Stapleton. The First Chapter concerning the Title of M. Fekenhams declaration.

THIS was an happy happe for M. Horne, that it happed M. Fekenhā with the omit­ting of suche slender circumstances to mi­nister to him matter of such triflynge talke, wherein otherwise M. Horne should haue had nothing to haue sayde. For here is he very exacte and precise in circumstances to be kepte, with al dewe obseruation, in a by matter, which whether it be true or false, doth nothing either preiudicate or touche the principal questiō, that is, whether the resolutiōs were made before Maister Fekenham deliuered vp his matter in wri­ting, or after. For this being true, that these resolutiōs were made to take away the scruples and stayes of M. Fekenhams conscience, whiche scruples rose and prycked his consciēce by and throughe such reasons and causes first vttered by talke and after by writing alleaged: wherein, I pray yow, hath M. Fekenham offended you M. Horne, so greuouslye, that therfore he should be noted of so vntrue reporte, that there is not almost one true worde in the title of his treatise: that he should be noted of ambiguouse sleights, yea and of malice to in prefixinge the sayed tytle to his Treatise?

And that he should conueigh vntrueth vnder coulorable and [Page 7] ambiguouse meaning, as not obseruing the circumstance of time, place, and person. What inconuenience is it, I praie you, though M. Fekenham wrote in the Tower, that whi­che he deliuered to M. Horne at Waltham? What incon­uenience followeth, I praye you, if he minded first to de­liuer the same to his examiners in the Tower, or els where, as occasion should serue? Is this sufficient to disproue him, to condemne him, to slaunder him of surmised vntruth? It is rather to be thought of such as are not malitiouse, to be plaine dealing: not to dissemble with you, but euen as he had penned the writing before, so without any alteration to deliuer it. Who neuerthelesse, afterward, hauing occasiō to exhibit and present the same writing to others, did sim­plie without guile or deceipt, signifie it to be deliuered vn­to you at Waltham. And was it not so? Denie it, if you can. Euerie Childe, by this may see, how fonde and foolish this your cauil is. But what is all this to the matter and thing now in hand? It is, as your selfe confesse, but a circumstance.Hovv vvel M. [...]orne k [...]peth his ovvn rule of circum­stances. But M. Horne now himselfe keepeth so lit­tle his owne rules and precepts of circumstance, that beside the miserable and wretched peruerting and deprauing of his owne authors he doth so often and so malitiously omit and concele the due circumstances of things by him reported (necessary for the full illustration and opening of the whole and entiere matter) that concerning this fault which he vn­iustly and triflingly obiecteth to M. Fekenham,In vvhat point the title of M. Fek. Treatise may be counted faulty. he may most iustly haue the prick and price, as they say.

But now that I remember, and aduise my selfe a litle bet­ter, I suppose I can not altogether excuse M. Fekenham for this title, but must race out therof foure words, and in steed of Lord Busshop of Winchester, set in M. Robert Horne: M. [Page] Fekenham dissembling and winking at the common error, whereby in the estimation of many, ye are both called and taken for the Bishoppe of Winchester: whereas in deede ye are but an vsurper, and an intruder, as called thereto by no lawfull and ordinary vocation, nor canonicall consecra­tion, of his great modestie and ciuilitie, willing the lesse to exasperate yowe and others, thowghe he well knewe ye were no right bysshop, yet after the vsuall sort calleth and termeth yow Lorde Bysshop of Winchester. But I must be so bolde by your leaue, as plainelye and bluntelye to goe to worke with yowe (as I haue done before with M. Grindall and M. Iewel yowr pewefellowes) and to remoue from you this glorious glittering Pecoks taile, and to call a figge a figge, and a horne a horne: and to saye (and that moste truely) that ye are no Lorde Byshoppe of Winche­ster, nor els where, but onely M. Robert Horne. For al­beit the Prince may make a Lorde at her gratious pleasure whome shee liketh, yet can shee not make you Lorde Bis­shoppe of Winchester, considering yee are not Lorde but in respecte of some Baronage and temporalties belonging and annexed to the See of Winchester. But you vsurping the See, as you are no Bishoppe, so for the consideration a­foresaid, yee are no Lorde, nor Prelate of the Garter. For yee can be no Prelate of the Garter,M. Horne no Bis [...]h nor P [...]e­late of the Gar­ter. being no Prelate at al: that being a prerogatiue appropriate to the Prelate and Bishoppe of Winchester. Now that you are no true Bis­shoppe, it is euident by that your vocation is direct contra­rie to the Canons and Constitutions of the Catholik Chur­che, and to the vniuersall custome and manner heretofore vsed and practised not onely in Englande, but in all other Catholique Countries and Churches deliuered to vs from [Page 8] hande to hande, from age to age, euen from the firste graf­fing and planting of the faith, especially in England. For the whiche I referre mee, to all autentique and aunciente recordes, as well of Englande as of other Nations, concer­ning the ordinarie succession of Byshoppes, namelye in the foresayed See of Winchester. For there was not, no not one in that See, that did not acknoweledge the Supremacye of the See of Rome, and that was not con­firmed by the same, vntil the late time of Maister Poynet: who otherwise also was but an vsurper, the true Byshop then liuing, and by no lawfull and Ecclesiasticall order remoued or depriued. Yee are therefore the firste Bis­shoppe of this sewte and race, and so consequentlye,M. Horn the firste B. of his race in the See of Vvinche­ster. In the Fortresse of our first faith annexed to Ven. Bede. par. 2 cap. 1.3. & 8. The Pro­testantes vvōder­fully tro­bled a­bout the questiō of the con­tinual succession of Bisshops. no Byshoppe at all: as not able to shewe, to whome yee did ordinarilie succede, or anye good and accustomable ey­ther vocation, or consecration. Whiche point being ne­cessarilie required in a Bishoppe, and in your Apostles Lu­ther and Caluin, and other lacking, (as I haue otherwhere sufficientlye proued, though you by deepe silence thinke it more wisedome vtterlie to dissemble, then ones to an­swere) they being therewith pressed, were so meshed and bewrapped therein, that they coulde not in this worlde wytte what to saye thereto, answering this and that, they wist nere what, nor at what point to holde them. Yea Beza was faine in the last assemblie at Poisy, with silence to cō ­fesse the inuincible truth.

But let it so be that your vocation was good and sound, yet haue you disabled your self to occupie that roome, and either ought not to be admitted, or forthwith ought ye to be remoued, for that ye are yoked (or as ye pretende) maried: and as wel for the maintenāce therof as of many other abhominable [Page] errors (in case you stand obstinately in them) no doubt an Heretike. That ye liue in pretensed Matrimonie with your Madge al the worlde knoweth, colouring your fleshly pleasures vnder the name of an honorable Sacramēt, by this your incest wretchedly prophaned and vilained Ye keep now your said Madge, in the face of al the worlde without shame, whiche in King Henries daies ye kepte in hucker mucker and lusky lanes as many other did of your sort: especially M. Cranmer that occupied the See of Cāter­burie: who caried about with him his prety conie in a chest full of holes, that his nobs might take the ayer.

Lecherie turned into the name of vvedlockYou wil perchance stande in defence of your pretensed mariage, and also of your other heresies, and say they are no heresies at all, and turne lecherie into wedlock, as some of your sorte haue of late daies turned, vppon good fridaie, a Pigge into a Pike, putting the said pigge in the water and saying: goe in pigge, and come out pike. But then I referre you to the olde Canons of the Fathers, to the writinges es­pecially of S. Augustine, of Epiphanius, of Philaster and other, that among other heresies, recite some of those that you openly and your fellowes maintaine. Yf ye will reiect the poore Catholiques,M. Horn and his fellovves accōpted heretikes by the Apologie of Eng­land. Apologia Lati. in. 8. pag 33. S. Augustine and Epiphanius also, yet I trust you will not be against your owne famouse A­pologie, whiche saith that Epiphanius nombreth fourscore Heresies (of the which it is one, for a man after the order of Priesthode to marie) and S. Augustine a greater nomber and so concludeth you and the residue to be heretikes. If ye wil denie ye mainteine any of those heresies, your preachings, your teachings and writings beare full and open testimony against you. What then haue you to iustifie your cause? You wil happely forsake and abandon S. Augustines autho­ritie [Page 9] withal the olde Canons and Councels, and flye vnder the defence of your brickle bulwarke of Actes of Parlia­ment.

O poore and sely helpe: o miserable shift that our faith should hang vppon an acte of Parliamente, contrary as wel to all actes of Parliament euer holden in Englande before, as to the Canons and Fathers of the Catholike Churche. A strange and a wonderfull matter to heare in a Christian common welth, that matters of faith are Parliament cases. That ciuill and prophane matters, be conuerted into holie and Ecclesiasticall matters. Yea and that woorse is, that Laie men that are of the folde onely, not shepheards at all,Religion [...]ered in [...]ngland [...]gaīst the [...] of the vvhole Cl [...]rgie. and therefore bounde to learne of their Catholique Bis­shoppes and Pastours, may alter the whole Catholique Religion, maugre the heades of all the Bishoppes and the whole Conuocation. This is to trouble all things: this is, as it were, to confounde togeather heauen and earth.

But yet let vs see the prouidence of God: These men,M. Horn can not defend and mainteine his heresies nor him­self to be a Bisshop by anie lavve of the Real­me. See the Apologie of Staphilus Fol 81. that relinquishing the Church, would hang only vpō a Par­liament, are quite forsaken, yea euen there where they lo­ked for their best helpe. For I praye you, what warrant is there by acte of Parliament to denie the Real presence of Christes bodie in the holie Eucharistia? Is it not for anye Parliament as well heresie nowe, as it was in Quene Maries, King Henries, or anye other Kinges dayes? What can be shewed to the contrarie? Doth not Luther your first Apostle and his schollers, defie you therefore, as detestable Heretiques? Nowe concerning Transubstan­tiation and adoration, is it not well knowen, thinke you, that in King Edwardes dayes, there was a preaty leger­demaine played, and a leafe putt in at the printing, which [Page] was neuer proposed in the Parliamente? What Parlia­mente haue your Preachers to denye free will, and the necessitie of baptizing children? Againe I pray you, is there any Acte to confirme your vnlawful mariage? Doth not in this point the Canonicall Lawe stande in force, as well nowe, as in King Henries daies? And so doth it not followe, that yee are no true Bishoppe? Beside, is it not notoriouse, that yee and your Colleages, were not ordei­ned no not according to the prescripte, I wil not say of the Churche, but euen of the verye statutes? Howe then can yee challenge to your selfe the name of the Lord Bis­shoppe of Winchester? Whereof bothe the Municipall and Ecclesiasticall Lawe dothe woorthelye spoyle you? Wherefore as I sayed, let vs dashe out these wordes, and then no reasonable man shall haue any great cause to qua­rell against the Title of M. Fekenhams Treatise.

The .2. Diuision. M. Horne.

The booke by you deliuered vnto mee, touching the Othe, was writen in the Tovver of London (as you your selfe confessed, and the true title therof, doth plainly testifie) in the time of the Parliamēt holden Anno quinto of the Q. Maiestie Ianua. 12. at which time you litle thought to haue soiourned with me the winter follovving, and much lesse meant, to deliuer me the scruples and staies of your cōscience in writing, to be resolued at my hands. And although you would haue it seeme, by that you haue published abroade, that the cause why you wrot, was to be resolued my hande: yet the trueth is (as you your selfe reported) that you and your Tovver fellovves, hearing that the Statute moued for the assuraunce of the Queenes royall povver, would passe and be establissed, did conceiue that immediately after the same Session, Commis­sioners shoulde be sente vnto you, to exact the Othe. VVhereuppon you to be in some readines, to withstande and refuse the duetie of a good sub­iecte, (.8.) The .8. vntruth, slā ­derouse. not without helpe of the reste (as may be gathered) deuised the matter conteyned in the booke, committed the same to writing, and pur­posed to haue deliuered it for your ansvvere touching the Othe of the Supre­macy [Page 10] to the Cōmissioners, if they had come This may appere by the Title of that booke that you first deliuered to me, which is worde for worde as follovveth.

The answere made by M. Iohn Fekenham Priest, and pri­soner in the Tower, to the Quenes highnes Commissioners, touching the Oth of the Supremacie.

In this Title there is no mencion of scruples and stayes deliuered to the Bisshoppe of VVinchester, but of aunsvveare to the Queenes Commissio­ners. I am not once named in the [...]itle, ne yet in the looke deliu [...] to mee: neither is there one worde as spoken to me: although in the [...] abroad, you turne all as spoken to me. [...]n your booke published a [...]e [...] kinds of speaches: [...] in d [...]de the vv [...]orste kindes of speaches In all that book [...] of M Feck. To the L. Bishop of VVinchest [...]. VVhen you [...] L. shalbe able &c. I shall ioyne this issue vvith your L. &c. But it is farre othervvise in your booke deliuered to me, namely. To the Queenes highnes cōmissioners. VVhen ye the Queenes high­nes cōmissioners shalbe hable &c. I shal ioine this issue vvith you, that vvhen any one of you, the Queenes hignes cōmissio­ners, &c. From October, at what time you were sent to me, vnto the end of Ianuarie, there was daily conference betvvixt vs in matters of Religion, but chiefly touching the foure pointes, which you terme scruples and stayes of conscience, and that by worde of mouth, and not by any writing. In all which points, ye vvere (.9.) The 9. vntruth. M. Fekenhā vvas ne­uer so an­svvered. so ansvvered, that ye had nothing to obiect, but seemed resolued, and in a maner fully satisfied. VVhervpon, I made aftervvard relation (of (.10.) the 10. vntruth. In­credible. good meaning tovvards you) to certain honorable persons of the good hope I had cōceiued of your conformity. At whiche time, a certaine friend of yours standing by, and hearing what I had declared then to the ho­norable in your cōmedacion, did shortly after (.11.) The .11. vntruth. There vvas no suche re­porte made. reporte the same vnto you, which as it seemed, you did so much mislike (doubting that your confederates should vnderstand of your reuolt (.12.) The .12. vntruth. slāderous which they euer feared, hauing expe­rience of your shrinking frō them at (.13.) The .13. vntruth. notori­ously slā ­derous. VVestminster in the cōference there, the first yere of the Q. Maiestie) that after that time I founde you alvvaies much more repugnāt, and cōtrary to that wherin ye before times seemed in maner throughly resolued: And also to goe from that you before agreed vnto. By reason vvhereof, vvhen in debating betvvixt vs, you vsinge manye shiftes, amongst other, did continuallie quarell in Sophistication of vvor­des, I did vvill you, to the ende vve might certainlye goe forvvarde in [Page] the pointes materiall, that you vvoulde vvryte your Positions or As­sertions, in fourme of Propositions: vvhiche I coulde not cause you to doe in anye vvise, but yee vvoulde still stande vncertainelye in graunting and deniyng at your pleasure: yea, althoughe I for the better agreemente to be had, did dravve suche in fourme of Assertion, and gaue them in vvrittng vnto you, as I gathered of your ovvne mouthe to be your opi­nion: yet vvoulde yee in no vvise stande too, and reste in any one cer­tainelye, but vsed still your accustomed vvrangling and wādring at large. Vvhiche your behauiour so muche misliked mee, that I coulde not but earnestly charge you vvith inconstancie, in that yee woulde sometimes denie, that yee before had graunted: and also graunte, that yee before denyed. Then being so muche pressed herevvith, and perceiuing that your frovvarde qua­relling vvith the plaine vvoordes of the Statute, coulde no lenger couer your euill meaning, at the length you did require, that I vvoulde put in vvri [...]ing the vvoordes of the Othe, vvith the sence or interpretation ad­ded thereunto, as you considering thereuppon, might deuise the fourme of your Propositions, vvhereuppon we might afterwarde debate. By this it may appeare, bothe how vntrue it is, that you hitherto had deliuered vn­to m [...]e any suche scruples of yours in writing, as you pretende in the Title (for then I needed not to haue sought any Propositions of your Assertions) and also how vntrue that is, that the interpretation of the Othe whiche I wrote at your requeste, before I euer sawe anye writing of yours, was to answere your scruples and staies deliuered to mee in writing.

M. Horne. The .3. Diuision. pag. 3. a.

After this in February follovving, certaine persons of vvorship resorted to my hou [...]e▪ partly to see me, and partly to heare somevvhat betvvixt me and you. And after that vve had reasoned in certaine pointes touching Religion, vvherein ye seemed openly to haue little matter to stande in, but rather did yelde to the moste in substance that I had saied: neuer the lesse being after vvithdravven in some of their companies, although yee did seeme openlye to consent and agree vvith me in that I had said: Yet (said you) the matter [Page] it selfe is grounded here (pointing to your breast) that shall neuer goe out. VVhiche being tolde me, I did vehemently then challenge you for your double dealing, and colourable behauiour: saying, that I thought you did not that you did, of any conscience at al: and therefore compted it but lost la­bour further to trauaile vvith such a one as had neither conscience nor con­stancy. But you, to shevv that ye did al of conscience, shevved me both vvhat yee had suffred for the same in diuers manners, and also hovv the same vvas grounded in you long before. For proufe vvhereof, ye offred to shevve me a booke of yours, that ye had deuised in the Tovver, and the same shortly after did deliuer vnto me, not as your scruples and doubtes to be resolued at my hande, vvherein ye seemed in our conference before had (.14.) The .14. Vntruth. That M. Fekenhā shoulde geue vp his Trea­tise in vvriting after he vvas re­solued by M. Horn. resolued: but only to declare, that the matter had bene long before setled in you, and this vvas the only and mere occasion of the deliuery of the said booke vnto me, entituled as is before declared, and not othervvise.

But as you haue cast a mist before the eyes of the readers, vnder the speach of a deliuery in vvriting, vvithout noting of any circumstance that might make the matter cleere, vvherein you shevve your self to haue no good mea­ning: euen so haue you set foorth resolutions of your ovvne deuise vnder my name, because you are ashamed to vtter mine, vvherevnto you yelded, and vvere not able to ansvvere.

Stapleton.

How vnlike a tale this is, that M. Fekenhā should either be resolued by M. Horn, or being resolued, should thē geue vp his matter in writing for none other cause thē M. Horn reporteth, I durst make any indifferent man iudge, yea a nū ­ber of M. Hornes own sect: there is no apparance, there is no colour in this matter. And therefore I wil be so bold, as to adde this to his other vntruthes: where vnto I might set an other more notable straight waies ensuing,In the an­svvere to the reso­lutiōs, the 440, leaf. that M. Fe­kenham should set forth resolutions of his owne deuise vn­der M. Hornes name, sauing that I leaue it to a place more appropriate, where the matter shal be more conueniently and more fully discussed.

The 4. Diuision. Pag. 3. b. M. Fekenham.

For asmuch as one chief purpose and intent of this Othe is, for a more saulfgard to be had of the Quenes royal per­son, and of her highnes most quiet and prosperous reigne: I doe here presently therfore offer my selfe to receiue cor­poral Othe vpon the Euangelistes, that I doe verely think and am so persuaded in my conscience, that the Queenes highnes is thonly suprem gouernour of this realme, and of al other her highnes Dominiōs and Countries according as thexpresse words are in the beginning of the said Othe. And further I shall presently sweare, that her highnes hath vnder God, the soueraignty and rule ouer al manner of persons borne within these her highnes realmes of what estate (either Ecclesiastical or Temporal) so euer thei be.

M. Horne.

Hovv so euer by vvords you vvoulde seme to tendre her Maiesties saulfty, quietnes, and prosperous reigne, your (.15.) The 15. vntruethe vilainou [...] and slau [...] derous. M Feken­hā by all his dedes hath all­vvaies shevved himselfe a most o­bedient subiect. dedes declare your meaning to be cleane contrary. VVhat saulfty meane you to her person, vvhen you bereue the same of a principal parte of the royal povver? vvhat quietnesse seeke you to her personne, vvhen one chiefe purpose and entent of your book published, is to stay and bring her subiects to an heretical misliking of her royal povver, vvhich is a preparation to rebellion against her person? Hovv much prosperity you vvish to her Maiesties reigne appeareth, vvhen that vvith (.16.) The 16. vntruthe Diuelish and spri­tish. diepe sighes and grones you looke daily for a chaunge thereof, and (.17.) The 17.18. and 19 vntruth [...] blasphe­mous horrible and vilainous For nei­ther is the pope any heretike, neither do Catholiks make him their God: Nei­ther wish t [...]ei hī to reigne in the Que­nes place, that is, to haue tēporal iurisdiction as the Quenes Ma [...]. hath. tharche Heretique of Rome, your (.18.) God in earthe, to (.19.) reigne in her place.

The .5. Diuision. M. Horne.

If I knevv you not right vvel, I should maruail, that you shame not to af­firme, saying: I doe here presently therefore offer my selfe to re­ceyue a corporal Othe: and further I shal presently sweare &c. Seing that you neuer made to me any motion of such an offer, neither did I at anytime require you to take any Othe.

You thinke and are so persuaded in conscience (if a man may trust you) that the Quenes highnes is the only supreme gouernour of this Realm, and of al her dominiōs and countries, and hath vnder God, the soueraignty and rule ouer al manner of persones, borne vvithin her dominions of vvhat estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal so euer they be. VVhereunto I adde this consequent vvhich doth necessarily follovv, Ergo: Your holy father the Pope is not (as you think in your conscience) the supreme gouernour ouer her highnes domi­nions, nor hath the soueraignty or rule vnder God ouer any personnes borne vvithin the same.

The Quenes maiesty must needs herein take you but for a dissembling flat­terer, in that you vvil seeme somtime in general speach, to attribute vnto her the onely Supremacy vnder God, ouer her dominions and subiectes vvhich you meane not, for vvithin a vvhile after in plaine vvordes you deny the same. And your holy Father vvil geue you his curse, for that being his svvorne Aduo­cate, at the first entry into the plea, you geue from him the vvhole title of his vniust claime, to vvit, the supreme gouernaunce ouer the Quenes highnes dominions and people. You must novv therefore make some shifte, and cal to remembraunce one sleight or other by some distinctiō, vvhereby to auoide your [Page 28] holy Fathers curse, that you may continue vnder his blessing. You vvill ex­pounde your meaning by restreyning the supreme gouernment of the Queenes maiesty onely in causes Temporal, and not in causes or things Ecclesiasticall. But th [...]s distinction commeth to late, and vvil doe you no ease, for that in both these kindes of causes you haue already graunted vnto her the only supreme gouernmēt: and that as you verily think, persuaded in conscience: vvheruppon you offer to receiue a corporal Othe vpon the Euangelistes. And this your graunt passed frō you by these vvords: Ouer al maner persones borne vvithin her dominions of vvhat estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal so euer they be: In this that you graunt vnto her highnes thouly supreme rule ouer the Lay and Ecclesiastical personnes: you haue also concluded therevvith in all causes both Ecclesiastical and Temporal, vvhich is plainly and firmely proued by this argument follovving.

A supreme gouernour or ruler is one, vvho hath to ouersee, guyde, care, prouide, order and directe the things vnder his gouernment and rule, to that ende, and in (.20.)The 20. vntruthe For not in actiōs belongīg properly to the things gouerned, but belō ­ging pro­perly to the gouernour and to his end those actions vvhich are appointed and doe properly be­longe to the subiect or thing gouerned. So that in euery gouernment and rule there are thre things necessarely cōcurrāt: the Gouernor, the Subiect, or mat­tier gouerned, and the obiect or mattier vvherabout and vvherein the gouer­nement is occupied and doth consiste. But the Quenes highnes, by your ovvne confession, is the only supreme gouernour ouer al manner persones Ecclesiasti­cal borne vvithin her dominions: Ergo: Her highnes thonely supreme go­uernour ouer such persones hath to ouersee, guyde, care, prouide, order, and di­recte them to that ende and in those actiōs vvhich are appointed and doe (21.)The 21. vntruthe proued to be so by M. Horn him selfe▪ as it shall straight appere. properly belonge to Ecclesiastical persones. And so by good consequent you haue renounced al foreine gouernment. For this exclusiue, Onely, doth shut out all other from supreme gouernment ouer Ecclesiastical personnes: and also yee doe (.22)The 22. vntruthe M. Fekē ­ham affirmed no such thīg affirme the Quenes maiesty to be supreme gouernour in those ac­tions vvhich are appointed, and that doe properly belong to Ecclesiastical per­sones, vvhich are no other but things or causes Ecclesiastical.

The .6. Diuision. Pag. 5. a. M. Fekenham.

And of my part I shal sweare to obserue and perfourme my obediēce and subiectiō with no lesse loyalty and faith­fulnes vnto her highnes, thē I did before vnto Quene Ma­ry, her highnes Syster of famous memory, vnto whome I was a sworne Chaplaine and most bounden.

M. Horne.

Like an (.23.)The 23 vntruthe slāderous For M. Fekenhā so did, not as an vn­faithful subiect: but as a repentāt Catholik. vnfaithful subiect contrary to your Othe made to King Hē ­ry, and continued al the reigne of King Edvvarde, you helpt to spoile Quene Mary of famous memory of a (24.)The 24. vntruth. This is no parte at al of the Prin­ces royal povver principal parte of her royall povver, righte and dignity vvhich she at the beginning of her reigne had, enioyed, and put in vre The same obedience and subiection, vvith the like loyalty and faith­fulnes, yee vvil svveare to obserue and perfourme to Quene Elizabeth: but she thāketh you for naught, she vvil none of it, she hath espied you, and thinketh, yee profer her to much vvronge.

Stapleton.

M. Horn would haue a mā ons bemired, to wallow there stil. Neither is it sin to break an vnlawful othe, but rather to cōtinew in the same, as wicked King Herod did: Now if M. [Page 31] Horne can ones by any meanes proue this gouernemente to be a principall parte, or any parte at all of the Queenes royal power, I dare vndertake that not only M. Fekenham, but many mo, that now refuse, shal most gladly take the said Othe. He wer surely no good subiect, that would wissh her highnes any wrong: neither can the maintenāce of the Ca­tholik faith wherof shee beareth the title of a Defendor, be coūted any iniury to her highnes. Nether is it to be thought but if there had ben any wrong or iniury herein done to the Croune, some Christiā Prince or other in the world would haue ere this, ones in this thousand yeares and more, espi­ed it, and reformed it too.

M. Fekenham. The .7. Diuision. Pag. 5 a.

And touching the reste of the Othe, whereunto I am required presently to sweare, viz. That I doe vtterlie testifie and declare in my conscience, that the Queenes highnes is the only supreame Gouernour of this Realme, as well in al Spirituall or Ecclesiastical things or causes, as Temporal: I shal then of my parte be in like readines, to receiue the same, when your L. shalbe able to make de­claration vnto me, how and by what meanes, I may swere thereunto, without commiting of a very plaine and ma­nifest periurie: which of my part to be committed, it is damnable sinne, and against the expresse woord of God writen, Leuit. Cap. 9. Non periurabis in nomine meo, nec pollues nomen Dei tui. And of your parte to pro­uoke mee or require the same, it is no lesse damnable of­fence. S. Augustine in witnes thereof saith: Ille qui ho­minem [Page] prouocat ad iurationē, &c. He who doth prouoke an other man to swere, and knoweth that he shal forswere him selfe, he is worse then a murderer: because the mur­derer sleeth but the body, and he sleeth the soule, and that not one soule, but two, as the soule of him whom he prouo­keth to periurie, and his owne soule also by ministring the occasion therof. And the points of this Othe whereunto I can not presently swere without most plaine and manifest periurie, are these foure following.

M. Horne.

Mutato nomine, de te fa­bula nar­ratur.As in that whiche goeth before, you couertlie vttered manie vntruthes, althoughe sometime yee stoumble on the trueth againste youre will: so in the rest you fal to plaine and manifest vntruths: least men shuld not perceiue what you are. You were neuer required by me to svvere, and therfore this is an impudent kind of dealing, to saie: vvherunto I am presently requi­red to swere, &c. I had none authoritie nor cōmission to require the Othe of you, neither might I tender it vnto you without peril to mie selfe: you being cōmitted vnto me by the most honorable Coūcel, without whose order I could attempt no suche mattier. You haue alreadie shevved in plaine matter, al­though not in plainnesse of speache, and that as you thinke, and are persvva­ded in cōscience, that her highnes is the supreme gouernour, so well in causes Ecclesiastical as temporal. For hauing supremacie ouer the Ecclesiastical per­son, the same being not othervvise person Ecclesiastical, but in respect of Eccle­siastical functions, things and causes annexed and proprelie belōging to Eccle­siastical persons: shee hath the Supremacie ouer the person in Ecclesiastical functions, things and causes, these being the only matter or obiect wherabout or wherein the rule ouer an Ecclesiasticall persone is occupied and dothe con­siste.

This seemeth to be your glorie amongst your friendes, that you make mee an offer, to receiue this parte of the Othe, when I shall be able to declare by what meanes you maie svvere without committing plain and manifeste [Page 32] periurie: If your abilitie be no better then here apeareth, it is none al all. Mine abilitie herein shal appeare in mine ansvvere to your foure points: God make you as readie to perform for duties sake, as ye wil seme readie to offer, wherbie to purchase to your selfe a glorious estimation. But wherfore did you not make this offer vnto me, either by woord or writing al the time of your aboad with mee? You pla [...]e novve after your returne into (.25.)The .25. vntruth. The To­vver is not M. Fekenhās hold: For it holdeth him, not he it. your holde, as you did after the Parliament before you came oute of the Tovver to me. VVhen you savve the end of the Parliament, and vnder­stood right well that the Othe was not like to be tendred vnto you, than sent you copies of the booke deuised for the aunsvvere touching the Othe, abroad to your friendes, to declare your constancie and readines, to refuse the Othe, wherebie thei might be the rather enduced, to continue their good opinion conceiued of you, and also paie your charges weekelie in the Tovver sent vn­to you (.26.)The .26. vntruth. The Quenes highnes vvordes in the Tovver, can testi­fie the contrary. euerie Saturdaie by your seruaunt, who wrote and deliuered the copies abroade, as you tolde me your selfe. Nowe you are returned a­gaine into the Tower, and perceiuing that your friends (as you gaue thē iust cause) haue some (.27.)27. A heape of slaunde­rous and railing vntrute. mistrust of your reuolte and wauering inconstan­cie, whereby your estimation and fame, with their seruice to your God the bellie is decaied, you haue deuised to set abroade the selfe same booke a­gaine that you did before, and to the selfe same ende, altering or chaun­ging nothing at all, sauing that you haue geuen it a nevve name and Title, and seeme as in this place, as though yee spake to mee by these woordes: when your L. &c. VVhen as in very deed, there was neuer any suche woorde spoken or writen to mee: and in the booke you deliuered to mee, your speache is directed to the Commissioners, and not to me in these words, VVhen ye the Quenes highnes cōmissioners shalbe able, &c.

The 8. Diuision. Pag. 6. b. M. Fekenham.

First is, that I must by a booke Othe vtterlye testifie, that the Queenes highnes is the onely supreme gouernour of this realme, and that aswell in all Spirituall or Eccle­siasticall thinges or causes, as Temporall. But to testi­fie any thinge vppon a booke Othe, no man may possiblye therein auoide periury, except he doe first know the thing which he doth testifie, and whereof he beareth witnesse and geueth testimonye. And touching this knowledge, that the Queenes maiesty, is the onely supreme gouernour aswell in Spirituall or Ecclesiastical causes as in Tēporal, besides that I haue no such knowledge, I know no way nor meane whereby I shoulde haue any knowledge thereof. And therefore of my part to testifie the same vppon a booke Othe, beinge without (as I am in deede) al know­ledge, I cannot without committinge of plaine and mani­fest periury. And herein I shal ioyne this issue with your L. that whē your L. shalbe able, either by such order of go­uernment, as our Sauiour Christe left behinde him in his [Page] Gospel and new testament, either by the writing of such learned Doctours both Olde and new, which haue from age to age witnessed the order of Ecclesiastical gouern­mente in Christes Churche, either by the general Coun­cels, wherein the righte order of Ecclesiastical gouerne­ment in Christes Church, hath beene most faithfully de­clared and shewed from time to time: or elles by the conti­nual practise of the like Ecclesiasticall gouernment, in some one Church or part of all Christendom. VVhan your Lordshippe shal be able by any of these fower meanes, to make proufe vnto me, that any Emperour, or Empresse, King, or Quene, may claym or take vpon thē any such go­uernmēt, in spiritual or ecclesiastical causes, I shal herein yelde, and with most humble thankes reken my selfe well satisfied, and shal take vppon me the knowledge thereof, and be ready to testifie the same vppon a booke Othe.

M. Horne.

The reason or argument that moueth you, not to testifie vpon a book Othe the Q. Supremacy in causes ecclesiastical, is this: No man may testifie by Othe that thing vvhereof he is ignorant and knovveth nothīg, vvithout committīg periury. But you neither knovv that the Q. highnes is the onely supreme go­uernour asvvel in causes Ecclesiasticall▪ as Temporall: neither yet knovv you any vvay or meane vvhereby to haue any knovvledge thereof. Therefore to testifie the same vppon a booke Othe, you can not vvithout committing of plaine and manifest periury.

For ansvveare to the Minor or seconde Proposition of this argument: Although I might plainly deny, that you are vvithout all knovvledge, and vtterly ignoraunt both of the matter and the vvay or meane, hovv to come by knovvledge therof, and so put you to your prouf, vvherein I knovv, you must [Page 35] needes faile: yet vvil I not so ansvveare by plain negatiue,Thom. Aquin. quaest. 1. de malo. but by distinctiō or diuisiō of ignorāce. And so for your better excuse, declare in vvhat sort you are ignoraūt and vvithout al knovvledge. There are three kinds of ignorātes, the one of simplicity, the other of vvilfulnes, and the thirde of malice. Of the first sort you cānot be, for you haue had longe time, good oportunity, much occasiō, and many vvaies vvhereby to come to the knovvledge hereof. Yea, you haue knovvē and profest openly by deede and vvorde the knovvledge hereof many yeers together. For you did (28.)The 28. vntruthe For no man can knovv that vvhich is not true. knovv, acknovvledge, and confesse, this su­preme authority in causes Ecclesiastical to be in King Hēry the eight and his heyres, vvhā your Abbay of Eueshā, by cōmō cōsent of you and the other Mōks there vnder your couent seale vvas of your ovvn good vvilles vvithout com­pulsion surrendred into his handes, and you, by his authority, refourmed, for­sooke your A rablement of vntruth [...] folishe vovve, and many (.29.)The 29. vntruth [...] Slaunde­rous and reproch­ful. horrible errours, and superstitions of Monkery, and became a secular Priest, and Chaplaine to D. Bell, and af­tervvarde to D. Bonner, and so duringe the life of King Henry the eight, did agnise, professe and teach opēly in your sermōs the kings Supremacy in causes Ecclesiastical. This knovvledge remained stedfastly in you al the time of kinge Edvvard also. For although you vvere in the Tovver in his time, that vvas not for any doubt you made of his Supremacy, for that you stil agnised: but for o­ther points of religiō (.30.)The .30. vntruth, This was not the cause of his enpri­sonment, as shall appeare. touchīg the ministratiō of the Sacramēts, vvher­vnto you also agreed at the last, & promised to professe & preach the same in opē auditory whersoeuer you should be apointed (.31.)The .31. vntruthe slāderous he vvas not deli­uered vp­on any promise of recan­tatiō, but to be dis­puted vvithal, VVherupō a right vvor­shipful gentleman procured your deliuerāce forth of the Tovver, and so vvere you at liberty, neuer mēcioning any dout in this matter: but agnising the Prī ­ces supremacy in causes ecclesiastical. VVherfore I may safly say, that the ignorāce and vvāt of knovvledge vvhich you pretend in your Minor Propositiō, is not of Sīplicity, and therfore must nedes be of vvilfulnes, or malice, or mixt of both. The vvay and meane vvherby to haue this ignoraūce remoued, you assigne vvith this issue, that vvhē I proue vnto you, by any of the fovver meanes, that any Emperour, or empresse, King or Quene may take vpō thē any such gouer­nmēt in spiritual or ecclesiastical causes, thē you vvil yeelde, take vpō you the knovvledge thereof, and be ready to testifie the same by booke Othe. Truely, I haue often and many times proued this same that you require, and by the self same meanes in such sort vnto you, that you had (.32.) nothing to saye to the contrarie. And yet neuerthelesse you continue still in your vvilfull and [Page] malicious ignorance,The 32. vntruthe mere slaū derous, as may vvel appere by this your booke. Sapien. 1. vvhich causeth me to feare that this sentence of the holy ghost vvilbe verified in you: In maleuolam animam non introibit sa­pientia. Yet I vvil ones again proue after your desire, euen as it vvere by put­ting you in remembraunce of those things vvhich by occasions in conference, I often and many times reported vnto you, vvhereof I knovv you are not sim­ply ignoraunt.

The .9. Diuision. Pag 8. a. M. Horne.

You require a proufe hereof, that an Emperoure or Empresse, King or Queene, maie claime or take vppon them anie suche gouernment (meaning as the Queenes Maiestie our Soueraigne doth novv chalenge and take vpon her) in Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall causes. (.33.) The .33. vntruth. imploy­ing a cō ­tradictiō to your former ansvvere made to M. Fek. as shall appere. For ansvveare I say, thei ought to take vppon them suche gouernment, therefore thei maie laufullie doe it. The former part is found true by the whole discourse of the holie Scri­ptures both of the olde and nevv Testament: by the testimonie of the Doctours in Christes Church: by the Generall Councels: and by the practise of Christes Catholique Churche throughout al Christendome.

The .10. Diuision. Pag. [...]. a.

The holy Scriptures describing the condicions, and propreties in a King, amongest other doth commaund, that he haue by him the booke of the lavv, (.34.)The .34. and (.35.).35. vntruth [...] in false trāslatīg, and lea­uing out a part of the sen­tēce ma­teriall. and doe diligentlie occupie him selfe in reading therof, to the end he maie therby learne to feare the Lord his God (that is, to haue the feare of God planted within him selfe in his ovvne harte) to keepe al the wordes, and to accomplish in deed al the ordinaunces, or (as the olde translation hath it) al the ceremonies by Cod cōmaunded (that is) to gouerne in such sorte (.36.) The .36. vntruth. T [...]e gloss. ordinar. hathe no suche thing. That he cause by his princely authority, his subiects also to be­come Israelites. To witte, men that see, knovv, and vnderstand the vvill of God. Redressing the peruersues of such as swerue from Gods ordinances or ceremonies. Wherupon it is, that God doth commaund the Magistrate, that he make (37) The .37. Vntruth. The place of the Deute­ronomy flatly be­lyed. diligēt examinatiō of the doctrine taught by any, and that he do sharply punish both the teachers of false and supersti­tious religion, with the folovvers, and also remoue quite out of the waye all maner of euill.

The .11. Diuision. Pag. 8. b. M. Horne.

The beste and most Godly Princes that euer gouerned Gods people, did per­ceiue and rightly vnderstande this to be Gods vvil, that they ought to haue an especiall Regarde and chief rule: Care and Su­prem go­uernmēt are ij. di­uerse thī ­ges. regarde and care for the ordering and setting foorth of Gods true Religion, and therefore vsed great diligence vvith feruent zeale to perfourme and accomplishe the same. Moyses vvas the supreme gouernour o­uer Gods people (and vvas (.38.)The 38. vntruth. For Moyses vvas the chiefe prieste, as shal be proued. not chiefe Priest or Bisshop, for that vvas Aa­ron) vvhose authority, zeale, and care in appointing and ordering Religion amongest Gods people, prescribing to al the people, yea to Aaron and the Le­uits, vvhat, and after vvhat sorte, they should execute their functions, correc­ting [Page 43] and chastening the transgressours, is manifestly set foorthe in his booke called the Pentateuche.

M. Horne. The .12. Diuision. Pag. 8. b.

After the death of Moses, the people as yet not entred and settled in the promised land, the charge of chief gouernment ouer Gods people both in cau­ses temporall and (.39.)The .39. vntruth. Iosue had not the Supreme gouerne­ment in causes Ecclesia­stical, but Eleaza­rus had it Ecclesiasticall, was committed to Iosue, and not to Eleasar, for to him belonged (.40.)The .40. vntruth. For be­side: In all things to be don of Iosue, Eleazar shoulde instruct him. Iosue. 3.4 5 6.8.23.24. onelie the ministration of the things be­longing to the Priestlie office. And to Iosue the Prince belonged the ouersight both ouer the priests and people, to gouerne, guide, order, appoint and direct eche estate, in all things that appertained to eche of their callings. Of the one ye seme to haue no doubt at all: the other is as plaine. For at the appointmēt of Iosue, the Priests remoued the Arke of couenant and placed the same. He did interprete vnto the people the spirituall meaninge of the tvvelue stones, which thei had taken by Gods cōmaundement forth of Iordan, to be as Sacraments or signes. He circumcised the children of Israel at the seconde time of the great and solempne Circumcision. He calleth the Priestes, commaundeth some of them to take vppe the Lords Arke: other seuen of them to blovv seuē trompets before the Arke, and appointeth to them the order of proceding. He builded an Aulter vnto the Lord God of Israel, according to the Lavv of God: be sacrificeth theron, burnt sacrifices and burnte offerings: He wrote there vpon the stones, the Deuteronomie of Moses: He read all the blessings and cursings as thei are set forth in the booke of the Lavve: And he read al what so euer Moses had cōmaunded before al the congregation of [...]srael, &c. Last of al Iosue, to shevv that causes of Religion did speciallie belong to his charge and care, maketh a long and a vehement Oration vnto the Israelits, wher­in he exhorteth them to cleaue vnto the Lorde with a sure faith, a constant hope and a perfect loue, obeiyng and seruing him with such seruice as he hath appointed in his Lavve. And doth zelouslie and with great threates diswade them from al kind of Idolatrie and false Religion.

Stapleton.

Iosue no Su­preme Gouer­nour in al Ecclesia­sticall causes. Num 27 THE Apologie allegeth as wel the example of Moses, as of Iosue his doings with the residue by M. Horne here alleaged. M. D. Harding sheweth that allegatiō to import no chief rule in spiritual matters, as in deed it doth not. Which chiefe rule, did rest in the Prieste Eleazarus, at whose voice and worde Iosue was commaunded,M. Nowel put to his shifts by M. Dor­man. to goe foorth, and come in, a place deaply dissembled by the Author of the Apologie. For the auoiding whereof M. Nowell is put to many shifts: first to glose, that this place concerning Eleazarus, may be restrained for going and comming to and froe the warres, whiche as it is true, so immediatlye before, it is generallye writen,Num. 27. Pro hoc si quid agendum erit, Eleazar sacerdos consulet Dominum For him (meaning Iosue) Eleazar shal ask coun­sel of God when any thing is to be done. In which words we see euidently, that Iosue what so euer he did, touching the gouerning of the people in Ecclesiasticall matters, he did nothing of him self, but was in al such maters instructed of Eleazarus the high Priest: whose part therfore it was al­waies to ask counsel of God, when Iosue had any thing to doe. And though this place shuld be restrained to warfare only, yet the authoritie geuen before by expresse wordes of the law, to the high Prieste, whose iudgement is cōmaunded in great doubts to be sought ād also followed, doth neuer the lesse take place.Iosue. 3 4.5.6.8.23.24 And thervpō foloweth that al the testimo­nies of holy Scripture, brought forth by M. Nowel, and be­fore him by M. Horne, can not, as they do not in deed, in­duce supremacie in causes Ecclesiastical. But th'execution of the high Priests or lawes cōmādemēt, which in deed we [Page 46] graūt to appertain to the Prince. And here I wil not quarel with M. Nowel, either for quoting .33.34. for .23.24. and not reformed, as he doth with M. Dorman for as smal a matter, as for the misquoting of S. Cyprian: or for treading M. Hor­nes steppes, and borowing his allegations, which not with­standing is a great obseruation with him as a worthy mat­ter (ye may be assured) against M. Dorman and M. D. Har­ding. This is but a childish and boyish rhetorike, not so con­uenient, I wisse, for M. Nowel the scholemaister, as for the boyes his schollers, whose propretye is to accuse their fel­lowes of borowing, and to borow them selues like truants. But for the doing of Iosue, I wil further note, that then the Priests toke vp the Arke of couenāt, ād went before the people. Iosue. 13. But I pray you M. Horne, howe was this obserued of late yeres, whē the lay men durst aduēture to take the guiding of the Arke, and goe before the Priestes, and not suffer the Priests to goe before thē? And durst alter the state of Chri­stiā religiō, against the wil ād minde of the Bishops and the whole Clergy then at their cōuocation assēbled? Well, let this passe for this present. I say no further for Iosue his do­ings, sauing that otherwise also they are not to be drawen into an ordinarie rule,Num. 17. for that the Spirite of God was cer­tainelye in him: and for that he had parte of Moses glory, and the people commaunded to heare him. And those things that he did (wherof M. Nowell and Maister Horne woulde inferre a Soueraigntie in causes Spirituall) he did them by the expresse commaundemente of God. And from suche Princes to all Princes indifferentlie to gather the like praeeminence in al points, were no sure and sound gathering and collection.

Els if you wil haue your examples to proue and cōfirme, [Page] then as Iosue circumcided, so let the Prince baptise, and as Iosue sacrificed vpon an Aulter, so let the Prince in Cope and Surplesse celebrate your holy Communion. Whiche two things as peculiar offices of Bisshops and Priestes, M. Nowel excludeth flatly al Princes from,Fol 23. & 24. yea and saith, they oughte to be vntouched of Prince or other person. Thus a­gaine either ye iumble and iarre one from an other, or els your Argument falleth downe right. Choose whiche of both ye will.2 Sam 5.

M. Horne. The .13. Diuision. Pag 9. a.

Dauid vvhom God appointed to be the pastour (that is, the King ouer Israel) to feed his people, did vnderstand that to this pastoral office of a King, did belong of duetie, not onelie a charge to prouide that the people might be gouerned vvith iustice, and liue in ciuil honestie, peace, and tranquillitie, publique and priuate: but also to haue a speciall regarde and care to see them fedde vvith true doctrine, and to be fostered vp in the Religion appoin­ted by God him selfe in his lavve. And therefore immediatlie after he vvas vvith some quietnes setled in his royall seat, the first thing that he began to refourme and restore to the right order, as a thing that appertained especi­ally to his princelie charge and care, vvas Gods religion and seruice, vvhich had ben decayed and neglected long before in the time of King Saul. For the better perfourmance vvhereof, as the Supreme gouernour ouer al the estates both of the laitie and of the Clergie (.41.) The .41. vntruth. Dauid vvas not Supreme gouernor in al manner cau­ses, but suffred the Le­uites in Churche matters to liue vnder the rule of their high Priest. 1. Par. 13.15.16. Dauid in all these matters, determi­mined no doctrine, nor alte­red any religion agaīst the Priestes vvilles of his ovvn Supreme authori­tye. in all maner of causes: after consultation had vvith his chiefe Counsailers, he calleth the Priestes and Le­uites, and commaundeth, appointeth, and directeth them in all manner of things and causes, appertaining to their ecclesiasticall functions and offices. He prepareth a semelie place for the Arke in his ovvne Citie. He goeth vvith great solemnitie to fetch the Arke of the Lord. He cōmaūdeth Sad [...]c ād Abia­thar the Priests, and the chief amōg the Leuites, to sanctifie them selues vvith their brethren, and than to carie the Arke vppon their shoulders vnto the place apointed He comptrolleth thē that the Arke was not caried before on their shoulders according to the lavv: and therfore laieth to their charge the breach that vvas made by the death of Vsa. He cōmādeth also the chief of the [Page 47] Leuits, to apoint amōg their brethrē, Musiciās to play on diuers kinds of inst [...]umēts, and to make melody vvith ioyfulnes. He sacrificeth burnt ād peace offe­rings. He blessed the people in the name of the Lord. He appointeth certain of the Leuites, to minister continually before the Arke of the Lord, to reherse his great benefits, to the honour and praise of the Lord god of Israell. And for that present time he made a psalme of gods praise, and appointed Asaph ād his brethren to praise god thervvith. He ordained the priests, Leuites, sin­gers, and porters, and in some he apointed and ordered al the officers and offi­ces, required to be in the house of the Lord, for the setting foorth of his seruice and religion.

M. Horne. The .14. Diuision. Pag. 9. a.

Salomon (.42.) The .42. vntruth. For Salo­mon of his ovvn authori­tie (as your ar­gument runneth) deposed not Abia­thar: but executed only the sentence, pronoū ­ced be­fore by Samuell Gods mi­nister. deposed Abiathar the high Prieste, and placed Sadoc in his roome And he builded the Temple, placed the Arke in the place appointed for the same. Hallovved or dedicated the Temple, offred sacrifices, blessed the people, directed the Priestes, Leuites, and other Churche officers in their functions, according to the order before taken by his Father Dauid. And neither the Priestes nor Leuites, swerued in anie thing (.43.) The .43. vntruth. Those vvordes are not in the scrip­ture alle­ged. pertaining to their office) from that, that the King commaun­ded them.

M. Horne. The 15. Diuision. Pag. 10. a.

Iosaphat hath no smal commendation in the Scriptures, for that he so stu­diously vsed his (.44.) The 44. vntruth. The Scri­ptur [...] termet [...] not any such Princely Autho [...]ity. 2 Par. 17. Gloss. o [...]d. princely authority in the reformation of Religion, and matters apperteyning, therunto. He remoued at the first beginnīg of his reigne al maner of false Religiō, and what so euer might because of offēce to the faithful. He sent forth through his kingdom visitours, both of his Princes, and also of the Priests and Leuits, vvith the book of the Lavv of the Lord, to the end they should instruct, and teache the people, and refourme all maner abuses in ecclesiastical causes accordīg to that book. After a vvhyle he made a progresse in his ovvn person throughout al his countrey, and Not by his ovvn lavves e­nacting a religion, vvhich preachers shoulde svveare vnto. 2. Par. 19. by his preachers reduced ād brought again his people from superstitiō, ād false religiō vnto the Lord the God of their fathers. He appointed in euery tovvn through­out his kingdom, as it vvere Iustices of the peace, such as feared the Lord, and abhorred false religiō, to decide cōtrouersies in ciuil causes: and in like sort he appointed and ordeined the high Priests vvith other Priests, Leuits, and of the chief rulers amōg the Israelits, to be at Hierusalem to decide, and Yea the Priestes iudged, not the King. iudge cō ­trouersies of great vveight, that should a [...]ise about matters of religiō and the Lavv. He did cōmaunde and prescribe (45.)The 45. vntruth. Thereappereth not in Scripture any such prescrip­tiō made vno the chiefe Priests 2. Par. 20. vnto the chief Priests and Leuits, vvhat fourme and order they should obserue in the ecclesiasticall causes and controuersies of religion, that vvere not so difficult and vveighty. And vvhen any tokē of Gods displeasure appeared, either by vvarres or other calamity, he gaue order to his subiects for commō praier, and enioyned to thē publike faste, vvith earnest preaching of repentaunce, and seeking after the vvil of the Lord to obey and folovve the same.

M. Horne. The 16. Diuision. Pag. 10. b.

Ezechias the king of Iuda, hath this testimony of the holy Ghost,4. Reg. 18. that the like gouernour had not been, neither should bee after him amōgest the kings of [...]uda. For he cleaued vnto the Lord, and svverued not from the preceptes vvhich the Lord gaue by Moyses. And to expresse, that the office, [...]ule, and go­uernment of a godly king consisteth, and is occupied according to Gods ordi­naunce and precept, first of al in matters of Religion, and causes Ecclesiasti­cal, the holy Ghost doth commende this king for his diligent care in refourmīg religion. He toke quite avvay (saith the holy ghost) al maner of Idolatry, su­perstition, and false religion, yea, euen in the first yere of his reigne, and the first moneth he opened the doores of Gods house:2. Par. 29. He calleth as it vvere to a Sy­node the Priestes, and Leuits, he maketh vnto them a long and pithy oration, declaring the horrible disorders and abuses that hath been in religion, the causes, and vvhat euils folovved to the vvhole realme thereupō: He declareth his ful determination to restore and refourme religiō according to Gods vvil. He commaundeth them therfore, that they laying aside al errours, ignoraūce, and negligence, do the partes of faithful ministers.

The Priestes and Leuits assembled together, did sanctifie themselues, and did purge the house of the Lorde from al vncleanes of false religion, at the commaundement of the King (.46.) The 46. vntruth. Those vvordes (concer­ning thīgs of the Lord) are no vvor­des of the text, but fa [...]sly ad­ded to holy Scrip­ture. concerning things of the Lord. That don, they came vnto the King, and made to him an accompt and report vvhat they had don, The King assembleth the chief rulers of the City, goeth to the Temple, be commaundeth the Priests and Leuits, to make obla­tion and sacrifice for vvhole Israel. He appoin [...]eth the Leuits after their order in the house of the Lorde, [...]o their musicall instruments, and of the Priestes to play on Shalmes, according as Dauid had disposed the order (47.) The 47, vn [...]ruth. Holy Scripture falsified, ād may [...]ed. as it shal ap­pere. 2. Par. 30. by the coū ­sell of the Prophetes. He and the Prince commaundeth the Leuites to praise the Lorde vvith that Psalme that Dauid made for the like purpose. He ap­pointed a very solempne keaping and ministring of the Passeouer, vvhere­unto be exhorteth al the Israelites, and to tourne from their Idolatrye and false religion vnto the Lorde God of Israel. He made solempne prayer for the people. The king vvith comfortable vvoordes encouraged the Leuites that vvere zelous, and hadde right iudgement of the Lorde, to off [...]e sacrifices of thankes geuing, and to prayse the Lorde the God of their Fathers, and assig­ned the Priestes and Leuites to minister, and geue thankes, accordinge to [Page] their offices in their courses and tournes. And for the better continuance of Gods true Religion, he caused a sufficient and liberall prouision to bee made from the people, for the Priests and Leuits, that they might vvholy, cheerfully, and constantly, serue the Lorde in their vocation. These doinges of the Kinge Ezechias touching matters of Religion, and the reformation thereof, saieth the holy ghost, vvas his acceptable seruice of the Lord, dutiful both to God and his people.

M. Horne. The .17. Diuision pag. 11 a.

Iosias had the like care for religion, and vsed in the same sort his princely authority, in reforming al abuses (48)The .48. vntruth. Boldly a­uouched, but no vvay proued. in al maner causes Ecclesiastical These Godly Kings claimed and toke vpon them the supreme gouernment ouer the Ecclesiasticall persons of all degrees, and did rule, gouerne, and direct them in all their functions, and (.49.)The 49. vntruth. as before, but som­vvhat more im­pudent. in all manner causes belonging to Religion, and receiued thu witnes of their doings, to witte, that they did acceptable seruice, and nothing but that which was right in Gods sight. Therefore it follovveth well by good consequent, that Kings or Queenes may claime and take vpon them such gouernment in things or causes Ecclesiasticall. For that is right, saith the holy Ghost; they should than doe vvrong if they did it not.

Stapleton.

KING Iosias trauailed ful godly in suppressing Idolatrie by his Kingly authority.Iosias What then? So doe good Catholike Princes also, to plucke doune the Idols that ye and your brethrē haue of late sette vppe: and yet none of them, take them selues [Page] for supreme heads in all causes Spirituall. And ye haue hi­therto brought nothing effectuall to proue that the Kings of Israell did so: wherefore your conclusion, that they did rule, gouerne, and direct the Ecclesiasticall persons in all their functions, and in all maner causes of religion, is an open and a notorious lye: and the contrarye is by vs auouched and sufficiently proued by the authority of the old Testament, wherevppon ye haue hitherto rested and setled your selfe.

It is here declared, that M. Horne cōmeth nothing nigh the principal question.But now that ye in all your exāples drawe nothing nigh the marke, but runne at rādon, and shoot al at rouers, is most euident to him that hath before his eye, the verye state of the question: whiche must be especially euer regarded of such as minde not to loosly and altogether vnfruitfully im­ploye their laboure, and loose both their owne and their Readers labour. I pray you then good M. Horne bring 1 foorth that King that did not agnise one supreme head and chiefe iudge in all causes Ecclesiasticall among the Iewes, I meane the high Priest, wherein lieth all our chiefe que­stion. Ye haue not yet done it, nor neuer shal doe it. And if ye could shew any, it were not worth the shewing. For ye should not shewe it in any good King, as being an open breache of Gods lawe geauen to him by Moyses: as these your doings are an open breach of Christ and his churches lawe, geuen to vs in the new Testament.

2 Againe what president haue ye shewed of anye good King among the Iewes, that with his laitie, altered and a­bandoned, the vsuall religion a thousande yeares and vp­ward customablie from age to age receiued and embraced: and that, the High Priest and the whole Clergie resisting and gainsaiyng all such alterations? If ye haue not shewed this, ye haue straied farre from the marke.

[Page 54]What euidence haue ye brought forth to shewe that in 3 the olde Law, any King exacted of the Clergie in verbo sa­cerdotij, that they shuld make none Ecclesiastical law with­out his consent, as King Henrie did of the Clergie of Eng­land? And so to make the Ciuil Magistrate the Supreame iudge for the finall determination of causes Ecclesiasti­call?

What can ye bring forth out of the olde Testamente to 4 aide and relieue your doinges, who haue abandoned not onely the Pope, but Generall Councels also: and that by plaine acte of Parliament?Generall Coūcels abando­ned out of Eng­land by acte of Parlia­ment. I saye this partlye for a certaine clause of the Acte of Parliament, that for the determina­tion of anye thinge to be adiudged to be heresie, reasteth only in the authoritie of the Canonicall Scriptures, and in the first foure General Councels, and other Councels general, wher­in any thing is declared heresie by expresse wordes of scripture. By whiche rule it will be hard to conuince many froward obstinate heretikes to be heretikes: yea of such as euen by the saied fower first, and many other Councels general are condemned for heretikes. Partly, and most of al, I saye it, for an other clause in the acte of Parliament, enacting that no forraigne Prince Spirituall or temporal shall haue any au­thoritie or Superioritie in this realme, in any Spirituall cause. And then I pray you, if any Generall Councell be made to reforme our misbelief, if we wil not receiue it, who shall force vs? And so ye see we be at libertie, to receiue or not receiue any general Councel. And yet might the Pope re­forme vs wel inough for any thing before rehersed (for the Popes authority ecclesiastical is no more forraigne to this realme, then the Catholike faith is forraigne) sauing that he is by expresse wordes of the statute otherwise excluded.

[Page] 5 Now what can ye shewe that mere laie men should en­ioye ecclesiastical liuings, as vsually they doe among you? 6 What good inductiō can ye bring from the doinges of the Kinges of the olde Lawe to iustifie, that Princes nowe may make Bishoppes by letters patents, and that for suche and so long time as should please them, as either for terme of yeares, moneths, weekes, or daies? What good motiue cā 7 ye gather by their regiment, that they did visit Bishops and Priestes, and by their lawes restrained them to exercise a­ny iurisdiction ouer their flockes, to visite their flocks, to refourme them, to order or correcte them without their especiall authoritie and commission therevnto? Yea to restraine them by an inhibition from preaching,Note. whiche ye confesse to be the peculiar function of the Clergie, exem­pted 8 from all superioritie of the Prince? What? Thinke ye that yee can perswade vs also, that Bishops and Priestes paied their first fruits and tenthes to their Princes, yea and that both in one yeare, as they did for a while in Kinge Henrie his dayes?Gen. 47. Verelye Ioseph would not suffer the very heathen Priestes (which onely had the bare names of Priests) to paye either tithes or fines to Pharao their Prince. Yea rather he found them in time of famine vpon the com­mon store.

9 Are ye able (suppose ye) to name vs any one King, that wrote him selfe Supreame head of the Iewish Church, and that in all causes as well Spirituall as Temporall: and that caused an Othe to the Priestes and people (the Nobilitie onelye exempted) to be tendred, that they in conscience did so beleue? and that in a woman Prince too, yea and that vnder paine of premunire and plaine treason too?

O M. Horne, your manifolde vntruthes are disciphired [Page 55] and vnbuckled, ye are espied, ye are espied, I say, well e­nough, that ye come not by a thousande yardes and more nigh the marke. Your bowe is to weake, your armes to feable, to shoot with any your cōmendation at this marke: yea if ye were as good an archer, as were that famous Ro­bin Hood, or Litle Iohn. Wel shift your bowe, or at the least wise your string. Let the olde Testament goe, and pro­cede to your other proufes, wherein we will nowe see if ye can shoote any streighter. For hitherto ye haue shotten al awrye, and as a man may saye, like a blinde man. See now to your selfe from henseforth that ye open your eies, and that ye haue a good eye and a good aime to the marke we haue set before you. If not, be ye assured we wil make no curtesie eftsones to put you in remembrance. For hi­therto ye haue nothing proued that Princes ought, which ye promised to proue, or that they may take vppon them such gouernment, as I haue laid before you, and such as ye must in euery parte iustifie, if either ye will M. Fekenham shal take the Othe, or that ye entende to proue your selfe a true man of your worde.

M. Horne. The .18. Diuision. pag. 11. b.

You suppose, that ye haue escaped the force of all these and such like god­ly Kings (which doe marueilously shake your holde) and that they may not be alleaged against you, neither any testimonie out of the olde testament, for that ye haue restrained the proufe for your contentation, to such order of gouernment as Christ hath assigned in the Ghospel, to be in the time of the nevv testament, wherein you haue sought a subtil shifte. For whiles ye seeke to cloke your errour vnder the shadovve of Christes Ghospel▪ you bevvray your secrete heresies, turning your self naked to be sene of al men, and your cause notvvithstanding, lest in the state it vvas before, nothing holpen by this your poore shift of restraint. So that vvhere your friendes tooke you be­fore but onely for a Papist: novv haue you shevved your selfe to them plainly [Page] herein to be a (.50.)The .50. vntruth. Moste slaunde­rous. M. Horne him selfe and his fellovves are in many poīts Donati­stes, as shal ap­peare. Donatist also. VVhen the Donatists troubled the peace of Christes Catholique Church, and diuided them selues from the vnity ther­of, as nor [...] you doe: The godlie Fathers trauailed to confute their heresies by the Scriptures, both of the olde and nevve testament: and also craued aide and assistaunce of the Magistrates and Rulers to refourme them, to reduce them to the vnitie of the Churche, and to represse their heresies, vvith their authoritie and godlie lavves made for that purpose, to vvhome it belonged of duetie, and vvhose especial seruice to Christ is, to see, care, and prouide, that their subiectes be gouerned, defended, and mainteined in the true and sincere religion of Christ, vvithout al errours, superstitions and heresies, as S. Augu­stine proueth at large in his Epistle against Vincentius a Rogatist, in his Epi­stle to Bonifacius, and in his booke against Petilian, and Gaudentius letters. Against this Catholique Doctrine, your auncestours the Donatistes, arise vp and defend them selues vvith this colour or pretence, that they be of the Ca­tholique faith, and that their church is the Catholique church: (VVhich shift for their defence against Gods truth, the Popish sectaries doe vse in this our time, being (.51.)The 51. vntruth. Answere the For­tresse M. Horne, annexed to S. Bede, if you dare to defend this most sensible and most grosse lye. August. Epist. 43. & 50. Lib. 2. cont. lit. Pet. ca. 92 Lib 2. con. Ep. 2. Gaud. ca. 2 [...]. no more of the one, or of the other, then vvere the Dona­tists and such like, of vvhom they learned to couer their horrible heresies vnder the same faire cloke) that the secular Princes haue not to meddle in matters of religion or causes Ecclesiastiall. That God committed not the tea­ching of his people to Kings, but to Prophetes Christ sent not souldiours but fishers, to bring in and further his religion, that there is no example of such order, found in the Gospell or nevv Testament, vvherby it may appeare, that to secular Princes it belongeth to haue care in matters of religion. And that (as it semeth by that S Augustine by preuention obiecteth against them) they subtilly refused all proufes or examples auouched out of the Olde testamente (as ye craftely doe also, in binding me onelie to the Nevv testament) vvhich S. Augustine calleth: an odious and vvicked guile of the Donatists. Let your friends novv, vvhome ye vvill seeme to please so much, vvhen you beguile them most of all, vveigh vvith aduisement, vvhat vvas the erro­nious opinion touching the authoritie of Princes in causes Ecclesiastical of the Donatists (as it is here rightly gathered foorth of S. Augustine) and let them consider vvisely these foule shiftes they make for their defence: And then compare your opinion and guilefull defences thereof to theirs and they must needs clappe you on the backe, and saye to you Patrisas, (if there be any vp­right [Page 59] right iudgement in them) deming you so like your graundsier Donatus, as though he had spitte you out of his ovvne mouth.

Stapleton.

HITHERTO, good Reader, M. Horne al­though vntruely, yet hath he somwhat order­like proceeded. But in that which followeth vntill we come to the .20. leafe, beside moste impudent and shamelesse lyes,M. Horns disorder­ly Trea­tise. wherwith he would deface M. Fekenham, he prosequuteth his matter so confusely and vnorderly, leaping in and out, I can not tel howe, nor whi­ther: that I verely thinke that his wits were not his owne, being perchance encombred with some his domestical af­faires at home, that he could not gather them together, or that he the lesse passed, what an hodge potche he made of his doings, thinking which is like, that his fellowes Prote­stantes woulde take all things in good gree, knowing that poore M. Fekenham was shut vp close inough, from al an­swering. And thinking that no Catholique els woulde take vppon him to answere to his lewde booke. I had thought M. Horne, that from the olde Testament, ye woulde haue gone to the newe Testament: and woulde haue laboured to haue established your matters therby. Belike the world goeth very hard with you in that behalfe, that ye doe not so: sauing that here and there ye iumble in a testimonie or two, I can not tell how, but howe vnhandsomly and from the purpose, yea against your owne selfe, that I wot well, and ye shall anon heare of it also.

[Page]In the meane while it is worth the labour well to con­sider the excellent pregnant witte and greate skill of this man, who hath in the former Treatise of M. Fekenham es­pied out (which surely the wisest, and best learned of all the worlde I trowe, beside M. Horne, would neuer haue espied, such a special grace the man hath geuen him of his maister the Deuill of mere malice, ioyned with like follie) that M. Fekenham is an Heretike, and a Donatist. But yet M. Fekenham is somewhat beholding to him, that he saith M. Fekenham hath bewrayed his secrete heresies. Wherein he saith for the one part most truely. For if there be any heresie at all in this matter surmised vppon him, as certain­ly there is none, it is so secrete and priuie, that Argus him­selfe, with al his eyes shall neuer espye it: no nor M. Horne him selfe, let him prie neuer so narrowly: whereas on the other side, M. Horn and his fellowes, and his Maisters Lu­thers and Caluins heresies, are no secrete nor simple here­sies, but so manifolde and so open, that they haue no waye or shift to saue their good name and honestie, blotted and blemished for euer (without repentance) for the obstinate maintenance of the same. Where of many were, many hū ­dred yeares since, condemned, partly by the holy Fathers, partly by General Councels. You say M. Fekenham hath secrete heresies, and that Donatus is his great grandsi [...], and the Donatists the Catholikes auncetours: but how truly, you shal vnderstād anon. In the meane while good Syr, may it please you fauourably to heare you and your maisters honorable pedegre; and of their worthy feares and prowes. You haue heard of them before perhaps,M. Horns and his fellovves aūcetors. and that by mee. But suche things as may edifie the Catholike, ād can neuer be answe­red by the Heretike, Decies repetita placebunt.

[Page 57]Howe say you then to the great heretik Aerius the Ar­rian,August. et Epiphae. de haeres. that said there was no difference betwene priest and Bisshop, betwene him that fasted and that did not faste, and that the sacrifice for the deade was fruitlesse? How say you to Iouinian, that denied virginity to haue any excellencye aboue matrimony, or any special rewarde at Gods handes?Hier. con. Iouinian. Ambro. li. 10. epi. 18 Ambros. serm. 91. Euth. in Panopl. tit. 33. To the Arrians that denied the miracles done at the saintes tōbes to be true miracles, and that the martyrs cā not caste out the diuels and relieue thē that be possessed? To the Bo­gomyles that said the deuils sate at the saints tōbes and did wonders there, to illude and deceiue the people, to cause the people to worship them? To Berengarius condemned in diuers councels, first for denying of the real presence in the sacrament of the aulter, and then for denying the tran­substantiatiō? To the Paulicians,Euth. Zi­gab. in Panop. tit. 21 Hiero. cōt. Vig. Ionas episcopus Aurelian. cōt. Clau­dium. Euth. in Panop. tit. 22. August li. 1. cont. 2. epis. Pela. ad Bonif. cap. 13. Cyril li 6. cōt. Iulia. that saied these wordes of Christe, Take, eate, this is my body, are not to be vnderstan­ded of his bodye, or the breade and wine vsed at the cele­bration of our Lordes maundy, but of the holy scriptures, which the Priests should take at Christes hand, and deliuer and distribute to the people? To Claudius and Vigilantius, that denied the inuocation of Saintes, and inueyed against the blessed reliques, and the vse of Lights and other cere­monies in the Church? To the Massalians and other here­tiks, saying that concupiscence as a sinne remayneth in vs after holy baptisme? And because ye shal not say I suppresse, conceile, or obscure, the chief and most notable persons of your auncetry: how say you to the Emperours Philippicus, Leo, Constantinus, condēned with their adherētes by the .7. general coūcel at Nice, that vilayned by defacing, breaking and burnīg, the Images of al the holy hallowes of Christ, ād Christes to? To whome for your more honour and glorye [Page] I adioyne the Emperour Iulianus the Apostata. Who as ye doe in your books and pulpits,Cyril lib. 6 contra Iulianū. Aug. lib. 2 cōtr. 2. epi. Pelag. c. 4. Caluin in his Insti­tutions, cap. 18. in fine: Ar­gētorati Impress. An. 1545 cried out vpon the Christiās. O ye wretched men, that worship the wood of the crosse, set­ting vp the figure of it vppon your forehed and dores: you there­fore that are of the wiseste sorte are worthy to be hated, and the residewe to be pityed, that treading after your steppes come to such a kinde of Wretchednes. To the Pelagians, affirming that children not baptized shalbe saued? And yet are your mai­sters in this point worse then the Pelagians, as wel for that some of them haue said, that some Infants thowgh vnbapti­zed shalbe damned, and some other though vnbaptized shal be saued: And some of them especially Caluin and other Sacramentaries say, that they shal come without Baptisme to the Kingdom of heauen: which the Pelagians durste not say, but that they should haue the life euerlasting, put­ting a difference, but peuishly, betwixte those two. And if ye thinke the race of your worthye generation is not fet­ched highe inoughe,Epiph. & Philast. de haeres. we will mounte higher, and as high as maye be, euen to Simon Magus him selfe. Of whome Mar­cion and Manicheus,Clemens li. 3. recog. Iraeneus. li 1. ca. 20. and after long and honorable succes­sion your Patriarches Luter and Caluin haue learned their goodly doctrine against free will. Yea to touche the verye foundatiō and wel spring of this your new gospel, which al­together is grounded vpō iustificatiō without good works, in that also ye drawe very nigh to the said Simon Magus.In the discourse annexed to Sta­philus. fol. 161. & sequent.

I forbeare at this time to speake of the residewe of your noble progenitours, hauing in other places (as I noted be­fore) spoken largely of the same. This shall suffice, at thys present, to make open to all the world, that they are no pe­tit or secrete heresies that ye and your fellowes mainteine. Come foorthe once, and cleare your selfe of this onelye [Page 58] obiection, if yow can, being so often pressed therewith. If you maintaine olde condēned heresies, what are yow lesse then heretiks your selues? If yow maintaine them not, or if they be not olde heresies which you maintaine, clere your self if you be able. I assure you M. Horn, you and al your fe­lowes wil neuer be able to auoide this one onely obiectiō. And therfore you and al your fellowes must nedes remaine stark hereticks, and for such to be abhorred and abādonned (except you repēt) of al good Christiās.Protestants be Donatists Now as I haue pro­ued yow and your companions open and notable heretiks, so shal I straite way purge M. Fekenham to be no Donatist, or any heretik otherwise, for any thing yet by you layde to his charge. But now Maister Horne beware your self, leaste this vniuste accusation against Maister Fekenham and the Catholikes whome ye cōpare to the Donatistes causelesse,1. The dis­sentiō of the Do­natists. August. de haeres. & in Psal. 36 & lib. 4. contra Cresc. c. 6. moste iustly and truely redounde vpon your and your fel­lowes heades. Beware I say. For I suppose I will laye more pregnante matter in this behalfe to your and their charge, then ye haue or possible can doe to Maister Fekenham or any other Catholike, whereof I dare make any indifferent Reader iudge. If I should dilate and amplifie this matter at large, yt would rise to a prety volume: but I will purposely abridge yt, and giue the Reader as it were but a taste.2. Aug. lib. 2 contra Iu­lian. & lib 3. contra Cresco. c. 66. & lib. 2. contra aduers. Leg. c 12.

They were al called first Donatistes: but as the first fell from the Churche Catholike: so fell they also afterwarde from their owne Churche and maister, into an horrible di­uision, of the Maximianistes, Circumcellions, Rogatistes, Circenses and others. A lyuelye paterne of the sectes sprōg from your Apostle Luther, as in their pedegree in the Apo­logy of Staphylus euery man may see.

The Donatistes would somtyme crake and bragge of [Page] their multitude, and bring it as an argument that the truth was on their side, as doth your Apologie. Which being re­strayned by the Emperours Lawes, and dayly diminishing, then they cried, the truthe resteth with the fewe elected and chosen parsons: then cried they: O lytle flocke feare not, as ye did, when ye were as yet but in corners, rotten barnes, and Luskye lanes.

