NOw then to proue my first propo­sition that the Pope and all the Bishoppes and Priestes are sub­iect by the law of God vnto the temporall magistr [...]te,All per­sons sub­iect to the temporal magistrat. in whose realme and dominions they doe dwell, thus I prooue, Salomon. Prou. 24. saith my sonne feare the Lord and King, and intermeddle not or be not among detractors, for their distruction wil a­rise sodainly and who knoweth the ruine of them both. Like­wise Saint Paul the Apostle in his writing to the Romaines thus exhorteth or rather commandeth them Chap. 13. Let euery soule be subiect to the higher power for there is noe power but from God: but those which are, were ordained by God &c. So then he that resisteth the power resisteth the or­dinance of God but they which doe resist do get themselues dānation: for princes be no feare of good worke but of il, but wilt thou not feare the power? doe well and then shalt thou haue praise thereby, for he is the minister of God vnto thee to good; but if thou haue done ill, then feare for he beareth [Page 2] not the sword without cause; he is the minister of God, a re­uenger in wrath to him that doth ill. And therfore ye must needes be subiect, not onely for wrath but also for con­science, for therefore doe yea also pay tribute, for they are the ministers of God seruing for this very purpose. Also in his epistle to Titus Cap. 3. he writes: warne them to be subiect to principalities & powers, to obey their commandements. Moreouer S. Pet [...]r from whom the Pope clameth his mo­ [...]arc [...] thus writeth in his first vniuersall epistle Cap. 2. Be ye [...]ub ect to euery humain creature for the Lord, whether it be [...] most excellent or vnto the presidents, as sent [...] him, to the reuenge of euil deedes, but to the praise of [...] good because so is the will of God, that ye doing well, [...]ay make m [...]re the ignorance of the vnskilfull as free men, [...] as men that haue libertie for a cloake of naughtinesse, but a [...] the bondmen of God, and anone after, feare God and honour the King. Ye do see how the old and new law doe a­gree in the supreeme authoritie of princes, ouer all persons borne or abiding within their dominions. Paul vsing this v­niuersall euery, excepting none, and Salomon and Peter an in­definite, in this place equall vnto an vniuersall. And Peter and Paul doe in expresse wordes giue vnto him the supreeme Emp [...]re of administring iustice in punishing the wicked & rewarding the good; and that he is so the Apostle doth proue by that [...]ll men pay him tribute, the which also he comman­deth to be paide, and also chargeth all men to be obedient vnto him▪ and not for feare onely, lest otherwise the prince would make them smart, but also for cōscience sake, because the [...] are in duety bound so to do, for that God had ordained them to be his lieuetenants in gouernement. And therefore if they were not obedient vnto them, they must needs be ac­counted & reputed for rebels vnto God, that would not ac­cept him for their soueraigne whom God had set ouer them. And Peter to suppres the carnal cogitation of the Iewes [Page 3] vnto whom he wrot that thought that the messias had en­franchised them, by his redēption from al subiection to man & also to preuēt the proud opinion of the clergy that should come after, who would clame exemption from earthly sub­iection, because they were appointed & ordained dispensers of the misteries of the Messias: he flatly affirmeth the cla­ming of such libertie to be nothing else put a plaine pretence & cloake for their naughtinesse: For he would they shoulde remēber that although they were deliuered by Christ from the bondage & tiranny of sin, death & the Deuill, yet they remained still his & his fathers bondmen, & therfore ought duetifully to obey still the ciuill magistrats, whom God hath placed in his owne throne, his king & his lieuetenant ouer them. And therefore Salomon in the place afore alleadged,An appel­lation in secular causes cannot be made to the Pope. ioyneth them together saying: feare God and the King. God principally (saith Lyra writing on that place) and secundari­ly the King who is his Vicar in temporall things. This being so, I cannot chuse but much maruaile at that saying in Cap. Licet de sor. comp. that an appellation may be made from all princes temporall. Yea & such as do acknowledge no supe­riour in temporalities, when none other can be had, and the matter is of som weight. For if as Tertullian saith in his A­pologie that there is no man aboue the Emperour, et quem soli Deo subiicio and whome I make vnder none but God, & in annother place of the same Apologie he saith of the Em­perours of Rome, in Dei solius potestate sunt, a quo sunt se­cundi, post quem primi ante omnes, et super omnes deos, quid in? cum super omnes homines, they are vnder God only, vnto whom they are seconde after whom they are first, before all men, and aboue all gods, and why not? seeing they are aboue all men. And againe if it be true that the graue and learned light of our Lawiers Bracton, that liued almost foure hundreth yeares agoe, in the raigne of Henry the thirde, doth affirme in the beginning of his [Page 4] booke, that a King cannot be a King, if he haue any superi­our in those things that doe appertaine vnto his crowne and kingdome, and may not haue in his kingdome any e­quall much lesse any superiour especially in administration of iustice, that it may be saide of him: Great is our Lorde & greate is his power &c. And that he doth aff [...]irme him to be the vicar of God on earth;This place Psal. 14 [...].5 [...] o [...] [...]od. I can not see by what right or reason, an appellation in a secular cause can be made from an Emperour, King or any supreame temporall magi­strate vnto the Pope seeing he is not theire superiour in temporalities. For all the worlde knoweth that an ap­pellation can not be made but from an inferiour iudge, vnto an higher, and also his superiour in that kinde of iu­risdiction. But much more am I amased at that impudent assertion Cap. tibi domino. 63. D. and inserted by Iunius into his armilla aurea in the title of Papa, Omnis potestas iurat fi­delitatem Papae, et obedientiam, recognoscens ab eo omne quod hab [...]t. Not yet n spiritu­ [...]ll mat­ers. Et si aliquando aliquis imperator donabit Ecclesiae vt de Constantine dicitur, non fuit donatio sed restitutio. Euerye power doth sweate feaulty and obedience vnto the Pope acknowledgeing from him all that he hath. And if at any time some Emperour gaue vnto the Church as is reported of Constantine it was no giuing but a restoring: For this is so repugnant vnto the holy scriptures and the common opinion of all diuines both ancient and moderne that most of our Catholickes Romains I thinke will be soe farre from defending it, that they namely, the vnlearned sort will as soone as euer they reade it cry out at me, as a most sham­lesse lyer for alleaging of soe shamefull a sentence. But al­though as I saide our Catholique Romane will not perhaps affirme that, Papae est terra & plenitudo eius, orbis terra­rum [...] vniuersi qui habitant in ea, the earth is the Popes and the fulnesse thereof, the orbe of the earthes and all that dwell therein.

Yet [...] doe nothing doubt but diuers of them doe holde be­ing taught by their schoolemaster Pighius and other that al­beit Peter and the Apostles were subiect vnto the Emperors and vnder other heathen states vnder whom they were borne and abode, yet alter that the Emperours and Kinges of the earth became Christians and did voluntarily put their necks vnder the yoke of Christ,The pops nor bi­shops haue any secu­lar king­dome. they straightway became ipso facto subiect vnto the Pope Christ his Lieuetenant generall in earth: according to the prophesie of Esay. Cap. 60. the nation and kingdome that will not serue thee Ierusalem shall perish: but how truely let vs consider. For first that the sense of this saying of the prophet is not such as Pighius suppo­seth but rather this,A place of Esay an­swered. that euerie nation that will not acknow­ledge Christ for their God, Lord and Sauiour, and be obe­dient vnto his precepts and ordinances shall perish, I doe thinke is so apparant that it needeth no proofe and spoken onely of his spirituall kingdome on the earth which his father gaue vnto him as Messias as it is written in the se­cond Psalme. Thou art my sonne this day did I beget thee, aske of mee and I will giue thee the nations for thine inheritance, and the boundes of the earth for thy possessi­on: and then as also in this place of Esay he commaundeth the kinges to serue him in feare, and to accept him for their prince, and embrace his discipline and doctrine or else they should perish. Now seeing this was a newe kingdome, and inheritance giuen him by his father latelie, it cannot be vnderstoode of the bodily and earthly kingdome, for he as God was possessed of that before, and from the be­ginning; according to that saying of Dauid. The earth is the Lordes and the fulnesse thereof, the orbe of the earth and all that dwell therein. But of his newe and newly re­stored kingdome consisting of beleeuing soules, and cal­led the kingdom of heauen, whereof hee thus speaketh, vnto his Apostles and messengers after his resurrection: all [Page 6] power is giuen me in heauen and in earth, wherefore goe ye and proclame, publish and make knowen vnto nations, how my father hath giuen me the Empyre of the whole earth, and that those which shal refuse to weare my badge of baptisme, and to obserue and keepe my lawes & ordinances while they liue on earth, shall after death be shut out of heauen & blis­full paradise. And so haue all both olde and late writers that euer I saw interpreted this place, and not of any earthly and seruile subiection, as Hierome, the nations and kings that will not serue the Church in a good and profitable bondage or seruice that they may be transferred into the Apostolicall dignitie: as Haimo shall serue thee by faith and good works: As Leo de Castro, who interpreteth that by this place of the Gospell: He that will beleeue and be baptised shalbe saued; but he that will not beleeue shal be condemned. And as Fre­rerius an other learned Spanish Fryer, that those which will not come into and continue in the true Church of Christ shall perich: And this to be the true meaning of the Pro­phet doth the next sentence before plainely conuince. Thy gates shall stand open continually, day and night shall they not be shut, that the strength of the nations or gentiles may be brought vnto thee, and the kinges of them led vnto thee for the nation, &c. Neyther is Pighius his cause any thing better aduanced by an authority of Nazianzene borrowed out of Gratian, A place of Nazianze­ne an [...]we­red. but afterward alledged by Saunders and Allen more according to the trueth of the text which they doe set downe in these wordes. What will you not be content that I doe speake my minde freely: for the lawe of Christ doth subiect you to my power, and vnto my barre: for we also haue an empyre, yea & I doe say more a more excellent and perfect then yours: vnlesse it be meete that the spirit do sub­mit it selfe to the flesh, and that heauenly thinges giue place to earthly. For who is so blinde that cannot see that Nazian­zene doth in this speach chalenge none other then a spiritu­all [Page 7] gouernment, such as our Bishops haue heere ouer their diocesses, and priestes ouer their parishes a charge of soules, and therefore because it hath the care and ordering of spiri­tuall and heauenly things, he doth affirme it to be more ex­cellent & perfect then the Empyre of kings who do rule ouer the bodies and goods of men: So that no wordes can more manifestly depriue the Pope and priestes of all earthly em­pyre and commaund in temporall thinges then these doe which doe affirme them to belong to the ciuill magistrate, their office being only occupied in sauing of soules, by spiri­tuall meanes, and onely in matters spirituall & heauenly, as preaching, praying, administration of the sacraments, and ec­clesiasticall discipline, and such like appropriated to priest­hoode; and that this was his meaning & mind it is apparant by the wordes which he vseth before to the Citizens of Na­zanse in the which he doth acknowledge himselfe, and all the clergie subiect vnto the secular soueraigne saying thus. But among other lawes of our doctrine, we haue also this most laudable law inacted, by the which as bondmen are commanded to obey & to be obedient vnto their masters, & wiues vnto their husbands, and the Church vnto Christ & disciples and schollers to their schoolemasters and pastors; so are we also prescribed to obey the superexcellent powers, not only for wrath but also for conscience, as we that are bounde to payment of tribute. Neyther let vs so behaue our selues, that we for our wickednes and lewde factes, doe deadly hate the lawe and looke for the reuenging sword, but rather so leade our liues that we may get praise of the power and magistrate: And then after he hath very eloquently shewed by many si­militudes that they ought not to blame the harmlesse of the sword, but to impute the smart thereof vnto their owne faul­tinesse; he leaueth as he saith the subiectes and turneth his speach vnto the Emperour and the gouernours, for ye must vnderstand that this oration was pronounced in the presence [Page 8] of the people of Nazanse, trembling for feare of the Empe­rours great displeasure and also of the angry Emperour and his officers, least he should be thought (these are his words) to deale altogether partially eyther not seeming to haue the like care ouer them to whome he ought more hoofully to looke vnto, as they that could do most either harme or good, as he had of the other inferiour sorte: or else to haue lost through feare or shame the freedom that he had from Christ not daring to admonish them of their duetie, because of their great dignity and power. And then he vseth the words alleadged by our aduersaries; what wil ye not be cōtent &c. But I doe not doubt but your maiestie wi [...]l take this my free speaking in good part, as a holy sheepe of my holy flocke, and a weaneling of the great sheepeheard. And then he v­seth very effectuall reasons to moue him to mercy, and fi­nally falleth to pitifull obtestations, by his owne hoary head, his immaculate priesthood which the Angels &c. by Christ his bitter passion, &c. in most suppliant sort, without any one word that any whit sauoureth or soundeth of authority, power or commaund, wisely and godly teaching the sub­iectes duetifull obedience, and the Emperour and his offi­cers mercy and moderation in gouernment. Furthermore the better to boult out the trueth, in the controuersy I thinke it will not be amisse to search out, whether in the old lawe the high priest who was a type and figure of Christ, and head of all the priestes, and had the supreme ministration of the mysteries of God,The high priest sub­iect to the tempo­rall magi­strate. and in whose name of Pontifex, the Bishop of Rome hath succeeded, was subiect vnto the ciuill magistrate or noe. And that he was is plainely proued in the 2. Cap. of 3. Kings where Salomon deposeth Abiather the high priest, of his office, and confirmeth him into Anathotb be­cause he had gone about to make Adoniah King, and also told him that he had deserued to die; but he would not put him to death, because he had borne the Arke of the Lord [Page 9] God, before his father Dauid, and had beene a continuall partaker of all his fathers troubles. Then if Salomon might lawfully execute the high priest for treason there is no doubt but that the high priestes were subiect vnto the kinges, as vn­to their soueraignes.

