Considerations temporall Princes also comming to be Christians did voluntarily consume establish by their politicall laws the same exemptions as first of all our first Christian Emperour Constantine the Greate as soone as he came to receiue that Grace and light of the ghospell did vpon his singular deuotion make al the Ecclesiastical persons immunes à communibus Reipublicae oneribus Free from al publicke charges and burthens of the Common-wealth which laye men did vnder goe as by his epistle sett downe by Eusebius is cleere And the same example did other Christian Emperours follow after him as may appeere by diuers laws as well in the Code of Theedosius as also of Iustinian And the same doth S. Hiâ—rome signifie to haue been in vse in his daies and S. Ambrose also in his so much as appertaineth to the freedome of their persons though for their lands and possessions he saith Agri Ecclesiae solnâ—nt tributum That the lands of the Church did paie a certaine tribute at that tyme which may be vnderstood in the respect of the Emperours publicke necessitie through warrs vpon which or like due coÌ„siderations Clergie men haue all waies been ready and ought to be to contribute willinglie and gratefully according to their abilities towards the publike charges of their temporall Princes affaires notwithstanding their exemptions by law and iustice 39. Particular Kings and Princes in like manner vpon their deuotions and to the imitation of their foresaid good Emperours haue by their particular lawes in euery Christian countrey confirmed the franquises freedomes and immunities of the Church and Cleargie and perhaps in no one nation morâ— throughout Christendome than in our English Realme whether we consider times either before the Conquest or after And before the Conquest it may be seen by the collectioÌ„ of old English lawes of euery Kingdome sett forth by K. Edgar and K. Edward the Confessor and after the Conquest by the Coâ—querour himseâ— as after shall be shewed And after him againe by the very first Statutes that are extant in Print namelie from the great Charter made by K. Henry the third in the 9. yeare of his Raigne and the articles of the Cleargie established in the 9. yeare of K. Edward the second in the fauour of the said Cleargie the said great Charter being reiterated and ratified in most of the insuing Parlaments for authorizing and establishinge the foresaid exemptions and priuiledges of Clergie-men which were from time to time by al our Kings confirmed as afterward shall more largely and perticularly be proued vntill the later times of K. Henry the eight 40. Now then matters standing thus and the Church in euery countrey throughout Christendome being in possession of these liberties freedomes and immunities for their persons and goods and acknowledging for their supreame superiour in Spirituall Power and Iurisdiction the Bishop of Rome and their temporall Kings in Ciuill and temporall matters there grew in processe of time many difficulties and entanglements about the execution and subordination of these two Iurisdictions Temporall and Spiritual the one to th' other sometimes by abuse passioÌ„ or indiscretioÌ„ of some vnder-officers of these two supreame powers tribunals within our land ech side seeking to incroach vpon the other or at leastwise not to be content with their owne limits For as between the spirit and flesh in this life to vse againe S. Gregorie Nazianzens similitude there is some continuall strife and struglinge so hath it been allwayes in a certaine sorte between these two powers of Spirituall and Temporall Iurisdiction or at leastwise in the exercise therof especially as riches temporalityes grew more in the Clergie and therby gaue matter of enuy and emulation and lesse deuotion to the laytie towards them in so much that at length for auoidinge worse inconueniences limitations conditions concordates and transactions were made
and brought into vse how far the execution of ech parties authoritie should be extēded in certaine inferiour things that might seeme either mixt or doubtful as by many examples both in France Spaine Sicily Naples Flaunders England and other countreys may be declared Whervpon notwithstanding daylie wee see sundry difficulties sutes and controuersies to arise 41. Some States also and Catholike Kingdomes haue made certaine Decrees or Restraints at sometimes de facto whether rightfully or noe I will not now dispute for preuentinge and remedyinge some pretended inconueniences in the exercise of certaine points of the Popes Authority within their said Realmes Some other also pretend to haue done the same with indult consent transaction or conuiuency of the Pope himself But none of all these which is the mayne pointe did euer deny or call in question the said Authoritie it self as after shall appeare but rather did many wayes acknowledge and confesse the same and of this kind of Restrictions or Interpretations are the most part of these few peeces of Decrees and Statutes Customes Laws or Ordinances that M. Attorney doth alleadge which make nothing at all for the proofe of his mayne question that our English Kings before and after the Conquest did take vpon themselues supreame Spirituall Authoritie as deriued from the Right of their Crowne nay rather they make fully against him for that the very manner of making these restraintes first by way of supplication to the Popes themselues as after shall be shewed and then by domesticall ordinances doth well declare what opinion the said Princes had of that power to be in the said Popes not in themselues And this is so much as needeth to be said in this place for a generall light to the whole matter Now shall we passe ouer to treat of the particular occasion wherevpon M. Attorney thought good to ground his whole discourse of Q. Elizabethes Ecclesiasticall Authoritie as presently shall be declared THE PARTICVLAR STATE OF THE CONTROVERSY VVith M. Attorney concerning the late Queens Ecclesiasticall Povver by the auncient laws of England deduced out of the case of one Robert Caudery Clerke CHAP. III. MAister Attorney for preamble or entrance to his designed Argument against recusant Catholicks for that to be his purpose the end of his booke declareth he setteth down a pittifull case of one Robert Caudery Clerke depriued of his benefice or parsonage of North-looffennam in Ruland-shire by the Bishop of London as high Commissioner with consent of some of his associates authorized in Causes Ecclesiastical by a Commission of the late Queene graunted by her letters Patents the nynth day of December in the 26. yeare of her Raigne I doe call the case pittifull not so much in respect of the poore man depriued and vexed as after shall appeare but much more of the publike partiality appearing to haue been vsed against him by sway of the tyme and by such men as occupied the place of Iustice. You shall heare how the Case passed and iudge therof your selues 2. This Caudery in the Terme of S. Hilary saith M. Attorney in the 33. yeare of the raigne of Q. Elizabeth brought an action of trespasse against one George Atton for breaking of his cloase in North-looffennam aforesaide vpon the 7. day of August in the 31. yeare of the said Q. But Atton pleaded not guyltie and the Iurie found that the said Cauderie had been depriued of that benefice in parte wherof the Cloase was broken by a sentence of the said Bishop of London Cum assensu A. B. C. D. c. Collegerum suorum For that he had preached against the Booke of Common-praier and refused to celebrate diuine seruice according to the same 3. Heerupon it came in question how and by what Authoritie the said Bishop of London had giuen his sentence either rightfully or wrongfully And first it was alleadged by Cauderyes Coūsell that the Authoritie of commission giuen to him to witt to the forenamed Bishop of London and certaine others his Colleags by the foresaid Q. Elizabeths letters Patents was only founded vpon a Statute made in the first yeare of her Raigne by which it was enacted That such Iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall as by anie spirituall or Ecclesiasticall power hath heertofore been or may lawfully be exercised for the visitation of the Ecclesiasticall estate and persons and for the reformation order and correction of the same and of all manner of errours heresies schismes abuses offences contempts and enormities within this Realme should for euer be vnited and annexed to the Imperiall Crowne of this Realme And that her highnes her heyrs and Successors should haue full power and Authoritie by vertue of that Act by letters Patents vnder the great Seale of England to assigne nominate and authorize such persons being natural borne subiects as her Highnes her heirs or Successours should thinke meet to exercise and execute vnder her highnes her heyrs and successours all and all manner of Iurisdiction Priuiledges and Preheminences in anie wise touching or concerning anie spirituall or Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction within this Realme of England and Ireland And to visite reforme redresse order correct and amend all such errours heresies schismes abuses offenses contempts and enormities whatsoeuer which by anie manner of spirituall or Ecclesiasticall Power Authoritie or Iurisdiction can or may lawfully be reformed ordered corrected and amended c. 4. This was the ground wherby both the Queene was indued as you see with all manner of Ecclesiasticall power and Iurisdiction and had authoritie also giuen her to bestow the same vpon others without anie other condition heere expressed but onlie that they should be naturall borne subiects So as if it had pleased her Maiestie to haue bestowed a Commission vpon so many Ladies of the Courte to visit some parte of the Cleargie or Laitie to redresse their errours heresies abuses or other enormities or insteed of the Bishops named by her she had thought good to nominate their wiues for high commissioners ouer them to reforme order redresse correct or amend abuses I see not by the words of the Statute why it had not been lawfull For so much as there is no exception of sex therin And as well might the Queene haue made women her substitutes in this point as this Statute gaue all the power in capite to her self being a woman I would aske moreouer that wheras K. Henry the eight when he was made head of the Church appointed for his Vicar-Generall in Spiritualibus the Lord Cromwell that was a meere lay man and caused him to sit aboue all the Bishops in Synods and Councels about Ecclesiasticall affaires why his daughter Q. Elizabeth that had the same authoritie that he had might not haue appointed my Lady Cromwell or anie such other Ladie of that sex wherof there were diuerse that professed good skill in diuinitie at the beginning of her Reigne for her Vicaresse-Generall in Ecclesiasticall affaires Nay why the feminne sex
the Archbishops and bishops seals of office for testisying of this the Kings Highnes armes be decentlie sett with Characters vnder the said Armes for the knowledge of the diocesse that they shall vse noe other seale of Iurisdiction but wherin his Maiestyes armes be engraued c. 23. Lo heere not onlie the name and Authoritie of head of the Church giuen to K. Edward the Child and taken from the Pope but all Iurisdiction also and signe of Iurisdiction spirituall taken from the Archbishops and Bishops of England excepting onlie so far forth as it was imparted vnto them by the said Child K. Which importeth much if you consider it well For this is not onlie to haue power to visitt and gouerne Ecclesiasticall persons and to reforme abuses Set downe in the Queenes graunt by parlament but to haue all Ecclesiasticall and spirituall power and iurisdiction originallie included in his owne person and so to be able from him self as from the first fountaine and highest origen on earth to deriue the partes parcells thereof to others which you may consider how different it is from that which here the Statute would seeme to ascribe to the Queene and opposite and contrarye to all that which the ancient Fathers in the precedent chapter did affirme protest not to be in their Kings and Emperours at all but in Bishops and Preists onlie as deliuered immediatlie to them by Christ our Sauiour and by them and from them onlie to be administred to others for their saluation But by this new order of the English Parlament the contrarie course is established to witt that it must come to Bishops and Preists from a laie man yea a Child and from a lay-woman also as the other Parlament determineth and then must it needs follow also as after more larglie shall bee proued that both the one and the other I meane K. Edward and Queen Elizabeth had power not onlie to giue this Ecclesiasticall iurisdictiō vnto others but much more to vse and exercise the same in like manner in their owne persons if they would as namelie to giue holie orders create consecrate Bishops confirme Children absolue sinnes administer Sacraments teach and preach iudge and determine in points of faith and beleife sitt in iudgement vpon errors and heresies and the like And this for K. Edward 