3. Aug. epis. 204. & cōt. Cresc.The Donatistes when they could not iustifie their own doctrine, nor disproue the Catholiks doctrine, leauing the doctrine, fel to rayling, against the vitiouse lyfe of the Ca­tholiks. In this point, who be Donatists, I referre me to Lu­thers and Caluins books, especially to M. Iewel, and to your owne Apologie.

4. Aug. lib. 1. euang. quaest. 4. cap. 38. The Do­natists re­fuse the knovven Church.The Donatistes refused the open knowen Catholicke Churche, and sayde the Church remayned onely in those that were of their side in certayne corners of Afrike. And sing not ye the like songe, preferring your Geneua and Wit­tenberge, before the whole Catholike Church beside?

The Donatistes corrupted the Fathers books wonder­fully, and were so impudent in alleaging them, that in their publike conference at Carthage, they pressed much vppon Optatus wordes, and layde him forth as an author making for them,5. Vide Aug. in breuiculo Collat. diei 3. & in lib. post Coll. ca. 31. See M. Davves in his 13. booke. who yet wrote expressely against them, and in all his writings condemned them. Is not this I pray yow the vsuall practise of your Apostles Luther and Caluin, of M. Iewel, and your own to, in this booke? as I truste we haue and shal make it most euidēt. And here let M. Dawes beare you company to, in the crafty and false handling of his own deare brothers Sleydans story, where he leaueth out Alex­ander Farnesius oration to the Emperour, wherein he she­weth the Protestants dissensions.

[Page 59]The Donatists to get some credite to their doctrine pre­tended many false visions and miracles, and they thowght that God spake to Donatus from heauen: And doth not M. Foxe in his donghil of stinckinge martyrs pretely followe them therein trowe you?6. August. in Ioannem Tractat. 13 An. 1558. Hathe not the lyke practise bene attempted of late in Hūgary, to authorise the new ghospell by pretēding to restore lyfe to an holy brother feyning him self to be dead, and by the great prouidence of God, found to be dead in dede?in l. theut. ad Senatū Germa. In lib. de miss. An­gul. Did not your Apostle Luther boast himself of his visions and reuelations? Which how coelesti­all they were doth sone appere, for that hī self writeth, that the deuil appered vnto him in the night, and disputed with him against priuate masse: by whose mightye and weightye reasons Luther being ouerthrowen yelded, and inconti­nently wrote against priuate masse as ye cal it.7. Thei pre­ferre a nationall councel before the general. Aug. lib. 2 de baptis. cap. 9. 8. August. de agone Christi c. 29. The Au­thour of the har­borovve. 9.

Did not the Donatists preferre, and more exsteme one national erroniouse councel in Aphrica, then the great and general coūcel at Nice? kepe not ye also this trade prefer­ring your forged Conuocation libell before the Generall Councel of Trident?

The Donatists said that al the world was in an apostasie at the cōming of their apostle Donatus: And is not Luther the same man to yow, that Donatus was to them? doth not one of your greatest clerks there with you now write, that Wyclyff begatte Husse, Husse begotte Luther: and thē addeth a shameful blasphemous note, this is the seconde Natiuitye of Christe?

The Donatists being charged and pressed by the Catho­liks to shewe the beginning and continuance of their do­ctrine, and the ordinary successiō of their Bisshops, were so encombred, that they could neuer make any conueniente [Page] answer. And are not ye I pray you, with your felowes pro­testāt bishops, fast, in the same myre? If not, answer then to my thirde demaunde in the Fortresse annexed to S. Bede.

Opt. lib. 2. Parte. 2 cap. 1. fol. 94. Aug. lib. 2 cont. Pe­til. ca. 92. Optatus lib. 2. In his Replie a­gainst M. D. Har­ding.The Donatists fynding faulte with Constantine, Theo­dosius, and other Catholik princes, ranne for succour to Iu­lianus the renegate and highly commended him. And doth not M. Iewel, I pray you, take for his president against the Popes primacy Constantius the Arrian, against Images Philippicus, Leo, Cōstantinus and such like detestable here­tiks by general councels condemned? Do not your self play the like parte in the Emperour Emanuel, as ye cal him, and in other as we shal hereafter declare?

Now who are, I pray you, Donatists, for the defacing and ouerthrowing of Aulters, for vilaining the holy Chrisme, and the holy Sacrament of the aulter? Which they cast vnto dogs: which straitwaies by the ordinance of God, Optatus. lib. 2.6. & 7. The Do­natistes crueltie to the Catholiks Optatus. Lib. 6. Aug. con­tra Dona. post Col­lat. c. 31. fell vpon them, and being therin Gods ministers, made them fele the smart of their impietie. It were a tragical narration, to open the great and incredible crueltie that the Donatists vsed toward the Ca­tholiks, and especially their horrible rauishment of religious Nonnes. And yet were they nothing so outragious, as your Hugonots haue bene of late in France, and the beggarly Guets here in Flandres, namely about Tournaye.

The Donatists said of the Catholiks: Illi portant multorū Imperatorum sacra. Nos sola portamus euangelia. They bring vs many of the Emperours letters, we bring the only ghos­pels. And is not this the voyce of all Protestantes whatsoe­uer? Only Scripture, only the gospel, only the word of God? And for the first parte, what is more common in the mou­thes of the Germayn Lutherans, of the French Caluinistes, and now of the flemmish Guets, then this complaint, that we presse them with the Emperours Diets, with the Kings [Page 60] proclamations, and with the Princes placarts? To the which they obey as much as the Donatists, when they haue pow­er to resiste.

Wel, we wil nowe leaue of al other conference and cō ­parisons, and tarry a litle in one more.The Do­natistes counted Martyrs. August. epist. 68. The Donatists though they were most wicked Murtherers of others and of them selues also, killing them selues moste wretchedly without any other outward violence don to them: yet were they takē of their confederats for Martyrs. Of whome thus wri­teth S. Augustin. Viuebant vt Latrones, moriebantur vt Cir­cumcelliones, honorabantur vt Martyres. M. Foxes stinking Martyrs: Euseb. li. 5 cap. 18. Niceph. li. 6. c. 32 Aug. con. epist. Ma­ni. ca. 8. Syr Iohn Oldcastel Syr Ro­ger Act­on. Anno. 2. Henrici. 5 cap. 5. Polidor. Harding. Fabian. Haul. Cooper. Eleanour Cobham. They liued like rob­bers by the high way, they died like Circumcellions (mea­ning thei slew them selues) they were honored as Martyrs. And now where lerned M. Foxe the trade to make his holy canonisation, in his deuelish dirty donghil of his fowle here­tical ād trayterous Martyrs, but of those ād such like schole­maisters? As of the Montanists, that worshipped one Alex­ander for a worshipful martyr, thowgh he suffred for no mat­ter of religiō, but for myscheuous murther. And of the Ma­niches, that kepte the day wherein their maister Manes was put to death, more solemply, then Easter day.

Haue ye not thē in M. Foxe, Sir Iohn Oldcastle, and Syr Roger Acton canonised for holy martyrs, though they died for high treason? yea their names al to be painted, dasshed, ād florished in the kalender with read letters, I thinke because we shoulde kepe their daye a double feaste? Whose and their confederates condemnation for conspiringe againste the Kinge, the nobilitye, and their countreye, appereth aswell by acte of parliament then made, as by the full testimony of all our English Cronicles. Is not dame Ellea­nour Cobhā a stowte confessour in this madde martyrloge? [Page] whose banishment was not for religion,Sir Ro­ger One­ly. Maga­ret lorde­man. The vvitch of Aey. but for conspiringe King Henry the sixts death by wytchrafte and sorcery, by the help and assistance of M. Roger Bolinbroke, and Mar­garet Iordeman, commonly called the Witche of Aey? The which two were openly executed for the same. But nowe is it worth the hearing to know, how handsomly M. Foxe hath conceyued his matters: wherein he plaieth in dede the wily Foxe and springleth with his false wily tayle, his fylthy stale not into the doggs, but into his readers eies. And as the Foxe, as some hūters say, when he is sore driuen, wil crafte­ly mount from the earth and kepe himself a while vpon the eather of a hedge, only to cause the howndes that drawe af­ter him to leese the sente of the tracte: euen so for all the worlde hath our Foxe plaied with his reader. But I trust I shal trace him, and smel him out wel inoughe.

First then, though M. Foxes authority be very large and ample in this his canonisation, and such as neuer any Pope durste take vpon him, yea and though he hath authority to make martyrs,See Har­ding, Fa­biā, Hall Cooper, grafton, the addition of Polichronicon. yet I dowbte whether he hath authority to make Knights to: for this Sir Roger Onley is neither a Sir, but of M. Foxes making, nor Onley neither: But M. Roger Bolinbroke only: put to death for the treason before speci­fied, as not onely his owne authours Fabian and Harding, whome he doth alleage for the story of Dame Elleanour, but al other also doe testifie. Truthe it is that Harding wri­ting in English meeter and speaking of this M. Bolinbroke endeth one of his staues with this worde Only, which is there to signifie no name, but to better and sweate the mee­ter, and is as much to say, as chiefly and principally, meaning that Maister Roger was the principal worker in this nigro­mancy. The meeters of Harding are these.

Whiche last woorde, some ignorant or Protestant Printer hath made Oonly. And then hath M. Fox added a Syr, and a Martyr too, and adorned him with no common inke, to set foorth and beutify his Martyr withal. And so of M. Ro­ger Bolinbroke, sorcerer and traitour, by a cunning Meta­morphosis he hath made, Syr Roger Onlye Knight and Martyr.

Wel, wil ye yet see further the craftie dubling of a Fox, walking on the eather of the hedge? Consider then that, for Margaret Iordaman that notable witch (least if he had named her and M. Bolinbroke by their own names, he had marred al the rost) he placeth an other woman, that by his owne rule died fortie yeares after.See M. Foxes Martyr, the 371. leafe. Alanus Copus. dialog. 6. cap. 16. Hune Debnam. King. Marsh. And yet can he not hit vpon her name neither, but is faine to call her, in steed of Ione Bowghton, the mother of the Ladie Yong, who in deed is one of his stinking hereticall and foolish Martyrs. For she craked ful stoutly that there was no fier, that could consume or hurt her. I could here name a rablemente of like holy Martyrs, as Richard Hune, that hong him selfe: King, Debnam, and Marsh, hanged for sacrilege. Beside a number of such notoriouse and detestable heretiques, that M. Foxe him selfe wil not I trowe, as great an heretike as he is, denie them to be heretiks. As Peter a Germain being an Anabaptist: as Anthonie Person an Heretike of the secte of the Paulicians, of whom we haue spoken.D. VVe­salian. As D. Wesalian, that denied the holy Ghost to procede from the [Page] Father and the sonne. And to conclude this matter, of the notable heretike Cowbridge, burnte at Oxford. Who ex­pounded these wordes of Christ, Take eate this is my bodie that shalbe betrayed for you. Covv­bridge. thus: Take, eate, this is my body, in the which the peple shalbe deceiued. Who also affirmed that the name of Christ was a foule name, and therfore ra­ced it out of his bookes, whersoeuer he foūd it. And would reade for Iesu Christ: Iesu, Iesu, saiyng that Christ was the deceiuer of the world, and that al were damned in hel, that beleued in the name of Christ. We wil now with this bles­sed Martyr of M. Foxes canonisation ende this talke with the whole conference, leauing it to the indifferent Reader to consider whether the Catholiques, or the Protestantes, drawe nearer to the Donatists.

Let vs then procede foorth, and consider vppon what good motiues, ye charge M. Fekenham to be a Donatiste, which are, to say the truth, none other but falshod and fol­lie. But, as ye surmise, the one is, because he craftelye and by a subtill shift refuseth the proufes of the olde Testamente, as the Donatists did. The other, because he with the said Donatists shoulde auouche, that secular Princes haue not to meddle in matters of Religion, or causes Ecclesiasticall: nor to punishe anye man for suche causes. Surely for your firste motiue so fine and subtile a blaste of an horne, a man shal not light­lye find againe among al the horners in England I suppose. But yet by your leaue Syr, your horne hath a foule flawe. When M Fekenham offereth to yeld, if ye can proue this re­giment either by the order that Christ left behinde him in the new Testament, either by the Doctours, either by Councels, or els by the cōtinual practise of any one Church, think you M. Horne that this is not a large and an ample offer? I wil not say, that [Page 62] this is subtyle shift, but rather a very blind, bytle blonte shifte of yours, to charge him with any refusall of the olde Testament, either openly or couertly. There is not so much as anye coniecture apparente, to gather this vppon, yea the olde Testamente is not by this offerre, as ye blindlye and blontly gheasse, excluded, but verely included. For if the new Testament, which reherseth many things out of the olde, haue any thing out of the olde Testamente, that make for this regimente: yf any Doctour, olde or newe, yf any Councell haue any thinge oute of the olde Testa­ment that serue for this regimente, then is Maister Feken­ham concluded, yea by his owne graunte. For so the Do­ctour or Councel hath yt, he is satisfied accordinge to his demaunde. Whereby it foloweth, that he doth not refuse, but rather alowe and affirme the proufes of the olde Testa­mente. And surely wise men vse not greatly to shew that, that maketh against them, but most for them. Wherefore it is incredible, that Maister Fekenham shoulde ons imagyn any suche syftynge or shyftynge as ye dreame of, hauinge wonne his purpose againste you euen by the verye olde Testamente as we haue declared. And therfore it is spo­ken but in your dreame, when ye say, ye haue thereby with meruelouse force shaken M. Fekenhams holde: which suerlye is so forcible, as wil not beate down a very paper wal. And meruayle were it, yf ye shoulde so batter his holde, when that these your great cannons come not nigh his holde by one thowsande myles.

Againe this accusation is incredible. For M. Fekenham him selfe is so farre of from this suspition, that he himselfe, bringeth in against you many and good testimonies of the old Law. (as fol. 109. and 123.) by the force whereof only he [Page] may be thought to haue shaken and ouerthrowen to, your rotten weake holde vnderpropped with your great Samp­sons postes as mighty as bulrushes. But I perceiue by your good Logike, your Law, and like Diuinity, silēce maketh a denial, and because M. Fekenham maketh no mention in this place of the matter to be proued by the old Testamēt, therfore he subtillie refuseth the proufes thereof. But yee should rather me thinketh induce the contrary, and that he consenteth to you for the olde Testament: Quia qui tacet, consentire videtur: (as the olde saiyng is) For he that hol­deth his peace, seemeth to consent: and so ye might haue better forced vppon him that all was yours, presupposing that ye had proued the matter by the olde Testament.

But you will needes driue your reason an other waye. Let vs see then, what we Catholiques can saye to you for your Apologie by the like drifte. You and your Collea­ges, seing your selues charged with many heresies, to wipe away that blotte if it be possible, and for your better pur­gation, take vpon you, to shew your whole, ful, and entier belief. And therevpon you recite the Articles of the com­mon Crede. But now good Syr, I aske you a questiō: What if by chaunce you had omitted any one of them, would ye gladly be measured by this rule, yee measure M. Fekenham by? Would ye be content, that the Catholiques should lay to your charge, that ye subtilly refuse that article, that you haue forslowen to reherse? If ye would not, thē must I say to you with Christe: Quod tibi non vis fieri, alteri non facias. Do you not to an other, that ye would not haue don to your selfe. If you say, that ye are content to stande to the very same lawe, as if ye be a reasonable and a constant man you must needes say: Loe then good Syr, you haue [Page 63] concluded your selfe and all your companions plaine here­tiques, for the refusal of the Article,The A­pologie of Eng­land in reciting the com­mō Crede leaueth out these vvoords Conceiued of the holy Ghost. Tom 1. Concil. pa. 752. M. Horne and his fellovve [...] by M. Horn his rule are Apolli­narians, and Eu­tichians. Conceiued of the holye Ghost, whiche ye omitte in the rehearsall of your Creede, which Article I am assured, ye find not there. Then fur­ther, seing that the Archeheretique Eutiches, and before him Appollinarius in the recitinge of the common Creede ranne in a maner the same race, you following them at the heeles, as fast as may be, pretermitting also these wordes: Incarnatus est de Spiritu sancto: here might we euen by your owne rule and exaumple, crye oute vppon you all as A­pollinarians and Eutichians, and that with more colou­rable matter, then you haue, eyther to make Maister Fe­kenham a Donatiste, or that your Apologie hath to make the worthie and learned Cardinall Hosius a Zuenckfeldi­an. Wherein your Rethorique is all togeather as good, as is this yours here against Maister Fekenham. Neither doe we greatly passe, howe the Donatistes in this pointe demeaned them selues, and whether they openly or priui­lie shonned proufes brought and deduced out of the olde Testament. In deed the Manichees denied the authori­tie of the bookes of the old Law and Testament: whiche I reade not of the Donatists.Lib. 2. contr. Pe­til ca. 92. Yea in the very same boke and chapter by you alleaged, Petilian him self, taketh his proufe against the Catholikes out of the olde Testament, whiche you know could serue him in litle stede, if he him selfe did reiect such kind of euidences. This now shall suffice for this branche, to purge M. Fekenham that he is no Donatist, or Heretique otherwise.

Concerning the other, beside your falshood, your great follie doth also shew it sesfe too, as well as in the other, to imagin him to be a Donatist, and to think or say as you say [Page] they did, that ciuile magistrates haue not to do with religiō, nor may not punish the trāsgressours of the same. M. Fekenhā saith no such thing, ād I suppose he thinketh no such thing: and furder I dare be as bold to say, that there is not so much as a light cōiecture to be groūded therof by any of M. Feken­hās words, onlesse M. Horne become sodenly so subtil, that he thinketh no differēce to say: the Prince shuld not punish an honest true mā, in stede of a theef, ād to say he shuld not punish a theef. Or to say, there is no difference betwixt al­things ād nothing. For though M. Fekenhā ād al other Ca­tholiks do deny the ciuile Princes supreme gouernmēt in al causes ecclesiasticall, yet doth not M. Fekenhā or any Ca­tholike deny but that ciuil Princes may deale in some mat­ters ecclesiastical as aduocates and defendours of the chur­che, namely in punishing of heretikes by sharp lawes, vnto the which lawes, heretikes are by the Church first geuē vp and deliuered by open excōmunication and condemnatiō.

As for S. Augustines testimonies they nothing touch M. Fekenham, and therefore we will say nothing to them, but kepe our accustomable tale with you, and beside all other score vp as an vntruth that ye say here also, that the Papists are no parte of the Catholique Churche, no more then the Donatistes.

M. Horne. The .19. Diuision. pag. 12. b.

But for that S. Augustines iudgemēt and mine in this controuersie is all one, as your opinion herein differeth nothing at al from the Donatists: I vvil vse no other confirmation of my proufes alleaged out of the olde testament, for the reproufe of your guilful restraint, then Christes Catholique Church, vttered by that Catholique Doctour S. Augustine, against all the sectes of Donatistes, vvhether they be Gaudentians, Petilians, Rogatists, you shoulde haue said Prote­stantes. vvho in so many pointes (as hathe ben she­vved) re­semble the Do­natists. Papists, or any other petit sectes sprōg out of his loines vvhat name so euer they haue.

S. Austine against Gaudētius, his second Epistle affirmeth, saiyng: I haue [Page 64] (saith he) already hertofore made it manifest,Lib. 2. cap. 26. that it apertained to the kings charge, that the Niniuites shoulde pacifye Gods wrath, which the Prophet had denoūced vnto thē. The kings which are of Christes Church, do iudge most rightly, that it ap­pertaineth vnto their cure that you (Donatists) rebel not with­out punishmēt agaīst the same, &c. God doth inspire into kīgs that they should procure the cōmaundement of the Lorde, to be performed or kept in their kingdom. For they to whom it is said: and now ye kings vnderstand, be ye learned ye Iudges of the earth, serue the Lord in feare: do perceiue that their auto­riti ought so to serue the lord, that such as wil not obei his wil should be punished of that autority, &c. Yea saith the same S. Aug. Let the kings of the erth serue Christ, euē in making lawes for Christ. meaning for the furtherance of Christes religiō. Epist. 48. How then doth kings (saith S. Aug. to Bonifacius, Epist. 50. against the Donatists) serue the Lord with reuerēce, but in forbidding and punishing with a reli­gious seuerity, such things as are don against the Lords com­maūdements? For a king serueth one way in that he is a man, an other way, in respect that he is a king. Because in respecte that he is but a mā, he serueth the Lord in liuing faithfully: but in that he is also a king, he serueth in making lawes of cōue­nient force to cōmaūd iust things, ād to forbid the cōtrary, &c. In this therfore kings serue the Lord, whē they do those things to serue him, which thei could not do were thei not kings. &c. But after that this begā to be fulfilled which is writē: and al the kings of the earth shal worship him, al the nations shal serue him, what mā being in his right wittes, may say to Kings: Care not you in your Kingdomes, who defēdeth or oppugneth the Church of your Lord? Let it not appertaine, or be any part of your care, who is religious in your kingdome, or a wicked de­prauer of Religion.

This vvas the iudgemēt of S. Aug. or rather of Christes Catholike Church, vttered by him against the Donatists, touching the seruice, authority, povver, ād care, that Kings haue or ought to haue in causes spiritual or ecclesiastical, the vvhich is also the iudgemēt of Christes catholik church, novv in these dais [Page] and defended, by the true ministers of the same Catholique Churche, against al Popish Donatists: vvith the force of Gods holy vvoorde, bothe of the old and nevv Testament, euen as S. Augustine did before. VVho to proue and confirme this his assertiō to be true against the Donatists, did auouch ma­ny moe examples, then I haue cited out of the old Testament: as of the King of Niniue, Epist. 48. of Darius, Nabuchodonozor, and others: affirming that the histo­ries and other testimonies, cited out of the old Testament, are partely figures, and partly prophecies, of the povver, duety, and seruice that Kings shoulde ovve and perfourme in like sort, to the furtherance of Christes Religion in the time of the nevv Testament. The Donatists in the defence of their heresie, re­strained S. Augustine, to the exāple and testimony, of such like order of Prin­ces Seruice in matters of Religion, to be found in the Scriptures of the nevve Testament: meaning that it could not be found in any order that Christ lefte behind him, as you also fantasied vvhē you vvrote the same in your boke folo­vving, yea, going euen cheke by cheke vvith thē. But S. Austine maketh an­svvere to you al for him and me both: VVho, rehearsing the actes of the god­ly Kings of the old Testament,Epist. 41taketh this for a thing not to be denied, to vvit, That the auncient actes of the godly kings mentioned in the Prophetical bokes, were figures of the like facts to be don by the godly Princes in the time of the new Testament.

And although there vvas not in the time of the Apostles, nor long time af­ter,Epist. 50.any Kings or Princes, that put the same ordinance of Christ in practise, al being infidels for the most part: Yet the seruice of kings was figured (as S. Augustine saith) in Nabuchodonozor and others, to be put in practise,Epist. 41. whē this of .71. Psalm should be fulfilled: and al the kings of the earth shal worship Christ, and all nations shall serue him, &c. As yet in the Apostles time, this prophecy (saith he) was not fulfilled: and now ye Kings vnderstand, be learned ye that iudge the earth, and serue the Lorde in feare with re­uerence.Lib. 2. cont. lit. Petil. c. 92 Dan. 3. VVhen the Christian Emperours and Princes (saith this Catholique Father) shal heare that Nabuchodonozor, after he had seene the marueilouse power of almighty God, in sauing the three yong men, from the violence of the fire, walking therin without hurte, was so astonied at the miracle, that he him selfe beinge before this but a cruell Idolatour, beganne [Page 65] forthwith vpon this wonderous sight, to vnderstand and serue the Lorde with reuerent feare: Doo not they vnderstande, that th [...]e thinges, are therefore writen and recited in the Chri­stian assemblies, that these should be exāples to themselues of faith in God, to the furtherance of Religion? These Christian rulers, therefore minding according to the admonition of the Psalme, to vnderstand, to be learned, and to serue the Lord with reuerent feare, do very attentiuely giue eare, and marke what Nabuchodonozor after said: for he, saieth the Prophet, made a decree or statute, for al the people that were vnder his obeis­sāce: that who so euer should after the publicatiō therof, speak any blasphemy against the almighty, they should suffer death, ād their goods be cōfiscate. Now if the Christian Emperours, ād Kings, do know, that Nabuchodonozor made this decree agaīst the blasphemers of God, surely they cast in their mīdes, what they are boūde to decree in their kīgdoms, to wit, that the self same God, and his Sacramēts, be not lightly set by and cōtem­ned. Thus farre S. Augustin: By vvhose iudgement, Note, that now S. Augu­stins Iud­gemēt is also the iudgemēt of the Catholike Churche. being also the iudge­ment of the catholik Church, it is manifest, that the order, rule, and gouern­ment, in Ecclesiastical causes, practised by the Kinges of the olde Testament, being figures and prophecies, of the lyke gouernment, and seruice, to be in the Kinges vnder the nevv Testament, is the order of gouernment, that Christ left behinde him in the Ghospel and nevv Testament: and so directly confuteth your (.52.)The 52. vntruthe M. Fekē ­hā hol­deth no such opi­nion. erroneous opinion.

Stapleton.

Lo, nowe haue we moe testimonies of S. Augustine to proue that, for the which he hath alleaged many things out of S. Augustin alredy and the which no man denieth. For what els proueth al this out of S. Augustine, both now and before alleaged, but that Christen Princes ought to make lawes and cōstitutions (euen as M. Horne him self expoun­deth it fol. 12. b.) for the furtherance of Christes Religion? This thing no Catholike denieth. And for my parte M. Horne, that you may not thinke I haue now ben first so aduised vp­pon [Page] sight of your booke, I haue forced that argument with many Exāples of Godly Emperours and Princes in my de­dicatory Epistle to the Quenes Maiesty, before the transla­ted history of venerable Bede. Briefly al S. Augustins words force nothing els but that Christē Princes may make lawes to punish heretikes (for that in dede was the very occasion why S. Augustin wrote al this) and ought to fortifie the de­crees of the Priests with the executiō of the secular power, when obstinat heretickes wil not otherwise obey. Thus it serueth our turne very wel. But nowe that Maister Horne may not vtterly leese all his labour herein, lette vs see, howe these matters doe truely and trimly serue against his deare brethern, and M. Foxes holy Martyrs to. We saye with S. Augustin, that Princes may punishe wicked depra­uers of religion.Li. 2. cōt. Petilianū cap. 92. & Epist. 48.50. And we further say, that ye are those. We say with saint Augustine, that Christian Princes may make a decree yea of death: as did Nabuchodonosor against the blasphe­mers of God, and carefully prouide, that God and his sacramēts be not lightly cōtēned. We say ye are as great blasphemers, as e­uer Christes Church had: we say ye be they, that haue con­tēned Christes Sacramentes, making of seuē two, and vsing those two after such sorte,Princes ād church lavves made a­gainst the protestās that the olde prouerbe may (the more pitye) in a maner take place, as good neuer a whit, as neuer the better. We say further that not onely the gene­rall Councell of Trente, but that the whole Churche hath condemned your opinions, by general and national Coun­celles manye hundred yeares synce. And that Christian Emperours, Christian Princes, as well in other countries, as in Englande, especiallye the noble and worthye Kinge Henrye the fyfte, haue made many sharpe lawes, yea of death against heresies. We do not, nor neuer did disalowe [Page 68] these their doinges, as repugnante either to the olde or new Testamente. Why then cal you for this respecte the Catholykes, Popishe Donatistes? But will ye know Mai­ster Horne, who be in this point in very dede the Dol­tishe Deuelishe Donatists? Hearken on well, and ye shall heare.VVho be the true Donatists for sayīg princes may not punishe transgres­sours in causes of religion. Episto. 50. Bonifacio Comiti. Fontanus li. 1. in hi­stor. no. temp. Vide epist. Aug. 48. in edit. Basil. & an­notationē margina­lē ibidem. Sir Tho­mas Hit­ton priest M. Foxes martyr. A great Lye of M. Foxe.

The Donatistes as S. Augustyne reporteth, sayde: It was free, to belieue, or not to belieue, and that faith shoulde not be forced. Was not this I pray you the cōmō song of the Lute­rans in Germany, and Englande at their beginning? Was not this your Apostles Luthers opinion, that no man should be compelled to the faith? And as there are many dissen­sions, diuisions, schismes betwixte you the Sacramentaries, and the Lutherans: so are you diuided also in this pointe. For your M. Caluin writeth, that a mā may laufully and by Gods law be put to death for heresie, as he practised himself also, burning Seruetus the Arrian at Geneua. But al Luthers schollers in Germany are not so forward. Yea some of your holy martyrs auouche, that the King cā make no law to pu­nish any maner of crime by death, ād that al such lawes are contrary to the Gospel. This was the opiniō of Sir Thomas Hytton priest, and yet is he a blessed martyr in M. Foxe his holy Kalēder, ād we must kepe his feast the x. of March by M. Foxe. Yet in a book of praiers set foorth by the brother­hod anon vpon his death, he is appointed to the .23. of Fe­bruary, and so either M. Foxe or they misse the marke. Ex­cept the one day be of his Martyrdom, and the other of his Translatiō. And whereas M. Fox saith, that there remaineth nothing of the saide Sir Thomas in writinge but onely his name, (which is a lye, and more to by a syllable) and that I heare saye he is busye to sette forthe a freshe in printe [Page] yet ons againe, his huge monstruous martyrloge, I wil doe so much for him, as minister him plenty of good stuffe I warrante you, to set forthe and adorne at his next edition, this worthy chāpiō withal. I do therfore remit M. Foxe, to Sir Thomas Mores books.S. Tho­mas More in his preface to Tyndal the 344. leafe. &c. There lo is matter inough for M. Fox, ād to much to: for euē by your own cōfessiō he is no se­cret but an opē dānable heretik, ād a Donatist: ād so I trowe no martyr, but yet good inowgh, ād as good as the residew of this worthy Kalēder. But now hath M. Foxe a far grea­ter busines in hande, for he must scrape out S. Iohn Old­castel knight,S. Iohn Oldcastle knight of the same opinion vvith S. Thomas Hytton priest. being not onely a traytour, but a detestable Donatiste also. Nowe al the weight resteth to proue this substancially to you and to M. Foxe, and to stoppe al your frowarde quarrelings and accustomable elusions agaīst our proufes. Wel, I wil bringe you (as I thinke) a substancial and and an ineuitable proufe, that is M. Foxe him selfe, and no worse man. For lo thus he writethe of this worthy cham­pion, and that euen in his owne huge martyrologe, who doubteth but to the great exalting and amplification of his noble work, and of his noble holy Martyr? The tenth article, saieth M. Foxe,Foxe in his En­glish martyrol. the 139. leafe. Col. 2. M. Fekē ­hā pur­ged by M. Horn himselfe of that he layeth to him. that manslawghter either by warre, or by any pretended law of Iustice, for any tēporal cause, or spiritual reue­lation, is expressely contrary to the new Testament, which is the law of graceful of mercy. This worthy article, with a .11. other of lyke sewte and sorte, in a booke of reformatiō (beilke ve­ry lyke to Captayn Keets tree of reformatiō in Norfolke) was exhibited in open parliament, yf we belieue M. Foxe.

Nowe you see M. Horn, where and vpō whome ye may truely vtter ād bestowe al this nedelesse treatise of yours a­gainst M. Fekenhā. And therefore we may now procede to the remnāte of your book, sauīg that this in no wise must be [Page 67] ouerhipped, that euē by your own words here ye purge M. Fekenhā, from this cryme, ye layde vnto him euen now, for refusing proufes taken out of the olde testamente. For yf,Rom. 1. as ye say, the order and gouernment that Christ lefte behinde in the Gospel and new testament, is the order, rule, and gouernmēt in Ecclesiastical causes practised by the Kings of the olde Testa­ment, then wil it follow, that M. Fekenham yelding to the gouernment of the new, doth not exclude, but rather com­prehende the gouernment of the olde Testament also, both being especially, as ye say, alone.

M. Horne. The 20. Diuision. Pag. 14. a.

Novv I vvil conclude on this sorte, that vvhich I affirmed: namely that Kings, and Princes, ought to take vpō thē gouernmēt in Ecclesiastical causes.

VVhat gouernement, orde, and dutifulnes, so euer belonging to any, God hath figured and promised before hande by his Prophetes, in the holy Scriptu­res of the old Testamēt, to be performed by Christ, ād those of his kingdome: that is the gouernmēt, order, ād dutifulnes, set forth, ād required in the Gos­pel, or nevv testamēt. But that faithful Emperours, Kings, and Rulers, ought of duty, as belonging to their office, to claime and take vppon them Not such Su­preme gouernmēt as the Othe prescribeth. the gouernement, authority, povver, care, and seruice, of God their Lorde, in matters of Religion, or Not in al causes ecclesia­stical. causes Ecclesiastical, vvas an order and dutifulnes for them: prefigured and fore promised of God by his Prophets, in the Scriptures of the olde Testament, as (.53.)The 53. vntruth. S. Augu­stin hath vvitnes­sed no such lar­ge and Supreme gouernmēt, as you at­tribute novve to princes. S. Augustine hath sufficiently vvitnes­sed: Ergo. Christian Emperours, Kings, and Rulers, ovve of duty, as belon­ging to their office, to clayme, and take vpon them, the gouernment, autho­rity, povver, care, and seruice of their Lord,You cō ­clude not in al thīgs ād causes, and ther­fore you conclude nothing agaīst vs. in matters of Religion: or Spiri­tual, or Ecclesiastical causes, is the gouernment, order, and dutifulnes, sette foorth, and required, in the Gospel or nevv Testament.

This that hath been already said, might satisfie any man that erreth of simple ignoraunce. But for that your vvilfulnes is suche, that you (.54.) The 54. vntruth. Slaunde­rours. de­light only in vvrangling against the truthe, appeare it to you neuer so plaine, and that no vveight of good proufes, can presse you, you are so slippery, I vvil loade you vvith heapes, euē of such proufes, as ye vvil seeme desirous to haue. [Page] The holy Ghost describīg by the Prophet Esay, vvhat shalbe the state of Christs Church in the time of the nevv testamēt,2. Cor. 6. yea novv in these our daie, (for this our time is the time that the Prophet speaketh of, as S. Paul vvitnesseth to the Corinthiās) addeth many comfortable promises, and amongest other maketh this to Christes Catholike Churche, to vvitte, Kings shalbe Nourishing Fa­thers,Esa. 49. and Quenes shalbe thy nources. Nourishing Fathers saith the glose en­terlined,Lyra in Esa. c. 49. In lacte verbi. In the mylke of the word, meaning Gods vvorde. Lyra addeth: This prophecy is manifestly fulfilled in ma­ny Kinges and Quenes, who receiuing the Catholike Faith, did feede the poore faithful ones, &c. And this reuerence to be done by Kings (saith Lyra) was fulfilled in the time of Con­stātine and other Christian Kings. Certainly, Constātin the Emperour, shevved himself to vnderstand his ovvn duety of nourishing Christes Church appointed by God in his Prophecy:Al this of Constan­tine is graunted and ma­keth no­thing for you. Euse. li. .3. de vita Constāt. Lib. 2. for he like a good, tender, and faithfull Nource father, did keep, defend, maintein, vphold, and feed the poore faithful ones of Christ: he bare thē being as it vvere almost vveried and forhayed vvith the great persecutions of Goddes enemies, and maruelously shaken vvith the controuersies and contentions amongest themselues, euen as a nource Father in his ovvn bosome: he procured that they should be fedde vvith the svveete milke of Gods vvorde. Yea, he him selfe with his publike procla­mations, did exhorte and allure his subiectes to the Christian Faith. As Eusebius doth reporte in many places, vvriting the life of Constā ­tine, He caused the Idolatrous religion to be suppressed, and vtterly banished, and the true knowledge and Religion of Christ, to be brought in and planted amōg his people. He made many holsome lawes, and Godly cōstitutions, wherewith he restrayned the people with threates, forbiddinge them the Sacrificing to Idols: to seeke after the Deuelish ād superstitious soth saiyngs: to set vp (55.) The 55. vntruth. They vvere Idols, not Images, that Constan­tin for­badde his subiects to set vp. Lib 4. de vit. Cōst. Lib. 1. Images: that they shoulde not make any priuie Sacrifices: and to be brief, he refourmed al maner of abuses, about Gods seruice, ād prouided that the Church should be fedde with Gods worde. Yea, his diligent care in furthering and setting foorth the true knovvledge of Christe, vvherevvith he fedde the peo­ple, vvas so vvatcheful, that Eusebius doth affirme him to be appointed of God, as it vvere the common or Vniuersal Bishop: And so Con­stantine [Page 68] tooke himself to be:Lib. 4. and therefore said to the Bisshoppes assembled to­gether vvith him at a feast, that God had appointed him to be a Bishoppe. But of this moste honorable Bishop and nourshing father, more shalbe saide hereafter, as of other also such like.

Stapleton.

NOw ye may conclude, that there is some regi­ment that Princes may take vpon thē in causes ecclesiastical: but if ye meane of such regimēt as ye pretend, you make your recknyng with­out your hoste as a man may say: and conclude before ye haue brought forth any prouf, that they ought or may take vpon them such gouernment. For though I graūt you al your examples ye haue alleaged, and that the doings of the olde Testament were figures of the new, and the saying of Esaye, that Kings shoulde be Nowrishinge Fathers to the Church: and al things else that ye here alleage, yet al wil not reache home, no not Constantines the great his example. Who being an Ethnike became a Christian, and to the vttermost of his power, set forth Christes religion in al the Empire. what then? your conclusion of supreame re­giment, wil not necessarily folow thereof. And when Eu­sebius calleth him, as it were, a common or vniuersal bishop, I suppose ye meane not, that he was a bisshop in dede. For your self cōfesse, that princes and Bisshops offices are far di­stincted and disseuered,M. Horne doth cur­tal Euse­bius sen­tence. and that the one ought not to break in to the office of the other. And if ye did so meane, Euse­bius himself would sone confounde yow, if ye reherse Con­stantines whole sentence, that he spake to the Bisshopes. [Page] For thus he saith to the bisshops. Vos quidem eorum quae intus sunt in Ecclesia agenda, ego verò eorum quae extra sunt Episco­pus à Deo sum constitutus. Euse. lib. 4 de vitae Constant. You are bisshops saith he, of those things that are to be don within the Churche: I am bisshop of outwarde thinges. Which answere of his may satisfie any reasonable man, for all that ye bring in here of Con­stantine, or al that ye shall afterward bring in: which decla­reth him no supreme iudge or chief determinour of causes Ecclesiastical, but rather the contrary: and that he was the ouerseer in ciuile matters. And the most that may be enfer­red therof, is that he had the procuration and execution of Church maters: which I am assured al Catholiks wil graūt.

But now whereas ye charge M. Fekenham partly with subtil, partly with fowle shiftes: this is in you surely, no sub­tyle but a blonte and a fowle shamelesse shifte, to shifte the Idols into the Image of Christe and his saints: and whereas Constantine put doune the paynims Idols, to make the sim­ple belieue, that the reformation which he made, was such as your reformation or rather deformation is. For to leaue other things, to say that Constantine forbadde to set vp Ima­ges, Euseb lib. 3. de vita Constant. is an open and a shamelesse lye: for he set vp the Crosse of Christe, that is so owtragiously and blasphemously vy­layned by you euery where, in the steade of the idolles, he decked and adorned the Churches euery where with holy Images,Nice. con. act. 2. Pa. 429. Col. 2. the remembraunce of Christes incarnation, and for the worship of his saints, therby to sette forth the truth, and the worship of God, and to conuert al nations from Idola­trie and deuelishe deceite.

M. Horne. The Diuision 21. Pag. 15.

Our sauiour Christ meante not to forbidde or destroy, touchinge the rule, seruice, and chardge of Princes in Church causes, that vvhich vvas figured in [Page 69] the lavve, or prophecied by the Prophetes.Mat. [...]. For he came to fulfil or ac­complish the lavve and the Prophetes, by remouing the shadovve and figure, and establishing the body and substance to be seene, and to appere clearly vvithout any mist or darke couer: yea, as the povver and authoritie of Princes vvas appointed in the Lavv and Prophets, as it is proued, to stretch it selfe, not only to ciuile causes, but also to the ouersight, maintenance, set­ting foorth, and furtherance of Religion and matters Ecclesiastical:Mat. 21. Euen so Christ our Sauiour (.56)The .56. vntruth. This pla­ce of S. Matth. maketh nothing for the Princes supreme gouerne­ment in Ecclesia­sticall things. Matth. 22 confirmed this their authoritie, commaunding all men to attribute and geue vnto Caesar that vvhich belongeth vnto him ad­monishing notvvithstanding al Princes and people, that Caesars authority is not infinit, or vvithout limits (for such authority belōgeth only to the King of al Kings▪) but bounded and circumscribed vvithin the boundes assigned in Gods vvorde, and so vvill I my vvorde; to be vnderstanded, vvhen so euer I speake of the povver of Princes.

Stapleton.

M. Horne goeth yet nedelessely foreward to proue that Christ did not destroy the rule of Princes in Churche cau­ses, figured in the olde Lawe, and now at length catcheth he one testimonie out of the new Testament to proue his saiyng: which is, Geue vnto Caesar, that belongeth vnto him. Which place nothing at al serueth his turne, but rather de­stroyeth, I will not say any figure of the old Testament, but M. Hornes foolish figuratiue Diuinitie. For it is so farre of (that of this place M. Horne may make any ground, for the Ecclesiasticall authoritye of Princes) that it doth not as much as inferre, that we ought to pay so much as tribute to our Princes, but only that we may paie it. For the questi­on was framed of the captious Iewes, not whether they ought, but whether they might lawfully paie any tribute to Caesar. Whiche was then an externall and an infidell Prince. For if M. Horne will say those woordes importe a precise necessitie, he shall haue muche a doe to excuse [Page] the Italians, Frenchmen, Spaniardes, and our Nation, which many hundred yeares haue paid no tribute to Caesar. But I pray you M. Horne, why haue you defalked and curtai­led Christes aunswere? Why haue you not set forth his whole and entier sentence:The pla­ce of Mat. 22. maketh ra­ther quite against M. Horn. Fol. 20. Geue to Caesar that belongeth to Caesar, and to God that belongeth to God? which later clause I am assured, doth much more take away a supreme regi­ment in al causes Ecclesiastical, then necessarily by force of any wordes binde vs to paie, yea any tribute to our Prince. And wil ye see how it happeneth, that Hosius a great lear­ned and a godly Bishoppe of Spaine, as M. Horne him selfe calleth him, euen by this verye place proueth against the Emperour Constantius, and telleth it him to his face, that he had nothing to doe with matters Ecclesiasticall? Whose woordes we shall haue an occasion hereafter to rehearse. Yea S. Ambrose also vseth the same authoritie to represse the like vsurped authoritie of Valentinian the yonger.Amb li. 5. Ep. 32. This ill happe hath M. Horne euen with his first authori­tie of the new Testament, extraordinarie, and impertinent­lie I can not tell howe chopped in, to cause the leaues of his boke, and his lies, to make the more mouster and shew. But nowe, whereas this place serueth nothing for any au­thoritie Ecclesiasticall in the Prince, and least of all for his preeminent and peerlesse authoritie in all causes Ecclesiasti­call, as M. Horne fansieth, Yet least any man (being borne doune with the great weight of so mightie a proufe) should thinke the Princes power infinite, M. Horne to amende this inconuenience, of his greate gentlenes, thought good to preuent this mischief, and to admonish the Reader ther­of: and that his meaning is not by this place to geaue him an infinite authoritie, or without limites, but such onely as is [Page 70] bounded and circumscribed within the boundes of Gods worde: and least ye should mistake him, he would himself so to be vnderstanded. Which is for al this solemnitie, but a foolish and a friuolous admonitiō, without any cause or groūd: ād groūded only vpō M. Horns fantistical imaginatiō, and not vpon Christ, as he surmiseth. Who willeth that to be geauen to Caesar that is Caesars, and to God that is Gods: but determi­neth and expresseth nothing, that is to be geuen to Caesar, but only paiement of money. And yet if we consider, as I haue saied, what was the question demaunded, it doth not determine that neither: though the thing it selfe be moste true. Howe be it this admonition serueth Maister Horne and his brethren for manye and necessarye purpo­ses, to rule and maister their Princes by, at their pleasure: that as often as their doings like them not, they may freely disobey, and say it is not▪ Gods word, wherof the interpre­tation they referre to them selues. And so farre it serueth some of them, and the moste zealouse of them, that nowe their Prince, though Supreme gouernour and iudge in al cau­ses Ecclesiastical, may not by Gods worde, appointe them as much as a Surplesse or Cope to be worne in the Churche, or Priestlike and decent apparell to be worne of thē other­wise. Yea some of them, of whom we haue already spo­ken, haue found a way, and that by Gods woorde, to depose the Quenes Maiesty from al manner of iurisdiction as well temporal as spiritual: and that by Gods holy worde. Whereof these men make a very Welshemans hose, to say the truth, and amonge other, M. Horne him selfe, for all his solemne admonition. For we plainly say, that this kind of suprema­cie, is directly against Gods holy worde.

M. Horne. The .22. Diuision. pag. 15. b.

[Page]And this to be Christes order and meaning, that the Kings of the Nations should be the supreme gouernours ouer their people, not only us temporal, but also in Spirituall or Ecclesiasticall causes (.57.) The .57. vntruth. The apo­stles ne­uer de­clared a­ny suche matter. 1. Pet. 2. Rom. 13. the blessed Apostles Peter and Paule, doe plainly declare. The supremacie of Princes they set foorth, vvhen they commaund euery soule (that is, euery man, vvhether he be, as Chrysostome saith, an Apostle, Euangelist, Prophete, Prieste, Monke, or of vvhat so euer calling he be) to be subiect and obey the higher povvers, as Kings, and their Lieutenants, or gouernours vnder them. And they declare that this supreme gouernement is occupied and exercised in, or aboute the praysing, furthering, and aduauncing of vertue or vertuous actions, and cō ­trary vvise in correcting, staiyng, ād repressing al maner of vice or vicious a­ctiōs,Epist. 125. vvhich are the propre obiect or matter herof. Thus doth Basilius take the meaning of the Apostles, saiyng: This semeth to me to be the office of a Prince, to aide vertue, and to impugne vice. Neither S. Paule, neither the best learned among the aunciente Fathers, did restreine this povver of Princes, onely to vertues and vices, bidden or forbidden, in the second table of Gods commaundementes, vvherein are conteined the du­ties one man ovveth to an other: But also did plainely declare them selues to meane, that the authority of Princes ought to stretche it selfe to the mainte­naunce, praise and furtheraunce of the vertues of the firste table, and the suppression of the contrary, vvherein onely consisteth the true Religion, and spirituall Seruice, that is due from man to God. S Paule in his Epistle to Timothe,1. Tim. 2. teacheth the Ephesians, that Kings and Rulers are constituted of God, for these two purposes: that their people may liue a peaceable life, thou­rough their gouernmente and ministerie both in godlines, vvhich is (as S. (.58.)The .58. vntruth. S. Aug. misse vn­derstan­ded. Lib 14. De Trin. cap 1 Lib. 5. de Ciuit dei cap. 14. Augustine interpreth it) the true and chiefe or propre vvorshippe of God: and also in honestie or semelinesse: in vvhich tvvo vvoordes (Godli­nes and Honestie) he conteined vvhat so euer is cōmaunded either in the first or second Table. S. Augustine also shevveth this to be his minde, vvhen de­scribing the true vertues, vvhich shall cause princes to be blessed, novve in Hope, and aftervvard in deed, addeth this as one especiall condicion, required by reason of their chardge and callinge. If that (saith he) they make their power which they haue a seruaunt vnto Gods Maiestie, to enlarge most wide his worshippe, Seruice, or Religion. To this purpose also, serue all those testimonies, vvhiche I haue cited before [Page 71] out of S. Aug. against the Donatists: vvho in his booke.Grad. 6. Rom. 13. Lib 2. cap. 83. De. 12. abusi [...]e num gradibus, teacheth that a Prince or Ruler must labour to be had in avve of his subiectes, for the seueritie against the traunsgressours of Goddes Lavve. Not meaning only the transgressours of the seconde table in tempo­rall matters: But also against the offendours of the first table in (.59.) The .59. vntruth. S. Aug. meaneth not to teach such gouerne­ment of Princes in Eccle­siasticall matters, as you teach, but onely to punish heretikes by lawes, & by the same to maintein the Ca­tholique faith de­creed of the Cler­gie, not by the Ciuile Magistrat Lib. 2. cōt 2 Epist. Gaud c. 11 Spi­rituall or Ecclesiasticall causes or matters. VVhich his meaning he decla­reth plainely in another place, vvhere he auoucheth the saiyng of S. Paule: The Prince beareth not the sworde in vaine, to proue therevvith against Petilian the Donatist, that the povver or authority of Princes, vvhich the Apostle speaketh of in that sentence, is geuen vnto them to make sharpe Lavves, to further true Religion, and to suppresse Heresies and Schismes: and therefore in the same place, he calleth the Catholique Churche, that hathe such Princes to gouerne to this effect: A Church made strong, whole, or fastened together with Catholique princes: meaning that the Church is vveake, rent, and parted in sonder, vvhere Catholique Gouer­nours are not, to maintaine the vnitie thereof in Churche matters, by their authoritie and povver.

Gaudentius the Donatist, found him selfe agreeued that Emperors shuld entremeddle, and vse their povver in matters of religion: affirming, that this vvas to restreine men of that freedome that God had set men on. That this vvas a great iniurie to God, if he meaning his religion) should be defended by men. And that this vvas nothing els, but to esteeme God to be one, that is not able to reuenge the iniuries done against him selfe. S. Augustine doth ansvvere and refute his obiections, vvith the authoritie of S. Pauls saiyng to the Romaines: Let euery soule be subiect to the higher powers, &c. For he is Gods minister, to take vengeance on him that doth euill: interpreting the minde of the Apostle to be, that the authori­tie and povver of Princes, hath to deale in Ecclesiastical causes, so (60)The 60. vntruth. S. Augu­stine ne­uer wrot so. vvel as in Temporal. And therfore saith to Gaudentius, and to you al: Blotte out these saiyngs (of S. Paule. 13. Rom.) if you can, or if you can not, then set naught by them, as ye doe. Reteine a most wic­ked meaning of al these saiyngs (of the Apostle) leaste you loose your freedome in iudging: or els truely for that as men, ye are ashamed to doe before men, crie out if you dare: Let murtherers be punished, let adulterers be punished, lette all [Page] other faults, VVhere is there in al this M. Horne, that the Princes hath to deale in Ecclesia­stical causes, so vvel as in tēporall? be they neuer so heinous or ful of mischief be pu­nished (by the Magistrate) we wil that only wicked faultes a­gainst religiō be exēpt from punishmēt by the lawes of kings or rulers. &c. Herken to the Apostles, and thou shalt haue a great aduantage that the kingly power cannot hurt thee, doe wel, and so shalt thou haue praise of the same power, &c. That thing that ye doe, is not only not good, but it is a great euill, to witte, to cut in sunder the vnity and peace of Christ, to rebelle against the promises of the Gospel, and to beare the Christian armes or badges, as in a ciuil warre, against the true and highe King of the Christians.

Stapleton.

HERE is nothinge M. Horne, that importeth youre surmised Supremacye. The effecte of your processe is, Princes haue authoritie to mainteine, praise and further the vertues of the first table, and to suppresse the contrary, wherein onely cōsisteth the true Religiō and spiritual Seruice that is due frō mā to God. And that he hath authority herein, not only in the vertues or vices bidden, or forbiddē in the second table of Gods cōmaunde­ments, wherin are conteined the dueties one man oweth to an other. This is graūted M. Horn, both of the Hosius. lib. 2. & Soto cont. Brentiū. Melanch. in lo. com. Cap. de magistr. Ciuilib.Catholiks, and of the soberer sort of Protestants (for Carolostadius, Pelar­gus, Struthius, with the whole rable of th' Anabaptists deny it) that Princes haue authority both to further the obserua­tion, and to punish the breach of Gods cōmaundements as wel in the first table as in the second, that is, as well in such [Page 72] actions as concerne our dutie to God him self, as in the du­tie of one man to an other. But al this is (as not onely the Catholike writers, but Melāchthon him self and Caluin, do expoūd) quod ad externam disciplinam attinet, Melanch. vt suprà. as much as apperteineth to external discipline: and the Magistrate is the keper and defender of both tables (saith Melanchthon) but againe he addeth: quod ad externos mores attinet, as muche as belongeth to external maners, behauiour, and demea­nour. For in the first table are cōteined many offences and breaches, of the which the Prince can not iudge, and much lesse are by him punishable. As are all suche crimes, whiche proprely belong to the Court of Conscience. To wit, mis­belief in God, mistrust in his mercy, contempt of his com­maundements, presumption of our selues, incredulitie, and such like: which al are offences against the first table, that is, against the loue we owe to God. Cōtrarywise, true be­lief, confidence in God, the feare of God, and such like, are the vertues of the first table. And of these Melanchthon truely saith: Haec sunt vera opera primae tabulae, In Apolo­logia Cō ­fess. Art. 18. These are the true workes of the first table. The punishing, correcting, or iudging of these appertaine nothing to the authority of the Prince, or to any his lawes: but only are iudged, cor­rected and punished by the spiritual sworde of excommu­nication, of binding of sinnes, and embarring the vse of the holy Sacraments, by the order and authoritie of the Priest only and spiritual Magistrate. Which thing is euident not only by the confession, doctrine, and continuall practise of the Catholique Churche, but also by the very writinges of such as haue departed out of the Churche, and will seeme most to extolle the authoritie of Princes, yea of your selfe M. Horne, as we shall see hereafter.

[Page]Againe whereas, the chiefe vertue of the first table is to beleue in God, to knowe him, and to haue the true faithe of him and in him, in externall regimente (as to punishe open blasphemy, to make lawes against heretiques, to ho­nour and mainteine the true seruice of God) Princes espe­cially Christians, ought to further, aide, and mainteine the same: But to iudge of it, and to determine, whiche is the true faith in God, how and after what maner he ought to be serued, what doctrine ought to be published in that be­halfe, the Prince hath no authoritie or power at all. There­fore Melanchthō,In locis com. vbi supra. who in his Cōmon places, wil haue Prin­ces to looke vnto the true doctrine, to correct the Chur­ches (when Bishops faile of their duetie) yea and to consi­der the doctrine it selfe: yet afterward he so writeth of this matter, that either he recanteth as better aduised, or els writeth plaine contrary to him selfe. For thus he saieth of the Ciuile Magistrates:In examine ordinā ­dorum. Non condant dogmata in Ecclesia, nec instituant cultus: vt fecit Nabuchodonozor. Et recens in scripto, cui titulus est Interim, potestas politica extra metas e­gressa est. Suidas in [...]eontio. Sicut Imperatori Constātio dixit Episcopus Leōtius. [...]. Nō sunt cōfundēdae fun­ctiones &c. Let thē make no doctrines in the Church: nei­ther appoint any worshipping of God, as did Nabuchodo­nosor. And euen of late in that writing which is entituled, the Interim, the Ciuile power hath passed her bounds and limites. As ones Bishop Leontius said to Constantius the Emperour: Thou being set to gouerne in one matter, ta­kest vpon thee an other matter. The functions (of both ma­gistrates) are not to be confounded.

In these woordes you see M. Horne, Melanchthon ta­keth away all authoritie from Princes in iudging or deter­mining [Page 73] of doctrine: and wil not haue the functions of both Magistrates Spiritual and temporal to be confounded.Novvel fol. 33. Yea M. Nowel himselfe with a great stomach biddeth vs shew, where they deny, that godly and learned Priestes might accor­ding to Gods woorde iudge of the sincerity of doctrine. As though when the Prince and his successours are made su­preme gouernours without any limitation, it fal not often out, that the bisshop, be he neuer so lerned or godly, shall not ones be admitted to iudge of true doctrine, except the doctrine please the Prince: As though there had not ben a statute made, declaring and enacting the Quenes Ma. yea and her highnes successours (without exception or limi­tation of godly and vngodly, and yet I trowe no bisshops) to be the Supreme Gouernour in all thinges and causes as well spiritual as temporal. As though you M. Horne, had not writen, that in bothe the tables, the Prince hath autho­rity, to erect and correct, to farther, and restrayne, to allow and punishe the vertues and vices thereto appertayning. As though the gouernour in al causes, is not also a iudge in all causes. Or as though it were not commonly so taken and vnderstanded of a thousand in Englande which haue ta­ken that Othe to their g [...]eat damnation, but if they repēt. You therefore M. Horne, which talke so confusely and ge­nerally of the Princes Authority in both tables, doe yet say nothing nor proue nothing this general and absolute Authority in al thinges and causes, as lustely without ex­ception the Othe expresseth. And therefore you bring in dede nothīg to proue your principal purpose, to the which al your proufes should be directed.

Againe where you alleage S. Augustin, that the worde Godlynes mētioned in S. Paule to Timothe shoulde meane, [Page] the true, chief, or proper worship of God (as though Princes hauing charg therof, should also haue authority to appoint such worship, when yet S. Paule speaketh there of no such or of any authority at al in Princes, but onely that by their peasible gouernmēt we might with the more quiet attēd to Gods seruice) you doe herein vntruly report S. Augustine, or at the leste missetake him.August. lib. 14. cap. 1. De Trinit. 1. Tim. 2. For the woorde (godlines) which S. Augustine will haue so to meane, is that which the Greeks call [...], Gods seruice or religiō, as himself there expresseth: but the word of the Apostle to Timothee, is [...], godlynes. So aptly and truly you alleage your doctors. But wil you know M. Horn, why th'Apostles both S. Peter ād S. Paul so earnestly taught at that time obediēce to Prīces? This was the cause. In the beginnīg of the church som Christiās were of this opiniō: that, for that they were Christē mē,1. Pet. 2. Rom. 13. they were exēpted from the lawes of the In­fidel Princes: and were not bound to pay thē any tribut, or otherwise to obey thē. To represse and reforme this wrōg iudgmēt of theirs, the Apostles Peter and Paule by you na­med, diligētly employed thē selues. Whose sayings can not imply your pretensed gouernmēt: onlesse yow wil say, that Nero the wycked and heathennish Emperour was in his tyme the supreme head of al the church of Christ, through­out the empire, aswel in causes spiritual as tēporal. And yet in tēporal and ciuil matters I graunt you, we ought to be subiect, not only to Christiās, but euē to infidels also, being our princes: without any exceptiō, of Apostle, euangeliste, prophet,Prieste­hod is a­boue a kingdom priest or monk, as ye alleage out of S. Chrysostō. As contrary wise the Christian prince him self, is for eccle­siastical and spiritual causes, subiect to his spiritual ruler. Which Chrysostom hīself, of al mē doth best declare. Alij [Page 74] sunt termini &c. The bounds of a kingdome, and of priesthood (saith Chrysostō) are not al one: This kingdom passeth the o­ther: This king is not knowē, by visible things, neither hath his estimatiō, either for precious stones he glistereth withal, or for his gay goldē, glistering apparel. The other king hath the orde­ring of those worldly things: the authority of priesthod cometh frō heauē: what so euer thou shalt bind vpō earth, Chrysost. homil. 4. de eo quod scripsit Esa. shalbe bound in heauē. To the king those things that are here in the worlde are cōmitted, but to me celestial things are cōmitted: whē I say to me, I vnderstāde to a priest. And anon after he saith: Regi corpora &c. The bodies are cōmitted to the King, the sowles to the Priest: the King pardoneth the faults of the body, the priest pardoneth the faultes of the sowle. The Kinge forcethe, the priest exhorteth: the one by necessity, the other by giuing coun­sel: the one hath visible armour, the other spiritual. He war­reth against the barbarous, I war against the Deuil. This prin­cipality is the greater. And therfore the King doth put his head vnder the priestes hands, and euery where in the old scripture priestes did anoynt the Kings. Among al other bokes of the said Chrysostom, his book de Sacerdotio is freighted, with a nōber of lyke and more notable sentēces for the priests su­periority aboue the Prince. Now thē M. Horn, I frame you such an argumēt. The Priest is the Prīces superiour in some causes ecclesiastical,Euidētly proued by S. Chrysost the Prīce not to be the Supe­riour in causes ec­clesiasti­call. Ergo the Prīce is not the Priests supe­riour in al causes ecclesiastical. The Antecedēt is clerly ꝓ­ued out of the words of Chrysost. before alleged. Thus. The Priest is superiour to the prīce in remissiō of syns by Chry­sostō: but remissiō of sins is a cause ecclesiastical or spiritual. Ergo the Priest is the Prīces superiour in some cause eccle­siastical or spiritual. Which beīg most true, what thīg cā you cōclud of al ye haue or shal say to win your purpose, or that [Page] ye here presently say? that the Prince hath the care aswell of the first, as of the seconde table of the commaundements: and that S. Paule willethe vs to pray for the Princes, 1. Tim. 2. that we may lyue a peaceable life in godlines ād honesty. In the which place he speaketh of the heathennishe princes, as appereth by that which foloweth, to pray for them that they may be cōuerted to the faith: Or of al ye bring in out of S. Augu­stin either against the Donatists (whereof we haue alredy said inough) or that Princes must make their power a seruāte to Gods Maiesty to enlarge his worship, seruice and religion. Nowe as all this frameth full yllfauoredly to conclude your principle: [...]. Augu­stin ret [...]rned vpō M. Horn and his felovves. Lib. 2. cōt. 2. epistol. Gaudentij cap. 11. so I say that if S. Augustine were aliue, he might truely and would say vnto you, as he sayd vnto Gau­dentius: and as your self alleage against your selfe and your bretherne. That thing that ye doe, is not only not good, but it is a great euil: to witte, to cutte in sonder the vnity and peace of Christ, to rebell against the promises of the ghospell: or to beare the Christiā armes or badges as in a ciuil warre, against the true, and the high King of the Christians: he would say, yf he were aliue vnto you, that as the Donatistes, did not deny Christ the head, but Christ the body, that is his Catholike Churche, so doe you. He would say, that as the Donatistes secte was condemned by Constantin, Honorius, and other Em­perours, the high Kings of the Christians: so are your here­sies condemned not only by the Catholik Church, but also by the worthy and moste renowned King Henry the fifte: and other Kings, as wel in England as else where: also by the high Kings of the Christiās, that is themperours as well of our tyme, as many hundred yeares since. And therefore ye are they, that cutte in sonder the vnity ād peace of Christes Church, and rebell against the promises of the Gospel.

M. Horne. The 22. Diuision. Pag. 17. a.

Chrysostom shevveth this reason, vvhy S. Paule doth attribute this title of a minister vvorthely vnto the Kings, or ciuil Magistrates: because that through fraying of the wicked men, and commending the good, he prepareth the mindes of many to be made more ap­pliable to the doctrine of the word.

Eusebius alluding to the sentence of S. Paule, vvhere he calleth the ciuill Magistrate, Goddes minister, and vnderstanding that Ministery of the ciui [...] Magistrate to be about Religion, and Ecclesiastical causes, so (.61.)The 61. vntruth. Eusebius neuer vn­derstood any such Ministery of the Ci­uil Magi­strat. Lib. 1. De vit. Const. Lib. 2. De vit. Const. vvell as Temporal, doth cal Constantine the Emperour: The great light, and most shril preacher, or setter foorth of true godlines: The one and only God (saieth he) hath appointed Constantine to be his minister, and the teacher of Godlines to al countreis. And this same Cōstantin, like a faithful and good minister: did through­ly set foorth this: and he did confesse him self manifestly to be the seruaunt and minister of the high King. He preached with his imperial decrees or proclamations his God, euen to the boundes of the whole worlde. Yea Constantine himselfe affir­meth, as Eusebius reporteth: That by his ministery he did put away and ouerthrowe al the euilles that pressed the worlde, meanīg al superstition, Idolatry, and false Religion. In so much (saith this Godly Emperour) that there withal I both called again mankīde, taught by my ministery, to the Religion of the most holy Law (mea­ning the vvorde of God) and also caused, that the most blessed faith should encrease and growe vnder a better gouernour (meaning than had beene before) for (saith he) I would not be vnthankeful to neglect namely the best ministery, which is the thankes I owe (vnto God) of duety.

This most Christian Emperour did rightly consider, as he had bene truelye taught of the most Christian Bisshops of that tyme, that as the Princes haue in charge the ministery and gouernment in (.62.) The 62. vntruth. Impudēt ād shame lesse. Cō ­cluded, but no vvhyt proued. all manner causes either Temporal or Spiritual: euen so, the chiefest or beste parte of their Seruice or Ministery to consist in the vvel ordering of Church matters, and their diligēt rule and care therein, to be the moste thankefull, acceptable, and duetifull Seruice that they can doe or ovve vnto God.

Stapleton.

I See you not M. Horne come as yet nere the matter. I see not yet, that Constantin changed Religion, plucked down aultars, deposed bis­shops, &c. But that he was diligent in defen­ding the old and former faith of the Christiās. If S. Paul cal the ciuil magistrat a minister, because through feare he cōstraineth the wicked to embrace the godly do­ctrin, as by your saying S. Chrysostom cōstrueth it, we are wel cōtent therewith. And withal, that the best ministery and seruice of the great Constantin rested in the settinge forth of Christes true religion: and that he preached the same with his Imperiall decrees and proclamations, as ye oute of Eusebius recyte. Neither this that ye here al­leage out of place, nor al the residewe which ye reherse of this Constantin (with whose doings ye furnishe hereafter six ful leaues) can importe this superiority, as we shal there more at large specifie. In the meane season, I say it is a stark and most impudēt lye, that ye say without any prouf, Cōstantin was taught of the bisshops, that Princes haue the gouernment in al maner causes, either tēporal or spirituall. You conclude after your maner, facingly and desperatlye without any proufe or halfe proufe in the worlde.

M. Horne. The Diuision .24. Pag. 17. b,

For this (.63.)The 63. vntruth, a [...] shal appeare cause also Nicephorus in his Preface before his Eccle­siastical history, doth compare (.64.)The 64. vntruth: in puttīg Emanuel for An­dronicus. Emanuel Paleologus the Empe­rour, to Constantin, for that he did so neerly imitate his duetifulnes in ru­ling, procuring, and reforming religiō to the purenesse thereof: VVhich a­mong al vertues, belōging to an Emperor, is most seemely for [Page 76] the imperial dignity, and doth expresse it most truely, as Nice­phorus saieth: vvho maketh protestatiō, that he saith nothing in the commen­datiō of this Emperour, for fauour or to flatter, but as it vvas true in deede in him. And so reherseth his (.65)The 65. vntruth. For this Emperor vvas a stark he­retike. noble vertues exercised in discharge of his imperial duety tovvards God in Church matters, saying to the Emperour, who hath glorified God more, and shewed more feruēt zele towards hī in pure religiō, without feyning, thā thou hast don? who hath with such feruēt zeale fought after the most sincere faith much endaungered, or clēsed again the holy Table? whē thou sawest our true religion brought into perill with newe deuises brought in by cōterfaict and naughty doctrines, thou diddest defende it most painfully and wisely.The (66.) Princes suprema­cy in re­payringe Religion decayed. The 66. vntruthe fond and foolish as shal ap­peare. Thou diddest shew thy selfe, to be the mighty supreme, and very holy an­chour and stay in so horrible wauering and errour, in matters beginning to fainte, and to perish as it were with shipwrak. Thou art the guid of the profession of our faith. Thou hast re­stored the Catholik and Vniuersal Churche, being troubled with new matters or opinions, to the old state. Thou hast ba­nished frō the Church al vnlawful and impure doctrin. Thou hast clēsed again with the vvord of trueth, the tēple frō chop­pers and chaungers of the diuin doctrin, and frō heretical de­prauers thereof. Thou hast been set on fier vvith a godly zeale for the diuine Table. Thou hast established the doctrin: thou hast made Cōstitutions for the same. Thou hast entrēched the true religion vvith mighty defenses. That vvhich vvas pulled dovvne, thou hast made vp againe, and haste made the same whole and sound again, vvith a conueniēt knitting togeather of al the partes and mēbers (to be shorte, thou haste, saith Nicephorus to the Emperour) established true Religion and godlines vvith spiritual buttresses, namely the doctrine and rules of the aū ­cient Father [...].

Stapleton.

Where ye say, for this cause also &c. This is no cause at all: but it is vntrue, as of the other Emperour Cōstantinus: and much more vntrue, as ye shall good reader straight way [Page] vnderstande. But firste we will dissipate and discusse the myste that M. Horne hath caste before thyne eies: and wherein him self walketh either ignorantly, or maliciously, or both. Ye shal then vnderstande, that among many o­ther errours and heresies wherwith the Grecians were in­fected and poysoned, they helde, cōtrary to the Catholike faith, that the holy ghost did not procede, from the father and the sonne,The Gre­cians at the Coū ­cel of Li­ons, ac­knovv­ledged the Popes Primacy Blōd. dec. 2. lib. 8. Ioan. Bap. Egn. Rom. Prin. li 2. Nice. Gregor. li. 4. & 5. Pachime­rus lib. 5. Fyue no­table lies concer­ning Images in the booke of homilies. but from the father onely. In which heresie they dwelt many an hundred yeare. At the length abowte 300. yeares paste the Emperour of Grece called Michael Paleologus came to the generall Councell kepte at Lions. Where the Grecians with the Latin Church accorded, as­wel in that point, as for the Popes supremacy, both in other matters, and cōcerning the deuoluing of matters frō Grece to Rome by way of appeale. This Michael being dead the Grecians reuolted to their olde heresie against the ho­ly ghost: and for the maliciouse spyte they had, against the Catholike faith, their Bisshops would not suffer him to be buried.

The author of the homely agaist Idolatry, as it is entitu­led, calleth this Emperour wrongfully Theodorum Lasca­rim, and saieth most ignorantly and falsly, that he was de­priued of his Empire, because in the Councel of Lions he relented, and set vp images in Grece. Whereas he was not put frō his Empire, but from his royal burial, as I haue said, neither any word was moued in the said councell of Ima­ges, nor any Images of newe by him were set vppe, which had customably continued in the Greeke Churche manye hundred yeares before: and so reuerently afterwarde con­tinued 1 euen till Constantinople was taken by the great 2 Turke. And yet this good antiquarye and chronographer [Page 77] will nedes haue the Grecians, about a .700. yeares together with a most notorious lie, to haue bene Iconomaches, that is, Image breakers. Much other foolish blasphemouse bab­ling is conteined in that Homilie. Yea many other shame­lesse lies are there, to disgrace, deface, and destroy, the I­mage of Christ and his Saints: especially one. Whereas he saith, that the Emperour Valens and Theodosius made a Proclamation, that no man shoulde painte or kerue the Crosse of Christ. And therevpon gaily and iolilye trium­pheth vpon the Catholiques.Li. 1. Cod. Iustiniani tit 8. alias 11. M Iewell also hath tvvo of the same fiue. In his Replie to the Ar­ticle of Images. Nicephor. Greg. li. 6. Three notable vntruthe of M. Horne, in this one storie. Volater­ran. li. 23 Sabell. & Blondus. Lib. 8. dec. 2. Whereas the Proclamation neither is, nor was, to restreine all vse of the Crosse, but that it should not be painted or kerued vppon the ground. Which these good Emperours, not Valens (for he was the valiaunt Capitaine and defendour of the Arrians) but Va­lentinianus and Theodosius, did of a great godly reuerence they had to the Crosse enact. And yet, as grosse, as foule, and as lowd liyng a fetche as this is, M. Iewel walketh euē in the very same steppes, putting Valens, for Valentinian: and alleaging this Edict, as generall against al Images of the Crosse. And yet these Homilies (the holy learned Homi­lies of the olde Fathers, namely of Venerable Bede, our learned Countrie man, whose Homilies were read in our Countrie, in the Church Seruice, aboue .800. yeares past, as also in Fraunce and other where, reiected) are reade in M. Hornes and other his brethrens Diocesse: and are with M. Horne very good stuffe: as good perdie, as M. Hornes owne booke: and as clerkly, and faithfully handeled, as ye shall see plainly by the very selfe matter we haue in hande. Andronicus the elder, sonne to this Michaell, whome M. Horne calleth ignorantly Emanuel. (for this Emanuel was not the sonne of this Andronicus but of Caloioānes, sonne [Page] to Andronicus the yōger, to whō our Andronicus was grā ­father) after his fathers death sūmoned a coūcel of the Greciās, wherin he and they annulled ād reuoked that his Father had don at the Coūcel at Liōs, namely cōcerning the pro­ceding of the holy Ghoste. And for the which Nicephorus M. Hornes Author, beīg also caried away with the cōmon errour, as with an huge raging tēpest, doth so highly auāce this Andronicus. And so withal ye see vpō how good a mā, and vpō how good a cause M. Horne buildeth his new su­premacy to pluck doune the Popes old supremacy. For the infringing wherof the wicked working of wretched here­tiks is with him, here and els where, as we shal in place cō ­uenient shew, a goodlye and godlye presidente, as it is also with M. Iewel for to mainteine the very same quarrel, as I haue at large in my Returne against his fourth Article de­clared.