But although I will passe ouer in silence, the putting to death of the high priest Achimelech and Azarias by Saul and Ioas because they will cauill they were tyrannicall, yer I will stay a little vpon the suppliant speach of Achimelech because it argueth subiection in the speaker. Saul vpon the occasion of Doeg sent for Achimelech the sonne of Achitob, 1. Reg. 22. 19. Cap. & all the hole howse of his father being priestes which were in Nob, who came euery man vnto the king, and Saul saide: Listen thou sonne of Achitob: who answered I am heere my Lord. And Saul saide why hast thou and the sonne of Ishai conspired against me: and hast giuen him being a trai­tour (and so continuing to this day) bread and a sword, and hast asked counsaile of God for him, that he might rise vp against me? And Achimelech answering the king thus spake? Let this crime be farre from me, neyther let the king sus­pect any such thing against his bondman, nor of any man of the whole howse of my father: For thy bondman knew nei­ther lesse nor much of this matter, &c. Doth there not ap­peare in these wordes almost a seruile subiection of the high priestes vnto the king? for by what baser terme can he call himselfe then his bondman? or by what higher and more soueraigne name could he speake vnto the king then calling him his Lord? a word that doth signifie the prince to haue his subiectes in such seruilitie: that Octauian the Emperour that did accept the names of Augustus or diuine, of father of his country &c. to haue his name sworne by and his images sacrificed vnto as a God:19 Cap. 2. Crome. Yet wold neuer admit as Suetonius and Dion doe affirme the title of Lord but abhorred it as re­prochfull, although now time and custome haue mollified [Page 10] the worde. But that the high priest had nothing to din mat­ters of state, we haue it set downe in flat wordes in the 19. of the second Paralip, or the Chronicles where this we doe reade. But Amarias the priest and your high priest shall be president or chiefe in those thinges which doe appertaine to God, but Zebadias the sonne of Ishmaell who is captaine of the house of Iuda, shall be ouer those workes which doe belong vnto the king. But now that we haue sufficiently pro­ued the subiection of the high priest of the Iewes, let vs come to Christ himselfe by pretence of being whose vicar and de­putie in earth the Pope claimeth this prowde prerogatiue of pearching ouer princes,Christ no earthlie ki [...]g. and discusse whether that he, as Christ and Messias, (for I thinke the Pope doth not chalenge to be Gods but Christes vicar,) was an earthly Monarch or noe; that he was none, it is apparantly prooued, by his re­fusing to giue iudgement on a woman accused of adulterie,Iohn. 8. and also by denying himse [...]fe to bee a competent iudge be­tweene two brothers, that contended about an inheritance. And finally in that he confessed vnto Pilate in expresse words that his kingdome was not of this world.Iohn. 18. As for the paying of foure drachmes for himselfe & Peter at Capernaum, I thinke with Theophylactus and some other that it was for the halfe sycle (which is two drachmes) due vnto the Lord for euerie man that was twentie yeares of age, as we reade in Exodus rather then for tribute due to the Emperour, because mee thinketh it doth better agree with Christes interro­gation to Peter, what thinkest thou Peter, of whome doe the kinges of the earth take tribute, of their owne children or of strangers, and he sayde of strangers: Ie­sus sayde vnto him then are the children free. As though he shoulde haue sayde.This ex­positi [...]n is vtterly re­pugnant to the meaning and pur­pose of Christ, as the godly reader, doth well vnderstād If Kinges children doe not pay tribute to their fathers, neyther ought I to pay vnto God any, becau [...]e I am his sonne: But if any man will contend that hee affirmed that he ought to pay no tribute to the [Page 11] Emperour, because he was the sonne of the supreme Em­perour God Almightie, I will not greatly striue with him, but I will in noe wise graunt Felicius that he claimes to be discharged, by right of any earthlie Empyre that he possessed as Christ; for that by no meanes can be gathered out of the text, yea what say you that that famous fryer Do­minicus Soto doth holde in learned worke de Iustit. & Iure, that the kingdome of Christ was meere spirituall, and writeth that he had proued it at large in his commen­taries vppon Mathew. Moreouer the matter is so ma­nifest that Pighius himselfe is forced to confesse that Christ his kingdome was onely spirituall, and yet he gi­ueth to him whome he woulde haue to be his deputie, temporall superioritie ouer all Christian princes in that hee is Christ his Lieuetenant, with as greate absurdidie as if a man shoulde denie that the Archbishoppe of Canterburie can heare and determine of felonies, and yet holde that his officiall may, or depriue the Constable of authoritie to enter forciblie into any mans house, other­wise then in cases of treason and felonie, and yet graunt it to the Constables deputie, or to say that hir Maiestie can not put in or out at hir pleasure, anie souldiours into hir towne of Barwicke, and yet maintaine that hir Lieuetenaunt of the Towne may doe it. And see I pray you how he answereth this obiection out of the Gospell, as my father sent me so I sende you. Whereas they say that Christ came not to exercise authoritie and empyre ouer Monarches, Kinges and princes, but as he was sente by the father,Christ gaue no temporal power to Bishops nor Pope soe he doth witnesse that the Apostles were sent by him, neyther therefore had they authoritie ouer kinges and princes they gather not aright, for that word (as) doth not import a likenes in all points betweene them whih were sent, Chist and his Apostles: but doth shew the senders or the authoritie of the senders: As if he had saide, my [Page 12] father sent me but I send you, otherwise Christ was sent by his father to redeeme mankind by his death, but not so ney­ther to that end were the Apostles sent by Christ, but for this purpose, that they shoulde out of all nations gather toge­ther his kingdom in the which all men should be made par­takers of his benefits: vnto the which kingdom yet he him­selfe had prescribed lawes, and had ordained Peter to be go­uernour thereof.Yet had Peter no more au­thority then the rest of the Apostles. I deny not but that the sending of Christ did in some pointes surmount the sending of the Apostles, but that Christ sent forth his Apostles with a larger commis­sion and power, then his father had giuen him, that no man I thinke will lightly grant Pighius, that knoweth that rule of the Canon Law, yea and I doe thinke of all lawes: Nemo po­test pius iuris conferre in alium quam sibi competere dignoscatur. (No man can giue more right vnto another, then may be knowen is in himselfe, & the saying of Christ, that the schol­ler is not aboue his schoolemaster, nor the bondman aboue his Lord; but it is enough for the scholler to be as his master is, and the bondman as his Lord. And Iohn. 13. Verily verily I say vnto you, the seruāt is not greater then his master, neither the Apostle nor legate or messenger greater then him that sent him. And with what authority he sent them, it appeareth by the words that immediatly follow: when he had said these wordes, he blew vpon them and said vnto them, receiue the holy ghost: whose sins ye shall remit they are remitted, and whose sins ye shall retaine, they are retained: and can any man call this power an earthly empyre? And bycause Pighius saith that Christ had ordained Peter gouernour of his king­dome, I pray let vs consider what power he gaue vnto him at the time of his institution or inauguration, his wordes be these,Mat. 16. I will giue vnto thee the keyes of the kingdome of heauen, and whatsoeuer thou shalt binde vpon the earth shall also be bound in heauen, and whatsoeuer thou shalt loose vpon the earth shall be also loosed in heauen, yee [Page 13] apparantly see that Christ gaue vnto Peter not the keyes of the earthly kingdome or Empire to aduaunce and de­pose Princes, but of the Kingdome of heauen to let in or shutte out from heauen, neither had hee a sworde or Scepter giuen him as ensigne of a King, but a key a token of a porter. So that except the Pope can shewe annother Chapter then that which was giuen to Peter he will want wordes to carrie away a terrene mo­narch. But although Pighius doe grant Christe his kingdome to be spiriuall, yet Felisius in his booke vp­pon the tenne commaundements,Felisius obiectiōs of Christs kingdom answered. on the Commaunde­ment honour thy father and thy mother, will not yeelde thereunto; but endeauoureth to proue his secular power and monarchy by his practise, in deciding all kinde of causes as of life and death when he badde Peter put vp his sworde▪ of criminall when he willed the woman taken in adultery to be gone: and of ciuill when he determined the controuersi be­tweene the Pharisies & the Herodians, whether the Iewes ought to pay tribute vnto the Emperours of Rome or noe. Doubtlesse if Felisius were not accounted for a great lear­ned man among the Catholickes Romaine I would not vouchsafe to shape these obiections an answeare, they are soe friuolous. For who seeth not that Christ his comman­ding of Peter to put vp his sworde doth no more proue that Christ had authoritie of publique Iustice, then the bidding of any simple gentleman in the Citty of London that his man put vp his sword which he had drawen in a fray against his enemy, will conuince him to be a Iustice of the peace of the same Citty, But that Christ saide vnto the woman ta­ken in adultery that she might begonne her way, for seeing noe man had condēned hir neyther would he: He doth plain­ly declare that he had noe authoritie to condemne or de­taine hir, but that she might be gone for any thing he had to say or deale with hir. Now for the matter of paying [Page 14] tribute it was not brought before him as a competent Iudge by parties sueing and sued by processe awarded, or vppon distresse taken, but onely moued vnto him as a skilful Doctor and learned diuine to be determined, as a doubt betweene the two sectes of the Pharisies and the Herodians; As if a Protestant and Catholicke should priuately come to Doct­or Felisius to know his opinion whether the Pope may de­pose Christian Princes or noe, but in very deede they came not to Christ to be resolued of the doubt but onely to en­trappe him and to see if happely they could bring him with­in the compasse of treason; by denying the paiment of tri­bute vnto the Emperour, and so procure his death by the Romaine president, as seditious; And therefore he asked them why they tempted him, and willed them to shew him a peny, and then he demaunded of them whose image was stamped on the peece, and they answered the Emperours; then saide he, giue the Emperour that which is his, and so likwise ynto god that which is gods: a very obscure sentence giuen by a iudge in a sute: but a wise and wittie answere for such false traterous Interrogants. And with the like tri­sles doth the same Felisius also trouble vs, when he goeth a­bout to proue the exemption of the clergy frō free subiection of secular princes because Melchisdech was both a king and a priest, & so likewise Moses a priest & supreme gouernor of the Iseralites: And finally Hely was both high priest, and also secu­lar Prince or iudge of the Iewes: For if Melchisedech were both a King and a Priest what is that to the controuersie that we haue now in hand, whether that Priestes be subiect vnto the temporall Prince: (but perhaps it touched the matter if we had disputed whether that a Bishop may be also a tem­porall Prince,See Fe­nestella. As for a King to be a Priest was an vsual thing in many countries among the heathen: Yea all the Romaine Kings had the chiefe charge of the sacrifices, temples and worshippe of the gods, and therefore when the Kinges [Page 15] were expelled they ordained a priest whom they called the sacrificing King, who should execute those publicke sacri­fices which did of right belong vnto the Kings function, but for hatred of their kings made him subiect vnto the chiefe Priest or Pontifiex Maximus: the which office of Pontifiex Maximus all the heathen Romaine Emperours continual­ly had.See Dion. &c. But that Moses was both the ciuill magistrate and also a priest it maketh very much against himselfe, for although we doe grant that Moses was a Priest, yet it is most manifest that he was not high Priest, but his brother Aaron whome yet to be subiect vnto Moses all men seene in the sacred scriptures do knowe, so that nothing can make more for the superioritie of the ciuill magistrate then this example that Aaron being high Priest and head and chiefe of all Priestes, was yet subiect to Moses an ordinary Priest,Moses was a prophet and not a priest. because he had the soueraigntie temporall. Likewise what is it to the purpose if that Hely the high Priest was also created secular magistrate, for so were all the high Priestes after the returne of the people from Babilon, vntill they were conquered by the Romaines and the kingdome was giuen by them vnto Herodes a stranger and Idu­mean.

Now seeing we haue aboundantly prooued in generall, the superioritie of the ciuill magistrate ouer all men liu­ing within their dominions, both by expresse places of scripture, and authorities of auncient fathers, and also con­uinced the subiection of the high Priest in the olde law vnto the ciuill Prince, and clearely shewed Christs kingdom to be spirituall and that he gaue none other to Peter and the rest of the Apostles and their successors, and haue fully an­swered all obiections of the aduersaries, I will descende vn­to practise and prooue the superioritie of Emperours and Italian Kings ouer the Popes and Bishoppes of Rome by [Page 16] the prescripsion of seauen hundreth yeares after Christ [...] kinde of proofe which we Catholickes Romaine exact of the Protestants crying vnto them to shew their successiion. But because Pighius the Popes proctor in the secular pri­macy doth subiect his client vnto the heathen Emperours,The Pops subiect to the Em­perours and Itali­an kings. I neede fetch my limmitation noe higher then Constantine the greate the first Christian Emperour. Now to shew how he banished Bishoppes perhappes will be thought to small purpose, because they doe giue this earthly Empire not vnto the Clergy but onely vnto the Bishoppe of Rome as Christs lieuetenant generall in all causes as well spirituall as tempo­rall.See for, these hi­stories Paul: Di­a [...] Platina and Sa­bellicus. But I doe finde that his sonne and successor Constan­tius did banish Liberius the Bishoppe of Rome because he would not subscribe to the deposition of Athanasius and caused another to be c [...]osen in his place. Moreouer when the Cytie of Rome and the Country of Italy came by con­quest into the possession of the Ostrogothes in Anno Domin. 483. Liberius. Theodoricus the King of the Ostrogothes or of Italy com­manded to come before him to Rauenna whether he had transferred the seate of the Empire of Italy, leauing the ci­ty of Rome in the gouernement of the Senate,Symma­chus. And least some man vnskilfull of antiquities should dreame, that it was then the Popes by the donation of Constantine, Theo­doricus I say summoned before him at Rauenna Symmachus and Laurentius who contended for the Bishopperickes of Rome to the diuision of the whole Cytie,I [...]hn. that he as soueraing might determine the controuersy vpon hearing of the mat­ter. And afterward when Iustinus Emperour of Constanti­nople had banished the Arrians out of all his dominions, Theodoricus sent Iohn the byshoppe of Rome and their Se­natours Embassadours vnto Iustinus willing them in threat­ning sort to tell the Emperour from him that vnlesse hee did spedily restore to the Arrians theire Churches, and suffer them to liue in peace, that he would extinguish [Page 17] [...] Italy. They comming to [...] honorably receiued by him, did with [...] beeing very hoofull for the safetie of themselues and [...] countrymen, entreat the Emperour gratiously to graunt the [...]nor of their Embassage, although it were vniust, and to haue regard and compassion of Italy which otherwise would vtterly perish, with whose teares the Emperour beeing mooued granted them their request. But when the Bishoppe with his associates were returned to Rauenna to make relation vnto the King of the Empe­rours answere▪ Theodoricus mooued with malice because [...] a defender of the Catholicke pietie had receiued him so honorably▪ killed him and his fellowes with paine­full imprisonment. Then Theodotus, annother king of the Ostrogothes sent Agapetus Agapetus the Bishoppe of Rome Embassa­dour as his subiect vnto Iustinian the Emperour, which Iusti­nian not long after hauing recouered Rome from the Ostro­gothes, did not by his Lieuetenant, but by his Lieuetenant Bel­sarius his wife spoyle Siluerius Silberius: the Bishoppe of Rome of his Bishopprick [...], & Bishoppes robes: and putting him in mo­nasticall needes confined him into an out Iland Charging him that he would haue betrayed the gate Asmaria that ad­ioyned vnto his house vnto the Ostrogothes, but in deed per­happes there was some other priuie grudge hidden in the Empresse her heart. But the manner of the doing doth ma­nifestly declare for how smale Princes Popes were reputed in those daies, for Belsarius sending an officer for him the Bishoppe was brought into his bedde Chamber, because Belsarius sate by his wife who being that day come from Na­ples wary was laide downe on her bedde. But the proude Dame had no sooner sene the Bishoppe, but she began to [...] and saide, oh sirrha wherein haue I or my Belisarius so so [...]e offended your maistershippe, that you should betraye vs vnto the Gothes and immediatly b [...]d away with him, not [Page 18] suffering him to speake one word, And in his roome was one Vigilius Vigilius. placed, who not long after refusing to restore vnto his seate Anthenius who had bene depriued of the Bishopbricke of Constantinople for the heresy of Eutiches; Th [...]odora the Empresse who fauoured Anthenius commanded to be arrested at Rome and sent prisoner to Constantinople, where when being vrged with this vniust request he had broken out into this impatient speach that he had thought he had come to Iustinian, but that now he well perceyued it was to Dioclesian. He was so well whipped for forgetting his lesson in the two and twentith of Exodus Non maledices principi populi tui thou shalt not speake ill to the prince of thy people; that he was almost slaine (I doe thinke noe Chri­stian or ciuill Emperour much lesse Iustinian woulde so ser­uilely haue v [...]ed him whom he reputed the monarch of the world) and anone after was ignominiously drawen along the cyty in a halter and then put in prison where he continued many yeares with onely breade and water Anno Domini. 591. Pelagius Pelagius the Byshoppe of Rome sent Gregory who succeded him in the see vnto Mauritius the Emperour of the east, to desire him not to be offended for that he had suffered himselfe to be denounced Byshoppe before hee had obtained his consent and confirmation; for he coulde not sende before that time to Constantinople, because the cytie of Rome had bene straitely beseiged by the Lom­bards: Now in those dayes saith Platina and all other Hi­storians, writing of those times and affaires the election of the Byshoppe of Rome was voide without the Empe­rours assent and conformation. And now we are come to Gregory himselfe surnamed the greate a man in such credit with the Popes of latter times and the Catholickes Romaine,Greg [...]y the great. that they and wee doe more follow him in the diuine seruice and ceremonies, then all the rest that euer satte in that see before him, and therefore I doe hope [Page 19] that you will the more willingly allowe and embrace his opinion and iudgement of the secular soueraignytye. As I doe not doubte but yee will cauell at manye of my former examples as vniust and tyrannicall, the which I will, not greately sticke to grant you, and yet they doe strongly prooue the superioritie of those princes, and that they were there lawfull, although lawlesse soueraignes, for as substantially doe the ba­nishmentes of the Catholicke Byshoppes by the he­reticall Emperours conuince the soueraignetie of the Emperours ouer the Byshoppes: as the confining of the heriticall Byshoppes by the Catholicke Emperours, Neyther am I lesse assured of the subiection of the Byshoppes of Asia vnto the Emperour of Constanti­nople for that I reade that Valens banished the Catho­licke Byshoppes thereof, then I am when I finde that Theodosius banished the Arrian Byshoppes of Asia. For neuer shall wee finde that when the Empire was deuided that euer the Emperours of the East of what Religion soeuer they were did bannish the Byshoppes of the West nor contrarye wise; but eyther dealte onely with them that were vnder their owne Empire, and who would haue a better proofe that this Island was subiect vnto the Romane Empire then the hauocke that Dioclesian made here of the Christians, and there Church and doth not he as sufficientlie shew himselfe to be a lawe­full iudge that hangeth vp twenty true men, a [...] hee that ex­ecuteth as many theeues: Neither doe wee reade that these Emperours and Kinges were reprooued for iniu­riously punishing them, ouer whome they had noe autho­ritie by right: but because they punished them against law and right: for matters that deserued noe punish­ment. But leauing this let vs goe to Gregorie, who had not learned to date his let [...]ers as the Popes doe now [Page 20] with Anno Pontificatus nostri in the yeare of our Popedome but regnante domino nostro Mauritio Tiberio piissimo Anno decimo quarto, post Consulatum eiusdem domini nostri decimo tertio, in the yeare of the raigne of our Lord Mauretius Tiberius the most godly Emperour the fourtenth, and after the consulshippe of the same Lord of ours the thirtenth, as his foure letters in the ecclesiasticall history of Beda are da­ted: wherein I doe nore three thinges: first that he doth not write the date of his owne creation or inauguration as soue­raignes doe; and secondly as subiectes doe that he writ­teth the date of the raigne of their Prince: and thirdly that he called him Lord: a worde so hautie and high, that August­us made an edict that noe man shoulde call him so, noe nor woulde not suffer his Children nor Childrens Chil­dren to call him so,Suetonius neither in earnest nor in sporte. More­ouer with what duetifull humilitie are all his letters fraught that he directeth vnto the Emperour calling him in the plurall number after an vnwonted manner, to declare his vnwonted lowlinesse and wonted subiection. Domini my Lordes, and yet because noe man shoulde thinke hee called him so rather of humilitie then of duetie, it is apparant he vseth not that tearme to anye other: But writing vnto Ethelbert the King of Kent he calleth him in Beda, sonne, a name of obedience and duetifulnesse, but yet also of loue as hee also calleth Ch [...]lderbert the King of Fraunce. [...]plaplib. 