24. Now then if it may be presumed as I thinke it may that Queene Elizabeths meaning was to haue no lesse Authoritie Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall giuen vnto her and acknowledged in her then her said Father and Brother had vsed before why did not the makers of this Statute set it downe in plaine words as the other did but disguised the matter by such māner of speach as they might seeme to giue but little wheras they gaue all and more then all The Cause was that which I haue said before for which they laboured not to be vnderstood of all men but to speake as it were in mysterye not to offend so publikelie the Caluinists and yet to include matter inough to ouerthrow Catholikes But the said exacter parte and purer Caluinists quicklie found out the matter and so they began verie shortly after to mutter and write against this and diuers other points of the Statute and so haue continued euer since and the Controuersie betweene them is indeterminable 25. Well then for so much as now we haue laid open the true state of the Question and that M. Attorney is bound to proue his proposition in this sense and explication that heere is sett downe out of K. Henry and K. Edwards Statutes to witt that Q. Elizabeth had all plenarie power of Spirituall Iurisdiction in her self to deriue vnto others at her pleasure as from the head and fountaine thereof And that no Bishop Archbishop or other Ecclesiasticall person within the Realme had or could haue anie spirituall power or iurisdiction but from the wellspring and supreame sourge thereof And this not onlie by vertue of the foresaid Statute of the first yeare of her raigne but before without this also by the verie force of her Princely Crowne according to the meaning of the old and most auncient cōmon laws of England It will be time now to passe on to the veiw of his proofes which for so new strange and weightie an assertion that toucheth if wee beleiue the former alleadged Fathers the very quicke and one of the neerest means of our eternal saluation or damnation ought to bee very cleere sound and substantiall We shall see in the sequent Chapter what they are VVHERAS IN THE CASE PROPOSED THERE MAY BE TVVO KINDES OF PROOFES The one DE IVRE the other DE FACTO M. Attorney is shewed to haue fayled in both and that we doe euidently demonstrate in the one and in the other And first in that DE IVRE CHAP. IIII. THat the late Queene of England had such plenary Ecclesiasticall Power as before had byn said this by the intent meaninge of the old ancient Common-lawes of Englād though vnto me to many others it seeme a most improbable Paradox and doe meane afterwardes by Gods assistance to prooue and euidently demonstrate the same and shew that from our first Christiā Kings vnto K. Henry the eight the Common-lawes of our Land were euer conforme and subordinate to the Canō Ecclesiasticall lawes of the Roman Church in all spirituall affayres yet for so much as M. Attorney hath taken vpon him to prooue the contrary two heades of proofe he may follow therin The first De Iure the second De facto And albeit he entitle his Booke according to the first to witt De Iure Regis Ecclesiastico yet doth he nothing lesse then prosecute that kind of proofe but rather flippeth to the second which is De Facto endeauoring to prooue that certaine Kings made certaine lawes or attempted certaine factes somtimes and vpon some occasions that might seeeme somwhat to smel or taste of Ecclesiasticall power assumed to themselues in derogation or restraint of that of the Bishops Popes or Sea of Rome 2. Now albeit this were so and graunted as after it will be reproued yet well knoweth M. Attorney that an argument De facto inferreth not a proofe De Iure For if all the factes of our Kings among others should be sufficient to iustifie all matters done by them then would for example fornication be proued lawfull for that some of them are knowne to haue had vnlawfull children and left bastardes behinde them And the like we might exemplify in other things Neither doe I alleadge this instance without peculiar cause or similitude For as in that vnlawfull act of the flesh they yelded rather to passion and lust then to their owne reason iudgment knowing well inough that they did amisse when they were voyd of the same passion so in some of these actions of contention about Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction some of them were byassed with interest somtymes by indignation
of the whole entire body of the Realme 15 You see whervnto this deuise tendeth to make yt a matter of treason to deny this fancy of M. Attorney that for so much as the Canons and Ecclesiasticall lawes of the Church made by Popes and by Generall Councells from tyme to tyme and receued vniuersally for spirituall and Ecclesiasticall matters throughout the Christian world were receued also and allowed by the Kings Comnn wealth of England which was an euident argument of their acknowledging of the said Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction of the Church and spirituall gouernours therof of this approbation and allowance he would inferr that these lawes were the Kings lawes though deriued as he sayth from others that is to say from Popes and Bishopps At which inference I doubt not but that his fellow-lawyers will smile And truly I am sory that he being accoumpted so great a man in that faculty which is wont to reason well hath giuen so manifest occasion of laugther For that euery puney young student of law will see by common reason that the admitting of an other mans lawe doth not make it his lawe or that he had power to make that lawe of himself but rather to the contrary it sheweth that the admitter acknowledgeth the other for his Superiour in all matters contained vnder that law For the power of making lawes is the highest power that principally proueth dominion in any Prince and the admitting and obeying therof by another Prince is an euident argument of inferiority and subiection and so here the admitting of the Popes Ecclesiasticall and Canon-lawes was an argument that the admitters acknowledged his supreme authority in Ecclesiasticall affayres 16. Neyther is M. Attorneys example of the Romans or Normans any thinge to the purpose all For that the Romans did not take from the Athenians any formall lawes made by them for the gouernment of the Romans for that had been to acknowledg superiority as before hath bene said but rather they taking a suruey of all the Grecian lawes aswell of Athens as other Common-wealthes or States they tooke parcells therof here and there and applied the same to their Common-wealth which was properly to make lawes of them selues And the like may be sayd of the Normans if they borrowed any of their lawes from England which yet I neuer read in any Author besides M. Attorney but rather that the Normans gaue lawes to England 17. But nowe in the Canon-lawes receiued in England for almost a thousand yeares together after our first Conuersion the matter is farr different for that these were receiued wholy and formally as lawes made by another superior power in a different Tribunall different causes sent expresly to England and to all other Christian Kingdomes to be receiued and obserued and some also out of the same Ecclesiasticall power made within the land by Synodes and Prelates therof and promulgated to be obserued both by Prince and people formally and punctually as they lay and so were receiued admitted allowed and put in execution by the said Prince and his Officers except perhaps some tymes some clause or parte therof might seeme to bring some inconuenience to the temporall State for which exception was made against it and the matter remedied by common consent And this was another manner of admitting lawes then the Romans admitted some peeces of there lawes from Athens or rather translated some pointes of the Athenian lawes into theyrs which was to make them selues Maisters of thus lawes and not receiuers or admitters And finally wee see by this to what poore and pittifull plight M. Attorney hath brought the title of his booke De Iure Regis Ecclesiastico Of the Kings Ecclesiasticall law to witt that it is the Popes Ecclesiasticall law◠in deed made and promulgated by him and his but receiued and obeyed by the King and consequently not the Kings law but the Popes 18. Wherfore to conclude the first part of this Chapter for so much as M. Attorney by these two arguments De Iure which are the only he mentioneth hath proued no right at all of supreme spirituall Iurisdiction to haue accrewed to Q. Elizabeth by the title and interest of her temporall Crowne but rather the contrary to witt that both his Arguments haue proued against himself we see therby how vnable he is to proue his said affirmatiue proposition by this first head and sorte of proofe De Iure I shall now in the second part of this chapter endeuour to prooue the negatiue by as many sortes of rightes and lawes as any thing may be proued that is to say not only by Canonicall Ciuill lawes but by law of Nature also of Nations Mosaycall Euangelicall and by our ancient Common-lawes of England all which doe concu◠in this that Q. Elizabeth being a woman could not haue any supreame spirituall power or Iurisdictiō in Ecclesiasticall matter◠THE SECOND PART OF THIS CHAPTER VVherin is shevved that Q. Elizabeth in regard of her sex could not haue supreame Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction §. I. 19. First then being to performe this we are professe in this place that we meane not to imitate the proceeding of some Protestants in this behalf who following no certayne rule of doctrine no◠moderation in their doings or writings doe passe to extreames therfore feeling themselues greiued vnder Q. Maryes raigne with the course of Catholike religion then held tooke vpon them to publishe that women were not capable of any gouerment at all Temporall or Spirituall nor to be further obeyed than they would make Reformation in Religion for so they called it comforme to their willes and prescriptions as appeareth by the bookes writings and actions both of Goodman VVhitingham Gilbye Knockes others who taking their fire of fury from Geneua sought first to kindle the same in England and being repulsed thence brake into open flames of combustion in Scotland and neuer coassed vntill it brought two Noble Queens mother and daughter to their ruyne and afterward put their heire and successor into such plunges by those and other heades of like doctrine and desperate attemptes answerable therunto as Gods right hand did only preserue him from like ruyne 20. But we are not of this spirit to seeke reuenge by such new brayn-sicke doctrine we graunt that Queens may lawfully raigne inherite that Successiō which euery Countrey by their peculiar lawes doth allow them The great Kingdome of France doth excude them so doe many lesser States in Italie and Germany and other Countryes yet doth Spaine England Scotland and Flanders admitt them for preuenting other inconueniences when Male-sucessors doe fayle So as for this point of Q. Elizabeths temporall gouerment we haue no controuersie in this place If any fell out betweene her and the Bishop of Rome whose authority she tooke from him and applyed it to her self and many otherwayes exasperated him that fact appertayneth not to vs that are priuate men to iudge