But nowe M. Horne, what if these hereticall doinges do nothing relieue your cause, nor necessarilye induce the chief Superiority in al causes, and perchāce in no cause Ec­clesiastical, cōcerning the final discussing ād determination of the same? Verely without any perchāce, it is most plainly and certainly true it doth not. For euen in this schismatical Coūcel, and heretical Synagog, the Bishops plaid the chief part,O vvhat a craftie Coper ād smothe ioyner is M. Horn? and they gaue the final though a wrong and a wicked iudgemēt. Who also shewed their superiority, though vn­godly vpon this mans Father, in that they would not suffer him to be interred Prīcelike: thē selues much more worthy to haue ben cast after their decease, to the dogs and rauēs, vpō a dirty donghil. What honor haue ye gotte, for al your crafty cooping or cūning ād smoth ioyning, for al your cō ­bining, ād as I may say incorporating a nūber of Nicephorus [Page 78] sentences together, of the whiche yet some are one,Vide Prae­fationem. Nicephor in histo. suam ec­clesiasticā. some are two leaues a sunder, and the first placed after the second and the second before the firste, and yet not whole senten­ces neither, but pieces and patches of sentences, here and there culled oute, and by you verye smoothlye ioyned in one continuall narration, in such sort that a man would thinke that the whole lay orderly in Nicephorus, and were not so artificially by you or your delegates patched vppe, what honor, haue you, I say, wōne by this, or by the whole thing it self? Litle or nothing, furthering your cause, ād yet otherwise plaine schismatical and heretical. For the which your hansome holy dealing, the author of the foresaid Ho­milie, and you, yea and M. Iewel too, are worthy exceding thanks. But M. Horne wil not so leese his lōg allegatiō out of Nicephorus. He hath placed a Note in his Margin, suffi­ciēt (I trow) to cōclude his principall purpose. And that is this. The Princes Supremacy in repairing religion decayed. This is in deed a ioly marginal note. But where findeth M. Horn the same in his text? Forsoth of this, that Nicephorꝰ calleth th'Emperor, the mighty supreme, ād very holy Anchor, ād stay in so horrible wauering, &c. Of the word Supreme ancher, he cōcludeth a Supremacy. But ô more thē childish folly! could that crafty Cooper of this allegatiō, informe you no better M. Horn? Was he no better sene in Grāmer, or in the pro­fessiō of a scholemaister, then thus fowly ād fondly to misse the true interpretatiō of the latine word? For what other is suprema anchora in good english, thē the last ancher, the last refuge, the extreme holde and staye to reste vppon? As suprema verba, doe signifye the last woordes of a man in his last will: as Summa dies, the last daye, Supremum in­dicium, the last iudgemēt, with a nūber of the like phrases, [Page] so Suprema Anchora, is the last Anchour, signifiyng the last holde and staie, as in the perill of tempest, the last refuge is to cast Ancher. In such a sense, Nicephorus called his Em­perour the last, the mightie, and the holy Anchour or staie in so horrible wauering and errour: signifiyng that now by him they were staied frō the storme of schisme, as from a storm in the sea, by casting the Ancher, the shippe is stayed. But by the Metaphore of an Anchour, to conclude a Suprema­cie: is as wise, as by the Metaphore of a Cowe to cōclude a sadle. For as well doth a saddle fitte a Cowe, as the qua­litie of an Anchor resemble a Supremacie. But by suche beggarly shiftes a barren cause must be vpholded. First al is said by the way of Amplification to extolle the Emperour (as in the same sentence he calleth him the sixth Element,Firma­mentum sextum & sempiter­uum. reaching aboue Aristotles fift body, ouer the foure elemēts with such like). Then all is but a Metaphore, which were it true, proueth not nor concludeth, but expresseth and lighteneth a truth. Thirdly the Metaphore is ill transla­ted, and last of all, worse applied.

Now whereas in the beginning of your matter, the sub­stance of your proufes hereafter standing in stories, ye haue demeaned your selfe, so clerkly and skilfully here, the Rea­der may hereof haue a tast: and by the way of preuention and anticipation, haue also a certaine preiudicial vnderstā ­ding, what he shal looke for at your handes in the residue. Wherefore God be thanked, that at the beginning hath so deciphired you, whereby we may so much the more, yea the bolder without any feare of all your antiquitie hereaf­ter to be shewed, cherefully procede on.

M. Horne. The .25. Diuision. pag. 18. a.

These and such like Christian Emperours, are not thus much commended [Page 79] of the Ecclesiasticall vvriters,1. Tim. 2. for their notable doings in the maintenaunce and furtheraunce of Religion, as for doings not necessarilie appertaining to their office or calling: but for that they vvere exaumples, spectacles, and glasses for others, vvherein to beholde vvhat they are bound vnto by the vvorde of God, and vvhat their subiectes may looke for at their handes, as matter of charge and duety, both to God and his people. VVhich S. Paule doth plainly expresse, vvhere he exhorteth the Christians to make earnest and continual praier for Kings, and for such as are in authori­tie, to this ende and purpose, that by their rule, ministerie, and seruice, not only peace and tranquilitie, but also godlines and religion, should be (.67.) The .67. vntruth. No suche vvordes in S. Paul furthered and continued among men: attributing the furtherance and con­tinuance of religion, and godlines, to the Magistrates, as an especial fruite and effect of their duety and seruice to God and his people. Chrysostome ex­pounding this place of the Apostle, doth interprete his meaning to be vnder­standed, of the outvvard peace and tranquilitie furthered, mainteined, and defended by the Magistrates, but chieflye of the invvarde peace of the minde and conscience, vvhich can not be atteined vvithout pure religion, as con­trary vvise, godlines can not be had vvithout peace and tranquility of mind and conscience. This vvouldd be noted, hovv ye racke S. Paule. He nameth not Reli­giō at all. He doth not attri­bute reli­gion to the rule and go­uernmēt of the ci­uile Ma­gistrate, but peace and tran­quilitie onely in godlines. This vvould be noted vvith good aduisement, that S. Paul him selfe shevveth plainly prosperitie, amongst Gods people, and true religi­on, to be the benefites and fruits in general, that by Gods ordinance springeth from the rule and gouernment of Kings and Magistrates, vnto the vveale of the people. The vvhich tvvo, although diuers in them selues, yet are so combined and knitte together, and as it vvere incorporated in this one office of the Magistrate, that the nourishing of the one, is the feeding of the other, the decay of the one, destroyeth or (at the least) deadlye vveakeneth them both. So that one can not be in perfect and good estate vvithout the other. The vvhich knot and fastening together of religion, and prosperitie in com­mon vveales, the most Christian and godly Emperours Theodosius and Va­lentinianus, did vvisely (.68.)The .68. vntruth. Thei saw no suche confoun­ding of the tvvo functiōs spirituall and tem­poral as you ima­gine. Ciril. Ep. 17. to .4. see, as it appeareth by this that they vvrote vnto Cyrill, saiying: The suertie of our common weale, depen­deth vpon Gods Religion, and there is great kinred and socie­tie betwixte these tweine, for they cleaue together, and the one groweth with the increase of the other, in such sorte, that true Religion holpen with the indeuour of Iustice, and the [Page] common weale holpen of them both, florisheth. Seing there­fore, that we are constituted of God to be the kings, and are the knitting together or iointure of Godlines and prosperitie in the subiects, we kepe the societie of these tweine, neuer to be sundred: and so farre forth as by our foresight, we procure peace vnto our subiects, we minister vnto the augmenting of the common weale: but as we might say, being seruaunts to our subiects in al things, that they may liue godly, and be of a religious conuersation as it becommeth godly ones , we gar­nish the common weale with honour, hauing care as it is cō ­uenient for them both (for it can not be, that diligently proui­ding for the one, we should not care, in like sorte also for the other) But we trauaile earnestly in this thing aboue the reast, that the Ecclesiasticall state may remaine sure, bothe in suche sort, as is seemely for Gods honour, and fitte for our times, that it may continue in tranquilitie by common consent without variaunce, that it may be quiete through agreemente in Ec­clesiasticall matters, that the godlye Religion may be preser­ued vnreprouable, and that the lyfe of such as are chosen into the Clergy, and the greate Priesthood maye be clere from all faulte.

Stapleton.

And shal we now M. Horne, your antecedent matter being so naught, greatly feare, the consequent and conclu­sion ye will hereof inferre? Nay pardie. For lo straite waye, euen in the firste line, ye bewray either your great ignoraunce, or your like malice. Not for calling this Em­perour as ye did before Emanuell (let that goe as a veniall sinne) but for calling him Christian Emperour, and willing him to be an example, a spectacle, a glasse for others, as one that (as yee sayed before) refourmed Relligion to the purenesse thereof: which saying in suche a personage as ye [Page 80] counterfaite, can not be but a deadly and a mortall sinne. Surely M. Fox of al men is depely beholding vnto you: for if this be pure religion, thē may he be the bolder, after your solemne sentence once geauen, bearing the state of one of the chief Prelates in the realme: and of a Prelate of the gar­ter withal: to kepe still his holy daye, that he hath dedica­ted to the memorie of his blessed Martyr, M. D. Wesalian, of whom we spake before. And yet I wene it wil proue no great festiual daie, for that he was an heretike otherwise al­so. Well I leaue this at your leasure, better to be debated vpon betwene you and M. Fox. In the meane while to re­turne to the matter of your dealing, wherof I spake: yf ye knew not the state and truth of your Emperours doings, ye are a very poore sely Clerke, farre from the knowledge of the late reuerend fathers, Bishop White, and Bishop Gardi­ner: and how mete to occupie such a roome,The great ignorāce or malice of M. Horne. I leaue it to others their discrete and vpright iudgemēts. And now Sir, if this be pure religion, as ye say, then haue ye one heresie more, then any of your fellowes, as farre as I knowe, hath: onlesse perhappes M. Foxe wil not suffer you to walke all post alone.M Hor­nes rhe­torik vp­on him­selfe re­turned. And then that I may a litle rolle in your railing rhetorike, wherein ye vniustly rore out against M. Feken­ham, may I not for much better cause and grounde, saye to you, then ye did to him, to make him a Donatist: M. Horne let your friends now weigh with aduisemēt, what was the erronious opinion of the Grecians against the holy Ghoste: and let them cōpare your opiniō and guilful defences ther­of to theirs. And they must nedes clap you on the back, and say to you Patrisas (if there be any vpright iudgmēt in thē) Deming you so like your great graunsiers the Grecians, as though they had spitte you out of their mouth.

[Page]Now for your conclusion, that you bring in vppon this Emperours and Constantines example, it is nedelesse and farre from the matter. Whereby by the place of S. Paule, before rehearsed,1 Tim. 2. Chrysost. ibidem. Cyrill. li. 1. Epist. 17.Tom. 4. and nowe eftsone by you resumed, by Chrysostome in his expositions of the saied place, and by Cyrillus you would haue vs seriously admonished, that prosperitie of the common welth and true religion, springeth from the good regiment of Magistrates, whiche we denie not, and that the decaye of religion destroyeth or deadlye weakeneth the other: which is also true, as the vtter ruine of the Empire of Grece proceding from the manifolde he­resies, especially that, whereof we haue discoursed, doth to wel and to plainly testifie. And therefore I would wish you and M. Foxe,A good aduertis­ment for M. Horne to consi­der the cause of the de­struction of Con­stanti­nople. Iosephus de bello Iud. & Hegesip­pus. In the yeare of our Lord 1453. with others, but you two aboue all o­thers, with good aduisemente to note, that as the wicked Iewes that crucified Christ about the holy time of Easter, were at the very same time, or thereabout, besieged of the Romans, and shortly after brought to such desolation, and to suche miserable wretched state, as in a manner is incre­dible, sauing that beside the foreseing and foresaiyng ther­of by Christ, there is extant at this daie a true and faithfull reporte: Euen so, your dearlings the Grecians, whose er­rour, but not alone, but accompanied with some other, that you at this daie stoutly defend, yet especially rested in this heresie against the holy Ghost, that ye terme with an vn­cleane ād an impure mouth, pure religiō, were in their chief city of Cōstātinople, in the time of Cōstantinus son to Iohn, nephew to Andronicus your Emanuels father, euen about Whitsontide (at whiche time the Catholique Churche in true and sincere faith concerning the holy Ghost, kepeth a solemne festiuall daie of the holy Ghoste) sodenly by the [Page 81] wicked Turks besieged, and shortly after the city and the whole Greke empire came into the Turks hands and pos­session. Wherein God seameth as before to the Iewes, so afterwarde to the Grecians, as yt were with pointing and notyfying yt with his finger to shewe and to notifie to all the worlde, the cause of the finall destruction, as well of the one, as of the other people. But what speke I of Grece?Heresies the destructions of common vveales. we nede not ronne to so fare yeares or contries. The case toucheth vs much nearer: The realme of Boheame, and of late yeares of France and Scotlande, the noble contrey of Germany, with some other that I neade not name, be to to lyuely and pregnant examples, of this your true, but nead­lesse and impertinente admonition. For the whiche not­withstandinge seeinge ye deale so freelye and liberallye, I thowght good also to returne you an other: I suppose not neadlesse or impertinente for you, and such other as doe prayse and commende so highly this Andronicus doinges.

And nowe might I here breake of from this and goe further forth, sauing that I can not suffer you, to bleare the readers eies, as thowgh the Emperours Theodosius,The popes su­premacy proued by the Emperor Valenti­nian alle­ged by M. Horn. Tom. 1 cō ­cil fo. 731 col. 1. and Valentinianus sayings or doings shoulde serue any thinge for your pretensed primacy: We (saith Valentinian to the Emperour Theodosius) owght to defende the faithe which we receiued of our auncetours withe all competente deuo­tion: and in this our tyme preserue vnblemished the worthy reuerence dewe to the blessed Apostle Peter. So, that the most blessed bisshop of the cyty of Rome, to whome an­tiquity, hath geuen the principality of priesthod aboue all other, may (O most blessed father and honorable Emperour) haue place and liberty, to geue iudgement in such matters as concer­neth faith and priests. And for this cause the bisshop of Constā ­tinople, [Page] hath according to the solemne order of councells, by his lybel appealed vnto hī. And this is writē M. Horne to Theo­dosius him self, by a commō letter of Valentinian, and the Empresses Placidia and Eudoxia.Dict. fol. 731. co. 2. Which Placidia writeth also a particular letter to her said sonne Theodosius, and altogether in the same sense. Harken good M. Horne, and geue good aduertisement: I walke not, and wander as ye doe, here alleaging this Emperour, in an obscure genera­lity, whereof can not be enforced any certayne particula­rity of the principal Question: I goe to worke with you plainly, trewlye and particularlye: I shewe you by your own Emperour and by playn words, the Popes supremacy and the practise withal of appeales frō Constantinople to Rome: that it is the lesse to be marueled at, yf Michael in the forsayde coūcel at Lions cōdescēded to the same. And your Andronicus with his Grecians the lesse to be borne withal for breaking and reuoking the said Emperours good and lawful doings. Neither is it to be thought, that Theo­dosius thowght otherwise of this primacy. But because ye hereafter wring and wrest him to serue your turne, I will set him ouer to that as a more commodiouse place to de­bate his doings therein.

M. Horne. The .26. Diuision. Pag. 19. a.

Hitherto I haue proued plainly by the holy Scriptures, and by some suche Doctours, as frō age to age, haue vvitnessed, th'order of ecclesiasticall gouern­mēt in the Church of Christ: yea by the confession, testimony, and example of some of the most godly Emperours thēselues, that such (.69.) The 69. vntruth. Such like gouern­mēt you haue not, nor euer shal be able to proue. like gouern­ment in Church causes, as the Queenes maiesty taketh vpō her, doth of duty belōg vnto the ciuil Magistrates and Rulers, and therfore they may yea, they ought to claim and take vpon them the same. Novv remayneth that I proue this same by the continual practise of the like gouernment in some one parte of Christendom, and by the general counsayles, vvherein (as ye affirme) the [Page 82] right order of Ecclesiastical gouernment in Christ his Church, hath been most faithfully declared and shevved from tyme to tyme.

Stapleton.

Hitherto you haue not brought any one thing to the substantial prouf of your purpose worth a good strawe: nei­ther scripture, nor Doctour, nor Emperour. Among your fowre emperours by you named ye haue iugled in one that was a stark heretik, but as subtily, as ye thought ye had hād­led the matter, ye haue not so craftely cōueyed your galles, but that ye are espied. Yet for one thing are ye here to be cōmended, that now ye would seame to frame as a certain fixed state of the matter to be debated vpō, ād to the which ye would seme to direct your proufs, that ye wil bring. And therin you deale with vs better, thē hitherto ye haue done seaming to seke by dark generalities, as it were corners, to luske and lurke in. Neither yet here walke ye so plainly ād truely as ye woulde seme: but in great darknes with a scōse of dymme light, that the readers should not haue the clere vew and sight of the right way ye should walke in, whom with this your dark sconse ye leade farre awrie. For thus you frame vs the state of the Question.

M. Horne. The 27. Diuision. Pag. 19. b.

The gouernment that the Queenes maiesty taketh most iustly vppon her in Ecclesiastical causes, is the guiding, caring, prouiding, ordering, direc­ting, and ayding, the Ecclesiastical state vvithin her dominions, to the furthe­raunce, maintenaunce, and setting foorth of true religion, vnity, and quietnes of Christes Church, ouerseyng, visitīg, refourming, restrayning, amending, ād correcting, al maner persons, vvith al maner errours, superstitiōs, Heresies, Schismes, abuses, offences, contempts, and enormities, in or about Christes Re­ligiō vvhatsoeuer. This same authority, rule, and gouernmēt, vvas practised in the Catholik Church, by the most Christiā Kings and Emperours, approued, cōfirmed, and cōmended by the best counsailes, both general and national.

Stapleton.

HEre is a state framed of you (M. Horne) but farre square from the Question in hande. For the Question is not nowe betwene M. Fekē ­ham and you, whether the Prince may visit, refourme, and correcte all maner of persons, for al maner of heresies and schismes, and offences in Chri­stian Religion, which perchaunce in some sense might somewhat be borne withal, if ye meane by this visitation and reformation the outward execution of the Churche lawes and decrees, confirmed by the ciuill magistrate, ro­borated with his edictes, and executed with his sworde. For in such sorte many Emperours and Princes, haue for­tified, and strenghthened the decrees of bisshops made in Councels both general and national, as we shal in the pro­cesse see. [...]he state of the Question And this in Christian Princes is not denied, but commended. But the Question is here now, whether the Prince or lay Magistrat, may of him selfe, and of his owne princely Authority, without any higher Ecclesiasticall power in the Churche, within or without the Realme vi­sit, refourme and correct, and haue al maner of gouernmēt and Authority in al things and causes ecclesiastical, or no. As whether the Prince may by his own supreme Authori­ty, depose and set vp bisshops and Priests, make Iniunctions of doctrine, prescribe order of Gods seruice, enact matters of religion, approue and disproue Articles of the faith, take order for administration of Sacraments, commaunde or put to silence preachers, determine doctrine, excommunicat [Page 83] and absolue with such like, which all are causes ecclesia­stical, and al apperteyning not to the inferiour ministerye, (which you graunt to Priestes and bisshops onely) but to the supreme iurisdiction and gouernment, which you doe annexe to the Prince onely. This I say, is the state of the Question, now present. For the present Question betwene you and M. Fekenham is grounded vppon the Othe com­prised in the Statute: which Statute emplieth and conclu­deth al these particulars.

For concealing whereof, you haue M. Horne in the framing of your ground according to the Statute,M Horn [...] dissem­bling fals­hod. omitted cleane the ij. clauses of the Statute, folowing. The one at the beginning, where the Statute saith. That no forayn per­son shall haue any maner of Authority in any spirituall cause within the Realme. By which wordes is flatly excluded all the Authority of the whole body of the Catholike Church without the Realme: As in a place more conuenient, to­ward the end of the last book, it shal by Gods grace be eui­dently proued. The other clause you omitte at the ende of the said Satute, which is this. That all maner Superio­rities, that haue or maye lawfully be exercised, for the visitatiō of persons Ecclesiasticall, and correcting al maner of errours, heresies, and offences, shall be for euer vnited to the Crowne of the Realme of Englande. Wherein is employed, that yf (which God forbidde) a Turke, or any heretike whatso­euer shoulde come to the Crowne of Englande, by ver­tu of this Statute and of the Othe, al maner superioritye in visiting and correcting Ecclesiastical persones in al ma­ner matters, should be vnited to him. Yea and euery sub­iecte should sweare, that in his conscience he beleueth so. This kinde of regiment therefore so large and ample I am [Page] right wel assured, ye haue not proued, nor euer shal be able to proue in the auncient Church, while ye liue. When I say, this kinde of regiment, I walke not in confuse, and ge­neral words as ye doe, but I restrayne my self to the fore­said particulars now rehersed, and to that platte forme, that I haue already drawen to your hand, and vnto the which Maister Fekenham must pray you to referre and apply your euidences. Otherwise, as he hath, so may he or any man els, the chiefe pointes of all being as yet on your side vnproued, still refuse the Othe. For the which do­inges neither you, nor any man else, can iustly be greued with him.

A reaso­nable de­fence of the Catholikes for refusing the OtheAs neither with vs M. Horne ought you or any mā els be greued for declaring the Truth in this point, as yf we were discōtēted subiects, or repyning against the obediēce we owe to our Gracious Prince and our Countre. For be­side that we ought absolutely more obey God then man, and preferre the Truth (which our Sauiour himself prote­sted to be, encouraging al the faithful to professe the Truth, and geuing them to wit, that in defending that, they defen­ded Christ himself) before al other worldly respects what­soeuer, beside al this I say, whosoeuer wil but indifferent­ly consider the matter, shal see, that M. Horne himselfe, in specifying here at large the Quenes Mai. gouernement, by the Statute intended, doth no lesse in effect abridge the same, by dissembling silence, then the Catholikes doe by open and plain contradiction. For whereas the Statute and the Othe (to the which all must swere) expresseth A su­preme gouernment in al thinges and causes, without excep­tion, Maister Horne taking vpon him to specifie the par­ticulars of this general decree, and amplyfying that litle [Page 84] which he geueth to the Quenes Maiesty, with copy of wordes, ful statutelyke, he leaueth yet out, and by that leauing out, taketh from the meaning of the Statute the principal cause ecclesiasticall, and most necessary, mete, and conuenient for a Supreme Gouernour Ecclesiasticall. What is that, you aske. Forsoth: Iudgement, determi­ning and approuing of doctrine, which is true and good, and which is otherwise. For what is more necessary in the Churche, then that the Supreme gouernour thereof, should haue power in al doubtes and controuersies to de­cide the Truthe, and to make ende of questioning? This in the Statute by Maister Hornes silence is not compri­sed. And yet who doubteth, that of al thinges and cau­ses Ecclesiastical, this is absolutelye the chiefest? Yea and who seeth not, that by the vertue of this Statute, the Quenes Maiesty hath iudged, determined, and enacted a new Religiō contrary to the iudgement of all the Bisshops and clergy (in the Conuocation represented) of her highnes dominions? Yea and that by vertue of the same Authority, in the last paliament the booke of Articles pre­sented and put vp there by the consent of the whole con­uocation of the newe pretended clergy of the Realme, and (one or ij. only excepted) of al the pretended Bisshops also, was yet reiected and not suffred to passe?

Agayne, preachinge the woorde, administration of the Sacramentes, binding and loosing, are they not thinges and causes mere Spirituall and Ecclesiasticall? And howe then are they here by you omitted, Maister Horne? Or howe make you the Supreme gouernment in al causes to rest in the Quenes Maiesty, yf these causes haue no place there?

[Page]Which is nowe better (I appeale to al good consciences) plainly to maintayne the Truthe, then dissemblinglye to vpholde a falshood? Plainly to refuse the Othe so generallye conceyued, then generally to sweare to it, beinge not generallye meaned? But now let vs see how M. Horne wil di­rect his proufes to the scope appoin­ted.

Stapleton.

NOW M. Horne beginneth to walke, though not more truly, yet more orderly then before. Now wil he bring inuincible proufs, taken frō the Councels General and National, from the Emperoures, from Kings, and finallye from the continuall [Page] practise of Christendome. In deede he beginneth here with Constantinus the Emperoure, and runneth on from Emperour to Emperour,A briefe rehearsall of M. Hornes discourse in his prouf [...]s against. M. Feck. with a continuall race, euen to the late Maximilian, Graundfather and next predecessour to Charles the fift. Then haue we about a ten Kings of Spaine, and about twelue of Fraūce, and as many of Eng­land also: and that sins the Conqueste: with diuers other Kings and Princes: yea he hath in his side, as he saith, Mos­couia, Graecia, Armenia, and Aethiopia. As for Coun­cels, what Generall, what Prouinciall, he hathe made a great mouster of them, and hath them all redy to serue him as he braggeth, at the least one halfe hundred. Beside all these, he is armed and fenced euen with the Popes Canon lawes, and with a number of Popes them selues. For the residue of his Authors, they are in great plentie. But I can not tell for what pollicy, whereas they driue the Catholiks to six hundred yeares, and pinne vppe their proufes within those boundes, this man by some speciall prerogatiue, by like; and for some deepe consideration vnknowen to mee, and perchaunce to him self too, buildeth moste vpon those that were after the six hundred yeares, yea a greate num­ber of them by one six hundred yeares later. And with these proufes he cōmeth now continually forth on, whole 70. leaues. But now alas how shall poore M. Fekenham abide the brunt of such a strong and a mighty force? It se­meth he must nedes be borne quite ouer. And surely so he should be,M. Horn cōmeth nothing nigh the marke. if they could ones hitte him. But thanked be God ther is one hūdred miles betwen him ād their strokes: And as farre doth M. Horne straggle from the very matter he taketh in hand to proue. Wherfore, good Reader, I pray the haue good eye and regard to the thing that ought to be [Page 86] proued by M. Horne and then shalt thou plainely see that M. Fekenhā is out of al danger of this terrible armye, as that commeth nothing nigh to him by many a faire mile.The dis­cussing of Con­stantines doings. Let vs now in Gods name beginne with Constantine who cō ­meth first to hād, whose doings, good Reader, by M. Horne here alleaged, for thy more ease, and for the better vnder­standing of M. Hornes whole drift, I wil orderly digest, and shortly dispose by certaine Articles.

The first then is (for āswere to this present point) that Cō ­stātine 1 repressed idolatry, ād false superstitiō of the Painims: but this proueth no principality such as our plat fourme re­quireth. And of this we haue also said somwhat before.

M. Horne. The .29. Diuision. fol. 20. a.

He did not only abolish al superstitions and false religions, vvhich had ben amongst the Gentils, but also he repressed (.71.)The .71. vntruth. Constan­tine re­pressed not here­sies by his Su­preme authoritye, but by a Superior authoriti of Bis­shops, cō ­demning before such he­resies. Eus. li. 3. De vita Cōstant. Li. 1. c. 19. Lib. 4. De vit Cōst. by his authority, lavves, and decrees, al such heresies as sprong vp amōgst the Christiās, sharply reprouing and correcting, the authors or mainteinours of heretical doctrines, as the No­ [...]atiās, Valentinians, Paulianes, and Cataphrigians, as Eusebius saith of him. And Theodoretus doth recite a part of an Epistle, that Cōstantine vvrote vnto the Nicomedians, vvherin the Emperor hath this saying: If we haue chast bishops of right opiniō, of curteous behauiour, we reioice. But if any be enflamed rashly and vnaduisedly, to cōtinue the me­mory and cōmendation of those pestilēt Heresies, his fool har­dy presumptiō, shal forthwith be corrected and kept vnder by my correctiō, which am Gods minister. Constantinus also gaue In­iunctiōs to the chief minister of the churches, that thei shuld make special supplicatiō to God for him. He enioyneth al his subiects, that they should kepe holy certaine daies dedicated to Christ, and the Saturday. He gaue a lawe vnto the rulers of the Nations, that they should celebrate the Sōday in like sort after the appointment of the Emperour. And so the daies de­dicated to the memory of Martyrs ād other festiual times, &c. And al such things (saith Eusebius) were done according to the ordinaunce of the Emperour.

[Page] He commaunded Eusebius the Bishop, to dravv certaine Instructions and lessons, as it vvere Homilies, forth of the holy Scriptures, that they might be reade in the Churches. VVhich vvas done incontinente, according to the Emperours commaundement.

Stapleton.

Constantine, saith M. Horne, by his lawes repressed the Nouatians, Valentinians, and other heretikes. And so woulde he represse you and your heresies too, if he were now liuing (as no Bishops) continuing the memory and com­mendation of pestilent heresies, that I maye truely vse your owne phrase: neither for al that should he be any supreme head of the Church. If Constantine, of his owne authori­tie had first of all men, the matter of those heretiques stan­ding in controuersie, determined the same, and pronoūced them as a Iudge, to be heretikes, then had ye said somwhat to the purpose. But now he found them by the Bishops ād the Church declared (before he was borne) for heretikes: So therefore he toke them, and so therfore he made sharpe lawes against them.M. Horns proufs returned against him. So that this place proueth onely Con­stantine to haue put in executiō the decree of the Bishops: and so it serueth very well against you for the Supremacie of the Bishops in such matters.

As doth the next also for the holy daies ye alleage dedi­cated to Christ, as Sonday and other: For these holy daies the Emperour did not first ordeine, but they were ordey­ned to his hand of the Church, before he was Christened. Namely the Sōday, as it may appere by the Coūcel of Nice it self.Can. vlt. And he like a good Prince was careful by his Empe­rial authority, to cōfirme the same, that the people drawen frō worldly busines, to the desire of heauenly things, might fruitfully obserue thē. So that not ōly the Sōday, for the ho­nour [Page 87] of Christes Resurrection, but also many other dayes were dedicated to the memory of the Martyrs of whom ye speake, before Constantines time, as appeareth well by S. Cyprian, Tertullian, and Origen. And thinke ye,Euseb. li. 4 ca. 15. Cyp. li. 3. ep. 6. & li. 4. ep. 5. Tert. de coron mi­lit. Orig. in illud Mat. vox in Ramae. Praying for the dead and to Saints vvas in Constan­tines time. Euse. li. 4. De vitae Constant. cap. 71. Euseb. lib. eodem. cap. 60. if Constan­stantine were now aliue, that he woulde well beare to see the aūciēt Martyrs festiual daies abolished? or that his eares would not glow for shame to heare, that it were a supersti­tious thing, to pray for al Christen soules, his own soule be­ing praied for as sone as he was deade, by the good and de­uout people? which (as Eusebius writeth) did therein to him an acceptable seruice: Also to heare, that it were plaine Ido­latrie, to pray to any Sainte in heauen, him selfe building a noble and a sumptuous Church in the honour of the Apo­stles, thinking therby to doe a thing that should be profita­ble and holsome for his soule: Vt precibus, quae eo loci ad ho­norē Apostolorū futurae essent, dignus haberetur. That he might be made (saith Eusebius) a worthy partaker of such prayers as shuld be there made for the honor of the said Apostles?

But Sir, I pray you, let me demaund of you a question. If Constantine were so godly a Prince as ye make him to be, how chanced it, he cōmaūded to kepe holy the satterday? Whē and where I pray ye, throughout all Christēdom can you shew by al that euer you haue read, that it was kept an ordinary holiday? I am sure it was neuer so kept. And great maruel it is to mee, that the satturday, being euen in the ve­ry Apostles time, and by them translated into the Sōday, in the honour of Christes glorious resurrection, and least we should seme to be Iewish, and Cōstantine him self, being so earnest against them that kept the Easter day after the olde fasshion of the Iewes, should so sodenly become him self so Iewish. This might haue ben a fitte cōstitution to be made [Page] of some of the Iewes, that to precisely and superstitiouslie also kept that day: as the Iew did in Englād, at Tewkisbury. Who falling vpon the Satturday (as Fabian writeth) into a pri­uy, Of the Ievve of Tevvkes­burie See Fabiā the .43. yeare of Henrie the third. would not for reuerēce of his saboth day, be plucked out. Wher­of hearing the Earle of Gloucester, and thinking to do as much reuerence to the Sōday, kept him there till the mōday at which ceason he was found dead. It had ben, I say, a fitte ordināce to haue ben made of some Iew, very vnfit for so good ād ver­tuous a Prince as was Cōstantine. Yet notwithstāding I am the better cōtent to passe this ouer, and find no great faulte with you, but with Musculus, whose translation beside his notable false corruptiō, is but very secōdary. But forasmuch as the cōmon copies of the Greke, seme not very sincere in this place,Euseb. De vita Cōst. lib. 4. c. 18 [...]. &c I wil not very much charge you neither. And yet I can not altogether discharge him, or you, if ye thinke so ignorātly and grosly as ye haue writen, that Cōtantine cō ­maunded the Satturday to be holdē as an holiday. And be­cause I am entered into this matter, I shal shewe thee mine aduise, good Reader, and that I suppose, for [...] shoulde be readen [...], adding one Iota, and so may there be made a good sense thus: Wherfore he admonished all that were vn­der the Romain Empire, that they shuld vpō such daies as were dedicated to our Sauiour, rest and kepe them holy, as the Satur­day was wont to be kept holy. In remembrāce as it semeth me, of those thīgs that our sauiour did vpō those dais. Wel let vs go now to the next, ād that is, that Cōstantine cōmaūded Ho­melies to be drawē out. So did Charles the maine too, and yet no man toke him, for supreme head therin. And would God that your homly homelies, had none other nor worse doctrine, than those that the saied Charles procured to be made: Or the Homelies of our country man the venerable [Page 88] Bede made a litle before Charles his time, ād yet extāt, ād in the Catholik church authorised. I pray God your Homelies may be made ones conformable to the doctrine of their Homelies.

The .30. Diuision. Fol. 21. b.

VVhen the Emperour heard of the great schisme moued betvvixt Arius ād Alexāder the Bishop of Alexandria, vvhervvith the Churche vvas pitiouslie tormēted, ād as it vvere rēt in sonder, he (.72.) The .72. vntruth, Ioyned vith fol­lye Su­prem go­uernmēt in al cau­ses folo­vveth verye courselye of sendīg letters to appease conten­tion. Socrat. li. 1 cap. 7. Sozom. li. 1. c. 16. Eus. li. 3. de vita Cōstant. toke vpō him, as one that had the care ād authority ouer al, to send Hosius a great learned and godly Bis­shop of Spaine, to take order, and to appeace the cōtētion, vvriting to Alexā ­der and to Arius a graue and also a sharp letter, charging Alexander vvith vanity, Arius vvith vvāt of circūspection, shevving them both, that it vvas vnsemely for the one to moue suche a question, and for the other to ansvvere therin, and vndiscreetly done of them both. And therfore cōmaunded them to cease of frō such contentious disputatiōs, to agree betvvixt them selues, and to lay aside frō thenceforth such vain and trifling questiōs. He pacified also the schism at Antioch begun about the chosing of their Bishop, to vvhom for that purpose he sent honorable Embassadors vvith his letters to a great nūber of Bishops that thā vvere at Antioch about that busines, and to the people, exhor­ting thē to quietnes, and teaching thē (saith Eusebius) to study after godlines, in a decēt maner, declaring vnto the bishops, as (73) The 73. vntruth. This fact shevveth no au­thoritie ouer the Bisshops in maters Ecclesia­sticall. one that had autority ouer them, euen in such maters, vvhat things apperteined and vvere semely for thē to do in such cases, and noteth vnto them a directiō, vvhich they should folovv. And after he had (saith Eusebius) geuē such things in cōmaunde­ment vnto the Bishops or chief ministers of the Churches, he exhorted them that they would do al things to the praise and furtherance of Gods word.

Stapleton

Here are two things: The one that Cōstantine sendeth his letters to Arius and the B. of Alexādria, to pacify ād ap­pease the cōtention begun with Arius. The other that he la­bored to pacify an other schism at Antioch, about the cho­sing of the B. of Antioch. Neither of these draw any thing nigh to the new primacy ye would establish. And such let­ters might any other good zealous mā haue sent to thē, beīg no Emperour. And as for elections in those dayes, not only [Page] the Emperour, but the people also had some interest ther­in. Wherefore here is no colour of your supremacie. And therefore to helpe foreward the matter, and to vndershore and vnderproppe your ruinouse building withall, ye inter­lace of your owne authoritie these wordes (as one that had the care and authoritie ouer all) which your author Socrates hath not, and likewise (as one that had authoritie ouer them) which Eusebius hath not.

And here by the way, I woulde aske of you, for eache matter a question. If these of Alexander and Arius, were vaine and triefling questions, as ye alleage, why doe ye call Arius his errour, an horrible heresie? And why say yee their dissention was about a necessary article of the Faith?Pag. 22. col. 2. I moue it for this, that hereby we may vnderstād, as wel the great necessitie of Generall Councels, as the Supreme gouern­ment of causes Ecclesiasticall, to haue remained in the Bi­shops there assembled.VVhy Constan­tine cal­leth those matters triefling questions which af­tervvard he toke for here­sie. For Constantine that tooke not at the beginning, these questions to be of so great importāce, after the determination of the Councel, tooke Arius to be a very obstinate heretique: and his heresie to be an horrible heresie, as ye cal it. Concerning the second, as we graunt the Prince had to doe with election, and yet not proprely with election, but with the allowinge and approbation of Spirituall mens election: so I demaund of you, what inter­est the people hath in either election or approbation nowe in England?A Nevv straunge manner of electiō novv in England. Againe I demaund, whether in the auncient Church the Prince might (as he may in England) not onely nominate a person to be elected of the Deane ād Chapter, but if they doe not elect within certaine daies, miserablye to wrappe them in a premunire? I make most sure accōpt ye shal neuer be able, to shew this. See then that euen in [Page 89] your election, which is beside and out of our chiefe mat­ter, ye are quyte out from the like regiment ye pretende to proue.

M. Horne. The .31. Diuision. Pag. 21. b.

This supreme (.74.) The 74. vntruth. No such supreme authority is either by S. Au­gustin or Eusebius expressed as shal appeare. Aug. epist. 50. et 48 Euseb. lib. 10 cap. 5. authority of the Emperour in Church causes is moste liuely expressed by S. Augustine and Eusebius, vvhere they make mention of the horrible Scisme, stirred by the Donatists, against Cecilianus Bisshoppe of Carthage: vvhose election and ordering to be Bisshop of Carthage, Donatus and others of his companions misliked, and therfore made a Schisme in that Church. The question in controuersie vvas, vvhether Cecilianus being ordered Bisshop, hauing the imposition of hands by Felix, vvere lavvfully consecrated and ordered or not this controuersie made a lamentable trouble amongest the Churches in Aphrike. At the length, the Donatists accused Cecilian vn­to the Emperour: desired the Emperour to appointe some Delegates to iudge of this cōtrouersy. And for that al the Churchs in Aphrike vvere bāded, either to the one partly, or the other, and for that France vvas free frō this cōten­tion, they require iudges to be appointed by his authority from amongest the Frenche Bisshoppes. The Emperour much grieued, that the Churche vvas thus torne in sundre vvith this schism, doth appoint Melciades Bisshop of Rome, and Marcus to be his (.75.) The 75. vntruth. Eusebius hath no such vvoords of delegates or cō ­missaries, but allea­geth for his so doinge: [...], the most holy law that is, the lavve of the Church, vvhich had ordayned bishops to be iudges in Churche matters. delegates and commissaries in this con­trouersy vvith certaine other Bisshoppes of Fraunce, Melciades colleages or felovv Bisshops, vvhom the Emperour had cōmaunded to be there vvith thē for that purpose. These commissioners vvith certaine other Bisshoppes accor­ding to the Emperours commaundement mette at Rome, and after due exa­mination had, doe condemne the Donatists, and pronounce Cecilianus cause to be good. From this sentence of the bisshop of Rome, and other bisshoppes his colleages being the Emperours delegates, the Donatists appeale vnto the Emperour, not onely accusing Cecilianus, but also Melciades the bisshop of Rome, and other Cōmissaries. Wherefore the Emperour causeth a Synode to be had at Arelatum, committing the cause to the bisshop thereof and o­ther bisshoppes assembled there by his commaundement, to be herde and dis­cussed. VVhereūto he calleth Crestus the bisshop of Syracuse a City in Sicilie by his letters. VVherein he declareth in (.76.) The 76. Vntruth. Constantin in those letters hath no such thing either in plaine termes or obscure. Only he expresseth a desire to haue the contention ended. plain termes, that it belongeth [Page] to his imperial cure, to see these controuersies in Church causes to be deter­mined and ended.Augu. epi­stol. 166. Donatus and his companions, being condemned also by these bishops, in the Synode at Arelatum, and Cecilianus cleered, doe a­gain appeale vnto the Emperour from their sentence, beseching him to take the hearing and discussing of the cōtrouersie. VVho calleth both the parties to­gether before himself at Millayn, and after he had herde the vvhole matter, and vvhat vvas to be said on both sides, This he did. But this he re­pented af­ter. Augu epi­stol. 162. Epist. 166. he gaue final sentēce vvith Cecilia­nus, condemning the Donatists. VVho after al these things thus done, as S. Augustin saith, made a very sharpe Lavv against the Donatistes, the vvhich also his Sonnes after him commaunded to be obserued.

Stapleton.

OF al that M. Horn bringeth of Constantines doings, or of any others this place semeth most cōformable, (not to that wherein we ioyn issue with him: which are a nomber of pointes, as I haue declared: in the proufe whereof in case M. Horn be defectyue in any one, M. Fe­kenham is at liberty from receiuinge the pretensed othe:Of Con­stantines iudgemēt in the cause of Cecilian.) but to that one point onely, that not the Bisshop or Pope himself, but the ciuil magistrate is, supreme iudge in causes ecclesiastical. And yet yf M. Horn could effectually proue this, he should quyte him self lyke a clerke. In dede your maister M Caluin, M. Iewel, and others runneth to this ex­ample as to a strong hold, which I trow neuerthelesse wil proue anon as stronge as a rotten rede.Artic. 4. fol. 105. & sequent. As also to any in­different Reader it may sufficiently appeare, that hath or wil reade our Return vpon M. Iewels lying Reply, where this whole matter is answered at ful. Yet let vs ones againe lay forth the matter.

[Page 90]Constantine, say you, in a matter ecclesiastical deuolued to him by an appele appointed as his Delegate the Pope him selfe, yea after the Popes sentence he appointed, vppon a new appeale certain other Bisshhops. The appellants being also agreued with this sentence, craued ayde at Constanti­tins own hands, who gaue the final sentence against them. Suerly these were froward quarreling men, what so euer they were. But what maner of men were they M. Horne? Forsothe as ye truely say, the Donatists, the most peruerse and obstinate heretiks that euer the Churche suffred. Is this then, thinke you, a sure grounde to build your supremacy vpon? Suerly as sure, and as sownd, as was your Emperour Emanuel, as ye call him. Beside this,M. Horne buildeth his supre­macy v­pon the doings of Donatists where is the longe te­diouse song, ye songe of late against M. Fekēham to proue him a Donastiste? Ye see here the Donatists them selues a­gainst the authority of temporal princes in Churche mat­ters, which before ye denied: and so may M. Fekenhā clere himself, that he is no Donatiste. Ye had done wel,M. F. pur­ged by M. Horne him selfe to be no Donatist. yf ye had eased your reader and your self most of all, with an hādsome worde or two interlaced, for the auoiding of this contradiction. Wel belyke it was by some voluntarie ob­liuiō forslone. I wil therfore take the paynes to supplie this defect of yours. I say therfore that both is true. For when it serued their purpose, and as lōg as they had any hope of any relefe for their wicked heresies, they ranne to the Empe­rors, yea to Iulian the Apostata, setting him forth with no smal cōmendations, for ayde and helpe. And so did they now.The mar­uelous in constācy of the Donatists But afterward when both this Constantin and other Emperors made sharp lawes against thē, thē the world was chaunged, then sang they a new songe: that it was not sitte or seamely for the princes to busie thēselues in Church matters. [Page] Yea so impudent and inconstant they were, that thowg [...]e themselues first browght the matter against Cecilian to the Emperours audience, yet did they blame innocent Ce­cilian for their own fact, as a breaker of the Ecclesiasticall order. And are not your maisters and cōpanions I beseache you the true schollers of the Donatists in this behalfe, as I haue before shewed? And who are they, tell me by your truth, that after sentence geuen against them by the Pope, by prouincial and general councels, yea by the Emperours them selues, doe persiste and endure in their wicked here­sies, and that more wilfully then euer did the obstinat Do­natists? Are they not of your own whole and holy genera­tion? Wel seing we haue now deliuered you from contra­diction, we may procede to the matter it selfe.

Ye say Constantine gaue sentence euen after the Pope. Yea but we say again (supposing this example true) that one swallowe brīgeth not the spring tyme with him. The pre­sident of one Emperor (for ye proue not the like in al your book of any other) cā not enforce a general rule, nor make a continual practise of the Church: which is your speciall scope euer by you to be regarded. And ye should haue re­garded here (yf ye haue any regarde at al) the circumstan­ces of the matter.The cir­cūstances of Con­stantines iudgemēt in [...]eciliās cause vveighed The Donatists were waxen very thycke and great in Aphrik, yea to the nomber almost of .300. bis­shops. Their bands, their faction were so great, their cruelty vpō the Catholiks was so enormouse, their obstinat despe­ratiō was such, fearing no mā, nor no punishmēt, yea most wickedly murtherīg their own selues in great multitudes, that the godly and wise prince Constantin, to mollifie their fury, and by gentlenes and yelding to them to winne them, fared with thē, as many good princes fare and beare with [Page 91] the people being in their rage, graunting them many thīgs, otherwise not to be graunted, for the shonning of a greater myscheif: And euen so did this good prince condescende to the Donatists, partly cōmittīg this cause after the Popes Sentence to other bisshops, partly taking it into his owne hands: (both which was more then he ought to haue don, as we shal anon see.) For al this he did not as one that toke him self (as ye dreame, and as (the more pity) appeales goe in our cōtrey at the Arches and other where) for the law­ful and ordinary iudge in causes Ecclesiastical. Which thīg wisely and godly considering Melchiades the Pope with other bisshops, to recouer the Donatists, and to take away al maner of quarelings from thē, and to restore the Church to her former vnity, so miserably and pitifully by them ren­ted and torne a sonder, did patiently beare with Constan­tyne: As a wise man would doe with the Mariners,VVhy somtime both ciuil lavves ād Ecclesia­stical are vvinked and des­sembled at. yf in a great huge tempeste, they goe somwhat out of their com­mon course, to saue their ship, themselues, and al the other. And as in the polytyke body: so in the spirituall body: the magistrats relent and winke at many things in such hurlye burlye: and the lawes and canons, which otherwise should take their force, be for such a tyme, nothing or sleightlye exacted.

Nice Cōc. Can. [...].For example, the canons of Nice forbidde, that at one tyme two bisshoppes shoulde be with lyke authority in one see. Now to go no further then our own Melchiades, and your Donatists: After the said Melchiades had condemned the Donatists, he offered thē, yf they would repent and incor­porate thē selues again to the vnity of the Catholik Chuch from the which, by a shameful schisme they had dismem­bred them selues, not onely his letters that they call com­municatorye, [Page] by the which they shoulde be counted through out the worlde Catholikes: but also, whereas by reason of this horrible diuision,Aug. epist. 50. et 162 in many places, were in one see two bisshops, the one a Catholike, the other a Donatiste, that he should be confirmed, that was first or­deyned: and that the other should be prouided of an other bisshoprike. And here by the way you see Melchiades and not Constantines supremacy.

A notable story concerning the Aphrican bis­shops. August. de gestis cū Emerito.Yea, which is more notable the case standing in Aphrik, that as I said in many places two bisshops sate in one see to­gether, of thre hundred Catholik Bisshoppes assembled in a Councel in the sayde Aphrike, they were all, sauing two, (and yet those two relented afterwarde too) contente to geue ouer their bisshopricks, to the saide Donatists, yf they would return to the Church. And yet the Nicene ca­nons were to the contrarye. Nowe I pray you M. Horne, yf ye had bene then as Melchiades was, what would your wisedome haue done? would you haue stepped forth and haue said to Constantine, that he vsurped an other mans office? that he had nothing to doe in those matters? and that the matter being ons heard by him, it could not be deuol­ued into any other cowrte? and so not onely haue exaspe­rated the indurate and obstinat Donatists, but also the good and godly prince, lately conuerted to the faith, and by this admonition thowgh trewe, yet out of ceason hasard all?

Nay, Nay, ye wil say, for al this Melchiades was but a mere delegate to Constantin, who lawfully and orderlye proceded in this case as owre prince doth now in like: and that this is but my prety shifte, and ye will put me to my proufes. But I hadde thowght you your selfe would haue proued hī a mere delegate, (seing you speak it so perēpto­rely) [Page 92] and that nothing was don here extraordinarily. But I see wel you wil allwaies obiect as your brethern doe not caring what hath bene answered to the obiection already, like as simple logicioners in scholes, when their argument is preuented, haue no shifte to inuente an other, or to reply vpon the former solution, but doe sadly repete the same. To you therefore M. Horne, as before to M. Iewel, I answer. The places by your self alleaged and quoted doe confounde you, and that in two places, brought out of S. Augustine. For first in one of the epistles that ye alleage,It is pro­ued by tvvo pla­ces allea­ged by M. Horn that Cō ­stantine vvas no lavvful Iudge in Cecilians cause. Augu. epi­stol. 48. Augu. epi­stol. 162. S. Augustyne doth reproue and rebuke the Donatists, for that they brought the matter to the Emperours consisto­ry: and saith they should haue first of all brought the matter to the bisshops beyonde the seas (he meaneth specially the Pope) and saith further that Constantin himself, did more orderlye, when he refused to heare the matter. Then in an other epistle also by you cited, he sayeth, that the principalitye of the Apostolike Chaire hath euermore bene inforce in the Roman Church. And now further concerning this appella­tion, he saith that there was no neade why that the matter should haue bene heard again, after iudgemente geuen by Mel­chiades. But yet Constantine procured the matter to be heard again at Arles, relenting (saieth S. Augustin) to the Do­natists obstinacy, ād laborīg by al meanes to restrain their great outragious im [...]udency. Now concerning Constantin, that he euē for the cōsideratiōs aforesaid, heard their cause himself: S. Augustin saith, of him, that he minded to aske pardō there­of of the holy bishops. Wherby most euidently appereth, that al this his doing was extraordinary, and not to be drawen into an vsuall example: or to be preiudiciall to the Ec­clesiasticall power, and muche lyke to the sufferance of [Page] Quene Mary, who for a tyme suffred her self to be writen and called the supreme head, thowgh she misliked the title, and at the day of her Coronation openly reproued the preacher for calling her so. And our graciouse Quene now vseth not that tytle by those precise words. And I woulde fayne know of you M. Horne, yf ye be so cunning, why the name onely is shifted, the thing remayning one and the verye self same as before. Thanks now be geuen vnto God, that hath so mercifullye wrowght with vs, that he hath caused you, in the cheifest matter that seemeth of your side in al your booke, by your owne author, your owne places voluntarily by you, and for you layde forthe, to destroye your own doctrine, and vtterly to ouerthrowe your selfe. Perchaunce you are now angrie with your selfe, for this mishappe and ouersight, and wil not styck shortly (as some of you beginne alredy pretely) to reiecte euen S. Augustin himself, as a suspect man, and partial in Church and bissho­ply matters, him self being a bisshop also. This rhetoryke I feare me wil one day burste out against him, and other as good and as auncient as he: as it buddeth hansomly alredy. And yf it chaunce so to doe, we wil prouide for our selues: and in this point, furnishe our selues, with such a witnesse as I thinke for shame you dare not deny, and yet for very shame his testimony against you, ye may not abyde. That is Constantine him selfe: who sayd to the Donatistes, and so withal to you their schollers in this point for this their ap­pellation.Opta. li. 1. M Horns primacy condem­ned by Cōstātine him self. O rabida furoris audatia: sicut in causis gentilium solet, appellationem interposuerunt. O furiouse and madde boldnes they appeale vnto me, as they were panyms and and heathens. Howe lyke yow this M. Horne? Where is now your like regiment, when Constantine himselfe, for [Page 93] this your desperat raging appeales, maketh you not muche better than a Pagan and an Heathen? Who shal clappe you on the backe now, and say Patrisas? Who is he now that is so like the Donatists, as though he had spit him out of his mouth? Hovv like M. Horne is to the Dona­tists. M. Horne in the .12. folio. What would he haue said, and howe would he haue cried out if he liued now, or rather how woulde he haue pitied Britanie his owne natiue Countrie (as our Chronicles re­porte) for this kinde of regiment, beside all other to many causes of pitie and sorowe, to beholde?

Now for a surplussage M. Horne, to end this your grea­test matter withal, so oft, so facingly, and so fondly alleaged of all your brethren, I must tell you, ye put not the case al­together right: Ye abuse your Readers. The principal mat­ter was not, whether Cecilian was laufully cōsecrated, this was but a coincident, and a matter dependant. The princi­pal matter was, whether Felix (of whome Cecilian was in dede ordeined) were a traitour, Traditor. as they then called such as in the time of persequution, deliuered to the handes of the Infidels, the holy Bible to be burnt. This was Questio facti, non iuris: as the Lawyers say. And such as a laye man may heare wel inough. The other was coincident and accesso­rie. And in such cases the Lawyers say,Alciat. l. nō plures Cod. de sa­cros. eccle­siis. that a lay man may at least wise incidently heare and determine a cause Eccle­siasticall. These and many other things mo, that might here be said, doe mollifie and extenuate Constantines faulte, if there were anye: and howe so euer it be, this is ones sure, that your owne authorities doe quite ouerbeare you, and proue the Popes Primacie.

M. Horne. The .32. Diuision. pag. 21. b.

Athanasius also that moste godly Bishoppe, being ouer muche vvronged in the Councell at Tyre, did flie and appeale from the iudgemente of that [Page] (77.)The 77. Vntruth. This was no ap­peale of Atha­nasius, as shall ap­peare. Socr. li.1. cap 34. Theod li. 2 cap. 28 Synod vnto Constantine the Emperour, delaring vnto him his griefes, beseeching him to take the hearing of the matter before him selfe: vvhiche the Emperour assented vnto, vvritinge vnto the Synode assembled at [...]yre, commaunding them vvithout delaie to come vnto his Courte, and the [...]e to declare before mee (saith this most Christian Emperour) whome ye shall not denie to be Gods sincere minister, how sincerely and rightly ye haue iudged in your Synod. VVhen this Synod vvas assembled at Tyre, the Catholique Bishops of Egypt, vvrote vnto the hono­rable Flauius Dionysius vvhom the Emperour had made his Lieutenaunte, to see all things vvell ordered in that Councell, and did desire him, that he vvould reserue the examination and (78)The .78. vntruth. That vvas no Synod at all, but Nego [...]iū Impera­torium, An Imperiall or Courtlye triall, [...]s Athana­sius cal­leth it▪ iudgemēt to the [...]mperour him self: yea they doe adiure him, that he doe not meddle vvith their matter, but re­ferre the iudgement thereof to the Emperour, who they knewe well, would iudge rightly according (.79.) The .79 vntruth. No suche vvordes in Athanasius. Athanas. Apol. 2. [...]o [...]. 91. & [...]3. to the right order of the Churche.

Stapleton.

THIS obiection of Athanasius his appeale (as you call it) to Constantine, is a common obiection to all your brethren, and hath ben vsed namely of M. Iewell in his lying Replie in the fourth Article more then ones. For the which (if I listed to follow the fond vain of M. Nowel) I might call you M. Horne, a seely borower of your fel­lowes Argumēts, &c. But to leaue that peuish toy to boies, of whom M. Nowel in the time of his Scholemaistershippe may wel seme to haue learned it, ād to answere briefly the whole mater, first I refer you to my former āswer made to M. Iew. in my Returne, &c. in the fourth Article. And now for a surplussage, I say with Athanasius himself (who knew this whole mater better I trow, then you or M. Iewel) that this which you call a Councell and a Synod at Tyre, from the [Page 94] iudgement of which Synod you say Athanasius appealed vn­to Constantine, referring the whole matter to his hearinge, this, I say, was no Synod or Councell at all. For of this ve­ry assemblie of the Arrian Bishops at Tyre, where they ac­cused Athanasius before the honourable Flauius Dionysi­us, the Emperours Lieutenaunt there, of grieuouse crimes, as of killing Arsenius, who then yet liued, and of a facte of his Pri [...]st Macharius, for ouerthrowinge of an Aulter, and breakīg of a Chalice, of this assembly, I say, thus doth a holy Synod of Catholique Bishops and Priestes gathered toge­ther at Alexandria, out of Egypt, Thebais, Lybia, and Pen­tapolis, pronounce and affirme, as Athanasius in his secōd Apologie (the booke by your selfe here alleged) recordeth. Praecla [...]i Euseb [...]ani, quo veritatem scriptáque sua obliterent, Athanas. in Apo [...]. [...] nomen Synodi suis actis praetexunt, quumres ipsa negotium Im­peratorium non Synodale haberi debeat. Quippe vbi Comes praesideat, & milites Episcopos suo satellitio cingant, & Impera­toria edicta quos ipsi volunt coire compellant. These ioly Eu­sebians (these were Arrians) to the intent they may blotte out the truth, and their owne writings, doe pretēd to their owne doings the name of a Synode, whereas the matter it selfe ought to be counted an Imperiall mater, not the mat­ter of any Councell or Synod. Loe Maister Horne, you with the Arrians, wil haue this to be a Synod: but we with the Catholique Bisshoppes of Egypt, Thebais, Lybia, and Pentapolis, and with Athanasius him selfe, denye flattelye it was any Synod at all, but onely Negocium imperatorium, a matter Imperiall, a ciuile matter, a laie or temporal con­trouersie. I truste we with the Catholique Bishoppes, and namely with Athanasius, shal haue more credit herein, then you M. Horne, and Maister Iewell, with the Arrians. [Page] But why doe those Catholike Bishops deny this matter to be any Synodall or Councell matter? Quippe vbi. &c. As in which matter (say they) the Countie, the Emperours Lieutenaunt, was president, and souldiours closed the Bisshops round about, and the Emperours proclamations compelled such to mete as them listed. Behold M. Horne, for this very cause that the Emperour and his Lieutenaunt bore the chief rule, therefore I say, did those Catholike Bishops accompte this matter to be no Synod at al. See I pray you M. Horne: Homo homini quantum interest, stulto intelligens. See howe farre square and extreme different your opinion is from the iudgement of the Catholike Fathers and Bisshops so many Aboue 12. hūdret yeares. hundred yeares past. You M. Horne and your fellowes, will haue al Synods and Councels to be called, ordered, di­rected,M. Horne clean cō trary to the Catholike Bis­shops of the Pri­mitiue Churche gouerned, confirmed, approued and wholy gouer­ned of the Prīce and his officers. And without the Princes authority, cōmission, order, directiō, cōfirmation, and royal assent, you wil haue no Synodes or Councelles of Bishops to auaile, or to haue force. Contrarywise, these Catholike Bishops in the East Church, do for this very cause reproue and reiect the Assembly of certaine Bishops, for no Synode at al, because al was there done by the authoritie, order, di­rection, and power of the Princes Lieutenaunt. And they doe make a plaine distinction betwene Negotium Imperiale, and Synodale, betwene an Imperiall matter, and a Synodall matter: as who shoulde saye, If the Emperour beare all the stroke, it is no Synod, nor so to be called.

Therefore these Catholique Fathers say againe, in the same place within few lines after: Si velut Episcopi sese Iu­dices volebāt esse, Athana­sius ibidē. quid opus erat vel Comite, vel militibus, aut edictis ad coeundum imperialibus? If these fellowes would [Page 95] be them selues Iudges as Bishops, what neded them to haue either the Countie, or the souldiars, or any Imperial Edicts to make them assemble? As who would say: In the Bishop­ly iudgement, in the Synode of bishops, it is not meete ey­ther to be summoned by the Prince, or to haue his Lieute­naunt present, or to haue his gard of Souldiars. These mat­ters become the temporal Court, and the Ciuile Consisto­rie, where by force of subiection, lawes do procede. They become not the Synods of Bishoppes, where with quiet of minde, with godly deliberation, freely and franckly, with­out feare or partialitie, Gods matters ought to be treated, discussed, and concluded.

Therefore againe these Catholik Fathers doe say of this Arrian Conuenticle at Tyrus: Qua fronte talem conuentum, Athana­sius ibid. Synodum appellare audent, cui Comes praesedit? With what face dare they call such an assemblye, by the name of a Sy­node, ouer the which the County was president? And yet will yow M. Horne, that the ciuill Magistrate shall be the president and Supreme gouernour, in and ouer al Synodes? Maye not a man nowe clappe yow on the backe, and saye, Patrisas, Arrianisas? And that yow are as like to the cursed Arrians, as if Arrius him self had spet you out of his mouth? Those Fathers cry yet againe vnto you and say:Ibidem. Quae species ibi Synodi, vbi vel caedes, vel exiliū, si Caesari placuisset, cōstitue­batur? What face of any Synod was there, where at the Emperours pleasure, either death or banishmēt was decre­ed? This cōuenticle therefore at Tyrus was no Synod. Nei­ther could therfore Athanasius appeale from any Synod to the Emperoure. But that which Athanasius then did, and which yow vntruely call an Appeale from the Synod, was only a cōplaint to the godly Emperour Constātine, againste [Page] the vniuste violences of the honourable (as you call him) Flauius Dionysius: wherein also those Catholique Fathers aboue mentioned, shall witnesse with mee against you. For thus they write: Quum nihil culpae in comministro no­stro Athanasio reperirent, Comésque summa vi imminens plu­ra contra Athanasium moliretur, Episcopus comitis violenti­am fugiens, ad religiosissimum. Imperatorem ascendit, depre [...]ās & iniquitatem hominis & aduersariorum calumnias, p [...]stulās­que vt legitima Episcoporum Synodus indiceretur▪ aut ipse au­diret suam defensionem. Wheras they could find no fault in our fellowe Prieste Athanasius, and the Countye by force and violence wrought many things against Athana­sius, the Bishoppe declining the violence of the Countie, went vp to the most religious Emperor, complaining both of the iniurious dealing of the Lieutenant, and of the slan­ders of his Aduersaries, and requiring that a laufull Synode of Bisshops might be called, or els that th'Emperour would heare him to speake for him selfe.VVhat maner of Appeale Athana­sius made to Con­stantine the Em­perour. By these woordes we see, that Athanasius appealed not from any Synodicall sen­tence of bishops to the Emperour, as a Superiour Iudge in Synodicall matters, but from the violence and iniuries of the Lieutenaunt, to his Lord and Maister, the Emperoure him self for to haue iustice and audiēce, not in any mate [...] of Religion or controuersie of the faith, but in a matter of fe­lony laid to his charge, as the murder of a man, and an out­rage committed by one of his Priestes in a Churche. For the which his aduersaries sought his death. And yet when they came before the Emperour, they chaunged their acti­on, and pleaded no more vpon the murder, which was foūd to be so euident a lye (Arsenius being brought forth aliue, before the benche, when they accused Athanasius of his [Page 96] death) neither vpō the Chalice brokē, that being also a very ridiculous ād a plain forged mater, but they pleaded a newe actiō of stoppīg the passage of corne frō Alexādria to Con­stātinople, ād accused hī as an enemie to the Imperial court and City. For prouf wherof, the Arriās brought in false wit­nesses, and periures.Athanas. Apol. 2. pag. 384. Socrates lib. 1. c. 27 Theodor. li. 1. ca. 32 But yet the Emperour (as they write) moued with pitie, satis habebat pro morte exilium irrogare: thought it enough in stede of death, to banish him. Whiche he did at the importune suite and clamoures of the Arrian bishoppes, sor quietnes and vnities sake in the church. But afterward in his death bed the Emperour repentinge him, commaunded Athanasius to be restored to his Bisshopricke a­gaine, though Eusebius the Arrian then present, laboured much to the contrary. In al this, there was no Ecclesiastical or spi­ritual matter, but mere Ciuile matters in hand.

Neither was it any Ecclesiastical matter, that the Catho­like Bisshops of Egypt as you alleage M. Horne) desired and ad [...]ured Flauius Dionysius the foresaied Countie to reserue the examination and iudgement of, to the Emperour himself. But the matter was suche as we haue before rehearsed, matters and actions mere Ciuile. Namely they adiured that iniuri­ous and partiall Magistrate, the foresayed Countie, not to proceede farder against their Patriarche, then so grieuo­slie attainted, but to referre the whole matter to the most Religious Emperoure, where they doubted not to finde more fauoure. Apud quem (say they) licebit & iura Ec­clesiae, & nostra proponere. Vide Apol. 2. Athan. sol. 427. Im [...]ress. Bas [...]l. An. 1564. Before whome we maye put foorth bothe the rightes of the Churche, and our owne. Meaninge that by his clemencye, they mighte be suffe­red to procede in that matter among them selues orderly as the righte of the Churche and of the Canons required: [Page] not (as M. Horne falsely translateth it) that the Emperour would iudge according to the right order of the Church. There are no such wordes in the letters of the Catholike Bishops of Aegipt alleaged by M. Horne. Otherwise, to seke any iudgement of Churche matters, at the Emperours handes, be you bolde M. Horne,Sozom. lib. 3. c. 8. Tripart. li. 4. c. 15. Athanas. Apol. 2. Athanas. in epist. ad solitar. vi­agentes. pag. 459. no man knewe better then Atha­nasius him selfe, that he could not doe it. For it is Athana­sius, M. Horne, that being restored, as I haue said, by Con­stantines last wil and Testament, and after againe the secōd time banished vnder the Arrian Emperour Constantius, by the meanes also of those Arrian Bishops, appealed to Pope Iulius, as his competent and ordinarye Iudge, and was by him restored to his Bishoprike, together with many other Bishops of the East, Paulus of Constantinople, Asclepas of Gaza, Marcellus of Ancyra, Lucius of Adrianople, with many other,Athana­sius and M. Horne of a clean contrary iudge­ment. appealing then likewise to Pope Iulius. It is Athanasius that saith: When was it heard from the creation of the worlde, that the iudgement of the Church shoulde take his authoritie from the Emperour? And what coulde that learned Father saye more directlye againste you and your whole booke M. Horne? Verely either that most lear­ned and auncient Father, whom the most famous Fathers of al Christendome haue alwaies from time to time reue­renced and honoured as a most glorious light and a singu­lar piller of Gods Church, either that moste excellent Bis­shop, I say, in whose praise euen out of the testimonies on­ly of the best writers a iust Treatise might be gathered, did fouly erre and misse of the truth: either you M. Horne, and your fellowes are in a great errour, and do defend an exce­ding absurditie, damnable both to you and all that followe you, forswearing your selues by booke Othe, when yee [Page 97] swere, that in conscience you beleue, which you ought not ones so much as to thinke. For see yet what this Nota­ble Bisshop pronounceth against you. It is Athanasius that saieth it. If this be the iudgement of bishops, Athana­sius vbi supra: pa­gina eadē Fol. 3 b. what hath the Emperour to doe with it? Els if Caesars threates conclude these matters, to what purpose haue men the Names of Bisshoppes? Contrary wise say you, M. Horne. It is a principal part of the Princes royall power, to haue the supreme gouernement in al maner causes Ecclesiastical or Spiritual.

O Barbarous heresye from the creation of the worlde neuer heard of before. O Antichristian presumption. I say, Antichristian presumption: I lerne of that most constant bisshop Athanasius so to say. For it is he that saieth these woordes. What hath Constantius omitted, that is not the parte of an Antichrist? Or what can he, when he cometh,Athanasi­us in epist. vt supra pag. 470.doe more? Or howe shall not Antichrist at his coming finde a ready way prepared for him of this Emperour to deceiue men? For nowe againe in stede of the Ecclesiastical iudgement, he ap­pointeth his palace to be the benche for Ecclesiasticall causes to be hearde at. Se (que) earum litium summum principem et Au­thorem facit. And he maketh himself the Supreme gouer­nour and chief doer of those controuersies: he speaketh of ecclesiastical. Now M. Horne, not our Gracious Soue­raigne, of her owne desire taketh vppon her such gouern­ment: but you most miserable clawebackes,In decer­nendo prī ­cipē se fa­cere episcoporum: & praesidere iudicijs ecclesiasticis and wretched flatterers do force her Grace to take that Title, the taking and practising whereof by the assured verdyt of this most lerned Father, is a plaine Antichristian presumption. For loe what he saieth yet agayne in the same page. Who is it, that seing the Emperour to make him selfe the Prince of bisshops in decreeing of matters, and to be president ouer Eccle­clesiasticall [Page] iudgements may not worth [...]ly say, that this Empe­rour is the very abhomination of the d [...]solation, which was foretolde by Daniel? See and beholde M. Horn, what a most horrible absurdity you labour in your booke to persuade: See to what an extreme inconuenience you force mens consciences, when you tendre them the Othe, comprising the same and more, which here Athanasius accompteth the practise of Antichrist. Se last of all what traytours you are to God and your Prince, which haue persuaded her most Gracious highnes to take vpon her such kinde of go­uernment which is a preparation to Antichrist, and resem­bleth the abhomination of desolation foretolde by Daniel. And thus much your own Author Athanasius. You see how wel he speaketh for you.

Socrat. li. [...] Cap. 28.Now that you alleage out of Socrates that Constantin threatened Athanasius he should be brought, whether he would or no, it anaunceth nothing the Authority of Con­stantine in Ecclesiasticall matters. For so much manye a Prince doth to him, that lawfully called to a Councel will not come, at the Churches commaundement. Wherein he is rather a Ministerial then a principall doer. Neither doth the place by you alleaged out of Socrates, proue that Constantine examined and iudged the doings of the whole Councell, but onely whether they had proceded against Athanasius of enmity or malice: And as Socrates there writeth,Socrat. li. 1. cap. 34. Constantin sayde, the suyte of Athanasius was, that in his presence he might (being driuen thereto by necessyty) com­plaine of such iniuries as he had suffred. And it appereth by Theodoretus by you alleaged in the said first booke, that the determination and definition of these matters rested in the Bisshops, the execution in the Prince. For the labour [Page 98] of Constantine with Athanasius then was, onelye that he woulde appeare before a Synode of Bisshoppes, which had accused him diuerslye before the Emperour, and of those Bisshoppes be tryed. Which the Emperour did, as Theodoret writeth, [...].Theod. lib. 1. cap. 28. Beleuing the accu­sers of Athanasius as Priestes, and thinkinge their accusa­tions to be true. [...]. For he was vtterly ignorant of their deceytes and craftly dea­linges, saieth Theodoret. Thus he iudged not him selfe o­uer Athanasius, but only procured, that to kepe peace in the Churche, the bisshops might assemble together, and trye their own matter among them selues.

M. Horne. The .33. Diuision. Pag. 22. a.

There vvere no Churche mattiers, or Ecclesiastical causes, vvherein the continual practise of the Churche of Christe, in this Emperours tyme, yea and many hundreth yeeres after, did not attribute the (.80.)The 80. vntruth: boldly a­uouched, but no vvaye proued. supreme rule, order, and authority vnto Emperours and Kinges, vpon vvhome (.81.)The 81. vntruth. Socrates belied, as shal ap­peare. In proaem. lib. 5. Lib. 1. De vit. Const. al Churche mattiers did depende, as vvitnesseth Socrates, vvho shevveth this reason of that he doth thoroughout his Ecclesiasticall History mention so much the Emperours. Because that of the Emperors (saith he) after they be­ganne to be Christians, the Churche matters doe depende, yea the greatest Councels haue bene, and are called together, ac­cording to their appointment. Eusebius commendeth the great boun­tifulnes of Constantine tovvardes all estates, But, (saith he) this Em­perour had a singular care ouer Goddes Churche, for as one appointed of God to be a common or vniuersall Bisshop, he called Synodes or conuocations of Goddes ministers toge­ther into one place, that thereby he might appeace the contē ­tious striuinges that were amonge them in sundry places. He disdayned not to be present with thē in their Synodes, and to sit in the middest of thē, as it had been a meaner personage, cō ­mending [Page] and approuing those that bente them selues of good meaning to godly vnity, and shewed him self to mislike on the other side, and to set naught by such, as were of contrary disposition.

Stapleton.