4. Indicto 12. eplam 96. et 97. But omitting many of his letters I will onely rehearse somewhat out of his threescore and one of the seconde booke, wherein he fin­ding greate fault with the Emperour for making an vn­iust Lawe as hee saith: that noe Souldiour shoulde en­ter into Religion, the which woulde haue made him to haue forgotten all humilitie, if hee had beene as proudly spirited as some of his successors haue beene, he thus beginneth his letters. Omnipotenti Deo reus est qui [Page 21] serenissimis Dominis in omni quod agit & loquitur purus non est. Ego autem indignus pietatis vestrae famulus. &c. He is guiltie vnto God that is not pure vnto my renowned Lordes in all thinges that he doth and speaketh, but I an vnworthie ser­uant of your godlinesse, &c. And anone after, Fatemur Dominis meis, and Dominorum pietas sanxit, I doe confesse vn­to my Lordes, and the godlinesse of my Lordes hath de­creed. And againe, Ego vero Dominis meis loquens quid sum nisi puluis & verniis: sed tamen quia contra authorem omnium Deum hanc intendere constitutionem sentio Dominis tacere non possum. But I speaking vnto my Lordes what am I but dust and a worme; but because I do perceiue that this constituti­on doth tende against God the creator of all, I cannot holde my peace vnto my Lords: Is this the speach of a soueraigne or a subiect. And a little after. Ad hac per me se [...]uum vlti­mum suum & vestrum respondebit Christus dicens, ego te & sacer­dotes meos manus tua commisi, tu a meo seruitio milites tuos subtra­his. And ego indignus famulus vester sci [...] &c. vnto this will Christ himself answere by me his vilest bondman and yours, saying, I haue aduanced thee from, &c. vnto the empyre, &c. I haue committed my priestes into thy handes, and thou do­est withdraw thy souldiours from my seruice. And I your vnworthy seruant doe knowe. And at the foote of the letter he writeth that which striketh this present controuer­sie stone dead: Ego quidem Ius [...]ioni subiectus eandem legem per diuersas terrarum partes transmitti feci & quia lex ipsa omnipoten­ti Deo minimè concordat, ecce per suggestionis meae paginam sere­nissimis dominis meis nunciaui, vtribique ergo quae debui exolui, qui & imperatori obedientiam pribus, & pro Deo quae sensui mini­mè tacui: I beeing subiect to commandement haue caused the same lawe to be sent through diuers partes of the world, and because the same lawe doth nothing agree with God, behold I haue signified it vnto my renowned Lorde by the letter of my suggestion, wherefore I haue in both thinges [Page 22] discharged that which I ought, who haue shewed obedi­ence vnto the Emperour, and yet haue neuer a whit left vnspoken that which I thought in Gods behalfe: In this authoritie I note first, that the Pope doth acknowledge him­selfe subiect and seruant vnto the Emperour beeing a Chri­stian and doth call him his leige Lord. Secondlie he doth affirme that God had subiected the priestes and clergie vn­to the Christian princes for to serue them: for otherwise it can not answere the other member: and thou doest with­drawe thy souldiours from my seruice: And thirdly that Gregorie a Pope doth acknowledge and affirme himselfe to be subiect vnto the Emperours commaundement, yea and thought himselfe so bounde to obey him, that he might not with a safe conscience refuse to publish such decrees of his as he thought in his conscience vngodly,M [...]lanus diuini ie, that Gregorie offended not in obeying a wicked & an [...]ngodly com­mande­ment. the which thing if any cunning Catholique thinke that Gregorie might not lawfully doe, let him reade Molanus a learned Ca­tholique of Louayne his booke de fide hereticis & rebellibus seruanda, of keeping promise with heretickes and rebels, and there he shall finde his fact defended, moreouer the like subiection of himselfe and the clergie vnto the Empe­riour doth he acknowledge writing of this verie same mat­ter and Lawe vnto Theodorus the Emperours physition in these wordes words, Valde autem mihi durum videtur vt ab eius seruitio milites suos prohibeat, qui ei & omnia tribuit, & domina­rie [...] non solùm militibus, Eplape­lib. 2. In­d [...]. in eplape­ [...]lt. sed etiam sacerdotibus concesset. In en­glish this, But it seemeth to me to be harde that he should forbid his souldiours his seruice, who hath both gi­uen him all that he hath, and also granted him to be Lorde ouer not onely the souldiours but also the priestes. In the same letter also he doth call the king my Lord; and our Lord. But although I hope that this assertion and iudgement of Grego [...]e surnamed the great, a Pope, a canonized saint, and one of the foure approued Doctors of the latine [Page 23] Church, will satisfie all reasonable Catholickes Romane. Yet I will proceede further with the ecclesiasticall practise. Anone after Gregorie and about the yeare of our Lord. 608. Bonifacius the third was a very earnest suter vnto Phocas the Emperour,Bonifaci­us. Paulus diaconus. to decree that the sea of Rome shoulde be the heade Church of Christendome, the which at length he obtained with much a doe: but in good faith he might haue saued much labour, if he had beene Monarch of the world, for then he could haue done it of himselfe without once God haue mercy to the Emperour.Paulus diaconus. And his successor Bonifacius the fourth put vp a supplication to the same Phocas that he would vouchsafe to commaund that the Temple of Pantheon at Rome, which had beene dedicated to all the Pa­gan Gods, should be conuerted to the Church of the virgin Mary, and of all the holy Martyrs.Seuerinus I trow this example is of some moment, Anno. 636. Seuerinus was chosen Bishop of Rome, to ratifie the which election saith Sabellicus, there must be had the assent of the Emperours Lieuetenant in Italy, called the Eparch. Isaac that then had that charge came therefore to Rome as he saide, but because he woulde be paide for his paines, he tooke out all the treasure out of the vestrie of the Laterane Church, deuiding parte of it a­mong his souldiours, and sending parte vnto the Emperour, and least he shoulde be called an ill cooke, hee also licked his owne fingers; and yet the Pope stirred not one whit, such powerlesse princes were Popes in those daies,Sabell. and such seruile subiectes vnto Emperours: Againe aboute Anno Domini. 650. Constans the Emperour commaunded his Eparch Olympius to cōmaund vpon their allegeance, Martin the Bishop of Rome and all the rest of the Italian Bishops to embrace the heresy of the Monothlites;Martin. which if they should refuse to doe that then hee shoulde take order, that the Bishop of Rome might be taken prisoner; or if that could not be done without great vprore, by reason of the good will [Page 24] and defence of the people, (for much was the authoritie and maiestie of the Emperours decayed with the people of Rome, by there farre distance, there small Empyre in Ita­lie beeing cooped in a narrowe corner, by the Lomberdes, their heresies and vngodlinesse; and finally because they had made the seate of their Lieuetenant to be at Rauenna) that then he shoulde cause him sodenly to be slayne by some sleight, he came to Rome declared the Emperours com­maundement, the which the Bishop refused to accom­plish, but to apprehende him the Eparch durst not, and of murdering him he missed. But two yeares after Theodorus the Eparch entered the Citie, apprehended him, sent him in Irons vnto the Emperour, who confined him into the Chersonesus of Thrace, where for pouertie he perished. An­no. 667. Diac. Constans the Emperour after he had vnfortunatelie fought in Italy with the Lombardes, came vnto Rome the Bi­shoppe Vitalian with all the clergie going forth sixe miles to receiue him, who shortly after deceiued them, for hee spoyled the Church called Pantheon of all the sacred orna­mentes,Vitalian. and vncouered it taking of the tile of copper, yea and all the auncient pieces of worke, eyther of copper or marble, that he could finde in the whole Citie, and sent to Constantinople: so that he defaced Rome more in seauen daies, then all the Barbarians had euer done since the decli­nation of the Empyre: and the like hauock he made in all the the Churches subiect vnto him in Italy, Sicileye, and Sardi­nia, and yet for all this Peter drewe not the sworde, for hee yet remembred how bitterly his master had once checked him before for fighting, Anno Dom. 700. Iustinianus the Em­perour (saith Diaconus) commaunding Constantine the Pope to come vnto him honourably receiued him,Constantine. and sent him backe; whom he beeing prostrated on the ground, desired to be an intercessor vnto God for his sinnes, renewed all the priuiledges of his Church, why then the priuiledges [Page 25] were first giuen by the Emperour and not by God himselfe. But that the Emperour fell downe at the Bishops feete, it was done in respect not of his greatnesse, but of his godli­nesse: a thing vsually done by great princes vnto ancient Monkes and Hermites, renowned for their strict life, and rare pietie, whereof all Christian histories yeelde vs store of examples: and this to be soe doth his request of inter­cession vnto GOD for his sinnes manifestly shewe. But to returne againe to our practise about Anno Domi­ni. 690. another Iustinian the Emperour sent Zacharias his Protospatharius or high Constable, into Italy, for to bring Sergius the Bishop of Rome, Sergius. vnto him in Irons, because he woulde not subscribe vnto a lewde counsell helde by him at Constantinople; Sabell. and he had done it if that the Em­periall Armie in Italy what for hatred of the Emperour, and the good will of the Pope, and his cause, had not speedily marched to Rome, to withstand his apprehensi­on: yet this Emperour did afterwarde renewe for Con­stantine the Bishop a confirmation of all the p [...]iuiledges of the Sea of Rome: This Constantine was the first Bishop of Rome (saith Omphrius) the newe Chronicler of the Popes, Qui in os ausus est resistere, which durst resist the Emperours of Constantinople to their faces, for he at the importunate petition of the people of Rome, who requested it with great outcries, decreede that the name of Philippicus the Empe­rour shoulde not be mentioned at the Aulter, nor in anie writing or recordes, nor his image set vp in their Chur­ches, because he had commaunded the Bishop to consent vnto his Arrianisme, and the abolishing of the Images of Saintes. But Paulus Diaconus who liued neare that time writeth that statuit populus, the people decreede, and not the Pope.

About Anno Domini. 7 [...]5. Leo Isauricus the Emperour commaunded Gregory the Bishop of Rome, Gregorie the second to destroy all the [Page 26] images of the Saintes, the which he refused to doe. But although the Emperour did execute many therefore, and about that matter banished the patriarch of Constantinople, and had sundry times practised the Popes death, both co­uertly, and also by open forces, causing the Eparch to bring his Armie before the Citie of Rome, where he was repel­led by the Lombardes; yet woulde the Pope by no meanes be wonne to consent that a new Emperour should be cho­sen in Ital [...]e, the which was now in a good forwardnesse, the people hauing slaine Martin the gouernour of the Citie of Rome, and his sonne the Lieuetenant of Campania, and the Citizens of Rauenna the Eparch: and had chosen them almost in euerie Citie newe officers: But Gregorie woulde by no meanes consent thereunto, but wonne them to be quiet with much a doe. But when the Emperour woulde not desist from forcing of his edict, for the abolishment of Images vppon the Romanes, and the Italians, Gregorie the third successor vnto the other, helde a Counsell in Ita­lie, wherein he excommunicated the Emperour, and then the Citizens of Rome and all the teritorie about, called by the name of the Duchy of Rome, reuolted from the Em­perour, who was negligent in defending them against the Lombardes, that had sweeped him almost out of all Italie, from Rome to the Alpes, and soe the Pope became prince of the Citie and Duchie of Rome, S. Sigon. de regno Italiae. and subiect vnto no man about the yeare, 730. And to establish the state of the Romane principalitie, by stopping of titles, Zacha­rias the Pope wonne his Creator Pepine the french king to spoyle Aistulfus the king of the Lombardes of Rauenna, by right whereof, beeing the siege of the Gotish kingdome and the emperiall exarchate in Italy; The Pope cannot de­pose prin­ces. he claimeth tribute of the Romanes, and for to bestowe it vppon him and his succes­sors, for to take away all quarrell for euer. Thus ye see that the Bishoppes of Rome were alwaies subiect vnto the tem­porall [Page 27] princes of the Citie, vntill such time as the reuolting people had created him their prince, as all other Bishops in ciuill soueraigne, so that the Popes are not exempted of temporall subiection by the institution of GOD, but by the election of men; as the high priestes became to be so­ueraignes after the returne of the Iewes from Babylon, there beeing ordained to be the temporall prince: Then seeing by the ordinance of God the Pope was a subiect, and by the creation of men beeing made a soueraigne, onely o­uer some certaine prouinces; I cannot see howe eyther by Gods Law or mans, hee can rightly claime anie autho­ritie to depose Christian princes at his pleasure, no more then any other subiecte can his soueraigne, or seuerall soueraignes one another: to grant eyther of which is soe absurde, that I shoulde shewe my selfe to haue verie little witte, if I shoulde goe aboute to refute eyther, as though any man that had common sense woulde doubte of them. For to reason that Sixtus Quintus, because hee is secu­lar soueraigne ouer these prouinces which are called the patrimonie of Peter, may therefore depose all other Chri­stian princes, is as good an argument as if I shoulde saie, ELIZABETH is Queene of England, therefore she may depose the prince of the patrimonie, and all other Christian princes. So that by prouing my first proposi­tion, that Christ gaue vnto Peter and his successors no soueraignetie secular, I haue also conuinced the se­conde, that they can not depriue Christian princes of their principalities.The Pope cannot depose the temporall soueraine Neyther is the Popes claime anie thing aduanced by those two sayinges of Christ vnto Peter, which I doe finde alleadged by Gregorie the seuenth, when hee first of anie Pope deposed Henry the fourth Em­perour, as the warrant of his doings.Plati. The first is feede my sheepe, wherein hee did not, sayde Gregorie exempt Kinges. And the other, whatsoeuer thou shalt binde on [Page 28] the earth, shall be bound in Heauen, and whatsoeuer thou doest loose in the earth, shall be loosed in Heauen. For I haue proued before that Christ his kingdome was spirituall; and soe a spirituall charge of soules hee committed to Peter, and the rest of the Apostles and their successors, and noe Empyre ouer the bodies and goods of anie men. But Doctor S [...]u [...]ders takes greate holde of the Greeke woorde [...]. Poimaine which the Apostle vseth when Christ bad Peter the second time to feede his sheepe for that worde (saith hee) signifieth also to gouerne. It doth indeede pro­perlie signifie to keepe sheepe, as we terme it wherein wee include not onelie the feeding of them, but also the care of looking to them that they take noe harme, the dressing of them when they be ill; and all other thinges belonging to the charge and duetie of a sheepehearde; and properlie no other signification hath it; but by a Metaphore to shewe with howe greate care, mildenesse and lenitie kinges ought to gouerne their subiectes. Homer and Plato doe often call kinges sheepeheardes of the people; and so likewise the sacred scriptures. In the twentith of the Actes we haue the same wordes: where we reade, Therefore looke vnto your selues, and the whole flocke wherein the holie Ghost hath placed you Bishoppes (and ouerseers) in greeke poimaine the Church of God which he hath purchased him with his bloode. Nowe that the Apostles or any Bishoppes had any secular power, Pighius himselfe doth denie, as long as the temporall princes had not receiued the Gospell: so that this worde can by no meanes importe anie earthly su­perioritie. And in this Oration Paule doth plainely de­clare, what kinde of kingdome Christes is, when hee saith to gouerne the Church of God, which he purchased with his bloode: for he purchased none with his bloode but t [...]s spirituall kingdome; for as GOD hee was possessed o [...] the Empyre of the whole worlde from the beginning. [Page 29] But the place of binding and losing we haue examined al­readie, and proued that it cannot be vnderstoode otherwise then Christ himselfe doth interpret it, in the twenteth of Iohn, whose sinnes ye shall remitte are remitted; and whose sinnes yee shall retaine are retained, and a recei­uing into the Church and kingdome of heauen, and a shutting out of it. And therefore he saith; whatsoeuer thou shalt binde on earth shall be bound in Heauen; and not, shall be bounde in earth, least any man should dreame that he gaue Peter secular power ouer earthly Empires, and that all the commandements and ordinances and decrees of his successors, touching worldly matters, should be receiued and kept, throughout the whole world. Neither if the Pope had any such authoritie giuen him by any generall Counsell,A general counsell cannot depose Princes. as I am assured he hath not (for as for the canon made in the counsell of Laterane, we will anone make a large seuerall treatise thereof, were it good and sufficient to binde all Princes to obedience, because it lieth not in the power of a generall counsell to dispose of secular matters. For seeing generall counsells doe altogether consist of per­sons ecclesiasticall, and they doe allow noe temporall prince any voice therein; and that all the Byshoppes that are as­sembled there, do sit as Byshops & spirituall Lords, & not as temporal, & that they be secular subiects, & not soueraignes; & that the kingdom of the Church is a distincte kingdom, as al the Catholickes say, from the kingdomes of the world; It is as absurd to holde that they can makes lawes touch­ing temporalities, to be obserued of all temporall Princes vnder temporall paines; as if a madde man would affirme that the assembly of the three states of France, may ordaine statutes for the Queenes maiesty of England, & hir realme, and that they are bound in conscience to obserue all lawes made there. For doubtlesse the temporall and the eccle­siasticall kingdomes are as seuerall kingdomes as Englande [Page 30] & France, & which haue more alliance together then the o­ther two, because they are both secular, both bodilie, both ruled, by one sword, but of the other the one is spirituall, the other bodily, the one of the worlde, the other of heauen; the one swayed by the ciuill and materiall sworde, [...]he other by the spirituall, the one slaying the soule, the other the body. But now I would not haue any fond man to imagine, that I doe goe about to spoile the temporall prince of his high prerogatiue, in ordaining of holsome lawes, for the main­tenance of the true faith of Christ; and the sincere obser­uation of all the rest of his holy commandementes; the which I doe thinke him bound in conscience to doe: but that I doe firmely beleeue and openly professe, that by the right giuen him by God, he may punish all persons, both ecclesiasticall and temporall, within his dominions, that shall offend, either in faith or manners, by fine, imprisonment, banishment, confiscation of landes and goodes, attainder of blood, death, or finally any other temporall paines; as the noble princes of this land haue alwaies vsed to doe. And therefore Iustice Brian in De­cimo of Henry the seauenth doth call the King a mixt per­son, for he is (saith Brian) a person vnited with the priests of holy Church. But I denie him the administration of gods holy sacraments, and the exercise of the spirituall sworde▪ which I doe appropriate vnto the ecclesiasticall offi­cers. Wherefore much lesse can the Byshoppes in a ge­nerall counsell, giue away the crownes of their Kinges; see­ing according to the afore rehearsed rule of the Canon law noe man can giue that right vnto another, which he hath not himselfe. But if there were ordained a bodie politicke of all the Christian princes and states, what they beeing as­sembled in a counsell generall might doe is annother que­stion, the which we will leaue to bee disputed of them that shall see this happe institution. And in the meane time [Page 31] they must pardon vs, if we doe not lightly beleeue that the Pope hath power to depose Princes; seeing wee can finde no warrant therefore, neither in the scriptures, the auncient counsells, the olde fathers, the practise of the Church of God, neither before Christ, neither seauen hundreth years after him, although there raigned many Idolatrous, hereti­call, and wicked Princes. Of the Iewish Kinges verye few were good, but rather such men as GOD had streight­ly commaunded that they shoulde not spare, if they were their Brothers, or such a friende as hee looued as deare­ly as his owne soule; but that his hand should bee first vp­pon him to stone him to death, and yet wee doe not reade that any one of them was deposed, by the high Priestes, or his subiectes; armed against him by them: And yet were they so zealous men of their dignitie, that they would in noe wise suffer the King to vsurpe ought vppon him, in so much that one of them openly withstoode Ozias the King,The histo­ry of king Ozias handled. that woulde vnlawfully execute his office, in of­fring incense vnto GOD; neither doth the expelling of this King out of the temple by rhe Priestes, because God had for his proude part stricken him with leprosie, and that thereupon hee sequestred himselfe from companie, and left the gouernement of matters of state vnto his sonne, prooue ought against the prerogatiue of Princes,The text saith 2. Coro. 26.20. that they cau­sed hastily to depart thence & he was e­uen com­pelled to goe out. as the English authour of the ecclesiasticall discipline doth in­ferre. For hee was not expelled out of the temple be­cause hee offred incense, but because the wraith of GOD had made him a leper, the which kinde of men by the ex­presse commaundement of GOD might not conuerse with other. And if wee will receiue the report and asserti­on of Iosephus, a learned Priest and historian of the Iewes, the priestes did not thrust him out of the temple, but ad­monished him to depart, the which hee did soone obey when he saw himselfe made so loathsome on a sodaine & was [Page 32] astonied with the manifest wraith of God; and hereunto the text seameth to assent which saith and hastily they ex­pelled him &c. But he himselfe also made hast to goe out, because he had presently felt the plague or strooke of God. But that he was as some seeme to say, deposed of his King­dome therefore, we doe reade neither in the scriptures, nor in Iosephus. But onely this saith Paralyp. So King Ozias was a leeper euen to his dying day, and dwelt in an house by himselfe, because he was full of leprosie, for the which he had beene cast out of the house of the Lord, Further­more Ioathan his sonne gouerned the kings house, and iud­ged the people of the land. And almost the same words wee reade in the booke of the kings, Soe that by the wordes of the text it doth not appeare that he was