especially in this place where our question is only of spirituall Iurisdiction in Ecclesiasticall causes which that it could not be in a woman in regarde of her sex all Catholique deuines doe proue by these reasons following 21. First by the disposition of the Canon-law which contayning the sense of Gods vniuersall Church from time to time both in the right and practise of this affayre of spirituall gouerment ought to be and is with wise learned Godly men of principall accompt credit and authority For that the said Canon-law is deduced from the decrees of Councells Synodes Popes auncient Fathers Doctors and Bishops and from the custome and practise of the said Church from time to time directed by Gods holy spirit according to his promise and receiued throughout all christendome from age to age though now contemned by certayne new maisters whose maistery standeth in this to scoffe at that which they vnderstand not or list not to follow be it neuer so good 22. This law then and iudgment of the Church is so far of euer hath been from graunting spirituall Iurisdiction to be in any Queene as in Capite by right of any temporall Crowne to be deriued from her to others as it doth not allow any woman to be capable of any spiritual power or Iurisdiction though it be but delegated giuen by commission substitution from another as appeareth by the textes of canon-Canon-law cited heere in the margent And the princypall reason herof is that all spirituall power being of two sorts Ordinis Iurisdictionis of holy order Iurisdiction the femynine sex is capable of neither of them Not of the power of Order saith S. Thomas which belongeth to the administring of Sacraments for that a woman by her sex cannot administer them nor is capable of Preist-hood or sacred orders required therunto And in this both Caluin and Cluinists agree with vs though Luther at the beginning held that all Christians baptized might be preists and administer Sacraments aswell women as men yea children and diuells also if they vsed the wordes institution of Christ as in the places of this worke◠here quoted may be seene 23. The second part of Spirituall power appertayning to Iurisdiction either internall or external in fore conscientia or in sore contentioso that is to absolue or loose in the secret Trybunall of conscience or in the open Court of externall contention cannot fall vpon a woman for the infirmity and indecency of her sex saith the Canon-law and for many other absurdities that would ensue therof if a woman should be admitted to the actes of Ecclesiasticall Iurisdiction which are principally two Docere Iudicare saith the said law to teach and iudge wherof neither of them standeth well in a woman to exercise ouer men the same lawe noting that albeit Christ our Sauiour loued well Mary Magdalen and other holy women that followed him and serued him vnto his death yet is it neuer read that he committed any part of Iurisdiction in gouerning his Church vnto them no not vnto the blessed Virgin his mother though she were replenished with grace full of the holy Ghost And this of the Canō-law 24. For the Ciuill albeit little occasiō was giuen therin amongst the ancient heathen Romanes the chief Authors therof to talke of of this controuersy of Spirituall Iurisdiction their whole subiect being of temporall Ciuill affayres yet in a certayne Treatise De Regulis Iuris of the rules of that law they haue this direction Faeminas remotas esse ab officijs publicis ideo iudices esse non posse That women are to be remoued by the Ciuill law from all publique offices therfore cannot be Iudges And if in Ciuill matters by that law they could not be Iudges how much lesse can they be supreame Iudges in spirituall causes which are of a far higher dignitie and indecency for women to meddle therin All which better appeare by that which is to eusue out of the law both of Nature and Grace which are the groundes of these Ciuill and Canonicall Constitutions For as the Ciuill law followed the one so the Canon followeth the other or rather both for that both proceed from God and are his lawes 25. To consider then of the law of Nature which is common to all Nations we read in the booke Genesis that the order obserued by God in the creation of man and woman was this that first Adam and all other Creatures were made and placed in paradise and afterward Eua was created for man and out of man and to the liknes of man as man was created before to the likenes of God Out of which order of Creation S. Paul doth in diuers places gather the naturall subiection of woman vnto man especially in spirituall matters appertayning to God to be eternally established by this law of their creation 26. For when to Tymothie he had said Docere autem mulieres non permitto neque deminari in virum I doe not permitt women to teach nor to haue dominion ouer her husband he addeth presently for his reason these words For Adam was first created and then Eua And Adam was not seduced but the woman was seduced And the same Apostle writing to the Corinthians about a certayne precept and ordination of his that woman should be couered in the Church men not and men to haue their hayre cutt women not in signe of subiection and subordination the one to the other he saith I doe prayse you brethren for that you are mindfull of me in all things and doe obserue my precepts as I deliuered them vnto you I will haue you knowe that Christ is the head of euery man and man the head of the woman and God the head of Christ. And as euery man that prayeth or prophesieth with his head couered dishonoreth his head which is Christ so euery woman praying or prophesying with her head not couered dishonoureth her head which is man And the man ought not to couer his head for that he is the Image and glory of God but the woman is the glory of the man for man was not made of the woman but the woman out of man not was the man created for woman but the woman for man c. Ipsa natura docet vos Nature it self doth teach you c. 27. Now then out of these deductions from the law of Nature so much vrged as you see by S. Paul for subiection and subordination of women euen in little small points concerning Religion as about speaking teaching and veiling their heads in the Church it may be inferred how earnest the same Apostle would haue bene if the question had been propoūded about the highest poynt honour office of Religion which is to exercise the place of Christ by mediation betweene God and man and to be as it were high-priest and President ouer men
in matters belonging to their soules for in this case all this law of Nature would be broken and the women should be head ouer men in the highest degree and so should not be the glory of the man as S. Paul saith that is subordinate to his glory as he is to the glory of Christ and Christ to the glory of God but the man should be her glory that is to say subordinate to her In iis quae sunt ad Deum In those things that appertaine to God yea she should be mediatrix betweene him and God in place of him that is chiefe priest And so all this first naturall institution of God should be wholy peruerted broken and turned vpside-downe 28. Neyther is it of any force to obiect as some doe that a woman may be head of men in temporall affaires as Queenes are for that God hath left this free to mâ—n to dispense in the vse of their naturall priuiledge of superiority for temporall gouernment and to appoynâ— women to gouerne them for auoyding worse inconueniences when there are no heyres-male to succeed as before hath been said But the matter is farr different in spirituall gouernment which dependeth immediatly of God himself and was deliuered by him to men not to women and so hath been continued throughout all ages from Adam to our dayes and vnder all lawes both of Nature Moyses and Christ. For in the law of Nature the first borne-male among the Patriarches was alwayes head of the family both in temporall and spirituall matters and consequently also Priest And in the law of Moyses the said priesthood and presidency in spirituall matters was annexed vnto a tribe of men and no woman admitted therunto And much more in the law of the ghospell as presently we shall declare and so we may conclude that from Eue to Elizabeth there was neuer woman that was supreame head concerning matters of Religion before her self so singular was she and her case in this point 29. Now then for the Euangelicall law meaning and sense of our Sauiour Iesus Christ in founding of his Christian Church that it was not to leaue any part or parcell of the spirituall gouerment and Iurisdiction therof vnto any woman and much lesse the supreme in any Kingdome or Countrey besides that which before hath been cyted and pondered out of S. Paul that women may not teach or speake in the Church which yet is a necessary part to be able to doe if need require and that which the Canon-law putteth in coÌ„sideration that Christ left no part of Ecclesiasticall gouerment either to his mother or to any other of his women-disciples besides all this I say it is not hard to shew out of the very Institution of Gods Church from the beginning and the establishment and perfection therof when Christ came in flesh he excluded cleerly women from all dominion therin 30. Foâ— proofe wherof first we are to suppose according to the vnderstanding of all ancient Fathers and declaration of scripture it self in many particulars that concerning the worke of our first creation and all ordinanâ—â—â— depending theron as also the Miracles and highest actions that fell out afterwards from that creation to the tyme of our redemption when any thing is ascribed peculiarly to Gods hand saying that God did this or God did that we must vnderstand it princypally of the second person in Trinity sonne of God himself who as he was to come downe to take our flesh and redeeme vs and to make vs his Church his Kingdome his body his price his glory so to that end did he create vs also according to that saying of S. Sohn Omnia per ipsum facta sunt All things were made and created by him and S. Paul speaking of those myraculous assistances giuen to the people of Israell going forth of Egipt doth ascribe the same euery where to Christ. As doth S. Iude also saying I would haue you to knowe brethren that Iesus â—â— first he saued the people of Israell that he brought out of Egipt so afterwards those that beleeued not he destroyed 31. This being supposed we are to note further that as Christ created Adam as the first head of his Church heere on earth vnder himself and made him Lord of all both temporall and spirituall and as Priest to offer Sacrifice and Eue out of him afterwardâ— subiecting her therby vnto him and to his perpetuall Dominion as before you haue heard S. Paul to collect out of this first institution so the diuell taking vpon him presently to contradict and ouerthrow this worke of Christ followed a quite contrary order and went first to Eue persuading her to goe preach to Adam the sermon that he had taught her as she did because his Doctor and Mistresse in this Ecclesiasticall function therby turned vpside-downe to both their tuynes and to the ruyne of vs all the whole order of subordination which Christ had appoynted before Wherby she should haue bene taught by Adam and not he by her But Christ comming afterward to visit them againe and to take accoumpt of this disorder albeit he knew then that the woman had bene the author therof yet would he not speake first to her but according to the order appointed by himself asked first for Adam Our Lord called for Adam saith the text dixit ei vbi es and said vnto him where art thou And when afterwards the whole cause being examined he gaue sentence vpon ech part for this disorder he specially confirmed againe his first Institution for the Dominion of manâ— and the subiection of woman saying vnto her Sub viri potestate eris ipso dominabitur tui Thou shalt be vnder the power of man thy husband and he shall haue Dominion ouer thee Which law and ordination is to be vnderstood in all kind of subiection aswell domesticall and politicall as Ecclesiasticall or diuine so as in all these three kinds of affayres man is made head and gouernour both at home in the common-wealth and in the Church by this first institution of Christ though in the former two it is permitted vnto man as hath been said vpon some occasions to yeld vp his right when he will though more in the second then in the first for that the things are more arbitrary and tollerable to witt that a woman should be head ouer all in the Common-wealth then at home ouer her husband But in the third which is in the Church and Church-matters no dispensation is permitted but that womans subiection must be perpetual And therfore when S. Paul as before hath been touched coÌ„meth to talke of Church-matters he suppresseth women presently by this law of Christ Mulieres saith he in Ecclesia tace ant non enim permittitur eis loqui sod subditas esse sicut lex dicit Let women hold their peace in the Church for it is not perâ—ittâ—d into them to speake but to