The general assertion that M. Horne here auoucheth, that in Constantynes tyme, the continuall practise of the Churche attributed in al Ecclesiastical causes the supreme rule to Emperours, is but a great vntruthe boldly auou­ched, but no maner of way yet proued, as hath bene de­clared, nor hereafter to be proued, as it shall by Gods grace appeare. Againe that he saieth: All Churche mat­ters did depende of the Emperours, and for witnesse thereof alleageth Socrates, is an other no lesse vntruthe also. For this prety syllable, All, is altogether M. Hornes, and not Socrates,Socrates [...] prooemio lib. [...]. pretely by him shifted in, to helpe forwarde a naughty matter. The very text alleaged by M. Horne, hath not that worde, nor speaketh not so generally. But it is no rare matter with men of M. Hornes brotherhood, to ouerreache their Authours, and therefore the lesse to be wondered at,Art. 4. Fol. 139. though not the lesse to be borne with. And to this place of Socrates I haue before answered in my Returne against M. Iewel. That which foloweth out of Eusebius, proueth M. Hornes purpose neuer a deale. Except M. Horne thinke some waight to lye in those words, where the Emperour is called a Common or Vniuer­sall Bis [...]hop: as though. we shoulde gather thereby, that the Emperour was then, as the Pope is nowe, and hath all­waies bene. Except these woordes helpe M. Hornes pri­macy, nothing is there that wil helpe it, reade and consi­der [Page 99] the place who listeth. But as for these woordes what sense they beare, no man better then Constantine him selfe by the report of the same Eusebius also, can tell vs. Constantin in dede was called of Eusebius as a commō bis­shop, that is, as a common ouerseer, [...]. Lib. 1. ca. 37. de vita Constant. by reason of his passing zele and singular diligence in furdering Gods true Reli­gion. But that he exercised therein no such supreme go­uernement as M. Horne fancyeth, neither made him selfe bisshop of bisshoppes, but stayed him selfe within the li­mites and boundes of his owne Iurisdiction, it appeareth manifestly by these his woordes spoken to a great number of bisshoppes, as Eusebius recordeth it in his own hearing to haue bene said. I am also, saith the Emperour, a bishop. [...],Lib. 4. ca. 24. de vit. Constant. [...]. But you are bisshoppes (or ouerseers) of those thinges that are within the Churche. But I being by God sette ouer those thinges that are without the Church, am also as it were a bisshop, or ouerseer. Marke wel these words M. Horne. Your allegation auoucheth not the Emperor absolutely to be a bisshop: but [...]. Appointed of God as a certain cōmō bisshop. that is, resembling for his great zeale to Gods Church, the very office and person of a bisshop. But here the Emperour distinctly expresseth the tru [...] bisshops office and vocation to be different from his own office and cal­ling. He confesseth, I say, expressely, that the bisshoppes are appointed of God to be the Rulers ouerseers and directers of those things that are within the Church, that is, that doe concerne the gouernment of spiritual causes, and matters mere ecclesiastical. But him selfe he acknowledgeth to be ordayned of God ouer those things that are without the [Page] Churche, as of wordly and ciuil matters ouer the which he being the Emperour was the supreme gouernour, and in that respect he thought he might after a sorte call him self also a bisshop, which soundeth, an Ouerseer, Ruler, and Guyder of such things as are to his charge committed. And verily after the paterne and example of this Noble first Christian Emperour, first I say that opēly professed and de­fended the same, it may wel be thought, the words spoken to Christian Princes at their Coronatiō time, haue ben cō ­ceiued and vsed. The which also, that the Reader may see how distinct ād differēt in dede the vocatiōs are of Prīces and Bisshops, and yet how in some sorte thei both are bis­shops, that is Ouerseers of Gods people, as Cōstantine pro­fessed hī self to be, I wil here insert the very words vsually rehersed to Princes at their coronatiō time by the bishops annointing them.Vide Pon­tificale impressum Venetiis An. 1520. These are the words. Accipe Coronā regni tui, quae licet ab indignis, episcoporum tamē manibus, capiti tuo imponitur, In nomine Patris, & Filij, & Spiritus Sancti: Quam sanctitatis gloriā, & honorē, & opus fortitudinis intelligas sig­nificare, & per hanc te participē ministerij nostri non ignores. Ita vt sicut nos in interioribus Pastores, restores (que) animarum intelligimur, ita & tu contra omnes aduersitates, ecclesiae Chri­sti defensor assistas, regni (que) tibi à Deo dati: &c. Take the Crowne of your kingdom, which is put vpon your heade by the handes of bisshops, though vnworthy, in the name of the Father, the Sonne, and the Holy Ghost. The which Crown you must vnderstand, doth signify the glory ād ho­nour of Godlynes, and the worke of Fortitude: By this al­so vnderstād, that you are partakener of our Ministery. So that, as we are knowē to be the pastours and gouerners of mens soules in matters internal, so you also shoulde assiste [Page 100] as a defendour of the Church of Christ, and of the kingdom geuē to you by God, against al aduersites. You see here M. Horne, that as in the words of king Iosaphat in the old law, and of Cōstantin the first Christiā Emperour, so to this day in the Coronatiō of al Christē Princes there is made a plain distinctiō betwene the Emperours or Princes Office, and the Office, charge and cōmission of a bisshop, cōmissiō I say cōmitted to him not of the Prince, but of God. And dare you then to cōfound thē? Or dare you for shame M. Horne make the world beleue, that Cōstantin bore himselfe for a Supreme Gouernour in al causes ecclesiastical or spiritual, when he him self in plain woordes confesseth, that of spiri­tual or Ecclesiastical matters the bisshops are of God (not of him) appointed the Rulers and ouerseers, but he hath of God cōmitted vnto him the Charge and rule of those mat­ters that are out of the Church, that are in dede no Church matters, but matters of policy, matters of ciuil gouerment, matters of this world, and cōcerning this present life only?

M. Horne. The 34. Diuision. Pag. 22. a.

The Ecclesiastical histories make mention of many Synodes or councelles, called or assembled at the appointment and order of this Emperour. But the most famous and notable, vvas the Nicene Councel: about the vvhich, con­sider and marke, vvhat vvas the occasion, by vvhose authority it vvas sum­moned and called together, and vvhat vvas the doings of the Emperour from the beginning vnto the dissolution thereof: and yee shal see plainely as in a Glasse, that by the order and practise of the Catholik Church, notified in the order of this general Councel, the (.82) The 82. vntruth. That vvil neuer ap­peare in the order of this Councel. supreme gouernment in Eccle­siastical causes, is in the Emperor and and ciuil Magistrates, and your (83.) The 83. vntruth. Not M. Fekenhā [...] but M. Hornes opiniō is cleerelye condem­ned by the agreement of these 318. Father [...]. opinion condemned by the vniforme agreement of .318. of the most Catholik Bisshops in the vvorlde, commending, and allovving for most godly, vvhat so euer the Emperour did in, or about this councel. The occasion of this famous and most godly councell, vvas the great dissention kindled, partly about a necessarie Article of our beliefe, partly about a ceremony of the Churche. [Page] Arrius incensed vvith ambitious enuie, against Alexander his bisshop at a­lexandria, vvho disputed in one of his lessons or treatises, more subtily of the diuinity than aduisedly, as the Emperour layeth to his chardge, quarreled Sophistically against him, and mainteined an horrible Heresis. Besides this, the Churches vvere also diuided amongest themselues, about the order or ce­remony of keeping the Easterday The Emperour sent Hosius vvith his letters, as I sayd before, into the Easte parties to appeace the furious dissentiō about both these matters, and to reconcile the parties dissenting. But vvhen this duetiful seruice of the Emperour, tooke not that effect vvhich he vvished and hoped for, then as Sozomenus vvriteth, he summoned a councel to be holden at Nice in Bythinia,Lib. 1. c. 17 and vvrote to al the chief Ministers of the Churches euery vvhere, (.84.) The 84. vntruth There appeareth in Sozo­mene no such Im­perial cō ­maunde­ment, but only that he called them to mete at a day. Lib. 1 c. 7. Lib. 3. De vit. Const. Lib. 8. c. 14 Theod. lib. 1. cap. 9. commaunding thē that they should not fayle to bee there at the day appointed. The selfe same also doth Theodoretus affirme, both touching the occasion, and also the summons made by the Emperour. Eusebius also vvriting the life of Constantine, shevveth vvith vvhat carefulnes, the godly Emperour endeuoured to quenche these fiers. And vvhen the Emperour (saieth Eusebius) savve that be preuailed nothing by sending of Hosius vvith his letters, Considering this matter with him self, said, that this warre against the obscure enemy troubling the Church, must be vanquished by an other (meaning himselfe.) Therefore, as the capitaines of Goddes army, towards his voayge, he gathered together a Synode oecumenical, and he called the Bisshops to­gether by his honorable letters, and that they should hasten them selues from euery place. These things, touching the occasion and cal [...]ing of this general counsaile by the Emperour, are affirmed to be true also, by Nicephorus the Ecclesiastical historian. Yea, the vvhole counsaile in their letters, to the [...]hurches in Aegipt, and the East partes, doe testifie the same Synode, to be called by the Emperour, saying: The great and ho­ly Synode, was gathered together at Nice, by the grace of God, and the most religious Emperour Constantine, &c.

Stapleton.

MAister Horne here entreth to a greate matter, and maketh large promises both to proue his principall purpose effectually, and to confounde M. Fekēham manifestly. But he wil I trowe, when he hath al sayed, be as farre from them both, as if he had helde his peace. First to proue a Supreme gouernment in Constantin, he telleth vs that Constantine summoned the great Councel at Nice in Bithynia: but if he had set in out of Ruffinus,Ruf. lib. 1. cap. 1. hist. ecclesiast. Ex Sacerdotū Sententia: by the wil, minde, and consent of the Priests, that is, of the bisshops: then had he marred all his matter: and therefore wilily he lefte it out. If he had added also out of Theodoret (whome he alleageth to proue that the Empe­rour summoned this Coūcel) why and wherefore the Em­perour would be present at the Councel him self this ima­gined Primacy that Maister Horne so depely dreameth of, would haue appeared a very dreame in dede.Theodore­tus lib. 1. ca. 7. hist. ecclesiast. The Emperor was present (saith Theodoret) bothe desirous to beholde the Number of the Bisshops, and also coueting to procure vnyty a­mong them. These and such like causes doe the Ecclesia­stical histories alleage. But for any supreme gouernment that the Emperour should practise there, as namelye that his Royall assent was necessary to confirme the Coūcell, or that without it Arius had not bene cōdemned, and that he iudged the heresie or any such matter, as you now M. Horne doe attribute to the Prince, hauing your whole re­ligion only by the Princes Authority enacted and confir­med, for any such matter I say, neither in this Councel nor in any other doe the Auncient histories recorde so muche as one word. Your new Religion M. Horne, hath set vp a new kinde of gouernment such as al the Christian worlde [Page] neuer knewe nor hearde of before.

Nowe that you say, the occasion of this famous and most godly Councel, was the dissension partly about a necessary Ar­ticle of our beliefe, partly about a ceremony of the Churche, which ceremony you say after, was, of keeping the Easter­daye, yf it be so as you say (as it is most truely) what saye you to your owne Apologie that saieth, that the vsuall keeping of Easter daye is, a matter of small weight, and to your greate Antiquary Bale, that saieth it is but a ceremony of Hypocrites? In Centu. De script. ecclesiast. Suerly Constantin made a greater accompte of this vniforme obseruation then so, seeing that it was the seconde chiefe cause that caused him to summon this fa­mous, and most godly Councell ▪ as your selfe calleth it. Se­ing also that he maketh them not much better then Iewes that priuately in his time kept Easter daye otherwise, then Rome,Euseb. li. 3 cap. 18. de vit. Const. Afrik, Italy, Aegypte, Spaigne, Fraunce, Grece, Bri­tanny, and many other greate countries that he him selfe reakoneth vppe. And here by the way falleth out in M. Iewel a lye or two, saying that our Countre .700. yeres to­gether kept their Paschal daye with the Grecians other­wise then we doe nowe. Ye see I haue abridged .300. yeares and a halfe at the lest. For Constantin wrote these wordes straight after the Nicene Councell ended, which was kept in the yere of our Lorde .328.

M. Horne. The .35 Diuision. Pag. 23. a.

The Bishoppes (as I said before) vvhen they thought them selues, or their Churche iniuried by others, vvere vvont to appeale and flie vnto the Empe­rour, as the (.85.) The 85. vntruth, euer auouched, but neuer proued. supreme gouernour in al matters, and causes Temporall, or Spirituall, the vvhiche appeareth moste playne, to be the practise of the Churche by these Bishops called vnto the Nicene counsaill. For vvhen they came to Nice, supposing them selues to haue novve good oportunity, beyng [Page 102] nighe vnto the Emperour, to reuenge their Being priuat quarels, thei could be [...]o ec­clesiasti­cal mat­ters tou­ching re­ligion, vvhich is euer commō. Sozom. li. 1. cap. 17. Li. 1. ca. 8. priuate quarelles, and to haue redresse at the Emperours handes, of suche iniuries as they thought thē selues to susteyne at others byshops handes, eche of them gaue vnto the Emperour, a Libell of accusations, signifying vvhat vvronges he had susteyned of his fel­lovve Bishopes, and prayed ayde and redresse by his iudgement. The Empe­rour forseyng that these pryuate quarelings, if they vvere not by some policy, and vvyse deuise sequestred, and layde aside, vvould muche hynder the com­mon cause, tooke deliberatiō, appointing a day, against the vvhich they shuld be in a readines, and commaunded them to prepare and bring vnto him all their libelles and quarelling accusations, one against an other: (Mark by the vvay, the craft and practise of Sathan, to stay and ouerthrovv good purposes, that euen the godly fathers and Bishoppes, vvanted not their great infirmi­ties, preferring their ovvn priuate trifles, before the vveighty causes of Gods Churche. And the vvisdome, zeale, and humblenes, of his moste Christian Emperour, vvho so litle estemed his ovvn honour, and authority, that he vvold rather seeme to be inferiour, or for the time no more than equal vvith his subiectes, to the ende, he might by his humbling of him selfe, aduance and exalt Gods glory, to the edifiyng and quietnes of his Churche.) The day came (vvhiche vvas the day before the first Session should be in the councel, as So­crates saith) the Bishoppes did not sleape their ovvne matters, but had their billes in a readines, and deliuered them vnto the Emperour. This vi­gilant noursefather vnto Gods Churche, had cared and deuised so diligently for the common cause, as the Bishoppes had done for their priuate qua­relles: and therefore, vvhen he had receiued their Libelles, verye (.86.) The 86. vntruth. He did it religious­ly, not politiqu [...]ly. politiquelye, saieth:The 87. 88 and 89. vntruths. Sozome­nes text in three places fal­sified. Sozom. li. 1. cap. 17. Theod. lib. 1 cap. 7. (bicause he vvoulde irritate none of them for that tyme,) That the day of general iudgement shoulde be a fitte time for these accusations. and Christ the Iudge, then would iudge al men: As for me (.87.) it is not leafull to take vpon me (.8 [...].) the iugement of (.89.) suche Priestes, accused, and ac­cusing one an other. VVhereunto, neuertheles, he added this priuy nippe, to pynche them vvithal. For of al other thinges (saith he) this is least seemely, that Bishoppes shoulde shewe them selues suche, as ought to be iudged of others. And so caused the Libelles to be cast into the fire, giuing them an earnest exhortation to peace and quiet­nesse.

Stapleton.

It is a worlde to see the singular logicke, and depe rea­soning of M. Horne, that can of such slender premisses in­ferre such mighty conclusions. For the Emperour to be the Supreme Gouernour in all matters or causes temporall or spiri­tuall, it appereth most plain (saieth he) to be the practise of the Church by these Bisshops c [...]lled vnto the Nicene Councel. An­swere first M. Horne. How could this possiblye be a pra­ctise of the Churche, that neuer before was vsed in the Churche? Except you wil say, that euen heathen princes may be your Supreme gouernours in al causes Ecclesiasti­cal. You knowe before this Constantine there was neuer Christian Emperour, to whome bisshoppes might put vp their complaintes as to their Supreme gouernour, onelye Philip excepted. Who is neuer read, euer to haue medled with the lest matter or cause Ecclesiasticall, but liued ra­ther like a close Christian, being afearde to displease the Romain Legions, who then were in maner al heathens, and who (as the worlde then wente) bore al the stroke in ele­cting of the Emperour, and in the continuance also of him. Contrarywise,Euseb. lib. 6. cap. 27. that he was subiect to the Bisshops, it appe­reth wel by the doing of Pope Fabian, shutting him out at an Easter tyme, from the number of cōmunicants, because he sticked to confesse his sinnes, as other Christians did. Answere therefore first to this, howe you auouche that for a practise which was or coulde neuer be vsed? Wel lette this goe for an other vntruthe.

Now let vs heare howe ioylely you wil proue, that the 318. Fathers of the Nicene Councel, doe condemne M. Fe­kenhams opinion, which before you promised to doe. The cause is to your seeming, that certain Bisshops accused one [Page 103] the other before the Emperour Constantine. But how can this be a good motiue for you M. Horn, to pronounce him therefore a Supreme Gouernour in all causes temporal and spi­ritual, seing it dothe not appere what those causes were, which the bis [...]hops did put vp vnto him? They might be, and so it is most likely they were, causes temporal. Verily your selfe confesseth, they were priuat quarrels: and so no matter of faith and religiō, (of which can growe no priuat quarrels, but cōmō cōtrouersies) but as it may seme, it was some priuat cōtētiō betwene neighbour ād neighbour (for at that time euery town had bis bisshops, yea many meane Villages also) concerning the limites and boundes of their possessions, or [...]uch like matter, which is a matter plaine temporall. Beside this they were not al at dissention but certaine, and perchaunce very fewe: how is then M. Fe­kenham condemned by 318. Bisshops of Nice? I see you wil play smal game, rather then ye wil sit out. I wil now bring you for M. Fekēham and for the Popes supremacy, no such trieflinge toyes and folishe gheasses: but a substantial au­thour Athanasius him self, that reciteth out of Pope Iulius epistle, that this famous and moste godly synode decreed:Athanas. Apol. 2. that no bisshop should be deposed, onlesse the Pope were first thereof aduertised: and that nothing owght to be determined in Councel, but that he should be thereof made priuye before. But why doe I craue ayde against you of this Councell, seing your own example plainlye destroyeth your imagi­ned Primacy, in that Constantine answereth to these quar­reling bisshops, that it was not lawful for hī to be their Iudge?M. Horne cōuicted by his ovvne example of Cōstā ­tines do­inges. Which sentence of his being so plaine, you more grosslye then truely or politykely would elude, as thowgh Constā ­tin meant no such matter, but politykely spake this because [Page] he would not irritate them, or leaste by priuate quarrels the weighty cause of the faith in hand should be hindred. Such gay gloses that destroy the text, may you by your ex­trauagant Authority make at your pleasure. But the sen­tēce of Sozomene only laied forth, shal both discouer your bastard glose, and open also your vntrue handling of his text. For Constantine refusing to iudge of the bisshoppes complaintes, calling them first (as Ruffinus at large reher­seth) Goddes, Ruffin. lib. 1. c. 2. hist. suae eccle­siast. Sozom. li. 1. cap. 17 and such as ought to iudge ouer him, not to be iud­ged of him, or of any men at al, but of God only, he addeth and saieth as Sozomenus your alleaged Author reporteth. As for me, [...], being a man (which woordes you guilfully left out) it is not lawfull to take vpon me [...], such iudgement not the iudgemēt: as you absolutely but vntruly turn it: For straight he expoūdeth what maner of iudgement it is not lawful for hī to take vpō him: adding immediatly [...] whē priests are parties plaintifs and defendants, not of such Priestes &c. as you,Three vntruthes of M Horn. in translating of one greke sentence. Ruffin. lib. 1. cap. 2. now the third tyme in one sentence, most lewdely and liyengly doe translate it. These woordes therefore of Constantine, thus spoken to the Bisshoppes, were not poli­tikely (as you glose Maister Horne) but religiously and re­uerentlye deuised, as to whome in plaine woordes he said: Deus vos constituit Sacerdotes, & potestatem vobis dedit de nobis quoque iudicandi, & ideo à vobis rectè iudica­mur. Vos autem non potestis ab hominibus iudicari. God hath appointed you Priestes: And hath geuen you power, to iudge ouer vs also: And therefore we are orderly iud­ged of you. But you can not be iudged of men. Here by the waye, Maister Horne: The best, the noblest, and the wysest Emperour that euer Christendome had, confesseth [Page 104] the Bisshoppes his superioures and iudges: Shewe you where euer any wise or good Bisshop so flatly agnised the Emperour his superiour or Iudge in matters of Reli­gion.

Nowe that this facte of Constantine proceded not of policie, but of reuerence: beholde, howe this example was interpreted afterward aboue a thousand yeares past, both of Emperours and of Bisshops.Concil. Chalcedo. Act. 1. Martianus that ver­tuouse Emperour protested openly in the Councell of Chalcedon, that he was present there, after the example of Constantine, not to shew his power, but to confirme his faith. And Saint Gregorie putting Mauritius the Emperoure (who in a chafe had called him foole) in mynde of the due­ty he owed to Gods ministers, rippeth vp to him particu­larlye this verye fact of Constantine, refusing to iudge vpon the bishopes complayntes &c. and addeth in the end as an [...], these woordes.Gregor. li. 4. epist. 31 In qua tamen sententia pie Domine, sibi magis ex humilitate, quàm illis aliquid praestitit ex reuerentia impensa. In which sentence yet (my good Lorde) Constantyne more profited him self by humilitie, then he did the Bishopes, by the reuerence he shewed them.

It was saieth Saint Gregorye, Reuerentia impensa, a re­uerence shewed to the bishopes, that Constantine would not iudge ouer their complaintes: It was politikelye done, saieth. M. Horne. Such a politike prelate hath Winchester diocese of him. Verely of that notable See with such pre­lates lately beautified, and now of this man so contamina­ted, we may say as Cicero saied of Pompey the greate his palace possessed of Anthonie that Infamous Rybalde. O domus antiqua, q̄ dispari Domino dominaris?In Phil. 2. For with the [Page] like sincerity doe you through the whole booke procede, sometyme flatly belying, somtyme nypping their senten­ces,Euseb. lib. 3. De vita Constant. but wel nere continually concealing the circumstan­ces and whole effect of your alleaged Authours, as we shal in the processe see.

M. Horne. The .36. Diuision. Pag. 23. b

The next day after, they assembled at the Emperours palayce, he com­maunded them to goe into the Councel house, to consult of the matter, (the coūcel house vvas vvithin Themperors pallayce, trimly furnished vvith seates, aptly ordred for such purpose, as it vvere in rovves.) They entred in, and vvay­ted vvithout any doings, til the comming of the Emperour, vvhose seat vvas of gold, placed at the first beginning of the rovves: (.90.) The 90. vntruthe in concealing the truth of the story as shal appeare. vvho being entred and placed in his seate, maketh an oration vnto them, declaring the conten­tiōs sprōg vp amōgest them selues, to be the occasion vvherefore he called thē together: and the ende is (saith he) that this disease might be hea­led through my ministery. After this he maketh an earnest exhorta­tion, mouing them to quietnes, forgiuing one an other; for Christ comma­undeth (saith he) that vvho vvil receiue pardon at his hande, shal also for­giue his brethern. After this most graue exhortation to vnity, and concorde, in truth, he geueth them (.91.) The 91. vntruth. Theodo­ret hath no such thing. leaue to consult of the matters in hande, pre­scribeth vnto them a (.92.) The 92. vntruth. The Em­perour prescri­bed no rule to the bis­shops. rule, vvhereby they must measure, trie, and dis­cusse these, and (.93.) The 93. vntruth. The syl­lable, All, foysted in, more then his Author hath. Socr. lib. 1. cap. 8. Theod. lib. 1 cap. 7. al other such disputations, and controuersies, in mat­ters of religion, to vvitte, Sanctissimi spiritus doctrinam praescrip­tam, The doctrine of the most holy spirit before writen. For (saieth he) the bookes of the Euangelistes, and of the Apostles and also the Prophecies of the olde Prophetes, doe euidently teache vs of Gods meaning. VVherefore laying a syde al dis­corde of enemity, let vs take the explications of our questiōs, out of the sayings of the holy Ghost. VVhen the parties vvaxed vvarme in the disputations, and the contention, somvvhat sharpe, then the Emperour, as a vvise moderatour, and ruler, vvoulde discourage none, but myldely caulmed such as he savv ouer hasty vvith milde vvoordes, coolinge their heate: and commended such as reasoned deeply vvith grauity.

Stapleton.

In all this talke is naught els but a heape of vntruthes, ād vaine gheasses, nothing to the principall purpose mate­riall: which will well appeare in a more open declaration of that, which you haue patchedly and obscurely shewed, as it were, a farre of to your Reader, concealing (as your maner is) all that any thing concerneth the Bishops autho­ritie in those matters. First then you tell vs out of Eusebi­us, that Constantine in the Councell of Nice, sate in a seat of golde, placed at the first beginning of the rowes. Euseb. li. 3 cap. 10. de vita Constant. Theodor. li. 1. c. 7. But you leaue out Modica, a small seate, or as Theodoret also calleth it, [...]: sitting in the middest in a low seate: You conceale also that whiche Eusebius your alleaged author in that very place addeth: Non prius in ea sedit, quàm annu [...]ssent Episcopi: He sate not downe before the Bishops had geauen him leaue. For so importeth the word [...]: vsed by Eusebius and Theodoret also. Which declareth very well the Bishops superioritie in the Coun­cell, where matters of faithe were to be treated. Nowe where you adde out of Theodoret, that the Emperoure should geue the Bisshops leaue to consult. &c. Theodoret in the place alleaged hath no such wordes. You imagine, by like, the Bishops had of the Emperoure suche a licence as your English Statutes require. That the Conuocation shall make no Ecclesiasticall lawe without the Kings consent. No, No. Constantine demeaned not him selfe so stately. You haue heard what his behauiour was, and shal heare yet far­der, by your next vntruth, which is this. You say, th'Em­perour prescribed them a rule whereby they shoulde measure, trye, and discusse, these and all other such disputations, &c. But you say it vntruely. For immediately after the wordes by [Page] you alleaged, to shew therby the Emperours rule and pre­scription, Theodoret addeth: These things and such like he vttered, as a naturall louing child, to the Priestes, as to his Fa­thers. If Children prescribe rules to their Fathers when they geue them good counsail, then did also Constantine here prescribe a rule to the Bishops. But if so to say, is more then childish, consider M. Horne how like a babe ye haue reasoned against the authority of such blessed Fathers, the Fathers of that most holy and learned Councell.

Verely S. Ambrose, who knew, I trow, better what was done in the Nicene Councel then M. Horne doth, and is of somewhat more credite too, reporteth farre otherwise of Cōstantines doings, then M. Horne coūterfeiteth. Thus he saith:Ambros. Lib 5. Epist. 32. And I pray you M. Horne, marke his saiyng wel. Si cō ­ferendū de fide, saderdotum debet esse ista collatio: sicut factū est sub Cōstantino Augustae memoriae principe, qui nullas leges antè praemisit, sed liberum ded [...]t iudiciū sacerdotibus. If conferēce must be had of the faith, this cōference ought to be kept of Priests: as it was done in the time of Cōstantine a Prince of noble memory: who (whē cōtrouersy of the faith sprōg vp) did not before prescribe any lawes, but left to the Priestes the free iudgemēt and determination Yet saith M. Horne, that Cōstantine prescribed to the Bisshops, a rule wherby they should measure, trye and discusse the controuersie in hande. Wherin obserue diligently (gentle Reader) that S. Ambrose is direct contrary to M. Horne, not only touching this par­ticular fact of Constantine (the one saiyng tha [...] he prescri­bed before hand no lawes at all, but left to the Bishops the triall of the controuersie free, the other auouching that he prescribed a rule to trie and discusse the matter by) but also touching the whole estate of the question betwene M. [Page 106] Horne and M. Fekenham here. For S. Ambrose wil haue the conference and trial of the faith to appertain to Priests chiefly and onely. For these wordes he spake against the yong Valentinian, who being seduced in his minoritie, as our late Soueraine King Edwarde was, would haue the matter of faith to be tried in Palaice before him and his benche, as matters of faithe are nowe in the Parliamente concluded. Contrarywise M. Horne will haue the su­preme iudgement of matters of faith to rest in the Prince, and all thinges measured by that rule and square that the Prince prescribeth. You see howe the iudgement of the Auncient Fathers, accordeth with the opinion of vpstarte Protestants.

But will you knowe, M. Horne, what Constantine in­tendeth in that his exhortation made to the Bisshoppes? He findeth fault, and worthelye, with suche as were faul­tye for their diuision and dissention in Relligion, and doth referre them to holye Scripture, that dothe euidentlye in­structe vs of Gods minde. But (wherein your liegerde­maine bursteth out) you shufle in of your owne this syl­lable All. a pretye knacke, I promise you, to swete your answeare withall. It is true, that we must measure and discusse our controuersies by Scripture,Traditiōs are to be regarded, vvhere Scripture faileth. and neuer resolue against Scripture: So where there is no plaine Scripture, there the Apostolicall traditions, the decrees or Gene­rall Councelles, the authoritye of the vniuersall Churche make a good plea. And these Nicene Fathers added vnto the common Creede this woorde [...]: expressinge liuely the vnitie of Christes Diuinitie in one substaunce with the Father, though the word appere not in scripture, and though the Arrians would neuer receiue or allowe it. [Page] Eutiches the Archeheretique deniyng that Christ had two natures, was wonte to aske of the Catholiques: In what scripture lye the two natures? To whom Mamas the Ca­tholike Bishop answered, where find you Homousion in the Scripture?Vide Act. 1 Chalced. Concil. pa. 776. col. 1. Well saith Eutiches, in case it be not in the holy scripture, it is foūd in the expositiō of the holy Fathers. Thē replied Mamas: Euē as Homousiō is not foūd in the scripture, but in the Fathers expositiō and interpretatiō: So is it with these wordes two natures of Christ, which wordes are not in Scripture, but in the Fathers. Ye may hereby perceiue, M. Horne, that ye must not sequester and sonder the Scri­pture, from the cōmon allowed exposition of the Fathers: nor geue iudgement in all causes by bare scripture only, as ye woulde make vs beleue, but take the faith and faithfull exposition of the Fathers withal. In like sorte obiected the Eunomians against Gregory Nazianzen for the God­head of the holy Ghost.Gregor. Nazian. lib. 5. De Theolog. [...]? From whence bring you vs foorth this straunge and vnwriten God? But Gregory Nazianzen answereth them, and you withal, M. Horne. [...]. The loue of the letter, is a cloke to them of their wickednesse. Thus you see, M. Horne, how wel Patrisas, and howe like you are to your progenitours and auncetours, auncient heretiques, Arrians, Eutychians, and Eunomians. Is this the grounde, M. Horne, that moued you among other Articles proposed to the fellowes of the new Colledge in Oxforde, to make this one also, vnto the which they shoulde sweare,Art. 1. An. 1566. Angl. 18. Mart. or rather forsweare: that out of holy Scripture all controuersies might sufficientlye be conuin­ced? I wish here, if I speake not to late, to that godly foū ­dation, to the which being (though vnworthy) a member [Page 107] sometime thereof, I ought of duety to wish the best, rather to forsake (as many, God be praised, haue done) the com­fortable benefit of that societie, then by absolute subscri­bing to such a daungerouse Article, a snare in dede against many Articles of our Faith, to fall to the approuing of your heresies, and so to forsake the Catholique societie of all Christendome, and of that Churche wherein our Godlye founder (Bishope Wicame of famous memorie) liued and died. Thus muche by the waye. To returne to you M. Horne, a vehement persequutour of that yong company, I tel you again, to make your maters more apparāt,The Apology hath shifted this syl­lable, Al, into a sentēce of S. Hierōs. ye haue slilye shifted in this prety sillable, All. The like part hath the Author of your Apologie plaied with S. Hierome, turning him to their purpose and yours here against Traditions, say­ing: Omnia ea quae absque testimonio scripturarum, quasi tra­dita ab Apostolis asseruntur, percutiuntur gladio Dei. All things (say they) which without the testimonies of Scrip­tures are holden, as deliuered frō the Apostles, be through­lye smitten doune by the sworde of Gods worde. Where to frame the sentence to his and your minde, ye haue by like authoritie, set in this syllable All, also.

M. Horne. The .37. Diuision. pag. 24. b.Euseb. li. [...] De vita Constāt. Socr. li. 1. cap. 8. Socr. li. 1. cap. 9. Theod. li. 1 ca. 13.

VVhen they had agreed of the chiefe pointes, vvherefore they vvere as­sembled, the Emperour him selfe calleth foorth Acesius a Bisshoppe at Con­stantinople, of the Nouatians religion, and (.94.)The .94. vntruth. For he had but priuate talke vvith him, no open examination. examineth him openlye, touching these Articles, vvherevnto the vvhole Councell had agreed and subscribed. He vvriteth his letters to the Churche at Alexandria, vvhere the controuersie touching the Diuinitie of Christ began, declaringe, that he him self together vvith the Bysshops in the Coūcel, had taken vpon him (.95.)The .95. Vntruthe. For Constantine did not this as the Iudge ouer Doctrine, or as Supreme gouernour, but as desiring aboue measure to serue the church vvith the Bishops▪ as he protesteth in the same sētēce saiīg: [...] vvhich vvordes you nippe of from the middle of the sentence. [Page] the searching foorth of the truthe, and therefore assureth them, that al things vvere diligently examined, to auoid all ambiguitie and doubtfulnes: vvher­fore he exhorteth and vvilleth them all, that no man make any doubte or delaies, but that cherefully they returne againe into the most true vvaye. He vvriteth an other to all Bisshoppes, and people vvhere so euer, vvher­in he commaundeth▪ that no vv [...]itinge of Arius, or monument conteyninge Arius doctrine, be kept openly or secretly, but be burnt vnder paine of death. After that all the matters vvere conclūded, and signed vvith their handes subscription, the Emperour dissolueth the Councell, and licenseth euery one of them to returne home to his ovvne bisshopricke, vvith this exhortation, that they continue in vnitie of faith: that they preserue peace and concorde amongst them selues, that from thence forth they abide no more in contenti­ons:Sozomen. li. 5. c. 25. and last of all, after he had made a long oration vnto them, touching these matters, he commaundeth them, that they make prayer continuallye for him, his children, and the vvhole Empire.

Stapleton.

Socra. li. 1 cap. 10.There is no matter heere greatly to be stayed vppon. The matter of Acesius proueth litle your purpose. Onlesse perchaunce, ye thinke that Constantine examined Acesius of his faith,King Hē ­ries sit­ting vpō Lambert. and heard his cause, as King Henrie did Lam­bert the sacramentaries cause, sitting vpon him as Supreme head, and pronouncing by his Vicegerent Cromwell, final sentence against him. For the whiche sentence M. Foxe wonderfully reueleth with the King, and reuileth him too: which discourse if any man be desirous to see, I remit him to M. Foxes madde Martyrologe.The .553. leafe Socr. lib. 1. cap. 10. Niceph. li. 8. ca. 20 The talke of Constan­tine with Acesius the Nouatian was onely priuate, as both Socrates and Nicephorus doe reporte it. Open exami­nation no Writer mentioneth. It is Maister Hornes vn­truthe.

His Proclamation that no man should kepe Arius books [Page 108] vnder paine of deathe, dothe not iustifie this supremacie by you imagined. This was but an outewarde execution of ciuile punishmente in the assisting of the Nicene De­crees. Nowe, touching that you tell vs, howe Constan­tine licenced the Fathers to departe, if he saied: Gramercy moste reuerend Fathers, for your great paines and trauail, nowe may you in Gods name, resorte to your cures and flocke, God speede you, God prosper your iourney:Theod. li 1. ca 14. And if he bare their charges too, that were poore Bisshoppes, as he did, in case he woulde not suffer them to depart till all matters were throughlye and finallye discussed, What then? What supremacy maketh al this? Or how is this a­ny thing like to the Supremacy now sworen vnto?

M. Horne. The .38. Diuision pag. 24. b.

Arius count [...]feiting a false and a feined confession of beliefe, like an hy­pocrite▪ pretending to the Emperour, that it vvas agreable to the faithe of the Nicene Councel humbly beseching the Emperour, that he would vnit and restore him to the (.96.) The .96. Vntruth. The very vvoordes of Arius falsified. mother Churche, and therefore hauing friends in the Emperours Court (as suche shall neuer vvante fau­tours about the best Princes) vvas brought into his presence, vvhom the Em­peroure him selfe examined diligentlye, and perceiuinge no disagree­ment (as he thought) from the agrement made in Nicene Councell (.97.) The .97. Vntruth. No suche vvordes in Theo­doret, or in any o­ther of the eccle­siasticall Historiās Socr lib. 1 cap. [...]8. absolued and restored him againe, vvhervnto Athanasius, vvho knevv Arius throughly, vvould not agree, and being accused therfore vnto th'Emperour, vvas charged by letters from him, that he should receiue Arius, vvith these threates, that if he vvould not, he vvould (.98.)The 98. Vntruth. No suche thing neither in Socrates nor in Theo­doret, for any mat­ter of A­rius. Theod. li. 1. ca. 27. depose them from his Bis­shoprike, and commit him to an other place. The Arrians heaped vp many and horrible accusations and slaunders vpon Athanasius, vvhervpon the Em­perour doth summon a Councell at Tyre, and sendeth commaundement by his letters [...]o Athanasius, that vvithout all excuse, he should appeare there, for othervvise he should be brought vvhether he vvould or no. He vvriteth to the Coūcel his letters, vvherin he declareth the causes vvhy he called that Coūcel. He shevved vvhat he vvould haue and vvhat they ought to do, ād prescribeth vnto thē the form ād rule wherby thei shuld iudge ād determin in that Synod. [Page] Athanasius appeared, appealed, fled to the Emperour, and declared the in­iuries offered against him in that Councel. The Emperour tooke vpon him the hearing of the cause,Soc. lib. 1. cap. 34. sent his letters to the vvhole Synod, commaunding them vvithout al excuse or delay, to appeare before him in his palaice, and there to shevv hovv vprightly and hovve sincerely they had iudged in their Synod, as I haue shevved (.99.)(.99.) A heape of vntruths as before in the .32. Diuision and third chapter. before. VVherein obserue diligently, that the Emperor taketh vpō hī, and no fault found thervvith, to examine and iudge of the doings of the vvhol Coūcel. Thus far of Cōstantine and his doings, in the executiō of his ministerie, and especially in perfourming that part, vvhich he called his best part, that is his gouernement, and rule, in Ecclesiastical mat­ters, vvherein it is manifest, that by the practise of the Catholique Churche for his time approued and commended by all the Catholique Priests and Bi­shops, in the Nicene Councell, the supreme gouernment, authority, and rule, in (,100.) The .100. vntruth. Facing ād impudēt, generally auouched but not in one par­ticular proued. all maner causes both Ecclesiasticall and Temporall, vvere clai­med and exercised by the Emperour, as to vvhom of right, suche like povver and authority, belonged and appertained.

Stapleton.

Beholde nowe an other Argument of M. Hornes ima­gined Supremacie. Arius hypocriticallye dissemblinge his heresie, and pretending his faithe to be agreeable to the Nicene faith, humbly besecheth Constantine, to vnite and restore him to the Mother Churche. And so he was absolued and restored. Theodor. li. 1. c. 14. Truely here had ye hitte M. Feckenhā home in dede, had there bene any such thing in your Authour, as in dede, there is not, nor can be, onlesse Constantine had bene also a Priest. In dede he released him from exile, be­ing before circumuented by a crafty Epistle of his and Eu­zoius together,Ruff. lib. 1. cap. 11. Tripart. li. 3. ca. 6. which in wordes semed to agree with the Nicene Councell, but in meaning farre disagreed. Yf ye call this, vniting to the Mother Church, your Mother hath a faire Childe, and a cunning Clercke of you: And yet were ye much more cunning, if ye could finde any such disordi­nate [Page 109] and folish false phrases in any mans penne sauing your owne. Neither can I tell in the worlde, where to find, or where ye found this peuish hereticall fond phrase, onlesse it were of Arius him selfe, of whome ye seme to take it. And yet durst not he, as starke an heretik as he was,Hist. trip. lib. 3. ca. 6 Sozomen. li 2. c. 27. to hasard so farre as ye haue done. In deede in his craftie and subtile letter, so ambitiously and coulourably penned, that Constantine supposed, it agreed very well with the very definition of the Nicene Councell, in the ende thereof,M. Horn hath no Author but Arius to helpe him. M. Horn vresteth euē Arius vvords. he made sute vnto Constantine to be receiued againe into the Catholique Cōmunion, in these wordes, speaking for him selfe and Euzoius his mate: Quapropter rogamus vntri nos per pacificam & Dei cultricem pietatem tuam matri nostrae Ec­clesiae iubeatis. Wherefore we beseche your honour being a peaceable Prince, and a true worshipper of God to com­maund that we may be vnited to our Mother the Church. Ye see, good Reader, if M. Horne hath any Author, who,Sozom. lib. 2. c 27 and of how good credite he is: euen no better then Arius him selfe. And yet in this pointe is M. Horne worse then he,It is pro­ued by Constan­tine him­selfe that it vvas the bis­shops part and not his to restore Arius ād other he­retiques to the Churche. and corrupteth and wresteth not onely the Catholique writers, but Arius wordes too. For Arius doth not desire Constantine to restore him, as M. Horne faineth, but to geue out his commaundemente; that he might be restored: and by whome was that, M. Horne, but by the Bishoppes? And this thing Constantine him selfe well vnderstode, and ther­fore though glad to see them (as he thought) to haue chan­ged their minde, yet (not presuming (as Sozomen writeth) to receiue them into the Communion of the Churche, before the iudgement and allowance of mete men according to the Lawe of the Church [...]) he sent them to the Bishops assembled then (for an other matter) in Councell at Hierusalem, that they [Page] shuld examine his and his cōpanions faith: Et clementem su­per eis sententiam proferrent: Trip. lib. 3. cap. 6. Sozo. vbi supra. Ruff. li. 1. eccles. suae hist. ca. 11. Trip & Sozo. vbi supra. Trip li. 3. cap. 10 Ruff. li. 1. cap. 11. Theodore. li. 1. ca. 14. Trip. li. 3. ca. 10. Socrates li. 1. ca. 38. and that they shoulde geue a merciful iudgement vpon them, yf they did truely repent. Ruffine also writeth agreable vnto this adding, so that A­lexander the Bisshop did therto assente. Eusebius and other dissembling Catholik bisshops, which were in hart Arians stil (as it did afterward appere) forthwith (in the Councel) receiued Arius into their communion. But when he came to Alexandria, he could not ther be receiued. The Catho­like bisshop Alexander of Alexandria yet liuing, would not admit him. Then remayning there a long tyme as excom­municated he desired (saieth Theodoret) to be by some mea­nes restored again, and beganne to counterfeite the Catholike. But when Alexander his bisshop and Athanasius his suc­cessor could not be so circumuented, he attempted ones again the Emperours fauour. And so by the means of Euse­bius of Nicomedia an Arriā bisshop in hart, he was brought to the Courte at Constantinople, and to the Emperours speach, the secōd time after his banishmēt. Where the Em­perour desirous to trie him, asked Arrius, if he agreed with the Nicene Councel, vpon which request he offred to the Emperoure a supplication and a foorme of the Catholike confessiō, pretending to sweare to that, but deceauing the prince with a contrary faith in his bosome, and swearing to the faith in his bosome. By these means th'Emperour di­missed him And therevpō the factiō of Eusebius wēt forth­with [...], with their accustomed violēce (saith Theodoret) to Alexāder the B. of Cōstantinople, Theodor. lib. 1. cap. 24. Socrat. li. 2. cap. 29. and required him to receiue him into Cōmunion. The Bishop vtterly refu­sed to do it notwithstāding the Courtiours request or Prin­ces pleasure: because (saith Alexāder) being by a whole Coūcell [Page 110] cōdemned, he cā not be restored. The factiō of Eusebiꝰ thret­ned Alexāder,Theodor. vt supra. Ruff. li 1. eccles. hist. ca. 13. [...]ripart. li. 3. cap. 10. Socrat. li. 1. cap. 38. that if he would not by faire meanes restore him, they would force him therto by foule meanes, saiyng: As against your wil we haue made him come to the Emperours speach, so to morow against your wil, we wil make you to receiue him into your Church. To this point therfore, the mater was now brought, that Eusebius with his faction conducted by force Arius to the Cathedrall Churche at Constantinople there by violēce to Church him: But lo, as they were going with al their heretical band to the church to play this part, God shewed his mighty hād, euen as he did vpō the Egyp­tians in the read sea, specified in the old Testamēt, or vpon Iudas in the new. For in the way Arius was driuē to seke a place to ease nature:The notable death of Arius. where sodainly he auoided with his excrementes his very bowels and entrails: ād in that filthy place gaue ouer his foule filthy stinking soule. A mete car­pet for such a squier. And this is, loe, the mother Churche whervnto Arius was restored and vnited. For other resti­tution by the true Catholike Bishops, whose office it was as ye haue heard, to restore him, had he none. And nowe with this miserable and wretched ende of this Archehere­tike Arius, wil I also end the doīgs of Cōstantine the great, wherin I haue so farre forth proceeded, as M. Horne hath ministred occasion. As for the Councel of Tyrus, whereof here againe mētion is reiterated, I haue spoken both in this boke, ād also against M. Iewel, as is before noted. And now may I boldly vnfold your cōclusion, M. Horne, where you say that the Nicen bisshops agnised this kind of regimēt in the great Cōstantine ▪ and say quite cōtrary, they agnised no suche regimēt which also I haue proued against you euē by your own examples of Cōstantine, and the Nicen Fathers, espe­cially of Athanasius, present at the said Councell.

M. Horne. The .39. Diuision. pag. 25. b.

Constantines sonnes, claimed and toke vpō them, the same authority, that their Fathers had done before them: and as Zozomen (.101.) The .101. Vntruth. Sozomē belyed. They made la­vves a­gainst the Idolaters but not lavves ec­clesiasti­call. Theod. li. 2. cap. 1. reporteth of them, did not only vpholde and mainteine, the ordinaunces made by their father Constantine, in Church matters, but did also make nevv of their ovvne as occasion serued, and the necessitie of the time required.

Constantinus, after the death of his father, restored Athanasius (vvhom his father had (.102.) deposed) to his bishoprike againe, vvriting honourable and louing letters to the Churche of Alexandria, for his restitution.

Constantius deposed Liberius, the Bisshoppe of Rome, for that he vvoulde not consent to the condemnation of Athanasius, in vvhose place Foelix vvas chosen, vvhom also the Emperour deposed for the like cause, and restored a­gain Liberius vnto his bisshoprik, vvho being moued vvith th' Emperors kind­nes (as som vvrite) or rather being ouercome vvith ambition (.103.) The .103. Vntruth. Liberius neuer be­came an Arrian. Socr. li. 2. ca. 36.37. becam an Arrian.The .202. Vntruth. For Con­stantine the great did not depose Athana­sius. Sabell. Platin. This Emperour deposed diuers bisshops, appointing other in their places. He called a Synod at Millayn, as Socrates vvitnesseth, saiyng: The Emperour commaunded by his Edict, that there shoulde be a Synod holden at Millayn. There came to this Councell aboue .300. Bishoppes out of the VVest Countries. After this, he minded to call a gene­rall Councell of all the East and VVest Bysshops to one place, vvhich coulde not conueniently be brought to passe, by reason of the greate distaunce of the places, and therefore he commaunded the Councell to be kept in tvvo places, at Ariminum in Italie, and at Nicomedia in Bythinia.

Stapleton.

YF Constantines Sonnes claimed the same authoritie that their Father had in causes Ecclesiasticall, then were they no supreame Iudges, no more then their Father was, who was none as I haue said and shewed. Yet saith M. Horne, They not only mainteined their Fathers or­dinaunces in Church matters, but also made new of their owne, But al this is but a loud and a lewd lye. Which (to be short) [Page 111] shal sone appeare in the wordes of Zozomene (M. Hornes Author) who in the boke ād chapter quoted by M. Horne writeth thus:Li. 3. c. 17. The Princes also (he meaneth Constantines Sonnes) concurred to to the encrease of these things (he spea­keth of encreasing the Christian faith) [...]. shewing their good affection to the Churches no lesse then their Father: and ho­nouring the Clergy, their seruaunts, and their domesticals, with singular promotions and immunites. Both confirming their Fa­thers lawes, and making also of their owne, against such as went about to sacrifice, to worship idols, or by any other meanes fell to the Grekes or Heathens superstitions. Lo, M. Horne, heare what your Author saith. As before Cōstantine promulged lawes against Idolatrie, and honored the Church of Christ, and the ministers thereof, so did his Sonnes after him. As for Church matters, as Constantine the Father, made no lawes or decrees therto apertaining, no more did his Sōnes. It is but your impudent vntruth.Three vntruthes of M Horns in fovver lines. Tripart. lib. 3. ca. 2. Now touching the first and eldest sonne of Constantine, called also Constantine, we haue here of him as many lies as lines. First in that M. Horne saith, that his Father deposed Athanasius, who was deposed by the Bishops, and not by Constantine, for he ba­nished him, but depose him, he neither did, nor could. The second, that this Constantine restored him to his bishoprick againe: wherein he belyeth (and so maketh the third lye) his Author Theodoret,Theod. lib. 2. ca. 1. M. Horne now. God be thāked hath foūd his suprē head in cōstātius the Arriā Emperor who speaketh of none other restitution, but that he released him from exile and banishmente: which ye wote is no Bishoply, but a Princely function and office. But now we may be of good comforte. For hauing boren out this brunt, I trust we shal shift wel inough for all the residue. For now, lo, we haue an Emperour, that as far as I can see, tooke vppon him in dede, in many things M. [Page] Hornes supremacy. Which may be proued by Athanasius, Hosiꝰ, Hilarius, ād Leōtius Bisshops of the very same time: But praise be to God,Athanasi­us ad soli­tartam vi­tam agen­tes, vbi & literae Ho­sij recitan­tur ad Cō ­stantium. Hilarius in lib. con­tra Con­stantium. VVhat li­king the catholiks thē liuing had of yt. VVhat Hosius sayde to him for this supremacy. Vide Sui­dam in Leontio. VVhat Leontius sayde to him for this supremacy. that the same men (al notable lightes of the Catholike Church) which declared that he vsed this authority, do withal declare their great misliking thereof: ād make him (so [...] of thē) a plain forerūner of Antichrist: as I haue before declared out of Athanasius. Meddle not Sir Em­perour (saith Hosius) with maters of the Church, neither com­maūd vs in such things, but rather learne them at our handes: God hath betakē and cōmitted to thée, th' Empire, ād to vs, hath, he cōmitted Church matters. And Leontius B. of Tripolis, at what time this Constantius being present at a Synod of Bis­shops was very busy in talke to set forth certain cōstitutiōs, saith boldly vnto him: Syr Imaruail with my self why that ye leauing your own, busy your self with other mēs affaires: the commō welth and warlik maters are cōmitted to your charge: the which your charge you forslow, sitting amōg the Bis [...]hops ād m [...] kīg lawes cōcernīg maters Ecclesiastical, wherin ye haue nothīg to do. And if this mā deposed Bishops, as ye say, then haue ye foūd a fair welfauored presidēt to groūd your primacy vpō. How wel fauored a prēsidēt he is, ād how worthy to be fo­lowed, if ye list to see, M. Horn, ye may learn of M. Nowel who saw farder in this mater a great deale, then your pre­latship. He hath laid forth no lesse then .13. Articles against this your supreme gouernour (M. Horne) to proue that he was for his busy gouernmēt in dede a very Antichrist. Thus you iarre ādiūble againe one agaīst an other, and can neuer agree in your tales. As for that he called the Coūcel at Ari­minū, ād els where, that induceth no such primacy as I haue and shal better herafter declare, namely whē I com to your own author the Card.Novvel fol. 114. Cusanꝰ: In the meāsesō, ye haue mi­nistred to me a good mater to iustify the Popes primacy. For [Page 112] behold Damasus broke ād disanulled al that was don at Ari­minū (saith Theodoret) because his consent wāted thereto.

And here that Councel which the Emperour by his su­preme gouernmēt (as M. Horn fansieth) sōmoned,Theod. li. 2. cap. 22. the Pope as a Superiour gouernour to this supreme gouernour, quite disanulled, which made S. Ambrose to say:Ambros. li 5. ep. 32. Meritò Conciliū illud exhorreo. I do for good cause abhorre that Councell. For which cause also, it is to this day of no authoritie at all. Thus al M. Horns exāples run roūdly against hī, ād quite o­uerturne his purpose. For why? How can possiblie a false cause be truly defended? That you say, Liberius the Pope of Rome became an Arriā is a slaūderous Vntruth. It is your brethrēs cōmō obiectiō, ād hath so oft bē soluted by the Catholiks, that your part had bē now (bearīg your self for a lerned Prelate) not to resume such rusty reasons, but to replie against the Catholiks answeres ād solutiōs, if ye were able. The worste that euer Liberius did (to make any suspitiō in him) is, that after banishmēt he was restored,Athanas. ad solit. vitā agēt. Tripart. li. 5. ca. 17 and yelded to Cōstātius. But Athanasius saith expresly, that the same his yelding was not to the Arriā heresy, but to the deposing of him frō his Bisshoprik. And that was al that the Emperor re­quired of Liberius, as it maye appeare by the learned and stout cōmunicatiō had betwen this Liberius ād the Empe­ror in Rome, as Theodoret at large recordeth. And to this he was driuē by force of tormtēs, saith Athanasius. Nowe for hī to become an Arriā is volūtarily to teache, to beleue, or to allow the Arriā heresie. Are thei al, trow you, Caluinists in Englād which for fear of displeasure, of banishmente, or of losse of goods, do practise the order of the Caluinists sup­per or Communion? As they are no right Catholiques, so are they not proprely Caluinistes or Heretiques. They [Page] are neither hotte nor colde. God will therefore (but if they repent) spue them out of his mouth. As for Liberius, S. epist. 74Basil, and heres. 75Epiphanius, S.epist. 165Augustine,lib. 2.Optatus, ād S.lib. 3. de Virgin.Am­brose doe speake honourably and reuerentlye of him, and doe reken him among the new of the Romaine Bishoppes: which they would neuer haue done, if (as M Horne saith) he had bene, become an Arrian, It semeth M. Horne is of alliaunce with M. Iewel. So hard it is for him to tel a true tale.Theod l. 4 cap 5.6.7. Prīces by Synodes (104) doe ordeine and con­demne Bisshops. Nowe to the next.

M. Horne. The .40. Diuision. Pag. 26. a.

Valentinianus the Emperour, after the death of Auxentius, an Ar­rian bisshop of Millaine, calleth a Synod of bisshops at Millayn to consult a­bout the ordering of a nevv bisshop. He prescribeth vnto them in a graue or a­tion, in vvhat maner a man qualified ought to be, vvho should take vppon him the office of a bisshop.The .104. Vntruth. A marginal note of that vvhich cā not be founde in the Text. They passe to the election, the people vvere di­uided, till at the last they all cry vvith one consent, to haue Ambrose, vvhom although he did refuse, the Emperour commaunded to be baptized, and to be cōsecrate bisshop. He called an other Synod in Illirico, to apeace the dissentiōs in Asia and Phrigia, about certaine necessary Articles of the Christian faith: and did not only confirme the true faith by his (.105.) The .105. Vntruth. Ioyned vvith a greate follye. royall assent, but made also many godly and sharpe Lavves, as vvell for the maintenaunce of the truth in doctrine, as also (.106.) The .106. Vntruth. Boldly a­uouched, but no vvaye proued. touchinge manye other causes, or matters Ecclesiasticall.

Stapleton.

VAlentinian the Emperour commeth in good time. I meane, not to proue your Primacy, M. Horne, but quite to ouerthrowe the same. For this is he that made an expresse Lawe, that in Ecclesiastical matters, only Ecclesiasticall men should iudge. S. Ambrose witnesseth it [Page 113] expressely in an epistle he wrote to younge Valentinian, this mans sonne. The forme of the law was this. In causa fi­dei vel ecclesiastici alicutus ordinis eum iudicare debere, Ambr. lib. 5. epist. 32 qui nec munere impar sit, nec iure dissimilis. Haec enim verba re­scripti sunt, Hoc est sacerdotes de sacerdotibus voluit iudicare. That in the cause of faith, or of any ecclesiastical order, he should iudge, that was neither by office vnequall, neither in right vnlike. Those are the words of the Rescript. That is, he wil haue Priestes to iudge ouer Priestes. Thus S. Am­brose plainely and expressely in one sentence quyte ouer­turneth al M. Hornes supremacy.

Yea so farre was this Emperour from al gouernment ouer Priestes in matters ecclesiastical, that euen in matters ciuil or temporal, he woulde not suffer priestes to be cal­led to the ciuil court. For thus it foloweth immediatlye in S. Ambrose. Quinetiam si aliâs quoque argueretur episco­pus, & morum esset examinanda causa, Ibidem. etiam hanc voluit ad episcopale iudicium pertinere. Yea farder, if a bisshop were o­therwise accused, and some matter of behauyour or out­warde demeanor were to be examined, that matter also he would to belong to the iudgement of Bisshops. Beholde, gentle Reader, what a supreme gouernor in al causes both spiritual and temporal ouer priests and Bisshops M. Horne hath brought forth. Verily such a one, as in very ciuil causes refuseth gouernment ouer them.

But this is he that comm [...]unded Ambrose to be consecra­ted bisshop of Millayn [...] (saieth M. Horne) and in that election prescribed to the bisshops in a graue oration, what a qualified man a bisshop ought to be &c. What then M. Horne? was he therefore supreme gouernour in al causes ecclesiastical? Yea or in this very cause was he, thinke you, the supreme [Page] gouernour? If you had tolde vs some parte of that graue oration, somewhat therein perhaps would haue appered either for your purpose, or against it. Now, a graue oratiō he made, you say, but what that graue talke was, or wherein it cōsisted, you tel vs not. Verily a graue oratiō it was in dede, ād such as with the grauity thereof, vtterly ouerbeareth the light presumption of your surmised supremacy. For this a­mōg other thīgs he saied to those bisshops grauely in dede. [...] &c.Theod. lib. 4. c. 5. Such a mā therefore do you place in this bis­shoply throne, that we also which direct the Empire, may glad­ly submitte oure heads to him, and reuerence (as a medicinable remedy) the rebukes that he shall make ouer vs: for men we are, and must nedes falle somtyme. So, M. Horne, woulde this Emperour haue a bisshop qualified (and so was in dede this Ambrose then chosen passingly qualified) that he shoulde tel and admonish boldely the Prince of his faultes, and the Prince should as gladly and willingly obey him, yea and submit his head vnto hī, not be the supreme Head ouer hī: as you most miserable clawbackes (vnworthy of al priestly preeminēce) would force modest prīces vnto. This was the graue lessō he gaue to the bisshops (as Constantin before to the Fathers of Nice) [...]: as a natural louing child, Theod. li. 1. cap. 7. [...], to the Priestes as to his Fathers: not to them as his seruauntes or subiectes in that respecte.

You say farder (but you say vntruly, to be alwaies like your selfe) that this Emperour confirmed the true faith (de­creed in a Synod in Illyrico) by his royal assent. As though your Reader shoulde straight conceyue, that as the Quenes Maiesty confirmeth the Actes of parliament with her highnes royall assent, and is therefore in dede the Su­preme and vndoubted Head ouer the whole parliament, so [Page 114] this Emperour was ouer that Synod. But Theodoretus (your Author alleaged) saieth no such thīg. Only he saieth. [...].Theod. lib. 4. cap. 7. Those thīgs that had ben decreed and established by the Bisshoppes, he sent abrode to those that doubted thereof. Other confirmatiō then this, is not in your Author or any otherwhere mētioned. And this was plain ministerial execution of the decrees, no royall confirmatiō of them.

M. Horne. The 41. Diuision. Pag. 26. a.

Theodosius, vvas nothing inferiour to Constantine the great, neither in zeale, care, or furtherance, of Christes Religiō. He bent his vvhole povver, and authoritie, to the vtter ouerthrovve of superstition, and false Religion, somevvhat crept in againe, in the times of Iulianus, and Valēs, the vvic­ked Emperours. And for the sure continuance of Religion refourmed, he made many godly Lavves, he defended the (.107) The 107. vntruth. Flauianus in that matter betvvene the Em­perour ād the bis­shops of the vvest proued a periured person. godly bishop of Antioche Fla­uianus, against the bishop of Rome, and other bishoppes of the VVeste, vvho did (.108.) The 108. vntruthe mere slaū derous. falsely accuse him of many crymes: and at the lēgthe, by his care­ful endeuour in Churche matters, and his (.109.) The 109. vntruth. There ap­peared no such Su­premacy ouer Churche matters in Theo­sius. Supreme authoritie there­in, this moste faytful Emperour, sayeth Theodoretus, sette peace and qui­etnes amongest the Bishoppes, and in the Churches. He called a conuocation of the Bishops, to the ende that by common consent, al should agree in vnytie of doctrine confessed by the Nicen councel, to reconcile the Macedonians vn­to the catholique Churche, and to electe and order a Byshop in the sea of Cō ­stantinople, vvhiche vvas than vacant. VVhen the tvvoo fyrste pointes could not be brought to passe, as the Emperour vvished, they vvent in hande vvith the third, to consult amongest them selues touching a fitte Bisshop for Con­stantinople. The Emperour, to vvhose iudgement many of the Synode con­sented, thought Gregorie of Nazianzene, moste fitte to be Bisshop: but he did (.111.) The 111. vntruthe, For he vvas for a time the bisshop there, as shal appeare. vtterly refuse that that charge.The 110. vntruthe. Al this vvas but one Councel, though they are tolde (to make a shevv of Supremacy in themperour) as if they vvere .3. seueral Councels.

[Page]Than the Emperour commaundeth them, to make diligēt inquisitiō for some godly man,Sozom. li. 7 c. 6.7.8 that might be appointed to that rovvme. But vvhen the Bisshops could not agree, vppon any one, the Emperour commaundeth them to bring to him the names of al such, as euery one of them thought moste apt to be Bisshop, vvriten in a paper together. He reserued to him self (saith Sozome­nus) to choose vvhome he liked best. VVhen he had redde ouer once or tvvyse, the sedule of names, vvhich vvas brought vnto him, after good deliberation had vvith him self, he chose Nectarius although as yet he vvas not christened: and the Bisshops maruailing at his iudgemēt in the choise, (.112.) The 112. vntruth. The bis­shoppes might (if they had listed) most lawfully haue remoued him. could not remoue him. And so vvas Nectarius baptized, and made bisshop of Constā ­tinople: vvho proued so godly a bisshop, that all men deemed this election to be made by Themperour, not vvithout some miraculous inspiration of the ho­ly ghost. This Emperour perceiuing, the Church had ben long tyme molested, and dravvē into partes by the Arianisme, and like to be more greuously torne in sonder vvith the heresy of Macedonius, a B. of Cōstātinople, and knovving that his supreme gouernmēt, and empire, vvas geuē him of God to main­teine the common peace of the Church, and confirmation of the true faith, summoneth a Synode at Constantinople, in the thirde yeere of his reigne (vvhich is the second great and general councel of the fovver notable and famous oecumenical councels) and vvhen al the bisshops vvhome he had cited, vvere assembled, he cometh into the councell house amongest them, he made vnto them a graue exhortation, to consulte diligently, like graue Fathers of the matters propoūded vnto them. The Macedonians depart out of the Cytie, the Catholike Fathers agree, conclude a trueth, and send the canons of their conclusion to the Emperour (.113.) The 113. vntruth. For not to be so cōfirmed as M [...]ior. fancieth. That is, by the vvaye of Supreme gouerne­ment &c. to be confirmed, vvriting vnto him in these vvords: The holy counsaile of bisshops assembled at Con­stātinople to Theodosius Emperour, the most reuerent obser­uer of Godlines, Religion, and loue towardes God: VVe geue God thankes, who hath appointed your Emperial gouernmēt for the common tranquility of his Churches, and to establishe the sounde faith. Sithe the tyme of our assembly at Constanti­nople by your godly commaundement, we haue renewed cō ­corde amongest our selues, and haue prescribed certaine Ca­nōs or rules, which we haue annexed vnto this our writing: we beseche therefore your clemency to commaunde the De­cree [Page 115] of the Counsaile to be stablished by the letters of your holines, and that ye wil confirme it, and as you haue honou­red the Church by the letters wherewith you called vs toge­ther: euen so, that you wil strengthen also the final conclusion of the Decrees with your own sentence and seale.

After this he calleth an other (.114.) The 114. vntruth. This vvas no other, nor no Councel at al. Councel of bisshops to Constantino­ple of vvhat Religion so euer,Sozom. li. 5. cap. 10. thinking that if they might assemble together in his presence, and before him conferre touching the matters of Religion, vvherein they disagreed, that they might be reconciled, and brought to vnity of Faith. He consulteth vvith Nectarius, and sitteth dovvn in the Coun­cel house amongest them al, and examineth those that vvere in Heresie, in such sort, that the Heretikes vvere not onely asionied at his questions, but also beganne to fal out amongest themselues, some liking, some misliking the Emperours purpose▪ This done, he commaundeth eche sect,The 115. vntruthe in reaso­ning. For al this proueth no vvhit any spiri­tual Su­premacy in Theo­dosius, to declare their faieth in vvritinge, and to bringe it vnto him: he appointeth to them a daye, vvhereat they came as the Emperoure commaunded, and deliuered vnto him the fourmes of their faieth in vvritinge: vvhen the Emperoure had the sedules in his handes, he maketh an earneste praier vnto God, for the assistāce of his holy spirite, that he may discern the truth, and iudge right­ly. And after he had redde them al, he condemneth the heresies of the Arians and Eunomians, renting their sedules in sundre, and alovveth only, and con­firmeth the faith of the Homousians, and so the Heretiks departed ashamed and dasht out of countenance.

Stapleton.

THis Theodosius had no greater care to further true religiō, then ye haue to slāder and hinder it:A heap of lies ga­thered together in the one story of Theo­sius. and that by notable lying, as it will, al other things set a parte appere, by the heape of lyes, that in this story of this one Emperour, ye gather here together. And first that ye call Flauian the godly bisshop of Antioche: For albeit, he stode very stowtly in the defence of the Catholike faith and suf­fred [Page] much for it, yet in that respecte for the which, he is here by you alleaged, he was not godly. As one that came to his bisshoprike, againste the canons and contrarye to 1 the othe taken, that he woulde neuer take vppon him to be bisshop of Antioche, Paulinus lyuing: and ministring by this meanes an occasiō of a greate schisme to the Church, which continued many yeares. And for this cause the A­rabians, the Cyprians, the Aegiptians with Theophilus Pa­triarche of Alexandria, and the west Churche, with Pope Damasus,Socra. lib. 5. cap. 15. Theo. li. 5 cap. 23. Sozo. li. 7. cap. 11. Vide Amb. epist. 78. tripart. li. 9. cap. 26. & 44. Siricius, and Anastasius, would not receiue hī in­to their cōmuniō. Neither could he be setled quietly, ād re­ceiued as Bisshop, vntil he had recōciled hīself to the Pope, and that his fault was by him forgeuē. For the which pur­pose he sente to Rome a solēpne ambassade: And so it appereth, that the .2. lyne after ye adioyne a freshe lie, that the bisshop of Rome did falsly accuse him of many crimes, who layde to him, no lesse crimes, then al the world did beside, which was periury, and schisme. Then as though ye would droppe lies, or lie for the whetstone, ye adde that by his su­preame 2 authority he set peace and quietnes in the Church 3 for this matter, shufflīg in by your supreame lyīg authority these words supreame authority, Theod. lib. 5. cap. 23. The popes primacy proued euen by M. Hornes ovvne storye. Reconci­liation to the pope▪ which neither your author Theodoretus hath, nor any other: yea directly contrary to the declaratiō of Theodoretus, who in the verye chapter by you alleaged reciteth the ambassade I speake of, which is a good argumēt of the Popes Supremacy: and may be ad­ded to other exāples of M. Doctor Hardings, and of myne in my Return &c. agaīst M. Iewel in the matter of recōci­liatiō. For as fauorable as themperour was to him, and for al the Emperours supremacy: the Emperour himself com­maūded hī to go to Rome, to be recōciled, he being one of [Page 116] the foure patriarches. And Flauianus was fayn also, to desire Theophilus bisshop of Alexandria to sende some body to Pope Damasus, to pacifie ād mollifie his anger, ād to pardō hī: who sent Isidorus for that purpose. And as I haue said, Flauianus hīself afterward sent Acatius and others his am­bassadours. Which Acatius pacified the schismes that had cōtinued .17. yeres, and restored, as your own author Theo­doretꝰ saith, peace to the Church, pacē (saith he) Ecclesiis re­stituit. Which words though Theodoretus, doth speake of 4 thēperor Theodo▪ yet he speaketh the like of Acatiꝰ which ye guilefully apply to Theodosiꝰ ōly, ād as falsely conclude therof, that Theodosiꝰ therfore should be supreme head of the Church. For so by that reason Acatiꝰ should also be su­preme head of the Church. Now foloweth M. Horns nar­ratiō of certain coūcels holdē vnder this Theodosiꝰ, so disorderly, so cōfusely, so vnperfectly, and so lyingly hādled, as a mā may wel wōder at it. He maketh of two coūcels kepte at Cōstātinople three: wheras the .1. ād .2. is al one (beīg the 5 secōd famouse general coūcel) ād properly to cal a coūcell the third is none, but rather a conference or talke. The first Coūcel, which he telleth vs of, was called (he saith) to electe 6 ād order a bisshop in the sea of Cōstantinople. Socra lib 5. cap. 6. Theod. lib. 5. cap. 8. Gre. Niss. in vita Greg. Na­zianzen. Nicep. lib. 12. cap. 11. Which (in case 7 he cā proue thē distincted Councels) was don in the Coū ­cel general, and in the secōde as he placeth it ād not in the first. As also the electiō ād ordinatiō of Nectariꝰ. He saieth that Gregory Naziāzene was neuer bisshop of Cōstantino­ple, but did vtterly refuse it. Whereas after he had taught there .12. yeares, to the great edifying of the Catholikes against the Arians, not enioyinge the name of a Bisshop all this while, he was at the lengthe, sette in his bisshoply see, by the worthy Meletius bisshop of Antioche, and by the whole nōber of the bisshops assēbled at the general cūcell. [Page] Though in dede he did not longe enioye it, but voluntari­ly, and much against this good Emperours mynde, gaue it ouer, to auoyde a schisme, that grewe vppon his election. For whome Nectarius (that M. Horne speaketh of) was chosen,Sozom. li. 7. cap. 8. [...]. Theod. lib. 5. cap. 9. [...]. being at that tyme vnbaptized. And so chosen by the Emperour, as M. Horne saieth, that the Bisshops though they meruailed at the Emperours iudgement, yet they coulde not remoue him. Wherein ye may note two vntruthes, the one that M. Horne woulde gather Theodosius suprema­cy by this electiō. Of the which electiō or rather naminge (for the Emperour only pricked him) I haue alredy answe­red in my Returne against M. Iewel, and said there more at large. And the bisshoppes, with common consent of the whole Synod, doe pronounce him and creat him bisshop, as also intheir letters to Pope Damasus they professe. The other that the Bisshops could not remoue him. Yes M. Horn that they might,Can. apos. 79. Can. Nic. [...]. La [...]d can. 3. Aurel 2. can. 1. 1. Tim. 3. aswel by the Apostolical, the Nicene, and other canons of the Churche, as by the very plaine holye scripture, and by S. Paule by expresse wordes forbidding it, for that he was Neophytus. Suerly of you that would seame to be so zelouse a keper of the sincere worde of God, and so wel a scriptured man, this is nothing scripturelye spo­ken: And therefore this your sayinge muste needes make vppe the heape. Yea and therefore they might lawfullye haue infringed and annichilated this election: sauing that, they bore with this good graciouse Emperour, that ten­dred Christes Church and faith so tenderlye, euen as Mel­chiades before rehearsed bore with the good Constantin.

Here may we now adde this also to the heape, that ye woulde inferre this Soueraynety in Theodosius, because the Fathers of this general Councel desired him to con­firme [Page 117] their decrees and canons. Which is a mighty great copiouse argumente with you throughout your booke, all in fewe words easie to be answered and auoyded. For this kind of confirmation is not, nor euer was required,VVhye and to what end the Em­perours confirme the lawes of the Churche. as though their ordinaunces were voyde and frustrate with­out it: as al that ye now doe, haue don, or shal doe in your synodes and conuocations without the ratification of the Quenes Maiesty. Which thīg for decrees of the Churche, ye doe not, ye haue not, nor euer shal be able to proue. But to this ende, were the Emperours required to confirme Councels that the willing and towarde people might haue the better lyking in them, and be the more allured careful­ly and exactly to obserue them, vpon the good lyking of their prince: And withal that the frowarde and malignāte people, that make no great accompte of the censures of the Churche, because yt doth not presently touche the bo­dy, or any temporal losse, might for feare of ciuil and tem­porall punishement, be brought the soner to keepe and ob­serue thē. And this litle short, but so true an answere, as ye shal neuer with al your cūning honestly shift it of, may suf­fice to euacuate and emptye a great part of your boke res­ting in this point.

But to shew in this place, ones for al,Hovve Empe­rors haue and may deale in Generall Coūcels. how emperors haue dealed ād may deale in General Coūcels, either for calling them, or for confirming them, or for their demeanour in them, I wil put certayne points or Articles, and note there­by what the practise of the Churche hath bene in this be­halfe: to thentent that the Reader maye knowe, what it is that we defende, and what had bene your part to haue proued, least walking alwaies in generalities, we spende words without fruit, and bring the cause to no certaine is­sew. [Page] And this I professe to take of one of your own special authors M. Horne, the Cardinal of Cusa, out of whō you alleage afterwarde a longe processe,Horne fo. 85. col. 1. c. as one that made who­ly for you. And in very dede he speaketh as much for the Emperour, and for his prerogatiue in ordering of generall Councels, as he could possibly finde by the continual pra­ctise of the Church from Constantines tyme down to his, which was to the late Councell of Basil vnder Sigismunde the Emperour, in the yere. 14.32.

Cusanus lib. 3. c. 9. de Cōcor­dia Catholica. Lib. 9. epi. 54.The first poīt thē is, that Kīgs ād Prīces, ought to be careful and diligēt that Synods ād Coūcels may be had, as the especial aduocates of the Church, and as of greatest power to pro­cure quiet paisible passage to Coūcels, abyding there ād re­turnīg home againe. Exāple in an admonitiō of S. Gregory to Theodorike the Frēche King, exhorting to see a Synod called in his realme for the repressing of Simony.

Cusan li. 3. cap. 10.The seconde point is, that to such Synods Princes ought to come with all mekenesse, reuerence and humility, and with gentle exhortations. Examples are Riccharedus, Sisenādus, and Chintillanus Kīgs of Spayne, as we shal hereafter more largely declare, in certain of the Toletane Councels.