either deposed or did giue vp the Kingdom, but onely abandoned al resort, by reason of his contagious sicknesse and ignominy, gaue vp the maneging of matters of state and the princely port vn­to his sonne, and so accordingly whosoeuer doth marke diligently the supputiaton of yeares, which the booke of the Kings maketh, shall manifestly see, that he reckoneth Ozias his raigne euen vntill his dying day. Neither if that Ozias had beene deposed because of his leprosy, would it soe much further theire cause, as they faine in saying that here­sy is inward leprosy, then, Idolatry is. And yet can they not finde that euer any King of the Iewes was deposed by the high Priest for Idolatry, nor any Christian prince by the Pope for any cause for the space of seauen hundreth yeares after Christ, although those times yeelded many vngodly Princes, as we haue shewed you before of Emperours, one flatly fallen, from the faith vnto Paganisme, sundry Arrians, some Monothlets, and Eutiches, and many cruell persecu­tors of the Catholickes. And so likewise many of the O­strogothes in Italy were Arrians, and many moe in the same prouince of the Lombard kinges. And yet a farre longer [Page 33] race of the Westgotish Kings in Spaine. But if any man will rubbe his face and say, that the Byshoppes of Rome in those ages eyther had not so much knowledge in the worde of GOD, or else so greate zeale as there successors since, all men that shall heare them will shoute at them. They write that when Nero whipped Senatoures, execu­ted noble men, spoyled Citizens, wasted prouinces, with­out cause or colour, and finally in all things made his lust law: he triumphing at this iolitie, boasted that neuer any man before him did know what an Emperour might doe.Act. 5. Certes the holy and learned fathers, in ancient time knew not this diuinitie, that when there princes wrongfully op­pressed them, they should straightway cast off their yoke, but rather patiently beare whatsoeuer ill should be inflicted on them for Gods cause.Mat. 5. They remembred that the Apost­les from whom they set their light and learning, being whip­ped at a conuocation of the Iewish Pristes and Elders, went away reioycing because they were counted worthie to suffer reproach for the name of Iesus.Athanati­us in epla. 2. ad vlit vit Agent They had not forgotten the saying of their Sauiour Mat. 5. Blessed are they that suffer persecution for righteousnesse; for theires is the Kingdome of heauen. Ye are blessed when men shall curse you, and persecute you, and lying, shall say all manner of euill a­gainst you for me. Reioyce and be glad because your re­ward in heauen is abundant: for so they persecuted the Pro­phets that were before you. When Constantius the wic­ked Emperour vrged Hosius the holy Byshoppe of Cordu­la, the Byshoppe of Rome his deputy, and the three hundreth Byshoppes assembled at Sa [...]dica, with bitter ba­nishment (as he had alreadie serued many of there colled­ges) vnlesse they would subscribe to the wicked errour of Arrius: they all refused to doe it, but they did not menace the Emperour with deposition, if hee woulde not relinquish his false faith, and reuoke the godly banished [Page 34] Byshoppes: bur contrariwise confessed vnto him. Non no­b [...]s fas est imperium in te [...]riis tenere it is not lawfull for vs to holde Empire on the earth. And not withstanding all his hurtfull wickednesse; yet they affirmed that he that should cast but a malignant eye at his Empire did resist the ordi­nance of God; so farre were they from thinking that his sub­iectes might openly take armes against him. Don Iohn De Austria in his warres in the low Cuntries,Don Iohns ensignes. bare in his en­signe a deuise of a crosse with this word. In hoc signo vicī Turcos, in h c signo vincam hereticos, with this signe I ouer­came the Turkes, with this signe I will vanquish the here­tikes: so if the latter Popes had saide, with this vertue and weapon of patience, our ancestors ouercame the heathen, and heriticall Emperours; and with the same we will ouer­come the Emperours that will intrude vppon our tempora­lities, perhappes their state had not bene now so staggering: for whosoeuer shall marke the course of the history of the Church of God, shall finde that it hath growen greate by patience, but hath rather decreased then encreased by armes and violence. Moreouer if the Popes will vouch­safe to reade their old recordes, they shall see and vnder­stande that such of their predecessors as armed themselues with patience, and vsed none other but the spirituall sword and that also sparingly and seldome; were had of all men in greater reputation and reuerence, and could doe more in the world, then their successors, that after the spirituall sword which Christ had deliuered vnto them sharpe and dreadfull to be vsed onelie in extremitie, & but in his cause & quarell, had through there continuall abusing and drawing at euery light priuate braule, became so hagled, blunt and con­temptible, that euery boy laught at it, did furiously fall to catching of the secular sworde out of the temporall magi­strates hand. Like as they report of Iulius the seconde whether meerely deuised or done in deede I (saith Fe­rou) [Page 35] know not: that when he went in person into the fielde against the French, armed with a paire of keyes in his hande, and a sworde by his side, hee threw his keyes into the riuer of Tiber, and therewith all draw­ing his sworde saide: seeing Peters keyes haue done noe good, Paules sworde shall helpe mee. And surely therein the Pope fared like, Ioakin the King of Iuda who trusted in a rotten reede the king of Egypt to defende him against the Assyrian: And so they incurred with him the curse pronounced in that place by the Pro­phet Ieremy. The prac­tise of de­posing Princes neuer came of charitie. Cursed is the man that trusteth in man and maketh flesh his arme. And because Cardinall Hosius will haue Luthers doctrine tried, whether it bee good or bad by the roote that bredde it, I pray let vs also see from what roote this practise of deposing of Princes did spring. There be two rootes saith Agustine vppon Iohn, and out of him Hosius, which two husbandmen the holie Ghost and the deuill, set in mans hart, the one charitie or loue, the other inordinate desire;Henry. of the one commeth all good of the other all ill, now whether of these rootes brought forth deposition of Princes I praye let vs consider. The first Pope that did it in practise a­bout Anno Domini 108 [...]. was Gregory the seuenth against Henry the fourth Emperour, because he being exaspera­ted against the Pope, for excommunicating of fiue of his chiefe counsellours; whome he thought ruled him to much, and for commaunding him vppon paine of excommuni­cation to appeare before him at Rome, the twesday in se­cond weeke of Lent; to purge himselfe of such chrimes as his rebellious subiectes the Saxons had accused him of;See Plati­na and Sigonius. had called a counsell in Germany where Gregory was deposed being accused there by Hugh Blancke a Cardinall, and many Italian Byshoppes, of Necromancy, heresy, lecherie symony, tiranny, and I know not what else, nor force how [Page 36] truely: but most true it is, that this was the cause of the Em­perours deposing, as it doth appeare by the Popes bull wherein wee finde these wordes. Because he hath too audaciously and rashly laid hands on the Church (the Pope speakes to Peter) and because he hath not obeyed my au­thoritie as becommeth a Christian. &c. therfore in thy name I do accurse him, depose him, discharge all men of obedi­ence towardes him, and forbid them to obey him, that all na­tions may know that thou art Peter. &c. Now to depose the Emperour because he had caused him to be deposed, was this charitie or inordinate desire of reuenge? did any of his predecessors before him the like? God saith reuenge is mine, & I will repey it: and S. Paul, charitie seeketh not hir owne. I pray you tel me what Charity was it towards the Church & Christendom, rather then he would forsake his sea, yea or reuoke his cholericke censure, that he would see all Germany and Italy, See Sabel almost vtterly destroyed by ciuill warres, his fauou­rers in Germany broken in seauen blody battelles, his two Idol Emperours slaine, and all the forces of his Italian staffe & stay, the mightie countesse Mawde vtterly defayted; great part of the Citizens of Rome consumed by three yeares seige, the Burgo San: Pietro twise sacked and defaced, all the house of the Corsy, the noblest Citizens of Rome and his fastest friendes raced to the grounde: the mi­racle of the world the septisolium, taken and deformed, his nephew taken prisoner, the cyty of Rome twise sette on fire, by Suiscardo, whom being excommunicated & now reconciled, he had procured to come to discharge him out of the castle of San. Angelo: with two huge wastes, remaine yet to be seene at this day in the fayrest part of the Cytie for a perpetuall reproch for the first deposing of Princes: & yet woulde not his stoute heart stoupe, but when at the importunate prayers of the oppressed Romaines, hee had graunted to receiue the Emperour into grace vppon his [Page 37] submission, he afterward vtterly refused it, because the Ci­tizens requested, that the Emperour might doe it, in his im­periall robes and fled first into the Castle San: Angelo, and afterward vnto Salerne, where he died in voluntarie banish­ment, not daring to abide at Rome, for feare of the Ci­tizens who for these manifolde calamities with which he had ouerwhelmed them, did deadly hate him. What an hard heart had he, that would not relent at so many and extreeme mischieues and miseries? Did he not blush to remember how the noble Quintus Metellus a pagane, being wrongfully forbididden fyre and water by Apulieus the Tribune of the commonaltie, to be reuenged on Meitellus for putting him out of the senate for his lewde life; chose rather willingly to go into bannishment, hauing the stronger faction, then that any tumult should be stirred vp in the Citie for him. Againe how many of his predecessors did for righteousnes sake suffer banishment, imprisonment, yea and painfull death, when they might haue shrowded and saued themselues, we haue alreadie shewed by many examples. And also Marcellinus a pagane doth report, that Constantius the Emperour coulde hardlie in the dead time of the night carrie Liberius out of the Citie of Rome, with great difficulty, for the good will of the people that burned in his loue: so that it is likelie that if the Bishop would with force haue resisted, he woulde haue beene to hot and to heauy for the Emperour to carry away. But neyther God nor Deuill had yet reueeled vnto the Bi­shop of Rome, this newe dignitie of Gregories: See Plati­na and Sigon. that they could by Apostolicall power binde all men, not onely in spi­rite but also in bodie, and all the goods of fortune: that they might depose Emperorus for their pride & cōtumacy, in not obeying of their commaundementes as Gregorie did Henry, and giue the Empyre vnto another, for his humilitie and o­bedience, as Gregorie did to Rodulph, because he had promi­sed to giue his sonnes pledges for assurance that he wolde [Page 38] stand to the Popes arbiterment: for they yet knewe not this reason that Gregorie alleadged quite voyde of reason, in these wordes. Wherefore (O Peter and Paule) the most holy and chiefe of the Apostles, confirme by your authori­tie, that which I haue spoken, that all men may nowe at the length vnderstand, that if ye can binde and loose in heauen, that then we also can in earth take away, and giue Empieres and Kingdomes, and whatsoeuer else men haue. For if ye can iudge those thinges which doe appertaine to God, what is to be thought we may doe, in these inferior and prophane thinges? And if it belong to you to iudge Angels, that raigne ouer proude princes, what is it seemely that we doe with their bondmen? Therefore let kinges and all princes of the worlde learne by this Emperous example what ye can doe in heauen, and how great ye are with God, and hence­forth feare to contemne the commaundementes of the holy Church. Doubtlesse these words (now at length may learne) and (henceforth may feare) were very significantly put in by G [...]gorie, for indeed before this time, this doctrine was vn­knowen to the world, as also that learned Hermite of Rome the Popes Chronicler Omphrius, a man inferior to none in the knowledge of the Romane antiquities, doth confesse in his booke of Cardinals in these wordes: Bishops cardinales did at the first take their place among other Bishoppes, ac­cording to the anciency of their creation; but afterward by little and little they came to take place aboue all Bishoppes, Archbishops, Metropolitans, Primates & Patriarkes, which began to be vsed by little and little, about the time of Gregory the seuenth, & Vrbane the second in which times the election of the Pope (whose authority did then begin to be supreame as well in spirituall thinges as temporall, the Emperours be­ing depressed or trodden downe) was taken out of the hands and power of the Emperours, and granted especially to the Cardinals. And anone after a Priest Cardinall was a meane [Page 39] place between a Bishop & other Priestes not Cardinals. But in the time of Alexander the third vnder whom the Church of Rome was aduanced to the highest top or step in earth, the most mighty Emperour Fredericke Redbeard, & he also a most infestious foe of the Church of Rome, being trodē vnder foot, & vanquished, and forced to desire peace of the Church: then first contrariwise Priest Cardinals were made of Bishops, for the dignity of the Cardinals did stil grow with the dignity of the Church & Bishops of Rome, but that was greatest in those daies. Thus farre Omphrius. But because Platina & others do affirme, that the Pope & the Emperour first fell out, about sy­mony or inuesting of Bishops, let vs see how iniuriously here­in, the Pope dealt with the Emperour. It doth appeare both by the Bookes of the canon law & also by Sigonius and other historians the Popes chiefe fauourers, that Pope Hadriā gaue vnto Charles the great the king of the french men, & Empe­rour of Rome, & Leo the eight vnto Otho the great the king of the Tuischtmen & Emperour for euer the inuesture of the Bi­shops of Rome, & of al other Bishops, within their dominions decreeing that no Bishop chosen by the clargy and people should be consecrated, vnlesse he were first nominated & in­uested (that is had the crosier and ring deliuered him) by the Emperour, this authority & priuiledge enioied al Emperours from Charles the great vnto this Henry being the 17 in succes­sion; and that he vsed it no otherwise it is aparant by the elec­tion of the Bishop of Cullen by the clergy & the people, a little while before this broile, wherof we do read mention made in Lambertus Snatchburgensis. A thing alwaies vsed in England, that neyther Bishop nor Abot, should be chosen without a conge de ler, or licence to chose, first obtained of the king, nor reputed for Bishop before the king had confirmed him. So likewise Hosius contra Brentium doth affirme, that the kings of Poland haue alwaies had the nominating of all Bishps with in their kingdom. Now of this anciēt part of his patrimony of [Page 40] the Empyre, would Gregorie spoyle Henry, yea and all lay men, making a decree that he should be accursed, that did take any ecclesiasticall dignitie or benefice, at the hande of any lay man,See Plati­na and Sabell. and did also excommunicate the lay man that should giue any, nowe I pray you which of them two, shew­ed most charitie? Henry that for quietnesse sake was conten­ted to loose the right which he and his ancestors had so long time held, in confirming of the Bishops of Rome in the cause and bloodie schisme of Alexander, Gregories immediate predecessor? or Gregorie that was not contented and satisfi­ed with this rare indulgence of the Emperour, in one and the greatest Bishoppricke, but would depose him vnlesse he would also surrender his right in all the rest, & eyther would haue his wil or else would set all Christendome in an vprore? And put case he had solde two or three small Bishopprickes as his enemies did charge him for, the great electors sees, they themselues beeing his enemies confessed he had not sold▪ was that a sufficient cause to make him forsake him and his successors, for euer an ancient right and inheritance, belonging to the emperiall crowne, as the presenting vnto benefices, is an inheritance of many secular subiectes? And could the Church of Christ be so much endamaged therby, as with thirtie yeares bloodie warres, in all partes of Germa­nie and Italy, through the troubles whereof, neyther the Popes nor other Bishoppes could employ their functions? But letting this passe;Philippe. the next deposition was of Philip the Emperour for inuading Peters patrimony, before he was Emperour, and while he was duke of Tuscan. But because some will say he was neuer Emperour, because through the Popes menaces but fiue of the electors had chosen him, we will let him passe and come vnto Otho Otho. the Duke of Saxon: whom two of the electors afterward at the great instance of the Pope, had chosen Emperour, and whom he almost im­mediatly after he had crowned him deposed, because he in­uaded [Page 41] the landes of his puple and vassall the king of Naples. Did this come of charitie or of a priuate quarrell? It is ap­parant that the Popes vsed not nor now doe to censure anie prince, for enuading of his neighbour, vnlesse he were a vassal or priuiledged prince of his. And then to make vp the good, three comes on a row Fredelicke the second Emperour,Frederick and also king of Naples, for inuesting of Bishoppes in Naples, and leuying money of the clergie. And after the controuer­sie was ended, againe, because he did not performe his vow to goe into the holy land; and that also satisfied for making warres against the rebellious Lombardes, or to make the ve­rie worst of it, for practising with the Frangipanes and other Romanes to reuolt from the Pope, whom he distrusted, did se­cretly ayde his rebelles in Lombardy. And did not flesh and blood and priuate reuenge raigne in all these actions? were any of these causes so weightie, that for them should be rai­sed vp the pernicious factions of Guelses and Ghibbelines? to set at enmitie for euer, not onely euery prince▪ prouinc [...] and Citie of Italy but also euery name and familie, for to embrace their murdering swordes. The last deposed Em­perour was Lewes the fourth,Lewes. See Plati­na and Nauill. because he intermedled in Ita­lie before the Pope had crowned him (a vsuall thing) and that which was the very cause indeede, because he openly professed himselfe a fauourer of the Ghibbelines, and namely the vicecount whom the Pope deadly hated, and had ex­communicated for taking armes against the Guelses, and put the Florentines, and the Neopolitanes and the other Guelses in feare, least he would saith Platina ex [...]ct of them Iura imperi­a [...]a the rightes belonging to the Empyre. And who seeth not heere partiality and not charitie? Moreouer Peter Peter. the king of Aragon was deposed and his kingdom of Aragon giuen vnto Charles of Valois the French kinges brother, be­cause he had receiued the Sicilians, reuolting from the tyran­ny of Charles the Duke of Aniou whom the Pope had placed [Page 42] prince there. And doth not also smell of priuate reuenge? Is this the common good, that Pighius beareth vs in hand, the Church of Christ reapeth by this prerogatiue of the Pope, that he doth therby reuenge the priuate displeasures of himselfe, his friendes and vassalls. At the same time the french king Philip le Beau, had spoyled Edward the fi [...]st, king of England iniuriously of the greatest parte of Guienne, and also Guy the Eare of Fuaunders almost of his whole Earl­dome, and was not deposed therefore. The cause is appa­rant, Sicily was held of the Church of Rome, and so was nei­ther Guienne nor Flaunders. But although he escaped scot­free for these wronges, and the long detayning in prison the Earle of Flaunders, and two of his sonnes, yet he was de­priued of his kingdome by Pope Boniface the eight,Philip the faire. for im­prisoning of a french Bishop, that rayled at him and mena­ced him, when he coulde not winne him to grant to goe with an Army into the holy land, on the which message the Pope had sent him vnto the king as saith Platina. But the french Chronicles report that the king caused him to be ap­prehended at home, at his owne house, for that he vnder­stoode, that he vsed often to speake very ill of him, and to rayle outragiously on hm, and deliuered him vnto his pri­mate the Bishop of Tolouse to punish him with his aduise. The kingdome of France was giuen vnto Albert the Em­perour, perhappes for a reward of his wickednesse in slaying of his soueraigne Adolph the Emperour; for other punish­ment I doe not finde that Pope did put him vnto therefore.See Mun­ [...]ter cos­ [...] [...]mog. lib. 3. in Al. 2. But yet I doe not doubt but the fault was more heinous then emprisoning of a Bishop, for rayling against his prince and Lord. Yea and that God did so account it he made it manifest vnto the worlde by his seuere punishment of all the conspiratours. For Albert himselfe was murdered by his owne Cosen germane; the Archbishop of Ments founde deade sitting in his chaire. The Bishop Stasburge was slaine [Page 43] by a pesant at F [...]nge in Brisgow. The Earle of Linengen died ma [...]de. The Earle of Sweibrucken was drowned in a riuer. The Earle of Ochsenstein had his deaths wound in the battell. And the Earle H [...]gerloch was slaine on the way by Otho the Duke of Danao. But to proceede Lewes th 12 of France was excommunicated, denounced a scismatike, and his king­dome and goods exposer for a common spoyle to all Chri­stians and the like penalty pronounced on all them that did or should take his part or ayde him.Lewes the twelfih. And therefore Iohn the king of Nauarre lost his kingdome, for procuring of a gene­rall counsell, to be called and held, without the consent of the Pope against the Pope that there his infestious foe Iul [...]us the second might be deposed, & an other more frendly placed in his roome. And doth not this altogether smell of priuate reuenge and not of charity? But perhaps you will say, it was a foule part of him, that would be called the most Christian king, to sow sedition and scisme throughout all Christen­dome, for his owne priuate quarrell: and that this doing of his was so ill thought of, by most of the pri [...] [...] of Christendome, that they entred therefore into league against him, and had almost set him besides his saddle. In truth I can neyther prayse the practise nor the pollicie of the French, who sought to represse the iniurious attemptes of the Pope against him rather by colour of lawe, to the disturbance of all Christendome then by armes, and inuading the Popes territories (as Philippe the moderne king of Spayne wisely did in the like case) and fondely thought it lesse enuyous,Anno Do­mini. 556. and more agreeable vnto his surname of the most Christian king, which his ances­t [...]rs had purchasesed, by defending the Popes and Peters patrimony with armes; to rayse vp a scisme, then to force the Pope to frindship by materiall force.