which is the very decision of our Question For that by these phrases clauses is signified as in the Canon-law and particulerly throughout the sixt booke of Decretals may be sene is properly meant that the Church and Clergie is free from all iurisdiction of temporall Princes except only in Ciuill matters and that their goods and persons are exempted from Princes secular Courtes that they are immediatly vnder their Prelates and they againe vnder the Sea Apostolike vnto which may lawfully be made appeales when iust occasion is offered that no lay iudge may sitt in iudgement vpon them or giue sentence ouer them or lay hand vpon their persons or goods but referre them to their owne Ecclesiastical Emperours other such points as may be seen in the Canon-law in the places before cited And you haue heard before in the second Chapter of this booke how conforme all these things are to Gods law and how willingly they were embraced approued and allowed by the first Christian Emperour Constantine and his Successours and by all Christian Catholike Princes since that tyme throughout the world but especially and aboue others in comparison by our English Kings before the Conquest and after also as in their dew places shal be shewed 6. And so when the forenamed Kings Edgar Edward in their very first law doe sett downe and determine as Fox also confesseth that the Kings office is to keepe cherishe mainteyne and gouerne the Church within his Kingdome which worde gouerne I haue shewed before to be wrongfully put in out of his due place and to apperteyne only to the gouernement of the Common-wealth with all integrity liberty according to the constitution of all their Auncestors and predecessours and to defend the same against all enemyes c. they doe in all this but approue and second the Popes Canon-lawes decrees therof for the preheminence of the Clergie and therby they doe directly ouerthrowe M. Attorneys proposition so doe all the Kings in like manner after the Conquest who following this example doe euer in the beginning of their lawes renew and confirme this lawe of King Edward for the libertyes and priuiledges of the Church and Church men As first the Conquerour himself as afterwarde in the next Chapter more largely shall appeare when we come to speake of him in particular whose lawes are sett downe by Houaden and others and are as effectuall for the Church as could be deuised after him to omitt K. Iohn and others Henry the third who was the chief founder of our present later Common-lawes and author of the Great Charter His first law likewise is for the foresaid liberties of holy Church in these wordes VVe haue graunted to God and by this our present Charter haue confirmed for vs and our heyres for euermore that the Church of England shal be free and haue all her rights wholie and her liberties inuiolated c. 7. This Charter of K. Henry did Edward the first his sonne publishe and confirme after him as appeareth by his owne preface prefixed before the said Magna charta And Edward the second that ensued after him not only ratifyed the same but added other Statutes also called Articuli Cleri in fauour of the same Clergie And in K. Edward the third his tyme I finde the same Charter confirmed and ratifyed by diuers and seuerall Statutes as namely in the first second fourth fifth and fourtenth yeare of his raigne and the like in the first sixt seuenth eight nynth yeare of K. Richard the second and in the first second fourth seauenth nynth and thirtenth yeare of K. Henry the 4. and in the third and fourth of K. Henry the 5. and in the sixt of K. Henry the sixt c. 8. And herby now though we goe no lower may the indifferent Reader see how vayne M. Attorneys vaunt was and is that he would proue and demonstrate by the auncient lawes of our Realme that Q. Elizabeth had supreme iurisdiction Ecclesiasticall by vertue of her Crowne And yet hitherto hath he alleadged no one lawe at all within the compasse of nyne hundred yeares togeather but only certaine impertinent scraps and raggs nothing making to the purpose nor worthy the gathering vp as after when we come to examine them will appeare And we on the contrary syde haue so many so auncient and so authenticall lawes as you haue heard and afterwardes shall be more particulerly declared for proofe of the opposite proposition iâ— his that all spirituall iurisdiction was only in Ecclesiasticall persons both bâ—sore and after the Conquest vntill K. Henry the 8. his dayes And thus much of this first demonstration concerning lawes The second Demonstration 9. The second demonstration is deduced from an other consideration not inferiour to the former which is that when â— Ethelbert of Kent for example was sirst of all other Kings conuerted to Christian faith by S. Augustine the Monke sent from Pope Gregorie the first to that effect vpon the yeare of Christ 600. and that by this occasion a new Ecclesiasticall Common-wealth was to be instituted and erected within his dominion concerning matters depending of Religion farre different from that which passed in his Realme before when he was a Pagan as namely to omitt matters of doctrine and meere spirituall gouernment concerning marriages legitimation of children burying paying of tythes iurisdiction of Bishops and priests the like that might seeme in some sorte to be mixt and concerne also the Common-wealth to whome was the recourse made sor direction counsaile and ordinance in these affaires to K. Ethelbert think you or to S. Gregorie the Pope no man will say I think to K. Ethelbert for that he was yet but a nouice in Christian religion though as capable of spirituall iurisdiction by his Crowne as either Q. Elizabeth being a woman or K. Edward the sixt a child of nyne yeares old when he was proclaimed Head of the Church of England as well in spirituall as temporall affaires 10. But in our case vnder K. Ethelbert we reade both in S. Bede and S. Gregory himself that in all Ecclesiasticall matters recourse was made to the said S. Gregory as hauing supreme authority in these affayres and therfore the said King was no sooner conuerted S. Augustine made Archbishop but the said Archbishop according to his office sent two messengers to Rome Laurentius a priest and Petrus a Monke to aske counsaile and direction in diuers cases as namely about the distribution of oblations at the aultar diuersitye of customes obserued in diuers contreys in saying Masse about punishing of sacriledge in such as steale from Churches about degrees of kinred or propinquity to be obserued in marriages about ordination of Bishops how he should proceed with the Bishops of France and Britany about baptizing women with child and churching â—hem after their child-birth and the like 11. To all which questions S. Gregory answereth
said King and Bishops tooke vnto themselues wholesome counsaile choosing and ordeyning particular Bishops in euery prouince of the Geuisses or westsaxons And wheras the said prouince had but two Bishops in old time now they deuided the same into fiue and presently the Synod being ended the said Archbishop was sent to Rome with honourable presents Qui Papam saith our Authour cum magna humilitate placauit Decretum Regis recitauit quod Apostolico maximè placuit He did with great humilitie endeauour to pacify the said Pope Formosus reciting vnto him the decree that King Edward had made for better furnishing the Countrey with more Bishops for the time to come then euer had byn before which most of all pleased the Apostolicall Pope Wherfore the Archbishop retourning into England ordeyned in the Citty of Canterbury seaueu Bishops vpon one day appointing them seuen distinct Bishoprickes Atque hoc totum saith he Papa firmauit vt damnaretur in perpetuum qui hoc decretum infirmaret And the Pope Formosus did confirme this decree of this distinction of Bishops in England daÌ„ning him eternally which should goe about to infringe the same So Malmesbury and consider the authority here vsed 58. The same Pope also wrote a letter to the Bishopps of England by the said Archbishop Pleamond in these wordes To our brethren and children in Christ all the Bishopps of England Formosus We hauing heard of the wicked rytes of Idolatrous Pagans which haue begun to spring vp againe in your partes and that yow haue held your peace as dumme doggs not able to barke we had determined to strike you all with the sword of separation from the body of Christ and his Church but for so much as our deere brother Pleamond your Archbishop hath tolde me that at length you are awakened and haue begun to renew the seed of Gods word by preaching which was so honourably sowne from this Sea in times past in the land of England we haue drawne backe and stayed the deuouring sword and moreouer doe send you the benediction of almighty God and of S. Peter Prince of the Apostles praying for you that you may haue perseuerance in the good things which you haue well begune c. 59. Thus went that letter with a far longer exhortation â—â— that behalfe with order and instruction how to proceed to coâ—tinew good Bishopps among them which was that as soone â—â— knowledge came to the Metropolitan of any Bishop dead he should presently without delay cause another Canonically to be elected in his place and himself to consecrate the same And moreouer he determineth that the Bishop of Canterbury hath byn euer from ancient times held for chiefe Metropolitan of England otdeyened so by S. Gregory himself as in the Roman Registers was authenticall recorded and therefore he confirmeth the same threatning that what man soeuer shall goe about to infringe this decree shal be separated perpetually from the body of Christ and his Church So Malmesbury 60. And in this example we see many points expressing the sense of these ages as first the vigilancy of the Pope Formosus ouer England the affaires therof though far remote from him and altogether embroyled with warrs no lesse then ouer other Prouinces Kingdomes of the world which is conforme to that which S. Bede writeth of the like diligence of Pope Agatho aboue two hundred yeares before this of Formosus that is to say that he seing the heresie of Monethelites that held but one only will in Christ to spring vp and encrease in diuerse places of the world sent one expressly from Rome into England to learne what passed there Pope Agatho saith Bede being desirous to vnderstand as in other prouinces so also in Britany what was the state of the English Church and whether it preserued it self chaste and vnspotted from the contagions of heretickes sent into England for this purpose a most reuerend Abbot named Iohn who procuring a Synod of Bishops to be gathered togeather about that matter by Theodorus the Archbishop found that the Catholike faith in England was conserued in all points entire and inuiolated of which Synod he had an authenticall copie deliuered him by publicke testimony to be carryed to Rome Thus S. Bede touching the attention and diligence of Pope Agatho in our English Ecclesiasticall affaires 61. And it is to be noted that in the same Synod is sett downe that fower seuerall Kings concurred thervnto to giue therby satisfaction vnto the Pope to wit Egfryd King of the Northumberâ— Ethelred of the Mercians Adelnulphus of the Eastangles Lotharius of Kent which is conforme to that which the King Edward the first â—â— the former example did when presently vpon the threatning letters of Pope Formosus he called forthwith a Councell remedyed the fault that was committed sent the Archbishop Pleamond to Rome to giue satisfaction and promise of amendment for the time to come which is to be presumed that none of these Kings would haue done if they had thought themselues iniured by this intermedling of the Pope as an externall power and that themselues had authority Ecclesiasticall deriued from their crownes to dispose order these things without any reference to the Sea Apostolike And so much for this argument and demonstration which openeth a window to see many things more which by me of purpose are pretermitted for that I couet not to be ouerlong The sixt Demonstration 62. The sixt Argument may be deduced from an vniuersall contemplation of all the Kings Archbishops and Bishops that haue liued and raigned togeather in all this tyme in England and the seuerall Prouinces and Kingdomes therof before the Conquest the Kings being in number aboue an hundred that were Christened as often before hath byn mentioned the Archbishops of Canterbury the spirituall heads of the English Church 32. from S. Augustine vnto Stigano and other Bishops of far greater number laying before our eyes what manner of men all these were what faith they beleeued and practised what vnion and subordination they had in spirituall and temporall iurisdiction amongst them selues both at home and abroad with the Sea Apostolike which in great part hath byn declared by the precedent arguments and demonstrations All which being layd togeather we may inferre that for so much as lawes are nothing else but ordinaunces and agreemenrs of the Prince and people to the publicke good of euery Kingdome State and Countrey we may inferre I say that according as we find the faith and religion of our Princes Bishops and people to haue byn in those dayes so were also their lawes For out of their religion they made their lawes and consequently it must needes follow that they being all perfectly Catholike according to the Roman vse as by all the former arguments you haue seene that they made no lawes concerning Ecclesiasticall matters nor admitted â—onceaued any from their ancestours nor could not doe they being also