Cap. 13.The third point is, that as Kīgs and Prīces for their own prouinces do cal prouincial Synods, so the Emperorus for the whole corps of Christēdō do cal General Coūcels. Nō ꝙ coactiuè sed exhortatoriè colligere debeat. Not that by force or cōstraint, but by way of exhortatiō he ought to cal thē. Examples are the Councel of Aquileia vnder S. Ambrose: the 4. General Councell vnder Pope Leo: the sixt vnder Agatho: the 7. vnder Adriā the first with the rest, as of eche in their places we shal declare.

The fourth: that the Emperor in case of a general schisme, ought first to certifie the Pope of the necessity of a Councel, and [Page 118] require his consent to haue it in some certain place assembled. So did Valentiniā and Martiā the Emperours to Pope Leo for the Chalcedon.In epist. praeambu. Cha [...]c. cō ­cil. In 6. Syn. Act. 1. So did Constantin the 4. to Pope Aga­tho for the sixt general Councel.

The fift point is, that the Pope summoneth and calleth al general Coūcels, far otherwise thē do the Emperours. For the Pope as the chiefest, and as hauīg power to cōmaund ouer al other bisshops for the principality of his priesthood, Cap. 15. by the power cōmitted to him ouer the vniuersal Church, hath to cōmaund al faithful Christiās, especially bisshops and priests to assemble and mete in Councel. But the Emperour exhorteth and inuiteth bisshops, but cōmaundeth the lay, to a Councel. And the Canons do cōmaūde, Tripart. hist. lib. 4. cap. 9. & 19. that without the Authority of the bisshop of Rome no Councel cā be holdē. Not so in the Emperor. For the Ephe­sin cōuēticle was disanulled, because Leo his legates were reiected, though Theodosiꝰ the yōger, did cōfirm it and al­low it. So the great Coūcel of Ariminū was cōdemned, be­cause Pope Damasus sent not thither, though Constantius themperour summoned it and allowed it. And the greate Coūcel of Sardica preuailed,Athanaes. Apolog. 2. because by Pope Iulius it was called and allowed, though Cōstātius thē Emperor resisted it and refused it. And thus much for the first beginninges of the Coūcel. Now in the Coūcel it self, what is the Princes part, ād what the bisshops, it shal appeare. Let thē the sixt point be, that at the Councel being, the Princes office and care ought to be, to prouide that altumult ād d [...]sorder be auoy­ded and to remoue such as are to be remoued ▪ Cap. 14. So did the iudges in the Chalcedō Coūcel, remoue Dioscorꝰ frō the bēch, ād admit Theodoret, the one by pope Leo cōdēned, the other recōciled. So when the parties waxed warm, they did their best to brīg thē to a calm. So did also Cōstātī in his own per­son [Page] in the first Nicene Councel, as M. Horne hath himself alleaged, and as Eusebius reporteth.

Fol. 24. a. Lib. 3. De vit. Const Cap. 13. Cap. 17.Seuenthly the Lay Magistrates or Princes: being pla­ced in the Councel in the roomes of Emperours and kings, Non habent vocem Synodicam, sed solum audire debent: haue no voice as a parte of the Synod, but ōly are there to heare. This practise is clere in al the Councels, as it shall appere in the particulars hereafter. The iudges therefore and Princes delegates mencioned in the Chalcedon and other Councels, are in the Councels, much after a sorte, as the Speaker in our Parliaments. To open and set forth to the Councel all matters to be treated vpon. To appointe (by the aduise of the Councel) the next metings, to breake of the present session, to promulge the Councels Sētence: and such like matters as belong to more orderlye and quiet proceding in al things.

Cap. 18.Eightly the force and Vigour of the Sentence in Coū ­cel dependeth only of the Bisshops, which make the Coū ­cel, & non ex Imperiali commissione, and not of the Empe­rours Commission, whose Authority is inferiour to the Sy­nod, saieth Cusanus. And so the Continuall practise will proue.

Ibidem.Ninthly the Emperour, the Princes, and their Oratours do subscribe as witnesses of that is done: but as iudging and determining, only the bisshops in all Councels haue sub­scribed.

Cap. 22.Tenthly for the ende and consummation of all Coun­cels, the Emperours and Princes ought to prouide, that such things as are decreed and determined by the holy Councels, may be obserued, and by lawes and penaltyes they ought to force their subiects to the obseruation thereof. But to confirme by [Page 119] waye of Ecclesiastical Authority and Supremacy, it hath euer belonged only to the bisshops of Rome, as by the continual practise of the Church it hath and shal yet better appeare. In this sence, and as I haue already saied, Empe­rours haue confirmed, and by their edictes established the Councels, lawes, and decrees of the Churche. And thus you see M. Horne particularly and plainly what we attri­bute to Emperours and Ciuil Princes in the calling, orde­ring and confirming of Councels, and what we deny most iustly vnto them. If you proue that which we graunte, you shewe your selfe a slender scholer, and a weake aduersa­ry, that will take vpon you to confute that practise, the limites and conditions where of you knowe not, which is altogether to fight in darkenesse or with your owne shadowe. If you can proue that which we deny, lette the truthe goe on your side. But you neither haue in this booke, neither shall euer be able to proue it. To auoyde therefore hereafter the superfluyte of vnfruteful talke, as well for myne, as for the Readers ease, in al your like ob­iections of Emperours calling and confirming of Coun­cels, I wil referre you to the answeres and distinctions pre­sently made.

To returne nowe to Theodosius, and to you M. Horne, we haue one vntruthe more to charge you withal: for that you would establishe this peerlesse and Supreme Authori­ty in Theodosius, because he hauing receiued in writinge the faith as wel of the Catholikes, as of the Eunomians, Arians, and other heretiks, after the reading of them, ren­ted all the shedules, sauing that which was deliuered by the Catholiks, whereupon the heretikes departed ashamed and dashte out of countenauce. Whome he had, as ye also [Page] write, before examined of their faith, and that after such sorte, that they were not only astonyed, but began to fall out amōges themselues, some lyking, some mislykīg the Emperours purpose. But alas good M. Horne, whie are ye your self, nowe as ye seame to me so sodenly dasshed out of countenance? Yea and whiche is maruayle in so harde a metall, me thinketh somwhat asshamed to, and wonderfullye astonied withall. Why man? Pluck vp your harte, and be of good cowrage. You wil perchaunce say I borde with yowe, and am sette vpon my mery pynnes. I woulde to God the matter were suche as yt myght be better lawghed at, then pitied. And that it might serue more for Democrytus, The one of them euer law­hed, the other e­uer wepte thē Heraclytus, and yet to say the truth, there is cause and to muche for them bothe. Perchaunce nowe some mā wil think I doe but ieste when I speake of shame: I would God yt were or myght ons be truelye sayde of youe, yt were a goodly sparcle of grace growing. Wel I put of that to other mēs iudgement. But that ye are dashed out of countenance, yea that ye are wonderfully astonied, M. Horne no lesse astonied in the tel­ling of this storie then the Ariās and other he­retiks thē vvere vvhē the thing vvas don. and that euen for the same cause, and after the same maner as the Arians and other heretikes thē were, I dare say it, and proue yt to. For if the Arians were asshamed and dasshed out of countenaunce, vpō these doinges of Theodosius onely, how much more are yowe asshamed and dasshed out of countenaunce, whose heresies are cōdem­ned, by so many Kings and Catholyke Emperours? Or yf ye say ye are not asshamed, then must I replie, ô shamelesse fellowe, and more impudente then the Arians. I nowe ad­de, that ye are more astonied then the Arrians and other heretikes with this facte of Theodosius, and therfore full slylie and wylilye, what was the doinges of the Emperour ye haue ouerhipped, whyche yf ye had put in, would haue [Page 120] serued, aswel againste yowe, as yt did againste them. And therfore the memorie of yt so astonied yowe, that ye durst not for shame name the matter, and yet for folly coulde ye not forbeare to patche yt in, as a speciall matter aduaun­cyng your supreamacy. For first,VVhy M. Horne hath lefte out the principal matter of his ovvn storye. Tanquam cauis bibēs in Nil [...]. Hovv Theodo­sius the Emperor dashed the Heretikes out of coūte­nance. Socrat. li. 5. cap. 10. The He­retiks fell at diuisiō before Theodo­siꝰ, vvhe [...] vpon he teareth their she­duls of their faith vvhich they of­fred. as Theodosius did not al­lowe, the open disputations of the Arians, Macedonians, Eunomians, whiche were verie redie to the same, so yf he had bene lyuing of late, he woulde not (ād euē for the same cause he disalowed the other) allowed your late westmyn­ster disputations: beinge more mete to leade the common people out of the truthe, then to confirme them in truthe, whereof we haue alredie somwhat towched. But nowe I praye yowe M. Horn tel vs what was the Emperours pur­pose that some heretyks lyked, some mislyked? wherin as yt were the dogge drinking in Nilus, as the olde peruerbe is, for feare of stinging ye dare not tary. Wel because ye are astonied at the memory of yt, I wil tel it for you. The Em­peror demaūded of the heads of the secte, whether they did allowe and receyue, the fathers of the Churche, that wrote be­fore the diuision beganne: Yea marye, say they, what else? we reuerence and honour them as our maysters: for feare (saieth the story) least yf they had sayde otherwyse, the people would wonderfully haue misliked theyre doings: wel sayd. sayeth the Emperour. Are ye then cōtente, for this matters cōtrouersed to stād to their sayings and testimonie? Here they beganne the one to stare vpon the other, and wiste nere what in the world to answere, and fynally fell owt as your self write, amongs thē selues. Now let the Emperor cal the Anabaptists, the Zwin­glians, the Lutherans, and demaūde of them, the same que­stion, woulde not the matter so fall out thinke you? Yea hath yt not alreadye so fallen out, and daylye so falleth [Page] out more and more against you and your Brethern, to your great shame? And thincke you, that yf Theodosius were lyuing now, he would not deale with your Billes, as he dealed with theirs? Woulde he not teare a sonder the she­dules, of al your false faithlesse faith? Yes that he would as­suredly. The greauouse remembrance of this did, so astone you, that it caused you, thus to leaue the matter it self, that was by some liked, and by some misliked, and to tel a liking or mislikinge of I can not tel what.

Ye maye see the ful ansvvere of this, in the Con­futation of the Apology fol. 31. Cod. Om­nis vtrius­que sexus. The Popes Primacie proued by the doinges of Theo­dosius, ād the Coū ­cels by M Horne alleaged. Vide Tō. 1. Concil. in Concil. A­quil. pag. 397. col. 1. bNow how so euer ye haue maymed the narration of the storye, and making the beste ye can of the matter for your purpose, primacy can ye make none of it. For the doinge of Theodosius reacheth not to the determination of anye thing in question alredy not determined, but to the exe­cution of the Nicene Councel: commaunding by expresse decree, that al should obeye the faith of Damasus Pope of Rome, and of Peter Patriarche of Alexandria, both defen­ders of the Nicene Councel.

Let me now a while after al this your miserable wre­sting and writhing, ād liberal lying to, deale shortly ād sim­ply with you: and see whether I can pycke out any thinge of Theodosius and these coūcels doings for the Popes pri­macy. Why then? Ys it not Theodosius that referreth the decisiō of Ecclesiastical causes to the Bisshops? Was it not he, of whō S. Ambrose saied: Ecce quod Christianus cōstituit Imperator. Noluit iniuriā facere sacerdotibus. Ipsos interpretes cōstituit sacerdotes. Behold what the Christiā Emperor hath appointed. He would not doe iniury to the Priestes. He hath appointed the Priests them selues to examine the mat­ter? Was it not this Theodosius the great, M. Horne? Yes surely it was he. Was it not Theodosius, to whome Saint [Page 121] Ambrose enioyned penance, which he most humbly obei­ed? Where was Theodosius Ecclesiasticall supremacye then? Is it not Damasus the Pope,Tripart. li. 9. ca. 30. that calleth these Bis­shops assembled at Constantinople, euen to Rome, there to aide and assist him in keping of a Councel? What? Saied they to him, Syr we haue nothing to doe with you, [...]. ye are a forrain Bishop to vs of the East? Nay nay, they confesse that he called them as his members (thē must he needs be the head) to the Councell at Rome. Yea they confesse, that by his letters they came to the Councel at Constantinople: they declare their good wil and readines to come to Rome too:Theod. li. 5. cap. 9. but for their excuse they alleage many reasonable causes, none of those that the Protestants alleage at this day. And finally in the name of the whole, thei send certaine of their Bishops thither. Now further, doe not these Fathers de­cree at this their general Councel,Can. 5. that the Church of Cō ­stantinople, shoulde be the first and chiefe of al other after Rome? Do they not then therin acknowledge the Popes Primacie? It is writen, M. Horne:Ecclesiast. cap. 2. Sapientis oculi in ca­pite eius, stultus in tenebris ambulat. The eies of a wise man are in his head alwaies opē, and in a readines to direct him in his way: whereas the folish man walketh in darcknesse, being vncertaine and vnsure which way to take or to goe. Now whether your eyes priyng and seking forth this story of Theodosius were opened or shutte, I leaue the iudge­ment to the indifferent Reader: But this dare I firmely a­uouche, that these things whiche I haue nowe last rehear­sed, beside other, that I willingly omitte, drawe much nea­rer to make the Pope supreme head of the Churche, then anye thinge ye haue broughte foorth, for the doinges of Theodosius, to make him Supreame Head. Which when [Page] ye haue al sayde and done be nothing agreable to the arti­cles in question betwene vs, concernyng our princes regi­ment. And therfore yf the matter were much stronger of your side, touching Theodosius, yet did ye nothing touche that ye owght to touche.

M. Horne. The .42. Diuision. pag. 27. b.

Theodosius left his tvvoo sonnes Emperours; of the vvhich I vvil say but litle: yet vvherein it may moste (.116.) The .116. vntruthe That vvil neuer ap­peare. manifestly appeare, that the su­preme gouernement in causes Ecclesiastical belonged to the Emperours.

Archadius the Emperour, vvhen Nectarius the bishop of Constanti­nople vvas dead, and so the sea vacant (.117.) The 117. vntruthe. Such cer­tification appeareth not in the story. vvas certified thereof he cau­seth Iohn Chrysostome to be called from Antioch: he commaundeth the other bishoppes collected into a Synode, that they admonish Chrysostome of Goddes graces, and vvhat belongeth to suche a chardge, and that they choose and order him to be the bishop of Constantinople. In which dooinge, (saith Theodoretus) the Emperour declared what careful ende­uour, he had about the holy (.118.) The 118. vntruthe. False trās­lation, as shall ap­pere. Li. 5. ca 27 Churche matters. But this su­preme authoritie, to care, appoint, and procure vvoorthy and good Pastours or bishoppes, vvhen the seas vvere vacant, appeareth more plainly in Ho­norius the Emperour, brother to Archadius, vvhome the bishop of Rome him selfe in his decrees, and his Glosars on the same, cōfesse and acknovvledge to haue the ouersight, rule and gouernement in the elections and orderinge of bishops, yea (119.) The 119. vntruthe. No such rule, or gouernemēt confessed by the Bi­shop of Rome. Luith­prand. ouer the bishoppe of Rome him selfe.

After the death of Pope Sozimus, vvere tvvoo Popes choosen at ones in a great Schisme, the one Bonifacius primus, the other Eulalius, vvhe­reof vvhen the Emperour Honorius, had notice beinge at Millayne, he cau­sed them bothe to be banished Rome: But after seuen monethes, Bonifacius vvas by the Emperours cōmaundement, called againe and cōfirmed (.120.)The 120. vntruthe. He vvas then to the temporalties of the bishoprike restored, but he vvas the true Pope before. by his authoritie in the Apostolicall sea. This Bonifacius beinge novve settled in the Papacy, by humble suite to the Emperour, prouideth a remedie against [Page 122] suche mischiefes in time to come. The case vvas this, saith the Glosator, Bo­niface the first, did beseeche Honorius the Emperour to make a Lawe, whereby it might appeare, what were to be done, when twoo Popes were chosen at ones by the vndiscreetnes of the Electours, contendinge amōgest them selues.Dist. 79. Si duo.Honorius did than constitute, that neither of those twaine shoulde be Pope, but that in a newe Election a thirde shoulde be chosen by cōmon cōsente. If twoo (saithe the Emperour in his Lavve made at the humble sute of Bonifacius) by chaunce againste righte be cho­sen, thorough the vndiscreete cōtention of the Electours: wee permitte neither of them to be Priest or Pope: but wee iudge him to remaine in the Apostolike sea, whom the diuine iudgemente, and the common consente dothe appointe frō amon­gest the Clergy in a newe Election. Vppon this vvoorde,Gratian. dist. 63. vvhere the Emperour saithe (wee permitte) the Glosar saith, and so the Empe­rour dothe not onely abrogate the clayme of bothe those that be chosen in the contention, but dothe make them bothe for that time vnable, and dothe decree an other to be takē out of the Clergie for that time. Againe the Glosar interpretinge this (the diuine iudgement) saithe: this is the meaninge that the Empe­rours wil and election muste stande, the Clergy and the whole people acceptinge with thankefull minde whome the Empe­rour doth choose. For the Emperours were called in those daies holy, and their rescriptes and iudgementes Diuine. Here you see by the (.121) The 121. vntruthe. Carolus Molineus is none of the Popes Glosars. Popes decrees and Glosars, that the Emperour had the supreme rule and gouernement in Churche causes, and this vvas the (.122.) The 122. vntruthe, vtterly vnproued continual practise of the Churche for the most parte, yea euen the bishoppes of Rome before they vvere ordered and consecrated, had their election ratified and confirmed by the Emperours, their Lieutenant, or other Princes.

Stapleton.

[Page]NOwe folowe in rew Theodosius his sonnes: Archa­dius and Honorius, of whome M. Horne sayeth he wil say but litle, belike, because he hath said to much of theyre father alredye, and more then he can iustifie, or for that he wil make vs a shorte tale, but yet a sweete. And wherein it shal most manifestly appere, that the supreame go­uernement in causes ecclesiastical belonged to the Emperours. Al Archadius doings here stande in appointinge S. Iohn Chrysostome to be bishop of Constantinople, a most wor­thie man who dowbteth?The ele­ction of S. Iohn Chrysostome by Archadius maketh him no supreame head. Tripart. lib. 10. c. 3. Socrates. lib. 6. c. 2. And I woulde to God as this his firste dealing with Chrysostome was to his worthy prayse: so he had not by his after dealinge blotted and blemished the same.

As for this election, first Archadius did it not of his own Supreme authoritie, but the fame of Iohn Chrysostom be­ing great, and after some debate aboute the election, Intra modicū tēpus cōmuni decreto omniū clericorū, & laicorū Impe­rator Archadius euocauit eum. Within a litle while (saieth Socrates) by the common decree and agreement of all the Clergy and of al the lay, the Emperour Archadius sent for him from Antioche to Constantinople, and so by the com­mon decree of al estates (as the order of electiō then was) he was elected bishop, not by the Emperours supreme and absolute Authoryty, as M. Horne fancyeth. Thē Theodoret though he tel not so much, yet dothe he not attribute the matter to the Emperour: as a parte of his gouuernement. Which that it might some waies appere, M. Horn thought good to spyce a litle the text with the powder of his false translation, that yet so it might somewhat relys in the Readers cōceit for his surmised primacy. For Theodoret saieth not, that in this dooing, the Emperour declared what careful [Page 123] endeuour he had aboute the holy Churche matters, but [...], the care that he had about Gods or godly mat­ters. Which care is commendable as in all men,Theod. li. 5. c. 27 so in prin­ces especially, for the greater good they are able to doe. [...]. Circa res diuinas. But such care of Gods matters emporteth no gouuerne­ment in such matters. As neither the care of Churche matters importeth iurisdictiō: Though yet that soundeth nea­rer to iurisdiction then the care and zeale about godly ma­ters. And therefore M. Horne thought good with this li­tle poore helpe of false translation, a little to itche forward his miserale and barraine cause. And that we shoulde the more fauourably winck at his liegerdemain, he phraseth it, the holy Church matters. Speaking very holily and reuerent­ly, that we might not suspect him of forgery. Whereas in the original text of his author, there is no worde, of ey­ther Church ▪ or holy Church. Last of all, though we graun­ted him (which we neither will nor may, considering the whole story, as Socrates describeth it) that Archadius him selfe appointed Iohn Chrysostom to be Bishop, yet maketh it not any iote to proue any Supremacie in him, eyther in al, or in any cause ecclesiastical. Vnlesse we wil haue euery laie patrō that presēteth his Priest to a benefice, to be suprē heade also: or measure the matter by the greatenesse and weight of the patrimony and liuing,M. Hornes primacy ouerthro­vven by his ovvn example. Gorgius Alexand. in vita Io. Chrysost. and not by the weight of reason. But now M. Horne, in an il time for your self, ād for your supremacy, haue ye here put me in remēbrance of this Archadius, and S. Iohn Chrysostom. Yf you would pur­posely haue sought a meane to haue geuē your self a greate and a shameful fall, that all that beholde you, mighte laughe you al to skorne: ye could not haue foūd lightly any where els a better occasion. For this Archadius being Emperour [Page] of the East, as Honorius was in the West, was excōmuni­cated of Pope Innocētius for banishing of the said S. Chry­sostom being most wrongfully deposed by his enemies, by the procurement of Archadius his wife. Now Syr I besech you tel me who is supreme head,Archadi­us th Em­peroure excōmu­nicated by the Pope. the Emperour, or he that excōmunicateth th'Emperor, especially being vnder an o­ther Patriarche and residēt so far of, as Cōstantinople is frō Rome? The next narration seing it toucheth nothing, but matters of election, requireth no great answere: namely se­ing M. Horne him self, hath made a sufficiēt answer against him self. For if th'Emperour made a law touching th'electiō of Popes, at the Popes own desire, belike here was no great Supremacy: euē no more then the Pope was cōtent either to geue hī, or to suffer at his hand. Neither the banishing of both Popes frō Rome, especially in a schism, as this was, by M. Horne here specified, causeth any spirituall iurisdiction, the matter it selfe being mere temporall, as the matter of the election being (in this case) only begunne, not brought to perfection. Beside this, here is no presidente of our elections in England. For here is both the Emperors, the Clergyes, and the peoples consente in the Bishoppelye e­lection.

I woulde nowe passe ouer to the next matter, sauing M. Horne here commeth in with his Glosatour and Glosar after such a cunninge sorte, lawlike, and gloselike, that it woulde not be to hastely lepte ouer. Firste he alleageth the Glosatour, as he calleth him, and that I am assured, is meante, and so to be proued of him that is the common expositour of the Canon Lawe, as appeareth by Maister Hornes owne allegations. But that he bringeth out of his Glosar, I am assured, is not to be founde in him that he [Page 124] calleth Glosatour. And so haue we an other extraordinary glose by M. Horne now first authorised.A nevve glose of the Canō law, now firste au­thorised by M. Horne. But perchance ye wil meruaile, good Reader, especially ye that are exercised and trauailed in the Canon Law, that M. Horne shuld haue so deape and rare knowledge in the gloses of the Canon law, that perchāce this question might appose the best Do­ctor in the arches, onles it wer M. D. Ackworth M. Horns sōne in law, who perchāce by his fathers speciall cōmision, though perhaps M. Horne neuer read the glosar him selfe, hath authorised vs a new glosar. And now me thīketh your eares itch to heare what glosar this shuld be. It had ben wel don for M. Horne to haue eased his Reader and me to in so doutful a mater. But seing we haue foūd him out at the lēgth out he shall, and al the world shall now know him, and shall know M. Horne much the better by and for him. Therfore to be short, it is Carolus Molineꝰ a frenchman, whose glose is as far as I can yet learn, scarse seuen yeres old, or therabout,Vide editi­onem iuris canonici in. 4, Lug­duni cum glos. 1559. scarsely past his infancy, and woulde hardly be allowed to speake, onlesse M. Horn had bisshopped it. Wherfore I see no cause, but that I may according to my manner, score vp this to. But yet if M. Horne will needes haue him a Glo­sar (with the which perchaunce I will not greatly sticke, especially in that sence, as merely we call a Glosar in our tongue, that is a vaine lyer) and thinke he may truely so call him, I will not muche contende with him. For if he skape scoring vppe for calling him Glosar here, surely he shall by no meanes skape for calling him the Popes Glo­sar the tenth lyne immediatlye following. For Molline­us is so the Popes Glosar, that he loueth the Pope, and al­loweth his authoritie, euen as well as M. Horne him self: as appereth as wel by his notes adioyned to the olde inter­pretour [Page] of the Canon law, new and fresh set out, as by his other workes extant in print, condemned among other in­hibited bookes by the late General Councel. And whoe would haue thought that M. Horne had such wise, wilie, wittie, fresh fetches? I perceiue a ragged Colte may yet proue a good Horse.

M. Horne. The .43. Diuision. pag. 28. b.

Sabellicus speakinge of the contentious entraunce of Damasus the first into the Papacy, vvhiche vvas not vvithout great bloudshed, as Vola­teranus saith, dothe note the ambition of the Prelates, to be the cause of suche cōtention about their atteininge of such roumes. For now (saieth he) the ambicious desire of honour, had by litle and litle, begon to entre into the mindes of the Bishopes. The vvhiche vvas proued ouer true, not onely in the elections of the Bishoppes of old Rome, but also in many Bishoppes of other Cities, especially of nevve Rome. These diseases in the Churche ministers, and the disorders thereout springyng: the Emperours from time to time studied to cure and refourme: vvherefore Theodosius and Valentinianus vvhen they savve, the great hoouing and shoouinge at Constantinople,Liberat. cap. 4. Socr. lib. 7. cap 29. about the election of a Bishop after the death of Sisinius some speakinge to preferre Philippus, other some Proclus, both being mi­nisters of that Churche, did prouide a remedy for this michiefe, to vvitte, they them selues (.123.) The 123. vntruthe. No such decree ap­pereth: neither in Liberatus nor in Socrates. made a decree, that none of that Church should be Bishop there, but some straunger from an other Churche, and so the Emperours sent to Antioche for Nestorius, vvho as yet vvas thought both for his doctrine and life, to be a sitte pastor for the flocke, and made him Bishop of Constan­tinople.

Stapleton.

This man is nowe againe in hande with the Emperours ordinance concerning the election of the Bishop of Con­stantinople: but by the way, or being as he is in dede, al out of his waye and matter to, he towcheth what slaughter there was at Rome, when Damasus was made Pope, and so rūneth backe agayne out of the way, and out of his mat­ter: [Page 125] which he might ful wel haue let alone, sauing that he would shewe his great familiaritie and affinitie with Iulian the Pelagian.M. Horne foloweth Iulian the Pelagian. Aug. lib. c cō. Iulian. De consti­tuendo Episcopo dissensionē populi Ro­mani in­sultabūdus obiectas. Volat. Ant lib. 22. pag. 499. multi mortales ex vtraque parte in­terfecti. Sabel. en­nead. 9. li. 9. Vi & armis cer­tatū, com­petitore superato. et c Ad Dam. Damasus Primacy recogni­sed by S. Hierom Who for lacke of good matter to iustify his own, and to infringe the Catholik doctrine, fel to controlle the Catholikes for their manners, and namely for this dis­sention at the creation of Damasus. Of which cotentiō, Sa­bellicus, saith M. Horne, speaketh: and Volaterranus sayeth it was not without much bloudshed. As though Sabellicus said not also, that the matter was tried with strokes. But where to finde or seke it in either of them, M. Horne lea­ueth vs to the wide worlde. But what is this, M. Horne, a­gainst Damasus Primacie, who was also a true and a good godly learned Bishop: whom S. Hierome for all this contention, recognised as head of the Churche, and as greate a Clerke as he was, yet being in doubte by reason of diuerse sectes about Antiochia in Syria, with what persons to com­municate, moste humbly requireth of him to knowe, with whom he should communicate, and with whom he should not communicate?

What is then your argumēt, M. Horne? Is it this? Da­masus entred into the See of Rome by force and bloudshed: Ergo, the Emperour at that time was Supreme gouernour in all causes Ecclesiasticall. Verely either this is your ar­gumēt, or els you make here none at al: but only tel forth a story to no purpose, except it be to deface the holy Apostolik See of Rome, which in dede serueth euer your purpose both in bookes and in pulpitts. What so euer it be you haue in hand beside, the Pope may not be forgotten.

Now that you tel vs of a decree made (by th'Emperours Theodosius and Valentinianus) that none of the Churche of Constantinople should be Bysshop there, but some straunger frō [Page] an other Churche, you tell vs a mere vntruth: Your alleaged Authors Socrates and Liberatus speake no one woorde of any such Decree. Liberatus cap. 4. in Breuiario. Socrates li 7 ca. 29 Niceph. li. 14. c. 34 35. The words of Liberatus (who translated in maner the wordes of Socrates) are these: Sisinius being departed, it semed good to the Emperours, to appoint none of the Church of Constantinople to be bisshop there, but to send for som straunger from Antioch in Syria (from whence they had a little before Iohn Chrysostome) and to make him Bisshop. And this worde for worde hath also Socrates, but he addeth more: [...]. Because of the vaine triflers and busy heades that were of that Churche. Of any Decree that the Emperor should make, none of them both doe mention. But at that time only the case then in Con­stantinople so standing, and their luck before being so good in Iohn Chrysostom, who from a stranger became their bi­shop, it pleased the Emperours so to doe. And al this they did by way of prouision for the Church quiet, not by waye of absolute authority or any forceable Decree, as M. Horn fableth and ouer reacheth his Authors.

M. Horne. The .44. Diuision. pag. 28. b.

As Constantinus and Theodosius the elder, euen so Theodosius the seconde a very (.124.) The 124 Vntruth Theodos. in these doings by you allea­ged, vvas vngodly godly Emperour, hauing and practising the (.125.) The 125 vntruthe. Vtterlie vnpro­ued supreme gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes, seeinge the horrible Heresies spronge vp and deuidinge the Church, but specially by Nestorius, did (126) The .126. Vntruth. For not by his au­thoritie. by his authoritie cal the thirde general councel at Ephesus, named the first Ephesine councel, geuinge streight (.127.) The 127. Vntruth. He gaue no suche Cōmaun­dement. commaundement to al Bishops vvheresoeuer, that they shoulde not faile to appeare at the time appointed, and further vsed the same povver and authoritie, in the ordering and gouer­ninge thereof by his (.128.) The .128. Vntruth The Coū cell resi­sted and refused the orde­ring of this Lieutenāt Iohn. Cyril. ep. 22. Tō 4. Liberat. cap. 6. All this vvas a leude fact vvhiche neuer cā to effect, ād vvher­of they al repented after, yet M. Horne buildeth vpon it. Lieutenaūt Ioannes Comes Sacrensis, that other Godly Emperours had beene accustomed to vse before him▪ accordinge to the cōtinual practise of the Churche, as it is plainely set foorth in the booke of general Councelles.

In this councel there happened so greuous contention betvvixt Cyrillus [Page 126] Bishop of Alexandria, and Iohn Bishop of Antioche, both beyng other­vvise godly and learned mē, that the councel vvas diuided thereby into tvvo partes: the occasion of this Schisme vvas partely, that Cyrillus and cer­taine other vvith him had proceeded to the cōdemnation of Nestorius, before that Ioānes vvith his cōpany could com, ād partly for that Ioānes of Antioch suspected Cyrillus of certain Heresies, misdeeming that Ciril had made the more haste to confirme them before his comminge. He therefore vvith his associates complaineth, and laieth to Cyrilles chardge, that he did not tary according to the commaundement of the Emperour for the com­ming of the Bisshops of other Prouinces, vvhich vvere called thither frō all partes, by the cōmaundement of the Emperour: That vvhan the noble Earle Candidianus commaunded him by vvriting, and vvithout vvriting, that he should presume no suche matter, but that he and those that vvere vvith him, should abide the comming of the other Bishops, neuer thelesse he pro­ceeded: that he and his company vvere the authours of dissension and discord in the Church▪ and that they had geuē the occasion, that the rules of the Fathers, and the decrees of the Emperours vvere broken▪ and trodē vnder foote: vvherefore they iudge Cyrill of Alexādria, vvith Memnō bisshop of E­phesus, to be deposed frō their bisshopriks, and Ecclesiastical ministery: and the other their associates to be excōmunicate. The vvhich their doinges they signifie to the Emperour Theodosius by their Synodical letters, to vnder­stande his pleasure, in (.129.) The 129. vntruth. The story hathe no suche vvoords. allovving or disallovvyng of their Synodicall actes. After this came the bishop of Romes legates, before vvhome in the coū ­cel Cyrillus and Memnō offered vp their libelles, deposing a contestation againste Iohn and his party to haue them cited, and render the cause of their deposition. The bisshoppe of Romes legates, vvith the consent of the councell, on that parte, sendeth for Ioannes and his parties, vvho returneth this an­svveare: Neither sende you to vs, nor wee to you, bicause wee looke for an answeare So did alvvaies Schisma­tiks, such as these vvere. from the Prince touching you. Therfore saith Liberatus: Cyril and Memnon, seeking to reuenge thē selues, did condemne Iohn and all those that stood with him, who suffered manye displeasures at Ephesus thoroughe the pride of these twaine. The Emperoure sendeth to the vvhole Councell his ansvveare in vvritinge, on this sorte: VVee allowe the condemnation of Nestorius, Cyrillus, and Memnon: the [Page] other actes and condemnations, whiche you haue made, we disallowe, obseruinge the Christian faithe, and vprightnesse which we haue receiued of our fathers ād progenitours.Liberat. cap. 8.etc. Certain of the Bishops did satisfie the Emperour (.130.) The .130. vntruth. These vvordes nipped of in the middle. Bicause the greate and gene­ral coun­cel doing all things regularly, hath con­demned Nestorius. By vhich appereth, the Coū ­cel gaue sentence ouer the Heretik, not themperour. whō he commaūded to enter into the Church, and to ordeine an other Bishop for Constantinople in the place of Nestorius. These things thus done, the Emperour dissolued the Coūcel, and cōmaunded the Bishops to depart euery man to his own coūtrie. VVithin a while after, the Emperour perceiuing the dissension betwixte Cyrill and Iohn to continue, whiche he thought was not to be suffered: called Maximianus, and ma­ny other Bishoppes that were then at Constantinople, with whome he cōsulted, how this schism of the Churches might be taken away. VVhose aduise had, the Emperour sent a noble man, Aristolaus vvith his letters to Cyrill and Iohn, commaunding thē to come to an agreement and vnitie betvvixte them selues, othervvise he vvoulde (.131.) The .131. vntruth, the word depose, is not in Liberatꝰ. depose and banish them both. VVherevpon follovved a reconciliation betvvene the tvvo bisshops, and much quietnes to the Churches.

Stapleton.

HERE followeth now an other Emperour Supreme head of the Churche, as well for calling of the firste General Councell at Ephesus, as also, for ordering and gouerning of it by his Lieutenaunt. Yf M. Horne do or can shew any decree or determination in matter of faithe, or any other Ecclesiastical matter made by Theodosius or his deputy, then were it somewhat. He sheweth no such thing, nor can shew any such matter. Al this ordering and gouerning, is concerning the externall and outward mat­ters, and to see al things done quietly and orderly: and by ciuile punishment to correct such as disobey the Councel. [Page 127] All the which are no matters of spirituall gouernement. Let vs then consider the particularities.

The calling of the Ephesine Councel by this Emperour Theodosius (which yet was at the request of Cyrillus the Patriarch of Alexandria,Niceph. li. 14. c. 33 not by the Emperours owne au­thoritie) M. Horne setteth foorth in these words: geuing streight commaūdement to al Bis [...]hops wheresoeuer, that they should not faile to appeare. As though the Emperour had so peremptorily cited them, and summoned thē both, as Prin­ces and Ciuile Magistrates doe cite their subiectes for ciuil matters. Whereas the history of Nicephorus by him al­leaged, geueth forth no token of such peremptory commā ­dement, but rather of the contrary. For the Emperour in his letters whereby he summoned them,Niceph. li. 14. c. 34 addeth this reason or threat to them that would draw backe. Qui enim vocatus non alacriter accurrit, non bonae is conscientiae esse apparet. For whosoeuer being called, hasteneth not, verely he appereth to haue an euill conscience. In which woordes he rather chargeth their conscience before God, then their loyal o­bedience to him: as Iosaphat did to the Priestes and Leuits of the olde Law, as before hath ben shewed.2. Paral. 19. Neither vseth any other threat or force of commaundement to expresse so much as an ynckling of that gloriouse supremacye that M. Horne would so faine finde out.

Againe,Vide Cyril. Epist. 22. Tom. 4. the ordering and gouerning (as you call it) of the Councell, by Ioannes Comes the Emperours Lieutenaunte, was suche as Cyrillus and al the Catholique Bishoppes of that Councell, complained of. Firste, because he made no true relatiō to the Emperour, what was in the Councel done. Then because he laboured to haue Iohn of Antioche with his confederates, reduced to the Communion of the holy [Page] Councel hauing brokē the Canons: To the which request, the Councell resisted plainlye, saiyng: It is not possible to force vs hereto, except both that which they haue done against the Canons, be disanulled: and also they become humble sup­pliauntes to the Councell, as suche whiche haue offended. When Iohn the Lieutenant could not winne his purpose this way, by force of authority, whiche those Bishops ac­knowledged none at all, for any matter Synodicall to be concluded, or decreed, he went about by a sleight to com­passe them. He desired them, to geue him in writing a con­fession of their faith: and I, saied he, will cause the other to sub­scribe therevnto, and so to agree with you. This he did (saieth the Councel) that after he might make his vaunte, and say. I haue brought these bisshops to an attonement, Concilia­ui eos ad amicitiā humanis inter se of­fensis dis­sidentes. Nō expo­nimus nos contume­liae. being at vari­aunce among them selues, vpon worldly displeasures. And the Councell espiyng this, replied againe, they woulde not geue the world occasion of reproche and shame. And as for the cō ­fession of their faithe which he required, they answered. We be not called hither as heretikes, but we are come hither to restore the faith that hath bene despised, which also we do re­store. And as for the Emperour, he hath no nede nowe to lerne his faith he knoweth it wel enough, and he hath bene baptised in it.

Thus we see the ordering and gouerninge, whiche M. Hornes cause dependeth vpon, of this Lieutenāt and Em­perour too, was a mere tyrānical violēce, not such as other godly Emperours accustomed to vse before him as M. Horne auoucheth. So did not Constantine in the Nicene Coūcel. Nor Theodosius this mans Grandfather in the Councell of Aquileia.Cyrill. vbi suprà. But this was such a tyrannicall gouernment, that Cyrillus and the whole Synod writeth thereof thus. We be [Page 128] all in greate vexation, being kept in with the guardes of souldi­ars, yea hauing them by our beddes side when we slepe: specially we, saith Cyrillus. And the whole Councell beside, is much we­ried and vexed, and many are dead. Many other also, hauing spent all, doe now sell their necessaries. This, lo, was the ho­norable gouernement of M. Hornes supreame head.M. Horne groūdeth his prima­cye vpon the doe­ings of Iohn a Schisma­tical Bis­shop. By force of armes to extort a cōsent. Such a gouernour would the great Turke be, or the Souldan, if he ruled againe. But suche rough paterns please verye well this rough and rude Prelate. Similes habent labra lactucas. Wheras ther­fore he calleth this Emperour Theodosius, a verie godlie Emperour, seing he calleth him not godly in this place, but in respect of his actions hereafter to be by him rehearsed, which are very lewd and naught, as it hathe and shall yet better appeare, it is a plaine vntruth,Donec poe­nitētiā a­gatis, et a­nathema­tisetis, hae­retica ca­pitula quae à Cyrillo Alexādri­no episco­po exposita sunt cōtra Euangeli­cam & ca­tholicam doctrinam Liberatus. cap. 6. what so euer he were in other thinges. And therefore either he shoulde haue forborne so to call him, at the least in this place, or shoulde haue founde some better matter for him to haue practised his Supremacie vpon.

For al Maister hornes declaration resteth in this, that he defended Iohn the Bishoppe of Antiochia, and a fewe of his confederates, the fautours of Nestorius, in this Coun­cell condemned. Whoe made Cyrillus and the residew of the Ephesine Fathers (two hundred in number) heretiks, and called their doings hereticall, as euidentlye appeareth by the selfe same Authour and chapter, that M. Horne taketh for his helpe and ayde. But to sweete this vnsaue­ry declaration wythall, he calleth thys Ihon a godlye man: and wandering here and there in by circumstaunces, lea­ueth owte thys, least the godlye Reader might sone sus­pecte thys Primacye, standynge vppon no better grounde.

[Page]Yet will M. Horne saye, that Theodosius practised this Supremacy here. First by the Earle Candidianus his De­putie,The cau­ses vvhy M. Horn taketh Theodo­sius for Supreme head. who on the Emperours behalfe inhibited Cyril and the other, that they should not procede til the comming of Iohn the Patriarche of Antiochia. Then, that after the said Iohn had condemned Cyril and Memnon, and deposed thē from their Bishopriks, the Emperour confirmed Iohns sen­tence. Thirdly that seing the dissension betwixt Cyril and Iohn to grow more and more, cōmaunded them to agree, otherwise he would depose and banish them both. Last of all, that Iohn being cited to answere before the Popes Le­gate, would not come, but said, he looked for the Princes answere.

The said causes an­svvered.But these things neither seuerally nor iointly are of any force. First, Candidianus doings, as ye see, goe no further then to the externall moderation, disposition, and order of the Councels doings. Whiche, as we haue before saide, is one point of the Emperours dealing in Councelles, as the Churches best Sonne, not as Supreme gouernour thereof. Secondarily, the Emperoure deposed not Cyrill, but the schismaticall assemble of Iohn and his cōsociates to the nū ­ber of .34. as Liberatus writeth:Cap. 6. and that contrary to the minde of al the residue, whose sentence though wrongful­ly geuen, Theodosius sinistrally affected and seduced, doth confirme. Wherein he is no principall worker, but an exe­cutour of the sentence. Thirdly, the Emperour threatned no deposition or depriuation, but banishment only, which is no Spirituall but Ciuile punishment, and so impertinente to our matter. Therefore where you adde, he would depose thē to ye are but a Glosar.Liberatus cap. 8. And as good a glosar for the Pope as your brother Molineus. For Liberatus your author, hath [Page 129] no such word. Only he saieth. He threatened to sende them both to Nicomedia in banishment. Last of al, Iohn beinge such a mā, ād so vpholdē by the Emperour, what meruaile yf he woulde not appeare before the Popes Legat,Proufes for the Popes primacy ta­ken out of the Ephesine Councell and M. Hornes ovvne author. Prosper in Chronic. Euang [...]li. 1. cap. 4. Nicep. lib. 14. cap. 34 Con. [...]lor­ses. 5. et 8. Chal. syn. Act 4. pagina. 871. [...]le [...]ine confe [...]sed the presi­dente of the Ephsine coū ­cel by tvvo Emperours. Pro Mar. vide act. 3 Cōc. Chal. of whō he thought he should be cōdemned? There is no felō by his good wil, that would appere at the Kings bēch, but would refuse it, yf he might be assisted therin. And yet it is an or­dinary ād a lawful cowrt, that not withstāding: and should be, though an hundred such should refuse it.

Wel Sir: Now that ye haue spēt and empted your proufs for the vpholding of Theodosius primacy, wherin ye work lyke one that taking vppon him to guyde other in the night, woulde put out the candle or torch and conducte them by a lanterne, let vs for our syde see, yf we can fetche any better light aswel from other, as euen from your owne Author, and from the doings of your owne councell and your owne Emperour, for the bishops and the popes ecclesiastical primacy. I say then that the head and presidēte of this councel was Celestinus the Pope: and in his steade the foresayde Ciril, and not the Emperour or his deputie. Vpō this as a certayne truthe all the ecclesiastical writers aswel Latins as Greke, vniformely agree, yea the whole councel yt self of Ephesus agniseth this Coelestine as theire presi­dente and head, as appeareth by the nexte general councel of Chalcedo shortly folowing, and in the Ephesin coūcels letters to the Emperour Theodosius him self: and to the Emperour Valentinian. And least ye should thinke, the spi­rituall men, and the councels encroched to muche vppon the Emperours iurisdiction, and did thē iniury, as ye, your Apologie, M. Iewel, and your other bretherne complayne, lo Themperour Marcianus, and the Emperour Iustinian [Page] in their open proclamations do plainly professe, that Pope Coelestine by his deputy Cyril, was president of that Coū ­cel.Pro Iusti edict. eius tom. 2. cō ­cil. M. Horns primacye destroied by his ovvne author. I trow M. Horne this is no lanterne light shut vp in a darke dymme Horne, but good torche light, or rather the fayre bright light of the sonne it selfe.

In case al this will not serue the turne, we wil drawe somwhat nearer, euen to your owne author, your owne Emperour, yea your owne wordes to, and by them proue our intente: and then I trust ye wil be fully satisfied. Who is he then Maister Horne, that writeth: Multos in hoc mundo reges esse, & non esse vnum, sicut Papa est super Ecclesiā mundi totius. There are many Kings in the world, and no one King of the whole: as the Pope onely is the gouernor ouer the Church throughout the whole world: Surely it is your own authour Liberatus. And hereby ap­peareth well M. Iewels great errour,Liberatus in breuiar. cap. 22. tom. 2. cō, pag. 119. M. Iewels errour. In his Re­ply fol. 254. M. Horne noteth not the author ād chapter of his de­claration ād vvhy? Euag. lib. 1. cap. 4. and M. Nowelles to, affirming stoutely and assuredly, that one man can no more haue the rule of the whole Church, thē of the whole world. Liberatꝰ a writer about xi^c. yers past, reporteth that assertiō, spokē of a holy bisshop to the Emperor Iustiniā, ād yet accōpted therfore neither foolish nor wicked. You be­gāne your narratiō with the dissentiō of Cyrillus and Iohns, but your memory or your truth fayled you, whē ye lefte out the author of whō ye toke it ād the chapter. Perchaūce ye were here astonied, as the heretiks were before Theo­dosius. For euē in this place your author sheweth, that Coe­lestin was the presidēt of this coūcel, by his deputy Cyrill: to whō he gaue instructiōs and informatiōs by letters, how he should demeane hī self with Nestorius, and prescribeth him a certain order for his doings. And therfore Cyril him self, at what tyme he should pronounce final sentēce of de­priuatiō [Page 130] against Nestorius, saieth he was forced therto by Coelestinus letters. In the geuing of which sentēce,Cyrillus gaue sen­tence a­gaīst Ne­storiꝰ by Celestinꝰ. Cyril. epi. 11. &. 12. Tom. 4. Cyril. epi. 17. Proued against M Horne by Theo­dosius hī ­self that thempe­ror is not supreame head in matters ecclesia­stical. M. Horns ovvn ex­ample al­so of Candidinia­nꝰ turned agaīst hī. Cap. satis euidenter distin. 96. neither thēperor, nor his Lieutenant, had any thing to do, either in allowing or disallowing: ād that wil I proue vnto you euē by your own supreme head Theodosius writīg to Cyrillus, vt perturbatio quae ex cōtrouersiis istis accidit, secūdū ecclesia­sticos canones dissoluatur, that the hurly burly which thē was for cōtrouersies of religiō, might be pacified and quieted according to the ecclesiastical canōs. Now by the ecclesiastical canō the ending and determinatiō of matters spirituall apperteyneth to the clergy, ād not to the layty. Now also both to answere you, and to take some hādfast against you of such things, your selfe haue alleaged: wil ye know M. Horne whether the doings of the erle Cādidianus thēpe­rors deputy, reached to the discussiō or determinatiō of any matter ecclesiastical, or no? I say, no. And for my saing to be cōfirmed I appeale to your own supreame head Theodo­sius, and plead for my self, the very cōmissiō, that he gaue to Cādidianus. Deputatus est Cādidianus magnificus Comes trā ­sire vs (que) ad sanctissimā synodū vestrā, ac in nullo quidē quae fa­cienda sunt de pijs dogmatibus quaestiones communicare. Illici­tum nam (que) est, eū qui non sit ex ordine sanctissimorum episco­porum ecclesiasticis immiscere tractatibus. I haue sent, saith themperour Theodosius, the noble erle Candidinianus, as my deputye vnto your holye Synode, geuinge him in charge, not to medle in anye poynte towchinge questions to be moued abowte godlye doctryne and Religion. For yt is vnlawfull for him, whiche is not of the order of ho­lye Bisshoppes, to entermedle with Ecclesiasticall mat­ters. But yet ye saye, Iohn and his fellowes woulde not appeare before the Popes Legates: A true man [Page] ye are in this point. It was so in dede, wherein his doinges were as good as yours and your felowes Protestante bis­shops,This Iohn refused to come be­fore the Popes Legates and the Coū ­cel by as good right, as M Horne and his fellovves refused the Coū ­cel of Trent. Liberatus cap. 6. M. Horns suprema­cye de­stroyed by his ovvne author ā [...] chapter. which being and that with a large saufe conducte, called to the late Councel of Trente, durst not, ye knewe your cause so good, shewe your face in such an ordinarie and learned consistory. Ye knew ye were no more able, to shewe good cause why ye haue deposed the Catholike Bisshoppes, then coulde your Iohn, why he deposed Cy­rillus and Memnon. And therefore he being called to geue a reckoning of those his doings before Pope Celestins Le­gates, who were then president themselues (for Cyrill and Memnon then both put vp their complaintes to the Popes Legats, thē newly come from Rome to Cōstātinople) and before the whole Coūcel of Bisshops, durste not appeare.

But loe now out of your own place ād chapter, an other opē proufe against you, for the Popes, ād the ecclesiastical primacy. For not withstāding all that euer your Emperour and supreme head did, and for al his allowing of Iohns wyc­ked proceding: the Popes Legats and the Councell with a more Supreme Authority resumed the matter into their hāds: to whō also Cyrill and Memnon bisshops of Ephesus vniustly deposed, offred their billes of cōplainte: wherevpō Iohn was cited to appere. who playd the night owlespart, not able to abyde the cleare light of the Popes authority, ād of so honorable a Councel. And so haue ye cōcerning this Ephesine Councel spoken altogether, as we saye, ad Ephe­sios, and very poore ayde are ye like to take at this Coun­cels hands. Nay, ye are quyt ouerborē ād ouertilted there­with. As it shall yet more at large appere to him that will vouchesafe to reade, that I haue writen of this matter a­gainst M. Iewel,Art. 4. fo. 837. et. 138 in my Returne of vntruthes.

M. Horne. The 45. Diuision. Pag. 30. a.

Eutyches stirred vp much trouble in these daies: vvherefore he vvas cited to appeare before Flauianus Bisshop of Constantinople, and other Bisshops assembled in a Synode, to ansvveare vnto his heresies: vvho vvoulde He vvas an here­tik I vvarrant you, that vvoulde not ap­peare be­fore his bisshop, but fled to the Prince. Liberat. cap. 11. not appeare but fledde vnto the Emperour Theodosius, and declareth vnto him his griefe. The Emperour sendeth vnto the Synod vvith Eutiches, one of his chiefe officers Florentius, vvith this mandate: Bicause wee study carefully for the peace of Goddes Churche, and for the Catholike Faith, and wil by Goddes grace haue the righte Faithe kepte, whiche was sette foorth by the Nicene Councell, and confirmed by the Fathers at Ephesus, when Nestorius was cō ­demned: wee wil therefore there bee no offence committed aboute the aforenamed Catholique Faithe, and bicause wee knowe the honourable Florentius, to be a faithfull and an ap­prooued man in the righte faith, wee wil that he shalbe pre­sent in your Synode, bicause the conference is of the Faithe. He vvas there asistaunt vnto the Fathers and (.132.) The .132. vntruth. Florētius vsed no examina­tion at al. examined Eutyches openly in the Synode, (.133.) The 133. vntruth. He neuer asked hī but one question. diuerse times of his faithe, and finally saide vnto him: He that (saithe Florentius) doth not confesse in Christ twoo natures, doth not beleeue aright: and (.134.) The .134. vntruth. Not so. that is not by Florētius, but by the Coū ­cel he vvas cō ­demned, and deposed. so vvas Eutyches ex­communicate, deposed, and condemned. Eutyches rested not here, but ob­teined that the Emperour did commaunde a nevv Synode to be had at Con­stantinople, vvherein to examine the actes of the former, vvhether that all thinges touching the proceding against Eutyches, vvere don orderly and rightly, or no. He appointeth besides Florentius, diuerse (.135.) The 135. vntruthe, Nicephorus hath no such thing. other of his nobles to be in this councel, to see the doings thereof. But vvhen Eutyches coulde not vvin his purpose in neither of these Synodes, he procureth by friēd­ship of the Empresse Eudoxia and others, that the Emperour should call a Synode againe at Ephesus: to the vvhich Synode the Emperour prescribeth a fourme of proceding. This Synode vvas a vvicked conuenticle, vvherein the truth vvas defaced and Heresie approued, the Emperour being seduced by Chrysaphius, one of the priuy chamber, and in most fauour vvithe him.

Stapleton.

AS Eutyches that false monke did, so do ye flie frō your ordinarie Iudges to suche as be no Iudges in the mat­ter. Neither the presence of Florētius, or any other the Emperours deputy in the councel, maketh the Empe­ror, as I haue sayd ād shewed before, a supreame head. And in as much as the Emperor sayth, that because the cōferēce is of sayth, he woulde his deputy to be present: that is graunted (whē matters of faith are debated) not only to Emperours, Dist. 96. Vbinam. Chal. Act. 3. pa. 838. Cabil. can. 6. Milleuit. Cap. 19. but to al Christē mē. But hereof yt may be inferred that in Coūcels assembled for disciplin ecclesiasticall, and not for faith, thēperor and his deputy haue nothīg to do: which in­frīgeth the greatest part of your supremacy. And which is plain both by the rules, and by the practise of the Church expressed in the Coūcels of Chalcedon, of Cabylon, and of Milleuitum. Now as we graunt the Emperours deputye may be present in the Councell, where matters of faith are in debate: so how he is present, and to what ende, and that he hath no authoritye to determyne and decide the controuersies, we haue alredy proued by Theodosius him selfe. To stoppe belyke this gappe, ye imagin Florentius to play the Iudges parte, as to examyne Eutyches openly in the Synod of his faith, and how he belieued. Examination Flo­rentius vsed none, but as any lay man beside might haue don, he demaūded what he beleued: which demaunding is not to determin, what and how he ought to belieue. Again where you adde, diuerse tymes of his faith, this is an other vntruth. For Florentius in al that Synode neuer asked him but one question (which you here alleage) and that after the Synode hadde nowe condemned him. But I suppose [Page 132] ye would fasten the Iudges part vpon him, because he sayd to Eutyches, he that doth not confesse in Christe two natures, doth not belieue a right. This might anie other mā haue sayd to, and this is but a symple sentence. And as simple as yt is, ye thought not very simply, but dubly and craftely, yea al­together falsly, minding to beare the ignorant reader in hād as thoughe this had bene the final sentence. And therfore ye say, and so was Eutyches excommunicated, deposed, and condemned. But by whom, I pray you, Maister Horne? By Florentius, or Flauianus in the Councell? And when and howe, I praye youe? Did not the Councell before these woordes of Florentius, demaunde of Eutyches his faithe?Liberatus cap. 11. Yea, did not they tell him? Thou must confesse this, and curse all doctrine contrary to this faith? Nowe when Eu­tyches would not, and said, as ye say in many thinges, he would not, because the holy scripture hadde no suche matter, then did the Councel curse him: And after this curse Flo­rentius spake the woordes by you rehersed. Afterwarde was he cursed again, and depriued of his priestly honour, not by Florenrius, but by his owne bisshop Flauianus, as it is conteined in the chapter by you quoted. Yea that more is, a playn place withal of the Popes primacy to. For both Flauianus sent this his Sētēce to Rome, and Eutyches thus cōdemned, cōplayned by his letters vpon Flauianus, and ap­pealed, to Pope Leo. But Eutyches rested not here: The Popes primacy proued by M, Horns ovvn author and chapter. (saieth M. Horne) In dede in Eutyches we haue a paterne of you and your felowes, that wil be ruled by no lawe or order of the Church. This Eutyches being first three seueral tymes cyted by his owne bisshop and Patriarche Flauianus, would not appeare before him, but by the meanes of one Chry­saphius his Godde childe, a buskyn gentleman aboute [Page] the Emperours preuy chamber, brought the matter to the Prince. Then a prouincial Synode being called by the Em­perour, and Eutyches condemned, he appealed from the Emperour to Pope Leo. Being by him also condemned, he woulde not yet yelde. No in the generall Councel of Chalcedon being thrise summoned by the whole Coun­cell of 630. Bisshoppes, his pride and obstinacy was suche, that he woulde not appeare, nor being there with ful cō ­sent condemned, would yet yelde thereunto. And al be­cause the .ij. natures of Christ in one person (which he de­nied) was not expressely found in the Scriptures. In all these (except his only appealing to Rome) he shewed him selfe as right an heretike, as any that nowe liueth. But this is a wōderful foly, or rather madnes in you to procede on, and to alleage farder matter of Theodosius doinges for calling other Councels in the mayntenance of Entyches at Constantinople and Ephesus,Leo epist. 51. ad. Pulcheriam. and by and by to declare, that the said synode of Ephesus, was a wicked conuēticle, as it was in dede, and as Leo calleth it, Non iudicium, sed la­trocinium. No iudgement, but a tyrannical violence, and al thinges there done against Flauianus, afterwarde reuersed by Pope Leo: a most certain argument of his supremacye. And yet ye cal your Emperour, a godly Emperour, neither shewing of his repentaunce, nor of any his good doinges. Thus ye see how pitefully euery way ye are caste in your own turne.

M. Horne. 46. Diuision. Pag. 30. b.

Leo the first, Bisshop of Rome a learned and a godly bisshop, although not vvithout al, faultes, maketh hum [...]le supplicatiō vn [...]o Theodosius the Emperour, and vnto Pulcheria: that there might be a general Coūcel called in Italy, to abolishe the wicked errour in Faith, [Page 133] confirmed by the violence of Dioscorus. The selfe same Bis­shop of Rome with many bisshops kneeling on their knees, did most humbly beseeche in like sort Valentinianus the em­perour, that he woulde vouchesaulfe to entreate and exhorte Theodosius the Emperour to cal an other Synode,Liberat. cap. 12. to reuoke those euil actes and iudgementes, which Dioscorus had cau­sed to be don in the condemnation of Flauianus Bisshop of Constantinople and others. In vvhich examples it is manifest, that the bisshops of Rome did (.136.)The .136. vntruth. The Popes neuer ac­knovlea­ged any such matter, and Leo lest of al other, acknovvledge the supreme gouerment, di­rection and authority in calling of Councels, vvhich is (.137.)The .137 vntruthe. It is no ecclesia­stical cause at al, as the Emperours vse it. one of the greatest amongest the ecclesiastical causes or matters, to be in the Empe­rours, and Princes, and not in them selues.

Stapleton.

IT is well and clerkly noted of you M. Horne, that Leo, being a godly and a learned bisshop was not yet without all faults It was wel spied of yow, least men should think he was borne without originall synne (which I dowbt whe­ther yowe wil graunt to Christes mother) or take him for Christ him self. For who, I beseache yowe, is without all faultes?

But what a holy, vertuous and godly man this Leo was, I let passe to speake (though very much might be said ther­in) bicause the good or euil life of a Pope or any other man is not material to the doctrin which he teacheth, or to the matter we haue now in hand. But verely for his right faith, true doctrine, and found belefe (for the which you seme to taxe him) I wil with ij. shorte saynges onely of ij. generall [Page] Coūcels shortly note to the Reader, both what an absolute doctour this Leo was, and what a malapert comptroller you are. The Chalcedō Councell of 630. bishops do expres­sely and plainely professe their Iudgement of this blessed father Leo (in their solemne subscription) in these wordes. Nos summè orthodoxum esse sanctissimum patrem nostrum Archiepiscopum Leonem perfectissimè nouimus. Act. 4. pa. 871. col. [...]. Tom. 1. Con. We most perfitly know, that our most holy father Leo the Archebi­shop, is of right iudgement in religiō, in the highest degree. Loe M. Horne those fathers so many and so lerned with one consent do saye: Not that they thinke or beleue, but that they knowe: and that not superficially or slenderly, but perfectissimè most perfytly, most exactly, most assured­ly: And what knowe they so surely? Forsothe that their most holy father Leo is Orthodoxus, a right beleuer, a true Catholike, a sounde teacher of Gods people. And not onely so, after a common or meane sort, but Summè Ortho­doxum: Catholike and right beleuing in the highest degree: without any blotte or blemish in that respecte. After suche a Sentence, so protested and pronounced, of suche, so many, so lerned, and so auncient fathers aboue vnleuen hundred yeres paste, in suche and so solemne an assem­bly for the absolute and vndoubted commendation of that excellent prelat, whence crepe you, with your lewde sur­mise, or with what face dare you deface him? With the like constāt and absolute cōmendatiō (without any surmi­sed exceptiō at al) in an other general Coūcel,Cōcil. Cō ­stant. 5. Act. 1. pag. 74. Tom. 2. Cō ­cil. the next af­ter this, he is called by the cōmon voyce of the East Bis­shops, Illuminator & Columna Ecclesiae. A geuer of light, and a piller of the Churche. You come to late, M. Horne, to blotte or to blemish the Reuerēt memory of so blessed, so [Page 134] lerned and so much commended a father. His light so shy­neth that no horne can dymme it. His doctrine is so strōge, that no surmise can weaken it. The more you kicke at this piller, the more you breake your shinne. The more you deface him, the greater is your owne shame.

Therefore as your glosing here was causelesse, so sure­ly your meaning is gracelesie. Verely suche as if ye had expressed it, woulde forthwith haue disgraced and quyte ouerthrowen your false conclusion immediatly folowing, freighted allmost with as many lies as lynes. For tou­ching his suyte to the Emperour to haue a Councell cal­led, you must vnderstande M. Horne, that the bare cal­ling of Councells suche as Emperours haue vsed, is not one of the greateste amonge Ecclesiasticall causes, nor, to speake properlye, any matter Ecclesiasticall at all, but a prouision by the waie of exhortation for the bishops to meete in some conuenyent place without breache of the ciuill order, which forbiddeth Illicita collegia: that is,Tit. de Il­licitis col­legijs. vn­lawful assemblies, as the same shoulde for such be accōpted if thēperor had not allowed them: And not only thēperor, but any other prince being lorde of the territory or soyle, where the bishops woulde assemble. In dede the discussion and determination of matters of faith in Councelles may wel be said to belong to the great ād weighty causes of the Church, but this belōgeth not to lay princes: and this not withstādīg, Leo is so far of frō acknowledging this supreme gouernmēt and authority in calling of councels, that yf I be not deceiued, ye your self do know ād belieue the cōtrary, and therefore durst not speak what ye thought, but vnder such dark and mystical talke. For I pray you, M. Horne, what is the fault ye find in Leo, worthy to be thus touched [Page] by yow onlesse yt be, that he moste playnely and seriously auowcheth this supreame authoritie to reste in the see of Rome? And then fare wel your goodlie conclusion. What other secrete faults, by your so quick prying egles eye, ye haue in him espied, I wot not. But your brethern of the best and learned sorte, fynde, as farre as I can fynde, none other fault then this that I haue sayde: wich is no fault at al. And therfore in your shrewde and vnhappie meaning, thowgh not in your expresse pēning, yt is a verye vntruthe. Yet yf ye wel pretend ignorāce, and make men belieue ye know no such thing in Leo, but that yowre cōclusion is true, and taketh place as wel in him as other bisshops, then wil I load and presse you,Prouf [...] out of [...]eo for the popes primacy. See his 3 sermon vvhere he calleth S. Pet. head of the Church. Epist. 82. vel aliâs 84. ad A­nastasium cap. 11. Tom. 1. cō ­cil. pag. 700. Ad vnam Petrisedem vnersalis ecclesiae cura conflueret. Ibidem. Vt pro solicitudine quam vniuersae ecclesiae ex diuina institutione dependimus: episto. 87. ad episcopos Aphrican. with such good and euidēte proufs, fetched no farder then from Leo him self, that ye shall be fayne, yf ye haue any grace to acknowledge the truthe. For whe­ther ye regarde his doings or his sayings, both are in this pointe moste notable.

S. Peters primacy he doth euery where confesse. As ap­pereth in many of his sermons, and in his other workes. For Leo saieth: Quoniam & inter Apostolos, in similitudine ho­noris fuit quaedam discretio potestatis: & quum omnium par es­set electio, vni tamē datū est, vt caeteris praeemineret. Where­as all the Apostles were of lyke honour (he meaneth in Apostleship and priesthood) yet was there difference of power amōgs them, and where as al were of lyke elected, yet was yt geuen to one to be peerlesse aboue the other. Wherein he meaneth Saint Peter. Leo saieth, that where other Bisshops haue their seueral and appointed care, the [Page 135] care of the vniuersal Church cometh to the only see of S. Peter. Leo saith, that euen by Gods own ordinance, he taketh care, for the whole Churche. And Leo saieth, Vt ab ipso quasi quodam capite, dona sua velut in omne corpus diffunderet, vt expertemse ministerij intelligeret esse diuini, qui ausus fuisset a Petri soliditate recedere: hunc enim in consortium indiuiduae vnitatis assumptum, id quod ipse erat, voluit nominari, Leo epist. 87. ad epis. Vicnnē. prouinciae: tom. 2. cōc. f [...]l. 705. Extra de elect & e­lecti potest c. funda­menta. Ievvell Pag. 311. A vvret­ched cor­ruption made of Pope Leo his words by M. Ievve [...]. V [...]de dict. c. funda­menta in. 6. & dist. 19. ca. [...]a Dominus: in editio. Iugd. 1559 dicen­do. Tu es Petrus & super hanc Petram &c. that from S. Peter the Apostle as from the head God powreth al his gifts into the body, and that God toke him into the felowship of the indiuisible vnity. The meaning whereof Leo him self ex­poundeth, saying, that he shall not be partaker of Gods miste­rie that departeth from Peters sowndenes: and for that Christe who is called in scriptures the rock, gaue the same name to Pe­ter. And here yt shall not be much out of the way to note, that M. Iewel recyting this place, doth not only dissimble that this is writen of the godlie and learned man Leo: but also fathereth yt vpon Pope Bonifacius, who writeth it to, but as ye see, not originally. And most lyingly for vnita­tis putteth in trinitatis: as though Leo ād Bonifacius should make S. Peter one of the three parsons of the blessed Tri­nitie. Being in this poynt, the popes glosar, as good as Molineus, or M. Horne him selfe. Whiche Molineus in this place gloseth apase, but not for the pope, but as much as he can againste him. And yet for this matter much better then M. Iewel, reading aswell here as otherwhere in the canon lawe: vnitatis, & non trinitatis. This nowe by the way, to shewe yow, that there be more popes glosars, then Moli­neus, and withal, one of M. Iewels prety knackes, worthy to be added for an after reckonīg to such as M. D. Hardīg, D. Sanders, and I haue most rightfully charged him with.

[Page]Let vs now returne to Leo, and see whether as in woordes he did amplifie this supreame authori­ty: so in his doinges he practised it, or no. Who is he then,Dict. epist. 87. Dedimus literas ad fratres & coepis­copos Tarraco. Car­tha. Lusitanos atque Gallicos eisque con­cilium Synodi ge­neralis indiximus. epistola. 93 ad [...]ur­biū. cap. 17. Vicem curae nostrae proficiscenti à nobis fratri & consacer­doti nostro Potentio delegantes▪ epistola 87. ad episcopos A­phrican. Dilectioni tuae vi­cem mei modera­minis delegaui, epi­stol. 82. To. 1. Con. pa. 742. Vicem ipse meam cō ­tra temporis nostri haereticos delegaui, atque propter eccle­siarum pacisque cu­stodiam, vt a comi­tatu vestro non ab­esset, exegi. epist. 55. [...]om. 1. Concil pag. 674 In ipso Leon. 57. Consensiones Episcoporū sanctorū cano [...]ū apud Nicaeā conditarū regulis repugnātes, in irritū mettimus, & per authoritatem beati Petri Apostoli generali prorsus definitione cassamus. Ad Pulcheriam epist. 55. Tom. 1. concil. pag. 672. Epistola 47. & 49. that reuerseth the vnlawfull doinges of Bisshoppe Hilarius at Fraunce? Leo. Who is he, that calleth to a generall Councell the Bisshoppes of Tarracone, Lusitania, Fraunce and Car [...]hage? Leo. Who is it that appointeth his deputye Poten­tius to heare and refourme matters Ecclesiasticall in Aphrike? Leo. Who is he that doth appointe Anastasius the Bisshoppe of Thessalonica, to be his deputye and vicegerente for matters Ecclesiasticall in those quarters? Leo. Who is he that resto­red to his bisshoprike the learned Theodoretus bis­shoppe of Cyrus dwellinge farre of in the easte, vniustlye deposed of Maximus his owne Patri­arche, and of Dioscorus? Leo. Who is he that sendeth his deputy Iulian to the Emperour Mar­cian to remayne in his cowrte, and to supplye his office, in such thinges as shoulde be done, a­gainst heretikes in those quarters? Leo. Who is he that did annichilate ād reuerse by the authority of S. Peter the Apostle, the doings of a nōber of Bis­shoppes at Constantinople, before the Bis [...]hoppe of Alexandria and other patriarches contrarye to the canons of Nice? Leo. Who is he that sendeth his Legates to be presidentes in the great Coun­cel [Page 136] at Chalcedo? Leo. Which him selfe signifieth in his letters aswel to the whole Coūcell as to thēperour Marcian.Epist. 59. & 61. Act. 3. Chal. cōc. Epist. 33.40 [...]4.55 Epist. [...]8. Leo epist. 47. Who is he that confirmed the Decrees of the Councel of Chalcedo, being therto required, as wel by the whole Coū cel, as by thēperour Marciā? Leo. Who is he that cōfirmed Anatholius and Proterius the ij. chiefe Patriarches in the Easte, one of Constantinople the other of Alexādria? Leo. And who is he that in summoning the Councel of Chal­cedon, yelded not otherwise to the Emperours appoynt­ment for the place, but with an expresse exception, say­ing? The honour and right of the See of S. Peter the most bles­sed Apostle, reserued ▪ Leo. Wherein he expressely sig­nified, that the Summoning of the Councell of right ap­pertayned to his Apostolike See. What saye yowe to all this, Maister Horne? Howe well dothe, Pope Leo, ac­knowledge your supremacy? For shame leaue of ons these lyinge conclusions. Hard yt will be I trowe, yt seameth to be so naturall an humour in men of your religion. But yet nothing is hard to the willing, and to him that will hartely seke for grace at Gods hande. The which I praye him of his mercy sende yowe: And learne I praye you to fynde faulte with your self, as ye haue greate cause, rather then with this good vertuouse bishop,It is in the 477. vntruth. In our Return [...] Art. 4. folio 142. faultlesse I dare saye for suche matters, as ye take for greate faultes in him. But to ende this matter, I must commende yowe for one thinge, for ye haue scaped one scoringe that your fellowe M. Ie­well did not scape: for writing that Leo did kneele with other bishops, which the wordes of his authour Liberatus by you here truelie rehersed, do not importe.

M. Horne. The .47. Diuision. Pag. 3 [...]. a.

Nice. lib. 15. cap. 12. Leo epist. 44. Marcianus, a godly Emperour, and very studious about the Christian Religion, succeded Theodosius, vvho besides that of him selfe, he vvas much careful to suppresse al heresies, and to refourme the Churches, restoring Religion to purity vvithout error, vvas also hastened hereunto by the earnest sute of Leo bisshop of Rome: vvho in diuerse and sondry epistles, declaring vn­to him in moste humble vvise, the miserable state of the Church, doth beseche him, that he vvould vouchsaulfe to cal a general councel. Many other bis­shops make the same sui [...]e vnto the Emperour, and to the same ende complaining vnto him,Act. 1. of the miserable destructiō, and horrible disorders, in Church causes. An example and paterne of their supplications, vvherby (138.) The .138. vntruth. Neither by Leo his epistle neither by the bisshops supplication any such thīg doth appeare. may appeare, that they acknovvledged the Emperour to be their Supreme gouer­nour, also in Ecclesiastical causes, or matters, is sette foorth in the Chalcedon councel, in the supplicatiō of Eusebius, the bishop of Dorelaum; vnto the Emperour: vvho maketh humble supplication as he sayth, for him selfe, and for the true or right faith. we flie vnto your godlines (saith this bishop vnto the Emperour) bicause both we and the Christian faith, haue suffered much wrong against al reason: humbly crauing iustice, and for that Dioscorus hath doon many, and that no smal offences, both against the faith of Christ and vs: pro­strate, we beseche your clemency, that you wil cōmaund him to answere to the matters, we shal obiecte against him: (.139.) The .139. vntruth. In nippīg of a clause in the middest, vtterly ouer­throvvīg M. Horns principal purpose. wherein we will proue him to be out of the catholike faith, defending heresies replete with impietie. VVherefore we beseche you to directe your holy and honourable commaun­dement, to the holy and vniuersal councel of the moste reli­gious Bishoppes, to examen the cause betwixt vs, and Dios­corus, and to make relation of al thinges, that are doon, to be (.140.) The .140 vntruth False trāslation. In epist. praeamb. iudged as shal seeme good to your clemency. The Em­perour protesting that they oughte to preserue the furtheraunce of the right fayth and Christian Religion, before al other affaires of the commō vvealth: sendeth their letters of summons to all bishoppes, commaundinge them to repaire to Nice, a citie in Bithinya, there to consulte and conclude, an vni­tie and concorde, in religion, and matters perteining thereunto, that here­after all altercation and doubtfulnesse be taken cleane avvay, and an hole­some [Page 137] trueth in Religion established, addinge (.141.) The .141. vntruthe Marcian vsed no such threates. Vide epist. preamb. Cōc. Chal. Tom. 1. Cō. pag. 734. col. 2. threates, and punishe­ment to them that vvould refuse to come at the time appointed. VVhā thas­sembly vvas made at Nice of all the bishops, and that the Emperours could not come thither, to be present in the Synode personally, vvhich they had pro­mised and did much coueite, they vvrite vnto the vvhole Synode, vvilling thē to remoue from Nice vnto Chalcedon vvithout delay: vvhere they assembled at the Emperours (.142.) The 142. vntr. At his exhortatiō, not commaū ­dement. commaundement, to the number of .630. bi­shoppes.