But that the Pope compelled him to this outrage, all writers doe confesse. For first contrary to the league [Page 44] made at Cambray, betweene him & the Emperour, the French king, the king Spaine, and the Duke of Ferara, against the Venetians who had encroched vpon thē all▪ he hauing gotten all that he claimed, [...]ee Iouius [...]n vita Al­ [...]hons. & [...]uiciardi­ [...]o. not onely made peace with the Venetians, without the consent of his confederates, but also excōmuni­cated, and with armes enuaded the fast friend of the French, the Duke of Ferara, because that he not hauing yet recouered all his right of them, would not cease to molest the Veneti­ans: And also he left no stone vnturned, to turne the French out of Milan an Genna, the which he at the length brought to passe. And was not he then the author of all his tra­gedie? Moreouer this Popes brothers sonne, Duke of Vr­bine cruelly murdered of emulation Alidosius a Bishop, a Cardinall,See Iouius [...]n vit. Al­phons & Guic. Boleslaw. and Legate of Bologna, almost in the Popes sight, and was put to no penance therefore. But Boleslaw the hardie king of Poland, was depriued by Pope Gregorie the seuenth of his kingdome, and also the country of the honour to haue a king (in the which dishonour it continued 200 yeares) f [...]ying with his owne hande in his fury Stanislaw, the Bishop of Craccow for excommunicating him, yea and in­terdicting the whole Citie of Craccow, to make him the more odious, because he openly kept another mans wife, and for adultery, a thing which as it should seeme by Cro­merus, as common in Poland in those daies as the cart way. Yea those noble women that were honest were forced to forsake there owne howses,See Cromerus hist. Pola. lib. 4. for feare of force and rauish­ment, yea and it was common in Italy and passed vn­punished in meaner men, then princes. But yet in ve­rie trueth the kinges fact was verie foule, and made worse by the furie of his fellowes that chopped in pee­ces the slayne corpes and cast it to the crowes. And yet perhaps Dauid did almost all ill in defiling of a noble mans bed, while he was in his seruice in the fielde, and afterward commaunding him to be murdered for his amendes, (but so [Page 45] dealt not Bolislawe with Stanislaw; and if the qualities of the persons be not equall, then the manner of the doing doth ouermatch, the one being done without any prouo­cation, and of aduised malice, the other vppon a greate ignominy & vnwonted with kinges, offered him and vpon a sodaine, while his blood was hotte. which seauen yeares continuall absence from his countrie in forraine warres a little before had ouerheated. And yet Dauid lost not his Kingdome therefore: Neither doe we reade of any realme interdicted for murdering of their Kinges, whereof we haue almost infinite examples; or any man deposed for intrud­ing into them by such wickednesse, vnlesse perhappes the murdered Prince were the Popes vassall. Soe that this zeale in seuere punishing of princes for misusing them of the clergy, I feare me may be imputed rather to a partiall fauour towardes them of their owne coate, and done for their owne securitie, then for zeale of Iustice. Like as our Sargeants at London are an hunded times more hotte to haue one hanged that hath slaine the basest Yeoman of theires, then another that hath murdered his maister, or the best noble man within the land. Iames the fourth the Scot­tish King flew his father in the feilde, and had noething said vnto him therefore; but was excommunicated for aiding of his auncient Alie the french King; whome the Pope lo­ued not, neither could his lamentable losse of life in that quarrel quench the Popes Choler, but that he persecuted him when he was deade long time, denyning his deade body buriall; but yet that is noe sinne against the holy ghost, for to aide on denounced a scismatike by the Pope, nor to beare armes against the captaine of a croysy it doth appeare by that we doe reade in Mariners his historie of Spayne; when Peter the king of Aragon comming to ayde the Earle of To­louse, and the Albigenses against whom the Pope had sent a croysy was slaine in battell by the Earle of Monsfort gene­rall [Page 46] of the Croysy, and that he would not deliuer Iames the sonne of Peter, who was brought vp with him and shoulde haue maried his daughter, but for this mischance vnlesse he would sweare that he would not reuenge his fathers, death, the Pope vpon complaint forced Monsfort by sharpe censures of excommunication, to set him at libertie with­out any such promise, that the Pope (it was Iuno Centius the third) might shew that he was annother God that woulde haue mercy where he woulde, and be mercifull to whome it pleased him, and that he doth nothing of desert but all motu proprio, as they vse to say; but yet perhappes he shew­ed grace vnto Iames for his fathers, Peters sake, who had purchased before hand his pardon for dying in the feilde, in the succour of a scismaticke and heretike by being crowned at Rome by the Pope with a crowne made of singing breade or wafers, and by graunting vnto the Pope the right to pre­sent vnto all ecclesiasticall lyuings. But to returne againe to the deposing of Princes. Iohn King Iohn the king of this land, bereft both of kingdome, and life, Arthur his elder brothers sonne, who had bene ordained and proclamed here apparant by common consent, and kept his Sister with duble iniury in perpetuall prison, and escaped scotfree at the Popes handes: but when he would not accept for Archbishoppe Simon Langton a Cardinall of the Church of Rome, aduanced to that office through the Popes extraordinary dealing, hee had his whole realme interdicted (which sustained no harme for accepting him for King against right) and also himselfe was deposed therefore. And what reason was there but that the King might aswell maintaine for Archbyshoppe the Byshoppe of Norwich the faithfull president of his counsell, and a man whom the Pope coulde not iustly mislike being first chosen at Ganterburye by the Prior, & almost the whole couent as the Pope Simon Langton his Cardinall chosen af­ter the other, & at Rome by a few of the couent that I may omitte that noe Byshop could euer be chosen in this realm, [Page 47] without the Kings licence, nor being chosen counted Bysh­oppe before the King had confirmed him. And if the Pope said that the couent chose Norwitch at Canterbury for feare of the King, because they had first elected their superior: might not the King as truely say that they chose Langton at Rome for feare of the Pope, for did he not force them to a new election, yea & threatned them who were afraid of the kings displeasure if they chose not Langton if Langton was an ill man, why was the Pope so importunate to haue him Archbyshop; & if he were a good man, why did that Pope shortly after himselfe excommunicate him? what bare rule here but flesh & bloud? Did Langton so farre passe Norwich that hee would do more good to the Church of England, then Nor­wich could do if he were placed Archbishoppe; then the cea­sing of all publicke seruice of God, & administration of the sacred Sacraments, for the space of six years; (for so long the interdict lasteth) thoughout the whole land could do harme? how many soules may a mā probably think were lost through this long irreligiousnes which otherwise might haue bene saued▪ I omit the great murdering of priests, the banishing of Byshoppes, the rasing of Abbes, Churches & Chappels, the manifould miseries massacres & wasts, that I know not whe­ther this more wilful or wofull interdict brought vnto this whol land▪ But ye wil say that before the land was interdicted the king had driuen out of the land the monks of Canterbu­ry, & seased on al their land, & goods. And afterward did the like to the Byshops that published the interdict. And also tur­ned out of al▪ such of the religious & spiritual persōs, as did fa­uour the Popes procedings; & all this before he was deposed by the Pope. But yet all these mischieues proceeded of the Popes indirect dealing, to make his Cardinall Archbyshop, and if the Pope woulde haue relinquished that action, the king had soon bene appeased. And can any indifferent man thing that the king had not iust cause, to bee displeased with the Couent of Canter­bury [Page 48] who first chose scecretly in the night, without his con­gedelier) there Superior Archbishoppe and also priuilye sent him to Rome without the kings notice, to be confirmed of the Pope; and then misliking of their owne doings elect­ed with the Kings licence his fauourite Norwich, whom they afterward reiected, & without the kinges licence chose at Rome Langton, one whom the King knew not; And did not the Pope offer the King such a wrong, as hath bene done neuer before, nor since that time to cause the couent to choose a Byshoppe without the Kinges congedelier, & that to at Rome by a few of the couent sent thither in messa­ges without their Pryor. And if ye doe thinke the king dealt rigourously in banishing the Byshoppes that interdic­ted the land, and in ceasing on their goodes that fauoured the Popes actions. How can you excuse the Popes cruel­ty in interdicting the whole land, whereof one halfe did take his part. And faine would I know of you whether it proce­ded of charitie that the Pope woulde not release his inter­dict and censures when the King offred to receiue Langton, See Ma­thew of Paris. restore the banished men, and fully to satisfy all men for theire losses, vnlesse he would also become his vassall, and make his realmes of England and Ireland tributarie for e­uer vnto the see of Rome; was this charitie, or couetousnes and ambition. And againe came this of Charitie that the Pope, who stoode so stiffe for the restitution of the losses of the clergie, before the king had subiected himselfe and his Realmes vnto him, did after that his owne turne was serued, force the Byshoppes to take halfe their due, and the rest of the clergie to beare their owne damages without one penny of recompence; And yet see more partialitie in this Pope. First he excommunicated & deposed the king, because he would not accept at his cōmandement Langton, for Archbishoppe; & anone after excōmunicated Langton and the Byshoppes, and the Barrons his confederates; because they [Page 49] woulde force the King to performe the oath which his owne legate had commaunded the King to sweare, at the attonement making for the restoring of the auncient lawes of the land▪ if the lawes were vniust and it was a wronge to constraiee the King to restore them; why did hee force the King to sweare the restitution of them. But if they weare iust, good, and godly, and for the publicke pro­fitte why did he not rather assist then excommunicate them that sought to force the king to keepe his bodily oath, made vnto him and them, the which he had also done at his co­ronation, yea, and had made (at the time of the peace with the Pope) a Charter of them which also this Pope him­selfe confirmed. Now the case was altered (Although indeede this case was of greater moment) and the Pope must still pleasure his friendes. First his cardinall was to be aduaunced to an Archbyshoppricke, and then the king his new vassall was to be enfranchised of all othes and ho­nesty, and vpholden and maintained with both sworde [...] in all tyranny and villanie. If any credit is to bee giuen to all the Catholicke Cronicles of that age, And this I speake not for that I doe like or allow the rebellion of the Barons,Lib. 9. but to shew the irreligious pertiality of the vniust, peruerse passionate Pope. I doe also finde in Cromerus that the Archbyshoppe of Gnesne did excom­municate Boleslaw the balde one of the Polonian Prin­ces Duke of Legnitz for taking prisoner the byshoppe of Preslen and certain other of that Church and detaining them in prison: And when that for all this he woulde not release them without ransome, Pope Alexander the fourth willed the Archbyshoppe to proclame a Cro­ly against him in Polen, and the Archbyshoppe of Mag­denburge annother in Germany. But these excommunica­tions for imprisoning of Prelates to proceede of partia­litie is manifestly discouered by the same Cromerus who [Page 50] writes, that not farre from the same time another Arch­byshoppe of Gnesne, did excommunicate Boleslawe the chast duke of the lesser Polen, and interdicted the whole prouince because certaine young Gentlemen had eyther by the com­mission or permission of Boleslaw the chast, taken and kept one moneth in honorable custodie Paule the Byshoppe of Crac­cow, because that contrary to his calling, he was wholly giuen to pleasures hunting and letchery, was grieuous to his sub­iectes, stubburne towardes his Prince, neither would mende his manners for the entreatie & admonishmēt of his Chap­ter and Prince; but also tooke a Nunne out of a Nunery & kept hir for his Concubine, Yet was the Godly Prince for­ced to let loose this vngodly prelate & to giue him two hun­dred pounde of siluer for a mendes; whereas if he had giuen him his desert, a halter, he had preuented a daungerous and bloodie Rebellion afterwarde in reuenge hereof pro­cured by the Bishoppe, also a pitifull wasting of the country done by the Lythuanians at his traiterous instigation. Hitherto ye haue heard not of one Prince deposed for Christes and the common causes, but all for priuate quarels, (here I willingly and wittingly omitte the depriuations of Sicilian and Neapolitaine Princes, and all other ouer whom the See of Rome clameth to haue Soueraignetie secular) And I can finde onely foure Princes deposed for Religion. The first Raimond Earle of Tolowsen, Since the writing of this booke Henry king of Nauarre hath been [...]priued of his do­minions▪ by the P [...] whether because he did embrace the Religion of the Albigenses, or because he did not expell them out of his dominions of certainety I know not. The seconde George Pogrebrot the King of Boemia, for maintaining the doctrine reuiued by Iohn Hus: And the third and fourth Henry the eight and his daugh­ter Queene Elizabeth, our renowned Princes and dreade Soueraignes. And although some hott headed Catho­lickes Romaine will perhappes praise the Popes▪ zeale in deposing of our Princes, yet must they needes all confesse, [Page 52] that it was done smally for the weale of him, & his friendes here, and therefore done without iudgement and discretion. And that these ma [...]do bulles haue killed many, and hurt more of the Popes friendes and fauourers, but not done one halfe penny worth of harme vnto them against whome they were sent. And how smally they haue bene regarded of the Popes most deuoutest children, it may apparantly appeare by the leagues made by Charles the Emperour, and Charles the french King, with King Henry and her maiesty after they were excommunicated and depriued by the Popes; and the one an euerlasting league both offensiue and defensiue to the euerlasting shame of such subiectes as haue sought to reuolt, or shall wickedly beare armes against the soueraigne in that vniust quarrell. But to con­clude, if wee doe wisely weigh the matter and carefully call to minde all the wofull warres and wastes, massa­cres, miseries and calamities that this practise of depo­sing of Princes hath wrought, wee shall finde that the West Church hath beene more wasted and weaken [...] thereby, and that it hath caused the murder of moe men then all the cruel persecutions of the heathen & heretickes, and all the bloodie swordes of the Turkes and Saracens. Thus hauing shewed that this deposing of Princes, is nei­ther authorised by the word of God, nor warranted by the practise of the Iewish nor Christian Church, within one thousand yeares after Christ, nor then deuised or since practised,The Pope cannot release subiectes of their aleagi­ance. for the profitte and benefitte of the Christian common weale: Let vs goe vnto our third pro­positiō that the Pope cannot loose subiects of their natural & duetifull faith and obedience vnto their Princes. It is the common opinion of all diuines Catholicke Romaine, that the Pope can not dispense in those things which are ordained by God. But this obedience to princes to be cōmāded by the law of god, it is most manifest by the places which we haue [Page 52] afore alleaged out of the sacred Scriptures, in the first proposition. Wherefore as Christ saide of Marriage those whom God hath ioyned togeather let noe man separate, and doth pronounce him to be an adulterer that doth put away his wife, and marrieth annother, vnlesse it be for forni­cation, notwithstanding that Moses had for the hardnesse of the Iewes harts, permitted them many other causes. So likewise may not the Pope separate the subiectes marryed to their prince (for so they are solemnely by a ring in our lande) from the Prince for any other causes then such as God hath ordained, and what subiecte soeuer shall for any causes put away his Prince and take annother com­mitteth rebellion and treason. And as Christ did abrogate that permission of Moses; so likewise must that of the Popes be repealed, and so much the rather because the Popes con­stitutions are not so well warranted, as were Moses ordi­nances, who receiued them of the very mouth of God himselfe. And if Christ saide he came into the world not to d [...]stroy the law but to fulfill it, by what right can the Pope who deriueth his authoritie from Christ as his substitute and deputy in the earth, claime the authoritie to make that voide which God hath ordained. And faine would I know of you, what faultes you finde in the word of GOD that subiectes may reuolt from their Prince, and take them to another, And I am sure you cannot name me one, for doubtlesse there can be noe greater faultes in a Prince then Idolatry and tyranny, and yet wee haue expresse commaundementes of GOD from his owne mouth vnto the people of Israell, for to bee obedient vnto two notorious Idolaters and triumphes,An obiec­tion of contro­uersie with the wicked a [...] swered. the one by the Prophet Ieremy. Chap. 27. that they should serue Nabuchadonisor; the other by Christ himself, that they should pay tribute vnto Cesar. But ye will say that Christ saide if thy brother will not heare the Church let him bee [Page 53] vnto thee as an Ethnicke and Publicane or customer, and that we are commaunded by Paule not to keepe company with the wicken, and by Saint Iohn not to say good morrow to an heretike. And now I would fayne know of you howe the Iewes did shunne an Ethnike and a publicane, did they not pay tributes and customes vnto ethnike Emperours, did they they not serue them in warre? finally did they not doe all dueties of loyall subiectes? did they not also come vn­to the publicans to pay their customs, and towlles although they were nor familiar with them, & did vsually keepe them company? Againe when Sant Paule did charge the Corinthi­ans, not to keepe company with a brother that was a whoorhunter or couetous, or an idolatour or euill tongued or a dunkard, or a violent taker away of other mens goods, and not to eate meate with any such. Doe you thinke the wife that had an husband, the childe a father, the bond­mand a Lord or master, infected with any of these faultes, were thereby incontinently discharged of all duety towardes them? yea and bound in conscience speedily to runne away from them, and neuer to doe them more seruice, nor come at them. I am sure ye will say no, for by the canon law they are bound to abide with them being excommunicated, for any other faulte then for heresy; And that is a latter edition of the Popes, for there is no such distinction to be found, in the cōmandement of God, nor his Apostles. But all excom­municated and wicked persons, are alike commaunded to be shunned, and no difference to be put betweene the Idolater, and the whooremonger, So then if Christ and his Apostles did not discharge the wife, the