office for that saith Florentius from the time he was made Archbishop which was no lesse then two years it was not permitted vnto him either to hold any Synod or to correct the vices which were sprung vp through England Wherevnto Malmesbury and Edmerus that 〈◊〉 with him doe add that the King would not suffer him to goe to Rome to take his pall of the Pope as all Archbishops of Canterbury were accustomed to doe and the other greatly vrged to haue licence But after a long combat which he had had with the King diuers other Bishops that followed the Kings fauour in a Synod at London vpō the third weeke in lent Anno Domini 1095. and eight yeare of King VVilliam his raigne the said Archbishop being extreamly baited by the King his followers stood constant in his appeale to Rome 4. Which thing Rufus perceiuing saith Malmesbury he sent secretly certaine messengers to Rome to intreat the Pope which then was Vrban the second to send the Pall of Canterbury vnto the King to be giuen to whom he would Whervnto though the Pope would not yeeld yet he sent back with his messengers for Legate the Bishop of Albanum named VValta with the said Pall who shewed vnto the King so many reasons why the Pope could not yeeld to his demaund and intreated him so forceably to be content that he might giue the said Pall from the Pope to Anselme with accustomed ceremonyes in the Church of Canterbury as at length he obteyned the same and made them freinds 5. But this frendship lasted not longe for that the very next yeare after the King continued his old manner of oppressing the Church S. Anselme went vnto him to VVinchester and there first by intercessors desired the King that he might haue licence to goe to Rome to conferr diuers difficultyes of his with Vrban the Pope The King answered that he would not giue him licence for that he knew him to haue no such great sinnes that it was needfull for him to goe to Rome for absolution nor yet to be lesse learned then Pope Vrban whose counsaile direction he would aske Whervpon the Archbishop entring the Kings chamber sate downe by his side saith the Story and disputed the matter with him affirming him to deny Christ himself that denyed recourse vnto his Vicar vpon earth And thervpon he concluded that this licence could not be denyed him by a Christian King and consequently he would goe The King said he should carry out nothing with him The Archbishop answered he would goe naked and bare-foote Which firme resolution the King perceiuing to be in him vsed by messengers vnto him diuers intreatyes saith VValsingham and offered large promises of fauours if he would stay But the other would not but departed the Realme though he were searched and rifled by the Kings Officers at the port 6. By all which story it most euidently appeareth that albeit this young disorderly and passionate King were as well in this as in other matters headstronge and violent in pursuing his appetites desires as well in Ecclesiasticall as Temporall affaires yet did he neuer deny the Popes spirituall iurisdiction in England but rather acknowledged the same in sending to Rome to intreat that the pall might be sent to him as also in going about to diuert S. Anselms recourse thither But alas there passed not many years but God punished seuerely these greiuous sinnes against his Church For as both the foresaid Malmesbury Edmerus that liued with him doe write S. Anselms going to Rome frō thence with Pope Vrban to a Councell of Bishops gathered togeather at Bary in Apulia wherin among other things all lay-men were excommunicated that presumed to giue Ecclesiasticall Inuestitures as also those that receiued them at lay-mens hands which was thought principally to haue byn done in respect of King VVilliam he returned againe some years after into France and there passing his banishment with great quietnes of mind he being one day with S. Hugh Abbot of Cluniaecke famous in those dayes for holines the said Abbot told him in the hearing of diuers others that the night before he had seen King VVilliam called before God and receiued the sorrowfull sentence of damnation wherat all the hearers marueyling the next newes they heard from England was that the said King was strangely slaine by an erring arrow of his familiar seruant Tyrrell while he hunted in the New-forrest and that being stroken he fell downe dead without speaking any one word And the same authors doe recount diuers other the like presages and prognostications that happened as well to the King himself as to other friends of his in England portending this euent but neglected by him 7. And this shall suffice for King VVilliam Rufus who raigned thirteen years And though he was naught to all kind of men saith Malmesbury and pernicious in his actions as well to secular as Clergy men yet had he no other iudgement in matters of religion then his father or auncestors nor euer was he noted of any least difference therin Nor doth Maister Attorney bring any instance at all out of this Kings Raigne and therfore shall wee passe to his younger brother that ensued him in the Kingdome OF KING HENRY THE FIRST VVhich was the third King after the Conquest §. I. 8. This was the third sonne of VVilliam the great surnamed the Conquerour who finding the commodity by absence of his eldest brother Robert Duke of Normandy tooke the Kingdome of England vpon him hauing gained by faire promises the good-wills of all or most of the Realme and so was crowned by Maurice Bishop of London for that S. Anselm Archbishop of Canterbury was yet in exile as before vnder Rufus you haue heard 9. What the said Henry did sweare and promise and what he began euen from the very day of his Coronation to put in practice Florentius that then liued declareth in these words Consecrationis suae die Sanctam Dei Ecclesiam c. From the very day of his consecration he set free the holy Church of God which in his brothers dayes had byn sold and let to farme he tooke away all euill customes and remoued all vniust exactions wherby the Kingdome had byn wrongfully oppressed before commaunded that peace and freedome should be holden throughout the whole Realme He restored the law of S. Edward to all men in common with those additions or corrections which his Father had added thervnto c. So Florentius And what his Fathers additions were and how greatly in fauour of the Church and of Ecclesiasticall power authority and libertyes you haue heard before in his life and lawes Wherby we may easily ghesse with what mind and iudgement this man entered vnto his crowne 10. And albeit in this point he neuer altered yet there passed not two years of his gouernment but partely vpon Kingly appetite to haue power in all things and
find recorded by Malmesbury and others of that time that Calixtus being made Pope vpon the yeare 1119. and presently comming into France and calling a Councell at Rhemes K. Henry of England sent diuers Bishops at his commaundement vnto that Councell And the next yeare after going to treat with the said Pope in person at his Castell of Gesorse in Normandy Acta sunt multae inter illos c. many things were treated between them saith Houeden as it was conuenient in the meeting of so great personages But the principall was that Henry obtained of the Pope to graunt vnto him that he might haue all the customes coÌ„firmed which his Father had in England and Normandy especially that none from thenceforth should be sent Legat into England except the King vpon some controuersie falling out which could not be ended by his Bishops should demaund the same of the Pope So Houeden 15. Wherby we may see the Kings iudgment of the Pope â—â—thority and the recourse to be made thervnto in matters of moâ—â— moment And that which is more soone after this meeting I find that the foresaid Emperour made the like attonement with the same Calixtus which Malmesbury recordeth in these wordâ— In nomine Sancta indiuiduae Trinitatis Ego Henricus c. In the name of the holy and indiuisible blessed Trinity I Henry by the Grace of God Emperour c. for the loue of God and of the holy Romaine Church and of my Lord Calixtus the Pope and for remedy of my soule doe remit freely to God and his holy Apostles S. Peter S. Paul and to his holy Catholike Church all inuestitures by ring and staffe and doe yeeld and permit that in all Churches within my Kingdomes and Empire there be made Canonicall election and free consecration of Ecclesiasticall persons c. 16. And thus was ended that fierce and bloudy controuersie that had lasted and troubled the whole Christian world aboue fifty yeares saith Malmesbury about the vse of Inuestitures pretended by princes to be graunted vnto them and their auncestours by different Popes But yet neuer challenged the same as incident to their Crowne or temporall iurisdiction but as a priuiledge graunted by the Sea Apostolike which might lawfully be done as you haue heard by the former rule of Baldus the Lawyer that the Pope may commit spirituall things by priuiledge in some cases as the is to a mere lay-man And yet further if we seek the beginning of these inuestitures how and when and to whome they were first graunted we shall find the matter very vncertaine For albeit some haue thought and written out of a certaine relation in Sigebert his Chronicle that the first graunt of these Inuestitures was made by Pope Adrian the first vnto Charles the Great in respect of his great meritts toward the Church yet others doe hold this to be false and that the name of Inuestitures was not knowne in those dayes but rather crept in afterward yea and rather taken and vsurped to themselues by certaine Princes by inuasion of intrusion vpon the Church priuately first then more publikely afterward and therevpon pretended by their Successours than granted by speciall gift or consent of any Pope aâ— alâ—â— Which seemeth to haue byn the case also of our King Henry 〈◊〉 first who as you haue heard did pretend to challeng the iâ—â—â—â—â—â—tures as vsed by his Father and brother before him wherof 〈◊〉 notwithstanding we finde no expresse proofe for example 〈◊〉 any of our historyes that they vsed them and much lesse that they were lawfully graunted vnto them And albeit they had byn yet might the same authority which did graunt them reuoke them againe vpon the notable abuses which therof did ensue by selling and buying of Churches by Princes and their officers 17. But howsoeuer this were yet is it manifest heerby that as well those princes which violently tooke these inuestitures vpon them as others that might haue them perhaps graunted for a tyme both of them I say did pretend to haue them from the Sea Apostolike and therin acknowledged the Primacy and Supremacy of Ecclesiasticall power to be in that Sea and not in themselues Which is wholy against M. Attorneys conclusion And therefore the said Emperour Henry the 5. when he deteyned prisoner the foresaid Pope Paescalis and forced him to make a constrained graunt vnto him of the said Inuestitures he would needs haue him put these words in his Bull. Illud igitur diguitatis priuilegium c. That priuiledge of dignity therfore that our Predecessours Bishops of Rome haue graunted vnto your Predecessours Catholike Emperours and haue confirmed the same by their Charters we graunt also to you and doe confirme by this present priuiledge and Charter that vnto the Bishops and Abbots of your Kingdome that shall be chosen freely without violence or Symmony you may giue the inuestiture of staffe ringe and that after the said inuestiture they may canonically receiue their consecration from the Bishop to whome it shall appertaine c. So he 18. And now consider good Reader that if so great potent an enemy of the Church of Rome was so desirous to haue her graunt albeit perforce of such little peeces and raggs of Ecclesiasticall authority as these were how much more glad would he haue byn to haue had all the Popes authority acknowledged to be in himself if he could haue deriued it from the Title of his Crowne and Empire as Syr Edward Cooke would haue taught him if he had byn his Attorney and how easily might he haue procured such a Statute to haue byn made vnto him by his people in Parlament as was made vnto Queen Elizabeth to giue her all supreame authority Ecclesiasticall that euer any person had or might haue if he had listed or if he had thought it had byn worth the procurement And surely it had bin a much more easie and lesse costly way to procure it at home in Germany 〈◊〉 to haue gone to Rome with so mayne an army and extraordinary charges labour and daunger as he did to extort the same from the Pope and yet not all his authority but a small peece therof as hath byn said 19. But now all was amended and accommodated againe as well the Emperour as his father-in-Father-in-law K. Henry yelded vp all their pretended right in those inuestitures as you haue heard And as in the procuring and retaining them by what manner soeuer they acknowledged the spirituall power of the Sea of Rome so much more in rendring them vp againe And for so much as both their acts are presumed principally to haue proceeded of our K. Henry all men may therby see his deuotion to that Sea 20. And this deuotion and obedience he continued from that tyme forward vnto his death which was some 15. years in all which time I might shew diuers euident argumeÌ„ts of this point as of his often sending to Rome