Stapleton.

M. Horne is nowe harping againe vpon his old string of calling of Councelles: and would establish Mar­cianus ecclesiasticall primacy thereby. But eyther his eies, his lucke, or his mater was not good, to happe vpō no better place then he doth, which doth beare him quyte ouer, and setteth forth pope Leo his primacye sending his ambassadours and vicegerents to Cōstantinople to reforme heresies, and to pardon and recōcyle such heretical bishops as were poenitente:Ep. 42. & 44. alias 44. & 46. Tom. 1. Conc. di­cta epist. 42 alibi est. 44. vnto whome he adioyneth as his dele­gate, euen the Bishoppe and Patriarche of Constantino­ple. And declareth this his doings in his letters as wel to the Emperour him selfe: as to Anatolius the Patriarche. Nowe, what yf pope Leo requireth a councell at the Em­perours hands? what doth this blemish his authority, more thē yf the Pope now shuld require the Emperor, the french and Spanishe kings, and other princes, as he did of late, to sende their bisshops to the councel? Verely that the Empe­rour so should doe, it was of all times moste necessarie in Marcian his tyme: the .3. patriarches of Alexandra, Antio­chia, and Hierusalem, with a great number of Bishops in the [Page] East, taking then the Archeheretike Eutyches part, against the good and godly Catholike byshop Flauianus, whome Dioscorus with his factiō murdered. Was it not then high time to seke al ayde and helpe,Generale Concilium ex praecep­to Christianorū prin­cipū, & ex cōsensu A­postolicae sedis placuit cōgregari. Epist. 59. alias. 61. ad luxe nalē. [...]om. 1. Concil. pag. 676. So [...]ra. li. 1. cap. 8. [...]ouncels [...] not be kepte vvithout the con [...]ent of the Pope. Beatissimi Petri iure atque ho­nore serua to. Ep. 45. alias. 47. Tō. 1. Cōc. pag. 663. col. 2. a. both spiritual and temporal? Or is it any diminution to the spirituall power, when the temporall power doth helpe and assist it? Or thinke yow, would this perniciouse pestilent fellow Dioscorus, and his faction any thing haue regarded Pope Leo his ecclesiasti­cal authority, which before had so notoriously transgressed both Gods lawes and mans lawes, onlesse the good Empe­rour had ioyned his assistaunce vnto it? And this maye be answered for the calling of many other generall Councels by the Emperours: especially of the firste seuen hundred yeares after Christ, when the Patriarches them selues were Archeheretikes, and the matters not like easily to be re­dressed by the Churche authoritie onely. Yet neyther did any Catholique Prince call, or could call a Councell with­out or against the Popes wil and consent. If ye thinke not so, as in dede ye doe not, then thinke you farre a wrong: And the godly and learned Bisshop Leo, as you call him, is able, if you be capable and willing toward any reformati­on, sone to refourme your wrong iudgement. Who decla­reth expresselye, that euen the Councell of Chalcedo was summoned, by the commaundement of the Emperours, with the consent of the See Apostolique. Surely it was a rule and a Canon in the Church, aboue .12. hūdred yeares now past, that no Councell could be kept (as Socrates witnesseth) with­out the authoritie of the Bisshop of Rome: And that by a spe­ciall prerogatiue and priuilege of that See. This preroga­tiue Leo also doth signify, speaking of this Emperour Mar­cian, who called the Chalcedon Councel, but yet, saith he, [Page 138] without any hinderance or preiudice of S. Peters right and ho­nour, that is by and with his consent, being S. Peters succes­sour, in the Apostolique See of Rome.

I meruail much, that ye frame this supremacie of Marci­an by the supplication of the Bishop Eusebius, desiring the Emperour to procure by his letters that he coūcel would heare his cause against Dioscorus, which serueth rather for the Councels primacy. The remouing also of the Councel frō Nicaea to Chalcedo, doth serue to as litle purpose.Vide Tom. 1. Concil. pag. 735. & 736. For the cause of the trāsposing was, for that Leo by his ambas­sadours had signified, that the Bishops would not assemble, onlesse th'Emperour would be there personally, for feare of seditiō and tumult of Eutyches disciples. It was therfore translated to Chalcedo, being nigh to Constantinople, that the Emperour might be there the more cōmodiously. And so that which was done by the good Emperor to assure ād honour th'Eclesiastical authority, ye turne it to the hinde­rance and derogation of it. But in the supplicatiō of Eu­sebius which you haue put so at large in your booke, it is a world to see how vntruly you haue dealt, partly with nip­ping of sentences in the midst, partly with false translation. First you leaue out at the very begīning of the Bishops sup­plication, wherin he shortly declareth the whole effect of his request, saiyng:Act. 1. Cōc. Chal. pag. 741. The entēt and purpose of your clemency is to prouide for all your subiects, and to helpe all that are iniuriously oppressed, but especially such as beare the office of Priesthod. By this beginning it appereth, the Bishop requested onely the Emperours external and ciuill power for redresse and help against iniuries. And because this should not so appere, you thought good to leaue it quite out. Againe in the pro­cesse, where the sayed Bisshoppe saieth: Prostrate we [Page] beseech your clemencie that ye will commaund Dioscorus to answere to the matters we shall obiect against him. It folo­loweth which you leaue out, the euidences of his doinges a­gainst vs being read in this Councell, by which words the bi­shop required the Councel to be his Iudge, not the Empe­ror: and least that shuld appere you leaue it out: At the end where the latine hath, perferre ad scientiam vestrae pietatis omnia quae geruntur, you turne it: to make relation of all thin-that are don, to be iudged: where you haue put in these words (to be iudged) of your own liyng liberality, more then your latine hath: and al to persuade, that the bishoppe requested here the Emperoure to be the Iudge betweene Dioscorus and him. Which (if ye had put in the whole wordes of your Author) would haue easely appeared nothing so, but ra­ther the contrarye: as by the places by you omitted, and nowe by me expressed, the circumspect Reader may sone perceiue. Thus like as your doctrine, so is your manner of writing, false, vnperfect, and vntrue.

Againe in all this tale, Maister Horne, though you tell vs at large howe the Emperoures Marcian and Valenti­nian sente their letters of Summons to all Bisshoppes com­maunding them, In epist. Praeamb. Concil. Chal [...]ed. Tom. 1. Pag. 733.734. & 735. col. 2 &c. Yea, adding threattes and punish­mentes to those that refused to come at appointmente, Yet you tell vs nothing that the Emperoure firste wrote vnto Pope Leo, and obteined his consente and Authoritye. And then that in his letters of Summones to al Bishops, certified them expressely of the Popes pleasure, and last of all that the Popes Legates required the Emperours to be presente personallye at the Councell, or els they woulde not come there them selues. All this yow lette passe. In deede it maketh not for yow. But it sheweth against yow and [Page 139] for vs, very well and plainely, that the supreme summon and citing of the bishops to that general Councel,In epist. praeamb. vbi supra. yea and the Emperours owne presence there, proceded directlye and principally from the Pope and his Legats. It declareth well the Popes supremacy in that affaire, as we shal in ma­ny other moe pointes decypher vnto yow anon more at large. Neyther doth the Emperour vse in his letters of Sū ­mon, the wordes of commaundemente, but saith: Venire dignemini. Vouchesafe ye to come. And againe. Adhorta­mur. we exhort you to come. This was the practise of Em­perours (as I haue noted before out of Cusanus) by the way of exhortation to call Councels: not by forceable cōman­dement, by threates and punishmēt, as you vntruely report.

M. Horne. The .48. Diuision. pag. 31. b.

The Emperour assigneth Iudges and (143.) The .143. Vntruth. They wer no rulers suche as M. Horne sancieth. Act. 1. The cause of discord vvas that they taught not quod veri­tas aut doctrina patrum requirit: that vvhiche truth or the Fa­thers do­ctrine re­quireth. This you omit. For vvhy? It shevved your ovn case. rulers in the Sinode about .24. of the chiefest of his Nobles and Senatours. After al the Bishoppes and the Iudges vvere assembled in the councell house, vvhiche vvas in S. Euphemies Church: the Emperour Martianus, vvith Pulcheria, entreth in amongst them, and maketh an Oration vnto the vvhole Councel, to this effecte. First he declareth, vvhat zeale and care he hath for the maintenance and furthe­rance of true Religiō: Then he shevveth, that partely the vanitie, partely the auarice of the teachers, had caused the * discorde and errour in Religion: He addeth the cause vvherefore he chardged them vvith this trauaile: And last of all he (.144.) The 144. Vntruth. The Em­peroure prescri­bed no fourme at al for determinīg of maters in cōtro­uersie. prescribeth a fourme, after vvhich they must determine the matters in controuersy. This done, the Iudges sate doune in their places, and the Bisshoppes arovve, some on the right hand, and others on the left hande. And vvhan that Dioscorus vvas accused, and the Iudges vvilled him to vse his lavvfull defence, there began to be amōgst the Bisshops vvhote scholes, vvanting some modesty, vvherefore the Iudges at the first stayed them vvith milde vvordes. VVilling them to auoide confusion: but being ear­nest, they ouershot the modesty of so graue men: vvherefore the honourable [Page] Iudges and Senate of the Laity, appointed by the Emperour, did reproue them saying: These popular acclamations, neither becommeth Bis­shoppes, neither yet helpe the parties: be ye quiet therefore, and suffer all thinges to be rehersed and heard in order with quietnes. VVhen the Iudges and Senate, had duely examined the causes, they gaue (.145.) The .145. Vntruth. notorius. The Iud­ges depo­sed not Diosco­rus, but the Coū ­cell. sentence to depose Dioscorus and others: So that this their iudgement semed good to the Em­perour, to whom they referred the whole matter.

Stapleton.

WE are now in order come to the Coūcel of Chal­cedo, the actes whereof being very long and te­dious, the leaues in the great volume rising to the number of one hundred and more, M. Horne hath here and there pried out good matter as he thinketh, to depresse the Popes primacie withal. Wherein he so handleth him­selfe, that he semeth to me for many causes neuer to haue read the acts, but to haue taken things as they came to his handes, ministred by his friends, or by his Latine Maisters. Ones,The aun­svver cō ­cerning the Coū ­cell of Chalcedo this is sure, that for some of his allegations, a man may pore in the booke, til his eies dasel againe, and his head ake, ere he shal find them, and in such prolixitie of the mat­ter, when he hath found them, and well weighed them: a man would thinke,The E­phesine and the Chalcedō Councell shevved in a darke horne. that M. Horne had either lost his wits, or els were him selfe a sleape, when he wrote those argu­ments: or els which is worst of al, that he was past al shame and grace. For as ye saw, good Readers, the Ephesine so shall ye now see the Councell of Chalcedo, by no cleare candle or torche, but all in a darke horne. Wherein he playeth like a false wilie marchaunte, that will not shewe [Page 140] his wares, but in a darke shoppe. But by Gods helpe I shall bring his naughty marchādise into the bright shining light, that al men may openly at the eye see al the leudnes of it.

And to begyn, with the first action of the said Councel, and to followe M. Hornes steppes with a litle tracing, ther sterteth vp at the first (I will speake with the least) a brace of lyes, besyde other vaine and impertinent talke.See the .1. [...]ome of councelle the 736. leaf and 737. col. 2. & 1. Of hys Iudges, whereby he woulde haue the Reader to thinke, that these noble men were Iudges in the decision and de­termination of matters ecclesiastical, he commeth altoge­ther to short, as ye shal anon vnderstande. And therefore this shall be the first lye. The second lye is that he saieth. The Emperour prescribed a forme, after which they muste determine the matters in controuersie. For in al the Actes of that Councell, there appeareth no such fourme or pre­scription made. It is vsual with M. Horne, in euery Coun­cel to report such a prescription. But as he hath often saied it, so hath he not once proued it, or shewed it by any one Authority, but his owne, which is a singular authoritye,See the 831. leaf. col▪ 2. to lye as lewedly (allmost) as M. Iewell. Yet to bleare the Readers eye, and to seame handsomly to furnish his mat­ter by some president and example, he layeth forth for his proufe, that these Iudges gaue sentence to depose Dios­corus the Patriarche of Alexandria, and others. This is all­together false.

For firste they were no competent and ordinary Iudges being mere laye men,4. Causes to proue that Dios­corus vvas not deposed by them▪ especially in causes ecclesiastical to depose a Bishoppe. Secondlye, puttyng the case, they had bene lawefull and ordinarye Iudges, yet was yt no finall and iudiciall sentence. For a final sentēce must decide and determine the matter, by an absolut cōdemnatiō or absolu­tion: [Page] which was not done here, this pretensed sentence being as your selfe write, cōditional: So that this their iudg­ment semed good to the Emperour, to whom they referred the whole matter. And here by the waye falleth out an other vntruth:Videtur nobis iustū esse. See the 847. leafe col. 2. for the Nobles them selues doe not cal this saying a Iudgemēt, but say, yt semeth vnto vs iust. Which words by lawe importe no final iudgemēt. Fourthly and laste, this was no iudgemente, neither was Dioscorus deposed here in this action (for in the beginning of the next action, the Iudges confesse, that sentence was not yet geuen vppon Dioscorus.) but in the thirde action: and that not by theis Iudges, as ye cal them, but by Pope Leo his deputies, and the residew of the Bishoppes without any referring of the matter to th'Emperor as the Iudges doe here.

Martians oration returned vpon M. Horne.The rest ye talk of in this place is of no weight: and yf it weyeth anie thing, yt weieth against you, as Marcians ora­tion, whych tendeth to this, that in new questions and dis­sensions of religion, we must haue a speciall regard to the do­ctrine, teaching and writing of the former fathers and coūcels: which rule and forme of Iudgemēt prescribed by him you quit left out, as a rule in dede, importing a plaine destructiō of your new gospel.See the 740. leafe col. 1. Now if the making of an oration by a lay man imploieth any authority, voice, or iuriseictiō in the Coūcell, then were many lay men (the ambassadours for their Princes, that made orations there, yea and found ma­ny faultes to in the Church, and desired the reformation of them) members and Iudges of the late Councel of Trent, which is notoriously false: and so is that also that ye write of the noble men at Chalcedo. And whereas they founde faulte wyth the populare acclamations of the Bishoppes, which of a great zele to the catholik faith cried out against [Page 141] Dioscorus and other that deposed the godly Bishop Flaui­anus, and that they would not receiue Theodoretus, nor heare such matters as he had to propose, because he for the time, helde against Cyrillus and other Catholikes: and that these noble men endeuoured to set an order and quietnes among them, doth plainly shew,M. Horn [...] argumēte for the exclama­tiō retur­ned vpon him selfe. See the 743. leafe. col. 1. wherein these noble mens office did rest: as nothing touching the definition of anye matter spiritual, but to prouide that al things might be don with order, indifferency and quietnes. For if a man consi­der, what disorder, tumulte, crueltie, yea and murder too, fell in the second Ephesin Councell, whiche customably is rather called a Conuenticle, and a cōspiracy, for the main­tenaunce whereof, ye make Theodosius a very godly Em­perour, and how that Dioscorus and his cōfederats, would not suffer the Catholique Bishops Notaries, as the manner was, to write the actes there done: but thrusted them out, and put in Notaries of his owne at his pleasure, howe he came to the other notaries and brake their wrytinges and fingers to:See the 750. leafe. 1. &. 2. col See the 847. leafe col. 2. howe that he forced the bishops to subscribe to a blanke: that is, in cleane paper, wherein nothyng was writen: howe that, Dioscorus would not suffer the epistle of Leo the Pope sent to the Councel to be read: and final­ly, howe that he slewe the blessed Bishop Flauianus: he that, I say, cōsidereth and wel weigheth the premisses, and that a great numbre of those schismatical bishops were also with Dioscorus at Chalcedo, shal sone perceue, what nede there was of these noble mens assistance, & that they might wel haue to doe there, thoughe not in ruling and iudging any spiritual matter, yet in the indifferent ruling and dire­ction of the Catholike Bishopes external doings, and to see that al things might procede with quietnesse and without [Page] parcialitie. Which answere ones made, will serue also for many other General Councels. But what a wicked Cham are you, M. Horne, that reueale to the common people in your vulgare bookes, the faults and disorders of your most holy and reuerent Fathers, the Fathers of so famous, and so learned a Councell? Verely Constantine the Greate, that noble Emperour,Niceph. li 8 ca. 16 would cast his Imperiall garment (he said) to hyde a Bisshops faulte, if by chaunce he should see any. And becommeth it your vocation, bearing the roume of a Bis­shop your self, to tel the people of the Bisshops whot scholes, of their want of modestie, and of ouershoting them selues? You a Bishop of Gods Church? Nay your sprit sheweth it selfe more bucherly then Bishoply, and as mete to carie a rake as a Rochet.

M. Horne. The .49. Diuision. pag. 32. a.

Act. 2.In the next action, the Iudges and Senate after rehersall made, vvhat vvas done before, dooe propounde vnto the Synode, vvhat matters vvere novv to be consulted of, and vvilleth them to make a pure exposition of the faith, and that vvithout any sinister affection, declaring that the Emperour and they, did firmely kepe and beleue, according to the faith receiued in the Nicen Councel: vvherevnto the Bisshops also accorde, and saith, that noman maketh, or may attempt to make any other exposition. Certaine of the Synode desired to heare the Symbol of the Nicen Councel re­cited, which the Senate and Iudges graunted vnto them.

Stapleton.

By this also it may easely be sene, wherein the duety and office of these Ciuil Magistrats did stād. videl. to see the Bi­shops requests, of reading this booke or that booke, this e­uidence or that euidence, put in execution. And so it ma­keth rather against M. Horne then with him.

M. Horne. The .50. Diuision. Pag. 32. a.

After that it vvas agreed vpon by the vvhole Synode, that Dioscorus should be deposed, Act. 3, 630. Bis­shoppes. (.146.) cō fesse the Princes suprema­cie in Ec­clesiasti­cal causes. The .146, Vntruth. most ri­diculous, a [...] shall appeare. the Synode vvriteth vnto the Emperours Valentinia­nus and Martianus, saiyng in this fourme: Grieuous diseases nea­deth both a stronge medicine and a wise Physition: For this cause therfore, the Lord ouer al hath appointed your godlines as the best and chiefe Phisition ouer the diseases of the whole world, that you should heale them with fitte medicines. And you most Christian Emperours, receiuing commaundemēt frō God aboue other men, haue geuen competent diligence for the churches, framing a medicine of cōcord vnto the Bishops (.147.)The .147. Vntruth. In cōcea­ling the next sen­tence fo­lovving opening the whol matter. This, thus in vvay of Preface said, they declare vvhat they haue done touching Dioscorus, they shevve the cause and reasons that moued them thervnto: both that the Emperour shoulde consider his vvickednesse, and also the sinceritie of their sentence.

Stapleton.

Now loe M. Fekenham must nedes yeld and geue ouer. For euen the whole Coūcel, to the number of .630. Bishops doth confesse (saith M. Horne) the princes supremacy in causes ecclesiastical (it is wel, it is not yet in al causes Ecclesiastical) And therefore this note is fastened in the Margente, as it were with a tenpeny naile, and yet al not worth a hedlesse pinne. For I beseech you, Maister Horne, howe can this notable conclusion of yours take anye anker holde of any saiyngs of the Councell by you here alleaged? How farre and how deaply your sharpe sight can pearce, I know not. But for my part I must confesse my selfe so blind, that I can see no cause in the world why ye should furnish your margent with such a iolie note.

Wel, I perceiue euery mā can not see through a milstone: But yet eyther my sight and my braine to, faileth mee, or [Page] all this great prouf standeth in this, that the Councell cal­leth the Emperours, the best and chiefe physitions ouer the disseases of the world, for framing a medicine of concorde to the Bisshops: By my trowth, it is wel and worshipfully conclu­ded, and ye were worthy at the least, to be made a potica­rie for your labour. Sauing that it is to be feared, if ye shuld procede on the body, as ye doe nowe with the soule, ye woulde kil manie a poore mans bodie, with your olde rot­ten drugges, as ye do now kill many a sowle with your pe­stiferous poysoned drawght of heretical potions, they take at your hands. But nowe to answere to you, and to your so farre fette phisike:A Copie of M. Ie­wells rhe­torike in his Reply, the 225. page. I pray yow M. Horne, why doe ye cut of the tayle of your owne tale? Why do ye not suffer the fathers to speake their whole mind? And to ruffle a litle in M. Iewells rhetorycke, what? were the fathers stayed with the choygnecoughe, and forced to breake of theyre matter and tale in the myddest? Mark well gentle reader, and thow shal see the whole Coūcel of .630. bisshops set to schole, and kept in awe, and not suffred to vtter one worde more, then M. Horne will geue them leaue. For the next wordes that immediatly fol­lowe in the same matter are these.Act. 3. fol. 861. col. 1. Pontificibus cōcordiae me­dicinā machinantes: vndi (que) enim nos congregantes omne com­modastis auxilium, quatenus factae interimantur discordiae & paternae fidei doctrina roboretur. For yow (say the fathers to the Emperours) assembling vs from all places, haue holpen al that may be, to pacify and kil these diuisions and dissen­sions, and that the fayth and doctrine of our fathers may be strenghthened. What worde is here M. Horne, that any thing towcheth your purpose? Here is nothing, but that the coūcel was assembled by their good help, which as I haue often declared, serueth not your turne to make them su­preame [Page 143] heads. Nowe because throwgh their meanes the Councell came together, in the whiche a quietnesse was set in religion, the Councell calleth them physitions,vvhy the fathers cal the Em­perours the chiefe Phisitiōs. yea and the chiefe: as they were chiefe in dede, in respecte of their cyuill authoritie wherewythe they did assiste the Councel, and did helpe by this ministerie of theirs, not by anie iudicial sentence, or other Ecclesiasticall acte (which ye shal neuer shewe) to quiet and pacefie the greate dis­sensions then raigning and raging. And so were they phisi­tions in dede, but the outwarde not the inward phisitions. The fathers were the inwarde phisitions. They made the verye potion, for the disease. And because we are ons entred into the talke of phisitions, they were the very phi­sitions of the sowle. The scripture saieth of the king: re­gem honorificate: honour the kinge,1, Pet. 2. Ecclesiast. 38. 1. Timo. 5. Heb. 13. Ecclesi. 4. yt saieth also of the phisition: honora medicum. Honour the phisition. But what sayeth yt of the prieste? The priestes, sayeth S. Paule, that gouuerne well are worthy of double honour: againe, obeye your rulers (meaninge the Ecclesiasticall rulers) for they watche to geue a reckoning for your sowles. And the Ecclesiasticus sayeth, humble thy sowle to the preste. So that ye may see M. Horne, the priestes to be the true and highest phisitions, as farre passing and exceding the other physitions, as the sowle passeth and excedeth the bodie: and then must the spirituall primacye nedes remayne in them. And that doe these Iudges here euen in this Action, expressely proteste and confesse against you. For they say touching the point of doctrine then in question. Quod placuit reuerendo Conci­lio de sancta fide, ipsum nos doceat. Let the Reuerend Coun­cel it selfe teach vs and infourme vs, what is their pleasure touching the holy faith: You see here, they toke no suprem [Page] gouernemente in this cause ecclesiastical, in determining, I say, the true faith: (as you will make Princes beleue they may and ought to doe) they yet being the Emperours de­puties, but lerned humbly of the holy Councel, what their determination in such matters was. Thus at the length your great mighty [...]ost, is thwyghted to a pudding pryck. Neither shal ye be able of al theis .630. bishops to bring one, that mayntained your pretensed supremacy. And when he proueth yt to you good reader by theis 630. bisshops, or by anie one of them I dare say M. Fekēham wil take the oth, and so wil I to. For it is as true, as the nobles gaue sentēce to depose Dioscorus and others. Who is not, as yet depo­sed and that wil I proue by M. Horne him self: who sayth, that in this actiō the whole synode agreed,M. Horne contrarie to him self in on leaf. that Dioscorus should be deposed: and so ful pretely doth he cal back that he sayd not fyftene lynes before: and proueth him self, a­gainst him self, that their saying was no sentence.

M. Horne. 51. Diuision. Pag. 32. b.

In the fourth Action, vvhen the rehearsall of al things passed before vvas done, the Iudges and Senate asketh if all the Bisshops agree: vvhervnto they ansvvered yea, yea. The Synode had requested the Iudges and the Senate, to make suite to the Emperour for fiue Bisshops, vvhich othervvise (.148.) The .148. vntruth. There is no suche must in all the Councell. must be deposed, as vvas Dioscorus, vvhich they did, and made this relation vnto the Synode: That the Emperour, perceiuing the humble suite of the Synod, doth licence them to determine touching the fiue, what they thought good: admonishing them notwitstāding, to geue good hede what they did: for that they must make an accompt to God of their doings.

Stapleton.

M. Horne would fayne fastē some ecclesiasticall iudge­mēt, vpō these lay men, as the depositiō of certain bishops: which he shal fynd, whē he cā fynd that they deposed Di­oscorus. [Page 144] It is playn, sayth M. Horn, for the whole councell maketh humble suyt, to the Emperour, to licēce thē to determi­ne towching fyue bisshops, which otherwise Must be deposed, as Dioscorus was. Ha good M. Horn, haue ye found now at the length, a must? That is wel and in high tyme espied out of you, or els al theis your great doīgs must lie in the mire. But I belieue whē we haue al done, we shal fynd no must, but a playn myst, that ye lyke a wily shrew, haue cast be­fore the eies of the simple readers, to blind thē withall. Yf I say not true, thē like a true mā of your word point with your finger, the leaf ād line wher, in al the acts of this coū ­cel your must lieth. I am assured, that neither in the 4. actiō wherby ye now plead, nor in the .1. actiō, wherby ye haue alredy pleaded (which both places spake of those fyue bi­shops) is anie mutterīg in the world of your musting. Truth it is that in the first actiō, theis senatours, thowght it reaso­nable, that Dioscorus ād theis fyue bishops, being the ring­leaders of that wycked conuenticle at Ephesus, should be deposed, but not by the way of any finall or iudiciall sen­tence, as ye fable. But as they thowght them worthy to be depryued, so neither did they depryue thē, nor thought them selues or the Emperour mete parsons to depryue them, but the councel.A sancto concilio secundū re­gulas, ab episcopali dignitate fieri alie­nos. Pag. 831. col. 2. And therfore immediatly followeth that they should be put, from all theire bishoply dignitye. But by whome M. Horne? A sancto Concilio: by the holy councell. And howe I pray yow? secundùm regulas. Accor­dinge to the canons. Then here standeth the case. The Emperoure, and not withowt cause, was in this mynde, that as they mighte and owghte by the Canons to haue bene depryued, so that execution shoulde haue bene done accordinglye: for example sake, as yt was allredye [Page] done vpon Dioscorus. And yet leauing the final determi­nation (as otherwise he could not choose, if he would fol­lowe the Canons by his deputies alleaged) to the Bishops. And this is the Licence ye falsely speake of.The true meaning of the place by M. Horne alleaged. Anno. 25. Hē. 8. c. 19. Sententiae vestrae per­misit deli­berare de Thalassio & quae vobis pla­cuerint. Fol. 872. col. 2. Liberatus. in Breuia. cap. 13. [...]. Quia con­senserant in subscri­ptione epi­stolae Leo­nis, &c. For proprely licēce it was none, neither doth the latine word inforce it, but that he permitted and suffered them to do therin their pleasure: which words doe not necessarilie declare his or­dinary authority to let them (as the Prince may let your Conuocation Decrees by act of Parliament) but onely the geauing ouer and yelding to the Fathers, in that mater, frō his owne mind and sentence, which he thought good and reasonable. The Fathers on the other side, thought not best to exact the rigour and extremitie of the Canons, but seing these fiue were hartely penitent, and had subscribed to the Epistle of Leo, whiche before they refused, and for feare of a great schisme, as Liberatus noteth, that happely might by this rigorouse dealing ensue, toke the milder way, and suffred them to remaine in their dignitie, and in the Coun­cell with them. See now M. Horne, if this be not rather a mist then a muste, a darke mist, I say, mete for theues as Homer saith, and not mete, as he saith, nor acceptable to the shepheard. How vnmete then for you M. Horne, that taketh vpn you to be the shepheard and pastor of so many thousand soules, that should kepe your flocke, from al such hurtefull mystes of false doctrine? Yea to feed them with the same, and to make him beleue, and that by the authori­tie of this honorable Councel, that ye feed them well, and that ye must so feed them. And yet, lo, like a blind Prophet ye haue said truer then ye wist of: saiyng they must be de­posed as Dioscorus was. For Dioscorꝰ was not deposed at all, by those whome ye fable to haue geauen sentence. [Page 145] Again see what falleth out otherwise against you. For yf the lay iudges deposed in the first action Dioscorus,Dicta pa. 931. col. 2. Videtur nobis se­cundum quod Deo placitum est, iustum esse si placuerit diuinissimo & pijssimo Domino nostro, eidem poenae Dioscorum reuerend. episcopum Alexandriae, & Iuuenalem reuerend, episcopum Hie [...]os. & Thalassium &c. they deposed also these fyue. For al cometh vnder one trade ād course of woordes. And thus euery waye ye walke in a miste, wandring pitifully to and fro, ye can not tell why­ther.

M. Horne .52. Diuision. Pag. 32. b.

In the fifth Action, the Iudges vvilled the Synode, to reade those thinges, vvhich vvere agreed vpon touching the Faith: vvhereabout began a great contention, one parte of them allovving, an other sorte disallovving that vvas redde amongest them. The iudges seing the exclamations and confusion that vvas amongest them, appointeth a Comitty, choosing foorth of sundry partes a certaine number to goe aside vvith the iudges, to make a resolutiō. VVhen they preuailed nothing, they threatened the vvhole Synode, that they vvould signifie these (.149.) The 149. vntruth. The word disorde­red, levv­dely ad­ded to the text, to make coulour of re­proche. disordered clamours vnto the Emperor, vvhich they did. The Emperour immediatly of his (.150.) The .150. vntruth. Not by any his supreme authority but at the bisshops choise ād pleasure, as shal ap­peare. Supreme authority, appoin­ted the order of Committies, vvhich the iudges had deuised before: geuing them in commandement, that going aside by them selues, they should cōsult and conclude a truthe in Faith, vvith such plainnesse, that there might no more doubtes arise thereof, vvhereunto al should agree. The Synode obeyed, and folovved the Emperours direction, and the Committies vvith the Iudges goeth a side into a secrete place, maketh conference, concludeth, and cometh again into the Synode, and reciteth their determination▪ vvhereunto the vvhole Synode gaue their consent, and so the Iudges commaundeth, that this their definition should be shevved vnto the Emperour.

Stapleton.

Ye shewe nothing that either the Emperour or his de­putyes, made any definitiō of the faith. Now thē yf the Fa­thers [Page] could not agree, themperour did wel to find out some meanes by committies to bring them to agremente, which is no spiritual matter. And so ye come not nighe to that ye should haue proued by a great deale. But let vs a litle con­sider the maner of these Cōmitties, the cause and the end thereof: and we shall see M. Horne quyte ouerthrowen with his own sway, and a moste euident argument of the Popes supremacy. At the beginning of the fyfte Action a forme of the faith being openly read, all the Bisshops cried, praeter Romanos & aliquos Orientales, beside the Romanes and some of the East:Concil. Chalced. Act. 5. pa. 879. col. 2 Definitio omnibus placet. The deter­mination pleaseth al.

Vppon this when they coulde not agree the Popes Le­gat stode vp, and said. If these men agree not to the letters of the Apostolike and most blessedman Pope Leo, commaunde it that we haue them copied out that we may returne home, and there kepe a Councel. The cause of the Cōmitties made in the v. Ac­tion. For this loe was the cause of al that garboyle. Dioscorus with Eutyches were alreadye condemned: the Nestorians in like maner. And the forme of faith after a sorte was agreed vpon, but not in such sorte as in the Popes letters it was conceiued. And against the foorme of the Popes letters all the Bisshoppes of Aegypt, of Asia, of Illiricum, Ponthus and Thracia, very hotlye resisted, affirming that the definition was otherwise per­fect enoughe. Which the Romaines and certaine of the Easte Bisshppes as earnestly denied. Herevpon the iud­ges to make the matter come to an agrement, made first a Committy in this sorte: that of all the foresaide prouinces, three should be chosen, and they togeather with the Romaynes and six of the Easte Bisshoppes shoulde conferre a parte. But this order beinge misliked, and the greater nomber of Bis­shoppes [Page 146] stil crying to haue it passe, as it was first concei­ued, not passing vpon the forme conceiued in the Popes letters, the iudges asked those that so cried,Pag. 880. col. 1. whether they allowed the letters of Pope Leo, or no? When they answered, Yea: and that they had alreadye subscribed thereunto, the Iudges inferred. Lette then that be added to the definition which is in those leters cōprised. The Bisshops of Aegipt and other crying alwaies to the contrarye, the debate was si­gnified to the Emperour. The Emperour sent back againe, that they shoulde take the order of Committye appointed, or yf that liked them not, Si vobis hoc nō placet, singuli fidē suā &c. Si autem neque hoc velit vestra sā ­ctitas, cognoscite quia in partibus Occidēta­libus fieri habet sy­nodus, eó quòd &c. then they should make an other Cōmittye by their Metropolitanes, and euerye man declare his mynde, that so the matter might come to an ende. But (saith the Em­perour) yf your Holynes will none of this neither, then knowe you certainelye, that you shall come to a Councell in the west partes, seing you will not here agree. And this also was that the Popes Legates before required. And the Bisshoppes of Illyricum as excusing them selues, cried. Qui contra­dicunt, Romam ambulent. These which doe not agree, let them walke to Rome.

Had Maister Horne and his fellowes bene in that case, they woulde haue cryed: what haue we to doe with Rome, or with that forayne Prelate, the Pope? But the Bis­shoppes and Fathers of those dayes knewe a better obe­dience to the See Apostolike. And therefore in the ende the Popes Legates with a fewe other of the Easte, pre­uailed against al the reste of Aegypt and Asia, of Illyricū, Pontus and Thracia: and endited the forme of their defini­tiō of the faith, according to the tenour of Pope Leo his let­ters, inserting his very words to their definitiō. Otherwise [Page] as the Emperour and the Popes Legates before threatned, they should al haue trotted to Rome, and there haue finished the Councel. Such was the Authority and preeminence of that Apostolike See of Rome, and so wel declared in this fifte Action out of which M. Horne concealing the whole yssue, order, and cause of the debate, thought only by a sim­ple commyttye, to proue his Supreme Gouernement in the prince. Thow seest nowe gentle Reader, that by the prince his owne confession, by the Legates protestation, and by the ende and yssue of the whole Action, the Supe­riority rested in the Church of Rome, and in a Councel to be had there, in case they would not presently agree. So harde it is for Maister Horne to bring any one Authority, that maketh not directly against him, and manifestly for vs.

M. Horne. The .53. Diuision. Pag. 33. a.

The Emperour cometh into the Synode place, in his ovvne persone, vvith Pulcheria, his nobles, and Senatours▪ and maketh vnto the Synode an ora­tion, of this effect. He careth for nothing so much, as to haue all men rightly persuaded in the true Christian faith: He declareth the occasions, It vvas be [...]ause he would [...] Doctrinī Patrum. The do­ctrine of Fathers: vvi [...]h you leaue out. vvhy he sommoned the Synode: He cōmaundeth that no man be so hardy, hereafter to hold opinion, or dispute of the Christian faith, othervvyse than vvas de­creed in the first Nicē coūcel, he chargeth thē therefore, that all partaking, cōten [...]iō, and couetousnes laide apart the onely truth may appeare to al men. He declareth his cōming into the Synod, to be for none other cause, thē (.151.) The 151. vntruth, in dissembling a greate part of the Sen­tence. to confirme the faith, and to remoue from the people in tyme to come, all dissention in Religion. And last of al, he protesteth his vvhole care, and study, that al people may be brought into an vnity, and vnifourme agreement in pure religion, by true and holy doctrine. The chief Notarie humbly asketh of the Emperour, if it vvil please him to heare their Ergo. it vvas be­fore defi­ned w [...]h­out the emper [...]r royal as­sent. definition redde: The Emperour vvilleth that it should be recited openly: he enquireth of them al, if euery man consented thereunto: they ansvvere, that it is agreed vppon by al their consentes. VVhereunto they adde many acclamations, commend [...]ng [Page 147] the vvorthines of his Emperial gouernmēt, cōcluding: By the O worthy Emperor, the right faith is confirmed, heresies banished, peace restored, and the Churche refourmed. After these acclama­tions, the Emperour doth openly declare vnto the Synode a For execution of the Coū ­cel. statute, vvhich he maketh to cut of and put avvay from thencefoorth, al maner occasion of contention about the true faith, and holy Religion. The vvhole Synode desireth the Emperour, to dissolue the councel, and to (.152.) The 152. vntruth. No suche words in the Acte [...] geue thē leaue to departe: vvhereunto the Emperour vvould not consent, but (.153.) The 153. vntruth, as before com­maundeth that none of them depart.

Stapleton.

Here is nothing, whervpon ye shoulde frame any con­clusion of Supremacy. Concerning Marcians oration we haue spoken somwhat before: and nowe ye geue vs more occasion, especially to note your true and accustomable faith, in the true rehersal of your Authour. For yf ye hadde not here maimed and mangled your owne allegation, ye had made your self a ful answere, for al this your bible ba­ble, to proue the Emperours supremacy, for that they cal­led or were present in the Councels. We (saieth this noble Emperour) are come into this present Councel, Hovv ād vvhye Prīces are presente in Coun­cels. not to take vp­on vs or to practise any power therein, but to strenghten and confirm the faith, therin following the example of the religious prince Constantine. By which woordes he declareth, that the Emperours authority and powre taketh no place in the Councel, to determyn or define any thing (which nei­ther is founde of the doings of Constantine, or this Mar­cian, or of any other good Prince) but only by ciuil penal­ties, to confirme and strenghthen the decrees, as did Cō ­stantine, and as this Emperour did also, as appereth by his woordes spoken to the Synode,Fol. 893. col. 2. in this sixt action by yow recited. These woordes of Marcian ye haue cut from the [Page] residue of the sentence: least otherwise it should haue by Marcian him selfe appeared that ye were but a glosar, a Popes glosar I say, as your brother Mollineus is: when ye wrote of the fiue Bishops,Multum quidē estis itinere fa­tigati, la­borē per­ferētes. ve­runtamen sustinete tres adhuc aut qua­tuor dies. Et presēti­tibus ma­gnificētiss. nostris iu­dicib. quae­cūque vul­tis mouete, competens aedepturi solatium. Nullus vestrū ante­quā perfe­cti termini ex omnib. proferā [...]ur à S. cōcilio discedat. Fol. 894. col. 1. that otherwise must haue bene deposed. Cōcerning the staiyng of the Fathers, that would haue departed, whiche ye inforce as a thing material, if ye had not followed your accustomable guise of dismembring your Author, ye should haue found a small matter. Ye haue (saith Marcian to the Fathers) ben much weried by your iour­ney: and haue taken great paines. Yet beare you, and staye you for iij. or .iiij. daies lōger: And our honorable Iudges being present, moue you what matter your hart desireth, and ye shal not faile of cōuenient comfort. But let no man depart, til all things be fully finished. What leaue is there asked here to depart, or what cōmaundemēt is made to stay and tarie? No, no, M. Horne: Princes were not thē so Imperiall ouer Bishops, as your dis­solute heresies haue caused of late some to be.

M. Horne. The .54. Diuision. pag. 33. b.

Bassianus, of late the Bisshop at Ephesus, cōplaineth vnto the Empe­rour, to direct his letters to the Synod, to haue his cause heard. The Empe­rour cōmaundeth the Synod to heare the matter. The Iudges cō ­maūdeth Stephanus Bisshop of Ephesus, to make ansvvere vnto Bassia­nus his complaint. After due examination had by the Iudges, openly in the Synod in this cōtrouersy, the Iudges asked of the Synode, vvhat they iudged to be done. The Bisshops adiudged Bassianus to be restored. But the Iudges appointed by the Emperour, vvould not (.154.) The .154 Vntruthe. They neither allovved nor disallovved any sentence of the Councel, but shevved only their aduise and minde. allovv that sentence, but dee­med neither of them both vvorthy to occupy that Bisshoprike, and that there should be a third chosen, and admitted to that see, to the vvhich (155)The .155. Vntruthe. It vvas no iudgement at all. iudge­ment the vvhole synode did accord. After the end of this Councel, the Empe­rour [Page 148] doth confirme the determination therof by his publique Decree.

Stapleton.

M. Horn wil not leaue his laical iudgemēt so: (being maruelous propense and enclined that way) belike because, he is become by the Canons a lay man him selfe, throughe his vnlaufull mariage: and therefore yet ones againe, they by their iudgement, if we wil credit M. Horne, do reuerse the iudgement of the whole Synode, in the cause of Bassianus and Stephanus. In dede, if M. Horne could proue, that the whole councel had first geuen sentēce, here had ben som­what for him with some good countenaunce, to haue sette forth and furnished his new primacy withal. But now ney­ther the whole Synode gaue yet iudgemente in the cause, neither was it any iudgement geuen by the laie men, more then was before against Dioscorus. For lo, M. Horne, they saye, nobis videtur, it seemeth to vs. But will ye see it is no sentence? Then I pray you marke well what followeth.Act. 11. pag 915. col. [...] Totū autē cōcilio sancto relin­quimus quate­nus sententiam quae in haec causa fuerit visa, de­promat. After they had told their minde and opinion, they adde and saye: But we leaue the whole matter to the Councell, to geue what sentence, it shall please them in this matter. Ye will say, yet the whole Coūcell followed the aduise of the iud­ges. Then it appereth it was but an aduise, no sentēce that they gaue foorth before. Els it were maruaile, if so so­dainly they wente from their owne determination. But will ye see, how wisely this mater is handled of M. Horne? Yf the first was a resolute and a final sentēce of the whole Coūcel, what authority had the laie men to infringe it? Or how cā ye say they did infringe it, when they left afterward the whole determinatiō therof to the Coūcel? Thus ye see euery way, that the more ye striue ād strugle in this mater, ād with this coūcel, the more ye mesh and intāgle your self. [Page] But perchaunce as ye see, or may see yf ye be not blynde, that ye are in the pytte or faste in the myre: so ye see not how to get out. And ye wil say, as ye say ād truely to, that the Iudges asked the Synod,In talibus sanct. Cōc. contingit frequēter, vnum ex praesentibꝰ reuerend, episcopis aliquid dicere, & quod ab vno dictū est, tā (quam) ab oībus si­mul dica­tur, & subscribatur & intelli­gatur. hoc ab exordio subsecutū est in tan­tum vt vno dicē ­te. scriba­mꝰ, sancta Synodus dixit. Act. 1. pa. 791. col. 2. what was to be don, and that they adiudged Bassianus to be restored. I graunt ye Sir: ye play now the true reporter: but either ye do not, or wil not vnderstand that wich ye reporte. For ye shall fynde a rule, and that euen in this Synode, that somtyme yt is writen (by the Notary) the Synode sayth, when the whole Synode sayeth not, but some of the Synode. And ye being so well trauayled by your self, or your frendes in this Synode, shuld haue cō ­sidered this rule, necessary to bring you out of the pytte of errour ye are fallen in. Wel perchaunce, as ye lack no cou­rage, ye will not so geue ouer, and will say the matter fa­reth not so here: and when yt is sayd The Iudges asked the Synode, the true vnderstā ­ding of the place by M. Horne alleaged. yt must be takē for the whole Synode. Now you put me to my shifte in dede: But I truste to shift whith you wel inough. What say ye thē to Liberatus, by you oft re­heresed, that sayeth as I say, that the whole Synode did not agree, that Bassianus shulde be restored, but parte of the Sy­node: and therfore the matter was put ouer to an other me­ting, at which metīg the whole Synod vniformely agreed, that aswel Bassianus as Stephanus shulde be remoued? In case this answere wil not contente you I wil I am assured, yf any most reasonable answere wil contente you, set you ouer to such witnesses, as your self hitherto haue best liked and sought all your helpe and ayde for your supremacy at their hands: I meane your Iudges and senatours the Empe­rours deputies. For wheras ye alleage the matter, as finally determined in the .11. action, the very same matter was re­sumed [Page 149] in the .12. action. Because (say they) that after our oft mouing the matter to you, and requiring, that ye woulde geue sentence concerning the bisshop­rike of the holy Church of Ephesus, Gloriosissimi iudices dixerunt. Quoniam sepe nobis interloquē tibus & pescentibus proferri sententiam de episcopatu sancta Ecclesiae in Epheso cō stituto, perfecta res­pōsio nō est data, Ve­nerabile &c. Act. 12 pa. 916. col. 3. there is no perfytte and resolute answere made: Let the holy ghospell &c. I trust by this tyme M. Horne, ye wil wisely geue ouer this matter of Bassianus and of all the resi­dewe of this Councell, that ye haue vniustly plea­ded vppon: and require of vs to belieue yow no better, then ye can shewe cause. Onlesse ye will haue vs vppon your bare worde to credite yowe. which I think wise men, wil not be to hasty to do, excepte ye can shewe some as good commission, as the Apostles had. For the bringing forth where­of, we are contente to geue you a good long day. As for this councel whervpō ye would seme your proufs shuld reste, ye haue not shewed yt to vs by anie good and cleare light, but as ye haue done be­fore, the Nicen and Ephesine, very obscurely and vnperfectly.

M. Horne. The .55. Diuision. Pag 33. b.

This Synode being finished, the Emperour banished Dioscorus into the Cytie of Gangren. VVhich thyng doon: The no [...]les of the Cytie (saith Liberat [...]s) assēbled together to choose one, both for life and learning, worthy of the Bisshopricke: for this wa [...] (.156.) The .156. vntruth Nipping of the Author alle­ged, as shall ap­pea [...]e. Lib. c. 15. cōmaunded by the Emperours Decrees. At the length P [...]oteriu [...] v [...]s [...]ade Bis [...]hop: against vvhom the seditious people raysed one [...]imo­theus Hellu [...]us, or Aelurus, vvho in conclusion, murthered Proterius. The catholique Bissoppes, vvhich mainteined the Chalcedon councel, made humble supplication vnto Leo the Emperour, both to reuenge the death of Proterius, and also (.157) The .157. vntruth. Not to depose, but, vt ex­pelleretur to expell to banish to depose Timotheus Hellurus, as one not Lavvfully instituted in the Bishoprike on the contrary parte, other Bishops make supplication v [...]to h [...]m, in the defence of Timotheus, and against the Chalcedon councel. VVhen Leo the Emperour had considered the mat­ter of both their supplications, for good and godly consyderations he vvrote his letters to the Bisshops of euery city, declaring both these causes, and vvil­ling them to send him (.158) The .158. vntruth false trā ­slation. Consulēs quid fi [...]ri oporteret Ask [...]ng counsel vvhat he shuld do. Cap. 16 their aduise, vvhat vvas best to be done: from vvhom he receiued an [...]vvere, that the Chalcedon Councel is to be maintei­ned euen vnto [...]eath: vvherevpon the Emperour vvriteth to S [...]ila his Lieu­tenaunt of Alexandria, that he should maintein the Chalce [...]on Coun­cell. Stila did as the Emperour commaunded: he expelled Timotheus Hellurus, and (.159.)The 159. vntruth Liberatus saith that an other vvas pla­ced, decre to populi, whiche you leaue out. placed an other in his roume, named Timotheus S [...]lefacialius, or Albus, vvho liued quietly all [...]he raigne of Leo, and Zeno, the Emperours, til Basilicus gat the Empire, vvho restored Timo­theus the Heretique: But vvhen Zeno recouered the Empire, this Timo­theus poisoned him selfe, in vvhose place the Heretiques chose one Peter Mogge. Af [...]er that Zeno the Emperour knevv of the crafty dealing of the heretiques, he vvrote to his Lieu [...]enaunt Anthemius, that he should de­priue Peter Mogge, and restore Timotheus to the bisshopricke, and fur­ther, that he should punish those, that vvere the authours to enstall Peter [Page 155] Mogge. Anthemius receiuing the [...]mperours mandate, did depose Peter Mogge, as one that vvas but a counterfayt made bissop, contrary to the lavv­es of the Catholique Churche, and restored Timotheus Salefacialius, vvho being restored, sent certeine of his Clergy to the Emperour to render him thankes.

Stapleton.

THis collection standeth in the banishing of Diosco­rus, and in the election and deposing of bishoppes: Proterius was chosen vniuersorum sententia, by the verdit of all the Citizens of Alexandria,Liberat. cap. 14. as the maner of choosing then was, both before and after. The Emperours commaundement was not the only cause thereof, but the cōmaundement of the Councell, for execution whereof the Emperour gaue forth his letters, also. For concealing whereof in your first allegatiō out of Liberatus, you leaue out the worde, Et: Also, where Liberatus saieth: For this was also commaunded by the Emperours edictes. The worde Also, you leaue out, to make your Reader beleue, that the onely Absolute cōmaundement of the Emperour was the cause, that Proterius was ordered bishop in the place of Dioscorus. Whereas themperours edict came forth, part­ly for auoyding of tumultes, which the hereticall adherēts of Dioscorus were likely to raise: And which they raised in dede, straight after the death of Marcian themperour, and remouyng Proterius made Timotheus to sitte in hys place: partly for executing the Chalcedon Councels De­cree, which was that a newe bishop should strayght way be ordered at Alexādria in the roume of Dioscorus,Act. 4. whom they had deposed. Nowe Timotheus was an open here­tike, [Page] standing against the Coūcel of Chalcedo, and a mur­therer withall of hys lawefull bishop Proterius, and there­fore no greate accompt to be made of the Emperours do­ings towards hym he being no bishop at al in dede. Nowe where the Emperour cōmaunded an other to be put in his place, it had bene well done, if ye had placed also (as your author doth) the whole words and doings of themperour: which was,dict ca. 15. that Stila his deputy shuld set in ā other. But whē M. Horne? when all the Bissops had answered that the Coun­cel of Chalcedo was to be maintayned euen to death: And that the foresayed Timotheus was vnworthy to be called either Bis­shop or Chaistian man. And howe M. Horne? Decreto populi. With the consente of the people: which kinde of choo­sing Bishops was then no newe thinge in the Churche, butAmbros. li. [...]. Epist. 32. Con. Ant. can. 16. Con. Sard cap. 1. vsed bothe before and after. As for the banisshing of Dioscorus (being before deposed of the Councell) I think your self wil confesse yt to be no spirituall matter.

M. Horne. The .56. Diuision. pag. 34. a.

After this Timotheus, Ioannes de Talaida vvas choosen, vvhereof vvhen Acatius Bisshop of Constantinople hearde, he being offended vvith Iohn, for that he had not sent vnto him synodical letters, to signifie of his e­lection, as the maner vvas,) he ioyned him selfe vvith the fautours of Peter Mogge, and accused Iohn vnto the Emperour, as one not sounde in Reli­gion, nor fit for the Byshoprike. Peter Mogge espying this oportunity, dis­sembleth an vnity and recōciliation, and by his friends, vvynneth Acatius, vvho breaketh the matter to thēperour, and persvvadeth him to depose Ioā ­nes de Talaida, and to restore Peter Mogge: so that the same Peter vvold first receiue and professe the Henoticō, that is, the confessiō of the vnity in faith,Lib. ca. 18. vvhich the Prince had set foorth, vvherof this is the effect. Zeno the Emperor, to al Bishops and people, throughout Alexādry, and Aegipt, Lybia, and Pētapolis: For somuch as we know that the right and true faith alone, is the begīning, cōtinuāce, strēgth, and inuīcible shyld of our Empire: we labour night ād day in [Page 156] praier, study, and with Lawes to encrease, the Catholik, The prin­ces supre­macye in (.160.) al causes. and A­postolike Church by that faith. Al people next after God, shal bowe doune their necks vnder our power. Seing therfore, that the pure faith, doth on this wise preserue vs, and the Romain cōmon wealth, many godly fathers haue hūbly beseched vs, The .160. vntruthe ioyned vvith folye. No suche Su­premacy can be gathered of the texte. to cause an vnitie to be had in the holy Church, that the mē ­bers displaced and separated through the malice of the ene­mie, may be coupled and knit together. And after this, declaring his faith, to agree vvich the Nicen councel, and those that condēned Nestorius, and Eutiches, (he sayth) we curse those that thinke the cont [...]ary. After vvhiche curse, declaring al the articles of his faith, he cōcludeth vvith an earnest exhortation vnto the vnitie of faith. The Emperour, saith Liberatus, supposing that Ioannes de Thalaida, had not ment rightly of the Chalcedō coūcel, but had dō al things fainedly, vvrote his letters by the persvvasiō of Acatius, to Pergamius & Apolonius his Lieutenantes, to (.161.)The .161. vntr [...]th. Not to depose, but, [...]t pel­lerent, to driue out and to banish ▪ depose Iohn, and enstal Peter Mogge. Iohn, being thus thrust out, repaired to the B. of Antioche, vvith vvhose letters of cōmendacion, he vvēt to Sīpliciꝰ bishop of Rome, and desired him to vvrite in his behalfe vnto Acatiꝰ bishoppe of Constantinople, vvho did so, and vvithin a vvhile after, died.

Stapleton.

The like drifte as before, followeth nowe also, and ther­fore the lesse nede of any long or exquisite answer. Sauing that a few things are to be cōsidered, aswel for the weigh­ing of M. Hornes reasons, as for such matters, as make for the popes primacye euen in those stories that M. Horne reherseth. As,.1. Sigeb. in Chron. Pantal. that pope Simplicius of whome M. Horne maketh mention excommunicated Peter the Bishop of A­lexandria here mentioned benig an Eutychian. Again that Acatius bishop of Constantinople, here also recited by M. Horne, was also excōmunicated by pope Felix. What?.2. Isidor. in Faelicē. To. 2. Cōc. Sig. Pāt. sai­eth M. Horn, a buttō for your popes curse. If that be a mat­ter ecclesiastical, our Emperors haue cursed aswel, as your popes: Euē our Emperour Zeno that we are nowe in hand withal. Say you me so M. Horne? Then shew me I beseche [Page] you, by what authority? For no man (you say your selfe af­terward) hath authority to excōmunicate, but only the Church and those who receiue authority therevnto by cōmission from the Churche. pag. [...]05. col. 2. Thus you say euen in this booke. Bring forth then the Emperours cōmission: Otherwise thinke not, we will crie sanctus sanctus to all ye shal say. And if you bring forth the cōmission, then are you vndone, and al your pri­macy. For if the Emperour hath his commission from the Church, then belike the Church is aboue him. Onlesse as ye haue found a newe diuinitie, so ye can find a new lawe, wherby he that taketh the cōmissiō shal be aboue him that geueth it. This curse then M. Horne was no ecclesiasticall curse: no more surely then if you shuld, if Maistres Madge played the shrewe with you,VVhat maner of curse Ze­no the ēperours curse vvas. be shrewe and curse to, her shrewes heart. It was a zelouse detestation of heretikes, as if a good catholike man should nowe say, cursed be al wic­ked Sacramentaries. And whome I pray you did he curse? Any, trow ye that was not accursed before? No, but chief­ly Nestorius and Eutyches: which were before by general Coūcels excōmunicated. Yet for al that we haue our mar­gent dasshed with a fresh iolye note, that the princes supre­macy is in al causes. I pray God send you M. Horne as much worship of yt, as ye had of your other late like marginall florishe owte of the Chalcedon Councell. Yet let vs see what proufes ye lay forthe: Why? say you: Was not Zeno required to cause an vnity in the church. Ye mary was he, and so was Constantine and Marcian to. Yea Marcian for that, was called the cheif phisition to. But we neade not put you any more in remembrance hereof, leaste ye take to muche pryde of yt. Yea but zeno sayeth, that after God all people shall bowe their neckes to his power. It is so [Page 157] in dede M. Horne. But onlesse ye can proue, that he saied to his spiritual power (which he said not,Hostiū generationes cōterētur. oēs autē incurua­bunt post Deum suā potestati nostrae ceruicem. Libe. c. 18 Gentes hostiles con­terentur, at (que) extī ­guētur, & oēs collae sua impe­rio secūdū Deū no­stro sub­mittent. Nice. lib. 16. c. 12. Libe. c. 18 Libe. c. 18 Nice. lib. 6. cap. 15. To. 1. cōc. pag. 961. col. 2. nor meante not) a good argument (the more pittye) hath quyte broken his necke. Neither yet doth Zeno speake of the neckes of any his subiectes, but (as yt semeth) of such nations as were his enimies. And assuredly such woordes al pagan Emperours vse. And yet they are not, I trowe, therefore supreme go­uernours in al causes spiritual. Now yt would require some tracte of tyme, fully to open either howe M. Horne hath confounded, maymed, and mangled his authours narration, or to shewe that these things euen in the true narration of the stories, that he reherseth, make fully agaīst him, and for the Popes primacy. For this Ioannes Talaida (saieth Libera­tus) appealed to Pope Simplicius euen as Athanasius did. Sim­plicius writeth to Acatius, who answereth: that he did all this withowt the Popes cōsent, by the Emperours commaunde­ment for the preseruation of the vnity in the Church. To whō Simplicius replied, that he ought not to communicate with Petrus Moggus for that he agreed to the Emperours order ād proclamatiō: onlesse he woulde embrace the decrees of the Coū ­cel of Chalcedo. Thus letters going to and fro, Simplicius died and Felix succedeth: who doth both depriue him from his bisshoprike, and excommunicateth him, for taking part with the said Petrus Moggus. After the death of Acatius, succe­deth Flauianus, who woulde not suffer himselfe to be en­stalled without the Popes consent. Within shorte tyme, Euphemius was Patriarche of Constantinople: who recei­ued synodicall letters from this Pope. These and manye other thinges else might here be said, euen out of the chap­ter vpon which Maister Horne himselfe pleadeth, which we passe ouer.

[Page]But for the Princes Supremacy in causes Ecclesiastical, what hath M. Horne in al this diuision? His marginal Note lyeth in the dust. What hath he beside? He saith. The Empe­ror by his Lieutenants deposed Iohn Talaida, the Patriarche of Antioche. But this is vntrue. The Emperour in dede com­maunded his Lieutenants,Liberatus Cap. 18. vt pellerent eum: to expulse and driue him out from his bisshoprike, but to depose him, that is to make him now no Bishop at all, that lay not in the Em­perours power. He did (as merely of him selfe a wise prelate said in King Edwardes dayes, being then in the Tower for the Catholike faieth) but take awaye the Ricke, Iohn re­mayned bisshop stil. And that with this Iohn Talaida so it was, appereth well by Liberatus your owne Author, M. Horne. For this Iohn Talaida (saieth Liberatus) appealinge from the Emperours violence to Pope Simplicius, habēs epis­copi dignitatem, remansit Romae, remayned at Rome, hauing stil the dignity of a bishop, who also afterwarde had the Ricke also. For the Pope endewed him with the bishoprike of Nola in Campania. Now as Emperours and Princes haue power (though not lawful) to expelle, and depriue men of the Church from their temporal dignities, and possessions: so to depriue a man of the Church from his office of ministe­ry, to depose a bisshop or a priest frō his spiritual Iurisdictiō and Authority (which deposition only is a cause ecclesiasti­cal) to the Church only frō whom such Authority came, it belongeth. Princes depriuations, are no ecclesiastical depo­sitions Take this answere ones for al M. Horne, you which vntruly reporte, that Princes deposed bisshops.

M. Horne. The .57. Diuision. Pag. 35. a.

This Pope Simplicius considering the great contentions that vvere ac­customably about the election of Popes, did prouide by decree, that no Pope [Page 158] should hereafter be chosen vvithout the authority of the Prince, vvhich decree, although it be not extant, yet it is manifest inough, by the Epistle of Kinge Odoacer put into the Actes of the thirde Synode, that Simmachus the Pope did keepe at Rome, vvherin the King doth not only auouche, the decree of Simplicius, but also addeth: VVe maruaile, that without vs anye thīg was accōpted, seing that whiles our Priest (meaning the bis­shop of Rome Simplicius) was on liue: nothing ought to haue bene taken in hande without vs.

Stapleton.

IF Pope Simplicius by decree, gaue the Prince Authority to confirme the chosen Pope, what helpeth this your su­premacy? Nay doth it not much impayre the same? For then al the Princes Authority in this behalfe dependeth of the Popes decree as of a Superiour lawe. And so he is sub­iect both to the law, and to the lawemaker. And yet this is all that in this Diuision hath any maner inckling to iuduce the Prīces Supremacy in any cause ecclesiastical. But yf M. Horn would haue loked but a litle further and vpō the first line of the next leafe, he mought haue found in the said Synod, that the see of Rome hath the priestly primacy ouer all the whole world. And that Councels must be confirmed by that see, with such other like matter. For whereas this King O­doacer, beside the decree touchīg the chosing of the Pope (which as your self say he made at the Popes request) made also an other concerning not alienating Church goods, the whole Synod reiected and cōdemned it, for these .ij. causes expressely. First (saith Eulalius a bisshop of Sicily, whose sentence (the other bisshops saying the same) the whole Sy­node [Page] folowed) because against the rules of the Fathers, this Decree appereth to be made of Layemen, though religious and godlye, In Synod. Rom. 3. sub Sym­macho. Tom. 1. Conc. pag. 1004. col 2. to whome that any authoritye was euer geuen ouer Ecclesiasticall goods, it is not reade. Secondlye it is not decla­red to be confirmed with the subscription of any bisshop of the Apostolike See. Nowe whereas, the holy Fathers In the Nicene Councel, Can. 4. & 6. haue de­creed, that if the Priestes of any whatsoeuer prouince (kee­ping a Councel within their owne lymities) shall attempt any thing without the authority of their Metropolitane or their bis­shop, it should be voyde and of none effect, howe much more that which is knowen to haue bene presumed in the See Apo­stolike, the Bisshop thereof not present (Qui prae rogatiua beati Apostoli Petri per vniuersum orbē primatum obtinens sacerdotij, statutis synodalibꝰ consueuit tribuere firmitatē. which bisshop by the prerogatiue of the blessed Apostle Peter, hauing throughe the whole worlde the Primacy of priesthood, hath bene wonte to confirme the Decrees of Councels) presumed I say, of layemen, though certayn bisshops agreing vnto it (who yet could not pre­iudicat their Prelat of whom it is knowen they were consecra­ted) is vndoubtedly voyde and of no effect, neither any waye to be accompted amonge Ecclesiastical decrees? Thus farre that Synod by your selfe alleaged M. Horne. God rewarde you for geuing vs such good instructions against your selfe. Or yf it came not of you, but of your frende, let him haue the thankes therefore. But yf it so falleth out against your wil­les both, yet God be praysed, that as by sinne he worketh somtime a greater amēdement, and turneth horrible temp­tations into a more confortable calmenesse then before the storme came, so also by your vnhappy meaning hathe yet brought vs to a happye information of such doctrine as vtterly ouerthroweth your heresye.

For here you see M. Horne, not only the laie Magistrat, yea the King him selfe, yea though he were religiouse and [Page 159] godly, vtterly excluded from all authority in causes Eccle­siasticall (whereby your phantasticall Primacie vanisheth cleane away) but also that the Pope (whome you cal a for­raine power) hath the Primacy, the chiefty and supreame praeeminence of Priesthode, not onely in Rome or the Ro­maine Prouince, but (saith this Synode by your self clerck­ly alleaged) per vniuersum orbem, throughout the whole worlde, and then if you be a parte of the worlde, he is your Primate too. Thus much saith this Synode: and thereby vtterly ouerthroweth the whole effect of the Othe, in both those partes for the whiche the Catholikes refuse to swere vnto it. Verely if ye goe on as you haue hitherto, you wil surely be espied for a preuaricatour, that is, for a double faced Proctour, secreatlie instructing your clients aduersa­rie, but in face protesting to plead against him. For bet­ter instructions, no hyred aduocate coulde haue geauen vs, then you the Counterpleader haue ministered vnto vs.

M. Horne. The .58. Diuision. pag. 35. a.

Next after Simplicius vvas Foelix the third chosen,Act. 1. vvho after his confirmation, sent many letters as vvell to the Emperour, as to Acatius Bisshoppe of Constantinople, about the matter betvvixt Iohn and Peter, but vvhen he coulde not preuaile in his suite, he made Iohn Bisshoppe of Nola in Campania. One of the letters that Pope Foelix vvrote vn­to Zenon the Emperour about this matter, is put into the fift Synode of Constantinople: vvherein the Pope after the salutation, doth most humblye beseech the Emperour, to take his humble suite in good parte. He shevveth that the holy (.162.) The 162: Vntruth. These vvordes Apostolike and Ca­tholique, left out. Churche maketh this suite, that he vvill vouchesafe to mainteine the vnitie of the Churche, that he vvill destroye Heresies, that breaketh the bonde of vnitie, that he vvill expell Peter Mogge bothe oute of the Citie, and also from Churche regiment: that he vvould not suffer [Page] Peter being deposed,Vide Tom. 2. Cōc. pa. 13. in epist. Felicis ad Petrum. Haec legat sancta Dei Apostolica et Catho­lica eccles. vt ab ipsa propter praedictas causas de­positū ad cōmunio­nē nō sus­cipias, sed per diui­nas apices vestrae se­renitatis ab Antio­chiae confi­nio propel­li [...]e, pro ip­so aūt cō ­stituite v­nū operib. sacerdotiū ornantem etc. Tom 2. Conc. Act. 1. Synod 5. pag. 19. b. to be admitted to the Communion of the Churche: but that by his honorable letters, he vvould banish him out of the bounds of An­tioche. And (saith this Bisshop of Rome Foelix vnto the Emperour) In his place appoint you one that shal beutifie the Priesthode by his woorkes.

Stapleton.

You procede still to bring authorities against your selfe. This Peter was deposed I confesse: But by whome, M. Horne? Not by the Emperour, but euen by Pope Foelix as appeareth but one leafe before the place which your selfe alleage. And in case it was to painefull for you to turne backe a leafe or two before, yet might you haue vouchsa­ued to haue read the next lines before your own allegatiō. In the which Foelix signifieth, that he was so deposed, and therfore requesteth th'Emperour to expel him, and to place some other mete man for him: whiche thing Popes doe at this day, requiring Catholike Princes to remoue hereticall Bishops, and to place good in their roome, neither yet ther­fore are, or euer were Princes accompted, enacted, or in­tituled, Supreme gouernours in all causes Ecclesiasticall. Your new Religion, hath inuented this newe Title. This Pope Foelix also excommunicated Acatius of Constantinople, for bearing with this Peter Mogge, as witnesseth Liberatus. Whereby appeareth clerely the Popes Primacie ouer the ij. chiefe Patriarches of the East Churche of Constantino­ple and Antioche. And you againe are with your owne examples cleane ouerthrowen.

M. Horne. The .59. Diuision. pag. 35. b.

Anastasius the Emperour (.163.) The .163. Vntruth. As before. deposed Macedonius Bisshoppe of Constantinople, as one that falsified the Ghospels, as Liberatus saith.

Stapleton.

If this Macedonius falsified the Ghospel, he was I wene, worthy to be deposed. But your Author vseth not this worde Deposed, but he saieth, he was expulsed. Whiche might be, being, by an ordinary and an vsual course,Liberatus cap. 19. by the Bishops first deposed. But because the matter is not cleare on your side, and if it were, it did not greatly enforce: by reason Anastasius him selfe was a wicked hereticall Empe­rour, and so no great good deduction to be made from his doings: I let it passe.

M. Horne. The .60. Diuision. pag. 35. b.

About the election of Symachus, Platina mentioneth vvhat great di­uision and sedition arose, in so muche that the parties vvere faine to agree, to haue a Councell holden for the determination of the matter. And there was a Councell appointed at Rauenna (saith Sabellicus) to the end that the controuersy might be decided according to right, before the king Theodoriche: before vvhome, the matter vvas so discussed, that at the last, this Pope Symachus vvas confirmed. Neuer­thelesse this fyer vvas not thus so quite quenched, but that foure yeares after, it blased out sorer againe. VVhereat the king (saieth Platina) beinge displeased, sente Peter the Bisshoppe of Altine to Rome, to enioye the See, and bothe the other to be (.164.) The 164: Vntruth. Platina saieth not so, but vt pulso vtroque sedem te­neret. deposed. VVherevpon an other Synode vvas called of 120. Bisshops, vvherein (saith Sabellicus) the Pope him selfe defended his ovvne cause so stoutlye, and cun­ningly, and confuted (saith Platina) al the obiections laid against him, that by the verdict of them all, he vvas acquited, and all the fault laied to Lau­rence and Peter.

Stapleton.

What may be said for the doings of Princes in the electi­on of the Clergie, and how your examples agree not with our practise, I haue already saied somewhat: and that I say to this too. But in the Diuision folowing, we shall saye to this more particularlye.

M. Horne. The .61. Diuision. pag. 35. b.

But to thentent it may the better appere vvhat vvas the Kings authority about these matters, mark the fourth Romaine Synode, holden in the time of this Symachus, and about the same matter of his, vvhiche although it be mangled and confusedly set forth in the Booke of Generall Councels, bicause (as it may seeme) that they (.165.) The .165. Vntruth. Slaunde­rouse and malitious vvould not haue the vvhole trueth of this dissention appaare: yet vvil it shevv much, that the Princes had (.166.) The .166. Vntruth. That coū ­cell vvill shevve they had verye small. no small entermedling, and authority in Synodes and Churche matters. This Synode vvas summoned to be kept in Rome by the (.167.)The .167. Vntruth. The King him selfe in the coū cel decla­reth, that not by his com­maunde­ment, but by the Popes letters, this Sy­nod vvas sūmoned. commaundement of the most honorable Kinge Theodoriche. He declareth that many and grieuous complaintes, vvere brought vnto him againste Symachus Bis­shoppe of Rome. Symachus commeth into the Synode to ansvvere for him selfe, geaueth thankes to the King for calling the Synode, requireth that he may be restored to suche things as he had loste by the suggestion of his enne­mies, and to his former state, and then to come to the cause, and to ansvvere the accusers. The more parte in the Synode, thoughte this his demaunde reasonable: Decernere tamen aliquid Synodus sine regia notitia non Praesumpsit. Yet the Synode presumed not to decree any thing without the Kings knowledge. Neyther came it to passe as they vvisshed: for the King commaunded Symachus the Bisshoppe of Rome, to ansvvere his aduersaries before he shoulde resume any thing. And (.168.) The .168. Vntruth. Not so. But be­cause as the Councel prote­sted, it perteined not to him or to any mans els. so the King committed the vvhole debating and iudging of the ma­ter to the Synode, vvhich concludeth the sentence vvith these vvords: Vvher­fore according to the Kings will or cōmaundement, who hath committed this cause to vs, we refourme or restore vnto him (to Symachus) what right so euer he ought to haue within the Citie of Rome, or without.

Stapleton.