childe, or bondman of their dueties towardes the excommunicated, neyther did they also the subiectes of their alleageance to their prince: for they be as fast tyed to their prince by a bond and lawe, which onely death can vndoe, as the wife is to hir husband, and [Page 54] therefore included in this word (Lex) of the canonicall verse that shewes who may communicate with excommunicated persons;Vtile lex humile res ignorata necesse. and also aswell vnder and subiected to their soue­raigne, as the childe vnto his father, and the bondman vnto his Lord and master; and so are comprised also in the word (humile) of the same verse. But let vs returne where we left. The Pope deposed Boleslaw the king of Polen for slay­ing in his rage Stanislaw the Bishop of Craccow; yet when Saule had without cause vniustly and tyrannically slayne A­chimelech the high priest, and all his whole house saue one, that fortunately escaped, yea priestes, in number fourescore and seuen, all the men, women, little children, sucking babes, oxen, asses, and sheepe that were in the Citie of the priestes, called Nob: Yet Dauid whom God had annointed king, and Saul did causelesse cruelly persecute from place to place, & sought by all meanes to bereaue of life, yet thought not himselfe discharged of his allegeance by this detesta­ble murder of the sacred priestes of God; but when hee had him twise at aduantage, saued his life, and tolde Abisri who desired him to dispatch the tyrante with one blowe, slewe him not, for who shall stretch foorth his hande against the annoynted of the Lorde, and shall be innocent. As sure as the Lord liueth, vnlesse the Lorde shall strike him, or his day shall come, that he die or perish in sight, God neuer be mercifull vnto me, if I doe stretch forth mine hande against the annoynted of the Lorde. Yee see heere a playne assertion of Dauid, that subiectes are not released of their alleageance if that their princes fall to vngodlinesse and tyranny, much lesse doth he allowe that euerie priuate man murder him shameful­lie, yea when a younge man brought Dauid newes of Saules death, and presented him with Saules diademe and bracelette, Dauid put him to death because he had tolde him, that at the Kinges great instance, and entreatie that [Page 15] he might not fall into the handes of his enemies, who en­uironed him rounde about, hee beeing no Israelite but an Amalachite, had killed him, saying, why didst thou not feare to sende thy hande, that thou mightest kill the an­noynted of the Lorde. And againe the bloode be vpon thy heade, for thy mouth hath spoken against thee, say­ing, I haue slaine the annoynted of the Lord. Where­fore seeing Dauid doth allowe no cause of reuoulte, and doth thinke that the subiectes are loosed of their allea­geance by no fault and wickednesse of their prince; by what warrant of the worde can the Pope at his pleasure release subiectes of their alleageance? And whereas we reade in the 34 of Iob, that GOD doth make the hypocrite man to raigne for the sinnes of the people, or as other translate it, to afflict and plauge the people, what a malapart parte is it of the Pope, to pull the rodde out of Gods hande by violence, and to chase him away, whome God hath specially sente to chastice his people. Neyther haue I sucked this sentence out of mine owne fingers endes, but learned it of a learned greate Pope, Gregorie the greate, who interpreting in his moralles the late rehearsed place of Iob, and alleadging vnto it the thirteenth of Osee, I will giue Kinges in my furie, hath these wordes. Quid ergo illos nobis praesse des­picimus, quorum super nos regimina ex Domini furore susce­pimus? Why then doe we despise them to be our princes, whose raignes, and gouermentes ouer vs wee haue re­ceiued from the wrath of GOD? So that the Pope may not displace the good princes, because they are good princes, nor the euill, because they are placed by GOD to punish his people. And if the Canonistes holde, that no man can iudge the Pope, because he sit­teth in the chiefest chaire. Who then shall iudge the king who is saide in 2. Paralip. 9. to be ordained of God [Page 56] to set vpon his owne throne, and shall any mortall man be soe audacious to pull him out of it? And if that no man can excommunicate the Pope because no man is his superiour, neyther can any man depose a king be­cause no man is his superiour. But the obiection out of Ruffinus his contimation of Eusebius, that Constantine the great said vnto the Bishoppes assembled in the counsell of Nice. A Place of Ruf­finus an­swered. God hath constituted you priestes, and hath giuen you power to iudge also of vs, and therefore iustly are we iudged by you. But what is the vttermost that can be infer­red of these wordes then a spirituall iudgement, for seeing he maketh them iudges because they are priestes, and not princes, how can it import any secular power? for the name of priest signifieth a man seperat from secular matters, and wholly dedicated to heauenly and diuine. So that to say that Bishoppes in that they are priestes are iudges ouer Kinges and Emperours, in matters touching their crowne and dig­nitie; is or absurde as if a man should say, the Apostles had power to remitte and retaine sinnes because they were fishermen. But as the Bishoppes shewed themselues farre from claiming any such authoritie, by exhibiting vp vnto him as their soueraigne and chiefe iudge billes of complaint one against another. So also did Constantine continually pra­ctise among them, and vpon them his Empyre and soue­raigntie. So at the counsell at Nice, when the definition of faith was presented vnto him by the counsell, not the counsell, but he did set downe the tēporall punishment, to the infringers thereof, he protesting that he would banish all men that would not obey and embrace it; And so immediat­ly after he banished Arrius, and certaine Bishoppes that re­fused to subscribe. And afterward as we reade in Socrates he made an edict that all bookes of Arrius his doctrine should be burned, and who soeuer did conceale any, and not bring them forth to the fire, should die therefore, we also [Page 57] finde in Theodoretus, that he banished Eusebius the Bishop of Nicomedia, and Th [...]gonus the Bishop of Nice, because they sought to peruert to the Arianisme certaine Alex­andrines, and that he wrote thus to the Citizens of Nico­media: If there shall be founde any among you, that shall audaciously praise and commend these pestilent Bishoppes their combes shall be soone cut, by the execution of the mi­nister of God, that is by me. So that the office of beeing Gods minister he kept still after he became a Chrstian; ney­ther was it fallen vnto the Church by his embracing of the faith (as Pighius saith.) And although he refused at the beginning of the counsell, to heare and determine the accusations, that the Bishoppes did put vp vnto him one against another, of humility and pollicie, because he would not haue that time vnprofitablie spent about priuate quarels which had beene appoynted for the common cause of Christ and his Church; and therefore burnt all their billes of complaint, yet that he dealt with the correction and pu­nishment of Bishoppes, it is apparant, by that which I haue alreadie alledged, and is made much more manifest by that Theodoretus writeth, how the Arrians of Aegypt suborned by money certaine fellowes (because if they had done it them­selues, it would haue smelt) to accuse Athanasius vnto Con­stantine, that he had set certaine impositions in Aegypt, and giuen the money thereof to one, for▪ to raise a commotion in the country, whereupon the Emperour sent for him to ap­peare before him at Constantinople (a long iourney for the chiefe patriarch of the East,) whither he came and cleared himselfe so substantially, that saies Tbeodoretus he recoue­red againe his Church allotted vnto him by God, which is as much to say, if he could not haue satisfied the Em­perour he had lost his Bishoppricke. After this his ene­mies accused him againe vnto Emperour of many greate crimes▪ who thereupon following the honorable custome of [Page 58] this land that all men are tried by their peeres, commaun­ded the Bishoppes of those countries to assemble together in counsell at Cesaria in Syria, to heare the matter of A­thanasius, whither, when Athanasius came not, because he thought, that seeing most that were assembled were his enemies he should finde no iustice there: then they hauing gotten more pretences of slaunder accused him vnto the Emperour of audaciousnesse and tyranny. See how it was accounted for an audacious part and rebellious, for a patri­arke not to appeare where the Emperour had commaunded him. Neyther did there hope deceiue them, for then the Emperour being exasperated did in letters vnto Athanasius, both declare his displeasure and also commanded him to ap­peare at Tyrus for there should be held a counsell of Bishops. Socrates reports that he threatned Athanasius that if he would not goe of himselfe, he should be fet by force. He also wrote vnto the counsell at Tiru [...]; in which letters Theodoretus hath these wordes. I haue sent vnto you Dionysius, one that hath beene consul, for to be president of the assembly, that if any man (which I thinke will not happen) now all little regar­ding you commaundement shall not be there, that there may be one hence from vs, that by emperiall commaunde­ment may banish him, and teach him (marke well these wordes) that he must not disobey the order that the king hath appointed for the trying of a trueth; But when Atha­nasius who singularly well acquitted himselfe coulde yet obtaine no iustice there, secretly fled vnto the Emperour to Constantinople and put vp an appeale vnto him, Constan­tine thereupon commaunded all the Bishoppes of the coun­sell to appeare before him at Constantinople, with all speede; the tenor of the mandate Socrotes setteth downe thus. That all ye that held the counsell at Tyrus to immediately hasten to appeare before vs, for to shew by deed the sinceritie and vprightnesse of your iudgement before me, that is to [Page 59] wit him whome not ye your selues shall deny to be the prop­per minister of God. From what power came this com­maundement to a counsell to appare before the Emperour, and to render a reason vnto him of their iudgement, as vnto the chiefe minister and officer of God. But to proceede with our historie: when the Bishoppes were come to Constantino­ple, they for feare of assured conuiction gaue ouer their olde slaunders, and charged Athanasius with a newe lie, that he should say vnto foure Bishoppes, that he woulde let the comming of corne from Alexandria vnto Constantinople, the which the Emperour ouer lightly beleeuing, banished Athanasius into Trier in Germany▪ where was now the Pope to depose the Emperour for banishing wrongfully the grea­test Patriarch of the East; this was worse then the empri­soning of the Bishop of Apamea by the french king for gi­uing him ill languages. But to returne to our matter: Socra­tes doth write that Athanasius his first troubles beganne, because he woulde not receiue into the Church Arrius whome the Emperour did nowe take for a penitent and honest man, whereuppon hee thus wrote vnto Athanasi­us. Seeing that you doe nowe vnderstande the tenor of the counsell and of my will, see that you doe giue all men entrance into the Church that are desirous to come in, for if I shall vnderstande, that any man that desireth to be made partaker of the Church, shall eyther be let by you or forbidden to enter in, I will immediately sende one of mine, that by my commaundement shall remooue you, from your Sea, and giue your place vnto another. Note that hee saieth I will sende, not the Bishoppe of Rome his officer; but one of mine owne men who shall displace you▪ and place another therein, not by com­maundement of the counsell or Bishoppe of Rome, but by my commaundement. The like also, writes Socrates, he threatned vnto Alexander the Bishoppe of Constanti­nople [Page 60] if he woulde not receiue Arrius into the Church. But you will say that the Emperour iniuried both Athana­sius and Alexander, I denie not that, but although Theo­doretus doth blame his ouermuch light credulitie, and doth excuse it by the like in Dauid against Miphiboseth, yet doth neyther hee nor any other ancient author ac­cuse him of tyranny, for medling with matters that he had nothing to do withall, or punishing of them ouer whom he had no lawfull iurisdiction, and also doth refute that you af­firme, that Constantine refused to iudge Bishoppes. Nowe to returne againe to the history, the same Socrates doth say that when the Arrians had accused Athanasius, Maca­rius, and other of their complices vnto the Emperour of foule factes. Constantine wrote vnto his sisters sonne D [...] ­linatius who was then abiding at Antioch 500 miles from Alexandria, to call the parties before him, and to punish them that he shoulde finde faultie. But afterwarde be­cause the Bishoppes were assembled at Tyrus about the dedication of his newe Church at Hierusalem, he referred ouer the hearing of those matters vnto them. So that at the first he had committed both the triall, and the punish­ment of the greatest Bishoppe of all the East Church vnto a temporall officer of his; the which fact and the other which I haue before rehearsed, doe plainly proue that Con­stantine did not account, nor acknowledge his Empyre, or him selfe empaired, or of lesse commaund by accepting of the Christian religion, but that he still executed his princely pre­rogatiue, on all persons both spirituall & temporall, and still clamed to be the minister immediate of God, & not any vnder officer of the Bishops of Rome Gods vicar on earth, & right­ly to, for as Paul saith, 1. Tim. 6. Let all bondmen whatsoeuer they be that be vnder yoke, repute their lords worthy of al honor, lest the name of the lord & his doctrine be blasphemed, but they which haue beleeuing Lords, let them not cōtemne [Page 61] them, because they bee their brethren, but rather serue them because they bee beleeuers, and belooued who are pertakers of the benefite Teach these thinges and exhort them: If any man teach otherwise and doth not yeeld vnto the [...]ound speaches of our Lord Iesus Christ, and that do­ctrine which is agreeable to godlinesse, is proud know­eth nothing, is mindesicke of questions & quarrelles, about wordes. So also might it haue been saide: Ye Popes & Bysh­oppes account your princes worthie of all honour, least the name and doctrine of Christ be euill spoken of, but ye Bysh­oppes that haue Christian Kinges contemne them not, be­cause they be Christians, but be the more obedient and du­tifull vnto them, because they haue embraced Chrst, and are pertakers of his benefit. This teach and exhorte but whosoeuer teacheth otherwise, teacheth contrary doctrine to Christ, is a proude prelate, and quite voide of knowledge And as Peter writeth 1 Epistle 3. Ye bondmen bee sub­iect in all feare vnto your Lordes not onely vnto them that are good and moderate, but also vnto them that are waywarde and vnreasonable, for this is grace or wor­thie of fauour, if a man doe beare sorrowes for con­science of GOD, suffering vniustly. So also might it haue beene rightly saide vnto the Popes and Byshoppes in Constantines time, and now also: be ye subiecte in all feare vnto your Princes, not onely vnto such as are good and gratious, but also vnto vngodly and tyrannicall, ney­ther release your selues of your alleagence, for if yee doe take and beare wrong quietly for regarde of GOD, God will abundadtly rewarde your patience; for the consequent is very strong and good, seeing the thinges are all together alike and equall; for if the Christian bondmen were not enfranchised, because they were spirituall brothers vnto their Lordes, neyther were the Popes and Byshoppes discharged of subiection vnto their Princes, because they [Page 62] were become their spirituall bretheren, and if you will to, their spirituall fathers. But they say with Phig­l [...]ius that Christ cōmitted the gouernement of his Church vnto Peter, What prince Peter was▪ and his successors, and therefore all Kinges that are of the Church are subiect vnto the Byshoppes of Rome. And if we grant, this can there bee ought else inferred then subiection in causes and censures eccle­siasticall, and not in causes and punishmentes secular and temporall: for what fonde Frenchman will say that because in olde time the Kinges of England were vassals vnto the French Kinges, for the Duchies of Nor­mandy and Guien, that therefore the crowne of Englande was subiect vnto the Kinges of France, or that they coulde commande the Kinges of England in any matter touching their crowne of England: or because the Bysh­oppes Chanceller can excommunicate a man for adultery, that therefore he can also depriue a man of life and liuing,Mat. 20▪ for a greater fault. Moreouer did not Christ plainelye enough declare what kinde of Kingdome he gaue to Peter, and the rest of the Apostles, and how vnkingely kinges they shoulde bee; when they contended among themselues who should be greatest. The kinges of nations (saide he) be Lordes ouer those countries, and their prin­cer haue power ouer them, but so it is not in you: doth he not here in plaine wordes take from them all earthlye and bodily Empire and power, and that too from the greatest of them; So that the Pope that claimeth to bee greatest and chiefest, is also hereby excluded: ney­ther will a shifte of humilitie serue to escape, seeing that to depose Princes is to raigne ouer nations, is to be their Lord, is to haue power ouer them, all which thinges Christ saith the greatest of his Apostles, & his suc­cessors should not haue: nor consequently authoritie to re­lease all subiectes of their allegiance the which is a supreeme [Page 63] point of Earthly Empire, the which neuer any mortall man yet had and onely belongeth vnto the great God, the su­preeme Lord and soueraigne of the whole world; for neuer yet was there any so mightie a monarch, that had all the world vnder his Empire, neither then could his authoritie extend ouer all nations: but his power determined within the bonds of his owne Empire, & could not stretch beyonde his owne vassals, among whom only he might decree in what cases their seignories should be forfeated, and their bond­men be enfranchised of the seruice of their Lordes and not prescribe lawes therein vnto all other not subiect vnto him, no more then the Queene of England can enacte, that if the king of Spaine shall doe this and this, that then hee shall forfeite his Crowne,Noe law of the Church touching tempora­lties euer alowed in this Realme or the king of France make an edict that if any Lord in England shal committe such and such faultes, that then he shall forfitte all his propertie o­uer his bondmen, and they to be enfranchised. And ther­fore because the Princes of this Realme did neuer ackno­ledge themselues vassals vnto the Pope, nor the See of Rome, nor neuer agnised him for their Soueraigne in tem­poralities, they did neuer heare when the Popes authori­tie was greatest, administer iustice and adiudge secular cau­ses here. according to the Popes decrees, and Canons of the counsels, but alwaies according to the lawes costomes and statutes of the Realme, and in those causes the Canon law had no authoritie, and force in this Land. This is so often affirmed by the author of the learned booke called the Doctor and student, (who as he was a greate lawyer, so was he also a good diuine and deuout Catholicke) that it weare tedious to rehearse them all. In the xliiii. Chapter of thee seconde booke thus hee writeth: for the ordinarie, no yet the partie himselfe haue any authori­tie to binde any inheritance by the authoritie of the spi­rituall law, how then can they binde the inheritance of [Page 94] the crowne, And againe in the same