to returne to the obedience and freindship of her King and husband and in the end threatneth to vse the Censures of the Church against her if she obaied not Parochiana eniuâ— nostra es saith he sicut â—◠〈◊〉 non pâ—ssumus deesse iustitia c. For you are our Parishioner aâ— also your husband I cannot but doe iustice either you must returne to your husband againe or by the Canon-law I shall be forced to constraine you by Ecclesiasticall censures I write this vnwillingly and if you repent not I must doe it though with sorrow and teares 6. The like letter at the same time wrote Richard Archbishop of Canterbury to K. Henry the sonne persuading him by diuers earnest arguments to returne into grace with his Father and in the end threatned him that if within fifteen dayes he perfourmed it not he had expresse commaundement from the Pope to excommunicate him But how this matter was afterward ended or compounded rather for that present you shall heare a little beneath though againe vpon other occasions matters brake forth brought the afflicted King at last to the most miserable state of desolation in minde that euer perhaps was read of in historyes For that as Stow out of auncient writers reporteth he died cursing the day that euer he was borne and giuing Gods curse and his to his sonnes which were only two liuing at that time and that he would neuer release or goe backe in this albeit he was intreated by diuers both Bishops and other religious persons euen vntill the very houre of his death Wher vnto Nubergensis addeth this saying for some reason therof Nondum vti credo satu defleuerat c. He had not as I beleeue mourned or bewailed sufficiently the rigour of that most vnfortunate obstination of mind which he had vsed against the venerable Archbishop Thomas in giuing the occasion of his murder and therefore doe I thinke this great Prince to haue had so miserable an end in this world that our Lord not sparing him heere might by his temporall punishment prepare him euerlasting mercy in the life to come So Nubergensis And this for his manners and conuersation wherin otherwise the said Author doth much commend him for a good Iusticer and leuing Father to his people a great Almes-man and founder of pious works and for a principall defender and preseruer of Ecclesiasticall libertyes c. 7. But now if we consider the point of our controuersie about his religion and particular iudgement in the matter of Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction no King euer of our nation did make the matter more cleere for his obedience to the Sea of Rome in all occasions wherof he had many in his dayes some of them neerly concerning himselfe as that of Thomas Becket Archbishop of Canterbury who for opposing himself against certaine new Statutes and Ordinances of the said King which in the heat of 〈◊〉 greatnes and temporall fortune he would haue made against the liberty of the Church pretending them to haue byn of his Grand-father K. Henry the first and if they had byn the antiquity was not great as you see the said Archbishop incurred highly his heauy indignation which cost him afterward his life as is notorious And these lawes were six in number as the histories of that time doe sett them downe The first that no appellation might be made to Rome without he Kings consent The second that no Bishop might goe out of the Realme without the Kings licâ—nce though he were called by the Pope himself The third that no Bishop may excommunicate any man that held of the King in capite but by the Kings approbation The fourth that it shall not appertaine to the Bishop to punish men for periury â—â— violating their faith but that it shall belonge to the Kings Courts The fifth that Clarks may be drawne to secular tribunals in certaine causes The sixt that the King and his lay-Iudges may determine controuersies about titbes or Churches 8. These were the lawes for which K. Henry the second made so much adoe to haue them passe as he enpawned his whole power therin moued for so much as in him lay both heauen and earth to effectuate them euen by the Pope himself but could not And yet you see that heere is not pretended any absolute spirituall iurisdiction but only delegatory in certaine little peeces and parcels therof or rather some little restraint of that supreme authority which he acknowledged to be in the Sea of Rome But yet for the good and peace of his land he pretended to haue them graunted confirmed allowed vnto him as he said they had byn to his Grand-father but could not shew it For as you haue heard in the life of K. Henry the first the holy and learned prelate S. Anselme stood against him in such sorte so as he preuailed not 9. It is heer also specially to be noted against M. Attorney that this King pretended not as hath byn said to haue this iurisdiction against Clergie men by right of his Crowne but by concession rather of his Bishops and confirmation of the Pope himself For so expresly affirmeth Houeden that liued at that tyme that he required the seales of the said Bishops and confirmation of Pope Alexander the third whervnto when Thomas Becket Archbishop of Canterbury that was Legatus-natus would not yeeld the King sent messengers to Rome presently saith Houeden to wit Iohn â—â—â—â—ford Geffrey Ridell to desire of Pope Alexander that he would make his extraordinary Legat in England Roger Archbishop of Yorke an old emulator and enemy of S. Thomas But the Pope perceiuing his drifte which was to oppresse the said Archbishop of Canterbury denyed the Kings petition in this behalfe though at the request of the Kings said messengers Consessit Dominus Papa vt Rexipse Legatus esset totius Angliae it a tamen quod ipse nullum grauamen facere posset Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo The Pope graunted that K. Henry himself should be his Legat ouer all England but yet so as he should not be able to lay any aggreiuaunce vpon the Archbishop of Canterbury that is to say should not preiudicate his ordinary iurisdiction or haue any authority ouer him Which point the King perceiuing and that his whole intent of oppressing the said Archbishop was heerby preuented he would not through indignation saith our Author accept of the said legation but sent back the Popes letters of that commission to him againe Wherby you see that he refused the said office for that he thought the iurisdiction giuen him was lesse then he would haue had and not for that he did not acknowledge the whole to be in the Pope and nothing in himself as from the right of his Crowne 10. But to abbridge this matter concerning his contention with S. Thomas wherof afterward he sore repented himself as you will heare though he entred into the same with great
iudge of such possessions as depend of legitimation we commaund your brotherhoods that leauing the iudgment of the said possessions to the King and his Courts you examine onlie the principall cause concerning the loialtie of the marriage it self and determine the same 43. Heerby then wee see first that M. Attorney alleadging this instance hath alleadged nothing at all against vs or for himself For that when the Earls and Barons refused to change the laws of England concerning inheritance vpon legitimation they said no more then is allowed them by the Canon-law it self as you haue heard And how will M. Attorney inferre of this that K. Henry the third held himself to haue supreme authority ecclesiasticall for that this must be his conclusion out of his instance or els he saith nothing 44. And it shall not be amisse to note by the way how these men doe vse to ouer-lash in their asseueratioÌ„s to help their feeble cause thereby By the auncient Canons and Decrees of the Church of Rome saith he the issue borne before solemnization of marriage is as lawfull and inheritable marriage following as the issue borne after marriage But this is not sincerely related For the Canon-law as you haue heard putteth diuers restrictions both in the persons to be legitimated and in the ends and effects whervnto they are legitimated as also concerning the Countries Kingdomes wherin they are legitimated Of all which variety of circumstances and considerations M. Attorney saying nothing his intention therin may easily be ghessed at And so much for this matter OF THE LIVES AND RAIGNES OF KING EDVVARD The first and second Father and sonne And what arguments M. Attorney draweth from them towards the prouing of his purpose CHAP. XI HAVING now come downe by orderly descent of seauen hundred yeares more of the raignes of our Christian English Kings shewed them all to haue byn of one and the self same Catholicke Roman religion comforme also in the point of this our controuersie about the acknowledgement and practise of the spirituall power and authoritie of the Sea Apostolicke in England concerning ecclesiasticall affaires And hauing declared the same so largely as you haue heard in three Henries since the Conquest of famous memory and authoritie aboue the rest and the last of them author also and parent of all statute-Statute-law in our Realme we are to examine now in order three Edwardes lineally succeeding the one to the other and all three proceeding from this last named Henry Vnder which Edwardes and their ofspring M. Attorney preteÌ„deth more restraint to haue byn made in some points of the Popes externall iurisdiction then vnder former Kings which though it be graunted vpon some such occasions as after shal be shewed yet will you fynd the matter far shorte of that conclusion which he pretendeth to maintayne that hereby they tooke vpon them spirituall soueraingty in causes Ecclesiasticall You shall see it by the triall OF KING EDVVARD THE FIRST VVhich vvas the nynth King after the Conquest §. I. 2. When King Henry the third dyed his eldest sonne Prince Edward was occupied in the wars of the Holy land being then of the age of thirty three yeares who hearing of his Fathers death retourned presently homeward and passing by the Citty of Rome found there newly made Pope Gregory the tenth called before Theobald with whome in tymes past he had familiarly byn acquainted whiles he was Legate for his predecessor Vrbane the fourth in the said warrs of the Holy-land who receaued him with all honour and loue and graunted vnto him saith Stow the tenth of all Ecclesiasticall benefices in England as well temporall as spirituall for one yeare the like to his brother Edmund for an other in recompence of their expences made in the Holy-land Whervpon when the next yeare after the said Gregory called a generall Councell at Lions in France which was the second held in that place of aboue fiue hundred Bishops and a thousand other Prelates King Edward sent also a most honourable embassage thither both of Bishops and Noble-men 3. This King Edward beginning his raigne in the yeare of Christ 1272. continued the same for almost 35. yeares with variable euents For as he was a tall and goodly Prince in person high in stature and thereof surnamed Long-shanke so was he in mynd also no lesse war-like haughty earnest and much giuen to haue his owne will by any meanes whatsoeuer when once he set himself theron though yet when he was in calme out of passion he shewed himself a most religious and pious Prince 4. Of the later may be example among other things his speciall deuotion to the Blessed Virgin mother of our Sauiour which both Mathew VVestminster and VValsingham doe recount from the very beginning of his raigne doe coÌ„tinue the same throughout his life by occasion of many strange and miraculous 〈◊〉 from imminent dangers which himself ascribed to the said dâ—uotion and to our Blessed Ladies speciall protection Wherevnto may be referred in like maÌ„ner the piety of the said King shewed in diuers other occasions As first of all when in the first yeare of his raigne he voluntarily set forth published and confirmed the Great Charter made by his Father in fauour of the Church saying as in the said Charter is to be read Pro salute animae nostrae animarum antecessorum successorum nostroruus Regum Angliae ad exaltationem Sanctae Ecclesiae emendationem Regni nostri spontanea bona reluntate nostra dedimus concessinius c. We haue giuen and graunted freely of our owne good will this Charter for the health of our soule and of the soules as well of our predecessours as successours Kings of England to the exaltation of holy Church and amendment of our Kidgdome c. 5. And the like piety he shewed in many other occasions in like manner as namely when he being in his iourney with a great army towards Scotland and his wife Q. Eleanor daughter to King Ferdinand the third of Spaine surnamed the Saint a most vertuous religious Lady falling sicke dying neere the borders therof he leauing his course retourned backe with her dead body to London Cunctis diebus vitae suae eam plangebat saith Walsingham Iesum benignum iugis precibus pro ea interpellabat eleemosynarum largitiones Missarum celebrationes pro ea diuersis Regni locis ordinans in perpetuum procurans The King did bewayle this Queenes death all the dayes of his life and did by continual prayers call vpon mercifull Iesus to vse mercy towards her ordeyning great store of almes to be giuen for her as also procuring Masses to be said for her soule in diuers partes of the Kingdome 6. And moreouer in all the places where the said body rested as it came to London he erected great goodly crosses in her memory Vt à transeuntibus saith VValsingham