Here hath M. Horne an other fetch to proue Princes to haue the chief interest in maters ecclesiastical: as for the de­positions of Bishops, yea of the Pope him selfe. And first he is angry, that this mater in the boke of Councels is so man­gled and confusedly set foorth. But it is an other thorne [Page 161] then this that pricketh him, that he will not disclose to all the worlde. For to saye the truthe, he seeth in his owne conscience, that of all Councelles,M. Horne complai­neth, but dareth not shew vvhere the thoro pricketh him. the selfe same Coun­cell that he here alleageth, dothe so set foorth the Popes Primacie, that the grieuouse remembrance therof, causeth him to speake, he can not tel what. Verelye, if M. Horne had stepped foorth but one fote further, and turned his eie vpon the next leafe, there should he haue found a clercklie worke made by Eunodius in the defence of the Councell, that he is in hand withall. There should he haue founde most euident authorities for the Popes Supremacie vppon all states temporall and spirituall. He should also finde the same booke to be confirmed by .CC. and .xxx. Bishops as­sembled at Rome in a Synode. Leaue of therfore, M. Horne this complaint, and complaine of that,Tom. 1, Conc. pa. 1009. that grieueth you in dede, and that is not of confusion, but of the confession ye find there of all the Bishops concerning the Ecclesiasticall praeeminence, liyng so open and thicke, like a great block in your way, that ye coulde not passe ouer to these your alle­gations that you haue here patched in, but that you must needes stumble and breake your shinnes therat: which grie­ueth you ful sore. But let vs now see, what good and hol­some herbes, ye being so cunning a gardener, haue gathe­red out of this garden, that as ye thinke lieth so vnhāsomlie and sluttishly. Ye say first that this Councell was called by the cōmaundement of the right honorable King Theodoriche. Make him as honorable as ye wil. But other then an Arri­an shal ye not make of him. Yf ye knew he was an Arrian,Martinus Pol. Sabellicus your honour might haue bene better bestowed els where. If ye knewe it not, then is your reading to small, I trow, to furnish such a boke as this is. And yet to say the truthe, small [Page] reading will serue the turne too. Ye say he called a Coun­cell: So he did. But how did he call it? Forsoth with the cōsent of the Pope Symachus, though the Coūcel were cal­led against him. For when the Bisshops had tolde the King, that the Pope him selfe ought to call Councels, Tom. 1. Conc. pa. 1007. col. 1. by a singular pri­uilege due to the See of Rome, because to that See, first the me­rite ād principality of S. Peter, ād after the authority of Coūcels, singulorum in Ecclesijs tradidit potestatem, gaue power ouer euery thing in the Churches, the Kinge made aunsweare, that the Pope had declared his consente to it by his letters. Yea and the Bishops not satisfied with the Kings so saiyng, required a sight of the Popes letters: which the King shew­ed vnto them out of hād. The Pope also him self being pre­sent, licensed the Bishops to examine his own matter. And a litle after: Affectu purgationis suae culmen humiliat. For desire of purging himself he hūbleth his high authority or dignity. Yet M. Horne addeth: the Synode presumed not to decree any thing without the Kings knowledge. Yf they had saied they ought not, then had ye said somwhat. But presume not, and may not, are two things farre a sonder. Though yet in one sense in dede they might not, nor ought not to haue proce­ded with the Kings consent, or without, against the Pope, who hath no Iudge in this world but God only: Neither cā he be iudged by his inferiours.Nec ali­quid ad se praeter re­uerentiā de Ecclesi­asticis ne­gotijs pertinere. pa. 1007. col. 2 And so these Bishops told the King to his face. And finally the King referreth the whole mater to the Synode, and plainly protesteth, that it was the Coūcels part to prescribe what ought to be done in so weighty a mater. As for mee (saith the King) I haue nothing to doe with Ecclesiasticall maters, but to honour and reuerence them, I cōmit to you, to heare or not to heare this matter, as ye shall thinke it most profitable, so that the Christiās in the City of Rome, might [Page 162] be set in peace. And to this point, lo, is al M. Hornes suprema­cy driuen. The Bishops proceding to sentence, doe declare that Pope Symachus was not to be iudged by any man: nei­ther bound to answere his accusers, but to be committed to Gods iudgemēt. And the reason the Coūcel geueth. That it appertaineth not to the sheep, but to the pastour, Vnde secū ­dum prin­cipalia praecepta, quae nostrae hoc tribu­unt pote­stati, ei quicquid ecclesiasti­ci intra sacrā vrbem vel foris iuris est, reformamus totamque causam Dei iudi­tio reser­uantes, v­niuersos hortamur. &c. Pa. 1008. col. 2. to foresee and prouide for the snares of the wolfe. And thē follow the words that you reherse, which are no iudicial sentence, but only a declaration that he should be taken for the true Bishop as before. But to medle with the cause, and to discusse it iudici­ally, they would not, because as they said, by the Canōs thei could not. And therefore immediatly in the same sentence, that ye haue in such hast brokē of in the midle, it followeth: We doe reserue the whole cause to the iudgemente of God.

Sette this to the former parte by you recited, being a parcell of the sayed sentence, as ye must needes doe, and then haue ye sponne a faire threade: your selfe prouing that thing, whiche of all things yee and your fellowes de­nye. That is, that the Pope can be iudged of no man. And so haue ye nowe made him the Supreame Heade of the whole Churche: and haue geauen your selfe suche a fowle fall, that all the worlde will lawghe you to scorne, to see you finde faulte with this Councell, as mangled and confusedlye sette foorth, whiche so plainelye and pithelye confoundeth to your greate shame and confusion, all that euer yee haue broughte, or shall in this booke bringe a­gainste the Popes Primacye. So also it well appeareth, that if there were in the worlde nothing else to be plea­ded vppon but your owne Councell and sentence, by you here mangled and confusedly alleged, M. Fekenham might vpon very good ground refuse the othe: and ye be cōpelled [Page] also, if not to take the othe for the Popes Primacy, being of so squemish a conscience, yet not to refuse his authority by your owne Author and text so plainely auouched.

M. Horne. The .62. Diuision pag. 36. a.

As it is and shall be most manifestly proued and testified by the oecumeni­call or generall Councels, vvherin the order of Ecclesiasticall gouernment in Christes Church hath ben most faithfully declared, and shevved from time to time (as your self affirme) that such like gouernment as the Quenes Maie­stie doth claime and take vppon her in Ecclesiasticall causes vvas practi­sed (.169.) The .169. Vntruth. Such like gouerne­mente vvas ne­uer pra­ctised by any Ca­tholique Empe­rour. continually by the Emperours: and approued, praised; and high­ly commended by (.170.) The .170. Vntruth. Not by one good Bishop, or godlye Father. thousands of the best Bisshoppes and most godly fa­thers that haue bene in Christes Churche from time to time: euen so shall I prooue by your ovvne booke of Generall Councels (.171) The .171. vntruthe Slaunde­rouse. mangled, maimed, and set foorth by Papish Donatistes them selues, and other such like Church vvriters, that this kinde, and such like gouernment, as the Quenes Maie­stie doth vse in Church causes, vvas by continuall practise, not in some one onely Church or parte of Christendome (vvhereof you craue proufe, as though not possible to be shevved) but in the notablest Kingdomes of al Christendome, as (.172.) The .172. Vntruth. Neither in Fraūce nor in Spaine shall you euer shevv it. Fraunce and Spaine, put in vre: vvherby your vvil­full and malicious ignoraunce shalbe made so plain, that it shalbe palpable to them vvhose eyes ye haue so bleared, that they cannot see the truth.

Stapleton.

MAister Horne nowe taketh his iourney from Rome and the East Churche (where he hath made his a­bode a greate while) to Fraunce and to Spaine: hoping there to find out his newe founde Supreamacye. [Page 163] Yea he saieth: He hath and will proue it by thowsandes of the beste Bisshops. Vndoudtedly, as he hath already founde it out by the .318. Bisshops at Nice, by the 200. bisshops at Ephe­sus, and by the 630. bishops at Chalcedo: (who stande eche one in open fielde against him) so wil he finde it in Fraūce and in Spayn also. If he had said he would haue found it in the new founde landes beyonde Spayn among the infidels there, that in dede had ben a mete place for his new founde Supremacy. Verily in any Christened coūtre by hī yet na­med or to be named in this booke, he neither hath nor shall find any one Coūcel or bishop, Prince or Prouīce, to agnise or witnesse this absolute Supremacy that M. Horn so depe­ly dreameth of. And that let the Cōference of both our la­bours trie: M. Hornes answer, and this Reply: As also who hath bleared the Readers eyes, M. Horne, or Maister Fe­kenham.

M. Horne. The 63. Diuision. pag. 36. b.

Clodoueus about this time the first Christian King of Fraunce, bapti­zed by Remigius, and taught the Christian faith: perceyuing that through the troublesome times of vvarres, the Church discipline had bene neglected and much corruption crepte in, doth for reformacion hereof call a nationall councel or Synode at Aurelia, and commaundeth the bisshoppes to assemble there together, to consult of such necessary matters as vvere fit, and as he de­liuered vnto them to consulte of. The Bisshoppes doe according as the Kinge (.173.) The .173. vntruth. The Bis­shoppes were not so at the Kings cō ­maunde­ment as M. Horne fancieth. commaundeth, they assemble, they commende the Kings zeale, and great care for the Catholique faith, and Religion, they conclude according to the Kings minde, and doth (.174.) The 174. vntruth. Notori­ous, as shal ap­peare. referre their decrees to the iudgement of the King, vvhome they confesse to haue (.175.) The 175. vntruth. For not in appro­uing do­ctrin, as M Horne here craftly vvuld inferre. the superiority, to be appro­ued by his assent. Clodoueus also called a Synode named Conciliū Ca­biloneum, and commaunded the bisshops to consider if any thing vvere amisse in the discipline of the Church, and to consulte for the reformation thereof: and this (saith the bisshops) he did of zeale to Religiō and true faith.

Other fovver Synodes vvere summoned aftervvarde in the same City at [Page] sondry tymes, by the commaundement of the King, named Childebert, mo­ued of the loue and care,As Clo­doueus and Chil­debert here, so Charles the Frēch King that novv li­ueth cal­led a Sy­nod at Poyssy by Paris of late yers. And yet is he not of his sub­iects takē for the supreme Gouernor in al causes Ecclesia­stical. Aurelia 1. Tom. 1. Conc. pa. 1046. a. Turonense 2. Can. 22 he had for the holy faith, and furtheraunce of Chri­stian Religion, to the same effect and purpose that the first vvas sommoned for.

This King Childebert, caused a Synode of Bishoppes to assemble at Pa­rys, and commaunded them to take order for the reformation of that Church, and also to declare vvhom they thought to be a prouident Pastour, to take the care ouer the Lords flock, the Bisshop Saphoracus, being deposed for his iust demerites.

Stapleton.

M. Horne so telleth his tale here, as yf this King Clodo­ueus had had the Bisshops at his commaundement to kepe Councels and conuocations at his pleasure: yea and that they referred their Decrees to his iudgement. But now so it is in dede, that neither the Prince proceded herein by way of meare commaundememente, neither the bisshoppes re­ferred to him any such Iudgement ouer their determina­ted Sentence. For proufe of the first: both the Bisshoppes in this very Councel at Orleans doe say to the Kinge, that they haue deliberated vpon these matters secundùm vestrae voluntatis consultationem according to the cōsultation kept by your wil, and the Bisshoppes of an other Councell hol­den after this at Toures in Fraunce also doe say of this Sy­node, quam inuictissimus Rex Clodoueus fieri supplicauit, which the mighty King Clodoueus made sute to be called. But because as the lawiers do note, the wil of a Prince, and the wil of a father, doe not differ from their commaunde­ment, therefore that Councel which the King by suite and supplication obtayned to be called,Aurelian. 1. in prin­cipio. is yet termed to be done praecepto & iussione, by commaundement of the Bisshoppes themselues at the Councell. For proufe of the seconde, I [Page 164] bring you the woordes of the Councel, which you in tel­ling your tale, thought good to leaue out. The bishoppes doe say vnto the Prince. Definitione respondimus &c. Ibidem. We haue by determining answered to the intent, that yf those thīgs which we haue decreed, be approued right also by your Iudge­ment, the Sentence of so many bisshoppes, may confirme and strenghthen the Authority of such a consent, as of the Kinge and greate Stuarde to be obserued. In which wordes they re­ferre not the Definition to his Iudgement, but doe shewe that yf his consent doe concurre, then his Authority is con­firmed by the verdite of Bisshops so great and so manye.

But ye say they confesse him to haue the superiority: And those wordes ye couche craftely among the rest,To. 1. cōci. pa. 1046. col. 1. M. Horne to proue his supre­macy al­leageth a bishop deposed for lesse fornica­tiō then him selfe vseth. Vide Tom. 2. Concil. pag. 149. col 1. & Conc. Au­rel. 5. can. 4. pag. 1. to make your Reader thinke, that the King had the Superiority in approuing doctrine. But this is an vntruth. They cal hī in dede Regem, ac Dominum maiorem, their Kinge or greate Stuard. Which is in respecte of temporal things, and of his world­ly principality, not of any Superiority in allowing or disal­lowing their Synodical decrees. And I praye you good Sir, was Saphoracus deposed by the Kinge, or by the Bishops? and was he as you say deposed for his iuste demerits? It had bene wel done to haue tolde vs, why he deserued to be deposed. But I suppose either ye know yt not, or else ye wil not be knowen thereof lyke a wyly shrewe. Forsurelye as farre as I can gather, yt was for that, he being a Bisshoppe vsed the company of his wyfe which he maried before he was prieste, contrarye to the olde canons, and a late order taken in the Councell at Orlyans . Yf it be so, in what case be you with your madge: pretending her to be your lawfull wyfe, yea and that after your takinge of holye orders.

M. Horne. The .64. Diuision. pag. 37. a.

A Princes charge. Theodobertus Kinge of Fraunce, calleth a Synode at Auerna in Fraunce, for the restoring and establishing the Church discipline. Gunthra­nus the King, called a Synod, named Matisconēs .2. to refourme the Eccle­siastical discipline, and to cōfirm certein orders, and ceremonies in the Church, vvhich he declareth plainly in the Edict, that he setteth foorth for that pur­pose. VVherein he declareth his vigilant and studious carefulnes, to haue his people trained and brought vp, vnder the feare of God, in true Religion, and godly discipline, for othervvise (saith this Christian King) to whom God hath committed (.176.) The 176. vntruth. Crafy cō ­nayaūce as shal appeare. A bis­shops iu­risdictiō. this charge, shall not escape his ven­geaunce. He shevveth the bisshops that their office is to (.177.) The .177 vntruth. A parte of the Sē ­tence nipped quyt of, in the middest. teache, cō ­fort, exhort, to reproue, rebuke, ond correct, by preaching the vvorde of God. He commaundeth the elders of the Church, and also others of authority, in the common vveale, to iudge and punish, that they assiste the bisshops, and sharpely punishe by bodely punishement, such as vvil not amende by the re­buke and correction of the vvorde, and Church discipline. And concludeth, that he hath caused the Decrees in the Councel, touching discipline, and cer­tein ceremonies to be defined, the vvhich he doth publishe and cōfirme, by the authority of this Edict.

Stapleton.

We haue nowe two Kings more of Fraunce: But in both these to proue your purpose, you haue nothing. King Gū ­tranus himself confesseth in the place by you alleaged: that God hath committed to the Priests the office of a fatherly autho­ritye:Tom. 2. Concil. fol. 179. And sheweth to what ende the Princes medle withe matters of religion. that is, that the sworde may amende such persons as the preachers worde can not amende. And yt is wor­thy to be considered, that among other decrees that this Councel made, and the King confirmed, yt was ordayned, that the Laye man where so euer he mette a priest should shewe him reuerence and honour.Conc. Matiscon. 2. can. 15. And in case the Prieste wente a fote and the Laye man ridde, the Laye mā should a light, and so reuerence him, as now the Christians are cō ­pelled [Page 165] to doe in Turkey to the Turks. And so I trowe this Councel maketh not al together for your purpose and sup­posed Primacy. Only it maketh to encreace the nombre of your vntruthes. For wheras you first talke of the Princes vigilant and studiouse carefulnes, to see the people brought vppe in true religion and godly discipline, you adde as the Princes woordes. Otherwise I, to whome God hath commit­ted this charge, shall not escape his vengeaunce. In making the Prince to saye, this charge, you woulde make your Reader thinke, the Prince acknowledged a Charge ouer true Re­ligion &c. And therefore you put in the margin, to beutifie your booke withal, A princes charge. But the Prince spea­keth of no such charge, as shall anone appeare. And when you adde to this, that the Prince shewed the bisshoppes, that their office is to teache, &c. there you leaue out, absque nostrae admonitione, without our admonishment, by which appea­reth, the Bishops knew their office, though the Prince held his peace: and that it depended not of the Princes supreme gouernment, as you would haue folcke to think. These cou­ple of vntruthes shal now euidently appeare by the whole wordes of the King, as they were in order by him vttered, which you haue confusely set out, putting the later parte before the first, and the first laste, adding in one place, and nipping in an other, thus to blinde and bleare your Readers eies, whome plainly you ought to instruct. For these are the wordes of Kinge Guntranus to the bishops of Mascon.Matiscon. 2. Tom. 2. Conc. pag. 179. Al­thoughe without our admonition, to you (holy bisshops) specially belongeth the matter of preaching, yet we thinke verily you are partakeners of other mens sinnes, if you correct not with dailye rebuking the faultes of your children, but passe them ouer in si­lence. For neither we, to whom God hath committed the king­dome, [Page] can escape his vengeaunce yf we be not hofull of the peo­ple subiect vnto vs. In these wordes orderly laied out as the Kinge spake them, thou seest gentle Reader, first that the King talketh not of this charge, Platina. as M. Horn vntruly repor­teth him, meaning a charge ouer religion, for the King ex­pressely speaketh of the charge of his kingdome: declaring, that as he, for negligence in his charge, so the bisshoppes for negligence in their charge, shal both increase the wrath of God. Also that without his admonition (which woordes M. Horne nipped quyte of in the middest) the bisshop hath to preache, to rebuke, to punish and correct the transgressours of Gods lawe. Such patched proufes M. Horne bringeth to pricke vp the poppet of his straunge fantastical primacye.

M. Horne. The .65. Diuision. pag. 37. b.

After the death of Anastasius thēperor, Iustinꝰ reigned alone a right ca­tholike Prince, vvho immediatly sent messengers vnto the bishop of Rome, who should both cōfirm the autority of the sea, ād also shuld prouide peace for al churches, so much as might be, with which doings of thēperor, Hormisda the bishop of Rome, be­ing moued, sent vnto thēperour, with cōsent of Theodoricus, Legats (178) The 178. vntruth. A parte of the Sē ­tence brokē of preiudicial. The pope is the kinges Ambassa­dour. the popes humble sute to thēperor, (179.) for the Ariā heretiks. The 179. vntruthe slaunde­rous. Martinus Penitentiarius telleth the cause of this legacy vvas, to entreate thēperor to restore those bishops, vvhich the vvicked Ana­stasius had deposed. This godly emperor Iustinus (saith Martin) did make a lavv, that the Churchs of the heretiks, should be cōsecrated to the Catholik religiō, but this Decree vvas made in Iohn the next Popes daies. The vvhich e­dict vvhē the King Theodoriche, being an Arian (saith the same Martin) and King of Italy, herd, he sent Pope Iohn (saith Sabellicus) vvith others in embassage vnto thēperor, to purchase liberty for the Ariās. Iustinus recei­ued these Ambassadours honorably, saith Platina, and thēperor at the lēgth ouercome vvith the humble suit of the Pope, vvhich vvas sauced vvith teares, graūted to hī and his associats, that the Arians shuld be restored, and suffred to liue after their orders. In this history, this is not vnvvorthy the noting, that the Pope did not only shevv his obedience and (180) The 180. vntruth. This fact proueth no subie­ction on the popes parte. subiectiō to the godly Emperor, but also that the secular Princes, ordeyned (181.) The .181. vntruth. The lavv of Iustinꝰ vvas no Ecclesia­stical law at al. Lavves ecclesiastical, vvith the vvhich the Pope could not dispēce. For al this busines arose about the [Page 166] decree, vvhich thēperor had made in an (182.) The 182. vntruth, as before. ecclesiastical cause or matter. If the Popes authority in these causes, had bene aboue the Emperours, he needed not vvith such lovvlynes, and so many tears to haue besought the Emperour to haue reuoked his decree and edict.

Stapleton.

NOw hath M. Horn for this turne left Frāce, and is re­turned to thēperours again: but so that he had ben as good, to haue kept hī selfe in Frāce stil. For though he decketh his margēt with, the Pope is the Kings Ambassadour:M Horns confuse narratiō. and again. The Popes hūble sute for the Arriā heretiks (which yet is a stark lie as we shal anō declare) yet by that time the whole tale is told (wherof this mā maketh a cōfuse narratiō) neither he nor his cause shal winne any worship or honesty thereby. I wil therfore opē vnto you gētle reader the whole story, truly and faithfully, and that by his owne authors Pla­tina, Sabellicus, ād Martinꝰ. The sto­ry trulye and fully opened. This Anastasius was a wicked Emperor, as M. Horne here cōfesseth. And yet two leaues be­fore, he made a presidēt of his doīgs for deposing of bishops. He defended Iohn the patriarch of Cōstātinople a great heretik who by his assistāce most iniuriously ād spitefuly hād­led the Legats that Pope Hormisda sent to hī,Sabellic. Plat. in Homisd. 1. exhorting hī to forsake ād renoūce his heresy. The said heretik Emperor Anastasius sent answere by the Legats to Pope Hormisda, that it was thēperours part and office to cōmaūde, and not the Popes, and that he must also obey thēperor. Surely a fair exāple for your new supremacy. After the death of this Anastasius strikē with lightnīg frō heauē for his wiked heresy ād As Pla­tina vvel noteth. Qui Apo­stolicae se­di debitā venera­tionē etc. Sa [...]e [...]. en. 8 li. 2. pag. 454. diso­bediēce succedeth this Iustin, a right Catholik prīce by M. Horns own words ād cōfesiō, who īcōtinētly sent to Rome his ambassadours, which should shew dew reuerēce of faith to the see Apostolike. Or as Platina in other woords writeth: [Page] qui sedis Apostolicae authoritatem confirmarent. That shoulde confirme the authority of the Apostolike See. And what was that I pray you M. Horne, but to confirme the Popes primacy,M. Horns ovvn story cōfir­meth the Popes Primacy. so litle set by before of the wicked Anastasius, and the heretical bisshop Iohn of Constantinople? And there­fore gramercye that forsakinge Fraunce ye haue browght vs euen to Constantinople, and to the Emperour there: sen­ding his ambassadour to Rome, to recognise the Popes most highe authority. Yow tel vs yet farder, that the Pope Hor­misda sent Legates to Iustinus. And there you breake of so­dēly. But what folowed? Forsoth immediatly it foloweth in the very same sentēce:Platina in Hor­misda. 1. which Iustinus receiued honorably the Popes Legats sendīg forthe to mete thē, the more to honour thē a great multitude of Mōks and of other Catholik ād worshipful mē, the whole clergy of Cōstātinople, and Iohn their bisshop cō ­gratulating also. At whose coming, the Emperour thrust out of the City and the Churches, the schismatikes called Aca­tiās (of their Author Acatius) whome Pope Felix had excō ­municated. Nowe goe forth, Gods blessing of your heart, God send vs many moe such aduersaries: And to say the truth, M. Iewel and your fellowes are not much worse to vs. But yet goe forward, for I hope we shal be more deaply bound to this good Catholike Emperour anon: and to you to, for bringing to our hād without our farder traiuail, such good and effectual matter for the Popes superiority. This godly Emperor made a law, say you, that the Churches of here­tiks should be cōsecrated to the Catholik Religiō. What did he M. Horn? Happy are ye, that he is fair dead and buried ma­ny years agoe, for feare lest if he were now liuing, your tē ­ples ād synagogs would be shortly shut vp, as they are nowe in Antwerpe, and in al Flanders here, God be praised. But [Page 167] who telleth this? Forsoth say you Martinꝰ Poenitētiarius. But lo, how wisely this tale is told, as though both Sabellicus ād Platina the Authors of your narratiō did not write the like. King Theodoricke tooke not in good parte, but euē to the very harte, these doings of Iustine. And why M. Horne:M. Horne calleth Theodo­rike now an Arriā, vvhiche before he calleth most ho­nor [...]ble. Because (as ye say now like a true mā) he was an Arriā. Say ye so M. Horne? Doth the winde wagge on that side now? For Theodoricus was, not two leaues before, The most ho­nourable King Theodoriche, and the Supreame Head of the Church of Rome to. But who saith M. Horne, that he was an Arrian? Forsoth say ye, Martin: and forsoth say I, the matter is ones againe fitly and clerkly handeled. For not onely Martin, but Platina and Sabellicus, from whome ye fetche your storie, write it also. This Theodorike sendeth his Ambassadours to Iustine, yea he sendeth Pope Iohn him selfe, who with most humble suite sauced (as you write) with teares, entreateth the Emperour, that the Churches might be restored to the Arrians. The Pope was then belike an Arrian him selfe. Surely the simple Reader, can gather none other thing by you, especially the same being dasshed in the margent to. Ye haue not done well to tell half the tale, and to tell it so suspitiouslye.VVhat the Popes [...]uit vvas to [...]usti­nus the Emperor The cause then of his earnest suite was, that otherwise Theodorike threatened, to shutte vppe all the Catholique Churches in Italie, and vnder his dominion. Yea your Author Martinus writeth, that he menaced to kill all the Catholikes in Italy: whome he calleth Christianos. This was the cause of his ernest suite, not for the fauour he bore to the Arriās, but for the fauour he bore to the Catholiques and their Churches. Iustinus receiued those Ambassadours, as you truly say, honorably. And as Sabellicus writeth, the Emperour was not onelye [Page] crowned of Pope Iohn, but at his first cōming most humbly and reuerētly fel at his feet before him and honoured him. But Iustinus did not so honorably entertaine him at Con­stantinople,Excepit Iustinus pontificem vententem multa ve­neratione, dimissus (que) ad eius pe­des adora­uit. but Theodorike at his returne did deale with him as homly, casting hī into prison at Rauēna, where what for hunger, what for lothsome filthines of the prison, short­ly after he died a Martyr. About which time or a litle after, he slew the honorable Senatours, Symachus and Boetius. Whiche thing al your three Historiographers doe write. Where ye wil vs to note that, not onely the Pope shewed his obediēce and subiectiō to the godly Emperor, but also that the se­cular Princes ordeined lawes ecclesiastical, &c. Your double note wil proue but a double vntruthe. For the Pope in this supplicatiō obeied not the godly Emperour Iustine, but the Arrian King Theodorike: Neither was it obedience of du­tie,Martinus Pol. col. 98 Plat. in Ioan. 1. Niceph. lib. 17. cap. 9. but a submission of charitie: partly to qualifie the furie of the Arrian tyrant, partely to saue harmelesse the whole nūber of Catholikes in Italy, which by th'Emperours edict should cōsequently haue ben destroyed. Againe this decree of Iustine was no ecclesiasticall mater, cōcerning any alte­ration of religion, any deposing of Bishoppes, any order of Church discipline or such like, but ōly a decree for banishīg of Arrian heretikes, and of ouerthrowing their Synagogs: which maner of decree being of denoūced heretiks, belon­geth properly to the ciuile Magistrate, and is an external or tēporal mater, no spirituall or ecclesiasticall cause, namely such as we ioyne issue with you. King Phillip hath banished heretikes out of this land and hath cōmaunded their Syn [...] ­gogues to be ouerthrowen. But he is not therfore taken for Supreme gouernour in al causes, or in any cause ecclesiasti­cal: Neither do or euer did his subiects swere to any suche Title.

M. Horne. The .66. Diuision. pag. 38. a.

VVithin a vvhile after this [...]hon, vvas Agapetus Pope, vvhome The­odatus the King, sent on his Ambassage vnto the Emperour Iustinianus, to make a suit or treaty in his behalfe. VVhen the Emperour had enterteined this Ambassadour vvith much honour, and graunted that he came for, tou­ching Theodatus, he earnestly both vvith faire vvordes and soule, assailed this Pope, to bring him to become an Eutychian: the vvhich vvhen he could not vvinne at his handes, being delighted vvith his free speache and con­stancy, he so liked him, that he foorthvvith (.183.) The .183. Vntruth. For Pope Agapetus deposed Anthy­mus and placed Menna in his room not iusti­nian. deposed Anthemius bisshop of Constantinople, bycause he vvas an Eutychian, and placed Men­na a Catholike man, in his roume. Agapetus died in his legacy, in vvhose roume vvas Syluerius made Pope, by the meanes, or rather, as Sabellicus saieth, by the commaundemente of the Kynge Theodatus, the which vntil this time, was wōt to be done by the authority of the Emperours (saith Sabellicus) for the reuenge whereof Iusti­nianus was kyndled to make warres against Theodatus. Syl­uerius vvas shortly after quarrelled vvithal by the Emp [...]resse, through the meanes of Vigilius, vvho sought to be in his roome, and vvas by the Empe­rours (184) The .184. Vntruth. By vio­lence ba­nished, not by authorite deposed. authority deposed. The vvhich act although it vver altogether vn­iust, yet it declareth the autority that the Prince had ouer the Pope: vvho like a good Bisshop, as he vvould not for any threates do contrary to his cōscience and office: so like an (185) The .185. Vntruth. Ridicu­louse. obediēt subiect, he acknovvleged the Princes au­thority: being sent for, came: being accused, vvas ready vvith hūblenes to haue excused and purged him self: and vvhan he could not be admitted thervnto, he suffred him selfe (186) The .186. Vntruth. As shall appeare. obediētly to be spoiled of the Bissoplike apparaile, to be displaced out of his office, and to be clothed in a Monasticall garement.

The same measure that Vigilius did giue vnto Syluerius, he himselfe being Pope in his place, receiued shortly after, vvith an augmentation, for he vvas in like sorte vvithin a vvhile (187) The 187. Vntruth. By vio­lence he vvas ba­nished, not by autority deposed. See oure Returne. Art 3. pag. 77. deposed by the Emperours au­thority, bicause he vvould not kepe the promise vvhich he had made vnto the Emperesse, and vvas in most cruell vvise dealt vvith all: vvhich cruel­ty vvas the rather shevved to him by the meanes and procurement (as Sa­bellicus noteth) of Pelagius, vvhom Vigilius had placed to be his Suf­fragan in his absence.

Stapleton.

ALL this standeth in two pointes. First, that an other Pope, Agapetus by name, was againe sent in Ambas­sage of Theodatus the King. But this (as Liberatꝰ wri­teth) was a tyrannical force,Libera [...]us cap. 21. made bothe to the Pope, and to the whole Senat of Rome. These Arrian and barbarouse Gothian Kings are no fit examples of gouernmente due to godly Catholik Princes. And their vtter destructiō folowed immediatly after, vnder Belisarius Iustinians Captain. Such blessed presidents M. Horne hath foūd out, to build his ima­gined Supremacy vpon. The next point is, in the deposing of two Popes by the Emperour Iustinian, wherin we nede by so much the lesse to enlarge our aunsweare, for that M. Horne freely and franckly of him selfe confesseth that they were vniustly deposed. Againe, that you say, the Pope suffe­red him self obediently to be spoiled &c. If your tale wer true, that were you know,Tom. 2. Conc. in vitae Sil­uerij. Pla­tina in Sil­uerio. Li­ratus. c. 22 but an homly obedience: but now he suffred not that spoile as you imagine, obediently: but was brought to that point by a very craft and traine, as in Plati­na and Liberatꝰ it may be sene. This therfore may passe for an other of M. Horns vntruths. So hard it is for such Prote­stāt Prelats to tel a true tale. With the like truth you write, that the Pope like an obediēt subiect, acknowleged the Princes autority. And why? Because forsoth he suffred himself to be cloistred vp by force of Belisarius (or rather his wife) the Emperours Captain. If such patience parforce proue a sub­iection, then is the true man an obediente subiecte also to the theefe, when he yeldeth him vppe his purse in the high waie to saue his lyfe.

[Page 169]But we say if there had bene iuste cause to depose them: yet neither themperour, nor the Councel could lawfully haue deposed them. And because good Reader,If ye will see more of these tvvo Po­pes, se the cōfutatiō of the A­pologie. Act. 1. Cō ­stāt. 5. syn. to. 2. Con. p. 71. c. 2. b. Definite sāctissimi ipū alienū esse, & nu­dū ab ōni epis. dign. at (que) effi­cacia. Ibid. p. 67. col. 2. a. Agapetus Anthimū cōdēnauit [...]t oī dign. sacerd. & officio nu­dauitet oī episcopat. & ortho­doxonoīe. Iustin. in authent. in constit. cōt. Anth. Vide 5. Synodū Cōst. Act. 1. pa. 67. col. 1. b. Et Liber. c. 21. To. 2. Conci in vita Vigilij. Li­beratus. Cap. 22. thou shalt haue a shorte and a ready proufe, and that framed to thy hand already by M. Horne, I remit thee to the fourth Ro­man Councell, wherevpon M. Horne lately pleaded, and to the very same sentence that M. Horne did him selfe al­leage. But yet by the way I must score vp as an vntruth, that Iustinian deposed Anthimus. For it was not Iustiniā, but Pope Agapetus that gaue sentēce of depositiō against hī: nor he was not deposed at that time, but before. In dede Iustiniā executed the sentence, and thrust him out of Con­stātinople, and banished him, though thempresse toke part with him. For fiirst we find, that Agapetus was desired by a supplicatiō of diuers of the East, to depose him. We haue also in the actes of the .5. generall Councel declared, that Agapetus did depose him. In case these testimonies wyll not serue, ye shal heare Iustinian him selfe, that shal tel you that it was not he, but Agapetus that deposed Anthimus. Quēadmodum nuper factū esse scimus circa Anthymū, qui qui­dē deiectus est de sede huins vrbis à sancto & gloriosae memoriae Agapeto sanctiss Rom. Ecclesiae pontifice. Euen, saith Iustinian, as we knowe it happened of late to Anthimus, who was displaced from the see of this imperial citie by Agapetus of holy and gloriouse memorye, bishop of the holy Churche of Rome. Neither was Vigilius deposed by the Emperous au­thoritye, as M, Horne fableth, but for not yelding to the Eutychian Emperesse, Iustinians wife, he was by a trayne brought to Constantinople and so banished. And all this was done rather by the wicked Emperesse, then by Iustini­ā: who (as Liberatus writeth) restored again both Siluerius [Page] (thoughe by the meanes of Belisarius he was caried awaye againe into banishment) and Vigilius also, though he dyed by the way in Sicilia.This Emperesse was ā Eutychian hereti [...]e. Such ex­āples ōly make for M. Horne

M. Horne. The .67. Diuision . pag. 38. b.

About this time, Epiphanius Bisshop of Constantinople, as Libera­tus, sayih, died, in vvhose roune the Empresse placed Anthymus. About vvhich time, vvas great strife betvvene Gaianus and Theodosius, for the bisshopricke of Alexandria, and vvithin tvvo monethes, sayth Libera­tus, the Empresse Theodora sent Narses a noble man, to enstall Theo­dosius, and to banissh Gaianus: Theodosius being banisshed, the sea vvas vacant: vvhervnto Paulus (vvho came to Constantinople to plead his cause before the Emperour, against certaine stubborne monkes) vvas appoin­ted, and he receiued, sayth Liberatus, (.188.) The .188. vntruth. The wor­des of Li­beratus fouly malmed in the mid­dest. authority of the Em­peroure, to remoue heretiques, and to ordeine in their places men of right faith. This Paulus vvas shortly after accused of murther, vvhervpon the Emperour sent Pelagius the Popes proctour, lying at Con­stantinople, ioyning vnto him certaine other bissops (.189.) The .189. Vntruth not with cōmissiō, but to do it by their meanes, vvithout vvhome (by order of the ca­nons) he could neuer haue done it. vvith commission to depose Paulus from the bissoplike office, vvhich they did: and they or­dered for him Zoilus, whome afterward the Emperour depo­sed, and ordered Apollo, who is nowe the Bisshop of Alexan­dria (sayth Liberatus). Certaine Monkes mette vvith Pelagius in his re­tourne from Gaza (vvher Paulus vvas deposed) tovvards Constantinople, bringyng certaine articles, gathered out of Origenes vvorkes, minding to make suyte vnto the Emperour, that both Origen and those articles, might be condemned, vvhom Pelagius for malice he bare to. Theodorus bisshop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, an earnest fautor of Origen, did further all that he might. Pelagius therfore doth earnestly entreat themperour, that h [...] vvold cōmaund that to be dō vvhich the Monks sued for: to vvit, that Origē vvith those articles should be dāned. The vvhich suit themperour graūted. being glad (.190.) The .190. Vntruth. False trā ­slation. Gaudēs se &c. Beīg gladde, that him selfe gaue iudgemēt &c. The Author thereby, noteth the Em­perours ambiti­ousnes. to geue iudgmēt vpō such matters, and so by his commandmēt, the sentēce of the great curse against Origē, and those articles vvere dravvē foorth in vvriting and subscribed vvith their hands, and so sent to Vigilius the bisshop of Rome, to Zoilus bissop of Alexādria, Euphe­mius of Antioche, ād Peter bisshop of Hierusalē. These Bishops recei­uing this sentēce of the curse (.191.) ꝓnoūced by themperours [Page 170] cōmaundmēt, and subscribing thervnto: Origen was condēned being dead, who before long agoe on liue was condemned.

Stapleton.

Here is a myngle mangle I can not tel wherof, and a tale tolde of a tubbe, for any reason or certaine scope that I see in it. Here haue we nowe, that themperours wife placeth and setteth in bishoppes to. For it was Theodora the Euty­chian Emperesse that placed and displaced the bishops here named: sauynge Paulus whiche was made by Pelagius the Popes Legate at Constantinople:The .191. Vntruth, These vvordes pronoūced by the Emperors cō ­mādemēt, are not in Liberatus Lib. c. 20. &. 23 Accepit abimpera. potestatē super ordinationem Ducū ac tribunorū vt remoue ret haereticos, & pro eis ortho­doxos or­dinaret. Lib. c. 23. whych thyng M. Horne concealeth. But I meruaile by what warrant that Empresse did al this. I dare say not by M. Knoxes and his fellowes, of whom I haue spoken. And what bishop, think you, that she setteth in? No better surely then her selfe: that is, Anthimus the captaine of the heretikes of that time. But this geare goeth handsomly in and out, all thyngs I warrante yow in dewe order and proportion: euen in as good, as the matter is good it selfe. For nowe M. Horne, after he hath declared, that Anthimus was deposed from his bishoprike, is retour­ned to shewe howe he was first ordered and made bishop. We haue then a tale tolde, to no purpose in the worlde, of Paulus the bishop and a murtherer, deposed, and well and orderly to, I trowe by Pelagius the Popes proctour, and so howe M. Horne frameth his primacy hereof, God woteth, I wotte not in all the world. For as for Iustinians commis­sion to depose bishops, if M. Horne meane of such as Kyng Edward gaue in England of late, it is M. Hornes commis­sion and not Iustinians. Neither hath hys author any suche thing. But only that themperour gaue the bishop authority, to appoint Captaines and other of the Emperours officers, to helpe forward the execution. Nay saieth M. Horne, the [Page] wurste is behind. For Iustinian thēperour gaue his iudge­mente vppon Origenes and cursed him to. Here in dede somwhat might haue bene sayde sauing that we haue sayd somwhat alredie of suche manner of cursing, and sauinge that M. Horne of hys great curtesie hath eased vs, ād hath made (I trowe againste hys will, but nothing against hys skill) a full answere for vs: saying that Origenes was long before this tyme, yea yet lyvinge condemned. Thē was there here no newe sentēce or determinatiō made by Iustinian, but a confirmation of the olde: and no more matter of su­premacie, then yf a man shoulde beshrewe Luthers cur­sed harte for his newe broched heresies, and curse them and him to: hys heresies being manie hundred yeares be­fore condēned, ād cursed by many a good vertuous clerke, and by many general and other Coūcels to Neither did Iustiniā geue any sentēce of curse against Origen him self,Cap. 23. but as Liberatꝰ saith; at his cōmaundemēt or procurīg the chief Patriarchs, of Rome, of Alexādria, of Antioch, ād of Hieru­salē did it and so by the ordinary Iudges in this case, not by the Emperours only or absolut commandemēt he was cō ­demned. And we find in the acts of the .5. generall Coū ­cell,Action. 4. Cō. 5. Cō ­stā. ca 11. Origen condemned with Arius, Macedonius, Euthy­ches and other.

M. Horne. The .68. Diuision. pag. 3 [...]. a.

VVhen Theodorus bisshop, of Caesarea in Cappadocia heard of this condemnation, to be reuenged he laboured earnestly vvith the Emperour, to condemne Theodorus Mopsuestenus a famous aduersary of Origen, the vvhich he brought to passe by ouermuch fraude, abusing the Emperour to the great slaunder and offence of the Church. Thus in all these Ecclesiasticall causes, it appereth the Emperor had the (.192). The .192. vntruth. The bis­shops not the Em­perour had the chief in­termed­li [...]g, as it hath well appeared. chief entermedling, vvho al­though at the last vvas beguyled by the false bisshops: yet it is vvorthy the noting by vvhom this offence in the Church came, vvhich appeareth by that, [Page 171] that follovveth: I beleeue that this is manifest to al men (saith Liberatus) that this offence entred into the Church by Pelagius the Deacō, and Theodorus the Bisshop, the which euē Theo­dorus him selfe, did openly publishe with clamours: crying, that he and Pelagius were woorthy to be brente quicke, by whome this offence entred into the worlde.

Stapleton.

M. Horne nowe will bringe vs a prety conclusion and prove vs, because bishopes be at dissention and abuse the Prince assisting nowe the one parte, nowe the other that the prince is supreame head.Euil suc­cesse [...], o [...] princes ī ­ [...]ermed­ling ī causes eccle­siasticall. Whereof will rather very well followe this conclusion. Experience sheweth that princes the more they intermedled in causes of religiō, the more they troubled the Churche, the more they were thē selues abused, and also misused others: Therefore prīces a­re no mete persons to be supreme heads in such causes. Examples hereof are plenty.

Constantin the great persuaded by the Donatistes most importunat suyt,August. Epist. 166. waded so farre ouer the borders of his owne vocatiō, that (as S. Augustin writeth) à sanctis anti­stibus veniam erat petiturus, Tripar. l. 3. c. 8. &. 12. it came to the point he should aske pardon of the holy bishops. The same Emperour by the suit of the Arrians medled so far with bishops matters, that he banished the most innocent, most godly, and most lerned bishop Athanasius: whereof in his deathebed he re­pented, willing him by testament to be restored.

Theodosius the first,Niceph. li. 12. c. 24. persuaded with the smothe toung of Flauianus the vnlawful and periured bishop of Antioch did take his parte wrongefully against the west bisshops and the greatest parte of Christēdom: wwhereof we haue before spoken.

[Page]Theodosius the seconde, defended the Ephesine con­uenticle against Pope Leo, seduced by Dioscorus and Eu­tyches,Cō. Chalc. Act. 1. & 10. or rather abused by one of his priuy chamber Chry­saphius an Eunuche: and wynked at the m [...]dering of holy Flauianus, whome the Chalcedon Coun [...]ll calleth Mar­tyr.

Lib. ca. 18.Zenon the Emperour deceyued by Acatius of Constā ­tinople, banished Iohn Talayda the Catholike patriarch of Alexandria, who appealed from the Emperoure to Pope Simplicius. And nowe in like maner this Emperour Iusti­nian while he was ouer busy in ecclesiastical matters, as one that toke great delight (so noteth Liberatus) to geue iudg­ment in such matters,Cap. 23. &. 24. Concil. Chalc. Act. 10. in fine. being deceiued by Theodorus of the secte of Acephali, condemned Theodorus Mopsuestenus and Ibas two most catholike bishops, and highly praysed in the Chalcedon Councel, wherof sprong vp in the Church a moste lamentable tragedye for the space of many yeares as all writers doe pitefully report.Niceph. lib. 17. ca. 29.30. & 31. This same Iustinian also banished the good bishop of Constantinople Eutychius for not suffering him to alter Religion. But he restored him a­gaine in his deathbed, as Constantine dyd Athanasius. He woulde haue banished also Anastasius an other Catholyke bishop of Antioche, because he would not yeld to his here­sy of Aphthartodocitae. Such examples ought rather to teach Princes not to intermedle with matters aboue their vocati­on (trulye as muche as the sowle passeth the body) then to geue them anye presidentes of supreame gouernemente, yea IN ALL CAVSES, as Mayster Horne and hys fellowes, as long as Princes fauour them woulde geue vn­to them.

M. Horne. The .69. Diuision. pag. 39. a.

[Page 172]This Pelagius as yet vvas but Suffragan or proctour for the Pope, vvho aftervvard in the absence of Pope Vigilius his maister, crepte into his See, in the middest of the broiles that Totylas King of the Gothes made in Ita­lye, vvhen also he came to Rome. In the vvhiche Historie is to be no­ted the Popes (.193.) The .193. Vntruth. This vvas no subie­ction in ecclesia­stical ma­ters, but Rome being then cōquered by Toty­las, Pela­gius vith­all the Ci­tie submi­ted them selues. subiection to Totylas, vvhome humblie on his knees he acknovvleaged, to be his Lorde, appointed thereto of God, and him selfe as all the reste to be his seruaunte. Note also hovve the King sent him Embassadoure, vvhat charge, and that by Othe, of his voyage, of his message, and of his returne, the King straight­lie gaue vnto him: hovve buxomelie in all these things he obeyed: Hovve last of all tovvard the Emperour (being commaunded by him to tell his mes­sage) he fell doune to his feet, and vvith teares bothe to him and to his Nobles, he ceased not to make moste lamentable and humble supplication, till vvithout speed, but not vvithout (.194.) The .194. Vntruth. Slaunde­rous as shall ap­peare. reproche, he had leaue to returne home. But least you should take these things, to sette foorthe that Princes had onely their iurisdiction ouer the Ecclesiasticall personnes, and that in matters Temporall, and not in causes Ecclesiasticall, marke vvhat is vvritten by the Historians. Platina amongest the Decrees of this Pope Pelagius, telleth (and the same vvitnesseth Sabellicu [...]) that Narses the Emperours other deputie, Ioyntelye with Pelagius did decree, that none by ambition shoulde be admitted to any of the holye Orders. Pelagius moreouer vvriteth vnto Narses, The .195. Vntruth. For the Decree of Narses vvas no ecclesiastical mater but an ex­ecutiō of the chur­che Ca­nōs made before. desi­ring him of his ayed against all the Bisshoppes of Liguria, Venetiae, and Histria, vvhich vvould not obey him, putting their aff [...]aunce in the autho­ritie of the first Councell of Constantinople. In vvhiche Epistle amongest other things he vvriteth on this vvise: Your honoure must remem­ber what God wrought by you at that time, when as Totyla the tyraunt possessing Histriam and Venetias: the Frenche also wasting all thinges, and you woulde not neuerthelesse This proueth naughte els but that (as Pelagius the firste hath or­deined) the sec [...] ­lar word helped, when the spiritua [...]l could not preuaile. suffer a Bis [...]hoppe of Myllaine to be made, vntill he had sente woorde from thence to the moste milde Prince (mea­ning the Emperour) and had reciued answere againe from him by writing what shoulde be done, and so bothe he that was or­deined Bisshoppe, and he that was to be ordeined, were brought to Rauenna at the appointment of your high autho­ritie. [Page] Not long after, Pelagius. 2. bycause he vvas chosen In [...]ussu Prin­cipis, without the Emperours comaundement, and could not send vnto him by reason the tovvne vvas beseged, and the huge risyng of the vva­ters stopped the passage: as soone as he might being elected Pope, he sent Gre­gory to craue the Em [...]erours pardone▪ and to obtaine his good vvill. For in those dayes (sayth Platina) the Clergie did nothing in the Popes election except the election had bene allovved by the Empe­rour.

Stapleton.

M. Horne telleth vs a tale after his olde wonte, that is without head or taile, to abuse his ignorant reader with a confuse heape of disordered and false wordes. Pelagius was sente by the Romans to King Totilas to entreat of peace, and that he would for a time ceasse from warre, and geue them truce. Saying that if in the meane whyle they had no succour,Sabellic. Aeneld. 8. lib. 4. they would yelde the citye of Rome to him. Pelagius coulde wynne none other answere at his hands, bu [...] that they should beate downe the walles, receiue his army, and stand to his curtesy and mercye. Totilas being afterward in possession of the City▪ cōcernīg pope Pe­lagius set Ambassa­dour to thempe­rour. and fearing warres frō the Emperour Iustinian, sent Pelagius to Iustinian, to tra­uaile with him for peace: sending him withall worde, that in case he would inuade Italye, he would destroye Rome, and plucke it downe faste to the ground. Totilas toke an othe of Pelagius and hys other ambassadours to doe hys message faythfullie, and to returne againe theyre ambassa­de exployted. Pelagius most pitefullye and withe manie teares layethe before Iustinian the miserable state and the vtter destructiō and desolation of Rome impedente, onlesse he woulde forbeare warre with Totilas: yea he ād hys fel­lowes fell vpon theire knees most humblye beseching him to haue compassiō of the citye. But in fyne Iustiniā would [Page 173] not relent. Wherevpon sone after their returne, Rome was set al on fier by Totylas, and no lyuing creature, man, wo­man, nor childe suffered there to inhabite. Prye nowe M. Horne and pycke out here what ye can to establishe your primacye: your folye is to open to be in this matter withe many words refuted. Here is no one matter Ecclesiastical, and that ye see wel inowghe: and therefore your selfe as faste as ye can wou [...]de steale away from yt, and proue your matter otherwise. But Sir ye shall not so steale awaye, but beside the note of extreme folye, to busie your selfe and your Readers with that, which your self can not deny, no­thing to towch spiritual matters, but that ye shal carry with you a lie or two. Els tel vs why you wil haue vs to note the Popes subiection to Totylas, Platina in Pelagio. 1. Sabell. Aenead. 8 lib. 4. seing that neither Pelagius was then Pope, Vigilius yet liuing at Cōstantinople, neither was he any other way subiect, then as to a Tyrant. For Totilas (who for his rage and crueltyes was called Flagellum Dei, the Scourge of God) at that tyme tooke Rome, and entred with the conquest. Pelagius did that homage to him, to ob­tayne mercy for his poore Cytyzens. And when Totylas seing him coming towarde him, said: What meaneth this ô Pe­lagius? comest thou to me as a suppliant? Pelagius answered, sayinge. Yea Sir I come to you, seing God hath made you my Lorde. But haue mercy, I beseche you, vpon [...]our seruaunts, haue mercy vpon the poore Captiue Cytie. And this lo was the sub­iection of Pelagius made to Totylas, which you wishe to be noted M. Horne, as though it made any thing for the Popes subiection in spiritual matters. Tel vs also whye ye write, that he departed with reproche. What reproche had he at Iustinians hand? Your authour Sabellicus sheweth of none. But see the mans folish wilynes. In dede Sabellicus writeth [Page] that Pelagius was noted as a fauorer of Anthimus: but then saith he withall, that Pelagius did detest it of all thinges to seme to fauour him. Wel, to supply this defect of his super­fluous liyng talk of Pelagiꝰ be brīgeth forth a decree against symony, made by Pelagius and Narses th'Emperors deputy. This is no mater of faith, M. Horne, no, nor no new decree of maners, but such as had bene decreed long before. And therefore but an execution of the old Canons: which Nar­ses might medle withal wel inoughe. There is then to make vp the mater yet ones againe a declaration concerning the interest of the Emperour in the election of Bishoppes and Popes too: wherevnto at this time we nede not greatly to say any thing: so much hath ben said hereof before.

M. Horne. The .70. Diuision. pag. 40. a.

About the time of Pelagius the first his Papacy, vvas there a Councel hol­den at Tovvers in Fraūce, by the licence and consent of Arithbertus the King, for the reformation of the Churche discipline, vvherein appeareth, that the Kings authoritie vvas (.196.) The .196. Vntruth. In that Councell there is no suche thing. necessarily required to confirme and streng­then the discipline. For vvhere they decree of the maides or vviddovves, that shall not be maried, vvithoute the consente of the parentes, vvhiche is an especiall matter Ecclesiasticall, they declare (.197.) The .197. Vntruth. They de­clare that the due obserua­tiō therof (not the strength) depēded vpō thos Princes good lavves. the strength thereof to depend vpon the commaundement of the Prince. Not onely (say they) the Kings, Childebert and Clotharius of honourable memory, kepte and preserued the constitutiō of the lawes touching this matter, the which nowe the King Charibert their successour hath confirmed or strengthened by his precept.

Stapleton.

Nowe is Maister Horne reuolted to Fraunce againe, but not to tarie there long. For sodainly he returneth againe to Constantinople. His short tale consisteth in two lyes. First when he saieth the Kings authoritie was necessarily re­quired to confirme the discipline of the Churche. For that [Page 174] neither is in the Councell, neither can be gathered out of it. The second is, that the Coūcel declareth that the strength of their Decree, being a speciall matter Ecclesiastical dependeth vppon the commaundemente of the Prince. For the Coun­cell declareth onely, that those good Kings of Fraunce kept the Constitution of the Churche in that behalfe:Tripart. li. 7. ca. 4. and for­ced by lawe the due obseruation thereof. Like as Iouini­an the Emperoure, made it death by lawe, to defile a Vir­gin or Nonne. Though that sinne before, was by the Chur­che condemned. All this doth but multiplie woordes. It proueth nothing your imagined Supremacye. Mary if you will knowe M. Horne, what this Councell by youre selfe alleaged, maketh for the Popes Supremacie, I will not lette to tell it you. The Fathers of the Councell do saye:Conc. Tu­rō. 2 can. 21. What Priest is he that dare be so bolde, as to doe contrarye to suche Decrees as come from the See Apostolique? And a li­tle after. And whose authoritie may take place, if it be not theirs, whome the Apostolique See sendeth and maketh his deputies or Referendaries? Our Fathers haue euer kept that, which their authoritie commaunded. Thus you fight well for vs, but nothing for your selfe.

M. Horne. The .71. Diuision. pag. 40. a.

The Emperoure Iustinianus calleth the Bisshoppes of all Churches vnto a Generall Councell at Constantinople, the vvhich is called the fifte oecumeni­call Synode, to represse the insolence of certaine Heretiques, vvho taught and mainteined Heresies and Schismes, to the greate disquieting of the Chur­che againste the doctrine establisshed in the foure forenamed General Coun­celles. In the time of this Councell Menna,Euag. li. 4. ca. 38. the Bisshoppe of Constanti­nople departed out of this life, in vvhose roome the Emperour placed Euty­chius. The Emperour gouerneth and directeth all things in this Councell,Niceph. li. 17. ca. 27.as the Emperours before him had done in the other Generall Synodes, as ap­peareth by the vvriting, vvhiche he sente vnto the Bisshoppes, vvherein he [Page] shevveth, that the right belieuing godly Emperours his auncestours did al­vvaies labour, to cutte of the heresies sprong vp in their time, by calling together into Synode the most religious Bisshops,Al this is graunted, but M. Hornes Primacie neuer a vvhitte thereby furdered. and to preserue the holy Church in peace: and the right faith to be sincerely preached and taught. He allegeth the'xāples of Cōstātinus Magnus, Theodosius the elder, Theodosius the yonger, and Mar­tianus the Emperours: vvho (saith he) called the former generall Coun­celles, vvere present them selues in their ovvne personnes, did aide and helpe the true confessours, and tooke great trauaile vppon them, that the righte faithe should preuaile, and be preached. Our forenamed auncestours of godlie memorie (saith he) did strengthen and confirme by their lawes, those things whiche were decided in euerye of those Councelles, and did expulse the Heretiques, whiche went about to gainesaye the determination of the fower fore­named Generall Councelles, and to vnquiet the Churches.

He protesteth, that from his first entraunce, he made these beginnings and foundation of his Emperiall gouernement, to vvitte, the vnitie in faith agreeable to the fovver Generall Councelles, amongest the Churche mini­sters, from the East to the VVest: the restraigning of schismes and contenti­ons stirred vppe, by the fautours of Eutyches and Nestorius, againste the Chalcedon Councell: the satisfying of many that gainsaied the holy Chalce­don Councell, and the expulsion of others, that perseuered in their errours, out of the holye Churches and Monasteryes: To the ende that con­corde and peace of the holye Churches and their Priestes, be­ing firmely kepte, one, and the selfe same faithe, whiche the fower holy Synodes did confesse, might be preached through­out Gods holye Churches, He declareth hovv he had consulted vvith them by his letters and messengers about these matters, and hovv they de­clared their iudgementes vnto him by their vvritinges: not vvithstanding seeing certaine Heretiques continue in their heresies: Therefore I haue called you (saith he) to the royall Cittie (meaning Constantinople) exhorting you being assembled togeather, to declare once a­gaine your mindes touching these matters. He sh [...]vveth that he opened these controuersies to Vigilius the Pope, at his being vvith him at Constantinople: And we asked him (saith he) his opiniō herein: [Page 175] and hee, not once nor twise, but oftentimes in writinge, and without writing, did curse the three wicked articles, &c. VVe commaūded him also by our Iudges, and by some of you,The Em­peroure (198) cō ­maūdeth the Pope to com to the sinod. The .198. Vntruth. For not in that sence as M. Horn imagi­neth. vilz to inforce thereby a Supreme gouerne­mente. to come vnto the Synode with you, and to debate these three Articles together with you, to the ende that an agreable form of the right faith might be set forth: and that we asked bothe of him and you in writing touching this matter: that eyther as wicked articles, they might be condemned of all: or els, if he thought them right, he should shewe his minde openlye: But he answered vnto vs: that he would doe seuerely by him selfe concerning these three points, and deliuer it vnto vs. He declareth his ovvne iudgement and beliefe, to be agreeable vvith the faieth set foorth in the fovver Generall Councelles. He prescribeth vnto them the speciall matters, that they should debate and decide in this Synode: vvhereof the finall ende is (saith he) That the truth in euery thing may be confirmed, and wicked opinions condemned. And at the last, he concludeth vvith an earnest and godly exhortation, to seeke Gods glory only, to declare their iudgements agreable to the holy Ghospell, touching the mat­ters he propoundeth, and to doe that vvith conuenient spede. Dat. 3. Nonas Maias, Constantinopoli.

Stapleton.

Here M. Horne, as he hath other Emperors and Princes, so would he now beare Iustinian in hand also, that he is and ought to be the Supreme head and gouernour in all causes euen Ecclesiastical and Spiritual. But Iustinian, if you will hearken to his lawes and Constitutions, will tell you flatly that suche a heade agreeth not with his shoulders. He wil not be made such a monster at your handes. You shall finde him as very a Papist for the Popes Supremacy, as euer was any Emperor before him, or sence him. For who I pray you was it, M Horne, that by opē proclamatiōs ād laws for euer to continue enacted, that the holy Ecclesiasticall Canons of the foure first Councels shall haue the strength and force of [Page] an imperiall lawe? Iustinians testimo­nies for the Popes primacie. Cōst. 131 ex trāsl. hal Sancimus, vt sancti ecclesiastici canones, qui [...]a sanctis. 4. Cō ­cilijs, Niceno, Con­stāt. Ephes. & Chalcedon. expositi sunt, vicem legum obtine ant. Praedictorum e­nim sanctorum Con­ciliorū decreta per­inde vt sacras scri­pturas suscipimus▪ & canones vt leges cu­stodimus. Ac pro­pterea sancimus, vt secundum eorum definitiones sanctiss. veteris Ro. Papae, primu [...] oīm sacerd. sit. Sūmi pōtificatus api­cē apud Romam esse nemo ē qui dubitet. Lib. 1. Cod. Iustin. de summae Trinitate. Ideó (que) oēs sacerdotes vniuersi orientalis traectus et subijcere et vnire sedi vest. San­ctitatis properaui­mus. & mox. Nec enī patimur quicquā quod ad ecclesiarū statū ꝑtinet, quàmuis manifestū & indubitatū sit quod mouetur, vt nō ēt vestrae īnotescat Sanct. quae Caput est oim sanctarū ecclīarū. Secūdū eorū definitiones &c. vt suprà const. 131. Sancimus sacras sequētes regulas &c. const. 5. Secundū diuinas regulas sancimus sacras per omnia sequentes regulas. const. 6. Was it not Iustinian? Who ys yt that embraceth the decrees of those holy Councells, euen as he doth the holy and sacred scriptures? And kepeth their Canōs as he doth the imperial lawes? Who but Iustinian? Who enacted also, that according to the definitiō of those foure Councels, the Pope of Rome shal be taken for the chiefe of all Priestes? Iustinian. Who yn an expresse lawe declared, that no man doubteth, but that the principality of the highest bis­shoprike resteth in Rome? Iustinian. Who declared to Pope Iohn, that he studied and laboured, howe to bring to subiection, and to an vnitye with the See of Rome all the priestes of the Easte? Iustinian. Who tolde him, that there shall be nothing moued pertei­ning to the state of the Churche, be it neuer so open and certaine, but that he would signify it to his Holi­nesse, being head of all holy Churches? Iustinian. Who declared, that in all his lawes and doings for matters ecclesiastical, he followed the holy Canons made by the Fathers? Iustinian. Who published thys lawe that, when any matter ecclesiastical is moued, his laye officers should not intermedle, but suffer the Bissoppes to ende yt accordyng to the Canons? This selfe same Iustinian.

What great impudency then is it for you to ob­trude him this title of supreme gouernour, whiche so many of his expresse lawes doe so euidently ab­horre? What shame, infamy and dishonour shoulde it be for him, to accept any such title, the Canons [Page 176] of the holy Catholike Church,Sequentes igitur ea quae sacris definita sūt Canonib. Cō. 123. Si ecclesiasticū ne­gotiū sit, nullam cō ­munionē habento ci­uiles magistratus cū ea disceptatione, sed religiosiss. episcopi se cundū sacros canones negotio finē īponū [...]. Const. 109. Haereti­cos & illi dixerūt, et nos dicimus, quicū (que) mēbrum sanctae Dei catholicae & aposto­licae ecclesiae nō sunt. in qua & omnes sanctissimi totius habi­tati orbis paetriarchae tam Romae occiden­talis, (quam) huius regiae vrbis, & Alexādriae & Theopolis & H [...] ­erosolymorū, & oēs sub ijs cōstituti epis­copi vno ore Aposto­licam fidē & tradi­tionē praedicāt. Qui igitur incōtaminata coīone, in Catholica ecclesia Dei amātiss. huius sacerdotib. nō participant, opt. iure vocamus haereticos. and his owne law­es, standing so plainly to the cōtrary? What? would you haue him an heretike, as you are? Hath not he yn hys Lawes pronounced hym to be an here­tike, that doth not cōmunicate in faith with the holy Churche, especiallye with the Pope of Rome and the fowre patriarches? Hath he not also in his said lawes shewed, that the Pope of Rome hath the primacy ouer all priestes, by the first fowre generall Councelles, vnto the which the Pope and all other patriarches haue a­greed? Obtrude not therefore this presumptuous Title to this Emperour, who of al other most shun­ned it. Bring forth M. Horne, what ecclesiasticall Constitutions and decrees you wil or can, made of this Emperour Iustiniā. Al wil not serue your pur­pose one iote. This only of the diligent Reader be­ing remembred, that all such lawes he referred to the Popes iudgement: that he made not one of his owne, but followed in them all, the former Canons and holy Fathers. Last of all that he enacteth ex­presly, that in ecclesiastical matters, lay Magistrats shall not intermeddle, but that bishops shall ende al such matters according to the Canōs. These three thyngs beyng well remembred and borne awaye, nowe tell on M. Horne, and bring what you can of Iustinians Constitutions in ecclesiasticall mat­ters.

The effecte of all your Argumentes yn thys Diuision, resteth vppon thys poynte, that Iustini­an made Lawes for matters ecclesiasticall, which thing I nede not further answer then I haue done. [Page] Sauing partly, that this lye of M. Hornes woulde not be o­uerpassed: wherein he imagineth all things here spoken to be done in the fifte generall Councell at Constantinople: whereas a greate part of them were done in an other Coū ­cel at Constantinople vnder this Emperour, whiche M. Horne doth here vnskilfully confoūde. Partly also to shew yet ones again, that Iustinian himself doth so expounde his doinges,Cōstit. 42 in Nouel. Quā sententiā tā. etsi per se valētem, multò ta­mē adhuc valentio­rē, reddit maiestas imperato­ria, quae regia hac vrbe ipsū expellit. Hovve thempe­rours be said to strengthē the lavves of the Churche. Tom. 2. Concil. pag. 21. that M. Horne can not wel wreste them to his pur­pose. For Iustinian saieth. We following the holy fathers &c. and so forth: as we by many places of Iustinian haue decla­red before. Againe speaking of things decreed in the Synod against Zoaras. Your sentence, saieth he, being of power by yt se [...]fe, our imperiall maiestye hath made yt yet muche stronger, which doth expulse him out of this imperial City. Lo M. Horn the decree of the Synode is stronge, thoughe the Emperour neuer confirme it, and where is then become your impe­rial primacye? Nowe farder you heare to what purpose the princes assiste: that is for the furtheraunce of the executiō. The bishops had deposed Zoaras, but they by their power coulde not thrust him out of the City and banishe him. This must be don by the ciuil power, and this did Iustinian, and by that made the Councels lawe the stronger. And so ye now heare of Iustiniā himself, what is the meaning of that which you here and so often alleage, that Princes strēghthē the lawes of the Church. And to shew that the Supreme gouernment, which is the final Sentence and Iudgemēt re­sted in the bisshops, not in the Emperour, in the first Actiō Theodorus the Emperours Officer, bringeth in the playn­tif Bishops of Syria, and saieth to the Synode. Vt in his inter­pellantes, vos ipsis finem imponatis. To the entent that you considering these supplications, maye make an ende of thē. [Page 177] And in the same Action the Emperour himself againe affir­meth, that:Act. 1. pag. 61. As ofte as the Sentēce of the Priestes hath deposed any from their holy rowmes, as vnworthy of priesthood, so ofte the Empire was of the same minde, and made the same order or cōstitutiō with the Authority of the priestes. Where you see M. Horne, that the deposing of Priestes or Bishoppes, pro­ceded first from the Authority, Sentence and Iudgement of the Priestes: And was afterwarde putte in execution by the Imperial lawes. That is, to say all shortly. The bishops deposed. The Prince banished. For by death in those dayes Princes proceded not against the clergy thoughe deposed and condemned in generall Councell. I might nowe goe forwarde for any thing of weight remayning: sauinge that your marginal note, that the Emperour commaundeth the Pope to come to Councell, stayeth me a litle, as making some good apparance for you. Ye say he commaunded the Pope, but yf ye had proued withall, that he had such authority to commaunde, then would the matter ronne better on your syde: or that ye could shewe that at this commaundemente he came to the Councel, which ye are not able to shewe. But yet am I able to shewe he came not. So that this indu­ceth rather the Popes primacy, especially considering,In praeam. epist Cōc. Chalced. that he was at Cōstātinople, euen whē the Councel was kept. Marciā also sent his letters to Pope Leo to come to Chalcedo, ād yet he came not, but sent his deputies thither for hī.

M. Horne. The .72. Diuision. Pag. 41 b.

The (.199.)The 199. vntruth. There is no suche Title. Title prefixed to the first general Councel, summoned by the commandement of Iustinian, telleth in effect generally, both the matter and also vvho had the chief authority in the ordering thereof: for it is intituled: The diuine ordinaunce and constitution of Iustinian the Em­peror against Anthymus, Seuerꝰ, Petrus, and Zoaras, Mennas the [Page] vniuersal Archebisshop and Patriarche of Constantinople, vvas present in this Councel, vvho had adioyned vnto him, placed on his right hande, cer­tain Bisshops, coadiutours, named and (.200.) The 200. vntruth. Flat and open, as it shal ap­peare. appointed by the commaun­dement of the Emperour, sent out of Italy from the sea of Rome. VVhen they vvere set thus in Councel, Themperour sent Theodorus one of the maisters of the Requestes, or his Secretarie, a vvise man, vnto the Synode: Bisshops, Abbottes, and many other of the cleargy, vvith their billes of supplications, vvhich they had put vp vnto themperour, for redresse of certain matters Ec­clesiastical. Theodorus maketh relation vnto the Synode hereof, deliue­reth the Billes of supplication to be considered on: presenteth the parties to the Synod, and shevveth that this is themperours pleasure, that they shoulde (.201.) The 201. vntruth. Not to dispatche (that vvorde is not in the Councel) but finem imponere, to make an end of by finall Sentence. The prīce the hi­ghest po­tentate next to God (202) in al cau­ses. The .202. vntruth. You ouer rech your Author. In al cau­ses, is more thē your Au­thor said. God reserueth to the prince the fulnes of direction in (.203.) Ecclesiastical causes. The 203. vntruthe, as before. For of Ecclesiastical causes, the Author speaketh not, but of banishing heretiks. dispatche and end these matters. Paulus the Bisshoppe of Apamea, in his bil of supplication, offred to the most godly Emperour in the name of al his, acknowledgeth him to be the highest Potentate in the worlde next vnto God: who hath magnified his Empire, and throwē his aduersaris vnder him: because he mainteineth the only and pure faith: offreth vnto God pure Leuen, that is to say, true doctrine as incense, and burneth the chaffe (meaning false religiō) with vnquencheable fier. And after the declaratiō of their Faith talking of the Eutychian or counterfaite catholike, He desireth them­perour, to whom God hath reserued the ful authority to direct, to cut him from the Churche, and to expulse him out of his Dominions. In like sort the religious men, and the Monasteries of Secū ­da Syria, doo offer vp a booke of supplication vnto the Emperour, beseeching him that he vvil commaund the Archebishoppe Mennas, president of the councel, to receiue their booke, and to (.204.) The .204. vntruth. False translatiō: for not, to considre, but Canonice finem accipere to conclude &c. The 205. vntruthe. A parte of the sentence nipped of, quyte ouerthrovving M. Hornes purpose. consider of it according to the Ecclesiastical Canons. The Emperour maketh a lavv and constitution, to ra­tifie and confirme the iudgement of the Synode against Anthymus, and other heretiks: vvherein also he decreeth touching many other ecclesiastical matters or causes: as, No man to Rebaptize: to prophane the holy Communion: to cal Conuenticles: to dispute further in those matters concluded on: to publishe or set forth the Heretical [Page 178] bookes: to communicate with them. And so knitteth vp all, vvith this conclusion. VVee haue decreed these thinges for the com­mon peace of the most holye Churches: Tom. 2. cō ­cil. pa. 20 Act. 1. Cō ­stā. pa. 20 Prima er­go est sen­tentia quae in Constā ­tinopoli cō ­tra Anthimum lata est, secun­da autem sententiae quae in Constant. fuit cōtra Seuerum Petrū & Zoaram. Terita cō ­stitutio est ordinaria. Quarta autem a­ctio in Hierosoly­mis, et haec omnia in 4. mēsibꝰ facta & sancitae fuerunt. these thinges haue we determined by sentence. (.205.)

Stapleton.

You goe on M. Horne, euer like to your selfe, and to your brother M. Iewel. For as at the first, you beginne with a great vntruthe, so you procede on with a greate manye moe. I meane not that ye cal the first for the fifte, lette the printer beare this, but for the residewe ye must take it vpon your own shulders. As first wher ye speake of the title: ther is no such title prefixed before the Councel: there is such a sentence in dede. But that it is a title prefixed before the Councel, as though this ordination were made before the Councel, and so should tel both the matters and who had the cheif authority in the ordering thereof, this is no simple lie. But euer ye shoote to farre, or come to short home. Af­ter those wordes by you rehersed yt followeth (which you leaue out) ad Petrum Archiepiscopū Hierosolimorū: To Peter Archebishop of Hierusalē, to whō Iustiniā did send this cō ­stitutiō, not before the Coūcel, but the Coūcel beīg ended. The order of these sentences, as it is declared in the acts of the Coūcel was this. First there was a sentēce geuē at Cō ­stantinople against Anthymus. Thē was there an other sen­tence geuen there against Seuerus, Petrus, and Zoaras. Thē was the constitutiō of Iustinian (whereof ye speake) made and sente to the bishop of Hierusalē, which kept there also a Councel and condēned Anthimus. And al this was done in fowre monethes. And therfore yt cā not be the true title of this Coūcel. And much lesse tel the matter and who had cheif authority there. But euery man is not so cunning as you, to make men weene, that the egge was a chycke [Page] before the henne had hatched. Yet for one thinge I here commende you, for telling vs that the Popes Legats in this Councel were set in the right hande of the Patriarche Me­nas, whiche I suppose maketh somwhat for the Popes pri­macye. But that you adde, they were named and appointed by the commaundement of the Emperour, I can not commēde you. For it is vntruly saied. They were the Popes owne Le­gates and deputies, of his own naming and appointing, not of the Emperours. For it foloweth in the same Constitu­tion of Iustinian,Tom. 2. Conc. pa. 20. b. touching these Legates: Omnibus qui­dem ex Italica regione ab Apostolica sede nuper missis. All being lately sent out of Italy from the See Apostolike. In like maner where you say, Theodorus a Maister of the Re­questes to the Emperour, (as you call him) deliuered to the Synod the Billes of supplication to be considered on, such consi­deration you finde not in the woordes of Theodorus: but this you finde him say to the Synode. V [...] in his interpellan­tes, vos ipsis finem imponatis. To thentent that by your meanes in these matters they may be ended and cōcluded. This the Emperours officer required of the Synode: that they would make an ende of the complaintes layed in by certaine Bisshoppes and Monkes. And this you conceale, and alter cleane to a simple consideration, as thoughe the Councel should haue considered, and then the Emperour concluded. And therefore yet ones againe in this very Di­uision,Tom. 2. Conc. pa. 23. col. 1. you tel vs of a booke of supplication made by the Mo­nasteries of Secunda Syria, to the Emperour, that Menna the president of the Councel should receaue their booke and consi­der of it according to the Ecclesiastical Canons. The woordes of your Author are: Quae in ipso insita sunt Canonicè finem ac­cipere conuenientibus ad ipsum &c. that the contents of their [Page 179] booke of supplication, be ended and determined Cononically (not considered only) and that by the accorde (not of Men­na only, whome only you name, being the bisshop of Con­stantinople) but, of the most holy Romaines and the holy Sy­node. Thus your false doctrine can not appeare (when it commeth to trial) but lodē alwaies with fardels of vntruths. But nowe I trowe we shall quickly lese this aduantage. For strayte ye bringe vs foorth a bisshop that calleth the Em­perour the higheste potentate in the worlde next vnto God, maintayning the onely and pure faith: offeringe vnto God pure leuen of true doctrine, as incense, and burning the chaff (mea­ning, as ye say, false religion) with vnquencheable fier. And thinke you M Horne, that yf Iustiniā now lyued, he would take your doctrine for pure fyne flower, and not rather for stynking musty chaffe or bran? Well you haue hearde his iudgemente in parte alredy. As for your bsshop yf he had sayd, in al causes, as you make hī to say in the margin, he had said wel towarde your purpose, but nothing towarde the truthe. And therefore ye hauing espied the former wordes not to come iumpe to your purpose, ye vndershore them withe an other sayinge of the saied bisshoppe, who spea­kinge of an heretyke, desireth the Emperour to whome God had reserued the ful authority to directe, to cut him from the Church, and to expulse him out of his dominions. Ye are not for al this much the nearer: for wherein the good bisshop meante the full direction, he him selfe sheweth: that is, in cutting away of heretiks, and expulsing them out of his domi­niōs. And therefore your goodly marginal note that, God re­serueth to the Prince the fulnesse of direction in causes Eccle­siasticall quayleth, and is not worth a rushe: Neither is yt to be collected by the expresse woordes of the bishop: and yf [Page] yt were, sauing for your shrewd meaning and mistaking, yt were not greatly material. For it might stād right wel, mea­ning of the ful and final directiō, which is the executiō. Ye now lay forth many ecclesiastical cōstitutions: and among other,Const 42. Haec decreuimus sanctorum patrum canones sequu­ti. [...]om. 2. C [...]c. pa. 62 Haec sentē t [...]auimus, sequentes sanctorum patrū dogmata. that no mā shal dispute further in matters of religiō ons concluded (where are your Westmynster disputations thē?) and that themperour had decreed all those things by sentence, for the common peace of the Church. Ye say the truth, but not all the truth, for ye haue most falsly, following your accu­stomable humour, left out iij. or iiij. wordes strayt waies fol­lowing. We haue (saith Iustinian) determined these things fol­lowing the decrees of the holy fathers. Which wordes doe set your self and your primacy to, quyt beside the sadle. And thus, as thēperours conclusion, that knitteth vp al, knitteth vp our conclusion to, for the ecclesiastical primacy, and vn­foldeth al your false conclusiōs in this your false boke: So, yf ye take and ioyne the very beginning of the said constitutiō to the wynding vp of yt, the matter wilbe much clearer: and so clere that Iustiniās cōstitutiō that your self do bring forth,Conc. Cō ­stant. 5. Act. 1. To. 2. pag. 61. may serue for a sufficiēt answere to al your boke: cō ­cerning princes intermedling in causes Ecclesiastical. We do (saith Iustiniā) no strāge thīg, or such as thēperors haue not ben accustomed vnto before, in makīg this present Law: (meaning against Anthimus,Tom. 2. Conc. Synod. 5. Act. 1. pag. 61. col. 2. a Rem non insolitam im [...]erio & nos faciē ­tes ad praesentem ve­ni nus legē. Quoties enim sacerdotū sen­tentia quosdam in­dignos sacerdotio de sacris sedibꝰ deposuit, quē admodū Nesto­rium, Eutychen, Arrium, Macedonium & Eun [...]mium, ac quosdam alios ad iniquitatem non minores illis: toties imperium eiusdem sententia & ordinationis cum sacerdotum authoritate fuit: sic que diuina & humana pariter concurrentia, vnam consonantiam rectis sententiis fecere: quemadmodum & nuper factum esse contrae Anthymū scimus, qui quidē deiectus est de sede huius regiae vrbis a sanctae & gloriosae memoriae Agapeto, sanctis. Ec­clesiae antiquae Romae pontifice, eò quòd &c. Seuerus, and Zoaras) for as often as the bishops by their sentence haue deposed and displaced out of their holysees and dignities any vnworthy par­sons, as Nestorius, Eutyches, Arius, Macedonius, and Eunomius, and certain other as nawghty as they were: thēperors folowing their sentēce ād authority decreed the same: So that ecclesiastical ād tēporal authority cō ­curring together, made one agremēt in right iudgmēt. [Page 180] Euen as we knowe it happened of Late touching An­thimus, who was thruste out of the see of this impe­riall cyty by Agapetus of holy and gloriouse memorie, the bisshop of the most holy Church of olde Rome.