Chapter, and th [...] ­fore it is somwhat to bee meruelled that ordinaries will admitte such land for a title &c. without knowing how the common law will serue therein, for of meere right all inheritance within this Realme ought to bee ordered by the Kinges Law. Also in the xxxvi. Chapter of the second booke, the Doctor of diuinitie saith, yet me thinkes alwaies that the title of the lapse, in such case is giuen by the law of the Church, and not by the temporall law, and therefore it forceth but little what the temporall law will in it as me seemeth. Whereunto the author answereth thus vnder the name of the student of law. In such cun­tries where the Pope hath power to determine the right of temporall thinges I thinke it is as thou sayest, but in this realme it is not so. And the right of presentment is a tem­porall thing; and a temporall inheritance, and therefore I doe thinke it belongeth to the Kinges law to determine, and also to make lawes who shall present after the six mo­neth, aswell as before, so that the title of abilitie, or none abilitie, be not therefore taken from the ordinaries. And in like wise it is of auoidance of benefices, that is to say that it shall be iudged by the Kinges lawes, when a bene­fice shalbe saide uoide and when not, and not by the law of the Church, and shall the law of the Church determine when the crowne is voide? As when a parson is made a Byshoppe, or accepteth another benefice without licence or resigneth, or is depriued, in these causes the common law saith, that the benefices be voide, And so they should be though the Church had made a law to the contrarie. And so if the Pope should haue any title in this case to present, it should be by the lawe of this Realme. And if hee should haue title to present vnto the Crowne should it not bee by the lawe of this Realme? And I haue not seene ne harde that the lawes of this Realme [Page 59] haue giuen any title to the Pope to determine any temporal thing that may be lawfully determined by the Kings Court, no [...] y [...] that he may depose the King, and giue his kingdom vnto any forreiner, but because noe man should repute this lawyer for a Lollard and enimie vnto the Pope, see what immediately followeth. Doctor. It seemeth by the reason that thou hast made now, that thou preferrest the Kinges authoritie in presentments, before the Popes, and that me thinkes should not stand with the Law of God, syth the Pope is the vicar generall vnder GOD. Stu­dent, That I haue saide prooueth nor, for the highest preferment in presentmentes, is to haue authoritie to examine the abilitie of the person that is presented, for if the presented bee able, it sufficeth to the discharge of the ordinary by whomesoeuer hee bee presented; & that authoritie is not denyed by the lawe of the Realme to belong alwaies to the spirituall iurisdiction. Thus se­ing the authour, of the Doctor and the student (whom some suppose to be Sainte Germany) is prooued to bee noe partiall man against the Pope, but onely a lear­ned Lawyer that setteth downe vprightly, to the satis­faction of mens consciences, what right euery man hath, and declareth the common opinion of his time when the Popes power was in the Prime: we will rehearse yet more out of him to the confirmation of you, our Ca­tholicke countrimen who doe openly professe, that ye will grant her maiestie as much, and as greate authoritie, as any of her ancestors before hir father had, since the conquest yea or since they embraced the faith of Christ. In the xlvii Chapter of the seconde booke, he saith that although by the Canon Law the Pope ought to present to all bene­fice [...] or dignities, the incumbents whereof dye at Rome or within two dayes [...]ourney thereof, yet he saith that it hol­deth not [...] this Realme▪ because by the lawes of this [Page 48] realme the King ought according to the auncient right of his crowne, to present of all his aduowsons that be of his pa­tronage. And in likewise other patrons of benefices of their presentment, and the plea of the right of pre­sentments of benefice is within this Realme belongeth to the King and his Crowne. And these titles can not be taken from the king and his subiectes but by their assent, and so the law that is made therein to put away that title bindeth not in this realme. Then may I reason of a stronger, that the Kinges title to the Crowne can not be taken away without his consent, and so the Law that is made therin by the Church to put away that title, bindeth not in this Realme. But to returne againe vn­to presentments of benefices, who knoweth not the terrible statute of premunire, made in the Raigne of Edwarde the third, against all such as shoulde prouide English be­nefices or spirituall dignities from Rome, or purchase them from the Pope, and also against all atturneyes, and agents in that matter, against the which statute the Pope neuer spurned but suffered it (saith Saint Germa­ny) and it hath alwaies beene vsed in this Realme with-without resistance, yea and in the statute made against the prouisions and translations of Byshoppes by the Pope made in the xvi. yeare of the raigne of Richarde the se­cond the vi. Chapter, we finde in those wordes the cause of the making of the statute, least the Crowne of this realme which is immediatly subiect to God, and to none other in al thinges touching the royaltie of the same Crowne, shoulde be submitted to the sea of Rome. We doe also reade there, that all the Barons, and all the Byshoppes present, and the deputies of those which were absent, being asked euery man seuerally saide that therein they would to their vttermost stand with the King against the Pope so zealous were all good Englishmen in those daies of the auncient ho­nour [Page 49] and libertie of their country, and the soueraignetie of their King. Moreouer Saint Germanye in the xxxix. Chapter of the second booke, entreating how ecclesiasti­call persons may dispose of their goodes, he vtterly re­iecteth the Canon law therein, and sheweth what they may doe by the lawes of this Realme, and at the length he saith thus, And moreouer a parson of a Church vicar & Chaun­tery priest, or such other; all such goods as they haue by reason of the parsonage vicarage or Chauntery, as that they haue by reason of their owne person, they may lawfully giue and bequeth after the common law, And if they dispose part among their parishoners, and part to the building of Chur­ches, or giue part to the ordinary, or to poore men, or in a­ny such manner as is appoynted by the law of the Church, they offend not therein; vnlesse they thinke thēselues bound thereunto by duety, & authoritie of the law of the Church, not regarding the Kings lawes. For if they doe so it seemeth they resist the ordinance of God, which hath giuen power to princes to make lawes. But whereas▪ the Pope hath soue­raignety in temporall things, as he hath in spirituall thinges▪ there some say that the goods of priests must in conscience be disposed, as it is contained in the same summe. But it holdeth not in this Realme, for the goodes of spirituall men, bee temporall in what manner soeuer they come to them, and must be ordered by the temporall law as the goodes of temporall men must be. Thus farre Sainte Ger­many; then may I inferre: if that the Pope, the coun­sell, and thee conuocation can not make a Lawe touch­ing the goodes of the spirituallty within this Realme, and that those which doe dispose of their goodes according to such a Canon doe sinne, although it doe agree with the law of this Realme, if they did it as bounde by that Canon: shall wee thinke that the Pope, the councell, or the conuocation can giue away the goodes, and landes [Page 62] of temporall men within this Realme, yea and the Crowne and kingdome, and that they doe not sinne mortally that doe obey any such decrees? And what account is to bee made of the Popes dispensation in temporall causes, the same learned author plainely declareth in the xli. Chapter of the seconde booke where hee saith, That although by the Canon law euery man may lawful­ly kill an Assasin (such a fellow as will at euery mans request kill any man for money) yet he affirmeth it is altogether vnlawfull in this land; and that notwithstand­ing the Popes dispensation and pardon, he that slayeth an Assasin is a fellon, and so ought to bee punished as a fellon. Moreouer in his xliiii. Chapter hee doth con­ctantly holde, that the Canon summes that do determine all scruples of conscience according to the Canon law doe rather hurt English mens consciences, then giue them light, and that there bee many cases in them ru­led according to the Canon law that are not to bee obser­ued in this Realme, neyther in law nor conscience. And in xlii. Chapter that although many sayings in the same summes doe agree with the lawes of this Realme, yet they are to be obserued by the authoritie of the Lawes of this Realme, and not by the authoritie alleaged by them. Fi­nally in the xxix. Chapter of the same booke hee doth flatly ouerrule our present case, whereas by the Canon Law an heretike hath ipso facto lost all his goodes, and therefore can make noe execution, he affirmeth that it holdeth and bindeth not here, for if he doe abiure hee hath forfeited noe goods, but if hee be conuicted of he­resie and deliuered to laye mens handes he hath forfey­ted all his goodes, that he hath at that time, that he was deliuered vnto them; but not his landes, before that he be put to death. To this the Doctor answereth: me thinketh that as it onely belongeth vnto the Church to de­termine [Page 69] heresies that so it belongeth vnto the Church what punishmēt he shal haue for his heresie, except, death which they can not be iudges in; but if the Church decree that therfore he shall forfeite his goods, me thinkes that they be forfeyted by that decree; vnto this obiection he thus answe­red vnder the name of student. Nay verely for they be tēpo­rall things, and belong to the iudgement of the kings court; And I thinke that the ordinarie might haue set no fine vpon one impeached of heresie, vntill it was ordained by the sta­tute of Henry the fourth, that he may set a fine if hee see cause, and that the king shall haue that fine. If this were the vniuersall beliefe of all good Englishmen in the time, when the Popes authoritie most flourished heere, and before this controuersie arose; that neither the Pope, nor counsell, nor Church, hath authoritie to ordaine any temporall punish­ment for heresy, can he be accounted a true Englishman that doth holde that the Pope can depriue her maiestie of her crowne and dignitie for a pretence of heresy?Of the counsell of Late­rane. or that the Canon made in the counsell held at Laterane doth binde vs heere in England? But because we vnderstand that the greatest scruple in conscience of our Catholickes Romane is grounded vpon this Canon: we will make a particular treatise thereof, and to vncomber and discharge their con­sciences shew first that it is no determination of faith that the Pope may depose princes, and secondly that it doth not binde in this realme, not onely because as I haue proued before, the Church can make no decree of temporalities, but also because by the verie Canon Lawe, it neither is, nor euer was in force within this realme; and finally neither orderly executed according to the order of the Canon. And first because I shall haue occasion to examine euerie worde of one member thereof I will set it downe verbatim worde for worde. Ca. 33 [...] Si ver [...] dominus temporalis requisitus & admonitus ab ecclesia, terram suam purgare neglexerit ab hac [Page 70] haeretica foeditate, per Metropolitanum & comprouinciales episca­pos, excommunicationis vinculo innodetur, etsi satisfacer [...] contempserit intra annum, significetur hoc summo pontifici Roma­no. vt extunc ipse, vasallos ab eius fidelitate denuntiet absolutos & terram exponat Catholicis occupandam, qui cam exterminatis hae­reticis sine contradictone possideant, & in fidei puritate conser­uent: ita quod bona huiusmodi damnatorum, si laici fuerint, confiscentur, si vero clereci applicentur ecclesijs a quibus stipendia per ceperint. Which may thus be englished, If the temporall Lord beeing requested and admonished by the Church, shall neglect to purge his land from this hereticall filthinesse, let him be inknotted with the band of excommunication, by the Metropolitane and Bishoppes of that prouince: And if he shall contemne to satisfie within one yeare, let this be signified vnto the Bishop of Rome, that he may denounce his vassalles acquitted of his fealtie, and expone or set forth, his land vnto the Catholikes for them to take, who, the he­retikes being driuen out may possesse it without contradicti­on, and keepe it in the puritie of the faith: so that the goods of such condemned men, if they be laye men, be escheted to the prince, or if they be clarkes, be applied to the Churches of whom they receiued stipendes; Heere ye see is no defini­tiue sentence of faith set downe, but onely an order appointed to be vsed for the rooting out of heresies, so that no weake Catholike conscience neede to make scruple, that the Pope can depose princes because the counsel doth say let it signified to the Bishoppe of Rome, that he may denounce his subiectes loosed of their obedience, &c. For the counsell goeth no more about to decide whether Bishoppes of Rome may depose princes, then whether Bishoppes may excom­municate them, whereof no man in those daies doubted, but content themselues with the vsed and practised authority of them both, for long before this time had the Popes vsed to [Page 71] depose princes, as Pope Gregory the seuenth, the Emperour Henry the fourth, and Boleslaw king of Poland. And Innocen­tius tertius the present Pope that then held the counsell, had himselfe before that time deposed the Emperours Philip and Otho, Iohn the king of England, and Raymond the Earle of Tolouse. So that seeing no man did then moue any doubt, whether Popes might lawfully doe it or no, neither did the counsell then goe about to determine it, but wholly omit­ting the matter, doth onely set downe an order to be vsed for the destroying of heresies. But otherwise if ye shoulde al­waies inferre, that for decreed for faith and lawfull, which generall counsels doe manie times as it were secretly receiue and not reproue; ye will neuer be able to defend them from errour in faith, and that which is equiualent, from beeing one, contradictorie vnto another; For at the second coun­sell of Nice it is not refuted,Cap. 32. but rather it seemeth by the way to be allowed, that Angels haue materiall bodies. So like­wise this counsell may after a sort seeme to allowe, that pa­trons may lawfully in good conscience detayne, a greate parte of the tythes and profits of their Churches, so that they doe leaue the vicar a sufficient liuing: because that this counsell finding faulte with this misorder, that patrons and certaine other persons doe take the profits of the parish Churches, doth charge them with no more: then the which what can be more against good conscience and equity, then he to liue by the altar that serueth not at the altar; and name­ly among Catholickes Romane that doe holde, that tythes are by the lawe of God due onely to priestes, and with what conscince then can any lay man enioy them. Likewise in the same counsell there is a Canon, that he that hath a pa­rish Church shall not serue the cure by his vicar, but by him­selfe vnlesse perhaps the Church be annexed to a prebende or dignitie, in the which case we do grant that he which hath a prebend or dignitie, seeing it must be, that he do serue in the [Page 72] greater Church, that he doe endeuour to haue in that pa­rish Church a meete and perpetuall vicar canonically insti­tuted, &c. Heere ye see that this counsell doth not thinke that residence vpon benefices with charge of soules is com­maunded by God his lawe; which is contrary to the coun­sell at Treent in the 23 Section in the first chapter of refor­mation. Yea Dominicus Soto in his booke de [...]ertitudine gra­tiae against Catherine, doth flatly affirme, that all the Bishops & learned men that were at that counsell did so wholly agree thar residence was required by the lawe of God, that there was not one man that doubted thereof but onely Catherine. Moreouer this counsell thinkes it meeter that a man be resi­dent in the Cathedrall Church, then in his parish Church, yea it seemeth to say of duetie it must be so, a thing verie absurd in Dominicke Soto his iudgement; who sharply repro­ueth the Cardinalles that haue Bishopprickes, and be not resident on them, but abide and continue at Rome; and thinketh▪ it no reason that they alleage that they ought to make their abode at Rome, because they be Cardinalles, and as it were assistants vnto the Pope, for saith he, resi­dences vpon Bishopprickes are commaunded by God, but Cardinalles to be attendant on the Pope is but a constitu­tion of man, the which must needes giue place to the or­dinances more ancient and greater. And bitterly doth he in­uey against the common abuse: that whereas by the Ca­nons of the Church no Cardinall may be a Bishoppe, be­cause both offices require residence, which one man can not performe, the Cardinalles to delude the force of this Canon, are neuer instituted Bishoppes but haue Bi­shopprickes giuen them in perpetuall commenda, whereby it is come to passe that the ordinance of Commendaes which was first instituted for the benefite of the Church by suffering one to haue the gouernment of it, for a time vntill a meete man might be founde for it; is nowe vsed [Page 73] to the destruction of the Church, and the vnlawfull enrich­ing of the couetous & ambitious. Yea the counsell of Trent in the 25. Section. Chap. 18. doth thinke this Canon of the counsell of Laterane, so vnreasonable and vniust, for to impropriate benefices with charge of soules; and to or­daine in them a perpetuall vicar, to serue the cure; that they doe forbid the like to be done euer hereafter notwith­standing any grace or grant: wisely weying the difference betweene an institution of God, and an ordinance of man, the seruing of God in a publike charge & in priuate person, & finally howe much greater good or hurt may ensue by the continuall presence, or the absence of the person in, or from his parish, then by his lying at, or frō the Cathedral Church. Soe that to salue all this gere, both ye and we are forced to say, that the counsels went not about to determine what ought to be beleeued in those poyntes, and so also must ye doe in this controuersie of deposing princes, and not to account it for a definition of faith, but a politique constitu­tion; Of which kinde of Canons Saint Augustine saith,De Baptis-Donat: lib. 2. cap 3. who knoweth not, that former generall counsels are often amen­ded by the latter▪ when by some experiment of thinges, that is opened which had beene shut, and that knowen that lay hidden, without any type of sacrilegious pride, without any swollen necke of vaine glorie, without any contention of spi [...]full enuie, with holy humilitie, Catholike peace, and Christian charitie. Moreouer the famous Cardinall Taie­tan [...] that doth hold and maintaine that the Pope cannot erre in the definition of faith, yet doth affirme in his com­mentaries vpon Mathew that he may erre in iudgement, whether a thing be lawfull or noe: And therefore he doth not accept the de [...]rees of the Pope, in his controuersie of diuotee for definitiue of faith, but for iudiciall: And in iudgementes the Popes themselues (saith he) doe con­fesse [Page 74] that they haue erred; and so then may also a generall counsell erre in iudgements by your owne rules, if perhaps any iudgement be to be founde of the counsell of the La­terane, against Raimond the Earle of Tolouse, for not pur­ging his country of the Albigenses.