he great difficultyes notwithstanding both therin and by domesticall conspiracyes not only the Lollards and VVickliffians but his owne nobility also kinred and cheife officers conspiring against him and seeking his ouerthrow And finally when he was in the very middest and heat of his wars and Conquest and his life and health most desired both by himself others he died with much affliction of mind in France leauing a little child of his owne name that was but eight moneths old to preserue and defend that which he had gotten but could not as the euent proued 4. This young infant then borne as it were a King of two so great Realmes and crowned in Paris it self which no other King of England euer was before or since drew out a longe raigne for almost forty yeres but intangled with many aduersityes and varietyes of fortune in which he lost first all his States of France not only such as his Father had gotteÌ„ by dint of sword but other likewise which his progenitors had inherited by lawfull succession of bloud and then by little and little leesing also at home his kinred trustie freinds that by Ciuill wars were cut of he lost at length his Kingdome being twise depriued therof and finally his life and progeny became a pittifull example of Princely misery and so this line of Lancaster entring by Gods designement as it seemeth to punish the sinnes of the former line of Edwards and Richard before mentioned and especially that as many thinke of their rough proceeding with the Church now were punished also themselues by another line of Yorke for continuing the said rigorous and preiudiciall lawes against the priuiledges and franquises therof which was written to K. Henry the 6. by Pope Martyn the 5. as Polidor noteth and he promised reformation therin but the thing depending of consent of Parlament was neuer effected nor that good motion put in execution 5. But yet that all these three Kings of the house of Lancaster were perfectly and zealously Catholicke no man can deny and infinite arguments are extant therof yea and of this point also in particular of their acknowledgment and reuerence of the soueraigne spiritual authority of the Bishop of Rome in the Church of Christ. And therfore King Henry the fourth considering the great hurtes and scandals that had ensued for many yeres togeather by schisme of Anti-Popes in the Sea Apostolicke was so carefull and diligent to procure and assist the Generall Councell indicted at Pisa in Italy for the extinguishing therof as not only he sent learned Prelates vpon his charges thither to help assist the said Councell as namely Robert Bishop of Salisbury and other learned men but wrote very pious letters also both to Gregory the 12. that was the true Pope and to all his Cardinals by a speciall Embassadge of his owne persuading the said Pope by diuers godly and prudent reasons to persist in his mind and promise of giuing ouer the Popedome as the other Anti-pope called Benedictus the 13. had in like manner promised Of which his letter to the said Pope he making mention in another to the foresaid Cardinals saith Cupientes ostendere quem zelum habuimus habemus vt pax detur Ecclesiae c. we desiring to shew what zeale we haue had and haue that peace be giuen to the Church we haue by consent of the States of our Kingdome sent our letters vnto his Holines c. 6. And when this Councell of Pisa tooke no great effect vntill fiue yeares after when in the tyme of his sonne K. Henry the 5. the generall Councell of Constance in Germany was appointed for the same effect the said sonne K. Henry the 5. following his Fathers piety heerin caused the Archbishop of Canterbury Henry Chychley to call â—â—â—â—t a Councell in England to choose fit English Prelates to be sent to that Councell and so were chosen not onlie the foresaid Bishop of Salysburie sent before to Pisa but Bath and Hereford also togeather with the Abbot of VVestminster Prior of VVorcester and other famous learned men to whom the King added for his Embassadour the Earle of VVarwycke to accompany them thither where the said schisme being extinguished by the deposition of three that pretended to be Popes and Martyn the 5. being established in that seate the whole Christian world was put in peace thereby 7. And for that in the same Councell the heresies of VVickcliffians and Lollards were especially condemned and anathematized the same decrees were presently admitted and put in execution in England by the zealous commaundement of the said K Henry the 5. though his father K. Henry the 4. and the whole State had preuented that decree by making temporall laws in confirmation of the Canonicall and Churches laws for the punishment of the said Lollards and VVickcliffians that denyed the Popes Supremacy and caused manie of them to bee burneed and so did K. Henrie the 6. also during all the time of his raigne whereby as by infinite other thinges that might bee alleadged their beleife and iudgment in that behalfe is sufficiently declared though in respect of some temporall inconueniences and the inclination of their people vpon former complaints they recalled not the said restraints laws or ordinances made by their progenitors wherof now we shall speake more particularly in answering the instances alleadged by M. Attorney our of their raignes Instances alleadged out of the Raigne of King Henry the fourth the thirtenth King after the Conquest §. I. The Attorney 8. It is resolued that the Popes Collectors though they haue the Popes Buls for that purpose haue no iurisdiction within this Realme and there the Archbishops and Bishops c. of this Realme are called the Kings spirituall Iudges The Catholicke Deuine It is to bee considered who resolued this and vpoÌ„ what ground for it maie bee there was some agreement taken between the Pope and the Realme in that behalfe concerning the Collectors authoritie as in other Catholicke Countreys also at this daie wee see there is Neither had the said Collector by his office anie ordinarie iurisdictioÌ„ but extraordinarie onlie by particular commission And commonly those collections were made cum beneplacito Principis with the good liking of the Prince where they are made Archbishops Bishops maie bee called the Kings spirituall Iudges for that they are his subiects as Peers and principall members of the Realme as before hath been declared and doe liue vnder his protection but not as though they receiued their spirituall authoritie or iurisdiction from him for then might he execute the same authoritie and iurisdictioÌ„ by others also which are no Bishops as by his Chauncellour and temporall Iudges giuing them the same iurisdiction which no man would affirme in that time as lawfull But let vs see his second Instance The Attorney 9. By the auncient lawes Ecclesiasticall of this Realme no man could be conuicted
togeather in one as also for that they are of so small substance as they deserue not to be handled a part For as to the first concerning the buying of alume of the Florentines who doth not see but that it is a temporall case wherin the Realme of England or Marchants therof being interessed the State might pretend iust cause to differre the admission or execution of the Popes sentence of excommunication touching that affaire vntill they had better informed him of the truth or iustice of the cause in their behalfe For this is vsed ordinarily by all Catholicke Princes and States euen at this day 17. The second obiection about the punishment of Priests and Clergy-men by their Bishops and Archbishops hath nothing in it at all that may make for M. Attorneys purpose For that heere is not giuen by Parlament any new spirituall iurisdiction to Bishops Archbishops but some temporall enlargement is graunted to the same As for example that they may not only suspend and excommunicate and punish by their spirituall censures such licentious persons of life but may corporally punish them also by imprisonment and other wayes as heere is set downe And least any in such cases might make recourse vnto the temporall magistrate saying that they were imprisoned wrongfully and contrary to the common secular laws of the Realme this refuge is cut of by this Statute and absolute power giuen to Bishops Archbishops to punish in such cases as well corporally as spiritually wherby also appeareth that such delicts of Clergy-men were in those dayes to be inquired of and punished only in the Bishops Courts and not in the temporall which was a dignity and no small preheminence of the Prelates of England aboue many other Countreys who neither then nor now haue the like absolute preheminence in all things as before hath byn shewed For that diuers cases and causes doe appertaine only to spirituall Courts in England which are handled also by secular magistrates in sundry other countreys as namely that of Testaments and the like And this is to be ascribed to the speciall piety deuotion of our Catholicke Kings and Countrey 18. As for the third point wherin M. Attorney saith Rex est persona mixta adding this reason because he hath Ecclesiasticall and temporall iurisdiction Whosoeuer maketh this instance either M. Attorney or some other author of his he little seemeth to vnderstand what is needfull to induce Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction wherof he may need more at large in the second Chapter of this booke And as for the person of a King it may be named mixt in some other respects as namely for that a King is annointed and therby hath somewhat of a Clergy-man also though absolutely he be a lay-man as you haue heard before the great Christian Emperour Valentinian professe of him self Quod erat vnus de populo that he was a lay-man and not a Clergie-man He is likewise head of the whole Common-wealth wherin are members both Clergy and lay-men as before hath byn said and in that respect is he head of both partes and consequently mixt or common to them both But all this induceth not necessity of spirituall iurisdiction except it be committed vnto him from the Church and Prelates therof in whome originally it is as in the forenamed place we haue abundantly declared 19. And the like wee answere finally to the fourth and last obiection wherin it is said that the King maie dispense with a bastard to bee made Priest and with a Priest to haue two benefices and this by his Ecclesiasticall power and iurisdiction The matter must bee distinguished that the King maie dispense or giue his consent in these cases for so much as toucheth the Common wealth or maie bee hurtfull vnto it and no otherwise which is to say so far forth as it maie importe or preiudice the Commō-wealth that bastards not inheritable should be Priests or one Priest hold manie benefices But then this dispensation is not by anie iurisdiction spirituall as M. Attorney would inferre but temporall onlie of the Prince as hee is head of the Common wealth For as concerning spirituall dispensation appertaining to conscience for so much as the prohibition that Bastards shall not bee ordained Priests was not made first by temporall Princes but by the auncient Canons of the Church none can dispence properly therin but he that is spirituall head of the whole Church or some other by his commission 20. And by the same reason for that spirituall iurisdiction ouer soules which is the iurisdiction of him that hath a benefice cannot bee truely giuen or deliuered to anie man but by him that hath it in himself to wit some Prelate of the Church that hath it from the fountaine of succession from the Apostles as before hath been declared it followeth that none which hath not this iurisdiction by this means in himself can giue anie benefice to anie man and much lesse two or manie benefices that is to saie spirituall iurisdiction ouer manie flocks to one man except hee onlie that hath superior and mediate spirituall iurisdiction ouer the said flocks and their soules And heerby wee see that standing in the principles and grownds before set downe and manifestly proued M. Attorneys instance is to no purpose at all to the effect and sense wherin hee would haue it vnderstood 21. And this shall suffice for this place and for the raignes and liues of all Christian Princes of our Realme that liued in vnion and conformitie of one religion and acknowledgment of one supreme authoritie spiritual of the Sea Apostolicke of Rome from the first to the last that is to saie from King Ethelbert that receiued the first grace of our conuersion to the Christian Catholicke Roman religion vnto King Henry the 7. inclusiuè who being the last and neerest English auncestour to his Maiesty that now is and succeeding after aboue a hundred and twenty English Kings of the same religion ended happely also his life raigne therein without any change or alteration And if this sonne had followed the same course and held it out to the end as he did for two partes of three of his raigne he had byn thrice happy but Gods prouidence for his and our sinnes permitted otherwise We shall therfore see breifly the manner means occasions motiues and euents therof in the ensuing Chapter OF THE RAIGNE OF K. HENRY THE EIGHT And of his three children King Edward Queene Mary and Queene Elizabeth And how the first innovation about Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction was made and continued in their dayes CHAP. XV. NOVV are we come vnto the time wherin great change indeed and alteration was made in our Countrey by particular Statutes and Nationall laws so far forth as a perpetuall and vniuersall receiued truth by nationall and temporall decrees could be altered in the foresaid point of spirituall and Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction For that K. Henry