M. Horne. The .73. Diuision. pag. 42. aNothing may be don in Churche maters, vvithout the prin­ces authority.

Al things being thus done, by the commaundement of the Emperour, in the first Action, and so foorth, in the second, third, and fourth, after many ac­clamations, the President of the Councel Mennas, concludeth: saying to the Synod: That they are not ignorāt of the zeale and minde, of the Godly Emperour, towards the right Faithe, and that nothing of those that are moued in the Church (.206.)The .206. vntruthe double both in the text ād in the margin: standing in false trāslatiō. Nihil eo­rū quae in sanctissi­ma eccle­sia mouē ­tur cōue­nit fieri. To. 2. cōcil. p. 78. co. 2ought to be don without his wil and commaundement.

Stapleton.

Now goe ye M. Horne clerkly to worke. For yf ye can roundly and hansomly proue this, ye may perchance set a new head vpon Iustinians shoulders: which yet woulde be but an vgle and a monstrouse sight. But this is neither clerk­ly, nor truely don of you; to turne Cōuenit, yt is mete, semely, or conuenient: into oportet, yt must or ought. I maruaile ye bearing the state of a bishop, haue so litle faith and honesty: or dwelling so nighe Winchester schole, so litle sight in the grammer. Mennas had condemned Anthimus: the Bishops and other cryed, that forwith he should cōdēne Seuerꝰ, Pe­trus, and Zoaras: as he did a while after. To whome Mennas answered, that it was mete to cōsult with themperour first. which is very true: for his great zeale to the faith, ād for that [Page] he hadde the exequution of the sentence, this is lyke your other knacke before, that Dioscorus and other must be deposed.Nos sicut scit vostra charitas, apostolicā sedem sequimur & obedimus: & ipsius commun [...]catores, cō ­municatores habe­mus, & condemna­tos ab ipsa & nos condemnamus. Act. 4. pag. 87. And surely I woulde haue meruayled yf Mennas had takē Iustinian for the supreame head who within fowre lynes after decla­reth the Pope to be the supreame head: and that he did followe and obeye hī in al things, and cōmunicated with them, that did communicate with him: and cō ­demned those whome he did condemne. Who also gaue Anthimus the heretik a tyme of repentance appointed by Pope Agapetus, and proceded in Sē ­tence against him, according to the prescription of the Pope,Cyrillus Epist. 10. & 11. & Coelest. epi. 12. inter epist. Cyril. as Cyrillus proceded against Nestorius in the Ephesine Councel, according to the limita­tion of Pope Celestinus.

M. Horne. The .74. Diuision. pag. 42. a.

Such is the autority of Princes in matters Ecclesiastical, that the Godly auncient Fathers did not only confesse, that nothing moued in Church matters (.207.) The 207. vntruthe. The godly Fathers neuer confessed so. ought to be done vvithout their authority, but also did submitte thēselues vvillingly vvith humble obedience, to the direct [...]on of the Godly Emperors, by their lavves (.208.) The 208. vntruthe. Notorious and im­pudent: often auouched, but neuer proued. Cod. lib. 1. tit. 17. in al matters or causes Ecclesiastical, vvhich thei vvuld not haue done▪ yf they hadde thought, that Princes ought not to haue gouerned in Ecclesiastical causes. The same zelous Empe­rour doth declare, that the authority of the Princes lavves doth rightly dispose and kepe in good order, both spiritual and tempo­ral matters, and driueth avvay all iniquity: vvherefore he did not only gather togeather as it vvere into one heape, tha lavves that he him selfe had made, and other Emperours before him, tou­ching ciuil or temporal matters: but also manye of those lavves and constitutions, vvhich (.209.) The 209. vntruthe Not vvhich his Auncestours, but vvhich the Apost­les and fathers of the Church had made before. his auncestours had made in Ecclesiastical causes: Yea, there vvas nothing perteyning to the [Page 181] Church gouernemente, vvhiche he did not prouide for, order and direct by his lavves and Constitutions:Nou. Cō 3. Thempe­rours ec­clesiastical Lavves. vvherein may euidently appeare the aucthoritie of Princes, not onely ouer the persons, but also in the causes Ecclesiasticall. He made a common and generall lavve to all the Patriarches, touching the ordering of Bisshoppes, and all other of the Clergie, and Church Ministers: prescribing the number of them to be suche, as the reuenues of the Churches may vvell susteine: affirming that the care ouer the Churches, and other re­ligious houses, perteine to his ouersight: And doth further inhibite, that the ministers do passe foorth of one Churche to an other, vvithout the licence of the Emperour or the Bisshoppe: the vvhich ordinaunce he gaue also to those that vvere in Monasteries. He (.210.) The .210. Vntruth. Not he, but the Canōs of the Chur­ch before gaue that autority. He only putteth the mat­ter by his lavve in executiō Cōst. 5. geaueth authoritie to the Patri­arche or Bisshoppe, to refuse and reiect, although great suit by men of much authoritie be made. He prescribeth in vvhat sorte and to vvhat ende the Churche goods shoulde be bestovved, and threatneth the appointed paines to the bysshoppe and the other Mynisters, if they trangresse this his Consti­tution.

He prescribeth in vvhat sorte the Bisshoppe shall dedicate a Monastery: be giueth rules and fourmes of examination, and triall of those that shalbe admitted into a Monasterie, before they be professed: in vvhat sorte and or­ders they shal liue together: He (.211.) The .211. vntruth. Not he, but the Churche prescri­bed that order and rule. Const. 6. prescribeth an order and rule, vvher­by to choose and ordeine the Abbat: He requireth in a Monasticall personne, diuinorum eloquiorum eruditionem, & conuersationis inte­gritatem: Learning in Gods woorde, and integritie of life. And last of all, he chargeth the Archebisshoppes, Bisshoppes, and other chur­che Ministers, vvith the publisshing and obseruing of this his constitution: Yea his Temporal officers and Iudges also, threatening to them both, that if they doe not see this his Lawe executed and take the effecte, they shal not escape condigne punishment.

He protesteth, that Emperours ought not to be carefull for nothing so much, as to haue the mynisterye faithfull tovvardes God, and of honeste behauiour tovvardes the vvorlde, vvhiche he saith, vill easely be brought to passe, if the holy rules vvhich the Apostles gaue, and the holy Fathers kept, and made plaine, be obserued and put in vre. Therefore, saith he, [Page] vve folovving in all things the sacred rules (meaning of the Apostles) do or­deine and decree, &c. and so maketh a constitution and lavve, touching the qualities and conditions, that one to be chosen and ordered a Bisshop ought to haue, and prescribeth a fourme of triall and examination of the party, be­fore he be ordered: adding that if any be ordered a Bisshop, not M. Horn is not so qualified. for he hath (he saieth) a wife Ergo M. Horne by his ovvne law, yea of the Apostles making, must lose his Bis­shoprik. Const. 57 qualified ac­cording to this constitution, bothe he that ordereth, and he that is ordered, shall * lose their bisshoprikes. He addeth furthermore, that if he come to his Bisshoprike by giftes or revvardes, or if he be absent from his Bisshoprike aboue a time limited, vvithout the commaundement of the Emperour, that he shall incurre the same penalties. The like orders and rules he prescri­beth in the same constitution for Deacons, Diaconisses, Subdeacons, and Rea­ders: commaunding the Patriarches, Archbisshops and bisshops to promul­gate this constitution, and to see it obserued vnder a paine.

He af [...]irmeth that this hath ben an auncient Lavve, and doth by his au­thority, renevv and confirme the same: that no man haue priuate Chappels in their houses, vvherein to celebrate the diuine mysteries: vvherevnto he addeth this vvarning vnto Mennas the Archebisshop, that if he knevv any suche to be, and do not forbid and refourme that abuse, but suffer this consti­tution of the Emperour to be neglected and broken, he him selfe shal forfait to the Emperour fiftie poundes of gold.

Const. 58.Also that the ministers kepe continuall residence on their benefices: other­vvise the Bisshop to place others in their roomes, and they neuer to be restored.

Stapleton.

We shall nowe haue a long rehearsall, full three leaues, of many Ecclesiasticall Lawes, made by Iustinian the Em­perour. But who would thinke that M. Horne were ey­ther so folishe to make suche a sturre for that no man deny­eth, and the which nothing proueth his cause, or to reherse such constitutions of Iustinian, that partely ouerthroweth his Primacy, partly displaceth him frō al bishoply and priest­ly office? But what shal a man saye to them that be past all shame, and haue no regard what they say or doe preach or write? Or how is this world bewitched, thus paciently to [Page 182] suffer, such mens sermons and bookes,Const. 6. Hoc aūt futurū esse credimus, si sacrarū regularū obseruatio custodiatur quā iusti laudandi et adoran­di inspectores et mi­nistri Dei tradiderūt apost et sancti patres custodierūt et expla­narūt. Sancimus igi­tur sacras per oīa se­quētes regulas. &c. aut in virginitate degens à principto, aut vxorē habens ex virginitate ad eum venientē, et nō vidu­ā. & mox: de caeter [...] aūt nulli permitten­tes àa positione legis vxorē habentitalem imponi ordinationē. Ibidem. yea and to geue them high credit to? Tel me then and blushe not M. Horn, whether ye be not one of them, that for lacke of such qualities, as Iustiniā, according to the holie rules and Canons ye spake of, requireth in a Bishop, must lose your Bishoprik, and those al­so that ordeined you? Is not this one of the qua­lities, that a Bisshoppe should haue no maner of wife when he is ordered? Yea that his wife that he had be­fore he was ordered Priest or Bisshop, must haue bene a virgin and no widowe at the time of mariage? Is not this one of the holye rules, whiche the Apostles gaue, and the holy Fathers kept and made plaine, whi­che Iustinian would haue obserued and put in vre? Now againe for Priest, Deacon, or Subdeacon that marieth after he is ordered, doth not Iustinian euē in your owne constitution say, that he must forth: with be spoiled of all Ecclesiasticall function and office, and become a laie man? Loke nowe well aboute you Maister Horne, and aboute your fellowes Pro­testante Bisshoppes, and tell mee, if this rule take place, whether ye can shewe among them all,Sacro Statim cadat ordine, et deinceps idiota sit. any one Byshoppe? And so by the merueilous handy woorke of God, yee are neither Parliamente nor Churche Bishops. What do ye tel me of Iustinians constitutions touching Monkes and monasteries,There is not a Pro­testant Bisshop in England by the cō stitution that M. Horne him selfe alleageth. and of the rules and fourmes that he prescribed to them? He sayeth in dede, that he hath a speciall care to see the monastical rules and fourmes according to the will of the holy Canones obserued. He saith that throughe the pure and deuoute prayers of religi­ouse [Page] men, all thinges doe prosper in the common wealth, both in peace and in warre. Hovve vvell M. Hornes doctrine agreeth vvith Iu­stiniās for the monastical life. Yf then Iustinian threatneth punish­ment, as ye truely say, both to spirituall and temporall ma­gistrates for not publishyng and causyng hys Constitutions made for religiouse men to be obserued: howe sharply and roughlye woulde he deale with you, your fellowes, and maysters, that by your preachinges haue caused so manye monasteries to be so pityfully ouerthrowen? Howe should yow escape condigne punishment, thinke you, that make no better of these Iustinians, and not hys, but rather the holy Fathers, rules concernyng the monasticall life, then to call the sayde holy life a foolis [...]e vowe, an horrible errour, and a monkish superstition?

M. Horne. The .75. Diuision. pag. 43. b.

VVhan this Emperour vnderstood, by the complaints that vvere brought vnto him against the Clergy, Monks and certein Bishoppes, that their liues vvere not framed according to the holy Canons, and that many of them vvere so ignoraunt, that they knevve not the prayer of the holy oblation and sacred Baptisme: Perceiuyng further, that the occasion hereof vvas part­ly, by reason that the Synodes vvere not kept accordinge to the order ap­pointed, partly for that the Bishoppes, Priestes, Deacons, and the re­sidue of the Clergy, vvere ordered, bothe vvithout due examination of the right faith, and also vvithout testimony of honest conuersation: Prote­sting that as he is mindeful to see the ciuil Lavves firmely kept, euen so he ought (of duty) to be more carefull about the obseruation of the Sacred rules and diuine Lawes, and in no wise to suffer them to be violated and broken. He renueth the constitutions for the Cler­gy, touching Churche causes, saing. This an­svvereth all your processe, M. Horn, The Em­peroure foloveth the canōs The Ca­nōs vver made of Bisshops in Coun­cels and Synods. Ergo he folovv­eth the Bisshops. If he fo­lovve thē he goeth not be­fore thē, He dothe not di­rect them prescribe to them, or gouern them, but is directed prescribed, and gouerned of them. Folowyng therefore those thin­ges, that are defined in the sacred Canons, we make a Pragma­ticall or moste full and effectuall Lawe, whereby we ordeine that so often as it shalbe neadfull, to make a Bishop. &c. And so goeth forvvarde in prescribing the forme of his election, examination, and [Page 183] approbation. And shutteth vp the Lavve about the ordering of a Bishop vvith this clause: If any shalbe ordered a Bishop against this for­mer appointed order, bothe he that is ordered and he also that hath presumed to order against this fourme, shal be deposed. He decreeth also by Prouiso, vvhat order shall be kept, if it chaunce that there be any occasion or matter layd to the charge of him that is to be orde­red, either Bishop, Priest, Deacon, Clergy man, or els Abbot af any Monastery. But aboue all things sayeth he, vvee enact this to be obser­ued, that no man be ordered Bishop by giftes or revvards: for both the geuer, taker, and the broker, if he be a Church man, shalbe depriued of his bene­fice, or clericall dignity, and if he be a Lay man, that either taketh re­vvarde, or is a vvorker in the matter betvvene the partyes, vve commaund that he pay double to be geuen to the Churche. He geueth lycence neuer­theles, that vvhere there hath bene somethyng geuen, by hym that is ordered Byshoppe, of custome, or for enstallation, that they may take it: so that it exceede not the somme prescribed by hym in this Lavve. VVe commaund therefore that the holy Archebishoppes, namely of the elder Rome, of Constantinople, Alexandria, Theopolis, and Hieru­salem, if they haue a custome to geue the Bishoppes and Cler­kes, at their ordering vnder twenty poūdes in gold: they geue onely so muche as the custome alloweth: But if there were more geuen before this Lawe, wee commaunde that there be no more geuen then twenty poundes. And so he setteth a rate to all other Ecclesiastical persons in their degrees, and according to the habi­litie of their Churches, concluding thus: Surely if any presume by any meanes to take more than we haue appointed, either in name of customes, or enstallations, wee commaunde that he restore threefolde so much to his Churche, of whom he tooke it. He doth vtterly forbidde bishoppes and Monkes, to take vpon them gardianship: neuerthelesse, he licēceth Priestes, Diacōs, and Subdeacōs, to take the same on thē in certein cases. He cōmaundeth tvvo Synods to be kept in euery Prouince yerely. He prescribeth vvhat, and in vvhat order, maters shalbe examined, and discussed in them. Besides these, he enioyneth, and doth commaunde all Byshops, and Priestes, to celebrate the prayers in the ministration of the Lor­des supper, ād in baptism, not after a vvhispering or vvhyst maner, but vvith a [Page] cleare voyce, as thereby the minds of the hearers, may be sturred vp vvith more deuotion in praisyng the Lord God. He proueth by the testimony of S. Paul, that it ought so to be. He concludeth, that if the religious bisshops, neg­lect any of these things, they shal not escape punisshment by his order. And for the better obseruing of this constitution, he commaundeth the rulers of the prouinces vnder him, if they se these things neglected, to vrge the bisshops, to cal Synods, and to accomplissh all things, vvhich he hath commaunded by this Lavv to be doon by Synods. But if the Rulers see notvvithstanding, that the bisshops be slouthfull and slack to do thies things, then to sygnify therof to him self, that he may correct their negligēce: for othervvise he vvil extremely punissh the Rulers them selues. Besydes thies, saith this Emperour, vve for­bid and enioyne the Religious bisshops, Priests, Deacons, Subdeacons, Readers, and euery other Clergy man, of vvhat degre or order so euer he be, that they play not at the table plaies (as cardes,Con. 133. dyce, and such like playes, vsed vpon a table) nor associat or gase vpon the players at such playes, nor to be gasers at ay other open syghts: if any offend against this decre, vve commaund that he be prohibited from all sacred ministery for the space of thre years, and to be thrust into a monastery. After thies Constitutions made for the gouern­mēt of the secular Clergy (as you terme it) in causes ecclesiasticall, the Em­perour descēdeth to make statutes, ordinaunces and rules for monastical per­sons (commonly called Religious) declaryng, that there is no maner of thing, The prīce hath su­preame gouerne­mēt ouer al persōs (.213.) ī al maner causes. which is not throughly to be searched by the authority of the Emperour, who hath (sayth he) receiued from God the common gouernment and principality ouer al men. And (.212.) The .212. Vntruth. These la­wes shew no suche principa­lity. to shevv further that this principality is ouer the persons, so vvell in Ecclesi­asticall causes as Temporall, he prescribeth orders and rules for them, and committeth to the Abbottes and Bisshoppes (iurisdiction) to see these rules kepte, concludynge that so well the Magistra­tes, The .213. Vntruth. Impudēt. That set ī the mar­gin, vvhich is not ī the text. as Ecclesiasticall personnes, oughte to keepe incorrupted all thynges whyche concerne godlynesse: but aboue all other the Emperour, who owghte to neglecte no manner of thyng pertaynyng to godlynesse. I omit many other Lavves and Constitu­tions, that not only this Emperour, but also the Emperours before him made, touchyng matters and causes Eccesiasticall, and doo remitte you vnto the Code, and the Authentikes, vvhere you may see that al manner of causes Ec­clesiasticall, [Page 184] vvere ouerseene, (.214.) The .214. vntruth. That can not be found either in the Code, or ī thauthē. August. Epist. 48. Const. 133. Solitaria vita atque in ea contemplatio, res planè sacra est, et quae suapte natura animas ad Deū ad­ducat. Neque ijs tantum, qui eam inco­lunt, sed etiam om­nibus alijs puritate sua & apud Deū in­terpellatione competentē de se vtilitatē praebeat. Vnde & olī eares Imperatoribus studio fuit habita, & nos non pauca de dignit. & honestate eorū legibus cōplexi sumus. Sequimur enī sacros in hoc canones et sanctos patres qui hoc cōprehēderūt le­gibus. quādoquidē nihil nō peruiū ad in­quisitionē maiestati èxistit imperatoriae, quae cōmunem in oēs hoīes moderationē et principatum à Deo percepit. ordered and directed by the Emperours, and so they did the duetifull seruice of Kyngs to Christ, In that (as S. Augustine sayth) they made lawes for Christe.

Stapleton.

All this geare runneth after one race, and allto­gether standeth in the execution of the ecclesia­stical Lawes. Neither is there any thing here to be stayed vpon, but for that he hath furnished his mar­gent wyth hys accustomable note, that the prince hath the supreame gouernment ouer all persons in all maner causes. Whiche as yt is largely and liberally spoken: so is his text to narrowe to beare any such wide talke. Yea and rather proueth the contrary, if he take the nexte line before with him, and stop­peth also his felowes blasphemous railyngs, against the holy monastical life. The solitary and the cōtem­platiue life (saieth Iustinian) is certeinly an holy thing, and such a thing as by her owne nature cōducteth sou­les to God: neyther is it fruitful to them only that leade that life, but through her puritye and prayers to God geueth a sufficient help to other also. Wherefore them­perours in former times, toke care of this matter, and we also in our Lawes haue set foorth many things tou­ching the dignity and vertue of religious men. For we doe followe in this the holy canons and the holy fathers who haue drawen out certaine orders and Lawes for these matters. For there is no thing that themperours maiesty doth not throughly search. Whiche hath recei­ued from God a common gouernment and principality [Page] ouer all men. Nowe thys place as ye see, serueth expresly for the Churches principality, whose holy Canons, and holy Fathers themperour, as he sayeth, doth followe. By whiche wordes appeareth,Sequimur sacros Ca­nones & sanctos patres. he made no one Constitution of hys owne Authority. And therefore hath M. Horne craftely shyfted in this worde Authority which is not in the Latine: as though the Emperours Authority were the chief groūd of these Constitutions, whereas it is but the seconde, and depending only vpon former Canons and writtinges of ho­ly Fathers. Yet hath this ioly gloser placed in his margine a suprem gouernmēt and principality in al maner causes. Which is not to be founde any where in the text, but is a glose of his owne making. Wherein me thinketh, M. Horne fareth as certaine Melancholike passionated doe: whose imagina­tion is so stronge, that if they begin earnestly to imagine as present, ether the sight or voyce of any one that they exce­dingly either loue or feare, by force of theyr imagination, doe talke with them selues, or crye out sodenly, as though in very deede, not in imagination only the thinge desired or feared, were actually present. Verely so M. Horne, be­inge exceding passionated to finde out this supreme gouer­nment in al causes, by force of his imagination, putteth it in his margin, as though the text told it him, whē the text tal­keth no such matter vnto him, but is vtterly domme in that point and hushe. This passiō hath vttered it self in M. Horne not nowe onely, but many times before also, as the diligent Reader may easely remember.

Brach. 1.2.M. Horne. The .76. Diuision. pag. 45. a.

Arriamiru King of Spaine, (215) The .215. Vntruth. He com­maunded not in M. Hornes sēce. That is, as suprē gouernor but as the Coūcel it selfe saith, as Pijssi­mus filius noster: Our most godlye Sonne. cōmaunded tvvo Conucels to be cele­brated in a Citie called Brachara, the one in the seconde yeare of his reigne, the other the third yere, vvherein vvere certaine rules made or rather renued [Page 185] touching matters of faith, touching Constitutions of the Church, and for the dueties and diligence of the Clergie, in their offices.

VVambanus King of Spaine (.216.) The .216. Vntruth. No suche thing in the Coū ­cell, nor that Vvā ­banus cal­led it at al seeing the greate disorders in the Churche, not onely in the discipline, but also in the matters of Faithe, and aboute the Administration of the Sacramentes, calleth a Synode at Brachara, named Concill. Brachar. 3. for the reformation of the er­rours and disorders aboute the Sacramentes and Churche discipline.

Stapleton.

NOW are we gon from Fraūce and Constantinople to, and are come to Spaine, and to the Coūcels called of King Ariamirus and King Wambanus. But the Fa­thers at these Councels tell M. Horne for his first greeting and welcome, that they acknowleged the authority of the See of Rome: and therfore being some cōtrouersies in ma­ters ecclesiastical among thē, they did direct them selues by the instructiōs and admonitiōs sent frō the See Apostolike.Vide Brac. 1. tom. 2. Conc. pag. 216. et 217 Can. 18. &. 23.

M. Horne. The .77. Diuision. pag. 45. b.

About this time after the death of Pelagius .2. the Clergy and the people e­lected Gregory .1. called aftervvards the great. But the custom was (saith Sabellicus) vvhich is declared in an other place, that the Emperours should ratify by their consent, th'electiō of him that is chosen Pope. And to stay th'Emperors approbatiō (saith Platina) he sent his messengers with his letters, to beseche th'Emperour Mau­ritius that he would not suffer th'electiō of the people ād Cler­gy to take effect in the choise of hī. &c. So much did this good mā (saith Sabellicus) seking after heauēly things, cōtemne earthly and refused that honour, for the which other did contend so ambitiously. But the Emperour being desirouse to plant so good a man in that place, vvould not condescend to his request, but (.217.)The .217. Vntruth. That is not in Sa­bellicus. sent his Embassadours, to ratifie and confirme the election.

Stapleton.

This authority toucheth nothing but th'electiō of the Pope wont to be confirmed by the Emperour for order and qui­etnes sake. And that but of custom only (for the custom was saith Sabellicus) not of any Supreme gouernement of the Prince in that behaulfe, as though without it, the election were not good. Yet I cōmend M. Horn that, he reherseth so much good cōmendacion of Pope Gregorie, that sent hi­ther our Apostle S. Augustine. But I marue [...]l how he can be so good a mā, and the religion that came frō him to England no better then superstiton and plaine Idolatrie, as M. Horne and his fellowes doe daily preach and write. And ye shall heare a non that he goeth as craftely as he can, and as farre as he durst to obscure and disgrace him.

M. Horne. The .78. Diuision. pag. 45. b.

Richaredus King of Spaine, rightly taught and instructed in the Chri­stian faith, by the godly and Catholique Bisshoppe Leander Bisshop of Hi­spalis, did not only bring to passe, that the vvhole natiō, should forsake the Arrianisme and receiue true faith, but also did carefully study hovv to conti­nue his people in the true Relligion by his meanes nevvelye receiued. And therfore commaunded all the Bisshops within his Dominions to assemble together at Toletum, in the fourth yeare of his reigne, and there to consult about staying and confirming of his people in true faith and religion of Christ by godly discipline. VVhan the Bisshoppes vvere as­sembled in the Conuocation house, at the Kings commaundement: the King commeth in amongest them, he maketh a short, but a pithy and most Chri­stian oration vnto the vvhole Synode: VVherein he shevveth, that the cause vvherfore he called them together into the Synode, vvas To repaire and make a (.218.) The .218. Vntruth. False trā ­slation. instaurare formam, is not to make a nevve fourme, but to re­paire the olde. newe fourme of Churche discipline, by common consultation in Synode, vvhich had bene letted long time before by the here­tical Arianisme, the whiche staie and lette of the Arrian [...] Here­sies, it hath pleased God (saith he) to remoue and put away by my meanes. He vvilleth them to be ioyfull and gladde, that the aun­cient [Page 186] maner to make Ecclesiasticall constitutions for the vvell ordering of the Churche, is novve through Gods prouidence reduced and brought againe to the bounds of the Fathers by his honorable industrie. And last of al, he doth admonisshe and exhort them before they begin their consultation, to sast and pray vnto the Almighty, that he vvill vouchsaulfe to open and shevv vnto them a true order of discipline, vvhich that age knevv not, the senses of the Clergy vvere so much benummed, vvith long forgetfulnes. VVherevppon there vvas a three daies fast appointed. That done, the Synode assembleth, the King commeth in, and fitteth amongest them: he deliuereth in vvriting to be openly read amongest them the confession of his faith, in vvhich he pro­testeth, vvith vvhat endeuour and care, being their King, he ought not only to studie for him self, to be rightly geuen to serue and please God vvith a right Faith in true Religion: but also to prouide for his subiects, that they be throughly instructed in the Christian faith. He affirmeth and thereto taketh them to vvitnes, that the Lorde hath stirred him vppe,The duti­ful care of a Prince about re­ligion. infla­med vvith the heate of Faith: both to remoue and put avvay the furious and obstinate Heresies and Schismes, and also by his vigilant endeuour and care to call and bring home againe the people vnto the confession of the true faith, and the Communion of the Catholique Churche. Furder alluding to the place of S. Paul, vvhere he saith, that through his ministery in the Ghospell, he offereth vppe the Gentils vnto God, to be an acceptable Sacrifice: he saith to the Bisshops, That he offereth by their mynisterie, this noble people, as an holy and acceptable Sacrifice to God. And last of all vvith the rehearsall of his Faith, he declareth vnto the Bisshoppes, That as it hath pleased God by his care and industrie to winne this people to the Faith, and vnite them to the Catholique Chur­che: so he chardgeth them, nowe to see them stayed and con­firmed by theyr diligente teaching and instructinge them in the trueth. After this Confession vvas read, and that he him selfe, and also his Queene Badda, had confirmed and testified the same vvith their handes subscription: the vvhole Synode gaue thankes to God vvith manye and sundry acclamations, saiyng: That the Catholique King Ri­charedus is to be crouned of God with an euerlasting croune, for he is the gatherer togeather of newe people in the Chur­che. This King truely oughte to haue the Apostolique re­ward, [Page] reward, who hath perfourmed the Apostolike office. This done, after the Noble men and Bisshops of Spaine, vvhom the vvorthy King had conuerted, and brought to the amity of faithe, in the Cōmunion of Christes Church, had also geuen their confession opēly, and testified the same vvith sub­scription: the King vvilling the Synode to goe in hand to repaire and esta­blissh some Ecclesiastical discipline, saith to the Synode, alluding to S. Paules saiyng to the Ephesians to this effect: That the care of a king ought to stretch forth it self, and not to cease til he haue brought (.219.) The .219. Vntruthe. No suche vvoords in that sentence the subiects to a full knowledge and perfect age in Christ: and as (220) The .220. Vntruth. The kīgs vvhole vvordes fouly maimed and mangled, as shall appeare. A Princes speciall care for his subiects a king ought to bend al his power and authority to re­presse the insolēce of the euil, ād to nourish the cōmon peace and trāquility: Euē to ought he much more to study, labour, ād be careful, not only to bring his subiects frō erours and false religiō, but also to see thē instructed, taught, and trained vp in the truth of the clere light, and for this purpose he doth there decree of (221) The .221. Vntruthe. No such vvords in the Councell. his own authority, cōmā ­ding the Bisshops to see it obserued, that at euery Cō ­muniō time before the receit of the same, al the peple with a loud voice together, do recite distīctly the Simbol or crede, set forth by the (222)The .222. Vntruth It vvas not of the Nicene Coūcel, but of the Cōstantino­ple Councell. Nicē coūcel. VVhē the Synode had cōsulted about the discipline, and had agreed vpon such rules and orders, as vvas thought most mete for that time ād chur­che, and the King had cōsidered of them, he doth by his assent and (223)The .223. Vntruth. For not by autho­rity of Supreame gouernemente (as M Horne driueth it) but only for the execution of it in his Dominions. authority, cōfirme and ratify the same, and first subscribeth to thē, and then after hī al the Synod. This zelous care and careful study of this and the other aboue named princes, prouiding, ruling, gouerning, and by their Princely povver and authority, directing their vvhole Clergy, in causes or matters Ecclesiasticall, vvas neuer disalovved, or misliked of the aūcient Fathers, nor of the bisshops of Rome, til novv in these later daies, the insaciable ābitiō of the cler­gy, and the ouermuch negligēce and vvātones of the Princes, vvith the grosse ignorance of the vvhole laity, gaue your holy father (224)The 224. Vntruth. Slaunderous and blasphemous. Lib. Epist. 7. Epist. 126. The Pope at that time cōmēded the Princes gouerne­ment in causes Ec­clesiasiastical. the child of perditiō, the ful svvay to make perfect the mystery of iniquity: yea, it may appe [...]e by an Epistle that Gregorius surnamed great, B. of Rome, vvriteth vnto this vvorthy King Richaredus, [Page 187] that the B. of Rome did much cōmend this careful (225) The .225. Vntruth. S. Gregory speketh not there of any gouernment at all. The (226) Prince calleth Councels ād gouerneth ecclesia­stical causes vvith­out any doings of the Pope therein. gouernmēt of Princes in causes of religion. For he most highly commendeth the doings of this most Christian King. He affirmeth that he is assha­med of him selfe, and of his ovvne slacknes,The .226. Vntruth. auouched in the margin, but not a whit proued in the Texte. vvhen he doth consider the trauail of Kings in gathering of soules to the celestial gaine. Yea what shal I (saith this B. of Rome to the King) answere at the dreadful dome when your excellēcy shal leade after your sel [...] flocks of faithful ones, which you haue brought vnto the true faith by carefull and continuall preaching, &c. Although I haue medled and don no­thing at al with you, doing this (227) The .227. Vntruth. S. Gregories vvor­des excedinglye o­uer reached. altogether with­out me, yet am I partaker of the ioy with you. Neither doth Gregory blame this King as one medling in Churche causes, vvherin he is not Ruler: but he praiseth God for him, that he ma­keth godly constitutions against the vnfaithfulnes of miscreants: and for no vvorldly respect vvilbe persvvaded to see them violated.

Stapleton.

We are now vpon the soden returned into Spaine: But wonderful it is to consider, howe M. Horne misordereth and mistelleth his whole mater, and enforceth as wel other where, as here also by Richaredus, that whiche can not be enforced: that is, to make him a Supreme head in al causes Ecclesiasticall. Ye say M. Horne, he called a Synod to re­paire and make a newe fourme of the Churche discipline. But I say you haue falsly translated the worde, instaurare, which is not to make a new thing, but to renew an olde: whiche differeth very muche. For by the example of the firste, Queene Marie repaired and renewed the Catholique Re­ligiō. By the report of the second, you made in dede a new fourme of matters in King Edwardes dayes, neuer vsed be­fore in Christes Churche. You say also he remoued from [Page] Spaine the Arrians heresies. I graunt you: he dyd so. But thinke you M. Horne,Tom. 2. Cōc. p. 168 col. 1. b. if he nowe liued, and were prince of our Coūtre, he would haue nothing to say to you and your fellowes, as wel as he had to the Arrians? Nay. He and his Councell hath said something to you and against you alrea­dy,Pag. 168. Ante cōmuni­cationem Corporis Christi. Pag. 169. Secundum formam cōcilij Cō ­stantinop. S [...]mbolū fidei reci­tetur. Et mox. Et ad christi corpus et sanguinē praeli­bandū, pe­ctora po­pulorū fi­de purifi­cata ac­cedant. Deijs sym­bolis vide tom. 2. Concil. pag. 392. as we shall anon see.

You say: he cōmaunded the Bisshops that at euery cōmuni­on time, before the receit of the same, the people with a lowde voice togeather should recite distinctly the Symbole or Crede set foorth by the Nicene Councell. It happeneth wel, that the Nicene Councell was added. I was afeard, least ye would haue gonne about to proue, the people to haue song then, some such Geneuical Psalmes as now the brotherhod most estemeth: Wherevnto ye haue here made a prety founda­tion, calling that after your Geneuical sort, the Communion, which the Fathers call the body and bloud of Christ: and the King him selfe calleth the cōmunicating of the body and bloud of Christ. Now here by the way I must admonish you, that it was not the Nicene Crede (as ye write) made at Con­stantinople that was apointed to be rehersed of the people. The which is fuller then the Nicene, for auoiding of certain heresies: fuller I say, as cōcerning Christ conceiued and in­carnated of the holy ghost (which thing I cā not tel how or why your Apologie, as I haue said, hath left out) with some other like. This Councell then hath said somewhat to you for your translation, and muche more for your wicked and heretical meaning, to conuey from the blessed Sacrament, the reall presence of Christes very bodie.

But now M. Horne take you ād your Madge good hede, and marke you wel, whether ye and your sect be not of the Arrians generation, whiche being Priestes, contrary to the [Page 188] Canons of the Church, which thei as mightely contemned as ye do, kept company with their wiues, but yet with such as they laufully maried, before they were ordered Priestes.The Pro­testantes follovve the Arriās in their carnal le­cherie. Can. 5. Tolet. 3. c. 1 Who returning to the Catholike faith frō their Arianisme, woulde faine haue lusked in their leacherie, as they did be­fore being Arians. Which disorder this Coūcel reformeth. The same Councell also cōmaundeth, that the decrees of all Councels, yea and the decretall Epistles of the holye Bisshops of Rome, should remaine in their full strength. Bicause forsoth by Arrians they had before ben violated and neglected,M. Horns Madge must be sold for a slaue by this Coū ­cel which M. Horne him selfe allegeth. Illi vero canonicè, multeres quidē ab Episcopis venūden­tur. et pre­tiū ipsum pauperi­bus irro­getur. Canon. 5. as they are at this day by you and your fellowes vtterly despi­sed and contemned. So like euer are yong heretikes to the olde. Vnū nôr is, omnes nôr is. And this is M. Horne, one part of the repairing, and the making (as you call it) of a newe fourme of the Church discipline, ye spake of. But for the matter it selfe, ye are al in a mūmery, and dare not rub the galde horse on the backe for feare of wincing. Now all in an il time haue ye put vs in remembrance of this Councel: for you must be Canonically punisshed, and Maistres Madge must be solde of the Bisshoppes, and the price must be geuen to the poore. I would be sory shee should heare of this geare: and to what pitifull case ye haue brought her by your own Coūcel. Marke now your margent as fast and as solemne­ly as ye will with the note: The duetifull care of a Prince a­boute Religion: with the note of a Princes speciall c [...]re for his subiects, and with such like. I do not enuie you such notes. In case now, notwithstanding ye are so curstly handeled of King Richaredus and his Councell, ye be content of your gentle and suffering nature, to beare it al well: and wil for al this stil goe forward to set foorth his Primacie, be it so. What can ye say therein further? I perceiue then ye make [Page] great and depe accompt that he subscribed before the Coūcell,A greate difference betvvixt the sub­scription of them­perours ād of the Bisshops. Sext. Syn. Const. act. 17. &. 18. Georgius miserante Deo, &c. Definens, subscripsi. Subscrip­tio pijss. & christ. di­lecti Cōst. imperat. Legimus et cōsenti­mus. act 18 Vt patet in dict. tom. 2 Concil. & Isidor. vi­del. Aera. 627. Hoc est. an. 589 Beda. li. 1. cap. 23. in Hist. gent. Angl. wherof I make as litle: considering here was no newe mater defined by him or the Fathers, but a cōfirmation and a ratification made of the first foure Councels. Which the King strengtheneth by all meanes he coulde, yea with the subscription of his owne hande, because the other Kings his predecessours had ben Arians. Otherwise in the firste .7. Generall Councelles, I finde no subscription of the Empe­rours, but onely in the sixte, proceding from the said cause that this dothe, that is, for that his predecessours were he­retikes, of the heresie of the Monothelites: but not proce­ding altogether in the same order. For the Emperour there subscribeth after al the Bisshops, saying onely: We haue read the Decree and doe consent. But the Bishop of Cōstantinople saith: I George by the mercy of God Bisshop of Constantinople to my definitiue sentence, haue subscribed: after the same sort o­ther Bishops also set to their handes. And this was because the mater was there finally determined against the Mono­thelites. In case this subscriptiō wil not serue the mater, M. Horne hath an other helpe at hand: yea he hath S. Gregory him self, that (as he saith) cōmendeth Richaredus for his gouern­mēt in causes Ecclesiastical: and this is set in the margent as a weighty mater, with an other foorthwith as weighty, that this Richaredus called Councels, and gouerned Ecclesiasticall causes, without any doing of Pope Gregory therin. But by your leaue, both your notes are both folish and false. Folish I say, for how shuld Pope Gregory be a doer with hī, being at that time no Pope, the coūcel being kept in the time of Pelagiꝰ .2. S. Gregories predecessour, in the yere .589. as it appereth by th [...] accōpt of Isidorꝰ liuing about that time: and S. Gregory was made Pope in the yere .592. by the accompt of S. Bede. [Page 189] False, I say: for Richaredus called not Councelles, but one onely Councel: yea and false againe. For there was no go­uernement Ecclesiasticall in Richaredus doings. Neyther is there any such word in the whole Councel by M. Horn alleaged, nor any thing that may by good consequence in­duce such gouernement. I say then further, ye doe moste impudently, in going about to make your Readers belieue, that Richaredus and other Princes after him, were takē for Supreme heades of the Church, till now in these later dai­es: and most blasphemously in calling the Pope, for this ma­ter, the childe of perdition. As wel might you for this cause haue called Gregorie so too. Who is surnamed, as ye here write, the Great. But God wotteth, and the more pitie, not very great with you and your fellowes. Of al bookes, his writinges beare most ful and plaine testimonie, for the Popes singular praeeminence: whiche thing is in an other place by me largely proued, that though the matter here semeth to require somewhat to be said, I neede not say any thing,See the 4. Article the 9. pag. and cer­tain folo­vving. but onely remit the Reader to that place where he shal finde that S. Gregorie practised this Supreme authori­tie, as wel in Spain, as other where, throughout the whole Christened world. But what saith S. Gregorie? Forsothe that the King Richaredus by his carefull and continuall prea­ching, brought Arrians into the true faith. S. Gregorie saith wel. And yet you wil not (I trow) say: The Prince himself preached in pulpit to the Arrians. What then? Verelye that which he did by his Clergie, and to the which he was a godly promoter, that he is saied to doe him selfe. As to preache, to conuert heretiques, to decree this or that, and briefely to gouerne in causes Ecclesiastical. All which the Prince in his owne person or of his owne authority, neuer [Page] dothe. But by his furderance such things being done, he is saied sometimes (as here of Saint Gregorye) to doe them him selfe.

M. Horne goeth a­bout craf­tely to disgrace and slaū ­der Saint Gregory.We might now passe to the next mater, sauing that as ye without any good occasion or bettering of your cause, bring in that Richaredus woorked these thinges without Pope Gregorie: So it may be feared, ye haue a woorse meaning, and that ye doe this altogeather craftely to ble­mishe and deface Sainte Gregorye with the ignoraunte Reader. Els tell me to what purpose write ye, that Saint Gregorye was asshamed of him selfe, Greg. li. 7. Ep. 126. and his owne slacknesse? Why bringe you in these woordes of Sainte Gregorye, What shall I aunsweare at the dreadfull doome, when youre excellencye shall lead with you flockes of faithfull ones, which ye haue broughte into the true faithe, by careful and continuall preachinges? I muste then either to refourme your ig­norance (if ye knew it not before) or to preuent your rea­ders circumuention by your wilye handeling of the mater, like to be perchaunce miscaried: if ye knewe it before,Greg. li. 6. Epist. 37. ad­monish you and him, that this is spoken of S. Gregorye in deede, but as proceeding from a maruelouse humilitye and lowlines.

The wor­thy doīgs of S. Gre­gorie.In like maner as he wrote to Sainte Augustine oure A­postle in the commendation of his doings, wherein yet vn­doubtedly he was a great doer him selfe many wayes, as by the Historie of Bede clerely appeareth Otherwise though Richaredus doings be most gloriouse and worthy of perpe­tuall renoune,Nauclerus Generat. 21. pa. 752 yet shal S. Gregory match him or passe him. Neither shal he altogether be voide of his worthy cōmen­dation, concerning his care for the refourming of Spaine, and repressing of heresies there, either by his authority, or [Page 190] by his learned woorkes. Verely Platina witnesseth, that by the meanes of this Gregorie, the Gothes returned to the vnite of the Catholike faithe. Plat. in Greg. 1. Whiche appeareth not at that time any otherwhere, then in Spaine

Hearken farder what Nauclerus one that you ofte re­herse in this your booke, writeth of him: In super Beatus Gre­gorius, &c. Beside this Saint Gregorie compelled the Ligurians, the Venetians, the Iberians, which had confessed their schisme, by their libell to receiue the Decrees of the Councell of Chalce­do: and so broughte them to the vnitye of the Churche. He reduced them from Idolatrye, partely by punnisshmente, partlye by preaching, the Brucians, the people of Sardinia, and the husbandmenne of Campania. By the good and migh­tye authoritie of his writings, and by Ambassadours sente in conueniente time, he sequestred from the bodye of the Chur­che, the Donatiste Heretiques in Affrique, the Maniches in Sicilie, the Arrians in Spaine, the Agnoites in Alexandria. Onely the Heresie of the Neophites in Fraunce, rising by Sy­moniacall bribes, as it were by so manye rootes, was spreade farre and wide: againste the whiche he valiauntlye foughte, labouring mightelye against it, to the Queene Brunechildis, and to the Frenche Kinges Theodoricus, and Theodobertus, till at the lengthe a Generall Councell beinge summoned, he ob­teined to haue it vtterlye banned and accursed. This saith Nauclerus of other Countries.

Now what nede I speake of our Realme, the matter be­ing so notoriouse, that by his good meanes, by his studye and carefulnes, we were brought from most miserable ido­latrie to the faith of Christe? And therefore as our Venera­ble Countreyman Bede writeth, we maye well and oughte [Page] to call him our Apostle.S. Grego­rie our Apostle. Lib. 2. c. 1. Rectè nostrum appellare possumus & debemus Apostolum. Quia cum, &c. For, saith he, wheras he had the chiefe Bisshoprike in all the worlde, and was the chiefe Ruler of the Churches, that long before were conuerted to the faithe, he procured oure Nation, that before that time was the Idols slaue, to be the Church of Christ. So that we may well vse that saiyng taken from the Apostle. All were it, that he were not an Apostle to other, yet is he our Apostle. We are the seal of his Apostlesship in our Lord God. It appeareth that S. Gregorie had to doe in Ireland also by his Ecclesia­stical authoritie.Greg. lib. 2 cap. 36. Thus much haue I here spoken of S. Gre­gorie, either necessarily, or (as I suppose) not altogether without good cause: Surely not without most deape harte griefe, to consider how farre we are gon from the learning, vertue, and faith, whiche we nowe almost one thousande yeares past, receiued at this Blessed mans handes. Which altogether, with our newe Apostle M. Horne heere, is no­thing but Grosse ignorance. And this blessed and true Apo­stle of our English Nation, no better then the child of perdi­tion. That is, as he meaneth in dede, a plaine Antichriste. I pray God, ones open the eyes of our Coūtrie, to see who is in dede the true Antichrist, and who are his messengers and forerunners, thereby carefully and Christianly to shun as well the one as the other. Christ is the Truth it selfe, as him selfe hath said. Who then is more nere Antichriste, then the teacher of Vntruthes? And what a huge number hath M. Horne heaped vs vppe in that, hitherto hath bene answered, being litle more then the third part of his boke? Yea in this very Diuision how doe they muster? Some of them haue already ben touched. But now to the rest more at large, let vs ouer runne the Diuision shortly againe.

[Page 191]First besides his false translation, putting for repairing the order of Ecclesiasticall discipline,M. Horns Vntruths laid forth. to make a new fourme thereof, as though that King altered the old Religion of his realme, and placed a newe neuer vsed before in Christes Churche, as M. Horne and his fellowes haue done in our Countrie, beside this pety sleight, and diuers other before noted, he hath so maimed and mangled the wordes of King Richaredus (wherein the whole pithe of this Diuision re­steth) to make some apparence of his pretensed Primacie, that it would lothe a man to see it, and weary a man to ex­presse it. Namely in the text where his Note standeth of a Princes speciall care for his subiectes. Tom. 2. Conc. pag. 167. col. 2. The whole woordes of the King are these: The care of a King ought so farre to be ex­tended and directed, vntill it be found to receiue the full mea­sure of age and knowledge. For as in worldly things the Kings power passeth in glorie, so oughte his care to be the greater for the welth of his subiectes. But now (moste holy Priestes) we bestow not onely our diligence in those matters whereby oure subiectes may be gouerned and liue most peaceablye, but also by the helpe of Christe, we extend our selues to thinke of heauenly matters, and we labour to knowe how to make our people faith­full. And verely if we ought to bend all our power to order mens maners, and with Princely power to represse the insolency of the euill, if we ought to geue all ayde for the encrease of peace and quiet, muche more we ought to study, to desire and thinke vppon godly things, to looke after high matters, and to shew to our people being now brought from errour, the trueth of cleare light. For so he dothe whiche trusteth to be rewarded of God with aboundant reward. For so he dothe, which aboue that is cōmitted vnto him doth adde more, seing to such it is said, Luc. 10. what so euer thou spendest more, I, when I come againe, will recom­pence [Page] thee. This is the whole and ful talke of Richaredus the king to the Councel touching his duetyfull care aboute religion.

Compare this, gentle Reader, with the broken and mangled narratiō of M. horne, and thou shalt see to the eye his lewde pelting and pelting lewdnesse. Thou shalt see, that the king protested his care in gods matters to be (not his dew charge and vocatiō, as a king) but an additiō aboue that which was commytted wnto him, and to be a work of supererogatiō, and that he extēded him selfe of zeale aboue that, which his duety ād office required. Al which M. Horn left out, bycause he knewe it did quite ouerthrowe his purpose.

He saieth againe of kyng Richaredus, that he decreed in the Councel of his owne Authority, commaundyng the bis­shops to see it obserued: which wordes also he hath caused to be printed in a distinct lettre, as the wordes of his Author alleaged.Cōcil. To­let. 3. Cap 2. Tom. 2. pag. 169. Col. 1. But they are his owne wordes, and do proceede of his owne Authority, not to be found in the whole pro­cesse of the Kings Oration to the Councell, or in the Coū ­cel it selfe. But contrariwise the Councell expressely saith of this Decree: Consultu pijssimi & gloriosissimi Richaredi Regis constituit Synodus. The Synode hath appointed or decreed by the aduise of the most godly and gloriouse King Richaredus. The Synode M. Horne, made that Decree by the aduise of the King.Vide Gre­gor. lib. 7. epist. 126. The king made it not by his own au­thority commaunding. &c. as you very Imperiously do talke. Againe where you saie that S. Gregory did much commend the carefull gouernement of Princes in causes of Religion, S. Gregory speaketh not of any suche gouernement at all. It is an other of your Vntruthes.

[Page 192]Last of all, where Saint Gregorie sayeth of humilitie, as we haue before declared, to the king: Et si vobiscum nihil egimus: Although we haue done nothing with you: You to amplifie the matter, enlardge your translation with a very lying liberalitie, thus. Although I haue medled and don nothing at all with you, doing this altogether without mee. For these wordes, medle, at all, and dooing this altogeather without me, is altogeather without and beyond your La­tine of Saint Gregorie. Whome you ouerreache excee­ding much: Making him not so muche as to meddle with the Kings doings, and that the king did altogeather with­out him: Which yet (if Nauclerus your common alleaged Author be true of his woorde) did verye muche with the King,Naucle­rus vbi supra: & Platina. and furdered many wayes the conuerting of the Ar­rians in Spaine to the Catholique faith.

But so it is. As in al your proufes you ouerreach migh­tely the force of your examples, cōcluding Supreme gouern­mente in all causes, when the Argumente procedeth of no gouernemente at all, but of execution, and so foorth, euen so in your translations (wherein yet you looke singular­lye to be credited, scarse ones in tenne leaues, bringing one sentence of Latine) you ouer reache marueilouslye your originall Authorities.

Suche is your vntrue and false dealing, not onely here, but in a manner throughout your whole booke. And nowe to ende this Seconde booke, with a flourishe of Maister Iewels Rhetorique, to sweete your mouth at the ende Maister Horne, that so with the more courage we may proceede (after a pause vppon this) to the Thirde and Fourthe, let me spurre you a question.

[Page] M. Iewell [...]n his Re­lie. pa. 91 What M. Horne? Is it not possible your doctrine may stande without lyes? So many Vntruthes in so litle roome, without the shame of the worlde, without the feare of God? Where did Christe euer commaunde you to make, your Prince the su­preme gouernour in all causes? By what Commission, by what woordes? Or if Christ did not, who euer els cōmaun­ded you so to do? What lawe? What Decree, what Decre­tall, what Legantine, what Prouinciall? But what a wonderfull case is this? The Supreame gouernemente of Princes in al causes Ecclesiastical, that we must nedes swere vnto by booke othe, yea and that we must nedes belieue in conscience, to be so auncient, so vniuersal, so Ca­tholique, so cleere, so gloriouse, can not now be founde, neither in the olde Law, nor in the new, nor by anye one example of the first 600. yeares.

Stapleton.

HAVING nowe good reader, passed the first sixe hundred yeares, and hauing answered to M. Hornes arguments, for such proufes as he pretendeth to serue him, for thinges don with­in those .600. yeares: I am in a great doubte and staye withe my selfe, what order to take for the residewe of myne answere. We haue gone ouer litle more then one half, of that parte of M. Hornes booke, wherein he taketh vpon him to be the challenger, and an apponente: and yf we weighe the nomber of yeares, in the which M. Horne taketh his large race and course, they yet remayne almoste a thowsande to those that be alredy passed. Yf we measure the leaues, almost the one halfe rest behinde to the nomber of .42. Beside the remnante of his booke, wherein he plaith the defendants parte. I speake thus much for this considera­tion. Yf I shoulde largely and copiouslye answere the re­sidewe, as I haue begonne, and fullye vnfolde his fonde follies, confuting euerye point, the booke woulde wexe to bigge and huge. On the other syde, yf I should lightlye and breiflye passe yt ouer, perchaunce M. Horne woulde bragge and saye he were not, no nor coulde be answered.

But yet bethinkinge my selfe well vppon the matter, the compendiouse waye seemeth to me at this tyme beste. Wherein I could be so shorte and compendiouse, that with one lyne, I shoulde sufficiently discharge my selfe for the whole answere, in saying shortly, but truely, that there is not, no not one onely authority apte and fyt to cōclude his purpose. I coulde also shifte him of an other waye: and [Page 194] because M. Iewel with other his fellowes groundeth him self vppon yt, as a good and a peremptorye exception, I might boldly say, M. Horne, al your proufes after Gregory come to late: your .600. yeres are empted, spente, and gone.

Again I might and truly, seing that his pretensed proufes, of the first sixe hundred yeares are so faint and weake, yea seing that he is quyte borne downe, with his own authors, in the same booke, chapter, leafe, and somtyme line to, that him self alleageth: say, that either it is most likelye, that he cannot bring any good or substancial matter, for the latter 900. yeares, or what so euer yt be, it must yeld and geue place, to the Fathers of the first sixe hundred yeares. And with this answere might we, contemning and neglecting al his long ragmans rolle, that hereafter followeth, set vppon him an other while, and see how valiantly he wil defende his owne heade. Which God wote he will full faynte­lye doe. Well I will not be so precise,The or­der to be takē here after in ansvve­ring the residewe of M. Hornes booke. as to let yt alone al­together, but I shall take the meane, and as I thinke, the most allowable way: neither answering all at length, and stitch by stitch with diligence, as I haue hitherto vsed, nor leauing all, but taking some aduised choice. Wherefore yf hereafter he bringe any accustomed or stale marchan­dize, yt shall passe: but yf any fyne freshe, farre sought, and farre bowght marchandize come, we will geue him the lokinge on, and now and then cope withe him to. Goe to then M. Horne, take your weapon in your hand againe, and besturre your self with yt, edglynge, or foyning with the beste aduantage ye can.

Ye say then Bonifacius the thirde opened the gappe to take away from th'Emperour the authority and Iurisdictiō of the popes election: Ye say it, but ye doe not, nor cā proue [Page] it. Ye say that he wonne of Phocas, that Rome might be head of all Churches, meaning thereby, as appereth well by that which followeth, ād by M. Iewel and your other fellowes, that it was not takē so before.Plat. in Bonifa. 3. Whereof I haue alredy pro­ued the contrary by the Councell of Chalcedo: by Victor, yea the Emperours Valentinian and Iustinian: and other­wise to.Adoi [...] Chroni. Beda de sex Aera. Martinus Polonus. Paulus Diaconus. But this you reporte vntruly. For the Popes suyte was not, that his See might be the head of al Churches, but that the see of S. Peter which is the head of all Churches, might be so called and takē of al mē. And the reason is added by Ado, Paulus Diaconus, Beda, Martinus, and others, bicause the Se [...] of Constantinople, wrote her selfe at that time the Chiefe of all others. This newe attempt, caused the Pope to make this suyt. Not that either it should be so (for so it had bene with­out the Emperours Autorytie) or that then it was first cal­led so. Ye say he wanne this gloriouse and ambitiouse title with no small brybes. Ye say it, but ye neither proue it, nor can proue yt. And sure I am, that none of your authours ye name in the margent,Sabel. Ac­nea. 8. l 6. Platina, in Boni. 2. Paul. Dia. de gestis Lōgobar. li. 4. c. 11. Naucler. Gener. 21. Martinus Polon. Vo­lateranus. sayth so. Neither do I yet see, wher­vppon ye shuld grounde your self, onlesse it be vppon your straunge grammer, turning Magna contentione, with great contention, or with much adoe, into no small brybes: as ye did lately conuenit, into oportet. And for this that ye call this a gloriouse and ambitiouse tytle, obtayned by this Bonifa­cius: truth it is, that as this tytle was euer due to the Church of Rome, and confessed as I haue said, by Councels, Empe­rours and other longe before the time of this Phocas or Bonifacius, so neither this pope, nor anie other of his succes­sours vsurped or vsed it, as a tytle. These be your manifold falshods M. Horne, lapped vp in so fewe lynes. After your lewde vntruthes, foloweth a copie of your singular witte. [Page 195] For to what ende, with what wisedome, or with what be­nefytte of your cause recyte you two decrees of this Bo­nifacius? I will geue yowe leaue to breath on the matter,M Hor­nes folly. least vppon the soden you might be apalled with the que­stion. The best answere, I wene, you coulde make, woulde be to say, that hereby appereth the Ambition of pope Bo­nifacius, 3. And then to proue that Ambition in him, by these decrees, I thinke, it would trouble you much more. For in the one he expressely decreeth against Ambition, in the other he alloweth the consent of lay princes in a bis­shops election. But it is wel, that as Sabel. saieth: Both these decrees are abolisshed. Wherof it will folowe, if that be true, that if the decrees were good, and made for you, then yet they continewed not, but were abolished. If they were naught, and made against the pope, yet the faulte was soone amended. Thus how so euer it fal out, you see howe wisely ād to what great purpose you haue alleaged those decrees.

M. Horne. The .80. Diuision. Fol. 48. a.

Novve began this matter to brue by litle and litle, first he obteined to (.231.) The 231. vntruth, as before. be the chiefe ouer al the Bisshops, then to couer vice vvith vertue, and to hide his ambicion, he condemned al ambicion in labouring Spirituall pro­mocion, and in the election of Bishoppes, vvhere the confirmation before vvas in the Emperours: bicause the Emperour gaue him an I [...]i [...]he, he toke an ell, bicause he had giuen him a foote, he vvould thrust in the vvhole body, and tourne the right ovvner out, For (.232.) The 232. vntruth. Thempe­rour by that de­cree is not left out, leuing out the Emperour, he putteth in the Princes of the Cities, from vvhome he might as easely aftervvardes take avvay, as for a shevve he gaue falsely that vnto them, that vvas none of his to giue: graunting vnto them the allovvance of the election: but to him self the authority of ratifying, or infringing the same, choose them vvhe­ther they vvould allovve it or no. And to shevve vvhat authoritie he vvould reserue to him selfe, borovving of the tyrant, speaking in the singuler nombre. Sic volo, sic iubeo, so wil I, so do I commaunde: for the more magnificence in the plurall nombre, he princely lappeth vp all the [Page] matter vvith volumus & iubemus, we will and commaunde: VVhich vvordes, like the Lavve of the Medes and Persians, that may not be reuoked, if they once passe through the Novve M. Horne doth his kinde. Sabel. Popes holy lippes, must nedes stand, allovve or not allovve, vvho so list, vvith full authoritie the matter is quite dashed. But thankes be to God for al this (the decre is abolished) folo­vveth immediatly. For (.233.) The .233. vntruth. 4 popes came be­twene ād 25. yeres. shortly after, Isacius the Emperours Lieute­nant in Italy, did confirme and ratifie the election of Seuerinus the first of that name, for saith Platina. The electiō of the Pope made by the Clergie and people in those daies, It was so, vi, non iure, by force not by right. was but a vaine thing, onlesse the Emperour, or his Lieutenant had confirmed the same.

Stapleton.

WHeras ye say this Bonifacius lefte out the Empe­rour (who had the confirmation of them before) in his decree concernyng the election of Bishops and put in the princes of the citie, and gaue falslie that to them, which was none of his to geue: yf ye mark the words of the decree wel, the Emperour is not left out, but lefte in as good case as he was before. Onlesse ye think the Empe­rour is prince of no city: or that all cities were at this tyme vnder the Emperour, wheras euen in our Europa, the Em­perour had nothing to doe, in England, Fraunce, Germanie Spaine, no nor in manie places of Italie. And I must put you in remembraunce,Fol. 38. that before this tyme, when Iustinian was Emperour, king Theodatus did confirme the electiō of pope Agapetus, as you reherse out of Sabellicus. Neither did the pope as of him self, and of newe geue anie authority to princes in election more thē they had before. But by his decree renewed the old order of electiō of bishops. Which was wont to passe, by the cōsent of the clergie, prince, and people, with the popes confirmation afterward: Therefore ye say vntruly surmising that the decree of Bonifacius, was [Page 196] in this poynt immediatly abolished. Verely your example of Isacius the Emperours Lieutenāt litle serueth your pur­pose, who shortly after, you say,Bonifa. 4. Theodat. Bonifa. 5. Honor. 1. confirmed and ratified the election of Pope Seuerinus. For first betwene this confirming of Seuerinus, and the deathe of this Bonifacius, foure Popes came betwene, and wel nere .30. yeres. Againe as touching this ratifieng and confirmation that Isacius the Emperours Lieutenāt practised, will you see how orderly it proceded? Verely by mere violence, by spoyling the treasure of the Church of S. Iohn Lateranes. At the distribution of which treasure afterwarde so orderly obtayned by the Emperour Heraclius, the Saracens fel out with the Christiās,Sabellicus Aenead. 8. lib. 6. pag. 535. (because they had no parte thereof with the Greke and Romayn Souldiours) forsoke the Emperours seruice, got from the Empire Damascus, al Aegypt, and at lēgth Persia it self, and embraced Mahomet then lyuing and his doctrine, which synce hath so plaged all Christendome. So well prospered the doinges of this Isacius: and such holsome examples M. Horne hath piked out to furnishe his imagined supremacy withall.

M. Horne. The .81. Diuision. pag. 48. a

Sisenandus the king of Spain,Tol. 4. calleth forth of all partes of his domi­nions the Bishops to a City in Spaine, called Toletum. The purpose and maner of the kynges doynges in that councel, the Bishoppes them selues set forth, first as they affirme: They assemble together by the praecepts and cōmaundement of the king, to consult of certaine orders of discipline for the Church, to refourme the abuses that were crept in about the Sacramētes ād the maners of the Clergy. The king vvith his nobles, cōmeth into the coūcel house: He exhorteth thē to careful diligēce, that therby al errors and abuses, may be vvypt a vvay clere out of the Churches in Spayn. They folovve the kinges (.234.) The .234. vntruth. The king folovved their directiō, not they the Kinges in causes ec­clesiasti­cal. directiō, ād agree vpō many holsom rules. VVhē they haue cōcluded, thei besech the kīg to cō ­tinu his regim [...]t, to gouern his peple with iustice ād godlines. [Page] And vvhē the King had geuē his assent to the rulers of discipline, vvhich they had (.235.) The .235 vntruthe. Not simply agreed vpon, but fully and finally had decreed and determined. Tol. 5. Tol. 6. Desinitis itaque etc. Tol. 7. agreed vppon, they subscribed the same vvith their ovvn handes.

The like Synode Chintillanus king of Spaine, did conuocate at Toletum, for certain ceremonies, orders, and discipline, vvhich vvas confirmed by his precept and (.236.) The 236. vntruthe. By the bis [...]hops de­cree not by the kinges decree. Decreto nostro sancimus. decree, in the first yeere of his reigne. And an other also by the same king, and in the same place, and for the like purpose, vvas called and kept the second yere of his reigne.

Chinasuindus King of Spaine, no lesse careful for Churche matters and Religion, than his predecessours, (.237.) The .237. vntruthe. For not by his Su­preme Authority, Studio Serenissimi Regis By the fauor and endeuour &c. Tol. 8. appointeth his bisshops to assemble at Toletum in conuocation, and there to consult for the stablishing of the faith, and Church discipline, vvhich they did.

Reccessiunthus King of Spaine, commaunded his Bisshops to assemble at Toletum, in the first yere of his reigne, and there appointed a Synode, vvherein besides the Bisshops and Abbottes, there sate a great company of the noble men of Spaine. The Kinge him selfe came in amongest them, he maketh a graue and verye godlye exhortation vnto the vvhole Synode, he professed hovve careful he is, that his subiectes should be rightly instructed in the true faith, and Religion. He propoundeth the fourme of an In that Othe, there vvas, I vvar­rant you, no Su­preme gouernmēt &c. Othe vvhich the clergy and others of his subiectes vvere By the vertu of a Canon made in Tolet. 7. vvonte to re­ceiue, for the assurance of the Kings saulfty. He exhorteth them to ordeine sufficiently for the maintenance of godlines and iustice. He moueth his nobles that they vvill (.238.) The .238. vntruthe. Not to assiste, but in al poīts to obey ād folovv the ordi­naunces of the Sy­nod. assist and further the good and godly ordinaunces of the Synode. He promiseth that he vvil by his princely authority, ratifie and maineteine vvhat so euer they shal decree, to the furtherance of true Godlinesse, and Religion. The Synode maketh ordinaunces: the clergy, and nobility there assembled subscribeth them: and the Kinge confirmeth the same vvith his (.239.) The 239. vntruthe. No such matter in the Councel. Tol. 9. Tol. 10. royal assent and authority. He called tvvo other Synodes in the same place for such like purpose, in the se­uenth and eyght yeeres of his reigne.

Stapleton.

WE are yet ons againe come to Spayne: and we haue nowe seuen councels summoned there, by theis foure kings, that M. Horn here nameth. But surely there is nothing, wherby to fasten this primacy vp­pon them. But here are manie playne and open things, that do so blemish and spotte M. Horn, and his Madge and their childrē with a most shamful reproche of perpetual infamy, as theis coūcels here by him alleaged, may seme to remayne in this his boke lyke the salt Stone, wherinto Lothes wyfe was turned: that is,Tol. 4. ca. 40. as a perpetual monumente of his shame and dishonestie for euer. For where is the clericall crowne that theis fathers require, in M. Hornes head? What a nomber of decrees appeare in theis councelles by M. Horne rehersed againste the filthie fornication and ma­riage of such persons both men and wemen as had profes­sed chastytie?Tol. 6. c. 6. Tol. 8. c. 4. & 5. & 7 Tol. 9. c. 10 Tol. 10. c. 5. For the which Potamius the bishop of Bra­carie is deposed: as was before Saphoracus (whome as ye heard, M. Horne browght in for an example of his proufe) in Fraunce. And here haue yowe, that not onlie Mai­stres Madge shall be a slaue, but her children to, thus in­cestuously begotten, shall be made bond men. I praye yow then what doe all theis Councells so muster here: onlesse yt be to represente to vs, and to all that shall reade and see M. Hornes boke hereafter, that he can alleage no Coun­cells, but suche as make against him? For beholde howe manye thinges these Councells decree, of whiche M. Horne, and his pewfelowes obserue neuer a white. [Page] Els where are the hallowed tapers to be vsed in the vigils decreed in those Councels?Tol. 4. ca. 8 Tol. 7. ca. 3 Tol. 10. c. 5 Where is the Masse so expres­ly in those Councells mentioned? Where is the order and discipline decreed there against renegate Nonnes? But to let these things passe, what hath M. Horne, in al those Coū ­cels to iustifie his primacy by? Verely in the first Councell by him alleaged Sisenandus the kyng entring in to the Sy­nod,Tol. 4. in praefat. began his talke to the bishops, Coram sacerdotibus Dei humi prostratus, lyenge flat groueling on the ground before the priestes of God. And in al that Councel he only exhor­ted the bishoppes to make some decrees for reformation of the Church. In the second Councel by him alleaged, wher he saieth the Synod was confirmed by the princes commaunde­ment and decree, the wordes of the Councel write expres­ly the contrary.Tol. 5. in. praefat. For the bishops there of their conclusion in that Synod do say. Ex praecepto eius, & decreto nostro sanci­mus. This we ordaine by the kinges precept, and our de­cree. It is their decree M. Horne not the princes. And so in the next Councell folowing,Tol. 6. c. 2. this Synod is called, the bishops constitution or decree: not the kinges. In the third Councell by you alleaged, the bishops confesse they were there assembled,Tol. 6. in praefat. Regis salutaribus hortamentis absque impe­dimento: by the holsome exhortations of the king without let, signifiyng that by the kinges meanes they were quiet­ly assembled,Tol. 7. in praefat. and nothing els. As also in the next Councell folowing they saie Studio serenissimi Regis & caet by the en­deuoure or fauoure of our most gratiouse kinge. Nay in the next Councel by you alleaged the kinge and his nobles confesse them selues subiectes to the bishops in such mat­ters.Tol. 8. in praefat. The king speaking to the bishops saieth. En Reuerendi patres excelsiori mihi venerationis honore sublimes, coram vo­bis [Page 198] aduenio &c. Beholde Reuerend fathers, highe to me in a more higher degree of honour, I come before you &c. And touching his nobles (of whome, as M. Horne noteth, there sate in the Synod a greate Company) he chargeth them,Ibidem. vt nihil à consensu praesentium patrum sanctorúmque virorum a­liorsum mentis ducant obtutum: that in no point they should direct their intention from the consent of the fathers and holy men there present. In which words you see M. Horn, his nobles were not there to gouerne, to direct, or to ouer­rule the bishops: but rather to be gouerned directed, and instructed of the bishoppes. And then as I saied, what is there in all these Councells that may any waies furder this vehement imaginatiō of your supremacy? And how much is there that ouerturneth the same, and establisheth the Clergies supremacy, in such causes to them apperteyning? For beside all this,Tol. 8. c. 4. lo what the Fathers in this very Coun­cell do yet farder protest. They saie, that Christ is the head, and the bishops the eyes. They say, that they being of the hi­ghest doe rule by the highnes of theire order: and doe gouerne the multitude of people, Nam dùm secun­dum Carnis assump­tae mysterium, Ec­clesiae suae fuerit dig­natus caput existere Christus, meritò in membris eius in­tentio Episcoporū, of­ficia peragere cerni­tur oculorum. Ipsi enim de sublimiori­bus, celsitudine ordinis regunt & disponunt subiectas multitudines plebium. Tol. 8. ca. 4. vnder their subiec­tion. And therevppon they say that Bisshoppes a­monge other their vertues, must excell in kepinge of chastitye. And they further doe declare, that such as be faultye therein, shalbe thruste oute of theire bisshoprikes. Yet one thinge there is, that semethe colowrablye to serue Maister Horne, that is, that the nobility also subscribeth. Which should seame to imploye a voyce and a consente. [Page] Vnto the which our former answer may serue wel enough, that the Bisshops decreed and ruled, not the Nobles. Again this may serue,Vide Cōc. 5 & Con. 8. that here in al these Councels, was no new matter of faith determined: but most of all this I am assu­red will serue, to say that many thinges were in those Coū ­cels, enacted for the assurance and succession of the Prince and of other cyuill and polityke matters, to the whiche noble men may subscribe wel inowghe.