Canons of counsels binde not but where they are receiued. Nowe this first scruple beeing taken away, let vs descend vnto our next article and conclusion, that the Canon doth not binde vs in this realme; who is so ignorant that know­eth not that all decrees and Canons of generall counsels, are not obserued and kept in euerie country, neyther doe thy binde the breakers of them in conscience; As for ex­ample, there was a decree made by the counsell at Nice, that deacons shall not sit aboue priestes: but yet we doe see at Rome, the Deacon Cardinalles, doe sitte aboue Bi­shoppes that be no Cardinalles. Likewise in Sexto Con­stantinapolitano in Trullo, there is forbidden kneeling in prai­er on the Sundayes, and soe likewise all the time be­tweene Easter and Whitsontide, And also that no man shall fast the Saturnedaies in Lent: but the quite con­trarie of both Canons, was most vsuall in this lande, and thought most deuoute when the Pope was in his high­est prime heere. Moreouer it is the common opinion of all the Canonistes, that the decrees and Canons refor­matiue doe not else where binde, but where they haue beene receiued, and therefore our seminary priestes doe holde, that the Catholickes Romane of this Realme, nor yet those in France, be not bounde to obserue the Canons of the late counsell at Trent, because they haue beene publikly receiued in neyther of the kingdomes. This then beeing soe, if I can prooue that this Canon of deposing of princes was neuer receiued in this Realme, then haue I conuinced that it doth binde no man of this Realme in conscience. And this will I first prooue by cir­cumstance [Page 75] of the time, and secondly, because diuers o­ther [...] for downe in the same counsell were neuer obserued [...], as for this Canon,The Ca­non neuer receiued, proued by circum­stance of time. it neuer came in pra­ctise heare [...]ntill Kinge Henrie the eyght. First it is cer­taine that the counsell at Laterane was helde in Anno Domini. 1215. and in the seuenth yeare of the raigne of Kinge Io [...]n, and in the time of the bloodie broyles of the Barons, against the kinge, it can not bee denyed but that the kinge had three Embassadours there, and like­lie enough it is, that they subscribed and consented as the rest of the Embassadours did, for their master sought all the meanes he coulde to please the Pope; that hee might haue his helpe against the Barons; and so indeede hee stoode his fast friende, and at the counsell, accursed the Barons, suspended the Archbishoppe of Canterburie Stephan Lang [...], for taking parte with them, and for the same quarrell would not allowe his brother Simon Elec­ted Archbishoppe of yorke, so that there is no doubte but the greatest parte of the realme, were as readie to dis­please the Pope, as their prince was to please him, for the chiefest cause that moued the king to sende Embassadours vnto the counsell was, saith Mathews of Paris, to procure the Popes curse against the Barons. These wofull warres continued to the death of kinge Iohn, soe that no parlia­ment was, or coulde be helde, whereby this Canon could be receiued: For if Sir Thomas More in his debellation doth truely say, that kinge Iohn coulde not make his king­dome tributarie to the Pope, without the consente of the parliament, much lesse coulde he giue the Pope authority to giue the realme away, God knowes to whom it should please him, or that Christian that was able to winne it by fine force, for according to the rule of the Canon Lawe, Quod omnes tangit ab omnibus debet approbari, that which toucheth [Page 76] all men ought to be allowed and approued and confir­med by all, wherefore the Lord chiefe Iustice in the first yeare of the raigne of Henry the seuenth, as we doo reade in the reportes of the same yeare Termino Hillarii. Chap. 10. affirmed, that all the Barrons vnto the Pope that after a sorte commaunded Edwarde the first to surcease from warring on the Scottes that helde of him: That although the king woulde giue away the right he had to Scotlands, yet for all that it shoulde not be soe, because that hee that is king of England is alwaies chiefe Lorde of Scot­land. And if the king of this Realme, cannot of him­selfe dispose of a thing annexed and incorporated to the crowne of this kingdome: will any wise man be of opi­nion that king Iohn coulde dispose of the crowne of Eng­land of himselfe, without the assent and consent of the states, and ordaine forfeytures thereof to forreyners and strangers. And although I can easily be perswaded that the subiectes for the extreame hatred that they bare vnto their present prince,The ini­quitie of the Canon woulde lightly be wonne to ac­cept of causes to be discharged of their alleageanc to their king: yet can I hardly be induced to beleeue, that they coulde suffer themselues, their wiues and children, landes and liuinges, goods and country to be exposed to the sacke and spoyle of all their neighbours, yea of all Chri­stendome if they shoulde vnhappily happe to haue a wic­ked king. And also well might they satisfie the will and in­tent of the counsell, without any such pernicious perill of there whole state, and also retaine still their ancient honour and liberty, if they themselues did make choise of the Physi­tion that should purge them, (if that the law of God had not vtterly forbidden thē to rebell frō their prince, were he neuer so wicked) and not foolishly bind themselues to take a purgation of they know not whom, & perhaps, vnhappily of such [Page 77] a one, [...] [...]te likely to purge them of ill humors so ex­treamely, that he would destroy the habit of their bodye, And hereof [...]o saide an example they neded not to seeke far: For as the very same instant they had a very plaine proofe thereof in France, where the earle of Tolowse was depriued of his earledome, because he would not purge his domini­ons of the Albigenses; and the earledome giuen by the Pope vnto Simon the Earle of Monssort; For that I may omit how bloudily Monssort executed the Popes mandate being ge­nerall of the Croysy against the Albigenses in sacking the Cities, murdering the men and women, how he did also vn­der that pretence assaulte & sacke cityes, that were not one whit infected with that sect, and slew in one battell twentie thousand of the people, and their Alies; After he was cre­ated earle by the Pope and counsell, and inuested therein by the French King, and al the whole country had embraced him for their prince, he cruelly cōmanded the citizens of Car­cassane Towlose & Narbon to dismantell their walles & to fill vp their ditches. This to doe (saith Paulus Aemilius mine author also in the rest of this history) they thought to be a wretched [...]e pitifull thing, yet they executed his cōmandement cur­sing the head of Simon, they begin with their owne hands to make their country naked of hir wals, they thēselues making thēselues subiect vnto all iniury, Nether did that seme to be the greatest of their euils, for Simon, both because his purse was well emptied through the charges of the warres, and al­so then he might throughly [...]ame them being afflicted with miseries, and manyfould mischiefes, sendeth about collect­ors and coactors to leuie a mightie masse of money of the country: It is strange that nature hath so ordained that eue­ry mans priuate damages doe moue him more then the pub­licke sorrowe, neyther can their be any sharper weapon found then that of money. They which at his commande­ment ouerthrew their country, could not endure the losse [Page 78] of their purse. So that the warre that was saide & p [...]ch­ed to haue bene taken in hand, & kept for godes cause; and might haue bene ended by sparing of them that had yelde [...], and by dessēbling of things past, was made now more hard to be ended through vnmercifull dealing. Dores were bro­ken, open distresses were taken, sighing, shriking, sorrowing, weping & wailing of men & women, were harde in euery house. At length sorrow being turned into anger, the olde Earle being then in hope of alteration, had returned out of Spaine whither he fled after his discomfiture in battell, was receiued of the Cyty of Tolouse and other Cyties there a­boutes, the byshoppes whom Simon had restored were dri­uen out againe, because the multitude thought them to fa­uour him. Then Aemilius seemeth to exclame against the wickednesse of this Canon, in giuing principalities to stran­gers, and sheweth how hurtfull it is to gods cause, for the aduancement whereof it is supposed to be made thus saying, Nihil in sacris bellis perinde obfuit, atque mos iam exortus, vt ho­nesta proscriptione suas quisque respiciat res; in ore omnium sanctū piumque versetur, consilio; conatu, animo secus afficiantur. S [...] de religione tantum agaetur, si obliuio noxae sanciatur, si sanatis mentibus fortunis hominum abstineatur, omnes idem sentiant, nūc de mortalium iure, de comitatures est, ea controuersia tollatur, nulla erit armorum causa &c. Nothing hath done so much hurt in the sacred warres as a custome that is now come vp, that euery man doth by honest prescription regard and respect his owne, that in all their mouthes is hearde, holy and god­ly; but in drift, doings, and in hearte, they are otherwise af­fected. If the matter be onely for religion, if it be decreed that the fault be forgotten and forgiuen, if when mens harts are healed their goodes be abstained from, let them be all of one minde; Now the matter in hande is about the right of men, and about an Earledome, let that contro­uersy be taken away, and there is no cause of warres. [Page 79] Ramond requesteth his auncient patrimony, Simon holdeth fast that, which he hath gotten by Armes, the gifte of the counsell, the benefite of the king of France. These men are [...]de [...]ill onely of there owne; But the Pope, be­cause the matter had once before beene adiudged, doth thinke it to stande with his constancie, and with re­ligion, to haue, the ordinances of their fathers to abide stable, and his owne decrees inuiolable &c. Thus the wise Barrons saw, and wee also may, that the warres in the Earledome of Towlose had ceased when the cause ceased, that is, when the Albigenses were expelled, and the Catholickes Romaine restored, if it had not bene for this decree of the Counsell that had adiudged the Earledome vnto Monssort, which now, seeing they were not contented with the reformation of the Earledome, and the Earle, continued manie yeares after, almost to the vtter destruction of the Country, and also the death of Simon, who eight yeares after was in that quarrell, slaine at the seige of Tolowse. But there sonnes Almericke and Ramond continued theyr fathers contention. When Almericke findeing him­selfe to weake, did three yeares after make ouer his right vnto Lewis the eight, the French King; for to bee created Constable of France, Lewes wanne A­ninion by assault, yet dyed before hee could accom­plish his conquest: and his widdowe, and regent of his young sonne followed the quarrell, and at length ended it, by composition, that Alphonse hir younger sonne should marry with the sole doughter and heyre of the Earle and enioy his earledome after his disease: this happened, Anno 1235, nyneteene yeares after that all warres for religion had ended. Soe greate a good had the first execution of this Canon wrought, I haue [Page 80] dwelt the longer in the narration of this history, for to shew the inconuenience of this Canon, and also to set before the eyes of my Catholicke Countrimen, what curtsie they and theirs are like to finde at the handes of a forreyne Catholike. Prince, if any should vnhappely (which God of his vnmea­surable mercy forbidde, and my hande shaketh to write) through their wicked and pernicious treason obtaine the conquest of this kingdome. But the english nobilitie that liued at the counsell at Latarane could not forget the wret­ched wracke and wast that a conquest bringeth, and the sla­uery, misery, and the extremity and cursed calamities, that the accepting of a forreine prince inferreth and enforceth, who then kept wofull warres, receiued from their auncest­ers by many discents, for their auncient lawes and liberties, of whom they had beene cruelly spoyled by the conqerour & his successors, and also deliuered them vnto their posteri­tys almost to the destruction of the bloud Royall, well neere to the vtter ruine of their owne howses, and the lamentable shipwracke of their deare country. Yea and what regard the nobilitie and people of this Land had then of any decree and Canon made by the Pope touching any temporall matter, it doth planely appeare by Mathew of Paris who writeth that when the Pope had sent Bulles of discharge of the Kinges oth, and graunt of their auncient lawes and liberties, and al­so excommunication against the Barrons, and their adhe­rents that did attēpt to force King Iohn to the performance of them, The Barons would not obey them, but all men ge­nerally, and as it were with one mouth saide, that the Bulles were of no moment because the ordering of laye matters did not appertaine vnto the Pope. For that onely the power to dispose of Church matters was giuen by our Lord vnto Pe­ter and his successors. What meanes the insatiable coue­tousnesse of the Romaines to stretch out it selfe vnto vs? what haue Apostolicke Byshoppes to doe with warres? [Page 81] See they will be the successors of Constantine and not of Peter &c. And in this minde they continued in the reigne of king Edward the first, when the Parliament assembled at Lincolne thus wrote (as we reade in Thomas of VValsingham & flores historiarum) vnto Bonifacius the viii. who among other things in his letters to the king, had requested, that if the King had any right in the kingdomes of Scotland, or any part thereof, that he would send his proctors and learned counsell vn­to him, and there the matter shoulde speedily with iustice be adiudged & decided. Neither that the kings of England had, by reason of the preeminence of their state regall, digni­ty and costome at all times inuiolably obserued, e­uer answered, or ought to answere before any Iudge eccele­siasticall or secular about his rights in the aforesaide king­dome of Scotland, or other his temporalities: wherefore we hauing held a diligent consultation & deliberation vppon the contents of your abouesaide letters, it was the common concordious, & one minded consent of vs all, & of eueryone of vs, & shalbe for euer hereafter vnaltered, that our foresaid Lord the King doe not about the rights of the kingdome of Scotland, or other his temporalities in any wise, answere iu­dicially before you, nor come vnder iudgement in any sort, or bring his rights aforesaide in doubt or question, nor there­fore sende proctours or messengers vnto your presence, see­ing the premises doe tende manifestly to the disinheriting of the right of the Crowne of the kingdome of England, and the kingly dignitie, & the notorious subuersion of the state of the same kingdome; & also to the preiudice of our fathers libertie, costoms, & lawes, to the obseruation and defending of whom, we are boūd by the duty of oth taken, & the which we will maintaine in all that we can, and will with the helpe of God defend with all our strength: Neither also doe wee permit, or in any sort will suffer, as neither we can, nor ought, that our foresaide Lord & king, (yea if he would) doe, or in [Page 82] any cause attempt, the premises so vnwonted, vndue, pre­iudiciall, and at other times so vnheard of &c. And now I pray you will any indifferent man beleeue, that our coun­trimen in those daies did thinke, that the Pope had autho­ritie to despose their Kings, or knew or heard, that their fa­thers and auncestours had giuen the Pope power to expose the kingdome of their countrie, for a common pray for all Christians and Catholickes; But now hauing prooued that this Canon cannot bind vs now, vnlesse our ancestours had receaued by consent of Parliament, & also haue shewed that it neither was, nor could be done; let vs fall to our seconde proofe that the Canons of this Counsell at least in tempo­rall cases, were neuer receiued in this Realme. In this counsel there was a Canon made vnder payne of excōmunication, that the Clergy should not be forced to pay any contributi­on to secular princes, neither shoulde they willingly of their owne accord pay any, without licence first obtained of th [...] Pope: Now that this Canon was neuer in force here, it doth plainely appeare by the subsidies payde by the Clergy vnto the sonne of King Iohn, Chap. 24. Henry the third, in the ix. the xvi the xxi. the xxix. the xxxvii. the xliiii. the xlii. yeares of his raigne, neuer once asked the Popes consent, but contrariwise in the xxxvi. yeares of his raigne the king hauing the popes mandate from the Counsell of Lyons, See Ho­lin [...]hed. to pay him three ten­thes because he was crossed for the holy land, they vtterly re­fused to pay him penny. The Clergy did also wthout contra­diction pay vnto his sonne and successor Edward the first in the eight yeare of his reaigne thre tenthes, and in the elea­uenth yeare the twentith part of all their goodes, but after­ward at the Parliament helde at Saint Edmondesbury, Robert the Archbyshoppe of Canterbury and some of the Clergy refused to pay, not claming to be exempted by this Canon but by another decre made lately that very yeare by Pope [Page 83] Bonifacius the eight, but then the King put the Cleargy out of his protection; and thus forced them to yeelde, and so they haue continued payment quietly euer since that time; An other Canon we haue in the same counsell, Chap. 4 [...]. that no prescription shall be good du­ring the whole time whereof the possessor did not verelye beleeue that the thing was his owne in truth, But that the law of this land did neuer make any distinction of pos­session bona or malae fidei, whether the possessor did think it to be his owne or not at all, our Lawyers doe know and acknowledge. And also the statutes of limitation made in the Parliamentes held at Marton and VVest­minster in the three and twentie yeares of the raignes of Henry the third and Edward the first doe plainelie prooue. Also a third Canon there is, a branch of this of the desposition of Princes, that the goodes of Clar­kes condemned for heretikes shall bee forfeited vnto the Churches where they serued.

This constitution not to bee obserued, the author of the booke called the Doctor and the Student doth at large prooue in the xxix. Chapter of his seconde booke, And also it doth plainely appeare by the statute made in the second yeare of Henry the first Chapt. 7. where wee finde that the goodes of Heretikes of what estate, condition and degree soeuer they bee, are escheated to the King▪ And also all their landes that houlde imme­diately of him, or of their ordinaries or their commissa­ries: but the landes of all other that holde in chiefe of other Lordes, the king to haue them a yeare and a day with their wastes, and afterward to returne vnto the Lord of the sea. And seeing that in three small matters that touched not the state, the Counsell was not, nor is receiued, can anye wise man beleeue that the Counsell was receaued in [Page 84] a Canon that touched the ruine of the whole country and kingdome, and namely, seeing it hath beene plainely proued, that a part of the very selfe same Canon was neuer a­lowed.

Now finally to conclude: neither was the sentence of depriuation canonically pronounced against her Maiestie, according to thee decree of the Counsell,The Ca­non not orderly executed. for whereas she should first haue bene admonished by the Church, and then excommunicated by the Metropolitane, and his compro­uinciall Byshoppes; and then if she had contemned to satisfie within one yeare, to bee depriued, &c. It is ma­nifest that she was not excommunicated by the Metro­politane, and the Byshoppes of his prouince, neyther I doe thinke admonished by the Church, but euen at the very first choppe deposed by the Pope. Therefore see­ing that neyther Pope, nor generall counsell haue autho­ritie to depose Princes, or release subiectes of their al­legiance, neyther was the Canon of the Counsell of La­terane for deposing of Princes euer receiued in this land, nor any other Canons of Counsels that touched tem­poralities, neyther yet that Canon orderly executed [...]-against her Maiesty. What good Christian English man can thinke, that hee was by that Bull of Pius Quin [...] discharged of his obedience, and allegiance that hee oweth vnto her Maiestye: And can absurdly beleeue, that all those that shall dye in that quarell shall vndoubtedlye bee damned in hell fire, with all miscreants and rebelles.