the eight after two partes of three of his raigne wherin he had not only acknowledged and practised according to the vse of all his predecessours but singularly also defended and propugned by publicke writing the Catholicke consent of all Christendome concerning the Soueraignty of the Sea of Rome therin did at length vpon certaine occasions of particular distast anger and exasperation falling out betweene Pope Clement the 7. and him about the diuorce of his wife Queen Catherine daughter of Spaine and the marriage of Lady Anne Bullen in in her place to neither of which the said Pope would consent make strange innouations by little little as first threatning and the said Pope then substracting some of his authority and giuing it to others and finally taking all vnto himself Which deuise being once begun was continued after his death by the gouernours of his young sonne King Edward though with lesse probability and apparance of truth as before hath byn noted then reiected againe by his daughter Queene Mary who restored the same whence it was taken but reassumed though in a different deuise of words by his second daughter Q. Elizabeth that least of all was capable of it as in precedent chapters hath byn declared So as heere though M. Attorney doth euery where talke of auncient laws and common consent there is neither anquity vnity conformity consent or continuance of anie moment to bee found which will better appeare by that wee haue briefly to touch of ech one of these Princes raignes in particular Of King Henry the eyght who was the twentith King after the Conquest §. I. 2. This Prince succeeding his father King Henry the 7. in the flower of his youth when he was but 18. yeares of age but adorned with many rare graces both of mind and body tooke the scepter in hand with as great expectation of his people neighbours round about him as euer did Prince of our land before or after him and for the space of more then 20. yeares performed the same in all points of an excellent Prince both in peace and warre vntill he fell into that vnfortunate fatall breach with his wife and Queene and disordinate appetite of the other that succeeded her whervpon ensued all those strange and vnexpected mutations which afterward were seene one thing giuing occasion and making way to the other as the euents declared 3. But among all other points of Catholicke doctrine no one was more obserued by this King while he remained in his auncient peace of mind then that of his due acknowledgment subordination and respectiue correspondence with the Sea Apostolicke which being in his dayes begun to be impugned togeather with many other points of Christian religion by Martyn Luther an Apostata Friar of Germany and his followers King Henry out of his great zeale and feruour towards the said religion and Sea Apostolicke tooke vpoÌ„ him to write a special learned booke in defence therof against the said Luther which booke he sent to Rome presenting it to Pope Leo the tenth subscribed by his owne â—and which I haue seen by a speciall Embassadour for that purpose Doctor Clerke Bishop of Bath and VVells that made an earnest speach and eloquent oration at the deliuery therof in protestation and commendation of his Kings high and resolute zeale in this behalfe all which being extant in print I remit the Reader thervnto for his better satisfaction 4. Only I cannot pretermit to recite in this place some of his words which he vseth in that booke in defence of the Popes Ecclesiasticall Supremacy which himself afterward vpon new passions rising so greatly impugned Thus then he wrote against Luther in those dayes Non tam iniurius ero Pontifici vt anxiè sollicitè de eius Iure disceptem tanquam res haberetur pro dubia c. I will not offer so much iniury vnto the Pope as earnestly and carefully to dispute heere of his right as though the matter might be held in doubt it is sufficient for that which now we haue in hand that his enemy Luther sheweth himself so much to be carried away with passion and fury as he taketh all faith and credit from his owne sayings cleerly declaring his malice to be such as it suffereth him neither to agree with himself nor to consider what he saith So be 5. And then after a large confutation of Luthers fond opinion and furious assertion that the pope neither by diuine or humane law but onlie by vsurpation and Tyrannie had gotten the headshipp of the Church K. Henry vseth two stong reasons and arguments against him among other to represse his maddnes therein The first of generall consent from antiquitie saying Negare non potest c. Luther cannot deny but that all the faithfull Christian Churches at this daie doe acknowledge and reuerence the holie Sea of Rome as their mother and Primate c. And if this acknowledgment is grounded neither in diuine nor humane right how hath it taken so great and generall roote How was it admitted so vniuersally by all Christendome When began it how grew it to bee so great And wheras humane consent is sufficient to giue humane right at least how can Luther saie that heer is neither diuine nor humane right where there is and hath been for time out of minde so vniuersall humane consent c. Certe si quis rerum gestarum monumenta reuoluat inueniet iam olim protinùs post pacatum orbâ—m plerasque omnes Christiani Orbis Ecclesias obtemperasse Romana c. Truly if a man will looke ouer the monuments of things and times past he shall find that prefently after the world was pacified from persecution the most parte of Christian Churches did obay the Roman yea and the Greeke Church also though the Empire were passed to that parte wee shall find that shee acknowledged the Primacy of the same Romane Church but only wheÌ„ shee was in Schisme And as for S. Hierome though he were no Roman yet did hee in his daies ascribe so much authoritie and preheminence to the Roman Church as he affirmed that in matters of great doubt it was sufficient for his faith to bee allowed and approued by the Pope of Rome c. This is the first argument vrged by King Henry of antiquitie and consent 6. Another hee alleadgeth of impossibilitie for the Pope to haue attained by force and Tyrannie to so great authoritie as he had according to Luthers calumniation the effect is this Cum Lutherus tam impudenter pronunciet c. Whereas Luther so impudeÌ„tly doth affirme that the Pope hath his Primacie by no right neither diuine nor humane but onlie by force and Tyrannie I doe wonder how the mad fellow could hope to find his Readers so simple or blockish as to beleiue that the Bishop of Rome being a Priest vnarmed alone without temporall force or right either diuine or humane as he supposed
well by the words of the Statute which are these VVhere the Kings most excellent Maiesty is by gods law supreme head immediatly vnder him of his whole Church of England intending the conseruation of the same Church in a true sincere and vniforme doctrine of Christs religion calling also to his blessed and most gratious remembrance the innumerable commodities which ensue of concord and vnity in religion c. hath therfore commaunded this his most high Court of Parlament to be summoned as also a Synod of all the Archbishops Bishops and other learned men to bee assembled c. for a full and persect resolution of certaine Articles proposed which are the former six his Maiesty also most gratiously vouchsafing in his owne Princly person to descend and come into his said high Courte and Councell and there like a Prince of most high prudence and no lesse learning opened and declared manie thinges of high learning great knowledge touching the said Articles matters questions whervpon after great and longe deliberate disputation and consultation had and made it was finally resolued as before c. 17. Thus you see how maturely this matter was done and resolued by the new head of the English Church and his Counsell which resolution not withstanding I presume M. Attorney and those of his religion will not well allow à parte rei though for his authoritie they may not denie it according to their owne grounds in that he did contradict therin the Popes and so in this respect they seem to bee but in pittifull plight for that neither the one nor the other head serueth well their turnes And with this wee shall leaue King Henry the 8. who in all the rest of his raigne which as hath byn said was but the third parte after his spirituall headship of that he had raigned before in acknowledgment of the Popes Supremacie his Decrees Ordinances and actions though they were inconstant variable yet were they all except this only controuersie of the Popes authoritie against Protestants and their religion as appeareth both by his solemne condemning and burning of Iohn Lambert for denying the Reall presence the next yeare after this Statute was made as also of Anne Ascue and others vpon the last yeare of his life for the same heresie and of manie others for other Protestant-opinions so as I doe not see how M. Attorney can much glorie in this first headshipp of his Church of England especially that being true which Bishop Gardiner preached and protested publikely at Pauls Grosse in Queen Maries time that K. Henry dealt with him a little before his death for reconcyling himself to the Pope by restoring to him his authority againe if with his honour it might bee brought to passe but before this could bee treated he died and thereby was frustrated of his good purpose therin The answere to certaine Instances of M. Attorney out of this raigne of K. Henry the eight §. II. 18. And this might suffice for King Henries raigne but only that M. Attorney vpon the recitall of certeyne of the said Kings Statutes made by himself for his owne spirituall Supremacy which I hold not needfull for me to stand to answere he moueth a doubt and answereth the same in such sorte as is worthy of consideration His doubt is that for so much as K. Henry was now declared head of the Church and all Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction taken from the Pope in England and in English affaires what shal become of the Canons or Canon law togeather with the Constitutions and Ecclesiasticall Ordinances depending of the Church of Rome wherby the spirituall Courts of England were wont to bee gouerned you shall heare his answere in his owne words The Attorney If it bee demaunded saith hee what Canons Constitutions Ordinances and Synodals Prouinciall are still in force within this Realme I answere that it is resolued and enacted by authoritie of Parlament that such as haue been allowed by generall consent and custome within the Realme and are not contrariant or repugnant to the Laws Statutes and Customes of this Realme nor to the damage or hurte of the Kings prerogatiue Royall are still in force within this Realme as the Kings Ecclesiasticall laws of the same Now as Consent and Custome hath allowed those Canons so no doubt by generall consent of the whole Kealme anie of the same maie bee corrected enlarged explained or abrogated For example there is a decree that all Clerkes that haue receiued anie manner of Orders greater or smaller should bee exempt pro causis criminalibus before the temporall Iudges This decree had neuer anie force within England First for that it was neuer approued and allowed of by generall consent within the Realme Secondly it was against the laws of the Realme as it doth appeare by infinite presidents Thirdly it was against the prerogatiue and soueraigntie of the King that any subiect within this Realme should not bee subiect to the laws of this Realme The Catholicke Deuine 19. Heere you see two points touched in this answere First the resolution it self and then the confirmation therof by a speciall example The resolution is very ambiguous doubtfull and vncertaine if you consider it For he saith that such Canonicall laws are to bee still in force as were allowed by generall consent not contrariant to the laws statutes and customes of this Realme nor importe anie dammage to the Kings prerogatiue Royall And what are these thinke you And how vncertaine a rule is this prescribed for laws whereby matters of conscience must be determined Who may not say in his owne case or others this Canon or Constitution though it be of neuer so auncient Councels or Decrees of the Church for of such consisteth the Canon-law was neuer allowed by generall consent of England this is contrariant to some Statute or Custome this importeth dammage to the Kings prerogatiue Royall and so indeed by establishing this new headship the whole body of Ecclesiasticall regimēt was ouerthrowne though M. Attorney to salue the matter saith that the said Canonicall lawes should remaine still in force with the restrictiōs aforesaid as the Kings Ecclesiasticall lawes which is as much to say as that these Canon-lawes that were made by generall Councels Nationall or Prouinciall Synods and by the Popes of Rome themselues shall not remaine as their lawes but as the Kings lawes for that he retaineth them of which poore refuge I haue spoken often before how weake and idle it is 20. But now for his particular example chosen out to proue that the generall Canonicall lawes of the whole Church receiued throughout Christendome may be corrected and enlarged explaned abrogated by a particular Countrey which is contrary to the common Maxime that no law can be abrogated but by the same authority by which it was made and allowed or greater I cannot but maruaile that he would insist vpō the exemption of Clerks from secular